Posts Tagged ‘proudly banned from little green footballs’

Robert Stacy McCain’s blog started out in 2007. He was linked by Glenn Reynolds for the first time that I can see on May 23, 2008.

Glenn linked to him 7 times under the name “R.S. McCain” in from that date till june 19th of this year.

He linked to him as “stacy mccain” 21 times between Feb 22nd 2009 and Sept 22nd 2009 (yesterday)

Now lets look at Little Green Footballs:

the first time the Tag Robert Stacy McCain is used was during Charles Attack on Stephen Green on September 12th 2009 (11 days ago).

If you search for the string rather than the tag, the first entry is September 12th 2009.

If you search for the string “The Other McCain” the first entry on LGF is September 12 of this year.

If you search for the string “stacy McCain” The first entry is, you guessed it, September 12th 2009.

The Phrase “R. S. McCain” produces no results, if you search for “Robert McCain” it yields no results.

Yesterday Charles attacked Glenn Reynolds for his link to Robert Stacy Yesterday and made it a point to leave that post up as high as possible today.

Also note that even Glenn Reynolds is now linking with approval to McCain. Here’s Instapundit denouncing neo-Confederates in 2005.

Now he’s praising them.

Apparently the importance to expose that racist, neo confederate and White supremacist Evil that is Robert Stacy McCain was so great that Charles waited until Robert Stacy McCain posted 5,071 entries on his blog on his blog before exposing him.

He was so outraged by Glenn Reynolds linking to him that he waited until his 21st instalance (yes that’s 20 instalances more than me, feel free to suggest to Glenn that I deserve another) to denounce him for it. Apparently he wanted to give Glenn every chance to change his mind.

My questions to Charles are these:

Why is that until Robert Stacy McCain wasn’t worthy of exposure until after September 12th of this year?

Why wasn’t he worthy of a tag until he started fighting back against you?

Did you mean to get to exposing him sooner or later but just didn’t get around to it?

And most important of all: what does Rush Limbaugh Honorary Lizardoid think of it?

I’d ask you in comments but since I’m proudly banned by little green footballs I figured I’d ask it here.

I may not have the experience of a combat veteran like Retired Sgt. Major David C. Carden of The Army Insider fame, but even I’m not enough of a sucker to fall for this.

Credibility is a precious commodity. Charles; I’m afraid you’re overdrawn.

Update: Moved a block quote to not include my introduction, also 21 chances, sounds like the New York Yankees and Steve Howe.

Update 2: Apparently Mr. McCain’s is so notorious a hater that the Wild Irish Rose blog who approvingly links to Charles latest attack on him didn’t find his extreme hated worth a post of denunciation in the entire history of the blog until today. Maybe they just didn’t get around to it till now, life is a busy thing you know..

However they weren’t too busy to turn on registration on comments after putting up the post. Amazing how speech rules tighten when you start to follow Charles.

Me I use moderation rather than registration, I hate giving my info and only have done so very rarely, but their blog not mine.

Update 3:
The man himself puts it better than I have then again he ought to, he writes for money:

Are Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer (Diana West, Richard Miniter, et al.) fascist sympathizers, as Charles Johnson has repeatedly alleged? All four of the individuals named are persons known to me, and I am utterly certain that these allegations against them are false. That Robert Spencer may have an unfortunate habit of sending “seething e-mails” (a temptation to which I have at times yielded myself) is known to me, but does not cause me to suspect him of being a crypto-fascist.

If I know that Charles Johnson has lied about people whom I know, and whose bona fides I have no reason to doubt, the question arises as to Johnson’s motive.

ya want motive just scroll up and hit the “beck” choice in the poll

In a mostly self serving story at the Washington post (despite the title) worrying about an Israeli strike on Iran, Jackson Diehl reports an important truth:

Between April 2001 and the end of 2008, 4,246 rockets and 4,180 mortar shells were fired into Israel from Gaza, killing 14 Israelis, wounding more than 400 and making life in southern Israel intolerable. During what was supposed to be a cease-fire during the last half of 2008, 362 rockets and shells landed. Meanwhile, between late 2000 and the end of 2008, Israeli forces killed some 3,000 Gazans.

Since April there have been just over two dozen rocket and mortar strikes — or less than on many single days before the war. No one has been seriously injured, and life in the Israeli town of Sderot and the area around it has returned almost to normal. Israeli attacks in Gaza have almost ceased, too: Since the end of the mini-war, 29 Palestinians, two of whom were civilians, have been killed by Israeli action.

These are basic facts and those facts add up to lives saved on both sides of the fence and more importantly regular lives that can be lived by real people.

This is why we who stand with Israel are proud of it and will continue to do so…

(unless they decide to do something really nasty like support Glen Beck or Rush Limbaugh, Honorary Lizardoid then maybe Israel too can be proudly banned from lgf. It’s the last piece of the puzzle that the bloggers at lgf watch are waiting for before setting up their accounts.

Update: A Good sign Charles is still hitting the Saudi’s over Israel.

You mean the Saudis lied when they said they would stop participating in the Arab League boycott of Israel? Shocka!

