Sadly, No
I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. I'm a fiscal conservative and largely libertarian, although, per Milton Friedman on open borders being a disaster in a welfare state, I'm not for open borders.
I do have to say, I know people on the right (who think I'm kind a nitwit for being against the Iraq war and some other stuff they're for), and people on the left (who, for example, find my ideas on health care just plain wrong), but I have to say, in my personal experience, people on the right haven't pulled the nasty attempts at intimidation and silencing that people on the left have when they've disagreed with me. It seems there's no fascist like a "progressive."
Let's tie in all your themes for this morning (chartreuse eveningwear excepted).
Islam --like the impoverished cultures that tend to embrace it-- nourishes the worst of human nature, our natural but childish fears and selfishness. They have no idea that struggling to contain their individual impulses can bring individual achievement to their lives. They're like a bratty little brother (or sister) who cries and has a fit when a senior sibling won't share the the money from the paper route or babysitting. (As with those darned Jews!)
Here in America, parents don't put up with much whining like that that. You want some spending money too, baby chile? Then get your own fucking paper route.
This is why I was so tickled by that Iranian I met last week... All the guy had to do was start earning his own living on the basis of his efforts --rather than his political or religious connections-- and all the childishness vanished from his heart. Being in command of his efforts and earnings, even as an unremarkable laborer, meant that much to him.
PJ O'rourke put it like this:
[T]he Tenth Commandment. "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor's." The Ten Commandments are God's basic rules about how we should live--a brief list of sacred obligations and solemn moral precepts. The first nine Commandments concern theological principles and social law. But then, right at the end, is "Don't envy your buddy's cow." How did that make the top ten? What's it doing there? Why would God, with just ten things to tell Moses, choose as one of those things jealousy about the starter mansion with in-ground pool next door?
Yet think how important the Tenth Commandment is to a community, to a nation, indeed to a presidential election. If you want a mule, if you want a pot roast, if you want a cleaning lady, don't be a jerk and whine about what the people across the street have--go get your own.
The Tenth Commandment sends a message to all the jerks who want redistribution of wealth, higher taxes, more government programs, more government regulation, more government, less free enterprise, and less freedom. And the message is clear and concise: Go to hell.
The theme emerges...
Amy, when reviewing this flood of snotty comments you're received this week, there really is a childish tone to the attacks from the left. Almost all the comments are brief, sarcastic and facetious. But as Zappa once noted, facetiousness doesn't work well in print: These are not mature critics. And the problem isn't just their spitball technique... It's their implicit resentment that you should dare to think your life (or blog or column or ideas about race) have any validity until they, your blog-commenting little brothers and sisters, have offered their certification.
But little brothers and sisters really need to get their own projects in order before they start telling their senior siblings how to run their paper routes, or babysitting jobs, or advice columns & blogs.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 2:50 AM
As someone who used to think of himself as Left leaning, I couldn't agree with you more. Of course there are those abortion clinic picketing types, but they're an aberration really. When was the last time a Noam Chomsky copped a pie in the face on a campus visit from a Right-wing student in the way that David Horowitz or (shudder) Ann Coulter have been attacked by vile Leftist thugs? But then one shouldn't be surprised when one looks at the behaviour of some of the most notorious hardline leftists of history: Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao...
GMan at August 16, 2008 5:06 AM
In a way, even though the far left tends toward pro-abortion stances, the anti-abortion types that engage in protest are of a kind with the left.
They are convinced that their belief system is the only valid one, they use threats of violence and humiliation to intimidate their ideological foes, and they want to use the power of government to impose their moral code.
Scratch a progressive, find a fascist. Every. Single. Time.
brian at August 16, 2008 5:32 AM
As someone who cannot be branded either "liberal" or "conservative" by anyone examining my arguments over time, I find that the most disgusting thing about an American liberal is their constant hypocrisy. Arguing for environmental controls while maintained a yardful of cars, rallying for peace and starting fights, clamoring for gun control laws while lying about the extent of existing law - and just ask promoters who cleans up after themselves at conventions.
I think this is a psychological constant: the less powerful you perceive yourself to be, and the less capable you are, the more important your personal wants become.
But a lack of personal competence means facts are always a trivial thing, to be disregarded when convenient. I am depressed by the continuing realization that there are so many people so eager to speak that they spend no time learning. Not even the basics - of government, any kind of evaluative thinking. Medicine, seatbelt use / accident risks, motorcycles, guns, airplanes, economics, computers... the law. The law! Most people don't even know what a crime is.
How strident are the cries of those who know all about police work, or military tactics - from sitting in the dark with a box of popcorn!
So many are fantastically pleased to repeat the lies and superstitions they find satisfying that it's tougher as time goes by to find an entertaining conversation. Look at how nasty a thread gets when the hooting starts.
How many of you here have spent days, weeks, years collecting information about the subject of your speech, weighing one fact against others, determining which is editorial and which is an information source?
Too few.
Amy, at least, does research - to the horror of those who haven't, but have feelings they must feed, to reassure themselves that unlike anyone else, they're special.
Radwaste at August 16, 2008 5:37 AM
I'm most shocked at how sleazy these people are, and how they've come here in this mob to try to punish me for speech with which they don't agree. Some creep named Brendan just posted a copy of the time-stamps of the corrections I made in my Wikipedia page, everytime these tiny jackbooted thugs posted another lie on the page. Finally, Wikipedia had to lock the page. Here's what Brendan wrote:
Which one of these things is not like the other? Option 1: You can't be a newspaper columnist and a blogger and be all sensitive about what people say about you, and I'm not.
And here's my response: "I'm talking about people's opinions, not people posting lies that can damage the career I've built as a columnist, journalist, and author. Again, I celebrate and will even defend your right to put up a blog criticizing my work. That's free speech, and I'm a fervent supporter of it. Are you really that dim that you don't understand the difference between posting career-damaging lies and posting opinion? Or is this the best you can do at trying to kneecap somebody with sleazy criticism, and you took what you had?"
If I'm for anything, it's for the truth. This little mob coming over from the Sadly Pathetic self-described "liberal/progressive" site, they kept posting in the comments that I was "lying" about something about somebody named "Gary Ruppert" -- really mention of the guy seems to just be a way to hijack my comments section and turn it into some attack site against people they disagree with (me), just like the hundred of comments denigrating me and others they disagree with on theirs. I find the efforts to intimidate me, to punish me for my unpermitted speech (at least in terms of what they agree with), just shockingly disgusting.
I have a friend in Beverly Hills, probably one of three Republicans, who had her Vote Bush signs stolen repeatedly in the last election. I did not vote for Bush; I voted for that sleazebag Kerry, but I am shocked by any effort to silence speech, and in the current election, I'm going to help her catch the people who will surely steal her McCain signs. P.S. She's no dope. She has a dog with a head the size of Lucy, which puts out a rather large quantity of excrement every day. In the past, she watered it down in a bucket and made a rather large moat around the sign. So...if they got away with their signs, there was still the bill for new car carpeting, I suppose, and I just love that.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 6:46 AM
Here's the blog of tiny little fascist Woody, who apparently is a 62-year-old man posting cracks like this --
"I had you as a trannie, but going the other way... no WAY that hair's 'real.' and that jaw! O, yeah, bite me, puh-leasze!!!!
-- on my blog.
His e-mail: konopelli@yahoo.com -- which is how I found his blog, posted without his name, of course, so still anonymous despite the e-mail address.
Here's his profile: http://www.blogger.com/profile/09205896988142798901
See, here's the deal, Woody. You are hiding under the cloak of anonymity. I'm guessing you're a tiny-dicked loser. I mean, what kind of 62-year-old man posts anonymous attack comments about a woman's looks on her website? Is this "progressive" behavior, trying to punish and intimidate me for speaking freely?
I don't post stuff I wouldn't say to somebody in person. It's uncivil to attack somebody about their looks. Also, I can't imagine somebody who posts anonymous attack remarks such as this having the balls to ever speak to me in public.
You are probably typical of the people Sadly Pathetic is sending over here. And you know my name, as I have the balls you couldn't dream of having to post under it, with my picture right there, because I stand behind what I write.
You might try it sometime, cowardly loser.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 7:05 AM
His blog is: http://walled-in-pond.blogspot.com/
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 7:06 AM
I agree completely Amy. I am a staunch Libertarian (in the Army, no less). I am often engaged in conversations where I am harshly critical of American foreign and domestic policy.Most (if not all) of my friends (many of whom are officers with advanced degrees and have multiple deployments under their belts) are conservatives - few are party line Republicans, but some are.
When we discuss issues (which is often), they engage THE ISSUES. Some of the time they agree with me, and when they don't, the most hateful thing I hear them say is (get ready for it)..."you are wrong."
Compare and contrast this with Law School (which I was half way through when I re-enlisted). There I was a "selfish, hateful mean spirited RIGHT WING RACIST RUNNING DOG CAPITALIST WHO RUBBED MY FINGER TIPS TOGETHER AND CHUCKLED "TEE-HEE-HEE" WHEN A BLACK/FEMALE/HOMOSEXUAL (the leftist holy trinity in hierarchical order) WAS CRUSHED UNDER THE BOOTHEEL OF MY TOTALITARIAN CULTURE."
The hatefulness of these people is astounding, but not surprising. One of the greatest lies in history concerns the dichotomy between Hitlerian Fascism and Soviet Socialism. The only philosophical difference between them was the scope of their philosophy. The Soviets believed that, for example, a factory worker in Minsk would feel a greater bond with a factory worker in Pittsburgh than he would with the owner of the factory. The Nazis believed that was nonsense - shared culture and history would trump social station. Hence, "National Socialism."
The communists who joined the Nazi party in Germany when it became clear the Nazis had won the day had a saying - "First Brwon, then Red."
WolfmanMac at August 16, 2008 7:07 AM
This is so odd. I always considered myself a liberal and a progressive. I think I'm going to start referring to myself as a rationalist and an independent from now on.
Melissa G at August 16, 2008 7:09 AM
"First BROWN, then Red." My apologies.
WolfmanMac at August 16, 2008 7:10 AM
The right hardly has a monopoly on having their signs stolen. In fact, in the 2004 election, sign stealing was widely reported as afflicting both political parties. See: http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/signs.asp
I post that link not for the urban legend about the sign stealer, but for the article afterwards by Barbara Mikkelson that summarizes the numerous instances of the thefts of both Bush and Kerry signs in 2004. There are legions of other articles you can find on-line that detail sign theft of both Republican and Democratic signs--just google the words: yard sign theft election. It's hardly an affliction by the right of the left.
Quizzical at August 16, 2008 7:29 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/08/16/sadly_no.html#comment-1581318">comment from QuizzicalRight, Quiz. And I have to say, I am against ANYONE who tries to silence another person's speech, especially political speech, and will fight to see that they can speak without being silenced if it's in my power (vis a vis my inability to have myself cloned).
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 7:40 AM
The fact is, all liberals and leftists are like Hitler. They are no good and hate America. here in the Heartland, we are not blinded by Obamabots or clamoring for socialist health care. We work hard.
Gary Ruppert at August 16, 2008 8:09 AM
Amy - you might want to talk to Ace over at Ace of Spades about the little mod they have that puts a hash code at the end of every commenters name. The hash represents a unique IP address, so you can spot the sockpuppets really fast.
If "Gary Ruppert" had bothered to read Jonah Goldberg's book, he'd understand that today's progressive movement are the ideological heirs to fascism, communism, and yes, naziism.
History's a bitch. It won't change no matter how many times they rewrite it.
brian at August 16, 2008 9:04 AM
I have a friend in Beverly Hills
The same one who told you Ruppert is in charge of Sadly, No?
The Kenosha Kid at August 16, 2008 9:27 AM
I have to say, in my personal experience, people on the right haven't pulled the nasty attempts at intimidation and silencing that people on the left have
Not even this guy?
However, Tucker says he and other classmates do recall Johnson being vocal about his views.
"I would always remember going to class and I would see that he had a Bill Clinton anti-campaign sticker [on his car] that says I don't miss Bill. "He would surf the internet and he would see that a Democrat had died and he would laugh about it."
Since he just killed a Democratic Party official, and didn't pull up his lawn signs, I guess it isn't that big a deal.
The Kenosha Kid at August 16, 2008 10:15 AM
The fact is, all liberals and leftists are like Hitler. They are no good and hate America. here in the Heartland, we are not blinded by Obamabots or clamoring for socialist health care. We work hard.
Brilliant violation of Godwin's Law, there. I'm completely convinced that you're right, now.
Quizzical at August 16, 2008 10:22 AM
Since he just killed a Democratic Party official, and didn't pull up his lawn signs, I guess it isn't that big a deal.
The worst thing about all of tiny little thugs coming over here is your inability to debate on a level beyond this.
Somebody who murders a party official is clearly in totally different territory than the tiny little thugs pulling up lawn signs, but yes, I take every attempt to quash free speech seriously -- and that goes even if somebody is trying to quash yours.
And I'll repost a comment from my earlier entry:
One of the SoPathetic nitwits wrote: "What you keep explaining is that if you say something outrageous, it's 'free speech,' whereas if someone else says something outrageous in return, they're 'trying to silence you' -- i.e., they are 'against free speech."
My response:
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 10:29 AM
Oh, and because some of you So Pathetics are clearly not that smart, I'll translate what I mean by "defamatory": damaging lies.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 10:31 AM
I'm puzzled by the claim that progressives are trying to "silence" Amy. Someone vandalized her wiki page with the tranny thing, starting nearly two weeks before the whole "don't make the cops have to shoot you by being poor and promiscuous" thing (an unfair characterization, maybe) and then again later. We don't actually know who that was, but we should assume it's someone with the ability to travel back in time. Given all the crap that's been going on in the government, it's safe to say that there is not a progressive with a time machine.
But I digress. Nobody's tried to silence anyone. Amy's posts and comments have been showing up with impressive frequency, even. She's been invited to comment at S,N! although with S,N!'s policy of not looking at IPs it's impossible to tell if she is doing so. The comments are still open there, by the way.
Doctorb at August 16, 2008 10:38 AM
Nobody's tried to silence anyone.
There's been a plan to punish and intimidate me for writing in a non-"progressive" party approved manner, both by mucking up my comments here and by posting defamatory material on Wikipedia.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 10:41 AM
What you're talking about is people making impertinent comments on your blog. Whether you choose to tolerate or not to tolerate such comments is entirely your decision, and is absolutely enforceable via such tools as delete buttons and IP banning. We're not reinventing the blog here; these are things that have been in use for awhile, and for which protocols exist.
I think what we're disagreeing about is all this language about 'silencing' and 'intimidating' and 'punishing,' language about not being a 'victim.'
