October 20, 2004
Missed It by That Much
Howard Kurtz links to Tony Pierce complaining about Glenn Reynolds, which is pretty newsworthy in and of itself no matter what you think of the actual complaint. And then later in the same column, Kurtz extensively quotes Dana Stevens' column about Jon Stewart on Crossfire, although he doesn't pick up any of the links in her quote, including the one to "the blogosphere" (er... me?).
Posted by Jim Treacher at October 20, 2004 12:16 PM
Man, it's sad to see Tony go off the deep end like that. Or was he always like that and I just stopped reading too long ago to realize it? Or is this a staged dick-a-thon on his part and on 11/5 he's going to be all, "surprise, I was just fuckin with ye!"
Posted by: Brian Jones at October 20, 2004 12:51 PMbro,
im not sure if this is good news or bad news, but andrew sullivan just linked the busblog.
brian jones, youve been away for a while. ive been off the deep end for quite some time: when i see a guy make 30+ pro-bush posts in a row and claim to be non-partisan, and not a republican i will call bs on him.
when have i ever been any different?
Posted by: tony at October 20, 2004 02:12 PMWell, you've inspired Sullivan to the point of relative coherence. So that's certainly an achievement. I'd call that good news!
Posted by: Angus Jung at October 20, 2004 02:37 PMWhen I was reading you you were doing observational stuff about girls and LA and sports and the occasional political post.
I stopped reading when the political posts started getting more frequent and strident.
Posted by: Brian Jones at October 21, 2004 10:43 AMYeah hes right you relly are kind of strident(political).
Posted by: iraqwarwrong at October 21, 2004 11:40 AM> when i see a guy make 30+ pro-bush posts in a row and claim to be non-partisan, and not a republican i will call bs on him.
That's nice, but not relevant because Reynolds doesn't do that, unless "pro-Bush" includes being against genocide in the Sudan, corruption in the UN, and pictures of Tennessee. There's also the drug-legalization, pro-gay marriage, and other positions that Reynolds takes that no one else seems to think are "republican".
And then there's the general question as to why Reynolds is obligated to do as someone else would like, especially someone who toes the DNC line so closely.
BS indeed.
Posted by: Andy Freeman at October 21, 2004 06:20 PM