As long as he keeps a grip on some reality there’s still hope and the LGF watch people will remain disapointed. Pollyanna lives!

On a day where this blog has talked a lot about being proudly banned by little green footballs for daring to defend Rush Limbaugh, Honorary Lizardoid last night. , leave it to James Carville of all people to remind us of what really counts.

My wife and I actually saw it yesterday and it made us both smile, it certainly put being proudly banned by lgf for daring to defend Rush Limbaugh, Honorary Lizardoid in perspective…

…but I’m going to keep tweaking Chucky about it anyway. At least until he puts up a post specifically removing Rush’s Honorary Lizardoid status.

Andrew Breitbart said this on Big Government:

Everything you needed to know about the unorthodox roll out of the now-notorious ACORN sting videos was hidden in plain sight in my Sept. 7 column, “Katie Couric, Look in the Mirror.” ACORN was not the only target of those videos; so were Katie, Brian, Charlie and every other mainstream media pooh-bah.

When you read the whole thing you realize how successful this has been. Acorns defenders in the print media are now forced to make their defense to a public that has seen the videos and Jay Leno and John Stewart mockery of Acorn has left guys like Errol Lewis in effect asking readers: “Who are you going to believe? Me or your own eyes?”

The media is now on the spot and choices had to be made. The Washington post chose to go after the filmmakers as it was very hard to go after the film.

Michael Barone commented:

The Post, like almost all of “mainstream media,” waddled in late on this story. I remember one time in the 1980s when the Wall Street Journal beat the Post was beaten on a story based on public information in Montgomery County, Maryland, court files. Ben Bradlee, the executive editor of the Post at the time, did not whine as New York Times managing editor Jill Abramson did on the ACORN story about how the bureau was short-staffed and, gee, it’s hard to stay on top of every story. Bradlee was furious—scooped in our own backyard!—and as I recall heads fell. But that was then and this is now. “Mainstream media” is complacent about suppressing a story that is embarrassing to the Obama administration and the Democratic party, and its response after getting scooped is to waddle in with attempts to discredit it. Pathetic.

The AP wasn’t far behind playing defense as they attempt to make excuses for Acorn:

ACORN has portrayed its problems as the unfortunate work of a few employees. In the best case, that suggests it made bad hires and gave them poor training and supervision. But when the founder of a national organization admits attempting to keep quiet his brother’s theft of more than $900,000, it’s a sign that ACORN’s problems may rise high and run deep.

How did ACORN wind up in this mess? Did it simply grow too big for its own good?

Oh I see poor Acorn betrayed by their own success. Peg’s (proudly banned from lgf yesterday) personal friends at Powerline (proudly banned from little green footballs last week) had this to say:

The AP takes the cue and puts the words in O’Keefe’s mouth. It’s quite a racket they’ve got going here, and someone really should call them on it.

They actually contacted the Washington post before putting up their entry and are still waiting a response.

Between this and the Van Jones issue the media is now faced with a choice: Unwavering defense of the administration or to act like, you know reporters.

This week George Stephanopolis made that choice and caught the president totally by surprise:

Save money on your state-mandated auto insurance with GEICO? Pass your signature legislation while holding the White House, a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and a 70+ seat majority in the House? Obtusely obfuscate the lawyerly difference between a dollar seized by the government through fine and a dollar appropriated by the government by tax? Confuse the practical utility of automobile liability insurance and health insurance?

Now, technically Obama is right in the Stephanopolis interview. A fine is not a tax. The net effect is the same but he’s the kind of technically right you might expect a Constitutional lawyer to be on this issue. He’s stuck on the hot seat, though, because he’d look like a dick nattering about what kind revenue generating bill originates in which house of Congress. So deny it, impugn Merriam Webster (a fine, upstanding woman I’m told), and misdirect with a fallacious comparison to state-mandated auto liability insurance.

Who’s the genius that cooked up that line of reasoning? It’s a flawed argument for a couple of obvious reasons.

This wasn’t a confrontational interview but that was an actual challenging question, the type that I used to hear reporters ask decades ago, and this president couldn’t handle it. I thought the guy was supposed to be the Liberal Ronald Reagan?

Morning Joe is all over the Steph clip today, it’s news but the real news is that he followed up. I submit that he would not be doing that if it wasn’t for the Acorn Tapes, Andrew Breitbart, James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles. That is the real news. The combination of Van Jones and Acorn are going to force the media to be either advocates or reporters and in at least some cases they are choosing to be reporters.

Related: This howler from Newsbusters:

But check out Tom Rosenstiel (formerly of Newsweek and the L.A. Times) gritting his rhetorical teeth at Alexander’s point even as he calls the liberal media “non-ideological”:

It “can’t be discounted,” said Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. “Complaints by conservatives are slower to be picked up by non-ideological media because there are not enough conservatives and too many liberals in most newsrooms.”

“They just don’t see the resonance of these issues. They don’t hear about them as fast [and] they’re not naturally watching as much,” he added.

The “non-ideological media” have “too many liberals in most newsrooms”?

Expect a lot more of this. The worm has turned.