Aug
1
1
Retardo “Dice” Clay
Pattycake Pattycake,
Pasty’s flack;
Axe-handles, cock-slapping, Thers’s kid — ack! –
You’re now and always Pasty’s man;
But Greenwald cites “Retardo”– ‘proof’ he’s a sham!
Pattycake, Pattycake,
Double-standarding hack:
“Pasty’s teh funny so I got his back!”
Count Cockula & Deb are the same, if you’d see,
But, no! - ’cause you’re a fucking wanker, and Jeff’s the wankee.
Whoa!
chimpy said,
August 1, 2006 at 9:43
that was some of the funniest shit i’ve read in a while (sorry not you guys, but the comments in the link). I love the part where the guy says “Honestly, the energy these people put into trying to destroy one guy is really amazing” and then proceeds with that lenghy conspiracy nut job about Greenwald’s comment section and his fuckin IP address. These guys really are in some long suffering momma’s basement somewhere aren’t they. Oh yeah, that was him dealing with the substance of Greenwalds posts. Oh man, i was rollin on the floor.
NobodySpecial said,
August 1, 2006 at 11:15
The idea that Goldstein’s family, his children, might be off-limits is somehow dismissed. At best (and it’s a poor best), the fact that we are bombing women and children in Iraq somehow is of “greater� import.
This commentary says it all for them. Insults against Goldstein’s family are OBVIOUSLY as important as bombing women and children in Iraq.
Why are they so protective of their reputations? Haven’t they realized yet that those got shot all to hell in the last six years of blindly backing Bush’s foreign and domestic policy disasters?
Patterico said,
August 1, 2006 at 15:47
1. “Mr.” Montalban seems to have an unhealthy fixation on Jeff Goldstein’s penis. Sad.
2. When someone deliberately chooses a completely outrageous way to put something, consider the possibility that it’s not intended seriously. For example, if I wanted to make it utterly clear that my Internet threats of violence were a joke, I might threaten, not to punch someone in the face, but to do something completely and utterly ludicrous. I might pick the silliest possible threat. That’s a clew that it’s not meant seriously. Hint: cock-slapping is a very ludicrous “threat.” That’s the point.
3. Further hint: Jonathan Swift did not seriously suggest breeding children to feed the rich. The outrageousness of the proposal is, as I say, a clew. And were you to mock him endlessly for proposing such a ridiculous thing, the joke would not be on Swift. It would be on you, for not understanding the satire. (Big time.)
4. There is a particular dishonest argument in response to an analogy which is popular among people who want to score a cheap point without addressing the issue: pretend that the person making the analogy is intending to *equate* the things being analogized. It’s particularly dishonest because analogies often liken the current situation to a more extreme situation, exactly to make the point obvious.
5. I expect most responses to this comment will be some combination of penis fixation, insult, and resort to the dishonest argument described in point 4. Call me Karnak.
6. Taking cock-slapping jokes seriously is very silly of you.
That oughtta stir the hornet’s nest a little. Have fun!
kc said,
August 1, 2006 at 15:57
6. Taking cock-slapping jokes seriously is very silly of you.
No one takes them seriously. Which is probably the source of JG’s impotent rage.
Anyway, nothing’s as silly as defending cock-slapping jokes.
John Protevi said,
August 1, 2006 at 16:06
Shorter Patterico: I have no life.
John Protevi said,
August 1, 2006 at 16:07
Shorter Patterico, take 2: Glenn Greenwald wrote a book?
Retardo Montalban said,
August 1, 2006 at 16:16
2. When someone deliberately chooses a completely outrageous way to put something, consider the possibility that it’s not intended seriously. For example, if I wanted to make it utterly clear that my Internet threats of violence were a joke, I might threaten, not to punch someone in the face, but to do something completely and utterly ludicrous. I might pick the silliest possible threat. That’s a clew that it’s not meant seriously. Hint: cock-slapping is a very ludicrous “threat.â€? ….
Maybe not, though repeating it millions of times sort of underlines a mental problem. But saying you should take a gun to Eschaton II is a threat. Saying that you’re going to take axe-handles to Yearly Kos is. Saying you will come to someone’s house and beat them up with your fists is. Saying that you’ll kick someone (in the throat iirc) is. Saying that you’re gonna show someone where Jimmy Hoffa is buried is.
And if what Frisch said was a threat, so was what was said by either Goldstein or one of his commenters about Thers’s kid.
But you can’t allow yourself to accept any of that because you’re a pathetic hack — which, I’ve been wondering: is Goldstein giving you a kickback from his latest pity-drive?
g said,
August 1, 2006 at 16:24
Pasty and Pattie remind me of a 80’s band, continually returning to medleys of their greatest hits.
The little Deb Frisch dustup was tthe most exciting thing in Jeffy’s life so far, so we are treated to endless reruns of it.
It’s like watching classic baseball games. I love baseball, but what’s the point of watching an old game?
Doug said,
August 1, 2006 at 16:30
Shorter Patterico III, The Search for Spock: When Goldstein talks about molesting someone’s kid, he’s just being satirical and over-the-top, but when Debbie Frisch does it, it is a horrible offense that threatens the very fabric of our society. The fact that you guys can’t recognize the difference just proves that you are TEH STUPID times infinity no takebacks.
DUDACKATTACK!!! said,
August 1, 2006 at 16:42
“Call me Karnak.”
-Sorry. “Fucking Asshole” suits you better.
Bill B said,
August 1, 2006 at 17:09
But saying you should take a gun to Eschaton II is a threat. Saying that you’re going to take axe-handles to Yearly Kos is. Saying you will come to someone’s house and beat them up with your fists is. Saying that you’ll kick someone (in the throat iirc) is. Saying that you’re gonna show someone where Jimmy Hoffa is buried is. - Mr. Montalban
Every one of these examples are cited by you, in your own piece, as having been posted by commentators on Mr. Goldstein’s site. Of course since his permalinks aren’t working (how convenient!!) its not possible to check the context of the comments. However, you know the context because you’re the one who highlighted the comments in your original post. Why are you now suggesting that Mr. Goldstein said these things?
And if what Frisch said was a threat, so was what was said by either Goldstein or one of his commenters about Thers’s kid.
What evidence do you have that Mr. Goldstein or one of his commenters said this? What Ms. Frisch has said and done is well documented and not disputed by her. It’s rather dishonest and irresponsible for you to suggest Goldstein has engaged in anything close to what this woman has done.
Retardo Montalban said,
August 1, 2006 at 17:40
Saying you will come to someone’s house and beat them up with your fists is. Saying that you’ll kick someone (in the throat iirc) is.
Goldstein himself is responsible for these two.
Love that “how convenient”, though. His links worked when I wrote the piece. I can’t help it he spends all that money on a dedicated server and still cant keep his shitty site intact. Actually — HOW CONVENIENT for him!
As for “evidence” about the comments on Thers’s kid, well, the content, style, timing, and victim all make it pretty obvious. But I’m sure wingnuts think Hezbollah did it. Surely not Goldstein or his commenters, who have never threatened violence oh no no!
tigrismus said,
August 1, 2006 at 17:57
Hold up, posting Goldstein quotes to document how obsessed he is with his cock is evidence of the one who posts them is obsessed with Goldstein’s cock? That’s a line of reasoning I’m especially surprised to encounter from a DA.
Cyrus said,
August 1, 2006 at 18:50
1. Yes, the person compiling a list of references to something is more unhealthy and sad than the person actually making those references. Clearly.
2, 3. Good news, guys! He figured out what “Rope. Tree. Conservative” meant! At least, at some point he figured it out, though maybe after “Pie. Face. Patterico”.
4. So this is fine when Goldstein does it, but bad when Dick Durbin does it. Makes sense to me!
5. How am I doing so far? I value your input.
6. First of all, the proprietors of Sadly, No! have been doing something very silly? Stop the presses! Second of all, if there were taking them “seriously” in the sense of “treating them as serious threats”, then that would be another matter. But taking such jokes “seriously” merely in the sense of “using them as insights into the character of the person making them”? It doesn’t sound too unreasonable.
Strange Forces said,
August 1, 2006 at 20:06
tigrismus:
It’s the same line of reasoning that led Ann Coulter to opine that, because of his affairs with women, Bill Clinton is a latent homosexual. It’s been a while since I took my symbolic logic classes, but I think that’s known as Proof by CooCoo Bananas.
