It’s probably very clear to most of my readers that the reason I started this blog was to counter Bryan White’s blog Sublime Bloviations. It even bothers me a bit because I don’t want anyone to think I’m obsessed with the fellow, I mean, I don’t even know him…he kind of hides under a rock. But he’s just a great antagonist that provides a lot of material for me to work with.
A lot of other Facebook commenters at the PolitiFact page argue a lot with Bryan and often say (much better) what I am thinking when I read them, or in some of the things I have said in this blog. So, here here are seven examples of people who have gone to the ropes in Facebook PolitiFact Page commentary with Bryan in the past year—are they all saying something similar? “Making [a] bunch of statements to look smart… he [Bryan] constantly talk[s] nonsense to me” (Kevin Park to Bryan); “Rational debate is impossible with the methods you use” (Kirk Klingbiel to Bryan); “Stop playing games parsing a handful of sentences” (Todd Ferguson to Bryan); “You wander off point and I can't figure if you do it purposely” (Bob Brown to Bryan); “Saying things over & over, asking for examples when the examples were already very clear to anyone else reading this, & long winded empty worded responses” (Dan Favero to Bryan); “If you could learn to get over this habit you have of mentally deleting what is inconvenient to your warped perspective” (Jim Bleikamp to Bryan) and finally “Great job of mischaracterization …. you make up what the other side is saying and then you refute it.......” (Garret Fitzgerald to Bryan).
Most of these statements were chosen on the basis of their not being “name-calling”—they are statements expressing what they think of what Bryan’s doing in his verbal exchanges within the comment threads. Nonsense, “irrational” debate, parsing sentences, wondering off point, long-winded empty worded responses, mentally deleting what is inconvenient, mischaracterization. When you read more of the comments below, you will see more overlap between posters making similar contentions about Bryan’s debate methods.
I almost get the impression, that in addition to his almost-always very negative (as he might say, snarky), undermining critiques of PF at his blog, that he’s also set on driving away posters at their Facebook page. I’ve watched him set the bait out for many people. Many don’t answer because they don’t want to contend with him. He has some sort of ego problem: always one-up, always the last word, an authoritarian, accusatory tone, and he won’t let you block him. It’s almost as if he’s a highly disgruntled ex-employee of the St. Petersburg Times. So, instead of using a gun like some who are truly crazy, he just shoots his mouth off instead?
Kevin Park, whose comments read like he was some sort of technical project manager, didn’t have time to take the Bryan bait, and just cut him off:
Kevin Park: I gave you a short answer, because question was ridiculous. You are making bunch of statements to look smart without knowing what they mean…..
I have to block bryan white if he constantly talk[s] nonsense to me... maybe, he is a real alien...back to david who clearly can have a civil discussion even he is on another side of the fence….. (June 24, 2010)
Kirk Klingbiel was a serious debater familiar with logic fallacies. Near the end of his debate he told Bryan he was a bully. That put Kirk in the same camp with me, as I had called him one too, only prefaced it with “cyber” which Bryan took issue with, of course.
Then there was Bob Brown getting it from Bryan on the immigration issues in Arizona:Kirk Klingbiel: I have concluded that rational debate is impossible with the methods you use (that have always struck me as childish) when selectively excerpting paragraphs out of context in your favor or in an attempt to change the focus of debate.
Kirk Klingbiel: You, sir, are a bully. I certainly have the ability to counter you despite what you think about my abilities, I simply do not believe you deserve a rebuttal and I refuse to make this debate about me or take your bait to engage in a fight. There's nothing I can do if you want to use this debate to prove that you are a legend in your own right and feel superior to any and all who oppose you in your own private war. …(July 5-6, 2010)
About 11 hours later, Bob’s final comment:Bob Brown: Bryan you are contrarian idiot. I am not going to chase my tail with you anymore. Your latest comment shows your complete lack of understanding of the laws and issues involved. You wander off point and I can't figure if you do it purposely because you don't have a point or you just can't understand the situation well enough to mount a counter-point…..(July 22 at 4:37 p.m.)
Same thread (earlier) from debater Todd Ferguson:Bob Brown: [to Bryan] You know debate is useless with someone who's mind is closed and lives in denial….
