What’s really funny is that Pantload insists that the Lindbergh smear is not meant in a cartoon way. Why, he’s defended Lindbergh from such things! But that’s not the point; the point, aside smearing Yglesias and Clark, is to shift the Lindbergh albatross away from the shoulders of the isolationist Right where it belongs and onto the non-interventionist, anti-imperialist Left where it, if one is honest, does not.

Also, the ‘don’t have a hissy fit just because I called you Lindberghs’ part of Pantload’s post is yet another instance of his patented manuever, the Jonah Goldberg Limited Takeback.

I don’t think pantload is even bright enough to know what he’s doing. He’s echoing the peretzians. That’s all. That the people who opposed fighting the Nazis were rightwingers, Prescott Bush’s, etc. just doesn’t appear on his soiled diaperscreen. (Holy Doppler radar, Batman!)

He and Rush have something in common.

Wow. There should be a Wiki entry that shows our beloved Pantload ChickenhawkNazifascist as the picture next to the definition of Embarrassing.

A little bit sympathetic to getting your house arbitrarily taken from you and exiled to some new shitty desert? Ipso post facto, you are a Jew Hater!

Please, God, come get these folks. We’ll get along.

I think we all have our own pet wingnuts whose particular version of insanity is uniquely engaging, and I have to say, Jonah Goldberg is mine. I tracked his entries over the course of an entire day here for anyone interested. It’s like the stupid is revving at 6000rpm, but the car is in park. All. Day. Long.

Michael Gerson’s Newspeak review of the SOTU and Webb’s rebuttal. Uniquely enraging. With the rating to prove it.

Don’t read it; just gouge an eye gently with a screwdriver. Same effect.

But one point that occurred to me afterwards is that D’Souza’s position is very reminiscent of Osama bin Laden’s. Now, while no fan of bin Laden’s myself, I’ve nonetheless criticized the cartoonish demonization of the guy as well. So, D’Souza shouldn’t take too much offense, at least when I make the comparison. Regardless, bin Laden believes the godless are pushing American policy in an unhealthy direction, and so does D’Souza and, more significantly, so do I.

Who else thinks it’d tick off bin Laden to no end to hear that he’s getting 10-4’s from dimbulbs like Jonah and D’Souza?

Posted By: I.F. Thunder (1/26/2007 at 9:55:02 PM)

Comment: Michael Gerson, I’d like to know your opinion about Bush and Cheney’s torture program. Would you say it is exceeding expectations? Who Would Jesus Torture, Michael?

Another conman hired by Fred Hiatt, of the ‘liberal media’ aka Washington Post.

In Tasty-Chee Doughboy’s world any discussion of the Israeli government or military’s actions is ‘attacking the Jews’. It’s the same as any discussion of America’s military or government actions — it squeezes through his pimple brain and comes out as ‘attacking the troops’ or ‘hating America’.

I am personally amazed the infected zit didn’t explode from the pus pressure resulting from categorizing the guy who negotiated a historic detente between Israel and Egypt as secretlly a Jew-hating Jew-hater.

The merits and motives of the arguments surely differ in important respects, but they are similar in important respects too.

Swear to god I had a student write that exact sentence in a paper once and leave it hanging there unsupported, just like the pantload does.I flunked him just for being a damned coward.

Jonah as Bush:

“I believe I’m actually the equivocator and I might decide what’s best. And what’s probably best might be for Don Rumsfeld or someone like that to have some influence” Mr Goldberg said.

Dang, nice pic. Does Cafe Press do Pez dispensers??

If I had his address I’d inundate him with stale Cheetos.

The merits and motives of the arguments surely differ in important respects, but they are similar in important respects too.

You are a Nazi, Jonah. Of course, you shouldn’t take that in a bad way. I just mean that like the Nazis, you’re in favor of pushing your country into a wider war. Okay, the merits and motives of the arguments surely differ in important respects, but they are similar in important respects, too.

Just when you thought this Flabby Freeloading Flatulist* had written his Last Atrocity [and I mean, who’s got over his first?] he picks yet another fight with not one, but two cats unquestionably his superior in any way imaginable. Again.

Flatulist* : A flatulist, fartist, or professional farter is a performer who receives payment for expelling flatus in an amusing and/or musical manner.

Jonah Goldberg & Le Pétomane:
The Strange Life of a “Fartiste”

the shorter Jonah left out “I don’t have time to review this in depth…”

Anti-Semitism is sweeping the “progressive” left in recent years. This is what makes Wesley Clark’s eyebrow-raising remark about Jews pushing us into war all the more troubling.

I haven’t seen much concern in the “progressive” circles about Jimmy Carter’s descent into troubling territory with his book about Israel and Palestinians. I did see Sadly,No carrying water for Carter on this one – http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/4525.html

Here’s a 3-part series by Prof. Alan Dershowitz that rather thoroughly rips Carter a new one: http://adershowitz.gather.com/

Perhaps Sadly, No should stop brushing it under the rug every time troubling things about Jews are said and written by leaders they support?

Choafing loaf says “smear left progessive chicken hawk brawk! brawk! lick lieberman scrotum leftists! damn arab subhumans eliminate them all darn lefty racists*

Perhaps LoafingOaf should recognize the difference between criticism of the Israeli government (and AIPAC) and anti-semitism. Does the Oaf consider domestic dissenters in Israel, the ones who didn’t vote for their current government, to be anti-Jews as well?

Loafing Oaf

Most American Jews are liberal, or at least vote Democratic. This is fact, going back a long time.

Most Anti Semites have traditionally been right wing nut jobs who see black helicopters.

Sadly, Yes! both Israel and the United States are ruled by a small minority of crazies whose population despises its foreign policies. Olmert’s approval ratings are even less than Bush’s, if that’s possible.

Anti-Semitism is popular on both the fringes of the Right and the Left.

And I’ve not said that criticism of Israel is not allowed.

Isreal should be held to the same standard as other countries. Unfortunately, the some on both the Left and the Right apply a double standard to Israel.

Anyway, Dershowitz is a liberal Democrat, and I think some of the things he’s saying about Carter at the site I linked and elsewhere need to be dealt with by people who have defended Carter. IT’s not any of Carter’s supporters fault if Carter is losing it, but I don’t like when things are brushed under the rug. Dershowitz himself has been a friend and supporter of Carter’s and he’s dealing with it. Why aren’t you guys?

I have no idea if Wesley Clark is an anti-Semite. I just think what he said will play into anti-Semites’ thinking and someone running for Prez has to be much more careful in what they say.

Wait, LoafingOaf, let me make sure I have this right. I should take Alan “Not torturing an alleged terrorist to save lives is selfish” Dershowitz as an authority on the bigotry of others?

The man who wanted to see the Germans as a people punished for the actions of the Nazis is now the authority on how anyone should be treated? Um…jeez, I’m at a loss for words. Really.

Listen, I’ll be happy to have this conversation with you, but I have to insist that you detox first.

But one point that occurred to me afterwards. . . .

I imagine this sums up Jonah’s life.

Isreal (sic) should be held to the same standard as other countries. Unfortunately, the (sic) some on both the Left and the Right apply a double standard to Israel.

Hey, LoafingOaf, please provide explicit references to where ‘The Left’ applies a double standard to Israel. Specifics, please.

IT’s (siccety) not any of Carter’s supporters (sic) fault if Carter is losing it, but I don’t like when things are brushed under the rug.

So, Oafy-baby, lift the rug and let’s take a squizz underneath. I I can find whatever Carter’s lost, there may be a reward.

Ah okay, “troubling” is drooling wingnut-speak for “imaginary”, I’m all caught up with the new lingo now.

It’s pretty sad to have nothing intelligent to say about President Carter’s brave confrontation of the apartheid policies of the rightwing hawks currently running Israel’s government, and have to fall back on “how dare that Jew-hating Jew-hater hate on the Jews.”

Pathetic, really, since even a cursory knowledge of history is all it takes to see past this laughable attempt to mischaracterize the accomplishments of one of the best friends the state of Israel has had in an American President.

