Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Because of the TRANSPARENCY

Surprise! “Obama Town Hall Questioners Were Campaign Backers”:

[…] while the online question portion of the White House town hall was open to any member of the public with an Internet connection, the five fully identified questioners called on randomly by the president in the East Room were anything but a diverse lot. They included: a member of the pro-Obama Service Employees International Union, a member of the Democratic National Committee who campaigned for Obama among Hispanics during the primary; a former Democratic candidate for Virginia state delegate who endorsed Obama last fall in an op-ed in the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star; and a Virginia businessman who was a donor to Obama’s campaign in 2008.

Normally I’d be outraged.

— But then, normally it’s unusual for a person to look lost, confused, and beaten at a town hall meeting he’s had rigged in his favor.

Man. Does this dude ever suck.

(h/t IP)

267 Replies to “Because of the TRANSPARENCY”

  1. router says:

    But then, normally it’s unusual for a person to look lost, confused, and beaten

    smoking a joint might do that to you

  2. The Pragmatic Republicans says:

    But we love him anyway. God help us we do. We just can’t help ourselves. It’s almost like we’re statist Democrats or something.

  3. Sdferr says:

    Notice how Francke-Ruta says “[Obama] is taking a page from the Bush playbook, stocking his town hall Thursday with supporters” but then down the page demonstrates Bush hosting a signing ceremony to which Tom Sawner is invited and is months later cited by Bush as an example to be emulated? Does Francke-Ruta even hear the clang?

  4. drago says:

    Are you implying he sucks because of his skin colour?
    Watchit mister!

  5. It’s almost like we’re statist Democrats or something.

    Progressive Corporatists.

    (thanks to whoever linked this earlier today)

  6. Jeff G. says:

    Andy Levy is NOT my hero.

  7. serr8d says:

    – But then, normally it’s unusual for a person to look lost, confused, and beaten at a town hall meeting he’s had rigged in his favor.

    What? You’re not surprised he’s seemingly beaten? (Oh, and beaten. RACIST!)

    It’s as if you knew Obama was bound to fail or something.

    But I’ll warrant that even predicting His failure will be seen as worse than even the sin of hoping for it. Because you just didn’t give Him enough support.

  8. happyfeet says:

    Matthew Continetti is that NPR lickspittle for when David Brooks calls in and says he can’t make it cause of he has that not so fresh feeling.

  9. happyfeet says:

    If not, conservatives have a real opportunity to introduce a truly responsible vision of a welfare state that maximizes efficiency and growth.

    Next time I see this wanker in the hall I’m tripping him or something. He thinks he’s all Jared Padalecki and I’m sick of it.

  10. ccoffer says:

    ” And
    if the president persists in giving America a big and slothful government rather than a limited and energetic one, then it will be incumbent on Republicans and sensible Democrats in Congress to stop him.

    What the fucking fuck? What in the freaking ass fucking fuck is that supposed to mean?

    Slothful? Slothful?

  11. router says:

    if the president persists in giving America a big bigger and more slothful government

  12. ccoffer says:

    Mission Accomplished!

  13. Ella says:

    ccoffer, so you don’t support the “slothful” characterization? Is that what I’m getting?

  14. pdbuttons says:

    if my computer was down,as it was recently, and I couldn’t get
    another narrative- I would randomly pick 5 people and beat them up
    and ‘surprise-surprise’ Gomer Pyle
    they’d all be democrats
    what a co-ink-e-dink
    next week I’ll be pickin’ cattle futures

  15. Joe says:

    Chicago, Chicago…

  16. guinsPen says:

    sloth:

    1. The first big step on the road to the depths of deg-re-day… I say first, medicinal wine from a teaspoon.

    2. Then beer from a bottle.

  17. Joe says:

    I agree not that funny…

    But I am ashamed to admit I am kinda diggin cartoon Laura Ingram in a bikini. She is right up there with the Esurance girl.

  18. cynn says:

    Oh My God, he’s so offleash we need to call Animal Control!

  19. Jeff G. says:

    Leash? Racist.

  20. cynn says:

    What’s racist about a leash? Lash, I could strenuously object to.

  21. libocrat says:

    I think the town was named Obamingrad.

  22. Jeff G. says:

    Two words, cynn: Kunta Kinte

    or LeVar Burton. You choose.

  23. cynn says:

    Yes, ccoffer, slothful as in hanging upside down in trees. It’s the green approach.

  24. cynn says:

    Jeff is going all ancestral on me now. Or pop culture. Same thing.

  25. happyfeet says:

    So the vice president’s daughter is some kind of crack whore, so what? It’s not like she’s having a retarded baby or anything.

  26. router says:

    It’s the green approach.

    like turning out the lights

  27. happyfeet says:

    Ashley Biden, 27, who is a crack whore and social worker employed with the Delaware Department of Children, Youth and Families.

  28. cynn says:

    What? HF where do you get that?

  29. router says:

    Ashley Biden, 27, who is a crack whore and social worker employed with the Delaware Department of Children, Youth and Families.

    the bidens: work for the whatever state. hey hairplugs hows the ag/army son doing?

  30. happyfeet says:

    Drudge has it.

  31. cynn says:

    OK, par for the Bidens. I’ll take it on your say-so.

  32. happyfeet says:

    I feel just terrible for what that young woman must be going through. Barack could give her tips on how to get that monkey off her back, except that might could be racist.

  33. router says:

    OK, par for the Bidens. demorat, progressive, loser ,cock suckers

  34. You voted for him and the communist President in Training, cynn. Don’t try to walk it back now. OWN IT.

  35. Merovign says:

    The WaPo coverage was hilarious. It was like going through the motions of bashing Republicans and licking the sack of Democrats, but it was almost like they knew that it wouldn’t fool anyone so it was half-hearted.

  36. router says:

    the O! owns “debt monkey”

  37. happyfeet says:

    When you hear temptation call, it’s your heart what takes, takes a fall I think.

  38. cynn says:

    I’m not walking anything back. How could I? He’s offleash and therefore running off to shit in every yard and scare every cat. Seriously, yes, I voted for him, and he is dealing with a catastrophe unseen even five months ago. As for the boutique questions, I think they suck. Obama needs to kick his hip advisors to the back of the bus’s sidecar and quit trying to be the media president. He needs to get off the tubes and get the job done.

  39. happyfeet says:

    he is dealing with a catastrophe opportunity unseen even five months ago

  40. libocrat says:

    Great, so Biden’s daughter gets the first pardon.

  41. happyfeet says:

    Barack’s illegal immigrant aunt what sneaked into the country to steal welfares I thought got the first pardon, no?

  42. The Pragmatic Republicans says:

    Biden’s daughter? No, that’s okay. A little blow is a healthy thing for her, and a good example for the youth of America. Now if it were Palin’s daughter that would be a whole different kettle of fish. Cause that snow billy is just no damn good.

  43. cynn says:

    That’s totally sick, router. I would have at least expected an “Obama my Bama, the ship is something or other…” poem takeoff. But no, typical sick shit.

  44. happyfeet says:

    Good point, Mr. Pragmatic Republican guy. She’s sure a lot thinner than that Meghan one.

  45. The Pragmatic Republicans says:

    Hey, and how about some sympathy, fellas. You know how heroic it is to be a Moby -er- Pragmatic Republican.

  46. router says:

    and he is dealing with a catastrophe unseen even five months ago

    the O! missed the great TARP thing in OCT ’08. the dude knows everything don’tchaknow

  47. serr8d says:

    Hmmmph. Having to be ‘shopped’ to the media outlets. Had it been a Bush daughter, the media outlets would’ve clawed each other’s tickers out to get that story.

    This story might be an Edwards love child sort of delayed reaction.

  48. happyfeet says:

    oh. That was a Dan link from earlier today. Here is context so you understand more better about the provocative yet deeply humanizing art router linked.

  49. happyfeet says:

    oh. #53 is for cynn.

  50. cynn says:

    You know, he’s lying cold and dead and all…

  51. happyfeet says:

    This story might be an Edwards love child sort of delayed reaction.

    It’s like how we’re still in the dark about whether or not Dick Cheney’s daughter likes girls or boys.

  52. The Pragmatic Republicans says:

    And btw, as long as we’re talking media and films did the LA Tiomes every release that tape of Obama and Ayers listening to the Muslim extremist condemn Israel? No, I didn’t think so.

  53. Joe says:

    router, that prompted me asking yesterday if Honest Abe really was the rail spliter.

  54. Joe says:

    Don’t get me started about Ol’ Hickory.

  55. Sdferr says:

    Funny that it is conceivable that Obama is not getting the job done. Hilarious, in fact, since he’s doing exactly what he has always been moved to do. That his imagination and reality don’t happen to correspond has little to nothing to do with it. He just knows.

  56. serr8d says:

    That David Thompson link features a caged ape. RAcisT!

  57. Abraham Lincoln says:

    You damn right I was, son.

  58. cynn says:

    It’s still sick shit. And Obama has no business tapping only his supporters for commentary. Chickenshit.

  59. router says:

    teh stupidity rules

  60. serr8d says:

    tapping only his supporters

    Cynn, you brought teh ironical funny.

  61. cynn says:

    teh stupidity refers to something

  62. serr8d says:

    teh stupidity refers to something

    Approximately 53% of voters.

    Wonder what it would be today, if the lies weren’t told?

  63. Joe says:

    So called provocative art is mostly juvenile art. Painting presidents getting it on with the artist is less note worty than Nagel, or LeRoy Neiman, and dare I say she is not as good as even this guy.

  64. router says:

    teh stupidity refers to something

    maybe progressive/demorat artists having imaginary sex with dead people?

  65. cynn says:

    At least you nailed the culprit.

  66. Joe says:

    As far as Biden’s 27 year old daughter, I do not care as it pertains to Biden or the Administration (provided she gets no special treatment in her favor). She is an adult. Many people, Bush and Obama included, used cocaine on occasion in their youth (and many more have too and have not admitted it).

    I thought Michael Phelps got a raw deal for a bong hit (like a kid in his twenties should be a major media matter over a bong hit).

    It is just rather 80s for a twenty seven year old to be snorting cocaine.

  67. router says:

    I thought Michael Phelps got a raw deal for a bong hit

    winning is losing dontcha”know”

  68. happyfeet says:

    She works with children though, Joe. We need a full investigation I think. She might be getting her crack through her clients at the Delaware Department of Children, Youth and Families or she might even be hooking them on crack to support her habit. Also, it definitely raises the question whether Joe Biden can handle the pressures of office when his drug addict daughter is going to require so much love and support to get through this. All in all, this is very, very troubling news. If you don’t want to hear it from me I understand, just click over to Andrew Sullivan. He’s on top of the story and he’s asking the hard questions.

  69. serr8d says:

    It is better to fail in originality than to succeed in imitation.

    Obama just can’t stand to be compared to Carter, so he’ll want to redefine FAIL in his own high-drama fashion.

    No, a garden variety Hostage Crisis, some pre-teen double-digit inflation and vapid ‘energy conservation’ failures are just not good enough. Look for a major international crisis where we, the U.S., will wind up soundly routed; high-teen (or near-drinking age) hyperinflation, and Cap and Trade (Al Gore misanthropic) energy legislation to get Obama up to the level of epic FAIL we know he’s capable of.

    All in four years! The ‘Carter Challenge’!

  70. Barney Frank says:

    Did some one mention blow?

  71. Marion Barry says:

    Wrong kind of blow, man.

  72. router says:

    the U.S., will wind up soundly routed;

    i beg your pardon

  73. Jeff G. says:

    I thought Michael Phelps got a raw deal for a bong hit (like a kid in his twenties should be a major media matter over a bong hit).

    Poor kid. Imagine how much he could have accomplished as an athlete had he just stayed away from the wacky weed…

  74. […] in four years! The ‘Carter Challenge’! croxxed from home Posted by Serr8d @ 3:41 am | Trackback Share […]

  75. Marion Barry says:

    Well, it’s a good thing someone stepped in before he moved on to the hard stuff and ended up in Congress.

  76. pdbuttons says:

    j-lo dress-twenty machine loud guns
    amerikka-press one for english
    hilary painted christian icon…
    priceless

  77. happyfeet says:

    Kellogg’s hates hate hates Michael Phelps cause he ruined their image and now everyone thinks Snap and Crackle are some kind of junkies or something. I saw a lady at the supermarket pick up a box of Rice Krispies and you could see it in her face. These don’t taste good anymore. She sadly returned the box to its shelf. I gave her an understanding look and we just stood there silently in the cereal aisle for a moment, reflecting on the tragedy of it all, Dan Fogleberg’s Run for the Roses mocking us gently over the store’s sound system.

    it’s high time you joined in the dance

    Senseless. A damn waste.

  78. Jeff G. says:

    Funny, I’m feeling all “Leader of the Band”-ish these days,

  79. geoffb says:

    “He needs to get off the tubes and get the job done.”

    True belief will never say die.
    But it does get funnier as time goes by.

    Things should be side splitting by June.

  80. happyfeet says:

    Ashley Biden can help you out with that, what I hear.

  81. serr8d says:

    This’ll stimulate the spirits of the lost souls crying for their doses of BDS.

  82. Ella says:

    In fairness to cynn, we really are in an economic situation that was totally unseen five months ago because Baracky wasn’t President five months ago. And even I am startled at how quickly the tides have turned against him.

  83. Ella says:

    In fairness to cynn, we really are in an economic situation that was totally unseen five months ago because Baracky wasn’t President five months ago. And even I am startled at how quickly the tides have turned against him.

  84. Ella says:

    To clarify: I am not startled in the least at his sucky performance. I just didn’t think any Kool-Aid drinkers would have noticed by now, and a few of them have.

  85. Ella says:

    Double post!

  86. pdbuttons says:

    bbby orr

  87. Darleen says:

    Serr8d

    Yes, the MSM would luv its kangaroo court against Booooosh, rather than report yet more Obama foreign failures

    GORDON BROWN’S carefully laid plans for a G20 deal on worldwide tax cuts have been scuppered by an eve-of-summit ambush by European leaders.

    Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, last night led the assault on the prime minister’s “global new deal” for a $2 trillion-plus fiscal stimulus to end the recession.

    “I will not let anyone tell me that we must spend more money,” she said. […]

    The assault by European Union leaders also represents a defeat for President Barack Obama, who is desperate for other big economies to copy his $800 billion stimulus plan.

    Not to mention that Hillary is giving Joey Hairplugs a run for his money in the insultingly stupid remarks department.

  88. Seriously, yes, I voted for him, and he is dealing with a catastrophe unseen even five months ago.

    You think maybe he should’ve been, oh, I don’t know, be getting some people to work at the Treasury Department rather than flitting around from one contrived photo op to the next and spending a trillion dollars a week?

    I see that he finally appointed three more people to Treasury today. Three. That plus the previous three and TIMMEH himself makes seven people.

    Hint: that’s not enough. Especially not two months in to his administration during a catastophe.

    But hey, he’s getting plenty of face time on the fluff news programs and gossip magazines.

  89. happyfeet says:

    serr8d… it means something I think that the NYT didn’t just pick up the wire copy for that. Mr. Soros is still enthusiastic about his denazification project, and the marxist dipshit he put in our White House sure won’t defend American citizens from whatever judgment our moral betters in Europe seek to pronounce. More likely they’ll use the European case as a pretext for further “investigation” here, in America.

  90. Joe says:

    happyfeet, did you meantion what about the children?, well, as usual,that changes everything. Biden needs to leave office to care for his clearly troubled daughter.

    And if the Seventh Day Adventists at Kelloggs do not care for indulging in the ganja every now and again, I know some marketing people at Taco Bell, White Castle and Krispy Kreme that can fill the breach. Twenty year olds smoking dope are their target demographic.

  91. psycho... says:

    I’m feeling all “Leader of the Band”-ish these days

    I was sneak-attacked by a Herb Alpert/Kenny G woodly-dee hotel lobby version of that in a hotel lobby a couple days ago.

    The world’s gone ass.

    a catastrophe unseen even five months ago

    Except by everyone who did it. And Ron Paul. RACISTVISION

  92. happyfeet says:

    also Jack in the Box tacos and assorted Little Debbie snack cakes and any number of frozen pizza brands would be proud to have Mr. Phelps’ imprimatur

  93. Marion Barry says:

    Snap, Crackle and Pop are junkies. Trust me on this one.

  94. Patrick Kennedy says:

    Marion is right, but you didn’t hear it from me.

  95. Patrick Kennedy says:

    Those little sumbitches will hurt you…

  96. Didn’t Soros work for the Nazis himself as a kid?

    It’s like Robert Byrd calling for “deklanification”.

  97. serr8d says:

    Ahhh, the Times Online gets it’s snub on M’Chelle…follow Darleen’s link to Obama’s foreign failures, then click the Java pop-up slide show titled ‘G20 Wags’ (wives and gals?). M’Chelle is flatterened at #17.

  98. Sdferr says:

    Hey happyfeet, you pick up on details aplenty, so do you know why my nic is sdferr?

    Or, I just got an e-mail a bit ago from Patterico, who wanted to know: “Do you approve of Goldstein’s outing of my commenters, using his knowledge of their e-mail addresses, left in comments on his site?”

    And I’m thinking, wtf is this about? Oh yeah, there was that Fritz guy about five days ago who got bent out of shape when Jeff asked him if he was so and so, that he liked to know who he was talking to when people started ordering him around.

    It’s kinda funny to me that Pat would ask, since if he’d read that thread he’d have noticed I didn’t hold Fritz in to high a regard. I even went so far as to refer to him as a “dishonest putz” if I recall correctly. But then I’m wondering whether Pat sees in me a sort of analog to Fritz, since my nic and my name (Stephen Ferrell) aren’t that far apart and maybe Pat wonders how I’d feel were I in Fritz’s shoes? Or I don’t know what the fuck (as I said) Pat has in mind. Interesting though, no?

  99. Dash Rendar says:

    This is precisely the angle we want to take:

    “Perhaps the best news in yesterday’s speech is that Mr. Obama has now taken ownership of this war. One lesson he can learn from Iraq is that — as hard as the fighting may get and as vociferous as the opposition at home may become — Mr. Obama now has an obligation to stay the course until our soldiers can return home in victory and with honor.”

    He has squandered himself onto our turf. I suggest we teach him a thing or two.

  100. Joe says:

    Soros was in his early teens and survived by posing as a Christian. To say he did little in helping fellow Jews is a fair statement. Soros admits he looked at the experience as one about being prepared and market “winners” and “losers”. Soros says he felt zero guilt and that may be true, the man may be a sociopath.

    Without more evidence I would hestiate to call him a Nazi collaborator for doing what it took to survive in a terrible period. Nevertheless, Soros always seemed to me to be the inspiration of this character.

  101. Jeff G. says:

    Okay, more info on a certain somebody who is planning a big “nuclear” post on the “REAL JEFF GOLDSTEIN.” Evidently he’s contacting a number of people who comment at both sites. I don’t know if he’s contacting other bloggers or not, but clearly he is using his time off to “build a case against me.”

    As I noted before, I’m not sure how I’ll react to this other than I’ll probably go off the radar for a while. The last thing I want to do everyday is have to defend myself against personal attacks from the left and right.

    Some of you have either met me in person or talked to me on the phone. Others of you have been commenting here for years and so know far more about me than this person who is presuming to tell the world about the “real” me.

    I’m hoping in my absence you will defend my name and carry on with what I’ve always tried to do on this site, namely advocate for a government that sticks to the founding principles of this country.

    I expected there to be arguments and debates when I started this; what I didn’t on was an intellectual culture so corrupted that a strong argument is, to the person whose “honor” it wounds, a hanging offense.

    Sadly, No! has already put together a post about my supposed deviancy. A post from a “respectable” right winger will essentially ensure that I’m marginalized (well, when taken together with how a few other high profile bloggers have likewise decided to make sure I’m marginalized).

    I’m not going to let blogging ruin the rest of my life. But I will say this: though I’ll likely leave this playing field, the person who is preparing his attack on me had better know that this site will stay up, including it’s archives. Others will be given the keys. And I will be spending my time — most of which we know is spent on my ass dreaming of ways to destroy someone’s honor, really giving that a go this time.

    As Joshua reminds us, the only winning move is not to play.

    Let’s hope it doesn’t get that far — although now I’m pretty certain it will.

  102. Darleen says:

    Or, I just got an e-mail a bit ago from Patterico, who wanted to know: “Do you approve of Goldstein’s outing of my commenters, using his knowledge of their e-mail addresses, left in comments on his site?”

    What the Fuck? Exactly where is it written that one is allowed to remain anonymous when attacking? How is that “outting”?

    Has Pat Frey really lost that last bit of his cottonpickin MIND?

  103. Sdferr says:

    Heh, it only remains for me to try to figure out whether he’s Meletus or Anytus in my mind’s play. I’m leaning toward Anytus since the story had Meletus a poet of sorts and there ain’t nothing poetic about this guy. And too, Anytus was a crazy democrat type, he just hated the Oligarchs.

  104. Jeff G. says:

    Don’t think he isn’t getting help, Darleen.

  105. Sdferr says:

    Did you get to meet Fritz the other night Darleen? Seems to me like you popped in a bit later in that thread or do I misremember?

  106. happyfeet says:

    just got back … sdferr – I don’t get your nic… it just makes me think vaguely of iron… I don’t get slart’s either for that matter –

  107. Darleen says:

    Sdferr

    I may have seen the name but I certainly didn’t pay attention.

    Which thread? I need to go study these wanna-be usurpers.

  108. Jeff G. says:

    Slart’s comes from Hitchhiker’s Guide.

  109. Sdferr says:

    Here you go Dar.

    That whole outing thing has always seemed a bit stretchy to me, given that the way Jeff posed the question had the guy ignored it or had he simply prevaricated, as he’d been doing right along since the moment he joined the thread, no one outside of Jeff and him would have had any way to decide the question one way or the other. So in a sense, he participated in his own exposure twice.

  110. Sdferr says:

    I think the ferr or farr part of the name is an Irish(Gaelic?) cognate to the Latin vir- root.

  111. louchette says:

    @107 … build a case of what? i mean i know you don’t know. but this is just retarded, what they call grudge wank. i can’t speak for anyone else, but probably anything such people might ‘expose’ would make me laugh, maybe make me like you more. like that ancient sadly no! post did. i hope it doesn’t get that far, but if it does yes put your rl (and family) safety and sanity and not life ruining stuff first.

    this shit makes me sad tho. sad and angry. even the troll and wank and wtf_ communities i’m in frown upon and boot people for crossing the line and screwing with people’s ‘real lives.’ and it’s all a big distraction from fighting the dirty socialists too. =/

  112. happyfeet says:

    I don’t think there will be any posts that are ugly in a Sadly No kind of way. I just … I’m concerned if a forthcoming post is framed like that ahead of time, and then if a post in re to whatever extent were to be published, it might be sort of one of those self-fulfilling thingers in terms of how people perceive that post. It might could just be a post about the debate that’s been going on.

    “Do you approve of Goldstein’s outing of my commenters, using his knowledge of their e-mail addresses, left in comments on his site?”

    This is troubling though cause the one I remember was never outed per se. Is there a reason that question would be in the plural? That said, outing people is one of those things that could easily have consequences far exceeding the provocation. Especially when so much of our little country is in the thrall of a narcissistic socialist what is petty and vindictive and arrogant and who commands a media that’s certainly no less so.

    >>>

    I still don’t get where sdferr comes from, exactly

  113. Jeff G. says:

    I guess I’m mean and evil and the world needs to know.

    And I guess this person has a few online accomplices who’d like to see that happen.

  114. happyfeet says:

    the Nordic fjords I think are one of those must-see things. I wonder if they let you go in winter? I would like to see them in winter.

  115. Sdferr says:

    The whole case business is a bit of douchebaggery or what, stupendous dickitude, something like that, I think. As though some great harm has befallen the dishonest putz Fritz the caring helper that a handful of blog commenters were exposed to his name, let alone his carping dissembling in that thread, fer fucks sake.

    [hf, first name stephen, second name begins with d, paternal name ferrell)

  116. B Moe says:

    Does anybody really take SadlyNo seriously? Or Balloon Juice? Andrew Sullivan?

    You are known by the company you keep.

  117. happyfeet says:

    no, you are not mean and evil. I feel like watching that shoes thing again. brb.

    oh. got it, sdferr.

  118. Jeff G. says:

    BMoe —

    People doing a search on your name come across that stuff. Chances are they don’t know what Sadly, No! is, but hey, if it’s “published”…

    That’s what somebody hopes to do here. And happy’s wrong. Like I said, I’ve been contacted by a number of people already. The word “nuclear” is not mine.

  119. happyfeet says:

    jeez. It’s up to 25 million views. That is many views.

  120. Lesley says:

    Are you now or have you ever been a supporter of Protein Wisdom?

    Oh goodie. A blogosphere blacklisting. Actually, that’s fine by me. I think OUTLAWS look better in black hats. Easier to pick us out that way.

  121. happyfeet says:

    I’m not wrong exactly I’m just naive sometimes and I do the denial thing. Also that guy said he wasn’t going to post nothing nuclear. Or maybe I read him wrong. But all day I’ve been thinking that everything was going to be fine. Okay don’t be mad but to be honest I asked someone if maybe there was some forthcoming post and someone said my fears, they were misplaced. I think I’m going to watch that shoes thing again.

  122. Molon Labe says:

    Jeff, be sure to track down the thread a couple weeks ago where Paterrico goes non-linear when some anon dude attacked him here in your forum. He called him out demanding that he post his real name, etc.

    Also, Darleen, if not too late suggest you do not answer his email. Consider that the fake “poll” he conducted was completely contrived just so that he could say “See, I got answers for both #1 and #2, so clearly Limbaugh was being unclear”. Cheap trick.

  123. Jeff G. says:

    I don’t remember that, honestly.

  124. Darleen says:

    Sdferr

    Ah, I remember now. I only dropped into that thread for a bit. Fritz was being particularly annoying, confrontational and disengenuous. Just like Bradley was dishonest.

  125. Molon Labe says:

    Can u search? Dude’s name was “landstander” or something like that. I responded in that thread also. Initially with a juvenile attack on Patterico then agreeing that he had a point about anon attacks.

  126. Jeff G. says:

    Oh, okay. I don’t remember when that was, but I can probably find it. Thanks.

  127. Molon Labe says:

    damn i shooda kept this on the down low. he’ll have to re-lawyerify his line of attack now.

  128. happyfeet says:

    oh. that link’s gone all 404 on me but if you go over there and follow the url path the post is still there

  129. Darleen says:

    Molon

    Pat or minions have not emailed me. I don’t think they will, they were quite happy to slam me in sexist, classist ways at Pat’s when I had the audicity to challenge them. I’m not on the Pragmatic Republican list.

  130. Sdferr says:

    Molon, Darleen was quoting me upthread, is the confusion here.

  131. Molon Labe says:

    oh sorry darleeen it was sdferr that got the email…anyway it’s likely a trap and suggest not responding…mistake likely due to situation as reported in email sent to your web site address

  132. happyfeet says:

    here is that thing Molon was talking about I think.

  133. happyfeet says:

    good memory on the name

  134. As near as Google can tell, that landstander person was never on here before the Patterico debacle, and hasn’t been back since.

    My money would be on a troll that Patterico has angered at his own site, who then saw his chance to come over here and talk smack.

    Much like TIMMEH and SEK at Patterico’s place.

  135. Sdferr says:

    yep, hf and it began here just above your cite. An ugly one that one.

  136. Sdferr says:

    Heh, I wonder, had Jeff been around during landstander’s visit whether landstander would have gotten the treatment, IYKWIMAITYD?

  137. Sdferr says:

    Dan certainly didn’t abide landstander’s nonsense in that thread.

  138. lina says:

    i don’t often comment on blogs but i must say that i used to be a big fan of patterico and recently have found him falling in the leftist guilt trap…and after finding this site i can’t even bring myself to look at his anymore…it’s like he got a brain transplant…or maybe the lawyer in him took over..either way no me gusta

  139. SarahW says:

    Do you approve of Goldstein’s outing of my commenters, using his knowledge of their e-mail addresses, left in comments on his site?”

    Why yes, yes I do. Although i have to point out that sometimes all that is needed is the commenting name, nothing more. I think Patterico might have less than the usual clue about how sloppy people are with their attempts at super-sekritness. In fact sometimes they post whole blogs worth of “278,000 things about me”. “Outing” is probably not even the right word for it, since they aren’t really in any locked closet.

  140. SarahW says:

    “See, I got answers for both #1 and #2, so clearly Limbaugh was being unclear”. Cheap trick.

    It wasn’t a cheap trick, it was a thinking error.

    We all know it [Rush’s statement] was meant to drive people’s GSR up, that it had that happy quality of shockah! followed by qualification, that whips heads around and pay attention. It was deliberate and appropriate, though Patterico obviously disagreed, thinking the important soft middle persuadable minds would be confused, and that powerful media aiding that confusion are too powerful to mess with like that.

    He confused deliberate strategic ambiguity and impropriety with “lack of clarity”.

    Second, he was arguing from an entirely different premise from what Jeff was trying to drive home at the time: It had nothing to do with the premise that the intention of the speaker is not altered or determined by reactions to the message sent,

  141. SarahW says:

    Sdferr – Ferrells of “Contention?” and Matthews Co? I just know some is all.

  142. Molon Labe says:

    You are taking the poll literally. The poll question was irrelevent. All that mattered was that at least one person answer differently from the others. The whole point of it was to then take that apparent ambiguity and bolster his argument about clarity of expression, yada yada.

    This fact occurred to me immediately after I voted in his stupid poll. But at least my “#1, obviously” made it to like Instapundit or some shit.

  143. SarahW says:

    #150, and to get that result, he relies, I again assert, on the underlying strategic ambiguity of Rush’s remarks. He was perfectly clear in context, but one had to allow for the double meanin implicit, as in a joke.

  144. SarahW says:

    double meaning implicit in the four word phrase ” i hope he fails”, that is.

  145. SarahW says:

    The remark by design was meant to get your notice. Not only was it startling to have someone come out as say what others would dance around to avoid saying, but it makes you want to know what he meant by it. And Rush then tells you. ( His policies are the ruin of America, so to hope for his success is to hope America fails)

  146. Molon Labe says:

    No argument from me in re Limbaugh.

    My point is that Patterico didn’t email that question without knowing an answer he wanted to get back and what he would do with it once he got it. He’s a lawyer for chrissakes. They never ask questions they don’t know the answer to.

    As an example, I mentioned the arftully contrived faux-poll intended merely to buttress his point about clarity.

    Just watch. He’ll probably twist your “in [the] closet” remark into a homophobic rant.

  147. SarahW says:

    I’ve had my fill of this blog fight. It was stupid at the start and its stupider now. Not the policy rants or the intellectual questions, but the fucking personal-ness of it, and the descent into reputation-wrecking and nasty slaps back and forth.

    JeffG – Can you take down the stupid “patrick Frey has no honor” post? Because I hate it. Even if you hold it deeply true, and want to shout it from rooftops, I don’t want to see stuff like that, it’s ugly. And it’s just beneath you.

  148. SDN says:

    The problem, SarahW, is that this is another standard Left tactic Patterico is using: Stand there shouting something that isn’t true no matter how someone shows it isn’t. It eventually gets wearing, and is one reason I don’t debate Leftists anymore. Unfortunately, Patterico is about to achieve what Leftists want with this tactic, which is to get Jeff to throw up his hands in disgust and decide the whole thing isn’t worth the hassle.

  149. Joe says:

    Normally I’d be outraged.

    – But then, normally it’s unusual for a person to look lost, confused, and beaten at a town hall meeting he’s had rigged in his favor.

    Man. Does this dude ever suck.

    Someone call the Secret Service, there must be something threatening about that statement.

    As to Sarah W, out of context I agree the whole Patterico flap does seems over the top. Disagreeing forcefully with Jeff G is fine. Patterico could have done that and I would respect it. But Patterico went the next step, in a manner very much following the tactics of the left, and made a false personal attack against Jeff G. I suspect it was a moment of anger, but rather than admitting his mistake he stuck with it (he is still saying that Jeff’s comments might have been a death threat to nk (may he live forever). If it had to choose character flaws, the one Patterico displayed would definitely be at the bottom of any list.

  150. LTC John says:

    “Poor kid. Imagine how much he could have accomplished as an athlete had he just stayed away from the wacky weed…”

    And the entire NBA from the 1960s to just about 5 minutes ago. However, having sold his image for the squeeky clean-ness, and the selling of the cereals, he committed one of the classic blunders…

    Another fine week from the current Administration – Smart Diplomacy and Transparency abound. I might not sleep well until I retire from the Army…

  151. B Moe says:

    LOL! Key quotes from the thread ‘feets and Sdferr link:

    Comment by Patterico on 3/9 @ 2:15 am #

    Now I hasten to add: my argument applies only to those foolish enough to issue challenges about manliness on the Internet.

    Because I don’t pretend to be Mr. Manly. All I’m saying is: it’s known who I am. I give Jeff the same credit. But some anony-pussy named “landstander” . . . sorry. It’s hard to take his chest-beating seriously when he makes accusations about bravery but doesn’t even have the stones to identify himself.

    If you’re commenting anonymously, cool — as long as you’re not accusing a guy of being a “nancy-boy” who puts his name out there. That, to me, is the height of being a pussy.

    Anyone with a name and address is free to disagree. (Anyone with a phony name and no address is also free to disagree and be shown to be laughably hypocritical.)

    Comment by Patterico on 3/9 @ 2:17 am #

    Retardo has invaded Protein Wisdom.

    What a fucking fraud this one is!

    ALL HAIL RETARDO!

  152. Joe says:

    Okay, more info on a certain somebody who is planning a big “nuclear” post on the “REAL JEFF GOLDSTEIN.” Evidently he’s contacting a number of people who comment at both sites. I don’t know if he’s contacting other bloggers or not, but clearly he is using his time off to “build a case against me.”

    I am happy to defend. But you will have to respond, to any such attack–even if it is only seting the record straight yet again.

  153. B Moe says:

    And speaking of outing anonymous pussies, isn’t it about time somebody found out who this piece of shit is?

    https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=14614#comment-687110

  154. geoffb says:

    I got the impression on that thread that Patterico knew/suspected who landstander was. Perhaps a commenter he had banned from his site in the past. The RETARDO and JOSH things seemed to aim that way.

  155. […] more at the link; hat tip to Jeff Goldstein, who got it from Glenn […]

  156. Joe says:

    Jeff:
    Dear Prosecutor Patterico,
    You gotta understand,
    It’s just our bringin’ up-ke
    That gets us out of hand.
    Our mothers all are junkies,
    Our fathers all are drunks.
    Golly Moses, natcherly we’re punks!

    PW regulars:
    Gee, Prosecutor Patterico, we’re very upset;
    We never had the love that ev’ry child oughta get.
    We ain’t no delinquents,
    We’re misunderstood.
    Classical liberalism really is good!

    There is good!

    There is good, there is good,
    Classical liberalism good!
    Like inside, the worst of us is good!

    Patterico: (Spoken) Did I hear a Death Threat?

    Jeff: (Spoken) Lemme tell it to the world!

    Patterico: Just tell it to the Johnson!

    Jeff:
    Dear kindly Charles Johnson,
    My parents treat me rough.
    With all their marijuana,
    They won’t give me a puff.
    They didn’t wanna have me,
    But somehow I was had.
    Leapin’ lizards! That’s why I’m so bad!

    Charles Johnson: Right!

    Prosecutor Patterico, you’re really a square;
    Jeff don’t need a judge, he needs an analyst’s care!
    It’s just his neurosis that oughta be curbed.
    Jeff’s psychologic’ly disturbed!

    PW Regulars:
    I’m disturbed!

    We’re disturbed, we’re disturbed,
    We’re the most disturbed,
    Like we’re psychologic’ly disturbed.

    Charles Johnson: (Spoken, as Judge) In the opinion on this court, Jeff is depraved on account he ain’t had a normal home.

    PW regulars: (Spoken) Hey, I’m depraved on account I’m deprived.

    Charles Johnson: So take him to a headshrinker.

    PW regulars (Sings)
    My father is a bastard,
    My ma’s an S.O.B.
    My grandpa’s always plastered,
    My grandma pushes tea.
    My sister wears a mustache,
    My brother wears a dress.
    Goodness gracious, that’s why I’m a mess!

    Allah: (As Psychiatrist) Yes!
    Prosecutor Patterico, you’re really a slob.
    Jeff don’t need a doctor, just a good honest job.
    Society’s played him a terrible trick,
    And sociologic’ly he’s sick!

    PW regulars
    I am sick!

    We are sick, we are sick,
    We are sick, sick, sick,
    Like we’re sociologically sick!

    Allah: In my opinion, Jeff don’t need to have his head shrunk at all. Juvenile delinquency is purely a social disease!

    Jeff: Hey, I got a social disease!

    Allah: So take him to a social worker!

    Jeff:
    Dear kindly social worker,
    They say go earn a buck.
    Like be a Pragmatic Republican,
    Which means like be a schumck.
    It’s not I’m anti-social,
    I’m only anti-that.
    Gloryosky! You lose if you do that!

    nk: (As Female Social Worker)
    Eek!
    Prosecutor Patterico, you’ve done it again.
    Goldstein don’t need a job, he needs a year in the pen.
    It ain’t just a question of misunderstood;
    Deep down inside him, he’s no good!

    Jeff
    I’m no good!

    PW regulars
    We’re no good, we’re no good!
    We’re no earthly good,
    Like the best of us is no damn good!

    Charles Johnson (As Judge)
    The trouble is he’s crazy.

    Allah (As Psychiatrist)
    The trouble is he drinks.

    daleycocks(As Female Social Worker)
    The trouble is he’s lazy.

    Charles Johnson
    The trouble is he stinks.

    Allah
    The trouble is he’s growing.

    daleycocks
    The trouble is he’s grown.

    ALL
    Patterico, we got troubles of our own!

    Gee, Prosecutor Patterico,
    We’re down on our knees,
    ‘Cause no one wants a fellow with a social disease.
    Gee, Prosecutor Patterico,
    What are we to do?
    Gee, Prosecutor Patterico…

    Pattrick Frey has no honor, in my opinion!

  157. Heh. Good one Joe.

  158. Of course, since you apparently seem overly familiar with a musical we’re going to have to put you under suspicion NTTAWWT.

  159. Ella says:

    The “Service Employees International Union”? Wasn’t that the union that Blago was trying to leverage to get a position for his wife in exchange for selling Obama’s senate seat?

  160. Jeff G. says:

    It’s beneath me to answer back charges that I made threats of violence? That I “ducked” an argument I didn’t duck? That I was set up, so that there can now exist an entire thread attacking me personally in which I wasn’t permitted to defend myself — and in which others pretending dispassion ruled on my honesty?

    How so? The post you wish me to take down was open — unlike someone’s “last word” post (no comments allowed), the thread that was shut down once I made my “death threat,” and the thread in which people were encouraged to defends someone’s honor after I had been banned for said “death threat” or “threat of violence,” etc. Tell me: are you calling for those threads to be removed as well?

    Two things: there is a charge against me of a “death threat” and a “threat of violence” that I believe was false and that I wasn’t allowed to answer by facing my accuser(s); there is a charge against me that I somehow “ducked” questions that would have pressured my arguments about meaning and intent (these last two having now been picked up by noted conservatives SEK and Thirstytitties).

    These charges are false and, I believe, the person who leveled them knew them to be so but saw wiggle room to argue otherwise. He should correct the record.

    Instead, I hear rumors that he will be looking for other instances of my having issued physical challenges to commenters to prove that it is “reasonable” to believe I was doing so in this particular context (which it is clear I was not).

    This doubling down will be offered as proof of something I’ve never denied — and the very fact that they can be plucked from my archives should be proof that when I actually do call someone out, I don’t leave much doubt about it. Instead, these will be marshaled — yet again — to give someone cover for reasonable doubt about my comments on another site.

    I don’t walk around exclaiming my integrity. I try to act in a way that allows me to earn it. So far, those who have loudest protested my evilness have been people on the left who have a vested interest in trying to marginalize me as a precursor to any argument I may enter into.

    But because I am often bawdy and ironic and plainspoken, or because I occasionally lapse into despair or self pity, it is easy to suggest that I’m the real lout here.

    Fine. But why would I let such suggestions stand? And do you really think there would have been a separate post about my public lynching had I not been frozen out from defending myself in person?

    Once the record is corrected, we can discuss removing my post. Until then, it is all I have by way of argument against the charges that were leveled against me.

  161. steveaz says:

    Obama is a “bubble President.”

    Think about it: his campaign began during and played on the psychy of a population experiencing a severe economic bubble. His media handlers afforded him their support during a bubble. His foreign benefactors tossed millions at his election due to a bubble. And the classist and racist demagogues that comprise his domestic base in the cities (aka Urban Community Organizations) nurse political prognoses derived in reaction to a bubble.

    (This may be why much of Obama’s budget amounts to re-inflating the “bubble.)

    As such, now that the bubble has popped, what’s a bubble-President supposed to do? He can’t really cut the military budget with NK popping rockets off. And, if he just prints money, then he generates even more impetus for an alternative reserve currency.

    Like I said. Trapped in a bubble. Bubble. President.

    Alas, post-bubble…If I was him, I’d lower the capital gains tax rate, instate a flat income tax-rate (17% for starters), and tax fat university endowments (If Harvard matched its alumni’s welfarist yens she would not hold hundreds of millions in reserves).

    Bubbles suck!

  162. But because I am often bawdy and ironic and plainspoken

    That, there, is why I read you. And, I disagree with Sarah on taking down the post.

  163. Jeff G. says:

    Another thing: you don’t think I want to see this ended?

    I’m not the one spending time emailing people loaded questions. I’m not keeping this going behind the scenes. I’m not threatening to “go nuclear” on anyone.

    There is a simple fix to this: correct the record. I don’t care about bans. I do care that a DDA is on public record as saying I made a “death threat” or a “threat of violence,” and that I refused to answer his queries. My post was a defense.

    Were the charges corrected, there’d be no need for that public response, would there?

    Evidently, though, it is easier to double down at my expense rather than admit to having made a couple of baseless charges in anger.

  164. Joe says:

    Instead, I hear rumors that he will be looking for other instances of my having issued physical challenges to commenters to prove that it is “reasonable” to believe I was doing so in this particular context (which it is clear I was not).

    Well I am glad we were not a nation of Patterico’s when WWII broke out, or Jeez, we might be speaking German and Japanese now.

  165. Joe says:

    I want to see it end too. I want to see the emphasis on fighting what is turning out to be a series of potentially crippling economic policies on this country by Team Obama. So rather than worrying about whether Rush is too mean, or Jeff is threatening some anonmous douchebag, how about taking the fight back to where it belongs.

  166. serr8d says:

    Jeff, don’t take down that post. Don’t ever change.

    This Patterico fellow is, if he is truly preparing a ‘nuclear’ post, opening himself up to an avalanche of protest. He may not want to go there.

    I mean, DDA in LA isn’t so much a tenured position, now is it?

  167. Jeff G. says:

    If you happen to be a “protein wisdom regular” who has emailed a certain someone about concerns over my mental state and about how unfairly you believed I treated a certain someone, prepare to have your emails published.

    Not by me; I don’t have them. But by someone far more honorable than I. Oh. And thanks it advance for trying to play both sides of the fence.

  168. Dan Collins says:

    You know, at one point I had some lefty accusing me of being some Dan Collins who’s a high-up NSC person. He was convinced.

  169. MarkD says:

    “Do you approve of Goldstein’s outing of my commenters, using his knowledge of their e-mail addresses, left in comments on his site?”

    Why yes, I do. I’ve never written anything I don’t stand behind and neither should they.

    Why not use my full name then? I’m also in the phone book, I wouldn’t care for my wife or kids to be bothered by people who don’t know how to disagree on issues without being disagreeable. You know, like the a$$holes who key cars that bear bumper stickers with messages they disagree with. Some people are less than honorable. Is this cowardly, or common sense? More the latter than the former I think, but insult away. My Drill Instructors have made me immune.

    I actually got an insulting e-mail once from someone who read my comment at a site that did show the e-mail addresses. It was pretty funny, since it made no sense whatsoever, given that it didn’t even mention a subject. I had no idea what he objected to, but I suppose it was cathartic for him.

    Patterico strikes me as both slightly unhinged, and the sort of man who gives the legal profession a bad name. He disagrees with Jeff, but isn’t doing much to convince anyone that he might be right. It’s good for him that I’ll never be on any of his juries.

  170. B Moe says:

    If you happen to be a “protein wisdom regular” who has emailed a certain someone about concerns over my mental state and about how unfairly you believed I treated a certain someone, prepare to have your emails published.

    Dude those emails I sent to PETA about the ‘dillo, it was a joke. I was drunk. It was somebody hacking my account.

  171. SarahW says:

    “You don’t think I want to see this ended?”

    Wanting and gettingare two different things (as I have daily proof.)

    I’m with Joe at #174.

  172. Sdferr says:

    I got another e-mail from Patterico this a.m., in response to the fact that I’d revealed the contents of that last one in this thread. Patterico now says:

    I see that the ethic of Protein Wisdom is that every e-mail previously thought private is actually public.

    This will be interesting then. Surely, since you and Jeff and Pablo feel feel to share and publish private communications, you’ll have no criticism of me if I start publishing e-mails from Protein Wisdom regulars worried about Jeff’s mental state; talking about how unfairly he treated me; etc.?

    OK then. You set the standard. I’m just following it. Thanks!

    The ethic of Protein Wisdom, eh? That’s interesting all right. I put the contents of that first e-mail here, but it’s funny, I don’t think I’m Protein Wisdom nor do I think I set any standard for Protein Wisdom (god help us all should that catastrophe ever come to pass).

    Thought private? Huh. Once it is in my possession, I’d have thought it was mine to do with as I choose, unless some agreement to the contrary had been obtained. Which, as far as I can recollect, no such agreement took place, nor was the subject ever broached, so little was it “thought”.

    And you know [I’m just speculating here] from the insouciance of the sign-off, I’ve half a mind to think that this could have been the point of the first e-mail to begin with. Push a little over here, watch the consequences over there, note them and use them to some calculated advantage. Maybe. Feels like. But then I think I’ve always been as easy mark for manipulation that way.

  173. Slartibartfast says:

    1) I don’t give a rat’s ass if anyone finds out my name, but it would tend to make me go find another pseud. Plus, the person who put it out there would then become my enemy, if they weren’t already.
    2) I don’t care whether or not Jeff has any sort of mental problems; he’s still thinking and writing more clearly than those who disagree with him.
    3) So, why shouldn’t we have a war of ideas instead of a concerted effort to stifle them?

    I’m guessing the answer to that last is: someone wants to win, but win by doing violence to Jeff’s credibility rather than to his ideas. It won’t work, as far as I’m concerned.

  174. Darleen says:

    Serr8d

    If LA County is like my county then, yes, dda is like a tenured position. Pat would have to break policy of the county or state bar to get bounced and, no, a blog fight – even with Pat coming dangerously close to libel (and he will make sure not to actually cross that line, you have already seen it with his ‘qualifications’, thin and sneering as they are) – is not going to come close to interfering with his job.

    IMO, this has nothing to do with him job. I certainly hope no one would go to my employer over blog posts/comments.

    The thread where Pat is angry at the “land”guy over the term “nancyboy” is instructive. Pat himself isn’t “above” calling out someone he thinks insulted him PERSONALLY.

  175. This will be interesting then. Surely, since you and Jeff and Pablo feel feel to share and publish private communications, you’ll have no criticism of me if I start publishing e-mails from Protein Wisdom regulars worried about Jeff’s mental state; talking about how unfairly he treated me; etc.?

    He’s made this charge a few times. PW regulars? Yea sure.

    Regardless, unless said emails were published in their entirety, I wouldn’t exactly trust Patt’s presentation; that they weren’t taken out of context, or edited to make it appear what it’s not. Especially given Patterico’s “I hope he fails” interpretation.

  176. Slartibartfast says:

    You set the standard. I’m just following it. Thanks!

    Ah, I see. This points to a kind of moral flexibility that makes chinese acrobats look positively wooden.

  177. guinsPen says:

    From that thread:

    70. Comment by bobby b on 3/9 @ 3:07 am

    I’ve not spent much time in PW lately – too many things going on – but I wandered over tonight, and got some cognitive dissonance blown right into both eyes.

    Is this landstander guy with his in-your-face homophobia representative of where things have gone over here? ‘Cuz, this ain’t pretty at all, and a conversation about the utility of Rush becomes a bit . . . rich . . . in this context.

    […]

    76. Comment by Patterico on 3/9 @ 3:11 am

    “Is this landstander guy with his in-your-face homophobia representative of where things have gone over here?”

    Oh, bobby b, you’ve missed A LOT.

    […] calling people “pussies” is the ORDER OF THE DAY.

    ‘Cause EVERYONE’s tough on the Internet.

    OUTLAW!

  178. Dan Collins says:

    I’m one of those people who communicated with Pat. I told him that Jeff had been treated for anxiety and represented as unhinged as a result of making that public. I complained about the way that both of them kept the quarrel going, as well, though I made it clear that I sided with Jeff on the language issues.

    Plenty of my comments are available for viewing, and in response to one of Pat’s complaints, that people were too afraid of Jeff to make the same complaints that they had in emails to him to his face, I said that he could post anything that I’d written to him. And so he can. If he does, I’ll simply post the whole conversation, so that we have full context.

  179. Darleen says:

    landstander makes one appearance here is it like A TREND!!1!1!

    but nk …. who not only attacked Jeff’s family but commenting on Jack Dunphy’s post about the 4 Oakland cops gunned down by murderer Mixon, expressed condolences and sadness for MIXSON’s death.

    That’s the kind of indecent person Pat is calling “friend.”

    But then, again, nk has a “real job” and doesn’t sit around on his ass all day.

    I wonder how much Pat shares his real views on SAH parenting with HIS family?

  180. Sdferr says:

    but nk …. who not only attacked Jeff’s family

    Wasn’t nk the guy who had a strenuous objection to a posting (not by Jeff) that merely linked to a story about the Congress cutting off vouchers in the District, thus affecting classmates of the Obama children at Sidwell, so appealing directly to their sympathies for their classmates and, it was hoped, putting pressure on their parents, who happen to be the President and First Lady, to intercede with Congress on behalf of those soon to be deprived children. And this, thought nk, was unforgivably using the children of the President, dragging them into the public eye for the sake of a political outcome? That profoundly sensitive nk dragged Jeff’s family into a blog comment for the purpose of, what, making a point, turning a knife, causing a ruckus?

  181. apotheosis says:

    Anyway, Jeff’s personal life is a marginally interesting but ultimately irrelevant sideshow, it’s the ideas that either resonate or don’t.

    I’ll start being more concerned about the messenger than the message when all the vegans in the world repudiate their culinary habits simply because they were also espoused by that one really exceptionally bad German guy some years back.

  182. serr8d says:

    That profoundly sensitive nk dragged Jeff’s family into a blog comment for the purpose of, what, making a point, turning a knife, causing a ruckus?

    And the fact that Patterico grabbed nk and used him as a battering ram (a stupid battering ram) and felt no qualms about it.

    Patterico is acting currently undiagnosed with something, other than just aggrieved assholism.

  183. Darleen says:

    Heh, this guy gets it but can’t help but offer up all the wrong reasons.

  184. ccoffer says:

    Its not that complicated. Patterico is a cunt because he is a DDA. Its part of his repugnant DNA. He’s doing both for a living and in his free time what self-righteous little douchebags naturally do.

  185. Sdferr says:

    in a perverse way paint himself as a credible and thoughtful political critic.

    It just can’t be, can it? Credible? Thoughtful? No. No. No. No. NO. [foot stomp]

  186. lee says:

    I’m thinking Pats ethics are on the situational side.
    For example, I wonder what his reaction would have been had a PW “regular” made a comment judging Pats life choices by making assertions about his wife and kids, then Jeff defended said commenter against Pats objections?
    I’m just guessing Pat would have a whole different take on the proceedings.

  187. Sdferr says:

    So, how about that Hobbes guy and his state of nature as a war of all against all, huh? That was some shit right there, wadn’t it?

