No, it’s David Horowitz (see Billmon), who responded with “Donald Rumsfeld only gave permission after having it sweated out of him by NYT Special Forces.”

Norb- OK you’re right, that is crazier. Mea culpa.

Also see The Poorman for strange creature La Shawn Barber’s “Prussian Blue = NAACP” (I know, nothing to do with the instant controversy), but there’s a really funny Derbyshire crack in the comments.

And we all know with all the travel Osama bin Laden is doing, the NYT Travel section is his first read. Maybe they do a feature on the the time share caves on the Afghan/Pakistan border.

My real issue is that if the NYT is delivering the paper to his cave step, why haven’t they turned it over to the CIA? Oh, I forgot they shutdown the Unit hunting him!

Lord. What will they all do when the space aliens show up?

Lord. What will they all do when the space aliens show up?

RAAAAAAAWX-anne- I think they’re more worried about the grey goo.

And yes, grey goo is my new favorite thing to laugh at.

fairweather privocrats

Apparently my wingnutese is a little rusty. Someone care to explain to me WTF this is supposed to mean?

You’ve hit upon the key to conspiracy rhetoric. Conspiracy arguments are “self-sealing.” That is, ANY evidence can shown to prove the existence of the conspiracy even if the evidence seems to contradict the existence of a conspiracy.

Hence, the witch’s denial that she is a witch is obviously evidence that she is a witch because that is clearly what we would expect a witch to say. (Like Billmon, we should resist the Monty Python reference).

So, if the NYT is in league with the Nazislamists, any evidence that they are not is evidence that they are.

The fact is that the New York Times was providing travel information to Al-Qaeda.

The fact is that the New York Times is the paper of record for Al-Qaeda. There’s not a secret they won’t publish.

I think that it was unfortunate that permission was given to this article, but then again, I doubt the New York Times told Rumsfeld the truth about their identities.

I have a request for “Fixing the Internets”: every time we get a screen grab of a bug-eyed Magangalangalang (whatev) and it says at the bottom Author of “Unhinged” – can we PLEEZE just get rid of the middle line? Like so:

Michelle Malkin

“Unhinged”

Thanks in advance…

Apparently my wingnutese is a little rusty. Someone care to explain to me WTF this is supposed to mean?

I’m as baffled as you are. Is she trying to make “privacy” a bad idea and, moreover, one associated with Democrats? Fine by me. Thanks for all the libertarian votes you’re sending our way, Stalkin’ Malkin.

I doubt the New York Times told Rumsfeld the truth about their identities.

Alright, I’ll bite. How do you think they got approval for the story and photo, then?

And if the NYT lied to Rumsfeld, then why is his press secretary shrugging her shoulders over all the conservative panty-twisting, instead of screaming about the evil lies of the media traitors?

Someone care to explain to me WTF this is supposed to mean?

I saw this explanation at Glenn Greenwalds’ blog by a commenter named “hypatia.”

PRIVOCRAT

Malkin must be a Heather MacDonald fan, and fellow soldier fighting the war against the privacy battalions.

NORB! They got to him to, Otto Man! It’s not safe to talk! NYT secret agents everywhere!

“The fact is that the New York Times was providing travel information to Al-Qaeda.”

Absolutely! How else do you think Osama would have learned about that fa-a-a-bulous day-spa on Antigua? Or that precious little bistro just around the corner from the Prado?

“I doubt the New York Times told Rumsfeld the truth about their identities.”

What, do you think they pretended to be from “Elle Decor” instead? Conde Nast maybe?

Mal –
Thanks for the definition. I figured “privocrat” was something along those lines, but I completely can’t grep the “fairweather” part. Isn’t it supposed to be “fair weather [positive noun],” like “privocrat” is a good thing? I mean, assuming that, I could see the slur from a libertarian toward a Democrat who only stood up for privacy when it didn’t take any work, but this… It’s like it’s beyond the opposite meaning and into some other realm of nonsense entirely.

