13
Dec
07

Free Speech = Free Minds

In celebration of johnnypeeper’s first week of blogging, I bring you a movie clip.

Warning – This clip is guilty of the following:

  1. Promoting racial hatred,
  2. Portraying, in an acceptable light, violence motivated by an individual’s national origin,
  3. Glorifying the inhuman treatment of individuals due to their class, and
  4. Attacking individuals based on their sexual orientation

If you are offended by the visual depiction and/or auditory presentation of one or more of the aforementioned, please do not watch or listen to this clip. That being said, enjoy responsibly.

(If the copyright holders deny fair use of the work for commentary and/or criticism, select this link)

You might notice my tendency to throw around the concept of free speech in my posts. Well, johnnypeepers got a long and sordid history with coming into conflict with those who want to oppress it. In fact, when I was about 5, I learned for the first time that there were societally-imposed barriers to speaking your little dirty-ass mind. I remember chasing our house-cat, Trickle, around the living-room calling him a “fucking feline”. Needless to say, my Momma cold whupped my little ass and told me I can’t be saying that shit.

I ain’t got to tell you the powerful effect that lesson had on little johnny. Since I knew the word was naughty, I was telling every nigga I knew about it (restricted mostly to Kindergarten acquaintenances). I even spread the word to jokers I didn’t know, including the dish-washer repairman. I’m surprised the good-hearted bureaucrats at Child Protective Services didn’t come in to rescue me from my abusive environment.

When I was 8, I developed a real bad vocabulary hangin’ with cats who were 14 or 15. They got a kick out of having me recite the mechanics of human reproduction. Little johnny didn’t know what all that shit was about cuz I couldn’t make no ball-juice, but I would be ready when the bitches came my way.

High-school was a little different. Since I was hip to the free expression prohibitions and speech codes of my oppressors, I developed an alternative lexicon. I contrived up words with no recognized linguistic meaning, but me and my Homies knew what they meant. This was an adaptive strategy used to defy my captors, much like the tactics employed by the people in the Soviet Union (including Pootie-Poot’s Democratic Russia) and modern-day China.

Until recently, I always had a vague understanding of free speech. I would wrap myself in its liberal protections frequently, but I did not know the critical role it performed in a free society. Eventually, I learned that Man’s (and Womyn’s) innate right to speak his/her mind provides her/him the tool to battle countervailing beliefs and oppression. Without free speech, we are relegated to 6 billion individual human islands thirsting for individual liberty, but who cannot aggregate the necessary force to implement it. With this recently acquired knowledge, I now champion the fundamental human right to free speech whenever, and wherever, I can.

I would be selfish not to acknowledge the cat who facilitated johnnypeeper’s greater understanding of this critical human right. Marc Randazza is a First Amendment attorney who specializes in obscenity, trademark, and copyright matters. He has an incredible blog called The Legal Satyricon that I highly recommend.

Without people like Marc, the State (motivated by a mob-rule mentality), would gradually whittle away your First Amendment rights in the interest of a never-ending variety of bullshit compelling justifications (national security, women’s rights, other assorted protected-class rights, unruly political discourse, hurt feelings, religious sensitivities, etc.). I highly recommend you check out his site and thank him for protecting your rights.


42 Responses to “Free Speech = Free Minds”


  1. 1 unfairalice
    December 13, 2007 at 5:22 pm

    I got a good laugh outta your post here. Especially about the fucking feline who in the end made you understand the greater importance of freedom of speech. Well congrats on having one week completed. I think I’m on that mark too. Funny how we both started around the same time. In anycase, that was a long conversation and there will be more like it. If you’re interested or bored please read and comment. This is, for me, kind of like throwing messages in bottles out into the sea of the internet.

  2. 2 horatiox
    December 14, 2007 at 11:15 am

    Decent post, dude. Free speech remains an important topic, however mundane to some in the blogopolis. Blogs and websites have over the last few years become ever more controlled, moderated, policed. I contend the liberal sites–like a DailyKOS– are generally as bad as the rightist-bonehead sites in that regards, even if the Kossack’s intentions rate higher on the Righteousness-o-meter. Troll-paranoia on KOS has led to all sorts of moderation guidelines and procedures.

    “Troll” doesn’t really even mean what it used to mean: now it means like outsider, dissenter, renegade, crypto-fascist jaggoff-on-meth, etc. Formerly on newsgroups (who remembers the glory days of alt.slack, and say an UeberTroll like ICEKNIFE??) it had more of a hacker connotation: real trolls didn’t merely say speculate on Hillary’s pubic hair style on a dem site, but like played pranks, launched viruses, engaged in ID theft, phucked things up.

