Post Reporter: ‘We Are Not Spared’ The ‘Nasty, Vulgar E-Mail’ From ‘Liberal Blog’ Readers
Post Reporter: ‘We Are Not Spared’ The ‘Nasty, Vulgar E-Mail’ From ‘Liberal Blog’ Readers
Last week, both conservative and traditional media outlets did their best to turn some hateful and inappropriate statements about Vice President Cheney by anonymous commenters at liberal blogs into a broad commentary on the left in general. As Glenn Greenwald predicted, Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz devoted his column to the “scandal”:
But as Greenwald (and Arianna) pointed out:
Stray, anonymous comments prove nothing. And those who rely on them to make an argument — especially without bothering to make any effort to prove that they are reflective of anything — should be presumed to have no argument at all. That is why they are relying upon such transparently flimsy and misleading methods to make a point.
During a WashingtonPost.com chat on Thursday, a reader confronted national political reporter Lois Romano about the coverage: “Selectively quoting anonymous posters from any political blog is shoddy ‘journalism’ at its worst. What does Mr. Kurtz have to say to defend himself on this?”
Romano had nothing to say about Kurtz. Instead, she bemoaned the “new viciousness in the process often generated by the blogs,” and likened herself and other reporters to Cheney, complaining that “we are not spared” the “nasty, vulgar e-mail” produced by “liberal blogs.”
Romano: We are watching the blogs, and just this month The Post assigned a young reporter to cover Internet campaigning. There certainly is a new viciousness in the process often generated by the blogs. You need to know that we as reporters are not spared — if we write an article the liberals blogs do not like we will be inundated with nasty, vulgar e-mail — which has no impact on our coverage.
While “liberal blogs” are lumped together with a tiny unrepresentative sample of anonymous commenters, the hate speech by leading figures of the conservative movement is ignored: today’s Post coverage of the Conservative Political Action Conference makes no mention of Ann Coulter’s inflammatory “faggot” remark.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Howard Kurtz is VILE!!!
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:33 pmOne can only conclude that the Romanos and Kurtzes fear that if Dems return to power, their tax cuts will end.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:35 pmI wonder if the comments were vile because the person about whom they were made is vile?? Could be a cause and effect going ton there Howie.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:35 pmAnd did Howie consider Ann Coulters comments about offing members of the Supreme Court to be vile?? What about Pat Robertson’s comments about nuking the State Department. Were they vile? Or is it only vile if spoken by a democrat?
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:36 pmIf reporters would do their job rather than repeating republican talking points, liberal blogs would not be gaining power and would not be so vocal. If someone does shoddy reporting, they should expect to hear a chorus of voices calling them out on their crock of crap.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:37 pmNamed blogger Kevin Good would see a lack of Dick Chaney as a small step in the correct direction.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:38 pmif the liberal/progressive/democratic “side” of the country had the 1/10 of the “mighty wurlitzer” working 24/7/365 on its behalf, manufacturing viciousness and slurs about the vastly more hateful extremist conservatives, we still would not be heard… it would make absolutely no difference… those who supply the electricity to power that enormous noise machine make sure those at the keyboard are fully aware that their playing talents can easily and quickly be replaced… all we can do is whine and i, for one, am no longer willing to do that… ignore them… just ignore them…
And, yes, I DO take it personally
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:40 pmHoward Kurtz is the MSMs Crypt Keeper!!!! That little piece of sh!t show on CNN where he pretends to keep an eye on the media is a COMPLETE PH*CKING JOKE!!!
Howie!! You’re a loser!@!
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:45 pmI think it’s clear that profanity is infinitely more offensive and dangerous than calling for the execution of liberals. I don’t want future generations of patriots to be cursing, while they are stringing up traitorous liberals.
That would be rude.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:46 pmDance with the devil and what do you expect? A bunch of pissed off people. What goes around comes around.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:46 pmAnd as we all know, the only people who post anonymously on political blog sites are those who agree with the political sentiments of that site.
By that I mean, it would be unthinkable for right wing partisans to post extreme and offensive “liberal” positions on a left wing site, pretending to be one of the gang so that they could be called on it by conservatives later on.
And by the same token, there’s no way lefties would do the same on right wing sites, right?
RIGHT??
Yeah, sure.
Remenber that old New Yorker cartoon — “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog…”
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:46 pmAnd as we all know, the only people who post anonymously on political blog sites are those who agree with the political sentiments of that site.
By that I mean, it would be unthinkable for right wing partisans to post extreme and offensive “liberal” positions on a left wing site, pretending to be one of the gang so that they could be called on it by conservatives later on.
And by the same token, there’s no way lefties would do the same on right wing sites, right?
RIGHT??
Yeah, sure.
Remember that old New Yorker cartoon — “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog…”
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:48 pmWhat do you expect to like and honored by the MSM. That is like CNN wanting to like FOX and getting more ring-winger on their staff.
The rignt-wing will still crap all over you.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:48 pmAnd as we all know, the only people who post anonymously on political blog sites are those who agree with the political sentiments of that site.
By that I mean, it would be unthinkable for right wing partisans to post extreme and offensive “liberal” positions on a left wing site, pretending to be one of the gang so that they could be called on it by conservatives later on.
And by the same token, there’s no way lefties would do the same on right wing sites, right?
That would be like a false flag operation, and those things never happen. RIGHT??
Yeah, sure.
Remember that old New Yorker cartoon — “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog…”
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:51 pmRomano: We are watching the blogs…
Good! Maybe you’ll learn something.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:51 pmYeah, what a shame. Lets forget about the fact that innocents die every day. We should focus on vulgar comments. What about a War on Vulgarity????
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:18 pm#16 Juan C
I’m sure their idea of vulgar also is used to define reality. If its not sanitized and happy, they don’t want to hear about it.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:24 pmYes, and neither are we spared nasty and vile comments from right wing wacktoids here on this blog….
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:27 pmAs many of you have seen in this blog regarding the trolls that come in acting as if they’re liberal progressives and call for unspeakable things to be done to the right-wing politicos of the day. I have had my name hijacked many times, and whomever writing inflammatory remarks that I would have never considered writing. NeoCons see blogs and alternative news media as a threat to their lies. If you cannot control what’s being disseminated, then you can’t control disinformation. They can control the media but they don’t control individual websites/blog sites yet. What we are seeing is a precursor to getting free speech banned. We need to stand up to this up front and foremost. The last bastion of free speech is about to be assaulted before the next election.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:27 pmI agree with #19. How can the media prove that the comments are made by liberals and not by conservatives pretending to be liberals? Now there is a real story.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:38 pmIf its not sanitized and happy, they don’t want to hear about it.
