24
Publick Notice
A few days ago, an anonymous left-blogger well known to many of us was outed, with his personal information including his employer and a photo of himself posted at a right-wing blog financed by the Discovery Institute — a fake ‘nonpartisan’ foundation that specializes in junk science and the Christian ‘Dominionist’ agenda.
Here’s the blogger who researched and posted the information.
He refuses to take the information down, instead threatening to expose other bloggers, threatening personal-grievance lawsuits of near-infinite variety, and (most recently) making false complaints to the ISPs of anyone who emails him on this subject.
He’s one of those young, completely dishonest GOP wingnut-welfare operatives who do nasty things to others, but then create whining victim-narratives when there are consequences.
Now, we’ve had quite a debate on ‘civility’ lately, on both the left and the right. It’s time we show that there are consequences for bad behavior.
This post is a last-warning to Mr. X after quite a series of exchanges by many people. In a way, we hope he ignores it. (Comedy gold1!!11)
King Spirula said,
May 24, 2006 at 23:37
One only need mention the DI and the adjectives “unethical” and “dishonest” follow like dingleberries during a shit.
Steve C said,
May 24, 2006 at 23:41
Ohhhh…I hope he ignores it and the full wrath of the angry left gives his blog a nice spanking.
Maybe a fun photoshop project..
how many ways can we insult is creationist agenda?
Kathleen said,
May 24, 2006 at 23:41
I am so sick of wingnut welfare whining.
Marita said,
May 24, 2006 at 23:45
Steve C, if that’s actually his picture, would we really need a photoshop project?
neil said,
May 24, 2006 at 23:45
Sir, I demand satisfaction! *whack*
Gavin M. said,
May 24, 2006 at 23:47
Oh, I added the tuba. See, I’m getting good at this!
Vestal Vespa said,
May 24, 2006 at 23:49
They always give the fat kid the tuba.
Hey Gavin- try photoshopping an “I beat anorexia!” t-shirt on him!
Steve C said,
May 24, 2006 at 23:49
Maybe an alien sequencing his DNA.
Aliens are intelligent designers right?
He looks pretty close to the missing link already so that would be too easy.
neil said,
May 24, 2006 at 23:52
Wow, Gavin, so his face is red like that naturally?
Gavin M. said,
May 24, 2006 at 23:56
(I actually fixed the color balance so it looked less startlingly red.)
Steve C said,
May 24, 2006 at 23:57
Any hints to what his blog is called?
yuh-uhuh! said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:00
how about releasing his photo sans-tuba for the rest of us to make our own photoshop phantazies out of?
Gavin M. said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:02
[24 fair hours, then it's a rumble. Don't want to call attention to the left-blogger's identity if it's avoidable...]
Steve C said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:04
Maybe too fair.
How long has he had the info poasted?
Nick of Inman Sq said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:05
What a blowhard!
Gavin M. said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:06
Since late last week. Maybe it’s too fair, yeah.
Steve C said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:12
I doubt he’s even considering it.
If Atrios or Kos get in on this it’ll be ugly.
Even PZ rallying the left would cause quite a stir.
jpj said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:21
It isn’t a tuba. It is a sousaphone.
Did you photoshop the red-devil eyes?
Gavin M. said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:23
It’s indeed a Sousaphone. Dammit.
JiuNoon said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:34
Why the tuba/sousaphone hate? Sousaphone is a damned hard instrument to march with and, on behalf of my Mexican bretheren, it is the soul of Banda music. Now, the picollo, there’s a wienie instrument…
Capt. Trollypants said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:37
ALERT KING ROLO!
BRING OUT THE CAESAR DRESSING!
HIS SALAD SHALL BE TOSSED!
Kathleen said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:41
where is Josh Trevino to police the right, and save the day?!
since he is so ethical….
blogenfreude said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:53
He looks like a slightly lighter, slightly dumber Jonah – with a beard.
Ted said,
May 25, 2006 at 0:57
Wow, you guys weren’t kidding about Malkin letting herself go.
Capt. Trollypants said,
May 25, 2006 at 1:00
Typical Hate-filled moonbat bloviating mewling spewing odious loathesome cobags.
