The 'Wrath' of Atrios Posted by Shadi Hamid

Atrios has just written a fairly nonsensical post, a paragraph which makes, as far as I can tell, no coherent sense. He writes, referring to something I posted earlier today

But when someone writes 'I like Will Marshall,' you know they can be ignored, if not laughed at and mocked, by all sentient beings until the end of time.

Until the end of time? This, I presume, is hyperbole. But Atrios goes on, and seems to imply that Will Marshall is evil and has the blood of hundreds of thousands of people on his hands. Not only that, but Atrios thinks that schoolchildren should spit on Marshall's image "for generations to come." Even if this is what passes in some quarters as rhetorical bluster, it strikes me as rather petulantly childish:

Marshall was one of the prime "Democratic" forces behind the invasion of Iraq, has nontrivial responsibility for the hundreds of thousands dead, and who, along with Bill Kristol, should have his image spat upon by schoolchildren during their "moment of quiet reflection" for generations to come.

Instead of attacking a Democrat like Will Marshall, maybe he should attack the people who actually took us to war, ran the war, and blundered the war; the people refuse to ban torture, insist on undermining the constitution, cheerlead warrant-less wiretapping, and promote a "unitary executive" - they're called Republicans, and it seems Atrios has forgot about them. Atrios, instead, would like to purge the Democratic Party of dissenters and create an internal civil war where none should exist. So much for party loyalty. Which side is Atrios on? Thanks for giving the Republicans more talking points.

And if Atrios actually cared to read my whole post, he would have noted that not only did I say "I like Will Marshall," but in the following sentence, I said

I also like the Kossacks because they want to stand up to Republicans and fight fire with fire. They understand that the Republicans have, it seems, done all they can to destroy our country and shred our constitution, and they’re sick of Democrats backing down and taking it. Well, good for them. I'm sick of it too.

The whole point of my post was to explore common ground between DLCers and the DailyKos community, and to see if their roles could be complimentary, and to highlight and value what each group brings to the table. So much for reconciliation.

Comments

[David]

I, too, like the Kossacks [one of the Diarists is an old friend], but I rarely go over there, or to Eschaton, because they're so preoccupied with their intraparty quarrels. Indeed, though they claim to be "just about winning," too often they seem to be "just about winning" control of the Democratic Party. Atrios most certainly tries to wield such power as he has to play the pettiest sort of high-school clique politics, with his constant blackballing and sexually charged humiliations. There's too much of it around the left blogosphere, and it could well scotch the Democrats' best shot in a generation.

[bartkid]

>Instead of attacking a Democrat like Will Marshall...

Mr. Hamid,
You have a typo in this sentence:
The word you are looking for is "enabler".

[commie atheist]

Until the end of time? This, I presume, is hyperbole.

No, no, he literally means until the end of time. Seriously.

You don't really get it, do you? Useful idiots like Will Marshall are what enabled the Republicans to do what they've done to this country. And useful idiots like you are continuing the tradition.

[AAnonymous]

Who the hell are you to broker reconciliation? Will Marshall is a fool, someone who not only should not be listened to but who should be disdained by reasonable people for his role in 1) promoting the Iraq war, 2) avoiding the realities of its continuation, and 3) trashing his fellow Democrats to earn cool points.

You have a tendency to write about two groups/people/things, declare both part good and part bad, and then anoint yourself the bridge or the amalgamation of the good on each side. It's self-indulgent, mendacious, and, above all, predictably boring.

[dave™©]

Dear Shadi,

You and Will can go fuck yourselves.

That is really the only response you and he merit.

Very truly yours...

[Bob Narus]

"Instead of attacking a Democrat like Will Marshall, maybe he should attack the people who actually took us to war..."

He is. The so-called liberals who backed the war bear much responsibility for it and the horrors that have followed in its wake. (I'm guessing that includes you, Shadi.) And Will Marshall and his DLC buddies have made a career of attacking liberals for having an insufficiently belligerent foreign policy, starting decades before anybody ever heard of the netroots. Where you got the idea that Atrios and Kos started this fight I don't know.

[Michael]

Through every word of support for invading Iraq, Will Marshall helped to take us to war. Through every word of support for the plan to invade Iraq, Will Marshall helped run this war. So when you say that he is an ok guy and a good Democrat, you are trying to reconcile the irreconcilable. It would be easier to reconcile the DLC with the RNC. With support of this war, what difference remains between them? The whole point is to stop sounding like Republicans and stop kowtowing to them. If you want to support an unnecessary and blundered war, you are not a dissenter so much as just plain wrong. The Will Marshalls can apologize for their mistake and admit they were just flat out wrong. Until then, they are intellectual jokes.

[GWPDA]

What a very silly and inchoate person you are. "Seems to imply"? How about "declares". States. "Says".

[GWPDA]

What a very silly and inchoate person you are. "Seems to imply"? How about "declares". States. "Says".

[GWPDA]

What a very silly and inchoate person you are. "Seems to imply"? How about "declares". States. "Says".