Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Glass houses and stones -- part deux.


Oh, my ... apparently, Kate still has her knickers in a knot, as you can read here (scroll about 2/3 of the way down the page to where the fun begins.) In order to truly appreciate the depth of Kate's petulance and hypocrisy, feel free to take a few minutes and read what started the whole thing. Take your time, I'll wait. Really. Dum de dum dum ... OK, to business, one annoying Kate excerpt at a time.

... an anonymous left wing blogger who has published a link to my contact info and home address in a post ...

Kate, honey, sweetie ... your contact info is splashed all over the web here. See? All that stuff under the 36-point header "Contact Kate". It's not like I published, say, your private cell number (as rumour has it you did to Belinda Stronach), or outed you from anonymity. Methinks you doth protest too much. Onward.

... a post that states I "don't like Muslims" ...

That's a subjective evaluation, of course, based on the obvious hilarity you find in the mistreatment of the detainees in Gitmo, to which I linked. Anyone reading my post had the same freedom to draw their own conclusions and decide, if they wished, that I was full of shit. Their choice.

For someone who is pretty much a one-person hate factory, Kate, you're awfully sensitive about criticism. You might want to consider a different career, one in which you don't so thoroughly piss off so many people. But I digress.

And finally:

... counsels others to do me harm ...

Really? I did that? Where? Assuming you're referring to my suggestion that anyone who wanted to do anything about "it" look you up, I could just as easily have been talking about, say, giving you a stern talking to, or papering your front hedge or something.

You do read a lot into stuff, don't you? I mean, it's not like I explicity encouraged violence (which, again, rumour has you did against some CBC reporter). Really, Kate. For someone so accomplished at dishing out abuse, you're awfully thin-skinned.

If some readers think I crossed the line, so be it. If they want to bitch and whine about it, hey, it's a free country and my comments section is open. But a word of warning -- I can put up with a lot of crap, but the one thing I'm not going to put up with is a lesson in civility from Kate McMillan.

P.S.: In a comment slightly further down at that first link above, Kate makes a sweeping generalization about left wing blogs "pushing the envelope way beyond criticism and namecalling." Namecalling? Does that include stuff like, say, linking to doctored, insulting photos of others?

Just trying to clarify the ground rules here.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure I understand the point, here...

Why do you expect your general readership to be interested in the activities of some faceless blogger who has called you a name? Is this person a mover or a shaker? Do the opinions of this person matter outside of the blogosphere? Or indeed, to anyone at all?

While I enjoy seeing your pointed barbs sticking out of the effigies of Canadian and American public figures, seeing you trade futile blows with anonynmous and entirely inconsequential people is dull. And it makes you look... well, small.

Anonymous said...

I think your comments are bang on. Kate goes apoplectic when anybody dares to criticize her.

Such is life in an echo chamber.

Dr. Dawg said...

You called it right, CanCyn. Kate is some piece of work: a hate-engine who recently exposed her snickering anti-Aboriginal racism for all to see, referenced here:
http://drdawgsblawg.blogspot.com/2005/07/frosty-fridayits-so-damned-hot-in.html

Then there is the crap currently on her site about a CBC reporter, referenced at Kathy Shaidle's one ("CBC reporters lie," says Kathy, "even on vacation.") Kate's dittoheads have had a go at Krista Erickson's sex life, what she was like in high school, and one even said she should be shot. Standard discourse for the moonbat Right, of course.

Turns out that the stuff about Erickson was made up, according to a poster who was there. A retraction from Kate? An apology from the oh-so-pious prig, Kathy Shaidle? Don't hold your breath.

Congratulations for exposing Kate's utter incompetence and hypocrisy. But you know, it could be a full-time job.

Zorpheous said...

Me thinks I need to update the un-written rules of Blogging according to the Blogging Tories and/or Right-wing Harper-Bots. I believe Simon Pole had my list last posted on his site. I'll see if I can grab it and update it. Lord knows we don't want to offend the Right-Wing Harper-Bots by violating their rules of Blogging, now do we?

calgary observer said...

Congrats. You have really exposed Kate for what she is: a hate factory. I believe charges should be brought against her under anti-hate legislation. She really is a retarded piece of work!

Anonymous said...

Twas no rumour CC.

Kate did indeed publish the number, which I called and confirmed at the time.

http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/001947.html

wonderdog said...

Re the Belinda Stronach phone number: no rumour.

See here and here and here and here.

Mark Francis said...

The rumour was over her blackberry contents, I think, but the cell phone number was spread around.

It's like being in high school all over again...

Anonymous said...

Hey, did any of you realize.. Canadian Cynic, Dr.Dawg, Robert McLelland, Section 15, Zorpheus, and Skippy, that according to Kate none of you are real people at all.

You are all just the alter-egos of the "dumb" "illiterate" "parasite" "lazy" indian activist woman, that Kate said her "Canada needs institutions to lock up the Indian activists and apologists" comments to?

Were you aware that none of you actually exist? And that you are all just figments of the imagination one particularly "angry injun"?

hee hee

That's the latest theory being spun in the tin-foil hat circle of Kate McMillan world.

http://dustmybroom.com/?p=1315

Has the details on this particular theory about the true identities of all critics of Hate McMillan.

And then... just to make it more interesting, having posited this as a reason that so many people only "appear" to be critical of the woman... they claim this same woman is actually "mentally ill".

Speaking of Mental Illness...

http://tinyurl.com/83frd

Zorpheous said...

The un-written laws and ethics that Blogging Tories keep making up:

1) you must have a blog to comment
2) you must never erase a blog entry, or the CPC Blogger Police will arrest you
3) you must be over the age of 42 and pay 3/4 of your income in taxes to be taken seriously
4) you are not allowed to question the Great Leader of your party, just follow blindly.
5) You must be a CPC/Alberta Conservative.
6) If you are from Ontario, you opinion doesn't count.
7) They don't apply to any Blogging Tory who breaks these rules.
8) No left wing blogger who has published a link to a Blogging Tories contact info and home address in a post, even if it posted on said Blogging Tories blog (although posting people private cell phone numbers is ok-dokey, see rule #7)
9) No left wing blogger is allowed to suggest people pay a visit to a Blogging Tory, but Blogging Tories are more than welcome to incite violence against the left wing blogger, or anyone they feel like, aka Brian Walsh, Katie, Vitor,... see rule #7)
10) Pushing the envolope is forbidden to the left wing blogger, the use of doctored photographs, tapes, transcripts, making up facts and pushing the envolope, in fact exceeding the envolope is the copywritten, trademarked and pattenned by the people like Kate and the Blogging Tories (see rule #7)

Zorpheous said...

I think we may need a Wiki for these rules about blogging that people like Katie and her friends keep making up. You know, just so we can keep them all straight and so we don't break them and upset these poor fragile emotional creatures.

Oh well.

Zorpheous said...

Anonymous,

"Every where you go, there you are..."

I'm still here ;-)

Meaghan Champion said...

"So There I Was..."

It's an inside joke.

Scott Tribe said...

To the anonymous poster who posted this url:

http://dustmybroom.com/?p=1315

I dont see anything there about Kate claiming everyone of Kate's critics are anonymous.. I see a particularly venomous conversation between MWW and Darcey, but nothing referring to the claimed imaginary critics

calgary observer said...

What worries me is that an elected MP (Monte Solberg) should adore Kate the hate factory so much. What does that tell you about Solberg? (The company you keep ...?).

Kate is full of hate and racism, and Solberg apparently agrees with most of Kate's crap (he keeps linking to her in full agreement). Then again, look at Monte. His whole demeanour and such reminds me of a time long, long ago ...

Anonymous said...

Scott:

Darcey writes on the thread:

"I’ve watched MWW race-bait the past fews months using various pseudonyms to back herself up"

If you stroll around some of the blogging tories sites that back Kate up, this actually is the paranoid theory d'jour.

Hell, a few months back on the Shotgun, "Greg From Dallas" started blabbing the conspiracy theory that "the attacks on Kate" didn't start until after he blog won the most popular canadian blog award.

He suggested it was all a Liberal Conspiracy to discredit her.

I guess if that's the kind of internal con-job, cognitive dissonance these whack jobs need to explain or rationalize to themselves why so many people are disgusted with her and her comments about "jap bastards" and genocide for Angolans, and locking up Indians and their kids... well, that says something about them a little bit too doncha thinK?

Seriously. Didn't you all know that you are part of the evil nefarious and devious Librano plot to make Kate McMillan look bad?

Zorpheous said...

Kate doesn't need any help on looking bad, she and her echo chamber friends do a very good job all on their own. I was reading an interview that Kate gave to some some online media blogger, forget the name, wish I had the link. In it Kate proud tells that she advises new bloggers to push the envelope and not to worry about being right (ie, the facts aren't really all that important) She states that the truth and the facts is important, and yet in another breath she states there is no such thing as objective truth. She's a real piece of work, that Katie, yup.

Anonymous said...

I'd love to get a screen shot of the "no objective truth" statement.

Anybody want to rustle it up?

Zorpheous said...

I really wish Anonymous was using their proper name here, well if anyone knows who the poster is please let them know I found the link to that interview for them

http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog/2005/07/the_normblog_pr_3.html

There's the direct link

Now for some money quotes from Katie

"What philosophical thesis do you think it most important to combat? > That objective truth does not exist."

"What do you consider the most important personal quality? > Respect for truth - without it, all other qualities or talents are corruptible."

"What would be your main blogging advice to a novice blogger? > I actually host a Carnival of the Newbies from time to time, and as part of the last one, several bloggers offered their tips. This was mine: Push the envelope, even if it means being wrong from time to time."