219 Comments »

1. Mark said,

   July 9, 2006 at 10:55

   Ya see, I come here for the jokes… and I stay for the ass kicking.

2. celticgirl said,

   July 9, 2006 at 11:41

   Whoa, nice work Gavin. I wonder how that felt for CY, getting his ass all detached and having it handed to him wrapped up like a present with a big bow on top?

   I think ‘polite discourse’ disappeared from the blogosphere some time back…

3. Richard 23 said,

   July 9, 2006 at 12:05

   Thanks Gavin. I apologize for threatening to slap you guys with my cock. I hereby resign.

4. MattR said,

   July 9, 2006 at 12:08

   The sad thing of course is that Deb was not seriously threatening anyone in anyway. I was just going through her history at that site and she was very clearly playing the “troll” role. Unsurprisingly, she was subjected to various sexual and physical comments which she did not like. She said “You wouldn’t tolerate it if some nasty troll started making jokes about Jeff’s children (saw the tyke reference in the post that started it all) being run over, kidnapped, etc. It’s over the line to make even vaguely threatening references to people’s real lives. So don’t do it anymore. Jeff, if you want me to perform as Professor Moonbat here at your zoo, you need to tell your pals there are rules. I’m going to take my tinfoil hat and kazoo somewhere else if you allow people to continue to try to diss me by referring to my body parts.” That was several days before any of the “threatening” quotes. Reads to me like she was trying to do an Ann Coulter imitation and it went over all of their heads (she even references that she is emulating a famous right wing figure)

5. Flying Rodent said,

   July 9, 2006 at 13:23

   What, there aren’t enough scary things going on in the world? Are these guys having to make stuff up be frightened of now?

   It’s a bit of a leap in tone, if you know what I mean - it’s one thing to be told by country-dwellers and suburbanites that we townies should agree with their insane reflections on the lessons of the London bombings, quite another to be informed that an email from some mouthy professor proves our collective malfeasance.

   For the record, threatening children is bad. I am opposed to it. On the other hand, insulting Jeff Goldstein is good, and I condone it!

   The little twat.

6. modus potus said,

   July 9, 2006 at 13:49

   She may have been provoked, and the Right certainly doesn’t seem to have any boundaries of discourse it’s not prepared to violate routinely, but I really don’t find her means of attack (or counter-attack) excusable, or see any reason to minimize it. Sure, it’s just one fistful of slime on top of the mountain of slime emanating from the Right, and we shouldn’t be afraid to point that out — repeatedly, and forcefully, as Gavin did. But making excuses for Deborah Frisch only feeds their game, and supports someone who at best showed extremely poor judgement.

7. Bistroist said,

   July 9, 2006 at 13:53

   Is there nothing The [Psychotic] LeftTM won’t stoop to?

8. Bistroist said,

   July 9, 2006 at 13:53

   Hmm. Dammit, the sup tag worked in preview.

9. Mark A said,

   July 9, 2006 at 15:10

   Remember, folks. Your decision to support Frisch’s comments with comments like “… Deb was not seriously threatening anyone in anyway. I was just going through her history at that site and she was very clearly playing the “trollâ€? role …” means that you condone discourse such as:

   I’d like to hear more about your “tyke” by the way. Girl? Boy? Toddler? Teen? Are you still married to the woman you ephed to give birth to the tyke?

   Tell all, bro!

   And

   [...] as I said elsewhere, if I woke up tomorrow and learned that someone else had shot you and your “tyke” it wouldn’t slow me down one iota. You aren’t “human” to me.

   [...]

   So if you could just tell me the AGE and SEX of your “tyke,” I’d be stoked!

   Thanx!

   And

   Ooh. Two year old boy. Sounds hot. You live in Colorado, I see. Hope no one Jon-Benets your baby.

   Are you still married to the woman you humped to produce the toddler?

   And

   I reiterate: If some nutcase kidnapped your child tomorrow and did to her what was done to your fellow Coloradan, Jon-Benet Ramsey, I wouldnÂ’t give a damn.

   And

   Give your pathetic progeny (I sure hope that mofo got good genes from his mama!) a big fat tongue-filled kiss from me! LOTS AND LOTS OF SALIVA from Auntie MOONBAT, if you donÂ’t mind!

   Somehow, Jeffy boy, I think you get off on the possibility of Frenching your pathetic progeny, even if it is a boy. You seem like a VERY, VERY sick mofo to me, bro.

   And

   Just my two cents: The pathetic jeffy boy goldstein plays the jew card 24/7. DidnÂ’t you notice?

   THIS IS A CESSPOOL!!! GET OUT WHILE YOU CAN!!!!

   JEFF!!! DRINK THE KOOLAID AND LET YOUR WIFE RAISE THE little Goldstein Junior!

   And

   I am SHAKING, I tell you, SHAKING!!! in my boots at the prosect at an FBI and/or state police trooper tromping down my driveway to see if I was a threat to the progeny of the pissant name of Jeff “pissant” Goldstein of the pathetic, neutered, sissified, state of Colorado. I don’t give a rat’s ass whether the pissant’s progeny live or die, but I have no intention of snuffing the mofo’s chillen myself.

   Your original post can be summarized in two phrases: “They started it” and “They’re worse than Frisch.” Do you really believe that Frisch’s comments are acceptable? Do you truly want discussions to be at this level?

   If you want to convince me that the “progressive” way is somehow superior, show me that the level of conversation can be elevated above
   

   All else aside, fuck you, you thin smear of human slime.

   Until then…

   I

10. Rob G said,

    July 9, 2006 at 15:35

    Mark A,

    As Gavin demonstrated, we have raised the level of discourse. It’s just that your buddies set the bar so damn low. Gavin’s parting shot was polite by your friends’ standards.

    Oh, by the way, fuck you.

11. Jillian said,

    July 9, 2006 at 15:38

    I don’t think it matters whether she was “trying to give them a taste of their own medicine” or not - comments like that are over the line.

    That being said…..who the hell is she? And why should any of us care who she is? And furthermore - how is she representative of “The Left” (or anything else) when no one has ever even heard of her before?

    The day Al Franken threatens to slap Jeff Goldstein across the face with his cock, I’ll pay attention. Until then…yawn.

12. rj said,

    July 9, 2006 at 15:57

    Hmm… shooting your mouth off about not feeling bad if someone’s kid dies…

    Directly threatening private individuals and helping to prop up a war that has resulted in the maiming or killing of innumerable kids…

    Yup, sounds about equivalent to me.

13. mikey said,

    July 9, 2006 at 16:06

    Seems to me the denizens of Right Blogistan are really scraping the bottom of the barrel in search of The Leftist Outrage of the Day ™. An utter nobody goes off on JG (like THATS never hapened before!) and all of a sudden everybody with the common sense to recognize that the current administration, as represented by the Republican Right, is incompetent, dishonest, venal, racist and corrupt is also a toddler-killer. Jeez, some of these people really need a new hobby. Something to fill the hours of the days when there’s really not that much to talk about. Maybe they could learn to love really bad music videos and kittens?

    mikey

14. Otto Man said,

    July 9, 2006 at 16:27

    Great post, Gavin.

    I was also struck by CY’s condemnation of the liberal blogs for not denouncing this person we’d never heard of, making a comment on a blog we’d never read. Seriously, was our Spidey sense supposed to go off as soon as she hit “submit comment”?

    Just because Jeff Goldstein is the center of his universe, doesn’t mean he’s the center of ours. Besides, with all his cock-slapping and dog-ass fingering, that universe is a creepy, creepy place.

15. Porgy Tirebiter said,

    July 9, 2006 at 16:29

    Your original post can be summarized in two phrases: “They started it� and “They’re worse than Frisch.� Do you really believe that Frisch’s comments are acceptable? Do you truly want discussions to be at this level?

    Let me try to explain to you how incredibly fucking stupid that is. There are several, if not many, levels of badness. Just for the sake of argument, let’s pretend there are 11 and label them 0 to 10, with 10 being, say, the Holocaust, and 0 being totally neutral, like, say, a hammer. You idiots are continually engaged in, or cheerleading for, behavior in the 7 to 8 range. Maybe 9. Frisch’s tantrum was a 5. Get it? Still bad. Not good. Not “acceptable.” But utterly, and unfortunately, relatively mundane. In other words, who the fuck cares if some idiot gets all riled up at Goldstein and says some crazy stupid shit? Goldstein lives for that kind of thing. Haven’t you noticed?

16. Doghouse Riley said,

    July 9, 2006 at 16:51

    Sure, Mark. Y’know, I don’t imagine Gavin really bothers with trying to argue morality with the High Council of Hypocrites, so anything he has to say is in the nature of informing people who may not know how Goldstein or Malkin work, or what they’re up to at the moment, just what’s what.

    And if you expect people to act like the morality police you might take a moment to consider what the actual police do. If you’re an innocent, law-abiding citizen who is wronged, the police might come and protect you or help you get restituition. If, on the other hand, you’re a notorious two-bit grifter who calls in because he just got the shit kicked out of him by an angry pigeon, they might just look at you and laugh. All clear now?

17. Hysterical Woman said,

    July 9, 2006 at 17:17

    Liberals acutally support women killing their children just because they’re sluts.

    The children are sluts? (Oh no, I’m a child molester!)

18. Mark A said,

    July 9, 2006 at 17:25

    “Fuck you.” “You idiot.”

    Okay, okay, it’s clear to me now. The level of discourse has been raised because “we have raised the level of discourse.” How, in any way, was I insulting or threatening in my post that warranted such “elevated” responses? You have no idea of who I am or what I believe other than what my post contained yet some commenters respond in this manner.

    If nothing else, I have my answer.

19. Otto Man said,

    July 9, 2006 at 17:44

    Before Confederate Yankee blasts all of us liberals for our evil insensitivity, let me apologize to Mark A. on behalf of all liberaldom.

    Perhaps it’s the five years of being called “America-haters,” “traitors,” and “terrorist sympathizers” that has lowered our sensitivity levels when it comes to name calling. We’ve forgotten that there are a few people out there who haven’t been constantly villified for the past half decade and whose little ears might burn at profanity.

    So I’m sorry your feelings were hurt, Felicity.

20. Mark A said,

    July 9, 2006 at 18:05

    Otto Man,

    Thanks for the thought. My feelings are far tougher than that and are just fine. If name-calling is the best we can do then we have no room to complain when others do it.

    I’m really unhappy with the response to Frisch’s trolling and the pass she’s getting because those on the right
    

    “… ‘defensively’ attack immigrants, gays, poor people, Muslims as a category, the far left as a political force, and random puny targets like Ward Churchill, Deborah Frisch, and small groups of students at UC Santa Cruz. If they ever decided to go up against someone with power or the ability to fight back… But why speak of things which will never be? These are cowards and bullies, the worst of America.”

    This is blatantly overblown rhetoric that does absolutely nothing to demonstrate that people on the left have anything to offer, which I believe they do.

    Frisch was way over the top (contrary to Porgy Tirebiter’s assessment) and should be condemned by people on both sides. Jeff G.’s comments noted above should also be condemned (which I most emphatically do.) Mindless polarization on both sides serves no one.

    *end of pontification*

21. g said,

    July 9, 2006 at 18:11

    I like Mark’s “folks” designation for it’s ability to encompass not only all posters here at Sadly, No, and all liberals as well. Good job, Mark!!

    So, squaring my shoulders and stepping up to take my personal responsiblity, Mark, I have to say - yes, I have sinned greviously.

    I have sinned, by my failure to visit Pasty’s site on a regular basis, along with any and all other right-wing sites, and reading not only all the posts, but all the comment threads therein. And in compounding of that sin, I have sinned by not reading Deborah Frisch’s comments, and being righteously aghast at them. And I have further compounded my sins by not immediately registering to those many right wing sites and, as a bonafide representative of the Left, posting my comments condemning her comments. And I have failed yet again, by not emailing at once to the Right wing sites that do not accept comments. And, further, I have sinned by not starting my own blog immediately, for the sole purpose of posting my condemnation of this horrendous, why this absolutely horrendous offense against a poor, gentle, inoffensive cock-slapper.

    Yes, I in my ignorance and failure to monitor the entire blogoshere 24/7, and guilty of allowing Deborah Frisch’s comments to go uncondemned for an entire 12 hours.

    We, the left, are guilty. There’s nothing more to be said.

22. rj said,

    July 9, 2006 at 18:24

    Mark A,

    There’s a fundamental problem with these “lefties should condemn so-and-so” games: although one can find despicable rhetoric on both sides, the right-wing side is widely publicized and lauded by the mainstream media. A typical exchange goes something like this -

    (1) A bunch of right-wing psychopaths are given copious airtime on national TV to call for the literal execution of journalists for publishing public information.
    (2) Liberals rightly decry these statements
    (3) Conservatives respond with, “When Prof. Lester Q. Bumblefuck of Northwest Kansas Polytechnic posted a blog comment saying he wished Christians would just die already, where was the liberal outrage? Huh? Huh? Tolerance, indeed.”

    These are not equivalent positions, and I don’t see why you pretend otherwise.

23. jpj said,

    July 9, 2006 at 18:25

    Mark A.:

    I don’t see a lot of defenses of Frisch’s comments here. I see calls for perspective. Frisch made some offensive comments BUT has already apologized and resigned her job. Frisch was NOT an Atrios or Daily Kos but a blogger with minimum traffic, at least before this latest dustup.

    By contrast, much bigger conservative bloggers have called for outright genocide of millions of people, both foreign and domestic. They sell merchandise that calls for killing of journalists and liberals. And yet, those very people who are now claiming for the condemnation of Frisch have been silent for years in the face of those actions. Commentators here are suggesting that they have no standing to be offended in the face of far milder comments from Frisch.

    Finally, we have been pointing out the inconsistency between declared outrage at Frisch’s comments adn the very real deaths of very real children that this country has caused over the past five years. The conservative blogosphere does not think all lives are equal: if the child is that of a fellow conservative then it should not be threatened, but if the child is across the globe then they don’t care if it lives or dies, indeed the often express joy at the deaths of THOSE children.

    Perhaps you can help us out be linking to conservative websites that have condemned the multiple calls for genocide that Gavin has posted here. And then link to liberal commentators who have rushed to join Frisch’s call that someone “Jon Benet” Goldstein’s child. Then, perhaps, your calls that it is LIBERALS who have degraded the discourse might be credible.

24. CS Lewis Jr. said,

    July 9, 2006 at 18:29

    We all realize this is totally meaningless in the greater scheme of things except as a demonstration of the fact that few on either the Left or the Right are interested in engaging the other side in adult debate? Because we think they’re authoritarian chickenhawk fucktards and they think we’re Godless butt-fucking traitors? Right? Who in their right mind wants to debate a prick like Jeff Goldstein or a fatuous idiot like David Brooks? I have intelligent right-wing friends I can argue constructively with, but real bipartisan conversation in the public sphere is dead for the time being, thanks to decades of Wingnuts shitting in the punchbowl. Now that the left is flinging the turds right back at them, they do their predictable pearl-clutching kabuki bullshit, and we’re supposed to give a millifuck about their shocked sensibilities? Wingnut, please.

25. Jillian said,

    July 9, 2006 at 18:35

    Here’s something to think about….

    Imagine if there really WERE a left-wing equivalent to Ann Coulter or Michelle Malkin. Imagine if there were some really big name leftie who routinely stood up and called for the President’s head on a pike, who wondered aloud why more people didn’t burn down conservative churches, who loudly declaimed that religious people were devoid of morals and a blight on the American landscape, who dreamed about how great it would have been if the fourth hijacked plane had made it to the White House - but only if everyone related to the Bush clan had been inside at the time.

    Can you imagine the reaction they’d get, and not just from the American right wing, but from moderate, mainstream Americans who don’t really give much of a shit about politics?

    Now, stop and think for a minute what it says about Americans that you don’t see an equivalent response to the one you just imagined every time Ann Coulter opens her hate-filled maw.

    There are times that Americans make it easy to hate America, I’m sad to say.

26. protected static said,

    July 9, 2006 at 18:39

    Otto Man - “5 years”? Rush has been bloviating a lot longer than that, and his zombie army has been regurgitating it the whole time. A decade ago (longer, in some cases), this was par for the course - they’ve been doing it so long, they don’t even see the problem with it any more.

    This is nothing new - and now that the f*ckers on the Right are getting a taste of their own medicine, they don’t like it. Waaaanh. Let them complain to someone who cares… I sure don’t.

    I for one am perfectly willing to ‘raise the level of discourse’ - when I am no longer being called a traitor by their mainstream mouthpieces.

27. Sherman said,

    July 9, 2006 at 18:43

    What rj said. If liberals had to denounce every stupid thing said on Kos or DU, and know about every post as soon as it goes up, we’d never get to gay-marrying terrorists and taking away your guns!

    And if wingnuts had to denounce everything stupid said on their countless dumbass blogs, they would have to quit their day jobs as perfessers in Podunk, Tenn.

    Intemperate, stupid shit gets said on blegs. The anonymity of the internets makes this happen far, far more often than it would in real life.

    Plus, Goldstein’s cockslapping.

28. ed said,

    July 9, 2006 at 18:47

    From Mark A. “Do you really believe that Frisch’s comments are acceptable? Do you truly want discussions to be at this level?”

    No one here said her comments were acceptable. They have just been pointing out the hypocrisy of the right demanding apologies from the left for something they didn’t do. Pure silliness.

    Let me provide you with a counter example to point out how stupid you sound.

    When you posted in this thread, Mark A., did you condemn the actions of the conservative bomber Eric Rudolf? I’m sure I didn’t see it in any of your posts. Does that mean that you find his actions acceptable? By your logic you do. I just searched Goldstein’s and Malkin’s blogs for “eric rudolf” and I saw no apologies, and they’ve had years to get them up (in fact one of only two mentions of Rudolf on PW was by commenter SW talking about the SCOTUS’ Kelo decision, “That does it. I hate to go all “Eric Rudolfâ€?, but I want a constitutional amendment to take back the property rights the constitution used to protect.”. which could almost be seen as condoning his tactics).

    So either you apologize, and get each and every member of the conservative movement to apologize for the actions of Eric Rudolf or we will simply assume you agree with him.

29. tigrismus said,

    July 9, 2006 at 18:48

    Mark A, you are a concern troll, plain and simple, and no we don’t want to convince you “that the “progressiveâ€? way is somehow superior:” we don’t give a damn that those who embrace, if not personally further, their own sides’ long-historied use of hateful and eliminationist rhetoric cluck their tongues because we weren’t condemnatory enough quickly enough for their delicate tastes because some nobody from nowhereville wrote something vile where we didn’t read it. If that’s too “they did it first” for your beautiful mind, tough shit; it’s called pull the truckload of beams from your own damn eye before you wring your hands over our speck.

30. Bloated Plutocrats » Blog Archive » It’s never enough said,

    July 9, 2006 at 19:11

    [...] Well, not really. But hey, if two commenters at Daily Kos can stand in for the entire Kos community, then maybe someone left a comment somewhere about Frisch that can be blown up into a general indictment of all liberals everywhere. Or maybe Confederate Yankee means ‘the psychotic left’ in a literal sense — meaning some unknown community of people with clinical psychoses who coincidentally share progressive views with, you know, us. [...]

31. Respectful Dissent said,

    July 9, 2006 at 19:23

    Fantastic post. Anyone who still buys “The Left and Right are Equally Bad–Let’s Find the Middle!” meme needs to spend three hours wading in the wingnut cesspool, and another three hours trying to find anything one tenth of one percent as bad in the major outposts of Left Blogostan. The Left sure is funnier, though …

32. Mal de mer said,

    July 9, 2006 at 19:24

    The level of discourse has been raised because “we have raised the level of discourse.

    Go to hell, you self-righteous blowhard.

    Oh, and fuck you.

33. JK47 said,

    July 9, 2006 at 19:29

    When Ann Coulter is forced to close up shop and never open her pie hole in public ever again, then I’ll take the wingnuts seriously on this issue. The hypocrisy on the right is of the most rank sort. I am so fucking sick of those people acting like victims. They created an atmosphere of hate and fear in this country that I don’t know if we’ll ever be able to shake off. They can deal with the consequences when the hate they created comes back to slap its cock in their faces.

34. joe said,

    July 9, 2006 at 19:33

    I really have no clue to who this Frisch lady is, I’ve never read her blog, nor do I intend to start. There is just too much to read already. That being said… I did read Confederate Yankee, and will admit to reading him a few times in the past, though mostly becuase I’ve found links to some of his more outragous attacks, and wanted to read the context. Unfortunately it appears that Con Yank only has one context: blow things out of proportion by pretending one persons actions prove all liberals are scum, and then drum up the hordes of pseudo-conservatives for attack.

    So long as we are going that route, I’d like to point out that there are no liberal KKK members, in fact every one of them is a conservative christian. I, as an independant yet liberal idealist, find it difficult to pigeonhole every conservative, or every christian, as racist, murderous hooded Klansmen. But maybe if i can start thinking conservatively, I will manage to fit my head into that pathetic little box.

    Ms. Frisch’s comments, while tasteless, are in no way a threat. If she was truly channeling Coulter…ughh, She was pathetically bad at it. Coulter wouldnt have drawn the line at not caring if something happened, coulter would at the very least hope that someone would do it, if not ask that someone do it. This is the harpy who wished the New york times had been attacked by terrorists, that called for the death or conversion of all muslims, and is currently being proven to have stolen much of her “best seller” writings on top of everything else.

35. Dorothy said,

    July 9, 2006 at 19:43

    Mark A.,

    If you want to convince me that the “progressive� way is somehow superior, show me that the level of conversation can be elevated above
    “All else aside, fuck you, you thin smear of human slime.”

    To quote John Stewart’s response to Tucker Carlson accusing the Daily Show of doing “softball” interviews with Democratic leaders: “Dude, my lead-in show is puppets making crank calls! You’re on CNN!”

    Why is it the responsibility of the kitten-war starting, video-battle escalating, Pastor-Swank-mocking proprietors of Sadly, No! to “convince” you that the “progressive way is superior”? Have you not noticed that this is a satire blog? (Of course, I don’t recognize you as a regular poster, so you may not have.) When you’re looking for rhetorical skill and eloquent debate on detailed policy issues, do you turn on Jay Leno or MacNeil Lehrer? Getting annoyed at Jay Leno for making wise cracks about people and flippant comments on important issues is stupid: that’s what he does. If you don’t like it, turn the show off. If you don’t like the satire of Sadly, No!, hit the BACK button and get on with your life. You’ll be happier, I promise.

    Several people have already addressed the hypocrisy of the issue at hand and the difference in degree on each side. If you can’t see the difference between “some obscure person makes tasteless comments about not feeling bad if Goldstein’s kid were to die” and “a nationally syndicated columnist with several books and weekly TV appearances repeatedly advocates the extermination of Muslims and the execution of NY Times employees”, then you are either willfully blind or hopelessly stupid.

    As far as raising the discourse, I have a suggestion: if you honestly want to engage in a philosophical discussion, don’t open with “You people have to stop talking like this if you want to convince me!” That is the hetorical equivalent of walking onto a soccer field and saying, “I won’t play with you people if you don’t play football!” The immediate answer will always be a defensive “Fuck you”–or the more rhetorically delicate, ” I’m sorry, I don’t recall inviting you to participate in our conversation.”

    You might try opening with a question instead of a challenge, something like “I’m not up on the references here: can someone fill me in on the background of this debate?” Or maybe “Can you clarify your position on what’s-her-name’s statments? It sounds like your supporting her some places and not in others.” Heck, even “I think Goldstein has a point. Weren’t those comments out of line?”

    If, on the other hand, you are not honestly inviting conversation and are just concern trolling, then, well, fuck you.

36. Sadly, No! » Blogger Ethics Panel said,

    July 9, 2006 at 19:54

    [...] It was unprecendented. I mean, it was the first truly mutual breakup in relationship history. « Give A Man A Frisch, And He Eats For A Day. But Teach A Man To Frisch… Jul9 [...]

37. g said,

    July 9, 2006 at 20:17

    Is the victim of Frisch’s offensive words the same Jeff Goldstein who regularly threatens to slap people in the face with his penis?

    Just checking….

38. Mal de mer said,

    July 9, 2006 at 20:36

    This is the same Jeff Goldstein who’s fabricated a wife and child out of whole cloth. I don’t for a second believe this man has a family…or at least one that still lives with him.

    For that matter, I don’t even believe his name is Jeff Goldstein. You’d think after all the outrages, someone would have gotten pissed off enough by now to air whatever dirty laundry of his they could find.

    Of course, I could be wrong. That’s the beauty of being a liberal. Fearless when it comes to doubt and being wrong.

39. Stogie said,

    July 9, 2006 at 20:43

    Gavin, you are a typical Leftist. You try desperately to demonstrate some moral equivalence between the Right and Deb Frisch. Unless you can show some Righty threatening someone’s toddler with death or sexual perversion, you are simply blowing hot air.

    As for publishing someone’s private addresses and phone numbers, are you talking about the Left publishing those of 10 or 12 Swift Boat Vets? Oh yes, there was the example of Michelle Malkin posting the names, email addresses and phone numbers of four Leftists at UC Santa Cruz, but then she was only posting what had already been posted by the Lefties themselves on a Leftwing website, as they solicited Leftist support to keep the US Military recruiters off their Commie Campus.

    Now as for the dead children and the crickets, it might help if you gave some context to the photos. Who are these kids and who killed them, and what proof do you have of your accusations? I could, of course, point you to some websites that publish photos of the 300 murdered schoolchildren of Beslan, Russia, who were murdered by Muslim terrorists, the folks who are so often supported by the Left in their parades, protests and university events. See Zombie’s photo page if you would like some actual details, like the kind you never give.

    In short, Gav baby, you’re full of shit and we both know it.

40. rj said,

    July 9, 2006 at 20:49

    Stogie’s right, those kids were killed by terrorists. Everyone knows that US planes drop nothing but puppies in little parachutes and our artillery shells are made of candy canes.

    Sigh. You know, there’s been a fair bit of discussion over whether these people
    are actually lying or if they’re just stupid. My theory is that someone told them about Socratic irony and they misunderstood it as simply playing dumb all the time.

41. Gavin M. said,

    July 9, 2006 at 20:57

    Unless you can show some Righty threatening someone’s toddler with death or sexual perversion, you are simply blowing hot air.

    Ok.

42. Jeff said,

    July 9, 2006 at 20:59

    “…murdered by Muslim terrorists, the folks who are so often supported by the Left in their parades, protests and university events.”

    Stogie,

    I would have gone with, ‘the folks whose pictures you place under your pillows at night,’ or maybe ‘the folks who you worship in your temples of atheism,’ or ‘the people you are trying to get travel visas for so they can come to America.’ I mean if you’re going to make shit up, make it interesting. We’re lefties, we know what we do and what we don’t do.

    Since you’re not providing information you should at least provide entertainment.

43. Gavin M. said,

    July 9, 2006 at 21:04

    As for publishing someone’s private addresses and phone numbers, are you talking about the Left publishing those of 10 or 12 Swift Boat Vets?

    HuffPost promptly removed the comments. (They can be seen here — telephone numbers and street addresses have been blocked out by TAS.) Asked about procedures to identify and remove threatening comments, Zaleski issued a statement, “Thank you for telling us. We were not aware since we receive over up to 10,000 comments a day. We are erasing them.” She added that the offending commenters will be banned.

44. JK47 said,

    July 9, 2006 at 21:04

    Unless you can show some Righty threatening someone’s toddler with death or sexual perversion, you are simply blowing hot air.

    And thus a mighty straw man was built. You can tiptoe around it however you want, but the Right has built its entire rise to power around hate speech. One woman’s obscure rantings on a blog does not absolve you of all the hateful shit spewed by the Limbaughs, Coulters, Malkins and Goldsteinss of the world.

    I could, of course, point you to some websites that publish photos of the 300 murdered schoolchildren of Beslan, Russia, who were murdered by Muslim terrorists, the folks who are so often supported by the Left in their parades, protests and university events.

    Right, “The Left” is constantly having parades supporting murderous Muslim terrorists. You, fuckwit, are the one who is full of shit.

45. Marq said,

    July 9, 2006 at 21:05

    Sometimes the silliness of these Left-Right squabbles just makes me dizzy. I mean, was I supposed to be monitoring the comments over at Pasty’s? Was I supposed to be reading him?!? Um, eew! Sorry, don’t do it and I’m not gonna start now. I don’t even have enough time to read all the lefty blogs I’d like to every day, let alone start reading a bunch of wingnut ones. And they really aren’t worth the time and effort. If I’ve somehow run through every single leftist blog I might even consider perusing, I might (and that’s a really tenuous “might”) swing by “Balloon Juice,” since John Cole is sometimes more-or-less lucid… but only sometimes. Otherwise, Malkin, Goldstein, Powertoolz, Instacracker, Red State, Confederate Yankee?!? Fuggedaboutit!
    Not to mention, I really don’t see what all of us piling on this woman at this point would accomplish. She discovered the true reason most people don’t make comments of a similar calibre on either side–it’s cost her her job. I doubt having all of left blogistan pile on her, telling her she’s a bad person, would have as much impact as that.

46. JK47 said,

    July 9, 2006 at 21:07

    Unless you can show some Righty threatening someone’s toddler with death or sexual perversion, you are simply blowing hot air.

    Ok.

    Pwned.

47. Gavin M. said,

    July 9, 2006 at 21:15

    Now as for the dead children and the crickets, it might help if you gave some context to the photos. Who are these kids and who killed them, and what proof do you have of your accusations? I could, of course, point you to some websites that publish photos of the 300 murdered schoolchildren of Beslan, Russia, who were murdered by Muslim terrorists, the folks who are so often supported by the Left in their parades, protests and university events. See Zombie’s photo page if you would like some actual details, like the kind you never give.

    Maybe you’re right. Instead of those photos showing four dead Iraqi children, here are photos of five other dead Iraqi children, who were killed by US troops.

    Unless that’s the liberal media treasonously lying again, or whatever excuse it is this week.

    *crickets*

48. protected static said,

    July 9, 2006 at 21:24

    Gavin, you are a typical Leftist. You try desperately to demonstrate some moral equivalence between the Right and Deb Frisch. Unless you can show some Righty threatening someone’s toddler with death or sexual perversion, you are simply blowing hot air.

    Stogie, I give you this from Orcinus… Here’s Dave’s post:

    Gone whaling
    Wednesday, July 05, 2006
    I’m off to the islands with a pack of 5-year-olds this weekend. I may actually have a breaking-news post this weekend, so look for it, though I can’t promise anything. Otherwise, we’ll be communing with the orcas.

    Here’s a comment typical of those left on the above post by a troll going by the name ‘Hippie’ who lists as his homepage ‘nukeisrael!.com’:

    I hear Dave likes to lube his stick with whale grease while he packing 5 year olds. It’s okay dave we here at NAMBLA support you rights to love young boys…
    Hippie | Email | Homepage | 07.09.06 - 10:14 am |

    Any more questions? Or doesn’t this one count, seeing as he’s too right wing?

49. Gentlewoman said,

    July 9, 2006 at 21:25

    Reposted from TBogg’s comments this morning:

    OK, here are some facts:

    1. Like most liberal blog readers (I suspect), I don’t read Pasty’s blog, unless a liberal blog links to it for some reason, and not often even then.
    2. Like most liberal blog readers, I’ve never heard of this woman, and don’t read her blog either.
    3. What she did was nasty and immoral, and she has now apparently lost her job as a result.
    4. Any time you mention Pasty in a blog post, or even in comments, you will be visited by B Moe and/or Pablo. They seem to take turns playing Patrocles, and may be the same person, I don’t know. Hell, they may be Pasty himself for all I know.
    5. Pablo commented at The Editors’ place yesterday. He claimed that Thersites had made these horrible comments at PW, supposedly in retaliation for Pasty’s repeated ‘outing’ of Thersites and his wife. The comments have now been deleted, I do not know why. You would have to ask The Editors.
    6. Pablo failed to mention that Thersites had a commenter on his old blog (since deleted) during the big squabble with PW who made similar horrible comments about Thersites’ own toddler. The winger response to this was…muted. Followed, apparently, by more repeated postings of Thersites’ real name, employment, and location on PW.

    I don’t know what, if anything, these facts have to do with one another. I merely point them out, to put any more winger demands for liberal breast-beating in perspective.
    # posted by Gentlewoman : 9:51 AM

    Please take note of #5. As of yesterday afternoon, Pasty’s minion Pablo was trying to accuse an innocent person of these comments. I have seen no apology, anywhere, for this.

50. dgbellak said,

    July 9, 2006 at 21:25

    Mark A said
    I’m really unhappy with the response to Frisch’s trolling and the pass she’s getting…

    Hey guys! I’m here for the “Let’s Celebrate Frisch!” party! I brought the chips and guac!

    Wait, this doesn’t look like the place…

51. Prof. Lester Q. Bumblefuck, Northwest Kansas Polytechnic said,

    July 9, 2006 at 21:29

    Dear rj:

    I never said I wished Christians would “die already.” I said “SOME wish they would die already.”

    I got that from Fox News.

    Regards,
    Prof. L.Q. Bumblefuck
    Dept. of Dinosaur Husbandry
    NWKSPT
    (”Go Fighting Three-Toed Sloths!”)

52. Archetypal Liberal said,

    July 9, 2006 at 21:30

    *end of pontification*

    Man, I’m glad that’s over. No, but seriously, just to show you that us liberals can be just as grown up and civil as, say, you, Mark, on behalf of the Entire Liberal World, I want to apologize for the behavior of what’s-her-name, you know, the Arizona person who…said some stuff…yeah, her.

    Happy now? Now please stop annoying everybody and go back to reading Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, and, yes, Jeff “Biggest Tool in Town” Goldstein.

    Have a nice day.

53. Jillian said,

    July 9, 2006 at 21:36

    Are we going to set up a betting pool on whether or not “Stogie” has the moral fortitude to come back here and admit he was wrong?

    My money’s on “not in a million years”. Any takers?

54. ned fucking flanders said,

    July 9, 2006 at 21:45

    If you want to convince me that the “progressive� way is somehow superior, show me that the level of conversation can be elevated above

    Mark A -

    Who the fuck said that any of us were trying to convince you of anything? I suspect we wouldn’t want you in our club anyway. You’d probably just drink all our beer and forget to flush the toilets. So thanks, but no thanks.

    And regarding the superiority of the progressive way: If I gotta explain, you wouldn’t understand . . .

55. Jack said,

    July 9, 2006 at 22:20

    Hey Stogie,
    “Go hunt them down and do America a favor. Get their photo, street address, where their kids go to school, anything you can dig up, and send it to the link above. This is your chance to be famous - grab for the golden ring. ”

    Sure seems like “some Righty threatening someone’s toddler with death”, dickwad. What you fail to realize is that some random cunt on a low traffic blog (that probably got around 2 hits a day before Cockslapper-in-Chief linked to it) really just doesn’t compare to say, mAnn Coulter saying that the best way to talk to liberals (read: anyone who doesn’t support Bush when he is acting suitably wingnutty) is with a baseball bat, or saying liberals are innately treasonous, or that Timmy McVeigh should have bombed the New York Times building. But I forget, you don’t even think that Ann is even nearly as bad as Deb whats-her-name, despite the fact that Debbie is a little known know nothing who can’t controll her anger against the rather nutty cockslapper in chief, and mAnn is a famous columnist with multiple book deals and more TV Sunday morning show appearances than Micheal Moore.
    And about the dead kids, are you honestly suggesting that the US should willingly bend to the level of Checnyann suicide bombers? By the way, since I found evidence of a rightwinger calling for the death of someones children (or at least to have them implicitly ‘hunted down’), why don’t you provide us some evidence of a left blogger saying that the beslan bombings were fine and good, dumbass?

56. Mark A said,

    July 9, 2006 at 22:35

    Nope, I didn’t know this was a satire site. My first visit — the latest batch of comments has provided me with plenty of evidence.

57. Mal de mer said,

    July 9, 2006 at 22:55

    Great. Fuck off some more.

58. tigrismus said,

    July 9, 2006 at 23:03

    Evidence of what? That if the first time you ever cross the threshhold at someone else’s place you act sniffily superior and demand everyone act as you decree folks will probably think you’re an asshole and treat you accordingly?

59. Mal de mer said,

    July 9, 2006 at 23:07

    Evidence of what?

    Evidence that “potty mouth” ends up killing Iraqi children. Or supporting Saddam Hussein.

    …or something. I frankly cannot tell anymore.

60. Pinko Punko said,

    July 9, 2006 at 23:12

    Plenty of evidence that your head is in your rhetorical lab, munchwad!

61. Kevin K. said,

    July 9, 2006 at 23:15

    Stogie,

    I think the editorial illustrations on your blog are masterful. I bow before you just as I did Timmy Gleason, who did a similar kickass job in my high school newspaper. I think he drew a slightly better devil than you, though.

    I believe it might have something to do with the tits.

62. Mark A said,

    July 9, 2006 at 23:39

    Actually, I meant “evidence that this site deals in satire.” Sorry you missed the meaning.

    I don’t recall “demanding” anything, tigrismus. I stated my view and what I hoped for. You apparently know that you can “treat [me] accordingly” already since that’s exactly what you’re doing. I’m happy to see that you recognize the “superiority” I bring.

    /sarcasm

63. Mal de mer said,

    July 9, 2006 at 23:44

    don’t recall “demanding� anything, tigrismus. I stated my view and what I hoped for. You apparently know that you can “treat [me] accordingly� already since that’s exactly what you’re doing. I’m happy to see that you recognize the “superiority� I bring.

    Oh, cut the crap. Do you know how condescending you’re sounding?

    You’re not fooling anyone.

64. Kobie said,

    July 10, 2006 at 0:00

    Guys, I’m having my “Al Qaeda Appreciation” parade tomorrow and I’d love it if you came. Floats will include “How To Turn Your Child Into a Fruit,” “Make Gay Marriage Mandatory,” and “Butcher All The Conservatives’ Children In Their Sleep.”

    Oh, and Mark, you condescending little shit … go crawl back under whatever right-wing rock you wriggled out from under, asshole.

65. Kay said,

    July 10, 2006 at 0:07

    Your post was really well done but I’m unmoved about Deb Frisch.

    Somebody upthread lukewarmily defended Deb Frishch’s comments at Protien Wisdom based on their guess that she was doing an Ann Coulter imitation that the pasty’s wingnuts didn’t catch on to. Could be and I sincerely hope so because that’s the only semi-rational explanation for her comments that I can come up with..

    The fact, though, is really simple. Like her possibly immitative target(s) has done so many times, Deb Frisch went way over the line.

    Of course we can cite the hundreds (or thousands, or more) times that the right wing trolls and bloggers have done the same or much worse and, Gavin, you did a scathingly admirable job of that. But Professor Frisch strikes me a bit like Representive Jefferson - he of the frozen cash stash - just now. He may be one of ours but we are not obligated to defend him by saying but… but… but, they were sooooooo much worse. It’s not worth the time and effort and it comes off legitimately hypocritical no matter how sound the point may be.

    That Delay, Ney, Cunningham and the rubber stamp gang have demonstrated corruption indescribably more signficant and grotesque than Jefferson does not mean that Jefferson’s penny-ante corruption is defensible. That the GOP has created a byzantine culture of corruption in DC does not give Democrats any immunity if they chose to play in its darkned recesses. Quite the contrary really, Jefferson gave them the opportunity to shout “looky, looky, he did it too!!!” and I despise him for that.

    That Goldstein and members have his posse have said and done worse does not excuse or mitigate Frisch’s comments. Nor does the fact that the nutjob right personified at PW and LGF created the distrubingly violent puerile cesspool that they now choose to complain about make me feel any better about “one of our own” wallowing in it.

    So, after reading through Frisch’s blog and the PW comments and a few other wingnut references yesterday, I just wrote off Frisch. I am sorry she lost her job (resigned or whatever) but she really should have considered that she was posting sickening and threatening crap using her real name. I can’t muster much sympathy for the consequences of angry, pointless stupidity… no matter which side of the political divide it falls on. We don’t don’t need her that badly.. hell, we don’t need her at all. Until this current episode, she was not even on my radar screen or as far as I can tell was she on anybody’s radar screen except a few very nasty wingnut nerds at PW.

    There is nothing that I could find in her blog posts or comments that were terribly brilliant or original and at times, her lefty trolling aside, she’s more than a bit tin foil hatty anyway. Futher, the apology that she’d offered up (as of yesterday, anyway) was much too equivocal for my taste — if you’re going to apogize, don’t do it while you’re still flipping that person off. Sure I’d probably choke trying to apologize to Jeff Goldstein too but, then, I would like to think that no matter how angrily or even profanely I disagreed with him, that I’d never put myself in a postion that would require an apology.

