Enter Atrios

Calling out Atrios! Oh no you didn't!!

Calling out Atrios? Oh no you didn't!!

Joe? Atrios is the bomb.

You are a war-enabling, self-loathing, sycophantic boob.

Try to keep this straight. Mm-kay?

Always about you, isn't it Joe?
What a pathetic excuse for a journalist.

"you mean it works like this: Bush vetoes appropriation, then announces troops will stay longer...because the Democrats won't pay for them? Sorry. Does not scan."

Dude, have you listened to what BUSH HAS SAID?

You're write, it doesn't scan. Because Bush's "logic" ain't.

Joe: Do you read the news? Bush was already floating the idea that "if the Dems don't give me more money, with no timelines, they'll cause the troops to stay longer." I mean, this was in the NEWSPAPERS. Do you read them? In retrospect, it seems clear that Bush was planning on withholding the news so he could pin the extensions on tyhe Dems.

You are beyond redemption.

Three very serious posts. I can see how right the commenters are here: you just want substance.

"you mean it works like this: Bush vetoes appropriation, then announces troops will stay longer...because the Democrats won't pay for them? Sorry. Does not scan."

Dude, have you listened to what BUSH HAS SAID?

You're write, it doesn't scan. Because Bush's "logic" ain't.

NTodd is right: this is not a conspiracy: it's in the goddamn NEWSPAPERS, from Bush's mouth itself!

Christ, you stink.

God Klein you are such a buffoon.

"Duncan: I'm glad you find me endlessly entertaining, but war isn't entertainment."

"But"? Uh, DOES NOT SCAN!!!

Atrios finds YOU entertaining, Klein. Not war. Since Klein does not equal war, there is no contradiction there, moron.

So YOU'RE the one who's serious about this war?

I can't stop laughing.

How do you do it, Joe? Who in god's name are you?

Some kind of wanker savant.

"you mean it works like this: Bush vetoes appropriation, then announces troops will stay longer...because the Democrats won't pay for them? Sorry. Does not scan."

Dude, have you listened to what BUSH HAS SAID?

You're write, it doesn't scan. Because Bush's "logic" ain't.

Joe, if Gates is trying to do the right thing, then why did he mourn the early leaking of this deployment extension? I don't buy his explanation, and I doubt you do either.

So, do what you do best: pontificate.

Damn it, I know the diff between 'write' and 'right'. But this comment engine is worse than Haloscan and Hitler combined.

Damn it, I know the diff between 'write' and 'right'. But this comment engine is worse than Haloscan and Hitler combined.

Re "Bush vetoes appropriation, then announces troops will stay longer...because the Democrats won't pay for them? Sorry. Does not scan."

Joe, the part you're missing is step 1: Bush says if Democrats "force" him to veto, he will have to make the troops stay longer. Bush in fact did say that (you do follow US politics and the Iraq War, right?)

Now you have an alternate theory and I'll grant you that it scans also. They're both plausible. Given the Bush administration's history, I'd say Duncan's is more likely, but who knows.

I don't think anyone takes this war as "entertainment", certainly not a few years in. Admittedly, in the early days, some of the boosters and the media coverage did make it seem like a video game.

Dear Mr. Klein, if you think Atrios thinks the Iraqi war is entertaining, you have not been a frequent visitor to his blog. If you're trying to be clever, you're not.

Joe:

Bush said, "The bottom line is this: Congress’s failure to fund our troops will mean that some of our military families could wait longer for their loved ones to return from the front lines."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/04/20070410-1.html

You're right it doesn't scan but that's because Bush is a liar and an idiot -- kind of like you. Atrios is exactly right. You have made a fool of yourself once again.

Prediction: Klein will not admit that he made a fool of himself, he'll try to spin his words some other way, like he did with "scapegoat".

Just because it does not scan does not mean that the White House and the Grand Wurlitzer won't put it out there. They have successfully put more ridiculous propaganda in play in the past.

Your Petraeus theory is interesting. Does not really relate to the issue at hand, which appears to be a straightforward attempt of Rovian dishonesty driving life-or-death policy decisions.

Kindly explain how I am wrong without insulting me, or saying, in effect, "Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time-a!"

As for war entertainment, as I remember, it was CNN, MSNBC, and the rest who played all the martial music and had the coooool graphics "back in the days of shock and awe."

Not Atrios.

Why don't your friends play the cool martial music anymore, Joe?

Why did they stop?

I realize that "war isn't entertainment" line was just a gratuitous insult, but next time apply it to someone where it might be vaguely on the mark like Max Boot and all his talk of "splendid little wars".

"If you're trying to be clever, you're not."

This snark stuff is HARD!

Joe: "Duncan: I'm glad you find me endlessly entertaining, but war isn't entertainment. I'm trying my hardest to report it out. Are you?"

Dude. Srsly. No one at Eschaton finds war funny. There are a lot of us there who are veterans. I know I am. Infantry. Tell us, Joe, where did you serve? When? Never? Even Preznit Little Bootz pretended to do the National Guard thing. Until he deserted that is. You could have been a contender! OK, not really.

Back on topic. If this is the "hardest" you can do, you need to go back to reporting on fashion or something because it's abundantly clear that you do not have what it takes to report cleanly on this war, how we got here, and what it will take to get back out. You, sir, are a buffoon. A buffoon and a tool of the Right. And people are dying because of your buffoonery.

Joe, perhaps Atrios was referring to your writing as being entertaining, and not the war itself? On the possible motive/leak issue, here's Crooks and Liars earlier today:

During his speech to the American Legion on Tuesday, President Bush said this:

The bottom line is this: Congress's failure to fund our troops will mean that some of our military families could wait longer for their loved ones to return from the front lines. Others could see their loved ones headed back to war sooner than anticipated.

On Wednesday Secretay Gates announced the Army would be doing this:

The Pentagon has announced that all active-duty Army soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan will serve three months longer than expected.

But on March 23 the House passed an Iraq spending bill that includes this:

The $124 billion legislation includes more than $100 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, plus billions more than Bush requested for combat equipment and training, for military housing and health care, to address the flaws in mental health care, brain trauma treatment and other issues that surfaced in the Walter Reed Army Medical Center scandal.

The bill would establish strict standards for resting, training and equipping combat troops before their deployment and lay down binding benchmarks for the Iraqi government, such as assuming control of security operations, quelling sectarian violence and more equitably distributing oil revenue. If progress is not made toward those benchmarks, some troops would be required to come home as early as July.

Apparently in Bush World passing a spending bill that fully funds the troops, expands funding for veterans care, demands a one year rest period and seeks to extract the troops from a civil war if the Iraqis don't meet certain benchmarks — all in record time — constitutes "failing to fund our troops" and making "military families wait longer for their loved ones to return," despite Bush's escalation strategy that sends more troops to Iraq and Secretary Gates' decision to extend their tours by three months. Paging Mr. Orwell. Mr. Orwell…

I can't wait until Joe logs in on Monday to find that the Atrios community has left 800 comments on this blog over the weekend.

You don't want to pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel, or electrons by the cubic yard.

Based on his scapegoat performance I expect to hear Klein post something like this:

Gosh you commenters are boring. I wasn't wrong about what Atrios said. Didn't you notice that I used "does not scan" to mean that Atrios is making perfect sense? You commenters are dense, unlike me the great Joe Klein. Tremble before my mighty intellect you lowly peons!

Joe, dude,
You and Duncan are *saying the same thing.*

Atrios:
Bush vetoes appropriation, then announces troops will stay longer...because the Democrats won't pay for them?
``
You:
In this case, Petraeus and Gates are doing the honorable thing: trying to complete the mission. The Bush White House, as always, is trying to undermine the mission and win the spin.
``

In other words, (I'll say this slowly, in short words) Bush is playing politics, hardball politics, using our troops as political footballs.

Helloooooo. Get a clue. You are just annoyed because Duncan wrote that he finds you entertaining, and that seems to have hurt your widdle feeewings.

"I can't wait until Joe logs in on Monday to find that the Atrios community has left 800 comments on this blog over the weekend."

Half of them will be written by Vinny while he's in his bathrobe.

Oh, goody. Can't wait for this two hundred and fifty comment exchange.

So what you're saying is that the latest deployment extensions were without WH approval -- Petraeus and Gates are basically trying to do what they are supposed to do, spin be damned? Who are the WH officials -- other than Bush -- pushing for troops to be sent home by September? Are the WH officials saying it off the record to you, or are you getting this information from sources within the DoD? Did Patreus/Gates clear this with the WH before announcing it?

Joe, what you have provided is behind the scenes news that might be worth expanding upon and raises a number of questions.

Atrios, like the rest of us mortals, don't have this information. Don't snark at him, as you are snarking at everyone -- he (and the earlier commentator) made a valid assumption based upon the WH's previous public statements. If you have information based upon your reporting, um, report it.

And no, we don't find this war particularly amusing.

Oh, goody. Can't wait for this two hundred and fifty comment exchange.

So what you're saying is that the latest deployment extensions were without WH approval -- Petraeus and Gates are basically trying to do what they are supposed to do, spin be damned? Who are the WH officials -- other than Bush -- pushing for troops to be sent home by September? Are the WH officials saying it off the record to you, or are you getting this information from sources within the DoD? Did Patreus/Gates clear this with the WH before announcing it?

Joe, what you have provided is behind the scenes news that might be worth expanding upon and raises a number of questions.

Atrios, like the rest of us mortals, don't have this information. Don't snark at him, as you are snarking at everyone -- he (and the earlier commentator) made a valid assumption based upon the WH's previous public statements. If you have information based upon your reporting, um, report it.

And no, we don't find this war particularly amusing.

Perhaps what Joke Line meant was that he couldn't find a metrical pattern in Atrios argument. Damn you Atrios for not writing blog posts in iambic pentameter!

God you're a buffoon, Klein. Its just amazing.

Joe's entertaining, but then again so is a dog eating its own vomit.

Difference is, the dog bears no responsibility for thousands of dead.

"war isn't entertainment. I'm trying my hardest to report it out."

Joe - your hardest has been pretty pathetic. Can you even provide a definitive answer why we are at war with Iraq?

Since war isn't entertainment - can you please point me to your column about the Television Correspondents' Association dinner where Bush showed slides of him looking under the desk and said “Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere.”

You know the column - the one where you took the president to task because you war isn't entertainment.

Go ahead - put the link up to the column where you wrote about how offended you were by that joke.

We'll wait.

Still waiting...

While we wait, here's a small transcript from one of your very important media appearances:

Klein: And, by the way, we're very much well liked among the young, educated Iranians. But this is not Iraq we're dealing with here. This is an ancient country, a very strong country, and a very proud country. And so, yeah, by all means, we should talk to them, but, on the other hand, we should not take any option, including the use of nuclea-....tactical nuclear weapons off the table.

Stephanopoulos: Keep that on the table?

Klein: It's absolutely stupid not to.

Stephanopoulos: That's insane.

Damm right Joe! The haters are back again, and in greaters numbers, because you linked to him. That was very foolish of you, Mr. Klein. (ha, just kidding, Joe).

Anyway, war is not entertainment, as you so eloquently said, and this is no time for laughs or cocktail parties. It certainly isn't a time for a blog to address anything other than serious issues, which is why, like you, I'm pretty sure Duncan hates America. Sometimes I tune into non-serious America-hating shows like "Hardball" or "The Chris Matthews Show" and they're laughing an awful lot. It's terrible. Luckily you are never entertaining, so you can take some comfort in that.

Keep up the good work, Joe. USA!

"war isn't entertainment. I'm trying my hardest to report it out."

Joe - your hardest has been pretty pathetic. Can you even provide a definitive answer why we are at war with Iraq?

Since war isn't entertainment - can you please point me to your column about the Television Correspondents' Association dinner where Bush showed slides of him looking under the desk and said “Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere.”

You know the column - the one where you took the president to task because you war isn't entertainment.

Go ahead - put the link up to the column where you wrote about how offended you were by that joke.

We'll wait.

Still waiting...

While we wait, here's a small transcript from one of your very important media appearances:

Klein: And, by the way, we're very much well liked among the young, educated Iranians. But this is not Iraq we're dealing with here. This is an ancient country, a very strong country, and a very proud country. And so, yeah, by all means, we should talk to them, but, on the other hand, we should not take any option, including the use of nuclea-....tactical nuclear weapons off the table.

