Patterico's Pontifications

2/13/2007

Full Screencaps of the Rewritten Liberal Avenger Comment, Together with An Explanation of Why It’s Not Even Close to Funny

Filed under: Blogging Matters,General,Scum — Patterico @ 6:35 pm



This is an update to my post this morning about the obscene doctoring of a conservative’s comment by someone with hosting privileges at the Malkin-hating “Liberal Avenger” blog. As you may recall, one of the hosts of that site altered a comment left by Patterico reader carlitos, so that it appeared to contain lurid descriptions of sex acts between carlitos and his sister. (More about her below.) Here is a sample quote from the comment, as rewritten by the person with hosting privileges at Liberal Avenger (content warning):

For example, when my sister and I were in Junior high school we used to experiment sexually – you know, the usual stuff that horny, young brothers and sisters do: rimming, finger-fucking, dry humping, etc. We practically spent the entire summer between 7th and 8th grade in bed – it was great.

Lovely.

I included a screenshot of the comment, as it had been deleted by the time I posted. Liberal Avenger this morning accused me of making up the screenshot:

Yeah, I’m not too concerned about carlitos suing me because of something Patterico made up.

L.A. was a scootch more careful on his own site, saying in a comment that, because I cropped it in Paint so that it wouldn’t blow everyone’s margins, “the content of that image belongs to Patterico – not me.”

If that makes any sense to you, you must be a rabid leftist.

In any event, I have full, uncropped screenshots in the extended entry of this post.

Incredibly, Liberal Avenger ends his comment with this:

I’m closing this thread to commenting. Patterico – shame on you!

Shame on me?

In one of Carlitos’s early e-mails to me, he shared a fact that reveals how hurtful the rewritten comment was:

My only sister died almost 9 years ago this April. I’d rather not discuss details, but she is no longer with us.

He has now authorized me to share that fact with you, and wrote about it in a comment to my earlier post.

Shame on me, Liberal Avenger??

In the extended entry I post links and screenshots of the rewritten comment, including one taken by carlitos, and two taken by me. I will post them in their entirety, so it may blow your margins, but that should be okay if they’re safely tucked away in the extended entry:

carlitos’s screencap is linked here. I went ahead and saved it to my own computer so I could post it here:

carlito-screencap.png

Here is a screencap that I personally took of the top of carlitos’s comment, to show it was his:

la1.JPG

And here is the screencap that I personally took of the bottom portion of the comment, showing the obscene portion of the disgusting and hurtful rewriting of carlitos’s comment by one of the hosts at Liberal Avenger:

la2.JPG

Liberal Avenger, an apology to carlitos is long overdue.

UPDATE: Tell Liberal Avenger what you think of this here — until he closes comments again, that is.

UPDATE x2: Dana notes that comment alterations at this site are not a new phenomenon. Which makes me wonder why Liberal Avenger would profess shock that it’s going on.

UPDATE x3: Now Liberal Avenger is backpedaling in the comments to the link given in UPDATE x1. He’s claiming that he was teasing me and not serious when he accused me of making up the screenshot. Whenever this guy gets caught saying anything indefensible, he pretends like it was a joke all along.

To paraphrase something he falsely said about me, this episode renders suspect everything he ever said, since what seemed seriously meant yesterday, will turn out tomorrow to have been a “joke.” Fine: all his accusations against Malkin throughout the years may now be safely treated as the joke that rational people already knew them to be.

128 Responses to “Full Screencaps of the Rewritten Liberal Avenger Comment, Together with An Explanation of Why It’s Not Even Close to Funny”

  1. And LA is still treating it like a joke.

    I saw that LA lurked around the previous thread and threw some predictably juvenile taunts into the mix.

    Liberal Avenger (and just what is it you’re “Avenging” – Losing a couple of elections?), if you are done skulking – come on in, join the discussion and defend your – um – “honor”.

    You’ve been accused of perfidious dishonesty on a Greenwaldian scale;
    yet your defense is “Patterico made [it] up.”?

    Not only that, but you accuse Patterico of editing others’ comments? Not “adding to” mind you, not “responding to” but out and out altering their arguments themselves?

    Is that really the defense you want to go with – “He’s a liar, and he
    does it too!”?

    Well, come to think of it, that’s what the Progressives have been
    consistently saying about the other side for so long now, I can understand
    that you’d not have a readily-deployable “Plan B”.

    Good luck, after many moons of engaging in asinine behavior online, of
    convincing people you’re not guilty of engaging in asinine behavior online; especially since your entire defense rests on a resounding “Nuh-UH” when presented with a screen cap of the incident.

    You’ve been accused by a credible blogger and a credible lawyer and you’ve essentially called him a liar. You can’t run away now and claim “joke” and expect any fair-minded person to ever take you seriously (if they ever did) again.

    Carlito, sorry about the loss of your sister – I’m sorry she’s not around to defend herself from the likes of this reprehensible “Liberal Avenger”, but you do her memory proud. God Bless you both.

    Abraxas (db3144)

  2. Liberal and Honor — the two do NOT go together.

    Bill M (afe2c3)

  3. Wow.

    I don’t think “liberals” do this. I think the word for people who do this is “assholes.”

    It would be crummy to respond, “What, Carlito, [fill in incest story here.]” But to make this stuff up, and clearly try to impute it to the actual Carlito…. it’s not pranky. It’s somewhere close to evil.

    See, I’ve seen parody on both sides. Iowahawk has his “found items” that are, um, parody. Liberals do parody, too, sometimes well. But this isn’t anything. This is just a – to put it very kindly -deeply misguided method of argument.

    So then the next step, if you screw up, is to do what Pat suggests – apologize for screwing up. How hard is that? Now that it’s clear the comment *was* there, just apologize for being jerks. And boot the dumbass who did this off for a while.

    Man, people are idiots.

    I think Carlitos’ particular situation with his sister – which we all feel for – doesn’t affect the analysis of what initially happened; I can’t imagine they knew, and I can’t imagine anyone would have done that if they knew. It does, however, affect the degree of need for an immediate and sincere retraction and apology now; that failure has no viable excuse.

    Finally, does anyone else find notable Carlitos’ retort on the site: “You guys are really unable to engage in debate.” Wow! Talk about measured and appropriate responses. Pretty impressive.

    –JRM

    JRM (355c21)

  4. It’s up to Carlitos how far he wants to take it. If they had done it to me, the substance of these posts would be forwarded to the U.S. Attorney in my district and to LA’s hosting service with a civil request for appropriate action.

    nk (54c569)

  5. Those responsible for this situation are beneath contempt.
    Whatever you need to do Pat, don’t do it gently.

    Another Drew (8018ee)

  6. I don’t think “liberals” do this. I think the word for people who do this is “assholes.”

    I’m not exactly sure where the difference is these days…

    The lefties spewing hate and bile over the death of the Republican Congressman’s passing are 100% on par. Those few sites and people from the left treating it with decency and respect are not the main-stream of ther party.

    The DNC wouldn’t know honor and decency, respect and virtue if it walked up and punched them in their naughty parts.

    Recently I followed a link from MM’s blog to send the DNC a thank you letter for the Imam. Thanking them for finally admitting their hate of America. Today I got e-mails about their contemptable resolution. I insulted them, and they added me to their mailing list…

    S’ok though… My Mit Romney e-mails still come in fine. They understand me. 🙂

    And Carlito, I’m very, very sorry about your sister.

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  7. ARGH! HAHAHAHAHAHA! Stop being such Christoretardinbredfaggots and go back to fucking your sisters.

