Most people know I don't like the guy much. The thing is, I'd probably like him more - even if he still disagrees with me - if he weren't so nasty to everyone. This post of his has been making the rounds, and it really makes the point about what's so wrong with the way he approaches things.
In an update he writes:
"The Advocacy Center for Equality and Democracy documents how much public opinion has changed on these issues under (and as a result of) the Obama presidency: “under the leadership of a President who campaigned with the promise to close the facility, . . . support for the detention center may be at its highest level ever.” "
Now, I can't speak for Glenn Greenwald and what he does and doesn't approve of - and I recognize that. He needs to recognize that he can't speak for a lot of left-of-center types like me. Does he even consider, in writing this, that maybe the mere presence of a military prison in Cuba isn't what bothered us about Guantanamo! Maybe what actually bothered us was the denial of habeas corpus, the torture, essentially the denial of constitutional and human rights! Funny idea, isn't it? That someone might actually care about what happens at Guantanamo a little more than whether it's located overseas or within U.S. borders.
I'll stop thinking and posting that Glenn Greenwald is a condescending jackass when he stops thinking I'm a "repulsive" hypocrite.
The violinist analogy improved
5 hours ago