Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund’s ‘We’re Listening’ Video

Just submitted via the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund’s contact page:

I really liked your youtube video featuring the audio of the Oklahoma state legislator making the homophobic comments. (Well, I was appalled by it. But I like that you’re helping to publicize it.)

I’m trying to figure out why you would fail to identify the person making the remarks. It seems to me that if posting the audio is justified, then identifying the person speaking is also justified. I mean, she’s a politician, and should be held accountable for her remarks. If identifying the person speaking is not justified, then posting the audio isn’t justified, either. I mean, it’s trivially easy for someone who is active in Oklahoma state politics to identify her based on the recording, so you’re not actually protecting her identity in any meaningful way, right?

The best I can come up with for a rationale is this: Something about the recording itself might have been illegal, or unethical. The video indicates that she was recorded without her knowledge. Maybe that’s actually a violation of Oklahoma law? Or maybe the editing of the audio omits remarks by others questioning her that would cast the people making the recording in a less-than-flattering light?

If that’s the case, then I can see a rationale for leaving her unidentified in the video. By not identifying her, you avoid the side issue that would be raised if she were to challenge the authenticity, completeness, or legality of the recording. In the meantime, you still get the benefit of shocking people with what she said (which probably translates into fundraising, or at least awareness-raising, for your organization). If she’s not identified, then she would have to “out” herself (so to speak) to raise an objection to the recording, which she might be unwilling to do.

But here’s the thing: If that’s the explanation, it strikes me as a shady ethical approach for your organization to take. I come back to the same position I felt when I first heard the audio: It’s shocking, and it makes me want her identity to be known so she’ll pay whatever price her constituents think is appropriate. Not identifying her may make some sort of tactical sense in terms of the rough-and-tumble of politics, but for me, it doesn’t pass the smell test. I’d be more inclined to support your organization if I believed that you were being scrupulously ethical in your actions.

She sounds like a homophobe, and a hate-monger. But she’s also a human being. She deserves to be exposed for having made those comments. But she also deserves an opportunity to give her side of the story, to the extent she wants to give one.

If you’re concealing her identity in order to prevent your audience from knowing the full story behind the recording, I’m not sure that’s ethically cool. It’s a pretty minor ethical lapse compared to denigrating and discriminating against a whole class of people based on their sexual orientation, granted. But it’s still uncool.

I wish you would be more cool.

John Callender
jbc@lies.com

Update: Apparently the Oklahoma state legislator whose voice is heard in the recording is Sally Kern. GayPolitics.com, which appears to be operated by the same people as the Victory Fund, posted the following comment yesterday:

One of the primary questions people have had after hearing her hateful speech was why no one ever mentioned her name. If the audio was worthy of being publicized, why not single out the person responsible?

There are a couple reasons.

First, we don’t want to make her a hero in anti-gay circles. Running a name and a picture would merely serve as a feather in her cap.

Also, while this speech is remarkable in its statements, it’s not unique. For every bit of hateful rhetoric we hear, scores of other anti-gay statements go unchallenged.

It is not our intention to make this individual the target of animosity and hostility. It is, however, our intention to let her know that we heard what she said, we do not approve and that we support public officials who recognize people in the LGBT community as equal, ordinary citizens.

I appreciate their providing the explanation, and I don’t doubt that that was the intention behind not mentioning her name. At the same time, I think their logic was muddled. By publishing the clip, they guaranteed that she would be identified and would receive the responses (both pro and anti) that they say it was not their intention to promote. This is a fish-or-cut-bait kind of situation. They can’t have it both ways. If they didn’t want to publicize her actions, then the appropriate course of action was… not to publicize her actions. If they were willing to publicize her actions, then I don’t think they’re really carving out any sort of moral high ground by letting others take the predictable next step of tracking down and sharing her identity.

86 Responses to “Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund’s ‘We’re Listening’ Video”

  1. knarlyknight Says:

    Good post jbc, I agree 100% with all your comments.

    It’s amazing to me how paranoid some people become, what does Sally Kern fear so much and why? It is clear that she is too scared of the subject to become knowledgable about it.

    GLB sexuality has been a part of every civilization since the dawn of time, it is a human condition; in essence Sally and those like her fear their own humanity. That fear is a deep seated psychological problem.

    Perhaps there should be a screening for paranoid psychotics to prevent them from running for public office – naaah, that would be a paranoid reaction.

    What surprises me the most is that it sounded like no-one in the audience was laughing at her, or heckling her for being such an idiot. In my City if anyone made comments like that they’d be laughed at and booed right out of the event. Such rigid social controls as a mob robbing someones right to speach goes too far, but it is better than enduring uninterupted fearsome hate drivel. Best would be the middle ground where heckling with Truth showed the speaker that there is broad and strong opposition to her stupidity.

  2. leftbehind Says:

    This is an interesting piece, but I have a really hard time figuring your angle on this, or why you’re even bringing it up. Not so long ago, when I attacked Enkidu for misspelling “moron” you were the first to rush to his defense. Around the same time, Knarlyknight advanced a theory, or your blog, that the World Trade Center’s destruction might have been masterminded by a cadre of homosexuals operating out of Bohemian Grove and accused me, again on your blog, of being a pervert to hangs out in airport bathrooms and a child molester when he found out I’m gay. I don’t recall you rising to my defense at the time, or the defense of the gay community, or even making any statement of discomfort at your blog, and, by extention, your name being used to prop up somebody else’s anti-gay sentiments. Forgive me, but I find it hard to believe that homophobia is a big issue with you. Now, if Ms. Kern had attacked somebody’s snarky spelling, I’m sure you’d be the first to express the appropriate outrage. I don’t, however, see you wasting the same amount of emotion on simple homophobia.

  3. leftbehind Says:

    This from the guy who called me a “Republican Hipocrite Fag” at 12:57, August 29th on this very blog (“Huffington on the Media at Dead Miners”)

  4. leftbehind Says:

    For clarity – my first post is directed to JBC. The second is directed towards Knarlyknight.

  5. enkidu Says:

    as usual lefty, you are way way way out in right right right field

    jbc didn’t ‘rush to my defense’
    he correctly informed you that I was using an intentional play on the word moron made famous by that rwnj who stood on the corner with his sign saying “Get a brain! morans” and his other sign “go USA”

    You never took me up on my wager to prove that I had intentionally used the word “moran” for comedic/satirical effect. Try google.

    moran

  6. leftbehind Says:

    I don’t know if anyone has told you this, but you don’t need to sign your postings at the bottom. The headline above the date tells everybody who you are before they rerad the post.

    Lefty

  7. leftbehind Says:

    That’s “read the post” of course – I was going for “comedy/satirical effect,” just like Knarly was when he called me a “Republican hipocrite Fag.”

  8. leftbehind Says:

    And while we’re on the subject of spelling, what does the “Moran” picture prove, anyway? That genocidal Republicans can’t spell? You’ve told us your own father is a genocidal Republican – how do we know it’s not him in the picture? How do we know you didn’t help him paint his sign? Knarly’s not the only one who can connect the dots around here. Are there really two guys who can’t spell moron correctly, or is something more sinister afoot?

    Also, as I’ve asked before to no avail, what does all this “moron” business really have to say about your ability as either an author, or as a commentator on the political scene? Say you really didn’t make “moran” up yourself – are you suddenly John Kenneth Galbraith (you’ll need to google that one) because you can ape somebody else’s misspelling? David Johanson spelled love L-U-V on a record. Am I Johnny Thunders all of the sudden if I spell love L-U-V on this blog? Can any of the millions of people who’ve never heard that record be blamed for thinking I’m an idiot for spelling love L-U-V should they encounter it on this blog? Can any of us who had never seen the “moran” picture before JBC brought it up be blamed for thinking you’re not the brightest bulb in the Lite Bright , what with your seeming inability to spell the word “moron” correctly, coupled with all this weird shit you write about genocidal Republicans and bizarre accusations concerning Chinese people and tanks? You once accused me of running over a Chinese guy in a tank. Am I the only one this gives pause? Isn’t that just a teeny bit much? And what about that tangent you went off on about me (or maybe it was TeacherVet) wanting to make lampshades out of JBC’s skin? Whether or not you can spell “moron” correctly is probably the least of your problems…

    If anyone has any trouble remembering what I’m talking about here, check out the following, tanks and lamps and all:

    lies.com/wp/2006/03/02/zogby-poll-of-us-troops/

  9. enkidu Says:

    sigh – lefty, there would seem to be no hope of a cure for your malady. Despite ignoring the thread’s topic (which you might think a ‘gay’ ‘black’ ‘man’ might comment on… yeah), you natter on about old grudges, tangential bullshit and nit picking details. Getting it all twisted and wrong, time after time after…

    I’ll go slow for you short bus types:

    No, I never said my father was genocidal…
    enjoys him some racist jokes, yes.

