« Nothing Is Funnier Than Angry Cracked-Out
Libertarians. Nothing.
A Question for Libertarians »

Jul
14

Life Imitates Opposite of Whatever Gary Says




Posted at 5:54 by Brad

Gary Ruppert:

The news about the Democrats exploiting the deaths of our soldiers in Iraq for their own gain is going to cause a lot of pain for Democrats.

You see, the Republican party is on the offensive to prove that we are still the best choice for America.

A FOX News Poll, of all things:

Less than four months before Election Day, the latest FOX News Poll finds that voters strongly favor the Democrats on key issues such as the economy and gas prices, and give the minority party a double-digit lead for control of Congress this fall. For most of President Bush’s second term in office, more Americans have said they disapprove than approve of his job performance and that is again the case in this new poll.

The president’s approval rating dropped to 36 percent, down from 41 percent approval two weeks ago and 40 percent in mid-June. Bush lost ground this week among some key constituent groups, such as Republicans, whites and men. Overall, 53 percent of Americans say they disapprove.

Forget being on the offensive, Ruppster — the GOP is just offensive, period.

20 Comments »

  1. Kobie said,

    July 14, 2006 at 6:02

    Gary Ruppert = totally divorced from reality. When even Fox News fails to uphold his worldview, his head must be ready to blow up like that dude in “Scanners.”

  2. Brad R. said,

    July 14, 2006 at 6:05

    Gary doesn’t really believe all this shit. I mean, he’s a conservative sure, but he also says a bunch of crap he doesn’t really believe. He’s like Frank from Gloucester, this incredibly obnoxious Yankee fan who calls into our local sports radio station to talk about how great the Yankees are, no matter how poorly they’re playing.

  3. Kathleen said,

    July 14, 2006 at 6:29

    In case this got lost at the end of the last thread….

    GOOOOOOO OAKLAND

  4. jrm78 said,

    July 14, 2006 at 6:40

    Basically, Gary’s a GOP homer (definition #5).
    /bedtime

  5. Kobie said,

    July 14, 2006 at 6:43

    He’s like Frank from Gloucester, this incredibly obnoxious Yankee fan who calls into our local sports radio station to talk about how great the Yankees are, no matter how poorly they’re playing.

    Is that an NYC-area station? And if so, does Jerome still call Mike and the Mad Dog on WFAN or did that old bastard keel over and die? He always was hoping the Yankees would trade like a Double-A pitcher for Barry Bonds or something stupid like that.

  6. Vladi G said,

    July 14, 2006 at 7:36

    Fuck Choakland.

  7. tigrismus said,

    July 14, 2006 at 16:22

    It’s WEEI, a Boston station. He does sometimes forget to call after a particular embarrassing performance by the Yanks, especially if he made bold predictions beforehand. Odd, that.

  8. Brad R. said,

    July 14, 2006 at 16:31

    He does sometimes forget to call after a particular embarrassing performance by the Yanks, especially if he made bold predictions beforehand. Odd, that.

    He’s EXACTLY LIKE RUPPERT though, isn’t he? Facts simply do not phase him. It’s amazing.

  9. tigrismus said,

    July 14, 2006 at 16:38

    Oh my God, could it be? Gary from Gloucester? I bet he is a Yankee fan, at any rate.

  10. King Spirula said,

    July 14, 2006 at 17:39

    Gary functions well as a reverse barometer, or as a window into opposite world.

  11. norbizness said,

    July 14, 2006 at 18:02

    Once again, we have confirmation that this is a person legitimately posting his RNC-press-release-influenced thoughts, and not some (not-so) elaborate hoax poster, a la Floyd Alvis Cooper? Because that last line about being on the offensive gives me about 95% confidence that it’s a hoax.

  12. Nikki said,

    July 14, 2006 at 19:36

    It gets his name on the front page here.

  13. olexicon said,

    July 14, 2006 at 20:18

    he once haunted Eschaton
    and his sctick was to say that “Joe Wilson will soon be indicted for outing valerie plame”

  14. norbizness said,

    July 14, 2006 at 20:41

    It’s up to 98% confidence in hoax now, olex.

  15. Bas-O-Matic said,

    July 14, 2006 at 22:55

    It’s up to 98% confidence in hoax now, olex.

    In Re Ruppert

    Ruppert is a tedious (and serious) wingnut. This much seems indisputable to me.

    As with Eper [Fred Eper, another troll that haunted both Eschaton and The Poorman with a strikingly familiar MO -eds] (they may be the same guy, at least that was the sense over at Atrios) I really straddle the fence with this one. The sheer volume of the wingnutese certainly argues for the fact that he is earnest in what he is saying. However, there are a few things about Ruppert (and Eper) that argue against it.

