dagblog - Comments for "Freedom to Fascism Redux: A Timeline of Recent U.S. History"

Maybe he was trying to be

PeraclesPlease — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:56:53 +0000

In reply to Then why focus his energy on

Maybe he was trying to be funny with "Big Adventure"?

Maybe he just didn't back up.

Then why focus his energy on

Verified Atheist — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 12:19:28 +0000

In reply to The first reactions to him

Then why focus his energy on moat and destor (calling them Bill and Ted), two of the few people who had not insulted him, but had rather actually discussed the issues? What does that choice tell you?

It truly saddens me that with

ironboltbruce — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 12:16:52 +0000

In reply to Freedom to Fascism Redux: A Timeline of Recent U.S. History

It truly saddens me that with all the things you could be doing to wrest control of our nation from the global corporate fascist elite and restore our Constitutional Republic, you instead prefer to childishly continue throwing insult spitballs at an impervious battleship. I will try once more to get you to focus on the Message more so than the Messenger:

http://www.dagblog.com/reader-blogs/creeping-fascism-if-we-dont-kill-ndaasopaeeakeystone-xl-pipeline-they-win-if-we-only-ki

The first reactions to him

PeraclesPlease — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 07:21:27 +0000

In reply to ^this. That he would choose

The first reactions to him were highly insulting.

Perhaps he didn't notice a change of heart, but TMac certainly hasn't let go of the bone.

The weren't criticizing his

PeraclesPlease — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 07:18:23 +0000

In reply to And people should engage

The weren't criticizing his work - they were asking who sent him, calling him a Paultard, and whatever else necessary to avoid evaluating his work.

I disagreed with his definition of fascism because it left out the domestic street violence and general thuggery. Other than that, I still don't see what he said is so much different than anyone else.

^this. That he would choose

Verified Atheist — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 00:15:45 +0000

In reply to I didn't insult him. I took

^this.

That he would choose to go after destor and moat specifically when they had only challenged his position, and had done so without any ill nature demonstrates why many have decided that IBB is not worth engaging. If you'll look back (Peracles), I did try to engage and even defend him, but as I've said above, he's exceeded my ability to assume good faith. (I like to think that I generally do a pretty good job of assuming good faith.)

I didn't insult him. I took

moat — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 00:02:59 +0000

In reply to Well, I didn't see a lot of

I didn't insult him. I took his position seriously by challenging one part of it. If he had replied to my comment, I would have tried to reply to that too. But he didn't reply.

Nothing comes from nothing.

And people should engage

artappraiser — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:23:01 +0000

In reply to Well, I didn't see a lot of

And people should engage self-identified professional P.R. writers, when the same people are of the opinion that their writing sucks, and instead of criticizing their writing, should ask them for clarification? Because?

Seems to me that if one was attempting to be a professional P.R. writer, trying to inspire people to act on something, or trying to put a spin on something, one would actually welcome knowing why one's writing wasn't accomplishing that for some folks.

Unless, of course, the "fuck-you-audience" thing is part of the writer's shtick, and the writer thinks he is a performance artiste posing as a PR writer. In which case, criticizing or booing or applauding the work, or saying meh, is exceptionally appropriate.

Pssst...tmc, I'm pretty sure

erica20 — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:22:09 +0000

In reply to Jeebus erica20, no where did

Pssst...tmc, I'm pretty sure it's just him, and if anybody at all is paying him, it's not much. Here's why I think this.

--There's no client list in sight. Of course, such clients would of course want their privacy... (yeah right.)

--There's a donations page that specifically refers to IBB.

--All the Google references to the site were of the type that could easily be self-generated.

Next we'll be seeing references on his site to "political writing featured on such respected sites as Dagblog." Which is how one-person-shops make themselves seem bigger than they are. Anyhoo I'd bet $5 that IBB's been a fledgling operation for quite some time!

***

I used to know this totally insufferable guy (we'll call him John Smith) who portrayed himself as a big Republican political consultant with all kinds of influential clients and associates. I wondered who on earth would hire or associate with him, but I figured when it comes to Republicans, you never know. Then when he gave me his card and the name of his organization was "The Smith Group" I almost choked laughing. He had a website, too--which also implied a big list of clients and employees without actually naming them. It was a hoot.

Apologies if I exaggerated your position. I really, really wanted to write "tip of a Black PR iceberg." ;^D

Well, if he's

PeraclesPlease — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:47:40 +0000

In reply to Or don't look. I think we've

Well, if he's overenthusiastic and unrealistic, that makes him what? Someone to insult and jeer at? This place could use a dose of the unreasonably idealistic.