ChrisWeigant.com

Liz Cheney Goes Down Swinging

[ Posted Wednesday, May 5th, 2021 – 16:01 UTC ]

Representative Liz Cheney did not come from the planet Krypton, but not unlike Superman (at least, the Superman from the 1950s television version) Cheney is in the midst of a "battle for truth, justice, and the American way." This may sound rather odd to hear, coming from me (as well as both dated and cliché). But while I disagree with Cheney on just about every ideological item on either one of our lists, I have to applaud what she is doing now -- standing up to the idiocy which has taken hold of her own political party, reminding them that they used to stand for things like personal responsibility and the U.S. Constitution, and calling a Big Lie an actual Big Lie. In today's Republican Party, that is both admirable and (sadly) almost extinct.

Liz Cheney knows the emperor is wearing no clothes. And she is loudly telling the rest of her party this fact. So, in response, the party is going to unceremoniously chuck her out of their caucus's third-highest leadership position in the House Of Representatives. For refusing to publicly and knowingly lie to the voters.

To put it another way, the Republican Party has just lost any remaining shreds of honesty or morality it may still have had retained over the past five years. Its members are shown to be white supremacists or investigated for child sex trafficking -- and the party leaders look the other way: "Nothing to see here... move along...." But when one of them refuses to swear loyalty and utter fealty to their Dear Leader, then she must be expelled. Ironically, she'll be booted out for actually acting like a political leader -- you know, by leading instead of blindly following (and encouraging) the senseless mob.

Cheney is going down swinging, at least. There will be no reconciliation for her after the opinion piece she just wrote in the Washington Post. That bright light you see is the flames of all the bridges she just burned, in other words. She may have to run for her House seat again as in independent, since she is one of the prime targets in the Trump faction's crosshairs. Her primary (should she run as a Republican) will be brutal, that's for sure. And she will never return to the ranks of GOP congressional leadership again (although she may be playing a long game and run for president later on, we'll see). But while Donald Trump is still alive, he will continue to vent his spleen on her, every chance he gets. So her GOP prospects, for now at least, look pretty dim.

She doesn't seem to care one whit. She is standing up for what she believes, and she is mincing no words for the others in her party who are not standing with her. She opens with an absolute broadside against Donald Trump and all those Republicans who are enabling him:

In public statements again this week, former president Donald Trump has repeated his claims that the 2020 election was a fraud and was stolen. His message: I am still the rightful president, and President Biden is illegitimate. Trump repeats these words now with full knowledge that exactly this type of language provoked violence on Jan. 6. And, as the Justice Department and multiple federal judges have suggested, there is good reason to believe that Trump's language can provoke violence again. Trump is seeking to unravel critical elements of our constitutional structure that make democracy work -- confidence in the result of elections and the rule of law. No other American president has ever done this.

The Republican Party is at a turning point, and Republicans must decide whether we are going to choose truth and fidelity to the Constitution. In the immediate wake of the violence of Jan. 6, almost all of us knew the gravity and the cause of what had just happened -- we had witnessed it firsthand.

House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy (Calif.) left no doubt in his public remarks. On the floor of the House on Jan. 13, McCarthy said: "The president bears responsibility for Wednesday's attack on Congress by mob rioters. He should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding." Now, McCarthy has changed his story.

Cheney is, in a word, standing for the truth. Against Trump's Big Lie. And she used House Minority Leader McCarthy's own words to show how her opinion has not changed, while his has. She's right -- many Republicans initially denounced Trump to some degree or another, but almost all of them have backed off the forceful statements they made immediately following the attempted insurrection. Cheney hasn't. She's reminding them of this.

She then moves on to detail what this truth means (or should mean):

I am a conservative Republican, and the most conservative of conservative values is reverence for the rule of law. Each of us swears an oath before God to uphold our Constitution. The electoral college has spoken. More than 60 state and federal courts, including multiple Trump-appointed judges, have rejected the former president's arguments, and refused to overturn election results. That is the rule of law; that is our constitutional system for resolving claims of election fraud.

Once again, Cheney is fighting for justice. Justice has already been done, she reminds everyone, and there was no fraud or stolen election, period. Standing against that is standing against the rule of law (which is supposed to be a near-sacred phrase, to Republicans). It is standing against justice, and against the United States Constitution -- another thing Republicans have told us all they supposedly hold near and dear to their hearts.

