Greenwald: A Bridge Too Far [Updated]

John, I’m stunned that you continue to think Greenwald was using the remark as a metaphor or hyperbole. He expressly stated that he was not:

 

And perhaps you were not “laughing” at rape survivors, but you were mocking them in a public forum where women (including asiangrrlMN) were revealing their experiences with rape and that they found the comments offensive.  Moreover, that men were also expressing concern likely means they have a mother, sister, daughter, aunt, or niece who has been a victim of sexual violence.  You chose to ignore all of that.  You could have said nothing.  You chose to insert yourself.  It was and is wrong. I didn’t seek nor did I want your defense.  Your silence would have been sufficient.  

And to those who think I overreacted or have a fragile lady-psyche, I’ll be sure to remember not to be so goddamn sensitive about rape in the future.  

I’ve removed myself from the masthead.  The celebration can officially commence.

-ABL
I’ve put off writing this post for days, and I still don’t have the words to express my disgust about the “rape analogy heard ’round  the Twitterverse.”  In case you’re not up to speed, long story short, I had a Twitter discussion with Marcy Wheeler about the NDAA; a Greenwald supporter quipped that if I saw Obama raping a nun on live TV, I would defend him for it; another supporter quipped that I would fantasize about playing the role of the raped nun; and Greenwald piled on. When asked to account for the clumsy rape metaphor, Greenwald doubled down, claiming that it wasn’t a metaphor, and that he actually believed that I and other Obama supporters would defend Obama if we were to see him raping a nun.

In what world is such a comment appropriate?  It was a vile thing to say, and it is a vile thing to defend.  Moreover, the stalwartness and cluelessness with which people, including John Cole, defended that statement is disappointing.

To be clear: I neither asked nor expected John to defend me.  I can and do defend myself. But I was surprised and stunned that he stridently defended Greenwald when he could have, and should have, said nothing.  Even worse, he managed to cast Greenwald as a victim.  Stunning.

Both Greenwald’s comments and the comments offered in defense are incontrovertibly offensive to women, offensive to rape survivors, and are inexcusable.   Does that mean I think Greenwald is pro-rape?  Of course not.  But using rape as a metaphor or leveraging it to score political points is tone-deaf, at best, and malicious at worst.

I’m without words to describe it any further, so I will simply direct your attention to this Chirpstory, to a post by Zerlina Maxwell (“Glenn Greenwald defends ‘Obama could rape a nun’ attack on supporters“), and to a post by Joy-Ann Reid (“On bullying: Glenn Greenwald and the ‘nun rape’ smear”).

I am disappointed that my tenure at Balloon Juice is ending this way, and I will always be grateful for the opportunity John gave me to blog at Balloon Juice.  But I must move on.

As such, I’ll see most of you around on Twitter, ABLC, and other cyberspaces.  To the rest — to those overjoyed at my departure — I’ll see you in Pie Heaven.

[cross-posted at Angry Black Lady Chronicles]






344 replies
  1. 1
    FlipYrWhig says:

    Ah, shit. Bon chance, ABL.

  2. 2
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    Yeah, Cole’s behavior on this was really, colossally, stupid.

  3. 3
    Trentrunner says:

    Nun-raping?

    So this is how the universe ends, not with bang, but a wimple.

  4. 4
    cokane says:

    twitter’s fucking stupid

  5. 5
    Mnemosyne says:

    So sorry. I hope you and John can patch things up off-line at least. The Greenwald quadrupling down of, “No, really, I meant that literally” — does Greenwald have some kind of social deficit that makes him not understand that there are some ideas that are inappropriate to actually verbalize in public?

  6. 6
    Trentrunner says:

    Do I think Greenwald is pro-rape? Of course not.

    Whew! Thanks for clarifying; many were unsure.

    But I wonder if he’s stopped beating his husband?

  7. 7
    thalarctos says:

    :(

    sorry to see you go, ABL, but I get it.

  8. 8
    Taylor says:

    So what about the NDAA?

    Can we get back to the fact that my government can now lock me up and throw away the key?

    Is Chile now our model for social order?

  9. 9
    Alison says:

    ABL, you know I’m with you on this. It’s sad for BJ as a blog to lose you, although as I said on Twitter, at least on your own site we can sometimes have decent troll-free convos on your posts. But even so…well, shit…this is essentially John’s house, and for the sake of decorum I’ll refrain from stating my opinions regarding his behavior. Ahem.

    Privilege: it’s a bad thing.

  10. 10
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    does Greenwald have some kind of social deficit

    As far as I can tell, a DSM’s worth of social deficiencies go hand-in-glove with libertarianism.

  11. 11

    It’s a shame to see you go. Understandable, but still a shame. This will make the haters that trolled your threads only too happy. I’d rather see you and JC work this out right here on BJ. It might prove to be very educational for a lot of people.

  12. 12
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Taylor: Pshaw! What about _my_ made-up fears of being spirited away in the night by jackbooted government thugs just because I said the wrong thing? Why can’t we talk about _those_?

  13. 13
    freelancer says:

    I <3 ya, ABL. I'll miss your posts here. I probably would have said something regarding Greenwald like, "yeah fuck that guy. He's disingenuous, one-note, ultimately cynical, and how dare a part time ex-pat instruct me on the morality of voting one way or another when he doesn't even cast a ballot?" I probably wouldn't have done what Cole did, but then I am not him and am not a mind-reader.

    That said, I'm not a fan of the kind of hyper-sensitivity and programmed, reactive outrage that politics more often engenders. I think few things are sacred, and if something is worth being mocked to illustrate a point, we all could use an edifying laugh. Greenwald was completely blind to make the rape comment with regard to Obama when he himself ignored all the bile spewed forth under Ron Paul's name only to declare him the most progressive candidate. Greenwald is a disingenuous asshole with an agenda that lacks a consistent integrity.

    I hate to see you go GBCW over this, but then again, I can always add ABLC to my RSS. See you then.

    PS Rape is serious, but it can be used rhetorically, even if to show rhetorically that the topic of rape can be funny.

  14. 14
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @John – A Motley Moose: Work out what? The reasons behind why John’s relationship to Greenwald are fractally self-similar to Greenwald’s relationship to Ron Paul? I guess there’s no accounting for a taste for libertarian bullshit.

  15. 15
    Lysana says:

    And this is my last comment here. Anne Laurie’s ability to remain here without public condemnation by John and the other bloggers for her anti-ABL post was pushing me away. The fact there are trolls here who still think the NDAA is all about them would be almost enough. The fact Cole was so crass as to shit on a woman he called friend as well as many other people (including Cole by extension, since he supports Obama and thus is a cultist who’d explain away Obama raping a nun by GG’s standards) is the last straw.

    So fuck you, John Cole. You don’t deserve Lily or Rosie. Tunch doesn’t deserve you.

  16. 16
    dmbeaster says:

    Well, I guess the appropriate analogy is that Greenwald, literally, would be the fluffer for Ron Paul before he raped another man.

  17. 17
    eemom says:

    oh shit.

    I’ve been saying for days that I don’t understand how anyone of conscience could continue to defend that creature, but this….

    fuck.

  18. 18
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Lysana: I still think the particularly pointed irony is that Greenwald embarked upon a days-long project of explaining away reprehensible things Paul has said and done, echoing similar efforts in the past defending Paul pere et fils, and yet _still_ has the audacity to rip into someone else for a proclivity towards… explaining things away. Know thyself.

  19. 19
    Djur says:

    Teacher says that every time someone writes a dramatic goodbye post on a blog, a troll gets its bridge.

    Don’t look at me, I’ve had mine for years.

  20. 20
    Observer says:

    ABL,

    Everybody is responsible for their own actions and own words (and certainly *I* wouldn’t have used a rape analogy nor would recommend anybody else using it) but I just don’t see why/how you perceive an unending string of sturm und drang as being beneficial to anyone, including yourself.

    In this latest incident, all parties seem to be in the wrong to me. But then again, I would say that about most of your spats.

  21. 21
    Aqualad08 says:

    Just to help John maybe understand the difference between a rape metaphor and a skull-fucking a kitten metaphor…every two minutes in America, a woman is sexually assaulted. In a place like the Congo, 48 woman are raped every hour. Because nuns are often committed to working with the poor, history is littered with stories of nuns being raped by various armed factions. I don’t have definite numbers on the skull-fucking of kittens, but I’m going to guess it is rather trivial in the face of the actual and real pain rape victims and their loved one suffer every day. It was a damn rotten metaphor by the original poster, and a damn stupid and insensitive wink-wink comment by Glenn (no, I don’t think he’s pro-rape, but taking that act lightly shows a lack of basic sense). I love ya John, but even a half-hearted defense of Glenn in this particular case only trivializes the very real and unfortunately under-reported and under-prosecuted act of rape.

  22. 22
    Alison says:

    @Observer: Dude, that “sturm und drang” you refer to is the fucking lived experiences and emotional reactions of actual people. Sometimes, for those of us who are less privileged than others, when confronted with something that is vile and offensive enough, that hits you in a spot that never fully heals, walking away from it isn’t possible. It’s in your head, it’s on your screen, it’s being shoved at you from all sides…and keeping quiet and not telling the assholes off is often what’s recommended, and it’s silencing bullshit. If someone feels the need to respond to an offense, telling them it’s probably not “beneficial” is condescending crap.

    And please, explain to me how those pointing out how repulsive and offensive rape jokes/metaphors were “in the wrong”. I’d love to hear it.

  23. 23
    dance around in your bones says:

    Gads, you guys. Missed the whole thang….but, oh hell.

    Twitter IS stupid. Too short to really express yourself; too easy to misinterpret….I don’t know enough about the whole thing to comment.

    Not that it stopped me from commenting. Hasta la pasta, ABL! Gonna miss ya.

  24. 24
    dead existentialist says:

    There goes the neighborhood . . . .

    Though the way some of the recent threads have devolved into flame wars and insults should’ve tipped me off.

  25. 25
    Ash says:

    A large portion of men in general are very cavalier about alluding to rape and using it as “metaphors” unfortunately. If any of them had daughters who ever had to experience something so terrifying and humiliating, I am sad to think they would still have no second thoughts of using the term in such a manner.

  26. 26
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Taylor:

    Can we get back to the fact that my government can now lock me up and throw away the key?

    Well, they can’t, actually, but don’t let mere facts disturb your paranoia.

  27. 27

    seriously? so a reasonable person is expected to believe that “raping a nun on nbc” is too intemperate? yet somehow, through the miracle of manufactured outrage, too on the nose to not be hyperbolic, and is somehow out of imaginary bounds?

    sorry, you may or may not have a point to argue on ndaa, we will never know, its clear that the response to glenn greenwald, and dr lollypop or whomever actually said it is purely ad hominem, and farcical. the victim routine is also pushing those bounds.

    some times you just have to call bullshit. attack greenwald on substance all day if it makes you happy, or makes some difference in the world, but this is ridiculous

  28. 28
    MoeLarryAndJesus says:

    Cole loves Rapistberger, but I don’t think “Big Ben” ever raped a nun.

    This is Balloon Juice’s lowest hour, if true.

  29. 29
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Alison: I think this is a particularly screwy case, though, because Greenwald really isn’t making a joke or a metaphor. He’s being totally literal. His point is that people who defend Obama would defend him in any circumstance. He’s not making a rape joke. He’s merely implying that if you support Obama without carving out a careful exception on civil liberties (ETA) that properly kisses Glenn Greenwald’s ass, you’re an evil, hard-hearted sadist. And I’m not saying that to defend him. I’m saying that to clarify how far gone and vile a human being Glenn Greenwald is.

  30. 30

    Sorry to see you go, ABL, but I understand completely.

  31. 31
    dmbeaster says:

    @Aqualad08: To punch up your point, if I say your mother wears army boots, I think everyone understands that it is a metaphoric insult without any literal ugliness. If I say your mother is an effing prostitute and you are the spawn of her tricks, it makes sense to perceive the insult as much more personal.

    That is why skull fucking kittens vs. raping nuns are not on the same plane of metaphorical insults.

  32. 32
    a.j. says:

    what Alison and aqualad08 said.

  33. 33
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    As far as I can tell, a DSM’s worth of social deficiencies go hand-in-glove with libertarianism.

    Yes, it does seem to come with the territory. They appear to have an empathy dearth. Helps explain their failure to understand that individual liberties MUST be restrained to some extent by the fact that we live in social groups.

    ABL, Cole says he wasn’t “defending” Greenwald, but I can see how you’d interpret it that way. He should have discussed this with you privately, not in public, and that way a dialog could be established, and understandings reached, not in front of others where barriers are erected with thoughts.

    Greenwald has assuredly crossed a line here, and your reaction (and the reaction of others) to that line crossing is not only understandable, it’s fully justified. Greenwald has no excuse for this, none. My respect for him has evaporated over the last few days, and this is the capper.

    Best of luck to you in all your future endeavors.

  34. 34
    Mnemosyne says:

    And before I go brush my teeth and head off to bed, let me just say I find it extremely creepy that Greenwald apparently believes in all sincerity that the current president of the United States is fully capable of raping a nun and just hasn’t checked it off his list yet.

    That’s what the “it’s not a metaphor” thing seems to mean — Greenwald literally believes that Obama is so steeped in evil that Obama would not hesitate to rape a nun.

    Makes Greenwald’s vehement support of Ron Paul even creepier now, especially with Paul repeating his bashing of the Civil Rights Act just a couple of days ago.

  35. 35
    dmbeaster says:

    @FlipYrWhig: What FlipYourWhig said @29. Greenwald’s recent comments here have also demonstrated the same point.

  36. 36
    Yutsano says:

    @Mnemosyne: The trolls will need towels. Good thing I have work tomorrow. And I’m not coming back to this thread. One mango is enough for me. Back. In. The. Boat.

  37. 37
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    Greenwald was not making a metaphor, or a joke, at all. He quite specifically disavowed it in this tweet. He meant his “rape” comment quite literally. He really is a disgusting sack of shit, and Cole’s complaining about the “smears” against GG is a load of bollocks.

  38. 38
    Martin says:

    @Taylor:

    Can we get back to the fact that my government can now lock me up and throw away the key?

    Now? They always could, and have, when they choose. Nothing’s changed.

    Well, actually one thing has changed – Obama said that you can’t. But that doesn’t mean that they won’t.

  39. 39
    MikeJ says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    He’s merely implying that if you support Obama without carving out a careful exception on civil liberties,

    That should be “civil liberties as defined by Greenwald.” There is no room for disagreement or dragging in facts or any of that. If you disagree with Greenwald, you support raping nuns.

  40. 40
    Stranger Reader says:

    Sorry that it ended on a bad note for you, but I really won’t miss the gossipy nonsense that seemed to be your stock in trade.

    Best wishes for your future elsewhere, ABL.

  41. 41
    Martin says:

    @MoeLarryAndJesus:

    Cole loves Rapistberger, but I don’t think “Big Ben” ever raped a nun.

    Doesn’t mean he’s never tried. You know how hard it is to get a nun to drink a roofie-laced martini?

  42. 42
    Alison says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I’m saying that to clarify how far gone and vile a human being Glenn Greenwald is.

    No argument from me on that. He’s a self-centered, narrow-minded, hateful jerk. That so many on the left think he’s some genius or great voice or whatever is fucking depressing.

  43. 43
    Darkrose says:

    I’m sorry to see you go, ABL.

  44. 44
    Observer says:

    @Alison:
    I’m not gong to get drawn into the specifics of this.

    Just saying that when somebody regularly gets involved in highly personal and highly vitriolic disputes then there’s obviously a conflict resolution issue with that person.

    This isn’t specific to ABL. It’s a general comment.

    People are free to do whatever they want. Specific to ABL I personally just don’t see how her style of public interaction is beneficial to her own supposed goals and objectives of said public interaction.

    ABL is free to do whatever she wants and so are you. You can call me all the names you want in the world.

  45. 45
    Hunter Gathers says:

    Yeah, Greenwald’s an asshole.

    I’m going to make sure to say something like that to my wife tomorrow, and have a bag of ice handy when she punches me in the crotch.

  46. 46
    Alison says:

    @Martin: DUDE. FFS this is the last fucking place for that shit.

    God fucking damn it, what in the hell is wrong with some people.

  47. 47
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @Observer:

    I’m not gong to get drawn into the specifics of this.

    Then you should shut the fuck up about it, because you have no goddamn idea what you’re talking about.

