In Fairness to Ace …

Posted on | August 28, 2011 | 63 Comments

. . . having decided to side with Pamela Geller in her dispute with Ace over Rick Perry, I am nevertheless obliged to say Pamela struck a low blow in blogging about her allegation that Ace publicly referred to her (offline and in person) as “Atlas Juggs.”

Ace strenuously denies this.

In general, ladies: Don’t ever do that to a guy. And by “that,” I mean casually slinging accusations of sexual harassment. You can file a lawsuit or call the cops or have your boyfriend punch somebody in the nose, but whatever you do, don’t use such accusations as a weapon of personal revenge. I very much empathize with Ace’s indignation at having his character impugned. No argument over mere politics is worth that kind of bad mojo.

It’s bad enough to have my friends at war with one another. It’s worse when they make it personal. Nobody ever asks my advice about this stuff, and nobody ever listens to my advice when I volunteer it, so I cannot be blamed for anyone’s errors but my own.

As to the present unpleasantness, I blame Rick Perry.

Or maybe Grover Norquist.

UPDATE: But having said that . . . I talked to both Ace and Pamela about this fight, and don’t know what can be done to end it. The problem is that someone seems to have issued a Prime Directive: Destroy any conservative who criticizes Rick Perry.

I exaggerate only slightly. There is a lot of pressure being brought against Perry’s critics. The governor of Texas is being sold as All That and a Stack of Pancakes, and anyone who isn’t buying the product is automatically accused of disloyalty or bad judgment.

There have been only a comparative handful of people in the conservative blogosphere — Michelle Malkin’s name leads the list — who have criticized Perry, and you might think that Team Perry would be content to ignore the criticism. But they seem very defensive, and this defensiveness results in harsh attacks on Perry’s critics. I’m sure Malkin was understating matters when she said she’s “gotten heat for not falling in line with the latest GOP bandwagon.”

Judging by the blowback I’ve gotten, I know how viciously personal the attacks can be. Like I said: Nobody ever asks my advice, so it’s not my fault what other people do.

Question: Who’s working on Perry’s campaign? Who are his consultants and top operatives? Because somebody needs to tell them to back the hell off.

UPDATE II: Lisa Graas adds her two cents, offering as the solution to the problem — you guessed, didn’t you? — Rick Santorum. And in all fairness, if what you want in a GOP candidate is a tough stance against the Religion of Peace, Santorum’s worth a look.

Category: Ace of Spades, Atlas Shrugs, Rick Perry

Comments

63 Responses to “In Fairness to Ace …”

TiminAL
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:02 am

Well then, I guess you did notice. I do however, respectfully disagree.
Quartermaster
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:03 am

I think Geller has a point on Perry on jihad, frankly. Norquist sure is, and he has little credibility in the conservative camp any longer because of it. Being married to a Muslimiya is no help in that regard.

Geller probably heard a rumor that Ace called her “Atlas Juggs.” I know what her face looks like, but have no idea if that part of her anatomy rises to the level of warranting the term “juggs.”

Frankly, We don’t need another Bush Republican as President. Two were two too many.
Jimmie
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:10 am

The problem is, Quartermaster, if you concede that Geller’s point about Norquist is correct, then logic leads you to Ace’s point and you have to ask yourself who, exactly, is untainted by the association with Norquist and, thus, pure?

Ace found one Presidential candidate: Jon Huntsman. Will Geller endorse him based on that? I tend to doubt it.
King B
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:30 am

Ace wrote a looooong post about his interaction with PG last night. I don’t really care what happened – as RSM notes, Gellar went about this the wrong way and, frankly, she’s sold herself for years in part on her looks, so even if Ace said exactly what she claimed without any context, it still wouldn’t be out of bounds. Plus, trying to fry Perry over a nascent connection to Islamic education is not only petty, it’s self-defeating imo.

Let’s make sure and not focus on the economy so we can get four more years of Pres. Jackwagon.
Steve in TN
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:31 am

So we now have the Hurricane Irene of the 2012 campaign. All blow and no go, this issue is.
TR
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:33 am

Stacy, were you there (CPAC 2007)? Did you read the Ace post with all the fk you pam, and fk this and fk that that Ace first dropped on Pamela? His extensive pathetic self-indulgent post following that was supposed to be a justification (he also says he has a panic disorder and has used benzodiaepines for therapy). “Gee whiz Hoss, cut me a break.” This must work for his mother or his family (or his fan club, apparently) but it sounded like he is a coward who says many things he often regrets then pulls the victim routine as an excuse. And he seems to enjoy projecting that view… its called passive-agressive behavior.
JeffS
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:34 am

If you’ve got ’em, flaunt ’em. Just don’t complain when people want ’em.
MrPaulRevere
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:42 am

