I realized that I have two hours of material which I will attempt to blurt out in two minutes.
1. Yes, Obama's "joke" was offensive. As Joe Torre said a million times, players can't control the outcome, but they can control their effort. We respect Special Olympians because they make the effort, working as hard as they can to achieve their best. Does anybody think that the obviously athletic (and proud of it) Barack has really committed himself to mastering bowling and is maxed out with a score of 129? If not, then watching him bowl would be nothing like watching the Special Olympics - it would be like watching a dilletante embarrass himself and annoy us. Or like watching me try to spell "dilettante".
[Just warming up, but gotta go...
Still to come - Jake Tapper and the Republican view of PC humor; Jeff Goldstein and the Captain on same.]
READY TO RUMBLE!
Let's start with a follow up Twitter from Jake Tapper, who helped launch this story:
Preparing for day of hypocrisy: conservs who would normally defend the SpecOlymp joke acting offended, liberals saying lighten up. Sigh
And AllahPundit:
Exit question: One of Jeff Goldstein’s points in his debate with Patterico over Rush Limbaugh is that it’s a grave mistake for conservatives to play by the left’s rhetorical rules. Isn’t that what we’re doing by beating up on The One for a very mildly politically incorrect joke, though?
Inshallah. I will not spoil the suspense by seeing whether Jeff G has responded. Instead, I will tell you how I interpet his past arguments. IMHO his basic theme is that the left has established themselves as the arbiter of language by declaring that racism, for example, is determined by the feelings and reaction of the listener rather than the actual words of the speaker. Thus, when Barack makes a joke about the disabled it is not (in Left-world) a big deal because they all know his heart is in the right place. However, if a hate-filled Republican says the same thing, then Open the Gates of Hell!
Jeff G's view (as I grasp it, and that is the only thing Jeff has that I am willing to grasp just now. Or ever.) is that words have meaning - if Obama's words were offensive, they were offensive regardless of how inclined people may be to project noble intent on to him.
That is much different from saying that conservatives routinely defend non-PC speech. Republicans ought to defend themselves from phony, politically opportunistic outrage, but that does not mean that we have no sense of manners and recognize no lines that should not be crossed.
That is hardly a subtle distinction, yet look at how that difference gets glossed in this coverage of recent comments by Clint Eastwood on PC humor (my emphasis):
Clint Eastwood goes gunning for PC killjoys by saying we should laugh at race-based jokes
He says the world would be a better place if we could still laugh at inoffensive jokes about different races.
"Inoffensive"! There are plenty of jokes about blacks, or Poles, or the Irish, that I don't think a reasonable person would consider to be offensive, and plenty more that are way over any reasonable line. Eastwood's utterly defensible point is that our ability to make distinctions has been lost by the right of any person anywhere to announce that their having taken offense defines the crime.
Or for another example, recall Rush Limbaugh's crucifixion for pointing out that Donovan McNabb was carried by the press because he was black. Was that a serious attempt to discuss the issues or political opportunism? Tough call.
So. Obama's comment was ignorant and projected an unfortunate and inaccurate image of Special Olympians as lacking skill, determination and the ability to master a task. There is nothing to defend and no reason to defend it, and he is not attempting to do so.
If Obama lacks for offensive comic material, here is a suggestion - "Watching me try to bowl is like watching Michelle try to balance the checkbook." Har de har - don't attempt that at home, Big Fella.
If Obama had wanted to try for self-deprecation, he could have gone with "Watching me try to bowl is like watching me try to balance the budget... making progress!" Or maybe, "Watching me try to bowl is like watching me, umm, try to talk without, uhh, my teleprompter." Obama's fans would have been mystified but I know plenty of folks who would have laughed.
Over to Jeff.
LAST CALL: Let me add that words have their meaning but speakers have their history. If a chap with a deplorable history of racist remarks makes a comment that falls in a gray area, he will be judged differently from a fellow with an otherwise stellar past. Obama's past is irrelevant here since his words don't come anywhere near a gray zone. And clearly, history is subject to manipulation - many people "know" Rush is a racist because of his McNabb comments, and judge his other words accordingly.
YOU KNEW I WASN'T DONE: If you have a joke that absolutely requires a dummy but you aren't comfortable with Micks or Polacks, go with some self-selected and racially/religiously/sexually indeterminate group. I lean towards "How many Red Sox fans does it take to change a lightbulb...".
BEATS ME. Ok, how many Red Sox fans does it take to change a light bulb? I have no idea - my free agent comedian hasn't delivered the punchline yet.
