50.137.181.253, Beaverton, Oregon

Posted on | December 14, 2014 | 57 Comments

A certain troll using the name “Bilibob” decided to post three comments on a post called “Emerging Awareness Update,” but don’t look for them now; all three have been deleted. A check on the IP address indicated the troll is using a Comcast connection from Beaverton, Oregon.

When I checked to see if there had been previous comments from the same IP, I found comments from a certain “Bubba” (fake email address [email protected]) who had commented on “Lubricating the Slippery Slope: The Intellectual Astroglide of the Elite” (Sept. 1, 2013) and also on “New Concept of ‘Rights’ in America: If You’re Not Gay, You Don’t Have Any” (Aug. 22, 2013).

Given the similar thematic content of those three posts, it can be assumed that “Bilibob”/”Bubba” of Beaverton, Oregon, is some sort of sexual deviant who doesn’t like anybody suggesting it’s wrong for his computer hard drive to be full of sick pornography.

Certain people like that are dangerous and others are not, and I cannot say for certain whether “Bilibob”/”Bubba” of Beaverton, Oregon, is a menace to society, but I do get tired of them constantly making accusations of bad faith (mala fides) against those of us who call attention to evidence of increasing degeneracy in our society.

If “Bilibob”/”Bubba” of Beaverton, Oregon, wishes to create his own blog to advocate the pleasures of sodomy, nobody is stopping him. However, this cowardly pervert seems to imagine he has a right to use my bandwidth and a flimsy alias in an effort to harm my reputation by recycling an old smear dating back more than a decade.

Longtime readers of this blog well know that in, September 2009, I fought a two-week blog war with Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs after Johnson, for his own peculiarly hateful reasons, decided to hurl all that stale “white supremacist” crap at me. Everyone who watched that conflict will recall quite well which of us was left standing, and who it was that slithered away to discredited obscurity.

That was more than five years ago now and, even before it began, the “white supremacy” smear against me was already more than five years old. At the time this first came up, via the Southern Poverty Law Center, Duncan “Atrios” Black and Michelangelo Signorile, I was employed as an assistant national editor at The Washington Times.

In that position, I was “a man under authority,” and my supervisors more or less ordered me not to respond to the accusations, as any denial or rebuttal by me would only serve to publicize their smear. This enforced silence was difficult for me to bear, as it is not my nature to tolerate insults and, furthermore, I doubted the wisdom of their policy of not responding. Certainly, I have always been capable of defending myself in controversy, and the ludicrous accusation that I was a “white supremacist” (what does that even mean in the 21st century?) was never difficult to refute. It seemed to me then, as it seems to me now, that the best response in such a situation is to take the antagonist head-on, but my bosses had a newspaper to run, and my job was not to offer them P.R. advice and so I stayed silent.

Subsequent to that, after I had been promoted to Culture Page editor, there began a series of intrigues inside the Unification Church, which owned The Washington Times. Although those intrigues had nothing to do with me and I knew nothing about them at the time, they ended up having a significant impact on the future of the newspaper and also my career. Basically, there was a struggle inside the Unification Church as to who would control the church’s various assets after the death of the church’s founder, Sun Myung Moon. Although I neither knew nor cared about any of that, there were certain disgruntled and/or ambitious persons (among them some members or ex-members of the Church who had originally gotten their jobs through those connections) who saw this as an opportunity to advance themselves or else to settle personal grudges against others.

As a result of this situation — and keep in mind, I knew nothing about what was going on behind the scenes at the time — certain  disgruntled malcontents began seeking to undermine our editor in chief, Wesley Pruden, and his deputy, Francis B.. Coombs. Both of them are newsmen par excellence, veterans of the industry who played key roles in the success of “America’s Newspaper.” Mr. Pruden was and is a man with a low tolerance for bullshit. Fran Coombs was the straw that stirred the drink and the cog that turned the wheel of the news-gathering operation at The Washington Times. He had impeccable news judgment and a keen sense for finding the kind of story the liberal media preferred to ignore, grabbing hold of it, breaking an exclusive, and then follow up! follow up!

Fran knew what he was doing, and pushed everybody to do it his way, and there were some people who resented his success. So when it was rumored that Mr. Pruden would soon be retiring, certain of those resentful enemies decided to make sure that Fran did not get promoted as Mr. Pruden’s successor. The absurd accusation that I was a “white supremacist” (really, can someone please explain what that phrase means in the 21st century?) became one of the weapons those enemies used to sabotage Fran. Basically, these people spread the rumor that because I was secretly some kind of KKK ideologue, and hadn’t been fired for it, Fran and Mr. Pruden were protecting me because, of course, we were all part of the Vast Neo-Confederate Conspiracy that was going to re-institute Jim Crow or whatever.

As ridiculous as that seems, it was taken seriously enough that Max Blumenthal (yes, the infamous nose-picker) convinced his editors at The Nation magazine that he could write an investigative exposé of this racist cabal at The Washington Times. Blumenthal’s “investigation” turned out to be the biggest fizzle since the invention of Coca-Cola, but it did serve to embolden Fran Coombs’ enemies and to add more ammunition to the raging behind-the-scenes battle within the Unification Church over future control of the newspaper.

Finally, in January 2008, it was announced that Wes Pruden would retire, that his replacement would be John Solomon, previously of the Washington Post, and that Fran Coombs would be leaving the newspaper with a generous separation agreement, so that Solomon could bring in his own deputy to “transform” The Washington Times.

This was devastating news to many of us inside the organization and, after this had been announced in a big meeting of the entire newsroom, I went outside to have a cigarette with one of our investigative reporters who said, in her Kentucky drawl, “If I’d have wanted to work for a f**king Postie, I’d have applied at the f**king Post.”

Exactly so. If there was one thing that united us as a team in the newsroom at The Washington Times, it was our absolute contempt for that worthpless crosstown paper, The Washington Post. Now here the owners had decided to pass over Fran Coombs for the job of editor at a newspaper to which Fran had dedicated more than 20 years of his career, in order to give that job to a f**king Postie.

Immediately I resolved in my mind to resign.

There were other factors involved. At the time, I had three weeks of paid vacation due which I was planning to use for a freelance project that would take me to Uganda, on assignment for a publisher to help a first-time author with research for his book. After I got back, I’d planned to use my nights and weekends to complete that project, which was going to be very difficult, but now that plan was unworkable. Imagine working 70-hour weeks while under the eye of a new editor.

No, this was a divine portent. I’d been at the paper more than a decade, and I would have gotten a gold watch if I had stayed another four months. (The Washington Times awarded gold watches to 10-year employees at its anniversary celebration each May.)

“It was like God said, ‘Go,” as I wrote in my resignation notice and a few weeks later, I flew off to Kampala, Uganda.

So that is the backstory of how I went from The Washington Times to my subsequent freelance career online. I’ve since traveled all over the United States covering political campaigns, debates and events of various kinds. From Kentucky to New Hampshire, from New York to Nevada, from Alaska to Florida, to South Carolina and North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan — it’s been a wild ride.

That old “white supremacist” smear is so far back in my rearview mirror now I seldom even think about it, but it’s amazing how stupid trolls think they can discredit me by bringing it up. “Asked and answered!”

Don’t these fools ever learn anything from their failures? I’ve explained everything that ever needed to be explained to everyone who asked, and yet these idiotic trolls can’t seem to figure out why the repetition of the same stale stuff never really damages me.

There are five A’s in “RAAAAACISM!”

That accusation has been flung around by liberals so haphazardly for so long as to have lost whatever meaning the word ever had. More than six years after Barack Obama’s election as president, we all know that “racist” is just another synonym for Republican.

Me, I was a “racist” before being a “racist” was cool. It was my ironic fate to be accused under circumstances that prevented me from addressing the accusation directly at the time and at this point, nearly a dozen years later, I accept that this was God’s will.

While I don’t pray often, I have never doubted that God answers prayer. We may not always be happy with God’s answer, and the way our prayers are answered may confuse or disappoint us, but the sincere prayer of a broken spirit, God will surely answer.

All the evil that my enemies have done against me has harmed me no more than God was willing that I should be harmed. If it was his will that I should be chastised, I thank God for the chastisement.

Yet I always knew this: Whom God would save, no man can destroy, and whom God would destroy, no man can save. God knows my heart, and I have many friends who can vouch for my character. My faults and weaknesses are known to my friends as well as are my strengths and ability. Why is it, then, that my enemies believe they can harm me with an old smear that has not harmed me yet?

“Asked and answered!” All of that was put to rest years ago, and any fool who can’t be bothered to research my vindication is probably such a fool that there’s no point trying to dissuade him from his folly.

Hate? Hell, I don’t hate anybody. Hate is against my religion. However, it is also against my religion (and here I speak of my own deep beliefs, rather than the doctrines of any particular sect) to let an elite bunch of self-appointed Moral Arbiters tell me what to think.

Do you think I’m intimidated by such intellectual busybodies? I’ve been through the Valley of Death doing 11o mph in a rented Nissan with a 40-ounce Budweiser between my knees, flipping cigarette ashes out the window and jamming Skynyrd on the stereo.

Shall I call witnesses to testify to my fearlessness? Buddy, I got sued for $1 million by the notorious bomber Brett Kimberlin. I called him a liar to his face in open court, and walked away a winner.

Given my reputation for fearlessness, for independence of mind and a willingness to say what I think without regard for who might be offended, let me ask an obvious question that these damned trolls never bother to ask: If I’m such a “white supremacist,” where is the evidence of this doctrine in anything I’ve written on my blog since 2008?

You can’t find it, because it doesn’t exist.

Seven years of absolute editorial independence, with no supervisor or editor to tell me what I could or should write. And yet at no time during the nearly seven years since I’ve been running this operation — we’ve had more than 17,000,000 visitors — have I ever written anything that would suggest that I am a “white supremacist,” whatever the hell that phrase is supposed to mean in the 21st century.

See, this is what gets me: Anybody who actually is a “white supremacist” is pursuing the futile politics of nostalgia. Even if anybody did want to “turn back the clock” to 1962 or 1953 or whatever reset point they might choose, there is no feasible way to do it. Americans living in the here and now might not be happy with various aspects of the political, economic, social and cultural status quo, and it may be that their study of history leads them to believe that some things were better in certain ways many decades ago, but they know you can never go back to the past, even if they wanted to, which most people don’t.

The United States is nation of (small-d) democratic political tradition, and while conservatives wish to restore and maintain the governing principles of our Constitution, this is not a nostalgia trip, but rather a belief that limited government — the rule of law — is essential to preservation of our fundamental human liberty. The problem is that most of our citizens, especially younger people, have been indoctrinated in a liberal/progressive worldview in such a way that they fear liberty far more than they fear government.

Well, it was not liberty that killed Eric Garner, was it? No, it was a police officer, an agent of the government of New York City, who put Eric Garner in that fatal chokehold. “I can’t breathe!”

Yeah, we’ve been getting slowly strangled to death by government for years in this country — all of us, black, white, whatever — and all these idiotic protesters who want to blame Garner’s death on racism have to wonder why that black man got choked to death in New York City rather than, say, Wetumpka, Alabama, or Sevierville, Tennessee.

Haven’t we all been told, for many years now, that the rural parts of America where people vote Republican are hives of racial hatred? The last time I checked Census Bureau reports, more than half of black Americans lived in the South, a place of conservative tradition where nearly every governor and U.S. Senator is a Republican. And yet we see that in 2014, a black man was choked to death by a cop in New York City, one of the most liberal places in the entire country.

Doesn’t that tell us something very important? Would it make me a “racist” if I suggested we should consider whether liberalism is really more dangerous to black Americans than racism? To make such a suggestion is not to excuse or defend racism, of course, but merely to say that the dangers fostered by liberalism may be the greater threat to the lives, safety and prosperity of black Americans.

See, we can’t even ask questions like that — we can’t be permitted the liberty to “think outside the box” about our nation’s problems — because liberals insist that to question liberalism is to endorse hate.

My basic argument is that you can’t really have freedom unless people are free to hate whoever they feel like hating. Certainly, I prefer love to hate, but the Federal Bureau of Love hasn’t been getting the job done. As a matter of fact, they’ve got us all so worked up into spasmodic paroxysms of racial antagonism that it will be a miracle if we can avoid having major race riots in the near future.

This blog is read daily by many thousands of men and women all over the country, of all races and religions. Perhaps most of them are white Christians, but there is nothing here that would (or should) offend a black person, a Hispanic, an Asian or a Jew. Probably some adherents of Islam might not like my opinion of The Religion of Peace , but as long as they’re not in favor of violent terrorism or the annihilation of Israel, I’m probably more in agreement with the Muslim than I am with any white liberal anyone would care to name.

As long as you hate liberal Democrats, we’ll get along just fine.

Nearly 3,000 words ago, I started this blog post by calling out “Bilibob”/”Bubba” of Beaverton, Oregon, the troll who decided he needed to use the comment space here to insult me by repeating accusations that were frankly answered long ago. The ignorance and sloth of others — who either don’t care what the truth is or else are too stupid to find it on their own — cannot compel me to explain once again what I have long ago explained to the satisfaction of anyone who ever really cared to know the truth. I can’t help what certain other people cut-and-paste on their web sites (that nobody even reads), but no one can bring that trash onto my site to insult me by imputing that I am hiding some secret “hate” from my friends and readers.

So “Bilibob”/”Bubba” of Beaverton, Oregon, with the IP 50.137.181.253, you go spread the word to all your “progressive” friends with whom you share political beliefs (and maybe some illegal porn files) that they need not waste time attempting to harm me. You’ll be lucky if your deliberate evil does not come bouncing back on you.

At least one young fool who thought he could destroy me is awaiting sentencing on federal charges next week. Karma is a bitch, baby.

Irreverent humor is considered "smart" when liberals mock morality and patriotism..Irreverently mocking liberalism? That's called "hate."

— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) December 13, 2014

 

Comments