Comments on: Leaks are Bad, mmmkay?

Leaks are Bad, mmmkay?

rzklkng — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:45:26 -0800

Those Clever Conservatives... The outrage from the right hemisphere of the internet over the latest domestic spying on financial records "leak" seems centered on "treasonous" activity by the NYTimes, even advocating violence against reporters. The dominant theory is that "leaks are bad" except when the President or Vice-President does it, an artifact of the Nixonian Era. This has spurred the creative genius of some to create photoshopped propaganda, although the quality is lacking as compared to others (see posts tagged with propaganda on Mefi). In light of the satirical guidelines described here (MeFi), perhaps it's time to remix this poster.

By: caddis

caddis — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:51:16 -0800

Obviously, the press is an enemy of democracy.

By: ook

ook — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:54:29 -0800

Did you really mean to include the same link three times?

By: rzklkng

rzklkng — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:55:29 -0800

Oops. No, I didn't.

By: Faint of Butt

Faint of Butt — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:59:15 -0800

I got a chuckle out of those Photoshopped posters, until I realized what site I was looking at. Then I felt sick.

By: illovich

illovich — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:59:44 -0800

I wish I knew sekret stuff I could link to the librul media, because it makes Michelle Malkin cry, and I totally hate that stupid bitch.

By: NationalKato

NationalKato — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:01:19 -0800

When a government begins to attack their country's media, you know the media has done something right.

By: rzklkng

rzklkng — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:10:47 -0800

Here's a substitute gallery.

By: blucevalo

blucevalo — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:11:16 -0800

Yeah, the New York Times (the New York Times!) is a cabal of treasonous fifth-estate blackguards ready to sell the country to Usamah bin Ladin at the drop of a hat. Excuse me while I pick myself up off the floor.

By: fluffycreature

fluffycreature — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:13:16 -0800

I got a chuckle out of those Photoshopped posters, until I realized what site I was looking at. Then I felt sick. Wow, I never heard of her before, so I random clicked on one of her articles. You can't make this stuff up, how is this listed as journalism and syndicated in 200 papers? Back to the post though, by attacking NYT it sure makes for a nice distraction and focuses the attention elsewhere. Sadly it's probably working...

By: absalom

absalom — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:15:15 -0800

Fourth Estate + Fifth Column = Fifth Estate?

By: clevershark

clevershark — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:16:15 -0800

If you really want top-notch PS work for these posters what you should do is hold a contest with real prizes, like brown shirts, mustache wax and armbands. Maybe a head-shaving kit too.

By: signal

signal — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:16:18 -0800

Why is it that being in favor of imperialist preemptive wars seems incompatible with a minimum of photoshop skills?

By: NinjaTadpole

NinjaTadpole — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:17:29 -0800

Are all artists leftie communists? I only ask because a number of the anti-NYT posters seem to have been "shopped" in MS Paint with the potato stamp tool.

By: NinjaTadpole

NinjaTadpole — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:18:27 -0800

(apparently others agree - what, did we all come on the same bus?)

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:19:18 -0800

think of michelle malkin and her photoshopping friends as being the conservative equivalent of 60s radicals chanting "hey, hey, lbj, how many kids did you kill today?" and holding signs depicting policemen as pigs ... shrill, addicted to psychodrama and the cultivation of outrage, and not very useful or effective as long as they stay out of political office one can just about taste the helplessness and rage ...

By: blucevalo

blucevalo — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:20:30 -0800

Fourth estate, sorry ..... boy, I'm making flubs left and right today.

By: illiad

illiad — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:26:12 -0800

Fourth estate, sorry ..... boy, I'm making flubs left and right today. But mostly Right. :-)

By: illiad

illiad — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:37:41 -0800

[...] being seen as emotional and passionate about the issues of the day, was often considered more important and influential than one's opinions on the issues themselves Isn't that one of the cores of the Religious Right Republicans' creed, where "conviction" is a virtue and "intellectualism" is vilified? I'm a moderate, which a lot of the RRR (and frankly the extreme Left as well) consider a Bad Thing, because to them I "lack conviction." If not toeing their party line and changing my position when justified by new information is "lacking conviction," then I'm as guilty of that as Limbaugh is of hypocrisy.

By: caddis

caddis — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:37:45 -0800

I don't know, it seems as though most of the outrage is coming from the right wing blogosphere and talking heads on this issue. "treason"

By: Nelson

Nelson — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:43:20 -0800

I'm confused. Was the New York Times OK when it employed Judy Miller to help sell the false story that got us into Bush's war in Iraq? But now they're not OK?

By: leftcoastbob

leftcoastbob — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:44:10 -0800

...the story quoted Vice-President Cheney as saying: "The New York Times has now twice -- two separate occasions -- disclosed programs; both times they had been asked not to publish those stories by senior administration officials. They went ahead anyway. The leaks to The New York Times and the publishing of those leaks is very damaging." Damn straight. But damaging to whom: the administration or the country? We report. You decide.

By: rzklkng

rzklkng — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:47:09 -0800

illiad, moderate is seen as bad, because "if you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything". Unfortunately, that requires that you adhere to the bad framing that the world is black or white, and ignore the fact that we live in the gray/grey. I prefer pragmatism, myself.

By: illiad

illiad — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:52:04 -0800

[...] moderate is seen as bad, because "if you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything". Ya, I've heard that catchy little rhetorical legerdemain before. Well heck, they're so wrong it's shocking. I am a firm advocate of Moderation. With conviction! Rather than belt the extremies with a tire iron like I am sure some of them deserve, I'd be content with biffing them rapidly with a Nerf bat. I mean, how moderate is that?

By: Neiltupper

Neiltupper — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:03:02 -0800

I'm a moderate, which a lot of the RRR (and frankly the extreme Left as well) consider a Bad Thing Now I'm really confused. Who comprises this "extreme left" in America?

By: illiad

illiad — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:04:59 -0800

@Neiltupper: I have no idea. I'm Canadian, and as such I speak of the more militant lefties Up Here that can be found in the NDP.

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:07:31 -0800

Who comprises this "extreme left" in America? You know, PETA, ELF, the NYT, Michael Moore, and the boogeyman.

By: Cycloptichorn

Cycloptichorn — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:08:10 -0800

If you don't read Glenn Greenwald, then you aren't getting the best explanation of what the Bush admin is doing in America these days and why it is such a problem. Clear, concise, excellent. Linkage

By: JackFlash

JackFlash — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:10:01 -0800

In all of their huffing and puffing, how is it that Bush, Cheney and their torch bearing rabble fail to mention that the Wall Street Journal published the same story on the same day.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:11:22 -0800

what I find absolutely hysterical are phrases like these from idiots like Malkin: "An Army of Photoshoppers...is unleashing on the MSM blabbermouths and their leaky sources." What? Unleashing on the MSM? The MSM doesn't read Malkin's stupid blog even when they book her on their shows. And those photoshopped posters, are they kidding? No one in the MSM or on the left will ever see this nonsense except in the context of mockery. These things are rallies for the faithful. What amazes me is this - these people are upset at the Times for running a story that their government is monitoring international financial transaction? OR are they upset because the administration asked them not to run it, and they ran it anyway? In other words, which is worse in the Rush Limbaugh-listening, adhere blindly to tradition mindset of the right - that the Times may have compromised some intelligence source in some indirect and superficial way, or that the Times wouldn't shut up and listen to ~~Daddy~~ authority?

By: dios

dios — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:16:53 -0800

If you don't read Glenn Greenwald, then you aren't getting the best explanation of what the Bush admin is doing in America these days and why it is such a problem. I'm sure there is no confirmation bias in that assessment. Which is the futility of this discussion. And the apropos taglines that describe the politics here at Metafilter keep rolling in without the least bit of self-awareness that the partisans are guilty of everything they accuse the other of..... Metafilter: no one in the MSM will ever see this nonsense except in the context of mockery. Metafilter: rally for the faithful.

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:19:08 -0800

WHAT A DEEP COMMENT woah i'm totally blinded by my partisans

By: DenOfSizer

DenOfSizer — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:20:28 -0800

Probably the NY Times staffers are the ones who told the Jews to get out of the WTC, too. Maybe they should call it the NY Crimes. I'm pretty sure no one but a jihadist would eat rhubarb pie.

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:21:22 -0800

the partisans are guilty of everything they accuse the other of What, precisely, does "everything" refer to here?

By: mooncrow

mooncrow — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:22:25 -0800

You made one tiny little error in you post. Ms Malkin is not a conservative. She is the hideous spawn of Satan and a hammerhead shark. It's a common error, but now you know not to make it again.

By: StrasbourgSecaucus

StrasbourgSecaucus — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:28:53 -0800

it's completely impossible to discern any logic in neo-cons these days.

By: tadellin

tadellin — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:30:24 -0800

I stopped readin the Times years ago because they were biased. They should be shut down, and the sooner the better. There are plenty of decent papers out there that don't believe that New York is the center of the universe.

By: Astro Zombie

Astro Zombie — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:31:28 -0800

You can't trust the neocons, but you can always trust the neocons to be neocons. -- Ordell Robbie

By: StrasbourgSecaucus

StrasbourgSecaucus — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:31:50 -0800

i read the new york post now. completely unbiased reporting.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:32:58 -0800

without the least bit of self-awareness that the partisans are guilty of everything they accuse the other of..... If you're suggesting that the left gets as shrill and irrational as the right, you're spot on. But that's a superficial reading. The point is that while the right is criticising the media for discussing what the government did, the left is criticising the government. We have a situtation where the government leaks information, the media picks up on it, the media then asks the same government that wanted it secret if it's okay to print it, the story gets out, and the public blames the media. None of those bloggers suggest there is anything wring with these eavesdropping/monitoring programs. If we are to assume that those who accuse the Times of treason are rational, thoughtful people, then we can only conclude that they support the government's monitoring. Which is frightening. At it's essence, the Bill of Rights exists to protect the people from their governments, State and Federal. What the right is saying is that they'd rather be safe and lose some rights than to keep those rights and run the risk that someone takes advatage of that freedom. The irony is that throughout history, the people have had more to fear from their own states than from outsiders.

By: prostyle

prostyle — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:35:26 -0800

Deleted comment by dios It hasn't even been an hour since his deleted comment, and he returns to make another of the exact same nature. Fantastic. Biting the hand that feeds since day one.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:36:27 -0800

that New York is the center of the universe I don't live in New York, but it is the financial capital of the country (world?), every creative industry is based there, and decisions made there ripple out to the rest of the country. The Times may or may not be a good paper, but its readers include very influential and powerful people in the U.S. They make decisions that affect people nationwide based on what they read in it.

By: DenOfSizer

DenOfSizer — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:37:45 -0800

Plus it's as close a thing as we got to a national paper. I mean, sometimes USA Today just doesn't cut it.

By: Astro Zombie

Astro Zombie — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:40:03 -0800

God, why would the New York Times waste so much of its time covering New York? And, while we're at it, why does the Minneapolis Star-Tribune waste so much ink on the Twin Cities?

By: StrasbourgSecaucus

StrasbourgSecaucus — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:40:21 -0800

and someone please tell me this post isn't a complete waste of text.

By: illiad

illiad — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:42:37 -0800

Saying that NYC isn't the centre of the universe is adopting the same attitude Western Canadians like myself exhibit from time to time: we gnash our teeth at Eastern Canada, make disparaging remarks about "Tranna" and claim that the West can do it on its own thankyouverymuch. But at the end of the day, the East does rule the West, regardless of what rhetoric we might want to fling about. What happens in NY doesn't stay in NY.

By: jeversol

jeversol — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:43:58 -0800

tadellin: It's not called the United States Times, it's called the New York Times. There's a reason for that. I'm sure if you look at the Louisville Courier-Journal, for example, you'd get the impression that Louisville is the center of the universe.

By: NationalKato

NationalKato — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:46:57 -0800

jeversol, don't feed th--- ah, nevermind.

By: illiad

illiad — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:49:35 -0800

Someone should talk to dios' madre. Let her know that he's been a very naughty boy.

By: edverb

edverb — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:53:02 -0800

The administration should quit pussyfooting around, and start following their authoritarian little charcoal hearts. Shut down the NYT for sedition. I dare them.

By: DenOfSizer

DenOfSizer — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:56:21 -0800

Plus they don't even publish a goddam Suddoko puzzle. How unAmerican is that?

By: The Jesse Helms

The Jesse Helms — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:56:24 -0800

The American Right is so attached to the Bush administration that 2+2 no longer = 4. Whatever political mechanism the Bush team has in place to achieve this fait accompli is amazing : whatever the Bush team does, the Right will tag along. Against abortion? You are for torture. Against reckless spending? You believe in runaway debt. Believe in the Bill of Rights? You allow the government to take your civil liberties from you. At what point did this happen? How did it happen? Has the independance of American thought been eroded by complete lock-step media saturation? There are many, many answers that are so far away.

By: The Jesse Helms

The Jesse Helms — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:58:39 -0800

dios, for someone claiming to be a lawyer you certainly drag red herrings all over the place.

By: NationalKato

NationalKato — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:58:59 -0800

I'm with edverb. I want them to fully see this threat through. Close down the Times and let the fun begin!

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:02:25 -0800

for someone claiming to be a lawyer you certainly drag red herrings all over the place. Experience has taught that, outside of their domain, lawyers are not necessarily any more logical or rigorous than other people. You might have noticed this with certain mathematicians or theologians, too.

By: Cycloptichorn

Cycloptichorn — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:02:49 -0800

I'm sure there is no confirmation bias in that assessment. Well, Dios, I would challenge you to examine the facts presented by Greenwald over the course of this year, in his various posts, and show how my original statement is incorrect. But I know it is far easier for you to not do so, so... we'll probably see more winning gems from you like this: "When the United States has lost, does that mean that UBL will be the political head of the United States?"

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:10:54 -0800

being seen as emotional and passionate about the issues of the day, was often considered more important and influential than one's opinions on the issues themselves i'm utterly amazed this post of mine was deleted ... a serious point made in a serious way, and on-topic

By: LooseFilter

LooseFilter — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:27:33 -0800

Surely this will be the thing that makes everyone.....ah, hell. I keep thinking, every time this Rhetoric of Hate is ratcheted up, that the collective American public (or at least the MSM) will finally realize the shrill irrationality of what's being said (or screamed). But then we don't, and I die a little inside.

By: StrasbourgSecaucus

StrasbourgSecaucus — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:34:57 -0800

WHBT. WHL.

By: three blind mice

three blind mice — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:35:18 -0800

There is a difference between revealing legal stuff that should legally be kept secret - and between revealing illegal stuff that the public might want to know about. If the NYT has violated any national security laws then prosecute them. If they have not, then leave them alone. Frankly, how many "terrorists" are using SWIFT? Damn few, if any, I would imagine, so the gains are minimal. On the other hand, how many Democratic congressmen and women are using SWIFT? And how can we be assured that the Republicans won't use the information gleaned from their spying to squeeze their political opponents? That is the real threat.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:36:53 -0800

They slugged away at gay marriage until they ran out of political capital there. Same thing with social security reform, same with immigration. Attacking the media is the next logical step; when nothing goes right the last refuge of the cornered scoundrel is to attack the messenger. What's next? Who knows.

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:37:37 -0800

how many "terrorists" are using SWIFT? Presumably, real terrorists would be using hawala, as it is reputedly very reliable and is "kosher" for them.

By: StrasbourgSecaucus

StrasbourgSecaucus — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:50:05 -0800

btw, those are some of the worst goddamned photoshops i've ever seen. can the right wingers only afford MS Paint?

By: fandango_matt

fandango_matt — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:53:18 -0800

By: zaelic

zaelic — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 11:57:47 -0800

Why is everybody so sure that Dios is a lawyer? He has been challenged to show his bona fides before by a lawyer on metafilter and did not. How many law firms allow employees to sit in front of the Big Blue all day and night waiting to drop troll bombs on anything critical of the worst - not legally elected - administration the United States has ever had to endure. Attacking the New York Times is only the latest in a Rove / Cheney effort to rally the "base" - they are down to Malkin and the Freepers now. Pretty poor showing.

By: effwerd

effwerd — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:03:52 -0800

I love all those bad 'shopped propaganda posters. They reveal, yet again, what Red America really is: a bunch of shrill pussies.

By: puke & cry

puke & cry — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:21:50 -0800

Why is everybody so sure that Dios is a lawyer? Well, he's got those shitty law posts going for him. Although I guess that fake-lawyer-dead-kid could do that.

By: homunculus

homunculus — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:28:24 -0800

Former CIA agent Larry Johnson:

As someone who works on a daily basis on money laundering issues and who is credited (see page 3, footnote 15), along with my partner, for identifying a money laundering technique employed by terrorists, I am mystified why this is even considered a story. It is no secret that the U.S. Government has been trying to monitor terrorist financial transactions since 9-11. Anyone who works in the banking/financial sector knows that SWIFT--the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication--is a major, but not only mechanism, for moving financial assets around the world. The only "secret" I can see, based solely on my understanding of how financial investigations work, is the fact that the CIA has access to this data without any judicial oversight.

By: Astro Zombie

Astro Zombie — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:29:59 -0800

I am also a lawyer. And a am ~~a member~~ president of Compulsive Liars Anonymous.

By: anotherpanacea

anotherpanacea — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:34:08 -0800

Frankly, I blame Bill Maher.

By: homunculus

homunculus — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:36:44 -0800

Great link, Cycloptichorn.

By: grabbingsand

grabbingsand — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:41:16 -0800

Dios. One question ... If you were in charge, either elected or crowned as Our King, what would you do to make this World a better place? Seriously. (And folks, let him answer.)

By: dreamsign

dreamsign — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:43:39 -0800

Why does everybody treat being a lawyer like some kind of hard-to-get qualification that is more worthy of respect than, say, being a video store clerk? It's not hard to believe; they're as common as doorknobs and come in all shapes and sizes, degrees of intelligence and knowledge. And the frequency with which lawyers are asked questions about the law -- but still *far* outside of their field of practice, making them little better than anyone else able to answer (well, I seem to remember from first year contracts...) -- renders them like any other specialist, that is to say, at best an expert in a narrow sub-field. After all, the job of a lawyer is not to know the law but to be able to research it (and later, for some, present it with flair). But then this is beside the point. If his views (and etiquette) were more in line with the mainstream here, we wouldn't be questioning his vocation at all.

By: norm

norm — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:53:47 -0800

btw, those are some of the worst goddamned photoshops i've ever seen. can the right wingers only afford MS Paint? Until I read the comments, I didn't realize they were by 'wingers. I seriously thought they were meant as ironic. Although, yeah. The quality is pretty universally terrible.

By: monju_bosatsu

monju_bosatsu — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:31:37 -0800

Dios. One question ... If you were in charge, either elected or crowned as Our King, what would you do to make this World a better place? Seriously. (And folks, let him answer.) He can't answer; Matt gave him a timeout.

By: fandango_matt

fandango_matt — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:34:27 -0800

posted by norm I didn't realize they were by 'wingers. I seriously thought they were meant as ironic. Although, yeah. The quality is pretty universally terrible. That's what happens when you cut funding for the arts.

By: caddis

caddis — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:44:59 -0800

Number 1 does seem to be cracking the whip. I thought dios's comments were obnoxious and designed more to stir trouble than to foster discussion, but time-out?

By: bardic

bardic — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:51:15 -0800

Can you blame him? We only get to see the proverbial tip-o'-the-iceberg with regards to the threadshitting that matthowie and jessamyn don't get to/have time to deal with/notice/etc. Le dieu has made calls for stronger moderation in the past, as have I. I'm happy to see he's made an example of himself, yet again.

By: Artifice_Eternity

Artifice_Eternity — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:56:57 -0800

Did anyone notice the second to last poster? It's a rework of an Allied propaganda image that featured a sinister Nazi in a Darth-Vaderish helmet. Except the wingnut put KARL ROVE in place of the Nazi. They really have no sense of irony at all.

By: homunculus

homunculus — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:58:17 -0800

Is Bush Administration's Bank Spy Program One Part of a Resurgent Total Information Awareness?

By: Artifice_Eternity

Artifice_Eternity — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:59:04 -0800

(Does Godwin's Law apply when people compare themselves, rather than their opponents, to Nazis?)

By: Artw

Artw — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:02:47 -0800

I dunno. But if some of the neo-con types flat out declared themselves to be fascists the honesty of it would be a refreshing blash of fresh air.

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:07:19 -0800

If that were to ever happen, we'd first get a lot of "well, fascists didn't have it all wrong... they took the challenges of the modern era seriously... etc." from Malkin et al.

By: Artw

Artw — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:11:16 -0800

And some of the more extreme neo-con stuff was sooo close to that. They seem to have disapeared en-masse these days though.

By: InfidelZombie

InfidelZombie — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:13:01 -0800

You know, fascists are the last group it is acceptable to discriminate against in this country. Liberals think they are so tolerant...

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:16:46 -0800

They seem to have disapeared en-masse these days though. I've noticed that too, and not just around here. Are folks taking some time to revisit their crazy-ass opinions, or are they just moving their online activity to some echo chamber?

By: Artifice_Eternity

Artifice_Eternity — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:20:21 -0800

Those @#$% liberals are anti-fasco-fascists!

By: The Jesse Helms

The Jesse Helms — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:31:49 -0800

Why does everybody treat being a lawyer like some kind of hard-to-get qualification that is more worthy of respect than, say, being a video store clerk? I take it you haven't been to law school?

By: nola

nola — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:42:51 -0800

none of this matters folks. why you ask? cause we number one. yeeeehawww.

By: Astro Zombie

Astro Zombie — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:51:44 -0800

Or a video store. I mean, jeez, shouldn't a video store clerk know where La Stada is?

By: SenshiNeko

SenshiNeko — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 15:05:00 -0800

It's interesting how much of the above linked Kennedy "WANTED FOR TREASON" handbill could be recycled for the present day and current President... 1. Betraying the Constitution (which he swore to uphold). 2. He has been WRONG on innumerable issues affecting the security of the U.S. 5. He has illegally invaded a sovereign State with Federal troops. 7. He has been caught in fantastic LIES to the American people. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

By: dreamsign

dreamsign — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 15:39:21 -0800

I take it you haven't been to law school? I have, which is why I asked.

By: joe lisboa

joe lisboa — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 16:51:15 -0800

I have, which is why I asked. Set and match.

By: Target Practice

Target Practice — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 16:52:46 -0800

DenOfSizer Garrison Keillor is an Islamic fundamentalist?

By: caddis

caddis — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 17:43:44 -0800

Set and match Hardly. dios is quite obviously a lawyer, and likely skilled, given his legal analysis on many a point around here. This lame call out of him is no better than the "global warming isn't real" crap.

By: the Real Dan

the Real Dan — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 17:55:00 -0800

I would like to see the deleted comments.

By: dreamsign

dreamsign — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 18:02:19 -0800

I wasn't slamming dios, but those who would question a person's professional status as some kind of claim to authority, which, if you read his posts, he doesn't resort to.

By: dreamsign

dreamsign — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 18:05:58 -0800

If my hypothetical video store clerk posted about some movie trivia, I can't imagine questioning his "supposed" employment as part of disagreement with the poster. Unless of course it was all based on a claim of authority, in which case he would have it coming.

By: DenOfSizer

DenOfSizer — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 18:35:08 -0800

TP -Garrison Keillor is an Islamic fundamentalist? Well, it ain't apple pie, now, is it? As Stephen Colbert (MamaBear?) would say, that's all I need to know.

By: monju_bosatsu

monju_bosatsu — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 18:43:30 -0800

I would like to see the deleted comments. dios's first comment, and his only deleted comment in this thread as far as I can tell, turned pyramid termite's comment into a tagline and read as follows, in it's entirety:

MetaFilter: shrill, addicted to psychodrama and the cultivation of outrage, and not very useful or effective.

dios's second comment remains.

By: caddis

caddis — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 18:47:33 -0800

That's it? Why is he on time out?

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 19:32:54 -0800

How fucking great it is to see y'all getting worked up about Dios instead of dealing with the original post. Buncha idiots.

By: Astro Zombie

Astro Zombie — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 19:34:18 -0800

I presume the camel's back finally broke.

By: homunculus

homunculus — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 20:06:41 -0800

Of Laws and Men, and Would Be Monarchs.

By: homunculus

homunculus — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 22:05:02 -0800

Sticking Up for the New York Times

By: homunculus

homunculus — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 22:18:05 -0800

Bush Confused About Leaks

By: rougy

rougy — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 23:13:50 -0800

The truth is not on the right-wing's side. Embarrassed and belligerent, they must attack anyone who speaks the truth. Why is nobody in the mainstream questioning the legality of this bank spying? Imagine the squeal that the Bush's or the Cheney's would make if any of us were to stick our nose into their banking transactions. This is not the Kingdom of Bush.