11
In Which Brad Replies to Various Comments
Warning: circle-jerkery ahead. I shall place it below the fold.
karen schell said,
July 10, 2006 at 22:07
You still don’t get it, do you?
Your (and others’) total & complete inability to _unequivably_ denounce Frisch and her shameful attacks is almost as despicable as her attacks.
Again, here is what I wrote:
What Frisch did was vile. We condemn her for it. All of us.
And then I wrote some stuff about Jeff being an asshole. The reason is because Jeff is an asshole. And just as no discussion of Frisch is complete without mentioning that she is an unhinged lunatic who should be condemned for making such evil comments about someone’s children, no conversation about Jeff is complete without discussing his assholishness. (For more on this subject, see the thorough documentation written by my colleague, the esteemed Perfesser Retardeau.)
Your promotion of her as both Saint and Poor Innocent Victim is beyond the grasp of any intelligent, reasonable person, whatever their political leaning may be.
Find where any of us did that, por favor. Frisch’s words and actions disgusted me. But what I object to primarily is people like Michelle Malkin who say that “THE LEFT!!!” dislikes Jeff because “his bold eloquence, sharp wit, and willingness to engage the other side have gotten under their skin.” Well, no. We dislike Jeff because he’s an unseemly, bullying pervert.
That said, no one deserves to have such horrible comments made about their children. Just like no one deserves to have this said about a family member:
Incidentally, Tim? I touched your sister in her secret places. Lots.
Posted by: Jeff G at November 17, 2005 10:42 PM
Is this too difficult to understand?
Next:
I’m simply saying it would have been classier to simply condemn Frisch and leave the partisanship for another post. Instead, Gavin’s point about Frisch was to make a partisan point.
Not exactly. Gavin was actually responding to a piece by Confederate Yankee. The title of his piece was, “A Proud Member of the Toddler-Threatening Community.” It went a little something like this (my emphasis):
It was disgusting a year ago when Daily Kos posters were all for attacking the sexual orientation of four-year-old Jack Roberts, the son of then Supreme Court nominee (and now Chief Justice) John Roberts. I thought it was disgusting, abhorrent behavior by deranged individuals, and I thought I’d seen the lowest of the low.
Then came University of Arizona psychology professor instructor Deborah Frisch.
Deb Frisch is living proof of my tagline, that “liberalism is a persistent vegetative state.”
No partisanship there!
So clearly, Gavin should have responded to CY’s post by writing not only that Deb Frisch sucks but that she is symbollic of liberalism as a whole.
OK, that’s all the circle-jerking I can take for the time being. I will be back later to post a crappy video and/or a funny Renew America column.
Bob Arctor said,
July 11, 2006 at 1:45
And with this clean new thread, commentators, please have a decent long shower before you write anything. Wash all the aphids off. Because you know, when you drop aphids everywhere, someone has to sweep them out again.
Brad R. said,
July 11, 2006 at 1:51
Bob- aren’t you still farming Substance D? Or did you get out of that racket?
His Grace, the Duke of Ruppert said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:08
The fact is Brad, you and the rest of “the left” are enabling child molestation. Jeff Goldstein was merely pointing out with his estemed eloquence that cannot be matched anywhere in “the left” how he had reached the heart and soul of poor deluded tim’s sister and converted her to the truth. It’s a sad, sad day when “the left” cannot hope to properly denounce one of your own without putting words in St. Goldstein’s mouth.
Next you’ll be suggesting that his obsession with roosters means something else entirely.
kingubu said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:09
Um, I guess I’m late to the party.
So, some adjunct prof. that no one heard of before yesterday posts some dispicable crap and suddenly the SadNoes (and the rest of us, I presume) are supposed to do… what, exactly?
Why are you even giving Goldstein the time of day on this? How are you even remotely associated with whateverthefuck some mouth-breather who represents no one but herself said in a comment to his site? Why play his game?
Brad R. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:12
So, some adjunct prof. that no one heard of before yesterday posts some dispicable crap and suddenly the SadNoes (and the rest of us, I presume) are supposed to do… what, exactly?
Condemn her. Which is what we did.
But peeps like Paterico want us to give Jeff a hug to boot.
kingubu said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:24
But peeps like Paterico want us to give Jeff a hug to boot.
God knows he could probably use one, but I still don’t get how you are in any way accountable here. That you would step forward to condemn the comment is already going the extra mile.
Jillian said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:25
I’m not sure a hug would cover it at this point - I think the ante’s been upped all the way to Spin the Bottle, or Three Minutes in the Closet.
Glad I’m not you guys.
Steve said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:28
Patterico is laser-beam focused on the single line of Gavin’s post where he says:
Patterico’s point is that there is no evidence the quotes were made up, aside from her own say-so (and she certainly seems unreliable), while Goldstein has presented IP logs and such to document that the quotes in question were legit.
I guess he has a fair point, in a sense, although he’s certainly overlooking the larger issue of the post in order to focus on that one throwaway line. But hey, that’s the Internets.
Patterico said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:28
But you didn’t just condemn her. She has claimed that she didn’t write the stuff about French-kissing Goldstein’s son — which appears to be a lie based on Goldstein’s IP address research. Yet Gavin wrote that the comments “seem to be made up.” Then he admitted on my site that he really had no idea. So he has, in fact, taken her side in this on that issue — and in the face of the evidence.
Also:
“Just like no one deserves to have this said about a family member:”
Well, when one follows the link, one sees it’s in response to this:
“At least Roger has an Oscar nomination and Charles Johnson was a professional musician. But Jeff Goldstein and Security Mom? Who the fuck are those no talent jerks, and why would anybody pay them to write awful boring derivative unfunny suckass posts?”
So Goldstein comes back with a “yo’ momma” type comment. Sure, nobody deserves to have their mother dragged into the argument, and it’s a damn shame when it happens. But the guy was asking for a slap back, and he got one. Hard to cry over that.
mdhatter said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:31
It’s a shame you don’t have a food column on the side. Then you could make up and have a guest blogger.
Oh wait. That’s been done.
Brad R. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:31
Patterico- so making a snide remark about someone’s lack of talent justifies “joking” about molesting their sister.
Got. Cha.
Patterico said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:32
Well, also, looking at the whole post, you see this:
Look at this righty outrage!! And this one! Etc. etc. etc.
Oh, but they’re making such a big deal out of this. And sure, it’s pretty bad. But it’s nowhere near as serious as these pictures of wounded and dead children.
That, is portrayed as condemnation. Well, I suppose. But if I had “condemned” Ann Coulter that way, I bet plenty of lefties would claim I had tried to minimize her comments. In fact, when I condemned her, I did so without reservation. It would have been nice to see that here — on a site that has been rude to Goldstein in the past. “Hey, we hate his politics and don’t like a lot of things he’s said, but bringing his kids into it is beyond the pale. That is all.” It’s an opportunity wasted.
Brad R. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:32
“But you didn’t just condemn her.”
-Patterico
“What Frisch did was vile. We condemn her for it. All of us.”
-Brad R.
Matt T. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:33
Give Goldstein his hug, now, Brad. Give Patterico one, too.
K. Ron Silkwood said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:33
“And then I wrote some stuff about Jeff being an asshole. The reason is because Jeff is an asshole.”
Yes. And no matter what anyone else may say or do, he will always be an asshole. The one fact that can never be diminished is that Jeff is a paste-eating asshole. The Frisches come and go, and what remains is the one abiding truth: Jeff is an asshole.
s.z. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:33
Brad, it’s sad that you and the rest of the moonbats fail to see that if some obscure twit made a vile remark about Jeff’s child, then he has achieved sainthood, and you must worship him. You must also kill the twit to return balance to the universe, or else the crops will fail this summer. That’s how it works.
mdhatter said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:34
So was your entire diatribe, patt
that’s what happens when a decent guy stands next to a doucebag.
