Archive for January 28th, 2010
HillBuzz on the Andrea Shae King Show: Live Thread
Use this thread to comment on our appearance on the Andrea King Show, beginning at 900pm EST/8pm CST.
Here’s the link to listen in: Andrea Shae King Show
HillBuzz on Breitbart-TV
Scott and Liz are McAwesome!
Tonight around 11pm CST, Breitbart TV will have a reposting of The B-Cast appearance Kevin made, talking about the attacks the Left has launched on him.
As soon as that’s live, we’ll have a link up here.
Many thanks to all who listened, and those of you who joined the live chat on B-Cast.
Scott and Liz were terrific hosts, and we look forward to doing the show more in the future, if you think it’s a good idea.
If you listened to the program, what did you think?
What did the people in the live chat respond to and comment on?
Feedback really helps, as we’re on the air later tonight with The Andrea Shea King Radio Patriot show, and would love to have more tips for you for this next appearance.
************
Here’s the link to the Breitbart interview: we don’t know how to embed the video here, and don’t see it on YouTube, so you have to go to BreitbartTV to watch the video.
Please support BreitbartTV. Scott and Liz are so nice, and their show is great.
BOOM! Taste her nightstick
While I don’t wish to speak too harshly about President Obama’s state of the union address, we live in challenging times that call for candor. I call them as I see them, and I hope my frank assessment will be taken as an honest effort to move this conversation forward.
Last night, the president spoke of the “credibility gap” between the public’s expectations of their leaders and what those leaders actually deliver. “Credibility gap” is a good way to describe the chasm between rhetoric and reality in the president’s address. The contradictions seemed endless.
He called for Democrats and Republicans to “work through our differences,” but last year he dismissed any notion of bipartisanship when he smugly told Republicans, “I won.”
He talked like a Washington “outsider,” but he runs Washington! He’s had everything any president could ask for – an overwhelming majority in Congress and a fawning press corps that feels tingles every time he speaks. There was nothing preventing him from pursuing “common sense” solutions all along. He didn’t pursue them because they weren’t his priorities, and he spent his speech blaming Republicans for the problems caused by his own policies.
He dared us to “let him know” if we have a better health care plan, but he refused to allow Republicans in on the negotiations or consider any ideas for real free market and patient-centered reforms. We’ve been “letting him know” our ideas for months from the town halls to the tea parties, but he isn’t interested in listening. Instead he keeps making the nonsensical claim that his massive trillion-dollar health care bill won’t increase the deficit.
Americans are suffering from job losses and lower wages, yet the president practically demanded applause when he mentioned tax cuts, as if allowing people to keep more of their own hard-earned money is an act of noblesse oblige. He claims that he cut taxes, but I must have missed that. I see his policies as paving the way for massive tax increases and inflation, which is the “hidden tax” that most hurts the poor and the elderly living on fixed incomes.
He condemned lobbyists, but his White House is filled with former lobbyists, and this has been a banner year for K Street with his stimulus bill, aka the Lobbyist’s Full Employment Act. He talked about a “deficit of trust” and the need to “do our work in the open,” but he chased away the C-SPAN cameras and cut deals with insurance industry lobbyists behind closed doors.
He spoke of doing what’s best for the next generation and not leaving our children with a “mountain of debt,” but under his watch this year, government spending is up by 22%, and his budget will triple our national debt.
He spoke of a spending freeze, but doesn’t he realize that each new program he’s proposing comes with a new price tag? A spending freeze is a nice idea, but it doesn’t address the root cause of the problem. We need a comprehensive examination of the role of government spending. The president’s deficit commission is little more than a bipartisan tax hike committee, lending political cover to raise taxes without seriously addressing the problem of spending.
He condemned bailouts, but he voted for them and then expanded and extended them. He praised the House’s financial reform bill, but where was Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae in that bill? He still hasn’t told us when we’ll be getting out of the auto and the mortgage industries. He praised small businesses, but he’s spent the past year as a friend to big corporations and their lobbyists, who always find a way to make government regulations work in their favor at the expense of their mom & pop competitors.
He praised the effectiveness of his stimulus bill, but then he called for another one – this time cleverly renamed a “jobs bill.” The first stimulus was sold to us as a jobs bill that would keep unemployment under 8%. We now have double digit unemployment with no end in sight. Why should we trust this new “jobs bill”?
He talked about “making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development,” but apparently it’s still too tough for his Interior Secretary to move ahead with Virginia’s offshore oil and gas leases. If they’re dragging their feet on leases, how long will it take them to build “safe, clean nuclear power plants”? Meanwhile, he continued to emphasize “green jobs,” which require massive government subsidies for inefficient technologies that can’t survive on their own in the real world of the free market.
He spoke of supporting young girls in Afghanistan who want to go to school and young women in Iran who courageously protest in the streets, but where were his words of encouragement to the young girls of Afghanistan in his West Point speech? And where was his support for the young women of Iran when they were being gunned down in the streets of Tehran?
Despite speaking for over an hour, the president only spent 10% of his speech on foreign policy, and he left us with many unanswered questions. Does he still think trying the 9/11 terrorists in New York is a good idea? Does he still think closing Gitmo is a good idea? Does he still believe in Mirandizing terrorists after the Christmas bomber fiasco? Does he believe we’re in a war against terrorists, or does he think this is just a global crime spree? Does he understand that the first priority of our government is to keep our country safe?
In his address last night, the president once again revealed that there’s a fundamental disconnect between what the American people expect from their government, and what he wants to deliver. He’s still proposing failed top-down big government solutions to our problems. Instead of smaller, smarter government, he’s taken a government that was already too big and supersized it.
Real private sector jobs are created when taxes are low, investment is high, and people are free to go about their business without the heavy hand of government. The president thinks innovation comes from government subsidies. Common sense conservatives know innovation comes from unleashing the creative energy of American entrepreneurs.
Everything seems to be “unexpected” to this administration: unexpected job losses; unexpected housing numbers; unexpected political losses in Massachusetts, Virginia, and New Jersey. True leaders lead best when confronted with the unexpected. But instead of leading us, the president lectured us. He lectured Wall Street; he lectured Main Street; he lectured Congress; he even lectured our Supreme Court Justices.
He criticized politicians who “wage a perpetual campaign,” but he gave a campaign speech instead of a state of the union address. The campaign is over, and President Obama now has something that candidate Obama never had: an actual track record in office. We now can see the failed policies behind the flowery words. If Americans feel as cynical as the president suggests, perhaps it’s because the audacity of his recycled rhetoric no longer inspires hope.
Real leadership requires results. Real hope lies in the ingenuity, generosity, and boundless courage of the American people whose voices are still not being heard in Washington.
- Sarah Palin
BREAKING NEWS: Senator Feinstein replaced by someone who makes sense
There’s a good chance Senator Diane Feinstein’s been replaced by some sort of high-functioning robot that makes sense, says good things, and realizes the full scope and magnitude of folly the current White House engages in. We don’t know who did it, so we blame, and thank, the Romulans — crafty devils that they are.
Feinstein today is calling for sense to trump whatever madness Dr. Utopia and notorious race-baiter Eric Holder were up to in threatening to put Khalid Sheik Muhammad (KSM) and other 9/11 villains on trial in New York City, just steps away from the site of the massive carnage they caused nine years ago.
Dr. Utopia, of course, didn’t understand, or care to understand, the enormous psychological, emotional, and financial costs this move would inflict upon New Yorkers. He and Holder were more concerned with giving KSM and his crew a public forum from which to denounce America, on the international stage, while costing taxpayers $200 million in a trial that would drag on for years, paralyzing lower Manhattan with nonstop terrorist reprisal threats, protests, and UTTER AND COMPLETE MADNESS.
Has either Utopia or Holder BEEN to lower Manhattan?
It’s a warren of tiny streets, alleys, and traffic congestion…on a good day. Now, add the KSM Terror Trial to that. Maybe someone should give Utopia and Holder some Mentos, a 2-liter of Diet Coke, and instruct these fools to combine the two and see what happens…the chaos that rockets and froths forth is what NYC would be like for YEARS, on a neverending basis, should these two get their way and afford KSM such a platform to denounce America.
