She tells Politico she did nothing wrong.
Well, I guess that’s that.
[Update a couple minutes later]
So, the explanation for the criticism of Lerner is anti-Semitism? And here I didn’t even know she was Jewish (though, admittedly, given her name, it doesn’t surprise me in retrospect).
[Update late afternoon]
No, Politico, Lois Lerner is not the victim here.
Does it matter to anyone that after all that’s gone on the IRS continues its behavior?
She’s the victim here the way Dan Rather’s producer Mary Mapes was the victim in “Memogate.”
Maybe Lerner can get a good book-and-movie deal out of this, too. (Baghdad Jim could act as her agent. She’ll never find another with such dog-like devotion and loyalty.)
I thought it was a fair article. While it noted her comments, the Politico article still noted what the actual issues are, and along those lines, Lerner really offers no defense other than to say there is more to it that she claims she can’t talk about. She can of course talk about it, but she is choosing not to talk about it.
I have no pity for her. She’s untouchable because she refuses to account for her actions.
I hope her interview creates a problem with her taking the 5th.
“So, the explanation for the criticism of Lerner is anti-Semitism? ”
She claims to have received anti-semitic slurs. Maybe that’s true, and if it is, she shouldn’t be criticized for telling the truth. I don’t see anyone, least of all her, claiming that ” the explanation for the criticism of Lerner is anti-Semitism”. The politico piece didn’t suggest it. You were misled by the aptly named Hot Air.
And yet, even if true, she thought that was useful information to feed to her allies in the Alinskyite media, even though it was completely irrelevant.
Sorry, Bob, but you are clearly just one of the fellow travelers and useful idiots.
Irrelevant? Her point was that she is now greatly disliked and that she is receiving insults. That’s her whole point. She didn’t say that anti-semitism is the root of the criticism, she just said that she is hated, and she is receiving nasty personal comments, and she doesn’t like it.
I agree with Wodun, below: I don’t think it means anything, other than the obvious: people who want to be insulting look for stuff to be nasty about.
I’m not a “fellow traveler” . Like Leland, I’m just someone who actually read the Politico article, and not just the misleading Hot Air summary.
Bob, since you invoked my name, I want you to know I agree with Rand’s point to you. I don’t know if you read many books. One thing you learn about most any story, rather fiction or non-fiction, is not much time is spent on irrelevant points. Lerner receiving hate mail, whether it’s anti-semetic, comparison to nazis, comparison to serial killers, whatever; that is irrelevant to why Lerner is a news worthy figure. After all, anybody working on Wall Street the last two days could make those same claims from run ins with the climate marchers. Politico is not interviewing Wall Street employees.
Lerner is newsworthy for her leading an organization that denied equal protection and due process to thousands of Americans, and rather than explain her role, she chooses to remain silent. She has that right, but her invoking of the right doesn’t make her the victim. She lives in a $2.5 million house and draws a federal retirement north of $100,000. On top of that, she is receiving government protection for the hate mail. The Politico article noted some of this, so I give it kudos. However, If she refused to answer the tough questions, then Politico should have dumped the part about hate mail and spent time discussing the questions Lerner chose not to answer.
If Politico wants to write about anti-semitism, they could start by covering VP Biden.
I think they mentioned it because it was juicy, but I agree it wasn’t newsworthy.
I assume you aren’t serious about Biden. Hath not a Vice President the Anti-Defamation League’s forgiveness?
Anti-Defamation League (ADL) National Director Abraham Foxman,: the vice president “needs to bone up on his Shakespeare”
“There is no truer friend of the Jewish people than Joe Biden,” Foxman said. “Not only has he been a stalwart against anti-Semitism and bigotry, but he has the courage and forthrightness to admit a mistake and use it as an opportunity to learn and to teach others about the harmful effects of stereotypes.”
In a statement, Biden said, “Abe Foxman has been a friend and advisor of mine for a long time. He’s correct, it was a poor choice of words.
As a public figure, I am sure she has been the target of every insult in the book. Look at the type of stuff talk show hosts get, even Art Bell faced nasty insults and death threats. People say these insulting things to public figures because they are trying to insult them. I don’t think it really means anything that Lerner has gone through a little of what Bob Hope went through.
I surrender. I don’t care if Muhammad Saeef al-Sahaf did get the name first, and Jim has been co-opting the nickname, Bob-1 has definitely become “Baghdad Bob.” Like most of the “Hive,” of course, one wonders if he is in fact a useful idiot, as he appears, or is deliberately trying to distract from his ideological gang’s essential scumminess.
Instead of figuring out what name you’re going to use when invoking the ad hominem fallacy, you could try making an argument with some substance.
It would only be an ad hominem fallacy if I were using it as an argument. I’m not arguing with you. As the saying goes, there’s no arguing with religion, and I’ve found it’s especially a waste of time arguing with cultists. And if you’re stupid enough to believe Big Brother is your best buddy, you’re too stupid to argue with. As Voltaire said, there is no reasoning someone out of a position they weren’t reasoned into in the first place.