The Most Impressive Drivel I’ve Read in a Long Time
Read this. I know it’s long, but read the whole thing. Then come back and tell me if you think I am right that Jeff Goldstein is simultaneously the most self-important and the most appallingly awful writer on the Internet.
Even though it’s difficult, try to separate the substance of his argument, which is profoundly flawed, from the quality of his writing. One could spend many paragraphs deconstructing his argument, but my point here is the writing itself. To me, it comes across almost as a parody of bad writing.
125 Responses to “The Most Impressive Drivel I’ve Read in a Long Time”
Donate to CFLF
Blogroll
Pennsylvania Blogs
The Liberal Media
Blogging Liberally
Advertising
Comments From Left Field is a member of...
Memeorandum
Archives
- 2010: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2009: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2008: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2007: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2006: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2005: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2004: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2003: J F M A M J J A S O N D
Blog Stuff
Admin
His argument is so flawed in fact that you forgot to say how!
Wow, that’s a flawed argument all right.
I’m sure I’m not the first to mention this, but your analysis suggests it’s time you asked for some of those brain cells you were so generous with be returned.
“Then come back and tell me if you think I am right that Jeff Goldstein is simultaneously the most self-important and the most appallingly awful writer on the Internet.”
Hell no. Obviously, you have no idea what a good writer is. Why did you write this post?
If it’s to demonstrate your judgement of quality writing, you failed miserably. Are you always this petty and vindictive?
Okay, I saw your sidebar and links. Obviously, intentionalism is not something you would support, so that explains your hostility towards Goldstein. Can’t be having honest communications now can we? Groupthink requires no critical or independent thinking. It’s so much easier to control people that way.
But some of us prefer liberty, so I’m sure you can understand that, even if you don’t like it. Or am I presuming too much? I don’t wanna break any of your speech codes and possibly offend your delicate sensibilities…aw hell, sure I do! Your hate for Conservatives will never be as powerful as our love for liberty. :^)
Wow, this is the worst blog ever. I’m not going to explain how or why, although one could spend many paragraphs on just that thing. Instead I’m just going to get my friends to nod in agreement.
“As you can tell, I’m easily distracted.”
The hell you say.
I came here looking for this author’s intent. My interpretation is that this author’s intent is to deliver as much hate as she possibly can; given her niggardly understanding of Jeff G’s essay, she is reduced to typical leftist poo-slinging.
Nothing to see here; move along.
Somewhere on my list of tas’s Rules of Blogging: never link to Protein Wisdom. Jeff Goldouche and all of his depraved fans truly have no lives. No professional life, no social life, no family life. They sit around in their underware all day, surrfing the blogosphere, looking for fights to pick so they can feel manly. And if you give them too much meat, they never stop coming to your blogging.
Worse is when Goldstein himself shows up (his super-inflated ego commands that he must eventually) and then you have to reply to his inane comments. That failed academic will build up so many false arguments that by the time you cut through them all, you realize you’ve wasted a day or two. And you never learn anything. It’s really not worth it.
See, tas just knows things. Or, tas likes to make stuff up and call it knowledge. Because of the good faith and pure intent.
Fale.
If you please; what profound flaw do you perceive?
I think you’re wrong.
Jeff is not “self-important”. On the contrary; he is actually quite self-deprecating at times. But when it is necessary to use academic jargon, he employs it with precision.
Ironically, as the subject of the linked post is the philosophy of communication, your casual assertion that it is amenable to “deconstruction” indicates your fundamental nihilism, which precludes any rational discussion, and in fact declares the attempt at such to be irrelevant at best.
Oh, what’s that? You think I’ve jumped to conclusions in, uh, INTERPRETING what you wrote, to assume that your use of the code word “deconstruction” necessarily implies that you’ve bought the entire Derrida combo platter, then moved on to Heiddeger and Nietsche for dessert? You think it’s unfair that I assert the power to read this meaning into your words? You insist that your words mean what you meant when you wrote them?
But you can’t think that, because that’s the core of Jeff’s “profoundly flawed” argument .
hey sit around in their underware all day, surrfing the blogosphere, looking for fights to pick so they can feel manly. And if you give them too much meat, they never stop coming to your blogging.
Huh. Some people like traffic. Of course, traffic that demands that you some how explain and defend yourself … I see how that would be troubling.
Well, tas, all I can say is that I despair of ever achieving honest communication with these people when they attack me for calling Jeff self-important and his writing appallingly awful. How do they know what my intended meaning was? As it happens, I admire insufferable pricks who think technical jargon and run-on sentences make for good writing. My entire post was intended as a compliment. Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying these folks don’t have the right to take offense. Taking offense is perfectly fine. But they don’t have the right to make me responsible for their understanding of my meaning, without trying to find out what I intended.
