Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
What a load of road apples
Posted by: McQ on Sunday, August 26, 2007

Dale destroyed the Martin Lewis "open letter" to General Pace requesting Pace "relive the president of his command" without even breaking a sweat. It is an absurd notion and anyone with even a modicum of intelligence and knowledge of the Constitution knows that. Obviously Martin Lewis, however, didn't.

After being savaged in the comment section there and apparently savaged in the blogsophere as well, Lewis now claims it was all a big joke:
I have been reminded of that question as I watch with bemusement the right-wing blogosphere getting its knickers in a twist over my column that presented a tongue-in-cheek open letter to General Peter Pace suggesting that he arrest George W. Bush for "Conduct Unbecoming". It was of course just a 'a modest proposal'...

Anyone who has read "Gulliver's Travels" (even the 'Comics Illustrated' version from Regnery Publishing for the "challenged reader") is aware of a little thing called satire. Perhaps has even heard of Jonathan Swift.

But it appears that the only "Swift" that the right-wing nuts have heard of is the Swift Boat.

Swift = Smear they understand.

Swift = Satire...? Well, let's just be charitable and say that it "eludes" them.
Riiiiiight!

It was all a bit of tongue-in-cheek fun to trap the right wing and show them up for what they really are.

Heh ... the attempt to salvage whatever bit of veracity and reputation this nimrod had is almost as bad as his open letter.

Why do I argue that? Because for quite a few comments to his original post, Lewis responded in a manner which wasn't satirical or tongue-in-cheek. He was utterly serious (although I'm sure he'll now claim that was also done in fun).

Examples - to the very 1st commenter in the thread who claims his suggestion amounts to a military coup:
========MARTIN RESPONDS=========

As my post says - I am absolutely not advocating a de facto military coup. I am simply advising General Pace that he should relieve President Bush of his command of the military - pending a court martial.

It is an interesting question as to who would then become Commander-In-Chief. I'm not sure that it would be the Vice President. But if it was - the same course of action could be taken if the Vice President acted with "Conduct Unbecoming"
Wow. Sounds like satire to me, and you? To the same commenter in a follow-up comment immediately after the first:
=========MARTIN RESPONDS==========

I utterly reject the use of any force or illegal action of any kind and specifically reject and condemn any calls for it. I do call on General Pace to speak his conscience and to do his ethical, moral duty to his forces and to his nation. Sometimes the right words from a man of courage have a moral impact that resonates.
Pure Monty Pyton there. Next, to a commenter who says he's full of it with his UCMJ cites, he says:
==========MARTIN RESPONDS=============

You are 100% correct. Well-spotted. I'm so used to Bush over-riding his Generals that the reference to "a general" leaped out at me. I am adjusting my letter to General Pace accordingly.

Of course this does not in any way lessen General Pace's authority to act. That particular phrase was not the cornerstone of my case. Merely an adjunct. The combination of Articles 7, 133 and 134 provide the authority for General Pace to save his nation.
Oh yeah, nothing at all serious about this response. Pure satire and truly arguing "tongue-in-cheek". Here's another response which backs his "it was all a big joke" claim:
============MARTIN RESPONDS==========

I ask General Pace to do two things. One is to relieve the President of his command as Commander-In-Chief. The other is to place the President under military arrest. It is arguable as to the conflict between the Constitution and the Uniform Code Of Military Justice. One of the important legal ramifications of My Lai was the obligation to relieve a senior officer of his/her command in exceptional circumstances. If General Pace was performing a military imperative in a peaceful, non-threatening manner and simply informed Mr. Bush that he was being relieved of his military command, there would be no justification for the Secret Service to act as you suggest. Whatever the ultimate consequence, the impact of such a courageous and noble act on behalf of his nation, would be significant.
And another:
=======MARTIN RESPONDS===========

