Ellensburg Said Greenwald Said

Here's an example of Ellensburg arguing on behalf of Greenwald at RWNH contrasted with Greenwald's actual post. It was hours later. Do Greenwald fanatics tatoo his posts on their arms? Even the logic flow is all but the same. Not to mention some wording. Greenwald's blog text in blue.

Rick Ellensburg Said:
6:52 pm 

RE: The article about Barr makes clear that the whole room hated Barr for criticizing Bush, not just one imbecile. And if you’re not familiar with the way in which even life-long conservative Senators are no longer conservative when they jump out of line,...

GG: We see the same thing happening to hard-core conservative Bob Barr due to his criticism of Bush's violations of FISA . Similarly, the minute a Senator with years of conservatism behind them deviates from a Bush decree on a single issue, they are no longer "conservative."

RE: And he said it’s not just the excess spending but the total lack of distrust in the federal government, as shown by the huge powers they want to put in Bush – FISA, torture, renderings, Guantanomo, etc. Where is the distrust of Government?
And Bush wants gov’t in every aspect of our lives – Schiavo, gay marriage. Everything is federalized, nothing left to the states. This is all in his post; you ignored it.

Where is the distrust of Government?

GG: It was that deeply rooted distrust that led to conservatives’ vigorous advocacy of states’ rights over centralized power in the federal government,

Whereas distrust of the government was quite recently a hallmark of conservatism, expressing distrust of George Bush and the expansive governmental powers he is pursuing subjects one to accusations of being a leftist, subversive loon

RE: He didn’t say all people who support Bush are slaves and cult members. Many are.

GG: Indeed, as many Bush followers themselves admit, the central belief of the Bush follower's "conservatism" is no longer one that ascribes to a limited federal government

RE: And they just had a conservative event and the whole place erupted in cheers when Ann Coulter urged violence on ragheads and called for the deaths of liberal supreme court justices and bill clinton. Is that conservative to you or a cult?

GG: It’s not some weird coincidence that the 5,000 people in attendance at the CPAC this last week erupted in "boisterous ovation" when she urged violence against "ragheads,’ nor is it an accident that her hateful, violence-inciting screeds -- accusing "liberals" of being not wrong, but "treasonous" -- become best-sellers.

And in that regard, people like Michelle Malkin, John Hinderaker, Jonah Goldberg and Hugh Hewitt are not conservatives. They are authoritarian cultists.

RE: And one other thing – in his update, he provides an example of conservatives who HATED FISA under Clinton and thought that eavesdropping on Americans, even with judicial oversight, was a dangerous threat to freedom. Now, under Bush, conservatives not only love eavesdropping, but think that it’s fine that Bush is eavesdropping with no judicial oversight.

GG: For a glimpse of how actual conservatives quite recently used to think, one should read this article at FreeRepublic.com, which decries the dangerous loss of liberty and privacy as a result of the Clinton Administration's use of a "secret court" (something called the "FISA court") ...

Conservatives used to consider things like this to be quite disturbing and bad -- and the eavesdropping then was at least with judicial oversight. Now, George Bush is in office, and all of the distrust we used to have of the Federal Government exercising these powers has evaporated, because we trust in George Bush to do what is best for us.

Another bit from GG below - both he and RE seems to like the word cult. GG used it twice in his post and RE did in his, as well.

GG: It doesn’t even sound like political argument; it sounds like a form of highly emotional mass theater masquerading as political debate. It really sounds like a personality cult. It is impervious to reasoned argument and the only attribute is loyalty to the leader. Whatever it is, it isn’t conservative.

Comments

[indianaredneck]

Dan get a life.

[dustin]

Dan, thanks for writing this peice.

It is informative about a fraud I care about. I'd like to see it brought out, I'd like as much information as I can get about it.

Further, it is funny and highly entertaining to read about these sorts of things. this surely is part of a valuable blog; we can't all read boring blah blah blah politics without a little of this stuff. Unserious matters can be followed up on, an I hope you continue to write about this.

Ignore the 'I'm too cool for this' type comments pressuring you to 'grow up' and ignore this fruad.

If radicals out there really are offended enought o comment about how another comment shouldn't be written, they are obviously jackasses. If they are embarassed, they should direct greivances towards Greenwald, who lacks this sort of funny, interesting comentary about unserious but relevant matters.

By the way, the ability to lie on a blog is relevant in today's changing world. People who think this is not important in at least an academic sort of way are not thinking about this clearly.

[rhodeymark]

I condemn this incitement to violence against socks. Furthermore, I believe the term "hosiery puppets" may be more appropriate here.

[TC@LeatherPenguin]

Sure, smacking his puppets is fun, but everyone seems to be missing the biggest fraud. Greenwald declaims himself to be a NYC civil rights lawyer with ten years under his belt. But Ron Kuby, radical son of William Kunstler, shyster to the craziest, never heard of the Double G dude.

[Dan]

Ron Kuby

LOL Now there's someone to get mad at.

[TC@LeatherPenguin]

Kuby's a dude. Might drive you crazy, but he is up front about it. Sammy the Bull wanted to shoot him. When Sammy realized the Hells Angels had Kuby's back and would kill everyone--woman and child, he called off the attack.

[Dan]

Kuby's a dude

Some ays they're fine. Other days they both drive me nuts when they get into stupid chit. And Kuby's honest, but he's still a freakin anti-US commie LOL and since he has his money now, the socialism he advocates wouldn't impact him. But, yes, he is up front.

[Ed]

Dan's just trying to make a name for himself by sleazily attacking a more successful, more interesting blogger.

Traffic spiked didn't it Dan? But don't you feel a little bit like a whore? Selling out your credibility for a few more hits?

[TC@LeatherPenguin]

Yo, Ed? Reach deeep into your pants.

Yes, Shirley, that's a puppet.

[Rick]

Gosh, what could Ed's beef be? GiGi summoned his harem to go forth and proclaim his fame, and now--presto--he very well known hereabouts. Can't stop talking about that Greenwald blogger!

Nice of Ed to show concern for Dan Riehl's credibility, which I'm sure Ed heretofore fussed over and admired like a prize Orchid.

Cordially...