    The whole membership thing, and the mandatory login/pass (— or worse, the pinche verification capchas—) seems pretty anal really: on the old sites you just posted something and let it fly (wordpress is a bit better, but many wordpress sites are heavily moderated as well). In certain contexts I can understand some moderation or deletion, at least if people agree not to use words like FUCK or discuss their favorite sapphic erotica DVDs. At this point, merely by using the wrong tone of language, or deviating slightly from the accepted ideology, one is troll rated, banned, deleted, even when attempting to make serious points.

    Noam f-n Chomsky has made a few interesting comments about the right to dissent, and free expression in general. I don’t care for Chomsky’s writings taken as a whole (I think he has always tended to ignore or at least justify the crimes of the left), but he sounds nearly libertarian on occasion, at least in terms of “communication rights”:

    “”Among people who have learned something from the 18th century (say, Voltaire) it is a truism, hardly deserving discussion, that the defense of the right of free expression is not restricted to ideas one approves of, and that it is precisely in the case of ideas found most offensive that these rights must be most vigorously defended.””” (Noam Chomsky).

    Se lah

  3. 4 madmonq
    December 14, 2007 at 1:32 pm

    Your mouth is like a gun. If you don’t use it responsibly you’re going to get shot at. So far all I see here is a lot of random senseless gunfire into the air and someone calling it freedom of speech. So be it.

    Johnnypeeper’s response:

    So be it is right fella. The “random senseless gunfire” you refer to is the exercise of free speech, notwithstanding your disapproval.

  4. 5 madmonq
    December 14, 2007 at 1:34 pm

    I think freedom of speech is like owning a gun. If you don’t use it responsibly someone might get hurt. So far all I see here is a lot of random senseless gunfire into the air and someone calling it freedom of speech. So be it.

  5. 6 horatiox
    December 14, 2007 at 1:42 pm

    Not really relevant analogy between speech and firearms: no one, as far as I can tell, has advocated free speech in the form of advocating violence or causing a riot (ala shouting “Fire” in a crowded theatre, or hateful inflammatory speech ala KKK….. or jihadists). Free speech generally is taken to protect punk rockers as well as philosophers, one supposes, however much that might irritate some. I feel the Chomsky quote above describes the situation fairly accurately: free speech concerns the right to dissent. Now whether that dissent should be polite, or not so polite, is another matter.

  6. December 14, 2007 at 2:16 pm

    Congrats on celebrating your first week blogging, J Peeps. In Blog Years, man–that’s like the equivalent to ten days or something.

    Still, that’s progress, my young friend. Progress.

    Thanks for being a visitor to my young blog–just eight months old. I appreciate your stopping by. Glad to have you on board.

    Now BLAWGROLL me , you bastard!!!

    LK

    Johnnypeeper’s response:

    You first bitch! Daddy don’t take orders from nobody.

  7. 8 Rachel Blumel
    December 15, 2007 at 7:49 am

    I have been out all night and had a few drinks with some good Brothers and some pretty ladies:) I’m a little too “relaxed” to read right now but wanted to say “What’s up”

    Johnnypeeper’s Response:

    Take off you cottage-cheese thigh old hag. You are not welcome on this site.

  8. December 15, 2007 at 11:48 am

    I’ll toss out a bit of free advice, since I feel a little bit to blame about this. You seem to have been afflicted with a budding case of horatiox. There is no known cure for this affliction. However, the experiences of myself and others may be helpful in dealing with the problem. Scratching the itch is a horrible idea. In a best case scenario it generates more bizarre commentary derived from that distinctive blend of monumental self-importance and minuscule actual knowledge. In a worst case scenario it generates heated arguments in which garden variety conservative talk radio beliefs are propped up with knowledge misappropriated with boldness only matched by its senselessness.

    I feel a bit of blame about it all because I already had the disease, and it seems the aggressive pathogen now spreads by virtue of comment. On the one hand, it would be a shame to cease commenting on other people’s blogs just because horatiox might break out in the aftermath of my participation. On the other hand, I can’t actually contain the problem elsewhere as I have on my own site. Though blacklisting has its uses, my advice for all who come into contact with this dangerous and destructive organism is absolute non-reaction. Who knows how much irritation I may have been spared if I simply ignored it rather than trying to treat the infestation like a human being capable of rational thought.

