Archive for May 5th, 2007

Eli’s Obsession With The Google

#2 search result for pterodactyl penis bone.

It’s always nice to be recognized.

May 5th, 2007 at 11:01pm Posted by Eli

Entry Filed under: Eli's Obsession With The Google

Dances With Tools

In case you didn’t catch Broderella’s brilliant online chat yesterday, in which he oh-so-deftly rebutted any claims that his Harry-Reid-is-as-embarrassing-as-Alberto-Gonzales column sucked flaming yak balls, here are some highlights:

Chaska, Minn.: As a political pundit how do you calibrate your perceptions on mainstream America? The reason I ask this is based on your recent columns. My guess is your views (as a lot of the Beltway punditry) is very skewed. Poll after poll validates that American values align with progressive positions on such issues as the Iraq war, abortion, Social Security and even health care. In fact, it’s not really the left-wing of the Democratic party’s views that are being subverted by the Republican agenda, but mainstream America’s views. So why keep insisting on bipartisan compromises when those views don’t reflect the wishes of a large majority of Americans? Do we really need to be held hostage to the selfish interest of a minority in this country? Because that is where we are now.

David S. Broder: …This first letter from Minnesota challenges the conventional wisdom by asserting that the country overwhelmingly supports the liberal agenda, both at home and abroad. I have to disagree. I think the country is closely balanced, with a controlling group in the center that rejects extreme positions and seeks practical solutions drawn from the agendas of both liberals and conservatives. Most Americans I meet are not ideologues of any sort; they are practical people seeking practical solutions to real challenges.

Translation: No, you’re completely wrong, and the polls are irrelevant. I only talk to people who worship the Great Purple God Of Bipartisanship as I do. Come to think of it, Broder says that most people he meets are pragmatic ideologues, but he doesn’t actually say that they disagree with the Democrats…

Baltimore: What would you say to try to regain the confidence of someone like me who has become increasingly skeptical of opinion makers like you because you have been so wrong so many times about the Bush administration and Iraq?

David S. Broder: I would urge you to view skeptically what any of us — including myself — say. We are very fallible. I certainly misjudged George W. Bush when he was a candidate, and that is not the only such misjudgment I have made. Not by a long shot.

Translation: Sorry, my bad. None of us have any idea what we’re talking about; you shouldn’t expect us to get stuff right.

New York: What is one single instance of incompetence on the part of Harry Reid that is of comparable magnitude to Alberto Gonzalez’s mismanagement of the Department of Justice?

David S. Broder: Sen. Reid is not managing a large bureaucracy, as is the Attorney General. But in his role as the spokesman for the Senate majority, he has made more egregious mistakes than I think they deserve. I continue to believe they have abler leaders in their ranks.

Translation: I got nothin’. But I’m still totally right.

Colorado: “I think the country is closely balanced, with a controlling group in the center that rejects extreme positions and seeks practical solutions drawn from the agendas of both liberals and conservatives.”

That may well be, but given that you consider the neocon Joe Lieberman to be a centrist, and your column(s) about how John McCain and Lindsey Graham were going to save habeas corpus and block torture, maybe your antenna isn’t as keen as it once was.

David S. Broder: Maybe they aren’t, but, as Rumsfeld says, you go to war with the army you’ve got. And I have only one set of antennae.

Translation: You may be right that I’m a gullible clueless idiot who accepts politicians at face value, but they still pay me to write this drivel. Does it really matter whether I get anything right?

Asheville, N.C.: You wrote in your column of April 26 that Senators in both parties (indeed, a long list of them) were dissatisfied and embarrassed, etc. about Harry Reid. What Democratic senators were on that long list? What was your source? Do you stand by what you reported in that column?

David S. Broder: Yes, I do. The senators will have to speak for themselves, but his record speaks volumes.

Translation: I got nothin’. You’ll just have to trust me, even though I’ve already admitted that I’m completely wrong about stuff on a regular basis.

Minneapolis: Why, in your view, does every member of the Democratic Caucus in the Senate disagree with your characterization of Harry Reid’s leadership?

David S. Broder: Since I would never question their motives, I have to assume that they spontaneously and simultaneously chose to express their confidence in their leader on the same day last week. I have a copy of their letter, with all the signatures, and it is going up on my wall. A semi-historic document to pass on to the grandchildren, as a testament to what a dope their grandfather was. I love it.

Translation: Dude, I trolled the fucking Senate! How awesome is that? It’s like a Concern Troll Lifetime Achievement Award!

Anonymous: Your anti-Reid column was thoroughly unconvincing. It struck me as a rather desperate attempt to maintain your “pox on both their houses” shtick, the other side of your ever-present “bipartisanship is the answer” coin. Why is it so hard for you to admit that Bush is, in fact, a uniquely bad president who has led the Republican party into a ditch that no blue-ribbon commission of respected elder statesmen from both parties can save us from?

David S. Broder: Perhaps because I have come to have deep respect for the wisdom of the American people, who, in 2004, chose to reelect George W. Bush as president. I have been very critical of his policies, economic, diplomatic and military. But I am unwilling to assume that I am so much smarter than the voting public that I will dismiss as worthless someone they have chosen as president of the United States.

Translation: I promise to give any elected president a free pass from now on, no matter how badly they fuck up. They don’t pay me to be smart or perceptive, in case you hadn’t noticed.

Washington: Could you please, for those of us who missed it, give us three or four concrete examples of what Senator Reid has done that were big mistakes? I, for one, do not count his saying that if we continue on with out current policy in Iraq that the war is lost, but for the sake of argument that can count as one.

David S. Broder: I am not engaged in a continuing campaign against Sen. Reid, so I will not repeat the examples cited in my column of instances in which he has apologized for his words or put his colleagues into a position where they must devise labored explanations of his remarks. The record is there for you to judge.

Translation: I learned this dodge from Scott McClellan. Pretty slick, eh?

Washington: Other than yourself, who are the best columnists in the business today?

David S. Broder: I have a great fondness for my colleagues at the Post such as Eugene Robinson and E.J. Dionne, Jr. And I am a big fan of David Brooks at the New York Times.

Translation: I have to work with the first two guys, but the columnists I really love are fake-centrist concern trolls like myself who tell the Democrats that the only way they can survive is by going along with everything the Republicans want.

Little Rock, Ark.: “But I am unwilling to assume that I am so much smarter than the voting public that I will dismiss as worthless someone they have chosen as president of the United States.”

Did you have these thoughts when it came to Bill Clinton?

David S. Broder: Yes.

Translation: I am a big fat liar.

3 comments May 5th, 2007 at 12:12pm Posted by Eli

Entry Filed under: Media,Wankers

Contact Eli



Most Recent Posts




May 2007
« Apr   Jun »

Thinking Blogger

Pittsburgh Webloggers

Site Meter

View My Stats *