National Review Nut 'Outs' Famous Liberal Blogger
Big news on the Internet! The
anonymous PSEUDOnymous blogger "publius" of Obsidian Wings, who has been blogging under that name since forever, is, in real, human life, some law professor in South Texas named John Blevins. Has your afternoon been enriched, now that you know this fact? Then you should thank National Review's Ed Whelan, who "outed" Blevins because Blevins had been calling all of his writing miserable and pathetic and wrong about everything, which it is.
Here's Ed Whelan trying, retardedly, not to sound petulant:
In the course of a typically confused post yesterday, publius embraces the idiotic charge (made by “Anonymous Liberal”) that I’m “essentially a legal hitman” who “pores over [a nominee’s] record, finds some trivial fact that, when distorted and taken totally out of context, makes that person look like some sort of extremist.” In other of his posts (including two which I discussed here and here), publius demonstrated such a dismal understanding of the legal matters he opined on—including, for example, not understanding what common law is—that it was apparent to me that he had never studied law.
Well, I’m amused to learn that I was wrong about publius’s lack of legal education. I’ve been reliably informed that publius is in fact the pseudonym of law professor John F. Blevins of the South Texas College of Law. I e-mailed Blevins to ask him to confirm or deny that he is publius, and I copied the e-mail to the separate e-mail address, under the pseudonym “Edward Winkleman,” that publius used to respond to my initial private complaints about his reckless blogging. In response, I received from “Edward Winkleman” an e-mail stating that he is “not commenting on [his] identity” and that he writes under a pseudonym “[f]or a variety of private, family, and professional reasons.” I’m guessing that those reasons include that friends, family members, and his professional colleagues would be surprised by the poor quality and substance of his blogging.
ZING. How awesome is "Ed Whelan." Why even bother asking what those reasons were? "pooplius" responds:
As I told Ed (to no avail), I have blogged under a pseudonym largely for private and professional reasons. Professionally, I’ve heard that pre-tenure blogging (particularly on politics) can cause problems. And before that, I was a lawyer with real clients. I also believe that the classroom should be as nonpolitical as possible – and I don’t want conservative students to feel uncomfortable before they take a single class based on my posts. So I don’t tell them about this blog. Also, I write and research on telecom policy – and I consider blogging and academic research separate endeavors. This, frankly, is a hobby.
Privately, I don’t write under my own name for family reasons. I’m from a conservative Southern family – and there are certain family members who I’d prefer not to know about this blog (thanks Ed). Also, I have family members who are well known in my home state who have had political jobs with Republicans, and I don’t want my posts to jeopardize anything for them (thanks again).
All of these things I would have told Ed, if he had asked.
But he didn't, so you are a loser, GET IT?
Obviously if you blog under a pseudonym, you should always prepare for some nut to expose you. But this doesn't make Ed Whelan much of a hero, either. Besides, we all know that "Ed Whelan" is a pseudonym for Cummy Cumburger or whatever.
Exposing an Irresponsible Anonymous Blogger [National Review]
Stay Classy, Ed Whelan [Obsidian Wings]