And then Cheney tells her fellow Republicans what the consequences will be if they continue following the path they are on:

The question before us now is whether we will join Trump's crusade to delegitimize and undo the legal outcome of the 2020 election, with all the consequences that might have. I have worked overseas in nations where changes in leadership come only with violence, where democracy takes hold only until the next violent upheaval. America is exceptional because our constitutional system guards against that. At the heart of our republic is a commitment to the peaceful transfer of power among political rivals in accordance with law. President Ronald Reagan described this as our American "miracle."

While embracing or ignoring Trump's statements might seem attractive to some for fundraising and political purposes, that approach will do profound long-term damage to our party and our country. Trump has never expressed remorse or regret for the attack of Jan. 6 and now suggests that our elections, and our legal and constitutional system, cannot be trusted to do the will of the people. This is immensely harmful, especially as we now compete on the world stage against Communist China and its claims that democracy is a failed system.

Those, in Republican circles, are fighting words. But they should be, since Cheney is fighting for the American way itself. Rejecting the peaceful transfer of power or even delegitimizing it in any way is flat-out un-American. It would pull us down off our pedestal and make us the equal of Third World countries, in fact. What's more, Saint Ronald of Reagan agrees.

Again, fighting words indeed. Cheney then rips the wound wide open and admits to everyone precisely why her fellow Republicans are falsely pretending the Big Lie is somehow true, and whipping up the Big Lie among their voting base: to make money and stay in power. And by doing so, they are helping the commies in China.

It would be hard to even imagine what stronger statement would even be possible, seen through the Republican Party lens.

Cheney then schools the cowards and spineless creatures in her party on what they should be calling for now: the Justice Department to continue the criminal investigations of the insurrection attempt, as well as a bipartisan and independent commission along the lines of the September11th commission, which will investigate the attack on the U.S. Capitol and nothing else. Cheney explicitly says this: "The Black Lives Matter and antifa violence of last summer was illegal and reprehensible, but it is a different problem with a different solution."

And then Cheney closes by telling the unvarnished truth of what the Republican Party has become and essentially calling the vast majority of Republican voters insane (or, perhaps, to be charitable, just those woke Democrats). Think this is an overstatement? You be the judge:

Finally, we Republicans need to stand for genuinely conservative principles, and steer away from the dangerous and anti-democratic Trump cult of personality. In our hearts, we are devoted to the American miracle. We believe in the rule of law, in limited government, in a strong national defense, and in prosperity and opportunity brought by low taxes and fiscally conservative policies.

There is much at stake now, including the ridiculous wokeness of our political rivals, the irrational policies at the border and runaway spending that threatens a return to the catastrophic inflation of the 1970s. Reagan formed a broad coalition from across the political spectrum to return America to sanity, and we need to do the same now. We know how. But this will not happen if Republicans choose to abandon the rule of law and join Trump's crusade to undermine the foundation of our democracy and reverse the legal outcome of the last election.

History is watching. Our children are watching. We must be brave enough to defend the basic principles that underpin and protect our freedom and our democratic process. I am committed to doing that, no matter what the short-term political consequences might be.

So, no... Liz Cheney was not born on Krypton. And I still think she's wrong about just about every one of her conservative principles being the right course of action for America. But I have to applaud how she's not just going down in flames, but she actually seems to cherish the journey. She is courageously and proudly fighting against her own party for what she believes is right, no matter how much of a cliché it might be: truth, justice, and the American way.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

44 Comments on “Liz Cheney Goes Down Swinging”

  1. [1] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    I couldn't make myself read through this nonsense.

    But an article on how you have denounced the THE Big Lie and are ready to take on the evil Big Money Deathocrats would be interesting.

    It is YEARS overdue.

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:
  3. [3] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    I have to applaud how she's not just going down in flames, but she actually seems to cherish the journey.

    Chris,

    I thought you were the talking points guy. Here's what that should say:

    I have to applaud how she's not just getting cancelled, but she actually seems to cherish the journey.

  4. [4] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Dick Cheney's daughter is fighting for "truth, justice, and the American way"? That's just a little difficult for me to go along with. I don't know what she's doing, but I am looking forward to her playing the woman card.

  5. [5] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Death Harris,

    I couldn't make myself read . . .

    Yes, we're well aware that your reading comprehension skills are not good and you'd rather just adsorb the lies and conspiracy theories from Youtube vids of failed comics instead.

    an article on how you have denounced the THE Big Lie and are ready to take on the evil Big Money Deathocrats would be interesting

    An article on how to bake a Derby pie might be interesting as well, but if you click on ABOUT THIS BLOG at the top of the page, it says:

    This blog's purpose is to present to the public one man's view of politics.

