Well, it seems I owe an apology to our readers. I really don’t like John Roberts. He lied in his testimony, promising to respect Stare Decisis– established precedent– and has been incredibly revisionist. But my characterization of him as foaming at the mouth, although true– and as described by local media– was over the top. One reader chastized me,

I have to tell you that I was very upset about how you described Roberts’ seizure. Although he’s a despicable man, describing him as “foaming at the mouth”, etc. and all of the other misguided information you gave about epilepsy is very unpalatable and a disservice to your readers.

As a person with epilepsy, and one who has worked with families who have children with epilepsy, I feel that your statements are discriminatory. People with epilepsy are unable to control their seizures, and have enough difficulty simply having them. They don’t need other people making disparaging comments about what they look like when they have the seizure, and that the seizures affect their abilities. That’s a good part of why so many people who suffer with seizures develop depression and low self esteem. It is essential that you clarify this to your readers, and make an apology to all of the people who have epilepsy. Don’t forget, there are MANY people who have/had epilepsy and are brilliant people who add a lot to society. Van Gogh, Tony Coelho, Tchaikovsky, and many more,. all had seizures.

She’s right. While no-one has said the Chief Justice is epileptic, my characterization certainly did feed into the images she described.

Two other readers also chastized me. I appreciate the feedback. Frankly, my thoughts about Roberts fall were much darker. I refrained from voicing them and went with this less severe comment. My preference would be for Roberts to no longer be the Supreme court justice. His continued presence in that role is horrible for the US. Horrible. His first year on the job suggests that he will whittle down rights and established precedents for workers, for reigning in the abuses of corporations, for women, blacks. He is a neanderthal, a despicable, rotten human being who intends to gut the constitution, gut the precedents already established, while protecting the wealthy, the powerful, corporations and extreme right wingers.

So, when I say darker, I mean I would have been happy to see him recover from his fall and seizure as a retiree convalescing — a festering cancer in the brain of our judiciary removed by nature’s natural response to an attacking pestilence.

So, you all have my apology for making a joke out of seizures, a metaphor about foaming at the mouth as a manifestation of right wing mind-set. But the idea that his fall could lead to his replacement on the supreme court– that would be a huge blessing for America. I wish the man, as a human being, no ill will. But as the toxic agent of Bush and the worst intentions of the right wing and the theocorporatocracy, I hope he enjoys an early retirement.

So, if this makes me a horrible person, so be it. The worst thing I can imagine for America, that no amount of electing progressives to replace right wingers can fix or clean up is the continued sitting on the supreme court of the two liars, Roberts and Alito. I’d like to see them gone, ideally by impeachment or voluntary resignation. Nuff said.

There you have it: a not-so-rare glimpse into the mind of one of our friends on the far, far left. Even as he “apologizes” for his previous statement, he couldn’t help himself, saying that he would have liked his seizure and fall to force a retiremant and convalescence, “a festering cancer in the brain of our judiciary removed by nature’s natural response to an attacking pestilence.”

You must have been sweating blood after that moderation session.

The Webmaster allows only comments he chooses and deep sixes the ones that don’t conform to his philosophy.

That is provably false, right here on this site.

“Comments” have long been used by corrupt news orgs in order to convince the public that “everybody” thinks a certain way.

A site owner is not publishing the opinions in his comments. See DiMeo v. Max.

The postings on all websites accurately reflect the opinion of the webmaster.

Not at all. Very often they attack the site owner and/or his opinion, and you can’t realistically argue that such comments reflect his opinion. Comments reflect a site owner’s opinion on allowing free discourse, or perhaps his laziness/disinterest in moderating them, and not much else.

If you have moderated comments then you accept responsibility for what is posted in your comments section. You are reviewing the comment and making the decision on whether or not it should be present.

If on the other hand you have unmoderated comments then it is a free exchange of ideas. Some of the ideas may be stupider and more childish than others but that’s the way it is.

Luckily with a readership of 2 I don’t have to worry about that. They don’t bother commenting they just call and say “That is the most assinine thing I have ever read. WTH were you thinking?”

There are exceptions, Howard. This site being an outstanding example of one. I have disagreed bitterly with Patterico on several posts dealing with police shootings and home searches. Patterico has warned, threatened to ban and I believe banned “conservative” commenters whose comments were over the top. He tolerates, and on occasion even engages, raving lefties like blubonnet and AF as long they remain civil. This site is definitely not an echo chamber for the host.

Wonkette, you, me, and all the rest of us are responsible for containing the filth and hate mail that comes our way and never allow those missives to see the light of day.

The postings on all websites accurately reflect the opinion of the webmaster.