January 02, 2006
The Insanity Continues
We, Woody and I (and of course you my beloved readers) have been subjected to a recent onslaught of comment spam from a group (although it is probably just one individual) most likely at a particular site called Thinking Meat. Feel free to go there if you wish, but I won't link there because I don't want to give them traffic. Let them get their own. At any rate, this particular commenter, this time by the name given "Jonah Dotson (who may even be real [Nah]- at least this time I got a real email address - fake and anonymous though it be - Meatbrain, just how dumb do you honestly think we are?). But, I digress, this time I will take part of his comment and turn it into a post for two reasons, the first, to have fun with a real honest troll, and the second, to put lie to his claims. Now, I will intersperse my comments into his as appropriate and in red so that you will be able to follow it a little easier. Also, to make it a little easier I will set his comments in blockquotes so that it will be more than obvious (Dotson/meatbrain needs all the help he can get).
FIRST POST:Actually Jonah, the practice of the Soviets was to incarcerate dissidents, sedate them heavily with such psychotropic medications as thioridazine, haloperidol, thorazine etc. When extra-pyramidal symptoms were frequently present, brought on by the anti-psychotics, they were also denied such medications as benztropine which can relieve some/most/all of the EPS. Secondly, there was seldom, if ever, any recognized symptomology of mental illnes of these unfortunate individuals; they had merely come crosswise with the Soviet (read evil) Empire. You may have noted that I am not an employee of the Soviet Empire, nor of the US government and I can, and will post anything I damn well please. Too, you will find nothing in what I wrote that would indicate that I believe that the insanity of the left needs cause them to be "locked up" which is another feature that seperates me and others from the practices of the Soviet Psychiatrists. If your comment is that it "would" be best to lock up dissidents, than that is your problem, not mine. Don't put words in my mouth.This is a great concept, GM, and you are to be commended for it. We all know that anyone who does not hold fast to the tenets of the right is mentally unbalanced. Wouldn't it be best if those who disagree with us were removed from society, for their safety and ours? This was the policy of Soviet psychiatrists, and it worked very well.
SECOND POST:Jonah, Jonah, Jonah, how silly you are. Please find for me the exact quote where I "espouse exactly what the Soviet psychiatrists did?" Or, more likely, are you being a little hysterical in your meanderings? Again Jonah, so that you can understand the difference between what I said and your straw-man argument, I have not ever proposed that anyone who "dissents from the State's views are mentally ill." Rather, what I said is that there are a lot of factors to be looked at and NO WHERE did I suggest locking them up, so I'm not, repeat NOT a "mental health professional in the best Soviet tradition." Rather, I do tend to be a cognitive restructuring adherent and a strong proponent of Reality Therapy. As I have noted, from my perspective the left, in particular the angry left (recognize yourself here do you Jonah?) are not in touch with reality. And this can be documented. As I mentioned in a previous post, the Daily Kos was predicting a win for Kerry, despite the fact that most polls showed Bush on top. Then too, we have the 2000 vote fiasco in which the courts stopped an attempt by Al Gore to overturn the very close vote in Florida. Subsequent counts by a number of independent newspapers confirmed Bush's win, but the [generic] left had problems accepting that. Then, we have the WMD issue touted by the left and by Democrats claiming "Bush Lied" when all the evidence from the previous Democratic Administration, France, Germany and Russia indicated that Saddam did have WMD and Saddam himself did everything he could to underscore that perception.Notice you said "Soviet" psychiatrists... the Soviet's were of the left.And you espouse exactly what Soviet psychiatrists did: the view that those who dissent from the State's views are mentally ill. You're a mental health professional in the best Soviet tradition.
It must be a proud moment for you.
I did not say "anyone" being on the left. I know a few lefties who are quite supportive of the Administration. Many of whom the left call "traitors" or are otherwise discounted. For example, Senator Joseph Lieberman is quite supportive of the Administration's war on the islamo-fascists (lets call them what they are and not use euphanisims like "terrorists" shall we?). Yet, the majority of the Democratic base is figuratively calling for Liberman's head and are quite openly planning to get someone from their so called "base" to run against him in the next election. Too, if you care to follow the trials and tribulations of the Lt. Governor from the State of Maryland as he prepares to run for the US Senate, one Michael Steel, now, if that isn't harsh rheortic I'll be damned if I know what is. Then we have the ravings as found on the Democratic Underground with language I suspect that none of those commenters would use in front of their grandmothers (not that we don't see some on the far right as well - sadly.) We have the "No blood for oil" meme, the "Bush Lied People Died" meme and oh so very many others. In fact, on meatbrains blog he uses the term liar and calls me a soviet psychiatrist like mental health professional... something you have carried on into your comments on this blog. Harsh rhetoric indeed (one of the resons I suspect 'ole Jonah and Meatbrain are one and the same... they consistently use the same arguments/phraseology) Pot, meet Kettle!...delusional thinking that they will change people's minds with their harsh rhetoric.Your accusation that anyone you perceive as being on the Left is insane and psychotic is not harsh rhetoric. Oh no, of course not...
THIRD POST:
Ahh Jonah, you are so amusing. My post is precisely about refuting the left's specific arguments as being out of touch. That they continue to harp on issues that only improve Bush's ratings. Did you notice, Jonah, when the information went out about the NSA intercepts, which seem to be entirely legal by the way (but that is another argument) and the Democrats and the left started talking impeachment, that Bush's approval numbers went UP? Jonah, did you notice that the American Voting Public has a long history of not trusting Democrats with National Security and that even the main stream media have discussed this issue? Yet, they continue to harp on "immediate pull out" and that just won't fly. Jonah, there is an old saw among those that can observe reality: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting the results to be different." Doesn't that really almost perfectly describe the Democrats today? If they keep this up, I wouldn't be surprised if Bush's positive numbers went over 65% and the Democrats end up losing a few Senate seats and a number of House seats. One last point Jonah. You wrote: "anyone who disagrees with you does so only because of their own political proclivities. You would dismiss any refutation on that basis -- just as you always have." In point of fact, since you don't seem to be able to digest what you read, my exact quote in the article in question was:Tell you what, rather than attack me, why don't you refute the specifics?You've already defined that as being impossible. Mr. Mental Health Professional. You claim that anyone who disagrees with you does so only because of their own political proclivities. You would dismiss any refutation on that basis -- just as you always have.
You could try to refute some of the left's specific arguments yourself... but you cannot. That is why you resort to ad hominem attacks of this sort. Everyone who dissents from Administration policy is crazy
Drummond calls this form of insanity Political Compulsive Disorder. Now, there will be many in the field, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers etc who will not agree that this is a mental disorder at all, but that would be because of their own political proclivities;I was obviously referring to Drummonds "diagnosis." I said nothing about anyone who disagrees with that are leftists. I said that there would be those who did not think Drummonds diagnosis would be a mental disorder and that might be because of the political proclivities of the person who disagreed with Drummond. What about that didn't you understand since you made such a big deal about me being the one who who said anyone who disagrees with me? I just don't understand you Jonah, you can't seem to see (or perhaps you do see, you just enjoy being contrarian) what is there right in front of you. Oh, and Jonah, I've given you lots and lots of specific examples, you have YET to refute any of them.
Actually, I've questioned their judgement, I've noted HIGH intelligence and that it doesn't necessarily translate to good policy and I've noted some psychological symptoms that may explain the process.-- that's your belief, and now you've put it on record. You can't argue rationally. You HAVE to attack your opponents' character, intelligence, and sanity. That's ALL YOU HAVE.
Tell us why anyone should trust your so-called professional judgment. given that you are quite willing to subjugate that judgment to your political views -- just like Soviet psychiatrists did.No one has to trust my professional judgement in this issue, as I said in my opening sentences:
Polipundit's DJ Drummond has maybe hit on a severe form of mental illness. As a Mental Health professional, I'm concerned about what the disorder is, how it begins - that is what is the genesis of the disorder and how can it be treated.Now, believe it or not Jonah, this is a political blog of the conservative persuasion and I am a conservative. I also happen to be a mental health professional and as such, I have far ranging interests. Further, I absolutely delight in the figurative skewering of my political opponents. Tell me that you don't as a wild eyed lefty. I noticed Jonah, that as Woody has commented you have used multiple fake names, fake IP addresses, and fake or anonymous e-mail addresses to make comments on my site. None of your comments are in the form of discussion or argument, you merely attack and use even more frequent ad hominems than I do; and mine are at least meant to be humorous. Now, I know that my sense of humor may not be yours, or may not be others, but it is mine and if you don't like it. Tough. This is my blog.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you CANNOT DEBATE, you MUST CENSOR. That's your way. That's all you know how to do.This is really the cutest part of your diatribe Jonah. What you do with your so called comments is attack and attempt to put your argument (what ever that is) in some kind of rational format. You've failed! If you had read my rules of commenting you would know that this is, as I said above, my blog. I rule here. If you want to make comment use your real name and a real e-mail address, don't be afraid of using your own IP address. That you consistently fail to do so says far more about obsession with this blog then even you probably care to admit. I will "junk" not "delete" any comment that I do not think advances the discussion, and many lefties and liberals and progressives have dropped a bon mot or two here without ever having had to fear having their comments junked; in fact Jonah, I have an uncle, I love him a lot and he is a fine man, one that I admire greatly, but he is a lefty and he disagrees with almost any thing I put here. Yet, he has never had a comment junked, because he argues rationally, I disagree with almost every position he takes, but at least he is rational. You are free to express yourself in a calm rational and oh so polite way, or suffer the consequences of not doing so. You, in your various disguises, have attacked Woody, me, Cao, Duncan Avatar, Seth Richardson and quite a few others. Possibly, though I may be wrong in this, to drive hits to your pitiful little blog. You know, the one with very few visitors, the one with almost zero comments, the one that does far more attack than anything else. Kind of makes me wonder what you are getting out of this besides notoriety. If you respond to this post, do so rationally. If you do not, your comment and any future comment that is like this one will be junked. And a good junk yard is EXACTLY where comments of the type you have been making belong. So, Jonah, cheers, have a great 2006 and may you learn to argue/debate effectively in the coming year. Posted by GM Roper at January 2, 2006 08:09 PM | TrackBackAnd every time you delete a comment that asks hard questions or challenges your views, you simply prove that point for me.
Zoinks!!!!
Posted by kender at January 3, 2006 01:45 AM
GM, sir, you have WAY more patience than I! And, I might add, we are better for it.
Nicely done.
Posted by too many steves at January 3, 2006 05:57 AM
GM, you really ARE a lot nicer than I am...
My Blog is named *And THAT is MY Opinion...*
I hope that's the lefty disruptor's 1st clue...
I have Halo Scan and a BAN button, and I know how to use it too... I figure, if they want to use MY bandwidth to write a novel on lefty lunacy, I can use that ban button at my RIGHT hand to make it just *go away*....
LMAO... It's gonna get a lot worse too my friend, as the '06 elections get closer and by the time '08 gets here, it will be *cyber warfare*...
Fire in the hole...
Posted by TexasFred at January 3, 2006 10:36 AM
I have to laugh at how he calls us cowards if we don't respond to every inane question and comment from him, as though our time and priorities are his. We're not Marty McFly. ("What's wrong McFly, Chicken?")
Posted by Woody at January 3, 2006 10:48 AM
Yeesh. I would have lost patience long ago. He threw out one baseless accusation after another expecting each to be answered credibly and then ignored each answer. I'm afraid to ask where in the vast universe he got the impression that you advocated employing Soviet techniques of psychiatry to even begin with.
Sounds a bit like the fellow my husband had the misfortune of running into the other day.
Posted by Oyster at January 3, 2006 12:20 PM
This is the usual Liberal, moonbat tactic, to throw as many accusations as you can in response to a point the liberal got destroyed on. I'm surprised we haven't been treated to a rerun of Gary Sick's October Surprise.
BTW, isn't that a great name for a delusional Lib, Gary Sick?
Posted by PCD at January 3, 2006 02:52 PM
OK, GM, you are far, far more patient and kind than I have been with similar trolls. I generally junk 'em much earlier on in the game and trea 'em to a few vicious whacks from my trollbat on the way. Sometimes they are cute in a rather twisted, orcish way, and I'll admit to the perverse pleasure troll-kicking sometimes gives me. (Yeh, confession: good for the soul and bad for the reputation. heh)
Still, fun to read your gentle, measured response. I sometimes wish I were so kind.
OK, so maybe I don't, but I wish I sometimmes wished I were so kind.
;-)
Posted by David at January 3, 2006 04:25 PM
Catch Gagdad Bob's latest refinement over at OneCosmos. I think it's a real insight.
Posted by Assistant Village Idiot at January 5, 2006 07:05 PM
