Conor’s response



Freddie deBoer used to blog at, and may again someday. Now he blogs here.

Related Post Roulette

17 Responses

  1. Avatar E.D. Kain says:

    Incidentally, should Conor ever show up in the comments section of this blog, personal insults against him would not be tolerated, both because of my personal regard for him, and because of this blog’s comment’s policy. I am told by those in the know that it is childish for us to care about such things, but we do, and I am proud that we do.

    You’re damn right, Freddie. I’m proud that we do, too. The Scene’s comment section has really devolved if you ask me. That won’t happen here.Report

  2. Avatar North says:

    On re-reading all three posts it really seems to boil down to:

    Connor says/approves of someone saying that the NEA is being used for political messaging and this is deplorable and Liberals should be ashamed.

    You say No it’s not and conservatives are hypocrites for saying so.

    He says yes it is. Then his commenteriate go collectively berserk like tweens in a mall though to be fair your first comment in his post made no sense to me.

    And yes, lets keep the comments civilized. I hate scuffing up my monocle.Report

  3. Avatar Bob Cheeks says:

    Hey, come on now, aren’t we being just a little toooo sensitive? After forty years in heavy industry I’m rather immune to the occasional mofo, sob, or whatever? And, where’s the fun of aggravating my leftist friends if they can’t hurl an insult or two my way.
    After all those years of arguing and fighting with commie union thugs, the internet and in particular the LOOG is rather like a gathering in a library.Report

    • Avatar E.D. Kain in reply to Bob Cheeks says:

      Yeah but we’re more like a library that serves drinks. The hurling of a few insults and the use of some flame-baiting is not out-of-bounds, of course, but we strive to keep this forum from devolving into the rancorous and even obnoxious sort of place so many internet forums turn into. Balance in all things.Report

    • Avatar Freddie in reply to Bob Cheeks says:

      I could be wrong, Bob, but I think if I was too sensitive, I wouldn’t link to Conor’s response at all. Or, indeed, frequent blogs that didn’t satisfy my ideological preconceptions. You know?Report

  4. Avatar Bob Cheeks says:

    Now Freddie, I’ve always associated you with the intellectual wing of the Left (now don’t go and get all haughty on me, that’s not exactly a compliment) and to be honest I’m not well enough acquainted with the sundry blogs and bloggers to know their political orientation, rather a bit confusing, and at my age I try and spend as much time with books as possible. But, I always enjoy a good epitaph thrown my way ’cause it makes me think I’ve drawn blood…but the wife says that’s not how one gains converts, and she’s right of course.
    So however you wanna handle it is fine with me but this kinda made you look like you were seeking sympathy, which I don’t believe is your style. But, that’s just my overview from fly-over country plus the beloved, and slightly confused, E.D. is right about not wanting to let the place deteriorate into a verbal whorehouse.
    So fight on, dude!Report

    • Avatar E.D. Kain in reply to Bob Cheeks says:

      I don’t know about the “beloved” part, Bob. Just sayin’.Report

    • Avatar Katherine in reply to Bob Cheeks says:

      To me, it doesn’t sound like Freddie’s annoyed at being insulted, but at having his post utterly misinterpreted and the point he was making ignored.Report

      • Avatar Jaybird in reply to Katherine says:

        I don’t know that Freddie’s point was ignored as much as both sides were talking past each other and the tone wasn’t that conducive to both sides feeling like they had to listen.

        The one side was saying “this is not appropriate, signalling is going on, the federal government shouldn’t be doing this” and the other side was saying “but nothing weird was said during the call, read the transcript, if you’d read the transcript you’d see that nothing inappropriate was said, what’s so inappropriate about Service Day anyway?”

        As tensions got higher and higher and more people resigned. This sort of made the argument appear to have a clear winner.

        Which then turned into a ban on us calling Conor “Friedersdork”.

        Which, if you ask me, is the biggest tragedy to come out of this whole argument.Report

  5. Avatar Mike says:

    Which is worse: a pussy fascist, or a scumbag who writes possibly accurate book about a former boss?Report

  6. Freddie,

    Two things:

    1) We’re aware that comments at TAS have declined in quality, and we’re working on a solution.

    2) Isn’t your position that there isn’t anything wrong with the NEA advancing a president’s political agenda, so long as that agenda isn’t controversial or partisan?Report

    • Wasn’t meant to be. Maybe I didn’t articulate that well. My point is that the guy from the NEA wasn’t there as a representative from the NEA offering funding or influence but rather offering guidance to people from the National Service Day administration in how to use art to support the event. That’s why I think it’s key to point out that no NEA money was ever on the table. And the Service Day is simply going to have some content in policy position, no matter what. As far as that goes, it seems as innocuous as possible. But I’ve been wrong before.Report

  7. I guess I’d say that while I can’t think of any political agenda that is more innocuous and less controversial than National Day of Service, I do still think it is a matter of using art for politics, and I don’t think it’s innocuous for the NEA to be involved in that.Report