Bill Schmalfeldt: Sadism, Sodomy and Other Bizarre Mental Aberrations

Posted on Comments

“It’s the ‘Butt Stuff.’ . . .
“Male conservatives are convinced that gay men want to put their ying yangs in THEIR BUTTS! This is a horrifying prospect to your average, stupid male. This is why a blanket recognition that being gay is a normal variant of human sexuality, to these small, frightened, uneducated men, means society is saying it’s OK for these gay men to put their willy-wallys in YOUR pooter hole!”
— Bill Schmalfeldt, “The REAL Conservative Case Against Gay Marriage,” Daily Kos, May 18, 2012

That was, of course, the post that got Schmalfeldt banned from Daily Kos, where the entire progressive community is pro-gay marriage and share his contempt for conservatives. Before getting to the question of exactly why what Schmalfeldt’s wrote about anal sodomy was so disturbingly offensive (“pooter hole”? who calls it that?),  let’s talk about his recurrent references to feces:

“Poop flakes”! That Feb. 22 Tweet, sent from Schmalfeldt’s since-deleted “Liberal Grouch” account to John Hoge, was one of the harassing messages that resulted in Schmalfeldt being slapped with a peace order at a Maryland circuit court hearing in a June. It refers to the “payment” Schmalfeldt imagines Hoge must have required to assist Lee Stranahan in pressing harassment charges against Schmalfeldt:

Bill Schmalfeldt spent months harassing Lee Stranahan and his family with disgustingly crude filth, including incessant and impertinent questions regarding the death of a child during childbirth. On Monday, 11 February, Lee came to Maryland from Texas to file a harassment charge against Schmalfeldt. I picked Lee up at BWI airport, took him to dinner, took him to the District Court Commissioner’s Office, put him up for the night at my house, and dropped him back at the airport on Tuesday morning. BWI is just off of one of the routes I take to work.

That is Hoge’s description of his own motives and actions in assisting Stranahan, but you see that Schmalfeldt imagines Hoge must have had some “payment” for this assistance. Schmalfeldt then describes Hoge as having excrement (“poop flakes”) in his beard because of some sort of degrading act of oral-anal contact. This theme — that people whom Schmalfeldt hates are unspeakable inferiors deserving of humiliation — is quite common in his discourse, as Ken White has remarked, “Schmalfeldt . . . is closest to his sweaty-palmed Happy Place when he is describing degradation of others.”

The word for this is sadism, and the very first post I wrote about Bill Schmalfeldt (in November 2012) called him a “sociopathic sadist“:

Once you know their motives and methods, these monsters aren’t nearly so scary as they’d like to be, and the real horror of their behavior is the soul-chilling realization of what sick pleasure they derive from it. Healthy minds do not delight in plotting evil against others, and wholesome spirits do not endlessly threaten others with harm they intend to inflict.

We are referring to a distinctly warped personality, a typical gesture of which is The Dire Warning of Terrible Consequences: “Dreadful things shall befall ye who offend me! Fear my wrath!”

Relishing their imagined vengeance, they seek to impress others by describing the humiliation they have in mind for their enemies:

“Just so you know, I am going to take great delight
in getting your personal identification and
punishing you to the full extent of the law.”

Schmalfeldt is “going to take great delight” in punishing @antvq16? For disputing Schmalfeldt’s account of why the Examiner fired him?

Bill,
I am yet again forced to discuss your column after you continued to (1) make your OBN articles personal, rather than talking about what such an organization is attempting to do and its potential implications, and (2) continued to reply in an antagonistic manner within the comments sections / Facebook.
Due to the continued disregard for projecting yourself in a professional manner, I am forced to suspend your access to our publishing platform again.
This was not how I hoped things would work out, but I’m no longer in a position to justify the amount of effort we as an organization have to put in to mitigate the complaints your work is constantly receiving. I wish you well on your blog.-
Best regards,
Kevin Staunton
Director, Northeast & Mid-Atlantic Regions

This December 2011 e-mail from an Examiner editor seems clear enough, eh? And Bill published this e-mail himself, so he can’t blame @antvq16 for merely describing it — “personal attacks and unprofessionalism” is an accurate synopsis — after Schmalfeldt claimed that his termination by the Examiner was because “stalkers” accused him of having “multiple accounts.”

But who cares? Bill does. He had challenged @antvq16: “Prove a lie I told.” The proof was offered, and the result was Schmalfeldt expressing his sadistic “delight” in punishing @antvq16!

Flashback to Feb. 18, a week after Stranahan had filed harassment charges against Schmalfeldt, and Schmalfeldt gloated:

It’s all horseshit. It’s all absolute horseshit. And I and my family have been put through pain and suffering because Lee Stranahan has a grudge. Because somebody, in my opinion, is paying Lee Stranahan to file these charges against me, in the hopes that I will either break or die.  I got some fucking news for you, Stranny [pause] Walker, Hoggy, Frey [pause] and Frey [pause] beware the Ides of March.

Notice, first, Schmalfeldt’s claim of “pain and suffering” inflicted by Stranahan, then go read Stranahan’s account of Schmalfeldt’s harassment. Then notice the diminutive putdowns — “Stranny” and “Hoggy” — and finally notice Schmalfeldt’s repetition of “Frey,” referring to Patrick “Patterico” Frey. Why? Frey had nothing to do with Stranahan filing harassment charges, so why does Schmalfeldt include Frey in this “beware the Ides of March” warning?

Isn’t the irrationality of Schmalfeldt’s reaction self-evident? Doesn’t this Dire Warning of Terrible Consequences seem to be coming from Schmalfeldt’s “sweaty-palmed Happy Place” where he imagines the degradation of others? And so we return full-circle to our previous consideration of that weird May 2012 article about anal sex that got Schmalfeldt banned from Daily Kos:

Most stupid men, married or otherwise, enjoy pornography.  They enjoy watching men with their throbbing, erect whatchamacallits do degrading thing to women with them.  Slapping them on the face with it.  Spanking them with it. There is no orifice on a woman’s body that is safe from the probing, pulsating prongs on the popular pornos.  And that includes the pooter hole.  There’s a whole SUBSET of pornography DEVOTED to anal sex.  They give an AWARD at the ADULT VIDEO AWARDS each year to the actress involved in the most erotic Anal Sex scene.
So, it’s not anal sex (as a practice) to which these small, frightened men object.
Heck, if you’re a man and you’re honest with yourself, you LIKE being on the “doling it out”end of anal sex.  How many heterosexual men reading this diary right now have never asked their wife or girlfriend to just take a deep breath, relax, “I’ll just put in the tip and we’ll see how it goes,” and then you ram it home like Captain Kidd jamming his sword back into his scabbard while she hollers “takeitouttakeitouttakeitout” and you tell her to just relax and it won’t hurt so bad and she starts kicking and screaming “takeitOUTtakeitOUTtakeitOUT youfuckingbastardpieceofshit“ and you finally do (because the walls are thin and your neighbors just LOVE calling the cops) and you tell her she should have at least given herself a chance to relax and enjoy it and she (if she’s your wife) doesn’t let you anywhere near her with “that thing” for weeks and if she’s your girlfriend she stops returning your calls?

Is this . . . objective journalism?

Or do you think that Bill Schmalfeldt’s commentary is personal, irrational, another product of his “sweaty-palmed Happy Place”?

Please, go read the rest of that Daily Kos item, including the comments, and tell me if you think Bill Schmalfeldt’s problem is what “stalkers” or “cybertrolls” are saying about Bill Schmalfeldt.

Or is the problem simply Bill Schmalfeldt himself?

 

52 comments

  1. You know, Stacy, I’m beginning to think you may be on to something with this “deranged cyberstalker” idea.

  2. POOP FLAKES!

    You’ve got to suspect derangement when somebody starts Tweeting about POOP FLAKES.

  5. Deranged seems to be a fitting title for a lot of demoncrats. I’ve worked wit ha lot of homosexuals, and while I have nothing personal against any of them, it is a choice that GOD labeled an abomination. Not an Obamanation mind you, thats just as bad. The conduct of my coworkers never was anything like so many of them I see on the net. The only reason I can see for their lack of civility and demands for acceptance is guilt. Deep in their minds, they know what they are doing is wrong. Its like the Telltale Heart. Their conscience won’t let them go.
    Our nation is collapsing whether we want to admit it or not. Our national sins which GOD is holding against us include acceptance of homosexuality, abortion, and the destruction of the family.
    Obama is our punishment. His policies and actions will bring about our destruction. We have, as James Dobson said, the president we deserve. May GOD have mercy on us.

  6. This guy falls into a broader category – like the shooters at the Navy yard, the Aurora theater, the school in Connecticut, Gabby Giffords and the judge and others in Arizona, and the guy who tried to shoot up the Family Research Council.

    We don’t lock up our nut cases anymore. They are out and about, many being a danger to themselves and/or others.

    In a sane and just world, there would be safe place for people like Bill. It would likely be a “mental institution” since Political Correctness has killed the traveling carnival sideshow.

  7. I’ve known a number of gay guys, and every single one of them was more sane than this troll. Heck, the guys at hillbuzz.org are fabulous and Republican, even.

  8. My main beef is with Kimberlin and Rauhauser who use this obviously mentally ill buffoon like a ten dollar crack whore as long as he is their attack dog. When he volunteered to do their bidding they were probably high fiving each other and could not believe their good fortune. Sick puppies, each and every one of them.

  9. That anal sex tirade was the fever swamp rantings of a certified lunatic. Homeboy is sick and demented to the depths of his being. That bit about forcing the wife into a little anal sex sounded confessional . I imagine the horror of the poor foolish girl when that pig faced sadist was sodomizing her. Poster Boy for the wheels coming off civilization.