There is a vast difference between arresting someone and the outcome of a court martial. I have not advocated that General Pace "court martial" Bush. Nor could he. I have suggested that he relieve him of his command - which would automatically trigger a court martial. At which Bush's status would be decided. So your analogy is moot.
Oh, and my favorite satirical arrow from his quiver of humor:
========MARTIN RESPONDS==========

I am most certainly not proposing sedition. I am saying that General Pace has an authority - be it military, moral or notional - to use his position as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to announce that he is relieving the President of his role as Commander-In-Chief. It may not carry weight over the President's power. But the symobilsm [sic] of such an act in defense of America's beleagured [sic] and abused armed forces could resonate loudly.
Yes, by now it is obvious to everyone reading these responses that he was truly involved in a joke. The problem was the joke was on him. His ignorance had him looking about as foolish as one could imagine. At this point in the comment section, he became strangely silent, no longer responding and defending his asinine post.

Then, a bit later, Lewis began showing up again in the comment section and suddenly he began dropping hints that in reality, the dumb right-wingers who'd shown up to savage him were the butt end of a wonderful and elaborate joke that they were just too stupid to grasp.

Mr. Lewis, I've seen some pretty pathetic attempts to cover your ass in the 5+ decades I've lived, but this has got to rank right up in the top 3. In fact the word "pathetic" seems inadequate to the task of actually describing your effort in that regard. It is so transparently a lie that you would think you'd be ashamed for even offering it.

You see, you tried too hard in your open letter and then you tried too hard in your responses to criticism for even the dumbest right-winger to buy into this load of hogwash you're trying to sell. Yup, "pathetic" seems inadequate, but it will have to do. With a capital "P".

Pathetic.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Of course, it’s the response you’d expect from a child, "Well, D’uh I was ONLY kidding." Sure you get busted and so the only thing to do is say you were:
1) Misquoted
2) Misinterpreted
3) Joking.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Martin Lewis doesn’t appear to be too swift. You’re sure this wasn’t a comedy sketch by Martin and Lewis?
 
Written By: tom scott
URL: http://
I’ve read Jonathan Swift (A Modest Proposal) and Martin Lewis is no Swift.
 
Written By: Bob
URL: http://
I wonder if the left would see the "satire" in Bush making a speech in which he said he was suspending the Constitution,then came back the next day and said he did it just to "watch with bemusement while the left-wing bloggers got their knickers in a twist" over it. How good of a laugh do you think we could expect from over at HuffPo with that one? Yeah,you know how funny that one would be don’t you?
 
Written By: InBama
URL: http://
In defense of the idea that it was intended as a joke...

(1) Sheryl Crow’s post at HP about using two pieces of toilet paper was a joke mistaken for a serious suggestion.

(2) Lewis’ bio advertises him as a "humorist". It’s not out of character for a humorist to write something intended to provoke a response like that.

(3) Dale has done exactly the same sort of thing in the past on a number of occasions. (i.e., write an absurd-seeming post, allow people to react, point out after the fact that it was a poke)

The medium makes it difficult to distinguish between absurd suggestion and intentional absurdity. And sometimes that makes it fun for writers to egg people on. I don’t know which he was doing, but it’s perfectly plausible. (cf: the Dale/Ace tiff)
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://
"Wow. Sounds like satire to me, and you?"

If so, he should be punished anyway, because it wasn’t funny.


"I wonder if the left would see the "satire" in Bush making a speech in which he said he was suspending the Constitution,"

Sure, just like they saw the humor in Reagan’s little joke about bombing the USSR.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Yeah Jon, sure...that’s it it COULD have been a joke. Is that going to be the new trope, make a suggestion and when it gets ripped, simply claim it was a joke?

I stand by the statement it’s pretty childish, we used to do that in High School, that’s the new plateau for serious commentary.

Here’s a hint, you read my POMO screeds on a topic and it’s fairly obvious it’s a joke, to Tim or Bit or a host of others. I read his thread, there wasn’t anyone egging him on or saying, "It’s a joke dudes."
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
For more see see here.
 
