“Obsession Is a Young Man’s Game.”

by Little Miss Attila on December 21, 2009

And what works on the Los Angeles Times doesn’t necessarily work on other bloggers.

Patterico accuses Jeff of editing comments on his blog, because one of his was altered by a Jeff reader/colleague over at “The Protein Wisdom Pub,” a designated playground for Jeff’s crew. (Though the action in question is a credited alteration of the comment: The additional words are italicized, and a note at the bottom makes it clear who edited it—Pablo, not Jeff.)

I don’t edit comments very much. I will redact information that seems inappropriate, of course, and every once in a while I’ll delete a remark that doesn’t further the discussion. (My policy is that I want people to try to be constructive, but it’s very rare for me to delete. I think I once accidentally deleted a legitimate comment when I was defending against a major spam attack, though, and I felt terrible.)

I know a lot of people like to play with the comments of obvious trolls, but I run an operation that’s small enough we tend to deal with ’em head-on, or ignore ’em. And I tend to endure more filth directed at me than I would tolerate from one commenter slinging it at another: There are remarks about me in my archives that I would have nuked if they’d been aimed at any other person. Not because I’m self-sacrificing, but because I don’t give a shit what people say about me in this arena of my life.

Of course, I also have to periodically warn/remind my regulars that my real-life lefty friends like to drop in every now and then, and spar a little bit. So that’s yet another reason I like folks to fight fair: I adore my readers, but that doesn’t mean they can pick on my friends whose brains have been rotted by reading too much Karl Marx/Noam Chomsky/David Brooks.

And I do not promise I’ll never mutilate the remarks of a troll who oversteps badly enough.

My feeling is that some get overwrought about what should be spirited debates about ideas. When that happens, they lose credibility with their readers, and it diminishes some of the good that is done by alternative media as a whole—left and right. It does not engender respect.

The ideal is, in the immortal words of Professors Smith and Wilson, to “place principles above personalities.” I’d like to see that happen a few more times before I die.

Now those of you who have kids should kiss them. I’ll be kissing my spouse and hugging my church sponsee.

It’s the holidays. Those who are able to chill out should try to do so.

Some of you feared that Patrick was starting to lose it, a la Charles Johnson; you may have been more prescient than I realized at the time.

[Ground rules for this thread, in case the sharks and jets descend again: please refrain from using Patrick’s last name, or his job title. Likewise, both men’s families are off-limits, as is mine. If I see a bunch of ad hominem stuff, I’ll lose interest and go file my nails. Should that occur, please email me about anything that appears to be a threat of violence—or offline harassment.

UPDATE, Mon. 10:21 a.m.: Maybe I should even this up, BECAUSE OF THE MORAL EQUIVALENCE!—Please refrain from using the word “liar” and the word “fraud.” And “poopyhead.”]

UPDATE II: The last name is fine, when coupled with “Spamming Macht.”

{ 126 comments… read them below or add one }

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 8:57 am

Horrors…but on some of my threads at PW, I’ve actually altered the comments of particularly abnoxious threadjacking trolls! Sometimes its the only thing that discourages them into leaving.

In one particular instance, “Leo Tolstoy” did indeed post a long series of cut-n-paste from Anna Karenina.

Unlike CJ or Pat, JeffG does indeed have one of the most open, tolerant comment threads. But each blog author has the right to mock or toss people who thread-jack and drive away legit commenters.

Reply

Little Miss Attila December 21, 2009 at 8:59 am

But Darleen! What about the Bill of Riiiiiiiggghhhttss???

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 9:13 am

ZOMG, LMA!! 😉

Reply

rls December 21, 2009 at 9:14 am

But Darleen! What about the Bill of Riiiiiiiggghhhttss???

Is it past due?? I know I paid it last month.

Reply

McGehee December 21, 2009 at 9:16 am

In fairness, the first time I saw the comment Pablo altered, I don’t remember seeing a disclaimer on it. Which didn’t stop me thinking, “Okay, somebody probably edited that.”

The fact I had to add the “probably” at the time is not Jeff’s fault, nor Pablo’s — but Frey’s and Frey’s alone. Then again, the fact I assumed it had “probably” been edited stems from Frey’s utter lack of self-deprecating humor, as far as I’ve ever seen.

Reply

McGehee December 21, 2009 at 9:17 am

…in fact, had Frey himself written it that way without it having been edited, I might have thought better of him. Huh.

Reply

Pablo December 21, 2009 at 9:34 am

In fairness, the first time I saw the comment Pablo altered, I don’t remember seeing a disclaimer on it. Which didn’t stop me thinking, “Okay, somebody probably edited that.”

Yes, that was added later, after the whining. But anyone reading it that didn’t realize upon reading it that it had been edited would have to be quite an idiot.

Someone who has openly declared their intent to spam someone’s blog in an effort to get banned, as Patrick had done in the very comment in question, has whatever ribbing they get coming to them.

…in fact, had Frey himself written it that way without it having been edited, I might have thought better of him. Huh.

He does not have that level of self awareness.

Reply

McGehee December 21, 2009 at 9:43 am

He does not have that level of self awareness.

Precisely.

Reply

DarthRove December 21, 2009 at 9:47 am

So can the pw people be the Sharks and the PP people be the Jets? Just so we can then decry the Persecution of The Other foisted upon us?

Plus the Sharks had hotter women and better songs.

Reply

McGehee December 21, 2009 at 9:55 am

please refrain from using Patrick’s last name

Oops, sorry — I didn’t see that before. LMA, if you choose to redact that particular four-letter word where it appears in my previous comments, rest assured I will not go ape-bleep over it. And I will obey the rules in all future comments.

Reply

Brian G. December 21, 2009 at 9:56 am

Patrick [unmentionable] is an embarrassment to conservatism. It’s time for him to follow the footsteps of his hero Charles Johnson and get out.

Reply

Joe December 21, 2009 at 9:56 am

And here is Senator Sheldon Whitehouse engaging in some Frey-tastic Charles Johnson-ist language on how anyone oppoing Obama is a racist!

Jeff maybe be a brawler. We PW readers and commentators can be a bit rough in our responses. But we know when we are being messed with and we know what is right and what is wrong. To borrow a bit from Senator Whitehouse’s hyberbole, Patterico is definitely not the Nazi Weremacht, but for a so called conservative he is a little too Vichy and Quisling for my taste.

Reply

Joe December 21, 2009 at 10:23 am

And oh BTW, when Patterico posted his piece on alleged editting, I immediately posted Pablo’s admission to editing a single post at the Pub–and forwarding it to Patterico’s site. My post was scrubbed and the information was ignored. Because this is all about faux outrage by Mr. Patterico.

Because that is how Patterico swings.

Reply

Patterico December 21, 2009 at 10:56 am

Joy didn’t read my post. Again.

It’s about 5+ alterations, not one. It includes alterations of comments by my supporters EricPWJohnson and “Leo Tolstoy.”. This is all in the post Joy didn’t read.

The alteration of my comment was not initially noted or credited. Which you can see in the screenshot I put in the post Joy didn’t read.

Altering comments puts the free exchange of ideas at risk. It is PARTICULARLY offensive when done by someone who claims to care about authorial intent. If the participants here were focused on ideas instead of personalities, this would be obvious. But in an Us vs. The Other game, principles are discarded.

If a blog host arrogated to himself the right to alter your actual words, it steals your intent far more thoroughly than any interpretive theory. If someone uses the wrong interpretive theory, you can point back to your words and show how they are consistent with your argument. If someone changes your words, you have lost that ability. It is an unfair and thuggish tactic and could not be further from principles of classical liberalism.

This is not a difficult concept.

That is all. I will not be responding further on this thread. My position is clearly articulated in the linked post, if anyone actually reads it.

Reply

Jerry December 21, 2009 at 11:18 am

My, this is getting old.

There are slightly more important issues these days than hurt feelings and nursed grudges.

Regardless of which side (if either) one supports, it’d be nice if at some point one party or the other would say enough of this and be the better by letting the matter drop. Immediately and permanently.

Patterico, no one appointed you to be the conservative crusader. If you have a problem with something someone said, drop them a line so the two of you can talk it out in private. If the other person takes it public, let them. Don’t respond in like kind. If the other person says let’s agree to disagree, leave it at that. You believe they’re wrong, they believe you’re wrong. Life continues regardless.

Let it go and get on with your life. Just. Let. It. Go.

Reply

Joe December 21, 2009 at 11:22 am

Patterico, you are being dishonest. You knew Pablo was fucking with you (after you called him names for days) on a single post. Yet you attributed it to Jeff. And then you refused to correct that right away. You claim you do not alter comments, you just scrub them, ignore the content of them, and then state falsehoods.

But that is how you swing Patterico.

Reply

Little Miss Attila December 21, 2009 at 11:22 am

Patrick, every time I don’t get deeply enough into the weeds of your irrelevant blah-blah-blah, I get accused of not reading you. And then I go back, and sure enough: The copy that I disregarded as irrelevant blah-blah-blah is indeed irrelevant blah-blah-blah.

DiCentra brought up the sensation of being “Gaslighted,” and that’s just how this feels.

Reply

Squid December 21, 2009 at 11:32 am

But in an Us vs. The Other game, principles are discarded….If someone changes your words, you have lost that ability. It is an unfair and thuggish tactic and could not be further from principles of classical liberalism.

This is not a difficult concept.

A guy who serially misrepresents the arguments of his debate partners is lecturing us on principles. A guy who shows no compunction about calling me an advocate for child molestation is lecturing us on thuggish tactics. A guy who thinks that obvious edits of trolls is somehow worse than the deliberate and malicious misinterpretation of meaningful arguments is lecturing us on interpretation. A guy who won’t recognize that what he considers a personal attack began as nothing more than a very pointed demonstration of the dangers posed by his interpretive theories is lecturing us on what is or isn’t “a difficult concept.” A guy who insists that “I’ve explained this before” is a cowardly dodge when offered by his opponents brushes off criticism by saying he’s explained this before. And a guy who can’t help rebutting every argument thinks we don’t know he’ll be back.

He does not have that level of self awareness.

Sometimes the irony burns. But it’s still delicious. Kinda like Thai food.

Reply

vanderleun December 21, 2009 at 11:34 am

I don’t think his hormonal medications in preparation for his sex-change into a newt are really working for Patterico.

Reply

Pablo December 21, 2009 at 11:50 am

Patterico, you are being dishonest. You knew Pablo was fucking with you (after you called him names for days) on a single post.

As he says in his own post, (“This one came to my attention only because commenter Pablo brought it to my attention [saying it was done for ‘lulz’]”) he became aware of the alteration when I rubbed his nose in it here. And yet he still can’t be sure that I did it, because Jeff is a dookiehead.

If someone uses the wrong interpretive theory, you can point back to your words and show how they are consistent with your argument.

Yah. That’s a hell of an argument you had there, spambot.

Reply

trfogey December 21, 2009 at 11:59 am

Let me get this straight — if I don’t have a fence around my yard, it’s OK for Patterico to plant a sign in my yard. However, should I disagree with the message on that sign, it is a violation of some kind of classical liberal principle for me to change the message on that sign to something that makes fun of Patterico and his original message. I should instead take the sign down and put up a fence to keep the bloody riff-raff off my lawn.

BWAAAAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!!!

If you want your sign kept in pristine form, counselor, keep it in your own yard.

Reply

pounce December 21, 2009 at 12:13 pm

I remeber back when John McCain’s infidelities forced “conservatives” to start defending adultery as “no big deal.”

Now JeffG’s juvenile blog posts are dragging “conservatives” even further down.

Altering posts? No big deal!

Threatening opponents with violence? Yawn.

Calling everyone he disagrees with an anti-Semite? He’s only joking!

You lie down with pigs…

Reply

Joe December 21, 2009 at 12:25 pm

“Calling everyone he disagrees with an anti-Semite? He’s only joking!”

So Patterico was only joking about that anti-Semite stuff Ponce? Good to know.

“Sometimes the irony burns. But it’s still delicious. Kinda like Thai food”

I prefer Thai food myself, but Pat seems to prefer a diet of Walcottian Schadenfreud, not getting that the joke is on him.

Reply

trfogey December 21, 2009 at 12:39 pm

I remeber back when John McCain’s BJ Clinton’s infidelities forced “conservatives” Democrats to start defending adultery as “no big deal.”

FIFY

Reply

Squid December 21, 2009 at 12:51 pm

The thing that gets me, ponce, is that Patterico is hammering away and hammering away and hammering away some more on his “Goldstein is violent” obsession because it’s a useful distraction to keep you from realizing that the so-called psychopath has thoroughly trounced Patterico on the merits of the argument. What’s so disappointing is that you’re lapping up this ad-hominem attack on Jeff as though it were part of a real argument.

Posting entire chapters of Anna Karenina is just littering. Cleaning up such litter is no sin. Miscasting the act of picking up the litter as though it were some terrible offense is just more bad-faith misrepresentation on your part, and does nothing to convince anyone that you’re interested in any sort of honest discussion.

Jeff might beat his sainted grandmother on a daily basis, but that doesn’t change the fact that Patterico completely mischaracterizes his Letterman arguments, and absolutely will not accept that this behavior is unfair and in blatantly bad faith.

Jeff might put puppies in a blender, but it doesn’t change the fact that he’s posed exactly the kind of “open questions” that Patterico posed for Stacy McCain. Open questions that Patterico still defends as appropriate, even though he knows that Jeff will not let up him until he admits that “open questions” that harm somebody’s reputation are anything but appropriate.

As an aside: if I thought you were being deliberately obtuse about recognizing the bad faith exhibited by you and yours, I’d be tempted to threaten violence against you myself. Fortunately, as you’ve continued your attempts at “argument,” I’ve realized that you’re just an intellectually and morally stunted child, and so my anger and frustration are transmuted into pity and patience. Which is good, because if you and Patterico could characterize me as a bad person, evidently it would take all the logic and persuasion out of my arguments.

Reply

pounce December 21, 2009 at 1:34 pm

“…the so-called psychopath has thoroughly trounced Patterico on the merits of the argument.”

I disagree.

All I’ve seen from JeffG is some pseudo intellectual b.s. followed up by infantile threats and insults.

I realize that’s all the Palin/Beck wing of the conservative movement requires, but please don’t pretend it’s seen as anything but silly in the real world.

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 1:46 pm

Darth

MAMBO!

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 1:47 pm

All I’ve seen from JeffG is some pseudo intellectual b.s. followed up by infantile threats and insults

pounce,

You need to wipe clean that glass navel you use.

Reply

Joe December 21, 2009 at 2:02 pm

Jeff might put puppies in a blender

Don’t knock it till you try it. Lots of vitamins when you are training.

Reply

trfogey December 21, 2009 at 2:17 pm

I realize that’s all the Palin/Beck wing of the conservative movement requires, but please don’t pretend it’s seen as anything but silly in the real world.

The real world knows that when you come to the conclusion in public that something a writer has written is racist, you are saying that the writer is racist. That’s what Patterico did to Stacy McCain. That’s why Jeff called him out. That’s why reasonable people of any political persuasion should be condemning what Patterico did, because the slur lives on, long after the [non-]apology falls off the front pages. Therefore, it is silly to expect that “he wrote a racist statement, but he’s not a racist” could ever fly in this day and age.

If you feel the need to ask those kinds of questions, better to do it privately. If you want to elevate yourself to a position of moral authority, then make sure your own hands are clean. If you take things about other people public, prepare to be examined and scrutinized yourself.

If it was OK for Patterico to call out Stacy McCain in public, then it’s OK for Jeff to call out Patterico in public. What do you think everyone would be thinking about Stacy McCain if he had responded to Patterico the way Patterico has responded to Goldstein?

Reply

ponce December 21, 2009 at 2:25 pm

“then it’s OK for Jeff to call out Patterico in public”

Hey, JeffG can say whatever he wants, but so can the people who laugh at the pseudo intellectual gibberish he barfs up when the mood strikes him.

I’m not picking on JeffG because I’m a big Patterico fan.

I’m picking on JeffG because he’s an embarrassment to the conservative movement.

Reply

Cassandra December 21, 2009 at 2:42 pm

You know, I have seen a lot of things on the Internet that have surprised and disappointed me.

This pretty much trumps them all. If people can’t see what’s wrong with altering someone’s comments, there’s no point in even arguing.

And saying it should have been obvious is no excuse. we all know most people don’t read carefully on the Internet and what you did will be in Google long after the context surrounding this is a forgotten memory.

This is not how adults behave. If you have any doubt about whether it’s right, try asking yourself if you’d excuse it if someone on the Left did it. You wouldn’t, and we all know why.

I don’t even have to stop and think about whether I would do something like that. I wouldn’t, because it’s just wrong. Kind of in the same league with publishing private emails, which when Donald Douglas did it, earned him quite a bit of censure. So what makes such tactics right now?

You all need to take a long look in the mirror.

Reply

Squid December 21, 2009 at 2:53 pm

pounce,

Let me spell it out for you, and for any others who may be reading, as plainly as I can.

Back in the spring, Patterico (PF) and Jeff Goldstein (JG) had a big dust-up regarding the Palin/Letterman controversy. Some ugly things were said, but both men agreed it would be better to de-escalate and bury the hatchet. So they did.

Earlier this month, Patterico decided that he should investigate statements made by Robert Stacy McCain (RSM) in a newsgroup in the 90s. He implied that the statements were racist, and though he denies making any such accusation, the implication is plain to any observer. The reasons PF decided to launch this public inquiry, and the timing of the inquiry, I still don’t understand. I’ll happily accept any light anyone can shed on these reasons.

JG took umbrage at this behavior, deeming it inappropriate to make public insinuations that somebody is racist, even if they couched it in terms of “just asking questions.” He also thought it was inappropriate that PF took it upon himself to divine RSM’s intent without getting a full understanding of the context and circumstances. PF defended his actions, as he evidently saw nothing wrong with his public inquisition, nor in allowing himself or his readers to minimize RSM’s intent in favor of their own interpretation.

As an example of why it is unfair to air public inquisitions into somebody’s character, JG started a series of “questions” regarding PF’s possible anti-Semitism. In doing this, JG defended his actions using the exact same arguments as PF, and defended his privilege in interpreting PF’s statements as he saw fit, just as PF had done to RSM. Those who know Protein Wisdom recognized it immediately as a pointed lesson to PF: opening the door to such public inquiries and subjective interpretations of past statements means opening oneself to those very same avenues of attack.

If PF had any self-awareness, he’d have understood JG’s meaning, and engaged JG on the arguments. Either he’d have offered a defense of his actions regarding RSM that couldn’t be used by those who’d attack PF under the same justifications, or he’d have acknowledged that JG’s point was valid, and that public inquisitions along the lines of his toward RSM were inappropriate and left one vulnerable to identical inquisitions from others. We’ll never know whether Patrick would have found a reasonable defense, because he treated JG’s public questions as a personal attack, rather than as a blunt lesson in blowback. This misunderstanding of JG’s intent was not to be his last.

In retaliation for what he perceived as an attack on his character, PF began a series of personal counterattacks. These included painting JG as an advocate for child molesters (in which he dug up the long-buried Letterman feud). They also included painting JG as an unstable, violent individual (in which he dug up occasions where JG has threatened commenters who pissed him off). The latest attack is on the editing of comments at Protein Wisdom, which, much like the earlier attacks, is being blown way out of proportion in an effort to cause as much reputational damage as possible.

These personal attacks against JG served two purposes: first, they made his readership look at Protein Wisdom’s “public questions” as a personal attack, rather than as the object lesson they were intended to be. Second, they served as ad-hominem attacks in an attempt to discredit JG as a debate opponent. It is commonly accepted in rhetoric that when an opponent’s argument cannot be refuted logically, you should attack the opponent personally in an effort to discredit the argument. This, of course, is logically inconsistent, since an argument can be sound regardless of who argues it. Further, the mischaracterization of an opponent’s argument, coupled with attacks on his character, are the textbook definition of an argument in bad faith.

Many, if not most, of PF’s readers don’t understand that JG’s “public questions” were never about a personal attack. They were always an attempt to make PF see that what he did to RSM was unfair and inappropriate. One major reason why PF’s readers still don’t understand what JG is doing is that they’ve relied on PF to frame the terms of the argument, and PF has gone out of his way to paint JG and his arguments in the most unfavorable light possible. They’ve accepted PF’s slanted “summaries” of the proceedings, and they’ve allowed themselves to be distracted by PF’s ad-hominem attacks regarding Letterman and violence. Those who see what PF is doing have tried to point it out, but they are ignored or misinterpreted by PF and his henchmen, and are shouted down by the chorus over there.

But you should understand this: the point of contention from the get-go is that PF’s treatment of RSM was unfair and inappropriate, and the “public questioning” of PF was never anything more than an example of just how such unfair “inquiries” can be used against anyone. If PF acknowledges that he was using the same unfair mechanisms used by the Progressives he rails against, and promises to refrain from such behavior in the future, I’d imagine that JG will be satisfied and the public questions will go away. Until then, I don’t see an end to this short of mutual assured destruction. Given JG’s history of transgressive blogging, and his possession of the better arguments, I happen to think he has a lot less to lose.

The preceding is my honest interpretation of the events leading up to this point. Where I’ve made characterizations or assumptions that you (ponce/pounce/anyone else) disagree with, I encourage you to challenge me on them. I will be happy to explain my reasoning.

Reply

Squid December 21, 2009 at 3:00 pm

Cliff’s Notes version: Jeff is doing to Pat exactly what Pat did to Stacy, using the same methods and justifications as Pat did.

If Stacy had responded to Pat in the same manner as Pat is responding to Jeff, how would you react?

Reply

Jeff G December 21, 2009 at 3:07 pm

I just recently altered a comment to remove information I felt was damaging to someone who has never shown me the same graciousness. Is that wrong too?

Or is it only wrong when I do it to people who are spamming my site, then note that I have done so, and as a consequence, get them to stop spamming my site — without having taken away their posting privileges forever?

Cassandra, Patrick, Beldar, et al., should get together and draft the set of rules we all need to live and blog by. Because Until they do, we’re all just floating out here in the chaos, terrified. How we manage to hang on in the face of such anarchy is a mystery.

People who read me know what I’m about. They don’t worry about whether dissent is allowed on my site, and they don’t question my honesty in dealing with dissent.

This new pretend OUTRAGE, in which readers are suddenly supposed to call into question whether they can trust commenting over there is bullshit, and the people trying to pawn it off are the kinds of people, when I “take a long look in the mirror,” I’m glad aren’t staring back at me.

Reply

Pablo December 21, 2009 at 3:16 pm

Cassandra, it requires neither excuse nor apology. You can do whatever you like with your comment spam. I had a wee bit of very harmless fun with mine. And if this is the most disappointing thing you’ve seen on the internet, well, I should send you some links. Meanwhile, I do hope you can find a way to get past all this. I hate to see a lady with the vapors.

Reply

McGehee December 21, 2009 at 3:27 pm

Of course, nothing demolishes a Patterico argument like Patterico making the argument. Check, please.

Reply

ponce December 21, 2009 at 3:34 pm

“I hate to see a lady with the vapors.”

And now JeffG’s moral-free grunts arrive to denigrate woman and work through their daddy issues.

Nobody tells me what to do!

Reply

trfogey December 21, 2009 at 3:52 pm

A comment I posted at Protein Wisdom.

“If you want to come to someone else’s blog and fling poo around the place, you’ve forfeited the right to have any say in how the owner chooses to redecorate in the aftermath. If the owner happens to redecorate in a manner that makes you look foolish, you’ll have an object lesson about being a good blog guest provided to you, free of charge.

Fling poo in haste — repent at leisure.”

And saying it should have been obvious is no excuse. we all know most people don’t read carefully on the Internet and what you did will be in Google long after the context surrounding this is a forgotten memory.

This is not how adults behave. If you have any doubt about whether it’s right, try asking yourself if you’d excuse it if someone on the Left did it. You wouldn’t, and we all know why.

Works the same way with accusations of racism, doesn’t it? You know — glass houses, stones, some disassembly required. Or, to the point here, should the anti-Semite call the racist “Bigot!”

If modern conservatism requires me to accept the definition of political correctness that the Leftist moonbats have been promulgating for the past generation, then slap my fanny and call me paleocon.

Reply

bh December 21, 2009 at 4:21 pm

If you clutch your pearls hard enough, do you get pearl diamonds?

Bloggers have been messing around with trolls and spammers for years. That the outrageous outrage is only trumpeted right now tells me someone is embarrassed by their behavior and is trying to change the subject.

EPWJ was an incoherent (literally) dullard who adopted PF’s admitted technique of hectoring as rhetorical gambit. Leo put up great paragraphs of non-responsive hookum. I actually thought it was Christoph.

Most importantly, PF spammed pw with dozens and dozens of cut and paste comments. The only change made was by Pablo in the original comment where PF stated his demented plan. Changing it to “spammy lunatic wrath” was both funny and extremely predictive as that’s exactly what PF then went about to do.

So, another day, another set of trumped up charges having nothing to do with any actual topic at hand.

Reply

bh December 21, 2009 at 4:22 pm

Just to be clear, the pearl diamonds crack is not directed at Joy. It’s directed at the drive-by scolds who could care less about context or how the blogosphere has handled things for years now.

Reply

pounce December 21, 2009 at 4:29 pm

And now the children are defending the sewer that flows from their juvenile minds, staining all the decent conservatives who make the mistake of associating with them.

Paleocons?

Yeah, right.

William F. Buckley and Jeff “Cockslapper” Goldbrick are two peas in a pod.

Honest!

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 4:30 pm

This pretty much trumps them all. If people can’t see what’s wrong with altering someone’s comments, there’s no point in even arguing

Well, Cass, I guess we are not going to argue (please see my first comment on this thread).

I’ve done it myself, so I guess I’ve stopped being an adult.

Darn, and I’m still going to have to file a 1040 next year!

Reply

Cassandra December 21, 2009 at 4:32 pm

Insulting me is not a refutation of anything I said :p

But if that’s all you’ve got, you go. “Context” doesn’t mean “It’s OK when I do it b/c he did something really, really bad first.” Two wrongs don’t make a right, except of course when justifying your own actions becomes an end in itself.

Grow up.

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 4:33 pm

pounce

moral-free grunts arrive to denigrate woman

Whoa! Projection! Do you also post under the nom-de-troll “nk”?

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 4:37 pm

“Context” doesn’t mean “It’s OK when I do it b/c he did something really, really bad first.”

Cass

With all due respect, I do not believe you are clear on what the issue is.

Just exactly where it is written that a thread author is verbotten from treating trolls and spam exactly how they want to?

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 4:58 pm

Oh, and Cass,

If you are interested in the bottom line in this, I suggest you read dicentra’s post.

Any person interested in property rights and what they truly represent understands JeffG’s structural arguments from the get-go.

Today alone you have Leftists rending their shirts and gnashing their teeth because THEY say Tom Coburn called for Byrd’s death on the Senate floor.

NOW do you see what happens when you support the STRUCTURAL notion that “perception” is more important than intent? Or, indeed, perception is EVERYTHING?

It’s just the Leftcult’s way of saying “SHUT UP” to anyone that doesn’t buy into their dogma. That there are so-called conservatives that buy into it makes it particularly alarming.

Reply

bh December 21, 2009 at 4:59 pm

“Grow up.”

Well, as you say, insulting me is not a refutation of anything I said.

I said: “Bloggers have been messing around with trolls and spammers for years.” As that statement is so obviously true, I then gave some context in regards to EPWJ and Leo being trolls and PF being a spammer. You can disagree on the specifics. You didn’t.

Guess what? This isn’t novel, this isn’t new. To pretend otherwise is to throw dirt in the air and call it an argument.

Reply

trfogey December 21, 2009 at 5:02 pm

Insulting me is not a refutation of anything I said :p

Claiming to be a victim is a childish way to change the subject. Should the anti-Semite call the racist “Bigot”, Cassandra? Was Patterico justified in “taking polls” and “asking questions” of Stacy McCain publicly on his blog?

But if that’s all you’ve got, you go. “Context” doesn’t mean “It’s OK when I do it b/c he did something really, really bad first.” Two wrongs don’t make a right, except of course when justifying your own actions becomes an end in itself.

Are you asking these same questions of Patterico, Cassandra? If you are, ask him about Levi Juhl of the University of Montana.

Grow up.

Some of us did. We’re waiting for you to join us.

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 5:06 pm

and if people still can’t get what dicentra was saying, I put up a good summary of why the Left wants words to mean what they say it means at any particular, random moment here and I did it WITHOUT words.

Reply

trfogey December 21, 2009 at 5:28 pm

William F. Buckley and Jeff “Cockslapper” Goldbrick are two peas in a pod.

Obviously, you haven’t read much Buckley. But that’s understandable — I’m sure multisyllabic words make your head hurt. And it’s hard to read when your fingers get too far ahead of your lips.

Reply

pounce December 21, 2009 at 5:43 pm

“why the Left wants words to mean what they say it means at any particular random moment”

The Left came up with a very clever trap that compels the dregs of the Republican party to spew their filth every chance they get…and people like you fell for it, Darleen.

Reply

mueller December 21, 2009 at 5:45 pm

William F. Buckley and Jeff “Cockslapper” Goldb(stein)rick are two peas in a pod.

Yes indeed. Both have/had the command and understanding of the language that we can only admire.

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 6:00 pm

pounce

Which “filth”, pounce? Palin putting “death panels” IN QUOTES which alerted people to pay attention to the medical rationing on the way? Rush’s “I hope he fails” when talking about Obama’s policies? Tom Coburn, in the midst of a horrendous blizzard, saying people should pray someone doesn’t make the vote? Tony Snow using the colloquialism “tar baby”? The white guy forced out of his job when using the word “niggardly” in a letter? Mark Twain’s statue taken down in Atlantic City?

Any person/organization that elevates the perception of the listener over the intent of the author/speaker is a thief. Reaction to theft is not filth. Except to other thieves.

Thank you again, pounce, for highlighting your own moral idiocy.

Reply

pounce December 21, 2009 at 6:13 pm

D’Arleeen,

America’s minority populations are growing much faster than its white population and you feel compelled, god knows why, to call Obama an “Uncle Tom” and a “Stepin Fetchit” and dream that you are somehow striking a blow for freedom without realizing that you are actually just smearing the party of Lincoln with your feces.

You almost have to admire the Democrats for coming up with PC, knowing how you and your ilk would respond to it.

WE might as well get used to be out of power.

Reply

dicentra December 21, 2009 at 6:16 pm

But if that’s all you’ve got, you go. “Context” doesn’t mean “It’s OK when I do it b/c he did something really, really bad first.” Two wrongs don’t make a right, except of course when justifying your own actions becomes an end in itself.

Oh, I get it. Waterboarding is WRONG WRONG WRONG even if the person you’re waterboarding planned 9/11 and has information about numerous other plots against the US.

If it’s not OK to waterboard someone for jaywalking, it’s not OK to waterboard them to get life-saving information.

Got it.

And yes, I know that was an extreme example.

Cass, this has become asymmetrical warfare. Back when I left some comments on your blog, it was a fair fight, dealing with concepts and ideas and all. And that’s fair game, no matter how rowdy it gets.

But then Pat took a strange turn, and he stopped arguing ideas and began denouncing Jeff roundly no matter what he said. “LIAR! HYPOCRITE!” he’d shout, and then giggle insanely to himself at how great it sounded to say that to Jeff.

Yes, that was IN the comments of the LMA threads:

http://littlemissattila.com/?p=11826
http://littlemissattila.com/?p=11908

Then he got all hysterical about the “threats of violence” that Jeff was posting at Pontifications. Threats that have approximately zero chance of being carried out, and everyone knows it.

(Threats of violence also being heretofore unknown on Pontifications)

You’d have thought that Jeff had showed up on Pat’s doorstep, pounding and hollering expletives the way he reacted. He compiled links to Jeff’s awful threats and posted them wherever he could find, including spamming Jeff’s archives around 40 times, hoping to create an enormous Google bomb.

Not to harm Jeff, mind you, but to “protect himself.”

Then he started taunting people in Jeff’s comments and getting screen caps of anything that sounded hostile to him, also to “protect himself.”

And he’s been fantasizing about the day Jeff bans him from Protein Wisdom, as if that would vindicate him for all time, because it would show the world how awful Jeff is and how pure and righteous Pat is. Jeff, of course, has been banned from Pontifications on and off for some time now. But Jeff deserves it for the threats he issued, see.

In this way, Pat has reframed it in terms of threats and attacks, danger and warding-off, enemies and allies, instead of the simple disagreement over concepts that it started out as.

That’s NUTS, yeah?

If this sounds like I’m exaggerating, it’s because you haven’t watched the blow-by-blow, and because you’ve never been in the crosshairs of someone with Pat’s personality disorder.

People who go completely berserk to “protect themselves” from what in reality is not an actual threat don’t have the ability to see how far out of control they’ve gotten. Those unlucky enough to be on the receiving end of their “defenses” begin to wonder what color the sky is anymore. It becomes surreal, you can’t tell what the disordered person is going to do next, because they’ve already crossed the line from common sense to total hysteria.

When you ‘re dealing with someone like this, there are no good answers, no graceful ways to extricate yourself. In Jeff’s case, he’s tried being calm, silly, ironic, taunting, angry, frustrated, and even silent.

But nothing works. He can only hope to match Pat move-by-move as Pat distorts and maligns his character in front of God and everyone.

Because if you only read Pontifications, it looks like Pat is the sane one and Jeff is out of control.

Those of us who’ve followed along the whole time have seen a different picture. I pray you never attract someone like Pat to your blog, because they are able to present the face of sanity to the rest of the world while harassing you with malicious things that no one else believes until they’ve seen it.

And on the Internet, it’s REALLY easy to keep one information stream from crossing another.

So please do us a favor and get off your high horse before pronouncing your “adult” judgments on a situation you don’t fully understand. Withholding judgment in the face of ignorance being a sign of maturity, too, ya know.

Reply

dicentra December 21, 2009 at 6:18 pm

Ponce:

Look up my utterances on the internet and see if you can find something that sounds remotely racist.

Then come tell me about the dregs of the GOP.

You almost have to admire the Democrats for coming up with PC, knowing how you and your ilk would respond to it.

Who is my ilk, ponce? How do you know us when you see us? And what separates YOU from the dregs, pray tell?

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 6:19 pm

Pee’Ounce

you feel compelled, god knows why, to call Obama an “Uncle Tom” and a “Stepin Fetchit”

I didn’t.

You almost have to admire the Democrats for coming up with PC, knowing how you and your ilk would respond to it

“me and my ilk”…hmmm, supporters of the US Constitution … that’s what you condemn?

Call me surprised (not).

Reply

pounce December 21, 2009 at 6:28 pm

“supporters of the US Constitution … that’s what you condemn?”

No, I ment the foul-mouthed children with daddy issues.

Here we see what a perfect trap PC is.

The more the Reagan Republicans try to rein in the excesses of the juvenile Beck/Palin Republicans…the more they lash out…dooming us all.

Reply

dicentra December 21, 2009 at 6:40 pm

Oh look. Jeff’s cataloged Pat’s descent into insanity in one place.

Is that the Pat you guys know or one that you barely recognize?

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 6:42 pm

Pee’Ounce

Your “concern trolling” is disgustingly transparent. I am a Reagan Republican…having worked on his campaign and voting for him.

Reagan wasn’t “PC” and that drove the likes of people like you bonkers. “Evil Empire”, remember that?

you’re a fraud

Reply

dicentra December 21, 2009 at 6:42 pm

No, I ment the foul-mouthed children with daddy issues.

You talking to me, pounce? You got evidence that I’ve got a foul mouth and daddy issues?

Reply

Slartibartfast December 21, 2009 at 6:43 pm

“It includes alterations of comments by my supporters EricPWJohnson and “Leo Tolstoy.”

EricPWJohnson is an unselfaware being that enjoys posting CHOCOLATE IS BETTER THAN VANILLA! AGREE OR DISAGREE kind of comments, and then is incensed that his comments are altered in such a way that might make him look even worse.

Tolstoy is a cut-and-paste spammer that…well…if these are two guys whose actual words you’re standing behind, Patterico, you’re befriending people even less adept at argument than you are.

Or, you’re hanging out with people who make you look good.

I’m thinking I’m on to something, there.

Reply

Pablo December 21, 2009 at 6:50 pm

Oh look. Jeff’s cataloged Pat’s descent into insanity in one place.

That’s the most disappointing thing I’ve ever seen on the internet. Aside from that time I tweaked a bit of comment spam for laughs. That was an atrocity. Again.

Reply

Squid December 21, 2009 at 6:50 pm

Calling your opponents immature and rude, and using name-calling and insults to do it, isn’t helping your cause, ponce/pounce. You might try another avenue. Perhaps by addressing some of the coherent, plain, and respectful arguments put to you earlier. To wit: if RSM had gone after Pat with the level of invective, bad faith, and ad-hom distractions that Pat has shown in the past week, would you be here defending RSM and calling Pat and his retinue names?

A man of principle would feel compelled so to do.

Reply

pounce December 21, 2009 at 6:57 pm

Darleen,

Reagan was the very model of decorum.

People like you, on the other hand, make it easy for Lefties like James Wolcott to link to one of your childish rants and say, “see what racist crackers the Republicans are?”

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/wolcott/2009/11/such-a-touchy-bunch-the.html

Reply

zombyboy December 21, 2009 at 7:00 pm

This is my first–and, I think, last–comment on the big Jeff-Patrick brawl.

First, I think that comparing Patrick to Charles Johnson is a step too far. As far as I can tell, what has happened to Johnson is unique and his strange obsessions (RSM, for instance) run about as deep as Sullivan’s Trig trutherism. I don’t think that Patrick really compares.

I haven’t got much of a dog in this fight–I’ve been reading both of them for some time, respect much of what both of them have said in the past, and have had the pleasure of meeting and drinking with Jeff. I really thought that this argument would sort of die out all on its lonesome–had hoped that it would die out on its own–but have found the subsequent storm to be illuminating. It’s been wildly revealing of both gentlemen’s personalities and temperaments.

While I’ve had my own thoughts about Jeff’s online persona here and there (which I will be happy to share with him over a beer if he finds himself caring about my opinion (which I doubt)), the longer this goes on the nastier Patrick is getting. His comment spamming yesterday was manic and disturbing–I really think he would benefit from stepping back and calming down.

Reply

dicentra December 21, 2009 at 7:07 pm

make it easy for Lefties like James Wolcott to link to one of your childish rants and say, “see what racist crackers the Republicans are?”

Aaaand we care what Wolcott thinks because…?

You’re making our very point, pounce. You’re embarrassed to be seen with us “racist crackers” in front of your Kewl Friends. You want the Left to see you as one of the “good republicans.”

But it’s so HARD when we have lively discussions amongst ourselves that include the word “racist.” I mean, just because Wolcott never bothered with the content of the actual argument (and would be hard-pressed to articulate the linguistic argument even to save his life) doesn’t mean we shouldn’t cringe when he does a sloppy job reporting on the melee.

Instead, we should chastise our fellows for embarrassing us in front of company, even if that company despises us heart and soul and gets a real kick out of making us dance to his tune.

What you’re saying is that we should never ever ever have a knock-down, drag-out fight on our side, especially not if the question of “race” is addressed, because the Left has already determined that we’re racist by definition, so our fights prove that the Left was correct about us?

Are you high?

What kind of person lets his enemy define him?

One who is trying to serve God without offending the devil, so to speak.

Either leave off trying to impress the Left or join them whole hog. It’s unseemly for you to try to straddle the abyss. On account of we don’t want to be seeing your naughty bits while you do it.

Reply

sdferr December 21, 2009 at 7:14 pm

Mistaking a snowcone for a conservative now? That doesn’t seem helpful, somehow.

Reply

Jeff G December 21, 2009 at 7:16 pm

Semanticleo called me “Goldbrick” on pw today. Coincidence?

Reply

dicentra December 21, 2009 at 7:24 pm

Regardless of Cleo’s intent, it was a racist statement.

Because I said so.

Reply

David R. Block December 21, 2009 at 7:24 pm

Obsession also seems to be the thing for a certain [I will not have my authority flouted! Someone must be made an example of, because the mall was a zoo today! David, I’m sorry–but you’re it. –Admin.] in LA, CA.

Reply

pounce December 21, 2009 at 7:26 pm

Not really.

“Goldbrick” is a fairly common term for somebody who sponges off his family.

Reply

dicentra December 21, 2009 at 7:34 pm

“Goldbrick” is a fairly common term for somebody who sponges off his family.

Yes, but “Goldbrick” is a clear phonetic analog for “Goldstein,” and a brick of gold is a big old ingot, right? Only banks and nations have them.

Which means that they’re under the control of the JoooooooZ, and Goldstein clearly being a Jewish name, that means that Cleo is making anti-semitic statements toward Jeff.

On his blog.

WHERE’S YOUR OUTRAGEOUS OUTRAGE, POUNCE? HAVE YOU NO SOUL!?!

Reply

dicentra December 21, 2009 at 7:37 pm

“Goldbrick” is a fairly common term for somebody who sponges off his family.

Oh, wait. I get it. You’re mocking Jeff for being the full-time parent instead of his wife.

What a horrible thing Jeff is doing, staying at home with his son instead of sending him off to day care, the way God intended. That kid will grow up tewtally screwed up, because if little boys wrassle with their dads or play catch with them TOO MUCH, they might not be pussified enough for Tomorrow’s Feminist.

Won’t know how to defer to His Betters on the Left, will he?

You got a wife, pounce? She sponging off the family? How about your ma, or any other woman who raised her kids full-time?

Hypocrite much?

Reply

Jeff G December 21, 2009 at 7:38 pm

So are you denying that you posted that comment on my site today?

Oh, and by the way: I think it’s good for “conservatism,” for which you so clearly stand (ahem), when a putative conservative calls someone who takes care of a child full time (and makes more in his spare time working at home than he would on the dole) a sponge.

That’s not only a fail from the position of promoting “family values,” but it’s a fail from the perspective of classical feminism: are those who stayed home and raised families to be dismissed as practically subhuman?

Granted, Frey — and several of his commenters — have offered similar arguments. So maybe it’s time we fleshed this out. Are you saying that my having put a career on hold to raise my child (a purely economic decision, mind you, because my wife was drawing a better salary) makes me a “sponge”?

Am I to be ridiculed and diminished for taking my family responsibilities seriously?

Let me know. Because while I used to hear this almost exclusively from the left, I’ve been hearing this quite a bit from the right recently.

Perhaps I’ll do a post.

Reply

Jeff G December 21, 2009 at 7:41 pm

Oops. Looks like dicentra and I overlapped.

Reply

pounce December 21, 2009 at 7:48 pm

Dude,

You’ve been milking that stay at home parent shtick for years.

Surely the kid’s in school by now, making it possible for you to work part time at least?

Reply

Squid December 21, 2009 at 7:56 pm

Really, pounce? It’s not enough that you tell us what we may and may not argue about? You have to tell us how to arrange our domestic affairs, as well?

Have you already worked this out with Jeff’s wife, or are you saying that wimminfolk shouldn’t get a say in how you arrange their lives?

You’re a real piece of work.

Reply

dicentra December 21, 2009 at 7:58 pm

Pounce

Regardless of Jeff’s domestic situation, what’s it to ya? Explain why you need to know at all, in any degree of detail? What business is it of yours?

Seriously, aren’t you embarrassed at asking such impertinent questions?

Reply

Jeff G December 21, 2009 at 8:01 pm

You’ve been milking that stay at home parent shtick for years.

I don’t recall bringing it up. Shall we review the tape?

Reply

Squid December 21, 2009 at 8:05 pm

And remember, pounce: every personal attack is an admission that you can’t refute an argument. I know it feels good to lash out (just did it myself, in fact!), but it doesn’t score any points in the scheme of things. Maybe you should try another avenue. Perhaps addressing the merits of the arguments and questions put to you upthread?

Naw — better to dodge the hard questions and go back to flinging poo. And calling your targets cowardly poo-flingers, just for the irony. Or better yet, excoriate us for the way we order our households, while calling us judgmental fascists! That would be just perfect!

Reply

Pablo December 21, 2009 at 8:08 pm

Serious question: Why is anyone even acknowledging ponce/pounce? It brings exactly nothing to the table.

Reply

pounce December 21, 2009 at 8:08 pm

Squid,

I don’t want to tell you what to argue about.

I’m just asking on behalf of a Republican party in decline that you refrain from making us such a joke.

I know in cases like JeffG and D’Arleeeen, my request is impossible, but for the rest of you…think of the children.

Reply

De Leon December 21, 2009 at 8:15 pm

Pounce meet petard. Petard meet Pounce. Why would I want think about children?

Reply

Squid December 21, 2009 at 8:24 pm

It evades, then flings poo. One can only imagine my surprise.

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 8:33 pm

Pee’Ounce

You are making yourself a joke. No conservative disses stay at home parents. Period. That makes you a fraud.

Big Government types…whether they self-identify as right/left, think the primary relationship every individual should have is with the Government. Families that actually raise their own children? Pfffft! Must be something wrong with them!

You are as much a fraud as Wolcott… the college dropout who married into his job and sets himself up as some sort of arbitrator of Taste and Intellect.

He wouldn’t understand a real discussion of ideas if it were delivered into his lap by one of his cats.

Reply

pounce December 21, 2009 at 8:46 pm

‘Big Government Types,” Darleen?

Really?

How ironic coming from a government union worker like yourself.

Perhaps yours and JeffG’s obvious social problems stem from low self-esteem, not daddy issues?

Reply

Little Miss Attila December 21, 2009 at 9:12 pm

I’ve been out Christmas shopping, and I’m still catching up.

Please lay off of Cassandra, who is technically correct–but has not, to my knowledge, had to deal with chapters from Russian novels in her comments section. (Nor, to my knowledge, Patterico leaving dozens of the same comment in various places.)

Altering comments is not good form. But I also think it’s a misdemeanor when one is dealing with trolls–particularly wordy ones who make your “real” readers scroll and scroll.

Patrick in full manic mode may be another issue, but the comment of his that was altered is clearly labeled as such.

The fact is, people lose patience after reading hundreds of comments on a particular subject–particularly when a lot of it is melodramatic stuff about how people are lying this and fraudulent that. And particularly when people seem to have spent days, weeks, or even months pretending not to see the other person’s point.

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 9:40 pm

Pee’Ounce

Small-government conservatives/libertarians do not eschew the proper role that government should play – defense-internal and external, and providing a forum for people to settle their differences (the judicial system).

Since I work within the judicial system, I work in one of the few legit areas of today’s government. No irony involved. And “low self-esteem”? Please, as a Californian I’ve seen the new age wackiness of the “self-esteem” movement too often. Your fraudulence in posing as anything other than a possible RINO is complete.

Reply

ponce December 21, 2009 at 9:46 pm

That’s the ticket, D’Arleeen.

Keep your spirits up for the holidays!

Rationalize away your dependence on the taxpayers of California.

Reply

Joe December 21, 2009 at 10:10 pm

Pounce say hi to Patrick “Spamming Macht Frey.”

Reply

Darleen Click December 21, 2009 at 10:23 pm

Pee’Ounce

is this where you believe police/military/judges, et al (and soon, doctors and nurses) should NOT be paid for their work?

I find your views interesting. Do you have a newsletter?

Reply

Bob Reed December 21, 2009 at 10:39 pm

ponce,

Part of what is wrong, macroscopically, with our society is the breakdown of the family unit; by career chasing moves and especially latch-key children. Regardless of how day-care centers are trumpeted by some folks they simply can’t replace the way that a parent in the home can effect the child’s development.

It is laudable that Jeff would choose to prioritize his child’s development over his own desires, and recognize what is truly valuable, a well adjusted and confident child, instead of measuring his own personal worth by job title.

After enjoying a career in the Navy, I too choose to stay at home and pursue opportunities for self employment, while being available to assist my elderly live-in mother-in-law. Could I be double-dipping ay a federal agency-without question. But how could I leave an elderly woman to her own devices, or bring in a relative stranger to sit with her; that would be essentially the same as shipping her off to an old folks home-an outcome that the old girl doesn’t deserve simply because the game changed and her daughter got married later in life…

Try sticking to arguments based on substance, instead of making capricious personal attacks. For one, they’re misguided, way off base, ridiculous in their content, and not germaine to any topic being discussed. And as hominem attacks like that are always the last refuge of a scoundrel who has in fact lost the argument already and instead trying to salvage the pretense of a victory by trying to shame their opponent…

An especially useless gambit if there is nothing to be ashamed of anyway.

Reply

ponce December 21, 2009 at 10:53 pm

And Joe lowers the bar just a tad more.

Well done, sir.

Oh Darleen,

For some reason I don’t think you’re a police/military/judge, nor are you a doctor or a nurse.

Are you?

Reply

Joe December 21, 2009 at 11:03 pm

ponce, you’re welcome. Tell Patty that he can find all kinds of racists in Avatar. It should keep him busy all weekend.

Reply

Darleen Click December 22, 2009 at 7:13 am

ponce

I worked at the DA office ten years. I’m now with Probation.

Prior to that I was a SAHM for 16 years and did a lot of volunteer work.

You don’t want to pay the people in the DA office or Probation? Hmmm. Maybe you’d like to be in California when the state prisons release 40,000 prisoners.

Why do you think legitimate government workers should not be paid?

Reply

timb December 22, 2009 at 12:47 pm

trfogey, did you ever read the bit McCain wrote where he compared preventing white teenage pregnancy with “white racial suicide”? Or, when he said slavery was good for balcks? Or, compared Harriett Tubman to Goebbels?

Highlighting his racial attitudes is a chance for people of good will to leave racists and white nationalist, neo-Confederate fools in the dust. I wouldn’t expect Goldstein to make that distinction, since this is about Karl and jealously and not about RSM. And, who knows why you don’t care, but, in my little opinion, you probably should.

I think my favorite part part of this thread is the mass of commenters from Protein Wisdom gathering here to decry Patterico for being “obsessed” with Jeff. Really? So “obsessed” he has one comment on this post. So “obsessed” his proxies are running around and flinging insults at Cassandra (don’t you dare have an opinion or the most concrete ass on the internet will attack you) and denouncing the absent Patterico. So “obsessed” he must have been the one who called the protein wisdom rapid response group. I think we see the obsession: Pablo unerring love for Jeff, Darleen’s need for a friend, dicentra’s need for a hero, and a host of authoritarians in need of defending the LEADER. Fools

PS Oh, and dicentra the next time you right some paean to Christianity, could you remind your readers why Christ would be so relativist to waterboard someone. You defended it…it’s a war crime….you claim to BELIEVE…..maybe there’s something in a golden tablet somewhere which allows Christ’s children to torture people? Fascinating display of hypocrisy there

Reply

Little Miss Attila December 22, 2009 at 1:26 pm

Tim, please substantiate these charges against R.S. McCain immediately, or I will delete them from your comment.

Reply

Pablo December 22, 2009 at 1:43 pm

How long has it been since you managed to get banned from PW and set out on your internet wide jihad on Jeff Goldstein, tim? Gotta be at least a couple of years, right?

Reply

trfogey December 22, 2009 at 4:37 pm

timb, Five miles from where I sit at this very moment, there used to be a sign on the side of the road that said “Welcome to Johnston County, NC — Home of the Ku Klux Klan”. That sign stayed on the side of that state highway up until about 8 or 10 years ago, until Glenn Miller’s Klavern got busted by Morris Dees and the SPLC. Of course, the Klansmen are still around — they just turned into anti-government types — you know, small government, 2nd Amendment, survivalist types.

What’s the closest you’ve ever been to a Klansman, timb? Have you ever been in the same room with one? Have you ever had one sidle up behind you and whisper “Niggerlover” in your ear, timb? I have. As I recall, my high school basketball team had to be escorted across the county line that Friday night by a couple of sheriff’s deputy cars. I only wonder what might have happened to us if we’d won that game that night. It came out during the Miller case that a sizable contingent of that sheriff’s department really were Klansmen.

What’s the closest you’ve ever been to a burning cross, timb? Ever had one fired up outside the building you were sleeping in? I have. Ever been invited to a high-school classmate’s Sweet Sixteen party and discover that her grandmother’s brother is the notorious Grand Dragon or Supreme Wizard of the local white sheet brigade? I have.

You see, timb, I’m betting that the closest you ever got to a real racist — you know, the ones who burn crosses and beat people with axe handles for fun — is the last time you watched “Mississippi Burning” on DVD. So spare me the “moral preening” and the lectures about the evils of racism. You’ve seen it second-hand — I’ve had in my face, up close and personal, and what Stacy McCain wrote ain’t it.

Reply

Joe December 22, 2009 at 6:15 pm

timb cannot, because it is not true about Stacy McCain. If it were, Charles Johnson would be shouting it from the roof tops.

and as for racism in the South, yeah there is still a lot of racism in the South. But the South is far more racially integrated than most people outside it realize and people there have dealt with racial issues over the years. But there is a hell of a lot of racism in New Jersey, New York, California, the Midwest, the Pacific Northwest, and dare I say, in that bastion of liberal thought, Massachusetts and New England (perhaps worse there in its own way). So timb’s moral preenings and looking for cryptoracists along with Patrick “Spamming Macht Frey” we can do without.

I mean come on, Frey is a german swiss name is it not? We all know about those volk and their need for purity. He also did, in fact, call Jeff Goldstein money grubbing. Fair to make a suggestion of anti Semitism? Of course it is not fair. That is the point. Just like it was not fair to start “asking questions” because Patterico’s spidey racist sense got triggered by of all things Charles Johnson and he decided it was fair game to out McCain.

Reply

ponce December 22, 2009 at 7:24 pm

“Why do you think legitimate government workers should not be paid?”

Every government worker thinks that they’re doing legitimate work, D’Arleen.

As I taxpayers, I bet we can survive without your services.

Reply

Joe December 22, 2009 at 8:03 pm

Ponce, we could probably survive with out Patrick “Spamming Macht Frey” too.

Reply

Pablo December 22, 2009 at 8:36 pm

Every government worker thinks that they’re doing legitimate work, D’Arleen.

I’m sure Patrick would agree. Are you actually trying to defend him with this line of attack? Or are you just concern trolling?

Reply

Joe December 22, 2009 at 9:45 pm

(\__/)
(=’.’=)
(”)_(”)

Reply

Little Miss Attila December 22, 2009 at 9:51 pm

[Grumbles to herself about what people do for the living, and how that isn’t the point, any more than it is in any way germane to the discussion what role anyone plays in his or her specific household economy.

Realizes that the discussion has taken some . . . lengthy detours since the original debate about what Stacy was after when he grappled with the interracial marriage thing.

Glares at everyone. Sticks out her tongue. Decides not to edit anyone’s comments, at least not quite yet. Halfway hopes someone provokes her into doing it again, and tries to imagine that it will bring an intense, power-mad head rush.

Realizes this is pathetic. Pours another glass of wine.]

Reply

Little Miss Attila December 22, 2009 at 9:52 pm

Kitteh!

Reply

ponce December 22, 2009 at 10:31 pm

Hey, D”Arleeen’s the government union drone who ironically whined about the size of the government.

At a certain irony rating, LMA should start issuing irony tickets.

Reply

Little Miss Attila December 23, 2009 at 12:07 am

This Den Mother only gives out merit badges for cunnilingus. Sorry.

Reply

Darrell December 23, 2009 at 12:22 am

In Ponce de Lie-On’s case, better consider adding analingus to that list.

Reply

ponce December 23, 2009 at 12:48 am

Very generous, LMA.

Most of us just get a pat on the head.

Reply

BumperStickerist December 23, 2009 at 3:58 am

It’s at times like these that I wish WuzzaDem was still on teh webs to make a funny, illustrated summary of the issue.

“Patrick and Jeff Order Breakfast at Denny’s” by WuzzaDem.

Reply

BumperStickerist December 23, 2009 at 4:03 am

and, as I saw the whole Tolstoy thing unfold. those were hella-long excerpts that were posted —

—————————–




































– see this sort of breaks up the flow



























Only longer.

and there were three or four excerpts.

What Patrick leaves unmentioned in that any number of people can/could comment as “Leo Tolstoy” – not just Patrick’s Defender “Leo Tolstoy”

I seem to recall a Glenn Greenwald expose on Patterico which featured Patrick looking at IP addresses and how anybody could post under any name.

.

Hmmmm … I wonder why Patrick forgot about that possibility.

Reply

Leo Tolstoy December 23, 2009 at 4:04 am

See what I mean?

Reply

Joe December 23, 2009 at 4:59 am

I posted a bunny at Patterico Pontifications and it lasted several hours till his crack team of stooges figured out I posted one here and at Protein Wisdom. That Patrick “Spamming Macht Frey”, it is hard to slip one past him!

Reply

timb December 23, 2009 at 9:52 am

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2009/10/meet-robert-stacy-mccain-neo.html

Joy, peep it out. The links to the source docs are there and you can spend a few days tracking them down.

Oh, and Pablo, don’t you still follow him around on the internet? Seems like we’re flip sides of a coin: me = right, smart, not lassoed to a psychopath who threatens to beat up folks; you, wrong, not smart, lassoed to a psychopath who threatens to assault people. Me, clarence darrow/you William Jennings Bryan. One of us won a battle (getting the one who p3wned Pablo banned from Goldstein land); the other won the war, as Protein Wisdom, much like the “career placed on hold,” withers to nothing.

Oh, and Pablo, don’t forget to turn the last light out. You and dicentra will be the last hero-worshipers torch carriers

Reply

Desert Cat December 23, 2009 at 4:41 pm

Horry carp, ma’am! You managed to attract this circus here too?

timb, has it occurred to you that there is, in fact, a substantial overlap between LMA and PW readership?

Some of you feared that Patrick was starting to lose it, a la Charles Johnson; you may have been more prescient than I realized at the time.

I was just thinking the same thing this morning as I drove in to work. Also comparing Andrew Sullivan’s sudden flip out a few years back.

I thought about posting on it, but really I loathe this kind of schoolyard drama crap, and certainly don’ t need to attract it to my site.

This whole thing played *directly* into one of Jeff’s major themes. Those of you who don’t get it, don’t want to get it at this point.

Reply

ponce December 23, 2009 at 4:49 pm

Yeah, any conservative who breaks with the looneys has “lost it.”

Sure they have.

Here we see a typical Palin/Beck teabagger “conservative” calling in to cspan in tears because he’s worried his prayers missed Robert Byrd and killed one of his own moronic senators:

http://wonkette.com/412908/we-did-everything-we-were-supposed-to-but-robert-byrd-is-still-alive

Reply

Pablo December 23, 2009 at 7:39 pm

Did you ever gull a bull, ponce?

Reply

Little Miss Attila December 23, 2009 at 7:44 pm

Ponce, you do know what a Moby is, don’t you?

My concern is that the ones who are trying to purge “loonies” are . . . a bit loony.

Reply

Pablo December 23, 2009 at 7:45 pm

Oh, and Pablo, don’t you still follow him around on the internet?

He’s a friend of mine and he has my respect, Timmah! You may be unfamiliar with the concept, but it’s well established. You could look it up or find someone you know that other people like and ask them. Meanwhile, what your deal again?

Oh, and Pablo, don’t forget to turn the last light out. You and dicentra will be the last hero-worshipers torch carriers

Don’t forget Ed.

Reply

Joe December 23, 2009 at 8:19 pm

Merry Christmas, belated Hanukkah, and Happy New Years to all.

Yes all.

Reply

Desert Cat December 23, 2009 at 8:47 pm

Yeah, any conservative who breaks with the looneys has “lost it.”

Any “conservative” who considers the likes of Jeff Goldberg, Robert Stacy McCain and the Tea Party Activists to be “looneys” has an incredibly tenuous grip on the title of “conservative”.

You are free to “break” right into the arms of the Democrat Party, if you so choose.

Reply

Looney Tunes December 24, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Pablo December 26, 2009 at 7:19 pm

Annnnnnnd…(insert drum roll)…ponce is an idiot.

Surprise, surprise, surprise.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: