Patterico's Pontifications

12/12/2009

Jeff Goldstein: Man of “Substance”

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 11:38 pm



Back in March, Jeff Goldstein and I agreed to de-escalate a nasty exchange, in which he had labeled me a “liar,” “insane,” an anti-Semite, and such.

Since then, he has repeatedly goaded me and mocked me in comments on his site, such as this comment, for example:

Then call him a liar.

Oh, and Patterico, too. Fuck all of them.

I have no idea where this unprovoked comment came from.

Yesterday I asked Goldstein why he made the above comment. His answer, and I quote:

Because fuck you.

(He later elaborates with some whining about how he had been banned here. That happened in March — and he was still saying “Fuck Patterico” in SEPTEMBER?? Anyway, I just announced his unbanning, at nk’s request. So he’ll have to find something else to snivel about.)

In the very same thread he proclaims:

Personal animus has nothing to do with the points I’m making. It didn’t in the last go round either — at least from my end.

So honorable, this man is. You know, it’s all about the IDEAS with him. As the above makes clear.

It is now clear that the policy of ignoring this man does not work. Israel doesn’t permit itself to be bombarded with unprovoked attacks with no response, does it? No, it doesn’t. Nor should it.

So, fine. The gloves are off.

More tomorrow, starting with Goldstein’s utter distortion of my statements about Robert Stacy McCain.

Details of the phony charge of anti-Semitism to follow, on Monday.

Don’t like it? Skip the posts. I’m tired of holding my fire.

155 Responses to “Jeff Goldstein: Man of “Substance””

  1. fuck him…..

    just for that, i’m going to start shitting in a different corner, and Jeff will just have to go hungry.

    (you can take the high road Pat, i’ve got the low one covered. %-)

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  2. It is now clear that the policy of ignoring this man does not work.

    I don’t think that policy has failed so much as it hasn’t yet been tried.

    John (62fb6f)

  3. Life is too short to waste time mud-wrestling with people like that.

    Steven Den Beste (99cfa1)

  4. this is not the future I don’t think

    happyfeet (2c63dd)

  5. I fidget with the digit dots
    frustration rules out there
    as the XU-1 connects the spot
    but the matrix grid don’t care*

    happyfeet (2c63dd)

  6. Would I have ever in my whole life learned to take the words what were in my head and type them into the little box at the bottom of these blog thingers and then hit the Say It button without Mr. Goldstein’s thoughtful and clever provocations?

    No.

    happyfeet (2c63dd)

  7. oh. I meant to link the youtube not the lyrics at #5

    happyfeet (2c63dd)

  8. HappyFeet

    I know you are a regular at godsteins I mean Goldsteins house of whatever

    Lots of good well meaning people have been sucked into the phenom that WAS Jeff and his potty mouth

    At a time when people gave into their frustrations of the constant hammer of the mainstream against GWB and Republicans Jeff was a the energy drink that some needed to validate their conservatism –

    everyone has an outlet – everyone has a waters edge

    I never liked Jeff – been that way forever – I saw thru the junior high debate team persona of someone who views his posts over and over again and reads with avarice and aclarity all the feedback getting an overblown sense of self worth

    EricPWJohnson (9b7688)

  9. He’s fun and trenchant and smart and he has conviction and wit and a soul and these are good qualities to have Eric even if people what don’t have these qualities tend to be far more successful bloggers.

    happyfeet (2c63dd)

  10. Its petty. Like dredging up old comments to ask someone if they are racist or that they just make racist comments.

    SGT Ted (c47cc2)

  11. Let me guess, Sgt Ted is a regular commentator here – just coming over to give his unbiased opinion….

    EricPWJohnson (9b7688)

  12. Happyfeet

    Can you provide any example of any independent source that can back up your claim?

    Or any passage? then explain its breathless originality

    EricPWJohnson (9b7688)

  13. I read the whole exchange over at Little Miss Attila and Patrick, I’m afraid came off as the whiny loser.

    Sheesh, you are a father, a prosecutor and most of all, an adult. Your comments by the end of the night looked like you were a child crying and repeating “I know you are, but what am I?” over and over and over….let it go….

    Annie Nakkie (ffafdc)

  14. I had a dream this morning of the not-ready-for-prime-time-Bloggers cemetery. It was comically poignant, bittersweet.

    SarahW (692fc6)

  15. Patterico, anyone who confuses one word tough guy vulgarity with analysis and debate is not worth the electrons.

    Not worth your time. I know you are irritated with the guy…but wasn’t that his goal?

    Eric Blair (ab836d)

  16. This all has some creepy Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome qualities to it. Sorry it’s happening. I won’t be watching.

    elissa (61c259)

  17. Pat, I’ve sort of been reading your posts
    about this, and I’ve got to say, that
    I don’t really understand your conflict.

    At this point, I have been so comfortable
    being called a racist that burning crosses
    on my neighbors lawns and roasting marshmallows
    is now one of my favorite activities.
    Fuck me! No intent involved.

    jack (e383ed)

  18. By the Mighty Hammer of Thor, peace will be fought for and won! Let the surgical keyboard strikes begin!

    GeneralMalaise (a38f27)

  19. This seems staged because it is too petty to be real.

    j curtis (5126e4)

  20. Whatever Eric. Its petty from both sides. My thoughts about Pattericos leftwing like attempt at “outing” of RSM as someone who makes racist statements and thus him maybe being a racist are formed without any input from Goldstein. I thought it an odious thing. Trying to paint me as a mindless drone groupie of Goldsteins is lame. I like both Patt and Jeff. I just think Patt is wrong on this one and is behaving like he accuses Goldstein of behaving.

    SGT Ted (c47cc2)

  21. someone who makes racist statements and thus him maybe being a racist

    Never learned to read for comprehension, did you, Ted?

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  22. Is there a point John or are you just going for the cheap shot?

    SGT Ted (c47cc2)

  23. “The best defense is a good offense.”
    -Gen. John “Black Jack” Pershing, USA

    AD - RtR/OS! (9b753a)

  24. Is there a point John or are you just going for the cheap shot?

    My point, Ted, since you obviously cannot read for comprehension, is Patterico and others have categorically stated that making a racist statement does not necessarily mean a person is racist. In fact, Patterico categorically stated he was not calling McCain a racist.

    But you completely missed that in your inability to read for comprehension as you went for your overplayed cheap shot. Just remember for next time: When Hearts are trump, don’t try to win with your deuce of Diamonds.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  25. I am reminded of the old saying about why you don’t want to wrestle with pigs:

    You’ll both get dirty and the pig likes it.

    Dave N. (58af57)

  26. So, the purpose of dredging up the quote and then calling the quote racist was to not call the person a racist. Yea ok.

