UPDATE: Please read comments to see if you agree or disagree, with this oh so important issue. Also, Three B! won’t sh*t on you for telling us to go eat it, because we’re not that kind of cobag.
There is like a category five going off in a teapot over at Americablog, and Atrios (some blog dude) gives it a hell yeah.
Our take is that when you base your argument and self-righteousness on some possibly fringe people sending you some emotional e-mails ripping you a new cobag-hole for hob-nobbing with either 1) some folks that you would turn around and with good reason rip the ever-loving-shit out of them (or should i.e. Katy Harris) or because of the ever-loving fact that you have been ripping the normal press, who you claim to be replacing, non-stop for that last X years about being too close to the people they cover, i.e. hob-nobbing at the exact same functions you get to go to now that you are “big time” seems slightly so ever MFGDAF self-serving.
We don’t even have a horse in this race, we just find the ol’ Hannah Arendt quotationing to be a little oh, just so after school special patronizing.
We don’t have anything against saying whatever you want at your place, but when people decide to ask for some accountability or have some questions about a picture that is like a slap in the face to a lot of them from a site that has- what FOUR FUND DRIVES A YEAR, for a free blogspot host, for four bloggos to link MediaMatters, TPM and some dude named “Open Thread” half the time, what’s wrong with that? Oh, they were rough about it? They felt betrayed? Could there be any reason for that?
We didn’t even care about this whole pile of crap at all when Johnny A. Americablog had his fun night on the town, we just found his response to the heat to be a little out of proportion, especially for a site that wields its readers’ anger like a bludgeon on a tick tock basis against targets of his choice. I think thou protest too much.
And the increasingly desperoni for content A-man gives it the “Tacitus to Ben D. slap on the back” level hell yeah, but with less words. Well, if you really wanted to say something meaningful, say it, even if you have to repeat the exact words because the disingenous concentration in the room is getting too much to take.
That’s our two cents, cobags.
UPDATE SOME MORE:
Here is what we told John A. in comments there:
I wouldn;t go that far, but for a lot of people it’s you get a joke or you don’t. Ok, so what to do about it? Go apesh*t like you can’t take a little heat, like you have no idea why people would be mad? Like their concerns just have to be dismissed in the most patronizing and arrogant fashion imaginable?
Let’s be scientific:
There is a vocal minority that has gone way over the top. Is it possible that their concerns might stem from some more reasonable feelings, feelings that perhaps were ill-expressed? How to deal with the situation? Turn it into a black and white, my way or the highway, or work through the bullshit? That seems a little RedState to me.
If one person is offended by something and another isn’t, what to do? Is there some objective offense quotient, and therefore someone’s offense is legit, and someone’s isn’t? That’s bullshit and we all know it. But there has got to be a better way than burning some bridges, not for traffic of course, people love this stuff, it’s fresh drama for the masses that demand content, when another open thread just won’t do.
From a site that constantly calls on people to apologize for plenty of stuff, and for a site that relies on its readers emotional reactions to effect policy, I would say John really jumped the shark here. You can take or leave these words. I am certain they smack of certain truths. And I’m not saying that I even disagree with him, just the way he went about his business, and on a public site with public comments, I’m more than happy to stick my nose into it. That’s just to preempt the usual “you don’t like it here, get lost” brilliance.
Also, I wonder how “The Left” feels about his hatred of money? GO ask him!