Real Ugly? Real Dishonest!

July 15, 2006 in Political Animals | 11 comments

Another right-wing blogger gets caught lying. The “Real Ugly American” pretends that a recent post by Kevin Drum at the Washington Monthly explains "Why the Left is Ignoring the War". One problem: Drum never claims to be explaining “why the left is ignoring the war”. In fact, the very first sentence of Drum’s post states:

Matt Yglesias suggests that I address the topic of why the liberal blogosphere doesn’t write very much about Israel-related subjects.
(Emphasis mine.)

And lo and behold, Real Ugly is careful not to quote that first sentence — since doing so would clearly put the lie to the horseshit he’s trying to sell here. Drum isn’t discussing the question of whether left-wing blogs are discussing the current hot war in Lebanon. Drum does not even mention the war in his post.

R.U. makes a big deal out of a comment on Drum’s post:

A political blog will be pretty lame without an opinion on an active war.

But which left-wing blogs are avoiding discussion of the recent outbreak of hostilities in the Middle East? Not Think Progress. Not Altercation. Not Daily Kos. Not The Agonist. And not TalkLeft. Which specific left-wing political blogs are “pretty lame” for not posting an opinion on the Israel-Hezbollah war? Rel Ugly doesn’t even try to name one.

There’s a reason why there are so many right-wing bloggers out there. It requires no particular attention to reality, nor any commitment to honesty, to be that kind of commentator.

  1. The Ugly American on July 15, 2006 at 11:00 pm

    Thanks for the link. I’m a registered Democrat and consider myself a Liberal.

    Does that make you dishonest?

  2. Rhyleh on July 16, 2006 at 1:32 am

    Ugly American:

    If you’re a liberal Democrat, explain which liberal Democratic ideals and policies you stand for? Can you cite examples of when you’ve sided with fellow liberal Democrats? If you are a liberal Democrat, why did you support small government advocate Raj Bhakta?

    Or are you dishonest?

    PS. Israel’s excessive use of force is no way justified. Collateral damage is never justified. Revenge is not a justifiable national security policy. Explain if and why you disagree with those statements.

  3. The Ugly American on July 16, 2006 at 11:07 am

    Sure pro-choice, pro social safety net (social security, welfare, Medicare, Medicaid), I believe in promoting and defending democracy around the world during any presidency not just when a Democrat is in office (ala John Kennedy, Harry Truman, FDR), pro illegal immigration reform which includes a path to citizenship, and allows most of the 12 million illegals living in the USA to remain here, a progressive tax code, pro environmental protections, pro minimum wage.

    Is that a good start for you?

    I don’t see how supporting (if you want to characterize an interview as support. I have made no contribution to his campaign) a small government candidate as anti-liberal. It certainly is anti-leftist / socialist and I am definitely that again ala John Kennedy, Harry Truman, FDR.

    I definitely was impressed with Mr. Bahkta and found him to be pretty middle of the road. Certainly not an ideologue.

    Can you tell me which positions I need to take in order to pass your litmus test?

    By the way meatbrain, the first thing I did in my post was include a link to Kevin’s post. Anyone who wants to know exactly what he said only needs to click on it. As it is the most popular outgoing link on my site right now it appears lots of people are doing just that.

  4. meatbrain on July 16, 2006 at 11:16 am

    And despite linking to Drum’s post, and apparently reading it, you chose to falsely label it as an explanation for why left-wing political blogs are allegedly not discussing the current war in Lebanon… despite the fact that they are.

  5. Not_Z on July 16, 2006 at 3:54 pm

    Thanks for the link. I’m a registered Democrat and consider myself a Liberal.

    Uh-uh.

    Are you by any chance Lieberman? Your pro-Zionist views, the anti-ACLU stand along with associations with 101st Fighting Keyboardists and anti-press bias puts you in a pretty narrow definition of Democrats. I can see one or two intersecting but all of them?

    Your blog is a hoot. I almost wasted five minutes reading it. Carry on Democrat.

  6. Rhyleh on July 16, 2006 at 10:20 pm

    So you are pro on:

    A social welfare safety net
    Progressive taxation
    Small government?

    I think your understanding of history is sorely lacking if you construe FDR, Truman and Kennedy as “small government” advocates.

  7. The Ugly American on July 17, 2006 at 11:08 am

    You asked the question. I answered.

    If you want to actually have a conversation let me know. I am always happy to talk politics 8).

    I would be glad to discuss history with you as well Rhyleh. Which history books do you read?

    if you prefer we could do it via email to avoid any temptation of having a public pissing match.

  8. Rhyleh on July 19, 2006 at 2:39 am

    Feel free to send me an e-mail. You can choose the specific topic of contention. I can see from your writing though that you have a very selective filter through which you view history. I was particularly amused when you posted: “I…believe in promoting and defending democracy around the world during any presidency not just when a Democrat is in office (ala John Kennedy, Harry Truman, FDR)...”

    Answer me a few questions: Did the US ever promote democracy when it was not in their interests to do so? Did the US ever undermine democracy when it was in their interests? How about during the presidencies you mentioned? During Republican presidencies? Are you implying that what Bush is doing amounts to “promoting and defending” democracy? If so, how? If you believe in this principle of spreading democracy, do you see in inconsistencies in how the US has gone about doing so historically and presently?

    As for public discussion amounting to a pissing match – to the extent that has happened it is entirely your fault, as evidenced by your arrogant question “Which history books do [I] read?” As if posting a list of books proves which of us has the stronger argument. The question is meaningless. If you want to send me a bibliography of what you read, go ahead and get it off your chest. I won’t return the favor.

    As to the litmus test, yes, I can go over that in more detail if you like. I’ll give you a hint as to why you have no credibility as a liberal or otherwise: Part of it has to do with your buying into the simple minded, idiotic, and self-serving rhetoric of “Islamofacism” versus “modernity.” A true liberal would never accept the neo-conservative terms of debate.

  9. Rhyleh on July 27, 2006 at 12:26 am

    Follow up: The Ugly American has made no response to my challenge. I am not surprised.