Patterico's Pontifications

1/24/2011

Charles Johnson Impotently Tries to Threaten My Job

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:51 pm

Looks like my last few posts really got to Charles Johnson:

The reference is to a post by Aaron Worthing, my guest blogger, who published the post while I was at work. Aaron’s post began as follows:

Okay so metaphorically, we just chopped off Charles Johnson’s head and mounted it on a pike on our collective front lawn, so why not go for Andrew Sullivan next?

Note the level of dishonesty at work here. Charles seeks to mislead his dopey crowd into thinking that I made a real threat against him, as opposed to a guest blogger making an explicitly labeled metaphorical statement. He has “deniability” because:

  • He didn’t actually say it was me, he just said it was my site, and of course that is technically true;
  • While Dowdifying the quote, he did say it was “metaphorical” — in a way that allows his dumber readers to conclude that is merely what my defense would be.

But of course the real purpose is to stir up his little army of sycophants and try to get them to contact my work. If you read through his comments, you’ll see that the small-brained lizards all fell for Charles’s little truth-bending exercise. They all think I wrote the post; they all think it’s a real threat; and several of them are making the usual predictable noises about how they are going to call my office, etc. etc. Stuff I have heard a million times before. Some examples:

Any public employee should be ashamed of posting anything like that anywhere.

. . . .

Who does this guy answer to? (And who is that guy’s boss?)

. . . .

Omigod! I’m sorry to hear about this. I’m also shocked that the guy who posted it is in law enforcement. He really should know how horrible such a web post is.

. . . .

Personally? I think they should fire him.

. . . .

They should give him the ultimatum of first shutting down “Patterico’s Pontifications” and then ceasing to engage in “late night” errant behavior. If not then they should fire him. At least that’s what I think Los Angeles County District Attorney, Steve Cooley, should do.

This is, of course, exactly what Charles sought when he wrote the post. This is all about shutting down the guy who criticized their hero Charles. He knows they will react like that. That’s why he posted what he did.

One commenter even quoted a left-winger here, who cited extreme comments on a pro-life blog to make a point about right-wing hate speech, and pretended that the extreme comments were being made by commenters here and supported by me:

This comment from that blog is terrifying. Be careful Charles. This does not even pretend to be metaphorical.

Jasper says:
January 21, 2011 at 11:07 am
’2 cent solution’

I would propose the 4 cent solution. A .45 between the eyes ….

Jasper says:
January 21, 2011 at 8:10 pm
“We do our ministry with love, not with hate speech, not with slander, not with anger or outburst. with a calmed, rational and loving approach”

I promise Joy, I will calmly pull trigger of my .45 into an abortionist that cuts the spinal cords of innocent babies. There will be no anger, slander or hate speech, only justice.

The level of idiocy and dishonesty is a compelling testament to the low level to which everyone there has sunk. That quote is from this comment by leftist Jim, who introduces the quote with the phrase: “You mean violent comments like this on a noted pro-life blog?” Leftist Jim is making a point about violent rhetoric on another blog. And the LGF commenter who quoted the comment had to know this.

Of course, by shading the truth to make it sound like I (not Aaron) made a real (not explicitly labeled metaphorical) threat, Charles hopes to frighten me and silence me.

Here is how much I am frightened and silenced:

Charles Johnson, you are a hypocritical, dishonest lowlife punk. This post of yours guarantees that I’ll be doing a new post about you every single time I find out about another lie of yours.

Every. Single. Time.

In doing so, Charles Johnson, I will metaphorically crush you. I will metaphorically disembowel you and eat your innards. But I will not do a single physical thing to you. Nor will I encourage others to.

I will simply laugh and laugh as your reputation continues to shrink into nothing.

I have, of course, had people do this exact sort of thing to me many, many times before — and it’s not purely a tactic of the left, either. (In fact, there is one certain “classical liberal” site that did almost precisely the same thing a little more than a year ago.) Tbogg, Sadly No, Brad Friedman, his partner the convicted bomber, the aforementioned “classical liberal” site, and several disgraced reporters and columnists for the Los Angeles Times have all learned that the best way to get me to stop pointing out their dishonesty is to stop engaging in dishonesty.

You stop lying, I stop pointing it out. Simple as that.

UPDATE: It just gets better and better. Here is a Twitter message Johnson just republished:

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha.

UPDATE x2: Jeff Goldstein denies gratuitously using my name and job title to harm me — in a post that gratuitously uses my name and job title.

His denial is false.

Commenter Dustin reminds us of the numerous posts in which Goldstein gratuitously linked my name, job title, and the word “anti-Semitic.” Dustin’s comments are here, here, and here. As Dustin explained:

You google bombed his name and job with ‘is he an antisemite’. Why didn’t you google bomb his blog handle, Patterico?

It’s really obvious that you were hoping that people searching for Patterico’s professional name would see questions about his antisemitism.

This isn’t funny, and you’d understand if you had a job.

Another point, your family was harassed by a deranged stalker. You chose to associate Patterico in your constant mentioning of this stalker, even though Patterico begged you not to, as this would lead the stalker to harass Patterico’s family. And indeed, he was right… that’s what happened. Thanks Jeff. You’re a real classy guy.

Your evidence that Patterico is an antisemite? None. You just thought it was a funny joke to have someone’s name on google linked to that question because you really, really hate the guy. He’s done nothing to you. He’s always asking you to chill out and stop this blog war. If I post something critical enough of you, Patterico just deletes it and asks me not to provoke you.

And I realize the reason is that he does actually want to have a life outside of this blog crap.

I think even Dustin doesn’t realize how far Jeff carried the Google bombing campaign.

You perhaps did not know that Goldstein, having created this Google bomb, then fortified the bomb by going to numerous of his old posts and linking the “anti-Semitic” post. Here are a few examples:

and here:

and here:

and here:

and here:

and here:

and here:

and here:

and here:

Note that Goldstein was not linking to comments of mine that he wanted to criticize, which would have been legitimate. Instead, he was repeatedly and gratuitously linking to a trumped-up smear on me, which specifically included my name, my job title, and the word “anti-Semitic.”

Goldstein appears to defend this smear as “satire.” Apparently, in his view, false words spoken online and linked to a person’s name and profession can’t be considered harmful as long as the intent is to joke or be clever. Deb Frisch must be thrilled to learn of Goldstein’s support for this excuse for Internet harassment.

I note also this Goldstein comment in which he uses my name and job title, and falsely claims that I was trying to hurt him professionally. The record shows that I was doing the precise opposite — but the smear worked. If you click on Goldstein’s comment and scroll down, you will see Jeff’s commentariat spinning into the exact same frenzy Charles Johnson spun his commenters into — with people posting contact information for the District Attorney, suggesting that the Los Angeles Times should be told bad things about me, and so forth. When Charles Johnson pulled his gratuitous naming of me and my job (alluding to Goldstein doing the same as precedent), I was reminded of this behavior by Goldstein.

P.S. Dustin also reveals that, like me and EricPWJohnson and many others, Dustin’s comments were altered at Protein Wisdom: “He instantly started changing all my comments on his blog.”) You can add this to the mountain of other evidence proving that Goldstein alters even reasonable people’s comments when they call him on his bad behavior.

Goldstein also admits that he outs commenters, and defends it by saying that if you included part of your name in your e-mail address, and then criticize him, you were asking to be outed.

These are all tactics of the sort Charles Johnson has used. My point is that, unfortunately, they are not limited to the left.

464 Responses to “Charles Johnson Impotently Tries to Threaten My Job”

  1. Did I seem frightened enough to get him to leave me alone?

    Patterico (c218bd)

  2. Grasping at straws to build what’s left of his readership.

    Sad.

    EvilMonk (de0cf5)

  3. Patterico, oh yup. Terrified.

    If we find your body in the street with 700x28C tire marks up your back, we’ll know who it was.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  4. How is trying to harm someone IRL supposed to help them gain sympathy again?

    And… if charles’s head is still on his neck, how isn’t Aaron’s comment metaphorical?

    Indeed, he truly lost the St Pancake argument in epic fashion. The only thing that wasn’t epic about it was the fact Charles didn’t have a reputation.

    And just look at the cute ‘treat them to a different standard’ crap Charles is employing. He was caught endorsing the ridicule of literally pancaking a person to death with a bulldozer. But he wants to reclaim the ‘civility’ high ground, so the subject must change.

    Omigod! I’m sorry to hear about this. I’m also shocked [bla bla bla]

    This commenter came from the St Pancake blog, and is having a fainting spell? Give me a break.

    I guess we’ll see more classy representatives of LGF, such as Jim Shay, screaming that we must stop criticizing Charles Johnson because it proves we are gay.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  5. Chuckles Johnson is pathetic. I have long held that people named Charles are doomed to be douche bags.

    JD (d4bbf1)

  6. Oh, and Patterico … points for the “impotent” metaphor. lol.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  7. Ashamed to admit that I visited his site occasionally years back before he went completely nuts. I don’t think he has had a coherent thought in years. Sad and pathetic.

    largebill (1d1579)

  8. Charles Johnson, you are a hypocritical, dishonest lowlife punk.

    I sense you’re holding back.

    Tully (62151d)

  9. “In doing so, Charles Johnson, I will metaphorically crush you. I will metaphorically disembowel you and eat your innards.

    You can call him Charles… you can call him Johnson… but you doesn’t has to call him Charles “Chitlin” Johnson.

    ColonelHaiku (f8a47b)

  10. Re: Update. Chuck lives in Stalkerville.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  11. There’s no way that anyone on LGF could have been misled about my comment, Patterico. I even included a link to the original blog by stanek with my quotes.

    Jim (8de501)

  12. You know what’s really hilarious. Patterico may tolerate Aaron using a sensible metaphor, but Charles Johnson had no rebuke when his top moderator wrote “nigger” on Hot Air’s comment threads. And when this mod, Kilgore Trout, bragged about it, Charles’s reaction was that the N Word staying up from the dead of night through the early morning was proof Hot Air was full of disgusting extremism. Trumped up evidence? Oh well. More proof of LGF’s problem than Hot Air’s? Ignore it.

    He didn’t fire his moderator. He had no problem with hate speech, even if it’s obviously crossing the line. It was during the time Hot Air was being purchased, and probably an effort to make the blog less appealing to an investor. No kidding. They like to go after your livelihood if you criticize them.

    Aaron uses a drastically milder phrase on Charles and suddenly the standards have changed. Suddenly, LGF’s commenters want someone’s job.

    If it’s any consolation, there really aren’t that many of them left.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  13. LOL, “Hate Blog”.

    Meaning what? That we point out lies? I thought ‘hate blog’ meant some kind of prejudice. It’s not prejudice when you list examples of poor character.

    I would bet my new shoes we see racial slurs or gay bashing or religious intolerance from completely new commenters. They will simply type up their own evidence tonight.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  14. This is what’s so amusing about Johnson’s megalomania–anyone who’s read this site over the past few years knows 1) what Patterico’s job is and who he works for; 2) that this isn’t the first time someone who was pissed off at what he had to say tried to get him fired; and 3) no one has ever been successful at it. CJ’s truly full of himself if he thinks he or his chimpout comment section will be the first to pop that cherry.

    For someone who allowed his blog to fester for years as Ground Zero for anti-Muslim hatred, it’s rather rich for CJ to play the part of the victim now.

    Another Chris (67858a)

  15. 9.Ashamed to admit that I visited his site occasionally years back before he went completely nuts. I don’t think he has had a coherent thought in years. Sad and pathetic
    Comment by largebill — 1/24/2011 @ 7:11 pm

    Don’t be ashamed. Many of us were loyal followers of LGF during 2003-2008. Charles Johnson is the one who should be ashamed — he has become everything that he once despised.

    President-elect Palin - 11/20/2012 (a2a019)

  16. I thought ‘hate blog’ meant some kind of prejudice.

    Well, I kinda hate stupid people…

    And the poor. I totally hate the poor.

    It’s why I want them to all starve and freeze and whatever else Democrats say I want to happen to them. I’ll be honest, I don’t pay much attention.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  17. Comment by President-elect Palin

    Damn, I need to check my sockpuppet alias before I post.

    aunursa (a2a019)

  18. Be careful with this worm. People who have actual jobs and accomplishments are targets.

    kansas (be45b1)

  19. If the LA Times sees his tweet, it might retaliate against you by publishing a news article on some topic with a slightly partisan slant.

    Northeast Elizabeth (a7296b)

  20. Charles is a hero to pearl-clutching civility junkies who hate extreme rhetoric – except when he says it’s OK. See, for instance, “LudwigVanQuixote” on Limbaugh and Beck. He’s so funny he has to explain the joke. Several times.

    Mork (c3ac61)

  21. I just realized he’s mocking Patterico’s assignment to prosecuting gang violence.

    You know, that kind of job would scare the living @#$% out of me. Maybe I’ve seen too many movies, but LA seems like a rough place with a lot of organized crime.

    If Charles is trying to bully his critic, shouldn’t the fact this critic is standing up to killers indicate some cyberbully can’t just post his name and see results?

    Charles isn’t even good at being a punk.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  22. but LA seems like a rough place with a lot of organized crime.

    It isn’t the organized crime you have to worry about – they usually understand that offing people like Prosecutors is, at best, unwise.

    It’s the un-organized gang bullsh*t that would scare the crap outta me.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  23. So, having been a regular reader of this site for well, a long time, but a rare commenter, feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, but I see Charles has written this in his blog comments (first post)
    By the way, Patterico’s real name was publicized by right wing blogs when they were attacking him for his very mild criticisms of Robert Stacy McCain. (Before I get accused of outing someone.)

    If memory serves correct, you (Patrick) outed yourself in the creation of this blog. Perhaps not in the first year, however I didn’t think it was some sort of “secret.”

    G (ce0c1b)

  24. oh, it gets better, regarding the comment over the 4 cent solution,

    Charles writes “And I’ll just point out that you’ll never find me using that kind of rhetoric at LGF – not in almost 10 years of blogging.”

    haha, words can’t even begin…

    G (ce0c1b)

  25. I, too, used to read LGF when it did the great work on rathergate and doctored palestinian tear-jerk photos. It might have been the only blog besides drudge i read then.

    The place I learned about Rachel Corrie was from LGF and I had a naughty laugh at how the ‘lizards’ made fun of her and her misguided principles.

    It’s one to move from right to left- that’s fine.
    But to move from a truth seeker who challenged the media and power structures to a shameless liar, PC apologist and one who obfuscates rather than clarifies- that’s another thing altogether.

    So sad

    breitbartfan77 (b72ab6)

  26. I don’t remember who linked to this on the other Charles Johnson post but it dug down a bit to the root of his crazy, hitting the philosophical nail on the head. Sometimes just average is too great a burden for some to bear.

    When I met Charles, back in 2004, he was fiftyish and driving a somewhat battered Hyundai. According to Raj, he’d been cleaned out in recent divorce and didn’t have much more than that Hyundai, his computer and his bike. That’s got to be a tough thing to take at fifty. It is probably fair to say that Little Green Footballs and the blogosphere were about the only things Charles had going for him. Which is, quite frankly, somewhat sad.

    Sad, and dangerous.

    Dangerous because it gave Charles Johnson, middle-aged mediocrity, the out he needed when it came to dealing with the fact that he was just another average guy. It’s something that the vast majority of us have to deal with at some point in our lives. We spend our first forty or so years believing that we are indeed special, that we can indeed do anything we want to (if only we work hard for it). It’s what’s been drilled into us since birth. And then, one day, we wake up and realize that we aren’t special. We cannot do whatever we put minds to. We discover we are mediocre. We are average.

    What’s important to note about this, at least as it applies to Charles Johnson, is that the notoriety gained from the Rather Affair, combined with popularity of Little Green Footballs has allowed Charles the opportunity to avoid, up until about a year ago, the day he had to reckon with his own mediocrity. He could look past his personal and professional setbacks and gaze upon the glory that was blogospheric prominence. If nothing else, he could now claim to being an influencer… Someone of importance… A leader.

    And herein lies the seeds of Charles Johnson’s self-destruction: He is not a leader. He’s an average guy.

    Dana (8ba2fb)

  27. Jim likes the attention he is getting for his irrelevant BUNNIES quotes.

    JD (d4bbf1)

  28. That is correct, G. I made the decision to reveal my name early on in the blog’s history.

    It is true that, during the McCain kerfuffle, a certain “right wing blog” continually published my name and job title, together with pejoratives, much as Johnson is doing now, with the intent of a) harming me on Google and b) stirring up the commentariat to contact my job.

    But it’s not like it was some secret. As you note, I revealed it myself ages ago.

    By the way, the Hardcore Gang Division folks in Compton would be surprised to know I’m there.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  29. Patterico, one of the other commenters on LGF quickly set the record straight about the comments from Jill Stanek’s blog that I posted here:

    re: #4 Rightwingconspirator

    That was someone quoting a comment that appeared at a “pro-life” blog. The link is there.

    Jim (8de501)

  30. It’s the un-organized gang bullsh*t that would scare the crap outta me.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs — 1/24/2011 @ 7:54 pm

    I was just clumsy with my words as usual, but yes, this is exactly why that would scare the crap out of me, too.

    And I don’t mean to show an unseemly level of praise here, but that is a job most people can’t do because of the intimidation factor. You’re not going to scare him away with twitter and blogging.

    G’s quote really boils it down. Charles is doing his best to deceive people about what Patterico has personally said. He’s relying on a quote from a completely different blog, quoted here to be criticized, as evidence about this blog.

    It’s just plain lying.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  31. And the comments from Jill Staneks blog were relevant in what way?

    JD (d4bbf1)

  32. @Jim

    And is that comment deleted yet, and is that person banned?

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  33. Perhaps, like the dearly-departed Eazy E, Mr. Patterico works in Compton, Michigan?

    Anyway, no one I know has ever voted for Nixon used Twitter.

    carlitos (a3d259)

  34. I just wanted to add, I love free speech. I love facts and reality too.

    G (ce0c1b)

  35. Chucky’s attempts to get Pat fired will fail as comically as his business model

    eddiebear (6d811d)

  36. Huh. Looks like one of mine got deleted here.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  37. Okay, I’ll add one more thing, I’m sure I’ve said this before but this really is one of the best blogs out there. Though, I only go to a few, I think I’ve been reading multiple times a day since 2005. This blog offers a good variety of local/legal/political issues and analysis, with the occasional entertainment post, like Patterico talking about a Gin Blossoms concert, or what not. And just consider the “jury talks back” feature.

    G (ce0c1b)

  38. Didn’t this happen to Sarah Palin?

    Arizona Bob (e8af2b)

  39. Huh. Looks like one of mine got deleted here.

    Yeah. I explained that to you in the comment. Not worth it.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  40. I used to read LGF all the time back in the day. And now I don’t.

    I still read Patterico even though I violently disagree with Aaron Worthing. Funny that.

    Newtons.Bit (d4b383)

  41. AW rox!

    JD (d4bbf1)

  42. So does AGW!

    JD (d4bbf1)

  43. This is incredible. A United States DA is involved in this type of garbage, and collects public salary!

    We are doomed.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  44. Elind:

    Welcome to Patterico! I see you are from Little Green Footballs. Why don’t you stay a while and explain just what it is that you find so distressing? Hint: instead of relying on Charles for your facts, provide them on your own.

    This should be interesting.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  45. Only the f*cktards at LGF, Elind… Only the f*cktards…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  46. My memory may be a tad sketchy, but on this point, I don’t think it is:
    It really wasn’t too long ago that Chuckles was all up in arms that HIS blog had been labeled a “hate blog” – and his defense was that he was publishing* the truth.
    IIRC, he had to (and several readers did as well) petition a fairly large ‘Net Nanny to take LGF off their defined “hate site” list.

    Ultimately, you know it’s truly gone to sh¡t over there when Charles’ flying monkeys no longer descend to defend his honor** any more.

    * – If you call linking, sometimes without attribution, publishing.
    ** – Such as it is.

    X_LA_Native (6c56cc)

  47. In the words of Peter Venkman,

    It’s true: this man has no dick.

    Mitch (e40959)

  48. I will take book that Elind will not stick around to discuss his comment.

    reff (7206a4)

  49. Ooops. Spoke too soon.

    X_LA_Native (6c56cc)

  50. Round eats boogerz.

    JD (d4bbf1)

  51. Elind eats boogerz.

    JD (d4bbf1)

  52. This is incredible

    Literally.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  53. charlie is such a silly head this is a blog of love

    happyfeet (aa4bab)

  54. You know, I almost posted this on Twitter but then I realized that almost nobody cares what Mad King Charles, Wizard of Little Green Footballs, thinks. This may a Freddy Krueger Moment: just turn your back and the nightmare will be over except that the sequels just keep getting worse and never end kinda like a recurring fungal infection on your small toes. Whatayagonnado?

    Ben Grivno (58038f)

  55. Pat:

    When did you become a U.S. district attorney? And, what is it?

    Ag80 (e03e7a)

  56. Elind licks lizard scrotum.

    JD (d4bbf1)

  57. When did you become a U.S. district attorney? And, what is it?

    I have learned many things about myself in recent days. I learned that I was lapd and got in trouble with them. I learned that I work in Compton. I learned that I am a U.S. district attorney. I learned that my name is Aaron Worthing, and that I made a comment about putting Charles Johnson’s head on a pike this morning around 10:12 a.m.

    I’m sorry I can’t give you a straight answer to your question. It is hard to keep up with all these new facts about myself.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  58. charlie is such a silly head this is a blog of love

    See? This is why I love happyfeet.

    The love, it keeps spreading!!

    Patterico (c218bd)

  59. But you have to say it like this:

    This . . .

    is a blog . . .

    of loooooooooooooooooove.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  60. Elind cannot see the love due to the lizard scrotum across the bridge of his nose. And Jim Shaw.

    JD (d4bbf1)

  61. funny how elind ran away. Hey Charles, is this the best you can do, fu^khead?

    eddiebear (6d811d)

  62. CJ lost it when PJM started up — and lost it big-time. I urged some people in the area to maybe check up on him to see if he’d had a stroke or something….but it seems he just was doing a Groucho Marx impression: “Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them… well, I have others.”

    cthulhu (8e00c9)

  63. Does Charles even live in LA, anymore, to make that kind of an elementary mistake, he must be watching
    two many episodes of Southland.

    narciso (6075d0)

  64. i think the stupidest thing about this is that even in the part Johnson quoted from, it is clearly not a threat, but a statement of fact. I am not saying we will, metaphorically or otherwise, decapitate the idiot. I was saying we (metaphorically) did do so, which makes the fact it was metaphorical all the more obvious by the fact he was still blogging. I mean either that, or they didn’t think CJ needed anything above the shoulders to do what he does.

