Bricker the troll

The BBQ Pit
41

I have no persecution complex. I just find people like you amusing. I hang out here specifically because I know I’ll be ‘persecuted’, because it’s always good to test your ideas against your opponents instead of living in an echo chamber like you and most of the other people here do. You flit back and forth between the SDMB, Daily Kos, Think Progress, and the rest of the lefty blogosphere, where your every utterance is met with wild applause, and you flatter yourselves into thinking your vision is unblinkered, your perception of reality unbiased despite the fact that you never hear anything other than what your fellow travelers tell you.

My reputation, and other conservative/libertarian reputations on this board, hinge on how closely we manage to agree with you. Precisely because I try to be open minded, from time to time I’ll find myself agreeing with you or others over some issue. Then suddenly, it’s “welcome back, Sam! He’s not so bad after all!”. Then if I having an opposing opinion, suddenly the clucking tongues of disappointment appear, and I’m the worst, foulest liar on the planet when I don’t get a number exactly correct or cover every little nuance you believe to be pertinent.

In the meantime, half of you routinely issue whoppers so large my keyboard has jaw imprints in it. Whoppers which go totally unremarked unless one of the handful of righties still active on this board decides to mix it up again. You all are completely blind to your partisanship, your own skewing of the facts, and your own shocking lack of knowledge of any news or fact that doesn’t make its way into the lefty blogosphere.

To bring it around to the current subject, lets consider the reaction to the ACORN scandal on this board, and compare it to the immediate reaction to Abu Ghraib. When the Abu Ghraib story broke, this board was full of people who didn’t see it as just the actions of a few out of control soldiers, but were determined to smear the entire Bush administration and half the U.S. military with it. You all were absolutely sure that this stuff went all the way up the ladder to Rumsfeld and Bush, and that there needed to be deep investigations, special prosecutors, yada yada.

Then MULTIPLE ACORN offices are found to be apparently helping people defraud the government and hide child prostitution, and the instant response from the people in that thread, with a few exceptions, was utter disbelief, followed by denial that it happened, attempts to attack the messenger by deflecting the debate over whether laws were broken in recording what happened, and attempts to believe that everyone caught on tape knew it was a a gag and was just going along with the joke. And the remotest suggestion that perhaps the problems with ACORN went deeper than just a few isolated bad apples was met with ridicule.

In the meantime, ACORN has been charged with numerous other crimes having to do with voter registration fraud and other malfeasances, and all of this is ignored, or swept under the rug, or written off as no big deal whatsoever.

Most of you people are a joke, made funnier by the fact that you don’t even realize it. When I post here, I can quote the responses of half of you just by seeing your username. You’re as predictable as Pavlov’s dogs. If most of you ever had a thought that wasn’t jammed down your throat by Markos Moulitsas or Paul Krugman, you’d probably be frightened by it.

Jeez, I’m almost out of matches, and yet there’s still a bit of bridge left behind me…Uh, you, you, and you, and especially YOU also suck.

42

<bunch of crap omitted>

Well, at least you made Bricker seem reasonable.

Mission Accomplished!

43

Nevermind, that was someone else.

44

I actually came with my own examples and thoughts regarding the lack of character of Bush Jr., The dishonesty of the Swiftboaters, the lack of evidence regarding the right media saying that Plame was outed before at cocktail parties.

In all those cases I did go deeper than anything Moulitas or Krugman came up with.

By contrast your recent stupid arguments trying to justify the Honduran coup plotters came cut and pasted from right wing media sources. And you came to that thread trying to show grandma to suck eggs. (As a Salvadorean, I already know what it means to have military, politicians and jurists putting a patina of democracy even to fraudulent elections in Central America)

So stop projecting Sam, it is you who is in reality frightened by new ideas, even if those ideas are old in Canada. (UHC)

45

Cross threaded. Original in GD.

46

With all due respect, I am not going to go wading through 692 posts looking for the request for a cite that I missed reading the first time through. Please link the post here, and we’ll see what I can do.

Tomorrow.

47

WTF? folks on here with 15,000- upwards of 30,000 posts who have spent too much time polishing the jackboot of moderation are now devolving into the status that is just below “Internet badass”? This is fuckin funny. I’m poppin corn and stayin tuned.

48

Bricker is a conservative who interprets facts in the most positive way for his fellow conservatives.

Bricker is a lawyer who interprets facts in the most positive way for his clients.

Bricker can dance verbal circles around pretty much everyone here, and most of you get angry over what you think Bricker said, not what Bricker actually said.

Bricker suggests, Bricker implies, Bricker qualifies. Bricker has a streak of ruthless in him about his use of language, and sometimes I feel it is unfair that he argues like a lawyer in these forums, which are not courts of law and are not populated by scads of similarly trained people who can debate him on his own terms. And he does insist on his own terms.

I personally don’t like his politics, but I wouldn’t dream of calling him a troll. People, he’s a fuckin’ intellectual hired gun, he is a very dangerous guy to argue with.

I try to be fairly precise in my own language, save for the occasional fuck, and while I don’t have the formal training, I recognize it and respect it in Bricker.

And remember another thing about lawyers. Just because they can argue the finer points of an issue better than the rest of us, it doesn’t mean they are in the right or on the side of justice.

With Liberty For All, Amen.

49

Well all I can say is BRICKER’S wife is a lousy fuck and his daughter is twice as bad.I want my money back you loser twats! Fucking lice… GODDAMNIT!

50

Well said, Boyo Jim.

Claude Remains, you might want to look into the benefits of not posting drunk.

51

Fair enough. What’d be more fair, IMO, is an excoriation of the dishonest twits who are creating their PR problem in the first place.

I won’t contend that, because I lack sufficient information. It wouldn’t surprise me, however. ACORN works with a population that historically is more prone to running afoul of the law than the general population: poor urban folk. If they had more stringent hiring practices, they might be unable to fulfill their goals of empowering the people they want to empower.

As it stands, I’m unfamiliar with any cases–any cases–in which ACORN’s lax procedures have actually led to a real live problem. No cases in which a pimp has gotten tax advice. No cases in which a vote has been cast illegally with ACORN’s help.

Compare that to Fortune 500 companies with their record of legal foibles, and it looks pretty good.

52

I could have saved a lot of words if only I had thought of this sooner – “Just think of Bricker as Satan’s lawyer.”

53

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

54

I don’t understand the Bricker apologists any more than I understood the Collounsbury Sycophantic Choir. I think if you’re worried about ACORN committing voter fraud, you’re an imbecile. Or if you exploit latent white racism by trumpeting ACORN as Satan incarnate, you’re even worse.

55

And this is one of his major flaws. He DOESN’T say what he means. He spouts the right wing talking points, but does so in a way that gives him weasel room if he’s called on it. He’s quite good at waiting until 10 different people call him on a point, and then he finally gets around to making his backup point. Like the ACORN thing, he posts the talking point, and it takes pages of discussion and cites until he falls back on the crap about the “culture” at ACORN. He always tries to keep one last bastion of rationality, but he hides that point unless pushed by other posters.

Personally, I find it not just annoying, but also dishonest.

56

Now opening for Sam Stone’s Persecution Complex!

57

Since somebody asked, about 30% of the registrations ACORN gathered last year were invalid. (Some were dupes, some where fraudulent, some incomplete) 400,000 out of 1.3 Million. About 30% where change of address, and the final third were actually new registrations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/us/politics/24acorn.html?_r=1

58

It’s not about defense *of *ACORN, or *of *anybody else. It’s about defense *against *ignorance and smears. Let this work and that won’t end it, the shit will just get flung against the next target. What are you willing to tolerate before you join the fight? Or are you still chasing the elusive butterfly of civil bipartisanship?

Really? What lies, smears, and fantasization have you seen him participate in that compare?

You’re acting just like a Democrat. Of the traditional, losing kind. Smarten up, willya?
As for Bricker, I’ve been trying to tell all of you for years. He doesn’t support principle or thought the way so many of you keep insisting, it’s only rationalization of the current RNC (and sometimes RCC) talking points. He’s merely a self-appointed pro bono advocate for a couple of clients who don’t even pay him for it, just like the trial lawyer he has never stopped being.

But core beliefs? True principles? Bah. Nothing there. This is a guy who doesn’t even believe there’s such a thing as justice. That’s how he could tell us Alberto Gonzales would have been a great choice for the Supreme Court.

59

“Invalid” is not the same thing as fraudulent, and so fucking what? Very few were actually fradulent, and no invalidated form is ACORN’s fault in any case.

60

I don’t think it’s Internet trolling, although I do think it is “concern trolling”, regardless of how much that phenomenon has to do with classic Internet trolling.

It is a suggestion that liberals undertake self-defeating actions, under the premise that it would increase their respectability and votes.

I would bet that if Glenn Beck denies the vicous rumors that are swirling around him he would only further smear his name. Same thing with regard to the liberals taking accusations about ACORN (and, indeed, any sort of formal connection between the Democrats and ACORN) seriously.