Oct 22nd, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Conference Calling
Dave Weigel and Sargent & Kleefeld both report on a McCain campaign conference call featuring Randy Scheunemann and Jim Woolsey to discuss al-Qaeda’s preference for a McCain victory. They seem to have taken a two pronged approach:
- Other “bad guy” types have said nice things about Obama.
- Al-Qaeda saying they’re hoping for a McCain win is obviously a bankshot effort to help McCain
Of course these arguments contradict each other.
On a more substantive note, in a world that wasn’t totally insane a major party presidential candidate using a guy like Woolsey who believes in crazy, discredited conspiracy theories about al-Qaeda would, on its own, be a devastating blow. But in our actual United States of Ludicrousness, advocating for wars is per se serious no matter how badly they turn out, so Woolsey the conspiracy theorist will always be taken more seriously than some DFHs.
46 Responses to “Conference Calling”
Register
RSSLogin
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Books By Matthew Yglesias
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Abortion
Afghanistan
Basketball
Blanche Lincoln
Budget
China
climate
Congress
Crime
DC
Demographics
Economics
Economy
Energy
Environment
EU
Finance
Football
Gender
Health Care
History
Inequality
International Law
International Relations
Iran
Israel
Media
Monetary Policy
National Security
NATO
NBA
Palestine
Political Reform
Public Health
Public Opinion
Race
Regulation
Russia
Sarah Palin
Sports
Stimulus
taxes
Technology
Trade
transportation
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Contact Matthew Yglesias
Use this form to contact blog author Matthew Yglesias.
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
October 22nd, 2008 at 12:42 pm
PROOFREAD, MOTHERFUCKER.
October 22nd, 2008 at 12:50 pm
You mean a bankshot for Obama, right?
October 22nd, 2008 at 12:50 pm
1. Other “bad guy” types have said nice things about McCain.
2. Al-Qaeda saying they’re hoping for a McCain win is obviously a bankshot effort to help McCain
Sorry, I don’t see how these arguments “of course” contradict each other? Can you elaborate?
October 22nd, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Decaf, strasmangelo jones.
October 22nd, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Wait, shouldn’t that be “said nice things about Obama” in #1, not McCain, and “bankshot effort to help Obama,” again not McCain, in #2? Jesus, Matt. I demand my minute’s worth of furious puzzlement back.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:00 pm
As John Hodgman put it, it’s a good time to be writing fake almanacs because the election is a referendum on reality.
In other news, Matt makes copyeditors cry.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:16 pm
You really are just fucking with us at this point, aren’t you?
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:18 pm
I don’t take it as personally as some people apparently do, but the fact remains that this post makes no sense. Since I’m not going to bother following the links (that’s why I read your blog), I really just don’t know what you’re trying to say here.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:22 pm
This post is an absolute classic. I will remember it always.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Just as icing on the cake, Matt also mistyped the keyword tag for this post:
Filed under: Al-Qaedad
So somebody searching Matt’s blog for posts about “Al-Qaeda” won’t find this post. (Under the circumstances, that’s probably just as well.)
What the fuck is “Al-Qaedad”, Matthew? Some new terrorist fathers-rights group?
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Belief in crazy theories has never been a disadvantage on the right. And, to be fair, I’ve heard some deeply peculiar opinions from lefties as well, although not so recently.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:25 pm
I don’t take it personally, but for fuck’s sake, you are being paid for this, Yglesias. The various typos and misspellings are one thing; swapping out “Obama” for “McCain” twice, such that your argument becomes unintelligible, is just embarrassingly unprofessional, and this is hardly the first time, or the second time, or even within the first dozen times you’ve done this. Proofreading this would’ve taken thirty seconds. Christ.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:42 pm
“Proofreading this would’ve taken thirty seconds. Christ.”
Agreed. I proofread and proofread my comments (and I ain’t paid for them). But then again, I’m over 50. For Matt, and his felow texters and twitterers (I do neither, are those the right nouns?) proofreading is so passe.
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Al-qaedad is just a hip new verb. Oh shit dude, you got so Al-qaedad! It’s the new “pwned.”
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Goodness sakes, lay off the man for the typos. It happens to the best of us.
Besides, you obviously got the point of the piece anyway. (Or perhaps you didn’t.)
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:47 pm
He said “crazy discredited conspiracy theories”. When is lonewacko going to show up? It’s like the batsignal for Batman . . .
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:55 pm
The funny thing is that the only way to make the two claims (understood as they were supposed to be written rather than as they were) is to think that the bad guys tell the truth in their public statements, and make their bank shots in their coded messages. It certainly seems more likely it would be the other way around.
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:01 pm
This thread was worth it just for the reactions to the non-composed post.