Brad R. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:34
on a site that has been rude to Goldstein in the past.
The poor dear. It’s not like he’s ever been rude to anyone else.
Ex-Fed said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:35
I’m not sure “rude” was le mote juste. You should have gone with “uncouth.”
Patterico said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:36
“Patterico- so making a snide remark about someone’s lack of talent justifies “jokingâ€? about molesting their sister.”
He didn’t say he molested her. I read it as saying that it was with her consent, actually. It’s like the schoolyard taunts about screwing yo momma. Yeah, it’s juvenile. But I think Jeff would readily admit he’s often juvenile.
In any event, it’s hard to see how it’s relevant to a discussion about someone’s comment talking about someone shooting one’s two-year-old son. The two examples are quite different.
Brad R. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:36
And Patterico- you still haven’t responded to my point that Gavin was responding to an article that tried to paint Frisch as “the face of the left.”
Brad R. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:39
He didn’t say he molested her. I read it as saying that it was with her consent, actually. It’s like the schoolyard taunts about screwing yo momma. Yeah, it’s juvenile. But I think Jeff would readily admit he’s often juvenile.
Look: Jeff had no idea how old this guy’s sister was, if he even had a sister. The guy could have had a sister who was 8 years old ferchrissake. Certain things should be off limits. Saying you touched someone’s sister in her secret places is a vile and gross thing to say. It should be condemned.
shargash said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:39
This is standard wingnut rhetorical bullshit. First they distort what you have said, then they demand repeated loyalty oaths, or some such bullshit, for breathtakingly obvious points. And it doesn’t matter how many times you repeat the oath, you still get criticized for not repeating it with enough feeling.
Case 1: Supporting the troops. First the wingnuts assert that opposing the war means you don’t support the troops. Then, no matter how many times you say you support the troops, they keep throwing it in your face.
Case 2: Blogging ethics.
Case 3: Dr. Frisch.
This is nothing more than an attempt at intimidation, designed to stifle any meaningful thought or discussoin. What is especially aggravating is that the wingnuts are vastly worse on these points than anything the left can dish out. They have to dig to the most obscure of obscurities to even come close.
While accusing the left of not supporting the troops, the wingnuts support putting the troops through a meat grinder, without proper armor or helmts, without proper medical care when they come home. And yet the wingnuts accuse the left of not support the troops. Assholes.
Wingnut bloggers, including and especially Pasty, wouldn’t know an ethic if it bit them in the ass. But they constantly call out the lefty bloggers’ ethics. Dickheads.
And then there’s Dr. Frisch. She is a nobody who said some things that are more or less equivalent to crap you hear from the right all the time. Everyone on this blog has denounced her. But that’s not good enough. Denouncing her == portraying her as a sainted victim. Hey, shitheads, I’ll type it slowly, so you can understand — we all denounced Frisch.
Now fuck off, cocksuckers.
kingubu said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:39
In place of the pointless group-hug, can we please just have more Tiny Tim videos? It hurts less.
Matt T. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:40
Ya know, if that threat to Goldstein’s kid is serious, why can’t he take some sort of legal action on it? Seriously. If it’s actually a serious, credible threat, surely there’s some sort of legal remedy. Is there nothing the law can do for a hard-working*, law-abiding white man in America anymore?
* I never did get an answer if the goofy bastard has gotten a new job to deal with his housing situation.
rj said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:42
Seriously, who gives a shit?! Right this fucking minute I’d wager that there are some neo-Nazis somewhere discussing whether firing squads or gas chambers should be used to exterminate Mexicans. I also guaran-fucking-TEE you they are all, without exception, right-wingers. On the same side of the political spectrum as Jeff Goldstein, albeit perhaps a bit farther out in the fringe. And you know what? I honestly couldn’t care less what a couple of inbred racist fucks are saying in Kudzu, Alabama. They have no voice in the mainstream political discourse (um, well, at least at this point), I don’t see Goldstein et al. posting a condemnation every time a new item appears on the National Socialist website, and I don’t expect him to. So why on earth should we fly into an orgy of tsk-tsking and solidarity with poor Pasty whenever some voiceless dipshit on the Left says something nasty?
Matt T. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:44
Saying you touched someone’s sister in her secret places is a vile and gross thing to say. It should be condemned.
Obviously you’ve missed out on the long history of “molestation as bonding humor” in the wingnut world. It’s sorta like how dudes greet each other with insults, you know.
First wingnut guy: “Hey, man. You’re Chosen Sports Team certainly stunk up the playing field/court last night!”
Second wingnut guy: “Screw you, dude. I touched your sister in her most secret places!”
FWG: “Man, it’s Miller Time.” And then buys him a beer.
Llama School said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:45
Not necessarily the case. I think Goldstein’s IP log only shows who initially made the post. (Most comment tracking programs keep track of the IP of who initially makes the post, not who makes changes to it afterwards). My guess is Goldstein could edit the post all he wants, and the IP address would remain the same.
Disclaimer: I am not saying that Goldstein did or did not edit that post. I am just pointing out that this piece of evidence isn’t as damning as it seems to Patterico.
Patkin said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:45
Y’know, I like this game of Pattricio reading whatever the fuck he likes out of comments. I think I’m gonna start doing it too.
To start with:
He didn’t say he molested her. I read it as saying that it was with her consent, actually. It’s like the schoolyard taunts about screwing yo momma. Yeah, it’s juvenile. But I think Jeff would readily admit he’s often juvenile.
I didn’t read this as Pattricio saying that he thinks it’s just schoolyard taunts. Instead, I read it as a blanket apology for rape of all kinds. All sorts of rape. Date rape, rape tartar, rape a la mode, rape rape rape. Pattricio is objectively in favor of rape, because I read his statement as such. And because he mentioned Goldstein, and Goldstein has yet to denounce my reading of what pattricio might have said, I can only assume the entire right-wing is in favor of rape.
Man, this is fun.
Patterico said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:46
Brad,
“And Patterico- you still haven’t responded to my point that Gavin was responding to an article that tried to paint Frisch as ‘the face of the left.’”
I think that’s a legitimate thing to respond to. She’s the face of the fringe left. Almost by definition. But there is a fringe right, too. Pat Robertson and Ann Coulter are some of its faces.
If he’d left it to that, and a simple condemnation, that would have been fair. But the post as written really mutes the condemnation — especially by taking her side on the comment alteration argument. Just another chance to take a slap at Goldstein. It wasn’t much of a condemnation, really. I think he called her comments “pretty bad.” This wholesale “We condemn it, all of us” language — wasn’t that in comments somewhere? I think the post itself called her comments “pretty bad.”
Matt T. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:47
And for what it’s worth, if you bring in molestation of female, possibly younger siblings into a game of the Dozens (”yo’ momma” jokes for you what ain’t got the culture) with most social groups, you will get your nuts caved in.
Brad R. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:47
OK, Patterico, here’s one more. Let’s see if I can make my point completely sparkling clear.
Imagine if I had said something like this about Michelle Malkin:
But that wasn’t really the point of my bringing up Michelle Malkin’s post. Which was this: Michelle Malkin: hot or not?
Me, I kind of like the ironic / blase sneer and the angst pirate affectation.
Or maybe she’s just sitting on cucumber.
Either way, the fact that she’s a vicious right-wing partisan is just so damn sexy. And even if she turns out to be a total bitch (which, how likely is that), I could just close my eyes and imagine myself getting a dirty sanchez from Margaret Thatcher.
Now: you would probably say I was a disgusting pervert for saying such a thing (and not just the part about Margaret Thatcher- I mean the parts about Malkin “sitting on a cucumber” and giving me a dirty sanchez), especially because my animosity toward Malkin is well-known. The entire passage, as posted above, is a disgusting fantasy intended to demean someone of the opposite sex and make them feel powerless.
Now replace “Malkin” with “Lindsay Beyerstein,” and you’ll see that’s precisely what Goldstein wrote.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:48
Uncle !
I’ll do anything …. recycle cans and bottles, panhandle, –
hell, I’ll get a goddamned job if that’s what it takes,, but,
please, tell me, how much money will it take to finally
hear the end of this nonsense ???
Kathleen said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:49
Maybe Gavin should email you his posts first, so you can approve their structure and full content, before he posts.
jesus christ this is what you are reduced to Patterico?
why don’t you spend your time condemning Conferderate Yankee for his post on this issue, which is what Gavin was responding to anyway?
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:49
name your price
Steve said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:49
What you’re missing here is that it’s wrong to minimize the vile nature of the comments themselves, but it’s not wrong to minimize the significance of the comments or their author, in the context of bloggers like Goldstein and Confederate Yankee trying to use the incident to score points against the entire Left.
The point is not just “That’s disgusting.” The point is, “That’s disgusting, but we’ve never heard of this nobody commentor who made the comments, so would you please stop trying to paint this unknown person as the Authentic Face of the Left for the umpteenth time?”
I think you can fit this incident into the larger context without pretending like the comments themselves were anywhere close to acceptable.
Ex-Fed said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:49
There was no condemnation.
There was condemnation, but it was muted. Or possibly mooted.
There was condemnation, but it wasn’t much of a condemnation.
It’s like watching a catepillar transform into a boootiful butterfly.
mdhatter said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:50
“And you know what? I honestly couldn’t care less what a couple of inbred racist fucks are saying in Kudzu, Alabama. ”
You should, a bunch of them are probably just back from deployment, and maybe a little maladjusted. It only takes one crazy screwball, enabled by a paste eating reactionary douchebag, for it to go horribly wrong.
either way, Patt would defend the paste eater to the end, and probably accuse you of intellectual dishonesty for not mentioning 9/11, or somesuch.
Patt. You forgot Poland.
just saying
mikey said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:50
AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!111!!Eleven
Gee, guys, I’d love to stick around and explain how we condemned deb frisch and have them tell us how we didn’t do it right and then we’re all yeah we did and then they’re all you couldn’t condemn hitler and we’re like oh yeah well so’s yer old man and they go you are objectively pro child molestation and we’re—ahh, never mind.
I gotta go call Deb Frisch and find out what I’m supposed to do tomorrow. Catch ya…
mikey
Patterico said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:50
Patkin,
What did I read out of comments?
I think you guys are reading things *into* comments — such as insisting that “touched her in her secret places” necessarily means unconsensual molestation.
The school yard “I screwed yo’ momma” chants imply the momma is willing.
Calling it molestation is simply the umpteenth example of people on this site twisting what he said to make him look worse.
mdhatter said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:51
There was condemnation, but it wasn’t much of a condemnation.
is that some sort of haiku?
themann1086 said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:51
And they accuse lefties of moral relativism…
Brad R. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:54
I think you guys are reading things *into* comments — such as insisting that “touched her in her secret places� necessarily means unconsensual molestation.
Patterico- (and this is my last response for a while, since I have work to do) my point is that unless you specifically know that the guy has a sister that is of consentual age, it is not appropriate to make such a disgusting comment.
The school yard “I screwed yo’ momma� chants imply the momma is willing.
Except it’s not “yo’ momma” but rather “your sister.”
His Grace said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:55
I’m just wondering if Patterico would like it if someone suggested that they touched Patterico’s sister in her secret places and he would rule out molestation immediately.
Dude, this sorta hypothetical “well what Jeff really meant was” that rules out any sick/embarrassing connotations is, well, fucking retarded
Patkin said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:55
What did I read out of comments?
I read it as saying that it was with her consent, actually.
That! That fuckbone! You read that out of the comment! YOU FUCKING SAID YOU READ THAT OUT OF THE COMMENT! You read that it’s schoolyard taunts, not a sexual slur, which is what yo momma jokes fucking ARE, FUCKBONE.
And now, what I decided to read out of your reply.
“I, Patterico, think molestation is awesome so long as Jeff Goldstein says it.”
And yet the ironic thing is, my read is closer to the truth.
Matt T. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:55
Brad,
Joking about liberal women in that manner is okay, because they’re all feminazis, therefore they both hate men and are total sluts. Bernstein’s was asking for it by espousing an opinion counter to a Conservative Male. It’s like a good molestation joke - and everyone loves molestation jokes, donchaknow, we used to tell ‘em all the time at the ol’ school yard - it’s too be expected as it’s a Right-Wing privalege. Just how it is.
Ex-Fed said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:56
Maybe it’s just me, but the “secret places” language sounds like its calculated to imply an underaged girl — because it echoes childish language.
But what indication is there that Jeff would ever post anything vulgar like that?
Patterico said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:56
Whatever. A woman in an argument with someone she disagrees with makes comments about that person’s son — his age, his gender, where he lives — and makes remarks about violent things happening to the son. Shootings. Kidnap and murder. Sure would suck if that would happen.
And Gavin writes a whole post minimizing it. Not as bad as this! or this! or this!
Pardon me if I don’t find it admirable.
mdhatter said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:56
Patterco.
You are arguing simple semantics. That’s um…. droll.
semantics aside
You may be a fine guy, and a cunning linguist, but Jeff is a douchebag, and you are standing next to him acting the Master Debater.
geoduck2 said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:56
I can’t keep up with you people. Now the thread I just posted on is dead.
Patterico - please see my comments at the end of the other thread.
Steve said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:58
But there is a fringe right, too. Pat Robertson and Ann Coulter are some of its faces.
Well, fine. But Ann Coulter sure gets a lot of media appearances for being so fringe, right? I don’t remember Matt Lauer saying “Ward Churchill, always fun to have you here.” Maybe you think Rush Limbaugh is a fringe jokester like Coulter, maybe you think he’s a serious purveyor of conservative thought, but one way or the other, the Vice-President of the United States makes regular appearances on his show. That’s pretty mainstream. Then you have guys like Jerry Falwell - completely fringe, no? - who actually get calls from the White House soliciting input on Supreme Court nominations.
What’s the fringe left? Once you get past Michael Moore - who hardly gets a lot of talk show bookings as a mainstream liberal voice - you have a right-wing noise machine straining to create these scary liberals out of whole cloth. Ward Churchill? Come on. And now Deborah Frisch makes Ward Churchill look like O.J. Simpson when it comes to relative fame.
No one knows who any of these people are on the “fringe left.” They’re utterly irrelevant in our political climate. And so we get tired of well-meaning folks like you saying “well, there’s a fringe left and a fringe right,” as if there’s some kind of equivalence. The point is that we live in a country where the fringe right actually gets treated as mainstream in a lot of ways, and that’s fucking scary, and the constant attempts to obscure that fact by bringing up the totally anonymous fringe left couldn’t be any more of a non sequitur.
Brad R. said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:58
Maybe it’s just me, but the “secret places� language sounds like its calculated to imply an underaged girl — because it echoes childish language.
That’s what I thought. OK, gotta go work for real this time.
Patterico said,
July 11, 2006 at 2:58
“FUCKBONE.”
Commenter #3 who it’s not worth talking to.
Well, it’s been fun.
Matt T. said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:00
And Gavin writes a whole post minimizing it. Not as bad as this! or this! or this!
Well, you’re defending the implied molestation/possible rape of an opponent’s sister as nothing more than a schoolyard taunt*. Pardon me if I’m not blown over by your moral superiority.
marky said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:00
Is Frisch politically active at all? Do we even know her party affiliation?
How in the world is she the face of the left, or the fringe left?
She was a complete nobody, and her current notoriety has nothing to do with her politics.
Jillian said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:02
Now: you would probably say I was a disgusting pervert for saying such a thing (and not just the part about Margaret Thatcher- I mean the parts about Malkin “sitting on a cucumber� and giving me a dirty sanchez), especially because my animosity toward Malkin is well-known. The entire passage, as posted above, is a disgusting fantasy intended to demean someone of the opposite sex and make them feel powerless.
Alas, Brad, I fear based on what I’ve seen Patterico posting here so far, that you are simply going to be told that you lack a sense of humor.
After all, it’s funny to threaten people - male or female - with sexual violence, isn’t it?
I tried taking the reasonable role. I’m done. As a general rule, I avoid talking to people who feel that dickslapping “jokes” are somehow funny.
If I were God, I’d make each and every human being on the planet who finds anything even remotely entertaining in JG’s repeated sex-soaked violence fantasies spend the rest of their lives working in homes for emotionally disturbed children, or as guardians ad litem in the courts. Just so they can see firsthand how totally unfuckingfunny it all is.
And then, I’d force them to watch reruns of “Full House” and “Growing Pains” whenever they weren’t at work - but I’d be a really mean God. ;-)
Patkin said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:03
Who’s talking? Am I suppose to want an open dialogue with you? Am I coming over to your sites and calling you fuckbone for being one? No. Oh dear Lord in Heaven, how will I live without conversation with Patterico? With his apologies for molesting a commenter’s sister under schoolyard taunts, as if we’re not old enough to have grown out of a fucking schoolyard.
Go get fucked, Patters.
DocAmazing said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:08
C’mon, guys. Seriously. Patterico doesn’t work for a DA’s office, does he? I mean, a guy who works for a DA’s office, acting as apologist for Dickslap and his commentary?
Not a reassuring thought.
Patterico’s Pontifications » Patterico Descends Into the Snake Pit Again said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:12
[...] The fun is at three threads, here, here, and here. Go say hi. [...]
Moss Marconi said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:13
mdhatter said,
Patterico,
You are arguing simple semantics. That’s um…. droll.
You may be a fine guy, and a cunning linguist, but Jeff is a douchebag, and you are standing next to him acting the Master Debater.
A fine guy? Patterico? Nah, he’s just another right-wing asshole.
His Grace said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:14
[Shudder] Next time the phones are open on Heavenly Idol, I can’t in good conscience vote for you Jillian. I know people who think that joking about molestation is for some reason, funny are deserving of a cruel fate. But haven’t you ever heard of mercy? Ten minutes of Kimmy Gibbler causes permenant insanity. A lifetime? Who knows what mosters you would create.
Roxanne said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:14
Gray gooooooooo. It’s everywhere.
Brad R. said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:16
Roxanne- your obsession with my obsession with The Grey Goo is disturbing. Don’t tell me you’re under its power too!
Ex-Fed said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:16
“Someone has said something nasty and untrue about me on another site, so naturally I am republishing it by linking to it. Fly, my poo-flinging pretties, fly!”
Kathleen said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:17
yeah, Patterico, it sure does suck when someone minimizes the vile things that someone else says, doesn’t it?
oh, and when you refer to us as a “snake pit,” it really does make your holier-than-thou, I-am-so-concerned-with-an-honest-debate comments here that much more laughable. and they were pretty laughable laready, so nice work.
I actually prefer the wingnut trolls, because at least they are honest with their crazy bullshit dishonesty.
In sum, you sir embarassed yourself today.
Matt T. said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:17
Oh, hell. He’s unleashing his minions. Considering he’s an apologist for someone as indefensible as Goldstein, I am not at all confident of the level of debating skills we’re about to see representing the Wingnut World. Be like arguing with one of those later Hapsburg kings, the ones who forhead sloped down over their noses.
Jillian said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:19
Sorry, His Grace.
I could be a very merciful deity for just about everything except this.
You know, I just thought of another way to demonstrate how totally out of line JG’s sister-touching comment is.
If it really is the sort of thing that just about anybody could interpret as a joke, then JG ought to be able to walk into any bar in America and casually drop that line on some guy at the bar. Right? I mean, it’s funny - they’d laugh about it, and the guy would totally buy JG a beer or something.
(As an aside, and because I really *don’t* like violence - sexual or otherwise - I really wouldn’t encourage anyone to try this particular experiment. I predict it would lead to a massive ass-beating.)
shargash said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:23
I just caught John Dean on Countdown tonight. His new book, Conservatives Without Conscience comes out in a couple days. In it he cites a massive study, involving hundreds of thousands of people that has been going on for like 50 years, of the “authoritarian personality”.
Basically, the scientific research shows that massively, overwhelmingly, authoritarian cultists are conservatives. He estimated that about 25% of America consists of conservative “authoritarian followers”. On the left, he estimates no more than about 1% (those of the very far left) are authoritarian.
The book comes out tomorrow. I’m looking forward to it. This is going to be fun. :)
Porgy Tirebiter said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:35
Here’s the moral of this deceased horse: Next time the ever-dwindling and ever-more desperate wingnut mob fixate on some silly bullshit like this, for God’s sake just ignore them. That will really piss them off.
Dorothy said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:37
Whatever. A woman in an argument with someone she disagrees with makes comments about that person’s son — his age, his gender, where he lives — and makes remarks about violent things happening to the son. Shootings. Kidnap and murder. Sure would suck if that would happen.
And Gavin writes a whole post minimizing it. Not as bad as this! or this! or this!
You missed a step, namely “Confederate Yankee writes a post claiming that the incident with this woman proves that ‘The Entire Left’ is objectively ‘pro toddler killing’ because they haven’t stepped up and ‘unequivocally condemned’ this woman’s comments en masse.”
See, with that critical step inserted, the point of Gavin’s post becomes “CY’s post was unfair and hypocritical: unfair because because no one’s ever heard of this woman, she has no influence on or claim to speak for ‘The Left’, and no one had any way of even knowing what she said before CY started complaining about it. Hypocritical because what she said really does pale in comparison to the eliminationist rhetoric and open calls for the extermination of Muslims, journalists, and liberals from mainstream, popular commenters on the right, and no one on the right is expected to condemn these people.”
Meanwhile, Patterico comes over and condemns Gavin for not condeming Frisch unequivocally enough, which proves he supports her comments and is objectively pro-toddler murder. And if the commenters don’t immediately condemn Gavin for not condemning Frisch enough, Patterico will declare us “not worth talking to” and take his tiny balls and go home.
Which kind of proves Gavin’s original point: Unfair. Hypocritical.
And don’t forget “assholish”.
His Grace said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:38
The next day’s protein wisdom post would be something on the order of “Leftist Thugs ruin my night out”
“I went out to a local drinking establishment and told a very humorous joke. Those poor idiots on the left couldn’t get it and rather than discussing things in a civilized manner they engaged in fisticuffs. I then tried to sooth their wounds by telling my favourite rooster related joke, but alas, they refused to engage in any real debate.” JG
Then Confederate Yankee, Patterico and the rest of them would write scathing denunications on how the liberal blogosphere has infultrated Jeff’s favourite watering holes and we need to apologise to him and our lack of not showing up to protect him from our own thugs is a sign of our own collective guilt.
rj said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:40
Patterico’s Pontifications » Patterico Descends Into the Snake Pit Again said,
Patterico’s Pontifications? Doesn’t that have a bit of a “Devastatin’ Dave” ring to it?
