Login Here
(Image from icanhascheezburger.com)
You know, as a blogger, one can go to the well too many times on certain topics. You want to hit as many targets as possible in the course of your work and you wouldn't want to fixate on one thing or person too much for fear of boring your readers or appearing to have an unhealthy obsession with someone. But I just can't leave this latest Ann Althouse debacle alone. It's like blogger crack. You guys may end up having to send me and Ned the Fighting Koi back to snark rehab before all this is over.
Who can resist a story like this? Althouse's wild-eyed meltdown on Bloggingheads TV was the Snot Heard Round the World, judging by some of the reactions I've seen today. Feministing's Jessica Valenti gives us the condensed version, Dave Niewert has a transcript and some editorial comments, including the following:
But just to answer her question: There's a reason the right blogosphere is so warm and welcoming to her -- she's useful to them.
Look, I've got no hesitation about criticizing Democrats on serious policy grounds (see here for a relatively recent example), and I don't think anyone in the liberal blogosphere has denounced me as a heretic for doing so.
But what Althouse has built a career out of as a blogger is criticizing Democrats (quite frequently, it must be added, on the most frivolous grounds) in a way that transparently buys into, and supports, right-wing talking points (most notably including the claim that left-wing bloggers are inherently more nasty than those on the right, a claim I think I have documented as patently false). In doing so, she's handy for conservatives the same way Michelle Malkin is handy for bigots -- they can hold her up as an example of some talking point and say, "See, even the liberal Ann Althouse says it, so it must be so!"
We need a name for these people, America's De-Educators. The ever-shrinking responsible media does its damnedest every day to force facts and information into the public's heads, but then people like Anns Althouse and Coulter, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, and InstaParsnip come along and pull them right back out again. Global warming? Just a theory! Cindy Sheehan? A grief prostitute with a porn addiction! The media's permanent hard-on for slandering the Clintons? They deserve it!
It gets dizzying after a while.
But back to blogger reaction to Althouse's piteous cry for help. At Eschaton we find the following:
Booby Fear
Alterman:
- A few months ago, Bob Wright asked me to do a BHTV with Ms. Althouse. I knew nothing about her at all, except that she accused a female liberal blogger who met with Bill Clinton of having breasts ... or something. I never could figure out what it was really. I said "OK," with the caveat that I wanted her to talk about why she, as a woman, thought it appropriate to call attention to the fact that another woman standing near Clinton happen to have breasts. I mean, my daughter will have breasts one day, and I want to be able to prepare her in case she needs to apologize for them. When Althouse emailed me to discuss potential topics, I said what I said to Bob, which was that we could talk about anything, as long as it included that topic. She got all huffy and pulled out of the discussion. Then she attacked me on her blog and again on the op-ed page of The New York Times. Here, she flips out -- is there any other word? -- with Garance when the latter merely refers to it. Garance is duly surprised by the hysteria -- as will you be if you watch it, I imagine -- but the fact is, she is getting crazy about the fact that she says Garance did not prepare the topic in advance. I tried to do that, and she flipped out as well.
And by the way, when she accidentally says, "You're really just undermining my point," she's right on. And by the way, calling the people at Tapped "vicious, ugly people" is not really a good argument for the civility of your side, ma'am.
You think? She didn't call us traitors or start discussing methods of execution for liberals like some members of the Kind and Welcoming and Ever-so-Civil Right Wing. It's a start, I guess.
Lemieux at Lawyers, Guns, and Money weighs in as well:
Ann Althouse gets livid at Garance Franke-Ruta over nothing. At one point, she threatens to hang up. She's become such a pathetic figure that it's almost painful to watch. (UPDATE: C&L excerpts a section here. Dave has the full transcript of the segment with commentary.)
Garance is understandably surprised that Althouse would go into an incoherent rage because she brings up the Valenti incident (make sure to scroll down to Althouse's own comments, including such knee-slappers as "Jessica should have worn a beret. Blue dress would have been good too"), since she had apparently discussed it the previous week with Glenn Reynolds and Dr. Helen. But this isn't really surprising -- she's constructed a very carefully sanitized ex post facto version of this incident, and she's not going to engage the merits with anybody who might remember it or who might challenge her version of events.
"Jessica should have worn a beret."??!! "Blue dress would have been good, too."??!!
And yet, to Miz Althouse, it is a puzzle why Teh Left wouldn't pull off the road to pee on her if she was standing on the shoulder on fire. Oh, and now, not content with her toddler-style tantrum with Franke-Ruta, Althouse is polling her readers (and we all know how painful that can be) as to who she should "debate" next:
Since I'm getting so much attention today for a hot encounter on Bloggingheads, let me remind you of this old Bloggingheads encounter with Jonah Goldberg. Anyway, here's the question: Who do you think would be the ideal Bloggingheads counterpart for me? Things to keep in mind: 1. I hate to be boring. 2. I want to have fun and be stimulated into finding new ideas. 3. I like the subjects that I talk about on this blog. 4. I like a good argument with a lot of back and forth.
She's also into light bondage and role-playing but NO WATERSPORTS.
Her readers offer helpful suggestions ("Camille Paglia!", "Andrew Sullivan!"), but Althouse bats them all aside as unsuitable for one reason or another.
Paglia? Amanda Marcotte? Scalia?!
Someone thoughtfully makes the following suggestion:
- A Hermit said...
How about T-Rex or Michael Berube; they certainly seem to have your number...
Or maybe "that intern" herself; that would be interesting...
*COUGH*!!
Well, as you can imagine, La Althouse doesn't even deign to respond to that comment.
But hey, Ann. If you read this, I'll be more than happy to take you on for the edification and entertainment of the bloggingheads-tv audience. I think it would be great. Just don't expect me to sit there and hyperventilate and clutch my breast (Heh. I knew I could work in the word "BREAST" before we got to the end of this post!) and let you run on ad nauseum about what a poor, persecuted, heretical victim of Teh Left you are.
But any time you want to bring it, baby, by all means, do.
I eagerly await your reply.
Share This 
Spotlight
Reply
LOL. Simon didn't beat Mortimer to the punch!
Ruth Anne: After she (Camille Paglia) uninvited me from dinner? I don't think she'd do a head to head debate. It's not her style.
Re Scalia: He does go around putting himself on show, and he did share the stage with Breyer. Still, it would be weird. But Judge Posner has a blog, so why not a judge on Bloggingheads?
Re Amanda Marcotte and Ezra Klein: I wouldn't go with someone who has outright insulted me on their blog. And Ezra is younger than my younger son. I think the extreme age difference, especially since I'm a teacher, creates the stupid impression that I should be mentoring the young person. I want an even playing field, not something that undercuts my side.
Also, I'm thinking journalists aren't a good match.