It’s sure easier than coming right out and defending the indiscriminate bombing of civilians, forcible land seizures, and violations of UN resolutions. But hey, those were only bad when Saddam did them.

… bin Laden believes the godless are pushing American policy in an unhealthy direction, and so does D’Souza and, more significantly, [my emphasis] so do I….

Jeez, Jonah, don’t hold back like this, tell us how important you really are!

Alan Dershowitz is a liberal Democrat like the Holy Roman Empire. I personally can’t remember anything nice Dershowitz has said about Carter in living memory, but why should we doubt him when he says “I’m a friend and admirer of Carter! That’s why i’m throwing slanderous accusations and lies around like a monkey flinging shit! Because i’m concerned about him as a friend.” Do you have any substantive attacks on Carter from someone who isn’t an on-record liar and plagiarist and a shill for the Israeli ultra-right? Cos i’d quite like to read them. I can’t read Dershowitz’ writing any more, he gives me a terrible sense of deja vu.

HTML Mencken

Is that you, Retardo?

the shorter Jonah also left out “Can somebody do some research for me…?”

All that picture of Jonah needs is some Bunny ears and a plunger: he’d fit right in with the newest Rayman game.

DZAAAAAAAAAHHH!HHH!!!!!!!!

With what Israel has done to its neighbors, especially the Palestines (its housemates?) is it any revelation that there is discord? I have a friend in Egypt who is scared of them- not what they might do to Egypt- but what their actions might ferment in the region. With our weapons, they have begun, strangely, to act like us. Am I an anti-Semite? No. Critical thinking does does not make me a bigot.

Nor Carter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWs87fjp_28&NR Wingnuts can’t use critical thinking skills.

But they can… dance?

ichomobothogogus: Dershowitz has been a friend of Carter’s for 30 years and helped him get elected President. Since he goes over that in part 2 of the 3-part articles I linked you to, you obviously didn’t read what he had to say. That’s your right. But it’s rather silly for you to post things to me that are completely refuted by the link I posted.

Officious Pedant said: “I should take Alan ‘Not torturing an alleged terrorist to save lives is selfish’ Dershowitz as an authority on the bigotry of others?”

What are you talking about? Normally when someone puts a quote in between someone’s first and last names it is a quote the person actually said. To do otherwise is a lie.

Here is where Dershowitz explains his views on torture: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-dershowitz/toward-a-more-productive-_b_26281.html

Dershowitz has posed an important question to Carter. Did Jimmy Carter advise Arafat to reject the peace deal on the table during talks with President Clinton? Carter has, thus far, refused to answer, but what he has written in his book suggests that he helped obstruct peace between the Isrealis and Palestinians.

I’m not here to promote Dershowitz. I merely posted that link because he’s a liberal Democrat and a longtime friend of Carter’s who has had to speak out about Carter’s book, and I wondered why I’m not seeing the “progressive” left deal with this stuff. And I mentioned this because I notice that folks on this web site – both its bloggers and commenters – have brushed the controversies about Carter’s book under the rug just like they want to with Wesley Clark’s statement and others on the Left. Why is there a pattern of not wanting to deal with troubling things being said about Jews and Israel by leaders this web site admires?

Left_wing_fox: Doughy sort of reminds me of Arthur from “The Tick”, only with less spine. When you said bunny ears, I immediately pictured him with Arthur’s superhero costume…

It might be nice if we had a real dialouge. Fact: Isreal has acted like a state that they previously abhored. REALLY uncomfortable fact, but there it is. Are we going to continue to support this?

Dershowitz: If torture is, in fact, being used and/or would, in fact, be used in an actual ticking bomb terrorist case, would it be normatively better or worse to have such torture regulated by some kind of warrant, with accountability, recordkeeping, standards and limitations?

Me: Replace the word ‘torture’ with the word ‘child rape’ and see if that sentence is still acceptable.

Which means, friend Oaf, that there are some things that One Just Doesn’t Do. Normatively speaking. If one wishes to be considered a leading light of freedom and democracy, one does not shag the dead as a matter of policy, one does not rape children as a matter of policy, and one does not torture as a matter of policy.

Dershowitz quoting Friedman: But singling out Israel for opprobrium and international sanction — out of all proportion to any other party in the Middle East — is anti-Semitic, and not saying so is dishonest”

Ah. Those who throw the accusation of anti-semitism around the most consider that any criticism of Israeli policy is out of all proportion. Which gives other nations an excuse for bad behaviour: nuclear weapons are acceptable, many say, because Israel has them, and the US supports several other nations which have them and are not party to the NPT. To be fair, one must apply the rules evenly, and it’s quite clear that the US government is not willing to do that.

After all, how many other nations in the Middle East have been occupying lands not their own for several decades?

Did Jimmy Carter advise Arafat to reject the peace deal on the table during talks with President Clinton?

I don’t know. But I believe the Palestinian/Israeli peace process works in a similar way to all so-called peace negotiations spawned by the US: make a set of unacceptable demands as prerequisite for even beginning the process, then claim that ‘they don’t want peace’. I can provide examples should you need them.

That’s not negotiation, Oaf, that’s a setup. If you and I were warring parties, and I said “Stick a broomstick up your arse and sweep the floor: that’s my offer, take it or leave it”, would you accept those terms?

Dershowitz’s defense is, essentially, “I don’t support torture, but since the US Government is going to torture people anyway, shouldn’t it at least be legal so we know about it?”

I guess since you actually seem to think that that’s a respectable question, I shouldn’t just answer with “Fuck no, are you crazy?”

Basically, the only other place I hear this argument used is in terms of abortion. The idea is that making abortion illegal doesn’t actually lessen occurences of abortion, and so therefore making it illegal is a worthless gesture.

Now, leaving aside the fact that I don’t really buy that kind of argument, it’s an even worse justification for torture then it is for abortion.

The pool of possible abortees is every single fertile woman in the US. The pool of potential torturers, on the other hand, is made up only of employees of the US Government. And not only that; the potential pool of torturers is made up primarily of people who work in the most monitered, hierarchical parts of the US government. In other words, THEY’RE ALREADY UNDER STRICT SCRUTINY.

Also, Dershowitz’s defense against accusations that he throws the word “anti-semite” around like a bone for old blue basically amounts to “nuh-uh!”

I’m gonna need more to regard him as a non-idiot.

Speaking of, for a while I was convinced Jonah Goldberg was the stupidest opinion writer in America.

But now I’m wondering if the title should go to D’Souza.

Thoughts?

http://bagnewsnotes.typepad.com/bagnews/images/destroy-JAM.jpg
“It says, ‘Romans go home!’ ”
“… No, it doesn’t!”

obviously i should have been clearer in my phrasing. i’m only 25 so “in living memory” doesn’t mean quite the same thing to me as it would to Carter or Dershowitz. I know Dershowitz was a Carter supporter in 76, but that’s irrelevant. Yourself and Dershowitz phrase it as if Dersh was a close friend and admirer of Carter’s until recently, to allow Dersh to play concern troll. You seem to think their relationship is important, repeating it in your second post:

“I merely posted that link because he’s a liberal Democrat and a longtime friend of Carter’s who has had to speak out about Carter’s book,”

Why the repetition? To give Dershowitz cover for his attacks against Carter? He wants to pretend that it wounds him deeply to have to take up the cudgels against his dear dear friend and he only did so with sadness in his heart after much soul searching, in the hope that no-one will notice it’s just another bog-standard Dershowitz smear campaign. But Dershowitz’s own statements in his post are rather sketchy. He goes into quite a bit of detail about his dealings with Carter in the election, but “I continued to work for Carter over the years, most recently I met him in Jerusalem a year ago, and we briefly discussed the Mid-East. Though I disagreed with some of his points, I continued to believe that he was making them out of a deep commitment to principle and to human rights. ” is the sum total of what he says about the last 30 years. (the rest of the article seems to be about something called “arab money” which is presumably a dollar bill in a jelabba). This combined with Carter’s “I don’t want to have a conversation even indirectly with Dershowitz, There is no need for me to debate somebody who, in my opinion, knows nothing about the situation in Palestine.” statement certainly doesn’t suggest a close personal relationship. If you could point me to something more substantial i’d be very grateful.

And as for all this “liberal Democrat” bollocks, i’d like some evidence for that as well, other than Dershowitz’s say-so. His actions certaibnly don’t bear it out. From where i’m standing he looks like just another racist neo-con bush booster with a hard-on for the Israeli Right.

If you have the gall and intellectual depravity to compare folks like Yglesias to Lindbergh, what’s next? A book about Hillary Clinton as Mussolini’s successor?

I’m so tired of the equation of Israel==Jews (note the mathematical convention of the double “equals” sign). This is on both the left and the right: I have a cousin-in-law who donates time and money to AIPAC because he thinks anything barring Israel’s will is anti-Jewish. How can we short-circuit this?

And as for all this “liberal Democrat� bollocks, i’d like some evidence for that as well, other than Dershowitz’s say-so.

This sort of points out the hazard of labeling individuals according to their politics. Dershowitz is absolutely a Democrat. As for being liberal, remember that most of his career has been as a defense attorney and constitutional scholar. In these areas, he has been a staunch defender of civil rights, practically a one-man ACLU. So “liberal” is a fair label… or it used to be.

Since 9/11, however, his position and tone have changed. Now, it seems that he is perfectly willing to toss out any rights for Arabs. Israel can do no wrong. Any criticism of Israel, particularly its relations with Arabs, amount to anti-semitism.

In other words, you are both right: historically, Dersh had been a liberal Democrat, one of our strongest supporters of civil and human rights. Now, he is a right-wing BushWar booster, filled with hate and desirous of revenge.

It’s more sad than anything else.

and I wondered why I’m not seeing the “progressive� left deal with this stuff

Ok, dood, pay attention. I’ll say it in little words ’cause you keep missing it when people explain it to you like intelligent grownups. For a lot of us on the “progressive left”, there is no stuff to deal with. We read, we folllow events, we pay attention. I read Carter’s book and found it fair, accurate and honest. These are discussions that have been going on all over the world, in europe, the ME, even in Israel itself. Only in America has it developed into a situation that anyone criticizing Israel’s actions is declared an anti semite. Seems to me this just means there is no debate on the substance…

mikey

“Since 9/11, however, his position and tone have changed. Now, it seems that he is perfectly willing to toss out any rights for Arabs. Israel can do no wrong. Any criticism of Israel, particularly its relations with Arabs, amount to anti-semitism”

This is pretty wide of the mark. Dershowitz has always believed this (well for decades anyway). He’s been a propagandist for the Israeli government way way before 9/11. His smearing of Israel Shahak was way back in 1973 and he’s not changed much since. He’s long been a supporter of shall we say “extreme measures” to combat terrorism. 9/11 may have given him the chance to be more open about some of his more grotesque ideas, but again his opinions haven’t changed that much.

As for his reputation as a civil libertarian, I’ve never seen much evidence of it. It usually appears (in much the same way the “liberal democrat” appelation does) as a precursor to supporting torture, or collective punishment,or detention without trial (“even noted human rights activist alan dershowitz agrees….”). It’s just window-dressing for his extreme right-wing views. If he did involve himself in civil rights issues in a serious fashion in the past, he certainly hasn’t deserved the title for an awfy long time.

Dershowitz is a serial plagiarizer and fabricator, with whatever academic credibility he ever had in tatters and a penchant for using his wingnut sugar daddies to try to run hits on his correctors.

Why is Dershowitz afraid to debate? By wingnut logic, doesn’t that mean he can’t ever be quoted?

Officious Pedant said: “I should take Alan ‘Not torturing an alleged terrorist to save lives is selfish’ Dershowitz as an authority on the bigotry of others?�

What are you talking about? Normally when someone puts a quote in between someone’s first and last names it is a quote the person actually said. To do otherwise is a lie.

Oaf, it’s called Google, and critical thinking.

Let me do this for you slowly.

Dershowitz on 60 Minutes:

DERSHOWITZ: If you got the ticking-bomb case, the case of the terrorist who knew precisely where and when the bomb would go off and it was the only way of saving five hundred, a thousand lives, every democratic society would have and will use torture.

MIKE WALLACE: Just in a ticking bomb case?

DERSHOWITZ: If anybody has any doubt about that, imagine your own child being kidnapped, the kidnapper being there, and mockingly telling you that the child has three hours of oxygen left and refusing to tell you where the child is buried. a situation where you suspect someone knows the location of a ticking bomb. Is there anybody who wouldn’t use torture to save the life of his child those people? And if you would, isn’t it a bit selfish to say “It’s okay to save my child’s life but it’s not okay to save the life of a thousand strangers by torturing the suspect? That’s the way people will think about it.

You’ll forgive (or you won’t, whatever) me for striking out the rheorical/emotional argument of a child in danger. Dershowitz refers to the concept of alleged terrorists later in the interview:

DERSHOWITZ: It’s not against the Fifth amendment if it’s not admitted in a criminal case against the defendant. But it may be in violation of due process. But what is due process? Due process is the process you are due under the circumstances of the case. The process that an alleged terrorist who is planning to kill thousands of people may be due is very different than the process that an ordinary criminal may be due. [See that last bit, there? An alleged terrorist who is planning to kill thousands? Aren’t you obligated to determine if the accused is a terrorist before modifying due process because he’s “planning” to kill thousands? Or are we all done worrying about guilt or innocence and due process?

So, you don’t have to be a confirmed terrorist to have your due process modified, and not torturing them to determine the “truth” would be selfish. Yeah, that’s the guy you refer to when addressing bigotry. I told you, dude, that we could wait for you to detox before doing this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070127/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_outcast_sect

Stupid anti-semites in their anit-semite boots. Don’t they know Isreal = Judaism and vice versa?? Any criticism of Israel IS criticism of Jews, and vice versa. I like saying vice versa, it makes me feel smarter than Brad.

you mean that film with Fred Savage and Judge Reinhold?

Well, my impressions of Dershowitz were based on his early defense of wildly unpopular defendants, on the grounds that everybody deserves the best representation possible, and on his early defense of pornography on 1st amendment grounds. I basically admired his willingness to piss people off for matters of legal principle. In particular, his book “Sexual McCarthyism”, an attack on the smear machine that hounded Clinton, made an impression on me.

It is true that he has been a knee-jerk supporter of the right wing in Israel from way back. But that’s kind of my point- he’s not so easily categorized… or at least he wasn’t back then. Now, he is quite easily categorized as a bigot and a hypocrite. Decades of defending civil liberties for all (except Palestineans, hmmm) and now he’s a leading advocate FOR government torture and genocide.

I suppose I’m particularly disgusted with him now because I used to respect this guy a lot, even when I disagreed with him (as on Israel).

As for the plagiarism charge, that’s debatable- he says he was using a standard academic format (citing primary source quotes and not the secondary sources that some claim were his actual sources- impossible to prove, even if true) and the Harvard Law dean backed him up…

But what is not debatable is the unctuousnous of his response: a counter-accusation that his accuser’s late mother was a Nazi collaborator, without proof. Couldn’t just leave it there, he had to make up shit about someone’s dead mother in a personal smear. What an asshole.

Check out this passage from one of the linked bits in the Goldberg post:

To say that folks who didn’t want to fight World War Two in the 1930s were automatically pro-Nazi (code for favoring the persecution of the Jews) is a grotesque exaggeration. Was Charles Beard pro-Nazi? Was John Dewey?

Sometimes people take horrible positions not because they’re evil or driven by some profoundly distorted ideology but simply because they’re wrong.

Interesting! Imagine if it had been written this way:

To say that folks who didn’t want to fight the Iraq war in the 2000s were automatically pro-Saddam (code for favoring Islamofascism) is a grotesque exaggeration. Was Chuck Hagel pro-Saddam? Was John Warner?

Sometimes people take horrible positions not because they’re evil or driven by some profoundly distorted ideology but simply because they’re wrong.

If Goldberg ever wrote something like that, Hugh Hewitt and the rest of the 4077th Kool-Aid Drinkers would be on him like stank on Lucianne’s undies. Of course, Goldberg would never have the nuts to write anything like that to begin with.