Gotta give Bush credit: He made the exact right move at the exact right time. Ditching Rumsfeld, the single most visible symbol of the Iraq debacle short of Bush himself, was perfectly timed. Had he dumped Rummy shortly before the election, it would have been seen as a desperation move. I suppose there’s a possibility that it might have changed the outcome, which has been seen as a voter repudiation of the war. But I don’t think it’s a sizable chance, and probably would have been seen as a case of “too little, too late.” In this instance, though, it managed to grab headlines from the Democratic triumph back to the White House. Bush has snared the spin cycle before the election dust has settled. He did the right thing in getting rid of an advisor who has given him nothing but bad advice and been a PR catastrophe on more than one occasion, and he did it at a time when his support base is at an all-time moral low. He has sent a definite message: He’s not going to be spending the next two years with more of the same and staying the course, steering the remainder of his presidency into irrelevancy.
With a smartening-up Bush and a newly energized Democratic majority, let’s see if the government finally gets on the right track.
PAD
• 
Okay, it’s time for another edition of the “Annie Hall” game. Our contestant today is Mike Leung. What he said is in boldface. What he meant is in italics.
Posted by: Mike at November 24, 2006 12:22 AM
While I’m breaking posts up to bypass the word limits of the Peter’s movable type,
I have writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea.
Posted by: Mike at November 24, 2006 12:22 AM
let me fix the typos in the previous sentence:
I have writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea writer’s diarrhea.
Posted by: Mike at November 24, 2006 12:22 AM
To simply make an untrue statement in itself does not qualify as lying. Why wouldn’t the issue of censorship be consideration when Lennie Green Footballs plainly reserve it as a privilege in their disclaimer?
I am up to my ášš in restraining orders. Why? WHY?!?!?!?
Posted by: Mike at November 24, 2006 12:22 AM
I dodged your charge of hypocrisy by qualifying why your readership of Lennie Green Footballs was fûçkëd up and mine was not. You refuse to denounce the site, sheltering their ridicule of the year’s dead, just as John Byrne ridiculed Steve Irwin’s death. I am not holding you to a standard I don’t live by myself. Ergo, no hypocrisy.
I must continue to attempt to intimidate people. Otherwise they may learn that I frequently wet the bed.
Posted by: Mike at November 24, 2006 12:22 AM
The Klan will not take me because I know hate crime laws are justifiable in the same manner cop-killer laws are justified, and say so unambiguously. Yet you keep trying to deride me by telling me what I say is compatible with them.
The Klan would not take me because I smell so terribly bad. I am so very lonely.
Posted by: Mike at November 24, 2006 12:22 AM
However, sheltering racism is right up the Klan’s alley. If anything you’ve said would exclude you from their membership, you’re going to have to remind me. Seriously, macaca, what have you said that would lead a Klan member to exclude you from membership?
Look at how I skewer my online enemies! Yet the opposite sex continues to find me unattractive? It is inconceivable!!!
Posted by: Mike at November 24, 2006 12:22 AM
Sounds like stalking to me:
EEEEEKKKKK!!!! It is a kitten!!!! Save me, someone, save me from the dangerous kitten!!!!
Posted by: Mike at November 24, 2006 12:22 AM
Which word throws you off, “pursue” or “quarry?”
I can read! Hooked on Phonics WORKED for ME! How can people fail to see my inherent superiority? I am so lonely and sad…
Posted by: Mike at November 24, 2006 12:22 AM
When you leave in the obvious substance of my reply — that I was making the distinction between being angry and sheltering anger — no, my reply wasn’t screwed up at all.
But my brain is twisted and on fire! Oh, the voices, the voices that tell me to take a shower and use deoderant — they are telling me this because they know personal cleaning products will poison me!!!!! I must resist those horrible voices!!!!!!
Posted by: Mike at November 24, 2006 12:22 AM
The object of my hatred made a habit of discussing cripples and midgets — not in the funny “South Park” way — but in the manner along the lines of “these people disgust me and I wish they had the decency to stay out of public view.”
Then his daughter developed an obvious speech/learning disability, which he discusses publicly. Of his publishing success, I will only say it came from severe sacrifices on his part above and beyond anything that has to do with getting published.
HE IS A SQUIRREL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Mike at November 24, 2006 12:22 AM
You’ve already cited posts from me discussing the tactics of trolling. I said you’ve given me a lot of freedom by abandoning any moral ground, and that is still the case. The only virtue of denying “ANY racially motivated murder” matches the plain wording of “Killing members of [a national, ethnical, racial or religious group]” in the definition of genocide this denial is to shelter racism.
I must continue to scream about racism and genocide, lest you find out about my bed-wetting!!!!!!!!!
WAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SAVE ME! SAVE ME FROM THE AWFUL KITTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Funny stuff, Bill.
The key to Mike is to realize that every accusation he hurls at people is far more accurately applicable to him.
He calls people obsessive and he’s demonstrated a level of weird obsessiveness that approaches truly alarming levels. (Alarming in the sense of your mental health, Mike. Nobody is scared of you.)
He calls people “needy” (his latest word) and really, have you ever seen anyone with a greater need for attention that wasn’t 2 years old?
He accuses people of being illogical and unable to formulate an argument while his wild leaps of logic and rambling reason make whatever point he seems to be making impossible to follow if you aren’t schizophenic.
He tells people they are so stupid they don’t even know what smart is and he’s…well, let’s be charitable…
He accuses people of racism….draw your own conclusions…
Really Mike, maybe you should reconsider your aqpparent decision not to sic CNN on us. No, hear me out! If you don’t start throwing around your massive media influence it’ll just encourage us to keep making fun of you and looking up stuff on the internet that illustrate what a grotesque little troll you are and have ever been. Just think about all those folks back in the days of Live Journal who, when they think of you at all (not often, these days) think of you as a nut. A kook. A weirdo.
At the end of the day, what do you suppose the general concensus here would be? You’ve managed to bring together liberal, conservatives, radicals, fundamentalists, and anarchists because, despite our wide and varied philosophical views of the world, we aren’t insane. Or whatever it is that makes you you.
I echo Bill Mulligan’s challenge. I DARE YOU to sic CNN on us!
Look, I’ve already revealed your name to the world: MIKE LEUNG.
Here’s your Web site for everyone to see:
http://www.çhìçkëņšøûp4ŧhëdámņëd.com/
You’ve accused me of having a taste for blood and dominance. I looked up information that was freely available online — I know that meets your unilateral definition of “stalking.” It’s time to sic The Dogs of Media on me!
Unless… you can’t? Unless… you were making empty threats?
The ball’s in your court, Mickey. I’m waiting.
By the way, in case anyone reading this thread is new to Peter David’s blog, I do not have a taste for either “blood” or “dominance.” That’s just some hysterical hyperbole from MIKE LEUNG, who gets bent out of shape when his proclivity for insulting people results in people insulting him back.
When you do it like I have — with far more wit, style, and panache than he could ever hope to show — he plays the hysterical victim.
And yeah… I know that pretty much every other poster in this forum posseses more wit, style, and panache than MIKE LEUNG. It’s not exactly a feather in my cap.
“I was going to write that I felt Jerry’s words about Mike were too harsh for my taste. That I do find him quite infuriating because I dislike when people deliberately behave stupid, and because he’s pìššìņg on an issue of great significance. I still think that way. Some of Jerry’s words were very harsh.”
Maybe they recently have been, Micha, but you’re not the one he’s been accusing of stalking and such. For me, Mike was funny, in a really strange and demented way, for a while. I didn’t care to flame him too badly because he was just too pitiful to be worth the effort. I would have likely been content to just skewer him in the manner that Bill has been doing or, after a while, ignore him all together.
