The Atlantic Monthly talks the talk and shreds the cred
Posted by Nicholas Gruen on Saturday, May 3, 2008
This entry was posted on Saturday, May 3rd, 2008 at 11:25 AM and filed under Politics - international.
Follow comments here with the RSS 2.0 feed.
Post a comment or leave a trackback.

It’s a gee-up Judging from the list of ‘interests’ I’d say the guy was just slightly wacko.
Posted on 03-May-08 at 1:31 pm | PermalinkNiall’s right. He’s taking the piss - but it’s clearly suckered a few people in the comments.
Posted on 03-May-08 at 5:14 pm | PermalinkNicholas Stick to economic and social commentary. You’re among the best at that. Rocca is a hopeless log.
I still can’t work out why someone as brilliant as you barracks for Collingwood.
Regards
Posted on 03-May-08 at 8:20 pm | PermalinkMaurie Joyce
Your comments on Rocca are cruel, but fair.
But I think you might have made this comment on the wrong thread.
Anyway I hope life is treating you well Maurie.
Posted on 03-May-08 at 10:19 pm | Permalinkyes, he’s serious - also apparently Obama’s going to announce a re-issue of Swift’s ‘A Modest Proposal’ as a foreign aid policy.
Nick, this, together with your Maureen Dowd-deafness, establishes your credentials as a purveyor of the dismal science. So for future ref, if it looks like a joke, it most likely is.
Posted on 04-May-08 at 10:05 am | PermalinkCan someone point me to clear evidence that it’s a hoax? I don’t want to spend lots of time researching this - but I’ve followed the first link and I can’t see why it’s clearly a hoax. Where’s the punch line, the place where it becomes clear it’s a hoax?
Posted on 04-May-08 at 10:18 am | PermalinkNick,
I’d suggest that the co-author of a book on “how the Republicans can win the working class and save the American Dream” shouldn’t be taken too seriously when he’s suggesting interesting candidates for the Democrats to run. Regardless of whether he’s writing in earnest.
Posted on 04-May-08 at 11:01 am | PermalinkI actually agree that it is not glaringly obviously a hoax. But this part seems to give the game away, especially the first phrase which is beyond hyperbole:
Posted on 04-May-08 at 11:29 am | PermalinkPatrick,
Yes, of course Louis Farrakhan as Defence Secretary is not serious serious, but it’s the kind of thing that Phillip Adams might write to make a point, (perhaps a stupid one) rather than because he was sending himself up.
I realise that on any reading the article is not serious in the sense that it is seriously proposing that Louis Farrakhan should seriously be considered as Defence Secretary. But the thing that bothers me is that the Atlantic Monthly is not a flip mag. It’s the kind of mag that, one would expect would clearly telegraph any spoof that it ran.
Posted on 04-May-08 at 12:20 pm | PermalinkBingo, GT
Posted on 04-May-08 at 2:14 pm | PermalinkNow I’m wondering if I haven’t gone mad. It’s pretty obvious that the author is trying to be funny, isn’t it?
Posted on 05-May-08 at 6:24 am | Permalink