Ann Althouse’s Integrity

Ann Althouse, who has recently lost her mind over Pajamas Media, writes up a nasty post accusing the PJ bloggers of making fun of the people injured during today’s parade as one of the floats went out of control:

“The M&Ms float crashed. Oh the humanity! As God is my witness, I thought M&Ms could fly.”

That’s the reaction in the Pajamas Media live blogging when a Thanksgiving Parade balloon crashes and falls, along with a streetlight into a crowd. Here’s an MSM report of the incident, quoting a spectator saying “It happened so fast. I said, ‘Oh, my God!’ It dropped like a rock.” Also: “A 26-year-old woman and 11-year-old girl were apparently hurt by the debris.”

Of course, as they were watching it on television, no one knew anyone had been hurt, and they were just joking. Later, as they became aware that someone had been hurt, they were much more (and appropriately, I might add) circumspect. Ann, however, writing hours after the event when the information is available that someone is hurt, doesn’t realize this, and hence her post.

When Jeff Goldstein goes into the comments to correct the record, what does Ann do? She taunts him and continues to ignore her error. So I post a comment:

Jeff, trying to clear the record, writes:

“Were you watching the parade coverage on CBS?”

Ann responds:

Why on earth would I do that? I’m not 7.

Which helps clear things up, I guess, because the way she has acted the last week, I thought she was 12. At any rate, I am 35, and I did watch the coverage, albeit on NBC, which had it in HD. My parents, well in their 60’s, watched it as well. Woe that is us that we can not be as mature as Miss Althouse.

You know, Ann is so damn worried about her independence, she seems to have forgotten about another “I” word- integrity. She prints an egregious smear, Jeff corrects the record, and she taunts him and does little more.

But hey, Roger Simon hung up on her, so she has a right to be a malicious liar. She better cherish that vaunted independence. She is going to need it when she has no friends left.

Of course, she can always run to the feminists again.

And what does the ‘independent’ Ann do? Deletes my comment.

When you put up a post, and you do not know it is mistake, no big deal. When someone points out you were mistaken, you should correct the record. Failing to do so makes you a liar, as you are knowingly spreading malicious untruths.

Deleting someone’s comments to cover up your perfidy makes you a coward and a liar. But hey- you are independent, cowardly, and a liar.

Just like George Galloway.

*** Update ***

True to form, Ann responds, and does not address the central issue- her repeated mischaracterization of what actually happened:

And what about this character, another PJM insider? He writes about my post, saying I’d “lost my mind” and titling the post “Ann Althouse’s Integrity”? All for a little old “Yikes”! Oh, I see, he was over here commenting and I deleted his comment. Yeah, because it was too abusive. Now, on his own blog, he’s calling me “a liar … spreading malicious untruths.” Where’s the lie? He thinks it’s a lie to have written about the accident in this post when I wasn’t watching the parade on television!

Let the historians of blogging judge who’s lost their mind. I’d like to know which insiders are embarrassed to be yoked to folks who are harassing me this way just for criticizing them a little. How bizarrely unprofessional! And, worse, how hostile to the spirit of blogging, which they so desperately want and need to recover!

I am yet another PJM ‘insider,’ trying to beat down any ‘criticism!’ Poor Ann, the newest victim class, unable to say whatever she wants without people responding!

And let’s single out this gem:

He thinks it’s a lie to have written about the accident in this post when I wasn’t watching the parade on television!

No one is that stupid and a law professor, and a more disingenuous distillation of the complaint regarding Ann’s post could not be made. Ann, what ‘he’ thinks is a lie is your pretending that the folks ‘live-blogging’ the event knew people were hurt and mocked it. If that were true, I would be right there with you bashing them. But that isn’t the case, and Jeff has attempted repeatedly to get you to correct the record. And you won’t.

History will show (how overly dramatic, and in tune with Ann’s inflated ego- Did you know Roger Simon hung up on her?), provided you don’t delete it all.

Bonus giggles- Ann’s biggest kvetch to date has been that Pajamas Media is too ‘corporate,’ and now our chaste defender of blogger independence has her feathers rumpled over ‘unprofessionalism.’

More bonus giggles- Simply the mention of the ‘spirit of blogging’ gets a smile on my face.