Stephanopoulos: Keep that on the table?

Klein: It's absolutely stupid not to.

Stephanopoulos: That's insane.

So let's make a summary assessment of Swampland after its first several weeks of existence.

1) Joe Klein - pretends he was right about Iraq even though he was completely wrong. Defends a racist. Pretends "scapegoats" are actually guilty. Calls out Atrios when Atrios is just repeating what Bush said himself.

2) Jay Carney - tries to earn some Kewl Kidz points by calling out Josh Marshall on Purgegate. Oops, you really screwed the pooch on that one Jay. You done tugged on Superman's cape, son. You'll never live it down.

3) Karen Tumulty - takes a gratuitous swipe at Hillary Clinton. All of her fellow swamplanders rush to declare Semper Fi! but none of them can explain how her snarky comment was anything but a gratuitous attempt to earn a Kewl Kidz merit badge that she can show off at the next Kewl Kidz Kocktail party.

4) Ana Marie Cox - the only one of you four who hasn't made a complete fool of herself yet, as far as I've noticed, although she also defends Tumulty's gratuitous attack on Hillary without any justification.

Boy are you geniuses off to a great start or what!

Shorter Joke Line: I wish I had 1/10th of the traffic Atrios gets! It's not fair!! IT'S NOT FAIR!!!

"Damn you Atrios for not writing blog posts in iambic pentameter!"

From now on, I demand Atrios write only in haiku form.

Fool, don't forget Mike Kinsley's visit.

Look guys, let's gain a little perspective here. In the past few years, I've been just as insulted by Joe's unwarranted diatribes against liberals and undeserving praise of conservatives as the next guy. But let's cut him a teeny, tiny bit of slack. He actually deserves a fair amount of credit for becoming a blogger and trying to run with other dogs on the internets.

I mean, who else of Joe's experience and reputation in the MSM has had the courage to engage the blogosphere on terms like this? Certainly not guys like Brian Williams! The fact that he's willing to put himself out there at the mercy of commenters on such a high-profile blog is commendable. I think this is all a healthy debate and should be encouraged, even when we disagree with him.

Let's continue to challenge Joe when he's wrong or foolishly naive, but calling him names or insulting him in such a childish way could just cause him to lose his appetite for entering this arena in the first place (yeah, I know -- tiny violins and whatnot). What we need these days are more guys like him entering the public debate, not fewer. Eventually, if Joe keeps this up, I predict he may even become one of us. Just look at how much he's conceded already. Do you think he ever would have admitted his past mistakes in the pages of Time? Not likely. This blog gives him a platform to correct the mistakes of the past.

Now, just one more thing: OMG, Atrios rulez! Keep doin' what you're doin', Duncan. :)

"Can you even provide a definitive answer why we are at war with Iraq?"

Because Joe Klein and the rest of his cronies rolled over for BushCo's lies.

Cory: I have a better idea. Let's not!

Let's just call a tool a tool. A tool with a blog, is just a tool who gets to annoy people interactively.

Joe was against the surge after he was for the war:

MR. KLEIN: ... This is a really tough decision. War may well be the right decision at this point. In fact, I think it--it's--it--it probably is.
RUSSERT: Now that's twice you've said that: 'It's the right war.' You believe it's the wrong time. Why do you think it's the right war?
Mr. KLEIN: Because sooner or later, this guy has to be taken out. Saddam has--Saddam Hussein has to be taken out."

Meet The Press, March 2003

"Let's continue to challenge Joe when he's wrong or foolishly naive, but calling him names or insulting him in such a childish way could just cause him to lose his appetite for entering this arena in the first place"

I think Markos would have something to say about that...

SCREW HIM!

Grow a thicker skin. And, you know, stop writing stupid crap.

NTodd wrote:
"Half of them will be written by Vinny while he's in his bathrobe."

And what was with Brian Williams' obsession with an "efficiency apartment?" He said it 2 or 3 times in 10 seconds. That dude sure has a hardon for efficiency apartments!

"And what was with Brian Williams' obsession with an "efficiency apartment?" He said it 2 or 3 times in 10 seconds. That dude sure has a hardon for efficiency apartments!"

I noticed that. I think to him it implies Vinny is a loser. Otherwise, he'd not be blogging and have a penthouse.

Joe - I realize that what Atrios is saying does not make sense to reasonable people. But, in case you have not noticed, neither Bush nor the people who listen to him are reasonable people.

I guarantee you that Bush will say that the Democrats are responsible for the troop tour extensions, the line will be propagated by rightwing pundits, you will refuse to directly refute them, and another bizarre lie will be entered into the public discourse.

Meanwhile, you will continue to snipe at Duncan and Eric Altermann for trying to spur you into action.

Well, as I predicted, the more (shall we say) vocal among us would disagree with my appeal to focus on the issues, not name calling. But remember this: The only way to change someone's mind is to get them to see your viewpoint -- but on their terms, not yours. That means all your attacks on Joe aren't going to amount to much because he rejects the premise of your remarks in the first place. Guys like him aren't stupid, just misguided.

I know you'll flame me about this, too, but in my book, it's the mark of immaturity to call someone a petty name, whether you're right or wrong about it. Obviously it's way cooler to be flip and detached and not give a damn what the object of your ire thinks, but again, that just ain't the way to wins someone over to your side.

And just because Markos thinks something, that don't make it right. Saying "screw him" sounds pretty shrill to me.

Well said, Terrapin. I think you -- and other commenters -- are dead on about this prediction. It's a pattern that is so obvious now that it's astounding they still manage to pull it off.

And I don't know why Joe has such an obsession with Atrios and Alertmann, but he really should get over it. They're just damn smart fellas. As off the wall as both of them can be, it's amazing how often they correctly predict events better than the professional pundits.

Joe,

The "estimable" Kevin Drum does the legwork so you don't have to. Scan this:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2007_04/011128.php

He not only finds YOU (as opposed to the War) endlessly entertaining in your never ending authentication.

...and he undoubtedly finds you smug, arrogant, narcissistic, a pr**k if you will.

But, of course, he is not alone. This is a universal belief Joe. Even you believe it.

"The only way to change someone's mind is to get them to see your viewpoint -- but on their terms, not yours. "

You haven't changed my mind. Perhaps because you're arguing on your terms, not mine.

MEMO TO JOE KLEIN ON THE ASTOUNDING MEDIOCRITY OF HIS WORK

In a previous thread, I commented on Joe Klein's three main weaknesses as a columnist. His post above throws all three of these weaknesses into stark relief, so I think it is worth revisiting them, with special attention to the way in which they come together to make Joe Klein one of the most ridiculous figures in contemporary American public life.

1/ Klein is very thin-skinned. He gets angry at people who are critical of his work, and routinely accuses them of being dishonest, acting in bad-faith, etc. In the post above, Klein suggests that, whereas he is nobly "trying [his] hardest" to "report out" the war, Atrios regards the war as nothing more than a source of entertainment. Basically, Klein insinuates that Atrios is morally defective.

2/ Despite all of his posturing as a Serious Journalist "trying [his] hardest to "report it out," Klein doesn't do much actual research. He routinely operates on a fact-free basis, without bothering to gather basic information about the issues he writes about. He relies on his "gut" in ways that make him seem foolish when his gut hasn't bothered to acquaint itself with the facts.

In the post above, Klein mocks Atrios for picking up on the following speculation (in Klein's words): "Bush vetoes appropriation, then announces troops will stay longer...because the Democrats won't pay for them." Klein rolls his eyes: "Sorry. Does not scan."

Had Klein troubled himself to do thirty seconds worth of research, he would surely have been aware that Bush and assorted White House spokespeople have been promoting this talking point for over two weeks! For example -- and this is just one example of many -- consider the following excerpt from the New York Times:

[NYT QUOTE BEGINS] Bush Blames Democrats for Impasse Over Iraq Bills
By JIM RUTENBERG, New York Times
Published: April 4, 2007

Mr. Bush warned that a failure by Congress to approve the $100 billion he had requested for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would prolong some tours in Iraq and shorten time at home between tours for others. “That is unacceptable to me,” he said. “And I believe it is unacceptable to the American people.

“It’s one thing to object to the policy, but it’s another thing when you have troops in harm’s way not to give them the funds they need,” he said. [NYT QUOTE ENDS]

Because Joe Klein does not generally consider fact-gathering to be part of his job description, he was unaware of this. And so he felt free to ridicule Atrios for noting a point that had been widely reported in the nation's newspapers for a period of weeks.

3/ Klein's self-perception as some kind of deep thinking Serious Journalist is the ingredient that combines with his mediocrity to make him one of the most ridiculous figures in contemporary American public life. Here you have a profoundly mediocre fellow, grinding out profoundly mediocre work -- just abysmally shallow stuff, full of factual errors, column after column, year after year... and he thinks he's some kind of Edward R. Murrow!

"It does not scan" because nothing that comes out of the mouth of the deserting fratboy coward scans.

End of discussion.

>>I know you'll flame me about this, too, but in my book, it's the mark of immaturity to call someone a petty name, whether you're right or wrong about it. Obviously it's way cooler to be flip and detached and not give a damn what the object of your ire thinks, but again, that just ain't the way to wins someone over to your side.

Give it up, Kleinscheisse, you silly concern troll.

Joe keeps asking for a slapdown - he has proven incapable of humility and intellectual generosity. He badly needs to have the piss taken out of him on occasion. He got this way by living in an elitist cocoon of important, cool people who look out for themselves and their cronies and not the public whose interests they are employed to pursue.

As a member of the hoi polloi (oh noes, more Greek!) it is my fiduciary duty to me mates challenge people like him when appropriate. Ridicule can be a useful tool in this process, whether applied to Klein or on you.

And if you don't think Kos earned the right to say "screw 'em" in re Blackwater, step up and show your bona fides.

Because America's Concern Troll is slow:

Friday, April 13, 2007

Endlessly Entertaining

I write for my regular readers, who I assume are generally up to speed with the current events that I cover, and therefore don't feel the need to state and restate everything all of the time. So, when I suggested that the Bushies and Gates were pissed when someone in the Pentagon had prematurely leaked their deployment extension plan, something Gates acknowledged, that it was because they had intended to announce the plans and then blame the Democrats' for it, I knew that my readers would know this was a plausible theory because Bush had said:

The bottom line is this: Congress's failure to fund our troops will mean that some of our military families could wait longer for their loved ones to return from the front lines. Others could see their loved ones headed back to war sooner than anticipated. This is unacceptable. It's unacceptable to me, it's unacceptable to our veterans, it's unacceptable to our military families, and it's unacceptable to many in this country.

In other words, they were planning to implement an "unacceptable" policy and then blame the Democrats, but the Pentagon leaker made that rather difficult.

Klein seems to be operating on the bizarre assumption that Bushies want to leave Iraq early. That's really weird.

Though, of course, less weird than his belief that he is the Iraq war. Wow.

-Atrios 18:52

How many people have died since Joe Klein said "We've got to take Saddam out!?" Screaming at Eric Alterman and lying about Atrios won't change who supported the never-ending disastrous war/occupation which was launched on the basis of baldfaced whoppers and who didn't.

That Mr. Klein feels compelled to fall into his usual pattern of baiting liberals and war opponents whilst prattling on and on about how he opposes the war is indeed entertaining. If Mr. Klein really opposed the war, he wouldn't use the word "surge" and he would describe the escalation for what it is.

Joe, are you this dense on purpose?

Reeeeowr! Swampin' it up, schoolyard style.

Cory - I am with you on cutting Joe some slack. He might post something kinda off-the-cuff, and then he might get overly defensive about the criticism, and then he might...but at least he keeps coming back for it and it is my hope that after a time he will pick up a pointer or two.

At the very least he must have noticed that the conservative voices on this board are nothing but semi-literate yahoos and that the progressives (despite our grievances with him) are capable of constructive argument.

Yea I have to admit Joe: The more I read of you the more of a tool you present yourself to be. Seriously how can you possibly say that you "report" this stuff when you don't seem to listen to anything Bush and his gang are saying. It's like you are 5 yrs old or something.

Joe,

You state that Petraeus and Gates are doing the "honorable thing" and trying to complete the mission.

What is the mission anymore?

