jeffgannon.com
kaus or hewitt
Thank you, Robert, for the link to Kaus.
Good grief! The man certainly likes exclamation points!
* UPDATE! And italics!
** P.P.S. And parentheses! (And "quotation marks")
Wait, what was the point again?
It's gotta be Kaus. He's completely inchoerent, with the worst personal writing style (those faux-editorial interruptions, the dot dot dots, the italics, the updates, the desperate neologisms, and so on). It's like David Doster Wallace and Hunter S. Thompson had a love child - and then raised it on a steady diet of lead paint chips for 18 years. His politics make no sense, either - he claims to be a democrat who is concerned about liberalism, yet he hates everything about the Democratic party and effusively praises right-wingers. I'd call him a masterfully over-the-top parody of the 1980s NEW REPUBLIC contrarian-critics-of-liberalism-to-save-
liberalism house style, except he's perfectly sincere.
My favorite Kaus moment was when he took on Paul Krugman over some issue of economics. Krugman hammered him flat with something that anyone who stayed half-awake in Freshman Macro would have instinctively understood. Kaus harrumphed for a few days, and then posted an (anonymous) email from someone who showed that it was theoretically possible to construct a case where Krugman was wrong, whereupon Kaus declared himself the victor. Yeah, he sure showed that Clarke-award winning economist a thing or two about economics!
I've been struck by the degree to which he's no longer namechecked in the Greater Blogosphere and by how much he's disappeared from the front page of Slate. When was the last time he broke a story, set the terms of a debate, or even coiled a clever term that made it into wider circulation? Shit, he's so inconsequential, even liberal bloggers who specialize in deflating cretinous right-wing rhetoric (TBogg, Roger Ailes, etc.) barely give him the time of day anymore. He's literally blogged his way up his own ass and disappeared!
Also: She isn't major, but Kaye Grogan over at Father-of-the-Year-nominee Alan Keyes's joint (renewamerica.us) might be the most awesomely terrible blogger in the history of space and time. She's been a pet obsession of The Poor Man for some time, and she has to be read to be believed.
Does Katherine Lopez at NRO count as a blogger? She's not really good enough to be bad--just predictable stupidity, day after day--but if there's some kind of an award for "Most Pathetic Excuse for a Blogger," she'd have ashot.
"He's literally blogged his way up his own ass and disappeared!"
LOL.
I'm going to vote for Keith Burgess-Jackson. He's not really a major blogger (though he's bigger than most), but he is a major headcase. Not only has he been able to make his own blog into a veritable How Not To book on blogging, but he also managed to start The Conservative Philosopher, and run it into the ground by scaring off all of the other posters by writing nonsense, turning off comments, and just being an asshole, all inside of a month (there are still others on the contributor list, but they don't really post).
I feel like Sully the Pooh (Andrew Sullivan). His comments literally drip with how he wants the world to be. "Everyone in the Bush Admin supports torture but I KNOW he is a good man with VISION, hence is blameless for at least a year of posts" or this chesnut "Catholic Church does something totally bad, and they are a church that knows better" (not should know better but they DO know better) followed up by "Catholic Church caves to public pressure for their badness, GOOD JOB, CC!" The air is so rarified from whence he blogs, I don't know whether there is any oxygen at all.
Jeff Jarvis. BuzzMachine is intellectual home to three-fingered dipshits and mouth breathers, with every day bringing a conga line of dim observations on . . . well, pretty much everything. Most egregiously, Jarvis -- who must credit his knowledge of Middle Eastern and Central Asian history to his work as TV critic for People -- has somehow become the Pimp Daddy for Iraqi bloggers who tell the right what it wants to hear.
I think Kaus is too insignificant to qualify anymore. This is the first time I've seen his name come up anywhere the blogosphere in months.
Worst writing? James Lileks, hands down. Reading his blog is like flossing with razor wire.
Worst actual blog? The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiller. (Also wins for worst blog name.) You said mere partisanship is insufficient to qualify. How about sheer repulsiveness? I don't think anyone, not even Charles at LGF, is so thoroughly contemptible.
Runners-up: LGF (natch), PowerLine, Volokh
C'mon, guys. Hewitt, Jarvis, and Sully got nothing on this crowd.
I just put up a post at Crooked Timber arguing for
Kim du Toit. The kicker is how amazingly popular he is- he gets more hits than Andrew Sullivan or Hugh Hewitt.
