Sometimes the truth emerges, no matter how tightly-wrapped the speaker. Even those folks who, like our own dear Sparkie, guard, or more precisely, deny and distance themselves from what they say.Once the cat's out of the bag...
I've often speculated about Sparkie's sexuality, based on her enthusiasms as expressed in her blog posts - a mixture of self-loathing and sadism.
It seems to me that the lady likes it rough, as in knowing that someone else is getting roughed up severely, up to and beyond the point of death. Burly guys in uniform, preferably combat fatigues crusted with dust and sweat, seem to hold a special appeal, as do angry old men who bully and abuse the women around them.
There's also the catholic angle, the one that posits women as either the ultimate arbiters of evil, like that slutty temptress, Eve; or as ceramic caricatures of impeccable goodness, fragile and unknowable, like the Madonna. Sparkie proudly admits to having converted to that twisted scam at the same time that millions have run from it as fast as they could.
Today was a day when she let it all hang out:
This ABC report is about show of unity with party's leaders Tuesday in Washington. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid praised Hillary. But the interesting part?
Read the comments. Oh boy.
This kind of anger toward Obama shown on an ABC news site sends a thrill up my leg.
;-)
I posted a comment in response, and promptly captured the screen for posterity. It's unlikely to stay up for long since Sparkie, like every other wingnut chickenshit with a blog, either turns on comment moderation and filters out those she objects to (and it doesn't take much, believe me); blocks IP addresses entirely; or just goes ahead and deletes the offending comment.
I thought it was pretty funny, myself.Bonus - The comment's been deleted. That took about 2 hours.
12 comments:
"...like every other wingnut chickenshit with a blog, either turns on comment moderation and filters out those she objects to (and it doesn't take much, believe me); blocks IP addresses entirely; or just goes ahead and deletes the offending comment."
Intellectual dishonesty suits your rhetorical style nicely.
Jimbo! I'm surprised to see you here. Shouldn't you be own mowing grass? It's not raining, is it?
Well, you gotta call them as you see them.
Tee hee.
A psychological point: the stubborn insistence on black and white thinking (madonna/whore) has its roots in the immature brain; around two years old, if I remember my training correctly.
It's no wonder so many of them throw tantrums.
Since she lost JD and Blake, she seems to have tried to gin up the traffic with a comic book pic. It didn't work.
I think she pissed off her base, much like McCain has.
And jim sullivan, she's been deleting my comments for YEARS. She even went so far as to change her template and conveniently deleted all of her old comments.
Please, keep trying to defend her.
Oh, and snarkle, I have a prediction -- I think Kathleen is actually smitten by the MUP. She will turn into an Obamacan around mid November.
I'm not a betting person, but I would be willing to make a little wager on my prediction. What say you?
No, Mr. Snarkle, it's not raining. I can only sit a lawnmower for so many hours a day. I wish it would rain, though. We need it.
Michelines,
Who said I was defending Rightwingsparkle? She's a moron. I'm not sure I understand what Mr. Snarkle sees in her.
I was pointing out (though it appears the point was missed) that Mr. Snarkle is not ignorant of the fact that some of his beloved wingnuts (you know, the ones he called chickenshit)don't filter out his comments or block IP addresses.
Wow! I haven't had this many comments since Fuckwad came to town.
I stand by my observation regarding chickenshit winguts and their general inability to tolerate points of view that counter their own.
One key element to psychopathy is a complete lack of empathy.
Another is, as werebear notes, arrested development.
As for Sparkie, I think she's an excellent example of the suburban wingnut subculture and, as such, is worth observing.
I'll take that bet, michilines. I say she's going down with Mad Jack. There's no turning back for her, because to do so would be to admit a mistake, which is not teh way o' the wingnut.
As for what's at stake - I'll put up something from Boston/New England that's unique and tasty, valued at up to $10, against something similar from down your way.
Deal?
You might be surprised that I agree with you, Snarkle, when it comes to Sparkie, as you call her, needing to be observed. But it should probably be left to a professional. I read her blog once and was somewhat less than taken with her gibberish.
I'd also bet that come November she'll go into mourning for a brief period (I can't see McCain beating Obama; Obama's charisma trumps McCain all around) then she will spew her bile regularly at Obama in the same manner the bloggers at the DailyKos do now toward our current president. That isn't to say that both sides, though psychotic ( as per the defintions you print here), don't make some good points every once in a while.
"I stand by my observation regarding chickenshit winguts and their general inability to tolerate points of view that counter their own."
Well, I'm sure you do. Let's not forget, though, that an inability to tolerate points of view other than your own was a key factor in the creation of your own blog. At least according to your sidebar.
Thanks for your continued response, Jimbo, but I think you're full of shit on this.
My 'tolerance' of other points of view in this context means that I'm perfectly willing to let such comments appear and stay in this blog, just as my use of the term 'tolerate' with regards to chickenshit wingnuts means that they, the chickenshit wingnuts, are unable and unwilling to do the same at their sites.
Instead, they filter, block, and delete. W
hich, as I've said, is complete chickenshit cowardice.
It's also SOP for chickenshit wingnuts, along with a range of other dishonest techniques.
I started this blog not because I don't 'tolerate' opposing points of view, but because I think that there are points of view, and more importantly, actions, that need to be aggressively and unambiguously challenged, dissected, ridiculed, exposed, and ultimately buried once and for all.
You know, points of view like: invading and occupying other countries with armed force; institutionalizing torture, or arguing that methods like sleep deprivation and psychological depersonalization are not torture; abandoning the rule of law, and the concept that no single individual is above it; spying on citizens; holding individuals, U.S. citizen or not, indefinitely without charge or access to counsel or the ability to challenge that holding.
Etcetera.
Your comparison of one person, Sparkie, to the entire 150,000+ membership of an online community, DailyKos, is glib and ill-informed.
Your reference to 'professionals' is vague and unhelpful.
Your writing is generally very poor. Stick to mowing lawns or, if you insist on writing more, get a copy a Strunk and White. Then use it.
Again, thank you for your comments.
Thank you for your advice, Mr. Snarkle. I take such things seriously. I started writing a blog, not because I thought myself a writer but because I want to become one. I'll keep working.
As I pointed out in my first comment,intellectual honesty isn't your strongest attribute. It could be not "owning up to your own shit" as you once said to me( as in ignoring the fact that myself and some others have not moderated or deleted your comments). Or it could be not acknowledging that the pathological hatred of many DailyKos writers is equal to the pathological hatred of people like your beloved 'Sparkie'. You just brand your hatred and intellectual dishonesty and cowardice as acceptable. I'm not saying the other side's behavior is acceptable, either.
After all you're still hiding behind a pseudonym, still deflecting any arguments with ad hominem arguments and appeals to ridicule.
the pathological hatred of many DailyKos writers is equal to the pathological hatred of people like your beloved 'Sparkie'.
Evidence?
you're still hiding behind a pseudonym, still deflecting any arguments with ad hominem arguments and appeals to ridicule.
You should really read and assess my comments more thoroughly before you respond.
Aaah, Snarkle.
It's no fun arguing with a kindergartener. I mean, listening to a five year old respond with ,"Nyah nyah, you're the stupid one, you need to learn to write!. Nyah nyah! I know you are but what am I?" can be annoying.
Listening to a self described poet and playwright use what amounts to the same tactic is pretty amusing for a time. But only for a time. I guess everything gets old.
"You should really read and assess my comments more thoroughly before you respond."
And why would you believe that I don't? Because I don't take the bait and argue when you insult me? Because I don't follow your clumsy deflections instead of focusing on that which you won't address? Your own intellectual dishonesty. Enough. I'm sure that's you'll just respond with more of the same.
I've had my fun. I'm going to go ride my lawnmower and feel "self-smug" for a while. See you around.
Self-smug: adjective: (1) Self satisified to such an extreme that the limbs are involved,usually from excessive pats on the back.;typically requires stretching first. (2) a lame attempt to make up a word,after investing one's poet/playwright ego in an argument.
See:https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=21357209&postID=2407026743568508063
You mean this pathetic piece of camel dung Snarklepoofter is still posting?
Haven't you managed to find a life yet? Hasn't you mother found a way to evict you and your bong collection from her basement?
Jeez, man, you're just like poor, tragic Smeagol. Slippery, fishhead-eating, slime-swallowing-and-choking, and always, still, stalking your betters.
Really, I do feel sorry for you. To a degree. I would support a fund that attempts to get your meds delivered on time, if you would promise to take them (NOT the bong hits) and keep those all-important appointments with your therapist.
Because internet stalking is something that will sooner or later get you in major trouble with the law. I'll bet you want to avoid that, eh? Because of the bongs...
I'll tell you what. Keep this blog up and running. After all, it's illegal to destroy evidence.
[knock knock]
"Yes, Officer?"
"Ma'am, we need access to your basement..."
;D
Post a Comment