Discussion for article #223265
ARRRRGGGHHH!
I’ve been abstaining from Greenwald related posts.
Why must you tempt me?
Because TPM needs clicks, and Greenwald needs to keep this little tempest in a teapot going to try to sell more books. I wonder how many of Greenwald’s books Omidyar will buy; mass purchase is the way most Tea Party libertarians force themselves on the best seller list, so I’d expect the same from emoprog libertarians and predatory capitalist libertarians…
Wow, Kinsley’s quite the pouter:
Next question?
Sullivan says my review is “unworthy of the Book Review’s high standards.” That is meant to sting, and it does. You might even call it a sneer, if the public editor weren’t above such things.
No Mikey…that wasn’t a sneer, just an accurate description of your attack-cloaked-as-review hackery.
And this is just lame:
Do the people on the other side of this argument believe that the government never has a legitimate need for secrecy? (Standard example: the time and location of the D-Day invasion.) Or do they believe, as I do and as I say, that occasionally the government is right to want secrecy and in those instances it should not “simply defer” to the press?
Yeah, because unconstitutional 24/7 domestic surveillance is JUST LIKE D-day.
No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State Hardcover
Average Customer Review: 4.6 out of 5 stars See all reviews (121 customer reviews)
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #42 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
Wow, Omidyar must be buying an awful lot of books to put it at #42 on the top 100 list. Not to mention paying off all of those reviewers!
Clever, clever Omidyar!
Oh, I’m sure we’ll one day get the back room story on how Greenwald got a Pulitzer, and it will probably involve more money changing hands. Omidyar gave Greenwald a lot of money to play with, maybe he’ll buy his own book in bulk, call it a promotional expense for Intercept.
As Digby points out, Kinsley does, in fact, say that the government “must” make the decision about publishing, while assuring us/himself that it should, presumably through the goodness of its heart, “favor publication with minimal delay.”
“In a democracy (which, pace Greenwald, we still are), that decision must ultimately be made by the government. No doubt the government will usually be overprotective of its secrets, and so the process of decision-making — whatever it turns out to be — should openly tilt in favor of publication with minimal delay. But ultimately you can’t square this circle. Someone gets to decide, and that someone cannot be Glenn Greenwald.”
Oh looky here folks! UnFadingGreen aka: Glenn Greenwald surrogate is posting again — spread eagled on his couch for this lout.
Take his retorts with a grain of salt and remember where they are originating from…
Greenwald is the new Sarah Palin; you know you shouldn’t click, you know it will be stupid and infuriating, and yet …
Heh. I feel like Al Pacino in the Godfather III.
Greenwald has been publishing pieces on the dismantling of the 4th Amendment for years. Obviously he was right. His reporting on the issue should be applauded. Instead, most of you blame the messenger. I voted for Obama twice, and would a third time given the likely alternative, but his expansion of Bush’s illegal wiretapping program, codifying it into law, was directly counter to his campaign promises and continues to be unconstitutional. If Greenwald comes across as arrogant, maybe it’s because he’s finally been proven right after years of screaming from the wilderness.
First, not illegal and second, not expanded but put under greater oversight. Not an auspicious start.
Except he is “not right” on either the issues of the law or the “abuses” he claims this exposes. And when he was screaming in the wilderness all those years, does that include those years when he deferred to the Bush government in its GWOT and invading of Iraq?
Also, does Greenwald (and you) agree with the 2009 Snowden who thought Manning should be “shot in the balls” for leaking classified documents?
Welcome to TPM, home of the new Total Information Awareness positive propaganda campaign!
Where everything is legal, James Clapper is a hero, and Obama is a NSA reformer!
Greenwald won the Pulitzer because it was the story of the year and it was deserving of the honor.
It’s meant to reward and encourage journalistic excellence in the pursuit and publication of important issues in the public interest.
There is a case to be made that this story pursued Greenwald (for ten whole weeks), it was just luck that it dropped in his lap and the only shoe leather he wore out was going from the divan to the printer.
But that would be unkind.
And it might cause the wrath of the acolytes to be rained down upon my head.
Thank goodness for Michael Kinsley. In terms of essaying, reviewing, and journaling, he is the George Orwell of this era.
I see what you did there. Greenwald and his surogates are always writing articles on the pattern “NSA can do this, therefore they do it to everybody regardles of legality”. So Omidyar gave Greenwald a lot of money, therefore Greenwald could buy himself a Pulitzer, and he could buy his way onto the best seller list, so obviously he did.
Much like Kinsley reviewing Greenwald’s book in the style of Glenn Greenwald, giving Greenwald all the sympathy and dodgy accusations Greenwald would give anybody else if he was reviewing a book.
Heh.
Yeah, the documented over-reach of the NSA is JUST LIKE some wingnut’s bizarre theory that GG’s book isn’t actually popular and well- received, despite any evidence whatsoever. Unlike the NSA fiasco.
That’s a pretty feeble comparison, but that’s par for the course here
From the guy who posted “Welcome to TPM, home of the new Total Information Awareness positive propaganda campaign!”.
Yes, that sarcastic remark was mine. What of it?