Jeff Goldstein Responds to Article in “Inside Higher Ed” Portraying Deborah Frisch as a Victim
I was about done with this whole Deborah Frisch thing, but I can’t let this stand.
There is a sloppy article in “Inside Higher Ed” that — I swear I am not making this up — portrays Frisch as the victim of right-wing crazies, just for making an innocent joke or two. I have excerpts from the article, and Jeff’s response to that article, below.
Also, at least one lefty site is accepting her lie that she didn’t publish comments about French-kissing Goldstein’s boy. Jeff has confirmed that she posted those comments from the same IP address that she used to post other comments.
First, the Inside Higher Ed article:
“I enjoy writing things that inflame, mock and infuriate the right,” Deborah Frisch said in an e-mail interview Sunday in response to a question about her online activities. By any measure, she’s achieving her goals — and she’s also out of a job.
Frisch posted a comment last week on Protein Wisdom, a Web site known for its no holding back conservative commentary, frequently with considerable mocking of liberal academics and ideas. Frisch, an adjunct lecturer at the University of Arizona until this weekend, said in the posting that she would not be sad if the 2-year old child of the site’s founder, Jeff Goldstein, was “Jon Benet Ramseyed,” and she reportedly posted other questions of the sort a Ramsey-inspired attacker might ask. (Goldstein lives in Colorado, where Ramsey was killed.)
Although Frisch apologized for the remark, which she called “nasty,” numerous conservative Web sites over the weekend traded stories about Frisch, saying that she had physically threatened Goldstein and his child (she denies this and says that however inappropriate her comments were, they weren’t threatening); that Frisch is Churchillian, as in Ward, not Winston (she agrees on some counts and has defended the notorious “little Eichmanns” remark); and that Frisch organized an online attack on Protein Wisdom (she denies this). They called on Arizona administrators to fire her (e-mail addresses were provided).
Frisch portrays herself as the victim. She’s trying to make herself into the next Ward Churchill:
Frisch acknowledged that the tone of her comments — even if they had nothing to do with her teaching — make her a target. “I play a dangerous game by being a professor and also having a very rabid left-wing blog and also posting nasty inflammatory comments on other people’s blogs,” she said. “The issue is how these rabid, crazy, right-wing nutcases have stalked me, told on me, reacted totally out of proportion to a joke in bad taste I posted on a blog. They are treating me the way they treated Ward Churchill — a lunatic lefty in academia who deserves to be verbally attacked, abused and mocked.”
The mind reels.
To state the simple truth: the issue, Ms. Frisch, is that you posted numerous comments threatening violence on a two-year-old boy. If you had directed those comments at one of my children, I would have, at a minimum, called the police. In my view, you’re lucky you’re just out of a job, and not facing criminal charges.
I talked to Jeff Goldstein about this article. Jeff’s access to his site has been spotty due to the repeated DoS attacks he has suffered lately. Accordingly, he authorized me to publish his response to the article. He has posted that response at his own site, here, but I am reproducing it in its entirety so that it can still be read if his site goes down again:
I received no email or phone call from anyone at Inside Higher Ed.
A few corrections:
1) I don’t believe I engage in “considerable mocking of liberal academics and ideas.” I taught English for a number of years at a private university in Colorado, in fact, so I’m not unfamiliar with the academy.
True, I have addressed issues of identity politics within the academy, but I’ve done so seriously. And for the record, I consider myself a classical liberal (I am about as far from a social conservative as one can be, for instance). so while I’ve written extensively on questions of progressive philosophical assumptions and how they lead to things like, say, free speech zones, I don’t mock liberalism. Just the opposite in fact: I think progressivism is in opposition to classical liberalism — particularly insofar as it promotes group identity over individualism.
2) Frisch’s apology was immediately followed by a walking back of that apology, and has now culminated in a desire to see rightwingers heads cracked open with baseball bats, and suggestions that I doctored her comments.
But her comments were cut and pasted as she made them, and they are recorded in Google caches in pristine condition. The suggestion that I altered them, therefore, is potentially libelous.
3) No one on my site harrassed Frisch, as a perusal of the various threads she appeared on will attest. And in my post, her school email was not included.
4) Frisch is relying on sites like this one to suggest that she is a victim. Don’t let her get away with it. Frisch was looking, by her own admission, to be banned from my site.
Not only that, but she is trying to suggest she is guilty of nothing more than engaging in a “teachable moment” — the presumptuous and self-importance of which is staggering.
But it bears noting that, even in your article, Frisch, an adjunct instructor, refers to herself as a “professor” and compares herself to Ward Churchill. Her desire for academic and leftwing martyrdom drips from her every word and claim. But I won’t be used as her dupe.
I had been prepared to let this go (something I believe I made fairly clear after my site recovered from one of the 3 DoS attacks I was under this weekend), but now that Frisch has decided to try to parlay her infamy into victimized Truth Speaker status, I’m prepared to follow through and make it clear once and for all that Ms Frisch is a very sad case indeed. In fact, the only reason she’s a “target” at all is that she has worked hard at setting herself up as one.
That is to say, rather than blaming “rabid, crazy, right-wing nutcases” for her troubles (such as they are; I happen to thing she’s quite enjoying the attention), she should take ownership of her own behavior, which throughout has been vile and manipulative.
– Jeff Goldstein
proteinwisdom.com
As for me, I would like to take issue with the article’s claim that Frisch posted a single comment, and Frisch’s claim that her comments “weren’t threatening.” They have been excerpted on many sites. Let me just remind you of some of the things she said that “weren’t threatening”:
I’d like to hear more about your “tyke” by the way. Girl? Boy? Toddler? Teen? Are you still married to the woman you ephed to give birth to the tyke?
Tell all, bro!
…
[...] as I said elsewhere, if I woke up tomorrow and learned that someone else had shot you and your “tyke” it wouldn’t slow me down one iota. You aren’t “human” to me.
[...]
So if you could just tell me the AGE and SEX of your “tyke,” I’d be stoked!
Thanx!
…
Ooh. Two year old boy. Sounds hot. You live in Colorado, I see. Hope no one Jon-Benets your baby.
…
I reiterate: If some nutcase kidnapped your child tomorrow and did to her what was done to your fellow Coloradan, Jon-Benet Ramsey, I wouldn’t give a damn.
…
Give your pathetic progeny (I sure hope that mofo got good genes from his mama!) a big fat tongue-filled kiss from me! LOTS AND LOTS OF SALIVA from Auntie MOONBAT, if you don’t mind!
Somehow, Jeffy boy, I think you get off on the possibility of Frenching your pathetic progeny, even if it is a boy. You seem like a VERY, VERY sick mofo to me, bro.
Frisch has claimed that the last bit, about French-kissing Jeff’s two-year-old, was not hers:
People are posting snippets of what I posted that have been embellished with references to french kissing and other things I didn’t say.
The meme that she didn’t say these things is being accepted by some, including the serial Goldstein-hating obsessives at Sadly, No!
I asked Jeff to check his IP logs on this issue. He confirms that Frisch posted all of her comments from two IP addresses. The French-kissing comments came from one of them. He has posted a screenshot of his IP logs at his post responding to the article.
I agree with Jeff. We cannot let the truth be so twisted so that this woman becomes the victim.
UPDATE: The Sadly, No! guy said in his post:
(Some extremely vile quotes attributed to her [not reproduced above] seem to be made up. I know it’s shocking that wingnuts would simply make things up, but life is full of surprises.)
Yet in comments here, when I called on him to forthrightly make the accusation that Goldstein altered the comment, he said:
I’ll say honestly that I don’t know for sure. But there are people who say they do.
Another detail is that we often have commenters impersonating our trolls. If you check the IP on the most offensive comments from Frisch, they might not match up with the others.
Except that they do, as Goldstein has shown.
So why is Sadly, No! saying that some of Frisch’s comments “seem to be made up,” when they admit here that they don’t know? And, now that we have proof that the IP addresses match between Frisch’s admitted comments and the ones she denies, doesn’t it seem wrong to say that the comments “seem to be made up”? And shouldn’t Sadly, No! issue a retraction?
Yes, they should. But is it likely they will? Say it with me:
Sadly, No!
UPDATE x2: And despite this support they have given Frisch, by blindly accepting her side of the comment-altering story against Goldstein’s IP address proof, they pretend in this post that they haven’t supported her. Gotta love it.
Jeff’s latest comment strikes exactly the right tone. Jeff was more than generous in his response to her semi-apology and gracefully accepted her offer of “a drink,” but she has chosen to start up all over again.
Now what? Jeff is the one and only person who can decide whether he wants to pursue this personally (libel etc), but none of us has to sit idly by while “Deb” tries to parlay her repugnant, inexcusable behavior into Mother Sheehan status.
Jeff, one poster earlier on suggested that she is very possibly capable of extreme behavior. The ease with which she threw in the towel on her career and chose to up her stakes and move to Oregon is pretty frightening in itself. My two cents is to assume the worst and hope for the best as far as she is concerned. I am shocked she has not retained a lawyer (assuming she hasn’t) and just plain laid low. It doesn’t take a great legal mind to figure out she is walking the line, if not criminally then certainly civilly.
