Comments on: Reason™ vs. Reason, Part 1,504

By: TallDave

TallDave — Fri, 12 May 2006 18:16:37 +0000

Well, that’s disillusioning. I guess I won’t mail in that renewal on my desk that I was dithering over.

Reason has some great articles now and then, but mostly they’ve become left-libertarians.

By: Richard Bennett

Richard Bennett — Tue, 16 Aug 2005 22:41:37 +0000

Gillespie’s leadership leaves something to be desired

He’s married to the chairperson of a Women’s Studies Department, and that tells you all you need to know about him.

Reason doesn’t seem to have much sense of a mission these days; while it claims to be a libertartian rag, it hasn’t pushed a libertarian agenda in ages except where free dope is concerned. But maybe that’s the nature of libertarianism in the Age of Terror.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Tue, 16 Aug 2005 18:34:18 +0000

I allowed my subscription to lapse last year, and got the same three smarmy “we know you didn’t really mean to let it lapse” issues. Sometimes I think the mag went to the dogs when Postrel left; other times I think she wisely left a sinking ship. Gillespie’s leadership leaves something to be desired, but with knuckleheads like McMenamin, Cavanaugh and Sanchez on their staff, I’m not how much better Postrel could do. No one can turn chicken shit into chicken salad.

By: Sigivald

Sigivald — Tue, 16 Aug 2005 18:03:14 +0000

I just gave up (ie, did not renew) my Reason subscription for similar reasons. (Though they sent me about three free issues with “please re-subscribe!” messages anyway.)

Maybe Virginia Postrel needs to resume the editor post.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:20:15 +0000

Good point. I'll try to use that word from now on, instead. To be honest non-mendacious, I probably would have eschewed both terms in favor of the more semantically deficient "doozy," had I known at the time of the comment that McMenamin was a long-standing editor of the magazine rather than a one-time guest contributor. I only know it now after looking up his M/H listing, not from anything posted at "Reason."

By: Kim du Toit

Kim du Toit — Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:02:44 +0000

I think you were banned because you’re a lawyer.

On the other hand, then that mendacious toad McMenamin should have been banned, too.

Not to teach a lawyer anything about legal vocabulary, but “mendacity” sounds so much more, well, reasonable than “lie”.

By: Richard Bennett

Richard Bennett — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 22:30:31 +0000

Congratulations and join the club, Jeff. They banned me from H & R for mocking one of their anti-Israel writers.

Oops, I’ve been banned here too, so nevermind.

By: David Ehrenstein

David Ehrenstein — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:54:29 +0000

Meanwhile the New York Times on its editorial page is continuing to promulgate the blatant lie that Judy Miller is in jail for refusing to reveal the source for an article she didn’t write. As she didn’t write an article about the Plame case there was no “source.” Consequently what she’s refusing to do do is cooperate with a criminal investigation. Fitzgerald undoubtedly has a host of questions to ask her whther one of them is “Was it Scooter in the Library with the lead pipe?” is mere conjecture — stoked by the Times and Judy allies like Lucy Dalglish. Judy is no journalistic Joan of Arc.

Hell — she’s no Susan McDougall!

By: Cobb

Cobb — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:25:08 +0000

Liars & Bloggers

Long live the blogosphere, where a spade is a goddamned spade – even if it’s all in legalese.

By: SayUncle » Blog Archive » Unreasonable

SayUncle » Blog Archive » Unreasonable — Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:04:43 +0000

[...] Xrlq has been banned from commenting at Reason because he called a lie a lie. What is actually worse is the defense of the lying. [...]