Comment by AshenShard
Yeah. Everyone of the stupids that support this war are ok with it as long as they dont see pictures of bodies or coffins arriving at night.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:39 pmTwo things strike me:
1. If they aren’t getting nasty email from the righties, perhaps they’re not pissing off enough people (AKA their job).
2. There’s no way to verify anything about the nasty emailers so it wouldn’t be a huge jump to believe that at least a few are sent by conservative ops to create a “scandal.”
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:42 pmHow do we know it isn’t Howie posting those remarks to make it appear like it’s all of us lefty bloggers?
Get a grip Howie. It’s apparent the RW has nothing better than smear and fear.
Good Luck with that guys! We are on to you and we will keep your feet to the fire.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:44 pmWhy aren’t the Kurtzes, Romanos, and Kristols…
…investigating the real corruption in the Bush administration…
…rather than trying to discredit the left wing blogsphere?
…How’s that TP?
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:48 pmI have notice lately rw bloggers on liberal blogs make a sick inflammatory statement. Then a few post latter another rw blogger (possibly a sock puppet) criticizes the offending post and then makes the outrageous claim that is typical of the left. This whole Kurtzes thing smells of a set up from the beginning of the “under cover” reporting. Almost a fabrication maybe?
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:55 pmWhat is actually wrong about being happy that Cheney almost bit the big one? If he would have went bye, bye, the world would be a better place, wouldn’t it? He IS the man behind bush, and if he was out of the way, bush would collapse like a house of cards.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:58 pmMaybe then we could get our soldiers back home, since we all know bush has no spine.
The most vile blog commenters in the entire blog community belong to FreeRepublic.com, closely followed by LGF and Powerline.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:00 pmThe fact that the Washington Post and other media outlets are focusing on liberal blogs shows extreme bias on their part and should make anyone wonder about what their motives are for attacking Liberal blogs exclusively.
Well, are you saying that NO liberal bloggers actually would make that inflammatory statement? If you read thru most of the posts the day after, it was “man, too bad he didn’t die”, it would seem that is the general consensus on these blogs, Bush Administration bad, anything that happens to them is deserved, since they are a bunch of lying dogs.
The sad part is, they are calling the kettle black.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:03 pmThe only person proved to be a liar is Bill Clinton, and he even did it under oath.
Man, too bad there are so many hypocrits out there, that can’t seem to understand that they are backing the wrong horse.
Comment by Will
This is all neocon op’s. Welcome to the Straussian Nation.
Irving Kristol’s (father of Neo-conservatism) mentor at the University of Chicago; Leo Strauss believed that “those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right – the right of the superior to rule over the inferior.”
Strauss also believed, “The people are told what they need to know and no more.” While the elite few are capable of absorbing the absence of any moral truth, Strauss thought, the masses could not cope. If exposed to the absence of absolute truth, they would quickly fall into nihilism or anarchy.
Irving Kristol has long argued for a much greater role for religion in the public sphere, even suggesting that the Founding Fathers of the American Republic made a major mistake by insisting on the separation of church and state. And why? Because Strauss viewed religion as absolutely essential in order to impose moral law on the masses who otherwise would be out of control. At the same time, he stressed that religion was for the masses alone; the rulers need not be bound by it. Indeed, it would be absurd if they were, since the truths proclaimed by religion were “a pious fraud.”
Strauss believed that the inherently aggressive nature of human beings could only be restrained by a powerful nationalistic state. “Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed,” he once wrote. “Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united – and they can only be united against other people.”
Not surprisingly, Strauss’ attitude toward foreign policy was distinctly Machiavellian. “Strauss thinks that a political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat,” “Order out of chaos”, “Following Machiavelli, he maintained that if no external threat exists then one has to be manufactured. “Perpetual war, not perpetual peace, is what Straussians believe in”. Wolfowitz and other administration hawks who have called for a world order dominated by U.S. military power. Strauss’ neoconservative students see foreign policy as a means to fulfill a “national destiny” – as Irving Kristol defined it already in 1983 – that goes far beyond the narrow confines of a ” myopic national security.”
As to what a Straussian world order might look like, the analogy was best captured by the philosopher himself in one of his many allusions to Gulliver’s Travels. When Lilliput was on fire, Gulliver urinated over the city, including the palace. In so doing, he saved all of Lilliput from catastrophe, but the Lilliputians were outraged and appalled by such a show of disrespect.”. The image encapsulates the neoconservative vision of the United States’ relationship with the rest of the world – as well as the relationship between their relationship as a ruling elite with the masses.
These people truly believe this crap. My point here is that these people will do anything to succeed with their agenda. They have no morals, and use the morals that you and I have against us. It’s all going to come to a head very soon. Either we understand who we are fighting against or we lose.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:06 pm#28 Comment by Me Too
Sure there are idiots on both sides. But the majority of people in her are not making threats as opposed to tongue and check remarks. People are angry. So rhetoric is going to get heated…that’s what debate is all about.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:10 pmMeToo
Just like on newshounds the last two days. You once again failed to actually read the original post.
MeToo = Paid Troll
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:11 pmSure there are idiots on both sides. But the majority of people in her are not making threats as opposed to tongue and check remarks. People are angry. So rhetoric is going to get heated…that’s what debate is all about.
Comment by JTitor — March 3, 2007 @ 7:10 pm
Without a doubt, there are idiots on both sides, but man, I cannot say I see as much vitriol coming from the idiots on the right. Seems like the sheer rage from the far left outweighs the rage from the right, by quite abit actually.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:13 pm[…] Again, traveling on business this week, I seem to have missed a dust-up that involved the Corporate Media finding a few “I wish Cheney had died” comments randomly posted on random blogs among about a zillion other comments and posts […]
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:15 pmAnonymity is one of the keystones of blogging and the blogosphere provides a place for people of like mind as well as those who oppose each other viciously to exist in the same place without punches being thrown. Nobody knows where the “vicious” quotes came from and this smacks of disingenuousness.
When Howie Kurtz can prove that “hate” posts are coming from legitimate progressive sources (which seems counterintuitive to begin with, it’s the right that uses hate as a tool), then he can feign disgust. Until then, he undermines his already thin credibility.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:15 pmWhy are we forgetting about O’Reilly who still hasn’t apologized to the kidnapped child? If you care, place your vote and read the post: http://prouddemocrat.dailykos.com/
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:16 pmStray, anonymous comments prove nothing. And those who rely on them to make an argument — especially without bothering to make any effort to prove that they are reflective of anything — should be presumed to have no argument at all. That is why they are relying upon such transparently flimsy and misleading methods to make a point.