Let’s not give her the satisfaction of site hits, I’m sure that Jeff or his friends will keep us updated. Meanwhile, we have to make sure, as is being done already on an ongoing basis, that the full, accurate story is out there. Jeff, can you access and save the whole series from beginning to end?
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 9:41 am
It’s not ’serial’ until Goldstein outs another anonymous blogger, leading to threats to his or her family, as happened to Thersites before.
And since we’re talking, Goldstein alters, edits, and selectively deletes comments. That’s a provable fact.
Comment by Sadly, No! Research Labs — 7/10/2006 @ 9:43 am
Sadly, No!
If it is provable, prove it.
Comment by Shaun — 7/10/2006 @ 9:45 am
I want to see you make the accusation that he, and not Frisch, posted the following comment:
Go ahead. I dare you.
You’ll waffle and insinuate, but you don’t have the stones to actually make the accusation. I know your type.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 9:45 am
You know, since we’re talking.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 9:46 am
Sadly, no, right Sadly No?
Look at the text, the same strange use of the word “bro,” and the rest of the language would make this very hard to fake, and why in the world would Jeff need to do it? This comment is far from the worst of the lot.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 9:49 am
I also liked this quote from the Higher Ed article
Frisch is known for going on conservative sites she abhors and engaging in debate.
She proclaimed, repeatedly that she was trying to get banned, not “engage in debate”.
That is one beautiful whitewash they tried there.
Comment by Veeshir — 7/10/2006 @ 9:57 am
You’ll waffle and insinuate, but you don’t have the stones to actually make the accusation. I know your type.
I wouldn’t make such an accusation in response to a dare, no.
You should also note that I didn’t defend Frisch. I said that her offense is trifling compared to what you guys do regularly. Mote –> beam, and all that.
Comment by Sadly, No! Research Labs — 7/10/2006 @ 9:58 am
Please send questions or comments about Inside Higher Ed to info@insidehighered.com
We prefer to receive correspondence by e-mail, but printed material may also be directed to:
Inside Higher Ed
2121 K Street NW
Suite 630
Washington, D.C. 20037
202-659-9208
Fax: 202-659-9381
Contacting reporters and editors
Ideas for articles, opinion pieces, columns, and other editorial features should be sent to Scott Jaschik (scott.jaschik@insidehighered.com), editor, or Doug Lederman (doug.lederman@insidehighered.com), editor.
Contacting specific reporters, columnists and opinion authors: Most authors’ e-mail addresses are linked from the bylines on their stories. For others, we’re happy to pass along your comments. Send them to editor@insidehighered.com
http://insidehighered.com/contact_us
Comment by Comment Here — 7/10/2006 @ 9:59 am
[...] Patterico has JG’s response to the Inside High Education piece in case Protein Wisdom is down. Technorati Tags: DebbieFrisch, Frisch, ProteinWisdom Filed under: Blogosphere, Liberal Morons — Flap @ 9:29 am [...]
Pingback by FullosseousFlap’s Dental Blog » Protein Wisdom Watch: DOS’d Again? — 7/10/2006 @ 10:00 am
Sadly No you have it bass-ackwards, obviously. You’re the one that started with the comment that Jeff was altering comments, not Shaun and Patterico. They only dared you to prove your accusation, which you obviously can’t.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 10:06 am
Patterico, it’s your site but I hope you will not drop the subject. Jeff has chosen his own course for the protection of his family and the rest of us have no right to gainsay him. It need not stop us from being outraged about this lady’s behavior. It may be that the authorities will not be involved after all but propagating what a poisonous viper she is will still be a public service.
Comment by nk — 7/10/2006 @ 10:07 am
Sadly! No Research Labs! That’s what PETA and I have to say. Are you guys not getting the message? “Animals Are Not Ours To Experiment On!”
Labs are great dogs and you should leave them along.
Here’s a link to PETA’s response to Running of The Bulls. It’s called Running of the Nudes and as Jeff G might say, you might even to able to see some cooze…if you look closely.
http://www.runningofthenudes.com/
Comment by PC14 — 7/10/2006 @ 10:07 am
I wouldn’t make such an accusation in response to a dare, no.
The predicted waffling.
Just so the world knows, the Sadly No! people insinuate that Goldstein altered the comment, but don’t have the balls to come out and say so.
This from their post:
Gee, what quotes, specifically, seem to have been made up, Mr. Smear Artist? And by whom? Which “wingnut” specifically made up what?
My firm prediction: You’ll never say. You’ll leave it at baseless insinuation, because that’s the kind of low-class cheap-shot artist you are.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 10:09 am
“It’s not ’serial’ until Goldstein outs another anonymous blogger, leading to threats to his or her family, as happened to Thersites before.”
I really just can not fathom how you could have followed the Golstein/Thersites dispute and claim, with a straight face, that Jeff Goldstein outed Thersites.
Comment by thelinyguy — 7/10/2006 @ 10:09 am
Sadly, Cowards!
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 10:10 am
Were I Sadly, No! (and Thankfully, Yes! I’m not!), I’d be very careful about promoting the story that I altered Frisch’s comment.
And of course, the poster above knows for a fact that I didn’t “out” Thersites and his wife. That info was on NTodd’s site as well as elsewhere on the web — and was subsequently posted in my comments over night, while I slept. Besides, it had already been publicized after Dr Haggerty went after Ann Althouse. And I removed geographical locale and any other info that didn’t seem pertinent to our “debate” over theory.
Of course, we could revisit the whole of that adventure in its proper context had not Thersites pulled his site before he started trying to rewrite the entire story.
Comment by Jeff G — 7/10/2006 @ 10:11 am
I find it interesting that Inside Higher Ed quotes Frisch as saying that “these rabid, crazy, right-wing nutcases. . . told on me.” Using the phrase “told on me” is illuminating. It’s as if Frisch knows that what she is doing is wrong, and her real complaint is that us wingnuts are tattle-tales. How dare we expose her lunacy to her bosses and the world at large!
Comment by JVW — 7/10/2006 @ 10:19 am
Jeff, I know you altered at least one person’s comments, and you posted Thers’s information yourself.
There’s no reason to go back into all of that, but as much as we squabble, you and us, we’re not the types to make serious accusations (e.g. inauthentic Frisch comments) without good cause and sources. We’re cheap shot artists, to be sure, but only about trivial things.
I’ll say honestly that I don’t know for sure. But there are people who say they do.
Another detail is that we often have commenters impersonating our trolls. If you check the IP on the most offensive comments from Frisch, they might not match up with the others.
Comment by Sadly, No! Research Labs — 7/10/2006 @ 10:19 am
But her comments were cut and pasted as she made them, and they are recorded in Google caches in pristine condition. The suggestion that I altered them, therefore, is potentially libelous.
Um, No Jeff Goldstein, it would not be ‘libelous’ to suggest that you altered her comments.
You EDIT PEOPLE’S COMMENTS ALL THE TIME. Especially when you are unable to defend yourself, since you are an intellectual pussy.
Plus, being a T.A. in a class does not mean you ‘taught the class’. I love how you inflate your ‘experience teaching’ so that your sycophantic loser readership thinks you are a prof.
Hope you’re enjoying that DOS attack. I know I sure am.
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 10:20 am
Sadly, No!
If you don’t know for sure, then why did you claim it to be a “provable fact”? You keep talking about sources to prove it. Put your money where your mouth is. PROVE IT!!!!!
Comment by Shaun — 7/10/2006 @ 10:23 am
JG does occasionally edit comments. When he does, he puts his addition, or substitution, in brackets to indicate that he did. It’s weird that anybody would take her word for anything. Even if you take the Sadly, No! theory that what she did doesn’t matter (because neo-cons are baby killers and, so, deserve it), it doesn’t stand to her credit, right? I still haven’t read anything from a, “Way to go Deb!” line of thought, anywhere. She said what everybody knows she said.
Comment by Nobody — 7/10/2006 @ 10:23 am
So there you go, Shaun:
PROOF that Goldstein edits or deletes comments.
Is that enough for you? Probably not, troglodyte.
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 10:23 am
If you check the IP on the most offensive comments from Frisch, they might not match up with the others.
Sadly, Uninformed!
He already did check.
By the way, I don’t know if Sadly, No! is behind the DoS attack on Goldstein’s site. But there are people who do know. Meanwhile, it’s interesting that they are enjoying it. That’s the kind of comment someone might make if they were behind it.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 10:25 am
JG does occasionally edit comments. When he does, he puts his addition, or substitution, in brackets to indicate that he did.
unfortunately, no!
He edited my comments with nary a bracket, intellectual lightweight that he is.
Online Integrity my ass.
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 10:25 am
It’s also interesting that the fringe left, as represented by the previous commenter here, is in favor of having political opponents’ speech squelched by DoS attacks.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 10:26 am
I really just can not fathom how you could have followed the Golstein/Thersites dispute and claim, with a straight face, that Jeff Goldstein outed Thersites.
We followed it from the Thersites side, and it didn’t seem like much at first. The key event was Jeff reposting the information himself.
I realize you guys aren’t our readership, but we’re super-zealous about protecting our commenters and about never allowing other people’s personal information to appear in our comments. We wiped Malkin’s name, address, and two phone numbers out of comments during that whole contretemps — and they were the real ones, not the out-of-date ones that some other clown was posting. We banned that guy. We don’t ban people lightly.
Like us or not, we have a little ethical hillock to stand on in affairs like this. We take some things very seriously.