The notion that Rick Perry is some sort of dhimmi reminds me of the accusation from the Birchers that Pres. Eisenhower was a ‘communist dupe’. It’s just silly. Pamela and Robert should stick to what they do best, which is reporting and news aggregation on Islamist trouble makers. I still give them clicks because I value their reporting skills. As an analyst Pamela lost me when she called Daniel Pipes of all people a dhimmi. The gift of being a valued analyst and commentator is one God has given only to a select few. Stacy, you have the gift as does Mark Steyn, the aforementioned Daniel Pipes and a few others of course. When folks stray from what they do best…well, just ask Charles Johnson how that ends.
vermontaigne
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:44 am

I don’t think anything needs to be done. It is what it is and that’s that. And I won’t be contradicted.
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:48 am

I read all of Ace’s post last night, one point he is correct on is that just because one has agreed or associated with Norquist in the area of fiscal policy doesn’t mean they must be blindfolded, strapped on a horse and sent out in to the desert. While I don’t know enough about GN to understand why he’s such a big deal, what I’ve read about his views on Islam, lead to the conclusion that he’s not to be trusted on that issue.
Dell Hill
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:50 am

I agree, Paul. And the slime hurled by Robert cost him a lot of stock at my desk. Just because one party engages in that sort of ugly language doesn’t mean they all have to. Pretty disgusting display, if you ask me.
Tennwriter
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:52 am

So far, I like Rick Perry, but, I’m not going to join any parade of ‘Perry or Else’, and if someone wants to try to start one on me (unimportant little me), I’ll start shouting Palin/Bachmann 2012 with Dave Ramsay as Sec Treas.
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:54 am

Having lived with Perry as Governor the last few years, right now he’s the best we’ve got unless Sarah jumps in. And he’s a LOT more conservative than GWB was; if it hadn’t been for 9/11, I suspect GWB would have been his father’s second term.
Tennwriter
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:59 am

Oh yeah, a few years back we had some real Rude Doods who were McCainiacs. If the same people are getting behind Perry now, well, I know why they’re rude. Its cause their mamma didn’t wash out their mouths with soap enough.
ThePaganTemple
August 29th, 2011 @ 12:59 am

Another one that would be worth a look for his stand on Israel, and Islam, though he has yet to declare his candidacy, is John Bolton. In fact, I think he’s slated to be a featured guest at some shindig Geller and Spencer are putting together in NYC on or around 9/11. It’s on her blog, unfortunately I didn’t think to copy the link at the time I saw it. Unfortunately, I don’t know if he would have much of a chance if he did run. Right now, the main issue is the economy, and that is just not noted as his area of expertise.

As for who is working on Rick Perry’s campaign, RSM, didn’t you yourself point out not too long ago that Newt Gingrich’s staff, or a select few of them, had deserted Gingrich to work for Perry?
Jack Woodward
August 29th, 2011 @ 1:10 am

Regarding the Perry team “defensiveness”, remember what happens to candidates who allow others to define them.
Jorge Emilio Emrys Landivar
August 29th, 2011 @ 1:12 am

You have it backwards, its Rove’s crowd who has started attacking Perry’s crowd. These two groups of consultants and such have gone at it for years, and this election has only put more fuel in the fire.

Anyway, I’m a Ron Paul fan, but I’ll take Perry over Santorum or Romney any day.
Blaster
August 29th, 2011 @ 1:14 am

It’s a primary and Republicans will state their positions about other Republicans. I get that. But “destroy everyone critical of Rick Perry?”. That significantly overstates the case. Fair game is fair game, but unreasonable criticism should get called out. Grover Norquist is a big wheel in Republican politics and to first call him out as a dhimmi then anyone who gives a speech or signs his tax pledge is an enemy of the state?

Not cool. Not cool at all.
To Quote Rodney King: 'Can't We All Just Get Along?' - The POH Diaries
August 28th, 2011 @ 9:22 pm

[…] Stacy’s got more on the […]
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 1:29 am

First thing we do, let’s kill all the consultants.
Lisa Graas
August 29th, 2011 @ 1:50 am

Daniel Greenfield, Sultan Knish, provided my quote of the day on this topic. http://blog.lisagraas.com/2011/08/29/quote-of-the-day-5/
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 2:05 am

When Rick Perry makes enemies like these, he’s got my vote….
Ray
August 29th, 2011 @ 2:30 am

Perry’s state did some great tort reform, has a strong economy, is billing the federal government for the costs they are incurring from the feds failing to protect the borders from illegals, is fighting the out of control EPA on their industry killing regulations, he is getting attacked by RINOs and lawyers… He doesn’t sound or act like a RINO, why would they attack him on something without meaningful substantiation? Geller appears to wrong on this one.
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 2:41 am

