Sunday, September 26, 2010

Moderated: Thoughts From A Conservative Mom (blog): Dr. Gottheil's 'Statement of Concern is now posted at PetitionsOnline.com...

Though I submitted the following comment to the "Thoughts From A Conservative Mom" blog post
Prof calls fellow academics ‘sanctimonious bigots’ on 9/25/2010, the fact that other posts and comments were posted there, but my comment never showed up, lead me to believe that my comment was moderated away. A visit to my blog from an administrator at this blog (thanks web traffic counter) later that day pretty much confirmed it. My comment:
Dr. Gottheil's Statement of Concern is now posted at PetitionsOnline.com, and is accepting signatures from anyone willing to speak out against human rights abuses in the Middle East. As you're obviously interested in the story, I urge you to step up and sign it: Support Regarding Discrimination in the Middle East against Women, Gays, and Lesbians Petition

Obviously, we'll be counting on everyone here to reply to this request.
Here's how I made note of it at the blog post where I'm tracking these "invites to sign the Statement" that I'm posting on rightwing blogs:
9/25 - *** Rachel at 'Thoughts From A Conservative Mom' here, obviously doesn't really care much about the rights of muslim women or gay folks, because she chose not to allow my comment about signing Dr Gottheil's Statement of Concern to appear. Not only didn't she reply to Dr Gottheil's plea (very much like those "sanctimonious, bigoted" academics failed to do), she doesn't want her readers to reply, either. Let human rights be someone else's problem, I guess... Sanctimony and hypocrisy walk hand in hand, sometimes... ***
Needless to say, I'm disappointed in her...

Saturday, September 25, 2010

Moderated: American Power (blog): Dr. Gottheil's 'Statement of Concern is now posted at PetitionsOnline.com...

Sometime on Friday, 9/24/2010, I submitted the following comment to the American Power blog post 'Sanctimonious Bigots' – Leftist Professors and Double Standards. (I can't recall the actual time, except to say it was before 9:30 PM.):
Dr. Gottheil's Statement of Concern is now posted at PetitionsOnline.com, and is accepting signatures from anyone willing to speak out against human rights abuses in the Middle East. As you're obviously interested in the story, I urge you to step up and sign it: Support Regarding Discrimination in the Middle East against Women, Gays, and Lesbians Petition

Obviously, we'll be counting on everyone here to reply to this request.
After waiting about 12 hours, I noted the following at the blog post where I've been tracking responses to my "sign the Statement against human rights abuses in the Middle East" commentary on rightwing blogs:
9/25 - *** Dr. Douglas has added several posts to his blog since I submitted my comment, so I reluctantly have to assume that he has rejected my comment asking he and his readers to step up and sign Dr. Gottheil's Statement of Concern. As he is both a conservative and an academic in the field of political science, I'm most disappointed in his obvious lack of concern for the human rights of women, gays, and lesbians in the Middle East. Given the chance to reply (figuratively, anyway) to Dr Gottheil's e-mail plea--a plea we can be almost certain Dr Douglas received and read--he chose not to step up, just like those "leftist" (and likely "nihilist" or "demonic," too) professors that he posted about failed to do. Double standard? You decide. ***
One has to wonder why Dr Douglas did not allow that comment to post, effectively refusing to reply to the Statement of Concern (or for that matter, allow his readers to do so), just like the professors he criticizes. Could it be that he is exhibiting the same kinda double standards that he's railing about in his post? One has to wonder...

Deleted: DUFF & NONSENSE! (blog) - Dr. Gottheil's Statement of Concern is now posted at PetitionsOnline.com

The following comment was posted on 9/24/10, at 9:00 PM (or thereabouts), to the blog DUFF & NONSENSE!, at the post Humbug and humbuggers!, which was harshly critical of liberal academics who had signed a petition critical of the Israeli government, but subsequently failed to reply to a single unsolicited e-mail request from Dr. Fred Gottheil, a fellow professor they had likely never heard of, asking them to sign a statement against human rights abuses in other countries in the Middle East.:
Dr. Gottheil's Statement of Concern is now posted at PetitionsOnline.com, and is accepting signatures from anyone willing to speak out against human rights abuses in the Middle East. As you're obviously interested in the story, I urge you to step up and sign it: Support Regarding Discrimination in the Middle East against Women, Gays, and Lesbians Petition

Obviously, we'll be counting on everyone here to reply to this request.
Disappointingly, as of 9:20 AM on 9/25/10 (less than 24 hours later), this blogger seems to've deleted my comment, as well as the backlink to a post I'd made at another blog describing my attempts to get folks to sign onto the petition. How should we judge this behavior, when evaluating this conservative's commitment to human rights? Duff sure seemed to care when it was liberal academics who weren't stepping up, but when it's his turn to speak out, he chooses not to do so himself, or to allow any of his readers the opportunity to do so, either. Hypocrisy? You decide.

All I know is that I'm damned disappointed in him... Humbug and piles of brown, indeed.

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Moderated: In Reply: Donald Douglas tears up and runs for the cover of his moderator "Delete" button.

Submitted for approval 9/20/10, 5:52 PM
...and rejected for publication, of course. (As I said below, it's the only way he can legitimately feel like he's "won.")
---

Rather than post my previous comment in full, Dr. Douglas rejects it as unworthy of publication, but then quotes a piece of it for his attempt at rebuttal, safe in the knowledge that I cannot reply where his readers will likely see it...

Repsac3:

You're banned, as always.

That said, this is fail:

"...you pick a definition out of a lexicographer's hat. And again you fail to show with real-world examples..."

First you claim no definitions. Then when supplied you reject them. And who's doing the twisting? I've got you guys pinned down. You're done. You got your moment in my comment section. You DON'T get your own milk crate to make a speech. Go back to your shithole of a blog and do what you do best: nihilist hate and demonology with all the other idiots fucks who drag their knuckles over there.
Classic.

Just classic...

I replied, anyway...
---

Quoting a part of my reply without posting the comment is cowardly. (But you already knew that, didn't you?)

I'm guessing it's the only way you can feel as though you've "won," however...

Whatever, Dr. Douglas... Enjoy your "victory..." And come on by, should you ever wish to have a complete (and unfortunate for you, unmoderated) discussion... Your many detractors welcome you to visit their blogs, anytime you wish... ...though we doubt you have the courage to take any of us on without your handy delete button, anymore... It's the only "american power," you have left.

Moderated: In Reply: The Douglas Strikes Back

Submitted for American Power blog moderator approval Monday, 9/20/10, 4:01 PM (WIS blog time)...
...and (except for one sentence fragment that Donald chose to quote in a comment *he* made) rejected for publication, for reasons I leave for the reader to judge for himself. (I know what *I* think, but each can judge Donald's level of cowardice without my having to tell you what I think...)
---

After actually approving one of my comments to his blog earlier today, Dr. Douglas replied. This is my next rejoinder... Let's see whether he's brave enough to continue the conversation...
---

Well, no, actually, Repsac3.

Denial will get you nowhere.

And why you keep alleging victim status is beyond me.

Some of your posts of late read as though you're whining about how those bad liberal bloggers are being mean to you... Of course, you're free to deny that, as well...

I'm not supposed to fight back when folks like you launch campaigns of workplace harassment?

Are you alleging workplace harassment, again? Where? (Or are you still whining about those incidents that two other bloggers allegedly did to you over a year ago? And what is this about you writing to SEK's place of employment to harass him, btw...?)

Yeah, by all means fight back... The more you do, the more you expose yourself for who you really are and what values you do and do not represent.

When I'm slurred for all kinds of shit, old, fat, stupid -- you name it?. Is that what you call "getting his ass kicked"?

No, much of that stuff is as foolish and as ultimately meaningless as your own calls of "butt-freaks" "nihilists" or your penchant for creating grade-school style fake names for those you oppose ("hatemaster," "bonejobkeefe").