Well, my name is Patterico and I’m here to say…
fourmorewars said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:42
The right blogosphere is right to demand that you and others condemn that woman without resorting to pointing out things their bloggers have said. ‘Cause, I mean, they do that all the time, right? Devote a days’ posts to condemning one of their own, without mentioning how evil the left is by comparison.
I’m sure they can come up with a number of examples of this.
Though, suffice to say we’d settle for one.
Amanda Marcotte said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:43
I was a bit amused to have this whole thing hung around my neck before I knew what was going on. It’s my fault somehow though I didn’t know what the hell was going on.
Roxanne said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:44
Brad, regarding the gray/grey goo:
It’s better than being obsessed with your obsession with K. Grogan.
Drew Johnston said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:46
What Porgy said. As “fun” as this has been, the best way to defuse this bullshit is to ignore it. If anyone had outright condemned Frisch, it would have been an implicit agreement with the “Frisch as the Face of the Left” folderol (Generally, you condemn people you work with or for - not random nobodies who happen to share your beliefs).
Next time this happens, ignore it. The right blogosphere will go through their whole tantrum/fainting routine but will end up burning out because no one’s there to watch.
EdsAppliance said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:52
Is this the line to register for the Summer Getaway package?
Jillian said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:55
There’s this guy that lives at Funfzehnhundredneunundachtzig Karlmarxstrasse in Flat 2B in a small village about fifty kilometers south of Berlin who ties firecrackers to the tails of cats and puts flaming bags of poo on his neighbor’s porches. He’s also voted Green three times out of the last six regional elections, making him a certified Lefty.
I just want to go on record saying that I condemn his behavior. Alois Heinrich Schellburger, shame on you! I distance myself from your horrid behavior.
J— said,
July 11, 2006 at 3:55
Me thinks this has been a diversionary tactic devised by The Editors. While Sadly, No! has been engaged in this debate, the Poor Man Institude has crafted a celebratory history of its own victory in the Great Annoying Video War and unilaterally declared the peace.
Hoosier X said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:01
NO! We can’t ignore them! If some angry (and maybe slightly demented) “liberal” says something really horrible about children or the president or the troops or the president’s children or the troops’ children or the children’s president or the president’s children’s troops or the First Lady’s special Independence Day recipe for apple pie (that she made for some children or for the troops) and we don’t respond immediately - ALL OF US! - and condemn these comments, then it means that we support them one-hundred percent and that we want the terrorists to win!
And saying things like that - and not condemning them! - is so much worse than supporting a war that has killed and maimed thousands of REAL CHILDREN!
WON’T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN! (Even the ones born in Iraq, and Afghanistan, Vietnam, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Panama, Guatemala, and all the other regions blighted by our proxy wars.)
(Oh, I forgot, all the children killed in those wars were worse off under the bad people we were fighting - even though they were still alive before US involvement!)
D, Cloyce Smith said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:03
Patterico says: It’s hard to see how it’s relevant to a discussion about someone’s comment talking about someone shooting one’s two-year-old son.
A constant theme in Patterico’s carping has been, “But we’re talking about a child!” She’s part of a phenomenon I noted at my own blog: as far as I can tell, in her writing, she has remained absolutely silent about the following high-profile conservatives:
– Brian Doyle, fourth highest ranking official the United States Department of Homeland Security’s public affairs office [arrested for pedophilia]
– Political consultant Carey Lee Cramer, the Republican consultant who created ads for Republicans in Texas [convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child, two counts of indecency with a child by contact and one count of indecency with a child by exposure]
– The infamous former Mayor of Spokane Jim West [who lured underage boys to his city office]
or, for that matter, any of the former Republican office-holders, party officials, and activists listed at this site
Well, as the far-right Confederate Yankee so ironically put it: “Welcome to the new face of the most deranged members of our political opposition, the toddler-threatening community.”
Patterico insists that we liberals have an obligation to denounce–immediately–anybody who represents the left and who makes threatening noises about children. Yet she herself has had weeks and months to denounce the representatives on the right who have actually assaulted and raped children, but you’ll find
{crickets chirping} silence.
So, Patterico, please do as you preach: denounce, individually, each and every one of those Republican and conservative child molesters listed above and on that site–all of them a matter of infamy and public record. Actual pedophiles, mind you–not crazy women making empty threats.
And, per your rules, when you offer each of these condemnations, do it without mentioning liberals or Sadly, No!, or any of the Democrats or, least of all, a crazy idiot like Deb Frisch.
Maybe when you’re done with this little exercise, you’ll understand how ludicrous you’re being.
mikey said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:05
walk into any bar in America and casually drop that line on some guy at the bar. Right? I mean, it’s funny - they’d laugh about it, and the guy would totally buy JG a beer or something.
OK, here’s the problem. It’s the goddam allstar break. There’s no baseball on. Hey, I love Rachel Rae as much as the next guy, but the TVs for watchin baseball, and there ain’t none. So I’m hittin the scotch, havin a toke and readin the blogs. Drunk and melancholy, mostly Brad and Gavin’s fault, and so I got to thinkin about Jillian’s post. And yeah, it’s gonna go off topic. ‘Cause the topic is played out dryer than an old woman’s corn on the cob (betcha didn’t think I was gonna go there, didja?).
So about 27 or so years ago, when I was pretty sure I wanted to die, but just didn’t know how to go about getting there and didn’t even have the skills to have the internal conversation to figure it out, I used to go into bars and do shit like that. I’d climb up on the hood of a camaro or corvette and piss on the windshield. Kind of a physical manifestation of goldstein’s fantasies. And yeah, you know what? When you’ve got six or eight local good old boys in some small town in new mexico beating you senseless, it’s weird, but you do have a kind of clarity. It’s when you realize that where you fucked up is you ENGAGED. The violence was cathartic, but ultimately senseless, much like this whole imaginary issue. When they hit you, it doesn’t hurt (at the time) and when you land one, and break a nose or bust a tooth, gawdam but it feels good.
Is there a point? Not really. I wanted to write something here that wasn’t a silly backnforth with mindless drones. I was thinking about those days from jillian’s post, and then I was thinking how glad I was I found…well, the shit I needed to begin to get it. And I wanted to leave you with an obscure musical reference that’s kind of where I am tonight:
“C’mon Jack, the sonofabitch is coming…”
Hope a few of you recognize it….
mikey
Singularity said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:11
C’mon, HG, you should know that people on the meds that Jeff is on aren’t allowed to drink. On the other hand, that might explain the erratic behavior that Pasty displays with every other post or comment. Ol’ Rooster Cockburn is probably just having a bad reaction.
Hoosier X said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:13
I just googled Deborah Frisch and WOW! A very disturbed woman, completely lacking in civility and honesty and integrity and taste.
I think she is the Ann Coulter of the Left. And we, to our credit, have not given her or any of her kind a platform or any encouragement.
(She should change sides. She would make a fortune.)
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:16
All of the above is, of course, of the most vital importance to
Mr Goldstein and Miss Frisch … but would someone/
anyone please explain to me how it can possibly
matter to you?
Darth Vegas said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:26
Maybe we should just lock Jeff and Deborah in a room together until they eat or slap each other to death. The are both pretty yickee, the deserve each other and we need to get on with our lives.
Like bad videos from the 80’s! Now that is something the world needs more of!
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:30
oh crap, “slap each other” ?? now, I’m stuck with that image of Goldstein
cock-slapping the good Doctor …
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:32
in his Napoleon-drag, of course
Abraxas said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:33
Xavier (and others, you know who you are)…
You know, If Jeff is obsessed about his cock, well - that’s one thing…
But you S,N! folks obsessing about his obsession about his cock?
That’s just gay (and not the good kind of gay either).
And just think - all this argumentation could have been avoided if S,N! had begun and ended a post with “Deb Frisch is a reprehensible toddler rape/murder fantasist idiot” and given a link.
And then you could have devoted the next post (all 500 words of it) to how Ann Coulter calling the 4 leftist political activists who shield themselves from criticism behind their husband’s deaths as “witches” is going to be the end of Western Civ and how Rethuglikkkans are all evil, etc.
No one but your fellow travellers would have believed you, but at least you could have avoided touching this particular tar-baby
(no racial imagery implied in that last statement, or maybe there was, I am a conservative, after all…)
Matt T. said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:35
mikey,
“Desperados Waiting For A Train”, written by the great Guy Clark. The version by The Highwaymen (Willie, Waylon, Kristofferson and Cash) from their ‘84 album was my pappaw’s last favorite song before Alzheimer’s took ‘em. He’d sing that opening line - “I played the ‘Red River Valley’/And he’d sit out in the kitchen and cry” - in his deep, rumbling, resonating voice over and over, just because he liked the way it rolled around the room. To this day, that tune will catch me unawares - not as into the Texas troubadour thing as much as I used to be - and I’m not ashamed to admit I will flat-out bawl, son.
I spent a lot of time working various sides of the music biddness and got to meet a whole lot of real famous people, and once you’ve smoked a number with Willie Nelson, there ain’t much to the rest of ‘em. But I met Guy Clark once and I will say the experience shook me a bit. Big man, big prescence. I told him about that song and Pappaw, and I thought his flace would split from grinnin’.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:35
well, since you admit to being a conservative, i will be …
compassionate. pointing out the absurdities of absurd
creatures like Mr Goldstein and Mr Frisch is all just
good fun
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:38
by the way, you and YOUR “fellow travellers” could very well be the end of Western
Civilization, if you were in any way competent…. fortunately for the sane majority
you are
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:39
not
g said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:42
“She’s the face of the fringe left. ”
Oh bullshit. Nobody ever heard of her until this weekend.
mikey said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:44
Yo, Matt T. Thanks man, Guy Clark needs a little recog. I sat at his table at Willie’s 1976 “Return to Panther Hall” in Fort Worth after they had closed it for YEARS to Willie. Dood, they sold longnex by the fucking CASE but nobdy thought to bring in an opener!! Charly Cole opened 48 bottles of beer that nite with his fucking TEETH!! What a moment in time…
mikey
Patterico said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:44
I’m on record here many times as disapproving the argument that you need to condemn everything out there. I say only that *if* you’re going to discuss Frisch’s actions here, you should condemn them.
Yet several people here act as though I made that argument.
You really just don’t seem to give a shit about responding to what people actually say.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:48
disapproving?
or: disproving?
or a combination of the two?
so, if one non-entity condemns another , then,
all’s right with world?
come on, it’s not like any of us … including Miss Frisch and Mr Goldstein …
matter in this non-matter
Abraxas said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:49
Mr./Ms.? Xavier,
Fantasizing about child molestation is not absurd - it is dangerous. Underage children should never be used as debating points in any argument; I hope you will agree and we can leave it at that.
I’ll assume your last word in your last post was “aren’t.” and there wasn’t a longer piece inadvertently missing or cut off by the HTML Faery - just to keep the volley going.
“…sane majority…”
You have to win an election before you can even start making noises about “majority”.
And you have to present positions that make sense before you can even start making noises about “sane”.
The President (with some big help from the U.S.’s allies) seems to be doing a pretty good job of bottling up Norko and the Mullahs, so WC appears to be in good hands at the moment.
Didn’t really want to open this up to a catholic debate about U.S. domestic and foreign policy; the Ann Coulter bit was just a “ferinstance”.
kc said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:51
[…] The fun is at three threads, here, here, and here. Go say hi. […]
Patterico calling in reinforcements.
What a tool.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:54
are you suggesting “though-crime?” is that your issue now?
I don’t particularly care what you or anyone else fantasizes about….
as to making crude remarks on-line, what? you think it’s something new?
I’m sorry to have to tell you, I just don’t have the capacity for a good fit
of self-righteous outrage every time someone abuses a keyboard
Matt T. said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:55
See, I don’t believe that. I don’t believe for one instant there was a room full of Texans and none of ‘em had a bottle opener. I’ve known way too many Texans to swallow that. I will, however, believe one just decided to use his teeth.
Last time I saw Guy was years ago at a folk festival in White Oak, Florida. My then-current pelvic affiliation gave me a sugar cube and I do believe it had something in it. I don’t know if I’d recommend the experience to just anyone, but I must say there’s something very vivid about that sort of songwriter when one is in the midst of a magic carpet ride. Keep your Pink Floyd and your Radiohead, I prefer Roger Miller and Ray Wylie Hubbard when it comes to the total destruction of my mind.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:55
sorry… thoughT-crime…..
al-though …..
Patterico said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:56
Nobody wants to come here, so don’t worry.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:57
I’ll take Felice & Boudleaux Bryant
Patterico said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:58
They know better than I do the chances that they’ll run into someone honest. There have been one or two here, among many.
Abraxas said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:58
“Patterico calling in reinforcements.
What a tool.”
From what I’ve read here so far, he doesn’t need any.
Reinforcements, I mean.
Or tools.
Although, I must say, all the authentically angry leftists and liberals here throwing around the f-bomb doesn’t speak well of the forensic skills of the average poster here. It’s as many posters have forgotten the point. Or don’t want to remember it. Or be reminded of it.
kc said,
July 11, 2006 at 4:58
I’m on record here many times as disapproving the argument that you need to condemn everything out there. I say only that *if* you’re going to discuss Frisch’s actions here, you should condemn them.
And they did. Repeatedly. Dumb-ass.
g said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:00
“I’m on record here many times”
Ad nauseum, I’d say.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:00
“f-bomb”…. isn’t that a bit infantile. the word is fuck,
a perfectly respectable little Anglo-Saxon number
with a good Teutonic heritage…. i would think
a Republican would appreciate that.
and I’ve always wondered, why is the expression
of anger considered a psychological disorder?
His Grace said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:02
I’m on record here many times as disapproving the argument that you need to condemn everything out there. I say only that *if* you’re going to discuss Frisch’s actions here, you should condemn them.
uhhh…
I guess we could write “We condemn Ms. Frisch’s actions and find them horrible.” 50000 times and it still wouldn’t be good enough for Patterico. Perhaps we need to make some sort of diarama,
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:03
on record ???
is this a glorified chatroom, or a grand jury proceeding?
mikey said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:04
I’ve known way too many Texans to swallow that. I will, however, believe one just decided to use his teeth.
Dood, c’mon, you KNOW there was some lady-impressin goin on at that table. Like I said, it was a moment in history…
mikey
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:06
let’s re-cap , and re-fine:
Miss Frisch typed comments that were crude and childish
to Mr Goldstein , who has mad his reputation (such as it is)
by typing crude and childish comments.
We now join our pogrom already in progress
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:07
oh, one more thing…. the sacred child in the midst of it all
is blissfully unaware of the foolish behavior of the
adults he is so foolishly depending on.
