A Comment from Mrs. Patterico on the TBogg Thing
Mrs. P. put up a comment at TBogg’s (her idea, not mine), so I thought I’d note it. You can read her comment here.
The post she is responding to is summarized in the extended entry, and her comment is quoted in full. I’m not blogging about this any more, but I thought I’d let her have her say.
The post that Mrs. P. is commenting on is titled “Reap Me,” with a picture of a tornado. In it, TBogg says:
Unfortunately, and I base this on the emails that I have just spent the evening reading, the end result is that Patterico’s Last Stand has pissed a lot of people off. A lot of people. And here is their concern: Patterico is an officer of the court employed by the District Attorney’s office in Los Angeles. As such he may have access to information or databases or god knows what that he conceivably, and I want to emphasize conceivably, use to get information on bloggers who don’t share his views. When one reads comments like this:
Kevin,
Glenn Greenwald departed the United States on June 22, 2006 and hasn’t come back since. If you want to know how I know that and more, send me an Email.
Posted by: Baggi at July 21, 2006 06:30 AMPeople get a little suspicious. Now I want to be clear that the above did not come from Patterico’s blog and has no direct relation to what has gone on between Patterico and myself, but when people start connecting dots a picture starts to emerge and Patterico may have accidentally put himself in the line of fire. There are people who already think that.
The idea that I have used government databases to look up information on bloggers is not true and has no basis in reality. I don’t understand why TBogg posted a comment from the Wizbang blog, from a commenter I never heard of — especially since it “did not come from Patterico’s blog and has no direct relation to what has gone on between Patterico and myself.”
But I don’t want to blog about this any more. So I’ll just turn over the floor to Mrs. P. Here is what she said:
I don’t even know if anyone is still reading this thread, but I just read it for the first time tonight. I am Patterico’s wife, and I thought I should come see what all the fuss is about. For what it’s worth, my political leanings are far to the left of my husband’s. When we vote, we almost always cancel each other out. I don’t think that should matter, but I wanted to say it so that no one writes me off as another right-wing nutcase. I’ll put in my two cents about all of this, again, for what it’s worth.
I think Patrick was wrong for “trying to yank TBogg’s chain” in the first place. Patrick has admitted this much. What really bothers me is all of the accusations/insinuations that he is using government databases or otherwise violating some D.A. policy. All of this because he did a Google search?!? The comment about Glenn Greenwald by “Baggi” that is quoted in this post has nothing to do with Patrick, and, frankly, I resent any implication that Patrick was somehow behind this.
I must say that I don’t spend a lot of time reading blogs (even my own husband’s). The only contribution I ever made to “Patterico’s Pontifications” was a music quote quiz I made up. It surprises me to see how quickly things turn nasty in the blog world. It reminds me of what I think about cars in traffic — people have a lot easier time being jerks in their cars and cutting in line, etc., in ways they would never do if they were standing face-to-face with the other person.
You guys probably don’t care too much about what I have to say, but I’ll say it anyway. I really don’t like being worried that some crazy person is going to find out our real address and try to teach “Patterico” a lesson. (I realize this doesn’t apply to 99.5% of you, but there is a lunatic fringe out there.) I also really don’t like the idea of people going after Patrick’s job. He has said some juvenile things, but he has not done anything close to the things he is being accused of in this comment thread.
That’s my two cents, for what it’s worth.
May I extend my to you, ‘Mrs. Frey’, my deepest condolences
anonymous (NTTAWWT) (993e1a) — 8/6/2006 @ 1:46 amfor this unfortunate situation in which you find yourself.
please ignore the first “my” in that sentence … I was a bit
anonymous (NTTAWWT) (993e1a) — 8/6/2006 @ 1:49 amteary-eyed while trying to type.
Mistake. I’m sorry Mrs. P., but its a mistake to attempt to engage those people – they aren’t rational. Best to not attract attention to oneself.
With what’s been going on in the blogosphere I’ve actually been thinking about not commenting on blogs anymore. I have a wife and daughter and the way these people behave who knows what might set them off. Just look at the way they behave – look at Frisch. Go read the responses to Mrs. P. in that thread at TBogg’s. People are over there posting calling her a retard.