BTW- you want some honest criticism of PJ? Try Laurence Simon, Jeff Jarvis, or the editorial board themselves.






64 replies
  1. 1
    ppGaz says:

    I’m really sorry, I’ve had too much wine and food to follow this.

    Is there a Cliff Notes?

    What is the theme of this story?

    { burp }

  2. 2
    John Cole says:

    Just more inside baseball. And the continuing erosion of whatever credibility Ann Althouse may have oince had. At least in my eyes.

    I second your burp.

  3. 3
    David Block says:

    It may be insignificant, but when I visited her blog today, I noticed that she now only has two endorsement quotes in her banner. There used to be six.

    The one from Reynolds is missing, among others.

    I wonder if she’s torching any bridges in the process.

  4. 4
    Slublog says:

    It seems you and Jeff have led to a change in policy on her site.

    Congrats.

  5. 5
    ppGaz says:

    Okay, I read the thread over there, and it sounds just like my little brother and sister when they were kids and argued interminably.

    The gist of their decade-long argument, IIRC, was “He (she) started it!”

    I was much older, so when they started doing that, I’d just get in my car and leave.

  6. 6
    John Cole says:

    Basically, it boils down to Ann stating that Jeff and others were cheering someone being injured, or at the very least, joking about it. Jeff points out that no, they had no idea anyone got hurt, and when they did find out, they did not joke about it at all.

    Slublog- Interesting. Apparently, in Ann’s myopic viewpoint, it is perfectly acceptable to say all sorts of nasty things about people, and then when people attempt to correct the record, they are being ‘uncivil.’

    Has she always been this nuts? I only used to read her every now and then when Glenn would link her, and I remember several times agreeing with her, several times not, but I never remembered her being certifiable.

  7. 7
    Maggie45 says:

    John, she got this way after Roger L. Simon called her and tried to BULLY her and THEN he HUNG UP on ANN ALTHOUSE. So she is now claiming her pound of flesh by dissing Pajamas Media at every opportunity…..saying it’s her DUTY to singlehandely save the Blogosphere by doing so. She reminds me of when I was still drinking and I built every slight, real or imagined, into a colossal resentment, way out of proportion to reality. Like a dog with a bone. I can say if I were one of her students reading her blog these past few weeks, my respect for my law professor would have lowered appreciably.

  8. 8
    Sojourner says:

    Why are we supposed to care?

  9. 9
    John Cole says:

    Sojourner- I can;t imagine why you would., I just find it amusing that Ann trashes people indiscriminately, and when people fire back or, as was the case here, try to correct her smears, she gets the vapors.

    I don’t know what she is thinking. Roger was an ass and rude to her. Fine. We get it.

    Plenty of people have made valid and substantive criticisms of PJ. I will add that so far I have not found much worth my while there, and think it is pretty boring, considering all the hype. But she is just being petty and childish, like a grade school girl whose date to Sadie Hawkins stood her up. not to mention being nasty to Jeff, who is a good friend.

  10. 10
    KC says:

    Not related, but since John’s been discussing it, I think he (and everyone) might be interested.

    Juan Cole has an interesting entry today countering a Guardian critic’s US marines-as-war-criminals article. In it he discusses WP and the assault on Fallujah. Here’s his conclusion:

    I agree that the invasion in 2003 was illegal. However, the assault on the guerrillas in Fallujah was not illegal. It had a UN Security Council resolution behind it authorizing Coalition troops to carry out such operations, and recognizing the transitional government of Iyad Allawi, which also backed the operation. What was done to Fallujah was so horrible that it is now often forgotten that there was every reason to think that the city was a base for the worst kinds of terrorism against innocent civilians in Baghdad and Karbala; there were very bad characters there. Black and white depictions of the Marines as villains and the guerrillas as good guys are silly and morally poisonous. If I had known the full extent of the damage that would be done to the city, I would have been against the Fallujah campaign; it is just terrible counter-insurgency tactics for one thing, and was a humanitarian disaster. But to say that the US military wilfully contravened its own regulations and knowingly broke US and international law on chemical weapons by deploying white phosphorus there would have to be proven from better evidence than has been presented.

  11. 11
    KC says:

    I guess, given what Kos has been saying about the WP issue, maybe my post does fit in this thread.

