someone say "hairy?"
B-O-N-K-E-R-S-!
I've never read blue racine. I'll check it out. Maybe he's just as bad as you and Peter, but the bar is set pretty high. I'll report back.
This one?
http://blueracine.blogspot.com/
Do you have a particular post? I've read the top 10 or so and didn't find anything bad at all.
Fred,
Really....you saying hairy deal....excuse me.
HA HA HA HA....
You're the best!
Every once in a while I see some sort of hope for rationality in JIJ. And every time it is dashed. Once again, right here and in the other thread it has been dashed.
On the one hand he wants government out of all human activity such as marriage and what not, and on the other he sees nothing wrong with Blue Racine which advocates enough government to drown in.
I've come to the conclusion that JIJ is just a poor lost and confused soul who calls himself a libertarian. And that is downright funny! And also a waste of time to have a conversation with.
You did the right thing Fred. Forget the nut cases who say otherwise.
Yeah, I didn't see anything particularly vile or vulgar in checking the posts at Blue Racine. Could you refer us to the posts you're talking about?
Perhaps I mispoke. I CERTAINLY found things wrong with her politcal philosophy. But Peter's problem (and to some extent Fred's) goes beyond political philosophy. I didn't see anything on her site as hate-filled as youd find on Peter's, as Fred inplied I would.
Fred-
In your opinion is Blue Racine the most vitriolic hate filled blog on the left side of the Cheddarsphere?
I am sorry but I don't see anything particularly "vile" or "vulgar" over there either. Can you provide an example?
Are there other nominees from the "acerbic left" that can compare to Peter?
As somebody who peruses the Wisconsin political blogs pretty often and isn't on either "side" I'd say the right side is generally more vile, vulger and acerbic (although admitedly, I've never really read this Blue Racine blog, so maybe it is terrible beyond the first 10 or so posts). I'd say of the ones I read, I'd rank think like this from most mean-spirited to least mean-spirited:
1) Peter Texas Hold'em (or whatever his name is)
2) Fred
3) Badger Blogger
4) Badger Blog Alliance
5) Marquette Warrior
6) GOP3 (but only because of one of the three)
7) Brew City Brawler
Brew City Brawler
9) Boots and Sabers
10) Folkbum (Note, if it were only Jay posting there, he'd be much lower. KR and a few others bring him down. Although they've been quiet lately).
11) Scott Feldstein
12) James Wigderson
13) Dean the thoughtful conservative
14) Nick Schweitzer
Those are just the ones I read regularly. I suppose it's sort of a bell curve now that I look at it, but the worst of the worst are on the right. That's just my opinion though.
Ooops. I included BCB twice. I meant to have Shark and Shepherd in there in either the 7 or 8 spot.
sU, you have illustrated EXACTLY why LIBTARDS hate me. ....I don't back down. They piss and moan and attack and hate and piss and attack and moan and hate some more, and your garden variety RINO-NEO-CON runs for cover. I don't.
Peter just vented in a manner that most LIBTARDS are keenly familiar with. Peter's angry diatribe was almost "liberal" in tenor and tone.
I forgive him, like I forgive all contrite and right minded libtards.
Allah-is-just-all-right thinks Conservatives are mean.
What a moroooooooooon. Clowns like Allah-is-just-alright.... are creepy.
"you have illustrated EXACTLY why LIBTARDS hate me"
I can't speak for the "LIBTARDS" but I don't hate you. I find your caracature hilarious.
I don't think anyone hates you Mickey.
Fred
You Complain about unfair Treatment??
Here's an exact comparison
Last week you were offended that folks called you out for deleting an incorrect blog post rather than posting an apology or admit your error!
You said it was no big deal to anyone but your haters.
Yet this week your brother right wing blogger,
leeter in a bottle, is all over Andrew Sullivan for doing the same thing you did!
The Right wing blogosphere is all over him!
So who's treating who unfairly?
http://lettersinbottles.blogspot...drew%
20Sullivan
I really don't care to comment on anything here...
Other than Bryan, thanks for the hair joke.
Keep up the good work Fred.
3rd way with all due respect I am trying to stay above the fray here, you are asking me to call out all these other blogs frankly I don't see the point.
This thing is going down hill and picking up speed.
I choose not to sling any more mud.
I'm disappointed BloggingBlue didn't make jesusisjustalrightwithme's list. I'll have to try harder from now on...
I'd have to agree with 3rd way. Most of us don't hate mickey/gus; we just feel bad for him.
Yes Campbell, most of you do hate me. You hate all moral people. You love abortion and gay rights, you hate morality. You love Marxism and freebies, you hate Captialism. You love emotion and power, you hate logic and reason. Yes Campbell you do hate....on a daily basis.
I don't hate you, some day you will grow into a man. Maybe.
Am I missing something? Who's Campbell?
I don't know but he sounds like a really terrible person.
Zach,
Never read it. Where on my list do you think it'd fall? The list includes blogs I like with authors that are not hacks too.
The only real question left is....WHY? Why is the left so intolerant and bigoted? Where does this anymosity and hate derive from?
Is it genetic, or is it a choice?
Ha ha. Nice one Mickey. I think it's because they are all FLAG-BURNING, MUSLIM SOCIALISTS! Libtards hate because they have so much EXTRA TIME because they DON'T have jobs like we hard working PATRIOTS do.
jesusisjustalrightwithme, you'd have to tell me where my blog would rate on your list. Read it and let me know...
jijawm, if I don't have a job, why have I been going to an office 5 days a week? What's more, why do they keep letting me in the front door?
BTW, you forgot to mention how we libtards all want big fat guvmint handouts!
That's gubmint Zach.
Allah-is-a-ok, isn't that far from the truth.
Libs have been known to burn the flag. Virulent strains of LIBTARD-ism still do.
Libs have been known to pretend that VIOLENT ISLAMOFASCISTS...(a "virulent strain" of Islam), are not a threat and need libs protection.
Libs are known to support groups and individuals that will not work and are a drain on society. They have "lot's of time" on their hands.
Lastly, Patriots support, defend and love America.
Libtards don't. They believe others should support, defend and love America. Libs want an America that is weak and full of lazy weak libtards.
And Allah-is-a-ok, thinks taxing those who have achieved is a bottomless LIBBY-BANK.
Libs want an America that is funded by successful people, and Libs want to punish the successful, because LIBS constituents are generally weak and not successful.
Thanks Allah-is-a-ok!
Yep.
Looks like Kay took the high road again.
I've read Blogging Blue...not so much....
For those who did not find anything vulger or vile on blueracine, then your mind is already gone.
Dan, just link to a post. I didn't look that hard. I'm not saying it isn't vile, I just didn't see it in the first few posts I read.
check again.
Okay, I'll give you one on that top post. That's pretty rude.
I'm not excusing it at all here, but that seems to be in response you you calling her vile and vulger on this post. Anything from before that actually is?
Dig through the history, I don't care to.
JJAWM, check the post about Palin, Hillary and pant suits. To me, it isomething you would find over on an r-rated or x rated site. But then, I am a prude.
So which splinter of Peter should we believe? "Do I hope we get hit over and over again by the jihadists? No. Do I believe we will? Sadly, yes. And the only silver lining in a black cloud that could kill millions of Americans is that it might take such events to give Americans the buyers’ remorse to once and for all send this bunch back to the kook fringe where it belongs" or "In fact, I seriously hope this country gets attacked by terrorists over and over again and every possible bad thing that can happen does happen … to people like you"? Are those two statements very different?
Do we believe "If I had the money, I’d put a bounty on his melon. Seriously." or do we believe "Do I hope someone shoots The Messiah? No. It would deprive their children of a father, and no child deserves to have his or her father taken away." Note the careful parsing of his sentence - he didn't repudiate his earlier desire to see Obama dead, did he? He's worried about the kids and not the man? Can anyone find the word "sorry" in this supposed apology? Badger Blogger wrote that Peter also "said something that shouldn’t have been said" at Drinking Right, hours before he posted his threat at B&S. Anyone know what that was? What's the reason behind flushing the entire THEB oeuvre? Was he ashamed of it? Something there he doesn't want the world to see?
I'm sorry JJAWM... your concept of ranking bloggers from most hateful to least is clearly flawed. Anyone who reads Dean Mundy and myself, and especially anyone who has MET Dean Mundy would NEVER EVER EVER rank him as more mean spirited as me. He doesn't belong on the list at all.
All other rankings you have there are suspect because of that one error.
Nothing foul sticks in my mind about Dean, either, but JIJARWM's ranking is just his personal opinion. As for whether people are more polite in person... what does that say about blogging and bloggers?
Uhh, check again, you and Dean are both at the "not hateful" end of my spectrum.
I think Nick was offended that he wasn't considered more hateful than Dean. Poor Wigderson is offended by the ranking as well.
Fred, if you made a mistake it was encouraging him to continue online. His "explanation" sounds even worse, with the only argument against assassination that it would make the president-elect's children fatherless. He actually offers up another argument in favor of assassination. Peter is sick. He needs help, not a blog, and not encouragement, and certainly not any showing that his views are legitimate representations of the Right.
I have been a pack-horse in conservative affairs too long to see someone like Peter make us all look terrible.
You may think you're helping Peter, but you're not. If you have any influence over him, get him to stop. If you don't have any influence, then quit legitimizing what he writes.
It is clear parts of of each side of the Cheddarsphere sometimes need some adult supervision. Thanks for standing up and being that adult Wiggy.
Even if it does make you sound like a libtard.
Geez, we got Peter and the left has the Daily KOS and Huffington post and .....
None of us can influence blogs with nation wide reach, but we can only influence our peers.
Comparing Peter to either of those places, or any local lefty is absurd BTW.
I agree with James. Peter does need help. Politics aside, I really don't like some of the things he has said to people.
"A pack-horse in conservative affairs"? Wow, Peter said the same thing about me once, too. Sorta. Can't link to it, it's down the memory hole.
JF, it's from a line in Richard III.
Ere you were queen, ay, or your husband king,
I was a pack-horse in his great affairs;
Yes, I think Peter was channeling some other line of the Bard when he suggested that I'd be eager to have sex with a horse. This is from his immortal post, "Memo to the Hate Left", now found in the bit bucket.
I'd like all you lefties to comment on Radio Talker Randi Rhodes who called for Bush to be assasinated.
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles...14-
03BD3977A7F0
Point me to one occurance of you complaining about her or asking for her to pulled off the air.
We are talking a national radio host here as compared to a local blogger.
Waiting.....
Fred,
No idea who she is. If she said it, that's totally lame. She should get help and anyone that listens to her show in a supportive way is kinda douchey. Of course, I'm not a lefty.
That said, can you find an example of one of the local lefties linking to her or reccommending her or anything of the sort after she said it? You know, so it's like equivalent to what you did for your dangerously bonkers buddy.
You were, and we were, talking about a local blogger as opposed to a national radio host. Peter's outburst is direct. Rhodes' gun-shot promo is the same, you think?
Way to just illustrate Freds point perfectly Foust.
Randy Rhodes says it to a Kinda sorta well OK not really National audience, and she gets a pass.
Peter shoots off at the keyboard and hes evil and must be avoided like the plaque.
Seriously?
BTW John:
I don't ever remember hearing you deny the horse story.
I don't listen to Rhodes. It doesn't surprise me that you can find anything you like on the Internet. You'll find what you are looking for, even if it's a three-year-old counter-example. It doesn't surprise me that a national radio program would do something like that. The bit doesn't name Bush, it implied him. They apologized for it. I'm not hanging out on RedState or DailyKos to post. I'm here to listen and talk about Wisconsin politics. Peter's outburst is local, not national. Did he apologize for it?
As for the horse rumor: completely unfounded. I used to raise sheep.
That was really B-A-A-A-D John!
That was really B-A-A-A-D
That's what she said.
Commenting by HaloScan