Smiling Mortician said,
August 1, 2006 at 20:19
Further hint: Jonathan Swift did not seriously suggest breeding children to feed the rich. The outrageousness of the proposal is, as I say, a clew.
Um. I knew Jonathan Swift. Jonathan Swift was a friend of mine. And you, Goldstein, are no Jonathan Swift.
NobodySpecial said,
August 1, 2006 at 20:31
4. There is a particular dishonest argument in response to an analogy which is popular among people who want to score a cheap point without addressing the issue: pretend that the person making the analogy is intending to *equate* the things being analogized. It’s particularly dishonest because analogies often liken the current situation to a more extreme situation, exactly to make the point obvious.
The poster of said commentary didn’t offer anything to offset the serious tone of the analogy in the middle of his lament about the evil evil left wingers then or at any time after. Given the history of right wingers in this country beating and killing gays, dragging blacks behind trucks, and generally equating the left with terrorists, child molesters, and Satan, you can’t be very surprised when people stop treating your outbursts as episodes of ‘humor’ and ‘analogy’ and instead treat them as the pathologies they clearly represent.
Unless, of course, you just want us to treat you like 14 year olds with no controls between thoughts and tongues.
Patterico said,
August 1, 2006 at 21:21
How’d I do with the predictions? Let’s see:
Penis fixation by commenters? Check.
Insults? Check.
Miss the point of the analogy, so respond to it with phony rhetorical trick? Check.
The only ones I missed: utterly dishonest attribution to Goldstein of statements by his commenters, and baseless suggestions of kickbacks.
You folks claim your penis fixation stems from Goldstein’s references to “COCK” on his site. But those references stem from the left’s fascination with Gannon’s “cock.” A fascination the folks here share, judging from the online store.
Let me see if I have this straight: you do or you don’t believe that threats to slap someone with a cock are serious? You do or don’t understand that the threat is phrased that way to make it perfectly clear that the “threats” are not serious?
NobodySpecial said,
August 1, 2006 at 21:51
Let me see if I have this straight: you do or you don’t believe that threats to slap someone with a cock are serious? You do or don’t understand that the threat is phrased that way to make it perfectly clear that the “threats� are not serious?
The only replies in the thread that refer to Mr. Goldstein’s ‘manhood’:
No one takes them seriously. Which is probably the source of JG’s impotent rage.
Anyway, nothing’s as silly as defending cock-slapping jokes.
And this:
Maybe not, though repeating it millions of times sort of underlines a mental problem.
And this:
Hold up, posting Goldstein quotes to document how obsessed he is with his cock is evidence of the one who posts them is obsessed with Goldstein’s cock? That’s a line of reasoning I’m especially surprised to encounter from a DA.
Pasty + reading comprehension? S,N!
NobodySpecial said,
August 1, 2006 at 21:52
My apologies, I called it Pasty. I should have called it Pasty’s Wingman.
John Protevi said,
August 1, 2006 at 21:58
Shorter Patterico, take 3: “really? Glenn Greenwald wrote a book about the Constitution? Don’t bother me with that trivia when I’m busy.”
tigrismus said,
August 1, 2006 at 22:02
Noone thought about the Goldmember until he brought it up. Early and often. Sometimes folks notice that sort of thing. And not that it has anything to do with anything, but noone thought about Gannon’s until photos he’d posted of himself at attention surfaced. As you apparently keep checking the store for Gannon cock stock, we have to assume, by your logic, that you have a wee fixation yourself.
Cock-and-bull aside, here’s a “clew” for you, too, darling: one doesn’t have to believe a threat is serious to think it is evidence of a warped mind. Noone thinks he really molested a commenter’s sister but it was still a nasty thing to say, and it’s not unreasonable to conclude that someone who would say such a thing is a little loco in the cabeza. Here’s another: insult people and they may actually insult you back. Shocking, I know.
Patterico said,
August 1, 2006 at 22:29
He didn’t say he molested a commenter’s sister.
His comment about someone’s sister was an insult — to someone who had already insulted him. I heard somewhere that’s okay to do. Like calling someone a fucking asshole for making some arguments.
I know Mr. Montalban sets the standard for smears here: no accuracy or basis required. But you don’t all have to follow his example. Try honesty for a change. Just try it out. Maybe you’ll like it.
I *said* maybe . . .
Cheers.
NobodySpecial said,
August 1, 2006 at 22:45
He didn’t say he molested a commenter’s sister.
Touch a woman in her ’secret places’, especially when she doesn’t want you to, and find out what words they use to describe it.
ahem said,
August 1, 2006 at 22:50
Shorter Patterico, take IV.
kc said,
August 1, 2006 at 22:52
Shorter Patterico: “blah blah blah penis fixation blah blah blah COCK!”
John Protevi said,
August 1, 2006 at 22:55
Shorter Patterico, take 4: “Puny human! Your mention of Greenwald’s book on threats to the Constitution is powerless before my Goldstein defense mind-ray! Don’t try to distract me while I’m focusing its awesome powers!”
kc said,
August 1, 2006 at 22:56
Let me see if I have this straight: you do or you don’t believe that threats to slap someone with a cock are serious?
The DA in action. “Just answer yes or no, sir! DO you or DON’T you believe cock-slapping threats are SERIOUS?”
Witness: “[snicker . . .]”
Patterico: “Your HONOR! Please instruct the witness to answer the QUESTION!”
John Protevi said,
August 1, 2006 at 22:58
I bow before the superior power of “ahem’s” Shorter. I for one would like to welcome our new Animotronic overlords.
tigrismus said,
August 1, 2006 at 23:26
I was merely pointing out the two were analogous because any threat was not taken seriously… Oh dear, please tell me you’re not refuting that they are analogous by pointing out they aren’t equal. No, it’s just a quibble over semantics is it, dear heart? I’m not afraid to go all dictionarial on your heinie and split your finest nethermost hair on the meanings of “molest” and “improper,” but let’s not; will you grant that it was a nasty thing to say? Perhaps even that it was over the line to bring in someone’s family in what was clearly meant to be sexually degrading? And sweetie, I didn’t say it was acceptible, just expectable. Try to keep up. But do tell me, in your learned opinion, is it necessary to take a threat seriously to think someone a right asshole for making it? Do you really think anyone thought Goldstein was literally clutching a ticket for Commenterville, population one face-slappee? Please note I’m not saying said commenter was not also an asshole, so let’s just nip that riposte before it fleurets(I spoke metaphorically.—My metaphor was drawn from fencing). And if you recognize that noone thought him serious, just a jerk(hard as they may be to believe) doesn’t that make you want to revisit your first post? Who knows, you may develop a taste for honest reevaluation yourself. I did said may.
Doug said,
August 1, 2006 at 23:27
Patterico lecturing someone on intellectual honesty is kinda like Mel Gibson admonishing someone to be nicer to Jewish people.
mikey said,
August 1, 2006 at 23:33
That’s a line of reasoning I’m especially surprised to encounter from a DA.
Really? Doesn’t surprise me a bit. Of course, I’ve been prosecuted a couple of times, so I’ve had the dubious pleasure of seeing them in action. Crepuscular logic and a complete disrespect for the facts tend to characterize your basic county DA. That, and a complete willingness to incarcerate the wrong person, if necessary, merely to add another conviction and maybe qualify for a raise…
mikey
Doug said,
August 1, 2006 at 23:49
Also let the record show that while I have not mentioned this word or this word once today, Patterico has done so repeatedly, a total of nine times in this comment thread alone, in fact. I will let my superiority speak for itself.
Marq said,
August 2, 2006 at 1:15
Shorter Patterico(suavé), part 67 & �:
“BLAARRGGHH! Me am reasoning–LOUDLY!!1 BLAARRGGHH1!!”
Thus endeth teh lesson.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 2:07
kc:
Having the witness snicker in your imagined cross-examination makes my point perfectly: Jeff’s “threats” are jokes, not threats. You guys (and Greenwald) treating them like *threats* shows *you* don’t get it. You’re like someone who repeatedly and bitterly mocks Swift for advocating cannibalism, and then goes around shaking your head and pointing at him, saying: “Jesus. He actually advocates cannibalism.” And when someone tries to explain that Swift meant it as satire, you accuse *them* of defending cannibalism.
A fallback argument would be equally silly: we don’t think Swift was serious, but he sure seems obsessed with cannibalism.
No . . .
The analogy: in each case the author makes outrageous statements that smart readers won’t take seriously because the author is using the outrageousness to make a point. In Jeff’s case, the point is: these aren’t real threats.
To criticize the statements as outrageous misses the point. It’s *supposed* to be outrageous. That’s how you know the threats aren’t real.
The more you mock the statements as outrageous, the more you show you’re missing the point, just as *everyone* has missed my ironic point about Retard’s penis obsession.
(Shall I explain that too? Jeff mocks the left’s obsession with Gannon’s cock, ergo Jeff has an obsession. Retard mocks that, ergo he has an obsession. The argument is labeled stupid and disingenuous — well, yeah. It’s Retard’s argument.)
Kathleen said,
August 2, 2006 at 2:09
But those references stem from the left’s fascination with Gannon’s “cock.�
awesome. best Goldstein defense ever.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 2:13
Of course, I’ve been prosecuted a couple of times, so I’ve had the dubious pleasure of seeing them in action. Crepuscular logic and a complete disrespect for the facts tend to characterize your basic county DA.
While we’re generalizing, I’d say the same thing tends to apply a bit more to criminal defendants.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 2:18
NobodySpecial,
“Touch a woman in her ’secret places’, especially when she doesn’t want you to, and find out what words they use to describe it.”
Touch a woman in her “secret places” when she *does* want you to, if you ever get the chance. Jeff didn’t say the sister was unwilling. Even if the women you’ve run into have all been unwilling to accept your advances, that doesn’t make the same true for others.
In other words, this little meme that Goldstein claimed to have “molested” someone’s sister is baseless, no matter how many times you repeat it.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 2:36
By the way, any of you attacking me with reference to my job, or any of you who attack, say, Goldstein for not signing up to go to war . . . any of you want to take the far less courageous step of telling us your true name and what you do for a living?
Anyone?
Or would you like to continue to hide behind a pseudonym and make childish attacks?
After all, what kind of courage does it take to step up to the plate and spew some opinions on the Internet using your real name? Very little, I’d say. So anyone here want to show even that small amount of courage — something Goldstein does every day?
That’s what I thought.
Kathleen said,
August 2, 2006 at 2:54
ah Patterico, John Cole already mined this territory. (http://www.thepoorman.net/2006/07/11/we-may-have-to-give-out-the-palme-dhair-early-this-year/#comment-210144)
Do you ever have anything to offer that isn’t derivative?
mikey said,
August 2, 2006 at 3:19
While we’re generalizing, I’d say the same thing tends to apply a bit more to criminal defendants.
ALL - Righty then. I guess we’ve identified the species then. I’ll 100% agree with you there, Mr. Patterico. Dead - on accurate.
mikey
kc said,
August 2, 2006 at 3:28
Patterico:
Having the witness snicker in your imagined cross-examination makes my point perfectly: Jeff’s “threats� are jokes, not threats. You guys (and Greenwald) treating them like *threats* shows *you* don’t get it.
You have just egregiously misrepresented my position - you know, I *could* sue you, but I won’t. Probably.
I have, more than once, tol d you that I for one don’t take JG’s cock-slapping comments seriously. That is - when he threatens to cock-slap every Tom, Dick, Harry, and Jane who disagrees with him, I don’t think he really means that he really intends to literally slap them, with his cock. Because to do that, he’d have to leave his house.
I just think it’s funny to watch you stoutly defend his cock-slapping and sister-molesting comments, even as you huffily chastise other people for their lack of manners.
It’s even funnier that after all this time, you still don’t get it.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 4:06
A threat of a lawsuit! I’d better get my best suit ready!
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 4:10
Of course, the threat comes from a guy named “kc” — someone with even less courage than Jeff Goldstein, who stands behind his comments with a name.
How does it feel to have less courage than Jeff Goldstein, “kc”?
How’s the Sunshine Band doing these days?
You think a lawsuit will revive your career, “kc”?
Kathleen said,
August 2, 2006 at 4:41
shorter Patterico: fuck on-line integrity
jackd said,
August 2, 2006 at 4:50
Or would you like to continue to hide behind a pseudonym and make childish attacks?
You can’t even pretend your previous arguments held any water, can you?
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 5:06
Shorter Sadly, No! commenters:
We all lack Jeff Goldstein’s courage, because he posts under his own name, and we’re too cowardly to do that.
Jennifer Russo said,
August 2, 2006 at 5:34
Your love for Jeffy is shining through. I’m sure he’s so proud to have a valiant defender such as you here in the “snake pit”. My hope is that some day Congress will see the light and you’ll see your dream of being his other half come to fruition. Honestly, don’t you have anything better to do with your time than to trawl the internets looking to defend the apple of your eye?
Heh. Courageous. Now, that’s funny. Everyone’s courageous when they’re sitting safely at home, spouting asinine gibberish through their computer screen. I find “cock slapping” hilarious simply because I doubt it’s physically possible for Goldstein to do any damage to anyone that way.
Retardo Montalban said,
August 2, 2006 at 5:34
Pattycake: you’re a lying sack of shit. Sue me, bitch!
Goldstein’s Gannon posts represent only a tiny amount of his cock-fetishing posts. You’re pretending that was the entirety of it, and I made up the rest of the quotes. Conservatives — always evading responsibility!
You’re a fucking liar to claim that the rest of the threats only come from Goldstein’s commenters (who, by the way, you seem to want to get off the hook — why? because they are *worse* than Frisch?) and not from Goldstein himself. Sorry, but he threatened Jesse Taylor, and not in a satirical way. Nor can one honestly say he threatened Kevin K. in a satirical way though that doesnt stop someone as dishonest you who claims that all threats that include the word “cock” are a joking, Swiftian non-threats.
Why are you here? Isn’t this valuable time taken from keenly and obsessively watching the L.A. Times editorial board? Don’t they have a word for that?
Why do you harp so much on KC’s pseudonymity? Do you want to know his name and address so that Pasty’s commenters can be sent to do their thing to him? You do realise that they ask for gas-money first, right? KC isn’t going to be silenced in whatever way for free.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 5:40
Shorter Retard:
“I only wish I had Jeff Goldstein’s courage. I would never say the shit I say here if people knew who I really am.
“God, I’m a pussy.”
– Retard M. (aka . . . well, I’m scared to say!)
Jeff G said,
August 2, 2006 at 6:10
All this talk about my cock is getting me hot.
Man, do I ever love me!
g said,
August 2, 2006 at 6:21
Ermm….. to say that “So-and-So is always talking about his cock” means that the person who notices this is obsessed with cock?
Who knew?
And who knew that we were all obsessed with Jeff Gannon’s cock? Couldn’t have had anything to do with the fact that he had posted photos of it all over the web.
g said,
August 2, 2006 at 6:22
Jeff Goldstein has courage? Don’t make me laugh.
Jeff G said,
August 2, 2006 at 6:26
Q: What do you get when you cross “Retardo Montalban” and a vagina?
A: Like, pussy cubed!
Seriously. I’m talking a vagina so big and weak-walled that you could park a Plymouth in it and still have room left over to hold “Eschaton III: Welcome to my buddy’s enormous vagina.”
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 6:54
“Jeff Goldstein has courage? DonÂ’t make me laugh.”
Maybe he does and maybe he doesn’t. All I know is that he has more courage than some gutless wonder calling himself “g” . . . or, for that matter, “Retardo.”
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 6:57
“Well, son, when a daddy loves a mommy very much, he takes his penis and puts it in her Retardo Montalban . . .”
me said,
August 2, 2006 at 7:20
He said, you said, he said, … blah blah fucking blah… for fucks sake shut the fuck up!
Pfc. Leftard said,
August 2, 2006 at 7:25
“Eschaton III: Welcome to my buddy’s enormous vagina.�
Sounds interesting. Maybe if you beg for just a little more money you’ll be able to afford a ticket.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 7:47
Shorter Pfc. Leftard:
Oh, me too! I’m a pussy too!
Shorter Retard:
But not as big a pussy as I am!
Shorter Pfc. Leftard:
Agreed.