Depose Saddam? Done
Find WMDs? None to Find
Spread Democracy? How?
Establish Security? In a Civil War?
Keep the Terrorists There? It took 19 of them to pull of 9-11. Surely the terrorists can spare 19 people to attack us here.

Please, enlighten me, what is the mission of the week, it seems to change as this putrid war grinds on.

And maybe I'm stupid, but if Bush vetoes the bill, isn't it he that is rejecting the funds? Your post just does not scan. Not at all.

"are capable of constructive argument."

Any idea when we might see the constructive part? Are all the Atrios people as one dimensional as the ones we see here? It is rather embarrassing to watch people fulfill the stereotype that is being constructed about them, while at the same time pretending they are not that.

"I'm glad you find me endlessly entertaining, but war isn't entertainment."

I say we pull out of Joe Klein as soon as possible.

Well, I just finished writing to Cory about cutting Joe some slack and then I read Eric's comment above (it is long so I won't repeat it but everybody should scroll back up and re-read it).

Eric hit the nail on the head. Sometimes it seems like Joe Klein is speaking a different language.

Leaving aside everything else, the idea that Bush wants, or that circumstances could possibly exist for (given his goal of a 'stable' Iraq), any real troop withdrawal in 5 MONTHS...wow, that is delusional.

What I mean Joe is what Bushie believes that is possible? Monica Gooding?

PS--Since many readers seem to have short memories, let me repeat that I've been opposed to the surge. I stand precisely with Senators Jim Webb, Jack Reed and Chuck Hagel on this: I think our best military minds--people like Genl Petraeus--should be devoting their attention to the safest, and least disastrous, and most responsible, way out of this.

And how many of "our best military minds" did Bush FIRE to get to the Napolean of the 21st Century, General Petraeus - aka - MacArthur 2007?

Give Bush a call -he's looking for a war czar - God knows he's hired stupider people.

Enter Obtuseness

"I know you'll flame me about this, too, but in my book, it's the mark of immaturity to call someone a petty name, whether you're right or wrong about it. Obviously it's way cooler to be flip and detached and not give a damn what the object of your ire thinks, but again, that just ain't the way to wins someone over to your side."

The point is not to win someone over to our "side," the point is to (1) discredit through ridicule people with crazy and dangerous ideas, and (2) to deflate and intimidate the gasbag punditry, who have shown themselves immune to persuasion because they think they have a monopoly on "reasonable discourse" and are thus overly suseptible to cowardice in the face of easily-gamed conventional wisdom (as the "anti-war" Klein proved through his abject cowardice in the fall of 2002).

The notion that things happen in this country because reasonable people arrive at reasonable courses of action through reasonable debate is at once hopelessly naive and hopelessly arrogant.

At any rate, goading Joe Klein from the Left has certainly made him a better writer, insofar as consistently forcing him to reiterate his antiwar stance is FAR preferable to his irritating, vacuous horserace election commentary. He is one of the most easily baited pundits out there.

God Bless Joe Klein's Fragile Ego.

General Zod is correct. What is the mission? How can someone be doing the honorable thing by supporting a "mission" which no one can define? Perhaps Joe might address this as it seems rather important...

Joe,

I'm a professional journalist, and I have found it generally a pretty smart move to assume that the cleverer bloggers out there -- and Atrios is amongst the cleverest -- actually know what they're talking about.

Your post has exposed how you are willing -- nay, primed -- to jump down his throat, without even pausing to examine what he is saying.

Blogs tend to show people for what they are. In your case, your blogging has exposed your appalling smugness.

What I don't understand, when you get right down to it, is why Elite Media types like you are so predisposed against the liberal thinkers. Unlike the conservative ones, all they're asking is for you to do your job better. I for one welcome it.

"Are all the Atrios people as one dimensional as the ones we see here?"

You could click on some links and find out...

Atrios is right on this one, Joe. You make a good point, but think it through... Atrios' theorem doesn't really conflict with yours.

Petraeus and Gates are pissed that the plans for redeployment were leaked, but not for the same reasons the Bushies are.

JoKline=Scanner

actually, this was one of Joe's better posts.

The big problem is that while Duncan acknowledged that he was engaging in informed speculation, Joe stated his opinion as fact.

Joe -- your alternative THEORY is perfectly reasonable, and acceptable. But its not fact -- and instead of "What's actually happening is this" should be "What I THINK IS actually happening is this"

Also, look up "expatiate." Duncan wasn't doing it -- under either definition (he wasn't "writing at length", nor was he "wandering" in his writing--two related topics in one thread isn't expatiating)

Blog tip #62 If you are going to use "big words" that someone might not be sure they understand, use them correctly. Because if someone looks up that word to try and understand precisely what you are saying, and it turns out you used it wrong, you'll be called on it.

Joe, you silly, silly boy.

No more commenting on Dr. Black until you have sat down and read his archives, at least one years worth.

He's right, he's (almost) always been right, he will continue to be right.

Many, many people are much smarter than you, you need to just accept this.

Now you have your homework for the weekend. Go....

"I say we pull out of Joe Klein as soon as possible."

We must fight them in Joe's anus so they won't follow us here...

I'm not asking them to do their jobs.

Their jobs, obviously, are to spread the propaganda their corporate overlords want spread.

I'm asking them to be journalists, not pathetic, transparent propagandists.

"Now you have your homework for the weekend. Go...."

He already did his homework, but Karl Rove's dog ate it. So can he please still watch Rocky and Bullwinkle on Saturday morning?

Joe Klein: Reportin' it out, bitches!

Joe, aside from whatever battle you have with Duncan, can you please point me to whatever evidence you have that any of the Bushies (I assume you mean the White House crowd) want to show progress by September AND then pull any troops out at all this fall?

Gates did lay out this scenario at his confirmation hearings and subsequent comments during February when talking about the 1) time it would take to show progress; and 2) the need for the Iraqis to meet benchmarks before we could gauge if the surge was working. But all we have heard of late is that the Iraqis are missing benchmarks left and right, and that the administration is now against establishing benchmarks for them at all.

Again, I've heard nothing at all from Bush, Cheney, Rice, and especially Gates recently that holds out any possibility about troops coming out at all during his term. This would seem to be confirmed by the National Guard call-backs this week, and the reports about the five new mechanized brigades Petraeus wants to place south and east of Baghdad in the coming months.

So if you have any information that the White House wants to declare progress of any type this year so that they can pull out any troops at all, please share it with us.

Is Rocky and Bullwinkle still on?

Sweet.

""Are all the Atrios people as one dimensional as the ones we see here?""

"You could click on some links and find out..."

I have and I hate to report that it wasn't very impressive. It just seemed to be a long series of one liners, with not much meat on the bones. However, I have learned that your crew doesn't like Joe Klein. That point has been made rather clear. Are there any other points to gleam or is that about it?

paul_lukasiak - "The big problem is that while Duncan acknowledged that he was engaging in informed speculation, Joe stated his opinion as fact."

That's gold Jerry, gold!
[Bonus question: From what syndicated comedy does that line come and who said it?]

JenJen - YouYou said: "Atrios is right on this one, Joe. You make a good point, but think it through... Atrios' theorem doesn't really conflict with yours.

Petraeus and Gates are pissed that the plans for redeployment were leaked, but not for the same reasons the Bushies are."

This is good. If Joe Klein is trying to say that Patraeus/Gates allowed the leak in an effort to confound Bush then he needs to game that scenario out a little bit more. What are they trying to get from Bush by allowing the leak?

I don't understand why you're attacking atrios.

He made the observation that if the rotation change hadnt been leaked, the admin would have probably attempted to blame it on the democrats funding bill.

What about that is shallow or disingenuous?

Are you simply baiting atrios to attract readers and links?

You might try writing insightful, well researched and fact checked posts, and you'll get linked anyway.

I'm trying my hardest to report it out. Are you??

Atrios links to and writes about all the awful stuff that happens daily in the Iraq Disaster. Stuff you won't see on Fox News and the White House (and Lieberman, McCain, etc.) pretend isn't happening. Even though that's not his job.

He also thought that invading Iraq was a horrible idea and has loudly said that from the get go. And he was pretty much correct about how it would go. Go ahead, look it up.

I wonder if he invasion would have even happened if those reporters whose job it was to "report it out" had really tried their hardest to do so from the get go. Did you? How's your record? How well do you sleep at night? Who's responsible for the stop loss, under-equipped soldiers, extended tours, and overall poor management of the war? How has that been reported?

You're horrible.

please don't come and scream at us at any parties, we're just trying to do a little good here. Atrios = right, Joke Line = wrong. why are you so thin-skinned and defensive? all those years before the internets you must have just thought you were such a much. everyone loved you even when you lied about crappy primary colors or so you thought. but we didn't love you and never loved you because you are a pathetic shill for your wingnut heroes while parading as a progessive. it's actually quite stomach churning and has been for what, fifteen years that I've had you on my radar. and now you know. your bubble has been burst. it's not the people who are revolting it's you. your cocktail parties just aren't as cool anymore now that you know that the rebel kids don't envy you but think you are a liar and an evil enabler to war. you are entertaining in a don't let this happen to you kind of way. but the war, the one you helped to cheer lead, the one started by the appointed president you did nothing to stop from taking office, nobody thinks that's funny at all.

"I have and I hate to report that it wasn't very impressive. It just seemed to be a long series of one liners, with not much meat on the bones."

I'm...skeptical of your claim.

That's Dr. Black, to you.

Along with Dr. Alterman.

I was going to have a few comments on the wet-lipped dullard Joe Klein, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word "faggot," so I — so kind of an impasse, can’t really talk about Klein.

Let me see if I have this figured out:

Petraeus supported the surge, which was advertised as a 6 month increase in troop strength.

Petraeus wants to run a "classic" counter-insurgency operation, which takes years.

Petraeus stated publicly that this war cannot be won militarily, until a "coherant" Iraqi government is established.

So, the General supported a surge, knowing it was being sold as a temporary 6 month increase in troop strength, all the while knowing that a true counter-insurgency effort would take years, which is unacceptable to the majority of Americans if you read the polls, all the while acknowledging that this war cannot be won militarily, until a coherant Iraqi government is established.

A General that is willing to lie to the american people, and sacrifice more of his soldiers lives in a cause that HE HIMSELF says we can't win does not deserve anyone's respect and trust. He is in charge because he was the only General Bush could find to support his idiotic policies.

You really need to look at what you write, because it is nonsense.

Joe-who cares if you were opposed to the surge? Michael Ware of CNN supports the occupation, but is extremely skeptical of the Democrats' plan for withdrawal, and has said so on numerous occassions. At this same time, he's been an extremely honest and courageous reporter who has been more than willing to criticize the Administration and others for their blind adherence to the failed occupation strategy (for which he's been attacked in what is SOP for the wingnuts). I may have opposed the war, the subsequent occupation and the surge, but Ware's reporting forces me to realize that withdrawal is going to be a nightmare, to say the least. That's what a journalist does - presents the facts as they are and gives us his most honest take, rather than advancing talking points or proving that Democrats are wimps.

On the other hand, journalism for you seems to be about seeing how many pissing matches you can get into. You wrote a column about why Bush was a horrible president, but rushed to the blog to say that no, no, you weren't calling for impeachment! Why don't you challenge yourself and your readers: investigate all of the administration's lawbreaking, make a case for why there are solid grounds for impeachment - list all the laws this administration has broken, but then argue that neither Bush nor Cheney should be impeached? It's what you believe, and it's a tough position to hold. I think that most people feel the same way (myself not included) and would welcome reading a serious treatment of this issue. It wouldn't make anyone feel good, and is likely to piss off a number of people, but it would be thought-provoking, and isn't that the point of good journalism?

This isn't really what I set out to write. It's just depressing reading you sniping at anyone who criticizes you. You call yourself a reporter in this post. You're supposed to be made of stronger stuff; prove it. Quit making what only you think are pithy observations about media critics who are just doing THEIR jobs, and do yours.

**I'm well aware that numerous other bloggers have seriously made the case for impeachment, and that Greenwald is probably second to none in establishing the administration's lawbreaking, but Greenwald doesn't write for TIME, and isn't a member of the punditocracy.

"I'm glad you find me endlessly entertaining, but war isn't entertainment. I'm trying my hardest to report it out. Are you?"

That's got to be one of the top ten all-time most juvenile statements I've read from a major blogger.

Has there ever been a more perfect example of why blogs are driving political journalism right now?

Anyone with half a brain and not on the Bush Inc. payroll knows that Bush and Gates were going to pin the extensions on the Dems.

Seriously, Joe, have you paid attention to anything that has happened in this country over the last six years??

apropos of nothing, but...

Does anyone else find it remarkable that, despite Joe already being critiqued pretty mercilessly here the past few days, he decides to call out both Kos AND Atrios on the same day?

*************
note to Ana...

Make Terrapin a front pager... not only are his comments great, but he pays me the occasional compliment! ;)

Joe,

You have got to be kidding!

I saw a Salon reference to this theory way before the A-man typed a thing.

You are the lamest thing on the web.

well i am one vinnie that believes that bush is always about manipulating people's lives and reality to fit his demonic plans for accelerating the rapture moment...set up the democrats to take the fall for extended tours...sounds quite likely. big split between the recently appointed gates ( the good guy who rode in from iran-contra? ) and the jesoids in the white house? maybe, but more likely they are drinking from the same cup of baby blood.

so if i tie my bathrobe closed and put on some black dress socks and bass weegens can i dip this coors light soaked pizza crust in the ambrosia?

We must fight them in Joe's anus so they won't follow us here...

Sending our soldiers into the trench on such a fundamentally unsound basis is asinine and a human waste. Are we to pay for both guns and butter?

Good Lord, Klein, the cliche "leading with his chin" is cowering in a corner somewhere, babbling in amazement and horror at your obtuseness.

Joe? Try Occam's Razoe, you'll find it's on Atrios side.

The safest course with Bush has always been to assume they're bad people. Not because they're Republicans and not because they're conservatives; but because they are bad people.

Everyone's on the clue train these days, come along.

Let's see Duncan was exactly right about Iraq - the decision to go in-- the war and the aftermath and yet even at this late date the MSM thinks he 'does not scan'

I have a question why was Gates holding this information back? when was he planning to release it?

smartone, as soon as ollie north got appointed war czar.

Hey, Joe...

If you are going to enter Atrios, please use protection. We know where you have been.

I don't find Atrios's proposition "hard to scan." There may be some reason you are known as "Joke Line."

Joe Klein once wrote a book about Woody Guthrie that didn't mention the labor movement.

Joe Klein opposed the invasion without telliing anyone he opposed the invasion, and instead derided anyone who openly opposed the invasion.

Joe Klein thinks you can treat Bush's utterances as if they are honest and serious.

Don't try to pick fights with Atrios, Joe. He's smarter than you.

Mr. Klein,
When are you going to learn that Atrios has many more loyal readers than you do? But, more to the point, Atrios's loyal readers are political junkies while your loyal readers, if you have any, are somnolent fools lulled by the drone of your incoherent punditing into utter vacuity. So even if you have any readers on your own, who value your writing, they seem to be too stupid to post to defend you. YOu might want to ponder this fact.

Atrios--hundreds of active and thoughtful readers. Klein? borrowing Atrios's readers since he can't scare up any on his own.

it seems a kind of pathetic lifestyle, but its your choice.

aimai

You're like that lunatic in Gravity's Rainbow who's convinced he's WWII.

Shorter Brian Williams (from his penthouse co-op on CPW or his beach house in the Hamptons): "Let them all live in efficiency apartments!"

Efficiency apartments are cheaper to rent than a one-bedroom apartment, because every living space--the kitchen, living room, and bedroom--are all contained in one room.

Efficiency apartments are similar to studio apartments, but they are not exactly the same. Both have a single room for living and a separate bathroom. Unlike a studio, the kitchen area of an efficiency apartment is smaller. However, many use the terms "studio" and "efficiency apartments" interchangeably.

We must fight them in Joe's anus so they won't follow us here...

Shock and awe in the maw,

or

Resist the urge to surge.

Stay tuned.

Avedon: "Joe Klein once wrote a book about Woody Guthrie that didn't mention the labor movement"

Joe Klein doesn't think strumming a guitar all day long is "hard work"!

>I'm glad you find me endlessly entertaining
Mr. Klein,
Oh, my. [Insert sound of clutching pearl necklaces] Such left-wing extremist behavior.

>I'm trying my hardest to report it out. Are you?
Please remind me how many days you have been in-country. Is it as many as Mr. Michael Ware?

By the way, the grand-and-all-seeing Google answers your rhetorical question disfavorably.
"joe klein" iraq Results: 703,000
atrios iraq Results: 1,060,000

You really do love bush don't you joe? How else to explain your rantings. So tell us joe did you believe dana perino today when she told the gaggle that bush didn't know about gates plan to extend the troops until a few hours before the news leaked?

Did Joe enter Atrios by the front door or the back? Window?

Captain, do you really think that if Joe every picked up Gravity's Rainbow, he got to the end of Tyrone Slothrup?

I have some sad news to report. Joe Klein attempted entry of Atrios via a side window on the second story at approximately 6:12 pm today. He was unable to complete penetration, however. He fell on his head and broke his neck.

In a speech to the Heritage Foundation in Chicago on Friday, Vice President Dick Cheney lambasted the Democratic-controlled Congress for insisting on a war funding bill that includes a timetable for beginning the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. He called it an "unwise and perilous endeavor" by the Democrats.

"It is impossible to argue that an unconditional timetable for retreat could serve the security interests of the United States or our friends in the region," Cheney said. "Instead, it sends a message to our enemies that the calendar is their friend, that all they have to do is wait us out — wait for the date certain, and then claim victory the day after."

GOD BLESS THE USA, OUR ARMED FORCES, AND OUR VISIONARY LEADERS

""Are all the Atrios people as one dimensional as the ones we see here?""

We've been told over and over again that, when deciding what to think about Imus' racism, we have to take his admirable commitment to multiple charities into account.

Fair enough.

So before we go after Rush Limbaugh, we should know all about his charity work.

I gave it a shot, googling "rush limbaugh's charity work"

Even I was shocked to find exactly 1 hit, a critical piece.

"The Bush White House, as always, is trying to undermine the mission and win the spin."

???

Are you drunk, stupid, or both?

