(Obvious porn name) "Peter Player" goes after Charlie Pierce. Pierce's reply? Epic!
"I guess I should reply to this with something beyond, "Witless sarcasm is no way to go through life, son." However, I am not going to go into great detail about how my "support" for Glenn Greenwald and/or Edward Snowden has hardly been "unequivocal" -- Anyone want to see how many comments "Edward Snowden, International Man Of Luggage" draws every time I use it? -- and how the post in question here was about the historic predisposition of the Democratic "base" voters to sit out the midterms predates the rise of the beast, Greenwald, by at least 20 years. (I don't believe it was Greenwald who held down Democratic base turnout in 2010 or in 1994, just to name two very bad recent years.) If Glenn Greenwald really believes that the country would be better off without the Democratic party, he's wrong. I also think the Democratic party would be better off without Joe Manchin or Heidi Keitkamp. Two tie, all tie.
The sum total of the rest of this whole thing is a bunch of ad hominem on Greenwald and Snowden, some bullshit about a near war between Australia and Indonesia, and a litany which apparently must be chanted, like baptismal vows ("Do you renounce Greenwald?" I do renounce him. "And all his works?" I do renounce them. "And all his allures?" I do renounce them.), before one can comment on the dangers of the surveillance state. Anyway, on the list of causes of why the Democratic base fails to turn out for midterm elections, which was the whole fking point of the post in the first place, Glenn Greenwald's opinion of the party ranks somewhere below the rain and unbreakable dental appointments. Anyone who believes otherwise should put down the cereal bowl and get out more."
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/daily-banter-article-response-032014
= new reply since forum marked as read
