And The Left Cried Out “No Hiding Place!” By Christopher M. Chupik

And The Left Cried Out “No Hiding Place!”

By Christopher M. Chupik

Let me tell you the tale of two websites.

First is a forum dedicated to a famous SF franchise (no, not that one, the other one). Let’s call it Franchise X Forum. In addition to sometimes interesting discussions of Franchise X, I had also enjoyed the various “Babe of the Week” threads where posters would share harmless cheesecake of female celebrities. But all of a sudden, those threads were gone, and a pinned post warning against starting any more was in their place. The air was feeling distinctly chilly.

Politics, we were informed by the moderators, is strictly forbidden. Especially when someone says something conservative. This does not prevent numerous posters (all of the left-wing persuasion) from including political statements in their signatures and avatars. Starting a thread where the poster declares that all global warming deniers are criminals? Totally not political. Objecting to such a post? How dare you?

In one of the threads that turned political, someone posted a dissenting (non-leftist) opinion and was promptly dogpiled for it. There was flaming and name-calling, all things supposedly banned by the moderators. I could have complained to the moderators, except for one thing: one of the moderators was taking part in the dogpiling.

Politics are forbidden, it seems, except when they’re mandatory.

So I’m not a poster at Franchise X Forum and won’t be any time soon.

The second place I wish to speak of is a blog with a strong fantasy slant. Lots of retro SF stuff and a focus on Sword and Sorcery. Let’s call it Slack Fate. Up until two months ago, Slack Fate was a daily must-visit blog for me. I had it in my bookmarks and everything. There was virtually no discussion of political matters at all on this blog and I appreciated that.

And then, about a year or so ago, Slack Fate suddenly did a massive guest post on global warming and how it was the responsibility of SF writers to deal with it. It was completely out of tune with anything I’ve seen posted there before. And unlike every other post on the blog, where the bulk of it was hidden behind the fold, this long, long post had to be scrolled past. As I did so, I had the sinking feeling that my days of visiting Slack Fate were numbered.

And then, at the end of August, in the aftermath of the Recent Unpleasantness, the editor of Slack Fate decided he didn’t want me reading the blog anymore. Said editor launched into anti-Puppy tirade after tirade and personally mocked anyone who complained in the comments. So now Slack Fate is a once in a while visit, at best.

Notice a pattern developing?

Now, I do visit various political blogs, but when I’m done with those, I like to go elsewhere and read about things that are not politics. But I don’t have that option anymore. Culture war is being waged on a thousand battlefields. Doesn’t matter if they’re political or not. Want to argue if Hulk is stronger than Superman? Better be ready to be derailed into an argument about George W. Bush (Seriously, I saw that happen once).

On the Franchise X Forum, I’m sure that once upon a time, the rules were not being used as a bludgeon against conservatives. But slowly, bit by bit, the rules of the board were eroded away. Moderators began abusing their powers, acting more like bullies instead of the people who are supposed to be watching out for bullies.

At Slack Fate, I’m not entirely sure what happened. There were conservative posters at that blog and there was no real hint of the editor’s biases until the global warming post. When Sad Puppies 3 happened, something changed. The editor not only took sides, but lashed out viciously against anyone who dissented. Last I saw, he was linking more and more to, posting about the favorite authors of and generally trying to be’s Mini-Me. Because heaven forbid a blog have its own unique character. This must be what the Invasion of the Body Snatchers looks like when you’re not a pod person.

In both cases, the result is the same: a supposedly apolitical forum which has become a hostile environment for libertarians and conservatives.

Now, I don’t want a “safe space”. Heaven forbid. These sites have already been turned into safe spaces — for leftists. But if your forum has rules banning politics, shouldn’t they be enforced fairly and across the board? And if you do want to discuss politics, you have to allow for the fact that not everybody has the same opinion. When posters see that the rules are enforced selectively, it encourages abuse. The fish rots from the head.

The people doing this are like religious fanatics, completely assured of the righteousness of their cause, willing to use any tool to further it. And in the process they take over institutions, no matter how small or insignificant, and turn them into temples where the only words spoken are words of praise. You’re going to hear about the Great God Mota whether you like it or not.

Systemic closure is the result. A thousand voices, all of them the same.

And the closing of the leftist mind continues.

501 thoughts on “And The Left Cried Out “No Hiding Place!” By Christopher M. Chupik

  1. A fine post to read this morning. I had a sudden surge of applicable invective. Not good. I’d ask for a douse of Holy water, but it might turn to steam.

    Unfortunately, this underscores why I have no use for most leftists. Rules are what they apply to others, not to themselves. It’s not the first time I’ve seen this with an SF blog, and it likely won’t be the last, As far as I’m concerned – But no, that involves more invective.

    What I can say is I have a policy of not doing business with the twits that practice “some are more equal than others.” Represent a company and apply rules in a partisan manner? Your company isn’t worth my business. An author? Ditto. That’s because it goes beyond any conviction of the rightness of cause; it goes into an unjust application of the rules they themselves set up. If they can’t be trusted to follow their own guidelines, there’s no reason to trust them on anything at all.

    1. If they can’t be trusted to follow their own guidelines, there’s no reason to trust them on anything at all.

      If I could figure out how to access WordPress’s “Like” feature on any comments except the ones that reply directly to me, I’d hit “Like” on your comment. If I could hit it repeatedly, I’d hit it a dozen times. This is precisely the right approach to take. That, and tell everyone you know that company X / website Y can’t be trusted, and why.

      1. Log in to WordPress, open the blog in its “Reader” function. It’ll just be a white page with the blog text and comments. The “Like” button with a little star is rightbeside the Reply button.

    2. Not good. I’d ask for a douse of Holy water, but it might turn to steam.

      Proposed experiment: Measure the heating value of various kinds of sin using an appropriately sensitive substance (Holy water).

      Applications?: Have holy water circulate in a heating/cooling loop through zone of evil, using it to boil water in a boiling water vessel and produce power. Eventual result: Hell freezes over, but you get it to perform useful work until it does so. 😛

          1. So if you had a thermal loop between Christian and Norse hells, you could both get useful work AND flatline both of ’em to room temperature?

            1. Unless there was an equivalent energy input on both sides to maintain their respective temperatures.

            2. It’s hell, right? You could put Maxwell’s Demon to work and drive the whole thing to absolute zero.

          1. *As oppose to the worse kind of thermodynamics where my brain panicked at seeing integrals for the change in entropy.


            Looks puzzled?

      1. Steam table thermo* professor’s remark seems applicable–we know Hell is isothermal or else you could build a heat pump and cool part of it.

        *As oppose to the worse kind of thermodynamics where my brain panicked at seeing integrals for the change in entropy.

    3. As Thomas Sowell has pointed out, the rules the establish are for the Benighted. The Anointed, having been saved from sin, are enlightened enough that they don’t need no steenkin’ rules.

      1. +++++
        The ancien regime had the clerisy, the nobility,and the Third Estate.

        Their society has clerisy/New Class in the role of the clergy, the 0.1% “donor class” instead of the nobility, and everybody else as the Third Estate.

        1. This is correct. They are trying to form a new aristocracy.
          In an idle moment I studied the makeup of various European aristocracies through history. They comprised of from between 6% and 20% of the population. The rules are different for the aristocracy than they are for other people. Legally different. The aristocracy rules itself and the non-aristocrats. The aristocracy controls who is admitted to its ranks, and can eject those it deems unworthy. It tends towards inherited membership, but it isn’t always that way.
          The US constitution forbids the federal government and the states from handing out titles of nobility, but I see a lot of parallels between the foundations created by political figures (and the merely wealthy), and titles of nobility.

              1. No, I mean I grew up with this. Anyone descended from nobility was likely to be communist or maoist and also very well connected, which helped in the leftist take over of Europe.

              2. Theodore Dalrymple has written that in the old days, before WW2, the educated English middle and upper classes used to get into academic posts or into medicine. These days they become bureaucrats working for the government or NGO’s.

            1. Ties to that short story of yours about the immortal aristocrats with the *SPOILER* conversation with vampire Lenin *SPOILER*?

                    1. Think Highlander – immortals need to fake their deaths every so often so that people don’t catch on.

          1. Of Course, Tom Kratman has already gone there in the Carerra books.

            One of the bad guys was “The Matrionarchess of CARE”, as her title among the Earth high-tier society (and others had titles based on NGOs), and on her death it passed to another scion of the progressive 0.01% – who unlike his predecessor seems to be having a crisis of conscience after falling in love with his sex slave (who is a spy for the locals, after barely escaping being a human sacrifice back on earth, as her sister took her place)

          2. I sometimes think liberals are very unhappy there is no peasant class in America for them to take care of, so they enact policies designed to create peasants. Their opposition in particular to the privately owned automobile. The Amish get along fine here in the middle of nowhere without them. For the rest of us, good roads and relatively inexpensive fuel for them are a necessary part of life. There are no busses, subways and trolleys to handle our transportation needs.

          1. When the Redskins flap first started, I wished there was a whiskey called “Firewater” so I could send a case to the half-dozen Amerinds who were kicking up a fuss. I was rather surprised to find out that such a product actually exists.

  2. Sadly, if “we” were as bad as the Lefties think we are, the Lefties would be dead. [Frown]

      1. What makes this even funnier is that the blonde chick also played Harmony the ditzy vampire on Buffy and Angel.

    1. Like being harangued by someone who claims you are dangerous and are easily swayed you’re violence. If they really thought t that they would remain quiet.

    2. Was in California over the weekend. Found it eye-opening. A lot of things about California that never made sense to me suddenly made sense. Basically there’s way too many people way too tightly packed, all trying to do the same things at the same times. Of course there’s a strong streak of “we must make sure everyone does what they’re supposed to do” mentality in the governing class there. Of course they think plebes can’t be trusted to carry concealed, after all, just spending time in one of their shopping malls made my fingers itchy…

      It’s the problem with assuming that people are basically good. Means that their bad behavior is just that – behavior – and can be corrected by an application of law, which of course, being basically good, people will obey. It’s a consistent view of human nature, but not one that I subscribe to.

      1. Spent a few days out there last Christmas. I’d move and renounce citizenship before living there. But the strain of ‘there oughta be a law’ and holier than thou mindset is not uncommon. And it has spread. I can be interacting with others and keeping the fact that I am religious and right under wraps and I get people ranting at me that people like me should be assaulted because raisins

        Recognize that most of these people see you as an enemy to be killed and destroyed and the world makes more sense

        1. A lot of them have ruined California to a state where they can’t live there anymore, so they move out and immediately start in on ruining their new state.

          1. Very common bumpersticker around my town: “I don’t care how you did it in California!”

            I always make it clear that though we’re newcomers we aren’t Californians….

              1. From what I hear… too late!

                I’m from Montana, and now back home, but I lived in California for 28 years…. it’s actually three tribes under one name: central coast (SJW-land), south coast (lemmingville) and farming interior (normal people). The problem is that SJW-land runs the whole show, if need be by trampling everyone else. Support the State of Jefferson, which proposes splitting the Normal People off into a new state, free of the coastal influence.

                  1. Oh, now it is.

                    We escaped last year, and rather than bring California with us, we have tons of cautionary tales. And we tell them, too.

              1. We moved from California to east of the Cascades a dozen years ago. Not much anti-California sentiment eastside; we figure if you can handle a winter or two, you deserve to live here. I have a hard time distinguishing between the anti-Cal westsiders and California types. I suspect they resemble each other too much and the look in the mirror hurts.
                (Note: even on the eastside, we figure it takes a while for Californians to learn to drive properly. On the gripping hand, they spend money here…)

          2. The funniest thing happened to me a few years ago. A friend of a friend told me that he moved out of Cali and to my state to escape the drug culture. A few minutes later he asked if I knew where he could get some blow.

      2. California is a large state with a large population, but the majority of that population is crammed along the coastal strip between San Francisco and San Diego. The population distribution is heavily skewed to the southwest corner of the state.

        1. the population vastly thins out towards ventura and Santa Barbara and there is very little population on the coast between Santa Barbara and san fran.

    3. The time is coming when a critical mass won’t precede that with “sadly”. Not long after they won’t add the “if” either.

      I fear the outcome of that…not that the lefties would win but that we’d all lose. However, I more and more see no way out. It only takes one (usually deluded*) side to start a war.

      * James Dunnigan’s and Al Nofi’s classic “How to Stop A War” concludes the most common cause of war is one side believing, incorrectly, they can win. They might but it is very rarely the “one and done” they expected.

      1. Civil Wars are ugly.

        That book is probably part of why I say that anyone who is certain they will win a Civil War is going to lose. (In Civil Wars, it is possible to have a winner, and it is possible to just have a bunch of losers. If the outcome of a Civil War is certain and in your favor, you don’t need a civil war, you can just round up the minority you don’t like by force. If your certainty of victory is partly in error, it may be wholly in error.)

      2. Yes, in many ways He Who Shall Not be Named is the forerunner of a new generation. Just like my generation considers the people 10 or 20 years older than us who think some planning is good for the economy and that the commies have high moral motives, RINOs, they consider us soft and way too patient. They come in fire and the sword.

        1. Not all of us. Some of us fear that the pendulum, in such case, would go too far the other way. I do not want to live in the Unnamed One’s society.
          But…a friend of mine has told me that I am the only person he knows that believes that a civil war could happen and that it would be a bad thing.
          And even then, I have found myself wondering if it would not be better to permanently remove certain people from the board.

            1. I missed the word “but” in that sentence when I first read it, seeing it as, “I know most of them”. Was wondering what your list looks like. 🙂

          1. Starting with the editors of the Encyclopedia Galactica, IIRC.

            But yes, there are some people that if they come running past my gate with the mob on their heels, I’ll probably be in the back of the house and couldn’t hear them asking to be let in.

          2. I don’t want to live in the Unamed One’s society either.

            However, if we get to the point where it is that or the progtard’s Zardoz are the only options I’ll start taking potshots at the flying stone heads.

        2. HWSNBN isn’t that much younger than us is he (I think you have 4 years on me and I’ve got about that on him.

          I’ll admit more and more I think he is right not because I desire fire and sword (we’ve talked about it so you know my expectations of that) but because, as I said, it only takes one side that thinks it can win to start it. You saw an attempt at 1848/1917 in OWS. That tells me they think they can.

          1. I don’t think OWS was an attempt at 1917, except for a few fringers, mostly because the denizens hadn’t thought that far ahead about what to do if their little camp-out failed to achieve the desired results.

            1. I remember out Hostess saying it strongly resembled the Carnation Revolution. I don’t doubt that the majority didn’t realize they were to be Communist cannon fodder. They didn’t in 1848, 1917, 1968, or even 1789 for that matter.

              Doesn’t change what those who got it started intended.

            2. I think the people in power thought it was. That’s why all magazines and some book publishers did profiles of the “movement” and Obama was head over heels for it.

        3. I’ve changed in response to the effects of the Obama administration. Maybe also in response to the causes of the Obama administration. I am considering things now, that I would have likely ended up rejecting ten years ago.

        4. Knowing the difficulty of identifying someone without naming them, I’m afraid I don’t recognize who it is that should go unnamed.

          Even if just limited to real life people, that identification covers a lot of territory… though it occurs to me that you may be referring to a certain individual online who revels in pseudonyms, and has been told by the police IRL to knock it off with the wankery.

          1. Not that guy; we’re referring to the guy who sicced the cops on he of which you are currently speaking.
            The cyberstalker of which you makes even straw!He Who Should Not Be Named look like a halfway decent human being.

            1. The rational for not naming flaming sword guy is that mentioning his name draws trolls. Boring trolls like fish semen.

      3. It is too true, however disgraceful it may be to human nature, that nations in general will make war whenever they have a prospect of getting any thing by it. John Jay

      1. The problem is, you say something often enough and:

        1. You might start believing it (this is the danger of creating your own cult for fun and profit…even Hubbard believed his own bullshit by the end).

        2. The people you are saying it about might believe you believe it. If they do they may believe they have no choice but to act in their own defense.

        1. HerbN: 2. The people you are saying it about might believe you believe it. If they do they may believe they have no choice but to act in their own defense.

          This is what concerns me at times. Having no sense of self-awareness, shame, or any other kind of restraint of their own behaviors, the hardcore leftards will always keep pushing, thinking that the restraint of the right is something that will continue no matter what, and never seem to consider what happens when those pushed too far decide that if they’re going to be demonized no matter what they do, then they’ll be demons.

          I really don’t look forward to the day that push one bit too much comes, and as a result things start going Buckman (from Tom Kratman’s Caliphate).

          1. Yep. “If I have to bear the name, I might as well play the game” is a _very_ old meme.Takes astonishing levels of self-unawareness to keep pushing and not expect something to break bad.

            1. If you are going to be assessed the penalties of being [BLANK] no matter what, you might as well gain the advantages. This is why most manuals of diplomacy and combat emphasize the importance of leaving your opponent an escape route.

            2. It’s a weird twist on Barretta. Instead of “don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time” it is “if you going to do the time might as well do the crime.”

              There is even a whole movie about it when you wind up in prison for murdering your husband who actually faked his death and framed you.

      2. It is projection, as evidenced by a leftist on twitter yesterday fantasizing about shooting white men in the face. (Note, the person was, himself, a white man.)

        They displace their own predisposition to violence into a hated other that can then be safely distanced and demonized.

      3. I don’t know. I used to think that most of the leftists exaggerated for ‘effect’. Possibly that what they were accusing others of doing was what they thought they would do if they only could.

        Remember, it only takes some highly motivated people (Bill Ayers anyone?) to move into education with the desire to manipulate others in order to produce a cadre of true believers. They have created many who are true believers — who are trained to be incapable of logical thinking so that they cannot see how the world would be if their assertions were actually true.

    4. Much as I say about the Israelis: If they did what they are continually accused of doing, there’d be nobody left to accuse them of it. Survivors, if any, would know better.

  3. A couple of examples of Robert Conquest’s Second Laws of Politics: “Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing.” And nowadays, I’d be surprised if there wasn’t some SJWs involved.

    1. ❤ the avatar and image, although I prefer the Dark beyond the blackest night, crimson beyond the blood that flows– deep with in the sands of time is where your power grows. I pledge myself to slaughter, all the foes who stand, before the mighty gift bestowed in my unworthy hand translation of her spell.

  4. Interesting timing on that post… yesterday I deleted my bookmark for a blog I’ve been an active participant in for several yeards.

    The owner is a minor SF author who took the trouble to start interesting topics, which had collected a group of interesting regulars. It was European, so I expected things to be rather far to the left of my own viewpoint.

    As time went by the author started going off on rants slagging off Americans, Republicans, Southerners, and Christians; by his posted sales figures, about 75% of his paying readership. Then he went on a raving “burn it all down!” tirade on the subject of the Puppies, adopted Vox Day as his personal antichrist, declared that he was a “feminist” and a “vegan”, and more or less quit starting any topics of his own, basically turning the blog over to a succession of guest posters that I’d never heard of, who used the blog as their personal platform for ranting that made John Scalzi look like Tom Kratman.

    I could have stayed around to needle them, but if I felt like butting heads with that sort of people, I’d pick a more useful venue.

          1. “I have the brain of a genius. I keep it in a jar on my bookcase.” [Evil Grin]

              1. This was my comment on facebook yesterday: If you were to add up the total volume of heads that Sarah Palin lives in rent free, she has, by far, the largest volume of living space in the United States, and quite possibly, the world.

                This was the headline that prompted it: BILL DALEY BLAMES SARAH PALIN FOR OBAMA’S MESS

                Lots of room inside some of those heads…

            1. I try to leave my mind safely at home. I’m less likely to lose it that way, and it’s really too small to wander on its own.

              1. The genius is mad and I keep hearing whispers from the jar. [Nervous Smile]

            2. “Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.”
              – Robert Bloch

            3. Somebody at Princeton used to be able to say that literally – he had Einstein’s brain!

          2. My wife goes by the initials “A.B.” A majority of our friends refer to her as “A.B. Normal.”

            (rimshot for “Young Frankenstein…)

            1. In “The Strange Case of Charles Dexter Ward,” HP Lovecraft said, “Do not call up what you cannot put down.” He was referring to necromancers, but it’s a useful guide for online debate as well…

              1. After seeing what good results the owner of the White Moose Café in Dublin did, in expertly trolling some butt-hurt vegan speshal snowflakes, I proposed deliberately doing the same on my own facebook author page … hey, huge exposure for the price of being blunt with idiots – what is there to lose? Alas, my daughter forbade it at once. She’s such a buzzkill….:-)

      1. I assume his guest posters’ opinions support his own. And I assume yours will do the same.

        I anticipate I will enjoy yours more than his…

      2. To our esteemed hostess:

        Work away and get things settled. The more distractions that are eliminated from your life and therefore to your writing the better. As I have said before we are a selfish lot who hungers greatly to have our brains filled with your output.

        Meanwhile, as we are a feisty bunch, we will wait with far less than perfect patience for your return to regular blogging.

  5. The left is intellectually bankrupt. They can not win an argument, so they do their best to turn them all into shouting matches.

    1. But yet everyone else is stupid, compared to them. You may have experience and knowledge diametrically opposite to what they’re pushing – but YOU will be the stupid one because you’re not following the meme of the day.

      I swear, I’m starting to think the ’50s/’60s may have been a golden age for rationality and science… 😦

        1. Oh, where should I start? 😉

          This may tread perilously close to politics – but you recall when Bush’s ANG attendance record hit the web, and all the left’s pundits pointed to it as proof he didn’t show up for work?

          None of them understood how the ANG or Air Force Reserve accounted to attendance, how points for attendance were assigned, how those points (which count towards retirement and are taken VERY seriously) are accumulated, or how the units would allow members to reschedule their drills at need. (I managed to not do my 2 weeks annual tour in one chunk for three years after my son was born. Instead, I did an extra weekend for 7 months to get those 14 points…)

          As the guy mostly handling my squadron’s attendance, I knew how it worked. I looked over Bush’s record, saw where he did his drill weekends, saw his annual tour makeup days – and saw nothing wrong with it. It looked like any normal year for a Reservist. He did his time. I said so over on a lefty site, detailing every step of the process, pointing out my thoughts on what days he was in for the regular monthly drill and his makeup days for annual tour.

          Oh, how the folks over on Kevin Drum’s site howled at the time. They were SURE something was wrong, despite (a) having no experience with ARPC’s point system, (b) no knowledge of the procedures at the unit level, (c) no knowledge of what happens if you should falsify a record like that, and (d) no understanding of what it was like in the Reserves after the Vietnam War.

          Wish I could find that – used to have it on my old blog but it seems to have been et by Aggravating…

          1. And they weren’t able to find a single military personnel specialist (you know, the folks who actually KEEP the attendance records, form 40s and the the like) who said he’d done anything wrong.

            That must have galled them no end.

            1. The main host? Are you not doing your own hosting or at least co-lo?

              I’m sure a ton of us have our own hosting and would be willing to include you (ie, I know at least one person who would).

              1. I’m actually on WP, (We have room too, but I started this one on WP) but by “main host” I meant me. For reasons to be explained later, I have been moderating my posts and will continue to do so for a few more weeks. I’m also insanely busy, so I get guests…This should ease a little towards the end of the year.

                1. *has visions of two books a week flying through Toni W’s office transom window, all by this “Hoyt” person. Smiles beatifically, purrs quietly*

                2. I think I can safely speak for all of us in saying if “insanely busy” includes “finishing a bunch of books, collections, shorts, and a move” we’d prefer you focus there and leave the politics to us 🙂

                  1. yes, it does include that, plus acting as publisher for the Hoytco publishing concern. Which reminds me I have two novellas and a short of younger boy’s to edit.

                  1. Don’t worry. The SJWs are currently focused on Milo’s most recent delightful presentation.

                    I’m sad I missed it (blast being sick!); but it seems that Milo got quite a lot more attention than Sarkeesian, and it wasn’t even intentional.

          2. Military “attendance” is really hard to explain to anyone who hasn’t been there. As an enlisted person my reaction to “flyboy lieutenant forced to find make work for me to do because they won’t let him go home” was something akin to “please merciful gawd no.”

            1. And do you recollect the little scribble in the upper right-hand corner of files – the file number of where they were supposed to go for the record, with the date and initials of the typist/clerk who filed them?
              Yeah, I know my experience in the AF with file plans and administration and all was about twenty years later … but still. Military procedure altereth not nor changenth ever, and I always wondered about that aspect.

              1. Yep, file plans… ah, they made life rather simple. If it was saved, it had to have at least a number on where it needed to be stuffed. Memos, reports, what have you… it hall had a place, and that place was marked on the document.

                (Which is another reason Rathergate irked me so. Wrong size paper, not a carbon copy, no file marks, wrong font, wrong spacing, wrong FAKE LETTERHEAD, for pity’s sake…)

                Gah. You’d never guess my lowest scores on the ASVAB were in admin.

            2. Yes. Which is ANOTHER thing that I posted on when Rathergate hit. No way in hell that supposed ‘memo’ was real.

              And ‘fake but accurate’ is still ‘fake’.

          3. leave aside that he had to fly a plane that tried regularly to kill its pilots.
            Or that some schmuck had to point out their “typewriter” font was a Microsoft computer font, and people who disliked the man said that, no, he did his duty as needed etc.
            But Booosch!!!1!

              1. Truthfully, none of the Century Series fighters was known for low accident rates. About all you say about them in that respect was that each type had different ways to kill you.

                1. iirc the 106 had some pilot kill rates on par with some combat deployments in other planes. t’was a nasty thing to fly, which he did, without seeing where he was going, from Texas to Florida.

                  1. Proglodytes typically fly without seeing where they are going, so they don’t cut Bush any slack on those grounds.

                    Even when they can see where they are going they usually refuse to believe it.

              2. As I remember the analysis: he picked that particular plane to train on because it was in wide use in Vietnam, expecting to go there – and they discontinued use of the plane just before he completed training, fouling up his deployment plan.

                1. Moreover, the replacement plane’s training slots were filled with returning, combat-experienced, pilots whose ANG enlistment terms were longer than his. By the time he was trained to the new plane he would have been just short of demobilization as the force down-sized post-war.

                  None of that mattered — John Kerry was a “recognized” decorated war hero (“reporting for duty”) whose lies were swiftly (heh*) catching up with him so the narrative had to be derailed. That Kerry was what they wanted to believe Bush to be was a truth too inconvenient to bear.

                  *Adverb ending in “-ly” playing off the swift boat vets — a twofer in proglodyte enragement.

                  1. Always remember folks, GWB entered the TANG and tried to go to Vietnam because he was a coward, but Clinton was ever so brave making sure he put himself in a position that his being called up would probably never happen.

                    About the only useful thing Kerry ever did was shoot that kid in the back.

            1. Yep. It’s really funny how folks turned their brains off at the sound of his name… 😦

      1. “Truth will not afford sufficient food to their vanity; so they have betaken themselves to errour. Truth, Sir, is a cow that will yield such people no more milk, and so they are gone to milk the bull.” — Samuel Johnson

    2. True to a great extent but as I’ve mentioned, the left has largely abandoned ideology for the Cult of Victimhood. Instead of constructing a platform of ideas and defending them, the ‘best’ leftists assemble a list of people to hate in order to validate that they are the best.

      1. Yeah, I’m starting to see more of the “I’m glad that your life is so wonderful that you aren’t impacted by $CAUSE.” “argument” over on Facebook.

        1. “My life is wonderful only because i have accepted his salvation and thus am assured I will rise above the sins and depredations of this fallen world.”

          That should shut their pie holes. Especially because none of their efforts to address $CAUSE à la Mode will actually have any real ameliorative effect.

        2. “Yeah, well, I still have to put up with you so it all balances out”.

          Aside, I love that Perl has become the generic unknown indicator of the Internet. Makes me light another candle at my shrine to Larry every time I see it.

          1. I thought there were a lot of languages that used $ to indicate a string. Isn’t that a Basic or Pascal or Fortran thing? (Those being the only computer languages I ever studied even briefly….)

                1. Hush you…you’re harshing my mellow.

                  Oh, and C shell as well…in fact I suspect all the core Unix shells use it and that’s almost certainly where Larry got it. Awk does as well.

                  1. She sells C shells down by the C shore. Or was it C-Cells or D-Cells down by de Dinah Shore?

              1. I’ve done some Perl, but don’t remember it; the one time I tried to review it convinced me to stay as far away from that language as I can. To add a couple of other languages:

                $ => variable indicates PHP
                $ => a way to chain functions indicates Haskell

                I seem to recall another language, perhaps Forth-like, that uses $ to indicate functions (if I recall correctly), but I can’t remember the name of that language off the top of my head…

                1. I think I remember that one. I programmed in Forth for almost 20 years, and I remember looking into a lot of variants and derivatives. I don’t remember the name, either.

          2. I grew up seeing it as CAUSE$, from learning to program in BASIC on TRS-80 computers.

            Since I was in high school at the time, I always made sure to use “G$” as a variable in my programs. It had nothing to do with an interest in guitars…. 😉

        3. Hahahahaha…..

          Not impacted…


          I have to believe that my problems are partly of my own doing, else I wouldn’t see any path to dealing with them. I am not a happy camper about the economic impacts of the Obama administration.

        4. They really get pissed if you say “it doesn’t hurt me because I FIXED the problem where it touches me. The big problem is that it’s not something you can fix for other people, any more than you can make someone walk.”

      2. “the ‘best’ leftists assemble a list of people to hate in order to validate that they are the best.”
        ah, the logic deficiency of the left:
        I’m better than {list of people};
        {list of people are terrible, evil people}
        therefore this somehow proves that I’m a wonderful person, the “best”? No, IF accepted it would merely prove you were some slight amount better than a terrible, evil person. This validates you, how?

    3. No they’re not! They hand each other pretty little certificates declaring how intellectual they are…

  6. The other thing I’m seeing is they proliferation of ’emotions’ overruling facts in both posts and comments. And woe be unto you if you counter their emotions with facts. I still visit some of those sites, just to see what their latest invective is, but I no longer comment, nor visit daily, much as you’ve said. There is something to that old saw, know thy enemies… sigh

  7. Yep … in the last couple of years, I bailed on an author discussion forum which had been pretty much dying in the vine anyway, when one of the contributors took to posting long irrational rants about women’s rights, and could not be reasoned with in any way. I just didn’t have the energy or the interest any mote. And I bailed on posting at Open Salon two or three years before that venue caved as well. When that first started, it was pretty liberal, but there were plenty of lively conservative voices, and the editors of Open Salon pretty much highlighted posts of merit without regard to political leaning. And then … the lefties got so rabid and all but a few die-hards with a taste for internet combat took down their pages. Salon closed the whole open thing about a year ago and removed everyone’s pages. I didn’t notice for months.

    1. These site closures only occur because conservatives can’t handle the Truth, which is all the more reason it must be shoved down their throats 25/8.

      1. And one of the “Truths” Conservatives can’t handle is that there are 25 hours in a day and 8 days in a week. [Evil Grin]

          1. Nope but my sister was. She really didn’t like my imitations of the Beatles. [Very Big Evil Grin]

            1. Which “incarnation” of the Beatles, Drak? (Or is this something I don’t want to know? The dragon with beads and tie-die would be… disturbing.)

              1. I regret to say that I’m old enough to lived through the first incarnation of the Beatles and their invasion of the US. [Wink]

                  1. Some years back a popular bit on LiveJournal was to search for “$NAME is” and see/post the results. Thanks to that, almost all hits for ‘Paul is’ were ‘Paul is dead.’ which is ever so uplifting. In day to day life, I have no issue with ‘Paul’ (folks chose it for being monosyllabic and therefore not shortened to something worse. I was almost named David, but while Dave would be acceptable, they both loathed ‘Davy’ and I find I agree. Appending -y or -ie or -ee to Paul makes me likely to be non-responsive if not anti-responsive.) As for Orvan? Well, not much contention there – how many Orvans do you know? And, curiously, I don’t mind ‘Orvy’, though that is likely as I’ve only been called that by women.

                1. Now the hair would be mildly concerning, but those were actually pretty spiffy suits…

                  Unfortunately, I could not annoy my sister with music star impersonations. I knew quite well that I would have been knocked across the room by my parents for imitating Elvis…

            2. A fellow I am aware of (there are some things I might prefer to remain ignorant about..) has a Beatles fixation. There are two times I stunned him enough to stop going on about them to/at me. One was when I started singing Pop Hates the Beatles. The other time he asked which Beatle was my favorite and I replied, “Peter Tork.”

                1. Now, those guys were actually fun to watch. They were on just before American Bandstand in my neck of the woods – I’d watch them, then go play outside and leave the sisters to drool over Dick.

  8. If it isn’t bogeymen like George Bush, evil corporations, or warble gloaming … It’s “eeeeeeeevil joooooos”.

    I actually prefer that authors confine their politics to obscure forums because I loathe them in a work of fiction I’m reading. I will never buy a Steven King book again. He wants to blame my guns for crime committed by his failed liberal social experiments? Keep your lousy novel, Steve.