    Sirkowski (28c050)

  8. Note well, folks, that major bloggers on the left actually voluntarily associate themselves with this crowd.

    Sadly, No!, TBogg, and the rest gladly link to Liberal Avenger and his incisive analysis of Malkin, Allah, and company.

    This post, and “sirkowski”‘s comment, demonstrate well what they have chosen to associate themselves with.

    Patterico (a8fa4a)

  9. Liberal Avenger’s blog is almost unreadable anymore. Anytime a person makes an argument they can’t debate, they resort to juvenile (or, in this case, disgusting) rewrites. How can he be proud of that mess?

    sharon (dfeb10)

  10. ARGH! HAHAHAHAHAHA! Stop being such Christoretardinbredfaggots and go back to fucking your sisters.

    Ignore it, you’ll be doing it a favor. It appears to beFrench Canadian, so it’s used to not mattering.

    It also references LA on it’s blogroll, promotes its “collaboration on the Liberal Avenger blog” and appears to advertise pedophilic cartoons on its website.

    What a perfect confluence of sewage.

    Abraxas (db3144)

  11. It also appears to have posting privileges on Liberal Avenger.

    How interesting.

    I’m developing a theory here . . .

    Patterico (a8fa4a)

  12. Geez. Good catch Patterico.

    It may have just outed itself.

    And I can’t get over what a foul little corner (NSFW!!!) of the web it inhabits.

    Abraxas (db3144)

  13. One could argue I’m a liberal nut, but the Liberal Avenger’s actions are disgusting and beyond anything a simple apology could correct.

    This sort of scumbag needs to go down in flames.

    David Markland (ddfe30)

  14. David,

    I’ve thought (and said) many bad things about you from reading some of your comments on here. At least for now, I take them all back 🙂

    Lord Nazh (d282eb)

  15. My comment left on LA’s site:

    LA, while I might be one of your resident conservative trolls, I think that you might, at least on occasion, listen to what I have to say.

    Did Carlito overreact to what could have been seen as a joke? Possibly, but that’s up to him. Did someone here alter one of his comments, without leaving a positive indication of doing so? Yup, sure did.

    And that was just plain wrong, whether it was intended as a joke or not: you don’t alter something someone else has written (save maybe to **** a profanity or fix a bad format).

    This is the point at which you say, “OK, it was meant as a joke, but we stepped way over the line this time, and we apologize.” That faces up to your rsponsibilities, and it ends the whole thing.

    Dana (556f76)

  16. Liberal Avenger is a coward. And a particularly amusing one.

    Nothing else to say.

    PP (c65bfa)

  17. And this was the response I got, though it was from Dobby, a semi-frequent commenter, and not LA:

    At which point you will be doing what Patterico and all the self-proclaimed “Christians” of his ilk never do — apologize. At which further point, the self-proclaimed “Christians” will do what — forgive you (as we forgive those who trespass against us?). Not on your life. They’ll rub it in your face until the end of time.

    Dana (556f76)

  18. Once you get past the insult the carlito its kind of funny, at least to me.

    I mean, this guy styles himself “Liberal Avenger”. He’s the caped crusader for liberals (in his mind anyway) – defending them (one presumes) from the dastardly conservative lies.

    There’s humor in that.

    Dwilkers (4f4ebf)

  19. You’d think they would calm down after winning the election. This is genuine pathology and little things, like being in the majority and able to put fantasies into action, doesn’t matter. I do have one small quibble. I know he calls himself (themselves) “Liberal” but that is not anything liberal. LIberal was once an honorable political label. They are leftist moonbats. Actually, I don’t even know if “left” describes it very well. It’s more incoherent than that.

    Mike K (416363)

  20. Basically, LA is telling us his site is a “joke site” (or at the very least, letting others treat it as one). Now, we know…it’s a joke…and he’s admitting as much.

    Jay (ec6ad0)

  21. WOW! You guys found secrets on the Internets? lol I mean, it’s not like the information about who I am and what I do for a living is spread all over the net, right? RIGHT? You guys are like real detectives, you should probably try finding some WMDs or something. You might come up with something else than PR0N!!!!!11111

    By the way, I was supposed to be banned a few months ago. Still waiting.

    [We can put your comments in moderation if you like. — P]

    Sirkowski (59d6cf)

  22. Starship Titus
    Also check out Sister Wulfia Focka on Slipshine.net, it’s good Catholic fun!

    [Links NSFW. — P]

    Sirkowski (59d6cf)

  23. Well, Sirk, our esteemed host has not actually determined which Liberal Avenger contributor with administrative access edited Carlito’s original comment. It could have been Gordo, it could have been Raul, it could have been SGO or TAS or the Ape or LA himself — or it could even have been you.

    Wanna ‘fess up? 🙂

    Dana (556f76)

  24. Just for the record, it really wasn’t the thing about my sister that set me off (though that didn’t help). It was the fact that someone would post something that sick writing as me, in a site where I was posting using that handle. As conservatives everywhere are googling “marcotte + godbag + hot sticky goo,” it should be apparent that someone shouldn’t want that sort of vile writing attributed to their nom du internets, even if it’s an anonymous handle like carlito(s). One day I may want to write a blog, volunteer for the (Chelsea) Clinton campaign, run for dogcatcher, etc. Wouldn’t want that sort of smut haunting me.

    carlito (2d2b08)

  25. And the funniest part? Sirkowski probably thinks he’s being rational and propper…

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  26. carlito, thanks for making your concerns explicit (8:48am). Reflecting on where Google et al will be in five years is enough to give me the willies at times. Certainly enough to restrain whatever impulses I might have to write sleaze. “Daddy, why did you write that back in 200*?” is a question I want to be able to answer, rather than skulking away from my own family.

    You entered into a good-faith public policy debate on a hot-button topic, with people who vehemently disagree with you. (I haven’t read enough to know where you stand, but that doesn’t matter here.) The hosts of the liberalavenger.com site abused your trust in a despicable fashion. They really poisoned the well–how can anybody know that what is under their name (or pseudonym) is what s/he originally wrote? And what’s the redress? (None.)

    It’s too bad. For all I know, some of Liberal Avenger’s cohort might be intelligent and well-read. Based on their performance in this instance, they’ve lost all presumption to decency. Internet sewage as a proud personal choice.

    AMac (c822c9)

  27. Christians love anal rape

    Docter Evil (a1d6c2)

  28. What does “NSFW” mean?

    Leviticus (68eff1)

  29. not safe for work

    G (722480)

  30. Ah ha. Muchas gracias.

    Leviticus (68eff1)

  31. Yes Dr Evil… We certainly do…

    We also love being able to spell simple words, such as “doctor”…

    Have a nice day!

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  32. Its too bad. For all I know, some of Liberal Avengers cohort might be intelligent and well-read. Based on their performance in this instance, theyve lost all presumption to decency. Internet sewage as a proud personal choice.

    Comment by AMac 2/14/2007 @ 9:50 am

    Actually some of them are, whether you agree with them or not. gordo had a well-written post defending William Arkin, which was linked by salon. Several posters and commenters have good arguments about global warming, abortion, you name it. But in-between, you get name-calling and weirdness. It’s an interesting experiment – a group blog with long-form essays, snarky one-liners, and the literary equivalent of monkeys throwing poo. That this stuff exists, on the lefty side of blog-world, one or two clicks away from newsweek / msnbc, only gets noticed when the bloggers get hired by Presidential candidates, I guess.

    [My memory is that gordo is pretty reasonable. — P]

    carlito (2d2b08)

  33. Check out Sirkowski Watch. He’s the worst of the Liberal Avenger posters.

    Sirkowski Watch (c0e540)

  34. Thanks for the link and the qualified endorsement, carlito. I’ll look.

    But after your experience, I’d rather hire strippers* than join their conversation.