Big Bang Hunter said,
August 2, 2006 at 7:50
And if what Frisch said was a threat, so was what was said by either Goldstein or one of his commenters about Thers’s kid.
- I take it you have the IP of this person you alude too, or you have information as to their identity, which is strange because no one else seems to know. Would be helpful if you have such, otherwise it would be equally helpful if you’d stop cranking out the bullshit and rumor mongering to bolster a zero case position Mr. Limewald sockperson. So what about it. Put up or shut up.
ahem said,
August 2, 2006 at 7:55
Wow. How exactly does one get to be an attorney at the age of nine?
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 8:10
“Sue me, bitch!”
First kc and the Sunshine Band threaten a lawsuit, and now Retard(o).
If these guys had real names I might be nervous, with all these lawsuit threats.
But someone too scared to type his real name into a comment box is probably scared of court. So your threats to sue don’t really scare me, “Mr.” Montalban.
Hosedragger said,
August 2, 2006 at 8:49
Hmmm…Liberals talking smack about Jeff collecting for legal bills and a server after being stalked by some loony tunes in Oregon and that’s bad. Dr. Coocoo-for-Coacoapuffs spends days begging for free legal advice, free lawyers, raving on and on about mythical money she thinks she is entitled to for her own self-destruction and then also puts up a “tip jar” that everyone is ignoring to the point of embarrassment by it still not so much as having a penny in it, and the Liberals say nothing about it and encourage it.
Yup, never a single Left-Wing blog is written or posted on where their hypocrisy on all levels doesn’t just jump out at you.
It boggles the mind that you guys can actually believe your own crap that you post and say.
i swear to God that if breathing wasn’t an involuntary reflex action, you knuckle-draggers would just plain suffocate.
ahem said,
August 2, 2006 at 9:14
While Jonathan Swift wasn’t averse to scatological humor for poetic effect, he tended to attract a readership several orders of magnitude smarter than either Pasty or Pasty’s Pet Prosecutor. Jeff is much more amusing when he’s trying to be ’scholarly’, albeit inadvertently; Pattycakes doesn’t even have that going for him
But, to quote another satirist, difficile est saturam non scribere when surrounded by such specimens.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 9:17
Shorter ahem:
I too am frightened to post under my own real name. I may not be as big a coward as Retardo, but I run a close second!
Freshly Squeezed Cynic said,
August 2, 2006 at 10:59
So, Patterico. Since posting under a pseudonym is “cowardly”, I assume that, by your own standards, you are a coward?
Pablo said,
August 2, 2006 at 12:02
Greenwald being full of shit: proof he’s a sham.
Greenwald cites Retardo: proof he’s a moron
Greenwald reads Sadly, No!: proof he’s a loser.
Greenwald refers to “Mr. Montalban”; proof he’s trying to make me bust a gut.
If I were still 12, it just might have worked.
Cyrus said,
August 2, 2006 at 13:04
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 9:17
Shorter ahem:
I too am frightened to post under my own real name. I may not be as big a coward as Retardo, but I run a close second!
Jesus, just why do you care whether or not someone posts under their real name? And since when is the validity of an argument or the truth of a statement dependent on the person voicing it? I’m amazed you haven’t already posted “takes one to know one” here.
A Big Fan said,
August 2, 2006 at 13:34
Been a lurker for a long time and love the site!!! Spot on!!!
Question:
If I’ve dropped my “Official SadlyNo!” butt-plug into the poopoo/peepee water, do I really need to wash it off before I stick it back in?
Thanks in advance for your help.
kc said,
August 2, 2006 at 14:22
Of course, the threat comes from a guy named “kc� — someone with even less courage than Jeff Goldstein, who stands behind his comments with a name.
Good LORD. I didn’t think you were THAT oblivious, Patterico.
Let me help you out: Who else has come on to SadlyNo’s comment threads recently and issued a ludicrous lawsuit threat? Hmmm . . .
Once again, the joke’s on you.
kc said,
August 2, 2006 at 14:37
Here we go:
Patterico said,
July 11, 2006 at 1:15
This is my last comment to you, Retardo (I can’t believe I just typed that): I just caught you in a blatant lie. Just now.
It was vile, too: a statement that I found “humorous� a comment about oral sex with a one-year-old.
It was, in fact, libelous. I’m not going to sue you, but I *could*. It was a flat-out falsehood.
http://sadlyno.com/archives/003226.html
MyPetGloat said,
August 2, 2006 at 15:10
“Seriously. I’m talking a vagina so big and weak-walled that you could park a Plymouth in it and still have room left over to hold “Eschaton III: Welcome to my buddy’s enormous vagina.â€?
Wow Jeff, thats the first dickless post generated from your Klonopin-addled synapses.
Stick with the dickless theme. It suits you.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 15:20
Can’t believe you guys are still keeping up the lawsuit threats.
If you want to sue, you’ll have to reveal your actual name, showing the courage that Jeff Goldstein shows on a daily basis.
And I can’t believe how oblivious *you* are. Hint: is it bothering you that I’m treating your mentions of a lawsuit as a real threat? Do you find that annoying? Because it wasn’t what you said or meant?
Heh.
It gets old having to explain every joke, and how each and every one of them is on *you*.
You lack not only the personal courage of Jeff Goldstein, but also his speed on the uptake.
Wussier and stupider than Jeff, you are.
Sad, really.
Is there one person willing to grow a pair, step up to the plate, and show the same courage Jeff Goldstein shows every day? After all, you ask him to show more courage in ignoring threats to his child. You ask him to show more courage in signing up for the volunteer army. But something that takes far *less* courage, spewing opinions under a real name . . . as to that, only Jeff seems to have the tiny amount of bravery required. Not one of you does.
Not one.
And certainly not “Retardo,” who would never dare to post this stuff under his real name.
Proving that, whatever Goldstein’s faults, he has more courage than Retardo. And the rest of you.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 15:37
Shorter MyPetGloat:
I don’t even have the *minimal* courage it takes to insult Jeff Goldstein using my actual name and place of business.
My God, I’m almost as big a coward as “Retardo”!
– MyPetGloat
John Protevi said,
August 2, 2006 at 15:50
Patterico on Aug 2 at 2:36: By the way, any of you attacking me with reference to my job, or any of you who attack, say, Goldstein for not signing up to go to war . . . any of you want to take the far less courageous step of telling us your true name and what you do for a living?
Anyone?
Or would you like to continue to hide behind a pseudonym and make childish attacks?
OK, I’ll bite. I’ve been posting under my real name. I’ll save you the Google: I’m an Associate Professor of French Studies at Louisiana State University. I don’t post in my official function, of course, merely as a private citizen, so no complaints about my wasting taxpayer money. I come to Sadly, No! once in a while to indulge my penchant for sophomoric “Shorters,” about which I’m planning to write an article, “The Transcendental Hermeneutics of Blog ‘Shorters’: Just How Short Can They Get?”
I guess I’ve been insulting you, by pointing out that you are a deeply unserious little man to waste your time on this stuff, when, as a lawyer, you could actually help our republic in this dangerous time by engaging in serious debate with Glenn Greenwald about the threats to the Constitution he details in his book. Instead you blither about with this stuff. In other words, you contribute to the republic in your day job. Why not take advantage of your training and your intelligence by tackling Greenwald’s book, instead of his IP address?
Pfc. Leftard said,
August 2, 2006 at 16:19
If you want to sue, you’ll have to reveal your actual name, showing the courage that Jeff Goldstein shows on a daily basis.
It doesn’t take much courage to use your name when you have nothing (job, career prospects, etc.) to risk? Anyway, Patty, is Pablo a big pussy too? How about Big Bang Hunter? And how much have you donated to the Jeff Goldstein Frivolous Lawsuit Fund? Why aren’t you representing your BFF pro bono so he doesn’t have to beg for money every few weeks?
kc said,
August 2, 2006 at 17:01
Move over, Mr. Feith: Patterico is officially the dumbest fucking man on the planet.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 17:14
Mr. Protevi,
Nice to see someone with balls. It would show more balls still for you to venture into the unfriendly territory of my blog, announce who you are and what you do, and call me a deeply unserious little man there. Feel free to do so. It’s a bit easy here, where all the pseudonymous cowards will agree with you. Tell ‘em you came from Retardo’s blog — then register your complaint about my lack of seriousness.