    1. Warble gloaming’s starting to reach the end of its utility – too much evidence against the ‘OMG, we’re gonna boil in 5 years if we don’t reduce to a medieval agrarian economic model’ is accumulating, and even one of the main ‘Burn ’em at the stake if they don’t believe in AGW’ pushers is starting to go ‘Hey, you know those models? Turns out that their results are little better than wild-assed guesses.’

      But without warble gloaming, whatever are they going to come up with to butcher the world’s economy and force all us unenlightened unwashed peasants back to our proper station?

      1. More and more, the leftoids are going into arse-covering mode,because their incompetent models are the opposite of reality. They still blame humans, and the medieval return is to reduce the pest levels (humans being the targeted pests).
        Note they feel they are not to be included in the pest levels.

        1. Slightly off topic, I just saw a Kindle eBook titled “The Chosen Ones”.

          The message of the “blurb” is Civilization has fallen, Technology is gone *and* that’s just fine.

          The author/authors should live without technology for a year. [Frown]

          1. A year? If they made it a month it would only be because christian charity demands that you help all the afflicated even if they caused the mess.

            1. Do they realize that if we have no tech, they’ll have no tech? Also do they realize how central technology is to the life they live?

              1. The progressive ideal is neofeudal. Their enclaves are defended and have all comforts and ours are shacks. There may be less tech than in a free society but they will have it and lord it. And parcel enough out for serfs to be distracted

                1. They seem to have forgotten about these folks called “engineers” and the folks who do similar but do not take the label. Unless they can enforce a Great Simplification ala A Canticle for Lebowitz. Yeah, some of us have this “can’t leave nuthin’ alone” gene. And in some, it expresses in… damned impressive ways.

                  1. That is why they need to make our lives filled with struggling and trying to comply with paperwork. Too busy trying to survive to think

                    1. In Niven & Pournelle’s “Inferno”, the inventor of bureaucracy was in hell and was attempting to fill out forms so he could retire. Sad forms were in wet clay which dried out before he finished filling them out. [Very Big Evil Grin]

                2. The progressive ideal is Zardoz. No, I’m not kidding.

                  And their world would wind up just like the one in the movie…including Sean Connery in the red diaper.

                    1. One thing about “Zardoz” is that the “Masters of the World” were destroyed. [Evil Grin]

                    2. True, the world of Zardoz wasn’t a nice place but in the end the creators of that world were destroyed.

                      And they were destroyed by one of their “tools”.

                    3. Zardoz was on a few weeks ago on some movie channel. I thought to myself it can’t be as bad as I remember.

                      I was wrong.

                      I hated living through the 70’s and I hate they’ve come around again.

              2. And how many people it takes to make the whole thing work? without thousands of technicians working 24/7, the cell network would go down in 6 months from lack of maintenance.

                1. It is because they lack any real understanding of how the world actually works and imagine that all of that infrastructure is unneeded.

                  1. I think that some of them think that the stuff or service just magically appears/happens. Food, electricity, potable water, flush toilets.

                    1. back in the 1980’s when the anti-nuke in particular and the anti-utility protests in general were going strong, most of those folks active in the movements truly had no idea what it took to keep the electricity infrastructure in place and running. They truly thought it was free energy (magic) that the evil corporations had stolen to sell to the oppressed public.

                    2. I ran into that several years ago with a guy I knew… he was complaining about his water bill, saying that water should be free since it’s necessary for life (or something).

                      He didn’t quite understand when I explained that water ~is~ free – the city water company is charging you for the parts, labor, and electricity to clean it and pump it directly to your kitchen.

                    3. I was reading Dave Freer’s post about not having potable water on the island he lives on, and remembered with a chuckle the taxi driver over here where I live in Queensland, baffled over the fact that people in the Philippines will tend to drink soft drinks more than water, then was shocked and horrified to find out that in most of the places, you really wouldn’t want to drink water from the tap, even after it’s boiled. He made bleating noises about the government, and it couldn’t seem to cross his head that there are governments out there who don’t give a crap about the people, and when he wondered about why was there no revolution, I said “With what weapons? Guns are expensive, even if we have the ability to own them.”

                      People, I swear, with their heads in the clouds. *shakes head* We still have regular outbreaks of amoeba-iasis (sp?)and cholera because of horrible water.

                      Also, bottled water is very expensive. Moreso than the demonized soft drinks.

                    4. Soft Drinks are good. In earlier times people drank ale instead. If the water is bad, what do you cook and wash with?

                      Sorry to hear that you are/were sick.

                    5. Water used in cooking is typically boiled and thus most active microbial life forms eliminated.

                      Typically, primitive cultures did not wash frequently. Of those who did I suspect analysis would show certain commonalities, such as use of hot springs (thus purified or disinfected) or ready availability of sea water, such as would be in the Polynesian cultures.

                    6. This is why, in most languages, the local distilled beverage is called “water of life” — uisge beatha, “whisky,” literally “water of life,” vodka, literally “little water,” and aquavit. In primitive cultures, converting your grain into potable not only made storage and transport much easier, it also precluded many a water borne illness.

                    7. Yep. My girlfriend likes to travel, and we live on bottled drinks – mostly water – in many places. Even in places with usually-good municipal water, it’s often best to drink bottled, because the local microscopic flora and fauna are likely to be different enough from what you’re used to that you’ll have problems.

                      You also learn not to get ice in your drinks.

                2. What about electricity and sewers and water purification and waste management? With no electricity, running (clean, nontoxic) water, and no flush toilets, life can be quite hard and quite dangerous. There are a number of fatal diseases that are caused by toxic water.

                  1. They are all caused by pollution by evil corporations. Once the evil corporations are gone all waters will be as pure as unicorn pee.

                    1. I would ask what dragons pee, but I’m afraid the rest of you would make me clean out Fluffy’s lair to find out for myself.

                    2. It’s not the pee you have to worry about. It’s the solid waste that you have to worry about. [Very Big Dragon Grin]

                    3. Don’t say that in front of Fluffy, who would be offended at the notion that merely being a dragon means he doesn’t know how to use the facilities properly.

                      (The draconic bathroom is in the back of his quarters.)

                    4. Assuming RES is correct there, the unicorn diet must be very high in molasses, or at least sugar cane. Or perhaps sugar beets. This seems to be carefully ignored or suppressed in most lore.

              3. I’ve seen some of them bragging about their collections of books that will teach them how to plant, harvest, perform surgery, etc.

                Almost every time, it turned out these collections are stored on their laptop or iPad, for convenience after the Apocalypse.

                I figure if they have computers and electricity, it can’t be *that* much of an apocalypse…

                  1. Backup? Shirley you jest!

                    I’ve had managers with doctorates give me the “why are you wasting my time?” look when I was trying to explain that it wasn’t a good idea to run an entire business off one elderly PC.

                    “But it has never crashed before. Therefore it’s not going to crash in the future.”

                    Then there was one place where some salesman sold them a “backup solution” way up the management chain, which was then presented to the IT departments as fait accompli. After it was in place, I tried restoring some data. I had to come in during the weekend to do it, because it couldn’t restore to a serve with anyone logged into it. No matter what I tried, it would grind along for about half an hour, asking for endless tape changes, then crash.

                    When I reported this, the reaction was “why were you testing it?” The non-backup “solution” was moved to a different IT department, and was still not working when I eventually left.

                1. And the instructions for building a bicycle-powered generator to keep the laptop battery charged – are on the laptop.

          2. The author/authors should live without technology for a year.

            I’m sure they’d be happy to do that, and tweet about it so the rest of us can see how awesome they are while they’re doing it.

            1. All of them are the spiritual descendants of Thoreau. They are daring!

              They’ve moved their stuff out of Mommy Dearest’s basement into Mommy Dearest’s lakeside cabin.

              They actually get their own food (some of the time, usually they still eat dinner at Mommy Dearest’s mansion) from the magic grocery store in the village.

              They sit and think deep thoughts about the meaning of Man (when they forgot to grab a bottle of Mommy Dearest’s brandy on the way back to the cabin, that is).

              I’m quite sure that Al Gore issued strict orders to the servants to turn off the pool lights (but not the heaters) when nobody is actually there. Saving the planet!

            1. put them all on an island in a shadow from satellites and no cell service, then cut all wires. We could then get rich making book on how long it takes to go Killkenny.

      2. Turns out that their results are little better than wild-assed guesses.’

        Little better??? I’d say worse. Much, much worse. If you are an expert in your field, a wild-ass guess has some elements of experience to guide you.

        1. It turns out their mistake was in underestimating the time required to stampede the herd, so that facts have caught up with and contradicted their projections. They were sure that if they set the event horizon at 100 years they’d be able to close the deal before the lead showed through their gilding the facts.

        2. As people have pointed out for years in several areas of knowledge, if they were making random mistakes, the mistakes wouldn’t be 100% in their favor. They’re not wild-assed guesses, let alone scientific wild-assed guesses; they’re lies.

      3. They wouldn’t have that problem if they’d just consult paleoclimatology to predict the effects of n rise in temperature. They don’t, with the result of all sorts wacky predictions that few seem to check, and which come back to haunt them.

        BTW, somewhere out there is a scientific paper that compares climate model predictions with actual data and found it was less that what could be accounted for by a random walk. In other words, they were less accurate than guesswork.

        1. > They wouldn’t have that problem if
          > they’d just consult paleoclimatology

          “They’re someone else’s experts, which means they’re untrustworthy. And they disagree with our predetermined findings, which means they’re wrong.”

    2. King’s Luddite views are rather annoying, especially when he benefits from one of the greatest technological advancements in history: the printing press.

    3. He also rants that writers should never use adverbs that end in “ly” no matter how carefully chosen or correctly used. A guy who preaches one really dumb thing will also preach other really dumb things. I stopped paying attention to him years ago.

      1. On that adverb position i agree with him seriously, fervently, rabidly, maniacally and entirely.

        And humorously. Mustn’t forget humorously, he muttered hopelessly.

    4. I’ve been working my way through William G. Tapply’s “Brady Coyne” series in audio format. They’re low-intensity listening while I’m doing something else.

      #13 is “The Seventh Enemy.” While it was pretty apparent that Tapply and his character leaned hard left, the entire book appeared to be a long wailing support for extreme gun control measures. I’ve already listened to all of that I care to, so he goes on the list with all the other authors who suddenly had the urge to turn their works into leftist screeds.

      I now feel the urge to reread some L. Neil Smith again…

        1. He appears to be mostly blogging and writing “nonfiction” essays these days. (I think the latest fictional thing is a graphic novel in the Martyn universe, circa 2010?)

          It would be interesting if he could actually write a few more Lando Calrissian novels. For the contrast.

          TRX, that is a rather drastic anti-toxin treatment, IMHO…

        2. Smith wrote “The Probability Broach”, “The Venus Belt”, and “The Nagasaki Vector.” They are all excellent IMHO.

          Just about everything else he wrote falls into the category of “radical Libertarian propaganda thinly disguised as a novel.” Even if you agreed with him, there’s not much novel in between the political bits.

          Well, except the the Lando Calrissian books. Those are the only Staw Wars tie-in novels I ever read that rated higher than “birdcage liner.”

          Smith had a fair online presence a decade or so ago, then abandoned his web site, hooked up as a guest editor(?) on some Libertarian manga/comic site, but other than rare screeds written for the JPFO, he’s been pretty silent. And he had a stroke a few months back; I haven’t seen anything from him since.

