(MOGS) Sorry folks, couldn't let this one pass me by

Joel Stein is not one of my favorite people right now (not that he ever was to)

I find him to be a condescending, arrogant, clueless, pompous (PIGEON).

I appreciate his honesty, I wish that he had an actual position to advocate other than "no parades please, the traffic is unbearable"

I'm not sure if that was supposed to be funny, but I can tell you this, it isn't.  I don't particularly care about his skills as a writer, or his "use of irony and the absurd" - as if writing on this subject is a simple school academic exercise and excuses him from criticism

And like I've said before, freedom of speech, also means the freedom to be spoken back to...

Don't take my word for it, see for yourself

And btw Chairman, Awesome Haiku in the comments.

Comments

[canuckistani]

Egads! Stein was verbally sliced and diced to a pulp in that interview! He came off looking pretty bad. Good thing he wasn't on Don Imus. Imus would've made hamburger out of him!! What was this guy thinking when he went on the air to discuss his article? Looks like he didn't even prep. I get the impression he just took the anti-war stance without thinking about it to get in good with his pseudo-intellectual journalism crowd.

[MOGS]

It just seems really apparent that the guy didn't bother to do much in the way of research, or critical thinking about the piece. It's like when one tosses off an opinion on something one really doesn't know much about, just for the sake of saying something or appearing smarter than everyone around you. That's the impression I got from the column, and then the interview pretty much confirmed my suspicions. Over and over again, I found myself asking, "if you just admitted you don't know anything about the subject, why the hell did you bother writing on it in the first place? To fill space? Dude, it's not that hard to call up your cousin West Point grad and at least ask the guy a few questions, that's not too much to ask, is it?"

Really, it kind of read like "blah blah don't support the troops. Blah blah imperialism. Blah blah blah morally bankrupt" - like a checklist or something, yup, I nailed all the requirements, that makes good copy.

The thing that bugged me the most. The attitude, and the tone: the author's non-chalant, casual approach to writing something to be read by potentially millions of readers on a fairly significant subject, and he basically scribbles down the first crap that pops into his head? And this guy graduated college in 1993? I was still in high school!

I almost lost it totally with his "I had mixed emotions about the invasion" - mostly because his tone of voice made it sound like he was refering to a bad call at a football game or something. It was like listening to, no offense meant, but to a whiny teen! Reference to the Boys in Trouble post, "Young and the Listless" anyone?
I may be reading too much into it, but I didn't get the vibe from the column, or especially the interview, to indicate to me that Stein doesn't stand for much of anything. Except for calling Maureen Dowd "hot" in one of his earlier columns.

Word.

[Amal]

First of all he comes of as incoherent and he also comes off as not having a point. From the answers he gives, it seems like he wrote the column without really giving it any thought and perhaps only to make sure his name is out there. Certainly, he contradicts himself often when he supports the troops delivering aid but not the ones in Afghanistan or Iraq.

He is also most definitely wrong when he says you cannot support the troops but be against the war. I am against the war but I completely support the men and women in that little corner of hell called Iraq.

All in all, Stein is a dumbass making sure that everyone knows he is a dumbass.

[Canuckistani]

Maureen Dowd is hot. And smart. I want to be like her when I grow up.

[Amal]

Canuckistani, I love Maureen Dowd but what does she really have to do with Stein?

[canuckistani]

Nothing, that's the point. She's too smart to ever make a fool out of herself like Stein.