You think it’s unfair that I assert the power to read this meaning into your words? You insist that your words mean what you meant when you wrote them?
And my words meant that I admire self-important and appallingly awful writing. It takes talent to write that way. So you are absolutely correct that my words mean whatever I intend them to mean, and I will be happy to accept your apology for assuming you know what my intended meaning was.
These jackasses won’t care, though. Their intention is to start a fight with the closest target.
Calling Jeff a bad writer is silly because he is in fact a good writer. You are a sillyhead.
For real you don’t know what a run-on sentence is? I know cause I write them all the time you are a sillyhead.
My entire post was intended as a compliment
Who is Keyser Soze?
These jackasses won’t care, though. Their intention is to start a fight with the closest target.
Us jackasses didn’t start the fight, but I suppose rational thought is lost on you.
happyfeet has a sense of humor, which is always nice.
Please ask me what meaning I intended with the above before you make me responsible for your interpretation.
Sillyhead: Takes one to know one.
And that is the entire point of Jeff’s allegedly “flawed” reasoning, which you don’t bother to “deconstruct”.
I didn’t assume that. You seem to have assumed that I assumed that. What I really meant by that was to deMONSTRate (heh) the absurdity of “code word” and “dog whistle” theory as routinely employed to paint as racist anyone who disagrees with your political positions.
Carin, don’t you know that “Rational thought” is inherently racist and patriarchial, just another tool to oppress The Other?
Please ask me what meaning I intended with the above before you make me responsible for your interpretation.
I’ve got a better idea. Why don’t you defend your position by pointing out just ONE paragraph that represents his flawed writing or flawed argument.
And, Happyfeet calls you a sillyhead because he’s just a tad nicer than some of the rest of us.
So when you’re jackass leader links to Kathy’s post with a snarky comment, he’s not starting a fight? Really? Wow.
thats was an awful read lol
Yes, Kathy was just minding her own business, talking about things that had absolutely nothing to do with Jeff, when oof! He starts throwing elbows about.
Bastard.
Honestly, I can’t BELIEVE Jeff linked to a piece that attacked him. He’s such a bully.
thats was an awful read lol
Yea … I bet reading is really tuff (spelled phonetically to help out) for you.
Given the craven overreactions that Jeff knows you retard always bring to blogs which he leaves snarky links for, I think Jeff knows when he intends to start a fight. I’ve never seen any blog which such a enormous community of lifeless losers who have nothing better to do then Protein Wisdom. Don’t you people have anything better to do? Jobs to goto? Families to raise? Perhaps you could take a break from your constant, insular, selfish trolling and, I dunno, do volunteer work for your communities? Seriously, do you fuckholes have any redeeming values whatsoever?
This isn’t a fight, tas, this is us making fun of your lame ass little blog. For it to escalate into a fight one of you would need to make a real argument and try to defend it. Ridiculous assertions of bad grammar and prose will only bring you, well, ridicule.
Um, what are you doing right now, tas? I am eating lunch at my desk. At work.
How someone can say things like:
“you retard always bring”
“lifeless losers”
“you fuckholes ”
and then accuse others of “selfish trolling”, is beyond me.
I think rawdawg was being facetious, Carin.
It’s really tough to troll a blog that one’s an author on. This is my home. Don’t come to my house and tell me I’m a troll.
I think tas needs to take a moment.
And, Kathy need to rethink her thought that Jeff is the worst writer on AlGore’s internets.
Finally, I must register my offense at the term “fuckholes” which could either be taken as a sexist or homophobic slam. Perhaps tas could illuminate his intent?
One more thing, tas, before I get back to work. This is Kathy’s first sentence, I bolded the important bits:
Read this. I know it’s long, but read the whole thing. Then come back and tell me if you think I am right that Jeff Goldstein is simultaneously the most self-important and the most appallingly awful writer on the Internet.
What part of “read this and tell me what you think” don’t you understand?
Jeff G?
What can u say about a guy who talks tough and then calls the cops cause he was scared of a women?
Since the woman is in jail now I would say he was correct.
Me: So you are absolutely correct that my words mean whatever I intend them to mean
The Monster: And that is the entire point of Jeff’s allegedly “flawed” reasoning, which you don’t bother to “deconstruct”.
And which I don’t need to “deconstruct” anymore, because you just did. The only point on which we now disagree is that you are saying Jeff’s reasoning is spot on, and I am saying Jeff’s reasoning is pure, unadulterated horseshit.
Well, that’s one vote for Jeff having beaten her up, instead.
