Goldberg Misreads His Own Blog Post In Order To Attack ThinkProgress
Goldberg Misreads His Own Blog Post In Order To Attack ThinkProgress
On September 21, ThinkProgress noted a 2004 blog post by National Review Online editor-at-large Jonah Goldberg, in which the conservative writer approvingly posted an e-mail from a then-active duty reader that savagely bashed generals as “a gigantic pain in the ass” who are “dishonest.”
In the post, ThinkProgress contrasted Goldberg’s vicarious attack on the credibility of generals with his current chastising of Democrats over their reaction to MoveOn.org’s Gen. David Petraeus ad in the New York Times. ThinkProgress suggested that Goldberg had separate standards for conservatives and progressives when it comes to criticism of military generals.
After receiving what he called some “e-pestering,” Goldberg responded today. In a post titled “UnThinking Progress,” he wrote:
Yawn. Well a few points: First, posting an e-mail isn’t an endorsement in the blogosphere. Second, there is a remarkable difference between criticizing a commander in the field during a war as vaguely treasonous or un-American, and questioning the credentials of a civilian running to be president of the United States.
Jonah, here’s a crucial difference: You pro-actively aided an attack on military generals, but now, you’re criticizing some Democrats for merely staying silent about a newspaper ad.
Goldberg’s response is either a misreading of his own 2004 post or a willfully misleading representation of our argument. The e-mail posted by Goldberg was an explicit sweeping attack on all generals, not just Gen. Wesley Clark, who was running for President at the time.
In fact, Goldberg’s post was entitled “A Military View On Clark, Generals Etc,” clearly showing that generals beyond Clark were criticized:
Nothing that Clark has said or done has surprised me in the least. Why? Because he acts just like the vast majority of general officers that it has been my displeasure to deal with during my 16 years in the U.S. military. Generals are, for the most part, a gigantic pain in the ass and we usually accomplish our military objectives despite their chaos-inducing presence. There are a few good generals here and there but most of them are an embarrassment.
Our criticism of Goldberg’s double standard still stands. Instead of attacking us, maybe Goldberg should clarify whether he believed generals were “a gigantic pain in the ass.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
33 Responses to “Goldberg Misreads His Own Blog Post In Order To Attack ThinkProgress”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I love those "gotcha" moments when they (pundits, trolls and politicians ) are caught read handed in their duplicity.
Good catch.
September 26th, 2007 at 10:25 pmerr... make that red handed, not read handed =P
September 26th, 2007 at 10:26 pmThe “vast majority . . . for the most part†are a gigantic pain. That is completely different from labeling any single General “Betray Us?†as an accusation of treason.
Comment by Rory — September 26, 2007 @ 10:20 pm
It's also completely different from what Goldberg acknowledges saying in 2004.
September 26th, 2007 at 10:32 pmGoldberg is a little twerp, who has a platform, only because of his mom.
September 26th, 2007 at 10:35 pmJonah "Doughy Pantload" Goldberg.
Nuff said.
September 26th, 2007 at 10:44 pmGoldberg is a little twerp, who has a platform, only because of his mom.
Comment by helenahandbasket — September 26, 2007 @ 10:35 pm
Goldberg is a prevaricator that got caught prevaricating.
Priceless
September 26th, 2007 at 10:46 pmIsn't Jonah Goldberg the guy who was afraid to fight Al Franken? I lent my copy of Franken's book to someone whose never given it back, so I can't check.
September 26th, 2007 at 10:48 pmThe “vast majority . . . for the most part†are a gigantic pain. That is completely different from labeling any single General “Betray Us?†as an accusation of treason.
Comment by Rory — September 26, 2007 @ 10:20 pm
They didn't label him anything. They left that up to the reader of the ad after presenting some facts about the General.
September 26th, 2007 at 10:52 pm...
speaking of gen. clark...
sam seder interviewed him on his show last sunday...
it ended kind of weird, out of time but also it sounded a little too close
to the iran drum rolls... sam has the audio posted at the link...
but, it makes since that clark has decided to back hillary...
check it out - what do you think?
http://samsedershow.com/node/1337
note from sam:
September 26th, 2007 at 11:00 pmOn second listen, he doesn't suggest anything but diplomacy re: Iran but he definitely is asserting that Iran is the biggest source of "mischief" in Iraq. I don't know that not to be the case, but short of Joe Lieberman, I don't recall hearing that assertion in other quarters. As opposed to Lieberman, however, he says that Iran's involvement is not necessarily militarily, but social...
...
Why would anyone give any credence to Goldberg on military issues. He has never served and has shown nothing but contempt for soldiers unless he can score points in his ideological battles. He is a typical right-wing hack, a hypocrite.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:00 pmFirst, posting an e-mail isn’t an endorsement in the blogosphere -JG
Then what is the point of posting it?
there is a remarkable difference between criticizing a commander in the field during a war as vaguely treasonous or un-American, and questioning the credentials of a civilian running to be president of the United States.
I dont find the difference remarkable between a serving general and one thats running for the oval office because BOTH of their credentials would come from service. I find JG's rational here...irrational.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:10 pmOne point about these "Generals" that seems to escape the right is that Bush has bashed his own Generals by firing them when they told him something he didn't want to hear.
It's all faux outrage and, unfortunately, our stalwart Democratic leaders walked right into it and participated in it.
I am totally disgusted with the Democarats. Today I became an Independent.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:33 pmGoldberg left out the part where the reader in 2004 says that most generals are pains in the ass.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:38 pmI also disagree with Goldberg's opinion that a general can be smeared as soon as he/she runs for president.