          1. His recovery is probably taking all his time. He may have permanently lost the ability to type.

          2. The Libertarian Enterprise at is up and running still, L. Neil is back doing the editorials.

            His latest completed novel is “Ceres” set in the same universe as “Pallas” and he’s working on “Ares” also in that series, and other books in the “Brightsuit McBear” series.

            Met him in Denver ’08 and Reno ’11.

      1. Though if you remember how that series ended (at least in the present iteration), it was with Susannah dumping Roland’s gun in the garbage can.

  9. “The people doing this are like religious fanatics”
    New corollary – Just as any sufficiently advance tech is indistinguishable from magic (Majik or however you spell it…)
    Any sufficiently dogmatic politics is indistinguishable from religion.

    1. Dewey specifically referred to the Progressive movement he helped shape as “a secular religion”.

    2. Marxism is definitely a religion. It operates totally on faith, and has no evidence supporting it in the real world. It’s prime supporters are zealots, who monitor the faithful to cast out the heretics. It has schismed into several different creeds (soviet, maoist, social democrat, etc ad nauseum). It has saints and high holy days. It has holy writ. It allows no other gods.

      Marxism isn’t even an economic theory. Economics is the study of supply and demand. Marxism is the denial of the concept.

  10. Perhaps the so-called “moderators” of such blogs and forums should be re-designated as “liberalators” or “progressivators.”

    1. “Left-wing Fundies” works for me. Because “Fundie”-ness isn’t an attribute of what you believe, it’s in how you force the rest of your environment to cow to your stated beliefs. (There are plenty of people who are literal-word Bible believers who don’t beat everyone else over the head for not seeing it their way.) Basically, it’s a character description…lack of character.
      IMHO, of course, and YMMV.

  11. The biggest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing people he didn’t exist.
    The biggest trick the founders of the Progressive movement ever pulled, was convincing their followers that they were just pragmatists, and that anyone opposing them was an ideologue.
    Add to this that one of the movement’s founders was also the founder of the current public education system, and set it up from the beginning to indoctrinate children in the dogma of his “secular religion”.

    A high percentage of the population has never examined their base assumptions, or even realized that they *have* base assumptions.
    They’re overtly political, but their self-conception is that they’re not at all political. Accuse them of being hidebound ideologues, and you’ll get a “Norman please coordinate” response (at best).

    1. I have actually seen them have vapors about someone’s introducing politics into a discussion by responding to a political and lying comment.

      1. Why, certainly. When someone dropped a turd in the punchbowl, they all agreed to support it by pretending it wasn’t there.

        If you insist on pointing to it, you’re the one causing trouble and should be dealt with accordingly.

    2. I think one of the most profound things Ayn Rand ever pointed out was in a talk to students at West Point called “Philosophy — Who Needs It?”. Everyone uses philosophy, whether they know it or not; those who don’t consciously develop their own philosophy, absorb it from those around them. Rand was advocating being familiar with Philosophy so that you could consciously choose what you accept and reject.

    1. Wild guess that one of those is a movable wall segment to enter a region that reflects no light

    2. Well, Slack Fate is pretty obvious, since it rhymes with the real blog’s name and has the exact same number of letters in both words. 😉

        1. That’s me! Uninitiated! Can I self-identify as uninitiated and claim minority victimhood status?

          1. Dark confession…I didn’t used to read a lot of SF blogs that didn’t have a lot of pictures of Aquanetta, Faith Domergue, Grace Lee Whitney, Yvonne Craig, Brinke Stevens, et al on them. (Okay, now Jenna Coleman, too, I’m a fickle bitch). The Sad Puppies fight made me change that, but since the proglodyte Torista blogs were indistinguishable from the Proglodyte political blogs I know of, I stopped following them.

              1. The paddle is just a metaphor. Our two initiation procedures involve forced thought, coupled with reasoned argument and Monty Python … our three procedures involve forcing you to think, to defend your positions with reasoned argument, Monty Python references and infliction of bad puns.

                1. You had me at Monty Python…. But I’m still going to be on the lookout for a big wooden paddle with “Metaphor” painted on it.

                2. Our four procedures involve forcing you to think, to defend your positions with reasoned argument, Monty Python references, infliction of bad puns and imparting of historical knowledge.
                  Our five procedures involve forcing you to think, to defend your positions with reasoned argument, Monty Python references, infliction of bad puns and imparting of historical knowledge and Rudyard Kipling quotes.
                  Our six procedures — shall I come in again?

              2. OK, if you won’t help stir the vat-o-BBQ-sauce, then you can go see why the onion chopping machine’s on the fritz.

      1. Yeah…the sad thing is I regularly bought it when it was an actual magazine. It published one of my favorite sword and sorcery tales of all time, “Oblivion is the Sweetest Wine” by John R. Fultz. I’d even guess you could call that a grimdark story although for me it scratched the same itch of classics such as Clark Ashton Smith’s “The Tale of Satampra Zeiros” although it was much creepier.

        I miss the magazine, I really do. However, over the past year I’ve lost my love for the website although it does have come classic articles from the past.

      2. Thing is, I’m a sci-fi fan, but not a sci-fi “Fan” and I don’t frequent these blogs/sites, so I don’t know. The only blogs in this area I follow are Sarah’s here, and, occasionally Monster Hunter Nation. Even less occasionally, I follow a link over to Vox Day or some other site, so spelling the names out for me allows me to be a little better-informed.

  12. As a followup, do you think, if the powers-that-be at those sites decided to wage a campaign against you (Christopher) that they’d give you the benefit of a veil of anonymity? Did they do so for Vox Day, or Larry Correia? Or Sarah?

    1. I knew the moment I mentioned Sad Puppies that I was opening myself up for attacks. The first site, I don’t know if anyone but a regular there would figure it out. The second one is so obvious I probably could have used the real name. If that editor hates it, fine: he already insulted me and my friends. What else could he do?

        1. I’m pretty sure as a Canadian citizen, I don’t have to worry about the IRS. Fortunately I’m still small fry in all this.

          1. I’m sure the Canadian equivalent is much worse, and if not, then it will be by the time Trudeau jr gets done.

          1. Sure – the IRS would never go out of their way to evade the legal restraints on them in order to penalize dissenters. Lois lerner herself said so!

  13. “Culture war is being waged on a thousand battlefields.”

    At least two of which you have quit.

    For those who decry the “Long March through the institutions,” this is how it happens. As thinking individuals, we have options. We don’t have to put up with their crap. At the very least we can create or own space. But the Progressive not only has no other option, but they have a moral imperative to chase out non-Progressives. Because they believe that your morality is determined by your politics, so tolerating a conservative is no different than hanging out with a cannibal pederast.

    If we keep letting them get away with this crap, keep letting them push us out of fora, then the average non-political forum-goer is just going to see the Progressive viewpoint. It will (really already has) become the default position, automatically rendering us (and reality) extremists. Furthermore, when we build alternatives to the places they corrupt, they’ll follow us there.

    The line must be drawn, and here is as good a place as any. I’m not saying that every political post must turn into a full-blown debate, but it needs to be responded to. Even if that response is something along the lines of “1) This is not an appropriate forum for this topic. 2) Anyway, you’re completely wrong.” Additions of things like links to opposing viewpoints or mocking the Progressive for their mindless religion are optional.

    1. Nonsense. People can control their own blogs however they choose.

      The war is fought over whether they are popular.

      1. Personal blogs? Sure, though I personally think that you should inform people when they say dumb things. But group blogs or online fora? The moderators who push this line rarely own the platform, they’re co-opting someone else’s property to advance their agenda.

        And the war isn’t about whether they are popular, they’ll just keep moving on to whatever is popular.

    2. Nothing at all wrong in calmly politely pointing out failures of fact or logic. If one does so on a left leaning forum one soon finds one’s comments deleted and eventually you get banned from the venue. And the more accurate your comments are the sooner that will happen.
      The one saving grace to the whole messy business is that once they have driven all the moderates and conservatives off, they inevitably start to eat their own.

      1. “I could explain the fallacy in your argument but doing so would get me banned from this forum.” is one way of handling it.

    3. Many people do not have the time or energy to debate progressives. They have personal, family and professional responsibilities. They do not have the time, money, knowledge or health to do what you suggest. Are you doing what you recommend?

      1. It takes little time, less stress, and no money to make an internet comment. And you should already have the knowledge, otherwise why do you think you are correct?

        1. One comment, true. But if you let yourself be sucked in by a liberal who is sounding reasonable on the surface… it can eat a buncha time.

          1. The proglodytes can pack an astonishingly large amount of anti-facts and factoids into a single assertion, such that unpacking it, revealing the invalidity of each claim, exposing every logical fallacy and and the cobwebs of implicit assumptions can take considerable work.

            Remember, we’re dealing with people who perceive no contradiction between HRC, on the night of the attack, advising her daughter that the consulate in Benghazi had been attacked by an al Qaeda related terrorist group and a week later telling the father of one of those men slain defending the position her policies had hung out to dry that “We’re going to get the guy who made that video.”

            Things must be explained to them in very very small portions — and even then, by the time you get to “our forefathers” they’ve lost track of “Four score and seven.”

            Then there’s all the squealing about “fore-fathers” being sexist …

          2. Maybe at first, but they all work off of the same canned script, so you can quickly ID what part of the checklist they’re working from and throw up your own canned response.

            1. I wouldn’t call it the best use of my time. I’d rather enjoy the limited amount of time my husband is at home.

    4. Considering how the Leftists keep rallying around pederasts, (and defend cannibalism on multicultural grounds) I don’t think that’s a defensible statement.

        1. A sane person, a cannibal, and a pederast walk into a bar…
          I’ll bet Ringo or Correia could really do something with that idea.

          1. You know it’s got to involve .45 caliber. Because “sane person” right?

            Beyond that, I can’t speculate.

        1. “Do they claim it’s a matter of taste?”

          Depends on what recipes the cannibal uses.

          As for the collectivists defending cannibalism, that makes perfect sense to me. After all, isn’t their moral code based on (often) metaphorical cannibalism?

          1. But collectivists hate Roman Catholics (especially if the collectivist claims to be one).

          2. “Cannibal” is such a hate-filled, harsh and derogatory word. We prefer to be called “Anthrophageists”, as is clearly described in our policy manual and cookbook, “To Serve Man”.
            We need no more of these microagressions here, please.
            Please pass the rum and barbecue sauce while you’re at it. Thanks

            1. The word is “humanitarian”. It’s well established that we love people… especially with capers and lemon butter.

  14. And here I thought it was just me finding more and more politics in everything…and always from a progressive point of view…I just stop reading the blogs as I have no energy left to fight them online. It’s difficult enough in every day life these days but I persevere. Thank this blog for providing a place for a respite from PC all the way. I enjoy the fact that everyone here doesn’t think/write exactly the same way on every topic. Keep writing and I will keep buying and reading.

  15. It is simple. They regard their views as simply the “normal” ones, and therefore “non-political”. Only people who disagree with them can be “political”. As usual, I have had the doubtful benefit of being able to see this under the magnifying glass.

  16. The political is personal and all encompassing. Because otherwise how could they achieve their control fetish

  17. The same thing happened to The Big Purple. I used to check it multiple times a day for roleplaying game news. Now I only load it when one actual play thread updates. When that campaign finishes I’ll probably never go there again.

    This is why we need to fight back. If we don’t soon enough everywhere will be a leftist safe space. On this, He Who Shall Not Be Named, is correct.

    1. “This is why we need to fight back. If we don’t soon enough everywhere will be a leftist safe space.”

      And that’s why the Left is slowly but surely reaching out its tentacles to put a stranglehold on the internet itself. There are plenty of places on the net that haven’t been assimilated by the Borg that will remain that way, which is why the Left simply wages war above that level. And politically, the Republican party doesn’t really seem to be interested in stopping them.

      And that’s why the Left wins – it wages total, offensive war. The Right just tends to play defense and conserve its losses.

    2. TBP went over to the enemy quite some time ago – it was always slanted left, but it went crazy left at least 5 years ago. It’s too bad because I’ve never found an rpg site I actually liked since.

      1. Oh, I think my last bit of TBP was…I think I still lived in Texas so 2010 at the latest.

        Mike Moran, whose wife is (I guess now was) in seminary, got banned when he finally let someone have it for religion basing. He got perma-banned while the heckler was left off.

        Mr. Moran, at least as he presented himself there, is an open and out 1930s style Red. But that’s not progressive enough for

        You’d think one of the few people to play in both Dave’s and Gary’s campaigns would be someone a site called would give a column not a permenant ban.

        Then again, Jason Alexander’s tale of moderation there ( shows how bad it was before politcs took over.

        1. Holy cow, the Alexandrian! I’d forgotten about him! Thank you, I didn’t really want to get anything done today anyway… *mock scowl* And yeah, I haven’t been to the Big Purple in I-don’t-know-how-many years. Nothing there to draw me, really. If I want to know what the latest thing in gaming is or to discuss cool game ideas, I visit my FLGS, check out Moe Lane’s blog, and wander through Kickstarter. *shrug*

        2. They’ve let Mornard (“Old Geezer”) back on since then … and banned him… and reinstated him … ad infinitum. He’s banned right now, but I’m not sure for how long.

          I’m down to almost pure lurking on the tabletop boards at this point, especially after they more or less warned me I was on thin ice for starting “I accept, believe and profess the Catholic Faith. Yes, all of it” and clarifying that yes, that includes sexual issues.

          “Armchair Gamer” (not the blogger, mind)

    3. Same thing happened to me. I used to be an extremely active poster there, but somewhere around 2010-2011 I dared to remark that I didn’t see what was wrong with one particular action of my country’s then-Conservative government. Dogpiling ensued with ridiculous speed, and the unutterable truth came home to me: It didn’t matter how much respect or likeability you earned in other ways. If you disagreed politically, you were anathema. I never posted to a key forum again, and my input into all the other forums has gradually trickled away over the years to almost nothing.

      I used to be able to post exegeses and apologia for Catholic theology on that board; I sincerely doubt I would be able to manage it now, especially if I used those apologia to explain why I hold particular positions.

      1. To borrow from a famous Hollywood mogul, their minds are made up; don’t confuse them with the facts.

      2. I never even went to Tangency or anyplace except RPG, the D&D/D20 forum when it split off, and actual plays.

        Yet I couldn’t escape the politics and the banning.

  18. Should have mentioned this in the post but it only occurred to me after: I’ve been on a forum for nearly 10 years now where there is a long-running (227 pages) cheesecake thread. I’m sure there’s been a few flare-ups along the way, but the moderators on that forum know how to deal with them without resorting to heavy-handed tactics like closing and banning all threads on the subject.

    (And before any angry feminist starts howling, I’ll point out that the two most enthusiastic and prolific posters of sexy women in that thread are women.) 😉

    1. Suze Randall (very NSFW link: found while searchengining her full name) is a highly successful erotic photographer. Banning such cheesecake is denying her right to present her artistic perspective on the modern dilemma. Anybody who has attempted the challenge of photographing the human form should be aware of the difficulties involved in lighting, film stock, lens choice and filters required to get even marginally attractive results.

      A little research will quickly reveal that many of the art directors and editors in the erotica field are women. It requires a very warped perspective to presume all these people are being exploited by male lust, especially when you have to define “being exploited” as receiving very generous pay envelopes and “exploiting” as paying money.

      1. The male gaze creates a market which… forces women to participate in their own objectification…patriarchy…patriarchy…pay-gap…

        These *-studies papers practically write themselves.

        1. I don’t know whether any others here watch Blue Bloods, but last week the show featured a sub-plot about a young female rights activist who fabricated a “hate crime” attack. Watching the episode Beloved Spouse & I wondered whether anybody has done any psychological studies on such false flag incidents.

          Probably won’t fit the narrative, eh?

          1. If you even raise the barest whisper of a *hint* of the possibility that such a thing as false accusations might theoretically exist, then you are “silencing” and “blaming the victim”.

            When it is later proven that a false accusation was made then it becomes a non-event and an exception and bad manners to even mention it.

          2. The producers of Blue Bloods had better watch their backs. Bad things happen to those caught being conservative while entertaining.

            1. The lady in the video doesn’t look “colonized” at all and I’m sure she’d kick me somewhere sensitive if I implied otherwise.

              I’d like to keep my sensitive parts un-kicked, so I won’t do that. 😀

              1. That just shows the depths of your nefarious workings. (You are, of course, part and parcel of it since all men are evil.)

                1. Yeah, that’s a convenient little lie. Let’s bigoted nutjobs like that… individual you quoted focus their hatred on people they know won’t hurt them and pretend it makes them brave resisters of Teh Evul Oppression!!1!!!

      2. Not to mention that female porn actresses are usually paid more than their male counterparts. Nary a peep about that not-imaginary “wage gap”. 😛

        1. It is also a widely recognized fact that those male counterparts work harder.

          Regarding recent salary complaints from Jennifer Lawrence, I gather her male co-stars were on set twice as many days as she was, which might account for her lower paycheck.

          Nyah – sexism in America, pure and simple.

          1. Wow. I looked up that actress and the media borg cube is throwing everything its got into that story. Search results were pages of major media outlets crowing about how her allegations “prove” that the wage gap is real.

            1. Yeah. If I (or, I daresay, almost any of the Huns) were in her Manolo Blahniks, I wouldn’t be complaining to the press about bias in America, I would be interviewing replacements for my agent with explicit instructions about my expectations.

              Perhaps she simply makes sufficient money that she’d rather count moral virtue coup than collect bigger paychecks. I wonder whether she includes riders in her contracts that require female(ish) production crew be paid the same wages as the male(ish)? For that matter, I wonder whether she is appropriately considerate of the folk whose make-up application, hair-styling, lighting and lens selections enable her to be a star?

  19. $HOUSEMATE has left a few fora for this sort of nonsense. I used to follow a web cartoon that had a bit of a left bent, but it wasn’t full-goose-bozo loony – but eventually the discussion group or such about it was. And it was a “no politics, just the cartoon topic” rule – until the cartoon became pointedly left-political, but nobody was supposed to call anyone on this? I stopped following that cartoon. And his, er, now ‘her’.. new cartoon. And I’d like to like it (unicorn character…) but the bad taste is still there, and some things even unicorn magic isn’t potent enough to detoxify. So… I don’t follow it, either.

        1. They saw a bet on processing time.

          I gave up on them when the author made it clear he figured Brenden Eich got what he deserved.

          1. Well ugh. I enjoyed “What If?” and was planning to buy his next one as well, but I’ll likely give it a miss now.

    1. I must confess to being driven away from The Devils Panties due to the assumed leftist bent and being rudely attacked when I rather mildly objected to it. After the artist made a joke about it being worse to bring home a Republican boyfriend than a boyfriend who was (some other category I can’t even remember), I posted something like “Hey, you should consider that some of your readers are actually Republicans.” The artist herself gave one of those “Sorry I caused any offense” non-apologies (as opposed to being actually sorry you said what you did), but the commentariat was pretty hateful, so I said heck with it.

      Sometimes life is just too short to give yourself heartburn by hanging around that sort of person.

      1. Sometimes life is just too short to give yourself heartburn by hanging around that sort of person.


  20. Shorter version: Gramscians gonna gramsci.

    The real problem is academia. Everything else the Left is infecting is just the outliers and the holdouts. I just look at zombie apocalypse stories as a metaphor for this.

    The “progressive” seeds have already been sown and really aren’t going to be undone in anyone’s lifetime. In fact, it’s only going to get worse. Critical thinking, as it has been more traditionally understood, has been slaughtered and burned. What universities teach now when they say they’re teaching Critical Thinking is actually just Critical Theory – the weak form of critical thinking puffed up with postmodernist lexicology.

    So these gasbags apply their EA Games worldview of “challenge everything” and think their work is done. They’ve already upheld their moral obligation and therefore their challenge is somehow infallible. And you see this all over the internet and media. And it’s because they control academia at all levels. For decades.

    The Bureaucracy runs a close second.

    1. I wouldn’t worry about the Universities. They are on short time. Between their attitiude that they are above the law and their expense and their non-education and their attitude towards the rights of their students, they are going the way of the major media except that their fall will be much faster. As soon as one of the alternatives (mostly online) is recognized by a substantial portion of business as putting out better potential employees that the U’s they are gone in a decade.

      1. The Universities are wholly owned* subsidiaries of the Democrat Party, sucking in government dollars and conducting indoctrination programs for their cannon fodder shock troops. Bernice Sanders and Hill Clinton are determined to protect that status, connecting their supplicants directly to the government money spigot. As the car companies became transmuted into Health & Retirement Schemes with car makers attached, so are University staffs becoming social conformity programs with a veneer of education. That is why “administrative compliance personnel” now outnumber professors at almost all colleges accepting government funds.

        *Minor exceptions, such as Hillsdale, Bob Jones, Liberty and a few others, noted.

        1. Several small Catholic colleges also still give students a decent education. Thankful for that as we have 1 in college and another hoping to go next year.

          1. Come to think of it, Heinlein had a formula for getting a good education at our universities: basically, avoid any major that didn’t involve a lot of math.

            Between that and what he had Kip’s father (in “Have Space Suit, Will Travel”) say about the state of education, leads me to believe that Heinlein saw what was becoming of education a long time ago.

  21. To the Left, politics (theirs) is not politics, it is merely good sense, it is science, it is the bleedin’ obvious. They are achieving epistemic closure while accusing their opponents of it. They staunchly believe in Free Speech, but theirs is of the Free Speech for Me but not for Thee variety, in which anything which ires them up is prima facie hate speech but what they say to others is Truth To Power, Tellin’ It Like It Is, and .Inconvenient Truths.

    Their obsession bleeds into everything in which they engage, but it is the water in which they swim and invisible to their own perceptions. Just as recent studies demonstrate it is the Democrat Party which has moved more sharply Left, they accuse conservatives of polarizing by standing our ground more firmly.

    We’ve seen ample reporting on “consensual” the witch hunts led by the party which bayed about “keeping government out of the bedroom.” We’ve witnessed their open musing about treating “Climate Deniers” not merely as heretics but as criminals. They’ve drunk the kool-aid and there’s no longer any reasoning with them. All we can do is punch’n’move, herding them into their sanctuaries (SF, Manhattan) and reduce their abilities to infect the body politic with their toxins.

    1. “To the Left, politics (theirs) is not politics, it is merely good sense, it is science, it is the bleedin’ obvious.”

      A thousand times yes. It drives me crazy when friends or commenters make highly charged political statements, you contradict them, and you’re the one accused of making things political. As you say, with them, it’s not politics, it’s *normal*. *sensible.* *just real life you nutcase*


      1. That’s when you smile at them patronizingly, pat them on the head and say, “It’s adorable that you think that, dear.”

      1. Climate change is real, happens each and every day.
        The questions that have not been adequately addressed, and will not be as long as it remains a progressive cause du jour, are:
        Will the general trend in climate change have any major effect on humanity?
        Will that effect be net positive or negative?
        Can humanity do anything to improve that outcome?
        Is the cost of doing so worth the effort required?
        You know, good solid scientific analysis and decisions based on hard evidence. Which of course is anathema to anyone taught from birth to follow the feelz and damn the consequences.

    2. This is why they can’t stand exposure to actual diversity — that is, people whose experience and thinking do not match theirs. It would bring the whole house of cards down.

  22. There’s a political site I’ve been going to since (I think) the late 90’s. Used to be very conservative.
    I got banned a couple of weeks ago, because I made the comment in response to an article about a ‘big conservative woman who married a very left wing man’, that ‘She wasn’t much of a conservative then, was she?’

    Yup, been on the site probably twenty years, and I got banned for that comment! Because somewhere in the article it mentions that her husband died. Like I care? Was supposed to be a political site, for conservatives! With political posts, not touchy feely crap. And yes, if you are a woman who marries a hard (and well known) lefty, you are NOT a conservative! I don’t care if you’re on Fox News, that doesn’t make you a conservative either (does Fox even employ any conservatives anymore? Stopped watching ages ago).
    I told the woman who runs the site, and one of the minions who contacted me later (in response to my asking why was I banned) that I was sorry to see them going SJW. Gonna have to mail back my ‘Ldotter’ pin one of these days.

    1. I don’t particularly agree with you but I hardly see the comment as ban worthy. Life is easier when husband and wife agree on religion and politics but when we seem to have lost the ability to view those with contrary politics as human much less manage to love them? I would argue that the “conservative” way to think is the old one where differences of opinion are accepted and expected while the progressive way is to demonize and silence such that everyone in your life thinks just as you do.

      1. Yeah, it’s not as if she married James Carville, right?

        When we become so invested in political partisanship that we let it affect such basic human interactions it is a sign we’re losing touch with reality. Politics is mostly about means to ends, not the ends themselves, and you have to be willing to work with those who do not share all your conclusions, as Reagan did to achieve his monumental 1986 tax reform.

        1. Wait, that sounds like you have not disowned all your relatives who have ever voted Democrat? Like you do not refuse to have any contact with persons more than 37 points away from the one true political position? Like you do not only associate long term with people less than 23 points away from the one true political position?

          How dare you…

          Oh, wow, look at the size of the log in my eye.

          Which is to say that while I may have considered severing a close relationship, it wasn’t the politics, it was other issues. (I choose not to do so, so it was a good thing I held off making a decision while my blood was up.)

          1. Yowsah! There are some conversations I don’t want to engage in at Thanksgiving Dinner, in part because I have learned that no matter how carefully (danged adverb ending in -ly, he pedantically bemoaned, somewhat caustically) I phrase certain views they are guaranteed to be misinterpreted, and who needs the agita?

            For much the same reason I eschew FB; too many family members who are likely to react to a post with “That’s not funny.” — and too many posts from them evoking such reaction from me.

    2. Um… dude. That’s not polite, and it’s not factual. It’s so wrong, I’m not even sure how to explain it to you.

      “Speak no ill of the dead” and “be nice to extremely recent widows” are not conservative values?

      And all those early Christian women who married pagans were not Christian enough, even though they are Biblically praised for the way they tend to convert their husbands?

      So yeah, I’m not surprised you got banned. I don’t think I would have done it to you, but then I don’t know Mary Elizabeth Ham personally, I do know you online, and you don’t strike me as being a troll or an arse on most topics. So I would have interpreted it as either snark that was not as funny as you thought, or that I would like to explain this aspect of normal behavior to you and see what we could work out. I have a lot of tolerance for People Saying Stuff.

      But it’s awfully easy to offend people, when it comes to anything about the dead. There was a darkly humorous JAG funeral episode that came out that way because the actor and production crew deployed their Irish sense of humor. And they almost got fired over it, because it turned out that Bellisario had an Italian sense of funerals, and he found it extreeeeeemely offensive in how it turned out onscreen, as opposed to how it looked in the script. The viewers apparently fell along similar lines, with some being very offended and others thinking it was the bestest episode ever.

      But mixing religion, politics, grieving widow, and the recent accidental dead? That’s championship level if you can pull it off without offending most people. So why are you surprised that it didn’t work out? Chalk it up to experience of the power of rhetoric over emotion, resolve only to offend people on purpose, and move on.

      1. For Christians, death is a promotion. Laughter and tears are comparable ways of addressing pain.

        Right up there with “As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.”

      2. *Looks up the name*

        Does anyone think he could’ve known something, and been considered a security risk because of her?

      3. I wasn’t speaking ill of the dead, she wasn’t dead.
        And I didn’t read all the way down through the article to see that he was dead.

        I was just reacting to the recurring and continuing BS meme of ‘right wing gal marries left wing man, and happiness ensues’ which is just pure BS. Notice you never see the reverse pushed in the news, do you?
        And no, the lady isn’t really all that right wing, it’s just another story attempting to show people that the left is better than the right, because the right is so easily trumped – by emotions!

        The fact that a long time contributing member got slammed with an instant ban because of FEELS shows that the site is now in the grips of the SJWs, and will start to move more and more left, until it’s like the Daily Kos.

        1. Well, if you didn’t know the man was dead, that’s different.

          But to answer your question, there’s a lot lot lot of pushing of “liberal woman should marry right wing guy.” Chiefly in romance novels, but sometimes in nonfiction. The difficulty is that a liberal woman is usually a lot more insular and narrowminded than your conservative woman. However, a lot of liberal women realize deep in their hearts that a lot of liberal guys don’t want to marry, or won’t be very good husbands.

          There’s a big segment of current romance which is all about “woman meets firefighter/Navy SEAL/FBI agent/cowboy/traditional man’s man who takes care of her.”

          Whether or not they will allow themselves to realize it in real life instead of keeping it to “forbidden” dreams and fantasy? That’s another question.

          A very good nonfiction book about this sort of thing? The cooking maven Pioneer Woman’s true story of how she married her husband the cowboy and became a happy housewife and cook, after running around and doing a lot of stupid things when she was young. (To be fair, she also did some nifty stuff, and getting married taught her entrepreneurship and management too. But she herself says it’s the story of how she learned humility and acceptance and became happy.)

          Of course women don’t tell guys this stuff. It’s against the code.

          1. The difficulty is that a liberal woman is usually a lot more insular and narrowminded than your conservative woman.

            Well, since Snidely Whiplash isn’t allowed to be a villain and provide the conflict that drives hero and heroine apart and then together, obviously the sensible thing for the modern woman to do is provide it herself.

      4. Myself, I do not subscribe to the “speak no ill of the dead” idea. Now, the volume of ill I speak depends on the degree of evil they did while among the living – the decedent in question, for example, gets far less “ill” spoken of him than, say, Hugo Chavez, Adolf Hitler, or Mao Zedong. And, in the lesser cases, I will refrain at least until they are in the ground or their ashes are cast (yes, that is politeness).

        As for the nonfactual – well, there I have to agree with you. The marriage to a committed Leftist was, if anything, only a minor indicator. I have hammered this woman several times for columns that were essentially apologias for the Left.

        (If this is the site that I think it is – it really isn’t a “Conservative” site, except in the eyes of the committed Regressives. Many of their columnists are only slightly veiled Statists, pseudo-libertarians, etc. Just not on board with the “proper” agenda.)

        1. I am replying to Reality Observer because it would be too much to reply to all the other replies above.

          No a conservative cannot have a successful marriage with a committed leftist. The level of entitled delusion and/or evil that it takes to be a committed leftist makes it impossible, not because of politics, but because that level of delusion and/or evil spills over everywhere contaminates everything nearby including relationships. If she had a successful marriage with a committed leftist she can be assumed to be no conservative.

  23. Here’s a common attitude that I found on one blog recently:
    “I don’t like what you said/reported/inferred about Subject A, so I’m going to ignore you or dismiss everything you said including how gravity and the real world works.”

    Who in the world agrees with someone else 100% of the time? What happen to having a dialogue and attempting to understand the viewpoint, background and experiences of others? Are people wrapped in community bubbles that need to be sanitized from any external influence including facts that may be in their best interest? What happens when real reality breaks their artificial universe?

    My spouse asks me why now I spend more time programming and working on projects that interact with physical world then reading fiction or interacting online. It’s just math, electronics, computers, weather and community service are more real than fiction or the stupid political games we play in the Great Game of Life. (It’s all fun till Mother Nature bites our respective asses.)

    1. While there was much about Ed Koch with which I disagreed, i agreed 100% with his dictum: ”If you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, see a psychiatrist.”

      1. Ed Koch, whatever his problems, was an improvement upon both his predecessor and his successor.

          1. While I can’t speak from personal experience about his predecessor, I grew up in New Jersey and remember many visits to NYC during Koch’s tenure. I also remember what it was like visiting NYC when Dinkins was running things afterwards. [shudder]

    2. > Who in the world agrees with someone
      > else 100% of the time?

      I don’t even agree with *me* all of the time. And I think some of the Voices disagree just to be contrary.

        1. When I call a meeting, a bunch of mine are always off conferencing in some ritzy resort.

          They are so surprised when they come back and find out what their assigned roles are…

      1. I disagree with myself to the point that I consider myself a political enemy.

        I believe that one can find points of agreement with some enemies, and treat them as allies against more irreconcilable foes.

        ‘Yeah, a world run by Bob would be a truly horrible place. He has some really dubious perspectives. I do know how he thinks, and about how far I can trust him. At least he isn’t a Democrat.’

    3. It can be valid– if someone demonstrates spectacularly bad judgement in one area where you can identify it, why would you trust them in another area that you can’t catch them? It’s a needless risk.

      It also only applies where their judgement *is* involved, of course…..

  24. I’ve been defriended on facebook by liberal friends I’ve known for 40 years and more. Because they didn’t like my views. As have all my my conservative friends. None of us had ever defriended a liberal. If you give up talking to them- you can’t convert them. I think they defriend us when the conservative arguments first begin to make sense to them. The cognitive dissonance becomes too much to handle.

    1. Remember Larry Correia’s dictum that internet arguing is a spectator sport. The goal isn’t to win over the Prog, that’s impossible. It’s to show the bystanders that Progs cannot formulate a coherent argument that matches reality.

    2. I have blocked only one person ever on FB. A dear sweet retired grade school teacher who drank the Obama kook-aide hook, line, and sinker.
      Still love her to death, but prior to both elections she would repost page upon page of his election committee’s talking points. Some days I had to wade through multiple screens of this just to see what my grandkids were up to. Asked her nicely to slow down a bit and that only seemed to make matters worst. I expect that somehow she felt that if she smothered me with her version of the ‘truth” she could make me convert to her viewpoint.
      Finally early on in 2012 I could not take it any more and blocked her.

    3. Hey, you haven’t lived until someone has started a webpage to attack you personally! And given out your name and address to boot!
      (Yes, I’ve gotten death threats, lots of them, as well as other things. The left are all such wonderful lovely people – especially when they feel you’ve ‘betrayed’ them by wandering off the ‘reservation’.)

      1. I found out about this, when I researched you when you first posted here. (What? Yeah, sometimes I do that, if we’ve been fraught with trolls. It’s been a while.)

        1. Now I’m curious as to what you’ve found!
          It’s funny, an old girlfriend from -many- years ago contacted me once (we’d lost touch ages ago) and after we exchanged greetings she told me how she found me, which was via one of those hate pages that was made to attack me. She said ‘Wow, whoever that is, they really hate you a lot!’

          Do you know that I’ve had a story written about me, accusing me of murder? I kid you not. They didn’t mention me by name (or I would have sued) but they used everything else about me, so those reading it, who knew who I was, would believe it. When I called the publisher up and had a talk with them, they went ballistic, (guess they were worried I was going to sue them) and they banned the author from ever writing for them again.

          Yeah, there are people out there who really hate me, and half of them I’ve never even met.

          1. I expect it helps to keep in mind that they don’t actually hate you, but it is Strawman John Van Stry they cannot stand. You are just collateral damage, condemned for not adhering to their construct of yourself.

            1. No, most of them actually hated -me-.
              I could tell stories. Everything you’ve ever heard of Lefties doing to a conservative? Been through it. Well, except for swatting, I haven’t been swatted yet.

  25. The people doing this are like religious fanatics, completely assured of the righteousness of their cause, willing to use any tool to further it.

    Herein lies the problem. What you say is politics, a matter of opinion that is discussable, they see as a rock hard truth that only a fool would deny.

    1. I picked the word ‘Fool’ specifically to indicate that I would not be swayed by appeals to my intelligence. Even if I have some, intelligence is harmful if one isn’t wise enough to know the uses of it. There are reasons to doubt how wise I am.

  26. Here is a discussion over at a very libel discussion group.
    Linda J. Dunn
    Date: Mon 26 Oct 2015 07:53:30a
    References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
    Message headers are currently hidden
    Raw text mode is currently disabled
    Quoted text is being shown
    Per Linda J. Dunn
    Translation please.
    Can someone who understands where these people are coming from explain to me the messages going around about how the investigation committee proved their

    Explicitly: The Wall Street, an article titled She Knew All Along.

    written by Kimberley A. Strassel. It’s been brought to my attention by certain conservative friends of proof of Clinton’s guilt.

    Say what????


    What the House committee did Thursday was finally expose the initial deception…*
    Then goes n to provide backstory.

    Then the article later noted:


    Here’s what the Benghazi committee foun in Thursday’s hearing. Two hours into Mrs. Clinton’s testimony, Ohio Rep Jim Jordan referred to an email Mrs. Clinton
    sent to her daughter….

    End quote to avoid copyright infringement potential.

    Quoting quoted email:
    Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like group.*

    Then further in the article, I quote:

    …But her own conversations rove she was in no doubt about what happened —
    while it was still happening.

    End quote

    Could someone who understands this logic explain how the writer got from Point A to Point B and why so many conservatives are taking up this article and holding
    it up as proof.

    1. First, I recommend avoiding hanging out in “very libel discussion” groups because they’re liable to libel you.

      Second, the questioner demonstrates Dorothy Parker’s definition of horticulture.

      If she can’t get from 2+2 to 4, there is likely very little anybody can say that will get her over that hurdle.

      Sigh … when you consider what gaps such people will clear …

  27. Replied to by George Peterson.
    You’re asking for logic from people who couldn’t find their way out of a T-maze.
    Followed by Susan Schwartz
    They live in a bubble or alternate universe.

  28. Proglodyte empathy on display:

    I Hope the Russians Love Their Children Too
    By Reihan Salam — October 28, 2015

    Compare and contrast how New York Times covered a school rezoning fight on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, where middle- and upper-middle-income white parents are resisting having their children shifted from a low-poverty elementary school to a high-poverty, heavily black and Latino school that state officials have acknowledged is “persistently dangerous,” and how it covered school segregation in the St. Louis metropolitan area, where middle-income suburbanites have been similarly reluctant to send their children to schools with higher poverty levels.

    When reporting on affluent New York parents, the Times offers a balanced account that acknowledges the legitimate concerns a parent might have about enrolling her child in a school with a violent reputation. If anything, reporter Kate Taylor gives short shrift to equally reasonable concerns about whether New York city’s conventional public schools are doing an adequate job of serving poor and minority students, though in fairness that is not the subject of this particular article. When reporting on St. Louis, in contrast, the Times focuses almost exclusively on the harm that attending segregated schools can do to poor black children. Nikole Hannah-Jones contrasts one relatively affluent, predominantly white school district in suburban St. Louis with the dismal quality of the region’s other public schools, yet she makes no effort to contextualize why middle-income suburbanites in Missouri might question the wisdom of forced integration efforts.

    Again, one could argue that this contrast merely reflects the fact that in this particular article Hannah-Jones, at least, wasn’t focused on the perspective of middle-income parents. My sense is that the Times might be slightly more sympathetic to middle-income parents in New York City, particularly those who insist that they are politically liberal, than to middle-income parents in the St. Louis suburb. None of this should come as a shock. But it is something that editors, and more importantly readers, ought to keep in mind.

    (And if you’re wondering about the title of this post, here’s a link.)

  29. Make rules, enforce them equally– Sarah’s rules here include a mom clause, and that’s OK because she’s pretty dang consistent.

    I see the “we’ll stop enforcing rules on THAT side” happen way too much, usually because ‘that’ side is getting in trouble more often and it looks bad. Nevermind that every single case is justifiable, or possibly was left a bit too long…
    and hitting back is bannable.


  30. Over 350 comments on my first post ever. I am humbled. Thanks to Sarah for letting me have a chance to contribute.

    The world shall hear from me again!

  31. How to handle a liberal.


    Asked tonight about the debt ceiling, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) instead used the question as an opportunity to provide a blistering critique of CNBC’s debate moderators, earning rousing applause from the audience. Here’s the exchange:

    CRUZ: The questions that have been asked so far in this debate, illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media. This is not a cage match. And if you look at the questions, Donald Trump, are you a comic book villain? Ben Carson, can you do the math? John Kasich, can you insult two people over here? Marco Rubio, why don’t you resign? Jeb Bush, why have your numbers fallen? How about talking about the substantive issues —

    QUINTANILLA: Does this count? Do we get credit for this one?

    CRUZ: And Carl, I’m not finished yet. The contrast with the Democratic debate, where every fawning question from the media was, which of you is more handsome and wise?

    CNBC: Let me say, you have 30 seconds left to answer should you choose to do so.

    CRUZ: Let me be clear. The men and women on this stage have more ideas, more experience, more common sense, than every participant in the Democratic debate. That debate reflected a debate between the Bolsheviks and the Menchavicks. Nobody watching at home believes that any of the moderators have any intention of voting in a Republican primer. The questions being asked shouldn’t be trying to get people to tear into each other, it should be what are your substantive —

    CNBC: I asked you about the debt limit and got no answer.

    1. So, apparently, Senator Cruz has what he refers to as an “audio-graphic memory”. That is, as opposed to a photographic memory, where upon reading something once, he can recall it, he *hears* something once, and is able to repeat it, word for word, and pause for pause.

      I heard a radio show go back over that segment this week and compare Cruz’s characterization of the questions with the questions being asked, and not only were they spot on, they were also given in the order in which the questions were asked.

      No wonder this guy was a debate team whiz.

  32. Orwell’s “…some are more equal than others.” was an ironic expression of “controllers” such as fascists.

    Saul Alinsky in “Rules for Radicals” flatly states “Make the enemy obey all of their rules.” while noting you have no obligation to live up to your standards….

    “What media bias? They’re simply pointing out common sense!”

  33. A photography site I frequent had someone suggest that using the term shoot was too violent and gun like. Heh, the contents got rather out of hand, including shots of Russian cameras mounted on gun stocks. You can’t give an inch. Another site with a rather eclectic commentariat has a bipartisan unofficial method where it you say something stupid you get called out vigorously. It is great fun. It is amusing to read the surprise of some people at the wild diversity of views expressed.

  34. Well, I avoided getting mentioned at Vile 770 despite my reference to Sad Puppies. That’s good, I think.

  35. As I have elsewhere, and repeatedly, most of this makes sense if you have educated yourself about the Bolsheviks and Stalin’s seizure of the Russian Communist party. None of it is new…it is a template used over and over by the political Left.

    None of it is about logic or fairness or progress or justice. It is about the raw exercise of power by a secular religion and its rabid adherents.

    Why is anybody surprised?

  36. I wish I’d seen this one yesterday, so my comment wouldn’t be buried under 427 others…

    I was one of the conservative posters at Slack Fate after SP3 broke. I tried to keep it civil and not descend into the quagmire. By and large, I succeeded, to the point that the site maintainer invited me to contribute articles. I did. There were even civil comments on them from the anti-Puppies.

    So I went there to post a proposal for a series of awards that both Puppies and anti-Puppies could agree on.

    The anti-Puppies were merciless.
    The Puppies were non-existent.

    Ask Orvan what my reaction to all that was. (Including twisting a bolt off when working on a car, necessitating replacement of a water pump I wasn’t planning to but, as it turned out, needed to be replaced anyway.)

    I’ve dropped the proposal. Aside from a few formulaic “the more awards, the better!”, I got damned little support and at least one set of ideas offered and then quickly taken away by one of the up-and-coming Cool Kids of SF.

    I don’t need that kind of heartache.

    1. I rather suspect there are some anti-Puppies who want to be seen as reasonable & civil; but there are few if any who really, at the buy-in level, want to agree with the Puppies on anything – least of all “their” precious awards/status signals.

    2. Sorry to hear that. It’s a shame to see a blog that was once so good fall apart so quickly.

  37. This all be news to most of you, but to me it’s very old. Twenty-seven years ago I got on the internet. It was a very different place back then, with all the interesting action occurring in newsgroups. Stranger in a Strange Land had an outsize impact on my thinking in those days and I joined a polyamory newgroup. Things went well for a year or so, but then I made a comment that perhaps gays would do better if they would adopt children and raise them in stable homes. I’m not sure what set her off but a woman astronomer accused me of being anti-gay. (Homophobe hadn’t enter the lexicon yet). I was flabbergasted. *I* wanted to be accepted by society and kids sure seemed important to my parents and my peers. Then all sorts of college students piled on and I’m sorry to say, I left the group (I was younger then, now they’d have had to kick me). This fight has been underway since nearly the turn of last century, not this one, and got serious in the 60’s. I don’t know if the fight can be won, but I’m still fighting.

Comments are closed.