I’m Guest Blogging for Instapundit

Monday, May 17th, 2010

Light blogging this week, as I’ll be joining a few others to fill in for Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit.

Glenn has an enormous platform. I’m thrilled he’s giving me an opportunity to bring some exposure to the issues we cover here.

I will post at least one open thread per day so y’all can yak, exchange links, and, of course, evaluate my performance over there.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

45 Responses to “I’m Guest Blogging for Instapundit”

  1. #1 |  ChrisD | 

    Good news. I can’t wait to see what 20-40 interesting links you will post today! ;)

  2. #2 |  Tom G | 

    Indeed.

  3. #3 |  Bill | 

    Awesome. You deserve it Radley! Totally looking forward to it.

  4. #4 |  Sam Wilkinson | 

    Have fun with his readers/supporters. They’re almost certainly not your own.

  5. #5 |  Rhayader | 

    Go get ‘em Radley.

    I signed up for the Instapundit RSS feed a while back, but it just hasn’t done much for me. Too many posts, tons of all-caps titles, with little to no substantive content in the feed itself. I prefer analysis to endless click-through aggregation, but hey I hope Radley kills it.

  6. #6 |  Johnny Longtorso | 

    Some link fodder:

    Check out the graph of Community Reinvestment Act commitments, and how they spike just before the crash:

    NCRC Documents Trillions of CRA Dollars in Communities since 1977; CRA Commitments: 1977-2005

  7. #7 |  Dixon | 

    it’s really pretty simple, Radley. You just post a link to a conservative saying liberals are to blame for the nation’s ills. Then you find a second conservative who agrees with first conservative, and update your original link with this new one. Then you write “heh” or “heh indeed”, followed by a link to an article about “night-vision ice chests” or some other new gadget. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

  8. #8 |  Chuchundra | 

    Dixon,

    Heh, indeed.

  9. #9 |  flukebucket | 

    I had never, ever gone to Instapundit even though I had often heard about it. I just clicked over there and got MARKDOWNS ON Gerber knives and multi-tools.

    Heh, Heh, indeed.

  10. #10 |  SJE | 

    Interesting choice Radley. Glen has a wide readership, but I consider his journalism/blogging to be less than your own: too much “heh” and “indeed,” less investigative reporting and analysis. Most importantly, there have been occassions where Instapundit has weaseled out of statements or positions that may be inferred from his site (e.g., “I only linked to it”). You have the balls to stand up and be counted, even when you are wrong, which is why I can rely on what you write.

  11. #11 |  Les | 

    It should be interesting to see the reaction you get on the blog of a war monger who thinks those who oppose(d) the wars support terrorists.

    I am confounded by Reason’s continual association with a guy who recently said:

    “Possibly Obama just hates Israel and hates Jews. That’s plausible — certainly nothing in his actions suggests otherwise, really.”

    and

    If I were the Israelis, not only would I bomb Iran, but I’d do so in such a way as to create as much trouble for China, Russia, Europe and the United States as possible.

    Doesn’t someone who says things like this deserve to be ignored?

  12. #12 |  mcmillan | 

    People might be interested in the Supreme Court ruling “that federal officials can indefinitely hold inmates considered “sexually dangerous” after their prison terms are complete

  13. #13 |  mcmillan | 

    oops html fail, this is the link http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/17/AR2010051701283.html

  14. #14 |  SJE | 

    I’ll try that on the wife: hey honey I’m “sexually dangerous”

  15. #15 |  Matthew Peck | 

    “Glenn has an enormous platform.”

    Is that what the kids are calling it, these days?

  16. #16 |  justinslot | 

    I kind of wish you hadn’t agreed to this, Radley, it’s just going to be more fodder for the “libertarians are Republicans” crowd (and Insty is the ultimate Republican in libertarian clothing.)

    Total agreement with #11.

  17. #17 |  Radley Balko | 

    I kind of wish you hadn’t agreed to this, Radley, it’s just going to be more fodder for the “libertarians are Republicans” crowd….

    Sorry, but if I only agreed to write for people with whom I’m in 100% agreement, I’d only be writing here. Obviously there are some limits. But though I don’t agree with Reynolds on everything, he’s certainly well within the mainstream of the public debate. It’s a good opportunity to get these issues in front of a broad audience. Reynolds has also been incredibly supportive of my work, my career, and in generating attention for the issues I cover.