Wait, so Michelle Malkin is a “real” privocrat? So that means she’d be against the government spying on its own citizens, right? And that she’d be against cops entering your home without knocking? Talk about “fairweather privocrats”. Look in the mirror, sweetie. There’s your fairweather privocrat, right there!

That said, I’d hit it.

They got to him to, Otto Man! It’s not safe to talk! NYT secret agents everywhere!

So Don Rumsfeld is the puppet of the evil NYT overlords? No wonder things aren’t going well in Iraq. I knew the buck had to stop somewhere, and Bill Keller’s office seems like the right place.

Is it possible to parade these wingnutts in front of a Judge and get them committed? They are showing clear evidence that they are suffering from a paranoid delusion.

Their assertion that the New York Times engaged in payback via the Travel Section is looney enough. It isn’t sufficient that The Times’ (IMHO really) weak-kneed liberalism sells us out to the terrorists. They have to be ACTIVELY trying to kill members of the administration.

But when faced with contradictory evidence, they either in Malkin’s case reject it out of hand (Apparently she is better at anticipating security threats than the Secret Service) or Horowitz’s insane rationalization that The Times has some sort of coercive power over the administration. If they weren’t Republicans, and they were talking about, I don’t know, pants, they would have been hauled up before a judge and sent for a psychiatric evaluation.

Michelle Malkin’s just bad writer, and doesn’t understand what she’s saying half the time. She probably meant “fairweather fellow-patriots who reveal themselves to be sissy privocrats” or something like that, but was in full, grand mal fascist seizure at the time and wasn’t thinking straight.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I am perfectly willing to be SadlyNo’s token wingnut. If you’ve got the space, I’ve got the crazy bullshit.

Not that Michelle would ever violate anyone’s privacy or anything…

I think it’s time to start scouting for higher-quality wingnuts.

Try The Trumpet.

“What news value and journalistic end was served by publishing the Cheney/Rumsfeld vacation home piece and the accompanying photo?”
Burgerflible?
“News Value”? “Journalistic end”? It was the damn TRAVEL SECTION, bitch! “look what a lovely little community, what fabulous antiquing! Superb crab-cakes!”
You simply can’t combat THAT level of Stupid. >

The fact is that the New York Times was providing travel information to Al-Qaeda.

The fact is that the New York Times is the paper of record for Al-Qaeda.

Dude! This is totally replacing “…for me to poop on!”

I am the walrus…FOR AL-QAEDA!
The newest offering from Peter Jackson was very good…TO AL-QAEDA!
2+2=4…TO AL-QAEDA!

Also, does this mean that Rumsfeld and Cheney are pussies? Can’t even stand up to THE TRAVEL SECTION OF THE NY TIMES? And we want them fighting a pan-national terrorist group?

Good god.

Malkin just accused the Secretary of Defense of being mentally incompetant.

And somehow this makes her a patriot and supporter of the country

I mean, wow. That is some grade-A nuttiness, right there.

Also, Privocrats sounds like a term Stephen Colbert would use.

If anyone finds out for sure where Bin Laden is, and catches him, it’ll be the NY Times. That would teach them!

THe new york times isn’t sending secret messages to terrorists. They’re sending messages OPENLY. Obviously you haven’t actually read the new york times. Trust me there is hysteria here but the vast majority is in the blame america first crowd, like you fine fellows.

“Sometimes you wanna go where nobody knows your real name”

Especially if your real name is Gary Ruppert.

If that really is you Gary, I seriously love you now, you’ve totally picked up and ran with the most insane and rediculous diversion yet. I mean, what do you think the NYT did to intimidate the Secdef? Waterboarding? Stress positions?

Just remember that according to you asshats that’s not toture anymore. Legal I say!

Just curious Dwane, do you think the NYT committed some kind of security breach when they published of photo of Rummy’s house after he gave them permission to do so.

If you do, can you explain why YOU think it is a security breach when the Sec. of Defense obviously does not.

If you don’t then can you point to what you consider a message that the NYT sent to the terrorists? And why they needed to publish it as opposed to just IMing bin Laden directly?

Trust me there is hysteria here but the vast majority is in the blame america first crowd, like you fine fellows.

Hey lookie, a new troll. Hi dwane. Y’know, I’m always a little baffled by the “blame america first” moniker. Now that you’re here, maybe you can help me understand it. I like to think that I look critically at any situation and try to assign blame where it belongs. Nobody ever seems to notice, but you guys seem to fall into the “forgive america for everything” crowd. Now, to me that looks pretty mindless. I mean, if you are unable (and so many wingnuts are) to even recognize when America is wrong, you can never work to improve our great nation. And indeed, under the bush/cheney cabal, things have gotten so much worse–the deficit, the rule of law, respect for our great constitution, our standing in the community of nations. Perhaps you “great patriots” might get your collective heads out of your collective asses for a few minutes and help us repair some of the damage, fer crissakes. Talk about a bunch of people who won’t make a contribution to positive change–it’s the extreme right wing. You clowns are so worried that somebody you don’t approve of might get married, or burn a piece of cloth that was sewn in china, or a brown person might get a little extra boost from the government, that you’ve sat idely by while these self-interested ideologues, who are really fake “conservatives”, flush everything America ever stood for down the toilet. Tell me why that is, dwane…

mikey

Well jpj,
Where do I start, I don’t think the NYT is purposefully sending messages, but they are publishing information that probably should have remained secret. I know they work in a competitive market where they’re always grasping for new information. But maybe, every once in a while they should show some freakin discression? Don’t you agree?

As to a security breach at the Sec. of Defense’s house, I don’t know what you’re talking about but I can almost hear you shrieking when I read the words you tried to put in my mouth.

Best regards,
Dwane

Dwane,
Don’t you mean “.. should of remained secret”?

Now, mikey, be fair. They don’t “forgive america for everything.” In their twisted little world, Amerca never needs forgiveness for anything. See, America is Powerful, a veritable nation of Blond Beasts, so it’s our right — no, duty — to do as we please to the Weak.

Hey Mikey,
I had to read your reply a couple times but I couldn’t actually read a rational argument. Just a machine gun litany of the usual cliche.

I’m not exactly sure how giving away information which aides people who want to murder innocent women and children, worldwide helps our standing with the world community. But I’m sure in your insane white is black world its a completely rational thing to do. If you believe that the intention of the NYT was to “repair the damage”, and not to “sell newspapers” I think you’re quite made.

Thanks for the thought,
Dwane.

“Forgiveness”? Take a class on deplomacy qubit, America has no permanent allies, only permanent interrests.

As to a security breach at the Sec. of Defense’s house, I don’t know what you’re talking about . . .–Dwayne

Since that is the subject of this post and comments, “Obviously you haven’t actually read” it.

Forget better wingnuts, I’ll settle for better quality shills and trolls.

mikey = mafia. who knew.

Morbo,
I’m aware of the subject. But I wasn’t aware I had such a strong opinion.

Dwane

Dwane’s ability to digest longer words is not matched by his ability to egest them with proper spelling.
Sorry if I’m being un”deplomatic” here.

Alright, fair enough dwane. Nobody likes words being thrust into their mouths.

So I take it your “open messages” to terrorists refers to other NYT stories, like the NSA wire-tapping story?

While of course terrorsist can be informed by such a story, so can ordinary americans. And the fact that many people think the whole NSA setup, by ignoring FISA oversight, is illegal makes it newsworthy, and something I want to know about.

I must turn my face away and shield my eyes whenever the full actinic glare of the Winger Reality-Denial Beam Weapon is shined directly towards us. (Warning: do NOT try this at home!)

– “Because the Supreme Court ruled it’s unconstitutionalâ€? may cut it with the moonbats and fairweather privocrats. Not with me.

– “Because it’s the overwhelming consensus of the entire scientific communityâ€? may cut it with the moonbats and fairweather privocrats. Not with me.

Um, Dwane this thread is purportedly dedicated to the claim made by members of the American right that the NYT endangerd Rumsfeld by publishing a picture of his summer home. If your scroll up to the top you’ll see the jolly Sadly No! crew poking gentle fun at Michelle Malkin for making such a claim.