    First, every once in a while, he approaches the wingnut (I guess it would be moonbat if someone was trolling a right wing site) plausibility line. This is the theoretical barrier where the wingnuttiness of the statement just doesn’t pass the smell test. It’s just too wingnutty to be believable. Gastroman’s [Demogenes Aristophenes trolling The Poorman -eds] been pushing it further and further over the line all night. Ruppert comes just to the very edge of unbelievability all the time, though he never crosses the line. Now, this in itself doesn’t mean much and isn’t really suspicious. The Editors give out weekly awards for doing this in a particularly egregious and publicly self abusing fashion. And while it would please me to no end to find out that Powerline, Michelle Malkin, et al were eleborate internet hoaxes, we all know this isn’t the case.

    Second, Ruppert (and Eper and Gastroman) never actually talks to anybody.
    It’s true. He may respond to the gist of what’s going on in the comments. But look at what he did here. Put some rightwng talking points into the ether and when someone responded, did it some more. There’s no sense of him being aware (or caring) that this is in a sense a conversation. He isn’t arguing with us. Of course, we can’t know his motives. Maybe he’s classic trolling for reponses (in which case I’m doing him a favor), maybe he’s a freeper who just wants to astroturf his talking points into the liberal blogosphere, maybe he’s a winger incapable of talking in anything but talking points. All three are certainly plausible.

    Related to this, and due in part to his style of talking in talking points, is that he exudes absolutely no sense of having a personality. I don’t know any other way to say it than that it doesn’t “feel� authentic. I don’t sense an actual “person� behind Ruppert. Now this could, of course, be because he is just spamming talking points on a liberal blog and doesn’t care to do much more. But most of the righties I’ve run into who go to liberal blogs to stir shit with the moonbats, have a little more than just the Republican spin of the day be it relentless cruelty, an ample sense of undeserved self-regard, an almost leering air of condescension (often all three!), or something. Gary just comes in here (and Eschaton, and I think I’ve seen him mentioned over at Drum’s but I very, very rarely read comments over there) and ploddingly recites whatever the party line is. *shrug*

    Now, I’m not really arguing that Ruppert is a classical troll. I’m just saying that, as with Eper, it’s hard to tell. Given that, I don’t know which is worse, that he’s investing so much time in classically trolling (although I’m helping him if he is, sorry Editors) for so little pay off (again, sorry) or that he’s earnest and I can’t quite commit to “he’s definitely not classically trolling�

    And I’m also definately not arguing that there is any practical difference between the two. At least from where I’m standing, it’s entertaining or it isn’t. And it’s only going to be entertaining for so long. And Ruppert was always tedious regardless of his motives. *cough*

    Whether Ruppert is for real is just one of those chicken and egg questions we’ll probably never have a definitive answer to.

  16. Gentlewoman said,

    July 15, 2006 at 1:59

    There are so many fake Gary Rupperts here, due to regular commenters arsing about (you know who you are), that I can’t even tell when it’s the ‘real’ Gary Ruppert any more.

    One evening, I counted four fake Garys and one (possibly) ‘real’ Gary in a comment thread here.

    I have theorized that there maybe isn’t any ‘real’ Gary Ruppert. It’s just a name that some netvocate operation has its trolls use, so they can keep track of how many blogs the talking points are getting spewed on ;) One Google search, and you’re done!

  17. RunningDogLackey said,

    July 15, 2006 at 18:24

    Greetings from ThinkProgress!

    Like Brainiac and the Borg, successive versions of “Gary Ruppert” incorporate increasingly sophisticated Concerned-But-Neutral Seriosity Simulators and Gently-Chastising-You-to-Abandon-Your-Self-Destructive-Unreason templates, as well as increasingly elaborate Criticism Inhibitors and Cold-Cock Smackdown Absorbers.

    However, we at TP have reverse-engineered our own aggregate Ruppert Posting Archive to create a Cumulative Humiliation Algorithm Generator (C-HAG) that should enable you to create an Infinitely-Nested Rebuke Auto-Responder capable of oversaturating GP’s legendary Non-Sequitur Wave Projector in jig time, thus hastening his expulsion to a less well-defended host , such as HuffPo or Hoffmania.

    We will be happy to gift you the C-HAG source-code and attendant manuals in exchange for all available research and blueprints toward a working DrBLT/J.B.Williams Ratfucking Module.

  18. Marqi Ruppert said,

    July 16, 2006 at 1:57

    The fact is, when I post in Ruppert-idiom, I never use the nic “Gary Ruppert.”

    I usually use “Tacitus.”

  19. a different brad said,

    September 10, 2007 at 19:21

    (Not so) Shorter how to think like Bob Owens.

  20. a different brad said,

    September 10, 2007 at 19:25

    Oooops. Wrong thread. Me teh not smert.

Leave a Comment

  • Things of Interest

  • Meta Goodness

  • Clunkers

    • httpbl_stats()