I’m over these Perrykrishnas. They took a page out of Axelrod’s playbook. They are just as bad as Obamabots. What’s in that flippin’ Kool-Aid they are drinking? Somebody better give these Perrykrishnas a lesson in how to win friends and influence enemies because they are doing major damage to Perry. Already people are saying they wouldn’t vote for this guy if he was the last person on the face earth. Somebody never taught them any Southern charm. Right now if this turkey got the nomination, I’d stay the hell home.
ThePaganTemple
August 29th, 2011 @ 2:42 am

Maybe that’s what a lot of this anti-Perry rhetoric is originating from. I don’t say this to disparage people who have legitimate concerns with him, but it seems to me the less important an issue might seem to a majority of people, the more important it becomes to the people affected by it the most.
ThePaganTemple
August 29th, 2011 @ 2:57 am

I said the same thing pretty much about Romney, even going to the point of writing a whole post about how I wouldn’t vote for him if he got the nomination. I was full of shit because I was worked up too much, and I hope you calm down enough to come to the same conclusion. I would definitely not be happy about it, but let’s face it, can we really afford to let Obama back in there, no matter how big a radical, or RINO, the GOP candidate might be? I would have to rack my brains to come up with more than a handful of people I would prefer to see Obama in office as they. Tom Hayden comes to mind, also Bill Ayers, and I’m sure I could come up with some more, but on the other hand I’m not sure any of them would really be worse. You’d have to run the gamut of people who aren’t qualified to hold the office, like Hugo Chavez, and still its questionable. So there’s just no Republican I will refuse to support. Yes, that includes Huntsman.
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 2:59 am

Bolton will make a fine Sec,of State.
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 3:02 am

Aren’t many of them lawyers, that’d make a twofer.
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 3:03 am

What I find most disturbing is the almost LGF-esque way Both Geller and Spencer are going hammer-and-tongs against Perry and now Ace.

And Ace’s exposure of even Spencer talking up that Aga-Khan as moderate just last year tends to deflate their argument now.
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 3:27 am

His enemies do a lot to commend him, some of his friends however do not. Almost as soon as he got in the race some of his supporters immediately went for the jugular on any who voiced reservations about some his views and actions. When one does that to Malkin and Geller there will be a spark or two.
Most of those who have their hearts if not their heads in the right place on this. In short they are scared to death that the nutbags (that would be folks like me) will get someone nominated who can’t beat Obie. This is IMHO a short sighted tactic and makes people suspicious. Even worse it makes the more.. .um.. conventional Republicans seem too conventional. When one considers the quality of Republican nominees like Dole, H.W. and McCain I think it’s fair and wise to suspect the wisdom of the conventionally wise.
Tennwriter
August 29th, 2011 @ 3:37 am

Not me, man. Tell the RINOs that and they’ll make you eat your words with a nomination Huntsman/Charlie Crist in 2012.

Romney doesn’t have my vote.

Total terror is sometimes the only way to wake the zomolent. Better a second term of Obama than a slow walk toward the cliff under a R.
Bob Belvedere
August 29th, 2011 @ 3:40 am

Fifty-points on the Cosmic Scorecard, instead of twenty-five.
alwaysfiredup
August 29th, 2011 @ 3:42 am

…a certain arctic fox springs to mind…
alwaysfiredup
August 29th, 2011 @ 3:48 am

Perry would do better to own his record and positions and just stand firm and weather the sh!tstorm. I am sick of Perry’s people taking off after everyone who dares to criticize Perry. I’ve been a Palinite for years and am well versed in both fair and unfair criticism – in fact, that was itself a part of the criticism: “fair or unfair, she has to deal with it”. Perry and his acolytes couldn’t stand even a tenth of what was hurled her way or ours. I have very little sympathy.

Shorter afu: Rooster up, people!
ThePaganTemple
August 29th, 2011 @ 3:55 am

The only thing that bothers me about it is the idea that if Obama gets back in there, we’re looking at the likelihood that he will appoint two or three, maybe more, Supreme Court Justices. Bad laws as bad as they are can be thrown out, or at the very least, tweaked to where they’re not as bad. But a far left liberal Supreme Court Justice is forever, politically speaking, especially seeing as how people are going to extremes to appoint judges young enough to insure they’re there for a long, long time.