Comment by Sadly, No! Research Labs — 7/10/2006 @ 10:28 am
Sadly, No! guys: whether you are behind it or not, do you support/”enjoy” the DoS attack on Jeff’s site?
Just checkin’.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 10:28 am
If you don’t know for sure, then why did you claim it to be a “provable fact”?
Provable fact that Jeff has altered comments in the past.
You need to read more carefully.
Comment by Sadly, No! Research Labs — 7/10/2006 @ 10:29 am
Now, let me state for the record:
Any DOS attack on some idiot Winger’s site is the direct fault of EVERY blogger on the internet to the left of Bill O’Reilly.
Much like Frisch’s comments, we obviously must all apologize for the actions of some random asshole, or else we implicitly support them.
Whatever.
I may not ’support’ the DOS attack, but I sure do enjoy it!
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 10:30 am
If I were King of the Forest, Not queen, not duke, not prince!
My regal robes of the forest, would be satin, not cotton, not chintz!
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 10:32 am
When I went to the website linked and clicked on the link in it that goes to where the post in question was edited, it takes me to the PW front page. I don’t know where it is I’m supposed to see this quote.
I haven’t been a PW reader until the past few months, so I don’t know the history of many involved in this Sadly No fight. I was there on PW at the time Frisch was posting her stuff for those few days. It was a train wreck you couldn’t look away from. She was pretty proud of what she was saying at the time until she realized that she wasn’t getting the backing she expected from outsiders. Then she was silent for a while as she watched the fallout. And then she started posting that they weren’t her words. Those who saw her post it in real time know this is a lie. You have your vendetta against Jeff, so you will choose to believe her. No one can change this in you. However, you don’t look too good for those who saw it all go down. Who am I going to believe? You or my lying eyes?
Comment by Shaun — 7/10/2006 @ 10:34 am
There’s your difference. I enjoy debating the other side in the marketplace of ideas. Shorter Rightwing whatever enjoys seeing the other side squelched. Just like a good fascist.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 10:36 am
whether you are behind it or not, do you support/”enjoy” the DoS attack on Jeff’s site?
Patterico, we don’t even hear about a lot of this stuff until you guys go into one of your linking furies.
If someone in the left-blogowhatsis was hacking sites, we’d be one of the first to know who it was, and one of the first to put a smackdown on them.
What was it you said about making vain accusations? I mean seriously here.
Comment by Sadly, No! Research Labs — 7/10/2006 @ 10:36 am
Jeff does not hide it when he edits comments.
But go ahead, insinuate all day, Lefty children. Suggest that this is another one of those Rightie conspiracies you love dreaming up. Imagination is a good thing for kids to have.
Comment by OHNOES — 7/10/2006 @ 10:38 am
Well, whoever is behind it is, I would guess, committing a federal crime. I don’t know this for sure, but it’s an educated guess.
Same goes for Frisch. Like I say, were I Jeff, I’d be calling the police or the FBI.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 10:39 am
Someone said he used to comment in his own blog pseudonomously. Which I think is a totally cool way to explore the medium of blogging.
Comment by actus — 7/10/2006 @ 10:40 am
Sadly, No! won’t go on record as to their opinions on the DoS attacks. Scratching your head over that one, are you, guys?
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 10:42 am
To the guy posting the antiwisdom link, seek help. When you say asshole every three words it puts a dent in your credibility. That whole post sounded like an unhinged rant, short on the proof. I believe Goldstein edited your comment.
The point that seems to escape you is he did this after you called him a racist and asshole, etc. etc. as you even admit to. In that context the comment he inserted in your place is rather tongue-in-cheek, don’t you think? Perhaps you need to just take some deep breaths and relax a bit. Also, I’ve read many posts on his site and never once encountered racism unless it was a blatant attempt at irony. So unless you can’t detect irony, I don’t know where you’re coming from with all of that. Actus has been trolling Protein Wisdom for a long long time and has never been banned or had his comment edited (at least I’ve never seen him claim as much), why do you think this is? Because he has never resorted to outright name calling and his posts are generally thoughtful and occasionally have a point, as obscure as they may be.
Comment by thelinyguy — 7/10/2006 @ 10:44 am
Dont they usually come from hacked computers all over the world?
Comment by actus — 7/10/2006 @ 10:44 am
Someone once said that actus was a baldfaced liar, which I think is a totally cool way to express oneself.
Comment by James — 7/10/2006 @ 10:45 am
I didn’t ’support’ Waco and Ruby Ridge either, but man I thought it was cool that there were less right wing fundies in the world!
Comment by Stop the Evil Right Wing — 7/10/2006 @ 10:47 am
Well, sure, but you’re not saying that’s what he did here, right? I mean, there actually IS a Deb Frisch. She had a job, and an ugly haircut. . . Unless it’s all a greater conspiracy than even I could have imagined!
Comment by Nobody — 7/10/2006 @ 10:47 am
More importantly:
Sadly, No! said this in their post:
Now they appear to admit that “seem to be made up” means “are made up according to Frisch, although we have no idea.”
So, to recap: some unhinged person claims something, and Sadly, No! doesn’t know whether the unhinged person’s claims are true — but they really want them to be. So they say that the claims “seem to be” true.
Now that’s good bloggin’!
It may be time to update the post.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 10:48 am
Why would I say that. That is not cool at all.
Comment by actus — 7/10/2006 @ 10:48 am
Wouldn’t thinking something is cool still be a way of expressing your support for it? You can’t have it both ways.
Comment by Shaun — 7/10/2006 @ 10:48 am
Sadly, No! won’t go on record as to their opinions on the DoS attacks. Scratching your head over that one, are you, guys?
I love how these arguments go fractal. Let me quote what I just said:
“If someone in the left-blogowhatsis was hacking sites, we’d be one of the first to know who it was, and one of the first to put a smackdown on them.”
You keep trying to make me go on record denouncing or approving of things, which seems a strange, legalistic style of argument to me because I keep plainly saying exactly what I mean.
My opinion on the DOS attacks? Shitty thing to do, and I’m against it.
What’s your opinion of the Rumsfeld’s Driveway frenzy, in which Times reporters were threatened by right-bloggers for photographing Don Rumsfeld’s house with permission from Rumsfeld?
Comment by Sadly, No! Research Labs — 7/10/2006 @ 10:52 am
This is the best April Fool’s Day gag ever! You guys had me so snookered, but then actus spoke truth to power and I’m cured. Deb Frisch is just a figment of Jeff’s autistic imagination.
Comment by Nobody — 7/10/2006 @ 10:53 am
I was there for the incident involving the pathetic little child calling himself “Shorter” something-or-other. Jeff most certainly did discuss the fact that he had altered the quote in order to mess with the idiot. I’ll bet he wishes he hadn’t done that now, but he did not try to pretend that he didn’t do it.
Comment by CraigC — 7/10/2006 @ 10:53 am
Sadly, No! won’t go on record as to their opinions on the DoS attacks. Scratching your head over that one, are you, guys?
I love how these arguments go fractal. Let me quote what I just said:
“If someone in the left-blogowhatsis was hacking sites, we’d be one of the first to know who it was, and one of the first to put a smackdown on them.”
You keep trying to make me go on record denouncing or approving of things, which seems a strange, legalistic style of argument to me because I keep plainly saying exactly what I mean.
My opinion on the DOS attacks? Dirty, lowdown thing to do, and I’m against it.
What’s your opinion of the Rumsfeld’s Driveway frenzy, in which Times reporters were threatened by right-bloggers for photographing Don Rumsfeld’s house with permission from Rumsfeld?
Comment by Sadly, No! Research Labs — 7/10/2006 @ 10:54 am
The foul waves of black, unrelenting hatred curdling throughout your site are such a breathtaking refutation of any “point” you may ever have (or will have) attempted to make: it genuinely boggles the mind that you’d proffer it as “evidence” of much of anything, really, save your own gibbering dementia.
I especially enjoyed pointing and laughing at the part where you openly confess to being a drunk, and (therefore) incapable of reading for comprehension.
Not that that wasn’t screamingly self-evident right from Jump Street, mind.
Putz.
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 10:55 am
The spam-eater ate my last comment, so I’m going to try it again….
Wouldn’t thinking something is cool still be a way of expressing your support for it? You can’t have it both ways.
Comment by Shaun — 7/10/2006 @ 10:55 am
Someone once said actus’ mom and dad were both first cousins.
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 10:57 am
FTR: post #38 is in response to the mouth-breather posting as “Shorter Rightwing Arseholes”: NOT Jeff G.
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 10:59 am
I haven’t seen all the various comments on Jeff’s site obviuosly, but have seen him alter comments a few times although never without making the fact plain.
Either he includes the original comment along with a translation into coherent rather than incoherent jackassery or he announces beforehand that a particularly irascible troll’s comments will be subsequently overwritten in order to tweak some moron’s nose. I’ve only seen the second format is used in response to extreme imbecility and it does provide for the humorous edification of the rest of his readers. The point is that neither format is a surreptitious act.
I suspect Short Rightwing Asswipe fell into the second category, but haven’t the time or inclination to look.
Comment by Just Passing Through — 7/10/2006 @ 11:00 am
Is there any way to excuse this woman’s behavior?
Sadly, no.