So, since you don’t know anything about the topic under conversation here, would you care to point to any particular examples of the NYT publishing information that “sent messages” to the terrorists? Rather than information about programs of dubious legality undertaken by our government that the American public might like to know about (secret prisons, wiretapping, monitoring financial transactions, etc.).

You choose a NYT story. And then please explain what you think the penalty should be to the NYT for said publication. And then explain how you think we can remain a free country with a free press under your proposal.

Thank you for helping me out on these matters. I’m sorry if my shrieking is too loud for you, we unbalanced liberals are like that.

Dwane, do you hear shrieking much? I think maybe you should get your ears checked.

Your hearing problem seems to be affecting your ability to put words together, because I’ll be darned if I can understand what you’re trying to say.

Dwane, 21:33: “They’re sending messages OPENLY. ”

Dwane, 21:57: “I don’t think the NYT is purposefully sending messages

Dwane, 22:05: “I couldn’t actually read a rational argument. Just a machine gun litany of the usual cliches….

and finally:

“If you believe that the intention of the NYT was to “repair the damageâ€?, and not to “sell newspapersâ€? I think you’re quite made.”

Wha?

THe new york times isn’t sending secret messages to terrorists. They’re sending messages OPENLY

Such as? I mean, this is a pretty strong claim to make, that the nation’s leading source of journalism is openly communicating with an enemy foreign body. I assume you have irefutable proof of these claims and, thus, have alerted the proper authorities. And by proof, I don’t mean personal opinions that basically boil down to never, ever, ever criticizing the government (as long as the government’s run by Republicans, of course).

And what terrorists? The IRA? The Klan? The various factions in South and Central America? The Minuetmen? Pro-democracy agitators in places like China or Iran? Shit, son, there’s a whole lot of folks in this world that could be described as “terrorists”, and a large number of them are actually Non-Arabic People. Are you saying they’re all more or less connected and get all their info from the NYT? How does that break down, anyway? Messages to al Qeada in the “Better Homes of The Rich & Powerful” section, orders to the IRA in the Arts section, something like that?

I had to read your reply a couple times but I couldn’t actually read a rational argument. Just a machine gun litany of the usual cliche.

Well, see, that’s the thing, dwane. It really wasn’t an argument. It was a question. And it’s funny you’d squawk about having words put in your mouth when you had just refered to pretty much all the denizens of this site as “blame america first”. Can you tell me when I ever did that? Of course you can’t. I’m betting you don’t know the most basic things about me–like what I might have done for, and sacrificed for, my country.

Now, let me ask you another question. Historically, governments without oversight by other governmental entities or a free press have always descended into abuse. Spying on their political opponents. Using the FBI or the IRS to quash dissent. Holding political prisoners. Now, are you saying that you don’t believe this happens, or are you saying that it’s just THIS government–bush, cheney, rice et al–that will not abuse the system? Are you saying something else altogether? Personally, I believe that bush/cheney bypassed the fisa court because they were using the NSA to monitor journalists they believed were hostile to them. I’m glad the press is still willing, at some level at least, to question abuse of authority, even when authority is abused under color of “national security”.

I’m sure you’d throw him in Gitmo, but it was that well known communist, fifth-columner, terrorist appeaser Ben Franklin who said:

They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

mikey

Heh. I just scrolled back up to the top and re-read the post title. Dwane, you are a gift from God.

Matt T., small children in rompers have known for years that messages to Sendero Luminoso are transmitted in the “Metropolitan Diary” feature. I’m surprised you didn’t know that.

I think it’s time to start scouting for higher-quality wingnuts.

Agitprop’s favorite target is The American Thinker – there aren’t many places where you can get writin’ like this:

“We’ll see how the discussions progress. Nothing is written in stone. But should the French treasury take on potential liabilities in the auto industry and fail at the same time it faces unknown liabilities for foundering Airbus, French taxpayers had better prepares themselves for possible tax increases.”

