Pam Geller interviewed by John Hawkins: answers a question about Fat Slob blogger
you can read this interview on Atlas Shrugged and Right Wing News
JH: Every time I read a story about you these days, I seem to see a quote from Charles Johnson in it. I know a lot of people are still scratching their heads wondering what happened to him. Here’s a guy that used to run one of the most popular, most read blogs on the planet. Then he started attacking you, started attacking other conservatives, moved way over to the left and the traffic on his blog imploded. Talk a little bit about that and what happened to Charles Johnson.
GELLER: I’m not equipped. Psychiatry is out of my field.
It’s one thing to evolve in your thinking. It’s another thing to become the reviled enemy of that which defines you. His sole purpose is to destroy people. I can’t relate to it. I don’t understand it. We can all sit here and scratch our heads and say, “Is he an operative? Is he being paid or what happened?” Who cares? He’s a destructive force.
Of course, the left will quote him even though I have absolutely nothing to do with him. I (don’t) read his site. I don’t know what he’s talking about. The enemy is, the last time I looked, it was creationism. I don’t see people being burned alive and slaughtered over Adam and Eve. So to me, there’s really nothing to talk about with him.
He adds nothing to the dialogue. He adds nothing to the discourse. He seeks solely to destroy the most effective voices on the Right. So to me, he’s lower than even a Kos and I don’t think the left trusts him either because he’s such a traitor. To say that he’s abandoned his principles is actually giving him too much credit. He now reviles the thing that he once was. You explain it.
He’s like a wounded animal up against the wall.
Against the wall sounds good. It’d be the last thing he hears if his beloved Left ever really wins. Traitors are never trusted, not even by the side they turn for…
That was a great answer on her part. I think when he calls her a shrieking harpy, he’s projecting. He fits that description far better than she does. In fact, I think I’ll start calling him that.
There is something perverse about Johnson. Almost as if he is having a nervous breakdown in front of us.
Meth addiction. That makes the most sense. Nasty, nasty shit. I wouldn’t do it if it was free and legal…
Creationists (like myself), so-called global warming deniers (like myself), those who oppose abortion in the case of rape or incest (like myself); those seem to be Charlie’s current targets.
I wonder who’ll he be targeting in his next round of vitriol?
Anything that comes within his field of view.
Yes Speranza, there is something very perverse about our blimp-like blogger.
Imagine his vapid existence. Each morning the pony-tailed pariah waddles to his laptop to begin scouring the major media news sites, blogs and yes, even twitter for tantalizing headlines and bits of gossip that he can distort, twist and manipulated to attack those whom he detests. Of course, those who he detests now, at one time were his cyber-comrades.
What a vapid existence for a completely craven man. My response to his bellicosity is this; how’s your blog traffic doing? By trying to ingratiate himself to his newfound progressive friends, he has sewn distrust and contempt of his motivations and intellect in all political camps.
I hope, sooner than later, a video may surface of a disheveled Chuck, mumbling to himself as he rhythmically rocks back and forth in front of his grease stained laptop, maniacally drawing mustaches on a pile of Pam Geller photos.
Try deleting this post, freak.
He really would be lost without his mad Kingdom.
“He now reviles the thing that he once was. You explain it.”
Ooh that nails it.
She answered the question very well, didn’t she? Hit the nail on the head about his essential destructiveness and lack of principles.
But I think he’s ALWAYS been that way. He’s never been FOR anything, maybe because he’s too superficial or just too insecure. I don’t know.
He’s always AGAINST. The only thing he does, the only thing he ever could do, is attack and vilify. IOW, unlike so many who are smeared with the epithet, he really IS a hate-monger.
Why he changed the OBJECT of his hatred is another question, of course.
And Pam answers a difficult question with intelligence and thoughtfulness, even a bit of charity. Not quite the “shrieking harpy” Fatass would have you believe, eh?
