Matthew Yglesias (August 01, 2008) - Good Night, and Good Luck

Give Douthat a wedgie on the way out.

And good luck.

Posted by MoeLarryAndJesus | August 1, 2008 6:20 PM

LinkTitle

Good luck. As Somerby writes today:

(There is) a certain type of liberal who is quite expert at losing elections

And you've been doing your best to morph into that type over the past six months.

Posted by Petey | August 1, 2008 6:22 PM

Have fun! Be Good! Live well!

Posted by cheflovesbeer | August 1, 2008 6:22 PM

Farewell, good luck at the new place.

Posted by El Cid | August 1, 2008 6:24 PM

Good job.

Posted by gregor | August 1, 2008 6:24 PM

Petey should know about losing elections. All of his preferred war-mongering candidates lost this time around.

Posted by mad6798 | August 1, 2008 6:26 PM

Godspeed you, Yglesias Emperor!

Posted by lampwick | August 1, 2008 6:26 PM

Shucks, Petey. Can't even be gracious on an occasion like this?

Speaking of liberals who are experts at losing elections . . . think I saw a profile of one in the Enquirer this week.

Posted by Trapper John | August 1, 2008 6:28 PM

Hmmm... while Matthew's blog is indeed the proper forum for multiple typos, I'll correct for posterity:

-----

"But I’m excited ... about the new job at the Center for American Progress. "

Good luck at CAP. As Somerby writes today:

(There is) a certain type of liberal who is quite expert at losing elections

And you've been doing your best to morph into that type over the past six months.

Posted by Petey | August 1, 2008 6:29 PM

Fair winds, following seas and six feet under the keel, Churchie!

Posted by calipygian | August 1, 2008 6:30 PM

God what a graceless asshole Petey is. Petey, I will be praying that you die painfully and quickly, and burn in hell for all eternity, as well as getting as ass raped by Satan on an hourly basis.

Ass raped by Satan. Now THERE'S a great band name waiting to be used.

Posted by voice of reason | August 1, 2008 6:34 PM

I will follow you there Matt. Enjoy the vacation!

Posted by Ed S | August 1, 2008 6:35 PM

That means no blogging for me for a week. I think I haven’t gone 24 hours without a blog post since 2004, and I haven’t gone blogless for a week since I started doing this over six years ago. I’m not sure if the vacation will be good for me, or if I’ll just drive everyone I know crazy pointing out that someone is wrong on the internet.

Don't worry about it. Just do what we do: go to that other person's blog and post a comment. It's fun; it's easy. And you can even invent a cool fake name like Clyde the Glide or Goneril.

Posted by Dan Kervick | August 1, 2008 6:37 PM

Goodbye, Matt. See you at the new place.

Posted by Freddie | August 1, 2008 6:39 PM

"Shucks, Petey. Can't even be gracious on an occasion like this?"

No. Folks who lie and smear to divide the Democratic Party away from working class voters don't get graciousness from me.

"Speaking of liberals who are experts at losing elections . . . think I saw a profile of one in the Enquirer this week."

I'd think you'd be more friendly to the labor-left, Trapper John.

We all are familiar with who owns the Enquirer and their particular long-standing relationship with certain Democratic Party figures, right?

Folks like Matthew and Josh Marshall may understand how to narrowly win nominations, but general elections are the pesky ones to them. Read your Somerby.

Posted by Petey | August 1, 2008 6:40 PM

Curious minds want to know: is Ambinder as in the tank for McCain as he comes across in his blog? If so, I'm not sure how you manage not to kill each other!

I will bookmark your new site. Best of luck to you!

Posted by SHF | August 1, 2008 6:40 PM

You botched the link just for old time's sake, didn't you?

Good luck.

Posted by 55 | August 1, 2008 6:40 PM

Thanks for all the good times, Matt!

Have a great week. See you at TP.

Posted by scythia | August 1, 2008 6:42 PM

*pours a 'lil juice*

Posted by Andrew | August 1, 2008 6:42 PM

I will be one of many people following Yglesias to the new site, as I did the the Atlantic.

I've gotta say, this move is making me reconsider my long-standing Atlantic subscription ... I like the long articles and about half of the back-of-the-issue stuff, while the other half of the back-of-the-issue stuff and the short articles send me straight up the wall, and the Atlantic's supporting Yglesias was a not-insignificant upside to my subscription. I like Coates, but I strongly feel the Atlantic should have an actual liberal political commenter, and that's not really who Coates is.

And, Petey, if you can't be nice at least be interesting.

Posted by Warren Terra | August 1, 2008 6:46 PM

I suggest Matt troll one of the conservative sites, and post comments under Blogger Zero.

Posted by Shine | August 1, 2008 6:46 PM

When you go to CAP, I hope you where a cap that says "CAP" on it

Luck is for fools. Good fortunes MY

Posted by Andrew Fly | August 1, 2008 6:49 PM

Same to you! God speed!