Feinstein is working in her own self-interests, clearly. She’s been around long enough to realize the Scott Brown win in Massachusetts is more of a wake-up call than Democrats will admit.
Americans are angry.
They are revolting. (“See, what did I tell you? Americans ARE revolting…I’ve been saying that for years now,” we imagine Michelle Obama noting somewhere deep in the White House today).
We, and in particular New Yorkers, will not stand for the KSM Terror Trials being held in New York.
And before they get any ideas, we don’t want them held in Chicago either.
It was a bad decision to try these people civilly in the first place. But, if that is the course Holder et al will take, at the very least try them somewhere it won’t cost hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money to maintain order in the chaos that ensues from such a move.
If Diane Feinstein, and Romulans, can appreciate this — why can’t the current sitting president and AG?
HillBuzz on the Radio
h/t Mizz Jodee
HillBuzz will be the featured guest on two radio programs today, talking about Obama supporters’ use of Alinsky Methods to threaten, attack, harass, libel, defame, malign, and destroy private citizens who oppose the current administration in any way.
We’re going to talk about everything we’ve seen the “Hope and Change Gang” do to Hillary supporters, in particular, since the summer of 2007.
Here’s where we’ll be on the air TODAY:
* Breitbart TV, starting at 4pm EST/3pm CST: http://www.breitbart.tv/livestream/ It’s “The B-Cast” with Scott Baker & Liz Stephans. We don’t know where in the show we’ll be on, so listen from the beginning if you don’t want to miss us. UPDATE: On starting at 510pm EST/410pm EST
* The Andrea Shea King Show at Radio Patriot, starting at 9pm EST/8pm CST: The Andrea Shea KingRadio Show
The Left’s brought the battle to Boystown, folks. They made it personal this time, and have impacted our future employment opportunities. They’re using tactics that take jobs out of our reach, and ultimately food off our plates. Because they don’t agree with the opinions we have on an amateur political blog.
Because we do not agree with the Liberal-Socialist agenda, Obama’s supporters have taken his “get in their faces” instructions to heart, and have gone for our throats.
And if they think we are just going to sit back and let them get away with doing this to people, without exposing every single one of these “PUMA hunters” as the Alinsky thugs they are, then they have met their match in a lot of ways this time.
*******
Just did BreitbartTV and wanted to thank the hosts, Scott and Liz, for the opportunity to tell America what the Left is doing.
For those who listened, what’s your feedback for us?
We’re up again at 9pm EST/8pm CST with The Andrea King Show, so please chime in now so we can refine our message for the next opportunity we get.
As always, thanks for your support. We are only just beginning to fight these people, and we will do everything we can to expose the Left to all Americans.
**********
If Larry Kudlow runs for Senate in New York, we will go all-in for him
We think Republicans could win both US Senate seats in the state of New York if they’d just leave the cocktail parties long enough to try. Here’s a tip we learned at Sidetrack like, forever ago: just slip the bartender a fiver, put a napkin over the top of your highball, and then go outside for a while and DO SOMETHING besides revel in how fabulous your cocktail party is. Then, when you go back inside, you can continue to do nothing some more, and your drink will be waiting for you, 100% GHB-free. Trust us, it works.
Why aren’t Republicans taking seriously the chance to snag TWO Senate seats in one state this year?
Rudy Giuliani would have probably beaten Kirsten Gillibrand.
We think Larry Kudlow can beat Chuck Schumer — whom we want to see defeated for his betrayal of Hillary Clinton in 2008.
EVERY Democrat in office now who voted for the Healthcare Rationing bill — without even reading it — deserves to be FIRED.
But, Schumer really is swine. He proved that on the DC-New York shuttle he took last month, when he wouldn’t get off the phone so the airplane could take off. The flight attendant kept trying to get him to hang up, to no avail, and Gillibrand finally had to pull some raisons out of her purse to distract Schumer long enough for the phone to be taken away from him. Schumer’s such a show-off. Give him an opportunity to pop his head back and dramatically catch raisins like an obese trained seal snatching up moldy sardines and he’s in hog heaven. “Raisins are so good….and so FUN!”
