It’s quiztime, courtesy of Mike Rappaport at “The Right Coast”:http://therightcoast.blogspot.com/2004_02_01_therightcoast_archive.html#107665099925278362, who does not like us. He turns his keen critical eye on four of our recent posts. The goal of the quiz is to match each of Mike’s devastating indictments to its target:
table(fig). {font-weight:bold;center}_|Accusation|Target|
|(. 1. Attacked conservatives when they were down. |((. A. John. |
|(. 2. Failed to discuss something on our blog. |((. B. Harry. |
|(. 3. Relies on news sources other than Fox. |((. C. Chris. |
|(. 4. Knows about the history of socialism. |((. D. Kieran. |
Answers are at “The Right Coast”:http://therightcoast.blogspot.com/2004_02_01_therightcoast_archive.html#107665099925278362. The accuracy of these criticisms, and their effect on our credibility here at CT, will be the subject of a later quiz.
{ 12 comments }
Dan 02.13.04 at 10:17 pm
Hopefully, you’ve learned your lessons.
Sebastian Holsclaw 02.13.04 at 10:34 pm
I don’t think you are representative of academia at all. You are much less crazy than many academics.
That is a compliment.
Really!
I’m just not good with compliments. :)
Brian Weatherson 02.13.04 at 10:38 pm
I thought the answer might be “All of the above” matched with “All of the above”. Maybe this isn’t obvious for attack 1, but since Conservatives have been down ever since 1997, and I’m sure all of us have attacked them one time since then, we all qualify for that.
John Quiggin 02.13.04 at 10:52 pm
Can I also plead guilty to “uses Google and hyperlinks”. A search on “Rumsfeld+’known unknowns'” produces over 6000 responses, most of them derisive, and none of them apparently reported on Fox. I just linked to the top one.
Of course, both Google and the Internet were produced by academics, so it’s far from surprising that they produce such unFoxlike results.
Marco 02.14.04 at 1:42 am
Links to LGF. Should link to remedial spelling, but doesn’t realise depth of problem.
Ophelia Benson 02.14.04 at 2:28 am
“So a prejudicial remark is made about conservatives and this writer sees it as an opportunity to attack conservatives. Just precious.”
Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! That’s so shocking! That’s awful, that’s appalling, that’s hard to believe, that’s stunning, I don’t know when I’ve been so scandalized. I’m horrified. I’m in agony. All my illusions have been shattered. Is that really how the left behaves? God, why aren’t they locked up then? The right never ever ever ever ever ever ever says mean things about anyone at all on the left ever ever ever ever.
What a prat.
robin green 02.14.04 at 3:04 am
“I hadn’t noticed any general derision, only admiration for its cleverness, but perhaps Fox News chose not to report the criticism of Rumsfeld’s remarks.”
My goodness, he is actually being sarcastic here, isn’t he? He actually seems to believe that “oh if there had been significant criticism, Fox would have reported it”…
Oh dear.
As for the history of the far left… obviously then, analogously, studying the history of the far right is incredibly shocking and revolting, and makes you practically Hitler.
paul 02.14.04 at 5:20 am
Well, you can’t say they don’t read your stuff (it doesn’t appear they understand it, but first things first).
The post below the one you cite is interesting: I’m not sure how realistic the threat of running into an armored money carrier is or why I would want to lay a mid 6 figure sum to protect myself against it . . . different priorities, I guess.
laura 02.14.04 at 7:06 am
I went there but I didn’t see “Kieran” as a choice. Some guy named Kiernan was apparently very mean, but Kieran is an unblemished innocent as far as I can tell.
Jeremy Osner 02.14.04 at 2:53 pm
Paul — funny, that was my exact reaction as well.
harry 02.14.04 at 3:02 pm
Bet he doesn’t sneer at Paul Wolfowitz for knowing lots about the history of the far left.
Conservative 02.15.04 at 7:58 am
You folks ain’t from around these parts are you? We don’t take kindly to strangers.
Comments on this entry are closed.