moonbattery.gif


« Open Thread | Main | Bill Ayers, De Facto Education Czar »


December 1, 2009

Charles Johnson Explains Himself

Posted by Van Helsing at December 1, 2009 7:13 AM

At last, Charles Johnson of the formerly widely read Little Green Footballs explains why he has taken to bellowing shrill liberal malarkey. He's composed a list:

1. Because I'm a moonbat.
2. Because I'm a barking moonbat.
3. Because I'm a bitter, sanctimonious, delusional barking moonbat.

That was the Cliff Notes version. The actual list includes a lot of Keith Olbermannesque sputtering about hate speech, fascists, racists, Sarah Palin, put-upon homosexuals, and even genocide against Muslims.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Chuck.

queef-olbermann.jpg
Charles Johnson. No wait, I thought he had a ponytail.

On a tip from AnonymoUS.


Comments

The actual list is pretty much right on.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 7:22 AM


Whatever you say, "Anonymous."

Posted by: Evil Otto at December 1, 2009 7:24 AM


Good comeback Otto! I bet you win a lot of arguments with that line. Douche.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 7:27 AM


Whatever you say, "Anonymous."

Posted by: Evil Otto at December 1, 2009 7:41 AM


Of course it is right on, Anonymous. If you are bat sh*t crazy.

Posted by: William Teach at December 1, 2009 7:47 AM


I used to read LGF alot after 9-11, but then I stopped for a while and when I went back I couldn't believe the transition. I guess everybody has their price, and Chuck's was pretty low.

Posted by: Tom J at December 1, 2009 7:53 AM


I got banned from LGF.

Posted by: Bob at December 1, 2009 8:15 AM


One has to wonder if he wasn't always this way.

Posted by: nancz at December 1, 2009 8:23 AM


I quit visiting when I discovered I was a racist because I didn't see the "obvious" racism in the Joker poster.

I'm now wondering how Charles is going to go about disavowing the "throbbing memo". I've never seen a transformation quite like his.

Posted by: jwb7605 at December 1, 2009 8:24 AM


Charles has his points, but I think he has become very intolerant. He's not bought off, or paid off. He started off being concerned about some things I do and don't agree with. He has formed the opinion that all religious people are crazy, and that science is "the answer". Science is an investigative method, and should have no room for personal bias. It also lacks compassion. You have to take pains to keep it clean, and you can't use it as a world view. He can't bring himself to believe that climate scientists could have enlightened self interest.

Religion should not bar someone from the public square. If it gives them a strong foundation of care and concern for others, I feel it makes them better people. More caring and more compassionate.

There are some folks out there who don't do anything but hate, and they drove this guy off the other end. If we come across true racists, we should not tolerate them, but we should not cry racists every time someone says something off color. We should respect people, but that should go both ways. It's amazing how people "in their struggle" will try to force someone else to respect their view without trying to give due respect to the other side.

Posted by: Another anonymous at December 1, 2009 8:31 AM


Chuckie is severely mentally ill. He has some kind of weird political bi-polar split personality syndrome. I wouldnt be surprised to seem on the news sitting on the top of tower with high powered rifle.

Posted by: Winston Smith - Ministry of Truth at December 1, 2009 8:40 AM


I am shocked - shocked! - to discover that the same fringe crazies who drove LGF away from the right wing are vilifying him because of his return to the Reality-Based.

Posted by: Joe at December 1, 2009 8:42 AM


Charlie's obsession with Sarah Palin and Pamela Geller is truly bizarre: it almost leads one to suspect that he could hold one of the world's largest private collection of their photos.

Posted by: Fiberal at December 1, 2009 8:53 AM


Someone Needs Attention

Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs says he's parting ways with the right because people who disagree with him are fascist, racist, homophobic, white supremacists. And he names names.

In fact, this is just another attention getting ploy to get back at people who have criticized Johnson. Go to The Other McCain for some background. Jules Crittendon and JammieWearingFool have good take-downs of Johnson's tactic, and James Joyner refutes Johnson's accusations in great and glorious detail.

Posted by: SK at December 1, 2009 9:00 AM


"Little Green Footballs" used to be at a daily visit for me.
I removed the entry from my book marks and not been there in months.
He did seem to be getting whacked out to the left at the time. Evidently, he is still in the moonbat mode...too bad.

I guess he is trying to establish himself with a new following. Just as flies are drawn to shit, the left will swarm to his site.

Posted by: Eneils Bailey at December 1, 2009 9:03 AM


It's as unsurprising as it is cringe-inducing whining. Which is to say, my ears are just singing with delight... ;)

Regards,
Brian "Banned!" L.
(SnappedShot)

Posted by: Brian L. at December 1, 2009 9:10 AM


Some say Charles is gay and come down with a bad case of AIDS related dimensia. It would explain alot.

Posted by: Winston Smith - Ministry of Truth at December 1, 2009 9:16 AM


"Parted ways?" Not like I'd paid really close attention to him since, but the last time I saw that blog making any sense was with rathergate. Maybe I've missed something. Since then I've wondered (even voiced it lately) why lgf kept showing up in our right column. It's just been his little cult of lefties over there sucking each others' asses.

