Greg Laden's Blog

Sadly, I'd bet not. Knowledge of history doesn't seem to be a requirement to be a pundit, especially of his "caliber" and orientation.

Posted by: Kent Sharkey | May 16, 2008 9:23 PM

Bush knows a lot about Chamberlain. For example, he scored 100 points in a game once, and was terrible at foul shots.

Posted by: J-Dog | May 16, 2008 10:19 PM

This was pretty standard fair for the right wing on any subject. They have no clue whatsoever about what they're spouting. Whether it's history, politics, biology, physics, the law, or common human decency, the most common strategy seems to be argumentum ad repeatwhatevermypastorsaid. It takes only a very gentle poke with a logic stick to uncover, at which time it usually turns into argumentum ad screamingJesushissyfit with a side of U.S.A. and fries.

Kevin James could have easily uttered, "Do you understand the words that somebody put into my mouth?" in that exchange. "You're an idiot," would have been an entirely appropriate rejoinder here, but Matthews' approach was an effective demonstration of just that.

I've never really cared much for Matthews' delivery, and thus have no honest comment on his content to offer in general. I've simply never been able to listen to him for more than about thirty seconds.

Posted by: JanieBelle | May 17, 2008 7:32 AM

I get the overwhelming majority of my news fix from NPR and blogs. Our local paper has a noticeable bent but that's really to be expected, given the demographics. I don't bother at all with the print edition, though I read one column online religiously (heh). The Letters to the Editor are fun whenever I need an excuse to smash my face with a hammer. "Knuckle-dragging mouth-breathers" is not an unfair assessment of many of the authors, though lately the paper's taken to printing letters from the sane from time to time.

On the rare occasion that I catch one of the talking heads on TV, it's usually "News-Lite" - Morning Express. Robin Meade caught my eye (how could she not?) once, and I like the delivery and general tone of the show in addition to all the pretty people. I only wish the stories were covered in more depth, but that of course is antithetical to the whole premise, and would probably deep-six all the things I like about it.

On your quasi-recommendation, I might take Hardball out for another spin next week and see what happens.

Posted by: JanieBelle | May 17, 2008 8:45 AM

Chris Matthews reminds me of Ric Flair with a brain -- loves to yell, sometimes you need earplugs to deal with him.

But Kevin "Not The King Of Queens" James? I'd never heard of this guy, and I'm rather glad, because there's nothing original about him. It just goes to the typical conservative knee-jerk equivalence that talking about something equals condoning it -- it seems to me that this guy is espousing exactly the same approach to diplomacy as conservatives in general do towards drugs and sex education.

Given how many denialists do the exact same things no matter what subject they're railing against, I guess I shouldn't be too surprised -- denialists and propagandists are cut from the same cloth.

(Coincidentally, I was discussing Chamberlain briefly with my dad the other night, and found myself wondering -- what do we know now that Chamberlain didn't at the time that might have made it seem like a sensible decision to let Hitler have the Sudetenland?)

Posted by: Brian X | May 17, 2008 12:40 PM

This allowed an easy invasion and occupation of the rest of Czechoslovakia less than 6 months later. This occupation preceded the invasion of Poland by another 6 months.

Sooo, tell me again why this appeasement thing was actually a good idea at the time???

Posted by: Xavier | May 17, 2008 3:36 PM