    No, I never said you “ran over a Chinese guy in a tank”…
    rather I said quite clearly that I fear many R’s (you specifically) would gladly run down any Libs if placed in the position of the tank driver in the famous Tiananman Square photo. My point was (and is) that there were two heroes that day. The ordinary guy (a damn Lib from the perspective of the Chinese gov) who stood in front of a column of tanks, and the other hero, the tank driver who refused to drive over his countryman. Based on my personal experience, there is a disturbingly large percentage of R’s who would put a ‘gay’ ‘black’ ‘man’ in the frickin gas chamber (see, o I dunno, the thread you are supposedly commenting on?) Or would gladly commit genocide of them damn dirty eye-rakyz, or them eye-rainians. Or would gladly drive right over pesky Libs/Dems/Progressive (with glee no doubt). For reference, see basically anything Ann Coulter or Rush Dimbulb or anything from rwnj hate radio. Or google the hate boat: the National Review’s cruise that a british reporter went on. Frighteningly psychopathic.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/ship-of-fools-johann-hari-sets-sail-with-americas-swashbuckling-neocons-457074.html

    No, I never said you wanted to make lampshades from someone’s skin (maybe that is the voice in your head?) Funny, i just read your link and the whole lampshades thing is me quoting a rwnj by the name of SGT. MARINE. here is rwnj sgt marine in his own words

    “SGT. MARINE Says:
    July 21st, 2004 at 9:18 pm

    Dear Fucken-Idiot JBC….You are another moron in this great nation.
    I would like to see Your mother, and the rest of Your family get gang-raped like a bunch of bitches. Then cut up to pieces and left to dry out so we Marines can have some fucken jerky from scumbags like You and maybe some book-covers and lamp-shades from Your skins =) Also for You we would have a special moment…..chopping You to little pieces and leaving Your on the street for those ragheads to ponder upon =)”

    That is a quote.
    A quote from someone else than me. Get it?

    Here is a quote from me that same day “Too bad so many people seem to prefer the thinking of SGT MARINE rather than the thinking of Washington, Paine, Jefferson, Lincoln, King and Carter.”

    To sum up: a moran is a rwnj who stands on a street corner to upbraid non-rwnjs, yet said rwnj can’t even spell the word “moron” correctly. Moran. It’s a joke, son, and you are it.

  10. knarlyknight Says:

    I got another dog two weeks ago – a Great Pyranees, 2 years old, from the SPCA, an amazing animal – and he is a playful big stupid dufus who adores me only a little more than I adore him. We had a great time at the beach today with my two other dogs (11 yr old and 3 yr old border collies), but in the car on the way home he puked what looked like shit all over the backseat of my car, and it smelled like a seal carcass on a midsummer day (i.e. very very bad.) It took me about 4 hours to clean out my car.

    While I was cleaning that mess, nearly vomiting myself, I was looking forward to seeing what intelligent things have been posted, or if shcb had left another slightly insane but tangentally relevant and irritatingly logical albeit totally one-sided statement. Instead, there are bunch of posts from Lefty in obvious psychological agony.

    Lefty, to clarify, I do not think you are a hypocritic republican fag. I think you were typing like a hypocritic republican fag before I wrote “hypocritic republican fag.” That is provinding, of course, that I did in fact write such a thing and I highly doubt that I did because I don’t use the word “fag” as a rule (there are exceptions.) Nevertheless, if I did write that you were a “hypocritic republican fag” then I probably had very good reason to do so. For the record, in general and overall I do not think that you write like a “hypocritic republican fag.”

    Anyway, the point of this post is this:

    Don’t you think that the SILENCE on the part of the audience listening to that hateful drivel from Sally Kern was more insidious and damning than anything that she said??? Isn’t there a responsibility for people to USE THEIR FREEDOM OF SPEECH TO STAND UP AND CONFRONT SUCH LIARS AND HATE MONGERS???

    I guess I’m just so disappointed because I want to hold in my mind a stereotype of Americans being proud independent thinking intelligent people with courage and moral integrity, but more often than not the examples I see are like the audience at Sally Kerns talk (meek mindless sheep) or idiotic angry posts like I’ve witnessed here today.

  11. leftbehind Says:

    Inky – I’ve already commented, very directly and pointedly to the subject of this post, which is more than you have. Maybe if you did not waste your energy posting so much wierd non sequiter shit about tanks and lampshades, you could spend far less of your time trying, again and again, to defend and explain remarks you made months ago. You have added nothing to the conversation at hand – you have simply repeated the same silly shit I’ve been using to make fun of you since last Summer, and provided even more fun for the future (gas chamber for Christ’s sake! What kind of fools do you run around with? They don’t let them fly planes too, do they?) It’s one thing for a person to go off on a momentary tangent on a blog; it’s another thing to make a career out of it.

    I’m really sorry than I impuned your ability to spell “moron” correctly, and that it has obviously ruined the last 8 months of your life. It’s March, 2008, and, from the way you’ve been pouting about this since last August, it’s clear you need closure – for the sake of your family, and for the good of the U.U. Airforce. Look, I spelled “read” wrong in one of my posts. Just make fun of me, and let’s move on. I really don’t want to think that there is some guy flying around in a fighter plane who’s that upset over something I’ve said. What if you were flying over Cosovo or something and you’re still stewing over the “moran” thing – “Fucking Lefty!” – when you suddenly lash out and punch the instrument panel, releasing a missle or something. I really don’t want that on my conscience.

  12. leftbehind Says:

    Knarly – The fact that you used the epithet, “Fag” is a matter of public record. The date has been provided, the archive easily consulted. There’s no wiggle room here

    I’m still unclear on some things in your last post. I won’t doubt that you had a “very good reason” to call me a fag – I am a bit light in the loafers, after all – but could you please explain to the rest of us when, exactly, a liberal-minded person who does not live in a compound somewhere might have “a very good reason” to call a homosexual a fag?

    Careful though – “The Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund is Listening,” even if JBC’s not.

  13. leftbehind Says:

    Knarly – it was August when all of this went down, and there is a good chance I was wearing tassle weejuns with a pair of shorts as I was posting. That’s pretty faggy. Might that be a “very good reason” to call me a fag?

  14. enkidu Says:

    I refuted each one of your crazy points with moderate language (except the quote from sgt psycho, which you tried to pretend was me threatening you or something equally crazy). Too bad you can’t do the same/tone down the crazy.

    lefty mcfrootloop quote: “an interesting piece, but I have a really hard time figuring your angle on this, or why you’re even bringing it up.” This is the sum total of a ‘gay’ ‘black’ ‘man’s comment on a thread about a gay bashing R elected official… no one here believes you are gay, black or a man. Can you find me a youtube of a D official spouting such hateful bs in 2008? I doubt it very much.

    To the thread at hand: gee, why would any gay person (and certainly one of color such as the noble tv and leftymcfrootloop vociferously claim to be) not refute and condemn the hate speech that Oklahoma R Representative Sally Kerns spouted in the youtube jbc posted? Your comment: interesting.

    Here is another enkidu quote from the link you provided lefty:
    “Sorry, but I am not buying into that whole “lets be all whimpy and spineless and keep the gloves on and ignore the vitriol spewing from the right so we can get elected” The right has had the gloves off for a long long while. Stop bringing butter knives to a gun fight folks. Stand up. Call em on the bullshit. Call em on the lies. The corruption. The hate. The greed. The insanity.”

    I renew my offer lefty: if I can show that I used the word “moran” intentionally misspelled for comedic/satyrical effect prior to the original offer of this challenge, you will kindly fuck off and stop wasting the electrons here at lies.com and never post here again. If I can’t, I’ll leave for good. I know I can win this one, but you haven’t the spine or the wit to take me up on this.

  15. leftbehind Says:

    Inky –

    My point on this thread is obvious to anyone who can read, which is probably why you’re having so much trouble with it. JBC understands what I’m saying, that’s why he won’t answer it. You don’t understand it, and that’s why you have.

    I’ll take you up on your stupid “wager” if you will tell me why I would want you to leave this blog. Everybody realizes by now that you’re too big of a pussy to hang with me, so we all know why you want me gone. Why would I want you gone? You’re fun to play with and you’re too damn stupid to know how or why. What better playfriend could I ask for? Do you actually think for a second that I’m not enjoying this? Do you honestly think that you’ve ever gotten to me one iota as much as I’m obviously gotten to you? You come to the table like a bitch, asking for the world and offering nothing. If you’re going to gamble, gamble like a man and offer something interesting. Otherwise, go cry to Mommy and see if she’ll made that bad man go away for you. You’ll have about as much luck with that as you’re having with me.

    Here’s an offer you blew me off on months ago: You deny that you have ever claimed, on this blog, to be a fighter pilot, or any other kind of pilot. If I can prove you have used language, on this blog, that any reasonable person would reasonably interpret to mean that you were claiming to be a pilot, or at least work around government aircraft, will you leave?

    If I can prove that you have made direct reference to your father and/or his friends as “genocidal,” which you deny, will you leave?

    There’s your offer, you won’t take it, so shut up.

    That’s a stirring quote you crib from yourself above. You have to love a man so unrealistically self confident that he will actually quote himself in an argument. “Butterknives to a gunfight…” that’s cute. Inky, wild man of the woods, takes on the entire right wing war machine by talking a bunch of shit on a left wing blog where he thinks everybody’s going to agree with him. You’d never be a match for any real right wing pundit. You can’t even handle me, and I’m just some hack.

    You knew Enkidu was a homosexual icon when you took the name, right?

    “Gilgamesh, king of Uruk (called Ereck in Gen 10:10), is described as “most handsome.” But because he is two-thirds god and one-third human, he distresses the citizens of Uruk with his insatiable sexual appetite and boundless energy. So the gods create a companion for him, named Enkidu, a wild, hairy man with “long tresses like those of a woman.” After a prostitute is sent to tame and train Enkidu, who also is “handsome … just like a god,” he is brought into Uruk, where he meets Gilgamesh. Meanwhile Gilgamesh has had two dreams, one of a falling star and the second of a mighty axe, toward which he feels strangely attracted. His mother explains, “A mighty comrade will come to you … [and] like a wife you’ll love him, caress and embrace him” (Tablet I). When Gilgamesh and Enkidu finally meet, at first they fight furiously, but then they “kissed each other and formed a friendship.” Gilgamesh persuades Enkidu to go with him to subdue the monster Humbaba, who lives in the Cedar Forest; so the king and his companion “took each other by the hand,” first to go have great weapons fashioned (Tablet II) and then to seek the blessing and prayer of Queen Ninsun, Gilgamesh’s mother (Tablet III). After Gilgamesh has a series of bad dreams, Enkidu comforts him, saying, “’Take my hand, friend, and we shall go [on] together…” (Tablet IV).

    Inky –

    My point on this thread is obvious to anyone who can read, which is probably why you’re having so much trouble with it. JBC understands what I’m saying, that’s why he won’t answer it. You don’t understand it, and that’s why you have.

    I’ll take you up on your stupid “wager” if you will tell me why I would want you to leave this blog. Everybody realizes by now that you’re too big of a pussy to hang with me, so we all know why you want me gone. Why would I want you gone? You’re fun to play with and you’re too damn stupid to know how or why. What better playfriend could I ask for? Do you actually think for a second that I’m enjoying this? Do you honestly think that you’ve ever gotten to me one iota as much as I’m obviously gotten to you? You come to the table like a bitch, asking for the world and offering nothing. If you’re going to gamble, gamble like a man and offer something interesting. Otherwise, go cry to Mommy and see if she’ll made that bad go away for you. You’ll have about as much luck with that as you’re having with me.

    Here’s an offer you blew me off on months ago: You deny that you have ever claimed, on this blog, to be a fighter pilot, or any other kind of pilot. If I can prove you have used language, on this blog, that any reasonable person would reasonably interpret to mean that you were claiming to be a pilot, or at least work around government aircraft, will you leave?

    If I can prove that you have made direct reference to your father and/or his friends as “genocidal,” which you deny, will you leave?

    There’s your offer, you won’t take it, so shut up.

    That’s a stirring quote you crib from yourself above. You have to love a man so unrealistically self confident that he will actually quote himself in an argument. “Butterknives to a gunfight…” that’s cute. Inky, wild man of the woods, takes on the entire right wing war machine by talking a bunch of shit on a left wing blog where he thinks everybody’s going to agree with him. You’d never be a match for any real right wing pundit. You can’t even handle me, and I’m just some hack.

    You knew Enkidu was a homosexual icon when you took the name, right?

    “Gilgamesh, king of Uruk (called Ereck in Gen 10:10), is described as “most handsome.” But because he is two-thirds god and one-third human, he distresses the citizens of Uruk with his insatiable sexual appetite and boundless energy. So the gods create a companion for him, named Enkidu, a wild, hairy man with “long tresses like those of a woman.” After a prostitute is sent to tame and train Eniku, who also is “handsome … just like a god,” he is brought into Uruk, where he meets Gilgamesh. Meanwhile Gilgamesh has had two dreams, one of a falling star and the second of a mighty axe, toward which he feels strangely attracted. His mother explains, “A mighty comrade will come to you … [and] like a wife you’ll love him, caress and embrace him” (Tablet I). When Gilgamesh and Enkidu finally meet, at first they fight furiously, but then they “kissed each other and formed a friendship.” Gilgamesh persuades Enkidu to go with him to subdue the monster Humbaba, who lives in the Cedar Forest; so the king and his companion “took each other by the hand,” first to go have great weapons fashioned (Tablet II) and then to seek the blessing and prayer of Queen Ninsun, Gilgamesh’s mother (Tablet III). After Gilgamesh has a series of bad dreams, Enkidu comforts him, saying, “’Take my hand…and we shall go [on] together…” (Tablet IV).

    p://epistle.us/hbarticles/neareast.html

  16. leftbehind Says:

    I’m of course, not including the entire link above, since including links zaps my posting about half the time. The “p” should be “Http” no “www.”

  17. enkidu Says:

    blah blah blah – I stopped reading after the schoolboy epithet of “pussy”

  18. knarlyknight Says:

    “Very good reason” referred primarily to the “hypocritic republican”, but without spending any time researching what was actually said by whom and why (that is really a total waste of time now) I would guess it was in relation to your condoning lewd behaviour in a public washroom (I wouldn’t want to enter it especially with my kids when the republican senator was getting a blowjob) while claiming to hold the high moral ground as a republican. If the term “fag” offends, I apologize, it’s shorthand for homosexual and usually inapproriate but I’ve heard many gays use it too but I , as a rule, avoid the term because I think it has a bad connotation; a bad connotation that might befit someone who condones lewd behaviour in a public restroom.

  19. knarlyknight Says:

    Of course, the republican senator never got as far as his playing footsies suggests in that context he wanted, only for the grace of God’s design that it was a cop’s foot.

  20. leftbehind Says:

    Knarly – I never condoned anyone’s lewd behavior, and I defy you to prove that I did. Why would the term fag “befit someone who condones lewd behavior in a public restroom,” anyway? Is that what you think gay people all do? Or is it just that homosexuality is such an awful thing that it should be equated with public indecency? “For the Grace of God’s design?” Is that it – that homosexuality is against God’s design? And you want to scold me for “claiming to hold the high moral ground?”

    Yes, “fag is shorthand for homosexual,” the same way that nigger is shorthand for black person, and both terms are bigoted and neither are ever appropriate under any circumstances – there’s no “usually” about either of them. Your shill about how you’ve heard “many gays use it too” is the same lame excuse white racists make for using the word “nigger.”

    And who, exactly is the hipocrite here? At the top of this thread, you’re waxing all poetic about how “gays are people, too” and how to be homophobic is to express “fear of one’s own humanity, ” then, at the bottom of the same page, you’re going into a rumination on what circumstances justify your use of the word, “fag.”

  21. leftbehind Says:

    Enky – You stopped reading when I resorted to calling you a “pussy” and I stopped taking you seriously at “kindly fuck off”. I knew the pilot thing would scare you off, it usually does. I kinda wondered about it for a long time – why would you bring your flying experience up out of the blue, then so voceriferously deny you’d said anything about it? Why was it such a sore spot? What were you really trying to avoid?

    Then I read this “Enkidu was Gay” thing while researching for a paper I’m writing and it hit me – Enkidu – the original Enkidu from the poem, was gay…hmm…a pilot…a gay pilot…why would a gay pilot want to hide the fact he was a flyer. Then I remembered that LARRY CRAIG WAS ARRESTED IN AN AIRPORT. He was arrested for soliciting sex from a cop who he thought was another gay man. Quick, what sort of gay man hangs out in an airport bathroom looking for sex? A male prostitute? Maybe. Another Senator? Almost certainly not. What sort of men spend a lot time hanging around airports? Well there’s tourists and there’s….OH, MY GOD – PILOTS?!? What if Larry Craig was in the airport men’s room hooking up with pilots!?! It certainly made sense. He travels a lot, as a senator, pilots travel a lot as, well, pilots. He could carry on a relationship for years with a pilot, flying around the country, synchronizing schedules for cheap quickies in mens’ rooms, after which both could fly home, warm in the afterglow. And what sort of pilot might Craig be looking for? Perhaps a pilot as “beautiful as a God,” with “hair like a woman’s” who he could “take to himself as he would a wife. Someone like…OH MY GOD!!! I felt like KnarlyKnight when he discovered Alex Jones had discovered that the owner of Tower 7 was jewish.

    Don’t worry though…you’re secret’s safe with me. With biblethumpers like Knarly around, we sisters have to stick together.