    Aaron Worthing (73a7ea)

  65. I was banned from LGF a while back, when Chuckles was early in his downward spiral. My offense? Posting, verbatim, one of his inconvenient old posts that he hadn’t gotten around to erasing yet. What a towering paragon of honesty! Shame about those plummeting page views, eh Chuck? In about three more months, that site will consist of nothing more than him and Kilgore Trout tirelessly scouring the comments sections of other blogs searching for comments about him to bitch about.

    Personally, I think he latches on to such bogus “threats” against him because he so deperately wants to be someone important enough to threaten. No one cares anymore, other than as an occasional source of ridicule.

    radar (988adc)

  66. As for true crazypants, the Ludwig character at LGF has repeatedly said that AGW “deniers” (skeptics are no longer permitted) should be tried and executed for crimes against manatees – or something. The he had to take a month-long break after melting down over the evil conservative sex appeal of Megyn Kelly. This is now one of CJ’s favored commenters. Srsly.

    Mork (c3ac61)

  67. Maybe the image you were going for was Medusa, or possibly Dennis Hopper’s groupie journalist in Apocalypse, but I think Col. Kurtz, waiting for
    an air strike, is more appropriate

    narciso (6075d0)

  68. If you look at Megyn Kelly and think evil, there is something wrong with you, something seriously wrong with you.

    JD (d4bbf1)

  69. I cropped Charles Johnson’s head and stuck it on a Pike.

    If you want it on your collective lawn then you are going to have to do it yourselves.

    I can’t really see what the problem is.

    http://i53.tinypic.com/2jbnrir.jpg

    Internet Septic Tank Engineer (b332c8)

  70. Ironically, Charles is frequently whining about being “held accountable” for comments on his blog.

    I’m proud to have been banned by LGF.

    DANEgerus (52bcb3)

  71. Pat:

    Maybe if you’re a USDA, they give you a badge, a hat and a bag of corn — to hit Compton gangsters.

    Ag80 (e03e7a)

  72. I never got banned by LGF. Cuz I never got into it. Went there a couple of times. You know, after his famous gif. He did make a gif once. Anyway. Didn’t like it. Didn’t stay.

    rdbrewer (2c8d9a)

  73. Spend a lot of time cleaning your pistol, doncha.

    Bette R. Thanu (c31ad6)

  74. 75: ?

    eddiebear (6d811d)

  75. I don’t think Charles just want’s his sycophants to make hay to get Patterico fired, I read his “hardcore GANG division” and “COMPTON” loud and clear.

    here is no reason to promote these 2 things in less I have it wrong and Charles is impressed that Pat prosecutes hardcore gang members in Compton.

    Topsecretk9 (ab69ad)

  76. Ack…proof posts

    Para 2 redo

    THERE is no reason to promote these 2 things UNLESS I have it wrong and Charles is impressed that Pat prosecutes hardcore gang members in Compton.

    Topsecretk9 (ab69ad)

  77. Because of ego, narcissism, and an inability to control either – Charles has become what he for so longed claimed to despise. Now he is well on the way to becoming something else – totally irrelevant.

    The honest thing to do is admit what was done and if he really thinks it reprehensible, apologize for it. Charles isn’t being honest – and still digging that hole.

    Would I get in trouble if I used a metaphor that likened that hole to the grave of his reputation?

    Athos (26d45b)

  78. #70:

    Megyn and the other “Fox News gutter sluts” are evil because they use their horrible boobies and pheromones and all to tempt libruhl men into thinking forbidden thoughts about AGW maybe not being true and plus they are whores.

    No kidding. That’s how he “thinks”. He’s the go-to guy for climate hysteria on LGF. LudwigVanQuixote. A total freakjob.

    Mork (c3ac61)

  79. 75.Spend a lot of time cleaning your pistol, doncha.

    Coupla times a day. More when I can get a chick to do it.

    rdbrewer (2c8d9a)

  80. #82 might be the best comment I’ve seen in weeks…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  81. Don’t you just hate it when that happens?

    Machinist (74634b)

  82. What’s a “Charles Johnson”, and why would anyone give a rat’s ass what he says about anything?

    AD-RtR/OS! (200f6d)

  83. Hmm……I believe when conservative bloggers and talk show hosts were going after Van Jones by using actual quotes from Jones a little over a year ago, the petulant portly ponytailed pooch threw an amazing collossal fit and flounced from the right-o-sphere because it was so unjust to go after somebody’s job like that no matter how much you might’ve disagreed with them.

    My my my my…..how times change.

    Fenway_Nation (4ef9c0)

  84. For a man who decries ‘dog whistle politics’ as CJ does, here he blows it loud and clear for all his whacked out cultists: “In addition to decapitating me, Deputy District Attorney Frey is now threatening to disembowel me and eat my innards. Also metaphorically.” This is a call for all the cultists to do whatever it takes to get Patterico fired.

    MrPaulRevere (861971)

  85. Meanwhile, one of Johnson’s less stable minions is in full florid mental meltdown mode. The nick is “Reginald Perrin” and he’s so over the top that he’s now getting gang-mocked by the other “lizards”. It reads a bit like Jared Loughner’s attempts to socialize on the web.

    Sadly, this Reginald is not the first passionate defender of the Thin-Lipped Moral Paragon™ to very publicly lose it. And sadly, Johnson’s pattern is to not do a thing to calm the crazy before it gets so embarrassing that he has to ban it. His lack of concern for the nuts who latch on to him is legendary. “Irish Rose” and “Sharmuta” are two female posters whose sad cases come to mind. What is inexplicable is why he has a hold on certain people like that. What is indubitable is that his site is run like a cult. Cold-hearted Guitar Charles is a certifiable sociopath.

    I look forward to your next piece about him.

    Mork (77f326)

  86. Charles is having hysterics over “right-wing macho crap”?

    Cue the tears at about 2:10 in this clip from Blazing Saddles. Who’d have thought years ago that Charles would be doing the French Mistake?

    :-D

    pst314 (48ad7b)

  87. 13.There’s no way that anyone on LGF could have been misled about my comment, Patterico. I even included a link to the original blog by stanek with my quotes.
    Comment by Jim — 1/24/2011 @ 7:18 pm

    FWIW, I’ll say I think it is classy that even a poster of an opposing viewpoint is willing to clarify the truth here at PP’s.

    But I can’t say comments about chitlins are ever classy in any context, but crimes against manatees was cleaver.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  88. So do you have a soft-core gang division?

    Unless the point is Compton is so wild it needs a special gang division just to make the streets safe for soft core gangs.

    papertiger (294e0d)

  89. I’m trying to remember when Progressives decided to give up persuasion – or even trickery – in favor of bullying. I guess it was some time during Bush II’s term.

    My advice, lifted from one of my favorite movies: “Don’t soil your knuckles on the man.”

    Y-not (45d6ad)

  90. Soft core gangs would be something like the Van Buren Boys from Seinfeld, I’m guessing.

    radar (98f691)

  91. How To Manage And Increase Blog Traffic
    by
    The Thin-Lipped Moral Paragon™

    1. Find another blogger you disagree with.

    2. Give them a nasty nickname.

    3. Punch them (metaphorically) in the face.

    4. Repeat step three until they punch back.

    5. Scramble back to the Moral High Ground and whinge about being stalked by haturrrs.

    6. Receive tongue bath from female blogroupies.

    7. Loop.

    Mork (77f326)

  92. Back when Jerry Brown was still the mayor of Oakland he ran a blog for a while.

    Charles linked through to Jerry’s blog and Gov Brown got a blog full of the lizard treatment, so much so that Jerry installed moderation and deleted all comments referencing LGF.

    It’s possible that Jerry might have forgotten the whole ugly incident, but I doubt it.

    There’s no way Gus would know about it but he’s barking up the wrong tree petitioning support from Governor Brown.

    Maybe he should try state officials that Charles hasn’t launched a blog war on.

    papertiger (294e0d)

  93. Mork

    you forgot about The Other McCain’s rule 5.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  94. If you are going to report on the all Charles Johnson’s lies you might was well change the name of your blog to LGF watch.

    kansas (be45b1)

  95. Dana,
    That “average guy” excerpt you linked to from Dennis the Peasant reminded me of why I like his blog so much — his utter honesty.

    I met DtP a couple of years ago when I was visiting a friend in Columbus, OH. Very down-to-earth, decent guy.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (fb9e90)

  96. I’m still here, but the comments that followed mine say it all. Too many juvenile brats here.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  97. Okay, Internet Septic Tank Engineer (#71). I LOL’ed.

    S. Weasel (39a70c)

  98. 98: so you refuse to engage, preferring to slink back behind the green gulag’s wall to brag about how awesome you are? Yeah, you definitely are one of the few remaining loozards, f&ckface.

    eddiebear (bd5de9)

  99. Elind – do you have lizard smegma in your eyes, which is keeping you from reading that which you are commenting on?

    JD (936b23)

  100. I can’t find the link, but I saw something recently (on HotAir?) about a sports column writer who got some very nasty comments from a reader over the internet (I think the one that finally moved the writer to action was a supposedly angry reader sending the writer a filthy photo JPG).

    Anyway, the writer tracked down the sender of the JPG, and talked with him about his actions. It turns out that the sender was very, very, very different in person, and apologetic. It seems like he just wanted to get a reaction, and was more than a little shamefaced about his own actions in retrospect.

    The internet does odd things to people—sort of like when a person is driving, and they say things to other drivers they would never say one on one (as if the car windshield is magical, somehow).

    Just my opinion here.

    Simon Jester (a99b4a)

  101. #95 Aaron:

    The closest Johnson ever got to using Rule #5 was when he repeatedly posted pix of St. Rachel “Roadkill” Corrie wearing a hijab and snarlingly burning a hand-drawn American flag.

    Let’s just say it attracted the wrong kind of perv.

    My impression of Charles is that he doesn’t “get” sex. Or get any sex. Whatever.

    Mork (77f326)

  102. #59, Patterico, not to worry, it’s a shallow man who knows himself.

    ropelight (20aa73)

  103. But, Charles Johnson is a good man.

    There. I said it.

    I’m not really following Patrick’s decision to include Goldstein in this clusterfark. But, I’m sure he has his reasons er, justification.s

    I’d point out that, for all the “climate of hate” talk post-Loughner, the only blogger that I know who’s been actually victimized by a lefty-crazed commenter for his blogging would be Goldstein.

    So there’s that.

    Returning to Johnson – well, why bother?

    BumperStickerist (19b59f)

  104. What an unfortunate misunderstanding.

    Note that I did not say “Charles Johnson should be broken on the wheel, handed his genitals, eviscerated and dismembered in the public square! He is a slimy pussbucket who doesn’t deserve to LIVE! BURN the witch!”

    No, I didn’t say that. I’m much too much of a gentleman to make such unkind and provocative statements.

    But won’t that make a nice little excerpt for Sir Charles? What a maroon.

    bobdog (166386)

  105. Charles Johnson, is irrelevant to my comment and I haven’t posted at LGF for some time. What you people should do is replace the name Charles Johnson with any name you choose. Someone you like or are indifferent to, or simply don’t know; doesn’t matter which, then read your own comments.

    If you are past mental puberty you will realize what you sound like. If not……

    Elind (9e06ea)

  106. I visited LGF earlier today…site is a sell of what it once was. Checked a few of the threads, couldn’t believe the amount of vitriol that was being spewed by Charles and his 20+ minions – there’s a lot of lonely and scorned people over there. Charles reminds me of the Uncle Rico from “Napoleon Dynamite” – trying to relive his glory days, while causing hate and discontent in the hear and now.

    Felt so filthy that I had to take a shower afterward – with Clorox and a Brillo pad to get clean again.

    Infidel Mataween (9e07b1)

  107. #107 Elind:

    Piss off, you fucking civility fag!

    Mork (77f326)

  108. That is a lie, elind, otherwise you would not have wandered over here to take a rhetorical dump. You lied in your initial comment, either that, or you are painfully estupido.

    JD (936b23)

  109. Playing the “you people” card never works, Elind.

    S. Weasel (39a70c)

  110. CJ’s Jan 23 10:07 post at LGF proudly said he was going to ignore all criticism from twitter and blogs (he retuned his “tweetdeck” or whatever.) Apparently that idea lasted only about 12 hours.

    Here’s a question from a Luddite: when somebody “retweets” something, does that mean they are implicitly endorsing or approving of the original “tweet?” What does a retweet definitely imply about the intentions, beliefs or motives of the retweeter?

    gp (72be5d)

  111. My comment was about you people. Therefore it works. What doesn’t work is “you lie”, if you know what I mean.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  112. elind: f*ck you

    eddiebear (bd5de9)

  113. I’m not a regular Patterico reader, but I must say, I usually do enjoy it when I get linked over here.

    The biggest irony is that the first time I ever got here was a link from LGF (don’t remember if it was directly from Charles or not).

    looking closely (1c54a2)

  114. Seriously, dude. What the Hell is it with you and these petty blog spats? You seem downright addicted to the 8th grade-level drama.

    Grow up. It reflects horribly on you.

    At the very least, respond to idiots like Johnson with some maturity and class. There are plenty of bloggers who manage to have blog wars without looking like children. Learn from them.

    Yeah, Johnson is a lying douchebag. What else is new? But all you’ve managed to do is roll around in his filth with him.

    Go read Ace’s blog and watch he manages to somehow utterly destroy people like Johnson, without looking like a petulant, whiny child.

    And bonus points for being funny about it.

    It is literally impossible to believe from reading this post that you are both an adult and a professional. Seriously.

    P (980e1f)

  115. eddiebear; thank you for the support, even if unintended.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  116. mork

    i meant the rule 5 reference much more ironically and self-referentially. :-)

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  117. “you people” ?! How racist can you be, elind?

    JD (936b23)

  118. elind

    all you have done is childishly insult us by alleging childish insults. do you have anything of substance to say?

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  119. elind: do ytou have a point, f*ckhammer?

    eddiebear (bd5de9)

  120. Honestly, does anyone actually pay attention to LGF anymore? I ask that legitimately, because I when I think of lefty blogs and websites, LGF doesn’t even hit my radar. HuffPo, Media Matters, Daily Kos all immediately come to mind (and set off my gag reflex in record time), but LGF is just… meh.

    MWR (32e6a8)

  121. Aaron, why do you ask if I have something to say when you don’t like what I say?

    Elind (9e06ea)

  122. “the only blogger that I know who’s been actually victimized by a lefty-crazed commenter for his blogging would be Goldstein.”

    BumperStickerist – Just shows how little you know, you creepy stalker c*nt. There, I said it, not to stir things up or anything.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  123. Johnson’s value, back in the day, was the ability to show the parts of Salafi islam, and certain aspects of Shia eschatology, that the MSM refused
    to consider, and the idiocy of the left, once he
    did a 180, he was just another Brock, John Cole,
    mouthpiece for the Sinisphere

    narciso (6075d0)

  124. Elind

    > Aaron, why do you ask if I have something to say when you don’t like what I say?

    good reading comp there. I asked if you had anything of substance to say. And by expressio unius i was implying that so far you hadn’t said anything of substance.

    narc

    CJ used to be a truth teller. you can significantly credit him for taking down dan rather.

    now he is dan rather. actually worse than the man.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  125. You’re a good man, daleyrocks.

    and I say that as one creepy stalker c*nt to another, demonstrably, creepier, more stalker-y c*nt.

    cheers.

    BumperStickerist (19b59f)

  126. Grow up, BumperStickerist.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  127. Wow. This is some childish banter you’ve got going. This kind of blog is a sort of sanctuary for smallish folks who didn’t get laid until it was too late. Y’all are some sad, angry, losers. Getting all worked up and writing nasty things about each other. Take a few deep breathes and go read a book or take your dog for a walk, but by god have some respect for yourselves and find a more noble and worthy outlet for your passions than these retarded squabbles. Pathetic bunch of sexless hyperventilators. Maybe the head you should worry about is getting some rather than fantasizing about putting a stick in some lib bloggers. Freudian really, I mean to say, you angry repubs come off like closeted ashamed gays.

    Luke (4a6822)

  128. “Grow up, BumperStickerist.”

    Unlikely.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  129. It wasn’t a statement of the extant probabilities.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  130. SPQR – thanks for the advice. Given the source, I’ll decline.

    If Pat’s using the same debate scoring system for his tiff with Goldstein as he is with Johnson, or if he thinks those two situations are analogous, he’s mistaken.

    Like, circa now Charles Johnson-level mistaken.

    .

    BumperStickerist (19b59f)

  131. I’ll leave you two to the log-rolling. Make sure to feel good about yourself when done.

    Cheers.

    BumperStickerist (19b59f)

  132. BumperStickerist – Turds are waiting to be fondled by True Conservative Classical Liberal Intentionalists. Back to work with you.

    CIVILITY NOW!

    OUTLAW!

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  133. I don’t know who the hell eddiebear is, but I find myself rather liking that person.

    Something about the style of writing speaks to me. I just can’t put my finger on what it is. :)

    Also, Daleyrocks @ #124… Nicely said. :)

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  134. You know I’m fairly certain my story doesn’t work if I don’t use Charles in it.

    papertiger (768dbe)

  135. If LGF Libels someone and nobody reads it, did it happen?

    My solution: Do not read LGF. Chuck is welcome to mutter amongst his minions. If we want real news, opinions, or analysis, we know where to look.

    Gork (aa16d4)

  136. Who the hell still reads husky’s stupid site anyway? This moron got a taste of the limelight and now thinks the world revolves around him.

    BrockSamson (a5a946)

  137. if he thinks those two situations are analogous, he’s mistaken.

    Um, they aren’t just analogous. They are almost identical. Posting the guy’s name and employer and then lying that he’s antisemitic (Goldstein’s slimeball lie) is very similar to posting his name and employer to say he runs a ‘hate blog’.

    In fact, I would be very surprised if Charles wasn’t doing this in hopes to build on the google bomb lying that Jeff Goldstein started.

    Charles Johnson is less crazy, and far less obsessed, than Jeff Goldstein, whose blog has mentioned Patterico over 20,000 times in the past couple of years (not hyperbole).

    It’s a separate issue to some extent, and no one wants to another PW blog war, but if you have a problem with Charles using a ‘he’s racist! here’s his actual name! here’s his employer!’ stunt, and don’t have a problem with Jeff doing it, that’s because you’re a sycophant.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  138. You don’t know eddiebear, Scott? He’s a co-blogger over at D-PUD (also his own blog). Where he is always as charmingly sweary has he has been in this thread.

    S. Weasel (39a70c)

  139. I had no idea…

    I like the cut of his jib.

    But not in a gay way.

    NTTAWWT

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  140. that should be NTTIAWWT, Scott.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  141. but if you have a problem with Charles using a ‘he’s racist! here’s his actual name! here’s his employer!’ stunt, and don’t have a problem with Jeff doing it, that’s because you’re a sycophant.

    If he is, then he is in “fine” company here…

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  142. @SPQR

    I use the contraction of “There Is”… Because I refuse to type more letters than I need to when stealing one of the few actually funny things from that s**ty show.

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  143. LOL. The overnight open thread turned into Crazypants Circus on LGF this morning. “The web’s premier site for civil political debate.” Hellz, yeah.

    Mork (874744)

  144. Scott, a contraction? Tsk tsk.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  145. the only blogger that I know who’s been actually victimized by a lefty-crazed commenter for his blogging would be Goldstein.

    FYI, the crazed commenter you’re talking about has actually screwed with Patterico IRL too. You’re just ignorant of this because Patterico didn’t post many blog posts seeking attention over the matter because he thought that would simply make the situation worse for the people he cares about. Jeff, on the other hand, made the situation worse for his family. And Jeff also decided to send that crazed person after Patterico, despite specific requests from Patterico.

    That’s not all, Brett Kimblerin, the Speedway Bomber, has also contacted Patterico IRL, though I don’t think Patterico wants to send any attention to this either.

    And that’s not all. Plenty of left wing whackos have reached out in ugly ways to people other than your holy God Jeff Goldstein. You use the idea that he’s some kind of ‘victim’ to shield him from a fair comparison, but that’s just victim mentality.

    He did actually start this idea of posting Patterico’s name and employer and calling him a bigot, based on absolutely nothing, then giggling about it. His evidence of antisemitism: Patterico was arguing with someone who was Jewish. He thought he was proving some kind of meta point (and also he thought he could hurt Patterico IRL).

    Your entire string of comments here proves you aren’t aware of anything that happens beyond Jeff’s self serving version of it. Your theory, that the biggest victim shouldn’t be criticized, comes directly from PW’s constant ‘woe is me’ whining.

    And sorry, Obama is extremely misguided and has unsavory friends, but he is your president, and just as Bush Derangment Syndrome tore us apart, reasonable Republicans try to see the good intentions behind Obama’s mistakes. He wants socialized health care because of how his mom died. He wants the USA to be reduced for other countries because he cares more about other countries. He has been forced to change path on the War on Terror, Gitmo, and several other critical areas. Why? Because at heart, he actually has good in him, and had no choice.

    If you can’t see that, it’s because you’re just a reflexive partisan. You are obsessed that Patterico said Obama was somehow a good man, to his kid, years later, even amid Patterico’s many criticisms of Obama (much better ones than you’ll ever see at PW, because PW’s logic is that Obama=bad). The idea that Obama is a human being, with misguided politics, is just too complex for you guys, which is why you have lashed out tens of thousands of times over it. Google “Good man” and “Osama Bin Laden” at PW, see which one got more hits over the past two years. Seriously: do it.

    It would be one thing if you disagreed and got over it, but the obsession shows you’re opposed to conservatives being frank or fair.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  146. Again, I will never ever tire of pwnage of one Chucklenuts Jhonson.

    Mister Christopher (1b8a9f)

  147. Scott Jacobs at 34: As of last night, the person hadn’t been banned on Jill’s blog nor had the comments been deleted. I’ve been busy today, so haven’t had time to check.

    Jim (8de501)

  148. There’s a distinction between Kimberlin, who has exhibited violence, in the past, some might say the assymetrical warfare, referenced in the next thread, and Goldstein, who hasn’t, who in fact was assaulted by that crazed psycho Frisch, who they have released again. This ‘good man’ garbage, is refuted,in the way, that Obama let someone be slandered by the Journolist, accused of inciting the assasination of a nine year old girl, the proof of which is some think this is some kind of explanation for something. Maybe it was right to give him the benefit of the doubt, then, but you know, the left is never encumbered by that consideration, and they never really pay a penalty for it. Maybe since they own the newsprint, and write the textbooks, there is a confidence they will not be found out.

    narciso (6075d0)

  149. Scott Jacobs, the comments are still there.

    Jim (8de501)

  150. BTW, I don’t even care about Goldstein. this is old, old news and I don’t see the point in re-litigating what amounts to a stupid disagreement over whether Obama has any good in him, or rather is just evil. It’s silly.

    But it’s the subject of obsession for a few dozen people who just love bringing it up, despite the fact they are seriously misguided.

    If you are that upset about such a mild point, stay where people of like mind hang out.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  151. “BumperStickerist – Turds are waiting to be fondled by True Conservative Classical Liberal Intentionalists. Back to work with you.

    CIVILITY NOW!

    OUTLAW!”

    - daleyrocks

    Well said, sir.

    When turd-fondling is outlawed, then only outlaws will fondle turds.

    Leviticus (68eff1)

  152. Feeding trolls results in more trolling. I would not give that blog any reference at all. I left it long ago and don’t like seeing it here. I liked that blog when it had good information and coherent ideas. That was a very long time ago.

    I served as a secondary undercover informant for a state agency in a sting, and I was well known in the community being investigated. When several people were raided, they knew immediately that I had to have been involved. My friend, a primary informant, couldn’t leave the nasty comments in that community’s forums alone. For my part, I explained to the community at large (only a few of which committed crimes) how the project began and why I had initiated it. I then said nothing further. There was no reason to. The trolls ate up my friends comments and he was their gift that kept on giving. At the end, most people believed the project was his, when it actually was mine. What they believed wasn’t important, so I never responded to that. I told my friend that if he didn’t want to be peeved about these people, he would be best served by going on with his life and not reading those forums.

    My personal opinion is that that blog should be ignored. Reasonable people know when someone is unhinged. Trust them to know better. I did, and I quit being a reader of that blog. I didn’t see any evidence of the assertions that blog made about the other blogs I read regularly. I came to the conclusion that the author had become unhinged and there was no need to read the vomit he spewed on his site. I didn’t need to see the victims of his hate defend themselves, and only noted when those blogs announced that that blog was removed from their blog rolls.

    The deal is this, as I see it: when you respond to unhinged folks, it gives them power over you. How? They yanked your chain, and you moved. So they yank again, and again you move. They continue in this manner until you see that it is totally pointless, since they actually have no desire to exchange ideas and come to the truth. You give up, and they win. It gives them a sense of moral superiority over you. If you like them having a sense of moral superiority over you, no change on your part is needed. This says more about you than how unhinged they are. This thread is full of it. Some of you seem to have no idea these guys are playing you. Or, even worse, you like playing with them, reducing yourselves to their level of unhinged, incoherent discourse which produces nothing but animosity and no useful result.

    Been there, done that (0204be)

  153. Aaron, if you paid attention you would see that we agree, that I haven’t been commenting on anything of substance.

    Why I bother? I suppose it has been a slow day, however if you actually thought about it you would see that the reason I said anything at all was simply the third world attitude of a public official, (dare I say servant?) who is supposed to serve all the public, not just the ditto head opinions expressed here.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  154. No, elind, you were being a douche, and since then, have gone to great lengths to prove it. Successfully.

    JD (306f5d)

  155. elind

    sorry, i didn’t realize i had to keep reading past the fifth inane comment to finally see a point.

    so… bottom line you were engaged in performance art imitating third world “public official,” is that about it?

    Of course to add extra random weirdness, you seem to think that public officials in third world countries tend to try to help the people, when in reality they mainly try to line their own pockets? huh.

    > not just the ditto head opinions expressed here.

    Which isn’t what happens here, but thanks for playing.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  156. “the reason I said anything at all was simply the third world attitude of a public official, (dare I say servant?) who is supposed to serve all the public”

    Elind – Are you saying that citizens have no rights to speech outside of their jobs? Really?

    Is that your final position?

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  157. Aaron, you didn’t get it at all.

    Daley, as to free speech, I presume our host the DA has taken some kind of oath to serve everyone equally. If so he has implicitly agreed to serve everyone equally regardless of political color, religion or otherwise.

    The opinions I detect here, if shared by him, don’t seem to hold that principle in high esteem.

    So, yes, there is a difference or should be a difference between how a public official views free speech. It is a matter of knowing when to shut up, sometimes called intelligence.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  158. I just want to say that, as a concerned Christian, I have been a reader of this blog for many years. I am truly grateful to Charles Johnson to opening my eyes to the extreme levels of hate, bigotry, lies, innuendo, dishonesty and downright horrific grammatical errors to which I have been exposing myself. It is telling that through my longtime exposure to this site, I became ever-more deadened to the outrageous and vitriolic rhetoric spewed forth by those on the right. In response to measured, calm, logical, and persuasive posts by those on the left, Patterico’s (and the right-wing’s, in general,) only response is to engage in even deeper levels of dishonesty and smear tactics.

    I bid you a good day!

    David

    David, infamous sockpuppet (725724)

  159. elind

    > Aaron, you didn’t get it at all.

    If i didn’t “get it” its because you didn’t explain it very well. you’re a nasty and incoherent cur.

    Go away. you add nothing of value to the blog.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  160. david

    well, those spelling errors would be all my fault. lol

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  161. “The opinions I detect here, if shared by him, don’t seem to hold that principle in high esteem.”

    Elind – That is merely your opinion of speech but it does not address the issue of the host’s right to publicly express his opinions.

    Are you suggesting because he may hold opinions with which you disagree, merely because during the day he is an employee of a city government, he should not be allowed to express his opinions in another forum. Seriously, is that what you are suggesting? Please address this question.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  162. I presume our host the DA has taken some kind of oath to serve everyone equally.

    Um, he prosecutes criminals. That’s what he probably swore to do. He didn’t swear to obey far leftist ideas of what self speech restrictions are ‘intelligent’.

    You’re insisting someone’s civil rights go away because they humiliated Charles Johnson, and you are so mad you hope their personal life is damaged.

    Patterico has already explained he knows when to shut up. Stop lying, and he stops pointing out lies. It’s simple.

    You read that, and are freaking out because you know Patterico’s winning this argument. Charles Johnson doesn’t have a leg to stand on. He supported mocking Rachel Corries with pancake jokes. He lied about it. End of story.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  163. Aaron, Aaron, you are slipping. I’m here to see if there is anything to add to. Again, we agree.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  164. “The opinions I detect here, if shared by him, don’t seem to hold that principle in high esteem.”

    Elind – The concept that the hosts job performance can be evaluated based on speech on a blog as opposed to superior and colleagues at work over periods of years is risible on its face. You should be able to come up with better reasoning to shut down speech you don’t like.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  165. Elind buggerz goats, so you should just STFU and agree with its nonsense.

    JD (6e25b4)

  166. I’m here to see if there is anything to add to

    There is plenty. If you were capable of stating a position and then backing it up with facts, you would see that.

    But sadly, you’re just another f**kwit following the dictates of CJ.

    Either try and engage, or f**k off. Sitting there tossing insults while you delude yourself into thinking you are some sort of f**king scouting mission is just retarded.

    Scott Jacobs (6aff37)

  167. Am I debating with Patterico? Am I defending LGF?
    Am I freaking out?

    I browse only a few blogs from time to time and happened to see a reference to this one on LGF and came because I was curious why a DA would so obviously express disdain for what is likely to be close to half of the people he serves.

    To clarify, I know little of Patterico’s stances, but I imagine them to be closely related to the frequency of 4 letter words I see here.

    I think, as I said earlier, it suggests we are tending towards a third world tribalism attitude in politics.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  168. “So, yes, there is a difference or should be a difference between how a public official views free speech.”

    Elind – How about a frothing at the mouth leftard college professor who blogs? Shouldn’t he close his blog so that students who do not share his leanings are not intimidated from taking his classes out of fear that the college’s professed standards of academic freedom will be adhered to according to your logic?

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  169. JD, I will when I get bored enough, which will likely be soon if you keep repeating yourself.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  170. “To clarify, I know little of Patterico’s stances, but I imagine them to be closely related to the frequency of 4 letter words I see here.”

    Elind – Not knowing his stances does not prevent you from answering the basic questions I asked.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  171. Daley, yes I sympathize with you about the frothing professor, but a professor is not a public official and one normally has choices in what courses to take after high school.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  172. I browse only a few blogs from time to time and happened to see a reference to this one on LGF and came because I was curious why a DA would so obviously express disdain for what is likely to be close to half of the people he serves.

    What? Charles Johnson represents half of Los Angelenos? Where’d you get that logic?

    Y-not fled LA last year (45d6ad)

  173. Daley, most blogs, and the posters on them, reflect the stance of the owner. Is this one different?

    Elind (9e06ea)

  174. 168:: Huhh?

    Elind (9e06ea)

  175. LittleGreenFootballs…..?

    I think my grandma might go there once in awhile, but other than that, nobody else I can think of…

    Zipity (8843dd)

  176. The opinions I detect here, if shared by him, don’t seem to hold that principle in high esteem.

    Elind: you’re being lazy.

    What is it that you have a problem with? You’re going so far as to challenge someone’s job, and their freedom of speech, but you won’t even point out what he said that you have a problem with. You say you ‘detect’ something, and that you’re not really aware of Patterico’s POV at all.

    That’s just lazy. Who the hell do you think you are to go to such an extreme as you have, without even bothering to know anything about the person you’re condemning? You haven’t even quoted anything he’s said.

    You were challenged to specifically explain what Patterico’s done, because the fact is that Charles Johnson is deceiving his blog readers about practically everything he discusses. Your reaction is to just get vaguer and vaguer. That’s lazy.

    Patterico can blog alongside Aaron if he wants. Aaron’s comments were not offensive to anyone. Charles was humiliated in this spat greatly, and his metaphor was justified.

    Your suggestion that Patterico is not prosecuting people equally is ridiculous. Casting random hysterical fantasies, without any evidence, admitting you haven’t even looked into the person’s POV at all, is pathetic.

    And what’s sad is that this lazy defense is all LGF’s few remaining commenters have to offer. Elind certainly won’t attempt to challenge the merits of the claim Charles Johnson is a liar. Not only is that claim well proven, but Elind is too lazy to even try. He probably hasn’t even read those posts.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  177. Metaphorically you’ll eat his innards, right? Cause that’d be just gross if you really ate his innards after metaphorically disembowelling him…

    DMartyr (75ee87)

  178. Elind proves yet again that leftist PC-think can’t even conceive of, much less tolerate, anything but the flaccid liberalism that caused Rachel Corrie to get flattened in the interests of terror and its enablers.

    Mork (15b001)

  179. Elind

    Ah, so finally you explain your non-sequiturs.

    > I presume our host the DA has taken some kind of oath to serve everyone equally. If so he has implicitly agreed to serve everyone equally regardless of political color, religion or otherwise.

    So basically you think freedom of speech shouldn’t apply to public officials and servants.

    mmm, all the better reason to oppose socialism. because under socialism EVERYONE becomes a public official or servant.

    Anyway, contra your opinions, people are allowed to have their own opinions even when they enter office, and continue to express them. yes, he is duty bound to serve everyone without regard to color, creed, sexual preference (he is in cali, after all), and so on, but speaking and acting are two different things, and your approach would impose a very real fascism on our ruling class stating that they may never express an opinion, except the ones you approve of.

    and i keep finding it funny that you keep holding up the third world as an example. first, i have never known third world public officials to keep their mouths shut on political matters. certainly chavez and castro don’t. of course everyone else under them probably do, but that has to do with the desire not to be murdered for freedom of speech and its not confined to government officials. i am sure Mugabe is fastidiously neutral in his pronouncements, right?

    Seriously, if you want me to behave a certain way you don’t say, “hey, this is how the third world does it.” 200+ years ago, we were basically a third world country, the backwater of the planet. i tend to believe that the reason why we are not still in that state can be found in the numerous things we do differently from them.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  180. 168:: Huhh?

    Comment by Elind

    Sarcastic dismissal doesn’t mean you somehow beat Y Not in an argument. You’re basing your entire argument on the disdain shown here for Charles Johnson. You say this disdain applies to ‘nearly half of LA’. Y Not is mocking you, because almost the entire left thinks Charles Johnson is extreme, fake, and dishonest. Almost the entire right thinks Charles is extreme, fake, and dishonest. The middle also thinks he is extreme, fake, and dishonest. What remains of LGF represents hysterical people, not a political stripe.

    People from prominent left wing and right wing and moderate publications have all criticized Charles Johnson’s bizarre personality.

    So yes, Y Not makes a good point. We are talking about disdain for a liar. Patterico isn’t showing disdain for liberals or conservatives and actually goes out of his way to welcome disagreement. You admit you haven’t bothered to check out the person you’re condemning, and it’s starting to look like you’re trying to protect your bubble from reality.

    I don’t like your disgusting ‘let’s not have political speech if you’re a prosecutor’ idea, but these posts actually are evidence Patterico is good at seeking truth. The only reason it doesn’t bolster his job credentials is that Charles is a petty nothing.

    Again, you have failed to bolster your initial claims. Now your argument consists of saying ‘huh?’ and ‘I’m right because I am!’

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  181. Keep up the good work Patterico. I’m glad you’re exposing this disgraceful low-life Chaz Johnson.

    I really do think that mental illness has set in — Chaz, look out for the white coats.

    Richard Romano (5cff42)

  182. Another thing that is hilarious is that LGF is the champion of ‘don’t judge me by my commenters or moderators!’

    After all, Kilgore Trout posts racial slurs. That’s his idea of an argument.

    But LGF also loves to judge people by their commenters. The main reason for this is that they also like to plant hateful comments (re: the hatred of black people that LGF left on Hot Air to frame Hot Air for racism).

    It’s hilarious that Elind is boasting repeatedly that he won’t even bother to learn Patterico’s POV, or what Patterico said about Johnson. He then says he sees all he needs to know because of the “four letter words” left by commenters, Aaron’s justified metaphor, etc.

    Elind doesn’t care about being reasonable. It came here to bash, and damn the logic.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  183. What a ‘chuck full of nut bar,’ CJ has turned out to be, and don’t reference ‘I’m crushing your head’
    because that could be violent, as well*.

    * Kids in the Hall, mid 9Os,

    narciso (6075d0)

  184. Wow. You all really have a fixation on Charles Johnson and can’t seem to get the idea that I didn’t come here to defend him or deny free speech.

    I came here because I think it demeans the office of DA, wherever it is, to get involved in blog spats, period.

    If you want one reason I don’t hang out at LGF either it is because I find blog wars boring.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  185. Elind, you’re going so far out of your way to not read anything specific, and just generally condemn someone.

    OK, so you think prosecutors shouldn’t get into arguments with people on the internet “period”. We get it. No one cares, because this is an absurd POV.

    You’re the one showing the fixation. Patterico isn’t fixated on Johnson, the liar. He’s fixated on media that tells lies. Anyone who reads this blog for any period of time will see that ‘this media outlet just told a lie, and here’s my proof’ is one of the most dominant themes. Johnson isn’t a common theme here. Lying is.

    You’re repeated your assertion many times, but it’s clear you don’t know much about the issues. One reason it’s clear is that you’ve boasted you don’t know anything about Patterico’s POV.

    Pathetic. Stop demanding people lose their freedom of speech. Pretending you didn’t is not adequate.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  186. Dude, it’s a thread about Charles Johnson. That’s not a fixation, that’s just being on-topic.

    S. Weasel (39a70c)

  187. OK, I admit it, I was trying to be do a parody of a concern troll, but I have clearly met my match. Elind, I acknowledge your superiority in every way. Since it is really impossible for anyone to be that actually dense and unable to see the obvious, you have really perfected the “concern troll parody.”

    You can ‘fess up now. You were just yanking out chains all along, right? Right?

    David

    David, infamous sockpuppet (725724)

  188. Lol, David.

    I tip my hat to you, sir.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  189. To those who think I’m debating Patterico; I’m not (as far as I know). I’m debating you who address me. Patterico I’m just critical of for hanging out with obsessive compulsive LGF haters.

    And David; I tried to explain my main point, which is after all just an opinion that happens to yank your chain.

    So, to that extent, we agree.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  190. with obsessive compulsive LGF haters.

    We don’t like people who lie. That’s not obsession. It’s obviously not compulsive, since we were ignoring him until he lied. No one pays attention to LGF very much anymore.

    You are transparently reaching for any basis to defend LGF. What’s really funny is that you’re too ashamed of your LGF affiliation to admit it. Why is that? Because LGF bans dissent, and decent people have turned away. You’re ashamed because it’s shameful.

    So Patterico proved someone was a liar. Someone else mocks Charles. Your response is to challenge Patterico’s job for ‘hanging out with’ the people who said something you don’t like.

    It’s just a total coincidence that Charles Johnson ordered you to do that.

    It’s just a total coincidence that you have a completely hysterical summary of exposing liars as ‘LGF HATE! OMG OMG!!!’

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  191. Dustin, you are losing it. I’m waiting for the godwin next.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  192. To those who think I’m debating Patterico; I’m not

    You aren’t debating anyone, really. You would have to have an opinion or idea of your own first…

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  193. No, I’m not losing it. My tone hasn’t changed at all. I’m not calling you a Nazi. Stop pretending you and LGF are somehow victims. Stop calling people ‘obsessive compulsive haters’ merely for pointing out someone told a lie like Charles Johnson did.

    Stop projecting your hysterical nonsense onto me. I’m just pointing out that you are wrong, on the merits, and that you are questioning someone’s IRL job because they proved a point on their blog.

    Personally, I think it’s great that Governors, Presidents, Prosectors, Doctors, etc have blogs. They have special insight into the world, and I want their opinions. I don’t see any need to limit those opinions to those who aren’t relied on for fairness.

    You said you have indications Patterico isn’t prosecuting fairly. but you don’t. You don’t even know what his POV is on the world, aside from his proving Charles Johnson is a liar. You’re just obeying Charles’s direction to the letter.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  194. Dustin, I’ve made my point more than once but you ignore it and keep pretending it has to do with LGF. The only connection is that LGF is one source that I use to keep myself a little informed of what goes on in the blog sphere.

    When I’m told within a post or two to do something unpleasant with myself, or just STFU, then I think that reflects on the host of this blog, and the position he holds.

    Probably that comes from being older than many here, and believing in civility, which seems to be a dirty word in some circles these days.

    I haven’t examined the details of who said what, but I do think that it is a petty slanging match that a public official should stay out of in the first place.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  195. Dustin, and no, I haven’t said Patterico isn’t prosecuting fairly, I’ve said that the attitudes I have seen in this short time in his blog suggests he holds a large percentage of Americans in contempt.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  196. Dustin, I’ve made my point more than once but you ignore it and keep pretending it has to do with LGF.

    Um, you called people obsessive compusive LGF haters. Now you say nothing you said relates to LGF.

    Everyone can tell that you’re arguing in bad faith. You’re following LGF’s instructions to condemn Patterico’s having a job, because he dared to criticize LGF. It’s pathetic and transparent.

    No, I’m not ignoring the subject you want me to talk about, I’m just pointing out an additional point. The point you like, the one about certain people having the ‘intelligence’ to ‘shut up’, I have argued against quite directly.

    YOU’RE doing the ignoring.

    I haven’t examined the details of who said what

    Yes, several times you’ve boasted that you don’t know anything about this. You just want to say it’s sooooo petty and we should leave poor LGF alone or face losing our jobs.

    Other people think it’s worth their time to demonstrate a lie they have identified. You think it’s ‘petty’, but I don’t think media integrity is petty.

    Why do you project when it’s so obvious? you studious ignore my refutation of your point, and then say I ignored your point. You’re showing a ridiculous degree of exaggeration and obsession, and yet you’re calling us obsessive about a blog that hasn’t been mentioned here for months.

    You say we’re compulsive, but you’re the one posting comment after comment about something you boast you haven’t even “examined the details” about. Do you know what the word ‘compulsive’ means?’ If you do, you’re projecting.

    LGF deserves a lot more scorn than they get. Posting racial slurs on other blogs? Citing quotes from different blogs mentioned here solely for the sake of criticism, in order to pretend we said that? Calling for someone’s job?

    You’re too much of a coward to even admit that you’re from LGF. I realize this is in vogue over there, to argue in bad faith, but you’re really bad at this.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  197. In doing so, Charles Johnson, I will metaphorically crush you. I will metaphorically disembowel you and eat your innards.

    What is best in life?
    To metaphorically crush your metaphoric enemies, see them metaphorically driven before you, and to metaphorically hear the metaphoric lamentation of their metaphoric women.

    malclave (4f3ec1)

  198. I dunno about the rest of it, but I am pretty sure the “metaphoric women” part is spot-on.

    David

    David, infamous sockpuppet (725724)

  199. Yeah, I wsa thinking of changing it to “illusory”, “fantasy”, or “pretend”, but decided to stick with the theme.

    malclave (4f3ec1)

  200. Elind, a little point, from someone who has followed (and never been kicked off, nor any of my acquaintances) LGF for about 9 years now.

    Do you note that people can give CJ karma points, but that although his posts are regularly updinged to high values, they are never listed any more as highly rated posts at the sidebar?

    That little feature kicked in after the famous NYT profile of LGF noted the hysterical levels of syncophancy there. Any guess why?

    Now, don’t get me wrong: blog communities can be a lot of fun, and there’s always a bit of the us vs them going on in blog wars. Its all good fun. But CJ…well, like everybody he really likes praise, and really hates criticism, but he’s kind of a bit off plumb in the degree to which this stuff matters to him. You can bet (for instance) that someone at LGF, if not CJ himself, is being so much a goof that they want to know WHO I AM now, in case I’m posting over there and need to be purged. So if you are coming from lgf and complaining about others being juvenile brats, it is pretty clear you don’t have a lot of insight into the bizarre whacko juvenility that inhabits that blog.

    HiHo (228bfb)

  201. I’ve said that the attitudes I have seen in this short time in his blog suggests he holds a large percentage of Americans in contempt.

    Uh, and you said this indicates he isn’t a fair prosecutor. Why lie about what you said in this thread?

    And please, tell me how the attitudes you see here hold a large percentage of Americans in contempt. Tell me how they suggest anything about Patterico.

    Before you level a charge like ‘patterico holds a large percentage of Americans in contempt, and therefore would make a bad prosecitor’, why not actually look at Patterico’s own words? Why not read HIS comments?

    Name me a blogger on the left who welcomes those who disagree in good faith as much as Patterico does? He’s always going out of his way to welcome liberals and conservatives alike.

    You’re smearing him with this ‘suggestion’ based irrationally on comments. Some of them may have been planted, but none of them would prove your point either way.

    And now you’re too much of a coward to face what you originally said.

    This is incredible. A United States DA is involved in this type of garbage, and collects public salary!

    We are doomed.

    Comment by Elind

    Those are YOUR WORDS, you liar. You obviously came here directly from LGF, call rational debate ‘garbage’, and condemn that idea that he collects a public salary at all.

    You’re too much a coward to even admit your own words in this thread.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  202. I dunno about the rest of it, but I am pretty sure the “metaphoric women” part is spot-on.

    No no. She’s totally real.

    She just lives in Canada…

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  203. Elind the civility slut says:

    “When I’m told within a post or two to do something unpleasant with myself, or just STFU, then I think that reflects on the host of this blog, and the position he holds.”

    Can we apply that to Johnson/LGF, then? In that case, he would own “St. Pancake” ten thousand times over, whether or not he ever said it, and this whole debate is moot.

    Logic has never been a lizard stronghold, though.

    Mork (748503)

  204. Elind, isn’t it really cowardly of you to say what you did, about how he should lose his salary, or we are doomed, and then, when Patterico just asks you to sum up what you think happened, you ignore him and boast “I am not debating Patterico! You are all petty!”

    What could be more petty than to trash someone’s professional work over something they didn’t even say?

    You learned that the head-pike metaphor was an overt metaphor. you learned Patterico didn’t say it. you learned that his original charges against Charles Johnson were dead accurate. And your reaction was to modify your point to ‘all blog fights are petty, and now I will pretend Patterico is responsible for all comments left here’.

    You failed to back up your initial claim. You owe Patterico an apology.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  205. What is best in life?
    To metaphorically crush your metaphoric enemies, see them metaphorically driven before you, and to metaphorically hear the metaphoric lamentation of their metaphoric women.

    This is a VERY close second for “funniest thing I have read in the last several weeks.

    Scott Jacobs (9b5ed3)

  206. Can we apply that to Johnson/LGF, then?

    Oh heavens, no! They really get mad when you do that. They have a big, obnoxious disclaimer saying you can’t do that. And yet, under that disclaimer, every LGF thread I’ve read in the past few years has several people citing comments as evidence against the blog’s host. Even Charles, the author of a disclaimer against this, does it all the time. Kilgore Trout wasn’t removed as a moderator for posting racial slurs to prove something about Hot Air’s hosts… he was praised. Charles thought he made a great point, and called Hot Air “disgusting”.

    As you say, logic isn’t their strong suit. This is the weakest possible argument Elind could offer, that even though he refuses to look at Patterico’s own views, or the details of this discussion, he sees all he needs to because someone told him to STFU.

    But they told him to STFU because his comment was idiotic. It calls Patterico a “US Prosector, which is illiterate. It calls for his job, which is insane. It calls debate “garbage” which is repellent. So people react to this in different ways, and Elind cherry picks the worst to prove that Patterico ‘hangs out with people who say STFU’.

    Who cares if he does?

    Elind’s “I don’t know, and I’m not going to learn” reaction is transparently dishonest. He knows. He’s just wrong, and this is the best way to avoid apologizing he can come up with.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  207. Elind:

    I haven’t said Patterico isn’t prosecuting fairly, I’ve said that the attitudes I have seen in this short time in his blog suggests he holds a large percentage of Americans in contempt.

    I’m interested in your definition of “a large percentage of Americans” because the only person Patterico has held in contempt here is Charles Johnson. He even welcomed you, Elind.

    DRJ (fdd243)

  208. Dustin, you keep changing the subject and putting words or intentions in my mouth.

    I don’t care what your opinion, or anyone else’s, of LGF is. I am saying that I think it demeans the office of DA to get involved in slanging matches with bloggers, regardless of who is correct.

    My initial comment didn’t say whose garbage, it said joining the spat was garbage, whoever started it.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  209. The gall of you is amazing. When did I ever try to go after your job?

    You and Johnson deserve each other. A nice long back and forth in which you each go on about your honor would be just about perfect.

    Christ, are you a self-righteous fraud.

    JeffG (e4cdd3)

  210. Elind, DRJ’s right that Patterico was very polite to you, welcoming you to his blog despite the fact that you called for him to lose his job (and yeah, when you say someone shouldn’t be on their public salary, that’s a fair summary).

    Why are you ignoring Patterico not showing contempt to you? You keep saying you don’t care what my opinion, or anyone’s, and you keep saying you refuse to learn what Patterico’s POV is, but you can’t escape. You already were treated to a civil welcome, and a request to explain what you think happened, so we can have a discussion.

    You say you have strong suggestions about what Patterico thinks, based entirely on what other people said. But you also have Patterico’s direct response to you.

    For you to say you think Patterico holds most Americans in contempt is simply unfair.

    You still owe him an apology. Twisting what you said to ‘prosecutors shouldn’t get into blog spats’ when what you said was ‘people who criticize other bloggers shouldn’t be prosecutors’ may seem really clever to you, but no one reading this thread will believe you.

    My initial comment didn’t say whose garbage, it said joining the spat was garbage, whoever started it.

    Who cares who started it? Charles Johnson lied, and Patterico pointed it out, just as he has to many others, from Mark Levin to the LA Times. It’s what he does.

    What a cowardly way to escape that you were obviously condemning Patterico harshly.

    This is incredible. A United States DA is involved in this type of garbage, and collects public salary!

    We are doomed.

    Pathetic.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  211. Elind, can you link to some of the posts you’ve made over at LGF encouraging civility on their end? Ten or so would do nicely.

    Thanks.

    malclave (4f3ec1)

  212. When did I ever try to go after your job?

    Right here.

    Basically, it seems that Charles Johnson simply copied the Protein Wisdom google bomb. Remember, they also linked this thousands of times in hopes of ruining someone’s career.

    Jeff’s evidence that Patterico is antisemitic? None at all. He defended this as though it were some kind of meta joke. giggle giggle giggle.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  213. LGF is a closed-ward nutfarm and should be treated as such.

    Mork (748503)

  214. You’re a fucking liar, too, Dustin.

    I didn’t send that post to anyone. I didn’t alert his bosses to anything. If you want to say that posting something like that — which was VERY OBVIOUSLY SATIRICAL — is going after someone’s job, then I’m guessing you’d be prepared to say something like, “IS STACY McCAIN RACIST” is the same kind of thing, only done in complete seriousness.

    Stop lying to yourself. And stop lying about me.

    JeffG (e4cdd3)

  215. BTW, google elind, and you see he has this same ‘you are all so immature’ tone towards anyone who criticizes Kilgore Trout or Charles Johnson.

    Oh, but you’re just criticizing Patterico because blog wars are ‘petty’. Strange that you always take one side of every LGF conflict, to say the exact same ‘I’m above the fray’ crap.

    I saw a reference to this on LGF. This would all be funny if it were not so sad. Given the attitudes expressed here, surely there are more evils in your world than LGF? -elind

    There are bigger evils than LGF in the world, Elind (pathetic strawman, btw), but you should worry a bit about your lack of personal integrity. You are, indeed, shilling for LGF in a blog war, but you lost the argument so thoroughly that you have to pretend Patterico’s wrong to even have participated in it.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  216. The gall of you is amazing. When did I ever try to go after your job?

    You did it right here, you worthless pile of dick-spittle.

    You really need to learn to stop being such a f**kwit.

    And purging that post won’t work. There’s at least one screen shot of the whole thing.

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  217. Also, cue JD’s convenient vacation from this blog while his buddy acts like an *sstard.

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  218. You’re a fucking liar, too, Dustin.

    I didn’t send that post to anyone. I didn’t alert his bosses to anything.

    I didn’t say you send that to his boss. So you calling me a liar, and then saying you didn’t do that, is a straw man. You google bombed his name and job with ‘is he an antisemite’. Why didn’t you google bomb his blog handle, Patterico?

    It’s really obvious that you were hoping that people searching for Patterico’s professional name would see questions about his antisemitism.

    This isn’t funny, and you’d understand if you had a job.

    Another point, your family was harassed by a deranged stalker. You chose to associate Patterico in your constant mentioning of this stalker, even though Patterico begged you not to, as this would lead the stalker to harass Patterico’s family. And indeed, he was right… that’s what happened. Thanks Jeff. You’re a real classy guy.

    Your evidence that Patterico is an antisemite? None. You just thought it was a funny joke to have someone’s name on google linked to that question because you really, really hate the guy. He’s done nothing to you. He’s always asking you to chill out and stop this blog war. If I post something critical enough of you, Patterico just deletes it and asks me not to provoke you.

    And I realize the reason is that he does actually want to have a life outside of this blog crap.

    Anyway, you suggested I accused you of sending that link to his employer, rather than google bombing it. You owe me an apology, JeffG.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  219. FU, Scott. Swordfish-style. Your temper tantrum has long since become tired. Maybe you should try to get me banned again, or go on a very public hiatus because I am not banned. At any rate, get over yourself.

    JD (b98cae)

  220. Jeff hates me because I pointed out there was a problem with his CV. I can’t even remember what it was (it wasn’t serious). He instantly started changing all my comments on his blog, so I gave up, except when his family was harassed and I wanted to say I’m pulling for his family even if we have ugly disagreements.

    Jeff, think about how you’re acting. You’re screaming that I’m a “fucking liar” because you disagree with a comment I wrote, didn’t link, that doesn’t have your full name or job in it (I realize you may not have a job right now, but assume you had a good, professional job). Just imagine how angry you would be if I said the exact same thing I did, only linked it, google bombed it, posted your full name and profession, and kept it up for years.

    Imagine if I actually went much farther than just saying you went after P’s job, and said you were an antisemite instead. No evidence… just asking questions in a way that will prominently feature on google search results.

    You’re crying foul now, so I know you’d really cry foul under my hypo. I won’t do that to you, Jeff, despite our major differences, because you should be able to earn a living for your family.

    The truth is that when people google your name, ‘questions’ like ‘Is he an antisemite’ shouldn’t come up. You aren’t one, I know it, and that would be transparently an attempt to hurt you IRL.

    Maybe you could just stop for a second and take down that post. Please. Sincere request.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  221. So, JD… Did JeffyG, or did he not, try to adversely effect Patterico’s professional life?

    Simple question.

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  222. This is getting silly. The defensiveness is getting so thick it can be cut with a knife. Perhaps many of you listen to Palin too much.

    I didn’t say Patterico should be fired. I was critical of him on a very simple fundamental basis.

    He is a public figure and should act like one, at least according to how I think that should be. Obviously this crowd just sees him as another blogger.

    Got to go. Tornado warning in FL.

    Elind (9e06ea)

  223. Jeff, why did you say “Is Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey anti-semitic?”

    Why didn’t you say “Is Patterico antisemitic?”

    You were trying to make some kind of douchey point that Patterico deserves to be scorned for just asking a question, but the question he was asking was based on something. I don’t want to dig that up, but it was a reasonable question, not like yours.

    The way you phrased it wasn’t merely to prove a point about questions, but meant obviously to harm someone’s professional reputation.

    And of course, you didn’t ask the question in your post, but made it your headline, which is what shows up on google.

    Pretend you didn’t mean to. That’s really honorable.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  224. Do you get a little tingle trying to start fight, Scottie?

    JD (85b089)

  225. You’re at a party and you don’t know many people there and Elind starts talking to you. You should:

    a. pretend to get a call on your cell
    b. knee him accidentally in the groin area, but really hard
    c. excuse yourself to use the bathroom and leave in your car instead
    d. spray a little saliva on him when you tell him you have pink eye

    Birdbath (8501d4)

  226. Answer the f**king question.

    In your opinion did JeffyG try to harm Patrick’s professional carreer?

    Come on, you’re a regular at both blogs… Surely you can form a fair opinion.

    So which is it? Did he or didn’t he?

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  227. Got to go. Tornado warning in FL.

    Comment by Elind

    You know, the other Elind that has been shilling for LGF on many other blogs is also from florida.

    Why don’t you admit that you’re really taking one side in a blog spat, rather than pretending you’re totally above it (as you did in several other places).

    What’s this got to do with Palin? You were saying something earlier about people having a problem with large numbers of Americans… don’t you seem to have that problem?

    I think he’s acting fine. I love that professionals have blogs, even if I don’t always agree with them, because they have special insight.

    These are the best blogs. People whose only claim to fame is their blog can also have something to offer, but I just don’t tend to find those ones as interesting. Part of having a blog is expressing your opinions. I want public servants to be willing to express their opinions. After all, it’s not like Patterico having a problem with lying is somehow incompatible with his profession. While you have strained so hard to avoid a discussion of what Charles Johnson did (after all, you are a proven LGF shill), that’s what this is about.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  228. I am not your little bitch, Scottie. I do not sit, stay, or heel very well either. Maybe you should ban me.

    JD (b98cae)

  229. ****”#

    Dustin, you keep changing the subject and putting words or intentions in my mouth.

    I don’t care what your opinion, or anyone else’s, of LGF is. I am saying that I think it demeans the office of DA to get involved in slanging matches with bloggers, regardless of who is correct.

    My initial comment didn’t say whose garbage, it said joining the spat was garbage, whoever started it.

    Comment by Elind — 1/25/2011 @ 1:31 pm”****

    OMG, how did I stumble onto the official website of “the office of the DA”? I meant to go to a blog! //

    Last I checked, even attorneys get to have opinions are interact with douchebags on the internet.

    Argh (ac087f)

  230. Yeah, didn’t think you’d take some sort of definitive position. That would require you have a God Damn spine.

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  231. Someone needs to do a post entitled, “What Left Wing Hate?” in reference to Ponytail Bicycle Seat Boy’s idiocy here.

    Wyatt Earp (ab5eef)

  232. Elind, you’re a Johnson-worshipping LGF fraud and shill. May your shit come to life and kiss you on the mouth.

    Mork (748503)

  233. Mork, why would it need to come to life first?

    I mean, Elind’s head is already pretty far up their ass, so no further motion is necessary…

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  234. Last I checked, even attorneys get to have opinions are interact with douchebags on the internet.

    You forget that you’re talking to someone from LGF. NOBODY is entitled to express an opinion that is not in praise of that site’s owner.

    malclave (4f3ec1)

  235. Elind

    > I didn’t come here to … deny free speech.

    What complete BS. All you have been doing here is to say that Patrick, a D.A., should somehow be restrained from doing this. You have exactly denied his moral and legal right of free speech.

    you’re fooling no one.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  236. Can’t we all just agree to savagely mock LGF and just leave the whole JeefG/Patterico spat out of it? I hate this, because I read both blogs, and it really pains me to see these guys at odds. Not trying to take sides, just saying.

    Oh, and Charles Johnson is a weed-whacker.

    David

    David, infamous sockpuppet (725724)

  237. The other thing I hate is the inability to edit comments to get rid of stupid mistakes like “JeefG” v. “JeffG”. Grrr.

    (Although JeefG does sort of look like JefeG, which has sort of a cool macho, Latin American strongman dictator vibe to it. Hmmmm.)

    JefeG.

    David, infamous sockpuppet (725724)

  238. Can’t we all just agree to savagely mock LGF and just leave the whole JeefG/Patterico spat out of it? I hate this, because I read both blogs, and it really pains me to see these guys at odds. Not trying to take sides, just saying.

    Yes. I definitely think this is for the best.

    I don’t back down from what I’ve said, but it’s old, old news. I know some people like both blogs, and while it’s clear they aren’t going to reconcile, there’s no reason to bring up the differences. Insofar as I did that, my bad, David.

    I do think it’s a shame that Charles would name Patterico’s job and try to sell this myth this is a hate blog. It really, really ticks me off, and I do associate that with something very similar, and also very wrong.

    But let’s move on.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  239. Elind is merely saying that Patterico should voluntarily recuse himself from having an opinion about the systemic self-delusions at LGF – because it is unseemly to overset the emotional balance of sensitive netizens like Johnson and his succubi.

    Mork (748503)

  240. I think when someone comes here claiming to never have done something, and can almost INSTANTLY be proven wrong, that remains relevant.

    Scott Jacobs (9b5ed3)

  241. I hope in all the recent comments it wasn’t lost that I googled Elind’s name and it turns out he’s been shilling for LGF for ages.

    So when he said he was just above blog spats, he was lying. He’s simply arguing in bad faith in his shilling for LGF again.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  242. I think when someone comes here claiming to never have done something, and can almost INSTANTLY be proven wrong, that remains relevant.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs

    Sure. It’s also good that we all seem to agree that threatening Patterico’s job is an outrageous way to respond to differences on a blog.

    But I do agree with those who really wish this subject didn’t come up very often. If it does, fine, I’ll tell the truth if someone’s trying lie about it. But I really don’t enjoy this one. I’m sure you don’t either.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  243. I would still very much like to see JD publicly say who he agrees with here.

    I mean, either he thinks JeffyG was being satirical, or he thinks JeffyG was trying to damage Patrick’s rep in regards to his IRL job.

    There isn’t a middle ground on this one. You can’t think both are right.

    And I would just like to know which of the two is JD’s position.

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  244. I would like a Land Rover, and to win the lottery, and World peas. The day I need to defend myself to you is somewhere between now and never. But, feel free to ban me, Scottie.

    JD (822109)

  245. Scott, to be honest, I don’t even know that I’m right. I say I understand “let’s just let it go, we’re exhausted even talking about this Jeff Feud!”, but is that reasonable?

    I even argue in the opposite direction sometimes.

    When we talk about Palin always responding to her critics, even when it makes her look like she has thin skin, a lot of people note that this seems to work better than the politicians who try to stay above the fray when they are smeared. Did it help Bush to be above the fray?

    Of course, those smears are more consequential than the ‘Is Patrick an antisemite’ google bomb, but if someone did that to me, I would really want to resist the smear.

    It’s exhausting, just as it’s exhausting to hear Beck explain he’s not really trying to shoot people in the head, or racist, or whatever. What makes it even more exhausting is that some people (whom I like) seem to enjoy both blogs, and didn’t come to either for this topic at all.

    Anyway, just to be intellectually honest, I don’t know that I’m right to argue for people to leave the Jeff G issue alone. I just know it’s really old.

    BTW, I like JD, even though I agree that this is not a hard call about the issue you’re asking about. He seems to want to avoid getting into a certain issue, because of his friends. I think we should just respect that. Perhaps he should just admit Jeff’s in the wrong, but we don’t really need him to. People should be able to avoid topics with a ten foot pole sometimes.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  246. The thing is, if he disagrees with Patrick’s opinion regarding JeffyG’s intentions, it is unlikely in the extreme that Patterico would ban him. If, on the other hand, he disagrees with JeffyG, there is at the very least a fair chance that he would find himself in the proverbial doghouse.

    His refusal to state his side certainly suggests which he supports, but it speaks volumes that he would so wish to remain in JeffyG’s good graces…

    Or so it seems to me.

    So it has ALWAYS seemed to me.

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  247. Jeff, seemed to be illustrating the fallacy of the argument, put forward against McCain, ‘illustrating
    absurdity by being absurd’

    narciso (6075d0)

  248. People should be able to avoid topics with a ten foot pole sometimes.

    Not when the issue is one friend directly attacking another friend and attempting to ruin their professional reputation.

    To be certain, if someone else here tried that with YOU Dustin, I would be one of the first people to be all over their textual s**t.

    Scott Jacobs (6aff37)

  249. “They like to go after your livelihood if you criticize them.”

    Isn’t CJ supposed to be some kind of musician? If you could find out where his gigs are and share some of his unsavory actions and comments with the proprietors, maybe you could hit him in the wallet instead.

    Just a thought for those with some time on their hands…

    5th Level Fighter (dd5bcf)

  250. 5th Level troll, I don’t think anyone here appreciates the planting of offensive comments here by lizardoids like you.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  251. Scott – I would let it drop, but that’s just me. I can’t control the comments of others and neither can you. I understand your position and I think I also understand JD’s. Trying to play Switzerland is tough sometimes.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  252. narciso, I know that, but it’s a failure.

    Asking if someone’s an antisemite because you don’t like them is not similar to asking if someone’s a racist when that’s a legitimate question. I am a fan of Mccain and sorely hope we don’t have to dig back into that. It’s one thing to say his comments are understandable and defensible, and another to say there’s absolutely no basis to criticize his comments, such that those who do should lose their jobs.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  253. Patterico, doesn’t really think McCain is racist, and Jeff doesn’t think Pat is antisemitic, can we stipulate to that. Kimberlin and Friedman and Frisch, are the real enemy, can we agree on that point. Now Sullivan and Johnson, I prefer not to think of them, if possible

    narciso (6075d0)

  254. I’ve said that the attitudes I have seen in this short time in his blog suggests he holds a large percentage of Americans in contempt.

    I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to beg to differ.

    SEK (1d9681)

  255. Back to Elind

    “This is incredible. A United States DA is involved in this type of garbage, and collects public salary!”

    What was the incredible? What was garbage?

    Speaking out for the truth? Holding liars accountable?

    How horrible that someone who represents the law for the public be engaged in that on their private time!!!!

    breitbartfan77 (b72ab6)

  256. Back to Elind

    “This is incredible. A United States DA is involved in this type of garbage, and collects public salary!”

    What was the incredible? What was garbage?

    Speaking out for the truth? Holding liars accountable?

    How horrible that someone who represents the law for the public be engaged in that on their private time!!!!

    breitbartfan77 (b72ab6)

  257. UPDATE x2: Jeff Goldstein denies gratuitously using my name and job title to harm me — in a post that gratuitously uses my name and job title.

    His denial is false.

    Commenter Dustin reminds us of the numerous posts in which Goldstein gratuitously linked my name, job title, and the word “anti-Semitic.” Dustin’s comments are here, here, and here. As Dustin explained:

    You google bombed his name and job with ‘is he an antisemite’. Why didn’t you google bomb his blog handle, Patterico?

    It’s really obvious that you were hoping that people searching for Patterico’s professional name would see questions about his antisemitism.

    This isn’t funny, and you’d understand if you had a job.

    Another point, your family was harassed by a deranged stalker. You chose to associate Patterico in your constant mentioning of this stalker, even though Patterico begged you not to, as this would lead the stalker to harass Patterico’s family. And indeed, he was right… that’s what happened. Thanks Jeff. You’re a real classy guy.

    Your evidence that Patterico is an antisemite? None. You just thought it was a funny joke to have someone’s name on google linked to that question because you really, really hate the guy. He’s done nothing to you. He’s always asking you to chill out and stop this blog war. If I post something critical enough of you, Patterico just deletes it and asks me not to provoke you.

    And I realize the reason is that he does actually want to have a life outside of this blog crap.

    I think even Dustin doesn’t realize how far Jeff carried the Google bombing campaign.

    You perhaps did not know that Goldstein, having created this Google bomb, then fortified the bomb by going to numerous of his old posts and linking the “anti-Semitic” post. Here are a few examples:

    and here:

    and here:

    and here:

    and here:

    and here:

    and here:

    and here:

    and here:

    Note that Goldstein was not linking to comments of mine that he wanted to criticize, which would have been legitimate. Instead, he was repeatedly and gratuitously linking to a trumped-up smear on me, which specifically included my name, my job title, and the word “anti-Semitic.”

    Goldstein appears to defend this smear as “satire.” Apparently, in his view, false words spoken online and linked to a person’s name and profession can’t be considered harmful as long as the intent is to joke or be clever. Deb Frisch must be thrilled to learn of Goldstein’s support for this excuse for Internet harassment.

    I note also this Goldstein comment in which he uses my name and job title, and falsely claims that I was trying to hurt him professionally. The record shows that I was doing the precise opposite — but the smear worked. If you click on Goldstein’s comment and scroll down, you will see Jeff’s commentariat spinning into the exact same frenzy Charles Johnson spun his commenters into — with people posting contact information for the District Attorney, suggesting that the Los Angeles Times should be told bad things about me, and so forth. When Charles Johnson pulled his gratuitous naming of me and my job (alluding to Goldstein doing the same as precedent), I was reminded of this behavior by Goldstein.

    P.S. Dustin also reveals that, like me and EricPWJohnson and many others, Dustin’s comments were altered at Protein Wisdom: “He instantly started changing all my comments on his blog.”) You can add this to the mountain of other evidence proving that Goldstein alters even reasonable people’s comments when they call him on his bad behavior.

    Goldstein also admits that he outs commenters, and defends it by saying that if you included part of your name in your e-mail address, and then criticize him, you were asking to be outed.

    These are all tactics of the sort Charles Johnson has used. My point is that, unfortunately, they are not limited to the left.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  258. Scott

    Its all about character, actions which speaks volumes

    I will say this – I’ve never been on a blog that has a more decent guy runing it and have as many enemies that are hell bent on undoing his personal life.

    For Jeff the liar to come over here and lie again is astonishing to some, not to me, he’s not to bright.

    I also found out the hiatus was hilarious for the guy who comments on everything.

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  259. I note also this Goldstein comment in which he uses my name and job title, and falsely claims that I was trying to hurt him professionally.

    I’m sorry again, but I’m calling bullshit. Someone needs to have a job before they can be hurt professionally.

    SEK (1d9681)

  260. I think you have more comments here today than Chuck still has readers.
    Can you say “attention whore”?

    proof (3d5329)

  261. Goldstein, just today: “I’ve never gone after his job. But I’m beginning to think he doesn’t belong in the position he holds.”

    Charles Johnson on the right. Same tactics, different politics.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  262. Jeez. No, Patterico, I did not realize he had gone to that length, going back to past posts that were not related, to link his ‘satire’ question.

    There wasn’t any doubt before that he did this to ensure your personal name and job, rather than your blog handle, was linked to ‘is he antisemitic’ on Google. Now it’s clear he spent hour after hour making sure his google bomb was truly effective. Some of those posts were linked by other prominent blogs. He knows what he’s doing.

    And yet he calls me a “fucking liar” for suggesting he did this to harm your career. That’s the only reasonable interpretation, Jeff.

    Those who are tired of this: would you take that lying down? I know it’s still the very last thing we came here to read about, but would you take this lying down?

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  263. Same tactics, different politics

    Geez, Pat, cause like a threat and an opinion on competency are, like, exactly the same thing!!11!!1!

    bwhahahahaha!

    darleen (75f31b)

  264. “But I’m beginning to think he doesn’t belong in the position he holds.”

    There’s an obvious riposte to this, coming from someone who… doesn’t hold a position.

    I realize Jeff is calling me a “fucking liar” because he has twisted the concept of language to the point where I can’t infer the most blatant of intentions. It’s sad that he even touches the issue, because he screws up some very interesting aspects of language, and gets to the point where I’m somehow wronging him to give him the reaction it actually appears he wanted.

    When someone orders a hamburger, their intent is that they want to eat. If someone calls Rachel Corrie ‘St Pancake’, their intent is that they want to mock her or the people who glorified her. If someone google bombs your name and job title with ‘is he antisemitic’ or ‘hasn’t denied murdering a little girl in 1992′ their intent is to harm your reputation. In this case, as narciso said, it was retaliation via ‘proving a point about accusing my friend of something I don’t want him accused of’.

    But that’s not a fair way to express that point. The way JeffG went around to old posts linking it, like a mischievous 12 year old, really exposes the degree with which he sought to do Patterico’s career harm.

    Jeff: I’m not a “fucking liar”. I’m not perfect, but I didn’t deserve that and would appreciate you acknowledging that you’re out of line.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  265. Geez, Pat, cause like a threat and an opinion on competency are, like, exactly the same thing!!11!!1!

    bwhahahahaha!

    I don’t get it, Darleen. Charles Johnson and Jeff Goldstein both put out nearly identical ‘Is Patrick Frey A Hater’ posts. granted, Jeff was a lot more dedicated to linking this accusation to tons of old posts of his, but it’s very similar.

    And they both suggest that they don’t think Patterico is competent, based on the fact they are in an argument with Patterico, with absolutely no analysis of Patterico’s performance or competence in his job.

    So yeah, they are acting the same. why do you compare one type of smear with the other type, when they both did both types? Is that a sincere, good faith argument? Are you the same Darleen that is some kind of Jeff sycophant? If so, you’re not helping his case by employing such a poor defense.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  266. Darleen, I forgot you were a contributor to the PW blog. It was a sincere mistake. Sorry for the error.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  267. but would you take this lying down?

    I certainly tried not to, but found that when I attempted to defend both Patrick and myself, I was further slandered by JD’s good friend JeffyG, who intimated that I was the subjected to threats because I, like others, had somehow threatened his family.

    So if I seem especially put out and upset over JD’s continued, feckless support-by-way-of-silence of JeffyG, perhaps you might better understand the why.

    Scott Jacobs (mobile) (e84a21)

  268. who intimated that I was the subjected to threats because I, like others, had somehow threatened his family.

    I didn’t know this part, Scott.

    I really hope this doesn’t become another drawn out fight, but I completely understand your great irritation.

    And I know I’m just sticking my nose in, but I don’t read PW. No offense intended to them, but it’s just not a blog I like because I really enjoy a certain commenter atmosphere where people get somewhere with one another (rare even here).

    The few times I’ve read PW, JD’s been a rare voice of ‘can you really justify going as far as you have?’ He’s done that to me here, too, and only when I have to admit he’s got a point.

    I do not always agree with him, but I’m glad he’s a commenter here. We shouldn’t cast people out who fail to live up to what we wanted them to do. Even if you’re justified in that hope.

    I admit I’m tipping the scales. I think the blog feud between Patterico and Jeff has caused a lot of collateral damage. RSM is one of my favorite bloggers, for example, and that bridge is burned (not Jeff’s fault at all, btw). A lot of commenters simply come at eachother as enemies, and hold grudges, when this is supposed to be a lot lighter in consequence than IRL interactions.

    It really gets in the way of arguing about politics, and if JD or you were to stop commenting here, that would be an additional piece of damage.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  269. Scott is correct. Jeff said he never threatened anyone who had not come after his family. That was false because Jeff had physically threatened Scott, who had never said a word about Jeff’s family. In trying to clothe his threats in a noble garb, Jeff implied something false and scurrilous about Scott.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  270. Jeff, why did you say “Is Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey anti-semitic?”

    Why didn’t you say “Is Patterico antisemitic?

    Oh, I don’t know. Why does Frey like to use my full name in all his titles — many of which, I’d like to point out, predate my posts questioning his (potential?) anti-semitism. And why did readers get the full R.S. McCain spelled out when Frey was engaging in his very important public investigation into whether or not Robert Stacy McCain is, in fact, racist, or just said racist things, because though he may or may not be a racist, he may or may not have racism deep in his subconscious mind, right to the left of his grubby Dixie soul.

    A matter of style, I guess.

    Do you need links and dates to see who did what first — and who was responding to whom? Or can you just Google it yourself, and enjoy the moment of revelation?

    By the way: Dustin’s on drugs, is my guess. I’ve had the same “about” page for years and years. I don’t have a CV. Even did a Google search to see if I could find an old one. No luck.

    I honestly have no idea what he’s talking about.

    JeffG (e4cdd3)

  271. Scott is a dickhead. Did he not come after my family? Because most of the dribbling sophists here have.

    If he didn’t, well, then I told him I’d beat his ass if I met him without his having first gone after my family. Making him the only one. The exception, not the rule.

    How proud he must be! Apologize for the misunderstanding. I’m almost certain he said something about my supposed lifestyle, but maybe I had him confused with nk. It happens. I can’t remember, nor do I keep records of such things.

    Unlike some people.

    By the way, what do we make of this:

    But hey, if it will toss his ass off the Internet, maybe I’ll do it.

    But why do it all in one post?

    Nobody will read all that. Except him.

    Maybe I’ll dribble it out over a couple of weeks.

    One damning point every day.

    Just factual.

    Nothing but links and facts.

    Now go run and tell your hero. This is going to last a WHILE.

    Oh — and I know a few people too. I’ll be telling them what a fucking psycho he is. He was going to write a book? Good luck.

    That’s Frey. Talking about me. In an email. In March of 2009. 9 months before I questioned his (potential?) anti-semitism.

    For the record.

    JeffG (e4cdd3)

  272. I would just like to note the asymmetry here.

    JeffG is allowed to comment here.

    By contrast, I am effectively banned at Protein Wisdom, because when I comment there, my comments are altered. As (we learned today) were Dustin’s. As were EricPwJohnson’s. As may be those of anyone else who bothers to take my side over there.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  273. We could discuss old fights to death. I choose not to, any more.

    The Krugmans and Koses (and Charles Johnsons) keep me plenty busy these days.

    Patterico, two days ago, before deciding once again that he just can’t quit me.

    But that’s not a lie. That’s just poor impulse control. Which I understand is a fine characteristic in a DDA.

    I mean, two days was all you could last, Patrick? Really?

    How small and sad.

    JeffG (e4cdd3)

  274. No, Jeff, what’s small and sad was how a small throwaway remark in a post about Charles Johnson got you all up and excited.

    Well, that’s not the only reason I don’t patronize your blog any longer.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  275. So if calling Jeff Goldstein by his full name makes a person suspect anti-Islam, what does calling the President by HIS do?

    Deep waters here.

    Mork (87b84e)

  276. Bleargh: “…makes a person suspect anti-Semitism…”

    Mork (87b84e)

  277. Like Sarah Palin, I have injected myself into this story!

    Patterico (c218bd)

  278. By the way: Dustin’s on drugs, is my guess. I’ve had the same “about” page for years and years. I don’t have a CV. Even did a Google search to see if I could find an old one. No luck.

    Yeah, I can recall exactly what that was about. That’s why I’m not creating any accusations that I can’t back up.

    Much unlike, say, going back to link my ‘Is Jeff G a racist’ post to dozens of old posts.

    Why would anyone do that?

    Now, you ask why Patterico uses your name when he talks about you. I think that’s because you go by your name online. It’s not like Patterico invented some ‘joke’ that you’re in the Klan, or an antisemite, and linked that. Patterico doesn’t do that with people who are anonymous. I know you out people like nk, so perhaps this whole anonymity issue is not one you care about.

    However, why link it to old posts? Why use Patterico’s entire professional title? Blog readers know him as “Patterico”, but employers would know him by the job title. That’s why.

    Why in the world are you pretending you didn’t do this to harm his professional reputation? It’s pathetic, JeffG. You’re showing a complete lack of personal integrity.

    his very important public investigation into whether or not Robert Stacy McCain is, in fact, racist, or just said racist things

    Full disclosure: the most painful aspect of my family life is that my elder brother was put up for adoption because he is of mixed race and my parents being poor (yes, they still had more kids together). Some in my extended family make race into an issue that it shouldn’t be.

    I really, really lost my cool with regard to RSM’s comment that it’s natural to not want your sister to marry outside her race (or whatever exactly he said). Since then, I have really come to think about how RSM’s a great guy who just said something stupid. I do that. We all do that.

    But it’s legitimate to call that comment racist. Going beyond that to ‘is RSM racist’ isn’t something I recall Patterico doing. I recall you’re the one who did that. After all, you just did it here. I don’t know why. I guess you think you can cloud the issue, and make RSM fans defensive, but as I recall, it was an RSM comment (from ancient history, I admit) that is racist, but from a guy who I honestly don’t think is racist.

    It’s a complicated discussion, and you made it a lot worse by the kind of summary I just quoted. It’s like you think Patterico was the Grand Inquisitor for publicaly discussing an already public comment .

    Anyway, let’s get one thing clear: discussing the racism of that post is not similar to you calling him antisemitic. you admitted you did that as a absurd joke, having no evidence of antisemitism. That’s unlike discussing racism when someone says racial preferences are natural or understandable.

    But let’s give you enormous, undeserved benefit of the doubt, and say you meant that comment to make the point that Patterico’s criticism was going too far. Why then did you call him by his full professional title and then google bomb it? The only impact of that is that his professional name is slandered on google searches, and his career harmed.

    When I interpret this the only way I’ve ever heard it explained, you call me a ‘fucking liar’. How did I lie? We all know your intent was to harm his career. You’re making things up about me.

    Did Scott threaten your family? If he didn’t, then you’re making things up about him.

    Don’t you think you’re going way, way too far, when you disagree with Patterico? He doesn’t take it lying down, so it becomes a huge mess when he defends himself, and you blow up even more.

    I don’t wish you ill in any way, Jeff, and actually think you’ll be a much happier person if you react more proportionally. Screaming that I’m a “fucking liar” is the main reason I’m still talking about your lying about and smearing of good people.

    RE: the CV (or whatever) issue, all I recall is that it seemed like a very small issue, and you freaked out. I said that the first time. I’m not on drugs… I just don’t remember it. If I was trying to smear you, I wouldn’t have noted it was minor. At the time, it seemed like your reaction to me showed I hit a button and you were hiding something major, but I see now that is unjustified. You just react like crazy to everything.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  279. Excuse me, my first “can” should say “cannot”. I’m not leveling any accusation, just relating my memory.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  280. Dustin is misremembering. EricPWJohnson’s comments were altered to his face — and I said I was doing so — because all he was doing was reposting the same thing over and over again.

    As were you. So I see where he gets it.

    And of course, you were told that it was Pablo who altered your Pub comment, and that I had nothing to do with it and had no notice that it was done. Did you never update your post to reflect that?

    I don’t much care. I don’t keep a dossier.

    And you aren’t banned at PW, as you well know. There are pages and pages of comments by you — including those you made during your last bender. Saying you are “effectively banned” is a coward’s dodge. Comment away. Just don’t Google Bomb the comments of old posts (some of which I didn’t even write, and none of which were germane to the comment), or leave chapters from the works of Tolstoy, or be EricPWJohnson, who is frankly far too stupid to bother posting on my site.

    I suppose rather than telling him to stop posting the same thing over and over — and then, when he kept up the behavior, changing his comments to mock him (while letting everyone know I was doing so) — I could have pretended he issued a death threat and summarily banned him.

    But my way was more fun.

    If you are “effectively banned,” it’s on you. Because you’ve never been actually banned.

    JeffG (e4cdd3)

  281. Yep, altering comments is not actually banned.

    That’s taking sophistry to new lows.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  282. patterico: Just ban Goldstein: it is past the point of principle. Ban him, then ignore him, and get on with life.

    Principle is putting up with fuckwits. Principle carried too far is encouraging them to be more of a fuckwit. Goldstein is acting like an utter fuckwit, and asking you to ban him. Do it, and move on, permanently. Not worth electrons or time.

    HiHo (b47010)

  283. I mean, two days was all you could last, Patrick? Really?

    How small and sad.

    Do you apply this logic to yourself? Of course not, because it’s not logical. Why should Patterico avoid the freaking obvious comparison between Charles Johnson saying ‘District Attorney Patrick Frey’s blog is talking about my head on a pike’ and your ‘Is District Attorney Pat an antisemite’?

    It’s not a lack of impulse control that the two are compared. It’s just an obvious point.

    Speaking of impulse control, the ‘good man’ meme is repeated on your blog tens of thousands of times. Do you apply your rule to yourself?

    I would have preferred it had Patterico not made the obvious comparison, and just let it stand for those who remember. Honestly, he probably should have seen this mess coming because you cannot resist. That’s Patterico’s flaw… he sticks to his guns for a long time (which is probably why he’s a successful prosecutor).

    You know what would kick ass, Jeff? If you apologized for the smear, took down the antisemite accusation, and offered a truce. I would bet my house that that Patterico would accept, and this would end.

    It would do the whole blogosphere some good.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  284. Jeff, you habitually rewrite comments by people who say things that displease you, without notice — and you know it. I included links above to prove it. We have Dustin’s testimony today as well, and he is known around here as an exceptionally honest and straightforward person. To call him a “fucking liar” is itself a scurrilous lie, and every regular here knows it.

    You alter people’s comments without notice. That is worse than a ban. It makes your site completely unreliable. And it means anyone who disagrees with you would be a fool to post there, as their words become mere playthings to be toyed with by the blog owner at will.

    People have tried to explain this to you before. You have not listened. OK, fine. It’s your blog and your reputation.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  285. Oddly enough, integrity really isn’t hard work.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  286. I’m not gonna make any friends with this, but as a sorta-kinda-outside observer, I just wanted to throw in my two cents.

    Patterico and Goldstein kind of deserve each other, but nobody deserves Johnson. I admit I drifted away from both Patt a JeffG’s blogs when this whole fight started, but I was reading both (commenting more at PW) when it started.

    JeffG got hit with a bullcrap false accusation, and it was obvious what it was. Jeff overreacted. Patterico overreacted in response. And that’s pretty much the story since then. For a year.

    BTW that accusation by way of misreading intent is exactly the kind of thing Jeff has been railing against for years, and was precisely the kind of thing to set him off.

    I came to this post via a link at AoS to read about CJ since I haven’t been to LGF since CJ started going all alpha-sierra between his anti-Christian crusade and his later Obama obsession, and I’m kind of surprised at how deep the blog war remains. I know it’s mentioned sometimes at PW but I don’t go there often anymore. CJ has turned into a straight-up creepy liar, as some guy named Larry has been known to shout on TV.

    I don’t think either Jeff or Patterico are capable of backing down, but if someone does resolve this they should get Barack’s Nobel Peace Prize.

    Maybe they can play some internet poker to settle it or something. 2 out of 3 Bridge games or whatever. Golf, I don’t care.

    Merovign (f827eb)

  287. This old feud is letting the real villain off the hook

    SteveG (cc5dc9)

  288. In trying to clothe his threats in a noble garb, Jeff implied something false and scurrilous about Scott.

    And while I sit here, having been threatened and slandered for having the sheer audacity to defend you, One of the people who you flat out refused to even EXPECT a single word in my defense remains, refusing to even respond to whether or not he believe your characterization of JeffyG’s post, or if he accepts JeffyG’s.

    I don’t ask he stand up to JeffyG for having threatened me. I’m well aware how worthless he is, and I am long past the point of expecting him to do anything even remotely resembling “The Right Thing” on that count.

    But he can’t even own up to whether or not he thought JeffyG was trying to get you in trouble at work, even knowing that siding with JeffyG wouldn’t effect his ability to post here in any way.

    JD is a feckless, morally turpid coward.

    I didn’t know this part, Scott.

    No regulars on THIS blog knew, save myself, Patrick, DRJ, and JD. If there were any others, I don’t know of them. I kept my reason for leaving vague on purpose, and after leaving told all of three people – none of whom comment here – my reason.

    JD hits the nail on the head, as I’m sure he knows, when he taunts for me to ban him.

    Because it was the refusal to do so that lead to my leaving.

    And it will lead to it again.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  289. This old feud is letting the real villain off the hook

    Comment by SteveG

    Good point.

    Charles Johnson must be pretty pleased. The way he tried to screw with Patterico’s job was wrong on so many levels. It was Aaron’s comment. The comment was minor. The thrashing it described was justified by Johnson’s dishonesty.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  290. Wonderful.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  291. Things I Learned Tonight:

    Putting a blogger’s full name in a post title makes it fair game for him to make up shit about you, combine your name and job title together with the made-up lie, and link that post in countless places to bump it up on Google.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  292. If it weren’t for the right wing blogs, I wouldn’t know what CJ was saying these days. Thanks for, uhm, keeping me informed.

    *yawn*

    crosspatch (6adcc9)

  293. So Obama is willing to listen to the ideas of Republicans to work on Health Care?

    Didn’t we hear that last year?

    I mean, that exact freaking line?

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  294. I will save you the effort, Scott. You and your f@cking faux moral high horse are beyond tiresome. I will bid you all adieu while Scottie does his little moral turpitude feckless act, and his feigned indignation over a threat that so concerned him that he offered up his address to the evil person that threatened him so horribly. When Scottie is redy to act like an adult again, someone drop me an email.

    For the record, you left out the part where you demanded of the hosts that I be banned for not taking your side, and went into a very grand drama queen exit when I was not banned because I had not done anything. Maybe someday you will outgrow your little fits of pique, and realize that a measure of friendship is not simply agreeing with someone.

    Later, folks. FU, Scottie.

    JD (d4bbf1)

  295. Maybe it’s the right thread. I’d rather talk about that.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  296. When I said “that” I meant the SOTU and not the thing that immediately preceded my comment. Which I would like NOT to talk about.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  297. Oh for fuck’s sake.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  298. I will bid you all adieu while Scottie does his little moral turpitude feckless act, and his feigned indignation over a threat that so concerned him that he offered up his address to the evil person that threatened him so horribly.

    I feel obligated to say this: I don’t think it’s feigned, JD. At all.

    And I think a big part of the problem, as I already explained, was JeffG’s false claim that he never threatened anyone who hadn’t come after his family. He tends to run to that justification because it usually gets him a clap on the back, but it was emphatically untrue as to Scott. And it was, in fact, an insult to Scott.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  299. So how about that State of the Union, huh?

    Patterico (c218bd)

  300. Jeff,

    We all know I’m stupid, feckless, and worthless to bother with, why do you so emotionally react when I attempt to interject the reality vs the fantasy’s on your blog about Pat?

    I do not frequent your blog anymore because “it appears” that you may have emailed personal information about my registration to another blog.

    So let me ask the question here Jeff – did you email information about my registration and my discus account to someone else?

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  301. Eric,

    I’m sure he did. He outed Fritz, and justified it by saying that Fritz’s last name was included in his e-mail address. If you post on his site and say anything unflattering about him, he may out you and try to take it into real life.

    Just like Charles Johnson.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  302. Wow, EPWJ. Now I feel totally justified by how I used completely anonymous discus info when I was commenting at a lefty site recently (this has nothing to do with PW).

    A lot of people here know me, partly because I just tell people to read Patterico and use my actual name. I really don’t have much to lose if everyone knew more about me.

    But it’s still just creepy when people take advantage of crap like that. Dan Riehl’s commenters started asking for my IP address once.

    Why can’t people merely debating on political blogs just get it through their god damn thick skulls that this is not that important? Screwing with people in real life, digging into ‘who they really are’, or trying to cost them their livelihood, over arguments on blogs?

    I used to think I was the oversensitive one, but that crap makes me look like a concrete stoic. Can’t there be a place where people just argue about their political views, without it affecting their ability to live their lives? Those who don’t want that: what the hell is wrong with you?

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  303. I will bid you all adieu while Scottie does his little moral turpitude feckless act, and his feigned indignation over a threat that so concerned him that he offered up his address to the evil person that threatened him so horribly.

    Is it inconsistent to be offended by someone threatening you, and nevertheless to take every step to show that you are not intimidated?

    I think the minimizing of the threat to Scott does not help anything. And it frankly pisses me off.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  304. Pat

    My wife and I used to (we missed this time as we were getting ready for work) – record the time of how far into the state of the union address did the president attack the oil companies – the previous record was a minute 7 seconds, this one may have beaten it.

    4 dollar gas got him and the dems into power, its what gor Carter into Power, this time the noose of high gas prices is around his neck (are ya hearing this Sarah?)

    Like my wife said let him flap his gums, the election is coming and her industry is taking no prisoners – now that they can give unlimited funds

    The real story is coming out about taxes and regulations and the crappy American petro market

    Not being pro oil hurts everyone, millions are invested in their stocks, every American uses their products, almost every industry is dependent upon them to keep their COGS/M/P competative, calling them out as the enemy is stupid, reckless, and harmful to all walks of life.

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  305. Really, integrity is not hard work.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  306. Dustin,

    At least you haven’t been physically threatened.

    I think one can see (at least many of us can) why Scott got so upset. Since he was. Physically threatened.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  307. I’m actually rather shocked JeffyG has not – to my knowledge – shared my address yet.

    And yes, I gave JeffyG my address, because I refuse to be intimidated. I refuse to let a threat from someone on the internet make me back down.

    I don’t have to be AFRAID of someone to consider a threat to be genuine.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  308. #289

    I want to publicly apologize to our host Patrick Frey DDA for participating in the previous combination of name and job title nonsense.
    I did it. It was wrong, so that means…(god I hate this part) I believe that I was wrong to be part of that and apologizing is all I can do.

    I’ve met JeffG and his wife (briefly) and I liked them both…. and will continue to do so.

    My choice in this feud is to opt out and to pick on what Obama and squishy Republicans and their enablers can do ruin our country

    SteveG (cc5dc9)

  309. “I think one can see (at least many of us can) why Scott got so upset. Since he was. Physically threatened.”

    Patterico – Has JeffG claimed that threat was satire yet?

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  310. I don’t have to be AFRAID of someone to consider a threat to be genuine.

    Comment by Scott Jacobs — 1/25/2011 @ 7:59 pm

    I think it’s a shame that we even have to run through this logic. If I recall you were either considering joining the USMC, or were in at some point. Obviously you are a healthy young man.

    Why should that be relevant? Some people are less capable of brushing off threats. It’s as much a loser of an argument to threaten to break your ankles as it is to say you aren’t banned because I just alter your undeleted points to smear you.

    ———–

    SteveG,

    That was damn impressive. I’ve said things I regretted too, and it takes personal honor to own it and apologize.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  311. Scott

    Jeff probably has my address, and now I’m sure many people do, I dont care, JD threatened me physically as well, something to do with his pitching days. JD lately accused my of oral sex with big oil, that was a great retort to an argument on whether Palin might find her progressive taxes on industry conflicting with her new crusade for less taxes.

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  312. Oh he most certainly has. If not satire, then hyperbola. Which I would have accepted, if upon getting my address he didn’t say “Will deal with this next time I’m out there.”

    “There” meaning his next trip to Chicago. Eh, I’m a couple hours south… Close enough.

    I gave up explaining where this city is ages ago. I’ve called it “a FAR south suburb of Chicago” for over a decade.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  313. I’m willing to give SteveG point for his apology to Patrick, and since I do not SPECIFICALLY recall his involvement in the threats or the threads on PW about them (or the slander), I have no issue letting those slide too.

    SteveG’s fine in my book.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  314. I want to publicly apologize to our host Patrick Frey DDA for participating in the previous combination of name and job title nonsense.
    I did it. It was wrong, so that means…(god I hate this part) I believe that I was wrong to be part of that and apologizing is all I can do.

    Apology accepted. I appreciate that very much and respect what it took for you to say that.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  315. Obviously you are a healthy young man.

    Oh, I passed my trimmest, fittest days years ago.

    I just learned at a young, scrawny, geeky age that backing down never stopped threats. Maybe standing up to them got you a beating, but if you kept getting up, eventually they looked for easier prey.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  316. Patterico – Has JeffG claimed that threat was satire yet?

    Probably. The defenses usually bounce back and forth between “I stand up like a man for my family and honor” and “I don’t ever mean anything by these threats; they’re obviously innocent Internet trash talk.” If one defense doesn’t work, you move on to the next.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  317. Daley,

    I hunted him down for days on his threats to Scott, the he started sharing my info with other people, changing my entire posts and one if not two of my clients (past clients) may have been contacted.

    Jeff got cornered and finally admitted wierdly that he may have been satire, then reversed himself angry that I made him respond, and then the crap started flying

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  318. JD threatened me physically as well, something to do with his pitching days

    Huh…

    I would have guessed them to be his catching days.

    IYKWIMAITTYD.

    NTTIAWWT

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  319. I cant se what I’m typing – as it always is in Doha until after the post is sent – so for all of you who wonder why my grammer is bad if not atrocious, well because it is, but the excuse sounds pretty good don’t it?

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  320. Look, this has gotten all over the place. I don’t know Scott, but I always thought he was a fine man, and still do.

    EPWJ needs to lay off JD with the insults. This is getting out of hand. JD has stood up for me.

    I don’t expect folks to agree with me, and I don’t want to fight with anyone. What did Churchill say about hanging together?

    Simon Jester (3ebfad)

  321. Pat,

    He did to me, but then he reversed himself, then he deleted a series of comments then he started the meme that he could change my posts, that I was asking the same question over and over again – just like JD here does when he cant formulate an argument or a response.

    Distorting the stands I have taken another JD and Jeff tactic

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  322. This is how it is when there’s practically nothing at stake. Just pause and reflect on how marvelous the GOP primary is going to be!

    I feel like this is a deleted scene from Idiocracy. We’re weeding out people who have low tolerance for hostility (not speaking about any particular blog, but the blogosphere generally).

    The O’Donnell/Castle issue got uglier than anything I’ve ever seen, and it was just a taste.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  323. What did Churchill say about hanging together?

    It requires more rope?

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  324. I see Goldstein is talking about you again on his blog. Don’t let that unemployable manbaby ankle biter drag you down to his pathetic level.

    Cheers.

    William (9df40f)

  325. “If one defense doesn’t work, you move on to the next.”

    I remember something about clown noses.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  326. Simon

    So the truth is an insult?

    JD has done nothing but insult me, and at best be totally misleading about my stances, JD financially supports someone who deliberately put Pat’s family in danger exposing his young children to a F*cking stalker who has a problem with young children – Pat’s family!

    JD sends this guy money…

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  327. “just like JD here does when he cant formulate an argument or a response.”

    EricPWJohnson – From my observation, the inability to fashion an argument or answer a question is usually on your part. If on the part of others it is usually in response to some ridiculous strawman question raised by you to avoid answering a question. We saw this behavior from you very recently if you recall.

    Just my two cents.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  328. Actually, Dustin, there’s a lot at stake, Castle was a fool who would sell out any principle in a heartbeat, O’Donnell may have been earnest, overenthusiastic, but had the right idea. But it was fine to become an echo chamber for the sclerotic Wilmington set, and the Journolistas.

    We saw in the last two weeks, how so few were willing to stand on principle, the freedom of speech and right to self defense, out in this faction, that Fremont and Seward founded, and Lincoln brought into being.

    narciso (6075d0)

  329. Simon

    I will say this, JD is a good person, who loves his family, who cares about his community, who cares about the truth, justice.

    He just cant handle blogging, which isnt really a negative when you think about it.

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  330. Unleash the Egrets of Death!

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  331. who cares about the truth, justice

    I fear I must call “bullsh*t on that one…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  332. Oh, I just recovered this comment of Jeff’s from the moderation filter (my guess is profanity put it there):

    Scott is a dickhead. Did he not come after my family? Because most of the dribbling sophists here have.

    If he didn’t, well, then I told him I’d beat his ass if I met him without his having first gone after my family. Making him the only one. The exception, not the rule.

    How proud he must be! Apologize for the misunderstanding. I’m almost certain he said something about my supposed lifestyle, but maybe I had him confused with nk. It happens. I can’t remember, nor do I keep records of such things.

    Unlike some people.

    By the way, what do we make of this:

    But hey, if it will toss his ass off the Internet, maybe I’ll do it.

    But why do it all in one post?

    Nobody will read all that. Except him.

    Maybe I’ll dribble it out over a couple of weeks.

    One damning point every day.

    Just factual.

    Nothing but links and facts.

    Now go run and tell your hero. This is going to last a WHILE.

    Oh — and I know a few people too. I’ll be telling them what a fucking psycho he is. He was going to write a book? Good luck.

    That’s Frey. Talking about me. In an email. In March of 2009. 9 months before I questioned his (potential?) anti-semitism.

    For the record.

    Goodness! Links and quotes?!

    As Tim Blair said of Charles Johnson: “THEY’RE QUOTING MY WORDS! IT’S A SMEAR CAMPAIGN!”

    It wasn’t before you FIRST accused me of being an anti-Semite, as you will recall. For the record. You had already called me insane, a liar, and an anti-Semite.

    And I angrily said that I was going to expose you as a hypocrite . . . by quoting you!

    My word! The gall! A smear campaign born of accurate quotes with links to back them up!

    Oh . . . and you omitted one other little part of the context of that e-mail: I was talking directly to you and you know it. You make it sound like a dirty back-channel campaign to DESTROY!!! you with lies. But in reality, I wrote that to Lying Pablo AFTER I knew that he was passing along to you information about a conversation he had explicitly agreed to keep private. So then I wrote an angry e-mail, WHICH I EXPLICITLY SAID I KNEW PABLO WOULD PASS ALONG TO YOU, saying I was going to expose you with accurate posts about you.

    And I never said anything to Pablo that I haven’t said in public many times.

    When the rubber hit the road, and it looked like your livelihood actually WAS being threatened — when someone wrote QoR to object to your antics — I wrote:

    All that said, I see that someone wrote Qor to complain about Goldstein’s behavior, and I want to make it clear that I disapprove of the decision of the person who wrote Qor. You can quote me on that. I don’t approve of people trying to make him suffer because of this dispute, and the actions I have taken have been intended as purely defensive. Do not write Qor unless it is to tell them that I do not want Mr. Goldstein fired from the site.

    That was the very same day you were falsely pretending I was trying to harm your livelihood, mentioning my name and job title, and stirring up your commentariat to post contact info for the DA and such.

    To get back to the real topic: Scott never said a damned word about your family. You threatened him anyway. You claimed you only threatened people who came after your family. This was a lie.

    The fact that Scott did not act intimidated did not make your physical threat any less reprehensible.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  333. JD makes the internet a better place whereas many others don’t

    happyfeet (164ead)

  334. Daley,

    You link opinion peices or misread something and suddenly have this habit of saying you’re the victor, when there is a cancaphony of information telling you otherwise.

    I appreciate your attempts to engage me but you do it simply to backup your name calling with suggests that you do have a concious, and you realize that on some level its wrong.

    Your labeling something as rediculous is simply just you and not the facts.

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  335. Speaking of Kimberlin, where are all those blog posts Patterico was going to post after he read that book on vacation? Huh? He said that was all he wanted to post about, but…. No? Why not, Patterico? Do you care to explain?

    Chris Hooten (6b52e6)

  336. Tell the truth now…

    Chris Hooten (6b52e6)

  337. Note that he hardly sounded as though he was anything but serious with THAT wording…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  338. JD makes the internet a better place whereas many others don’t

    Comment by happyfeet

    I agree. He’s not perfect. If I were Scott, I wouldn’t want to hug him. But as understandable as Scott’s view is, I don’t like the idea that JD would leave any more than I like the idea Scott would.

    We don’t need that kind of crap.

    Did he not come after my family? Because most of the dribbling sophists here have.

    It’s bizarre that he pretends he can’t remember if someone went after his family or not. That’s really low, Jeff. Don’t use your family that way. If you have no memory of Scott doing something, you need to admit it upfront. Since you strongly suggested he had, you also should apologize. That’s an egregious accusation to make without knowing it’s true.

    I questioned his (potential?) anti-semitism.

    What potential antisemitism? Just because you’re Jewish, if you are, doesn’t mean people who argue with you, and never mention anything about Jews whatsoever, can be questions on those grounds. That’s an egregious accusation to make. You already admitted you meant this as ‘satire’, and now you pretend it could be a real issue. Which the hell is it?

    Posting people’s personal emails may be completely legal, but it’s also pretty low. The whole point of some of those emails is to keep the ugly blag spat from spoiling the blogs. Why not just leave it off the blogs?

    No one is trying to persecute you, Jeff. You pissed Patterico off, and so he said he was going to use your own words to ruin your reputation. Not the prettiest thing to promise, but that’s basically his shtick if you’re a liar.

    Why not just call the feud off?

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  339. Note that he hardly sounded as though he was anything but serious with THAT wording…

    Comment by Scott Jacobs

    No, he sounded like he absolutely meant his threat. He sounds like he’s completely lost it. The “(potential?) anti-semitism” also firmly establishes that Jeff does want people to take that accusation seriously, despite Jeff admitting there’s absolutely no basis for it.

    One thing JD and I disagreed with was my impression that a lot of the craziest nuts we come across actually were from PW at some point. William Yelverton, that one crazy one who is in jail, Christoph, etc. I get the impression Jeff’s attitude of ‘I don’t care if it’s true, so long as I put a question mark on it!’ and his feeling this is justified by mere blog arguments, attracts kooks.

    In this thread alone, Jeff has defended changing people’s comments, he has admitted to threatening people, he has admitted to pretending someone’s an antisemite. He has transparently tried to screw up someone’s career.

    And the only two complaints he has issued are that Patterico promised to ruin his reputation by quoting him, and that we discussed racism regarding a really good person who said something stupid once.

    And sadly, like that crazed stalker who went to jail, I suspect Jeff knows he’s lost his reputation and hopes to stir up enough problems here that Patterico at least suffers some too. It’s not a fight that can be won, it’s just a fight that can be defended against.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  340. JD makes the internet a better place whereas many others don’t

    I agree with this, although I don’t appreciate his minimizing the physical threats JeffG made to Scott.

    JD financially supports someone who deliberately put Pat’s family in danger exposing his young children to a F*cking stalker who has a problem with young children – Pat’s family!

    You know, I saw you say something like this before. I think you are perhaps confusing Brad Friedman/Brett Kimberlin and Jeff Goldstein? Jeff Goldstein is not a convicted bomber or a convicted bomber’s partner, for Christ’s sake. JD can’t stand the convicted bomber or his partner.

    I think I saw you saying JD had threatened you up thread? I’m afraid I don’t believe that.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  341. Internet. Serious Business.

    carlitos (a3d259)

  342. I agree with this, although I don’t appreciate his minimizing the physical threats JeffG made to Scott.

    The Jeff repeated in a completely “No, this is not satire, I mean it” way.

    I almost wish JD would come back and defend that.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  343. As you can see, Patterico, this brings out the best in everyone! Sigh.

    Simon Jester (3ebfad)

  344. Speaking of Kimberlin, where are all those blog posts Patterico was going to post after he read that book on vacation? Huh? He said that was all he wanted to post about, but…. No? Why not, Patterico? Do you care to explain?

    I also wanted to post a series of posts about my South Africa trip. And I wanted to post my L.A. Times Year in Review.

    Unfortunately, I am very busy. I can’t do everything I want to do when I want to do it, and time-intensive projects with no clear deadline get put on the back burner.

    You, perhaps, had some different idea?

    Patterico (c218bd)

  345. As you can see, Patterico, this brings out the best in everyone! Sigh.

    This is wonderful.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  346. You, perhaps, had some different idea?

    Comment by Patterico

    He sounds like some kind of conspiracy theorist from a nutjob site.

    I guess he’s insinuating you were paid off again. Hopefully he meant you learned you were mistaken (not possible in this case), or worried about a lawsuit.

    However, I too look forward to more on this subject sometime.

    As you can see, Patterico, this brings out the best in everyone! Sigh.

    Comment by Simon Jester

    It does suck. However, would you take it lying down, if it were you? It’s easier said than done.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  347. You already admitted you meant this as ‘satire’, and now you pretend it could be a real issue. Which the hell is it?
    Comment by Dustin

    He’s simply employing the Jon Stewart syndrome: changing hats between journalist and comedian whenever it suits him.

    aunursa (a2a019)

  348. BTW, I’m referring to the notion that Patterico was paid crazy GOP money (which was just an incredibly paranoid delusion).

    Sometimes I wonder if we’re all taking a paranoid schizophrenic incredibly too seriously because he happens to be intelligent enough to look pretty normal.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  349. I don’t believe I’m reading this. What on earth? Has everyone gone completely mad? Or is this some kind of weird sock-puppet war?

    Maybe it’s just because I’m beyond tired, but this thread has become hallucinatory.

    Could everyone go to bed?

    Dianna (f12db5)

  350. I’m about 80% to 85% sure this is the reason Glen Reynolds doesn’t have a comment section.

    Eh. Maybe 90%.

    papertiger (048d94)

  351. Jon Stewart syndrome: changing hats between journalist and comedian whenever it suits him

    To be fair, I don’t think JS has ever claimed to be a journalist…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  352. LOL, Papertiger.

    Yeah, it’s also that people would just rip comments out and pretend Glenn Reynolds was responsible (much as Charles Johnson did with the anti-abortion comment).

    It sucks to respond to this crap. It sucks to not respond, and let some things said against you just stand unchallenged.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  353. 100%

    carlitos (a3d259)

  354. Merovign,

    Your memory is off. Goldstein was already calling me insane, a liar, and anti-Semitic before the event you cite, which was itself misportrayed as so many other things have been.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  355. I do agree with Merovign’s spirit, even if he’s in error about the origin of the feud.

    Merovign, it’s been a long time since this flared up here. Hopefully it doesn’t become an ongoing issue again. You’re surely right that people who came to discuss what a creepy dick Charles Johnson is will be disheartened to see this topic has emerged.

    Just another point, I think Patterico admitted he was mistaken about the rope+tree comment. He didn’t give Jeff any latitude because Jeff was already a persistently hostile guy, but he did come back and admit a mistake. I think that’s enough. People screw up, and what separates us is who refuses to admit a mistake. Jeff knows Scott didn’t threaten his family. He knows Patterico isn’t antisemitic. He knows he shouldn’t have threatened people, or gone after their professional reputation, or outed them, or altered their comments to make it unclear what they said.

    He’s had a very long time to come around and admit he made a mistake, and instead, he doubles down in this thread. If you see this as two people who have repeatedly overreacted to eachother, I think it’s relevant that one side has tried to be honest about it. I think it’s relevant that one side’s overreaction is to merely point out what’s happened, and the other side’s is to smear people as antisemitic, or threaten to break their ankles, or pretend they are threatening their family.

    Anyway, I’m with you 100% on your actual wish that this entire feud be resolved.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  356. Deb Frisch, perhaps I should forgive you.

    Mitch (e40959)

  357. I reconsidered the rope+tree comment the very next day. At the time “rope, tree, ___” was a big meme, and I thought it was a reference to that. The next day people said they didn’t think it was a death threat, and I said you know, maybe you’re right. That said, he was also talking about settling things with nk without resorting to the law, and he had a history of threatening fights, so I said I would leave the ban.

    Why do I bring this up? Because a) Merovign did, b) I reconsidered it within a day, and c) Goldstein brought up that incident again not two weeks ago, in a post.

    I make one comment, reconsider it the next day, and he’s still posting about it on his front page two years later.

    Then comes in tonight to call me obsessive.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  358. Notice how short lived Hooten’s hooch-induced bravery was.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  359. And, if you check, I actually APOLOGIZED for misreading his intent so badly, in December 2009. Over a year ago.

    The link and everything else backing up what I say is here:

    http://patterico.com/2009/03/19/points-of-agreement-on-interpretation/comment-page-12/#comment-475769

    Why, when I apologized over a year ago, is he still posting about this?

    Patterico (c218bd)

  360. Patterico, victimhood has its attractions. As we know both learned so well in our profession.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  361. “Your labeling something as rediculous is simply just you and not the facts.”

    EricPW – I believe people here have made up their minds about ridiculous conduct and facts as you recently witnessed, but I would not presume to speak for them. Carry on.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  362. I was wondering about your trip to SA the otherday… where did you stay and your ratings.
    Plus photos of course.

    We may head off to Tanzania, but work has been slow, so it is looking more like Safari park USA with sedated toothless lions and lethargic wildebeests… kinda like the USA Obama envisions; but diapered

    SteveG (cc5dc9)

  363. Time to not make friends again.

    Y’all were jabbing at each other before that event, and after that event, that was just a big axis that locked the dispute in place.

    Neither of y’all are capable of unlocking your jaws and letting go. You both keep blaming the other of bringing it up, and you’re both right.

    It all started when we found out you two not only disagree, but disagree irreconcilably about interpretation of text. Your version threatens his worldview (he figures that if intent doesn’t matter (much) you don’t even need the text), his version threatens the entire history of a large chunk of your profession (textualism of one variety or another).

    He viewed your arguments as disingenuous, you thought you were pointing out a flaw. He thought he responded with satire (per his rebel/outlaw shtick), and you saw over-the top threats. And so on ad nauseam. You both ramped it up as time went on, one was worse on one day and the other the next.

    I generally hate equivocation and rarely see equal sides in life’s conflicts. But every so often you run across a conflict where the checkmarks line up pretty well, and this is one of them. Perfectly? No, but who cares?

    But that’s just the way I see it, what the heck do I know?

    PS I looked in on this ongoing dispute from time to time, his responses have been more “obvious” and yours more subtle. But I don’t buy subtle prods as less offensive, manipulation is no less offensive than insult.

    Ultimately y’all are gonna have to decide to drop it or not, it’s not up to me.

    Merovign (f827eb)

  364. Pat,

    JD threatened me, yep.

    He said something about his pitching days, on the bridge rock throwing thread where a BP agent killed a 15 year old, wanted me to stand there and he could see if a rock was fatal or not.

    Also, I’m not confusing Goldstein, Goldsteins sent your info to Frisch, it that not correct?

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  365. Actually, Dustin, there’s a lot at stake, Castle was a fool who would sell out any principle in a heartbeat, O’Donnell may have been earnest, overenthusiastic, but had the right idea.

    I guess I wasn’t clear enough. I grant there is a lot at stake with a Senate election. I meant there’s not much at stake in this blog spat, and people are getting nasty. That Senate primary was much more minor than the 2012 election will be, and it got incredibly nasty for the right.

    Whether you thought Castle to be the best we could win with, or thought he was unacceptably moderate, you have to admit that race got nasty. And we’re going to see it get much nastier when it’s Palin vs Huckabee vs Romney. No matter who you like (of those three, I think most of us would pick Palin) the race will get very ugly.

    I think that kind of thing is similar to the fault lines we’re seeing in some of these blog spats. I didn’t like Castle, though I did say O’Donnell would lose badly, so we should do what we can to avoid Coons (who is far worse). Imagine that same argument, amped up to a billion, if Palin is nominated, but is behind in too many swing states. Or if anyone but Palin is nominated, especially a RINO. It will be quite ugly.

    I predict it’s going to be worse than anything the right blogosphere has ever dealt with before. There’s some good in that, because it means a lot of people take a deep personal stake in their country’s future, but mostly I think it’s not the best way to go about things.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  366. Ahh here’s the quote:

    75.I threw in the low 80′s in high school. I would volunteer to be the hurler to test out that theory that EricPW floated.

    Comment by JD — 6/9/2010 @ 11:57 am

    You need to read the context

    http://patterico.com/2010/06/08/el-paso-border-patrol-agent-shoots-attacker/#comment-666323

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  367. Pat

    Here’s more:

    113.Well, for this guy, talk is cheap. I like JD’s solution: since rock throwing is no big deal, perhaps he wouldn’t mind demonstrating in person by being a target. Since it is no big deal.
    I still find it hysterical that this human nullset, who spends every posting period throwing metaphorical rocks on this blog, is writing about the throwing of actual rocks.

    Comment by Eric Blair — 6/9/2010 @ 5:28 pm

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  368. Pat

    Another, here’s hoping someone else:

    117.I say we let the 14 year old version of Strasberg throw the rocks at EricPW.

    Comment by JD — 6/9/2010 @ 5:34 pm

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  369. Pat,

    Here’s more

    138.EricPW – Are you willing to be the target to test out your asspull? A simple yes or no will suffice.

    Comment by JD — 6/9/2010 @ 6:07 pm

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  370. Pat

    Another

    165.EricPW – He already linked to it above, moron. You never did answer – to test out your asspull that rocks only sting from beyond 20-30 feet, hell, let’s make it yards, would you be willing to be the target for the test?

    Comment by JD — 6/9/2010 @ 6:48 pm

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  371. I guess I shouldn’t have taken these as a threat?

    Please advise

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  372. I generally hate equivocation and rarely see equal sides in life’s conflicts. But every so often you run across a conflict where the checkmarks line up pretty well, and this is one of them. Perfectly? No, but who cares?

    Patterico made an argument you think is disingenuous, and Jeff google bombed him as an antisemite and seriously threatened to break someone’s ankles. Anyone reading Jeff’s own words in this thread knows that the satire defense Jeff made was false, not that satirical google bombs don’t count. He means to screw with Patterico’s job. He meant to threaten Scott. He meant to suggest Scott threatened his family, based on nothing but a desire to play victim.

    Read the thread. Just this one. Instead of dropping in from above, actually read the thread.

    Honestly, I don’t think this has anything to do with intentionalism. I also think Patterico has always employed the bit of truth in intentionalism (the part before you take it to extremes).

    Merovign, I was totally on board with your wish that this just stop, but you are drawing a false equivalence, and being on the wrong side of that is provocative rather than deflating. I agree it’s extremely silly to even argue over things like ‘who started it’, but would you really take this lying down? Should we rest, now that we know you think Patterico making an argument you find disingenuous is equivalent to the crap described in this thread?

    That Google bomb is real. It’s meant to ruin someone’s livelihood. Read Jeff’s description of his threats in this thread. He means to scare people. Note the suggestion Scott threatened Jeff’s family. That’s horrible and with no basis.

    Furthermore, the single thing that you think Patterico did wrong, in your earlier comment, he admitted he was wrong and apologized honorably. If the only wrong you cite on one side is already admitted and apologized for, and the only truce requests are also one sided, can’t you admit that your equivalence is false?

    I think sincerity matters. That Patterico admitted he was mistaken about the rope comment is evidence he was acting in good faith.

    You are definitely lecturing the wrong folks, even though I respect your sentiment as kind and well intentioned.

    I responded to you directly two times now, and I’d appreciate if you would simply address some of the points I’ve raised. In particular, I think it’s quite relevant to your initial complaint that Patterico was acting in good faith, demonstrated by his quick correction and apology, years ago. I think if you compare that to my complaints you will see there is no equivalence.

    In fact, I think if people generally admit to this basic truth, the motivation to bring Jeff up at all will completely go away.

    Please list the grievances against Patterico that you think are equivalent to what Jeff demonstrated himself in this thread.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  373. I guess I shouldn’t have taken these as a threat?

    Please advise

    Comment by EricPWJohnson

    It doesn’t seem like JD is threatening to harm you, but rather was saying that if you think such a rock thrown is threatening, then you concede that the officer being hit by those rocks would have been justified in using force instead of simply letting himself be pelted with rocks. Regardless of whether you agree with that logic (I do), I think it’s clear that JD was not saying he was going to throw a rock at you.

    If JD had asked for your address, and then said he was going to prove to you that a rock thrown from 30 yards can kill, I think that would be a threat. But you weren’t arguing with JeffG, you were arguing with someone who doesn’t make that kind of statement.

    I also seem to recall JD was really annoyed about the video you said showed certain elements shooting that didn’t seem to pan out. It seemed like the cop who shot to defend himself from rocks being thrown wasn’t getting a fair shake.

    BTW, I’m sorry I’m being verbose. That’s how I write when I’m tired and lazy.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  374. Dustin,

    Given the context of the thread – he was threatening to kill me, trying several times to get me to agree to his attempt to strike a fatal blow at me – he even posted his quals to do so

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  375. IF asking for my address qualifys as a threat then I guess thats a new standard.

    I only posted these as a response to Pats not believing me.

    In retrospect I should have just emailed them to Pat

    We will find out in the next few months

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  376. Comment by EricPWJohnson — 1/26/2011 @ 12:47 am
    “Given the context of the thread – he was threatening to kill me, trying several times to get me to agree to his attempt to strike a fatal blow at me – he even posted his quals to do so”

    Total BS! He asked you if you would be willing to have him do something you said was harmless, and you say he was threatening your life? Not unless he threatened to do so, which he didn’t, and not unless you are admitting you were spewing BS about the rocks not being dangerous.

    You were being very disingenuous on that thread, claiming that rocks were harmless and making up other claims about the officers actions and dancing away from any legitimate discussion. Now you are outright lying about him threatening you.

    I have my problems with JD baiting trolls but you are a liar.

    Machinist (74634b)

  377. I used to post there until he was paid off by Soros. Told him he sold his soul and he banned me – not that I needed banning as it was my farewell post.

    Petra (b46a05)

  378. Machinist,

    Did he volunteer to demonstrate me as a target, and he would try and strike a fatal blow?

    If you are saying a discussion of rock throwing qualifys someone to make threats to end the discussion, well then I guess I wasn’t being threatened, and since I wasn’t willing to stand defenseless and let someone try and kill me with a rock to prove my point, well I stand corrected.

    If this was a new standard I might point out your comments that people should have resisted more on some airplanes a decade or so ago

    No one volunteered to put you through a test risking your life to prove your comments and I would have jumped their crap immediately

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  379. Well, you should post here more often. :)

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  380. I figured that Scott :)

    EricPWJohnson (c72be1)

  381. Here is the Wall Street Journal article that described many of the “facts” that I had stipulated in the thread

    Yes I am indeed a liar, so says the video, and the woman who saw it

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704256604575294950172855306.html

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  382. Thank you, Patterico, for calling out Charles Johnson for the truth-bending and altering that he posts as “reality” on his website. The guy used to have a decent blogsite. And then something happened. Pathetic. Now he and a handful of moronic brown-nosing pinheads do a daily repeat of Kos and call it original, reasoned, rational, thought.

    LeonidasOfSparta (c9c010)

  383. What I just cannot understand is how Patterico fails to see that he and Goldstein are the same.

    EXACTLY the same. The same behavior. Exactly. The same pettiness, the same petulance, the same obsessiveness, the same inability to do what your mother taught you 30 years ago – to just ignore the idiots, to just let some things go.

    Charles Johnson, Jeff Goldstein, and Patrick Frey are almost identical in every way. And then they flail at each other and pretend that this isn’t the plain truth.

    You’re ALL embarrassing yourselves. How do you not see that? How does anyone?

    Again, I’m stunned that any of you are adults. Or educated. Or professional.

    It’s really just embarrassing to watch.

    edud (677191)

  384. #387. Although I can’t say I agree or disagree with your “equivalency rating” on Patterico and the other 2 bloggers, did you have to be as ridiculous as the ridiculousness you point out ?
    What I mean is, you used the same tired internet insults – acting “just like the rest”, yourself.
    1. mommie taught you better
    2. obsessive (just short of insane or take your meds)
    3. I’m stunned (at how bad it is since I’m not goody two shoes angel line)
    4. not adult / childishness insult
    5. “uneducated” – another of the usual insults
    6. unprofessional (less used but one nonetheless)

    I guess I’d say “embarrassing” is closest to least used internet insult territory…

    Congratulations, we can add you in to the three musketeers you pointed out, at least in my book, as far as your own criticisms go, and for obvious reasons.

    SiliconDoc (7ba52b)

  385. #387 ” Thank you, Patterico, for calling out Charles Johnson for the truth-bending and altering that he posts as “reality” on his website. ”

    I believe the last one I saw (I’m not here a lot) was the size outing of the Glen Beck rally as compared to the libs “truth” rally. Quite ironic huh.

    And yes, I meant 388 above not 387.

    I appreciate ANYONE pointing out the lies and telling the truth. I don’t mind the fights as it goes along, so long as the one telling the truth wins, and wins big – and the fight is rather inevitable. Conversion (of the liar)to the truth is a perfect game or a massive sweep and is the most desirable.

    SiliconDoc (7ba52b)

  386. edud

    Totally disagree, absolutely disagree. Pat is not nor ever will be on his worst day a Johnson or a Goldstein, in fact I think he cares deeply for these people on a personal basis.

    I guess that’s the point, he has to deal with people in the worst segments of our society, the victims, the felons, and all that pain, and in the end is fair to those here who are the most unfair to him.

    If Goldstein and Johnson spent time with Pat at his DA’s office and saw what he does, they would have a totally different perspective than they have today

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  387. Merovign,

    You’re entitled to your view of this, but you shouldn’t pretend to be some disinterested observer. When your original comment was initally stuck the in spam filter for a short period, you were immediately over at PW insinuating I had hidden it — and saying that Jeff was right and I was simply continuing the fight because I was a lawyer. Then you come over here and characterize the dispute in a way designed to favor his side, but with an affected air of disinterest, seeming to blame both sides.

    I remember you: you have done this before. Again, you’re entitled to think and say whatever you like, but people here are entitled to know you are not as disinterested as you pretend to be.

    Again: as recently as January 10, he brought up the rope-tree deal, something I had apologized for more than a year before. It is a little galling to be the only one who ever apologizes, the only one who ever tries to seek truces (only to see them broken immediately), and then be told it is MY responsibility to set this right.

    Take your “Jeff is at fault too” shtick over there and see how long you last.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  388. EricPWJohnson,

    I don’t see those comments by JD as threatening to you.

    I now understand what you meant with the references to Frisch. That is a complicated story but Dustin expressed the essence of it in the quote cited in the update. It is slightly more nuanced than that but he got the essence right. She sent me dozens or e-mails at my workplace, posted vile things about my parents, etc., and many of the e-mails she sent me were forwarded to Jeff by others who were also copied. I asked him not to publish those e-mails as it would inflame her further against me and he refused — taking the position that redacting my name would be enough. But redacting my name did not hide from HER the fact that he was publishing e-mails she had directed at ME, and sure enough, she was inflamed further and stalked me more. I resented being forced to deal with her in his manner.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  389. Pat,

    Yeah they were threats, of course they are harmless but he was offering to do it and quit insistant.

    Of course it unleashed some hilarity from friends and family (you have to know me to love me – well even that)

    For example:

    like – Eric, after a half hour of pummeling – those acne scars might not look so bad (I didnt have acne…)

    What is there left to damage

    Would it be considered littering

    and there were more…

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  390. PAt

    I will say this to your greatist enemies out here in the ‘sphere, you always extend your hand in truce and friendship

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  391. “Yeah they were threats, of course they are harmless but he was offering to do it and quit insistant.”

    EricPW – More back pedaling. The comments were a direct result of your intellectually dishonest form of debate on this blog. You claim rock throwing at BP agents should not have triggered the response it did. Somebody suggests you put yourself in the shoes of the BP agent, all of a sudden you whinge about it becoming a threat. You need to decide which side of the argument you want to take, rather than attempting to take all sides.

    It is just another example of your disingenuousness here, IMHO. I’ll continue to let others form their own opinions of your incessant whining.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  392. Daley,

    So in your opinion what was JD wanting to do then?

    The agents statement unfortunately did not seem to match some aspects of the video’s that surfaced later – as much as people spin this – he hasn’t been cleared after what 7 months?

    When an agent involved in a fatal shooting of a child, should we expect an honest/accurate statement?

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  393. “Take your “Jeff is at fault too” shtick over there and see how long you last.”

    Patterico, I haven’t waded through all the PW posts, but I don’t believe I have ever seen JG apologize clearly and unequivocally for things he has written—and I have seen you do that thing several times. If JG has apologized for maligning people or misrepresenting them, I would appreciate seeing that, so that I can be fair.

    I suspect your piece of advice to the poster is a good one. That is the only way people can evaluate the differences.

    But: Soros smiles about this kind of thing. Everyone’s mileage may vary.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  394. “So in your opinion what was JD wanting to do then?”

    EricPW – Was something unclear in my comment?

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  395. Daley

    so describe what JD was going to do?

    Physically

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  396. so describe what JD was going to do?

    Well, he wasn’t going to throw a rock at you. He was going to continue to point out that a rock was cause for a cop to defend himself. When someone says that a rock thrown from 30 feet away isn’t going to hurt anyone, an obvious retort is to put yourself in the shoes of the person getting hit by rocks and ask yourself if you really mean that.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  397. Similarly, we could ask JD to put himself in Scott’s shoes, when he pshaws the stuff Scott found outrageous.

    I respect his decision to not touch this issue, but if I were in Scott’s shoes, I’d be infuriated if someone pretended I was threatening their family. That kind of ‘I’m a victim’ crap crossed the line, even if you think ITG boasting is no big deal.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  398. Dustin,

    Thanks for trying to interpret what JD was doing, for justification reasons.

    However, regardless of his opinion, what was JD repeatedly offering to do

    physically

    I didnt say it wasnt going to hurt someone it didnt rise to the level of the response

    We will know in a few months

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  399. 370.Ahh here’s the quote:

    75.I threw in the low 80′s in high school. I would volunteer to be the hurler to test out that theory that EricPW floated.

    Comment by JD — 6/9/2010 @ 11:57 am

    You need to read the context

    http://patterico.com/2010/06/08/el-paso-border-patrol-agent-shoots-attacker/#comment-666323

    Comment by EricPWJohnson

    Don’t be so dismissive, Eric, those skills allowed him to become the best trainer in Illini basketball history. I’m sure kendal Gill could tell us that no one was able to wipe a sweat stain or wrap someone’s groin with nearly the love and affection of JD.

    he’s an authortarian piece of crap, who kowtows to whomever he believes is calling the shots and thinks selling basketball goals andinsurance makes one a Galtian superman. But I digress

    From an outsider’s point of view, as I have been at Protein Wisdom and here, there’s a huge difference between Pat and Jeff. Jeff is jerk, who revels in feelings of victimhood and his politics long ago lost touch with reality.

    Pat is a conservative. I so rarely agree with him, it’s amazing, yet he always people with respect (even when he’s not sure he respect the other person!) He also rarely threatens to beat someone up, as if he were a fourth grader.

    Eric and Scott, while often incorrect on politics, are at least decent judges of character.

    By the way, Dustin, good on you for your performance here.

    Lastly, to the person who commented that Stacy McCain is not a racist. Pat may think not, but McCain is George Wallace and Roger Taney’s illegtimate off-spring. Right wingers should stay as far away from that neo-Confederate race pimp as possible, IMHO.

    timb (449046)

  400. “We will know in a few months”

    EricPW – At the time of the incident your ability to make evidence free assertions with certainty was what was in question, not the outcome of a trial or disciplinary proceeding. The hallmark of your intellectually dishonest commenting style is to make assertions unsupported by facts or evidence and then demand proof or facts when questioned on your assertions by others. It is the exact same pattern pointed out in the recent post here about Andrew Sullivan. You exhibit blatant double standards and hypocrisy as a matter of course. People have come to expect it from you due to your behavior over time. You’ve earned the credibility you have. Exult in it.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  401. Timb

    JD is a great American, a good man, who loves his country and has gone to great great lengths to defend this BP agent. He is a better man than I. So is Daley, Dustin and many others who waded in to defend this agent in his greatest time of need.
    You missed the character issue, my point is that JD even can be put in a situation where I think things were said that perhaps (I’m not saying he was mistaken – or I was right) could have been expressed differently. JD is a man of character an honor – don’t forget that.

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  402. I didnt say it wasnt going to hurt someone it didnt rise to the level of the response

    Yeah, that’s right. I remember better. Nonetheless, that’s why JD wanted you to put yourself in the shoes of someone who could have been killed by rocks being thrown.

    We all can set the line where we think rhetoric has gone too far. I honestly think JD was mocking your claims that the rocks didn’t warrant the self defense shooting. It was more of a sarcastic ‘would you volunteer to take that hit?’ mockery, than a ‘I am going to hit you and show you how wrong you are about rocks’.

    Anyway, JD can be rough when he disagrees. He’s been that way with me, and it has ticked me off before. But we’ve both been around long enough to understand his shtick is grandiose mockery. You are entitled to participate without feeling like people want to harm you, EPWJ, and honestly I think JD agrees with that, even if his rhetoric talked about how you would surely agree with the officer’s urge to live if you were in his shoes.

    Remember, that thread got off to a bad start very early, and there was an impression people were being dishonest about video they saw (the version implicating the officer never did appear).

    Thanks for remembering this story. DRJ covered border security better than anyone, and I wonder if there’s a blog dedicated to it.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  403. Dustin,

    I’m not implying that I felt threatened by JD – I dont, its a genetic defect on my part.

    Like I said he’s a good guy. However his meaning was clear for all that.

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  404. Well, it sucks that we’re still losing good folks over this stuff, EPWJ.

    You and I share a tendency to be provoked. But it’s great that you recognize people you disagree with very strongly are still good people.

    There’s nowhere near enough of that sentiment.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  405. Dustin,

    Here is my point on the entire incident. If we start on a path of shooting children, we will turn public sentiment away from the closed border and more towards further restrictions on the BP agents.

    I think when we have a policy of not returning gunfire, not shooting when Mexicans point weapons at our agents, but rock throwing is – leaves the security of the border and the country in jeopardy.

    You can just imagine where a lawyer or legislator can make an real solid issue out of these “policies” which BTW the Patrol does not have the legislative authority to make.

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  406. If we start on a path of shooting children, we will turn public sentiment away from the closed border and more towards further restrictions on the BP agents.

    Granted, we shouldn’t have ‘shoot kids’ as a policy stance. However, if we were to have a policy of not shooting kids, guess what those thugs on the border will do? they will use child soldiers.

    The whole situation sucks, and my view is that we shouldn’t play games. Mexico isn’t playing games with her southern border either. We have plenty of rationale to militarize flare up points. We have plenty of experience controlling huge borders. In Iraq, we have one installation that controls 200 miles of border. 10 of those, with QRF drones, and deployments to flare up points, and we will see an increase in violence in the short term, and a decrease in violence over the long term.

    Anyway, that’s neither here nor there, IMO. JD and I have a different POV than you on this issue, and that’s why we had a thread to argue about it. I don’t think any of us sincerely wished to intimidate anyone else about it.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  407. Patterico – I did point out in my post over there that it may have been a wrong word (the implication that it might have been a spam filter) and posted when the post appeared here to correct that.

    You’re only reading what you want to see – criticism of you. I also told Jeff he wasn’t letting it go like he should, but you only see criticism of you.

    Sure, I posted more words here, I didn’t want to just copy it over there and they were reading over here anyway.

    Thanks for just trying to turn me into some dishonest caricature for your gallery.

    Dustin:

    Jeff overreacts. It’s his nature. Stop poking him with a stick and he’ll stop overreacting. That argument started before the “rope tree” comment, even on that thread, and didn’t stop afterward.

    You think Jeff is in the wrong, he things you’re in the wrong. You both post lots of links to things you think the other side did wrong. Have you looked at his? It ain’t all puppies and flowers. Some of it is prodding from Pat, some of it is just Jeff overreacting.

    And guess what, Pat’s posts about Jeff? Some of that is actual bad behavior by Jeff, and some of it is just Pat poking Jeff with a stick to see him dance. Because Jeff will dance, no doubt about that.

    I am certainly not going to dig through the last year’s archives on both sites to list everybody’s claimed offenses and my judgment of which are valid or not, I have a freakin’ life (if not much of one).

    But if y’all just keep on claiming to be the aggrieved party and no one is gonna take it lying down, everybody’s gonna be dead of old age before the argument ends.

    It’s up to you.

    In summary, I think Patterico and JeffG present themselves very differently, but they both claim a long list of offenses (some of which are valid) and neither one is going to let it go. Jeff is more of a “wild man” and overreacts to things, which doesn’t help. Patterico likes to be subtle (and sarcastic) and that sets Jeff off as sure as lighting a fuse.

    If you think someone is irrational, you avoid them. In real life. On the internet, you make a career of it. Y’all say that about Jeff, but keep going back. Jeff says that about you, and keeps coming back.

    Y’all both have a list of more than a year’s worth of offenses, whether it’s actual or perceived insult, accusations of dishonesty, or real or perceived manipulation attemtps (including google-bombing, which Jeff claims was some sort of point about RS Mccain and Pat claims was a threat to his job, and both sides repeatedly bringing the issue back up)…

    You know what? I think I’m wasting my time. Enjoy your blog war. I’ll be at Ace’s.

    Merovign (f827eb)

  408. wow, holy crap we have over 400 comments here. lol

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  409. Sorry, typical of me to forget to say one thing after all those blah blahs…

    Dustin, if I line up everyone’s offenses and scored them on their offenseyness and you “won,” would Pat and Jeff stop poking each other with sticks to get a reaction?

    That’s my point. I also posted my above reply over at Jeff’s place, but I’m just venting, I don’t think anyone’s going to change. I used to really like both places, but I also must emphasize that Chuckles is in a class of his own – someone said y’all were the same above and I think as bad as Pat and Jeff are to each other I don’t think either one can hold a candle to Chuckles.

    Merovign (f827eb)

  410. Man… you spend a couple of days away from the computer, and all hell breaks loose. No matter – for all the advice that this whole dispute should just be ignored, I say this: if you leave your dirty laundry in the hamper long enough, it’s going to stink something awful. Gotta air that sh*t out. Dustin’s done a pretty good fisking of things, I think – kudos.

    To draw any sort of parallel between Patterico and Goldstein is completely disingenuous. The one mistake Pat made, in my opinion – identifying Goldstein’s moronic rope+tree remark as a genuine threat – was quickly recognized, rescinded, and apologized for by Pat himself (as he’s pointed out numerous times).

    Goldstein tried to f*ck with Patterico’s career with the anti-Semitism post, satire or not – probably in a fit of petulance, offended that Pat scorned him for his recurrent and insistent blegs. Goldstein threatened Scott Jacobs – to try to pass that threat off as a joke is laughable – and then lied about his motivations in doing so (which is the most despicable and cowardly thing of all, trying to paint Scott, who presumed only to defend himself, as one who threatened women and children – using his own family as a shield from guilt). He can’t even apologize like a man, as we see in #274.

    I didn’t know that he did that, Scott – as you said, you only shared it with a few people. But that makes your response all the more understandable, in response to such a despicable slander – “scurrilous”, as Patterico said.

    It would be interesting to see Goldstein back up his claim that “most of” the “dribbling sophists” at this site have “gone after” his family – maybe the same way Scott did, right, Jeff? (i.e. by doing nothing of the kind?) Delusional bastard… who here has done anything of the kind?

    Scott has no right to ask JD to apologize for anything Goldstein did, but I think he has every right to ask JD to admit that what Goldstein did was wrong – because it’s a really, really easy question.

    That said, Machinist is right to object to EricPWJohnson’s bizarre claim that JD’s rhetorical rock-throwing invitation was a threat – where the hell did that come from? That comment is not remotely threatening, and I resent the fact that EPJW is trying to hijack anger towards Goldstein for his own ends. Comment #406 strikes me as bizarre, too.

    Patterico has objected to slander against himself (from JG), the siccing of a psychopath (against him, by JG), slander and threats against his commenters (from JG), the frequent unannounced modification of his commenter’s comments (by JG), and JG’s stunning hypocrisy and whining throughout. He has not physically threatened anyone, slandered anyone, modified anyone’s comments, or sicced any psychopaths on anyone. That puts him firmly in the right, in my mind.

    So, this may just boil down to tribalism, but if the only alternative to tribalism is tolerance for despicable behavior, I’ll take tribalism every f*cking time. You gotta back up your people, and you gotta know who your people are. So in that sense, it’s a healthy exercise anyway.

    Leviticus (e87aad)

  411. I don’t think either one can hold a candle to Chuckles.

    Agreed.

    Anyway, as far as I can tell, you’re just asking for a reasonable end to a pointless feud. I believe your equivalence is based on a lack of awareness of the full problem, which is due to your lack of patience for an issue you don’t enjoy digging into. That’s completely understandable, and I also understand why you don’t much care about my response that it’s not so equivalent. To you, that comes across as yet another step in the pointless stick poking.

    anyway, I do want to add that my comments fail to appear for a while, on a daily basis, and the filter is not being used to hide critical views.

    That you don’t want to dig into the matter enough to realize that Patterico’s playing in good faith, and nowhere near as nasty as JeffG has been, is understandable. But you are definitely wrong to claim Patterico’s record is similar to Jeff’s. After all, the mistake you informed him off, he already informed us off years ago when he corrected and apologized in good faith. It’s nothing like the suggestions someone’s antisemitic, or threatened Jeff’s family, which are totally in bad faith, and just plain nasty.

    I hope you get exactly what you’re calling for, in hoping this goes away, but would you take this lying down? Honestly, imagine I knew your read name, and on the basis of you making an argument I find disingenuous (such as the false equivalence), I google bomb your name and job with ‘satire’ about you being antisemitic.

    Would you take that lying down? In many ways, the internet would be a much better thing if people managed to do that, but they can’t, because folks like you fall for the lies. I see it in the way you sincerely believe Patterico is somehow an awful guy, just rolling in the mud, the same as Jeff. That right there is basically the only reason Patterico is participating in this anymore.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  412. Leviticus, thanks.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  413. Dustin

    JD and I have been blogging together since 2006

    We have had some conversations, none unpleasant.

    We used to take on Andy and jandrew and that crazy woman that kept harassing me and Kathleen in person stalking us and calling Kat “hostess”

    This person made Frisch look like a choir girl

    Jill, Ed T, the bigolddog, blake, Dave in Texas, Eric Erickson before he was Red State, GarryK the purple avenger which I allways wondered was Happyfeet MarkD, good times, good times

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  414. Thanks for that comment, Leviticus.

    You gotta back up your people, and you gotta know who your people are.

    My only issue is that it took this long.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  415. Leviticus,

    JD threatened me, thats indisputable, trying to say I’m Hijacking anger – WTF – JD can’t threaten me in reality, but he did

    I dont change a single comment in 406 and restate it here JD is a good person nothing changes that

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  416. “JD threatened me, thats indisputable,…”
    Comment by EricPWJohnson — 1/26/2011 @ 12:07 pm

    I dispute it. That is a lie.

    Machinist (74634b)

  417. “For Jeff, the argument can’t be let go because the core of the dispute is the core of his philosophy. Pat can’t let it go because, well, he’s a lawyer.” — Merovign the Disinterested.

    He has no choice, because of principles! Me, I do it because I’m one of those asshole lawyers. But you’re not taking sides!

    You’re just another Goldstein Koolaid drinker trying to pretend like you’re some neutral arbiter. I called you out on it. If that means you’re going to go to Ace’s and not return, you won’t be missed.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  418. For those who want to pretend that Jeff and Patterico are equivalents, mirror or whatever horse shit semantics you are using, I simply repeat:

    Integrity, its not that hard.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  419. I’d like this to be the last thing I say about this, but I can’t make that promise because then it’s an invitation for someone to come in and feel like they can tell another lie without rebuttal.

    I do think there are differences in our behavior. I have already detailed that.

    That said: no, I don’t think I am perfect. No, I don’t think my behavior vis a vis Goldstein has at all times been what I wish it had been.

    I do seem to be the only one willing to acknowledge that about myself, and the only one who has tried to stop all of this. Many times.

    The fact that I remained completely silent about the insane linking I showed you in this post, for more than a year, should be evidence that I tried to let this go. I knew about it, the whole time. But I felt as if every piece of evidence I provided was falling on deaf ears, as everyone adopted the “a pox on both your houses” attitude that is so easy and convenient to hold, when it’s not YOUR reputation at stake. And so I gave up trying to defend myself.

    I still pretty much do. But when something like this Charles Johnson deal happens, on the heels of people like Stacy McCain calling on ME to UNILATERALLY apologize and “end” the feud — as if I can do that by myself, and as if I am the only person at fault — it becomes a bit difficult to take.

    OK, hopefully that is all that needs to be said.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  420. Patterico,

    I am one who has used that line “a pox on both your houses” in the past (not here or there), not knowing about the Google BS and other things that went on behind the scenes and over there. This was long ago and what I’ve learned and what I’ve seen since then have been sadly revealing.

    I apologize to you for doing so. As much as I hate this business, I was wrong.

    Machinist (74634b)

  421. EricPWJohnson ,

    The quotes by JD that you yourself have posted dispute your claim. You would need an OJ jury to sell them.

    Machinist (74634b)

  422. “My only issue is that it took this long.”

    - Scott Jacobs

    You’ve been supported by many of us ever since you left. You should have no issue in that department.

    “JD threatened me, thats indisputable, trying to say I’m Hijacking anger – WTF – JD can’t threaten me in reality, but he did.”

    - EricPWJohnson

    No he didn’t. He asked you a rhetorical question as a means of drawing attention to the flippancy of your argument.

    Leviticus (f7799f)

  423. Leviticus and Machinist: thank you for your comments. Thank you to Dustin as always for all of his.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  424. What began as a cool thread, hippy-punching that thin-skinned loser Charles Johnson, has degenerated into reductio ad adsurdum, with various grown men trying to decide if they’ve been threatened or not while sitting warm in their homes in front of glowing monitors and tap-tapping on well-worn keyboards. Un-freaking-believable. The only death they’re threatened with is from too much sedentary living because of their sitting for far too long on their ever-fattening arses.

    Patterico, you re-started this one, mentioning a “certain classical liberal site”. Hahahahahahahahahahahaha, indeed.

    Don’t you wish you hadn’t?

    Johnathan Hawksnest (033197)

  425. Patterico – I don’t think you could have sold any Mensa memberships to the visitors on this thread.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  426. I’m fine with it, Johnathan. Is there a problem with telling the truth?

    Patterico (c218bd)

  427. Only when it is “An Unpleasant Truth”, Pat.

    Al Gore (fb8750)

  428. If I thought Tbogg would fly off the handle if I named him in this post, should I omit him? Same for Sadly No? Same for Kimberlin? Etc.

    The only person who deserves to have me refrain from truthfully mentioning their past misdeeds in an appropriate context is someone who has apologized for those misdeeds. I do not give Jeff Goldstein the power to determine what I say about him, by his promising to fly into a dishonest rage against me if I do — even as he reserves the privilege to drag out ancient history that I HAVE apologized for.

    Good treatment is earned through good behavior, not bad and dishonest behavior.

    Patterico (d519ff)

  429. Leviticus,

    look I dont care if you didn’t like the argument, which is cearly coloring your judgement, I also defended JD instantly when someone came in to pile on, so your theory of hijacking anger was based upon two things, that I had a motive and that people are too stupid to think for themselves

    neither of which are correct

    In 2003 a federal judge awarded 350,000 citing POST guidelines that rocks are not fatal in simple rock throwing. This was in the case of an adult.

    The rock throwing is awful, the jews have been debating it for years, and they don’t shoot rock throwers.

    EricPWJohnson (13b18d)

  430. There’s a huge differential between Jeff G and the others you list (those are obviously much closer to the cretinous Charles Johnson). That you can’t recognize the difference is part of your problem. You commit the fallacy of false analogy, after committing the fallacy of misinterpreting evidence (the so-called death threat(s)). You committed the fallacy of tautology, by over and over repeating the premise that Jeff G is somehow your enemy. You created an enemy when you should have backed off, ‘cooled your Sputnik’, so to speak.

    Finally, with “is there a problem with telling the truth?” you commit the fallacy of false dilemma. There’s were other choices than becoming the All-Knowing Self-Righteous Purveyor of Truth, Justice, and the Internet Way; being the only self-appointed White Knight left in the blogosphere.

    Ask yourself, how would Glenn Reynolds have handled this?

    Jonathan Hawkesnest (033197)

  431. Well, Professor Reynolds doesn’t allow comments. The reason is pretty clear.

    Simon Jester (540873)

  432. (the so-called death threat(s))

    F**k you, you ignorant little s**t.

    From JeffyG’s own comment: “If he didn’t, well, then I told him I’d beat his ass if I met him without his having first gone after my family. Making him the only one. The exception, not the rule.”

    That is, in any court, an admission of a threat. That he failed to intimidate or frighten me does not change the fact that he threatened me. That he would then go on to falsely claim he only threatened those who went after his family, implying that *I* had gone after his family, was false. He admits to having made the accusation, though he now at the very least says he doesn’t REMEMBER me doing so (the reason, btw, that he can’t remember is because I did not, would not, and will not).

    So if the fallacy at the foundation of your chain (that of misinterpreting evidence) is not, in fact, misinterpretation, then what does it do to the rest of your “belief”?

    BTW, how are things at PW? when you go back to your home there, do say hi for me.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  433. Hawkesnest: I have never heard of you before and assume you have the same lack of familiarity with the facts shared by most who take up for Goldstein

    You try having a guy distort your views and lie about you for two years and see how you like it.

    If I were Glenn Reynolds I would do what he does with Sullivan and people like him: link posts by others who slam him effectively.

    If you’re going to play Gandhi of the Internet, show us you’re willing to go all in. Please tell us your employer’s name, city, and contact info. Or STFU.

    Patterico (d519ff)

  434. Put simply, Hawkesnest, you commit the fallacy of being a sanctimonious prick who doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

    Patterico (d519ff)

  435. Like that line from Red October, ‘this will get out of control, and we’ll be lucky to get out of this alive’ this thing has gotten more tangled that the Gavrilo Princip shooting. This began with Patterico
    taking a shot at McCain, Goldstein, rebutted, with
    an equally ludicrous premise, and it was off to the races, it’s not unlike the whole fracked deal between you, Riehl and Levin, last summer and fall.

    orson (6075d0)

  436. orson/narciso:

    Pick one name and stick with it.

    You also don’t know what you’re talking about. Goldstein started this virtually the day Obama was elected. The history started way before your little revisionist story.

    Patterico (d519ff)

  437. And the reason he started it was petty and personal: Karl left him and later started blogging here, and Jeff resented me and blamed me for it.

    Patterico (d519ff)

  438. Sorry, that was in response to “Mork” yes there was friction between both of you, before, but clearly everything escalated after the McCain kerfluffle. Goldstein is not Kimberlin or Frisch, or Johnson, for that matter. Now we know the Times (both of them,) lie with relish (and a little mustard) an example here,

    http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/marxist-barbara-ehrenreich-exploits.html

    One can’t scarcely believe that there are advocates for the kind of violence that scarred
    Athens this previous spring, and want to bring it
    here,

    orson (6075d0)

  439. Put simply, Hawkesnest, you commit the fallacy of being a sanctimonious prick who doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

    I recommend my example – I try to be a sanctimonious prick who knows what he’s talking about.

    Its more fun.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  440. Goldstein is not Kimberlin or Frisch, or Johnson, for that matter.

    Of course he is not Kimberlin or Frisch, orson/narciso. But if he lied about you as he has about me, you would think he is Johnson.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  441. As for McCain, yes, things rekindled when Mr. Intentionalist took a post where I said I wasn’t calling McCain a racist and said I was calling McCain a racist.

    Which is one of maybe 1000 times he has twisted my words beyond recognition.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  442. Jonathan Hawkesnest – Ask yourself, would Glenn Reynolds have used the words fallacy or false five times in such a short comment. It sounds like the work of a sedentary individual who thinks very highly of himself.

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  443. “Goldstein is not Kimberlin or Frisch, or Johnson, for that matter.”

    ian – Who is he this week?

    Do we win prizes if we guess correctly?

    daleyrocks (e7bc4f)

  444. I wasn’t really kidding about the Admiral Painter quote, (Fred Thompson’s character)both sides are dug in like the battle of the Somme, what more is their to be said.

    narciso (6075d0)

  445. This caught my eye. Is there a virtual equivalent? Maybe if the guy had a blog, he wouldn’t be facing misdemeanor charges…

    Angeleno (91c113)

  446. I wasn’t really kidding about the Admiral Painter quote, (Fred Thompson’s character)both sides are dug in like the battle of the Somme, what more is their to be said.

    That’s simply not true. I have taken every opportunity to end this and still would like to. But not on the terms where I have to unilaterally apologize and unilaterally stand down.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  447. woman who loves slander and gossip goes to the penalty box (“Confessional”) seeking absolution. For penance, the priest gives her the task of buying a chicken, walking through town, plucking feathers and dropping them as she walks. She does this. Returning to the priest, he then instructs her to go collect the feathers. “Father,” she sez, “the townspeople think I am crazy for plucking the chicken as I walked through the town… and anyway, it will be impossible for me to collect all of the feathers. I know not where they have been blown or where they are… How can I possibly retrieve them?” The priest takes a deep breath, sighs, and says, “You are correct.” This is what slander is. Efforts to obscure the truth are nothing short of violence to our neighbors. Purposefully bending the truth is the raping of reason.

    enoch_root (daed3a)

  448. That’s simply not true. I have taken every opportunity to end this and still would like to. But not on the terms where I have to unilaterally apologize and unilaterally stand down.

    You’re not that big a man, obviously.

    Every chance you get, you feed this beast. This post for example, where you started this by citing a certain ‘classical liberal blog’ when you had no real reason to cite that blog; that cite turns out to be just another spark keeping this mess alive. Your only motive for doing so must be your own personal ‘assuage my poor aching butthurt!’ reasons. So, you crow and shout to the world “I am INVINCIBLE!”.

    Yes, you are, Boris Grishenko.

    Oh, and Scott? When will you ever become a man?

    Jonathan Hawkesnest (03f606)

  449. Hey, guys! What’s up?

    …….

    …….

    Anyone seen happyfeets turtle?

    Dan Collins (0c4c92)

  450. Comment by Jonathan Hawkesnest — 1/28/2011 @ 5:49 am

    I dunno. When is your mom free? I understand that she has the best rates…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  451. That last one had to hurt

    EricPWJohnson (601e3b)

  452. Anyone seen happyfeets turtle?

    Nope. Not seen JD post a comment since Tuesday night…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  453. Hey folks, anyone awake? I see from the posts that I have lots of 4 letter fans; mostly concerned about my alleged shilling for LGF, and not much else.

    I also notice, without reading everything, that our public DA host hasn’t had anything to say about about many of his foul mouth supporters.

    Who knows, maybe the local papers will eventually notice where his support base lies?

    Elind (9e06ea)

  454. Elind doubles down on the impotence

    SPQR (26be8b)

  455. Elind, one writer from one of the local papers reads and comments here regularly. Our gracious host has written an Op Ed in the other. You’re an idiot (5 letters!)

    carlitos (a3d259)

  456. Thank you for the quick comments. I’m glad some were in the KISS principle, although I expect no less.

    Does anyone actually wish to discuss anything of substance?

    Elind (9e06ea)

  457. Does anyone actually wish to discuss anything of substance?

    Most certainly.

    However, I’m afraid I would have to ask you to possess substance first.

    I’ve little interest engaging in debate with some dunder-headed cocktard who thinks people who – GASP – don’t like the idea of being forced to buy something means they want people to “die in the street”.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  458. We are having this same discussion in another thread, but without your 6 pack attempts at insults, more or less.

    If you don’t want to die in the streets and can’t help yourself, but could have if you have tried, that means it is up to someone else to do something. Right?

    So, you think it is everyone else’s constitutional obligation to fork out for those who don’t think they have any obligations?

    Help me out here (no * if you can help yourself, please)

    Elind (9e06ea)

  459. So, you think it is everyone else’s constitutional obligation to fork out for those who don’t think they have any obligations?

    No, I do not.

    Which is why I do not like ObamaCare.

    The current system works. I have listed TWICE things that could be done to reduce cost. Things that were not done in the bill that passed Congress. There is nothing about ObamaCare that would actually reduce costs.

    Instead, it transferred huge swaths of power to the hands of the Federal Government.

    I don’t think you know this, but Medicare and Medicaid have higher rates of denied care and canceled coverage than private insurance. They also pay less (often less than things cost), so it is ONLY with private insurance that hospitals can afford to even treat the people with Medi-coverage.

    Punishing private insurance is not the answer. Private insurance is the CURE.

    Government has never – not once – done something with public funds at or under budget.

    Here’s another thing – Medicare and Medicaid are not, in fact, cheaper to run.

    The claim was made that Private Insurance spends less of every dollar on “treatment”. While that is TECHNICALLY true, it is not ACTUALLY true.

    The reason it is true is because the books don’t lie. The way the books are kept on the Federal level, it is true. The hidden lie is that a LOT of the administrative costs are counted on a different set of books. They hide those costs that SHOULD be included.

    Ok, it isn’t fair to say “hides”, but it is the same trick with the CBO – the rules allow for accounting tricks to make things appear to cost less than they actually are.

    The bill did nothing to fix the problems, added MORE problems, and deigned to force me – under penalty of law – to buy something I do not wish to buy. Am I playing a risky game? Yes I am. But I have CHOSEN to play the odds. To use the government to demand I pay money I do not wish to spend is disgusting.

    And to support that attempt is equally disgusting.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 1.0796 secs.