We Have An Instant Ignorant Dolt Today - Ed Whelan

Jesus, it's Sunday, for crying-out-loud.

You really have to be working at it, to want it, oh, so badly, to become an Instant Ignorant Dolt on the weekend.

I mean, you have the luxury of five days, to piss all over yourself, and spread your ignorance out, and then kick back over the weekend to bask in it, or to flail away, attempting to explain, or suppress, your shining moment of dunderheadedness.

But Ed Whelan just couldn't wait ... He had to let it explode, to shoot out of the gate, like a geyser of unfettered PartyofNoican bile.

Whelan, who is the President of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, blogs on the Flying Monkey perch of The National Review, and, also worked in the Bush Grindhouse "From just before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, until joining EPPC in 2004, Mr. Whelan was the Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel in the U.S. Department of Justice. In that capacity, he advised the White House Counsel’s Office, the Attorney General and other senior DOJ officials, and Departments and agencies throughout the executive branch on difficult and sensitive legal questions."



Hmmm ... Advised on "difficult and sensitive legal questions."

What was going on in the The Bush Grindhouse from 2001, to 2004?

The building of the lies for the invasion and occupation of Iraq ... The building of the Bush (Cheney) Torture Program ... Illegal wiretapping ... The exposure and outing of a covert CIA Agent ...

Which is where we landed today, with IID Whelan.

We'll let Steve Benen set up, succinctly;

On Friday, publius -- Hilzoy's Obsidian Wings co-blogger and someone I've known for several years -- had a blog post criticizing something National Review's Ed Whelan wrote. As blog criticisms go, the piece was acerbic but hardly outrageous -- Whelan made an observation about judges pondering policy outcomes, and publius referenced a Volokh item that took issue with Whelan's assumptions.

Whelan, publius said, is "a smart guy with outstanding legal credentials," adding, "He just enjoys playing the role of know-nothing demagogue." The same post referenced a quote from Anonymous Liberal, describing Whelan as "essentially a legal hitman."

So, what does our Instant Ignorant Dolt Ed Whelan do?

He writes a post, outing and exposing the identity, and employer, of publius, as well as sending him a pissy email.

Exposing an Irresponsible Anonymous Blogger

One bane of the Internet is the anonymous blogger who abuses his anonymity to engage in irresponsible attacks. One such blogger who has been biting at my ankles in recent months is the fellow who calls himself “publius” at the Obsidian Wings blog.

And, this is a good one, even in his hackery, his moment of Ignorant Doltness, Whelan admits "Well, I’m amused to learn that I was wrong about publius’s lack of legal education."

Then IID Whelan goes on to expose publius, where he works, and hits on him a few more times.

TBogg gets the honors for the most descriptive post on this, saying "Bitter out-of-power wingnut welfare recipient Ed Whelan fucks up explaining a joke, gets called out on it, and then goes Full Metal Asshole ..."

The Anonymous Liberal, who got dragged into this, offers;

Whelan responded by publishing Publius' real identity on the National Review website and sending him an email saying "now who's the hitman, you coward and idiot."

Um, it's still you, Ed, but thanks for proving it.

It's really difficult to put into words just how despicable and childish this behavior is. This is a man who was a Deputy Assistant Attorney General. He's currently the President of the Ethics and Public Policy Center. And he's acting like a six-year-old.

John Cole, on Balloon Juice, points out a bit of irony, noting "Shameful, but to be expected. I mean, after all, Publius was defending a racist latina! He had it coming. Good thing Whelan heads a group that deals with ethics. That kind of experience could come in handy during a situation like this."

And, publius (we'll stay honoring his nom-de-plume), also responded to IID Whelan, in his sardonic "Stay Classy Ed Whelan";

And to be clear – the proximate cause was that Whelan got mad that I criticized him in a blog post. More specifically, he’s mad that Eugene Volokh made him look rather silly – and he’s lashing out at me for pointing that out, and publishing my name.

[snip]

As I told Ed (to no avail), I have blogged under a pseudonym largely for private and professional reasons. Professionally, I’ve heard that pre-tenure blogging (particularly on politics) can cause problems. And before that, I was a lawyer with real clients. I also believe that the classroom should be as nonpolitical as possible – and I don’t want conservative students to feel uncomfortable before they take a single class based on my posts. So I don’t tell them about this blog. Also, I write and research on telecom policy – and I consider blogging and academic research separate endeavors. This, frankly, is a hobby.

[snip]

All of these things I would have told Ed, if he had asked. Instead, I told him that I have family and professional reasons for not publishing under my own name, and he wrote back and called me an “idiot” and a “coward.” (I’ve posted the email exchange below).

How often have we seen this from the Flying Monkeys of the Right Wing Freakshow?

Have a disagreement with their dogma, they don't defend their position, they personally attack the dissenter, the person with a different opinion, a different point-of-view.

Valerie Plame is, certainly, a shining example of this

So Ed Whelan, you join the clown train of The Garlics' growing roster of Ignorant Dolts.

Just remember to change, frequently, as you piss all over yourself.


Bonus Ignorant Dolt Ed Whelan Riffs

A.J. Strata: A Far Right Tirade At NRO Results In Exposing An Anonymous Centrist Blogger

James Joyner: Outing

D. Aristophanes: douche-bag (n.) - see Whelan, Ed

Kevin Jon Heller: Ed Whelan Outs an Anonymous Law Professor/Blogger

Tom Maguire: I Deplore This

Joe Gandelman: Blogging Ethics: You Strongly Disagree With Me I Expose Your Identity

Brad DeLong: The National Review: Taking the Class Out of Class Warfare: Ed Whalen Edition (Why Oh Why Can't We Have a Better Press Corps?)

Scott Lemieux: Advocate of Arbitrary Torture Shows Lack of Ethics

And, the last word, to Publius - Thanks All

Sadly No Slaps Down Prom Dress Boy On Bush Legacy

I think, we can expect to see these things trickle out, through the end of the year, and into the next.

The dwarfs, finks, phonies and frauds of the Right Wing Freak Show, looking to lay down some gold, frankincense and muir at the alter of our first-and-only Court-Appointed President's legacy.

It seems Commissar Goldberg is about to talk or write about it.

You may remember the new Definer of Fascism from the pages of The Garlic, when we noted the reaction to his book in our "The morning after always looks grim if you happen to be wearing last night's dress".

There's a great interview (with Goldberg splaying all over the place) by Salon's Alex Koppelman ("We're all fascists now");

In the book, Goldberg attempts to convince readers that six decades of conventional wisdom that have placed Italy's Benito Mussolini, Germany's Adolf Hitler and fascism on the right side of the ideological spectrum are wrong, and that fascism is really a phenomenon of the left. Goldberg also attributes fascist rhetoric and tactics to Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and describes the New Deal's descendants, modern American liberals, as carriers of this liberal-fascist DNA. In a sense, "We're All Fascists Now," as Goldberg puts it in one of his chapter titles.

Larisa Alexandrova weighed in also, with her 'Springtime For Hitler' post;

Either Jonah Goldberg is putting on a new production of the Producers or his latest book is a cry for help from a fractured and disoriented mind.

Titled... wait for it... Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning, it is a retelling of history through the lens of propaganda.

Recently, Commissar Goldberg put out the call to his RWFS, and his National Review minions - "I thought it'd be interesting to know what NRO readers think Bush's legacy will be. Please send thoughts — hopefully constructive".

We noted the other day, Spencer Ackerman's brilliant definition of the Bush Legacy, recommending Obama adopt it on the stump;

Welcome to the next four years. These people have plunged the country into two failing/failed wars and killed hundreds of thousands of people. (Also, they pulled off a housing crisis and a healthcare crisis and an environmental crisis and when an entire city drowned the administration left the black people to die.) There’s no alibi: when conservatism had its chance to govern, this is what it yielded. If I was one of them, I’d bitch about Rajiv Chandrasekaran or Jeremiah Wright or whatever was necessary to distract people from what I did when I had the chance to do it. Get ready for years and years and years of this puerile and tiresome nonsense.

Probably not the legacy-building constructive narrative Commissar Goldberg is looking for ...

Heck, it's probably registering on Goldberg's Liberal Fascism Meter as we speak

Well, if he doesn't like that one, Brad, over on Sadly No, came up with another gem today.

I highly encourage you all to send Jonah your thoughts on this matter, be they constructive or otherwise.

For my part, I think pictures speak more than a trillion-kabillion words, so I’ll let them speak for me. Ladies and gentlemen, the Bush Legacy

You gotta go over to the post and check it the pictorial Brad lays out - Pretty much on-target!

And Brad adds;

To sum up: Bush has been a smarmy, destructive asshole for the past eight years and he has left the next president with an extremely large pile of shit to deal with. And you, Jonah, dutifully enabled the stupid SOB for years until you realized that he was starting to cost the GOP votes. Lest we forget...

A "smarmy, destructive asshole ..."

Yep, sure sounds like the Court-Appointed President (h/t Barry Crimmins) we have had over the past seven-and-a-half-years.

He'll own that legacy, that moniker, for perpetuity.


Bonus Links

Lawyers, Guns and Money: Dear Jonah: I Am Not Serious, Either

E&P Staff: Jon Stewart Goes After Jonah Goldberg and 'Fascism' -- He Responds

The Hon. Dr. St. Rev. Bradley S. Rocket, Esq, PhD, MD: A tantalizing peek at history’s greatest book

Retro Rudy ... When The Emperor Has No Clothes, I Guess, We're Supposed To Compliment His Hair ...

Just last week, and earlier this month, The Garlic highlighted the shark-jumping abilities of America's Mayor.

Then, on Saturday, Alex Koppelman, of Salon, dug into Hizzonor's claim of his Ground Zero heroics, and came out with "After 9/11, Rudy wasn't a rescue worker -- he was a Yankee; Giuliani said he spent as much time at ground zero as many rescue workers. Where was he really? Much of the time, at baseball games."

Well, apparently, the shark handlers took umbrage to that characterization.

Joan Walsh has a piece today, detailing the blowback on Koppelman's "After 9/11, "Rudy wasn't a rescue worker -- he was a Yankee" from the National Review, and not one defender, but three;

When the National Review attacks

Not sure how that plays out for the Presidential Pennant Race, when you have to go three-deep into the bullpen to bailout a wannabe Yankee. It's more than probable that's there's a stadium-full of inimical press waiting in the on-deck circle.

Bonus Links

Wayne Barrett: Rudy Giuliani's Five Big Lies About 9/11

Where's Ernest Borgnine when you need him?