Alterman Yet Again

Here's Eric's version of our conversation at the party last night via Atrios.

My version: Yes, we had a argument. "Screaming" though? Seems to me Eric's voice was raised, as was mine. And backing into a corner? Oh please. My sense was that when I tried to have a discussion with Eric, he refused...I even tried to point out some things we have in common--like Springsteed and the Mets, and the fact that he probably agrees with 93% of the things I write (even if he never says so). I asked him why he never once called me--unlike, say, Greg Sargent, who has--when he has questions about my work. No response to that, either. In fact, this seems Alterman's modus operandi: He's not interested in honest argument. He doesn't engage, but takes potshots from the sidelines. He writes about journalism, but it's a subject he only understands vicariously, since he never does any reporting.

Finally, Eric's right about one thing: I shouldn't take him so seriously. But as a New Yorker, I do love a good argument. I take politics seriously and intellectual honesty even more so--and now that I'm spending time here in the blogosphere, I figured I'd respond to his constant abuse. If he doesn't want the conversation, so be it. I won't make the mistake of taking him seriously again.

Note to Readers: This controversy is oh-so-ten-years-ago, but Primary Colors was an anonymous novel.The rules of novel-writing are not the same as those of journalism, or even blogging. I followed the same rules of anonymous novel-writing as Henry Adams did when he denied authorship of Democracy. That case is long closed, and has nothing to do with Alterman's purposeful mischaracterization of my work.