Enjoy the holiday everyone!
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
pledge allegiance to boeing, the #1 manufacturer of weapons in the world! then blow shit up.
Thanks to our troops today and in the past who are the reason we can celebrate Independence Day.
#1 Back to your commune hippie.
I just went to a Tea Party in Bozeman where there were over 2,000 attendees…3 times bigger than the last one.
Deficit Spending is the #1 issue.
It’s gotta stop.
First Bush, now Obama.
Folks are fed up.
It will be the 2010 defining issue…Fed Debt.
3 – 2k? Still a puny number no matter how you cut it. How many were packing heat?
As Schweitzer remarked, “Folks in Montana in CRAZY about guns…”
So given the source, I understand the sentiment. Fear works well on some people…
Was there any fear about the deficit run to finance WWII? We’re trying to finance the reconstruction of this country after the spectacular failure of right wing governance.
I was browsing the reviews of Fred Kaplan’s book “Daydream Believers” and I was struck by this:
A description of the worst Preznit ever’s strategeries and it nails to a great extent the Limbaugh mentality parroted by the trolls here.
I’ll have to request this book from the library.
@3
And how’s this for irony:
@5
You should. It’s a great book.
@4
Stop picking on poor Mr C. He can’t help it if the wingnuts were in a trance and didn’t notice Bush’s spending like a drunk sailor for the last 8 years.
.
@3 Mr. Klynical Spews: “I just went to a tea party in Bozeman”
I supppose it’s probable that, given how utterly and completely stupid you are, you instead hooked up with the Green Coalition of Gay Loggers for Jesus who were protesting in Bozeman today.
http://bozemandailychronicle.c.....0march.txt
Palin Threatens To Sue Bloggers, Media
Soon-to-be ex-governor Palin’s attorney issued a threat to sue newspapers and bloggers who have posted public comments that his client is “under federal investigation.”
Personally, I think that guy should read New York Times v. Sullivan. He must have missed that case in law school.
@10…RR…
Not so fast, especially in your case. The “actual malice” standard should be easy to meet with all the poison, lies, vitriol, and downright pre-flush that you’ve uttered about Gov. Palin.
Ipso facto you are the walking poster boy for actual malice.
Better start getting your assets nice and liquid in order to pay the damages.
The Piper
i thought you guys liked the tea party protesters? oh no, wait. that was the iranian protesters you liked.
Pooper posts: “Better start getting your assets nice and liquid in order to pay the damages.”
If this is the best you can do, we now all know why you are an ex attorny. You are incredibly inept.
Way to go Steve @ 9 above. I was going to mention that. Sounds like a great group. And of course KKKycal KKKlow is a liar as this latest tea party in Bozeman numbered “in the hundreds” per the local paper, not “two thousand” per his deranged claim.
@13: Tell us about Hitler, truthy.
truthy,
is it true Patler found out Rockwell was a secret marxist? Please explain.
Daddy Love spews: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
I’m here to combat the newly found enthusiasm of a couple of our boys in here for telling us the Presidential Approval Index from RasmussenReports.com. According the Rasmussen’s site, “…the Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve.” Today it is at -2 (33% Strongly Approve and 35% Strongly Dispprove).
Mr. Cynical is fond of tellng us about it, at least on the days when it is negative. For example that he doesn’t tell us is that, as of today, overall, 53% of voters say they approve of the President’s performance so far, and 46% disapprove (index of +7). These are almost exactly his Election Day percentages and indicate that his support is quite remarkably stable.
Piper Scott tells us, even less usefully, that Sarah Palin’s “latest Pew poll” favorable v. unfavorable numbers are 45 percent favorable versus 44 percent unfavorable, and then he compares that to Rasmussen’s Presidential Approval Index. This is misleading in a number of ways.
– One is a poll of job approval ratings, and other is whether a person is looked upon favorably or not.
– The Rasmussen index is calculated only from thsoe people who indicated the strongest feelings on the matter. If you look in the Pew poll at Palin’s Very Favorable percentage (15%), versus her Very Unfavorable percentage (22%), you can see that HER index is -7. It’s still a meaningless comparison but one which for propaganda purposes does not sound as good, eh?
I don’t know what Sarah Palin’s job approval numbers are in Alaska, but I am guessing they’re pretty much in the toilet.
However, we CAN find out Obama’s favorable/unfavorable numbers, can’t we? In the same Pew poll that Piper cited for Palin, Obama’s Very Favorable percentage is 37% and his Very Unfavorable percentage is 11%, putting his index at +26. Now this number CAN be directly compared to Palin’s -7. In an honest comparison, Barack Obama blows Sarah Palin away. But honest people already knew this.
In addition, Obama’s overall numbers are Favorable 72% and Unfavorable 25%. Again, Barack Obama blows Sarah Palin’s Fav45%-Un44% away.
Hey, we all already know that these were lies and that Mr. Cynical and Piper Scott are the lying liars who tell them.
sources:
http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_fav.htm
http://www.pollingreport.com/p.htm
http://www.rasmussenreports.co.....tics/obama
@11
You know, Crackpiper, if you were trying to use the phrase ‘ipso facto’ in order to make yourself look smarter, you should probably do it in a comment that isn’t completely ridiculous. If it was that easy to just sue any random internet commenter for libel, we’d all be figuring out how to split up Puddybud’s collection of Earth, Wind, and Fire records right now.
@17…Lee…
Well, if you’d bother to look into what rabbit claimed then you would understand the comment.
BTW…it is that easy to sue any random Internet commentator for defamation. The issue lies in public personalities suing under the standard set out in NY Times v. Sullivan, which requires a showing of “actual malice” before a plaintiff can recover.
An ordinary citizen isn’t obligated to show that element of the tort, but someone in the public eye must. Of course, it exists among the comments of the HA Happy Hooligans such that malicious redundancy becomes the order of the day. Saying spiteful, damaging things that you know, or have reason to know, are false with the intent to injure can still get you in lots of trouble.
The cumulative nature of the malice qualifies to make it ipso facto per se. The evidence is here by the ton, and rabbit and others (you too) stand condemned out of your own mouths.
Really…the landscape is littered with it.
The Piper
I just finished watching New York City’s fireworks display on my 5″ b&w TV. That was a hell of a show! I’ll bet it was pretty in color. NY votes Democrat, too. Most patriotic town in America.
@2 You’re welcome.
@3 So — deficit spending to give tax cuts to billionaires is OK, but deficit spending to save the economy isn’t? Typical Republican values.
@6 “The Tea Party, a conservative movement initially organized to protest ‘out of control spending at all levels of government,’ …”
I think this should be rephrased, “The Tea Party, a conservative movement initially organized to protest ‘out of control spending by Democrats at all levels of government,'” because they certainly didn’t object when Republicans were doing it. What a lame bunch of juvenile hypocrites.
@6 (continued) Oh, here’s another real charmer from the same article:
“Organizers of the Tea Party – who have said they do not oppose Leland’s march – do contend that it would set a dangerous precedent to require protestors to pay for a demonstration, since it is a constitutionally protected right.”
Yeah, right. These are the same guys whose party kept protesters a mile away from Bush’s motorcades and sicced the cops on demonstrators in the streets outside their last two national conventions. Apparently they think only they have constitutional rights — a constitutional right to make the citizens of Bozeman pay for their silly little demonstration, that is.
GOP = H – Y – P – O – C – R – I – S – Y
Let’s be frank: Republicans are bullies. They want to tell other people what to think, what to do, what to say. If you object, you get smacked on the head by a club-wielding regime enforcer. I can’t tell the difference between GOPers and Iran’s ayatollahs.
@11 Malice? You’ve got to be kidding! Malice isn’t necessary. Merely telling the truth about Republicans more than suffices.
Golly Frank Pelletizer, it isn’t our side pushing for the Fairness Doctrine…
@13 What I find really interesting is pooper’s attitude toward free speech. He clearly doesn’t believe in it. I can understand where Palin’s attorney is coming from — he’s in it for money, and so, probably, is she. But pooper? He’s just an ornery cuss who can’t stand any opinion that doesn’t agree with his own.
Even in Alaska, a state full of fortune hunters, it’s hard to find anyone who loves money like the Palins. I think her whole political career is aimed at about making money. That’s my opinion, and I’m entitled to it! Don’t like my opinion? Sue me!
It’s hilarious that teabaggers think they have a constitutional right to make taxpayers pay for their demonstration against taxes! This prove they’re nothing but gasbags.
@18 Uh, what did I claim, crackpiper? That some bloggers and newspapers post comments that Palin is “under federal investigation.” And you think that’s actionable? Good grief, man, you’re a joke.
@18 Here ya go, crackpiper:
The abruptness of her announcement and the mystery surrounding her plans has fed widespread speculation. But Palin attorney Thomas Van Flein on Saturday warned legal action may be taken against bloggers and publications that reprint what he calls fraudulent claims.
“To the extent several websites, most notably liberal Alaska blogger Shannyn Moore, are now claiming as ‘fact’ that Governor Palin resigned because she is ‘under federal investigation’ for embezzlement or other criminal wrongdoing, we will be exploring legal options this week to address such defamation,” Van Flein said in a statement. “This is to provide notice to Ms. Moore, and those who re-publish the defamation, such as Huffington Post, MSNBC, the New York Times and The Washington Post, that the Palins will not allow them to propagate defamatory material without answering to this in a court of law.”
Associated Press (quoted under fair use)
All I did was summarize this news story — and you think I can be sued for that??! No wonder you’re not an attorney anymore.
Just the other day Palin was bitching about having to spend $500,000 to defend herself against ethics complaints. Apparently she’s got plenty of money to hire a lawyer to bully her critics, though!
@26 No, it sure as hell isn’t. You guys think your side should be the only side to be heard.
@31…RR…
Parsing the truth and what you said again, eh what?
Essentially you claimed that NY Times v. Sullivan estops defamation litigation against someone like bloggers when what they say is directed toward Gov. Palin.
That’s just not true. If there’s actual malice, then it’s actionable.
That you’ve been the king of actual malice since Methuselah was in short pants goes without saying.
You make bald-faced assertions that turn out to be flat-ass wrong, yet you don’t have the integrity or courage to admit your mistakes.
Really…how do you stomach what you see in the mirror every morning?
The Piper
OK, so I went to Huffington Post to see exactly what Alaska blogger Shannyn Moore said that led Palin to sic a lawyer on her, and here’s what I found:
For weeks the rumors of a criminal investigation against the governor have been brewing. They are rumors, but are swirling fresh again with Palin’s resignation. I’m holding my breath for the other “Naughty Monkey” to drop. Another theory for the resignation is that the Palins would have to disclose the book deal as well as other financial details as governor.
She didn’t even say Palin is “under investigation,” but only that “rumors are swirling” of a “criminal investigation.” She also offers another, and perfectly plausible, “theory for the resignation.”
I certainly don’t see anything actionable here. If rumors indeed are swirling that a criminal investigation of Palin is underway, then Moore is simply reporting the fact that such rumors exist. In any case, Moore didn’t come anywhere near accusing Palin of criminal wrongdoing or even suggesting the rumors are true; to the contrary, Moore explicitly suggests there may be another explanation for Palin’s highly abrupt and unusual resignation.
All of this is the stuff of politics and public life. Palin is a mercurial — and apparently thin-skinned — public figure. And once you’ve become a public figure you can’t simply resign from the public eye. You can’t decide, “I don’t want to be the object of public discussion anymore” and force everyone to stop talking about you. Especially when you’ve been a relentless attention-seeker up to that point.
This is a woman who sought to possess vast power over our lives and futures, yet she thinks people don’t have a right to talk about her. Privacy is something she forfeited when she sought the public limelight and the authority that comes with high public office. We have a right to discuss, and criticize, those who would wield authority over us.
Someone needs to explain that to her.
@34 “Essentially you claimed that NY Times v. Sullivan estops defamation litigation against someone like bloggers when what they say is directed toward Gov. Palin.”
Uh, crackpiper, for an ex-lawyer (who presumably somehow graduated from an accredited law school) you sure don’t know legal terminology very well. Here, I’ll help you:
“Main Entry: estoppel e-!st@-pul
Pronunciation: e-ˈstä-pəl
Function: noun
Etymology: probably alteration of Anglo-French estopere stopping, from estoper
Date: 1531
Results
a legal bar to alleging or denying a fact because of one’s own previous actions or words to the contrary
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary copyright © 2009 by Merriam-Webster, incorporated”
http://www.referencecenter.com.....#038;flv=1
Apparently your premise is that because I dislike Palin, everything I write about here is “malicious.” I suggest you look up the definition of that term as well. Not the vernacular definition, but the legal definition of “malice” delineated in New York Times v. Sullivan in terms of the showing a public figure has to make in order to have a cause of action for libel.
“Really…how do you stomach what you see in the mirror every morning?”
I like what I see in the mirror: A U.S. war veteran, a patriot, and a Democrat. Thank God I’m not a Republican! Then I’d have trouble living with myself.
@36…RR…
Whatever…
You don’t like how I used a word, so you use that as a diversion to engage in your own huff-and-puff, which is something you do a lot when caught with your rhetorical pants down.
You misinterpreted NY Times v. Sullivan, didn’t you? But you haven’t the intellectual honesty to admit it, which makes you a pathetic humbug.
Sucks to be you…
The Piper
@34 “You make bald-faced assertions that turn out to be flat-ass wrong”
If this was actionable every Republican in the country would be in the defendant’s dock.
I think Pooper inhaled too much fireworks smoke tonight.
@34
You make bald-faced assertions that turn out to be flat-ass wrong, yet you don’t have the integrity or courage to admit your mistakes.
Oh my god, I think I just hurt myself laughing at this.
Crackpiper, please stop digging. If you can’t tell that what Roger does in these comment threads is well outside the scope of what those laws are meant to deal with, you really are the dumbest person I know.
@40…Lee…
His bald-faced assertion was about a legal standard, and he was flat-ass wrong (you’ve been there – you know what it’s like to be flat-ass wrong).
When confronted with the correct standard, he didn’t acknowledge his error and correct his mistake – he simply did a shuck-and-jive to avoid being embarrassed, which only compounded the embarrassment.
If he is a retired member of the bar (something I increasingly doubt, given his fubaring such a well-known case as NY Times v. Sullivan), then he has an ethical obligation to correct his mistake.
Got it?
The Piper
lee, i’m not sure why you called the thread “independence day”. if it was christmas, you wouldnt call it christmas, would you? you’d call it holiday. so, instead you should call the fourth “holiday, day”.
makes it more consitant.
@41
I know Roger Rabbit. He is a retired attorney. And he appears to understand the laws regarding libel much better than you.
This statement:
Is dead fucking wrong. No judge would look at a bunch of flip comments left by an anonymous commenter with no audience and who makes no real attempt at being taken seriously and rule that that adds up to “actual malice”. Goldy and I deal with issues like this occasionally when crackpots come after us (remember Bradley Marshall?). We understand the law. Roger Rabbit understands the law. Apparently, you think the law means whatever you feel like pretending it means.
Hi all,
This is a completely annoying holiday that celebrates violence, even more annoying than Thanksgiving which is built around a lie.
I worked hard all day and wanted to get some sleep but there’s too much noise out there, and it’s the type of noise that accesses my hard-wired human desire to get up and defend my domicile.
It’s also drier than it’s ever been since records have been kept, so fires are a possibility.
And besides, I come by my dislike of this holiday proudly, by my heritage, I’m the descendant of loyalists.
Of those of you who had ancestors here then, many of you may be too, since at the very least 30% of the population was loyalist.
But the winners always write the history.
My maternal grandfather’s family had to flee after the Revolution. They went to Bermuda and my grandfather came back just in time to get drafted for WWI–(a war sold on lies) and then catch the pandemic of 1919.
Lucky for him and me, grandma nursed him back to health.
You always hear about “taxation without representaion.”
But while Britain made a lot of money off colonialism around the world, they lost money on their 13 colonies here.
The Boston Tea Party was a protest initiated by the American smuggler industry against the REMOVAL of a tax on Britich shipping, which essentially leveled the playing field so that the American ships would no longer have an unfair advantage. However, all of these people were engaged in the slave trade and there weren’t any heroes in the story. (The Tea Party facts from Barbara Tuchman’s The First Salute).
(That’s not to take away from these “tea parties” people are having now, just pointing out how much nationalist propaganda becomes fact when everyone is thinking like a herd animal.)
So that’s why I’m not enjoying this bogus holiday.
Cheers,
new left conservative 1
PS. Except it’s not totally bogus–good things did come out of it, good people fought on the side of the Revolution, and the first George W, in sharp contrast to the later one, was by far our greatest president ever. Historic precedent would have had him be a corrupt despot, and that would have changed things wouldn’t it?
Hey let’s change the subject. A Cook County Libtardo Judge John J Fleming gave no jail time to Chicago Police Officer Tony Abbate after he pummeled the female bartender as she worked in a bar. The judge was endorsed by the libtardo progressive gang called the Chicago Council of Lawyers (CCL).
Goes to show you how libtardo judges react in libtardo cities.
Happy 4th to you too! Now try growing up and being a Dad asshole. No more illegal activities or Taco Bell. At least try and hide your bongs at the very least. I feel sorry for your wife/girlfirend/some chick you banged and knocked up. She deals with a lot.
Hey, Puddy…is there some kind of code book to translate the gibberish you post into something resembling the English language your ilk whine should be the only one used in this country when you’ve got your knickers in a knot about Mexicans?
As what’s left of the Republican cause dissolves into worthless muck, your postings have advanced beyond their usual level of irrelevance. Your use of slogans copied from Fox News has reached the extent that they’ve run together.
Is this really a way to mask the fact that you have absolutely nothing worthwhile to say?
@47
Your use of slogans copied from Fox News has reached the extent that they’ve run together.
lol artie, i suppose its better to use slogans from more than one outlet. like cnn, nbc, abc, cbs, nyt. you could just pick one of them because they all say the same thing. of course, when you take your orders from tel aviv, then it would tend to make the message the same.
FartyArt: “knickers in a knot over Mexicans”? What are you babbling about? Puddy posted about libtardo judges letting libtardo policeman off for pummeling women. You are crazy this morning.
@43…Lee…
Still, rabbit got the law wrong, refused to correct his error when called upon to do so, and thereupon engaged in a rather silly evasion of his responsibility in that regard.
Your defense of this is evidence itself of an intellectual lack of integrity. And you also mistate the standard and potential liability. It’s there, so you need to OBJECTIVELY deal with it, not just do your hide-bound ideological thing.
You did say something, however, that is quite telling when you described rabbit as “an anonymous commenter with no audience and who makes no real attempt at being taken seriously.” In your words, then, rabbit’s both a complete irrelevency and a joke.
Wow! With friends like you, who needs enemies?
So, again, what he did was mistate NY Times v. Sullivan, and bloggers can be held liable for defaming a public figure when the actual malice standard is met.
Now, this brings up another subject: blogger credibility. The whole “just reporting rumors” garbage is one reason a lot of people continue to refuse to take bloggers like you and Goldy seriously. That you make zero effort to look into rumors before spewing them on HA, and because you’re pretty selective about spewing only rumors that smear a certain class of people (those with whom you disagree) says more about you than than those against whom the rumors are aimed.
Another word for all this is gossip. Couple actual malice to it, and it becomes actionable defamation.
Will they – and you – correct all this or call upon the HA Happy Hooligans who’ve repeated the canard to correct the misstatements? Especially after the FBI has totally and unequivocally debunked the rumors?
You have a choice: be a stand-up guy and deal with the truth of the situation, or continue on the vitriolic path you’ve followed so far. Which will it be?
And rabbit…I’m also calling upon you to give equivalent time to the reports of the FBI denial as reported in the LA Times. And I’m again calling upon you to correct your misstatement of the law.
Pretty simple…
The Piper
Is this the malicious “Piper fucks goats” thread I’ve been waiting for?
@51…Steve…
Thank you for providing another bit of evidence in support of my argument.
The Piper
What a silly argument over supposed “libel.”
Piper says his in his last: “…bloggers can be held liable for defaming a public figure when the actual malice standard is met.”
I read ALL of the posts, and you know what? No one here has disagred with that statement, and in fact everyone discussing the issue agreed explicitly with that statement. Assuming that the other stnadards for libel are met, of course. As RR has said meny times, establishing that one has told the truth is an absolute defense in cases such as these.
The disagreement seems to be about whether, given the facts of the specific case in question, the plaintiff in such a lawsuit will prevail.
I think it is a pretty faint hope. Damn faint.
52 Steve
I have certainly heard that rumor swirling.
If nothing else, Palin’s lawyer’s clumsy attempt at pre-emptive intimidation is certain to attract MORE scrutiny from the press, not less.
@50
So, again, what he did was mistate NY Times v. Sullivan, and bloggers can be held liable for defaming a public figure when the actual malice standard is met.
No, he said absolutely nothing of the sort. Please point to the comment where he did. What he said (and what I’m calling you out for) is claiming that anything he’s said meets the bar for “actual malice”. Pretending to be a cartoon character while in the comment threads of a blog is not going to reach that bar. Even if you pass along rumors. You really are a brainless moron.
Now, this brings up another subject: blogger credibility. The whole “just reporting rumors” garbage is one reason a lot of people continue to refuse to take bloggers like you and Goldy seriously.
LOL! Goldy just won another award for the work he does here at this blog. And you’re a local laughingstock (by the way, the posts I wrote making fun of you are still some of the most highly trafficked posts on my site. I’ve run into people who’ve started laughing when they find out I was the person who wrote the Crackpiper posts).
You have a choice: be a stand-up guy and deal with the truth of the situation, or continue on the vitriolic path you’ve followed so far. Which will it be?
The truth of the situation is still the same. What I wrote in comment #43 still stands. Roger Rabbit has absolutely not crossed the “actual malice” line with regard to Sarah Palin. You’re a clueless, petty buffoon who apparently has the same lack of understanding of the law that Sarah Palin’s own lawyers have.
Mr. Klynical failed to tell us the whole story. The Green Coalition of Loggers for Jesus kicked teabagger butt in Bozeman yesterday.
http://bozemandailychronicle.c.....oggers.txt
It appears too that Marvin was there to accuse the Gay Loggers of bigotry against gays.
@52 Why isn’t your outrage directed at Mr. Klynical for lying about attendance at the teabagger event in Bozeman? Hell, the teabaggers didn’t amount to diddly squat! The Green Coalition of Gay Loggers for Jesus protest was the real scene in Bozeman yesterday. Let go of the pomposity there, Piper, and show us a little regard for truth and justice. Oh, and gay logger’s robots deserve rights too, man. Get on it.
@52
Ok, so then how come Luke Esser hasn’t sued Goldy for his Luke Esser fucks pigs post? If you think there’s a lawsuit there, call Luke and have him do it.
“the Crackpiper posts”
I bet that’s a hoot. Piper’s such a vapid, pompous ass. It’s been a long time since I’ve encountered so much unwarranted smugness in a person. Link, please.
60 Steve
http://effinunsound.com/
There’s a Crackpiper post up now.
@56…Lee…
Look at rabbit’s post @10 where he sweepingly cites NY Times v. Sullivan. He misstated the case and the differing standards for defamation of public versus private figures.
Again, if those who publish lies about a public figure do so with an intent to do harm, that can rise to the level of “actual malice,” which then affords a public-figure plaintiff the right to recover damages.
In rabbit’s specific case, he is the poster boy for malice. Take a look, generally, at his posts over the years, then analyze whether they have a regard for the truth and whether those that are untruthful are designed to inflict injury or end up doing so because of a reckless disregard for the truth and the consequences of the utterance.
You, however, now seek to minimize him as nothing more than a “cartoon character.” Again, friends like you, etc…
That he adopted a cartoon-character pseudonym is irrelevent to the point at hand. On other topics, in other threads, rabbit has attempted to be taken seriously as an analyst and commentator. In support of that, I encourage you to look at what he’s written about light rail, sound transit, and transporation policy generally.
Are you saying that these posts should be regarded as nothing more than the rantings of “an anonymous commenter with no audience and who makes no real attempt at being taken seriously?” That he was a mere “cartoon character” when he uttered them?
Again, again, again…Rabbit, and now you, misstate NY Times v. Sullivan. See also subsequent decisions that refine the actual malice standard, especially Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., which held that an expression of an opinion that met the standard is actionable.
As for the award Goldy recently received? Is that the one that he touted a few days ago? The all-lefty, all-the-time back-patting that then dissed others who failed to toe your version of the party line?
When he gets something that commends him for his objectivity and awarded by an organization that doesn’t have an ideological ax to grind, let me know.
And as for the Crackpiper stuff? Where I hang, that only enhances my stature – you’re known as much for the enemies you make as for the company you keep.
The Piper
@59
If you search for “Scott St. Clair” in Google, it’s like the 3rd link. That’s how many incoming links it has.
@61
Look at rabbit’s post @10 where he sweepingly cites NY Times v. Sullivan. He misstated the case and the differing standards for defamation of public versus private figures.
No, he didn’t. Nothing he said in comment #10 is incorrect. And he said nothing at all about the difference between public and private figures. You’re just making that up.
Again, if those who publish lies about a public figure do so with an intent to do harm, that can rise to the level of “actual malice,” which then affords a public-figure plaintiff the right to recover damages.
Absolutely, so point out when Roger Rabbit has intentionally lied about Palin (without it being obvious satire, of course). I know what the law is here. There’s an attorney whose been trying to threaten Goldy and me with a frivolous suit right now, and based upon my readings of the law, I arguably have a case against someone else.
In rabbit’s specific case, he is the poster boy for malice. Take a look, generally, at his posts over the years, then analyze whether they have a regard for the truth and whether those that are untruthful are designed to inflict injury or end up doing so because of a reckless disregard for the truth and the consequences of the utterance.
His comments are almost all snark and satire. My god, you must sit around wondering how The Onion keeps itself from being sued all the time.
You, however, now seek to minimize him as nothing more than a “cartoon character.” Again, friends like you, etc…
Do you not know that Roger Rabbit is the name of a fictional cartoon character? LOL!
That he adopted a cartoon-character pseudonym is irrelevent to the point at hand. On other topics, in other threads, rabbit has attempted to be taken seriously as an analyst and commentator.
Ok, so point out one of the comments where he crosses the line of actual malice.
Are you saying that these posts should be regarded as nothing more than the rantings of “an anonymous commenter with no audience and who makes no real attempt at being taken seriously?” That he was a mere “cartoon character” when he uttered them?
What I’m saying is that satire is protected against the “actual malice” standard. What Roger does here is often done in a tongue-in-cheek fashion. The law makes distinctions that apparently you’re not smart enough to recognize yourself. That’s why Goldy was protected from the law with the “Luke Esser fucks pigs” post.
As for the award Goldy recently received? Is that the one that he touted a few days ago? The all-lefty, all-the-time back-patting that then dissed others who failed to toe your version of the party line?
Our version of the party line? Are you retarded? Goldy’s been spending much of the last two weeks trying to gin up primary challenges to Democratic legislators. I’ve easily criticized the Obama Administration in more posts than I’ve complimented them. And even the WaPo called HA one of the best state blogs in the country.
When he gets something that commends him for his objectivity and awarded by an organization that doesn’t have an ideological ax to grind, let me know.
I guess the Washington Post doesn’t count then. LOL!
And as for the Crackpiper stuff? Where I hang, that only enhances my stature – you’re known as much for the enemies you make as for the company you keep.
Whatever helps you cry yourself to sleep at night, Melinda.
Piper’s outrage at Roger and “malice” is laughable given the eliminationist rhetoric spewed from the right. Any brief examination of wingnut book titles alone tells a story of real malice. The news of yet another wingnut murdererer shooting up a church or assassinating a doctor reveals the consequences. In the era of Beck, Coulter and O’Reilly, Goldberg and Savage, a preening Piper would lay on us his “regard for the truth”, his concern of statements “designed to inflict injury”, and his pious regard for “the consequences of the utterances”. Shove it up your pompous ass, Piper.
@64…Steve…
That you live in emotional pain is evidenced in your projecting upon me any sense of “outrage.”
I’m not outraged – I merely sought to set the record straight by encouraging rabbit, and now Lee, to draw back from the precipice.
But you take that and explode into a confused Jabberwocky-like gaggle of cliches, oddities, and irrelevencies.
BTW…where do you stand on the “rumors” about Gov. Palin? Now that the FBI has totally debunked them, do you think that those who traffic in them should stop, then issue an appropriate correction and apology?
Please, tell me what you think.
The Piper
If there is a stronger word than “pompous” for a pontificator who is so full of himself that he keeps on spewing drivel thinking that an adoring public will hang on his every syllable, will somebody tell me what it is?
“Buffoon” is no longer useful as he has exceeded the greatest upper bound of its applicability
@65
I’m not outraged – I merely sought to set the record straight by encouraging rabbit, and now Lee, to draw back from the precipice.
What precipice? You’ve accused Roger Rabbit of two things he hasn’t done and we’re making fun of you for it. The only precipice here is inside your own head.
@66
“Buffoon” is no longer useful as he has exceeded the greatest upper bound of its applicability
Agreed.
Yes, when an FBI oficial says something, all rumors immediately cease to exist. Such is the awesome power of the FBI.
Y’all know that Piper’s just dutifully trolling, trying to help Palin’s lawyers intimidate and silence critical speculation about her fucking insane (seeming) antics.
@70
I don’t think he’s helping that much. :)
Rumors are also swirling about IRS investigations against SP. I assume that the FBI speaks only for itself.
@65 Sigh! A wingnut resorting to accusations of projection. I reckon it’s better that than your ackowledging just how fucked up your head has become, Piper. Continue to rage on about Roger and his so-called malice, you pompous right-wing whore, and ignore the murderers spawned by the right wing hate machine. We’ll convey to the families and friends of the dead how you view the “emotional pain” of progressive victims of real malice, right-wing hate, as mere “cliches, oddities and irrelevancies”.
Sarah’s Tweets here:
http://twitter.com/AKGovSarahPalin
It seems she is pro-freedom. A bold stand indeed.
@74
It’s like being pro-life, a rhetorical attempt to cover up the desire to reduce the freedom of others.
@17 Lee says:
.
ROFL.
That has to be one off the funniest comments I have read in a loooong time.
Ouuccch! Lee!
Piper, from the EFF thread, “Isn’t what most people take as the theory of evolution by now discredited?”
LMFAO!! What a fucking loon!!
@77
OMG, what a moron.
74 Funny thing Palin makes such a big tweety-deal about the parade in Juneau. Seems the organizers of the parade had a convertible all ready for her to ride in, and sent her an invite well in advance. They were surprised that she never responded, and instead showed up along the parade route with Todd, Bristol and the two babies for a brief photo op, and then left.
77/78 Well, the theory of evolution does fall rather short in explaining why Piper himself came to be with us.
Paying your taxes is patriotic.
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., attributed. (see Felix Frankfurter, Mr. Justice Holmes and the Supreme Court, Harvard University Press, 1961, page 71.)
81. ArtFart spews:
77/78 Well, the theory of evolution does fall rather short in explaining why Piper himself came to be with us
Evolution has a sense of humor.
Paying your taxes is all good and patriotic…if they are used correctly and if your not being robbed blind.
“Collecting more taxes than is absolutely necessary is legalized robbery.”
-Calvin Coolidge