Ah, Ann Althouse. Always a delight.
She writes a bit of nonsense about the Pelosi/plane nonsense, gets called on it by Scott at LGM, and then gets herself into a snit because Scott was mean to her by making a perfectly legitimate criticism. Through her mad research skillz, Althouse reveals to a stunned world the shocking news that he isn't a lawyer at all but a political science professor! (A fact he has clearly been at pains to conceal. Bust-ed!)
All of this is of course delivered in her inimitable style. (Well, actually it is irresistibly imitable. More on that later.)
Scott Lemieux -- who has a bizarre case of Althouse Derangement Syndrome -- links to this post and rants obtusely about how it's a post-9/11 security requirement that the Speaker of the House fly in a military plane as opposed to a commercial plane. But this post is about a controversy over the size of the military plane she should have, not about whether or not she should have a military plane. He points out that Hastert got a military plane. Well, duh, Scott, that's in the article I linked to....
And then read the text of my post, which doesn't criticize Pelosi for wanting a military plane by for "her desire to avoid having her plane stop to refuel." You know, words have meaning. Two words you might want to learn are "never" and "mind." And then maybe "I'm" and "sorry." You twit.
Lemieux['s blog] had to withdraw a rant about me on Thursday because his own commenters explained how he was being an idiot and got it wrong. Let's see if he figures out his boo-boo this time and corrects it. I don't normally link to my haters, but I'm going to make an exception just to say that Scott's bumbling is especially ridiculous.
Scott replies in the Althouse comments:
A few observations:
1. Attacking someone's "reading skills" is a bad move when you misidentify the authorship of a post you'd like to single out for attack purposes.
2. It's also poor strategy when your interpretation of events is at odds with information in the very newspaper story you cite as evidence for your claims about the Speaker of the House. To wit, Althouse says: "Can someone explain how Nancy Pelosi has the nerve to tell a group of veterans that her desire to avoid having her plane stop to refuel is all about security?"
Though the LA TImes article she links to contains this paragraph:
The House sergeant at arms originally advised Pelosi that Hastert had used a military plane and recommended that she use one that didn't need to refuel. That prompted her office to request clarification of the rules, Daly said, noting that she never actually requested a specific plane.
How selfish of her to follow someone else's recommendation. (And of course this was available on February 8...)
And what the hell would be so unreasonable about wanting to fly nonstop from DC to California anyway? Mysteries, mysteries...
3. Is Althouse really claiming that she was confused because she confused the the letter "d" first with "Scott Lemieux," and then with a penis? I assume this is intended as some class of "Joke," but it is, um, really fairly bizarre. Althouse owes an apology not only to the letter "d" but perhaps to other consonants as well.
4. That last comment of hers I quoted makes her claim that it is other people who are "deranged" seem somewhat unpersuasive. Somehow.
Anyway. I myself am shocked at Althouse's language. Incivility is the plague of the blogosphere. When oh when will it end.
I will make a start. I here offer a short video that will perhaps clear up the difficulties certain bloggers are having with the letter "d." I hope that with this gesture the Healing May Begin.