Because everybody knows there’s no casual racism or misogyny on the right.
I went over to Althouse’s and wrote a number of insanely offensive comments, but everyone started agreeing with me before I could declare “April Fools’!” Please ignore comments in which someone talks about trading in white women for Filipina because the former can’t be trained; calls strangers “cunts” in front of their kids or justifies calling strangers “cunts” in front of their kids on account of “Alinksyite incivility collapsing into mutual incivility”; sings about it being “time to give the country to the darkies” or advocates that popular means good; claims that there were tea bags at the Boston Tea Party or blames the firing of Don Imus on “the Progressive Jews and the non-Jewish Left” because they were all written by an undercover agent in it for the lulz.
Those good folks only wrote those terrible things because I baited them.
Update. You Althouse people really aren’t very bright. To anyone who thinks that I actually wrote the comments paraphrased above, I suggest you click here and enter my last name into the “Instructor” field. I’ll wait … so are you really ready to accuse me of writing that? I’m only asking because, unlike Althouse, who has tenure and can misbehave as she pleases, I’m a lowly lecturer who, if he steps out of line, will be fired on the spot. Ann has the IP addresses of the people who left those comments and knows that it wasn’t me.
If she insists on lying, I can’t afford to prove her wrong in a court of law; however, I’m willing to put my name and career on the line and proclaim, in no uncertain terms, that I didn’t write the racist comments I mocked her for brooking on her blog. She can’t be fired for besmirching her university in public like this, but if I’m lying, I can be dismissed with two snaps from an irate bureaucrat. So in the interests of truth, I demand that should Althouse insist on claiming that I wrote those comments, she publish the IP addresses of the authors of the comments I linked to. If they all resolve to Corona, California, I’ll exit the internet for life.
Well, yeah. Of course. If there’s one thing Andrew Breitbart knows and understands really, really well is the intersectionality of racism and how it adversely affects white people. The whole racist socio-cultural-economic structure is predicated on the black man being able to offend the sensibilities of the white man with his very being. I thought that was common knowledge.
Too much crap to wade through over there, although I did like Althouse wondering whether someone who had photoshopped a misspelling onto a teabagger’s sign was liable for a defamation lawsuit.
She never fails to provide the lulz.
You better be careful or you will be new evidence of liberal fascism.
Those numbnuts at Althouse think you wrote some or all of the comments you linked to, so a clarification might be in order.
I left a comment over there, we’ll see what they do. Honestly, though, I can’t believe she’d be that stupid. I mean, as you wrote over there, I wasn’t being subtle, what with including the links and all.
Typically, they’re all claiming tonight that they knew it was a joke all along. This is what got to me this week: Althouse is double-quick to label a simple factual observation that Sarah Palin is an imbecile “misogyny.” But what was Divine Ann’s reaction to the story of Phoebe Prince, the Mass. 15-year-old bullied into suicide? I paraphrase, but it’s close: the little whore got what was coming to her.
Sick, even by the elevated standards of the Althouse Echo Chamber.
Unless I’m missing something all of the linked comments have been deleted.
Nope, she just broke the links. If you hit “Older,” they’re still there. I’ve got screen-shots of them, though, and if she does delete them, I’ll upload them.
You know, for the lulz.
Althouse’s site has never had links to comments that worked properly. I don’t think there was any attempt to break links.
I should’ve known better than to assume competence, but what can I say? It’s Week One of the Spring Quarter, and every single one of my students is going to earn an “A” … because, in all honesty, this man is why I went into teaching.
Please upload ‘em when you get a chance. At least a portion of Althouse psychosis is a frightening need for blog hits – I try not to visit the vortex of chaos and dumb.
I can’t believe you dragged us into the Authouse. I have had similar experiences baiting right wingers. Whenever I think we have reached the bottom, I find bottom-feeders even lower.
You posted as Chase. Here is a response:
I see a LOT of comments criticizing Chase; just search Chase on that Althouse page.
In short: Chase is bullshitting and posters here are accepting it without checking the evidence.
KenB, how do you know SEK was the author of the Chase post? If you reread the OP on this thread, slowly, you’ll see that he is claiming no such thing here, and indeed has posted to Ann’s follow-up thread that he was not the author of any of the posts he linked to. But perhaps you have independent evidence that it was him.
