March 20, 2011

Candyass blogger move of all time: Lawyers, Guns & Money bans Meade!

The little professor Robert Farley couldn't face the challenge Meade made to his (truly lame) post "On Libya" (which I blogged about yesterday).

Imagine not wanting the brilliant, good-humored Meade as a commenter! Here's Farley's last ouch:
Bye, Meade. When the idiocy gets so thick I feel almost compelled to respond, it’s time for you to leave.
Ha. Meade wrote something that demanded a response, and Farley wasn't up to it. The professor had one last oomph of potency: He could oust Meade and delete all his old comments. Incredibly lame. Embarrassing. But apparently not as embarrassing as the inability to deal with a challenge to the scribblings you'd like to believe are so smart and so righteous.

UPDATE: Farley wrote a new post to say thanks for the link. I'm not going to link to it though, because I'm not going to link to them again. I hope they note all the traffic they are getting from here, because they're not getting any more. Of course, they will continue with their dumb attacks on me. But they've cut off the man who defends me from them, so I've got to cut them off too.

IN THE COMMENTS: Palladian said:
The little professor can delete all he wants, but Google remembers.... Just click the word "cached" under each result to read the Meadey goodness.
There's lots of good stuff in there. You can see what La Petite Farlette and his partner Scott "Kitty" Le Mew were afraid of.

ADDED: I don't link to them anymore, but I'll note that they are getting challenged about deleting all of Meade's old comments. They are trying to argue that all those comments were spam that needed to be removed. But the bloggers and commenters over there had interacted with Meade. You don't interact with spam. A step up from spam is "troll." But everyone knows not to feed the troll. Why did they go back and forth with Meade if he was a troll? Their interaction is the evidence that he was not a troll. Robert Farley simply became exasperated and embarrassed when Meade outwrote him, and he destroyed the material that made him look bad. He's like a scientist who destroys his data after his conclusions are questioned.  The obvious presumption in the case of destruction of evidence is that it hurt your case.  Of course, the evidence of their interaction with Meade is still there, and that evidence also, as I've just explained, is evidence against them. What colossal losers!

152 comments:

Lincolntf said...

No big loss for Meade. I gave up on those shitbirds after one day. It didn't take 5 minutes for Koch/Halliburton/Truther/AGW-insanity to dominate any given thread.
Humorless and with no command of the language is no way to run a blog, LG&M.

Birkel said...

They can withstand logic by plugging fingers in their ears. But when people point and laugh they have to close their eyes and plug their ears.

The Left knows mockery of their President cannot stand. As soon as it becomes ok to mock Obama on SNL, Letterman, The Daily Show or any other liberal bastion you will know he won't be reelected.

Meade said...

Robert Farley is a hand-wringing warmonger "humanitarian" who really hopes that if this use of military force goes badly, Obama and his followers can point the finger of blame at the UK and France.

The problem, of course, is that Gaddafi’s exist doesn’t prevent a “half-baked result that burdens us for years to come” any more than Saddam Hussein’s exit did.

Trooper York said...

Jeeez Meade you are such a trouble maker.

chickelit said...

Farley: Meade, you're banned!

Meade: Chuck you too farley!

Jim said...

I hate it when that happens.

AJ Lynch said...

This was my favorite comment over there re Meade. It was from a commenter named Rarely Posts:

"Would LGM please post a generic recommendation and request that people not respond to Meade? He never seems to understand what anyone else is saying, and I’ve never seen responses to him improve the quality of the discourse. Instead we all end up wasting a lot of time and energy. It would be a specific application of the rule: “Don’t feed the trolls.”"

Btw "Lawyers Guns & Money" is one of my alltime favorite Warren Zevon songs.

edutcher said...

As Michaeleen Flynn would say, "That red hair's no lie".

Besides, Meade nailed it.

The Lefties are gonna be limping from this little foray (i.e., Libya) for years.

AJ Lynch said...

OT only somewhat, but the headline in my local liberal rag today, the Philly Inquirer, reported:

"ALLIES HIT LIBYA".

I still remember the same liberals at that paper mocking Bush's Iraq Coalition, which essentially was the same damn countries as Obama is using!

Ut said...

"He never seems to understand what anyone else is saying, and I’ve never seen responses to him improve the quality of the discourse. Instead we all end up wasting a lot of time and energy."

This is a common tactic in the leftosphere. In fact, most of the far left blogs have vote down buttons so that they can all suppress views they don't want to hear.

(Such a feature is often requested by the liberal commenters at Althouse ... Garage, FLS and Alphaliberal.)

They simply want a cocoon in which dissent is not tolerated and group bullying is employed to keep people in line.

Take a look at the social dynamic at any college or university and you'll quickly discover where this most effective tactic was incubated.

Meade said...

@Lincolntf: You know, I wasn't even aware of LG&M until my Google Alert on "Althouse" one day pointed me to a post where Scott Lemeiux was taking a shot at Ann.

I wasn't really a troll there, more of a gadfly. Although I took a lot of personal abuse, I don't think I ever went beyond mocking the bloggers over there whenever they put up posts taking gratuitous shots at Ann. I'm pretty sure the line in Farley's mind that I crossed was in commenting on a post he wrote that did not have to do with taking a shot at Ann.

I'm still laughing at pompous Farley's prickly vanity and his inability to handle a little mockery and criticism. My only regret is that I won't now be able to go in and leave a comment defending Ann whenever they go all box-of-winey on her.

rhhardin said...

That's not a fake self-righteousness. That's the genuine article.

Clueless is a special talent.

roesch-voltaire said...

Don't know the blog, but I agree that blocking out reasonable dissent, or satire on a blog is candyass.I've been blocked from any number of conservative blogs after a few comments, which is why I am thankful for this blog and Frum Forum--open conservative blogs.

