Doggedly searching for the crux of the biscuit.
If you have sense enough not to spend time mucking around in the sewer that is the right-wing blogosphere, you probably missed the latest frenzied circle jerk. Fortunately, Jon Swift is there to sum it all up for you, complete with handy reference links. I really should set up an f-key to insert the text "you'd think they'd get tired of being 100% wrong about everything, but you'd be mistaken".
The posts that cracked me up the most were the "semiotic" analyses. I've read semiotic analyses, I've performed semiotic analyses, and any analysis that fails to be at least thirty times longer than the original text is no semiotic analysis. Also, you must use the use "prolepse."
Posted by: Jackmormon at July 27, 2007 05:27 PMStill batting 0.001.
When did they get a hit? I missed it. Was it a single or a home run?
Posted by: Brock Landers at July 27, 2007 05:52 PMThe Dan Rather thing should have been ruled an error, but it was scored an infield single. The batter then won the MVP award.
Posted by: Cangrejero at July 27, 2007 05:59 PMI sent this to Labs asking him to post about it. I figured he'd go into a proper froth.
I swear to god, everyone linked in Swift's article should be banned from ever touching a keyboard again as long as they live.
Posted by: bitchphd at July 27, 2007 07:57 PMBut Ms. phd...what fun would we all have then? They actually give credence and justification to our existence. :)
Posted by: Mr. Sticky at July 28, 2007 03:49 AMI mean, beyond the "giving rise to the next generation" thing.
Posted by: Mr. Sticky at July 28, 2007 04:31 AM"touching a keyboard again" s/b "procreating or being allowed around children"
Posted by: M/tch M/lls at July 28, 2007 09:36 AMWhen I read at the top of the page...
"I am a reasonable conservative who likes to write about politics and culture. Since the media is biased I get all my news from Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and Jay Leno monologues."
I decided I wasn't in the mood for extra silly, stoopid shit today...
Posted by: Joel at July 29, 2007 03:06 PMAah, crap, I should have said "even if he made some of it up", not "even if he made all of it up", since the New Republic says Beauchamp's fellow soldiers verified 2 out of 3 of his claims (even though the Army's own investigation found the claims to be false).
For the sake of argument, let's assume that the Army investigation is complete BS. Still, Beauchamp has now admitted to the New Republic that he and his unit met, and mocked, the disfigured woman in Kuwait, before they ever set foot in Iraq.
So maybe they were desensitized as a result of ordinary military training, not as a result of the horrors of war. A key difference, as that necon wingnut Shakespeare's Sister has pointed out in the above-linked post.
Posted by: Gaijin Biker at August 4, 2007 05:27 AMIt seems Beauchamp's story is now moving into the all-too-familiar category of "fake, but accurate"
Considering that the same folks regurgitating this spoonfed talking point said Beauchamp didn't exist a couple weeks ago, I'm pretty sure this wingnut narrative is full of shit, too.
Posted by: Stu at August 4, 2007 09:38 AM