  48. 48
    Alison says:

    @Observer: I didn’t call you any names, but I will say that it must be really nice to be so loftily above it all. If you haven’t suffered what others have, consider yourself God damn fucking lucky and then stop telling those who have the right and proper ways to behave.

    “Conflict resolution issue”. Yeah uh-huh sure.

  49. 49
    Observer says:

    @The prophet Nostradumbass: Saying I’m not going to get drawn into a pointless debate isn’t the same thing as saying I have no idea about it.

    I don’t know what’s wrong with you folks sometimes.

  50. 50
  51. 51
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @Observer: If you’re not willing to understand what’s going on, STFU. It’s pretty simple. Your comments demonstrate that you aren’t interested in doing that.

  52. 52
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Observer:

    Given that the specifics are what all the noise is about, your comments are without worth.

  53. 53
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    Shorter “Observer”: If you say abrasive things, you shouldn’t be surprised if you’re accused of condoning Obama raping a nun.

    Seriously, go fuck yourself.

  54. 54
    stillonline says:

    Damn! Another “Glenn” and just when the stench of Glenn Beck was clearing – here comes GLenn Greenwald. A leftwing nut job who is just as loose with facts and even more in love with conspiracy. Send that man a blackboard! Maybe we should just call all these propagandists “Glenn”

  55. 55

    @Alison:

    you are quite entitled to hate greenwald for his opinions, how he defends them, or anything else. keeping it in perspective, he is just another asshole with an opinion.

    and if you could troll the fuck out of people by claiming to literally believe someone else’s intentional exaggeration, you might do it too.

  56. 56
    A Humble Lurker says:

    I’ve always enjoyed your posts here, and I had a feeling eventually you’d get tired of all the drama some posters seem hell bent on making out of your posts, but it still sucks that you’re leaving. I don’t blame you though. I guess I’ll be checking in on your blog.

    John, even knowing your past I thought you were a good guy. And maybe there’s an opportunity for you to learn from this, but you were totally in the wrong on this one dude. This is total privileged crap right here and you need to get over yourself on this for the better of the blog and for the better of yourself. Your defending of Greenwald is a lot like his defending of Paul. Whatever good he’s got on his record is FAR outweighed by this stupid act of his, just like Paul’s racism far outweighs his letting us all smoke pot.

  57. 57
    Alison says:

    @Observer: What’s “wrong” with us is that for some people, it’s not a “pointless debate”, damn it.

    Again, if this is “pointless” for you, COUNT YOURSELF FUCKING LUCKY AND MOVE THE FUCK ON. Seriously, all you are doing is pouring salt in the wounds here, and you seem to be enjoying it.

  58. 58
    Alison says:

    @Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal: No, actually, I wouldn’t. I’m not an egomaniac shitbag like GG.

  59. 59
    Observer says:

    @Alison: Alison,

    You have no idea what I have or haven’t suffered over the course of a lifetime. No idea at all. You shouldn’t make assumptions.

    And I’m not telling anybody the right and proper way to behave. Pointing out that a certain strategy or tactic as employed by one person hasn’t really worked is entirely not the same thing.

  60. 60
    Taylor says:

    @Mnemosyne:
    Read your own fucking link.

    Detention of American citizens. This was the most controversial section, of the bill, and the most misreported. A Senate compromise amendment to the bill leaves open the question of whether the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force against the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks authorizes the president to detain American citizens suspected of terrorism who are captured on American soil. This matter may never be settled, as the risk of getting smacked down by the courts may dissuade presidents with even more expansive views of executive power than Obama from ever trying it.

    In his statement, Obama says he wants “to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens.” He continues: “Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation.” Note what the president does not say: that indefinitely detaining an American suspected of terrorism would be unconstitutional or illegal. Obama’s signing statement seems to suggest he already believe he has the authority to indefinitely detain Americans—he just never intends to use it. (In the context of hot battlefields the courts have confirmed he does indeed have that power.) Left unsaid, perhaps deliberately, is the distinction that has dominated the debate over the defense bill: the difference between detaining an American captured domestically or abroad. This is why ACLU Director Anthony Romero released a statement shortly after Obama’s arguing the authority in the defense bill could “be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield.”

  61. 61
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    The amazing thing to me is that Greenwald actually believes that Obama could rape a nun.

    It’s not a metaphor for him.

    This, and his ongoing embrace of the racist shitstain that is Ron Paul…and his apparent crossing of the bridge from civil libertarian to full blown libertarian…that is, a neo-feudalist…has done it for me with him.

    I’m still concerned about the status of the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments, but damn, it’s going to be hard to take Greenwald with the same degree of seriousness after this sad weekend. Embracing the candidate of the outright neo-Nazis is just, as ABL points out, a bridge too far. Fuck, it’s the first bridge, not even the Arnhem bridge.

  62. 62
    Martin says:

    @Alison:

    DUDE. FFS this is the last fucking place for that shit.

    Really? I thought busting Big Ben for his rapist ways was pretty routine around here. Or am I supposed to be extra sensitive because GG said something dickish to ABL? I don’t even find it surprising that GG said something dickish to ABL.

  63. 63
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: Well said.

    Why do people keep saying that Greenwald was using a “metaphor”, or a “joke”, when he has quite specifically said that he is not, and that he means his “rape” comments quite literally?

  64. 64
    Observer says:

    @Alison: @Alison: What are you talking about? Does this also have to get personal with you as well? *sigh*.

  65. 65
    Djur says:

    The amazing thing to me is that Greenwald actually believes that Obama could rape a nun.

    Really? Where did he say that? Because that is cuckoo for cocoa puffs.

  66. 66
    Citizen Alan says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    And before I go brush my teeth and head off to bed, let me just say I find it extremely creepy that Greenwald apparently believes in all sincerity that the current president of the United States is fully capable of raping a nun and just hasn’t checked it off his list yet.

    Jesus H. Christ is there no bottom to your mendacity. That is NOT what he said. What the original tweeter said, to which Greenwald agreed, was that IF Obama had HYPOTHETICALLY raped a nun (and yes, that was a stupid and needlessly offensive scenario), people like ABL (and IMO, YOU!) would find some pretext for excusing Obama’s actions and even attacking anyone who condemned him. In other words, the argument is that there is nothing — literally nothing — that Obama could do which would cause ABL and other hard-core Obama supporters to ever waiver in their obsessive, knee-jerk support of him. I find your eagerness to misrepresent what Greenwald said in order to accuse him of having, of all things, pro-rape sympathies, to be utterly despicable.

  67. 67
    msskwesq says:

    I find Greenwald terribly offensive in general and do not read his drivel at all anymore. I have noticed in the past few months a lot more short tempers and insults on BJ and was thinking how I may have to pass on coming here in the future if it keeps up. I come here to exchange information and discuss ideas (and take a break with pet people) not join a flame war over someone like GG. I enjoy your perspective ABL and am sad you won’t be here to give us your opinions. I’ll see you on facebook.

  68. 68
  69. 69
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @Citizen Alan: No, Greenwald just fantasized that IF Obama did “rape a nun”, ABL would watch approvingly. That’s SO MUCH BETTER.

  70. 70
    msskwesq says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: Agree completely about a bridge too far…

  71. 71
    Mack Lyons says:

    After bearing witness to the way ABL was treated on this issue and the NDAA, I can see why she’s leaving. I had a feeling it’d come to this. I was also disappointed to see John Cole and Booman over at Booman Tribune hop aboard the “Glenn Greenwald wuz rite/Ron Paul man-love/NDAA Paranoia” bandwagon.

    @Martin:

    Really? I thought busting Big Ben for his rapist ways was pretty routine around here. Or am I supposed to be extra sensitive because GG said something dickish to ABL? I don’t even find it surprising that GG said something dickish to ABL.

    Being a dick is what many people here seem to excel at.

  72. 72
    Alison says:

    @Observer: I make no assumptions, which is why I said “if” numerous times. Because I know that I don’t know that. That being said, I still feel that someone – regardless of what that person has been through – who can view all this as pointless or be largely unaffected by it is still privileged over someone who can’t. And should not be telling others how they should view or react to things. You can say you;re not doing that, but that is indeed how you’re coming across.

    if you want others to keep in mind that they don’t know your life…I’d say the same to you. And when someone, i.e. me or ABL or whoever, is clearly very troubled by something, pointing out the flaws in their reactions is mighty unhelpful at best.

  73. 73
    Ash says:

    @The prophet Nostradumbass: I see now that he was using a joke or a metaphor, but to use rape as an “example” in this situation is just as dense and poorly thought out.

  74. 74
    Darkrose says:

    @Citizen Alan:

    @jennpozner @JamilSmith It is NOT a “rape metaphor”: it’s a statement they they’d defend ANY evil: assassinations, child-killings: EVEN rape

    Given that Greenwald has made it quite clear that he believes Obama to be personally guilty of assassinations and child-killings, for him to stress that he’s not making a rape metaphor sounds pretty much like he’s saying Obama just hasn’t gotten around to it yet.

    Maybe that’s not what he meant; I don’t know. Unlike Glenn, I don’t assume that people I disagree with are inherently evil. I do know that stating as fact that an American woman–who, in case you missed it, has a 1 in 3 chance of being a rape survivor–is so deluded and stupid that she’d excuse rape if the candidate she supports was proven to be a rapist? Not fucking on.

    I get annoyed when people make snide comments referencing Greenwald’s partner. This is a level of nastiness from him that goes beyond even that.

  75. 75
    Alison says:

    (And not because I think anyone gives a shit but simply because I’ve been vocal here…I’m off to bed. I look forward to reading through the 8278 comments that shall come in before I wake.)

  76. 76
    freelancer says:

    @Alison:

    Could be that in this case, he was thinking of “the nun” as a character in the abstract (which this nun is because Jeez Tom I was only speculating about a hypothesis), and the butt of the joke was actually Big Ben for being a sleazy criminal. Not making light of actual clergy in the world that are victims of sexual assault.

    Some here are taking Greenwald’s disgusting statements on the subject and are projecting it onto others here who if they have any passing knowledge, know that we prefer humor as a de-escalating device. It is at this point where it’s as if the skull-fucking kitten reference would be applicable if a commenter (not the disgusting OP) made a dark joke about extra-species assault, and those pissed off at the OP jumped on the commenter for ignoring the plight of feline animal rescue. Greenwald is an asshole, and a hypocrite to boot. The blowup happened, as far as I can tell, over language and imagery. It’s unseemly that he posits the position he does. But outrage to hypocrisy, especially planned, polemic hypocrisy is tiresome and just wears you out. There’s enough going on in the actual news to raise my blood pressure. Someone talking about my President committing a rape, or being a Nazi, or a Fascist, or a traitor, that ain’t news or worth the delayed M. I. That a Manic-Progressive asshole sides with the other side before those who actually want to enact their own goals into national policy, well there’s always Hamsher teaming up with wingnuts on FNC to remind me that this cynical faux liberalism isn’t anything new either.

    Fuck these people, and those of you that are angry, I get it. But check yourself before you accuse people of minimizing X, Y, or Z when they are just trying to keep the room from spontaneously combusting. Inflamed political rhetoric is a tactic used by cynical fucks to obfuscate the positions of well-meaning decent people.

  77. 77
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @freelancer:

    Greenwald is an asshole, and a hypocrite to boot.

    Heh, perhaps he should have included himself in his book “Great American Hypocrites”.

  78. 78
    Trentrunner says:

    It was not a metaphor. It was not a joke.

    It was a hypothetical example, an extreme used to try to make a point.

    It seems to have failed.

    On the other hand, looks like nun-raping is back on the menu, boys!

  79. 79
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @Trentrunner:

    It seems to have failed.

    ORLY? You don’t say?

  80. 80
    p says:

    I think there is an implicit argument to what Greenwald is saying, and while it is stupid, should not be taken with such offense.

  81. 81
    middlewest says:

    That dude has always creeped me out, so I’m not really surprised he’s gone the rape-fantasy route. It’s funny though, if you had said yesterday that “Glenn Greenwald could indulge in some bizarre rape fantasy that includes President Obama and ABL, and people would still defend him”, Glenn’s weird little army of groupies would have screamed bloody murder. Now that he’s gone and done it, well, it’s not a big deal SHUT UP. He’s not even a good writer, why does this personality cult exist?

    And for John Cole and all the other dudebros who are having trouble understanding all this, let me offer you a word of advice: if you ever feel the desire to inform a woman that you have imagined her playing a role in some form of hypothetical fantasy rape-scenario, even if you feel this rape-scenario makes some sort of totally awesome rhetorical point, KEEP IT TO YOURSELF. Because Jesus Christ. Come on.

  82. 82
    eemom says:

    I’ve read all the tweets, and this is what went down:

    Asshole “Dr Dawg”: ABL would defend Obama raping a nun.

    Greenwald: Yep, she’d say he was just doing it to teach us the evil of rape.

    [shitstorm]

    1st Greenwald response: Huh?? I didn’t say it, he did!

    2nd Greenwald response: Well, it’s TRUE. ABL really WOULD defend Obama raping a nun. I was right.

    3rd Greenwald response: I was right. You don’t understand twitter.

    4th Greenwald response: I was right. You don’t understand twitter.

    5th Greenwald response: I was right. You don’t understand twitter.

    6th Greenwald response: I was right. ABL defends Obama killing children!

    John Cole: What the fuck is this stupid shitstorm about? ABL picks on Glenn all the time! EVERYBODY picks on Glenn! STOP fucking picking on Glenn!

  83. 83
    Joseph Nobles says:

    The wedge-issue-pushing Greenwald claims his first victory in 2012. With this kind of success, can splitting the Democratic Party be all that difficult to accomplish?

    To hell with Glenn Greenwald.

  84. 84
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @eemom: That’s about right.

  85. 85
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @Joseph Nobles: Yup. If you’re interested in re-electing Democrats, Greenwald should be considered a foe.

  86. 86

    @freelancer:

    Inflamed political rhetoric is a tactic used by cynical fucks to obfuscate the positions of well-meaning decent people.

    as is referring to someone who has never been charged with a crime of being a sleazy criminal.

    the bottom line for me, is that if glenn greenwald pisses you off, don’t read him. he couldn’t afford publicity like this.

  87. 87
    Trentrunner says:

    Wow. I just started following ABL on Twitter tonight.

    That is one world-class drama queen.

  88. 88
    Yutsano says:

    @eemom: The make-up sex is gonna be epic though.

  89. 89
    MikeJ says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    With this kind of success, can splitting the Democratic Party be all that difficult to accomplish?

    If you want to split the Democratic party, show up one Tuesday night for the local county party meeting and suggest ordering a pizza.

  90. 90
    Trentrunner says:

    And I can’t wait for Sully to point out that anger correlates with lower IQ, as does having a vagina. Bell Curve Trifecta!

  91. 91
    eemom says:

    suppose some asshole had tweeted:

    “Greenwald would defend Ron Paul shooting a black child.”

    And ABL had responded

    “Yep, he’d say Paul was just doing it to teach us about the Second Amendment.”

    What would Greenwald have said?

    “Well, I don’t actually SUPPORT Ron Paul. But I take ABL’s point.”

    Right.

  92. 92
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @eemom: Precisely, hell yes.

  93. 93
    Uriel says:

    It wasn’t a joke of any kind: it was a *deadly serious point* about blind defeders of evil acts – and it’s TRUE

    The fuck- if we’ve come to the point where we’re expected to pretend that a statement like that is somehow defensible, simply because it comes from the frantically typing fingers of GG- I guess the only sane response is to tap out.

    Green ballon juice, ya’ll.

  94. 94
    the farmer says:

    Stay classy Greenwald! [/sarcasm]

    Greenwald is an insufferable preening creep. Even more of an insufferable preening creep now that he’s become a panting fanboy apologist for his Dear Leader in waiting Ron Paul (although he’s been a starburst stricken apologist for Paul going back many years).

    He should change his name to Grimm Creepwald. Heh, indeedy.

    Interesting too that when ABL challenged him to debate the NDAA issue he scurried off to hide. What a loozer.

    *

  95. 95
    Martin says:

    @eemom: I’m just shocked that people are having so much trouble communicating a nuanced topic in 140 characte

  96. 96
    Trentrunner says:

    We don’t have a nun-rapist handy, but has anyone asked what Jerry Sandusky thinks of all this? Might be helpful.

