« Two down, one to go | Main | Talk About An Over-Inflated Sense of Self-Worth! »

Lunatics on the right

Well, I finally found one. It will be a great cause for celebration among my moonbat commenters but I finally found a lunatic on the right.. Or that's why I assume. His behavior is so bizarre, there are only two conclusions.

1) It is loony.

2) He is completely rational and it picking a fight hoping for a Wizbanging. From his pathetic stats, this might be the case.*** Whatever the case I'll link the insanity if for no other reason then to get him to quit whining.

I won't smack down his every point-- my time is far too valuable for that. I'll just give you 2 examples.

Wizbang links an article from, of all places, the Duluth News Tribune dated January 26 to supposedly make the point that the Times was wrong.

The goofball could not bother read it to see that it was a New York Times story re-run in another paper. What a mental heavyweight.

He also whines that I am conservative. (odd considering he claims to be one)

Wizbang's slandering [BTW If it is written it is libel -ED] the Times to draw in conservative readers is the very same game, only worse, and without any original reporting or quoted sources. ... But it can not be done with the conservative blogging community's own brand of bad reporting and unfounded smear.

In one sentence of my reply I say:

So, I've read your rant, it made no sense and you were demonstrably clueless. Now if you have a point, I'll entertain it, but so far all I've heard you do is whine because I'm conservative.

To which brain-damaged boy replied:

Not to mention being cast as a "whiny liberal" in comments here by Paul, when nothing could be further from the truth.
The quotation marks were his even though that is not what I said.

Whatever his motivation, insanity or traffic-whoring. Here are your links. Now go play in traffic and quit emailing me.

[Kevin adds] I've actually address the issues raised in Dan's original post here. Those of you quick to rush to Dan's defense might be a little surprised at the tone he adopts in e-mails I publish. He was trying to goad us into a fight that we really weren't looking to get into. Several e-mails and posts later he finally succeed...

** [Kevin again] The moment I read this I knew what the response would be. Sarcasm so doesn't translate to blogs. I've left it in strikeout for continuity sake, but it's not a reflection of my beliefs and it's still MY site. If you read my post you will see, however, that this fight was clearly picked by Dan and he became belligerent when we wouldn't respond to his satisfaction...


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Lunatics on the right:

» The Ebb & Flow Institute linked with I Need A Fact Check On 3 Please

Comments (44)

As an aside, is there anyth... (Below threshold)

As an aside, is there anything wrong with having pathetic stats? The majority of us do you know.

I am a proud microblogger.

Sorry that might have been ... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Sorry that might have been rude of me...

There's nothing wrong with it as long as you don't bother the shit out of me in an attempt to change it. ;-)

P

I like that concept, Jeff. ... (Below threshold)

I like that concept, Jeff. Just like the microbrews are so highly esteemed, so should us microbloggers be. (And no, please don't come to my site. I wouldn't want to get big and impersonal or anything.)

Aw, come on, guys! Wouldn't... (Below threshold)

Aw, come on, guys! Wouldn't you just LOVE an Instarush to get your hit counters spinning?

I love it! From now on, I'm... (Below threshold)

I love it! From now on, I'm not a small blogger with a dedicated audience of a few hundred people. I'm "for a select few." I'll start calling my blog "The Shape of Days Special Reserve," and I'll charge $10 a post to readers of the most discerning taste!

Jeff- If Yellow Tail can ha... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Jeff- If Yellow Tail can have a Special Reserve than anyone can. lol

How long before "microblogg... (Below threshold)

How long before "microblogging" gets included in Webster's Unabridged Dictionary?

Webster's Unabridged ... (Below threshold)
OneDrummer:

Webster's Unabridged

Microblogging - (v) to repeatedly cast your gaze down your pants with a magnifying glass in abject horror at the size of your blog.

Thanks for confirming your ... (Below threshold)
Dan:

Thanks for confirming your idiocy, Paul. Nice going insulting all small blogs - real bright. As to the facts - your linking the NYT's piece picked up in the Duluth paper did nothing to establish your accusation thet the story wasn't receiving national attention DUH! You did that because you didn't even understand what you were reading. The NYT's was talking about the Sri Lanka national press - it was a foreigm desk piece dateline Sri Lanka, dummie.

