[Dean's World] Dave Price: Battle of the Glenns

[notify at powerblogs.com]

Posted by Dave Price:
Battle of the Glenns
http://www.deanesmay.com/posts/1153411819.shtml


   Thereâs been a sort of [1]ongoing scuffle between Glenn Reynolds and
   Glenn Greenwald for some time now, which is fascinating to me because
   in many ways Greenwald resembles nothing so much as a Bizarro
   Instapundit: while both are career law-talking-guys who claim to be
   civil libertarians, where oneâs interests are bemusedly eclectic and
   expansive the other is narrowly, even bitterly focused, where Reynolds
   is concise and witty Greenwald is verbosely leaden, where Glenn is
   moderate, friendly, and reasonable The Other Glenn is hyperpartisan,
   vitriolic, and hyperbolic. And while I donât know for sure, it seems
   safe to assume Greenwald is probably a [2]kitten-blender.
   Unfortunately hyperbole, vitriol, and verbosity seem to be most of
   what Greenwald brings to the table. Thereâs nothing wrong, per se,
   with vicious partisan punditry, and if Greenwaldâs raison dâetre is to
   be a sort of Ann Coulter of the sinestrosphere, then hey, more power
   to him. But Annâs diatribes against the left are readable because they
   always have a sort of tongue-in-cheek feel; when she talks about
   âliberalsâ incessant treasonâ she knows people are rolling their eyes,
   and when she says (with a smile) the politically outspoken 9/11 widows
   are âenjoying their husbandsâ deathsâ she does so knowing people will
   say âthere goes Crazy Ann againâ and one gets the feeling, watching
   her laugh and toss her long blonde hair about, that sheâs not just
   fine with that but employing it as an act to gain attention â and
   then, having got our attention, she goes on to adduce evidence for her
   crazy-seeming arguments, which then seem, while often still
   implausible (or just [3]offensive), at least slightly less crazy.
   Bizarro Glennâs problem is that for the most part he isnât really
   making arguments, but just flinging out over-the-top accusations, with
   little ironic humor and less evidence. [4]Here, for example, in the
   same vein in which he mistook our host Dean for a âconservative,â
   while calling for journalists to denounce the dextrosphere he makes
   this unintentionally hilarious statement:

     As its leading bloggers vividly illustrate, pro-Bush âconservatismâ
     is a highly authoritarian movement which seeks to vest unlimited
     and unrestrained power in their Leader, views garden-variety
     political dissent as blasphemy and treason, and glorifies violence
     as a justifiable tool to achieve their glorious political ends.

   Virtually everything in this sentence is ridiculous (disclosing
   [5]national security [6]secrets is garden-variety political dissent?
   Greenwaldâs garden is apparently composed of [7]genus Psilocybe), but
   letâs look at the most amusingly over-the-top tendentious part:
   âunlimitedâ and âunrestrainedâ power? Youâd think one or the other
   would suffice, but I suppose if youâre going to gun down a strawman
   you might as well use both barrels. Of course, no one is arguing
   Bushâs power should have no limits: I havenât heard anyone suggest
   President Bush could or should openly defy Supreme Court rulings, as
   the man on our $20 bill did, suspend habeas corpus for U.S. citizens
   as the man on the $5 bill did, or [8]introduce legislation to change
   the legal structure of the Supreme Court to allow him to pack it with
   his people, threaten to nationalize the media if they donât give him
   good war coverage (and bug them to boot), all of which the leftâs
   sainted FDR did in the lifetimes of many alive today.
   As Original Glenn has alluded to, the mendacious rhetoric employed
   here is nearly Orwellian (complete with [9]Goldstein), especially as
   it calls for denunciations from the press. This is not an attempt at
   debate, this is Two Minutes Hate, and poorly done at that.

References

   1. http://instapundit.com/archives/031507.php
   2. http://www.imao.us/archives/000567.html
   3. http://instapundit.com/archives/028582.php
   4. http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/07/journalists-its-time-for-some-articles.html
   5. http://michellemalkin.com/archives/005466.htm
   6. http://michellemalkin.com/archives/005434.htm
   7. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psilocybe
   8. http://www.crf-usa.org/bria/bria10_4.html
   9. http://proteinwisdom.com/index.php?/weblog/entry/20707/