The “vast majority . . . for the most part†are a gigantic pain. That is completely different from labeling any single General “Betray Us?†as an accusation of treason.
Comment by Rory
If you as a Right Wing Loon choose to interpret the word "betray" as to mean treason, that's your problem. I see it as he is betraying his country and his men by not telling the truth, the whole truth not just the partial truths he cherry picked. Actually, now that you think about it, that does have the ring of treason to it. One of the definitions of treason is:
That certainly describes what General Betrayus did. He betrayed our trust and the trust of his troops.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:38 pmDoughy Pantload: "Yawn. Well a few points: First, posting an e-mail isn’t an endorsement in the blogosphere."
September 26th, 2007 at 11:40 pm--------------
"But Librul Blogs are 100% responsible for everything that is posted in the comments by anonymous people".
IOKIYAR
Jonah is a prime example of a chickenshit, chickenhawk, warmongering, armchair ranger who would fill his pants at the thought of having to even know what a military man goes through. Betrayus is a water carrying, bootlicker for the thugs in the Dubya crime family, much like Jonah the fat doughboy.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:01 amI don't even know this guy.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:26 ama little OT:
apparently even our conservative leader sees Bush admin for what it is...excerpt follows
--
September 27th, 2007 at 12:57 amrest http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/260643
sorry forgot the part that I found pretty astute even for a conservative...from the same article above
--
September 27th, 2007 at 12:59 amrest http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/260643
Oh dear, I hope this doesn't distract the people at TP from continuing to report the good news.
September 27th, 2007 at 1:28 amOff topic, but did anyone catch that incredible Bushism that the Chimp uttered today at a kid's school while promoting that his 'No Child Left Behind' program be continued?
He said "Childrens do learn". It seemed to be an answer to the question he posed several years ago when he asked "Is our children learning?"
September 27th, 2007 at 1:28 amWhy does everyone give such as damn about "attacking" Generals? Aren't they, you know supposed to fight wars? Are they getting the vapors over what they read in paper?
September 27th, 2007 at 1:52 amCaption:
Mom, will you come over here and sit on my lap ?
∞
September 27th, 2007 at 2:40 am"...during my 16 years in the U.S. military."
Who does this refer to??
September 27th, 2007 at 7:08 amWhy do we care what this twit has to say?
September 27th, 2007 at 8:20 amJust ignore him..
September 27th, 2007 at 8:41 am"during my 16 years in the military"- Active duty? Reserves or Guard???
September 27th, 2007 at 9:11 amhe doesn't look like he could pass the weigh -in. Plus, why not stay 20 and get a retirement? (beer money)
Hmmmm,.....................
He is just another dip bloger. Not accountable, misleading and obviously partisan.
Comment by Vendetta — September 27, 2007 @ 8:56 am
You love it -- that's why you spend so much time here.
September 27th, 2007 at 10:56 amIf you as a Right Wing Loon choose to interpret the word “betray†as to mean treason, that’s your problem. I see it as he is betraying his country and his men by not telling the truth, the whole truth not just the partial truths he cherry picked. Actually, now that you think about it, that does have the ring of treason to it. One of the definitions of treason is:
the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.
That certainly describes what General Betrayus did. He betrayed our trust and the trust of his troops.
Comment by bilbobaggins — September 26, 2007 @ 11:38 pm
You are absolutely correct on your observation. The #1 meaning I find for the word betray is "to lead astray". Isn't that exactly what MoveOn was referring in that ad? But, the Right needed to hijack the definition and make it mean treason so they can then use it to bash and condemn progressives and everyone not condoning this illegal occupation and immoral war. I am bitterly disappointed that Democrats in Congress can't see that this is simply distracting political theater by the Party of Hypocrites.
How about the Democrats offer up a resolution condemning attacks by swift boaters on the reputation of Max Cleland and John Kerry? Let see how many Republicans join us on that 'sense of the Senate' motion? I doubt 1 would sign on to that.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:43 amwhat an incomplete, faux sort of adult is this lying, little bullshit artist. the only claim to fame this douchebag has is being the fastest swimming sperm in his daddy's nut sack.
btw his “during my 16 years in the militaryâ€- refers to his playing with g.i. joe "action" figures, where likely he choked on g.i. joe's helmet.
September 27th, 2007 at 11:48 amThis guy and his momma are both sleaze buckets!
September 27th, 2007 at 12:09 pmMy God. We truly live in a crazy world. Are we really STILL discussing one ad in a newspaper instead of the actual war itself???
The right-wing will do ANYTHING to avoid any actual discussion of the war. Petraeus did betray us. According to even the Pentagon, his numbers about violence were incorrect. He played up pre-surge numbers while downplaying post-surge violence. They have a team that works for Petreaus that decides how to count casualties. This entire "surge is working" argument is just being accepted as fact by the lapdog mainstream media. You have to wonder at some point if the media lapdogs' corporate masters simply want us to remain in this war forever, so they can keep all those government contracts flowing, and continue to profit off all those "missing" billions of dollars.
I can't believe this is the same country I once served. We've become a sad joke. We are in dire need of real leaders at every level of our government and military.
September 27th, 2007 at 12:43 pmIt is really a good blog,keep on writing.
October 10th, 2007 at 11:10 amNathan Rosseister
Free Online Dating: Thanks to YouLoveMe.com, Social Networking and Free Online Dating for 40+ Baby Boomers is finally here! Mature Singles from all over the United states can get to know each other on YouLoveMe.com for Mature Dating or just become friends and share baby boomer life experiences or impress each other with their MyPage.