DEVELOPING: How many Red Sox fans to change a lightbulb? None, they have yet to see the light.
Or, That depends on many lightbulbs are down in the cellar.
We're having fun now.
LATE BREAKING: Imus - Fire Barack.
OUCH:
"He didn't just cross the line," Obama said [about Imus]. "He fed into some of the worst stereotypes that my two young daughters are having to deal with today in America."
Hey buster, ask Sarah Palin about it...
I NEED SOME WATER: Right after the Special Olympics joke Jay Leno and Barack Obama yucked it up about Obama's new dog, with Leno wondering if it was a "portugese waterhead" and Obama joining in. Turns out that "waterhead" is urban slang for a person with Down's syndrome. Roll the tape.
Obama got big props for his cool during the campaign. How is he going to brush this dirt off his shoulder?
HOW SOON WE FORGET: No real need to imagine the reaction if Bush had said this - in the summer of 2004, disgusting anti-war flyers were made up with a Special Olympian and a caption of "Starting a war in Iraq is like running in the Special Olympics - Even if you win, you're still retarded."
In October 2004 that poster was photo-shopped with a picture of Bush's head superimposed over the Special Olympian and given a new caption - "Voting for Bush is like running in the Special Olympics - Even if you win, you're still retarded".
The posters were found at the campaign headquarters of a local Dem candidate. Their "defense" - it was a dirty trick by Evil Republicans.
So I guess it was considered offensive enough to blame Bush back in 2004. Well, then, they should blame Bush now! If he hadn't left Obama so many problems the poor guy could get some rest and concentrate when he spoke.
I'd call Obama a 'Special President', but it's derogatory to those who've truly been challenged, as Obama has not. He's not even taking his present challenge seriously. Fifty-five vegetables, forsooth.
==================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 07:43 AM
Very interesting that the Captain's Palin video was pre-Leno.
==============================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 07:53 AM
"Fifty-five vegetables, forsooth".
Those would be Obama's White House advisers?
Posted by: PeterUK | March 21, 2009 at 07:54 AM
When I first heard the remark BO made about "special olympics" my reaction was that is a "chidish" thing to say. So I consulted a friend who teaches PE to 4th and 5th graders at a private day school. She said her students use the expression frequently.
Posted by: BB Key | March 21, 2009 at 09:51 AM
I think it was Deb in a previous post who reminded us about Obama's principled take on insensitive comments, back from his fire-Imus commentary.
As he's clearly stated in the past, retards don't make the list.Posted by: Extraneus | March 21, 2009 at 09:53 AM
Looks like Rasmussen's approval/disapproval chart is about to cross.
That's some trend you got there, Mr. President.
Posted by: Extraneus | March 21, 2009 at 09:57 AM
Ex, you know the Strong Support line will level off in the low to mid 30's, no matter what TOTUS does. So the line to watch is the Strong Disapproval line since it measures the other side and the muddle.
Posted by: Old Lurker | March 21, 2009 at 10:02 AM
Well, at least he actually wore a tie on Leno. It could have been worse.
Posted by: E. Nigma | March 21, 2009 at 10:08 AM
It is rumoured that Obama used the Teleprompter when Michelle ordered him to propose to her.
Posted by: PeterUK | March 21, 2009 at 10:15 AM
Nicely done,TM.
BTW we would all do well to adopt Jeff's argument and use it often in responding to the left. They've gotten away with this carp for so long that few can even see the game behind it anymore.
Posted by: clarice | March 21, 2009 at 10:18 AM
If Congress really enacts a 90% bonus tax, wouldn't it be nice if they included the following:
“…and any politician receiving any donations from any company receiving said funds, will be taxed at the same 90% level on all of their income and all of their donations…”
Posted by: PMII | March 21, 2009 at 10:18 AM
"It is rumoured that Obama used the Teleprompter when Michelle ordered him to propose to her."
Raises the question about whether that was simply a mirror on the ceiling over the bed...
Posted by: Old Lurker | March 21, 2009 at 10:23 AM
**THWACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*
Posted by: clarice | March 21, 2009 at 10:30 AM
See Cyrano de Teleprompter —Ace
http://ace.mu.nu/
Posted by: PMII | March 21, 2009 at 10:39 AM
Raises the question about whether that was simply a mirror on the ceiling over the bed...
**Soylent frantically tries to poke out his mind's eye**
Although, someone over at AoS suggested that if the Teleprompter had a voice, it would be the voice of Barry White.