    If he is censored, he will presume it is an ideological attack that unjustly deprives the world of his august brilliance, not a sensible effort to improve a blog’s noise-to-signal ratio. If he is consistently and effectively censored, he will continue to use comments as a means of heckling from afar — breaking the spirits of other bloggers who are striken by the sadness of knowing so much hate and ignorance can be concentrated within a single Internet user. Take his plunge into the Zeppelin thread. Just imagine the host of mental disorders required to imagine his personal disdain for one of rock’s greatest bands, and for rock music itself, would be of particular interest to other readers.

    Here we see some $10 ideas coming out of a $0.50 mouth, with predictable results. As one might expect from such a virulent persona, there is great interest in the frontiers of obnoxiousness. He lives up to all the cliches, including an eagerness to engage in physical combat as well as assertions that civil litigation might follow from those who do not yield to the unquestionable superiority of his assertions and interpretations. It may seem like a worthwhile amusement to toy with a horatiox infestation, but the novelty value wears away quickly, and he seems to possess unlimited time for purposes of pursuing his personal vendettas online. An informed cost-reward analysis is unfavorable for even the most capricious of troglodyte-baiters.

    That said, my own infestation has already reached such an advanced stage as to bring about this blog-comment-stalking behavior. As such, I might as well get in a poke while I’m here. Note the childlike incapacity to recognize the distinction between what could be subject to legal sanction and what is actually a good idea. I could suggest that Dick Cheney begins each day with three pints of blood freshly drawn from the necks of newborn puppies, and it is unlikely I would be arrested for doing so. This is not because in time of war we must all rally around the man who runs our government. It is because the existing leadership is amply deserving of extreme criticism on numerous fronts without departing from reality.

    Never mind civility — think of the distinctions between fact-based dissent (Iraq policy increases popular support for terrorists, working class Americans are seriously distressed by decades of trickle-down economics failing to trickle much of anything down, political and economic isolation is not the way to promote a nation’s progress from militant extremist leadership to something more moderate, etc.) and misinformation-based dissent (we have to fight them over there so we don’t wind up fighting them over here, mainstream global warming science is just a conspiracy to punish corporations for their own success, a billions Islamofascists are dedicated to nuking Israel en route to nuking America, etc.)

    Free speech can do tremendous harm without raising a single legal issue. Thus those who exercise this liberty in the political arena incur a particular duty to do so responsibly through dedication to fact-based narratives. What makes horatiox doubly insidious is that he is not just as prolific and venomous as any troll could ever be (after all, there are only 24 hours in the day,) but that his energies are dedicated primarily to propping up the misinformation-based narratives fed to him by the same media outlets that provide him with the daily diet of hatred that seems to be his sole purpose for clinging to life.

  9. 10 wittgenstein
    December 15, 2007 at 2:55 pm

    Tune it down. If you use cpaital letters all the time they lose their punch.

  10. 11 horatiox
    December 15, 2007 at 3:51 pm

    Whoa! The D-weed, ignus fatuus maximus of Blogopolis blows some wind. . AS your brain-fart indicates here, you can’t write. You don’t know what a valid argument is. You rely on trite little emotional appeals, slogans, ad hominems. Even an insult to the few rational leftists remaining in blogland. You’re sort of a wannabe Goebbels, and the whole point of you posting here is to prevent people from pointing out your idiocies (and we really don’t care what peepers does anyway).

    D-weed’s a bit sore anyways, so the predictable resentment. He lost his ass on some global warming sites: not merely due to rightist-boneheads (yet even the anti-AGW writing of a Bonehead like Crichton should not be dismissed), but by all sorts of people (including some non-conservatives) who actually know something about proving the claims of AGW (ie, see Dennis Rancourt, canadian physicist, and green). Then, after he got trashed, D-weed started into his usual milquetoast defamations, bogus inferences, and preacher-speak: anyone who objects to that great liberal Al Gore and his Chevy-sponsored eco-politics supports the Republicans, if not the aims of fascism itself! Heh heh.

    Al Gore more or less flunked his science courses at Harvard, misrepresented evidence of AGW (as was proven when the Feds themselves corrected Mann, the hockey stick guy); the political record of Big Al, who took Occi money for years, is a few baby steps away from say Reagan’s. But who cares: Gore’s the hero of the PC bogus suburban-greens. Even Marx pisses on all that (as Alex Cockburn and his pals at Counterpunch have pointed out, for years)

    Maybe like D-weed should re-enroll in some remedial writing courses –not to say a review of the categorical syllogisms you never mastered–at Skokie JC, or whereever you got yr AA in PC Byatching. You’re an insult to Reason, to the principles of the Founding Fathers, to Logos itself.