Maguro said...

Whenever someone talks about "the quality of the discourse", you know they're full of shit.

Methadras said...

roesch-voltaire said...

Don't know the blog, but I agree that blocking out reasonable dissent, or satire on a blog is candyass.I've been blocked from any number of conservative blogs after a few comments, which is why I am thankful for this blog and Frum Forum--open conservative blogs.


You won't get blocked out here. Even by us conservatives. Why give up a chance to shoot down your leftard ideas at every opportunity. Fish in a barrel I say.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Wow. Really mature of him to delete all of Meade's posts so that we have no idea what the beef is between them.

On this blog, Althouse has the class and courage to keep even the most derogatory and obnoxious comments from posters about herself instead of whining about it and deleting.

Sounds like Farley needs to get some brass balls.

lewsar said...

and a hearty thumbs up to chicklit for the r. crumb reference!

wv: fuskeda - too easy.

bagoh20 said...

Haa, The blogger equivalent to sawing off the branch you're sitting on, taking your ball and going home, and stepping on a rake all in one move. Well done slayer Meade. You are the Kwai Chang Caine of the media.

bagoh20 said...

I'm of course referring to Farley as the one stepping on the rake, etc.

John Burgess said...

Lewsar: That phrase--chuck you farley--has been around since I'd guess the 1940s. I grew up using it and don't recall r.crumb being a neighbor.

WV: rousing the rabli.

bagoh20 said...

I would love to see more dissent here. I've learned some things from what there is.

Has anyone noticed that the lefties here have kind of dried up lately. I think it's because their side has been pretty embarrassing for a while now.

Most of the regular lefties here feel obligated to defend what they clearly are not proud of. I'd like to see some who are willing to call it on there own when mistakes are made. I've seen plenty of criticism of conservatives on here by Althouse hillbillies when it's deserved.

The left equivalent of a Meade here would be a great addition. Farley and his readers don't know what they lost, and they are worse off for it.

BTW, roesch-voltaire is one of the better ones from the left here. I almost never agree with him, but he is a welcome, reasonable, and valuable contributor.

Now that damned Obama-voting Alhouse, she's another story. Her I would ban.

Meade said...

I'm sure Robert Farley is following this thread so I want to say:

Thanks, Robert Farley, for putting up with me for as long as you did. I know you're a professor or an assistant professor or a TA or something so please accept this advice in the spirit in which it is being offered: Buy yourself a dictionary. Look up the word "discreet." Then look up the word "discrete." Make a mental note.

Go easy on your poor students, Robert Farley. Some of them may be required to take your course when all other sections are closed. Try to be generous to those who come to you to get their drop/add slips signed.

Thank you, Robert Farley, and goodbye.

Ann Althouse said...

I feel sorry for all the other commenters over there who interacted with Meade, including Farley's co-bloggers, Scott Lemieux and Paul Campos. Those guys seemed to like some interaction. Did Farley consult with them before deleting all Meade's work, leaving holes in all those other conversations.

I've had some individual commenters here who've decided to delete all their old posts, and I was and am irked by the destruction they caused and how disrespectful it was to everyone who ever took the trouble to talk with them.

Go if you want, but don't destroy the work of others.

So, for Farley, he should have at least confined himself to excluding Meade prospectively. The destructiveness that he brought down on his own blog's commenters speaks for itself: He was vain and afraid that Meade had embarrassed him.

That is why what he did is the candyass blogger move of all time.

Farley is a very small man.

Trooper York said...

Roachy we love you buddy. Nobody would support having you banned. You are like the retarded brother that we bring to the park and let run around and chase the birds and squirrels.

Just don't touch anything. Okey Dokey?

Ann Althouse said...

d

Ann Althouse said...

I think you know what that means.

Ann Althouse said...

Advice to Paul Campos: Start your own blog. You are better than those other guys.

Trooper York said...

Doesn't this Farley guy live in a van down by the river?

I didn't know he had a blog.

pbAndj said...

It's nice that Meade can rely on his wife to do his fighting for him. Sure, the LGM adventurism started w/ Meade being the defender. But, in the end, it was the big gun who really had the fire power.

I hope this sort of thing doesn't reoccur. Meade needs to feel that he's defending his woman. If Meade's "heroics" always escalate to a level beyond his capabilities, he may eventually realize who's truly the helpless party at Meadehouse.

Sad.

Ann Althouse said...

"Wow. Really mature of him to delete all of Meade's posts so that we have no idea what the beef is between them."

Farley wrote a school-girly post about Libya and he couldn't take the heat. That's all you need. Pack it up in a box marked "lame" and don't think of him anymore.

Trooper York said...

And Scott's brother Mario was a lousy hockey player. I don't care what you say. Very overrated.

Steel Turman said...

I have noticed a distinct lack of civility in the blogosphere, of late.

Anyone else notice that?

To those of you who would be uncivil or otherwise mean-spirited, all I can say is ...

... fuck you.

Ann Althouse said...

@pbAndj

And if I were like Farley, I'd just exclude you and delete everything you ever wrote here. So, yes, I'm more manly than a man, but that man is Farley. Not Meade.

EliRabett said...

Spelling flames? Your moma is an adjunct rank outs? Break out the cookies.

Ann Althouse said...

Hi, Steel. It was nice of you to drop by to say "Fuck you." This civility thing is really taking off.

bagoh20 said...

Helpless party at Meadehouse! Woohoo! I'll bring the margaritas.

Trooper York said...

Hey pbAndj you are pretty silly. The blogger lady can take care of herself. Only pussies and douchenozzles ban people from posting because they are scared of what they have to say.