And I understand that a RINO can wreak havoc on judicial appointments as well, but at least there the party can presumably exercise some kind of moderating influence on a RINO president, if the people raise enough hell about it. The trick is making said POTUS understand that its more important to his long-term future to not piss off the base than it is to appeal to a “broad cross-section of the electorate”, meaning basically those independents who don’t give a shit about judicial nominations to begin with, at least not that much.
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 3:58 am

Agreed. Ace had a pretty good take down of Gellar, but nothing I hadn’t already heard. Ditto Spencer. They were both serving weak tea. This is going to hurt them both, a lot more than either Ace or Perry.
ThePaganTemple
August 29th, 2011 @ 4:00 am

Question-are Geller and Spencer lying, or are they sincere. And if sincere, are they wrong, perhaps misguided. The unspoken question I find myself asking is, who if anybody are they supporting? If they have somebody in mind-like their friend Bolton, for example-that might afford a partial explanation of this. But it seems to me to be a heavy-handed, negative way to go about it. If its somebody already in the race, who would they prefer? Santorum? Bachmann? I can’t see them supporting anybody else that’s there.
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 4:00 am

Perry’s got the Comb, but Palin’s got the Mane! yee haw!
Tennwriter
August 29th, 2011 @ 4:13 am

Bzzzzt. A strict focus on the economy is a bad idea.

It is not time to compromise and worry about ‘electability’. It is time to vote for the Right Person, and then someone even harder core for VP.
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 4:14 am

“They are… who we thought they were!”
Tennwriter
August 29th, 2011 @ 4:23 am

In order to get RINOs to be reasonable, you gotta be crazy. At least thats my theory.

Time for the Conservatives to take over this Party.
Threedonia
August 29th, 2011 @ 4:26 am

Michelle Malkin is in no way like Pamela Geller. Malkin usually does top notch work. Her problem is making mountains out of molehills (or dredging up things Texans got over long ago). Geller is libeling and slandering Perry.
Threedonia
August 29th, 2011 @ 4:32 am

Even if he said “Juggs” a thousand times… calling Rick Perry a dhimmi is still crying out for Cocoa Puffs.
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 4:37 am

Can Perry beat Obama? Do we know that for certain? At this point, I have doubts about Perry’s ability to beat Romney. If he can’t beat Romney, it all becomes moot, eh?
Garym
August 29th, 2011 @ 4:47 am

Ace comes off as a huge whiner after that rediculous post last night. He should have just mentioned it and moved on.
Also, the Perry people need to grow some thicker skin. Hell knows we Palinistas have taken and refuted more crap than Perry will ever receive.
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 5:03 am

Ron Paul can beat Romney. He is the only candidate who can’t smack Obama with Obamneycare. The only thing Romney’s really got going for him is the God help us the rest of the field are all crazy folks. I predict this is going to be a good year for crazy. Further more Romney ain’t all that on jobs, his business experience isn’t as good as he claims.
We don’t need a businessman to get the economy going we just need someone who knows government is the problem and get it out of the way. Perry does fit that bill as well as any of the non-Romney candidates. Perry also has a most endearing disdain for the media. If he can keep the press talking about him and not go on MSNBC as a guest, that’s the ticket. The trick is to create the impression that he’s avoiding them because they lack relevance rather than because he’s afraid of them.

Something I believe you said about some of the senate candidates not needing to go on national shows but get on TV in the state where they’re running. Couldn’t that apply to primaries?
Anonymous
August 29th, 2011 @ 5:26 am

Geller sees no grays and pretty much cares only about anti-jihadism and anti-antisemitism. This makes her a double edged sword at times and causes her to attack in haste sometimes like her deplorable statements about the EDL. If you’re looking for always fair and balanced oh well, however when it’s time to storm the Ground Zero mosque, she’ll give no quarter and ask for none.
M Simon
August 29th, 2011 @ 5:41 am

In fairness to Pamela I have blogged her Juggs. I would have posted the video directly but she has it locked so you can’t embed it.

Pam’s are nice. But the First Mate’s “Girls” are nicer. Yeah. I’m a very lucky guy.
Adjoran
August 29th, 2011 @ 6:31 am

Not if you mean Sarah Palin. She’s also shared a dais and exchanged warm words with Norquist. That’s why using him as a red flag is silly – every Republican candidate or potential candidate has had contact with him at some point, and most sign his anti-tax pledge.
f3ba
August 29th, 2011 @ 6:48 am

Exactly.

Right now, I am a Perry guy through and through…but that doesn’t mean that he shouldn’t be thoroughly vetted through the primary process. Nor does it mean that I won’t change my mind if, through said vetting process, facts come to light that would indicate that Perry would govern in a fashion that I think would be inappropriate.

But this? This is a blatant attempt at character assassination. The simple fact of the matter is that Geller has gone way out beyond the pale with this. Way, waaay out.

The question is: why? To what end? Who benefits?

The amusing thing is, I think she would have been far more effective if she had put all the dots down on the paper, connected 2 or 3 of them, and then intimated that she believed it highly probable that the rest are connected as well. Instead, she ham-handedly started bashing away with any blunt instrument at hand, on the thinnest of evidence, making leaps of logic that at the very least strain rational thought.