Yes, well us “liberals” should have remembered that three weeks ago when Amanda Marcotte did the exact same thing. Used disgusting emails in an attempt to distract us from the real problem, that she is an offensive smear artist.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:17 pm#33, Me Too,
Surely you’ve heard the term “ignorance is bliss”? Or, “if you’re not outraged you’re not paying attention”. Take that bs somewhere else.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:17 pmAnd besides, how can a statement be any more vile than the vileness about which the vile statement was made?
If the current vice president is not the embodiment of vile, I don’t wish to know of anything viler.
How about the axis of vile?
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:17 pmAny nominations? (other than the aforementioned miserable excuse for a human being…)
Comment by Me Too #s 33, 30, & 28
MeToo = Paid Troll
Comment by theroachman #32
…They actually PAY schizophrenics/multiple personality disorder sufferers?
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:19 pmRe:#31
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:20 pmyou must be new to liberal blogs…?
I think it’s time to storm the conservative blog comment pages with anti-liberal hate speech and death threats against Hillary, Obama, Murtha, and Pelosi. Oh wait, they already do that themselves.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:20 pm@ 39 I think it’s time to storm the conservative blog comment pages with anti-liberal hate speech and death threats against Hillary, Obama, Murtha, and Pelosi. Oh wait, they already do that themselves.
RWers also do that to liberal bloggers they do not like.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:23 pmjay severin hasp,
Love the name, that guy’s a total fraud. Don’t you love that he’s a “libertarian” to shore up his populist credentials yet he worked as a Republican political strategist for 20+ years. There’s Severin fallacy #1.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:24 pmIt’s been said before, but it bears repeating: the media needs to stop whining and do their freaking jobs.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:28 pmSeems like the sheer rage from the far left outweighs the rage from the right, by quite abit actually.
Comment by Me Too
First educate yourself in what political sides in the spectre mean. Just dont use left and right freely and easily to avoid insightful analysis. There is no left in the US. You will have to go to Europe in order to know the true meaning of left. US has a moderate centre and a fanatical right. The fanatical right -the political group in the current government- has almost nothing to do with conservadurism. What you have is a national extremist corporate government. Pretty much like the Nazis. Just look all the signs.
Now about your statement: That is probably one of the lamest, empty, corny comments I have read. If your country would have suffered 650,000 civilian casualties due to a never-ending occupation, based on lies as big as a house (yes, buddy, no matter what you say about Clinton, I couldnt care less about him, but Bush lies has killed more civilians and destroyed more countries than any blowjob could do) by, lets say China, and a chinese guy comes with: Hey, why so much rage? This chinese president have to fight american terrorists there so we dont have americans here. Lighten up. I would assure you that you would be mad. Think about it.
There are a lot of reasons to be mad. Just imagine your little brother turn to shreds by a cluster bomb, burned with White Phosphorous or killed by a religious terrorist from another sect, that the invading army are supporting with money and weapons.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:32 pmWithout a doubt, there are idiots on both sides, but man, I cannot say I see as much vitriol coming from the idiots on the right. Seems like the sheer rage from the far left outweighs the rage from the right, by quite abit actually.
Comment by Me Too
I would disagree. Ann Coulter’s remark wasn’t vitoral and purely baseless? Again you have many people coming in here posing as liberals making inflamatory remarks…happens here all the time. The locals are here for the debate, and to vent. The majority are good people in here.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:33 pmFannie/Sutra,
While I agree that there are those on the Left who would post comments on RW blogs to get those blogs in trouble if they could, the simple fact is that most RW blogs don’t allow comments.
The major exceptions are Free Republic and LGF. And if you’ve been around the Internet for any length of time, you know that Free Republic has always been that vile, long before Liberals had a serious Internet presence.
So while you have anonymous posters, with unverified credentials, posting nasty stuff in the comment sections of liberal blogs, on the Right you have the actual “leading lights” making the vile comments. The same people held up by the likes of CPAC and Howie Kurtz as people worthy of invitations and fawning profiles.
It’s not even a close comparison.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:34 pm42 Sap
Hah!!!
Not a chance. Come on it is the Washington Post we are talking about. Whose owner thinks he is Jesus and whose primary goal in life is the end America.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:35 pmI think it’s time to storm the conservative blog comment pages with anti-liberal hate speech and death threats against Hillary, Obama, Murtha, and Pelosi. Oh wait, they already do that themselves.
Comment by jay severin has a small pen1s
Love the name and the comment….
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:35 pmNot a chance. Come on it is the Washington Post we are talking about. Whose owner thinks he is Jesus and whose primary goal in life is the end America.
Comment by theroachman
And don’t forget the Moonies are one of the biggest contributors to the republican party.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:39 pmWhy are they singling out liberal blogs as the source for the hateful words? There are certainly plenty of them on the right wing blogs as well. I can’t get too excited about this because it seems that since Cheney was the victim of the recent comments, it is just another attempt to smear the liberals by the right wingers and the msm.
Liberals are subjected to hate, slander, ad hominem attacks and outright lies all day, every day on Fox TV, on conservative radio and on the blogs, and these are committed by those who own the blog, or “star” on the program — the reports that has the right’s panties in a bunch are by anonymous posters like most of us here. We are just ordinary people writing our thoughts and opinions.
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:40 pmJTitor = Paid Troll
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:42 pmAnd don’t forget the Moonies are one of the biggest contributors to the republican party.
Comment by JTitor — March 3, 2007 @ 7:39 pm
just to be clear:
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:48 pmmoonies = washington TIMES
Yep, our sons and daughters are coming home from Iraq, missing limbs or dead, and the BIG problems is harsh language by anonymous commenters on blogs.
Way to keep the focus on the core issues, MSM! (Idiots.)
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:53 pmalong the same lines:
Victimless
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:57 pmBy: John Amato @ 3:30 PM - PST
The right wing nutosphere is world renowned for playing the victim card, but today they reached new heights in wankerville. They are calling Mike Stark a stalker because he went to the CPAC convention and took a photo with Michelle Malkin
[…]
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/03/03/victimless/
.
Kurtz is a faggot.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:01 pmFunny… I’m sure that these very same people relish talking about how much they enjoy the killing of Muslims.