    If some big lefty blog asked me to fill in for a week, I’d do that too.

  18. #18 |  Mad John | 

    Who knows, maybe fake libertarians will benefit from reading a real one.

  19. #19 |  apetra | 

    your introductory post on instapundit was too long for the blog’s format.

    keep it brief.

  20. #20 |  Les | 

    Radley, I see your point, especially if Reynolds has been supportive of you, but it seems to me that the problem isn’t left/right.

    Suggesting that Obama “hates Israel and hates Jews” is not at all “well within the mainstream of the public debate.” It’s nuts.

    Worse than that is saying that Israel should start a war with Iran by bombing them in a way to bring even bigger nations into the conflict. That’s certainly not “well withing the mainstream of the public debate.” In fact, I think that kind of war-mongering qualifies as “disgusting.”

    It reflects a complete disconnect from the horrors of war and a mindless devotion to the government of Israel. Sure, he thinks it’s wrong for SWAT teams to bust in on people because of drugs, but he has no problem with the inevitable blowing to bits and burning alive of innocent men, women, and children that comes with the wars for which he advocates.

    Finally, he’s accused people who opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan of being unpatriotic and anti-American. Doesn’t that mean you, Radley?

    Then again, I’m sure he’s aware of your (and Reason’s) position on the war and U.S. foreign policy in general, but that just brings into question his sincerity. Does he really mean what he says?

    Needless to say (yet, still I say it!), you don’t need anyone’s approval for where you choose to spread your valuable messages. So I hope you take this criticism in the good faith and respect with which it’s intended.

    And Mad John above makes a very good point.

  21. #21 |  Eric the .5b | 

    Going to go with Mad John @ #18. When Fox News published Radley, he was able to push entire issues in front of people who otherwise wouldn’t have heard about them.

    Maybe a libertarian posting there will make readers nostalgic for the first few years of the 00s, when Reynolds would dare to post things that could offend slack-jawed, party-line-voting GOP folk. If any of those readers still exist.

  22. #22 |  skunky | 

    Radley:

    I understand your point about agreeing 100% etc. But where do you draw the line? I mean, is it 75% agree with or 1%? How about writing on the LaRouche blog because you agree with them on tenth amendment issues?

    Reynolds is a war-mongering sycophant. Heh, indeedy.

  23. #23 |  flukebucket | 

    I think your first post was fine. Maybe a little wordy compared to the Althouse lady but what the hell.

    Have you seen these?

  24. #24 |  Michael Chaney | 

    Re: #11 – you should consider that Reynolds didn’t write either of those statements – they’re from articles that he has linked to. He has made clear many times that he doesn’t necessarily agree with any particular article that he posted, he’s just putting it out there for people to read and form their own opinion.

    As for Obama vs. Jews, the simple fact is that he’s lost a huge amount of Jewish support in the last year. It’s clear that many Jews don’t view him as being friendly. FWIW.

  25. #25 |  flukebucket | 

    Messed around a little bit today at the Instapundit site. Maybe it is just me but I don’t get it. A bunch of one sentence posts with no comments? Or am I doing something wrong?

    How the hell could this guy need a break? A break from what?

  26. #26 |  a submission | 

    courtesy of fark.com:

    Police issue a warrant to raid a studio that broadcast a report of a cop failing a lie detector test. I guess we should be glad they bothered with the warrant.

  27. #27 |  MattJ | 

    Flukebucket:

    He’s a full-time law professor who also writes articles for law journals and other print publications, as well as running one of the most-read political blogs out there (critics above who are looking for more substantive comment from him than one can find at his blog should consider clicking on ‘other writings’ on the main page of his blog, don’t expect investigative journalism, as he is not an investigative journalist)

    How the hell could this guy need a break? A break from what?

    His job, his freelance writing, and his blog?

  28. #28 |  MattJ | 

    #24 Michael Chaney

    Re: #11 – you should consider that Reynolds didn’t write either of those statements – they’re from articles that he has linked to.

    Just a little googling would let you know that you’re wrong – he wrote both statements.

  29. #29 |  Les | 

    you should consider that Reynolds didn’t write either of those statements – they’re from articles that he has linked to.

    That is incorrect. He wrote them here:

    http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/96488/

    and here:

    http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/95964/

  30. #30 |  flukebucket | 

    running one of the most-read political blogs out there

    That is not the one with the one sentence posts is it?

  31. #31 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #12 mcmillan

    People might be interested in the Supreme Court ruling “that federal officials can indefinitely hold inmates considered “sexually dangerous” after their prison terms are complete

    Well, it’s just civil commitment, so it doesn’t really count as incarceration. You know, like waterboarding isn’t really torture and seizing your property without charging you with a crime isn’t really theft and banning “offensive” words on TV doesn’t violate the First Amendment.

  32. #32 |  Matthew Peck | 

    I just posted this question on Facebook:

    “Hey, by the way. You know how Almighty Healthcare uses funny accounting to drive its ten-year cost down by starting taxes now, but not starting the actually healthcare programs until 2014? What’s the over-under on how long it’ll be before Congress starts borrowing against that “fund”, a la Social Security?”

  33. #33 |  Kristen | 

    Police issue a warrant to raid a studio that broadcast a report of a cop failing a lie detector test. I guess we should be glad they bothered with the warrant.

    Fark headline writer fail (as much as the po-po would like to issue warrants, they don’t and can’t)

  34. #34 |  Michael Chaney | 

    My bad – I thought I remembered both of those posts but obviously didn’t. I’m still not terribly bothered by it, though.

  35. #35 |  flukebucket | 

    I clicked through “other writings”. His writings with “Popular Mechanics” timed out. As far as I could tell he writes one column a month for the Washington Examiner along with his one sentence blog posts. He called the damn Tea Parties The New Great Awakening.

    I agree. He needs some time off.

  36. #36 |  Chuchundra | 

    Peck, that is really funny…if by funny you mean completely untrue.

  37. #37 |  Will | 

    Reynolds is horrible. I dont think he should be considered in mainstream thinking.

  38. #38 |  MikeZ | 

    I’ll agree with flukebucket here. I went over there to check it out and the lack of comments and short posts bugged me. It wouldn’t stay on my regular rotation of blogs to read.

  39. #39 |  André Kenji | 

    Glenn is inteligent and a pragmatic libertarian at heart. But he has to appease to people that are called “the Republican base”. Something like Rachel Madow, maybe: a very inteligent and good intelectual that has to convert into a partisan hack.

    Anyway, Glenn´s old blog at msnbc.com that was REALLY good.

  40. #40 |  Stephen | 

    Here’s one for discussion…

    http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/051710-officer-shoots-chase-suspect

    Cops kill a guy for threatening to commit suicide. I guess you can’t kill yourself, the cops want to do it first.

  41. #41 |  dmoynihan | 

    My favorite (from the ’90s), was media blitzes on the dangers of “suicide by cop”–you know, the people was depressed and asking for it.

    Good luck with the gig, Radley. Glad to see more attention (and credit to you!) for the issues you’ve been reporting on lo these many years.

  42. #42 |  ChrisD | 

    Here is the sentence after the “Obama may be anti-Semitic” statement, which adds a little context:

    “Possibly Obama just hates Israel and hates Jews. That’s plausible — certainly nothing in his actions suggests otherwise, really.

    But it’s also possible — I’d say likely — that there’s something else going on. “

  43. #43 |  flukebucket | 

    Anyway, Glenn´s old blog at msnbc.com that was REALLY good.

    I knew he had to have had another one at some point in time because the one I looked at is the biggest bunch of nothing I have ever seen. When you click on other writings to see some of his law review articles and get this I mean seriously. WTF? Radley considers himself fortunate to have the opportunity over there but in my opinion they are damn lucky to have him.

    I can’t imagine bookmarking that site and making it a must read. He knows how to embed a link. Big deal.

  44. #44 |  SJE | 

    Flukebucket: Reynolds can write and research really well. At the same time, its not much on display on Instapundit, and some of his public statements are intolerant and do not reflect well. Having Radley over at Instapundit is like getting Mark Twain to guest write on the college newspaper.

  45. #45 |  flukebucket | 

    #44 SJE

    Thanks. I really wasn’t trying to be an ass I just could not figure out what all of the hoopla was about. Reynolds this and Reynolds that and I sure as hell couldn’t find anything on his blog to get excited about. It is just that I had heard about him for years and saw him referenced on numerous blogs so I venture over there when Radley is gonna guest blog and take a look at it and think, “you have got to be shittin’ me”

    But no big deal. There is just so many blogs a man can read in a day. Instapundit just won’t be one that I mess around with much.

Leave a Reply