Posted by geha714 | August 1, 2008 6:51 PM

See you on the other side.

Posted by blah | August 1, 2008 6:54 PM

It seems fitting that your final post had a broken link!

Good luck at the new gig!

Posted by John | August 1, 2008 6:54 PM

Yglesias: That means no blogging for me for a week. I think I haven’t gone 24 hours without a blog post since 2004, and I haven’t gone blogless for a week since I started doing this over six years ago."

yes, you're certainly one of the most prolific bloggers of all time. I don't know how you do it, but i'm glad you did, because you've emerged as the one of the strongest young progressive voices out there (and with a shout-out to the commentators, who are consistently as insightful and sharp as the main author).

have fun on your vacation, and i'll be reading you every day at CAP starting next week.

Posted by raft | August 1, 2008 6:55 PM

Good luck, Matthew. I look forward to reading your blog at the new location. I hope the job change doesn't result in less frequent posting.

Posted by Daniel, Esq. | August 1, 2008 6:58 PM

I assume that Think Progress will finally be offering the range of Big Media Matt t-shirts and mugs that we have all been waiting for.

Good luck!

Posted by otto | August 1, 2008 6:58 PM

Vaya con Dios

Posted by southpaw | August 1, 2008 7:02 PM

See you over at the new place. Way to prosper.

Posted by ferd | August 1, 2008 7:05 PM

Best of luck, Matt!

Posted by Lynn | August 1, 2008 7:10 PM

Later kid.

Posted by EpicureanQuaker | August 1, 2008 7:11 PM

Been just a little while since I discovered you, glad to hear you're not going away for good. May not always agree but you're very eloquent and pretty insightful, most of the time.

I've already got the new URL bookmarked.

Posted by Joe | August 1, 2008 7:42 PM

I will get you at the new site, Yglesias! Count on it!

Ban me! I dare you!

Mwahahahahahahahahahah!!!

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | August 1, 2008 7:43 PM

Well, I guess Matt's leaving The Atlantic means there's no reason for me to visit this website again. As I understand it, the owner of the Atlantic likes to throw around money. I'm not sure why he couldn't throw enough money around to keep Yglesias. How disappointing.

Posted by Joe Strummer | August 1, 2008 7:47 PM

U R mi HERO

Posted by burning flock | August 1, 2008 8:14 PM

You son of a bitch! You've written for the Atlantic, have changed minds on a not-insignificant scale, built up a slavishly devoted troll-coterie, and all still on the sunny side of 30. In your own small way, you're as much an enfant terrible as Obama. Good luck in the future you magnificent bastard. Wipes small tear from the corner of eye.

Posted by Vivisfugue | August 1, 2008 8:25 PM

Well, I guess Matt's leaving The Atlantic means there's no reason for me to visit this website again.

...but losing Yglesias will make more space for Megan McArdle's thoughtful and well-crafted insights. Excellent strategery from the Atlantic.

Posted by Max Power | August 1, 2008 8:37 PM

Best wishes, Matt.

Posted by Klug | August 1, 2008 8:41 PM

Matt -- Well done. Enjoy every day of your blogging-free vacation--may it rejuvenate you.

I'll lost track of the number of different bookmarks I've had for you, but will look forward to latest intertube spout.

Posted by Bragan | August 1, 2008 8:54 PM

Petey are you accusing the Clintons, your new political crush, of smearing Edwards, your old political crush?

Posted by mad6798 | August 1, 2008 8:55 PM

"I've" lost track . . . an unintentional typo in honor of MY.

Posted by Bragan | August 1, 2008 8:57 PM

See you in a week, Matt. I was just chatting with your little brother in my hallway, he's doing well and having a good time here in Gotham! Good luck.

Posted by little nardini | August 1, 2008 9:05 PM

I am so excited about your new blog Matt! I will happily be following you over there. (I will however be back here to visit Andrew!)

Congratulations again and thank you for sharing your perspective.

Good luck!

Posted by Trinity | August 1, 2008 9:19 PM

Good job here and good luck in the new job. Have a great week and I look forward to reading you at your new address.

Posted by eve | August 1, 2008 9:23 PM

Surely Satan has better taste? I mean, who would want to be that intimate with Petey? Even Petey doesn't like Petey!

More importantly, good luck, Matt. I am looking forward to what Ta-Nehisi has to say, but I will definitely check out the new blog! Couldn't you have called it "Tristfoond Skimbog", just for old times' sake?

Posted by morzer | August 1, 2008 9:26 PM

How will you hang in without blogging for a week I couldn't do it...

Good luck at CAP and the new blog. I'll be checking it out.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by matt | August 1, 2008 9:38 PM

Enjoy your time off. I'll definitely check out the new site.

Posted by S.P. Gass | August 1, 2008 9:39 PM

OMG!

Here's hoping your new site:
-actually works properly, like not taking forever to load after posting a comment and actually remembering personal info when you check the box
-doesn't have animated ads
-doesn't have an ugly design
-doesn't contain any content that you are ordered to write by insane / stupid conservatives

Good luck!

