The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

‘A Lengthy Criminal History’

Posted on | November 3, 2013 | 12 Comments

Is anyone really surprised?

Aurora police arrested a man they suspect kidnapped an 8-year-old girl from her bedroom on Monday.
John Stanley Snorsky, 26, of Aurora has been charged with first- and second-degree burglary and second-degree kidnapping, according to Aurora police. . . .
Snorsky has a lengthy criminal history, including armed burglaries and violent crimes with use of a weapon, according to records.
Officers were called to a home in the 1600 block of Hanover Street at about 12:15 a.m. Monday. Police believe the suspect removed a screen, opened the unlocked window and grabbed the girl. Police said he likely saw the light in her room and had been watching her. The girl struggled and was able to escape his grasp. When her father tried to confront the suspect, he fled.

A series of minor crimes and then, one day, without notice, the petty criminal escalates and commits a crime that makes national news.

Thank goodness that girl got away. A lot of them don’t.

 

Category: Crime

LAX Shooter: Some Kind of Kook

Posted on | November 3, 2013 | 33 Comments

There’s this weird little game going on between the Justice Department and the media where bits and pieces of LAX gunman Paul Ciancia’s one-page manifesto keep getting leaked out, and yet it seems no one has the entire note. So the shooter supposedly ranted about the “New World Order” and “fiat currency,” which is being interpreted by some as evidence of a right-wing motive — except, no it’s not: It’s Jared Loughner and Zeitgeist all over again.

Perhaps you’ve forgotten how Loughner, the 2011 Tucson shooter,  was a big fan of the pseudo-“documentary” Zeitgeist, which wraps up 9/11 Truther stuff in a lot of conspiracy theory crap about bankers, “fiat currency,” and other such paranoid kook stuff.

Now, the New York Times:

James Mincey, who told ABC News that he was a former roommate, said he met Mr. Ciancia for lunch a week before Friday’s attack.
>“He would always talk about documentaries he would watch about whatever, but there was never any kind of hatred, or any hatred group, or anything like that,” Mr. Mincey told ABC News.

 “He would always talk about documentaries he would watch”?

Hey, what kind of “documentaries” was Ciancia watching?

And while we’re at it, did Ciancia like to smoke a little weed, play a lot of video games? Because it seems to me we’ve had kind of a streak of incidents like this, going back nearly 15 years to the Columbine massacre, all of which involve a general category of perpetrators: Creepy little weirdos, mentally ill or borderline cases, who like to get high and play video games, and who go off the rails without anyone much noticing because who are we to judge? It’s those Strange Young Men:

My theory is that non-judgmentalism and the ACLU-inspired concern about the rights of suspected criminals have been diffused so deeply and widely throughout our culture that people are afraid to pay attention to their common-sense hunches, or to act on their suspicions about people whose behavior is, in fact, genuinely suspicious.”

People need to be paying attention to this, but they’re not.

 

 


Category: Conspiracy Theories, Crime

You Stay Classy, @CharlieSheen!

Posted on | November 3, 2013 | 29 Comments

Charlie’s Twitter message the day after Halloween:

last night was awesoem!
I went as an officer from
DCFS
(child protection srvc)
because that’s about as sane as these inept and retarded
doosh bags seem when dealing with my sons bob and max.
it’s an abhorrent dick dance that has NOTHING to do protecting any child.
instead they are swayed by the evil and pathetic über loser
whore that calls herself Brooke.
there will be a reckoning.
there will be a whirlwind,
that they will all reap while
desperate begging for my forgiveness.
you’ve all been warned.

Hey, Charlie, you misspelled “awesome” and “douchebags,” so at least you got that going for you, “über loser.”

Publicly calling your ex-wife a “whore”? When you’re kinda notorious for screwing prostitutes and porn starlets less than half your age?

Really mature, Charlie. Really grown-up.