  12. 12
    Sojourner says:

    Okay, you have a problem with Ann and you have a problem with Sheehan. Aren’t there any men that irritate you?

  13. 13
    John Cole says:

    Yeah. This is all about me hating women.

    But to answer your question, you need look no farther than this post- George Galloway.

  14. 14
    John Cole says:

    Wow, KC. That is interesting.

    As the old saying goes- “If you have lost Juan Cole…”

  15. 15
    Sojourner says:

    This is all about me hating women.

    Lighten up, John, and have another glass of wine.

    Galloway hasn’t rated his own topic. At least not lately.

    I was just curious as to whether there was a reason as to why you were so irked with women. I did not mean to suggest that it was a permanent condition.

  16. 16
    John Cole says:

    I am not irked with women.

  17. 17
    Sojourner says:

    I am not irked with women.

    Ok.

  18. 18
    John Cole says:

    Ok.

    What are you accusing me of , woman? You have a problem with me?? What is your deal?

    :)

  19. 19
    Arthur Feld says:

    Why do people just assume Roger Simon hung up on Ann Althouse? Because she said so? (other than the fact that most people would hang up on Althouse, given the things she writes)

  20. 20
    Steve S says:

    Oh my God! John Cole is OUTRAGED! OUTRAGED I TELL YOU! that someone dare perceive a joke about an M&M’s float as being mean spirited.

    Thank god for these little bits of blogger hyperbole, or my day just wouldn’t be complete.

  21. 21
    kl says:

    Aren’t there any men that irritate you?

    Hi, welcome to the site!

    P.S. Nobody remembers WKRP in Cincinatti anymore?

  22. 22
    kl says:

    Or Cciniiinnnnati, or however it’s spelled?

  23. 23

    You know John, you call Galloway a liar quite often, however I have yet to see any reason to take your word for it. Do you have some evidence or proof that Galloway is such the piece of shit you make him out to be?

    I mean, if he really is guilty of all the US says he is, why hasn’t he been charged?

  24. 24
    Jane Finch says:

    Cripes, you guys are acting like chestbeating 14 year olds.

  25. 25
    BumperStickerist says:

    You know John, you call Galloway a liar quite often, however I have yet to see any reason to take your word for it. Do you have some evidence or proof that Galloway is such the piece of shit you make him out to be?

    Christopher Hitchens provides most of the research on the subject. Scroll down and you’ll see a bunch of entries on source material regarding Galloway.

    I

    mean, if he really is guilty of all the US says he is, why hasn’t he been charged

    ?

    Well, for starters, he’s a member of the British government so that helps him.

    Though, given the problems that developed with Galloway’s testimony to Congress, it’s possible that Galloway would be charged with a crime should he come back to the US.

    There’s been some talk about charges in Britain based on his financial dealings rather than his preference for dictatorial regimes that pay him.

    All of which makes me a hypocrite because George Bush is the lyingest liar that ever lied.

    Halliburton.

  26. 26
    Sojourner says:

    What are you accusing me of , woman? You have a problem with me?? What is your deal?

    No!! Good G-d! What is the matter with you???

    Just drop it.

  27. 27
    OCSteve says:

    She was at it again later yesterday, essentially using their public discussion of their problems as justification for her own criticism.

    I think the jury will be out for a while yet. I wish them luck and hope they succeed but I have my doubts. I think they made a huge mistake by building the hype and that launch party was, well, like a parody of launching a new media enterprise. So far the site itself doesn’t do much for me. I guess I hope they succeed mostly because I like most of those involved.

    I can not understand the continued glee of certain bloggers carping from the sidelines. Jarvis is probably the most notable, but Althouse is certainly making up ground. Dennis made a good case for himself, and frankly I think he deserves his pound of flesh. These others though seem to want them not to succeed because the whole concept violates their vision of what blogging is.

    The most glaring “no comment” is the Powerline guys. Not a single comment, good or bad (that I have seen) beyond noting the launch and a related article on Malkin. You just know that PJM would have tried hard to recruit them, but they must have had no interest. Competition with their new News site? I’m guessing they are taking the “if you can’t say something nice…” approach.

