just today more...on that phony Russiagate fake news story...

[Mark Thibodeau]

Oh, I am more than familiar with that particular bit of condescending,
self-contradictory, willfully blind, point-missing, pig-obstinate nonsense
from the ever more bizarre Slate.

Let me see if I can find the definitive rebuttal I read back when it first
shit-I mean hit the interwebs.

YOPJ

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Thomas <uzs7lz at uni-bonn.de> wrote:

> I don't know Eric Garland or his tweets so cannot say anything first-hand,
> but remembered the name. This here is a rather devastating take-down:
>
> http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/201
> 6/12/what_the_hell_is_wrong_with_america_s_establishment_liberals.html
>
> Of course, and needless to say, just like the C. J. Hopkins' piece I
> linked to earlier, Kriss' polemic more or less corresponds with my own
> thoughts upon the current brouhaha. Mark Thibodeau may enjoy the prose
> style, if not the content.
>
> Choice quote:
>
> 'On Dec. 11, fueled by prescription amphetamines and craft beer, Eric
> Garland disgorged a sprawling 127-tweet thread explaining to America and
> the world exactly what was going on, how Russia put Trump in power, and
> what they could do about it. And the thing was a sensation. Every so often,
> a text comes along that perfectly captures the mood of a certain section of
> society at a certain time, something that screams their pain for them in
> ways they can’t quite manage to do themselves. Garland’s tweet thread is
> that common roar of establishment liberalism in the age of Trump. It’s been
> retweeted thousands of times, gaining fawning praise from much of the
> liberal intelligentsia. Finally, someone has had the courage to put it all
> together, in a grand masterpiece of political analysis. Kurt Eichenwald of
> Newsweek and Vanity Fair called it “a MUST read.” Clara Jeffery, editor in
> chief of Mother Jones, gushingly described it as the “single greatest
> thread I have ever read on Twitter. And in its way a Federalist Paper for
> 2016.” “Great writing, using a form that doesn’t usually lend itself to
> greatness,” gurgled the Washington Post’s David Fahrenthold. Tim Fullerton,
> New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s director of communications, glooped that “if
> there were a Pulitzer for tweeting—this thread would be the undisputed
> winner of 2016.” Patton Oswalt: “Succinct & propulsive writing.” Sean
> Illing: “Bullshit-free.”
>
> Clearly something horrifying has happened to America’s great liberal
> intellects. One moment they were yapping along in the train of a historic
> political movement; now, ragged and destitute, they wander with lolling
> tongues in search of anything that might explain their new world to them.
> This is, after all, how cults get started. Cultists will venerate any
> messianic mediocrity and any set of half-baked spiritual dogmas; it’s not
> the overt content that matters but the security of knowing. If Trump’s
> devoted hype squad of pustulent, oleaginous neo-Nazis can now be euphemized
> as the “alt-right,” the Eichenwalds and Jefferys of the world might have
> turned themselves into something similar: an alt-center, pushing its own
> failed political doctrine with all the same vehemence, idiocy, and spleen.
> So it’s strange, but not surprising, that so many people would sing the
> praises of Garland’s masterpiece, because it is absolutely the worst piece
> of political writing ever inflicted on any public in human history.'
>
>
>
>
>
> Am 20.12.2017 um 00:54 schrieb Matthew Taylor:
>
>> Jesus, I bet some of you look at Eric Garland's Twitter and see something
>> profound rather than a sad paranoiac shooting up Adderall and being cheered
>> on by the increasingly conspiracy-prone liberal commentariat.
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20171220/6e1bd4c3/attachment.html>