by von
John Fund, a Wall Street Journal reporter at this year's CPAC, seems to be facing some kind of financial crisis. Via Crosstalk:
John Fund highly respected Wall Street Journal columnist did the strangest thing today. He walked right into blogger's corner (he is not a credentialed blogger). He sat right down at a machine that wasn't his...it in fact belonged instead to Adam Doverspike of RedState.
He began typing away and when Adam returned - and in fact needed to return to his blogging duties was told by Fund:
"I'll only be a minute..."
20 minutes later, Adam gave up and left to go get something to drink...as of this typing - as you can see in the picture above - Fund was still using Doverspike's machine.
Never asked permission, never asked forgiveness...
For the love of God, someone buy this man a Blackberry! (Or a Treo, which is my annoying gadget of choice.)
Adam Doverspike, recovering Fund-ictim, is far more charitable to Fund than Fund deserves.
The National Debate has started a pledge drive.
Outside the Beltway calls it Fund-quiddick.
LaShawn Barber seem decidedly Fundstruck.
The American Mind breaks Fund-quiddick, Part Duex.
And I clearly don't have enough to do. (Or I'm procrastinating to avoid finishing my brief ....)
UPDATE: Well, this may be a first. Kos, of all people, captures my thoughts on Fund-quiddick-gate exactly:
Righty blogs are mighty upset, and they are trying to frame it in that "MSM versus the Bloggers" frame which colors just about everything they deal with these days.
It's likely much simpler than that -- Fund is simply an inconsiderate asshole who doesn't respect the property of others. And the two bloggers who let Fund steal their computers for long periods of time where patsies for letting it happen.
I don't know about the bloggers being "patsies," but the rest is about right.
Adam Doverspike, recovering Fund-ictim, is far more charitable to Fund than Fund deserves.
Damn commies!
Posted by: liberal japonicus | February 19, 2005 at 07:16 PM
Fund is, or used to be, editorial page editor for the WSJ. I remember seeing him on TV once denying that he was a Republican, claiming to be independent.
That told me all I ever want to know about him.
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov | February 19, 2005 at 10:04 PM
John Fund highly respected Wall Street Journal columnist did the strangest thing today.
He may be many things but highly respected is not one of them. Could it be any stranger than making the top ten idiots at DU
Posted by: Don Quijote | February 19, 2005 at 11:14 PM
a blackberry? how about some manners?
Posted by: praktike | February 20, 2005 at 12:16 AM
John Fund made it a point to never read the news pages of the WSJ or any other mainstream publication Whatever facts he needed he just made up.
I do not beleive I have ever read a single thing by John Fund that was not seriously lacking credibility.
Posted by: ken | February 20, 2005 at 01:22 AM
Good god, I was following some of the links. Are these people for real? At Kevin McCullough's weblog (not sure how I got there, but it was from the links Von gave), there was this:
The mind boggles...
Posted by: liberal japonicus | February 20, 2005 at 01:30 AM
Sorry, that's from the first link that Von gave. Just below it is this:
The former Bob Barr? Who is he now?
And there's this
Posted by: liberal japonicus | February 20, 2005 at 01:37 AM
Posted by: rilkefan | February 20, 2005 at 02:17 AM
The mind boggles...
don't worry, it's not like she's popular or anything. she only reflects the views of a few, and nobody takes her seriously.
Posted by: cleek | February 20, 2005 at 08:52 AM
Yeah, I'm guessing it's like RW porn, nobody actually admits they like her.
Posted by: liberal japonicus | February 20, 2005 at 09:36 AM
I'm with praktike (how is that pronounced, anyway?): the fundraiser should be to send the guy to etiquette classes.
I do love the "punishment," though -- plastering a picture of him in all his piggish glory on every blog. This could be an interesting strategy. I could use my cell phone to take picture of that obnoxious woman who always has 20 items in the 15-items-or-less checkout lane...
Posted by: Opus | February 20, 2005 at 11:09 AM
Slow news day? ;^)
Posted by: caleb | February 20, 2005 at 11:40 AM
oh yes, and for the record, I can't think of anyone who respects John Fund, who is a big fat lying wanker.
Posted by: praktike | February 20, 2005 at 01:00 PM
Amen. And how do you pronounce Praktike, anyhow? (I've always assumed it's Prak as in "Practical" and -tike as in tyke. But I guess it could be Prace-teek.)
Posted by: von | February 20, 2005 at 01:27 PM
I assumed "prak-ti-ka" with the "ka" really a European "keh", accent on the first syllable.
Posted by: rilkefan | February 20, 2005 at 01:32 PM
Criminy.
All Fund has to do is rent a car, and he'll get a Blackberry for free.
Of course, he's now got to overcome an obstacle...whether anyone would be willing to rent him anything at all ;)
Posted by: aireachail | February 20, 2005 at 03:02 PM
"Patsies"? Yeah.
Also idiots. Anybody who walks away from a "live" computer in a public place without locking it up tight deserves what they get.
He's lucky if Fund didn't erase any files or send any nasty e-mails in his name.
Posted by: lightning | February 20, 2005 at 03:07 PM
rilkefan nails it.
Posted by: praktike | February 20, 2005 at 03:08 PM
I assumed "prak-ti-ka" with the "ka" really a European "keh", accent on the first syllable.
like 'practical', without the el ... ?
Posted by: cleek | February 20, 2005 at 03:09 PM
Don't blame John; it's quite possible that the top ten idiots at DU are self-made.
Posted by: Slartibartfast | February 20, 2005 at 06:59 PM
I think he meant 'pasties'.
Posted by: sidereal | February 20, 2005 at 08:18 PM
Is that pasties, as in the meat pie, or pasties, as in something a...performance artist might wear?
Posted by: Slartibartfast | February 20, 2005 at 08:25 PM
I thought they were the same thing. You mean strippers don't wear meat pies?
Posted by: sidereal | February 20, 2005 at 08:29 PM
Mmm, warm meat pies.
Why isn't there a Chanel #cheeseburger?
Posted by: rilkefan | February 20, 2005 at 08:34 PM
Anybody who walks away from a "live" computer in a public place without locking it up tight deserves what they get.
In the same way that people who don't lock their cars deserve to get them stolen? Is this the new way we define property rights in America: "Finders keepers?"
Posted by: Phil | February 20, 2005 at 08:48 PM