    Because everyone knows that calling a statement racist is divorced from the imputation that the speaker is a racist, especially in this day and age of everyone right of center being impugned as a racist for opposing the socialist policies of the First Black President. Sorry, that doesn’t wash.

    What happened was a little public show trial with “Are you now or have you ever been a racist you must answer for your old words” bullying on the blog, when Patterico could have simply emailed RSM for an explaination, instead of sliming him publicly with the allegation of having incorrect thoughts.

    SGT Ted (c47cc2)

  27. Because fuck you.

    Has it ever occurred to anyone that it’s both ironic and amusing that a word associated with an act considered pleasurable to most, and something that one person directs to another person he or she generally is turned on by, is also used in a negative way? So, in reality, Goldstein actually may be turned on by Pat, and wants to stick one part of his body into a part of Pat.

    Of course, that would make Goldstein a gay or bi dude. But if he’s like the blogger of Little Green Footballs, maybe it’s his inner leftist side (or sexually amorphous side, since about 10 to 20% of gays/bis don’t consider themselves liberal) yearning to come out.

    Mark (411533)

  28. Ted, do you know anything about context? Or compare/contrast?

    Or, better yet, to carry on with your theme “Calling out a statement as racist means calling out the stater as racist”:

    If you ever told a single joke in your life, you are a comedian.
    If you ever made an offensive remark in your life, you are an offensive person.
    If you ever stepped on a japanese beetle, you are an inhumane animal killer (and maybe a racist one, at that).
    If a store ever gave you too much change and you pocketed it quietly, you are a hardened criminal.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  29. This has all been amusing guys.

    imdw (e66d8d)

  30. “Is there a point John or are you just going for the cheap shot?

    Comedy gold.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  31. Blog Fight!

    Techie (43d092)

  32. (Full disclosure: old “regular” at Jeff’s site, but eventually drifted away due to the utter inability of Jeff or anyone to moderate that site. After the umpteenth thread derailed by the exact same 3-4 trolls, I just didn’t find it worth the effort anymore)

    Techie (43d092)

  33. It seems a unwise use of resources to sta on this last point. McCain is a contrarian for and ill, talking up Barr as if he was an answer last year, that business on the listserv, thirteen years ago!! But he was fundamentally right on the main question, this year which was full throated and whole hearted opposition to the Obama juggernaut.
    There was none of this ‘well he’s a good man, and deserves a chance’ garbage. Because there was nothing in his professional or even personal record that suggested such a thing

    bishop (996c34)

  34. So, the purpose of dredging up the quote and then calling the quote racist was to not call the person a racist. Yea ok.

    Actually, Ted, the purpose was to illustrate a couple of racist statements from people of different races. Pat did not list RSM as the source of the quote in the original post, he simply asked his readers whether they felt it (and the other quote) were racist.

    When Pat disclosed the source of the quote, RSM started backpedaling. All Pat wanted from RSM was to state categorically whether he had said it, and RSM danced around that issue for quite some time.

    But at no time did Pat say that RSM was racist, nor did he ask any of his readers to make that judgment. You’ve inferred that Pat meant to call RSM racist, but your inference is not based on anything factual.

    Some chump (8087d5)

  35. Patterico, can you send out some sort of alert to regular readers when you get off this boring crusade?

    harkin (c407e2)

  36. Shorter harkin: I’m posting to say I’m not posting.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  37. Not worth your time. I know you are irritated with the guy…but wasn’t that his goal?

    Precisely. We need you, Patterico, for more consequential stuff.

    And when will we hear about Climategate from Justin Levine? Or have I missed it?

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (9eb641)

  38. Pat,

    Whst is your endgame for this Blog war?

    Because it seems that Sullivan and Greenwald are calling your tune here.

    JSF (33fc51)

  39. This is rapidly turning into the lamest slap fight on the internet.

    Another Chris (470967)

  40. The way to deal with Goldstein is daily Two Minutes Hate sessions.

    Official Internet Data Office (0a4bf0)

  41. #3 That should read: “..you get filthy, and annoy the pig.”

    A Simple Mind (621247)

  42. “Let me guess, Sgt Ted is a regular commentator here – just coming over to give his unbiased opinion….”

    I’m not necessarily taking Sgt Ted’s side here (admittedly, I think he may have a point), but I do want to point out your rejoinder to him isn’t particularly effective.

    You’re basically saying Sgt Ted’s criticism of Patterico isn’t worth a heck of a lot because he probably reads and supports Goldstein, as opposed to being a regular Patterico reader and commenter.

    The counterpoint from Sgt Ted’s point of view is easily made: He doesn’t read and comment here because of the reason he gave to criticize Patterico.

    So accept Sgt Ted’s opinion as 1 vote, neither more nor less. It doesn’t automatically become an invalid opinion just because he wasn’t previously a Patterico fan.

    Logically, that doesn’t fly.

    Nom des Voyages à L'Étranger (5f1187)

  43. My curiosity is piqued. Why is any of this of interest to any of you, with exception to Don Frey, Don Goldstein and Don McCain?

    A Simple Mind (621247)

  44. […] we now know I’m both not a “man of substance,” and that I run away from confrontation. On the plus side, I believe the jury is still out on […]

    Meet your site host, 2! (38c333)

  45. What is this stupid game, actually Jeff is quiet mild in his reaction, considering all the carp he put up with that crazy stalker Fritz, and other matters. So Patterico is generally right on things, in his criticism of the Times, but sometimes horribly off base, as he was last spring, and apparently now. Because apparently there is nothing else at stake, except the entire medical care delivery system, the American industrial economy,
    and the fate of the war on Salafi jihadism.

    bishop (1fa513)

  46. I actually like the guy, but he does seem to have a bit of a temper.

    Having a temper is only a flaw if you give into it.

    Douglas (2c3ce5)

  47. John Hitchcock said: “Shorter harkin: I’m posting to say I’m not posting.”

    Try Reading-Is-Fundamental, what I’m saying is that I enjoy this blog (usually) very much and that it’s been a daily visit for quite a while.

    James Rainey is running wild, California is in a public-employee-bought cr*phole, Obama is trying to cripple American business and give a huge portion of the GDP to the developing world in a fraud-science-inspired guilt-trip, the democrats are trying to buy the next 25 years of elections with a power move to take over the medical insurance industy, federal employees have managed to up their salaries to 70% more than their private sector counterparts since the recession began, etc etc etc…….

    and Patt’s on vendetta over one statement from long ago that he admittingly still doesnt understand????

    in other words…

    shorter John Hitchcock: “I’m posting to…….hell I don’t know.”

    harkin (c407e2)

  48. I hope Obama fails.

    DarthRove (b25a2f)

  49. “Because apparently there is nothing else at stake, except the entire medical care delivery system, the American industrial economy, and the fate of the war on Salafi jihadism.”

    Dude, there’s a subtle difference in how broadly 2 bloggers define the word “intend”, and whether one can do a racist thing without intending to do it… or whether it is therefore NOT a racist thing if there was no intention to do it.

    This is an incredibly important point and must be settled before the blogosphere can move on to cover these blasé stories du jour.

    But seriously, while the above is possibly not as serious as I set forth, it has now literally come down to saying that one of my news sources is a serial liar, money-grubbing, and base in several aspects. If true, that actually is of some importance to me, and if not true, it’s of importance to me that yet another news source of mine would make such a claim.

    (I’m using the term “news” broadly to include opinion and insight.)

    Nom des Voyages à L'Étranger (5f1187)

  50. “Comment by Nom des Voyages à L’Étranger — 12/13/2009 @ 9:16 am”

    Having read further down the thread, I realize my comment isn’t spot on (because Sgt Ted actually claims to read and like both men, as do I), but on the other hand, I think it’s an accurate refutal of the point EricPWJohnson tried and failed to make, which was designed to devalue the weight Sgt Ted’s opinion for a specious reason.

    Nom des Voyages à L'Étranger (5f1187)

  51. That’s right up there between the difference of imply and infer an issue for the ages. Now I admit going on secesssionist websites makes as much sense
    as going on other kind of controversial media, that was thirteen years ago.

    bishop (474138)

  52. What is it with you guys. I don’t have a dog in this fight but I am getting sick of these fights between conservative bloggers. Isn’t that what LGF became, a wave of litmus tests and flame wars. Last time I stopped by here you were in your disagreement with McCain, who I never read. If this place is becoming another LGF I expect to get slammed by your regulars and dismissed as irrelevant by you.

    To be clear I don’t care in the least about your little pissing match. Please focus on the real war here. We are at the most perilous time in this country in my lifetime. Patterico has been a stellar site with first class content and comments until recently. I hope it returns to form.

    Brian in Idaho (01c919)

  53. James Rainey is running wild, California is in a public-employee-bought cr*phole, Obama is trying to cripple American business and give a huge portion of the GDP to the developing world in a fraud-science-inspired guilt-trip, the democrats are trying to buy the next 25 years of elections with a power move to take over the medical insurance industy, federal employees have managed to up their salaries to 70% more than their private sector counterparts since the recession began, etc etc etc…….

    Agreed! That’s why I hope Patterico will ignore Jeff G.’s distraction. Patterico has spelled out his views on JG, RSM, etc, very clearly. Patterico is not obligated to continue to explain them to those who cannot/will not comprehend. What Patterico has been doing these years is too important. So saith this loyal reader.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (9eb641)

  54. Come on. A good man would step up and back away from this mess.

    Which one will prove himself worthy?

    serr8d (5cfc5b)

  55. Patterico is not obligated to continue to explain them to those who cannot/will not comprehend.

    That’s why he OCDed on RSM and now he’s going to do the same on Jeff Goldstein.

    I guess I was just ahead of the curve, maybe now that more people are telling Patterico they aren’t interested in the size of his e-penis they’ll get the idea that we just don’t really care that pottymouth Jeff Goldstein (another blogger whose appeal to most people ended about 3 years ago) hurt Patterico’s feelings. Patterico’s attitude is also incomprehensible. If you don’t like it skip the posts? Why not just say don’t come to the site anymore? People want to read what you have to say Patterico, just not what you have to say about a teen queen of the week drama fight between you and whichever blogger has got your panties in a bunch. Goldstein being incredibly rude to you like that isn’t enough to go on a crusade about him. That’s childish. He was being childish. Be the adult and start posting about something other than your pissing matches with other bloggers please, your site and you are above it Patterico.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  56. #51… thank you Brian.

    Huey (b957d9)

  57. I think Patterico’s posts on RS McCain are worthwhile, because we need to know fact from fiction about what McCain said on race. McCain should give straightforward answers. And it’s good that Patterico is not letting McCain off the hook because he’s also a conservative.

    Having said that, I implore our esteemed host not to discuss JG again, unless it’s absolutely necessary. We know how that movie ends.

    I know, as Eric Blair says, your blog, your rules.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (9eb641)

  58. Comment 51 is also very sadly on point… anyone disagreeing with Patterico’s crusade has been accused of being a shill for McCain, and now Goldstein, or accused of deliberately misrepresenting what Patterico said, or not understanding it, or some other typical bad argument used when you’re mad at someone and you don’t have anything to say to shut them down. This thing with Goldstein is a personal feud, nothing else but, and it’s an embarrassment.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  59. I beginning to wonder if Sadly No! had it right all along.

    Fritz (89bfa6)

  60. Nonsense, chaos. The one’s who have been accused of misrepresentation actually … you know … misrepresented what Patterico wrote. Etc.

    I’m not thrilled at seeing a blog fight between people who I respect but your comment is not on.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  61. Nonsense, chaos. The one’s who have been accused of misrepresentation actually … you know … misrepresented what Patterico wrote. Etc.

    No, it wasn’t nonsense. Lose the tribalism.

    I’m not thrilled at seeing a blog fight between people who I respect but your comment is not on.

    It was completely on. Anyone who dared disagree with Patterico’s crusade against McCain was smeared as either throwing up strawmen or just not understanding what Patterico said. The fact that some of them actually were throwing up strawmen doesn’t absolve responsibility. Don’t like it? Too bad.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  62. I beginning to wonder if Sadly No! had it right all along.

    Congrats for linking to a site that’s actually less mature and more hateful than Goldstein in his most ranty moments.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  63. Sadly No is, was, and always will be, full of shit. It makes me like Jeff to know they dislike him. Actually, that’s when Jeff was at his best, when he was causing the lefties pants-wetting crying jags.

    And I do wish that people would stop using Stacy McCain as a foil to either attack or support either Patterico or Jeff. That discussion is over and nobody is doing McCain a favor by persevarating on it.

    nk (df76d4)

  64. Wow, being accused of not understanding is now a “smear”?

    “The fact that some of them actually were throwing up strawmen doesn’t absolve responsibility. Don’t like it? Too bad.

    Do you have a coherent version of that comment?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  65. Sadly No is, was, and always will be, full of shit. It makes me like Jeff to know they dislike him. Actually, that’s when Jeff was at his best, when he was causing the lefties pants-wetting crying jags.

    And I do wish that people would stop using Stacy McCain as a foil to either attack or support either Patterico or Jeff. That discussion is over and nobody is doing McCain a favor by perseverating on it.

    nk (df76d4)

  66. Patterico, what you call “holding your fire” is what separates you from him. There is honor in that, there is self-respect in that, there is a rising above the mire in that. You give it up, you become like him.

    Understanding clearly that you will not change his mind, you will not cause him to re-think or re-consider anything, by making this decision to unload, you are making a decision to indulge your anger and frustration and feed the beast – nothing more. It’s to no one’s betterment. And unfortunately, it will affect him less than it will you because you are the one surrendering an honorable principle and behavior. It will cost you. It won’t cost him.

    If you allow this person to control your reactions and allow this person to determine the playing field, you surrender the very qualities that garner respect for you. There is no end game in this that is worthy. So you have to decide whether this one, single person worth it. Sadly, it seems you believe he is.

    In reality, you are giving someone that you disdain and have no respect for, control and influence over you. Ultimately you are choosing to surrender to him and play the game the way he demands. He wins.

    And that is my half-cent worth.

    Dana (e9ba20)

  67. “It was completely on. Anyone who dared disagree with Patterico’s crusade against McCain was smeared as either throwing up strawmen or just not understanding what Patterico said. The fact that some of them actually were throwing up strawmen doesn’t absolve responsibility. Don’t like it? Too bad.

    Comment by chaos ”

    Accused by patterico?

    I think you need to back that up.

    You’re right that the tribalism needs to go. This idea that Patterico was on a crusade or smeared anyone is ridiculous. He wasn’t even hard on Mccain, much less those who disagreed with Mccain. He said ‘don’t put words in my mouth’, and pointed out that a few people grossly exaggerated what Patterico said. In black and white, he backed up his claims.

    The fact that some of them were throwing up strawmen proves that Patterico was right that some of them were throwing up strawmen. Of course that absolves him of guilt for a ‘crusade’ of smears. I mean, do you speak english? This isn’t complicated. Patterico proved his case and won the argument. Most of the people bashing him had to back off and admit the jerks were using strawmen. You just admitted it yourself.

    This ‘don’t like it? Tough shit!’ is right in line with the Jeff G style of ‘Because Fuck You.’ no one cares about that argument besides noting it comes from people with nothing better to say.

    Dustin (44f8cb)

  68. Nothing I can add to Dana’s eloquence. So I’ll just go OT with more bad news for The Precious.

    The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows that 23% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -19.

    Today is the second straight day that Obama’s Approval Index rating has fallen to a new low. Prior to the past two days, the Approval Index had never fallen below -15 during Obama’s time in office (see trends).

    The 23% who Strongly Approve matches the lowest level of enthusiasm yet recorded. Just 41% of Democrats Strongly Approve while 69% of Republicans Strongly Disapprove. Among voters not affiliated with either major party, 21% Strongly Approve and 49% Strongly Disapprove.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (9eb641)

  69. “#

    Patterico, what you call “holding your fire” is what separates you from him. There is honor in that, there is self-respect in that, there is a rising above the mire in that. You give it up, you become like him. ”

    -Dana

    I agree with this, but to a point. Patterico isn’t really changing ot becoming different. He has a much higher threshold for where he gets pissed off, and Jeff has reached that threshold. Just refusing to engage complete nuts like Jeff G is much better, probably, but Patterico isn’t some kind of stoic saint. He’s repeatedly been lied about, called an anti-semite, etc.

    Look at how nice Patterico was to RSM. Even with proof that RSM said, and then lied about his having said (when he repeatedly distorted whether the quote was accurate) a bona fide racist quote, Patterico noted that this didn’t prove that RSM was racist. But Jeff accuses Patterico of being a racist repeatedly while noting the he made it up and that charging someone with being racist is really really horrible. Imagine if Patterico actually had said something antisemitic, as RSM said something racist… would Chaos and Jeff give Patterico the grace and understanding PAtterico is giving their ‘side’?

    No. That is unjust. It’s ugly. And if Patterico wants to rub it in their faces, I think that’s highly entertaining. It’s not like the Jeff G side of the blogosphere was going to make any dent in anyone’s POV. It’s not friendly fire. These are our Andrew Sullivans, who hate the left like Andrew hates the right… not because they thought it through or care about intellectual honesty… ‘because fuck you’ is all you’ll get out of them at the end of the day.

    You’re right that Patterico falls short of the perfect turn-the-cheek saint, and that’s too bad, and I don’t really hold it against him.

    The kind of debate Jeff G’s style of angry, self important, fake intellectual, ugliness attracts is Deb Frisch versus Ann Coulter quoter. That’s just stupid. Patterico’s Cyrus Sanai versus Happyfeet is on a different level. Even his liberal trolls are pretty smart. I don’t think anyone has even been convinced by ‘because fuck you’.

    Dustin (44f8cb)

  70. O.k. to say “too much testosterone”?

    m (a622c3)

  71. Wow, being accused of not understanding is now a “smear”?

    Yes, it can be used an insult to the intelligence, which it was being used as. Don’t play dumb please.

    Do you have a coherent version of that comment?

    Do you have anything to say that doesn’t involve insulting my intelligence? The comment was perfectly comprehensible to anyone who isn’t a moron. If you’re going to go this way just cut to the chase and call me stupid. Get your head out of Patterico’s ass too please.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  72. Patterico, what you call “holding your fire” is what separates you from him. There is honor in that, there is self-respect in that, there is a rising above the mire in that. You give it up, you become like him.

    rofl, Frey to Goldstein:

    The things I say about you, I can prove. You’re a whiny, overly verbose, hypocritical, thin-skinned, dishonest, nasty, money-grubbing sorry excuse for a man. The evidence is out there.

    Yeah you stay classy Patterico while criticizing everyone else for not living up to your classy standards. Stay classy for sure.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  73. Actually I was smearing myself by alleging I didn’t understand your comment.

    Evidently there is not a coherent version of it.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  74. Actually I was smearing myself by alleging I didn’t understand your comment.

    Evidently there is not a coherent version of it.

    You can whine about how it was incoherent all you want, it wasn’t. I’m sorry your grasp of the English language, when written, is obviously not as strong as mine.

    The fact that some people were deploying and attacking strawmen rather than what Patterico said does not absolve him or you or any of the other Patterico tribesmen around here of the responsibility for simply flinging that charge out to just about everyone who dared disagree with his and your witch hunt of RS McCain and now Jeff Goldstein.

    Do you guys have a secret handshake or anything so we can know who is in the cult of Patterico and who isn’t? Maybe a special hat, so we can identify the Truth and Justice and I’m Just Asking Questions and I’ll Show You up Goldstein Just You Wait and See Squad on sight.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  75. And maybe we can have an honest and thoughtful and intelligent discussion of if you insult Jeff Goldstein with 7 insults in one sentence, and three to five of them are classic anti-Semitic remarks, does that make Patterico an anti-Semite? Does he have to intend to be anti-Semitic when he calls a Jew “whiny, hypocritical, dishonest,” and “money-grubbing”? Patterico, did you write that? Are those your words? Maybe we can have 14 days straight of me badgering Patterico over the quote and see how much he enjoys being the target of a ridiculous smear campaign.

    The things I say about you, I can prove. You’re a whiny, overly verbose, hypocritical, thin-skinned, dishonest, nasty, money-grubbing sorry excuse for a man. The evidence is out there.

    Oh wait of course Patterico puffed up like a beach ball full of manufactured self-righteous indignation when Goldstein even dared suggest that his comments were anti-Semitic.

    Patterico: Judge of meaning and intent not only for himself, but for the universe! And if you disagree or don’t give him what he wants, he’ll hound you for two weeks until you prostrate yourself before his Prosecutorness and render unto Frey.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  76. Jeff needs to find out who his friends are. And when he does not to be too hard on them so he won’t lose them. And not, “You do what I tell you, you n****r”.

    nk (df76d4)

  77. Stashiu, if you’re around, I lost the most brilliant comment I ever made in the spam filter I think.

    [I don’t see anything nk. Is it already showing up? –Stashiu]

    nk (df76d4)

  78. And of course, it’s Jeff’s fault, not Patterico’s for this spat. All Patterico is doing is pointing out Jeff’s behavior. If that’s such a bad thing for Jeff to be associated with, that’s Jeff’s fault.

    Call it self righteous indignation all you want… if Patterico doesn’t have a case he will have egg on his face and if he does have a case it is Jeff’s fault. This ‘you can’t bring that up… it’s not up for discussion… you are a loser windbag for even wanting to defend your good name’ is the biggest load of crap.

    What’s especially funny is that Patterico is defending himself from racism charges, and the people telling him to shut up were the same people who kept saying that it’s an egregious offense to accuse people of racism (even with evidence).

    Dustin (44f8cb)

  79. Yeah it’s Jeff’s fault, particularly the part where Patterico made repeated references about Goldstein making money – “begging” was a really good word choice in one of the comments – over at Little Miss Attila’s site. Really classy.

    All I’m doing is pointing out Patterico’s behavior, right?

    This ‘you can’t bring that up… it’s not up for discussion… you are a loser windbag for even wanting to defend your good name’ is the biggest load of crap.

    As someone who liked and still does like Patterico and did not care either way about either McCain or Goldstein before this, I don’t believe it is a load of crap at all, whatever size.

    What is a load of crap is badgering someone about something they wrote 14 years ago and then justifying yourself with the most ridiculous arguments and then as soon as interest waned in that personal feud starting up another one with someone else – this one because that someone else apparently is just too impolite and must be chastised. After reading Patterico’s comments at Little Miss Attila’s, it’s obvious that neither Patterico nor Goldstein has a leg to stand on the who is a more polite person question. The only difference is Goldstein doesn’t try to present himself as polite as a way to show his credibility. Patterico does. The demeaning way he spoke to Goldstein and about the people disagreeing with him was really quite revealing.

    What’s especially funny is that Patterico is defending himself from racism charges, and the people telling him to shut up were the same people who kept saying that it’s an egregious offense to accuse people of racism (even with evidence).

    What’s especially funny is that Patterico has set himself up as the Arbiter of Meaning and Intent and apparently we’re all supposed to sit around and accept Patterico’s Heads-I-Win Tails-You-Lose framing of the debate. And you don’t have a problem with it.

    I wouldn’t say Patterico is racist or anti-Semitic because I think it’s fairly obvious he insulted Goldstein in the heat of the moment – but if you say something that could be taken as racist in the heat of the moment, something you almost undoubtedly wouldn’t say if your blood wasn’t up, does that make the statement racist? Does it make you racist? We need to have a conversation about this. I hope Patterico will explain his statements. I hope the fact that I’m mocking the hell out of him won’t preclude him from explaining himself.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  80. So an Italian boy, an imiigrant to America, writes back to his mother in Sicily: “Mama, I have fallen in love with an American girl and I am going to marry her”.

    After his mother recovers from her faint, she writes: “Figlio, don’t marry an American girl. American girls do not cook like Italian girls. American girls do not keep house like Italian girls. And every time you get into a fight she will call you Wop.”

    Well, the Italian guy marries the American girl, nonetheless. And after a while, he writes to his mother”

    “Mama, I married the American girl and you were wrong. She cooks like an Italian girl. She keeps house like an Italian girl. And when we fight she only calls me Wop when I call her n****r.”

    nk (df76d4)

  81. “Mama, I married the American girl and you were wrong. She cooks like an Italian girl. She keeps house like an Italian girl. And when we fight she only calls me Wop when I call her n****r.”

    Now that’s true love right there. For the ages.

    Details of the phony charge of anti-Semitism to follow, on Monday.

    \

    Phony as can be. I mean, you only made insulting references to a Jew making money multiple times while in the middle of a rather contentious discussion with him that got increasingly personal as it progressed. Nothing more phony than charging someone with anti-Semitism after they kept insulting a Jew about making money. Phony as it gets.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  82. You’re not supposed to insult a Jew about making money? Wadda? Well, whom can you insult about making money? Bushmen? They don’t have money, I understand.

    nk (df76d4)

  83. Maybe the government is anti-Semitic for prosecuting Madoff?

    nk (df76d4)

  84. Being Jewish is no defense to nothing. Or being anything else for that matter except maybe an imbecile.

    nk (df76d4)

  85. You’re not supposed to insult a Jew about making money? Wadda? Well, whom can you insult about making money? Bushmen? They don’t have money, I understand.

    Last I checked the Bushes were rolling in dough and as long as you’re a Newsweek, Time, or Rolling Stone subscriber (or a reader of Andy Sully) it’s perfectly acceptable to insult the Bushmen about making money. The Bushwomen now, they’re off limits, unless it’s Laura, and then you can make disgraceful references about drunken driving.

    Maybe the government is anti-Semitic for prosecuting Madoff?

    Let’s not be dense here. We’re not talking about prosecuting a Jew for fraud. We’re not talking about criticizing a Jew who is greedy for being greedy. We’re talking about repeatedly making insulting references to making money while arguing with a Jew over the internet. If you don’t see why that might be just the tiniest bit not classy, then your head is too far up Patterico’s buttski.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  86. I also forgot to mention how classy it is to call Goldstein a bitch and how not hypocritical it is to chastise Goldstein for being personal and nasty while insulting him at every turn as a fraud, bitch, etc.

    Really if anyone hasn’t read what Patterico had to say over at Little Miss Attila’s, you should take a gander. He really comes off as an upstanding person who is in credible position to “not hold his fire any more” and lecture people about civility and such. The more I read of these comments the more I think maybe I was deluding myself when I said I still liked Patterico. You’re an arrogant, nasty man when your back is up Mr. Frey.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  87. And I’m no stranger to false accusations of racism or prejudice. (Why, I even had a blogger call me anti-Semitic because I mocked one of his continual beg-a-thons for cash — even though I said absolutely nothing about his Jewish heritage!) There is no shortage of dishonest people who casually throw around the accusation, to be sure. That’s why I was careful to limit my language to the one statement that I am confident was indeed racist.

    Stay classy Patterico. I can mock a Jewish blogger’s allegedly continual beg-a-thons for cash and there’s no way no how that could possibly be anti-semitic – because I didn’t mention his Jewish heritage!

    Honestly I hope you do a better job arguing in the courtroom than you did there, I haven’t seen a steaming pile of bullshit that hot and smelly for a while.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  88. chaos,

    That’s nonsense. You are saying that there’s a special sensitivity when talking with Jews about money. And I call bullshit on that. I have had Jewish bosses and Jewish clients and Jewish opponents. And I have Jewish friends, some of whom will eat what I cook and some who will not even have a glass of water at my house.

    nk (df76d4)

  89. You’re an arrogant, nasty man when your back is up Mr. Frey.

    I know I am. I don’t know that Patterico is but I would not blame him for it.

    nk (df76d4)

  90. That’s nonsense. You are saying that there’s a special sensitivity when talking with Jews about money. And I call bullshit on that. I have had Jewish bosses and Jewish clients and Jewish opponents. And I have Jewish friends, some of whom will eat what I cook and some who will not even have a glass of water at my house.

    Ummm yes in fact there is a special sensitivity when talking with Jews about money when you are insulting a Jew by nastily referring to him as “money-grubbing” or someone who goes on “beg-a-thons.”

    You are doing what Patterico has whined about for weeks: you are misrepresenting me. I did not say that there is a special sensitivity in the air when talking with Jews about money period, or in general. I said that there is when you’re insulting a Jew about his making money for no other reason than to insult him.

    Everyone knows that Jews being “money-grubbing” is classic anti-Semitism. Patterico knows it. The question is, why would he say something like that when he knows what he knows? Heat of the moment in my opinion, something to apologize for and move on and no bad reflection on you for saying it because everyone gets mad and says ill-considered things.

    But instead Patterico is doubling down, and since he’s on his high horse examining the character of bloggers, I’ll be more than happy to examine his. So far it’s not a very pretty picture. He and Goldstein were throwing about juvenile insults like it was their job.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  91. So honorable, this man is. You know, it’s all about the IDEAS with him. As the above makes clear.

    Just like you’re so honorable, and it’s all about ideas with you, as your 30+ comments in that thread over at LMA’s makes clear, what with 90%+ of them either consisting entirely of you insulting Goldstein, consisting mostly of you insulting Goldstein, or containing insulting remarks aimed at Goldstein by you. One thing you’ve made very clear: you’re a hypocrite.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  92. Allright, chaos, Jewish bloggers deserve special treatment. No go and get a cock-slap someplace.

    nk (df76d4)

  93. Allright, chaos, Jewish bloggers deserve special treatment. No go and get a cock-slap someplace.

    Another strawman, and a homophobic insult. Patterico cultists, you stay just as classy as the man you’re lining up to defend.

    I never said Jewish bloggers deserve special treatment.

    But your special treatment comment is puzzling. Is it advocating “special treatment” to say that insults that play, intentionally or unintentionally, off prejudicial stereotypes are bad and should not be made?

    I don’t think it’s right to insult Jews by calling them greedy unless you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are in fact greedy and deserve to be insulted for it (like, say, Bernie Madoff). If you can’t, if they aren’t, if they don’t, you’re getting close to a line that decent people shouldn’t want to get close to.

    That goes for being angry at a black man and saying he’s lazy, or any other insult based on a stereotype you can think of.

    I hope you don’t mind nk because from now on I’m referring to you as a homophobe, unless of course you admit that what you said was a thoughtless insult. Because it was homophobic, it was intended to be hurtful in that way, and it shouldn’t be acceptable.

    chaos (9c54c6)

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

    Judge for yourself how credible Patterico is to be judging Jeff Goldstein’s character.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  95. All we want is life beyond teh Thunderdome I think.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  96. chaos, are you really so clueless as to not recognize nk’s reference to a Jeff G. bit?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  97. chaos, are you really so clueless as to not recognize nk’s reference to a Jeff G. bit?

    If you weren’t such a mindless shill for Patterico you’d notice that I haven’t exactly been singing Goldstein’s praises either. I also mentioned that I don’t read Goldstein – today is the first time I visited his site since I can’t remember when. It’s funny how this place is all big on reading comprehension – until, of course, the facts get in the way of defending your and Patterico’s poor widdle egos.

    I don’t give a shit if it’s Goldstein’s trademark. Telling me to go get cock-slapped would get your nose bent in a new and fun direction if you said it to my face. It’s not right if Goldstein says it, nk says it, or even if Barack Obama said it.

    It’s obvious you don’t have anything to say other than to try to insult me, so how about you shut the fuck up and find some other way to try to suck up to Patterico.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  98. Can’t you both just stop this nonsense? I love both sites and would rather read something other than y’all arguing.

    otcconan (8a5930)

  99. “Phony as can be. I mean, you only made insulting references to a Jew making money multiple times while in the middle of a rather contentious discussion with him that got increasingly personal as it progressed.”

    I didn’t say a goddamned thing about him being a Jew. Nor, in that comment, did I call him a “money-grubber.”

    My post will simply be about the nature of employing group victimhood as a way to intimidate people who are saying something you don’t like.

    That’s all.

    Patterico (64318f)

  100. So, chaos, your answer is that no, you didn’t recognize that nk was making a reference to a Jeff G. bit. But you are sure fast with the homophobe label.

    Meanwhile, your repetitive name-calling is pretty amusing for someone so indignant about supposed name-calling.

    Grow up, chaos. Maybe you’ll recognize your own complete lack of any coherent comment.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  101. I love how from about comment 79 on, a “reasonable person” interpretation is confronted by an intentionalist reading, and some here immediately decided that it was prudent to go the way of the intentionalist and away from the “reasonable person” (here, played by commenter “chaos”).

    Hopefully some of the more thoughtful wags here will recognize the irony.

    JeffG (88bc84)

  102. Y’all should check out my latest post, on language, and how Goldstein’s views on language do not prevent misinterpretation. It’s here.

    Patterico (64318f)

  103. “Stay classy Patterico. I can mock a Jewish blogger’s allegedly continual beg-a-thons for cash and there’s no way no how that could possibly be anti-semitic – because I didn’t mention his Jewish heritage!”

    – chaos

    You really missed the boat on all those “intentionalism” threads, didn’t you? I mean, insofar as you’re a regular reader around here, and all, I’d think you would’ve seen at least one of them – there sure as hell were enough of the things.

    If I understand Patterico’s cited legal language correctly, the only way for anyone to (fairly) conclude that his remark to JG was “anti-Semitic” was that A) there was nothing else he could’ve meant by it (nope), and (or?) B) there was no other way JG could’ve interpreted it (nope). So, at least within the framework set out on this site, the charge is spurious. Because a reasonable observer could conclude that Patterico pointed to Goldstein’s “money-grubbing” because Goldstein is, I dunno, grubbing for money. Regardless of his Jewish-ness. Because (believe it or not) there are people of every racial/religious/cultural background who grub for money.

    “I hope you don’t mind nk because from now on I’m referring to you as a homophobe, unless of course you admit that what you said was a thoughtless insult. Because it was homophobic, it was intended to be hurtful in that way, and it shouldn’t be acceptable.”

    – chaos

    Then we can all start referring to you the same way, for telling us to get our heads out of Patterico’s ass. Because that could be interpreted as homophobic, too. Unless of course you admit that it was a thoughtless insult.

    Finally:

    Patterico – While my first instinct was to tell you to shred Goldstein (in all his jasmine-scented glory – h/t nk), cooler heads (such as Dana’s) have reminded us that there is a right way and a wrong way to do things. Though it would probably be temporarily satisfying to attack Goldstein, you would indeed lose something for it, and he would not. This is a clear-cut “turn the other cheek moment”, and while I would certainly understand if you went after Goldstein anyway (despite the contrary urging of so many of your commenters, who haven’t had to put up with the same libel you’ve endured), I can’t bring myself to encourage you to go after the guy. As much as I’d like to.

    But as for tribalism, well… I don’t think there’s anything wrong with tribalism. I certainly know where my loyalties lie in all this, and it’s really annoying to have JG’s little drones sticking their heads into the room to puke all over the place.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  104. One way or another, I’m not saying that you shouldn’t respond to Goldstein’s retarded accusations, only that you shouldn’t sink to the level of attacking him. Again, there’s a right way to go about all this, and you’ll gain respect from rational people if you stick to do your best to the straight and narrow.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  105. to *stick to* the straight and narrow.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  106. Patterico (since you’re in the comments), or someone else who knows definitively one way or the other: is my understanding of the legal language on contract law you cited a while back (in #105) correct?

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  107. Lately, I don’t mind being called a homophobe. Go ahead, chaos, enjoy yourself.

    nk (df76d4)

  108. Then we can all start referring to you the same way, for telling us to get our heads out of Patterico’s ass. Because that could be interpreted as homophobic, too. Unless of course you admit that it was a thoughtless insult.

    You know it’s funny just how dishonest Patterico and his defenders have become. Calling someone a brown-noser is potentially homophobic? Really? What planet do you live on?

    Meanwhile, your repetitive name-calling is pretty amusing for someone so indignant about supposed name-calling.

    Like Patterico, I can prove any claim I have made. Good for the goose is good for the gander right buddy?

    Grow up, chaos. Maybe you’ll recognize your own complete lack of any coherent comment.

    Grow up, SPQR. Go buy a dictionary and find some new words to try to insult my intelligence with. Can you get any more pathetic?

    chaos (9c54c6)

  109. You really missed the boat on all those “intentionalism” threads, didn’t you? I mean, insofar as you’re a regular reader around here, and all, I’d think you would’ve seen at least one of them – there sure as hell were enough of the things.

    No actually I couldn’t really care less about that stupid argument, which is in fact what I said when Patterico whined about people (me, since no one else was saying it) saying that the whole thing was stupid.

    My problem is with Patterico, and now you little cultists, being hypocrites and liars, and originally it was with Patterico going on some inexplicable crusade regarding RS McCain that he still refuses to provide an explanation for.

    Not once has Patterico given an explanation for any of this (and if he did and I missed it link it and I’ll tell you what an idiot I am for missing it).

    chaos (9c54c6)

  110. Chaos, go get yourself a cock-slap. Seriously, this time. It will do you good.

    nk (df76d4)

  111. chaos – Which Jewish blogger are you talking about?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  112. Chaos, go get yourself a cock-slap. Seriously, this time. It will do you good.

    nk, go get yourself an adult. Seriously this time. Tell him to post for you. It will do you good.

    chaos – Which Jewish blogger are you talking about?

    Why, Abraham Micklesteinburger of course.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  113. Which Jewish blogger are you talking about?

    I assumed it was me (and then was very confused).

    SEK (9e7eee)

  114. This guy’s just so darn cute. Can we keep him?

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  115. chaos, that you don’t understand Patterico’s explanations does not mean he has not made them.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  116. This guy’s just so darn cute. Can we keep him?

    And here I thought that particular insult had been sent to the incinerator by the 4Chan Internet Police years ago.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  117. chaos, that you don’t understand Patterico’s explanations does not mean he has not made them.

    Find a new broken record to play, hack.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  118. This guy’s just so darn cute. Can we keep him?
    Comment by Leviticus — 12/13/2009 @ 4:12 pm

    Well okay, but you have to clean up after him. 😉

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  119. Leviticus, if you keep him then you have to feed him, water him and take him out for his walks.

    ‘Cause looks what he’s done on the floor.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  120. Leviticus, if you keep him then you have to feed him, water him and take him out for his walks.

    ‘Cause looks what he’s done on the floor.

    You’re almost cute yourself when you try to be demeaning in a cutesy way. It suits you.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  121. Oops, I called it a “him” when it might be a “her”. I need to be denounced for sexism, because I obviously meant to insinuate that chaos is not in fact potentially perhaps of the gender that chaos actually happens to be. It’s outrageous.

    Where’s JD when you need him?

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  122. Oops, I called it a “him” when it might be a “her”. I need to be denounced for sexism, because I obviously meant to insinuate that chaos is not in fact potentially perhaps of the gender that chaos actually happens to be. It’s outrageous.

    You need to be denounced for being terrible at trying to insult with wit. Other than that, you’re a fine fellow.

    But I’ll try to be serious one more time. Apparently, because Jeff Goldstein does or used to enjoy telling people to go get cock-slapped, that means if anyone defends Jeff Goldstein, it is okay for them to be told to go get cock-slapped.

    If you disagree with this, it means you’re a drooling moron perfectly described by Leviticus’ idiotic quote above.

    The lack of intelligence and character is obvious. But remember, if 3 people keep mocking me long enough, they must be right!

    chaos (9c54c6)

  123. As opposed to “if I keep calling those 3 people morons long enough, I must be right… but why won’t they listen to me!?”

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  124. As opposed to “if I keep calling those 3 people morons long enough, I must be right… but why won’t they listen to me!?”

    Wait, you’re under the impression that I’ve been trying to convince you, nk, or SQPR of anything?

    You’re more silly than I thought.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  125. 53 54 55 57 67 & 97.
    I can but agree, I know some others also said the same type of thing too, but none of you actually need a second from me.

    Here is a subject that needs some sunshine.

    Bill S.1147; Prevent (legal item) Trafficking act of 2009

    TC (0b9ca4)

  126. Chaos

    Imagine a world where Jeff actually gets paid for his words

    its called employment

    EricPWJohnson (9b7688)

  127. Chaos

    Imagine a world where Jeff actually gets paid for his words

    its called employment

    …Okay?

    I mean I really don’t care what Jeff Goldstein does or doesn’t do for a living, whether he’s a productive member of society or just some guy sitting in his pajamas in front of a keyboard somewhere…

    Insulting Goldstein really doesn’t do much for me, really. So if you want to prick me, find another way to do it.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  128. No, chaos, its quite clear that you have no intention of convincing anyone of anything other than your possession of a toilet of a mouth.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  129. chaos

    Its a recitation of fact – not an insult

    Jeff has lost his paying job as a blogger – is this not correct?

    EricPWJohnson (9b7688)

  130. No, chaos, its quite clear that you have no intention of convincing anyone of anything other than your possession of a toilet of a mouth.

    Oh ho ho that is a good one. You’re getting better at trolling, but only very slightly. Now if you’re going to accuse me of having a toilet of a mouth, maybe you’d like to quote some examples? Of course, you’ll have to make sure that you’re quoting me and not Patterico, or your buddy nk.

    Really how long do you want to keep getting abused like this buddy? Give it up already. You’re looking like a complete tool and you’re not even trying to make it better. Are there any other tired old insults that were tired old insults twenty years before the internet was even a word you’d like to throw out, or are you going to join the 21st century here sometime?

    Its a recitation of fact – not an insult

    Jeff has lost his paying job as a blogger – is this not correct?

    I have no idea. If true, well, uh, I don’t really care, I guess that sucks for him =)

    chaos (9c54c6)

  131. EricPWJohnson, Pajamas Media ended its blog advertising program some time ago, yes.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  132. SPQR

    did it stop paying him – did it invite him to join as a writer?

    EricPWJohnson (9b7688)

  133. chaos, you really are quite hilarious. Calling me a troll? Do you not know what the word means ( consistent with all the rest of the many discussions you’ve failed to follow ) or do you think that accusing others of your own behavior is some grand empowerment of your toilet mouth and bile-filled trolling? You were the one who admitted not intending to convince anyone of anything – the very definition of a troll.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  134. EricPWJohnson, the advertising program was cancelled for everyone, not just Jeff. It was losing a lot of money.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  135. chaos, you really are quite hilarious. Calling me a troll? Do you not know what the word means ( consistent with all the rest of the many discussions you’ve failed to follow )

    Oh yes we really are going down the list of tired old internet lines tonight, aren’t we?

    What’s next, I mean you’ve pretty much tapped the “you don’t understand jack” and “I’ll mock what you said knowing full well I’m misrepresenting you” wells bone dry.

    or do you think that accusing others of your own behavior is some grand empowerment of your toilet mouth and bile-filled trolling?

    Please SPQR, provide some examples of my toilet mouth and bile-filled trolling. Remember, make sure you’re quoting me, not Patterico at Little Miss Attila’s, and not nk either. Make sure it’s me you’re quoting.

    You were the one who admitted not intending to convince anyone of anything – the very definition of a troll.

    No, liar, I said I wasn’t intending to convince YOU, nk, or leviticus. The quote was very clear.

    Seriously though how long do you intend to keep lying and embarrassing yourself with the horrible quality of your lies?

    Call me a troll as many times as you want, won’t change a thing buddy.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  136. I support Patterico’s decision to continue this debate for two reasons: First, I trust Patterico and his judgment. If he thinks he needs to say more on this subject, he should say it. Second, blogging is a subjective undertaking. If debating with Jeff G about language is what motivates them right now, so be it.

    DRJ (84a0c3)

  137. I support Patterico’s decision to continue this debate for two reasons: First, I trust Patterico and his judgment. If he thinks he needs to say more on this subject, he should say it. Second, blogging is a subjective undertaking. If debating with Jeff G about language is what motivates them right now, so be it.

    You’re not allowed to sound so reasonable it comes off meek! Off with your head!

    chaos (9c54c6)

  138. SPQR

    You mean my original point that no one was paying for his words?

    EricPWJohnson (9b7688)

  139. EricPWJohnson, its an issue for Jeff G. One that has consumed more than one Guiness between us.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  140. SPQR

    The point is the underlying issue is the more he damages himself – the further he gets from ever being published

    EricPWJohnson (9b7688)

  141. As Christmas approaches, here’s hoping for a soon-to-arrive day of peace and reconciliation among all conservative bloggers.

    The Sanity Inspector (513d2f)

  142. I just want some socks and maybe a checkered flannel shirt.

    nk (df76d4)

  143. nk – I would like better trolls.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  144. So would I. You guys suck at it. I’ve seen better trolling from Muslims than what nk and daley and spqr dish out. Maybe it’s the turban that gives that extra zazz.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  145. EricPWJohnson, that’s a more complicated topic. Its been quite a while since the last time I had a chance to discuss it with Jeff G. face to face. Haven’t seen him at any Denver area blogger bashes in awhile.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  146. chaos – Are you one of our retread banned trolls?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  147. chaos – Are you one of our retread banned trolls?

    daleyrocks – were you a stupid asshole your whole life, or was it puberty, or did your mom open a freezer door into your head while holding you in the kitchen too often?

    chaos (9c54c6)

  148. daleyrocks, starting to look like it, isn’t it?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  149. daleyrocks, starting to look like it, isn’t it?

    Keep calling me a troll enough times, maybe someone will believe you!

    Funny how you three are the only ones who apparently have had this flash of insight. Or care about it. Maybe you should draw some conclusions from that =D

    chaos (9c54c6)

  150. Look at how nice Patterico was to RSM. Even with proof that RSM said, and then lied about his having said (when he repeatedly distorted whether the quote was accurate) a bona fide racist quote, Patterico noted that this didn’t prove that RSM was racist.

    He is God-like in his forgiveness.

    Someone should wash his feet and anoint him with oils.

    B Moe (534cee)

  151. Whose turn is it?

    happyfeet (2c63dd)

  152. […] I was at pains to deal with at the time of their unfolding. Behold! Cecchine has since recruited a dubious political hack and internet bully to manage a spin campaign to try to resuscitate Cecchine’s […]

    Historical Revisionism and the art of the Smear: More on Jake Shannon, his confederates, and catch wrestling (38c333)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1447 secs.