  97. 97
    a.j. says:

    Can anybody help with mechanics of cleek’s pie filter? I’ve tried to add people but still see their unresolved childhood issues all over the comments.

    I’m even getting the “add Assholio to pie filter?” confirmation message, but it’s not filtering them.

    How do I make the filter work?

    Thanks

  98. 98
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @eemom:

    Yup. Nailed it.

  99. 99
    jaywillie says:

    @Djur: It was probably Tweets like these:

    @worsement There was nothing funny or joking about it – it was a comment on blind defense of whatever Obama does ggreenwald 2 days ago

    @worsement That person did not tell a joke about rape – it wasn’t a joke at all – it was criticism of blind leader worship ggreenwald 2 days ago

    @mountain_goats @JamilSmith It wasn’t a joke of any kind: it was a *deadly serious point* about blind defeders of evil acts – and it’s TRUE ggreenwald 1 day ago

    @JamilSmith @jennpozner Yes, I think Obama defenders who justify assassinations, drone killing of children, etc. would justify ALL crimes ggreenwald 1 day ago

    @CitizenAlan: You keep telling yourself/us Glenn didn’t say what Glenn said (I mean, it’s not like there’s a public online record of it…oops!), just as you make the exact same comment and pretend you’re not. It’s sort of how Glenn tries to weasel his way out of any responsibility for his words by saying he didn’t make the initial analogy to Obama supporters defending the rape of someone, he just turned it up a notch.

    You’re not saying that Pres. Obama wants to rape nuns, just that his supporters would defend him if he did. Supporters of Greenwald are just as weaselly, conniving, and disingenuous as he is.

    Of course, it’s not like your boy St. Glenn is much better than the people he calls out with his obfuscation and refusal to acknowledge Ron Paul for what he is: a straight-up, old school racist. I’m not really sure how he convinces himself that he’s a staunch defender of civil liberties when he has no problem completely overlooking Paul’s racist views, especially as they pertain to the Civil Rights Act and since Glenn’s big issue is civil liberties. The dude acts like he can’t fathom why progressives/liberals don’t laud Paul for his stance on civil liberties, when everyone knows exactly why we don’t.

    Also: what kind of person comes in to a thread related to an incident involving incendiary comments about rape and makes rape jokes? Huh, Martin, Trentrunner?

  100. 100
    Joseph Nobles says:

    @MikeJ: I’m saying! I definitely belong to the party of Will Rogers.

  101. 101
    freelancer says:

    @Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal:

    as is referring to someone who has never been charged with a crime of being a sleazy criminal.

    I see your point, but my language there was that Ben’s situation definitely didn’t take place in the abstract. To make light of that would be to minimize an actual instance of alleged sexual assault, which is something I can’t do in good conscience, and he’s lucky he wasn’t charged. Even then, did you know that Lorena Bobbit, R Kelly, Robert Blake and the LAPD were charged, but were never convicted and are now considered as innocent of crime as Ben? Perception and reality, poetry and poise, abstract vs concrete consequences. Just want to highlight these things.

  102. 102
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @eemom: No, he would have said that anyone who questions the infallibility of Greenwald Pontifex just mindlessly supports Dear Leader, which isn’t at all the same as the way he reflexively defends Ron Paul, Rand Paul, and professional racists, because he said the magic words and no backsies.

  103. 103
    Trentrunner says:

    You have a point. An idiotic one, but a point nonetheless.

  104. 104
    Kerry Reid says:

    Funny how the pro-war fanboys-turned-“liberals” (Cole and Greenwald) end up hanging tight in the end, isn’t it? No reason for this authentic feminist and liberal to continue to dance to Cole’s phony-baloney, liberal-when-it-doesn’t-imperil-my-internet-crushes bullshit.

    Hey John, remember when you told a troll “You know what’s like rape? RAPE, you stupid fuck?” Too bad that guy wasn’t the real deal and the “Glenn Greenwald is my libertarian DREAMBOAT” bullshit fantasy replaced your common sense and decency.

    But hey — you’re the “dumb motherfucker” who didn’t figure out that the GOP was full of destructive bullshit until a few years ago. So what else could we expect?

  105. 105
    Uriel says:

    @The prophet Nostradumbass:

    Why do people keep saying that Greenwald was using a “metaphor”, or a “joke”, when he has quite specifically said that he is not, and that he means his “rape” comments quite literally?

    Because SHUT UP THAT’S WHY!

  106. 106
    eemom says:

    @Martin:

    I’m just shocked that people are having so much trouble communicating a nuanced topic in 140 characte

    you know, I generally agree, and I don’t use twitter myself.

    But in this case that is just a cop out. There was no misunderstanding about what Greenwald said and meant. He doubled, tripled, and quadrupled it.

  107. 107
    the farmer says:

    #97 – We don’t have a nun-rapist handy, but has anyone asked what Jerry Sandusky thinks of all this? Might be helpful.

    Greenwald could rape a ten year old boy in a shower live on CurrentTV and his fanboys would say we weren’t seeing what we were seeing. Apparently, that would be a fair assessment of Greenwald by Greenwald standards.

    *

  108. 108
    moe99 says:

    Nero fiddled while Rome burned. Democrats argue and abuse each other at a similar juncture. Which one’s more fun?

  109. 109
    Mack Lyons says:

    @Trentrunner:

    We don’t have a nun-rapist handy, but has anyone asked what Jerry Sandusky thinks of all this? Might be helpful.

    This is pathetic. I expected better of the trolls here at BJ. Go work on your act some more.

  110. 110
    AxelFoley says:

    The fuck, Cole? You defending that bitch-ass prick Greenwald?

  111. 111
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @jaywillie: No, you don’t understand. Greenwald doesn’t condone the bad things about Paul, he criticizes them, it’s just that after that he puts them in a box and says they’re not germane to the argument, then proceeds to praise the parts he does like. But people who defend Obama, see, they criticize the things they don’t like about him, but then they put them to one side and proceed to praise the parts they do like. It’s, like, totally different, and one is totally nun-rapingly evil.

  112. 112
    Trentrunner says:

    So, let me see if I understand this:

    GG: Rape-endorsing, racist-enabling, exile-claiming, America-hating, Sully-loving, Obot-spraying he-wolf of the blogosphere.

    ABL: Drama-queening, rape-againsting, anger-loving, righteous-toting, Balloon-Juice-leaving she-wolf of the blogosphere.

    John Cole: Innocent bystander.

    That about it?

  113. 113
    Anne says:

    Not to nitpick, but as offensive as the comment is that someone would continue to support Obama if he saw him raping a nun, it does not mean that the person believes that Obama himself is literally capable of such. This whole thing has gone so far off the rails it’s ridiculous. I’ve just come from reading comments to Greenwald’s article in Salon that started this whole thing, and to say that people are missing the point is beyond understatement. This current flap could not have come about if the original article was fully read and fully comprehended (although I do not condone some of the offensive language and personalization ABL and others are objecting to). I understand ABL’s feeling that John did not defend her, but I would guess that John did not have a chance to reflect on the whole thing and should probably be given a pass for whatever he posted on Twitter in the heat of the moment in response to other people spouting off in the heat of the moment. If everybody really thought this through it would not have come to this. It was disorted at the source, leading to some really crazy shit, including what has happened here, and ensuring that the actual policy concerns will remain unaddressed in the media at large and in virtually all of the blogosphere. Instead we have Glenn is a liar and a despicable human being, ABL is a hothouse flower who has been so disrespected that she must take a stand, stomp off and never post on this blog again, John is an insensitive jerk with a hidden agenda…Oh, please. This has turned very nasty, very quickly. This blog has been a breath of fresh air and an amazing source of information and support for so many. If this changes that it would be a real shame.

  114. 114
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Kerry Reid:

    I don’t think that Cole is exactly hanging tight. It’s next to impossible to perceive tone in written communication, but eemom’s transcription of the series of tweets indicates to me that Cole could have been serious about STOP beating up on Glenn, or snarky about STOP beating up on Glenn.

    The way you interpret that is based on the lens you view Cole through.

    My lens is less critical than yours, obviously. I’m seeing some snark. But I’m honest enough to concede that I could be reading it wrong, and he’s actually seriously asking ABL to stop beating up on Glenn. I certainly can understand why ABL would interpret it that way and think that Cole is defending Greenwald.

    Online communication, strictly text, without emotes to convey tone or body language that we use to fully read a verbal comment in face to face communication, is perilous. It’s vital to be clear, concise, and to read your words without your own internal voice adding meaning that others might miss. Very easy to send the wrong message, one you did not intend, as others interpret the words differently than you do.

  115. 115
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @the farmer: Or, Greenwald could have a career-spanning history of consorting with and offering apologies for blatant racists, bigots, and fearmongerers, but his fans would defend it as a heartfelt concern for civil liberties.

  116. 116
    Trentrunner says:

    I’m deeply, deeply offended that so many are not offended at what I find more offensive than those who don’t find what I find offensive to be more deeply offensive than I what I find to be most offensive of all: Lacking a sense of humor.

  117. 117
    manual says:

    The crocodile tears over Greenwald’s comment are obnoxious. This false umbrage is ridiculous and indicative of trying to make oneself the center of attention – rather than the actual issue. And this is why I cannot take ABL’s posts seriously. They are riddled with false outrage, borne of distortions, and turned into personal issues. Greenwald is not pro-rape and he was merely making a point that had nothing to do with the author. There is no reason to infer otherwise.

    This focus on tonality and decorum (as if ABL affords others the treatment she desires) is silly and ruins intellectual merit of the issue.

    One thing the Brits have that we dont is serious debate where polemic and venom are dished out and people either return fire or lose – they dont wrap themselves in false martyrdom to change the subject.

  118. 118
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Trentrunner: Not exactly. John fucked up because he had that spidey-sense kick in where political correctness and oversensitivity momentarily appears to be the greatest possible peril. If your white privilege lasts for longer than 4 hours, contact a doctor of African American studies right away.

  119. 119
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @manual: He was merely making the point that if you defend Obama on civil liberties you’d also enjoy watching him rape a nun. What could possibly be wrong with that?

  120. 120
    the farmer says:

    #115 FlipYrWhig

    Yup, just exactly like that. Just like what Dave Neiwert warned us about in 2007:

    Ron Paul and His Followers

    *

  121. 121
    MikeJ says:

    Why does pro-bommbing, pro-invasion Greenwald get to tell anybody else that they’re morally inferior because he’s made a logical leap from a to b to q to m that proves with geometric logic that the target of his ire supports bombings and invasions?

  122. 122
    Finn13 says:

    Glenn Greenwald was 100% correct that ABL would defend Obama no matter what crime he committed. And now ABL has had her fee fees hurt and is taking her ball and going home. ABL could never hold a candle to Glenn’s intellect and ability to reason, she lost before she even started.

  123. 123
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: There’s no snark there, VDE. It’s the same cadence as Anne Laurie used when complaining about ABL’s apparent hordes of loyalists trying to silence critics (like Corner Stone) with trumped up charges of racial insensitivity. This is the same domain. “Geez, it was just a stupid remark, why do we have to get all PC about it?”

  124. 124
    Martin says:

    @jaywillie:

    Also: what kind of person comes in to a thread related to an incident involving incendiary comments about rape and makes rape jokes? Huh, Martin, Trentrunner?

    Well, I guess someone who can’t take anything anyone says on Twitter seriously. It’s like trying to have a conversation through interpretive farting, and then getting actually, genuinely pissed off that someone farted aggressively toward you and then demanding that they explain their aggressive farting through more nuanced farting.

    Was it incendiary? Well, yeah. But so what? IT’S FUCKING TWITTER. What do you expect – it’s a medium which incentivizes the use of 4 letter words simply because they’re shorter than 5 letter words. I don’t blame ABL for being genuinely pissed off because it was all directed at her, but I can’t be outraged by proxy at every stupid fucking thing that gets said on twitter or youtube or wherever. So, I guess that’s the kind of person I am, since you asked.

  125. 125
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @Finn13: That is a parody, yes?

  126. 126
    Uriel says:

    @Trentrunner:

    I’m deeply, deeply offended that so many are not offended at what I find more offensive than those who don’t find what I find offensive to be more deeply offensive than I what I find to be most offensive of all: Lacking a sense of humor.

    You might want to take that up with this guy here:

    @mountain_goats @JamilSmith It wasn’t a joke of any kind: it was a deadly serious point about blind defeders of evil acts – and it’s TRUE ggreenwald 1 day ago

  127. 127
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Finn13:

    ABL could never hold a candle to Glenn’s intellect and ability to reason

    Candles don’t tend to work in hot, damp air, no.

  128. 128

    @freelancer: and unlike those people you mentioned, what is different is that there was evidence that a crime was committed and the confusion is centered around who did it. you are obfuscating reality, intentionally or through lack of knowledge, when you conflate that with someone who was investigated, but where no probable cause was determined. no one could conclude that a crime was committed.

    in a sense there is a common theme to all of this. in the case of greenwald; a provacateur, draws provacateurs in response. as rape is an under reported crime that is difficult to prove, those very unjust realities and the reactionary response to right the inherent wrongs, creates a secondary response that uses the commonly held belief in the basic injustice of rape, and wields a cudgel that seeks to berate any attempt to verify any claim at alll

    counter-prejudice does not defeat prejudice. you can defend the basis for counter-prejudice, and you can make many great points, and become a hero amongst liberals at least, but you aren’t doing a thing for the truth.

    the truth in the end is not an advocate nor a cudgel.

  129. 129
    Kerry Reid says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: Well, heaven forfend we expect John to do anything as simple and decent (especially in defense of one of his bloggers) as say “Hey Glenn, if you’re using rape jokes to make a point, KNOCK IT THE FUCK OFF!”

  130. 130
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @The prophet Nostradumbass: Hopefully it’s a parody of what it looks like to be an unquestioning follower and sycophant.

  131. 131
    Thymezone says:

    Dammit, everyone knows this place has turned to pure shit, but we thought the center would somehow hold. Now that seems unlikely. Neglect, foolishness, lack of common sense and a legacy of falling for hoaxes (if you think NDAA is a bullshit issue, hey, you should have seen that Iraq war, which this blog supported aggressively. Sure, that support went away, but it went away in almost the whole US population, so that’s not exactly worth the Nobel Prize, is it?).

    This place does not deserve you, but it sure as hell needs you, ABL. I hope you can find a way to return.

  132. 132
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    Here’s the thing about using the “rape of a nun” as the example.

    When you say this to a woman, it pushes buttons. Because of the sad fact that waaaaay too high a percentage of women have first or second person experience with rape. Yeah, it pushes some buttons.

    Which I think is precisely what Greenwald intended to do.

    Thus, it’s manipulation calculated to raise heat that overwhelms whatever light might be shed. Because the person on the receiving end is reacting mainly to the heat, not the light.

    Which is by design…as a diversion.

    The fact is, Greenwald’s been defending a man who has embraced some of the most disgusting things that take place routinely in our political discourse, bubbling just beneath the surface.

    It’s pretty much the equivalent of commenting that Mussolini got the trains to run on time. Or that [insert central European regime leader here] at least built the Autobahns and put Germany back to work.

  133. 133
    Admiral_Komack says:

    “Why do people keep saying that Greenwald was using a “metaphor”, or a “joke”, when he has quite specifically said that he is not, and that he means his “rape” comments quite literally?”

    *Because it is a way to give that piece of shit Glenn Greenwald an out.
    Greenwald meant what he said, but some people are too stupid to see it.

    I’m sorry to see you go, ABL.
    Good luck in the future.

  134. 134
    Pray Tell says:

    What’s worse? Raping an innocent, detaining them indefinitely, killing them with a drone strike, or invoking them in a Twitter?

  135. 135
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Kerry Reid:

    He ought to do that, I agree. Cole shouldn’t have gotten involved at all, and I’m sure he’s regretting it, but once he did, saying that explicitly at the time would have eased things up. He did say it in different words later on here in the comments, IIRC a couple of threads down.

  136. 136
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: But, see, Greenwald defends the good things about Paul and deplores the bad ones. But people who defend Obama defend the bad things too, because everything he does is bad, because he’s nun-rapingly evil. QED.

  137. 137
    the farmer says:

    ABL could never hold a candle to Glenn’s intellect and ability to reason

    Try lighting a candle in a wind tunnel. I wonder when Greenwald will take ABL up on that debate challenge? I’ll bet he doesn’t show up for that candle lighting.

