« Who Said That? Charlie Sheen or Muammar Gaddafi | Main | We're on the verge of mob violence in Wisconsin »

Hyper Critical

Over the past week or so, I've been having more than my share of fun with one of our resident detractors from the Great White North, "hyperbolist." And I have to confess that I feel just a smidgen guilty about it.

First, it started with a discussion about energy policy. In that discussion, hyper disagreed with my idea -- stealing John Galt's notion of the government's ideal role to be to "get the hell out of the way" and simply loosening a lot of the controls and restraints it places on the economy. Hyper thought it woudl be better for the government to assert more control and attempt to direct people and businesses into doing the "right thing," instead of simply trusting them to act in their own best interests and do what they wish. That degenerated into an argument of my "trust the common sense of the people" attitude and his "the elites are elite for a reason, and the average person is an idiot" beliefs.

At some point, our wires got crossed. (I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and saying we misunderstood each other, and not that he changed his arguments midstream.) He insisted that his deference for the "elites" wasn't for in the field of governance, but in public service in general -- we should reward public servants in order to attract the best into that field.

That's an argument I've heard before, but it took hyper's pushing it for me to finally pull together why I have always rejected it. And that is because I started thinking about the sorts of "public service" employees we're talking about. Three examples sprung to mind.

The first is teachers. They tend to be local employees; the state employs bureaucrats and teachers at state colleges. But it occurred to me that we have discussed many times the ways to draw "the best and brightest" into teaching, and some of the ways discussed -- merit pays for exceptional performance, regular evaluations to weed out the poorer teachers, streamlining the firing process for the truly horrid ones, school vouchers to give parents some direct say in their children's future, and whatnot -- have been fought tooth and nail by the teachers' unions. No, to them, the best way to improve education is to secure tenure, increase pay across the board, improve pensions, and other such broad strokes. So it's clear that the teachers' union aren't that interested in making actual improvements. So forget them.

The second group of public employees that came to me are those who don't have equivalents in the private sector. Social workers, for one. Public administrators, for another. We don't really need to put much effort into attracting the "best and brightest" in this area; they literally have nowhere else to go. They've chosen their career path, and there isn't much need for it in the private sector, so until we develop a critical shortage of such folks, we don't really need to waste much effort into recruiting there.

The final category that came to mind was the ugly stereotype of "public employee" that so many people use as a shorthand term for "worthless slugs." The DMV clerks. The jobs these folks do can be relatively important, but their sloth, their apathy, their inflexibility, and their general inefficiency are the stuff of legend. Do we really need to offer hefty incentives for these dullards? They've got decent pay, job security, and relatively easy jobs -- that ought to be more than enough for most of these Bud Bundys.

Then, yesterday, I mentioned how the "hacktivist" group "anonymous," the self-designated vigilantes of the internet who have asserted their right to decide who can speak on the internet and who can't, have decided to dabble in domestic American politics by going after the web sites of Koch Industries and the libertarian thinktank "Americans For Prosperity." I found this entirely typical of the left -- if you disagree with them, you have no right to speak and ought to be silenced by any means necessary, legal or not. Hyper, however, stood up for "anonymous," saying that he was glad that the unspeakably evil and rotten and downright icky Koch Brothers and the AfP folks needed to be silenced so they couldn't spread their seditious propaganda.

I have to confess -- I was kind of hoping that someone would stand up for "anonymous," and was glad it was hyper. Because it was my intent to apply a little "instant karma" to that person. If they endorsed the cyber-attacks of "anonymous" shutting down people's web sites, then they certainly couldn't object to my doing a bit of the same -- editing, rewriting, or downright removing their comments. (It was largely at random, occasionally by accident -- we have a new interface behnid the scenes, and I still haven't quite got the hang of it.) Hell, I was on more solid moral ground than "anonymous" is -- Kevin, the owner of this site, has empowered me to do such things, and entrusted me to use my own best judgment in doing so. So if hyper agrees with cyber-terrorism like the DDOS attacks that denied AfP and Koch Industries from using their own property -- the web sites -- then what's the big deal with a web site editor exercising some editorial control over their own domain?

Cue the whining. He really didn't like that. And I can understand his surprise -- usually, we here at Wizbang don't usually act so ham-handedly. But I have to admit, it was fun. I understand the appeal of the "anonymous" crowd -- being an irresponsible juvenile and doing whatever the hell I want, regardless of propriety or even the law can be a blast.