  11. December 15, 2007 at 4:59 pm

    I concede my previous comment was not perfect prose. When attempting any significant, if necessarily partial, inventory of the problems with letting horatiox be heard, there is much information to convey. That I should do so with haste should not pose any problems for comprehension. Readers intent on taking my meaning should have no trouble, and as for the rest — why read if you have no intention of taking meaning from the text.

    As for “losing my ass,” others are welcome to judge for themselves. Of course if you are a sock puppet happily taking Rush Limbaugh’s hand up your backside as a requisite prelude to speaking out about any issue with political ramifications, anyone who does not agree with the “Al Gore is out to ruin America” has lost the debate simply for breaking with dittohead orthodoxy. horatiox gives some people pause because he is so prolific at namedropping, but when the misunderstandings and outright deceptions are stripped away the underlying skeleton is purely a produce of right-wing rabble-rousing.

    However, it really doesn’t matter if he swings that way or not. Like most people who never wind up disagreeing with anything they ever see on Fox News, he probably does not possess any sort of coherent ideological base . . . nor should he. Political labels and ideological devotions ultimately obstruct learning more than they advance it. A thoughtful citizen ought to remain free to accept truth from any part of the political spectrum, and to deny falsehood likewise. The problem with this particular ubertroll is that he is passionate about the embrace of falsehood and obsessive (I believe he has submitted over 100 comments to my blog since being blacklisted, and I’m not alone in this campaign of nonsensical heckling) in hounding those who have clashed with him in the past.

    So to those looking on I say pay heed — keep your head down and perhaps the blight will pass without leaving further marks. Take issue with this twit and he is likely to chase you from one end of the blogosphere to the other in his pathological dedication to spreading the hatred that comes to him through the red-faced ravings of pundits he constantly sides with while disavowing. That he should mutilate the words of genuinely worthwhile thinkers along the way provides some amusement value, but the morbid fascination of his numerous mental dysfunctions tends to wear off long before his interest in sustaining antagonistic contact.

  12. 13 horatiox
    December 15, 2007 at 5:25 pm

    Ah touched a nerve. Who gives a sheiet about your cheap attempts at ethics, or politics, or invective, D-wind. Let’s reiterate: you do not know how to write, and you are neither an intellectual nor a wit. You’re not some Kerouac-like hepcat either, as the collection of moralisms and generalized idiocies on your blog demonstrates: “What You Should Think”. Hah. Sounds about like a collection of Erma Bombeck columns (and reads like that as well). You don’t know how to think.

    Your sort of “stagflation’ speak wouldn’t make it at the average Toastmaster’s meeting (ever heard of probability???: Not to say the commodity market?) . I doubt you know a supply curve from your Scripture lessons, fraud. You can’t even produce some lightweight gonzo. (and I could care less if your cronies clap at your syntactical excretions or not) .

    Other than that, step in a ring, pissant, like Marquess of Queensbury style: I’ll provide you with a lesson in logic 101, right quick. Verstehen sie das, schmutz? Gut.

  13. December 15, 2007 at 5:52 pm

    Wow, even when you point out that he’s the sort of imbecile who believes arguments online are best settled with threats of violence, he continues to inject the threat of violence into arguments online. People are welcome to check out my blog if they want to see just how far from the mark horatiox’s observations actually are. Based on his remarkably consistent track record of error, I can only take the previous comment as an indication that my own writing is much brighter, coolers, and deeper than I had previously suspected. Thanks for the inadvertent support, Peach.

  14. 15 Mushroom
    December 16, 2007 at 3:48 am

    Congratulations on your first week of blogging. You’ll get the hang of it eventually, just keep at it and read other people’s blogs for guidance on writing. And remember, the Golden Rule applies — it’s considered hypocritical to talk about freedom of speech in your blog while speaking ill of others for using their freedom of speech. (You’ll get the hang of commenting on others’ blogs eventually too. We all start off pretty lousy at it if we don’t know much about what the people are talking about or are not familiar with the writers.)

    My sister learned the value of free speech at an early age… she used her middle finger a lot as a little girl. We’re all rather surprised she made it through elementary school, because there is a difference between speaking your mind regardless of what others may think — and pissing off everyone without a cause.

    Johnnypeeper’s response:

    “there is a difference between speaking your mind regardless of what others may think — and pissing off everyone without a cause.”

    Maybe I better find a “cause” so that my speech will be sanctioned under your approving authority. Oh wait, My cause is pissing off jacklegs like you.

  15. 16 Doc Syntax
    December 16, 2007 at 10:56 am

    Hilarious.

  16. 17 horatiox
    December 16, 2007 at 11:59 am

    Note how DemonSnitch (and others) conveniently overlooked the rather spot-on quote from Chomsky regarding the right of dissent. Who cares about the right to dissent, Chomksy, Voltaire, history of the Enlightenment?? There’s an opportunity to vent, defame, and get some petty vindictive rage on (all rather amusing, since after a dozen or so non-obscene yet critical comments of ours appeared on his site, he blocked further comments).

    We point out his errors, his great generalizations, his appeals to emotion (instead of like to fact-based arguments) on one or two sites, and he starts into his rants and paranoia: “Troll”! Oddball! Rightist! etc. that’s the mark of these neo-liberal-conservatives who have RUINED the Net, sort of like Diane Feinsteins, Inc. Snitch.com. Want a clue to Demonwind’s real character? Note the quote from Dan Quayle, offered without irony or sarcasm. Yeah, great gonzo-scribbler who quotes Danny Quayle (and other conservatives), and holds Ron Paul to be a great visionary. Pitay da foo!

    (even the shade of HS Thompson pisses on ya, D-weed)

  17. December 16, 2007 at 12:27 pm

    Thanks for the robust exchange fellas (horatiox and Demonweed in particular). The heated dialogue and attendant disagreements provides others the opportunity to scrutinize your opinions and beliefs, Ultimately, discourse of this nature contributes to the “marketplace of ideas” and enriches the discussion.

    Another benefit of this forum, and each individual’s contribution, is that it also allows for a synthesization of varying perspectives. The inherent conflict in views held by those on each extreme of the political spectrum can work as a tool to generate a moderation of opposing views into a workable compromise of sorts.

    Thank you to all who have taken the time to speak your mind and advance your views.

  18. December 16, 2007 at 3:11 pm

    It may also be worthy of note that while I have yet to bother posting a single comment at horatiox’s blog, he cannot permit a single post of mine to pass without an outburst of pre-adolescent hostility from him. I respect his right to blather and lie to an audience of one (which makes that royal “we” of his all the more comical.) Also, note the use of distorted names. As with his understanding of philosophy (a subject he claims to teach in spite of clearly failing to apprehend at even the most fundamental of levels,) his understanding of invective reflects a fixation of playground dysphemisms. He claims it is a “prevarication” to refer to him as a source of harassment, yet the man-sized infant cannot manage to go even a single whole week without lobbing attacks my way. Hounding me as I comment in other blogs may be a new behavior, but it only shows that his mental illness continues to escalate, compulsions growing more and more beyond his control. I wonder how long it is before he begins to burn effigies of what he imagines I might look like, and if I will still be dealing with his schoolyard namecalling decades hence.

    Though I appreciate the words of thanks, I believe both of us should be criticized. It is not a productive thing for me to have dragged such a creature into another’s den, and horatiox has yet to express himself anywhere online but that anything resembling a valid perspective is not lost in much greater quantities of misinformation and juvenile invective. Adding a link to his own mangled attempts at reflection on ideas far beyond his feeble grasp could provide an excellent example of how not to do this blogging thing, but then again I don’t think any of us suffer for a shortage the warnings posed by bad examples. I join the chorus of congratulations no the progress of this project, though I also apologize that by way of award I’ve wound up inadvertently giving you contact with the single greatest waste of the Internet since the man behind the Bea Arthur porn archive first utilized HTML.

  19. 20 horatiox
    December 16, 2007 at 3:40 pm

    Yada yada yada. You’re the champion of Blather and useless, windy rhetoric, loudmouth-weed. Did you grasp the Chomsky’s point yet, not to say the First Amendment? A bit of a stretch, given that you’re accustomed to the wit and wisdom of Dan Quayle.

    You routinely conflate values with facts, and mistake ideology for Reason (ever hear of Hume, great Name-dropper? Google the “is-ought” problem when you have time away from the Quotations of Great Men site) . You don’t know enough about the science of AGW to offer any informed criticisms of the Gore or IPCC “modellers”, or the viewpoints of the AGW skeptics, for that matter (which includes humans on links und rechts). Not only that, you’re bor-reeng as phuck.

