My Defense To Patterico's Dishonest Attack

A rightwing blogger named Patterico - ironically, in real life, he's a prosecutor - blew a fuse admidst two debates we were having and banned me from his site while also deleting my last comment there. No big deal, right? It's a typical tactic righties employ who can't take the heat of an open debate. But Patterico didn't just ban me and delete my comment. He decided that he had to lie about me in a manner meant to demonize.

Here’s Patterico’s lie about my banning:

I have banned one person in the last 24 hours: Macswain. There’s a long history there of lies and vicious insults, but the final straw was when he admitted that he read through a comment thread in which carlitos said his sister had died — and *then* MacSwain declared “funny* a comment about carlitos having disgusting sex with her.

He claims a long history of lies - in fact, he has repeatedly called me a liar - yet, he has never cited a single lie or even a false statement. What I really have is a history of proving Pat wrong and, unlike Pat, I don’t make these bold claims without evidence. Here is a post and comment thread where I proved Pat was smearing John Kerry by suggesting Kerry did not fully release his Vietnam era records. He’s held a grudge ever since and has been searching for away to silence my legitimate criticism. Here's a link (See Comments 74 & 98) to our latest dust-up where I called bullshit on any suggestion that he was, as a matter of principle, opposed to the Edwards bloggers losing their job.

He claims vicious insults. This is almost comical given he usually answers my posts with name calling completely devoid of substance. Trash talk exists on his blog and he partakes in it freely. He is simply a thin-skinned hypocrite who can’t handle the better trash talk that comes back at him. I’ve never cried about his weak efforts at trash talk or name calling directed toward me. Really, if he wants to whine like a little bitch about trash talk, he shouldn’t throw mud at others.

Most importantly, Pat outright lies when he states “[I] admitted that [I] read through a comment thread in which carlitos said his sister had died — and *then* MacSwain declared “funny* a comment about carlitos having disgusting sex with her.” I challenge Pat to post this admission.

The only post he can be referring to is Comment No. 49 to Pat’s initial post attacking The Liberal Avenger. I said in total:

Too funny.

I just want to know which of you righties read the rewritten comedy and didn’t get that it was a prank.

I don’t what’s funnier - the rewritten post, Pat’s preening and posturing about caning (or was it caneing) all the guest bloggers or the Tort-Reform righties claiming a lawsuit should be brought over this.

Thanks, Pat, for highlighting this - you once again scored for great comedy.

Where do I admit reading Carlito’s post? Nowhere - Pat is simply lying when he says I made this admission (or he’s delusional in believing such an admission exists). The fact is I had not read carlitos statement about his sister and only became aware of the tragic death of Carlito’s sister when Pat posted that fact at the bottom of my comment No. 49.

Then, the first line of my next comment (No. 50) says: Now if they knew about his personal tragedy, I would agree with you. Huh? What’s that? I actually agreed with Pat that the prank wouldn’t be funny if someone had foreknowledge of Carlito’s tragedy. Why would I say that if, as Pat claims, my position was that, even knowing about the personal tragedy, the comment is funny? The fact is that was not my position and that irrefutable sentence directly contradicts Pat's false claim.

Pat simply attributed to me an outrageous position - a strawman - to try and justify a banning and now he continues to lie while preventing me from defending myself. What’s worse - and what this despicable man has completely omitted from his explanation as to my banning - is that when he made his charge that I knew about Carlito’s tragedy and, then, stated that he was going to ban me, I got a comment up before he could get the ban in place. My comment said he was wrong as to his assumption of my knowledge and that he was banning me on false facts.

Guess what this defender of the sanctity of comments did: PATTERICO DELETED MY COMMENT. He didn’t want anyone to know my defense so that he could continue his false smear.

I don’t run away from debates and will debate Pat anytime, anyplace - using logic and evidence as above - without threats of bannings or deletion of comments.