What I really meant by that was to deMONSTRate (heh) the absurdity of “code word” and “dog whistle” theory as routinely employed to paint as racist anyone who disagrees with your political positions.
I missed this before. This means we agree on something else. Jeremiah Wright is not a racist.
Why don’t you defend your position by pointing out just ONE paragraph that represents his flawed writing or flawed argument.
Remember the line in that old Lay’s Potato Chips commercial? “Bet you can’t eat just one”?
It’s really tough to troll a blog that one’s an author on. This is my home. Don’t come to my house and tell me I’m a troll.
I didn’t tell you that. I merely pointed out the hypocrisy of you engaging in such name-calling as you call others’ action “trolling”. Note that the words “troll” and “trolling” are not the same. Hate the sin, love the sinner and all that.
But let’s pursue your logic, such as it is. You don’t think it’s possible to troll in your own house? Don’t you think that a lot of the things written by the proprietress of anncoulter.com are accurately described as “trolling”?
Which of your political positions does “Rev.” Wright dispute?
Remember the line in that old Lay’s Potato Chips commercial? “Bet you can’t eat just one”?
I had forgotten all about that one. For some reason “Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs” keeps running through my head.
Remember the line in that old Lay’s Potato Chips commercial? “Bet you can’t eat just one”?
Bored now. You’ve got nothing.
To properly interpret what your post means, we might have to look at the body of your work. I will be as drive-by as you apparenty were and not bother. However, we can also look at who you consider to be authorities (or at least good writers) by examining your links to other blogs. They appear to be mostly lefty blogs, whose opinion of Jeff’s work is generally similar to what you have written in this post . We can also look at the comments from people who agree with you, as most commenters do not frequent sites which are composed of material that they do not agree with.
Taking those things into consideration, a reasonable person would conclude that you meant what your post said, and that any apparent backtracking you have done since then is just that, backtracking. This is not to say that this is the correct interpretation, only the most likely given the evidence I cited.
And then, of course, after I refreshed, you state that Jeff’s reasoning is “… pure, unadulterated horseshit.” Why is it horseshit? How? The fact that you went after style right away is telling in that it does not address his argument, which tells me you may not understand it. If you understood his argument you could attempt to refute it. I have yet to see a refutation of intentionalism from anyone that wasn’t based on an emotional response rather than a logical one. Maybe you could be the first.
“jgpoontang on March 16th, 2009 11:41 am
Jeff G?
What can u say about a guy who talks tough and then calls the cops cause he was scared of a women?”
Just a guess here, but you don’t have kids, do you?
Oh, and Jeff’s stalker is in the nuthouse, right now.
Which of your political positions does “Rev.” Wright dispute?
See, I can’t answer that question, because to me it’s a complete non sequitur as a response to what I wrote, but I don’t know, it could mean something or relate in some way that I am not aware of since I don’t know what you intended.
In fact, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to communicate in any meaningful way in this “discussion,” as a result of the fact that I can never know what your words mean and you can never know what my words mean, because there is no objective or even reasonably accurate standard by which to determine the meaning of another’s words. A dictionary is no help. Dictionaries don’t tell you what the writer intended the word to mean. Context and history don’t help us understand meaning, either. Only intent determines meaning, and even if I knew your intent I still would not be able to rely on that to understand your meaning, because what if you were lying or deceiving yourself about your intent? Do people ever really know intent at its deepest level, anyway?
So — long story short, I cannot answer your question because I don’t know what it means until you tell me what you intended it to mean. And even then… Well, you know.
Now I can’t get that Jethro Tull song “Thick as a Brick” out of my head.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toHlMD50eYY
Taking those things into consideration, a reasonable person would conclude that you meant what your post said, and that any apparent backtracking you have done since then is just that, backtracking.
But you don’t know what my post said. That is, you can pronounce and read the words, but you can’t know what they mean, because there is no general understanding of what any word means. Meaning is determined by intent.
But let’s assume for the sake of argument that a reasonable person *could* conclude there was some traditionally or widely shared understanding of what a word like “self-important” or “appalling” meant, based on the dictionary definition and the way most people seem to intend to use those words. In that case, wouldn’t a reasonable person be able to reasonably conclude that when an adult white male who lived through the civil rights movement or has learned about it in school and is reasonably well-educated about the history of blacks and whites in the American South from 1619 through, say, 1968 greets a black adult male with “Hey boy, how ya doin’?” said black adult male has every reason and right to take offense no matter what said white adult male claims his “intent” was?
Do I have the right to take offense if I’m called a “kike” or a “dirty Jew,” regardless of any protestations by the speaker of those words that they had no anti-semitic intentions at all?
Damn. I knew she didn’t understand the topic, but I didn’t realize she was that clueless.
go back and read what you said to me about Wright. I’ll wait….
Let me try to give you a real world example, Kathy. I grew up in a very white area of WV, not because it was particularly racist, but just because there was never a reason for black people to move there. Among my friends and I, boy was a term of endearment, at late night pool tournaments at a friends house, for instance, it was very common to hear someone say “look at that boy shoot pool!” when someone was on a hot streak.
Later at college I had befriended quite a few blacks because of my love of jazz and blues, and one night was the only white guy shooting pool with them in the dorm rec room, I knew that boy was a touchy word around blacks, but wasn’t really thinking about it as I had gotten very comfortable with our friendship and when one of the guys got hot I said, without thinking, obviously “look at the boy shoot pool!”
I meant no offense, in fact I meant it as a term of endearment, and most of them realized it and laughed it off. A couple of guys couldn’t let it go, however, and forever after my friendship with them was strained, because I could never just relax and be myself for fear of offense.
I’ve been narrative ignored, I suppose.
go back and read what you said to me about Wright. I’ll wait…
I read it the first time, smartass. Your response does not address what I said. Maybe you should ask me what I meant instead of being such a snot face, eh? (and I intend that term in the most complimentary way possible).
Oh, I get it… repeating “intend” in a mocking tone now substitutes for a substantive argument.
Sup Captain Cocko. I expected there to be only 40 comments when I returned to my computer — I see your patrol from Troop 1 Trollville must really, really not have anything better to do today. I’ll be sure to get you guys the number for some cheap hookers.
The example I dealt with posited a child yelling for his boy dog in the presence of a black male. Not quite the scenario you’ve set up here.
I know. I did that because in the paragraph below, which you quoted in your post, it’s quite clear which of the three scenarios using the word “boy” would be offensive to an adult black male. Yet you chose one of the two other scenarios which it is obvious the Patterico reader was not suggesting would be offensive to an adult black male. In fact, that was the reader’s entire point. You chose to make your argument that the meaning of words should be derived from their intent, using this quote from Patterico’s blog, by pointing to a specific context given in the quote in which the word “boy” is clearly not being used as a racial slur, when that was obviously and plainly NOT the context the Patterico reader was claiming would cause offense.
That was very dishonest of you, and it’s a tactic that, in my experience of reading your blog (and granted I don’t read it every day) you have taken repeatedly. I have no respect for that.
Actually, there are circumstances where I would call someone a “dirty Joooo” (and I’d spell it like that to make a point) and they would have no reason to take offense at me, because in fact I am not the least bit anti-semitic. My use of the offensive term is in protest of those who actually do think of Jews as “dirty”. In spoken language, I don’t have the luxury of misspelling it, but I do have some other cues I can use.
I’m pretty sure that if I call Jeff a “dirty Joooo” in such a context, he won’t be one bit offended at me, because he’ll understand my intent.
Maybe that’s the context in which black folk can call each other “nigga” with no offense being taken.
And also, by the way, in that quoted paragraph, the Patterico reader who posted it as a comment did not say that the example of a boy calling his dog was in the presence of a black man. He just said that the meaning of the word “boy” changes with the context (as do most words), and the example of the boy calling his dog was one example of one such context. There is no black man hearing the boy call his dog in the reader’s example. You added that yourself.
You know what I always say when someone calls me “smartass”? “It’s better to be a smartass than a dumbass”.
In fact, I am capable at using facial tissue quite well, and my response was entirely on point:
Now, you’re saying that we agree that Jeremiah Wright is not a racist. (That’s a neat trick, as I said nothing whatsoever about him.) Presumably that has something to do with him disagreeing with one or more of your political positions, so that you’re offering him as a counterexample against the routine I describe. If you can’t find any such disagreement, then whether he is a racist is orthogonal to the routine.
I have been searching for hours now as to where Jeff Goldstein’s butt has gone! Darleen? Pablo? The Monster? B Moe? Success! The Goldstein anus and all its rewards are here, splayed out for me like turd treasures!
I’m pretty sure that if I call Jeff a “dirty Joooo” in such a context, he won’t be one bit offended at me, because he’ll understand my intent.
No, of course he would not be offended, and of course he would understand your intent — because you are a regular reader and perhaps a personal friend, but in any case someone Jeff knows well enough to know the intent.
If Jeff did not know you well, or not at all, or you were someone who had shown yourself to be prejudiced in the past, Jeff might very well be offended. I know I would be, in the latter scenario, and wouldn’t be in the former.
The difference is *context.* Exactly the concept that Jeff, and many of his readers apparently, feel has no bearing on meaning.