So thanks, hyper, for hanging around. Every now and then, it's nice to have a straw man, a stooge, a straight man, a token, an in-house doofus to use as a laughingstock -- and you've been one of the best.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (46)

What Hyper needs to realize... (Below threshold)
jim m:

What Hyper needs to realize is that when he and his buddies on the left try to silence those people they disagree with what they are really doing is promoting an atmosphere that, should they lose, could result in the very same thing to them.

What is in their favor, however, is that most of the rest of us have some moral scruples and despite having some desire to shut them up and send them off to a gulag we won't. We won't because despite the fact that we think they are stupid and even dangerous we know that to do so is simply wrong.

They are playing a game of chicken with snuffing out people's civil rights. Sooner or later they will lose that game. Everyone who plays it does eventually. It's a smart move to not play that game to begin with.

I've applied for every gove... (Below threshold)

I've applied for every government job within 100 miles of where I live. LOL, hey, I'm just as qualified as any other dullard! But seriously, the reason I have is because the pay and benefits are so much better than anything offered in the private sector. The bottom line is that I'm running a small business and paying several thousand dollars a month in taxes so public employees can have pensions and medical insurance that I can't even afford for myself. WTH is wrong with this picture??

I've got two kids working for public unions and I'm happy they have good jobs, but while they enjoy their full dental, including orthodontist coverage, their mama has been working for 30 years in the private sector, actually employing people, stimulating the economy, and paying taxes, without any sort of benefits at all. It pretty much stinks that I have to contribute to some 20 yr old's primo pension plan when my own, which nobody helped me with, got eaten a few years ago in a 401 K.

hyper is the ultimate hypoc... (Below threshold)

hyper is the ultimate hypocrite.

hyper, you're on the air!</... (Below threshold)

hyper, you're on the air!

Actually that's all that tr... (Below threshold)

Actually that's all that trolls are good for. Throwing them in the air and batting them about with your paws is fun entertainment. To actually engage in real argument with them is useless, since they do not accept logical and rationality in their lives.

Or, as the great Heinlein said, "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig."

Hyper's the product of his ... (Below threshold)

Hyper's the product of his environment. He's been programmed with certain modes of thought, and he's got a really, really hard time thinking outside the box of 'fairness' and 'social justice'.

Tried to get him to understand that we're out of money - his response seemed to be 'You're not out of money, you still have checks and people who'll loan you money.' Tried to get him to consider the 'Fair Tax' with the following -

Americans For Fair Taxation:

The FairTax plan is a comprehensive proposal that replaces all federal income and payroll based taxes with an integrated approach including a progressive national retail sales tax, a prebate to ensure no American pays federal taxes on spending up to the poverty level, dollar-for-dollar federal revenue neutrality, and, through companion legislation, the repeal of the 16th Amendment. Which got the following...


The flat tax benefits rich people to the expense of the poor. Wealthy people will hoard wealth, poor people will contribute an even greater proportion of their income to pay for the cost of society, and the problems illustrated in the charts in that article above will be exasperated. Yeah, I'm getting kind of exasperated myself. The FAIR Tax isn't a FLAT tax - but Hyper seems so programmed he can't even think about the difference between the two.

And Mother Jones isn't the first (second, third, or even hundredth) place I'd go for anything resembling honesty when it comes to financial news. They've got a core audience, they play to that audience, and their content is explicitly tuned to that audience - the sort who think 'equality' and 'fairness' are the most overriding criteria for anything. And there HAS to be someone blocking what they want - now it's the 'Superrich'. Oddly enough, the MJ link didn't have anything on either the Fair or Flat tax.

I let my sub to THAT rag lapse a good... lord, 30 years back?

Ah, well. Maybe the horse will learn to sing, eventually.

One thing I'd love for Hyper to consider, a rather cogent quote by Heinlein. (yeah, yeah, I know, Starship Troopers, jackbooted thugs, yada yada, I know the cant, spouted by people who would never read the book for themselves...) -

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.

This is known as "bad luck."
We've been having a spell of 'bad luck' lately, haven't we?

Aw, crap! The blockq... (Below threshold)

Aw, crap! The blockquotes on this blog... AAARGH!!!

Anyway, here's how it should have looked.