But what the heck, huh? You’re rich and famous and you’ve been rich and famous forever, and so you’re entitled to treat other people like dirt and never be held accountable for all your bogus bullshit.

Just don’t be surprised that when you’re old and ugly and broke, nobody is gonna love you anymore, and you’ll die alone.

 

Category: Celebrities

Obama and the New York Times Decide Which Health Plans Are Worth Keeping

Posted on | November 3, 2013 | 38 Comments

Be grateful for enlightenment from Our Moral Superiors:

Congressional Republicans have stoked consumer fears and confusion with charges that the health care reform law is causing insurers to cancel existing policies and will force many people to pay substantially higher premiums next year for coverage they don’t want. That, they say, violates President Obama’s pledge that if you like the insurance you have, you can keep it.
Mr. Obama clearly misspoke when he said that.

Doug Ross: “These people make Chris Matthews look objective.” Letting ordinary Americans have choices is acceptable to Our Moral Superiors, as long as they get to decide which choices we have.

 


Category: Barack Obama, Health Care, New York Times

‘A Long Twilight Struggle’

Posted on | November 3, 2013 | 43 Comments

That phrase from John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address came to mind this morning as I was reading an e-mail from a friend lamenting the continuation of the war against Diana West and her book, American Betrayal. Busy with other matters, I had forgotten about the unfortunate internecine conflict that developed after Ron Radosh and David Horowitz attacked West in August.

Alas, ignoring it doesn’t make it go away. Conrad Black has repeatedly taken up the cudgel against West, and she responded this past week with a letter to National Review, including this remark:

No comment from the commentariat at the larger outlets over this heated clash, however, which is noteworthy in itself. A battle royale is joined over a book with “names” on both sides — not your everyday occurrence — and none of the capital-p pundits says (dares say?) a word about it, not even to write a book review.

That’s strange, isn’t it? Diana West has many influential friends, and her adversaries also have many friends, but most people — especially those she calls “the capital-p pundits” — seem determined to stay as far away as possible from this ugly fight. And who can blame them? Nobody wants to get themselves muddied up in a mess like this.

At any rate, the e-mail this morning from a mutual friend reminded me that Diana is still under fire in a battle that is out of sight of most readers. It is easy to ignore other people’s problems. Knowing how I have relied on the encouragement of friends to sustain me during some of my own struggles, however, and having defended Diana West since this controversy began, I felt a burden to take notice and to let her know she still has my sympathy and support.

Diana has been kind enough to include my commentary — along with that of  Andrew Bostom, Vladimir Bukovsky, Donald Douglas, M. Stanton Evans and others — in her new e-book about this controversy, The Rebuttal. You can show your support by visiting her site, DianaWest.net, and by following Diana on Twitter.

 

 

PREVIOUSLY:

 

Category: Books, History

@TedCruz At Heritage On Bond v. U.S.; Slate‘s Eric Posner Hardest Hit

Posted on | November 3, 2013 | 41 Comments

by Smitty

Ted buzzes Heritage to talk about Bond v. United States, and manages to piledrive Eric Posner’s shrill objections:

Cruz is a treasure. He offers simple, lucid arguments. Cruz says more cogent, intellectually stimulating things in 43 minutes of video than #OccupyResoluteDesk has offered in 5 miserable years.

I want to see Ted Cruz run for President in a few years, if only for the joy of watching him calmly, pleasantly, rhetorically disassemble all other contenders.

He alludes to a report published by the Senate, which appears to be this under-reported gem, “The Legal Limit: the Obama Administration’s Attempts to Expand Federal Power”.

Still more at Breitbart.

Category: Republicans, Texas

Did Roger Shuler Violate Alabama Law by Impersonating an Attorney as ‘RogerS’?

Posted on | November 2, 2013 | 62 Comments

Portrait of a Kook: Roger Shuler

On Oct. 24, Patterico called attention to a commenter using the name “RogerS” at BreitbartUnmasked.com, a site rather notorious for attacking enemies of Brett Kimberlin and Neal Rauhauser. Conspiracy theorists won’t believe it was just a coincidence that, the day before Patterico published that post, authorities in Shelby County, Alabama, arrested blogger Roger Shuler on contempt of court charges.

