Tuesday, November 03, 2009

What Would Jesus Say? Probably Not Much.

Our standard policy is not to publish any emails, even if they are unsolicited, without the sender’s permission. However, we reserve the right to do so if the email in question is nasty, insulting, or obscene.

In this particular case, it managed to be all three.

Yesterday we received a request for a blogroll link reciprocation. I usually don’t have a problem with that and will oblige the blogger. But this time things went a bit sideways.

Here’s the email:

Dear Sir or Ma’am,

I had been hesitant to add you to my list of blogs on my front page. Because of the allegations of racism. But seeing how Charles Johnson has been after anyone that disagrees with him. I will be adding your Blog.

If you would do the same for me, I would be quite pleased.

Thank you,
-Patrick
http://www.politicalbyline.com


This request seemed a bit odd, as you’ll see in my response:
- - - - - - - - -
Dear Sir or Ma’am,

Patrick, if you had looked at our blog at all, you would know that we have names. Right at the top of the blog there are links to us, complete with names.

In other words, his salutation — “dear sir or ma’am” — made me wonder if he’d ever even opened our page to learn our names.

Then he says:

I had been hesitant to add you to my list of blogs on my front page. Because of the allegations of racism..

How diplomatic, hmm? So I responded in kind:

Allegations of racism are the most spurious and easiest kinds of calumny in which to indulge in our current cultural climate. If you are going to live with any degree of integrity in the blogosphere you will ignore them. Otherwise you’ll have to cut out too many worthwhile people from your circle of acquaintances in the vain hope that you will avoid being charged with similar accusations. If you run in fear from anyone charged of racism it’s merely an indication that the leftist-marxist claptrap has ensnared your mind.

Nothing to be ashamed of, lots of people fall into this black hole. It gives them the illusion of safety, the illusion that they will not be shunned as long as they are *very* careful not to say certain words or think certain thoughts. Good luck with that endeavor. Eventually your self-censorship will render you mute.

Walter Williams has already forgiven you.

Some of our guest bloggers say things I consider racist, but they are not mean and they have a specific point of view: they see their own heritage being trampled and obliterated and it scares them.

We were banished from Pajamas Media for an essay by a guest blogger. PJM is a Hollywood phenomenon. It is only conservative on the surface. In reality, it is lock-step Hollywood leftist and totally p.c.

Then he puts his whole foot into this tar baby:

But seeing how Charles Johnson has been after anyone that disagrees with him. I will be adding your Blog. If you would do the same for me, I would be quite pleased.

In other words, he finally noticed that Charles might have a problem (I looked at his blog and he says that Stacy McCain is his new best friend. Thus I presume he couldn’t avoid knowing something that heretofore had escaped his attention). I couldn’t resist pointing this out:

So as long as Charles was only after us then he was correct, hmmm? Now that his [redacted] guano craziness has become too obvious to ignore it is safe to align with us now? Long before you bothered to pay attention, he threw many fine people under the bus, including Oriana Fallaci. Where were you then?

Courage based on principle isn’t done by the numbers but by examining the fundamentals. We still stand by Vlaams Belang, even though most European parties won’t touch them. Parties that are far more anti-Semitic and anti-Democratic than VB won’t have anything to do with them. VB pays a huge price, literally, for their integrity.

Then I diverted myself into discussing the content of his blog:

By the way, I looked at your blog and noticed your complaint about the high price of medication. I pay 4 or 5 times what you do. I’d love to get by with such a small bill.

However, my point is that national health care will not solve that problem for you. The Big Pharma folks have already gotten the Dems and Obama to agree that they won’t be touched. Drug prices aren’t going down. If they do, you will simply pay higher taxes in order to give the money to Big Pharma. Either way, you pay.

Did you know that part of the reason your bill is so high is that these same companies give European markets a huge break? If you could still buy your drugs in Canada, you’d save a bundle. But Americans bear the burden of European nationalization of health care and the business practices of Big Pharma when they deal with European markets.

Since you don’t permit comments on your blog, you don’t give your readers the chance to educate you. Sure, there’s a lot chaff with the few grains of wheat sometimes, but I find our commenters have a lot of knowledge and permitting people to have their say increases your own level of understanding and your base of knowledge.

In closing, I suggested that our blog might not be a good idea for him because of the comments of others, mostly leftists, about our racism:

In sum, I would say that you shouldn’t have us on your blogroll. Other people think we’re racist now. They mostly tend to be on the leftist side of the blogosphere, but still… once one is tarred with that brush one either learns to shrug off such accusations or one quits blogging.

