How right can someone be? (Subtitle: The unifying traits of angry nitwit bloggers)

I never thought I’d find someone who makes this guy look both coherent and moderate, but thanks to Meatbrain I happened across this post on a wreck of a blog named, predictably enough, “American and Proud.” Its keeper, one Robert from the Dallas area, and Meatbrain have a bit of a history; Meatbrain wrote about a post in which Robert declared that “fucking queers” should be “banished to a damn Island somewhere and used for target practice.” By way of hollow retaliation, Robert ranked Meatbrain third among his picks for the five WORST people in the blogosphere for 2008 (caps his), with this description:

#3 Thinking Meat (Or thinking of meat)
This is another libtard troll, he has frequented here and several other “Right minded” blogs, he really never says anything other than the daily KO’s talking points. Rumor has it he is under house arrest for child molesting, I am not sure how true that rumor is, but I wouldn’t doubt it. TM is by far one of the most prolific trolls the blogworld has seen, he posts comments and blogs about us “Conservatives” He insults us the best he can by showing how big of a traitor he is. He has posted lies upon lies but calls it “education” I love the faux intelectual type, as you will see soon enough. Congratulations TM you have made the list.

When Meatbrain left a comment, Robert, not content to merely delete it, changed it from this to what you see now.


As a pointless mini-experiment, I left Robert a comment noting his spelling and grammar errors, always a sure-fire way to piss off dolts and smart folks alike. He altered it to suggest I was soliciting gay sex, and responded in such a way as to continue this nonexistent dialogue. I left one more comment, which Robert also modified to suit. I suspect that some of the follow-up comments ostensibly from others also came from Robert. Anyway, the whole exchange is here (and is funny for the fact that Robert still doesn’t know that “emence” is not a word).
All of this reminds me how uncannily similar far-right bloggers are. I’m sure the same can be said of god-free bloggers, but I like to think that although atheist commentary is largely the same in terms of content (as one would expect), styles and approaches vary tremendously. There’s no ideology at work here; critics of religion can logically support their positions and vary in their background–often coming from the church side of things themselves.
But nutjobs are ideologues. They deny any and all claims supporting anthropogenic global warming not because they understand or even care to investigate the science, but because they see AGW as a liberal cause. They rail against Marxism without having a clue what this means, and condemn the ACLU for stances it does not hold. They get all their “news” from sites like the WorldNut Daily and FOX. If they can even feign objectivity, they make no effort to do so. Look at Robert’s “About” page: He We says that as a nation, we “lead the world with compassion,” yet thinks the death penalty is not used often enough (this, from a Texan). Coherence is not a strong suit of these pundits.
So in this spirit, as in inveterate list-maker I am pleased to present a slate of five characteristic practices (and there are more) shared among almost all wingnut-bloggers:

  • The banning or editing of dissenting comments. Angry idiot bloggers will give lip service to pretending to do this because of excessive “trolling” by “libtards” and “moonbats,” but for the most part they don’t even disguise the fact that they are not interested in honest dialogue and simply prefer to spew bullshit unrestrained by calls for factual support or decency. Not surprisingly, they, being hypocrites, usually have no qualms about throwing tantrums into the comment fields of their interlocutors. Robert explains that he “reserves the right to edit, change, re-format or otherwise render hilarious any comment left at American and Proud that is deemed worthless or off topic,” but what he means here is that he reserves the right to behave like the craven soul he is and monkey with comments that point out why Robert’s own expulsions are unintentionally comical.
  • Uncontrollable urges to link all dissent with homosexual urges. Robert is an unusual case in his extreme homophobia, but even those who are able to avoid outright slurs tend to be unable to let go of any discussion in which they can inject anti-gay blather. The Opine-Editorial freaks who descend upon pro-gay sites like syphilitic yet indefatigable vultures comprise an archetypal example of this.
  • Rampant jingoism. One good reason to mock these blogs rather than ignore them is because they go out of their way to tell you how very American they are. Sorry, assholes, but you’re the folks everyone with a modicum of fair-mindedness and any sensibility recognizes as a massive drain on the country. You can’t write, you can’t go three “sentences” without calling for a homo or someone else to be put to death, you claim to love Jesus and to top it off you live in a lice-infested armpit like rural Texas and call it paradise. Just be satisfied that you can legally vote.
  • PayPal donation buttons. This one has always amused me, given wingnuts’ penchant for screaming about the liberal policy of doling out handouts to people who don’t deserve it. Well, if there’s a better example of a blogger whose site does not merit support than one who can’t assemble a sentence in English, alters comments, and in general shows no inclination toward truth or scholarship, I can’t conceive of it.
  • 5. Not linking to those being criticized. Absent the ability to reason or generate prose in non-private variants of English, winger-bloggers place undue importance on site traffic, and so they feel they are punishing the opposition by not allowing for the possibility of two or three extra hits referred from their pits of malevolence.
    But there’s another side to this: When someone with a brain (meaty or otherwise) writes about such foul assholes, chances are good that like-minded and similarly literate people will chime in with assent. The last thing an angry winger wants to do is expose his peers to evidence that what he has written is not, in fact, held in any esteem outside the acidic milieu of shitheads preaching hate and lies to other shitheads. That is, nutters won’t link to criticism of themselves for the same reason they won’t allow it on their own sites: It robs them of insularity, which is the only thing they have going for them, and punctures whatever paper-thin facade of credibility they have managed to erect within their own scattershot and synaptically substandard minds.

The reason I don’t mind giving this Robert sap and those like him a few hits is because I know that beneath the calcified layer of excrement surrounding what little cerebral matter he possesses, when Robert has been exposed as the rage-fueled and cowardly clown that he is, he recognizes it very well. He knows at heart that in advocating murder under an anonym he has no guts at all, and that his blog is nothing but a pulpit for ejaculating hateful spew into the faces of people depraved enough to eagerly lap it up. As with every other slack-jawed angry yokel, when someone points these things out, his only recourse is yell even louder, repeatedly call people faggots, and use the ban and edit functions of his blog interface to make himself feel marginally better. And I don’t feel it’s a complete waste of time to point fingers at people even if they’ll never change and only get off on the rare attention given to what they write, because in a world where Sarah Palin can become a legitimate vice-presidential candidate, understanding how stupid people think and behave is more important than dismissing them, tempting as the latter option may be.
Sometimes people like this disable comments altogether, but this is a good thing as it’s a step toward giving up blogging entirely; no one can keep churning out screed after screed without getting some feedback here and there about what people think of their ideas, and the feedback that racist assholes like the ones I’ve described in this post is, when limited to other blogs like this one, bound to be overwhelmingly negative. And while I roundly support the practice of unfettered idiots having as much of a say online as everyone else, it would hardly break my heart to see them keep their toxic bullshit to themselves.
Considering how infantile these biological adults’ behavior can be, it’s frightening to comprehend what they were like as literal children. Robert calls himself “proud,” but this is a laughable claim coming from someone who lacks the spine to attach a name to his views and has to resort to a literal blockade of outside input. Robert and those like him are nothing but angry cowards, plagued by just enough well-deserved guilt to keep them from really standing up for their beliefs. And they know it.

Advertisements
  1. #1 by Bob O'H on January 2, 2009 - 1:38 pm

    no one can keep churning out screed after screed without getting some feedback here and there about what people think of their ideas

    Oh, the ID crowd can. How about Casey Luskin? Or John A. Davison? If you haven’t come across JAD’s ramblings, then you’ve missed out on a real treat.
    I love it so!

  2. #2 by Bob O'H on January 2, 2009 - 1:38 pm

    no one can keep churning out screed after screed without getting some feedback here and there about what people think of their ideas

    Oh, the ID crowd can. How about Casey Luskin? Or John A. Davison? If you haven’t come across JAD’s ramblings, then you’ve missed out on a real treat.
    I love it so!

  3. #3 by Bob O'H on January 2, 2009 - 1:38 pm

    no one can keep churning out screed after screed without getting some feedback here and there about what people think of their ideas

    Oh, the ID crowd can. How about Casey Luskin? Or John A. Davison? If you haven’t come across JAD’s ramblings, then you’ve missed out on a real treat.
    I love it so!

  4. #4 by Kevin Beck on January 2, 2009 - 1:47 pm

    Well, the ID gangsters have an agenda and are being paid to pursue it. The people I’m talking about are anonymous plebe-tards whose only reason for blogging is venting and opining, just as with those of us who can write and English and are at least show some interest in distinguishing bullshit from fact.
    Also, I wonder how enthusiastically Luskin, Egnor, et al. would be if not for the attention they do get–PZ alone guarantees a huge audience, albeit a disapproving one. And with ID reeling, terminally so, from the Dover decision, the DI mouthpieces are at a point where their only choices are to be either despised or ignored. So they write about the people writing about them.
    Casey Luskin is not an idiot and, although this can be said of a lot of creationist flacks, he clearly does not but that which he so dutifully peddles. If there are IDers out there facing a real and daily crisis of conscience, he has to be one of them.

  5. #5 by hibob on January 2, 2009 - 2:01 pm

    While it does fall under the sin of editing of dissenting/extraneous comments, I still love the disemvowelment method of moderating trolls that Hayden developed and brought to the blog BoingBoing:
    “Q. All the vowels have disappeared from a paragraph I wrote! What’s going on?
    A. We did it. Someone (a moderator, one of the Boingers) was expressing displeasure at your remarks. The technique is called disemvowelling. It deprecates but does not delete the remark. With work, the disemvowelled text should still be readable. ”

  6. #6 by Warren on January 2, 2009 - 2:28 pm

    Robert declared that “fucking queers” should be “banished to a damn Island somewhere and used for target practice.”
    What about fellating or masturbating queers? Are they safe from this clown’s ire?

  7. #7 by Sigmund on January 2, 2009 - 2:50 pm

    One thing I’ve noticed about these sites is that, while they are almost impossible to use as an honest discussion forum, they are easy to infiltrate, so long as you act like a right wing simpleton.
    I’ve gone onto some of these sites as and experiment and tried to see if there was anything I could post that was so over the right wing line it should result in the banning of the commenter.
    It was impossible to do so and yet at the same time the slightest hint of liberalism (or even being reasonable!) would get you a lifetime ban!
    It actually turned into a game with a few friends of mine where, after registering for one particular right wing site we started telling the most ridiculous right wing tales, absolutely daring them to realize we were pulling their legs and ban us.
    The trouble is, of course, that it’s very difficult to distinguish between a hoaxer telling silly stories and a substantial part of their normal visitors – idiots!

  8. #8 by Kevin Beck on January 2, 2009 - 2:52 pm

    Hi, Bob!
    I don’t think I invoke a double standard here by saying that disemvoweling an undisguised troll is not on a par with completely changing the intent of a comment from someone responding something posted only as bait in the first place.
    Robert is not just a coward, he’s a pathetic coward. It’s not just enough that he says what he does anonymously–that alone should imbue him with the pseudointegrity to at least let comments stand. But he can’t; he doesn’t like how the world operates, so like many he uses a blog to create an illusion of control over things like homosexing and liberalism.
    In his New Years Resolution post he wrote “Conservatism made a comeback [in 2008] whether you like it or not.” Sure it did; the elections and shit don’t count, and you can make sure of that by saying things like “Whether you like it or not” and “‘Nuff said.” To guys like Robert, this represents sound logic.
    Robert inherits a fantasy dystopia and only adds to my disgust for that shithole of a state he lives in, which unfortunately catches a lot of innocents in the crossfire if I’m not careful to fight my own prejudices.

  9. #9 by Kevin Beck on January 2, 2009 - 4:25 pm

    Also, I wonder why Robert hates Donald Douglas so much. The guy’s blog (which I had never heard of and expected to be a mooontard commiebat libtwat site) is basically a serial complaint about the “radical left,” and though he’s four times as literate as Robert, he links to pages that are scarcely any better, is all for bombing the shit ouf Gaza at any cost, and thinks the Bush-Cheney administration gets good marks. That’s standard neocon fare, but he comes across as an unusually self-aggrandizing twit:

    “A number of bloggers have noted that they’ve been nominated as finalists in the 2008 Weblog Awards. I didn’t make the cut, and actually, I wondered why. I had a great year blogging, and I’m currently ranked 94 in Wikio’s December ‘top blog’ rankings. I don’t keep track of these things, in any case, and I probably would have had to nominate myself and then put up a bunch of posts asking readers to vote for me. I’m not really into all of that. Besides, I figured these contests are insiders’ popularity gigs, probably not worth the time to an academic blog geek like me.
    “Well, it turns out Jules Crittenden proved me right. He notes that the Weblog Awards are corrupt in his post, ‘Best Individual Blog 2008 Finalist’…”

    Sure, he’s not “into all of that,” but he bends over backward to explain that the reason he wasn’t picked for some trivial award is because the system is rigged.
    Am I the only loud, profane, overly opinionated blogger who isn’t a complete fucking asshole? Christ!

  10. #10 by Miguel on January 2, 2009 - 4:33 pm

    But nutjobs are ideologues. They deny any and all claims supporting anthropogenic global warming not because they understand or even care to investigate the science, but because they see AGW as a liberal librul cause. They rail against Marxism without having a clue what this means, and condemn the ACLU for stances it does not hold.

    Of course, “’cause pinko-commie-faggots should all … rantfrothrant …”
    This one’s good too:

    The basic principles of American and Proud are:
    1. God exists, Jesus died on the cross for ALL of our sins. I am not a religious fanatic, I believe life is meant to be lived and the Christian religion provides the BEST guidelines.

    My bold.

  11. #11 by Comrade PhysioProf on January 2, 2009 - 5:31 pm

    Am I the only loud, profane, overly opinionated blogger who isn’t a complete fucking asshole? Christ!

    Helloooooooo!!!!

  12. #12 by Badger3k on January 2, 2009 - 7:27 pm

    I am not inclined to give this asshat any traffic, period, but I am sure this real American Hero has a military history? Surely a dedicated patriot has (or better is) serving his country?
    Never mind, I just soiled myself and saw he is the usual cowardly wanking-on-muh-guns useless piece of crap. I do like the cognitive dissonance of this bit:
    “The blog owner reserves the right to edit, change, re-format or otherwise render hilarious any comment left at American and Proud that is deemed worthless or off topic.
    The blog owner will not censor the comment area. The blog owner is not responsible because someone is offended in the comment section. If for any reason you feel offended by comments left at American and Proud call 1-800-tuf-shit.”
    He will not censor, but he will change comments? WTF? What’s the difference cowardly pigfucker? (this is to the ranting wanker, naturally) – I hate pissants like this.

  13. #13 by Kevin Beck on January 2, 2009 - 9:27 pm

    Here’s something really funny. You may have noticed that the most prominent of Robert’s commenters is one “Texas Fred,” whose style is eerily like Robert’s and who manages to comments very quickly whenever Robert posts something. And Texas Fred has a blog of his own at TexasFred.net.
    Well, I looked up the the domain registration info for both AmericanAndProud.net and TexasFred.net, and guess what? They reside at the same IP address and have the same two nameservers.
    That’s right, folks; not only is Robert a nameless coward and a coward who alters comments, he’s a coward who had to create a second persona just to agree with himself and provide the illusion of support.
    What. A fucking. Loser.

  14. #14 by fannie on January 6, 2009 - 1:49 pm

    Hello Kevin, I’m so glad you’re back blogging again!
    Your 5 characteristics are right on. Over the past few years I’ve been making the rounds (mostly lurking) at different rightwing sites and I alternate between feeling amused, frightened, and sad for some of these people.

%d bloggers like this: