On the topic of Kluwe, who last time I checked had no problem attaching his name to everything he said, “First Ringer” on the conservative blog site “True North” says: “Kluwe’s tactics are the epitome of his generation — foul-mouthed personal attacks against anyone who disagrees. ... In truth, the media needs Chris Kluwe’s release to be about his vocal and abusive activism. Because admitting to solidarity with Kluwe’s political views, and his ability to deliver good copy to sportswriters and sports radio networks, is harder than portraying the SoCal punter as a victim of a 1st Amendment NFL crackdown. Does anyone seriously believe that if Kluwe had come out passionately against gay marriage (ala Matt Birk), and saw his production dive, that those arguing against Kluwe’s release today would be defending his penchant to ‘hanging 10 on any issue that stirs his emotion?’ … Here’s hoping that Chris Kluwe finds the time to focus on realizing that being a public relations bully to those who don’t share his worldview isn’t the best way to advance what’s left of his career.” So help me out here. What comes first? "First Ringer's" bravery to speak out? Or his anonymity?
Okay, Brian, I'll help you out. The merits of FR's arguments aren't affected in any way by whether or not he writes under his own name or a pseudonym. I'd also mention that it's not especially brave to use ellipses to remove the context of what FR is talking about when he uses the term "foul-mouthed" to describe some of Kluwe's deep thoughts. I'd further suggest that Lambert consider (a) the difference between bravery and bravado, and (b) whether FR's observation that "being a public relations bully to those who don’t share his worldview isn’t the best way to advance what’s left of his career" might also apply to a guy who works for MinnPost, too.
4 comments:
D,
I hadn't seen Lambert's article, so thanks for bringing it to my attention.
There's not much to say since, frankly, Lambert doesn't say much except to rap my knuckles for using a nom de guerre. I'm surprised Lambert cares much about the story at all since with a few exceptions (Les Carpenteur at Yahoo and Chip Scoggins at the Strib), the media reaction to Kluwe's release has been more ho-hum that even I anticipated.
My issue with Kluwe isn't even his positions, simply how he addresses them. And I'd agree that calling people "a**hole f**kwits" while signing your name to the attack isn't bravery, it's bravado and it's juvenile.
I hadn't seen Lambert's article, so thanks for bringing it to my attention.
Reading MinnPost, so you don't have to!
Many thanks for the service, Mark!
In other news, Mr. Lambert has come out against the authors of the Federalist Papers and most female authors of the 19th century for this practice, while endorsing the anonymous sources that the mainstream media thrives on.
Our pal Mitch Berg's "Seventh Law of Liberal Projection" once again proves irrefutable.
When a Liberal issues a group defamation or assault on conservatives’ ethics, character or respect for liberty or the truth, they are at best projecting, and at worst drawing attention away from their own misdeeds.
Post a Comment