Americans For Fair Taxation:

The FairTax plan is a comprehensive proposal that replaces all federal income and payroll based taxes with an integrated approach including a progressive national retail sales tax, a prebate to ensure no American pays federal taxes on spending up to the poverty level, dollar-for-dollar federal revenue neutrality, and, through companion legislation, the repeal of the 16th Amendment.
Which got the following...

The flat tax benefits rich people to the expense of the poor. Wealthy people will hoard wealth, poor people will contribute an even greater proportion of their income to pay for the cost of society, and the problems illustrated in the charts in that article above will be exasperated.

And then on to the rest, but you folks can figure it out...

Hey J,Can you fix ... (Below threshold)

Hey J,

Can you fix my grammar and spelling mistakes for me? Maybe you can even rewrite my comments for me so that I actually make sense?


I've never even responded t... (Below threshold)
Pile of Pooh:

I've never even responded to anything hyperbole wrote. I just assumed that he was either a very talented troll or a hopelessly confused child. But after reading this record of his "debate" with JayTea, I find that I am overcome with a desire to give hyper a metaphorical kick to the ribs. People like him are slowly but surely bringing America low. It's social entropy, and there's little that can be done to stop it, I'm afraid.

But I console myself with this thought: when I'm happily dead of old age, having lived most of my life during the tail end of the Golden Age of America, ignorant liberals like hyper will be squatting in the wreckage they have created of what was once the greatest nation the world has ever seen. I can imagine no greater justice than that fate.

So enjoy living in your filth, hyper! When your cherished elites are telling you what you can eat, when to sleep, what medications you have to take, what kind of car you can drive, and paying you the same flat dole as everybody else... Well, just think of me laughing at you and I'll have a little piece of immortality.

Jay: you're making a (commo... (Below threshold)

Jay: you're making a (common) mistake, your education proposals aren't going to draw the best and brightest.

The best and brightest (in any profession) are going to go where they have the most control over the way they go about their jobs, where they don't have to worry about vindictive or petty bosses screwing them, where they are given the resources they think they need to do the job, where they don't have to worry about getting replaced by someone younger and cheaper, where they can get better than normal pay and benefits and so on.

Sounds good... but these butt up against things you propose. For example, merit pay sounds good, but to a teacher, it smacks of giving someone too much discretionary control over their salary. Getting rid of tenure? A device for replacing older teachers with younger cheaper. Charter schools and school choice? Ways of diverting resources away from where the teacher wants them. Parental control over lesson plans and curriculum? Ditto, it is viewed as an weakening of a teacher's flexibility to do the job the way they want.

You can't have both. And the system can't get fixed until this conflict is resolved. If you're going to impose the controls you want, you're not going to attract the best. If you want the best, you're going to have to stand back and grant them the autonomy to do the job the way they want.

The best and brightest (... (Below threshold)
jim m:

The best and brightest (in any profession) are going to go where they have the most control over the way they go about their jobs

Not necessarily. The best and brightest go where they can get the most value for what they do. Most people will give up a measure of control for higher compensation.

Also the best and brightest will also often accept a measure of risk based on the confidence that their ability will gain them the reward they seek. Low risk situations often lack the high reward that people desire.

While government jobs pay well they lack the opportunity for advancement and really high reward hat exists elsewhere. What you end up with is people unable or unwilling to compete in the market based on their abilities being rewarded for their inability to perform.

Inherent in this is an acceptance that someone's income should be based on their ability to produce. Most liberals deny this idea. The Bible says that if a man does not work he should not eat. The left denies that notion saying that people should be paid the same regardless of their contribution.

The exception to this is that the left believes that people who pay into heir political system through union dues should be paid more for doing less. That is where we are with education today.

rich, I'm a blogger, not a ... (Below threshold)

rich, I'm a blogger, not a miracle worker. I can barely do those things for myself...


One quibble, Jim. The apos... (Below threshold)

One quibble, Jim. The apostle PAUL wrote that if a man will not work, don't let him eat. I get a little creeped out about the idea of animate, talking objects.

Thus sayeth the Lord, not the book, you know?

pile @ 9:I can't j... (Below threshold)
Brian The Adequate:

pile @ 9:

I can't join you in the happy thoughts of the progressives having to eat their own crap. I worry too much about my daughters, nieces and nephews they are gonna drag down with them.

Since we are talking about ... (Below threshold)

Since we are talking about teachers I want to tell you guys I took my youngest son (15 yrs )out of the public school system and was able to enroll him in a private school this yr. He did have to pass entrances exams but he got in. His teachers are smart,energenic,knowledgeable, almost annoyingly effervscent and apparently expect damn near perfection. They don't care if you eat in class much less chew gum. This was a kid that never studied at home and is now doing 2/3 hrs homework every night including after Basket ball practice or games and weekends. Most of these kids are smart some come from rich families but alot don't. I see 2 factors that contribute to my sons "enlightening"... peer presure and smiling but tough teachers that don't believe your dog ate your homework and are willing to discipline you if necessary. Now, there are only 73 kids in his grade and a little less then 300 in the HS. I know PS are different b/c of the numbers...also b/c of the PC. There is none of that at this school and you name it the nationality is here...interesting. All these kids get along b/c the school won't put up with it. If there is a problem I get a email If I don't do something young blood is out the door with no refund. I know not all PS can be this way but it can sure be better and a lot of it has to do with PC, administration and teachers.

I forgot to add my sons 1st... (Below threshold)

I forgot to add my sons 1st marking period was a effin disaster but by the time I got his grades he had started to improve and his teachers told me this was not unusual. They had seen this all too often. He had to practically unlearn what he was being taught

Hyperbolist isn't liberal l... (Below threshold)

Hyperbolist isn't liberal left, he is extremely leftist. He does miss his many examples of hypocrisy.

Teachers at one time sociologically speaking, was a listed profession. In other words, people became teachers as a calling. Something they had to do and wanted to do. Now the education system attracts teachers by inticing them with excessive benefits and percs. Now we see where that gets us.

JT, Social Workers do have a private sector counterpart. They are caseworkers in hospitals. They manage aftercare, placement, homecare, etc. at point of discharge. ww

ww ~ The line between "libe... (Below threshold)
Jim Addison:

ww ~ The line between "liberal-left" and "extreme left" disappeared with the Democratic Leadership Council. And in my book, if they sport a picture of Che, they're not a "leftist" at all, but a communist or Marxist.

Teaching was a "calling" when it and the ministry were low paid. Teaching below the college level was dominated by single females, most of whom taught until they were married, and some continued on after being married. There was no tenure and no unions.

In the real world, you are paid only for your results - or, more specifically, how your results are perceived by your superiors. Public education over the last forty years has, by that standard, been an utter failure.

Oh, and hyperbolist: Wossa... (Below threshold)
Jim Addison:

Oh, and hyperbolist: Wossamatta you? Can dish it out but not take it?

JT ~ Thanks for exposing the little worm as the hypocrite he is (not that it was a shock or anything).

Don't forget, Hype is Canad... (Below threshold)

Don't forget, Hype is Canadian, so take pity on our Great White North brethren who have to live with him.
God help the people that have to work with him.

Oh yeah, he deserved all of that and more.

Thank you JT, I laughed my ass off when you whanged his comment. The response you got was pure comedy gold and 100% Hype.

I was off-site all day at a... (Below threshold)

I was off-site all day at a presentation, and I don't have access to this wienernet dink-tank on my iPhone (my carrier says it's a restricted site?), so apologies for not wading into this thoughtful exchange of Really Big Ideas earlier in the day.

Anyway, here's what I had to say yesterday about Jay Tea's accusation that Anonymous' supporters buy into the 'might makes right' fallacy:

"Might makes right" would describe the way the Koch brothers have run their company, whereas Anonymous would be more akin to, say, Robin Hood and his gang.

They fucked over (or tried to fuck over) Visa and Mastercard and Amazon for trying to censor Wikileaks. They are trying to prevent Koch Industries' astroturf campaign that will lead to the deregulation of the hydro industry in Wisconsin, which they will gobble up without having to even field a competitive bid. There was no debate on this--Walker was going to ram this through with his union-busting budget, and most people in Wisconsin weren't even aware of it. Also, Walker has said repeatedly that he is not interested in debating the Democrats who fled the state--he's made up his mind. But Anonymous are the ones who are shutting down debate? By keeping a fake grassroots campaign from dishonestly influencing public opinion? By sticking up for an organization whose entire modus operandi is disclosing information?

Anonymous are the little guy. They are David, and their "victims" are all Goliaths; whereas a blog moderator censoring comments is sort of like Goliath, if Goliath was insecure and bored at work. (I added the last four words just now.)

jim m: The Bible says that if a man does not work he should not eat.

I didn't know Joseph Stalin wrote the Bible.