I wonder if Patterico knows what goes on here? I’ve gone ot of my way to not give offense, instead asking for clarification, and the Left Fielder ignores that.
Seems like a lesson there somewhere.
You know what I always say when someone calls me “smartass”? “It’s better to be a smartass than a dumbass”.
You are in trouble then, because you are both.
Just dial 1-800-DAR-CLICK.
Or just tell Pablo you’re Jeff G. and he’ll blow you for a baloney sandwich.
Well, coming from you, that’s quite the compliment.
Maybe that’s the context in which black folk can call each other “nigga” with no offense being taken.
I couldn’t say, not being black — and for the record, that word is offensive to me whether it’s used by a white or a black person (unless it’s being used to make a point, as in your example). I taught middle school and high school for a few months in the Bronx, and that word was used freely and constantly between students who were all either black or Hispanic. It bothered me a lot. But that does not give me the right, or the permission, to use the word myself. Because some black people, and especially younger ones, don’t understand the history of that word and how it was used to terrorize and degrade black people, doesn’t mean that now it’s okay for me, as a white person, to use a word that, from my mouth, would be taken as a direct attack and an intentional insult.
Terrorize?
I knew there was some reason she always hung around Protein Wisdom.
Yeah but if I tell everyone I’m Jeff G, I’ll get my cock punched more than sucked.
A fucking grown man and a father (or so his wife tells him) lamely trying to pick a fight over an internet discussion?
Yes, thats JG!
Come on, tas. Let’s meet up. You can call me all the names you want — like Cockula or what have you — and in return, I can meet the guy who, though broke, spends his days bitching about it on his blog instead of going out and finding a fucking job that gives him more than a single wait shift a week.
I can certainly see why you need Obama. I mean, you can’t be expected to feed yourself! Tell me, did you swallow your “pride” and take the foodstamps? Or are you making do on the government loans…?
Not that tas can’t defend himself perfectly well, but if you’re looking to attack people who are unemployed and on food stamps, I’m a much better target than tas is. I really don’t think he’s on food stamps, although I could be wrong. But if you want the real deal, it’s me, baby. I use food stamps, and a food pantry, plus I get cash assistance (WELFARE, BABY!), plus I’m waiting to hear about my application for SSD, and I’m going to be evicted if I can’t come up with the March and April rent by April 1.
So stop wasting your time with tas. He’s small potatoes. If you want to rage at someone who doesn’t have a job or enough money to pay for food and rent, I’m your woman.
Jeff, they clearly claimed the higher ground when they began calling Darleen a whore.
Kathy, the attack on unemployment was began by your boy tas:
one can conceive of any number of ways in which the white males can be cognizant of how a black male might take “boy” and still not mean to offend, or where the black male doesn’t take offense or conceive of the remark as a racial slur: they could be friendly with him, and this could be a running joke.
Uh-huh. But then he wouldn’t, uh, be offended.
Oh, come on tas, give your mom and sisters some time off! They’ve done yeoslut’s work keeping you, their little godforsaken mutant brother-child happy in the basement, so’s he can co-blog on a no-name lefty shit-hole what’s not seen this much traffic in years. Even Kevin at ‘Rump Roast’ (!) gives up a link to little traffic whore Kathy so she can stay afloat.
Tell you what, tas, give ‘em tonight off. You’ll need ‘em well rested to get KOS to link you again.
Kathy, I’m fairly sure your intent was to insult Mr. Goldstein. Plainly and unashamed.
Strange from someone that I believe is sincerely upset at the thought of any random black person being insulted, regardless whether they themselves feel they have been.
Your tender sensibilities seem strangely inconsistent.
Also, your regulars are obviously of much lower class than Protein Wisdom’s. PW’s regulars commenting here seem to banter with a goal of making a point. Yours seem to be simply vile, and kinda stupid.
Do you realize this thread isn’t something you should be proud of?
Well, perhaps it is with the crowd you run with…
Lee, your own farts always smell great.
Nah, I know when I have released a real stinker.
Mostly I do it in the bathroom, so as not to torment others.
Maybe you could light a match?
Actually, we saw plenty more traffic last week, partly due to something else you mention…
The fundraiser for Kathy netted a lot more traffic for CFLF then Trollstein “Wisdom” will ever send — netting bipartisan links, at that — because Kathy is a well-respected blogger on both sides of their sphere. The fact that Goldstein sent over his legion of trolls to attack a blogger that regularly gets respect from the other side just shows how classy you guys are.
Of course, another measure of class can be seen in the reasons Goldstein holds a fundraiser. In lieu of trying to get a job, Jeff would rather petition his readers for dough so he can become a mountain man. Because, you know, charities would never need that cash.
Keep it real, dipshits.
Yup. Why can’t I be a real man and expect my wife to feed me? And god forbid a student receive loans from the government to cover expenses — that’s socialism!
Wouldn’t it be easier to just look in the mirror? Time for another PW fundraiser!
So, tas is a failed waiter? I think Kathy and tas should be out looking for jobs instead of picking fights on the internet. Mostly because self-reliance is liberating, but also because neither of them can write worth a damn making this a truly pathetic way to spend your time. Which is only compounded by the fact that it’s what you mostly do with your lives.
Get out there and sweat that rage off, people! Work will do you good.
Memo to tas: When your employer is hiring new people “for no apparent reason” and yet doesn’t have any hours for you, that means you suck at your job and they don’t want you around. You’ve been replaced. And now you know the unapparent reason. You’re welcome.
Really. Check the schedule. The new person has way more hours than you do. That’s because you’re fired.
Oh damn!!! I missed all the fun.
Thank you Kathy; this is an awesome thread. I can’t decide which line is my favorite.
This one by B Moe: “Later at college I had befriended quite a few blacks because of my love of jazz and blues.”
That’s fucking classic. You just can’t parody these guys. At first I thought it must be someone from The Daily Show doing a mockumentary of a righty commenter. That line is sheer, comic genius.
The there’s this list of beauties from Jeff G:
At 2:48 pm: “Oh, and hi, tas! Let me know if you ever want to meet up so that you can tell me what you really think of me!”
At 4:27 pm: “Does that mean you don’t want to meet me in person, tas?”
At 6:26 pm: “Come on, tas. Let’s meet up.”
At 6:31 pm: “Let me know when you want to meet to call me all these names.”
Righteous!!! It’s the 12 year-old calling out Tas for a fight behind the water tower after school. You see, as The Monster told us at 8:38 am, Jeff G is not self-important but self-deprecating. He’s playing the role of the insecure adolescent so we can all bust our guts laughing. And it works!!! You guys are killing me.
But, all kidding aside … Tas, these folks aren’t to be taken lightly. I got my hands on a tape of a leadershp conference hosted by their ass-kicking leader.
This one by B Moe: “Later at college I had befriended quite a few blacks because of my love of jazz and blues.”
That’s fucking classic. You just can’t parody these guys. At first I thought it must be someone from The Daily Show doing a mockumentary of a righty commenter. That line is sheer, comic genius.
It was 1976 in a small town in WV. A lot more black people were into jazz and blues than white. If you got tired of hanging around smoking dope and listening to Lynyrd Skynyrd with good old boys, the other option was smoking dope and listening to George Benson with the brothers.
You just can’t parody these guys.
But you can accuse them of deceit rather than respond to their points? By the way Kathy, this is a classic example of the discussion. Rather than respond honestly, McSwain prefers to “interpret” my comment as dishonest.
You have to love the way these Protein Wisdom goons shape arguments. Goldstein, apparently having nothing better to do (it must be great to be unemployed and have your wife pay your bills, for years, and then spend years on the internet complaining about people who have real financial problems that may require real government assistance), rifles through my blog looking for ammo to attack me with. Then he cherry picks what I wrote. Instead of mentioning that most of my hours per week is spent being a student since I’m a bit occupied, Jeff frames me as some lazy bastard looking to be on the government’s dole. He also forgets to mention my admittance that I burned through a bunch of resumes this summer looking for a job — which somehow ruins his welfare argument against yours truly. Then Jeff accuses me of “spending weeks” on my blog “complaining” about this, which is funny because a quick check of my blog shows me that I’ve made two posts and two comments in the past couple of weeks. If I spend all my time there, I’m sure not doing a great job.
Jeff, having wasted his time on my blog all day in a pathetic comb for counterattacks, could have mentioned all this. He surely knows it.
Trolls like Goldstein are concerned with only one thing: looking like they’re right even when they’re dead wrong. Then they show a biased views of the facts and take to the internet like a monkey takes to throwing shit, proudly displaying their ignorance like it’s truth. And if somebody gets on Jeff’s nerves when he points out just how full of shit he is? Jeff not only resorts to threats of physical violence, but sometimes Captain Cocko just wants to touch his pee-pee to your face:
Comment threads like these have happened for years because nobody on Protein Wisdom has a fucking life. I try never to link there anymore — and I certainly don’t spend time reading it.
Mostly because self-reliance is liberating….
Pablo.
You know as much about self-reliance as a newborn infant knows about a Ph.D. dissertation thesis.
And no, you’re a stranger and I don’t know you. But I do know this. With the same certainty that I know my name, or my daughter’s birth date, or anything else that’s certain.
Thank you Kathy; this is an awesome thread. I can’t decide which line is my favorite.
Well, thank you, too, Mac. It’s great to see another sane voice in here.
tas, you should so take up Jeff’s offer to meet up. Imagine all of the fun you could have shooting intoxicating gay snuff porn videos with him!!! Boner city!!!!!!!!
You have to love the way these Protein Wisdom goons shape arguments.
Did he really say that out loud? On this thread?
This is what B Moe said once you pry Goldstein’s cock out of his mouth:
Get it?! No difference!
I am outstanding in my field!
Loaning brain cells to those in need since 2003
You guys might want to see about getting some of those back.
Jesus Christ, the guy who sits home all day and relies on the soon-to-be-extinct (March 31st) Pajamas Media blogger-network for the meager income he actually contributes to his family is making fun of other people for being under-employed?
But its not good enough that he has to be a failed writer who sits on his ass responding to people like us while his wife goes out and works to put food in his sons mouth. Now he is eager to risk jail &/or a small stint in prison by arranging some ill-defined duel to fight anonymous internet trollers who insult him? He’s going to let his wife work even harder to pay the legal bills that such an action would surely bring? He’s going to let his son go into school everyday and listen to his peers tease him for having a father who is a two-bit criminal? The worst part is that he probably means it because even though he’s not stupid he is obviously quite disturbed.
The worst part is that this isn’t abnormal for him. One would think that a blogger who loves to publicly insult other people might develop a tolerance to being insulted back, but NO! This is how he responds to EVERYONE who insults him online. Its like a broken record. I’ve seen other people who take up martial arts and suddenly think they are the world’s biggest badass but never anyone who combines as pumped-up an ego with as thin a skin.
Especially those bits that contain the sense of humor.
Even after the “boy” fiasco of the Seventies, I’m happy to report that B Moe Dee didn’t give up on blacks.
In the Ninties, he tired of drying Jack with the good ol’ boys and was driven back toward the blacks because of his love for gin & juice (and not just any gin … Tanqueray, of course).
Let’s see how that turned out for B Moe.
Got nothing, do you macswain? All you can do is swat at the imaginary flies buzzing around your head.
If you knew anything about me, you’d know how I actually spell my last name. And that I’ve revealed who I am before.
You like to think you know something, don’t you Jeff? I suppose I could do a simple background check on you too, if I cared. Which I don’t. The fact that you care to do background checks on bloggers that you run into randomly every year or so tells me that you’ve got fucking problems, man. Seek help.
I suppose you found my address, too. If you ever try making good on your threats of meeting mano e mano, be aware that as a baseball fan, there’s a bat in my home and in my car.
One would think that a blogger who loves to publicly insult other people might develop a tolerance to being insulted back, but NO! This is how he responds to EVERYONE who insults him online.
That is one of the key things about Jeff that makes him such a jackass. He’s a thin-skinned bully.
I have a lot of anger at internet snipers — particularly those that countenance any mention of my wife and son — so our handshake might not be the most cordial you’ve ever received.
You are an internet sniper. One of the worst. And for someone who is so touchy about any mention of your wife and son online, you sure talk about them a lot. People who go ballistic at any mention of their private lives maybe should not be using their private lives and the people in their private lives to raise money and make political points. Ever since I first saw Protein Wisdom, you’ve been sprinkling your posts liberally with self-serving anecdotes about Satchel and his mom. If you don’t want your family members to be used by internet snipers, two pieces of advice: Don’t bring them onto your blog to start with and don’t be an internet sniper yourself.
That is one of the key things about Jeff that makes him such a jackass. He’s a thin-skinned bully.
Yes, but he is so wonderfully predictable. Play the tune and watch him dance.
“You know as much about self-reliance as a newborn infant knows about a Ph.D. dissertation thesis.
And no, you’re a stranger and I don’t know you. But I do know this. “
Well Kathy, that means you’re running on faith, ya silly Pablobotherer. As for me, I left home at 17 and I’ve been head of household for going on 25 years. Without a welfare check, ever, unlike, um….you.
You have to love the way these Protein Wisdom goons shape arguments.
I like facts, tas, as opposed to making stuff up, like you did in your very first post on this thread. And what’s funny is that that which you claimed to know (much like your similarly unemployed friend Kathy )about all those evil right wingers is God’s honest truth about you, and you know it. Loser.
Projection is not your friend. But I could be. You’re in my general neighborhood. I’ll buy you a piece of beef, if you like. Because of the charity!!!
Wait … that’s not ol’ Dr. Pablo who performs surgeries with a mellonballer, is it? One of Rightwingsparkle’s runts.
This just couldn’t get any better, could it?
No. And you’re not Macswain of goats and bacon grease fame, are you? You can get more inane, can’t you? I have faith in that.
That’s the kinda line the ol’ Pablo would’ve used. Ha Ha Ha
But I can see why you’re a Jeff G. fan … with a mind that quickly turns to using goats and bacon grease. You must be proud to have a leader who so quickly turns to physical threats and attacking people’s anonymity.
Pablo, you can feel free to post here without the threat of background searches, people showing up on your doorstep or filling your personal email with threats. We don’t roll like that … though I might trash talk ya bit and I don’t whine if you return it.
Hee hee hee
tas the terrible. Boy with a bat. What a joke he is. Adam DuPussy, I’m afraid your bat would become your own personal popsicle stick.
What a McSweening wimp.
Pablo, you can feel free to post here without the threat of background searches, people showing up on your doorstep or filling your personal email with threats. We don’t roll like that….
Of course not. You don’t need to do a background check to just make shit up, now do you?
Shorter serr8d (you know … because he cuts like a knife … well, ur, a bread knife): “Sweep the leg, Jeffy” … then materbates to violent fantasy.
Longer B Moe (hard to do a shorter with such simplistic thoughts): Goo Gooo Gaaaaaah … me no make no sense … Guuuu … aaaaahhhh.
You must be proud to have a leader who so quickly turns to physical threats and attacking people’s anonymity.
You must be proud to have a leader who so quickly turns to empty physical threats and attacking people’s anonymity.
I fixed it for you.
JG cant and wont do shit. He is the poster child for impotent rage.
As for me, I left home at 17 and I’ve been head of household for going on 25 years. Without a welfare check, ever, unlike, um….you. …
Pablo, you just prove my point. You have only the most superficial and shallow idea of what it means to be self-reliant. Leaving home at 17 and being “head of household” for 25 years does not necessarily mean you’re self-reliant.
I repeat: You do not have the first clue what it means to be self-reliant. Well… maybe the first clue. But you’ve got a long way to go before you have a full understanding.
We don’t roll like that … though I might trash talk ya bit and I don’t whine if you return it.
You haven’t read this thread, have you? Your side has nothing but offered baseless assumptions and several gallons of whine of the “He hit me back first!” varietal. Direct requests for specific criticism in responses to a “That’s totally icky, right?” post generate nothing but insults from your compatriots.
You haven’t improved their record of making any actual argument. Would you like to start? Or are you good with the class clown act?
I suspect that you don’t understand what self-reliance is, given that you seem to think you can attain it on welfare.
Poor Pablo. So angry. I guess being cuckolded will do that to a guy. An insecure and pathetic guy.
More baseless, fallacious assumptions from Sporsk. Do you have an argument, friend? This place sorely needs one.
Anyone? Bueller?
I suspect that you don’t understand what self-reliance is, given that you seem to think you can attain it on welfare.
Pablo, you don’t disappoint. Thanks for the lead-in.
I am going to list some well-known people here, from various fields. I want you to tell me which ones are self-reliant, and which ones are not:
Mike Wallace
Sally Jesse Raphael
Rob Thomas
Jean-Claude Van Damme
George W. Bush
Buzz Aldrin
J.K. Rowling
Rush Limbaugh
Jackie Kennedy
Virginia Woolf
William Kristol
Joe the Plumber
Take your time.
One more thing: If you look up any of these people, you lose automatically. I want you to tell me which ones you think are self-reliant just from what you know of them as famous people.
Now listen here, folks, I will say this once, and only once.
As our new visitors may or may not have the grace to have noticed, despite what we at CFLF think of anyone’s opinions, most opinions are free to be posted here without fear of retribution, banning, etc (much to the chagrin of some of our staff). There are quite a few sites that would have scrubbed this entire thread long ago, but we don’t out of some strange attachment to free speech and letting people have their say.
There are things that will not be tolerated. Personal threats and a lack of respect for the anonymity of those authors here who choose to remain anonymous will result in the immediate scrubbing of all of your comments and your being banned from further contributions at this site.
Just because I don’t write here anymore that doesn’t mean I don’t still pay attention, and I have no tolerance for those who cross the already spare lines of decency I like to have maintained for our authors.
You have been warned.
Careful, Pablo, I think it’s a trap!
i know! Ralph Waldo Emerson!
Who, like Jackie Kennedy and Virginia Woolf, is dead. Unlike your argument, which seems never to have drawn breath. Let me know if and when it’s born, won’t you?
Kyle, you are one graceful dude. I just wanted to make sure someone said that.
I try.
Careful, Pablo, I think it’s a trap!
And Pablo was clever enough not to fall into it. Gotta give him credit for that.