I am looking at you Kay Howard of "Television Without Pity" you stupid piece of crap.

Trooper York said...

I prefer to keep my comments on the highest intellectual level possible.

Trooper York said...

Double D.

Trooper York said...

I think you know what that means.

traditionalguy said...

The Battle of Madison has begun. Skirmishers like LG&M are forming their weapons against Althouse & Meade. Our two musketeers seem to be to Obama's 2012 SEIU Offensive as the the 101st Airborne surrounded in Bastogne was to Hitler's Ardennes Offensive (even the cold weather also has been similar). The last word heard from Meade in the Capitol rotunda was "Nuts".

Trooper York said...

"Best line of 2011 so far:

So, yes, I'm more manly than a man"

Steel Turman said...

Just trying to lighten things up, Ann.

You know me ... 'Mr. Civility'.

I am still trying to get my head around a blog being named 'Lawyers, Guns & Money' being run by such a snot-nosed wimp.

Warren Zevon is spinning in his grave.

pbAndj said...

"I'd just exclude you and delete everything you ever wrote here"

Something I'm well aware of.

I ended up here (about three years ago) after being banned at several other places. Only one of them actually deleted all of my comments.

Anyway, like Meade I'm proud of my bannings. But, I'm glad that I didn't have "connections" (aka blogger wife) that could come in and retaliate for me. In theory there's nothing wrong w/ spouses helping each other. But, this situation should have remained a mano a mano tussle. When Althouse lends a mano, the folly of Meade's original efforts become crushingly glaring, imo.

Don't Tread 2012 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Don't Tread 2012 said...

Annoying the left should be worn as a badge of honor.

Nick Lewandowski said...

AJ Lynch,

By God you're right.

I had totally forgotten that Qatar and the UAE contributed planes to Shock and Awe, that the Arab press was reporting favorably on the Iraq invasion and that the people of Iraq had repeatedly asked the international community to be invaded after much of its diplomatic corps defected.

Looking back it's like we're standing on the cusp of some bizarre window to the past... a regular gash in space-time.

That liberal rag would do well to remember that history always repeats itself!

Trooper York said...

The blogger lady does not delete people or ban them from her site. Even annoying people who have had big fights with her like I have. The most annoying and stupidest posters have free reign. If you don't believe me just read Jeremy or Alphaliberal. Or me for that matter.

But attacking Meade is not the way to go. Meade is entitled to say whatever he wants wherever he wants without it being referanced to the manly blogger lady.

tree hugging sister said...

Why am I hearing Pee Wee Herman in "Pee Wee's Great Adventure" saying, "I know you are, but what am I?" over and over...?

Trooper York said...

Manly blogger lady. Hee hee.

Jeff with one 'f' said...

"But they've cut off the man who defends me from them, so I've got to cut them off too."

Congratulations to Meade.

And congratulations to you too, Professor. So many lefty feminists would bristle at the notion that a man would try to protect them, let alone acknowledge it with respect. I find your regard for each other touching

lewsar said...

@john burgess: i wasn't around in the 40s, so i wouldn't know.

the r. crumb comic is two guys insulting each other on the street, which each panel having each guy say some mashed up saying based on 'fuck you charley'.

an example would be 'you chuck fuckly'. for whatever reason, i thought this was hilarious, and i've remembered this for over 50 years.

traditionalguy said...

pbAandJ...What is your opinion of Sarah Palin taking on Obama and Karl Rove by attacking in both directions? Has her ability to fight demeaned John McCain? IMO that is a special Man's Rule whose usefulness ended long ago. The KKK's tactic here in Georgia was to attack and shame any whites who accepted blacks as equals. That slime ball tactic's usefulness also ended long ago.I am speaking to you as a Guardian type husband. My wife's social and literary skills are extra special ones, just like the Professor's are, and I couldn't be prouder of her for using her God given skills anytime.

Meade said...

Trooper York said...
"Manly blogger lady. Hee hee."

Careful there, Duke. More manly than (one particular) man: Robert Farley.

More lovely than (generally) any other woman.

Trooper York said...

Hey buddy....it wasn't me that said that...it was her.

Plus even Boy George is more manly that Mr. Farley. Just sayn'

Phil 3:14 said...

from Mr. Farley's CV:

Assistant Professor, Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce, August 2006-present.

Not very diplomatic of him.

wv: birring

"And in response Prof. Alhouse shouted to the lefty blogosphere, 'Birring it on!!'"

Palladian said...

The little professor can delete all he wants, but Google remembers.... Just click the word "cached" under each result to read the Meadey goodness.

paul a'barge said...

This is what a coward looks like:
Farley

Scott said...

Maybe they want LG&M to be more like LGF.

peter hoh said...

Banning reasonable, dissenting commenters is a sure sign that you've given up on the debate.

Canuck said...

Scott would play with Meade because he enjoys the snark. But Meade was not bringing anything to the table for Farley.

Too many factual questions without presenting any of your own ideas about the topic. (And silly posts about spelling and drinking.)

Seven Machos said...

What's with the lefty fascination about insinuations about Meade's masculinity.

You're a faggoty ass pussy, pbandj. Therefore, you have no business questioning the masculinity of other males. How can you, when you don't know what it is?

Seven Machos said...

Too many factual questions

Truly fucking hilarious. Yeah, dude. Those factual questions are annoying.

Tell us the one about how private schools have not had tuition increases.

Shanna said...

I am looking at you Kay Howard of "Television Without Pity" you stupid piece of crap.

Ah Trooper. I appreciate your televisionwithoutpity jabs, even if no one else does!

Canuck said...

"Yeah, dude. Those factual questions are annoying."

wikipedia is your friend.