Dwilkers (a1687a) — 8/6/2006 @ 5:04 amThe only post subsequent to Mrs P’s than uses the word ‘retard’ reads (in full):
and followed a post concerning TBogg posting on this site, ie it appears to be directed at Mr (not Mrs) P.
John (549fcf) — 8/6/2006 @ 5:46 amIs it possible to win a poo throwing fight with a monkey? For the monkey, there is no shame in losing because he’s a monkey. Even if you win, you still walk around with some monkey poo on you.
Wesson (c20d28) — 8/6/2006 @ 8:09 amDWilkers,
I agree with John: the “retard” language is directed at me.
Yes, it’s not going over well, which doesn’t really surprise me. There’s “reap what you sow” responses (similar to the headline of the post she’s responding to). At least one person seems to think that my exposure of sock-puppetry by Michael Hiltzik, and discussion of the probable sock-puppetry by Glenn Greenwald, somehow constitutes “outing” — so this is a serial crime of mine, you see. Also, my favorite Internet stalker shows up, of course, saying that I tell everyone he’s been to prison, and then explaining that he never tried to hide it. Well, no kidding. That’s how I know: because he’s said so himself.
I have little doubt that, for some of these people, there is no crime too severe to be disproportionate to *mentioning* a publicly-accessible Google search that could lead to a page someone created himself. Someone could show up at my door and shoot my family, and there would be those who would chalk it up to “reap what you sow.” For mentioning a Google search.
Patterico (50c3cd) — 8/6/2006 @ 8:18 amI think it is unproductive to debate with other bloggers since it always seems to deteriorate to a s**t storm, mostly conducted by commenters who are usually (Excepting Hitzlik, of course) nuttier than the blogger. Hugh Hewitt has such a storm going on now with Andrew Sullivan. The names are better known but the comments, at least on Andrew’s side, are just as juvenile.
Mike K (416363) — 8/6/2006 @ 9:04 amMrs. Patterico –
Yes, things get nasty on the internet, due in part to the dehumanization of the medium. Just as they do inside cars, everyone feels safely anonymous in front of his or her screens and some of them use that cover to behave badly. But unlike with cars, on the internet, it takes a non-trivial investment of time and effort to pierce that anonymity. Patterico and his friends have made smearing people based on their personal lives and outing people who would prefer to remain anonymous– TBogg, smearing Greenwald, whatever silly noise went down with the Golden State guy, etc., etc., etc. – an integral part of their shtick. It’s a way of intimidating opponents rather than engaging them, it’s dangerous and abusive, and it’s completely beyond even the loose norms of acceptable behavior online.
Maybe you should take a gander at just what it is your husband does online – it’s fucked up, immature and, pragmatically speaking, someone will almost certainly take it upon themselves to smear his nose in the shit he makes. Rather than “resenting any implication that Patrick was somehow behind this,” you should take the time to understand why people think it credible that your husband would behave improperly with government databases: he has repeatedly shown himself to be capable of enthusiastically going completely over the line and then glibly justifying the fucked up consequences to himself. After all… he was “just yanking TBogg’s chain, or rattling his cage,” right? That easy ability to justify harming another is precisely why there’s no reason to trust “Patterico,” internet loose cannon, with the kinds of data Patrick Frey, assistant DA, has access to. And no, this isn’t really a question of partisanship: it’s about ethics and maturity, or the lack thereof.
Your husband plays a dirty game, and it wouldn’t be exactly shocking if he got a little muddy. Of course, I do sincerely hope that no one bothers either of you because of “Patterico’s” actions online, and, obviously, they wouldn’t be justified were they to do so.
–cs
cs (498895) — 8/6/2006 @ 9:04 amWhen I said:
At least one person seems to think that my exposure of sock-puppetry by Michael Hiltzik, and discussion of the probable sock-puppetry by Glenn Greenwald, somehow constitutes “outing” — so this is a serial crime of mine, you see.
I think this is the guy I was talking about.
You know, I shouldn’t have opened comments on this thread to begin with, and I’m going to close them now. Having comments just perpetuates the argument. I just wanted to give Mrs. P. her say, not keep this going.
Patterico (50c3cd) — 8/6/2006 @ 9:11 am