Cathy Seipp. Her posts are nothing but inane, self-important blathering, tales of her association with the criminally insane Luke Ford, and LA gossip. And she writes for the National Review. And her head looks like a Q-tip.
Sorry, that should be "the same tripe" for the National Review. Her guest stint on Volokh was one of the worst things I ever saw.
Oh come on, folks! Obviously here, "worst blogger" means "right of center blogger," or 'blogger I don't much agree with." Mickey Kaus, really? Choices like that make you sound like a bunch of thin-skinned babies. I prefer Ted Barlow's vote for Kim du Toit. Little Green Footballs comes to mind. How about Free Republic? Disagree with Kaus all you like; he can, I think, hardly be characterized as VILE. These other folks can.
Or how about Alec Rawls, John Rawls's emotionally disturbed son? I believe he has a blog or similar website.
Well, I don't think worst blogger is entirely ideological. I'm sure I agree with Kaus on more issues than John Cole, but the latter's blog is infinitely better. In a way, I find the Republican hackery of Kaus and Reynolds all the worse because they pretend they aren't. I can see Thad's point about LGF--amazingly popular, unspeakably vile, and also plays the "I'm not a conservative I'm an independent" card.
POwerline really does belong in the discussion, though. As hackish as Hewitt and even more reprehensible. Good call by Ted, as well; I had no idea that DuTwat was so popular. The Dickification of American conservatism, I gues...
I'm remember having an eye glazing argument with an idiot student over the Du Toit essay. . . arggh. Another memory that needs to be killed with drugs and alcohol. . .
I can see Thad's point about LGF--amazingly popular, unspeakably vile, and also plays the "I'm not a conservative I'm an independent" card.
Not to defend Charles, who pretty much single-handedly redefined the word "douchebag," but Misha is worse. Much worse. Just the rampaging egomania alone: "Emperor Darth Misha," the "Give us more, O Caesar!" button, "Imperial Edicts," "Palace Mail," and the most incredibly loathsome regular feature on the internet, "Pop a Pali for Pizza" (which is exactly what it sounds like -- then send pizza to the Israel Defense Forces whenever they kill a Palestinian).
Misha also basically instructed his readers to go out and kill Eric Blumrich (of Bushflash.com), and published a map to Eric's home on his site.
Seriously, what has Kaus or Sully ever done to compete with that?
May have to distinguish between the simply bad and the outright evil.
Doesn't "outright evil" usually trump "simply bad"? (That's the way I've always played... )
No. Simply bad and outright evil are different concepts; the one indicates incompetence, the other, well, evil. "Worst blogger" can, without further definition, mean either.
While I'm not saying he should be ranked first, it also seems to me that the name "Roger L. Simon" should come up here...
In terms of pure evil, calculated dissemination of lies, slander and disinfo, I've got to say Davey Horowitz (he calls himself "blog" so I figure I can too.)
In terms of sheer lightweightedness and irrelevance posing as essence, I've always found Wonkette a bit too cheeky. Y'know, I don't want to piss on anyone's parade, but those of us who live west of the Hudson and south of DC don't really care too much about "secret" NY liasons, lame in-jokes, and cheap pop cultural references. Seeing her recently on some cable news show lapping up the tripe those jokers pass off as analysis did not improve her image much at all in my estimation.
I'll go with "Screw'em" Kos and wait for all the comments on how this makes me a horrible troll.
Wow. After reading the above, I've gotta NiceDoggie to list of MOST EVIL FOUL F#$%@ EVER TO POLLUTE BLOGOSPHERE (not to mention wider internet worlds).
Unreal.
No. Simply bad and outright evil are different concepts; the one indicates incompetence, the other, well, evil.
Rob, I think Misha is off the charts on both counts.
But even if he weren't, does it even make sense to contemplate the aesthetics of, say, the Powerline guys, in isolation from their sheer loathsomeness? I'm not sure it does.
I'm in favor of a utilitarian approach to "worst."
Worst = evil + incompetence + influence
It seems pretty clear that people just wont be able to view the "worst blogger" question except through ideological eyes.
The real worst bloggers are those that you visit once and say "I never have to do that again."
So even if they annoy the shit out of you, if you keep going back they must be doing something right.
except through ideological eyes
Are you saying is "ideological" to be repulsed by someone like Misha? Silly me, I thought anyone with an once of simple human decency would be appalled by what goes on over there.