"Tell us the one about how private schools have not had tuition increases."

I never claimed that and I don't believe that.

Trooper York said...

Well Shanna they banned me after I only made about four comments. And I was perfectly polite and on topic. I have vowed revenge and soon I will be able to take it to the next level at an appropriate venue.

Kay Howard won't know what hit her the stupid twat.

Seven Machos said...

wikipedia is your friend

No. Wikipedia is your primary source for both information and your social studies reports.

Facts matter. Not to idiots like you, of course, who have all the answers before knowing anything so trifling as facts.

DaveW said...

Wow. Really mature of him to delete all of Meade's posts so that we have no idea what the beef is between them.

My thoughts exactly. I went over to see WTF was going on but it's impossible to tell what they were so upset about.

It seems pretty lame to me to ban someone you just disagree with. Now, if Althouse banned that douchnozzle that posts her salary and whatnot in the comments every once in a while I'd find that perfectly reasonable.

/whatever

They aren't worth your time Meade. You guys sure are getting the natives riled up the last few weeks.

Canuck said...

"Wikipedia is your primary source for both information and your social studies reports."

You are right 7M. And if you use it people don't have to waste time asking factual questions that can be answered using wikipedia.

I think it was the boring nature of the comments, and the fact that his questions could have been answered by wikipedia that got him banned by Farley. Just my two cents...

The last draw:

"Meade,

I normally don’t respond to trolls, even ones with substantial pedigree, but Operation Desert Fox and Operation Northern Watch were discreet military ops with different timetables and different objectives. The former took place across four days in 1998, and was designed to punish Iraq for insufficient cooperation with weapons inspectors. It did indeed hit the Iraqi air defense network and other Iraqi military targets.

Operation Northern Watch was conducted between 1997 and 2003, and involved the enforcement of a no fly zone over northern Iraq. This no fly zone was initiated in Operation Provide Comfort. The Iraqi air defense network was only attacked when it engaged (through turning on radars, etc.) Western aircraft, and Iraqi aircraft were only attacked when they crossed into disallowed airspace."

It gets boring to answer questions that people can find themselves on wikipedia.

then somebody else said:

"gmack says:
March 20, 2011 at 11:22 am

Meade, do you have a point? If you have something to contribute to the discussion of what’s going on in Libya, please share it. If you do not, can you please go elsewhere?"


I think that was the last draw for Farley.

Canuck said...

7M,

Facts are stubborn things.

Canuck said...

My best guess: The problem was that Farley wasted his time answering the factual question.

Robert Farley says:
March 20, 2011 at 10:51 am

"Meade,

I normally don’t respond to trolls, even ones with substantial pedigree, but Operation Desert Fox and Operation Northern Watch were discreet military ops with different timetables and different objectives. The former took place across four days in 1998, and was designed to punish Iraq for insufficient cooperation with weapons inspectors. It did indeed hit the Iraqi air defense network and other Iraqi military targets.

Operation Northern Watch was conducted between 1997 and 2003, and involved the enforcement of a no fly zone over northern Iraq. This no fly zone was initiated in Operation Provide Comfort. The Iraqi air defense network was only attacked when it engaged (through turning on radars, etc.) Western aircraft, and Iraqi aircraft were only attacked when they crossed into disallowed airspace."

Meade said...

"I think that was the last draw for Farley."

The last draw for Farley was when I responded to his comment you quoted and pointed out to him that Operation Desert Fox and Operation Northern Watch were, regardless of his analysis after he fact-checked with Wikipedia, neither discreet (as Farley wrote) military operations, nor discrete (as Farley meant) military operations. They were both a part of the conflict with Saddam that had been going on for over 7 years and directly led to Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. That last part is the truth that causes most people on the left and Farley's heads to explode.

Except for Campos - and even he I have my doubts about him sometimes - that site is crawling and creeping with intellectually dishonest bloggers.

Seven Machos said...

So, this dude banned Meade because he alleges that Meade got some facts wrong?

Really?

Better go back to Wikipedia, Canuck. Report on Susan B. Anthony's due Tuesday morning.

Also, tell us the one about how public school tuition is going up because of a lack of state funding while private school tuition is going up for some totally different reason. I love that "fact."

Canuck said...

"The last draw for Farley was when I responded to his comment you quoted and pointed out to him that Operation Desert Fox and Operation Northern Watch were, regardless of his analysis after he fact-checked with Wikipedia,"

I don't understand why that would cause him to ban you. Perhaps because you didn't make a connection back to Lybia.

Meade said...

The last straw was when I, a college drop out, corrected his word usage. He's a college TA or something. Or maybe he's working on his master's degree. I forget. Let's just say he has the credentials to be very highly self-regarding.

knox said...

In theory there's nothing wrong w/ spouses helping each other. But, this situation should have remained a mano a mano tussle. When Althouse lends a mano, the folly of Meade's original effortsblahblahblah....

You obviously have a blog crush on Althouse, and are jealous of Meade. Crushingly glaring, indeed.

Canuck said...

"Better go back to Wikipedia, Canuck. Report on Susan B. Anthony's due Tuesday morning."

You're a odd duck, 7M. :)

Meade said...

"I don't understand why that would cause him to ban you. Perhaps because you didn't make a connection back to Lybia (sic)."

Perhaps. He does come across as someone who is challenged to make connections and probably needs others - or Wikipedia - to make them for him.

kent said...

Canuck: wikipedia is your friend.

Wikipedia is the Tiger Beat of "reference sources."

PBandJ: I ended up here (about three years ago) after being banned at several other places.

Good heavens. The shock. My heart.

Trooper York said...

I think the only reason somebody should be banned is because they are boring.

Wait. I take that back.

Seven Machos said...

