Comments on: Those Wacky Martini Republicans

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Tue, 21 Sep 2004 18:22:16 +0000

That’s putting it lightly. I’ll choose my terms carefully to distinguish Martini Republicans (those who advocate the Martini Republic) from Republicans who simply enjoy martinis. Just don’t enjoy too many of them in one setting, else the distinction may be blurred between the two.

By: MartiniPundit

MartiniPundit — Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:31:05 +0000

Pardon the interruption, but I’d like to state for the record that I am the Martini-drinking Republican. From what I’ve read on their site, they’re definitely left of center.

Thanks, Matt.

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:31:17 +0000

Damn, I forgot to mention the sterile victory proclamation following the furious attack against the obvious strawman and the infantile ad hominem. My bad!!

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Thu, 16 Sep 2004 18:26:08 +0000

I ignored nothing. Your co-dependent raised two basic points, and I addressed both of them. The first – that ITM had managed to “squeeze onto a Baghdad server” unperturbed by a 14-hour nationwide blackout – comes off sounding like the “smoking gun” to prove ITM isn’t really coming out of Baghad after all (AFAIK, there were no power outages in Langley, VA at the time). The second point then undermines the first, by proving that at least some parts of Iraq had power some of the time. Once that canard goes away, the significance of the power blackout diminishes substantially; now it’s just one more bad thing that happened in Iraq, not evidence for Joseph’s crank theory that ITM is run by the CIA in Langley.

Once Point 1 is destroyed, Point 2 leaves me nonplussed. A lot of crappy stuff has happened in Iraq; therefore, no single Iraqi can post anything jovial? Please.

If anything, the juxtaposition between the bad news from Iraq and the happy post Joseph is so unhappy about is evidence that the brothers are for real. Any CIA plant worth his salt could have done better than that, e.g., by making tangential references to the news, complete with the appropriate pro-U.S. spin, rather than a puff piece so transparent it would make Dan Rather blush.

Joseph seems to be living in a world of stereotypes. His sole reason for believing ITM is not for real is because they routinely express views he doesn’t believe (or, in all likelihood, want) Iraqis to hold. By that logic, maybe a group of Iraqi bloggers are debating whether the Martini Republic is for real, or if it’s just a plant by a bunch of Ba’ath Party members in hiding. Everyone knows that all “real” Americans are gung-ho, trigger-happy, warmongering Rambo, n’est-ce pas? :whip:

By: Justene

Justene — Thu, 16 Sep 2004 18:16:51 +0000

The new rage against “anonymous” blogging is interesting. It’s usually the first bit of mud when someone doesn’t like your viewpoint. I have an interesting email exchange with someone who complained about my “anonymous” blogging, even though my full name appears on all my posts and my law firm is linked in the sidebar. There’s very little you can’t find out about me from the blog.But it’s called Calblog so, therefore, I’m “anonymous” and to be disregarded.

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 16 Sep 2004 17:04:28 +0000

Check your tinfoil hat. As for calling me ‘dumb’, you should check out of your crystal mansion before you start throwing stupid rocks at other people.

It clearly is possible for the “Model” iraqi blogger to find time in between blackouts and car bombs in order to post a derogatory review of Farenheit 9/11. In fact, he could even post a review of “Return of the King” or “Spiderman II” as well. No doubt. The question is why he never seems to comment on the world around him exploding, and posts only soothing and reassuring pablum to the neocons.

As usual, you ignore the most salient point, and resort to strawmen and ad hominems. This is not uncommon for people like yourselves, bereft of wit and intellect.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Thu, 16 Sep 2004 16:53:20 +0000

“Moderate” Democrat? Duly noted. It’s getting rather difficult keeping up with your constantly shifting definitions of your own views. Last time you were a McCainiac hypercapitalist, remember? And a few months before that, you were a self-proclaimed “liberal Democrat” who “hearts” Kerry, admires Jane Fonda, and won’t even talk to old friends whose only sin is belonging to the wrong party. And now you’re taking your moderacy to a whole new level by suggesting that a nationwide power blackout in Iraq should have made it impossible for pro-American Iraqis – but not anti-American ones – to blog. I’ve lived through my share of blackouts over the years, but I cannot say I’ve ever encountered a single blackout that was not viewpoint-neutral.

So now you’re a “moderate,” and presumably, that dumb aleck who calls himself Alex is the other. O-kay. I don’t recall reading any posts by the other two Martini Republicans, so I’ll reserve judgement on them.

Not sure what my name has to do with any of this, but for what it’s worth, my first name is right there on the sidebar. Figuring out my real last name is a bit trickier, but it too is doable. If you really need to know it for some reason, email me. But if your only reason is to carp against the idea of anonymous blogging, save your breath.

By: joseph

joseph — Thu, 16 Sep 2004 15:32:52 +0000

Dear anonymous shallow shadow-dweller: I’m a moderate Democrat. I’m a real person. I see no conspiracies anywhere. I see the War in Iraq deteriorating, as does everyone in Iraq except DVD Omar. Martini Republic is composed of two moderate Democrats and two centrist Independents. None of us have been on any CIA payroll, not even 1099s, for quite a while. All of this is a matter of public record. What was your name, again?