Good grief.

Joe UNILATERAL SURRENDER Klein has spoken!

"Are all the Atrios people as one dimensional as the ones we see here?"

Most are - some are two dimensional, some interestingly, are zero dimensional. As Joe Klein has pointed out, they all seem to hate America. Many are Canadian. A few are French. Appallingly, I think, one or two might be both.

You can't believe a word they say, since they all slavishly follow Duncan, who lives in an efficiency in Montpellier, VT which is populated by Frenchmen leftover from the Revolutionary war, with some lazy cats.

Say, Joe's right.

We should simply ignore Iran, ignore Hezbollah, ignore Hamas, ignore Syria, ignore Somalia.

That will make it all better.

Signed,

Neville Chamberpot

"I stand precisely with Senators Jim Webb, Jack Reed and Chuck Hagel..."

Where, in Cambodia, or back on your Swift Boat?

Oh, sorry.

I thought this was the BOAT PEOPLE 2004 blog.

Never mind.

April 13 (Bloomberg) -- Democratic Senator James Webb accused Republican John McCain of questioning the patriotism of those who disagree with him on Iraq and "hiding behind the troops as political justification" for a misguided policy.

"I think that John McCain has been impugning people's patriotism and I really regret that he is doing that," Webb, of Virginia, said on Bloomberg Television's "Political Capital with Al Hunt," scheduled to air today. "I'm very disappointed in him."

...

In the television interview, Webb said McCain had approached him on the Senate floor and said lawmakers should avoid the type of personal attacks that occurred during congressional debates about the Vietnam War 30 years ago.

Since that conversation, Webb said McCain has been "consistently" attacking those who disagree with him about the war.

"I don't believe it is in anybody's interest for members of the Senate to be impugning the other side's patriotism or, by the way, hiding behind the troops as political justification for what we are doing," said Webb, a former U.S. Marine.

Joe: Please show us hrough your own reporting or any other news articles that there is ANYONE in the Bush administration, or among the GOP candidates for 08, that is saying they want the troops out of Iraq anytime in 2007 or 2008, on any basis that is realistic to the civil war/sectarian gulf as it exists.

Unless you can show this and convince those of us in the voting public that whomever that might be that you find has some influence on actual policy, the you should admit that Bush won't end the war, and if the war should be ended before 2009, that the only way that will occur is if the Democrats in Congress force Bush to adopt a withdrawal policy.

If Bush can't be forced by Congress, then admit that we are no longer a republic based on democracy. We have become another Roman Empire, ruled by a dictator. You may need to review the very substantial control of the warmaking and war policy outlined in Article I of the Constitution to understand that the founders didn't want an uncontrollable Executive (King) to be created as US President.

Joe,
This is twice as embarrassing as the last post.

"...Petraeus and Gates are doing the honorable thing: trying to complete the mission."

Oh, please tell me more. What's the mission? Is it to find WMD"S? Check - completed hunt and found ZERO WMD's.

Is it to remove Saddam? Check - Saddam was captured and now is pushing up daisies.

Is it to create a democracy? Check - voting by the people and new government for the people took place in 2004.

We invaded Iraq because the state of Texas noticed that Gulf War I pulled their economy out of the toilet.

Suddenly failure W is governor and has amassed a huge "WAR chest". Wow. Amazing...I wonder how many Enron "subsidiaries" went broke donating to Chimpy?

And to think, Bush gets selected and goes to WAR with Iraq! And Halliburton gets all the no-bid contracts!

But serious Joe and the rest of the bought and paid for media ignore the painfully obvious.

"Bush vetoes appropriation, then announces troops will stay longer...because the Democrats won't pay for them? Sorry. Does not scan."

"The Democrats won't pay for them"

That actually DOES scan--it's perfect iambic tetrameter.

Mr. Klein,

I'm afraid I would have to disagree with you and point out that Atrios is dead on correct. Like so many of your wealthy, media-star colleagues you are simply out of touch with reality. Have been for some time now I'm sorry to have to point out to you. You probably need to retire, but it won't matter much because your corporate masters will only replace you with a different version of you---somebody most interested in advancing their own career and making a name for him/herself instead of reporting the news and/or providing any real insight about the events of the day to the public. It's really sad. I wish I could conclude otherwise, but really I've tried and cannot. Your coziness with the rich and powerful has turned you into one of them. You're a part of the problem Joe, but that's true of all the courtesans who work for the corporate media and report on the official doings of those who represent them. At the core of what ails our great country is the rotten carcass of a once free press, now completely enslaved by corporate ownership representing what can only be described as a gilded, capitalist version of the state owned media in the Eastern Bloc countries of yore. Here's the story you might want to keep your eye out for: Democracy is making a comeback in the USA and it gets a full head of steam the world of news and communication will be completely transformed. That means the corporate media will lose it's vaunted place at the top in favor of a journalism that prefers the truth over fantasy and that values our nation's democratic heritage far more than the bottom line.

NTodd
April 13, 2007
"I can't wait until Joe logs in on Monday to find that the Atrios community has left 800 comments on this blog over the weekend."

Half of them will be written by Vinny while he's in his bathrobe.

You pantless tart! Leave me and my bathrobe out of this!

>>Susan Geldof
April 13, 2007
""Are all the Atrios people as one dimensional as the ones we see here?""

"You could click on some links and find out..."

I have and I hate to report that it wasn't very impressive. It just seemed to be a long series of one liners, with not much meat on the bones. However, I have learned that your crew doesn't like Joe Klein. That point has been made rather clear. Are there any other points to gleam or is that about it?<<

No, I'm pretty sure you're brain is full. You may be excused now.

""Are all the Atrios people as one dimensional as the ones we see here?""

"Most are - some are two dimensional, some interestingly, are zero dimensional. As Joe Klein has pointed out, they all seem to hate America. Many are Canadian. A few are French. Appallingly, I think, one or two might be both.

You can't believe a word they say, since they all slavishly follow Duncan, who lives in an efficiency in Montpellier, VT which is populated by Frenchmen leftover from the Revolutionary war, with some lazy cats."

Oh please, they may be blinded by their anger at Joe, but they are not stupid. I won't even try to figure out what point you think you are making.

"they may be blinded by their anger at Joe"

Ouch!