Discreet and discrete are easy enough to remember. You want to keep your extramarital affairs discreet. While you personally probably want them not to be discrete from time to time, it's better to keep them discrete, lest one of the discrete people involved become upset and tell everyone about your multiple affairs, thus making them no longer discreet.

See? Easy!

knox said...

The last straw was when I, a college drop out...

My husband's a college drop out, and one of the smartest people I've ever met. Only people who cling to their own academic bona fides equate college with intelligence.

Trooper York said...

If that were the case they would have to ban everyone at boringheads. Then they would spread out all over the rest of the internets.

Like herpes or bedbugs or something.

Brian Hancock said...

Candyass? They are pussies!!!! Give me a smart ass any day. Meade is the Bugs Bunny of the blogosphere.

That is meant to be a compliment

Fen said...

I think his students and staff deserve to know that Robert Farley cant handle free speech.

Emails away.

Maguro said...

Kind of an obscure topic to throw a hussy fit and ban someone over. Desert Fox was an extension and intensification of Operation Southern Watch, not Northern Watch, but really who cares other than the Air Force historians? Both the northern and southern no-fly zones and the UN sanctions regime were part of a larger national security strategy of containing Saddam Hussein and preventing him from obtaining WMD. ONW and OSW might have been "discrete" at the operational level, but they were both elements of the same strategy.

Seven Machos said...

Moreover, if both operations were during the Clinton administration, when our no-fly policy in Iraq caused substantial starvation, the operations were also discreet. After all, major media rarely if ever reported on them.

Such discretion when war is involved is one of the strange coincidences of Democratic presidential administrations.

Be said...

Clicked the link in your previous post to see the comment & all, and only found a bunch of 'responses' calling Meade stupid, etc and conjecturing on your sex life. Nothing from Meade. Thought, 'oh dear,' and just left.

Heck, I'm out of my tree, but (think that I) am not delusional like that, so guess it's something to be thankful for.

vword: mulling

PaulV said...

SOS Albright said 500,000 Iraqi children died because of UN sanctions. A point lefties ignore when bashing Bush who ended UN sanctions by deposing tryant SH

vbspurs said...

Meade, so sorry this happened to you. :(

As field workers in the Middle Ages said, more meade for us!

Seven Machos said...

Kitty Le Mew. That sounds familiar. Wasn't she the villainess the George Lazenby James Bond flick?

Trooper York said...

No. She was Pepe Le Pew's first wife.

Trooper York said...

She just spells it differently.

The French!

Browndog said...

DAMN!

To think the other day I posted a comment that read "send lawyers, guns and money"-

My most brilliant Althouse blog post to date-

Now sits among the smoldering ruins of a Libyan integrated missile defense system.

ugh.

Jimbo said...

I have never commented here (or too many other places, either) but to borrow a term that I have seen on Instapundit, I believe Dr. Farley is "credentialed but not educated". I read through the cached comments and he does not come off well. He is right to be embarrassed. Candyass is the perfect term for him.

DADvocate said...

One thing professors cant' stand is a non-professor who is smarter than them. We're supposed to listen in awe to the scholarly musings.

Patrick said...

Yeeesh...

That's lame even for blogging standards.

Michael K said...

"I've been blocked from any number of conservative blogs after a few comments, which is why I am thankful for this blog and Frum Forum--open conservative blogs."

I call bullshit on this. I read lots of conservative blogs and have suffered through lots of lefty obscene and illogical comments. I have been banned from Washington Monthly several times (I think they forget) for statements that were well supported but disagreed with their theme.

Comments of mine at Mother Jones have disappeared although Kevin Drum is a respectable lefty and open to debate. He does not control the moderators, as he has told me in private e-mail.

I have seen a few conservative blogs, like Powerline and Commentary's blog, that gave up and ended all comments after being spammed by angry lefties who were immune to argument.

Belkys said...

Bush's Iraq Coalition,include 39 countries plus the help of Kuwait

Revenant said...

SOS Albright said 500,000 Iraqi children died because of UN sanctions.

Well, yes, but she was full of crap.

Denton said...

The title of the thread pitched me a curve for a moment. For an instant, I thought it referred to http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/, a blog with a somewhat similar name and a very engaging point of view.

Seerak said...

I would never dream of ever deleting hostile comments at my blog; they give them every opportunity to hang themselves, for all to see -- and they do it in your backyard, where they can never, ever delete them.

Witness the pearls of wisdom left by Lee Stranahan after I busted him for trying to cash in on the post-Obama surge of interest in Ayn Rand ("Going Galt" etc.) It gets "better" the further down you go.

As others applaud his work on Pigford and his recent Huffpo editorial on MSM hushing of death threats against WI Republicans, I think to myself, what an amazing place America is, that there is opportunity even for someone who uses "widdle" in a serious discussion.

Seerak said...

dammit, forgot the link.

Charlie Martin said...

You guys are so cute.

Chef said...

Wasn't it just a few short years ago that left-wing politicians claimed that dissent was the highest form of patriotism?

If Farley can't even take written criticism online, how does he ever interact with, you know, *people* who might disagree with him? Surely an academic wouldn't be completely isolated from disagreement.

Oh, wait...

Kirk Parker said...

"I am still trying to get my head around a blog being named 'Lawyers, Guns & Money' being run by such a snot-nosed wimp."

No, it's perfect: the song is from the POV of a juvenile-beyond-his-years dweeb who gets himself in trouble and then expect the Old Man to bail him out.

Browndog said...

Can we still send lawyers, guns, or even money?

As long as it's not to the guy living in the van?

Down by the river?

jim said...

Banhammer? Big hairy whoop.

I still remember my first B& - the confusion at not being able to comment quickly giving way to sheer delight ... oh, what lulz.

Point Of Agreement(!): It's generally considered a dick move to play the DELETE FUCKING EVERYTHING card, because it not only mutilates previous threads but makes the mod look like a big baby. MODS ARE GODS, thus mewling over your full diaper via wholesale deletion sullies the Pantheon.

Dedicating a post to The Fascism Inherent In Teh System that led to your ban? Congratulations: you are not one iota better than the person who banned you. Looks less like "they can't HANDLE the truth" than "Trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls trolling ..."

The existence of Google Cache means your pearl-clutching is either idiotic or dishonest. Having your Drama Cake & eating it too is not an option, no matter how many fools or liars tell you otherwise.

As for all the "this is typical lefty behavior" spew: pack it in, kids. It's not NPR who're infamous for cutting people's mics in mid-interview, & who picked which side in classic freedom of speech cases (Ulysses, Tropic Of Cancer, et al) is hardly a mystery. Show me some teabaggers getting arrested for wearing the wrong t-shirts (or better yet, surrounded by riot-cops telling them how much they look forward to beating the living hell out of them while they're being penned up like cattle in barbed-wire-topped "Free Speech Zones") or go fly a kite.

AJ Lynch said...

Nick Lewandowski:

So this Coalition is A-OK with libs like you but Bush's Coalition led by most of the same countries was what illegal? Unrefined? Distasteful? Just led by the wrong kind of people?

And fuck you you asshole.

Seven Machos said...

Jim -- If people who ban are bad and people who are banned and talk about being banned are bad, what does that make people who talk about people who talk about how they were banned?

Dirt-stupid motherfuckers leading meaningless lives is what I'd say. Let's be honest: if you commit suicide right now, how many people will care?

former law student said...

Candy assed indeed.

I've been banned by better blogs than LGM.

kent said...

Show me some teabaggers waaahhh waaahhh *snivel* whine [SNIP]

Next time, remember to stamp your little foot just so every so often, for special emphasis.

Phil 3:14 said...

Machos;

Gosh you're in a mood.

BJM said...

...or go fly a kite.

Really?! That's all ya got?

BUWHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Jum said...

What a perfectly Stalinist solution to not only "disappear" an opponent, but to throw all evidence of his existence down the memory hole. Heh.

The best joke? 3-to-1 Farley is a big backer of those self-adulatory programs that state and local bar associations love to put on to paint lawyers as selfless guardians of liberty. You know the ones: lawyers are the "courageous defenders of the Constitution", or they "speak for the mute" and "protect our basic freedoms".

Ouch! Irony overload!

dave in boca said...

I'm proud that I'm in the cohort that LG&M has banned along with Meade. You have to understand that most left-wing bloggers have NO desire for any exchange of ideas or alternative viewpoints. They are simply agitprop commissars whos main goal is to whip up the cadres or keep them from straying too far from the Party Line. I've also been banned by MotherJones, NewsHoggers, The WashingtonMonthly and Shakesville, to include other noisome extensions of the conspiracy against the US constitution that is the Democratic Party.

The list does go on, but you get the point and Meade is to be commended for distinguished service in trying to rehab obvious hopeless recidivists and loathsome paraphiliacs.

dave in boca said...

"I've been blocked from any number of conservative blogs after a few comments,"

Funny, this rarely happens with most conservative blogs who run all sorts of libtard patter consistently in their comment sections. At least the fifty or so I visit in the course of a week. Whereas, I can read many libtard blogs, but almost never see a negative comment and am blocked from commenting myself for a previous infraction.

As with most of your comments, roesch-voltaire, you are either inaccurate or downright dishonest. Or maybe that "any number" means "two or three?"

Jymn said...

Bloggers have every right to ban whoever they like. ‘Meade’ has been an O’Keefish provocateur over this whole Wisconsin affair. You (and 'Meade') have selectively – and deceptively – reported on the protests without any real context. You have provoked and prodded the protesters until they have achieved your desired goals – marginalize the opposition by using a few useful idiots like Shankman. Then capitalize on your supposed 'reporting' by inflaming the Breitbart right. Your dishonesty - and motivations - in your provocations do not need another forum. I’m glad LGM is not enabling you or 'Meade' any longer.

I quote your comment policy:

"I'm big on free speech, but if you want to push its limits you'd better be interesting. You can't just stop by to drop an insult or a lie that you can't defend. Earn it."

Live what you ask of others. You delete comments. I'm pretty sure you've banned trolls who do not contribute to an honest discussion. You provoked the actions you wanted to occur. And now you want to manipulate how other bloggers handle their blogs. Be honest for once and live by your own stated rules. Is that too much to ask of you?

kent said...

"You (and 'Meade') have selectively – and deceptively – reported on the protests without any real context. You have provoked and prodded the protesters until they have achieved your desired goals – marginalize the opposition by using a few useful idiots like Shankman. Then capitalize on your supposed 'reporting' by inflaming the Breitbart right. Your dishonesty - and motivations - in your provocations do not need another forum. I’m glad LGM is not enabling you or 'Meade' any longer.

[...]

"You provoked the actions you wanted to occur. And now you want to manipulate how other bloggers handle their blogs. Be honest for once and live by your own stated rules. Is that too much to ask of you?"


SHORTER JYMN: [::fills diaper::]

Fort said...

No, the hyperbolic libel of Campos doesn't get a pass because he's not as batshit crazy as Kitty.

Campos is not an honorable person because "...he authored an uninformed column, and then added a thuggish suggestion that my university should discipline me for daring to utter thoughts that, in his uninformed state, he found uncongenial. After he has educated himself sufficiently to have an informed opinion on the subject, Campos might still disagree. But if he does, I promise not to try to get him fired for not sharing my opinions. Perhaps one day, he’ll learn to return the favor."

Glenn H. Reynolds is a professor of law at the University of Tennessee. He moderates the popular Web log Instapundit.
com.

timb said...

Daveinboca,

you have been banned from all those places because you're an insane numskull who believes blogs like Newshoggers and LGM are part of a vast conspiracy on the part of the left.

You should pretty be banned by anyone not named Savage or Levin....you are freakin' OUT THERE in a way that would scare Meade and Professor Althouse

kent said...

You should pretty be banned by anyone [...]

"This is what democracy looks like!"

Fen said...

Bloggers have every right to ban whoever they like.

And we have the right to mock them for it.

Look, the "tell" here is not that Meade was banned, but that candyasses over a LGM went back through to delete all his comments.

ie. they got their asses handed to them and needed to erase the evidence. Their actions say everything you need to know about their integrity.

Dark Avenger said...

So, Ann, did you learn the term 'candyass' from law school, or did you walk by some graffiti before writing this post?

Dark Avenger said...

So, did you learn the term 'candyass' in law school, or did you pass some graffiti the other day, Professor Althouse?

vet66 said...

The lefty's don't like it one bit when the other side picks up the guide-on of questioning authority. I have no sympathy for them at all. Their time has come and passed, a victim of it's own illusion.

Years ago I asked my Dad for some money for something I believed was important. He told me to go out and pick whatever I needed off the money tree in the back yard. There was no money tree so I got a job.

Jim O said...

Left wing sites are big on censorship of their comment sections. I got the same treatment from Little Green Footballs last month. Why cant't the left handle even the mildest criticism?

Susan Duclos said...

I think a post showing all the cached comments and responses should be in order, without a link to the candyasses of course.

Since eventually they will disappear or not be shown in the google cache, saving them and showing them here, where more readers will see them than if they stayed up there, could be called justice.

murgatroyd666 said...

As near as I can tell from reading their justifications and comments, they banned Meade to keep the level of intellectual discourse up to their high standards. They can't let him comment there because he's a mean, ugly old poopyhead.

kent said...

Legal Insurrection weighs in on the Meadegate contretemps, and finds LGM profoundly lacking.

EXCERPT: "I'm no fan of LGM, I find them to be childish and petty (with the exception of Paul Campos), pretty much what you would expect from leftist academics who have never accomplished anything substantial and who view blogging as a way to make a name for themselves. [...] Going back and deleting comments even after other readers had responded to those comments? How Stalinist of them."

Ann Althouse said...

"I'm pretty sure you've banned trolls who do not contribute to an honest discussion."

Oh, you're "pretty sure"? You're pretty lame. And utterly wrong.

Ann Althouse said...

"As near as I can tell from reading their justifications and comments, they banned Meade to keep the level of intellectual discourse up to their high standards."

And what they normally do is hurl insults at me, often lying, characterizing me as a drunkard.

orbicularioculi said...

This is a fun blog. The dynamic duo-meadhouse is causing left-wing heads to explode.

"...How I love the smell of [frying libtard brains] in the morning..."

murgatroyd666 said...

And what they normally do is hurl insults at me, often lying, characterizing me as a drunkard.

Yeah, I saw that. And I thought that calling you "Outhouse" was a particularly classy and adult tactic, too.

Only a couple of them even bothered to address the point of Meade's comment. (Smugly and badly.) The rest of the monkeys just flng poo around and congratulated themselves oh how much more intelligent and sophisticated they were than that old poopyhead Meade.

kent said...

[::after finally slogging through a representative sampling of LGM postings::]

So, essentially... an entire site filled with nothing but Ritmos and Shilohs, then?

Is it possible to shudder and giggle hysterically, simultaneously...?

Sophia X said...

testing

Sophia X said...

Dammit. Ate my comment. Shorter comment: the deletion of old comments is something that happens automatically when a user is banned. Farley did not go and hand delete every individual Meade comment from the past.

Second, since when did LGF become considered a liberal or left site? That seems like an insanely broad definition of liberal.

murgatroyd666 said...

Second, since when did LGF become considered a liberal or left site? That seems like an insanely broad definition of liberal.

LGM has always been a bunch of lefties.

Are you confusing Little Green Footballs (LGF) with Lawyers, Guns, & Money (LGM)?

Sophia X said...

My LGF question was in response to this from Jim O at 9:33 am:

Left wing sites are big on censorship of their comment sections. I got the same treatment from Little Green Footballs last month. Why cant't the left handle even the mildest criticism?

Meade said...

Sophia X, aren't you Scott Lemieux?

Meade said...

Interesting exchange between commenter "Brad Potts" (or "Brad P") an Scott Lemieux this afternoon. I get the sense the smarter commenters over there are troubled by Farley and Lemieux's illiberality and their willingness to ban someone they simply don't personally like. Lemieux appears to be flummoxed by Brad Potts here:

Brad P. says:
March 21, 2011 at 2:13 pm
[...]

I will say that I thought Lemieux’s tiff with Althouse was a little distasteful. Not assigning any blame, both parties were more than willing, but not really my cup of tea.

There is a cliquey, “too cool for school” sort of attitude on here where commenters compete for the wittiest sarcastic dismissal which is jarring and frustrating to deal with. I guess its the “Sadly, No” factor. It is flame and baiting, and will ensure that no counter opinions outside of the hopelessly patient, narcissistic, or both will ever show up here. And yes, I think the people responsible for this blog are very complicit in that.