Also, the posters defending Chase easily outnumbered those criticizing him.
Commenters here are accepting a whole lot without checking evidence just because the initial claim goes along with their prejudices.
I don’t get the joke. How is this even an April Fools prank? It’s just the normal business of pointing out how superior one is.
And Tom says “I paraphrase but it’s close” and comes with a vile misrepresentation of a lengthy discussion. No one so much as even implied that the bullying of the suicide victim was “just what she deserved” or remarked on her virtue. Sometimes I think that liberals just love the excuse to utter the forbidden words.
Does it give a little frisson of excitement to do it once you’ve given yourself permission on account it’s not what you think after all, but those awful other people?
That whore got what she deserved… it’s forbidden to say those things and therefore so… sweet?
And the permission to say nasty things about Palin is sweet too. Anyone else and it would be misogyny. But she’s an approved target.
Because you don’t like her.
Concern troll: still very concerned! (And trying to wave the bloody shirt of misogyny in the process. Never mind what Althouse herself has had to say about Jessica Valenti or Hillary Clinton, of course.)
Why is it misogyny to point out that Sarah Palin is a fucking moron?
Because she’s their moron.
“Sometimes I think that liberals just love the excuse to utter the forbidden words.”
q.v. SEK on Nolte.
Definitely an Althouse poster. Clueless.
Or possibly just older than junior high.
Oh, snap.
Doghouse Riley had a great post on right-wing racism. I made some footnotes for it here. Ann’s readership definitely fits in with the party Riley describes. The sad part is that if I hadn’t been paying close attention to the comments, I wouldn’t have thought any of those were particularly extreme for a right-wing site.
Her latest line of defense seems to be that ‘Chase’ isn’t one of the regulars. Oops.
OK, I know I’ll be excoriated or excommunicated for this, but …. Just what did SEK do? Did he or did he not write, for instance, the Filipina post? Or is that post a paraphrase of someone else’s post? And whether he wrote the original(s) or not, how does that make the IP address of the *poster* not his own?
I’m very confused.
And whether he wrote the original(s) or not, how does that make the IP address of the *poster* not his own?
I suppose it’s possible that one of those commenters lives in my apartment, but if so, they’ve done a damn fine job of hiding these many months.
The posts in question were written by Althouse commenters: SEK made a joke about how he’d written them to be provocative. The Filipina post, for example, was written by someone who’s been posting on the internet — and talking about his docile Filipina wife — for years: he’s an identifiable person, and clearly not SEK.
He linked to genuine comments, pretending to admit he had been an agent provocateur, which led to Althouse blaming SEK for ruining the sanctity of her principled centrist Algonquin Round Table.
Thanks! I thought that was what was going on, but to be honestly I wasn’t sure.
I don’t see the links, just posts such as the ‘teabag defining to kiddies’ post. I really don’t want to wade through those hundreds of comments – can you point me in the right direction and I’ll shut up?
Here are shots of a few: one, two, three, four.
All right, I think it has finally gotten through. Your post was not at the Authouse, it was *here*, and the links were *here*. I’ve been looking for a post by you, on the Authouse comments. Consider me p*wned.
FWIW, IMHO p*wning wingnuts is like trying to teach a pig to sing. You know, the kind of thing Bobo Wens does during the dark hours.
I’m not surprised they’re confused. According to Ms. Annevino Veritas the only place you can find racist messages are on kids’ pajamas in campaign ads. And onion rings are sexist.
If you can read that shit and not walk away, you really will believe anything you read.
Scott, I’m actually not sure that Althouse has the commenters’ IP addresses. Back in the day Blogger didn’t automatically provide these to the blog proprietor (and even in the case of a threatening post, wouldn’t provide the IP address without a subpoena).
Maybe that’s changed with one of their updates, though.
Fair enough; however, that doesn’t change the fact that I wasn’t Mr. Subtlety with this post. Also, I see she hasn’t posted this morning, so despite abundant evidence to the contrary, she may be capable of shame.
Wait, what’s that? She’s claiming to be superior because she doesn’t delete racist and misogynist tripe? Never you mind, then.
