September 02, 2003

How to hijack someone's comments

Castro-admirer Leesa, in this post on September 11th, provides an object lesson.

Posted by Andrea Harris at September 2, 2003 07:29 AM
Comments

Andrea, Interesting post. I personally would have titled it, "How to spread propaganda and perpetuate misinformation--an example by Yeti and Co."

Posted by: Leesa at September 2, 2003 at 10:33 AM

That's it - from now on I'm sticking to posting about the myth of the Female Orgasm.

Posted by: TheYeti at September 2, 2003 at 11:07 AM

Having read the linked article over at The Yeti's site, I'd say that Leesa is living proof that John Derbyshire was right.

"Wherever there is a jackboot stomping on a human face there will be a well-heeled Western liberal to explain that the face does, after all, enjoy free health care and 100 percent literacy."

Posted by: Tobacco Road Fogey at September 2, 2003 at 04:40 PM

Dear Compatriots -

Please join up with bloggers around the world in defense of the Iranian people against a Fanatic Islamic Terroristic Dictatorial regime with BLOG-IRAN Grassroots Campaign. If it's something you would be interested in please visit http://www.activistchat.com/blogiran/

Hope to hear from you!!!!
In Unity,
Haleh

Posted by: Haleh at September 3, 2003 at 01:22 AM

WHY did you point me to that, Andrea? WHY? Was I too full of the joy of living, of hope for the future, of simple contentment in the everday pleasures of the world? Did I smile too widely, too often? WHY?

Leesa, honey, I got about 2/3 through that comment thread and never did see you acknowledge that people don't try to float pickup trucks in a frantic attempt to get the fuck out of Dodge if Dodge is truly a workers' paradise. You can cite statistics from history books all you want to, but until you address that central fact, you haven't proved a goddamn thing.

(Sorry for all the swears, Andrea. But . . . WHY?!?)

Posted by: ilyka at September 3, 2003 at 08:08 AM

ilyka, your patronizing attitude is not surprising. Not once in the thread did I claim that Cuba was a "workers' paradise." I did also address that fact, in that members of the upper middle class and upper class left en masse after the revolution, and that persecuted dissenters often leave today. I never denied the fact that Castro mistreats dissenters, matter of fact, I noted and agreed with it many times.

Perhaps a course in reading comprehension is in order, honey?

Posted by: Leesa at September 3, 2003 at 01:40 PM

Leesa,

You know, your problem is that you swallow the text and spit out the comprehension. You know absolutely NADA about Cuba. Not a single damn thing. And to make it worse you rant and rant and spew forth what can be construed as a Castro speech to his people. Which, if I may be so bold as to point out, are the epitomy of a CAPTIVE AUDIENCE.

Posted by: Val Prieto at September 3, 2003 at 02:21 PM

Where I grew up, people who would talk about Communist dictators with stuff like, "Of course he's no angel, but..." -- are called "but"-heads.

Posted by: McGehee at September 3, 2003 at 02:43 PM

Curious, seeing as according to people with high-falutin' degrees, Castro was a conservative.

Posted by: Brenda at September 3, 2003 at 02:58 PM

Leesa,

Cuban dissenters are "mistreated," you say, and some of them "leave." Is it not worth acknowledging that they are risking their lives in trying to leave, as leaving Cuba without permission is a de facto capital offense? Is it not worth adding that if the Cuban police don't catch these people who "choose to leave," it is highly probable that the sharks will?

There are much poorer states in the world than Cuba, but they don't generally have defections every time they send a sports team to a Western country. That's because people can legally leave if they want to, without being shot on sight. They don't have to defect.

Posted by: Michelle Dulak at September 3, 2003 at 03:31 PM

Val, interesting that you take me trying to prove one point as the entirety of my knowledge on Cuba. Interesting, indeed. A single debate can hardly be an example of one person's knowledge on a subject, as debates are generally oriented towards a specific issue. This debate was over whether Castro=Saddam. I disagreed, and cited facts that backed up my argument. Because the debate was a narrow one, I refused to be sidetracked onto issues that did not relate to the point I was trying to prove, which was that not everything Castro did was bad. It's really that simple.

Michelle, I did not deny the fact that they risk their lives. Again, the debate was over whether Castro=Saddam. Yes, there are horrible, horrible things that go on in Cuba. I never denied this. Instead, I stuck to a single argument, which was that not everything Castro did was bad. He does not equal Saddam Hussein. That's it, period. I am aware that people cannot legally emigrate from Cuba. I have acknowledged that Castro does horrible things. I have acknowledged that dissenters flee Cuba because they fear what will happen to them if they stay.

Brenda, careful--you're giving credence to those wacky left-wing liberal Marxist academics! They're not to be believed! Don't be brainwashed!

Andrea, thanks for all of the hits. It's been fun.

Posted by: Leesa at September 3, 2003 at 03:51 PM

Leesa: goodbye, it's been real dull having you around.

Troll King: no.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at September 3, 2003 at 09:21 PM

Okay. Hopefully I can survive this by leaning on my well-known utter loathing for that bearded Pig Fucker, Fidel Castro.

To the best of my knowledge, his body count stands at around 17,000, according to sources like THE BLACK BOOK OF COMMUNISM. Furthermore, while his torture chambers are a study in horror for anyone who's cared to learn about them, he hasn't made a habit of throwing people live into a plastic shredder merely for his own personal amusement.

In the list of great monster dictators of the 20th century, Castro probably belongs somewhere near the bottom of the Top 100, whereas Saddam probably deserves to be somewhere in the top 10.

So--and Andrea's probably still irate with me after the whole "Bright" thing--I must say, Leeza's not entirely (not entirely) off-base.

Except it's hard to point to anything truly good done by Castro. It really is, and she should acknowledge that too.

Posted by: Dean Esmay at September 3, 2003 at 11:16 PM

Oops. "Leeza" should equal "Leesa." Solly.

Posted by: Dean Esmay at September 3, 2003 at 11:17 PM

Oops. Dear me. Just read the comments from her on the Yeti's thread where she talks about how if you visit Cuba, people "gush about" Cuba.

Oh. My. God. I'd better rethink my position...

Posted by: Dean Esmay at September 3, 2003 at 11:31 PM

Yes, Leesa is, for all of her ability to string big words together and copy/paste arguments like a fiend, an idiot.

A well meaning idiot. But still, an idiot.

I'm sure Hitler liked puppys.

Need I say more, or are the Godwin's Law Police (does that even apply to 'blog comments?) going to break out the rubber hoses and commence waling on my ass now?

Posted by: Eichra Oren at September 4, 2003 at 02:03 AM

Gush about Castro. I mean to say "gush about Castro."

Grr. I'm such an idiot.

Posted by: Dean Esmay at September 4, 2003 at 06:10 AM

Thanks for that explanation, Andrea.

Posted by: Troll King at September 4, 2003 at 09:48 AM

The only reason Castro's body count numbers don't equal Saddams is because he has a big, bad-ass neighbor 90 miles to the north that would not allow it. The 17000 deaths Dean mentions seems like a very low number to me. We need to add to that all of the Cubans that have died trying to escape the regime by crossing the Gulfstream.

And Leesa, the reason I said you knew absolutely nothing about Cuba, apart from it being obvious, is one that Dean mentioned in quoting you. "Gushing about Castro." What planet, exactly, are you living on?

Posted by: Val Prieto at September 4, 2003 at 03:53 PM