Posted by Swan | August 1, 2008 10:02 PM

As other have said, we look forward to the new site.

Posted by SavageView | August 1, 2008 10:04 PM

-Isn't read by any spoiled brats, like two women I know who can take any benign and harmless comment they hear or read and twist it into a totally crass or spiteful remark that was miles away from the intended meaning.

Anyway--

OMG!

This is so monumental!

/snark

Posted by Swan | August 1, 2008 10:06 PM

-doesn't have an ugly design

Not that this one is ugly, though-- it looks fine.

(FYI this was a pre-emptive remark to protect against malicious spoiled brat mis-interpretation).

Posted by Swan | August 1, 2008 10:09 PM

We enjoyed your tenure here. Thankfully you didn't make too many more stupid posts like "I don't care for environmentalists," which you said back at TAPPED once.

Good luck with the new digs and the vacation.

Posted by Steve W. | August 1, 2008 10:20 PM

Please reactivate www.matthewyglesias.com . It's much easier than changing my blog link to your site.

Posted by Steve Sailer | August 1, 2008 10:24 PM

Nice sneakers, Matthew!

Posted by Sen. Barack Obama | August 1, 2008 10:31 PM

If anyone wants to know just how bad CAP is - and how well MattY will fit in there - read my comments here:

matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/07/big_think_tank_matt.php

Or, just take a look at the typical ThinkProgress post and its comments. Don't the Clintons have higher standards?

Posted by TLB | August 1, 2008 10:34 PM

Hey Matt, it was a great last week you had here ripping apart McCain. I can now understand all the shit you probably had to put up with, being in the same room as morons like McArdle, Douchehat, and JEFFREY FUCKING GOLDBERG. I will not renew my subscription this month.

I hope you do great work at CAP, and regardless, you'll be one of my heros. Keep telling it like it is.

Posted by Big Pimpin | August 1, 2008 10:39 PM

The question isn't how you will last a week without blogging but rather how I'll make it through that week wihtout your blog posts. Good, bad or otherwise, I've appreciated your work since befoe you called the Atlantic home. I suppose I can manage to wade through a week of work without your usual edifying commentary. Already have the new site bookmarked. Catch you on the other side.

Posted by Kurzbein | August 1, 2008 11:06 PM

Matt,
Enjoy this leisure time and congrats on the move. Looking forward to the new blog. As I said when you announced the move, I hope you’ll find a venue or context to do long-form journalism on some regular or semi-regular schedule.

Posted by jason | August 1, 2008 11:07 PM

Goodluck, Matt.

Posted by Natascha | August 2, 2008 12:09 AM

Wow, this will be the fourth reincarnation I'll follow along through. Though, I did become largely absent during the TPM stint. The format was terrible and Josh Marshall can drive me up a wall at times.

At least last I checked CAP had a competent IT staff. I'll probably never come back to any Atlantic content at all. Ta-Nehisi is interesting but it takes certain events to make me want to find out what he's thinking and that's pretty rare. I think that's a bad call for a replacement for a left-center generalist.

Posted by Ed Marshall | August 2, 2008 12:42 AM

Gud luk, and tank you, Mr. Iglesias!

Posted by brian z | August 2, 2008 1:05 AM

Good luck with the new gig.

Posted by fnook | August 2, 2008 2:35 AM

WTF. Your new employers have not created your blog, so I can't put the feed in into my reader--I will have to remember to do it. I will remember to do it, but that is pretty complacent.

Posted by Chris Dornan | August 2, 2008 4:59 AM

See you at the new place, and have a great vacation!

And that's one of the best XKCDs ever.

Posted by low-tech cyclist | August 2, 2008 5:29 AM

In the blogging world, your name is bigger than the Atlantic's.

Posted by David | August 2, 2008 6:58 AM

No blog for a week? SUCK. Perhaps I will have to go terrorize spackerman.

I hope I’ll be a good addition to the CAP team.

Ahem: 'The Atlantic? They still publish that? What's with this CAP thing? Hrmm. Well, Matthew is going over there so we'll see.'

By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable.

For the last time: ...and the comments were without form and void; and darkness was upon the blog. And God said...

max
['STFU, Petey!']

Posted by max | August 2, 2008 7:54 AM

Good luck on your new gig. I didn't know CAP was a neo org. I'll steer clear in the future.

Will an actual liberal take your place at the Atlantic?

Posted by Becca | August 2, 2008 8:50 AM

Have a great break, thanks for all your terrific work and I look forward to reading your new blog!

Posted by Ruth | August 2, 2008 9:51 AM

Great tour of duty at the Atlantic, hope you have a nice vaca.

Posted by Peter K. | August 2, 2008 9:52 AM

Matt: I'm looking forward to you giving Ambinder the treatment he deserves now that you're free to criticize him.

Posted by Led | August 2, 2008 10:02 AM

Matt, great job. So long, and thanks for all the fish.

Posted by Glenn | August 2, 2008 10:04 AM

The Atlantic just became considerably less interesting. Enjoy the well-earned time off, and safe travels across the blogosphere.

Posted by Khaled | August 2, 2008 10:06 AM

Vaya con Dios, Matt. See you after the jump.

Posted by EarBucket | August 2, 2008 10:07 AM

Where will the archives go?

Posted by M | August 2, 2008 10:57 AM

Have a swell time at the dude ranch.

Posted by Linus | August 2, 2008 11:59 AM

See ya at CAP. Can't wait for Coates! Will be interesting to hear an African American take on the election. That might not interest Ed Marshall who apparently is only interested in Coates for Jena 6 updates. There is a black man (black by white race rules anyway) running for president. Margin is the new center.

Posted by Kate | August 2, 2008 1:21 PM

Harvard ed, book under his belt, stint with The Atlantic: Yglesias will land on his feet.

As far as I'm concerned, CAP's loss is The Atlantic's gain. ;-))

Posted by MarkG | August 2, 2008 1:56 PM

Well, this leaves me with no reason to return to the Atlantic, since I can read all about Megan at Sadly No! anyway. I will be following you to Think Progress, Matt, and I hope you throw us basketball junkies a few fixes in season.

I am pleased to see that Petey is as arrogantly wrong about you and Josh as he is about basketball.

Posted by Walter Crockett | August 2, 2008 4:48 PM

Hama Rules! Haim Saban! Saddam's Bootlickers! Transhuman (and Summer Glau)! You have not shown me the data yet! This reminds me of my review of Barack Obama's autobiography!

Posted by El Cid | August 2, 2008 6:20 PM

That might not interest Ed Marshall who apparently is only interested in Coates for Jena 6 updates.

I didn't even know who he was until I started listening to bloggingheads as my work distraction. That was before the Jena 6 and Coates is mostly interesting to me because I can't figure him out at all. I have absolutely no idea what he would have said about the Jena 6 and that's why I think he's a bad replacement for Yglesias.

He's a great voice, I usually like him, but there is a contrarian strain that Matt got burned by young enough to learn and I don't think you could say the same for Coates.

Posted by Ed Marshall | August 2, 2008 10:24 PM

The only thing I won't miss is that between you and Sullivan each posting 10-15 times a day, there were some days I got nothing done at work.

Some days I wish were more like Douthat and posted only three times a day.

Good luck at CAP. Coates will be great.

Posted by Shine | August 3, 2008 12:00 AM

No idea if Matt reads these, but if you do, your old site address is down (matthewyglesias.com). You might consider updating that as you move. Good luck.

Posted by faux facsimile | August 3, 2008 1:28 AM

Congrats on the raise, Matt, but I think you are going to be preaching even more to the choir at your new home. The Atlantic attracted at least some conservative commenters, but I doubt you'll see many of us at the new place. Then again, maybe you don't want to, in which case all the better for you.

I'm sure your less prolific colleagues are going to breathe a sigh of relief that you won't be around anymore to make them look like slackers by comparison.

If Ta-Nahesi becomes the black version of Jeffrey Goldberg, his will be a similarly boring blog. We'll see.

Best of luck to you, and let me leave you with one suggestion: find the smartest young conservatives in D.C. and engage in debate with them. It will keep you sharp and keep you from becoming complacent.

Posted by Fred | August 3, 2008 3:02 AM

Good luck Matt!
Yours was the only 'voice' here at the Atlantic that I thought was worth reading. Guess I won't be comin round here no more.
See you at thinkprogress.

Posted by aaron | August 3, 2008 4:57 AM

This seems like a pretty extreme measure for Haim Saban to take just to remove all my past comments here from the blogosphere. SLC must be talking to him.

Posted by Don Williams | August 3, 2008 11:13 AM

1) Congrats on the new gig, and good luck out there!

2) As for this "vacation" I do not approve. How can you expect us to go a whole week without MY content?

Posted by Mike | August 3, 2008 2:10 PM

What? No leering questions to the effect of "what's it like to 'work' with Megan? nudge-nudge, wink-wink".

Sheeze ... you people on the internets nowadays are being way too mature. Why back when I was a kid on the internets in the good old days, people were far more immature than you kids are today. Dang kids! Get off my lawn!

Posted by DAS | August 3, 2008 2:32 PM

Farewell center-right Atlantic! Read ya at CAP.

Posted by Meer | August 3, 2008 5:30 PM

Watch for how Mattew convinces CAP to stop fighting against the abolition of the estate tax.

What's ideology vs a bank account....

Posted by Petey | August 3, 2008 7:47 PM

Matt's enemy Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn is dead.

Matt's hero Vladimir Putin is happy.

Posted by Petey | August 3, 2008 7:52 PM

Um . . . I believe I've always favored the estate tax and don't plan to stop.