Speaking of coincidences, however, when Brett Kimberlin fanboy Bill Schmalfeldt reported the arrest of Schuler, he described Shuler as an attorney — and Shuler is definitely not an attorney, so we have to wonder where Schmalfeldt got that mistaken impression.

Oh, Patterico, can you please tell us what “RogerS” was doing?

One of the cast of little transparent sock puppets at Breitbart Unmasked is a fellow who goes by the handle “Roger S.” This “Roger S” was recently on the site talking up the high quality of Kimberlin’s recent RICO lawsuit. My God, Roger S says, the defendants ought to be scared. And Roger S should know! He himself is a lawyer who has handled RICO lawsuits himself! With devastating results!

Hmmmm. So it seems that “RogerS” was presenting himself at a pro-Kimberlin site as an experienced attorney, and pro-Kimberlin blogger Bill Schmalfeldt erroneously “reported” that Alabama blogger Roger Shuler is an attorney. Just a coincidence?

Aaron Walker examines the evidence suggesting that this is not a coincidence, that Schmalfeldt and “RogerS” were in frequent communication, and that Schmalfeldt knew that “RogerS” was Roger Shuler of Alabama and, apparently, believed the bogus claims by “RogerS”/Shuler that he was indeed an experienced attorney.

Readers may examine that evidence and decide for themselves what to believe. Roger Shuler’s got himself a whole heap of trouble down in Alabama nowadays. Having frequently (and unsuccessfully) gone to court as a pro se litigant, Shuler is now on the defense against some very experienced attorneys, including the formidable Bill Baxley.

One might pity Shuler, were it not for the type of atrocious defamation that has been Shuler’s ouevre as a blogger. And if Roger Shuler was indeed “RogerS,” what about this comment?

RogerS on September 20, 2013 at 5:29 pm said:
Well, I think Kimberlin has it correct in his suit, saying that Mr. McCain is not a “legitimate journalist.” Legitimate means that the journalist follows legitimate rules of ethics established by legitimate governing bodies. As you have made abundantly clear, Mr. McCain refuses to follow these legitimate rules of ethics. Instead, he engages in what is obviously malpractice journalism, just as a lawyer who violates the rules of ethics on a wholesale level engages in malpractice lawyering.
I would go even further, and say that Mr. McCain could never be hired by a legitimate media or news company because of his serial violations of the rules of ethics. I believe that he knows this and that is why be engages is his smear blogging tied to tip jar donations.
Mr. McCain is a blogger, a smear blogger, but he is not a journalist as that term is used in the profession. As an attorney, I have no doubt that a federal judge will agree with Kimberlin’s portrayal of Mr. McCain.

Ahem. What horribly false things to say about me, “RogerS.”

Sitting your ass in the Shelby County Jail now, aren’t you, “RogerS”?

Maybe I should just let bygones be bygones, and work myself up some sympathy for Roger Shuler’s constitutional rights.

Trying.

Trying real hard.

Gosh, this is embarrassing.

Despite my profound commitment to the First Amendment, and my concern about “prior restraint” issues in the Shuler case, for some reason I’m unable to work up any sympathy at all for Roger Shuler.

Tell you what: Have yourself a look at the various comments of “RogerS” at BreitbartUnmasked.com and tell me what you think.







Now, it just so happens — lo and behold! — that on Oct. 31, “RogerS” showed up in the comments at BreitbartUnmasked.com to deny that he is Roger Shuler. “Xenophon” vouched for this and, of course, we can always trust what an anonymous blogger says when vouching for the veracity of an anonymous commenter, right?

