Dear Fern: Welcome to Rossholia.

Shed a tear for Birth Pangs' Fern Hill -- the most recent victim of Patsy Ross' campaign of wretched dishonesty. Early on, Fern wonders aloud whether there's any point to rebutting someone so horrifically deluded, so I'd like to help her out here.

Fern, darling:

Let me assure you that Twatrick is, without question, one of the most dishonest bloggers in all of Christendom. He lies. Chronically. Perpetually. Pathologically. And all the while accusing others of dissembling. The hilarity is overwhelming. (And, yes, I'm going somewhere with this, so be patient.)

Perhaps Twatrick's greatest talent is to take normal English words and twist them into some novel and unexpected interpretation to make a point. For example:

[Canadian Cynic] posts the home address of political opponents on his blog, which is undeniably scummy.

As hard as it might be to believe, there are two (count 'em, two) misrepresentations in that one sentence. Let me elucidate.

First, Twatrick is obviously referring to my former feud with failed Calgary aldermanic candidate and NAMBLA obsessive Dick Evans. And, yes, it is true that I have posted Dick's home address and other contact info on my blog more than once. But you search in vain in that passage to learn that all of that information was nothing more than what NAMBLA Dick had already published on his own campaign website. In short, I supplied absolutely no information that wasn't already in the public domain by Dick's own hand, but that's not something Twatrick wants you to know, is it? But, astonishingly, the dishonesty doesn't end there.

Twatsy goes on to accuse me of (apparently) outing "political opponents". Um ... huh? Political opponents? Given that I'm technically anonymous and am not running for office of any kind, how exactly does Dick Evans magically become a "political opponent," I wondered. When challenged on this, Twatrick philosophized that 1) I disagree with Dick, therefore, he is an "opponent" of mine and, 2) since Dick and I disagree on some topics politically, we are therefore "political opponents." Q.E.D.

This, of course, flies in the face of the normal and common usage of that phrase; that is, individuals who are competing for political office, but it's standard Twatrick -- take regular words, mangle them beyond recognition, and serve up the result as rhetoric. Classic Twatsy. But that doesn't begin to compare with the hysterical hyperbole that is the Twatrick. Check out this baby:

What Cynic and his coterie of vicious hooligans either fail to recognize, or fail to admit, is that the freedom for those who disagree with them to express their views without fear of attack or harassment is part and parcel of a progressive social contract in which people -- each presumably as equal as the next -- are permitted to hold to hold their own opinions, recognize their own interests, organize in order to pursue their interests, and express their opinions in that regard.

Canadian Cynic, with his constant bullying of anyone who dares disagree with him, cannot be allowed to undermine the very foundations of progressive politics.

Quite right. Apparently, one anonymous man with a blog who has never outed a critic, who has a fairly liberal comments policy and who rarely comments on others' blogs represents an unacceptable threat to political progressivism and Canadian democracy in general. Jesus Christ, Twatsy, drama queen much?

But as amusing as all this has been, none of this would distinguish Twatsy from your typical right-wing Canadian whackjob, except for the fact that he really does have a unique talent which separates him from the pack, and that is his ability to simply fabricate entire alternate realities when it suits him.

Back here, Twats was waxing moronic on the Sens "Better Halves" dust-up, and produced this absolute gem of dumbfuckitude:

That aside, Mallick took such a personal interest in the matter in which she called up Ready and allegedly took him on a tour of the First Place website, through several links which don't seem to exist on the site. Birth Pangs' blogger Fern Hill insists that the links were later removed from the site (something which actually is in the realm of possibility, but hard to accept without proof that they existed in the first place).

Stop right there. Go back and read that passage again slowly, to truly appreciate the stunning idiocy of Twatsy's position. He is seriously suggesting that, hey, those links don't exist now so maybe they never existed. Can you appreciate the imbecility of that suggestion?

Those original links were, in fact, a huge part of the original story. Their existence, and their subsequent removal, were covered in detail in a number of places. There was no doubt whatsoever that those links were there at the beginning of this story, and while people of various political stripes expressed their opinions forcefully on this topic, not one of them actually abandoned reality to the point where they suggested that the links never existed.

Except for Twatrick.

Only Twatrick, this long after the incident, is so contemptuous of reality that he is actually proposing that that never happened. Ignore the news coverage. Ignore the blog posts. Ignore the opinion pieces. Those links aren't there now, therefore, hey, who's to say they were ever there? Even the most batshit crazy of Canada's fetus fetishists never proposed something so hilariously stupid and indefensible. Except for Twatrick. And that's because, quite simply, Twatrick has no interest in reality. Or honesty. Or accuracy. In a nutshell, Twatsy makes shit up, and publishes it as if it has value.

Seriously, Fern, that's the problem here -- you can write whatever you want, and you can write it carefully and meticulously, and Twatsy will take it, and mangle it, and add his own version of reality to it, and you'll read it and think, "What the fuck?" Because that's how Twatsy works. I mean, really, this is the guy who tried to dismiss the Montebello controversy by claiming (even to this day) that triangles have eight sides. Because, in Twatsy's reality, maybe they do. When it's convenient. (Perhaps tomorrow they'll have four sides. Or 11 sides. Or whatever allows Twatsy to convolute another argument.)

In short, Fern, you can respond to Patsy Ross if you want, but it's never going to make any difference. He's simply going to continue lying, because it's all he knows.

P.S. In case anyone's interested, Patsy did threaten to track me down and physically assault me, so it's really pretty rich for him to be whining on about civility the way he does. Just an observation for any prospective employers who might want to google Patsy -- he has some serious anger management issues. If I were you, I'd make sure he never figured out where you live.

Trust me on this one.

OOOOOOOH, HOW TIMELY: Twatsy makes shit up again:

But quite frankly, it's impossible to take anything Cynic has to say about anti-Semitism seriously when one considers some of the company he keeps.

Notably, My Blahg proprietor Robert McClelland.

An interesting accusation since:

• I have never met Robert McClelland,


• I rarely correspond with Robert McClelland, and


• Robert McClelland and I do not share membership of any aggregator.

But perhaps I'm being hasty here since, using Twatsy's logic, I can justifiably say that Twats "keeps company" with people who advocate the rape of children. Oh, yeah, this is going to work nicely.

Thanks, Patsy. I would have never dreamed of making that kind of accusation if you hadn't pointed the way. At this point, the possibilities are endless, aren't they?

HEH. Indeed.