Sunday, January 17, 2010
From a notorious TigerHawk comment troll and former TH classmate and roommate (regular readers know who he is), a non-partisan Facebook status update:
[Notorious TigerHawk lefty comment troll] marvels at how Barack Obama's managed to piss away more hope and goodwill in exactly 1 year than teen newlyweds or a bad football coach. Can't blame Tea Baggers, white people's cognitive dissonance/world view or inheriting a vast mess at home and abroad for everything, folks.
Indeed. Not by a long shot. And notice how closely the "piss away goodwill" narrative matches the lefty criticism of George W. Bush in the months following September 11. There is a lesson in there, which is that few things are more ineffable or dissipate more rapidly than the "good will" of nation states and politicians.
Which is the difference between trolling and actually thinking about something. If CC could write his trolls here at 300 words per minute, he would gladly do so. Stream of consciousness, not thinking.
There is quite a contrast in coherence of arguments between his trolls here and what he writes on his own blog.
When I have read his blog, I have been surprised at how many times I have said to myself that CC has made a good point. I cannot recall having that reaction to his trolls here.
I don't believe he is the hate monger he appears to be when he posts at Tigerhawk, but his routine was old the first time I read it, and it gets more tiresome with every post. Racist comments do not belong in a reasoned debate.
On the contrary, I think it's an honest glimpse into his warped little mind; just with all tact and social buffers stripped away. His posts here are remarkably consistent, considering that they've been going on for a couple of years now. That implies either careful maintenance of false messages (unlikely) or a core of truth.
He likely really is racist, and justifies this (like all racists) with generalizations and collective guilt; you can glean some of this by when he *tries* to get under people's skin by saying something that he's sure they'll hate, but they don't, because they don't actually conform to his stereotype. A memory of a jab about Pres. Eisenhower being soft on commies and blacks or something like that comes to mind. Some comments about 'typical white people' are laughably stupid.
Look at the title of his blog; Nat Turner's Revenge. The historical Nat Turner's Revenge was a killing spree of Southerners in 1845, in which he led the massacre of 55-65 people (including children) with hand weapons because they were white. He bludgeoned at least one woman to death with a fence post. That's not an accidental naming; it's calculated. And it's only one element in a stack of examples which you could probably find here via Google, if you cared to.
He also once challenged me to a physical (yes, really) fight. If I'm ever in Baltimore, I might give him a ring, leave a fence post in his car or something.
He really is a shit head.
CC's blog has a novel explanation of why Obama has failed so far. Hint, it isn't Obama's fault: it's everyone else's.
His aides are second rate, the newspapers stink, his opponents are mindless idiots, the citizenry are moronic enough to reject his Oneness. It's not the Won's fault, says CC...
"What would the Obama White House—this supposed “Change” movement—be like if Barack had true counterparts to P. Kenneth O’Donnell by his side. And a Robert Francis Kennedy. If Joe Biden was more Lyndon Johnson and less, well, Joe Biden? Hell, if Glenn Beck et al were less clowns, and more like James Reston or Walter Lippman? If Al Sharpton was more Roy Wilkens, and Hillary Clinton a younger Eleanor Roosevelt in her? Beyonce was Eartha Kitt. Blake Lively was young Helen Gurley Brown? Or if Joe Lieberman was less a tool, and little more like Everett Dirksen?"
BT, as I have only bothered to go to his blog once - and it was a thoughtful piece - I am glad to have your report. I think his aim here is merely to change the subject, distracting more conservative persons when they are onto something.
As to the paragraph quoted by anon: isn't it amazing to listen to liberals wax nostalgic for the good old days, cherry-picking their memories as much as Archie Bunker? That Bob Dole, see, he was a decent Republican - not like they have now. And Bush 41. I considered voting for him. Priceless.
Dawnfire82: if he challenged you to a fight, then you are quite justified in your point of view.
What I have observed of CC is that he drops in a comment, and very rarely responds. That gave me the impression that he was more interested in stirring up the wingnuts than in a discussion. His trolls here are very poorly argued As an attorney he is quite capable of constructing a good argument: he just doesn't bother here.
Again, if he challenged you to a fight over the BS he posts here, then you are justified.