Gillibrand and Schumer flying around together, all tandem, feels like the two worst contestants ever cast on The Amazing Race, where Phil Koeghan might want them to make it to the finish line, but we’re hoping they’re both replaced in November. Neither one of them stood up and put an end to the insanity displayed the week before Christmas when Democrats tried to shove that monstrous Rationing bill through to passage, like Panda trying to stuff fruit cake through the neighbors’ mail slots again (“But, if I didn’t, they’d be mad I didn’t get them anything, and their dogs or birds will eat whatever falls on the floor, like they’re so clean or whatever in there they can’t have cake on the floor all day.”).
We’ve decided, actually, to make defeating Chuck Schumer one of our goals in 2010. That means we’ve now got three of our berths filled on what races we will be actively engaged in:
(1) All-in to re-elect Michelle Bachmann so she can replace Pelosi as Speaker
(2) Defeat Barbara Boxer, even if a paper bag or a Muppet ends up getting the nomination against her. Whoever is the Republican nominee is not Barbara “Call me Senator!” Boxer, and that’s good enough for us.
(3) Repay Chuck Schumer for what he did to Hillary. Read Game Change and see why.
All of these races we can have a lot of fun with, while also, we believe, finding our own little niche where we can, hopefully, make enough of a difference that the Left declares war on us some more (since, for whatever reason, our helping Scott Brown for the last month was instrumental enough to his win for them to declare a fatwa upon one of us personally).
We’d like to find two more contests that will hold our interests and give us many opportunities to rally the troops to kick Liberals’ cans.
Thoughts on what the last two should be?
Thoughts on who the GOP will put up for those New York seats?
Will Republicans ever learn that cocktail parties are super fabulous, especially when there are hot jock strippers, but that for a cocktail party to be extra special double triple sec good, YOU HAVE TO WIN THE RACE FIRST.
TROLL DISSECTION 101: How to break apart a concern troll's posting like it's made of astroturf and Legos
This is such a weird concern-troll comment, left on a thread tonight, that we just had to let the comment stand, instead of deleting it, to break it down for you and also ponder WHAT exactly is the intent of leaving something like this.
Here it is, in full, from a poster calling herself “Penny Long”:
HB, may I ask why you like Hillary so much, and also Sarah. I know you started supporting Sarah as a protest against the nasty Obama people against Hillary. But now you sound like a loyal fan of Sarah.
Their politics are entirely different. Hillary wants public healthcare, Sarah not. Hillary for big(ger) government, Sarah not.
What areas of the democratic ideology that you gave up or will not relinquish? Hard to imagine you turning away only becuase of the base behaviors of the liberals, unless integrity trumps ideology. You said to vote them all out. No one on dem side worth saving because of personal integrity?
Just want to understand.
Thank you for helping our camp.
Take care.
This is such a great example of concern-trolling, we’re going to breakdown, line by line, what’s going on here. It’s so textbook David Axelrod, he might have even written it himself.
LINE ONE: HB, may I ask you why you like Hillary so much, and also Sarah.
That sure sounds like the DNC is concerned about Clinton’s recent remarks to Travis Smiley, and also the fact that so many Hillary supporters also luv the Guv. The Left has no idea what to do with this, and constantly tries to make Hillary and Sarah supporters clash. The joke, on them, is that Hillary and Sarah supporters are the same people most of the time. Reagan Democrats are Hillary Democrats are PUMA Democrats are Tea Party Democrats are Scott Brown Democrats are Palin Democrats. Oooga-booga, despite what Donna Brazile claims about not needing the blue collar, working class, “rural people”, this probably terrifies the DNC to no end. Hardcore Hillarians, like us, will never in our lives forgive the DNC for how it treated Clinton. Say “May 31st, 2008″ to a PUMA, and you get the same look on their face you’d get talking about December 11th, 1941 or September 11th, 2001. HORROR. Disbelief, still, years later. HORROR. It sure looks like Axelrod’s trying to rev up the campaign trolls to drive a wedge between HRC and the Saracuda. Maybe this has been driving them nuts since Hillary said she wants to have coffee with Palin and talk about her book. That must have made heads explode.
LINE TWO: I know you started supporting Sarah as a protest against the nasty Obama people against Hillary.
What’s done in this sentence is really interesting. First of all, concern-trolls like to say something that makes it look like they are familiar with your writing. ”I know you started”. ”I know you support”. ”I know you believe”. Etc. That’s done to psychologically establish some connection with you. ”Oh, you read me, really? Wowsers. I HAVE A READER! OMG. I have to totally call my friend Abbey and tell her SOMEONE READS ME! They know I started something. They know I support things. They KNOW I BELIEVE IN STUFF! OMG, who is this person, because I just HAVE TO pay attention to what they say. They KNOW I do things”.
Then, there’s a weird pivot, right away, but slipping in something factually incorrect right into the “I know” statement. No, the reason we support Sarah does NOT have anything at all to do with Obama. We support Sarah Palin because she is awesome. Sarah Palin loves America, that’s why we support her. If Obama never existed, we’d still support Sarah Palin. We supported her before she was McCain’s VP pick and the rest of the country heard about her. We liked her for the last few years because we heard Ted Stevens babbling about the Internets being a series of pipes and tubes bedraggled by dumptrucks one day, and wondered how someone that odd could be a Senator forever. Then, we heard about the bridge to nowhere he wanted to build to name after himself, so he could send more dumptrucks and tubes to places no one wanted them. Sarah Palin came to our attention at that point, YEARS ago, because this sharp, witty, razor sharp hockey mom just eviscerated the fools running Alaska. Since we’ve always been fascinated by Alaska itself, and always dreamed of going there, Palin’s early performance as governor made us curious about her, and we kept her on our radar through 2008…when we started saying in June, on this site, that McCain was going to pick her for VP. Go back and check our back issues on that one. We certainly weren’t the first to want her as VP, but we were early to the game, because we supported her all along.
And we will continue to support her long after Obama is a one-term bad memory exiled to Hawaii with is fashion icon wife, no longer proud of her country because she doesn’t get to live in the White House after 2013.
Note what else is going on in this sentence, though. She says “the nasty Obama people” in a sing-songy, childish sort of way. Like Gollum in Lord of the Rings, talking about “those nasty Hobbit-ses”. It’s a too-cool-for-school put down the Axelrod set are making at our expense. When our friend Panda is afraid of a small dog, like a Pekinese or something, we’ll chide him, “Oh, does big strong Panda get big time sca-wared of the nasty little doggitt? Oh, that nasty doggy-woggy is so nasty to Panda, isn’t he?”. ”Those nasty Obama people sure were mean for winning, weren’t they? No wonder you had to protest against them. That was a good protest. You get a gold star!” is how that line comes across to us.
Maybe it’s because we spend hours writing about 15,000 words a day on this site, so we pay attention to usage, and to the subtle differences phraseology can make in content and spirit of a piece. ”Those nasty Obama people”, that was tossed in deliberately, by someone we think could not contain her or himself and just HAD to take a dig at the PUMA movement.
LINE THREE: But now you sound like a loyal fan of Sarah.
This line is strange because there’s no “now you sound” or “but” about this. We’ve always been a loyal fan of Sarah. Since before Day One, which for most of the rest of you was August 29th, 2008. See remarks above, we were on the Palin Express before the train tracks were even built.
This is CLASSIC concern-trolling, folks.
People who love music could help us with this analogy, we’re sure, but if you don’t focus on the words so much, but just get a sense of the beat in this question, there’s a certain rhythm to it, almost like a haiku.
Like this:
HB (gets your attention), two loud sounds, BOOM BOOM
May I ask you why you like Hillary so much: Ba ba ba ba ba ba ba ba baba ba ba
and also Sarah: DA DA DADA.
Some more of the ba ba ba ba ba ba ba ba ba beat.
Then: BOOM (But), DA DA DA DA DA DA DA DUM.
And then the next sentence hits in a different musical range, where your brain is now primed to listen more closely to the next part, where the concern troll is trying to make you doubt your own stance and logic.
None of this is meant for us. It’s meant for you readers.
Another giveaway is the fact that around here, with regular readers, you call us “Buzz Boyz”, “Boyz”, “Buzzers”, etc. Only very rarely do any of you address us as HB. Yes, it happens SOMETIMES, but it’s just so unusual we can’t remember the last time we saw it. Sometimes, depending on who is responding to emails, we’ll sign something HB, but normally we don’t write anything as a signature, since responding in comments turns up as “HillBuzz” automatically.
That “HB” way of addressing us feels like it’s an Obot used to using BO all the time, and sees that we use HRC sometimes for Hillary, so that person (who, strangely, we get the impression is female….since our demo here, according to Alexia data tracking, is skewed something like 70% female) thought calling us HB would seem natural.
But, it doesn’t. It seems wrong somehow. Like those cats and dogs they bury in Pet Semetary and they come back “wrong” somewhere in Maine. This comment is just “wrong”, and we spotted it instantly amongst dozens of other comments waiting for moderation.
LINE FOUR: There politics are entirely different.
This is the declarative sentence the troll wanted to make from word one. The first few sentences were building trust and a relationship so that you would listen. Ba ba ba ba DA DA DA da DUM. And now that your attention is had, here comes the thing they want drilled into you: YOU CAN’T LIKE BOTH, SO STOP TELLING PEOPLE THEY CAN LIKE BOTH.
We think Obama is scared that Clinton voters will back Palin in a BIG, BIG, BIG way in 2012 now that Hillary has said she would not be Obama’s Secretary of State after 2013, even if he won a second term in that unlikely event. There must be some internal Axelrod polling that shows Obama’s approval would be even lower if Hillary was not Secretary of State, reassuring people that there was at least one competent grown up in this Administration. Now that Clinton has said she’s out after one term as SOS, and might not even stay for the full four years of this disaster, it feels like Axelrod’s people are attempting to sink the chance of anyone drifting into Palin waters.
Do you see what we just did in that paragraph above without you maybe realizing it?
We conjured the image of the Titanic sinking, representing the Obama administration, with perhaps Clinton getting into a lifeboat and Obama going down with the ship. We never mentioned the Titanic in the paragraph, but we used words that conjured the image we wanted.
That’s what concern trolls do. Do not think for a moment that every word is not carefully tested and focus grouped with these people.
LINE FIVE: Hillary wants public healthcare, Sarah not.
More incorrect declarative sentences that are stated as fact, now that you are supposedly lulled into thinking you trust and believe this person is speaking the truth.
Hillary did not campaign on “public healthcare” in 2008. We surrogate spoke for her across 27 states. She wanted to open the Congressional health plan to all Americans. Healthcare would have been available to everyone who had ever been denied care for any reason, or could not afford care on their current salaries. Hillary was not going to take away anyone’s insurance and create a nationalized system. She learned, the hard way, in 1993 that Americans see that as anathema. TRUST US, we spent 8 weeks in Iowa giving speeches, going door to door in blizzards, and talking with Iowans by their hearths, warming up with hot CoCo telling them Hillary Clinton was not sent from anywhere to create public healthcare and cause nightmares. But, see how that’s jabbed in there?
It’s also setting Hillary and Palin up on different sides of a fence that the troll wants you to think is really the Great Wall of China, insurmountable and permanent.
The next line is really a follow up of this point, where the troll says, “Hillary for big(ger) government, Sarah not”.
In the two years we’ve been running this site we have never seen a single one of you pull a David Foster Wallace-esque use of parentheses like that on the word big(ger). We might not comment on every post left here by you readers, but we scan each one visually, if not read them all in full, to check for spam, bad words, and trolls. There is a TON of Asian spam for Cialis and Viagra that include a weird amount of parentheses for some reason. Babblefish must use those when it can’t figure out a character…so there will be words with oddly placed characters all over the place. If any of you were really writ(ing) like this we w(ould) notice it immediate(ly).
Just another clue this is not an actual reader, but someone who probably thinks she’s the next Maureen Dowd, if not Sarah Vowell.
SECOND PARAGRAPH: What areas of the democratic ideology that you gave up or will not relinquish?
After stating those “facts” to you for a while, now the troll awakens another part of your brain by asking a question of you. Notice there are words missing in this question. You have to read it a few times to make sense of it. The “are” that should follow “What” at the beginning is gone. And, it still doesn’t make sense without adding a “the” or “some” before “areas”. The word “relinquish” is also suspicious. It’s like reading a book report by an overachiever who abuses thesauruses. “Relinquish” has more syllables in it than any word used in the beat and pattern of this comment so far. The only words that stand out with more than two syllables preceding it are “Hillary” and “government”. But, those two words don’t jump out the way RELINQUISH does, used right at the end, before the question mark.
It feels like, psychologically, the troll wants you to be left with RELINQUISH on some subconscious level.
You would be relinquishing SOMETHING as yet undefined if you chose to support Sarah in the future. And you don’t want to do THAT, now do you?
NEXT LINE:
Hard to imagine you turning away only becuase of the base behaviors of the liberals, unless integrity trumps ideology.
This whole sentence is out of character to the rest of the comment. It feels like it was cut and pasted and written by someone else. Suddenly, four and five syllable words are magically dominant. INTEGRITY. IDEOLOGY. “Base behaviors” is odd, too, because this is the first appearance of an adjective like “base”; it just does not fit with the rest of the “voice”. Neither does the “unless integrity trumps ideology” part. It all feels very grad school intern-written.
What WE THINK happens is that the trolls have a Word document in front of them. It has key bits like the stuff in blue above that need to be put everywhere because they focus-group tested well. The troll however, needs to pose as a member of the forum, so the troll can’t JUST put the required message anywhere. The troll must write an original paragraph BEFORE the blue sentence, so that the comment seems to “fit” better with other comments on each board.
Let’s see if the troll bookends this cut and past job with another reference to something we really said on this site.
You said to vote them all out. No one on dem side worth saving because of personal integrity?
Bingo Bango!
We did say all Dems needed to be voted out.
Whoever monitors us at the DNC pushed the panic button at that, evidently, because we were assigned a better than average concern troll to respond to us. They don’t like the “VOTE THEM ALL OUT” stuff. Not one bit. See how odd it is that the capitalization and abbreviation tendency is so off in that last sentence in green. When did this person abbreviate before the word “dem”.
After a sentence as polished and catch-phrase-y as identity trumps ideology or whatever, why is this person suddenly getting lazy with the word “Democrat”, and using the lower case “dem” as an abbreviation.
Our gut says it might be because this person notices something we do that is actually very odd in writing about Democrats.
We do not call this party “Democratic” the way the MSM does. We say “the Democrat Party”. NOT Democratic, which you find in common use. So, if this troll wants to look like she belongs here, and reads us regularly, then the troll needs to avoid saying “Democratic”. Making the “D” in Dem makes the abbreviation less noticeable, too. Visually, the “dem” just flows into the words around it, instead of looking like the cab on a little locomotive or bulldozer, the way the letters “Dem” look to us. Do locomotives and dump trucks bedraggle the Internets too, we wonder. Quick, call Ted Stevens!
CLOSING:
Just want to understand.
Thank you for helping our camp.
Take care.
What’s done here is out of a need to try to make these Final Exam essay-style posts feel more natural, so the troll says, “Just want to understand,” which is code for, “Brain, do not see this as suspicious. I am NOT a troll. I just want to understand. Nothing to see here, move along.”
We bet that whole closing is used over and over again on different sites, because “Thank you for helping our camp. Take Care” is so generic.
Why not a Go HILLARY! Or something else more personal. ”Our camp” could also be another psychological push to establish community with the readers. ”We are in this together. It is our camp. I am one of you. Do not be frightened. We come in peace. Always”. That’s what you hear right before the space lizard rips off its face and eats a gerbil in front of you.
And you’re just glad it wasn’t Richard Gere with a gerbil instead.
See how you can always tell it’s us posting?
You know our “voice”.
You know our beat.
You know we usually, unless we are PISSED OFF or in rally the troops mode, ALWAYS end posts with some kind of a joke…no matter how dated….or so gay you have to be the ghost of Quentin Crisp to get it.
See…did it again.
Does this help those of us in our camp identify trolls better?
We just want to understand.
Take care.
