Talk:Jonah Goldberg

NeoCon

Jonah Goldberg is a neoconservative, not a conservative. --HowardJ87 02:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, Goldberg identifies himself as a conservative and not an neocon (and he's written on the problematic use of the neocon label). He's not a neocon in the conventional definition of someone who moved from left to right. Makgraf 21:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Jonah Goldberg is a neocon / neoliberal. He outright rejects the traditional notion of conservatism, i.e. the value-centered historicism of Burke and De Maistre, and wants to replace real conservatism with Jacobin abstractions.

See: http://www.vdare.com/gottfried/first_universal_goldberg.htm http://www.vdare.com/gottfried/pope.htm and http://www.vdare.com/williamson/goldberg.htm --HowardJ87 03:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

IP address

It looks like the user at IP Address 69.3.236.144 Really has some personal beefs with Jonah Goldberg, as displayed by his repeated vandalism of this article.

I'm still pretty new to Wikipedia. What is the process to go through to have a user blocked from editing a specific article? If anyone can help out with that, it would be great! --WAHooker July 7, 2005 12:19 (UTC)

What is the purpose of the Juan Cole link? --69.37.131.232 18:28, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I took out 3 sentences that I felt both had innaccurate information and didn't contribute anything. Goldberg and Sullivan disagree about many issues aside from the aforementioned social issues (Iraq and Bush spring to mind). The line about Goldberg having no experience in government and political organizations seemed gratutious (and is also wrong, he worked at the AEI). The 'Mendoza' line is fun, but pointless. Maybe if it was connected to Simpsons references? Makgraf 01:06, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that he was entirely serious with the "invasion of Africa" thing. I think it was more of a thought experiment. How can that be reworded - or is it even important to include in the article at all? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.36.138.30 (talk • contribs) .

Clicking through the link and reading Goldberg's article (actually the first page, the link for Next Page on NRO's site is broken), he appears to be serious. Strange. Crust 22:24, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I fixed the link and read the whole thing. Yes, he was serious (for context this was his view in May 2000, much has changed since then of course). Crust 22:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I rather think that he wouldn't advocate it now for purely logistical reasons (apparently invading sovereign states is harder than he thought!), but it would still be a "noble" enterprise in principle. What an utter cock. --Saforrest 16:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Goldberg advised Tripp to record her phone calls as a precaution against reprisals. Given that they hadn't happened then we should be talking about possible reprisals (i.e. that could happen) rather than saying "the reprisals". Makgraf 05:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I think either phrasing is possible. "To protect against reprisal" and "To protect against any possilbe reprisal" mean basically the same thing to me. Neither suggests that a reprisal is inevitable, only that the victim of it think it is. I like the brief version better on principle (brevity in language) but they both mean the same thing. One's just wordier. Bjsiders 14:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah yes, but "To protect against the reprisals" implies that they are inevitable. You're right though, just "reprisals" is briefer and cleaner. Makgraf 18:17, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Sid vs. Sidney Goldberg

Should Jonah's father Sidney be referred to, at least to begin with, by his full name? Also, would it be better to talk in a little more detail about what he did? (He wrote for TechCentralStation.com, at least. Does anyone else know more about where he worked?) BLHersey 02:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Question

Wouldn't it make more sense to provide a link to his author archive-at either NRO or Townhall.com-instead of linking to individual essays or columns he's written? Ruthfulbarbarity 17:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

The article does link to both his NRO and his Townhall archives. However, it is good to link to the articles that are quoted in the article so that users can (1) verify the quote is genuine and (2) see it in context. Also, when it says he has written about censorship, many will be curious to know what he has written about it. The link riught allows them to find out in a single click. Otherwise they'd have to fossick about in his archives or google "Jonah Goldberg + Censorship", etc and it'd take a lot longer for people to get the info. Jacob1207 20:41, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I added his attacks on liberals and Democrats, in 2006 over 25% of his columns contained these. Getterstraight 20:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Er, citation? Makgraf 05:22, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

New facts

Two new facts were put on the page recently one about Coulter and one about a Pinochet option for Iraq. I believe they are both true but the do need citations. Master shepherd 21:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I gave the citations. My find button didn't recognize the apostrophe in the orginal quote so it looked like it wasn't in the article . When I read the full article I found the quote and put it back. Makgraf 05:56, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

frequent topics

A bunch of new info was put up on the frequent topics section with no citation. I deleted the stuff that was clearly not NPOV the rest I marked as citation needed. If they don't get cited soon I am going to delete them. Master shepherd 23:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Igoldman said "Citations for the above paragraph on Iraq all come from one column, syndicated, "IRAQ WAS A WORTHY MISTAKE," Oct. 20, 2006, at this link: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjY2M2M2YmY3YWZhODg5ZTQwYjdlN2MxM2FjNzQ0OTA=. Thanks to the policy he championed in Iraq, the U.S. Army is nearly "broken," as one general told Congress. Consequently, it now accepts recruits as old as 42, which means Goldberg, if he chose, could still enlist." Someone needs to evaluate this and then insert the facts from it into the article. Makgraf 08:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

The "implied treasonous motives to those who disagree" charge is a pretty serious one and so far I haven't seen any evidence backing it up. Makgraf 08:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

""to wars that advance U.S. interests (or, allegedly, President Bush's or Israel's or ExxonMobil's interests."" This isn't implying "treasonous" motives in any way. I'm sure most people on the left would agree that they oppose wars for the sake of advancing, say, American economic or military interests. Saying people object to wars for realpolitik reasons does not equal calling them traitors. I should probably add that Goldberg is saying this in a sneering way because that's how he does things. But it doesn't add up to the accusation provided.Makgraf 23:16, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

What about Goldberg's "bet" with Cole?

February 8, 2005: "Anyway, I do think my judgment is superior to his (Juan Cole) when it comes to the big picture. So, I have an idea: Since he doesn't want to debate anything except his own brilliance, let's make a bet. I predict that Iraq won't have a civil war, that it will have a viable constitution, and that a majority of Iraqis and Americans will, in two years time, agree that the war was worth it. I'll bet $1,000 (which I can hardly spare right now)." Link: http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg200502081153.asp

216.59.249.73 16:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

This was recently added to the article. Abe Froman 16:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but Prof Cole never took Goldberg up on the bet. So I don't really see the relevance. Makgraf 19:27, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it is relevant in two ways, first by highlighting Goldberg's beliefs on foreign policy in Iraq, and second, by showing how strongly he believes in them. Abe Froman 20:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

If he actually made the bet, yes. But people offering bets on things are pretty common. What do others think about this? In the mean-time I'm going to rewrite it to be compatible with the rest of the article. Makgraf 20:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Goldberg wrote the words, and it is notable in context of his relationship with other academics opposed to his positions. Whether he "took" the bet is irrelevant. Abe Froman 20:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I lean towards saying this should stay. It fits very well into the section which is in about Goldberg’s relationship with other writers, and it does seem to capture something of his style of writing and confrontation. I am somewhat uncomfortable about the fact that the statement is about such a hot button issue, but Goldberg is often controversial. If it were to be removed then I think the same reasoning would have to apply in removing Garofalo's comment about Goldberg being a chickenhawk. Master shepherd 15:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Guess it should stay in then. Makgraf 23:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Remember WP:NPOV when putting things in the article! Makgraf 18:05, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm a little confused why the new sources are "more reputable citations" than the existing ones. We have Goldberg saying he'll make a bet which has the citation where Goldberg says he'll make the bet. Then we have Cole rejecting the bet which has the citation where Cole rejects the bet. Why would retrospective articles 2 years later be "more reputable" than the actual sources. They just seem redundant. Makgraf 01:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

As an FYI to people who are watching this page I am not rv this because the anonymous editor is saying mean things or disagreeing with me but because he is using homophobic slurs which is expressly forbidden in WP:NPA. Now I'm not personally offended by this but this sort of thing has no place on wikipedia. The implication that being gay is bad is a hatefull one and could create a chilling effect which could marginalize people in that community. Makgraf 02:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Biography assessment rating comment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Jreferee 20:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Bernard Goldberg

Does Jonah Goldberg have any relation with another conservative commentator Bernard Goldberg? Wooyi^{Talk, Editor review} 03:58, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Nope [1] Makgraf 16:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)