66. tigrismus said,

    July 10, 2006 at 0:25

    The comments might or might not be satire, they are not all input by the proprietors and can’t be taken as “evidence” of their intent in hosting the site.

    Now, I read “Your decision to support Frisch’s comments with comments like “… Deb was not seriously threatening anyone in anyway. I was just going through her history at that site and she was very clearly playing the “trollâ€? role …â€? means that you condone discourse such as [her statements] … Do you really believe that Frisch’s comments are acceptable? Do you truly want discussions to be at this level? If you want to convince me that the “progressiveâ€? way is somehow superior, show me that the level of conversation can be elevated above…” as an indication that folks here had failed to adhere to some set of required standards as set by you, and an implicit demand that we change our behavior to suit you. Your next comment seemed to support that reading.

    I certainly recognize the sense of superiority you bring.

    All in all, it’s hard to consider you a sincere interlocutor when your first comment was universally condemnatory and based on strawman argumentation, and every comment after a variation on the theme “see, my predjudice was proven correct.”

67. tigrismus said,

    July 10, 2006 at 0:31

    That was to MarkA, not to Kay.

68. Pinko Punko said,

    July 10, 2006 at 0:54

    I love it when tigrismus batters up.

69. Patkin said,

    July 10, 2006 at 0:56

    Kay: The problem is, we can’t win. If we bring up the blatant wrong-headedness of the right, they scourge the Internets looking for one guy in Bumblefuck, New Mexico that is a leftist and said something rotten. Who we then have to apologize for. And then can’t attack the right for THEIR wrong-headedness, boundless as it is, because they found That One Guy That Proves The Left Is Psychotic.

    I don’t know who this lady is. I don’t care who she is. But the right’s managed to co-opt her as a shield from our atatcks on them because look, she said these bad things, so how can you target us, you hypocritical leftists?

70. Mark A said,

    July 10, 2006 at 0:56

    Thanks, tigrisimus. I truly (no sarcasm) appreciate a thoughtful response that contains cogent criticism such as yours.

    It is not my intention to hold anyone to my standards — I have a hard enough time adhering to my standards myself. I’m tired of the extraordinarily low level of dialogue around the blogosphere (see mal de mer and Kobie above). Aren’t you?

    I take issue with dismissing Deb’s comments as “playing the troll.” I view trolling as a fairly simple and stupid activity in general although some can be very creative. Deb could undoubtedly call Jeff G. any name in the book, comment on his sexual prowess/IQ/table manners to her heart’s content without a blink from me — Jeff G. is publishing his own blog and elects to allow (mostly) open commenting so he knows the kind of trash a troll will talk.

    I maintain it is over the line to attack the author’s family, pet’s, house, place of employment, etc. I disapprove in the extreme of anyone (other than the one involved in the conversation) calling someone’s employer or spouse or anyone outside the conversation unless there is conduct potentially over the line of “legality”. For example, those people who frequent Jeff G.’s site that sent email to Deb’s boss should butt out — they have no dog in the fight.

    Do you agree with this? As Dorothy pointed out above, I should ask open questions here and seek your opinions. I want to know yours.

71. Gentlewoman said,

    July 10, 2006 at 1:15

    Mark A:

    Did you see my post at 21:25 above? I consider this woman’s comments to be horrible and immoral.

    Did you read #6 in that list? JG is not the only person that this has happened to. His response to the other occurrence was to post the personal information of the child’s father. Repeatedly. Now, do you think this was a responsible or a civil action?

    Among the reponses of one of his minions (who may, in fact be the blogger himself, I don’t know) was (see #5 in the list) to go to a liberal blog and accuse that father of having posted these disgusting comments at PW.

    Now, we have found out that this is not true.

    Notice I do not bring in the many and varied horrors of the actions, political or personal, of other winger blogs. I confine my observations to the blog which has raised the uproar in this particular case, and drawn these other bloggers in to ‘defend’ him and his child.

    Now, tell me again, you wish our response to this sort of conduct to be what, precisely?

    Civil? Reasoned? What makes you think that whatever our response was, would make a fucking iota of difference?

72. Kobie said,

    July 10, 2006 at 1:18

    Hey Mike A — nobody is condoning the comments made on Cockslap’s blog, you nitwit. What we object to is the blatant fucking hypocrisy of the wingnuts who expect everyone to the left of Joe McCarthy to publicly flog some lame-ass blogger nobody’s ever heard of while at the same time applauding hatemongers like Malkin and Coulter.

73. Mal de mer said,

    July 10, 2006 at 1:25

    love it when tigrismus batters up.

    No kidding. She’s a hero of mine

    …you are a “she” aren’t you?

74. tigrismus said,

    July 10, 2006 at 1:30

    I posted my opinion of her statements in my first post, that what she wrote was vile. The fact that I have to repeat it seems to underline a point several have made today, though: no response is ever deemed sufficient. The woman apologized and lost her job, no one is cheering what she said, most are strongly disapproving. The one post that you call “dismissing” seemed explanatory rather than exculpatory to me, and is only one post.

    As for your other point, sure I’d like to see the level of the conversation raised, but it won’t happen by scolding people into it, nor will it it happen by pretending nastiness from the until now unknown Psycho McProfessorly is representational of the entire left but Coulter, Limbaugh, Malkin, et alia are just great jokesters, what fun(not saying you are doing this, but it seems to be a common sentiment).

    I’ve got to run, but I’ll get back to this thread tomorrow if you’d like to continue the conversation.

75. tigrismus said,

    July 10, 2006 at 1:31

    Yep. *blush* *scuff scuff scuff*

    Now I REALLY gotta run!

76. Mal de mer said,

    July 10, 2006 at 2:04

    I just remember the funniest thing Tigrismus said was when she accused Gary Ruppert of being a “selfish lover.”

    …thank God for adult diapers. I can’t even think about that statement without pee’ing.

77. Mark A said,

    July 10, 2006 at 2:11

    Thanks for your response, tigrisimus. Good stuff. For the record, I know of many commenters on various sites that are sick of all of the left and right blowhards. I guess we’ve lost our collective senses of humor.

    Gentlewoman — I agree with you: posting someone’s personal information as a method of inciting attack (rhetorical or otherwise) upon them is wrong and should be condemned. I have said so on right-wing blogs and received a similarly warm response. While I could understand it if someone posted such information in response to having their own information posted first, it’s still wrong to do so. (I’m not saying it happened in any of these cases.) The difference? I’m trying to make one myself — civil discourse. It might be a lost cause but still worth trying.

    Kobie — exactly where did I say that I
    

    expect everyone to the left of Joe McCarthy to publicly flog some lame-ass blogger nobody’s ever heard of while at the same time applauding hatemongers like Malkin and Coulter.

    Seems obvious to me that you’ll applaud whoever you want to. Both Malkin and Coulter have said some worthwhile things and some silly things — I’m not a cheerleader for either (or Rush, or Gore, or Beelzebub for that matter.) For example, Coulter asked a question the other day (I’m paraphrasing): “When is the New York Times going to get around to uncovering a secret al-Qaeda plot?” That’s a thoughtful question that I believe should be answered. However, she also said “My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.” This was an indefensible statement that should be condemned by all sides. The fact that it has not been condemned by everyone is no excuse to give others a pass. (See JK47’s comment above.)

    I maintain (again) that if anyone attempts to explain away Frisch’s implicit threats to Jeff G.s kid with “Oh yeah!?! Well the other side says millions of worse things than that” is, by failing to condemn her words, condoning them (or worse). If you disagree, I’d like to hear why. Calling me a “condescending little shit” and telling me to
    

    go crawl back under whatever right-wing rock you wriggled out from under, asshole

    accomplishes nothing but making you look foolish. If failing to respond to such silliness makes me “sniffily superior”, well, I’ve been called worse.

78. Patkin said,

    July 10, 2006 at 2:31

    Fuck civil discourse.

79. Gentlewoman said,

    July 10, 2006 at 2:39

    Mark A: My point, which you seem to have missed, is that it is too late to play the civil discourse card.

    It has become apparent to most of us that the wingers do not want civil discourse.