You also accused them of misleading people about who wanted the baby, yet in their own story they acknowledged that only one couple had applied for custody. In short, you didn't even understand what you read, let alone what you wrote.

And, BTW, you should look into fair use policy as discussed on several blogs lately as the way you used your the original story from LBO doesn't come close. FInally, when you suggest I am only going on about the post because YOU are a conservative - is in fact assigning a political motivation to my pointing out your poor work - ergo equating me with a liberal. But likely this is all above your head.

Maybe you should stick to writing about not being able to find a woman and leave the real writing to others more qualified. They abound, even in the small blog world you insulted with this post. You are clearly a fool.

Oh, and nice touch with the... (Below threshold)
Dan:

Oh, and nice touch with the quit emailing me crap. Especially as my last email to you and Kevin ASKED you to not email but repsond in comments at MY blog. Which neither constitutes traffic whoring, or continuing to email you. Is the problem your fragile ego, or your small ..., wait, I better not say it and give you grounds to pull this reply - you get the drift, maybe. Heck, you can't even understand the NYT's, let alone much else. And, hey, thanks for the traffic bumb BTW. ; )

My last email to Paul-
Please feel free to reply in comments at any of the links listed below as others have, should you choose to. As a staunch conservative and long time Wizbang supporter, I see no need to be called inattentive, unable to read, or a whiny liberal simply for pointing out a flaw in one post at Wizbang. That is outrageous and disappointing conduct on your part. And if that's your typical response, then please do it publically, just as I have done in posting my claim.

Dan,You're a douch... (Below threshold)
Mark:

Dan,

You're a douchebag. Find a life.

Paul, I don't know you, don... (Below threshold)
hobgoblin:

Paul, I don't know you, don't have a clue who this Dan guy is, and this Dan guy may well be an asshat (I am not going to bother, to be frank , to read all of the little bitchy tit for tat), but I will say you're one prickly dude.

If you want to flame me, fine. I don't blog and I never will. I'm happy that talented guys like yourself, Jay, and Kevin do. Wizbang often makes my day.

But let me give you a little free advice that's worth every penny:

Chill out.

Not everyone who disagrees with you is attacking the very fiber of your being. Again, I don't know about Dan, but after your "global warming" post (with added atmospheric chemistry!) I've noticed that you just go off far too easily.

Just a friendly observation, no offense intended.

I'm sure the Weblog Awards ... (Below threshold)
Eric:

I'm sure the Weblog Awards were set up in an altruistic fashion to recognize bloggers and had NOTHING, I say NOTHING to do with getting this place recognized.

Talk about link-whoring.

Nice name calling, there Mikey, that shows class.

Okay, group hug everybody.<... (Below threshold)

Okay, group hug everybody.

"I love it! From now on, I'... (Below threshold)

"I love it! From now on, I'm not a small blogger with a dedicated audience of a few hundred people. I'm "for a select few." I'll start calling my blog "The Shape of Days Special Reserve," and I'll charge $10 a post to readers of the most discerning taste!"

Haha! So your blog will start a marketing campaign comparable to Sheiner Boch's campaign in the early to mid 90s then; selling what was once a cheap beer as expensive to gain better notoriety. Surely a fellow Texan would understand this concept.

An interesting venture into blogging and one in which I will watch to see if it works.

P.S. I do not mean to imply The Shape of Days is cheap or a beer, though I think I'm going to grab myself one.

I've read him before.... (Below threshold)

I've read him before.

He definitely needs meds.

Dan to prove your lack of r... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Dan to prove your lack of reading ability...

It is Jay who can't find a woman. I've been married well over a decade you moron.

Thank you for showing your true analytical skills.

P

How people as stupid as you can still breath just amazes me.

TIME OUT!heh.... (Below threshold)
mesablue:

TIME OUT!

heh.