  188. cranky-d says:

    Hobbes was apparently a bit of a paranoid. Not that I’m judging, here, as I have a streak of paranoia myself.

  189. happyfeet says:

    I have a bad feeling that maybe this weekend wasn’t all about relaxing with family. Just cause of the emails Sdferr got. I don’t know what good can come out of the way this seems to be headed. On the other hand maybe right now is just the calm before the more sunny happy not a cloud in the sky every goddamn day calm. That happens a lot in LA.

  190. ThomasD says:

    I see that the ethic of Protein Wisdom is that every e-mail previously thought private is actually public.

    Holy fuck, from a freaking attorney no less! Earlier I alluded to him being rather Ahab-like, now he’s gone full-on Queeg. That dude is losing it.

  191. Sdferr says:

    And then there is an earthquake and buildings fall. In LA.

  192. happyfeet says:

    Yes. We’re definitely due for a big one I think.

  193. serr8d says:

    now he’s gone full-on Queeg

    No,you’re thinking of Charles Johnson.

  194. malaclypse the tertiary says:

    For my part, I must admit that I really like Jeff; personally. I think I know him well enough to suggest that he doesn’t have any desire to hurt anyone as a matter of course. He’s a rhetorician and he’s speaking about subjects the consequence of which are cultural. If I take a hard line with a client, I may lose the business, but the larger culture will not suffer for it. If Jeff makes nice with someone who is impugning him, by extension (and especially in a communications culture wherein technology has a long memory and does little to differentiate between the message and the messenger) the force of his rhetoric is undermined. This is not a coffee klatch. This is playing for keeps. It’s not merely about Jeff’s or Pat’s honor, it is about whether and how the ideas for which they are vessels will be heard.

    Some things are worth fighting for.

  195. malaclypse the tertiary says:

    To wit.

  196. donald says:

    Um, really Jeff, the best possible answer to This guy is go fuck yourself pussy. You have a blog. You’re pretty goddamned straight forward about what you think, and you don’t suffer fools gladly. Outside of the fact that I don’t have a blog because I’m not that smart, I am smart enough to know that anything some hack lawyer in LA wants to peddle is twaddle from a hack Lawyer in LA. Do what donald would do. Tell him to go fuck himself, and if he’s got any other problems you can always get together in person.

  197. donald says:

    Really, it’s better that way. Don’t ever let some hack lawyer cunt influence how you live your life, or keep you from doing what you want to do. Assuming by the way that you want to continue. I will say that I wonder about that sometimes.

  198. donald says:

    Oh, and now that I’ve seen a picture of Meghan McCain, she needs to get together with Ashley Biden, do a lot of blow, then they need to make some videos if you know whut I mean.

  199. donald says:

    You know, cause she’s a big girl and all.

  200. donald says:

    Though in fairness, blonde also and not unattractive. Just big…the cocaine can help with that, and the videos would turn some large green. Anyhoo, have a nice day all.

  201. Darleen says:

    It’s not merely about Jeff’s or Pat’s honor, it is about whether and how the ideas for which they are vessels will be heard.

    Some things are worth fighting for.

    Bravo, MTT, bravo.

  202. Sdferr says:

    So what to make of this, the latest e-mail missile from our friend Patterico?:

    Yes, you have been used, idiot.

    Thanks!

    He’s got me there for certain, for I’ve likely always been and no doubt always will be an idiot. Though not particularly proud of it, mind you. Facing facts can be hard sometimes. Well used, I might ask? Or ill? That is yet to be determined and we shall see.

  203. Jeff G. says:

    All a piece of honesty, integrity, and good faith, sdferr.

  204. Slartibartfast says:

    What a wonderful guy. There’s enough wonderful there for him to be his own best friend.

  205. Jeff G. says:

    I’m curious who else he used in the same way. And how far he plans on taking this.

    And even why he feels the need.

  206. Slartibartfast says:

    Oh, I missed this:

    slothful as in hanging upside down in trees. It’s the green approach.

    Sloth fur is host to a cyanobacteria (read: algae) which can give a sloth a greenish appearance. So, deliberate joke, or accidental?

  207. Slartibartfast says:

    I’ve had no contact of any kind with the guy, Jeff. I tend to shy away from email contact, at least, for this very reason.

  208. Sdferr says:

    We don’t have quite enough of the story to know yet I don’t think. I can parse this stuff in any number of ways, enough that I’m loath to commit to too narrow a reading of it as yet. The question I’ve got no firm answer to is the “what for” question. I don’t know what for, I simply don’t. Patterico has taken a path that wouldn’t have occurred to me to take I think, so I don’t have any intuitive sense of the point of his choices. Without that, I await developments to further flesh out the story.

  209. malaclypse the tertiary says:

    Jeff, I’ve been thinking about this all day (well for weeks actually). Here’s what I think. Fuck a bunch-a Patterico. If he wants to accuse you of death threats, let him. He’s dissembling and running on ego. He clearly doesn’t understand the linguistic argument and as time goes by and he becomes increasingly recalcitrant it becomes more and more clear to me he’s invested in not understanding it.

    But that’s not even the important part. The important part came to me as I was re-reading David Thompson’s discussion with Stephen Hicks. Here’s the bit that gave me the eureka moment:

    DT: … More recently, in a piece about the art world’s reliance on postmodernist rhetoric – what’s often called “art bollocks” – I pointed out that the artist Aliza Shvarts was mouthing opaque gibberish while pretending to be profound. The text she’d written and presented as a key part of her art was clumsy, incoherent and often simply meaningless. It was a kind of verbal flailing and rhetorical camouflage. (It’s difficult to determine exactly how wrong an unintelligible analysis is.) One postmodernist commenter took exception to my criticism – first by accusing me of arguing things I clearly wasn’t arguing, then by saying I was holding “entrenched positions” in which “aesthetic values” (in scare quotes), “scientific reality/clarity” (again, in scare quotes) and my own “reliance on logical consistency” (ditto) were obstacles to comprehension. Specifically, they were obstacles to comprehending Shvarts’ alleged (but oddly unspecified) “arguments of power, control [and] dominance.” The tone was, of course, condescending and self-satisfied. I’m guessing the commenter in question didn’t pause to consider the possibility that one might find pomo bafflegab objectionable precisely because it represents the “power, control [and] dominance” of what amounts to a priestly caste.

    SH: A lot of what you’re getting from your various commentators seems like third-raters playing the game, so it’s probably not worth focusing on them – instead of attending to the lessons they’re learning from the leading pomo strategists.

    My revelation was, Patterico doesn’t matter. I had been thinking he does, and he did; but only because he provided the occasion to make your long-argued point material to our current situation. But as I was reading that passage, I remembered that Mark Levin mentioned your HotAir piece. You’re the one saying something worth repeating, not Pat, not Allah, not even Steele. Your argument is the one that really animates (in this current milieu) the notion of speaking truth to power.

    Jeff, your argument is important. I know you know this. I know I’m not saying anything novel. But I just realized that isn’t merely abstract. I realized that Obama should be made to answer to your argument. Dodd, Frank, Rangel, Emanuel, Fish, Rorty, Soros and others who wield much greater power and speak to much larger audiences than Patterico should be made to answer to your argument. Patterico wronged you. Allahpundit wronged you. But they don’t matter when compared to the importance of your argument. That’s what it really means that your argument is important.

    I have domestic concerns to which I must attend now, but I wanted to say this because it just burned in my head and I had to get it out. I have a predisposition to “turgid” prose (so I’ve been told) and I’ve been wronged in ways not dissimilar to what you’ve experienced, and that’s why I so urgently wanted to say this. I wanted to say it in a comment here, publicly, because I suspect others here agree and would support the notion that your argument and the eloquence with which you make it deserves a higher target than Patterico. Sadly, as PJM has demonstrated, the people “on your side” either don’t have the stones or the understanding to help you with it, so fuck ’em.

    I want to help get the Outlaw Foundation kicking so hard that these second-tier peddlers in other people’s ideas have to join YOUR movement.

  210. donald says:

    I said it a lot quicker and to the point above. I totally agree with Malaclypse.

  211. So what to make of this, the latest e-mail missile from our friend Patterico?

    I think he’s trying to demonstrate that the suggestion he has no honor is without merit.

    I mean, I’m certainly convinced, aren’t you?

    It’s clear that at this point “winning” is more important to him than what’s left of his reputation.

  212. Sdferr says:

    So Slart, here’s a question. Assuming Patterico is using me as a simple conduit to post his messages here, rather than write them in a post here as most people would do, and as he is still welcome to do, so far as I know, ought I to continue to allow myself to be used in this way, particularly in light of his applied appellation “idiot”, which while endearing enough to me, isn’t generally used in that manner nowadays?

    Or ought I to, say, simply delete any future e-mail from him sight unseen? Or choose some other course as yet undelineated? What say ye?

  213. Sdferr says:

    Or pitch in on the query to Slart, SBP. What do you think?

  214. I’d save them without responding, Sdferr, just in case they’re needed as evidence in future.

  215. Sdferr says:

    Since my tooliness is right out there in the open though, SBP, let’s be clear. You would suggest that I cease performing that function for whatever Patterico’s purposes may be.

  216. I don’t know what his purposes are, either, but I’m fairly certain that his goals don’t coincide with mine. So, yeah, I would be loathe to operate as his tool under those circumstances.

  217. Slartibartfast says:

    I’d tend to ignore them. Save or dispose of as you please. Patterico’s conduct in this matter has been pretty dismal, and that makes him unworthy of paying any attention to, in my book.

    I would in no case allow him to use me as a communication path. It’s kind of a weenie thing to do.

  218. Sdferr says:

    Sheesh. Idiot. Tool. Weenie. I’m rackin’ ’em up today man. I think I’ll go watch the golf.

  219. Slartibartfast says:

    No, it’s a weenie thing for him to do, Sdferr. You’re only a weenie if you do it.

    Past weeniedom is redeemable, if there is any.

  220. ushie says:

    I think Patterico should just man up and admit he’s no Jared Padalecki and be done with it.

  221. Jer Olson (blowhard) says:

    Okay. As a future post on this topic, from either Jeff or Patterico, will just result in a/many similar response/s, here’s a proposal:

    Patterico deletes the thread with the nk/Jeff interaction, puts up something like, “Deleted to decrease future animosity.”

    Jeff does the same with his post, puts up something like, “Deleted to decrease future animosity.”

    Honestly, anyone who cares has already read them.

    After that, both put up a post or mention a couple times in their own comments, “For my sake, please don’t mention Jeff/Patterico in the comments. It simply takes away from what I’d personally like to write about.”

    Or, if that isn’t acceptable, simply do the latter.

    As a reader and commenter, I’d be more than willing to never again mention or reference Patterico on this or any other site I read.

    Make a decision that it is done and it is done. A couple weeks from now, this is a vague memory and both bloggers will once again have readers concentrating on their posts without this as a distracting subtext.

  222. happyfeet says:

    ushie makes a compelling point. WWJPD is the question not enough people are asking I think.

  223. Jer Olson (blowhard) says:

    If Patterico and his commenters think this message is laughable coming from me, fine. It’s fully understandable if you dislike me.

    The message still holds however. I think it’s a good idea.

  224. Jer Olson (blowhard) says:

    You know what, I’m doing this, regardless of other’s actions. Barring some sort of future inflammatory post, I’m not mentioning Patterico in a negative way on this blog or any other.

    I think it would be good if others would do the same but people can do whatever they feel best.

    When we say something negative against P, we increase the chance that he’ll feel required to retort. End result, we give Jeff a headache even though we don’t mean too. And it’s the same on the other side. P’s commenters give P a headache, even though they have his best interests at heart.

    YMMV.

  225. happyfeet says:

    ok. I’m in.

  226. guinsPen says:

    Ditto.

    I think it would be good if others would do the same

    Attention Joe, this means you.

  227. Jer Olson (blowhard) says:

    Excellent, great guys.

    To the lurking Patterico readers: I admit hypocrisy. I’ve taken ad hominem shots at Patterico on this blog and am now calling for peace.

  228. guinsPen says:

    we give Jeff a headache even though we don’t mean to

    I don’t know.

    What say you, Joe?

  229. Jer Olson (blowhard) says:

    “we give Jeff a headache even though we don’t mean to

    I don’t know.”

    Let me state that personally then because many others here have been better about this than I have. I admit hypocrisy on that front as well.

    I, personally, have given Jeff a headache even though I haven’t meant to.

  230. apotheosis says:

    There better not be any hugging.

  231. Jer Olson (blowhard) says:

    It might help to get the ball rolling for people to chime in.

    But, if they don’t, that’s cool. You don’t have to agree publicly to agree.

  232. serr8d says:

    Sounds like a plan. I like it when a plan comes together. I’m in.

    No nukes, or the plan goes out the window. And I pshop Patterico’s head emerging from teh goatse.

  233. Mary Louise says:

    Though I’m not really that invested in this. Nor am I a long time reader or commenter. Reading Jeff at HA brought me here. But bad blood is no good, and I don’t want to see Jeff or his family suffer needlessly.

    So I think Jer’s suggestion is a very good one.

  234. guinsPen says:

    Apologies, Jer Olson, let me rephrase my question to Joe.

    Yo, Joe. T-Balling yourself the other evening over at PP?

    What’s up with that?

  235. Sdferr says:

    Using the browser find function with the name Patterico and moving backwards from this post one post after another for the past few days, searching out each and every reference is an interesting exercise. Try it. The truth is that the subject (what was the question again?) was for the most part greatly diminishing if not disappearing, save for a couple of notable and generally dismissible exceptions. What was the question again? Oh, yeah. It would be easy to do.

  236. Jer Olson (blowhard) says:

    Sdferr, you’re entirely correct. Both that it’s been winding down for awhile and that it would now be easy to stop.

  237. geoffb says:

    Ok.

  238. Slartibartfast says:

    I scarcely ever give P a thought, when he’s not brought up here.

    So, uh, sure. Whatever.

  239. happyfeet says:

    that’s the spirit!

  240. lee says:

    I’m OK with the proposal, but it depends on how Jeff feels about leaving the impression that he made some sort of threat of physical violence/death.

    I think there needs to be a retraction of that particular idiocy, in the interests of what Jeff has been talking about, that is, reframing a speakers intent, and then pushing for that to be the accepted narrative. As in, everyone right of center is a racist, sexist homophobe. Rush is an inarticulate self interested moneygrubber. Jeff is an unstable pyscho.

    But if Jeff is OK with unilateral disengagement, I’m cool…

  241. I make no promises. I’m pretty sure, though, that I’ve never introduced the subject of this person, nor his differences with Jeff, anywhere on this site (even in the Pub) since the Limbaugh comment arose. I can’t envision anything that would change that.

    I will not pledge anything about my own site, as I am solely responsible for its content and what I say there will reflect on no one but myself.

    For whatever it’s worth.

  242. McGehee says:

    Grrr. That was me.

  243. cynn says:

    So who the hell is afraid of Jeff? I’m sure not. Patterico did him wrong; Jeff did nothing more than a playground roar. Patterico wants to escalate and elevate. I’m not your friend, but you know better.

  244. Jer Olson (blowhard) says:

    I doubt the principals will agree on the past so I wouldn’t ask them too.

    I’m just saying that, going forward, peace is better. Let’s agree to let it be. Maybe it will spread and be reciprocated. It’s possible. And, if possible, worth it.

  245. Pablo says:

    Hi everybody! Did I miss anything?

  246. Jer Olson (blowhard) says:

    A rare albino jackalope sighting. Truly majestic.

  247. Pablo says:

    malaclypse the tertiary, that’s an outstanding comment.

  248. Eben says:

    I don’t know which saddens me more, Patterico’s lameness or Jeff letting it get to him.

    I’m rubber, you’re glue, yadda, yadda, yadda.

  249. Earl says:

    Maybe Obama should hire a former gay male hooker to lob him softballs. He won’t get any points for originality but that joke never gets old.

  250. Jeff G. says:

    Gay, you say?

    OUTRAGE!

  251. Jer Olson (blowhard) says:

    Eben, if that’s the case, surely you’re in favor of just letting it go then.

  252. Sdferr says:

    Jer, our pact not to mention P has a weird resonance against the 10 terms not to use with Muslims post, don’t you think? At least I do.

  253. Jer Olson (blowhard) says:

    Sorta. But… you know how a quantitative difference is large enough to be a qualitative difference? I think this falls into that category.

  254. Sdferr says:

    Yeah, for instance I admit to being annoyed at Joe’s attempts, or so they appeared to me, to stir the pot once again yesterday linking the most recent defense Pat’s put up in re Limbaugh. Meh. Whatever. That sort of thing is fairly easy to resist.

    The problem, the conflict that arises in the context of speech and how it works, however, just doesn’t appear that it can admit to resolution without hashing it out, even when everyone tries diligently to remove all traces of ad hominem from any reference, boink, up it pops again. And eggshells, so to speak.

  255. Jer Olson (blowhard) says:

    I understand, but we’re humans, there is no way around it.

    But, if we all go a couple weeks with rigorous avoidance, we won’t be walking on eggshells anymore and any future little disagreement will be viewed in terms of that future disagreement, rather than the current large disagreement.

  256. Sdferr says:

    Still, (christ! I didn’t intend to get to harping on this, but I seem to be unable to cut myself off once I got going.) and yes, we are human and we know damned well when we are engaged in circumlocution or subject avoidance. Neither of which necessarily feel all that natural in any circumstance, let alone one in which the question of how ordinary speech can be constrained by political demands outside our control. Heebeejeebees galore man.

Comments are closed.