tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post4673379765271745483..comments2024-03-28T14:57:10.887-04:00Comments on the daily howler: TWO DIFFERENT WORLDS: And now, a word from CNN's analysts!<b>bob somerby</b>http://www.blogger.com/profile/02963464534685954436noreply@blogger.comBlogger62125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-18247571098774898922022-04-01T20:41:38.645-04:002022-04-01T20:41:38.645-04:00Your comment shows how dumb you are. It doesn'...Your comment shows how dumb you are. It doesn't show that Somerby is a Republican in sheep's clothing. Mindless rigid tribalism, and what comes from the left in that regard nowadays couldn't be more the case, is what Somerby opines about. I'm a Democrat. I am liberal. I KNOW that what the right wing, grand Wurlitzer echo chamber does is feed much propaganda (group think) to closed minded people. But the point here is THAT THAT IS WHAT THE LEFT ALSO DOES! AND IT IS SICKENING for its own sake, but it is also so helpful to Republicans! When the left is ABSURD in its RIGID, TRIBAL-like "reasoning", that helps Republicans win! Many of the comments here, some of which are astonishingly dumb, show such a lack of reading comprehension and are additional proof related to Bob's main argument on this topic. This moronic way of understanding stuff that says that nothing the opposing side's tribe says can be accurate, smart, or well-reasoned is DUMB! And that says that if one criticizes the moronic nature of how a darling of the left receives accolades (in rigid group think-style), that means that one must be a Republican in sheep's clothing to have uttered that or that one is a fan of the insurrection of Jan 6, or that one must not realize that Republican sh*t stinks is not a smart way to be smart about understanding stuff. Smart people, aka, people who can apply critical thinking skills, can hold more than one thought process in their head at the same time. TWO VIEWS, even ones that are DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED to the other, can BOTH be reasonable at the same time and both may have merit. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-50324105261831313082022-04-01T20:17:16.406-04:002022-04-01T20:17:16.406-04:00Krazy, I am going to suggest you know that is not ...Krazy, I am going to suggest you know that is not our fundamental disagreement. <br /> Within the confines of what is legal, nobody is "obligated" to do anything. The question is, why would anyone actually interested in the crisis of our discourse choose only one side, again the less prevalent and successful side, to examine? After years (the 90s) of examining the right and being well aware of their corruption, why would someone suddenly decide only the sins (real and sometimes wildly imagined) of the left are worth looking at? <br /> This is our disagreement, and your lack of an answer is in a way an answer, for there IS no good answer. Bob is not only fairly often completely wrong, he's something of a fraud. <br /> So Rationalist, where do you go for a look at the right media? Or is that what you usually just watch and accept? <br /> Anon at 4:34 pretty much says it all. But would Bob agree with Krazy and Rationalist that he only goes after the left now and that's O.K.? I wonder.....<br /> Greghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288008924419574934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-643609965606888102022-04-01T15:51:57.960-04:002022-04-01T15:51:57.960-04:00Greg,
it seems our fundamental disagreement conc...Greg, <br /><br />it seems our fundamental disagreement concerns your belief that Somerby is obligated to criticize both Left and Right. Why do you think that? Why isn't he free to focus his commentary on the Left, so long as his criticism is legitimate (and in your answer, can you assume his criticism is legitimate so that we stick to the larger point?)Krazy Katnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-35774972654002218282022-04-01T13:58:05.103-04:002022-04-01T13:58:05.103-04:00"If Jackson walks into the hearing room and s..."If Jackson walks into the hearing room and sits down in her chair, and Laura Coates says it is the greatest accomplishment in human history"<br /><br />Well, it would be indeed "the greatest accomplishment in human history", if, say, she was completely paralyzed. <br /><br />Otherwise, just like with the liberal super-admiration for her alleged knowledge of the law, it smacks of condescension. <br /><br />Y'know, same as Vegetable in Chief praising Demigod Barry: "<i>I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.</i>" Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-32894038022807250152022-04-01T13:05:25.057-04:002022-04-01T13:05:25.057-04:00“He cannot both claim that she is overpraised, doe...“He cannot both claim that she is overpraised, doesn't deserve the things being said about her, then say that he offers no criticism of Jackson.”<br /><br />This is precisely where you go wrong.<br /><br />If Jackson walks into the hearing room and sits down in her chair, and Laura Coates says it is the greatest accomplishment in human history, Somerby can point out that Coates is overpraising her without being critical of Jackson.<br /><br /> <br />Krazy Katnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-24156216998327684302022-04-01T12:33:42.829-04:002022-04-01T12:33:42.829-04:00Anyone who isn't a bigot, or isn't perfect...Anyone who isn't a bigot, or isn't perfectly fine with bigotry, left the Republican Party more than two decades ago.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-36372352550542215462022-04-01T12:10:55.132-04:002022-04-01T12:10:55.132-04:00Krazy,
Again, it's somewhat refreshing to n...Krazy, <br /> Again, it's somewhat refreshing to note that, at least to an extent, you get it. First, if you'll allow a question, who do you go to for a critique of the Right Press? <br /> I would say we are not awash in quality, fact checking of media of any kind. Someone recently challenged me on the Tara Reid story, arguing her tale had simply not taken root. <br /> That's not really true. What surfaced was that the her hotshot Me Too lawyer dropped her when it surfaced she had misrepresented her background in Court Cases to serve as an expert witness (!). <br /> Chris Hayes, who days before had looked into the camera and intoned "THIS STORY IS NOT GOING AWAY">>>> let the story go away. And other who had hyped it on MSNBC made no mention of why Tara was now MIA. No one holds these people to much account on either side. <br /> So for a guy who started out using Socrates to set the record straight, simply deciding one side's sins (the bigger, more successful side at that) do not matter is highly suspect. And given Bob's now absurd justifications of southern racism (it's all about Northern Condescension!), I think we can fill in the blanks. <br /> Greghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288008924419574934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-64687233725747092622022-04-01T11:43:54.875-04:002022-04-01T11:43:54.875-04:00You're complete garbage making the asinine cla...You're complete garbage making the asinine claims you do. Lower than dirt. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-19151556940039626632022-04-01T11:39:23.689-04:002022-04-01T11:39:23.689-04:00OK, I am done with you. You have revealed yourself...OK, I am done with you. You have revealed yourself. Have fun chatting with Mao.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-85433740664559475622022-04-01T11:31:37.876-04:002022-04-01T11:31:37.876-04:00You don't deserve any respect. No one that cas...You don't deserve any respect. No one that casually and stupidly throws around accusations of racism and bigotry does.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-70558370916264265902022-04-01T11:26:40.667-04:002022-04-01T11:26:40.667-04:00Krazy Kat,
She's the best. The Right only dis...Krazy Kat,<br />She's the best. The Right only disparages her, because they are so used to putting sexual predators on the Supreme Court.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-41483002754337455012022-04-01T11:22:47.278-04:002022-04-01T11:22:47.278-04:00I, too, don't think 11:29 is being enough of ...I, too, don't think 11:29 is being enough of a bigot to be praised by the Right.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-59178986948264617272022-04-01T10:52:20.985-04:002022-04-01T10:52:20.985-04:00Carla -- getting people's names right is a sma...Carla -- getting people's names right is a small thing to ask and a sign of civility and respect for others.<br /><br />Nothing that Somerby does is secret. I notice that you don't address any of the specifics that people provide in response to your comments.<br /><br />As noted before, Somerby always says that a person is good, kind, decent, before ripping them to shreads. You choose to believe only those statements and ignore the ones where he immediately contradicts the positive things said about someone.<br /><br />About Jackson, Somerby says:<br /><br />"For ourselves, Jackson's testimony to that point hadn't seemed to set her apart from previous nominees to the Court..." and he didn't know whether Toobin's praise was justified.<br /><br />For many paragraphs he says nothing at all about Jackson, then he says:<br /><br />"We'll skip the astounding dumbness of the latter part of Henderson's presentation, in which Jackson's slender account of her "methodology" as a judge was praised to the skies."<br /><br />This is a clearly negative remark about Jackson's answer. "Slender" is not a compliment and Somerby is clearly objecting to the praise of it, as part of his ongoing complaint that Jackson is being overpraised.<br /><br />Then, after another repetition of his complaint that she has been overpraised, Somerby says:<br /><br />"Nothing that we've said today is offered as a criticism of Judge Jackson, who has had a very substantial legal and judicial career. For ourselves, we weren't blown away by her performance during these hearings."<br /><br />He cannot both claim that she is overpraised, doesn't deserve the things being said about her, then say that he offers no criticism of Jackson. Those statements are incompatible. It is true that Somerby himself offers no evidence in support of his claim that she does not deserve such praise, but his denial and criticism of the praise offered Jackson is itself a criticism of Jackson's background and performance and Somerby does say he finds her testimony lacking.<br /><br />What's wrong with this pudding. Nothing, it is fine, it just isn't wonderful. In what way isn't it wonderful? I'm not criticizing it, it just doesn't ring my bell. How not? crickets... This is what Somerby is doing.<br /><br />Then Somerby claims that his focus is those four stooges, but in the process he has subtlely torn down Jackson by attacking the praise of her, all without any evidence against her whatsoever.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-42558212618444675112022-04-01T09:54:02.207-04:002022-04-01T09:54:02.207-04:00Dear 10:17 and Clara and Friends,
How truly fiend...Dear 10:17 and Clara and Friends,<br /><br />How truly fiendish this Somerby is. How I’ve been duped. He states as straightforwardly as can be that he offers no criticism of Jackson. But then, while pretending to criticize the CNN analysts, he secretly criticizes Jackson. <br /><br />And while discounting the praise of Jackson’s performance on a single morning of the hearing, Somerby is secretly criticizing her entire career.<br /><br />Is there a secret decoder ring you can mail me so I too can see beyond Somerby’s actual words to the real truth of what they mean?<br />Krazy Katnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-81156272128296512672022-03-31T23:42:56.627-04:002022-03-31T23:42:56.627-04:00You have to be one of the dumbest people to ever u...You have to be one of the dumbest people to ever use a computer.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-77513133559821740712022-03-31T23:41:50.375-04:002022-03-31T23:41:50.375-04:00This response is too imbecilic for words. This response is too imbecilic for words. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-15034474931875584312022-03-31T23:29:30.548-04:002022-03-31T23:29:30.548-04:00But what is the evidence that her response was &qu...But what is the evidence that her response was "slender"? Somerby gives none. He just calls it that. He is no legal expert of any kind. On what basis can he use adjectives like that, beyond his own bias? Similarly, he is no judge of whether the praise is overblown or warranted. It is his assumption that she cannot be as good as people consider her that leads to that idea, that the praise is overblown. These cable news panels haven't been making up the idea that she is head and shoulders above other nominees. She really is good and many people, including judges and lawyers, the ABA, and people from both political parties, have been saying she is that good. How then does Somerby get to decide that the praise isn't justified -- he knows less than the panelists he criticizes. His only evidence is his own bias. He has offered nothing else.<br /><br />Calling me a dumbass doesn't change anything. It makes you look like you have no real arguments to make.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-80612160477756696352022-03-31T23:24:24.742-04:002022-03-31T23:24:24.742-04:00The assumption that praise of a black woman must b...The assumption that praise of a black woman must be overblown and ridiculous is at the heart of this problem. Somerby has said that he considers there no objective way to determine whether the praise is warranted. I presented evidence (from the ABA) that this is not so. In the absence of any way of determining the merit of this nominee, Somerby has chosen to assume that praise of her is overblown, ridiculous. That is the essence of bigotry -- an assumption in the absence of evidence that someone is necessarily inferior or substandard based on gender and skin color. In Jackson's case, there is the evidence of a lifetime of solid achievement. Somerby chooses to discount this. That too is bigotry.<br /><br />The praise must be first shown to be overblown, ridiculous, not assumed to be so. It is the assumption that makes this a bigoted attack.<br /><br />You ask why Jackson could not have a substantial legal and judicial career and be the recipient of overblown ridiculous praise at the same time? The answer is that if her career is not simply substantial but is demonstrably beyond that, the praise is then not overblown or ridiculous but justified by her accomplishments.Not a rodenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02216459357112547141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-58503267342415272672022-03-31T22:32:02.987-04:002022-03-31T22:32:02.987-04:00Why could the Judge Jackson not have a substantial...Why could the Judge Jackson not have a substantial legal and judicial career and be the recipient of overblown, ridiculous praise at the same time? <br /><br />Why would criticism of overblown, ridiculous praise axiomatically be a bigoted attack on the recipient of the praise?<br /><br />That doesn't make sense. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-11397691866909685292022-03-31T22:22:45.465-04:002022-03-31T22:22:45.465-04:00You can't get any dumber than thinking that So...You can't get any dumber than thinking that Somerby is here to criticize the media.<br /><br />If Somerby were in favor of Jackson's appointment, but objected to the press coverage, he would have written this essay entirely differently. For one thing, he wouldn't have repeated the numerous statements praising her, made by the panel, in sarcastic quote marks and italics, as if they were unwarranted, exaggerated, overblown. <br /><br />There is a lot of enthusiasm for Jackson's appointment in a lot of quarters. Presenting this as something the media has cooked up is disparaging of her candidacy, her qualifications and her ability.<br /><br />What do you think it means when Somerby says that her response to a question was "slender"? Do you think that is a good thing, praise of her answer?<br /><br />You can call other people stupid after you learn to read between the lines in the kind of essay Somerby likes to write. He is leading you around by the nose. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-53733986247407012012022-03-31T22:17:27.152-04:002022-03-31T22:17:27.152-04:00That is how Somerby operates. He has things both w...That is how Somerby operates. He has things both ways. He will say that someone is a good decent person before ripping into them.<br /><br />Here is how Somerby discounts the positive appraisals of Jackson's ability:<br /><br />"Where Jackson was "phenomenally talented"—better than the rest, Toobin had said..."<br /><br />He repeats that "phenomenally" in quotes numerous times, enough to get the point across that he thinks the opposite of her, that such praise is overblown, ridiculous even.<br /><br />Then there is this:<br /><br />"We'll skip the astounding dumbness of the latter part of Henderson's presentation, in which Jackson's slender account of her "methodology" as a judge was praised to the skies.<br /><br />("Given her methodology, it's clear that she likes to clear the decks, as she said, when she approaches these different issues as a judge," Henderson said. In Jackson's very slender telling, that seemed to mean that she likes to approach all cases impartially.)<br /><br />By now, it wasn't just that Judge Jackson had done phenomenally well in the early questioning, due to her phenomenal talent. It had also been incredibly moving to see her very compelling pushback against the charges by Senator Hawley—against charges which were very, very untrue."<br /><br />It is clear from the use of emphasis in this passage, the repeated word "slender" and the context that Somerby doesn't think Jackson deserves the praise of Henderson, Coates and others he criticizes today.<br /><br />So, KK, there is a great deal else that indicates what Somerby thinks of Jackson's merit as a nominee. Somerby attacks Jackson in the guise of complaining about those who praised her. If their praise is so wrong, so must Jackson's ability be downgraded.<br /><br />And yes, I do believe that Lindsay Graham was being condescending and mansplaining. She took it with good grace and did not complain, but that doesn't mean he wasn't doing it.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-64842140954417252872022-03-31T22:02:32.375-04:002022-03-31T22:02:32.375-04:00There's only one sentence in the post where Bo...There's only one sentence in the post where Bob directly states what he thinks of Jackson's qualifications:<br /><br />"Nothing that we've said today is offered as a criticism of Judge Jackson, who has had a very substantial legal and judicial career."<br />Krazy Katnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-72413305969033475602022-03-31T22:01:16.300-04:002022-03-31T22:01:16.300-04:00There's one and only one sentence in the post ...There's one and only one sentence in the post where Bob directly states what he thinks of Jackson's qualifications:<br /><br />"Nothing that we've said today is offered as a criticism of Judge Jackson, who has had a very substantial legal and judicial career."<br /><br /><br />Krazy Katnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-61355939274081558432022-03-31T21:22:15.282-04:002022-03-31T21:22:15.282-04:00From No More Mister Nice Blog:
"But I guess ...From No More Mister Nice Blog:<br /><br />"But I guess Republicans can read a poll:<br />A broad majority of Americans say they would vote for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s confirmation to the Supreme Court if they were senators, a new Marquette Law School poll finds....<br /><br />The poll found 66% of respondents say they would confirm Jackson if in the Senate, while 34% would oppose her.<br />And in a poll from Quinnipiac that's truly abysmal for President Biden -- he's at 36% approval, 55% disapproval -- Brown has very good numbers, and Republican senators don't.<br />Americans say 51 - 30 percent that the U.S. Senate should confirm Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, while 19 percent did not offer an opinion.<br /><br />Americans disapprove 52 - 27 percent of the way Republican Senators are handling the confirmation process of Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson, while 21 percent did not offer an opinion.<br /><br />On the other hand, Americans approve 42 - 34 percent of the way Democratic Senators are handling the confirmation process of Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson, while 23 percent did not offer an opinion."<br /><br />Somerby will say that all these people are just parrotting what they were told to say by cable news but (1) not enough of them watch cable news, (2) his theory that people just repeat what they are told doesn't work on other poll topics.<br /><br />No one has more disrespect for the average person's opinion than Somerby does. That's another clue that he is a Republican in sheep's clothing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-71823673502141929582022-03-31T20:25:02.982-04:002022-03-31T20:25:02.982-04:00"She had almost been crying! Also, she spoke ..."She had almost been crying! Also, she spoke as a mom!"<br /><br />And here we see the real reason why Somerby is working so hard to convince us that Judge Jackson lacks merit as a candidate!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com