A couple weeks ago I linked to a tribute to crazed lunatic Pam Geller written by a guy named Scott Pollack, who says he is the “chief editor” of something called The Critical Post. I noted at the time that it was simply one of the most badly written diatribes I had seen in a long time, bad enough to make a high school English teacher lose his lunch. Two other writers from the same site have now written amusing attempts to respond to my criticism, ducking directly into the punch in the process.
The first response is written by someone who uses the moniker Diogenes Bohica, with an introduction by Brian Sidler. Sidler ducks into the punch in the very first paragraph with this sentence:
Our readers are bid to recall, Diogenes of Sinope was a Greek philosopher and a Cynic. Among others, his distinguishing characteristic amidst the Greek pantheon of great minds and known by those familiar with his works, is anecdotal.
That last sentence is nonsensical, not just in grammar but in substance as well. Bohica does not better himself:
Shortly after reading Scott Pollack’s epic paean to Pamela Geller, I read Ed Brayton’s smarmy and malicious ad hominem critique. While Mr. Pollack’s article has occasional digressions and is at times poorly punctuated, it does have the mitigating virtues of enthusiasm, accuracy and supporting documentation.
Like most people, Bohica seems to have little idea what an ad hominem is. I’m sure Pollack found my mockery of his non-existent writing skills to be insulting, but that does not an ad hominem make. Pollack’s writing was appallingly bad, especially for someone who postures as the editor of a website. I pointed out that it was appallingly bad and I was right. Sorry if that bother you.
My efforts to find anything by Mr. Brayton similarly criticizing the TOTUS’ (Teleprompter of the United States) frequent use of “uh,” “um” and “y’know” while pausing to find his place on the scrolling screen, attempting to formulate a thought, or merely giving people a cue for a standing ovation, were fruitless.
Imagine that. But there is a difference, of course, between someone who uses “ums” and “uhs” while speaking — that is, almost all of us almost all of the time — and someone who writes as badly as Mr. Pollack does. If our pseudepigraphic Greek correspondent wants to find substantive criticism of President Obama, that certainly isn’t hard to find on my blog. I am one of the president’s most vociferous critics for his disturbing betrayals of the Constitution when it comes to executive power, the Bill of Rights, the rule of law and many other issues.
One may conclude that Mr. Brayton, a self described failed comic due to the illiteracy of his audiences, resents Mr. Pollack’s growing presence in the blogosphere and may be a misogynist envious of Ms. Geller’s courage, dedication, eloquence and appeal.
One could conclude such a thing, but only if one is an idiot. I had never heard of Pollack before stumbling upon the post in question, but I would have no reason to resent Pollack’s “growing presence” even if he had one. But since the Alexa ranking for The Critical Post is 3,733,130, compared to 17,752 for FTB, his “presence” has nothing to do but grow.
The second response is from the aforementioned Sidler, who decides instead to go for fat jokes:
Were I to be enthusiastically inclined to provide the kind of ad hominem attack that these dweebs who frequent the freethoughtblogs.com forum do not deserve, there would be no end to the tongue-in-cheek humor I could provide and enlist as well aimed arrows in an endless quiver of personal barbs.
That Mr. Ed Brayton seems to be a little fatty, like his acolytes, who have to reach underneath their rolls of flab to find only smidgens of manhood, a term I use loosely in their regard, is a laughable aside. I wish I could draw. I could render a wonderful cartoon depicting what their personal scenes staring at computer screens must assuredly resemble…
To conclude, Mr. “Defunct Non-Comic” Ed Brayton, not only sports a very generous girth where-under his manhood hides, he and his cohort are hypocrites to boot.
Come now, Mr. Sidler, you can do better than that. You neglected the obvious “he’s so gay” and you failed to end your post with an exasperated “Whatever!”
A closer inspection of their web metrics reveals freethoughtblogs.com is mostly frequented by young lads 18-24 with some college, browsing from home or school. Enough is said there to fill volumes of humorous, off color remarks. Moreover, it’s taken them a few years to get where they are which is not very far at all, intellectually or otherwise.
The point is however, they’re not worth too much. We’re too busy.
Right. That explains why you wrote two different responses, neither of them with a shred of substance to them. It’s because you’re too busy.
One last note. There is this curious subdivision within its confines called Maryam Namazie. What prey tell is the sole purpose of this meandering? To deride Islam of all things, can you imagine? Something which our friend Pam Geller spends her time doing very well.
He didn’t need to go to Maryam Namazie’s blog to find criticism of Islam; I am a staunch critic of Islam myself. I do not criticize Pam Geller because she thinks Islam is a bad thing, I criticize her because she turns criticism of Islam into virulent hatred for Muslims and a desire to violate their rights and because she promotes the patently ridiculous fantasy that America is on the verge of being taken over by Sharia law. You simply cannot maintain that last position without being either delusional or stupid.
I criticize Geller for her obvious hypocrisy in complaining, for example, about religious accommodations for Muslims but not for Christians or Jews. I criticize her for painting all Muslims with the same broad brush, as though they were all just waiting for their chance to behead someone. Reactionary Islam is the most hateful and barbaric ideology in the world and it must be firmly opposed. But it isn’t just irrational to include all Muslims under that label, it also harms our ability to fight against the most virulent strains within that religion. There are thousands of moderate, reasonable Muslim Americans working diligently with the FBI, the CIA and NSA, and the military to infiltrate, analyze and directly fight against Muslim terrorist groups all over the world. They should be praised rather than demonized.
So let’s recap. Incapable of defending Pollack’s inability to write coherently, Bohica and Sidler make the following points:
1. I’m jealous of the popularity of a blogger who doesn’t get even a tiny fraction of the traffic I get. And,
2. I’m fat.
3. I use ad hominems, which isn’t surprising since I’m fat and all my readers are losers.
Bravo, gentlemen. Your brave battle with rationality is bound to end successfully.