What a sad world we live in.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:04 pmI think most of the folks that are paying attention realize that the lefty blogs are threatening the cozy relationship between the MSM and the entrenched/establishment politicians. They’ve been working toward common goals for some time and sadly there are a lot of Dems that aren’t interested in too much truth either, wouldn’t want to derail a perfectly good gravy train.
The lefty blogs threaten to empower the common folks, give them a voice, aid in attempting the actual practice of democracy. The Establishment can’t allow this medium to evolve much further (net neutrality battle)….truth in the people’s hands can really hurt profits. Conservatives despise an informed public. Witness where the “regular folk” red-staters they get their facts!
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:07 pmThe Saturday Cartoons (via C&L)
http://bobgeiger.blogspot.com/ 2007/ 03/ saturday-cartoons.html
all great… my favorite is the 2nd… apropos to this thread…
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:15 pm.
It’s becoming easier and easier to i.d. the Republicans at these big newspapers!
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:17 pmHarsh language has always been a problem with the anonymous internet. Go to a MSN or AOL chat room (non-political) and it becomes readily apparent. I can find harsh language here, there and everywhere on the net.
They are only creating another controversy. Phhhbbbtttt.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:17 pmAnd if these emails are anonymous, how does one know if they are liberal, conservative, independent etc.. or just spoofed emails to make it appear otherwise?
Politicos could have a field day with such juvenile ruses.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:21 pm“We Are Not Spared”
Nor should you be, ye vile, hatefilled, lying scum!!!!
Since the MSM won’t call you out, someone MUST.
All hail freedom of speech on the net!
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:34 pmWell put #55.
The Conservative far right want ultimate power over all and don’t care how to achieve it, be it lies, hate, loss of life.
The American people are finally waking up to this, therefore, the far right have notched up their attacks via tv, radio, blogs, any means necessary, and by doing so by hiding behind religion.
I am a liberal, and honestly, I feel that the GOD that I have learned about and love, would never do what these groups are doing. That’s my opinion.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:38 pmWe got vicious words, Cheney’s got vicious policies that result in the death and maiming of hundreds of thousands.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:38 pmWhich one’s worse?
Tangent to harsh language;
Backlash: Dean, Edwards campaign, Malkin blast Coulter
for referring to Edwards as ‘faggot’ during CPAC speech
(Rawstory)
Ya know, I don’t put much into Malkins writings, she is free to post her views. However, I tend to agree with her when it comes to Coulters latest vomit comet.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:45 pmNico - I’m sure you’ll agree that c*nt is as, if not more offensive than fagg*t. But a “favourite” aspect of left wing blogs, is the generous use of descriptive venereal diseases.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:47 pmAs T.S. Eliot so POETICALLY observed in his classic THE HOLLOW MEN(tm):
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:48 pm“Mistah Kurtz - he dead. A penny for the Old Guy.” A PENNY TO PUT ON EACH OF HIS COLD SIGHTLESS ORBS, THAT IS!!!!! That vile sell-out Howard Kurtz is DEAD as far as I am concerned for his SICKENING, NASTY, VULGAR, ONE-SIDED, VITUPEROUS, SLANTED, BIASED ATTACK on the PATRIOTS OF THE BLOGOSPHERE, namely my colleagues and I of Think Progress(tm) and other Voices of Freedom like The Huffington Post(tm), Salon.com(tm), et cetera. When a KNOWN MOUTHPIECE for Bushland Uber Alllies like Howard Kurtz DARES TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE RIGHTFUL FLAK THAT WE SHOWER UPON SUCH VILE CREATURES LIKE Torticola Cheney, CHIMPya, Bushland Uber Allies and its media supporters like Coulter-GEIST, Malkin, O’LIE-lly, Limburger and OH YES, Kurtz, that miserable piece of hyena-shit, YOU KNOW THAT FREE SPEECH and DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA IS BEING ASSAILED BY THESE SCUMBAGS, AND WE, THE PATRIOTS OF THE BLOGOSPHERE, ARE NOT GOING TO STAND IDLY BY AND TAKE IT FROM JERKS LIKE Kurtz–BE WARNED, Kurtz and Bushland Uber Allies, THE KID GLOVES ARE OFF–PREPARE TO TASTE OUR E-MAILED FISTS!!!!!
Margaret Cho’s hate mail from the Bushistas.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:57 pmI didn’t realize Malkin had denounced Coulter’s latest nonsensical bleat. I suppose there’s always been some natural tension between the two of them, they’re competing for the same audience and they’re using the same character to do it.
I propose a ‘Rightwing Celebrity Deathmatch’ between the two whackos. Coulter may have some masculine characteristics but would you really want to f*c* with Michelle Malkin? That one strikes me as batshit crazier than all of them.
BTW, Firedoglake has an excellent thread up right now on the msm and and how things got so out of hand.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:58 pmPREPARE TO TASTE OUR E-MAILED FISTS!!!!!
Comment by Raymond Funamoto — March 3, 2007 @ 8:48 pm
YEA !!! TAKE THAT!!!
that was great…
i think jay said it well, and i agree, that the MSM feel threatened by the blogs, and the bloggers, and commenters, feel empowered, and strengthened and heartened (mostly) by this, finally, truthful information…
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:03 pmhttp://www.savetheinternet.com/
.
Poor babies.
They can dish it out but they sure can’t take it, can they? The strategy all along has been to get liberals to hold to a higher standard than they do. “I’ll agree to play fair, but then I lie. If you trusted me, you’re just stupid.”
It’s the Lucy, Charlie Brown, and the football strategy. You know: Lucy says, “Charlie Brown, let me hold the football for you to kick. I PROMISE I won’t yank it away at the last minute like I’ve done every other time.” Charlie Brown reluctantly agrees, because he wants to believe in people, then lands flat on his back when Lucy once again plays him for a fool.
These conservatives are whining because some liberals are playing the game by conservative standards.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:06 pmComment by DeCon — March 3, 2007 @ 8:57 pm
that needs to be forwarded to howie…
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:07 pmAl Gore is full of BULSH*T, read it here:
http://newsbusters.org/node/11122
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:10 pmI didn’t realize Malkin had denounced Coulter’s latest nonsensical bleat.
Malkin, I think, has realized that political hate speak has reached it’s zenith and can only now freefall to earth. I expect Coulter will soon follow suit.
I think it’s about time we return to civil discourse as it only serves to divide our nation at a time when it we need to stick together like a band of monkeys on a reed raft.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:10 pmBlogs-smogs. No one is generating the realistic anger people feel about this administration because of many things: stolen elections, the war in Iraq, torture of prisoners, the damage done to our international reputation, our economy, the national debt, the tax cuts for the rich during a war and many other things they have done. This is the real feelings that are out here. That is what happens when the people in the WH refuse to listen to the public.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:11 pmHey DeCon,
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:16 pmI just read those e-mails that Margerat Cho was inudated with. If any more evidence is needed to show who’s more hateful than the repugs on the blogosphere then I don’t know were to find it. Really incredible and vulgar stuff that they hit her with.
Harsh emails are usually just round filed.
You catch many more flys with honey than with shedds spread.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:19 pmA good one, is go check out the hatemail page on democraticunderground.com talk about hate speech.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:22 pm[…] “Liberal Media”: Post Reporter: ‘We Are Not Spared’ The ‘Nasty, Vulgar E-Mail’ From ‘Liberal Blog’ Reader… • • […]
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:22 pmI didn’t realize Malkin had denounced Coulter’s latest nonsensical bleat.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 3, 2007 @ 9:10 pm
At her blog, Malkin wrote, “…Crickets chirping.”
oooooh… that’s pretty harsh…
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:24 pmi will not go to malkins blog, but what i read at rawstory didn’t sound like much of a denouncement… but probably as much as she could muster…
#71
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:25 pmThis Russian scientist has done this before. I would not put any stock in what he says (although you do, clown). If he is willing to put it up for peer review then lets see if it holds up. Or is he (and you) afraid to be shown the charlatrans that you are?
Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet’s recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human-induced—cause, according to one scientist’s controversial theory. -The Truth.
Mars doesn’t have billions of people with cars exacerbating the problem. Mars has a very weak magnetic field. Mars does not follow Earths orbit nor procession. It is true, we do have solar cycles. If I follow the logic of that article then Earth will as well dry out as Mars did. (hmm)
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:29 pmThe debate on whether or not burning fossil fuels is causing global warming is over. Even the Cheney administration has acknowledged this. You should let it go.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:33 pmoooooh… that’s pretty harsh…
i will not go to malkins blog, but what i read at rawstory didn’t sound like much of a denouncement… but probably as much as she could muster…
Comment by katy
For Malkin its something. She didn’t have much to say when the AP shot her down either. =)
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:37 pm#71 - Will man ever learn from his or her mistakes? I sure hope so. Thanks Mr. Gore.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:42 pmUh, guys? #71, 78, 79… aren’t you whoring on the wrong thread? Is this a hamfisted attempt at getting us off topic, or are you just in the wrong neighborhood? Either way, you just don’t come off looking very smart.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:44 pmHave a nice day!
Here is a collection of right remarks I copied in a single day. I call it “brownshirt rants.”
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:48 pmHoward Kurtz is an intellectual coward and a disgrace to journalism.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:48 pm#71
[1997] “A magnetic field shields a planet from fast-moving, electrically charged particles from the Sun which may affect its atmosphere, as well as from cosmic rays, which are an impediment to life,” Acuna said.”If Mars had a more active dynamo in its past, as we suspect from the existence of ancient volcanoes there, then it may have had a thicker atmosphere and liquid water on its surface.”
“Mars Global Surveyor has been in orbit for only a few days, yet it already has returned an important discovery about the Red Planet,” said Vice President Al Gore. “This is another example of how NASA’s commitment to faster, better, cheaper Mars exploration that began with Mars Pathfinder is going to help answer many fundamental questions about the history and environment of our neighboring planet, and the lessons it may hold for a better understanding of life on Earth.”
So, The Truth, when our planet cools, and the Earths dynamo of molten metal cools (we still have volcanoes) the magnetic field dissipates. Mars should be looked at, I think, as to what Earth MAY become in the future and should not be used for comparisons today or to PROVE that AL Gore is lying about global warming.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:49 pmMarch 3rd, 2007 at 9:49 pm
Without a doubt, there are idiots on both sides, but man, I cannot say I see as much vitriol coming from the idiots on the right. Seems like the sheer rage from the far left outweighs the rage from the right, by quite abit actually.
Comment by Me Too — March 3, 2007 @ 7:13 pm
Looks like somebody is off their meds.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:50 pmUh, guys? #71, 78, 79… aren’t you whoring on the wrong thread? Is this a hamfisted attempt at getting us off topic, or are you just in the wrong neighborhood? Either way, you just don’t come off looking very smart.
Have a nice day!
Comment by SKdeA
If you prefer not to debunk falsities before they grow feet, fine. I prefer to shoot them down before they gain altitude.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:53 pm#87 - Jim
That wasn’t “ForTruth,” it was “The Truth.”
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:53 pmI don’t believe it. CNN is covering Ann Coulter’s “faggot” comment as their lead story. What’s this world coming to?
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:55 pmClair Voyant, Whoops! My bad!
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:59 pmBasically, with the assessment of our Director of National Intelligence this week that Iran is not going to develop a nuke before 2015, these joker Republicans running America are ZERO FOR THREE ON THE AXIS OF EVIL:
1. Iraq. Didn’t even have a nuke program. Yet we rushed to INVADE because of an IMMINENT THREAT. Okay that was smart.
2. Iran. Our wonderful Republicans basically destroyed our intel on Iran by outing Plame. Then they cried nukes nukes nukes. Now it’s no nukes until 2015. Sheesh. We almost went to war again over this crap.
3. North Korea. Again, our genius Republicans cried wolf over a uranium enrichment program that we now know may not have existed. In the process they caused NK to quadruple their plutonium arsenal.
And while they obsessed over the Evil Axis, the Republicans didn’t pay nearly enough attention to eradicating al Qaeda or to all the BS going on in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:05 pmThese Republicans are the gang that couldn’t shoot straight. I can’t believe Bush called himself a “Wartime” President. What an embarrassment. It would be a hoot if it weren’t so tragic in all the lost lives.
No worries, Jim.
ForTruth is nutty, but not certifiable.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:06 pmRAPE LIBS’ KIDS UP THE BUTT!
by: steveshawaproudamerican
This one is truly demented. Become a pedophile and sodomize innocent children because an American doesn’t agree with their view so he can get his salad tossed in prison.
I wonder if this twisted little thinker would also want to rape the children of log cabin Republicans.
Mr Cheney, Sir,do you see the problem with this type of thinking? Your daughter is likely a good person and will soon be raising your grandchild, surely, sir, you find this divisive political vernacular dangerous.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:07 pm“Comments posted following an attempt on Vice President Cheney’s life were nothing short of vile.”
***********************************************
Oh, puh-leeeeeeeeeeeeeeze! As if nobody at Free Republic or Red State ever posts vile comments about Democrats! I myself wish that I had a dollar for every time that I’ve seen a conservative/Republican post a message proposing that all liberals/Democrats be arrested, stripped of their citizenship and/or constitutional rights, imprisoned without trial, exiled for life, eviscerated, and/or simply pulled from their homes and shot in the streets…I’d be set for life!
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:08 pmAnyone else notice that the Washington Post, since the beginning of the year, has hired many more political writers, most of them fairly young, unknown, and of a decidedly right wing bent? Even their daily political chats, which I love reading, seem to be run by more of these conservative unknowns ( unknown to me, anyhow ). I have been reading the Post online for a couple of years now, and I read everything, everyday. What I have seen over the past couple of months shows me that, instead of taking criticism positively and disregarding the nut commentors, the Post’s management is in somewhat of a bunker mentality, especially the mainstream status quo defenders such as Kurtz. This does not bode well for those of us who care about getting the facts straight, and who need the Post to help in that regard.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:29 pmOn Nov. 22, 1994, Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina, slated to be the new chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Clinton is so unpopular on military bases in North Carolina that “he better watch out if he comes down here. He’d better have a bodyguard.”
Helms made this astounding threat to Clinton in a Raleigh News & Observer interview. The newspaper was questioning Helms about a statement he made Nov. 18 on CNN’s “Evans and Novak” program. When asked then if he thought President Clinton was “up to the job” of Commander in Chief, Helms stated: “No, I do not. And neither do the people in the armed forces.”
While Helms’ threat created nothing less than a worldwide sensation, it was written off by Republican leaders as “That’s just Jesse.” Helms later said his statement was unwise, and that he “should have said it better.”
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:34 pmCrazy Eduardo~
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:34 pmIf StevieWonderShaw is the best these clowns can do, I don’t have any worries, sleeping tight, etc.
I’d certainly like to see Mr? Shaw try sodomizing my daughter. He’d have whatever dinky penous he could get up shot off in a heartbeat.
Anyone else notice that the Washington Post, since the beginning of the year, has hired many more political writers, most of them fairly young, unknown, and of a decidedly right wing bent?
I quit reading Kevin Drum sometime back. They play both sides of the fence for greenbacks. The thought process, I think, is one of littering.
So what if I, one person, materially greedy, lie to the public? One litterer is not a problem, but when you get many litterers following the same bent it becomes a problem. Sadly they haven’t yet realized what they are doing.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:39 pminstead of taking criticism positively and disregarding the nut commentors, the Post’s management is in somewhat of a bunker mentality,
The WaPo is a bastion of center-right cowards who definitely feel threatened by the truth.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:44 pmMeanwhile, ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus has been posting on the Griffin thread a valiant defense of his use of the word “c*nt” to describe another poster.
Those sort of posts give “liberal” blogs a bad name.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:45 pmI wouldn’t hold your breath waiting for the MSM to do their job. If CNN is covering the Coulter remark, they probably called her to ask her permission. They probably followed it with a 30-second spot on her upcoming book “Sodom: How Liberals Corrupted Ted Haggart”.
I never post anonymously. Don’t believe in it. You can click on my link to watch my films and learn more about my work as the anti-conservative. They can all rot in hell. They’ll enjoy it there. The government privatized it.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:49 pmhttp://newsbusters.org/ stories/ maher_sorry_cheney_assasination_attempt_failed.html
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:52 pmWhats your point Tracy? Do you have one?
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:57 pmAs for the anti-global warming crackheads let me offer you this.
I grew up trained in science and then decided against it. I’m not a global warming freakazoid. It’s a theory. I can assure you that an increase in the world’s population has an effect on the quality of life. Just think about where you grew up. It’s probably doubled or tripled in size. You have more people you don’t like. You have more cultures that have intertwined. There’s more conflicts, less parking, higher taxes, more problems. Now extrapolate that over a global community and throw in a variety of religions, cultures, languages, and capitalism. I’m not saying that capitalism is bad. I am saying that everyone being a capitalist is bad. Industrialized countries use more resources and then competition for those resources causes problems. We’re seeing that with oil with China and the US. What do you think the stock market hiccup was about the other day. But do you really think we shouldn’t make any adjustments to how we live based on the state of the world? By developing alternative energy we could actually be ahead of the competition. Will our economy be ruined by these changes? Some say YES but that’s just a theory…like global warming. Can we make some adjustments without hurting our economy? Absolutely. We are the greatest nation EVER on the face of the planet. I bet we can make some changes and turn a profit doing it. Keep that in mind when you see $5/gallon gasoline this summer. Standing behind the oil companies NO MATTER WHAT does only one thing…leave you behind the oil companies. Record profits during a crisis should be a telling signal.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:02 pmBill Maher is a perfect example of a hate filled liberal.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:02 pmMeanwhile, ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus has been posting on the Griffin thread a valiant defense of his use of the word “c*nt†to describe another poster.
Those sort of posts give “liberal†blogs a bad name.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 10:45 pm
Thin skinned fcukheads like yourself that think vulgar words by private citizens give people a bad name, are why people make fun of you Tippers of the world. Why don’t you stick to banning rap videos, and get a grip on what battles are worth fighting.
I’m not a public spokesman, and if you think my private words as a private citizen represent any political movement, you don’t understand the first amendment, or what the fcuk you actually think progressives stand for. Do everyone a favor Tipper, and buy a clue!
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:04 pmThose sort of posts give “liberal†blogs a bad name.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
Valiant Venus is likely Jason Hendler (aacording to moniker link).
I grow weary of man and his armageddonish ways BNF.
I have seen the man of light,
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:06 pmand battled the black knight.
knowledge of the equilibrium
and thoughts beginnings
from the fish Zeus Split
and filled with his wisdom
to the chimneys of Earth
Walls and objects pop quite loudly.
Air Eggs, Socrates spake of.
I have seen thru the mirror darkly
And thru mirror of light forwardly
I have peered into Lucifers eyes
I have seen the writing on the wall
and the hand that guides it all.
Oh man, why for cannot you see?
I bring truth unto thee.
Crazy Eddie, I must be.
http://newsbusters.org/ stories/ maher_sorry_cheney_assasination_attempt_failed.html
Comment by Tracy — March 3, 2007 @ 10:52 pm
The title of your link, and your posts are inaccurate and a smear. You’re a fcuking lying fool Tracy.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:06 pmBill Maher is a perfect example of a hate filled liberal.
Comment by Tracy — March 3, 2007 @ 11:02 pm
Not true - but you are the perfect example of a hate filled conservative. Hypocrite.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:06 pmAnd Coulter, Hannity, Savage et, al are not? Get a grip please.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:07 pmPot, Meet Kettle. I’d also add Valient Venus to this list. Lady, you need some help.
#106 jay severin hasp
Good points. Can also add to that the reasons we are losing jobs in this country. Good, high paying industrial jobs, with great benefits are greatly reduced in this country because companies refused to spend the money to update the technology in their factories. Case in point, the steel industry. How much of that is left in this country? Much of it is gone because we continued to use inefficient, 19th century technology while Europe, especially Germany, was using top of the like equipment and thus could produce a higher quality, cheaper product.
Companies have to invest in improving their industrial infrastructure, not in 400 million dollar retirement packages for their CEO’s.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:07 pmBill Maher is a perfect example of a hate filled liberal.
Comment by Tracy
I don’t Maher nor mimick him, he speaks for himself and not for me.
Should I think you are hateful, like Coulter, for she claims your political ideology?
I should not.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:08 pmValiantVenusGrewFromUranus,
It seems to me that if someone is offended by your language, it’s easy enough to respect that.
It doesn’t appear that your vocabulary is limited. Maybe try being more creative?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:10 pmValiant Venus are you JMH or not?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:11 pmBill Maher is a perfect example of a hate filled liberal.
Comment by Tracy
TV is not me.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:14 pmIt seems to me that if someone is offended by your language, it’s easy enough to respect that.
It doesn’t appear that your vocabulary is limited. Maybe try being more creative?
Comment by Clair Voyant — March 3, 2007 @ 11:10 pm
I respect that they have a right to be offended. If the language were aimed at them, or if I were a public figure that would be relevant. Me, I’m more offended by passive aggressive hypocrites that criticize selectively, like BNF. The ‘girls’ trueblue and zooey say they were offended by coarse language - yet I presented links showing both had used that language themselves.
Sorry, but there’s lots posted here that offends me far worse than coarse language. And the same should be true for everyone!
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:15 pmValiant Venus are you JMH or not?
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 3, 2007 @ 11:11 pm
Nope, he’s a fool.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 pmCrazy Eddie,
I’m sorry, who is JMH?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 pmComment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — March 3, 2007 @ 11:04 pm
When you post here, you are no longer a private citizen writing private words. You’re in a public forum, and your words are out there for the whole world to view. And it’s a safe bet to say I understand the First Amendment far better than you.
Let’s face it, the more you write, the worse you appear.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 pmCrazy Eddie,
I’m sorry, who is JMH?
Comment by Clair Voyant
Jason Hendler, as Venus’s moniker directs one too.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:19 pm109 - interesting poem. How do I know you?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:19 pmWhen you post here, you are no longer a private citizen writing private words. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
No, I’m a private citizen exercising my first amendment rights.
You’re in a public forum, and your words are out there for the whole world to view. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
That’s true, I’m a private citizen speaking as a private citizen.
And it’s a safe bet to say I understand the First Amendment far better than you. Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
This is a private forum - there are no first amendment rights here - so I question your assumption.
Let’s face it, the more you write, the worse you appear.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
You’re entitled to your opinion - which is usually quite good. Exception when your ‘emotion’ and ‘irrationality’ gets involved like this. Use your ‘brain’ and not your ‘heart’ on this issue. Stop trying to be the big bad dragon slayer, it’s derogatory to trueblue and zooey. They aren’t your damsels.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:20 pm“The ‘girls’ trueblue and zooey say they were offended by coarse language - yet I presented links showing both had used that language themselves.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus”
I see. Maybe you just have a problem with women.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:21 pm“Jason Hendler, as Venus’s moniker directs one too.
Comment by Crazy Eddie”
Still confused, but it’s possible that it’s unimportant. Thanks.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:23 pm#120 - Clair Voyant,
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:23 pmJMH is a 39 year old going on 40 who lives in his mother’s basement in Melborne, FL. Also known as Jason or Jason M. Henley(sp?).
I see. Maybe you just have a problem with women.
Comment by Clair Voyant — March 3, 2007 @ 11:21 pm
Nope, I like women. I even like trueblue and zooey. They’re smart capable women. I just disagree with them on this issue. They/BnF and some others have a different opinion. That’s fine, but I don’t have a problem with that. They have just as much of a right to complain and belittle my language, as I do to use the language to belittle valiant venus & Tracy. That’s my opinion - and last time I checked I was still entitled to that.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:23 pm109 - interesting poem. How do I know you?
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:19 pm
If you were half the shaman you wish you were, you’d realize the absurdity in that question! Ah, the irony ;)
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:24 pmIt came back - Jason M Hendler.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:25 pm“That’s my opinion - and last time I checked I was still entitled to that.
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus”
So you wouldn’t mind being called a c*cksucker?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:27 pmIt came back - Jason M Hendler.
Comment by WaltTheMan — March 3, 2007 @ 11:25 pm
I hope not ;) Sorry, the alias makes fun of the two most annoying trolls, hope that explains this.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:27 pm“It came back - Jason M Hendler.
Comment by WaltTheMan”
I don’t have enough history here. Thanks, anyway WaltTheMan.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:28 pmI might add that anyone living in a basement in Florida is certifiably insane.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:28 pmIn other news:
Iran, Saudi heads vow to work for unity
The Shi’ites and Sunnis are starting to figure out they’re being played against each other by the United States.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:30 pm109 - interesting poem. How do I know you?
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
You do, but not.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:32 pmYou are one of few
who has broken thru
entropic thought
Now you’re just being stupid.
The internet is a public forum. And, if there were no first amendment rights, the government could censor every post.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:32 pmComment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus — March 3, 2007 @ 11:24 pm
And if you were a student of shamanism, you’d know that shamans are not omniscient. Ah, the stupidity. :-P
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:34 pmSo you wouldn’t mind being called a c*cksucker?
Comment by Clair Voyant — March 3, 2007 @ 11:27 pm
Actually calling me a fcukhead is probably more appropriate - because that would deride me as a person, without trying to smear gay people. Calling me a *d*ckhead* is a more closely related term - and ironically one that I believe it was trueblue that used.
But if you did that - even in a passive aggressive manner as you just did - that would make you exactly the kind of passive aggressive ann coulter figure that people are deriding here. After all, she didn’t ‘call’ him that term, she indirectly implied he was one - as you did with me.
I always find this sort of hypocrisy interesting - and unfortunate - in progressives.
And to answer your question, no, if you called me a -d*ckhead-, that would be your right and your opinion. But I’d appreciate if you would call me that ‘honestly’, instead of the passive aggressive dishonesty of the other progressives that have committed the same sins, but only implied it.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:34 pmNow you’re just being stupid.
The internet is a public forum. And, if there were no first amendment rights, the government could censor every post.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:32 pm
Now you’re just being stupid. If the blogmaster decides you can’t post anymore you can’t. You have no first amendment rights here, only the blog master and owner of the site has that.
For a lawyer, I’m shocked you failed to understand such a simple principle.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:36 pmAnd if you were a student of shamanism, you’d know that shamans are not omniscient. Ah, the stupidity. :-P Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:34 pm
Who said omniscient? We were referring to whether you ‘know’ someone - ironically the same st*pid comment you made to me about my comments to zooey! Ah, the stupidity - and ironically from a man I generally find quite intelligent! Thanks for demonstrating how allowing your emotions to destroy your reason can turn even a super bright person like yourself, into a valiant venus!
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:38 pmIf you were half the shaman you wish you were, you’d realize the absurdity in that question! Ah, the irony ;)
Comment by ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus
It’s probably better that you didn’t know V V
It would cause you much grief.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:39 pm136:
Now, when the darkness greets light
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:39 pmAwakening the spirit so dim within
Man-unkind will be put to flight
And rest in pieces therein
Surrendered the hate
To little, to late
Eternity didn’t wait.
#140 - ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus,
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:40 pmYou were the first to bring your privates into the debate (in #118, I believe).
Who said omniscient? We were referring to whether you ‘know’ someone - ironically the same st*pid comment you made to me about my comments to zooey!
it was in reference to a poem V V.
Down past the madness of the march hare
etc. If you know you know, if you don’t
forgeddaboutit =)
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:42 pmIt’s probably better that you didn’t know V V
It would cause you much grief.
Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 3, 2007 @ 11:39 pm
Then you can count your blessings, and live in that belief with my blessing. But the ‘it would’ is interesting for someone responding to Shamans not being omniscient. Sounded suspiciously like you were implying you had it!
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:43 pmI am wondering if all this you said, she said debate will lead to something fruitful, as all debates should head to.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:43 pmValiantVenusGrewFromUranus,
Well, this certainly has been an interesting evening, not what I thought I’d find here.
Later, f*ckhead.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:44 pm#140 - ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus,
You were the first to bring your privates into the debate (in #118, I believe). Comment by WaltTheMan — March 3, 2007 @ 11:40 pm
Yep, and as a private person I have a right to call a c*nt a c*nt - which by the way means a ‘generally disliked woman’. Yet you people call her haggette - which defines her as ‘completely evil’.
Who’s being a hypocrite with the ’slurs’ - BnF maybe?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:46 pmMan-unkind will be put to flight
And rest in pieces therein
Surrendered the hate
To little, to late
Eternity didn’t wait.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — March 3, 2007 @ 11:39 pm
So tell me, when did you surrender to your hate of me? When zooey or trueblue attacked me?
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:47 pmI am wondering if all this discussion will lead to a fruitful result as all debates should head to.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:48 pmWell, this certainly has been an interesting evening, not what I thought I’d find here.
Later, f*ckhead.
Comment by Clair Voyant — March 3, 2007 @ 11:44 pm
So because I call a right wingnut troll a c*nt, I’m part of the problem. Because I feel I have a right to do that - you call me a f*ckhead.
Yeah, no hypocrisy there.
So BnF, you didn’t condemn trueblue or zooey for their language - do you feel that only ‘liberals’ like me shouldn’t use foul words to describe conservatives? Or do you think Voyant demonstrates the hypocrisy I was referring to?
You people are super smart, and I really do like all of you, including you BnF. But you really don’t get the difference between coarse language, and what these fcukheads on the rightwing are doing. Sad - that’s why they get better press coverage too.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:50 pmJuan, It has two chances - little or none.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:50 pmThen you can count your blessings, and live in that belief with my blessing. But the ‘it would’ is interesting for someone responding to Shamans not being omniscient. Sounded suspiciously like you were implying you had it!
I dont have any tarot cards or crystal balls if thats what you mean. What you forget is that thought is only energy and that you are only a speck, an Atom, if you will.
I can tell you where to look to find the pillar of light, yet you, likely, would deny it.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:50 pmI am wondering if all this discussion will lead to a fruitful result as all debates should head to. Comment by Juan C — March 3, 2007 @ 11:48 pm
I hope so. Because I’m debating BnF, who’s a bright a capable person. He’s just too mad at me right now to realize that he’s treated me unfairly, and inconsistently.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:51 pmSlightly OT, but how long before the right starts labeling us as related in ideology to the anarchists causing the riots over in Denmark?
Article
I can just hear them preaching that this is the result of liberal leftist ideology and that is what our side will do if not controlled.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:51 pmOops, sorry for the double post.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:53 pmI dont have any tarot cards or crystal balls if thats what you mean. What you forget is that thought is only energy and that you are only a speck, an Atom, if you will. Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 3, 2007 @ 11:50 pm
So many words, so little understanding of any of their meanings…
I can tell you where to look to find the pillar of light, yet you, likely, would deny it. Comment by Crazy Eddie — March 3, 2007 @ 11:50 pm
Yeah, says the person that judges me for using foul language, by using foul language against me. I can tell you that based on this interaction, it’s you that just missed the light, and denied it.
I was honest and consistent with my attitudes about foul language, and in fact I’m still not upset that you called me that. But you showed that you don’t have consistent values, as most on this blogs can be shown on this matter. The fact is most of us use foul language in our lives to describe the most foul people we interact with. I’m just honest about it.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:54 pmJuan, It has two chances - little or none.
Comment by WaltTheMan — March 3, 2007 @ 11:50 pm
I hope you’re wrong. But considering how emotional BnF and many are about this topic - you may be right.
March 3rd, 2007 at 11:55 pmhttp://www.peace-action.org/
———————————————————————————
To: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
cc: Chairs of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Committee on International Relations
We, the undersigned, vehemently oppose any U.S. military action against Iran. Such military action would inevitably kill large numbers of innocent people, foster even more hatred and international condemnation of the U.S., and dramatically increase the instability of the region. Our own intelligence agencies have concluded the Iraq war has worsened the terrorist threat, and a war against Iran