Friday, January 26, 2007

If you can't believe the howling wingnuts, well, who CAN you believe?


No, no, William ... don't get up. Let me get a couple more shots in first.

Back here, we collectively towel-snapped one William E. Demers in the nads for gushing over George W. Bush's oratorical skills. I'm guessing that it's easy for William to dismiss the derisive contempt for Glorious Leader coming from the Left, but what does he do when those on the Right are equally unimpressed?

In a video address entitled, “A Lifeless State of the Union,” President Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council said, “I believe the president failed to challenge the new majority to advance core family and cultural issues. What will become of the culture of life, the defense of marriage and permanent family-friendly tax policies?” [FRC, 1/24/07]

“I think the president left a lot of conservatives shaking their heads” by avoiding the issues atop their agenda, said Bill Lauderback, executive vice president at the American Conservative Union. [WSJ, 1/25/07]

“We’re disappointed that he didn’t mention cultural issues at all,” said Rich Lowry, editor of National Review magazine and a summit host. “Everyone realizes that this is a product of his diminished circumstances.” [AP, 1/24/07]

A bit of advice, William: It's a really, really, really bad sign when America's shrieking, neo-con flying monkeys start to look thoughtful and intellectual by comparison. I'm just sayin'.

BY THE WAY, it's not like I need to lay even more of a smackdown on Mr. Demers, but his kind of infantile whining really grinds my gears.

As you can read back here, our boy William suggests he's up for a good intellectual free-for-all:

You guys need to grow up. Rather than calling me names, why don't you come discuss your opinions with me?

However, given previous opportunities to get into the actual substance of an issue, William has instead responded with junior high school rubbish like this, involving childish references to my alleged lifestyle and blogging habits and employment status and so on, which makes it hard to take him seriously when he claims he really, really wants to have a dialogue.

No one's stopping you from having a discussion, William. You can start anytime you want. Really.



WELL, THAT WAS PREDICTABLE. Poor Mr. Demers can't handle the intellectual scrutiny so he descends into childish innuendo in the comments section, wondering if I'm "stalking" him. This from someone made a detailed list of my blog posts over a two-day period.

I'd finish with a snappy, devastatingly witty punchline but I don't want to waste them. At least, not on William.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Link bait? Boring.

Anonymous said...

Are you stalking me or what?

CC said...

No, William ... I think we're done here. But thanks for playing.

Anonymous said...

Oh God, the old "You are Stalking me" card is being played. Channelling the dead ghost of the famous rightwing nutter Anonalogue are we?

Ti-Guy said...

Who can resist stalking William? He's a compelling orator.

Seriously, some people need to learn the definition of "stalker" -- ie. someone who follows you around. I think CC's more of a trap-door spider.

Anonymous said...

I have a java application on my blog that tracks people, so it only took me 3 minutes to see what he's been up to.

His activity shows a minimum of 8.5 hours a day watching my blog, and I would say that is a little bit concerning.

thwap said...

I love this blog ...

Anonymous said...

Right William, StatsCounter is your super fancy blog tracker?

Ok so, you know that HTTP is a stateless protocol so there is no way you can know how long anyone "watches" your site? StatsCounter (which I also have) counts two visits, one in the morning, one in the evening, as one long visit....

But I guess I can hardly expect someone of your, uhm, intellect, to understand the "magic" of the internets...

M@ said...

You put your blog up on the inter-tubes, Willie, but you don't want people visiting?

Actually I imagine that isn't all that much of a problem for you.

CC said...

Thanks, Mike. I was just going to tell William he was an imbecile, but your explanation is good, too.