Thursday, January 04, 2007

Bonb of Sitcheb!

It's not really that I think there is a conspiracy among the corporate media and right-wing scumbags that echo it to tie Barack Obama to Osama bin Laden through bogus "typogrpahical errors". Any typist would understand how the "b" key could be switched with the "s" key - even though they are typed by different fingers in different rows on the keyboard.

I just think they are bonb of sitcheb.

8 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was wondering if it had something to do with spellchecker and lazy copy editors. Like, maybe "osama" was in the spellcheck dictionary abd "obama" wasn't and the lazy copyeditor just ok'd the spellchecker suggestion.

Just sayin'

1/05/2007 8:49 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

Obama isn't in CNN's spellcheck?

Yeah, that makes sense.

I'm just glad they fixed the problem where the spell-check suggested "lying war criminal evil bastard" when someone typed in "bush".

1/05/2007 10:28 PM  
Anonymous Rhymes With Right said...

And yet somehow you've managed to overlook the incident mentioned by one of my commenters, when a noted Republican operative was listed as "Nigger Ennis" instead of Niger Ennis. I guess such things just don't bother you.

http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/210559.php

And of course, let's remember where the first public "Osama/Obama" confusion came in -- it was Senator Jabba the Drunk (D-Chappaquidick)

1/06/2007 12:02 PM  
Anonymous Rhymes With Right said...

Two corrections -- the last name is "Innis" -- and it was MSNBC. The pic is up over at my site.

Tell me -- do you find such a "typo" to be equally outrageous, or can you understand this one?

1/06/2007 12:12 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

RWR -

There are so many responses possible to your little tirade, I hardly know where to begin.

1. What makes you think I'm not bothered by the Innis typo?

2. It's easier to believe that an extra g would show up in Niger than that a totally different letter would show in his name.

3. You forfeit the right to complain about errors when you make two of your own in your comment.

4. The Innis thing happened slmost 5 years ago - before I started blogging.

5. It's not my job to patrol the media for slights to rightwingers. This is my blog, and if you come here expecting to see me complaining about rough treatment to Republicans, you're going to be sorely disappointed.

1/06/2007 4:38 PM  
Anonymous Rhymes With Right said...

In other words, you are a full supporter of the double standard applied to minority Republicans.

On the other hand, I applauded the Blitzer apology to Obama and condemned Debbie Schlussel.

It's clear which of us is fair and balanced -- and which of us is a partisan hack. For that reason, you clearly forfeit the right to complain about unfair treatment of members of your party.

1/06/2007 5:45 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

RWR, you make me smile. My failure to write about a typo from a half decade ago means that I support a double standard. Sure it does. Good catch.

And my favoring of liberal people and progressive thought means that I'm a partisan hack? Well, maybe - I certainly don't think I would recommend anyone rely on my blog for a complete survey of American political thought. I would call myself a well-informed, articulate, sophisticated, intelligent, creative voice of progressive thought, but I suppose "partisan hack" works, too.

But I'm afraid that my "partisan hack" status does nothing to show that you are, to use a corrupted phrase, "fair and balanced." Really, you're not.

But I like you anyway.

1/07/2007 8:24 AM  
Anonymous Rhymes With Right said...

This is my blog, and if you come here expecting to see me complaining about rough treatment to Republicans, you're going to be sorely disappointed.

No, that is where I get my assertion that you are guilty of partisan hackery. You admit that you are not going to object to rough (and, presumably, unfair) treatment of Republicans, while I will object to such treatment of Democrats (see my pieces on Obama and Keith Ellison for recent examples).

And my point about your having overlooked the Innis example is much more simple than you care to acknowledge, and you even confirm it -- in that case, you are more than ready to acknowledge that it is simple human error, something you are not willing to do with the Obama/Osama error (by the way -- how strongly did you condemn Kennedy's error?).

Like I said, you seem to have a double standard and that's OK -- just admit it. In the mean time, I will continue to be fair and balanced when such things happen. :)

1/07/2007 10:12 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home