The chap made a loathsome comment. Why defend it? Worse, why explain it away as the linked blogger is attempting? All Kos needed to do was say "I'm sorry about my comments. These men have families and have served their country honorably. They didn't deserve to be murdered and have their corpses desecrated." That would've been the end of it. He never did this and I can't imagine why he would be so stupid as to avoid apologising. Good grief, was he so blind as to not realize that his enemies were reading his blog? What principle was he defending by refusing to apologise? So the icon falls because he can't grasp reality and the true believers attempt to excuse the fact that the messiah was merely a man.
There is an unhealthy obsession with Instapundit in your posts. It reminds me of a certain hedge fund manager who would vocally denounce Warren Buffett. Why bother if you end up sounding like a jealous fool? When Reynolds applauds the death of innocents you are free to call his advertisers. Until such point you will be whistling Dixie and sounding silly. I know you hate the current administration but don't let it turn you into a raving loon. Michael Walzer is a far better example than Michael Moore.
I didn't think I was defending it. What Kos actually said was pretty dumb. (Though I think the 'civilian' discussion at least a little bit misleading-- there's a good post on the related issues at Body and Soul.) But I find the "shocked! shocked!" tone-- and the corresponding accusations of rot, moral corruption, etc.-- a little bit hard to take, given some of the other reactions to the Fallujah events. (For an amusing contrast, watch people on the LGF comments talk about how appalled they are by the callous disregard Kos shows for human life, then suggest that he be killed for it.)
As for Reynolds, I don't think I've said much of anything about him here before, though maybe I'm so deep in my obsession that my memory fails. I've heard the ancients speak of the Golden Age of Blogs, when his site was more worth reading, but I've generally just ignored it, since in our current Iron Age (often noted as beginning with "Valerie Plame? Too complicated!") it seems not so interesting.
The chap made a loathsome comment. Why defend it? Worse, why explain it away as the linked blogger is attempting? All Kos needed to do was say "I'm sorry about my comments. These men have families and have served their country honorably. They didn't deserve to be murdered and have their corpses desecrated." That would've been the end of it. He never did this and I can't imagine why he would be so stupid as to avoid apologising. Good grief, was he so blind as to not realize that his enemies were reading his blog? What principle was he defending by refusing to apologise? So the icon falls because he can't grasp reality and the true believers attempt to excuse the fact that the messiah was merely a man.
There is an unhealthy obsession with Instapundit in your posts. It reminds me of a certain hedge fund manager who would vocally denounce Warren Buffett. Why bother if you end up sounding like a jealous fool? When Reynolds applauds the death of innocents you are free to call his advertisers. Until such point you will be whistling Dixie and sounding silly. I know you hate the current administration but don't let it turn you into a raving loon. Michael Walzer is a far better example than Michael Moore.
Posted by David | Link to this comment | 04- 4-04 5:37 PM
I didn't think I was defending it. What Kos actually said was pretty dumb. (Though I think the 'civilian' discussion at least a little bit misleading-- there's a good post on the related issues at Body and Soul.) But I find the "shocked! shocked!" tone-- and the corresponding accusations of rot, moral corruption, etc.-- a little bit hard to take, given some of the other reactions to the Fallujah events. (For an amusing contrast, watch people on the LGF comments talk about how appalled they are by the callous disregard Kos shows for human life, then suggest that he be killed for it.)
As for Reynolds, I don't think I've said much of anything about him here before, though maybe I'm so deep in my obsession that my memory fails. I've heard the ancients speak of the Golden Age of Blogs, when his site was more worth reading, but I've generally just ignored it, since in our current Iron Age (often noted as beginning with "Valerie Plame? Too complicated!") it seems not so interesting.
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 04- 4-04 7:14 PM