  22. enkidu Says:

    hey lefty, did you just agree to my wager?
    you know: if enkidu used the term “moran” correctly prior to 8/30/07?
    Or that I iz too stoopid to spell moron correctly? If the the former, you never post at lies.com again (ever) or if I truly didn’t use the intentional misspelling to satyric/comedic effect, then I’ll never post here again.

    will you agree to this wager?
    I still say you lack the spine or the wit to make the wager and to live up to it.

  23. leftbehind Says:

    But my wagers are so much more fun. I’m sure a lot more bloggers around here would be a lot more interested in whether or not you’re a cool airforce pilot than whether or not you can spell your name correctly.

    Besides, I don’t think you understand what a lose/lose situation your own “wager” is. If you lose, you’re some dumbass who can’t spell “moron” correctly. If you win, you’re a grown man who has spent the last 8 months of his life crying like a big girl because someone he doesn’t even know impuned his spelling on a web blog. Did you say you had children, or that you are a child?

    In any case, I’ll never agree to your wager because you want me to too badly. Besides, why should I? So you’ll applaud me on my “spine and wit?” That would be like Yul Brenner complimenting me for having thicker hair than he did. Because everyone else around Lies.com ccould finally put the burning question of whether or not you can spell “moron” correctly? I doubt anybody but you gives a shit.

    The real issue here isn’t the word “moron” or your spelling, or my politics or any of that. It’s a simple matter of you getting your feelings hurt and wishing I would go away. The question’s not whether or not you can spell moron. it’s how badly you want me to leave. What are you willing to do to get rid of me? what sort of deal are you willing to make with me for me to go bye-bye? I’ll draw up a prince of a”wager” with you, but it better be good and I better get the best of it when it’s over. I’m more than willing to leave Lies.com forever, but I would like to see how far you are willing to publicly debase yourself to get rid of me. Unless you’re willing to crawl in the mudd to see me gone, don’t even bother.

  24. leftbehind Says:

    P.S. Don’t be so cross with me. I was just kidding about the Larry Craig thing…wasn’t I?

  25. knarlyknight Says:

    Enk, is Lefty a 13 year old punk or just a rabid idiot?

    Lefty, If someone played footsy with me in a public restroom I’d have a big problem with that.

    Your questions make it clear you are having problems with simple concepts and are trying to make mountains out of molehills. Let me put this in simple terms for you.

    Your wrongdoing was being a “hypocritical republican”, as it related to your ridiculous defence of Sen. Larry “I have a wide stance” Craig’s lewd behaviour in a public place. If memory serves, you were defending his right to have homosexual sex in a public washroom, and that’s what earned you the label “fag” in this instance, as it helped to describe the aspect of “hypocritical republican” that was at issue. Had you been defending his right to have homosexual sex with another consenting ADULT (unlike many hypocritical republicans we hear about) in a private place i.e. hotel room, his house, etc. I would have witheld the term fag. I am sure if I used that term then you more than earned it by what you wrote in relation to the discussion about Sen. Larry “I was just reaching into his stall to pick something up” Craig.

  26. knarlyknight Says:

    As for the God’s design thing, that was just another poke at republican bible thumper’s moral hypocrisy.

  27. leftbehind Says:

    I never defended Larry Craig. I simply stated, back in August, that I thought his arrest should not be an excuse for broad homophobia. If you’ll recall, which I can tell by everything you’ve typed today that you can’t, we weren’t even discussing Larry Craig when you called me a fag. We were supposed to be debating media coverage of a mine rescue. Had Inky not interjected gay sex into the conversation (and isn’t gay sex just the first thing that comes to everyone’s mind when they think “mine rescue) it would have never entered the thread.

    It’s so good to know that you never call anyone a fag unless they “earn the title.” It’s very important to know when the time has come to call a “fag” a “fag,” after all. But I can’t help but wonder: wouldn’t it take a lot of the guess work out of it if you just never called anyone a “fag” in the first place? Just a thought, but unlike yourself and Sally Kern, I haven’t burdened myself with the hard task of keeping the world’s moral compass pointed in the right direction, have I? Ah, the Grace of God’s design…

  28. leftbehind Says:

    All kidding aside though, it is good that you’re willing to draw the distinction between “homosexuals” and “fags.” It does society the same service as those disadvantaged whites who are ever trying to explain the important distinction between ” black people” and “niggers” to an uncomprehending world. Keep up the nice work.

  29. leftbehind Says:

    I sure hope the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund really is listening. They could learn a lot around here.

  30. knarlyknight Says:

    Lefty,

    It is nice to see you have calmed down and regained your sense of humour. I did not read much of your prior posts today because they were just too angry, long and boring.

    Now that you’ve calmed down a little it seems like an appropriate time to introduce you to the Art Fag, a person who seems to take this title very seriously.

    The Art Fag has written lot of interesting articles about shows in Vancouver. Being a “fag” in Vancouver has about as much of a negative connotation as having brown hair. I live near Vancouver, and have become accustomed to the general acceptance of the term compared to its earlier, primarily pejoritive, use.

    Nevertheless I realize that in many or most other places it is not a term that is accepted or shrugged off so easily, therefore as a rule I do not use it.

    Perhaps you can write to the Art Fag and provide an education as you obviously are infinitely more knowledgeable about politically correct way to label ones-self. Perhaps you’ll be as outraged at this blatant and continued use of such a bad label, in a magazine no less, as you were when I tacked it on to “hypocritic republican” in describing your actions. . . (Outrage: that is the “wide” republican stance on such issues, no?)

    http://onlymagazine.ca/Art/art-fag022208

    I know it is all so confusing for you Lefty, perhaps this discussion about Grade one homework on name calling and feelings might also help:

    “Should the word ‘fag’ be in a grade one student’s homework?”
    http://www.citynews.ca/blogs/familymatters_18794.aspx

  31. knarlyknight Says:

    Hey, Ann Coulter called Gore a “Total Fag” and called Clinton gay too.

    http://mediamatters.org/items/200607280001

    She didn’t even tie it to anything relevant, she was just throwing about fag insults because she is a republican.

    Is it okay in Lefty’s mind to call someone a fag if you are a republican calling a democrat a fag?

    Seems like Ann Coulter needs some Grade one homework (see my previous post.)

  32. leftbehind Says:

    Don’t throw Ann Coulter up to me, Knarly – you’re the one trying to justify your own lack of couth with her’s, not me. Just because Ann Coulter is an insufferable asshole doesn’t mean you have to be, too. Elvis Costello once called Ray Charles a “jive ass nigger,” does that make it okay for the rest of us to so? I’ve already made my blanket statement regarding when it is acceptable to call someone a “fag” – it simply isn’t.

    Maybe you and Art Fag should pay a visit to jiggaboojones.com. Jones bills himself as the “number one name in the world of niggers.”

    Says Jones:

    “I am Jigaboo Jones commonly called Jigaboo (Mother Fucking) Jones.
    Better known to some as That Black Mother Fucker Taking Your Shit. I have been jacked up, jacked, shot at, shot up and shot down.”

    “I have been a Dealer, Gambler, Jackker, Con-Artist and a Fool. Mostly today I am just a gambler and a Fool. I don’t Rap and I am not on Crack (I get those questions asked a lot). Yes, it is true I used to also do hair. I can still do hair too, but I ain’t Gay or no shit it is just that When I was growing up Niggers (Niggas) in the Hood used to spend hundreds of Dollars getting their Jerry Curls Hooked up and I wanted in on the action. You can laugh but I scored thousands of dollars and was in a legit enough job to clear my fucking Parole.”

    Now there’s a man that certainly knows how to label himself. I’m sure that in his community, “nigger” and “jiggaboo” have even less of a negative connotation than does “brown hair.” Does that liberate either of these terms for the rest of us? Are you going to walk up to some black guy and say, “Hey, how’s it going, Nigger?” Then cite Jiggaboo Jones when the guy gets mad?

    I really don’t understand why you and Ann Coulter have so much trouble understanding this. Didn’t your mothers teach you this kind of thing when you were five?

    This is really a new low. In all my years of blogging, I could have never imagined that I would find myself, in 2008, on an ostensibly liberal blog, debating with a grown man (?) on whether or not it’s okay to call somebody a fag.

    I really shouldn’t be surprised. Anyone can just google “Alex Jones Homosexual” and see where Knarly gets this shit.

  33. leftbehind Says:

    Knarly – I seem to remember you educating us back in August about the gay Illuminati at Bohemian Grove. Could you go over that for us again. It might help clarify this whole “fag” issue.

  34. enkidu Says:

    blah blah blah lefty
    a simple yes – you agree to my wager
    or a simple no – you don’t agree to the wager and are a spineless nit wit
    a single syllable… you can do it!
    focus!
    I bet you’ll just fly off on a multi post rant about, oh hell, just about anything.
    Funny how a wise old gay black man has nothing substantial to say about an elected Oklahoma R spewing the nastiest of anti-gay hatespeech. Nice Macaca Moment.

    btw – knarly, I wouldn’t bother, lefty uses gay hating pejoratives and grade school play yard epithets way more than you do (but he’s supposed to be a ‘wise old gay black man’… right…) Look lefty, when you grow up and lose maybe 100… 120 lbs, join up and put your money where your foul mouth is. Oh right, the military hates teh gay too.

  35. enkidu Says:

    btw – the thread start story just showed up on CNN

    sounds like the Rs won’t be able to sweep this under the rug
    or hide it in the closet
    or flush it down the men’s restroom at the airport
    or throw it in the trash can at a rural rest stop

    you know, where the Rs hang out

  36. jbc Says:

    Side point: If I didn’t respond to some earlier comment that betrayed anti-gay views, it should not be taken to mean I support gay bashing. There are lots and lots of comments posted to lies.com (mostly by the same handful of users, as I’m sure you know). I’m happy that people are finding the site’s comment feature useful, but for the most part I don’t pay much attention to what they’re saying.

    For the most part, the only active moderation I do concerns the moderation queue, where comments get held for review before they become publicly visible under the following circumstances:

    1) The user posting the comment has not had a previous comment approved by a moderator, or

    2) The comment contains 2 or more hyperlinks.

    Most of the comments that end up in the queue are spam, so I delete those. A few of them are what I consider to be legitimate comments (i.e., they seem to have been written by an actual human being who actually read the article in question and wanted to leave a comment on it). For those, I almost always approve them, regardless of content.

    The only cases I can remember of my _not_ approving a real comment involved really blatant pornographic stuff, or hate speech that rose to a level of disgustingness that I just couldn’t craft _any_ rationale for airing it on the site. On that latter point, I’m not talking about stuff I merely disagree with, but stuff where I feel that posting the comment could actually lead to direct harm, and where I can’t imagine any legitimate free speech right that would be curtailed by deleting it. And I have a very, very high bar for that; like I said, I don’t think I’ve censored non-spam comments on the site more than 4 or 5 times during all the years I’ve operated it.

    I thought it was interesting when ymatt recently tried to do some more-active content-based regulation of comments on some of the articles he’d posted. He asked me my views on that before he did it, and while I didn’t stop him, neither did I encourage him, and on some level I was relieved when he ended up deciding it was more trouble than it was worth, and stopped doing it. But that was his deal.

    Returning to my main point, though, the fact is that I actually don’t read the large majority of comments written by the site’s regular users. I don’t begrudge you guys the disk space the comments use; if you get something out of posting them, you have my blessing, but you shouldn’t assume that I’m actively following the discussion. Because for the most part I’m not. Once in a while I notice someone saying something that I either agree or disagree with, and once in a very, very great while I might feel like jumping in and commenting myself.

    There are some users who, over the years, I’ve asked to consider posting their own articles to the site, and granted “authoring” privileges to, in case they’re willing to do so, and when those people post items I definitely pay attention, and comment when I have something to say. But in terms of the comments themselves, those discussions take place almost entirely below my personal radar.

    That’s not meant as a criticism. I just don’t have the time.

  37. leftbehind Says:

    Point taken, and I understand that you cannot take an active role in every thread – the site is too big. You have read this thread, however, and you know what’s going down. What do you think?

  38. knarlyknight Says:

    LOL

    Lefty, it’s amazing how low your reading comprehension is these days (most days actually). To repeat, JBC basically said:

    He does not have the time to read our posts, much less respond to inane pleas for self-confirmation as in your question “What do you think?”

    The other amazing thing is how incredibly wrong you are in your accusations. If you look back through the records, you’ll find that you referenced Alex Jones Bohemian Grove sites many, many times, and I doubt I even referenced it once except perhaps in reply to you. What I do recall referencing was Wikipedia’s faggy quote by Richard M. Nixon talking about Bohemian Grove, which is worth repeating given your fixation on damning people who might dare to utter the “F” word:

    “The Bohemian Grove, that I attend from time to time — the (inaudible) and the others come there — but it is the most faggy goddamn thing that you would ever imagine. The San Francisco crowd that goes in there, it’s just terrible. I can’t even shake hands with anybody from San Francisco.” — President Richard M. Nixon

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohemian_Grove

  39. leftbehind Says:

    Think about it, dickwadd – if he wasn’t reading this particular thread, he couldn’t have commented on it, could he? Jesus Christ…I feel like I’m spoonfeeding an infant sometimes. No wonder Alex Jones stopped returning your e mails.

  40. enkidu Says:

    “dickwadd”
    ahhhh you can smell the civility!
    misspelled as well… angrily mashing the keyboard like that increases the potential for repetitive stress injuries

    your rwnj score: 87%
    try harder!

  41. leftbehind Says:

    I can smell something ,but I don’t think it’s civility.

    How in the world could I spell “Dickwadd” wrong, you dickwadd – it isn’t even a proper word. Until Webster’s puts it in the dictionary, I’ll spell it any way I please to. I’ll bet moron’s in the dictionary. though…as in M-O-R-O-N.

    What gave me away was a rwnj? Was it that time, recently, when I flew of the handle and called Hillary Clinton a “team killing fucktard” – no wait, that was Matt…seriously though, I would take this rwnj business a lot more to heart if you showed any indication of knowing what a rwnj was, outside of a label to put on anything you don’t like. To my mind, a right wing nut job might be, for instance, a homophobe (Knarly) who hurls politically incorrect epithets at people (Knarly,) uses Ann Coulter as a yardstick by which to judge his own behavior (Knarly) and gets the bulk of his information from internet sites (Infowars.com) run by Libertarian wierdos (Alex Jones) with bizarre conspiracy theories (911 “Truth”) regarding how liberals (homosexual “activists” in the public schools, the Illuminati) are trying to circumvent democracy and set up a world empire.

    I’m not sure how you’re non-counting, white behind is keeping score, but my tally shows, as of this post, Lefty 22, Sad Bitches 0

  42. enkidu Says:

    now I see why you spell it Dick Wadd
    he’s a gay porn performer (must be a fav of yours, loser)
    wtf is “bareback pig video”?
    sounds about right for you

    (the urban dictionary states that “dickwad” is the correct spelling btw)

    so are you going to take me up on my wager or fold like a “Dick Wadd”?

  43. leftbehind Says:

    Why in the world were YOU googling Dick Wadd? A little (bi) curious, are we? Checking out a little online AC to charge up your DC? I always figured that the only thing vanilla about you was your creamy white skin! It’s funny how a supposed joke like all that “Larry Craig’s fucking a pilot” stuff starts to bring out all sorts of latent truths.

    Bareback Pig fucking is, essentially a literal version of what I do to you and your faulty prose on a metaphorical basis around here. Obviously, if you’re checking out Dick Wadd’s site, metaphoric pig fucking isn’t scratching your itch the way it used to. I needn’t win any wagers to get rid of you – it won’t be a month or two until Dick Wadd’s magic flute has lured you away and you won’t even remember all your friends at Lies.com.

    …and the Urban Dictionary can do to me what I’ll bet you’re dying to do to Dick Wadd.

  44. leftbehind Says:

    Lefty 23 Sad Bitches 0

  45. leftbehind Says:

    So, Inky – now that we know you’ve seen both, who’s hotter? Dick Wadd or Jeff Gannon?

  46. knarlyknight Says:

    A dose of reality for you Lefty: JBC did not respond to your pathetic question. I’m not going to waste any more time on you either, you are pathetic.

  47. leftbehind Says:

    At least you know when you’re beaten, Knarly, and that’s a big step for you

    …and as far as JBC goes, his silence speaks volumes. My initial question was simple: “why express such concern over homophobic remarks made all the way off in Oklahoma when you don’t seem to mind such remarks on your own blog?” His answer was that he doesn’t have time to read the blog and didn’t know such remarks are being made. Fine, but the fact remains that he had to have read this particular thread to realize that I had asked him that question, or he could not have responded to it. If he read this thread, he also has read your lengthy, defense of the word “fag” and was, evidently, not bothered by it. He realizes you called me a “fag,” and doesn’t care. In an instance in another state where, realistically, there’s no active role he can play, he is concerned with homophobic statements. Here, on his own blog, where he could put a stop to such statements, or at least express dismay at them, or seek to correct them in some way, he doesn’t care. Sally Kern is a small-minded, bigoted individual, just like you are.The only difference between the two of you is that Sally Kern is a Republican politician and you are not – that’s a very important distinction for JBC. While he’s busy looking for the little red “R” the same kind of homophobes he claims to dislike so much are right here in his midst and he purposely looks the other way. I’m sure if he were able to meet Sally Kern he’d really give her a piece of his mind. He’d have a lot to say, I’m certain. If he actually meant any of it, he’d say it to you, too.

    I guess I’m done, as well.

    When Inky gets back from DickWadd.com, tell him I said good night, and that he shouldn’t be afraid of his own humanity.

  48. enkidu Says:

    23 to 0?
    with your bizarre penchant for quoting family circus, I am surprised it isn’t a bajillion to none

    lower than pathetic (I am guessing syphilitic)

  49. knarlyknight Says:

    Good guess Enk, that probably applies too. Pathetic, syphilitic and a severe persecution complex.

  50. knarlyknight Says:

    for the record, I did not call Lefty a “fag”. I called him a “hypocritic republican fag”. I probably should have called him a “hypocritic republican person”, but that didn’t have quite the ring to it given his then-current defenses of Senator Larry Craig’s escapades in a public washroom that was notorious for lewd behaviours. Not that anyone cares about what I called Lefty.. In fact I’d wager to guess that Lefty is the only one who cares, I only care becuz Lefty has such a nasty way of mischaracterizing that sometimes it begs for the record to be put corrected.

  51. leftbehind Says:

    “For the record, I did not call Lefty a ‘fag,’ I called him a ‘fag.” ??? That’s quite a defense there, Champ. I’m stunned.

    You keep saying that I defended Larry Craig at some point. Can you produce a date and a quote to support this assertion just to keep the record “put corrected?” If you can’t prove that I defended Larry Craig’s behavior with a dated, exact quote we can all reference, you shouldn’t say that I did, no matter how fast the plane was going when the steel melted, okay?

  52. leftbehind Says:

    I’ll even give you a lead: the thread in question is “Huffington on the Media on Dead Mine Rescuers” from Saturday, August 18th, 2007. That’s when you called me a fag (sorry – you didn’t call me a “fag”, just a “fag.”) For you to have been attacking a defense I had made of Larry Craig, I would have had to have made that defense on that thread. Supply the exact quote and the time of day it occured on August 18th, 2007 and I will voluntarily leave this blog for the period of one month (until August, 11.) I’ll make it even easier on you – you called me fag at 12:57 AM, so I had to have made my defense of Larry Craig some time prior to that.

    I’ll even cut you some slack. If you can’t find the quote, I won’t even make you admit you can’t find it. You can just go on about your business. But be advised that if you ever make an unfounded assertion that I defended Larry Craig, which I did not, on this blog again I will ride you more consistantly, viciously and more maliciously than I ever have in the past. And I know what other blogs you visit regularly, and I can start visiting them, too. You think I’m a jackass now, you haven’t seen anything yet. Find that quote and you’re rid of me for a solid month, and I’ll go out of my way to avoid you after that. Don’t find the quote and drop the subject, we’re cool. Don’t find the quote and keep making false accusations, and I’ll stay on you like Illuminati symbolism on on a Starbucks cup. Like pizza stains on Alex Jones’ polo shirt. Like Inky’s eyes on Dick Wadd’s tan, toned, pulsating buttocks.

    You’re forgetting – this isn’t all that psuedo scientific 911 Truth crap you and those other morons at 911blogger waste your time with. There is no “well maybe this happened” or “this could have possibly occured this way.” Either I defended Larry Craig on that thread, or I didn’t. You’re either going to prove that I did or you’re going to drop the subject. Otherwise, I’ve decided to replace Inky with you as the special object of my respect and affection.

  53. knarlyknight Says:

    Lefty’s threats to “ride you more consistently, viciously and more malicously” are lame because (a) I’m not afraid of what Lefty writes and (b) Lefty does not know if, or where else I post or if I do post elsewhere because Lefty is clueless about if or what pseudonym I might use.

    Lefty’s offer did tempt me to review the “Huffington on Dead Miners…” thread at 12:57 and the first thing noticed was that I did not call Lefty a “fag” there, rather I posed the combined question about Lefty’s hypocrisy and his declaring his sexuality only on this blog (and thus presumably not in real life), thusly: “does that mean he is a closet Republican hypocrite fag?”

    There was no answer from anyone, neither to affirm nor deny. Is one to take Lefty’s silence as acceptance? Who knows. Who cares.

    It seems the matter was forgotten, except to Lefty who evidently left the question to sit and fester inside for six and a half months, before he chose to raise it again just recently.

    I’m not one to criticize another for bad timing, as I’ve often been a victim of my own bad timing. I just wish that Lefty or someone else had posted something on August 29 or August 30 to the effect that: “No, it does not mean Lefty is a closet Republican hypocritic fag because (insert specious rationale’s here).” Allowing such a thing to fester for six and a half months is not healthy; as we can see in Lefty’s posts.

    In the six and a half months this item has grown to such gargantuan proportions inside Lefty’s brain that he is now threatening to stalk me around the internet with his particularly juvenile and rude brand of malicious “riding”. Whatever.

    The second thing I noticed was that I posted two posts at 12:57. The first post set out my position most concisely. It shows my observation that Lefty’s earlier Larry Craig comments were about Larry’s homosexuality (i.e. an unnecessary strangely out of place defence of homosexuality since no-one on this blog was attacking homosexuality, they were attacking Larry’s hypocrisy) and Leftbehind seemed to have entirely missed the point that the whole issue was Larry Craig’s behaviour in a public place.

    The post bears repeating as I asserted that Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms are an improved version of your Bill of Rights because ours upholds the rights of sexual preference:

    knarlyknight Says:
    August 29th, 2007 at 12:57 am
    Both enkidu and leftbehind are acting like juvenile idiots (except of course that leftbehind isn’t acting); what is truly disturbing is that it is clear from leftbehind’s comments that he thinks that the excerpt about Sen Larry Craig is solely about homosexuality and completely misses the fact that the arrest was for lewd conduct in a public place.
    Not sure if this applies to America, but in Canada homosexuality is upheld by our Charter of Rights and Freedoms (just think of it as an updated and improved version of your Bill of Rights) and lewd behaviour in a public place is a crime.

    So I was making it pretty clear, as in the previous example and others in that thread, and in the actual Larry Craig related threads, that the behaviour was the problem because it was sex being done in a public place thus was lewd and therefore unlawful. Compounding the “problem” was the hypocrisy of closet homosexual republicans who damn homosexuality as a mortal sin (which it isn’t.) That hypocrisy is wrong because it is unnecessary, cowardly, and a deep betrayal not only of others but also of oneself.

    So did Lefty or did he not defend Senator Larry Craig’s lewd public behaviour?

    Lefty’s defence of the Senator was not made in a simple sentence, or even a few sentences in one post, it was more insidious than that. Lefty’s defence of the Senator was a consistent strategy of misdirection through red herring attacks to discredit Enkidu’s points about republicans being hypocrites for damning gays using the damning senator Craig as the most recent prime example. Let’s look at the exchange prior to my question (that now has Lefty so upset):

    1. enkidu Says:
    August 27th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
    you start off with I’m an “asshole” and “shitty” then bemoan the tone?
    oooookkkaaaaaayyyyy
    Whatever you say Senator…
    “Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was arrested in June at a Minnesota airport by a plainclothes police officer investigating lewd conduct complaints in a men’s public restroom, according to an arrest report obtained by Roll Call Monday afternoon.
    Craig’s arrest occurred just after noon on June 11 at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. On Aug. 8, he pleaded guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct in the Hennepin County District Court. He paid more than $500 in fines and fees, and a 10-day jail sentence was stayed. He also was given one year of probation with the court that began on Aug. 8.” Are ALL Rethuggles™®© closet gay hypocrits?

    leftbehind Says:
    August 27th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
    C’mon, Inky-doo-doo, even you can come up with better than Ted Nugent – he’s an easy mark. Even I called him out as a jackass years ago, on this blog, back when JBC posted about Steve Earle and “John Walker’s Blues.” Your post says a lot more about you being a pussy and going after obvious targets that it has any bearing on anything I’ve posted on this thread.

    leftbehind Says:
    August 27th, 2007 at 2:25 pm
    I only use “asshole” because I believe in using clinical terms.
    I’ve already declared myself openly gay on this blog a long time ago – do you have a problem with that, you social conservative bastard? Just because Jerry Falwell’s dead you think you can take his place? I’m black, too – you got a problem with that?
    Are all Liberals homophobic cheesedicks, or just you?

    A quick aside for scorekeeping:

    Enkidu: asks if “ALL Rethuggles™®© closet gay hypocrits?”

    Leftbehind: calls Enkidu a pussy, asshole, social conservative bastard, and asks if “all liberals are homophobic cheesedicks”

    So far, Enkidu seems to be the sane one.

    Let’s carry on:

    leftbehind Says:
    August 27th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
    What’s the matter, Anita Bryant? Cat got your tongue?

    leftbehind Says:
    August 27th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
    Why don’t you climb down out of the Florida Sunshine Tree and say something?

    shcb Says:
    August 27th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
    Maybe the Iraqi’s (blah blah blah …. )

    leftbehind Says:
    August 27th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
    I think he had to go to a Promise Keepers meeting, or something.

    leftbehind Says:
    August 27th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
    See. I wouldn’t ordinarily get so mad about this, but’s just the principle of the thing. I mean here’s a guy who goes on and on about what a Liberal he is, and how right wingers are so full of hate, yet every time he wants to really insult the Republican Party, or whoever he figures to be his adversary at the moment, he throws up some example of a homosexual Republican – as if there is something immoral, insulting or comical about the very nature of homosexuality. “Not only is Larry Craig one of those stupid rethuglicans, but he’s also a QUEER!!!” This began around the time I mentioned, in one of my posts, that I am a gay man, and there are numerous examples of it on this blog.

    See. Right there above. A Red Herring / Straw Man Defence of Senator Larry Craig.

    Pretending to quote Enkidu, Leftbehind screeches: “Not only is Larry Craig one of those stupid rethuglicans, but he’s also a QUEER!!!” Enkidu never said any such thing, that all spewed solely out of Lefty’s brain. Lefty’s totally straw man (bogus) set-up for argument.

    Also, Enkidu never suggested there was anything immoral about homosexuality. Enk’s post dealt with the absolute hypocrisy of closet gay republicans, and his question suggested that Lefty was also a hypocrite gay republican in the real world. Obviously that struck a nerve with Lefty. Whatever.

    Lefty’s usual response to such posts about Larry Craig are to eventually launch into a diatribe against homophobes and to defend homosexuality, which only serves to re-direct attention from the Senator Craig’s hypocrisy and therefore presents a diversionary (red herring) defence for the Senator.

    I could bring up other examples but I’ve made my point and this is already very tiresome.

    Yet there is another noteworthy thing I noticed, and that is that Leftbehind set a precedent by declaring himself to be “such a fag about it” the day before I asked if he too was a “closet republican hypocritic fag”

    In Leftbehind’s own words posted at 5:16 pm August 28 on the very same thread (“Huffington on the Media …”) :

    Not to be the spelling nazi again, but what kind of moron spells the word “moron” wrong? You spelled it “moran.” Not that my spelling is very good, either, but it’s awfully hard to make someone else look stupid when you can’t even spell “moron” right, yourself. Sorry to be such a fag about it, but come on…

    Let me repeat, the day before my use of the shameful, horrific, forbidden term “fag” Leftbehind called himself a “fag.”

    Does that or does that not prove that Lefty is a hypocritical republican fag? I think it does, but I am open to any reasonable arguments to the contrary.

  54. leftbehind Says:

    Knarly – Not afraid of me? Don’t you read Alex Jones any more? Homosexuals control the Government, blew up the World Trade Center and are turning the public schools into training centers for a sexually deviant army with which to run you good Christians into the sea. Who knows what I’m really capable of. Boo Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!

    So do didn’t really call me a “fag,” You just insulted me and asked me if I was a “fag.” Wow, that’s a world of difference. All the difference between me calling you a idiot and asking you, “are you some kind of idiot?” Which I’m not asking by the way, as I don’t want to seem redundant.

    So any defense of homosexuality is a “red herring” defense of Larry Craig? That’s just brilliant. That’s just like saying that defending Heterosexuality is a defense of Eliot Spitzer (hey JBC – could you pretend Eliot Spitzer is a Republican, just long enough to start a thread about him? That would be very interesting.) Sorry, but this line of logic doesn’t really work outside 911blogger and and the Westboro Baptist Church. It just doesn’t hold water around elightened liberals like me and JBC, anyway.

    Good try on the “he said it first” angle there, David Duke, but I think the rest of us covered this at the top of the thread. That’s just like saying you get to call Mike Tyson a “nigger” because he called himself one on ESPN. I really don’t see what you backwoods types don’t get about this one.

    Why is your Digg page so boring? You don’t even have a picture up. I’ll bet you’re a good looking boy – why not post a little photography for the ladies – you know, the ones who might accidently end up on your page while they’re trying to meet someone else

    While you were going over the August thread, did you ever figure out how a discussion of media coverage of a mine rescue turned into an argument over homosexuality? It was Inky who brought it up, I remember that much, and given his recent fascination with Dick Wadd, I guess I know why, sort of, but it’s still a puzzle. Are you old enough to remember the Village People, Knarly? I remember there being a cop, a cowboy, a sailer, a construction worker and an American Indian, but I don’t think there was a Mine Rescuer, was there? Of course, I may not have been paying as close attention as Inky was…

  55. leftbehind Says:

    And to answer the issue of what I meant by “came out on this blog,” I was referring to the fact that I had only recently started discussing my sexuality on this blog – I’ve been out in the real world for some time – and that, once I had let that particular cat out of the bag around here, Inky felt compelled to inject homosexualty into nearly every online conversation we had. Look it up – it’s a fact. I have never, to my memory been the one to bring up homosexuality on this blog, and would be just as happy if it was never brought up again.

    It’s been my experience that, often times, a person who is not so sure about who they are sexually will sometimes fixate on the first openly gay man they meet and start to project their feelings and confusion on that guy. This can often turn really ugly, as confused people tend to lash out and take their initial disgust with their own forbidden feelings out on the object of their fixation. That’s what Larry Craig did to gay men, en masse, what a lot of people are doing to Larry Craig now and, I’m afraid, Inky is doing to me. Not that I don’t have sympathy – we’re talking about men who were raised in very restrictive environments and are now going through a frightening and costly emotional turmoil – but it’s still an awful way to treat other people, and a scary thing to be the target of.

  56. NorthernLite Says:

    I think the reason that there hasn’t been a post about Spitzer is because he’s not trying to lie about it. He got caught, has now resigned and is taking the heat for his actions.

    Republicans should be taking notes.

  57. leftbehind Says:

    Well he had to have lied to somebody at some point or he wouldn’t be in this mess would he? He’s evidently been using prostitutes for at least six years while simultaneously prosecuting at least 18 defendants in high profile prostitution cases, so I’d say he probably wasn’t giving somebody the straight story, wouldn’t you?

    Hey, just between you and me, it’s alright to talk bad about Eliot Spitzer. He’s a Democrat, but he wasn’t supporting Obama.

  58. leftbehind Says:

    And far as “taking the heat for his actions,” what choice does he have? He’s on the verge of being put on trial for a Federal offense, no matter what he does. You make it sound like he’s martyred himself or something.

  59. leftbehind Says:

    The girl he paid $4500 dollars to fuck is described a “petite, very petite girl around 5′ 5″ tall, 104 lbs.” It seems the Dems like ‘em small. If I wanted to be an Enkidu about this, I might suggest they like ‘em real small, between Spitzer’s child-like little paramour and that kiddie porn guy who worked for Barbara Boxer. Of course I’m not, so I won’t.

  60. NorthernLite Says:

    Holy, simmer down there buddy.

    All I was saying is that it’s not like he jumped in front of the cameras and immendiately started to defend his actions or deny them (lie), like other certain politicians of late.

    Chill out.

  61. leftbehind Says:

    Don’t get alarmed, I’m just fooling around with you. You want to see hot under the collar, just wait until the humourless twosome get wind of this turn in the conversation.

  62. leftbehind Says:

    NorthernLite – do you know much about Andy Kaufman?

  63. knarlyknight Says:

    Lefty can’t chill out. He’s been berating me for the last few days for using a particularily insensitive word waaaaaay back six months ago; when I now realize that my choice of that generally offensive word was prompted by his own use of it to describe himself just the evening before. Hilarious: Lefty exhibits a pinnacle of hypocrisy, fully earning the hypocritic republican nom de plume.

    Add to that his outright lie that he only recently came out of his closet six months before (again, his own words from that Huffington thread six months ago state that he has declared his sexuallity on this blog a long long time ago.) Sheeesh, who cares.

    So many lies, straw men and hypocrisies it is a wonder anyone ever bothers with Lefty’s comments at all.

  64. knarlyknight Says:

    Add to that list: rants full of extremely abusive language againt people on this site.

  65. leftbehind Says:

    See NL, what did I tell you? And you thought I needed to chill out.

  66. leftbehind Says:

    This character here is in a real bind. He’s actually put a lot of work into this idiotic thread, and is honestly angry that it’s not going his way. He actually stews over this thread when he logs off. It’s amazing to me how anyone can get so emotionally worked up over something so inconsequential and ephemeral. It’s almost like a science experiment sometimes, just seeing how much emotional response I can get from him while hardly investing myself at all.

  67. enkidu Says:

    knarly, good try, but you can’t reason with insanity
    (see TreasonousVeterinarian, or just about any lefty post where he isn’t massively medicated)

    lefty isn’t ‘gay’ ‘black’ or a ‘wise old man’ so no harm, no foul (he spews homophobe slurs indiscriminately like no gay man – much less a wise ol black one – ever would)

    His knowledge of deathmetal, current video games and slang peg him as a white redneck tweenager with a bad attitude and a foul mouth. He enjoys playing the race/gay card as a sport. “Lookit me! I am a wise ol gay black dude spouting rwnj bs! respect me or face the wrath of my Family Circus quotes!”

    No one cares about your insanity lefty. I wish you would finally grow a pair and accept my wager so I could banish you forever (not that I expect you would live up to your side of the bargain, as considerable evidence exists that you are both spineless and witless).

    rwnjs – wrong
    is that short enough shcb?

  68. knarlyknight Says:

    Lefty, do you think you are actually fooling anyone?

    If you want to talk about emotional involvement, let me point out that JBC still hasn’t bothered to waste his time responding to your plea for self-affirmation: and it was YOU who got awfully angry and abusive after I pointed out to you that JBC is not interested in wasting his time doing so.

    Refer to March 10, 11:51 am and your insulting, abusive response at March 10, 12:08 pm

    Truly pathetic.

  69. NorthernLite Says:

    For the record, I think Spitzer is an asshole not because he cheated on his wife with a hooker, but because he claimed to be and presented himself as one type of person when in actuality he was a much different person. The so-called hypocrite factor, which is being displayed by a lot of other politicians these days, from all political stripes.

  70. shcb Says:

    Inky, I haven’t been following this thread, just not much interest but yes I like it we could even lengthen it a bit, “rwnjs- wrong in so many ways”, “rwnjs-nuts in a bucket”, “nuts to nuts of the right wing” (kind of a takeoff of the major at the battle of the bulge)? what do you think? When you get to people like Pat Buchanan I might even use it.

    NL, did you hear that his wife wanted him to fight for his job? I think she is as drunk with power as he.

  71. knarlyknight Says:

    funny shcb.

    NL – I may disagree with you. Maybe. First I’d like your opinion. Although the hypocrite factor with Spitzer is real, would you agree that a bigger factor (besides arcane crossing state-lines and money laundering laws) might be that he had put himself in a position to be blackmailed and thus compromised his public trust?

  72. enkidu Says:

    so will Rep David Vitter R-LA do the right thing and (finally) resign?

  73. NorthernLite Says:

    Yeah, nothing bothers me more than someone claiming to be morally superior to the rest of us, all the while they’re either ordering hookers, looking for gay sex in a washroom or talking dirty to children.

    I do give Spitzer some credit though: He admitted he did wrong, apologized to the people of his state and then resigned. Can’t really ask for much more than that, other than charge him criminally for something millions of men do all the time.

    shcb, it’s hard for me to comment on the wife. Her world just got flipped 360 degrees and she may say/do things that seem irrational to us because we aren’t in her position.

    knarly, I’m not quite sure I know what you’re asking me, can you elaborate a litttle bit?

  74. knarlyknight Says:

    NL – I’m not following this subject closely, I don’t even really know who Spitzer was and don’t care.

    My question, and it’s not only directed at you, was based on an assumption that: by his illegal use of the hooker(s?) he made himself vulnerable to people in the “hooker ring” who could extort political, legal of other favours from him in exchange for keeping his “secrets” safe. The public trust depends on officials not being compromised in such a way.

    Then again that question reeks of naivety, as some would say everyone in Washington is compromised to some extent, either by what they did at the Bohemian Grove (that’s a joke to rile Lefty) or acceptance of excessive offerings from lobbyists…

  75. NorthernLite Says:

    Yeah, someone who has tried to position himself as a staunch crime-fighter partaking in a criminal activity isn’t showing every good judgement.

    The only reason I’m following this one is because NY is rigfht next door to ON and it’s been getting a lot of coverage in our media. In fact, NY is our (Ontario’s) second largest trading partner, after Michigan.

  76. enkidu Says:

    I would also say that someone who seeks the public’s trust should be held accountable when they break it. If he had an affair with his intern say or a coworker, not so bad. Bad, but not illegal, just kinda stupid.

    Ordering up high priced hookers (eight times I read this AM) makes you unqualified to have a position of moral authority. Ordering three trillion dollars of counterproductive Iraq war for your high priced hookers/lobbyists/cronies should land you in jail. 260 lies for ol gee dub. Nearly 1000 for the shrubco team verified so far. When will they be held accountable?

    Spitzer led a smooth transition to the Lt Gov over the last couple days and then resigned. As well he should. David Vitter? nah, Diaperboy won’t resign. Typical GOOPer hypocrite.

  77. shcb Says:

    Good point NL, but there seems to be a pattern with the wives of politicians caught with their pants down that “stand by their man”, not all to be sure, but… Even here in Colorado, our former governor, Bill Owens was having an affair and moved out of his house into the Governors’ mansion, sans wife, later in his term as his name was being bandied about as a possible White House contender his wife miraculously forgave him and ushered him home to their modest Highlands Ranch home. Leaving the Mansion empty. He must still be thinking of running at some point because they are still together.

  78. NorthernLite Says:

    The only explaination I can think of for these wives standing by there men, other than wanting to keep their famlies together, is that some women are very attracted to men with money and power. And once they find that man, it’s probably hard for them to give that up. The lifestyle and all that. But again I don’t think we can ever really understand it because a) we’re not women and b) and we’re not in their shoes.

  79. knarlyknight Says:

    Don’t comment on my shoes.

  80. shcb Says:

    These guys are typically not the type who are home every night at 6, they keep long, wierd hours and after a while I wonder if the gals really care if the guy is home or not, they make their own lives have their own friends etc. I don’t know, I don’t think that is probably the case but… I have a good friend that was a battered wife, she is … soft? needy? don’t exactly have the right word, but she told me that no matter how abusive her first husband was she thought he was better than nothing. I think they also just like the trappings, the best country clubs, government paid trips, security details, maids and drivers, hob knobbing all that. No two probably do it for the same reasons but there seems to be a pattern. Now of course not all guys in office do it, do you think maybe the type of guy that sleeps around picks a gal that will let him or visa versa? Idle ramblings. All I know is these women are, wait for it, IDIOTS!

  81. knarlyknight Says:

    NL and SHCB explanations make sense to me and there is at least one more to add: As long as they stick by their man they are not seen (by themselves or imagine that they are seen by others) as a failure. If the marriage split up the wife may think she’s living under a cloud (of other peoples’ judgements) that she couldn’t satisfy him. If she keeps the marriage together, that helps to affirm for her that the hookers meant nothing to him (as she wants to beleive) and that she is the truly important one in his life. Also then all those past years together were not meaningless.

    Rationalized further, she says to herself “Yea my husband may have slept with a prostitute but that just proves how virile he is and the fact he stays with me proves how much better I am than those hookers.” If the marriage splits up because her husband wants to sleep with young high priced hookers instead of her, that makes her feel like a failure.

    I don’t know,it is all just conjecture to me. Perhaps someone should ask Lefty about this topic, he might have had some direct experience.

  82. shcb Says:

    I think those are all good points, I doubt LB has any greater insights, I think the gay community has the same percentage of people that are true to their word and those that are creeps, folks are folks.

  83. NorthernLite Says:

    All good points.

  84. knarlyknight Says:

    No, shcb you totally misunderstood my reason for asking LB. I was not suggesting we ask LB for his insights as a member of the gay community at all, I was talking about asking his view as an active member of the hypocrite community.

  85. knarlyknight Says:

    shcb, as for your guess that the gay community has the same % of trustworthy vs creeps, I’ve come to the conclusion that, contrary to initial intuition, your suggestion is not so. I’d say there were far fewer creeps and losers in the gay community than in the general population (excluding prison population I guess!) Maybe something about having the strength to face ones fears and come out of the closet, often to public or family scorn, is good for their character or something. Kinder, more caring and more forgiving of themselves and others. No connection necessarily but also find the same with alcoholics who have been through AA successfully and have abstained for a long long time.

  86. knarlyknight Says:

    Okay, here’ the deal. I thought Eliot Spitzer was old news, then Greg Palast opened my eyes to prosecutor discretion and got me to thinking. Hate it when that happens, it’s nicer to just sing lalalala and march along in step like shcb.

    A few tidbits:

    Then, on Wednesday of this week, the unthinkable happened. Carlyle Capital went bankrupt. Who? That’s Carlyle as in Carlyle Group. James Baker, Senior Counsel. Notable partners, former and past: George Bush, the Bin Laden family and more dictators, potentates, pirates and presidents than you can count.

    and this:

    Do I believe the banks called Justice and said, “Take him down today!” Naw, that’s not how the system works. But the big players knew that unless Spitzer was taken out, he would create enough ruckus to spoil the party. Headlines in the financial press – one was “Wall Street Declares War on Spitzer” – made clear to Bush’s enforcers at Justice who their number one target should be. And it wasn’t Bin Laden.

    and finally, just for Enky, this:

    Funny thing, this ‘discretion.’ For example, Senator David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana, paid Washington DC prostitutes to put him in diapers (ewww!), yet the Senator was not exposed by the US prosecutors busting the pimp-ring that pampered him.

    I thought the whole thing (“Eliot’s Mess”) was worth the read:
    http://www.gregpalast.com/elliot-spitzer-gets-nailed/#more-1979

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.