Since we're being ecumenical about things, that sort of language is eye-rolling when misused by a certain group of grimly aggressive cod-feminists that we've tangled with in the past. It's the overwrought language of a passive-aggressive bully, of someone who backs into you and cries that you pushed them.
In the present context, I suppose anything we might say would be mitigated by the fact that we're clearly not very smart.
Sadly, No! Investor Relations at August 16, 2008 11:06 AM
I'll post it again, for the slow:
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 11:09 AM
The Advice Goddess and Friends in the Ghetto.
( This is covered under #3: Parody sites about me or my ideas. )
Iris Puma at August 16, 2008 11:29 AM
Trust me, as a long time reader of SadlyNo, nobody who operates that site is behind the Wikipedia change and you have absolutely no evidence of that, and your claim that you do is bogus. You said that you have the inside scoop and have talked to someone who knows Gary Ruppert. This is, in fact, impossible, because Gary doesn't exist. That you have has only inflamed the mockery and ridicule of you. Gary has been a fictionalized wingnut joke in the comment threads over there for eons. He has nothing to do with the operation of SadlyNo. You should have taken the high road, Amy, because you've revealed yourself to be something of a fool.
As for your rules and what you will and will not tolerate. What you won't tolerate seems to contradict what you claim you will tolerate.
Lesley at August 16, 2008 11:41 AM
Well, Lesley, the person I spoke to is somebody I've known for years, and exists. The fools are those who come here and post crap to ruin the discussion instead of debating on the issues.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 11:56 AM
Iris is a rare girl coming over from So Pathetic -- in that she actually posted something funny. Thanks, Iris.
And you're right -- not only do I welcome stuff like that, I love it.
Makes me yearn for a copy of Hellzapoppin'.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 11:58 AM
I especially loved the dog jumping rope.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 12:00 PM
Amy, the so-called "left" has gotten far more repressive and totalarian than the "right" they so decry. I'm somewhere in the middle, agreeing with some things from one "side", some things from another "side" and sometimes disagreeing with them both. And sometimes, believe it or not, I don't have an opinion or can't decide who's right or wrong. And -- now this is wild and crazy -- sometimes I've had an opinion that I've actually changed after listening to someone's reasoned argument. (Hint to the trolls: reasoned argument is not name calling or saying because we say so.)
While I do -- as an Atheist single mom -- feel very threatened by the Religious Right, I don't feel threatened by less extreme Republicans and have in fact helped vote one Republican senator into office who has not caused me to regret my vote.
But, lately, in day to day life, it is those who claim to call themself progressive I find most repressive. Just what has happened on this board is a fine example of that. You are criticized above for allowing free speech to the extent that you do not delete them or bar them yet they cry when you speak up and defend yourself. They only pretend to not know the difference between open speech and defammation. They know it only too well. They are using speech as a weapon, not a tool.
The pen is mightier than the sword and they believe that. But you have proved to have the sharper wit, the keener mind -- in short, the superior weapon when it's a war of words -- and they are now slashing wildly with the dull blade of their weak "intellect".
Frankly, it's the turn our culture's taken lately. Trans-fat has now been banned in my city from all places that you eat at. Now you can argue the pros and cons of trans-fat but, man, the freedom of customers to eat as they choose (this is not second-hand smoke going into someone else's body when you partake, this is something they freely choose) and the freedom of an eating establishment to use same. They might have had a legitimate argument to say you had to disclose if you use trans-fat and the customer could decide to buy or not but, no, they removed choice/freedom for customer and proprieter because they don't think I should eat trans-fat. (Why do I fear some of my take-out will never be the same?)
The same with all the PC bullshit. You don't want to hang out with racists, don't. I don't. But to prohibit speech so to the point that you feel free to harrass (yes, harrass, that is what they are deliberately doing here) a writer on her blog merely because she criticized someone's personal behavior who happens to be the race you're selected out for special treatment and then have the fucking nerve to claim you are doing it in the name of freedom is fucking ludricous.
Big Brother is watching and war is peace.
T's Grammy at August 16, 2008 12:05 PM
These "Sadly, No!" people are whack... Even by the diminished standards of blog commentary here and elsewhere, these people face troubling matters of personal development which should have been handled through normal maturation. Consider:
[1.] The name of their blog is "Sadly, No!" Their embrace of sarcasm begins before you even load the page. "Sadly, no!" is a smirking teenager's response to some unheard plea that the world should be working better. They're happy to let you work this out without context (a pattern which continues in their comments here at Amy's: See #3, below).
[2.] There's a seventh-grader's fascination with social status:
> She's been invited
> to comment at S,N!
It's about clubbiness and being part of the "in" crowd at the junior high, here nothing could be worse than not being invited to the cool kid's birthday party.
[3.] Consider the comment "Posted by: Gary Ruppert at August 16, 2008 8:09 AM": There's no sincerity in it at all, not one word. The signature is a apparently a (satiric!) shibboleth of theirs, a precious in-joke (see #2, above). Nor is there any clue who the author is... So if you decided you agreed with his perspective whole-heartedly, you wouldn't be able to contact him to say so. And if you were merely interested in his perspective but wanted to get a few more details, you wouldn't be able to ask. These are not people who are interested in trading ideas or offering persuasion.
What we got here is just a wafting miasmia of teenage resentment. And they're so energetic about it! They log in, pinch off these tiny turds of hatred, zip up their pants and go away again. I have to wonder about their childhoods, etc... What happened to them that they get such pleasure from being so loudly sullen? Why do they have to be anonymous with it? What hurt are they trying to express?
Amy's blog is not the center of human accountability or anything, but the people who regularly comment here at least leave names and enough personal information that you can figure out where their ideas come from. And Amy's always, always let people say whatever they want. She gives us enough rope to hang ourselves, and I got the rope burns to prove it.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 12:36 PM
Crid you just love to read what you write don't you?
owlbear1 at August 16, 2008 1:12 PM
Wait, I'm confused. So you're NOT a tranny? My god, genetics can be so cruel sometimes.
Alexis Arquette at August 16, 2008 1:27 PM
Ironic that Owl's comment should be curt and sarcastic, ain't it? That's exactly the point I was making.
Brief eruptions of teenage resentment is all these people got.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 1:28 PM
Another one, from "Alexis"!
I missed the tech part of the discussion earlier in the week... Are we sure these aren't all coming from a a single bitter person, a child of divorce in an under-decorated one-bedroom somewhere?
I mean, did it ever even occur to Owl & Alexis to be brief but clear, instead of brief and backhanded?
Listen, I love me some sarcasm... I been making sarcastic comments here very steadily for almost five years, often challenging Amy's belief's quite pointedly. Letterman was my favorite guy on TV. All my favorite people (Zappa, Paglia, Hitchens etc) are bright and pugilistic... I love a good smartass.
But they follow through with roundhouse punches. It's not just about bitchslaps.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 1:35 PM
snicker
owlbear1 at August 16, 2008 1:36 PM
Exactly. It's all "Kilroy was here," but under another name, by a bunch of 13-year-olds -- going on 62 in some cases (the pathetic commie man with the "walled-in-pond" blog).
Could you imagine any 62-year-old you know spending time going on some chick's blog to say, "Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah! You're ugly!"?
It's no wonder these people post anonymously.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 1:39 PM
Meanwhile, a bunch of yahoos are posting on another entry, entries that are solid "Spam Spam Spam Spam" for lines and lines in my name. Vandals who have no ability to debate in a civilized way, so they act like the tiny little thugs they are. And no, all from different IP addresses. This is a busy little mob, apparently gathering somewhere to plot to put little turds up on my site.
Meanwhile, I've almost finished the next chapter of my book. Some of us actually DO things instead of trying to destroy the things other people have created, imagine that.
And yeah, Crid -- I do love anybody who can give great debate, fight back using their brain instead of their rectum. And that's what's so tiresome about these assholes. Instead of participating in any sort of interesting interchange, they just sit their in their own feces and crayon up the walls.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 1:46 PM
And check out the last one here (before I closed the comments):
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2006/06/04/html_hell_1.html
"Progressive," indeed.
How amazing that so many tiny little people are so excited by coming over here to write on the walls.
The last two left by vandals were from Holland and Berlin. The one before that was from Hamburg. The one before that was from Berlin. Down the pike, there was one from Moldova.
You know, if I were European, I'd be a lot more worried about Islam's encroachment in my society than following orders to put little turds on my site all day, lest I not be taught a lesson about giving an opinion that doesn't toe the "progressive" line. You just have to love that word. Please somebody, wake me when there's progress.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 1:50 PM
I didn't realize until now that your political views were fairly similar to my own. Most interesting.
Amy, your experiences with "progressives" have echoed my own. I referenced your posting and added several experiences of my own here. I found it rather healing to do so!
Robert W. at August 16, 2008 2:00 PM
What's all this then?
The Weally Weal Gawy Wuppert at August 16, 2008 2:16 PM
Pssst...Amy, those people really aren't coming from Europe.
But thanks for another screencap of your racist spew.
p3wned again.
Gary Ruppert, advice Fairy at August 16, 2008 2:18 PM
The last two are from the same tiny little turd, this whois info:
IP address location & IP address info:
IP address [?]: 87.118.101.102 [Whois]
IP address country: ip address flag Germany
IP address state: Thuringen
IP address city: Erfurt
IP address latitude: 50.983299
IP address longitude: 11.033300
ISP of this IP [?]: Keyweb AG
Organization: Keyweb AG IP Network
Host of this IP: [?]: tor-anonymizer1.dotplex.de [Whois]
Local Time of this IP country: 2008-08-16 23:21
I'm writing a book about this now -- about, among other things, people who have no self-control unless they're being watched. They think they're anonymous, and perhaps they are, so they behave in a way they never would if they were face to face and would be called on what they say.
This is the behavior of tiny weeny powerless functionaries during the day and week, whose only power is to grafitti on the wall here, absent the intellect to join the discussion, and the wherewithall, intellectually, to do it.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 2:26 PM
Smart stuff, Robert W. I liked this bit:
Another thing I respected from your post -- that you say you LISTENED to Barack Obama, and made a decision about him. This is the behavior of a thinking person -- all too rare around these parts, what with the order to the "progressives" to come over here and drop turds.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 2:29 PM
Dude, Amy, you got pwned by someone using Tor. You don't have a horde of Europeans after you, you've probably got one person with a lot of time on their hands.
And your "Islamic horde" comment is priceless. Racist much? Oh, wait....
Oh, god, as if this couldn't get any better...you're just the gift that keeps on giving.
Gary Ruppert at August 16, 2008 2:31 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/08/16/sadly_no.html#comment-1581440">comment from Gary RuppertIslam isn't a race, it's a death cult. There are blonde, blue-eyed Muslims.
I used to think of Muslims like I thought of astrologers, as people who believe in silly, uproven crap -- until 9/11, which took place just blocks from my old New York City apartment. Then I started reading about Islam, including translations from the Quran, a book which commands Muslims to convert or kill anyone who isn't Muslim, and to murder anyone who is an apostate. To be against this sort of thing isn't racist, it's civilized.
And no, not all Muslims are of this ilk -- many are as secular as Christmas Christians. But, far too many want you and me dead because we are "the infidel." That said, I don't hate Muslims. I just don't want to let them do what the Quran commands, and if they are going to do what the Quran commands, I prefer that they do it in Saudi Arabia and other primitive lands.
Finally, what about a religion that accords women the rights of dogs seems "progressive" to you?
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 2:36 PM
Yeah, I'm starting to think this is just one or two pathetic little munchkins. It would explain why they're so brief in the comments... Each posting requires a complicated regimen of spoofing technologies as well. They don't have _time_ to say anything interesting.
I wonder how much of the stuff in the big message stacks earlier in the week was made by people like that. A lot of the messages didn't have any identity to them, they were just footprints in the carpet.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 2:38 PM
p3wned? I understand your problem, Amy. You're dealing with a bunch of children
Cody at August 16, 2008 2:39 PM
Amy, we're making fun of you. No one has even so much as said "shut up". That you respond as you do only means we're doing so effectively. Banning people, deleting comments, pretending we're trying to victimize or plotting against you, just like the scary mooooooshlims, all adds up to huge funny.
Oh, n the fact that conservatives respond more positively to you than lefties means you're more a conservative than a liberal. The racism against blacks and Muslims is a big tip-off. Also callibng yourself a libertarian, which means you're a conservative who doesn't want to be held to the culture war standards you'd force on others. Another big tip off is the fact that your readership overlaps with Jonah Goldberg's. And the projection. You're the one banning and deleting comments, yet you're the one being silenced?
Also, the need to feel persecuted instead of admitting mistakes, like calling black children a litter.
brad at August 16, 2008 3:00 PM
> Amy, we're making fun of you.
Why do you have to say so? Henry Youngman never had to explain his one-liners.
PS- Christ, Brad's blog is called "Fire Megan McArdle."
I'm sure that's meant to be all intellectual and ironic, but...
Rather than try to get McArdle fired, why not just write things that are more interesting than she does, and take away her audience?
That would best for everyone. But there's this fascination with taking people down a peg....
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 3:07 PM
Practitioners who follow the Pa Doe (wrong) path are known for their egotism, jealousy, and lack of honor, morals, discipline and stability. Their selfishness and tendency toward instigating trouble cause them to believe in a distortion of reality that is far from the truth.
MoonBot 5000 (patent pending) at August 16, 2008 3:12 PM
oh Brad, that there are people like you running around this planet scares me. Amy didn't make any mistake. She made no racist comments. The people who are on here writing negative useless comments.. well those comments say more about you than Amy. Please know and remember that.
Melody at August 16, 2008 3:12 PM
I think we have a new member of the McArdlehouse Gang.
We need a name for her...along the lines of "Costco Coulter". Cuz that's what you are Amy, a cheap-ass version of Ann Althouse or Megan McArdle.
That your commenters would admire someone so vain and banal is fitting, really.
Gary Ruppert, advice Fairy at August 16, 2008 3:22 PM
Crid's exactly right with this: "Rather than try to get McArdle fired, why not just write things that are more interesting than she does, and take away her audience? That would best for everyone. But there's this fascination with taking people down a peg...."
I don't always agree with McArdle or others at The Atlantic, but when I don't, I'll either e-mail a friend what she's written or they've written with a comment about it, bring it up over dinner with friends, or blog it. If it's even that momentous.
The idea of firing somebody so their view can't be aired, well, that's right in line with the "progressiveness" I've seen from all the tiny little thugs coming over from Sadly Pathetic.
Also callibng yourself a libertarian, which means you're a conservative who doesn't want to be held to the culture war standards you'd force on others.
You have no idea what it means, because you're interested in nothing more than shitting out your opinion as a sort of "Kilroy was here."
"Culture war standards I'd force on others"?
Um, like how I fight with Crid all the time that gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry?
I don't force anything on anybody. I write about my views and encourage others to debate them if they disagree with me. Crid and I have been fighting about how wrong he is about gay marriage -- in my opinion -- about since he started coming here. If we all agreed here, it would be as dull as it is when the adult teenager or teenagers comes over and leaves their tiny turds.
And Crid's right, about why they're so short.
And if they were funny, you wouldn't have to tell us.
The only funny thing any of you have posted here is the video, via Iris, from vaudeville days, of the monkey and the dog jump-roping. Not one of you has had an even slightly humorous or witty original thought. Or, for that matter, an original thought.
(If I've missed one, feel free to point it out.)
I just can't imagine anyone could have any sort of personal worth from being a tiny little vandal, all because somebody posted something their "progressive" cult leaders deems not okay, or the mob over there in "progressive"-land deems not okay.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 3:23 PM
Amy, nobody posts spam manually any more. That's why it comes from so many addresses. Distributed spamming is all the rage now.
Why, if I'd just respond to all the emails I get from these bastards, I'd be sinking my 57" dick into a different Russian girl every night and then retiring to count the money from all the stock picks I got.
As if.
brian at August 16, 2008 3:25 PM
Memo to self: someone named Melody finds it disturbing I don't share in anti-Muslim bigotry (even as someone who's lived in NYC since well before... that day) or find it ok to analogize black children with animals.
Further, she finds also finds it disturbing that I've amused myself this past day while waiting to get over this cold by watching a self-styled goddess melt down in highly comic ways, and respond to laughing criticism with paranoia and declarations of international plots against her.
I'm ok with that, Melody, but I can't promise I'll remember it.
brad at August 16, 2008 3:25 PM
You're the one banning and deleting comments,
Missed this. Comments, no matter how they take me to task about any issue, I'm fine with and have always been fine with. What I'm not fine with is vandalism via the comments form, which is what is being perpetrated here with all the "Gary Ruppert" comments and so many others, and the posts that say simply "Spam" or "Mwhahah" hundreds of times on older entries.
Don't pretend you don't understand this. I get that you're a slightly more verbal form of vandal -- one who, as Crid points out, is too impotent to outwrite or think Megan McArdle, so his blog is named for getting her fired.
You're just a wee turd, and I'm sure every night when you go to bed, that thought must occur to you and really burn you. So sorry, but don't bring it around here.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 3:27 PM
Brad, if you derive any of your heritage from European stock, muslims have been trying to kill you since the 7th century.
But then again, I guess that sort of nuance is lost on enlightened progressives such as you. Because, what's 10% of a billion? Couldn't possibly be a threat, right?
brian at August 16, 2008 3:28 PM
If you disagree, Amy, you'll "blog it".
However, me having a blog where I express my disagreement is a fascist attempt to silence Ms. McArdle.
Herein lies your comic genius.
brad at August 16, 2008 3:28 PM
I am not a diplomat and, as such, I am not fully conversant with the elegant and rarefied language of the diplomatic trade. I have a reputation for saying what I mean and meaning what I say. So I trust that you'll forgive me if I come across as a bit blunt when I state that I, not being one of the many villainous, cocky couch potatoes of this world, find Mr. Amy Q. Alkon, Sr. the most catty person in the entire world. I want to share this with you because I have always been an independent thinker. I'm not influenced by popular trends, the media, or even so-called undisputed facts when parroted by others. Maybe that streak of independence is what first enabled me to see that when Amy was first found trying to prevent us from recognizing the vast and incomparable achievements, contributions, and discoveries that are the product of our culture, I was scared. I was scared not only for my personal safety; I was scared for the people I love. And now that Amy is planning to prostrate the honor, power, independence, laws, and property of entire countries, I'm certainly terrified.
A study of the worst sorts of deplorable, aberrant upstarts I've ever seen indicates broad political and ideological agreement on the use of force combined with a set of simple tactics to achieve their immediate goal: to get everyone to march in lockstep with Amy's bloodthirsty factotums. Even though Amy eschews his commitments to responsibility and truth in favor of a breathless and drooling enthusiasm for voyeurism, this does not negate the fact that Amy is absolutely mistaken if he believes that it is better that a hundred thousand people should perish than that he should be even slightly inconvenienced. Considering that we must protect the interests of the general public against the greed and unreason of rummy fogeys in such a way that there is nothing he can do about it except learn to live with the fait accompli, I offer that he presents quasi-scientific and pseudointellectual justifications for his pompous bait-and-switch tactics in order to convince people that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point. He may mean well but I'm not a coldhearted person. I'd like nothing more than to extend my hand in friendship to Amy's myrmidons and convey my hope that in the days to come we can work together to discuss the programmatic foundations of Amy's delirious squibs in detail. Unfortunately, knowing them, they'd rather manipulate the public like a puppet dangling from strings because that's what Amy wants.
No one -- except Amy, so high on his own hallucinations that he believes them to be real -- can seriously believe that his stances are all sweetness and light. Why do I tell you this? Because these days, no one else has the guts to. Although he is ever learning Amy is never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. The truth, in this context, is that even when the facts don't fit, Amy sometimes tries to use them anyway. He still maintains, for instance, that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape.
We can't stop Amy overnight. It takes time, patience and experience to prevent the production of a new crop of the most foul slobs I've ever seen. I indubitably hope that humanity will rid this earth of venal buffoons with the greatest dispatch, since otherwise, the earth might well become rid of humanity. I feel no shame in writing that it's best to ignore most of the quotes that he so frequently cites. Amy takes quotes of of context; uses misleading, irrelevant, and out-of-date quotes; and, presents quotes from legitimate authorities used misleadingly to support contentions that they did not intend and that are not true. In short, the worst types of incoherent, disgusting authoritarians there are must be treated with political justice, not with civil justice, as they are decidedly not real citizens. I'll say that again because I want it to sink in: The drivel emanating freely from his mouth gives me cause to reach for the nearest vomit pail.
Amy maintains that everything he says is utterly and thoroughly true. Perhaps it would be best for him to awaken from his delusional, narcoleptic fantasyland and observe that he likes to reopen wounds that seem scarcely healed. Such activity can flourish only in the dark, however. If you drag it into the open, Amy and his emissaries will run for cover, like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen when the light is turned on suddenly during the night. That's why we must find the inner strength to insist on a policy of zero tolerance toward vandalism. Because the truth is not meant to be warm and fuzzy, it therefore stands to reason that he throws a tantrum every time he doesn't get what he wants. Well, that's another story. To get back to my main point, I ought to mention that it's considerations of this sort that make it worth our while to learn about the muzzy-headed things Amy is up to. I'll probably devote a separate letter to that topic alone, but for now, I'll simply summarize by stating that the virus of obstructionism took control of our country's political life long ago. Now, thanks to Amy's writings, that virus will continue to spread until no one can recall that in a country like ours where charlatanism, oligarchism, and onanism run rampant, we need laws to help enforce behavior that ought to be performed out of common sense, decency, and tolerance. I submit that everyone should stop and mull that assertion. Then, you'll understand why Amy can't see beyond his own domineering, anal-retentive concerns. It is no more complicated than that.
My goal is to get Amy to realize that I am confident that mumpish goofballs will come to their own conclusions about all of these matters. Of course, if he insists on remaining an ignorant, uninformed, and ill-informed soi-disant do-gooder, that's his prerogative. Following this line of logic, it would appear that I am a law-and-order kind of person. I hate to see crimes go unpunished. That's why I obviously hope that Amy serves a long prison term for his illegal attempts to caricature and stereotype people from other cultures. I like to think I'm a reasonable person but you just can't reason with two-faced sluggards. It's been tried. They don't understand, they can't understand, they don't want to understand, and they will die without understanding why all we want is for them not to foster feudalism at every opportunity.
I am sick of hearing Amy intone with an authority reminiscent of Moses descending Sinai that the laws of nature don't apply to him. Let me rephrase that: He is like a magician who produces a dove in one hand while the other hand is busy trying to inject even more fear and divisiveness into political campaigns. Let me give you a concrete example of his totally flighty behavior. Really, the only way to deal with a subject like this is to study concrete examples -- many concrete examples -- to look at the details and observe how Amy's lickspittles merely present their allegations as though they were true, a technique known as a "conclusory" or "Kierkegaardian" leap. My example begins with the observation that when people say that bigotry and hate are alive and well, they're right. And Amy is to blame. I am making a pretty serious accusation here. I am accusing him of planning to engage in the trafficking of human beings. And I don't want anyone to think that I am basing my accusation only on the fact that the objection may still be raised that all it takes to solve our social woes are shotgun marriages, heavy-handed divorce laws, and a return to some mythical 1950s Shangri-la. At first glance this sounds almost believable yet the following must be borne in mind: He coins polysyllabic neologisms to make his belief systems sound like they're actually important. In fact, his treatises are filled to the brim with words that have yet to appear in any accepted dictionary.
Amy has been doing "in-depth research" (whatever he thinks that means) to prove that he has mystical powers of divination and prophecy. I should mention that I've been doing some research of my own. So far, I've "discovered" that every time Amy utters or writes a statement that supports frotteurism -- even indirectly -- it sends a message that Amy is the arbiter of all things. I claim that we mustn't let him make such statements, partly because his hortatory exclamation that it would be beneficial for him to convict me without trial, jury, or reading one complete paragraph of this letter makes me think that the fallout from Amy's venom-spouting ipse dixits has been an increasingly predatory environment of calculation, scheming, and pandering that will, by virtue of its omnipresence, inflict more death and destruction than Genghis Khan's hordes, but primarily because I honestly dislike Amy. Likes or dislikes, however, are irrelevant to observed facts, such as that Amy may have access to weapons of mass destruction. Then again, I consider him to be a weapon of mass destruction himself. If there is one thing I have learned, it is this: Everyone ought to read my award-winning essay, "The Naked Aggression of Amy Q. Alkon". In it, I chronicle all of Amy's zingers from the execrable to the hidebound and conclude that we've all heard Amy yammer and whine about how he's being scapegoated again, the poor dear.
Amy's junta is a distant cousin of the communist political organizations that were responsible for the murders of at least 90 million people. Sure, it sounds wrongheaded. Blame that on unreasonable undesirables. Amy's recourse to absolutism as a tactical modality for waging low-intensity warfare has been successful. More than that, Amy once said that a totalitarian dictatorship is the best form of government we could possibly have. Oh, please. I'm just glad I hadn't eaten dinner right before I heard him say that. Otherwise, I'd probably still be vomiting too hard to tell you that there are some simple truths in this world. First, Amy's recent attempt to open the gates of Hell may prove to be a watershed event for those of us who want to view the realms of favoritism and nonrepresentationalism not as two opposing poles but as two continua. Second, he seems to enjoy making unfounded statements and jumping to conclusions. And finally, he seems unable to think of turns of speech that aren't hackneyed. What really grates on my nerves, however, is that Amy's prose consists less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning than of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated henhouse.
Please forgive the following sermon, but it can't be avoided in this discussion: I, for one, can't possibly believe Amy's claim that skin color means more than skill and gender is more impressive than genius. If someone can convince me otherwise, I'll eat my hat. Heck, I'll eat a whole closetful of hats. That's a pretty safe bet because Amy has warned us that one of these days, simple-minded, crass self-promoters will defend pauperism, obscurantism, and notions of racial superiority. If you think about it, you'll realize that Amy's warning is a self-fulfilling prophecy in the sense that I recently received some mail in which the writer stated, "Amy's values are so inverted, they would make Lewis Carroll blush." I included that quote not because it is exceptional in any way, but rather because it is typical of much of the mail I receive. I included it to show you that I'm not the only one who thinks that it's really not bloody-mindedness that compels me to break the spell of great expectations that now binds stupid wantwits (especially the childish type) to Amy. It's my sense of responsibility to you, the reader. Does anybody else feel the way I do, or am I alone in my disgust with Mr. Amy Q. Alkon, Sr.?
Gary Ruppert, advice Fairy at August 16, 2008 3:29 PM
Also, the need to feel persecuted instead of admitting mistakes, like calling black children a litter.
One more still -- here I am for Pajamas, referring to rich white women with many children as having "litters," in my title "Rich Litter":
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/rich_litter/
Pointed that out before, how I have referred to white Catholics, Muslims, and rich women as having "litters," but brad's probably seen that many times. The reality is, this isn't about whether I'm racist or not, it's about trying to beat me into toeing the "progressive" line, and punishing me for not doing it -- whether or not I'm actually "racist."
Those "progressives" have language rules, and all are to follow them, sans dissent.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 3:32 PM
So their plan is to act as my friends and coworkers and school mates over the years, even allowing me to date one of their "death cult", a brilliant, beautiful, educated woman, along the way?
Devious.
Btw, as a grad student in philosophy I'm grateful to Islam for preserving the works of Plato while we in the West were too busy living in the Dark Ages to remain literate.
brad at August 16, 2008 3:32 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/08/16/sadly_no.html#comment-1581466">comment from bradIf you disagree, Amy, you'll "blog it". However, me having a blog where I express my disagreement is a fascist attempt to silence Ms. McArdle. Herein lies your comic genius.
A blog is an appropriate forum to voice disagreement -- I've said this perhaps 50 times in the past two days. The issue is with the title of your blog -- Crid pointed out that you seek to fire Ms. McArdle, not a surprise since you will never come close to publishing anything that unseats her from her post out of talent and smarts.
Look, so sorry you're a loser, but take it elsewhere.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 3:34 PM
Brad - I suppose you'll thank them equally for their destruction of historical artifacts in Afghanistan, then?
If Islam was ever benign, it is being taken over by people who believe in a literal interpretation of the Quran - which means kill or convert the infidels to bring about the justice of Allah.
I suppose you're among those who believe that radical Christians are the greatest threat mankind faces, right?
Well, they ain't got nothin' on the new and improved followers of Mo.
You know "moderate" muslims. Good for you. So do I. They happen to have been in this country for a long damn while, and aren't exposed to the radical teachings coming out of Saudi-funded mosques and madrassas.
But the plural of anecdote is not data. And you'll find - if you're still together - that if you decide to marry this nice young woman that you'll be expected to convert. Because she's certainly not going to give up her religion for you.
brian at August 16, 2008 3:39 PM
"Brad, if you derive any of your heritage from European stock, muslims have been trying to kill you since the 7th century."
They must be really bad at it, if they have not manages to succeed after 1,400 years.
Malaclypse at August 16, 2008 3:39 PM
I wonder whether your need for the last word will outweigh the number of proxies out there.
Probably not.
I truly believe my little niche snark blog will convince the conservative owner of The Atlantic to put aside his agenda of ruining the imprint and go back to honoring its traditions. Really, because my ego is as overblown as yours.
brad at August 16, 2008 3:40 PM
Have you considered the possibility of Moslem collaboration in this current campaign against you, Ms. Alkon? They certainly would want your truth speaking silenced.
T.D. Fitzgerald at August 16, 2008 3:40 PM
Funny, I've been saying something similar about the Jews and their supposed efforts to take over the Earth - if they haven't managed to do it in 5,700 years, they aren't ever going to.
The muslims are fast approaching the magical 51% of the population in many European nations. Wanna lay odds on how many non-muslims will be left there after that happens?
brian at August 16, 2008 3:41 PM
No brian, I've also known folk directly from Saudi Arabi and across the Muslim world. Part of living in NYC is frequent interaction with immigrants.
I think religious fundamentalism of all stripes are a threat, and that Christianity has just as bloody a history as Islam.
brad at August 16, 2008 3:46 PM
Amy, I find the attacks on your sexuality to be offensive, as offensive as your screed about Tarika Wilson. So I guess that makes it about even. You then compounded your error by allowing your ego to run amok and all you did was look silly.
But there is no way you are the least bit liberal. You're a conservative libertarian. Your commenters are even more rabidly conservative than you are and your blog is partnered with the highly conservative PJ media. So no, you don't get to wrap yourself in anything remotely liberal.
noen at August 16, 2008 3:52 PM
I counted; that "August 16, 2008 3:29 PM" comment had over two thousand words. None of them made a lick of sense.
Seriously, what's happening to this blog? It used to be this nice little neighborhood shop....
> my little niche snark blog
Snark is not a niche, it's a stage of life. We're expected to grow through it, thereafter relying on its lessons only to enoble and clarify.
> convince the conservative owner
> of The Atlantic to put aside
> his agenda
First, "agenda" is a silly word nowadays. Second, don't be grandiose. The point is that your first impulse was not to countermand McArdle's arguments, but to end their distribution.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 3:55 PM
I suppose you'll thank them equally for their destruction of historical artifacts in Afghanistan, then?
The Taliban do not represent Islam any more than the Dominionists represent Christianity. That you equate the two tells us something about you but nothing about Islam.
noen at August 16, 2008 3:57 PM
I counted; that "August 16, 2008 3:29 PM" comment had over two thousand words. None of them made a lick of sense.
What a pathetic loser douchenozzle.
Gary Ruppert, advice Fairy at August 16, 2008 4:03 PM
Not that I expect you will, Crid, but in my very first post on my blog I make a point to say I don't think I'll manage to get Megan fired. The truth is I just wanted to learn to blog, and she provides a very target rich environment.
I have other forums for more constructive energies.
brad at August 16, 2008 4:06 PM
He listens to Loveline, though
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 4:06 PM
McArdle's arguments
Being generous, I see.
Gary Ruppert, advice Fairy at August 16, 2008 4:06 PM
None of them made a lick of sense.
That's the point of absurdest satire.
First, "agenda" is a silly word nowadays.
Wealthy individuals don't have goals they wish to accomplish with their wealth and influence? Sure they do, they've said so publicly.
noen at August 16, 2008 4:08 PM
McArdle's arguments
Look at me! Look at me! Look at meeeeeeeeee!
noen at August 16, 2008 4:10 PM
See, Amy, I really think this is all one guy... One tragic, bitter guy....
> That's the point of
> absurdest satire.
Insufficient absurd, anemically satiric. What made you think that's what we're here for, anyway?
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 4:11 PM
Not that I expect you will *go there and verify this*, Crid...
Oopsies, distracted.
I think you'll all get to declare victory via my absence soon.
brad at August 16, 2008 4:13 PM
The muslims are fast approaching the magical 51% of the population in many European nations.
Which ones?
The Kenosha Kid at August 16, 2008 4:14 PM
Pssst...Crid, you terminally clueless asshat—Google "complaint generator" and be enlightened.
Gary Ruppert's Tools of the Trade at August 16, 2008 4:16 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/08/16/sadly_no.html#comment-1581491">comment from noenAmy, I find the attacks on your sexuality to be offensive, as offensive as your screed about Tarika Wilson. So I guess that makes it about even. You then compounded your error by allowing your ego to run amok and all you did was look silly. But there is no way you are the least bit liberal. You're a conservative libertarian. Your commenters are even more rabidly conservative than you are and your blog is partnered with the highly conservative PJ media. So no, you don't get to wrap yourself in anything remotely liberal.
I don't seek to wrap myself in anything. And the last thing I want to do is to be associated with liberals -- or any group. I'm a Kerry-voting fiscal conservative, staunch gay marriage supporting...etc. I also voted for Schwarzenegger. And Al Gore for president and Bill Clinton before that. I know that gets in the way of your desperate attempt to label me some Jonah Goldberg clone.
My screed on Tarika Wilson was offensive to you? Well, you're free to disagree with me in my comments section. Unfortunately, my comments section has been taken over by a bunch of thugs, so there's less discussion now and too much juvenile coloring on the walls by the likes of a guy too intellectually impotent to outwrite or outhink Megan McArdle, so he's left to call for her firing in his blog title.
By the way, had my comments section not been overrun by yahoos, you and I might've had a discussion -- an exchange of ideas. I have them often with Crid, who slaps me around here all the time, and shows me errors in my thinking. The same goes for Rad and lots of other regulars here. This isn't some lockstep site. Patrick, who posts here, is so far left, if the world were flat, he'd have long since dropped off the edge. Don, who lives in Paris, frequently takes me to task for being an idiot about something or other. And I love that. I get to respond back, because these people are starting discussions, they aren't trying to disrupt them.
Again, if you don't have the chops for debate, maybe take a community college course in it. And FYI, a little something Hitchens told me: Always be able to argue the other side as well as you can argue your own.
It seems to me that few of the people squeezing out their little "progressive" Kilroy-was-here turds all over my site have given any thought to what I've actually written, and the stuff I've written and others have written to explain my point of view (like the way I use the term "litter" to refer to women of any color or socioeconomic group or religion who have, well, litters of children.) I'm a colorful writer. Perhaps, to the uninitated, my verbiage seems harsh. That's what comments sections are for -- well, for those who are thinking people, and not just a mob of yahoos bent on anything but thought.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 4:17 PM
Insufficient absurd, anemically satiric.
Gary is a fiction, I think. I don't know, he might be real too. But his character is an absurd comment of right wing trolls. But there's no accounting for taste.
What made you think that's what we're here for, anyway?
Me? I had nothing to do with it. Or do you mean you here? I wouldn't know. Or perhaps all of us? What is the meaning of life? Obviously the true meaning of life is to ridicule pretentious twits.
noen at August 16, 2008 4:20 PM
You get to decide what you're here for - you don't get to decide what the rest of us are here for (except by limiting "here": banning and/or deleting).
ckc (not kc) at August 16, 2008 4:24 PM
By the way, Amy, gays and lesbians have always been allowed to marry...
Just sayin'.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 4:28 PM
You know who else endlessly reminds us of their Democratic voting record, Amy? Ann Althouse.
And she goes on to spew the usual right wing spew, just like you.
I almost wonder if Dame Althouse hasn't developed a second personality as a batshit-insane racist advice columnist.
Gary Ruppert, advice Fairy at August 16, 2008 4:29 PM
By the way, Amy, gays and lesbians have always been allowed to marry...
And it is with this comment, sir, that you prove to the rest of us that you have no soul, nor any humanity.
Seriously, fuck you.
Gary Ruppert, advice Fairy at August 16, 2008 4:30 PM
Yeah, this is all one guy. There just aren't that many people in the world with computers looking to post one-liners, all with the same tone, on a blog out of the blue.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 4:35 PM
brad, christianity may have had a bloody past but islam has a bloody present.
Or are all the vidoes sumuggled out of moseques fake?
How about the british teacher almost beaten to beath for allowing children to name a bear after a boy in the class, a boy named ater the pedophile, excuse me the prophet.
How about the riots over cartoons?
How about the religious police who locked little girls inside a burning building so they wouldnt shame their families when they ran out of the building without head scarves on?
How about in islam women are killed for the crime of being raped?
Or honor killings?
Is any of this sinking in?
lujlp at August 16, 2008 4:35 PM
I don't seek to wrap myself in anything.
Well, that was my perception. That you were shocked, shocked to be tagged a conservative, which you clearly are in my opinion.
My screed on Tarika Wilson was offensive to you?
Yes, it really was. I'm poor, inner city, live in and among all kinds of ethnicities. It was the kind of tone deaf soft prejudice I occasionally hear from upper middle class types. And just to be fair, I'm equally offended by the sexual comments made towards you. I'm GLBT myself so no, they are very distasteful.
By the way, had my comments section not been overrun by yahoos, you and I might've had a discussion -- an exchange of ideas.
I'm tempted, I'd be up for it but... color me skeptical that there can be any fruitfull discussion on a blog, any blog.
Again, if you don't have the chops for debate, maybe take a community college course in it.
I've been poor and worked crappy jobs all my life. Have you seen the price of tuition these days? Sheeeeesh.
That's what comments sections are for -- well, for those who are thinking people, and not just a mob of yahoos bent on anything but thought.
They are just making fun of you because you said some stupid crap. They say those things because it gets to you. Don't let it get to you. I'm still unconvinced that comment sections are for thinking people. I've rarely seen it happen and those who self proclaim to be thinkers of great thoughts usually are not. In my experience.
noen at August 16, 2008 4:41 PM
Your feelings have been hurt, and we'd all feel terrible about that, but anyone so proficient with finely-grained "nym" management is probably not a stable enough identity to worry about offending. Nor should we take note of your concerns about racism or religious tolerance. You're just not for real.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 4:43 PM
You shouldn't let the reality of the commenter impinge on the reality of the comments.
ckc (not kc) at August 16, 2008 4:48 PM
You should kiss a girl.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 4:52 PM
...or, to be equally pithy and insightful - you should blow a goat.
ckc (not kc) at August 16, 2008 4:54 PM
Is any of this sinking in?
There were no video cameras during the Inquisition. If there were I am sure one could match injustice for injustice. And don't get all your news from Wing-nut Daily.
Islam itself is a beautiful tradition, certainly as beautiful as any other. The architecture, the art, the poetry... there is much that is admirable. When I take the bus I am just floored by the fabrics the Somalian women around here wear. Yeah, their culture is repressive in some ways and I wouldn't want to live like that but that's just tribalism. It will pass with time.
The real conflict is between "The West" and older rural tribal traditions with a great big dollop of religious fundamentalism.
noen at August 16, 2008 4:57 PM
It was the kind of tone deaf soft prejudice I occasionally hear from upper middle class types.
What, specifically?
See, this is how it works around here. It's real civilized. You state an opinion. And yes, best if you actually STATE it, and don't just say that you have one. Then other people can know what you think and address it.
I still don't know what your problem is.
Crid, on the other hand, states very clearly what he thinks, and then you can tell him what you think and why you think he's wrong on point A or point B, etc. It's very civilized and interesting when we have people capable of civilized discussion here -- no matter how greatly they disagree.
As for being poor, in New York, I slept on a door on two milk crates and worked for $5/hr as a mover, and once even worked as a chicken. I was born with a plastic spoon in my mouth, but I've worked up to stainless steel. And FYI, my old assistant, who's Korean, and first generation American, and from a poor family, worked her ass off at a community college and earned a scholarship to Northwestern. That's the sort of message I send to poor, inner-city kids -- that and telling the girls not to become young single mothers, because it's a poor life for children, and will likely leave them mired in poverty.
Now I see that that part of my message is especially important, given how much "whatever"-ing there seems to be about women with lifestyles like Wilson's. She was a TERRIBLE MOTHER, and should be held up as one and as an example of what young inner city women should not become. It has nothing to do with her death, by the way, and everything to do with the reprehensibly irresponsible way she lived -- and I mean that in relation to the fact that she had multiple daddlyess children raised in an environment fraught with peril.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 4:58 PM
"Crid, on the other hand, states very clearly what he thinks, and then you can tell him what you think and why you think he's wrong on point A or point B, etc. It's very civilized and interesting when we have people capable of civilized discussion here -- no matter how greatly they disagree. "
"Your feelings have been hurt, and we'd all feel terrible about that, but anyone so proficient with finely-grained "nym" management is probably not a stable enough identity to worry about offending. Nor should we take note of your concerns about racism or religious tolerance. You're just not for real."
Discuss.
ckc (not kc) at August 16, 2008 5:02 PM
Crid writes, a common viewpoint of his: "By the way, Amy, gays and lesbians have always been allowed to marry..."
One of the turds responds, as expected:
"And it is with this comment, sir, that you prove to the rest of us that you have no soul, nor any humanity. Seriously, fuck you."
Now, this a point I think Crid is pretty ridiculous on, and we've gone at it on this point numerous times -- I have and other commenters here have, too. But, what we do is this: we address his actual remark.
As LaShawn Barber pointed out, calling somebody "racist" or "lacking in humanity" isn't a discussion, it's a discussion ender.
And again, we totally get it, you're unable to carry on a discussion, so you lash out like an angry little boy, over and over again. But, it's a bore and you're not welcome here -- and let me clarify, not because you have a difference of opinion on this with Crid, as I happen to, but because you're unwilling and probably incapable of discussing an issue, and instead resort to name-calling, which is just a bore to read. Please leave.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 5:02 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/08/16/sadly_no.html#comment-1581512">comment from ckc (not kc)Discuss
It's actually quite simple.
You're a tiny little troll who doesn't add to the discussion -- and, in fact, seems rather aggressive about disrupting any intelligent discussion that might take place around you. You aren't welcome here. Please leave.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 5:14 PM
There were no video cameras during the Inquisition. If there were I am sure one could match injustice for injustice.
WTF???
So you're of the opinion that a christian attocity from 400 yrs ago justifies a muslim attrocity today?
Well the what justified the muslim attrocites 400 yrs ago?
You see neon the bible and the torah are considered to be products of the time.
The quran is considered to be timeless and the laws and rules about killing infidels are just as relevent now to the religion as thery were centuries ago
lujlp at August 16, 2008 5:25 PM
What, specifically?
The squeezing out a litter comment in particular and more generally blaming her for getting murdered while holding her child. These are examples of being racially insensitive. Those of us who are privileged to belong to a different class, gender of ethnicity than others ought to be mindful of the impact that certain words or phrases can have.
Conservatives like yourself often feel that such political correctness is a too heavy burden on them. Sure, it can sometimes get out of hand, balance in all things, but most of us lefties feel that caring about the feelings of others is not too high a price to pay.
I slept on a door on two milk crates....
Yeah well we lived in a hole in the road and ate gravel for breakfast. Spare me your lectures please. And the pull yourself up by your bootstraps delusions too. No one believes that crap. Was that while you were in film school? You got where you are because you were handed certain advantages because you are white and Jewish. The rest is no doubt your own but you were given a leg up so to speak, that others did not have.
Tim Wise: On White Privilege
noen at August 16, 2008 5:35 PM
So you're of the opinion that a christian attocity from 400 yrs ago justifies a muslim attrocity today?
No, they are all equally unjustified. I thought that would be obvious? Silly me.
the laws and rules about killing infidels..
You have been misinformed by your diet of wing-nut news. There are no such laws. This should be easy enough for you to discover on your own. I'd start with more mainstream information sources or just enter the appropriate search terms. I'm sure you'll get plenty of hits of sites that debunk that hateful meme.
I'm equally certain that won't be good enough for you. You want to believe that shit and so you will. No matter what anyone says.
noen at August 16, 2008 5:44 PM
As for being poor, in New York, I slept on a door on two milk crates and worked for $5/hr as a mover, and once even worked as a chicken. I was born with a plastic spoon in my mouth, but I've worked up to stainless steel. And FYI, my old assistant, who's Korean, and first generation American, and from a poor family, worked her ass off at a community college and earned a scholarship to Northwestern.
Luxury. We used to have to sleep UNDER the door with the milk crates for pillows, and I paid the movers $5/hr to throw chickens at me. I was born with molten slag in my mouth, but I've since worked it into a vaguely spoon-like shape. And FYI, Monty Python did this bit better in the first place.
D. Aristophanes at August 16, 2008 5:53 PM
I'm going to make one more comment under this nym, a serious one—evidently, Amy, you are unaware of the philosophy of S,N!:
We don't debate wankers like Crid. When he makes comments like that, we view that as beyond the pale, and not worthy of engagement. Unlike you, we do not see all opinions, however evil and inhumane, as equal players on an egalitarian playing field to be engaged one like another. That is how the Overton Window (look it up) got moved so far to the right, and if we are to prevent this country's slide into the Second Dark Ages, we need to fight, and that is what we are doing.
Gary Ruppert, advice Fairy at August 16, 2008 5:58 PM
"the tiny little lives of a small mob of people now revolve around me".
That's so true, Amy. Sorry this is happening here. My son joined groups like this when he was around 13. They seem to thrive on attacking people while locked in their bedrooms, with clearsil on their faces. Luckily, he grew out of it.
You are too good to keep answering them. Nothing you say will be acceptable, as they simply twist everything you say into the next personal assault. These are kids...or "adults" going on 13.
lovelysoul at August 16, 2008 6:32 PM
See my earlier post. It cued the clueless.
Time to impose a character limit on posts.
Radwaste at August 16, 2008 6:39 PM
I see someone found the bullshit generator.
And noen - read the quran. it tells you everything you need to know about those who interpret it literally.
And if you are as many minorities as you claimed earlier, you should be able to get into any university you want for free.
Especially if you're gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered all at once. The research grants to study you would cover a doctorate for sure.
brian at August 16, 2008 6:55 PM
The Muslim horde will go after all of our gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgenered people, after they kill off the Great White Man, who is the foundation of this civilization.
It's all in Ayn Rand, read it for yourself, and be enlightened.
brain at August 16, 2008 7:02 PM
> Time to impose a character
> limit on posts.
Yeah, comments should be limited to people who have good character. Good to have gotten under his skin, though. I'm presuming he's an obese shut-in or something. This guy is really lonely.
> I'm going to make one more
> comment under this nym, a
> serious one—
This is so weird. It's like we're supposed to beg him not to give up this precious identity that's come to me so much us....
PS I think noen is the same guy... They're ALL the same guy
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 7:07 PM
Oh, and Amy - that "real" quote from the S/N crowd?
I'm afraid that Dan Collins found out the hard way what liberalism and progressivism are all about from one of the bitches either there or at FDL.
The comment she had for him was something to the effect of:
"I'm not interested in debate. I want to eliminate your way of thought"
Basically, progressivism is about the eradication of anything that isn't progressive. Because if you're too stupid to see the light, well, we have no use for you conservative neanderthals.
Let me tell you something, Mr. Progg. Everything that you believe in has been tried over and over again. Hundreds of millions of people were murdered in the name of your ideology. And the way that your type talks about what they want to do to conservatives tells me that you have no qualms about following in Mao's bloody bootsteps.
The only thing standing in your way is the fact that conservatives tend to be heavily armed.
brian at August 16, 2008 7:08 PM
"[brian], on the other hand, states very clearly what he thinks, and then you can tell him what you think and why you think he's wrong on point A or point B, etc. It's very civilized and interesting when we have people capable of civilized discussion here -- no matter how greatly they disagree. "
"And if you are as many minorities as you claimed earlier, you should be able to get into any university you want for free.
Especially if you're gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered all at once. The research grants to study you would cover a doctorate for sure."
Discuss (civilly) brian's interesting and civilized point on gender indentity and access to higher education.
Barry Huppert at August 16, 2008 7:15 PM
Ayn Rand!! That blithering idiot? HAHAHAHAHA!!!!! The only person dumber than she was is Jonah the pantload himself. I remember reading her pathetic attempt at epistemology when I was 16. So do go on. How you hold your head up with that massive brain of yours is a wonder.
noen at August 16, 2008 7:15 PM
Dear Amy:
You've been taking an uncharacteristic drubbing on a couple threads lately - unfairly, I think. While, for reasons of my own, I've refrained from making any posts here for a while, the high adventure on your blog of late has revived my flagging desire to hit the keyboard.
I'm a center-right Republican. I DO disagree with your stance on the Iraq. I disagree with you on a few other issues as well (drugs, prostitution, abortion), and on one particular topic I think that you can be regrettably boorish (the things you write about people of religious belief).
But all that is nothing, really. First of all, no reasonable person can credibly call you a "nitwit". Your detractors might paint you as opinionated, strident, or abrasive with some justice. But any attentive observer of human behavior will note that faults such as these are, at times, the by-product of certain other attributes - passion, brilliance, even genius.
However I might disagree with you on some of the items above (and even disapprove on the one matter cited), the fact remains that I agree with you on so much else: I admire your passion for fairness, justice, and human freedom. Your uncompromising commitment to individual responsibility and individual initiative are much-needed tonic in these decadent times; your unsparing intellectual honesty is bracing and refreshing. Above all, I admire the discipline, rigor, and the logic of your reasoning (with the single exception of your handling of religious beliefs different from your own).
Yours is the only blog I read regularly, because it is the only blog that I find consistently interesting. Your reasoning is tight, your wit sharp, your writing brilliant.
"Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house." (Matthew 5:15)
Well done, Amy. Keep that candle lit!
"More Weight!"
Dennis at August 16, 2008 7:24 PM
Neon: You got where you are because you were handed certain advantages because you are white and Jewish.
As someone who's also white and Jewish and worked her way up from nothing, I can tell you that the only "leg up" is having grown up in a community where education and personal responsibity were stressed. But that's the point, isn't it? That's what Amy (and most of the rest of us that are actually rational) has been saying all along. That if the "black community" would also start to stress those things they might start to make the progress they claim to have been denied by "the man."
The death of this woman was tragic, and contrary to the words that have been put in Amy's mouth she's stated repeatedly that she also thinks it's tragic, but the larger tradgey is that this woman had 6 children in 8 years with multiple fathers - and just like you Neon they will feel like they can't get an education or make anything of their lives because no one will push them to do it. Instead of decrying how much easier other groups have it, why don't you try to learn from their examples and incorporate those advantages into your own life.
Kristyle at August 16, 2008 7:24 PM
if you are as many minorities as you claimed
No Brian, that was just my way of indicating that I'm part of the gay community without getting into details. Sorry you got confused but I guess that happens quite a bit.
noen at August 16, 2008 7:25 PM
That if the "black community" would also start to stress those things they might start to make the progress they claim to have been denied by "the man."
Exactly. They get uppity and start demanding things like "equal rights" and before you know it we'll all be eating fried chicken and watermelon.
brian at August 16, 2008 7:29 PM
Sorry, had to go to get some food, so I just got back to delete the work of the vandals.
I'll post something about the previous victim'y post of noen in a moment.
And thanks, Dennis -- really appreciate that.
Not used to having thugs around here...also, maybe it's thuggery or maybe these people are truly dumb and/or willfully dumb. I see postings over and over and over again, by me and others, explaining my original post and answering the questions of the yahoos. I think they just are so incapable of carrying on a civilized adult discussion that all they can do is take a big dump on the floor here.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 7:33 PM
if the "black community" would also start to stress those things they might start to make the progress they claim to have been denied by "the man."
They lack the ability to do that. They are systematically discriminated against because of their, wait for it... race. See how that works? You have no conception of just how poor many people are nor how difficult that is to overcome. The occasional few who do, out of the many millions who do not, does nothing to refute that.
they will feel like they can't get an education or make anything of their lives because no one will push them to do it
No, they won't have access to a decent education in the first place. Most will face systemic discrimination based not on anything they have control over, but on their race.
Or do you seriously believe there is no racism?
noen at August 16, 2008 7:36 PM
Crid, the use of the word "litter" to describe a woman's children is admittedly vulgar. I don't care for the choice either. I don't agree with Amy's choice of the word, but she clearly chose that word for a reason. I for one am confident that said reason had nothing to do with the race of the children.
As to your reference my post, you must find something appealing about Amy's writing yourself, as you are one of the most frequent contributors here. Just about any thread I read, you generally have multiple posts. You spend an awfully large amount of time participating in the forum Amy provides. You must be getting something out of it!
Dennis at August 16, 2008 7:42 PM
Hey, Amy,
I just wanted to let you know there was one more pair of eyes supporting you in the Wikipedia post, but I think you may have turned off comments for it? I wouldn't blame you if you had. Really absurd, the whole thing is. Most of those posts didn't make a whole lot of sense, but I guess they weren't supposed to. I know you said they don't bother you, but they must, at least a little, because they're hurtful, and I'm sorry that you're being attacked this way.
Brenda at August 16, 2008 7:47 PM
Dennis, that wasn't crid nor was it Brian above.
I don't agree with Amy's choice of the word
It isn't about the word per se. There isn't an algorithm or a program for you to follow. It's simply about making a little effort to care about other people. Having some empathy for the plight that others face in life, that's all it is.
Are you unable to empathize with others?
noen at August 16, 2008 7:55 PM
Here, to one of the gang members coming in here under the name Gary. He posts this: "We don't debate wankers like Crid. When he makes comments like that, we view that as beyond the pale, and not worthy of engagement."
I've read probably a War & Peace length text of comments from Crid in the years I've been blogging here, and he is everything you and your other thugs coming here are not: Intellectually honest, highly intelligent, and lucid, just for starters. He cuts through crap the way you all shit it out -- here and at the pathetic Sadly, No! site.
What we have here are differences of opinion. I love them. I welcome them. They make for interesting discussion. You tiny little thugs don't want to allow for that. It galls you that people with differences can have a civilized discussion, because you probably rarely have one -- and certainly never with people who disagree with you.
I once had a half-hour debate about gay marriage with my late friend Cathy Seipp. It was at a party at my house. Reason's Matt Welch walked past and said, "She's wrong, she'll never admit it, don't waste your time" -- and in full earshot of Cathy. That's how stuff works in my crowd. We say stuff openly, whether or not people agree with it, and dish it out. This is what free speech is about.
By coming here and mucking up my comments section with comments from some in-joke that's not funny - whatever the Gary Ruppert deal is, you show that you are about the antithesis of free speech and open debate. That you are, as I rightly called you, fascists who call yourselves "progressives."
As for noen, who's apparently got a real busy schedule moping about how victimized she is -- I went to NYU on a scholarship. My parents wouldn't send me because it was too expensive. So I wrote my little ass off and sent myself there. Same as I write my way into everything I need.
Let's not talk about me, though. Let's talk about my Korean ex-assistant, a first-generation American whose parents spoke little English when they got here and whose grandma still speaks none (she hangs up on you if you call and you don't speak Korean). This girl didn't have advantages. She grew up poor, and went to public school in a bad neighborhood in L.A. What she did have is values. She was instilled with a value of hard work and achievement, and she put herself through Santa Monica College, and then won a scholarship to Northwestern, based on achievement. She, like my current assistant, has fantastic integrity -- again, a product of values.
Now, how many Koreans do you see having six children, by five different gang members, etc.? There's a problem in the black community, and LaShawn Barber has noticed it, and so have I, and the fact that I have a white face and red hair doesn't make my observation racist any more than hers is (and it's not).
And back to our original subject: No one with any values or integrity brings six children into the world as the unmarried girlfriend of five drug dealers, and then lives in such a way that they are imperiled. My point, once again. You find this racist? Tough tacos.
You don't like my language? Guess what? I'm not going to change the way I write and speak because people whose entire identity revolves around what whitey has supposedly done to them, or men have supposedly done to them, or whomever...take your pick.
You don't like it, well, blog about it. What I see from your responses here is that you are untrained in and or just not rational and intelligent enough to engage in any sort of debate that requires dropping those "progressive" beliefs about what is and isn't permitted that you cling to like a rat on driftwood.
Do you think it's racist to metaphorically compare you to a rat? It has nothing to do with racism, especially since I don't hate blacks or anyone, but if you think there's some element of racism in that, I'm sorry you're fucked up in the head, but I really can't help that, and I'm not going to write in fear that someone will find some way to translate what I wrote into race hatred.
As for my language somehow being racist, I posted a link to a piece from Pajamas where I used the same language ("litters") to describe children of rich women. And I posted the same about children of (white) Catholics and children of Muslims.
You are either so stupid or so intellectually dishonest or both that you refuse to acknowledge this.
And FYI, I got where I am because I worked my ass off. While you and your "progressive" buddies were leaving little turds on my site all day, I wrote the final third of a chapter of my book. Spent all day on it, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., and I only stopped at 6 because the cafe where I write on Saturday shuts its doors then.
As for the stinking bullshit that people are prevented from achievement because they are black -- "You have no conception of just how poor many people are nor how difficult that is to overcome."
Oh, please. My Korean ex-assistant did it, and coming from a family just off the boat, without command of the language. A close friend of mine is black, self-made fashion designer. I learned a lot from her (she used to host a group of women entrepreneurs at her house). In fact, it was her idea that I should have an assistant. Now, this woman grew up very poor and got a scholarship to FIT but could not afford to attend. Nevermind that, she taught herself to sew and sold clothes out of the back of the family station wagon. She now has a store of her designs in a chichi area of Los Angeles, and sells to stars, and sells wedding dresses to the Japanese. How did she do it? No, she didn't put on a white mask. She worked her ass off, same as I did.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 8:03 PM
Correct, that wasn't me, this guy is pretending to be people he's not.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 8:05 PM
They lack the ability to do that. They are systematically discriminated against because of their, wait for it... race. See how that works? You have no conception of just how poor many people are nor how difficult that is to overcome.
That is completely ridiculous. There is no longer institutional discrimination in this country. That in no way means there aren't still people who are racist - of course there are. But that doesn't mean you have to let that limit you - it takes work, but if it is important to you, you'll do it. If not, then we don't want to hear the whining.
And as for not having any conception of just how poor people are? Now you're being racist. Just because I'm white doesn't mean that I've grown up in the lap of luxury. I'll match you "poor" for "poor" any day of the week. When I was 18 I weighed 85 pounds and it wasn't because of an eating disorder, it was because there had never been money for food. And I lived in a neighborhood as bad as any you've seen. The only difference is that I made the conscience decision to not let that be my whole life. I worked hard and got scholarships and worked multiple jobs to pay for college and made something of myself. It wasn't easy, but the idea that life should just be handed to you is exactly what is holding people like you back (and by "people like you" I mean whiny people, not necessarily any particular race since I've known hardworking people and whiny people of every race).
If you want to know how lucky you are, you should spend some time checking out how people in other some countries have it, maybe then you'd spend less time feeling sorry for yourself and more time taking advantage of the blessings you have.
Kristyle at August 16, 2008 8:07 PM
Brenda, I did turn off the comments on that post. These bullies vandalizing my site (rather than participating in a discussion) were just taking too much of my time.
Are you unable to empathize with others?
You know, I'm unwilling to coddle those who search desperately, like suckerfish, for racism at every turn.
I have explained probably six times here that I have used the word "litter" to describe various types of women who have, well, litters of children. Including rich white woman.
Ah, time for a deduction! Here, noen, I'll help you out, since you seem incapable of seeing anything but racism at every turn. As somebody posted on Pajamas on my rich litters piece:
"We get it Amy. You don’t like kids. Enough already."
The truth is, I don't like underparented kids, and it's my believe that anyone who has a litter of them is shortchanging them in terms of emotional and physical care, and certainly in the case of this reprehensibly bad mother Tarika Wilson, endangering their lives by taking up with yet another drug thug.
Okay, if I say a white woman who lives as Tarika Wilson does is a terrible mother, etc., and all the things I said about Wilson...what do you call that?! Because, had she been white, I would feel exactly the same way.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 8:11 PM
Correct, that wasn't me, this guy is pretending to be people he's not.
Again, these cretins don't have the chops to engage any one of us in a debate, so they resort to creepy, underhanded behavior. I'll go try to find that comment, Crid, delete it and block the asshole. They're posting in my name, too. Just disgusting.
And Krystle, you rock. Kudos.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 8:12 PM
The IP of the person impersonating Crid was:
204.13.236.244
They've been blocked.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 8:14 PM
"Are you unable to empathize with others?"
My Dear Noen:
In the 434 words of prose that I have posted on this thread, there is absolutely nothing from which you can resonably infer anything about my capacity for empathy or lack thereof.
Your posing of this question is a very transparent waving of a bloody emotional shirt at me to either A)shame me into silence or B) to lead me off topic in a fruitless effort to defend myself.
Sorry, I won't be taking the bait. The matter of my capacity for empathy has no bearing on the matter.
Dennis at August 16, 2008 8:14 PM
Iris is a rare girl coming over from So Pathetic -- in that she actually posted something funny. Thanks, Iris.
Sadly, No.
I posted that video because I thought it was a sad and ironic comment on your basic problem: you demean those for whom you profess empathy and compassion. If you watch it in that light, it ain't so comical.
Iris Puma at August 16, 2008 8:17 PM
Exactly. They get uppity and start demanding things like "equal rights" and before you know it we'll all be eating fried chicken and watermelon.
Welcome to the 21st century! Not sure where you've been these past few decades, but I'm sure you'll be thrilled to know that "equal rights" happened quite some time ago. It's time that those people who are the beneficiaries of the work and sacrifice of the people who worked for those "equal rights" stepped up to the plate and stopped waiting for someone to hand them the world and started earning it.
Kristyle at August 16, 2008 8:23 PM
That's what Amy (and most of the rest of us that are actually rational) has been saying all along. That if the "black community" would also start to stress those things they might start to make the progress they claim to have been denied by "the man."
To belabor a point, if this was the intention of Amy's original post that caused all the stir, why did she cherry-pick one random woman who was tragically killed and in the process manage to insult her innocent children for the circumstances of their birth?
That was just rude. Amy saw a news item on a woman killed by the police and decided to use her tragedy as a case study in poor decision-making. Nasty shit. And people got pissed because, you know, leave this poor woman and her kids alone -- she's already paid the ultimate price for whatever fuck-ups she made in life, and her kids are basically orphaned now.
She's not a famous person. She and her children are total strangers to us all. And fuck, man, she just got shot and killed by the cops for no good effin' reason. The "litter" slur is just kind of the icing on the cake.
Now is where it gets complicated. And where I have a tough time buying Kristyle's point that Amy's really all about pointing out the inadequacies of the black community in helping its members build better lives (not that Amy's shown any real insight into how that can be fixed, but let's ignore that for now).
See, at no time does Amy even attempt to explore the possible circumstances in which Williams' made her choices. Amy doesn't make it at all clear that she thinks Williams' life choices, while obviously hers to make, might have been limited in any way by her life circumstances. Or by failures by her community as a whole, or by our society as a whole. Or that bad decisions made in poverty tend to have far more drastic repurcussions than bad decisions made by middle-class or wealthy individuals.
(Oddly enough, Amy and some of her defenders have alluded fairly frequently to how fucked up Williams' kids are going to be now, and some commenters have even basically written them off as future felons ... which begs the question, if the crappy circumstances of THEIR lives have sealed their fates, how is it that Williams herself is a moral free agent despite the crappy circumstances of her young life?)
Anyway, for Amy, it's all down to Williams and her shitty life choices. And that makes Tarika Williams, a woman who Amy doesn't even know and who just got killed by the police, a shitty human being in Amy's eyes.
And that's just ... kind of disgusting. It's not the worst wingnut shit I've ever seen, not by a long shot. But it's also fairly typical. For wingnuts, everything's always down to personal choices, whether you're a zillionaire or just got shot by the cops for no good reason. For wingnuts, everybody lives their lives making choices in a bizarre socio-economic vacuum that is somehow missing the very real condiitons that shape and constrain our decision-making processes.
Now I can understand where a lot of conservatives think people aren't being shamed into taking personal responsibility enough in modern society. I'm actually not at all averse to that viewpoint. What I don't get, and don't like, is the argument that this is ALL there is to society's ills, that the complex circumstances of birth, education, family life, community values, economics and legal peculiarities are all just liberal rubbish we ought to ignore.
D. Aristophanes at August 16, 2008 8:24 PM
Amy, nowhere was I "moping about how victimized" I am. And I'm perfectly capable of reasoned discourse but to be honest all I'm seeing from you is insults. I have made several replies by now to a few issues and yet I don't see a single reasoned response in return.
Do you want civilized discourse or not?
noen at August 16, 2008 8:28 PM
That was just rude. Amy saw a news item on a woman killed by the police and decided to use her tragedy as a case study in poor decision-making. Nasty shit. And people got pissed because, you know, leave this poor woman and her kids alone -- she's already paid the ultimate price for whatever fuck-ups she made in life, and her kids are basically orphaned now.
Her kids are orphans because she was a terrible mother, and she was a terrible mother because, unlike in the Korean community, her behavior was not met with great shame. In fact, it's all-too-common. Single mothers, no daddies, drugs and thuggery are celebrated. That's the nasty shit, not the fact that I shone a light on it.
But, "Aristophanes," the kind of comment you're leaving above is just fine with me. You're stating your opinion, which differs with mine, not coming here like a common thug, but with computer access to post comments that read "Spam Spam Spam" or some really dumb in joke about "Gary Ruppert."
Still, your remark above reflects the mush-mindedness of the other "progressives" who have come here from SoPathetic, and also the notion that they share that I should not be allowed to voice my opinion on this, and that I should not be allowed to give the story the focus I did -- or, at the very least I should be punished for it.
Personally, I find it valuable to say, "Hey, this type of behavior is wrong and should be changed." What I find particularly nasty is letting it go uncommented, so it can continue.
And again, I have a program I started in which I do my part to tell girls not to become teen mothers or unmarried mothers and to get a career and develop themselves first. More than I see from so many in the black community, especially those beacons of self-interest, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 8:37 PM
Dennis I wasn't inferring anything, I was asking a question. It was not intended as a slam so much as to find out if your personality type is one that is governed by rules or by empathy. If the former then I expect I will have a hard time getting you to understand some things. If the later then my job will be much easier.
I'm getting the feeling that discussion is going to be hard here. Not because of any animosity, but due to lang/cultural differences well spend all out time talking past one another. Is that what's going to happen?
noen at August 16, 2008 8:39 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/08/16/sadly_no.html#comment-1581584">comment from noenI have made several replies by now to a few issues and yet I don't see a single reasoned response in return.
Saying it's not there doesn't mean it's so. I just wrote probably five pages about your posts, all of them "reasoned," like everything I post.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 8:39 PM
Amy, the Wilson woman was certainly not an ideal mother, but there are large families that are very healthy. My girlfriend is one of 7, and all the siblings are close, and her parents are just lovely people.
When I was homeschooling my son, I also met a lot of other HSing moms with big families. Yes, many are religious, so you might disagree with them on that, but from what I observed, most were really good parents instilling positive values. They were not neglectful at all. Plus, in large families, siblings often help nurture each other, and it certainly helps build social skills.
In fact, I made the point on another thread here that I think one reason we have so many spoiled kids is because families are having fewer of them. Therefore, parents hyperfocus on their one or two irreplacable and precious kids to an extreme. This is creating a lot of self-centered kids.
My opinion is that we have given parents the wrong idea about "attentiveness". Families of the past were usually much larger on average, but that didn't mean their kids were neglected physically or emotionally.
I just object to you lumping that together -"six kids = neglectful parent".
But, again, I'm sorry to see all these hateful posts. You don't deserve this. One thing I immediately noticed and respected about you is that you fight fairly, using logic. One can agree or disagree with your conclusions, but you always back them up.
lovelysoul at August 16, 2008 8:42 PM
Amy, the Wilson woman was certainly not an ideal mother, but there are large families that are very healthy.
True, lovelysoul. It helps if there's an extended family around to take care of the kids, and then, I'm guessing those kids were the product of family with a mommy and daddy, and the daddy went to a job every day that did not involve making drug deals.
My neighbor and her husband have two kids, and she's in her late 30s and he's in his early 40s. Architecture prof, so he doesn't make piles of money, but he earns a living, and he's a great and very involved dad. I see him there on the weekends drawing a checkerboard out of chalk on the ground and playing checkers with his kids, and reading to them in the evenings and giving them "projects" (which they love...like drawing a monkey from a big movable-limbed magnet he brought home from a museum).
He also disciplines his kids -- in the evenings, he's the one who gives them a time out, etc. I mean, this is an enormous thing and an enormous responsibility, raising just two children, four and seven, and these are involved, married parents, and the mom is a stay-at-home mom (she was an architect and does some design work occasionally), but it's tough for them -- as mature adults with TWO kids.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 8:51 PM
Amy's really all about pointing out the inadequacies of the black community in helping its members build better lives (not that Amy's shown any real insight into how that can be fixed, but let's ignore that for now). - D. Aristophanes
Thats a lie. We are nowhere near as stupid as the people in your life, did you even bother to read anything she wrote on the first blog item?
Or did you 'figure it out' by gleaning bits of info from peoples reactions?
lujlp at August 16, 2008 8:52 PM
Personally, I find it valuable to say, "Hey, this type of behavior is wrong and should be changed." What I find particularly nasty is letting it go uncommented, so it can continue.
That's exactly why we tiny turds of Sadly, No came here as well. Think about it.
The Kenosha Kid at August 16, 2008 8:53 PM
"Her kids are orphans because she was a terrible mother."
You have no such knowledge.
Ah, clearly we have different values.
For me, any woman who has six children by five uncondomned different drug dealers by 26, and has a new drug dealer squeeze in close proximity to those kids is a TERRIBLE MOTHER.
So...you think this is ideal parenting? Or you agree with me that this is terrible parenting, to be a single mother of a bunch of daddyless children and then endanger their lives by taking up with a drug dealer?
Which is it?
Good parenting or terrible parenting?
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 8:54 PM
Um, Amy - people criticizing you and even mocking you are not signs of a 'notion' that you should not be allowed to voice your opinion.
Unless you believe your right to opine in the public sphere comes with an additional right to not have those opinions criticized or mocked.
The wikipedia vandalism is a different matter. That's just nastiness, especially considering that Encyclopia Dramatica was set up specifically to do that type of shit. DOS attacks and gaming Blogger's spam feedback to get a site or blog shut down would also fit in the category of 'not allowing you to voice your opinion'.
Trolling comment threads is a bit touchy, but as one of my S,N! colleagues already mentioned, you're in complete control of how to manage assholian comments you don't like.
Anyway ... you say:
Her kids are orphans because she was a terrible mother, and she was a terrible mother because, unlike in the Korean community, her behavior was not met with great shame.
Really. That's the whole ballgame, is it? Lack of community shaming is really the only problem facing black Americans?
D. Aristophanes at August 16, 2008 8:54 PM
I just wrote probably five pages about your posts, all of them "reasoned," like everything I post.
It was all about you.
Let's recap:
The squeezing out a litter comment in particular and more generally blaming her for getting murdered while holding her child. These are examples of being racially insensitive. Those of us who are privileged to belong to a different class, gender of ethnicity than others ought to be mindful of the impact that certain words or phrases can have.
Conservatives like yourself often feel that such political correctness is a too heavy burden on them. Sure, it can sometimes get out of hand, balance in all things, but most of us lefties feel that caring about the feelings of others is not too high a price to pay.
Please respond how it is that a woman holding a child, on her knees attempting to comply with the police, is at fault for not getting down fast enough?
Please explain to me how calling large families of Catholic, Muslims or Blacks a "litters" shows any compassion or sympathy for others?
Please explain to me how your status as a white Jewish woman does not give you privileged status in America?
noen at August 16, 2008 8:57 PM
You compound your error by making a sweeping, racist statement about all blacks. Your opinions on this matter are ugly and bigoted.
I made no statement about "all blacks." That would be irrational, and I'm anything but irrational.
But, if you say there's no problem with unwed mothers in the black community and a glorification of thuggery, and a lack of societal shaming for women who live as Wilson did -- you'd be...lying.
You claim I'm racist -- you assume I have some hatred for blacks. You can't know what I think, and I don't hate anyone. You're the one who's bigoted - about anyone who isn't kowtowing to the "progressive" point of view, and suggests that, gasp! personal responsibility and societal shaming is in order for people who squeeze out daddyless children and endanger them by taking up with yet another drug dealer.
Your values are really whack. And you're tiresome for your assumptions.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 8:59 PM
That's a lie.
Is not! Seriously, though, what's a lie? I couldn't tell from the bit of my comment you quoted.
D. Aristophanes at August 16, 2008 9:00 PM
neon are you just stupid?
She was 26, the oldest of her 5 kids was 8, meaning she was pregnat somewhere between 17 & 18 - this means she spent OVER HALF of her adult life pregnat by a string of FIVE DIFFERENT DRUG DEALERS
after this stellar run she invites drug dealer NUMBER SIX to live in her house
How in the hell does that not make you a terrible mother?
lujlp at August 16, 2008 9:04 PM
I think Noen is the one of the spoofer's identities. Maybe Iris too. Not that I'm paranoid or anything, but no one here is showing much leg in terms of personal identity.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 9:06 PM
not that Amy's shown any real insight into how that can be fixed - that was your lie fucktard
lujlp at August 16, 2008 9:08 PM
You're the one who's bigoted - about anyone who isn't kowtowing to the "progressive" point of view, and suggests that, gasp! personal responsibility and societal shaming is in order for people who squeeze out daddyless children and endanger them by taking up with yet another drug dealer.
It might have been a wee bit tasteless to use as an example a woman who was just shot to death by a police officer. Not to be too much of a progressive fascist or anything.
The Kenosha Kid at August 16, 2008 9:09 PM
Ah, clearly we have different values.
Values? I though you wanted tightly reasoned discourse? You made an unsupported knowledge claim for which you have no factual basis.
For me, any woman who has six children by five uncondomned different drug dealers by 26, and has a new drug dealer squeeze in close proximity to those kids is a TERRIBLE MOTHER.
Emotionally I would agree with you but you wanted reason. Reason says you have no access to such knowledge. You don't know the conditions of her life or the decisions she had to make.
I know enough about poverty not to judge others too harshly for the choices they make. At the same time I condemn acts of violence and such. Rule based personalities tend to not understand how one can have multiple conflicting ideals. That's understandable I suppose but I'm not sure how we get around that.
noen at August 16, 2008 9:10 PM
Amy, after having two kids, I can't imagine 6. Yet, my grandmother was one of 9. Large families were more the norm then, and I doubt any individual child got a whole lot of parental attention, as the parents (assuming both were still living) were busy working.
I mean, your neighbors sound like great parents, and you can do so much more with a smaller number of kids - projects and activities and such. But I also think that the whole PC, "self-esteem" shift has been a result of parents having fewer kids. Parents of larger families couldn't possibly compliment every drawing or spend so much time hovering over any one particular child. Yet, there's a lot of pressure on today's parents to be that attentive at every moment, which I'm not sure is so healthy for the kids.
This psychologist, John Roseman, writes a parenting column and he says parents should be like the sun and the kids should be the planets orbiting them - not the other way around. He thinks families are too child-centered today, which actually makes the kids anxious because they feel like THEY are holding the family together. I really agree with that.
To me, the best parents simply provide a solid, loving base - that consistency. It's harder without two parents, but as long as at least one is providing that strong, loving base, most kids seem to thrive.
lovelysoul at August 16, 2008 9:11 PM
Sure, it can sometimes get out of hand, balance in all things, but most of us lefties feel that caring about the feelings of others is not too high a price to pay.
Honey, you're free to care about them to the point where you only write the words "a," "an," and "the." I'll continue to write the way I write, and because I am anything but racist, I will not kowtow to the mob that has come here.
"Please explain to me how your status as a white Jewish woman does not give you privileged status in America"
Please tell me how your status as a black woman, and especially a LGBorT one, does not give you privileged status in America. Affirmative action anyone? There's an organization of newspaper editors I belong to. Want a fellowship? You'd better not be white! Because they only have minority fellowships. You don't solve racism with racism.
You get places in the world the same way my Korean assistant did: Not by whining about how victimized your people are but by working your ass off. First generation American, dirt poor, scholarship to Northwestern. Pretty damn great. And read above, Krystle's words. And frankly, I grew up middle class in Detroit, and went to NYC where kids were quite privileged and had daddy call to get them jobs. Oh, but there was Reggie Hudlin. He got hired out of Harvard to work at Ogilvy, easy as pie. He's black you know. How is he not privileged?
Some people are prettier, some are uglier, some are richer, some are poorer. You take what you have, make the most of it, and do something with it.
I actually have a learning disability -- ADHD. I tell the kids that to help them understand the value of hard work.I've been taking Ritalin for years, but I have a real problem with organizational tasks other people find simple. When I speak to the kids, I show them a photo of me looking all polished moderating a panel with Arianna and a bunch of other authors. And then I show them the reality: While somebody without ADHD might've written a neat outline of questions to ask, I had questions out of order, a terrible mess, on about five pages of single-spaced typed paper. I cut them all apart and the photo I showed the kids was of me on my rug, taping hundred of these questions together, and making a big mess while my dog walked over it.
Nobody has a perfect life, but those of us who say, "Fuck it, I'll do anything I can to not let that get in my way, and I'm going to become somebody -- as opposed to 'I'm going to become six drug dealers' fuck toy,'" we're the people who accomplish things in this world.
And I have enormous respect for anyone like Krystle, or my old Korean assistant, or my fashion designer friend who built something while coming from nothing. And it's for that reason - -to show kids what's possible -- that I started this program at an inner city school.
And come on, noen, you're just disingenuous about this. How many black girls do you know who give enough of a shit about inner city kids to go give an afternoon from their life to talk to them -- and it's exhausting -- once a month, in hopes of showing them that they don't have to end up like Tarika Wilson?
The idea that I am racist is just laughable, and you know it. And the fact that you persist in calling me racist because I don't pussyfoot around in the written word the way the "progressives" say it should be...well, it says everything about you and your need to keep that mind of yours shut to the facts.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 9:16 PM
not that Amy's shown any real insight into how that can be fixed - that was your lie fucktard
Yeah, well, I'd call that a difference of opinion, more than a 'lie'. The value of Amy's insights into fixing the black community is a matter of some debate here and reasonably represented subjectively, more 'pie' than 'pi'.
yer pal the fucktard
D. Aristophanes at August 16, 2008 9:17 PM
You claim I'm racist -- you assume I have some hatred for blacks.
No, I'm sorry if I gave that impression. I don't believe you are racist, though I don't know for sure, but I do your judgment about Tarika's moral worth is insensitive, crass and likely racist.
You then proceed to judge the entire black community without at all acknowledging the societal problem of overt racism in the US. Even if you are right you've done nothing to contribute. All you've done is promote your own agenda on the back of a poor black woman. That's cold.
I think Noen is the one of the spoofer's identities.
Nope, and Amy can confirm. I've posted under only this nym and no other. Though I can understand why people would be paranoid by now.
noen at August 16, 2008 9:23 PM
Emotionally I would agree with you but you wanted reason. Reason says you have no access to such knowledge. You don't know the conditions of her life or the decisions she had to make.
It's values, dear. My values say that if you live as she lived, bringing daddyless children into the world six times, and endangering those children by being in close proximity to another drug dealer, you are a bad mother.
I don't care if she had to work in the coal mines and wear a clown suit everyday while doing it. She could've worn birth control or given those children up for adoption. She could've said no to dating a drug dealer. We all have choices. Hers added up to TERRIBLE MOTHER.
"Please respond how it is that a woman holding a child, on her knees attempting to comply with the police, is at fault for not getting down fast enough?"
She's at fault for living with a drug dealer and endangering her children. Women who live with the guy who delivers Wonder Bread are unlikely to be victims in SWAT raids. I've already said 1. I think it's reprehensible to SWAT raid a house with kids, and 2. I don't agree with our drug laws. I said these in my original post.
"Please explain to me how calling large families of Catholic, Muslims or Blacks a "litters" shows any compassion or sympathy for others?"
My sympathy lies with the children.
If you want to write a blog that shows sympathy for women who fuck uncondomned drug dealer dick and spew out children and then take up with yet another drug dealer, and say, boohoo, it's because she had dark skin, not because she had no values, and was raised without values, in a community that doesn't do enough to condemn behavior like this, have at it, lady.
Meanwhile, I'm done with you. You're either so dumb you can't understand these comments I have been making repeatedly , or you get some joy out of seeing me type after writing a book chapter all day.
I don't know how you get through life with such a mush mind. If I feel compassion for anyone right now, frankly, it's you.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 9:24 PM
At the very heart of things those guy(s) were annoying.
Purplepen at August 16, 2008 9:24 PM
I beg to differ. Unless Ms Wilson was the victim of several successive rapes, then she had every opportunity to not have six children in close proximity to violent crime.
This is the nut of the argument. If we were talking about Andrea Yates, would anyone consider Amy racist for calling her out?
The problem with the Sadly, No crowd is that they want to pussyfoot around the "race issue". The left keeps telling us we need to have a "dialog on race relations", and as soon as anyone to the right of John Kerry opens their mouth, the accusations start.
How can we have a conversation when fully one half of the population would rather stick their fingers in their ears and shout "you're a racist!"?
Oh, and to the person impersonating me - cut the shit. There is no such thing as anonymity, and if you think Tor will protect you, you are sadly mistaken.
brian at August 16, 2008 9:29 PM
Noen's gone, and so is "Aristophanes." Just banned them both.
And Noen, nobody's paranoid, just bored shitless of you and your ilk. You either can't comprehend what's being explained to you or are doing it on purpose. Either way, it's drudgery having you here.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 9:29 PM
You claim I'm racist -- you assume I have some hatred for blacks. You can't know what I think, and I don't hate anyone.
I've been requested by a banned Sadly, Nosian to pass along the observation that "hatred isn’t requisite for racist asshatery". Nor, to add my personal observation, is it requisite for classist (i.e. right-wing/libertarian) asshatery, which is what we are left with if we remove the racial element from your apparent feelings that Ms. Wilson got her just deserts.
Gary Coopert at August 16, 2008 9:30 PM
Brian, I'm still waiting to hear which European nations are fast approaching the 51% Muslim mark.
The Kenosha Kid at August 16, 2008 9:33 PM
Noen -
life is cold. The sooner you come to terms with that, the sooner you can move forward.
If there is institutionalized racism in this country, it is in favor of minorities. Anything you see in response is backlash.
Doesn't make it right, but there it is. You'll note that "affirmative action hire" isn't a term of endearment.
By continuing to play the race hustle by the rules set forth by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, we aren't actually getting anywhere. Bad behavior by blacks is blamed on white people. White people are judged to not care enough, and get penalized. Then we get the privilege of being called racist when we make the observation that maybe there's a relationship between black criminals and their representation in our prisons.
As a white person, I can't win. As a heterosexual white man, I'm the target of every single scheme to force equality of outcome without actually demanding improvement from people. And when it all goes to shit, I get blamed!
But I should just shut up, because my ancestors weren't slaves, which means that I don't possess sufficient moral authority to judge anyone.
Y'know what? Fuck that. I've seen what people can do when they decide that they aren't going to listen to those who tell them "you can't possibly succeed - the system's stacked against you".
The problem with the departed (the mention of whom started this whole imbroglio) was that she believed that she could do no better with her life than to be a serial baby-mama.
And I fail to see how it's racist to point that out.
brian at August 16, 2008 9:38 PM
if we remove the racial element from your apparent feelings that Ms. Wilson got her just deserts.
I never said that, but you're being sent here by the dim so I'll explain it again.
I have said numerous times, on three entries, that she did not "deserve" what happened to her, and in fact, I don't even believe in capital punishment for the most heinous criminals, because I don't think we have a right to take lives.
The thing is this: If you put yourself in harm's way, it should not be a surprise when harm comes to you. There are streets I do not drive through at night to get home because they are dangerous. If I drive through them, do I DESERVE to get carjacked or robbed or raped? Of course not, but it will not come as a surprise if I do.
This woman was a terrible mother because she put her children at risk -- first by having daddyless children, and second, by having a drug dealer in close proximity to those children.
If you are a moron or so mush-brained that you cannot understand or accept this, well, I feel sorry for you, but I'm going to keep banning all the people bringing the discussion level on my site down to the level of that of two goats chewing cud.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 9:39 PM
Kenosha - Why should I bother? Any sources I give will be immediately rejected by you as either racist, xenophobic, islamophobic, or worse.
You and your friends are the ultimate zipperheads.
But anyone with a calculator can look at present-day populations and fertility rates, and do a simple bit of mathematics to come up with the answer.
England will be majority muslim by 2050.
You can dismiss that as "over 40 years away", but that's not as far into the future as our oil supply depletion, and I hear plenty of panicked bleating about how we MUST do something about it now.
But you go back to living under your rock. After all, it protected you from the Soviet Union, didn't it?
brian at August 16, 2008 9:42 PM
Muslims make up 2.5% of the population of the United Kingdom, and while their fertility rate is higher than non-Muslims, it is declining. England won't be majority Muslim by 2050.
You and your friends are the ultimate zipperheads.
Is this the reasoned discourse that goes on here? Or is this the name-calling that us "tiny turd" "progressive fascist" "zipperheads" from "Sadly Pathetic" brought over here?
The Kenosha Kid at August 16, 2008 9:50 PM
So Aristophanes you are of the opinion that it is bad for people to discourage others in their comunity to have multipule children by numerous drug dealers and turn you kids house into crack central for drug dealing boyfreind number 6?
Because encoraging such behavior didnt work si well, did it?
lujlp at August 16, 2008 9:51 PM
Mr. Aristophanes is not able to respond to your inquiry, as his input to this discussion has been deprecated.
Herbert Hoovert at August 16, 2008 9:59 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/08/16/sadly_no.html#comment-1581628">comment from Herbert HoovertMr. Aristophanes is not able to respond to your inquiry, as his input to this discussion has been deprecated.
As has yours.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 10:10 PM
> I've posted under only this nym
Your use of the word "nym" is what convinces me. Until a few hours ago, I'd never heard it. I'd never *needed* to. Also, I think Kenosha is one 'em. And Gary Coopert. And Herbert, and Aristoph,etc This is one guy, completely out of control of his behavior. There just aren't that many new people in the world taking an interest in this messages of this blog. It's just not possible.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 10:15 PM
Well, at least you stopped linking to my site with your drivel.
I produce my own drivel, thank you very much. I don't need you diluting the quality of my nonsense with your bullshit.
And when I'm emperor, all other Brians will be required by supreme edict to change their names. I don't want any more confusion about who someone is talking to when they call my name. Do you have any idea how annoying it is to have some woman screaming your name only to find out she's yelling at her kid three aisles over?
brian at August 16, 2008 10:16 PM
I suspect they're using some kind of proxy server. Anyone who knows about this, please spill.
And for those of you here who don't have the intellect and ability to reason of retarded goats, I'm working on rooting out those bringing down the discussion. As I just wrote to Crid:
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 10:18 PM
There he is again. This is the guy who was impersonating us earlier. I don't think shutting down individual IP addresses is going to be helpful.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 10:19 PM
I can assure you that the reference to emperor was the real me.
Because my ego IS that large.
brian at August 16, 2008 10:22 PM
There just aren't that many new people in the world taking an interest in this messages of this blog. It's just not possible.
Totally agree. That's some pathetic loser.
And Brian, thanks -- I needed the laugh.
And we haven't needed the word "nym" before since we haven't had an onslaught of intellectually impotent "progressives" until now, who must feverishly hide their identities lest anyone find out who the morons really are.
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_561538038/nym.html
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 10:23 PM
Of course, they don't even need to use anonymizers. They could just power-cycle the DSL modem and get a new address every restart.
What the hell am I doing up at 1:30 in the AM?
I'm going to bed.
brian at August 16, 2008 10:23 PM
Amy, it's just one party guest, he's just wearing 30 jackets.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 10:24 PM
I'm deleting the losers' comments with alacrity.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 10:25 PM
It's the same old story. Leftists and feminists using opprobrium to disrupt stuff. It's hackneyed, but it does work. Sucks.
Jeff at August 16, 2008 10:37 PM
Difference between free speach and spam
lujlp at August 16, 2008 10:46 PM
See, I don't think Ed Rouse actually made the 1045pm posting, because he misspelled his own name. (But his web page is straight out of the Lewinsky years. Makes me feel young again.)
But Loojy's post of 1046 is authentic. No one else in the world spells things that way. (Luvyoo, bro!)
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at August 16, 2008 10:56 PM
True. But your explanation is incoherent.
So are you, otherwise you wouldn't be criticizing theirs.
Abortion protesters? I've only seen them holding placard and praying.
If you mean criminals or even terrorists, then haven't you failed to distinguish between the 99.99% of peaceful abortion protesters and the criminals? You'll find criminal activity in any ideological group. The issue is whether the ideology itself is criminal.
and they want to use the power of government to impose their moral code. (brian)
So do you. Isn't that what orderly governance is? The idea that one shouldn't legislate morality is stupid. We have laws against murder because it's morally wrong to murder. We have laws against theft because it's morally wrong to steal.
You obscure the real issues with a cloak of moral superiority. It's a plain old example old question begging. The issue is not whether we should legislate morality, we must. The issue is what morality to legislate.
You just privilege your morality as a given so you don't have to justify it, even as you want others too. That's called hypocrisy.
You've managed to get almost everything in that post quite wrong.
Jeff at August 16, 2008 10:57 PM
lujlp is responding to a comment I just deleted.
The comments posted here by the tiny little thugs coming here from So Pathetic are coming in the shape of site vandalism -- designed to wreck my comments section and turn it into a graffiti wall of "Kilroy was here"'s.
I left this comment on So Pathetic, or whatever it's called: "I am a free speech advocate. I don’t ban people."
Those of you who post here know that, because I actually am a free speech advocate, I have, up till now, banned only about four people here. Two were annoying as fuck -- C.P. and I think his name was Jason...
And the other two pretended to be real people they were not.
Banning has started now with people posting truly defamatory stuff in real commenters names -- defamatory in the sense that it's somebody saying really racist words under another person's name as if that person posted it. These lowlifes are doing this to see if I'll ban them. I'd rather not ban anybody, but I refuse to let my site degenerate into the teenage "in-joke" (thanks, Crid) that So Pathetic is.
Meanwhile, it's hard to believe that anybody is as to comprehend plainspoken rational arguments as noen appears to be. I have to suspect that it's not possible to be incapable of comprehending what I've posted, over and over and over again.
You can pretty much say anything here -- about an issue or about me -- as long as you aren't here for malicious reasons, as part of a mob, to disrupt my site. If I perceive you are, I'm not going to just sit by and let you do it.
And I don't ban people. I ban thugs. If you got banned, that's why. Anybody coming here who wants to speak their mind, and not for purposes of disrupting this site and who doesn't turn every discussion into torture, come on in.
Amy Alkon at August 16, 2008 10:57 PM
But Loojy's post of 1046 is authentic. No one else in the world spells things that way. (Luvyoo, bro!)
Plus if anyone really pissed me off I'd torture them to death
lujlp at August 16, 2008 11:14 PM
I'm pretty sure her kids are orphans because a police officer put some bullets into her body for no good reason.
Dan Someone at August 16, 2008 11:21 PM
So dan you are raiding a drug house in search of a violent armed felon, you hear gunshots, a head of you you see dark figure crouched in an unlit room in what appers to be a fireing position.
What would you do?
lujlp at August 16, 2008 11:28 PM
Assumes facts not in evidence, and misleads by incompleteness.
You don't know it was for "no good reason." You've assumed that as a fact with no good cause. The law uses a reasonable person standard. In a very dark room, in an armed drug dealer's house, in a neighborhood known for attacks on police, a kneeling figure that disobeys commands and holds something in their hands could be a perceived as a threat by a reasonable person. Notice I wrote 'could.' We have no way to know either way just yet.
You mislead by incompleteness. Guilt, and indeed even the definition of the crime itself, can be mitigated by the actions of the victim.
I don't know if you are a leftist, but these errors are typical of leftists and feminists.
Jeff at August 16, 2008 11:31 PM
lujlp says it more clearly than I.
Jeff at August 16, 2008 11:32 PM
Amy, FYI in case you didn't already know it, the 204.13.236.244 is also an anonymizer (part of the Tor network). It's a shame, because these anonymizers have some very important legitimate purposes. However, if they get overused by the gutless/brainless wonders that have been posting here, everyone will block them and they won't be available for legitimate users.
Shawn at August 17, 2008 1:53 AM
Amy:
The most certain sign of a bankrupt argument is ad hominem attack.
So, if I may be so bold, may I make a suggestion:
Replace all text constituting ad hominem attack with [ad hominem deleted].
It will leave anything substantial untouched while rendering all the effort put into the ad hominems completely pointless.
Hey Skipper at August 17, 2008 1:55 AM
Amy, I've been reading your blog for quite some time now and thought that now, while you're battling this seemingly never ending shit storm of ignorance, was a good time to let you know that I appreciate your site, the work you put in on posts and your willingness to debate and engage all sorts of people.
I'm conservative and Christian, so there are many things we do not have in common, but I'm constantly surprised by how much we do agree on: the need to bring back a culture of personal responsibility and self-reliance, the importance of manners, the danger of islamic extremism, the need to defend the basic freedoms--speech & press, freedom of religion (or in your case, from).
I think you've gone above and beyond what's reasonable in tolerating the poo-flinging monkeys (oh, dear, does using the word monkey make me a racist?) who've been tracking their muck all over your site. They're trying to exercise the heckler's veto--in the name of free speech, they're trying to shout down everyone else. Banning people like that isn't a betrayal of your principles; it's upholding the ideal that people should be able discuss and debate ideas, not suppress them. If these twits can't behave like rational human beings, they should stop walking upright.
LauraB at August 17, 2008 2:05 AM
Thanks so much, Laura...truly appreciate that, especially since you're somebody who disagrees with me on a number of issues. And you're absolutely right about this, and said it perfectly:
In fact, on the subject of banning, if you Sadly Pathetic thugs want to know how I feel about it, you can quote Laura above on my behalf.
Amy Alkon at August 17, 2008 2:24 AM
Kenosha Kid,
It's not just fertility among the Muslim population already in the UK. It's also bringing over your brothers, sisters, parents and grandparents.
It's also forcing your 14-year old daughter to go to Pakistan to marry her cousin, enabling the cousin to now bring over all of his relatives.
We have the same problem here with Mexican and central American immigrants, most of whom are illegal. Grant amnesty to one, and now he can bring all of his relatives in legally. And his grandparents - who never paid any Social Security taxes - are eligible for Medicare and SSI payments.
I - and, I presume, you - have to fund those benefits with the taxes we pay.
And the Mexican immigrants don't have a significant part of their population who want to make the country into Sharialand. They just want to get rich.
Gordon at August 17, 2008 4:58 AM
Very late to this party, but had to comment on this:
"Unlike you, we do not see all opinions, however evil and inhumane, as equal players on an egalitarian playing field to be engaged one like another."
And with that, the intolerance of the left stands starkly revealed. Rational thinkers do not fear the marketplace of ideas.
snakeman99 at August 17, 2008 8:37 AM
Amy, I like goats. Will you have sex with me?
Mickey Kaus at August 17, 2008 11:19 AM
...one shouldn't be surprised when one looks at the behaviour of some of the most notorious hardline leftists of history: Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao...
Hitler is your idea of a hardline leftist?
Sounds like someone's been taking "Liberal Fascism" a little too seriously.
Bitter Scribe at August 17, 2008 12:24 PM
...a head of you you see dark figure crouched in an unlit room...
Yes, these darn dark figures! It's this lady's fault that, not only did she have her children fathered in a way that met with Amy's disapproval, she was born with less than luminous skin.
Bitter Scribe at August 17, 2008 12:29 PM
I repeat. Hitler was no leftist. Nor was he a liberal.
Clapping your hands over your ears and wailing "He was TOOOO!" doesn't change this fact. I suggest you folks do a little reading. Shirer is a good place to start. Joachim Fest is also fairly good source, Randall Bytwerk, and others. Oh, and Time Magazine's coverage of the Third Reich (which refers to the Nazis as a party of the right, not the left) is quite available in the bound periodical section of most libraries.
Or maybe you're going to claim that Henry Luce was a dastardly leftist too?
Paft at August 17, 2008 1:04 PM
Hitler was not a leftist, idiot.
tb at August 17, 2008 1:05 PM
To most normal people that would be something of a pyrrhic victory. I mean, if it comes down to me having to have a giant moat of liquified dog shit on my property or else they get the sign, the heck with it, they can have it. But that's me.
tb at August 17, 2008 1:40 PM
if covering your front yard with shit is the price to pay for knowing you're right, then it's worth it.
brain at August 17, 2008 2:10 PM
You don't know it was for "no good reason." You've assumed that as a fact with no good cause. The law uses a reasonable person standard. In a very dark room, in an armed drug dealer's house, in a neighborhood known for attacks on police, a kneeling figure that disobeys commands and holds something in their hands could be a perceived as a threat by a reasonable person. Notice I wrote 'could.' We have no way to know either way just yet.
You mislead by incompleteness. Guilt, and indeed even the definition of the crime itself, can be mitigated by the actions of the victim.
I don't know if you are a leftist, but these errors are typical of leftists and feminists." -- Jeff
Actually Jeff, you are a fucking moron. The house was the victims house who despite Amy's disgusting attacks was innocent of any crimes. The officer heard shots from another area of the house because his buddies were busy pumping a few rounds into the family pets. And the item she was holding in her hand was a 14 month old child who was also shot and lost a finger. Perhaps he didn't see the child in her arms because he shot blindly through her bedroom door - not kneeling and disobeying as you bizarrely assert.
mgordon at August 17, 2008 3:37 PM
It's very simple: would a reasonable person even *go into* a neighborhood like that without armed backup? No, they would not. And thus, anyone *in* that area, is obviously a threat and should be viewed as such by default. If these people could simply stop the behaviors and cultural patterns of the poor, really to stop being poor in the first place, none of this would have happened to them. Bad things like poverty, rape, starvation, and murder don't just happen to good people for no good reason, thus we must face the fact that the victim was herself chiefly to blame. QED.
DanPat at August 17, 2008 5:15 PM
Hi Amy.
I am also a libertarian and fiscal conservative, and an environmentalist and conservationalist, and it is indeed a lonely place to be. The left and right don't welcome such people, and I have also noticed the various hypocrisies mentioned above.
A plague on both their houses!
Bruce at August 17, 2008 5:23 PM
Also, I think the dog doodle "moat" is an hilarious and brilliant idea -- serves those sign-stealing thugs right, getting dog "business" on them.
DanPat at August 17, 2008 5:42 PM
Neighborhood like what?
tb at August 17, 2008 6:01 PM
You know what kind of neighborhood -- the kind where those sort live.
DanPat at August 17, 2008 6:12 PM
Bad things like poverty, rape, starvation, and murder don't just happen to good people for no good reason, thus we must face the fact that the victim was herself chiefly to blame.
My Korean assistant was poor and grew up in a poor neighborhood, but she did not live with a drug dealer. You have no right, if you have children, to do so, especially 6 daddyless children from five other drug dealers.
Amy Alkon at August 17, 2008 6:23 PM
"You have no right, if you have children, to do so, especially 6 daddyless children from five other drug dealers."
And if you do and the police shoot you to death, it's more YOUR fault than the that of the police! Any misfortune, you suffer, in fact, is an opportunity for libertarian bloggers to sharpen their own sense of superiority on you.
Paft at August 17, 2008 7:31 PM
Radwaste, I know just what you mean. I do consider myself liberal (though fiscally I'm more, um, not), but I don't rant and rave and act as though I'm better than others. I like to think I "walk the walk" even though I don't much "talk the talk." An ex-friend of mine is someone who gives liberals a bad name. She is just as inflexible and dogmatic as someone on the right. She thinks she's morally superior to everyone else and she's highly hypocritical. She is, in fact, a fascist.
I wish there were more than two viable political parties, that's sure damn sure.
Monica at August 18, 2008 7:22 AM
And if you do and the police shoot you to death, it's more YOUR fault than the that of the police! Any misfortune, you suffer, in fact, is an opportunity for libertarian bloggers to sharpen their own sense of superiority on you.
Hey, shit-for-brains. I like the cut of your jib!
Norman at August 19, 2008 7:34 AM
Leave a comment