I also don’t think they care because somewhere along the line, mockery became a substitution for discourse.

reply
Scott Lemieux says:
March 21, 2011 at 2:58 pm
As you’ve made this charge several times, can you cite any Althouse post of mine that didn’t make a substantive argument?

reply
Brad Potts says:
March 21, 2011 at 3:17 pm
I’m not sure if calling her a “five-alarm wing nutter”, having “Althouse of the Day” posts referring to her as a hack on multiple occasions, and attributing her with “C+ junior high school civics class essays” are really classy things to do.

Like I said, no blame there, I know snarky aloofness is kinda the deal here.

And all of the posts were substantive. I was turned off by the tact, not the content.

Meade said...

I also see Farley going all defensive, replying to comments I made and posted here (above), he would have had to come over here to copy them so he could paste them there because - hilariously - he had scrubbed the originals from his own site:

Now, neither of these is, in particular, very offensive. But I think it’s fair to say that they don’t reveal much, if any, indication that Meade is interested in engaging in an actual argument. Rather (and this characterizes Meade’s entire tenure as an LGM commenter) he’s interested in throwing potshots, making irrelevant critiques, and in general disrupting comment threads. I have very little patience for this kind of nonsense, because it detracts from the pleasure I have in blogging.

Isn't that convenient? "...interested in throwing potshots, making irrelevant critiques, and in general disrupting comment threads."

That's exactly what what Scott Lemieux, Scott E.K., and even Paul Campos did to Ann Althouse from the safety of their little Lawyers, Guns, and Money club.

Paul Campos is a special disappointment as I understand AA considered him a friend when she taught at the University of Colorado Law School.

former law student said...

Ut said...[re Meade the commenter]

"He never seems to understand what anyone else is saying, and I’ve never seen responses to him improve the quality of the discourse. Instead we all end up wasting a lot of time and energy."

This is a common tactic in the leftosphere. In fact, most of the far left blogs have vote down buttons so that they can all suppress views they don't want to hear.

(Such a feature is often requested by the liberal commenters at Althouse ... FLS


Nope.

I'm going to start calling Ut "statistician," as in the Twainian sequence -- lies, damn lies, and Ut's comments.

Sophia X said...

Sophia X, aren't you Scott Lemieux?

Oh, for fuck's sake, you internet paranoids (on all sides). I promise you that I am a person of no import and minimal internet presence who resides in the Midwest. I've never met Scott Lemieux, I enjoy reading his blog but have no fealty. All I did was point out that the deletion wasn't personal, it was just the code. Meade, you're far more active in the LGM comment section than I've ever been. Surely you knew that it was the code?

Meade said...

"Shorter comment: the deletion of old comments is something that happens automatically when a user is banned."

"Shorter" this and "shorter" that is a common Scott Lemieux expression. How would a reader - even a long-time reader - know their deletion code? Even Farley seems befuddled by his own blog's inner workings. But somehow Sophia X., a person of no import and minimal internet presence understands.

former law student said...

When I got around to looking, Meade's comments had pretty much disappeared from first the Google cache and then the Yahoo cache. But what I saw could have irked only the most sucree of derrieres.

The most proximate in time Meade comment was "Heh." I'm not sure why that would have driven one of them over the edge.

I do have to tut-tut at Meade for repeated grammar and spelling flames. Traditionally those signaled the lamest of flamers.

Meade said...

Please. What do you base that on? I didn't make repeated grammar and spelling flames. Once I suggested Lemieux needed better proofreading and once I schooled Farley in word usage. I'm sure you can still read all their comments in which they called me some form of stupid. The truth is it ruins their blogging pleasure to be criticized.

dave in boca said...

"you have been banned from all those places because you're an insane numskull and it sounds like timb is also filling his diapers, just like Jymn.

And it's "numbnut" in timb's case---sadly, his primary school forgot to teach him how to spell before they threw him out.

Hold the fort, Dr. Reynolds, because the barbarians are into the Capitol, way past the gates.

Sophia X said...

"Shorter" this and "shorter" that is a common Scott Lemieux expression.

Ah, you, sir, are not aware of all internet traditions. Perhaps you should expand your trolling footprint. "Shorter" is a common device for interpretive (frequently snarky) restatements of someone else's words and it's used all over the lefty blogosphere. In my case, I didn't even use it like that. I typed a long comment. It got ated. I didn't want to retype the whole thing so I went with the short version.

How would a reader - even a long-time reader - know their deletion code?

I'm trying to remember how I know this. Someone else getting banned, people complaining about all the old comments disappearing and having it explained that that's just how the comment system works. Had Farley taken the time to individually delete all of your comments I'd be more critical of his cost benefit analysis than signs of creeping fascism.

timb said...

And it's "numbnut" in timb's case---sadly, his primary school forgot to teach him how to spell before they threw him out.

No, douchebag, I spelled it correctly, you are just not well read:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/numskull

versus

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/numbnuts

Maybe you should stop listening to Limbaugh and pick up a book?

timb said...

kent said...
Is it possible to shudder and giggle hysterically, simultaneously...?


Ask your wife, Kent, I'm sure she experiences quite frequently.

I mean, this is a thread where whining counts as substance and Meade is the Master of Wit (and new media) and, as such, is miles beyond the class warfare (pitting members of the middle class against each other, while Ann counts her public salary all the way to the bank) schtick you've been running with, Ann.

Imagine, new media Meade whining about getting banned came right before he was about to explain which Republican State Senator gave him the tickets as quid pro quo for Ann's generous support of Governor Walker. [crickets]

The Fool said...

I don't really have a dog in this fight because Ann Althouse is obviously a sad joke, so I hesitate to say anything that suggests a convergence of views on my part with such a blatantly hypocritical, disingenuous weasel as the execrable Althouse.

But she's right about Farley.

He got me banned from their web site because I was too tough on him. Poor little guy.