Comment by Jim Treacher — 7/10/2006 @ 11:02 am
Yeah, Kent, he’s a perfect example of what passes for the left these days. They’re such angry, unhappy little creatures, I don’t know how they make it through the day.
Comment by CraigC — 7/10/2006 @ 11:03 am
Ooh, deleted my messages and spam-filtered my IP to make a false case.
Now you have to delete all the messages that refer to mine, as well.
[screen capture]
Nice talking, as always.
Comment by Sadly, No! Research Labs — 7/10/2006 @ 11:04 am
I’m confused.
How is the fact that Jeff has edited/removed comments in the past even remotely relevant to the question of whether he has done so in this particular case?
Patterico, Malkin, and Blackfive have contemporaneous quotes of the Frisch comments at issue. Unless Jeff’s some sort of Evil Mastermind™ — and I do realize that he’s one of them Jooooooos, so anything’s possible — it seems pretty far gone to suggest that he not only altered Frisch’s comments on his blog, but also arranged to have them altered on at least three other blogs as well.
Comment by Brett — 7/10/2006 @ 11:05 am
Patterico, the spam-eater has eaten up my posts! LOL It won’t let me post using my other email. What happened? I couldn’t find how to contact you outside of posting.
Comment by Shaun — 7/10/2006 @ 11:06 am
Kent,
Clicking your link, I see that Jeff would definitely have a potential libel action against the Shorter guy. But somehow I’m guessing he doesn’t have enough money to be worth going after.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 11:08 am
Drudge has linked to this story…
“Psychologist, Professor in Hot Water Over ‘Threats’ to Blogger’s Two Year Old…”
http://www.drudgereport.com/
Comment by Dreport — 7/10/2006 @ 11:09 am
Someone once said actus’ mom and dad were both first cousins.
So what? Lots of people have first cousins. It isn’t unusual that two people would both happen to have first cousins. Your insults will make more sense if you use proper grammar.
Comment by Big Worm — 7/10/2006 @ 11:11 am
Comment #44 looks bogus.
Comment by nk — 7/10/2006 @ 11:18 am
Well, Sadly Retarded seems to have the same sick sexual fascination for Jeff that Deb has. I thought the left was liberated about sex and sexual identity, but considering the amount of homophobic commentary from the left then I can guess that much of this hatred has deep seated psychological issues.
But thanks Anti-intellingence and Sadly Demented for acting as a zoo example of the case in point.
Comment by capt joe — 7/10/2006 @ 11:19 am
Actually, it was Jeff Goldstein that said he used to comment on his own blog. Said he stopped, and said something about the blogosphere being younger then.
Comment by actus — 7/10/2006 @ 11:21 am
Really sad situation. Certainly someone is lying or cannot control themselves. Everyone involved, of any political stance, should ponder what lies lead to.
Consider that Gorby said that the USSR’s failure was partly because the Communists lied to themselves until they no longer had any facts to guide them.
And Speer, before Gorby, said the lies that Nazis told one another greatly hurt them. (not that anyone would have it otherwise.)
Let partisanship end at the lies edge!
Comment by K — 7/10/2006 @ 11:22 am
This is very odd.
I did not delete any comments from “Sadly, No! Research Labs” from this thread or this site.
Yet, they appear to be gone.
I remember some on this thread. But now, they aren’t there.
There have been weird things going on with comments lately. I am going to see if I can recover them.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 11:22 am
Same link to insidehighered. So the BS goes on.
Comment by nk — 7/10/2006 @ 11:23 am
I didn’t say I was A drunk - I said I was drunk.
But, I guess one could make the case that, while I was drunk, I was A drunk.
Anyways, the fact that I am angry and use dirty language on my blog doesn’t detract from the basis of my points. I am angry because you idiots are a huge group of torture-supporting, preemptive-war-based-on-lies-loving assholes.
And sheesh, being drunk on a Saturday night - what a lush! How could I possibly dare?
My durty mouth and my moonshine swillin completely ‘dents’ my credibility, eh? I’m sorry you are such a prissy little baby who drums up affronts wherever one may find them in an attempt to prove that you aren’t all evil-incarnate wingers. It’s not WHAT I say that you focus on, its HOW I say it.
Did you learn that in the Upstairs Debate School classes you took?
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 11:25 am
Someone once said actus’ mom and dad were both first cousins.
Watch out ‘Kent’! You might poke someone’s eye out with that wit!
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 11:28 am
I have found them in the spam-filter and tried twice now to recover them, without success. Someone named Shaun can’t comment either. Jim Treacher hasn’t been able to comment for days, although I hand-recovered some of his comments yesterday. This is seriously screwed up.
I was updating the post to quote Sadly, No’s comment, which is inconsistent with what they said in their post, and it had disappeared.
I’m sending an e-mail to my tech guy but that’s all I can do.
Meanwhile, I can see that the guy is leaving further comments, also going into the spam-catcher, accusing me of doing this deliberately. Well, that’s just great.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 11:28 am
The numbers are all messed up too or it’s my eyesight. I swear that what is now comment # 49 was numbered #44 when I posted my #51. Sorry Jim.
Comment by nk — 7/10/2006 @ 11:29 am
> the pathetic little child calling himself “Shorter” something-or-other.
He does sound short, doesn’t he?
Comment by Jane — 7/10/2006 @ 11:33 am
It does? Why?
Comment by Jim Treacher — 7/10/2006 @ 11:33 am
Just testing to see if I can get through. My posts from the beginning have also disappeared. There are posts commenting to me, but no “me”.
Oh well. Hope you can get it fixed, Patterico.
Comment by Shaun — 7/10/2006 @ 11:33 am
Great, what was #44 and then #49 is now #59. Ok. It’s the Drudge link. It’s the sam insidehighered post.
Comment by nk — 7/10/2006 @ 11:33 am
I am having terrible problems with comments. I keep trying to recover them but there is a tech glitch. Sadly, No! and Shaun have both gotten comments caught in the spam filter, and I can’t seem to hand-recover them.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 11:35 am
Mm-hmm.
P.S. No prob, nk.
Comment by Jim Treacher — 7/10/2006 @ 11:36 am
well, shorter doesn’t refer to his height if you know what I mean.
Comment by capt joe — 7/10/2006 @ 11:37 am
Shaun’s comments have also been sent to the spamcatcher, even the ones that were already posted. It’s totally out of control. I have a desperate e-mail in to the tech guy.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 11:42 am
I think Sadly No is PURPOSELY breaking his comments into the spam filter so that he can blame you and gin up OUTRAGE!
Because it makes as much sense as any other “explanation.”
Comment by OHNOES — 7/10/2006 @ 11:42 am
So that’s your point? Behind that crusty veil of dirty language lies a shred of truth so awful we don’t dare address it, lest it destroy our “evil-incarnate” souls? For the record, I don’t give a damn about your language, it’s the fact that what you seem to think are serious accusations sound like incoherent ravings.
Thanks for proving my point so eloquently. Everything you say is based on name-calling of some sort. Why would someone take what you say seriously when you sound like a 10 year old throwing a tantrum? The substance of what you’re saying seems so minor in comparison to how you’re expressing yourself.
No, it’s common sense. Grow up and then people will treat you like an adult. It’s obvious you’re not interested in honest debate. You are a shit slinger looking to score points, so why should anyone take what you say seriously?
Comment by thelinyguy — 7/10/2006 @ 11:43 am
“Anyways, the fact that I am angry and use dirty language on my blog doesn’t detract from the basis of my points.”
Well, as my daddy used to say (the one who fought in 3 wars to protect your potty mouth), people who use foul language have limited vocabularies. And judging from the rest of your post, I’d say he was right.
Comment by sharon — 7/10/2006 @ 11:44 am
Okay, they’re back, at least some of them, temporarily, after my third attempt to hand-recover. I’ll look for any others. Hopefully they don’t disappear again.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 11:46 am
There are still some missing.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 11:48 am
Denial of Service attacks, and comments that disappear. How about that. Is there a common link? Sadly, no.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 11:54 am
I don’t these guys are behind it. I had a split-second where I wondered if I’d been hacked, but then sanity prevailed and I realized all the comment problems I have been having are probably connected with this.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 11:56 am
As far as I can tell, everything has been recovered. Until it disappears again.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 11:57 am
I don’t recall them having denied the denial of service attack, do you agree Patterico?
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 11:58 am
The Insanity Of The Obsessed Part Three: Stop Digging!…
Are you freaking kidding me? How about doing a little research? “She reportedly posted other questions of the sort a Ramsey-inspired attacker might ask”?
If Scott Jaschik truly wanted to explain what happened, why didn’t he directly use the commen…
Trackback by Liberty and Justice — 7/10/2006 @ 11:58 am
Also, I already addressed your point above, which you either didn’t catch or are ignoring. So I’ll say it again.
It looks like Goldstein edited your comment in addition to banning you as an obvious joke in response to you calling him a racist and asshole, perhaps more (which you openly admit to, and even seem proud of). Since you have already called me names and your post on your blog is littered with profanity and yet more name-calling, I’m inclined to call that “a dent to your credibility.”
I think everyone who was cognitively functional realized that you did not actually make that post. So if this was your big ‘aha!’ moment, you have already lost your argument.
Goldstein once edited a comment from a troll (in an obvious way) to make a joke at his expense! What a fascist!
