17
Shorter Anti-Greenwald Irregulars
When last we left our story, Glenn Greenwald had tolchocked Misha for advocating the lynching of five Supreme Court justices, and shamed the right-blogosphere for their usual relaxed and carefree attitude toward the espousal of murder, genocide, and the dismantling of the American political system in favor of an authoritarian one-party state.
An uproar ensued against Greenwald, primarily citing the pivotal decisions in cases such as You Are v. What Am I, and Smelt It v. Dealt It.
Then on Sunday, Glenn whacked them again even harder (leaving as collateral damage our long-worked post on the Joao Silva affair). But Glenn, dude, it’s too late — you were ‘Fisked’ this weekend. That’s the gantlet in which the WingNet dishonestly claims that you’re lying and/or makes deranged attacks on your mental state, while rudely calling you uncivil, nit-pickingly accusing you of nit-picking, or writing multithousand-word jeremiads about your ‘obsessiveness.’ Your reputation is forever ruined in the blogosphere. Actually, no — it means you’re getting to them.
Here we go ’round the stupidberry bush:
Shorter Xrlq: “Greenwald asserts that ‘five ropes, five robes, five trees — some assembly required’ is an allusion to lynching. Yet another example of the dishonesty of the Left!”
Shorter Patterico: “So-called ‘Constitutional scholar’ Greenwald links to someone called ‘Retardo.’ Game over! (Bwaha.) Oh wait, I thought of another thing…”
Shorter Ace of Spades: “Gay Gaywald is an obscure unknown nobody who is gay.”
Shorter Perfesser Flowbee: “Here’s an essay I didn’t read. Say, the first sentence reminds me of something.”
More Shorter Xrlq: “He says ‘tomato’; I say ‘to-mah-to.’ Yet another stinking lie!”
Shorter Misha: “Blar-har! Puny human Greenwald. Hey, let’s run that old rope/tree graphic again.”
Glenn, we present you with a laurel and hearty handshake. Vous êtes arrivé.
Some Guy said,
July 17, 2006 at 11:49
I dun feel like reading the links. Did any of them use the “you can’t prove he wasn’t advocating building them tire swings” defense?
Gavin M. said,
July 17, 2006 at 11:51
Stunningly, that’s not far off the mark.
Tim Lambert said,
July 17, 2006 at 12:49
Wow, you weren’t kidding about the “shorter xrlq” part. 5000 words denying that the quote implied lynching. Is it any surprise that Xrlq is a big fan of John Lott?
Roxanne said,
July 17, 2006 at 12:53
Looks like they have a new whipping boy — in the form of Michael Totten.
Ryan said,
July 17, 2006 at 13:29
God, the wignuts hate Greenwald. If you want to see some truly deranged ranting, check out Dan Riehl. He has spent hours and hours and hours digging around the Internet trying to get information on Greenwald, writing one juvenile post after the next. They’ve become obsessed with him because he’s hurting them. Notice he never makes a single personal insult – pierces them with substance, and they can’t fight back.
What’s happening here is obvious. Instapundit is so full of frustration and anger towards Greenwald’s criticisms that (while chiding the Left for uncivil posts) he links to every loser and sicko who writes a single negative thing about Greenwald, no matter how extreme, deranged, personal, bitter, etc.
So now they’re all trained that if they want attention and traffic from their master, they need to be good little attack poodles and write about Greenwald – the more personal and inane, the better. Insty has linked to 10 posts like this, at least, in the last week. Greenwald has become their meal ticket. Insty must really be fuming, hes used to have people believe his “moderate-mild-reasonable” bullshit and Greenwald exposes him as the insane extremist he and his minions are.
DUDACKATTACK!!! said,
July 17, 2006 at 14:04
Soap.
Toilet Paper.
Toothpaste.
Literacy.
Wingnut.
Some assembly required.
Jeff Fecke said,
July 17, 2006 at 15:20
My personal favorite is the “Who is Glenn Greenwald?” one. Who is Glenn Greenwald? Well, for one thing, he’s a bestselling author, as opposed to some guy blogging from his mom’s basement.
Who the hell is Ace of Spades? He doesn’t even have a frickin’ name!
Doug said,
July 17, 2006 at 15:20
At first I was tempted to write a frothing post about what kind of an asshole Xlrq must be to insult his readers’ intelligence by trying to claim that Misha wasn’t actually calling for the Supreme Court justices to be lynched. After reading some of his comments thread, though, I’m no longer convinced they have any intelligence to insult.
I mean, what this argument basically boils down to is “Misha was just kidding, ha ha, but DEB FRISCH IS A HORRIBLE BABY-KILLER WHO IS A THREAT TO THE BLOGOSPHERE AND TO SOCIETY!!!11!!!ONE!1!!1ELEVEN!1!!” Which is the kind of pseudo-argument that should be an immediate first-ballot selection into the Blogospheric Dumbfuckery Hall of Fame, and yet paradoxically is par-for-the-course S.O.P. from these people.
The Velvet Blog said,
July 17, 2006 at 15:24
Xrlq’s comments devolve pretty quickly into an argument about the subjunctive case. It’s actually kind of funny, coming after that nonsensical rant.
Karatist Preacher said,
July 17, 2006 at 15:50
What the hell was that Ace of Spades shit about? Going to Radio Shack to pick up a copy of Cock Weekly?!?
Otto Man said,
July 17, 2006 at 16:10
I didn’t think it was possible, but that Ace of Spades nut is even more obsessed with cock than Jeff Goldstein. He’s projecting like an IMAX.
Mike Nilsen said,
July 17, 2006 at 16:36
I love any post with the name ‘Joao’ in it!
Mark said,
July 17, 2006 at 16:47
Speaking of Ace, one could easily take his piece “Why Does The Unhinged Left So Hate Jeff Goldstein?” and change it to Greenwald…
Case in point.
Sad, but true.
Steve said,
July 17, 2006 at 17:09
It’s just amazing that so many on the Right appear to sincerely believe we all have it in for Jeff Goldstein because he is their Deep Thinker and we just can’t handle the forceful logic of his brilliant arguments. I mean, this is a guy who is guaranteed to make at least one post a week pretending that a blank white space on the blog is Robert Byrd in a sheet. Haw, haw, haw.
word warrior said,
July 17, 2006 at 17:16
Do you guys ever feel silly playing this real life dungeons and dragons game with greenwald, goldstein, malkin, misha, etc.
It’s sissy violence, sissy sex and a teensy weensy bit of real political debate.
Any of y’all got real lives or real axes to grind?
What a bizarre world I stumbled into.
Alice in wankerland
Otto Man said,
July 17, 2006 at 17:32
Do you guys ever feel silly playing this real life dungeons and dragons game with greenwald, goldstein, malkin, misha, etc.
Yeah, right. It’s the left that lives in a real life Dungeons and Dragons game.
If you’ll excuse me, I have to go back to Misha’s place. When I was last there, “Emperor Darth Misha I” was trying to beat back a horde of Kossak orcs with his +2 battle axe, and “Deathknyte” was going to cast a Fireball spell against the Eville Wizarde Greenwalde. Unless, you know, their mom called them in for dinner.
Marc said,
July 17, 2006 at 17:35
Is a “word warrior” something like a “mathmagician”?
Brando said,
July 17, 2006 at 17:38
The irony of Misha’s post about the NYT photograph is writing a rabid, spittle-flecked rant against not having the COURAGE to ATTACK a sniper with a 35mm camera when you are blogging about the picture instead of, I don’t know, fighting in Iraq.
Show Trials #37 at The Politburo Diktat said,
July 17, 2006 at 17:42
[...] Gavin M. at Sadly No!, for glorious ’shortening‘ of reactionary bloggers. But perhaps their necks should be ‘lengthened’ comrade? [...]
jade said,
July 17, 2006 at 17:42
You should have given Ace of Spayed some credit for realising that they don’t have to respond to Greenwald. They can just put their fingers in their ears, shout “La la la, can’t hear you!” and run away, as per usual when faced with torture hysterics (his phrase for people opposed to torture).
jade said,
July 17, 2006 at 17:50
They’re really upset, aren’t they.
Nope Mr Dicktat, I think we can leave the “jokes”-about-hanging-people-we-don’t-like in the capable paws of you Righties.
Kathleen said,
July 17, 2006 at 17:56
wow. I really can’t believe that this is Xrlq’s defense: “First, [Misha] never said anything about [the strung-up Justices]dying”
also – I love how unhappy GG makes the wingnuts.
Matt T. said,
July 17, 2006 at 17:58
Charlie: “They said you was hung!”
Sheriff Bart: “And they was right.”
“Prof. Flowbee”…hee…
Jeff R. said,
July 17, 2006 at 18:12
What kind of traitors are you? You can’t even speak French correctly: vous êtes arrivés.
jade said,
July 17, 2006 at 18:19
No, it’s a singular vous.
Republic of Palau said,
July 17, 2006 at 19:17
Yes, the vous implies contempt rather than formality.
Gavin M. said,
July 17, 2006 at 19:21
Do you guys ever feel silly playing this real life dungeons and dragons game with greenwald, goldstein, malkin, misha, etc.
No.
It’s sissy violence, sissy sex and a teensy weensy bit of real political debate.
Yes.
Any of y’all got real lives or real axes to grind?
No.
Gavin M. said,
July 17, 2006 at 19:29
Yes, the vous implies contempt rather than formality.
Not at all. It’s quite correct, except for the ever-looming possibility that I’m wrong.
D. Sidhe said,
July 17, 2006 at 19:37
It’s not merely gay marriage which is being argued against; it’s their value as human beings that is being uncouthly denigrated.
Man, that still pisses me off. Let’s try it again.
I want to marry my gay partner. You know, mostly just to fuck with the patriarchial power structure, since, according to the Freepers, I can’t want to just be married for legal reasons or sissy shit like love or whatever.
They tell me I can’t get married, because apparently my queer germs will infect the straight couple downstairs who spend a lot of time throwing things at each other.
I say why not.
They say, “Well, it’d be like letting you marry a dog or a turtle or a chair!”
The entire anti-gay-marriage argument almost invariably descends into some person who has never met you or your partner saying one or the other of you is not human.
Oddly enough, and feel free to call me a big girl or whatever, I tend to take this comparison between me/my partner and an animal as, somehow, denigrating my or my partner’s value as a human being. You know, like calling us animals. You’ll pardon me if I take that a little personally, and get irritated every time I see it.
Hey, dumbass. Come up with a better example, okay?
Lame Man said,
July 17, 2006 at 19:38
Say, did all of the wingnuts come out and condemn the fake anthrax thing at the NYT? Because, as you know, fast fast fast condemnation is one of the wingnut’s key attributes.
nashtbrutusandshort said,
July 17, 2006 at 19:41
Hate him, hell — they’re terrified of Greenwald. He’s everything most of them are not: intelligent, well-informed, rational, persuasive. And deep down, most of them know it. Hence their resorting to lies, distortions, and homophobic insinuations. It’s all they’ve got, the poor sods.
Otto Man said,
July 17, 2006 at 19:44
I do love the irony of some third-rate blogger dismissing an author with a book that made #1 on Amazon and the NYTimes best-sellers list as a nobody.
Correction. A gay nobody.
The Commissar said,
July 17, 2006 at 19:51
“Hate him, hell — they’re terrified of G … He’s everything most of them are not: intelligent, well-informed, rational, persuasive. And deep down, most of them know it. Hence their resorting to lies, distortions, and homophobic insinuations. It’s all they’ve got, the poor sods.”
Heh.
mikey said,
July 17, 2006 at 20:13
You’re SO right, Sidhe. I freakin HATE that argument: “If we let you get married, we’ll have to let people marry their DOGS”. Setting aside that I don’t really care if people DID marry their dogs, and the reasonable argument that dogs can’t consent, there’s still a big problem here. I don’t see people lining up demanding the right to marry their dogs. And even moreso, I don’t see dogs lining up demanding the right to marry their people. And I don’t see any other equal protection case where the opposing argument was the constitution doesn’t offer the protection in question to other species. But I live just south of San Francisco. I remember how proud I felt when our ROCKIN’ mayor, Gavin Newsome, stood up to the haters and the fear mongers and said “No – no discrimination will be allowed here. No “separate but equal” in my town”. I’m an old straight guy, but dammit I admire courage like that.
And I’m with you. They need to get a better argument or shut the hell up…
mikey
Gavin M. said,
July 17, 2006 at 20:16
Heh.
D’oh! Refuted again!
FMguru said,
July 17, 2006 at 20:21
Is a “word warrior� something like a “mathmagician�?
More of a “choad warrior,” it seems…
Mal de mer said,
July 17, 2006 at 21:09
Not at all. It’s quite correct, except for the ever-looming possibility that I’m wrong.
Well, since you called him “Glenn” and not “Mr. Greenwald,” I woud have used “tu” and not “vous.” But the français de France (the ur-cheese-eating-surrender-singes) have the annoying habit of mixing first names with the formal vous, so who knows?
/franco-fart
fiver said,
July 17, 2006 at 21:16
Do you guys ever feel silly playing this real life dungeons and dragons game with greenwald, goldstein, malkin, misha, etc.
No, because D&D is awesome.
I’d gladly play with Greenwald, but Goldstein, Malkin, Misha, and Etc. are going to have to find a different group to game with. People that are that caustic in real life are no fun to play with. Jeff’s +1 Cock of Slapping can’t compensate for his personality.
ROFL said,
July 17, 2006 at 22:19
Upset? We’re not upset.
Oh, you mean all that noise you hear coming from the right?
That’s called laughter. We read comments and threads like this one and can’t help it.
Between you lefty bloggers and howard dean, you guys are sure to have a net loss of seats this year and in 08.
And a demcrat president again? Not in our lifetimes.
The democratic party has a very real chance of fading to the level of the green party.
That makes us smile and clap and laugh.
Learn to interpret that noise for what it is.
Marc said,
July 17, 2006 at 22:26
The democratic party has a very real chance of fading to the level of the green party.
Yeah, that must be why the Dems have a 2-to-1 lead in most of the congressional preference polls for this fall’s election. Keep whistling past the graveyard.
That makes us smile and clap and laugh.
So you’re a group of five year olds? Sounds about right.
Otto Man said,
July 17, 2006 at 22:30
Between you lefty bloggers and howard dean, you guys are sure to have a net loss of seats this year and in 08.
That must explain the 8-to-12 point lead the Democrats have in all these congressional polls, and why most political observers — even Ann Coulter! — are predicting a Democratic takeover of one or both houses this fall.
Keep ROFL. And then be sure to IM your friend’s mom for a ride to cheerleading practice.
STH said,
July 17, 2006 at 22:32
Geez, what kind of real ‘winger uses the term “democratic party”? What’s the deal, ROFL, is your fax machine down?
Time for an intervention, Garybot.
ROFL said,
July 17, 2006 at 22:34
Yeah, and those exit polls in 04 were just dead on in picking the winner.
The guffaws just keep rolling out of you guys.
mikey said,
July 17, 2006 at 22:37
And a demcrat president again? Not in our lifetimes.
Jeez, how do you people find your way home at night?? Until I started hanging out here and discovered this concept of “trolls”, I honestly had no idea that there were people who had this incredible ability to utterly ignore reality and live in a level of denial that simply boggles the mind. This asshat, the garybot, all these clowns amaze me. Even fox news is reporting the disasterous (for the right) poll results. [Shakes head] It’s beyond comprehension…
mikey
MCH said,
July 17, 2006 at 22:38
Please note that exit polls, by definition, cannot count insider vote fraud.
tigrismus said,
July 17, 2006 at 22:42
Goodness, I’ve never seen such dedicated auto-fellatio before. ROFL, you are making this the HOTTEST web pr0n site EVAR!
Marc said,
July 17, 2006 at 22:55
Yeah, and those exit polls in 04 were just dead on in picking the winner.
Does anyone want to explain the difference between exit polls, which are notoriously unsound, and the pre-election polls, which were pretty much dead on?
Perhaps someone skilled in working with special needs children?
Some Guy said,
July 17, 2006 at 23:03
Slightly Longer ROFL: I have nothing to say, and can not or will not back up my claims with facts or statistics. Therefore, I can only assume that Left wingers are stupid. QED, what-what?
islmfaoscist said,
July 17, 2006 at 23:35
Even slightly longer still wingnuts: That noise you hear is not us squealing like stuck pigs, it’s just us laughing nervously to ourselves about getting bitch-slapped so we can pretend everyone is laughing with us, not at us. Oh, and (insert fantastical wish-prediction about the war, the elections, or the size of my genitalia), too!
Kathleen said,
July 17, 2006 at 23:47
he loves that return key, doesn’ he? why do I think that he just never learned how to construct a paragraph?
Marita said,
July 17, 2006 at 23:52
Goodness, I’ve never seen such dedicated auto-fellatio before. ROFL, you are making this the HOTTEST web pr0n site EVAR!
Oh, so the “L” stands for licking. Got it.
Herr Doktor Bimler said,
July 18, 2006 at 0:18
Kathleen said,
he loves that return key, doesn’ he? why do I think that he just never learned how to construct a paragraph?
I blame it on excessive use of Powerpointâ„¢. Some software reprograms the user’s brain… simple disconnected thoughts… 6 lines per slide… bullet points… presidential briefings…
Come to think of it, I blame most things on excessive use of Powerpoint. This may seem simplistic, but it’s a strategy that simplifies life immensely.
word warrior said,
July 18, 2006 at 0:29
I think that if Jeff Goldstein is Count Cockula, it makes sense to call his wife Cunt Cockula – the Count without the O. He. He. He. Mrs. Cockula, calling herself “Mrs. Protein Wisdom” came to my website and told me not to refer to her any more or she’d tell the FBI on me. I think it makes perfect sense to refer to Mrs. Cockula as C*** Cockula – the count w/o the O.
I don’t think that a guy who calls himself Count Cockula and spends his days fighting with people on the web ought to be a stay-at-home dad taking care of a two year old boy.
Does anyone disagree with either of these statements?
WW
Herr Doktor Bimler said,
July 18, 2006 at 0:36
Yes. Both of them.
Jack of None said,
July 18, 2006 at 0:42
You might be ROFLing, Right Honorable Troll-san, but we’re over here ROFLMAOing. Our firepower is superior.
Herr Doktor Bimler said,
July 18, 2006 at 0:46
I suppose there is no way of telling whether ‘Word Warrior’ is really Deb Frisch, or someone borrowing her website address. If the former is true, then the weird web persona is taking over — we are getting too much Mr Hyde and not enough Dr. Frisch.
Bas-O-Matic said,
July 18, 2006 at 0:47
ROFL said,
October of 2004 called and said it was missing it’s random wingnut troll. I’ll give it a call and let it know the troll showed up in our yard.
dgbellak said,
July 18, 2006 at 0:48
It’s true, nothing was overtly said about lynching. Perhaps he meant to lay comical snare traps for the justices, or rescue them from quicksand.
Gentlewoman said,
July 18, 2006 at 1:08
they’re terrified of Greenwald. He’s everything most of them are not: intelligent, well-informed, rational, persuasive.
Plus, a lot of sensible people read his blog. Of course, I read his blog, and a lot of libertarians read his blog, but besides us, there are a lot of sensible people. Wingers don’t like sensible people getting wind of the dumb shit they get up to on the internets.
His posts are the sort that sometimes make their way into the SCLM, too. Hmm. Wingers REALLY don’t like sensible American voters getting wind of the dumb shit they get up to on the internets.
In other words, the ‘rational conservative’ mask has slipped, and grown-up, sensible Americans who read Greenwald may see what is behind it.
They won’t like it.
Christopher said,
July 18, 2006 at 5:57
It’s hard to take somebody seriously when they can argue that Misha’s comments aren’t about lynching.
Is xrlq having a joke at our expense?
I have trouble believing he’s really that obtuse.
damnum absque injuria » The Doucheosphere Strikes Back said,
July 18, 2006 at 7:49
[...] In case you’re wondering, the answer is no, apart from a backhanded whine about “juvenile name-calling,” the Grand Master Douche has not personally responded to any of the plethora of deceits I exposed over the weekend. And why should he? He’s got plenty of mini-douches – “Greendouchies,” if you will – champing at the bit to do his bidding for him. Never fear, I’ve read the Greendouchies’ comments so you don’t have to. Here they are, in a nutshell (one nutshell per Greendouchie, that is; there’s no telling what kind of hanky panky might could goin’ on if two or more Greendouchies were trapped alone in a nutshell together without adult supervision). I promise to be at least as fair to the Greendouchies (aren’t the cute?) as Sadly, No! has been to the “Anti-Greenwald Irregulars” they’ve quoted to date. Is that the same thing as being fair generally? Sadly, … well, you get the drift. [...]
Bas-O-Matic said,
July 18, 2006 at 8:09
Cobag incoming!
Bas-O-Matic said,
July 18, 2006 at 8:14
Shorter XRLQ: I’ll borrow this shorter trope amd still fundamentally misunderstand the rhetorical posture of the argument I’m having. Oh Douchey Douche McDouche, you Douche
STH said,
July 18, 2006 at 9:26
This “Doucheosphere” person sounds like a garden-variety, humorless, right-wing cobag trying to imitate Pinko Punko, a greenhouse-type, lovable lefty cobag.
Pablo said,
July 18, 2006 at 12:11
Why are you guys selling all of this “Rope. Tree. Conservative. Some Assembly Required.” gear?
Hypocrites much, douchebags?
Pablo said,
July 18, 2006 at 12:14
Bas-O-Matic sez:
“I’ll borrow this shorter trope amd still fundamentally misunderstand the rhetorical posture of the argument I’m having. “
..perhaps while wearing a “Rope. Tree. Conservative. Some Assembly Required.” shirt and thinking lustfully of the days when a guy like Matt Hale could threaten a judge’s life and it was just “heated rhetoric” in the Gospel According to GiGi.
Dear God, you kids are stupid.
tigrismus said,
July 18, 2006 at 16:36
Oh, sweet, innocent Pablo, read the xrlq link and you’ll discover that motto had absoutely nothing to do with lynching when someone on the right said it first, so obviously it can’t mean lynching when someone on the left parodies it, however much such a parody chafes your delicate hide. Cornstarch will help, dear boy.
God said,
July 18, 2006 at 17:08
Dear Pablo, please research the inspiration of said T-shirt before writing letters to us about how other people are stupid. Sincerely, God.
Big Worm said,
July 18, 2006 at 17:21
Oh look, Pablo gets his latest talking point from Patterico and he runs right over. What a good Pablo! An extra helping of protein for you!
D. Sidhe said,
July 18, 2006 at 17:48
Hooray! My complaint about the irrelevant insertion of homophobia into random debates has been mocked by said inserter (get your minds out of the gutter) as an irrelevant insertion of homosexuality into a random debate!
Man. Could not have seen that one coming. Still more evidence of the conservatives’ ground-breaking anti-irony vaccine.
Gavin M. said,
July 18, 2006 at 17:50
Why are you guys selling all of this “Rope. Tree. Conservative. Some Assembly Required.� gear?
That’s easy. It’s because we’re not selling any such gear from our store that isn’t even open yet.
Has Patterico been making a crazy, false accusation again? That’s so Patterico!
D. Sidhe said,
July 18, 2006 at 22:46
No, seriously. Can I just say that I dig the fact I’ve been “shorter”d? Turns out, I’m still laughing. ‘Cause that’s some funny shit. I mean, dude. I’m *nobody*. And not like bestselling-author-we’re-pretending-we’ve-never-heard-of nobody, I’m the real thing. I mean, Jesus. My fucking *neighbors* don’t know who I am.
And yet, I’ve been deemed worthy of shorter. Screw Glenn, *I* have arrived.
Pablo said,
July 19, 2006 at 0:06
Oh, sweet, innocent Pablo, read the xrlq link and you’ll discover that motto had absoutely nothing to do with lynching…
So just ignore the noose.
Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!
Fucking tools, the lot of you.
Toodles!
tigrismus said,
July 19, 2006 at 0:27
Darling, do I need to draw you a map? It looks like I do. Check out the link that was referenced, remembering he’s on your side. Google rope tree some-assembly and check the returns. Check out Misha’s(also on your side, dear boy) original “Rope. Tree. Journalist” shirt, and his later reference to “five ropes, five robes, five trees,” which is the exact statement xrlq discusses. Considering all these things, find a dictionary and look up the word parody, and maybe satire for extra kicks. Please don’t make me connect the dots for you, your density has aready sucked the fun out of the thread.
Tee hee hee, OK, I lied about that last bit, laughing at you will always be fun!
Patterico’s Pontifications » Devoted Fans of Glenn Greenwald Emphasize the Same Points About His Resume — From the Same IP Address!! said,
July 20, 2006 at 15:29
[...] http://sadlyno.com/archives/003294.html#comments [...]