Worst = evil + incompetence + influence
Ah, but your solution suffers from the same problem as almost all utilitarian calculations: weighting.
Keith Burgess-Jackson at analphilosopher is the wost blogger in earth's history.
I think Kathryn Lopez counts as a blogger -- she posts so much that it would be enough to make The Corner a well-filled blog even with no other posters -- and she has no rivals as the worst of the worst. It's almost fun wondering what will be the insane obsession that takes up all her time this week (Arlen Specter, Terri Schiavo, Arlen Specter, abortion, Arlen Specter...). She can't write, she can't even spell, and she appears never to have had an actual thought in her life; if asked to explain why she's taking a position, she refers you to an article on today's NRO. She is in a class of her own.
Since most people here are obviously going to pick conservative bloggers as the worst, I'm also going to enter a separate pick for worst liberal blogger. My choice is James Wolcott: self-indulgent, hysterical, totally dependent on other bloggers and/or pundits for his political "ideas," frightfully snobbish, unfailingly contemptuous of those vulgar Christians who don't dine at the right restaurants, he is a living parody of the worst in fashionable New York liberalism.
Still not as bad as K-Lo, though.
I nominate Jay Rosen.
My additional rules: Lying. Knowing that others know it, too. Continuing to lie thereafter. Polishing the lies up and serving as a slick liar, swaying public opinion.
Top of my list:
1. Club for Growth
http://www.clubforgrowth.org/blog/
2. Club for Growth – Social Security Choice
http://www.socialsecuritychoice.org/
3. Larry Kudlow – Kudlow’s Money Politic$
http://lkmp.blogspot.com/
Hands down.
I'd like to point out that before this discussion, I was coasting through life blissfully unaware of both Kim du Tuit and the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler. That age of innocence is gone forever. In all kinds of important ways, they're clearly worse than Kaus. But I'll say this: I can imagine a kind of actual person who'd enjoy those sites. I can't say the same for Kaus; I simply can't imagine what a non-horrified Kaus reader would look like.
I simply can't imagine what a non-horrified Kaus reader would look like.
Whoever they are, they've gotta be HUGE fans of Zell Miller and Davey Horowitz.
for sheer Dumb-Assedness, Oliver Willis is in the top tier of candidates.
I'd go with Mischa for "Worst Blogger' provided there is not some deep, deeeeeeep, ironic twist to his posts.
The Daily O-Fer Kos provides a great example of 'Unintended Consequences Blogging' - Kos and Co. may be the worst thing to happen to democrat partisan politics. But they'll sure have fun driving that bus over the cliff.
Wait - I just saw the blogroll.
correction:
Worst Blogger - James Wolcott
for reasons cited by James Lileks in his funnier, more lucidly written takedown of Wolcott on his blog, The Bleat.
Which is in and of itself a potential candidate for 'Worst Blog' except that the Bleat is a perfect example of a what a blog should be - personal to the point where some people think parts of it are idiotic.
Wolcott's attempts at blogging is just idiotic - occasionally well-written, but idiotic.
Bumper, Lileks didn't come close to laying a glove on Wolcott. Lileks isn't one-tenth the writer that Wolcott is, and he knows it and resents it.
You must be using the old East German Olympic Judge scoring system to give that exchange to Wolcott.
Wolcott's blog is, and will likely to continue to be, a train wreck.
It seems to me that the commenters are treating the terms of this contest as something of a sham -- partisanship is obviously very important in influencing your thinking. For example, if intellectual dishonesty were a factor, Kos would be widely mentioned. Is there any doubt? Billmon's style of argument, if you can call it that, is deeply dishonest (even if funny). These people are no different than the partisans of the right mentioned above.
It is also interesting that Andrew Sullivan is so widely reviled on both the right and the left, yet he is so widely read. Sullivan's blog-style is to reveal his own struggles, and that leaves him open to the charge that he is not consistent, or his thinking is muddled. He may just be more willing to open his thinking to his readers.
I gotta disagree with the James Wolcott nomination. Were it not for his mention of LG&M, I never would have found this blog. Whatever else his sins may include, he gets automatic papal dispensation for that.
for reasons cited by James Lileks in his funnier, more lucidly written takedown of Wolcott
OMFG, that's the funniest thing I have ever read.
