Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
A full two days since he was shown that his "quote" from Barack Obama is fake and yet it still remains at the very top of his latest column at the Worldnutdaily. And remember, this is a man who declared in an email to me:
I am not scientist, but a philosopher and an intellectual so the way I approach all bodies of knowledge is from reason and veritas (truth).
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. I also don't think the phrase "intellectual integrity" has any meaning for him at all.
Ah, but he has responded by email. And predictably, he did the "it may not be a real quote but it reflects his opinions" thing. And then he preached at me.
Hello Ed, Although perhaps not Obama's exact words, do you think they reflect his racist animosity towards white people and America? Remember a quote can be a paraphrase of one's ideas and sentiments.I corrected the Huxley quote although I found attributions of that quote to both Huxley and Gray. The point being Darwin said those words because like most rational people who don't have a vendetta against God, Darwin knew evolution wasn't a "theory" but an unproven sham hypothesis at best which humanists and atheists used as a pretext to remove Christianity from its central place in Western Civilization.
On Judgment Day it will not be Darwin's bearded face whom you will see. Ed, please give your heart to Christ before it is too late!
Peace,
Ellis
And indeed, it appears he finally did change the attribution on the Darwin quote sometime after I publicly shamed him for the second time over it (the first time was in February; the second time was in June). Will he pull the Obama quote now? It's still there at the moment.
All of this is pure idiocy, of course. No, even as a paraphrase I don't think the quote comes anywhere close to expressing Obama's feelings. I have been a constant critic of Obama since the day he took office so I certainly cannot be accused of being biased toward him in this regard, but the notion that Obama hates white people and is out to destroy America in order to take revenge on us all -- which is what Washington said in his column -- is beyond moronic.
And this Darwin quote that he adores so much is utterly irrelevant to the truth of evolution as an explanation for the natural history of life on earth. Yes, Darwin had his own doubts about his theory while he was still working on it; so what? Does that somehow cancel out the 150 years of research that has continually confirmed common descent since then? Only an idiot or a demagogue would believe so.
Politics
Comments
Posted by: WScott | July 29, 2010 12:13 PM
Agreed WScott,
I believe that if you paraphrased it, it isn't a quote.
Posted by: Silent Service | July 29, 2010 12:18 PM
But Ed, he said Peace.
That makes up for all the xtian arrogance and self-righteousness oozing out the rest of his EMAIL doesn't it ?
Posted by: steve oberski | July 29, 2010 12:21 PM
It's as likely to be that as Jesus' fuzzy mug. And I imagine Darwin would make for more interesting dinner conversation, not to mention a better judge.
Posted by: Gretchen | July 29, 2010 12:23 PM
He's just using "truth" as a paraphrase for "truthiness". That makes it all okay.
Posted by: Tony | July 29, 2010 12:24 PM
jeebus. I mean what else can you say.
Posted by: rmp | July 29, 2010 12:24 PM
And what's up with the beards ?
It's like their concept of an afterlife was fabricated by some bronze age misogynistic, xenophobic, genocidal tribal patriarch.
Imagine that, eternity with desert goat herders that didn't even understand germ theory. Can't hardly wait.
Posted by: steve oberski | July 29, 2010 12:36 PM
He'll probably change it once he gets over the embarrassment and the wounded pride thing. Hurry the hell up though. Make it snappy. Chop chop. Maybe check snopes the next time something sounds too good to be true.
Remember a quote can be a paraphrase of one's ideas and sentiments.
Yeah yeah. Hurry up dude.
Posted by: 386sx | July 29, 2010 12:40 PM
I don't expect to see any bearded faces after I die, but if I do I really hope it's this guy.
Posted by: Captain Mike | July 29, 2010 12:41 PM
Like I say: If you are allowed to quote in the first person something that was said in the third person, just because it matches your "guess" of what the person really feels, I offer you an opportunity..
Ellis Washington loves to rape goats.
Now your next post can begin with, "I love to rape goats. ~Ellis Washington" After all, perhaps not Washington's exact words, do you think they reflect his sexual obsession towards goats and violent goat sex? Remember a quote can be a paraphrase of one's ideas and sentiments.
Posted by: James Sweet | July 29, 2010 12:42 PM
Link fail. Sigh.
http://www.uncoached.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/crazy_beards_5.jpg
Posted by: Captain Mike | July 29, 2010 12:43 PM
If there's a god, evolution is the way he or she or it did things. That's what the evidence points to. So Washington's disagreement isn't just with Darwin, but with God himself.
Posted by: Augray | July 29, 2010 12:43 PM
Interesting reading: Ellis Washington's confessions.
I could almost feel sorry for him... almost.
Posted by: Dr X | July 29, 2010 12:44 PM
@steve oberski #7,
It's probably because beards are hair not on top of the head, and judging by his picture, he doesn't care much for any hair. He probably thinks that excess hair makes people look like chimps or monkeys. And he ain't no monkey, goddammit!