Written By: tom scott
URL: http://
The problem is that it’s all too plausible - and too much of a lefty fantasy to be seen as satire. Plus the comments. Oh, and it wasn’t funny at all.
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
In defense of the idea that it was intended as a joke...
I’d be more inclined to believe it really was a joke had Lewis not defended his writing so stubbornly, and then changed his story so often.

No, I think Lewis was mostly serious in his essay. Once he got called on it — from lefties, no less — all of a sudden it’s satire. The fact that so many liberals were telling him it was a bad idea seems to have escaped Lewis, since he said he enjoyed watching the right wing get worked into a lather.
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://steverino.journalspace.com/
I thought I couldn’t have more comtempt for Lewis and then he proves me wrong by calling upon Swift in his defense.
 
Written By: Dusty
URL: http://
He should be tried for sedition, and either hanged or stood before a firing squad.

Don’t worry, that comment was JUST SATIRE
 
Written By: SHARK
URL: http://
I could tell it was a joke from the start. You’re just sore because you fell for it. Lighten up!
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
I could tell it was a joke from the start. You’re just sore because you fell for it. Lighten up!
So Erb, we can assume that everything you’ve ever posted here is satire, yes?
 
Written By: Shark
URL: http://
I could tell it was a joke from the start.
Dead giveaway that the opposite is true.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
"Why do I argue that? Because for quite a few comments to his original post, Lewis responded in a manner which wasn’t satirical or tongue-in-cheek."

It’s not just Lewis’s comments, but everybody else’s. I just went through the first page of comments to this thing and even if there was any comments by a Huffington Post people treating this as satire I couldn’t find them.

Now, maybe he doesn’t expect us right-wing wingnuts to recuhgniz his hi’ fallutin’ satire (or satyr?...who the hell’s Jonethun Swift?), but if he’s remotely competent, shouldn’t his own audience understand it?

The fact this was satire wasn’t recognizable to **anybody** but Lewis (and given his earlier comments even that’s pretty debatable).
 
Written By: AD
URL: http://
So was "nimbus" satire also?
 
Written By: Shark
URL: http://
mental note: if I’m ever accused of treason, "it was satire!"
 
Written By: AD
URL: http://
ahh, d*** typos, I should know better by now not post this late.
 
Written By: AD
URL: http://
I can’t believe people would accuse this man of lying! He’s said such nice things about Bush in the past. Like this:

LEWIS: Well, you know, I respect President Bush because he’s a man of integrity, and he keeps his word.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0206/29/smn.09.html

But then again there is this too:

Some thanks are in order:

1) To George W. Bush. It only cost $354 billion (and counting) and the lives of 3,000 very expendable US military to enable the President to demonstrate to his dad that he has a bigger Dick. Or is one...

Isn’t it ironic - don’tcha think? Saddam hung so that Dubya can prove that he’s BETTER hung...

And this in the comments on page 5,same article:

I take poetic license with grammar - just as this administration takes cynical license with truth...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/martin-lewis/well-hung-saddam-hung-t_b_37423.html

Just satire I’m sure....
 
Written By: honestAbe
URL: http://
The left has already been calling for the assassination of Bush, the impeachment of Bush, apprehension and imprisonment of Rumsfeld and American generals by the EU/Hague/NATO/whatever the hell and general violence and thuggery against non-leftists (actual vandalism during the 04 election).

Maybe all of that is just a bunch more clever satire. Or perhaps the entire socialist ideology is a satire of humanity.
 
Written By: jows
URL: http://
The left has already been calling for the assassination of Bush, the impeachment of Bush, apprehension and imprisonment of Rumsfeld and American generals by the EU/Hague/NATO/whatever the hell and general violence and thuggery against non-leftists (actual vandalism during the 04 election).
Although a larger portion has called for impeachment, the rest have been called for by about .001% of the left — the extremist wing that the right loves to attack, but which doesn’t really illustrate the majority of the left. And, of course, don’t forget conservative and libertarian opposition to the policy.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
As I remarked that my own place, yesterday, the original call, seems to me a reflection of the degree of desperation that the left finds itself feeding on lately. As has already been remarked to in these comments, they’ve been trying to get something /anything on W for some time. They have been unable to.

There is madness of a sort at work here. The comment that I posted from Hillary Clinton day before yesterday I think correctly identifies the genesis of it; their biggest concern is to threats to their power. They recognize that power is being lost to them. Power, to the Democrats, is as life itself. It is as the breath that they take. The desperation that we see here takes on the quality of a drowning man, flailing about for something / anything that will float, thus sustaining that breath. The implication here is that they know the only way that they can maintain their power, is to usurp it… unconstitutionally. Illegally.

The simple explanation for the quality of both the original comment, and, when caught by around half the countryon that comment, the laughable defense of it, is a quality about acts of desperation...

You see, you very seldom get the chance to think desperate acts through. This was clearly not thought through.

It does have the advantage, however, of showing the rest of us, quite clearly, the mindset we’re up against.

And Erb; when I see Howard Dean is the chairman of the DNC, I know your claim is way off base. The extreme left is the Democratic party.
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
I don’t know which he was doing, but it’s perfectly plausible.
I understand your point and don’t dispute it in general, I’m just suggesting that in this case his fairly vigorous defense of the post in the comments moves it from a "plausible satire" to a "back-peddling excuse", and a poorly done one at that.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
This satire defense is wonderful. You can do anything and just call it satire!

This opens the door for all sorts of wonderful and vile things....
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Jon,

I think your attempt at fair play is admirable, but I agree with McQ. It could have been just poorly executed satire, and certainly I am guilty of that, though I don’t hold myself out as a humorist, he does. If as a professional humorist that was the best he can do, well, get a new line of work.

In my own post on this I pointed out that at first I thought it was satire. I kept waiting for the mask to slip and let us in on the joke. Except, it didn’t. Neither lefty nor righty commenters took it as a joke, he didn’t act as if it was a joke in his responses. So I don’t buy it. The only joke in this is Lewis.
 
Written By: Lance
URL: http://asecondhandconjecture.com
More on the claim of Erb that the farleft isn’t the majority of the Democrat party today.... Let’s see if anyone can guess who ran this poll:
Is Marx a useful theorist for Democrats?

Groucho maybe, Karl no — 24% (8 votes)
He offers some insights, but these are limited — 15% (5 votes)
He offers much insight and we should take him more seriously — 51% (17 votes)
He offers to most complete explanation of our society of all political theorists — 9% (3 votes)
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
The irony of the left, even satirically, calling for a military takeover (what else would you call this) of the government is...well, there just aren’t words to describe how ironic that is.

Yo BDS rules, OK!



 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Ah, satire. That Gerald Ford was such a humorist. Who knew? Now I get it. No Soviet domination of Poland indeed. Hah! Pretty funny.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
I wonder if Lenin and Stalin would have mumbled something about satire if things had gone the other way.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
I wonder;

How many people have been screaming at the top of their lungs, "I didn’t mean it " just before the switch got thrown?

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
Okay, quick lesson: this is satire. That was not. This is satire. That was not.

Satire means "a narrative where irony and exaggeration are used for a humorous portrayal." There was no irony or exaggeration in what he wrote.
 
Written By: Phelps
URL: http://phelps.donotremove.net
Bithead, a poll of 33 people is almost surely biased and statistically insignificant. Also, it doesn’t address the issues discussed, but goes off into political theory. Come on, you can do better than that.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
Sure, just like they saw the humor in Reagan’s little joke about bombing the USSR.
I always saw that as just another unfulfilled campaign promise.
 