Dwane, I have yet to see you say anything even remotely cogent. Your ‘reply’ (if you can call it that) to me is so nonsensical it’s not even wrong. Either you have a serious comprehension problem, in which case I’d suggest you take a class on reading, or you’re a provacateur just looking for attention. Like MJ’, though, you’re free entertainment, so keep it up.

Sorry to disagree with you qubit.

Anyway, you mentioned forgiveness as though a country can forgive another country. I mentioned Lord Palmerstons axiom just to make the point that a the concept of forgiveness is not a concept that applies to the discourse between two countries. Countries are not people.

Marky I apologize for not spell checking what I wrote better. I guess I got excited and composed my replies too fast. Anyway I look forward to many long days of delightful political discourse with you and your friends!

Best regards,
Eric

So, is it dwane or eric?

And IIRC, the concept of “forgive america” was actually a play off your own introduction of the phrase “blame america first” – so it really has nothing to do with other countries.

Ooooh, are you announcing your intentions to be our new Pet Troll?

Better check in with Gary for your orientation.

Let’s see if I am following this:
The less that people know about their higher-echelon public servants, the better;
The more that their higher-echelon public servants know about them, the better.

Have I missed anything?

If the lives of two or three high-ranking public employees are really so crucial for the future of the free world, you have to wonder if concealing their holiday addresses is really sufficient to keep them safe from assassination. It might be a wise precaution to stop publishing their photographs as well. For public appearances they could wear masks or paper bags over their heads, and speak through voice distorters. To preserve the anonymity of future presidents, the election campaigns would involve cartoon images rather than real people… Ooops, you already have that.

I think Dwane has failed his audition.

I blame America seventh.

I just can’t get behind the whole idea of debating a guy named “dwane.” It’s just bad form.

Oh, no, Bob Scum, Dwane did just fine.

He was quite funny and, at times, very polite.

And also inconsistent, contradictory and dishonest.

Plus, he came back and tried to back up his statements, even engaging some of the contributors, which I feel is probably Gary’s greatest weakness.

Dwane is welcome any time, and I hope Gary helps him get in touch with Netvocates so he can get paid for his efforts.

G, thanks for pointing that out, though I don’t think it will make a difference. Apparently, dwane/Eric didn’t bother to read mikey’s comment.

Dwane, I was simply observing that you and other wingnuts don’t “forgive America for everything,” since you think America by definition never does anything morally blameworthy. The rest of my comment was just some snark about the cartoonish version of Nietzchean morality often lurking in the background of that thinking.

Gee that’s funny, I never knew that dwayne was short for eric.

Anyway, whatever you call yourself, if you enjoy political discourse so much, maybe you would consider answering some of the pointed and relevant questions you’ve been asked about the statements you made.
Can you indeed point to an example of what you claim, of the NYT openly sending messages to terrorists? Even one example that isn’t the revelation of a secret government program of dubious legality? Because if that’s all you got, you might want to step back for a second and think for a minute about the role of a free press in a democratic society. The NYT tells the government they’re going to publish this stuff, and if the government says “no! don’t!” then the press says what they’ve been told to say by the supreme court, which is “show us how this will directly impact war, terror, criminal efforts ect. and if the government can’t do that, and all they can come up with is “don’t publish it”, tough titty for the government.

The NYT isn’t publishing troop positions, it isn’t giving out bomb making instructions, so why don’t you pull you head out of your ass for a second and see that the press has not only a right, but a responsibility to inform the public of what goes on in their name. It’s called democracy, America used to be big on it.

Hoosier X,
I agree completely. Bradrocket asked for better wingnuts, and dwane answered the call of duty. A huge improvement over Gary, who couldn’t pass a Turing test to save his life. Hmm… maybe Gary’s really just a bot.

Timmah420,
The NYT isn’t publishing troop positions
Yeah, unlike FOX News.

Dwane is obviously just Tall Dave in disguise. So polite, so reasonable, so boring.

The fact is that you bitches will come crawling back to me when you want the real wingnuttery.

Gary, just because we date someone like dwane on the side it doesn’t mean we still won’t come home to you.

Can I just say that I love Mikey?

I was always under the impression that names like Dwane, Dwayne, Dwight and Dwang were reserved by force of law for C&W singers.

Dwayne (n). A piece of wood set between two studs, posts, etc., to stiffen and support them.

Hang on, that’s ‘Dwang’.

The fact is that you bitches will come crawling back to me when you want the real wingnuttery.

Well, somebody will do some crawling anyway. We always keep our whips warm for you.

Hey Sidhe. What a sweet thing to say. I’m (in a rare moment) speechless. Thanks…

mikey

Us: NORB!

Woody: What’ll it be Norb?

Norb: I never met a beer I didn’t drink.

Let’s see, by following the pattern of construction:
plutocrat: supports rule by the rich
democrat: supports rule by the people
theocrat: supports rule by a religion (technically, by the gods)

Shouldn’t a “privocrat” be someone who supports “rule by privates”? And then what sense of “privates” is used there? Military rank? Genitalia?

Or maybe they support “rule by privvies”–you know, that makes a certain amount of sense when considering Michelle’s writing.

OK, you guys are all very very funny. But I’m actually scared. I mean, it used to be sort of hyperbolical to call these wingers “demented,” but now we’re looking the thing straight in the face, aren’t we? We are trying to live in a country where our public discourse is dominated by people who are quite literally insane.

Dorothy, I was going to post a comment like that, but then I had to spoil it by going and finding out that “privocrat” is a portmanteau word formed from “privacy” and “bureaucrat” — you know how the peoples hates the bureaucrats, so anything-o-crats is automatically Teh Evil — which kind of put me off the whole thing.

OK, you guys are all very very funny. But I’m actually scared.

Hey squeaky. It’s ok. You oughta be scared. I had a sergeant who used to always say “If you ain’t scared, you ain’t payin Attention“. I’m scared too. I actually think it’s too late to be recovered. My evidence? Hillary. If we can’t elect someone who won’t pander, who will stand up and speak truty regardless of the political consequences, we don’t have a prayer. And is the deficit really recoverable? Check Krugman. Seems to me, if you aren’t stockpiling ammo and cigarettes you’re behind the curve…

mikey

“If we can’t elect someone who won’t pander, who will stand up and speak truty regardless of the political consequences, we don’t have a prayer. And is the deficit really recoverable? Check Krugman. Seems to me, if you aren’t stockpiling ammo and cigarettes you’re behind the curve…”

Oh, man, you aren’t even scratching the surface. We’ve got genuine 21st century fascists running the country. Peak oil is just around the corner. Global warming is much, much worse than we thought it was. The private debt in the US is almost as bad as (maybe worse) than the public debt. And the only thing that is propping up the US dollar is that too many people are holding too much debt; when the panic selling starts, it’s going to be ugly.

“Can I just say that I love Mikey? ”

You gotta stand in line, Sidhe. I was first. I’ve applied to be one of his minions, and I’m checking the mailbox for my letter everyday.

Ambassador de Sadesky: The deciding factor was when we learned that your country was working along similar lines, and we were afraid of a doomsday gap.

President Merkin Muffley: This is preposterous. I’ve never approved of anything like that.

Ambassador de Sadesky: Our source was the New York Times.

I have to tell you, that dwane has makes me made, too.

And now, a little humor. Very little.

Well, well, well. I see everything’s well in hand here. Issue discussed, wingnuts hog-tied and neutered, new troll acquired. Surely there must be *something* I can do! Hmm….
I don’t really feel like dropping some nice ad hominems on this “eric” or “dwane” or whatever he is. Wouldn’t be sporting on his first day.

I know! I can set up an open italics tag….
[ducks thrown garbage and rotting fruit]

Michelle Malkin can spew all the venom she can muster.
but no matter how right wingy she gets, she’s still not white. which is what she wants.
one gets the feeling that she believes that if she can appropriate all the features of the gop, that somehow makes her less of an colored person.

Dan,

I’ve given up on trying to save the country, the Constitution, etc., from these people. I figure I’ll fight the battle I have a chance at: saving the language. If I can’t rescue our poor, tortured speech from these perverse mouths, at least I can seek revenge through ridicule.

Or something.