Posted by: Shawn Smith | July 29, 2010 12:48 PM
Now you even have a third-party source that you can cite for the quotation!
Posted by: James Sweet | July 29, 2010 12:50 PM
In a recent interiew Ellis Washington said:
"I am really, really, into guys. Bearded guys especially."
Well, I'm paraphrasing. What he said verbatim was: "Good morning".
But, don't you think the first quote is what he meant? I mean, it's consistent with his wishing me "good morning" since I have a beard. Also, it's consistent with his after-death dream/fantasy of meeting bearded men.
Posted by: Dr. Steve | July 29, 2010 12:53 PM
He also confessed to raping goats. In his own words! Well, perhaps it was a paraphrase -- but I recently found out that a paraphrase concocted by a hostile 3rd-party source can be attributed as a direct quotation without sacrificing any journalistic integrity! Hmm, then again, the person I learned that from is an admitted goat rapist, so.... maybe not.
Posted by: James Sweet | July 29, 2010 12:53 PM
The complete, utter, lack of honesty and smugly condescending claim that he has "intellectual integrity" is typical of GOP hacks. Ellis, Beck, Limbaugh, Newt, O'Reilly, and the rest of them have no honesty and they do not argue in good faith. It is all about the party line and pushing the cause. On a good day they might nod in the direction of honesty and truth but only when and where it doesn't conflict with wider ideological concerns.
Nothing they say can be trusted or taken at face value. They habitually utter truths only when they think it will let them slip in a bigger lie.
As the Sherrod case pointed out they lie, manufacture controversies and smear people simply because they can. They are malicious and lack any respect for words and the truth. It is ludicrous to engage with them. The only appropriate way to deal with them is to ignore them when you are not pointing and laughing.
These are the creationists and flat-earthers of politics. Engagement with them only serves to bolster their credibility while lower yours, and to confuse any issue they are involved with.
Posted by: Art | July 29, 2010 1:09 PM
@James Sweet -
I was going to concoct a similar "quote" from EW, but you beat me to it. And you played it much better than I would have.
Well done sir!
Posted by: qetzal | July 29, 2010 1:09 PM
He needs to apply this,
to this.
>blockquote>On Judgment Day it will not be Darwin's bearded face whom you will see. Ed, please give your heart to Christ before it is too late!
Cognitive dissonance it's a wonderful thing... for Theism.
Posted by: Doug Little | July 29, 2010 1:10 PM
Maybe you should copy James Randi's Sylvia Browne clock and have a little counter on the blog. That way in future people will be able to look and see "it has been 36174 days and Ellis Washington has still not retracted his fake quote"
Posted by: Matty | July 29, 2010 1:17 PM
From the first line of the EW column linked by Ed:
Murderous? Since when did either the Weathermen in general or Ayers in particular murder anyone? The way I heard it, the WU went out of its way to attack only property, and the only people killed by any WU bomb were those planting one!
Posted by: Robin Levett | July 29, 2010 1:28 PM
Posted by: Doug Little | July 29, 2010 1:35 PM
"Remember a quote can be a paraphrase of one's ideas and sentiments."
Ed, please replicate this portion in a separate dumbass quote of the day.
Posted by: Buffoon | July 29, 2010 1:37 PM
Sorry, any chance instead you could post:
"Remember, a quote can be whatever you think the person might be saying"
as a separate dumbass quote of the day? It's a perfect paraphrase.
Posted by: Buffoon | July 29, 2010 1:40 PM
For people like Ellis Washington, "intellectual integrity" means something like "unwavering loyalty to bad ideas", or "openly anti-intellectual."
Posted by: debaser | July 29, 2010 1:42 PM
Always be wary of the assertions of anyone who replaces the simple, practical, and perfectly apt and comprehensible word "truth" with something else, be it "Truth" or "TRUTH" or "veritas."
"My Truth is better than your truth."
It's almost as if they are engaging in a form of relativism...
Posted by: tacitus | July 29, 2010 1:59 PM
Well, yes. He has formed a shell around his intellect, preventing facts from entering. This intellectual shell, its integrity has not been breached.
Posted by: James Sweet | July 29, 2010 2:00 PM
Rational people are not flat Earthers.
Posted by: Paen | July 29, 2010 2:12 PM
No surprises. When your true religion is one of "rightness," you're not inclined to admit to errors.
Posted by: Sadie Morrison | July 29, 2010 2:25 PM
The deep dishonesty is that Washington is using the fabricated quote as evidence that it reflects Obama's racist animosity, which in turn is what he claims as justification for the use. His circular thinking is so tight it has broken his mind.
Posted by: Russell | July 29, 2010 3:14 PM
The secret to academic excellence:
1) Come up with crazy idea.