Time Out?? Not even close! ... (Below threshold)
Dan:

Time Out?? Not even close! And sorry for getting the woman thing wrong, Paul. I guess anyone can find someone afterall. And all it proves is that I spend time getting what I read and post correct, as opposed to reading Wizbang too much, which I do sometimes miss. Though your stuff does tend to be rather weak. ;( Hope the Mrs. doesn't feel the same!! LOL

Paul,I read Wizbang ... (Below threshold)
Beth:

Paul,
I read Wizbang and I read Dan's blog regularly. Dan's NOT stupid, and it's frankly immature for you to call names and slam him for having a smaller blog (which by the way, if he had more time to spend and co-writers, I'm sure would be much bigger).

I'm not even going to pick a fight here, but hobgoblin is right. You really do need to chill and remember we're all on the same team. Just because someone disagrees with ONE post doesn't (or SHOULDN'T) make him your enemy. This bullshit makes me sick.

Like other "lesser" beings/microbloggers/ whatever, I should be insulted by your insinuation that "pathetic" stats are some kind of reflection on a person's intelligence, sanity, or character. At what point are stats not "pathetic"? And if this is what you think of the pathetic-stats bloggers, is it a wonder any of us would link-whore? (BTW, I know Dan, and his rants aren't attempts at link-whoring any more than anyone else's rants anywhere in the blogosphere.) If you think it's an empty attempt at link-whoring, why didn't you just ignore the whole thing?

Anyway, I say I SHOULD be insulted by your "pathetic stats" remark, but I'll consider the maturity shown in this post and take the remark for what it's worth. To be perfectly honest, in my opinion you're behaving like a moonbat yourself in this case by personally attacking your critics--and everyone else in the process.

Can't we all just get along?

Beth
"My Vast Right Wing Special Reserve" ;-)

Beth the only one who reall... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Beth the only one who really got insulted by that line was Dan... because he is pathetic.

And you... for the same reason.

He (and you) have no facts so you feign righteous indignation.

Grow up.

Paul, I come to yo... (Below threshold)

Paul,

I come to you with the authority of a blogger who commands literally dozens of readers, so tell me to f-off at your convenience.

But... you've lost your temper with both Dan and David at ISOU. Both of these folks are pretty reasonable. It just isn't right. That's all I'm sayin'.

Let's see. This all started... (Below threshold)
julie:

Let's see. This all started with someone writing or calling Paul the following:

But is Wizbang really any better, or are they actually worse in their adherence to anything like a journalistic standard?

undermines blogger's credibility

at least sloppy and at worst fraudulent

all Wizbang really does is take this story from LBO and pretty much make it their own by cutting and pasting the text,

And talk about sloppy journalism? Oh, please!
bad reporting and unfounded smear.

dangerous.

is a hatred of the left and the NY Times in particular somehow enough to excuse poor and biased journalism?

Yet, Paul is called insulting and told he needs to "chill" and the other party is called "reasonable. I don't think so.

Julie one of the built in f... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Julie one of the built in features of moonbats is that reason is not needed.

But thanks for the research.

julie,I'm not goin... (Below threshold)
hobgoblin:

julie,

I'm not going to pick on you (especially if you're the "julie" i saw posting at ace's---in which case, you should write a book called "How to make enemies and alienate people"), but since you seem to be calling me out for saying "chill," let me just note that I'm not defending this "Dan" dude, who I've never read, and after this probably won't anyway.

All I meant, and mean, is that somethimes it might behoove Paul not to pet the sweaty stuff.

I'm guilty of insulting behavior on the internet to be sure. But flying off the handle at people (on a moderately frequent basis, and as a blog contributor) just looks bad. That's all I'm sayin'.

Wow, upset because I used t... (Below threshold)
julie:

Wow, upset because I used the word "chill"! Now, look who's touchy!

ps: I don't want friends like you. I certainly don't want your unsolicited advice, -- then or now. And maybe you shouldn't have assumed Paul wanted your advice, either.

Paul: Maybe the people who ... (Below threshold)
julie:

Paul: Maybe the people who are criticizing you, especially those who never even bothered to read the post that set this off, need to see it.

First of all, Paul, you are... (Below threshold)
Beth:

First of all, Paul, you are absolutely right in that I have NO FACTS about the Baby 81 story; I don't care about it whatsoever and have made no comment anywhere about the story itself, either. So what's your point?

I don't "feign righteous indignation," nor do I have any righteous indignation. I said I am NOT really insulted (merely amused) and that I didn't want to pick a fight, but you obviously can't take even the slightest criticism from anyone. Truthfully, I really don't care about your opinion of me personally because I don't know you from Adam, NOR do you know ME.

All I wanted to do was come to the defense of a friend who I think has been unfairly characterized. Some of the others here who have jumped on the bandwagon to attack Dan probably know nothing of the guy or his site, either.

I will respectfully decline further comment, because it's obviously just pissing in the wind, and this is SO not worth my time--I have far more important priorities than responding to you in this thread any more. Don't you?

Napoleon, don't be jealous ... (Below threshold)
bdankers:

Napoleon, don't be jealous that I've been chatting online with babes all day. Besides, we both know that I'm training to be a cage fighter.

I think there was plenty of... (Below threshold)

I think there was plenty of hyperbole and protesting a bit much all around. This blogging is a rough business eh?


Anybody that wants a beer, I'll buy.

Yo, hobgloblinYou ... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Yo, hobgloblin

You said, "All I meant, and mean, is that somethimes it might behoove Paul not to pet the sweaty stuff."

That's more ironic than you realize. If you follow trackback about the "fact check on aisle 3", he goes after me because I did not refute goober boy point by point.

Here's the time line.

I got like 4 mails and 3 posts about the one story. When I finally replied, I simply gave 2 examples of why the guy was an asshat and then dropped the links for people to decide. So as you said, "I didn't sweat the small stuff."

THEN I get pummeled some more and when I reply you tell ME to chill????

Dude, think it thru.

Paul

That was not exactly my poi... (Below threshold)

That was not exactly my point. I grant you Dan used some overly provacative language in his original post. You could have chosen to ignore it, but you didn't. You responded, not to the actual point he was making but to an aside, and then you flamed him, and you continue to flame him. The more I read of this the more I think he is right to begin with and the more I think Kevin needs to put you on a shorter leash.

Not everyone who disagre... (Below threshold)
Krusty Krab:

Not everyone who disagrees with you is attacking the very fiber of your being. Again, I don't know about Dan, but after your "global warming" post (with added atmospheric chemistry!) I've noticed that you just go off far too easily.

The problem with the global warming post was that it contained too many factual errors. But watching Paul get hammered was pretty entertaining you have to admit. Posting outdated 9th grade science notes does take some balls though...

I'm just sayin'.

Paul,OK, man. No ... (Below threshold)
hobgoblin:

Paul,

OK, man. No worries. Last attempt to clarify for me.

It's quite likely that you were justified in your reaction. (I'm admittedly too uninformed int that regard to render an opinion)

All I'm suggesting---suggesting mind you---is that you have a higher profile than most folks on the internet, and you also seem to take offense (and serious offense) at what seem to be small disagreements.

Maybe this guy was goading you into a fight for traffic-whoring. I don't doubt there are folks out there like that, I see Olliver Willis do it brazenly and constantly. I'm sorry you were on the receiving end of it.

My only thought is that FWIW (and coming from a total stranger over the internets, that's not much) you don't need to give this jerk the satisfaction of a response, links, or any attention whatsoever.

If you feel a response is in order, try the strict ridicule angle (Bill's pledge about Oliver).

I just think you hurt your credibility to tee off on people so much over minor seeming stuff. And I otherwise like and respoect your writing, so to me that's unfortunate.

Do what you want, of course, but that's just my take.

Godspeed.

Dan used some overly pro... (Below threshold)
julie:

Dan used some overly provacative language in his original post.

Uh, he used a lot of overly provocative language. Why wd you describe it as some?

You could have chosen to ignore it, but you didn't.

Dan could have chosen to ignore Paul's post, but he didn't. Paul's post wasn't even about Dan. Dan's post about Paul was insulting.

You responded, not to the actual point he was making but to an aside, and then you flamed him, and you continue to flame him.

Ifthere was an actual point, it was obscured by the "you're an a-hole" point. (Remember, a little bit of "a-hole" goes a long way.)

The more I read of this the more I think he is right to begin with and the more I think Kevin needs to put you on a shorter leash.

I guess you will try to argue that this isn't an insult, but a "point."

I posted this at Ebb and Fl... (Below threshold)
Dan:

I posted this at Ebb and Flow and it is as true here as it was there. Paul is choosing points to argue but only evading his errors. For one piece of it, this is what happened.

Here is what he posted - "The New York Times said national newspapers had carried "almost daily narratives" about the baby's fate. Wrong. The national press jumped on the band wagon much later."

All I said was that he was wrong because he didn't comprehend that the Times was talking about the Sri Lanka national press - which is true, they were all over this story and the Times points it out.

Instead of facing up to his mistake, he is simply choosing to manufacture something else to talk about. The Sri Lanka press was all over the story, the Times is right on that issue, Wizbang is wrong. End of story. And he is wrong on all points I brought up for anyone who desires to look.

Anytime you want to judge these types of snits - who is doing all the name calling and the hyperbole - it's fairly clear who the loser is. Paul has no facts to stand on - so all he can do is rant. If Kevin were smart, he would put him on a shorter leash as someone suggested. He obviously can't or won't represent Wizbang very well in this type of thing, and certainly not intelligently.

All I said was that he w... (Below threshold)
julie:

All I said was that he was wrong

How can you say this with a straight face? All you did is personally insult the man. Why don't you face up to that? And, it was you who started with the name calling and insults. I just don't understand why you and your buddies think you can do that and then expect the other person to roll over for you. It's like you're from another planet.

And, what's with all this leash talk? You got neutered. Putting Paul on a leash ain't going to bring them back.

Julie,Nice to meet... (Below threshold)
Dan:

Julie,

Nice to meet ya, Mrs. Paul. I'm glad the boy has someone just as crazed looking after him. ; ) Carry on.

Dan: Sorry pointing out the... (Below threshold)
julie:

Dan: Sorry pointing out the obvious to you is too much for you to handle.

Dan says: Nice to meet y... (Below threshold)
Krusty Krab:

Dan says: Nice to meet ya, Mrs. Paul. I'm glad the boy has someone just as crazed looking after him. ; ) Carry on.

Dan, let me be the first to congratulate you for having the language comprehension skills of a narcoleptic simeon. Please excuse the subtlety.. I realize it is lost on you.

Now why you wanna go use bi... (Below threshold)

Now why you wanna go use big words? I'm from south Georgia and it's hard to follow. And who's this simeon fellow anyway? Does he have a blog?

Krusty - Congratulations on... (Below threshold)
Dan:

Krusty - Congratulations on having the humor comprehension skills of a dullard. Get someone to connect the dots for you. Then, just color in the little squares. It'll be fun and challenging for you, no doubt.

Dan says: Krusty - Congr... (Below threshold)
Krusty Krab:

Dan says: Krusty - Congratulations on having the humor comprehension skills of a dullard.

Gosh! Golly jeez thanks for the lesson in humor comprehension, Mr. Dan, even though I don't suppose that I am the one having trouble laughing right now. I shall put this lesson in humor comprehension right beside your exhibited trophy-level skills in reading comprehension and ability to laugh at your own sorry self, both of which has the rest of us in such awe.

Spam eating phrase: Danus Equus Asinus Posterius

Basil: Man, aw sure am sorry 'bout dem fat-ass lawyer words. Here's a joke fer ya, and a lesson in Southern dialect fer dem Nawtherners.

M. R. Ducks.
No. M. R. Not.
O. S. M. R. 2 ducks!
No. M. R. not ducks!
O. S. M. R. 2! C. M. Wangs?

Hey, I missed it until just... (Below threshold)

Hey, I missed it until just now: julie is Mrs. Paul!

I *love* your fish sticks!




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy