Here’s a troll dropping from someone named “Judith” that falls into a category we call “Hillary vs. Sarah”, in which trolls try vainly to drive a wedge between supporters of Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. We believe the fact so many Hillary Dems love Palin keeps many at the DNC wide awake at night. Constantly, trolls try to alienate Clinton supporters from Palin. It’s so obvious, it’s hilarious, actually. Of all the varietals of troll out there, the “Judith” Hillary vs. Palin trolls are the most transparent and sloppy.
Here’s “Judith’s” comment below. See if you can dissect her remarks yourself, before clicking on “more” to read our breakdown:
I haven’t visited this site regularly (until today) and so there’s surely some history I’m missing. I like Sarah Palin and I’m glad everyone on this site does too, but I’m just curious. I wouldn’t think that Palin’s policies and political philosophy would be that attractive to people who supported Hillary Clinton.
I’ve got to tell you, I would never have supported Mrs. Clinton. (again, as I noted in another comment – I was appalled by what was done to Mrs. Clinton in the primaries. I didn’t think sexism was that big of a deal until I saw it practiced by the Left.) Also, I’m glad to be a comrade in arms with moderates, independents, etc., to kick out the Leftists.
So – and I don’t mean this at all sarcastically or snarkily – those of you who consider yourselves supporters of both Mrs. Clinton & Mrs. Palin – can you tell me how you view their disparate policy positions and how you support (or would support) both?
General comments:
If you have been following the “Troll Dissection 101″ series on HillBuzz, you’ll know troll droppings can be identified by their general smell. Without getting into the meat of this comment, can you get the feeling something just isn’t right about the wording, sentence structure, and remarks?
We read hundreds of comments a day on this site.
There’s at least 200 remarks that never make it passed moderation, because they’re troll droppings. Most of them are Asian spam sites that try leaving comments linking to scam sites selling Viagra, Cialis, etc. Other troll remarks are just expletive-ridden rants, assorted threats from the Left, or expressions of the Left’s desire all of us here get AIDS and die.
Of the posts that get through, there’s a natural flow, meter, beat, and rhythm to people’s writing. It’s interesting, because even though people are clearly of different persuasions politically (or otherwise), and come from different parts of the country (or Australia, France, Ireland, and the UK, for some of our readers), and all of you are making different points, the structure of your remarks is almost universally the same.
It’s to the point, never choppy, and only on the rarest occasions do any of you write in stilted fashion. 99% of you write the way you speak, which is how we write. If you were sitting here at Buzzquarters, you’d be hearing essentially what’s typed up in posts. If you’ve heard us on the radio or on TV, you’ll know this is true. “You sound just like HillBuzz. Are you HillBuzz?,” one of us got once, at a rally he spoke at, when someone in the crowd came up and ID-ed him based only on his word usage, pacing, and jokes.
Trolls don’t sound like real people. They sound like recycled bits of focus-group tested jargon and logic puzzles the Axelrod Astroturfing brigade sends out into the Internet.
Let’s look at “Judith’s” remarks now, line by line, to see what we mean:
(1) I haven’t visited this site regularly (until today) and so there’s surely some history I’m missing. I like Sarah Palin and I’m glad everyone on this site does too, but I’m just curious. I wouldn’t think that Palin’s policies and political philosophy would be that attractive to people who supported Hillary Clinton.
First off, it’s odd that someone who claims she hasn’t visited this site regularly (until today), because that’s just a weird thing to say. Does it mean that today’s the first time she’s visited numerous times, or does it mean that today’s the first time she ever visited, but intends to visit regularly in the future? Normal people don’t talk like this in comments. They just don’t. Chances are, someone who has never read us before won’t leave a comment. Many of you tell us that you “lurk” on the site for months before you ever leave a comment. Of course, there are exceptions to that…but it’s been our experience, in two years running this site, that if someone comes to us via a link at some other site, and reads us for the first time, the only instance where they leave a comment is to write something vile and nasty to us because they are upset with something we said that day.
A few weeks ago, we let the guys over at Redstate and Ace of Spades have it because they were being Eeyores over Scott Brown’s chances in Massachusetts. We spanked their little butts but good, and told them to man up and work hard and not let the MSM and concern-trolls get them down and make them give up, because Scott Brown would win if we all worked hard for him (and how did that turn out, Eeyores?). Well, someone at Ace didn’t like that one bit, and put a link up to us on the site…and we were flooded by many 20-something Republicans who didn’t like us calling them pessimistic, lazy, gullible punks. So, many of them left nasty first-time comments attacking us, calling us fags, etc…but oddly enough, none of them could argue the points we made.
THOSE are the kinds of first-time reader comments we get. We have to say that in two years doing this, we’ve never once had a first time reader chime in to say they don’t understand what we are about or ask us to clarify anything. There are close to 5,000 posts on this site. There’s a FAQ section in the CONTACT tab that, ironically enough, answers the very question that “Judith” asks above. Why didn’t “Judith” just read that?
Because “Judith” is a troll.
Judith wants to ask the question of why Hillary supporters can support Palin, because in asking that as a question the goal of astroturfing is to make the readers doubt such a thing is possible. “How can an elephant fly?”. “How can Michelle Obama wear that dress and not look ridiculous?”. “How come I never see Tom Cruise being affectionate with Katie Holmes?”.
What sort of mental images do those questions conjure in your mind?
Well, elephants can’t fly, so you are reminded of how ridiculous a thought that is. Michelle Obama looks ridiculous in most of her dresses…and, well, it’s TOM CRUISE with a woman, so do the math on that, too.
The troll claims “to not know the history” of the site, which is troll cover for asking something like this. That’s designed to placate any of you out there reading it who would jump in and yell TROLL! and attack Judith for asking a dumb question. “Well, she said she doesn’t know the history, so just give her the benefit of the doubt,” is what Judith hopes another poster will say in the thread. Who knows, Judith may very well ask that same question herself later, under a different name.
Here’s an interesting tidbit for you: Judith’s IP address has been used to post comments on this site before. We have our spam filter setup to screen all new IP addresses attempting to post. Every new poster must be approved before she or he can leave a comment. Judith was able to post her remark without going into moderation. That means Judith has posted here before. We scanned our comments and have never had a poster named Judith coming from this particular IP address before. We scanned for this IP address, and see that it’s been used before, but for comments left under the name “Susan” and “Brian”. So, “Judith” uses multiple handles, and has posted here multiple times as different people, but “Judith” claims to not visit us regularly.
Interesting.
It’s also funny she says “this site” instead of HillBuzz.
We’re always really suspicious of any comments that feel like they could have been left at any Hillary supporting site, with just cut-and-paste action going on. Not referring to HillBuzz, HB, Boystown, “The Boyz”, Buzzers, or other personal touches usually left for us feels like a giveaway that the poster is taking a comment crafted in an astroturf operation and leaving it here, before moving on to leave it at Pumapac, NoQuarter, The Confluence, or wherever. Chances are, we’re on a hit list, and these people just plug and chug Judith’s canned remarks at one site after another.
The reason for doing this tonight is because Sarah Palin knocked the Tea Party speech out of the park. Chances are, we’re on a Google Alert paired with “Sarah Palin”, so any time we say nice things about the Governor, the troll cave gets an alert, and the trolls mobilize to try to drive a wedge between the Hillary and Palin supporters.
Notice the bit where troll Judith says, “I like Sarah Palin and I’m glad everyone else on this site does too, but I’m just curious”. That’s classic trolling. Judith needs to establish a bond with readers, fast, within the first few sentences. So she says she likes Palin, is glad everyone else does to, and then adds the I’m just curious stuff to plant some doubt in people’s heads about the Hillary-Palin dual support…it’s a foreshadow to what she’s going to do in a moment.
The next part is CLASSIC troll, and must rate highly in focus groups Axelrod runs because it’s repeated over and over again all across the PUMAverse. Repeatedly, these people keep insisting that Hillary and Palin are so far apart, that their supporters must hate each other, never agree on anything, and that Hillary people are natural enemies of Palin-ites.
This is just not true. We’re living proof of that. But it’s the wedge the Left continues trying to drive between all of us. We’re never going to let that happen.
(2) I’ve got to tell you, I would never have supported Mrs. Clinton. (again, as I noted in another comment – I was appalled by what was done to Mrs. Clinton in the primaries. I didn’t think sexism was that big of a deal until I saw it practiced by the Left.) Also, I’m glad to be a comrade in arms with moderates, independents, etc., to kick out the Leftists.
A couple of things are going on in this next part.
(a) Tries to establish some credibility as a third person observer by saying she was not a Clinton fan, and tries to use the sexism of the Left as the reason she’s here — that’s an attempt to stir some emotion in readers, most of whom are still livid about the way Clinton was treated. If you are emotional, you are less likely to logically dissect the troll’s comments.
(b) The whole comrade in arms thing is meant to make you agree with this person, and listen to the troll, because she’s trying to establish similarities between you and her.
(c) The use of the word “Leftists” is interesting. We bet that’s in the Google Alert this comment was prompted by too. Normally, we say “Liberals”, but have deliberately used the word “Leftist” today in a psy-ops mission of our own…as we read a focus group report saying Americans are less willing to support Democrats if they are called “Leftists” repeatedly than if they are labeled “Liberals”. Hence, we’re going to be using the term Lefists exclusively. It might be coincidental, but it’s just odd the day we went full-bore with the “Leftist” verbiage we get this troll remark talking about being comrades in arms against Leftists.
(3) So – and I don’t mean this at all sarcastically or snarkily – those of you who consider yourselves supporters of both Mrs. Clinton & Mrs. Palin – can you tell me how you view their disparate policy positions and how you support (or would support) both?
Whenever we have to go to a shady convenience store, or if we’re at a bad restaurant, and the clerk or waiter gives the wrong change and we catch it, the first thing out of their mouths is almost always, “I wasn’t trying to cheat you”. That means they were trying to cheat us.
When a troll says they don’t mean something sarcastically or snarkily, they mean it sarcastically and snarkily. And snarkily isn’t even a cromulent word.
“Disparate” is another of those $5.00 words that Axelrod puts into his cut-and-paste troll remarks for some reason. We’re still not sure why, because these words never fit the rest of the comment. Someone who uses the word “disparate” should be able to use the SEARCH function on this site to answer the question she is asking. Someone with a vocabulary that good (at least college freshman), should be able to find the answer to what she is asking right at the top of our home page, in the CONTACT section. In fact, before asking any questions at all, someone using “disparate” in regular speech would always check for an FAQ somewhere before commenting.
So, that’s just really fishy to us.
And, like we said, all of this fits into the meme of astroturfers consistently asking why Hillary supporters and Palin supporters can get along so well, and support BOTH women across party lines…because they have a deliberate and determined agenda to drive a wedge between both camps, so Clinton voters do not help Palin in 2012.
We really think the DNC is terrified of legions of Hillary men and women making sure what happened to Clinton at the hands of the Obama Kool-Aid Hope and Change Gang doesn’t happen to Palin.
As we said, we will not let them win.
How good were you at spotting the above?
Anything we missed?
February 7, 2010 at 1:32 am
“Notice the bit where troll Judith says, “I like Sarah Palin and I’m glad everyone else on this site does too, but I’m just curious”. That’s classic trolling. Judith needs to establish a bond with readers, fast, within the first few sentences.”
Oooh, Oooh, Buzz Teacher, I caught that!! I really did. I’m learning! :o)))
February 7, 2010 at 12:30 pm
“I didn’t think sexism was that big of a deal until I saw it practiced by the Left.”
THIS is what made my bullshit detectors go crazy. Most of the trolls like to get in a few digs at the right and center even as they pretend to be one of us. This is based on the idea that we, well, only think sexism is a big deal when the left does it.
Projection, anyone? (*cough* Palin *cough*)
February 7, 2010 at 1:46 am
“before asking any questions at all, someone using “disparate” in regular speech would always check for an FAQ somewhere before commenting.”
Speaking as someone who does use words like “disparate”, I wish to commend you on the excellence of your analysis. I do, in fact, read FAQs before asking potentially stupid questions.
Is there really a search function on this site? I’ve never been able to find one.
Cuz, I spend waaayyyy too much time scrolling backwards to find old posts here. There’s gotta be a better way!
I have Firefox. Is there a way to search a site with that?
And just for the record … I was totally copacetic with the troll’s use of snarkily, but I had to google to edify myself as to the etymological historicity of cromulent, thus demonstrating once again that this site is not merely amusing, it is also highly educational.
February 7, 2010 at 1:50 am
We try to embiggen all vocabularies here.
February 7, 2010 at 11:28 am
I believe the correct term is “embiggenfy.” ;)
February 7, 2010 at 11:56 am
Or “ginormousize.”
February 7, 2010 at 12:12 pm
LOL!
February 8, 2010 at 3:00 pm
No no, the correct new term is “to Al Gorize.”
February 7, 2010 at 2:00 am
Ba-hahahaha! Nice ;)
February 7, 2010 at 6:46 am
Chrissy: Left click on “Edit” and then highlight and left click on “Find.” You’ll see a search box open at the bottom left on your screen.
February 7, 2010 at 12:37 pm
I use the search box on the main page it is one the righthand side right under the Blogroll list
February 8, 2010 at 3:01 pm
Chrissy, you can also just do a search with your search engine.
Just put in HillBuzz.org and the name or topic you want.
February 7, 2010 at 1:50 am
I remember reading this comment when it was first posted and kind of skimmed it then moved on. That’s how much I’ve picked up from you guys. I notice the troll-baiting now on all the sites I go to and I’ve learned not to bother responding. I really appreciate the way you break it all down. I know how to spot concern trolls & Eeyores now. And boy were you right about Scott Brown.
February 7, 2010 at 1:57 am
okay. even i could spot this one… thanks to what you boyz have taught us… my first clue now is… does it fit?
heck no it doesn’t!
February 7, 2010 at 2:02 am
Hillbuzz, you guys are fearless defenders of freedom and the American way, saving us from disparate trolls and Axelturf.
Can you PLEASE help save us from the Eeyores, too? I attended Palin’s speech in Kansas last night, another homerun. Six thousand people ATE UP the Sarahcuda…
But talking to folks: they don’t think she CAN win in 2012. They LOVE her, but they’ve fallen for the enemy propaganda put out by Axelrod’s army, bought into the meme that she can’t win independents, or that the GOP won’t let her win the nomination.
Help save us Hillbuzz, you’re our only hope. You remind us that Sarah CAN and MUST defeat Dr. Utopia.
Here are my rather long musings on Sarah’s pre-Tea Party speech in Kansas if you’re interested.
Sarah Palin – Yes She Can
http://www.recoveryfromliberalism.blogspot.com
Oh, and I was a early adopting PUMA, circa 2004. Visceral bad reaction to John Kerry, but that’s another story.
February 7, 2010 at 2:10 am
I have always been A Republican and A Patriotic Conservative, and I believe Jesus is my Savior, which leads me to be puzzled and outraged how any decent human being could utter a critical word about our President.
As a lifelong Republican and Patriotic Conservative, clinging to Jesus, I am taking the dangerous step of transcending my narrow constrictures to oppose the bad people who hate our President.
Sigh, groan, insinuate and insinuate … get the message … your thinking is not approved, and you should be deeply ashamed of your thoughts.
February 7, 2010 at 2:17 am
Good one Tonawanda! Perfect example of a trolling comment!
Oh wait..you weren’t serious were you? My bad, and I am so deeply ashamed for my unapproved thinking…
Ha ha ha ha ha ha… oh you guys…
February 7, 2010 at 5:57 pm
I would say leave that church now… it is leading you astray… and making you think that one cannot criticize the policies of a man who is red on the inside…..
February 7, 2010 at 2:13 am
I’d just like to point out that someone who seems to be positioning herself as center-right/right, would use the phrase “comrade in arms”, which has strong connotation with Marxist/Communist/Socialist philosophy.
I can honestly say that I cannot think of a single time when I have used the term “comrade”, let alone “comrade in arms”, in casual conversation or any blog post.
February 7, 2010 at 2:19 am
Nice catch! I love this stuff.
February 7, 2010 at 3:14 am
I tend to say “brothers and sisters in arms.”
February 7, 2010 at 11:59 am
“Rogue warriors” perhaps?
February 7, 2010 at 3:42 am
Eric -
“Comrade” is a word we don’t use either. Just writing it feels icky. Words that end in “e” like that are always weird for us…we have to double check the spelling on it mentally, and just naturally avoid them. Growing up in the 80s, we also have an aversion to anything too Soviet sounding. Comrade is definitely in that category.
February 7, 2010 at 5:59 pm
haha, I grew up in the 1960s – at least they were my formative years…. Comrade has that really communist connotation… it is used by unions where the leaders tend to be communists. Here in Australia that would be something like the Painters and Dockers and the builders’ labourers.
February 7, 2010 at 9:39 am
There is a friend on Twitter who uses the name Comrade in his name as a political joke.
Funny thing is, after I wrote to him, I got followed by these Russian guys who typed in Cyrillic. Couldn’t understand a thing they said. 8-0
February 7, 2010 at 10:18 am
I saw that one too. Us military types always use things like “Shipmates”, “Brother Marines” or “Fellow soldiers”.
Or, sometimes, “Fellow jackasses with guns”. That’s one of my favorites. :D
February 7, 2010 at 12:07 pm
If I use “comrade”, it’s always to sarcastically rip someone.
Every time I see that word, I picture Tom Courtney in “Dr. Zhivago.” :-)
February 7, 2010 at 10:24 am
I never, ever use that word myself. I’m very interested in Russian history, plus my jurisdiction has Russian roots and was severely set back by the 1917 revolution. So, naturally, I’m suspicious of anything that might have to do with Marxism/communism/socialism.
February 7, 2010 at 12:22 pm
Yes! I thought that too – I read the comrade thing and was just given the creeps.
February 7, 2010 at 5:58 pm
that was my red-flag too. Comrade in arms is a communist term. It is not a term used by the truly moderate centrists.
February 7, 2010 at 2:38 am
The more I visit this site, the better I like it! You guys rock. By the way, I listened to your interview online — you *do* write like you talk! Thanks for the ongoing lessons, insight, and and fun, too!
ZurichMike
Gay Republican in Switzerland
February 7, 2010 at 3:13 am
One thing they aren’t understanding is that they can’t create wedges between us. I and everyone else recognize that there are issues that we don’t agree on…. but what the trolls fail to get is that we have chosen to set those things aside and are focusing on what unites us together in a common cause.
February 7, 2010 at 12:11 pm
Agreed. I do not find trolling effective at anything other than exposing them as dumb a$$ leftists.
February 7, 2010 at 3:22 pm
I agree, Mary Beth. I still keep up with members of my local Ron Paul meetup group, and yesterday one of the members posted a rather caustic assessment of Sarah Palin as a “poser” who was trying to “hijack” the Tea Party movement.
Eighteen months ago, I may have agreed with her, and not said anything. But this time I was compelled to point out that Leftists/communists/socialists have been happy with incremental progress for 100 years, willing to take 2 steps forward and one step back, because they always knew they were at least taking a step forward. Leftists have made continual slow progress for decades, and we libertarians and conservatives have killed our momentum with “crabs in a bucket” syndrome and purity tests and circular firing squads.
Since finding Hillbuzz, I’ve decided that the enemy of my enemy can be my friend (especially if they fundamentally love America.) Unless I run for office myself, there will NEVER be a candidate I agree with 100%.
We can fight over “purity” later, after we save the USA. Right now we don’t have the luxury.
February 7, 2010 at 4:59 pm
I agree.
February 7, 2010 at 8:00 pm
Well said Kathleen!
February 8, 2010 at 1:50 pm
Kathleen: Love the reference to the “circular firing squad”!! I agree with you wholeheartedly – we may differ on some issues but if we all love our country enough to stand shoulder to shoulder despite our differences, we will be invinciple. Being from Texas, we love all the symbolism associated with the Alamo….so: We all have to be willing to cross the line drawn in the sand – whether it means victory or defeat.
February 7, 2010 at 4:32 am
I think this is your best Troll Dissection (so far).
February 7, 2010 at 7:14 am
This was an easy one for me to spot. What I find truly stunning about the Boyz analysis is your knowledge of your audience. I lurked here for months before I worked up the courage to post and spent hours reviewing the FAQs and other background information on one of my first visits. (I’m also a bit surprised that I was not identified as a troll because my writing style tends to be pretty formal and commenting is new and not quite comfortable for me.)
One of the things that stood out to me was the use of the title “Mrs.” to describe these powerful women. Maybe it’s just me (I don’t like being referred to as “Mrs.”) but it strikes me as a subtle attempt to undermine them. If you’re going to go to the trouble of using a formal title in a blog comment, wouldn’t you use “Secretary” or “SOS” for Hillary and “Governor” or “former Governor” for Palin?
February 7, 2010 at 10:12 am
Your point about titles is well taken, but some months back when all the brou-haha was really getting started, I began habitually referring to Sarah as “Mrs. Palin” just to sort of rub inthe FUN she has BEING Mrs. Palin! They tried to drag her through the mud as Governor and then, sarcastically, as “former Governor”…so I made a point of calling her Mrs. Palin just to underscore that she didn’t depend on titles or positions for her perspective of herself and didn’t ask others to do it either.
February 7, 2010 at 12:56 pm
By undermining AFinch, does that cover “don’t call me Ma’am, call me Senator, because I’ve worked very, very hard for the title”?
Sorry, couldn’t resist. Anything that undermines Babs Boxer is OK by me.
February 7, 2010 at 1:08 pm
Touche. I know it is the proper title according to Miss Manners. It really just rubs me the wrong way–probably some deep psychological issue. And for the record, miltary men and women may address me however they choose. ;)
February 7, 2010 at 6:03 pm
I am of the opposite bent… I detest the use of the word Ms. I prefer Mrs when I am addressed and go ballistic when I am addressed as Ms. – that is just me.
February 7, 2010 at 10:32 pm
AFinch – you just said what I was thinking about my own posts. I’m fairly new, and since I write for a living, can tend to be a little bit formal as well. In fact, I’ve typed and retyped comments before because “informal” seemed weird in print and yet, “formal” seemed stilted. Commenting is new and still somewhat uncomfortable for me as well, but I LOVE reading all the great ones from the Hillbuzz readers. (BuzzBoyz – I also changed my user name from M to MA, but only because after my first couple of comments I noticed there was already an “M” posting here!)
So nice to be able to come here to get educated and entertained all at once!
February 7, 2010 at 7:22 am
I noticed the troll person said “comrades in arms”
sites like HillBuzz, Hillaryis44, C4P who are at the very least defenders of both ladies against sexist attacks and will defend them both against it, they have called Hillary and Sarah “sisters”
but never have I heard “comrades” being used.
second point:
“those of you who consider yourselves supporters of both Mrs. Clinton & Mrs. Palin – can you tell me how you view their disparate policy positions and how you support (or would support) both?
”
Whenever I read a statement like this, it always makes me think of som UN-DNC person who is doing research on trying to figure out why people like me, loyal-dems-who-support-sarah, support both Hillary and sarah.
ANd its not just basic curiousity, it is a research job. Why the heck should HB spend time and effort over and over explaining their views for a Axel-hole researcher?
February 7, 2010 at 7:48 am
Thank you for the troll lesson. I know when something doesn’t sound right, but haven’t been able to explain it to myself. I hope the comb-over minions aren’t learning too much here!
[not to be snarky, but does Axelrod have a face made for radio or what?]
February 7, 2010 at 9:17 am
Trolls are like roaches….you kill one and they just keep breeding…
I have to admit I’ve said things and been paranoid..”They’re all going to call me a troll if I say this”…but I love this site and I come here daily and can attest to the fact that we all have different views and can express those views freely without vileness or leftist bullying.
I think Sarah has taken her shots and has taken them well. Better than most people. I would be happy if Hillary rose up and socked Obama in the mouth and took the nomination from him. From that point it gets fuzzy….The next year or two is going to be interesting to say the least. I am so relieved not to wake up terrified that the healthcare industry is going to be ruined any second by some trick or slight of hand by the Congress and Senate …and that is largely due to people like us who stood up and yelled STOP!! Unfortunately, we have an incompetent president who cares more about his own ego than the security of this country…but that’s another topic.
I’m not going to try to visualize who will run or win or get nominated or run with whoever and just concentrate on getting people elected in 2010 and throwing out the “Leftist thugs” who are in there now.
February 7, 2010 at 9:23 am
“Whenever I read a statement like this, it always makes me think of som UN-DNC person who is doing research on trying to figure out why people like me, loyal-dems-who-support-sarah, support both Hillary and sarah.
ANd its not just basic curiousity, it is a research job. Why the heck should HB spend time and effort over and over explaining their views for a Axel-hole researcher?”
I just had an idea…why don’t we have some fun with the Axel-hole researchers? Lead them to believe that we are as dumb as a box of rocks. We could come up with ridiculous reasons that we could support both Hillary and Sarah. A HillBuzz version of “psy-ops”. I am from Louisiana, where “educated” people think that Cajuns are backward and stupid. The Cajuns quite frankly do not care what others think of them. They are known for “having a little fun” with those who think that they know about the Cajun culture. They let the people believe that the stereotypes that they have heard about Cajuns are all true…the more ridiculous, the better. Boyz, would you care to “throw this around”? It could be great fun, and it would keep Axel-hole in the dark as to what we are actually doing. The bottom line is that we love our country, and will put aside our differences when it becomes necessary, because we are ALL Americans.
February 7, 2010 at 9:32 am
How about this comment over at Founding Bloggers:
“”She[Palin} is just trying to Use the tea partiers. I guess I should not be so hard on her. I like Palin. What turned me off of Palin is she is fake. I know she is fake becuase she has been so quick to throw People under the bus.. and she is always using her family as political tools.”"
http://www.foundingbloggers.com/wordpress/2010/02/we-found-a-tea-party-democrat/
February 7, 2010 at 9:48 am
idiot. Did s/he even listen to the speech, she explicits states its a leaderless movement, and it is NOT about any one person.
Classic troll line:
“I like Palin. What turned me off of Palini s she is fake”
formula:
state something positive, then rebutt your own positive nugget with a bat of irrational negativity to bring doubt to the readers.
February 7, 2010 at 10:15 am
That’s exactly what I’ve noticed…say something positive to identify with readers and establish some credibility and then cut the throat. HillBuzz has been educating me….I’ve always noticed this KIND of thing, but had never seen it explicated in writing before. EXCELLENT!
February 7, 2010 at 4:07 pm
That troll is definitly not from the US. You can tell by the fact that they type out every word over and over “she is, have not, do not” etc.
You’d be hard pressed to find a single post written by an american that doesn’t have a contraction in it-no matter how formal or informal the post or occasion is. It’s the english as a second language person native to another country that doesn’t use contractions at all. It’s very stilted and awkward. Look at that one sentance. There were 5 places they could use a contraction and didn’t a single one.
February 7, 2010 at 6:26 pm
this is the classic troll statement.
Look at what it says and how fake it is:
She [Palin] – this should be the first clue…. on a topic talking about Palin but has to identify her in this way….
“is trying to Use the tea partiers” – why the capital for “use”. It looks weird.
“I guess I should not be so hard on her” – the classic statement in trying to connect with the readers of the blog.
followed by:
“I like Palin. What turned me off Palin is she is fake” – these two statements do not connect with each other. How can you say you like someone and then accuse the person of being fake. Then comes the “I know statement” – it is very misleading:
“I know she is fake because she has been so quick to throw People under the bus… and she is always using her family as political tools….”
first of all, Sarah has thrown nobody under the bus and she does not use her family as political tools….. this is classic leftist projection at work. Barry has constantly thrown people under the bus, starting with Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright. Michelle has been using the children as political tools. In Sarah’s case it has been the MSM that has engaged in that kind of behaviour towards Sarah and then they make the opposite claim like they are innocent… sure…
However, in that last sentence you have once again the strange capitalization of the classic troll – People…..
February 7, 2010 at 12:28 pm
Wow. Quite a comment. Who has Palin thrown under the bus??? That’s not even remotely rooted in a shred of reality. What planet are these lefty nut clowns from? And can they PLEASE go back there??? Now?
February 7, 2010 at 9:51 am
PLEASE Do NOT talk to Sundance fan. He is a typical troll trying to stir up the masses here and it is more than irritating to see his comments and then us waste our time reponding to him. Please don’t! He will go away if we ignore him. I’m sure he was paid to be here right after the speech on the speech thread. Thanks!
February 7, 2010 at 9:54 am
He was the one that kept saying Palin had crib notes written on her hand, right? Apparently, the same “observation” it is all over the leftist blogs this morning. (I don’t have the courage to go look for myself.) He was a tricky one because he was so pathetic I almost felt sorry for him.
February 7, 2010 at 10:02 am
The trolls are out big time and it is best when we do not engage them in so called conversation. It just irritates me so! They have arrived over at Big Government and they make a comment and get 37 responses. They have talking points and are getting paid to do so.
February 7, 2010 at 10:38 am
in this instance I 100% agree with you.
They should be completely ignored. They come, drop a load of crap, and the commentors spend all that wasted efforted refuting it.
what a waste of energy.
I hope biggovt.com folks know about troll dropping.
February 7, 2010 at 11:27 am
They have been all over the “Bigs” since just about day one. They get pounded pretty hard.
February 7, 2010 at 1:13 pm
AFinch, my hat’s off to you for having the courage to actually plow thru a leftist blog. I’ve tried, but my stomach couldn’t take it. Question: So what if Sarah had crib notes? How is that worse than a speech written in its entirety (probably phonetically)on apair of Tele-Promp-Ters? If Lefty clowns think every word Oboob utters is extemporaneous, then they’re dimmer than I thought.
February 7, 2010 at 10:01 am
I disagree, s/he seemed to be pretty fixated on that whole hand writing thing. But recanted. And I accept that.
I have no issue with people being up points we may disagree on. After all there are dems/indies/repubs/conservatives on who blog on this site. I do have an issue with trolls like the one HB used in their latest exmale of troll droppings. And it an excellent example provided by HB.
B/c in that latest troll dropping post, it requires people to research and rebut points, doing opposition research for some Axel-hole twit.
When campaigning for Hillary, I founding trolling had 3 purposes.
1) create doubt.. I was for them.. but.. etc. This makes supporters doubt their support, or it makes them spend unnecessary effort shoring up effort for a supposed supporter, who is in reality not one.
2)basic opposition research purposes. Ask “why are you for this person?” Again more time spent defending a candidate to a person who is not open minded in reality.
3)turn the tide. “I was for this person, but then I found this piece of information out, so I will not be supporting them anylonger”. This works when this poster has long been “supporting” a said candidate so the other genuine candidate takes their word more seriously.
And so the genuine supporters think: “well if poster X who has long been supporting this person and now has changed their mind, maybe I should too”
(Axel-hole hired so many people from ads I saw on Craig’s list just for this #3 point, all to sway Hillary dems to back that marxist fraud)
Disagreements are not trolls, if too much time is need to defend your support, then I just ignore that posting. But again, disagreements are not trolls.
February 7, 2010 at 10:03 am
OK disagree once. But he/she kept going and going and going. Enough!
February 7, 2010 at 10:07 am
yes, they sure did, but they also moved on and apologized (several times)for it.
If they continue, then just ignore them and scroll past their posts.
For now, I’m moving on.
February 7, 2010 at 10:10 am
S/he was the ONLY person to make that observation and is it just a coincidence that it happens to be what the leftists have latched on to elsewhere?
February 7, 2010 at 10:46 am
I did not wait nor read their apologies because I was so ticked off seeing and reading their earlier, many posts.
February 7, 2010 at 10:18 am
“(Axel-hole hired so many people from ads I saw on Craig’s list just for this #3 point, all to sway Hillary dems to back that marxist fraud)”
Do you have screen shots of this or any links to establish? (Not that I doubt your word, but I’d like to put a link on my website.)
February 7, 2010 at 10:36 am
yes, I never kept a record of it, but I had seen them on some of Hillary supporting sites.
I would look thru the archives of Hillaryis44.org or the Confluence or TexasDarlin site
(all of them are linked to on the right on the blogroll)
one of these 3 is where I remember seeing it several screenshots of those Craig’s list ads.
February 7, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Here is an article about a few of the criaglist obama jobs http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=106537
February 7, 2010 at 12:24 pm
Please review:
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/
My intent was not to disparage, but was just to point out an observation. I did not mean to offend, and if my observation offended I apologize.
February 7, 2010 at 12:42 pm
I am glad to see you were proven right. You were treated very harshly on this site last night, and I was seriously turned off by it.
If I had been accused of being a troll, I think I would have kept trying to prove my point as well.
You don’t need to apologize for trying to point out something that maybe be used against Sarah. That is what we all SHOULD be doing. Looking for ways the left will go after her, and beating them to the punch.
I think you are the one who is owed an apology.
February 7, 2010 at 5:15 pm
I agree with this, too. Turns out that Sarah did have notes on her hand which was pretty perceptive of you. Personally, I find nothing wrong with hand notes that are used as reminders when giving a speech. It wasn’t like Sarah read her whole speech from notes on her hand, or from a teleprompter.
I don’t know your political beliefs. I haven’t visited you link yet, but I guess it’s possible that you are not the biggest fan of Sarah Palin. To that, I say “so what”. From your past comments on this blog, my feeling is that you a anti-Obama, and that is good enough for me at this time. I think that the comments above that were made by Kathleen are a good way to look at things.
February 7, 2010 at 5:52 pm
Ok. I’ve finally visited your link, and I have no doubts whatsoever. You are NOT a troll.
Some of your blog’s posts are pretty funny, too. I prefer the laughs over back biting.
February 7, 2010 at 12:00 pm
OK, I don’t know for sure if sundancefan is a troll or not, but he was ABSOLUTELY correct in his assessment last night. I saw “something” written on her left hand too, and the looney left has already posted youtube videos of her looking at her hand during the question & answer period. They are using it to say she needed “cheat notes”.
I think we are getting a little carried away on this site trying to “out” the trolls in our midst. I have seen regulars like Maxine also called trolls for some of her comments, and I don’t think it moves the conversation forward.
I think sundancefan’s concern was that this would be used against Sarah, and I felt that way too when I saw her looking at her hand. But like I said in another comment last night, it could have just been a cute note that Piper wrote to encourage her mom.
Anyway, let’s not get so caught up in troll hunting that we lose sight of what is important–that we all come to Hillbuzz because we love this country and enjoy the community we have been fortunate enough to create here.
February 7, 2010 at 12:42 pm
Kimberlie, I was beginning to think I was crazy. You are 100% correct in your thoughts on my motivation. I thank you for providing a voice of reason on this issue. I hope that you do not encounter the “wrath” of irrational troll hunters in your expression as such.
It appears that some have taken to equate rational concern with trollesque behavior.
In any regard. My sanity remains confirmed.
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/
Again, my apologies to ANYONE who felt angst, by my observation of what was not originally noticed by most.
I completely agree that
February 7, 2010 at 1:10 pm
I tried to stand up for you last night, but no one wanted to hear it.
I don’t like all the “troll” namecalling that’s been rearing its ugly head lately on this site. I feel like we are starting to sink down to the level of discourteous childishness that we see on the left, and if I wanted to be a part of that, I would just read Kos or Huffpo.
I come here many times each day and comment because (most of the time) people on this site are respectful to one another. I have made some controversial comments in the past and was treated with love and respect and I will always be grateful for that.
I hope that we will continue to disagree without being disagreeable and without the namecalling.
February 7, 2010 at 1:18 pm
I know you did Kimberlie, and I really do appreciate it. Like you I have enjoyed my visits to this sight immensely. The smart humor, and consideration was part of the appeal.
However, to analogize it appears that the site is becoming a “prom-comittee” exchange. Discourteous childishness it an apt descriptive. Perhaps, just perhaps, with a pause and deep cleansing breath, some will reconsider their commitment to civility. I indeed hope so.
February 7, 2010 at 5:25 pm
And that’s what is bothering me. People, who have been around this blog for a bit, and have never indicated trollish behavior in the past, are being accused of trolling. It’s kind of like an online witch hunt with some innocents getting burned. It’s not nice, in my opinion.
This is not to say that the troll dissections are not informative. I am learning from them. But, I am also witnessing the downside of some nasty behaviors with shades of mob mentality. That’s definitely not what I expect when I visit this blog, but it’s getting more like that lately. I refuse to partake in it, but I will defend myself when someone treats me like shit.
February 7, 2010 at 12:32 pm
deb, it was not my intent to “stir up the masses”. It was merely an observation. If expressing my concern that this could potentially be an issue makes me a troll, then I guess in this instance I was. Please look here:
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/
If my concern came across as irritating then I am sorry. Truely sorry. Chicken little I am not. Observant I am. Again, my apologies to you and anyone else who viewed my observation as disparaging.
February 7, 2010 at 12:44 pm
Okay. I apologize for calling you a troll.
February 7, 2010 at 3:46 pm
ditto
February 7, 2010 at 8:05 pm
sundancefan, I know I had gotten into it a little, but I never called you a troll…of that I am sure. In fact, I said “…assuming you are NOT a troll, you have to realize that the left does look at these sites…” In any case, I apologize if it was taken that way. I shouldn’t have blown it up as something it wasn’t. I think your point was to point it out as something we should be ready for and I took it as we shouldn’t bring it up because we were adding fuel to the fire. In thinking about it again, I don’t think it would have mattered…the left would have found it anyway and done the same thing. Meh.
I make no claims to be good at troll hunting, but I know people who are and the Hillbuzz boys are in that group, so I’ll leave it to the experts.
February 7, 2010 at 9:55 am
I think what I see in these troll dissection lessons is that, overall, they are poorly written. You are correct – most people write the way they talk, and people don’t talk like this.
On another note, I am appalled by the nasty emails you received from alleged conservatives. FYI, none of my conservative friends do this. None of them. Methinks some people need to re-evaluate their sexuality if the first pejorative they use to argue POLITICS with a bunch of gay guys is to call them “fags.”
February 7, 2010 at 10:05 am
I would bet you that they are not conservatives but say they are. In Denver a year or so ago, they busted a DEM (a paid one too) who broke the windows of the Dem Headquarters to make it look like a conservative did it.
February 7, 2010 at 1:00 pm
I’ve been reading the comments at ACE since Hillary suspended. I am not surprised at all, Many/NOT All of the long time commentors there make very homophobic remarks. Maybe they wouldn’t talk like that in real life, but on a place where no one knows who they are, they have no problem talking like that.
That is one of the reasons I don’t recomend people there even tho I learn alot and I can ignore the offensive commentors, who think they are so funny BTW.
February 7, 2010 at 11:28 pm
I check Ace maybe 2-3 times a week……they’re usually on top of current happenings and I used to find it a bit more amusing than I do now……I find Ace and some of the posters there to be misogynistic…..I’ll never forget Pamela Geller’s (Atlas Shrugs) description of meeting Ace in person at some convention……..haven’t noticed alot of gay bashing but I wouldn’t be surprised…..they do think they’re funny Lyn
February 7, 2010 at 10:05 am
I noticed the smell in the air and wouldn’t have been deceived by the pile Judith left…but I still have to say I wouldn’t have been able to break it down as you do. (I would have just avoided any conversation she was involved in) But when I read what you wrote, my brain immediately knows–”oh, there’s the logic that explains the smell!” Intellectually, I get it, but still consciously connect the dots only after it’s pointed out. Frustrating. Thanks for what you are doing here in the whole site. “Taking people at face value” as individuals has been such a big thing in my life and thinking. Of course, taking people at face value is a fine thing. But the fact that it’s a fine thing does not mean it is safe to take every person at face value. Learning, learning, learning.
February 7, 2010 at 10:05 am
Hillbuzz:
Thank you for calling out the redstaters on the Eeroyism of the right. It gets so frustrating sometimes. Now its infected the Dan Riehl blog. I think his time at MSNBC is clouding his judgement on Palin.
February 7, 2010 at 10:29 am
YouTube is eaten up with trolls and Eeyores…the dissections help so much with them.
Half the time you call them on what they’re doing, and they scurry away.
February 7, 2010 at 10:58 am
Another thing about this troll: the use of ‘I’. Constantly. I this. I that. Most pepole don’t talk or write that way, we just blab out thoughts, not thinking of ourselves.
February 7, 2010 at 11:14 am
I reside in south Florida. This time of year we get invaded by the snow bird leftists who want to escape all that white glo-bull warming stuff.
You would’t believe the BS talking points I am hearing about why Hillary didn’t get the nomination. I guess since it has become so obvious that the first Affirmative Action professor is actually “REALLY STUPID” there is a need to not only discredit Sarah but to step up the Hillary bashing and kill 2 birds with one stone.
Why don’t we start a thread to list all of the ridiculous leftist talking points we hear so we can discredit all of them in return. I am hearing some really pathetic ones. What losers!
February 7, 2010 at 6:40 pm
you know, even though I do not support Hillary, one thing I recognize about her happens to be that she is not stupid. It is the same quality with Sarah. The woman talks well. On the other hand Barry sounds stupid, and he sounds like someone who does not understand Constitutional law….
February 7, 2010 at 12:12 pm
[...] How do we eliminate the word “polarizing” as a weapon used against female candidates? and Troll Dissection 101: Hillary Clinton vs. Sarah Palin Edition and Photoshop Challenge: Church of Anthropogenic Global Warming Edition and Sunday Open Thread: [...]
February 7, 2010 at 12:15 pm
[...] How do we eliminate the word “polarizing” as a weapon used against female candidates? and Troll Dissection 101: Hillary Clinton vs. Sarah Palin Edition and Photoshop Challenge: Church of Anthropogenic Global Warming Edition and Sunday Open Thread: [...]
February 7, 2010 at 12:32 pm
Sarah Palin on Fox News Sunday @ 2pm and 6pm today!
February 7, 2010 at 12:43 pm
I first heard of this site over at GWP during the Massachusetts special election. People were talking about how Hillary supporters at Hillbuzz were supporting Scott Brown as enthusiastically as conservative sites.
I have to admit, I was curious so I came over a few days ago to take a look. The first thing I noticed was the banner, with a pic of Hillary. I then started to read through some of the blog posts and comments. I saw support for both Sara and Hillary in these posts and comments.
Today, I came by to read the follow up from last night’s speech. While doing so, I started to ask myself questions. What were the questions? About the same as “Judiths”. These two women are about as far apart on the issues as you can be, so it raised questions for me.
At sites that I frequent most, Conservative Underground, GWP, RedState, Tenth Amendment Center and others, I’m not considered a troll. But from the looks of things, that may be exactly what I am here. I do have alot of questions about support for two women with such different points of view on the same website.
I can see however, asking those questions would most likely just turn into a name calling fest. I, like some of you hope Gov. Palin runs for President. I would vote for her in a heartbeat. I voted for her in 2008. To me, Sen McCain was just along for the ride. But I could never bring myself to vote for Sec. Clinton.
If all this makes me a troll, so be it. There are some thoughtful people here. There are also the mudslingers. Be careful not to let the mudslingers dominate or you will be no better than the KosKids.
For the most part I have enjoyed my short time here. People are starting to buzz about Hillbuzz. I think that’s a good thing. Just keep in mind, people who don’t agree with EVERYTHING you think, aren’t bad people. Maybe they just have honest questions, like me.
Later
February 7, 2010 at 1:19 pm
Sarah Palin spells her name with h at the end.
Any time a person has to make excuses for why he/she is reading Hillbuzz, I take it as a sign that the person has no personal convictions or opinions.
One of the reasons I like Hillbuzz is that there are no namecalling here, just strong, varied opinions. And those opinions are represented by all of us that are angry about the direction of our country’s financial status (and our own), among other issues.
And who cares if two different women (people)of different political views are supported here? I do not get the validity of your concerns.
February 7, 2010 at 5:41 pm
What is GWP?
February 7, 2010 at 12:44 pm
Lord help me, I’m agreeing with Glen Beck, LOL. But he was asked what he thought was more important in a candidate, their character or the issues they support. He immediately said their character. I agree. Issues are meaningless. Politicians lie, they make empty campaign promises, they “adjust” their views on issues. Much more important is their character, it stays consistent.
For example, I would much more trust Sarah Palin to make good decisions about women’s health then I would trust the allegedly prochoice, prowoman Obama. Blech. For him being prowoman is simply a label you wear on your sleeve to pander for votes and popularity. For Palin it’s her life, it’s a part of her character. She could no more throw women under the bus then she could chew off her own arm. Would I agree with everything she did? Probably not, but I would never doubt her intentions or her motivations to do the best possible, like I do with Obama.
February 7, 2010 at 2:25 pm
yttik,
I agree with you totally. I saw Glen Beck interview and I had the same response as Glen. Why I like Sarah Palin is because as you stated she is about “character”. You are absolutely correct. She would never throw women under the bus nor would she throw children under the bus.
Obama and much of our democratic leadership in congress, on the other hand, could care less.
And “pro-choice” in the Obama world really is a misnomer. The correct label should be “pro-abortion”. I read comments on-line during the 2008 presidential election that horrified me and they all came from Obama supporters – comments to the effect that the Palins should have aborted their youngest child and terribly derogatory terms about “special needs children”.
However Palin has come through as a “shining star”. She has only become stronger and more of an inspiration to all of us.
February 7, 2010 at 6:49 pm
Speaking as an outsider, I found the derogatory stuff about Trig to be really disgusting.
I read about some of the disgusting things being said because Sarah chose not to abort her Downs’ Syndrome baby. She got roasted from doctors in Canada, and lots of people, because she chose to give life to her infant.
Then there were things like the stupid stuff written by Andrew Sullivan. The stuff was stupid and demeaning. On top of that the DNC got people to write all sorts of lies about the Palins and about Sarah’s role as governor. It was good when one of the leading protagonists was outed and he lost his job over what he was really like… (he deserved to lose his job)… then there is Levi Johnson (yuk)….
February 7, 2010 at 1:00 pm
Dear Hillbuzz commentators and moderators. Last night my wife and I noticed something written on Sarah Palins hand during her speech.
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/
Our original thought was “oh crap, we hope that the idiots don’t use it against her”. We were actually nervous for Sarah because we noted the national spotlight with major media coverage. Our fear was that the content of her message would be lost in disparaging comments. We both found the notations to be endearing and relective of something any ordinary speaker would do. Heck, it’s something we would do.
That was the reason we mentioned it. We were fearful and wondered others opinions as such. “We (I) was not claiming the sky was falling”, we were just making an observation. That observation elicited a strong negative emotional attack response from other commentators.
So please allow me to extend our sincere apology for upsetting anyone. I hope that any offended person(s) will accept that apology and the genuine sincerity accompanying it.
February 7, 2010 at 4:00 pm
Palin’s got them in the palm of her hand, she’s crushing the elitists, and there’s not much they seem able to do about it. They can’t help it. The more they struggle, the worse it is for them. You almost have to wonder if they like it that way. Go, Cuda!
http://ckmac.com/thewholething/2010/02/in-the-palm-of-her-hand/
February 7, 2010 at 5:05 pm
no problem :)
February 7, 2010 at 1:00 pm
Yes boyz’ when I read Judith’s post’s I knew this person was a “concerned troll” this is the same person who you used as the example for the “troll dissection 101″
However’ still need to learn to break down their talking point’s, Yet’ they still remain the same. Comparing, casting doubt and playing one person against the other”
sundancefan last night’ maybe not a troll– but was acting like ONE”” to many post’s in regards to the sharpie notes on Palin’s hand’s and honestly– it was becoming redundant…” So’ I’m still not sure if that person is a concern troll or not?”
That’s what you boyz are teaching us’ and it’s not a bad thing to call someone-out’ eventually sundanced apologised”"”! Just Sayin… :)
February 7, 2010 at 1:11 pm
Cali, if you were on a bus headed for a cliff, and you were the only person who saw the abyss coming your way, would you just sit down and wait? Or, perhaps, would you try your earnest best, to provide the other passengers the benefit of your eyesight?
February 7, 2010 at 1:20 pm
Yes,,,and I know your heart was in the right place..! Sorry’ you had alot coming at you and hope you will continue to be part of this amazing group of supporter’s…”
February 7, 2010 at 1:25 pm
Absolutely. “Right is Right even if nobody does it”, and “Wrong is wrong even if everybody does it”. I think this place recongizes that (mostly).
February 7, 2010 at 1:12 pm
Sorry’ sundance, but’ it was a little over the top,,,however’ we were all so high on Palin’s speech it seemed like a “personal attack”
Sometime’s we all need to step back and think before we post and even then we can step on toe’s and not even know-it!
However we can all agree,,, Sarah did knock her speech right out of the park…” peace peeper’s :)
February 7, 2010 at 1:21 pm
She did an awesome job!! That IS what matters. All the best.
February 7, 2010 at 1:33 pm
Well. When someone keeps obsessing about a non-issue, and you see this same non-issue pop up on other conservative boards, you recognize it exactly for what it is. Sarah gave a rousing speech yesterday; she was wonderful.
That tedious and repetitive comment is an attempt to keep the focus away from her speech. It is so Axelrod-Astro-turf transparent and obvious. Icarus flew too close to the sun; the same thing happens when you try to dance too close to the sun.
February 7, 2010 at 2:01 pm
Another clue in the “those of you who consider yourselves supporters of both” comment is that trolls often take the role of a professor. Notice that Judith didn’t just come on with questions for HillBuzzBabes (as Rush called you), but questioning everyone who is reading it. Heck, it was an essay question demanding evidence to support your claims – “how [do] you support (or would support) both?”
At least she wasn’t one of the supertrolls who simultaneously give you an essay question AND say that you can’t answer it honestly because you’re a victim of cultural/religious/political indoctrination. I see those a lot on blogs by Christians and black conservatives.
Oh, and I’m a longtime lurker and have no idea if I’ve posted before. ;)
February 7, 2010 at 2:31 pm
I guess what caught my eye was the use of the conjugation of the word “snark” I can honestly say I never heard the word “snark” (or it’s derivations) used more than a few times until I started reading here regularly. So, for me, Hillbuzz has partial ownership of the word snark, in any of it’s forms! The use of the word in the post in question after stating they didn’t visit this site regularly made me question.
That being said – I’m wondering where we cross the line on Troll Hunting? How do we know when a troll post does damage? After asking a question about the Coakley-Brown contest I was questioned as to whether I was a troll (after months of posting on all sorts of topics). I hadn’t been able to keep up-to-date with the blog entries because my job (church music director) was in it’s extremely busy season (Christmas), so I just missed the blogging on why attitudes and support had changed and I was asking a question that I truly was interested in knowing the answer. I asked the question because I figure there was a good reason that I had just missed.
It was one question that got me “tagged” as a troll. So how far is too far?
I guess my thoughts on the post above – what’s the harm in explaining why people who support Hillary also support Sarah, even if it is a troll question? Chances are there are several dozen sincere new readers to one troll and maybe the edification would help? With the exposure of Hillbuzz through many different high -profile articles and blogs, this site has been getting lots of new readers. We already know this group has become quite a diverse crowd, with lots of things in common, the biggest being our belief that the Dr. U administration and the current Congress are trying to rip this country apart at the seams.
After last Wednesday’s election there were several posts on “Well, I don’t like Kirk – so I just won’t vote.” Maybe trolls – some most definitely. But people posted the reason for the need to vote for Kirk, regardless of whether you’re thrilled with him or not. Maybe this helped some sincere people who weren’t posting – but who truly thought they might sit out the Senate election in IL.
I know trolling can be a big problem. But when “outing” trolls shuts down sincere questions that can really educate the general readership – trolling might not have served it’s main purpose, but it does manage to sidetrack the intent of this site.
February 7, 2010 at 3:50 pm
Actually, the first person I ever heard use the word “snark” in public was, amazingly, the late and beloved Tony Snow.
He used to use it on his radio program and he used it several times in press briefings.
How I miss him, especially when I see that loathsome Gibbs at the podium!
February 7, 2010 at 6:34 pm
Tony Snow was such a cool guy. And a class act.
February 7, 2010 at 5:39 pm
Well written. I feel the same way as you, and I am a moderate Democrat (I’m guessing here that you are more conservative than I).
February 7, 2010 at 6:58 pm
Maybe when people write like that and use the word snark…. we can get in the habit of giving the shout out to Mrs Polly from Snarkpolitan….. :)
February 7, 2010 at 7:02 pm
I did pretty good with that one. I must be improving.
I noticed that first sentence was not right right away. “I haven’t visited regularly until today” does not make sense.
I wouldn’t necessarily flag an attempt to create common ground as trollish. I do that sometimes too if I’m concerned that someone might misunderstand me and I really think there’s a good chance they could. But this person did it too much. They tried too hard to be ingratiating.
I would like to know what they meant by sexism wasn’t a big deal until they saw it done by the left. Does that mean sexism was fine before? Or does it mean they hadn’t seen it before? Same problem as the first sentence- it doesn’t make sense.
They are really all over the place, like a liar who can’t quite get his story straight. They don’t really know what they are supposed to say.
And is it just me or is there an overtone of condescension there?
February 7, 2010 at 10:20 pm
How come I have never seen a Savatage “Hall of the mountain King” instrumental here? It is called ‘prelude to madness’ and I have included a link to all it’s 80′s hair band -screaming heavy metal glory. =)
February 7, 2010 at 10:40 pm
One other thing, I never use the word ‘leftist’ anymore, I prefer the term ‘Sinisterist’ – since after all, sinister is left in latin, and the connotation matches the denotation so deliciously… (and NO I am not a troll, just a well read squid working on his bachelors ;P )
February 7, 2010 at 11:46 pm
‘sinister is Left in latin’
I had no idea…..very interesting though….am reading a book by Barbara Oakley called “Evil Genes: Why Rome Fell, Hitler Rose, Enron Failed and My Sister Stole My Mothers Boyfriend”…….in it she examines what she refers to as the ‘Successfully Sinister’.
February 8, 2010 at 3:11 am
“Also, I’m glad to be a comrade in arms with moderates, independents, etc., to kick out the Leftists.”
First, thanks for the troll lessons.
Second, the thing I keyed in on is lumping “moderates, independents, etc.” together. I’ll watch further lessons to see if this is a pattern or not.
February 10, 2010 at 1:55 pm
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by KathleenHanover: RT @Hillbuzz Troll Dissection 101: Hillary Clinton vs. Sarah Palin Edition http://bit.ly/aYBkle...