Well, not really. But the incomparable fellow Law Professor Ann Althouse does indeed claim, tongue-in-cheek, that this bloke’s posts give her bouts of ADD (as I think they do me), and I venture that perhaps a well-timed lawsuit might be one way of finally ridding ourselves of this biting midge.
Greenwald and his daily self-affirmation
Many of you are aware of my appreciation of Professor Althouse’s judicious analysis. In deference to fellow (and apparently truant) editor Fredegar, I have refrained from posting my own thoughts on Salon’s Glenn Greenwald’s daily spoutings. (Well, that, and I don’t see any need to dignify Greenwald’s spoutings with any additional links or airtime. Others have astutely dubbed him He Who Must Never Be Noticed.)
Althouse’s recent careful dissection of Greenwald’s habitual extraordinary lack of introspection, however, leads me to a rare exception to that deference. Althouse’s post amazingly puts to print precisely the words that have floated around my head in my continual attempt to understand what value added, if any, Greenwald adds to the blogosphere. And note that A.O. makes no such self-important claims–Greenwald, on the other hand, routinely reminds us of his privileged role in the Second Coming. Here’s Althouse’s words about the man I very unaffectionately call alternatively Rush Greenwald or Glenn Rushwald (though I’ll add that I’ve laughed at and with Rush Limbaugh–something I’ve never experienced reading Greenwald):
Where is Greenwald’s self-examination and self-deprecation? All I ever see is self-importance and preening and condemning others as inferior, which kind of seems like a “pervasive and insecure craving for artificial masculinity [that] supplants rational and substantive political considerations.”
That last quote comes from Greenwald himself, recently very typically vivisecting Chris Matthews, Victor Davis Hanson, and others on the right for their belief in the importance of masculine virtues, which belief Greenwald laments as (in typically simultaneously self-important, hyperbolic, and dismissive fashion) “lead[ing] directly to some of our most significant and controversial political decisions.”
Althouse doesn’t go further here, but I’ll venture that this is Greenwald’s simple arrogance (and “simple,” because it’s unthinking–it doesn’t forward his position in any way): Greenwald doesn’t grant his ideological opponents rationality or free will. Rather, he attributes to his opponents mere stupidity and banal urges that (he nearly daily argues) underlie their opinions, writings, public speeches, and so on. A shameful way to engage in dialogue, to be sure. To believe Greenwald, he’s Socrates, and any of us who call ourselves Conservatives are Pavlov’s dogs.
With that, Greenwald goes to the trash heap. For those of you who read him: my apologies. I’m hereby making another exception: I won’t recycle.