Posted by: Soylent Red | March 21, 2009 at 10:43 AM
Light bulbs and baseball, TM? I think the answer is that a Yankee fan can change three bulbs in a row without a problem, but then chokes on four chances to change the next one. The Sox fan messes it up three times, but then does it correctly the next four times.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | March 21, 2009 at 10:44 AM
I don't know what Tapper is complaining about. Who started this PC garbage and which political party has been using it as a weapon to degrade and vilify its political opposition? Why, the DEMOCRATS!
They are the world's GREATEST HYPOCRITES! Byrd used the phrase "White nigger" on a nationally televised interview--and where does he now sit? Trent Lott made an affectionate remark to Strom Thurman that didn't use one offensive word, and he lost his seat as majority leader.
I might give Obama the benefit of the doubt if he hadn't been one of the WORST OFFENDERS in the past--just ask Don Imus about teachable moments.
To put it in another way, they portray themselves as the defenders of the downtrodden, but in reality simply use the disadvantaged to grasp power. If Obama would say such an insensitive thing on national TV--what must he utter in private!
Conservatives are simply judging Obama by the standards of public behavior that HE SET HIMSELF.
He may talk like a black preacher when he addresses the masses(notice how his voice and diction changes depending on the audience!), but in reality he is a self-centered elitist who has never gotten his hands dirty a day in his life.
Posted by: verner | March 21, 2009 at 10:44 AM
To me, it just shows how little he understands his position in the world. He went from neighborhood politician to most powerful man in the world in 5 years.
He regularly says uncareful things about our allies, over praises China, calls out critics like Santelli and Cramer, and has made even Las Vegas's Oscar Goodman mad.
He just doesn't get that everything he says is listened to and magnified.
The Special Olympics joke is the kind of thing you might say among friends who all know how truly feel about Special Olympians.
It isn't the kind of thing you say when you don't know your audience.
It surely isn't the kind of thing you say when you are President and thousands of Special Olympians may be eagerly watching you on tv.
Posted by: MayBee | March 21, 2009 at 10:55 AM
Eastwood's utterly defensible point is that our ability to make distinctions has been lost by the right of any person anywhere to announce that their having taken offense defines the crime.
Well, there are different sets of rules for that, too. Republicans in general, and George Bush in particular, have no right to be offended by anything. (Think dueling chimp cartoons.) We are all,obviously, beyond the pale. Especially Extraneus:
As he's clearly stated in the past, retards don't make the list.
Woefully incorrect. But very funny!!
Posted by: Tom Bowler | March 21, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Yup. It the comment hadn't come from an elitist race-hustling hypocrite, it wouldn't have been very offensive at all. But these are the same people who can't take a joke, no matter how tame. So too bad, Obama, the benefit of the doubt isn't deserved.
From the high-minded Imus days...
Gee, you know, come to think of it, I'd bet some people have daughters in the Special Olympics, too.Posted by: Extraneus | March 21, 2009 at 11:00 AM
The rise of blonde jokes co-incided with the political incorrectedness of all other jokes.
In 'Stranger in a Strange Land', the author makes the very interesting point that humans laugh when something has gone wrong. I cannot make the point as eloquently(I don't even remember it very well), but his point was sort of that it is the political incorrectedness that makes it funny. That is what is so sad about all this business of political correctness and speech and humour. It is dehumanizing. Who would have expected that from the left. Heh!
========================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 11:02 AM
So much of the conversation about whether the joke was funny or offensive misses the point. To my mind, this isn't about what is acceptable behavior in regular people, it's about what's minimally expected of a President.
When the President of the United States makes fun of handicapped people on national TV, that is a big deal. Aside from the fact that it's unpresidential in the extreme, other questions arise, such as: Why does he have so little self-control? What other disastrous utterances can we expect in situations where he is under far more pressure? How did we elect such an immature and thoughtless person to the highest office in the world and what will the consequences be?
Posted by: Porchlight | March 21, 2009 at 11:06 AM
See LUN for Vanity Fair columnist Michael Wolff's critique of Obama. Article dated 3/20 entitled "Barack Obama Is A Terrible Bore".
Posted by: belle | March 21, 2009 at 11:06 AM
We are the creatures who laugh. They have it backwards; it is dehumanizing to place any person or group beyond the limits of humour.
=========================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 11:07 AM
I am too slow! While I was typing, MayBee made my point much better than I did.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 21, 2009 at 11:07 AM
"He didn't just cross the line," Obama said. "He fed into some of the worst stereotypes that my two young daughters are having to deal with today in America."
