John Hinderaker- Total Idiot

The bullshit continues from one of the silliest people on the intertrons:

One basic question emerging from the midterm election is: to what extent did the terrorists win? We will have a lot to say about this over the days to come, but here are a few preliminary thoughts.

I don’t think there is any doubt about the fact that the terrorists, world-wide, were hoping for a Democratic victory. See, for example, this article by Aaron Klein. And the spike in violence in Iraq prior to the election was generally understood as an effort by the terrorists to help Democratic candidates.

***

Do the Democrats feel at all sheepish at having their victory hailed by al Qaeda? Do they feel any pressure to demonstrate to the American people that they are not a de facto ally of the terrorists? Not as far as we’ve noticed so far. But when the Democrats stop celebrating, they may want to pause long enough to consider a simple question: Why are the terrorists so happy that they won?

The Democrats are not even in control, yet John has discerned the terrorists are happy. He has decided that the rise in violence prior to the election is “generally understood” to be an intentional act to persuade the election. Some preliminary thoughts:

It was generally understood by John Hinderaker that Terri Schiavo was a bon-bon and an espresso away from a walk, and it was “generally understood” by this Great Lakes buffoon that Iran is an Arab nation (wrong buffoon on the second one- like the breathless babble of a pre-schooler, the Powerline nonsense all runs together, and I confused Paul’s ramblings with J0hn’s. It is Saturday, and I am too lazy to find more of John’s silliness, so you can put in the comments for me if you so desire).

Suffice it to say, it is “generally understood” around here that John Hinderaker is a total idiot. The idea that the terrorists know the difference between a Democrat and a Republican any more than Hinderaker can think his way through the difference between Shia/Sunni is laughable.

Reasonable people can only conclude that there are certain folks in the GOP will say anything for political advantage. John Hinderaker is one of them. He should be ignored, or if you must pay attention, ridiculed. For this foray into sheer idiocy, John Hinderaker has now earned his own category here. In the future, when a Republican says something stupid or vile simply for partisan gain, we will call the gaffe a “Hinderaker” and file it appropriately.

Glenn Greenwald seriously address this nonsense.

*** Update ***

BTW- It is “generally understood” in the Arab world and elsewhere that Don Rumsfeld should be tried for war crimes. When is John Hinderaker going to start his campaign to force Rumsfeld to stand trial?

*** Update #3***

Mona offers this up as one of Hinderaker’s gems:

It must be very strange to be President Bush. A man of extraordinary vision and brilliance approaching to genius, he can’t get anyone to notice. He is like a great painter or musician who is ahead of his time, and who unveils one masterpiece after another to a reception that, when not bored, is hostile.

*** Update ***

More deep thoughts:

I join with Ed in hoping that we can prevent the Democrats from delivering Iraq to the jihadis, but my estimate of their good faith is lower than his. The Democrats have staked everything, politically speaking, on the proposition that the Iraq war is a failure and a disaster. They have every interest in ensuring that our effort there does, in fact, fail. I think, in short, that the terrorists are reading the Democrats’ intentions correctly.

I should add that by “the Democrats,” I don’t mean every rank and file member of that party, many of whom no doubt want America to succeed. I’m referring to almost all of the party’s national leadership and the large majority of its elected officials.

Despite all their talk, we are not dealing with serious or sane people.

*** Update ***

By request, Captain Ed’s two spectacular responses.






88 replies
  1. 1
    SomeCallMeTim says:

    “Intertubes,” not “Intertrons.” Or you really have abandoned the Republican Party.

  2. 2
    pie says:

    Hinderake for President!

    Because after all, the Democrats would be worse.

  3. 3
    norbizness says:

    I still can’t believe they elected a cleaned-up Walter Sobchak to the Senate in Montana.

  4. 4
    pie says:

    Hinderake for President!

    Okay, so his name’s not really ass-rake. But if he changed it, he’d corner the 7-to-15-year-old vote.

  5. 5
    pie says:

    I still can’t believe they elected a cleaned-up Walter Sobchak to the Senate in Montana.

    Shut the fuck up, Donnie!

  6. 6
    Mona says:

    John, while there is no greater idiot and Bush-worshipping shill on the planet than John Hinderaker (this is my “general understanding,” as well as my particular one), the “Iran as Arab country” blooper was actually Paul’s.

  7. 7
    ThymeZone says:

    Well first of all, there is a reason why they call this guy Assrocket.

    He’s an ass of the first order.

    Second, what has always struck me about these lunatics, whether it’s Falwell and Robertson blaming liberals for 911 and Katrina, or this moron suggesting that terrorists win because his favorite party lost seats in Congress, is that the moment things go unfavorably, they all shit on the American people and the whole idea of freedom.

    See, America doesn’t work, and freedom’s just another word for something you better keep in the closet, in order to maintain the grotesque worldviews marketed by these sociopaths. Sociopaths who somehow get themselves pulpits or tv shows or columns or blog audiences or talk radio syndication …. and then use it to shit on the people in order to puff themselves up or top off their bank accounts.

    So, that nice little rant done, my question is, why the HELL do we pay any attention at all to these buttheads?

    “They hate us for our freedom?” Where did that slogan come from? And how do you think they thought it up? They thought it up because they are talking about themselves.

  8. 8
    jake says:

    I don’t think there is any doubt about the fact that the terrorists, world-wide, were hoping for a Democratic victory.

    Yes, what a brilliant idea! Politics is just a big game of Opposite Day! Do you ever get the impression that if terrorists said they didn’t want Americans to shoot themselves in the head, arse clowns like this would reach for the 9 mm?

    However, Madmoiselle HidetheRake seems to know a lot about what the terrorists are thinking, therefore he must be a terrorist, therefore he needs to be “dunked,” until he can give bin Laden’s correct address. Hey, it’s a no-brainer.

  9. 9
    chopper says:

    i like the new category. it just..fits.

  10. 10

    As a Minnesotan, I would like to apologize to America for John Hinderacker.