  20. December 16, 2007 at 4:27 pm

    If I am indeed boring, then why is it that you cannot leave me be? Like pretty much anyone else whose path you have crossed, I would gladly give up 10% of my net worth to never cross paths with you again. Instead you compound the arrogance of history’s worst kings with the desperation of a schoolboy unable to stop acting out obnoxiously in the search for attention. If I were indeed boring, misguided, et al. then it should be not only easy but natural and desirable for you to abandon this campaign of annoyance. Instead you cannot help yourself but to continue it. I do not know if you are a slave to your own malice or if you imagine constant harassment of your betters somehow elevates you, but I do know that you cannot stop giving grief to those who have the misfortune of falling under your obsessive crosshairs. At the very least, please seek professional help while you continue to display your pathological inability to actually behave like you were bored with those you accuse of being boring.

  21. 22 horatiox
    December 16, 2007 at 5:40 pm

    Leave you be? We have, Narcissist-Weed. Leave me be. You’re the one who derailed this thread with your typical, boring whines. This thread reveals your own obsessions and issues. (Spare us your wannabe-BF Skinner analysis-lite as well, “Doc”). You need help, clown. I no longer post on your site, anyway.

    I left you be weeks ago, after puncturing your pompous rhetoric-balloons on the Edelman thread.

    “Brevity is the soul of wit”

    (danke, JP for an important thread. Alas, free speech means allowing trolls like D-w the right to derail threads)

  22. December 16, 2007 at 6:03 pm

    That is simply not true. Just today you sent along a comment, and I let one slip through as recently as last week. The evidence is solidly at odds with your own claims about your own behavior. Either you are so far beyond sane that you have a real life Jeckyll and Hyde problem, or you are showing a particularly severe form of disrespect to this group by lying outright to all who would listen. Either way, this is a serious indication of how unfit you are to opine online.

    Speaking of which, free speech does not mean that johnnypeeper must permit anyone and everyone to comment on his blog. That is just as idiotic as arguing that free speech entitles people to break the rules of an online forum, spray graffiti on a neighbor’s home, or fling poo at exposed paintings in a museum exhibit. Free speech actually entitles blog proprietors to create and enforce whatever rules on expression they see fit. Free speech also means that you are entitled to do as you please, even to the point of flinging poo at your own work in your own home. It is actually an encroachment on free speech to forcibly compel others to permit objectionable expressions within their own property.

    Save for johnnypeepers, the rest of us here are guests — not owners. Were he to censor us, that would be an exercise of his free speech right, not a violation of the censored. An inability to grasp that elementary distinction is a hallmark of the common troll. Alas, his persistence, dishonesty, and the sheer annoyance factor conspire to make it clear that horatiox is an extraordinary troll. The only thing common about his behavior is a general failure to achieve an average level of understanding about the matters where he clumsily feigns expertise.

  23. 24 horatiox
    December 16, 2007 at 6:09 pm

    STFU, bitch. How’s that. You’re a little lapdog. Try the Chomsky again, lapdog-weed. Or Polonius, for that matter. Or review the cliffsnotes to Aristotle again, until you get it right.

  24. December 16, 2007 at 6:27 pm

    Ah, the real horatiox stands up at last. Thank you for showing others your true nature. Now if only you could see it yourself, an urgently-needed drive for self-improvement might awaken. Thinking that may make me a hopeful fool, but rather that than a hateful maniac.

  25. 26 horatiox
    December 16, 2007 at 6:53 pm

    Hate? Nyet. Forget Polonius: he’s a bit deep for peasants, links aber rechts. I’m not apologizing to you, hick. You lost two or three arguments, and your fee-wings were hurt. You were about to lose more arguments, until you shut down your blog.

    Scroll up a few comments, D-w: note the relevant citation form Mr. T: Pitay da Foo! You have nothing to say, yet say it loudly and ineffectively in 10 paragraphs per hour.

  26. December 16, 2007 at 6:58 pm

    You do realize that me losing an argument in your mind is not the same as me losing an argument in reality, right? It is sort of like you leaving me in peace in your mind is not the same as you actually leaving me in peace. Still, I wish wholeheartedly you could reconcile that psychotic break.

    Long ago I realized that you have no capacity to engage in real argument. You like to sling about seemingly random references to thinkers, many of whom actually have good ideas. Yet when it comes to a link between what you think and what those people actually wrote or said, it just isn’t there. I’m not asking for an apology, as we know you are even less capable of admitting error than the present Commander in Chief.

    However, it would be nice if you could muster the modicum of dignity it would take to remain silent as an alternative to sharing even more of your foolishness with the group. This would not only be nice for everyone else annoyed by your insufferable yet inept spew of venom, but it would also be nice for you. Better to be silent and thought a fool than speak up and confirm it for all who bear witness, eh?

  27. 28 horatiox
    December 16, 2007 at 7:17 pm

    Given your own problems with defining even a baby-step argument in first -order logic, we should not consider your blog as authoritative on, like, anything. And not only are you challenged by deduction, inductive reasoning (i.e. working with data, evidence, fact-claims) presents a problem, as your faux-economic guestimates indicate.

    Care to wager on your AGW claims, for one, Deeep thinker, and your defense of Gore/IPCC and the Inconvenient Half-Truth? Lay some shekels down. You didn’t even know what the relevant issues were on the Edelman thread. I don’t care for Edelman (yeah, he’s a bit of a bonehead–), but he’s 10x the intellectual you are, and correctly noted numerous flaws in Gore’s pop eco-movie, and in Mann’s research, and in numerous other AGW studies. So have others. Perhaps we can also refer to the work of Dr. Hug, a real chemist, not a “modeller” ‘s study . His research refutes the IPCC claims that man-made CO2 results increases in temperatures. That’s for starters.

    Or, instead, STFU.

  28. 29 horatiox
    December 16, 2007 at 7:47 pm

    Hey peepers: apologies to some extent for the rants, but I do think you should keep the channels open. Flame wars are not too amusing, but he’s the one who refuses to back down. Really delete my comments if you want: though I trust you would delete D-weed’s loudmouthed, moralistic scheisse as well. He started this, really. A few comments were made against his liberal preacher-speak on another site (not just from me), and then on or a few of his posts, and that irked him apparently, and he shut his shiiet down, That’s it. D-weed dishes it out but can’t take it. As here: he doesn’t even address your points but starts into whining.

    Whatev. He ain’t down with a rock and/o gonzo programme either, though he has fooled some people into believe that he is. Jerry Falwell on crack.

  29. December 16, 2007 at 8:14 pm

    If Ayn Rand and David Lynch co-wrote a screenplay, I imagine it would come as close to giving us a glimpse of horatiox’s personal reality as anyone could without the distasteful task of psychotherapeutic inquiry. Then again, perhaps said screenplay would need to be put through a blender first. See, I can make use of recognizable names as well, but with the added advantage that their context resonates in a way that is broadly meaningful. This comes from having some sense of what those public figures actually did and how it resonated in the real world — a much more useful approach than simply keeping a long list of authoritative figures to invoke as if merely knowing their names conveyed credibility.

    It doesn’t really matter “who started it,” though even there the horatiox version of events meshes poorly with reality. What matters is that you are stuck in a rut of behavior that is worse than useless. You are not only consistently but blatantly demonstrably dishonest. Yet you think someone would take a wager with you over a question of science you choose to settle by refuge in a political bunker? Okay, so your ten lawyers all are poised to sue me and you’re also ready to pounce like a pugilist with the style of Muhammed Ali and the brute force of Mike Tyson, each in their primes. When you actually find someone who is impressed by threats of litigation and violence made under an online pseudonym, do let us know, k?

    In the mean time, do the world and yourself a huge favor and try to confine your expressions to those that in some way reflect reality. This will mean getting in touch with reality, but it should not be impossible for you to do so. You are not a rape victim languishing in the Darfur sun. You are not a political dissident locked in a Burmese prison. Heck, you’re not even a random farmer swept up in the Guantanomo dragnet. Whever it is that you hide from by constructing this elaborate alternative to reality, I believe you have the strength to face it. Do that, and then perhaps one day you can begin to engage others in some sort of dialog that will make as much sense to them as your words apparently make to you.

  30. 31 horatiox
    December 16, 2007 at 9:18 pm

    Uh, how about a nice warm cup
    o……..aww yeahhh….S T F U

    Do that, and perhaps one day you can begin to
    understand how pathetic you really are.

    Give the gifft that keepz on giffin’!

  31. 32 JoMaMa
    December 17, 2007 at 8:59 am

    Boys, Boys, Boys….you two need to catch a good dart game and settle your little disagreement over a glass of some homemade brewsky’s…the slander is too much for me to read of a beautiful sunday morning!!

  32. December 17, 2007 at 10:12 am

    demonweed is incredibly short-sighted, not to mention boring. those with real ideas and information to impart, dillweed, are able to do so without the use of excessive paragraphs. if you think this is the place for people to read the rough draft of your impending tome of useless garbage, think again. dumb bastard.

  33. December 17, 2007 at 11:48 am

    It may also be worthy of note that horatiox is fond of posing as many identities to fabricate the impression that others agree with him. It could possibly be that I have two detractors both hyperaggressive and fond of playground namecalling, but I’d wager if johnnypeepers cared to look he would discover a curious coincidence in that Betsy Ross and horatiox utilize the same ISP (not to mention the same infantile tone.) Heck, he couldn’t even come up with a real URL to give depth to the spoof. Yet, of course, when people react to these antics with blacklisting, he remains convinced it is not because of his pathological hostility and dishonesty, but rather a nefarious scheme to censor his invaluable contributions. I still see the amusement value in his fumbling ploys, but this nuisance has been on my case too long for the entertainment value to continue to eclipse the sorrow that comes from knowing such a hateful ignoramus actually exists.

  34. 35 Betsy Ross
    December 17, 2007 at 11:59 am

    Poor little demonweed. You are wrong, yet again. It is not that I wish to join horatiox in giving you a hard time, but you’re such an inflated moron that it’s dare I say it, impossible, not to take a shot at you. You’re of the opinion that your opinions count and are waited for with bated breath by the masses. For all of the two-ton wordsmithing you inspire too, it doesn’t even come close to matching the simple rants of a mongoloid like this Johnny Peepers cat. Think about that: you have less to say than a mongoloid.

  35. 36 Betsy Ross
    December 17, 2007 at 12:02 pm

    Correction: ” For all of the two-ton wordsmithing you ASPIRE to”. Never let it be said I won’t edit myself.

    Now, demonweed, reach into your short little sack for some empty comeback that deals with my correction. Come on, you can do it. You shrivel-headed little punk.

  36. December 17, 2007 at 5:20 pm

    horatiox — a troll by any other name would still smell as foul. Though congratulations on your new cybertranssexual status. I don’t think anyone else is buying this ruse, but it does shed even more light on the pathology that drives you to take anti-social behavior online to levels that may be unprecedented and surely put you in the bottom percentile of Internet users in terms of integrity, decency, et al.

  37. 38 horatiox
    December 17, 2007 at 6:13 pm

    There you go making bogus inferences again, D-weed. I have no clue who “Betsy Ross” is, but others obviously can recognize, uh, long-winded verbal excretions when they smell them. And if you care to like press the issue we can get the ISP records and prove your idiocies–but really that would be even more boring than your usual 20 paragraph brain-fart.

    In technical terms, you’re what is known as a stupid phuck.

  38. 39 horatiox
    December 17, 2007 at 6:33 pm

    And as your own whiny prose reveals, you the B-yatch, d-grrl: sort of Phyllis Schafly-at-the-Kiwanis’ Klub , tho’ not quite as eloquent as Ms Schafly. Why not like do the right thing, and say break into mom’s stash of vicodin, grab a handful, suck down a quart of popov, maybe put on yr fave lingerie, and exit the proverbial stage left? Das stimmt! You go grrl.

  39. December 17, 2007 at 6:49 pm

    Cries of STFU, pretending to be a girl, and calling for my suicide . . . wow, your idea of winning an argument really is astounding. Congratulations on further displays of what passes for brilliance on your side of the psychotic break.

  40. 41 horatiox
    December 17, 2007 at 6:52 pm

    What a shocker: you’re lying again, D-grrl. Open you little yap so more, d-grrl the liar.

  41. 42 Betsy Ross
    December 18, 2007 at 10:06 am

    Hey, Demonweed: show us your little pock marks, i.e. tits.
    Really, girl, let Betsy throw a little advice your way. You need to lighten up, take a few pills, down some whiskey, maybe fool around with a couple of sailors on shore leave. Sure it may result in an infection, but medical technology has advanced to the point it’s only a momentary annoyance.
    I don’t care what you do as long as it doesn’t involve you fiddling yourself with one hand and typing meaningless bullshit with the other.
    And please stop writing that I am horatiox. I know it’s hard to come to grips with the realization that more than one person realizes you’re shallow and banal, but the sooner you do realize this then the sooner we can begin to assist you in making a change for the better.
    I’m an old woman who would rather be sewing empty symbols of a nation than getting into a back-and-forth with a mindless little runt; however, I can’t sit idly by and allow your pretentiousness to continue to infest this mongoloid’s blog. Look at the poor wretch’s face, for God’s sake. He has enough problems in this world without having to read the thousands of words (it must make his eyes hurt so) left here in this comments section. Do what’s right, demonweed, and SHUT THE FUCK UP.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Johnny Peepers

----> is a socio-pathetic degenerate with a penchant for cheap booze, ruphy-laden broads, and dim sum soup.

a

Blog Stats

  • 1,076,749 hits

Archives


%d bloggers like this: