Ever have one of those days when you’re crushingly busy, but making headway…
…and then you run into a task that, at first glance, appeared pro forma and easy, but turns out to be a huge undertaking?
I got that same thing looking at Nick Coleman’s latest column excrescence today. What looked via the headline to be a routine fisk has turned into a monstrosity that will take some concerted effort.
So rather than wuss out and do it later, I’m going to walk the alternative media walk, and decentralize the job. I’m going to reprise one of my favorite bits, and ask you, gentle reader, to gimme a hand here.
Pick a part of the column – a paragraph, a passage, a statement – and fisk it in the comment section.
Show the dead tree media who’s boss!
You may commence.
We’re in a state of disgrace.
Nobody can read this drivel and honestly find anything but an angry, obsolete columnist that like many extreme liberals are “shaking mad” but can’t tell you specifically why, or if they can it’s utterly a lie like this ridiculous article.
No Nick, you are a disgrace.
Careful, Mitchketeers! By accepting this invitation, you become “occasional writers” for Shot in the Dark. Mitch may be forced to repudiate your comments someday!
Note to the reader: while the temptation to fisk Angryclown might be overwhelming, do try to stick with Coleman.
(Put another way: I repudiate Clown’s attempt to hijack the thread!)
I”m just wonderin’… If Coleman’s writing is so terrible, which it ALWAYS is, why would you ask us to even READ it, let alone respond? My general rule on excresence is to not get anywhere near it until the stink stops.
In 1973, Time Magazine put Minnesota’s governor on the cover, showing off a northern pike above the words “The Good Life in Minnesota.” The story’s headline was, “A State That Works.”
In 1976 Mondale was elected Jimmy Carter’s VP. That 1973 governor, Wendell Anderson, appointed himself US senator in Mondale’s place. In 1978, in a reaction to the perceived arrogance of DFL governance and continued economic decline in the northern half of the state, DFL senatorial candidates (Anderson and Fraser) and DFL governor Perpich lost to republican opponents.
You know, Coleman’s column was online Tuesday evening, and I had to wait until now to get a fisking. Between Foot and Mitch, I expect instant reaction to Nonmonkey’s diatrabes.
I”m just wonderin’… If Coleman’s writing is so terrible, which it ALWAYS is, why would you ask us to even READ it, let alone respond?
Because, to turn 2 Timothy 3:16 completely on its head, it “is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.”
I have to abstain, since I turned Nick’s column back on himself yesterday.
In 1973, Time Magazine put Minnesota’s governor on the cover, showing off a northern pike above the words “The Good Life in Minnesota.” The story’s headline was, “A State That Works.”
Could part of it be that lily white middle class Minnesota was about has hard to run as Howie Deans 98% white middle class Vermont is? Since 1973, we have accepted hundreds of thousands of third-world refugees….I mean citizens from developing nations. That puts a huge strain the the systems, especially education. And it’s worse if you consider Detriot, Gary, and Chicago citizens moving here also.
I often feel the same way reading your blog Mitch, start to write, then write more..etc.
Then figure out how easy it is to resolve.. I simply delete what I was going to post and move on.. Try it.
Hey Mitch..
On that point, the one where something seems small.. and short but isn’t..let me add into the list of Constitutional violations by Bush started yesterday.
1. Signing Statements
2. Torture Memoranda
3. Unending war and assumption of powers imperpetuity based on that unending war
4. No fly lists of political opponents
5. Making appointments in the Department of Justice based upon political loyalty in direct violation of the law.
6. Overriding the opinion of the then Attorney General – Comey – and secretly issuing torture memoranda while denying the situation existed
If those don’t make you shiver, what would, disbanding Congress perhaps?
I mean, a signing statement is no less a usurpation of Congressional authority than disbanding it would be, it’s just a little more subtle.
I’m sure I’ll think of another dozen or more heinous violations of everything we feel is dear, but then again, I shouldn’t say we, as you apparently have no objections to signing statements, to torture, to fictional wars based on phony data used to keep REAL data about US citizens.
Gosh, this is going to be a lot of work.. so many aggregeous acts, so little comprehension by wingnuts…
Mitch,
Add one more..sorry..
Claiming that North Korea sponsors terrorism, and then removing them from the terror list, in short, making false claims, or unproven claims, whipping up fear (at home and abroad) and then using it for political gain.
Oh, and then saying Libya had abandoned WMD, blaming North Korea for attempting to ship Uranium Hexaflouride to Libya, and then WHOOPS! retracting it when you learned your good ole ally Pakistan actually was the culprit, and WHOOPS! it shipped through Dubai Ports World (if I recall correctly).
Oh, and attempting to farm out port security to DPW – and leaving your Constitutional responsibility to keep the nation secure – in the refuse heap by doing so – after leaving port security unaddressed for five years after 9/11..
Mitch, this is fun.. thanks :)!
peevish is like Garrison Keillor with his love/hate man crush on President Bush.
Mitch, this is fun.. thanks !
My pleaure, as always.
I ask a question about civil liberties.
I get in response:
1. Signing Statements
About which legitimate constitutional questions exist! I agree! Clinton abused them, and I’m not convinced Bush hasn’t! But that is (or is not) a presidential power, not a civil liberty.
2. Torture Memoranda
Which, again, is something that may or may not be a presidential power, and may or may not be something I support (I trend toward “not”), but again, since it applies only to foreign fighters captured overseas – who are not really covered by the Constitution or largely by the Geneva Convention – it’s not really a civil liberties issue. Unless you’re a foreigner captured in action against the US overseas.
3. Unending war and assumption of powers imperpetuity based on that unending war
Again, another separation of powers issue (as well as illogical; the President didnt’ start an “unending war”, it’s a war that hasn’t ended yet), not a civil liberty.
4. No fly lists of political opponents
If it happened – and to the best of my knowledge, nobody has proven a partisan political motivation – it would be potentially an abuse of bureaucratic power, not a constitutional issue. I think the no-fly lists are largely useless, and need to be pretty much scrapped anyway.
5. Making appointments in the Department of Justice based upon political loyalty in direct violation of the law.
Not quite sure what you’re talking about here. The President is allowed to make appointments, and politics are assumed to be a factor. If you’re talking about the US Attorneys “controversy”, the “loyalty” factor is both an unproven allegation AND well within the President’s power anyway, as I understand it.
6. Overriding the opinion of the then Attorney General – Comey – and secretly issuing torture memoranda while denying the situation existed
Comey?
I mean, a signing statement is no less a usurpation of Congressional authority than disbanding it would be, it’s just a little more subtle.
It’s nowhere near that cut and dried; while I might agree that the Bush administration overuses them, the legal questions about his entitlement to do so are still very much in play.
Hey Jeff… while you’re quoting scripture, please try Mathhew 18:15
“If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother.”
In short, publicly rebuking is considered wrong, even sinful, and an act of pride, and certainly disrepectful and beneath the conduct of good men.
So, where again.. is it that you are to rebuke publicly?
Peev: “I simply delete what I was going to post and move on”
Me: Um. . . er. . . pbsht. . . HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Peev, you haven’t been able to shut up about anything in your whole sorry existence. You’re the quintessential exhibit of a person suffering from Internet commenting disorder. I mean, I regularly read Fark comment threads, and those commenters rarely come across as unhinged as you, which is saying something, believe me.
Nick is an “angry white male”!
“In short, publicly rebuking is considered wrong, even sinful, and an act of pride, and certainly disrepectful and beneath the conduct of good men.
So, where again.. is it that you are to rebuke publicly? ”
Yes, Peevish. Where, indeed, is it? And why do you do it at such tiresome, dullwitted, rottentempered, humorless length? Or are you copping to being wrong, sinful, sotted with pride, disrepectful and bad?
So Mitch, when do you delete the defamatory comments again.. exactly?
So Mitch, when do you delete the defamatory comments again.. exactly?
What on earth are you talking about?
In general? When I find them.
In specific? Get real. I don’t keep a log.
In specific, Yoss isn’t worth beans as a person (clearly) but he consistently makes comments that are nothing short of childish and usually scatalogical.. I won’t ever respond to him directly, he’s not worth it. You, however are. You claimed you delete comments, yet to me it seems unless they’re directed at you (at least that I’ve ever seen in three years) you don’t ever delete them, especially if they’re directed at a critic.
AK – not worthy of reply.. try again.. you’ve both wilfully ignored the causation conduct and the prior hypocrisy in question.. I laugh in your general direction.
Oh, jeez. Now Peev is channelling Dwight Schrute. I’m being shunned! “Mitch, please tell Yoss he isn’t worth beans as a person (clearly).”
I hope my Mom and Dad don’t find out I’m not worth beans as a person. All that time and effort on their part. . . wasted!
Gosh, first I got AngryClown to not respond to me, now Peev! At this rate, I’ll be able to mock everyone I want with no chance of reprisal by December! Go Christmas!
Mitch responded..
Mitch Says:
October 4th, 2007 at 11:36 am
I ask a question about civil liberties.
I get in response:
1. Signing Statements
About which legitimate constitutional questions exist! I agree! Clinton abused them, and I’m not convinced Bush hasn’t! But that is (or is not) a presidential power, not a civil liberty.
Yet – by chosing to ignore the directive of Congress, he impairs the people’s constitutional right to equal representation.. that’s a liberty.
2. Torture Memoranda
Which, again, is something that may or may not be a presidential power,
No- it’s NOT a power, we signed treaties against it, and our own SCOTUS reprimanded this guy for violating treaties were are signatory to.
and may or may not be something I support (I trend toward “not”), but again, since it applies only to foreign fighters captured overseas – who are not really covered by the Constitution or largely by the Geneva Convention – it’s not really a civil liberties issue. Unless you’re a foreigner captured in action against the US overseas.
Actually, being free from torture is a civil liberty, and it’s not a long stretch to see it happen to a US citizen.. in fact there are at least rumors of somewhat questionable conduct.. and I’m glad you ‘trend’ against torture, I’d sure hope you go stronger than trend. But back to the point, do you really want to claim that what we do to foriegners is not something we should be concerned about?
3. Unending war and assumption of powers imperpetuity based on that unending war
Again, another separation of powers issue (as well as illogical; the President didnt’ start an “unending war”, it’s a war that hasn’t ended yet), not a civil liberty.
No – it’s a civil liberty issue, he assumed the power to spy on folks based on it. He claimed those unitary powers, the ability to ignore the Congress, and the will of the people extending from it, based on it. He claims we’re “at war’ when no declaration of war exists.
4. No fly lists of political opponents
If it happened – and to the best of my knowledge, nobody has proven a partisan political motivation
Ok, let me educate you then, liberal group members were placed on that list – including my sister, who was nothing other than a treasurer for the AFLCIO. So please, spare me, it’s not a question. In addition, someone like Joseph Islam was prevented from flying, please tell me that wasn’t about too broadly brushing with political sentiment.
– it would be potentially an abuse of bureaucratic power, not a constitutional issue. I think the no-fly lists are largely useless, and need to be pretty much scrapped anyway.
ON that we agree.. but it’s still a liberty issue, someone was prevented from:
1. Free and open travel
2. Excersise of rights of interstate commerce
5. Making appointments in the Department of Justice based upon political loyalty in direct violation of the law.
Not quite sure what you’re talking about here.
Well -sorry, let me help – the blonde lady who testified after granting immunity said clearly that she had made promotion decisions based on political favoritism. She was chastised for doing so, and advised that were it not for her immunity, she could have been prosecuted, because such conduct is illegal.
The President is allowed to make appointments, and politics are assumed to be a factor.
Not what I’m talking about.
If you’re talking about the US Attorneys “controversy”, the “loyalty” factor is both an unproven allegation AND well within the President’s power anyway, as I understand it.
Also, not what I’m talking about. and the fact that Bush didn’t do it directly.. doesn’t matter a whit, he created such an environment, and there have been comments from MANY areas that similar attitudes were cultivated, that it’s clear political nepotism in ‘real’ positions has been the word of the day. Whether it happened previously is no defense, it’s wrong, and you asked, and denying a job to a properly qualified person based on political affiliation, is absolutely a civil liberty issue.
6. Overriding the opinion of the then Attorney General – Comey – and secretly issuing torture memoranda while denying the situation existed
Comey?
Acting attorney general while Ashcroft was in the hospital, he told Gonzalez to NOT do issue such a memo (while Gonzalez was WH counsel), yet Gonalez ignored the opinion of DOJ.
I mean, a signing statement is no less a usurpation of Congressional authority than disbanding it would be, it’s just a little more subtle.
It’s nowhere near that cut and dried; while I might agree that the Bush administration overuses them, the legal questions about his entitlement to do so are still very much in play.
Oh, yes it is, and when it gets in front of the SCOTUS, unless it’s stacked with RW sychophants AND it’s a Republican Pres, signing statements will be repudiated without any doubt or question. Beyond that, Antonin Scalia made his opinion of the excesses of GWB abundantly clear in People v. Hamdi.. if you think this Pres hasn’t violated liberties (and I think you KNOW FULL WELL he has) – go read that opinion.
In specific, Yoss isn’t worth beans as a person (clearly) but he consistently makes comments that are nothing short of childish and usually scatalogical..
Actually, not only is Yossarian worth beans as a person, but indeed his legume consumption makes him a worthy emissary between the human and bean worlds.
You claimed you delete comments,
No. I delete comments. There’s no “claim” about it. It is an objective fact.
yet to me it seems unless they’re directed at you (at least that I’ve ever seen in three years) you don’t ever delete them, especially if they’re directed at a critic
Question: If the comment is deleted, and you never see it, does it exist?
The fact is, if a comment is merely offensive – even to me – I very rarely delete it.
If a comment in my opinion would leave me open to legal problems, I delete it quickly and unceremoniously. And I owe nobody an explanation about who and when I do it; this blog is private property.
Also, look – I don’t necessarily disagree on a number of the constitutional issues. Signing Statements should be tightened up.
“Rumors” of torturing American citizens – right, and there are rumors that 9/11 was an inside job, that the moon landing was fake, and that you can’t be legally prosecuted for not paying federal income taxes. Get back to us when you have more than rumors.
As to torturing foreigners – like I say, I’m opposed in principle. And yet if some Yemeni “student” walked into my office wearing a “Kill a Jew for Mommy” T-Shirt saying that he’d just parked a delivery truck with a nuke somewhere in Saint Paul, I’d take a staple puller to his eyeball personally to find out where.
As to Hamdi – more on that later.
Actually,
The ‘private’ nature of this property would be in some question. It’s publicly posted, and anything here is pretty damned near to publicly available (i.e. in the public space), so while you get to control things – no doubt – the private nature of your property would be of dubious abilty to sustain.. meaning, I could copy ANYTHING you place here, and put it out in the public space, and I don’t need your permission – and the ‘I’ isn’t me, it’s anyone… just to quibble.
As far as your response goes, you’re right, I don’t know if I see it, on the other hand, I’ve never seen it otherwise..regardless, I DID say, as FAR AS I CAN SEE – and I can say CLAIM as I desire – because, AS FAR AS I CAN SEE, HAVE SEEN I don’t recall one instance of you repudiating, deleting/banning whatever, a comment after the fact. You say you do, ok, you say you do.
And funny how you’ll come to the defense of your sychophant, but .. gee, scatalogical Yoss insults (me, AC, Doug), where is your defense? Oh, yeah, non-existent.
And given his conduct, I don’t buy your defense, he comports himself poorly, and I suspect, if I knew him, he’d fall far short of being judged anything other than an ‘not worth beans.’ If you think he is, well, maybe our standards are just different. I don’t find craven, witless people who have nothing to offer but ugly, vile words, to be worth reply. If Yoss ever has anything on point to say.. and can say it without personal slight.. well, pigs probably will fly by the window, but I haven’t seen it yet.
And one last thing Mitch, unless it’s YOUR comment – or exposes YOUR conduct, there is not – and we’d have to have a real lawyer, not you or I judge this, there is not ONE legal problem a comment could create if posted here by someone not in your control/employ/you.. I suppose if it violated a trade secret and you suspected it did, or something similar, probably that too.. but I find it really dubious that you’ve had ‘secrets’ posted here by strangers/others that you had to then delete.
My experience has been you delete things you don’t like – that have nothing to do with legal problems – if it does a compare and contrast that is unfavorable to you (personally) you deleted it, if it insulted you (and only you) you deleted it – but I sure don’t recall even one post from someone else that you deleted – bluster and feigned indignation aside – which looks pretty pompous btw – I don’t recall one incident. Not that it didn’t happen, but the norm is about you..at least AS I RECALL.
“meaning, I could copy ANYTHING you place here, and put it out in the public space, and I don’t need your permission”
Oh, just go ahead and TRY. If you don’t attribute it, you’re violating copyright and are subject to the law as such. Whether Mitch would choose to pursue such action is up to Mitch.
And Peev? AC regularly insults people, and doesn’t get deleted or banned. It’s kind of what goes on around here, in case you haven’t noticed during your Tolstoy-esque mewlings.
In summation: fart, fart, ass, butt, farty fart fart.
And one last thing Mitch, unless it’s YOUR comment – or exposes YOUR conduct, there is not – and we’d have to have a real lawyer, not you or I judge this, there is not ONE legal problem a comment could create if posted here by someone not in your control/employ/you..
That is an issue that is still very much in question among bloggers. I can’t remember all the cases (and I don’t care to look ’em up right now) but there’ve been some wins and some losses in that department.
I, as it happens, am the judge.
My experience has been you delete things you don’t like – that have nothing to do with legal problems
Untrue.
Oh, I DID accidentally delete everything you wrote here between November of ’06 and, I think, March or April -whenever it was I banned you last. Clicked the wrong button.
if it does a compare and contrast that is unfavorable to you (personally) you deleted it, if it insulted you (and only you) you deleted it – but I sure don’t recall even one post from someone else that you deleted – bluster and feigned indignation aside – which looks pretty pompous btw – I don’t recall one incident. Not that it didn’t happen, but the norm is about you..at least AS I RECALL.
