Tugging on Superman’s Cape

Posted on | June 17, 2010 | 38 Comments

Guess who decided to pick a fight with Mark Steyn?

I don’t often respond to Conor Friedersdorf, usually because it would require me to read him . . .
Evidently, my old friends at The Atlantic Monthly feel differently. From that perch, Mr Friedersdorf takes issue with my observations on “honor killings,” and has written to NR’s editors demanding a “correction.” The executive honchos in turn passed his demand on to me, and suggested I take a look at it as they’d been unable to get through it. . . .

Read the whole thing. Suffice it to say that it is not Mr. Steyn who needs correcting.

Category: Terrorism

Comments

38 Responses to “Tugging on Superman’s Cape”

Americaneocon
June 17th, 2010 @ 6:12 pm

LOL!!

Steyn is probably the last person I’d debate!
Americaneocon
June 17th, 2010 @ 2:12 pm

LOL!!

Steyn is probably the last person I’d debate!
Dave C
June 17th, 2010 @ 6:22 pm

Heh

I don’t often respond to Conor Friedersdorf, usually because it would require me to read him . . .

I’ve tried reading him a few times but couldn’t figure out what he was going on about. It was easier not to bother.
Robert Stacy McCain
June 17th, 2010 @ 6:22 pm

Steyn is probably the last person I’d debate!

I’m beginning to wonder if Joe Fein might be onto something here. IYKWIMAITYD.
Dave C
June 17th, 2010 @ 2:22 pm

Heh

I don’t often respond to Conor Friedersdorf, usually because it would require me to read him . . .

I’ve tried reading him a few times but couldn’t figure out what he was going on about. It was easier not to bother.
Robert Stacy McCain
June 17th, 2010 @ 2:22 pm

Steyn is probably the last person I’d debate!

I’m beginning to wonder if Joe Fein might be onto something here. IYKWIMAITYD.
Dave C
June 17th, 2010 @ 6:29 pm

Excitable Andi got in on the action, basically asking NRO “When will you stop beating your wife”
Dave C
June 17th, 2010 @ 2:29 pm

Excitable Andi got in on the action, basically asking NRO “When will you stop beating your wife”
Andrew Sullivan
June 17th, 2010 @ 6:33 pm

I hate to take sides against anyone in The Atlantic family, and I love going against the Repubitrons and torture apologists at NRO. I will never forgive John Podhoretz for mocking me when he still worked there and Jonah Goldberg for actually writing a book that not only made money but was a best seller.

But I wish I could ~~seduce~~ convince Mark Steyn to see the advantages of…well let’s just say spending summers in P-Town. That beard, grrrrr. There are bears in those NRO woods and I want to go hunting.
Andrew Sullivan
June 17th, 2010 @ 2:33 pm

I hate to take sides against anyone in The Atlantic family, and I love going against the Repubitrons and torture apologists at NRO. I will never forgive John Podhoretz for mocking me when he still worked there and Jonah Goldberg for actually writing a book that not only made money but was a best seller.

But I wish I could ~~seduce~~ convince Mark Steyn to see the advantages of…well let’s just say spending summers in P-Town. That beard, grrrrr. There are bears in those NRO woods and I want to go hunting.
Andrew Sullivan
June 17th, 2010 @ 6:49 pm

Steyn had the audacity to write this:

[UPDATE: Friedersdorf’s colleague, The Atlantic’s Chief Obstetrician, thinks my post is evidence of “epistemic closure” on the right. Ah, yes. Because nothing says “closed-minded conservative bubble” like a right-wing racist sexist loon worrying about the murders of brown women.]

Fine! Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned! The P-Town invitation is off.

Conor notes this statement by Mark Steyn:

The media’s attitude to “honor killings” is not only shameful and dishonors the dead; it’s also part of the reason why America’s newspapers are sliding off the cliff: Their silence on this issue is merely an especially ugly manifestation of how their news instincts have been castrated by political correctness.

Thus is reproduced as fact at the Corner, the way Newsweek uses a campaign book like Going Rogue as self-evidently part of the historical record. But, to read only the NYT for the past decade reveals Steyn to be hallucinating:

Over a period of roughly a decade, the newspaper ran everything from major internationally reported stories on honor killings in its glossy magazine to a crime story about a local honor killing on its New York regional page. It covered honor killings in Europe, the Middle East and the United States.