Hey buster, ask Sarah Palin about it...
Posted by: verner | March 21, 2009 at 11:12 AM
I give you slapstick, and pratfalls. Funny? Or ouchy? You be the judge; and remember to laugh 'til it hurts.
========================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Ha Porch! I was just wishing I'd waited for you to say it, because you said it so much better.
Posted by: MayBee | March 21, 2009 at 11:15 AM
MayBee and Porch, you both make the most EXCELLENT point. The man is not presidential. He is dragging the office into the sordid morass of pop culture in order to shore up his MTV base, and it's a miserable failure.
DIGNITY
From relaxing the dress standards in the oval office to appearing on Leno, he's turning the presidency into a reality show.
Posted by: verner | March 21, 2009 at 11:24 AM
To my mind, this isn't about what is acceptable behavior in regular people,...
... it's about whether Obama is really as much of an empty suit as we said he was before the election.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 21, 2009 at 11:28 AM
let's give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.....as to the future, as Teddy Kennedy so aptly put it, "we'll cross that bridge when we come to it".
Posted by: matt | March 21, 2009 at 11:36 AM
I'll be non-pc and offer this "shrink's" very insightful take on why Obama is forced to use TOTUS. She liberally quotes the late Dean Barnett on the "real" Obama, which includes a reminder of his sneering, "How many [Joe] plumbers do you know that make $250,000 a year?"
Posted by: DebinNC | March 21, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Perhaps we should separate Obama from TOTUS in our assessments? As in "TOTUS would never have done this, this was pure Obama."
Axelrod needs to have Obama fitted with a cochlear transmitter (with shock capability). Then Obama could be TOTUS all the time.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 21, 2009 at 11:42 AM
This, along with many other similar gaffes and errors, is almost certainly a preview of something really awful to come. As MayBee pointed out, he doesn't even know what he's doing wrong, and even if he did, he doesn't have the control to avoid this kind of error.
By the way, when the reality dawns on the reality-based community that the President is totally inept, I now know what they will say: It's McCain's fault. If McCain hadn't ran a terrible campaign (and picked Sarah Palin for VP), he would have won and we would have been spared Obama. That was what a liberal Obama voting friend tried to float to me a month or so ago, and it's what the Palin haters on the right have already said.
Posted by: Porchlight | March 21, 2009 at 11:44 AM
In My Old Home Town (there's your obscure literary reference) we used to make ethnics jokes about "bo-johns". They were some kind of southeastern European, but no one really remembered which (possibly Serbs/Croats), so no one got really offended, while people often referred to themselves as bojohnsself-deprecatingly.
Sample:
Q. Why'd the Bojohn Ice House close?
A. Lost the recipe.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 21, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Too much on the bowling gaffe, not enough on the AIG crack ... I'm still confused.
So have we since Thursday redefined the term terrorism to mean those working in corporate building instead of those flying planes into said buildings?
Once we get this settled, I also have a question or two about the 'Geithner is doing "outstanding job"' remark.
Posted by: Mean Dean | March 21, 2009 at 11:49 AM
A bo-john is a bohunk, short for bohemian, which is Southeastern Europe. Polacks are a closely related species.
====================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 11:51 AM
TOTUS and POTUS ... the difference between the character and the actor.
The Character: Jed Bartlet - American hero
The Actor: Martin Husheen O'Bama - Hollywood leftist
Posted by: boris | March 21, 2009 at 11:55 AM
I am confident we can all join hands and collectively deplore the relative absence of Mac jokes.
Also, I must work on the lyrics for "Why Can't Obama Bowl More Like A Man?" and/or "Why Can't Obama Be Tough On Iran?"
Posted by: Elliott | March 21, 2009 at 11:55 AM
"...reality dawns on the reality based community?" Are we going to to another modification of daylight savings time? Daylight reality time to make the morons see the nose on the end of their face?
Posted by: Gmax | March 21, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Isn't it time for Bob Dole to weigh in on this dude?
================================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 11:56 AM
She liberally quotes the late Dean Barnett on the "real" Obama, which includes a reminder of his sneering, "How many [Joe] plumbers do you know that make $250,000 a year?"
Right Deb. This isn't his first gaffe, but just the latest in a long string of condescending put downs of ordinary people. And Michelle does it too--ie her statement that she was unaware of the plight of military families and the infamous "proud of her country" bit.
They just posted a "greatest hits" at the Chicago Tribune. Let's remember the bitter gun clingers, his grandma acting like a typical white person, and his claim that McCain was a techno-dunce because he COULDN'T use a keyboard (by the way, McCain is certainly taking to twitter! so there), the snarky giving of the middle finger during speeches, and the pig/lipstick comment.
Least we forget, he almost lost the primary to Hillary because he appeared to be so out of touch and hypocritical.
This isn't just an outlier, it's a documented pattern.
Posted by: verner | March 21, 2009 at 11:57 AM
How many voters do you suppose have a handicpped member? Why would any politician be so stupid as to offend all of them for a laugh on Leno?
He doesn't think things through.
He's a jiving street punk.
Posted by: clarice | March 21, 2009 at 11:57 AM
One of the issues here is that given his uncompromising support and weak justifications for abortion, the Obamas would never have a special needs child.
Posted by: motionview | March 21, 2009 at 11:57 AM
BO">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59XB68F54kA">BO at first presser (sans TOTUS)
Posted by: DebinNC | March 21, 2009 at 12:03 PM
"Jiving street punk"? Whatever makes you think that?
Actually, he'd lose first round at the Twelvsies. He's man absent of wit.
===========================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 12:08 PM
Remember, Deb, at his first presser Obama promised Geithner's plan 'in great detail' for the next day. That was almost two months ago. He had to know that was a gigantic lie. He gets away with this because he is allowed to do so by our 'free press'.
The nice thing about Bush being held to a much higher standard of behaviour is that he performed to that much higher standard. So, there's justice after all. You get what you pay for, or maybe you get what you believe in.
============================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 12:11 PM
AS I've pointed out in the past, I would be the first to applaud an articulate African American official to high office (Thomas, Blackwell and most recently Col. West) I ignored the first part of MacFarquahar's New Yorker profile of him, what four or five years ago, because it didn't seem interesting; his antiwar speech in 2002. I still thought that he would make a good role model, for a community that really is in need of one. After the Jeremiah Wright revelations, that idea started to go away, when one actually listened to his speeches
and not the hype about them; one found him
basically repeating the same gripes of Sharpton and Jackson, but in a softer voice.
When I saw the debates between him and Hillary, that really cemented my concerns.
I knew that McCain was an inperfect vehicle for a challenge, but I thought after Sarah
was selected, there was a better than even
shot that he'd be defeated. A whole confluence of events that we won't rehash
here, made that impossible. As I pointed out
before, what has kept 'hope alive' to use another overused cliche, has been the one
redeeming aspect of that otherwise miserable effort. A sample LUned below from her Lincoln Day speech, from a twitter of all things, you know how I hate twitter, validates that conclusion
Posted by: narciso | March 21, 2009 at 12:13 PM
He doesn't think things through. He's a jiving street punk.
That's the real BO we rarely see. The artificial BO usually on display is scripted down to the last syllable and inflection.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 21, 2009 at 12:14 PM
he'd lose first round at the Twelvsies.
Barak the character is Chicago black. Barry the actor is mixed race Hawaiian.
Posted by: boris | March 21, 2009 at 12:14 PM
I also have a question or two about the 'Geithner is doing "outstanding job"' remark
Like Barack Hussein would actually know one way or the other? "Hold, on, let me check the teleprompter on Geitner..........."
Posted by: Pofarmer | March 21, 2009 at 12:20 PM
narciso, the evil that was unleashed upon Sarah is what changed the election, and that evil is the enemy. It is a culture war, and look what the culture of the left is bringing us; death, destruction and despair. We should not be ashamed to make this point. They want us to be ashamed. Big error.
=========================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 12:22 PM
People should have gotten a clue regarding Zero's humor versus John McCain's humor at the Al Smith dinner.
Posted by: glasater | March 21, 2009 at 12:25 PM
Great point glasater! I thought the best word to describe Obama's performance was leaden.
Posted by: verner | March 21, 2009 at 12:29 PM
Hallelujah, at Hot Air, the Captain has the horsetrading that may have kneecapped Cap and Trade for this year. This may sink it for good, because we are cooling, folks, and kim is sure it will be for at least as long as the next election.
===========================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Have you all seen the Twitter uproar at Jake Tapper?
Even Jay Rosen is in on it now. The usual left suspects attacked Tapper for his Special Olympics post, and now are upset he's banned them and their vitriolic spew from his Twitter feed.
Oh, how I love those guys.
Posted by: MayBee | March 21, 2009 at 12:36 PM
Thanks Verner--and Zero's jokes were mostly too "inside Washington".
I didn't get many of them but I am just a blonde:-)
Posted by: glasater | March 21, 2009 at 12:36 PM
Oh to be a fly on the WH wall at that "Newsmaker of the Year" award ceremony yesterday. The absurdity of the WH barring the press was exceeded by the certainty that BO and those black publishers, quick to see pc offenses in others, can't recognize it in themselves.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 21, 2009 at 12:37 PM
Liberals love to hoist Conservatives by their own petard. When Conservatives are caught having affairs, or sponsoring earmarks, the Liberals are all over it.
When they say "macaca" or make a gay joke, or don't kiss special interest group butt whenever asked, they get it handed to them.
So when Barak does something like this, what kinds of idiot gives them a free pass? Taking the "high road" is why the GOP has been impotent and why we have Liberals in charge right now.
If the enemy kicks you in the groin, kick them right back, and aim for the kneecap too. Beat the stuffing out of them by their own rules, then maybe they will agree to change them.
But otherwise, yes, don't let libs set the rules of any debate or argument.
Posted by: smarty | March 21, 2009 at 12:39 PM
Jay Rosen, in case you aren't aware of it, is a grand fool. Er, maybe that's tool.
============================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 12:42 PM
And Tapper painted a target on his back by acting like a real journalist. It's just amazing we've come to this point.
=================================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 12:43 PM
Po- great point.
It is obviously Geithner and Summers teaching Obama about economics. Surely there's no evidence he's ever paid attention to economics on his own.
So what is it supposed to mean that Obama thinks one of them is doing a good job? Or that he has confidence in them?
It's meaningless.
Posted by: MayBee | March 21, 2009 at 12:47 PM
Maybee,
Where at Political Punch is all that going on?
Bravo TM = fabulous post.
And Bravo TC - for the correct answer to the light bulb question.
Posted by: Jane | March 21, 2009 at 12:58 PM
The "tell" on Obama and how he despises,looks down on average Americans and ingratiates himself with the leftist elites to curry their favor was his unscripted slander of them in SF during the election.
Anyone who claims O's real character is a surprise just wasn't paying attention.
Posted by: clarice | March 21, 2009 at 12:59 PM
Even Jay Rosen is in on it now. The usual left suspects attacked Tapper for his Special Olympics post, and now are upset he's banned them and their vitriolic spew from his Twitter feed.
Heh. Jay Rosen kept saying dumb things, which I kept demolishing in 140 characters because they were so dumb.
So he blocked me.
I'd be curious if Rosen is saying anything about how Tapper is, I dunno, violating the people's right to know or anything.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | March 21, 2009 at 01:08 PM
Jane, it's going on at Twitter.
You can catch some of it at TIME's Swampland.
These people are always furious when they aren't given free rein to spew their vitriol.
Which is hilarious, because conservative commenters at Swampland are called trolls and are utterly abused. I was once told I was responsible for a shooting in Arkansas, when a Dem official was shot.
Posted by: MayBee | March 21, 2009 at 01:12 PM
So he blocked me
Hilarious. Are you Charlie (co) on Twitter? I want to find what you were saying.
Once at Althouse I mentioned JR (who wasn't involved in the thread) as a "blog triumphalist" and he entered in the thread and went bezerk on me. He said I had low standards.
He is always at the center of these "free speech" frenzies, though, isn't he? Yet right-of-center commenters at his place are hounded off the website as culture warriors.
Posted by: MayBee | March 21, 2009 at 01:17 PM
It is obviously Geithner and Summers teaching Obama about economics.
Somehow that doesn't reassure me.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkywatzky | March 21, 2009 at 01:21 PM
"his claim that McCain was a techno-dunce because he COULDN'T use a keyboard"
McCain could fly a high performance aircraft,which is more than Obama can do.
Posted by: PeterUK | March 21, 2009 at 01:23 PM
So here's the other thing about Jay Rosen, keeper of honor of the Press.
His latest post on PressThink was:It Took 23 Years, But I Finally Got to Give My View of the National Press on National Television
In which he and Glenn Greenwald get to sit down and reveal the truth about the problems of the press with Bill Moyers.
This article was posted and lauded by his lefty followers just days before the Washington Post reported on Moyer's role in trying to out Jack Valenti as gay and planting questions with the press corps during Johnson's press conferences.
Right around then, thread comments were closed.
Posted by: MayBee | March 21, 2009 at 01:25 PM
Is Obama's abysmal bowling score cause by him jumping too high when he is pitching the ball?
Posted by: PeterUK | March 21, 2009 at 01:39 PM
Jay Rosen is one of the worst apologists for press bias. What a turkey.
=========================================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 01:40 PM
Jane, it's going on at Twitter.
Groan - something else I have to learn to stay in with the cool people.
Where will it ever end
Posted by: Jane | March 21, 2009 at 01:42 PM
Boris needs to correct the mis-spelling.
Barak the character is a Chicago crook.
Right out of the mold--the color of the plastic used is immaterial.
Posted by: Larry Sheldon | March 21, 2009 at 01:52 PM
I see on Twitter the other blogger/journalist Rosen attacks is Andrew Malcom. He says they are ruining journalism with their fluff.
Hmmm...what do Tapper and Malcom have in common?
It's hilarious that Rosen thinks spending time attacking journalists on Twitter isn't fluff.
Jane- don't worry about Twitter. It is a little weird, although a good way to get news feeds. The left attack squads are going to ruin it soon enough.
Posted by: MayBee | March 21, 2009 at 02:12 PM
MayBee I might be on the wrong thread...but that you would give Chris Matthews enough of a listen to find an occasional pearl is scary. I worry about you! :-)
Posted by: Old Lurker | March 21, 2009 at 02:16 PM
think the answer is that a Yankee fan can change three bulbs in a row without a problem, but then chokes on four chances to change the next one.
Nonsense - I changed 26 bulbs in a row but got stuck on 27. Until October, anyway.
Posted by: Tom Maguire | March 21, 2009 at 02:20 PM
Malcolm broke the story about the press being excluded from the press award affair. Though he blogs for the LATimes, I think he's been a bit of a real journalist.
===========================
Posted by: kim | March 21, 2009 at 02:33 PM
TM:
I changed 26 bulbs in a row but got stuck on 27. Until October, anyway.
You were juicing.
Posted by: hit and run | March 21, 2009 at 02:35 PM
I responded to Allah in the comments to his post, but it kinda got buried.
I offered to write a post for Hot Air clarifying, but I haven't received a response as of yet.
Posted by: Jeff G | March 21, 2009 at 03:27 PM
Maybee, Ryan C at Tapper attacked me as a racist for posting Obama's call for Imus to be fired.
Posted by: bad | March 21, 2009 at 03:40 PM
I'd never submit to the "left’s rhetorical rules" but I sure as hell see no problem throwing their own standards back in their faces.
Allahpundit seems confused on that point somehow.
Posted by: boris | March 21, 2009 at 03:42 PM
a propos motionview's comment, Redstate's take.
I've said it before, Obama talks this way because he can't help it. He's a punk, and in that world, the ability to dis people is street capital. This is what he is, there's no stopping it from escaping now and then.
My observations of his conduct in office lead me to the conclusion that he is unworthy of it. He defiles the office.
Posted by: PD | March 21, 2009 at 03:44 PM
I am offended by Obama, the petty little man. I am offended by what a farse he is making of being President. So, anything he says, simply adds to that.
He is himself the joke . . . the very, very bad and cruel joke. And, more and more folks are recognizing it. Clients are coming into our office and uncharacteristically initiating political conversation. Not one, so far, is anything but worried and concerned about where this guy is taking this country.
Posted by: centralcal | March 21, 2009 at 03:54 PM
Boris,
The left has no standards. Everything is situational and relativistic so there is nothing to throw back.
The President's public conduct is not consonant with the dignity of the office which he holds, based upon observation of past Presidents. It is entirely consonant with the conduct which one would anticipate from a Chicago gutter trash politician, based upon observation of many Chicago politicians, some of whom are still guests of the state of Illinois.
I would never toss anything back at the dirty socialists. It's not worth the effort.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 21, 2009 at 04:01 PM
Re: MALDEF Won't Be Running Civil Rights After All [Ed Whelan]
More stupidity in the WH. Poor handling of appointments and caving to special interests.
I thought Rahm had been part of a previous administration. What the hell?
Posted by: bad | March 21, 2009 at 04:16 PM
It's fascintating that Obama has lower standards for POTUS regarding insensitive/offensive remarks then he does for an entertainment figure.
Posted by: bad | March 21, 2009 at 04:20 PM
I would never toss anything back at the dirty socialists.
Just meant I'd have no problem if you ever did.
It's not worth the effort.