Written By: triticale
URL: http://triticale.mu.nu
Bithead, a poll of 33 people is almost surely biased and statistically insignificant. Also, it doesn’t address the issues discussed, but goes off into political theory.
The polling numbers have grown significantly, since then. Translation; you didn’t bother looking for it before opening your mouth.

But better than this; you seem to be making the assumption that political theory has no connection whatever with political action. Nice attempt a confusing the issue. Face it, Erb; the far left is what is driving the democrat party today. And what drives the far left... Look at the polling numbers, and you tell me.

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
Bithead, you not only gave an alleged "poll" (You don’t say where it’s from or if it’s scientific) about political theory, when I was pointing out that the positions about Bush were from a small extreme. In other words, you simply aren’t addressing the issue, and you’re doing it in a manner unsupported by any evidence other than something for all I know you’re making up.

So you don’t address my point, and you make another irrelevant point with no evidence or analysis. Very weak.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
Bithead, you not only gave an alleged "poll" (You don’t say where it’s from or if it’s scientific)
Of course! How in the world would anybody be expected to guess if I gave all of it away? Hint, since you so very obviously need one.. GOOGLE text of the quote... then Go reread the blinking question.



 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
McQ... Having listened to your last podcast (sorry... dinner with my sister in from NC), I have to say it COULD have been satire.

I mean, you guys DID say his other satire was based on things that couldn’t possibly happen or be true...

So technically...

Oh and to the drooling retard who uttered the following:
and the lives of 3,000 very expendable US military
...

I have said it before, and damnit I’ll say it again.

You’re keeping score for the wrong damn team, you cretin.
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
McQ... Having listened to your last podcast (sorry... dinner with my sister in from NC), I have to say it COULD have been satire.

I mean, you guys DID say his other satire was based on things that couldn’t possibly happen or be true...
Again, it’s not based on what he might have done in the past, its based on his defense in the comments of what he did the other day.

Had he never opened his mouth, or in this case, engaged his keyboard in defense, then yes he could argue it was a satire and you would have to agree that no matter how poorly done, it was at least plausible. However his immediate and tenacious defense of the post killed the satire plausibility gambit for him. That’s why it was so painful to watch him try to twist his way out of the stupidity he’d posted with the further stupidity alleging "satire".
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
No, Bithead, you provide your sources. Otherwise, your information is worthless (33 people in a poll?) Also, it didn’t address the issues in play so it really was irrelevant in any event. Unless you provide some cite or evidence, you’ve got nothing at all.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
If you’re going to dedicate multiple posts to the HuffPost’s crazy, you might drop a mention in of this crazy somewhere. It looks like the Center For Security Policy wants George Bush to be President For Life.

I mean, otherwise, your readers might inadvertently think that only leftists tolerated crazies like Mr. Satire, right when a counterexample is simultaneously breaking news.

You wouldn’t want that to happen.


PS: I, too, think it’s a bad idea for the military to mount a coup against George Bush. He’s done 80% of the damage he’s likely to do already, frankly.
 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
I, too, think it’s a bad idea for the military to mount a coup against George Bush. He’s done 80% of the damage he’s likely to do already, frankly.
Only one scenario could warrant refusal to follow Presidential orders: if it’s clear Congress opposes and has passed legislation opposing a war against Iran. Let’s say that happens, the President vetos it, and the veto is not overridden. Or if Congress tries, but minority filibusters and the like prevent the legislation from being passed. Then the President might think he has license to attack Iran. But only Congress can declare war, and if they do not approve use of force and have tried to ban it, then the President would clearly be overstepping his constitutional authority.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
No, Bithead, you provide your sources. Otherwise, your information is worthless (33 people in a poll?)
a parental you didn’t bother to go back to one question. The question was, "could anybody guess where I got that from?"

Clearly, you can’t.
Tell me; are you always this reluctant to do your own research? Seems a regrettable trait for someone in your position.
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
Bithead, if you want something to count for anything you don’t tell people to guess, you give your source. You didn’t. You have nothing. My guess is that you just made it up.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider