Friday, October 21, 2011

In Reply: Thom Paine Gets It Really, Really Wrong...

In reply to Liberal Socialist Attacks College Professor - Independent Realist
(Entire post appended below)
---

I hope you won't mind if I step in to clarify a few things... (I'm not even going to bother with the specious ad hom and misunderstanding of my political views, as none of it is germane to the topic at hand...)
It seems the chief instigator of the attacks on Prof. Douglas is one W. James Casper, a liberal socialist who has become so enamored with the destruction of Prof. Douglas that of Casper’s six different liberal blogs he personally writes, he has devoted voluminous space on three of them just to his attacks on Prof. Douglas. One of these blogs contains numerous posts offering the most insightful and elucidating verbiage “ROTFLMFAO!!, WHOO HOO!!, BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!, & LOL!!!” written repeatedly, hundreds of times, as if Mr. Casper were an obsessive compulsive on speed.
Only one blog, American Nihilist, regularly discusses Dr. Douglas. (The man has a Ph.D... Show him some respect.) A second, What'd I Say, is a catch-all for everything I put out there, from cross posts from my other blogs, to this very comment, whether or not you choose to allow it to show up here at your blog... (after it's written and submitted, of course...) The third, called Malicious Content--the one you reference here with all of the “ROTFLMFAO!!, WHOO HOO!!, BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!, & LOL!!!” nonsense, is a blog dedicated to recording trollage and spam, and the particular "elucidating verbiage" you refer to are word-for-word transcripts of comments made by the very guy you're defending, Dr. Douglas. That said, I agree with your characterizations of both the comments themselves and the person who wrote them.

As for whether or not I'm instigating attacks on Dr. Douglas, the only one's I'll accept credit for are my own--most of which, especially of late, have been responses to posts and comments made by Dr. Douglas, and all of which never leave the blog realm... (...with one exception... I do own a "Sasquatch Israel" tee-shirt, which I obviously wear in my offline world.)

Any suggestion that anyone has ever contacted the college where Dr. Douglas is employed, or has in any way taken any online disagreement with Dr. Douglas into his real life world at my bidding or for my benefit is quite simply wholly unsubstantiated paranoid nonsense cooked up by Dr. Douglas himself, for reasons that remain unclear...
"Casper (not to be confused with Casper the Friendly Ghost, who is actually quite benign) seems to want to curtail Prof. Douglas’s First Amendment right to free speech, while at the same time demanding he be allowed to continue defaming Douglas’s character, assumedly in the hopes that Douglas would be fired from his job."
Leaving aside the fact that only the government can curtail anyone's First Amendment rights, and I'm just a private citizen, exactly what leads you to the conclusion that I want to curtail Dr. Douglas' speech or have him fired from his job in the first place, particularly since I repeatedly say quite the opposite in my posts and comments, including speaking out clearly and consistently against those who've contacted the college where Dr. Douglas is employed--the impetus for Zilla's initial post, and thus this one, as well? Is there some specific link(s), post(s), or comment(s) that you can reference in support of your claims, or is this just some vague feeling you have when the moon rises, and the bats take wing?
"Perhaps we should each make a concerted effort to Google search the names W. James Casper and Repsac3, find out what sites he is commenting on, and flag each of his comments as offensive. Perhaps if enough of us do this, Casper will find himself banned throughout the web, and be forced back to the liberal socialist sty from whence he came."
Golly... Talk about limiting one's speech...

Isn't that a little cowardly, Thom? Wouldn't it be braver and far more honest to answer my posts and comments with posts and comments of your own--perhaps quoting and citing the things I actually say this time, of course--and beat me fair and square in the marketplace of ideas, right there at the posts where I'm spouting off?

I mean, I'm just sayin'...
---
Submitted for moderator approval Approved and posted (partially, anyway--It was submitted in two parts, but only the latter was approved. Nothing prior to my quote of Robert saying "Perhaps we should each make a concerted effort..." made the cut.) 10/21/11, 12:25 AM (or so), Eastern
---

UPDATE: Added (another) link to Robert's post (the title, below), for anyone who might've thought the other two contained in this post weren't sufficient.

While folks like Donald and Robert here want to hide what those they disagree with have to say by moderating their comment sections for content and limiting the number of verbatim quotes, citations, and links they use when blogging, I want nothing more than to give folks every opportunity to read exactly what they have to say, in all of it's contextual glory, and thus will quote and link to their exact words as often as I can... ...and sure, I'll even add a few if they don't feel I've given them enough "Look at ME!!!" time.

Please, go look at them. Read what they have to say. Weigh their arguments (as well as the arguments of those who disagree with 'em, of course), judge as fairly as your conscience allows, and come to your own conclusions. I ask for nothing more. And I ask for nothing less.
---
Liberal Socialist Attacks College Professor - Independent Realist

As we are all too familiar with, liberal socialist attacks on conservatives is commonplace. Whether at the various “Occupy” protests around our country, or on the many conservative blogs, or even from the Oval Office itself, these folks just can’t seem to help themselves. Whenever they are faced with truth (which happens anytime anyone takes an unbiased look into their beliefs) they come unglued. Along with their usual bag of tricks which include ad hominem attacks, circular reasoning, name calling, yelling incoherently, mindless chants, illogical babbling and outright lies, we can now add libelous attacks designed to destroy lives and livelihoods.

I first learned about the attacks on Professor Donald Douglas through a very insightful and well written article over at the Zilla of the Resistance blog. Entitled Stand Against Evil – Never Let it Win, Zilla’s article outlines just what has been happening to Prof. Douglas. By the way, in case you didn’t know, Prof. Douglas is the author of the American Power blog.

It seems the chief instigator of the attacks on Prof. Douglas is one W. James Casper, a liberal socialist who has become so enamored with the destruction of Prof. Douglas that of Casper’s six different liberal blogs he personally writes, he has devoted voluminous space on three of them just to his attacks on Prof. Douglas. One of these blogs contains numerous posts offering the most insightful and elucidating verbiage “ROTFLMFAO!!, WHOO HOO!!, BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!, & LOL!!!” written repeatedly, hundreds of times, as if Mr. Casper were an obsessive compulsive on speed.

After spending the day reading all six of Mr. Casper’s blogs (stopping only for the occasional trip to the porcelain throne – you know what they say “what goes in, comes out”), but refraining from reading his Huffington Post comments (leftist drivel rarely changes, and Casper’s doesn’t), I came to the conclusion that W. James Casper needs to loosen the hat band on his tin foil cap, and try ever so hard to come up with something original. Well, actually I guess he did in that most liberal socialists do not spend such an exorbitant amount of time (and bandwidth) trying to destroy someone simply because of their views. And that seems to be the crux of the issue with W. James Casper (aka: Repsac3), namely Prof. Douglas’s views. Casper (not to be confused with Casper the Friendly Ghost, who is actually quite benign) seems to want to curtail Prof. Douglas’s First Amendment right to free speech, while at the same time demanding he be allowed to continue defaming Douglas’s character, assumedly in the hopes that Douglas would be fired from his job.

But alas, isn’t defamation of character just another tool in the liberal socialist bag of tricks? Of course it is. And if Casper manages to get his way, and Prof. Douglas is terminated from his position, well, then of course his family will suffer, but I am sure that Casper will consider them “collateral damage.”

All in all, W. James Casper is a liberal socialist troll, and a troll of the first order. His blogs reflect this, his comments on other blogs reflect this, his tweets reflect this, and his Facebook wall reflects this. Unfortunately, conservatives do not engage in the same style of tactics used by W. James Wilson, otherwise he would likely find his blogs and twitter feed and Facebook wall flooded by the comments of conservatives outraged by his reprehensible actions. Of course, the lack of such a flood only encourages and emboldens cretins such as W. James Wilson to continue their attack on truth. Wilson has been banned not only on Prof. Douglas’s blog, but also on Andrew Breitbart’s site as well. Perhaps we should each make a concerted effort to Google search the names W. James Casper and Repsac3, find out what sites he is commenting on, and flag each of his comments as offensive. Perhaps if enough of us do this, Casper will find himself banned throughout the web, and be forced back to the liberal socialist sty from whence he came. Because if he isn’t stopped, then he will just continue. Why? Because this is what trolls do, whether they are liberal socialists like Casper, or islamic terrorists. The lack of a concerted effort to stop them just encourages them to continue what they are doing, and we must ask ourselves, is Prof. Douglas the only target, and who will be next? Just a thought.

Posted by Thomas Paine (Robert P. Tuttle, III) at 5:24 PM

9 comments:

Carl said...

Who's "W. James Wilson"?

repsac3 said...

You'll have to ask the author, Robert P. Hoover...

Wondering if the guy is even going to post the comment, or acknowledge that there even was one...

(What is it with these assholes and moderating before the fact...? Why are they so afraid to have people disagree with their posts? It's almost as though they don't have enough confidence in what they're saying to let dissenting voices be seen and heard, and to respond to them as they come...)

Kevin Robbins said...

Points out pretty well why you have a "What'd I Say" blog there, Reppy.

Love his masthead:

Thank you for visiting the Independent Realist Blog. My name is Thomas Paine, and on this blog I will be offering up my views on the news and current events. I call myself an independent realist because I do not subscribe exclusively to the views of either of the main political parties of Democrat and Republican. Rather, I prefer to make up my own mind, and espouse my own views based on realistic common sense. I sincerely hope you will find my blog articles enjoyably informative, and I equally hope that you will honor me with your opinions and comments. Thank you.

On the upside he's very polite in thanking the reader at the beginning and end. Downside is that Zombie Thomas Paine is coming on All Hallow's Eve to kick him in the nuts.

His blogroll puts to the lie his hoo-hah about being independent and not subscribing exclusively to any party. It's a wingnut extravaganza. And Thom, if you come on over please honor us with your opinion and comment. Pretty sure it'll stay up.

repsac3 said...

I just don't understand these guys, Kevin...

Is there really any value in lying about a guy, without quoting or citing word one of what he ACTUALLY writes, and then refusing to post or reply to his rebuttal? Does that really pass for a victory in these folk's minds? Are there really folks who take these kinda tactics or the folks who employ them seriously (aside others who do the same, I mean)?

It's just sad on sad... It really is...

I trust you saw (or soon will see) my new response, one post up...

Capt. Fogg said...

"Is there really any value in lying about a guy, without quoting or citing word one of what he ACTUALLY writes, and then refusing to post or reply to his rebuttal?"

Why sure there is. It lets you avoid having to show how you said anything incorrect or inaccurate or unfair by making it all about how big you are, how "potent" you are, how masculine, how liberal, etc. And then of course you get to elevate your fake umbrage to martyrdom when anyone responds in anger.

I mean, did Gadaffi bother to explain why he was an insane tyrant? No, much easier to make up crap about those Liberals out in the streets with guns. (I wonder how you say BWAHAHA in Arabic?)

Faced with having to explain why Romney saying the US has a divine mandate to rule the world does not sound like Stalin or Hitler, it's just so much easier to call the writer impotent and small and suggest proof of something by referring back to than to refute or take exception to the words -- and of course you can continue that back in the bubble with the doors closed and your ugly spider-eating friends will glad-hand you and declare victory.

Beats hell out of having to come up with a reasoned and reasonable response.

Repsac, you're right -- they don't have confidence in what they're saying because they're usually not saying anything other than crude insults. It's all they can do when defending the indefensible. If you're tall, they'll call you small, if you prove them wrong they'll scream liar, if you're an industrialist, they'll call you a communist: it's theater of the absurd because you can't answer an absurdity any more than you can answer an obscenity without descending to their level and the only way they can simulate relevance is to piss you off.

repsac3 said...

"Why sure there is.... ..."

I guess I was thinking' about sane folks when I wondered that, and that was my first mistake...

"it's theater of the absurd because you can't answer an absurdity any more than you can answer an obscenity without descending to their level and the only way they can simulate relevance is to piss you off."

FTW, truth division...

And I think what bugs Donalde most is that I seldom get angry... or rattled... or give up and let him say whatever nonsense he wishes, while I cheerfully ignore him...

"(I wonder how you say BWAHAHA in Arabic?)"

FTW, humor division... 8>) (I'd LOL, but the AssProf pretty much ruined it for me...)

Thomas Paine said...

My, my, aren’t we just a bit testy when faced with the truth. Well, please allow me to try and clear some things up for you. First off, to Carl, my mistake, I meant W. James Casper. Sorry, don’t know why I had the name Wilson on my mind, my bad.

Second, to Kevin Robbins, I am pleased that you like my masthead (and thanks for visiting by the way), but I must confess I am a bit confused by your apparent implication that to “make up my own mind, and espouse my own views” necessarily means I must accept a viewpoint that I find irrational, namely those espoused by yourself, Mr. Casper, and other leftists / liberals / socialists. The fact of the matter is, as I point out in my masthead, I do not subscribe exclusively to the Democrat or Republican viewpoints. In fact, I can find fault with both parties. Nor do I subscribe to every viewpoint of those in my “wingnut extravaganza” blogroll. Are my views exclusively conservative even? No. Although I do lean more towards conservatism than any other viewpoint. This hardly makes me a liar though. As for the real Thomas Paine rising up from his grave on Halloween to kick me in the groin, well, even metaphorically speaking the statement is only pandering to the fantasies of those who agree with you politically. Typical of the left. And finally, thank you for the invitation to come and comment over here as time allows.

Third, to Repsac: “Robert P. Hoover”? Well, I guess I deserved that. No harm, no foul. You can stop wondering if I am going to post your comment(s), yes, I am. I do have other commitments, and I do not take time off from them to blog or answer comments on my blog, so you’ll just have to wait a bit. This is not moderating before the fact, and call me what you will, I have been called much worse by people far more intimidating and scarier than you. Rest assured I have enough confidence in myself and in what I say to allow dissenting voices (such as yours) to be seen, and to respond to them. However, as I just mentioned, I do have other obligations that take precedence over blogging and responding to comments. I simply get to them when I can. That means on my timetable, not on yours. The fact that I allowed/published a “friendly” comment without publishing you immediately simply means that the ‘friendly” comment did not require a response from me. Yours did, hence the delay in posting your comment. And please do not flatter yourself by claiming that I only posted your comment because you made these additional comments. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Additionally, thank you for crediting me when re-posting my article, although I would have preferred quotations with credits and a link back, one must take what one gets I suppose, and many would simply have re-posted without giving credit where credit is due. So, for that I do sincerely thank you. Now on to the business at hand.

One of the things that you have consistently complained about is the lack of evidence to support Doctor Douglas’s claims against you. (I am conceding to your wishes here Repsac, and will refer to him as “Doctor” rather than “Professor” lest I inadvertently give your jibe any substance). The good doctor actually has given evidence to support his claims, in the way of statements and links on his blog. Perhaps you missed them. I didn’t. However, in the way of trying to make things easier for you to understand, I have simplified things somewhat.

As I am apparently not allowed to post my complete rebuttal to your arguments, they can be seen on my blog, http://independentrealist.blogspot.com/2011/10/w-james-casper-repsac3-responds.html

The evidence is there Mr. Casper. All you have to do is look.

repsac3 said...

There are two links to your post, Robert, so i'm not quite sure what it is you're on about... Perhaps you will do me the honor of linking to whichever of my blogs you refer to in future posts-- which so far, you've not managed to do a single time in two good sized posts, despite several references--and in the process show me how you prefer it be done.

I understand where you're coming from, commitment-wise, but that's just another reason not to moderate before the fact--which is obviously what you do, not allowing comments to appear on your blog until after you've read and approved of their content--and in your case, written your rebuttal post, apparently... (God fo'bid any idea with which you do not agree get out there without your simultaneous answer to it... As though real life is ever that neat and tidy...)

I have already submitted my 3 part response to your six fact extravaganza (though I've not yet posted it over at What'd I Say, so folks here can preview it while you review, revise and rebut...

And by the by, Robert... Have you any intention of approving / posting the first half of the comment in the post above on your blog, or were the observations about who actually posted those innane WOO HOO!!!'s and whatnot a little too much, given what you said about the author--back when you thought it was me, I mean?

With baited breath, I await the answer... whenever you're not too busy, I mean...

Carl said...

(I wonder how you say BWAHAHA in Arabic?)

MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

First off, to Carl, my mistake, I meant W. James Casper. Sorry, don’t know why I had the name Wilson on my mind, my bad.

Interestingly, Thom, the identical mistake occurred in an "independent" post BY ANOTHER NEOCON BLOGGER!

Reppie, take a closer look at the excerpts you posted. Identical mistake. "Casper" first, then "Wilson".

Conspiracy much, Thomboy?