Posted by: Mr Evilwrench at December 1, 2009 9:21 AM


"Parted with the right" is the wrong term for what he did.

Years ago, I parted with the right when it became apparent that the right was neither sufficiently conservative nor sufficiently focused on protecting individual liberty from the advance of Big Government.

What he did was to finally revert to his leftist roots, hook, line, and sinker. Conservatives who become disillusioned with their leaders do not suddenly come unhinged, begin spewing nutroot talking points, and turn away from a philosophy of liberty and human achievement that any actual believer would hold deeper than the various metapolitical issues he cited.

Perhaps he has already seen a dropoff in ad revenue. Somebody should tell him that blogs are not yet eligible for Porkulus funding.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 9:26 AM


I think some have touched on his problem. With his evolving hatred of the extreme right his intolerance grew to a point that only the left would accept his views.

Posted by: IOpian at December 1, 2009 9:26 AM


Part of his problem is the inability to differentiate between multiple flavors of hard right.

Like most leftists, he seems share the view that "hard right" and "religious right" are one in the same.

Apart from the general racial demagoguery and identity politics referenced by that post, much of his issue appears to be with religious extremists.

Why would somebody upset with the groupthink and personal control espoused by organized religion choose to embrace the greater concentration of groupthink and political control of the modern left, unless they were already sympathetic to the left?

What he is doing is digging for reasons to embrace leftism. Items 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 reference the discredited attacks made against all conservatives by purveyors of victimization and identity politics. These attacks may have started with a kernel of truth when applied to an extreme fringe figure, but it is fallacious and downright insulting to apply the same condemnation reserved for Klansmen and Neo-Nazis to the hundreds of millions of Americans who are disturbed by the explosive growth in the size and scope of an increasingly progressive and Marxist-leaning government.

As usual, the attack on conservatives isn't even rational. In the same item, he chooses to lambaste creationism for not being science (which it isn't), then proceeds to pretend as if climate change is based on rock solid science (which it isn't).

Item 6 best defines his problem. The lunacy is in the current government; those opposed to lunacy, naturally, are skeptical of the largest growth in the size and scope of government sine FDR, as well as the fact that said growth is being spearheaded by Marxist sympathizers at the highest levels.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 9:59 AM


I'm sure Van H. is stung that his wee blog wasn't specifically named by LGF but he shouldn't fret.

Scroll down through today's Moonbattery. Is there a thread anywhere that can't be correctly described as "bizarre conspiracy theory", "Obama hatred" or "raging hate speech"?

What was that "bizarre conspiracy theory" from a couple days ago? Oh yes, "Googlegate". What's above this thread? Ayers...again! And down below, Soros...again!

"Obama hatred" doesn't need elaboration because you can find some on every Moonbattery page since the February primaries of '08.

For pure mean spirited hatred you can't do much better than Yardale's pathetic Helen Thomas thread.

See? LGF described this blog perfectly.

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 10:00 AM


That's too bad your ilk have managed to chase off yet another moderate. You ambitiously support the likes of Palin, Hoffmann, and Beck, so much as the GOP now has a purity test. Charles Johnson has seen the crazy! ....and he has walked away. Like Frank Scaefer,who once made many of you look liberal, recognize that the Democratic Party represents a much larger tent than the GOP's conservative base. Your comments make that very clear.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 10:14 AM


lao I noticed you still defecate here If this site is so bad then get the fuck on down the road.

Posted by: Farmer Ted at December 1, 2009 10:17 AM


Forget the big tent. We believe in conservative, limited-government, pro-freedom principles.

If individual liberty and self-reliance are not in vogue, then good riddance to those who do not share the values that drew us conservatives into politics in the first place. Selling out on core principles to goose up the party ranks with those who do not believe in its core values is antithetical to what conservatism stands for.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 10:28 AM


I think Charles is scared that all conservatives will end up in concentration camps . He's just covering his own ass , I guess he really believes
liberals will win in the end . Sorry Chuck the story of the USA don't end that way !

Posted by: Galigher at December 1, 2009 10:40 AM


Explain? So, moderate republicans and liberally social individuals are anti-freedom? Go ahead, keep marginalizing yourself. Are every one of your friends and family exactly like you? I hope not, but I am sure you will say yes. In reality (you might try it sometime), the U.S. and the world are diverse. Feeling your "conservative purity" threatened is no better than how the Taliban treat women. You don't love freedom!

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 10:42 AM


anon at 10:42am your doctor called and said to get back on your meds.

Posted by: Farmer Ted at December 1, 2009 10:47 AM


As opposed to Galigher at 10:40 who thinks LGF is saving himself from being thrown in concentration camps with other conservatives?? Behold, another far right conspiracy theory.

And AnonyCount, please explain how Yardale's hate fest on Helen Thomas upholds the core values conservatism stands for?

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 10:52 AM


No such thing as moderate anything. Can you be a moderate alcoholic ? a moderate murderer ? You are
going to have to decide which side your on ! If the progressive's turn this country into a communist state , I will be going to the camps or dead, because I will not surrender my ideals . The moderates will surrender and try to coexist with the dictators,
And become servants and second class citizens .

Posted by: Galigher at December 1, 2009 11:02 AM


I myself find Helen Thomas to be one fine looking man!

Yum!

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 11:03 AM


Hey Bitchboy, the site is called "Moonbattery" for a reason - the bloggers post about liberal moonbats who make life unpleasant for normal Americans. Sometimes there is a "Counter Moonbat" thread where a pol or an average citizen fights back against the aforementioned moonbattery that makes all of our lives a living hell.

And me calling you "Bitch Boy" has nothing really to do with "hate", it's just. well, you're a little bitch.

Posted by: Atomic Lib Smasher at December 1, 2009 11:04 AM


Explain? So, moderate republicans and liberally social individuals are anti-freedom? Go ahead, keep marginalizing yourself. Are every one of your friends and family exactly like you? I hope not, but I am sure you will say yes. In reality (you might try it sometime), the U.S. and the world are diverse. Feeling your "conservative purity" threatened is no better than how the Taliban treat women. You don't love freedom!

You are using labels to deflect from the real issues.

If somebody supports health care takeovers/mandates, cap and trade, delegation of authority to UN bureaucrats, bailouts, business nationalization, the extremely high taxes we already have, big government, unsustainable deficit spending, reckless monetary policy, compulsory Ponzi retirement schemes, political correctness, dhimmitude, union thuggery, deliberately failing schools, wipeouts of senior secured creditors to favor political allies, ceding US nuclear sovereignty, unfunded mandates, pork spending, corruption, welfare dependency, wealth redistribution, gun control, or complete and total abandonment of Constitutional principles, then that person has some problem with freedom.

Conservatives do not oppose those evils and those who support them as a matter of partisan solidarity - conservatives oppose those evils and those who support them because such positions are direct attacks on freedom and liberty.

Republicans vote for party solidarity. Conservative is an ideology, not a party.

In the end, I am a conservative. Why would I support a person whose positions are hostile to liberty and counterproductive to my beliefs?

Why should any true conservative?

If you have not noticed, we are talking about fundamental freedoms, not petty social issues. The Republican party has already sold out many of its core principles to build coalitions on these divisive social issues, best exemplified by the ridiculous crusade against Internet poker.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 11:06 AM


I do have one nice thing to say about Helen Thomas, at least she had the decency to call the Obama administration on their attempts to manage the press corps. And given that she's been around since the pre-Cambrian age, she knows what she's talking about when she says she's never seen an administration that attempted to control the press like the Obama administration.

Back to the thread--Charles Johnson who?

Posted by: Judith M. at December 1, 2009 11:07 AM


Like I said Galigher, "behold, another far right conspiracy theory", your side seems to be full of them and that's your "real" problem. No "real".

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 11:07 AM


And yes, to answer your earlier question: I do wear a ball-gag and a a leather mask when I post here.

It makes it that much more exhilarating when I get my face shoved int he dirt by my superiors here when I run off at the mouth.

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 11:12 AM


There is a little something that has historically been used in this country, it's called compromise. You might try it sometime. "If the progressive's turn this country into a communist state , I will be going to the camps or dead" I wonder why some folks think the far right is crazy? I see some of you say "2010, be afraid"...of what? A divided political fraction of the country? LOL! Nobody is asking you to "surrender" your ideals, but you need to wake up that you lost last year, and are likely lose more with this "Sorry Chuck the story of the USA don't end that way !"

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 11:13 AM


And AnonyCount, please explain how Yardale's hate fest on Helen Thomas upholds the core values conservatism stands for?

Nice try on attempting to bait me into responding to a false dichotomy.

Your goal is to get me to admit that it either is in line with core values, based on BS reasoning, or has nothing to do with core values, at which point you will claim victory.

The simple truth is that it has absolutely nothing to do with policy or positions and is neither a defense nor an indictment of conservative principles. It is simply a jab at a person whose extremist politics have been repeatedly featured on this site.

Whatever you might be tempted to say in response, just keep in mind that the majority of the comedically-inclined political musings and other topical satire comes from the left, and any sweeping generalizations from you might also apply to a certain crude Senator from Minnesota sitting in what is probably a stolen seat.

On a related note, it is fairly obvious to everyone with half a brain that the entire conservative message does not hinge on the actions of Yardale, but admitting that would be inconvenient to your attempt to attack core conservative values based on one non-policy related blog post by one author.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 11:14 AM


I wonder why some folks think the far right is crazy?

Every political movement throughout history has its share of people who would be labeled as "fringe" by the other side.

Whether those people are right or unhinged is irrelevant.

What matters is that a few people do not speak for an entire movement, as Johnson seems to think. Conservatives disillusioned with those speaking out for conservatism, be they political leaders or conspiracy theorists, should respond by articulating the core values they feel are missing from the messages of the outspoken, rather than throwing conservatism out and joining the rank-and-file of the progressive movement.

During the Bush years, extreme leftists spewed forth conspiracy theories about Bush and Cheney, their motives, and their intentions. Lefists vocally asserted that 9/11 was an inside job, that the entire strategy of war was a pork barrel handout to Halliburton, that Bush was planning to suspend the Constitution and implement martial law, etc.

So, if your complaint is with the "conspiracy theorists" who speak for the right (be they correct or incorrect - it doesn't matter), then tell me: did all of the truthers or other hysterical liberals speak for the entire left during the Bush years?

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 11:22 AM


Whether those people are right or unhinged is irrelevant.

Clarification: In this context, "right" is being used as a synonym of "correct" or "accurate."

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 11:23 AM


Anon, the WH's attempts to micromanage the media should be disconcerting to anyone conversant with human nature, but even more so to those who are familiar with the history of totalitarian regimes (both Communist and Nazi). Don't tell those who know how these little assaults on freedom can turn into a wholesale loss of freedom that they have nothing to worry about. They've seen our future in the past.

Posted by: Judith M. at December 1, 2009 11:23 AM


During the Bush years, extreme leftists spewed forth conspiracy theories about Bush and Cheney, their motives, and their intentions. Lefists vocally asserted that 9/11 was an inside job, that the entire strategy of war was a pork barrel handout to Halliburton, that Bush was planning to suspend the Constitution and implement martial law, etc.

So, if your complaint is with the "conspiracy theorists" who speak for the right (be they correct or incorrect - it doesn't matter), then tell me: did all of the truthers or other hysterical liberals speak for the entire left during the Bush years?

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 11:22 AM


I wanna see this answered here by Bitchboy, so I reposted the question again to maybe get his attention, ACM.

Posted by: Atomic Lib Smasher at December 1, 2009 11:31 AM


Oh yeah, that's never happened in American government before. What are saying is it is bad for liberals to meet with a White House, but ok if conservatives visit a republican White House...correct? Your attempt is cute, but so obvious.

No matter how you hope it's true, democrats are not Nazis, and Obama is not Hitler or Mao.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 11:37 AM


"climate change denialism" - Good grief. Talk about jumping on a bandwagon just when it's about to go off a cliff. What an idiot.

And Hot Air is an extremist web site? Mild mannered and always proper Ed Morrissey and a snarky libertarian atheist? Extremists? You gotta be kidding me. It gets a million visits per day, has many thousands of registered commenters with very few making even marginal comments. CJ got all huffy about someone calling Obama "Ogabe" due to his unsound insane monetary policy and totalitarian tendencies. CJ's liberal mind probably spun that into racism or something. The most objectionable comments I've ever seen there were left by CJ sycophant "Killgore Trout". It wasn't long ago that there was more of the stuff he accuses HA of going on in his own posts and comment section.

I think he's either being dominated by a liberal woman, or something is pressing on his brain. He should go get an MRI.

I also noticed he removed the visit counter at some point. Probably says he didn't like Sitemeter's code or some other BS.

Oh wait, I decided to check this Sitemeter thing before posting. He discontinued it two years ago for "privacy" reasons. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/28374_Blogs_Privacy_and_Sitemeter

Posted by: forest at December 1, 2009 11:38 AM


One of his fundamental problems is that he thinks Nazis and Fascists are "right wing", but this misconception still can't explain the level his delirium.

Posted by: forest at December 1, 2009 11:47 AM


Does one fringe nut on either the left or the right speak for everyone on that side? Of course not.

I point that out here constantly because Moonbattery just loves to paint the entire spectrum of the left with the same brush. Look at the utterly bizarre ravings of Yardale and others commenting who assume the "left" somehow supports the Washington cop killer.

How can anyone rationally believe that kind of junk?

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 11:49 AM


I point that out here constantly because Moonbattery just loves to paint the entire spectrum of the left with the same brush. Look at the utterly bizarre ravings of Yardale and others commenting who assume the "left" somehow supports the Washington cop killer.

How can anyone rationally believe that kind of junk?

The left has a history of supporting other cop killers.

While not every leftist descended to that level of moonbattery, it isn't entirely unreasonable to believe that history might have repeated itself, had the killer not been ventilated.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 11:55 AM


GoY addressed the college where they have another cop killer oxygen thief as a commencement speaker and Susan Saggybags has repeatedly been a criminal advocate, especially for suspected cop killers. He wasn't painting the whole left.... although, are their leftists who support the police and want criminals punished?

Posted by: Atomic Lib Smasher at December 1, 2009 11:58 AM


Lao,

I don't think most leftists support the cop killer.

I actually half way expected CJ to come up with some "evidence" that the guy was a "right wing extremist" - like a photo of him in the vicinity of a tea party or a friend of his who knows someone who knows someone who knows Filip Dewinter or something

Posted by: forest at December 1, 2009 12:04 PM


"While not every leftist descended...etc."

Let me play Van H.'s favorite game and "translate" your words.

In other words "It's entirely reasonable to believe that leftists everywhere support a guy who walked into a restaurant and murdered 4 cops in a planned ambush."

Get real. That "belief" is far right conspiracy theory combined with a hatred of the left. It has no basis in reality.

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 12:05 PM


You should win the Gold Medal with the fuckin' word gymnastics that ya do to try to twist ACM's post into painting all libs as cop killer lovers, Bitchboy. "The Left" is a generalization based on a larger movement, such as the "Free Mumia" groups.

Posted by: Atomic Lib Smasher at December 1, 2009 12:21 PM


Poor CJ! Talk about being in the wrong place at the wrong time!

I knew there was a reason I always hated LGF, even when CJ was nominally on the "right".

Posted by: Rob Banks at December 1, 2009 12:21 PM


In other words "It's entirely reasonable to believe that leftists everywhere support a guy who walked into a restaurant and murdered 4 cops in a planned ambush.

Your translation is so inaccurate as to be delusional.

I included the Mumia analogy to unambiguously imply that this cop killer might have became a cause celebre among the far left, just as Mumia did.

The Free Mumia movement was never a core issue in the Democratic party, but that doesn't mean it didn't attract a significant following of committed leftists.

Some of them, such as Van Jones and Bill Ayres, even received jobs in the White House.

Your position is somewhat difficult to maintain when your side appoints, to top positions, self-avowed communists with a history of advocacy for cop killers and the truther movement.

Had this cop killer lived, it is very plausible that he would have become another cause celebre. Although Washington is a liberal state, it still does impose the death penalty, which would have been essentially required of any prosecutor who wished to maintain the support of moderates.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 12:25 PM


More delusional conspiracy theories. I have no doubt that somewhere on the web there's a site where level-headed and serious conservatives discuss real issues of the day and formulate reasoned political responses and detailed policies of their own. It certainly doesn't happen on Moonbattery.

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 12:29 PM


List of reasons I stopped spouting liberal nonsense:

1. I quit injecting heroin
2. I stopped believing I was the center of the world
3. I stopped thinking everyone owed me something
4. I started working
5. I developed a process of critical thinking
6. I developed a hatred for histrionic little pussies like Keith Olbermann.
7. I value God more than Obummer.

Posted by: nms at December 1, 2009 12:39 PM


Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 12:29 PM

And what about the name "Moonbattery" would lead a rational person to believe this was a sober, news only site? This site is what it is Lao, if you want a more serious conservative site go to NRO.

Posted by: Judith M. at December 1, 2009 12:40 PM


LGF at one time,..um,..maybe twice would post some interesting stuff,...just try posting facts on abortion and the loons come out to play. (very ignorant loons)

Posted by: Christene at December 1, 2009 12:42 PM


"The Left" is a generalization based on a larger movement, such as the "Free Mumia" groups. "

Nice try there. As there is with the GOP there is with the democratic party. There are moderates, and there is the respective bases of conservatives and liberals. The right is now purging folks like Johnson out with conspiracies and futuristic Cartmann paranoia. Keep marginalizing yourselves, you are doing half the work for moderates and liberals.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 12:43 PM


Judith, see my post at 10:00 for my take on what this site is.

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 12:47 PM


Anonymous can marginalize my Johnson

Posted by: nms at December 1, 2009 12:48 PM


Lao Mao, it isnt mean spirited hatred, its mocking. Too bad you cant tell the difference.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 12:50 PM


Look at how all the lefty sites are somehow blaming Mike Huckabee for a black man killing 4 cops in cold blood. Heck, turn on MSNBC between 6 and 10pm. They would never actually blame the guy who killed the cops, since he is black. Same deal with the Ft. Hood killer - it was him and his Islamic ideals, it was the War in Iraq and Afghanistan, and by extension George W Bush, that was to blame.

Earlier this year a white guy killed 4 cops in Pittsburgh - the lefty publications nationwide blamed him and his right wing extremist views. While the black guy who killed 4 cops in California around the same time got almost no coverage - what little there was focused on the killers family saying "He wasnt a monster and he was nice boy" and basically saying how tough it is being a black hood in America.

Posted by: Sgt. Joe Thursday at December 1, 2009 12:56 PM


lao please see my reply to you. It really doesn't matter what you think because you are incapable of having a rational discussion with someone who doesn't agree with you. Now run along or should I say get the fuck out if you don't like this site.

Posted by: Farmer Ted at December 1, 2009 12:57 PM


"Lefty" sites blaming Huckabee?? Look to your own. Scroll on up to the cop killer thread and debate Fiberal and Atomic Lib Smasher among others.

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 1:00 PM


I have no doubt that somewhere on the web there's a site where level-headed and serious conservatives discuss real issues of the day and formulate reasoned political responses and detailed policies of their own. It certainly doesn't happen on Moonbattery.

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 12:29 PM

Then get your ass over there! STFU here.

Posted by: your momma at December 1, 2009 1:01 PM


Farmer Ted, this site is a source of endless amusement to me, why would I want to leave? I think it's hilariously funny when people like you use phrases like "having a rational discussion". I saw an example of your "rational discussion" at 10:17. My advice to you is, don't follow me while wearing your slippers.

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 1:06 PM


I think Lao is wetblanketing this site because leftists are so very afraid of being ridiculed. Ironic, that, given that was one of Alinsky's favorite tactics.

Posted by: Judith M. at December 1, 2009 1:07 PM


lao I wasn't having a rational discussion with you I was telling you to get the fuck down the road if you don't like this site. You constantly complain about Van, V, Gregory, etc and piss and moan about this site. So if you hate it that much then leave. Don't worry about me ever following you because I don't follow fools.

Posted by: Farmer Ted at December 1, 2009 1:09 PM


Posted by: nms at December 1, 2009 12:39 PM

Right on.

I'm still confused by grown ups who aren't on drubs continuing to think that way.

Posted by: forest at December 1, 2009 1:10 PM


Oh look! Lao is butt hurt again.

Posted by: PJ at December 1, 2009 1:11 PM


"Lefty" sites blaming Huckabee?? Look to your own. Scroll on up to the cop killer thread and debate Fiberal and Atomic Lib Smasher among others.

We're blaming Huckabee for letting a violent felon out at the same time we're blaming the violent felon for pulling the trigger.

The drive-by media has been running interference for the killer by talking about Huckabee or gun control instead of homicidal, cop-killing maniac.

Huckabee's rotten judgment does not, in any way, diminish the killer's responsibility for the crime.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 1:27 PM


"running interference"?? I have no idea what you mean. I first saw Huckabee linked to this tragic killing (the four cops, to be perfectly clear), on Fox.

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 1:33 PM


Lao is what the kids cal a lolcow. Tha being said, his value as a lolcow has been decreasing very rapidly.

It seems he going into his depressive cycle of his illness.

Hence the astute observation that he is severely butthurt, yet again, because not everyone agrees with or likes him.

Posted by: SK at December 1, 2009 1:40 PM


Huckabee's rotten judgment does not, in any way, diminish the killer's responsibility for the crime.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 1:27 PM

My sentiments exactly. That is a big difference between conservatives and liberals. Liberals ALWAYS blame others. Conservatives are not afraid to consider where they might have been able to prevent a catastrophe by acting in a different manner.

Posted by: Judith M. at December 1, 2009 1:40 PM


I love it. "Liberals ALWAYS blame others." Let's have another phony blanket statement about the left and what they do and believe. They come thick and fast around here. See Yardale's latest declaration on the "Moonbat WaPo" thread.

For the record, the anonycount quote you noted covers my sentiments exactly too.

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 1:47 PM


Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 1:47 PM = BAAWWW!

Posted by: SK at December 1, 2009 1:48 PM


"That is a big difference between conservatives and liberals. Liberals ALWAYS blame others. Conservatives are not afraid to consider where they might have been able to prevent a catastrophe by acting in a different manner."

HeHe! Thank you for smile of the day. Dick Cheney says the Bush Admin. bears no responsibility for the problems in Afghanistan after ignoring it years. Sarah Palin blames the media and McCain staff for her own shortcomings. The right on this site blame moderates for their party problems, not their own batshit crazy bigotry! That is the shortlist.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 1:51 PM


I didn't say conservatives always took responsibility, I said liberals NEVER do. Please show me one example of a prominent liberal taking responsibility for a negative consequence without having his or her arm twisted. It just never happens.

Posted by: Judith M. at December 1, 2009 1:56 PM


Let's start with Lydon Johnson,shall we?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 1:59 PM


We could add Coleman and Hoffmann to the "it's somebody else fault", the go to target....ACORN!

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 2:02 PM


Damn bitchboy.... if ya wanna debate the WaPo blogging moron, do it over in that thread.

Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you? Were ya born stupid or did it happen on accident?

Posted by: Atomic Lib Smasher at December 1, 2009 2:05 PM


And what did you have in mind for Lyndon Johnson, Anon?

Posted by: Judith M. at December 1, 2009 2:08 PM


"No matter how you hope it's true, democrats are not Nazis, and Obama is not Hitler or Mao". You made the statement, now back it up. If you're going to make absolute statements, try to have some back-up. As you're posting an opinion about dems and 0, the opinions that they are,in fact, Nazis, socialists or Communists, and that 0 is indeed, Mao, Hitler, Stalin or Jimmy Carter redux are just as valid as your opinion.

Posted by: UpNorth at December 1, 2009 2:11 PM


After escalating war in Vietnam, saw the error of his decisions and withdrew from his reelection bid to "focus on peacemaking". Well knowing that Vietnam was a losing cause, chose to take different avenues to correct the mistakes.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 2:15 PM


I'm good enough, I’m smart enough, and dog-gone it ... people like me.

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 2:17 PM


It's AIDS day. Shouldn't Lao be at a quilting bee?

Posted by: Karin at December 1, 2009 2:26 PM


I wrote off Charles "Icarus" Johnson and Little Green Gonads a few months back. There is literally no reason for Conservatives to pay attention to it any longer. CJ lost me when he went on his anti-creationism crusade, and picked a fight with the great Robert Spencer.

Posted by: Refuter Of Liberal Vermin at December 1, 2009 2:33 PM


anon @ 2:15pm did you just quote your college professor or highschool teacher?

Posted by: Farmer Ted at December 1, 2009 2:34 PM


Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 2:17 PM

No, you're not and no, they don't.

Posted by: SK at December 1, 2009 2:38 PM


Posted by: Karin at December 1, 2009 2:26 PM

If by quilting bee you mean bathhouse, then yes.

Lao is probably more on the 'supply side' of AIDS.

Posted by: SK at December 1, 2009 2:40 PM


"CJ lost me when he went on his anti-creationism crusade" When was it God made the fossils?

That Charles Johnson actually took this on does not mean he is suddenly a liberal. This is another example of the right's small tent/small mind mentality.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 2:41 PM


Looks like Charles is doubling down on idiocy today. He put up a post about his conversion to the Church of Warming. Says he read a bunch of books and looked at the data and had no choice but to believe.

Too bad a bunch of the data has been manipulated and/or destroyed. It kinda reminds me of the whole Rathergate "fake but accurate" thing.

Posted by: forest at December 1, 2009 2:41 PM


Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 2:41 PM

The problem I have with it is that he became obsessed with creationism like he got obsessed with Vlaams Belang and anyone remotely associated with them. I lost interest in LGF about that time because it was just plain boring, but I've been reading more lately because he's really gone off the rails at full throttle and it's entertaining again.

Posted by: forest at December 1, 2009 2:47 PM


The one thing that I didn't like much at LGF was his cruel take on the death of Rachel Corrie. I don't support Corrie because Corrie was an idiot and borderline treasonous but, I didn't find their 'humorous take' on her horrible death amusing int he least.

I pitied the poor girl and her family. Her death is further proof that Left Wing liberalism is a virus which consumes/kills those that are terminally infected with it.

Prevention or intervention could have saved her from a lethal case of moonbattery.

Posted by: SK at December 1, 2009 2:58 PM


I used to support the Left, but they're anti-white.

Then I supported the Right, but they're anti-white as well.

So, what option do I have?

It's not my nation anymore.

Posted by: TheGreatWhiteAmericanWimp at December 1, 2009 2:59 PM


I do not know his work very well. I know of him, but have read very little. It is amusing to see the right go nuts that their own lunacy is chasing people off. This is like watching a minor league Frank Scaeffer. You are sinking your own ship. You don't grow a party and/or cause by forcing people out. Yet, keep it up it is entertaining.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 3:00 PM


No one 'forced CJ out' of anything, genius.

What happened is that Charles Johnson simply regressed backwards into the Left Wing mindset that polluted his brain for years before he became a 'conservative'.

Hence, CJ's views increasingly became more and more moonbatty that the only people who will support him are his devoted sycophants and and his fellow left wing loonies.

Posted by: SK at December 1, 2009 3:10 PM


Ahh yes, more denial. "It's not the conservatives fault, he just regressed". LOL! And Frank Scaefer? What about him? Was that all the religious fanatics he surrounded himself with that forced him to become a liberal? Your ideals are dwindling, your base is shrinking, so next time you wail "2010! Be afraid!", do so while looking in the mirror.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 3:19 PM


Yeah, you keep thinking that, Lao. Frame your ideology's impending doom in 2010 and 2012 in such a way so you can pretend you're not afraid.

Your continued & profuse projection is delightful.

:)

Posted by: SK at December 1, 2009 3:24 PM


Anon, are you free for a cup of coffee? It's not a date, it's just a cup of coffee...

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 3:26 PM


Please send this pic to your friends so they see it before CJ goes after me for it...

Global Warmingists

Posted by: DANEgerus at December 1, 2009 3:28 PM


First off, I am not Lao. Second, it is fun to see right-wing losers so afraid. You do not have enough candidates to take back the House with any authority, and in the Senate you are faced with the same problem. Keep propping up your crazies, makes our job easier.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 3:39 PM


Right wing loser are afraid because Republicans won't take back the house "with any authority".

I agree, the Democrats will probably lose the majority in the house by a only few seats.

Posted by: forest at December 1, 2009 3:54 PM


You are going to pick up 81 plus seats? You should take that act on the road, you are funny!

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 3:59 PM


Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 2:41 PM

Dear idiot who is too lazy to create a proper screen name:

CJ is a left wing twat for a number of reasons.Number 1: He seems to think creationists pose a greater danger to society than the Global Jihad. Number 2: He has exposed himself as an outspoken Obamunist, rushing to defend the Kenyan President on multiple occasions. Number 3: He is hostile to Sarah Palin. Number 4: He obsesses over alleged connections between prominent Conservatives and those he views as Racist, fringe groups & individuals, all while condemning the use of "Guilt by Association" tactics by the Right. Number 5: He is a totalitarian webmaster, ruthlessly banning those who even whisper a hint of dissent against his leftist tendencies. I'm sure you share these twisted, insane views.

Posted by: Refuter Of Liberal Vermin at December 1, 2009 4:22 PM


Creationism is an issue, and the idea of pushing it in schools is dangerous because of the variety of religions in our country. Of you jump right into one of the issues Johnson finds idiotic, as does most of the country, except you and the Wash. Times owned by self proclaimed second coming of the Messiah, cultist Moon. "hostile to Sarah Palin"?? C'mon! This is politics, not a marbles game! She can't even get quotes right, and thinks a bus tour means the staff takes the bus, and she takes a plane. Everything you point to on Johnson show him as a moderate, so we'll take him.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 4:37 PM


Posted by: Americaneocon at December 1, 2009 5:23 PM


Anonymoron didn't even touch Numbers 2, 4 & 5. Here is Number 6:

Charles "Icarus" Johnson is a true believer in the cult of Global Warming.

Posted by: Refuter Of Liberal Vermin at December 1, 2009 5:35 PM


#2 He isn't a birther. Sounds sensible.

#4 You mean an "alleged connection" like Glenn Beck supporting conspiracy theories??

#5 He's a "totalitarian webmaster" - bwahahahaha!

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 5:52 PM


Creationism is an issue, and the idea of pushing it in schools is dangerous because of the variety of religions in our country. Of you jump right into one of the issues Johnson finds idiotic, as does most of the country, except you and the Wash. Times owned by self proclaimed second coming of the Messiah, cultist Moon. "hostile to Sarah Palin"?? C'mon! This is politics, not a marbles game! She can't even get quotes right, and thinks a bus tour means the staff takes the bus, and she takes a plane. Everything you point to on Johnson show him as a moderate, so we'll take him.

You're missing the point. None of that should change the value of core conservative principles to someone who is truly conservative.

It also shouldn't precipitate knee-jerk reactions on completely separate issues. Regardless of his distaste for creationism, what does creationism have to do with coming out of the liberal closet to accuse anyone to the right of MSNBC of racism, bigotry, and fascism?

That line of false accusations is old and tired, having been not only abused for decades, but abused to such a degree over the last two years as to render it farcical by default.

Those who spew false accusations of intolerance as a way to shut down any possibility of intelligent debate by means of ad hominem degeneracy also render themselves farcical by default.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 1, 2009 5:53 PM


"Those who spew false accusations of intolerance as a way to shut down any possibility of intelligent debate by means of ad hominem degeneracy also render themselves farcical by default."

Anonycount, we see eye to eye on that one. While I receive a great deal of ad hominem degeneracy around here, I never reciprocate.

Posted by: Lao at December 1, 2009 6:09 PM


Conspiracy theories are scary when folks are out to get you. You left wingers scare me.

Posted by: Tong at December 1, 2009 6:34 PM


I've just been reading on several blogs about all the CJ/LGF hoopla today... I read LGF for a while, 04~07ish

I enjoyed the content and comments... and eventually on one of CJs registration "windows" got in the Lizard Lounge... I commented only once or twice

Then he started all that European political party bashing... they don't muslims so they're all fascists he sez

and then the weird spat w/ Robert Spencer (I admire Robert Spencer and have read his works) and Pam Geller...

then the wholesale assault on religion... and I realized I had to leave LGF.... just went cold-turkey... and I've not looked back

it's a sad tell of a CA lefty thinking he was "mugged by reality on 9/11" and moving right as a result... and the inevitable swing back to the left.... CJ must have drank the koolaide and got infected w/ bad craziness

Posted by: ronn at December 1, 2009 6:41 PM


Icarus, LOL, dumbshit flew too close to the sun. OMG, its the sun, not fossil fuels that cause global warming. Is there a scientist around?

Posted by: Tong at December 1, 2009 6:43 PM


"You are going to pick up 81 plus seats? You should take that act on the road, you are funny!

Posted by: Anonymous at December 1, 2009 3:59 PM"

They only need to pick up 41 seats to erase an 81 seat deficit. Man liberals are dumb.

Posted by: forest at December 2, 2009 4:31 AM


I'm curious to why Charles Johnson is even mentioned anymore? He obviously is struggling personally, is paranoid beyond belief, his blog is floundering, most of the people who helped make his blog are now gone, and he apparently has become a repetitive bore. I refuse to visit his feckless site anymore.

Personally, I just wish people would let LGF die and look at Charles as a tragic figure who showed some talent but withered away. Let Johnson go the way of Pet Rocks and Beanie Babies. An occasional good memory, a figure of amusement and an example of a fad.

Johnson no longer warrants attention.

Posted by: Goodbye Natalie at December 2, 2009 3:48 PM


I think this is hilarious - that retard Anonymous and his butt buddy Lao think we conservatives are 'afraid', yet Anonymous is the one too cowardly to post an actual name.

We know all to well that we lost the elections last year, so we don't need a moron like you to point it out. Last year's elections only proved to me that there are a LOT of stupid people in this country. It's a fact - liberals are stupid. Every last one of them, and the both of you (Lao and Anonycoward) emphasize this with every single ridiculous post to this thread and others. Nothing you say will ever change the fact that liberals on a whole are drooling, idiotic, mean-spirited, cowardly, power hungry troglodytes with the morals of a rabid dog.

Furthermore, Charles Johnson is a liberal, always has been and always will be. Conservatives don't need him, and don't want him. He's an idiot with major problems. You disgusting moral degenerates can have him.

Posted by: Marie at December 3, 2009 8:46 PM


Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)