    They want us dead.

    If you haven’t realized this yet…well, you will probably realize it soon. Just keep trying out civil discourse on winger blogs, and see what you get back from them.

    So, yeah. What Patkin said. Fuck civil discourse.

80. g said,

    July 10, 2006 at 2:41

    “When is the New York Times going to get around to uncovering a secret al-Qaeda plot?â€? That’s a thoughtful question ”

    No, that’s an incredibly fucking stupid question. The New York Times is neither a law enforcement agency nor an anti-terrorism intelligence organization.

    They have neither the resources, the training, or the expertise to uncover a secret al-Qaeda plot. One might as well ask when the Washington Times would do the same, or Coulter/Malkin themselves.

81. Mal de mer said,

    July 10, 2006 at 2:45

    Jesus, is Mark A. still riding his high horse? Who breeds these people?

82. geoduck2 said,

    July 10, 2006 at 2:57

    I agree with you: posting someone’s personal information as a method of inciting attack (rhetorical or otherwise) upon them is wrong and should be condemned. I have said so on right-wing blogs and received a similarly warm response.

    Mark A,

    Just Curious….

    Have you ever read PW?

    If you do read PW, did you say anything about Thers’s and his wife’s information being released, repeatedly? Did you care that the workplace of his wife was released? Did you care that their home town information was released?

    Did you care that Jeff Goldstein repeatedly and gratuitiously posted this information on the front page of his blog in a direct response to things other commenters were saying on other blogs? It was a explicit strategy for him to try to shut people up.

    He knew that it would shut people up, because that information was potentially dangerous to the physical saftey of Thers’s wife and his children. The picture of the children were on the blog. It would be easy to find the children with the published information.

    And all this happened after the sexual comment had been made about their child?

    Oh yeah - their children got death threats too. Do you care? Did you say anything at the time?
    —————————-

    Of course what this woman said was over the line, reprehensible, and ridiculous. However, we do not know the full name of Jeff’s wife or his wife’s workplace. We do not have specific information about the suburb or town in which Jeff lives. If we did, we would not post it on the web, to “win” a debate about literary theory.

    Why? Because it is potentially dangerous and immoral.

    Please note the people who thought it was acceptable to do such an act.

83. Gentlewoman said,

    July 10, 2006 at 3:06

    geoduck, if you are still here, I put most of that stuff in my comment waaaaaaaaaay up there at 21:25.

    But it does no good. Willful blindness cannot be cured.

    I know you know Thers and Mary, will you please tell them that they might want to speak to The Editors about the deleted Pablo comments from yesterday? Because he did accuse Thers of this, before it was known that it was this woman from Arizona.

    I did not know about the death threats. This makes me even more disgusted with this conduct.

    Good to see you, wish it could be under more pleasant circumstances :(

84. Gentlewoman said,

    July 10, 2006 at 3:08

    he did accuse Thers of this

    This ‘he’ of course refers to Pablo, not The Editors! Sorry for any confusion.

85. RogerC said,

    July 10, 2006 at 3:28

    Suck it wingnuts: this is what absolute moral authority looks like! My side gets to say whatever nasty shit it likes, and you have to sit there and take it. Because you killed Iraqis! Like your big scary enemy Sadam Hussein, before you. Now we get to make shit up against you, and it’s all an object lesson. Do you understand? Of course not, you’re stupid, as well as culpable for the war!

86. Dogtown said,

    July 10, 2006 at 3:33

    What is the point at all of showing dead children? It’s about as productive as trying to link you and your blog to dead North Korean children. Because, after all, you’re far enough lfet that you’re Communist. So, ipso facto, you’re linked to Kim’s dead. Right?

    *crickets*

    *crickets*

    You managed to generate a long post without making a single cogent point, then attempt to wrap it up by implying that Protein Wisdom is responsible for dead Iraqi children?

    Your commentariat is composed of confirmed idiots. You get what you deserve with posts like these. And it doesn’t escape anyone that you’re pussing out by not linking to this story at Jeff’s site, preferring instead to go to CY. You don’t deserve the plaudits you give to yourself. Pussy.

87. Dogtown said,

    July 10, 2006 at 3:36

    “My side gets to say whatever nasty shit it likes, and you have to sit there and take it. ”

    Yep, and you get to slide your mouth under my aching asshole and take my hot shit down your throat. Swallow without chewing, you pimplefaced fag whiffer.

    And LIKE IT.

88. geoduck2 said,

    July 10, 2006 at 3:36

    I know you know Thers and Mary, will you please tell them that they might want to speak to The Editors about the deleted Pablo comments from yesterday? Because he did accuse Thers of this, before it was known that it was this woman from Arizona.

    You mean Pablo was accusing Thers of being this woman?

    Oh Lordy.

    I hope I’m not making things worse for their family by posting now.

    During the Recent Unpleasantness, Pasty was reposting the private information any time anybody posted about this.

    It was an explicit threat to stop posting or the information would be spread all over the internet repeatedly. Of course, after a while the proverbial cow was out of the barn.

    The potential danger was obvious, yet Jeff repeatedly posted the information, ignoring the immorality of his acts.

    And he did all this in an effort to win a debate about literary theory!
    —————-

    Aside from that - I’m doing well. Over here we watched the world cub today. Being part Italian-American I was rooting for Italy. I wish I was in Boston today!

89. Patkin said,

    July 10, 2006 at 3:38

    Awesome! More trolls!

    Let’s see… we’ve got a parody troll of a leftist, well done, well done. And someone accusing Sadly, No people of communism and affiliation with North Korea! Also well done, especially since with guys like me around, they’re half right!

    I like the phrase “commentariat” though. Can the guys in charge start using that as an actual term? Ironic and/or un-ironic term, whichever way you wanna run it.

90. Jillian said,

    July 10, 2006 at 3:43

    you pimplefaced fag whiffer

    Just out of curiosity, why is it that conservative types so often seem to think that “fag” is the ultimate in insults? Is it a total lack of imagination? Or serious unresolved same sex attraction issues?

    And why do right wing queer boys/girls put up with it?

91. Gentlewoman said,

    July 10, 2006 at 3:48

    Yeah, I’m bummed, geoduck. I was all ‘allez les bleus’ :( There’s a WC thread up top, btw. My eldest nephew is in Italy right now, bet he’s having a blast. Someone said up top that the North End is going wild! Good night to be in Boston, for sure.

92. geoduck2 said,

    July 10, 2006 at 4:07

    Yeah, I’m bummed, geoduck. I was all ‘allez les bleus’ :( There’s a WC thread up top, btw. My eldest nephew is in Italy right now, bet he’s having a blast. Someone said up top that the North End is going wild! Good night to be in Boston, for sure.

    France was playing better then Italy, that’s for sure. The Italians looked tired.

    Oh - it would be a blast to be in Italy tonight.

    (I wonder if Conservative American men don’t like watching soccer because the male soccer players are Teh Hot? Hmmm…does it speak to their psycho-sexual issues that they need to work on?)

93. The Poor Man Institute » Who knew? said,

    July 10, 2006 at 4:08

    [...] I spent all day in Tijuana, and it turns out I’ve been pre-emptively banning some wanker named “Pablo” because I CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH! BEFORE I READ IT! WHILE IN MEXICO!!! Or, optionally: because I have a spam filter. Additionally: I have a spam filter. And: you are insane. Nobody who doesn’t meet the software criteria for probably selling kiddie porn and/or dick pills is banned. [...]

94. g said,

    July 10, 2006 at 4:16

    “and you get to slide your mouth under my aching asshole and take my hot shit down your throat”

    Sadly, No! you stupid little wanker. You are sitting in your momma’s basement typing away at the keyboard next to the washing machine. I am in my pleasant home far far away from your crappy little self, and nowhere near your diseased body, so what you are actually doing is jacking off and fantasizing like the sick freak that you are.

    But, hey, whatever gets you off.

    It’s actually a pretty good example of how little an effect nasty shit in comments has on actual people, absent the publication of personal contact info. Dogtown is sitting there in his fucking trailer, or whatever, thinking he’s affecting people, but actually he is all alone.

95. Kobie said,

    July 10, 2006 at 4:25

    The trolls are out in full force tonight, boys and girls.

    Mark A said,
    I maintain (again) that if anyone attempts to explain away Frisch’s implicit threats to Jeff G.s kid with “Oh yeah!?! Well the other side says millions of worse things than that� is, by failing to condemn her words, condoning them (or worse).

    Everyone is condeming it, and nobody’s attempting to explain away anything. However, the other side does say things worse than that. And the hypocrisy of the righty blogs going batshit because our condemnation-of-Frisch rate hasn’t hit 100 percent yet while Malkin/Coulter et. al. say things equally or more vile is astounding.

96. D. Sidhe said,

    July 10, 2006 at 4:59

    And why do right wing queer boys/girls put up with it?

    I’m guessing they’ve seen what happens when they protest.

97. Bas-O-Matic said,

    July 10, 2006 at 5:12

    “When is the New York Times going to get around to uncovering a secret al-Qaeda plot?� That’s a thoughtful question that I believe should be answered. However, she also said “My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.� This was an indefensible statement that should be condemned by all sides. The fact that it has not been condemned by everyone is no excuse to give others a pass. (See JK47’s comment above.)

    As said above, it isn’t a thoughtful question at all. What it is is an accusation of treason. Or at the least an invitation to make the inference. Treason, is, by the by, a capital offense. Coulter is in effect saying that, the New York Times is focusing energy that it supposedly (which is spurious as explained above) could focus against Americas enemies against the United States and as such is aiding and comforting the enemy and are as such deserving of death. That you cannot see this and instead view this as a reasonable question goes to show how a quarter of a century of conservatives poisoning the well have made the discourse such that we could have people seriously say, in the United States of America, that the press should be prevented from printing the news under penalty of death.

    What Frisch said was vile. But frankly, she’s nobody and I’m not answerable for her. What the right-wing does in this country on a daily basis is far more insidious, with for more potentially disasterous effect than what some fringe nutjob said in Jeff’s comments.

98. Dorothy said,

    July 10, 2006 at 5:45

    Mark A.,

    Please look up the definition of “red herring” and “non sequitur”. If you’re going to insist on civil discourse, I have to insist that we actually follow the rules of rhetoric.

    The main point of Gavin’s post was “Several right-wing blogs are accusing ‘the Left Blogosphere’ of threatening children because a) 2 or 3 commenters on D-Kos made some stupid cracks about Jack Roberts and b) we haven’t condemned some woman we have never heard for making crass remarks about Jeff Goldstein’s kid in comments to a blog we don’t read. I think this is hypocritcal considering the overall prevalance of actual threats and eleminationist rhetoric coming from nationally prominent right-wingers, including Goldstein himself.”

    Your response was “But weren’t these comments reprehensible?” This is off topic. Whether or not these comments were “out of line” is not germane to Gavin’s point. Gavin’s point was that is it not fair to take ‘the Left Blogosphere’ to task for this woman’s comments because SHE IS A NOBODY and NOBODY KNEW ABOUT THESE COMMENTS, especially when well-publicized comments from the Right Wing Noise Machine(TM) are NEVER CONDEMNED by “the Right Blogosphere”.

    And whether or not Ann Coulter ever has anything resembling a “valid point” is also completely and totally irrelevant. You yourself stated that her comments regarding Timothy McVeigh and the NYT building were out of line and “should be” condemned by everyone on both sides. THEY WERE NOT. ‘The Right Blogosphere’ DID NOT condemn her comments, and several bloggers even celebrated them. And when Coulter says things as bad and worse, she is still invited onto talk shows and signed off with comments like “Always fun to have you on, Ann.”

    Do you or do you not think that this is hyocritical? When blogs like PW complain that the entire ‘Left Blogosphere’ (as if such a thing actually existed) hasn’t condemned this non-entity Frisch while simultaneously linking approvingly (or worse) to Coulter’s and Malkin’s and Limbaugh’s eliminationist hate speech, isn’t that the very definition of hypocrisy?

    And if so, then Gavin’s point is QED. And at no point did anyone support Frisch other than saying “well, hell, she’s not as bad as Coulter”–which kind of gets right to the heart of that whole “hypocrisy” thing, doesn’t it?

99. southwestpaw, a.k.a. prof moonbat said,

    July 10, 2006 at 6:35

    Wow. Thank you. I couldn’t have said it better myself.

100. dr. moonbat said,

     July 10, 2006 at 6:44

     Hmm… shooting your mouth off about not feeling bad if someone’s kid dies…

     Directly threatening private individuals and helping to prop up a war that has resulted in the maiming or killing of innumerable kids…

     Yup, sounds about equivalent to me.

     eggzactly.

101. Dogtown said,

     July 10, 2006 at 8:41

     Also, I love it when Jeff whips me with his cock. His cum tastes like strawberries. Wouldn’t you agree, Pablo?

102. Gavin M. said,

     July 10, 2006 at 8:48

     Are you trolls still hanging out? It’s late; y’all need some sleep if you want to be in good form tomorrow.

103. JK47 said,

     July 10, 2006 at 8:49

     Well done, Dorothy. Your game is tight. Thread over, trolls vanquished.

104. Pinko Punko said,

     July 10, 2006 at 9:15

     I also love how the trolls answer the other trolls posts like they don’t know who’s who.

     In effect, they are the brightest slices in the loaf, if you know what I mean, and I think you do.

105. geoduck2 said,

     July 10, 2006 at 9:27

     Dr Moonbat?,

     Um - I’m not sure if you’re the person who started this - but if you were: What in the world is going on with you?

     1) A parent could feel threatened by your statements & they are not acceptable. Implicit or explicit physical threats towards adults or kids are not morally acceptable in my book.

     Why do we need to explain this?

     2) Your behavior is also self-destructive in terms of your job. (Unless you’re playing some crazy game with the blog-o-sphere, which wouldn’t unduly surprise me.)

106. The Cranky Insomniac said,

     July 10, 2006 at 9:32

     There’s no defense for Ann Coulter.
     There’s no defense for Goldstein’s comments.
     There’s no defense for Frisch’s comments.

     Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot. So is Michael Moore.

     Lumping together all leftwing blogs is stupid. So is lumping together all rightwing blogs.

     Many bloggers, like most politicians, are hypocrites.

     Are we done now?

107. Feministe » Enough Already. said,

     July 10, 2006 at 11:24

     [...] My question is, are there voices on the right who are willing to criticize their own? Where are they? Gavin at Sadly, No! wonders the same thing. And it’s a must-read post, so head over there. [...]

108. Jillian said,

     July 10, 2006 at 11:29

     are we done now?

     Nope. Because we’re still struggling with that “false moral equivalence” issue. Oh, and that “apples and oranges” issue, at least when it comes to the blogosphere, whereby well-known and well-read bloggers like Goldstein (or Michelle Malkin) get compared to total nonentities like whatever nonentity of the week Right Blogistan decides to blow up into Evil Moonbat Overlord this time.

109. Steve the Pirate said,

     July 10, 2006 at 14:23

     Hey, where are the pictures of all the dead bodies we dug up in Iraq; y’know, the ones that Saddam gassed?

     I mean, you’re all about blaming Americans for civilian casualties, but where’s the equal reporting?

     Wanker.

110. Shygetz said,

     July 10, 2006 at 14:30

     Wow, so now liberals are to blame for Saddam Hussein.

     Revisionist history is fun (and profitable)!

111. celticgirl said,

     July 10, 2006 at 14:42

     That sounds like a great idea…why don’t we ask the Iraqi people who they’d rather be killed by - Saddam or the *cough* Coalition of the Willing?

     At least they expected it from Saddam…their “liberators”? Not so much. Hey, maybe that’s why they’re less than thrilled with our being there. Just sayin’…

     Freedumb is on the march!

112. Emboldened » Blog Archive » Crickets & Responding to the Right said,

     July 10, 2006 at 14:57

     [...] You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Leave aReply [...]

113. Dogtown said,

     July 10, 2006 at 16:09

     Word’s getting around that, when all of this is over, Gavin will be revealed as the source of the DoS attacks on PW. It wouldn’t surprise anyone, given his perverse obsession with Jeff. You know, the kind that propels him to generate such long posts regarding Jeff’s site, or twist his logic into a pretzel comparing PW to slaters of Iraqi children.

     And if/when this is discovered about Gavin, he’s going to have his ass drop-kicked all over the Internet. Enjoy Sadly, No! while you can, kiddies.