    *

  138. 138
    Gex says:

    If you know anyone who has been raped, you know that an unexpected encounter with the topic can set of PTSD responses. Not that any of the dudes who like to make rape jokes or rape analogies should ever be bothered to understand that their freedom to be un-PC and say whatever they want can actually harm others. But whatever. Men largely don’t have to deal with the fears that women do. You know what they say: a man is afraid a woman will laugh at him, a woman is afraid a man will rape/kill her.

    But it’s light hearted and no big deal to GG and JC. They don’t have to live in fear and be reminded of that fear constantly.

  139. 139
    Finn13 says:

    @FlipYrWhig: That was beyond weak. What wasn’t weak was Glenn’s correct assertion that Obama fans like ABL would never criticize him no matter what crime he may commit.

  140. 140
    Finn13 says:

    @The prophet Nostradumbass: Do you need help with your reading comprehension? Look elsewhere.

  141. 141
    bargal20 says:

    @Darkrose:

    Given that Greenwald has made it quite clear that he believes Obama to be personally guilty of assassinations and child-killings…

    Um, are you trying to argue that Obama is not guilty of assassinations and the killing of children? If so, you have a great career ahead of you as a drone.

  142. 142
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Finn13:

    You know, that’s just bullshit.

    It’s obvious to me that someone is projecting his own butthurt over how people have reacted to his defense of the racist Paul onto ABL.

    Paul’s lack of respect for civil rights obliterates his concerns about civil liberties, because it’s obvious that the mud people don’t get them. No problem.

    The thing about civil liberties is that unless they apply to all, they are in peril for all. This is why Paul’s failure to give a rat’s ass about civil rights is so damning. It’s also why Greenwald’s defense of Paul damns Greenwald as well.

  143. 143
    Joseph Nobles says:

    @Finn13: What you say is not true.

  144. 144
    mike the dealer says:

    @Finn13:

    0/10 troll

  145. 145
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Finn13: I thought the effect of reading Glenn Greenwald was supposed to be that you learned NOT to kowtow to an authority figure whose every word ought never be questioned. And yet, look at you.

  146. 146
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @Finn13: No, I don’t need help. You, on the other hand, if you’re not kidding, have some issues.

  147. 147
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    He’s showing signs of the cult of Paul. A cult Joseph Stalin would envy.

    The most Dear Leader inclined group in America at the moment is the Paultards. All the talk of Obama as “a savior” is pure projection.

  148. 148
    Finn13 says:

    @Joseph Nobles: But it is true, you’re just too cowardly to acknowledge it

  149. 149
    Finn13 says:

    @The prophet Nostradumbass: I definitely have issues with people who support heinous policies like murdering children with drones, and US citizens with no trial, letting criminal bankers off the hook. Got anything of substance to say or just vague insults?

  150. 150
    Lupin says:

    A couple of years ago I had a private email argument with Greenwald, about one of these small things where he was factually wrong. Instead of conceding the fact and issuing a correction, he quickly resorted to personal invective.

    I told him at last that he would end up being exactly the type of Joe Klein person he was then attacking.

    It didn’t take him long. Greenwald = the new Joe Klein.

    Everything happens so much faster these days.

  151. 151
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: We’re just going to go around again on this, and here’s how it will go. Glennbot du jour will say that Greenwald doesn’t support THAT part of what Paul is all about, only the good parts. And then when it’s pointed out that that’s exactly the same thing people who defend Obama say — that while some stances aren’t the way they/we would like, on balance they/we stand with the guy — perhaps a choice remark about raping nuns or exploding children. Because they learned how to argue by watching Greenwald chop logic, read minds, demagogue, and play sleight-of-hand games.

  152. 152
    Finn13 says:

    @mike the dealer: Do you also give yourself a cookie, or a gold star sticker after telling yourself that you ‘win’?

  153. 153
    dead existentialist says:

    @Finn13:

    Glenn Greenwald was 100% correct that ABL would defend Obama no matter what crime he committed.

    Subtext: Those people always stick together.

    ABL could never hold a candle to Glenn’s intellect and ability to reason, she lost before she even started.

    Subtext: Bitches and coloreds shouldn’t question the white man because they don’t have the intellectual capability to do so.

    Got it.

    Now get back to skull-fucking that kitten.

  154. 154
    Finn13 says:

    @FlipYrWhig: Look at me? Is ‘never’ in your view a few blog posts, because you might want to get that short attention span looked into. If you can prove that I’ve ‘never’ disagreed with Glenn Greenwald, go ahead, otherwise take your pathetic strawman and shove it.

  155. 155
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Finn13: I definitely have issues with people who are so a-feared of the jackbooted thugs of the federal gummint that they’d rather not have one, opening the door to massive suffering and dislocation and a blind eye to bigotry, sexism, and homophobic discrimination. You know, like Glenn’s little elfin pal Ron.

  156. 156
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Glennbot du jour will say that Greenwald doesn’t support THAT part of what Paul is all about, only the good parts.

    The problem here is, as you and I both know, and as I’ve stated a few comments up, that unless you fully support civil rights, you can’t be serious about supporting civil liberties. You know, the “good part”. Well, along with smoking dope legally in a few selected enlightened states, which of course will not include Paul’s home base of Texas.

    They go hand in hand.

    Paul obviously is a fanatic about civil liberties.

    For the “right” people.

    Mud people need not apply. Get back to totin’ that cotton.

  157. 157
    The prophet Nostradumbass says:

    @Finn13: Your very first comment on this thread consisted of nothing but “vague insults”, and you have gotten no better with subsequent ones, and you accuse me of that? Ha ha, it is to laugh.

  158. 158
    taylormattd says:

    I’m so sorry to see you go ABL. And Cole, fuck you for kissing that prick’s ass. It’s kind of pathetic how you feel the need to suck up to those firebagger / Paullbot assholes

  159. 159
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Lupin: Let me guess. Did he say that the real issue was that you loved Obama and wanted to marry him and thus you couldn’t take the powerful, throbbing truth only Glenn Greenwald can provide a desperate world?

  160. 160
    manual says:

    @FlipYrWhig

    No, you are an idiot. It wasn’t that they would “enjoy it,” but, rather, that they would try and defend it. He was making a simple argument that people who are party first, rather than ideas first, fall prey to vacillations of opinion. By example, people who are adamantly anti-war and anti-free trade during a republican administration find themselves arguing in favor of the issue they once scorned under a democrat. It happened under clinton and it is happening under obama.

    Support obama and vote for him – i see no alternative -but please dont defend noxious ideas because the standard bearer of the party supports them.

    And please, please, do not suggest that the greenwald/ABL exchange was about obama supporters enjoying nun rape or that he is insensitive to rape victims. That is a deliberate misreading, and if it’s how ABL wishes to transform debate, good riddance.

  161. 161
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @taylormattd: John went from wingnut to civil libertarian to something left of that. He thinks Greenwald is a kindred spirit, rather than a dogmatic demagogue with one idea, fed bad.

  162. 162
    Finn13 says:

    @dead existentialist: All your conclusions only show that you are, in fact, the racist. My problem is with unquestioning Obama defenders, and people who distort opponents views to avoid the discussion at hand (that would be how ABL would defend Obama no matter what crimes he committed), nothing else, but your playing of the race card shows how utterly bankrupt and vacant your thought processes are.

  163. 163
    Finn13 says:

    @The prophet Nostradumbass: My first post asserted that Glenn was correct about Obama supporters defending him no matter what he does. But thanks for playing.

  164. 164
    Lupin says:

    Personally, I think Greenwald is correct, say, 95% of the time. (Although reasonable people may clearly disagree.)

    But it’s that 5% when he appears pathologically unable to recognize he made a mistake and looses it that makes it impossible for me to ever respect him completely.

    A tragic character flaw.

    As for ABL, I agree with her far less than I agree with Greenwald, but I understand where she’s coming from, and I wish John had stood by her on this. I would have.

  165. 165
    Finn13 says:

    @FlipYrWhig: What does that have to do with Obama defenders supporting President Drone no matter what kinds of crimes he may commit? Oh, that’s right, nothing.

  166. 166
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @manual: His simple point is that if you support Obama you support child murder and you would support hypothetical nun-rape, but if you spend many consecutive days and, off and on, years defending Ron Paul, that’s totally cool, consistent, and progressive. It was a simple point, and the upshot was that to support Obama is to support unconscionable evil, but to support Ron Paul, you get to screen out the evil and cherry pick the things that please the cherubic choir of Bradley Mannings in Greenwald’s mind. No thanks.

  167. 167
    Uriel says:

    @manual:

    It wasn’t that they would “enjoy it,” but, rather, that they would try and defend it.

    Yes-and that is odious, dishonest bullshit on it’s face. Sorry you can’t see it.

  168. 168
    dead existentialist says:

    @Finn13: Oh, okay. I’m the racist. I’ll buy that in the current political environment where white is black, up is down, right is wrong.

    But I noticed you didn’t deny that you are skull-fucking a kitten, amirite?

  169. 169
    Finn13 says:

    @FlipYrWhig: Pointing out that someone as odious as Ron Paul’s policies are more liberal in some instances than the supposedly liberal Democrats is nothing more than reminding aging liberals how far they’ve lost they’re way. You can call it supporting Ron Paul but you’re missing the point, probably willfully.

  170. 170
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Finn13: Not so fast. I’m also very concerned about satellites, missiles, bombs, bullets, and slingshots… Really any object that allows someone to attack someone else at a distance gives me moral dilemmas, because the important thing, when you think about it, isn’t the way the technology is used, it’s the name of the technology and the way it is or isn’t attached to a human being.

  171. 171
    Lupin says:

    @FlipYrWhig: No, actually, it had nothing to do with Obama and/or his policies; if memory serves, it was about something he wrote about the Polanski case, where he’d made a factual mistake, something having to do with the California Penal Code, which I pointed out in an email to him. It’s been a while and I honestly don’t remember what it was, but what I do remember was that it could have easily been corrected (and it should have), but instead, he dug in his heels and things degenerated from there.

  172. 172
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Finn13: Um, look into the history of people petrified by the potential nefarious deeds the federal government might commit, and tally up how many of them were “liberal.” Don’t just call things “liberal” because you happen to like them. And pass it along to Greenwald, because he regularly fucks that up too.

  173. 173
    the farmer says:

    #167 FlipYrWhig – but to support Ron Paul, you get to screen out the evil and cherry pick the things that please the cherubic choir

    Ron Paul is like a really awesomely starburst pizza pie because you get to pick your favorite toppings and ONLY the really awesomey pizza with the toppings you choose will be delivered to yoooooo! It’s much better than a pony because eventually a smelly pony will have to take a shit on your carpet.

    *

  174. 174
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Lupin: He doesn’t believe anyone else could ever be correct, or that they could use a thought process other than the one he happened to use. The only reason anyone would ever think something differently than His Holiness is because he’s either stupid, brainwashed, on the take, or all three.

  175. 175
    FlipYrWhig says:

    Stupid insomnia. I’m wide awake arguing about Glenn Fucking Greenwald. I need to take stock of my life in the new year.

  176. 176
    Finn13 says:

    @FlipYrWhig: Are you seriously trying to deny Obama has anything to do with the drone program he has massively expanded upon? And that’s just one thing we could discuss in terms of how not deserving of liberal support he is.

    And yes I know, there’s no one else to support, but that was never the issue here, the issue, once again is how Obama supporters refuse to criticize Dear Leader in any meaningful way for political purposes and it stinks.

  177. 177
    cinesimon says:

    Yeah John, I say fuck you too.
    I’ve been a daily regular here for about a year now, and still enjoy your posts.
    No longer.
    If you want to chase such great minds away with such ease, I can only assume you don’t give a shit beyond your own preening self indulgence – and are also happy to chase readers away.

    I hope the other wonderful thinkers & writers leave in good time also.

  178. 178
    manual says:

    @FlipYrWhig
    Again, its not that you support child murder, but that his policies, namely the use of drones and expansion of war theaters, result in lots of dead children. And if you are unwilling to acknowledge that, condemn it, or alternatively, are arguing in favor of said Obama policy, then yes, you are supporting very bad actions. LBJ was a mass murder and, in the long-run (from a purely American point of view, and not the millions of dead and maimed Indochinese), he was one hell of a president, actually.

    @Uriel
    I can see it clearly. From one democratic administration to another, democratic partisans try and defend odious ideas they would otherwise deplore. Time and again, ABL defended Obama on issues, I presume, she would not ordinarily support. That is the point.

    I have a job, so off to bed. If my answers dont suffice, please feel free to run wild with your imaginations.

  179. 179
    Lupin says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    “He doesn’t believe anyone else could ever be correct, or that they could use a thought process other than the one he happened to use.”

    Yes, based on that single experience, I’d agree with that.

    The irony was that, just at about the same time, Greenwald was attacking Joe Klein for the very same sin.

    What saddens me is that, as I said above, I happen to agree with Greenwald most of the time, but that character flaw of his really ruined him for me.

    My guess is that as gets older he’s going to become increasingly wacko. (Let’s face it, none of us get any better with age.)

    It was a rather stupid and offensive thing to say and an incredibly clumsy way of making a point, which is not without merits. i.e.: that Obama supporters are understandably prepared to forgive him for actions that they might have condemned from the Bush regime.

    But then that point is so blindingly obvious that it’s virtually pointless to hammer on it. The only proper answer is a Homer-like D’oh.

  180. 180
    Finn13 says:

    @FlipYrWhig: Since you failed to point out any specifics, I can only guess as to what you think is conservative that I called liberal (please cite something specific). Too be sure, Paul comes to some of his civil liberty positions from a John Birch point of view, but that again is not the point. The point is that Obama defenders are blind to his very conservative and corporate policies and outright crimes against humanity. Holding our governmental leadership and financial elites to the rule of law is a liberal position.

  181. 181
    Mack Lyons says:

    @the farmer: That’s what annoys me about Ron Paul supporters – their incessant willingness to overlook horrifically glaring flaws and cherry-pick whatever they like about the guy. These people, Greenwald and Cole included, are a living, breathing “Stand by your man” moment, nevermind they earned their black eyes not a minute ago for not using the right soap to wash the dishes with.

    But at least many people here got to run off some colored b*tch who thought too highly of herself. Can I expect the same treatment to befall Anne Laurie if she ever gets on the wrong side of the Greenwaldian/Pauloid herd?

  182. 182
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Finn13: The issue is that Greenwald invented this line of criticism long ago whereby the only way to defend Obama involves defending him on everything all the time 100%, so any single defense of Obama on something is equivalent to mindless worship, because that’s the only thing Greenwald understands when it comes to Obama. And yet, mysteriously, any political figure Greenwald likes, he gets to pick and choose only the bestest of stands, because, you know, principle.

    Plenty of people support Obama, declare their support for Obama, defend Obama on contested ground, and do so _by thinking things through_. Greenwald creates this caricature of an unreasoning Obama defender, then wields it to silence all reasoning Obama defenses. And now he’s got you doing it for him. Because, if you haven’t noticed, he’s kind of a dogmatist, and a dick. And, ironically enough, what he has managed to build is… A cult of personality that springs up and swarms in his defense even when he fucks up and makes weird rape remarks because he genuinely thinks Obama is evil.

  183. 183
    Joseph Nobles says:

    @Finn13: What you say is not true.

  184. 184
    Lupin says:

    @manual:

    Time and again, ABL defended Obama on issues, I presume, she would not ordinarily support. That is the point.

    Actually, that was the point before the point of all this, isn’t it?

    That an XYZ supporter would defend XYZ’s actions even though they would condemn the same actions from someone else is hardly news. As I said above: D’oh.

    The actual point is Greenwald using a clumsy, stupid and offensive metaphor to make that rather inane point and pathologically refusing to concede he put his foot in his giant mouth.

    That’s the point.

  185. 185
    Mack Lyons says:

    @FlipYrWhig: In other words, some of you folks have been had by a complete asshole. And a manipulative one, at that.

  186. 186
    HBin says:

    @eemom:

    Don’t forget the part where Cole call people sexists for being mad at him for not defending ABL. I haven’t read all the tweets, obviously, but I really, really doubt the main issue people have with Cole’s response is that he wasn’t playing big-daddy protector. Only in his own imagination.

  187. 187
    HBin says:

    @eemom:

    Don’t forget the part where Cole call people sexists for supposedly being mad at him for not defending ABL. I haven’t read all the tweets, obviously, but I really, really doubt the main issue people have with Cole’s response is that he wasn’t playing big-daddy protector. Only in his own imagination.