My commenters could explain to you why I don’t discuss Greenwald’s “substance.” (The short answer: his arguments, dishonest as they are, aren’t worth my time. Mocking him with hand puppets is.)
Jon Henke at Q&O has a recent post about his “substance” and its dishonesty. Check it out.
I suspect you’ll decline my invitation and stay on safe ground here, where you’ll encounter few dissenting views. But at least you have more guts than everyone else here.
I won’t debate Greenwald, but I’ll debate you if you like. Unlike Greenwald, you’re not a proven liar. And you’re willing to put your name to your opinions.
Pick a topic. We can do it here, where you’ll have back-up, if you feel you need it, or on my site.
I get to pick a topic too.
Deal?
John Protevi said,
August 2, 2006 at 17:30
Patterico, I don’t want to debate YOU, here or anywhere. I don’t want to hear what your readers think. I don’t want to know what X, Y, or Z thinks about Greenwald’s IP address, or his blog, or anything of that sort. I want you to help us understand what’s wrong, if anything, with Greenwald’s book. He claims, in his book, that there is a serious threat to our republic’s institutions. I think he makes a good case, but I’m not a lawyer. I’d like to know what a serious conservative lawyer thinks about the arguments he poses in his book. If you are that person, then please write about his book. Otherwise, if you keep ducking the serious issues that confront our republic, and continue to waste your time and ours about IP addresses, then I’m going to stick with my previous characterization of your blog persona. That is, I think “Patterico,” your blog persona, is a deeply unserious little man. What you are in your private life, I have no idea. I’ll visit your blog again when you write about Greenwald’s book. My previous visits haven’t made it worth my while.
Pfc. Leftard said,
August 2, 2006 at 17:43
It would show more balls still for you to venture into the unfriendly territory of my blog, announce who you are and what you do, and call me a deeply unserious little man there.
Where, of course, pseudonymous little cowards that frequent Patty’s site, such as Pablo and Big Bang Hunter, will agree that Patty and Jeff are the bestest ever and libtards are sooo stupid.
Cyrus said,
August 2, 2006 at 18:28
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 9:17
Shorter ahem:
I too am frightened to post under my own real name. I may not be as big a coward as Retardo, but I run a close second!
Jesus, just why do you care whether or not someone posts under their real name? And since when is the validity of an argument or the truth of a statement dependent on the person voicing it? I’m amazed you haven’t already posted “takes one to know one� here.
Yes, the reposting is intentional. Since Patterico has apparently commented three times in as many hours and done nothing but praise Jeff’s balls. Well, praise them in two comments and say that John Protevi has more balls than most people here, but not enough balls to post a comment on Patterico’s site. By the way, I’d like to second Protevi’s preference for an actual debunking of Greenwald’s arguments over babbling about sock-puppetry. And balls.
mikey said,
August 2, 2006 at 19:09
Good GAWD!! Teh Stupid. It BURNS! When you kids are done arguing about who has courage - er, I mean Balls, can I play on the tetherball?
mikey
A Big Fan said,
August 2, 2006 at 19:37
Still waiting for an answer on the butt-plug thing. Thanks
ahem said,
August 2, 2006 at 19:45
It’s to be regretted that substance and Pattycakes will never meet. (Nor will the former catch site of Pablo or the other pee-pees). I’d advise John Protevi not to go near chez Patticakes without an anonymous proxy, given his tendency to sniff IP addresses as if they were a stack of dirty underwear. I shall, however, quote a little Swift that seems apposite here:
In short, Pattycakes is a blissfully happy man.
Doug said,
August 2, 2006 at 20:14
It would show more balls still for you to venture into the unfriendly territory of my blog, announce who you are and what you do, and call me a deeply unserious little man there. . . . I suspect you’ll decline my invitation and stay on safe ground here, where you’ll encounter few dissenting views.
What a freaking joke. Have we set the bar so low for “balls” that all it takes is leaving a comment on someone else’s blog to earn courage points? What would happen if one of us did that, Patty, would one of your commenters call us “moonbats” and . . . disagree with us? Oh, the horror! I can feel my personal safety being threatened just thinking about it!
Then again, I suppose this kind of melodrama should come as no surprise coming from a side that, on more than one occasion, has put their courage in fighting “the war of ideas” in cyberspace at home on the same level as that of our soldiers actually getting shot at in Iraq.
Please, Patty, whatever else I could say about you, I at least figured you for a fucking adult. Enough with the schoolyard “Come over here and say that!” taunting, and while you’re at it, howsabout you quit trying to use that “anonymous commenters suXXorZ” canard to distract from the fact that your “arguments” in defense of Goldstein have been picked cleaner than a drumstick at Limbaugh’s 4th of July barbecue.
Pfc. Leftard said,
August 2, 2006 at 21:34
A Big Fan,
That’s a pacifier, silly.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 21:37
That’s the whole point, Doug with no last name or known job. I have said repeatedly that it doesn’t take all that much courage to post on the Internet using your full name and stating what you do. However, the tiny bit of courage it *does* take . . . you don’t have it, buddy. Jeff G. does, and you don’t. That’s all.
John,
You could pick something from the book if you like. I’m not reading Greenwald’s book and I’m not responding to it. He’s dishonest in innumerable ways and isn’t worth my time — other than to make fun of him. If his book is anything like his blog, it’s full of distortions, half-truths, and broad-brush characterizations (you know, like tarring me with the alleged view of certain unnamed conservatives who aren’t me, as has happened in recent comments).
I’m not a FISA expert. The limited posting I have done on it has simply noted the convincing arguments by liberals like Cass Sunstein that the NSA data mining was authorized by Congress. I also think there are non-frivolous arguments to the contrary.
I discuss serious issues in depth on my site all the time. If you’re genuinely interested, I can e-mail you some links.
By the way, I don’t discount all pseudonymous comments. But I have nothing but contempt for those like “Retardo,” who hide behind a pseudonym and won’t ever tell us their real names or jobs — and use their anonymity to take cheap shots at the *courage* of people who disclose their names and what they do for a living. Comments to the effect that Goldstein needs to “grow a pair” and ignore Frisch’ s accusations of child molestation, or that he should sign up for combat — well, those are comical coming from people too cowardly even to say who they are.
You don’t do that, John. But an awful lot of people here do. And whatever they think of Jeff Goldstein, they are undeniably less courageous than he is, in this respect.
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 21:54
John,
The offer stands. Pick a topic you think is important — even one from Greenwald’s book — and I’ll give you a response.
I clown and antagonize here because it’s the ethos, and because I have genuine contempt for people who hide behind anonymity to take cheap shots at real people. But I am civil to those who deserve it. And I’m always looking for new lefty commenters on my site. If they’re respectful, I insist that my commenters be respectful to them. (I’m not civil to everyone; only those whom I think deserve it.)
Standing invitation remains open, if you really want to talk issues.
P
Patterico said,
August 2, 2006 at 22:00
Oh: anonymous Doug?
I’m saying it all over here. I’m just saying that it takes a bit more to wade into unfriendly territory. I’m doing it here, and holding my own just fine. I wonder if anyone here has the stones to wander over to my place, stand your ground, and argue your points.
I’ll even give you an unfair advantage: if you’re civil, I’ll make sure people over there are civil to you.
Extra courage points for using your own name and telling people what you do.
Anyone?
P
John Protevi said,
August 2, 2006 at 22:00
Patterico, thanks for the invitation. I will visit some day soon. JP
Doug said,
August 2, 2006 at 22:55
Yes, after going back over this thread and re-reading your witty, trenchant barbs such as “pussy,” “coward,” “grow a pair” &c., I’ve concluded that you’re exactly the kind of person who instigates reasoned, thoughtful debates. I’ve also concluded that your standards for bravery are airtight.
So you’re “saying it all over here” and you “waded into unfriendly territory.” Whoop-de-goddamn-do. You’re not going up in the space shuttle or wading into a firefight in Tikrit, kemosabe, you’re leaving comments on a blog (and mostly asinine ones at that), so quit acting like you deserve the fucking Congressional Medal of Honor.
Just out of curiosity, if I’m leaving my actual first name on here, how the hell does that qualify me as “anonymous Doug,” or are you one of the special kids? By the way, if you click on my name, it takes you to my blog, where you can find my full name and even a crappy picture of myself! I find that publicly displaying this information is an excellent way of maintaining complete and total anonymity, don’t you?
You know, Patterico (your Christian name, yes?), I try not to be one of those people who doesn’t slag off every single conservative as a complete and utter moron out of hand, I really try, but you’re making it really difficult.
kc said,
August 2, 2006 at 23:45
Patterico says:
I have genuine contempt for people who hide behind anonymity to take cheap shots at real people
Say now, that’s no way to talk about Pablo. He’s been nothing but a friend to you.
Mal de mer said,
August 3, 2006 at 0:19
This lying arsehole, Patterico, is a crown attorney? Seriously? Do you people actually have a process by which your judiciary is held accountable, or did that somehow get flushed down the toilet with the rest of your Constitution?
Freshly Squeezed Cynic said,
August 3, 2006 at 0:22
You know, Patterico (your Christian name, yes?),
Sadly, No!
Which makes his pseudo-macho posturings even more laughable than they currently are. Patterico, I really don’t care what you call yourself. I don’t care much what you consider “balls” to be. Frankly, I wish you the best of luck in your new heroic, ball-filled career of leaving comments on an internet site, where people, god forbid, might disagree with you, or, shock horror of horrors, might even say nasty things. But please, please don’t pretend, after a good couple of days of simply saying “I don’t know your name, you pussy”, you have any actual credibility left here at this point. So I shouldn’t be surprised if everyone mocks you (again, god forbid). You really haven’t done anything that would dissuade someone from mocking you.
Let us remind ourselves of what Bill Shakespeare had to say:
“A Patterico by any other name would still be a flaming hypocrite.”
That may, of course, be a paraphrase.
P.S. I’m sure I’m a “pussy” or “anonymous” for having a pseudonym of my own, which is of course the root of all evil. I’m sure God listed it as the eleventh commandment, but Moses wasn’t listening by then because he was inhaling the fumes of the burning bush, that hippy bastard. Having already addressed that, what else do you actually have to say, Patterico?
Big Bang Hunter said,
August 3, 2006 at 0:27
- All this back and forth is total bullshit. Still waiting for Retard to post that info, and back up his comments.
Kathleen said,
August 3, 2006 at 0:50
Who are you?
Not tellin’. Not that it’s some big secret. You can probably find out who I am — if you really care. Indeed, if you’re a regular reader, you’ll figure it out sooner or later. I just want to make you work a little bit.
Where does the name “Patterico� come from?
My dad used to call me this sometimes when I was a kid.
BWAH HA HA HA HA HA HA *wipes tears*
gotta love it.
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 2:19
Doug,
You make two excellent points that support my positions.
First: it takes little courage to comment on a blog using your real name and stating your profession.
Indeed. Wipe the spittle from your chin and re-read my comments, and you might even find I’ve made this exact point . . . several times.
You’re missing only the next step, which is: Retardo and the other anonymous folks here don’t even have *that* teensy tiny amount of courage. Jeff Goldstein has it. You apparently have it.
Retardo? Nope.
Second point: you note that anyone who reads your blog can easily divine your true name. Good for you. I don’t research the commenters here, but now that you point that out (and I trust you) I retract my characterization of you as anonymous.
If a regular reader of yours will know your name, then you don’t qualify for the “Not as Brave as Jeff Goldstein” award.
(There’s a verrrrry subtle hint in there for the bwa-ha-ha’ers. (I thought Gavin and Brad said “Bwa-ha-ha” was a *right-wing* thing. Oh well.))
But Retardo qualifies for the award. Big-time.
P.S. Doug, do you list your profession on your site? Everyone here seems to know mine. We know John P.’s. What’s yours?
P.P.S. I instigate reasoned, thoughtful debates with reasonable, thoughtful people. You might be such a person; I don’t know.
Kathleen:
You haven’t actually read my post on Greenwald’s sock-puppetry, have you? Nor has . . .
Freshly Squeezed Cynic:
“IÂ’m sure IÂ’m a “pussy” or “anonymous” for having a pseudonym of my own, which is of course the root of all evil.”
Nah. Having a pseudonym is peachy, my friend. But if you have ever questioned Jeff Goldstein’s courage — claimed, for example, that he should “grow a pair” and ignore Frisch, or sign up for the all-volunteer army — then I simply point out that he has the guts to attach his name to his opinions and you don’t. As Doug notes, we’re not talking about a lot of courage. To the contrary, we’re talking about a teeny amount — that you lack. And that Jeff G. has.
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 2:29
Note that listing your profession does actually take a bit of courage, as there are always anonymous folks like Mal de Mer who make insinuations about how you should lose your job for your political opinions. It’s not the first time I’ve seen such crap, and it won’t be the last.
Anyway, Doug, not only do I try to initiate reasoned debate, I also will tone it down and *initiate* the process of civility. Often I’m slapped down when I try, just surprisingly often, I’m not. I did the same thing with John P., who called me a “deeply unserious little man” but seems to have agreed to debate me in a civil fashion in the future.
I’m trying to tone it down with you, too, and give you a chance to enter a civil dialogue. How this effort is met is up to you.
But some people don’t deserve that — notably, “Retardo.” He hides behind a pseudonym and takes dishonest potshots at the courage of people with the guts to use their real names, like Jeff Goldstein. That’s how you know Retardo is a putz who earns no civility. It takes so little courage for him to use his own name — yet he doesn’t even have that piddling, tiny amount of bravery. What a freaking wuss.
ahem said,
August 3, 2006 at 2:47
We liked you better when you were posting drunk, Pattycakes. At least you were honest. The sanctimony’s dripping like a bad makeup job in the rain.
Note that Pattycakes’ tactics are exactly those used by Pasty in his flailing attempt to procure information about Thers. None being forthcoming, he set his little goblins to work.
You and your internet-friends cannot be fucking trusted with people’s personal information. You cannot be fucking trusted not to ruin people’s lives. You have proved yourself to be giggling exploitative shitbags.
Oh, and courage isn’t measured by attaching your inside leg measurements and video of your last endoscope to your opinions. It’s measured by the extent to which you’re not a disingenuous liar. Meaning that Pasty and you fail that test.
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 2:50
“We liked you better when you were posting drunk, Pattycakes. At least you were honest. The sanctimony’s dripping like a bad makeup job in the rain.”
What, you want me to call you a “pussy” too, Senor Anonymous? No need. It’s quite clear.
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 2:54
But Retardo is still a bigger pussy than you, ahem.
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 3:07
kc:
“Say now, that’s no way to talk about Pablo. He’s been nothing but a friend to you.”
Has the Sunshine Band prepared your lawsuit yet, oh thou commenter lacking in Jeff Goldstein’s courage?
B Moe said,
August 3, 2006 at 3:38
Note that Pattycakes’ tactics are exactly those used by Pasty in his flailing attempt to procure information about Thers.
Is that the guy whose used his vaunted position in academia as his sole means of attack, but refused to reveal his position in the ivory towers? Is that the same Thers that shut his blog down rather than reveal the IP address of the pervert poster, then continued to accuse PW of making the post, all the while opening a series of shiny new blogs using exactly the same fucking psuedonym that was so outrageously revealed?
I am still confused by why he shut his first blog down it he was going to keep blogging as Thers.
Must be some more of that reality based shit that is always confusing me.
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 3:40
“Of course if Goldstein really wanted some adventure, he could go to the recruiting office, but — hahahahaha — everyone knows that ain’t gonna happen.” — Retardo
Of course if Retardo really wanted to do something far less brave than signing up for a war, he could tell us his real name, like Jeff Goldstein does . . . but — hahahahaha — everyone knows that ain’t gonna happen.
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 3:41
You know, because he’s a pussy.
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 3:57
“On the other hand, there is something wrong with being a chickenhawk coward, a paste-eating cretin, and a talentless hack.” — Retardo
This is rich. A “chickenhawk coward” — this coming from a guy who is such a huge pussy that he won’t even disclose his name. As Doug noted, posting shit on the Internet is “not going up in the space shuttle or wading into a firefight in Tikrit.” It takes relatively little courage to do.
Yet “Retardo” lacks it.
And he still feels qualified to judge Jeff Goldstein’s courage, calling him a “chickenhawk coward.”
This is why “Retardo” is so richly deserving of contempt.
A Big Fan said,
August 3, 2006 at 4:04
Pfc. Leftard said,
August 2, 2006 at 21:34
A Big Fan,
That’s a pacifier, silly
For you maybe, I just use ‘em to keep the oatmeal in.
kc said,
August 3, 2006 at 4:14
Patterico:
Has the Sunshine Band prepared your lawsuit yet,
No, dumb-ass. I had no intention of suing you - it was a play on your own risible threat to sue one of the SN! bloggers. How quickly you forget . . .
Maybe I should have thrown in a “cock” reference, or a sister-molesting crack - you know, your kind of humor - to make sure you got it. Maybe something like - “Sure, you’ll find out my real name - when I serve you with a summons, along with my COCK!”
kc said,
August 3, 2006 at 4:24
Patterico, a quick review of your blog comments reveals the following commenters who are, in your own laughable parlance, “huge pussies” and “pseudonymous cowards”:
Polybius
Gotta Know
Loafing Oaf
Dwilkers
Bilgeman
Freedom Fan
And of course: Xlrq.
And that’s just one thread.
Do your commenters know that you hold them in such low esteem? That you have, how did you put it? “utter contempt” for them?
Tsk.
Jeff G said,
August 3, 2006 at 4:25
Q: Why did “Retardo Montalban” cross the road?
A: Because he heard Glenn Greenwald yelling, “here, pussy pussy pussy!”
DG said,
August 3, 2006 at 4:28
so was what was said by either Goldstein or one of his commenters about Thers’s kid.
Can’t be backed up, but so what? As long as it tars those you hate it serves it’s purpose. Right Retardo?
a sister-molesting crack
Now don’t worry, some day a woman will let you touch them in their secret places too. When they consent, it isn’t molesting. It’s sex.
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 4:34
“No, dumb-ass. I had no intention of suing you - it was a play on your own risible threat to sue one of the SN! bloggers. How quickly you forget . . .”
I have no intention of ceasing to pretend that you really are suing me. It’s a play on SN commenters’ own risible decision to treat an express disclaimer of an intent to sue, as a threat to sue.
And I even explained this to you above:
But it’s even worse when I *explain* it, and you *still* don’t get it.
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 4:36
“Do your commenters know that you hold them in such low esteem? That you have, how did you put it? “utter contemptâ€? for them?”
If any of my commenters were to dishonestly question the courage of a person with the guts to use their real name, I would deem those commenters pussies, just as Retardo is (as real person Jeff G points out) a rather giant pussy.
But my commenters don’t do that. Your hero Retardo does.
The pussy.
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 4:39
The real issue, Jeff G, is whether a douche like Greenwald helps a pussy like Retardo stay fresh.
Jeff G said,
August 3, 2006 at 4:43
Knock Knock
Who’s there?
A big giant pussy.
Oh! Hey, “Retardo”! Come on in! We’re just about to start watching a Nora Ephron movie!
Big Bang Hunter said,
August 3, 2006 at 4:50
- Since Retard is one of Limewald Sockpersons Socks, I’m sure he has to at least launder him once a week.
- Still waiting for that IP Retardo, or is this like one of those Rove indictment things?
B Moe said,
August 3, 2006 at 4:54
The real issue, Jeff G, is whether a douche like Greenwald helps a pussy like Retardo stay fresh.
Would he use it like a nasal spray? I think that would work wonders.
ahem said,
August 3, 2006 at 6:04
Lordy, it’s the Fox All-Star Viewer Panel.
Still, I suppose it’s better for Pattycakes and the Pastemongers to get collectively wasted on Everclear via the internets than do it alone.
ahem said,
August 3, 2006 at 6:05
Oh, and Pattycakes? Check your voicemail at work tomorrow.
B Moe said,
August 3, 2006 at 6:16
“Oh, and Pattycakes? Check your voicemail at work tomorrow.”
Deb? Is that you?
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 6:42
“Oh, and Pattycakes? Check your voicemail at work tomorrow.”
Ooh, a real-life threat from the left!
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 6:55
Y’all proud of your stalker-boy “ahem”?
Hosedragger said,
August 3, 2006 at 7:25
Ahem is Deb…furthering her drive towards self-destruction. I’m sure this is really helping your case, huh Deb? Now leaving voice messages? Everytime I think a human can’t get any stupider…
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 7:35
No, “ahem” has been around this blog for a while. It’s Deb-like behavior — stalking — but it ain’t her.
Hosedragger said,
August 3, 2006 at 8:27
She must be so proud. Her own little progeny. Is ahem going for it’s worthless PhD. as well? It guarantees a job where you get to say, “Hi, and welcome to WalMart.”
Retardo Montalban said,
August 3, 2006 at 9:02
This is rich. A “chickenhawk coward� — this coming from a guy who is such a huge pussy that he won’t even disclose his name. As Doug noted, posting shit on the Internet is “not going up in the space shuttle or wading into a firefight in Tikrit.� It takes relatively little courage to do.
Yet “Retardo� lacks it.
And he still feels qualified to judge Jeff Goldstein’s courage, calling him a “chickenhawk coward.�
This is why “Retardo� is so richly deserving of contempt.
As it happens my computer translates from Batshit — this is what it came up with:
“Retardo, in projecting everything I, Pasty, and Pasty’s cretins have ever done and said in generla and unto you and S,N!’s commenters, I’m revealing myself as the hugest fuckfaced douchebag in the history of the universe, and as I repeatedly soil myself in this comments section, let me again add: if you, Retardo, do not reveal your real name and address so that “Vercingetorix” or “Pablo” can come beat you to death with axehandles, YOU’RE a pussy, meanwhile Jeff Goldstein goes on with his affectation that he’s the equivalent of a soldier — even, in his latest stab at macho bullshit, quoting MacArthur — which proves what courage he has; why, he’s practically on the front lines!”
“Also, if you make a joke about *my* threats to sue, I’ll pretend that you’re seriously threatening a lawsuit, because I’m willfully dense like that, being as I am one of Count Cockula’s ‘familiars’, and, well, I can say with authority that he really sucks as hard as he blows.”
“Cheers, Pattycake”
Wow, technology works wonders. Perfect translation! Oh wait, I gotta make it artistic, comedy genius a la Protein Wisdom: “Perfect translation!” There. Now that’s gilding the lily!
Pasty: chickenhawk coward weenie puny little cry-baby wahwahwah please send him money he’s so scared of the STALKER!!! Meanwhile the cash goes to the axe-handle slush fund; Mike Patterico, Treasurer? It is a mystery!
Patterico said,
August 3, 2006 at 9:10
Drunk much, Retardo?
what the hell said,
August 3, 2006 at 10:07
wow, i just read through this whole thread. some weird shit. leaving me with several conclusions (these are expert opinions, I have a Ph.D. in cognitive psychology with an emphasis in psycholinguistics, so I am a trained language analyst) :
1. Some of you are obsessed with pussy - pattiolancoal, or whatever, apparently views everyone around him, male and female, as a giant pussy. Imagine how debilitating this condition must be - walks into his local WalMart to get the cheetos, or whatever, and rather than seeing the sweet face of that 75 year old greeter, he sees a human size, in this case probably shriveled and puckered, pussy. Everywhere he goes, there they are, McDonalds, burger king, wendys - I believe someone noted the annual Star Trek convention, where he would see a whole room full of them, his weekly Amway meeting, pussies, pussies, everywhere. My diagnosis - he isn’t getting any. Prescription - mercy fuck. Someone’s got to do it people.
Interestingly, there is one person he doesn’t see as a giant pussy, and that would be this Jeff G that he refers to. From what i gather, he views Geff (or whatever) as this huge, massive penis, rather than a pussy. Freud had much to say about this, of course, and based on my expert analysis of P.’s writing, here’s what i think happened:
Pouterico was up late one night reading this Geff blog, eating a pepperoni pizza, and watching, for the 48th time, the return of the Jedi. Drifting off to sleep, he experienced some dream state melding of the feelings he was having for his hero, jeff, the revelation that Darth Vadar was really Luke’s father, and his recently consumated personal massage in honor of the Princess Leia. So, we have the father figure, the hard on, the woman, and the rest of it - a perfect opportunity for transference of the oedipal complex, as the psychodynamic neofreudians would call it, and viola, geff is now, in pueblotica’s mind, the giant penis.