    Not Derby pie. Not One Crackpot Demand. Not your obsessive compulsive fixation.

  6. [6] 
    Kick wrote:

    Nice writeup, CW.

    I never thought I'd agree with Liz Cheney on a dang thing, but then I'm not the one who finally deduced that Donald Trump is a threat to the country. Fact is, she's on our side on this issue. Recognizing obvious facts and pointing them out is the very least that humans can do.

    The GQP stabbing each other in the back want you to know that Biden is not a unifying president and that cancel culture will be the death of the Party... oops, they meant America. Connecting dots isn't their strong suit.

  7. [7] 
    John M from Ct. wrote:

    Just as I didn't trust the Lincoln Project while admiring their polished anti-Trump ads last year, so I don't particularly trust Rep. Cheney. But I can hardly disagree with the facts of what she says in her article, as you report. She deserves applause for not just her honesty, but her political courage.

    I even whistled when she casually listed the old mantra of 1980s Republicanism, "We believe in the rule of law, in limited government, in a strong national defense, and in prosperity and opportunity brought by low taxes and fiscally conservative policies." I disagree that those things are, by themselves and in the ways in which they are interpreted by Republicans, the best path forward for the country; but at least I recognize that they form a viable and consistent political platform within the American tradition. Trump torpedoed everything on that list - but not, I would add, without some help from the GOP US House and Senate over the past twenty years. Not to mention the previous Republican president ... and vice president.

  8. [8] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    1

    I couldn't make myself read through this nonsense.

    Translation: Don Harris didn't read it but declares it "nonsense." That lying bullshit right there is exactly how is shit here is exactly why no one should ever take a word I say seriously.

    But an article on how you have denounced the THE Big Lie and are ready to take on the evil Big Money Deathocrats would be interesting.

    Your shit is repeatedly and definitely uninteresting.

    It is YEARS overdue.

    Your crusade has produced multiple YEARS of human waste, which is why we refer to it as "bullshit mountain."

    So to recap:

    * You fail our test
    * You do not pass "go"
    * You do not collect $200 dollars
    * You get no votes
    * We're writing in our own names
    * Our priceless idea will elicit a change in your behavior... any day now.

  9. [9] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    liz cheney can bake me a pie.

  10. [10] 
    Kick wrote:

    NANCY PELOSI
    SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE

    From the GOP Leadership: Help Wanted –
    Non-Threatening Female

    MAY 4, 2021

    Seeking Replacement for House Republican Conference Chair

    Word is out that House GOP Leaders are looking to push Rep. Liz Cheney from her post as House Republican Conference Chair – their most senior woman in GOP leadership – for a litany of very Republican reasons: she won’t lie, she isn’t humble enough, she’s like a girlfriend rooting for the wrong team, and more.

    So what exactly are House GOP Leaders looking for in a #3? Punchbowl AM got the scoop and, well, it’s not surprising… they want a woman who isn’t a “threat” to them.

    Inbox Punchbowl News AM

    McCarthy and Scalise will want someone in leadership who is not only relentlessly on message, but also someone who does not pose a threat to them and their power.

    As Michael Gerson, former speechwriter for President George W. Bush, put it in the Washington Post yesterday:

    Nothing about this is normal. The GOP is increasingly defined not by its shared beliefs, but by its shared delusions. To be a loyal Republican, one must be either a sucker or a liar…Knowingly repeating a lie – an act of immorality – is now the evidence of Republican fidelity.

    https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/5421-0

  11. [11] 
    Kick wrote:

    Is it even legal to cancel Darth Cheney's daughter on May the 4th?

  12. [12] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    In today's Republican Party, that is both admirable and (sadly) almost extinct.

    Wow. Just wow.

    I hated Dick Cheney and I hate his daughter's politics, as do you.

    It's just so unforeseen that I would find myself ADMIRING folks like Liz Cheney and Mitt Romney *smh* who are demonstrating more fealty to our Constitution than most of the other Repug #Putin'sBitches.

  13. [13] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    luke, leia and liz - who knew?

  14. [14] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    [1]

    Deathkiller Harris, you are an uncompromising idiot, and have wasted any chance of recruiting support here in Weigantia because English (comprehension) is not something you have any appitude at. Stop wasting our time.

