The post below was first posted on February 26, 2006, following an expeditionary foray into a liberal blog.
It turns out that fathead/Uncle Joe ("fatneck" at Mr. Sayet's) was from that blog.
Any interested observer will have noted both Mr. Sayet's and my own forbearance in censoring/deleting a particularly noxious and persistent troll like fathead, out of principle and the championing of Free Speech. They would have also noted fathead's unconscionable exploitation of that principle--which is more of a courtesy in a blog, anyway.
They would have also noted fathead's sneering accusations of "cowardice" when he reached critical mass here and began to be deleted for the sake of hygeine.
Calling that an act of "cowardice" was a projection. By his own words, by his own--his own, mind you-- understanding of what compels deletions (i.e. cowardice) it is certain, then, that the censoring, deletion, and banning of your outspoken host at that blog, over two years ago, was cowardice.
The post merits recopying now because, for one, it is an accurate and enduring profile of the liberal mind in action.
Two, it explains why fathead/Uncle Joe was indeed obsessively after your host as if on some vendetta.
I thought he may have been any of several angry liberals that Republicus had confronted in the past: Gothamimage (who was in denial of being a Bush-hating liberal), Lee Harvey (who admitted it), or the alternatingly whiny and heckling houstonmod, but I couldn't be sure.
Then Alice had discovered that he belonged to a band of cartoonists. That still didn't trigger anything, but, recently, something clicked.
Fathead is Sirk (or "Sick") from the liberal blog I was observing two years ago.
He was the most repugnant of the group.
Here is the post which covers my adventures at that liberal blog: BANNED FROM THE LIBERAL AVENGER
...or, should I say, "Escape From The Planet Of The Apes?
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Republicus has trolled he means visited the blog of The Liberal Avenger ( http://www.liberalavenger.com/ ), and, indeed, felt like an astronaut visiting an alien planet...
...or more like Colonel George Taylor on the Planet of the Apes (there is actually one character there who is part of the troop that runs the blog who goes by the handle of-- fittingly enough-- "Apeman").
Of course, by the film's end, Taylor realizes that the Planet of the Apes is actually the future planet Earth.
God save us all if Liberalism should happen to inherit the earth (the Statue of Liberty is there, of course, but in ruins and buried chest-deep in the ground).
Although the group blog is technologically cutting edge, prolific in production, quick to grab breaking stories, and well-organized among the cooperative, communal troop, Republicus felt like he was on a safari hacking his way through a jungle with a machete and then stumbling upon a clearing filled with a troop of armpit and crotch-scratching, hooting, hopping, hollering, and screaming monkeys and apes who started throwing their feces at him.
It's a noisy place. Gibbons and spider-monkeys--the useful idiots in the choir-- are constantly swinging from branch to branch across the leafy canopy and dropping an assortment of obligatory nuts and monkey feces like "Bush LIED!" and "No WMD!" and "Abu Ghraib!" and "Valerie Plame!" and "Imperialism!" and "Neocon!" and whatnot on your head.
There's a Dr. Zaius-like orangutan (he knows who he is) who frowns suspiciously at the appearance of Homo sapiens (i.e. conservatives) and is shocked that they know how to speak and formulate arguments (like Dana from Common Sense Political Thought, http://commonsensepoliticalthought.com/), because it flies in the face of his orthodoxy (which is that the liberal is the higher, enlightened primate and the conservative a grunting troglodyte).
His first impulse is to shout down and try to intimidate the intelligent conservative--or "wingnut"-- and accuse him of being a dangerous interloper from the Forbidden Zone (i.e. "Red State" America--a.k.a. "Jesusland"), but will grudgingly--and tentatively, on a trial basis-- tolerate the infidel as long as he minds his inferior place.
In other words, the "wingnut" is consigned to a status of Islamic dhimmitude, and watched very carefully.
There's also a General Ursus-like gorilla or two (they know who they are) who serve as sergeant-of-arms of sorts and angrily patrol the clearing and Whack! uppity "wingnuts" upside their heads with their rifle-butts to maintain order.
Then there's the Cornelius-like higher-order chimps (they know who they are) who seem good-natured enough, inquisitive, intelligent, and lovers of science and show some affection--and even respect--for the brutalized "wingnuts," but, born and bred on the Ape Planet, are careful not to overly-fraternize with them and so invite recriminations from Dr. Zaius and the Ursuses and being tagged as "Wingnut-Lovers" (or some such stigmatization).
The religion of the apes is bereft of a Supreme, Transcendant Deity (that would be too primitive a notion for such stunted "progressives" to entertain), but while vehemently attacking any conservative, biblically-based "Manichaean" notions of "Good" and "Evil" and condemning the morality engendered by those value systems and crying foul against the subsequest sanctioning--if not necessitating-- of judgment calls (because "It's all relative...There are too many shades of gray...Too much nuance," etc.), they spend a considerable amount of time projecting just those very things, but inversely as they draw the line that separates "Good" and "Evil" between (1) President Bush, the "Neocons," Republicans, conservatives, and Christians, "wingnuts" all (i.e. "Evil") and (2) the rest of the world (i.e. presumably liberal and "Good"), while judging the "wingnuts" as being judgmental and themselves as non-judgmental in the process.
They don't seem to be aware of the endemic illogic and outrageous contradictions which manifests themselves in such liberal gems as "We hate your hatefulness!" and "We will not tolerate your intolerance!" and, of course, "We judge you to be judgmental!"
Hence, the liberal ape is silent or dismissive--if not approving-- of former President Bill Clinton's bombardment of Iraq on explicitly-stated grounds of Iraqi WMD capabilities but explodes in furious indignancy when military action against Saddam Hussein is continued to finality by the hated President George W. Bush on the same grounds (among sundry others).
He is silent, dismissive, or approving of Clinton's use of the availed NSA surveillance tools when he utilized them to track down domestic terrorist Tim Mcveigh and his ring (American citizens all), but explodes in fury when Bush uses the same tool in the pursuit of foreign, Al Qaeda operatives when a domestic link is reasonably suspected.
He is silent or dismissive of liberal Senator Ted Kennedy's drunken delay in reporting the Chappaquidick incident to the proper authorities (because he needed to sober up before reporting that he drove his car off a dock and drowned the lady passenger in the process), but explodes in fury when the despised Vice President Richard Cheney delays in reporting the recent hunting accident to the White House Press Corp...
...and snidely sneers that the vice president was drunk and needed to sober up!
He rages against the message-controlling endeavors of the administration and its historical prerogative to pick and choose, shelve, or dispose of information that is helpful or harmful to their agenda, but then resorts to, in his very blog, outright censoring of, not only relevant points that would bolster the "wingnut's" arguments, but their reasoning rebuttals to unwarranted attacks as well.
And on and on.
Such a twisted tangle of illogic which naturally produces sundry hypocrisies and contradictions spewing out of the orating ape appears to be the result of absorbing the insidious, nonsensical propaganda of their own sacred Scriptures, the canon of which includes the gospels of such secular saints as Noam Chomsky, the epistles of Al Franken, and the fevered, apocalyptic Revelations of such visionaries as Michael Moore.
Chomsky, for one, is granted the infallibility of a pope, and any challenge to his authority on all matters of Heaven and Earth is tantamount to blasphemy.
For the religious Bush-Hating liberal, President Bush and his administration are, of course, the center and cause of Evil in the world today, but the demonization inspires frenzied frissons of anger and despair one sees not in Sabbatical or Sunday Judeo-Christian congregations, but in a cult, and not just any cult, but a satanic one.
The word "satan" comes from the Hebrew word for "adversary," referring to the adversarial status the entity of Evil has towards humans. Because it was believed that faith in a nurturing God and trust in His Word (as believed by the faithful to be intrinsic in Scripture) was essential to the survival of the species in a fallen world presided over by that very satan, it was incumbent upon the malicious entity to sever the spiritually-umbilical relationship humans have with the benevolent, life-sustaining Creator (as bridged by Sacred Writ), before he can have the species fully in his malignant clutches.
And that endeavor is best accomplished by demeaning The Word (i.e. The Bible) and attacking outright the Western Deity and biblical champions with venomous insults and sneering sophistries alike, behavior which is clearly displayed in the coven of The Liberal Avenger.
In the process, they--as usual-- contradict themselves.
"Jesus probably never even existed, no one can know for sure because The Bible is myth and not history."
"Christians worship a man who definitely died and stayed dead 2,000 years ago."
King David (who lived 1,000 years before Jesus Christ and is a greater candidate to be determined a myth) was nevertheless "definitely (i.e. historically in Time and Space) a flaming queer."
So Jesus probably never existed, but if he did, he's definitely dead.
Similarly, if King David actually existed, he was definitely "a flaming queer."
Those are the syllogisms of simpletons, as they arbitrarily premise the dubiousness or outright denial of Christ's or King David's historical existence on the assumed "mythological" nature of The Bible, but the "historically unreliable"--if not worthless-- material is then parsed and subjectively interpreted to arrive at "definite" conclusions that, supposedly, the material implicitly suggests (e.g. that Jesus was dead as a doornail and therefore the "Resurrection" was but a graverobbing, or that David and Jonathan were more than "just friends"), despite what is explicitly stated (e.g. a corporeal resurrection for the former and an aggressive heterosexuality for the latter that compelled the "flaming queer" to arrange the death of the husband of the woman--i.e. Bathsheba--who was the object of his "flaming, homosexual" lust).
With all that in mind, what makes "satanic" an appropriate adjective to use when describing some of the apes in there is not any claim of theirs to "enlightened" equal opportunity atheism (i.e. a rejection of the supernatural and all forms of theism on grounds of rational skepticism), but their focused attacks against Western Judeo-Christianity in particular, and more specifically against conservative Christianity itself.
Indeed, the same visceral bile is not vented on other religions, such as Buddhism and Hinduism.
You could argue--in defense of the double-standard-- that they are not the same thing, i.e. Judeo-Christianity versus Buddhism and Hinduism, the former following the Western tradition of divine, spiritual transcendance while the latter two being Eastern pantheistic or polytheistic religions of divine material immanence, and that they--the apes-- are merely expressing their preference for the latter by insensistively, ignorantly, intolerantly, and disrespectfully lambasting the former (which is, incidentally, a very un-Buddhist thing to do).
Alright, that is certainly their prerogative, but consistency of principle is not the earmark of the liberal, and what calumny should be doubly-dumped on the head of Islamic Jihadism--the third major Western religion of divine, spiritual transcendance and an outcropping of Judaism and Christianity to boot--is not only tongue-bitten, but replaced with apologies and justifications for the maniacal, religious extremists, defenses that they cannot muster for faithful Christians (who themselves are considered to be the maniacal, religious extremists par excellence).
Here are a few examples which illustrate that:
Republicus once countered the sneering and over-the-top term of "Christo-fascist" with "Islamo-fascist" (because we are at war, and the Christian-hating liberal must constantly be reminded who the real enemy of the state is).
One of the apes in there jumped on that and disqualified the compound word on the basis of the definition of "fascism," and how it was inapropos to conjoin such a politically-loaded term with the "apolitical" Muslim.
But that ignores the fact that by the very nature of compound words, the "fascist" in "Islamo-fascist" conditions the other word (i.e. "Islamo"), and/or vice versa, so it was a worthless, gratuitous criticism.
It's like critiquing the compound word "trundle-bed" because a trundling does not mean bed.
Furthermore, given the preferred system of theocratic government, the nationalism, racism, and militancy (hallmarks of fascism) inherent in the tirades of Jihadists everywhere, Republicus--along with others-- believes the compounding of "Islamo" with "fascist" works well, with the "dictatorship" inherent in "fascism" easily interchanged with "theocracy," both being autocracies of sorts and sharing other qualities (if not synonyms).
Meanwhile, however, no apologies for starting the exchange with "Christo-fascism"!
Another example of satanic, single-minded malice towards Christianity was in posts about the Danish cartoon controversy.
The posted grievances at Ape Land were not against the maniacal mobs of Jihadist extremists for their taking of violent offense against cartoons that more or less came right out and illustrated that Islam begets violence, but were gripes against--you guessed it-- "American Christians" for criticizing the violence, calling them--the Christians-- "ignorant" and "disrespectful" of other religions before apologizing for the Jihadists (e.g. they were the victims of insensitive and disrespecftul blasphemy from the Christian West which they felt compelled to riot against, as well they should!).
By the way, of the Christian Westerners who were present--including Republicus--all said that the cartoonists could have exercised--under the circumstancs-- more tact, so the blanket premise by the apes was a false one to begin with.
Anyway, the shamelessness of that Blame-America-First knee-jerk reaction and proof of the satanic double-standard against Christianity is the fact that, a few posts before that, a resident cartoonist there--Sick, or "Sirk"-- was snidely revelling in providing links to his X-mas cartoon which featured a liberal Asian teeny-bopper--the strip's heroine-- telling a WASPish conservative blonde dressed in Santa Claus tighties that God must have a tiny penis in order to penetrate the Virgin Mary and still preserve her virginity (shocking the sensibilities of the Christmas blonde, which must've been-- Republicus presumes-- the hilarious beauty of the punch-line, i.e. "Mock and Shock the Christian Conservative!").
But the apes were astonishingly oblivious to their own stark double-standard when juxtaposed with their later, inverted positions on a nearly identical subject!
In another post, Sick was gleefully discussing and providing links to some other cartoon which had Pat Robertson (or somesuch televangelist) sodomizing the corpse of the crucified Christ.
Granted, Robertson appears to Republicus as a manipulator who swindles his gullible, check-writing flock for his own cupidity and pursuit of wordly power, but Republicus commented that if he--Sick--really wanted to make a career out of cartooning, he had better mainstream his material, because that stuff wasn't going to fly in Peoria.
For that, Republicus was attacked by a liberal monkey there (swinging in from the jungle), accusing him of being an "Uptight Roman Catholic" (Rebublicus is neither) and nearly quagmiring him in dyslexic gibberish.
So yes, the apes at Ape Land clearly demonstrate an exceptional malice for conservative, American Christianity that overrides any gripes they should have for Islamic sects that are--demonstrably-- the fascistic threat they accuse the former of being, and which just so happen to be the stated enemy we are at war with.
It's satanic inversion. It's backwards.
Not only that, but the sheer malice evidently overrides their reasoning abilities as well, if their utter blindness to the double-standard is any indication.
Perhaps it is partly because the enemy of their enemy is a friend, and the Jihadist's are the enemy of their enemy, the despised and Evangelical George W. Bush.
Finally, the two "wingnut" trolls who were, eventually, banned--i.e. Republicus and a gentleman named Corrie-- were the ones who were the most easily identified as--not merely Bush-supporting, "pro-war" Republicans (who themselves get their fair-share of abuse)--but "Christo-fascists," and so earned a special contempt for themselves.
Mind you, Republicus never sermonized, but merely discussed the theological matter--which they raised-- in reasonable terms.
For his part, Corrie explores and didacts The New Testament in his blog ( http://sddc.blogspot.com/) on a scholarly level.
Ape Land is indeed militantly anti-Christian, and those "wingnuts"--like Republicus--who identify themselves with the beleagured Faith and spring to its defense when it is routinely maligned and gratuitously attacked and point out the double-standard and request an explanation for it invite the special contempt and are singled-out for the fast track of abuse, censorship, and then banishment (followed by long-winded, mentally-masturbating posts which--self-conscious of the censorship-- attempt to rationalize and explain why the censorship was not censorship and why the vindictiveness was not vindictiveness, similar to, interesting enough, their idolized hero's--i.e. former-President Bill Clinton's-- assertions that fellatio did not constitute "sex").
Until the final eviction, any toleration of a "wingnut" is evidently considered by the more ideological and militant apes of the troop (e.g. the orangutans and gorillas) not as something done in the spirit of Free Speech, but as magnanimity, that they are merely doing the wingnut--or "troll"-- a favor, warning him that if he didn't follow the sharia-like rules of the liberal community (e.g. submission--if not adherence-- to party-line and ideology), he was in danger of having his speech abilities impaired, and they cryptically mention devilish devices fashioned for just that very purpose, causing nearby gorillas to get excited and purse out their lips and hoot and shake their heads about and hit the ground with a stick in a spasm of delight at the prospect of the foregone execution (the Cornelius-like chimps, presumably, must recognize the Nazi and/or Jihadist-like anti-American barbarity of such measures, but, as in the movie, it would seem, feel pretty much helpless when trying to reason with the religious and militant bullying wing of the troop, and so say nothing).
Republicus, of course, saw an opportunity to see just how "inclusive" and "tolerant" and "non-judgmental" and "pro-diversity" (all things they accuse "wingnuts" of not being) the liberal ape truly is when push came to shove, so he saw fit to push the envelope (which simply means "speak his mind").
Sure enough, with a few well-reasoned rebuttals which irrefutably pointed out the inherent, illogical contradictions, hypocrisies, double-standards, sheer partisanship, judgmentalism, intolerance, hatefulness, and outright pettiness of the apes' arguments, leaving them stymied but trembling in fury, they decided the time had come to perform the lobotomy and silence the talking abomination once and for all by rolling out such Mediaeval instruments as "The Disemvoweler" and "The Scratcher," contraptions utilized for operations of censorship, performed with vindictively-smug satisfaction and sadistic, heckling glee.
Visions of Mediaeval Inquisitors pulling out blaspheming tongues with pliers flashed through the mind of Republicus, as well as images of Zarqawi cutting off the heads of civilians.
The apes once said that the only reason why conservative American Christians don't behave like Jihadist terrorists is because they don't have the power to, but if gained they would decapitate evolutionists, abortion providers, and homosexuals alike, as well as engage in aggressive censorship (always referring to the anomalous abortion clinic bombings by the unhinged Pro-Life militant as proof).
But that is a projection:
As the hosts of Ape Land, with certain powers at their command, the apes choose not to argue with their conservative guests on a point-by-point basis, as is expected in a political blog, or even just ignore the warranted rebuttals, but instead--after initially responding by firing warning salvos of insults like "a*****e"-- sadistically indulge themselves with the devilish instruments at their disposal-- e.g. the dreaded "Disemvoweler" and the sinister "Scratcher"-- to silence the reasoning opposition.
One does not need to wonder how they would deal with political opposition--from Republicans to Conservatives to Pro-Intervensionists to Creationists to Pro-Lifers to those opposed to Same-Sex Marriage-- were they given real political power, because they demonstrate their Mediaeval inclinations--right before your eyes-- in Ape Land.
As for how they would deal with the despised, milk-&-cookies, notoriously-law abiding and tax-paying American Fundamentalist Christians, one thinks of how the Roman Emperor Nero dealt with the hated faith.
Sick took the censorship one step further:
While the Disemvowler and the Scratcher make plain that the actual quote has been tampered with, Sick deleted an entire comment by Republicus and typed in new words where the comment was under the handle of Republicus, quite literally putting words in Republicus' mouth that were not said.
These are the belligerent, fascist primates posing as "liberal" Champions of "Free Speech" and "Diversity" and "Tolerance" and "Anti-War" and "Intellectualism" who deem themselves fit to dictate on the World Wide Web how fascistic, anti-Free Speech, anti-Diversity, anti-intellectual, and intolerant the war-mongering Bush Administration-- and conservative "wingnuts" everywhere-- allegedly are.
And here they are, "Hey-Hey For The Monkees":
The main host, LA, seems to be your typical liberal against all the things liberals are typically against, most especially Bush-And-All-Things-Bush, but he seems to be a good-natured and even a fair-minded fellow, nonetheless, who enjoys a lively discussion with good give-and-take.
Republicus once wrongfully accused him of deleting a comment (after already being disemvoweled and scratched out on several occassions). He was mistaken, however, and apologized (the comment was posted in another thread).
Before that discovery, however, LA thought that the comment may have been inadvertantly swallowed by the blog itself, and he had the hospitality and class to apologize (even though it wouldn't have personally been his fault).
There's also Ryan, and Gordo, who likewise tow the party-lines and subscribe to the ideologies but seem to be of pleasant character, with no hard feelings, and revert to normalcy (i.e. common decency and All-American bonhommie) when disengaged from politics.
They struck Republicus as the higher-order chimps of the analogy.
Then there's Upyernoz, Joe, Jimmy, and Dobby, who appeared to Republicus as the Gibbons and Spider-Monkeys who swung across the canopy and threw stuff down on the "wingnuts," like monkey feces and coconuts.
Then there's SGO, who's like a high-school hall-monitor of sorts, carrying a clip-board and always red-flagging the "wingnuts" and warning them to stop running down the hall.
If a "wingnut" becomes too impassioned with the subject and begins to argue forcibly, SGO will appear and SLAP down a ruler on the desk and remind him of the three-strikes rule (or somesuch suppressive measure) and the preference for O'Reillyesque "pithiness" before finally exploding in fury and lopping off "wingnut" heads with a THUNK (what is censorship, after all, if not virtual decapitation?).
He likes to mock Christians by blessing them with an invocation of pagan deities before signing off with a flourishing and smug signatory: ~
He is a self-important orangutan with limited patience.
Further down the food-chain is "Apeman," who has a condescending, dismissive, faux-elitist, but grunting attitude towards what he perceives to be the lower-order bacterium (i.e. Republicans, Conservatives, Christians, etc.).
Twice he gratuitously-- off-topic-- sniffed that the blog of Republicus was "horrible"-- which, of course, could only be a compliment.
He is...well, he's an ape.
At the very bottom of the food chain is Sick, or Sirk (whatever), a cartoonist who wastes his talents scribbling and quipping in the cartooning style and with the subject-matter one would find in Hustler magazine.
Sick is the crankiest of the troop, the Grumpy of the Seven Dwarves, and while he seems to be spitefully championing his own rights to Free Speech with his insults and anti-Christian (if not antisocial-- or even sociopathic) in-your-face cartoons, he constantly begrudges and soon enough denies the same right to others (even after attacking them and warranting a rebuttal).
When Republicus complained, Sick's response was: "This is my thread and here you're my bitch."
As a representative of Liberalism, Sick is not doing the cause any favors, to be sure.
Sick, it should be added, with his chronic complaints about America and her elected President, is not even an American citizen, but a Canadian one (go figure).
Republicus suspects that the recent election of conservative Stephen Harper to the Prime Ministership of Canada may be a contributive factor to his now chronic grumpiness and spiteful scribblings, but really now, that's really no excuse for going ballistic when his inconsistencies in principle and outrageous double-standards that always favored the opposition to Bush/Republicans/Conservatives/ Christians get pointed out (which is when the s**t really begins to fly, ad hominem attacks get spewed aplenty, and the temptation to censor becomes irresistable).
Sick is a howler monkey...
...if not an angry gorilla who can't find his banana because he stuck it up you-know-where one naughty afternoon and then forgot where he put it.
Welcome to the land of liberals, "a grotto of guano-drinking moonbats," as one resident conservative zoologist--Bedrock Truth, the Moonbat Abattoir, and the real star of the show (http://moonbatabattoir.blogspot.com/ )-- aptly puts it.
Welcome to the Planet of the Apes.