She night have mentioned the fact of his ugly divorce, which sent him into a tailspin a decade or so ago, and led him to immerse himself in computer coding and the website design thing. He’s not the first guy to succumb to misogyny, following such an experience. He always saves his most vicious bile for the women he hates, including Pam, Palin, Cindy Sheehan in the old days, St. Pancake, etc.
That’s exactly what I was thinking when I read her reply, as I mentioned above. He sounds more like a “shrieking harpy” than she does.
General question.
Has Icarus ever publicly acknowledged TDoD?
During the few moments of sobriety that Cato has now, he mumbles about the Mad King hunched over his used chinese desk-top, googling madly for any reference to his name on the inner-webs.
He will never publicly admit it, but every reference to him here is read by him, and causes him to grind his butt further down on the seatless pole of his bike in frustration.
Hey….anyone got a can of dog food you ain’t using?
Sum’bitch won’t stay sober long enough to go food shopping.
I feel that way about all of the illegal drugs.
With the possible exception of heroin in the case of terminal suffering, but even then, I might take a pass on it.
This is one helluva good interview – it goes well beyond the Chucklehead issue. Long live Pamela, Spencer, and Geert Wilders!
Ouch!
*
DaiFrancis
16 October 2010 4:18AM
Of course, one is free to make up their own mind.
It’s a fact that Charles Johnson has deleted numerous old posts and comments from his blog– hiding the same opinions he now labels “bigoted” and “hateful” and perpetrated by the “right wing” if made by others.
He’s deleted old posts that were extremely critical of leftist websites such as the Huffington Post, Daily Kos, the Guardian along with others. In those days many of the people who wrote on those websites were labeled “bigoted,” “hateful” etc. These people he now courts as reasonable and kindred spirits because they now suddenly share the same opinions. Will the real Charles Johnson please stand up?
He claims that Pamela Geller “posted more than 6,000 comments at LGF in [his] earlier days, when [his] comment moderation policy was much more laissez faire than it is now” as if to imply Mr. Johnson disagreed and was appalled even back then with all that Ms. Geller said. Ignoring that he was once her “blog daddy”!
Did you read that number? 6,000?! Yes, he let 6,000 supposedly hateful comments on his site and yet, he implies that he disagreed with all of them all because he had a laisseiz faire posting policy. He then tries to claim that he threatened to ban people that used the term “St. Pancake” but yet never once mentions that he ever threatened to ban Ms. Geller during at least her first 5500 posts. Amazing.
Of course I’d like to know that this LGF Dictionary that Mr. Johnson now renounces as if he didn’t agree with it. Again implying if there was anything in that dictionary that would “smear” him today, he “didn’t [technically] write it” and thus supposedly disagreed with it. Believable? You be the judge. He didn’t write “St. Pancake” ever?! But was responsible for dozens of posts ridiculing her death and her families’ efforts to blame Israel and Caterpillar. If Charles now seems to be so sensitive to this young dead lady, why did he “stalk” her and her family for years with critical blog posts?
I’d like to also know who came up with the constant “Religion of Peace” posts about Muslims? Who coined the term ROPMA, for “Religion of Peace my ###” Who wrote the “Palestinian Car Swarm” posts that implied that the Palestinians were animalistic and didn’t care for human life because they were Muslims.
Charles just didn’t change his opinion, he tries to whitewash his previous extremist rhetoric. He wrote hateful things about this newspaper and yet now is welcomed as if he was on their side all along.
And finally, I’d love to see what former Arab News writer John Bradley has to think of the new and improved Charles Johnson. I also know that Dennis Prager and Victor Davis Hanson are disappointed in ever having associated themselves with Mr. Johnson. But at least he has new friends here at the Guardian as long as they ignore his previous hateful comments about their newspaper.
*
o Recommend? (1)
o Report abuse
o
o | Link
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/oct/13/ground-zero-islam?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments
i can’t be arsed anymore to read anything by or about my forner blogmaster, but… he really wrote a piece for the Daily Wanker?!
what’s next? Syria becoming an ally of Israel? Andrew Sullivan writing for the Westboro Baptisyt Church newsletter? 0bama becoming a radical free-marketist?