Then your recollection is incomplete to the point where you are belaboring a nonexistent point.
The ‘private’ nature of this property would be in some question.
Not to anyone who understands the issue.
MPR, WCCO and the Strib’s products, like mine via this blog, are publicly visible.
So go ahead and walk into MPR, WCCO or the Strib and stuff some “questionably private” property in your pocket and see what happens.
And Yossarian – who actually works in the field – is right. My content is copyrighted. I do not retain a staff of lawyers to prosecute plagiarists, as Yossarian notes, but plagiarism is plagiarism.
My goodness, Peev. Obsess much??!!!
I don’t buy your defense, he comports himself poorly
What defense? I said he’d be a good ambassador to the world of beans.
I mean, if beans had an independant Beanish homeland, and we had an embassy there.
scatalogical Yoss insults (me, AC, Doug), where is your defense? Oh, yeah, non-existent.
Um, right.
RickDFL, Doug (who’s ban was way overdue) and “Coldeye” insulted me even more regularly. I saw no defense from you – nor did I expect one.
There is no right not to be attacked or offended – certainly not for me, and not for any commenter.
And I will assail Yossarian for his scatology no sooner than I would ding Jimmy Page for his chording technique, or a Cordon Bleu chef for their onion-slicing technique. He is an artist.
“I often feel the same way reading your blog Mitch, start to write, then write more..etc.
Then figure out how easy it is to resolve.. I simply delete what I was going to post and move on.. Try it. ”
Joke……right?
I count 6 drive-by blatherings in this thread alone. This fckn moonbat can’t get enough of himself!
As ambassador of Beanoslavia, I feel I must comport myself to better accommodate the sensibilities of the uptight and voluminous Peevs of the world, even though I suspect hanging out with Peev and his ilk would be the social equivalent of descending a steel slide, naked, on a 90+ degree day.
There I go again, not comporting myself properly.
“And Yossarian – who actually works in the field…”
Alfalfa or soy?
I knew Cathcart had to be a farmer.
Miiiiitch! AC is insulllllltiiinggggg meeeeeeee! I’m offennnded! Deleeete his commmmmment!
PB/Mikey/Peevish?whatever said:
Hey Jeff… while you’re quoting scripture, please try Mathhew 18:15
“If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother.”
In short, publicly rebuking is considered wrong, even sinful, and an act of pride, and certainly disrepectful and beneath the conduct of good men.
How come you left out what comes next? You know, verses 16 and 17?
“But if he does not listen, take one or two other along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”
Maybe because of your moonbat views?
Seriously, dude…this is second time I’ve busted you misusing Scripture.
I knew Cathcart had to be a farmer.
Yes, AC, Yossarian is a man outstanding in his field.
“Doug (who’s ban was way overdue)”
You can have him back. Seriously.
I did my time.
It’s just part of the dues you pay.
St. Paul revealed: “Seriously, dude…this is second time I’ve busted you misusing Scripture.”
I’m praying Jesus to put a hex on you, Paul. You should feel your hemorrhoids acting up right……NOW.
Saint Paul writes at Fraters.
You’re referring to Paul, I think.
To avoid confusion, I’ll switch to “St. RuPaul” when making fun of him for quoting the Good BookTM like Ned Flanders on crank.
Pet Peeve, here’s a hint: IF you are so egregiously disenfranchised by how Mitch decides to run his own personal blog (rightfully and properly a benevolent dictatorship, might I remind you), leave and go start your own.
http://www.blogger.com
Visit and have your own “Taking shots at Shot In The Dark” up and running in less than 5 minutes.
But for the love of God and all that is holy, QUIT WHINING BY PARAGRAPHS UPON PARAGRAPHS.
Why is it that leftists always whine, complain and protest, and conservatives just get up and DO? A self-explanatory question.
Bill C(unt) whined: “Why is it that leftists always whine, complain and protest, and conservatives just get up and DO?”
They do male interns, guys in airport mens’ rooms…
I’m praying Jesus to put a hex on you, Paul. You should feel your hemorrhoids acting up right……NOW.
AC, I suggest you stick to hurling cream pies and spraying seltzer water. Things you know about, m’kay?
Of course, I’m way outta range here in Minnesota.
You’re never out of Jesus range, RuPaul. He sees you when you’re sleeping, he knows when you’re awake. And he’s pals with Angryclown. So you better watch out, for goodness sake!