See, there are coincidences and then there are coincidences. As anyone can see from the comments I’ve screencapped, “RogerS” had been commenting quite frequently: Oct. 17, Oct. 18, Oct. 19, Oct. 21, Oct. 23 and then . . . silence, beginning the same day Roger Shuler was arrested in Alabama, continuing for a full week until, after Aaron Walker pointed out that it is a crime in Alabama to impersonate a lawyer, suddenly “RogerS” pops up to say he is definitely not Roger Shuler.

What kind of coincidence do you think that was? And don’t you think that authorities in Alabama, who seem to be very zealous in their enforcement of the law, might be able to get a subpoena to determine whether Roger Shuler was indeed the phony lawyer “RogerS”?

Because it seems to me that if there were probable cause to suspect Roger Shuler of actually committing a crime — as opposed to a mere contempt of court problem regarding civil litigation — they could get a search warrant for Roger Shuler’s computer.

However, that’s just common sense talking. I am not a lawyer, and I sure as hell would never impersonate a lawyer on the Internet.

 


Category: Aaron Worthing, Patterico, Roger Shuler

Carol Shuler, Mrs. Kook Blogger

Posted on | November 2, 2013 | 25 Comments

Roger Shuler is the Alabama blogger who has been smearing those corrupt! fraudulent!! Republicans!!! who are in a conspiracy!!!!

Anyway, the Karl Rove-led GOP conspiracy — ELEVENTY!1!1! — against Roger Shuler involved the Shelby County Sheriff’s Department, which arrested the paranoid kook Oct. 23 on a bench warrant for contempt of court after Shuler skipped an Oct. 18 hearing in one of the several defamation lawsuits against him. Here is a video in which the kook’s wife, Carol Shuler, describes her husband’s arrest:

Watching that video, do you feel a certain sympathy for this woman? Her life has been upended because, unfortunately, she married a kook, and doesn’t seem to realize what a kook her husband is because, frankly, she’s not quite the sharpest tool in the shed herself.

Being dimwitted is not a crime, of course, and neither is being crazy, but when you let people like that have Internet access, you have to expect a certain number “running with scissors” injuries.

That video was posted by the heinous Karoli Kuns. In justification of the adjective “heinous,” I’ll let my fellow defendant Kimberlin Unmasked explain why Karoli is part of “Team Kimberlin.”

And did I ever mention that Andrew Breitbart despised Karoli?

Look, I’ve never made a secret of my political beliefs: All liberals are wrong about everything at all times. But there is a difference between being merely wrong and being actively evil. Karoli and her Team Kimberlin comrades are actively evil. Attorneys tell me that calling people “evil” is a constitutionally protected expression of opinion. Attorneys laugh when I say, “No, it’s a Neutral Objective Fact.”

And speaking of attorneys, the eminent First Amendment champion Ken White of Popehat has a few words for Karoli:

Monday, Karoli felt comfortable letting the court sort it out when Brett Kimberlin sues people for blogging, and not drawing conclusions about whether Kimberlin’s complaint is political or his targets’ speech is protected:

I don’t write any of this with an intention to hold blog court, nor is this post intended to take up the cause of justice for Brett Kimberlin. That’s the province of Popehat and his gang of libertarian lawyers. The court will decide this case, and as part of that decision they’ll have to decide what constitutes free speech and what does not.

Friday, Karoli felt comfortable saying that the court’s contempt order in Roger Shuler’s case is wrong, that the case against him is political, and that his speech is protected:

Blogging is not a crime, and having bloggers tossed in jail because you’re the son of a powerful politician with your own ambitions is a dangerous precedent that has not escaped the scrutiny of many, without regard to whether we are right or left.

I’m tempted to be uncouth.

No, sir, Mr. White — leave that job to me! And this is probably a good place to mention that Ken’s a liberal, which means he’s also wrong (as a matter of Neutral Objective Fact) but not evil, thank God.

 

BomberSuesBloggers.com

 

Category: Alabama, Conspiracy Theories, Roger Shuler
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin