Greenwald Derangement Syndrome [View all]

[adric mutelovic]

This is a response to a recent article written by Obama defender Johnathan Chait, entitled, "Greenwald is Ralph Nader."
From the blog The Heart of The Matter, written by Barry Eisler:

I just read an article by Jonathan Chait in New York Magazine that was so silly and self-indulgent I wasn't going to comment on it. What's the point of comparing Greenwald to Ralph Nader (or to anyone else, really)? What's the point of discussing Greenwald at all, compared to the importance of his reporting? Can you really try to castigate Greenwald for arguing that in various ways Obama is worse than Bush, when so many Constitutional law experts are arguing that indeed, Obama is worse than Nixon? Is Chait ignorant of the mountain of evidence behind this argument, or of the other people making it? Why does he refer to but fail to address the actual evidence in the supporting piece he links to, instead treating the argument itself as ipso facto evidence of sanctimony?

snip

And most glaring of all, did Chait really complain that "For Greenwald... the evils of liberals loom far larger than the evils of conservatives," when he's talking about a guy who's written no fewer than three books (and God knows how many blog posts) on the failings of conservatives -- with titles like How Would a Patriot Act? Defending American Values from a President [Bush] Run Amok; and A Tragic Legacy: How a Good vs. Evil Mentality Destroyed the Bush Presidency; and Great American Hypocrites: Toppling the Big Myths of Republican Politics?

Read more here, including how Johnathan Chait's feelings are hurt in part because Greenwald once called him a "McCain worshipper": http://barryeisler.blogspot.com/2013/06/greenwald-derangement-syndrome.html