I wasn't aware there were people out there who actually enjoyed flossing with razor wire, let alone those delusional enough to recommend the practice to others.
These people are no different than the partisans of the right mentioned above.
Anyone making the claim that Kos or Billmon are in any way comparable to The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiller and LGF is in no position to accuse anyone else of being blinded by partisanship.
To even mention James "The Extremely Desperate Homeless Man's Erma Bombeck" Lileks in the same sentence with Wolcott, a funny and erudite critic and a gifted writer, is ridiculous. Lileks' blog--an unholy mix of lame cutsey-poo anecdotes about buying paper towels with his daughter at Target with deranged, clueless, hackish wingnuttery--is pretty much the definition of unreadable.
Lileks' blog--an unholy mix of lame cutsey-poo anecdotes about buying paper towels with his daughter at Target with deranged, clueless, hackish wingnuttery--is pretty much the definition of unreadable.
I gots to say, I don't see much difference between that and Wolcott's blog, which is an unholy mix of lame cutesy-poo anecdotes about hanging out with his Upper West Side friends with deranged, clueless hackishness (much of which, as I said before, gives the impression that he's leeching off other bloggers rather than actually, you know, thinking for himself). And while I like some of his filtered, edited writing (not in Vanity Fair, though, but he was good when he was the TV critic for the Village Voice), I find his self-indulgent blog posts an unreadable bag of cliches.
Wolcott is beside the point, though. I'm still interested to hear some nominations for worst liberal blogger -- unless it's considered a given that there are no bad liberal bloggers. (I would even agree that on the whole, there are fewer outright superhacks among liberal bloggers than conservative bloggers; but come on, there's gotta be some rotten apples in the liberal blogbarrel.)
Another nomination for worst liberal blogger: Amanda Marcotte, now of Pandagon. A blogger for whom all issues are "women's issues," and for whom all "women's issues" are exactly the same, and who therefore writes exactly the same post for every issue. If Martians landed tomorrow, her post would read: "Would conservatives be so interested in this 'Martians' story if they were poor black women?" She's like a cross between Amanda Bonner and a Xerox machine.
I gots to say, I don't see much difference between that and Wolcott's blog
Why doesn't it surprise me that someone clueless enough to write the above sentence would also write the one below?
Another nomination for worst liberal blogger: Amanda Marcotte, now of Pandagon.
Why doesn't it surprise me that someone clueless enough to write the above sentence would also write the one below?
Why doesn't it surprise me that someone clueless enough to answer posts with lame rhetorical questions would also write the lame rhetorical question above?
Your rapier wit wounds me, sir.
I shall therefore remove myself from this conversation until such time as I can come up with a simile as scintillating as "she's like Amanda Bonner and a Xerox machine" (complete with mangled link).
BTW, my link didn't work, so I should probably explain the Amanda Bonner reference: Amanda Bonner was the character Katharine Hepburn in the 1949 movie Adam's Rib; she was a feminist attorney who takes on the case of a woman who shot her unfaithful husband, and wins by turning the case into an argument about equal rights and double standards, outraging her husband (the prosecutor), who argues that none of this has anything to do with the fact that the woman is guilty of shooting her husband in cold blood. Since then Amanda Bonner has been my byword for someone who frames everything as a women's rights issue even when it has nothing to do with what happened.
I shall therefore remove myself from this conversation until such time as I can come up with a simile as scintillating as "she's like Amanda Bonner and a Xerox machine" (complete with mangled link).
See above for an attempt to compensate for the mangled link. As for the non-scintillatingness of my similes and non-rapierness of my wit, granted, but I don't have to be witty myself to know a bad blog post when I see one. Besides, I know my posts aren't witty. That puts me one up on James Wolcott.
See, Scott, the thing is Lileks is in on the joke, as such. Wolcott is not.
Also, it's called "The Bleat" for god's sake with the specific description of 'dashed off tripe'. That's accurate.
Were Wolcott to add the descriptive phrase 'day old pablum, covered in drivel' to his site, then maybe he wouldn't be the worst.
fwiw, it's not that I don't 'get' or appreciate the style in Wolcott's writings - he's just a god-awful blogger.
Also, it's called "The Bleat" for god's sake with the specific description of 'dashed off tripe'. That's accurate.
That being the case, why would anyone want to read him???
I can't believe we're seriously having this conversation. Next thing we know, someone here will be claiming that Joel Schumacher isn't really that shitty a director, that the atrociousness of his movies can be excused because he's "in on the joke," and that in any event he's certainly way better than that hack Martin Scorsese ever was.
Thad, I think it's more like Kevin Williamsonesque "irony"; if you advertise that something is dogshit, then it doesn't matter that it is. Of course, the so-bad-it's-good defense only works when the artiste *isn't* in on the joke. And when the "modesty" is as transparently false as it is with Lileks, it's even worse; it's just an all-purpose chickenshit copout. And none of which changes the fact that Wolcott 1)can write, 2)has some measure of taste and aesthetic judgment, both of which give him massive advantges over Lileks, a sixth-rate hack who still gets excited about Star Wars trailers.
The day of the Wolcott link was probably the most exciting day in the history of our blog. Thad and Scott have given a more than competent defense, not that he needs one.
The people who wonder at my blog's (somewhat unearned) popularity are probably the same who saw that 60 million people voted for GWB in 2004, and went, "Huh?"
It's about guns, conservative thinking and strict Constitutional constructionism, folks.
That, and killing terrorists.
60 million people kinda like that stuff -- get over it.
Given the source (Barlow and his little collective of liberal girlymen), I accept the title of "Worst Blogger" with humility and gratitude.
Clearly, red meat is not an item found on most of their diets.
And speaking of red meat: for those who don't get the joke at the Emperor Misha's site (just his own posts, not the others'), please accept a coupon for 1 sense of humor with an irony supplement, available at a fine comedy store near you.
And now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to the range.
Ladies and gentlemen, I believe we have a winnah!
"strict Constitutional constructionism"
Particularly given the way Bush took office, I have to give Mr. Du Toit this: he's much funnier than Mickey Kaus...
Michelle Malkin, all the way.
he's much funnier than Mickey Kaus...
I agree -- check this out:
At Crooked Timber, 1:28 PM:
And now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to the range.
Here, at 2:27 PM:
And now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to the range.
Again at Crooked Timber, 2:36 PM:
Vilmar—have you no shame, man? Think of the poor bulls!
Think he ever made it to the range today?
Maybe not, but he sure showed what a manly man he is. Or maybe not.
There's nothing quite as cluelessly funny as that brand of conservative who thinks talking about how he likes guns is this trangressive thing that sends all us liberals into a sputtering rage.
Actually, the first thing that sends you all into a sputtering rage is the certainty that we will continue to do as we please regardless of what you think.
I understand the sentiment behind this post (and the responses)--believe me! But in retrospect I think it was kind of a bad idea. I know it's hard to resist--and du Toit is a slow-moving target--but this kind of divisive snarkiness is just too easy and too divisive. Or so I'm starting to think. That's why I quit writing such posts after my "du Toitification" one. The blogosphere gives us opportunities to achieve rational consensus--and it also gives us opportunities to exacerbate the gulf between right and left. I'm not saying that we always have to be nicey-nice with each other...but why recreationally p*ss each other off?
Du Toit's "p*ssification* essay was very, very stupid, it's true. Painfully so, in fact. I'm not saying that we have to ignore that. I'm just saying that, in the future, we might let dumbass bygones be dumbass bygones and get on to the work of finding the truth and achieving consensus.
it is hard to take this seriously when you link to dipshits like martini republic...yes kaus uses ppss too much and is boring, but martini republic is run by petulant lying shits.
so before you start tossing rocks, do something about that glass house you live in. and de-link MartinRepublic.com. they are dicks.
Definitely Oliver Willis, who mistakes his venom and hate for intellect. His photo, all smug looking and flabbly, doesn't do him any favors, either.
How "dare" you nominate Kaye Grogan? No, really! It is clear that Kos is far more godless...and rude, to boot, too! America was founded on "freedom of the blogs," and this was guarantted by God. But those Kosmopolitans take things too far, and ostentatiously so. Kaye, in scintillating contrast, provides us with a "glimpse" of the mind of Real Americans, like some crossing guard in Ames, Iowa. This is something so truly lacking in the rest of high-faluting America-last "Blogoworld."
And that's just my opinion!
colorado equity home loan colorado equity home loan colorado equity home loan. lortab online prescription lortab online prescription lortab online prescription.
Commenting by HaloScan