But accusations of stalking and, “maybe you will take it upon yourself to remove me from the gene pool,” end the joking for me. You, the Bills, Sean, Rex or others can make an offhand joke (oh, so that was you peering through my living room window the other night) and I know that it’s not seriously meant in the least. With Mike, we really have no idea how serious he is. It could just be more of his writer’s diarrhea, just mindless drivel, a troll’s attempt to provoke a reaction or a dementedly paranoid mind’s honest belief stated in print. Mike is crazy seeming enough that there is no way to tell and he has a less then stellar history with these matters on other blogs.
So I pointed out, after his repeatedly going on about it, exactly what I felt about him and made it clear, in the simplest and purest way I could, that he’s a pathetic, cowardly little troll who wouldn’t even rate a face to face if he lived next door. Was I harsh? By my POV, hëll no. Did he deserve it? By my POV, oh yes.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Mike,
I unshroud you just this one last time. You like saying that people have written checks that their butts can’t cash when involved in exchanges with you. Well, your making accusations of stalking and accusations of desired homicide fit that bill quite nicely. I offer you these options.
1) If you’re serious, then go all the way. Do what you gotta do, áššhølë. Go to your local press, get a lawyer, call the ACLU, call the cable news networks and get serious about it. However, I should warn you that, by the time I’m done with you, by the time you’ve been made to look a complete fool in public and in court, it will end with a portion of every paycheck you ever make again in your life going to my bank account to cover the settlement you’ll end up paying.
2) If you can’t get serious about it and you’ve realized that you’ve jumped in over your head and written a check that your butt can’t even come close to cashing, then shut the fûçk up about it.
Option #2 would be the wisest of those two choices for you to take.
I now re-shroud you. Hopefully, I’ll never have to talk to you again.
More fun with Mike.
When he says “Your reference to the righteous disciplining of a degraded woman was gratuitous. You’ve simply demonstrated your appetite for disciplining and degrading women.” just remember when he also said (to Jerry I think) “Sometimes I see these couples in their 50s in public, where the guy will hold the back of his wife’s neck like he’s steering her by the neck. Is there a lucky woman whose neck fits the back of your hand when you go out?”
I think that was the first time i was sriously creeped out by Mike. Sadly, not the last time. Do awful people even know how awful they sound to normal people? And Mike, whatever that woman did to you taht made you so hateful to the gender, you probably deserved it. Move on.
Because this might be the first time Bill Mulligan actually reads this, I’m going to fix it:
You’ve atated a couple of times now the belief that I don’t read your stupidity. You give far too much credit, my trollish friend. But seriously, just as a glimpse into your…um, mind, how exactly is it that I replying to specific parts of your silliness, often even going through the trouble of cutting and pasting them into my response (to remind people of how stupid you are) if I’m not reading the posts? Seriously, how does that happen? Do you even think about what you write before you write it?
“Micha, once again I applaud you.”
Thanks Sean.
Jerry C wrote:
“”I was going to write that I felt Jerry’s words about Mike were too harsh for my taste. That I do find him quite infuriating because I dislike when people deliberately behave stupid, and because he’s pìššìņg on an issue of great significance. I still think that way. Some of Jerry’s words were very harsh.”
Maybe they recently have been, Micha, but you’re not the one he’s been accusing of stalking and such.”
You’re right. I’ve not been as affected by his insults. I pretty much tuned out most of what he said as empty nonsese, except as far as breaking down his genocide argument. Although I started to get involved because I was annoyed by the casual way he accused Bill Mulligan of racism, and only later because of his trivializing genocides, I haven’t realized how others were affected by his insults.
In a way, maybe his insults are worse than the ones he received because their is no distinction for him between joke and reality. His arguments are insults, and his insults arguments.
I also have to admit that I’ve found it hard to hold back on insulting him, because of hisinfuriating attitude. I’ve also found it hard to walk away, because of the subject, because of my inability to walk away from statements I think are wrong, because it became amusing for me to observe how Mike’s arguments were becoming more and more twistedm, and also because I didn’t have much to add to the newer threads (TV shows and comics that have not yet arrived in my country and so forth).
But I am concerned that we are becoming very vicious, while feeding the problem. I doubt stopping would stop Mike. He seems to thrive on this. But still. At least we should try to prevent it from moving on to future threads.
I wonder what the other people who come to this Blog think about this endless argument.
——————
On a lighter note
Bill Myers, are you sure saying his full name three times in capital (I counted) is wise. I recently saw a movie called Candyman, and I’m not so sure. We have problems with the squirl threat as it is.
Micha, I’ve thought about whether or not we were being too viscious to Mike. Not because he doesn’t deserve it, just because it’s not a particularly good way to spend one’s time. And the possibility that he gets off on it.
Then again, we have been able to keep him occupied here, away from the women and children, so it may be for the greater good.
“At least we should try to prevent it from moving on to future threads.”
Well, it’s jumped several threads and gone on for almost a month now. If you know anything about our Mike’s past elsewhere, he has been known to keep hammering away at his pet point of the moment for months after everybody else stopped caring to play. All answering anything he has to say about this month’s genocide argument is going to do is extend the time that we’ll still be getting posts from him about it.
“But I am concerned that we are becoming very vicious, while feeding the problem.”
Maybe, maybe not. As I said, I quit responding to him after a while. The only reason I said anything about him at all for quite a while was in response to others’ remarks about/to Mike.
When I brought Mike up specifically in my “Basic introduction: Troll 101” post, it was because I kept seeing his stalking remarks being repeated by him and I decided to stress exactly how stupid he is with this stalking garbage and really stress how no one here would give a dámņ to waste the time or effort to even think about stalking someone so worthless.
Was I being a bit vicious? Oh, yeah. I was being as vicious as possible in my efforts to best describe his worth and his true rating on my interest meter in order to, again, make clear how foolish his stalking bit really is.
He threw it out there and I was happy to start leaving him alone. He kept saying it and he started to come off as believing his own garbage rather then just ranting. Like I said up top, I don’t play that game when it comes to being accused of stalking or of being accused of wanting to kill someone. He wants to keep being that stupid with I and others here, he’s going to get lots of vicious in return by lots of people here.
And he’ll only have himself to blame in the end. Not that he’ll ever work that out.
Posted by: Jerry C at November 24, 2006 09:45 PM
All answering anything he has to say about this month’s genocide argument is going to do is extend the time that we’ll still be getting posts from him about it.
I extended to him a very real gesture of peace. He made his reciprocation contingent upon my agreeing with him about his definition of genocide, which I cannot do in good conscience. So I tried ignoring him for awhile and he kept hounding me, insulting me at every opportunity. I think he’ll stick around no matter what we do.
Nevertheless, I suppose there’s still a good case to be made for ignoring Mike. It may not reduce the frequency with which he posts — but at least we’ll know he won’t be getting the satisfaction he craves.
Posted by: Jerry C at November 24, 2006 01:29 PM
You, the Bills, Sean, Rex or others can make an offhand joke (oh, so that was you peering through my living room window the other night) and I know that it’s not seriously meant in the least.
So that’s you! I don’t mind too much, but could you at least cut back a bit on the heavy breathing and pawing at the window? It’s starting to disturb my wife a bit.
The baby thinks you’re hilarious, though.
-Rex Hondo-
What can I say, Rex. Kids love a clown.
Or, in my case, a Klown.
+:-}
Great. Jerry just admitted to being a killer from outer space. There’s going to be poison cotton candy flying all over the place.
Rex, listen, if you find a watch in your hall closet it’s mine. That was the last place I saw it, anyway.
Good Christ.
I’ve seen threads go off the rails before, but nothing like this. Close to 600 postings, and this has degenerated into an string of diatribes, cross-accusations, near-incoherence, and a seemingly endless session of Whac-a-Troll. Several people involved have written me privately expressing concern over the level of animosity and the nature of accusations; having taken the time to haul out my weed-whacker and hack through this thing, I can see the basis for the concerns.
What I do not see is a point for this continuing. I am taking the extraordinary step of exercising my prerogative as your host and calling an end to this entire sorry excuse for discourse. I don’t care who started it, who finished it, or who was responsible. It’s done. And let’s try to hold matters to a slightly higher standard of discourse next time.
PAD