Comments on: Is Neal Rauhauser the One Who Wrote the Anonymous Claim that Rove’s ORCA System Was Hacked?

By: Milhouse

Milhouse — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 02:11:07 +0000

Some time about 1997 I came up with this analogy: Supposing the legal BAC level is 0.1, and Clinton were caught driving with 0.12, his defense would be that the limit should be 0.05, and by that standard lots of people drive while over it, so he's really no worse than them. Now he may be right that the current standard is too lax, and should be tightened. But he is guilty under the current too-lax standard, while the people he's trying to use as "guilt shields" are obeying the law as it currently exists. Perhaps if the law were tightened they'd adjust their behaviour accordingly, or perhaps they wouldn't and then they'd be criminals, but you're a criminal now, not in some hypothetical universe.

By: Milhouse

Milhouse — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 20:26:56 +0000

Did I ever explain about how they accuse others of what they are doing themselves?

Oh, that's long been obvious. In many cases, they actually believe that Rs are doing the same as them. This is known as the "everybody does it" defense. I noticed it very strongly during the Clinton administration.

By: Patterico

Patterico — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 20:22:04 +0000

No, the mythology is that they somehow prevented Karl Rove from stealing the election (again).

Watch to see if Neal collects a “reward” from Velvet Revolution. Or if it goes to some anonymous person who could be Neal.

It’s good to give rewards to your associates.

I have been thinking more and more about how these people try to portray conservatives as grifters. Did I ever explain about how they accuse others of what they are doing themselves?

By: Milhouse

Milhouse — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 19:24:39 +0000

Do I understand this correctly? BK offered a reward for proof of Republicans tampering with voting machines, and somebody is claiming this reward on the basis that he tampered with the Republicans’ campaign software?! Even if this weren’t NR, even if it were a genuine group and its claim were genuine, how would that qualify for the reward? Rather than providing proof of R crimes, this “group” is admitting crimes of its own, D crimes! The exact opposite of the myth BK wants people to believe.

By: Saturnian

Saturnian — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 18:08:31 +0000

They hold the grudge for your reporting. Strike “grudge match” then. It is something you knew about, in detail, when the story seemed, here, to be about something else altogether.

Large, epic swaths of the supposed Weinergate saga/backstory were created entirely in pursuit of this grudge by others wrongfully targeting you and your allies.

That wasn’t evident to those PP/LS/Ace, etc. loyal readers who didn’t understand the scope this long-term “left v. right” dispute until months later.

Many/most of the commenters here back in June/July 2011 were in earnest trying to figure out what was going on in relation to the juicy Weiner story that was exploding in the MSM, on Red Eye nightly, etc. They didn’t realize that the areas covered in such depth here were just fiction – not to get Weiner – but to get “team Breitbart” (or whatever you want to call it). When NYT and others dropped the story like a hot potato it’s because they realized this – it had nothing to do with Weiner. And the commenters here, Lee, and many others mocked Jennifer Preston for it, because the readers didn’t know the whole story, the real reason behind the WeinerSocks fake scandal. Patterico wrote “Hi Neal” but many/most of the readers didn’t know what that meant for weeks or months. It meant that Pat had sort of figured it out, while others were still wallowing in who was trying to get Weiner – the false premise of the whole episode. The SWATting then soon followed, making Patterico even less able to share info (presumably) and the loquacious Lee to zip it (presumably) as readers were told that law enforcement was handling the whole matter now. Readers didn’t know about the horrible SWATtings (or what that even meant) and thought that “mum’s the word” was about the Alicia Pain & Jennifer George calls, which seemed like things that prolific bloggers wouldn’t clam up about just because the cops were involved. The SWATting makes the cone of silence make more sense in retrospect.

By: Patterico

Patterico — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 17:38:31 +0000

Their real goal is lefty notoriety leading (they hope) to $$$$$$. Aaron’s lawsuit may uncover whether that is working or whether it has backfired.

By: Patterico

Patterico — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 17:37:12 +0000

Labeling it a “grudge match” plays into their hands. I reported on Kimberlin and he targeted me as a result. How is that a “grudge match”? They attack everyone who ever reports on them to make the reporting appear personal. It works because people either don’t report, or if they do the lawyers take out the meaty stuff over fears of lawsuits. That does not make it a “grudge match.”

By: Saturnian

Saturnian — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 16:58:33 +0000

There were 3,000+ comments because many of the commenters at the time thought that there was a real story going on that had some relation to the actual Weinergate episode. It took quite a while for it to unravel enough so that people realized that it was really more about a pre-existing grudge match between the lefty cyberstalker assholes and their long-term targets (Patterico, Breitbart, Stranahan, and friends). A battle that is fought with some relish on both sides. It was also 3,000+ because Pat stopped posting new threads with open comments for a long time at some point, leaving the “monster” thread open for weeks on end as the “definitive” place to comment. I think that may have been right after the SWATting (which the readers didn’t know about for months later). He may have been advised to “say no more” as it was being investigated. (Notice I said “may have.”) I don’t really remember.

By: Dan Collins

Dan Collins — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 15:15:39 +0000

I see nothing but upside in Rauhauser keeping his little package tidy.

By: Pious Agnostic

Pious Agnostic — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 14:24:32 +0000

Seriously, only 20+ comments? The days of 3000+ comment threads behind us.

There were GIANTS in those days!