    [5]

    An article on how to bake a Derby pie might be interesting as well, but if you click on ABOUT THIS BLOG at the top of the page, it says:

    This blog's purpose is to present to the public one man's view of politics.

    Not Derby pie. Not One Crackpot Demand. Not your obsessive compulsive fixation.

    D'ya think we should establish a GoFundMe account so DeathkillerDon can get some ESL education? I'm in...he's so much better at political humor than political advocacy. I see real potential here. 'Course I see a lot of potential in the 74 million idiots who voted for Deathkiller Trump, so there's that.

    [7]

    Just as I didn't trust the Lincoln Project while admiring their polished anti-Trump ads last year, so I don't particularly trust Rep. Cheney. But I can hardly disagree with the facts of what she says in her article, as you report. She deserves applause for not just her honesty, but her political courage.

    Yeah, well I for one don't trust Lincoln Project, nor Mitt, nor Liz Cheney. But even sinners have been known to do God's work (says this Godless, Commie Pinko Loud and Proud Libtard) so let us celebrate, not disparage, what shreds of decent actions we may get from whatever Repugs, eh?

    [8]

    Gawd, Kick, I sure do enjoy your input in these pages. You are my favorite thing in the whole "Nothing but Queers and Steers" Texas Republic.

  15. [15] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Kick, just to set the record straight...

    The last time that I drove back to California (after delivering a U-HAUL truck full of clothing to one of our impoverished Native American First Nations Brothers and Sisters in South Dakota) I made my partner stop underneath the "Welcome to Oklahoma/Texas" signs...and take a photo of me from behind, apparently pissing on said signs.)

    Oh, how do I really feel?

  16. [16] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    Perhaps Liz Cheney could orchestrate a pax with Trump, maybe she could enlist her father's help and have Trump down the ranch, Trump and he could do a little Quail Hunting.

    hehe

    I do kind of feel bad for her, in the same way, I feel bad for the feeder Goldfish I throw in with my Pihranas.

    Two words: "Cheeto Jesus"

    Lol, this actually is healthy for the GOP, they're just taking the scenic route through the five stages of grief, and ran out of gas before departing Denial.

    Anger is where they make up for lost time as they, as a group, seem to be forever angry.

    Bargaining will be a tough row to hoe for them, they don't play well with others, much less themselves.

    Depression isn't really their thing, ignorance remains bliss, as always. By that standard, they are forever ecstatic.

    Acceptance, their final stop, they'll find Liz waiting for them with a nice tall pitcher of who gives a fuck how these people destroy themselves, just that they do.

    It's a mind-boggler how Republicans will process all this when the only thing tangible from which to draw a conclusion is that the GOP has zero loyalty to themselves, so why would anyone expect loyalty from them in return for a vote.

    Their long and winding road through the stages of grief was always going to be drawn out, no one remembered to pack a moral compass, and Cheeto Jesus, the bus driver, gets paid by the hour and therefore is in no rush to let the journey end.

    LL&P.

  17. [17] 
    Kick wrote:

    nypoet22
    13

    luke, leia and liz - who knew?

    Who knew? This guy: https://www.rebelscum.com/DarthTater.asp

    While the GOP wholeheartedly supports the Mr. and eagerly supports the pricks... balls simply cannot be tolerated. ;)

  18. [18] 
    Kick wrote:

    MtnCaddy
    15

    I recognized your foul stench. ;)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruo_O5E686c

    Somebody stop us!

  19. [19] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    So, Liz Cheney clears the low bar and refuses to endorse the Big Lie about the 2020 presidential election. Good for her.

    "If Cheney is punished by her own party, I will not applaud, but I also will not sob. I sit silently in acknowledgment, as one does, when karma swings low and performs its function." ... Charles Blow, New York Times

  20. [20] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Yes, this blog is one man's opinion on politics.

    And it includes a comments section for us to put in our opinions on the one man's opinion on politics.

    And that INCLUDES my opinion that as a public figure covering politics CW should address One Demand instead of avoiding it and/or offering dodges.

    And since CW has lauded people for not taking no or no answer for an answer from other public figures and keeping after them until they get an answer then it is okay for me to keep after CW to hold him to the same standards he expects from other public figures.

    And the standards he sets for this blog with the ENTIRE mission statement.

    That includes "My main focus will be the hypocrisy and foibles that emanate so regularly from Washington,DC, but are ignored by the mainstream media."

    In my opinion that covers the Hypocrisy of the big money Deathocrats and One Demand.

    And the paragraph about media bias and issues put into the "who cares" category.

    And the list of promises at the end.

    All apply to CW addressing things like One Demand.

  21. [21] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    That should be the hypocrisy of the big money Deathocrats and the media not covering One Demand.

  22. [22] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    "In my opinion that covers the Hypocrisy of the big money Deathocrats and One Demand."

    What's all this, has your idée fixe finally broken, Mr. H?

    ...Or is it just a common-all-garden Freudian-slip?

    I'm sensing bits of the Trumpian legacy of lies flaking away just around the corner, Rudy seems set to burst, like the boil on the butt he is. Barr and his antics look fairly ripe too.

    Surely every caliginous act brought into view must chip away at some support, somewhere... No one is Teflon-coated completely? Gotti did die in jail.

    Trump v Facebook... lol, This one was easy, Facebook has just reported one of the best quarters in its brief history, outpacing Wall st. projections with an impressive 48% gain over the same period last year. Their MAU (monthly active users) grew by a half-billion for the same time period, not losing 74 million as we're lied to by right-wing media empty-heads and their drones.

    Zuckers so-called 'oversight board' seems to have had the desired effect, that of appearing to do something but actually giving him six more months to pick a quiet time to jettison his petard. He should have just ripped that bandaid off entirely, if Trump has his druthers, he'd marshal his mob to make Twitter flutter. Hair Trump honestly believes he built Twitter from the lie up, he sees them of having double-crossed his ambitions, he might have a scintilla of a point there...Meh, even a blind chicken gets a piece of corn sometimes.

    LL&P

  23. [23] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Speaking of hypocritical Deathocrats, what about AOC and her Courage to Change PAC that was set up to give money to challengers of corporate Deathocrats specifically saying that money would not be given to candidates that take money from corporate PACS giving money to candidates that take corporate PAC money.

    The only question is whether this will be presented with a MIDDOTW week award for following the SOP of the Deathocrats, a MDDOTW award for the hypocrisy and betrayal or just completely ignored.

  24. [24] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Don,

    Pontificating again?

    AOC, unlike you, understands politics. She gets shit done rather than whine about no one agreeing with arbitrary goal posts of questionable purity. I already answered the why last time you criticized AOC for her PAC, so I will leave it to you to look up the reason she is supporting all democrats in reelection rather than those small few who 100% agree with her...

  25. [25] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Death Harris,

    Critical thinking skills should be all that are needed, but under the circumstances, you should do like Bashi says and look up his previous response to your AOC trolling. Then ask your mom to explain his comment to you (due to your reading comprehension issue).

  26. [26] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @canuck,

    i still think nobody else gets it.

    JL

  27. [27] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    (26) Oh, I think you'll find that's never really been of any concern to me. It would be vain for me to assume anyone read anything I write, and vainer still of you to assume that I have written with any intention of it been understood.

    So here we are.

    It relaxes me to go on the journey that a few paragraphs of fluff here and there provide, I maintain my end of the covenant entered into between blogger and blogged, my presence effects no precarious balance struggling to find allies of like-mindedness. The two monolithic constructs herein manage elegantly choreographed coexistence despite their contrary intransigence.

    A Testimony to the longevity of individual stances and their back and forth sustained mutually assured continuation. Simply put.

    At least one will always.

    LL&P

  28. [28] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Kick [8],

    When I heard about this, I couldn't help but think about Death Harris.

  29. [29] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @canuck,

    so if i'm the only other person who knew what the hell you were talking about, it's my fault for wanting somebody else to be in on the joke?

  30. [30] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    Lol, I almost forgot, there was something that I saw, processed, and promptly forgot while I was making clear, crystal (27).

    The obvious non sequitur of;

    "And the paragraph about media bias and issues put into the "who cares" category.

    And;

    "That should be the hypocrisy of the big money Deathocrats and the media not covering One Demand."

    I suppose one could argue that both statements can be true at once, but it's an infinitely easier lift to consider both parts equally invalid and self-canceling...The 42 here is... You do, Mr. H you seem to care whether media bias exists, but only if it precludes all other issues in favor of your precious fixation, One Demand.

    This one just left a smile up for grabs, which I thought I would try on, if I like it, I might keep it, one can never have too many smiles.