Of course, most of us realized long ago that jeff was a giant penis.
T. Monroe said,
August 3, 2006 at 10:15
Retardo, just so you know; there are people out in the vast confines of the blogosphere that read the ENTIRE exchange between thers and JG, including seeing the pathetic threat left by an unknown commenter on thers’ site, the automatic assumption that it HAD to have come from JG or his commenters, (because we all know that the left NEVER uses sock puppets to bolster claims on their own site to recieve sympathy; right Greenwald?), and the repeated requests from JG and others for thers’ to provide the IP of the commenter, and the utter denial of these requests to back up the slanderous lies you and your ilk were slinging at Jeff culmonating in thers’ shutting down his site.
And these people I speak of have seen you twist the story to an outright lie, with the hopes that, if you simply repeated it enough, it would soon become fact.
You claim that Jeff deserves the comments frish left about his family and site your bullshit rendition of the thers story as proof, hoping in your little mind that no one remembers what actually happened. Well, we do know the truth, and can see you for the petty coward you are, to falsify events to prove a ridiculous point so you can be in the center of a SN circle jerk once again.
And while I do hold you in contempt for your pathetic choices, I cannot help but feel sorry for you; it must be terrible to need attention and admiration so much that you would stoop to subhuman lengths to obtain it.
So please, seek help, retardo. A man who can honestly not see that his posting on someone’s lack of courage concerning volunteering to fight a war or ignoring a mentally deranged pedophile’s overt threats using a fake name is anything other than the very defination of Irony is in serious need of counseling.
Well, counseling, and maybe for someone to tell him that renaming someone ‘pasty’ or ‘pattycakes’ in order to cut them down is about as professional and adult as using multiple aliases to rain praise on yoursel….
….nevermind.
Travis
T. Monroe said,
August 3, 2006 at 10:23
“I have a Ph.D. in cognitive psychology with an emphasis in psycholinguistics, so I am a trained language analyst”
Greenwald, I thought we told you: stop pretending to be educated in order to attack people you disagree with; it’s pathetic.
…at least, I sincerely hope that’s what is going on here. I mean, there’s no way an acutal PhD would write something as blatently frivilous as that.
B Moe said,
August 3, 2006 at 12:39
I am starting to think Retardo may be Amanda Marcotte, they both spend all their time argueing with their own fantasies of the other side.
….if you, Retardo, do not reveal your real name and address so that “Vercingetorixâ€? or “Pabloâ€? can come beat you to death with axehandles, YOU’RE a pussy…
….Pasty: chickenhawk coward weenie puny little cry-baby wahwahwah please send him money he’s so scared of the STALKER!!!
And of course the complete lack of irony.
Pablo said,
August 3, 2006 at 12:47
Exactly what is it about my name that you fucking retards find pseudonymous?
Pablo. P-A-B-L-O. Pablo.
Now, I’ve seen stupid, and I’ve seen really fucking stupid, and I’ve seen extraordinarily bone shaking stupid (of course, that last one was here). I’ve seen fire and I’ve seen rain. I’ve seen sunny days that I thought would never end. I’ve seen lonely times when I could not find a friend. But I never thought I’d see you kids bring cowardice and stupidity to entirely new depths the way you have here.
Is this Fantasy Island for the sub-40 IQ crowd, Retardo?
“Drool, everyone, drool! Our guests are arriving!”
Pablo said,
August 3, 2006 at 12:48
B Moe! Dude! How am I this morning?
Retardo Montalban said,
August 3, 2006 at 13:18
Oh now I see that Pattycakes has been really busy. What, so now TBOGG’s name’s gonna be added to a Nixonesque axehandles shitlist? I wonder just how long it’ll be before one of you clay-eating white trash fuckwits tries to get him fired or tries to fuck with his family on the “justified” grounds that he calls Michelle Malkin on her lying bullshit, because that is the only possible reason why you idiots want “real names”, not that most “real names” would do you any good.
As for “Pablo” — what the hell is that? It might as well be “Jeff’s Semen Receptacle” so vague and general it is without a last name.
Not that I want to know your name. Identity is identity on the net. If it makes you feel better, you can call me John Smith — what difference does it make? How do you know that’s not my real name? How do I know that Pablo is your real first name? As long as the identity is constant — and mine is and has been for years — it doesnt matter what the name is. My picture’s been put on this blog and others several times. I claim my work. If that ain’t good enough, then sorry, you’re just as huge a whiny titty baby as Jeff Goldstein. Well, okay, I’m sorry; no one’s that pathetic. But you’re close.
Doug said,
August 3, 2006 at 13:48
Wow, it looks like Patty’s really on the disclose-your-identity kick these days. Have your ID card ready, and make sure your papers are in order! Don’t turn around (oh-OH-ohhh) when Der Kommissar’s in town!
One last comment from me on this, Patty, because you’ve already done a tip-top job of making yourself look like an idiot I’m kind of reaching the point where the law of diminishing returns kicks in with respect to my contribution to the effort — but if you’ve decided that your chosen mission in life is a crusade against anonymous blog commenters, guess what? You’re going to be pushing that rock up the hill for a long, long time. And furthermore, anyone who goes by the handle Patterico and states on their blog that they’re “not tellin’” who they are has no business whatsoever leading that crusade in the first place. Nobody owes you a full rundown of their name, place of residence, job, serial number, marital status, favorite flavor of ice cream, etc. etc., so quit acting like you’re the Caped Anti-Anonymous Crusader of the blogosphere. Do you really want to reveal to the world that you have nothing better to do than that?
Anyway, you and Jeff go have a grand old time engaging in another “You suck”/”No, YOU suck!” slapfight with whomever. I think I’ve said my piece.
Big Bang Hunter said,
August 3, 2006 at 14:04
All these comments, and still no IP, huh Retardo. Not looking too good sport.
T. Monroe said,
August 3, 2006 at 14:16
keep on spinning, retardo.
seriously dude, get help.
Now, before you start using sock puppets to sling your vile ignorance.
dgbellak said,
August 3, 2006 at 14:44
T.Monroe, Big Bang Hunter, et al.,
I’m going to generously assume you’re all human, and none of you are Patterico. Nonetheless, like it or not, your infantile, near-parroted defenses of the indefensible have reduced all of you, in fact, to nothing more than living, breathing sock puppets. Congratulations for giving us yet another textbook example of “projection”.
B Moe said,
August 3, 2006 at 15:09
Retardo Montalban said,
August 3, 2006 at 13:18
How do you know that’s not my real name?
Thank you, I was having a shitty start to my day, this should leave me with a smile on my face for the rest of the week.
Retardo Montalban said,
August 3, 2006 at 15:14
In your effort to out-stupid Pattycakes, you left out this part:
you can call me John Smith …How do you know that’s not my real name?
there’s dumb and then there’s B. Moe clueless fucktard dumb.
Tulkinghorn said,
August 3, 2006 at 15:18
This lying arsehole, Patterico, is a crown attorney? Seriously? Do you people actually have a process by which your judiciary is held accountable, or did that somehow get flushed down the toilet with the rest of your Constitution?
What, you are scanadalized to find that a lying arsehole can be appointed assistant prosecutor?
These very poorly paid positions are filled with hacks and the wayward children and nephews of Judges and prominant attorneys. You can tell when the father went to Stanford and the son has a correspondence degree and took the bar exam five time before passing how he got the job.
Being incompetent schmucks fully half of them become lying, systematically dishonest schmucks so that they can keep up their prosecution success rates and keep their jobs.
Maybe 30% are top notch attorneys going on to better things, but those guys are detested by the good ol’ boys.
Retardo Montalban said,
August 3, 2006 at 15:18
PS — Just because I know it makes you cry by the bucketfull:
Jeff Goldstein is *still* the biggest chickenhawk coward weenie alive! Bawk Bawk Bawk! I’m flappin my arms in mockery of you, Pasty!
BAWK BAWK BAWK!!!
B Moe said,
August 3, 2006 at 15:31
Careful observers will note Retardo refuses to answer if he is Amanda Marcottes strap-on or not.
Alex said,
August 3, 2006 at 16:30
Patterico:
“By