“Giambi said he had not read the San Francisco Chronicle story, which cited transcripts of his grand jury testimony, and he would not say whether the newspaper’s report was accurate.”
- from The New York Times
__________________________________
All right, once a steroid-infused musclehead manages to use a new dodge effectively, it’s fair to say that it’s gone mainstream. It’s a meme. It’s “out there.” It’s “a thing.”
President Bush has been the master of the “I haven’t read that” workaround, and it never fails to both a) work, and b) provide a few low-hanging punchlines for lazy comedy writers. It is brilliant, though - it allows you to deny what you want without specifically contradicting the hard evidence against you.
Bush has used it so frequently that there’s little doubt that history will credit him with creating it. But there’s still a lot more we can do with it:
Courtrooms: “Your honor, while I haven’t read the specific charges against me, let me say that what I’ve heard sounds like a pack of lies.”
Weddings: “I will be true, honest, faithful and supportive within my understanding of those terms, though I would note that I haven’t looked over the actual vows. With that in mind… I do.”
Blurbs: “Though I haven’t actually read Brian’s new book, I certainly consider him capable of writing the most significant American novel of the last twenty years.”
Write some yourselves! Use historical examples! [Exodus: “Though I have not yet read the Ten Commandments, it is consistent with my understanding of them to build this golden calf…”] This is the sort of game that Comments boxes were created for.
The possibilities are limitless, and all it takes is a small suspension of disbelief; that the person in question hasn’t actually read the incredibly significant document about themselves that everyone is asking them about. After you’ve swallowed that, the rest goes down easy.





62 comments
bjd
February 10, 2005 at 7:26 pm
1“I don’t need to read that to know it is crap.” –Every leftwing blog about every rightwing blog.
“I don’t need to read it to know it’s crap.”
–Every rightwing blog about every leftwing blog.
Hey this is fun, Adam!
bjd
February 10, 2005 at 7:27 pm
2“You don’t need to read the Constitution to know the United States of America is based on a Fundamentalist Christian values.”
Tom
February 10, 2005 at 8:02 pm
3“While I haven’t exactly read the Bible, I would say that I’ve skimmed through it enough to say that it’s worth following.”
Jim
February 10, 2005 at 8:44 pm
4“I don’t know why they think I owe any more taxes….Isn’t that why they take them out of my paycheck?”
Bob
February 10, 2005 at 9:26 pm
5I never read A Brief History of Time, but I know Stephen Hawking is against gay marryin’ and Social Securitizin’.
dave
February 10, 2005 at 9:34 pm
6“I haven’t seen Farenheit 911 but I know it’s all lies, and Michael Moore is a communist who hates America”
norbizness
February 10, 2005 at 10:00 pm
7I haven’t seen my FREE CREDIT REPORT (click here), but I’m sure that it’s filled with vile, slanderous recitations of my 6-year struggle with those bastards at Montgomery Ward’s.
P.S. Shorter joke question for Giambi’s steroid press conference: “Show us you’re (your) nuts!”
Scott
February 10, 2005 at 10:41 pm
8“I haven’t read Saddam’s 12,000 page declaration of weapons stores that came out yesterday, but I can unequivocally say that he is lying and is a threat to the United States mainland”
scott
February 10, 2005 at 10:43 pm
9I haven’t read the ABM / Land Mine / Kyoto greenhouse gas treaty, but I will never allow America’s safety / military capability / or economic freedom to be threatened by a bunch of foreigners (and the US Senate).
andrew
February 10, 2005 at 10:47 pm
10while i haven’t read a newspaper in the past 35 years, i think the american public accepts the fact that those pages are nothing more than leftist propaganda.
fylo
February 10, 2005 at 11:15 pm
11I haven’t read any of the books written by former administration insiders but the various reports that everyone in the White house was informed not to send memos to the President because Dubbya “isn’t a big reader” are just a bunch of liberal lies.
Joan
February 10, 2005 at 11:47 pm
12“While I haven’t actually reviewed your X-rays or your lab results, I think it’s safe to say that the symptoms you’ve been having are all in your head.”
tess
February 11, 2005 at 12:39 am
13“I know that I’m reading a moderate blog because he’s not as right-wing as the rest of the blogs that I read, even though I’ve never read a left-wing blog. And he supports our president, so you’re moderate only if you support our president, otherwise you’re a crazed leftist looney.”
OT, is anyone going to the UC Berkeley taping of Wait-Wait? I want pics.
Deno the Untergeek
February 11, 2005 at 12:43 am
14http://rawstory.com/news/2005/index.php?p=48
This is a great story from the world of politics. Speaking of things that don’t hurt people cause they aren’t real, this is a letter from Rep Loise Slaughter of NY to Pres Bush, stating her shock (outrage) at the proto-scandal from the white house correspondent that wasn’t. I can’t wait for some good to come of this…
Auros
February 11, 2005 at 3:07 am
15I didn’t hear about the Berkeley taping til after the tix were all sold out. They never mentioned it on the show, I never heard about it on KQED. WTF?! I am quite ticked off — I usually make my donation to KQED during the WWDTM broadcast during the pledge drive. You’d think they’d keep a record of those, and let us know. Or something.
Adam, any chance you could hook me up? Maybe if I offer to buy you dinner at some snazzy Berkeley cafe?
Thompson
February 11, 2005 at 6:44 am
16“I haven’t read a war plan that contradicts mine, yet. I’m sure that 150,000 troops will be enough to win the peace and hold the country. See? Elections. Proof right there. Ignore the body count.”
Mary
February 11, 2005 at 8:55 am
17“I haven’t read the Constitution or the Bill of Rights but I’m positive that these repressive new laws (the Patriot Act) are needed to protect those important documents.”
Rhiannon
February 11, 2005 at 9:04 am
18“I ain’t never read no Bible but I know God don’t like them homo-sexuals or liberals…. and, um.., oh yeah… and Goody Wilson down the street (God I always hated her) is a WITCH! So I’ma gonna build me a bon fire and set ‘im all to burnin’ in the name of m’lord! Whose with me?”
Landis
February 11, 2005 at 9:53 am
19“I didn’t actually look at the speedometer but I couldn’t have been doing more than 55 mph officer” (Oh wait, are we supposed to make these up?)
–
Yeah, I’m a little peeved about the WWDTM thing as well. I had no idea until it was too late (and this was like 4 months in advance in November!). You have to be on the Cal Performances mailing list to have known that it was coming. No mention from the WWDTM website or KQED.
Jason
February 11, 2005 at 10:11 am
20I never read the Koran, but I’m sure it praises both Michael Moore and Jane Fonda personally. Plus, I got an email that said the Koran talks about some “eagle” that cleanses the land of evil. That’s all the convincing I need.
Stevie
February 11, 2005 at 11:25 am
21The August 6th 2001 memo? I mean I guess could have read all 550 words of it. It isn’t like it listed the very flights al-Qaeda intended to use.
Ya see? People don’t understand that at the time of year in Crawford, the brush gets out of hand, and there was a lot of it, the brush and 550 words can get in the way of the task at hand. It was an innocent time, but we live in a different world, where our enemies are like the brush that caused all this in the first place.
Smonkey
February 11, 2005 at 11:34 am
22I didn’t actually read the exit poll survey results, but that fact that I was reelected makes me confident that I have a mandate from the voters.
Jerry
February 11, 2005 at 1:17 pm
23I haven’t read, and Condi hasn’t read, the 9/11 report or any of the FAA’s 105 daily intelligence summaries between April 1, 2001 and Sept. 10, 2001,and G*d knows we didn’t read ‘em before 9/11, so if it says anything about anything we might have done to prevent this sad disaster that allowed me to attack Iraq, uh, forced me to attack Iraq, that would be what the liberals call “conjecture,” or somethin’.
Sharon
February 11, 2005 at 1:34 pm
24“Although I have not read every single rule and regulation promulgated by the S.E.C., and although I have not studied the economic history of the U.S.A. prior to and leading up to the Crash of 1929, I feel sure (and G-d has told me) that nothing like that, or like the abuses of Enron, WolrdCom, Adelphia, …., will ever happen again following the privat/t/a/v/i/r/personalization of Social Security.”
Kyle
February 11, 2005 at 4:18 pm
25“I haven’t read any science texts/academic papers, but I know evolution is wrong and Creationism is right.”
markg
February 11, 2005 at 4:20 pm
26“I never thought to read the will or anything, why would I?” Anna Nicole Smith.
ellen
February 11, 2005 at 4:43 pm
27Although I have never read the US Constitution, Bill of Rights, or any other socialist leaning mumbo jumbo, I can assure you that I am suitably prepared to keep my daddy’s business interests in mind while I am “president”.
Strangefate
February 11, 2005 at 6:55 pm
28While I have not personally read the reports coming out of Iraq, I believe I speak the truth when I say we’ve completely won and the Iraqis all love us.
Although I’m not aware of the exact details of these rumored accusations of voting fraud, I can guarantee you that I support democracy.
True, I have not actually heard the defendant’s argument, but I feel it’s safe to say he’s a terrorist and has no legal rights.
While I can not conclusively say at this time whether I wrote these so-called “documents” defending the use of torture, I believe the most likely answer–pending further research–is that I didn’t.
Oh, wait, we were supposed to make up *new* ones weren’t we? My bad.
Bob
February 11, 2005 at 7:14 pm
29I haven’t read the writing on the wall. As your President, I think it’s wrong to reward vandalism.
Phil
February 11, 2005 at 10:23 pm
30“I haven’t actually read the manual, but I once had a conversation with someone who had skimmed it. Of course I’m certain that ‘format c:’ is what you type to recover your critical files. Do you think I would have held positions in the Nixon administration, Oliver North’s office, and Arthur Anderson if I didn’t know what I was doing?”
Harold
February 12, 2005 at 9:31 am
31“I am not entirely familiar with all of the precise details of the law, but I am duly authorized to threaten to arrest anyone I think is violating the law.” - The police officer involved in the Denver bumper sticker incident
Virginia
February 12, 2005 at 9:31 am
32I’ve never read Lynne Cheney’s Sisters, but I’m sure that the liberal media’s reports of it are typical of their shrill hatred of freedomdemocracylibertydemocracyfreedomliberty. Knowing Lynne as I do, as a fine, upstanding patriotic Christian American, no one could convince me that contributes to the homosexuals’ agenda of indoctrinating our precious children into their selfish, hedonistic lifestyle.
Auros
February 12, 2005 at 4:16 pm
33To be fair to Giambi, his lawyer has almost certainly advised him to dodge questions — he hasn’t been given immunity from much of anything. There are criminal charges pending in CA, and a civil suit from the Yankees to revoke his $80M contract.
David
February 12, 2005 at 5:43 pm
34Off topic:
Arthur Miller is just not as important to contemporary America as Johnny Carson. No diminishment of the entertainer Johnny Carson is intended here. I just cannot help but notice the difference in the reaction of the media: Johnny Carson an icon - Arthur Miller a playwright. And it probably says more about our culture than it does about the media.
From my little corner of the culture, farewell Arthur, and thanks for some characters who I think will prove timeless.
Lynne
February 13, 2005 at 7:29 am
35Off Topic as well
Murray:
There’s a story on AOL news today about Staunton, VA and kids going off to bible classes during school days. Parents are protesting and taking the issue to the school board. The group that offers the classes, Weekday Religious Education has retained Gil Davis (of Paula Jones fame) to represent them.
I’d never heard of it until you mentioned it so I thought I’d give you an update.
Murray
February 13, 2005 at 9:39 am
36I haven’t read the article but that doesn’t mean that I can’t pass judgment on it.
I have several problems with taking the kids off for bible study.
It separates the children into the “saved” and “left behind”. Anything that divides a class is, well, divisive.
The law doesn’t allow school employees to teach a religion to the students, so these people must be non-employed volunteers, but there are liability issues with this. I know personally that volunteers still need to go through a back ground check for felonies and child abuse but taking the children off school ground transporting them back and forth, and having them taught somewhere with out any official school employees is a problem for me. To my knowledge all of the other volunteers work WITH a teacher or school employee. I volunteered to be a mountain bike team coach for my local school but I always worked with at least one of the teachers.
One of two things happens, either the children who are left behind get extra schooling putting them ahead of the others or, the time is just wasted so that the class stays together. Neither of these is acceptable.
I can understand if parents want their children to be brought up in the faith. But that is what Sunday school, catechism, vacation bible school, home bible reading and any number of other things is for. If they want the school to integrate the bible and faith into every class then they should do as my parents did and send their children to a Christian school. If this type of education is important, then they should pay for it.
There is a Christian school in the county (Fulton County Community Christian School) so it’s not as if there is no alternative.
But the public school belongs to the public, those who are Jewish (almost none), Muslim (most certainly none), agnostic (probably quite a few), or what ever. The school is to educate all of the students with out catering to the majority.
Oh by the way, sending your child to a Christian grade, high school and college, doesn’t insure that he won’t throw off his religion later in life. I know.
Leslie
February 13, 2005 at 4:01 pm
37David, a toast to Abigail and Danforth and Willy Loman. Long may they live!
J. Deighton
February 13, 2005 at 4:13 pm
38David- you mean they’ll live as long as Karnac?
Murray- way to bring things around to the topic at hand. “I haven’t read the article but that doesn’t mean I can’t pass judgment on it…” Ha! Ha! Ha!
David
February 13, 2005 at 8:57 pm
39J. Deighton,
Lobster only knows…
And I’m off again. This is from a piece by Arthur Miller, “Topics: On the Shooting of Robert Kennedy” (June 8, 1966)that just slapped the cranial crap out of me.
“We must begin to feel the shame and contrition we have earned before we can begin to sensibly construct a peaceful world. A country where people cannot walk safely in their own streets has not earned the right to tell any other people how to govern itself, let alone to bomb and burn that people.”
Arthur, you were one of the lifelines to our national soul.
“I haven’t read DEATH OF A SALESMAN or THE CRUCIBLE, but I know they’re communist propaganda.”
–Joseph McCarthy
“I don’t need to read a bunch of left-wing shit. Joseph McCarthy was the man.”
–Ann Coulter
“I haven’t read Ann Coulter. I don’t want to puke.”
–David
Nicole
February 13, 2005 at 11:40 pm
40David -
Johnny Carson was a cultural icon. Arthur Miller was that guy who was married to Marilyn Monroe and wrote plays. Ernst Mayr was some scientist dude. Or the ex-president of Bulgaria. Yeah, that sounds right.
Thompson
February 14, 2005 at 7:00 am
41I know you’re kidding, Nicole, but that’s still one of the saddest things I’ve read here. Call it a chuckle through the gloom…
Deno the Untergeek
February 14, 2005 at 11:26 am
42Remember those ‘values voters’ we kept hearing so much about a couple months ago for some reason? This reflects those values: A talking head on tv who entertained us vs. a man who wrote plays to make you think. Naturally the talking head gets the publicity. How many people have read his plays? Of those, how many actually read them without going to cliff notes or spark notes?
Not to diminish Johnny Carson’s role in our society; maybe to diminish Arthur Miller’s…
Flipside
February 15, 2005 at 11:10 am
43Oh, goodie, how ’bout these:
1. “I haven’t actually seen ‘Fahrenheit 911,’ but it irrefutably exposes the ignorance, incompetence, and lies of that neo-fascist Chimpanzee Shrub and his evil pack of conniving minions, because hey, it’s a documentary, so it’s obviously all real - and all true. And it’s by Michael Moore.”
2. “Of course I’ve seen ‘Fahrenheit 911.’ What do you mean have I ‘verified its representations?’ Uh, well, it irrefutably exposes the ignorance, incompetence, and lies of that neo-fascist Chimpanzee Shrub and his evil pack of conniving minions, because it’s a documentary, so it’s obviously all real - and all true. And it’s by Michael Moore.”
3. I don’t need to actually read the USA PATRIOT Act to know that, having been promulgated under the regime of the fascist, neo-nazi imperialist Shrub, it obviously revokes nearly all of the Bill of Rights and flushes any fleeting remnants of civil liberties down the toilet. Dude, pass the bong already!”
4. While I haven’t actually read any part of the Bible, anyone who holds sacred any of its teachings or otherwise advocates adherence to the same is obviously a narrow-minded, racist, intolerant, pea-brained bigot. Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to protest and call for the expulsion of a fellow Brown University student who actually is bigoted enough to have voiced concerns over some of the teachings of Islam in an open classroom discussion the other day.” [Note: In this last hypo, readers may substitute UC Berkley for Brown University if desired.]
Monty Zoom
February 15, 2005 at 3:10 pm
44“Although General Custer hasn’t personally viewed the intelligence reports, he isn’t concerned with the number of reported natives in the area of the Little Bighorn River valley.”
Mike Z
February 15, 2005 at 3:19 pm
45“Professor, why did I get a D- on my term paper?”
“Well, I haven’t read your essay so I just can’t comment on it at this time. However, I can say that all grades will be thoroughly examined and evaluated and then we’ll go from there.”
“Ummm..Quick follow up: How can you assign grades without reaing the essays?”
“Look, my position on this issue is clear. If and when it comes time to evaluate student performance, I will thoroughly investigate all of the available options. I just don’t know how to make it any plainer.”
Auros
February 15, 2005 at 6:07 pm
46@ “Flipside” the Troll:
a) I’ve seen F911.
b) I think some of its presentations are intentionally distorted, though I have yet to hear anyone actually show that anything is outright false. This is more than one can say for many Republican claims.
e.g. Dick Cheney, in the VP debate, insulted John Edwards by saying that he was “up in the Senate most Tuesdays” and that he hadn’t met Edwards prior to the debate; subsequently, it was shown that he was on camera sitting next to Edwards on at least two occasions, and had shaken hands with him; furthermore, the Congressional Record says that Cheney had, at the time he made that remark, only been “up in the Senate” to serve as Senate President TWICE in his tenure as VP.
c) While I have not read the Patriot Act all the way through, I have read excerpts cited by legal experts on both sides of the aisle, read their analysis of the implications, and come to the conclusion that some of its provisions should be repealed and that others should be allowed to sunset as planned. I also have read the accounts of several representatives on how Patriot, and various other laws, have been rushed through Congress without giving our representatives and their staffs enough time to analyze them — introducing them at 11pm and calling for a vote by midnight, and crap like that. I object to these manipulative tactics.
c) I’ve read the Bible cover to cover in a recent, scholarly translation that does not contain the glaring flaws of earlier versions (e.g. in key passages of the King James you can find mistranslations “poisoner” as “witch”, “young woman” as “virgin”, and so on), and will be happy to point out, using citations of theology and the source material, how any particular plank in the Xian Right’s platform is termite-infested.
d) I don’t know a single liberal ACLU type who thinks that people should be ejected from a university for holding politically-incorrect opinions. Last I heard, it was the right wing that was calling for CO to fire a professor for saying some boneheaded things about America deserving to be attacked. (Furthermore, if I lived in France, I would object strenuously to their public-school dress code which bans any display of religious belief, no matter how unobtrusive.)
Now: Go crawl back into your hole.
Flipside
February 15, 2005 at 6:54 pm
47Well golly gee, Auros, I obviously struck quite a chord with you, didn’t I? Thus pointing out, quite unintentionally I might add (but thank you all the same), a common, pervasive character trait of sorry liberals like you: utter self-involvement. Get over yourself, stupid - you write as if my post were directed solely at you. But as your informative post clearly explains, YOU are not one to be lumped into the category of putzes referred to in my post. You who just so happens to have personally investigated all four topics of my post and come to indepedent (incidentally off-topic) conclusions that nonetheless support the heightened nobility of the ever-enlightened, ever superior Leftist cause. Oh thank you, Auros, thank you for putting me in my place!
(Now please get a life, dude).
Mike Z
February 15, 2005 at 6:58 pm
48In defense of the troll:
Unfortunately, for every intelligent, informed dabater like Auros, there’s ten silly left-wingers that pretty much fit flipside’s satirical description.
If some here are making fun of the far right when they do it, then it should be ok to make fun of the far left when they act likewise.
Jerry
February 15, 2005 at 8:43 pm
49Flipside (or, as you like to call yourself, “getalife@losers”)-
Just pathetic. Did you (or do you) make fun of your high school debaters because they have rules of argumentation that require a reasoned response, or just hate them because they can out-think you and love the neocons because they don’t require you to think?
I just love your counter-arguments to Auros: “Sorry, self-involved, stupid..” How wanting of counter-points can you get?
And, just out of curiousity, how is he “off-topic” when he responds to each of your numbered points and addresses the specific points you mention in each?
Oh, write this down: when you write he “…just so happens to have personally investigated all four topics of my post and come to indepedent (sic)(incidentally off-topic) conclusions,” I guess implying that an informed person wouldn’t have done this, as well as “Sorry, self-involved, stupid..” as noted above, it is called an “ad homenum” argument, that is, rather than addressing your opponent’s facts or logic, you attack him.
Overall, “F-” or, go ahead, take an “A” on the neocon scale.
Flipside
February 16, 2005 at 8:59 am
50Jerry,
Thanks for further proving my point. It was satire, dummy. And, necessarily, quite rhetorical - you know, not meant to be responded to in itemized fashion by some joker with too much time on his hands who actually saw fit to interject his opinions, in irritating detail, with respect to each example I put forth.
As for the rest of your post, unlike you, I don’t need to try to prove my intelect on some nauseatingly homogeneous liberal blog populated by dudes like you. (By that I mean people who spend far too much time hanging around here looking to stroke their own already over-inflated sense of intellectual superiority as a means of assuaging the self-loathing that pervades their souls). I really have no interest in presenting polished, airtight arguments on this board - I do that all day at the office and in court (and since I still have this job after all these years, I’m going to assume that I am quite competent at it).
That in mind, on the rare occasion that I port here, it’s perfectly within my right to indulge in some shallow, juvenile, ultimately harmless fun.
No go and get yourself a job, blogmaster. If you and your ilk devoted merely half the time spent ruminating (read: whining) online actually doing something concretely productive, this country would indeed be a far better place. Ponder the irony.
Flipside Out!
Murray
February 16, 2005 at 6:03 pm
51*falling on the ground, mortally wounded, legs in the air, kicking*
Oh Flipside, Why did you have to come along and ruin everything?
I knew someone with great enough insight would one day see though our world of effete, elitist, solipsistic, navel gazing. With out mercy, you have skewered our once heroic, now turned pathetic attempts to put a dangerous world into a humorous perspective. Having thus exposed our feeble exercise, with the dispatch of an attorney who hasn’t been fired (so you must be as good as you say), what will be our fate? Must we now troll Neocon sites and lob bits of (what I realize now is only a farce) insight, only to be pummeled by the overwhelming reason and fury of the right? Where will we turn?
Curse you Flipside!
*body spasms subside and only soft whimpering is heard, as darkness falls*
Flipside
February 16, 2005 at 6:30 pm
52Gee, Fabulous Grouse, that’s an awful lot of effort expended to say what essentially amounts to nothing more than “Sticks and stones may break our bones.” Never sought to make an impression, never expected I would, not surprised I didn’t and, accordingly, don’t care to now.
I’m not in the practice of “trolling” any blogs, liberal or conservative, in hopes of getting a rise, Fabulous Grouse. I think I have proved at least one point though - someone comes along into your antiseptic chat room and pokes a little fun at the far left, and all hell breaks loose. Look at the responses to my first post, which, by the way, fails to directly convey any views whatsoever other than a satirical contempt for the behaviors of a handful of far-left wackos. But when liberals smell blood - in the form of any view different than theirs - the feeding frenzy begins. (Hey Jerry - is this an example of “post hoc ergo procter hoc?” You might wanna write that down, mm kay?)
That said, Fabulous Grouse, I haven’t actually read any accounts of this happening, but I’m confident it happens all the time, because, as my posts obviously make clear, I’m a “neocon.”
Keep on bikin’, big guy.
David
February 16, 2005 at 9:19 pm
53Flipside,
Lawyers don’t don’t win by force of intellect, although plenty of them are quite gifted intellectually. Why do you think so many are liberals? There are, to be sure, many quite bright conservative lawyers as well.
But in my experience and in my reading of American political history, insight tends to emerge more often in liberal circles, and tends as well to be more often opposed in conservative circles because that insight does not conform to received wisdom.
Recorded history is replete with the march of liberal insight struggling with the chains of conservative received wisdom.
I had the blessed good fortune to be a college student starting in 1960, so I got to enjoy the onset of the unshackling of American minds from the bonds of 50s conservatism. I did have to endure a pre-professional counseling office that still asked my professors if I showed any signs of being a communist sympathizer, and I did get filmed by the local sheriff’s office, along with everyone else in the first civil rights march at the University of Florida, but other than that, it was a time of celebration of the human mind and the liberal spirit.
The Goldwaterites couldn’t stand it, and their political descendants appear to have finally stamped out most of the influence of leftist wackos, so it seems to me you shouldn’t even waste your time with a gaggle of effete liberal losers who clearly have nothing better to do with their time than seek a haven of humor as a stay against the neocon nitwittery currently in control of the great American experiment.
Enjoy your current ascendance, but do wear plenty of safety gear.
David
February 16, 2005 at 9:25 pm
54Well , shit, I see my laptop has a slight stutter (Lawyers don’t don’t).
Murray
February 16, 2005 at 11:24 pm
55Flipside,
As a former scientist I was trained not to make generalizations for which I didn’t have proof. I guess that some lawyers don’t need to be quite so rigorous. We have had some resident conservatives on this site, who have provided lots of good natured banter, and earned a certain amount of respect. One in particular sent me a personal email to say that even though we seldom agreed he enjoyed the debate and was especially thankful that it never devolved into personal attacks.
It usually doesn’t here.
Yes, the composition of most of the commenters is fairly homogeneous, virtually all are college educated or beyond and quite a few are professors. But why should that be a surprise? Adam’s work is akin to Twain, Will Rodgers, or even Garrison Keillor, not the 3 stooges. Those who like their humor dry and don’t mind having to stretch their brains to get the point would be similarly attracted to this site. Those who see the horror of this administration, and take solace in ridiculing it with satire, find a haven here. And a really nice community. Many of the regulars (irregulars) communicate beyond this comment column. We share a common bond but also a common outlook and coping mechanism.
I’m sorry that you failed to see (or appreciate) the humor in my last post, but I do believe that you kind of missed the point. Beyond the sticks and stones thing, you are creating a lot less disturbance than you would like to think you are.
Excuse me if with 3 attorney brothers I no longer have a fear, awe, (or sometimes even a respect for) lawyers. I would imagine in your circles that you perceive yourself a man/woman of importance. This is how you portray your self. Excuse me also, if to this poor soul, it comes off as arrogance. Let me know if I have missed the mark.
You may have done your homework by cruising my web site but I’m not sure what advantage you feel you have gained other than giving me a cute nickname. But just like W, it’s easy to overdo those things.
So “Semper Ubi, Sub Ubi! Veni vedi vici!
(It’s not just lawyers who can misquote Latin)
Flipside
February 17, 2005 at 8:50 am
56Ugh,
Well, Murray, whatever type of scientist you were, you clearly were not a psychologist. I’ll let the ineffectiveness of your attempt at condescension speak for itself, and resist the temptation to discuss my personal personal, proefssional, and/or educational history and background as others apparently have seen fit to do as part of teaching me a lesson. Cuz that, as you so astutely pointed out, would just be a lot of self-important blather.
I’m glad you and your like-minded, enlightened brethren have found such a place of solace in this cold, incomprehensible epoch of Republican tyranny. (Your previous, supposedly humorous post would have been better, and perhaps more accurately conveyed your angst, had it included “Da Horrah, Oh, da Horrah!”) I will now retreat to my hole with the rest of my narrow-minded, bible-thumping, homophobic, warmongering friends.
And I’ll leave you to figure out what my last latin reference actually means.
Ok, back to blamebush.typepad.com!
Murray
February 17, 2005 at 5:08 pm
57Flipside,
Do you mean “Post hoc, ergo procter hoc”? Comeonman, even the riff-raff who listen to Car Talk know that. “After this, therefore because of this”. Meaning that when something goes wrong after something else happened, the problem was therefore because of that thing. It works on irony because it is generally meant to indicate that just because one thing happened after something else DOESN’T mean it was caused by it.
I prefer “Correlation doesn’t mean causality”.
“But when liberals smell blood - in the form of any view different than theirs - the feeding frenzy begins. (Hey Jerry - is this an example of “post hoc ergo procter hoc?” You might wanna write that down, mm kay?)”
OK Flipside, you must be way smarter than I because for the life of me I can’t see how this quote makes any sense? Please explain.
Just coming here posting something provocative is fine, but let me quote you for a bit:
“a common, pervasive character trait of sorry liberals like you: utter self-involvement. Get over yourself, stupid - you write as if my post were directed solely at you.”
“As for the rest of your post, unlike you, I don’t need to try to prove my intelect [by the way Flipside, that’s spelled INTELLECT] on some nauseatingly homogeneous liberal blog populated by dudes like you. (By that I mean people who spend far too much time hanging around here looking to stroke their own already over-inflated sense of intellectual superiority as a means of assuaging the self-loathing that pervades their souls)”.
“And I’ll leave you to figure out what my last latin reference actually means”.
“- I do that all day at the office and in court (and since I still have this job after all these years, I’m going to assume that I am quite competent at it).
Flipside, maybe you are the world’s greatest attorney, maybe we are stupid, self-involved nauseatingly homogeneous liberals, but it’s hard not to think that you come across as exceptionally arrogant.
David
February 17, 2005 at 7:22 pm
58Ain’t nothing homogeneous about liberals, nor do I know any who are stupid. Homogeneity is anathema to the liberal spirit, for god’s sake, or hadn’t you noticed, Flipside? I’m glad I don’t know the same liberals that you do.
Why do you think we have such trouble “staying on message,” and why we do nuance? We understand that the message is subject to constant revision as we stumble on our fascinating humanistic journeys through reality. We might revise imperfectly, but at least we do revise when reality speaks.
I apologize for any liberals you’ve met who have created in your mind such a bizarre concept of liberals. Wish you could spend a day drinking beer and running the woods with me and some of my liberal buds. I think you’d find rural Southern liberals interesting, to say the least.
The crowd would, of course, also include some beer-drinking conservatives, but no hatemongers allowed. It can go no further than jovially suggesting to each other that we are probably full of shit, but that really describes the human condition about 90% of the time.
Peace, my good man.
j.
February 17, 2005 at 10:30 pm
59Variation on a theme:
Rep. Walter B. Jones Jr. (R-N.C.) pressed Rumsfeld on whether he had talked with an aide who was quoted last month as saying Congress had been too generous in expanding military retirement benefits. “No, I have not, nor have I seen the statement that you’ve quoted in the context that it might have been included,” the defense secretary replied.
j.
February 17, 2005 at 10:31 pm
60Oops. Above quote is from:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A30800-2005Feb16?language=pri nter
Jerry
February 18, 2005 at 12:16 pm
61I think Flipside was making a joke on the Latin “post hoc ergo propter hoc.” See, he has wittily substituted the Greek proctos (changing the last letter, for some reason) which means “anus” for “propter.” Now, “After that, therefore anus that” doesn’t seem to mean anything, but he may be insulting us in clever lawyerese. Or, in spite of his rigorous training, just doesn’t know the right words.
Flipside, you are right, of course. No one is requiring polished air-tight arguments. Humor and wit from the right would be a welcome change. But stupid personal attacks are just that.
john
March 6, 2005 at 10:19 pm
62am new to internet, am amazed so many have so litte going on in there lives they feel this sort of thing is meaningful.
flipside was right, you all need to get jobs.