    "And that INCLUDES my opinion that as a public figure covering politics CW should address One Demand instead of avoiding it and/or offering dodges."

    I'm not quite sure how much of 'public figure' an avowed blogger can really lay claim to be, they're almost by definition an aloof spectral species of cultural observer that are rarely seen and never heard as they float among the issues of the day. As for addressing One Demand our in-house incorporeal insouciant has done justice to One Demand and found it wanting. One Demand had its name put to the test and can't, in fairness, be said to be living up to its name as you demand it to be scrutinized and re-evaluated many times daily when it hasn't varied at all from its original form. I think Einstien referred to that flogging of the same dead horse as 'crazy' in his own dry vernacular.

    Are you expecting CW to have amended his evaluation of OD (odious dialogue or one demand, if you please) when no change has occurred since his first opinion was made?

    It could just be that he wants no part of crazy.

    hmmm?

    LL&P

  31. [31] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    NYP...(29)

    You certainly got the tense right, half point.

    I'm afraid I might have moved on to a different thing entirely and clumsily contaminated the new thought in my haste.

    I'll give you a heads up when we start playing 'Matsui', and it will never start with...

    "A doctor, who specializes in skin diseases, will dream he has fallen asleep in front of the television. Later, he will wake up in front of the television, but not remember his dream."

    ...And most importantly, can never end with Kashmir...

    There are lines that one never crosses.

    LL&P

  32. [32] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Bashi (24) JFC (25)-
    Whatever excuse you gave before doesn't matter now any more than it did before. (I didn't reply to your response?)

    She took money to fight candidates that take corporate PAC money saying it would NOT be given to candidates that take corporate PAC money and then gave that money to candidates that take corporate PAC money.

    When you do that there is not a valid reason for doing it. PERIOD.

  33. [33] 
    Kick wrote:

    Death Harris
    20

    Yes, this blog is one man's opinion on politics.

    No shit, Death.

    And it includes a comments section for us to put in our opinions on the one man's opinion on politics.

    State the obvious.

    And that INCLUDES my opinion that as a public figure covering politics CW should address One Demand instead of avoiding it and/or offering dodges.

    CW isn't a public figure, and his blog only includes your opinion of your monomania for two reasons:

    (1) You haven't stopped trolling and spamming your personal one-man crusading bullshit on his blog when he's requested on multiple occasions that you either stop doing it or be banned and expunged from his site via the "red card."

    (2) He hasn't yet thrown that "red card."

    And since CW has lauded people for not taking no or no answer for an answer from other public figures and keeping after them until they get an answer then it is okay for me to keep after CW to hold him to the same standards he expects from other public figures.

    CW is not a public figure; regardless, why do you keep making this asinine claim that CW has lauded others for not taking "no" for an answer and then practically blaming him for your trolling and spamming of him? Ridiculous! Show me all these quotes where CW has "lauded people." I will be happy to show you all the quotes where he has specifically singled you out and referred to you as a "troll" (because you are one) and the quotes where he has specifically told you to stop with your monomania on his blog. You seem determined to ignore his actual comments in favor of making shit up about him practically begging you to troll him since he's "lauded" all these "people." Name these "people" and show us the quotes.

    So to reiterate: It's delusional to practically blame him for you stalking his blog with your personal bullshit as if he asked for it... particularly when he has actually singled you out and asked you to stop.

    And the standards he sets for this blog with the ENTIRE mission statement.

    You keep bringing that up also as if it's some kind of contract he's made with every Don, Dick, and Harry who believes he is owed something. This is his blog, and I can find nothing in his mission statement that should be misconstrued as an implied contract for him to service your pathetic personal political purity pity party.

    That includes "My main focus will be the hypocrisy and foibles that emanate so regularly from Washington,DC, but are ignored by the mainstream media."

    I cannot fathom why you believe that sentence is some kind of implied contract wherein the author has volunteered to shill for every dipshit with an idea out there who is being ignored by the mainstream media. Why favor these general sentences from the mission statement versus the author's direct paragraphs written personally to you? It defies common sense, which it appears you have none.

    In my opinion that covers the Hypocrisy of the big money Deathocrats and One Demand.

    So you believe that a blog author's general mission statement is a greenlight to you and your own one-man personal crusade while choosing to totally ignore the paragraphs that were actually meant for you personally? Do you perhaps see your problem? You're missing the forest for the trees. He's actually addressed you personally in no uncertain terms while you're out there fantasizing that his mission statement is your contract to troll. Nuts!

    And the paragraph about media bias and issues put into the "who cares" category.

    Sentence fragments are not paragraphs. He's addressed you personally.

    And the list of promises at the end.

    Sentence fragments are not paragraphs. He's addressed you personally.

    All apply to CW addressing things like One Demand.

    No, they don't. That general mission statement is not about you and your personal bullshit, but I can show you multiple paragraphs that address your trolliness and your personal crap directly and in no uncertain terms.

    So to recap: You're ignoring the reality of the paragraphs that were written to you personally in favor of your fantasy that CW's mission statement is some kind of a contract requiring him to shill your shit. It isn't. You have a personal response that was written for you so there's no reason to choose your delusions over that reality.

    Would you enjoy the reality of CW actually writing a column about you? I can picture it now.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    ````````````````````````````

    My Blog Troll Has One Demand,
    and I'm Going to Let Him Have It

    I have a blog. My blog has a troll. Not an ordinary troll, mind you, but one that believes my general mission statement is about him while ignoring responses written directly to him. Although I've definitely responded to his tilting-at-windmills political philosophy and requested he stop his trolliness or be banished from my site, he continues to prefer his fantasy over reality. It's nothing I haven't already said in previous comments, but he's been trolling for this, and I'm going to give it to him.

    [Insert previous comments here.]

    Any man’s death diminishes me,
    because I am involved in mankind;
    and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
    it tolls for thee.

    ~ John Donne

  34. [34] 
    Kick wrote:

    James T Canuck
    22

    I'm sensing bits of the Trumpian legacy of lies flaking away just around the corner, Rudy seems set to burst, like the boil on the butt he is. Barr and his antics look fairly ripe too.

    "Boil on the butt"! *I can't stop laughing* :)

  35. [35] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    23

    The only question is whether this will be presented with a MIDDOTW week award for following the SOP of the Deathocrats, a MDDOTW award for the hypocrisy and betrayal or just completely ignored.

    Wrong. There are lots more questions out there due to the fact that everything is not about you and your "tilting-at-windmills political philosphy," Death Harris.

    You seem completely and totally oblivious to the fact that this blog isn't about you and your bullshit. It's mind boggling how utterly self-centered you are... the height of conceit... and for absolutely no reason whatsoever that I can discern.

    So to recap: Get over yourself! Everything isn't about you.

  36. [36] 
    Kick wrote:

    James T Canuck
    27

    I hear you. :)

    So here we are.

    Yes, sir.

    It relaxes me to go on the journey that a few paragraphs of fluff here and there provide, I maintain my end of the covenant entered into between blogger and blogged, my presence effects no precarious balance struggling to find allies of like-mindedness. The two monolithic constructs herein manage elegantly choreographed coexistence despite their contrary intransigence.

    "Boil on the butt!" ;)

    *still laughing*

  37. [37] 
    Kick wrote:

    John From Censornati
    28

    When I heard about this, I couldn't help but think about Death Harris.

    "Male took off his colostomy bag and started swinging it at others, some units have feces on them..."

    Oh, I see exactly what today is. It's "y'all have ganged up and are trying to kill me" day. It's a conspiracy! Heh.

    Y'all are implanting visuals that are going to linger. I can't stop laughing. I need a drink because it's 5 o'clock somewhere. Oh, wait... it's 7:15 here. Drink! :)

  38. [38] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Don,

    She took money to fight candidates that take corporate PAC money saying it would NOT be given to candidates that take corporate PAC money

    Can you back this up with something official from either AOC or her PAC?

  39. [39] 
    Kick wrote:

    James T Canuck
    30

    You do, Mr. H you seem to care whether media bias exists, but only if it precludes all other issues in favor of your precious fixation, One Demand.

    I know, right!? It's a wonder he doesn't rename the precious as "One Ring."

  40. [40] 
    Kick wrote:

    James T Canuck
    30

    You do, Mr. H you seem to care whether media bias exists, but only if it precludes all other issues in favor of your precious fixation, One Demand.

    I know, right!? It's a wonder he doesn't rename the precious as "One Ring."

  41. [41] 
    Kick wrote:

    When I was four years old, I watched my mother kill a spider... with a tea cozy. Years later, I realized it was not a spider, it was my Uncle Harold. :)

  42. [42] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    New column up!

  43. [43] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    meh, i preferred the beatles.

  44. [44] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Meh, too. Heh.

Comments for this article are closed.