Abraxas said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:08
““f-bombâ€?…. isn’t that a bit infantile. the word is fuck,
a perfectly respectable little Anglo-Saxon number
with a good Teutonic heritage…. i would think
a Republican would appreciate that.”
I choose not to use the word in civil discourse because I don’t need to use it.
I would think a leftist would appreciate that … you know, freedom of choice.
If I want “a perfectly respectable little Anglo-Saxon number
with a good Teutonic heritage” I’ll go for a beer. Or a supermodel. Or a supermodel with beer.
“and I’ve always wondered, why is the expression
of anger considered a psychological disorder? ”
If you’re honestly asking, then the proper question might be “…WHEN is the expression of anger considered a psychological disorder?”
The answer of course being, but not limited to - severe displacement, rape fantasies about political opponent’s children. Not to caricature the debate, but; Anger is healthy. Threatening children is not.
rj said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:08
Although, I must say, all the authentically angry leftists and liberals here throwing around the f-bomb
… and another winger gets the vapors upon reading some naughty words written by lefties.
Perhaps one of the same righties that praised Go Fuck Yourself Cheney for telling it like it is?
dgbellak said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:08
Although, I must say, all the authentically angry leftists and liberals here throwing around the f-bomb doesn’t speak well of the forensic skills of the average poster here.
Yes, we must all follow the “admirable restraint” of that eloquent wordsmith, Jeff Goldstein. We can taunt our enemy by suggesting we fucked their sisters, we just have to avoid using the word “fuck”. And we must also remain ambiguous regarding age and consent. For that is how you craft a forensically impressive retort.
Abraxas, I hope I just impressed your presumably Ventura-inspired self. I sure impressed your mother last night.
Jillian said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:09
Next time you need to explain your moral revulsion at Frisch’s comments, I suggest using this. Eventually, we’ll find a medium which relays the message.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:10
“I choose not to use the word in civil discourse”….
well, that says it all, now, doesn’t it?
if you can type a sentence like that with a straight face
I can certainly understand your horror of the word
FUCK
D, Cloyce Smith said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:11
Patterico says: I’m on record here many times as disapproving the argument that you need to condemn everything out there.
This is disingenuous. As you well know, Sadly No!’s original post was made in response to that very argument (made by Confederate Yankee)–not to anything you said.
You can’t retroactively say, “You should have responded to the post I made later instead.” Neither Gavin nor Brad could have predicted that you would show up here and change the terms of the debate.
And, so, just like you have been challenging Sadly, No! to condemn Frisch without responding to Confederate Yankee’s (and others) smears against the “silence” on this blog, I’m CHALLENGING you to denounce each and every right-wing child molester. Why do you equivocate? Why can’t you simply condemn them without offering excuses for yourself? Is it really that hard?
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:16
wait —
what if we condemn everything anyone has ever said ?
Blam!!!
tabula rasa …. game over ….
re-Start
Jillian said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:18
Gah.
Seriously, folks - sex is not an insult. If you think it is, then A.) you’re doing it wrong, B.) you need to take up a non-sexual hobby - I recommend golf, and C.) Please wear a sign or something, so those of us who don’t think sex is an insult don’t accidentally end up going home with your lame ass from a bar some night.
Let’s leave everybody’s sister, daughter, son, mother, father, and brother out of this. From now on, sexual insults should be reserved for only sufficiently removed consanguinal relatives - I’m holding out for fourth cousins, twice removed.
geoduck2 said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:18
I would like to say, on record, that I will never, ever, ever, ever, again get into a lit crit debate on the internet.
I promise.
Patkin said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:20
Although, I must say, all the authentically angry leftists and liberals here throwing around the f-bomb doesn’t speak well of the forensic skills of the average poster here.
Fuck off, fuckstick.
Abraxas said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:21
Then, to take them in order, Mr. Xavier -
“… and another winger gets the vapors upon reading some naughty words written by lefties.
Perhaps one of the same righties that praised Go Fuck Yourself Cheney for telling it like it is?”
I don’t have the vapors, it’s just unimpressive that one needs to use such language.
And no, I didn’t praise Cheney; in fact, (in keeping with the theme of the evening): I unequivocally denouce the Vice-President for the use of such language.*
And dgbellak
“Yes, we must all follow the “admirable restraintâ€? of that eloquent wordsmith, Jeff Goldstein. We can taunt our enemy by suggesting we fucked their sisters, we just have to avoid using the word “fuckâ€?. And we must also remain ambiguous regarding age and consent. For that is how you craft a forensically impressive retort.
Abraxas, I hope I just impressed your presumably Ventura-inspired self. I sure impressed your mother last night. ”
If it suits you to find parallels between child rape fantasies and personal insults, well, nothing I say will convince you otherwise. If you meant to be ironic about attempting to insult a woman you’ve never met (my mother) by juxtaposing it with Jeff’s insulting of a woman HE’S never met - well - ho, ho. Or maybe you meant it to be risible?
And no, I didn’t take my name from a Jesse Ventura film (although thank you for the IMDB pointer, I’ll have to read more about that); it’s just that all the cool names were taken. Like dgbellak.
*please notice the absence of any “but they started it, Liberals are worse, etc.”
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:23
I long ago vowed to “never, ever, etc., again get into a lit crit debate”
anywhere ….
put a gun or a right-wing blogger’s cock to my head and I will not
debate the influence of Lucia Joyce’s schizophrenia on
Finnegan’s Wake …
not for all the lesbians in Arizona or Oregon
phleabo said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:23
Shouldn’t we focus on the truly salient matter, that of Jeff Goldstein’s heroic interal struggle with his homosexuality and the attendant rage problems that have resulted from his longstanding suppression of said homosexuality?
The man likes putting his penis on other men; that’s gay. And gay is fine. But for Jeff, gay is shameful, and so Jeff redirects the anger he feels about himself for his intense sexual desire for me, outward, everywhere. It’s gotten so bad, he needs drugs to control it - dangerous, addictive drugs.
Whatever whoever that woman was that nobody’s ever heard of before said or did, it’s been condemned, and that’s fine. Now, let’s focus on Jeff’s real problems. If we all treat him with love and respect, if we let him know that it’s OK to be who he really is, maybe we can make a breakthrough. Let’s help someone!
matoko-chan said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:25
abraxas is part of the incantation that zeus uses to get rid of the flies in the Satre play, “Les Mouches”.
abraxas gallo gallo tse
you’re welcome. ;)
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:25
“needs to use such language….” …. “such language”….
say it out loud…. can you hear yourself, Mzzz Scarlet?
JK47 said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:29
But you S,N! folks obsessing about his obsession about his cock?
That’s just gay (and not the good kind of gay either).
Look, a toady of a Jeff Goldstein toady. Way to stick up for your homey Patterico. Now we shall use you as a pinata for the remainder of the time you choose to post here. Welcome.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:30
you know, Abraxas, would you like to see some really filthy language?
how about:
collateral damage …. traumatic amputation …. war crime ….
do those give you “the vapors?”
JK47 said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:32
I condemn Frisch to triple infinity times googol plex.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:33
and i condemn JK47
tag — you’re it ….
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:37
dammit, Abraxas, it was your turn to condemn someone
get in the game, honey
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:40
crap …. I hate when “the Bible” comes back to me ….
aren’t Republicans the Xtian party?
wouldn’t they remember the punch-line
“let he who is without sin cast the first stone” ?
(you know — when J.C. was trying to talk them out of
stoning his wife to death for cheating on him)
D, Cloyce Smith said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:44
phleabo said, Shouldn’t we focus on the truly salient matter, that of Jeff Goldstein’s heroic interal struggle with his homosexuality and the attendant rage problems that have resulted from his longstanding suppression of said homosexuality?
Don’t even try go. If JG* were gay, then the right-wing would insist he’s on my team. And then Confederate Yankee and Malkin will insist that I have to apologize for his insensitive statements and ominous threats. And then I may have to become straight.
Not. Gonna. Happen.
* That other JG was enough horror to deal with for one decade, thank you very much.
dgbellak said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:47
If it suits you to find parallels between child rape fantasies and personal insults, well, nothing I say will convince you otherwise.
And that’s the other big issue that doesn’t seem to get through to the “Not the children!” crowd. Though none of us can say for sure (another point lost on many) I think most people here don’t actually believe her comments construed a child rape fantasy, or that she was a pedophile or any such things. When you see huge amounts of juvenile banter (no offense, Gavin, Brad & co….er…rock on!) taking place on both sides of the blogoshpere, it becomes so difficult when things get personal to differentiate between what’s serious, what’s a threat, what’s sensibly touchy, what’s batshit insane…well, it loses its shock and awe pretty quickly. The only things that truly offend or disturb are trends that are sociopathic, noticeable patterns of such behavior…well lookee here!
Point being, in a world of vile, disgusting quips, one set of boundary-crossing remarks to one fucktard does not a child molestor make. So pardon those who fail to rush to “unequivocally condemn” such a person.
Abraxas said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:47
“needs to use such language….� …. “such language�….
say it out loud…. can you hear yourself, Mzzz Scarlet? ”
I tend to write the way I would speak to you if we were standing face-to-face. I don’t think that Leftists and Liberals and Conservatives etc. can’t speak to each other, not as enemies, but as opponents. (yellow flag - too many negatives on the field). Let me be clear, that’s my personal ethos, not a plea for anyone else to adopt that sentiment.
And JK47 -
“Look, a toady of a Jeff Goldstein toady. Way to stick up for your homey Patterico. Now we shall use you as a pinata for the remainder of the time you choose to post here. Welcome.”
No one sent me here. I happened to end up here as a result of following the Frisch controversy. I had thought that this was a place with free-flowing debate, f-words (sorry Xavier) notwithstanding. Go ahead, pinata away. Either S,N! welcomes, and vigorously debates differing opinions or it does not. Either way, I thank the owners for allowing me to post thus far.
But in the face-to-face world F-you is generally not accepted as “vigorous debate”.
I apologize if my replies seem tardy, it isn’t a sign of disrespect, I just cannot type quickly.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:49
I believe the children are the future ….
of course, if Mr Goldstein has his way,
they won’t have one
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:51
and I thank whatever-if-anything-is-behind-it-all
I never have the dubious pleasure of hearing
you speak to me “face to face”
MM said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:51
This has officially reached the height of absurdity. Patterico is purposefully reading every condemnation in the least favorable light possible.
This is someone that had a near zero traffic blog, that wasn’t an active commenter except apparently for a few dust ups with Steve Verdon and Crooked Timber, until she got into it with Goldstein.
So now the Commissar, Rick Moran and Patterico decide to play these silly gotcha games.
“Say she’s bad or you agree with her”
“That denunciation isn’t strong enough”
“That denunciation also demonstrated a lack of civility toward Goldstein, who is the pinnacle of all that is good. I’m not all convinced that you don’t support child rape.”
“That denunciation is acceptable. Telling that it didn’t come until I pressed you for it.”
This is not a complex issue, consistenly the response from “The Left” is:
1. That Deb Frisch did something really bad.
2. But nobody knew who she was until a few days ago, so forgive us for not freaking out like It was a Talk Left post or something.
3. Just becuase it’s beyond the pale, let’s not forget that Goldstein is still a dick.
None of these are incredibly vague or complex ideas. Why some of these bloggers on the right can’t seem to follow them tells me that they are being fundamentally unserious about this.
I have a sneaking suspicion that the next time Goldstein or Vercingtorex or another of his commenters threaten a left blogger the response from the right is going to be “at least he goes after adults, you perverts. Enjoy the axe handle from the back and Jeff’s dick from the front.”
IOW, the right is preparing to give Jeff carte blanche to say or doanything he wants, so long as he doesn’t explicitly reference child molestation or child murder. Nice.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:53
another thing not accepted in the “face to face world … as vigorous debate”:
bald-faced lies.
I find those more obscene than a few naughty words
MM said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:54
Also, typing while on the phone causes typos. That or my UNHINDERED RAGE TOWARDS GOLDSTEIN. Blarrrrgggggghhhhh!
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:55
you don’t suppose Goldstein is a pseudonym borrowed from Orwell?
no, can’t be, he’s not that clever
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:56
we can still use it for Bush’s bogeyman:
Usama bin Goldstein
D, Cloyce Smith said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:58
Xaveri says, another thing not accepted in the “face to face world … as vigorous debate�: bald-faced lies.
Come to think of it, exposing one’s penis is not something one would do in a face-to-face debate either. But that sort of action in virtual space doesn’t seem to bother Abraxas, now, does it?
marky said,
July 11, 2006 at 5:59
Like I said earlier.. how do we even know her politics?
Why is she a lefty?
Abraxas said,
July 11, 2006 at 6:00
dgbellak:
After reading what she said, I firmly believe that she means that child harm. I’m not saying that to score points, or to contradict for contradiction’s sake. You can believe me or not.
She kept posting things such as the molestation fantasy. She kept doing it. Again and again.
Misunderstanding is one thing, we all misapprehend each other online all the time; the net seems custom built to hurt feelings and encourage vendettas. But you simply don’t bring a 2-year old into the mix in such a way. You don’t do it, you don’t joke about it and you don’t validate it. You simply don’t.
Unless there’s something wrong with you.
But one cannot take a chance. Now Jeff has to take measures (I hope) to protect his family that may include the acquisition of lethal force. It’s really a shame it went this far, but there’s only one person responsible for that, I’m afraid. Not a combination of people; not 30% her fault, 30% his fault and 83% Halliburton’s fault.
I don’t know that it can be put any plainer than that.
Anyway, I have to go take care of some business, thank you all for reading and considering, or reading and vilifying, or reading and saying “whatever…”
I’ll check back later if any would like to continue.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 6:00
well, I don’t know, D., depends on what the argument was about …
whether or not “exposing one’s penis” would prove the
point
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 6:03
for fuck’s sake: i can sit here typing and mean any child in the world harm
and it is nothing without “means and opportunity”…. however–
if I order a 500 lb. bomb dropped on a neighborhood in Iraq,
or a missile fired into a neighborhood in Gaza,
then we might want to grab the kids and run for it
Patkin said,
July 11, 2006 at 6:03
Either S,N! welcomes, and vigorously debates differing opinions or it does not.
I don’t know how the guys in charge of S, N feel about vigorous debate, but I personally can tell you that I hate you, hate all your right-wing buddies, and don’t give a fucking damn about you and yours.
So go fuck yourself and your passive-aggressive civil discourse, fuckstick.
geoduck2 said,
July 11, 2006 at 6:04
For the Record:
I believe Patterico when he says that he did not approve or think it was funny that an anonymous commenter sexually threatened a two year old child.
Xavier said,
July 11, 2006 at 6:05
but playing “king of the hill — take the high moral ground”
in this milieu is self-serving, and as hollow as Our
Dear Leader’s head
Patkin said,
July 11, 2006 at 6:06
Also, am i wrong but did the fuckstick with a Batman villain’s name insinuate Goldstein has to get a gun now to protect his precious boy from… what, exac