James Taranto, Wall Street Journal Columnist: Gabby Giffords Could Not 'Produce 900 Publishable Word

[onehandle]

Source: Huffington Post

Conservative columnist James Taranto raised eyebrows on Friday when he questioned how Gabby Giffords — who he said "has severe impairments of her motor and speech functions" — could have written her New York Times op-ed so quickly. Giffords authored a New York Times op-ed published on April 17, after the Senate failed to pass expanded background checks for gun purchases. "Shame on them," she wrote, in response to the senators who voted against the bill.

Speaking on Friday's edition of the NRA's "Cam & Company" talk show, Taranto said he found it "odd" that Gifford was able to finish writing the piece less than five hours after the Senate vote.

"If you read this piece it's presented as a cry from the heart, as Giffords' personal reaction as somebody who's been wounded by gun violence to the betrayal of these senators," he said. "So we are supposed to believe that somehow in less than five hours a woman who has severe impairments of her motor and speech functions was able to produce 900 publishable words and put in an appearance in the White House in the course of it. So I think that's a little bit odd."

Taranto also recently attacked Giffords' plea for stricter gun control in a column for the Wall Street Journal, calling her "a practitioner of incivility and unreason."

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/22/james-taranto-wall-street_n_3134416.html

---

Asshole.

[Danmel]

1. what a dick

That is all.

[xtraxritical]

16. A ball-less shrivel dick.

[TeamPooka]

29. total tool.

[silverweb]

2. Class-less goon.

[alcibiades_mystery]

3. Gunners are fucking scumbags

And not just the conservative ones.

[2ndAmForComputers]

12. I disagree. Only the right-wing ones are scumbags.

If you know what I mean.

[baldguy]

80. Which is all of them.

[Skittles]

4. never occurs to him she could have written it BEFORE the vote

knowing how Congress is bought by the NRA

[NJCher]

34. LOL

from N2doc's toon thread:




Cher

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

40. Presidential nominees have both acceptance and concession speeches ready

Except for Romney, of course, who was so convinced he had it in the bag that he didn't need to write a concession speech.

link

[bobclark86]

54. He had a concession speech...

It went like this:
"I don't have a concession speech, because I am so great."

His victory speech:
"I don't have a concession speech, because I am so great."

[bemildred]

5. Classic Republican projection.

He KNOWS he could not write that if he had a week.

[madrchsod]

6. he should go fuck off....

spineless shit ragging on a real american hero.

[NoodleyAppendage]

7. Non-fluent aphasia does NOT mean that written expression is necessarily similarly impaired.

As usual a conservative spouts off from the posterior about things that she/he knows nothing about.

Expressive language is impaired in non-fluent aphasia, which is what is going on in Gifford's case because regions in the left frontal lobe were damaged (i.e., Broca's area). However, other functions such as reading and written expression, while somewhat reliant upon peri-Broca areas are localized elsewhere in that brain hemisphere. Those areas may not have been as heavily damaged.

[freshwest]

19. True.

[pscot]

38. I've wondered

how much function she may have lost, but haven't seen any reports offering specifics. She has courage.

[NoodleyAppendage]

79. From the brief information I've seen about the path of the bullet...

...and from the residual cognitive and motor deficits, that her left frontal lobe was heavily damaged extending back to the motor and somatosensory strip. I've wondered about posterior cortical deficits. Those tend to not be as apparent. She doesn't demonstrate any outward visuospatial impairment or attentional neglect, but it's really hard to say.

[tclark0404]

39. But, but....

But, but, that's science speak. That can't be true.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

8. There is nothing wrong with her MIND....

Unlike this idiot.

[dballance]

9. Even Worse is the Thought His Editors Read the Piece and Published it Anyway

Taranto is not alone in his blame. The WSJ editors should be shamed as well. Presumably some editor read the piece before it got published and allowed it to go into print.

Shame on all of them. But what does one expect from RW hacks at a RW paper?

[alittlelark]

10. Different parts of the brain.... the columnist needs to get one.

[blackspade]

11. Hey James Taranto!

Fuck off.

[Milliesmom]

13. Really

Her mind is good, she probably told Mark what she was thinking and he wrote it, just because she didn't actually take pen in hand does not mean she didn't write it. It's her thoughts, that is all that matters.

[mimi85]

14. Fuck off times 1000!

No matter when it was written, what an insult to a truly courageous person. To question Gabby is WAY over the line. She is one of the most sincere people I've ever heard. How dare anyone say such ridiculous things about her! Screw the idea of someone being on a stamp posthumously, she should have her own stamp NOW - with Mark on it as well! He get's my nomination as husband (make that man) of the year!

Make that after my husband who has been the best after taking care of me for months after brain surgery last year. That day, May 5th, Cinco de Mayo, s now known as Cinco de Mimi, thanks to the grandkids.

Damn. this James Taranto guy pisses me off - what a dick is right!

[KamaAina]

15. KamaAina, Longtime DUer With A Cognitive Disability: I've Got Your 900 Words Right Here.

Although, technically, he is correct: None of them are publishable.

[Cassidy]

58. ROFL!

I laughed so loud I even scared myself!

[Brigid]

91. Our winner!

[longship]

17. That's right. This man has no dick.

[freshwest]

22. OMGawd, my favorite scene from that flick! Thanks!

[longship]

25. Well, it's true!

[TheMadMonk]

28. Definitely up there with Cronauer's: "In more dire need of a blowjob..."

Lines like that, are I think more perfect than "signature lines" like "Make my day." which end up getting overused to the point where you (suicidal as you know the idea is) want to punch Arnie square in the face.

Sometimes it's an action and you cringe through half a movie waiting for Tom Hanks to gratuitously piss in some non-conventional place or manner.

But a line entirely forgotten until we're reminded of it, is fresh every time it's heard.

[ellie]

61. I love that scene!

I just watched that movie over the weekend. I want to come back as Bill Murray, in any movie he is in. He is awesome.

[FailureToCommunicate]

63. Are you sure? Even this one?...

[ellie]

73. Yes!

[Dustlawyer]

90. I always loved the Bill Murry line, ..."dogs and cats living together..." The no dick line awesome

as well!

[Moostache]

18. What's his theory on Stephen Hakwing then?

I suppose that he must find that somewhat more than "a little bit odd"...

Typical Republican Idiot response to anything - "I can't conceive of this being possible in my shrunken excuse for a brain; so therefore, anything and everything that causes cognitive dissonance in ME, must be a conspiracy of some kind or part of a secret liberal plot."

Its one of many things I find repulsive in the reptilian, er, I mean right wing brain - such a massive predisposition to asshattery.

[mwooldri]

55. Exactly what I was thinking.

Ms. Giffords can communicate faster than Professor Hawking. Yet he has wrote a number of papers and books. I guess it is really all about politics here.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

78. "He has written".

Not "wrote".

[mwooldri]

86. Thank you for the grammar lesson.

Also more accurate han "he had wrote" would be "he wrote". The "he has wrote" statement is 400-500 years old and has dropped out of common usage.

Please feel free to correct any grammatical errors in my reply to the post that you have written to me. I would also appreciate it if there is more tolerance given to others that do make the occasional grammar error in their postings here, since this isn't English class. Many of us here are not professional writers and some of us haven't had any formal education in English since leaving secondary school. I do acknowledge that I do need improvement in this area, and I do need to have the wisdom to remember which audience I am speaking to. There are differences in English worldwide and an accurately constructed phrase in English can be different in American English.

If there is something that I have said or done in a prior posting here that has offended you, then I ssincerely apologise. This also goes for this particular post.

I am upset over this, as I was called out in public over my grammatical error. I would have preferred a more friendlier private message if errors in my English are irritating, or if you feel some friendly feedback is warranted.

Again I apologise if I have offended you in the past, or if this reply is itself offensive. I'm just hurt by your reply and I feel I needed to address this situation.

Thank you for listening.

Regards, Mark.

[maddiemom]

95. Don't worry about it, Mark.

There's no reason to apologize over a simple grammatical error. Take it from an English major who's just short of a PHD.

[Kalidurga]

20. He only finds it odd because...

He has never put together 900 publishable words in his life.

[SoapBox]

21. wow...show'n off your "brass"...I guess.

What a dick.

[freshwest]

23. Another lackey given a position of influence by patronage. Kiss off, you worthless dickweed!

[brush]

24. Fire the a_ _hole. nt

[kestrel91316]

26. Verbal aphasia doesn't necessarily mean she can't express herself

through writing. What a complete shitstain this man is.

[beyurslf]

27. Two things: Her impairment may not limit her ability to write and couldn't she have written

it in advance and plugged in specific vote numbers after the vote?

[applegrove]

30. "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win."Gandhi

[DFW]

31. This pond scum doesn't know Gabby. I do.

I was with her again this New Year's. She does have her impairments, but give her a couple of hours, and she could have handled this.

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[Brimley]

33. Please

Don't be insulting pond scum, as it, unlike this Wingnutty Simian Jerk, does have some purpose for its existence.

[DFW]

35. Point taken n/t

[Brimley]

32. This guy writes for the Wall Street Journal?

Not RedState? Not CPAC? Not Stormfront???

[DFW]

36. The WSJ is now Murdoch-owned

Anything not directly related to factual financial reporting will resemble Hannity Hate rants.

This is not the Financial Times we are dealing with here.

[Mopar151]

37. And I suppose, in the history of the WSJ

No reporter has ever had a story fixed in rewrite. If only.

[Enrique]

44. big columnists like Taranto often do have "research" people

Juan Williams just blamed his "research" person when he got caught plagiarizing for example.

[fasttense]

41. Who the hell is James Taranto?

And where did he get his Physical Therapy license?

What do I care what this douche bag has to say? He sounds like another right wing idiot.

[lunatica]

42. It's actually entertaining to see how low they can go

They do believe in attacking the messenger don't they? But I think he should keep it up because he's hurting his cause more than helping it.

[Enrique]

43. go get her!

it's open season on Giffords because she is such a threat to them.

Of course it's possible she had help from her staff with the writing, but that would not be an issue unless you have some reason to make it an issue.

[Orsino]

45. GOP SOB. Shooting the messenger (again). n/t

[thesquanderer]

46. Also, it's ad hominem

Easier to attack the messenger than the message.

[Wednesdays]

47. Even IF what he claims is true (and that's a big IF), then so what?

Even if the whole thing was ghostwritten for her, does that mean she didn't endorse every last word of it? Does that make her op-ed any less true?

[marble falls]

48. Gabby "a practitioner of incivility and unreason."? Projection.

[riqster]

49. WSJ used to be a business paper.

Not any more.

[marmar]

50. WSJ's opinion dept. is an outhouse.

nt

[appleannie1]

51. That's because he has motor skills and speech functions and can't produce 900 words worth

publishing. He thinks everyone is a stupid asshole like him.

[Zoeisright]

52. Fuck. Off. And. Die. Taranto

[Octafish]

53. Anyone have an email addy for the fascist?

I'd like to send him a word or two.

[Botany]

67. his twitter feed

https://twitter.com/jamestaranto

[Octafish]

72. Thank you, Botany!

TWITTER will do just fine for the sentiment I want to express.

[Sunlei]

56. She is not a politican anymore where they have to 'take' this kind of slander/libel, right?

If Mrs. Giffords is another regular American citizen now, they should sue the crap out of that RW/NRA asshole!!

[benld74]

57. Lesser have said less and gotten CANNED over it James!! buh-bye Jimmie!!

[Lost-in-FL]

59. Neither GWB.

Keeping it classy GOP.

[yellowcanine]

60. First of all, she could have dictated it to someone - or used voice recognition software.

Hopefully his fellow reporters will take him to task for this.

[xxqqqzme]

62. Jackass!

I too have suffered brain trauma and it depends on what part of the brain in damaged. My trauma paralyzed my left side, slowed my swallowing reflex and left me hyper sensitive to salt. It did not affect my ability to reason, write or speak. It also did not touch my long or short term memory. My neurologist told me that if I had to have brain damage, I got lucky.

While shortly after the trauma, short term memory can be scrambled and time jumbled, with therapy the pathways are re-established and a recognizable normalcy returns.

The intelligence Giffords relied on to carry out her duties as a congressperson, is still there and functioning.

[Botany]

64. I wish Traranto would speak that crap around Mark Kelly (or me)

Last edited Wed Apr 24, 2013, 08:20 AM - Edit history (2)

This pasty pile of goo can't refute Gabby's words intellectually so he goes
low brow and tries to say that because of her brain injury she no longer has
the mental skills to be able to write something.

[DonCoquixote]

65. Let us be frank and honest

I will warn that this response is going to be blunt, perhaps crude, but it does have a point.

When Gabby Giffords was presumed dead, we saw right wing sites mushroom with responses ranging from "she had it coming" to "let's have more of this." The right wing pundits did not feel they had to at least say "stop it guys, you are making us look bad." This was a state where "second amendment remedies" were promoted, where Sarah Palin put cross hairs on candidates. Nothing has changed, indeed, the second amendment types still talk about how guns are needed to threaten government, even the "left wing libertarian" types like Ted Rall get on board with the gun nuts. Of course, Taranato knows he cannot just whoop and belech, so he calls one of the more polite and unifying figures in Congress a "practitioner of incivility and unreason", which is a very nice way of saying "she's a witch, burn her!"

Let's be honest, if Gabby died that day, these pigs would not mourn, any more than they do for those who died since that day, or for those that will die in the days to come. While they pretend to be civil, they know they get power by encouraging these "lone wolf" types that, for lone wolves do seem to read the same books, go to the same websites, and listen to the same people. We cannot make the same mistake Obama and Clinton do, which is the idea that somehow, these people really do not WANT to be barbarians, and that there is an argument that can turn them back into fellows. No, the real complaint they really have against Gabby is that she did not die, the way they want all that are not servants to them to DIE. They are every bit the sociopaths the Tsaranev brothers were.

[libodem]

66. No-balls

Wanker. FU.

[Wolf Frankula]

68. Wolf tries to Wipe his Butt with the Wall Street Journal

He throws the paper down in disgust and says, "Even for this it is not good."

The Wall Street Journal, the most carried and least read paper in America.

Wolf

[blue neen]

81. Perfectly stated!

[libnnc]

69. Hey Taranto...

Kiss my ass you fucking fuckwit no good fucker.

[Thinkingabout]

70. If Taranto took as much time visiting with Americans with Disabilities as he did in writting this

Post he would have realized through their disabilities there are many ways to write a 900 word post through other means than hands to script. This boy needs to do better, we now know how dumb he is and he has a long way to emerge.

[truthisfreedom]

71. He's an idiot. Obviously she had plenty of time before

To prepare the 900 words. It was a predictable outcome.

[grantcart]

74. Recently I overheard a right wing fanatic remark

"Oh look they are marching Gifford's around for show again, have they no shame".


I have spent a lot of time thinking about this and I have come to the conclusion that they feel that if someone has effrontery to actually stop one of their inconvenient bullets that are going to undermine their standing among citizens that the victim should lose his/her first Amendment rights.

[oldbanjo]

92. It shocks me that her husband would let them

use his wife like a puppet.

[grantcart]

94. are you being serious or is it sarcastic?

[JNelson6563]

75. Stay classy Taranto!

Really shameful.

Julie

[Lint Head]

76. What do you expect from an asshole working for a fish wrapper.

[Pachamama]

77. Thoughts, Intellectual Reasoning and Speech Ability have no Reflection on the other...

I rest my case with this asshole James Taranto....

[blue neen]

82. Taranto could produce 900,000 publishable words, and not a single word would be worth reading.

How much did the NRA pay this imbecile to spout his ignorant nonsense?

[Nine]

83. Of course it was written in advance, you moron!

This idiot probably thinks obits of famous people are written from scratch when they die. He probably thinks award show nominees don't think about their acceptance speeches until the second their names are announced as the winner. He probably thinks candidates in debates create all their remarks completely on the fly. Sheesh! And he has the nerve to question Gifford's mental capacity?

[The Wizard]

84. It's a fascist Murdoch rag

Anything else would be an anomaly.
Anyone disparaging Gabby Giffords is probably a substance abuser or Nazi.

[spicegal]

85. Clearly the the idiot who said that that knows nothing about neurological injuries. There are

plenty of people who suffer from strokes, and other forms of brain injury, who have aphasia (can't speak), but who's brains work just fine. We've developed a number of technologies to help these folks communicate. Gabby Giffords is capable of speaking. It's just very slow and stilted. Brain injuries are funny things, and it all depends on what part of the brain is injured, and aggressive rehab, which she had. She also likely wrote that article in advance ready to release in the event the legislation was shot down. There's nothing wrong with that. But then this is the conservative MO, attack the messenger, ignore the message.

[secondwind]

87. 1) she could have dictated it 2) she could have spoken into a computer that recognizes her voice,

etc. She has a fabulous Assistant, her name is Pia Carusone, and we know her since she was a teen....

[47of74]

88. Fuck you James Taranto

[thucythucy]

89. Living in the disability community I run into this all the time.

Someone can't talk, walk, act like your typical pasty white male plutocrat so therefore they must have no mind.

I've known people with CP--with incisive minds and clever wit--who were institutionalized for years because they couldn't speak clearly and drooled.

I've also known folks with brain injury, Tourette's, severe epilepsy, MS and MD, who would probably be dismissed by this jerk entirely because of their external appearance.

Ableist at his core. No better than Rush Limbaugh going after Michael J. Fox.

It's not just the African-American, Hispanic, women's, GLBT and youth vote they're losing.

It's the disability community vote as well.

[glinda]

93. Ass

[raging moderate]

96. Any speech/language pathologist would be happy to educate Mr. Taranto on his astounding error.

Several other individuals here have already explained extremely well how it happens that an impairment in one speech/language area does not automatically mean impairments in other communication areas. I have worked with several individuals who were even worse affected than Mrs. Giffords but were totally capable of perceptive intellectual writing. One of them later wrote a book, and I would not be at all surprised if Gabby Giffords becomes a published author. In fact, I hope she will. Her little essay was spirited and incisive. Unlike Mr. Taranto, she would undoubtedly do careful research before expressing her opinions, so her book would be well worth reading.