The topic garnered attention from magazine editors, freelancers, staff reporters in the newspaper, writers on the book review and arts pages, and multiple op-ed columnists from across the ideological spectrum. One of those columnists wrote multiple items about honor killings across several years (and even mentioned them in a couple columns that won a Pulitzer Prize!). Considering the magazine stories on honor killings alone, the Times must have spent tens of thousands of dollars at minimum covering the subject in its Sunday glossy. Honor killings were also deemed important enough to frequently appear in the World Section briefs.

So what on earth is Mark Steyn talking about?

Himself, I think. But since there is only a tenuous connection between what Steyn writes and what most people deem as non-wingnut reality, this critique will hold no water on the right. What matters to them is not grappling with what is, but asserting an ideology and cultural solidarity against libruls. So we have a simple test: will NRO correct the record (as if Steyn has ever conceded an error on anything), or will epistemic closure reign on?

[sob] I so love him.
Andrew Sullivan
June 17th, 2010 @ 2:49 pm

Steyn had the audacity to write this:

[UPDATE: Friedersdorf’s colleague, The Atlantic’s Chief Obstetrician, thinks my post is evidence of “epistemic closure” on the right. Ah, yes. Because nothing says “closed-minded conservative bubble” like a right-wing racist sexist loon worrying about the murders of brown women.]

Fine! Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned! The P-Town invitation is off.

Conor notes this statement by Mark Steyn:

The media’s attitude to “honor killings” is not only shameful and dishonors the dead; it’s also part of the reason why America’s newspapers are sliding off the cliff: Their silence on this issue is merely an especially ugly manifestation of how their news instincts have been castrated by political correctness.

Thus is reproduced as fact at the Corner, the way Newsweek uses a campaign book like Going Rogue as self-evidently part of the historical record. But, to read only the NYT for the past decade reveals Steyn to be hallucinating:

Over a period of roughly a decade, the newspaper ran everything from major internationally reported stories on honor killings in its glossy magazine to a crime story about a local honor killing on its New York regional page. It covered honor killings in Europe, the Middle East and the United States.

The topic garnered attention from magazine editors, freelancers, staff reporters in the newspaper, writers on the book review and arts pages, and multiple op-ed columnists from across the ideological spectrum. One of those columnists wrote multiple items about honor killings across several years (and even mentioned them in a couple columns that won a Pulitzer Prize!). Considering the magazine stories on honor killings alone, the Times must have spent tens of thousands of dollars at minimum covering the subject in its Sunday glossy. Honor killings were also deemed important enough to frequently appear in the World Section briefs.

So what on earth is Mark Steyn talking about?

Himself, I think. But since there is only a tenuous connection between what Steyn writes and what most people deem as non-wingnut reality, this critique will hold no water on the right. What matters to them is not grappling with what is, but asserting an ideology and cultural solidarity against libruls. So we have a simple test: will NRO correct the record (as if Steyn has ever conceded an error on anything), or will epistemic closure reign on?

[sob] I so love him.
Adrienne
June 17th, 2010 @ 6:50 pm

I would never pick a fight with Mark Steyn but I would not be adverse to bit of wrestling. OMGosh!!! Did I actually say that in public??
Adrienne
June 17th, 2010 @ 2:50 pm

I would never pick a fight with Mark Steyn but I would not be adverse to bit of wrestling. OMGosh!!! Did I actually say that in public??
Andrew Sullivan
June 17th, 2010 @ 7:18 pm

Stay away from him Adrienne. He’s mine.
Andrew Sullivan
June 17th, 2010 @ 3:18 pm

Stay away from him Adrienne. He’s mine.
Adrienne
June 17th, 2010 @ 8:26 pm

Andrew – a duel, perhaps?? Be aware that I am a little old Italian lady and I fight dirty. Very, very dirty!
Adrienne
June 17th, 2010 @ 4:26 pm

Andrew – a duel, perhaps?? Be aware that I am a little old Italian lady and I fight dirty. Very, very dirty!
Honor Killings in the West | Little Miss Attila
June 17th, 2010 @ 4:34 pm

[…] h/t: The Other McCain […]
FMJRA: Stacy Enjoys a Wee Bit of Schadenfreude When CoNor (with but one “N”) Tugs on Superman’s Cape « Si Vis Pacem
June 17th, 2010 @ 5:17 pm

[…] FMJRA: Stacy Enjoys a Wee Bit of Schadenfreude When CoNor (with but one “N”) Tugs on Superman’s Cape 2010/06/17 by Ran / Si Vis Pacem The fun begins here. […]
Andrew Sullivan
June 17th, 2010 @ 10:05 pm

Andrew – a duel, perhaps?? Be aware that I am a little old Italian lady and I fight dirty. Very, very dirty!

I am sure you do, Adrianne. You sound like a Palin supporter.

Unfortunately for me, I doubt I can swing Mark Steyn to see what a great couple we would make.

I dare not approach him, I can barely mention–the unrequieted desire of my affection.

And the sting of rejection. [sob]
Andrew Sullivan
June 17th, 2010 @ 6:05 pm

Andrew – a duel, perhaps?? Be aware that I am a little old Italian lady and I fight dirty. Very, very dirty!

I am sure you do, Adrianne. You sound like a Palin supporter.

Unfortunately for me, I doubt I can swing Mark Steyn to see what a great couple we would make.

I dare not approach him, I can barely mention–the unrequieted desire of my affection.

And the sting of rejection. [sob]
Bob Belvedere
June 17th, 2010 @ 11:21 pm

If Steyn is Superman, does that mean you’re Batman: The Dark Knight Of The South?
Bob Belvedere
June 17th, 2010 @ 7:21 pm

If Steyn is Superman, does that mean you’re Batman: The Dark Knight Of The South?
Obi's Sister
June 17th, 2010 @ 11:58 pm

This must have made your day!
Obi's Sister
June 17th, 2010 @ 7:58 pm

This must have made your day!
nicholas
June 18th, 2010 @ 12:23 am

Who would Sulli be then? The Joker?
nicholas
June 17th, 2010 @ 8:23 pm

Who would Sulli be then? The Joker?
richard mcenroe
June 18th, 2010 @ 1:24 am

nicholas — either Ambush Bug or Forbush Man.

Somebody told me to say that.
richard mcenroe
June 17th, 2010 @ 9:24 pm

nicholas — either Ambush Bug or Forbush Man.

Somebody told me to say that.
wombat-socho
June 18th, 2010 @ 3:32 am

Conor needs to find useful work in a field more suited to his talents. IIRC, Harris Teeter is hiring bag boys.
wombat-socho
June 17th, 2010 @ 11:32 pm

Conor needs to find useful work in a field more suited to his talents. IIRC, Harris Teeter is hiring bag boys.
nicholas
June 18th, 2010 @ 3:49 am

“Ambush Bug… his name is supposedly Irwin Schwab, but he has mental problems that prevent him from truly understanding reality around him, so…”

Hmm.

“Forbush Man was a wannabe superhero (albeit one with no superpowers), with a costume comprising red long johns with the letter F on the front and a cooking pot with eye-holes on his head.”

I can see your dilemma, Mr. McEnroe. Both excellent choices!
nicholas
June 17th, 2010 @ 11:49 pm

“Ambush Bug… his name is supposedly Irwin Schwab, but he has mental problems that prevent him from truly understanding reality around him, so…”

Hmm.

“Forbush Man was a wannabe superhero (albeit one with no superpowers), with a costume comprising red long johns with the letter F on the front and a cooking pot with eye-holes on his head.”

I can see your dilemma, Mr. McEnroe. Both excellent choices!
Estragon
June 18th, 2010 @ 4:57 am

Well, I’m sure young Conor is jubilant with the attention, as are his babysitters at the Atlantic, who can use the traffic.

It makes no sense that anyone would pay the kid for his writing, which has little to commend it beyond rigorous spell-checking. The only reasonable explanation is that the editors are amused by the name.

It is pretty darned funny, now that I think of it.
Estragon
June 18th, 2010 @ 12:57 am

Well, I’m sure young Conor is jubilant with the attention, as are his babysitters at the Atlantic, who can use the traffic.

It makes no sense that anyone would pay the kid for his writing, which has little to commend it beyond rigorous spell-checking. The only reasonable explanation is that the editors are amused by the name.

It is pretty darned funny, now that I think of it.
ubercheesehead
June 18th, 2010 @ 3:36 pm

What little respect I had for Andrew Sullivan was just shreaded by reading this comment thread.
ubercheesehead
June 18th, 2010 @ 11:36 am

What little respect I had for Andrew Sullivan was just shreaded by reading this comment thread.