I’m talking about Sadly, No!
HAHAHAHHAH EAT! IT!
Edmund Schluessel said,
May 25, 2006 at 1:06
I used to march cello.
(Woody Allen was two chairs behind me)
Edmund Schluessel said,
May 25, 2006 at 1:31
And I hate to spoil the nuklearation, but you may be revealing information in that filename.
Gavin M. said,
May 25, 2006 at 1:35
And I hate to spoil the nuklearation, but you may be revealing information in that filename.
[eeps!]
Welp, too late to change it, I guess.
Mal de mer said,
May 25, 2006 at 2:02
Oh, Jesus…I just saw this on one of the better Internets:
Recently on the internets there was a debate about whether or not it was proper feminist protocol to pop open a site called Go Fug Yourself and cackle mercilessly at the parade of horrid celebrity clothing that the proprieters mock. [BLANK] said no.
Gee, I wonder who [BLANK] is?
…uh, sorry. Carry on!
Gavin M. said,
May 25, 2006 at 2:04
Ann-someone?
LA Confidential Pantload said,
May 25, 2006 at 2:12
Is this the same asshole who took exception to being called a chickenhawk and then started posting under a bunch of fake IDs? Fuck it – out him RIGHT FUCKING NOW!
Mal de mer said,
May 25, 2006 at 2:13
Whoever it was, the frock she had on was fuuuu-gly!
Pinko Punko said,
May 25, 2006 at 2:28
The default answer to the question asked of an emu is “no”. Mal, how could you know “no” that?
Mal de mer said,
May 25, 2006 at 2:32
It does save a lot of guess-work, Pinko.
Anyway, I’m giving her a break. I read her comment in the above-mentionned discussion and I think she may be kind of depressed.
Pinko Punko said,
May 25, 2006 at 2:56
I am trying to be serious when it comes to her, I don’t want her to feel picked on. I even found some issues to agree with her on, but that didn’t work either. She hates me. I have tried to repair burned bridges before, but what happens is some snark leaks out somewhere and for people that like to keep stuff burned, they just use that as ammo. They make sure there is no agreement. Finding slights, etc.
The Crapture said,
May 25, 2006 at 3:19
Speaking as a mexican.
I (and i cannot stress this strongly enough) HATE banda music.
i’m old school. give me a small 3 or 4 piece conjunto (a guitarist, an accordion, a bass and a small drum kit) or a classic mariachi outfit and i’m happy, but Banda?
por Dios! take a 30 man brass section, dress them up like little brown clones of Gene Autry if Timothy Leary had set up his color palette and then give half of them shit-ugly mullets and record them all playing seven different songs at the same time and fronted by lead singers who all invariably sound like “Slowpoke Rodriguez” and that’s what banda sounds like
(I.e. circus music for coke-addled rednecks from Sinaloa)
Mal de mer said,
May 25, 2006 at 3:48
…they just use that as ammo.
I’ve known quite a few academic feminists who end up being bullied/manipulated by others whose reasons for that are entirely personal (depression, unresolved anger, etc.) and have nothing to do with feminism.
There’s nothing you can do.
BenA said,
May 25, 2006 at 4:56
Whenever the Discovery Institute comes up, it’s always worth reminding everyone that they get a big chunk of their money from the Gates Foundation.
Just say “no” to Microsoft!
Kathleen said,
May 25, 2006 at 5:07
ok. I have had my differences with Ms. A-B, but she dares to come down on GO Fug Yourself?!@#$
SHe has GONE TOO FAR.
Kathleen said,
May 25, 2006 at 5:23
ok, I am taking this way too seriously. But really. Are you kidding me with this?
“Maybe I’m just humour-impaired, but I find Go Fug Yourself pretty appallingly anti-women, as it seems to be dedicated to mocking the hair, bodies and clothing of primarily female “celebrities.â€? I’ve long felt that Dolly Parton takes a very feminist approach to her appearance – her blond wigs, large breasts and uber-flashy clothes are intentionally over the top, mocking and satirizing the expectation that female performers need to look a certain way, regardless of their underlying talent. See e.g. this: [link]
But don’t let me ruin your fun.
One – yes you are humor impaired. Two, I wouldn’t let you ruin my fun, if my fun was on a paper plate, and you purposefully sat on it during a barbeque.
I cannot stand that woman.
Patrick said,
May 25, 2006 at 5:37
Oh boy! Look at that tuba! How long did it take you to photoshop that? You’re right, you do have a lot of time on your hands!!!
But seriously, I’m LMAO. I admit, I was a little cranky when you first emailed me — but when you try and extort someone by email — the humor doesn’t always translate.
No need to keep my identity secret (ooh, Mr. X, so mysterious) — I’m Patrick Bell everybody. My friends and fellow bloggers want you to keep the photoshopped images and “roasting” comments coming; they think it’s a riot, and tell me they haven’t laughed this much in months.
PS – If any Sadly, No! readers want to see what I’m really all about, visit my personal blog:
http://www.RespectfullyRepublican.com
PPS – Contrary to what you’d have your readers believe, no one pays me to write my blog, and I do it from home before or after work :0) Speaking of work, where’ve I heard what you said about DI before? Typical poppycock…
D. Sidhe said,
May 25, 2006 at 5:41
I dunno. I can kind of see how she got to that position. Cattiness is somewhat anti-woman, in a Brainwashed By The Patriarchy sort of way. But I can see the position advocated by Amanda, as well. And I have to say, I gravitate naturally more to the latter.
Plus, GFY is really funny.
Mark said,
May 25, 2006 at 5:45
From the comments section Kathleen alluded to:
You’re correct, I do take the crass objectification of women very seriously. And if I found comparing Dolly Parton to Pamela Anderson and Anna Nicole Smith funny I’d spend more time at blogs like TBogg. This one used to be a respite from that sort of thing. I will indeed take my sphincter elsewhere.
She has got to be the most hypersensitive person in the world after Jeff Goldstein. At least Jeff will just accuse you of trying to blow his dog; I actually find that preferable to A-B’s sanctimonious “I’m so disappointed in you” bs.
norbizness said,
May 25, 2006 at 5:49
I think I found the blog using the DI and the file name, but must have glazed over the offended post. We need him with a French horn, but his hand to fat to fit in there.
norbizness said,
May 25, 2006 at 5:52
Of course, ignoring the comment above mine. Somebody photoshop a kazoo into my buttcrack.
mdhatter said,
May 25, 2006 at 6:01
is that what you kids are calling it these days?
mikey said,
May 25, 2006 at 6:38
Hey, Patrick, frustrated much yet? No, take a deep breath. I’m sure there’s gonna be somebody along any minute that gives a shit what you have to say. Here, just wait. Any minute now.
[Crickets Chirping]
mikey
Steve C said,
May 25, 2006 at 16:42
Respectfully Republican.
That’s a good one.
I like Creationist Hypocrit better.
Chadwick said,
May 25, 2006 at 16:52
Just posted over at RR, but because the comment thread is moderated and Patrick has no integrity, I just wanted to post this for posterity.
How exactly did cliff “out” you by linking to the site YOU NAMED AFTER YOURSELF? Do you really not see the difference between registering a domain in your name and naming the site after yourself?
You might have a case about naming your employer, though- if your employer didn’t have a webpage for you and your full name, which you linked to at the site under your own name.
This is different from “googling” for more information about someone than they have provided, by the way. Apparently they don’t teach a great deal of logic (or ethics) at that university you went to.
You allege that Cliff has launched a “smear campaign” against you, but there is curiously no link to such a risible assertion. Care to provide one?
Also, you never really addressed Cliff’s allegation in the “Leftist of the Week” post that you posted what you believed to be a home address and telephone #. You never denied them either, instead making weak jokes about censoring comments that you’re saving for ominious purpose. .
Given that information, I doubt this comment will make it onto the site- you seem to lack the intergrity to do so.
Nonetheless, this “hardcore Leftist” thinks your argument is extremely weak, and has managed to say so without the childish name calling that offends you so.
So-
Did you or did you not post what you thought his home address and phone number were? If not, why does the person who did that share an IP address with you?
(I’ll be cross posting this on the left websites, of course, because you’ve given me no reason to trust your integrity.)
yuh-uhuh! said,
May 25, 2006 at 16:58
Gavin, I think it’s been 24 hours. My photoshop is all warmed up!
tigrismus said,
May 25, 2006 at 16:59
Patrick, do you know what the word “respectfully” means? If a person wishes to remain pseudonymous, and yet you publish that person’s personal information and “laugh your ass off” at requests that you remove it, does that conform to your understanding of the word?
sohei said,
May 25, 2006 at 17:34
My friends and fellow bloggers want you to keep the photoshopped images and “roasting� comments coming; they think it’s a riot, and tell me they haven’t laughed this much in months.
Yeah, like you have friends. Cardboard cut-outs of Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon don’t count, you sniveling little brownshirt wannabe. Gavin, take this punk down, please.
Gregor Samsa said,
May 25, 2006 at 17:37
I tried to comment at RR too. But either my comment is left to whither in some sort of moderated purgatory or it wasn’t worthy. What gives?
Chadwick said,
May 25, 2006 at 17:47
sohei-
He clearly doens’t have any friends- according to his blogger profile, Pat’s favorite books include The DaVinci Code and The Wheel of Time series.
If he had friends, they would let him know his taste is for shit, and recommend some decent books.
Brian said,
May 25, 2006 at 8:50
Hey Mikey, I’ve got some shit I can give him. Not quite a pound, so I can use regular mail, right?
[Babies crying]
I’d much rather have the crickets…
neil said,
May 25, 2006 at 8:52
I bet this was just a big psych-out, and tomorrow this post will be gone and Gavin will be all like “Who’s Patrick Bell and why would I demand satisfaction from him?”
Oh, here’s the funniest thing to come out of all this so far. Go to the PLU College Republicans web site (Patrick Bell’s liberal-outin’ blog is also their blog) and then click on ‘Core Beliefs’. And try ‘About The Republican Party’ too when you’re done with that.
And the copyright says it’s been like that for 4 years. I guess it’s true.. in College Republicans, you learn how to rat-fuck and not much else.
Pinko Punko said,
May 25, 2006 at 21:04
They haven’t laughed, ever, Pat. Except at homeless people that smell bad and at Cindy Sheehan, cuz her son got killed. I’m not sure if those things count as laughter, chump!
Jillian said,
May 26, 2006 at 2:54
If any of you are expecting anything resembling honesty or integrity from someone who takes money from the Discovery Institute, I sure hope you aren’t holding your breath.
Cyanosis isn’t particularly attractive.
Discovery Institute represents the lowest of the low in the echelon of dishonesty – below Holocaust deniers and those who think A Flock of Seagulls wasn’t the worst band in the history of the world. There is no form of mendacity to which they will not stoop.
Steve C said,
May 26, 2006 at 5:10
Hey! They had one good single.
Milli Vanilli
Now THAT’S horrible.
the DI is worse than Milli Vanilli…
Thers said,
May 26, 2006 at 17:15
Just posted the following at the Online Integrity site, as well as here. The comment has not shown up yet at OI, but that’s standard for that place; there’s a long delay for comments… anyway:
Patrick Bell of Respectfully Republican, Reagan’s Children, probably elsewhere, and a diarist at Red State, has pretty clearly done something that violates the OI statement of principles.
The post where he does so is here. In this post he provides the real name and picture of someone who wished to remain anonymous, and added his employment information. There is no question that Bell did this on purpose; he acknowledges in the post that the person he outed “doesn’t want anyone to know his full identity.”
As far as I can tell, Bell has not signed the “pledge.” However, we have been told that “Violations of these principles should be met with a lack of positive publicity and traffic.”
To be fair, Bell defends himself here. Just to note, Bell apparently has no wish to be anonymous and makes his employment status clear, so his complaint that the person he outed did it to him first makes no real sense.
So there you go. What’s the response?
Timmah420 said,
May 27, 2006 at 7:25
Patrick, Go slide your naked cowardly body down a big rusty cheese grater into a pile of salt and vinegar.
Respectfully, me.
Note: I borrowed your idea of respectability for this comment.