Comments on: Ignatieff http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/ Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made Sun, 27 May 2012 06:29:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: jcasey http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-207088 jcasey Fri, 10 Aug 2007 22:01:15 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-207088 If I'm not mistaken, there have been several posts here about Ignatieff's arguments. Go look at those. If not those, then you can read these two: http://thenonsequitur.com/?p=450 and http://thenonsequitur.com/?p=446 If I’m not mistaken, there have been several posts here about Ignatieff’s arguments. Go look at those. If not those, then you can read these two:

http://thenonsequitur.com/?p=450

and

http://thenonsequitur.com/?p=446

]]> By: bi http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-207025 bi Fri, 10 Aug 2007 07:15:54 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-207025 And again, <b>where was the post-war plan?</b> Anyone could see early on that there simply wasn't one. And again, where was the post-war plan? Anyone could see early on that there simply wasn’t one.

]]> By: bi http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-207024 bi Fri, 10 Aug 2007 07:10:06 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-207024 Jon, your words were _so_ thoughtful, it shows so clearly what a bleeding-heart "leftie lib" you _really_ are. and it _actually_ addressed what the Iraq war critics actually said, and it so _brilliantly_ defends Ignatieff's _actual_ arguments. And just to add, the big honking all-caps and repeated exclamation marks are such _stunning_ hallmarks of Civility, Substance, and Good Form. ...now, if Ignatieff was a savant idiot, Jon is merely an idiotic idiot. Jon, your words were so thoughtful, it shows so clearly what a bleeding-heart “leftie lib” you really are. and it actually addressed what the Iraq war critics actually said, and it so brilliantly defends Ignatieff’s actual arguments.

And just to add, the big honking all-caps and repeated exclamation marks are such stunning hallmarks of Civility, Substance, and Good Form.

…now, if Ignatieff was a savant idiot, Jon is merely an idiotic idiot.

]]> By: Jon http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-207023 Jon Fri, 10 Aug 2007 04:35:55 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-207023 <i>Jon still thinks someone needs to explain how Ignatieff’s wrong?</i> Well, call me an idealistic leftie lib, but I don't like it when people trade unfunny insults about people they consider unfashionable. Isn't it bad form? Nor do I like it when people try to deligitimize points of view from even being considered. Those of you who teach, what's your opinion of those whose reaction to you is no more thoughtful than a meow? If you must talk about him, is it so hard to actually talk about what he has to say? Sorry, I guess that's too hard. Oh, but, no, making you think how a war supporter feels about Iraq, NO! Call the International Criminal Court, it's a war crime!! RUN! EXTERMINATE!! Jon still thinks someone needs to explain how Ignatieff’s wrong?

Well, call me an idealistic leftie lib, but I don’t like it when people trade unfunny insults about people they consider unfashionable. Isn’t it bad form?

Nor do I like it when people try to deligitimize points of view from even being considered. Those of you who teach, what’s your opinion of those whose reaction to you is no more thoughtful than a meow?

If you must talk about him, is it so hard to actually talk about what he has to say? Sorry, I guess that’s too hard.

Oh, but, no, making you think how a war supporter feels about Iraq, NO! Call the International Criminal Court, it’s a war crime!! RUN! EXTERMINATE!!

]]> By: Ginger Yellow http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-206999 Ginger Yellow Thu, 09 Aug 2007 22:41:45 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-206999 Speaking of Blondie, check out yesterday's Comics Curmudgeon for one of the filthiest strips in living memory. Speaking of Blondie, check out yesterday’s Comics Curmudgeon for one of the filthiest strips in living memory.

]]> By: roger http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-206938 roger Thu, 09 Aug 2007 17:01:11 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-206938 Michael, I was also thinking of the mea culpa column by Peter Beinart which begins so cutely and sweetly with his wifey-poo asking him how he could have supported the war - oh, the domestic details, they are just like dagwood and blondie, and they make us realize what an adorable, young, upper middle class and never-to-volunteer-for- military-service family we have here - and he has to sadly admit that he'd listened to Makiya and, being mr. heart of gold himself, had been seduced out of his usual tough guy stance. Rather like Jack Nicholson in that Schmitt picture, writing to the little African child he sent money to. Beinart ended the column with an insouciant flourish - so cute! - by wondering what that Makiya character was up to, nowadays? Hadn't seen him for years. By the end of that column you knew exactly why a guy like Beinart is hot property in punditland, but you also knew - with a heavy heart - that the real damage wrought by the war was to Peter Beinart. How he has suffered! I'd compare his suffering to that of Mel Gibson as Christ, except of course Beinart's suffering is less tacky - it isn't like he lost his job or anything. That would be too vulgar! Luckily, he could always gaze upon his picture of Harry Truman for strength and inspiration as he dreams of other, better interventions to get back in the game. Michael, I was also thinking of the mea culpa column by Peter Beinart which begins so cutely and sweetly with his wifey-poo asking him how he could have supported the war – oh, the domestic details, they are just like dagwood and blondie, and they make us realize what an adorable, young, upper middle class and never-to-volunteer-for- military-service family we have here – and he has to sadly admit that he’d listened to Makiya and, being mr. heart of gold himself, had been seduced out of his usual tough guy stance. Rather like Jack Nicholson in that Schmitt picture, writing to the little African child he sent money to. Beinart ended the column with an insouciant flourish – so cute! – by wondering what that Makiya character was up to, nowadays? Hadn’t seen him for years. By the end of that column you knew exactly why a guy like Beinart is hot property in punditland, but you also knew – with a heavy heart – that the real damage wrought by the war was to Peter Beinart. How he has suffered! I’d compare his suffering to that of Mel Gibson as Christ, except of course Beinart’s suffering is less tacky – it isn’t like he lost his job or anything. That would be too vulgar! Luckily, he could always gaze upon his picture of Harry Truman for strength and inspiration as he dreams of other, better interventions to get back in the game.

]]> By: Michael Bérubé http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-206936 Michael Bérubé Thu, 09 Aug 2007 16:57:42 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-206936 Now that you mention it, actually, Socrates was a <i>huge</i> asshole. I'm starting to think Western philosophy took a wrong turn right there. And no, JP. No love for Curveball. Now that you mention it, actually, Socrates was a huge asshole. I’m starting to think Western philosophy took a wrong turn right there.

And no, JP. No love for Curveball.

]]> By: bi http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-206914 bi Thu, 09 Aug 2007 14:57:22 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-206914 Jeez, post-war Iraq is such a train wreck, and Jon still thinks someone needs to explain how Ignatieff's wrong? And do I need to explain again what's wrong with _that_? ... Jeez, post-war Iraq is such a train wreck, and Jon still thinks someone needs to explain how Ignatieff’s wrong?

And do I need to explain again what’s wrong with that? …

]]> By: djw http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-206910 djw Thu, 09 Aug 2007 14:44:58 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-206910 Henry already took care of that. Division of Labor. Henry already took care of that. Division of Labor.

]]> By: Jon http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-206904 Jon Thu, 09 Aug 2007 14:22:46 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-206904 That's right - if you don't like what somebody says, don't explain why he's wrong, attack him personally. If a student said we shouldn't care what Socrates or Einstein said and wrote because they were assholes, would you accept that? After all, there's evidence Socrates WAS an asshole to many. How about actually addressing what people write instead of personally attacking them? That’s right – if you don’t like what somebody says, don’t explain why he’s wrong, attack him personally.

If a student said we shouldn’t care what Socrates or Einstein said and wrote because they were assholes, would you accept that? After all, there’s evidence Socrates WAS an asshole to many.

How about actually addressing what people write instead of personally attacking them?

]]> By: JP Stormcrow http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-206889 JP Stormcrow Thu, 09 Aug 2007 12:43:07 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-206889 <i>“Savant Idiot” previously “The wisest fool in Christendom”?</i> The Economist apparently had a competition for <a href="http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=3490808" rel="nofollow">"wisest fool" of the past 50 years</a> in 2004/05. The results are <a href="http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_PVJRSQQ" rel="nofollow">here</a> in the 1/29/05 issue, but behind a subscriber firewall, perhaps someone with access can inform of us the winner(s). Surely a fair use. “Savant Idiot” previously “The wisest fool in Christendom”?

The Economist apparently had a competition for “wisest fool” of the past 50 years in 2004/05. The results are here in the 1/29/05 issue, but behind a subscriber firewall, perhaps someone with access can inform of us the winner(s). Surely a fair use.

]]> By: ed http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-206881 ed Thu, 09 Aug 2007 11:44:11 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-206881 Didn't Ignatieff become a politician? Didn’t Ignatieff become a politician?

]]> By: jay bee http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-206877 jay bee Thu, 09 Aug 2007 10:12:21 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-206877 "Savant Idiot" previously "The wisest fool in Christendom"? “Savant Idiot” previously “The wisest fool in Christendom”?

]]> By: Prolegomena » Iggy pop? http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-206874 Prolegomena » Iggy pop? Thu, 09 Aug 2007 09:08:23 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-206874 [...] considering some of said commentary accuses Ignatieff himself of the same. Calling Ignatieff a savant idiot or out-lambasting the roasters has all the air of what a fellow grad student once called [...] [...] considering some of said commentary accuses Ignatieff himself of the same. Calling Ignatieff a savant idiot or out-lambasting the roasters has all the air of what a fellow grad student once called [...]

]]> By: dsquared http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/comment-page-1/#comment-206872 dsquared Thu, 09 Aug 2007 08:28:35 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/08/08/ignatieff-2/#comment-206872 <i>Whereas when the liberal hawks like Berman, Ignatieff, and Packer say “Iraqi exiles,” they clearly mean Kanan Makiya. (Tara McKelvey’s update on him, which you’ve probably read, is here). It’s almost as if, for the Hawks, there were only two Iraqi exiles in the world: Chalabi, whom they mistrusted (hell, even Bush didn’t want to install him as the puppet), and Makiya, whom they revered</i> note that this is revisionist history - at the time, plenty of times and in writing, Chalabi was right at the side of Makiya, and if anything deserving of more praise because he actually went back to Iraq. Since no charges were ever brought against Chalabi on charges of being a traitor or Iranian intelligence asset (let alone proven), I personally think it's rather disgraceful the way they've dumped him. Whereas when the liberal hawks like Berman, Ignatieff, and Packer say “Iraqi exiles,” they clearly mean Kanan Makiya. (Tara McKelvey’s update on him, which you’ve probably read, is here). It’s almost as if, for the Hawks, there were only two Iraqi exiles in the world: Chalabi, whom they mistrusted (hell, even Bush didn’t want to install him as the puppet), and Makiya, whom they revered

note that this is revisionist history – at the time, plenty of times and in writing, Chalabi was right at the side of Makiya, and if anything deserving of more praise because he actually went back to Iraq. Since no charges were ever brought against Chalabi on charges of being a traitor or Iranian intelligence asset (let alone proven), I personally think it’s rather disgraceful the way they’ve dumped him.

]]>