Re: Brewer

Thank you for the excellent response. I'm about to go get drunk but will get back to you at greater length tomorrow.

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 9:51 PM, Left Coast Rebel <leftcoastrebel@gmail.com> wrote:

Mr. Brown,

This is quite a list and response. Obviously you and I are on the opposite side of the political spectrum but I think you will find that in many ways, I, (along with many of my brethren) do not fit the template that you put forth here. First, you wrote:

..my purpose is to advance the Obama Agenda by means of avarice and deception because all is permissible under dialectical materialism. This is the key motivation of everyone who writes for such publications, of course. Normally I don't tell people this outright but, having examined some of your output, I gather that you've already gotten it all figured out, so there really is no point to keeping up pretenses

This is quite funny and I admit, you are an excellent writer. On that point (the writing), you got my attention (and frankly, I am jealous of your cred). On the other point, not so much. As much as I loathed the Bush administration, especially in the later years, I loathe far even more the Obama administration. The fact that the press has never been an honest broker regarding Barack Obama and never will be, is a shameful and disgusting spectacle. I don't assume that you are a 'shill' for Obama. Also, I am far from a simpleton and I sense that you assume so, being that I am a conservative/libertarian. Still, I appreciate the sarcasm. Nice work!

Again, you wrote:

I wrote to you because I admire you. Whereas many other movement conservative pundits were unwilling to defend Brewer's unusual decision to smoke a bowl of salvia before giving her opening statement or whatever the fuck was going on over there, you came right out and characterized her as having exhibited the qualities of a "real person." Presumably this is a good thing, one that ought to further incline Arizonans to vote for her; just as presumably, or perhaps even more presumably, but probably less presumably, she would have come off as even more of a "real person" had she fallen out of her chair and then just sat there on the ground making gurgling noises, and thus given Arizonans even more of a reason to vote for her.

First, I don't appreciate the cursing, is that necessary? I believe it dilutes the point you are trying to make here. Also, you are crossing quite the theoretical bridge here to attempt to equate Brewer's gaffe/misstep/nervous mistake as being not that much different than her quivering on the floor in a drug-induced, slobbering state. If you assume that I would have defended her in that state, you are wrong.

Then you quipped:

In such a case, I imagine you would have defended her even more vocally whereas other conservatives of less rigorous ideological commitment might have just given up on her and gone back to writing about how Islam, unlike other religions, has prompted violence.

For background on my take on Islam and the Ground Zero Mosque, go here. I hardly fit the narrative that you assume and typically reject the false right/left dichotomy regarding Islam. That's another letter in itself.

Moving along, you said:

..you have attacked your political opponents for having exhibited far lesser instances of "nervousness" and then write something to the effect that you might be a disingenuous person. Pursuant to this, I did a bit of Googling to find those instances and immediately came across something else that caught my attention, which brings us back to the emperor of Japan.

And am I to assume that ''nervousness'' led Obama to bow to the emperor of Japan? What then led him to bow to the Chinese President in April? Or the Mayor of Tampa? In the grand scheme of things, it's low on the totem poll. But, it is not becoming of a President. What say you?

Then, you finished with these questions, and I will respond:

1. What do you think would motivate an American president to bow down before the emperor of Japan or any other monarch?

2. How obvious is it that the first question is intended to get you to double down on the implication that Obama had done some terrible thing by bowing to a monarch?

3. Why do you suppose I would want you to do such a thing?

1. - I have no idea but it is disturbing - compared to trillion + deficits, a drop in the bucket.

2. - It isn't quite so obvious....nevertheless Obama bowing to a Monarch (or anyone else for that matter) is a strange sight to behold but low in the priority scale for America to discuss (I know, I know, you wanted a gotcha moment). And before you assume it, no, I am not a birther.

3. - Because you hate anyone right of center? And trust me, I am right of center. But I am pro gay marriage, believe marijuana should be legalized, think that our troops should be brought home from the Middle East....

If you are interested in more discussion that may be mutually beneficial for our media endeavors (as in content for an article at one of your outlets) that may send traffic to my site, then I am interested in furthering the conversation. If a grating tit-for-tat, is what you want, then don't waste my time.

Cordially,

-Tim

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:

Tim-

Thanks for getting back to me. Regarding your questions, I write for Vanity Fair, Skeptic, The Skeptical Inquirer, Huffington Post, New York Press, The Faster Times, and a few other outlets and also serve as director of communications for an atheism-oriented political action committee called Enlighten the Vote as well as the instigator of a media reform movement called Project PM. My purpose in doing so is to impress girls. More fundamentally, my purpose is to advance the Obama Agenda by means of avarice and deception because all is permissible under dialectical materialism. This is the key motivation of everyone who writes for such publications, of course. Normally I don't tell people this outright but, having examined some of your output, I gather that you've already gotten it all figured out, so there really is no point to keeping up pretenses, is there, Mr. Bond? I mean, Tim.

Of course, you were really asking me what my specific reason is for writing to you about your recent defense of Jan Brewer in the wake of her performance at what I assume to be some sort of thing involving Arizona. I'm going to be imperfectly honest with you; I wrote to you because I admire you. Whereas many other movement conservative pundits were unwilling to defend Brewer's unusual decision to smoke a bowl of salvia before giving her opening statement or whatever the fuck was going on over there, you came right out and characterized her as having exhibited the qualities of a "real person." Presumably this is a good thing, one that ought to further incline Arizonans to vote for her; just as presumably, or perhaps even more presumably, but probably less presumably, she would have come off as even more of a "real person" had she fallen out of her chair and then just sat there on the ground making gurgling noises, and thus given Arizonans even more of a reason to vote for her. In such a case, I imagine you would have defended her even more vocally whereas other conservatives of less rigorous ideological commitment might have just given up on her and gone back to writing about how Islam, unlike other religions, has prompted violence. In this, you are very much akin to one of those Japanese soldiers who stuck it out on some Pacific island long after the emperor had signed the treaty, except that in this case the Japanese are about to take back the House, which is what I get for using sloppy metaphors.

Having said all of that, I will come clean and state that my intention here was to prompt you to defend Brewer even further and then point out cases in which you have attacked your political opponents for having exhibited far lesser instances of "nervousness" and then write something to the effect that you might be a disingenuous person. Pursuant to this, I did a bit of Googling to find those instances and immediately came across something else that caught my attention, which brings us back to the emperor of Japan.

On a certain occasion, you criticized Barack HUSSEIN Obama for having bowed to the emperor of Japan. This being noted, I would like to ask you three questions.

1. What do you think would motivate an American president to bow down before the emperor of Japan or any other monarch?

2. How obvious is it that the first question is intended to get you to double down on the implication that Obama had done some terrible thing by bowing to a monarch?

3. Why do you suppose I would want you to do such a thing?

I look forward to your response.

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Left Coast Rebel <leftcoastrebel@gmail.com> wrote:

Mr. Brown,

Yes I would be willing to discuss further but who are you with and for what purpose? Are you with a newspaper? Online source?

Cordially,

-Tim, Left Coast Rebel

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 2:43 AM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
Howdy-

I was wondering if you'd be willing to discuss your assessment of Brewer's performance - as well as your assessment of those who have commented on her performance - at greater length. If so, please let me know.

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
512-560-2302

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
512-560-2302

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
512-560-2302