Patterico's Pontifications

4/21/2011

Wonkette Editor and Cretin Ken Layne, on Removing Posts

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:10 pm



Wonkette editor Ken Layne, yesterday, on taking down his site’s “mock Trig Palin on his birthday” post:

As for taking down the post, as you know on the internet there is no “taking down the post.” Why even try that? So people like you can get another freelance internet column out of it by feigning outrage again? (“They tried to take down the post, but we found it on Google cache!”) There is nothing in “political media” approaching even the most basic intellectual honesty, so why would any website fall for that “You should take down the post” thing? Wouldn’t that be crazy? So of course you never take down a post.

Wonkette editor Ken Layne, today, after a flood of advertisers departed the site:

A post on this page satirizing Sarah Palin using her baby as a political prop was very badly done and sounded like the author was mocking the child and not just Sarah Palin/Sarah Palin’s followers.

The writer, Jack Stuef, has apologized for it. And we have decided to remove the post as requested by some people who have nothing to do with Sarah Palin, but who do have an interest in the cause of special needs children. We apologize for the poor comedic judgment.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Hey Layne — did you figure out how many children you have yet?

Cretin.

60 Responses to “Wonkette Editor and Cretin Ken Layne, on Removing Posts”

  1. Ouch

    SteveG (cc5dc9)

  2. hmmm. not sure how many children Mr. Layne has but it’s starting to look like a sure bet that your posts on this subject will outnumber them 🙂

    happyfeet (760ba3)

  3. hmmm. not sure how many children Mr. Layne has but it’s starting to look like a sure bet that your posts on this subject will outnumber them

    You know those reading comprehension questions on the SAT that ask you to identify the main point of the passage?

    You didn’t do very well on those, did you? 🙂

    Patterico (c218bd)

  4. I picked c

    happyfeet (760ba3)

  5. Take a look at my witty profile at the ROFL game ROBLOX

    johnjacob (39aebb)

  6. Well, now the spam comments, like the previous one, are making more sense than happyfeet.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  7. Yikes–you can almost see the brown trail from the website to where the inconvenient post was “dragged offstage” for convenient disposal in the memory hole.

    The boycott pressure should be kept on until Layne retracts the despicable “homophobe” whine directed at Papa John’s, too.

    M. Scott Eiland (7d42e8)

  8. So, I wonder if they know that Papa John is gay?

    G (ce0c1b)

  9. Where did Stuef apologize?

    JD (318f81)

  10. Notice that the editor rolled AFTER the ads got yanked.
    ^..^(____)~~~

    Cheshirecat (e80054)

  11. I certainly hope if Mr. Layne’s wife is expecting, that the baby isn’t born with any handicaps.

    Dana (4eca6e)

  12. Other than his father, you mean, Dana.

    Simon Jester (e8d7a2)

  13. This may sound silly, but this whole silly episode exposes one side of the Internet we don’t think about a lot.

    It gives everyone a voice. Sometimes those people are silly people intent on avenging slights as they try to grapple with being adults in a world and people that do not conform to their view.

    So they gravitate to others who share their view and are rewarded for being to articulate that shared view without the advantage of experience.

    Many of these people have some talent. They become voices for others that agree. Despite their talent, though, they have don’t have any sort of self-awareness nor adult mentoring to say, simply, stop.

    They end up being sorry losers insulting proxies for the girl that wouldn’t date them in high school.

    Ag80 (6134b7)

  14. You are describing a lot of people with that comment, Ag Good call.

    Simon Jester (e8d7a2)

  15. “…we have decided to remove the post as requested by some people who have nothing to do with Sarah Palin.”

    That says it all.

    Arizona Bob (911aa5)

  16. I think that it’s important to note that Ken Layne isn’t just the editor, he’s the owner. Advertisers pulling out can really affect his world. Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

    carlitos (28bbc0)

  17. Dana, not that I’m comfortable wishing it on anyone, but I think knowing someone with Down Syndrome might be the greatest blessing Ken ever had. Just honest love, no viciousness. The very opposite of Ken or Rick’s hearts. It would probably be his salvation if his next child had Down Syndrome, though I admit I wouldn’t wish it. In honesty it’s more that I wouldn’t wish a parent like Ken on a child with Down Syndrome than the other way around. Ken would probably kill her before birth.

    It probably would snap him out of this focus on being mean for the sheer shock of it.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  18. ‘there is no “taking down the post.”’

    Unless your sponsors threaten to cut you off at the knees, then the impossible all of a sudden becomes possible.

    Moral: lefties are all about money, and they don’t like having THEIR wealth redistributed.

    Dave Surls (259925)

  19. ‘there is no “taking down the post.”’

    It’s OK, happyfeet kept a sceenshot.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  20. Some people don’t learn, even with that experience, one of the most vile characters out there, Geoffrey Dunn, formerly of the Huffington Post, now with Business Insider, has a special needs child, so does Axelrod, yet we know where they stand,

    narciso (79ddc3)

  21. Both my father and I – horrible people the both of us – have a odd sort of reverence for people who are afflicted with some level mental retardation.

    I mean, I have never in all my years even heard of someone with Downs Syndrome being mean-spirited, or for them to hold a grudge. They are completely without guile, and truly do not know malice.

    And as someone who knows so much malice it might as well be an actual person, I just find that something to be admired…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  22. Ken Layne: We apologize for the poor comedic judgment.

    — So, the original post was intended to be funny?

    Icy Texan (82fcef)

  23. it’s important to draw meaning from these rare occurrences when people say mean stuff on the internet I think

    what does it all mean???

    Some people would say that this sort of question is inherently trivial and meaningless. Others would disagree and say no actually this is of much import you stupid nihilist pikachu.

    I know what I’ve learned today though… kraft bagel-fuls – “the quick on-the go bagel filled with Philadelphia cream cheese” – are revolting. Do not put these in your mouf.

    happyfeet (760ba3)

  24. We apologize for the poor comedic judgment.

    Am I the only one who thinks that sounds an awful lot like “We’re sorry you are so stupid that you didn’t get the joke”?

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  25. They are completely without guile, and truly do not know malice.

    As Palin has said, these people make you reconsider what constitutes a perfect person. Are they disabled, or is it the other way around? Ken appears to have a much deeper deficit.

    And now I’m considering what it must be like to have a petty and vicious man like Ken for a father. Some kid out there has that to look up to. What happens when they gain access to the internet? In all likelihood, they become a Republican.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  26. Consider that two wrongs never make a right
    But that THREE………do.

    Neo (03e5c2)

  27. Jay Leno-Sarah Palin is going to israel as if muslims aren’t suffering enough.

    More like it Jayson.

    DohBiden (15aa57)

  28. “We’re sorry you are so stupid that you didn’t get the joke”?

    That’s exactly what it means, Scott. Ken has gone on and on, for years, about how funny it is that morons don’t get his satire. Somewhere I read him bragging that when he wrote for AOL 100% of his readers had no idea what he was trying to say. Ha Ha Ha. Of course, Tommy Christopher has very well explained that joking about mentally disabled people having sex or incest causes downs just isn’t coherent satire of anything Sarah Palin or Trig (the actual target) has done.

    My take is that they love saying ‘you didn’t get it’, but the best way they can make that happen is to tell jokes that are just nonsense. Like ‘The dead baby was stapled to the chicken’ jokes.

    The joke is ‘I just shocked you’. My dog sneaks up on me and surprises me for humor sometimes. It is no exaggeration to say that my dog is a superior comedian to Ken or Rick.

    It’s a complete non-apology, and they certainly will not be offering Trig or Trig’s family any contrition. No, Sarah Palin / her family cannot be treated as human, because then someone might be infected with their arguments. Ken’s whiny liberal commentary over the years makes it clear this nastiness is political.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  29. I believe the distinction, actually, is whether you are attempting to hide the existence of the page or acknowledging (in its place) that you realize it was in poor taste.

    In other words, if the link winds up in once sense or another at “404 not found”, then you’re attempting to hide your error.

    If instead, it winds up at “Uh, Sorry. We realized this page was in bad taste and have removed it”, then you’re merely acknowledging that you made an error, which is, if not utterly forgivable, it’s at least acceptable.

    The attention-setting blog might get one more post noting that the errant site has acked their mistake (allowing one crow caw) but not much more after that.

    And by making that crow caw, the attention-setting site is gaining some “right” points, but you can also see that the errant site ALSO earns some “right” points… they said they were wrong and apologized. People are more likely to remember that than the error itself.

    IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (c9dcd8)

  30. Are they disabled, or is it the other way around?

    Simple answer: Which one can function in the real world, without external protection?

    Any question/argument about the answer? Therefore, is there any question as to which is “disabled” (i.e., “less capable of functioning than the average person“). No? I didn’t think so.

    Q.E.D. — Question asked and answered.

    We can all desire a universe where the rule of “everything feeds off the death of other things” isn’t The First Rule Of Existence, but that’s not the universe we live in. Reality always rears its ugly head.

    Parents want their children to be whole, healthy, and, most critically, capable of functioning in the Real World without them. Down’s types are largely not capable of this.

    IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (c9dcd8)

  31. This sickens me. I know Ken Layne from my college days, and have long had a high regard for him. He’s very talented and perceptive. I was sorry that Ken joined the leftist auto-da-fe against Palin. Guess that’s what you’ve got to do to be a real individualist.

    I think Ken’s got some serious self-hatred going on right now for being hypocritical — a trait he detests in other people. He’s too self-aware not to recognize it in himself.

    Money, of course, is the reason for Ken’s multiple reversals. Wonkette is a business first. The writing and posturing must give way to that reality.

    As a father and husband, Ken’s simply not free to say what he thinks and damn the consequences. His air of being above it all has been punctured. He’s been shown up as a conflicted, compromised mortal, just like much of humanity. That knowledge has got to sting.

    I wonder: Were the nasty attacks on Palin and other conservatives also just part of Wonkette’s business model — attracting eyeballs by feeding red meat to the left?

    Ken, take a look at that portrait in the attic. Do you even recognize it anymore?

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (c30fbb)

  32. “Somewhere I read him bragging that when he wrote for AOL 100% of his readers had no idea what he was trying to say.”

    Not that many people speak maggotese.

    Dave Surls (259925)

  33. Bradley, it’s great to see you around, and I hope you’re getting along well.

    Thanks for the insight into this man.

    Frankly, it’s a relief to hear that Ken would feel self loathing for his hypocrisy and fundamental compromised condition. That is better than not feeling anything after this kind of obscenity. I guess I wasn’t thinking about the fact that as he abuses the Palin family (his apology certainly blames them for Rick’s attack), he’s actually abusing himself. You make a perceptive point yourself that he is actually a conformist, too.

    I hope he comes around. Everyone can.

    Igotbupkis, there is more than one way to identify essential functions. These two men lack something I find more important than being able to independently feed myself. I hope I didn’t annoy you with some notion that Downs is not a serious and difficult condition. I realize it’s quite a challenge for the family. But there’s something those people have that we all should pay attention to for its merits, while we acknowledge the things that aren’t so convenient.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  34. The fact that Ken would feel self loathing about his own hypocrisy – and not for failing to FIRE the little s**t the second that post was made – tells me a lot about the guy…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  35. Hi Dustin, thanks for the kind words. I’ve been out and about a lot, and have been mostly lurking these last few weeks.

    Scott, Ken firing Stuef would have been the biggest imaginable act of hypocrisy. Stuef has written before mocking Trig, and Ken encouraged it and praised it. It’s part of Wonkette’s business model. And if Stuef were fired, he just might make that known in uncomfortable detail.

    Wonkette needs to bring in the lefty true believers, and there’s nothing like mockery of Palin and the son she didn’t abort to make the far left happy. I’d love to see Wonkette throw stones at Fox News for allegedly slanting the news to appease its audience. Wonkette is a nice glass house.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (08536c)

  36. Bradley,

    Interesting that you liked Layne. Matt Welch is buddies with him. And I like Matt Welch. Yet I find Layne to be the lowest type of human scum, with seemingly no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  37. And I agree, we have missed you, Bradley.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  38. sometimes you gotta look real hard to see the good in people

    happyfeet (760ba3)

  39. Unintended irony at #39?

    Gazzer (339c2e)

  40. heh.

    Agreed, Gazzer…

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  41. BroBrad!!

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  42. Maybe this will be the next post removed

    http://gop12.thehill.com/2011/04/republicans-scuttle-palins-oil-tax.html

    EricPWJohnson (6c5758)

  43. Sarah Palin’s record as governor of Alaska has largely gone unchallenged by conservatives, despite the fact that one of her signature legacies was imposing an oil profits tax — a distinctly liberal idea.