Todd Ferguson: Bryan: based on the FACTS, there is no way anyone could claim that what Pearce said was true. Stop playing games parsing a handful of sentences in the article; it doesn't change the FACTS. ( July 21 at 3:11 p.m. )
I have “friended” through Facebook Dan Favero, who is a prolific debater and has remained a frequent commenter on the PolitiFact page despite Bryan’s attempts at wreaking debate havoc upon him:
It was in December, 2009, when Bryan’s antics first came to my attention as he debated someone who worked in the news media, Jim Bliekamp (unfortunately I didn't link this one):Dan Favero:… See Bryan, there is no need for you to refresh your memory - it's right there for you & everybody else to read…. Saying things over & over, asking for examples when the examples were already very clear to anyone else reading this, & long winded empty worded responses doesn't change the fact that you don't know crap about tax law. This is obvious to people, even those whose knowledge is limited to being able to prepare a 1040EZ.
If you really think you are fooling anyone else with your comments, good for you. But I can't see wasting anymore time with you on this subject. You are going to believe what you want to believe no matter what the facts are.
So give it your last shot so you can think you actually won something here. (June 26 at 8:21 a.m.)
Jim Bliekamp [to Bryan]: You're into another of your rhetorical analyses that are of interest to no one but yourself, Bryan, and are yet another indicator that you need a life… And what the hell is a "potential lie"? I'll tell you what it is--it's a meaningless contradictory hunk of rhetorical garbage. .. Get a job, Bryan (December 8 at 6:39 p.m.)
And the last one, someone who was pretty “flamboyantly” tough on Bryan (and others), but nevertheless got tired from arguing with him and for the most part stopped posting, Garret Fitzgerald. Here are some good examples:“…So how did I skip over the power of WWW part? You wouldn’t even be aware of it, you fool, had I not included it in my post in the first place? But you have just skipped over the 2 words that PRECEDED the reference to the web—“probing reporters.” If you could learn to get over this habit you have of mentally deleting what is inconvenient to your warped perspective....someone might one day take you seriously…” (December 10, 2009)
Garret Fitzgerald: ***When Rush talked of Prince William Sound, there were two ways to take his reference***
As usual, Byran, nonsense and equivocation...You're just full of sophism...(May 2 at 7:48 p.m.)
Garret Fitzgerald: ***that a visit to Prince William Sound involves digging under the sand or observing the (mild) oil slicks that emanate from the beaches where oil remains under the sand.***
That's not the point Limbaugh was making and you know it.
(May 2 at 7:50 p.m.)
Garret Fitzgerald: The oil doesn't just *Disappear* Bryan...
Of course, Bryan, I guess you get better info from El Rushbo than you'll ever get from Politifact- which of course is your constant subtext. Or at least you want to diminish the barriers between people who actually care about understanding the truth as opposed to those who diminish it because when you can't really argue facts, then you try and destroy the truth behind the facts.
(May 3 at 3:25 a.m.)
From an earlier thread in April:
Garret Fitzgerald: Tactics are all you have......Great job of mischaracterization (jesus, you win all your arguments...because you make up what the other side is saying and then you refute it......what a clever little boy!).... ***why giving all Americans a federal job paying a million bucks annually wouldn't work.*** I made a quite satisfactory explanation of your absurd example....Used to you[r] tactics, though....Any reasonable person can see what you're doing....
(April 5 at 5:02 p.m.)
Lately, Bryan has been *after* a commenter by the name of Ray Gross. In one of Ray’s responses to Bryan, he concluded with telling Bryan to STFU. I believe the PolitiFact moderator may have deleted it, but considering everything, maybe we should all do that regardless. Of course, Bryan would say that we’re not providing any evidence or argument to counter his, but hey, why should we? As these comments show, arguing with Bryan is a waste of time.
By the way, this will be my last major post for 2010. I had this written up a few months ago, but had not made up my mind on publishing it. I thought I'd use it to conclude the year, because starting next year there may be some changes to my format (with a lot less on Bryan's antics). I also believe this may be a good link to refer those Facebook posters to who are being tormented by him. That way, they'll know they're not the only ones...there's many, many others.
Post-script (January 6, 2011): There may just be a method to his madness.
No comments:
Post a Comment