LA Times blogger Andrew Malcolm can apologize to Joe Biden now

[babylonsister]

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005070017


LA Times blogger Andrew Malcolm can apologize to Joe Biden now

May 07, 2010 12:28 pm ET by Eric Boehlert

Laura Bush's former flak thought it was quite funny when Biden last month predicted that when the new jobs number came out, they would show the U.S. economy had added approximately 200,000 jobs. Malcolm mocked Biden not once ("Joe Biden update: Up to 200,000 new jobs next month. Count on it!"), but twice ("Write that down.")

Surprise! Turns out Biden knows more than Malcolm:

US creates 290,000 news jobs as Americans flood job market

[gateley]

1. Good for Joe! And thanks for posting this! I'm heading over to the LA Times

to see if Andrew Malcom takes comments on his blog. :hi:

[babylonsister]

2. Rub it in for me!

:fistbump:

[DrToast]

3. That guy is a putz

I look forward to him giving Biden credit.

*crickets*

[elleng]

4. BRAVO!

[geardaddy]

5. K and R

for Joe.

[Kingofalldems]

6. K and R for the idiot Teabaggers and their freeper cousins

[impik]

7. Stupid teabagger

[Phx_Dem]

8. Yoo hoo, Andrew? What's the matter, cat got your tongue?

[Cha]

9. It wouldn't be hard to know more than malcom who is on my

shit list.

Not that VP Biden isn't brilliant..it's just that scum mediawhores like malcom are a dime a dozen. A few months ago malcom had a pic of Pres Obama and Troops in his blog that he had cherry picked to make it look like they didn't like him..down below he had a pic of bush and the Troops swarming all over him like they do President Obama and written below was some tripe about "who do the troops like better?". Major paraphrasing but it was the meme.

And, the comments were predictably anti-President Obama and pro bush("I miss him").

That's the only way idiots like malcom can get the reaction they want..i.e...lie their fool heads off.

Write this down, malcom.."I'm a loser mediawhore".

[PatSeg]

10. Malcolm will just ignore it

and move on to some other outrageous comment, but it sure is fun watching these fools be wrong.

[nilram]

11. Here's what I posted to Malcom's blog,

It is, in fact, a figure of speech to say "from one to two hundred" when one might write "from one- to two-hundred" and meaning "from one-hundred to two-hundred." Similarly, one might say "from one to two hundred thousand," or "from one hundred to two hundred thousand" when one might write, in a more formal manner, "from one-hundred thousand to two-hundred thousand." Verbal use of the English language differs from written usage, and colloquial usage differs from formal usage. This is commonly understood, and, for the more thick-headed, it is examined in the first year, nay, the first semester of the college-level study of communications.

To criticize Biden's verbal, colloquial usage as if it were expressed in a written, formal framework is a quite transparent misrepresentation. To coin a phrase, you misunderestimate the man -- and the public.


------

Here's Malcom's follow-up to Joe's 200,000 estimate,
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/05/joe-biden-update-wrong-on-jobs-again.html