Today at 1.0 titled: Uncle Jimbo Apologizes, Banned User Lies.
Again we see a very common tactic of people who’ve been blocked from commenting at LGF — they go to other blogs and simply lie about the circumstances, to make themselves look better, and to make me look like some kind of arbitrary dictator/Hitler wannabe. I’m not going to let these lies stand.
I was Chucked Johnsoned after Charles Johnson made a few comments in a anti-Expelled Ben Stein thread insinuating that creationists and Radical Islam are in bed together. Never mind the fact that I don’t want to kill people that disagree me, but that nuance is lost over there.
So I left a comment saying that word of mouth in the blogsphere doesnt matter, but after that comment I could never promote or invite anyone to 1.0 ever again.
Now we have quite a few here that were banned and then smeared by Charles and of course Charles also blatantly lied about them on his site, to which they could not defend themselves.
So here you can have your say, why were you banned?
Don’t let the lies stand.
Tags: Charles Johnson, LGF, lgfsucks
This entry was posted
on Friday, March 6th, 2009 at 2:10 pm and is filed under Blogmocracy, Free Speech, LGF.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.
Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.
Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.
We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.
Play nice!
I asked Chuck if he believed in God. He said it was none of my business and banned me.
I was banned because I disagreed with the way Charles Johnson dismissed Kahane as a terrorist. I said repeatedly that I did not support Kahane, but I simply disagreed with the terrorist label. In reply, Charles libeled me (claimed I supported Kahane), and then banned me.
Previously, I had posted support for Geert Wilders, and showed how Charles Johnson was smearing the man. This engendered no love from Charles towards me.
LGF has devolved from what it was. Very sad.
If 1.0 is so concerned about banned posters lying about the reason behind their banning…..why doesn’t he allow them to defend their supposedly “false” statements, and in a forum where the “minions” can see the entire story?
Instead he hides on LGF, where he maintains all the power, and is surrounded by sycophants to bring up and “expose” these so-called liars.
As usual, LGF 2.0: The Blogmocracy extends OUR forum for Charles Johnson to show all of our posters who were banned from LGF why they are nothing but “liars”.
Buddy G wrote
“I asked Chuck if he believed in God. He said it was none of my business and banned me.”
Wow! Thats harsh.
Quella
Ah……the falsely slandered Meir Kahane. We actually had an post here at The Blogmocracy, regarding Meir Kahane after I noticed what was being done to you. (http://www.littlegreenfootballs2.com/2009/02/18/meir-kahane-who-was-he-really/)
There is so much one can say about who Kahane really was versus how he has been labeled by naive gossipers. However, the largest of all ironies is that if they actually took the time to read Kahane, 95% or more of 1.0’s readers would quickly see that they too were “Kahanists”.
So, I’m sure Mr. Johnson gave you a forum to defend yourself before outright banning then criticizing you on his blog right?….right?……..more like YEA RIGHT!…..
I left after he banned Lance for asking simply “Two in a day, eh”? when the creationist/evolutionist stuff first started almost a year ago.
I didn’t get banned until I told Chuck he’d lost his f’in mind last week.
It was either that or outing sharmuta for up-dinging herself with different nics. (which she probably still does, but at least she created socks that people don’t know are her now)
But I’m pretty sure it was the out of your f’in mind comment.
The truth is not a defense over there.
Jamuka, there were others who were banned for daring to ask Chuck if he believed in God. I wonder why he dislikes that question.
I dared to engage praying Mantis in why he was an atheist and I then told him why in my humble view he was wrong. In doing so I reminded him a couple of times that God made the heavens and the earth. That is all it took for CJ to blow a gasket. I was tali-banned.
Wright1faith- tali-banned! I love it, lol.
For the new citizens, and since we are on the subject, the following is my take after my banning, well that would be my 2nd and final banning:
_________________________________________
It was never my intention to comment about my banning, but after reading this thread I felt that I had to. First, I would very graciously like to thank everyone here that had something nice to say about me. I do not hold the hard feelings against Charles or LGF that many of you do (and I can’t say that I blame you all either) however. Despite my strong feelings that I was unfairly banned (as I didn’t violate any of the standing rules), I should have known where that conversation was going to end up.
First, I highly recommend for all of you who are interested, that you actually go over to LGF and read the entire thread. If for nothing else, to ensure that you get the full picture, and all the facts. (whether they work for me, or against me)
Second, insofar that this is probably my only available venue to stress my position on this matter (and hopefully finally put it to rest…although I am probably just asking for further ridicule from those on LGF) I just wish to make a few comments about the situation.
(A) I have never denied Charles’ right to ban whomever he wants from his site. Accordingly, I do not protest my banning, nor harbor any angry feelings towards Charles, or LGF. I still, and have always said (as we have all heard) that it is his site and he can run it however he would like. That being said, it doesn’t also mean that everything he does there is automatically moral, right, fair, or even kind. Of course, he doesn’t have to be, but he and those there and elsewhere shouldn’t pretend that they are just because “it is his right”. Accordingly, I fully stand behind every statement I made on that thread. It should be pointed out that none of them could prove any of my claims incorrect. In fact, my claims that there is “groupthink”, and that Charles wields an immense amount of power to lead the “lizardoids” was only further proven by their actions of dinging me down, and criticizing me “personally” with such fervor AFTER Charles criticized and banned me. I don’t hate the “lizardoids” for their actions, nor Charles, but facts are facts.
(B) I find it ironic that I claimed that I was having my words purposefully spun so that they could be used to get me banned, and quickly thereafter….I was banned. The fact that many whom were banned from LGF share a very similar story to mine also adds interest to the entire situation.
(C) It was claimed after I was banned that I was banned because I “made it all about me”, and “hijacked the thread”. This is ridiculously untrue. When you go over that thread, you will notice that for the most part I was quiet, until Killgore (whom I still like) stated that the absence of objections to the Anti-ID argument on LGF was proof that the “Evolution” argument was true. At that point, I decided to opine that there might have been another reason for the silence. (that those who did object were humiliated, criticized, ganged up on, etc.) It was at this point that Sharmuta contacted ME. I only responded to her/his comment. From there others contacted ME. As is the standard practice of LGF (and most blogs for that matter), I responded to those who “replied” to me. I never reached out to them to “pick fights”, “be rude”, or “hijack the thread”, I simply responded when THEY contacted ME. If that is reason for being banned, then we might as well shut down all blogs immediately!
(D) I do not believe that I was ever “rude”. It really just isn’t my style (or at least hasn’t been for a while). The only time I would ever get a bit testy would be on Israel threads. I take that topic very (maybe a little too much) seriously! The claims that I was “rude” to pro-Evolution advocates on LGF is just simply wrong. Go read my posts, they speak for themselves (if they are still on LGF). Truly, I would only respond to the vicious attitude, and group attacks on those who didn’t buy into the Evolution theory, and point out that those who were advocating the Pro-Evolution position on LGF did so with the open-mindedness of an Islamist Imam. I did, do, and still believe that either of the competing theories COULD be correct. I really do not know! What I do know however is that treating those whom you disagree with on this topic with the type of vitriol that I saw occurring on LGF is not kind, moral, or necessary. Such infighting used to be cause for banning. I only asked for honesty from both sides about what their grudge was, and that they both admit that neither side could really be “so sure”!
(E) On the topic of “honesty about what their grudge was”, I highly suggest (if it is still there) Charles’ comments to me about why he continued to post Anti-Creationist threads. In short, he stated that he believed that Creationism was a 19th Century, uneducated belief, that is ok for idiot religious people to teach their kids at home, but that type of stupidity shouldn’t be taught in schools.” (I encourage you all to find the actual quote however, as I wouldn’t want to misquote anyone) This again only proves my point that his comments that “it is only about teaching it in science classes” mantra (which he used to swear by) was truly just a “wedge strategy” to attack Creationism in general. It seems obvious that his grudge was not with ID activists pushing it into schools, or it being taught as science but actually against the concept of believing in Creation as it is “nothing more than 19th Century, anti-intellectual” idiocy. If that is his belief, then fine; I only requested, expected honestly about it.
(F) It is incorrectly claimed on that thread that I was banned the 1st time for the same reason I was banned this time (presumably “picking fights”, “hijacking threads”, and “making it all about me”). This just isn’t true. I was banned the 1st time because Charles misunderstood a post I made about his ability to do what he wishes with his blog. People were complaining that he had set up a system of “monitor lizards” and how this was unfair, mean…whatever. I posted something to the effect of “no matter what lame-ass rules Charles makes, its his blog, so deal.” In haste, Charles completely misunderstood the post and took this comment to be attacking his rules, and without giving me a chance to explain; I was banned! After contacting Charles in private and showing that he misunderstood my post, I was reinstated. He thereafter on the next open thread (IIRC) made some false comment about how I got back in by begging, pleading, and kissing butt. I showed the proper amount of respect I held for him and his blog, but I surely didn’t beg, plead, or kiss butt.
(G) Lastly, for now (no Charles, that is not “a threat”), I understand why I was banned. It came down to a business call. As an owner of a blog, Charles presumably feels that he must ensure that those on his blog find it to be a utopian environment that echos their beliefs. Sure, you can disagree, but don’t get carried away. My comments on my final thread went too far. Instead of just debating the issue, I dared to shine a light on the environment that existed on LGF, and the character of many of its posters. Understandably, bad mouthing the company to the clients would worry the Owner. If the majority of posters, or readers were led to share a belief that LGF was all of the things I was exposing it to be, they would no longer frequent the site, and he would be out of a business. To me, this makes complete sense. I do not believe that anything I said was untrue, but I picked an incorrect venue to express those beliefs. This left Charles with two options: (1) He could have written me an email to my account (which I know he has) and informed me of what I was unwittingly doing, and I would have immediately stopped, or (2) he could ban me! We are aware of the choice he made.
If I had a blog, I wouldn’t guard it so closely, and I surely wouldn’t be so thin skinned. But it is Charles’ blog, he comes to it with his own personality, and prejudices, and accordingly he can run it however he would like. I truly wish him nothing but luck with his endeavor, and I hope he finds (or continues to have) happiness and peace.
Hopefully this post clears up any misunderstandings anyone reading it might have had.
WrathofG-d
________________________________________
You can read LGF2’s take on it at the time here: http://www.littlegreenfootballs2.com/2008/12/19/wrathofg-d-banned-from-lgf-because-of-fight-with-sharmuta/
I was banned because I told Charles that he was dead wrong when he said McCain chose Sarah Palin because she was a creationist. I told him McCain chose her because she was a woman.
The notion that she might have attracted former Hillary supporters was, I guess, beyond his grasp.
Wrath
Well said, the way you acted at 1.0 during both banning’s and with the mischaracterizations by Charles and the other lizards really inspired me to try and rise above it and not fall into it.
I still struggle with trying to rise above it, but the good news is,
I have lots of room for improvement.
Thank you for living it and not just saying it.
Bar
Wow, friend…that is huge. That really means a lot to me. Seriously!
I struggle every moment as well.
I used to be a regular at a forum and after a while the forum sufered the same fate. The moderators ganged up with a few ‘liberal’ posters and started banning those who didn’t toe the party line. I did complain to but it fell on deaf ears. After a while it became a club of like minded folks, with no difference in thoughts.
I see the same eeeire pattern repeating itself at Charles weblog and once again, you have the bootlickers with the owners growing ego. And i notice it’s always those on the left that are prone to such behaviour.
Ironically religious folks have greater tolerance then these ‘progressives’, in my experience anyway. I shudder to think what would happen if these maniacs had control of the goverment and start to run the show as they see fit. I think that is when you will see armed revolt.
This is why I absolutely detest liberals and their global warming/evolution/anti war…agenda. These are very, very intolerant people and luckily these loons are still a minority.
Thank God for the religious right in keeping things balanced. Compare the US to the UK. One is religious while the other isn’t. Guess who has more freedom and who hasn’t. Ironic isn’t it.
LGF 1.0 should rename itself Little Green Monkeys.
Wrath
You are very welcome.
It would be foolish of me to think I am somehow immune to the same traps and temptation that have befallen Charles. So its best to be on guard and have reflection upon my own actions.
Otherwise I am only saying it and not living it.
I guess there is a good side to being a idiot 19th century creationist.
Wrath
A very balanced, objective, thoughtful account — wish everyone, including me, could analyze themselves and their actions that well and that honestly — you set a high standard, and we all need to see people who can do that.
I stopped spending much time at LGF1 because, frankly, I found the constant writings on the conflicts between science and religion infinitely boring and there are way more important ideas to deal with in today’s world.
However, I was and still am a bit haunted when I think about the change in Charles, and it seems most everyone agrees that he did change. I have heard a possible explanation, but I don’t know if it’s true. It always disturbs me when someone changes so radically — it seems there is something that caused it that must be a very hard burden to bear — and I feel quite saddened when something happens that affects a person so much.
I got banned for “backstabbing”
Child of Mary,
Reading your reference to Jonah Goldberg’s book on another thread made me wonder whether you’d read Alinsky’s “Rules” books when they came out, so I chased you over here to ask.
I was banned for pimping for fascists (read: supporting the Vlaams Belang).
I was banned for agreeing with another lizard who stated that he was removing his bookmarks for 1.0 due to the change in direction on that blog. My final post was: “I couldn’t agree more”. I see that Charles “get off my website” Johnson does not handle criticism well.
Oh well, there is really nothing to go back there for anyhow, just the usual ID conspiracy threads and that stupid pissing match CJ has with Geller.