Also, why hasn’t Actus been banned or had any of his comments edited over at Protein Wisdom? He’s been trolling there for a long time. Perhaps it’s because you provoked him and crossed a line he sets for his own blog?
Comment by thelinyguy — 7/10/2006 @ 12:00 pm
Frisch has been pushing the altered comment meme since Friday when Proteinwisdom went down. It’s been picked up by the easily manipulated like SadlyNo and promoted. The record exists, but it’s only one more small step down the path of intellectual dishonesty to claim the record itself is also altered.
Things are actually going swimmingly for Frisch as far as her modified agenda is concerned. She hit the mainstream through Drudge. She’s posted another taunting parody of an apology on her site that vectors any readers to SadlyNo post on Jeff. The left is slowly coalescing behind her. Her 15 secs of fame on a slow weekend is staggering along towards 15 mins. If she can keep uping the ante, she’ll get there. I anticipatet much more from Dr Deb in the next few days.
She’s batshit crazy, but not, unfortunately, stupid.
Comment by Just Passing Through — 7/10/2006 @ 12:18 pm
I updated the post with the Sadly, No! quote that I was trying to find when I discovered that all their comments had disappeared.
Here I wanted to *use* their comment against them, and at the same time they were accusing me of deliberately disappearing their comments.
Very frustrating. Probably just a taste of what Goldstein is feeling.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 12:21 pm
B-b-b-b-b-but… I HATE HATE HATE HATE HAAAAAAAAAAATE that evil Reich-Winger Rethuglikkkan Goldstein! I hate him so much it hurts! Can you not see how he cruelly eviscerated my comment and clearly “sexed up” Frisch’s comments to gin up outrage? Is that not the most obvious, most logical explanation for what happened? How can you even trust that vicious, evil, bible-humping, torture-loving neokkkon war-humper!
Comment by Not Shorter Rightwing Arseholes, but I play him on TV — 7/10/2006 @ 12:22 pm
I mean, my harsh language only shows how much I HAAAATE that evil, evil man!
The fact that you remark about that, well, that just proves that you are pretending not be an evil, hate-filled Rethuglikkkan, which you ARE, by definition, no matter how much you deny it!
Comment by Not Shorter Rightwing Arseholes, but I play him on TV — 7/10/2006 @ 12:25 pm
That was supposed to be “She’ll hit the mainstream through Drudge.”
Comment by Just Passing Through — 7/10/2006 @ 12:25 pm
Just Passing Through,
I agree she is playing to her strengths and making lemonade from lemons but the comments that she admits to–threatening a two-year-old to name one–are damning beyond salvation.
She can cry victim but it’s hard to see who could believe it. I think we do need to be vigilant to abuse and lies though, and by “we” I mean sensible parties on both sides of the aisle. That woman should not be allowed to practice in learning institutions.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 12:27 pm
Parents shouldn’t blog…
Why the hell are they blogging? They have young children. Shouldnt they be spending time with their kids instead of wasting all their time trying to dazzle strangers with their political insights?…
Trackback by Don Surber — 7/10/2006 @ 12:40 pm
Both comments are correct.
The fact that you are (patently) unhinged, however, does.
*Yawn*. Too easy. Next…?
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 12:40 pm
Man, I hate it when my ‘limited vocabulary’ gets in my way. That’s when I always resort to cussing!
You may not know this, but I have just as much English Learnin’ as your fancypants idol Mr. Goldstein. I got my BS in English, then went on to ‘teach some classes’ (be a TA, that is called) while I was working on my graduate work. Then I got a job running supercomputers, so getting a phd to teach about Beowulf didn’t seem to appeal to me anymore.
Cursing does not come from my limited vocabulary (and both my grandfathers fought in WWII, to protect our nation, just like your daddy, so don’t feel special or anything). Oh, then there’s the whole ’satire’ thing - not sure if you are familiar with that. My wellspring of invectives is sourced purely in your asinine support of the Chimp In Chief who turns everything he touches to poop.
And, Patterico, your ‘basis for libel’ idiocy is quite laughable. Remember when Limbaugh sued Franken over ‘Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot’? Guess what - Limbaugh lost. Satire my friends.
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 12:42 pm
No argument there.
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 12:48 pm
I don’t know what satire means, but I sure like saying it.
See, it is your support for a man, excuse me, chimp I HATE HATE HATE HAAAAATE so much that drives me to cursing.
Comment by Not Shorter Rightwing Arseholes, but I play him on TV — 7/10/2006 @ 12:49 pm
I’m beginning to think Surber shouldn’t blog.
Comment by Jim Treacher — 7/10/2006 @ 12:51 pm
Exactly, Kent - that’s why I called it a BS, as in bullPOOP. I actually got what was called a B.A., aka Bachelor of the Arts, but I think BS is much more appropriate, since the only reason people get English degrees is because they want to speak pretentiously.
Or write, or whatever.
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 12:52 pm
Rick O’Shea,
I agree with everything you say. However, the points you made don’t enter into her calculations. She does not have to successfully don the mantle of victimhood. The attempt just serves keeps her current. Infamy will satisfy her agenda.
Also, in my comment I meant to say “She’ll hit the mainstream through Drudge.” and not “She hit the…”. It was also supposed to be at the end of the paragraph where it makes sense. I’d edited it before submitting it, but the edits didn’t take or something.
Comment by Just Passing Through — 7/10/2006 @ 12:52 pm
Satire, as in “If some nutcase kidnapped your child tomorrow and did to her what was done to your fellow Coloradan, Jon-Benet Ramsey, I wouldn’t give a damn.” Boy that was some satire there.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 12:55 pm
He’s a satirist now.
Dripping with satire.
Stop it, you’re killing me with your satire!
Care to tell me where I ever brought up Bush or any of his policies? I did not vote for Bush. Goldstein is not my idol.
You also compare your education to Goldstein’s. Bravo. Now I read his blog next to yours. What happened? Is it the drinking? Do you just not care? Is your hatred (sorry, your satire) such a blanket of protection that you don’t have to bother with cogent analysis or coherent arguments?
BTW, you have now twice ignored my criticism of your main argument. Should I expect a rebuttal in the near future?
Comment by thelinyguy — 7/10/2006 @ 12:55 pm
And, Not Me, I don’t recall writing the word ‘hate’. Hate is a very strong term that I only apply once in a while. As far as I can tell, I don’t hate anyone. I may hate the killing of thousands of innocents as a direct result of a war you supported. I may hate the fact that Abu Ghraib occurred as a direct result of the war that you supported. I may hate the fact that we run an illegal gulag in Cuba that even our right-leaning scotus said was against the law, or the fact that George thinks he can ignore the ‘quaint’ Geneva Conventions.
I don’t hate George, you or anybody. I hate the terrible things your group has done. Sorry I have this thing called a ‘moral center’ (not the Bill Bennet kind - a real one). When my sense of decency has been violated so many times by the right, it makes me use invectives. When the American ideals (such as no torture, etc) my grandfathers fought to defend are constantly abrogated in gross violations of international law, I curse.
But whatever - keep it up, fellas. You’re all doing a heckuva job sitting in your basements with cheeto-stained hands, drawing up the plans for the next ‘war’, perhaps in Iran (or perhaps North Korea, which George is messing up just like everything else he’s done).
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 12:59 pm
Satire, as in “If some nutcase kidnapped your child tomorrow and did to her what was done to your fellow Coloradan, Jon-Benet Ramsey, I wouldn’t give a damn.” Boy that was some satire there.
Go read my post - I wrote that I in no way support the actions and/or words of some random bit player on the left who I never heard of before.
Good argument there, pal.
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 1:02 pm
Zoomed over the Everest’s peak of your cranium so high and so fast, you couldn’t even see the contrail, huh?
Here, precious. Finish up your malt 40. Daddy gets cross when you neglect your breakfast.
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 1:02 pm
So Shorter I suppose you prefer the code of the enemy, the code that includes hacking off civilians’ heads with bowie knives and distributing the act over the internet? Or maybe you like blending in your own children while attacking the enemy? Or blowing up civilians in trains or skyscrapers, or massacring two hundred children at Beslan? Or is it those sexy chador the women have to wear, as profiled in this week’s Time? Sorry we’re infringing on your rights there, but you know you can always move to Europe where the thinking is so much closer to your own.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 1:05 pm
“Cursing does not come from my limited vocabulary”
But, apparently, your limited vocabulary does include it.
Comment by sharon — 7/10/2006 @ 1:06 pm
Gee sorry I missed your post, Shorter, I’ll have to dig it up.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 1:06 pm
Ah. Now it all (finally) becomes clear.
I hadn’t been made aware, until just now, of SRA’s creepy, self-documented history as Jeff Goldstein’s frothing and obsessed online stalker.
So: it’s all just some weird, fetishistic Fatal Attractions-type thing, then.
A weird, DRUNKEN and fetishistic Fatal Attractions-type thing, I mean.
Yikes.
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 1:16 pm
SRA…please try to keep your eye on the ball, son. We are not here to debate international politics on this thread, so quit changing the subject. You satire (hate) Jeff Goldstein so much that you went over to his blog and called him names. You then acted like “a prissy little baby who drums up affronts wherever one may find them in an attempt to prove that you aren’t” crippled with satire (hate) by waving out the instance where jeff deleted your comment and inserted a joke at your expense (again, because your only apparent purpose in being there was to call him names…for satire of course). You use this as evidence of him being an evil asshole or some such combination of satiric (hateful) words. Just admit that you don’t like Goldstein because of politics, not because he’s done something specific and undeserved to you. In fact, you really do seem to satire (hate) him.
The real point here is that this incident you cite is supposed to lend more weight to the claim that Jeff Goldstein edited Frisch’s comments. You failed as soon as you linked to your site and opened your mouth.
Comment by thelinyguy — 7/10/2006 @ 1:17 pm
How does Carl Rove do it?
Comment by Gbear — 7/10/2006 @ 1:20 pm
I was just wondering that exact same thing Gbear. I think Goldstein is a Rovian plant and SRA is a Goldstein plant. F’ing brilliant. He actually had me going there for a minute. I always heard leftists were beyond parody, now I get it.
Comment by thelinyguy — 7/10/2006 @ 1:30 pm
I do not like Goldstein’s politics - you are right. I don’t ‘hate’ him, as I don’t know him personally.
His support of torture and an illegal, immoral war makes me not like his ideas even more.
His racist statements, which were the subject of the post I was referencing, was the reason why I went over there and started leaving my comments. I called him a racist because he made racist ‘jokes’ and tried to call it ‘humor’ or ‘irony’. My sister is Mexican, and I don’t appreciate his racist bullpoop. My ‘only apparent purpose’ (not apparent to you, I guess) was to let him know I didn’t like what he said, and I used my limited Spanish to color what I had to say.
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 1:31 pm
For somebody with “Shorter” in his screen name, he sure does go on.
Comment by Jim Treacher — 7/10/2006 @ 1:33 pm
Actually I know that Shorter is a racist.
He probably was one of those who saw the movie “King Kong” and thought “look at the negro causing all the mayham, more proof that Peter Jackson is racist!” while most people thought “hey look at that big monkey/ape i.e. non-human.”
SHORTER = RACIST
Comment by J — 7/10/2006 @ 1:34 pm
I only got to the #2 comment from the obsessive-compulsives at S*dlyNo and had to immediately comment.
They are as contemptible as Frisch. I have many other things I could say, but this is Patterico’s site and I respect the tone he sets.
But let me say I wouldn’t be at all surprised if someone affiliated with S*dly was connected with the DDoS attacks on Jeff’s site. There’s no bottom to their pond o’scum.
Comment by Darleen — 7/10/2006 @ 1:34 pm
Actually the war is neither immoral or illegal.
SHORTER LIED, IRAQIS DIED
Shorter is a fascist. Clear and simple.
Comment by J — 7/10/2006 @ 1:35 pm
Look at Shorter trying to push his morals on everyone.
Typical…for a goosestepper.
Comment by J — 7/10/2006 @ 1:37 pm
Man, J, I feel so….baited. Maybe I should bite?
Eh, no - not worth it…
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 1:38 pm
I hope the Perfesser doesn’t end up boiling Goldstein’s rabbit.
Comment by Dave — 7/10/2006 @ 1:41 pm
So you deny not being a racist and fascist and a liar?
Shorter = Racist
Shorter = Fascist
Shorter = Liar
End of story.
Comment by J — 7/10/2006 @ 1:44 pm
Shorter let me ask you a serious question, and I promise I won’t mock your answer (and hope the neighbors don’t as well): What do you think would happen if we pulled our troops home, let the NYT publish whatever it wants, and stop all of the programs that the left has been criticizing? I mean this in the context of the terrorists. Specifically, would you feel as safe?
Have at it. I PROMISE civility.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 1:49 pm
His “racist” jokes are irony, because irony deficient (I’m using your sense of satire as a litmus here) people such as yourself take them seriously and call anyone to the right of howard dean racists, especially Jeff Goldstein. He’s in an interracial marriage, (I think) and yet he’s a racist. Just against Mexicans, then? Or is it more likely that he was making fun of such accusations through irony?
I was called a racist on wizbang by someone that sounds just like you for saying that Cynthia McKinney was at fault for striking that capital police officer. I hope that’s not your standard too, but from what I’ve heard it wouldn’t surprise me. You seem to enjoy making assumptions and jumping to conclusions. Apparently I’m a Bush-supporting, Goldstein-idolizing, torture-supporting, something-something, blah blah blah for some reason or other.
Comment by thelinyguy — 7/10/2006 @ 1:50 pm
I honestly can’t decide which is the more suprising: that your sister is a man, or that he is (apparently) full of “racist bullpoop.” Will you tell me some more about your “B.A. in English,” if I manage to talk the bartender into allowing you to suck on his counter rag again…?
… and, of course: none of your self-righteous voguing and vamping does anything to explain away the creeped-out, obsessive-compulsive blog dedicated to ranting about Jeff Goldstein on a nearly daily basis, simply because the poor man kept refusing your incessant requests for the two of you to “rassle nekkid, like the gladiators, mmmmMMMMMM” while Elton John’s “Tiny Dancer” played on a continual tape loop in the background.
“Seek” and “therapy,” muffin. In that order.
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 1:50 pm
Actus is Protein Wisdom’s special child. His messages are in special short packets, he wears a tinfoil hockey helmet, and special nanny software has been installed on his computer to protect him from cognition.
We tease because he annoys us.
Comment by Alan Kellogg — 7/10/2006 @ 1:51 pm
And, kent, do stalkers end up getting sick of what they are doing? I started the ‘Shorter Jeff Goldstein’ thing after he banned me and changed my comments. I got over 2000 hits on the first day.
After a couple of weeks I got burned out, because I can’t stand to read anything he writes - he’s predictable and not funny - so I broadened the scope of the blog to include the entire right wing. So now I stalk the entire right wing, if that’s ok with you…
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 1:52 pm
Shorter you obviously didn’t read his postmortem interview with Zarqawi. Now THAT was funny.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 1:54 pm
while Elton John’s “Tiny Dancer” played on a continual tape loop in the background
That, I must admit, was funny.
Comment by Shorter Rightwing Arseholes — 7/10/2006 @ 1:59 pm
Shorter why would you go through the trouble to attack Jeff, setting up that website and all? Karl Rove is out there man! Bush lied, people died! Go after the Big Fish! Your congressman! Your senator! Joe Lieberman! He’s out there out of control, the frigging guy SUPPORTS THE WAR!! He’s all into DEFENDING AMERICA!! C’mon, review a Michael Moore movie! I mean c’mon man, MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 2:01 pm
Couldn’t say, as I’ve never seen the (putative) attraction of the thing, myself.
Judging from the rapid deterioration of your grammar and sentence structure, however: it’s doubtless safe to venture that they do grow a good deal more drunken, as the grueling, self-imposed regimen of the day’s trolling rolls right along. (… and, of course: the very fact that you actually established a blog solely to whinny and mewl at another blogger to begin with is more than simply “wrong” — it’s scary wrong. Nurse Ratchet wrong, even.)
Again: yikes.
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 2:04 pm
Well, I have a child to take care of (Jesus, should I be talking about that with all these Frisch supporters around?) and can’t spend all day monitoring the stupid spam filter, which appears to be catching way too many comments.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 2:07 pm
Patterico it seems to hold the comments up and then spit them out, back to the time they were supposed to have been posted. Not the end of the world, apart from the fact that a lot of comments could go unnoticed.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 2:09 pm
I’m having to hand-approve virtually everything.
This damn thing is out of control. I hate it.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 2:24 pm
You’re doing it all for the hegemony and the oil, mannnnn! CONFESS, you freakin’ neocon bushitler warpig fascist! CONFESSSSSSSSSS — !!!
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 2:28 pm
It’s Rove I tell you. He’s a frigging CyberRove.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 2:31 pm
Kent it is becoming clear that you are a true fellow red RightWing ‘O Facist. May I be the first to say: You suck.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 2:34 pm
All the folks here and elsewhere who take issue with Jeff, his blog, and his commenters, seem strangely unable to leave the guy alone. This is especially the case for Ms. Frisch, who is promising to drop the subject over on her blog. But I will bet she’ll be blogging about this into next month, as will the others, like Shorter Buffalowing Arseholes, who object to such a “racist supporter of an illegal, immoral war”.
Look at all the people still commenting about that stupid prick Thersites, and perpetuating the meme about Thers being outed and his kid being referenced in a vulgar manner. Never mind that it’s all bullshit. Proven bullshit.
Fast forward two months, when we’re verging on the election, and tempers heat up as Dem’s realize they’re gonna lose another one, then someone pulls the Frisch card to score some stupid points, portraying sympathy for the Devil and hatred for Goldstein (or any other similar blogger).
The left is that predictable.
Comment by Brian — 7/10/2006 @ 2:46 pm
And it’s a hard thing to do. Get a Bachelor of Sciences degree in English.
Anyway, let’s bracket this thing. Why should that mendacious mental-patient-to-be be exemplary of anything. Because she lied about wanting a “ceasefire,” and instead (as compulsive liars will do) claimed that Jeff had altered her comments (perhaps she’ll be able to use the Patrick Kennedy defense), Jeff will now, I suppose, make this a legal matter, which he would have before were he the insane, hateful wingnut you make him out to be. So, let’s let it go for now. Certainly we all have more important things to do than to contemplate ad nauseum the psychosis of Dr. Deb Frisch. I do wish that Ace or Wuzzadem will do her imaginary advice call-in radio show on Air America, but that’s only because I love theater of the absurd.
Maybe something good will come of it, even for Deb Frisch. Maybe as a result of being prosecuted, she’ll end up getting the help that she so obviously needs. I honestly think that her behavior (given that she studies “Decision Making”) is a cry for help. Further, maybe institutions of higher education will be more careful to vet for online signs of instability.
Remember, Deb solicited Jeff to commit suicide. But he’s such a paste eater that she had so show him how.
Comment by Dan Collins — 7/10/2006 @ 2:46 pm
Nice dogs.
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/preps/11198.php
Comment by PC14 — 7/10/2006 @ 2:49 pm
Do I? Or do I? My bum itches. Palestine. Ah, those accursed “lib’ruls.” I have a stuffed toy tiger, I do, I do. PEAK OIL, MISTER! Ham. HamhamhamhamhamhamHAM.
Sorry. Sorry. I was attempting to “channel” actus for a moment, there. Purely as a sort of thought experiment, you understand. You were saying, again…?
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 2:55 pm
Shorter said:
All thoughtful and rational people hate the killing of innocents. It is, however, intellectually dishonest to not consider the context of why thousands of innocents have been killed. First, most of the innocents being killed are being killed by people other than Americans and allied soldiers. The insurgents, whether foreign or domestic, kill many innocents daily. A significant part of the domestic insurgents did not magically start killing innocents in 2003. Before the invasion they were doing the same thing at the direction of Saddam.
Those innocents who do die at the hands of coalition forces fit into two categories: those who are killed unintentionally and those killed against orders to the contrary. It behooves us to use any practical means at our disposal to prevent unbalanced people from joining the military, but the fact that we are imperfect at that task doesn’t, in my opinion, invalidate any use of military force. Likewise, the fact that innocents die in shooting wars isn’t a disqualifier. It is a factor that has to be considered in the calculation of whether war is the correct answer to the problem. The better the precision of the weapons used and the more accurate the tactical intelligence available, the less unintended civilian casualties and the less weight this factor carries. We seem to be making great and continuing improvements on the precision of our weapons, but tactical intelligence is more difficult to control and predict.
It is interesting that you describe Abu Ghraib as an event rather than specifying the abuses that occurred there. I condemn the illegal abuses that happened there and believe that they were handled correctly by prosecuting those involved. I don’t think those abuses can be used to support a conclusion that we should not detain captured enemies, or that, once detained, they should not be interrogated to determine what they know about enemy operations and infrastructure. The methods that are allowable are indeed worthy of debate.
SCOTUS did not say any such thing and I doubt seriously that you’re careless enough to not know better. SCOTUS may lean slightly more right with O’Conner’s replacement by Alito, but Roberts sat this one out, as you know, eliminating that factor. What SCOTUS did say was that the use of military tribunals at Gitmo was unconstitutional
without congressional approval, and contrary to the Geneva Convention. Stephens, in the majority opinion, went on to say that there was no particular problem with indefinite detention without trial as an alternative. I am no SCOTUS or constitutional scholar, or even a lawyer, but I can read as can you and the wording was unambiguous and relatively unencumbered by arcane legal terminology.
It would be helpful if you could explain what parts of the Geneva Conventions that George Bush is ignoring. It would also be helpful if you’d avoid using distractors like “quaint” where Gonzales referred to certain provisions of the GC as quaint, where they were obviously exactly that. “In my judgement, this new paradigm… renders quaint some of the provisions requiring that captured enemy be afforded such things as commissary privledges, scrip (i.e., advances of monthly pay), athletic uniforms, and scientific instruments. http://msl1.mit.edu/furdlog/docs/gonzales_memo_quaint.pdf
Which group would that be? Humanity, the West, America, the Coalition, Conservatives, Bush supporters, white people, or atheists. I belong to all of those groups and yet still seem to be able to reach different conclusions than others in the same group. Therefore lumping me into these groups in order to insinuate that I share a common opinion with them is incorrect and objectionable.
We all have a moral center. That center is dynamic in some, and unrecognizable in others. For most it moves seldom, and then slowly, and falls within a range that most people can relate to.
Nothing makes you use invective. You chose to do so. When you do so, it detracts from your point unless the usage is clever or humerous. Regardless of your opinion, it is fact that anything that causes members of your audience to ignore or be distracted from your argument must therefore detract from it.
Unless you define torture down to harsh language, it’s difficult to argue convincingly that there are constant gross violations. That, as I’ve stated before, is arguable. I doubt your grandfathers really had torture high on their list of ideals they were fighting for, unless they were unusual, but its a handy assertion and sounds good if taken at face value.
Ouch, got me there. Other than the fact that I have no basement, avoid Cheetos and other carbohydrates like the plague, and haven’t been invited to any war planning sessions.
Comment by Immolate — 7/10/2006 @ 2:56 pm
Brian, can you summarize (with links) the Thersites story? Briefly? Because I see the left is all over the place today saying that Goldstein outed the guy. I have no idea what happened there. Can you fill me in?
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 2:57 pm
Sadly Still Consuming Oxygen!,
Great. So which of you little douchebags is it that likes to think they’ve googled me up as a married swinger in Maryland and drops cute little hints to the effect? You know, the Buffalo area nitwit. Which of you little bastards is it that is oh so interested in “outing” me, even though I’m not really “in”?
Comment by Pablo — 7/10/2006 @ 3:00 pm
NIce fisking, Immolate- slow, calm, methodical and oh, so effective.
Comment by Tom — 7/10/2006 @ 3:00 pm
I was wondering the same thing, what is this Thersite of which you speak?
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 3:08 pm
Every place I go for the Thersites story seems long on assertions and short on links.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 3:12 pm
It’ll take me awhile to gather the linkage re Thersites, but will try. Problem is, Thers closed the blog in question, Metacomments, so much of the evidence went with it, allowing the assertions to live on that much easier.
Basically, during the whole kerfuffle between the two bloggers, a commenter disclosed information about Thers’ identity, along with his wife (a.k.a. NY Mary) on Jeff’s blog. Several hours elapsed, during which Jeff was either asleep or out of the house while Thers was emailing him demanding the info be removed from the comments area, until Jeff finally did remove the offending information. In other words, he was as magnanimous to Thers as he has been today with Frisch by removing public newspaper articles about Frisch from his comments area, per Deb’s request.
After Jeff removed Thers’ info, a commenter (many think it was a chap who goes by the handle of NTodd, but who used a sock puppet identity, so it’s just conjecture on our part) placed an offnsive comment about Thers’ kid on Thers’ site, not Jeff’s. Thers went ballistic, along with his commentariat. Jeff volunteered to look into the matter if Thers would give Jeff the IP address from the comment so he could check and see if it was a PW commenter, which Thers was certain it was. To this day, that IP address has not been offered up, and never will.
Soon thereafter, Thers and his crew kept at Jeff. They wouldn’t let it go, wouldn’t accept the facts facing them. Jeff finally threw in the nice-guy towel a dn “outed” Thers and NYMary, but using information that was readily and publicly available, interestingly enough on NTodd’s blog. This is Thers’ new blog, and the comments there are monitored scrupulously by its owner. Wonder why.
Again, I’ll round up some links, but since Thers’ old blog is gone, so is the evidence.
Comment by Brian — 7/10/2006 @ 3:20 pm
Frisch voluntarily resigned her job the moment those comments were made public. That’s proof enough to anybody but a demented Leftist that she made those comments.
Comment by Carlos — 7/10/2006 @ 3:29 pm
Re: #131 Nice dogs.
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/preps/11198.php
What’s even more troubling is that if you click on the picture you’ll see a small child in the frame - probably not much older than J.G.’s.
Here we have a woman who has made sick and threatening sexual comments about a small child, yet possibly has one in her care?!? I think someone needs a visit from Protective Services.
Comment by TakeFive — 7/10/2006 @ 3:29 pm
The Thersites thing started here.
And, it being PW, you should probably read everything for about 3 weeks forward from there.
As has been mentioned, the portions of the discussion that happened at Thersites’ place have been either unfortunately or conveniently deleted, depending on where you stand. You can draw from that, and from who did the deleting, what you will.
Comment by Pablo — 7/10/2006 @ 3:33 pm
TakeFive,
Beth from My Vast Rightwing Conspiracy has been all over that. I don’t care how the woman gets help, but it’s clear that she needs it. She is in a hell of her own making, and she’s high on the adrenaline rush of her newfound notoriety, but she is going to crater badly. Then we can revisit this issue with the nice folks from Sadly, No!
Comment by Dan Collins — 7/10/2006 @ 3:33 pm
Like in the comment that he took down. It was all very onlineintegrity.org worthy.
Comment by actus — 7/10/2006 @ 3:39 pm
“She is in a hell of her own making, and she’s high on the adrenaline rush of her newfound notoriety, but she is going to crater badly.”
Plus, she has to get those dogs to Oregon.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 3:40 pm
Dr. Deb says that her latest apology is going to be her last post on the “Goldstein affair” for at least a month. Do we have a pool going? I get tomorrow.
http://debfrisch.com/admin/mt-tb.cgi/502
Comment by Dan Collins — 7/10/2006 @ 3:40 pm
>>>What’s even more troubling is that if you click on the picture you’ll see a small child in the frame - probably not much older than J.G.’s.
I would consider reporting this incident to Child Protective Services just to give them a heads up.
Comment by Carlos — 7/10/2006 @ 3:41 pm
Sounds like your argument might be with the mysterious NTodd, actus. Why don’t you research that?
Comment by Dan Collins — 7/10/2006 @ 3:41 pm
I think we should probably just try to take personal repercussions out of it at this point.
Comment by Patterico — 7/10/2006 @ 3:46 pm
I agree.
Comment by Dan Collins — 7/10/2006 @ 3:48 pm
What do you mean by “personal repercussions”? It’s mighty personal to that child if she’s in the care of a sociopath. Everything Frisch has done vis a vis her child molestation/death threat comments suggests borderline sociopathic. I’m not being hyperbolic. What it hurt just to forward someone at Child Protective Services the info and facts.
Comment by Carlos — 7/10/2006 @ 3:55 pm
Carlos,
I’m not sure, because of the antecedent is vague, but I’m pretty sure he meant my suggestion that actus dig into NTodd.
But I am pretty sure that actus is too lazy to do that, so my suggestion wasn’t really serious.
Comment by Dan Collins — 7/10/2006 @ 4:00 pm
Research what?
Comment by actus — 7/10/2006 @ 4:02 pm
Who really initially blew the whistle on Thersites and NYMary in comments. Why they didn’t forward Jeff the IP address. Why they nuked the site. Why they lied about Goldstein till he got pissed enough to re-post it. I don’t know.
Comment by Dan Collins — 7/10/2006 @ 4:05 pm
Here’s some truthiness for you, actus. Pay attention to the misprision at the end of the piece, because it’s priceless:
http://independentsources.com/2006/07/08/deb-frisch/
Comment by Dan Collins — 7/10/2006 @ 4:10 pm
I think we should probably just try to take personal repercussions out of it at this point.
I was just a little startled to read the things that woman had written and then see her in a home setting with a small child. The comment about a visit from CPS was not made to out of vengence, but rather concern.
While men have a virtual monopoly on sexual violence against children, this is a woman who has written of deeply troubling and explict acts with a child that is just a toddler, as well as other violent sexual imagery.
I’ve heard “they seemed so nice…” too many times after a tragedy. But it’s not my kid, right? So I’ll get back to working on my quaterly report now…
Comment by TakeFive — 7/10/2006 @ 4:13 pm
It wouldn’t take much effort at all to forward some pertinent links the Child Protective Services about this. If it’s done in good faith and you submit only the facts, there should be no negative legal repercussions to the sender.
Comment by Carlos — 7/10/2006 @ 4:20 pm
Shorter is starting to make Deb Frisch look positively sane! And that takes real effort.
Comment by MikeD — 7/10/2006 @ 4:21 pm
I don’t see why that matters. Not for the purposes of onlineintegrity.org. That standard isn’t publicly available information. Its about respecting the wishes of the subject of the information. Quite a big difference.
Comment by actus — 7/10/2006 @ 4:23 pm
actus,
I see. So, then, it’s fine to lie about someone online, and when you do it, your anonymity ought to be protected. Because it’s about the integrity.
Comment by Dan Collins — 7/10/2006 @ 4:27 pm
Oh, dear lord… this is just too, too falling-down-funny NOT to share, really and truly: Psycho-Stalker Deb “French Kissin’ Kidz, Yo!” Frisch Botches Her Own (Planned) Interview!
*******************
A guy from Fox News named Richard Carbery emailed me on Saturday asking me if I’d be willing to be interviewed on Monday. I said yes, but then, I talked to people who actually watch Fox News and they strongly advised me against being interviewed on Fox, on account of they bully moonbat guests like me. Here’s the correspondence so far. Any advice on how to reply to Mr. Carbery would be appreciated.
Ms. Frisch,
Are you available for a phone interview on Monday. We will discuss what you’ve stipulated to have written, the blogosphere etc. I need a reply either way.
Regards,
REC
Dear Richard,
Of course. Any time Monday is fine with me. I was interviewed by Richard Harris on NPR when I worked for the National Science Foundation. I’ll try to find the interview and send it to you, because I know you are really into fair and balanced reporting and the more information the better!
Deborah Frisch, Ph.D.
Thanks. I’ll be in touch with you on Monday morning. Considering my request was for Monday, I wouldn’t have the time or need to entertain your NPR experience but I appreciate the offer. Let’s pencil in 710P EST via phone with John Gibson. Where can I reach you?
REC
I’m not sure where I’ll be. You can give me your phone number or else I can email you when I decide where I’ll be.
Could you tell me a little about the format of the show. I assume you’ll be interviewing Jeff also. Will he be interviewed by phone also? How do you plan to put it together for the show. I don’t watch Fox News so I don’t have an image of what the segment will look like, how long it will be, what will be the visual since all you’ll have is my audio, etc.
DF
This is for national radio. I didn’t plan to have Jeff on. Just you and the host. So, it can be done by phone. This all pending the host’s approval, he’s back in town tomorrow and I haven’t even run it by him.
REC
Richard,
I talked to a reporter from the Arizona Daily Star today and they are going to have a story tomorrow. Jeff and I have resolved our differences and both want to de-escalate the situation. So I am going to pass on the offer to be interviewed by Fox News.
Thanks,
Deborah
I’ll ask Jeff if he can verify your claim. Regardless, we will be discussing this story, not only in Arizona but nationally. Considering you agreed to come on, I would ask that you reconsider.
REC
Richard,
Why don’t you ask the host to email me with a rough idea of what he wants to talk about and I’ll think about it.
Thanks,
Deborah
We don’t do that. We want to discuss the story about your interactions with Jeff and the “tone” in the blogosphere. I emailed Jeff, with whom I’ve never corresponded to before and he claims that (your claim) that you’ve put this behind you, is false. I don’t know if this is a pattern with you but you agreed to come on, now you’re obfuscating coming on and perhaps misrepresenting the situation. If you want to “de-escalate” why not hop on the phone with the host for five minutes and participate.
REC
This guy sure knowz how to sweet talk a moonbat!
**********************
You could hold this sad, silly creature up to your ear and actually hear the ocean roar. Swear to God.
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 4:27 pm
I’m not the one that came up with those principles. And I do think that people get pissed and take revenge. But to me, thats the sort of retaliation that those principles claim to avoid. If someone is lying about you, you call them a liar. An anonymous liar. At least, thats what those principles seem to call for.
Comment by actus — 7/10/2006 @ 4:44 pm
Every time actus uses the word “principles”: a li’l baby kitten goes blind.
And then dies.
Comment by Kent — 7/10/2006 @ 4:51 pm
Jeff, end the attempt to flip the situation and put her in jail.
Comment by jpm100 — 7/10/2006 @ 4:56 pm
Sorry, actus,
My response got flagged, so we’ll just have to wait to see whether the blog administrator lets it post.
The tension is palpable.
Comment by Dan Collins — 7/10/2006 @ 4:57 pm
Oh. To be clear. They aint my principles
Comment by actus — 7/10/2006 @ 4:58 pm
Thank you so much, immolate. I’m a lazy bastard, and I so didn’t feel like going to all that trouble. Nice job. And I notice he hasn’t been back.
Comment by CraigC — 7/10/2006 @ 5:08 pm
This stream just proves how public these comments are, and how you can’t post here (or anywhere) unless, to paraphrase the popular trusim, you don’t mind having it on the front page of the newspaper. It also underscores the responsibility Frisch has (had) as a professor, and the lumps she has to take now that her lack of sanity is out of the bag.
Comment by Rick O'Shea — 7/10/2006 @ 5:23 pm
Here’s a story in The Arizona Star about this incident:
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/137300.php
The most hilarious part is this excerpt:
//Now that she won’t be teaching, Frisch said she plans to finish writing a book on decision-making.//
As a great mind once said, “You can’t make this shit up!”
Comment by Cap'n Billy — 7/10/2006 @ 5:43 pm
Immolate, good response. As CraigC said, I didn’t have the energy to go through all that for the 1000′th time and you did it better anyway. It’s not like it’ll do any good, though. You can’t actually debate with some people.
Comment by thelinyguy — 7/10/2006 @ 5:46 pm
How about a caption contest? (Or are we still de-escalating?)
Comment by Dave — 7/10/2006 @ 6:12 pm
Okay, how long before we get the “okay, this is really the last time I’m posting” message?
This will be my last post on South(west)paw on the Goldstein affair for at least one month.
Comment by Wesson — 7/10/2006 @ 6:13 pm
“and both my grandfathers fought in WWII”
Only one war? Tsk, tsk, tsk.
Comment by sharon — 7/10/2006 @ 6:25 pm
Aah! The goggles, they do nothing! You bastard!
[dies]
Comment by Li'l Baby Kitten — 7/10/2006 @ 6:51 pm
Seriously, one wonders on which side. Given the dissolution of their gene pool, I suspect the Milice.
Cordially…
Comment by Rick — 7/10/2006 @ 7:14 pm
The Frisch attack on Goldstein - the latest news, along with other misc. blog notes…
Here’s a refresher on what happened last