Getting your ass kicked is the more subjective stuff that makes up the bulk of the replies to you on those blogs you attack... You know, the stuff you dismiss with a quoted line or two from a friendly source, if you bother to address it at all... (But of course, you already know all that, which is why you're stepping up the attacks on the ephemera, instead...)

You showing up here again proves there are no rules, norms, or standards you will abide, because you're nihilist.

We've been over this, and I've expressed what my rules, norms, and standards are on this subject many times over. It's a public blog that accepts comments (albeit moderated). You don't have to print those comments with which you disagree (or cannot argue), but you cannot stop me or anyone else from offering them. (And if this is an example of your practical, real-world definition of nihilism, I really do feel sorry for those students who end up in your classes...)

For what? Misreading? Kinda hypocritical, no?

No. I specifically said that misreading the sign (at least initially) isn't much of an offense. What you did is make up a pretty vicious lie based on your misreading, and then attribute that lie to a whole group of people in an effort to smear them.

I stand by it.

You stand by what? The mistake? The vicious lie?

Unlike you.

No idea what you mean by that. Doubt you do, either, though perhaps whatever you make up to explain it (if you do indeed post this/reply at all) will be entertaining...

Nice try on the "evil" thing.

Pretty much nailed it, I think. But those who read my charge and your excuses can decide for themselves...

You must feel pretty stupid adopting nihilism as your handle.

We never did... Your constant misuse of the word as an epithet for your many enemies a few years ago--which you've replaced with variants of the term "demonology" of late, according to other bloggers--kind of bestowed it on us.

And Brendan doesn't offer a definition. Neither do you.

Well, we're not the ones making the charge. You are... Since you're the one saying we're nihilists, you're the one who should be making your case by defining your terms and then showing how the definitions apply... And for years now, you've failed to even try, let alone actually do so.

try this.

Again you pick a definition out of a lexicographer's hat. And again you fail to show with real-world examples (quotes, for example...) how I or anyone else you label a nihilist fits that definition.

Another failure. (It's always that second part that seems to trip you up... It's easy to just toss out labels against folks with whom you disagree... It's a whole other thing trying to convince anyone aside yourself that they actually apply... But by all means, keep trying, Dr Douglas... Keep trying...)

(The Marxist-Leninist stuff similarly doesn't apply... ...though you're welcome to attempt offering real world examples of my believing in any of that, should you wish to... In the meantime, what's freely offered may be freely denied.)

Saturday, July 17, 2010

Moderated: In reply: American (power) Tits and Ass: (Grandma Moses' tits, Norman Rockwell's ass) ((points))

Submitted for moderator approval 7/16/10, 7:08 AM, AmPow blog time...
...and (as of 24 or so hours later) apparently rejected for publication, for reasons known only to Donald Douglas, the moderator in question. (What is he afraid of?)
---

In reply to American Power: The 'Hotness Gap' Just Too Much for Illiterate English Professor Scott Eric Kaufman!, and in particular JBW's observation about the disconnect between Donald's (& Cons,' in general) disparagement of the "lib'rul" hedonism of Hollywood and their claim that all of the "hot" babes reside on the Con side of the proverbial aisle.
---

Dopey cherry picking notwithstanding, almost all of these "Rule 5" bait and switch T&A "tease" posts (and a whole lot of the music blogging at AmPow, as well) would pretty quickly come to a standstill if the blogger(s) who write/post them actually required that their subjects express, in word or deed, fealty to the (neo)con (or even worse for them, traditional) political and social values that Con rule 5 bloggers claim to advocate...

Besides... While many of our smart gals are quite pretty, (and our actresses, songstresses and other show biz gals are very smart, as well) the most important attribute for our female policy wonks and politicians isn't how good they look in a skirt or whether we can use them as props to draw people to our blogs under false pretenses for the vanity of inflating the hit numbers, but how good they are at being policy wonks and politicians.

Sorry, Don... Once again, it's a fail...

(Title (American (power) Tits and Ass: (Grandma Moses' tits, Norman Rockwell's ass)) lifted from one of my all time favorite Lenny Bruce riffs...)