Never you mind.
She’s probably just sleeping off last night’s box-o-almaden. I fell for your joke, but it is actually worse that those are real. Some Authouse denizens are really sick, twisted little people.
Absolutely you’re right that it’s obvious enough; I’m just footnoting.
Well-played, instructor. Well-played indeed.
We are going to find out who you are and we are going to get you fired.
Look at the top of the blog. His CV is just a click away. Dumbshit.
I doubt very much that Paul knows what “CV” means.
But what does SEK’s constant velocity joint have to do with anything?
Winner!
I received an email recently from an irate commenter who threatened to figure out who I was and out me. The email address he sent it to? My regular one, i.e. my-three-names-squished-together-without-dashes. I’m sure some day he’ll sleuth me out.
…or not. [still laughing]
Damn you, Scott Eric Kaufman of the University of C********* at I*****, if I ever find out what your name is and where you work, my vengeance will be unleashed with the white-hot fury of a thousand tea parties!
…unleashed with the white-hot fury of a thousand tea
partiesbaggings!There, fixed that for you.
The people posting on her blog are still clueless.
They don’t understand that Scott was riffing on the recent claim that racists at the health care protests were liberal “agent provocateurs.”
Sigh.
Subtlety isn’t lost on them so much as it’s driven out of town by people brandishing barrels of tar and pillowcases full of feathers.
Right. THOSE are the ones that are clueless.
“I went over to Althouse’s and wrote a number of insanely offensive comments, but everyone started agreeing with me before I could declare “April Fools’!””
Where in the world do those clueless people get the idea that he wrote a number of insanely offensive comments? Stupid clueless people.
See what I mean? Even after it’s been explained veeery slowwwly they still don’t get it.
Meeep Meeep.
They’re just entertaining the possibility that SEK’s post above is itself a false-flag operation. Those socialists are tricksy!
Yeah, at this point, SEK and the commenters have been about as subtle as a punch in the nose.
And still the Authousers are confused.
Please remind me…
Which political party favored slavery?
Which political party enacted Jim Crow laws?
Which political party hates Israel?
Oh, that’s right…the Democrats.
Keep obfuscating, kids. It’s amusing.
Which political party hates Israel?
Wait, I know, I know…THIS one!
http://www.americannaziparty.com/
You forgot to mention our continued love and idolization of Robert Byrd, Jessie Jackson’s Hymietown comment, and our starting WWI, WWII, the Korean War, and Vietnam.
We Democrats have a lot to answer for.
I used to be a Democrat, but ever since SEK pretended that he had posted comments on Althouse’s blog I’ve been upset about Chappaquiddick!
Seriously, any idiotic “but the Republicans were totes more liberal on race in 1875!” post that fails to mention Robert Byrd…FAIL.
The “Democrats hate Israel” was a nice touch, though. It’s true, no Democratic President or Congress has ever voted to send economic aid or weapons to Israel, and Lyndon Johnson’s support for Egypt, Jordan and Syria in 1967 nearly turned the tide of the Six Day War.
You’re in luck. Doghouse Riley had a post up yesterday that addressed nearly the same things.
Also, you should mention that Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. Or something.
Please remind me…
Forget reminding me, someone teach me what the democrats have done for the black community the last 30 years.
High dropout rates?
High rates of violence?
High rate of abortions?
High rate of single-parent families?
My turn to remind you… every time a black person talks about slavery he is talking about what the democrat/dixiecrat party did to the black race.
Lessee…last thirty years?
1980 Jimmy Carter (D), President
1981-1989 Ronald Reagan (R), President.
1989-1993 George H. W. Bush (R), President.
1993-2001 Bill Clinton (D), President.
2001-2009 George W. Bush (R), President.
2009-2010 Barrack Obama (D), President.
So having a Republican in the white house 20 out of the last 30 years is central to your point, I suppose.
Too lazy to look up which party controlled Congress for the most years during that period, so go knock yourself out if that floats your boat.
And, yes, I am sure that
Shelby Steeleall of your black friends define slavery as the cruel oppression they have suffered under the yoke of their cruel Democratic representatives.Voting rights act. pushed through by a guy named Johnson; Civil Rights Act of 1964, ditto; guy named Nixon got himself re-elected twice promising white folks that he wouldn’t pursue enforcement of the fair-housing laws and school integration.
Shall we continue?
Which political party did the Dixiecrats leave in order to become Republicans after the civil rights legislation that Democratic President LBJ urged Congress to pass was, indeed, passed?
(Hint: Trent Lott, who said that we wouldn’t have all these problems today if the Dixiecrat candidate for President was elected in 1948, is a member of that party.)
That should have been “not a member of that party”. That’ll teach me to type too fast…
Yeah, what Dave3544 said.
There’s always hara-kiri…
Wait…Althouse herself — in a separate post! — was not only completely oblivious to the non-subtle humor but made fun of somebody else for interpreting it correctly? Jeebus.
Now she’s going after Language Log for writing “Muphry’s Law.” In order to do this, she had delete the link to “Muphry’s Law” because, damn it, even if Liberman isn’t stupid, someone other than her will be mocked today.
If you do Blogger in the HTML edit mode your text won’t include links. It’s Charity to Althouse Eve!
But if you’ve used Blogger for more than a week, you know that pasting text should be done in compose mode to preserve formatting and HTML, so the only reason not to is to strip out formatting or because you didn’t notice there was an explanatory link there…. malice or stupidity? Either works.
I’d go the opposite and say you should use HTML edit to remove formatting and remove HTML unless context demands. Obviously in this case, um, FAIL.
They’ll never forgive Byrd for renouncing the Klan back in the middle of the last century.
Althouse did not go after anyone for “Muphry’s Law”. She pointed out the irony of criticizing spelling errors whilst making one. SEK, you are just being intellectually dishonest about this. But my standard challenge applies here: read her post in full yourself and see if SEK is playing loose with the truth.
Read the post “in full” myself. “Muphry’s Law? Muphry’s Law? Ha!” And the comments about kissing black ass were priceless.
KenB, since you don’t seem to be too bright, let me explain:
She pointed out the irony of criticizing spelling errors whilst making one.
“Muphry’s Law” is not misspelled. That is all.
Once again you are dishonest. It is quite plain that neither Althouse nor most people troll the underbelly of the internet enough to recognize that odd and UNLINKED allusion. I admit I did not.
Let’s agree: I did not see one blog post on the internet and that proves I am “not too bright”. You bullshit about what you did or did not do — see SEK’s latest on Althouse and that proves you are “not too honest.”
Dude, you have to work to be this stupid: Althouse dishonestly didn’t include the link that is included in the Language Log post. Go over there, you’ll see that it’s the same one I’ve put in two comments already.
Why do you lie? The term was clearly linked yet you say it’s UNLINKED.
Why do you serve the father of lies? Why do you do the work of Satan?
The irony ids already being pointed out by the term “Muphry’s Law>” Google it. So she’s either being ironic about irony, or just plain stupid.
Wow. Meta-stupidity. We really are in a post-modern environment.
[...] has devoted another post to figuring out my previous one because, according to her, it contained “strange levels of complexity.” It [...]
This is why we call them teabaggers, they self identify!
Keep up the good work.
boc
Geez, SEK. I can’t say I thank you for directing my attention to Althouse’s place. It’s really pretty stunning stuff. One tends to forget. I’m not sure if that’s a bad or a good thing.
Post and thread very satisfying.
Except that practical jokes suck when the butt of the joke refuses to understand the joke, no matter how detailed the explanation.
I went over to Althouse’s and wrote a number of insanely offensive comments
When you can’t find what you’re looking for, make it up yourself. Kudos.
To anyone who thinks that I actually wrote the comments paraphrased above,
You said you did. Oh well, one of you SEKs is lying.
too stupid to live
Technically, I suppose I did lie, the same way I do when I say, with a straight face no less, something like “Nothing would make me happier than to see the Yankees repeat this year.” Because I don’t! I’m lying! I’m a lying liar who lies!
Why lie about doing something offensive?
When I lie, it’s about me being the best looking guy in town, not the person that expressed myself in an offensive manner.
Was that one of those blogging under the influence posts?
Say, can you prove it wasn’t you that wrote what you said you wrote before you said you didn’t. Just askin’.
Absolutely too stupid to live.
You did note that the point of the post was to point out the absurdity of the idea that sites like Althouse’s have agents provacateurs/mobies that write stupid and racist things to make the usual not-at-all-stupid-and-not-at-all-racist contributors look stupid and racist, didn’t you?
Maybe you do need mobies. You don’t seem smart enough to follow a train of thought on your own.
Why lie about doing something offensive?
It’s 1) funny, and 2) undermines the new conservative nonsense that all offensive commentary on their sites comes from liberal plants. As is obvious to, well, everyone one but you, that was the point.
Say, can you prove it wasn’t you that wrote what you said you wrote before you said you didn’t. Just askin’.
See the update, then ask yourself whether I could’ve left all those comments given where I was at the time they were left.
Also, you know, use common sense.
I entered your last name on your link.
I must be stupid, I don’t see how that proves you didn’t write it. Don’t you have access to a laptop or current model cellphone? Or maybe comments like that be written from Corona?
Or is your argument “I’m a professor so I can’t do it?” Wasn’t that the same argument that Professor Kerri Dunn @ claremont college used when it came out she staged her own “hate crime” a couple years back?
This is the internet version of VP Cheney’s 1% solution: if there’s the remotest possible chance that a liberal is to blame, we must assume that is the case. That you might have been teaching at the time is no barrier; that the comments noted were written by people (though I use that term loosely) with independent identities and even existences; that there’s an entirely consistent logic to the satire you perpetrated which requires that the comments not be written by you; none of that is really proof of innocence, because you’re a liberal.
would you like a larger shovel to help you dig this hole?
I must be stupid,
Go no further. You’ve summed it up nicely.
This is the internet version of VP Cheney’s 1% solution: if there’s the remotest possible chance that a liberal is to blame, we must assume that is the case.
You mean like those black congressmen lying about being called “nigger” 15 times and being spit on. I guess the lack of proof is making liars out of them. Strange that all those cameras and not 1 single incident made it to video.
Did you find it strange that congressman Emanuel Cleaver had his office release a press statement that he was spit on and then said he never spoke to anyone about it? Why did a democrat congressman lie? Why are you more concerned about a private citizen (althouse) than a person with much more power then she has. Back in the old days, liberals were against “the man,” stood up for those that didn’t have the power. My how times have changed.
That you might have been teaching at the time is no barrier;
How is that a barrier? My girlfriend is a 3rd grade teacher, if I email her at 11:00 to tell her my plans for the evening changed, she will usually reply within 15 minutes.
People I work with/for, some of them are professors. If I email them during school hours I’ll get a reply within minutes.
Thus, because of my life experience with teachers/professors I know they have access to the internet and this excuse is gibberish.
that the comments noted were written by people (though I use that term loosely) with independent identities and even existences;
So how many people actually confessed to writing it?
that there’s an entirely consistent logic to the satire you perpetrated which requires that the comments not be written by you;
Didn’t we learn from the new yorker satire incident that liberals are not comfortable with satire, even when it comes from a liberal magazine.
Didn’t don imus use the satire/joke excuse regarding his nappy headed hos comment. Why is it liberals play the “I was only joking” excuse when caught.
none of that is really proof of innocence, because you’re a liberal.
If a “teabagger” admitted he did something offensive and then said he was only joking, would you believe him?
Maybe someone smarter than me can explain why if SEK is so concerned about losing his job which unlike althouse SEK doesn’t have tenue, why would he do something stupid enough that he would even have to bring into the conversation that SEK could lose his job. It sounds like SEK is trying to make people feel sorry for him as an excuse.
It appears that every day is April Fools’ Day for Althouse’s commenters.
Same Anonymous Guy: there’s a well known story that returning Vietnam veterans were spit on upon their return. So far as I know, there’s no proof that such a thing ever happened. Would you argue against this story with as much vigor as you argue against the stories in re: black congressmen?
How is that a barrier?
I tell my students that they can expect a 24-hour turnaround on email. That’s normal. Abnormal? Responding to email while I teach.
Someone smarter than you would not be hard to find. SEK’s comment about losing his job was (get ready for it…) a joke. It differs from Imus’ “nappy-headed ‘hos” outburst in that a) it it free of racism; b) it has a larger context; and c) it’s actually amusing.
I’m only adjunct faculty, but I assure you, I do not interrupt one of my lectures to check my e-mail. Email me during a time when I’m working and you’ll get a response when I’ve stopped. You might want to spend more time with gainfully-employed people.
The various comments at Althouse’s were written by people who have a track record of commenting there and who, in at least one instance, are commenting there still. They were not made up for the first of April; they existed, and commented, prior to SEK’s calling them out. You could, as they say, look it up.
You mean like those black congressmen lying about being called “nigger” 15 times and being spit on. I guess the lack of proof is making liars out of them.
Everyone quoted in this article is a liar.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/3457015
Strange that all those cameras and not 1 single incident made it to video.
This video is lying.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/28/congressman-spit-on-by-te_n_516300.html
Did you find it strange that congressman Emanuel Cleaver had his office release a press statement that he was spit on and then said he never spoke to anyone about it? Why did a democrat congressman lie?
Lies, lies, lies, yeah.
http://voices.kansascity.com/node/8452
These damn liberals and their lying press releases. Will their perfidy never end?
http://hiphopwired.com/2010/03/29/video-shows-tea-party-protester-spitting-on-black-congressman-video/
Good grief.
Dear Same Anonymous Guy,
SEK didn’t write those comments. He really didn’t. You need to believe him here. He was mocking the commenters at Althouse’s place, yes — mocking them for their callous offensiveness — and that is by some lights rude, but the point is that he didn’t write them. People who participate in Althouse’s blog did.
If you yourself find the comments offensive, call them out there. SEK didn’t do it.
there’s a well known story that returning Vietnam veterans were spit on upon their return. So far as I know, there’s no proof that such a thing ever happened. Would you argue against this story with as much vigor as you argue against the stories in re: black congressmen?
You’re talking about something that happened 40 years ago. Things have changed.
I don’t believe the troops came home with the intentions of proving that they were going to be treated badly by fellow Americans, unlike what the black congressmen had hoped for.
1. The media wasn’t recording the walk of the troops past the protesters like the media did with the black congressmen.
2. The troops weren’t carrying recording devices to record how badly they were going to be treated like were being carried by the entourage of the congressmen.
3. The troops didn’t intentionally take a path past the protesters like the black congressmen did.
I’ve heard the spitting story before from veterans. Just because they served doesn’t mean they can’t lie, but why would they lie. Unlike SEK and his gotcha game, the veterans were actually sacrificing for their country, to them it was a very personal issue and not some political hackery.
If you believe that the tea party is about racism, then you are clearly able to see the evil/hate that man is capable of, why don’t you believe that people that hated the war/troops wouldn’t spit?
And what is the “reason” it couldn’t have happened? Because it was made up to discredit the anti-war movement? LOL
And the biggest difference, 40 years later we have the proof that the black congressmen lied. Do you have the proof the veterans lied?
Because in The Same Anonymous Guy’s world “No recorded proof of what people on Left say = Proof it didn’t happen”, but “No recorded proof of what people on the Right say = it happened, you lousy commie pinko.”
40 years later we have the proof that the black congressmen lied
Wait. We do? What proof is that? Are you saying that an absence of evidence (in the form of videos or photos) is an evidence of absence (of the spitting)?
I don’t believe the troops came home with the intentions of proving
What’s your basis of evidence, apart from your belief? As for your pious yammering about the troops and sacrifice and blah blah blah: you do know that there was a draft on? And that the draft requires a rather more complex reading of troops’ motives than what you present here?
At any rate, apart from this possible evidence, apart from the fact that you’re just a dittohead, the fact is that you’re making an apples and oranges comparison.
There were I don’t know how many thousands of veterans returning from the Vietnam war over a period of a decade, many of which were years in which there was a large, well-publicized antiwar movement. And yet there’s no photographic evidence of any spitting incidents?
On the other hand, you have a single incident with tens of congresspeople. One incident.
You see the problem?
I mean, apart from the below, from Prodigal:
“Because in The Same Anonymous Guy’s world “No recorded proof of what people on Left say = Proof it didn’t happen”, but “No recorded proof of what people on the Right say = it happened, you lousy commie pinko.””
You want proof that the spitting on Vietnam Veterans thing is a myth?
Okay: read this and this.
If you’re able to recognize what I’m up to here, you can thank this professor for doing that pedagogy thing he does.
SEK didn’t write those comments. He really didn’t. You need to believe him here. He was mocking the commenters at Althouse’s place, yes — mocking them for their callous offensiveness — and that is by some lights rude, but the point is that he didn’t write them. People who participate in Althouse’s blog did.
So let me get this straight…
Some professor has nothing better to do in life than go around claiming he wrote something just to mock people he doesn’t agree with politically?
Wow. This just goes to show how stupid I really am. I always thought professors were people to look up and admire, because of their education they were above this kind of petty behavior.
No no: you admire them because they can write sentences in English when you cannot.
you admire them because they can write sentences in English when you cannot.
Thank you.
Some will find it petty. Others will think that he was trying to embarrass Althouse and/or her commenters into taking a look at themselves
When it becomes partisan politics it becomes petty. It becomes more mocking (like acknowledged above) instead of helpful.
Go no further. You’ve summed it up nicely.
-
A more succinct summary of this thread I cannot imagine
I might be stupid, but you’ve pointed out twice I’m real good at that summarying stuff.
I believe the word you’re reaching for is “summarizing”.
It depends on your perspective, Some Anonymous Guy. Some will find it petty. Others will think that he was trying to embarrass Althouse and/or her commenters into taking a look at themselves, the remarks they make, the things they champion or denounce. If they do that with a clearer eye, they might well be ashamed of some of the things that are said there. That’s the point.
he was trying to embarrass Althouse and/or her commenters into taking a look at themselves, the remarks they make, the things they champion or denounce. If they do that with a clearer eye, they might well be ashamed of some of the things that are said there. That’s the point.
Does this mean you believe shaming someone into changing their behavior is successful?
Do you mind if I ask if you have kids? If so, do you practice the same shaming concept to teach them?
Does this mean you believe shaming someone into changing their behavior is successful?
I believe that shaming people who should well be ashamed can work sometimes, yes.
I believe that shaming people who should well be ashamed can work sometimes, yes.
Ouch.
If someone writes/does something they are not ashamed of, doesn’t that mean in their mind they believe it to be the right thing?
Wouldn’t shaming them have the reaction of them being less receptive to learning?
How many times has shame helped you learn something?
If someone writes/does something they are not ashamed of, doesn’t that mean in their mind they believe it to be the right thing?
Actually, no. People do things without considering them; they haven’t necessarily made a considered judgment. They haven’t necessarily viewed the matter from more than one perspective. So while they may not, at first blush, be ashamed of what they do or say, they may upon being presented with alternative perspectives decide that they actually were not right. Or they may decide to temper their words or behavior.
This is pretty basic, it seems to me.
There’s a significant difference between the child-raising that you mention, and the case of blog commenters: the latter are not children, one assumes.
How many times has shame helped you learn something?
A few times. It’s not easy to change perspectives, not by a long shot.
we’re getting pretty far afield here anon. could you just admit that you guys got it wrong and go back from whence you came. your attempts to “exit on a high note” by “winning” some sort of argument are stale. we have all learned a valuable lesson about april fools’ day.
How many times has shame helped you learn something?
Offer void where commenters are shameless, or incapable of learning.
Wouldn’t shaming them have the reaction of them being less receptive to learning?
What kind of soft-headed Deweyan criminal-coddling “progressive” are you?
This just goes to show how stupid I really am.
A more succinct summary of this thread I cannot imagine.
“Some professor has nothing better to do in life than go around claiming he wrote something just to mock people he doesn’t agree with politically?”
And you’re giving althouse a pass on this exact same behavior why, exactly?
Erm. General note: the default threadedness of the comments here makes it difficult to notice recent contributions. I’m not seeing a way to unthread, as it were, and view comments in chronological order. Possibly newer comments escape notice.
All of which is to say: Same (sorry I called you Some) Anonymous Guy: Substance McGravitas linked up there to a video of the spitting-upon-Congressmen.