Posted by Matthew Yglesias | August 3, 2008 8:34 PM

see?

Posted by Walter Crockett | August 3, 2008 8:56 PM

Get off the internet, Matt! No more screen time for the rest of the week!

Posted by scythia | August 3, 2008 9:25 PM

Petey, good of you to join us. Or was there a lack of syphilitic pedophiles requiring your services as a procurer? Say hi to Rielle for us, won't you?

Posted by mcilroy | August 3, 2008 10:42 PM

I hope you'll feel more comfortable criticizing McCain at the new job. Ideally, every post (rather than every other post) should be about how McCain is a) a liar, b) crazy, c) stupid, and/or d) a force for evil in the world.

More seriously, good luck. Your one of the best bloggers out there, particularly when it's not an election year. And may Republicans recover within the next four years so that your talents for criticism may be put to good use.

Posted by rab | August 4, 2008 12:01 AM

Watch for how Mattew convinces CAP to stop fighting against the abolition of the estate tax.

More importantly, how do we convince you to shut the hell up?

Why don't you go make yourself useful like LarryMoeandJesus does over at Douthat's blog? There's a place for liberal trolls addicted to ad hominem, and attacking their natural allies in the center left is not it, you idiot.

Sheesh, even fucking Mixner at least has his strategic priorities straight--and providing probable cause to suspect that you're dumber than him does not enhance your rhetoric.

Posted by DMonteith | August 4, 2008 12:05 AM

Dances With Woolves. I am Wind In His Spellcheck. Do you see that I am your friend? Can you see that you will always be my friend?

Posted by Wind In His Spellcheck | August 4, 2008 4:40 AM

Matt

Take Andrew Sullivan with you or get him an Obama doll or rosary beads because his obsession with Obama is creepy.

Posted by Karlene | August 4, 2008 5:14 AM

I didn't see this one coming.

I'll look forward to seeing you soon over at ThinkProgress' digs, Matt, where you'll no doubt be a better fit than Spencer was there (that is not a knock at all on Ackerman, btw, as he himself would probably say as much and his new home at FDL is likewise all the more apropos). While I hate to see these moves, if only because I hate having to tinker with my rss feeds as such, I think this is a good thing all around.

Posted by Bill W. | August 4, 2008 10:13 AM

I didn't see this one coming.

I'll look forward to seeing you soon over at ThinkProgress' digs, Matt, where you'll no doubt be a better fit than Spencer was there (that is not a knock at all on Ackerman, btw, as he himself would probably say as much and his new home at FDL is likewise all the more apropos). While I hate to see these moves, if only because I hate having to tinker with my rss feeds as such, I think this is a good thing all around.

Posted by Bill W. | August 4, 2008 10:15 AM

Good luck, and God bless. I draw inspiration from you in my own blog, and I look forward to continuing to read your posts at Think Progress.

Enjoy the week off.

Posted by Scientific | August 4, 2008 11:59 AM

Vaya con Dios.

Now, go kick some ass.

Posted by Tungsten | August 4, 2008 12:20 PM

Good luck and I look forward to reading your blog again soon.

Posted by bob oso | August 4, 2008 2:56 PM

Will Al follow you? I hope so.

Congrats and etc., see you at CAP.

Posted by Ben Cronin | August 5, 2008 2:52 PM

Just in case you don't already have it as an item on some to do list, you might want to fix it so that matthewyglesias.com stops being an automatic referral to this blog.

Posted by washerdreyer | August 5, 2008 3:35 PM

best commenter name: DJ Spellchecka

most bat-shit insane commenter: Petey, followed closely behind by a few of the regular trolls (you know who you are!)

Posted by Peter K. | August 5, 2008 4:46 PM

no one reads the atlantic, anyway

Posted by vchagz | August 5, 2008 6:57 PM

I dunno. I think that Hector Dauphin-Gloire and Richard Steven Hack might've beaten Petey on the crazy scale. Petey might have been tied with Chris Ford or The Lone Wacko though.

I do love his condemnation of "people who lie and smear to divide the Democratic Party," though. There should be a Molière play where a character based on Petey says a line about how terrible divisive smearers are.

Posted by Julian Elson | August 5, 2008 7:02 PM

MatthewYglesias.com will be referring to the new site once the new site actually exists.

Posted by Matthew Yglesias | August 5, 2008 7:40 PM

This is giving me a chance to become aware how little time it takes to keep up on all the other blogs I read, among other things. For example, did you know that if you go "outside" and look up, everything's blue? It's called the "sky" apparently (I googled it).

Posted by godoggo | August 5, 2008 8:18 PM

no one reads the atlantic, anyway

I used to. But since it became a neocon rag, no longer.

Posted by David W. | August 5, 2008 10:35 PM

Will Al follow you? I hope so.

Probably only for basketball threads, at least in the beginning. I'll be interested to see how tolerant of, er, dissent the CAP site is.

Posted by Al | August 6, 2008 1:21 PM

I cant wait to begin destroying supporters of Zionism and their arguments. Its called using evidence to do so. SOmething most of you dont understand

Posted by DebunkingZionism | August 6, 2008 10:19 PM

I cant wait to begin destroying supporters of Zionism and their arguments. Its called using evidence to do so. SOmething most of you dont understand

Posted by DebunkingZionism | August 6, 2008 10:20 PM

Dear Atlantic: Please make the URL of Matt's new blog into a link.

Thanks.

Posted by Robert C. | August 7, 2008 8:44 AM

We miss ya Matt.

In the meantime, Ta-Nehisi's doing a great job in your stead.

Posted by dannity | August 7, 2008 3:55 PM

Joining late but had to note the irony of Petey, supporter of John Edwards then Hillary Clinton, claiming to have some kind of special insights on how to win elections.

I also note that Somerby likes to rail against those democrats who constantly claim that they're in the right, while their candidates lose time and time again. Sounds a bit more like Petey to me.

Posted by Steve V | August 7, 2008 7:19 PM

Speaking of Petey, imagine his reaction when he heard/read the breaking news about Edwards affair.

Posted by Bragan | August 8, 2008 4:09 PM

Maybe "Petey" is a pseudonym for Rielle Hunter.

Posted by Matthew Yglesias | August 8, 2008 4:44 PM

Ouch, that's got to sting.

Posted by Bragan | August 8, 2008 5:09 PM

Petey's official comment on the John Edwards revelations:

Let's see what the specifics are after Nightline. Details always matter in long-lived stories, and let's see what those details are.

I have only two thoughts in the meantime:

- Full props for the discipline of holding it for an extra week to drop it into the best newshole of the season.

- And Whoa! Robert Loggia!

Posted by Petey | August 8, 2008 5:16 PM

OK, this Olympic parade is boring me so I'll pile on. What the hell.

Separated at birth?

Posted by godoggo | August 9, 2008 2:07 AM

Now that constant Edwards boosterism has ceased to be an effective means of advancing the progressive agenda, I'm finding another way to make myself useful.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | August 9, 2008 2:05 PM

Remember, Neil, in order for government programs to have sufficient political support to be properly funded and maintained over time, they need to apply universally.

If the program is limited to Orlando, political support will gradually wither. Folks in Orlando will start receiving A-10 Thunderbolts with faulty ailerons and leaky fuel tanks, and eventually a budget deal will get cut so that no one at all will get their own military attack aircraft from the government.

Posted by Petey | August 9, 2008 2:52 PM

That's true! And you'll never hear me say otherwise. Of course, in order for innocent people not to be slaughtered by the thousands in stupid wars, we need a president whose foreign policy impulses aren't just about looking tough.

But really, what I'm thinking is -- there's the Petey I know and love. Can we get back to you making your points in this clever fashion, and less of the repetitive and self-discrediting ad hominem attacks on Ezra and Matt?

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | August 9, 2008 3:43 PM

"But really, what I'm thinking is -- there's the Petey I know and love. Can we get back to you making your points in this clever fashion, and less of the repetitive and self-discrediting ad hominem attacks on Ezra and Matt?"

If people kissed and made up now, what would be the point of the convention?

Regarding Matthew, here ya' go.

Regarding Ezra, what can you say about someone who rises arguing for an issue and policy, then when it comes to the test in elections, stands against that very issue and policy because it's the professionally and socially expedient thing to do? The etiquette books call for endless ad hominem in that situation.

Posted by Petey | August 10, 2008 3:05 AM

If that's the kind of thing Ezra did, there's no way he would've been so sympathetic to Edwards in the beginning. He would've sold out to better-funded candidates with more media buzz earlier in the game, rather than working as hard as he did to convince the blogosphere that the Edwards plan was superior. And he wouldn't bother to post extended, detailed explanations of why Obama's plan is inferior as late as mid-April. He could've very well just ducked my question -- I know he's a busy guy -- and let everybody think that the Obama plan was better than it was.

I don't want Ezra to reflexively support whoever has the best health care plan, just as I don't want our specialists on any single issue to reflexively support whoever has the best plan on that issue. Despite having the same plan, Hillary was nowhere near as promising as pre-affair Edwards on passing UHC. That's when I want my health care wonk to say, "Look, Hillary clearly has a better plan, but her ability and will to get UHC through aren't so great as to be decisive in this situation." Then if he sees a bunch of other issues where there's reason to prefer Obama, he's free to tell us about those.

That's how one gives an honest and accurate assessment of the situation, which is what Ezra gave us. It's only increased my admiration of him, and it's part of the reason why I've been so unhappy to see your treatment of him over the past months.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | August 10, 2008 8:25 AM

Neil,

Seeing as how you've entered into an outright disagreement with Petey on a specific point, you should prepare for his everlasting opprobrium.

The good news, of course, is that you're about to come into a trust fund!