  28. 28

    […] Ann Althouse’s Integrity […]

  29. 29
    Krista says:

    What are you accusing me of , woman? You have a problem with me?? What is your deal?

    :)

    Sojourner, hon. You missed the smiley face at the end of it. John was just yanking your chain.

    Besides, we know that there are plenty of men who irritate him…our own DougJ and ppGaz probably have top spots on that particular list.

  30. 30
    kl says:

    Do you have some evidence or proof that Galloway is such the piece of shit you make him out to be?

    NO!!! He also lies about the shade of the sky.

  31. 31

    She has every right to change the comments policy on her site mid-stream.

    Of course, this brings her integrity into question. Not that you’d expect integrity from someone who indoctrinates young human beings into LAWYERS for a living.

    As me who I think less of: law professors or Hezbollah youth camp trainers. It may take me a while to come up with an answer.

  32. 32
    John Cole says:

    No one is arguing she doesn’t have a right to change her comments policy, Laurence.

  33. 33
    John Cole says:

    Nobody remembers WKRP in Cincinatti anymore?

    “With God as my witness, I thought turkey’s could fly!”

    Maybe one of the funniest episodes in sitcom history, and easily up there with the MAry Tyler Moore episode where Chuckles the Clown was killed, or the Newhart when they had the alien expert on Dick’s show.

    Actually, every Newhart was the funniest ever.

  34. 34

    Like I’m going to take Hitchens at his word when it comes to criticism of Galloway.

    Any other sources? Or are we just demonizing the man because he ripped the Senate committee a new asshole?

  35. 35
    ? says:

    John–

    Haven’t you deleted comments that you objected to here on your blog?

    Haven’t you rewritten posts without acknowledging having done so?

  36. 36
    ? says:

    I’m looking forward to being “moderated” by you.

  37. 37
    TJ says:

    Like I’m going to take Hitchens at his word when it comes to criticism of Galloway.

    Thanks for proving you didn’t even click on the link provided. It doesn’t connect to a Hitchen’s article, it is a page of links to other sources that prove Galloway is a liar.

    Or are you so slow that you need us to click on the links for you?

  38. 38
    TJ says:

    I’m looking forward to being “moderated” by you.

    OPPRESS ME, DAMNIT!

    I DEMAND PUNISHMENT!

  39. 39
    Davebo says:

    Follow along as Protein Wisdom’s Jeff Goldstein and Hillary Johnson of Jack & Hill play Regis and Kathy Lee, providing blogalicious live coverage of the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade.

    Live blogging a parade. 3.5 million USD and they’re live blogging a parade.

    I’m beginning to think this is all a conspiracy designed to keep Roger Simon financed well enough that he never considers writing another screenplay.

  40. 40

    It doesn’t connect to a Hitchen’s article, it is a page of links to other sources that prove Galloway is a liar.

    ,

    What a manipulative little shit you are. While the link doesn’t directly pull up a Hitchens article it pulls up a page that has several links to different hitchens articles. I did click on the link and it took me to a bunch of links which were basically all articles by Hitchens.

    Anyone who clicks on the link can see for themselves.

    Go fuck yourself, you lying sack of shit.

  41. 41
    Sojourner says:

    Sojourner, hon. You missed the smiley face at the end of it. John was just yanking your chain.

    Shiat!!! Drat!! Phooey!

    And I can’t even claim that I’m hungover.

  42. 42
    Sojourner says:

    Sorry, John.

  43. 43
    John Cole says:

    I am not offended, Sojourner. No need to apologize.

  44. 44
    ? says:

    John: I admit I’m quite surprised to see my comments made it through moderation.

    And TJ: fine use of the caps lock to enhance your (I guess) intended irony, so thanks for doing your best.

  45. 45
    John Cole says:

    ?- I have banned one person permanently in 4 years, and two people I blocked for a week.

    I bet I have deleted a total of 50 comments or less, and most at the request of the author of the comment.

    Do I edit my posts. Sure. Whenever I find typos or grammtatical problems or something that makes no sense.

    If I signficantly update a post, I put up *** Update ***

    Why would you think your comment would not get through?

  46. 46
    kl says:

    Because he’s such a truth-telling iconoclast!

  47. 47
    OCSteve says:

    She has every right to change the comments policy on her site mid-stream.

    Absolutely. And I, as an avid blog reader, have every right never to visit her site again.

  48. 48
    TJ says:

    I did click on the link and it took me to a bunch of links which were basically all articles by Hitchens.

    Here’s a clue sparky, you have to READ the articles, which contain links to evidence.

    Christ-on-a-stick, does someone have to drive to your house and do this for you?

  49. 49
    TJ says:

    And TJ: fine use of the caps lock to enhance your (I guess) intended irony, so thanks for doing your best.

    DON’T STIFLE MY EXCESSIVE USE OF EXCLAMATION POINTS, FACIST!

    (are you EVER going to make a point?)

  50. 50

    The enemy is the MSM, not ourselves.

    You’re squabbling like a bunch of goddamned Palestinians.

  51. 51
  52. 52
    ? says:

    John–

    The reason I’m surprised is that I have had comments deleted here in the past.

    Specifically, you deleted several comments I made on a thread about Tom Harkin, prior to last year’s elections.

    I can completely believe that you have forgotten this–the whole Harkin episode amounted to less than a tempest in a teacup. I also completely agree that you have a very open comments policy.

    Still: it happened.

  53. 53
    John Cole says:

    ?- I very rarely delete comments. I just deleted one in another thread today, but it was doing little more than calling me a drunk.

  54. 54
    jo/bh says:

    Laurence, well, let’s consult the cats and see what they think:

    Snufflecutes the 3rd: Don’t touch me there!

    Calico Betty: Someone please help me!

    Reginald the Cute: My master takes the easy dodge of a pox on both their houses. Which is especially funny because anyone with the reading comprehension of a talking cat can tell he’s mainly angling for attention in this matter that his own writing can’t achieve.

    Flufferbottom: Shouldn’t a joke be funny the first time to even be a candidate for such mindless repetition? And, yeah, me too, stop with the inappropriate touching.

  55. 55
    Pablo says:

    Did you know Roger Simon hung up on her?

    That may be this year’s “Did you know I served in Vietnam?” :-)

  56. 56
    ? says:

    John–

    I hope you don’t think I called you a drunk on some other post. I assure you, gratuitous insults are not my style.

    The comment you deleted on the Harkin thread wasn’t gratuituous either. But you didn’t like it, so you deleted it.

    Althouse did the same to you. And you considered it reason to question her integrity.

  57. 57
    John Cole says:

    ?- Really, you have to provide me with a little evidence.

  58. 58
    John Cole says:

    ?- Here is the thread in question, and I do not remember it, but is seems pretty clear that I did not delete your comment dsimply because I didn’t like it, I deleted a series of comments from a bunch of you because you were attacking each other.

    And really, this is about more than Ann just deleting a comment.

  59. 59
    ? says:

    John–

    For the love of God!

    You must be kidding me!!

    I have no evidence–specifically because you deleted it!!!

    Too bad about your memory, John. You felt quite passionately about this at the time.

  60. 60
    TJ says:

    ?, ‘ fine use of the caps lock to enhance your (I guess) intended irony, so thanks for doing your best.’

  61. 61
    ? says:

    TJ–
    Perhaps you’re confusing the shift key with the caps lock key?

    Just a guess.

    Good luck.

  62. 62

    So TJ, do you want to apologize and agree that it links to a bunch of Hitchens articles?

    Or do you want to continue to be the lying sack of shit that you are?

  63. 63
    kl says:

    I think those are what we call leading questions!

  64. 64

    […] Of course, when dealing with Althouse and others, I have learned it doesn’t matter what you actually say, it is what they think you have said and what they can convince their legions of air-headed readers/yes-men that you have said. It really doesn’t matter that Sullivan is not talking about rank and file Christians, but rather the folks who think that the government’s primary role is instilling and maintaining morality in the populace. […]

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] Of course, when dealing with Althouse and others, I have learned it doesn’t matter what you actually say, it is what they think you have said and what they can convince their legions of air-headed readers/yes-men that you have said. It really doesn’t matter that Sullivan is not talking about rank and file Christians, but rather the folks who think that the government’s primary role is instilling and maintaining morality in the populace. […]

  2. […] Ann Althouse’s Integrity […]

Comments are closed.