Jim Addison, you used to be a relatively well-humoured, articulate, thoughtful individual, but now your comments are a series of snarls. I hope that whatever happened to make your life so unpleasantly sour is something that you can overcome, with time and with therapy.

I would give you a + vote f... (Below threshold)

I would give you a + vote for that hyper but you beat me to it.

914, you're my favoritest c... (Below threshold)

914, you're my favoritest commenter here. I only wish I could grow up and be like you some day.

Apparently hyper doesn't be... (Below threshold)

Apparently hyper doesn't believe that Amazon, Visa, MasterCard, etc. do not have the right to refuse to do business with groups that he likes. That they have a legal and moral obligation to continue to do business with groups like WikiLeaks, which engages in activities that can best be described of questionable legality and morality.

And if they decide that they'd rather not get involved in the kinds of activities WikiLeaks likes to do, then they are obviously evil and must be destroyed.

None of these companies declared WikiLeaks as evil, as an enemy, said that WikiLeaks needed to be destroyed. They just said "we would rather not be involved in this." And for that, they were attacked.

Which hyper has no problems with. In fact, "not adequately supporting leftists" is a capitol corporate crime to him.

Which makes me wonder what he thinks of the Koch brothers giving $20 million to the ACLU to fight the Patriot Act...

No, it doesn't. I'm much happier not getting into that dipshit's head.


I've got to say, Jay, you p... (Below threshold)
Evil Otto:

I've got to say, Jay, you played Hyper like a cheap fiddle. Well done.

Read his 4:29 comment for a real education into how deep his moral rot goes. His defense of Anonymous really is nothing more than this: if one disagrees with the progressive agenda, anything is fair game. He paints these sad little hackers as David, and their victims as Goliath... never mind that what Anonymous is doing is utterly illegal. Never mind that Anonymous wasn't involved in any way until they chose to make themselves involved. Never mind that the Koch Brothers have the right to give money, support the groups, causes and candidates they like. None of that matters. If someone opposes the progressives, they must be punished, and damn the law. Free speech for me but not for thee.

And yet he whines like a little b*tch when someone dares to give him a little taste of what he advocates.

Sure, the Koch Brothers hav... (Below threshold)

Sure, the Koch Brothers have the right to support their causes with large amounts of money, but isn't it incumbent upon intelligent citizens to ask why and what for? Unions do it, PACs of all colors do it, George Soros does it, goddam foreign governments do it! Why? Because that's what we've let our political process become. Before you spew your adolescent venom, look in the mirror. This is about power and profit, no more no less. We should all be up in arms against the plutocrats, shoulder to shoulder with the folks in Madison. If you think the destruction of the middle class and the union busting that is going on today in this country (funded in large part by the aforementioned brothers) is the solution to our financial crisis, you need to find another news source.

This would be a win-win for the corporatists who are hell bent on turning the clock back 100 years. Hamstring the unions and their campaign contributions even though it's OK to "support the groups, causes and candidates they like". The added benefit for the right, whoever they are these days, is that these policies will likely cause significant job losses, which hopefully will help flatten out what little recovery we've had, something they will ecstatically harp on in 2102.

And J, if you look at the Tobin video and honestly think he was assaulted, well, shame on you.

Have to admit I missed the ... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Have to admit I missed the original pissing match, but, after catching up by following your links, Jay Tea, it seems to me you have a strange idea of victory. Yeah, I guess it was kinda clever to edit hyperbolist's comment to prove your point, but, umm, those who saw it got it the first time. Not a whole lot of need for a second post boasting about how clever you were in the first post.

Then there's this piece. Tell me, does your contention that there is no need to recruit the best and brightest for social work and public administration (because where else are they gonna go?) also apply to the military? That may have been the dumbest paragraph you've ever written, Jay.

And what is it with conservative hatred of the DMV? I don't know what it's like in VT, or NH, or wherever it is you live, but in NC, where I live now, and FL, where I grew up, wait times are always reasonable and the employees seem to me to be working reasonably hard. I think they should probably get extra pay to compensate for the thousands of times they have heard some asshole bitch about how "I pay your salary, bub!"

"conservative hatred of the... (Below threshold)

"conservative hatred of the DMV?"

Takes a mental sloth to stereotype like that Bruce.

I like how the ignorant lef... (Below threshold)
jim m:

I like how the ignorant left thinks that you need to physically injur someone for assault to have occurred.

The legal definition of assault is simply to threaten a person with physical harm. You do not have to carry out those threats you just have to be perceived as capable of carrying them out. If you touch the person you are threatening you commit battery. You also do not have to harm the person for battery to have occurred.

So legally, Tobin was assaulted. You would also have an argument to say that he was battered by the people pushing and shoving since they were trying to obstruct him from doing his job.

Here's the deal with Jay Te... (Below threshold)

Here's the deal with Jay Tea, Bruce: he has very high regard for himself but doesn't have anything to be smug about outside of this blog and some WWII fan-fiction. On his Wizbang posts, a supposedly discursive outlet, his work is read and commented upon by a few bright and worthwhile commenters (JLawson, Clay, OregonMuse, SCSI, jim--the latter two having low regard for me, but I really couldn't care less, and they at least have the decency to not butcher the language); but largely it's a clutch of morons who contribute nothing more than "Yeah! Stoopid librulz! Guv'mint is suckz!" to any topic. (Bonus: if it's WildWillie, he'll say something about liberals being full of hate. Think he must have read that in a truck stop washroom a few years back.)

So I'm not at all surprised that he took the opportunity to censor out my comments and then write a fucking brilliant celebratory piece the following day about how he censored out my comments--apparently as an analogy as to why the Anonymous hacker collective are a bunch of jerks? I guess the analogy would be sound if I were a credit card company or astroturf organization trying to fuck over thousands of union members, but I'm not, so it isn't.

Hardly the stuff that they'd let you publish over at Commentary, eh Jay?

You're right Hyper. I have... (Below threshold)
jim m:

You're right Hyper. I have low regard for you. But don't take it personally. It's just that I think your positions are ignorant, uniformed and lack any understanding of history, political realities, and economics.

Other than that I'm sure you are a fine person (despite being from Canada).

groucho, I agree with most ... (Below threshold)

groucho, I agree with most of what you said. You know who doesn't agree with you? Hyper and "anonymous," who think that you shouldn't investigate and challenge and questions such things, but just obliterate them from the public discourse. Don't challenge folks, don't dig up the facts, just silence those who you don't like.

Bruce, you've been around long enough to know that I'm no Charles Johnson, censoring and banning any and all who dare disagree or even challenge me. What I did to hyper's comments was an aberration -- inspired by his own championing of such tactics. He praised the silencing of one's opponents by brute force, even if in violation of the law -- so I applied the principle (sans the illegal elements) to him. After all, if it's fair for his allies to do it, it's fair for me, too, right?

As far as the personal attacks... hyper thinks he's shaming me by mentioning that I wrote a pair of World War II short stories, and published them here and elsewhere. Boy, he'd have a conniption if he knew I had another story from that era half-written in my head, and I'm probably going to publish it at that other forum any day now.

And I've often said I don't have much of a life apart from the blog, so BFD.

Finally, he brings up my past affiliation with Commentary. He's absolutely right that they wouldn't have cared one whit for the butthurting I've given him -- but doing things like that is part and parcel of what I enjoy doing. If they hadn't placed a premium on my exclusivity, and allowed me to do such things away from their sandbox, I'd probably still be writing for them today -- but I can't be Mr. Serious And Scholarly all the time. Every now and then, I need to break out the chainsaw and party.

Finally, hyper, note that I am reserving nearly all my "attacks" on you for what you've said. I don't bother with dealing with petty, personal shit like you do (apart from the Viagra/Extenze/Beano trifecta, which I rather enjoyed).

I don't do that for several reasons -- the biggest one is that I simply don't care enough about you to find out or remember your personal details to make such attacks worthwhile.

You're amusing and occasionally useful, hyper -- both in spite of yourself.


OK, but what about your con... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

OK, but what about your contention that social workers and public administrators don't need to be recruited from the "best and brightest" because there is no other place in the private sector in which they can work? Does the same go for the military?

And are you the guy in the DMV having a hissyfit about having to wait your turn, bitching about how "I pay your salary, ya know"?

Bruce, military service is ... (Below threshold)

Bruce, military service is a calling. And I don't recall the military organizing for collective-bargaining rights.

And yeah, I'll stand by my assertions that we don't really need "the best and the brightest" in a lot of public-sector jobs. There are plenty of existing benefits for working in the public sector; I don't feel like paying more and more to make those jobs even more appealing.

Because that's the bottom line, Bruce; it all comes out of my -- and everyone else's -- pockets. We HAVE to set our priorities and limits, 'cuz we can't count on anyone else to do it for us.


Bruce, are you SERIOUSLY co... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Bruce, are you SERIOUSLY comparing military service to clerical work for a government bureaucracy? I can just imagine it ...

"... in local news, Postal Clerk Shanniyah Ubbuwawah received the Silver Stapler for strict adherence to policy, in a ceremony attended by her family and presided by President Obama.

"In his remarks, the President praised Ubbawawah for keeping her customers in line and refusing to serve anyone without exact change and the correct forms in triplicate.

"To attend Ubbawawah's ceremony, President Obama chose to miss the funeral for Marine Gunnery Sergeant Mark Sinclair, who died in combat near Kabul. Sinclair was in his third tour of duty in Afghanistan, and leaves behind a wife and two children, aged 3 and 6.

"Explaining the decision, President Obama said "It's a difficult decision, but I have to promote those who make a difference that makes America great, rather than those who choose violence and to create controversy. Sgt. Sinclair chose to go to Afghanistan, and I chose to honor Ms. Ubbwawah."

"No sane officials in the government were available for comment."

I actually liked the WW II ... (Below threshold)

I actually liked the WW II stories, for what it's worth. I studied WW I and WW II throughout my undergrad as electives. Those conflicts shaped my nation's identity to at least the same extent as they did yours.

If I didn't think you, DJ, and a few others wrote thoughtful and provocative blog posts, I would go be a jerk on some other blog.

Well, in my opinion, Hyper ... (Below threshold)

Well, in my opinion, Hyper without knowing summed up his mindset when he said "There was no debate on this." That is him in a nutshell.

I do enjoy the fact that I get under Hyper's cold, canadian skin. But he is the poster child for the extremely left, snooty elitist. A very judgemental character with a lot of issues.

I am well aware there are people who have a different opinion then me on issues. Hyper knows this but cannot accept the fact that some think he is absolutely wrong and not very bright. In actuality, I don't hate hyper and his buddy brucy. I just plain don't respect them. Mainly because they and their liberal buddies do not respect conservatives simply because we are.

Again "There was no debate on this" is how hyper approaches all subjects. ww

"Extremely left"Ha... (Below threshold)

"Extremely left"

Have you ever been to a college campus, Willie?

I work in marketing. I buy some things made in the third world. I vote centre-left, more for social than economic reasons.

Your characterization (caricature) of me is not in line with reality. If you bothered to read substantive exchanges that I have with, say, JLawson or DJ on debatable issues, then you'd realize that what you're saying is incorrect. Debate is like one of my favourite things and I have the utmost respect for conservatives who enjoy it. I guess you're basing your opinion on those instances where I make categorical statements, but Willie, anyone who doesn't make categorical statements is without principles.

It might very well be the case that I haven't tried to debate anything you've said lately, but then you would have to proffer an argument rather than just a sweeping general statement about "the left" for that to be possible.

Hyper, for a guy who loves ... (Below threshold)

Hyper, for a guy who loves debate, you have an odd way of showing it:

Yeah, fuck that guy for cutting taxes and allowing Wall Street to record record profits. Fucking communist.

15. Posted by hyperbolist | February 27, 2011 5:00 PM | Score: -23 (33 votes cast)

I see hyper has come back out of the commune to defend his messiah.

Perhaps instead of taking credit for what the GOP Congress has done Hyper should explain how the collectivist in chief is really some defender of the free enterprise system and a promoter of individual liberty.

16. Posted by jim m | February 27, 2011 5:15 PM | Score: 10 (12 votes cast)

jim m--Wall Street's profits are at a record high. Your taxes--I fucking guarantee it--are lower than they were three years ago.

So unplug the goddamn talk radio from the USB port in your neck and try thinking about what is actually going on.

17. Posted by hyperbolist | February 27, 2011 5:20 PM | Score: -19 (29 votes cast

Sow, reap, repeat

What, so those statements c... (Below threshold)

What, so those statements can't be debated because I wasn't hiding my exasperation? Taxes are lower under Obama than they were two years ago; Wall Street has recorded record profits--hardly the modus operandi of a "leftist" administration, is it!...

These are factual statements. Now, I would like to know where, if not talk radio or Fox News, someone might have gotten the incorrect impression that their tax burden has increased under this administration's economic policies. Do enlighten me, SCSI.

Yes, taxes are lower under ... (Below threshold)

Yes, taxes are lower under Obama than they were two years ago... despite his best efforts to the contrary.

Sorry, he doesn't get credit for things that happen in direct conflict with his best efforts.


Dangit, Hyper! Now ... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Dangit, Hyper! Now you're going to make me post a serious comment!

** sigh **

OK, we all love our labels and easy-quick stereotypes, and I'm guilty of it too. Problem is, people are not always easy to assign categories to, at least not fairly, and it gets really rough when you have someone who is sometimes a moron, and sometimes quite insightful.

Hyperbolist counts as that kind of person. I have to say Hyper, that some of your comments have been badly-thought-out and look like just emotional reactions. On the other hand, folks, Hyper has posted some well-considered arguments, even when we disagree. He has taken the time and trouble to think things through on at least some of our topics. Without naming names, that's not as common as we'd like. I also have to say that we all like snark and sometimes have a very hard time resisting the urge to deliver what we believe to be a stinging riposte of wit.

None of this means I won't pop off a smackdown if I think it's approrpriate, or if I'm having a really bad week and I'm feeling like maturity is over-rated. I also think that Hyper over-reacts at times; in the comment which JT overdubbed earlier this week, Jay came right back and posted the actual comment right after it, so everyone would be able to read it. It's not actual malice, and no real harm or insult was done, at least nothing anyone should carry a grudge about. There have been a lot worse things written about me (after 2008 I was the subject of several blog articles which misrepresented my analysis of polls and tried to make me look like a moron - readers will have to decide for themselves if the insults were accurate) and if you're going to post a strong opinion you will get targeted sometimes. I even think this post is reasonable in its context, but within the comment section I do feel obliged to point out that Hyperbolist has been a more valuable contributor, with some genuinely valid perspectices and arguments, than many others who comment here.

My apologies for the length of the comment; I've been dealing with too many lawyers of late, and while I successfully resisted the urge to use subparagraphs and latin phrases, I could not find the means to be concise.

As if I ever was.

DJ, goes back to respect. I... (Below threshold)

DJ, goes back to respect. I will say Hyper gives many, straight out insults. Then at times he seems reasoned and thought out but I already know what he really thinks about us. If he showed up here and offered more respect to those that disagree, and after all, this is a conservative site, then he will earn respect. Until that time, I find him a petty person who likes to judge folks, including their grammar and spelling. That is petty and disrespectful.

I do not count college kids in any political mix. They are for the most part irresponsible kids enjoying the freedom of life for the first time and are full of idealistic but unattainable dreams. ww

Hyper, when you consistentl... (Below threshold)

Hyper, when you consistently lead in with invective and insults, you cannot be taken serious as someone that values debate. How many tantrums would a reader here have to endure to find one of your substantive exchanges? The former outweigh the latter.

It's why nobody has a serious conversation with 914, for instance.

Jay Tea, Obama's economic a... (Below threshold)

Jay Tea, Obama's economic advisors know well enough that the last thing you do in a recession is raise taxes on the middle class. Paul Krugman would tell you that.

DJ: thanks. You're a really good writer and though I disagree with much/most of it, it's never a chore to read what you have to say.

Willie, what do you mean by "us"? By what right do you include yourself in the same group with whom I've had conversations and interesting (though often times overheated) arguments? And why are you talking about college kids? I may be under 30 but I've nearly paid off all of my student loans, and I've got a pretty good investment portfolio and I've travelled quite a bit. And yet you think I'm some naive 21 year old? Yeah, why wouldn't I speak to you respectfully?

I've never seen 914 try to have a serious conversation with anyone, SCSI, so I resent that a little bit--but yes, obviously sometimes I'm more interested in making someone look or feel stupid than trying to persuade them of something, and that's dumb. Not that it's any excuse, but I bet there would be significant overlap between "days when hyperbolist is a douchebag", and "days when hyperbolist has to bite his tongue rather than personally insult a client's or manager's intelligence".

"Obama's economic advisors ... (Below threshold)
retired military:

"Obama's economic advisors know well enough that the last thing you do in a recession is raise taxes on the middle class. Paul Krugman would tell you that."

Yet Obama and his advisors want to raise taxes especially on the rich (and they have said so numerous times) and Paul Krugman agrees.

As for you Hyper. You want to knock Jay Tea for writing on this blog but yet you come stink up the place with your presence.

Feel free to go join Lee Ward and others and make Wizbang a better place without your presence.

You raise the IQ of a room just by leaving it.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


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