    * Duke lacrosse rape hoax reference

    AMac (c822c9)

  35. Wow, you lot need a good butt kicking, life is about starting in the pitstop and than ripping up the roads and crashing in the grave in a unidentable object saying ‘What a ride, whens the next one?’

    Say hi to the higher people for me would ya?

    XS (ad4848)

  36. And the funniest part? Sirkowski probably thinks he’s being rational and propper…

    Why would I try to be rational with you guys? Seriously, get over yourselves. Call the Internet police to send a waaaaaahmbulance cuz it’s serious business!

    Dana says:
    or it could even have been you.

    It can’t be me, but try to guess why.

    someguy says:
    Certainly enough to restrain whatever impulses I might have to write sleaze. “Daddy, why did you write that back in 200*?” is a question I want to be able to answer, rather than skulking away from my own family.

    Ok, maybe you guys don’t get it so let me set the sarcasm swith to off for an instant. As far as cartoon porn goes, I’m almost a household name and I’ve talked many times about my job on the Liberal Avenger blog. All my family knows about, no problem there, to the contrary. I’ve even been hired a couple of times to do school books illustrations, no problem there either, lol.

    Jeez, in what sad puritan world do you guys live? You guys are not gonna pull off a Ted Haggard and start masturbating on my pictures in secret, right? I’d feel real dirty…

    not! lol

    I thought conservatives were man’s mans. Not little princesses who tie their panties in a knot like Catholic school girls at the sight of pornography. Oh no! A facial cumshot! Eeeew! Like, totally gross, ‘am gonna tell Jesus!

    What does “NSFW” mean?

    It’s my middle name.

    Sirkowski (59d6cf)

  37. Oooh, rebels! Teenagers actin’ out!

    Kewl.

    AMac (c822c9)

  38. What? you typed something? sorry, was to busy playing with myself and on computers games,

    XS (ad4848)

  39. So then, my dear rightwing-wingnuts…

    Regarding Sirkowski…

    You finally find a liberal that isn’t afraid to punch below the belt…

    One that has gotten fed-up with you fundamentalist creatures sufficently that he’s occasionally willing to set aside intellectual-discourse and reasoned-argument opting instead for throwing the occasional ball of mud in your direction so as to maybe muffle the smell of your vomit inducing beliefs…

    And so, when you realize you can’t take the heat… You try to call him on not using “rational discourse”…? More to the point… You try to use him as being an example of liberals AT LARGE as being the types to throw mud and resort to namecalling…?

    You guys are so fucking pathetic. For years you’ve made paper-thin campaign rhetoric and smear-tactics your bread&butter. Where do I start…? Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Tom DeLay, the Swift Boat pukes, or the mere insinuation that there’s something wrong with being a West Coast Liberal a la Nancy Pelosi?

    And now, when you’re on the receiving end… You start whining that it isn’t “rational.” Somehow, I don’t feel sorry for you. Liberals offer plenty of rational and reasoned sentiment. It’s just that since your positions are messed-up, the only way you can trade blows is by name-calling: ergo, your bread&butter.

    Oh, and I couldn’t help but me amused when you called him out on being a smut-peddler. And why’s that…? Because I can’t help but wonder if you’re somehow ENVIOUS of liberals that are able to express themselves sexually while still accepting themselves for who they are. It’s you rightwing fundamentalists that tend to preach against the “moral decay of society”– weeks before you’re outed for getting a backrub from a gay masseur. Your re-occuring sexual repression and hypocracy makes you all the more pathetic.

    I don’t know whether to call you “Losers” or closet-homosexuals. Do yourself and the rest of society a favor. Pole-vault off a cliff somewhere in the Deep South and put your “values” to the test to see if you survive. If you do, it’s the rapture and we’re rid of you. If not, we’re still rid of you.

    AlphaFactor (deda1a)

  40. Psychoanalyze, much?

    AMac (c822c9)

  41. Your re-occuring sexual repression and hypocracy makes you all the more pathetic.

    Not so. “As for sex — well, it turns out that it’s Republican (and especially Republican women) who have it more often and better.

    Laura (087c0d)

  42. Sirkowski wrote:

    It can’t be me, but try to guess why.

    Well, if it couldn’t be you, the only guess would be insufficient access level — and I’d doubt tha guess.

    Dana (556f76)

  43. AlphaFactor,

    You’re so right. Just because someone like carlito wants to engage in “rational discussion” doesn’t mean YOU have to… rational discussion is for sissy girls, and liberals play by their *own* rules.

    “…Willing to set aside intellectual-discourse”: Man, just saying that gave me a big, liberal hard-on. I’m glad their are big men like you and Sirkowski out there to put whiny, “rational” pussies like carlito in their place.

    What your people did was wrong. If you can’t admit that… well, if you can’t admit that there really isn’t anything more to say.

    Leviticus (A Liberal) (0f74f7)

  44. As a matter of fact, I don’t know Carlito and even after reading through these posts, I’m still not sure what was going on.

    If those guys made a mistake or screwed-up, fine. Call em on it.

    But don’t for a minute act surprised when the occasional liberal with guts decides to throw off the gloves and fling some mud BACK at you. And don’t even try to use those instances as evidence that liberals don’t use genuine argument in supporting their positions.

    Heh. After all. We’ve all seen it before.

    When we use genuine rhetoric or argument to back our positions, your ilk realizes they’re outgunned so they resort to namecalling to keep from getting knocked-out — or compensating for their own insecurity.

    When we use namecalling or decide (even if only briefly) to throw off the gloves and give you a taste of your own very familar medicine, you start whining and call “Foul!” while going on to say that liberals don’t use real argument.

    Not that any of it’s new.

    Oh, and thanks again for dragging us all into the desert for a meaningless war. I’m sure we’ll be seeing a return on that half-trillion-dollar investment reeeeeal soon.

    AlphaFactor (deda1a)

  45. carlito wasn’t interested in rational debate.

    The comment in question as originally written by him was an elitist swipe at poor/minority women. It was yet another bogus collection of facts and innuendo to support the racist/classist opinion that most women seeking abortions use abortion as a casual means of birth control. His argument consisted of several variations on the old “the bitch had an abortion because she didn’t want pregnancy to interfere with her fabulous ski vacation” canard.

    Our blog has 40,000 comments stored. I don’t think we’ve banned anyone from commenting. It’s my understanding that Patterico has banned several people from my site from commenting here just in the past 24 hours! Stifling debate is a conservative blogosphere game – it has nothing to do with what we’re doing on LA.com.

    [I have banned one person in the last 24 hours: Macswain. There’s a long history there of lies and vicious insults, but the final straw was when he admitted that he read through a comment thread in which carlitos said his sister had died — and *then* MacSwain declared “funny* a comment about carlitos having disgusting sex with her.

    After sirkowski posted a link to an adults-only site, his comments went into moderation and have all been approved. — P]

    Stop by and see for yourself! Everyone is welcome!

    [And you’ll rewrite their comments? I guess it’s easy not to ban people if you arrogate to yourself the freedom to routinely rewrite their comments. — P]

    The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2)

  46. No thank you, LA. Incestuous child pornography, falsely attributed to a real person, is hardly a reason to visit your site.

    nk (4d4a9d)

  47. What pisses me off most about your attitude is that you strike me as a smart and sensible person. I hate seeing people behaving worse than their character. Ok, don’t confess apologize but dump that little creep that did this to YOU as well as to Carlito.

    nk (4d4a9d)

  48. BTW: I just flushed a Sirkowski down the toilet. It was less disgusting than the one on your site.

    nk (f58916)

  49. Oh – it was me. There’s no question that I am responsible – nobody else.

    P.S. and stop taking yourselves so seriously.

    The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2)

  50. I don’t believe you.

    [It’s clear that you can’t believe anything he says. Because he may always later declare it a “joke.” — P]

    nk (f58916)

  51. “P.S. and stop taking yourselves so seriously.”

    I thought I said that I was disappointed because I took you seriously.

    nk (f58916)

  52. LA lied when he wrote:

    I don’t think we’ve banned anyone from commenting.

    That’s a damn, dirty lie and you know it. I was banned when I pointed out that SGO knew nothing about Aristotelian metaphysics.

    Isn’t it funny that everything is rascist or classist when you disagree with it? Easier than thinking, I suppose.

    You can apologize or you can continue to lie. It’s up to you, LA.

    Fritz (0063c1)

  53. Fritz:

    I remember you, but I don’t remember you being banned. I am speaking the truth when I say that I don’t think we’ve banned anyone.

    Do we have a reputation for banning people? I don’t think we do.

    The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2)

  54. Patterico said: “It’s clear that you can’t believe anything he says. Because he may always later declare it a “joke.””

    Do you think I really thought that you somehow logged into my site and edited carlito’s comment, Pat?

    [You said I made it up, which implied I created the image. Once I posted an unedited image, and a second one from carlitos, you declared it a joke. — P]

    The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2)

  55. On the one hand, a centrist like me can stop by Patterico’s site to read some interesting arguments and posts. If I want to, I can comment. The discussions I’ve joined have been at least good, and sometimes great. When Patterico gets pissy (he does sometimes), I leave. Plenty of other good parties on this Interweb thing.

    On the other hand, a centrist like me can learn from carlito about what happens to dissenters at liberalavenger.com. Pour encourager les autres. I don’t even have to journey over there to earn Rapid Rewards points–the acolytes bestow them here, too.

    It’s a good thing that Liberal Avenger, Alpha Factor, Sirkowski, and the rest of the gang have so thoroughly instructed us tenderfeet about what it all means. Otherwise I, for one, wouldn’t have figured it out. Thanks, guys! Nice politics you got there, too.

    AMac (6b8516)

  56. […] update: Patterico says it well even while dealing with a hate filled attack from the left. […]

    Thoughts on the McEwan resignation and hate mail… at Herd Watching (1d0ae5)

  57. When Patterico gets pissy (he does sometimes), I leave.

    Moi??!?!?!?!

    Patterico (a8fa4a)

  58. Do we have a reputation for banning people? I don’t think we do.

    Why ban when you can alter?

    Patterico (a8fa4a)

  59. The discussions I’ve joined have been at least good, and sometimes great.

    Lol. Alright, so you have a point. There’s no need for us to always be at each other’s throats. We occasionally can learn from one another and jointly consider how we can make the world a better place.

    AlphaFactor (deda1a)

  60. … to support the racist/classist opinion that most women seeking abortions use abortion as a casual means of birth control.

    Really? You sure?

    Not that this thread is about abortion, but these stories show you that there are legitimate counter arguments to be made against your cultural assumptions.

    Trying to justify your personal attack on Carlito’s family by using the topic of debate as an excuse is worse than weak.

    If Carlito’s arguments had no merit, why not let them stand? If you’re so confident of your positions, why not let people see the obvious “wrongness” of his position for himself? You were wrong to alter his comment, you were wrong to claim someone else “made it up”, and you are wrong to now treat it as some sort of spectacular trick or treat. You are mistaken if you think that this episode is going to make people more likely to want to engage in the free exchange of ideas with you.

    Rather than the horror of having to actually defend your idiocy, you and your friends decide you’d rather make other people’s arguments for them.

    Oh, and AlphaFactor? Your plea to

    … jointly consider how we can make the world a better place.

    coming on the heels of

    You guys are so fucking pathetic.

    and this nonsense by your fellow traveller somehow doesn’t come across as very sincere. You are the problem, not those trying, on the Right and the Left, to hash out their differences honestly.

    Fix yourself, then try to fix the world.

    Also, word of advice – don’t put personal information on the net asking for a job while at the same time flaming everyone with whom you disagree with a link pointing back to that very same personal information. If you can’t figure out why, then you deserve to be an unemployed UCB grad.

    You’re a young man, you’re entitled to make (some of) the mistakes that young men make – but mistakes made on the internet are forever.

    Abraxas (db3144)

  61. AlphaFactor, based on your 2:06pm comment, I suppose you’re exercising your sarcasm muscles, but I’ll bite.

    I agree.

    AMac (6b8516)

  62. To AlphaFactor,

    Ok, I’m trying to be civil right now, and trying – for the moment – to not channel a certain Blogger.

    That having been said…

    You’re kidding, right? You think we have an issue with being called names and with being mocked?

    Have you attended a college class in the last 10 years and tried to argue a Conservative viewpoint? Do you have ANY idea the HELL I put up with? I’m CONSTANTLY called a homophobe (my gay friends find that unlikely), a racist (my minority friends disagree), a mysoginist (no, I only dislike my ex’s, and I feel I have valid reasons after they cheated on me) and any number of fairly rude phrases I won’t commit to text here. You think the left resorts to insults on occation? That your side does it as a last resort?

    For God’s sake I was told by my Econ professor that my home state’s favorite past time is tying ‘queers to the back of a truck and dragging them around the state’ (HIS words, NOT mine, thank you very much).

    I have witnessed in the last 4 months online some of the most vile hate from the left, targeting people who have never hurt them. Pages of prayers that MM get killed in Iraq, cries that “only 201 to go” at the death of the congressman, editing posts so that they now (falsely) admit to incest?

    Does any of that sound even remotely sane to you? Even close to propper?

    If you want to talk, fine… I’m willing to talk. I’m always willing to talk. I love a good debate. Bring a willingness to listen and consider what you hear, and I’ll always do the same. Come for a discussion. Come for a debate. Don’t come just to insult and berate and bait… Come to talk…

    When you show up wanting only to be insulting, you shut down our desire to talk and have an open exchange. You stand a far, far better chance at changing minds and opinions when you are, you know, not douches…

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  63. I think LA is guilty. I think he did it. And the reason he has danced around the whole issue and keeps changing his story is because even though he won’t admit what he did was wrong, he knows it was wrong.

    Deletion of the altered comment was a concious act of admission that altering the comment was wrong in the first place. Whatever new cover story that has followed can’t conceal the fact of that guilty minded act.

    Brad (71c617)

  64. Deletion of the altered comment, incidentally, occurred after I e-mailed him about it — but before I posted.

    Patterico (a8fa4a)

  65. To the aforementioned:

    When I said that I do actually believe that we needn’t ALWAYS be at each other’s throats,
    .
    .
    .
    I meant it.

    Oh, don’t get me wrong… It’s damn SATIATING at points to trade blows at times. THRILLING, even. It was much the same sensation that got me addicted to Quake3 a few years ago. XD

    But, hey. We’re all human. So, occasionally, maybe just for the sake of doing so, it’s nice to get along. Occasionally.

    Why else do you think I’m not worried about posting my personal info online (even if I haven’t updated it in 5years…)? It’s simply cuz I do have some faith in my fellow netizens — even the carnivorous ones on the right-wing.

    So… Do I take back anything I said earlier…?

    Not A Chance.

    But… I’ll admit that it is fun to spar with you guys, and for that, you have my actual thanks.

    *buys round of drinks*

    AlphaFactor (deda1a)

  66. I think that everyone is forgetting the most important point in this whole discussion.

    We need more abortions.

    Sirkowski (ad8594)

  67. I rarely visit the comment threads of the blogs I frequent – Patterico’s being one of the few exceptions.

    Personally, I would like to see more divergance of opinion here – generally the dim is “amens” from more than a little preaching to various choirs. But anyone with any interest in either a good sane debate or a dislike of poo-flinging lower primates should shun and heap scorn on such nasty things such as AlphaFactor, Sirkowski, or LA himeslf – given his admissions here.

    They have proven that they will lie at will, and deploy the most vile abuse possible at whim.

    One moment it’s a joke, mutated the second before from sizzling seething hatred directed to anybody “thinks” the way carlito does.

    But they have now committed this fatal mistake in public and it, along with LAs admissions, will now lie lodged in caching Web servers world-wide.

    Think about it, youngsters. There is a consequence to being vocal and identifiable jackasses – you get known and remembered as jackasses. And you royally deserve every bit of that recognition.

    JSinAZ (5c230e)

  68. Still no apology? Lame. I thought it would’ve happened by now. So much for blogs being more accountable.

    David N. Scott (71b49c)

  69. Still no apology? Lame. I thought it would’ve happened by now. So much for blogs being more accountable.

    David N. Scott (71b49c)

  70. Uh-huh. So, JSinAZ, you’re saying that this might not be a suitable opportunity to say that, “YOU SUCK!” Heh. Curiosity, is all.

    Man, I can’t even tell what you guys were talking about originally.

    Is it abortion? If it was, here’s my sentiment:

    “Keep it safe. Keep it legal. Keep it rare.”

    There. That should be enough lighter-fluid to re-start a healthy debate.

    (…..or possibly burn down a house.)

    AlphaFactor (deda1a)

  71. Sirkowski, # 66 said:

    “We need more abortions.”

    His first and most urgently.

    nk (2ab789)

  72. Funny that apologists for the fraud really don’t seem to realize what their need to resort to such tactics means in terms of the value of their political opinions. They realize on some profound level that they cannot contest matters on the merits, so all that remains to them is deception, even (especially?) of like-minded leftists.

    Federal Dog (9afd6c)

  73. Alpha Factor, Sirkowski, Liberal Avenger–you are cut from the same cloth.

    I live down the street from the county jail, so I know the difference between being polite to folks on the street and trusting them. This thread is another reminder of the reality of Al Gore’s Intraweb Thingy. We’re all next door to people whose parents never taught them how to comport themselves.

    Alpha Factor, you’ve dished out a few Psych 201 lessons (#s 39, 44, 65). One of your confederates got this ball rolling by engaging in the slimiest of behaviors towards carlito. Re-read the original post if you’ve forgotten. What’s followed has been a cascade of evasions, excuses, falsehoods, ad hominems, tu quoques, and gloats.

    To bring up “learning from one another” (#59) in the midst of this is just another insult.

    You guys aren’t Liberals and you aren’t Avenging. You egg each other on in escalating displays of sociopathic behavior. This is more serious than the comments section of some blog. I hope that these patterns are limited to your online personas. If they start spilling over into real life, I hope you will connect the dots and take appropriate action.

    I’m done here.

    AMac (c822c9)

  74. carlito wasn’t interested in rational debate.

    The comment in question as originally written by him was an elitist swipe at poor/minority women. It was yet another bogus collection of facts and innuendo to support the racist/classist opinion that most women seeking abortions use abortion as a casual means of birth control. His argument consisted of several variations on the old “the bitch had an abortion because she didn’t want pregnancy to interfere with her fabulous ski vacation” canard.

    Comment by The Liberal Avenger — 2/14/2007 @ 3:55 pm

    Not true. In fact, another flat-out lie, as you still can see at the thread over there. Search every comment I’ve written on that site, and you’ll never find such a statement.

    The stats I linked were from contracept.info, a pro-choice contraception website. They run banner ads for “pro choice america” and mail-order condoms. LA’s accusation is complete bullshit. Here are those offensive statistics I cited about women who have abortions:

    – 42% did not use contraception during the month they became pregnant
    – 11% never used a method of birth control
    – 47% have had at least one previous abortion

    Anyway, it’s pointless to argue, take a look at my last attempt to clarify my point.

    carlito Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    February 14th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
    LA Says:

    February 14th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
    Carlitos:

    What was the gist of the original comment?

    Actually, it was just some stats on how around half of women who have abortions are not having their first. Therefore, at some level, they are using it for birth control. Also, 42% of women weren’t using birth control when they got pregnant. The site was a contraception website, it really wasn’t a “right wing” source.

    I even made fun of the “ski trip” comment from brt. Honestly, you are barking up the wrong tree here.

    Tommykey Says:

    February 15th, 2007 at 12:02 am
    PENIS! PENIS! PENIS!

    sirkowski Says:

    February 15th, 2007 at 2:28 am
    My thought exactly.

    carlitos (b38ae1)

  75. WHAT THE HELL…

    I have been a loyal fan of Miss Dynamite for a while now and I feel that I need to make a few comments.

    I hate fascist conservatism. With some of you, it seems that you all are shitsling more than anything. I’ve had to put up with this kind of crap for a long time and suddenly I find this!!!!

    What started this, I’ve tried to look and figure it out, but I can’t see past the smokescreens. One moment it was abortion, then its about Liberal Avenger possibly editing a blog, then how Pornography is bad, next we should say that blacks and women shouldn’t vote.

    I come from a long line of liberals, however, I am a Socialist Republican for goddess sake, and I’m not even Christian.
    I don’t believe Christ was my savior but I am willing to die for your rights to believe so or to prevent the desecration of a church, temple, mosque, or even Hitler’s civil rights.

    (BTW: I DRAW PORN TOO and I have been hired by a charity foundation to do a children’s pamphlet so they can brush their teeth.

    And if you don’t like it and it’s not illegal, then don’t look at the naked; man, woman, animal, pregnant, suggestive (in any combination, your choice you freaks) when they appear.
    Its people like you guys that believe that video games causes violence and I am sick of hearing it, pretty soon we may revert back to Pac-Man because the only thing that Ms. Pac-Man wears is a damn bow.)

    I want everyone to take a step back and review what just happened. A smart man learns from their mistakes, a Wise man learns from the mistakes of others.
    However the Enlightened learn from possible mistakes.
    At least the fucking Buddhists got it right, Thanx Grandma!

    My heritage-
    Grandma: White, Buddhist
    Mother: B&W Jew
    ME: Wiccan
    Brother: Agnostic
    Cats: gay

    Merry part and blessed be.

    Spice (f5135c)

  76. And BTW again:

    I would be honored to be “Cut from the same cloth” as Alpha Factor, Sirkowski, and Liberal Avenger.

    Finally some one says whats on my mind

    I am Spice and I approve this message!

    Spice (f5135c)

  77. What started this, I’ve tried to look and figure it out, but I can’t see past the smokescreens.

    Indeed. The only part you’re not getting is who put them up.

    Patterico (a8fa4a)

  78. it seems that rational debate left along time ago, on both sides.

    Spice (f5135c)

  79. LA wrote:

    I remember you, but I don’t remember you being banned. I am speaking the truth when I say that I don’t think we’ve banned anyone.

    Do we have a reputation for banning people? I don’t think we do.

    The only one I remember was a stort term ban on BRT. But it’s a simple check: just go to your options page and look.

    By the way, I was very surprised to find out that you were the one who edited the comment.

    Dana (3e4784)

  80. #

    Fritz:

    I remember you, but I don’t remember you being banned. I am speaking the truth when I say that I don’t think we’ve banned anyone.

    Do we have a reputation for banning people? I don’t think we do.

    Comment by The Liberal Avenger — 2/14/2007 @ 5:32 pm

    What a bunch of weasel words. You dance around the essence of the matter by standing on what you “think”, what you “remember”, and what your “reputation” is. You don’t “remember”. You don’t “think” you’ve banned anyone. Ask SGO, LA. Then you won’t have to think about it, you’ll know. Either your blog has banned people or it hasn’t, your opinion regarding the matter, or the reputation others have given you, is beside the point.

    You edit comments and then deny it. You ban commenters and then claim you can’t remember. You’ve allowed other posters on your blog to delete comments on the grounds that anyone who disagrees with your dogma must be a troll. You’ve then lied about it, repeatedly. Have you no shame?

    Fritz (c0e540)

  81. From one of your regular posters:

    # sirkowski Says:
    July 20th, 2006 at 2:59 pm

    BRT is indeed due for a ban, and this thread proves it. Even when he agrees with us he’s trying to fuck up the treads.

    Fritz (c0e540)

  82. Umm…

    What the hell are you guys talking about?

    AlphaFactor (deda1a)

  83. You all forgot about Poland!

    President Bush (a1d6c2)

  84. Macswain makes a strong argument that you sir, are a hyprocrite. He entitles it “My Defense To Patterico’s Dishonest Attack”

    http://macswain.blogspot.com/

    [“He,” Macswain?

    To all: this comment was posted from Macswain’s IP address — an IP address used by Macswain dozens of times on my site, but never used by any other commenter on this blog. Macswain is sock-puppeting here, posing as a disinterested third party to lend artificial support for his post. Pathetic . . . if fitting. — P]

    [UPDATE: See comment #92 below. He claims it’s some other guy. Even though he has a history of lying, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. — ]

    webhub (76d8da)

  85. Sha-zaam! Fritz reminded me of one by siting my own blog!

    I’m just trying to figure out what that says about my memory.

    Dana (556f76)

  86. I’ll add, webhub/Macswain, that you are full of it. You admitted reading the comment thread, saying:

    I don’t what’s funnier – the rewritten post, Pat’s preening and posturing about caning (or was it caneing) all the guest bloggers or the Tort-Reform righties claiming a lawsuit should be brought over this.

    The argument that a lawsuit should be brought was made further up that comment thread — the same comment thread where carlitos said his sister had died. You admitted reading the comment thread — yet you claimed that the comments about carlitos’s sister were funny.

    Oh — and your subsequent comment, which said little more than that I was wrong and dishonest (the same thing you always say about me), never appeared on this site, and thus was not “deleted.” Your comments have been moderated for weeks because of your penchant for lying about me. I have ultimately published every one — but only after reviewing it first for lies, and responding to those lies.

    I’m told that comments in moderation often look like they have been posted, until the user refreshes. So maybe you thought I “deleted” it. But I didn’t. You were already banned by the time you left it. And it didn’t have any content anyway. No explanation as to how you read the comment thread but didn’t see what carlitos had said. No evidence or proof. Just a standard-issue Macswain comment that I was wrong and dishonest.

    Further, if I’m interested in squelching debate, why are your comments still littered all over my site? Answer: because I’m not squelching debate.

    I banned you for repeated lies, and for ghoulishly laughing at a comment mocking what you knew was carlitos’s tragedy. And now that you have sock-puppeted, it’s quite unlikely that the ban will be rescinded.

    It’s too bad, in a way. You sometimes made good points. You corrected me on John Kerry once, and after I made a forthright correction, you said you respected me for it.

    But ever since, you have strained to argue that I am dishonest, often twisting the facts yourself to fit that theory. Even after I corrected something that you had caught, you never gave me the benefit of any doubt.

    So I doubt I’ll miss you much, webhub/Macswain. Maybe some day you’ll get over your need to hurl accusations of dishonesty at honest people — and your need to sock-puppet. Maybe then you’ll make valuable contributions to another site.

    But you’re done here.

    Patterico (a8fa4a)

  87. Macswain/webhub has been reduced to talking to himself on his own blog. You can read it here if he hasn’t deleted it. I threw in my two cents in comment #5 in his thread, again, if he hasn’t deleted it:

    You are so pathetic, Macswain.

    You not only sock-puppeted using “webhub” on Patterico’s blog (“posted from Macswain’s IP address — an IP address used by Macswain dozens of times on my site, but never used by any other commenter on this blog” — Patterico), but you posted an anonymous comment from yourself referring to webhub (probably, but no matter)… and then, and this is where it gets funny, used your webhub puppet to talk to yourself on your blog.

    Dude, you need to get laid or something. Step away from the keyboard — you’ll only hurt yourself with it.

    Christoph (9022e9)

  88. Isn’t it interesting how the words of some of these preening lefties who consider themselves such paragons of virtue are constantly belied by their actions?

    Brad (79d2d7)

  89. Hate the game, not the player.

    Sirkowski (04215a)

  90. “Hate the game, not the player.”

    translated = the ends justify any means

    Brad (79d2d7)

  91. Macswain is now claiming that “webhub” is some different guy on his same server.

    Fine, we’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. My comment #87 stands. The weight of the evidence is that he was laughing at what he knew was carlitos’s tragedy — plus he lies here constantly anyway. He won’t be commenting here again.

    Meanwhile, a whole universe of people are still allowed to come here and disagree with me. I started a post consisting of all the comments disagreeing with me and my comments for the past week, and my fingers fell off after going through about a day’s worth.

    So the idea that I’m squelching speech is another lie by him.

    So long, Macswain.

    Patterico (a8fa4a)

  92. “carlito wasn’t interested in rational debate.”

    Do you frequently indulge in Psychological Projection?

    htom (412a17)

  93. In response to Macswain’s statement that he isn’t webhub, I’m also willing to consider giving him the benefit of the doubt. Here is my reply:

    Ah yes, the server.

    It is remotely possible that you are not lying in this case. You could be one of those decent honest blokes who laughs at men whose words are altered, in painstaking detail, to make it appear that they are bragging about having sex with their sister before she died.

    You could be one of those kind of decent honest men.

    Because of course it could be that that IP address was never used in the history of Patterico’s blog, then once you were banned someone jumped on that exact same server and, with all the issues Patterico discusses, chose to ride to your defense, which you immediately noticed, and began commenting on here.

    That could be too.

    Either way, you’re a sicko who is also a sockpuppeteer or isn’t one. We’ll let the readers decide.

     
     
    [cross posted at Macswain, anon, &/or webhub’s crummy blog]

    Christoph (9022e9)

  94. I’ve disagreed with Patterico more than once. Never were my posts altered or was I banned, even when I went on a tedious shouting match or two with Actus. It’s a rare thing for Patterico to ban anyone and not without sufficient provocation.

    On the LA site, on the other hand, my comments were “troll blathered” or otherwise altered almost from the very first one. It just gets old really quick to have the idiots there “FU” and act like maladjusted adolescents all the time.

    sharon (dfeb10)

  95. Heh heh heh.

    Ahhhh….!

    My god, I love the Internet.

    Whether it be the fundamentalist-creatures on the Right…

    Or, yes, even my boys on the Left. I love the bastards, but, hey. Let’s face it. They can sometimes overdo the pessimism or the gloom-and-doom thing.

    All the same, I’m glad to share the virtual playground with the whole lot of ya’.

    I mean, christ… In this forum alone…

    I’ve gotten away with going from playing psycho-analyst, to grade-school bully & mud-flinger, to peacemaker, even to half-baked stoner that just points and laughs at whatever happens to be passing by at the time…!

    Where else can I switch modes over-and-over? Learning > sharing > assailing > befriending > behaving silly.

    Heh. If I acted like this in real-life, they’d peg me for multiple personality disorder or something.

    So, think what you will… Also. This McSwain fellow. I don’t know if he was conservative or a liberal, but hey, if he was acting civil towards you guys at some point previously…

    Who knows? Maybe you can make it a personal goal for yourself:

    rebuilding the mixture of civility AND antagonism; of proportions unknown.

    That’s the real secret to enjoying the Internet. Being able to ACCEPT the ambiguity that fluorishes in every corner of it! In individuals, in sub-cultures, or throughout the Web!

    Now… before I bore myself stupid…

    REPUBLICANS SUCK!!

    Ah. Much better. =)

    AlphaFactor (deda1a)

  96. If you want to prevent someone from imitating you online, you need to digitaly sign your messages (see here for information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_signature). If done properly you can verify that you did indeed write a comment, and that it’s unchanged since you signed it.

    GnuPG (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Privacy_Guard) is a free and open source program you can use to do this. It is kind of hard to setup, but I found Gpg4win (http://www.gpg4win.org/) made it fairly simple.

    The Security Now podcast (http://www.grc.com/sn/SN-034.htm) is a good place to start learning about this stuff, if your interested.

    Mark (7590a6)

  97. The difference between liberals and conservatives: conservatives get upset when liberals lie about what we’ve said, and liberals get upset when we tell the truth about what they have written.

    Dana (3e4784)

  98. LA is a nitwit.

    Patterico said:

    Note well, folks, that major bloggers on the left actually voluntarily associate themselves with this crowd.

    Sadly, No!, TBogg, and the rest gladly link to Liberal Avenger and his incisive analysis of Malkin, Allah, and company.

    There really aren’t many clean hands here. How many center-of-right bloggers link to nicedoggie.net?

    Kevin (1a2575)

  99. […] Patterico’s Pontifications: Full Screencaps of the RewrittenLiberal Avenger Comment, Together with An Explanation of Why It’s Not Even Close to Funny […]

    Maybe We Should Be “Liberal Avenger Watch” Instead « Sirkowski Watch (6175c2)

  100. I’m sorry to see that Liberal Avenger, whose blog I used to read, has chosen to stoop this low. (I quit reading L.A. not because I came at any point to disagree with L.A.’s positions but because there are so many good lefty blogs out there it’s hard to keep up with them all.) That having been said, I must add that I’m not amazed to see that Liberal Avenger has chosen to chosen to stoop this low; I perceive that it was only a matter of time before he or someone like him adopted this tactic; and I can even sort of see why he did it. And why did he do it? He did it, IMO and in brief, because you righties invite this kind of treatment. Scarcely a day goes by without at least one of you fabricating something, usually out of the whole cloth & without any foundation, as witness the faux Lincoln comment exposed by Glenn Greenwald, as witness the faux Dahlia Lithwick opinion as exposed by Dahlia Lithwick, and as witness the ginned-up outrage over an Amanda Marcotte movie review that was nothing if not innocuous (I know because I read it). And these are only the few conservative inventions (all of them, notice, overtly intended to malign and injure liberals) which have been over-the-top enough to become unignorable during the last few days. One would need a memory-space the size of the Library of Congress to catalogue fully the consequences of libellous conservative fantasy over the past few years. Sorry, but if you guys are going to attribute to dead presidents opinions they never uttered, if you’re going to rewrite the prose of liberal columnists wholesale, and if you’re going to spam liberal bloggers just for squints and giggles (or because one of your self-selected Head Bullies has told you to do so)—well, in that case, folks, you’ve been instumental in creating a certain kind of world, and it looks as if you’re going to have to live in the world you’ve made. Don’t look to me for sympathy or outrage. On the basis of your own conduct, pursued over the course of weeks, months, and years, you’ve rendered this sort of reaction inevitable. In one sense, I’m disappointed in Liberal Avenger, but in another—I’m surprised that it took him so long.

    bekabot (3afeb8)

  101. Shorter bekabot: If you righties would just stop exposing the truth about us lefties then we lefties would not need to falsely attribute a pornographic confession of childhood incest, made up from our fantasies, to a rightie.

    nk (f58916)

  102. Shorter NK. Go jump in the lake, bekabot.

    nk (f58916)

  103. Really short (indeed positively hieroglyphic) nk:

    “See, conservatives really do completely rewrite liberal positions just for fun (when we’re not doing it for profit) as I’ve demonstrated for you benefit just now. Look ma, no hands, wheeeeeeee!!! P.S.—we’ve been at this game longer than you have, in fact we’re old hands at it, so don’t try to outdo us on our home ground. We wrote the Creative Redaction book. You’ll never catch up, never, you hear?”

    We’re learning, nk, we’re learning.

    bekabot (3afeb8)

  104. No Dana, the difference between conservatives and liberals is you get upset by penis vagina.

    Sirkowski (0d3e0d)

  105. “P.S.—we’ve been at this game longer than you have, in fact we’re old hands at it, ….”

    I know. Your brethren, at Rathergate, tried it with the fake TANGO documents as one example. You’re just not good at it. You get caught. What good is a lie when the Internet proves it to be a lie within five minutes?

    “… so don’t try to outdo us on our home ground.”

    We would be foolish to lie about you. No lie we could make up could paint you as bad as you really are.

    nk (f58916)

  106. How many center-of-right bloggers link to nicedoggie.net?

    Let us know when Romney hires Misha to blog for him, won’t you?

    Also, feel free to point out some of the approving links to unhinged commentary.

    You can do it, Kevin! There’s no need to use an unsubstantiated allegation as a justification. Flesh it out. Technorati is your friend.

    Pablo (cb50c5)

  107. “We would be foolish to lie about you.”

    Stop doing it, then. You’re always free to quit.

    (Ceasing to misattribute quotes would be a good place to start. At least learn to differentiate what’s inside the quotation marks from what is outside said quotation marks. Just an idea.)

    bekabot (3afeb8)

  108. I apologize bekabot, I missed your point completely (that you were being sarcastic and not bragging in #104).

    nk (5e5670)

  109. Patterico:

    You’ve convincingly been proven wrong on Macswain’s site about webhub and macswain being the same person. http://macswain.blogspot.com (“Patterico Steps in the Shit Twice More”)

    Care to acknowledge that you were WRONG?

    [I see you’re lying about me on that site as well. You and Macswain are peas in a dishonest pod. You’re banned too — and that’s assuming you’re a different person. But hey, no biggie. Lying lefties like you are a dime a dozen. I’m much more concerned about this gnat buzzing around my head. As for you and Macswain, I’ll never give either of you another thought, as long as I live. Have a nice life. — P]

    webhub (b263c1)

  110. I’m sorry to see that Liberal Avenger, whose blog I used to read, has chosen to stoop this low. (I quit reading L.A. not because I came at any point to disagree with L.A.’s positions but because there are so many good lefty blogs out there it’s hard to keep up with them all.)

    So far so good …

    That having been said …

    Uh, oh.

    … I must add that I’m not amazed to see that Liberal Avenger has chosen to chosen to stoop this low …

    Oh. Well, we’re not either. We’re all in agreement so far.

    I perceive that it was only a matter of time before he or someone like him adopted this tactic; and I can even sort of see why he did it.

    Well, why then, did he do it?!?

    And why did he do it?

    Er, yes – why?

    … because you righties invite this kind of treatment.

    Ah, I see. Sort of like how wearing a short skirt is “inviting” rape. Or Israel’s defense of its borders is “inviting” terrorism?

    Not equal to your example in turpitude perhaps; it does, however, engage in the *exact* same kind of reasoning. But please, go on …

    Scarcely a day goes by without at least one of you fabricating something, usually out of the whole cloth & without any foundation, as witness the faux Lincoln comment exposed by Glenn Greenwald, as witness the faux Dahlia Lithwick opinion as exposed by Dahlia Lithwick, …

    I, and I would guess many others here, are utterly unfamiliar with either of those examples. Stipulating that your characterization of them is true, and we’re actually talking about making up quotes out of whole cloth, then both of those incidents are … reprehensible.

    Perhaps you were expecting that last word to be “excusable” followed by a lame rationalization about how “lefties do it too.”

    No.

    Reprehensible.

    … and as witness the ginned-up outrage over an Amanda Marcotte movie review that was nothing if not innocuous (I know because I read it).

    I read it too. I didn’t like it – in all honesty, I thought it was in poor taste. And guess what? You don’t get to decide what’s “offensive” for the rest of us. And that’s you’re point there, isn’t it? Not that you or Ms. Marcotte care whether or not it was offensive, which is a position you certainly have the right to take, but that anyone who said that they were offended were lying (hence your use of “ginned up”), ’cause well, no one could possibly be offended by what we all know to be the truth, right?

    There’s a word for someone who can’t empathize with the genuine feelings, emotions and thoughts of others – “psychopath”. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and think of you as someone who “won’t” empathize rather than “can’t”. Others may not be so generous.

    And these are only the few conservative inventions (all of them, notice, overtly intended to malign and injure liberals)…

    Really? Now, in addition to thinking it’s OK to rewrite our arguments, you know our intentions as well? It couldn’t possibly be that our arguments are “overtly intended” to express our points of view in opposition to yours, and that any distress that may cause your and your fellow travellers’ sensibilities is a secondary concern?

    Nah – we’re obviously in it to malign and injure you.

    which have been over-the-top enough to become unignorable during the last few days.

    Well, I will always acknowledge a Progressive’s expertise in over the top political posturing. But we’ve already condemned the two (maybe) valid examples you have and debunked the third, so let’s moveon.org, shall we.

    One would need a memory-space the size of the Library of Congress to catalogue fully the consequences of libellous conservative fantasy over the past few years.

    Yes, yes, yes. You think we’re Evil. We get it. By the way, if there’s so much libellous material out there, why haven’t more Liberals sued?

    Oh, that’s right. Because when Progressives say “libel” they’re likely to mean “doesn’t agree with me”.

    Let’s see; Blah, blah, blah, ah – here we go …

    well, in that case, folks, you’ve been instumental in creating a certain kind of world, and it looks as if you’re going to have to live in the world you’ve made.

    You realize what you’ve done here, right? You’ve created a little black hole in which not even logic – let alone light, truth and understanding – can penetrate. You are complaining about the behavior that causes “… a certain kind of world.” in a post which defends that exact behavior as something inevitable in the world in which you complain about said behavior.

    I stand in awe of your perfect example of cognitive dissonance.

    Don’t look to me for sympathy or outrage.

    Well, see – we didn’t and we aren’t. No one emailed you to come join the party, did they? Patterico? No. Lord Nazh? No. Wait … on second thought, I’ll bet that tricksy Dana did. And anyway, even if anyone here did invite you to play, any adult who can’t immediately see that what LA did was wrong and is (and here’s the tricky part) inexcusable, simply isn’t going to get it. We think it’s wrong – you think it’s ok to do it to “get back” at the mean conservatives.

    The rest is “Blah, blah, blah …”

    But hey, you’ve earned yourself a motto today … “The moral high ground; It’s not just for Jeebus freaks anymore.”

    You’re welcome to respond, but next time, please try to be more interesting.

    Abraxas (db3144)

  111. Abraxas…

    You are the wind beneath my wings…

    Yes, yes, yes. You think we’re Evil. We get it.

    That made me lol… Well played sir… Well played…

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  112. Pedobear wishes to know more about this sex with sisters. Was she underage? That’d be hot. Pedobear is a practicing catholic, so pedobear loves putting the dick to the kiddies.

      ∩___∩
       |ノ      ヽ
      /  ●   ● |  C’MON!
      |    ( _●_)  ミ
     彡、   |∪|  、`\
    / __  ヽノ /´>  )
    (___)   / (_/
     |       /
     |  /\ \
     | /    )  )
     ∪    (  \
           \_)

    Pedobear (afaf21)

  113. Abraxas wrote:

    on second thought, I’ll bet that tricksy Dana did.

    Tricksy? Someone’s been channeling Gollum! 🙂

    Dana (556f76)

  114. Comment # 113: Looks like someone had a little bit too much free time on his hands!

    Dana (556f76)

  115. “Looks like someone had a little bit too much free time on his hands!”

    -Dana

    It’s probably better he spend his spare time *drawing* the bear than *channeling* it.

    Leviticus (A Liberal) (d29440)

  116. Stupid parenthetical disclaimer!

    Leviticus (d29440)

  117.    ∩___∩
       | ノ      
      /  ●   ● | 
      |    ( _●_) ミ
    彡、   |∪|  、`\
    / __  ヽノ /´>  ) Pedo Bear says,
    (___)   / (_/ “YOU FAGG0Rts!!1”
     |     /
     |  /\ \
     | /    )  )
     ∪    (  \
           \_)

    Pedobear (afaf21)

  118. Call me crazy, but I’m willing to bet that if someone was to look, they would find that Pedobear’s IP is located in Montreal, Canada. Of course, that might constitute feeding the trolls; forget I mentioned it.

    Fritz (7bed81)

  119. Well, it wouldn’t be a blog-kerfuffle without noting that MarioGeorgeNitrini111 is challenging Patterico to a debate, over at the webhub/macswain.

    carlito (2d2b08)

  120. “Comment # 113: Looks like someone had a little bit too much free time on his hands!”

    People in prison or in an insane asylum usually do. Perverts living in their mothers’ basements too.

    nk (d7a872)

  121. A piece of unsolicited advice to Patterico:

    Never wrassle with a pig. You can’t come out clean, and only the pig gets any enjoyment out of it.

    Lurking Observer (5a757b)

  122.   ∩___∩
       | ノ      
      /  ●   ● | 
      |    ( _●_) ミ
    彡、   |∪|  、`\
    / __  ヽノ /´>  ) Pedo Bear says,
    (___)   / (_/ “Guess again hideous elderly!″
     |     /
     |  /\ \
     | /    )  )
     ∪    (  \
           \_)

    I’m not from canada. I’m an import from japan currently in new york. But I have fapped to some of sirkowski’s more loliriffic art pieces.

    Pedobear (afaf21)

  123. Too bad your ancestors were not from Nagasaki or Hiroshima, pig.

    nk (947b03)

  124. Well, now that I have looked up “fapped” in the urban dictionary, my life is complete. Patterico, despite the irony of their appearing in this topic, I think you should delete Mr. Bear’s link and signature.

    carlitos (b38ae1)

  125. Who said anything about Sirkowski, Pedobear? Odd.

    Fritz (7bed81)

  126. First Marcotte and McEwan, now their defender L.A. self-destructing within weeks of each other. You’d think their side of the aisle didn’t have all the momentum. Maybe they aren’t acting like frothing, vindictive lunatics because they’re angry about things being out of their control. Maybe it’s their natural state.

    P.S. Say, L.A.: Just kidding about the “maybe” part.

    L.N. Smithee (9ac2d2)

  127. 150a6f529963b06cb431ce5c98c2d09a…

    150a6f529963b06cb431ce5c98c2d09a…

    150a6f529963b06cb431ce5c98c2d09a (160332)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2865 secs.