  10. The problem is not the regular, run-of-the-mill gays, it’s the Gay Mafia and the bathhouse crowd who are distorting public policy that are making things bad–even for gays.

    Like Penn Gillette points out: you can complain about the dangers of bad neighborhoods and crime being the fault of a fallen society. But the fact is, if you go to a neighborhood with a higher than average percentage of gays, it’s much more likely to be a lot safer place to walk your dog at night than many other neighborhoods in the same city.

  11. You know, this brings up the issue of exactly how much we should care for and about the mentally deranged. I mean, psychology is simply not advanced to the point where highly-functional people can be labeled as damaged in some clinical way, where we can then get them treatment.

    Obvious cases we barely treat at all. Some tiny fraction respond to drugs in roughly the same way early cancer patients responded to massive blasts of full-body radiation. But a whole slew of derangements stalk the human polity. They are on display every day, and yet we are prevented from dealing with them directly.

    The leftists essentially hold the rest of us hostage to the less sane because they play our better nature against us. It’s true we need to feel compassion for the mentally ill, even a slug like this guy. But somewhere on the scale of caring we have let things get way too far out of balance. It seems some days that the inmates do, in fact, run the asylum.

    We need a better solution, and it isn’t just “better care for the mentally ill.” It’s something more structural.

  15. The Left seems to be of two [deranged] minds on this subject…

    -Some believe that these people are merely living in an alternative form of Reality and, since everything is relative including Reality, who are we to judge these people and lock them up.

    -Others on the Left believe in the tactic of sowing Chaos in the society/culture they have targeted for destruction, so letting the mentally ill roam freely in said society helps their cause.

  17. Slightly OT, but still dealing with CBBS.

    Is Press @DeepStateNews a Schmalfeldt sockpuppet? Or is there really someone out there deluded enough to support him? I’m not sure which to believe, because on the one hand it’s hard to imagine people supporting BS, but on the other, the writing style seems slightly more coherent and less obscene than most of BS’s rantings.

  18. How could Bill Schmalfeldt “stay classy”? To do that, he would have to have been classy at some previous point in his life, and that seems…. highly unlikely based on his current state of non-classiness…

  19. While social media has provided the avenue for what Glenn Reynolds called “An Army of Davids,” it’s unfortunate side effect is giving a platform to all manner of lunatics to spew their bile over all and sundry. In a sense, Mr. Schmalfeldt’s willingness to post his rantings under his own name or under pseudonyms which are easily tracked is a blessing. It allows him to be isolated and marginalized. It is that marginalization which he fears more than anything. Without his self-created controversy, Mr. Schmalfeldt is nothing but a home-bound pathetic little man of insignificant insight or intellect.

  21. The awful truth is that brain damage, brain pathology, and dysfunction of many mental illnesses (which are very physical illnesses) can and do make their victims into really big jerks. Possessing varying degrees of functionality, often far from “full jibber mode”, they still

    become extremely unpleasant and even dangerous people. He chooses to be unkind and give excercise to his ugliest thoughts, but he isn’t choosing from a full deck, really.

    I hardly ever see his posts or picture without trying to cleanse my thoughts with an unspoken wish for him to “get well soon,”
    but Bill Schmalfeldt will never get well.

  23. That bit about most stupid men liking porn – is he including himself? One of his distinguishing characteristics as a Professional Journalist (TM) is photoshopping the heads do those he dislikes on male porn images. Add to the mix his troubling obsession with Ali’s sex life and genitalia….

  25. BS’ s “art,” such as it is, allows us a picture-window view into his id, and what we see is what we get.

  28. I think it’s a little of his cognitive disconnect. He seems to have been trained (probably via general society) that “porn is something only guys who can’t get any real action settle for”. But he obviously enjoys consuming and participating in it, so in order to get by his “moral filter”, he appears to “hide” his participation within “satire”. Add in a generous dose of projection, and he can enjoy his pornographic materials without his “moral filter” going off. (Which may admittedly be less a question of personal morality and more a question of “internal consistency”: this permits him to sling insults which rarely apply to his targets but certainly to himself)

    I would also guess that the Kossacks banned him for this reason: they suddenly found themselves as unwilling participants in his sexual acts.

  31. The Prognazis defined mental illness down. When the DSM II was rewritten by 2 gay psychologists, which moved homosexuality from abnormal to normal, the trend of applying political decisions and relative morality continued in DSM III and IV.

    “Presented with data from researchers such as Alfred Kinsey and Evelyn Hooker, the seventh printing of the DSM-II, in 1974, no longer listed homosexuality as a category of disorder. After a vote by the APA trustees in 1973, and confirmed by the wider APA membership in 1974, the diagnosis was replaced with the category of “sexual orientation disturbance”.” Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Manual_of_Mental_Disorders#DSM-II_.281968.29

    Original source: ^ Spitzer, R.L. (1981). “The diagnostic status of homosexuality in DSM-III: a reformulation of the issues”. Am J Psychiatry 138 (2): 210–215. PMID 7457641

Comments are closed.