When last I ventured over to Making Light, I
took the advice of that Christopher guy
and I stopped posting. What's my thanks? All of my vowels
have now disappeared...(Look under Housekeeping before it all goes down the Memory
Big Fat Sigh.
I mean, what is
wrong with Patrick Nielson Hayden and his grotesquely fat Vowel Thief of a wife Teresa
Nielson Hayden? It's sad I tellya. Just so sad.
Anyway, here's the
sorry tale as to why nobody can post at Electrolite from now on. I guess I should gloat
that I have this much control over the Hayden editorial function. What miserable stupid
Here's the whole
story. And since I'm confident about my arguments all vowels and consonants shall remain
First a prelude:
Well before we speculate on the evil things I have been
accused of saying, it might be helpful if we add a bit of background. Now, heres
what I first said:
Yup, that cartoon just about hits it on the head. It also points out that something
that Richard Hofstadter (who coined the term the "Paranoid Style" and describes
the Republican Party quite well...)is still true: Because the Republicans are just the
blatant servers of Capital they come off as honest, plain speaking folk, just like the
alien baby eating party. Where Dems, torn between their base which has nowhere to go
(although the Greens may get a second look from me) and the GOP-lite faction DLC, always
comes off looking ambiguous and torn, which comes off as sleazy politician vibe. When, in
fact, the dems have to at least wrestle with their base and their conscience before
selling out over Social Security or taxes, which the DLC already wants to do...No wonder
the baby eating party always seems to win. Does the baby eating party benefit from the
fortunate deaths of senatorial candidates just days before the election...?! Just
So, who you gonna choose America: the straight shooting GOP Anti Christ who wants to start
WW3 or some Wishy Washy Dem with their big words (Hofstadter also wrote the fount work
"Anti-Intellectualism in American Life", must reading these days) and their
"lockboxes"...It's alien baby eating party all the way.
PS: When will you comment on the Bush administration filing suit to stop electric car
requirements in California...I mean, I guess, it's not only just a war about oil, which
must be false gosh help us perish the thought, but it apparently also isn't about
squelching alternative fuel sources as well to ensure my conquest of the mideastern oil
remains profitable...I feel like I'm in a bad alternative universe and I can't get out,
can't get out, can't get out, can't get out...
So that made it through the
Hayden Ministry of Information. Then this guy said this:
From Erich Schwarz,
posted on November 17, 2002 11:50 PM:
"So, who you gonna choose America: the straight shooting GOP Anti
Christ who wants to start WW3 or some Wishy Washy Dem with their big words (Hofstadter
also wrote the fount work 'Anti-Intellectualism in American Life', must reading these
days) and their 'lockboxes'..."
Gosh! And here I thought that having an A.B. from the Ivy League and a Ph.D. in hard
science from Caltech made me all intul-ek-shul.
But I voted Republican, so clearly I is stoopid. Muchos thankos por clearito uppo thato.
--Erich Schwarz (writing in Espanol Bushisto
Now, this is where it gets tricky, because I responded to
this argument, which has now been flushed down the Memory Hole. I might point out that for
you to make an accurate judgment about the merits of what I wrote or the justification of
the censorship, then you would have to have read exactly what I said. But if I recall, I
said something like:
But Bizarro language aside, why did you vote Republican? And then I mentioned
three areas where I thought the Republicans were actually in the way of science
research, most notably stem cell research. I then pointed out, because unlike DLC
democrats, Im not bought off and can vigorously defend myself against the
opposition, that I would wait for answer and then determine if he was stupid. This is, and
this needs to be pointed out to allegedly sharp editors, not the same as calling either
conservative politics stupid or him stupid, or as he calls it stoopid.
So then I wrote this:
Well, first, my apologies. I didn't know that I was commenting at a church. Poor
Erich. How I must have wounded him.
Second, I didn't call him stupid. What I said, and I'm going from memory here because I
don't expect my messages to go down the memory hole at socalled "liberal sites"
(guess that explains that non ACLU link), is that I would determine if he was stupid based
on his answer. Now, he might have some very intelligent answers as to why he votes
Republican. For example, today, the Senate passed a bill that would have prevented the
whiny lawsuit filin' public from taking their grievances to a courtroom against Big
Pharma. I'm sure that's intelligent. If you're maimed by aspirin, then of course you
shouldn't be able to sue in a court of law. How democratic. Or, perhaps he's from the
future, and he knows that only a fascist Earth can defend us from Alien invasion in 2021.
Well, fine. It takes the Klingons or the Cardassians to beat the Shadows. I get it. I
think that, as well, would be an intelligent reason to go Republican. You just never
Again, I find all of this stuff mild. But theres the
history of our little feud. So, I started taking the argument over to the oh so
Rubenesque Teresa's site. And where I then later found that my vowels had been stripped.
Nice touch. Clarification: By
the way, I posted that at Electrolite and that was censored and excised so to speak. So I
waited until dark, when all vigilantes strike, and posted it several times under a
different IP address. I don't consider it spamming by the way but self defense. The
"alleged" reasons he gives for censoring me in the first place are wrong and
don't make any sense, especially in the no holds barred arena of message board decorum.
(It would not be unlike a television show being cancelled today because a character used
the word "Hell".) I've also done this before at well known chickenblogger's site
Dr. Weevil. And while I loathe Dr. Weevil, let's give him some credit for just censoring
me and not shutting down his whole fucking message board system...even right wing fascists
have a right to consort with themselves afterall...Frankly, I thought that's what Patrick
would do and we would all move on with our lives. Then he decides to cancel his own
message board. Bizarre. like I said before...I'll never get that.
(Oh, one more thing
Patrick, I may not have made all the aliases obvious. I have multiple IP addresses. Happy
for these rebuts go here.)(Look
under housekeeping..(I decided to take the debate over to his wife's site. I was just
about to give her congrats for having more fortitude than her husband when the
disemvowelings began...Pathetic and Sad.))
Scott and Allison Scott: You are not attacking the argument
when you attack me personally. Otherwise, I have to assume that you wholeheartedly agree
with my offer to stay off the message boards here and at Electrolite entirely in exchange
for the message boards being brought back on line. I think this is a reasonable solution.
As least Lydia makes a few arguments. Lets take a look at them graph by graph
As my mother would say, Dear heavenly day in the morning. It's been a
while since I've seen someone not get it in such a vast and comprehensive fashion. The sad
thing about this is that I think that, within your value system, your offer to stay off of
the Nielsen Haydens' comments for a year in exchange for letting other people post
comments is noble. Unfortunately, it just won't work.
Is your mum British mayhap? Your whole pretentious style is
redolent of buttered scones and tea. However, I do appreciate you recognizing that my
offer is noble. I mean, afterall, youre an articulate poster. Shouldnt you be
allowed to post at Electrolite? Wouldnt it be stupid to punish you and other writers
and suckups because of something that I did. And why wouldnt it work? If Im
the offensive party, then Ill simply remove myself. Sounds simple enough. Ill
make sure (really sure)that I post my defenses on my own site so that when Googled in the
future people can make their own determinations as to how sound my judgments are.
How did you come to think that posting via sock puppets was a
good idea, or a reasonable revenge? Patrick has made any number of comments in his blog
about disliking, but permitting anonymity -- as long as people behaved themselves. The
very act of posting as a sock puppet violates that rule. Misconceptions, so many
misconceptions. Patrick can't possibly have censored you because his blog is not public
property. It is no more censorship to remove one of your posts than it is to reject a
submission. It's just editing, that's all. Since it's his, he can decide what to allow on
it. The line becomes fuzzier when we start talking about the news media, which have as a
role the dispassionate informer of the people. It is reasonable to argue that news
organizations have an obligation to the public, not just to their owners. However, Patrick
isn't setting himself up as a news source, either.
Theres so much wrong with this I barely know where to
begin. Lets start at the top. First, its kind of obvious that I wasnt
disguising myself, unless Avram and Isaac have come back from their respective graves. As
far as the censorship issue, this goes to the very core of what distinguishes the left
from the right. The left, to me, stands for freedom of speech, and at the very least,
freedom to defend ones position on a message board. Ive never censored anybody
at my own message board and Ive urged that we dont censor people over at
Warblogger Watch. To me, this is what distinguishes the left from the right. We want to
hear what the other side has to say. I wouldve liked to have heard why someone in
the sciences thinks the republicans, working to turn the United States into a second rate
genetics power, is good for science. Now, we may never know. And quite frankly, if you
open up your comments section to the public, then there should be some freedom of
expression allowed. Otherwise, when you criticize Fox News, as Patrick has done, it
undermines your very argument. For example, here Patrick is quoted criticizing Fox
News: Of course, thinking along these lines, one is inescapably reminded of
the endless ritual invocations of freedom and democracy from the chatterboxes of Fox News,
a company run by a wizened gargoyle whose willingness to accommodate Beijing's every
desire approaches levels normally seen only among professional submissives. But remember,
it's liberals who are the enemies of freedom. Of course. That was on August
7th of this year. Now, anytime he criticizes them again, someone with a memory will point
out that hes a hypocrite and that he simply follows his own agenda, as does Fox
News. Whats worse, hes censoring somebody who agrees with most of his policy
points. Its beyond just plain stupid. Its absurd. I mean, if I was a right
winger Id be laughing in my boots. So, this is how I close down all discussion at a
liberal site bhahahahaha etc
The phrase "publishes two websites" suggests that you
mistakenly think that Teresa's blog is somehow dependent upon Patrick. That's a silly
mistake. They're married, they live together, they share a domain, sure. None of this,
however, suggests that one of them might be in control of the other's blog. The thing
you've missed that I think is most basic is: they don't need you. Patrick can stop
comments on his website. Teresa can, too, if she wants. There are various ways (some
labor-intensive) to make sure that you don't post, even if they leave comments functional.
Your offer to refrain from posting, while sincerely meant, isn't worth anything because
you're not offering them anything that they don't already have.
Look, dearie, you got it wrong. The phrase publishes two
websites refers to the websites that I publish. Get it? Jeez. And Im posting
over here because I can defend myself and my position which I should have the right to do.
It also shows, yet again, the silliness and impotence of censorship. As for they
dont need you well thats not the argument. Because of something that Im
accused of doing ,which isnt true and which I find especially galling, youre
no longer allowed to post over at Electrolite! How stupid is that? I guess they do need me
or something. I still cant wrap my head. Furthermore, Ive offered not to post!
Its obscene whats being done here. So you and Jane Yolen are no longer allowed
to post because of something Ive done
You could try apologizing for having been rude, though. I've no idea
if the apology would be accepted, but it's the one thing I can see that you have to offer
that P & T don't already have. Teresa is notably merciful (and just -- scary
combination). By all the standards I know, both Usenet etiquette and just plain etiquette,
you've behaved quite rudely.
Sigh. Again, if my comments hadnt been censored, you
would have known that I did offer my apologies. And how do you apply your standards to
things that you havent read and that have disappeared down the memory hole
Are you a psychic faux British person as well?
(These are my two sites, get it? Good.)
PS: Just for the record, I think the people at Ellison Wonderland were kidding and simply
trying to emulate their hero. The friendly folks at Warblogger Watch, who chortle over
Paul Wellstones death, well, I take their threats seriously.
Mr. MacDonald: Nice literary putdown. Its always good to
meet an opposition thats literate. One big problem: youre quoting a poem that
is widely thought to be pro war and was very popular in WWI when lots of Shropshire lads
were dying. This Shropshire writes for Warblogger Watch and opposes not only invading
Iraq, but the whole methodology of the War on Terror. I might be annoying but I'm not that
guy. Im also not British.
To Kate: How can you comment on something that you havent read? Are you a faux
British psychic as well? Read what I actually wrote first, and then declare your loyalty
and allegiance to the Hayden mantra of the hour. That would be much more effective if you
From Philip Shropshire,
posted on November 21, 2002 08:58 AM:
Is that it? Shameful. Let me reiterate my offer: I'll be happy to withdraw from commenting
here or at Electrolite in the forseeable future. If you have a problem with me, then you
should deal with me, Patrick. Don't punish your readers.