Well sometimes it's fun to grab the troll's club from it's grimy paw and smack it about the head and shoulders until it runs away.
But you're right, their attention span is so short they quickly forget the pain and are back way too soon.
Posted by: boris | March 21, 2009 at 04:23 PM
Rosen--via twitter--is now accusing Tapper of "Holden Caulfield syndrome"--heh.
Posted by: glasater | March 21, 2009 at 04:56 PM
Tapper may end up needing personal protection just like the AIG employees.
Posted by: bad | March 21, 2009 at 04:58 PM
Excellent post TM
Concerning Obama's "Special Olympics" gaffe and Sarah Palin;
A huge instate move is ongoing to get Sarah Palin to reverse her refusal to accept 172 million of Stimulus cash for Alaska School Funding. Part of the Funding was supposedly tabbed for Special Ed Programs, so the Dem's, the media, and the all powerful Teacher's Union are playing Sarah's outrage at Obama's Special Olympics comment as hypocrisy, and they are putting on a full court press to get her to crumble on her principals and reverse her decision. Sarah's Lt Governor, apparantly trying to establish wiggleroom, has come out and stated she didn't really "Reject" the funds, she just didn't "Request" them. Again, this reporting of who said what, when, where and why shpould all be taken with huge grains of salt since it's coming through the mouthpiece of the">http://www.adn.com/news/politics/story/730545.html">the ADN, but this has the potential to make her come off looking like a Yankee Fan with a handful of light Bulb's.
Posted by: Daddy | March 21, 2009 at 05:00 PM
I think the fact that ACORN is sponsoring thru a shill the bus tour of the AIG employees' neighborhoods to point out their homes at the same time O just shoveled millions into the pockets of these thugs and grifters is getting very scary.
Posted by: clarice | March 21, 2009 at 05:21 PM
It's very thuggish and is truly intimidating.
Posted by: bad | March 21, 2009 at 05:32 PM
"To me, it just shows how little he understands his position in the world. He went from neighborhood politician to most powerful man in the world in 5 years."
Yes that is so true. It is amazing to me how many gaffes politicians do make. After all, you'd think you'd get the hang of it after so much time in public. Here's the rule - try not to make too many jokes, and if you have to make a joke, don't make fun of a demographic while doing it. Not too hard. After all, they are all voters too aren't they?
I think the problem is we need more information on the local level and we need to screen these people before they become congressmen and women and senators, and get to know them more when they start out. I vote for Congessmen and Judges and I have no idea what they are about. Multiply this all over the country and this is why we get the people we do in office. We need more information on the local level.
Posted by: sylvia | March 21, 2009 at 05:34 PM
testing
Posted by: sylvia | March 21, 2009 at 05:39 PM
Allahpundit seems confused on that point somehow.
Allahpundit seems confused on a lot of things.
Daddy, it's become pretty plain that there's NOTHING that Sarah will do that won't be criticized harshly, and NOTHING that her opponents won't try to use against her. I honestly don't know how to respond to the kind of attacks the left is making today.
Posted by: Pofarmer | March 21, 2009 at 05:55 PM
Rahm Emmanuel is a more committed leftist than even Obama. Dont put down to incompetence what can easily be explained by commonality in viewpoint. And I am deadly serious here.
Posted by: Gmax | March 21, 2009 at 06:05 PM
I vote for Congessmen and Judges and I have no idea what they are about.
Somehow, I am simply not shocked by your statement...
Posted by: Gmax | March 21, 2009 at 06:08 PM
I can't believe people are still paying attention to Jay Rosen. I gave it up years ago.
Although I admire TM for still pointing to his blog on the front page. Some loyalty. I just never click on the link. No point.
Posted by: sbw | March 21, 2009 at 06:29 PM
Remeber Don Imus' Comment?
Obama said: "He fed into some of the worst stereotypes that my two young daughters are having to deal with today in America. The notions that as young African-American women — who I hope will be athletes — that that somehow makes them less beautiful or less important. It was a degrading comment. It’s one that I’m not interested in supporting."
Therefore, laughter and the lack of reaction from Obama’s remarks suggest Americans have a set a rules for race, class and gender: If you touch them you will pay.
And another set of rules for individuals that have a mental or physical disability: If you touch them, it’s ok if you apologize. Oh, and by the way, it’s okay to laugh at the jokes that come at the expense of the latter.
It is just cruel.
http://tinyurl.com/cgpymq
Posted by: Barb Lamont | March 21, 2009 at 06:31 PM