Friday, October 06, 2006

One More Word on that "Stop Sex Predators" Blog. For Now

Recall a couple days ago when I mentioned that the "blog" that published those (very slightly) creepy e-mails that Mark Foley sent to a page was giving off a fragrance vaguely reminiscent of Ryan Rhodes' bathroom post burrito? (And let's not forget the satisfying validation too.) One of the more objective members of the local lefty blogosphere -

*SNORK!!!*

urp..'scuse me a sec.

*hack* *hack* *HWAAARRRRRKKKK!!!*

Sorry. Reading that last remark about self-proclaimed "objective" leftybloggers made soda shoot out my nose. Don't you hate that? It, like, burns that cavity above your throat and behind your nose for two hours. In the meantime you feel the need to blow your nose every 15 seconds, but no snot comes out.

There was this one time, I was sitting in a McDonald's with a couple of friends and one of them said something funny that made me hork the Coke that was in my mouth out my nose. The accompanying spasm caused me to fart really loud, which caused my other companion to shoot the gulp of soda in his mouth out his nose. So there the three of us sat, blowing our noses into napkins and farting and -

KARNation: GET ON WITH IT!!!!!!!

Sorry. Where was I?

Oh yeah: the line from the Democrats and their Bobos was that those of us who thought it might be a good idea to do some digging were "grasping at straws." Nope, nothing else to see here! This is a Republican scandal and all 240 (or so) Republicans are guilty of either boinking their pages, wanting to boink their pages, being gay, or trying to cover any or all of the above up. No more questions need be asked thank you very much.

Well, maybe. Or maybe not. Even an objective lefty - no, strike that - an intellectually honest lefty should concede that "Stop Sex Predators" looks suspicious for every reason stated here and in this story.

INTELLECTUALLY HONEST LEFTY INTERRUPTS: OK I concede your point - that blog seems suspicious. But so what?

I'm glad you asked. (By the way, as an intellectually honest liberal, don't you feel lonely most of the time?)

INTELLECTUALLY HONEST LEFTY: (weeping) Why yes, yes I do sometimes.

Awwwww. Do you need a friend?

I'll be your friend.

INTELLECTUALLY HONEST LEFTY: (Smiling through tears.) Thank you!

C'mere and give me a hug!

KARNation INTERRUPTS: WOULD YOU PLEASE GET ON WITH IT!!!!!

Right-o.

What was the question again?

AN INCREASINGLY EXASPERATED KARNation: SO WHAT????????

Ah yes.

Let's frame it this way: MDE forwards this statement from one of the drones at MNPooplius, in defending Patty "Pun'kinhead" Wetterling's latest pack of lies TV ad (emphasis mine):

Matt Martin from MN Publius wrote this about Wetterling's new ad:

"Rather, Wetterling is addressing an issue very near and dear to her heart by publicly calling for responsibility in the handling of this matter. She has not pointed fingers, she has not overstepped, she has merely stated that anyone who knew about this should resign immediately."

It is my theory - and it's just that right now: a theory - that Stop Sex Predators was set up to appear as a seemingly detatched party through which the story could get to the public at a time of someone's choosing (and a little common sense would inform you that the "someone" in question would not be an ally of the Republican party), without having to go through an already reluctant press.

And if that is indeed the case, the fact that the blog started in July provides a (CAUTION: COOL LATIN ARCHAEOLOGICAL TERM COMING) terminus ante quem ("date before which") that shows "someone" knew about the Foley deal long before any of this became public. That would make such a person /organization / political party guilty of the exact same thing the Dems are currently trying to hang on the entire house Republican caucus. Even the motivation would be the same (power).

Let's return to the MNPooplius quote up there, which (in a refreshing change for those juveniles) is perfectly reasonable:

"Rather, Wetterling is addressing an issue very near and dear to her heart by publicly calling for responsibility in the handling of this matter. She has not pointed fingers, she has not overstepped, she has merely stated that anyone who knew about this should resign immediately."

Anybody who knew about this should resign immediately. And those not in a position to resign, like volunteers, supporters, etc., should be slimed to within an inch of their miserable lives.

Oh, I know what you're saying. You're saying: "Foot, I fully realize that you are a golden god, a beacon of lucidity in a blogosphere - sorry - Thunderjounalsphere gone mad, and one of the handsomest people I have ever known; and I am a complete and utter dumbass - but everybody knows that you can mess with the date stamps on blogger and create archives all the way back to 1990 if you wanted to. The fact that the first post on that blog is in July proves nothing. But I still love you."

True. You can date any post anyway you want. For instance, you may be reading this post on Friday Oct. 6, 2006. But the date below clearly says it was posted on Oct. 7. (I've changed it back to the 6th now.)

No, you didn't just get sucked into some temporal vortex, you silly goose! Blogger allows you to do that.

On the other hand, you cannot change the line in your profile, that says when you first signed up for a blogspot account.

Oh, look at that: "On blogger since July 2006."

There may be more...

No comments: