New Tizona Post

A huge victory for the cause of freedom: a Federal court has ruled that cops can no longer treat videoing them in the course of executing their duties as a criminal offense.

Response to a troll

CalJim, aka CaJim, Jammin, and "Guest", takes umbrage to comments I made in response to comments he made (re-read it - it'll make sense on the second pass). For those of you who don't know about good old Jimmy, let me introduce you.

• Old Jimmy is a butt-buddy of the Caput a Palos
• Old Jimmy is a prominent voice for the FLDS persecution club (FLDS Texas)
• Old Jimmy still refuses to believe that Greg Prickett is the Caput a Palos
• Old Jimmy thinks that the Vulture is guilty of journalistic malpractice
• Old Jimmy has reading comprehension issues
  

Let's address old Jimmy's gripes, one by one.

I have never called you a pedophile nor even inferred it, your need to broad brush many topics might work for you but don't accuse me of such simple minded thought processes. Come on Vulture admit it, I never called you a pedophile.

You, Jim, may not have ever called me a pedophile. But how would I know, since so many of you over there at FLDS Texas and the (thankfully) dead Caput Penitus Culus post as "anonymous".

But that's not even the point. I said, "Your side categorizes my side as being pro-pedophilia." Your side != you personally. There's that reading comprehension problem again.

Your preoccupation with 'Due Process' I've criticized, especially now in the light that minor children brought to the YFZ Ranch from Canada definitely were sex trafficked from British Columbia.

Really? Children brought to the YFZ Ranch from Canada were sex trafficked? See, I did a Google search under "News" (so as to filter out wild accusations from bloggers like little Greggie), for "FLDS sex trafficking Canada" and I didn't get a single hit. Not one.

That's how your side works. Some blogger repeats gossip and it's fact to you, because it's what you want to believe. Legitimate news operations risk lawsuits if they print wild accusations. That's why there's no mention of any of that under "News" on Google. Even Big Media (the BM for short) wants no part of allegations that might get them sued.

You, however, stay mute on anybodies rights other than FLDS Church Priesthood men and their Prophet. Howze that? The women and children of this fanatical sect are look upon by their tenets of faith as literal property but you somehow clam up on that topic. Does equality stop at the MENS room door for you?

First, it's "anybody's", not "anybodies". Do try to be articulate when you write.

Second, you want to talk about a "broad brush"? The very idea that my interest in Due Process starts and ends with the FLDS is ridiculous on its face. See the right hand column, where it says "Labels"? See how it starts with various amendments, includes categories such as "bad law", "constitution", "crime", "Das Überwachenden", "Der Staat", "DHS", "F'ing lawyers", "Free Speech" - I could go on and on. The FLDS? Child please! They're way down on my list of priorities. I've spent way more time railing about cops, prosecutors, and politicians who violate the public trust than I have on the FLDS - and a lot of the FLDS posts were to defend myself against the likes of you and your execrable cohorts.

Tell me, when I write about black men who spent decades in prison because of planted evidence, prosecutors hiding exculpatory evidence, or other malfeasance, does that mean I don't care about white men in the same situation? Or do you simply choose to only see what you want to see? I suspect the latter.

Scott Ledbetter republished your opinion pieces and his 'Ye Olde Journalist' blog fancies itself as a mainly journalistic site fighting yellow journalism and you allow him to pass off your writings as news content and it has never been labelled as editorial nor opinion column.

For the love of Pete! This is the exact same argument he raised months ago when Greggie's story appeared in the UNT student newspaper. Apparently old Jimmy expects Ye Olde Journalist to adhere to some kind of high standard of journalism, like The Washington Post or The New York Times. As if! Jimmy, those fishwraps regularly print opinion masquerading as news! Virtually every story about Global Warming is nothing but propaganda and political posturing slathered on like mustard on a ball park frank, masquerading as legitimate "news". What's the difference between Dana Milbank of The Post writing a Page 1 "news" article that says that Republicans are obstructing "progress" and me writing - well, anything? Get a clue, son. There is no "pure" journalism. Stop whizzing on Scotty. He can put anything he wants in his blog because....wait for it...it's HIS BLOG.

You're nothing but a troll, Jimmy. I don't know why I wasted my time responding to you. Nobody gives a rat's stinking tuchus what you think about anything. Your own mama doesn't even listen to you. Give up. Please.

Input needed

You may have noticed that I haven't posted in a while. There's good reason for that -- I've been pondering the future of this blog. Not whether or not I will continue to post; that's not changing. Rather, I've been contemplating whether or not to switch from Blogger to Wordpress.

Why switch? Comments.

I used and was very happy with Haloscan during the early years of this blog. Then those rotten bastards at JS-Kit bought out Haloscan and implemented the gawdawful abortion that is Echo in its place. I hate Echo with a hatred that burns white hot 24x7.

I put up with it because (a) this isn't exactly a comments-heavy site to begin with, and (b) I was too lazy to look into what I needed to do to replace it.

But when my beloved, Deadeye, told me that she was unable to enter comments the other day due to Echo, that was the last straw. Nobody disses Deadeye. Nobody.

So I began exploring a replacement for Echo in earnest. Blogger native comments was never an option; been there, done that, hated it. After exploring the interwebs, I installed Disqus on this site because it is very highly recommended.

But that creates a dilemma. Echo makes it impossible to export comments w/o prior experience with their API. They really are assholes, in every sense of the word.

Okay, so I lose 3 years of comments - so what? There's nothing been said in those comments that amounts to a hill of beans. But there was an argument not so long ago around the topic of deletion of comments from those bigots at FLDS Texas. They claimed I delete comments from trolls just like they do. The problem for them is: I don't. To this point I've deleted only one comment on this site, and that was to protect the commenter from themselves (overt racism with your real name attached to it = not smart). Ultimately, I decided that I don't give a tinkers damn what those subhumans think. Lost comments? So what.

Then I was taken with another idea. Why not cut the cord to Blogger entirely. So I started playing around with Wordpress. I really like the layout I built, the color scheme, etc. It bothers me that it's not customizable to the extent I would like, but I can live with that, I suppose.

So here's the deal: This is your chance to weigh in. Stay with Blogger and the status quo, or move over to this? Click here to vote. As in Chicago, you can vote as many times as you like.

The OC attacks

For the most part, I respond to comments in the {expletive-deleted} Echo comments.  But when there is a comment requiring too much response for just a comment, or a comment that really sticks in my craw, I reply with a blog post.

This comment met both criteria.  It was in response to my comment that we are "living in Atlas Shrugged".

You're living in Atlas Shrugged, which was the vision of a lunatic who has as much insight into living human beings as Dustin Hoffman's "Rain Man". To be a consistent Randian you need to have as much contempt for Christianity as for Socialism. Of course it was all that "Good Samaritan" and "Golden Rule" crap that she particularly hated. Is that part of your Christianity?

If you can back up your claims with anything besides wordplay and overuse of the word "literally", that might hold some interest . As it is, you remind me of the "merry pranksters" of the 60s/70s with their "radical" "underground newspapers" with everyone they opposed dressed up as Nazis. I like you in many ways -- primarily when you talk to me directly; not so much when you're preaching, but I gotta speak the truth as I see it.

Don't put words in my mouth. I was neither preaching, nor espousing the incoherent, contradictory, and, frankly, sophomoric epistemology of Ayn Rand.  When I said that we are "living in Atlas Shrugged", I meant the world portrayed by Rand in the novel.  In the book, the government and industry were run by looters --  looters who raped the productive by pushing legislation in the interest of "fairness", etc.

The world we live in has looters pushing legislation "for the children", "to save the planet", "to make us safe from terrorism", "to make health care affordable for everyone", "because they're too big to fail".  The end result of all of these legislative "responses" to "crisis" is the same as those portrayed in Rand's novel.

Wealth is confiscated from the productive.
Government amasses more power over all facets of our lives.
Our personal liberties are lost.

You cannot deny this - not if you're paying attention, not if you're being honest and not disingenuous.

You believe in AGW - hey, how 'bout that?  I don't.  ALL proposed "solutions" to AGW involve confiscation of wealth.  That and nothing more.

You're free to continue your misplaced "faith".  I see AGW for what it is: the hijacking of science to promote an agenda that centralizes government power, redistributes wealth (mostly to crony capitalists), and destroys individual freedoms.

I wonder what FLDS Texas thinks of this

That sound you hear is the concussion wave from a dozen heads exploding over at FLDS Texas upon reading this.

President Barack Obama's polygamist half brother in Kenya has married a woman who is more than 30 years younger than him.

Hmmm.  I didn't know there were FLDS living in Kenya [/sarcasm].

Where's your outrage and indignation NOW, bigots?  Or is it okay in Kenya, or when the offending party is related to the President?

I'd go over there and comment on it myself.......but they've banned me from posting comments there.  Whus the matta, bigots?  Skerd?

Is it Echo....?

Yesterday I received an email notification from Echo, my current -- and soon to be ex -- comments provider/software/PITA.  The email said I had a comment from {Person X}, and included the comment content.

However, when I went out to reply to the comment, I found it wasn't there.  Okay, figure I, it's probably just a lag between the time the comment hit Echo and the time that the blog widget refreshes to get the most current comments.

I waited.  And waited.  And waited some more.

The comment never showed!

So my question is...is it Echo "swallowing" the comment because I refuse to convert to their pay-for-play service?  Or did {Person X} delete the comment...maybe have second thoughts?

Echo wants me to convert to their pay-for-play service.  To quote a great American, "NFW".  Echo, to put it succinctly, sucks.  It makes the native Blogger comments service seem awesome by comparison.  Why in the name of all that is right with the world would I PAY MONEY to receive the same shit service and use the same POS user interface I have now?

Query to my fellow bloggers out there.  Is there a comments service out there you use and recommend?  Don't suggest CoComment -- it absolutely refuses to acknowledge my "ownership" of TVL. 

I don't care what it takes -- even if I have to pay for someone else's service -- Echo is coming down.  I've had it.

Man, I miss Haloscan!

P.S.  Message to {Person X} -- thank you so much for your kind comments.  Encouragement is always much appreciated.

Transitioning comments

You may notice that my site is somewhat "broken" for the next little while as I attempt to transition my comments from soon-to-be-dead Haloscan to Echo.

Please excuse our dust while we perform this tedious exercise.

Thank you.

---

I think I've got all of the kinks ironed out. Please let me know if you encounter any weirdness when entering comments.

Ellie Light speaks!

The Ellie Light ("photo" at left) story continues to grow legs. Updates can be found here and here.

The latest count from Patterico's Pontifications:

65 publications in 31 states and the District of Columbia.
3 national publications and a Yahoo link
2 foreign publications.

A must read, also from Patterico's Pontifications, provides more analysis of this controversy.

One of the national publications, Politico - specifically columnist Ben Smith - tries to justify their place as the first guppy to swallow the Ellie Light BS.

While conspiracy theories about the emails seem to be abounding, there's no particular reason to believe that this was something more than one person's gambit. The letter got published (again and again) because it was pretty well done, but a lot of people can write.

Commenters weren't in a forgiving mood.

It still doesn't answer the question as to why you, Ben, felt the need to post "her" email here. I have rarely seen you post entire emails from "fans". Why this time?
Posted By: | January 25, 2010 at 09:53 AM

"(T)here's no particular reason to believe that this was something more than one person's gambit." This said by the first person to give Ellie Light a forum. This is obviously part of the astroturfing army that Axelrod put into action for President Obama. Forgive me if I don't believe you Mr. Smith.
Posted By: | January 25, 2010 at 09:56 AM

Gotta hand it to Ben, he's very good at ignoring the comments that point out he's full of crap.
Posted By: Eric | January 25, 2010 at 11:34 AM

Schadenfreude, sweet schadenfreude. But I digress.

The bottom line is that Sabrina Eaton has opened a can of worms and is to be commended. By doing the work of a reporter and...wait for it...INVESTIGATING, Ms. Eaton has committed an act of real journalism. Would that more "reporters" would follow in her footsteps.

Vulture Droppings - who is Ellie Light?

Vulture Droppings is a semi-regular feature of this blog. It's a kind of "Random Thoughts" post in which I try to quickly summarize a particularly large event or series of events. Think of it being sort of like what a vulture leaves behind after devouring a horse. You don't get the whole horse, just highly processed leftovers.

---

There's a viral story churning around the interwebs right now regarding a prolific letter writing grandmother by the name of Ellie Light. At least, "prolific letter writing grandmother" is the cover story for Ellie Light, an obvious pseudonym, since "Ellie" translates as "Light", and E. Lite looks a lot like "elite".

This edition of Vulture Droppings looks at the issue from three angles. First, the identity of Ellie Light - who is she/he, or is it an operative from the government or some group? Second, who is behind Ellie Light? And finally, why is this vacuous bimbo getting so much media play out of her insipid little letter when most people are lucky to get ONE letter to the editor published EVER.

---

First, kudos to Sabrina Eaton of the Cleveland Plain Dealer, who brought this story to light.

Ellie Light sure gets around.

In recent weeks, Light has published virtually identical “Letters to the Editor” in support of President Barack Obama in more than a dozen newspapers.Every letter claimed a different residence for Light that happened to be in the newspaper’s circulation area.

“It’s time for Americans to realize that governing is hard work, and that a president can’t just wave a magic wand and fix everything,” said a letter from alleged Philadelphian Ellie Light, that was published in the Jan. 19 edition of The Philadelphia Daily News.

A letter from Light in the Jan. 20 edition of the San Francisco Examiner concluded with an identical sentence, but with an address for Light all the way across the country in Daly City, California.

Variations of Light’s letter ran in Ohio’s Mansfield News Journal on Jan. 13, with Light claiming an address in Mansfield; in New Mexico’s Ruidoso News on Jan. 12, claiming an address in Three Rivers; in South Carolina’s The Sun News on Jan. 18, claiming an address in Myrtle Beach; and in the Daily News Leader of Staunton, Virginia on Jan. 15, claiming an address in Waynesboro. Her publications list includes other papers in Ohio, West Virginia, Maine, Michigan, Iowa, Pennsylvania and California, all claiming separate addresses.

Altogether, Ms. Light had letters published in 62 publications in 29 states and DC, 4 national publications (including USA Today), and 2 foreign publications (hat tip to Patterico's Pontifications, where you can find the complete list of publications). Note that this is as of 7 PM Sunday night; the final tabulation will certainly be higher.

---

It begs the question: who is this Ellie Light? A real person? A leftard with a lot of time on her/his hands? Or is she/he something more sinister - a government hireling? An ACORN operative? A DNC mouthpiece?

If you read the comments on Ms. Eaton's story, you see all kinds of speculation and postulates. The most common allegation is that Ellie Light is Ellyn Sunstein, the daughter of Cass Sunstein, the Obama administration's Regulatory czar who is a proponent of government infiltration of chat rooms and blog comments by paid flacks to undermine conspiracy theories (more here). Others suggest it is Mr. Sunstein's wife, the former Samantha Power. Power fits the model of Ellie Light in that Light seems to favor the British spelling of words rather than the American spelling (Power is Irish).

Others speculate that Ellie Light is an ACORN operative who is paid each time one of her/his letters is published. It does fit the ACORN model, and would explain why she/he doesn't bother to use a different name along with the different city of origin each publication is provided; after all, she/he can't get paid if they can't verify that she/he was the author.

A few wags have speculated that Ellie Light is just Il Duce himself trying to gin up some support for himself. Or Michelle Obama. Or Rahm Emmanuel. This site has a particularly amusing collection of theories.

Attempts have been made to use the originating IP address of the email to trace the source of Light's emails. One intrepid blogger traced an "Ellie Light" comment to an ISP in Saudi Arabia, although spoofing software could have masked the real source. The Free Republic fingers Obama's own Organizing for America website and its paint-by-the-numbers form letter generation software. Yet another blogger links Ellie Light to an international public relations firm.

It matters who Ellie Light is. It matters because if Ellie Light is someone on the government payroll, or even a DNC or ACORN operative, it further damages the already damaged credibility of Il Duce.

---

One has to wonder: given the likelihood of a letter to the editor being published once, let alone in 72 publications - one THREE TIMES IN A WEEK - one has to ask oneself, what's up here? This stinks to high heaven. And it begs a question that has to be stated as two questions.

Who is behind Ellie Light, that she gets this kind of response?
What is it about Ellie Light that causes editorial page editors to look upon her letter with such favor?

This two-part question matters. It matters a whole hell of a lot.

If Ellie Light's prolific acceptance by 69 publications is a matter of someone powerful behind Ellie Light, then it's obviously someone with a whole lotta juice. Juice this strong points to interests that are, at minimum, engaging in disinformation; at worst, they may be breaking the law.

But if Ellie Light's prolific acceptance isn't due to someone with juice behind her...well, what does THAT mean? It means that liberal editorial page editors are swallowing whole a campaign to improve the public perception of Il Duce, and are doing so in a concerted effort to prop up his sagging popularity.

Need I elaborate on how malignant either of those scenarios is in terms of our trust in public institutions?

---

It gets more interesting. Now there's evidence of letters to the editor published in various papers across the country that have identical content but different "authors".

---

I'll be the first to admit that this may just be a tempest in a teapot. But it just might be something very, very big. I commend Ms. Eaton and The Plain Dealer for printing the story. I commend the Drudge Report for bringing it national awareness. And I hope with total sincerity that this isn't one of those stories that just goes away with the questions left unanswered.

Blame it on racism

Just what you wanted to see - another post about Czaban and FSR's ass-headed decision to let him go. I only bring it up again because of something a commenter posted in response to the flood of comments posted in response to Czabe's original post (the complete text can now be seen here).

I wish I could link to the whole chain of comments, but it only exists as a snapshot in my personal coComment account, inaccessible to others. You'll just have to take my word for it that I'm not making this up. Anyway, this is what a commenter using the handle 'Billy Ray' wrote.

Czabe sucks! Y'all are a bunch of racists for hating on Steven A Smith!

Racists. Not "I disagree with your assessment of the situation and welcome Mr. Smith as a replacement for Mr. Czaban, whose show I did not enjoy." No, Mr. Stereotype goes straight to the race card. Nice.

Let me clear things up for 'Billy Ray'.

1. Every post written prior to yours was written by a Czaban FAN. As you can expect, those of us who are fanboys of Mr. Czaban are unhappy with FSR's decision. It goes without saying that, as fans of Czabe's show format, his style, and the topics he discusses, we'd be a little less than enthused for his replacement.
   


2. Screamin' A. Smith is a disciple of the ESPN faux "debate" school of sports radio and an adherent to the motto, "He who yells loudest wins the argument". As such, those of us who find this radio format annoying are going to voice our displeasure.


3. If it was JP 'The Brick' (another adherent to the "he who yells loudest" school of thought) who had been named as Czaban's replacement instead of Mr. Smith, I guarantee there's not one of the 77 commenters who preceded you who would have responded any differently than they did.


4. Prior to your post, not a single person commenting on the thread mentioned that Mr. Smith is black.


5. Ergo, given points 1-4, you're an idiot and a tool.
   

There, wasn't that easy. Logic 1, Dipstick 0.

Overplaying the race card is SOOOOO done! C'mon! Use your brain. Think for yourself. See the world how it really is.

Race relations in this country will never heal until tools like 'Billy Ray' STFU.

Wiener of the Week

What a week this has been! Since I started poking a stick into the cage full of law-fetishists at Caput Penitus Culus, I've experienced a level of childish name calling, attempts to intimidate, and baseless accusations that would certainly intimidate a lesser bird. As such, we have a repeat winner for WotW.

In the past week, I've been accused by the CPC fetishists of:

• Being pro-polygamy and pro-pedophilia
• Being a misogynist
• Being intollerant of non-Protestants
• Being guilty of "muddled thinking"
• Being menopausal

In addition, I've been called:

• A computer geek
• A lawyer wannabee
• A computer geek who couldn't make it as a lawyer (AS IF! It's not rocket science!)

Additionally, my opinions have been summarily dismissed and my questions regarding bad case law (such as Dred Scott) ignored because:

• I'm not from Texas
• I'm not a lawyer

Oh, and let's not forget attempted intimidation! Old Caput thought I could be intimidated by showing my real name in one of his retorts! Hey Caput a palus! I don't intimidate! There's a reason I have my real name and real picture on my blog. It's because I'm not afraid to have my controversial opinions attributed to ME, a real person, a husband and father of two.

I almost forgot - I was accused of being uncivil. No merda! The whole point in me citing this asshat as WotW last week was in response to the incivility shown by the law-fetishists towards Toes. I fight fire with fire. Apparently, that hurt their feelings. Eff 'em if they can't take a joke! Besides, it's hard to take the accusation of incivility seriously when they're slinging insults while signed on as ANONYMOUS! Effing cowards!

In their eyes, I'm one of THEM. I'm FLDS. I'm pro-pedophia. I'm pro-polygamy. My consistent stance as a defender of Constitutional principles throughout the history of this blog is meaningless -- it's a beard to mask my FLDS connections. Could these people be any stupider?

So, Caput Penitus Culus and your fellow law-fetishists - you're the Wiener of the Week!

Caput Penitus Culus - the final word

An open letter to Caput Penitus Culus.

I spent the better part of yesterday trying to reason with you about how the actions against the FLDS represent a further erosion of the 4th Amendment and, as such, a threat to all of us. You, for your part, couldn't let go of your precious case law. Rather than address my questions, you evaded, disparaged me, and kept floating back to your original justification: case law says it's okay, so it's okay.

Well, Mr. Lawyer. Let me ask you this. What about Dred Scott? THAT was case law. Was it right? Was it good? Did it appropriately protect the rights of Americans as directed by the Constitution? Would you cite it today if it were still case law?

Just because some cross-dresser with a wooden mallet says so doesn't make it so.

Likewise, the erosion of the 4th Amendment continues unabated because the cross-dressers continue heaping more bad case law on previously established bad case law until the 4th Amendment is nothing more than hollow words, signifying nothing.

You're awfully adept at gratuitous personal attacks when you can't make your point. But I'm adept at personal attacks that BOLSTER my point.

You, sir, are an intellectual lightweight hiding behind a law degree. The next original thought you have will be your first. You are no better than Adolph Eichmann. "There's no case law prohibiting the gassing of Jews...", I can hear you saying, were you around in the 1930's and 1940's.

It is people like you -- useful idiots -- who are contributing to the enslavement of the citizens of the United States of America.

May you have the pleasure of experiencing first-hand the horror of being unjustly arrested because "case law says it's okay".

Coram Non Judice - an update

The proprietor of Coram Non Judice and I have been going round-and-round all day today (click here to see the exchange; it starts a little more than half way down the page (search on 'Vulture' to see where it starts).

Mr. Non Judice is a real piece of work. Every time I make a point, he veers in a different direction. First it was "the FLDS act more like Nazis than the Texas Police supporting the raid" in answer to my point about the government slowly getting us used to paramilitary raids on weirdos so that they can branch out in suppression of any group deemed to be outside the mainstream.

Then he objected to my use of the word 'blitzkrieg' as a description of the raid when I was pointing out how grossly over-the-top the militarized police presence, in full combat regalia, was.

Then, when I pointed out the legal fallacy of a warrant naming one person being used as justification for the search of the ENTIRE COMMUNITY he fell back on "no one was deprived of their rights...there was a warrant".

Then, to counter my next volley, where I asserted that nowhere in the Constitution does the armed invasion of an entire community even BEGIN to be authorized by a mere warrant, he accused me of being a supporter of PPSG (Pedophile Polygamist Support Group)! To further add insult to insult, he called my thinking "muddled and unclear". My response:

Which part of "I don't support the FLDS, their beliefs, or their alleged pedophilia" don't you understand? Doing wrong in an attempt to "do right" is STILL WRONG. Yes, there may be child abuse and pedophilia going in at El Dorado. But does that make illegal search and seizure okay?

Think through the consequences. The Law of Unintended Consequences is a bitch.

I have no idea what is "muddled" and "unclear" about not wanting the Constitutional protections of the 4th Amendment to be violated notwithstanding the righteous cause being paraded about as the justification for doing so.

This earned me this rebuke.

It is clear that you don't understand the Constitution nor the law.

And your opinion still doesn't matter...

Now it was time for that winning Vulture charm to show through.

Okay, Mr. Constitutional Expert - show me where it says that ONE (or two - if you insist) F'ING WARRANT is sufficient to justify setting up a military-style perimeter around a village for purposes of searching ALL RESIDENCES IN THE VILLAGE w/o respect to whether the individuals dwelling therein ARE EVEN NAMED IN THE F'ING WARRANT, and then I'll shut up.

My opinions may not matter to you, Mr. High-and-Mighty-Legal-Expert, but my 'couldn't care less' quotient remains unaffected.

You and your chums here are nothing but bombastic authoritarians who think that any generic warrant is sufficient justification for any little thing der Staat wishes to do to its citizens.

Enjoy Amerika. It seems to fit you.

So...do I think Mr. Caput Penitus Culus (that's Latin for 'Head Inside Ass') will ever come around to my way of thinking? Not a chance in hell! This assclown is so steeped in his self-perceived superiority because......wait for it.....HE'S A LAWYER...that he'll never accept the error of his thinking, particularly when his foil is a computer programmer who doesn't even have a college degree (*GASP!!!!*)

I'm probably done arguing with old Culus. He's WAAAAAAAAAY too smart for me. Probably better looking, too. And more popular.

Tool.

Wiener of the Week - Updated

Normally the WotW is simply the Vulture poking at some governmental asshat through the bars of their bureaucratic cage with the pointed and barbed stick of vitriolic language. But today, it's personal.

This assclown seems to think that people like Toes and me who are appalled at the actions of Texas CPS and the militarized goon squad that supported it in the raid on the FLDS are, at best, stupid, at worst, supporters of pedophilia.

Let me set the stage for you. Sore Toes and a Broken Heart is an excellent blog that serves to document the invasion of the FLDS "compound" by Texas Stoßtruppen and the subsequent legal machinations engineered by Judge Barbara Walther, who, rather than sitting on a judicial bench, should be in jail for her contributions to this abortion of justice.

Mr. Coram Non Judice (ooooooooh! He MUST be smart! He knows Latin! I'm so effing impressed!) took umbrage to a recent post by Toes in which she called into question the legality the both the search warrant used to justify the invasion as well as the legality of expanding the scope of that warrant from a single individual to the ENTIRE community.

Mr. I'm-smart-'cause-I-know-Latin savaged Toes, accusing her of being a "lawyer wannabee" and implying that she's pro-pedophilia.

When Toes brought this up on her blog, I made a comment in her defense that Mr. Self-Important found offense with. But rather than blast me, the commenter, he blasted Toes, for not censoring me!

Her argument would be stronger if one of her last commentators didn't use the term "strumtruppen," which she then moderated and approved.

I followed up at his blog with the following comment (entered verbatim)

SOOOOOOOOOO....you have a problem with my characterization of the amassed SWAT forces that invaded the FLDS "compound" as sturmtruppen. Boo-fricken hoo! Do you have a better word for militarized troops in body armor armed with automatic weapons and backed by armored vehicles?

Don't be disingenuous! Pull your head out of your dogma and look a little deeper at what has been a decades-long trend. Right now they only persecute "oddball" religious groups like the Branch Davidians and the FLDS. But, mark my words, they're working their way up to the point where ANY group of citizens whose views are outside the mainstream can be targets. People like you are "useful idiots" -- putting forth the government line ("this case says 'blah blah blah' so it's okay") and making future atrocities more likely.

Yeah, let's round up the weirdos who MIGHT be engaging in pedophilia! Let's round up all the weirdos, period! One day you'll be saying, "Hey, wait! I'm not a weirdo - I'm mainstream! Get away from me!" as you're led away for being a Mormon, or a blogger, or simply for belonging to DAR. Then maybe you'll understand the viewpoint of people like Toes and me.

Note: this comment still hasn't appeared on Mr. Genius' site yet. Maybe he'll censor me, since Toes wouldn't.

Congratulations, self-important assclown! You're the Wiener of the Week!

UPDATE: My comment finally did get posted 13 hours after I originally posted it. Now let's see what kind of response I get. I'm not nice like Toes, so it should be interesting.

Gimme satellite options!

yodaddy waxes roth concerning a tailfeather-ruffler of his own.

Freedom of choice? What a great concept; but where and how do we get it? Certainly not on satellite TV. I have tried on several occasions to persuade Direct TV to let me chose the channels I receive through my satellite.

According to the person answering their phones I did make a CHOICE. Ah no I did not. They give me a choice of sorts. For a certain price you get a PACKAGE of channels, some of which can be very obnoxious, vulgar or just down right irritating. For instance: When I made my CHOICE, All I wanted were some movie channels; ESPN; Local news and entertainment channels and sports channels such as Fox Arizona, Versus and Fox Intermountain. What I got was some of what I wanted and a whole pile of stinking..er crap.

For instance: I am not Catholic. I am not Mormon and I am not gay. But whether I like it or not, I get a Catholic channel, a Mormon (BYU) channel and a channel that consists of pro-lesbian, pro-gay garbage, daily; all day and night long. So apparently I am sustaining and supporting their causes whether I like it or not. I don’t like it. I want those channels out of my house and out of my life. Unfortunately I can’t get rid of them without dumping channels I wish to keep. Ah isn’t freedom of choice wonderful?

Satellite TV boasts of offering many, many channels bnt they neglect to tell you that the bulk of them are ppv. That’s fine. I don’t care. All I want are the dozen or so channels that I want to watch without the rest of that l@*%$#@.

The problem seems to be that there is no serious regulatory agency keep these people in check. So who do you turn to????

Dude, I was with you chapter and verse until you went all "regulatory" on me.

Chances are you're right...but this feathered libertarian scavenger just HATES all regulation of all kinds. Call me simplistic and naive, but I really believe in the power of the marketplace. In fact, were existing regulations on television transmission to suddenly disappear, there would emerge, after a brief but gawd-awful period of utter chaos, a potpourri of viewing possibilities that are utterly impossible in today's over-regulated marketplace.

Did you know that many of the channels that DirecTV and many cable stations force you to accept -- the very self-same channels you wish to dump from your available options -- are carried either because of regulatory mandate or in an attempt at CYA, lest they be sued by one of the interest groups so intent on ramming their particular 'ism' down society's collective (and I do mean collective) throats?

Let us hearken back to telephone deregulation. Remember what an MCF that was going to be? Now look at where we are. In many markets, you can pay a flat $40-50 per month (or $25 if you are willing to put up with the inherent "issues" of VoIP) for local AND long distance service. I'd dare say that in the 70's, before deregulation, you were paying a WHOLE lot more (proportionally, in 1970's dollars) for your phone service, especially if you had out-of-state relatives. Additionally, the menu of available gadgets, options, and services has exploded. You think good old stodgy AT&T would have invested one dime in all of that creativity were their monopoly to have survived? I think not!

Nonetheless, that was a great post, yodaddy. Thanks for the input.

It's on!

Apparently Ardwulf doesn't know me very well, or he wouldn't have written this in response to comments I made over on What I think you should read in defense of Harry's post there.

I can’t help but notice that you’re doing your ‘research’ at a climate change denial blog, which in turn has gotten its data (in both of the articles you linked,) from WorldNetDaily, a right-wing propaganda outfit with very shady financing, ties to white supremacist organizations and which has promoted, among other things, belief in the silly North American Union conspiracy theory.

If this is one’s definition of ‘research’… well, then I can understand how one might be unable to distinguish facts from lies.

Let's start from the beginning.

I don't do "research" at "climate change denial blogs". Here's a sampling of websites I've referenced for climate change/warming news.

AOL
Agence France-Presse (France)
Associated Press
Business Post (Ireland)
Czech President Vaclav Klaus (speech quoted by The Australian)
Discovery Magazine
Information Week
John Coleman, Founder, The Weather Channel (speech quoted by KUSI, San Diego)
KCRG Des Moines
Milenio.com (Mexico)
National Journal
National Post (Canada)
National Public Radio (NPR)
New York Times
Politico.com
San Francisco Chronicle (sfgate.com)
Senator Ben Cardin (2 letters)
Sify News (India)
Technology Review
Telegraph (UK)
The Daily Mail (UK)
The Guardian (UK)
The Heartland Institute
The Herald Sun (Australia)
Times Online (UK)
Washington Times
What I think you should read
Wikipedia
WorldNetDaily.com

That's quite the rouge's gallery of climate change "deniers", isn't it? Especially considering that the most damning of the articles cited from these sources came from NPR!!!!

I don't consider the New York Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, the AP, AFP, nor any of the UK sources to be extremist, anti-climate change advocates or deniers, do you? There's balance in my sources (something ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, and Fox might seriously consider).

And another thing, I consider your characterization of WorldNetDaily as a typical leftist "I can't refute your argument so I'll smear your source" attack. WorldNetDaily IS right-leaning. They also feature a whole raft of liberal opinion writers (Sarah Posner, Ellen Ratner, Bill Press, Roger Ebert, David Linderoff, Juan Cole, Glenn Greenwald, Congressman Barney Frank, Rob McKay, and Robert Parry -- and this is just Liberals featured since September 1st!). Contrast that with the number of Conservative or Libertarian voices featured by The New York Times (if you said more than 2, you aren't paying attention).

As for the totally unfounded (and unproven) allegation that WorldNetDaily has ties to white supremacists, follow this chain of recent accusations, if you will.

Leftist "White Supremacist" Accusations:
The editor of the Washington Times
Bill and Hillary Clinton
Lou Dobbs
Ron Paul
Michelle Malkin, who is Asian!!!
Novelist Stephen King
"Doctor" James Dobson

As you can see, rather than debate in a reasoned, thoughtful manner, the Left resorts to ridiculous name calling. Does anyone, ANYONE, REALLY believe that any of these people are White Supremacists? Anyone?

You wanna know why I treat climate change propagandists and "believers" the way I do? Because it's a fraud, that's why!!!!

Temperatures have been dropping for the last decade. The ocean temperatures are stable. 28,000 scientists question the "consensus" of global warming (vs. 3,200 who signed off on the UN's fraudulent "study"). All physical evidence points to a cooling trend. And the biggest proponents of drastic change to "combat" warming have a financial stake in said "change"!

But there's no convincing the likes of Ardwulf. They're believers. You might as well try to convert an Islamist to Christianity. Ardwulf may not realize it, but he totally made Harry's point.

Atheist hate

Why is it that so many of those who identify themselves as atheists are major a-holes? Vox Day refers to them as Socially Autistic, but I'm not quite so nice (BTW, Vox also blogged on this same "event" today, in case you want to check out what he had to say.

There's a young woman from Texas named Rachel Lucas who blogs about various themes and issues. She's quite popular (hold the jealousy, Vulture!). Over the weekend, her boyfriend's dad was involved in a bad motorcycle accident. He's pretty mangled. The doctors put him into a coma for his own protection (he was thrashing pretty badly) and to help with the cerebral swelling. This is the context within which this little episode occurred.

Rachel made the mistake of titling a post, "There are no atheists in a fox hole". Everyone over a certain age (trust me, I'm over a certain age) knows that this truism dates back to WW II. Well, almost everyone knows -- certainly the asshat atheists didn't, either that or they were just spoiling for a fight. She received page after page of hate- and profanity-filled shinola from the "intellectuals" who comprise the atheist community. Here's Rachel in her own defense.

The update I posted about Rupert’s dad was titled “There are no atheists in a foxhole.” Which anyone who reads here regularly would understand is my way of poking fun at myself, seeing as how publicly, on this blog, I’ve repeatedly identified myself as feeling like either an atheist or an agnostic, depending on my mood. I’ve regularly criticized Christians and their beliefs and have asked them to defend themselves, which they did, some nicely and some not. I’ve been very open about the fact that I simply don’t know the truth even though I’d like to, and that I find debates about religion interesting because they give you such a window into how other people think and view the world. There’s a whole category here called “Religion” but the point is, I have no religion. I reject organized Christianity and every other religion that’s ever been.

So I used that quote to describe the way I was feeling at that moment, while writing about a loved one who is in a coma. I was feeling down and sad and worried, and I used that quote because whenever I’m in a scary situation, I think about whether there’s a God, and I almost always find myself believing that there is because it helps me and comforts me to do so. The belief diminishes my suffering, simple as that. It may be wishful thinking but so what? It helps me and hurts no one.

Well. That post title really, really, really pissed off some atheists.

---

So I hope the atheists have gotten what they wanted from me. That’s what I’m here for, to use “offensive” quotes during emotional times and to be instructed with great gusto and attention about what a bigoted jackass I am so that I’ll never use such quotes again and all the world will learn what happens to you when you make that mistake. It’s really quite marvelous and I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m ready to join their organization RIGHT NOW, if they’ll have me.

They just seem like such kind and considerate people, out there teaching the world about tolerance and overcoming bigotry, spreading their word wherever they think it’s necessary for the furtherance of enlightenment and elimination of negative stereotypes about atheists, even if it means hijacking a thread on a personal blog about someone in a coma. Because TRUTH is all that matters, people. Learn it and live it.

Actually, the quoted material above doesn't do the post justice; she handled herself very well. You should read it for yourself.

I know there are REALLY clueless Christians who would have confronted Rachel with a whole sermonette full of fire and brimstone to "convert" her in her hour of pain and anxiety. They're jerks -- it's not the time nor the place.

But I'm pretty sure -- REALLY sure -- that no Christian would treat her like these two paragons of intellectualism.

If you are going to pray “just in case”, I suggest you pray to as many different gods as possible. If not, you may be praying to the wrong one. And don’t forget to gather a few additional lucky charms while you’re at it. I suggest a rabbit’s foot, 4 leaf clover, and a horseshoe for starters. Then you might want to do a Google search for lucky charms. There may be a number of them recognized by other cultures which are effective that we don’t know about.

Then you might want to tackle eliminating all the bad luck charms. You never know, that might make a difference as well.

If you are comforted by these measures which give the appearance of ‘doing something’, then why limit them to simply praying to one potential god when there are so many other acts of magical thinking which are comforting in situations where there is little else one can control.
- Skeptigirl

Your opening post is a lie. There ARE atheists in foxholes… even if you don’t “believe” there are. Pat Tilman was just such an atheist. Educate yourself and quit deleting posts who try to lessen the bigotry you spread. http://www.atheistfoxholes.org/

Lying for Jesus is still lying. I hope your friend gets better. I hope he never is the bigot you are.

Just because your faith makes you feel all humble and honest… doesn’t make it true, you know.
- A Third Atheist (articulett)

Doesn't it make you warm all over to see the concern they have for...right. No concern. No thought for her injured family member ("get better so you can represent non-bigotry" hardly counts). No thought for her feelings as she goes through a tough time. Only hatred, contempt, and vitriol. Kinda makes you hope with all your might that there IS a hell, just so those a-holes can go there.

From the suggestion box

That DW is an idea man. Here's his latest:

Vulture, Somewhere on here maybe you should think about putting a spot for our everyday gripes. Something like The Bitching Post. Or a Venting Station or Stop Me From Going Postal. Just a thought...

Uh, D? I believe this whole blog is the place for bitching.

What I could do is a second blog "page" for gripes, venting, bitching, pissing, and moaning (or, what Liberals call "activism"). I'll certainly take it under consideration. I'm in the middle of a site redesign right now, but perhaps I can retool my "test" blog (where I'm creating the new design) into "The Kettle" (a Kettle is a group of circling vultures).

Shoot I could even open up "authoring" authority to those of you interested in writing your own rants without having to go through the middle man (me). Sound like a plan? Who's interested?

The full-service blog

DW asks:

Would it be possible to post clip art (appropriate) along with our comments?

The answer is a resounding "yes", provided the clip art is accessible via an internet address. For example, if you have an AOL Albums account, a Google Web Albums account, a Kodak account, or whatever, then you can send me a link to the picture.

Otherwise, I guess you could email the clip art and I could upload it myself. Whatever works, right?

A customer-friendly blog

Yesterday DW posted the following:

Just a thought for your blog. I realize it is your blog oh Vulture, but you should have a suggestion link [so] your over 100 hits can leave suggestions. Or even a place where we could post the thought of the day if you so decided it was worth it. I know you probably think that is a gay suggestion but what ever works. I still love ya

Why dear DW, how wrong you are! Behold - the New and Improved TVL! I've taken the liberty of adding a new widget to the bottom of the blog whose purpose is to give you, the reader, a way to contact the Vulture with email comments, suggestions, and "thought of the day"-type input.

I really like the idea of a thought of the day -- I have some very smart readers among the few, the proud, the too-much-time-on-their-hands readers of TVL.

I've also posted a new widget in the "Vulture Fun Facts" section - a widget that counts down the days-hours-seconds until the Vulture turns 50. This is what a full-service blog does for its customers.