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:10 pm
I’m really starting to wonder if Matt had some sort of traumatic proofreading experience as a child.
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Woolsey looks dead. It’s not just the closed eyes. The akimbo arms and crease on the hat also look post-rigor. It would make sense since when’s the last time anyone saw him on TV? Now, that Brooks and Adelman have jumped ship – they’re running out of rats.
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Okay, now one of the McCains has been changed to an Obama, but point 2 still reads:
Can we get another round of copyediting, please? Don’t worry about the “Filed under: Al-Qaedad” — it’s pretty trivial in the grand scheme of things
October 22nd, 2008 at 3:14 pm
But then again, I’m over 50. For Matt, and his felow texters and twitterers (I do neither, are those the right nouns?) proofreading is so passe.
Damned kids.
October 22nd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
The whippersnapper thing’s no excuse. I’m Yglesias’s age and I can spell. For that matter, there are plenty of bloggers younger than Yglesias, professional and non-, that can spell well enough to make their points perfectly clear.
And I note that Yglesias, even after correcting the first mistake, still has the second one in there.
October 22nd, 2008 at 3:19 pm
The half-correction makes this post all the more classic.
October 22nd, 2008 at 3:19 pm
“Goodness sakes, lay off the man for the typos. It happens to the best of us.
Besides, you obviously got the point of the piece anyway. (Or perhaps you didn’t.)”
Yeah, I got the point. And I probably would have gotten it even if I hadn’t already seen the same point made (in proper English) on at least one other blog. But no, I won’t lay off Matt (in part, I admit, because I don’t like him, although I find his blog and commenters interesting). But he does this kind of stuff a lot, in part because he posts too darn often and doesn’t always think before hitting enter (and this is substantive as well). Moreover, I just don’t get his indifference to the intellectual quality of his own work. The post remains uncorrected although it has been up almost three hours, this is a major error, and the comments (which I doubt Matt often reads) have highlighted it.
October 22nd, 2008 at 4:06 pm
Not to go off too far into the crazy/trivial weeds, but–isn’t there a difference between some Al-Qaeda poobah’s public ‘endorsement’, and semi-public chatter on an internet bbs between AQ sympathizers? To wit, isn’t the former (as happened to Kerry in 2004) more likely to be the bankshot, and isn’t the latter more likely to be the genuine sentiment? Not that anyone with an IQ above that of Sarah Palin gives a rat’s ass either way, of course.
October 22nd, 2008 at 4:34 pm
What the fuck is “Al-Qaedad”, Matthew? Some new terrorist fathers-rights group?
I think al Qaedads are the key demographic the Sunni parties are targetting in the next election cycle. They want a candidate who isn’t afraid to fire a Kalashnikov into the air, but who still seems like someone you could sit down and eat a goat with.
October 22nd, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Maybe he meant this:
Or this:
Either correction would make a lot more sense than what he has up now.
October 22nd, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Look at the bright side: If we look at when the first typo was corrected, and then see when the 2nd typo is corrected, we’ll be able to get a fairly accurate figure for often Matt Y. actually reads the comments on his posts.
February 18th, 2009 at 2:55 am
Hey Guys My name is Jimmy
Does anyone know anything about blackhat stuff? I found these sites and these people are have proof of making over $900 a day from some these Black hat methods. What do you guys think about this.
Click Here Now To Learn More! Blackhat seo
Or Go Here! solid trust pay
March 1st, 2009 at 6:44 pm
cialis
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 7th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Whats Up My name is and Admin I hope this is posted int he right section. I felt this was the best place to ask about this , if not please feel free to move it where it belongs, I really like this place and will be an advid poster here.Jim
I have been into internet marketing lately and would like to know if you know anything about blackhat marketing techniques? The reason I ask is because I found a couple places where people have proof of making over $900 a day from some these Black hat methods. Im just curious if anyone here is making money online through Blackseo or any types of whitehat techniques like these sites are about.
These sites have many different money making free scripts and types of ways to make money online. Alot of it has to do with CPA and affiliate programs. Hopefully you guys could help me understand some of these methods or just PM me and I can show the methods I am struggling with and I would be willing to give the scripts I bought for free, if you can help me figure them out. I just want to make money online since the economy is so bad now.
Here is the first site make money online forum
Here is the 2nd site advertise
March 11th, 2009 at 4:46 am
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 12th, 2009 at 11:39 pm
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
March 14th, 2009 at 5:29 am
Great site. Good info
xanax
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:19 am
tramadol
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:31 am
buy viagra online
It is the coolest site,keep so!
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:25 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:16 am
I want to say – thank you for this!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 6:27 am
I rarely comment on blogs but yours I had to stop and say Great Blog!! viagra