  188. 188
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @manual: I’m sorry, “drones” is beside the point. Dropping rabid monkeys trained to throw acid at suspected terrorists would also be bad. The bad part is dead innocent bystanders. I have no idea whether drones produce more dead bystanders than any other instrument of war. Many threads ago I said that the real problem seemed like “itchy trigger finger,” whether that happen by unmanned and remote-piloted drones, by bazooka, or by acid-throwing monkey. “Drones” in particular don’t seem like a unique or unusually troubling problem to solve. Don’t push the big red button too soon. Done.

  189. 189
    Triassic Sands says:

    I was going to offer a substantive comment on the merits of this whole mess, but then I remembered this is an ABL thread and don’t like commenting on them because they virtually always seem to end up in mindless bickering.

    I am disappointed that my tenure at Balloon Juice is ending this way…

    You may be disappointed, ABL, but I can’t believe you’re surprised. Sad to say, I think BJ will be better off without you posting here, but I do wish you well and hope you find a way to engage in political and social discussions without all the fighting and name-calling.

  190. 190
    HBin says:

    @the farmer: Nahhh, his fanboys would say it’s Obama framing him, of course.

  191. 191
    Lupin says:

    In French restaurants, sometimes as part of the menu, they ask you to choose between cheese OR dessert. Sometimes it’s hard.

    If they asked you to choose between cheese OR a plate of dog turds, it wouldn’t be so difficult.

    That’s what the US political system has degenerated into, where Obama is the cheese. Basically we’re no longer a fully functional democracy, and under these circumstances, choosing the camembert doesn’t mean one is oblivious to its stink.

  192. 192
    Finn13 says:

    @FlipYrWhig: That’s so wrong I don’t even know where to begin, and it’s late. Greenwald himself has praised Obama when he deserved it, on gay rights, not defending DOMA, a few other issues, so to claim he has constructed a black & white for/against line of criticism is simply not true. Greenwald has not “picked” Ron Paul, as you seem to insinuate, he merely takes a few issues and used Paul to remind liberals how much their shit stinks these days, and rightly so. He’s discussing issues and policies, not whole persons. Obama defenders and democratic partisans can never get past that. Greenwald is a more genuine liberal than the democratic loyalists that exist here. And claiming that he thinks “Obama is evil” is just about the best and most succinct illustration of a partisan loyalist missing the point of criticizing policy /party and not the person. Congratulations!

  193. 193
    Finn13 says:

    Since sleep is calling let’s just shorthand the rest of it:

    Me: Obama defenders are incapable of criticizing Obama in any meaningful way.

    Flip: But Ron Paul is horrible

    Me: That has nothing to do with the fact that Obama defenders are incapable of criticizing Obama in any meaningful way.

    Flip: Greenwald is an asshole and his defenders annoy me.

    Me: Still nothing to do with Obama defenders being incapable of criticizing Obama in any meaningful way.

    Loyalist: You ran off the black lady and are a racist.

    Me: That doesn’t have anything to do with Obama defenders being incapable of criticizing Obama in any meaningful way either.

    etc. etc. nite nite

  194. 194
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Finn13: Greenwald is not a liberal, not in the slightest. He is a small-r republican. His foundational issues are about limiting the power of the federal government to intrude on personal liberty. The most vocal champions of that school of thought are on the right and always have been. His free-spech client Matthew Hale was on the right, Ron Paul is on the right; a Greenwald-style analysis of this character Glenn Greenwald would surely involve tagging his lifelong predilections as right wing. Is he? I don’t think so, but I know he’s very much more libertarian than liberal and cares infinitely more about the libertarian stuff than the liberal stuff. He also seems to think that politics is possible without politicians and doesn’t understand that you can have a different opinion about something serious and not be a lesser life form.

    And, with that, my battery is fading, and so is my resolve to keep this up. Goodnight and don’t let the drones bite!

  195. 195
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Finn13: Me: people who support Obama criticize him on individual issues every damn day but Glenn Greenwald pretends not to see it so he can keep up the pretense that he’s besieged by Obot berserkers when all he wants to do is explain to them in dispassionate terms that their hero is evil.

  196. 196
    the farmer says:

    @182 Mack Lyons.

    I hear ya. And I think Cole folded like a cheap lawn chair on this one. Greenwald is a former copyright attorney who made a fool of himself defending neo-Nazi Matt Hale in a copyright dispute years ago. He has about as much credibility as a constitutional law expert as Ann Coulter. Or any other number of “experts” turned hyperbolic flash in the pan pundit. Greenwald should make the move to the Nancy Grace rabid celebrity lawyer channel instead. But I still want to see ABL debate Greenwald (a challenge Greenwald has run away from so far).

    *

  197. 197
    Cheryl from Maryland says:

    Dear ABL — Sorry you will no longer hang out here, I’ve enjoyed and been informed by your posts.

  198. 198
    boss bitch says:

    John Cole’s defense was weak. very weak. No one skull fucks a damn kitten, but women do get raped. He should understand why the comparisons don’t make any sense.

  199. 199
    Ted says:

    I disagree with the analogy, but good riddance. It is nice the blot on Balloon Juice is leaving.

  200. 200
  201. 201
    Kane says:

    It is disappointing that ABL will no longer be posting here. I’ve enjoyed reading her unique perspective here at BJ.

    The vile comments from Greenwald are what I’ve come to expect from him. But it’s difficult for me to understand why JC would defend Greenwald and his comments. Also, I don’t understand his willingness to throw ABL under the bus. He seems to have more loyalty to a football team than he does to one of his featured writers.

  202. 202
    Yevgraf says:

    Have thought on this. Seems to me that looking at Greenwald’s half-assed career, he’s a racist with an obsession over his sex life.

    The perfect libertarian, IOW.

  203. 203
    amk says:

    Sorry to see you go, ABL. You definitely brought a combative voice with a totally different perspective here. Keep fighting the good fight.

  204. 204
    wilfred says:

    “So fuck you, John Cole. You don’t deserve Lily or Rosie. Tunch doesn’t deserve you.,”

    she said angrily, as she stormed out. Alone, again, Cole instinctively grabbed for the remote and the scotch. In the distance, the wee hours grew silent. Rain wettened the already damp spirit. In a simpler time, a man could stick his head in an oven. Cole pondered: “Microwave or convection”.

  205. 205
    amk says:

    @eemom: LOL. Nicely put.

  206. 206
    4tehlulz says:

    ITT we argue with Glenn’s sockpuppet.

  207. 207
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    I’ve written and deleted several things and am really damned near speechless. My wife and daughter looked it all over and think GG is an asshole and John has his head shoved up GG.

    I concur. You drink a bit too much and get ‘loose’ on the keyboard John?

    My wife has a suggestion for you John; “Go ask another woman if it’s offensive to her. Maybe his Mom.”

    Walk a mile in shoes and all that. Jeez John, what a stupid fucking move. This and the uncontrolled trolls that you want everyone to leave alone, I’m not doing a GBCW now but I am seriously reconsidering the time spent here. I’ve been here for about seven years now and the accepted level of shithead trollery really sucks.

    I’m sorry to see you leave ABL but I don’t blame you a bit for doing so. What John did was extremely offensive, full stop. The anti-ABL trolls may celebrate a ‘win’ but the only loser here is John.

    GG is a whiny little bitch in Brazil, he’s nothing.

  208. 208
    Samara Morgan says:

    well….sowwy.
    i allus thought you represented ABL, even when i didnt agree with you.

    Greenwald is a libertarian.
    that is the proximate cause of your dispute. In the run-up to Nov. 2012 we will see ALL libertarians bark like dogs and speak in tongues, alas to no avail….the black man is still gunna win.

    you shouldnt take it personal.

    still, i wish you’d stay.
    this site has been pablumized and pasturized enough all ready in the name of kumbayah “both sides do eet” politics.
    you at least had a fresh perspective.

  209. 209
    WhatAreWeDoing says:

    How did we on the left degenerate into the whining classes like this?

    Where would we be without the Greenwalds, and the Hamshers and the Cenks telling us how disheartened and dispirited we are?

    Possibly still in control of the House?

  210. 210
    Samara Morgan says:

    n/e ways, that was the best twitter war since Michelle Malkin and OWS.
    merci mille fois por tous infinities des gentillesse, mademoiselle.

  211. 211
    Raven says:

    @Samara Morgan: Holy shit batgirl, I agree with you!

  212. 212
    Samara Morgan says:

    @Odie Hugh Manatee: GG is in Brazil, and Dr. Manzi is in France. Dont you find it amusing that the greatest intellectual defenders of libertarianism and conservatism are EX-PATS?

  213. 213
    Samara Morgan says:

    @wilfred: win.
    i heart twitter.
    it reveals peoples immediate souls in 140 char or less….and they cant get it back..

    the moving finger writes
    and having writ
    moves on

  214. 214

    John Cole is a Republican, is anyone surprised at his response to this?

    ABL works her ass off trying to provide context for the dysfunction of our government, reminding people that all compromises by the Obama administration are due to an intransigent Republican Party dominated by wing-nut Tea Party folks who really don’t give a flying fuck about anyone but their lily white asses.

    Yet, when ABL or any of us attempt to provide context or inject a little political reality into the mix, we are called names like Obamabots or “Obamalovers” (Greenwald and Walsh) and what the hell, they might just as well say we would defend the President if he raped a nun on NBC?

    So much of that mentality is just political stupidity. Politicians have been deal-making and compromising since the founding of our country. Just imagine if every time a politician compromised, their supporters abandoned them and called anyone who hasn’t a clever name or made a rape analogy for the fun of it.

    Balloon Juice has become a great example of how this stupidity permeates the new media. JC allows all sorts of bullshit to be spewed on his site in the comments. And maybe he isn’t aware, but when you google racist things, Balloon Juice comments often come up. Maybe that’s cool with Cole, he is a Republican at heart.

    It amazes me how the election of a black man as president has forced so many former-Republicans-turned-bloggers to revert back to their former bigotry and callousness.

  215. 215
    Lit3Bolt says:

    Ok, rape metaphors suck. At the same time, I fucking tired of the inevitable emo supernovas that occur anytime a thoughtless rape metaphor is used, and that a man (or more rarely, a woman) who makes such a metaphor, often thoughtlessly, is subject to the worst fee-fee hurting in all the time/space continuum of fee-fee hurting, and then all offended women gather ’round to show each other their hurt fee-fees and how offended they were. The whole god damn thing stinks of worst kind of internet kabuki.

    I fully expect ABL to have a post titled “Glenn Greenwald and John Cole, Rape Apologists.” Problem is, the story is so goddamn complex to explain I think it loses its impact in all the nuances and twists, but y’know, rape apologists! There will be a cute lil’ animated jpeg that says “Men are doody-heads” and “Fuck people” and we can all go there and console each other THAT WE WILL SURVIVE this latest ultimate tragedy.

    Manufactured drama gets the blog hits, tho.

  216. 216
    Biff Mitchell says:

    So glad to see the self-hating negress go away. Now if her simpleton followers will follow suit, this blog will be vastly improved.

  217. 217
    Raven says:

    @Lit3Bolt: I’d call you a dick but a dick has a head.

  218. 218
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @Samara Morgan:

    I wouldn’t call it amusing…

  219. 219
    The Sheriff's A Ni- says:

    John’s usually good at going ‘oh fuck’ after getting slapped around a couple times, so I’ll wait and see on his answer first.

    Saint Glenn of Brazil is showing why he’s right at home among the Paulbots, though. Can’t think of anything – or anyone – an inch beyond their nose.

  220. 220
    Samara Morgan says:

    @Raven: ill be batgirl to your dark knight anyday……Raven.

    “Nell did not imagine that Constable Moore wanted to get into a detailed discussion of recent events, so she changed the subject. “I think I have finally worked out what you were trying to tell me, years ago, about being intelligent,” she said.
    __
    The Constable brightened all at once. “Pleased to hear it.”
    __
    The Vickys have an elaborate code of morals and conduct. It grew out of the moral squalor of an earlier generation, just as the original Victorians were preceded by the Georgians and the Regency. The old guard believe in that code because they came to it the hard way. They raise their children to believe in that code– but their children believe it for entirely different reasons.”
    __
    They believe it,” the Constable said, “because they have been indoctrinated to believe it.”
    __
    Yes. Some of them never challenge it– they grow up to be smallminded people, who can tell you what they believe but not why they believe it. Others become disillusioned by the hypocrisy of the society and rebel– as did Elizabeth Finkle-McGraw.”
    __
    Which path do you intend to take, Nell?” said the Constable, sounding very interested. “Conformity or rebellion?”
    __
    Neither one. Both ways are simple-minded– they are only for people who cannot cope with contradiction and ambiguity.”
    ― Neal Stephenson, The Diamond Age: Or, a Young Lady’s Illustrated Primer

  221. 221
    amk says:

    @Odie Hugh Manatee:

    The anti-ABL trolls may celebrate a ‘win’ but the only loser here is John.

    Yup. cole chose a stupid fort fart to defend.

  222. 222
    sherparick says:

    On his blog Glenn asks the following as what he considers an honest progressive’s decision to support Obama:

    “..Yes, I’m willing to continue to have Muslim children slaughtered by covert drones and cluster bombs, and America’s minorities imprisoned by the hundreds of thousands for no good reason, and the CIA able to run rampant with no checks or transparency, and privacy eroded further by the unchecked Surveillance State, and American citizens targeted by the President for assassination with no due process, and whistleblowers threatened with life imprisonment for “espionage,” and the Fed able to dole out trillions to bankers in secret, and a substantially higher risk of war with Iran (fought by the U.S. or by Israel with U.S. support) in exchange for less severe cuts to Social Security, Medicare and other entitlement programs, the preservation of the Education and Energy Departments, more stringent environmental regulations, broader health care coverage, defense of reproductive rights for women, stronger enforcement of civil rights for America’s minorities, a President with no associations with racist views in a newsletter, and a more progressive Supreme Court.”

    Yes, Glenn, I would. My answer is “yes” because 1) Ron Paul is not going to get the Republican nomination this side of hell freezing over; 2) even if he did, the downside of his domestic views (letting the states become little racilist theocracies where Gays could face the death penalty and miscegenation will once again be a felony) outweigh the dubious good that U.S. withdrawal from international affairs and the use of force would have in the world.

    I have bigger problems with Obama then those that Glenn mentioned since the President’s pro-banker policies, starting with the selection of Secretary Geithner have left millions unemployed, growth stagnant, and foreclosures as a festering wound in the economy. Basically, despite all the sturm and drang on the right, especially in Faux, CNBC, and Bloomberg he has not changed any significant economic policy from the 2d term of the Bush administration, including lax regulatory enforcement at Justice, Treasury, and the SEC. And don’t get me started on the Environment.

    But still it is “yes.” Because I have to compare and contrast with the likely alternatives who would be worse on all the things I think Obama has been wrong on as well as reverse the things he has been good on.

    P.S. I have always been puzzled by Glenn’s, John Cole’s and Marcy Wheeler’s sense of betrayal regarding Obama’s hawkish views on Afghanistan and Pakistan (Civil Liberties, that I can understand). He was pretty clear in the debates in 2007-2008 that he would escalate the war in Afghanistan as he withdrew from Iraq. And that he would not be limited by borders in regard to hunting Al Qaeda targets in Pakistan. Apparently, there are promises he was not suppose to keep.

  223. 223
    Samara Morgan says:

    oh btw….you wont see me at Angry Black, Imani.
    im still banned.
    ;)

  224. 224
    Rp says:

    What I find odd is that a friend and GG fan used a rape scenario in an argument about Obama a few months ago. He argued that if Obama came home and discovered some criminals raping his wife he’d try to negotiate with them. What is it about Obama and rape scenarios? Hmmm…

  225. 225
  226. 226
    MattMinus says:

    Oh look, ABL is fishing for affirmation by “leaving”. This is, what, the 6th or 7th time she’s pulled this?

  227. 227
    Keith G says:

    And before I go brush my teeth and head off to bed, let me just say I find it extremely creepy that Greenwald apparently believes in all sincerity that the current president of the United States is fully capable of raping a nun and just hasn’t checked it off his list yet.

    My head exploded at 6:40 AM.

    @Djur:

    Teacher says that every time someone writes a dramatic goodbye post on a blog, a troll gets its bridge.

    I am so using this in the future.

    I do not like the product of writers who persistently use outrage instead of logic, humor, and writing ability to construct interesting arguments. Both ABL and GG are outrage writers which is why I tend not to care much about either one – it is probably why they fight like unhinged sisters.

    I am one of probably many who saw this type of ending (of which I see little downside) coming for quite some time. ABL has her talents, but her shtick, methodology and temperament was a poor fit here, though it was great of Cole to try.

    Up thread, another beat me to it…

    “Sorry that it ended on a bad note for you(ABL), but I really won’t miss the gossipy nonsense that seemed to be your stock in trade.”

    It’s a new year. Let’s move on.

  228. 228
    Karen says:

    I’ll miss you ABL but I totally understand why you’re leaving.

    Sorry, I don’t care how much people hate Obama, the nun raping non metaphor was just way too much.

    And JC? I don’t get you. I don’t understand how you can defend the comment when GG said he was being serious and not metaphorical at all.

    I thought you were better than that. You don’t have to defend ABL just because she was a Front Pager here and you don’t even have to do it because she was your friend.

    But to publicly side with GG after he says something so vile makes me wonder about you.

    I was trying to think of an equivalently horrible thing to say as a way to show why GG’s remarks are so disgusting but when the word “rape” is thrown in, that kind of defies comparison.

    I guess we should just get used to a Romney Presidency because even though the Republicans are fracturing and their clown parade should be the best present for Dems, I can see that as long as Obama is the Dem candidate, Ron Paul has managed to create enough PUMAs that the Republican party should be kissing his ass and thanking him for doing the one thing they could never accomplish.

    Destroying the Democratic party. But then again PUMA, so it’s all good, right?

    I don’t love everything Obama does or the Dems do. But I know, even if it’s just 10 percent better than the Republicans, that 10 percent matters to me. Under Republicans, all the things PUMAs claim to hate will be not only be happening but on a larger scale.

    But I guess that doesn’t matter as long as they can make their point.

    Ugh.

  229. 229
    OzoneR says:

    @Finn13:

    Holding our governmental leadership and financial elites to the rule of law is a liberal position.

    Ron Paul does not want to do that, period. As a matter of fact, he wants now law. That’s the fucking point.

  230. 230
    Mary Jo says:

    I’m sorry to see you go. Greenwald is a bully and his comment was inappropriate and offensive. I stopped reading him more than a year ago and am glad of it.

    He’s not worth my time.

  231. 231
    gogol's wife says:

    I’m very sad about this. Greenwald is definitely not worth it.

  232. 232
    Keith G says:

    @Anne: Your post here is brilliant. It is insightful and humanely constructed. Brava.

    I hear there is an open spot on a certain blog. A writer with this level of output should get it,

  233. 233
    Samara Morgan says:

    @Keith G:

    ABL has her talents, but her shtick, methodology and temperament was a poor fit here, though it was great of Cole to try.

    unlike of course Erik “Beyond Unions” Kain and Freddie “Firebagger” de Bore, of course.
    They fit right in to the BJ model.
    ;)

  234. 234
    Soonergrunt says:

    Wait, what?

  235. 235
    Samara Morgan says:

    @Anne: oh go suck Dave Weigels dick summore Old JAFI.
    you are just pissy because Cole slapped you down over l’affaire Cornerstone.
    ;)

  236. 236
    Helen says:

    @Soonergrunt: Thank you. I can’t stop laughing.

  237. 237
    WhatAreWeDoing says:

    sherparick said,
    “On his blog Glenn asks the following as what he considers an honest progressive’s decision to support Obama:

    “..Yes, I’m willing to continue to have Muslim children slaughtered by covert drones and cluster bombs, and America’s minorities imprisoned by the …”

    ******************

    I agree.
    I took over 30 years to get to this point.

    While the right trudges along with their ALEC packets, packing the school boards, redistricting and moving everything to the right bit by bit and defeating the Russ Feingolds and Alan Graysons, we whine about purity and help them make it THAT much harder for the next Democrat.

    I really thought they learned a lesson after the “no difference between Bush and Gore” debacle, followed by the “Draft Al Gore campaign”, but then we saw the 2010, “I’m disappointed in Democrats” debacle, followed by recalls.

    Whereas, the right is in absolute lockstep, they get more of what they want, and that makes it that much harder for the Democrats to clean up.

    I think the best thing to do is to turn these people off and support who you need to support and move things leftward inch by inch…. because change IS that slow.

    I look at it like someone who got to be 400 pounds over 25 years, and decides to take the doctor’s advise;
    It’s hard and progress is slow, so they cave into to the get thin quick schemes for another decade.

    By the time they have another crisis, and bring back the doctor, they are 500 pounds and it is harder, and progress is even slower….

    So I, for one will do my phone banking and write checks for the most progressive candidates , and support whichever Democrats win, and tune out the whiners… at least as long as ONE side is HYPO- critical of it’s own and the other side is HYPER- critical .

    I realize a 7-2 SCOTUS where Scalia is the moderate and a Gingrich in the WhiteHouse, along with a Congress filled with Bachmanns and Santorums allows for joyful pure unadulterated whining… but it’s just not worth it.

  238. 238
    Dave says:

    Now if Cole would just leave this might be a tolerable blog.

  239. 239
    Samara Morgan says:

    @Raven:

    “Until a man is twenty-five, he still thinks, every so often, that under the right circumstances he could be the baddest motherfucker in the world. If I moved to a martial-arts monastery in China and studied real hard for ten years. If my family was wiped out by Colombian drug dealers and I swore myself to revenge. If I got a fatal disease, had one year to live, and devoted it to wiping out street crime. If I just dropped out and devoted my life to being bad.
    __
    Hiro used to feel this way, too, but then he ran into Raven. In a way, this was liberating. He no longer has to worry about being the baddest motherfucker in the world. The position is taken.”
    ― Neal Stephenson, Snow Crash

  240. 240
    jon says:

    There’s just so much wrongness being laid about and pointed at with “Haha!”s and “Eureka!”s and so forth.

    First, Obama’s fans never criticize him? WTF? Did anyone see those elections we had in 2010? Sure, it was a stupid way to get back at him for whatever, but plenty of Obama fans were criticizing his inability to solve a problem that was far worse than even some of the financial cranksites imagined. And no Obama fan ever used the phrase “public option” in public.

    Second, Glenn Greenwald said a lot of stupid shit, but has anyone here never done that? Yeah, he dug deeper and missed much of the point of the criticism. Yeah, he probably is very much a complete asshole. Yeah, he does have a beef with Obama that goes well beyond politics. His points are made, and they still need to be answered.

    Third, how about them drones? I’d say they’re immoral. But they’re closer to Moral on the moral/immoral spectrum than are B-52s, firebombs on Tokyo and Dresden, really big firebombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, napalm, fuel-air bombs, enhanced interrogation techniques (thanks, Bush!), and even Civil War artillery. They’re probably more moral than human snipers with four-mile ranges, since any attack on those will get a lot of firepower in response, leading to more death. War is a fucking mess, drones are also messy, and our intelligence in many regions still hovers around the third grade level of understanding.

    Fourth, indefinite detention? Oh, you mean the stuff that’s already possibly allowed since the AUMF and the Patriot Act? And this NDAA changed what, exactly? Nothing as far as I can tell. The signing statement was pretty clear, though I guess the Betrayalist wing needs to blame Obama for what now appear to be three Congressional approvals of such stuff and one former President who cheered it on.

    And fifth, there’s what this whole damn thing is really about. The elephant in the room is that the GOP and the Congress (including many Democrats) want to retroactively excuse the evil of the past. But they don’t want to come out and say it, so they use things such as the NDAA to force Obama to do that. Obama has already pretty much pardoned Bush for the torture, and that’s what has many so angry. That’s what Greenwald’s beef with Obama is about. He says “drones” but he means “letting Bush go”. He says “Bradley Manning” but he means “Dick Cheney”. And so on. Many Democrats are pissed as well, threatening to support Ron Paul because the 2010 elections made things so much better so we may as well go Full Retard.

    Obama has made many shitty compromises. There. I said it. I criticized the man. Should it be in all-caps? I’d enjoy the cathartic moment of Bush going to Federal Prison for breaking many laws, too. And I hate how the GOP can’t admit that they hate Obama for effectively pardoning their guy. It makes them sad. It makes them all angsty with pent-up rage that That One has more forgiveness than their cold little hearts can ever contemplate. And it makes me angry, too. Justice demands a trial. History and moving on seems so… Vulcan and shit. I don’t care if it is 11th-dimension Monopoly or 65th-level Paladin, he’s smarter than I am and I’ll gripe away because I want to.

  241. 241
    Ben Cisco says:

    @WhatAreWeDoing: It is literally going to take a full-on fascist GOP regaining the WH for some of these folks to get it.

  242. 242
    Samara Morgan says:

    @WhatAreWeDoing: im on a stevenson kick tonite.
    like allus, Neal gets it.

    “All these beefy Caucasians with guns. Get enough of them together,looking for the America they always believed they’d grow up in, and they glom together like overcooked rice, form integral, starchy little units. With their power tools, portable generators, weapons, four-wheel-drive vehicles, and personal computers, they are like beavers hyped up on crystal meth, manic engineers without a blueprint, chewing through the wilderness, building things and abandoning them, altering the flow of mighty rivers and then moving on because the place ain’t what it used to be. The byproduct of the lifestyle is polluted rivers, greenhouse effect, spouse abuse, televangelists, and serial killers. But as long as you have that four-wheel-drive vehicle and can keep driving north, you can sustain it, keep moving just quickly enough to stay one step ahead of your own waste stream. In twenty years, ten million white people will converge on the north pole and park their bagos there. The low-grade waste heat of their thermodynamically intense lifestyle will turn the crystalline icescape pliable and treacherous. It will melt a hole through the polar icecap, and all that metal will sink to the bottom, sucking the biomass down with it.”
    ― Neal Stephenson, Snow Crash

  243. 243
    Michael D. says:

    Wow. That Greenwald statement was pretty vile. There is no situation where I think I can even come close to seeing a reason to defend it.

  244. 244
    Wee Bey says:

    No clue if John will read this, or care, but for the record:

    You’re in the wrong, Cole.

  245. 245
    Keith G says:

    @Samara Morgan: Are you making a point here?

  246. 246
    Samara Morgan says:

    @jon: simply great post.
    conservatism is really about never having to say you are sorry….and refusing to admit the world is changing.
    that is why conservatives reject science and Holy Evolution.

    That’s what Greenwald’s beef with Obama is about. He says “drones” but he means “letting Bush go”. He says “Bradley Manning” but he means “Dick Cheney”. And so on. Many Democrats are pissed as well, threatening to support Ron Paul because the 2010 elections made things so much better so we may as well go Full Retard.

    Greenwald is an expat libertarian living in Brazil.
    He’s not invested.
    Hes just a scold.

    I dont know how to play 13-D chess.
    im content to see how Obama does.
    I do know game theory.
    I can make the 4×4 payoff matrix for everything Obama does, so far.

  247. 247

    @Djur: OK, that’s funny, I don’t care who you are.

  248. 248
    Brian R. says:

    In Cole’s defense, the blog banner does say “consistently wrong since 2002.” Sticking up for that unbelievable shithead Greenwald on this one is just par for the course.

    Sorry to see you go, ABL.

  249. 249
    Samara Morgan says:

    @Keith G: yup.
    i dig ABL cuz shes honest and passionate.
    You were probably one of the stupid Teucrian cows that thought your brilliant suasion was turning EDK liberal, and that Firebagger Freddies arguments made “sense”.

  250. 250
    Samara Morgan says:

    @Djur: Trolls Unite!

  251. 251
    Samara Morgan says:

    i think you should stay and fight, ABL.
    i did.
    and behold!
    i won.
    ;)

  252. 252
    Fed Up In Brooklyn says:

    ABL’s leaving BJ????? Thank effing God.

  253. 253
    RossInDetroit says:

    My $0.02, for what it’s worth. There’s a lot that’s worth fighting for and against in politics this year. It’s a shame to see so much fire exchanged between allies. And so much damage.

  254. 254
    keestadoll says:

    And GG’s site meter keeps tick-tick-ticking up! Whatever. Johnesus Christ but this blog needs some Pepto and a shovel to navigate.

  255. 255
    Someguy says:

    Greenwald’s comment was execrable. Greenwald is a ass.

    His basic sentiment was dead on though.

    I challenge anybody to explain how, under Bush, we would have sat here clucking approvingly like fat old hens as Congress passed and the President signed a bill that makes permissible the military detention of Americans, apprehended in the United States, based on the finding of a couple military officers that they are more likely than not Al Qaida operatives or sympathizers. No, we’d have had the vapors about it.

    Yet’re just fine with Obama having that power. This is incredibly short sighted. Wait until Bain alum Mittens or (Gaia forbid) gay hatin’ Rick Santorum is wielding it…

    And on ABL leaving – sorry to hear that. You were the only person here willing to really take the gloves off when talking about the racist right. You’ll be missed.

  256. 256
    Splitting Image says:

    Sorry to see you leave here, ABL, but I’ll add you to my blogroll.

  257. 257
    Keith G says:

    @Samara Morgan: You are too wrong for words.

    After my first attempts, I didn’t care about the writing of those too. They were poorly thought out and often filled with factual errors. It seemed that they were often punching above their weight class (actually not unlike ABL and GG for that matter).

    And like all of the above, you seem more than happy to throw about fact free assertions in the service of pseudo-intellectual prowess.

    What does game theory say about that?

  258. 258
    arghhh! says:

    Apparently, at heart, all men are pigs.

  259. 259
    Samara Morgan says:

    @Someguy: firebagger alert.
    do we know each other?
    from TAS the glibertarian hivemind perhaps?

  260. 260
    Gustopher says:

    ABL, balloon juice will be poorer for your absence.

    I have no doubt that you would criticize Obama if he were raping a nun. It seems a bizarre thing to have to say, but apparently people have to say it.

    And I hope Tunch gives John a suitably painful, but not permanently debilitating, mauling for this. He was a complete ass.

  261. 261
    Rathskeller says:

    ABL, I’m sorry to see you leave in this way. I wish you had paused longer before deciding to leave, and that you had decided differently. I will miss your voice here.

  262. 262
    MattMinus says:

    @Gustopher:

    I have no doubt that ABL would call the raped nun a racist.

  263. 263
    Samara Morgan says:

    @Keith G: nothing.
    game theory is game theory.

    “Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker’s game because they almost always turn out to be—or to be indistinguishable from—self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time.”
    ― Neal Stephenson, Cryptonomicon

  264. 264
    brendanm98 says:

    Simply reprehensible on GG’s part. He’s often been quick to resort to extreme rhetoric but this is way over the line. His supporters, including Cole, shouldn’t give him a pass on this (@91 is right on), however they feel about his other work.

  265. 265
    Samara Morgan says:

    @Keith G:

    “They wanted to carry her, but she jumped to the stones of the plaza and strode away from the building, toward her ranks, which parted to make way for her. The streets of Pudong were filled with hungry and terrified refugees, and through them, in simple peasant clothes streaked with the blood of herself and of others, broken shackles dangling from her wrists, followed by her generals and ministers, walked the barbarian Princess with her book and her sword.”
    ― Neal Stephenson, The Diamond Age: Or, a Young Lady’s Illustrated Primer

  266. 266
    nancydarling says:

    I feel like a 5-year old living through the parent’s nasty divorce. I love ABL and I love John. I guess I’ll have to keep my little suitcase packed and live in two places now.

  267. 267
    Keith G says:

    @Samara Morgan:

    self-righteous sixteen-year-olds

    Hmmmmm

  268. 268
    LarsThorwald says:

    Lot of stupid, childish drama on the internet this new year.

  269. 269
    amk says:

    @MattMinus: Fucking racist idjit, aren’t ya ?

  270. 270
    jon says:

    @Someguy:

    I challenge anybody to explain how, under Bush, we would have sat here clucking approvingly like fat old hens as Congress passed and the President signed a bill that makes permissible the military detention of Americans, apprehended in the United States, based on the finding of a couple military officers that they are more likely than not Al Qaida operatives or sympathizers. No, we’d have had the vapors about it.

    Are you referring to the AUMF or the Patriot Act? I was, back in 2002 and 2003, asking on sites such as Protein Wisdom how those conservatives would like those acts as implemented under a future President Clinton. Oddly enough, I was wrong to think they’d mind, since apparently it’s still only the liberals who seem to worry about unchecked power. Unfortunately, we’ve also grown quite used to the idea that foreigners deserve such treatment. Our concern for ourselves is quite like the old joke about the airplane crashing someplace but no Americans were on board so it doesn’t matter.

  271. 271
    Cacti says:

    Fare thee well ABL.

    Your tenure at BJ, up to and including the circumstances of your depature, has been an object lesson in how deep the white and male privilege runs among those who call themselves liberal/progressive.

  272. 272
    Emma says:

    After reading as much of this as I can take, here’s my $0.02: The whole thing has only reinforced my belief that there’s a subset of the readership here who is made extremely uncomfortable by ABL. Some try to disguise it as “balance” and “reasonableness” and some are just downright aggressive in ways they aren’t towards male front pagers. A small subset of that subset are women. A larger subset of the subset are perfectly all right, even all-out supportive of a male as aggressive as ABL.

    Which only goes to show that all we’re doing is replaying the larger social issues.

  273. 273
    HBin says:

    @Rp: The better question is, what is with Greenwald and his obsession with woman being raped?

  274. 274
    Marc says:

    @Someguy:

    What you just wrote about the defense bill is a complete fucking lie.

    http://motherjones.com/mojo/20.....-years-eve

    That’s why Greenwald is so despicable; his hatred of Obama is so deep that he simply can’t be trusted to write accurately about anything that the man has done. It’s Iago-level derangement.

    And then he projects his own attitude towards Obama onto those defending Obama against his unhinged attacks.

  275. 275
    scarshapedstar says:

    Uh-oh. I hope EDK isn’t on the waiver wire.

  276. 276
    Neal Peart says:

    Geddy, Alex and I think Cole should have posted here before he took to Twitter to comment about ABL’s posts over the last few days, particularly in light of his initial post to “start” a conversation. Well, he sure has hell did start a conversation, perhaps one that needed to be had between the various dispatches of the blogosphere, but GG and his online drones fucked it up. Even if GG agreed with DrDawg’s “point”, the use of ad hominem attacks undercut GG’s point. It could have been made differently and GG should have just said, “ABL, what that poster said was crude and while I see his point and agree with, I don’t agree it was a good metaphor.” Instead, GG goes fuck all in and proves what’s he really about. For that reason alone, this incident has value.

  277. 277
    El Tiburon says:

    Always the victim…

    While I personally find ABL nothing more than a thin-skinned, bomb-throwing master of stating the obvious: OH NOES, THERE’S RACISM OUT HERE Y’ALL!! I don’t like to see her go if for nothing more than the entertainment value. Now E.D. Kain, he was a waste of space.

    But the internet meme is now complete:

    Glenn Greenwald, racist and rape enthusiast, supports 100% Ron Paul and every single word he has ever uttered especially the part about hating the blacks and state rights and the racist stuff.

  278. 278
    MattMinus says:

    @Emma:

    I love this species of argument. “Lets pitch the merits of any argument and get right down to the fact that it’s racist to disagree with me.”

  279. 279
    Krankor says:

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Holy shit, it’s like Satan and Hitler in a hot baby-oil wrestling match.

    Oh crap! That’s an analogy. I know they scare and confuse little liberal sensibilities and all. I’ll just say I really don’t think ABL is, literally, Hitler. She lacks the communication skills first of all …

  280. 280
    Donut says:

    Not one bit of this very silly dust-up is going to have the slightest impact on either how the government governs, nor on Obama’s reelection chances.

    So stupid. So pointless. Well, done, attention whores ABL and Greenwald. No one in any position to do anything about your preferred outcomes in this mentally-midgetized proxy war gives one shit about either of you and your childish Twattings. Good god.

  281. 281
    Neal Peart says:

    Thanks for the post John.

  282. 282
    Emma says:

    @MattMinus: Nice strawman, may I lend you a match? Note that I did not discuss the reasons why they were uncomfortable with her. Merely that they were. In fact, I don’t think it’s about racism. It’s about the fact that a loudly outspoken, opinionated woman seems to be off-putting to a subset of the population while a loudly outspoken, opinionated man is not.

  283. 283
    Someguy says:

    @Marc:

    This is why ACLU Director Anthony Romero released a statement shortly after Obama’s arguing the authority in the defense bill could “be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield.”

    Yeah, me and ACLU President Anthony Romero – complete Firebagger liars.

    How’s the Kool Aid taste, Marc?

  284. 284
    MD NEOmaha says:

    Use this faux controversy for all its worth ABL. It’s likely the last thing anyone will ever remember about you. And, probably the most telling about your personality (at least as revealed through your on-line writings).

    I think that i speak for many in the blog community when I say that your knee-jerk defenses of all things Obama brought no intellectual value to our conversations. Only some of the ugliest insults delivered with the least honor.

    I release you into your cesspool of blindness. God Speed, ABL

  285. 285
    TMac says:

    Here is the problem, you Greenwald way to much attention which is what a guy like that craves with every.single.bone in his body. And every time you react to him, he wins.

    The best thing to do to Greenwald is to marginalize him, don’t read his BS don’t react to his obvious trolls, i.e. raping a nun and excusing it,and all his other wild trolls, he refers to them as his blogs of truth, but they are all trolls. He is always looking to publicly fight with other writers and all it serves to do is to draw more people to his blog.

    Marginalize him, don’t read him, don’t comment about him, don’t refer to his blogs, seriously, what hurts Greenwald more than anything, fewer and fewer page clicks he needs to survive. Encourage others to do the same, so that his blog withers up and dies. Because that is what he deserves.

  286. 286
    Keith G says:

    @jon:

    how those conservatives would like those acts as implemented under a future President Clinton. Oddly enough, I was wrong to think they’d mind,

    The sad truth is that they do not have to be concerned since the leadership of the Democratic Party is center right on those issues. They will and do behave in very similar ways. So, conservatives need not worry too much.

    One could argue that this is the way the electorate wants it to be; so, that is the way it is. While winning elections is what political parties need to do, there are other existential needs. Dealing with the big problems that are looming in the future is one very important need.

    I get, and often applaud, the decision to table certain issues in order to build a better political landscape. I just wonder if too much has tabled for later action. Political fights, even a losing one, can be important for defining the identity of a political group. Without an identity, what is there to rally around?

    For three years, an emotional melee has centered on the questions of whether Obama has conceded too much and if he has fought too little. It is a fair and time honored issue and it will take a decade or so to figure out.

    What has astounded me is how many of our own has let this important debate get so personal and then so nasty. Both GG and ABL have been gleeful practitioners of this crap.

    To hell with both of them.

  287. 287
    Avedon says:

    Fine. Let the record show that everyone would draw the line at raping a nun on live TV.

    It’s nice to know that people have standards.

  288. 288
    Corey says:

    LMAO at everyone reading deep sexist/racist subtexts into every public utterance of Glenn Greenwald, then turning around and mocking him for living in Brazil and calling him a “little bitch”.

    He’s made it really clear that he lives in Brazil only because his home country will not allow him to be with the person he loves. Also, pretty sure he spends 3+ months here a year. Homophobes.

  289. 289
    sixers says:

    Not sorry to see ABL go. She was a sloppy writer who is in the tank for Obama no matter what. Greenwald chose a poor way to express that but its true all the same. It was nice knowing you ABL. I don’t expect to see you again as you have no real writing talent and I choose not to read kool-aid drinkers on either side of the aisle.

  290. 290
    Donut says:

    RossInDetroit:
    January 3rd, 2012 at 9:00 am:

    My $0.02, for what it’s worth. There’s a lot that’s worth fighting for and against in politics this year. It’s a shame to see so much fire exchanged between allies. And so much damage.

    Same point I was trying to make but slightly different angle. Greenwald has increasingly become a crank IMO, and the rape analogy was ridiculous and if I were in Cole’s shoes, I don’t know that I would have defended it, but really, this argument such as it is moves the needle on the discussion nowhere. It’s ceased to be a policy disagreement and turned personal. And in doing that, all the salience on all sides is lost. Total waste of time and energy for all.

  291. 291
    sherparick says:

    Greenwald was way off base on the “rape metaphor,” especially when directed at an African American woman about an African American President. It reminds some of who are melanin challenge that even when we think we have gone beyone white, sexual, and class privileges, that we are still prisioners within our own skin and experience. (There were other ways to make a snarky point at us “progressive” defenders of Obama on this issue (like “Obama could set off tactical nues in Pakistan and we would cheer him on.” Not that he would or that we would in that event (Santorum, Romney, well, I guess we might see.)

    By the way, has anyone being reading what the center-right Fidez party is doing in Hungnary? It is not to different from what is happenign in Republican controlled states in the U.S. What do you think will happen if the Republicans get the Presidency, House, and Senate? The cartoon about it being illegal to vote Democrat might not be to far off.

    I am not saying that you have to love Obama or even support or vote for him, but you do have to compare and contrast the real world alternatives and then not run away from accountability for the result as Ralph Nader and his supporters did after 2000.

    Finally, it would be really helpful to primary both Democrats and Republicans with candidates closer to your views rather than see the Michelle Bachmans, Marco Rubios, and Mike Lees vindicated in election after election.

  292. 292
    Thatgaljill says:

    seriously bummed, but I will subscribe to ABLC and read you there.

  293. 293
    Pray Tell says:

    Obama may not overtly support the prison rapes of people whose only crime was using the same recreational substances Obama admitted to having used in his award winning book…

    but I don’t see him doing anything to free those people from prison en masse as Ron Paul (and Gary Johnson) has promised to do.

    The implementation of the US War on Cannabis has been and is racist.

    Obama is leading that racist war.

    Why won’t Obama protect those people from rape?

  294. 294
    NCSteve says:

    I have a dream that, at some point, people will realize that when people join in a lengthy argument where they are limited to 144 characters, the invariable and inevitable result will be that every single person participating in the argument will end up being in the wrong.

    Arguing on Twitter is like playing Tic-Tac-Toe or Global Thermonuclear War: the only way to win is not to play.

  295. 295
    ochone says:

    this comment is a hit and run, not sticking around for responses. reason is, i think many people, particularly progressives, are so frickin hypersensitized that they go all melodramatic and frankly bullshitty when a taboo is broached.
    no matter how stupidly greenwald doubled down, he was CLEARLY using rape as a metaphor for how utterly terrible ABL’s position is. doing so was unacceptable in terms of his slur on ABL, but it was categorically NOT unacceptable in terms of his views of rape victims. he was doing the OPPOSITE of what ABL claimed, using what he accepts is one of the very worst things that can be done to someone to make an overwrought point.
    ABL’s twisting of this of positively Bushian, in Dubya’s hiding behind the troops period. i get why, because the slur on her is atrocious, but it’s still pathetic.

  296. 296
    ochone says:

    ps
    what ABL and her supporters have done plays into the very worst of politics these days, crying racism, misogyny etc when none is present. it’s exactly this kind of bs the republicans specialize in. given that there is more than enough of the real thing around, the last thing we need is for sane people to validate the fake stuff.

  297. 297
    Samara Morgan says:

    @Corey: here ypu fucker.
    read the tweet.

    @ggreenwald
    Glenn Greenwald
    @DrDawg @AngryBlackLady @g_p_g @emptywheel No – she’d say it was justified & noble- that he only did it to teach us about the evils of rape.

  298. 298
    3am says:

    ABL – leave, leave, leave. I was here before you, was here while you were posting, and will be here afterwards. You’ve thrown tantrums like this before and come back, but I hope you are really gone for good this time. Grow up.

  299. 299
    ochone says:

    pps
    i know greenwald says it wasn’t a metaphor, ok. saying it was literal was even more imbecilic. but the point stands that he was in no way minimizing rape. he was doing the opposite.

  300. 300
    Kola Noscopy says:

    I have never used the alleged pie filter, nevertheless this is the most delicious post I have ever read.

    Bye!

  301. 301
    kc says:

    What is this “twitter” thing everyone keeps talking about?

  302. 302
    Kola Noscopy says:

    @Lysana:

    And this is my last comment here.

    OH my lands! This IS a happy day!

  303. 303
    Swishalicious says:

    ABL leaving BalloonJuice is like that part in the Matrix where that guy with the creepy white beard reveals to everyone that the machines have destroyed Zion like 5 times already, and they are becoming increasingly efficient at it.

    I feel as if she has “left” probably a handful of times at this point, and with each new ABL iteration she becomes a more potent caricature of herself with an even shorter shelf life.

    See you in a month ABL, for ~3 days this time, before you “leave” again!

  304. 304
    airBB says:

    I’m with sherparick and the other guy who isn’t too engorged with rage over GG and JC. My answer, too, is Yes I am supporting the guy responsible for killing Muslim children because I think the alternative is much much worse.

    My admission does not mean I am sitting on my hands. I’ve sent out faxes to the leaders of the Dem in both houses as well as the white house (I was told on another blog that faxes and phone calls were still the best ways to reach people in govt) on a couple of issues. And I was just gearing up for another, once I caught my breath at the magnitude of power grab by Obama, when I saw this flame out post.

    I thought GGs post on Ron Paul was instructive and right on. I think he wants more of us, more of us who support Obama, to talk more about the issues of executive power.

    I love reading Balloon Juice because there are a wide variety of voices here (except when Glenn Greenwald is involved, unfortunately), even when things get magma core hot. I love the fact that JC allows comments. It’s actually what keeps me coming back.

    I think it’s unfortunate that Greenwald really hits on the argument of Obama supporters being willing to support him doing anything. I’m an Obama supporter. I don’t take it personally when GG says things about some Obama supporters. Looking at the number of comments here though, he’s kind of right.

    Also? I’m a woman who’s been raped. I get GG’s point. Kind of unfortunate to use as an example but I’m ok with it.

  305. 305
    vector56 says:

    You “Obamabots” have nerve! Obviously, this is yet another distraction and attempt at misdirection to take the spot light off Obama’s crimes against humanity and deliver some “fake outrage” to those who would dare speak the truth (Greewald). Strange how a hypothetical nun being rape causes you fake-liberals more outrage than real human beings being killed every day by this man’s drone attacks. But, it is only little Brown people on the other side of the world being killed (so far); it’s not like they are as human as a make-believe nun.

  306. 306
    Egilsson says:

    Thank God ABL is leaving. I only hope she stays gone from this blog.

  307. 307
    Mathias says:

    at last. fuck off and don’t return, abl. you’ve been a blight on this blog since you started posting your shit here.

  308. 308
    different-church-lady says:

    Now can we stop taking Greenwald seriously?

  309. 309
    alex says:

    ABL, this is the most inane, fake-outrage, bullshit. GG made a rhetorical point, which you never really dealt with, and you focused on this? por favor

  310. 310
    Tim in SF says:

    I’m with ya 90% of the time, ABL, but I’m with JC on this one. Sorry.

  311. 311
    Can't Be Bothered says:

    thin skinned, bomb throwing drama queen. Always cranking the outrage to 11. A one note perspective and uninteresting writer. Made innumerable flame wars about herself. The fact that you went out in such a stupid dramatic fashion is only fitting. I, for one, am glad that this blog will not have to be consumed with your egocentric drama at least bi-monthly anymore. Take your fans with you, and please don’t have a change of heart and try to come back. Cling with a death grip to your pride and righteousness to forever save this blog from your toxic self aggrandizement. Byyyyyeeee.

  312. 312
    WaterGirl says:

    …let me offer you a word of advice: if you ever feel the desire to inform a woman that you have imagined her playing a role in some form of hypothetical fantasy rape-scenario, even if you feel this rape-scenario makes some sort of totally awesome rhetorical point, KEEP IT TO YOURSELF. Because Jesus Christ. Come on.

    This.

    I would like to second the suggestion that Cole get his mom’s reaction to both statements that originally invoked rape – the original guy who said ABL would defend Obama for raping a nun on TV and GG, who said that she would say Obama is trying to teach us something by raping the nun on TV.

    Cole, ask your mom. Ask your sister. And ask your good friend who is female.

    There’s no hope of agreement on how people feel about GG or ABL in general OR about what any of the three of you said. Forget all that.

    But maybe something good can come out of this clusterfuck of a twitter storm. Maybe a whole ton of people can learn that the only time to talk about rape is when you are talking about rape. To bring rape into a conversation to make a point about anything unrelated to rape is just offensive. And it will completely derail the discussion you were having in the first place.

    A man is afraid a woman will laugh at him, a woman is afraid a man will rape or kill her. Please accept it as a matter of respect for women.

    Even if you can’t understand that, or why that is, please accept it. Because Jesus Christ. Come on.

  313. 313
    gogol's wife says:

    @eemom:

    Thanks for breaking it down. No more needs to be said (but I see there’s a 500+ thread up there, so I guess more has been said).

  314. 314
    Feudalism Now! says:

    Quick take:
    GG – still tone deaf, hypocritical and inconsistent Not worth the time
    ABL- sorry to see you go but you still have your own soap box and the new gig to get your pov out. Your posts here were mostly flame bait but you’ve had some gems. In this issue, JC done you wrong.
    JC- wtf? The inconsistency bugs me. GG went below and beyond with his/his commenters hyperbole, Excessive hyperbole that you have specifically called out several times before. I don’t think it matters much to you, but I am disappointed in your judgement.

    The whole Paul curious debate or the left of Obama on cherry picked issues is a silly debate. No different than most of our debates, though. Knock yourselves out.
    Using rape as a metaphor/ ‘no literally he could violate a nun’ is just stupid. It is never appropriate or witty. You void your argument before you begin. Not sure why this is debated. Dumb statement. Dumb argument.
    Using rape

  315. 315
    different-church-lady says:

    @alex:

    GG made a rhetorical point…

    Well, yeah, except for the part where he claimed it wasn’t rhetorical.

  316. 316
    LanceThruster says:

    For the record, hasn’t a generic “rape” analogy been long on the books?

    I’m thinking of the phrase whereby “X would still get the support of his party even if caught with a live boy or a dead girl.”(or something to that effect).

    There’s also, “Lie back and think of England.”

    Also, for the record, I have often said that I find the Dems just as corrupt when it comes down to it, but add, “slightly less rapacious” than the GOP.

    I suppose that holds true whether or not referring to sexual “rapaciousness.

  317. 317
    pandera says:

    Good God – this is the most childish, idiotic thread I’ve ever read. ABL is a talented and funny writer when she talks about herself and her life – when she enters politics she becomes a self-entitled, whiny child. (Who must be paid attention to damn it! And you’re all wrong and Jane Hamsher is a racist and John Cole is a rape supporter and…and…and – Hey WHY ISN’T ANYBODY LOOKING AT ME!) It’s pathetic and a waste of an interesting talent. I hope she finds her space and her voice and realizes her limitations. And to everybody attacking JC and GG for this, it might be time to grow up.

  318. 318
    John M. Burt says:

    So long as we’re talking about what is a (revolting) metaphor and what is an (appalling) accusation, let’s not forget that there was a time when an American President financed and endorsed the rape and murder of nuns, and was defended for so doing by his supporters: http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04.....038;src=pm

  319. 319
    Loviatar says:

    Instead of commenting on a post from a wannabe, why don’t you fools go read something from an actual writer.
    .

    The Messenger

    I think about that moment and I get warm–and then I think about Farrakhan and I go cold. The limitations of the man who’d orchestrated one of the great moments of my life were evident as soon as he took the stage and offered a bizarre treatise on numerology.

    .

    But what they pundits never got was that Farrakhan promised something more–improvement, minus the need to beg from white people. Farrakhan promised improvement through self-reliance–an old tradition stretching back to our very dawn. To our minds, the political leaders of black America had fled the field.

    .

    I’ve thought a lot about Farrakhan, recently, watching Ron Paul’s backers twist themselves in knots to defend what they have now euphemistically label as “baggage.” I don’t think it makes much sense to try to rebut the charges here. No minds will be changed.

    .

    Best post of the year and the year just started.

  320. 320
    different-church-lady says:

    Hey, listen ladies, nobody gives a shit what you think about rape in a discussion that has nothing to do with rape.

    Yeah.

    So, who brought rape into the discussion again? THINK…

  321. 321
    Spectre says:

    Christ, the mental disease and dishonesty in this thread by ABL and her supporters is astounding.

    Anyway, ABL had already lost all her credibility a while back, you could see it in the way people responded to her posts and “thoughts”. She’s by far one of the intellectually weakest and most vulgar Obama propagandists, so she was starting to be counter productive.

    Now she leaves, making a scandal that Cole is pro-*insert your favorite boogeyman here*, and the remaining Obama apologists can continue to attack and slander anyone who dares defy them, such as Greenwald.

    The stupid, how it burns.

  322. 322
    Spectre says:

    Literally, this little stunt by her is all about distracting and claiming the opposite of the truth. Ballon-Juice is literally one of the most anti-Greenwald blogs on the internet (because he is one of the strongest left-wing critics of Obama).

    So of course, now the sheeple will think Anti-Greenwaldians get persecuted. Grow up.

  323. 323
    A Humble Lurker says:

    @Biff Mitchell:

    So glad to see the self-hating negress go away. Now if her simpleton followers will follow suit, this blog will be vastly improved.

    Yes, I see now the reason ABL has gotten so much crap has been her poor writing, and not the color of her skin or her gender. No.

    I honestly think it would be fun to see how well she’d be received if she came back and posted under a different name. I bet a lot of fuckers here who disliked her before might just suddenly have a mysterious change of heart.

  324. 324
    not motorik says:

    Thank god she’s gone.

    Seriously, she was the worst blogger ever.

  325. 325
    MJ says:

    I think that Greenwald’s decision to lash out at ABL far more connected to his explosive anger at being intellectually challenged about his legal analysis of civil detention & the NDAA, than it was to any deep-seated insensitivity about rape. However, I have to wonder whether his quick dismissal of any challenge by anyone who disagrees with his overly simplistic, theoretical construction that civil liberties > civil rights –> Paul > Obama doesn’t reveals much more about Greenwald’s discomfort with dissent than he’d ever be willing to admit.

    (I’ll leave it to others here to analyze the degree to which Greenwald’s poor judgement re: the rape analogy was exacerbated b/c he was being publicly called out by an “Angry Black Lady” who openly & notoriously challenged his much bandied about, yet still unproven claims of moral & intellectual superiority.)

  326. 326
    thank you jeebus says:

    THANK YOU JEEBUS FOR SENDING abl PACKING !!!!

    THAT IS ONE NEW YEARS WISH FULFILLED ALREADY !!!

    WOOT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  327. 327
    Michelle says:

    304 comments ago, Alison wrote, “And please, explain to me how those pointing out how repulsive and offensive rape jokes/metaphors were ‘in the wrong’. I’d love to hear it.”

    304 comments later, no answer to that question.

    But y’all go on convincing yourself that ABL is somehow *the bad guy* in all of this. If that’s what it takes for you to sleep at night.

  328. 328
    John Cole says:

    @Biff Mitchell:

    So glad to see the self-hating negress go away. Now if her simpleton followers will follow suit, this blog will be vastly improved.

    WTF is wrong with some of you people? Seriously, if you all knew half of the shit ABL put up from some of you racist fucks, you’d understand why she has a hair trigger on some things.

  329. 329
    A Humble Lurker says:

    @John Cole:

    Dude, to racists ABL doesn’t have a hair trigger because of what other people to do her, around her, or say to her. It’s because of what she is. Because they’re racists. You can’t teach racists to play nice, man.

    You really don’t see it, do you? You’re whole stance during this was ‘both sides do it!’. The idea we’ve been mocking on this blog for months now. And it’s not true. When has ABL ever said or endorsed anything close to Greenwald’s self-admittedly not metaphorical not hyperbolic ‘they’d excuse him raping a nun’ bs?

    Greenwald’s the Republican’s in this case, dude. The only side that is doing it. I feel sorry for you if for some reason that’s hard for you to take, but it’s the truth. And I don’t feel sorrier for you than I do ACTUAL rape victims highlighted in this thread who were saying how offended they were by what he said.

  330. 330
    mclaren says:

    The only serious question now involves the issue of how much Karl Rove is paying ABL.

    She appears to have interest only in attacking people like Naomi Wolf and Glenn Greenwald…the only people standing up and speaking out against the steady destruction of the constitution and America’s accelerating slide, first under Dubya and now under Obama, into a totalitarian state devoid of the rule of law, where presidents like Obama can order the murder of U.S. citizens without a trial or even charging them with having committed a crime. And lawyers like ABL will defend the president for this gross violation of the basic rule of law.

    Think about that.

    Ponder it for a minute.

    We have passed a point of no return here. A lawyer now staunchly defends a president who has ordered the murder of an American citizen without a trial and without even charging him with committing a crime.

    Since ABL only exhibits interest in attacking people who speak out against the ongoing destruction of the constitution of the United States, and has stopped attacking people like Karl Rove and Rick Perry, it’s clear that ABL has sold out to the Republicans.

    The only question now: how much money is she getting?

    How much is Karl Rove paying ABL to relentlessly attack Naomi Wolf and Gleen Greenwald and anyone else who stands up for the basic rule of law that has served as the essential foundation of civilized society since the Magna Carta?

    ABL has now turned herself into the Julius Streicher of 21st century America. Instead of relentlessly and savagely defaming Jews, she has devoted herself to relentlessly and savagely defaming anyone who speaks out against America’s slide into fascism.

    Shame on you, ABL. For shame!

  331. 331
    William Hurley says:

    It seems your outrage is born of Greenwald’s bone-close assessment of your habitual apologies for the murder of innocent women, men and children in countries that are not only not at war with the US but are allies – as Obama’s State Department tells it.

    The numbers that stand in as an abstracted presence for the thousands casually murdered papers over the President’s unfettered eagerness to “dispatch” – to nearly all Americans – nameless, faceless innocents by means such as exploding their bodies, burning their bodies, crushing their bodies, mangling their bodies and – with shrapnel – boring holes through their bodies. These innocents might be “lucky”, context considered, because the ravages Obama has unitarily visited upon children, women and men has induced the rise and rampage of death squads in “drone patrolled” regions subjecting the maimed, wounded and psychologically damaged to the wanton violent impulses of murders on par with Obama but who do their dirty work in person – with hand-held drills, hammers, acid and other “house-hold” items.

    These are the acts you unflaggingly defend while playing virtual “human shield” to the person who orders these depraved acts with horrifying frequency. You have exhibited no willingness or ability to restrain your defensive apologies – and no one expects a circumstance to arise that would provoke you to break your addiction.

  332. 332
    Rebecca Testerman says:

    It is incredibly annoying when commenters here attribute their personal opinions to all (fill in the blanks). I’m a woman and have suffered sexual assault and think ABL is totally and spectacularly in the wrong. It is really obnoxious of you to tell John Cole if he just checked with any woman or rape survivor they would straighten him right out.

  333. 333
    John Cole says:

    Dude, to racists ABL doesn’t have a hair trigger because of what other people to do her, around her, or say to her. It’s because of what she is. Because they’re racists. You can’t teach racists to play nice, man.

    You really don’t see it, do you? You’re whole stance during this was ‘both sides do it!’. The idea we’ve been mocking on this blog for months now. And it’s not true. When has ABL ever said or endorsed anything close to Greenwald’s self-admittedly not metaphorical not hyperbolic ‘they’d excuse him raping a nun’ bs?

    Are you working over time to misunderstand me? I’m the one who cleaned out the spam and blacklist filter when the scumbags would show up. There is no both sides do it equivocation here at all.

  334. 334
    FuzzyWuzzy says:

    @Alison: This is idiocy. ABL is taking her ball over to the other teeter totter because she is mad at the people on this teeter totter, and now everyone on this teeter totter is a bad person because they are white/male/straight/doubting Obama/poopy. It is not the fall of Rome. It is ABL pouting after a spat.

  335. 335
    gaz says:

    ABL, sorry to see you go.

    I’ll visit your blog.

    The silver lining is all of your stalkers will finally STFU.
    At least here.

    Also, as far as Glenn Greenwald. I’m going to be the bigger person and refrain from telling many of his blind adherents *I told you so*. =)

    Anyone else who defends GG at this point, can KMA.

    John, you still owe ABL an apology, IMNSHO. Maybe two now, by my uninformed count. (I only see what happens here).

  336. 336

    […] I just got finished saying that I really couldn’t bear Glenn Greenwald, then this: […]

  337. 337
    William Hurley says:

    @FuzzyWuzzy:

    As with any person who’s perpetually a victim in his/her own mind, life cannot be lived without the manufacture of persecutors. Witness, as one of many hundreds of examples, the unrelenting cycles of purges and murder by Little Red Book waving Chinese acting out their fatalistic faith addiction to the Chairman during China’s Great Leap Forward then Culture Revolution. No matter how many were killed, beaten, tortured or starved to death – the faithful followers of Mao never found fault in themselves when fault could be “found” in another. Today’s comrade was often tomorrow’s hidden traitor revealed.

    Fortunately, I say sardonically, the President’s adoration for the murderous efficiency of drones alleviates his faithful automatons from having to do the dirty, bloody, hands-on work themselves – freeing them up to turn their ire on those whose aspirations for civil society are and remain high. As such, they lack the courage of Cultural Revolutionaries even though they aspire to their zeal and thoroughness.

  338. 338
    William Hurley says:

    @Michelle:

    How about we wait for an as yet produced defense of extra-legal murder of American citizens and the citizens of an American ally that totals in the thousands? It is and remains the first and most significant question/request among the multitude of posts on this subject.

  339. 339
    gaz says:

    @moe99:

    Nero fiddled while Rome burned. Democrats argue and abuse each other at a similar juncture. Which one’s more fun?

    Option C:

    Watching you make a moronic post about this as though John Cole, ABL, or GG were representative of Democrats (Glenn Greenwald is a Libertarian expat, you idiot)

    The stupid. It fucking burns.

  340. 340
    moron says:

    I’ve removed myself from the masthead. The celebration can officially commence.

    Good riddance. This otherwise great site will be far better without your clownish drama-queenery.

  341. 341
    MikeF says:

    Well, at least she’s flouncing off on a high note. Of the many times ABL has come at Greenwald, this is the first and only time she’s actually had a point and made it honestly and well. I’ll miss her anyway.

  342. 342
    3am says:

    @Michelle:

    You wrote:

    “304 comments ago, Alison wrote, “And please, explain to me how those pointing out how repulsive and offensive rape jokes/metaphors were ‘in the wrong’. I’d love to hear it.”

    304 comments later, no answer to that question.

    But y’all go on convincing yourself that ABL is somehow the bad guy in all of this. If that’s what it takes for you to sleep at night.”

    Can you explain to me where there was either a rape joke or rape metaphor?

    This is what happened:

    * Greenwald believes that US policies under Bush and Obama are responsible for the extrajudicial assassination of US citizens and the death of numerous innocent bystanders (including children) in Afghanistan.
    * He believes this is unconstitutional, odious, and indefensible.
    * He believes ABL defends Obama on these charges, so he wonders where the line would have to be drawn before she would not defend him.
    * He choose one of the most offensive possible crimes – the rape of a nun – and then said that he thought ABL would defend Obama in that case, too.

    It’s a serious insult to ABL, that anyone would be offended by. Anyone has a right to be angry at that.

    But there is no rape joke in there. And there is no rape metaphor in there. If there were one, it would be offensive. Since there are none, it’s a false accusation.

    And ABL is smart, I think she knows this and is cynically using it as a cudgel against Greenwald. I’m not saying she’s a ‘bad guy’ but that is ‘bad guy’ behavior.

  343. 343
    TiMT says:

    @Taylor:

    If you read the statement made by the WH to simplify the NDAA bill (H.R. 1540) signed into law here, you will note this section that clearly negates your assertion – please read below:

    Section 1021 affirms the executive branch’s authority to detain persons covered by the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note). This section breaks no new ground and is unnecessary. The authority it describes was included in the 2001 AUMF, as recognized by the Supreme Court and confirmed through lower court decisions since then. Two critical limitations in section 1021 confirm that it solely codifies established authorities. First, under section 1021(d), the bill does not “limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.” Second, under section 1021(e), the bill may not be construed to affect any “existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.” My Administration strongly supported the inclusion of these limitations in order to make clear beyond doubt that the legislation does nothing more than confirm authorities that the Federal courts have recognized as lawful under the 2001 AUMF. Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation. My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.

  344. 344
    Visiting troll says:

    Gawd; who cares?? If this is serious public debate, give me Teletubbies. What a vapid, self-absorbed, profoundly trivial waste of time.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] I just got finished saying that I really couldn’t bear Glenn Greenwald, then this: […]

Comments are closed.