Comments on: Now here’s an ugly bit of business….

By: Jean-Paul Belmondo

Jean-Paul Belmondo — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 23:30:21 +0000

conradg says “Something can’t be a smear if it’s true. Pointing out that Vero isn’t even an American is not a smear.”

What? If someone responded to Barney Frank’s comments by saying, “Well, you know what? He’s a Jew,” would that be a smear? It’s true, and certainly I don’t think there’s anything wrong with being Jewish — but wouldn’t we assume that critic was trying to suggest that there’s no need to take advice from a Jew? I think conradg should reword his analysis.

As for Brendan M.: Well said, sir! Touche!

By: Jean-Paul Belmondo

Jean-Paul Belmondo — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 23:28:55 +0000

conradg says

As for Brendan M.: Well said, sir! Touche!

By: Robert

Robert — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 17:00:59 +0000

I find it amusing that leftists like to “prove” their intellectual superiority by pointing out how nuanced their POV can be. Yet they can’t grasp de Rugy’s pretty obvious point.

Cinnamon – Your point is right on target.

By: When anti-American means anti-liberal | docweaselblog

When anti-American means anti-liberal | docweaselblog — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 09:12:15 +0000

[...] Tom Palmer has more [...]

By: Bentley Strange

Bentley Strange — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 08:47:46 +0000

Chait and Yglesias “ironic” !?! After reading some of their works I doubt either has the wit or intelligence to understand what irony really is. I mean, defending Barney Frank !

By: Dick Eagleson

Dick Eagleson — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 22:41:49 +0000

I urge the head coach of Team USA to see if Team France might be interested in trading Ms. de Rugy for Messrs. Chait and Yglesias, with perhaps a future draft pick or two thrown in to sweeten the deal.

By: Brendan M.

Brendan M. — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 19:26:26 +0000

Normally, I’d feel obligated to leave a more substantive comment, but seeing as how the author didn’t bother I’ll just make a quick statement: Tom G. Palmer is a giant, fucking moron and a pathetic, dishonest ignoramus. n

By: Jeff

Jeff — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 15:35:33 +0000

Did I miss it when C and Y called Andrew Sullivan un-American ? Sullivan is the darling on the left who it turns out, is still trying to become an American.
Attack the messenger is right out of the Alinsky playbook.

By: Assistant Village Idiot

Assistant Village Idiot — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 15:11:23 +0000

Oh, irony! Well darn, we didn’t know, seeing how we’re stupid over here on the right. I still thought that irony was something more than a post hoc rationalization of simple inversion.

Filed in my extensive collection of incidents illustrating that liberalism is a social, rather than intellectual POV, dependent on sneering as a method of social control. It’s so cute when they sigh and roll their eyes like that.

By: Frank B.

Frank B. — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 14:22:10 +0000

You know what they say about fighting with pigs…
Well, even if you don’t, now you’ve experienced it. Some of the comments are proof that you’re title to this post could not be more accurate.

By: Any Principle Here?

Any Principle Here? — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 12:55:48 +0000

[...] Tom Palmer understandably takes issue with Jonathan Chait’s and Matt Yglesias’s criticis…. But as I reflect on a principle that these bloggers inadvertently point to in their attacks on Vero, I find myself to be potentially in agreement with them. [...]

By: willis

willis — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 12:13:15 +0000

“But didn’t we have like a 90% top marginal tax rate in America in the 1950s? So was Ike’s USA un-American? Or anti-American?”

Ike inherited those tax rates when he took office. To his disgrace he did nothing to change them. It took a famous pro-American, John F. Kennedy, to drastically reduce them. As for Barney Frank’s positions, please stick to politics and don’t get personal. At least not this early in the morning.

By: Rich Cook

Rich Cook — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 11:48:08 +0000

Nicolas

Stanleyville?

By: Rich Cook

Rich Cook — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 11:47:22 +0000

Nicolas

Is this the same Belgium that took over the Belgian Congo?

By: Cinnamon

Cinnamon — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:38:14 +0000

I thought Jonathan Chait and Matthew Yglesias were worried about foreigners opinions of the US? They were under Bush, no so much now?

By: Lord Action

Lord Action — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:29:22 +0000

What’s hilarious is these two douchebags would be the first to note “patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels”, but appearing in a “France bashing DVD” is a crime against reason. F’ you, you statist commies.

By: Rob

Rob — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:27:06 +0000

Un, anti confusion? Isn’t it simple? un means not, anti means against or opposing

By: jay

jay — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:25:54 +0000

Punishing success is unAmerican. And taking that extracted wealth to spend on more budget wealth extraction schemes to serve the party of big budget wealth extraction schemes is antiAmerican. At least, it was until the Progressives appeared on the scene.
Viva la Rugy!

By: Colorado

Colorado — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 03:44:12 +0000

You mean it’s a defense against stupidity to claim intentional irony?

No wonder then that idiots like Chait do it.

By: 5th Level Fighter

5th Level Fighter — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 03:28:16 +0000

Crusty Dem February 1, 2010 at 8:34 pm

“Now that Chait and Yglesias are on the record detailing (and explaining for the irony-impaired) that their posts were ironic…”

You must mean “now that they’re on the record covering their own hateful, bigoted, lying asses…”

You libs are always so quick to defend you’re own pathetic trash. Can’t you keep your fascism clean?