Update: John Cole is upset as the post I linked on his blog was "By: Tim F" and apparently Cole doesn't want to be accountable for it. Fair enough, nothing new in that.
John Cole attempts to flesh out a post by Salon's Glenn Greenwald questioning the credibility of Senator Kit Bond and, apparently, everyone else who blogs and supported the war over the past few years:
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds to me like Bond just said that for four years he and all of the other elected, media and online war boosters were completely wrong when they argued that everything was under control, we had a great plan. By Bond’s own admission the warhawks had no real basis for telling folks like me to just stop all the damn complaining and let the misunderstood geniuses on top do their job.
That's a complete distortion of the debate that has raged on the Right among supporters of the war over recent years. Many, including me, were arguing for a change in strategy going back at least two years. But we did it without suggesting the only option was surrender, or simply quitting.
As as for Glenn Greenwald questioning anyone's credibility ... well, there's always this, I suppose.
How DARE you criticize Glenn Greenwald!
Spoken by as true an authority on credibility as Greenwald himself, in one of his incarnations, anyway.
Actually, I didn't have anything to say about the subject at all, moron.
Posted by: John Cole | Sunday, July 22, 2007 at 06:45 PM
I'm pretty sure Cole agrees with Gleen. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Well, actually, there's quite a bit wrong with it. Gleen has his knickers twisted over Bond saying back in January, '06 that progress had been made against the insurgency. As if we couldn't have had the wrong plan and still have made progress. At least that's how I think the criticism is directed.
Gleen and the anti-war crowd were right. Never mind their hysterical predictions prior to the actual battle (10,000 dead, WMD's to be used against our troops etc.) and now we must heed their omniscience. The enemy is not AQ or Iran or insurgents but the resident at 1600 Pennsylvania. That's all you really need to know. Call it Anti-war for DUmmies.
Posted by: Chris | Sunday, July 22, 2007 at 07:16 PM
I didn't realize you don't take responsibility for what's posted on your blog. I guess I should have figured as much.
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Sunday, July 22, 2007 at 07:17 PM
Ooops. I should have said that I think Tim F., writing on Cole's blog, agrees with Gleen.
Posted by: Chris | Sunday, July 22, 2007 at 07:29 PM
4 years of Bush-a$$-kissing and voting for all his policies and now Republican senators want us to believe that they have been criticizing the war all through; what a hoot; only the delusional kool-aid 28% drinkers are buying that; 72% of country is going to end this war starting September.
Posted by: Calder | Sunday, July 22, 2007 at 07:31 PM
I didn't realize you don't take responsibility for what's posted on your blog. I guess I should have figured as much.
Sure, I will take responsibility for whatever is said on my blog, you dishonest hack. But let's revisit what you wrote:
"John Cole attempts to..."
I didn't attempt to flesh out anything, and pretending that you were right using my name in the post is precisely the kind of weaselly bullshit that got us in this mess in the first place.
You ever get to the bottom of the Natalee Holloway mystery, or did the google hits stop coming so you decided it was no longer worth obsessing over?
Posted by: John Cole | Sunday, July 22, 2007 at 08:34 PM
I'm hurt, John ... really hurt. LOL
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Sunday, July 22, 2007 at 09:32 PM