A while back balbulican started using the phrase moronosphere - I think that’s a pretty good description of SDA’s little trick, of course, the defenders jump right in and defend.
I’m guessing Kate is quite proud of that manly looking arm she’s promoting.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @1:31 pm It is astounding what passes for “humour” in the moronosphere.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @1:48 pm So - someone, presumably Kate, sends Kinsella a picture of Kate’s engine plate number, drawn on someone’s arm. The intent is obviously to mimic a Holocaust survivor’s tattoo.
Kinsella responds respectfully.
And this is
(a) Funny?
(b) Indicative of something bad about Kinsella?
How?
Said in February 11th, 2008 @2:28 pm “(b) Indicative of something bad about Kinsella?”
Upon further reading, it appears that the whole scheme was designed to demonstrate that Kinsella is some sort of rube when it comes to the Internet - that he was unable to verify the true source of the original email with the picture.
That’s a real thigh slapper, isn’t it? Who looks like the real idiot now? Even Ezra thinks, at the very least, that it is in poor taste.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @2:29 pm I, for the record, think it’s distasteful. But then, I’ve never been a Kate fan. Hey balbulican, you may find this funny or ironic, but a commenter in my article about the Kate-Kinsella flap said I wasn’t anti-Islamic enough for his tastes, and thus not conservative enough. In fact he said I should join the liberal party.
I wonder if he realizes that being a racist isn’t a prerequisite to voting conservative.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @3:07 pm As an aside, the email/picture wasn’t a “fraud” as posted on another site, since it made no false representation as to what it was.
I don’t know Kate’s motivation. However, it’s entirely possible she wasn’t a) trying to be funny, but instead b) testing whether or not Kinsella is a debating lightweight.
After all, had Kinsella taken a path other than to rush the picture onto his site as a validation of his bona-fides, he might now be using the picture to bolster his argument against his detractors. Instead, he’s practicing damage control.
Sending the picture was a big risk since it could have backfired, but I would say the evidence indicates Kate knows Kinsella better than he does himself.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @3:21 pm I’m amazed at the twisting and turning going on to make this look like some kind of brilliant coup.
Let’s return to the story in its simplest form.
Someone sends Kinsella a deliberate attempt to mimic a Holocaust survivor’s tattoo.
Kinsella responds respectfully.
That, in the eyes of McMcMillan’s Maggot Army, is cause for derision and mockery.
You really don’t need more than that.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @3:34 pm This should surprise no one, but Richard Evans is taking credit for sending the email correspondence and the picture.
Kate and Richard - what a combo that is.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @3:36 pm Wow. I wonder who helped him write out all those numbers?
Said in February 11th, 2008 @3:42 pm Wow. I wonder who helped him write out all those numbers?
I didn’t write the numbers and that’s not my arm…
Keep trying though, you’ll get it all figured out eventually…
Said in February 11th, 2008 @3:49 pm Thanks for the link Scott.
This whole event has all of the maturity and intellectual value of a high school popularity contest taken too far. To use an image of the holocaust to achieve the outcome is pathetic and shameful.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @3:52 pm “I didn’t write the numbers…”
I assumed that, Richard. After all, there were a LOT of them.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @4:12 pm Well, I’ll probably be accused of giving Ms. McMillan too much credit but I thought it was a brilliant (and cruel) demonstration of the stupidity of Warren Kinsella (and folks like him). People who think invoking icons and emoting over them is actually more virtuous than honest debate.
Showing the weakness of the icons is a stroke of genius. The more you think about it, the more it resonates.
Frankly, I didn’t think she was as clever as that… I’ll give her kudos without ever denying that it was in bad taste… Sometimes bad taste underlines the message.
I don’t doubt that some folks were genuinely offended - hell I was uncomfortable with it myself - but it really underlines the point… Icons are not ideas or ideals.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @4:15 pm Lawrence, but you see the irony in admiring someone’s ploy of trying to pass himself off as a holocaust survivor and at the same time making fun of someone who takes at face value that claim? Warren Kinsella is guilty of gullibility. The gullibility of believing nobody would be insipidly evil enough to pretend to be a survivor.
Whooee! I thought this might finally be the time when KKKate’s supporters see her for the racist harridan she is. Judging from some of the comments, I guess she can do anything she wants and her sycophants will rally to her cause.
“Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?”
Have you no sense of decency, Kate, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?
JB
Said in February 11th, 2008 @4:21 pm Lawrence, you thought is was “brilliant”, but “not as clever as that”? Ummm….
You and the other apologists can attribute retroactive Brechtian depth to this vulgar little charade as much as you want. If you are amused by the spectacle of a man responding with respect to someone who presents themselves as a Holocaust survivor, then you’ve chosen your level.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @4:35 pm “insipidly evil”?
No, I wouldn’t agree with that…
Whoever pranked Kinsella never claimed to be anything, but simply let his preconceptions and his hubris lead him down the garden path. It was a mean thing to do… but it certainly was not “evil”. If Kinsella (or anyone on these internets) learns a lesson from it then it’s probably a good thing in the long run.
The “free speech” debate that’s gone on the Canadian blogosphere over the past few weeks has been painful to watch for those who normally say little (by choice). Kinsella bears a large part of the blame for the venal stupidity of that debate (though certainly there is much blame to spread around). I’d say Kate (or someone) has brought things to a head, and that’s a good thing IMO.
Crisis/Opportunity
Said in February 11th, 2008 @4:46 pm Lawrence, you thought is was “brilliant”, but “not as clever as that”? Ummm….
I’m surprised that a fellow clever enough to use “Brechtian” in a sentence is still not clever enough to read a simple sentence.
Since your insults are based on a horrible misreading of clear, unambiguous writing, I’ll just go ahead and consider them withdrawn.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @4:46 pm Whoever pranked Kinsella never claimed to be anything, but simply let his preconceptions and his hubris lead him down the garden path.
Of course. Because a tatooed arm with a number could indicate anything. And a picture of a crematorium could imply a bake sale.
Kinsella bears a large part of the blame for the venal stupidity of that debate
True.
I’d say Kate (or someone) has brought things to a head, and that’s a good thing IMO.
False.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @4:57 pm “Whoever pranked Kinsella never claimed to be anything, ”
That’s one of the more ingenious and dishonest distortions I’ve heard so far.
If I put on an old military uniform and some purchased medals, bind one foot behind me with duct tape, and go stand on a street corner selling poppies, would you insist on examining my service record before buying one? Or would you respect what those symbols represent and take me on good faith?
Said in February 11th, 2008 @4:58 pm “Since your insults are based on a horrible misreading of clear, unambiguous writing…”
I assume you’re talking about your contributions to another thread somewhere?
Said in February 11th, 2008 @5:06 pm I see Larry Joe resurfaced on a cloud of aloofness and self-satisfaction…or is that methane?
Who can tell. But already, the oxygen, she is being drained from the room.
…*gasp*
Said in February 11th, 2008 @5:10 pm Or would you respect what those symbols represent and take me on good faith?
An interesting question; if all that’s between us is a poppy and a Twoonie then certainly I would take you on faith. If however, I was planning to exploit you as proof of my own virtue then I would make damn sure that you were what you claimed to be.
Kinsella was not looking to “share” with this fictional Holocaust survivor, he was looking to exploit him in his own game of “Holier-than-thou”. He got what he deserved.
The thing that you have to decide is whether you’re defending poor victimized Kinsella (I think you can sense my sarcasm) or, as most folks are doing, any genuine Holocaust survivor who might be traumatized anew by this disrespectful misuse of their ordeal (which I mean without a hint of sarcasm).
It was in very bad taste, without a doubt, but it worked for me. Think Lenny Bruce… or Richard Pryor… or Chris Rock.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @5:19 pm People are taking to exception to my statement that McMillan “never claimed to be anything…” because, of course, she certainly was making the implication.
Yes she was, and there is really no other implication to be drawn but that she intended to be taken as a Holocaust Survivor. But the implication (rather than the assertion) is important for what it says about Kinsella. He so desperately wanted validation that he leaped at it without thinking. It’s part of the beauty of the thing. A really big con requires the participation and the greed of the victim.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @5:19 pm You attribute motives to Kate and Warren, and judge them both in that light. Well, we know the point of the prank was to mock; there we agree. The motivation you ascribe to Warren is a guess, one that puts him in the worst possible light, and certainly the one that McMillan’s Maggots are trying to sell.
I’m glad it worked for you. De gustibus non est disputandum.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @5:33 pm The motivation you ascribe to Warren is a guess, one that puts him in the worst possible light, and certainly the one that McMillan’s Maggots are trying to sell.
Yes it’s certainly a guess, but it’s an educated guess and one that matchs all the facts and outcomes. I’ve been reading Kinsella (and occasionally corresponding with him) for a number of years. Kate, I don’t know as well… but she’s certainly impressed me with this episode. As I said before (and as you managed to misunderstand); I did not previously give her credit for being that clever. Perhaps I am reading more into it then she intended… If so, it was still an entertaining and revealing incident.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @5:40 pm Kinsella was not looking to “share” with this fictional Holocaust survivor, he was looking to exploit him in his own game of “Holier-than-thou”.
If you look at the entire correspondence (which is, allegedly between Richard Evans and Warren Kinsella), I’m not sure this is the case:
—–Original Message—–
From: “Eitan”
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 10:58:29
To:”Warren Kinsella”
Subject: The Good Fight
Dear Mr. Kinsella,
I do not share this message on my arm with many, but it speaks for itself. You may use it if you wish. Keep up the good fight.
Signed;
A reader.
[photo of tattooed arm]
—– Original Message —–
From:
To: “Eitan”
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: The Good Fight
Eitan, I am honoured by the confidence you have placed in me. May I reprint your email without your name? It would encourage others, too. W
Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
—–Original Message—–
From: “Eitan”
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:37:15
To:
Subject: Re: The Good Fight
You may do so, yes.
—– Original Message —–
From:
To: “Eitan”
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 11:54 AM
Subject: Re: The Good Fight
Thank you
Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
—–Original Message—–
From: “Eitan”
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:06:15
To:
Subject: Re: The Good Fight
You may show the photo as well if it helps get the message across.
E
—– Original Message —–
From:
To: “Eitan”
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 5:18 PM
Subject: Dear sir
It will probably not surprise you, but it still shocked me to see a B.C. lawyer, Jay Currie, suggest on his web site that the photograph you sent to me was faked. I do not know if this man is a Holocaust denier, but I know from past experience that he is choked with hate. Similar comments are being made on a site called “Small Dead Animals,” but anonymously.
I apologize to you that your suffering is being mocked in this way. If you would like me to take down your email and the photograph you sent me, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Warren Kinsella
PS - The link is here: http://jaycurrie.info-syn.com/pownd/
Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
From: eitan@terleski7.com
To: wkinsella@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Dear sir
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 18:05:36 -0700
There is no need to apologize Mr. KInsella. Let them mock. You may keep the e-mail up as long as you wish.
—– Original Message —–
From: Warren Kinsella
To: Eitan
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 7:30 PM
Subject: RE: Dear sir
Eitan, is there a number I can call you at?
Warren Kinsella
http://www.warrenkinsella.com
wwkinsella@hotmail.com
—– Original Message —–
From: eitan@terleski7.com
To: wkinsella@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Dear sir
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 09:05:30 -0700
You’re welcome to call me any time Mr. Kinsella. 403.333.7035
Oh, and my name’s not Eitan, it’s Richard. Richard Evans.
If we are to assume this exchange is authentic, it appears Kinsella was at least privately commiserating (with a rather practiced fraud, I might add) and took the steps necessary for public disclosure. Doesn’t sound nearly as self-serving as you’ve characterised it.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @5:44 pm “If I put on an old military uniform and some purchased medals, bind one foot behind me with duct tape, and go stand on a street corner selling poppies, would you insist on examining my service record before buying one? Or would you respect what those symbols represent and take me on good faith?”
Of course I’d take you on good faith, but that’s a terrible analogy.
A better one is if you came to me and said “Please use me as an example of how disabled veterans support your work for them”
In that case taking you on good faith is at best lazy and at worst reveals me to be uncritical of “evidence” that supports my positions.
The “means” may have been inappropriate, but I haven’t seen someone argue convincingly against the “ends” that Kinsella shouldn’t be taken seriously as anything but a guy who’s pushing a very specific agenda. (And I made no statement about the validity of his agenda.)
Said in February 11th, 2008 @5:45 pm Heh. Well, as previously noted, we KNOW Kate’s goal was derision, and of course, in order for that to succeed, it’s essential to make Warren’s respectful response risible. Those who need to view it in that light, will.
Some interesting thoughts in the comments section here.
I gotta ask if the good Merle Terleski for Ward 7 in Calgary knows that Evans used his domain name to send the emails.
I’m going to join with the Canadian Cynic in wondering just how closely associated the Blogging Tories want to be with this chunk of stupidity, or, if in true political partisan fashion, will line up behind it.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @6:21 pm stageleft, nobody associates you with the occasional eruptions of lunacy from the progressivesphere. So don’t taint me with Kate.
Can someone tell me what the point of the “trap” or “joke” was? I think I’m a reasonably smart guy from a left-wing moonbat, but it took me a good twenty minutes after reading Kate’s post to figure out what the hell she was going on about. But still, I can’t figure out the punch line. Any help?
Said in February 11th, 2008 @6:47 pm Peter,
1. Kate takes digital image of VIN number of her motorcycle and emails it to Richard Evans
2. Evans spoofs an email address to Kinsella in which he pretends to be a holocaust victim
3. Kinsella believes him, and posts the image up, much to his own lack of judgment
4. Kate and friends have a good laugh
5. All at the expense of 6 million dead people.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @7:13 pm Can someone tell me what the point of the “trap” or “joke” was?
Sure. Kinsella has been beating his little drum for the past few weeks about his pro-censorship sentiments, his hero Richard Warman, the peril of bathroom graffiti (horribly convenient bathroom graffiti, but we’ll let that go for now), his obsession with Kate McMillan and various other facets of his narcissism.
All of those things go into the mix. 1)His arguments in favour of censorship all take the same form… a weepy exploitation of some token group (including his own daughter when necessary) and a quivery-lipped declaration that “if that makes me a censor then (sob!) I guess I are one.” 2) Richard Warman, Kinsella’s hero has been credibly accused of being a “pretend” hate monger who posts invective about the “n*gger c*nt” Anne Cools. This kind of virtuous play-acting is implicitly endorsed by Kinsella with his impassioned defence of the guy as a “Hero”. 3) The recent racist bathroom graffiti, posted by Kinsella that looks, to my eye, like a fresh ballpoint scribble. Would it shock you to hear that I suspect it was only moments old when it was immortalized by Warren’s handy camera? 4) Warren’s recent solicitation of his readers for comments that back him.
Put them all together, mix in a little personal animosity (are you aware that Warren recently “implied” that Kate has sexual relations with her dogs?) and the thing practically cooks itself.
It ties all the themes together beautifully and it does it with an efficiency that it really quite remarkable. All it took was the inspiration and the audacity to do it. I commend her on both.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @8:18 pm Always go back to the simplest rendering.
a) Someone pretended to be a holocaust survivor.
b) Kinsella treated them with respect.
That’s the part we KNOW. The rest is spin.
Pace, Lawrence and J. You do it as well as can be expected.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @8:18 pm Actually, I’ll add one “know” to that. A good chunk of the conservative blogosphere - including Mark Steyn and Damian - are as repulsed by this as the rest of us. To their credit.
There are ideologues who would find a way to excuse anything if it reflected their biases. And then there are conservatives who don’t delude themselves that “anything goes” as long it’s on “their side”. This has been an interesting exercise in determining who still has some sort of moral compass left.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @8:43 pm There are ideologues who would find a way to excuse anything if it reflected their biases.
That’s a nifty conclusion. What bias do you suppose is being reflected here? Be as specific as you like…
Said in February 11th, 2008 @8:53 pm Dunno, Lawrence. But tell you what. Let’s cut to the chase.
That little prank was vile. You don’t think so? No problem. I do. Mark Steyn does, Ezra Levant does. Damian Penny does. And of course, a whole lot of other folks not umbilically attached to Kate and the Maggots do to.
So you just enjoy it. Revel in it. Relish it. I won’t try to explain to you why its vile: I don’t explain Beethoven to the deaf or Van Gogh to the blind. You don’t get it, and to be honest, I haven’t an ounce of interest in helping you.
The End.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @9:08 pm My, you’re a bad-tempered fella, eh?
I’m neither attached nor affiliated with Ms. McMillan. You don’t have to explain to me why it’s vile, I’ve already explained to you why I approve of it despite it’s unquestioned bad taste.
So make a big display of your outrage, maybe some of the fellas will even pretend to buy it…
I don’t.
And I’ll put my “moral compass” up against your dissembling foot-stomping any day. You go ahead and pat yourself on the back about your moral superiority again though.
Said in February 11th, 2008 @9:37 pm “My, you’re a bad-tempered fella, eh?”
Naw. No temper here. Just a tired realization that there really are folks out there who’ve lost any sense of decency. Go find a nice litter box to roll in, there’s a good fella.
Sure. Kinsella has been beating his little drum for the past few weeks about his pro-censorship sentiments, his hero Richard Warman, the peril of bathroom graffiti (horribly convenient bathroom graffiti, but we’ll let that go for now), his obsession with Kate McMillan and various other facets of his narcissism.
All of those things go into the mix. 1)His arguments in favour of censorship all take the same form… a weepy exploitation of some token group (including his own daughter when necessary) and a quivery-lipped declaration that “if that makes me a censor then (sob!) I guess I are one.” 2) Richard Warman, Kinsella’s hero has been credibly accused of being a “pretend” hate monger who posts invective about the “n*gger c*nt” Anne Cools. This kind of virtuous play-acting is implicitly endorsed by Kinsella with his impassioned defence of the guy as a “Hero”. 3) The recent racist bathroom graffiti, posted by Kinsella that looks, to my eye, like a fresh ballpoint scribble. Would it shock you to hear that I suspect it was only moments old when it was immortalized by Warren’s handy camera? 4) Warren’s recent solicitation of his readers for comments that back him.
Put them all together, mix in a little personal animosity (are you aware that Warren recently “implied” that Kate has sexual relations with her dogs?) and the thing practically cooks itself.
It ties all the themes together beautifully and it does it with an efficiency that it really quite remarkable. All it took was the inspiration and the audacity to do it. I commend her on both.
So the obvious next step was to forge a Holocaust survivor’s tattoo and then when Kinsella “fell for it” (I mean I know whenever I see someone with an concentration camp tattoo I automatically assume they would be sick enough to fake it), make him the butt of the joke?
Honestly, this makes no sense to me. None.
Said in February 12th, 2008 @12:32 am This whole kerfuffle just goes to show the dishonesty some will engage in. Funny that, isn’t it?
A “prank” - that involves dishonesty. Whether you think it is funny or not - one fact of the matter is dishonesty was one of the tools used to pull the prank.
Hey… wasn’t it Kate when she was asked to be one of the CBC “round table” bloggers a couple of years ago, the one who threatened another one of the bloggers with a legal suit, as well as the CBC?
Hmm.. yup.. free speech and all that!
There is a thread that does seem to run through some folk - and that thread is dishonesty and squishy principles.
Said in February 12th, 2008 @5:56 am Perhaps one of the first songs.. of my childhood.. that motivated me to think of liberalism, liberty, anarchy, question what folks told me…
Yes, insanity. In a “Christian Land.” In the past few decades. Insane Christian terrorism and hatred. Supported by folks in Canada. And the US.
To be honest, the Warren Kinsella’s, the Kate McMillans, Richard Evans, etc etc.. are all the same. They pretend to be what they are… but when it comes down to it, they are all the same.. popularity contest participants… and wanting to argue and cheat by whatever gets them their popularity.
Game players.. that have never actually played the game. But they pretend so much. And ignore what is convenient to them to ignore.
Once again, have a listen to the song… written in the 1970’s.. Christians…
Here are the lyrics should you choose to want to know more:
Come and sit my little son
Upon your daddy’s knee
Your almost ten and your growing up
in a land so wide and free
You asked me just this afternoon
About the land we left far behind
And why we left old Ireland
Why it’s always on my mind.
Well over here a little boy
Can grow to be a man
Without the ignorance and the fear
That thrives throughout our land
Where little boys just the age of you
Are taught for to kill and to maime
Oh God help them what will they become
In a land that’s gone insane.
Instead of playing at the ball
They gather in the night
For to play with toys of more deadly fun
Petrol bombs and gelignite.
And if men must vent their hatred
Oh why must they teach their sons
To be just like them and hate the same
Our nations’ race is run
Jesus said to let all the little
Children come to him
But the devil’s got them jumping
And I feel he’s bound to win
For everyone there of course is right
And it seems it’s just to late
For to save the future you have to save
Little Children born of hate
~ Will Millar
*************
I’ve been there. Might not have been ten years old.. possibly nine… but I’ve been there.
I laugh at the MacMillan’s, the Kinsella’s, the Evans.
None of them have any clue and are only interested in scoring points.
Assholes, the lot of them.
“A really big con requires the participation and the greed of the victim.”
I wasn’t aware that con-artistry was a virtue celebrated by the right wing in Canada until now. But you definately nail it dude. KKKate is a con-artist and she pulled a fast one on Kinsella.
I’m sorry… what was there to admire in her behavior again?
Was it the part where she impersonated a holocaust survivor to “get back at” Warren, or was it her chuckling over the “joke” along with her herd of winged monkeys…
You do know that laughing at your own jokes is sorta considered unfunny right? That it kinda kills a joke when you have to spend hours and hours (Like Raph here) explaining over and over why it was such a knee slapper.
I’m amazed that it hasn’t occured to any of Kates minions that this “joke” was simply unfunny to normal people.
Can you imagine what sort of head-space somebody would have to be in to think that impersonating a holocaust survivor was the height of wit?
Seriously. Think about it.
Kate and Richard really and truly have no idea (it would seem) that their behavior is repugnant to most people. Or if they do, they don’t care - because they are too busy yucking it up over the “joke” they made.
The SPIN is coming from the Kate-Sphere that this “con” makes Warren look foolish. It doesn’t.
There are some things Warren has done to make himself look like an ass, but believing somebody who was making representations of being a holocaust survivor is not one of them.
Said in February 12th, 2008 @7:11 am I’ve noticed something interesting at Kathy Shaidle’s blog. (Yes, I know. I like eating pork rinds, too.) Most of her posts are simply acid-dipped turdlets, linking to someone else who does the dirty writing/thinking on her behalf. But when she or one of her spiritual partners screws up, she’ll crank out a lengthy rationale/justification. You can measure her level of discomfort with the issue by the word count. Her rambling “justification” of the McMillan-Evans debacle is one of the longest things she’s written all month.
It’s funny. I have to admit that although I despise her site, I put McMillan on a whole different plane from Evans, who is just a foul, inarticulate thug. My error.
Whooee! I’m also confused as to the punchline of this so-called joke. Kinsella is a longtime strong supporter of Israel. He lost a lot of credibility and left-wing friends during the recent Israel-Lebanon conflict when he supported the contention that Israel was reacting with reasonable, measured force when it unleashed massive airstrikes against Lebanon’s infrastructure and population. While most of the left was claiming that Israel was engaging in collective punishment, Kinsella stood fast with Israel and agreed with Harper’s cold-blooded assessment.
Kinsella, for better or worse, has been a staunch supporter of Israel. KatieGal knew that and played him on that basis, I figger. I just don’t see what’s funny about it. I suppose the Stormfronters might get a giggle out of tricking a Jew-lover. Maybe that was it.
I hear some rumblings about KatieGal maybe gettin’ kicked outta the Boogin’ Tories. I don’t imagine that’ll really happen or that her traffic will suffer too much if it does. The BT’s got a high tolerance fer hate mongerin’ and if they ain’t kicked out Dr. Roy, they ain’t gonna kick out KKKate.
Garvin, go back to sieg heilin’ at Stormfront with the rest of the slime. Take Ilsa the she-wolf with you.
JB
Said in February 12th, 2008 @9:00 am “I wasn’t aware that con-artistry was a virtue celebrated by the right wing in Canada until now…”
You all have a lot of trouble dealing with individuals as individuals, don’t you? I am not “the right wing in Canada” any more than you are the letter “M”.
The reason that I celebrate this particular “con” is because it comments so beautifully on multiple facets of the same issue. It doesn’t just mock Kinsella’s microscopic credibility, it also makes a powerful point about the ethics of entrapment. Warman and Kinsella (and folks of thier ilk) think that entrapment is just peachy-keen when their designated targets are in the cross-hairs. Now the outraged cries about “dishonesty” ring a little hollow. All these folks more Catholic than the Pope all of a sudden…
Kinsella - for some inexplicable reason - seems to enjoy some political credibility still. To the extent that his remaining credibility has been diminished this has been a good thing. The fact that Kate McMillan’s credibility takes a hit among some people as well… shrug… they mostly seem to be the same folks who didn’t like her in the first place.
I’m not here to defend Kate McMillan in any case, I will defend what she did in this specific instance though… I think it was brilliant blasphemy. — “Piss Christ” comes to mind except in this case it would be Piss Christ hitting Kinsella full in the face.
Said in February 12th, 2008 @9:12 am Garvin, go back to sieg heilin’ at Stormfront with the rest of the slime.
I always enjoy the bravado of the well-hidden coward. Cheap slander is so much easier than that boring old reading & thinking & rational response drudgery.
Said in February 12th, 2008 @9:21 am
So this is what it’s come down too? Faking a concentration camp tattoo in an attempt to make someone look foolish? Thank God Kate and SDA speak for the people of Saskatchewan…. I am so proud…..