    Nobody in Minnesota even much cares for the idiot.

  11. 11
    ThymeZone says:

    I don’t think there is any doubt about the fact that the terrorists, world-wide, were hoping for a Democratic victory.

    Just seeing that blockquoted by itself makes me laugh out loud.

    My gut reaction to it is one word: Darrell.

    I knew I’d heard that voice before. It’s Darrell. In fact, all you need is the first six words. I’d recognize that absurd proof-by-assertion construct anywhere. It’s Darrell.

    Darrell is Assrocket.

  12. 12

    […] it was “generally understood” by this Great Lakes buffoon that Iran is an Arab nation (wrong buffoon on the second one- like the breathless babble of a pre-schooler, the Powerline nonsense all runstogether, and I confused Paul’s ramblings with J0hn’s. It is Saturday, and I am too lazy to find more of John’s silliness, so you can put in the comments for me if you so desire). […]

  13. 13
    ThymeZone says:

    the spike in violence in Iraq prior to the election was generally understood

    Just amazing. That kind of sloppy speech didn’t pass muster in my freshman classes in college.

    What really makes me laugh is not just the idea that the IED gangs in Iraq are political scientists pulling the levers of American electoral history …. it’s that they are so good at it that they are beating the mighty Bush-GOP Machine at their own game!

    Damn, those fucking turrists are good!

  14. 14
    Mona says:

    Oh goody. Since John has solicited nominations for the Best Hinderaker Inanities, this is among my favorites, from July 2005 — Bush, Genius:

    It must be very strange to be President Bush. A man of extraordinary vision and brilliance approaching to genius, he can’t get anyone to notice. He is like a great painter or musician who is ahead of his time, and who unveils one masterpiece after another to a reception that, when not bored, is hostile.

  15. 15
    ThymeZone says:

    National Guard combat brigades that have already served in Iraq may be called for a second tour, likely breaking the 24-month deployment limit initially set by the Pentagon, the Guard’s top general said. “When that policy was originally formulated, I seriously doubt anyone thought we would be where we are today,” Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum said.

    Let’s all take a moment today on Veterans Day to recognize the extent to which our leaders have screwed over our military and generally stuck it to our troops in so many ways.

    This damage may be the thing that we live to regret the most about this ridiculous WOT and the way we’ve gone about it.

  16. 16
    jake says:

    It must be very strange to be President Bush. A man of extraordinary vision and brilliance approaching to genius

    Mr. Hindraper, please remove the Presidential Package from your mouth.

    Here, let me tidy this up a bit:

    It must be very strange to be President Bush. A man of extraordinary vision idiocy and brilliance incompetence approaching to genius, a stumbling drunk who’s pissed his pants he can’t get anyone to notice it up. He is like a great painter junkie or musician whore who is ahead of his gives head all of the time, and who unveils drops trou to masterpiece one john after another to a reception that, when not bored, is hostile repulsed.

  17. 17
    jcricket says:

    John – Hindrocket is indeed a total idiot, and this is just the latest in a long line of propoganda from him. The “glorious leader” comment was spectacular. It far exceeded any parody written by DougJ, “General JC Christian” and the Onion.

    Meanwhile, back in normal Republican-ville, Ed Morrisey had a John Cole-esque “Sanity Rant” when responding to the blogger of the year, though:

    [Democrats] are Americans, and Americans put them in charge, and they have earned the right to show us how they will face the enemy now that they control the agenda. If [the Democrats] fail, I’ll be the first to castigate them for losing ground to the terrorists. However, I’m going to base that on their actions, and not on the word of a murderous thug who couldn’t care less whether their American victims are Democrats, Republicans, Greens, Libertarians, or LaRouchists.

    I’m hoping we can find common ground with them now that they have the responsibility to govern. If we can’t, then let’s criticize them for their actual failures, and not get so intent on grasping at any way to attack them that we start becoming repeater stations for the ravings of genocidal lunatics.

    It really is remarkable how people like Hindrocket, who parrot the thinking of Osama or whomever, are accomplishing the exact opposite of what they think (i.e. the terrorists win when Hindrocket buys their line of thinking about Democrats).

    (BTW, for those of you not around the Intertubes long enough, John Hinderaker actually used to refer to himself as Hindrocket. He scrubbed his archives at one point to eliminate that unfortunate nick-name).

  18. 18
    ThymeZone says:

    He is like a great failed painter or musician who is ahead of his time can’t get a gig, and who unveils one masterpiece crappy composition after another

    Yes, we can all have great fun with this material. It’s the stuff of the Daily Show.

    You can’t spoof an Assrocket, he is the real deal.

  19. 19
    r€nato says:

    I prefer to think that the results of last week’s election were not so much that the terrorists won, but that the mouth-breathing fundamentalist morons lost.

  20. 20
    jcricket says:

    The spike in violence in Iraq prior to the election was generally understood

    Just amazing. That kind of sloppy speech didn’t pass muster in my freshman classes in college.

    What’s shocking is that Hindrocket and the “big trunk” are lawyers. You know, people paid to argue, in the classic sense of creating convincing arguments. People who have years of training. Some from really good schools, even.

    The number and volume of logical fallacies in this post alone are stunning. Without almost any work I spot argument from fallacy, and affirming the consequent (i.e. “If Democrats are on the side of terrorists, terrorists will be happy if Democrats win. Terrorists are happy, therefore Democrats are terrorists”)

    If I were a client of Hindrocket and he pulled this kind of crap, I’d sue for misconduct/malpractice (whatever you call it when your lawyer is clearly unqualified to practice law).

    John Yoo and Instapundit also show shocking ability to just ignore the law whenever they need to push some Republican talking point. Usually they resort to “ad hominem” or “appeal to emotion”.

  21. 21
    jake says:

    BTW- It is “generally understood” in the Arab world and elsewhere that Don Rumsfeld should be tried for war crimes. When is John Hinderaker going to start his campaign to force Rumsfeld to stand trial?

    No, no, no. If the Arab World (= Terroristville to mental fly weights) wants him to stand trial, the Hindsniffer and his ilk will reflexively pout and say no! like a snotty toddler. The Arab World should say they want to pat Don on the back and invite him home to dinner. Then sit back sure in the knowledge that a pack of bloviators will tear Don to shreds with many a bleating cry of “traitor.”

  22. 22
    matt says:

    I don’t think he says these things for political reasons, I think he actually believes him.

    When we dismiss these crack pots as merely partisan hacks, I think it makes a joke out of what is really a bizarre and potentially dangerous world view.

  23. 23

    redstate.com doesn’t get the joke

    When I saw the shirt ‘Your Mom – Rated E for Everyone’, the first thing that came to my mind was… MILF. I’m guessing redstate is thinking Brady Bunch.

    So then I dug, and found the source for the shirt, and I was right.

  24. 24

    John Yoo and Instapundit also show shocking ability to just ignore the law whenever they need to push some Republican talking point. Usually they resort to “ad hominem” or “appeal to emotion”.

    You never wondered why Glenn Reynolds is a college prof?

    He couldn’t cut it in the courtroom.

  25. 25
    dave says:

    jcricket-

    As a frequent blog reader I have noticed a lot of criticism of lawyer-bloggers taking the form of “they should know better.”

    While I agree that Hindraker is a complete idiot, I fail to see why it is so shocking that a lawyer would advocate for his point of view by using logical fallacy. Since lawyers are trained to use logic to advocate vociferously for their side it is no suprise that they would employ logical fallacy where it suited their argument [see also: Althouse, Ann].

    To lawyers like Hindraker, this is all a rhetorical game. A game he has been professionally trained to play.

    I still agree that he should be called on it though.

    Also, he’s a douche.

  26. 26
    Andrew says:

    I really, really can’t wait for the day that Assrocket gets put on the no-fly list and is triple audited by the IRS.

  27. 27
    Teak111 says:

    Not familiar with Hindringer, but he must be a brillant parody, kinda of a Jesus J General-type who has secretly inserted himself into a mainstream righty blog and spouts off brilliant satire. In this light, his stuff is brilliant, so good infact that most take him seriously. I see him huddled in his office laughing that he all fooled everyone.
    Coming from the lefty blogs mostly, its interesting that although we have our strident moonbats, most are at least smart, and few display the authoritain worship seen in Hindracker (if he’s legit) and others. Just a thought. rebuttals welcome.

  28. 28
    capelza says:

    SomeCallMeTim Says:

    “Intertubes,” not “Intertrons.” Or you really have abandoned the Republican Party.

    That cracked me up.

    Thank you to all Veterans…always, but especially on this day.

    Hindrocket scrubbed that self-titled nick? Ha!

  29. 29
    Halffasthero says:

    The Other Steve Says:

    As a Minnesotan, I would like to apologize to America for John Hinderacker.

    Nobody in Minnesota even much cares for the idiot.

    /agree

    And as noted above – Captains Quarters rebukes him nicely. These guys really need to be careful of what they think they are actually accomplishing. Demonizing 1/2 of the nation because you think you know better is destructive in the extreme.

  30. 30
    jcricket says:

    You never wondered why Glenn Reynolds is a college prof?

    He couldn’t cut it in the courtroom.

    I’m confused, are you saying?

    The Republicans are the lawyers that says the legal system doesn’t work and then gets law degrees and proves it.?

    Or this?

    The Republicans are the people that says the education system doesn’t work and then teach classes to prove it?

    Or are they just proving that thing they always quote?

    Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach?

    (NB: The last one is odious, but Republicans very often believe it. I do not.)

  31. 31
    Walker says:

    You never wondered why Glenn Reynolds is a college prof?

    He couldn’t cut it in the courtroom

    While Glenn’s logical fallacies are up there with the best (or should I say worst) of them, logical argument usually means more in the university setting in the courtroom. My impression from sitting in voi dire several times is that lawyers in the courtroom want people who don’t understand arguments and are influenced by appeals to emotion.

    My PhD has kept me off many jury. In fact, the only time I sat on a jury was for a minor traffic case, and then only because almost everyone else “personally knew a cop” (another fast way off a jury).

  32. 32
    jcricket says:

    When we dismiss these crack pots as merely partisan hacks, I think it makes a joke out of what is really a bizarre and potentially dangerous world view.

    Yeah, this is one of the things that bothers me when people dismiss Coulter, Savage and Limbaugh (in particular). Saying “oh, they’re just in it for the money, they don’t believe that” actually makes what they’re doing worse. Their absolving themselves of responsibility, which makes them more prone to extreme hyperbole, which effects all their listeners. The rise of “eliminationist rhetoric” (sometimes aimed at the A-rabs, but equally as often aimed at non-Republican Americans) from this flank of the Republican party is truly worrisome.

    Hindrocket scrubbed that self-titled nick? Ha!

    What’s even better, IIRC, is the other John on Powerline was called “The Big Trunk”. Dollars to Donuts, the Powerline bloggers are going to have their own “Mike Jones moments” soon enough.

  33. 33
    jcricket says:

    Sorry, it was Scott Johnson that was the “Big Trunk”. Otherwise, homoerotic nickname point still stands.

    While searching the tubes, I had also forgotten how much Powerline were pushing the “Joseph Wilson will be indicted as the liars and traitors by Fitzgerald” line of BS.

    Again, if you are a client of these three tools – run, run run, to get new lawyers.

  34. 34
    RSA says:

    Here’s a line from the Powerline follow-up post:

    But isn’t a reasonable starting point for that engagement the fact that the terrorists are delighted that the Dems have won, and are convinced that the Dems’ policies, as the terrorists understand them, will benefit the jihadis?

    Actually, I’d assumed that the “reasonable” starting point for Powerline was that everything the terrorists believe is wrong. They’re apparently right when their beliefs align with those of neocon hawks.

  35. 35
    jcricket says:

    To lawyers like Hindraker, this is all a rhetorical game. A game he has been professionally trained to play.

    Fair enough, and as Walker pointed out, in a courtroom this might actually be a reasonable line of attack (confuse the jury with good-sounding, but otherwise logically fallicious arguments) – esp. when you have no legitimate case.

    So, if every time they (John Yoo and Instapundit too) offer up their legal reasoning/writing it contains such massive logical fallacies, I’d argue that it’s pretty clear they’re bad lawyers, with weak cases. It is especially important to point out this trend when they make actual legal arguments (e.g. John Yoo’s justification of the ‘Unitary Executive’) – all they have is smoke & mirrors. (or fire and brimstone, if you prefer).

  36. 36
    demomondian says:

    It’s a pretty pathetic diatribe, isn’t it?

    That said, I think Ed at Captain’s Quarters misses a critical point. The Democrats have been acting as a loyal opposition, and I expect the Republicans to behave the same way — I expect them to OPPOSE our proposals vigorously, and I don’t expect them to make their own proposals. That’s not their job, necessarily.

  37. 37
    chopper says:

    i always thought his choice of ‘hindrocket’ as a nick was interesting. i mean, who else but a secret communist agitator would pick a weapon from the soviet’s greatest helicopter for a nick name?

    i mean, he wants to turn the USA ‘red’, correct?

  38. 38
    Salty Party Snax says:

    Hindraker has always been a nitwit, one that has been peddling the most absurd species of bullshit for years. His need to serve as an unbashed apologist for the most incompetent and disastrous president in U.S. history runs so deep that you can only wonder what he would post in the way of an explanation upon finding his wife in the sack with Georgie Bush.

    “She was on the White House roof inspecting for possible moisture incursions in the shingling there when suddenly the roof gave way and she landed on the president’s dick.”

  39. 39
    jake says:

    To lawyers like Hindraker, this is all a rhetorical game. A game he has been professionally trained to play.

    Sad, but true. I once made the idiotic assumption that law school involved honing one’s mind to distinguish Right from Wrong and fight for Right. (Look, I was young and foolish.) Not so much. We were trained to hone our minds to win. A friend once compared it to Boot Camp. A slander on the military but still accurate.

    I won’t see that money again in a hurry.

    As for his writing “skills.” Yeah, he writes like a lawyer. The ABA has (or had) a program that required law schools to teach budding lawyers to avoid the passive voice and “heretofores” like the plague. I don’t think it will really catch on because the pv and long meaningless words are essential to bamboozling folk.

  40. 40
    ThymeZone says:

    President Bush’s job approval rating has fallen to just 31 percent, according to the new NEWSWEEK Poll. Bill Clinton’s lowest rating during his presidency was 36 percent; Bush’s father’s was 29 percent, and Ronald Reagan’s was 35 percent. Jimmy Carter’s and Richard Nixon’s lows were 28 and 23 percent, respectively. (Just 24 approve of outgoing Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s job performance; and 31 percent approve of Vice President Dick Cheney’s.)

    Worst of all, most Americans are writing off the rest of Bush’s presidency; two-thirds (66 percent) believe he will be unable to get much done, up from 56 percent in a mid-October poll; only 32 percent believe he can be effective. That’s unfortunate since 63 percent of Americans say they’re dissatisfied with the way things are going in the country; just 29 percent are satisfied, reports the (Newsweek) poll of 1,006 adults conducted Thursday and Friday nights.

    Looks like Assrocket’s Genius is in for some rough sledding.

  41. 41
    Baby Jane says:

    “They hate us for our freedom?”

    They hate us for our corndogs.

  42. 42
    sparky says:

    This claptrap is typical of lazy, cynical lawyers. They know precisely what they are doing; they assume no one will look too closely and thus fall for the rhetorical move. And if they do get caught, there’s no consequence (in my experience, this is usually true in court, too–no punishment for misrepresentation in court unless it’s a direct lie). As someone said above, though there are ethical rules that supposedly prohibit this kind of conduct, in reality the rules are ignored in favor of making any kind of argument that might pass. In law, no one likes you if you lose.

    Sophistry like this works on those who haven’t been exposed to it. It’s important to call them on it because otherwise it ossifies into the conventional wisdom, probably through mindless repetition.

  43. 43
    Tsulagi says:

    That “Bush is a misunderstood genius” is classic. Creates a real image of a total drooling Bush butt boy tool.

    Let’s see, the rocket up Bush’s ass is bemoaning an AQ leader in Iraq holding a press conference. During which the guy claims their ranks have grown to 12,000 in the Iraq chapter. Laughs citing Bush as “the stupidest president in U.S. history.” Asks us to stick around; good for business. Iraq is in a civil war.

    So how did we get to this point Assrocket? Didn’t happen since Tuesday. Oh, I know: Stay the Course! Must be some of that “extraordinary vision and brilliance.”

  44. 44
    Pooh says:

    My impression from sitting in voi dire several times is that lawyers in the courtroom want people who don’t understand arguments and are influenced by appeals to emotion.

    In the courtroom being the operative language. Most of the heavy lifting goes on before that point for an audience of judges (and more usually, their law clerks) who can spot the incoherent logic. In fact, from experience, it’s the law clerks’ favorite thing to do, because then they can shake their heads sadly at how many shitty lawyers there are out there.

    Asscannon also demonstrates the timelessness of the trial lawyer maxim, if the law is on your side, pound on the law, if the facts are on your side, pound on the facts; if neither the law nor the facts are on your side, pound on the table.

  45. 45
    Pooh says:

    So, if every time they (John Yoo and Instapundit too) offer up their legal reasoning/writing it contains such massive logical fallacies, I’d argue that it’s pretty clear they’re bad lawyers, with weak cases. It is especially important to point out this trend when they make actual legal arguments (e.g. John Yoo’s justification of the ‘Unitary Executive’) – all they have is smoke & mirrors. (or fire and brimstone, if you prefer).

    I don’t think Yoo is a bad lawyer, just completely unethical. His sleight-of-hand occurs early in the game, when he starts with indefensibly ahistorical premises (basing “executive powers” to be understand by the framers to include a pre-Magna Carta understanding of the British monarch’s authority.)

    He’s also a master of bootstrapping. He argues that where there is ambiguity in the meaning a so-and-so statute or treaty or Constitution, the executive gets to break ties. Then he invents an ambiguity to prove that the executive’s ludicrous reading is correct.

    So in short bad, bad man, not necessarily bad attorney, because he’s pretty subtle with it…

  46. 46
    ThymeZone says:

    I don’t think Yoo is a bad lawyer, just completely unethical.

    When in law school do they teach you to drop straight lines like that?

  47. 47
    SeesThroughIt says:

    That “Bush is a misunderstood genius” paragraph will never not be completely hilarious. It perfectly completes the transition from Hindraker to Hindlicker.

  48. 48
    Mike S says:

    He’s one of Baby Hewy Hewitt’s favorite bloggers.

    nuff said.

  49. 49
    CaseyL says:

    Hindraker wrote another swooning article about meeting a high mucky-muck GOP official – Frist, I think? or a member of Bush’s cabinet? – that made it very clear, to me at least, that he’s just a fangirl.

    I see the same kind of fluff on blogs where the writer is obsessed with the latest CW homoerotic prettyboy programming, right down to the “OMG! Hez soooo sexy & brilliant!!1!!1” praise and the “U SUX u dont GETIT i hope you DIE DIE DIE” defense against all critics.

  50. 50
    Mona says:

    John Hinderaker is not stupid. He knows exactly what he is doing, and employs slippery, lawyerly skills to advance his undiluted devotion to his Greatest Love Interest and full-time client, George W. Bush.

    Nowhere did this become clearer to me then when he was assessing the legal “defenses” issued by the Bush DoJ (as a press release) on Bush’s purported kingly authority to violate any law he likes. Hinderaker repeatedly characterized the relevant SCOTUS precedent — that is fatal for his genius’s arguments — as “silly.” No one would dream of saying that in a legal brief, because the precedent is solid and was affirmed as such by both John Roberts and Sam Alito during their confirmation hearings. The particular opinion Hinderaker was dissing — from the Korean War era — is one of the most elegant in the law (in my opinion), and has been approvingly used as an analytical tool by the Supremes in several recent cases, such as Hamdi. Including by Clarence Thomas.

    But his whole way of approaching the issue was meant for non-lawyer consumption, so that his lay readers would figure if a “smart lawyer like John Hinderaker says it, it must be so.” He is a dishonest shill, and nothing more.

  51. 51
    Bruce Moomaw says:

    Well, you know, Bush’s approach to governing DOES resemble Philip Glass’ approach to music.

  52. 52
    Bruce Moomaw says:

    That being said, I am still waiting to see just what the Dems WILL do security-wise. The biggest reason I ended up favoring a pullout from Iraq is that we need our military strength more elsewhere — particularly in trying to keep Iran from acquiring the Bomb, and in dealing with any military crises produced by the fact that North Korea and Pakistan already have it. When Kerry said in his first dedbate with Bush that “nuclear proliferation” was his idea of the biggest threat confronting us, I was delighted — until it turned out that Kerry was simply parroting what his speechwriters had written, and had put in little thought on the subject himself. I would hope that they’ve finally realized that our new security nightmare isn’t going to go away soon and return them to the Happy Days of winning elections purely on domestic issues, and that they’re actually going to have to put in serious thought on it from now on. (It would also be nice if this election restored some sanity to the GOP on that subject.)

  53. 53
    Bruce Moomaw says:

    As for the famous line about pounding the table when the law and the facts aren’t on your side, I thought of that one many a time during the election campaign — when it was excuciatingly clear that the GOP had reached the pound-the-table stage.

  54. 54
    Pb says:

    When Kerry said in his first dedbate with Bush that “nuclear proliferation” was his idea of the biggest threat confronting us, I was delighted—until it turned out that Kerry was simply parroting what his speechwriters had written, and had put in little thought on the subject himself.

    When did it turn out that that was the case? Incidentally Kerry was saying this in 2003 as well. More speechwriters?

  55. 55
    Bruce Moomaw says:

    To PB: probably. He certainly didn’t put in much thought on the subject himself, or he would have been suggesting the possibility that we might have to apply some kind of pressure to Iran (at least economic, if not military) rather than just suggesting that we negotiate them out of the Bomb, as he says in that 2003 speech and repeated during his campaign. But then, he also didn’t give any indication of having thought out what to do if his expressed plan to mystically charm other nations into sending hundreds of thousands of troops to help bail us out of the Iraq mess failed (as it almost certainly would have).

    Now, getting back to Hindraker’s idiocies, note in particular:

    “Strategy Page has a closely related analysis; read it all: ‘Now, the stage is set for al Qaeda to win a major victory. It was a simple matter of getting the American media to ignore the battlefield victories while accentuating al Qaeda’s attacks. What could not be accomplished on the battlefield –- an American retreat from Iraq –- was instead achieved in American newsrooms.’ ”

    Note that the people being bamboozled by the Evil Liberal Media must include Centcom itself, as confirmed by that leaked Powerpoint slide showing Iraq sliding rapidly from its initial position about midway between “Peace” (in green) and “Chaos” (in blood-red) far in the direction of the latter, with perceptible movement further toward Chaos just in one week and no sign at all of the slide slowing. And as for that “victories on the battlefield” crap (which we’ve also heard from Cheney): we heard the SAME GODDAMN GARBAGE during the Vietnam War, and (as that NVA general told Harry Summers after the war) it’s obviously irrelevant in a guerilla war against an insurgency, in which the only meaningful “battlefield” is the entire goddamn country.

    Note also that one of Hindraker’s pieces of “evidence” that the Islamic fascists are delighted with the Dem win is one Iranian official declaring that “Americans have now shown that they realize the foolishness of their continuing to support Israel.” The Democratic Party, of course — whatever its other military policies — will abandon Israel on about the same day bin Laden holds a bar mitzvah for his next son. I imagine that all this gloating by Iranian officials is aimed at their OWN increasingly skeptical people: “See how stupid you were to doubt the success of our own glorious military and foreign policies!”

  56. 56

    […] Unlike his distant relation Vincent van Gogh who cut off one of his own ears, George Bush van Gogh cut off both. What the world told him recently was too much to bear. His style (never as straightforward as some admirers would admit) and his world both became more swirly. His art and his words moved more and more in circles. His impressions mattered far more than what others saw before them. Still sunshine occasionally brightened his dark garden. Where previously Bush van Gogh spoke of traitors everywhere around him, friends now found the unrecognized genius speaking suddenly in a strange bipartisan voice. Such moments of sanity were all too brief. Reality was left far behind. Genius and the asylum awaited. In time, what sort of genius and art will be recognized in George Bush van Gogh? […]

  57. 57
    Pb says:

    Bruce Moomaw,

    Well there are objective methods by which we can tell how much the terrorists won in this election, too. For instance, I haven’t seen the statistics out showing how many seats al-Qaeda picked up, or for that matter Hamas. Come on, Hinderaker, put up or shut up–how many seats do the terrorists control in Congress now?

  58. 58
    Pb says:

    And, oh yeah…

    “in addition to our military might, we must deploy all that is in America’s arsenal — our diplomacy, our intelligence system, our economic power, and the appeal of our values and ideas” — John Kerry

    My take is, just because he talked about carrots, that doesn’t mean that sticks were off the table.

  59. 59

    Bush: “A man of extraordinary vision and brilliance approaching to genius”

    reminds me of the character Chance the Gardener in Peter Seller’s Being There.

    The character Louise sees him on TV, and offers her own assessment, which is quoted here.

    Hmmm… Gardener… Bush… any relation? Naaah. ;)

  60. 60
    Zifnab says:

    If only the Bush Administration could rally their base as easily and idiotically at home as in Iraq. We could convince them all that you have to vote Shia or the Democrats win, and that Democrat/Republican infight occurs entirely to sway the Iraqi elections.

    A vote for the Sunnis is a vote for Nancy Pelosi. If you’re not with the Shia, you’re with the Democrats. In fact, the Sunnis are secretly liberal radicals intent on aborting the fetuses of young gay Shia boys and they must be stopped at all costs. Worst of all, Sunnis want to raise your taxes.

    Someone book Karl Rove, Ken Mehlmen, and the rest of the Republican leadership a ticket to Iraq right away. I think if they press this, we’ll have those insurgents out of office by ’08 easy.

  61. 61
    Carot says:

    “why the HELL do we pay any attention at all to these buttheads?”
    The same reason henhouse owners don’t ignore foxes. These people assume that if their argument isn’t refuted quickly then there must be a grain of truth in it, then they join even more nonsense with it. This quick counterattacking starting in left wing blogs and percolated up into the Democratic leadership. Since these people get handed their ass in arguments instead of being ignored they are starting to come to their senses. This will however rapidly change if the counterattacks stop.
    The same problem happens with mainstream science. Many of the ideas on the lunatic fringe in science persist because scientists believe it is better to ignore them rather than demonstrate they are wrong. Dawkins interviewing Haggard was a good example, it was probably one of the few times Haggard had to listen to a contrary position instead of just preaching to the converted.

  62. 62
    Richard 23 says:

    Why does AssRocket give a fuck what the latest terrorist propaganda is anyway? They’d spin the election as a win for their cause no matter who won.

    Why does the authoritarian right trust the terrorists so much? Why take them at their word? Why does AssRocket hate America?

    Remind me again why Powerline was Time’s blog of the year. Idiots.

  63. 63
    jake says:

    I should add that by “the Democrats,” I don’t mean every rank and file member of that party, many of whom no doubt want America to succeed. I’m referring to almost all of the party’s national leadership and the large majority of its elected officials.

    Gee that’s mighty big of you Mr. Hindtaker. Now the Democrats know what they must do to meet your excruciatingly strict standards: Don’t run for office as a Demoncrat, don’t vote for Demoncrats, don’t disagree with fearless leader.

    What will it take to move this fetid bucket of sanctimonious santorum to the KMBA file? Or is the JH – TI file worse than KMBA?

  64. 64
    Cy says:

    John,

    As someone who has enjoyed your blog on occasion in the past it is really a shame to see you go off the deep end. Obviously there have been mistakes made by the administration but only a child expects life to be perfect. No war n the history of mankind has ever been perfect or bloodless or mistake free. It is really disappointing to see people who once seemed reasonable screaming like barking moonbats that anyone who disagrees with them is an idiot or a war criminal. I guess you just want to be on the side that’s winning. I am sure you will feel right at home with your new friends at Kos and Democratic Underground. Welcome home.

  65. 65
    Zifnab says:

    If only pundits were elected officals.

  66. 66
    a says:

    What an awful posting.

    Full of ridicule and name-calling, but at no stage did it even attempt to address Hindraker’s points. Which point are, on the surface at least, obviously correct.

  67. 67
    a says:

    oh, and it is telling that those who like to quote the “brilliance approaching to genius” paragraph always take great care to omit the next sentence.

    Why is that?

  68. 68
    Gold Star for Robot Boy says:

    Ah, I see fans of Hindraker’s have arrived.
    Hey, wingnuts, don’t be afraid to stick around a while. You may even learn something.

    Why is that?

    Because by that point, most readers’ eyes have rolled right out the back of their heads.

  69. 69
    Walker says:

    Full of ridicule and name-calling, but at no stage did it even attempt to address Hindraker’s points.

    There were points? What are they? He says progandists claim the Democrat’s win is a good thing, therefore Democrat aid terrorists. How does that even resemble a logical argument that can be addressed?

  70. 70
    craigie says:

    Which point are, on the surface at least, obviously correct.

    Obviously.

    On the surface, I mean. But deep down, where logic lives, they are insane.

  71. 71
    Dreggas says:

    It is really disappointing to see people who once seemed reasonable screaming like barking moonbats that anyone who disagrees with them is an idiot or a war criminal. I guess you just want to be on the side that’s winning. I am sure you will feel right at home with your new friends at Kos and Democratic Underground. Welcome home.

    This coming from someone who most likely frequents red state etc. The place now screaming and howling that the terrorists have one complete with the ever so sane commenters who claim this is somehow gods plan and that he will rapture Bush et al up and leave pelosi as president…yeah John’s a real loonie alright. I think some people need to seriously examine their side before casting stones with regard to lunacy.

  72. 72
    Perry Como says:

    How does that even resemble a logical argument that can be addressed?

    In the same way al Qaeda thanked the President for sending more US troops to Iraq so the terriers could kill more infidels. Cy, “a”, why is the President falling right into al Qaeda’s trap?

    Intellectual Honesty: 1
    Hindrocket: -1634058

  73. 73
    BadTux says:

    Nevermind Hindrocket, the real news of the day, according to World Nut Daily, is that Google hates our soldiers and supports terrorist organizations like the Democratic Party! Offered up as proof of the latter is that they will accept ads pointing out that Tom Delay accepted bribes, but won’t accept ads pointing out that Nancy Pelosi eats raw babies while handing out AK-47’s to terrorists. Whoa! We gotta all stop using Google RIGHT NOW or … or… the terrorists will KILL US ALL!

    What’s that? Blogger is owned by Google? Err…. nevermind.

    Seriously, what is it with all these craven cowards in the right wingosphere? They seem terrified of EVERYTHING! It must be sad, quaking in fear every day that way…

    – Badtux the not-cowardly Penguin

  74. 74
    CaseyL says:

    Remind me again why Powerline was Time’s blog of the year.

    I was going to say, because Powerline was the driver of the kerfuffle over the Dan Rather Memos. That was, IIRC, the official reason given.

    But Time is also the rag that put Ann Coulter on its cover. And Time’s latest on-line issue devotes its top story to “Republicans Regrouping,” rather than the Democratic sweep, or any analysis of why the Democrats won.

    All in all, it seems that the reason Time named Powerline Blog of the Year is because Time decided to cast its lot with the wingnuts.

    And Hindrocket’s fans? You can KMBA.

  75. 75
    jcricket says:

    Hindrocket, Hewitt, RedState, Malkin, Coulter, Savage, Limbaugh, and even Hannity are becoming increasingly vitriolic with each passing year, and have long since left the realm of sane conversation.

    Unfortunately, they still have a lot of influence, because sanity is not a prerequisite for people believing you these days.

    But, like Glenn Greenwald has discovered, the best defense is a good offense spiced with a heaping dose of ridicule. There’s no use trying to have a “debate” with these tools. John’s found that out on a number of occasions (see both RedState & Dan Riehl for examples).

  76. 76
    Pb says:

    Nice post from Captain Ed; it all reminds me of something I wrote a few months back, called “The GOP Lets Osama bin Laden Run Their Foreign Policy“. Looks like not much has changed!

  77. 77
    Redhand says:

    Wow, I just visited Powerline and saw that “Paul” is accusing “Captain Ed” of being “disloyal” to fellow conservatives. You have to read the whole post to see the magic “disloyal” word, but check out this excerpt:

    Acting very much out of character, Ed has let his rhetoric get the best of him.

    It’s commendable, in a way, that Ed wants to be high-minded, and thus is reluctant to speak ill of the Democrats at this juncture. It would more commendable if he followed the same approach when he writes about his fellow conservatives.

    Are the Powerline trio thin-skinned or what?

    I don’t think there’s a more truly “compassionate conservative” on the right side of the blogosphere than Captain Ed. Always a gentleman, he’s also smart enough to think for himself on many conservative issues, immigration reform for example. The Powerline people attacking him this way is very low class.

  78. 78
    Sherard says:

    John, I disagree with much of what Paul has to say, especially on this topic, and his delivery is grating to say the least.

    But if he is an idiot, all I can say is, it takes one to know one. Your idiotic rhetoric sounds exactly like his, just coming from the opposite side.

  79. 79
    jake says:

    oh, and it is telling that those who like to quote the “brilliance approaching to genius” paragraph always take great care to omit the next sentence.

    Don’t look at me, I got the whole thing.

    Which point are, on the surface at least, obviously correct.

    They certainly are. If the surface we are talking about is the surface of Uranus.

    But a (a what, one wonders) illustrates my political dividing line: On the one side there are people (regardless of voting record, political leanings, etc.) who don’t take themselves seriously, can admit when they are wrong, understand the power of laughter and how sometimes the best thing one can do with a full-bore whack job is point and laugh. On the other there are humourless cretins with telephone poles stuck up their arses. Shrill and vindictive, the least sign that someone disagrees with them or doesn’t take them seriously acts like a powerful emetic on their delicate systems, causing them to vomit up even more idiocy. It is the job, the duty, of the former group to keep an eye on the latter and of course, wind them up until they snap.

  80. 80
    Tulkinghorn says:

    As for his writing “skills.” Yeah, he writes like a lawyer. The ABA has (or had) a program that required law schools to teach budding lawyers to avoid the passive voice and “heretofores” like the plague. I don’t think it will really catch on because the pv and long meaningless words are essential to bamboozling folk.

    Legal writing is intended for two audiences: judges and clients. Judges are usually successful and smart lawyers, so they know all the rhetorical tricks, shifting focus, use of passive voice, misdirection, and characterization of evidence that skirts the line of dishonesty. They can smell the necessary intellectual dishonesty a mile off.

    The purpose of all the claptrap is not to fool the judge, but to fool the client. They are the ones paying the bills, and they want vigorous advocacy for their money. They have often fooled themselves about their case, convincing themselves they are right without ever thinking objectively or seeking objective counsel.

    You can tell the truly honest lawyers at a glance — they are the ones living under the bridge, slowly starving to death.

  81. 81
    raj says:

    Hinderaker’s postings are, of course, the brayings of a jackass. But, you might want to query, who is paying him to write those brayings?

    Follow the money.

  82. 82
    Tulkinghorn says:

    Follow the money, sure, but the point I was trying to make is that the main person he lies to
    is the same person he lies for. It works very well up to the point cognitive dissonance kicks in.

    As in most millennial movements, the end of the world for Hindraker has come and passed. And the fraudulence of the movement is exposed to all who have eyes to see.

  83. 83

    […] John Hinderaker- Total Idiot […]

  84. 84
    Pooh says:

    Nowhere did this become clearer to me then when he was assessing the legal “defenses” issued by the Bush DoJ (as a press release) on Bush’s purported kingly authority to violate any law he likes. Hinderaker repeatedly characterized the relevant SCOTUS precedent—that is fatal for his genius’s arguments—as “silly.”

    Mona, you forget that he misrepresented the holding of Youngstown, willfully in my book by ‘cleverly’ excising important language with ellipses…

  85. 85
    Pooh says:

    I don’t think Yoo is a bad lawyer, just completely unethical.

    When in law school do they teach you to drop straight lines like that?

    Sadly, they taught us a distinction between the two

  86. 86
    freedle says:

    The Democrats have staked everything, politically speaking, on the proposition that the Iraq war is a failure and a disaster.

    Spoken like a trained mind.

    Just like a cult they can’t distinguish reality from what they have been conditioned to see. The whole world, including Bush’s Daddy who is coming to bail his failed son out again, knows that Iraq is a NO WIN situation. Iraq is a horror, the culmination of failed, inept and shortsighted policy. It was started by a man who only his cult following thinks has any understanding of world’s politics – a man who DID NOT know the difference between Sunni and Shia sects before the war. Think about that. This is the person who led us into a plan-free war. The fact that he hasn’t resigned in the shame he is incapable of feeling is disgusting.

    We missed any chance of making it work when the Child King demanded to hear what he wanted to hear about what would happen in the aftermath. The media may get all excited when he says he will look at bipartisanship, but that is because they are spineless tools. Bush is incapable of bipartisanship, incapable, mentally.

    Face it, Bush has serious psychological problems, that is quite obvious to all but his cult. 30 million out of 6 billion people. Bush can NOT take any criticism and everyone who has been around him, sans his “loyalty cult,” has reported that in no uncertain terms. He is a bully’s bully and incapable of facing a discouraging word (read: reality) and the right has been conditioned to believe this is a sign of strength.

    In fact, the new right is so swept up in their alternate and false reality, they are a national security problem. Rush and Fox and their “leaders” will drag their minds further into the abyss and they are conditioned to follow them deeper. They live a cult world where anyone not in support of conservatisms’ road to hell is of Satan. This is so cult like it is frightening.

    What the right and their recent spin is doing now is simply setting up their mental escape, paving the road that will take them further and further from reality – a place where they can blame anyone other than the source for their own ideology and leader’s failed policies. These are people who accept the belief that Saddam and Al Queda are in cahoots. They are conditioned to believe the MSM is out to get them, persecute them, because they don’t report their false reality as fact – even though the MSM bends over backwards to accommodate their trained reality. Is it any wonder why they think Saddam and Al Quada were buddies?

    The right in America is a cult. I don’t write that with any enjoyment, it is sad. They know not what they do – just like a cult. Any look back at the last six years shows that they are controlled – conditioned to chirp on queue. The Kerry “flap” is a prime example. They are incapable of seeing how manipulated and dishonest they have become. Just like a cult.

    Here, you only need a one of these – Who do you see?

    No ONE has a way to win in Iraq. The chance for that has past. The only way Bush will “win” is to get the democrats to sign off on some con Lee Hamilton, the grand capitulator, signs onto and thus take the blame with Bush from here on. That is what we are down to – Iraq will be a no win horror if we stay or if we leave. Anyone who can’t see that by now is a cultee, a fool or a liar.

    The fact that the right foolishly and blindly cheered this horror into being should be enough for them realize they have no clue and for them to face that they should shut the fuck up, but just like a cult they are conditioned not to see what they are doing and the horror it enables.

  87. 87

    […] Lady MacCheney still lives in an alternate reality. One in which she hangs out at a saloon with John Hinderaker, who once called Bush a genius. It must be very strange to be President Bush. A man of extraordinary vision and brilliance […]

  88. 88

    Perhaps if someone still cares about such things they could change the link in Update #3 to the correct one, which is

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/a.....011024.php

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] Lady MacCheney still lives in an alternate reality. One in which she hangs out at a saloon with John Hinderaker, who once called Bush a genius. It must be very strange to be President Bush. A man of extraordinary vision and brilliance […]

  2. […] John Hinderaker- Total Idiot […]

  3. […] Unlike his distant relation Vincent van Gogh who cut off one of his own ears, George Bush van Gogh cut off both. What the world told him recently was too much to bear. His style (never as straightforward as some admirers would admit) and his world both became more swirly. His art and his words moved more and more in circles. His impressions mattered far more than what others saw before them. Still sunshine occasionally brightened his dark garden. Where previously Bush van Gogh spoke of traitors everywhere around him, friends now found the unrecognized genius speaking suddenly in a strange bipartisan voice. Such moments of sanity were all too brief. Reality was left far behind. Genius and the asylum awaited. In time, what sort of genius and art will be recognized in George Bush van Gogh? […]

  4. […] it was “generally understood” by this Great Lakes buffoon that Iran is an Arab nation (wrong buffoon on the second one- like the breathless babble of a pre-schooler, the Powerline nonsense all runstogether, and I confused Paul’s ramblings with J0hn’s. It is Saturday, and I am too lazy to find more of John’s silliness, so you can put in the comments for me if you so desire). […]

Comments are closed.