2) Fabricate evidence to support the idea.
3) Claim that the fabricated evidence is OK because the idea is true. Just look at the evidence in (2)!
7) Profit?
Posted by: Troublesome Frog | July 29, 2010 3:19 PM
Oy. I hate this kind of thing. I also fired of an email to Mr. Washington regarding the issue.
Posted by: PennyBright | July 29, 2010 3:37 PM
He's equally as dishonest about his own past. His brief bio at the bottom of his columns at WND claims that he is "former editor of the Michigan Law Review." That's not true. For one semester he was a reference checker for the law review when someone in that position fell out. He was still an undergrad at the time. He was not editor of the law review, not by a long shot.
Posted by: Ed Brayton | July 29, 2010 3:38 PM
Mr. Washington,
My father was a virulent racist and went to some lengths to instill his fears into me. I once had to disarm him during a confrontation that might have ended sadly for all.
I spent thirteen years of my life south of the Mason Dixon Line.
Mr. Washington, I know racism when I see it. Mr. Obama is not a racist, sir. I am not quite certain of your pedigree but I can see quite clearly that you have that old fear in you and, like my father, are trying to rub it off on me. I, and the company I keep, resist you.
Now, will you kindly shut up?
Posted by: Crudely Wrott | July 29, 2010 4:07 PM
They must give master classes in truthiness over in Wingnutistan. Even though Obama never said the quote, it's still fine for him to attribute it to Obama because he really, really believes it reflects Obama's inner feelings. And the words "quote" and "paraphrase" are now synonyms.
It hurts my brain just trying to pierce what passes for logic over there.
Posted by: greatbear | July 29, 2010 4:10 PM
It's a paraphrase of his life that reflects his achievements, of course!
Posted by: Tacroy | July 29, 2010 5:12 PM
I just saw the article. I don't think he's going to correct it. The whole article is built on a fake quote. Correcting the attribution of a Darwin quote is one thing, but having the whole house of cards come down is another. That's just too much kool-aid. He's knee deep in it on this one I'm afraid. No going back on this one. Cuckoo! He drank the kool-aid and there's still some leftovers. Way over the rainbow on this one. WOW.
Posted by: 386sx | July 29, 2010 8:34 PM
Regarding Washington's claim to have been a law review editor:
"Although perhaps not
Obama'smy exactwordsachievements, do you think they reflecthismyracist animosity animosity towards white people anddesperate desire to pretend I've actually accomplished something worthwhile in America?"Posted by: James Hanley | July 29, 2010 8:57 PM
tacitus said:
"It's almost as if they are engaging in a form of relativism..."
thus spilling the beans about Mr. Washington's incestuous relationships.
What I've heard Ellis the perv say is this:
"Yes, Glen Bek did rape and murder a young woman in 1991. I know, because I was there and accessorized him, after the fact."
Posted by: democommie | July 29, 2010 10:01 PM
Pretty funny.
This Washington seems like kind of a tard, but that's not what makes this so amusing. What really gets me is the way he just oozes grandiosity from every orifice on his body.
My favorite bit was the part where he engaged in Latin-dropping right before pointing out that it was actually superfluous.
But Ed, checking references is a kind of editing. Surely this upstanding character wouldn't deliberately phrase a sentence in a technically ambiguous way that would suggest to most casual readers that he held a more prestigious position than he actually did. Why, that would be downright shameful.
Posted by: Escuerd | July 30, 2010 2:31 AM
Ed - to be fair, Mr. Washington said he was 'a senior editor' not 'a senior Editor'.
Captain Mike - Regarding this guy, it's nice to see what Davy Jones looked like when he was alive!
Mr. Darwin is clearly better than Ellis Washington's god because his god couldn't even foresee that humans were going to get sooo bad he'd have to send a flood. Mr Darwin on the other hand, according to Mr. Washington:
could see how his 'hypothesis' would be used by future atheists and humanists as yet unborn.... spooky. - Dingo
-----
Mr. Ellis Washington is a sanctimonious serial goat-murderer and rapist, who likes to eat babies alive on the weekends.
Can't wait until I read the headline:
'"I admit to serially murdering & raping goats, I eat babies alive on weekends too!" - Ellis Washington.'
Posted by: DingoJack | July 30, 2010 3:17 AM
Crudely @ #35:
Excellent post. If only Ellis was the protagonist from BioShock that may have worked...
Posted by: JerseyJim | July 30, 2010 7:55 AM
Ellis, in an email to Ed you stated:
"On Judgment Day it will not be Darwin's bearded face whom you will see. Ed, please give your heart to Christ before it is too late!"
I seem to recall something about "Thou shalt not lie".
Do the math, Mr. Washington.
(There's something else about a beam and a speck you might want to look into.)
Posted by: Taz | July 30, 2010 2:21 PM