Boring and irrelevant stuff IMHO.
ChildOfMary
Song & Dance Man has mentioned that Charles was not always so active in posting comments.
It was not until he became proactive that this stuff started. I am very incline to agree, Charles was self described as center-left, until 9/11 then he became more conservative or his site just attracted the conservatives.
An LGF member named DanG and Zombie both made comments that religious conservatives should get out of the way, then more liberal types would feel welcome in the group.
DanG made a comment that stated something to the effect of, “after 9/11 we put up with religious people because we were in a fight, but now its time to stop and not put up with their crap anymore.” I cant find the exact quote, but that is close.
Charles gave him an up ding on that bigoted comment.
Bar,
So you are saying that Charles was willing to side with people he might not completely agree with for the sake of a larger goal, and affiliating with those people doesn’t necessarily mean you agree with everything they say?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm, where have I heard the concept before?…..
I was not banned. In fact, I probably still have an account there (under my LGF user name, different than here). But I sympathize with many who were banned, because I witnessed first-hand the circumstances under which many others were given the boot.
I abandoned participating in the site because I disagreed with the very tenous footings one had to walk upon if one wanted to retain posting privileges. As I began witnessing how a great many posters were banned simply for their stances in opposition to the dominant ones proffered by CJ and his reliable crew of sycophantic followers (and which they couldn’t intellectually rebut), I realized the boards were not my cup of tea, interaction-wise. Marching lock-step isn’t in my nature.
Whereas there are many positions on which CJ and I would probably agree personally and ideologically, my growing disappointment with his site was not that he posted controversial topics or maintained controversial views among many of the regular posters. It was that more and more I observed that TRUE discussion and debate on those threads was rarely entertained — it only amounted to brief, contentious argumentation, followed by the (predictable) bellows of “Troll!” at the “offending” parties taking an alternate view than the majority, and the quickness with which the banning stick was employed on said offending parties if they proved admant and intellectually viable. (For those who were simply contrarian asswipes, I have no such sympathy.) The boards there are primarily an excuse for sympatico cheer-leading about the given thread topic, followed by descent into trivial, banal, personal yack. Debate? Please — attempt an intelligent questioning of Dear Leader’s stances on any topic and see what an attempt to debate will get you. Take issue with one of his posted opinions? Kiss your privileges goodbye. I find that atmosphere not inviting or educational in the least. If you’re not going to allow dissenters to voice their opinions (Hello D-Kos), what’s the point of maintaining a commentary blog in the first place — simply to garner as much like-minded followers as possible, telling you how awesome you are for placating their commonalities? If that’s what CJ envisions, then he’s welcome to it — I won’t be along for the ride, boosting his (self-inflated) ego.
Most egregious to me, however, is that recently Johnson seemingly has NAZI’s on the brain, finding them under every bed, resorting to the most tenuous guilt-by-association tactics by labeling as “Fascist” or “NAZI” practically anyone who happens to not be a political moderate such as himself. Apparently he’s convinced hook, line and sinker by the age-old, stand-by designation of “Fascist” as a right-wing ideology — it is not. He’d do well to educate himself in that area.
Besides, on a lesser level I simply got tired of seeing thread-after-thread pertaining to some tech esoterica which in the end was merely an excuse for CJ to tout his computer “expertise.” While most personal blogs do contain (to one degree or another) a certain element of “Hey, dig ME!” I’m not impressed by someone who seemingly revels in patting himself on the back about what latest nifty compu-gizmo and design gimmick he’s mastered.
Bayonet
Yes, he rode the backs of conservatives until he no longer saw any need or benefit from them.
Bar,
Isn’t that exactly what he hates/accuses Vlames Belang, Atlast, Robert etc., for doing?
Interesting LGF banning case history here:
http://infinitemonkeyatthekeyboard.blogspot.com/2009/03/wwwlittlegreenstfutballscom.html
I wasn’t banned. I quit.
I quit because I got sick of posters like Kilgore, Sharmuta and Salmantis bulling others and shouting down any disagreement. I got sick of A.Von Hilten’s Jew hate, and medaura’s Serb/Spencer hate. I got sick of the endless creation threads, and Zombie asking that religious people be kicked out of the conservative movement so because they were so embarrassing.
Most of all, I got sick of Charles siding with the meduara/kilgores/Sharmutas. He kept them, while posters like Mama Winger, Storagemanager, Babbazee and were driven out, or banned.
I’m not sure why I was banned, because I was given absolutely no warning Johnson was even considering banning me.
I have wondered if maybe I was banned by one of Johnson’s moderators, rather than by he himself.
Some months ago, Johnson gave moderator powers to some of his trusted minions there, and it has crossed my mind that one of them banned me, and not Johnson.
I hardly ever posted to Johnson’s blog. When I did do so, I was polite.
I was raised to be polite, which is one reason I behaved myself at his blog when I did bother to post.
Another reason I was careful when I posted at the original LGF (”LGF 1″) is that I realized Johnson is very insecure and will ban people if he feels threatened; he will ban people over emotional reasons. (This means I was careful not to be rude or insulting when posting there.)
When Johnson began making blog entry after blog entry about Evolution/ Intelligent Design / Creationism, I periodically entered into such threads to leave links to sites that demonstrate the flaws with macro-evolution itself and the flaws in the assumptions of those who believe in it.
One day at LGF 1, I placed about two or three anti-macro-evolution links into one post in one thread, and then, shortly thereafter, when a thread about evolution/I.D. appeared right on top of that one, I pasted those same links into that thread.
When I returned later to LGF 1 to post, I discovered that my account was blocked.
I was not given any prior warning that I was going to be banned, and Johnson never explained why I was bannned.
I can only assume that I was banned for placing links against Evolution in an Evolution thread at Johnson’s blog.
Also, while all that was going on, I never went to other blogs, forums, and sites to complain about Johnson.
At no time did I tell Johnson what content he should or should not be posting to his blog, though personally, I thought he was doing way too many blog entries about evolution/ I.D./ Creationism, and I was getting bored by it (but again, I *never* stated that view at his blog).
It is sad that some can only see as far as their own understanding, and what their false prophets can prove.
That type of thinking would have made gravity, germs, jet propulsion, and every other scientific discovery impossible, as none of them were provable until they were.
Funketeer
for CJ to tout his computer “expertise.”
I am not a computer expert, but I have been using computers since the mid 80’s which was before hard-drives, we had drive “A” and drive “B” both 5.25″ floppy drives which held a total of
1.2 MB if you had a double sided double density disk.
From my interactions with Charles maybe he can program OK, but he doesn’t know jack about how they really work. And he always explains that anti-science creationists shouldn’t be using them, because they are anti-science.
Like computer science really has anything to do with evolution.
I am sorry, but that guy is a lot dumber then I ever gave him credit for.
Bar—- That is beautiful portrait you put up, but really, shouldn’t we leave Chuck’s wife out of this?
Or—or maybe—or—could it be Chuck himself? :O
Funketeer— Well said!
Hagar –
No, haven’t read Alinsky yet — just portions that others commented on here and there. Should put it on my wish list — I think it’s available online???
Hagar said,
Wow. I hardly even know what to say.
I myself am a Creationist and a social conservative (Johnson hates both those groups), but Johnson is very misinformed if he thinks someone like me would choose or reject a candidate based upon his or her views on Creationism/ Evolution.
When choosing a candidate, I tend to look at the person’s stances on the War on Terror, abortion, legalization of homosexual marriage, and does the candidate believe in limiting the size of government – that sort of stuff.
(It wouldn’t even cross my mind to factor in whether that candidate was a Creationist, Evolutionist, or Intelligent Designer.)
Johnson has a very warped, narrow, incorrect understanding of social conservatives and Creationists if he thinks we’d be drawn to a candidate for merely choosing a Creationist as a running mate.
I think Johnson is confusing his own obsession about Creationism with how Creationists themselves vote, think, and approach issues.
This says more about Johnson than it does about Creationists.
bar –
I don’t know, I just think something dramatic had to have happened to bring about such a change — I’ve seen that with a handful of others in my lifetime, old enough for senior discounts after all — usually it’s something quite dramatic, some life event — I could be wrong, there is just an unease in my heart about the whole situation. But then, I’m a little strange sometimes.
Anastasia
That made me spit beer, LOL.
Thank you!
The picture is the Mono Lizard.
ChildOfMary
You could very well be right, some rumors about cancer and a family member have floated around.
I still haven’t checked to see if I actually have been banned yet.
I’d rather not give CJ the pleasure of seeing my attempt in his logs.
bar said,
Johnson has actually conveyed that opinion??
I don’t understand how someone such as Johnson (who pretends to be so sensitive about racism and prejudice) will none-the less himself cling to -and perpetuate- such bigotry and prejudice against Christians and social conservatives.
There is no difference between smearing anti-Macro-Evolutionist Christians as allegedly being “anti science” uneducated yokels, as it is to dredge up old stereotypes of black people as eating watermelon, fried chicken, and being lazy.
Johnson is doing the very thing he claims to be against…
Johnson holds to and propagates a set of bigoted stereotypes against Christians and social conservatives.
Money quote about Charles from Funketeer’s link to “infinitemonkeys” above:
“He has a nasty habit of seeing mail that he hates and thinking that that is the definition of hate mail.”
(A fine and fair criticism of LGF at that link, BTW. If what that blogger says is true about CJ and the Popular Kids outing his real name, etc….well, that’s truly sad.)
Quote: “Two in a day, eh?”
CloudyDay
He has said that creationists should not use computers since we are anti-science and all.
I thought, what kind of stupid argument is that?
Now I say he (Charles) doesn’t understand how computers work because of an argument me and Killgore had in a spinoff link. Killgore provided a link to some pro-evolution site that claimed some guy has written a computer program that proves evolution to be true. It has something to do with “random numbers”. I explained that link doesn’t prove anything because computers only do what you program them to do, and nothing else.
Computers do not have the ability to create “true random numbers”, pseudo-random numbers they can do, but not “true random numbers”, so these “scientists” are just blowing smoke up your ass.
Charles down dinged each and every reply I had for the Trout and of course up dinged all of his nonsense arguments. So I can only conclude that Charles is completely clueless on how computers really work.
As I think anyone can guess, I was banned because I questioned darwinist rage boy’s (Chuck’s) views on what he thinks ID is.
He first made the mistake of saying that the academic freedom bills are “creationist bills”. Then he made the mistake of saying that medicine needs evolution. I showed to him the statistic that shows that the majority of american doctors don’t believe in thr atheistic version of evolution taught in schools. If evolution is so important for mdicine, how come the majority don’t believe in the unguided notion of evolution?
I got back with another nick, and after he had showed some intricate biological machine, I said something like this:
“Amazing how this design, ingenuity, sophisication came into existence by itself, right….? Right..?”
I made one or more coments stressing on the idiocy of thinking that complex specified machines come into existence by themselves,and then I was banned.
That, I think, was around the same time I made lgfonevolution.blogspot.com
bar-
It is quite funny that someone who would make that comment, who thinks of himself as being more intelligent and educated than Creationists, doesn’t understand computers himself.
The aspect that drew my fascination the most, though, is that here Johnson is creating and spreading a false stereotype, a bigoted view of an entire group of people (Christian Creationists), who would no doubt turn around the next minute and scream it’s wrong to be prejudiced against Muslims (the Koran should not be banned as hate literature, the deportation of Muslims = mass murder, etc.).
Why would someone who claims to be against prejudice against one group of people (Muslims) be so comfortable being prejudiced against another group (Creationist Christians)?
Mats,
Don’t know if he’s changed or not, but before I was banned from LGF 1, Johnson was confusing the terms and concepts “Intelligent Design” and “Creationism.”
Johnson, at least at one time, did not realize that Creationism and Intelligent Design are NOT the same thing.
I don’t know if Johnson was honestly ignorant of that information, or if he thinks by lumping the two together he’s doing a wonderful job of smearing what both groups really believe.
CLoudy,
Because darwinist rage boy doesn’t want to people to know the truth?
If he qualifies ID properly,and creationism properly, it gets harder to defende evolutionism.
In DRB’s (darwinist rage boy’s) view, the reason why people are banned ranges from being a neo-nazi to being a creationist who voices his opinion.
Chuck’s is less free than atheistic minded blogs like Panda’s Thumb, or PZ Myers’ blog.
Heh.
You were not the first or the last to be booted for asking straight up just what Mr. Johnson believes.
He still hasn’t answered the question yet has he?
You will not find my challenge of the 1.0 blogtator because he has deleted. hidden to all but himself my few posts over thar.
I cannot understand why evolutionists get so angry if you’re skeptical or don’t believe in evolution being a fact? Why? I find this behaviour puzzling.
CloudyDay
If you noticed he has wrapped it around the separation of church and state issue, so he can justify his bigotry as pro-American.
There are many pro-evolutionary web sites that claim ID is just creationism rewrapped, so I think Chuck is just repeating that same mantra.
And from some Atheist I have come across like Killgore, they just seem to have a deep hatred against Christians and Jews, we are not cool in today’s PC world, while every other religion is cool and only Christians are open to ridicule.
He is really a main stream lefty, nothing more.
CChuck (and the guys from Cox and Forkun) really think that american secularism can defeat the islamic threat. Those guys can’t just read the news that suface from secular europe.
I think it’s hard to tell whether CJ is deliberately confusing terms for smear purposes or has just become so fanatical about all this that he simply CAN’T think straight. I’m inclined to believe it is mostly the latter.
I distinctly remember one thread where Mandy Manners said something about Bobby Jindal being a “Young Earth Creationist.” The poster named Wolfie replied that that was unlikely since he was a practicing Catholic. Charles jumped in immediately to “correct” Wolfie by giving links to the Louisiana Academic Freedom Bill.
I was waiting for Wolfie to come back and say, “Hey. That’s irrelevant. We were debating what Jindal’s personal views are. Signing the AF Bill—-(which, BTW, explicitly rejects teaching YEC!)—-is not the issue.”
But Wolfie didn’t answer him. Just dropped it.
It really hit me that, on this subject at least, CJ could no longer grasp categories or make distinctions. IOW, this is not a reasoned opinion passionately held, but a pathological obsession.
Anyway, Granny always told me you should never attribute to malice what can be chalked up to stupidity!
This was the comment that brought about my eventual demise that offended the 1.0 standard.
After that I questioned Charles to admit or not his belief in God. He could not answer, so he chose to block me. He now has few that are willing to challenge him.
What a shame the premier fact check your ass site has now become, ‘Is my ass OK with you?, site?
Mats— Indeed. It is precisely the most secular groups in the West that are the most eager to appease Islamofascism in all its forms.
Chuck et al are indulging in pure fantasy.
“What a shame the premier fact check your ass site has now become, ‘Is my ass OK with you?,’ site?”
Good one, Song. And yes, it’s too bad.
Does anyone here know what the wikio ratings measure? LGF is really in the sewer, but I don’t know what all this wikio stuff means.
Funny, Charles started his anti-creationist jihad after Ben Stein released his movie.
Note.that.fact.
Was his prejudice waiting in the wanton wings for an opportune moment where he would come out of his clandestine closet?
For asking why a comment was deleted.
My own banning from LGF was not such a big deal. I was a long time reader from about 2004 but never posted, so there was no need to disparage me after my banning.
Matter of fact I am very thankful for it now.
But what really got to me was the treatment of Song & Dance Man and all the vitriol that followed, and then Charles purposely mischaracterizing everything S&D Man said was more than I could bear.
And then add to that the way Mama Winger was banned for defending “LGF” the first time and then for defending S&D Man the second, the gloves came off its fighting time.
And the Robert Spencer.
3 strikes and you are out
bar
Charles cherry picked ONE comment that I posted and used it to persuade those who would listen that I was off my rocker.
He is a such a schlamiel.
that is soo cool
Did anyone notice I edited that before it was posted?
S&D Man
I had read many of your comments and could easily tell what type of person you are.
You were one of the, if not the most popular guy at 1.0 when I was reading.
And besides the many conversations we have had since then, there is no way in hell you are some kind of “freak” or bad guy. That is just beyond stupid.
I still cant believe Charles did that and then cherry picked that comment from here and spun it into complete stupidity. But that is how Charles trolls.
I don’t recall who said it, but a while back someone made the comment at LGF saying
“is it possible to be a troll on your own web site.”
Yes it is.
I’m mot following who said what, and what this has to do with Uncle Jimbo.
Is the first paragraph from CJ?
When, where, and why did Uncle Jimbo apologize, and to whom?
If this has to do with a thread AtS, please explain, as I don’t go there, and haven’t in a very long time. Even when someone tries to sneak a hyperlink(Gateway Pundit, I’m looking at you) by 1.0, good ol’firefox shows the url in the tray, before I click on it, and never click on a snot-ball hyperlink.
Sorry N2L, I only included the title incase someone wanted to fact check my ass.
Yes that paragraph is from CJ.
Uncle Jimbo at Aces of Spades had made disparaging remarks about LGF which was about a Zombie thread about Islamic signs on busses in San Fran.
So he (Jimbo) apologized and claimed he was hasty in making his post, but a poster at his site by the name of “Angry White Dude” also said stuff about LGF because he was banned and all.
Is that the same Uncle Jimbo that is at B5?
Seldom get to Ace of Spades.
N2L
That I do not know, I don’t get out much.
What the?
LGF Cookbook
n2l
Ace of Spades has been chucked a johnson.
Chen
Yes it’s true. A select few 1.0′ers have developed a cookbook.
It ain’t no dictionary, I can tell you. They’re still trying to get it right.
ChenZhen
So are you saying you missed my first post on the LGF cookbook?
Does anybody even read this site?
/
Please, call me n2l.
The other is another way of expressing Fnet = m * a.
You should check out Uncle Jimbo’s videos at youtube.
song_and_dance,
Now why doesn’t that surprise me.
I wonder if B5 has…yet?
n2l
I rarely listen to Rush anymore, but he did mention Atlas Shrugs today. I bet that toasted the the hides of the non-believers just for the drive by acknowledgment.
And BTW sadm is a good abrv.
Night y’all.
Going down slow.
sadm it is then.
I try not to miss Rush, but I often have interruptions. I always check his website when I get home.
That Pam was mentioned is awesome!
She does excellent work, and is tireless.
Interesting stuff, y’all!
When I first found out about it, 1.0 was a place where many varieties of opinion could be found. That was then, this is now.
I believe I prob’ly got on CJ’s radar screen when, in responding to a post from one of the resident atheists, I had the unmitigated gall to say that Hell is _not_ a place you’d want to spend eternity in.
There ensued one of those 1.0 pile-ons where a few lizards make very sure that _everyone_ knows how lame you are for believing the Bible is true.
Back to my blockulation: Time passed, the Vlaams Belang hoodey-hoo rose up, IDer/Creationist became another way of saying “ignorant, cousin marrying, snake-handling Christianist”, many long-term Lizards suddenly became Un-Lizards and (no matter what Lao Stinky said) professions of belief in God as HE says He is were becoming more and more intolerable.
Then Charles posted a story that ended with the line: “They’re lying for Jesus” and in the ensuing thread, he wrote about how the “hate mail” was pouring in, and quoted one of the e-mails he’d received. Seriously, it was poorly written, poorly phrased and kind of annoying – but hateful? Not.
I posted a comment saying that the people in the story he’d posted about were lying for themselves and that truth was very important to Jesus and He NEVER asked anyone to lie for Him.
Then I noted that, over the years, LGF had posted and commented and mocked those who label as “Hate” anything that disagreed with their POV. I also said that, while I found the e-mail to be poorly written and annoying, I didn’t see “hate”. I concluded the comment by asking, “did he get on your last raw nerve”?
The following morning, I hoped to get an answer to my questions. I looked at the comments after my post. Nothing.
That afternoon,I got home from work, and found my comment deleted and my account blocked.
=======================================
I sent the following to CJ:
You deleted my post and blocked my account.
What pulled your trigger __ the “J” word (heh) or questioning your redefiniton of “hate”?
Say “Hi” to the folks in your echo chamber.
TTFN
least (but you know that)
=======================================
[ side bar: This occured shortly after the comment rating (up-ding and down-ding) thingy was activated. I posted a comment addressed to Charles, that Hell wasn't a good place to end up. This comment was down-dinged by Sharmuta. In a post, I asked her why. She posted back, "Because you have the nerve to presume to lecture a person who went to a Catholic school about Hell." -- really, that's what she said. On a whim, I checked the official Roman Catholic position about Hell-it was _exactly_ what I told Charles. Heh, indeed. ]
LGF has become a Borg blog, “You will be assimilated or you will be banned”
I just noticed, Alex is missing.
Can one chuck johnson themself?
All I know is that I am glad to be outta there. You never knew where the trip wire was… I actually was tali-bannedthree times. I have to say by the third time, I was enjoying yanking their chains. What always killed me was the self absorbed, self importance some of his minions displayed including of course Das Commissar himself. It is as if they held the monopoly on truth and yet they were so often short of that particular commodity. So, I like the way this is shaping up. I am sure we will continue to get refugees unless Johnson begins to become more tolerant in order to retain his population of posters. Lastly, regarding the people who have posted here I remember most of you and I liked you over there and like you more now [here].
The angry post-ban email to CJ is clearly a waste of time.
wright1faith
Tali-banned 1.0 style
ha!
I’m using that from now on.
After my banning CJ posted in a thread to a question: what is a Darwinist?
CJ replied, “it’s a smear term created by creationist[s].
I sent an e-mail asking him if he was really that f**king stupid?
I never got a reply, but it was a rhetorical question.
ChildofMary,
“No, haven’t read Alinsky yet — just portions that others commented on here and there. Should put it on my wish list — I think it’s available online???”
You can get “Rules For Radicals” on Amazon. Haven’t checked on “Reveille For Radicals” but Rules is the key to understanding Alinsky and the extent to which Obama’s strategy follows his blueprint.
No2l
I always call you No2 as in Startrek. You can call me No1. tehe
Hagar
I agree, Obama’s strategy does follow the blueprint. Interesting to note is that even though he has achieved the Presidency he continues to work toward the liberal agenda he thinks will bring the upper class to their knees. He is doing this by continuing with the “Rules”. Unfortunately, though he may bring the upper class to their knees, he is bringing the rest of us down with them. It’s at a time like this that the middle class need to rise up and go to the Sal Alinsky school of business themselves.
bar
I don’t understand how anyone can perceive “Darwinism” to be a smear term. It is simply another word for “Macro- Evolution.”
Anytime I use the word “Darwinism” that is what I usually mean by it, at least. I do not use it as an insult, it’s just a descriptive term.
Darwinist? Words of whizdumb from CJ: “it’s a smear term created by creationist[sic]”
What the…? How the heck is “Darwinist” a “smear term?” He believes in neo-Darwinism, so…Oh never mind…
Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad.
CJ is nuts.
CloudyDay
Exactly, thanks for finding my misspelling by the way.
My contention was Darwin is a word and “ist” is a suffix, so which one of those did us
creation[ist] create as a smear term? The word itself or just the suffix?
The sad part is I am criticizing a guy on his use of English and I suck really bad at English.
I also thought is was a bit ironic because CJ used the word Creation[ist] and the word Darwin[ist] in the same sentence, yet claims the latter was a smear term, while the former is not. WTF?
CJ is not brightest bulb in the bunch.
Here’s another Mona Lizard on the net.
That would have been a better pic!
It looks a lot more lizard like.
Banned during a Glenn Beck thread for asking why it is wrong for people to stock up on guns&ammo. Also wondered if someone had sand in their ‘gina’ because of the reaction to this particular Glenn Beck show.
No big whoop. Replaced LGF1 with LGF2.
Welcome keyword, good to have you here.
Banned, not for a comment, but for using the rating system; I had the unmitigated gall to down ding CJ and his various lickspittles. Yeah, its a real bastion of free thought over there.
Bar said:
I’ve always considered myself and ID’er. I’m not sure how he did it, I just believe that he did.
The first couple of threads about this at 1.0 were downright eye opening. I saw people that I respected (zombie/killgore) telling us how they really feel. Zombie with her medieval comments and saying people like me needed to be kicked to the curb to bring in more liberal voters.
And I was told that ID meant creationist. How can they tell me what I believe?
Sharmuta started off defending believers. It took only 2 or 3 threads for her to flip her whole view to completely mirror Charles’. Crazy on a stick.
That was new, too. Before Killgore was firmly atheist, but respectful of other people. Or so I thought.
Suddenly it was ok to make fun of “god-breathers” or something like that. I can’t remember who used that term but I was stunned and when it was updinged I just shook my head.
Hagar–
Thanks, Reveille is also available on Amazon — put both on my list.
Currently reading “the 5000 Year Leap”, another Beck recommended book.
Victrola, I haven’t read the whole thread, but I know there were people banned for down-dinging anti-Robert Spencer comments.
Like you, no comments, just rating.
ChildofMary, I hope you’ve felt the hugs and prayers sent your way!
Yes, Arwyn, it was a real revelation for me, too, when people like Zobie and Killgore started letting us know how they really feel about us.
I lost a great deal of respect for Zombie, when she came out with that kick religious conservatives to the curb stuff, and, to this day, I ignore her website, and her pictures, whenever they pop up on a blog anywhere.
She wants to be loved and accepted by the same nutjobs she takes pictures of, while despising the very conservatives who support her.
I suspect Killgore was only respectful of “God breathers” because he thought it wouldn’t be cool to make fun of them on the site. LGF used to have a lot of Jewish posters—don’t know if it still does.
Like Zombie, I suspect he was just waiting for the opportunity to tell everybody his real opinions.
Song & Dance
THAT’S going in rotating quotes. LOL!
And I got sick of the meduara inspired “Hate Spencer!” campaign. I think Charles’ war against him has everything to do with his criticism of Albania, the supposedly ideal moderate Moslem state, and nothing to do with his supposed Nazi tendencies, which he really doesn’t have.
Arwyn, my impression is that a lot of atheists are extremely thin-skinned, and quick to take offense, or go into attack mode, if they think you’re dissing them. For whatever reason, they see all religious people as being out to get them, even when said religious folk have absolutely no interest in them.
If we ever do get a new inquisition, it’s going to run by aggressive, secular atheists, not Jews, Christians, Buddhists or what have you. Just take a look at Russia, and other officially atheist countries.
Yaza, exactly. The masks came off.
Arwyn: The first couple of threads about this at 1.0 were downright eye opening. I saw people that I respected (zombie/killgore) telling us how they really feel. Zombie with her medieval comments and saying people like me needed to be kicked to the curb to bring in more liberal voters.
me: I remember zombie saying that when Christians are trashed and discriminated against, they ought to ‘lay back and take it’. I guess she feels tha some people are ‘more free’ than others.
Yaza…. I’ve rarely met an atheist who, upon hearing of my religious beliefs, didn’t feel the need to make a snide remark or try to ‘educate me’ as to how it REALLY happened.
Lance, tell me about it! My in-laws are atheists, I get that all the time!
Yaza…. I don’t even know what the big deal is either… it isn’t like they’re saying “You have to be an atheist or you’ll burn in hell forever!” . . . if eternity doesn’t hinge on it, why the hell are they so insistant that I agree with them? At least the other religions have some sort of requirement to adhere to their system for eternal salvation…..
With the religion of atheism (oh, piss off your in-laws…. call atheism a religion… since it has all the requirements of a religion), there’s not only NO afterlife, but it doesn’t REALLY matter what we do here on earth.
so why can’t I believe in whatever I want?
Bar-
5.25″ floppies? I’ve got you beat. Timex Sinclair ZX-81, 2kb memory expandable to 64kb, casette tape to save data/programs
http://oldcomputers.net/zx81.html
Yaza,
While that was true of the Soviet Union, it isn’t with the Russian Federation.
Officially, Russia is an Orthodox Christian state, while unofficially, it is a KGB/FBS state. The current, and previous, patriarch of the Orthodox Church is KGB/FBS.
Here is an article from my favorite blog on Russia, La Russophobe.
My experience with most atheist I’ve met, is that they tend not to be comfortable in their own skins, and proselytize like the mohammedans.
Arwyn
That really opened my eyes also, it is not the difference of opinion that I didn’t like.
It was the open and purposeful disrespect of the religious types, which is a well known liberal trait.
And then I recalled a thread about Ted Kennedy and how Charles was deleting any post that was even remotely disrespectful. With all this talk about how conservatives are not asshat liberals so lets not act like them.
Only for them to turn right around and act like asshat liberals with regard to this, yet they justify it so they can all pretend they are not really as bad as the asshat liberals they detest.
They have become they very asshat liberals they detest, maybe because they actually think there are better then everyone else.
Chen–who’d you “backstab”? LOL…
Yeah, I ‘quit’ too, asked Charles to take me off because he banned Sphinx. I forget though why Sphinx was banned and need to ask him again.
I had my IP blocked for sending mail to Charles, and really don’t know why he bothered. He blocked half of a university at one point to block someone’s IP though….HAHAHA…he’s actually quite funny. So, what should I pshop him into again?
off with my head
Nice.
The computer my dad had before the IBM PC was a beast, with no monitor.
Just a printer, a typewriter thingy and a reel to reel tape drive and everything was stored on roll-tape, like film although it was paper and the program and data was just a bunch of holes in the tape.
Well, *I* was banned because I said that what was sauce for the goose was sauce for the gander: since we had endured 8 years of hopes for Bush’s assassination from the Left, why shouldn’t we on the Right be able to hope for the same thing regarding Obama?
I said that it was folly to adopt a gentlemanly demeanor regarding Obama and the Dems given the extraordinary viciousness and dishonesty of the Dems all this time. Let them feel the results of their behavior.
Unfortunately, while my IP was blocked, it seems that the block came unblocked. This saddens me.
I was banned because I said on 2.0 that I didn’t care if I got banned at 1.0. Obviously charles is an avid reader of 2.0.
The reason I didn’t and don’t care is because 1.0 has become completely irrelevant.
“Obviously charles is an avid reader of 2.0.”
Yeah, he probably falls asleep every night reading 2.0 on his Kindle. :p
Agree with most of the commenters here, 1.0 has become a place where, if your faith is in the “innate goodness of man” and Science (purposefully capitalized), you’ll probably get along just fine.
But if your faith is in God — and you will not be silent about it — you’ve gotta go NOW.
ps to Arwyn @ 9:37 AM:
I’d forgotten that Shar had made that flip. Living proof that if you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.
I don’t think he got it.
archonix,
When I looked at your link to 1.0, I also saw that CJ is back on his you’re an idiot if you question Obama’s birth certificate hobby horse.
The funny thing is that CJ posts a link to an official press release from the State of Hawaii that says, “yes we have his birth certificate in our vault”–but they don’t reveal the contents of of it. So, in other words, since the law in Hawaii in 1961 allowed anyone to walk in and register a birth there, the question has yet to be resolved. What a farce.
I was banned because when Charles was rude about one of my posts I wrote “Childish, Charles”. he felt the need to delete that comment too. He also deleted my next comment which was about how I didn’t believe in Intelligent Design “yet”.
Of course, deleting someone’s comment and then banning them only gives an impression that they “must have written some awful genocidal/hateful/racist thing” when in reality it is more likely that Charles doesn’t want to allow a post that may cause his followers to question his deity.
Charles Johnson is a sad, petty little man.
Lex-
The story of my demise, as artfully told by Gordon, here at LGF Banned and Blocked (I elaborated a bit in the comments). As you can see, I got my payback. Twice, as it turns out. In fact, I had so much fun that it was well worth being banned.
Walking on eggshells in a cult-like community just ain’t my bag, anyway.
I was banned for defending Ann Coulter from his ludicrous assertion that she defended white supremacists in her book.
Then, after I was banned and couldn’t respond, Sharmuta, Mandy, etc. accused me of aligning myself with the Klan, being a nazi apologist, and so on and so forth.
One thing about Charles that really pisses me off is the way he blocks links from sites he hates (Atlas and JihadWatch), blocks dissenters from even seeing his site, bans users who link to those dissenters and/or the sites he hates, then links to those sites himself, slanders the owner with ridiculous attacks, and then acts indignant when they try to respond.
He even fantasized about Steve Gilbert, the owner of Sweetness and Light, threatening him with a lawsuit once. This was after Gilbert totally debunked his Coulter claims, and despite the fact that Johnson cited Sweetness and Light as a credible source on over 15 separate occasions before: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=site%3Alittlegreenfootballs.com+%22sweetness%22+%22light%22&btnG=Search.
You know, for someone who’s ludicrously pro-censorship/pro-whitewashing, he’s really bad at covering his tracks. Stalin has nothing on this guy when it comes to whitewashing, and even he knew how to throw out contradictory records.
To use his own words on Gilbert, Charles “Rev. Jim” Jones-son is “a major nether orifice.”
I’m a Born Again Christian, no other reason needed, but I did indeed preach to that crowd that they needed to be saved or burn in hell, that’s not politically correct to do, oh and by the way I’d say most of you need to be born again too. Guess it got too fire and brimstone, there was some pagans there that wasn’t too happy, one of them with a leaning towards very young girls, he didn’t like knowing he was going to that dark place that burns.
Read and get saved:
http://biblebelievers.com/come_to_jesus.html
here’s a nice great one about the Jews:
Anti-Semetism – Past, Present and To Come
http://biblebelievers.com/misc_periodical_articles/mbi_001.html
I was banninated at LGF because I had the gall to question the sincerity of Charles’ faux-outrage when he claimed to believe that Pam G was REALLY calling for his public flogging.
Charles Johnson, on too many occasions to count, has proven himself a fraud, a liar, and a phony.
I’m most disappointed in myself for thinking (for far too long) that he was one of the good guys, when in fact he just another petty and narcissistic creep with the intellectual depth of a milk saucer.
Charles Johnson can now only surround himself with sycophants and ‘yes men’ who possess no will of their own and ultimately that will do more to expose his true lack of character than anything we could do.
Jimmy
No good can come from those who have your best interests as a means to use it against you.
least,
—–
Well, I’m not overly religious (I’m a former Catholic who cannot even claim cafeteria status) and even I, as a rational human being who understands History, can grasp when a religion is not a good thing for believers as well as those not of that ‘faith’. This equating Christianity with islam because of ‘fundamentalism’ is absurd. Now I’ve said it before, but when it comes to Christianity as a religion, us Catholics are sometimes looked down upon for not studying or reading the Bible enough, for having ceremony over content. And that’s true. Yet the Church has had a storied history (with many flaws), but the most important legacy being intellectual pursuits. The Church saved the written words of antiquity. They maintained the historical bridge which has kept us in touch with who we are, of where we come from. The Bible is just one source of that, an important one to Christians to be sure. But the fire at the Library of Alexandria destroyed much of the earliest recorded writings of us humans in our endeavors to understand our world — and our place in it. While Christianity did not come out of Rome, per se, it did come out of Roman culture, a culture of written records.
Sure, some Christians can be obnoxious, but if push comes to shove, I can make a value judgement as to what’s currently important. ID/Creationism just ain’t it. Besides, I think I understand the Church’s teaching that Darwinism and Creationism can go hand in hand. The Big Bang is nothing more than the creation of the universe. Religion applies another layer to the ‘out of nothing, the universe was created by this massive explosion . . .’ theory. There was a god of some sort before all that. I think the Church’s rationale about the concept of God is that God is not static, is not unchanging; just the differences in the Jewish relationship with a harsh and brutal Yahweh in the Old Testament to the kinder, gentler God of Christianity’s New Testament, bear this out. This helps explain evolution as being part of ‘God’s plan’. Along with character traits in species, there was intellectual development going on. But there were certain principles which when applied to one’s life made the world a better place: The 10 Commandments. The Golden Rule. Now those are basic things one can relate to and understand. (Funny how islam’s koran, as a supposed Abrahamic faith, does not contain the 10 Commandments.) Taking out the blaspheming bits, those commandments are what elevate us above animal status, from acting upon instinct to having rational thought, to the concepts of free will and personal responsibility for our actions. And since God’s eternal, time simply does not mean the same thing considering our short life-span. Seven days to Him would be unfathomable to us.
And I’ll add this: Now, any comment ratings system is a joke. More so at 1.0, where it has been used to ban people for downdinging, which is the ultimate in ridiculous bullsh*t. Comment ratings are lazy. You don’t like what I wrote, then write a reply listing your reasons for your disagreement with what I wrote. That’s internet debate. Down-dinging, anonymously or not, a comment does not refute the statement(s) made. Comment ratings funnel talking points into a number. I do not like talking points, and I care even less if an idea is positively popular or not, as a good idea remains a good idea, no matter how many others disagree. Comment ratings systems are for those who cannot elucidate their own opinions; such systems are group think run amok, happily monitor lizarded for your sychophantic reading pleasure.
PS – That ‘edit’ feature needs to be just a wee bit longer of a window. I made changes to the above with less than 10 seconds to spare. The PRESHUH!
Anastasia wrote
“What a shame the premier fact check your ass site has now become, ‘Is my ass OK with you?,’ site?”
LOL!!!!!! Thats hilarious!!!!!
I was banned during an Obama anti Christ conversation. lord Charles put his foot down and told us to knock it off. I replied “ok dad”. Gone………….Charles is a spineless little man.
128. Jamuka
Er..it was actually me that said it at #53
And thanks, glad you liked it. I was cracking up when I wrote it.
Cowardkerry
Welcome, and on behalf of the 2.0 nation I offer this laurel and hearty handshake.
OK SD man, credit goes to you and it IS hilarious. We should put it up somewhere.
Jamuka
According to Arwyn it will soon be in the sidebar quote thingy.
Cowardkerry,
Banning you for that comment I wouldn’t call ’spineless’, I’d call it extremely thin-skinned, as in transparent. 1.0 is not a font of humor or wit any more, from the top down through the monitor lizards to the sychophant minions. 1.0 turned into Huff-Po! And I can’t stand Huff-Po.
It’s like these certain web hosters have to get an army of posters commenting even just nonsense to somehow show their relevance so as to be some sort of Fellatio Media spokesperson with ‘a pulse on the blog world’. That’s the height of egotistical ridiculousness. (If that last one’s not a word, then I’ll take coinage credit.)
133. S&DM
It is. You should scroll through them one day. I think you have like 3.
#124- Jimmy the Clam— Yeah, you had “the gall” all right! The COURAGE and SELF-RESPECT is more like it. I will bet that a whole lot of other people on that thread wanted to say what you did, but were AFRAID to do it. What kind of discussion board is that, where you can’t even state the obvious if it conflicts with the master’s fantasies?
BTW, when my father was outraged by someone, he would often say “He oughta be shot at sunrise and chased out of town.” At age five I knew perfectly well that it was a figure of speech. (I will admit that it wasn’t until I was about 7 that I realized how funny it was to talk about chasing a dead man out of town!) CJ’s ego evidently prevents him from attaining the intelligence of a five year old.
#129- Cowardkerry
#134-Rick Z
It’s amazing how UNfunny that place gets whenever Chuckles is around. Sad.
#67- ChenZhen
What? You mean you haven’t bought one yet?!
Yes, the Popular Kids put together a cookbook that they are selling. As of about a week ago I think they had sold about 75 copies.
Then there’s the small Maronite church near where I live. Less than 50 members. They put together a cookbook too. Last time I checked they had sold over 400.
All snark aside, the cover of the LGF book was just wonderful. Drawn by jaunte. Any big fan of LGF would want the book for that cover alone. But alas, there aren’t many big fans anymore.
#126- RickZ
Some good insight on several things!
I don’t know exactly why I was banned. After being banned, I noticed that Charles announced he was banning people who voted down things that he liked and voted up things he didn’t like.
I voted down on his evolution threads, so I assume that’s why I got the boot. I though the whole reason he added the voting system was to get feedback from his audience. I guess it was a little more Orwellian than that.
A.C. Hall
Saddam Hussein getting 100% of Iraq’s vote is analogous.
1.0 is evolving…you know, survival of the fittest and all that.