Good luck with your website. You look like you’re doing well.

Dymphna
Gates of Vienna

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Shortly afterwards I received an incensed response from our former querent:

From: Patrick <tpblogeditor@gmail.com>
To: Dymphna@chromatism.net
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 11:48:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Blogroll

1. I do not know where you get the idea, that I do not allow comments on my site. I do, I just moderate them [oops, missed that -D. I saw several posts and none seemed to have comments].

2. Your attitude sucks. You talk down to me, like I am some sort of idiotic twit.

3. I do not take instruction from a woman. Bible forbids that. Read it sometime, you might learn something

4. I will leave you there, but don’t expect me to go out of my way to cite you, seeing you have such a smart [redacted. body orifice at the terminus of the alimentary canal] condescending attitude.

Good Day, you smart [1st redaction. The idiom for the area of the body called “gluteus maximus” in Gray’s Anatomy.] [2nd redaction. Both the idiomatic phrase and the correct word for a female dog].

-Patrick
http://www.politicalbyline.com


Heavens to Betsy! This email certainly brings into question Dr. Brooks’ contention that religious people are happier than secularists. From all appearances, this is one unhappy camper. And imagine being instructed by a gasp! woman! Due to his religious restrictions, did he demand only male teachers during his school years?

As for what the Bible forbids, I was reading that Book while this guy was no more than a concupiscent gleam in his daddy’s eye.

Don’t mess with a woman who minored in Christian Scripture and the Prophets, my son. You run the risk of having your head ripped off and an annotated copy of the King James version stuffed into an otherwise empty cavity.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

I just happened to be emailing back and forth with Kathy Shaidle at Five Feet of Fury when this dude erupted. I’d been telling her we hardly ever get ugly emails. She offered to share one of hers, which she’d just posted for her reader’s contemplation. You can see it here.

There are definitely some strange folks out there. And if it's not obvious, I am thoroughly tired of people who think maybe we're acceptable after all now that enough major bloggers have called attention to Chazzer's ummm... deficits. If you weren't with us then, I will somehow survive without your links now, thankyouverymuch.

But I'm not saying y'all shouldn't be nice to him. He’s obviously suffering.

23 comments:

christian soldier said...

Gates of Vienna has been on my roll since my blog site's inception in fact-
my very first post gave credit to you...and I never asked reciprocation...
http://carolmsblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/many-thanks_02.html
C-CS

Dymphna said...

Hmmmm...I went over to look at that post and I remember it, both for the drawing and the fact that you were Danish.

So let's make it a live link, okay?
Carol's Blog!

So come December, you'll have been at it for two years. Good for you, lasting so long.

I checked out the site you have blogrolled for Danish News. That was a surprise.

BTW, did you know the Baron is also an artist? Oils, mostly. Unless you count computer graphics.

I'll put you on the list for the template update...

Anonymous said...

That is hilarious. Thanks for sharing!

Gregory Kong said...

Oh, come on now. I can understand that you think PJM is a bit of an ass for hammering you and all, but consider;

1. Charles Johnson co-founded it. Before anybody knew he had a load of weapons-grade crazy, pople probably would have given their co-founder the benefit of the doubt. Yes, you gave a full accounting and defence of yourself, but hey, so does the BNP and ain't too many people cutting them much slack. Human nature, I guess.

2. Calling PJM liberal is a bit over the top, won't you say? Yes, they have some idiots writing for them (a certain Reuben Whatizname Jr comes to mind). Yes also, there appears to be an infestation of liberal trolls in the comments column.

But come on. Look who's under the PJM banner. Instapundit, the Blogfather himself. Zo. Vodkapundit. Bill Whittle.

You can't be calling them names now, can you? Liberal my foot.

Anonymous said...

I can and I do. Bill Whittle particularly. He's a right-liberal, a blank-slate nurturist. He stated explicitly (I think this would've been back in 2003 or 2004 timeframe, when I was reading him because den Beste kept referring to him) that he could take any tribal kid from Africa and, raised correctly, turn them into a world-class physicist just as effectively as any suburban white kid. That was when I stopped reading him. IQ distributions and genetic correlations are not imaginary.

Whittle has his good points, but he's a right-liberal. Same could be said about PJM in general. Reynolds is not any sort of hard-core conservative, he's a wishy-washy libertarian with a pro-lawyer bent. He's useful and interesting, but he's no moral compass. And let's not talk about Roger Simon.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Well, you know lady. You are about the most pathetic of them all. Calling PJM Liberal is about the most stupid thing you could ever say. I suppose Alphonso Rachel is liberal as well?

No, here's the truth. They do not embrace RACISM and YOU DO! This is why you called them Liberal, because you allow RACIST TRIPE on this Blog! and they removed their link to you.

I was not aware that you did not add people to your Blogroll. I never read over here. But, did you explain that? No. You came back with this idiotic condescending e-mail.

For the record, the BIBLE DOES say that women are NOT to instruct men.

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. - 2 Timothy 2:11-15.

Now put that in your pipe and smoke it.

-Pat

Anonymous said...

I can't help myself. Can't believe I've run through three of my four posts for this thread already.


Rollory to Patrick
show details 10:31 AM (15 minutes ago)

That's real Godly of you.

Thanks for taking my advice, and keeping "it" up! You're doing great!

Patrick to me
show details 10:40 AM (6 minutes ago)

I could make one Blog posting and make that blogs of yours a living nightmare for you.

I would advice, that you both back off...

Rollory to Patrick
show details 10:43 AM (3 minutes ago)

Oh, sure, do it. I'm really intrigued. What is this super-secret
ultimate blog weapon you have? I wanna see it!

Keep running into brick walls like this, they'll be calling you "Flathead"


The SA Goons would have a field day with this guy. Not to worry: Mister Bigshot Lawyer Leonard J. Crabs Esq., who makes his office in the disused outhouse by the trailer park, will handle all matters of legal significance arising from this alleged so-called purported "altercation".

Anonymous said...

As I said to both of you morons in e-mail. I was going to engage you both, and post the ENTIRE e-mail. But you know what? You racist idiots are not worth it.

Everyone that knows anything about this Conservative Blogosphere knows that this Blog engages in racial bigotry. This is why PJM removed the link to you.

Fighting terrorism, with racism, is like fighting a fire with a hose full of Gasoline. PJM knows this and so does any other civil minded Conservative.

Like I said... You're not getting any free traffic via me. Not in this lifetime.

Enjoy your tailspin, you racist twit.

Baron Bodissey said...

Rollory --

Gates of Vienna's rules about comments require that they be civil, temperate, on-topic, and show decorum. Your comment violated the last of these rules. We keep a PG-13 blog, and exclude foul language, explicit descriptions, and epithets. This is why I deleted your comment.

Use of asterisks is an appropriate alternative.

----------------------

Rollory said...


I can and I do. Bill Whittle particularly. He's a right-liberal, a blank-slate nurturist. He stated explicitly (I think this would've been back in 2003 or 2004 timeframe, when I was reading him because den Beste kept referring to him) that he could take any tribal kid from Africa and, raised correctly, turn them into a world-class physicist just as effectively as any suburban white kid. That was when I stopped reading him. IQ distributions and genetic correlations are not imaginary.

Whittle has his good points, but he's a right-liberal. Same could be said about PJM in general. Reynolds is not any sort of hard-core conservative, he's a wishy-washy libertarian with a pro-lawyer bent. He's useful and interesting, but he's no moral compass. And let's not talk about Roger Simon.
11/04/2009 10:21 AM
Rollory said...

Rollory to tpblogeditor
show details 10:12 AM (21 minutes ago)

You're hilarious. I've had my issues with Dymphna, but you're just
wack. How old are you? How used to making mistakes are you? How
often do you admit having made mistakes?

You screwed up, she called you on it, and then you multiplied your
screwup many times over. Good work. Keep it up.


Patrick to me
show details 10:26 AM (7 minutes ago)

Two Words.

F*** off


Yes, I am a professional jerk, and I take GREAT pleasure in that.

Note to troll victims: getting the outraged response is the whole REASON we do it. It tells us we scored. It makes us laff.

X said...

Oh noes! RAAAAACISM!

Chechar said...

@ “Everyone that knows anything about this Conservative Blogosphere knows that this Blog engages in racial bigotry” --Patrick

I am afraid to say that people who subscribe to phrases such as the above are precisely the ones that will be severely punished in the near (or not so near) future: as I have explained a minute ago in another thread.

Homophobic Horse said...

That wonderful beacon of knowledge and political relevence PJM refused to run Julia Gorin's damning piece on American involvement with Kosovo. They did not give any reason.

Vladtepesblog.com said...

One cannot help but wonder, where all these champions for racial fairness were, when Mugabe threw all the white farmers out of Zimbabwe. The fact that he turned the bread basket of a continent into a net hungry nation and impoverished it to an extent only Africa can understand is secondary, in this one case, to the question that puzzles me, does racism only matter in areas that have been inhabited by white European stock for millennium?

I suppose the question is futile. Like asking a student working on Israeli apartheid week what he thinks about 'Palestinians' who hang their own family for selling land to Jews, if that qualifies as a sort of apartheid or not.

xoggoth said...

I fairly frequently comment on Islam and you're on my blogroll as you say all the things I can't be bothered to being as I'm a lazy old git.

Never seen any racist posts here. I really don't like and would not link to the "peedofile prophet" and "religion of piss" sort of anti-Islamic blog as I think pointless offence is counter productive. The truth about Islam is quite sufficient argument against it.

PS I certainly wouldn't want a link from here as links from any serious blog would inhibit my freedom to post complete nonsense whenever it takes my fancy, which is most of the time.

Old Atlantic Lighthouse said...

Results 1 - 10 of about 58 from harvard.edu for blacks "lower iq".

Results 1 - 10 of about 789 for blacks "lower iq" site:.gov.

Results 1 - 10 of about 43 from ed.gov for blacks "lower iq".

Search "racial differences exist"

"In 2005, offending rates for blacks were more than 7 times higher than the rates for whites"

USDOJ BJS

Harvard, the NIH, Department of Education and USDOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics can say these things.

The PC correct "right" wing blogs would have trouble at best tolerating direct quotations from the DOJ, Harvard, Education Department, NIH, etc.

The so called extreme right blogs seldom go farther than what is at Harvard, DOJ, ED, and NIH.

Inalienable Rights said...

I'm shocked - SHOCKED - to hear that different races are allowed to participate on this blog, but that's what a racist does. Whereas a humanist advocates for humans, and an Islamist advocates for Islam, so a racist advocates for races. It's too bad there are so many people like Patrick opposed to this sort of inclusive blog culture. Diversity is our strength after all.

It's only sarcasm if you're smart. Otherwise, it's just wisdom. Or something.

Chechar said...

@ "a racist advocates for races..." --Inalienable Rights

This is Newspeak. An oldspeakser would say: “a conservative racialist [with "a"] is concerned about the survival of his or her ethnic group.” See the recent entry Hate movement or elemental survival? in my blog.

Gregory Kong said...

Rollory: Dude, the Blogfather is a law professor. You think he's gonna be anti-lawyer? Come on! Yes, he's mostly libertarian, but so what? We need them under our frigging umbrella too.

As for Bill Whittle... okay, let's try this on for size. His bigger point is that if you take people, white, black, orange, beige or purple, and subject them to the same 'nurturing', as you call it, and they would turn out in pretty much the same manner, statistically speaking.

Of course there's going to be differences. As a Christian, I believe everyone has a unique soul (and hence personality) from conception, and therefore different responses to the same upbringing. But just as you can turn the son of a true-blue white natural-born American into a jihadist, you can turn the daughter of a Kenyan refugee into a proud and patriotic member of the USMC. And a novellist.

But actually, Patrick sounds a bit cheesed off as well. Dude, lighten up a bit. I'm a racist myself, you know? It is my deeply held belief that the Chinese race (or at least, the Imperial China culture) is inherently superior.

Doesn't mean I'm gonna go denigrate or defame anyone else, now.

Old Atlantic Lighthouse: I dunno, man, it sounds like the ghetto 'liberal' culture more than any inherent disincentive to select for intelligence.

Of course, if scientists found out that the genes for athleticism were the exact opposite of the genes for intelligence, then maybe that's something to probe further. But I doubt there's enough information right now.

Kathy said...

Patrick should leave the bitchiness to women. We do it better.

xlbrl said...

Patrick does not read like a native English speaker. Perhaps he is of an obscure Arab Christian sect.

Darrin Hodges said...

3. I do not take instruction from a woman. Bible forbids that. Read it sometime, you might learn something

Sooooo, can somebody show me where in the bible it says that, so um, you know, I can show it to my wife :P

Nick said...

Darrin,

It's 1 Timothy 2:11-15, not 2 Timothy 2:11-15 as Patrick says.

2 Timothy 2:11-15, hilariously, contains admonitions about quarelling...

Post a Comment

All comments are subject to pre-approval by blog admins.

Gates of Vienna's rules about comments require that they be civil, temperate, on-topic, and show decorum. For more information, click here.

Users are asked to limit each comment to about 500 words. If you need to say more, leave a link to your own blog.

Also: long or off-topic comments may be posted on news feed threads.

To add a link in a comment, use this format:
<a href="http://mywebsite.com">My Title</a>

Please do not paste long URLs!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.