« The Undead | Main | Protecting Our People »

January 31, 2008


Maybe if someone paid Jack he would do gooder at papers.

Hillary should have said sere more when talking about global warming.

When I was a kid, my mother recommended that I follow my friends in jumping off of a bridge.

I never trusted her again after that.

Thanks -

Nice analysis, Hilzoy.

They've actually deleted several critical (but hardly profane) comments over at Tapper's follow-up post (also linked at S,N!).

When I was a kid, my mother recommended that I follow my friends in jumping off of a bridge.

Apparently if my husband and his brothers complained of being bored as children, their father would tell them to 'go and play in the traffic'.

And (as GMT noted in comments over at Political Animal) Tapper was also "tapped" to report on a bogus study from National Journal dubbing Obama the "most liberal senator."

The RNC definitely has no problem reusing their mouthpieces while they're still warm.

From George Washington's farewell address:

"In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views."

Jake Tapper reports:
"Did Washington just say that the United States should break up into smaller parts? In a moment of candor in his farewell address, Washington said that North and South, East and West were doomed to fight because of a 'real difference of local interests and views. Shame on Washington for inciting civil war."

Is there any way of putting pressure on him, or his editors, to make him correct this? I mean, possible bias is one thing, but outright illiteracy is quite another...

The Clinton campaign did not provide for me, as requested, an explanation of what he meant.

Wahhhh! Those mean old Clintons won't help me do my job!

What about the timeless Tapper classic (as opposed to the "sell-by" classic): I have come to praise Caesar, not to bury him?

What's sad is that there isn't a correction on the thread, just an update detailing a response from the RNC construing the quite Tapper-style.

I have come to seize your berry, not to appraise it.

Wow. His second statement is ... Oh dear God ... incredible!

First he pretends to be the humble guy interpreting the incredibly convoluted and complicated statement. Then says snarky things about the Clintons interpreting the word 'is'.

You know, it reminds me of the courtroom scene in Idiocracy.

Well done, SDM.

Makes you realize how hard Broder has to work at pulling this crap. The difference between a gifted amateur and a true professional...

I think what is much more worrisome than Tapper's lack of reading skills, is the mindset of all the commenters who lapped up his totally distorted version of the speech without a second thought, even though the full quote was provided. What does that say about political discourse in the US and how the decision who to vote for is made in the majority of cases? What do they really think? "Damn hippies want to take away my money, my car and tell me what to do"?

Sometimes all the admirably fine-grained analysis done at blogs like ObWi seems like a parallel universe to me, totally disconnected from what goes on in the average voter's head. Sometimes I think the GOP's success is due to playing these base instincts like a fiddle, while the Democrats are wasting their time trying to be halfway truthful. Sometimes I think it's all a bloody waste of time.

"Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, pray for them that persecute you, that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven, for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the tax-gatherers the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the Gentiles so? And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what gain have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing in return; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Most High: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. Be ye merciful, as your Father also is merciful."

Jesus Christ today commanded Christians to hate their enemies. He went on to say that Christians should love their enemies. So there was something of a contradiction there. Or perhaps he mis-spoke. Or perhaps this characterization was a description of what would happen if there isn’t a worldwide enemy-loving effort…I’m not quite certain.

So what you're saying, Hilzoy, is that Jesus would raise our taxes, repeal the bankruptcy bill, hand out free money, and invite bin Laden to the White House for a chat?

I have some sympathy for Mr. Tapper.

Here again is the "smart" solution from Clinton:

"The only way we can do this is if we get back in the world’s fight against global warming and prove it is good economics that we will create more jobs to build a sustainable economy that saves the planet for our children and grandchildren. It is the only way it will work."

What the hell is Clinton saying?

I’d like to play the Tapper game with the words of our friend and ally, the Iraqi Shiite leader Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Husayni Sistani:

‘The following ten things are essentially najis [unclean]:
1. Urine;
2. Faeces;
3. Semen;
4. Dead body;
5. Blood;
6. Dog;
7. Pig;
8. Kafir [unbeliever];
9. Alcoholic liquors;
10. The sweat of an animal who persistently eats najasat [ie, unclean things].’

Sastani adds, ‘the entire body of a Kafir [unbeliever], including his hair and nails, and all liquid substances of his body, are najis [unclean].’

And Tapper:

Dogs are as dirty as Kafirs. Pigs are as dirty as Kafirs. Faeces are as dirty as Kafirs; and yet, in spite of all of this, it is possible that certain parts of pigs and dogs may be clean, and that some part of faeces may be clean.

You should check

Lincoln, of course, advocated the dissolution of the union AND the expansion of slavery in his House Divided speech. Or he didn't - he was unclear on the point.

We are now far into the fifth year, since a policy was initiated, with the avowed object, and confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation.

Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only, not ceased, but has constantly augmented.

In my opinion, it will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached, and passed.

"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.

Well get ready. This is thhe treatment Hillary and Bill will get every time she opens her mouth righht up to thhe day McCain is inaugerated.


Idlemind mentions above the National Journal reporting done by Tapper (which I haven't looked in to yet). Another thing I haven't seen mentioned here is Mark Kleiman's take on another piece of Tapper's writing, from the day prior to the Clinton article. Something about Obama's stance on Rumsfeld in 2001.
Dang Hilzoy, I didn't know that Obama was for turning back the clock... just one more reason to support him, IMHO, I can go back and revoke my bet for Giuliani on the Presidential futures markets. Yes I can!

Sorry, wrong link directly above:


Um .. what you should check is Tapper's newest post. (Guess the URL didn't make it though the ObWi spam filter. )

Guy's trying to explain where the comments went (not his fault!), and saying the whole point of his first post was to discuss the costs of fighting global warming.


Not sure if he really does believe it, or if he's just sealing up his 2008 Hacktacular Award.

MarkD: I would have thought he had already locked in that award with his first post. His second was just icing on the cake. No further work necessary.

Whoever polices the comments on Tapper's blog has a streak of Redstate in them. I've had two deleted, which of course contained no personal attacks or cursing. Not sure why a couple of other comments that dare to mention that Tapper was wrong (or even use the word "liar") are still visible, though. Maybe the censor is just incompetent.

Amid the criticism, a quick note of congratulations to the Clintons. I knew the speeches were lucrative (tens of millions), and was happy for the couple when the UAE $20 million payout was leaked. But $130 million for brokering a uranium deal between a dictator in Kazakhstan and some start-up Canadian investor. Wow. Real go-getters, those Clintons.

$400,000 per year salary. Shadows on the wall of the cave.

I wonder if Obama has figured it out yet.

Tapper ought to be failing his second grade Language Arts class for the thirty-fourth consecutive year, but thanks to the soft bigotry of low expectations, he ended up as ABC's Senior National Correspondent instead. If he HAD GOTTEN out of school without the ability to do basic math and had ended up as a NASA engineer, his ignorance would harm people in direct and obvious ways.

Maybe he's not the only one: "gotten" is one of my pet peeves. Is it really difficult to type: "If he had graduated school without...?" It's shorter and is actually correct!

“And maybe America, and Europe, and Japan, and Canada — the rich counties...
Innocent typo or another case of dyslexia?
Apart from the all-too-common arrogance to say "America" for USA while referring in the same sentence to Canada (and not all of Europe is rich btw).

Oh, sorry. The first sentence should have been blockquoted. I accidentally used 'quote, /quote' instead.

Hey, cut the guy a break. He's a busy man! I'm sure he has neither the time nor the legal training to figure out what Clinton was saying.

John S: "Is it really difficult to type: "If he had graduated school without...?" It's shorter and is actually correct!"

Some might argue that "had been graduated without" is actually the correct form, because graduation is not something you do, it's something that's done to you.

Not to be pedantic or anything.

I'm still wondering what superstition he has about "gotten", but maybe he's British and unfamiliar with American usage.

For that matter, "gotten out of school" does not necessarily imply graduating; a dropout has certainly gotten out of school, after all.

KCinDC: I'm still wondering what superstition he has about "gotten", but maybe he's British and unfamiliar with American usage.

I would rather type a letter on a French keyboard than use "gotten" without scare quotes, because as a Brit I know it brings eight years of awfully bad luck.

But he can't be British, because in Britain nobody graduates from school. You leave school: you graduate from university or college.

In a stunning attack, prominent ObWi commentator Jesurgislac today accused the British education system of being useless. "In Britain nobody graduates from school," Jesurgislac wrote.

MarkD: I would have thought he had already locked in that award with his first post. His second was just icing on the cake. No further work necessary.

Well, then his third post secures his spot in the Hall of Fame.


And like KCinDC, I posted a totally, 100%, profane-free, legitimate comment. It was deleted a DOZEN times.

"Jake Tapper" FTW

Tapperized Jake Tapper:

(deleted from the comments)

Wow, I hardly know how to take this.

This morning, trying to understand what former President Bill Clinton was driving at when he made a statement about effort to combat global warming, I <> did not <> examine closely or subject to detailed analysis, especially by breaking up into components" or "To make sense of; [or even ]comprehend."

But I suspect <> I should defer to their expertise.

Apologies for <> confusing public comment from a former president about a major world issue and trying to <> slow down our economy."

The comments to this entry are closed.