    – The Hill GOP12

    EricPWJohnson (6c5758)

  44. More hate speech on Palin…

    Democrats, though, stood strong with Palin in opposing any rollback on the tax hike

    Said here first on Patterico (by me) – but classified as hate speech like Ken’s by some commentators here:

    But Palin’s oil tax increase is much more problematic for the campaign trail, and it could become a headache as she makes the case that she’s a tax-cutting, philosophical conservative.

    I dont agree with the article’s drawing conclusions on her 1.2 million dollar windfall – that any alaskan was eligble for

    EricPWJohnson (6c5758)

  45. People unclear on the concept #3244.

    Honestly, dude, you are just DCSCA without spellchecking running. A human Weeble.

    Simon Jester (11e8e7)

  46. From the article, which is dated three weeks ago;

    A companion oil-tax bill is still in committee in the Senate. Senate leaders have said they aren’t interested in passing it before the Legislature adjourns for the year on April 17. Bills have a two-year lifespan and Parnell could always try again with the Senate next year if he can’t get senators to flip now.

    narciso (79ddc3)

  47. “More hate speech on Palin…”

    Don’t worry, dude, your blind hatred of Palin comes through loud and clear.

    The subject of the thread is a vile lefty attack on a three year child, and how the lefties are busily trying to make the fallout from it go away, now that’s it affecting their profit margin, but you just can’t resist changing the subject to demonstrate how much your hatred for Sarah Palin is justified.

    You’re basically pathological.

    Dave Surls (b7b4a0)

  48. And a fabulist. Just like IMP.

    JD (318f81)

  49. Hey, let’s talk about Palin! In a post about Ken Layne’s hypocrisy!

    Actually, let’s not. Find a more relevant thread and stop derailing this one.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  50. Yes, good to see Bro. Bradley contributing, and I understand and agree with your point about the forces at work.
    But the love of money is the root of all sorts of evil, and when a considerable number of people routinely do things against their own principles and better judgement for the sake of more money, it should not be surprising that the sum total for society is a lot of dysfunction. Yes, it is a very difficult decision regarding how much of your conscience can be violated before deciding to seek other employment, and some in desperation put up with doing things they hate.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  51. When originally asked if Palin was a good governor EricPW could not answer because he believe it is her duty to serve the interests of out of state oil companies rather than the citizens of Alaska. He is an unabashed oil company shill as has been shown time after time on this blog and a trafficking in smears is his stock in trade.

    His inability to converse with principles, honor and integrity on the internet leave me with few doubts why he has trouble in his personal life.

    A more honest view of the legislative action surrounding Palin’s original oil bill is presented here:

    http://biggovernment.com/wpitcher/2011/04/05/the-lingering-influence-of-crony-capitalism-and-big-oil-in-alaskan-politics/

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  52. Sorry Patterico, I was finding a link and missed your 51.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  53. MD in Philly,
    “But the love of money is the root of all sorts of evil . . .”

    I’d substitute “power” for “money,” especially when that power is linked to a belief in one’s own righteousness. This is true of secular as well as religious theocrats.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (a18ddc)

  54. #29–you have to wonder if 100% of your readers don’t understand what you wrote, if the problem lies not with your audience, but with the author.
    And the sky on his planet is red.

    Rochf (f3fbb0)

  55. I dislike Palin and thoroughly disagree with her politics, but have a very hard time understanding why others on the left engage in the thoroughly ugly practice of bashing her over Trig. I can be pro-choice and still admire a couple who decides to have a child with Downs syndrome. My sense is that most people admire this, whatever their politics. Attacking her on this point is both wrong and politically stupid.

    Wonkette’s crude and ugly post has drawn scorn from sources coming from varied points on the political spectrum. That is as it should be.

    Angeleno (2ffd38)

  56. Angeleno, it is because those of the Left ( and a denizen or two here ) need to continuously reassure themselves of their superiority over Sarah Palin by engaging in these attacks upon her and her family. Its a tribal bonding thing.

    They only succeed in establishing their inferiority of character however.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  57. Plenty of tribal bonding going on, right and left. Quite a bit goes on in the comments here.

    Angeleno (2ffd38)

  58. Ah yes the same EricPW who used the left’s talking points about the duke lacrosse players has a lot of nerve to question Palin’s conservatism.

    And nice to know EricPW hates alaska’s constitution.

    DohBiden (15aa57)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1919 secs.