Posted by DMonteith | August 10, 2008 9:48 AM

Very Good job.
http://www.piriketseverler.tr.gg

Posted by PiriketSeverler | August 10, 2008 10:10 AM

If people kissed and made up now, what would be the point of the convention?

no. sow the seeds of chaos, and reap the weeds of destruction.

wise men know when the seasons are changing, and plant their crop accordingly.

[the point of the convention, in the 21st century, is to symbolize and transmit the organization's reconciliation, not to debate and ratify it, to address the more charitable reading]

Posted by scythia | August 11, 2008 4:00 AM

"I don't want Ezra to reflexively support whoever has the best health care plan, just as I don't want our specialists on any single issue to reflexively support whoever has the best plan on that issue."

But they simply can't support the candidate with the worst plan on their single issue, just because it's beneficial to their careers.

I had no problem with you supporting Obama, Neil, but it simply wasn't an option for Ezra. Sometimes when you own an issue, it ends up owning you. There were several folks besides Ezra focusing on healthcare in 2006 and 2007, and the ones who were seemingly supportive Obama for other reasons remained neutral in the nomination race, since that was the only honorable option for them.

But Ezra has no honor, so he chose a more personally expedient course. And I don't think folks should forget that he has no honor. That's a personality defect that doesn't get remedied over time.

It'd be as if Ana Marie Cox had endorsed Tom Tancredo despite rising to prominence on the back of her pro-buttfucking agenda. You simply can't do such things and not be considered a fraud.

Posted by Petey | August 11, 2008 11:58 AM

A blogger decides that he is going to back a whole candidate rather than a single policy, understanding that no one campaign policy proposal gets signed into law, and he is suddenly a man without honor who deserves regular trolling and slimy, mean-spirited attacks.

But when a presidential candidate who claims to be the selfless champion of the poor turns out not only to be a mediocre campaigner (whose various non-profits have all been abandoned now that their true purpose, electing John Edwards, is not coming to pass) and a narcissist with a sexually self-destructive streak who was willing to torpedo his entire nation's chance at having a sane executive just so he could get his rocks off... and let's reserve our judgment.

Pathetic.

Posted by Philly | August 11, 2008 12:47 PM

Fart.

Posted by a troll | August 11, 2008 2:02 PM

But Ezra has no honor, so he chose a more personally expedient course.

Petey, deal with the counterarguments above: (1) Ezra was fighting the uphill battle for the Edwards plan quite effectively for a long time. (2) Even when he supported Obama in the end, Ezra was making a considerable effort to show people that Obama had the worse plan. These are the actions of an honorable person, and you haven't said anything to convince me otherwise. The 'personal expedience' interpretation of Ezra's behavior doesn't fit the data.

Your whole position only makes sense if UHC is dramatically more likely under Clinton than under Obama. Then Ezra's decision looks like a betrayal of UHC. But with Edwards out of the game there's hardly anything left to betray. Hillary is "a weak politician to be leading the charge", to quote the savvy Petey I once knew and loved. And that's why the health care wonk doesn't have to support Kucinich or Hillary or whoever has the best plan.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | August 11, 2008 3:04 PM

I said Fart.

Posted by a troll | August 11, 2008 5:40 PM

"Your whole position only makes sense if UHC is dramatically more likely under Clinton than under Obama."

Agree strongly.

"The 'personal expedience' interpretation of Ezra's behavior doesn't fit the data."

Disagree strongly.

"that's why the health care wonk doesn't have to support Kucinich or Hillary or whoever has the best plan."

Again, I think a healthcare wonk does indeed have a responsibility not to side with the candidate with the worst healthcare plan.

I think a healthcare wonk has a responsibility to not side with the one candidate who managed to take the kind of healthcare reform that wonk has advocated for off the table for his administration.

But that's the thing, of course. Ezra ain't a healthcare wonk, or any other kind of wonk - that's just a pose. He's an ambitious and unprincipled career "liberal" who will take any position he thinks necessary to advance himself at any given moment.

Y'know, I'm not particularly happy with those healthcare wonks who took a neutral stance on the primary campaign due to Obama's strength among the chattering class, but at least I can keep a token level of respect for them. Ezra cowardly chose a path for himself that left him below even those very minimal standards.

"These are the actions of an honorable person, and you haven't said anything to convince me otherwise."

I don't expect to convince you otherwise. We've already been around this once, and we see the underlying facts differently, so we're bound to reach differing conclusions.

-----

At the end of the day, folks like Matt and Josh Marshall lied and distorted things in the heat of a campaign. Fine. That happens in politics. But Ezra managed to pivot on a dime and negate everything he'd been advocating for up until that point. That's something that should and will continue to haunt him.

Posted by Petey | August 12, 2008 9:27 AM

If you were providing any evidence for your interpretation of Ezra's actions, or trying to reinterpret the data points I've presented above, I'd have something new to say.

But you're not. You're just restating your thesis in the face of contrary data without providing any new evidence.

-----

After Iowa, I realized that Edwards had lost, and I receded from politics for about two months until the Texas caucuses brought me back. I posted occasionally, but I didn't read nearly as much as I used to. Everything in politics just looked too bleak. (It helped that I had a successful academic job search to distract me.) I think this was a good thing for me -- I had to let the Edwards dream totally die before I could look at everything with fresh eyes.

When I've read your attacks on Ezra over the past few months, I've wondered if having some time to reset would've been a good thing for you too. I don't understand how you suddenly embraced the case for Hillary as the eventual deliverer of the Edwards Plan, and your position that Ezra's Obama sympathy was some kind of corrupt careerist gambit seems completely mad. I'd be as willing to believe that he was doing it as part of an intricate plan to get popcorn from Vladimir Putin.

It just looks like all the emotions of giving up on the Edwards UHC dream got superimposed on inappropriate events and people, over the extended period of time that it takes to give up on something that tremendous.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | August 12, 2008 11:37 AM

"I don't understand how you suddenly embraced the case for Hillary as the eventual deliverer of the Edwards Plan"

- Because she embraced the plan.

- Because she embraced certain politically difficult details of the plan that would make no sense to embrace unless she actually intended to legislate it. (She waited until February to say certain magic words, but she said them and repeated them nonetheless.)

- Because passing the plan was in her own political interests, as she sees them. And that's the bottom line in figuring out what politicians will do.

The 30 second TV spot version of this is Krugman's correct assertion that there was some chance of UHC with Clinton and no chance with Obama.

After you get there, the question becomes one of how good a chance. And I'd say it would've been better than 50/50.

There is more to the Presidency than UHC, but on that one issue, I do think it's clear that Clinton decisively put herself on the side of the angels.

-----

"your position that Ezra's Obama sympathy was some kind of corrupt careerist gambit seems completely mad"

Well...

Would you agree with the far narrower proposition that it was obviously and unquestionably in Ezra's professional and social interest to side with Obama?

Posted by Petey | August 12, 2008 2:06 PM

Because passing the plan was in her own political interests, as she sees them.

Of this I've never been convinced. When she suddenly realized that she was falling behind in the primary and she needed something to hit Obama with, (that is, in February) she started trumpeting mandates. But for so long before that, we were hearing the UHC in term 2 stuff. This isn't what a firm commitment to passing UHC looks like.

And I'd say it would've been better than 50/50.

Consistent with your position, you're putting the HRC-UHC odds pretty close to where I had the JRE-UHC odds. (The Senate is a big variable.) I'd put Hillary at

Would you agree with the far narrower proposition that it was obviously and unquestionably in Ezra's professional and social interest to side with Obama?

If there's any benefit for backing Obama, it's very slight. Obama never looked like the kind of guy to freeze out people who weren't behind him in the primary, and he hasn't been doing that. (Giving Evan Bayh VP buzz, for example.)

And if I were a big Obama booster who only cared about keeping score, I wouldn't like Ezra very much. On the issue where he has expertise, he was always negative on Obama, even if he was saying nice things about Obama in other places and supporting him overall.

(If Ana Marie Cox says that Dodd is the best candidate on buttsecks but that she's supporting Edwards because of health care and hog waste, that helps Dodd more than Edwards. People listen to her on buttsecks, but she has less credibility on other issues, and why should anyone care about her overall endorsement?)

As for the DC punditocracy, I don't see that there's any serious goodies you get by being Ezra rather than John Cohn. I've hung around those people a few times, and if he'd been a Clinton supporter, everyone would've understood -- hey, you're Mandate Boy, cool, whatever, let's have some beers and spam the world's hottest guy poll for Brian Beutler.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | August 12, 2008 5:14 PM

That's what happens when you try to use less-than signs. I have Hillary's chance of passing UHC at under 20%, and Obama's chance at 5% or so, just because the future is weird.

Senate numbers matter big here, of course, and I've always thought that there were more committed anti-Hillary voters to help the GOP downticket than anti-Obama voters.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | August 12, 2008 5:18 PM

Ha! You guys are keeping the last Yglesias thread alive. Do you read him at his new site? I'd check it out, but since he was too lazy to hyper link to it, I'm too lazy to type it in my browser.

Posted by Fred | August 12, 2008 6:28 PM

Fred:
Click:

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/

Posted by Joe Klein's conscience | August 13, 2008 2:07 AM

出会いサイト

Posted by 出会いサイト | August 13, 2008 9:25 PM

toeflL.L.CはTOEFL受験者にtoeflに関する情報を提供して、toefl PBT 対策とtoefl ITP(団体受験)対策を総合的にサポートします

Posted by toefl | August 13, 2008 10:01 PM

FX

Posted by FX | August 13, 2008 10:27 PM

データ復旧のパソコン一発修理[パソコン修理・RAIDデータ復旧・サーバデータ復旧ならお任せ！

Posted by データ復旧 | August 13, 2008 10:47 PM