Friday, April 30, 2010

Well, the Good O' Boys Roundup has started up the barbeque again: Codrea, David Hardy and I are denounced by a racist, retired "Federale."

Typical of the ignorant breed. Saddest thing is this low-life existed off our tax dollars all his career. Thanks to David for the heads up.


Peter said...

That is one offensive SoB. As the son of (legal) Hispanic immigrants, I violate just about every stereotype he just threw out there. And as a III'per, I definitely do not consider myself part of the problem. As usual, his words reflect more upon himself then about the people he speaks of.

Rhetorical Taoist said...

Yeah, he won't post my comment - the idea of considering every man as a brother regardless of genes or creed is not something he can handle.

Parrothead Jeff said...


I'm with Peter and David Codrea. I'll have a blog post up a bit later tonight, but for now I'll just say I can't disagree with that piece of refuse more.

I seem to recall hearing something about how it's better to be despised by the despicable that I think applies rather well here.

Keep up the good work - the flack is getting heavier so you must be getting close to the target.

Anonymous said...

When your opponent is royally screwing up, let him.

Don't engage a fool in his folly.

straightarrow said...

here is my comment to him on his website, don't know if it survived moderation.

I read your piece and it is racist ranting. You don't have to like it, but it is. Maybe you should read it.

Of course the minorities are aligned mostly with the other side. The other side did something very politically intelligent, even if immoral. They made them dependent. Then created all sorts of problems for them, followed immediately by proclaiming themselves saviors. Uh huh! Salvation usually doesn't translate to "I won't fuck you up if you do what I want". But the other side has been getting away with it a long time.

However, we are seeing a change in attitude amongst minorities, slow and small but it is happening. One reason is that all sources of information available to them can no longer be controlled as they once were. Those members of minorities not dependent on government and who aspire to betterment are starting to realize the heretofore unseen fetters on them and are starting to reject them. With the exception of some who use racism, even if it must be manufactured of whole cloth, to their personal profit.

Your theme that minorities are incapable of enlightened self-interest in a moral context is racist. If you don't see that, you are part of the problem.

The above was presented without malice and is divorced from this part. But in the interest of fairness I will tell you something about myself. I view the fact that you are a federal law enforcement officer (or were) proof that you can be and have been bought. Moral men could not do the things our LE personnel are now required to do just to get their retirement and other benefits. I was the most pro LE citizen you ever saw 30 to 40 years ago. I didn't change, the character of LE and it overseers did. I am not yet anti LE, but I am extremely suspicious of them. They have earned that suspicion with their rampant law-breaking, their special dispensation when caught, and the total betrayal of their oaths to the constitution to benefit of political masters who are less than stellar human beings in many cases.

Oh, and you might be careful of whom you call a coward.

Anonymous said...

I am so tired of the claim that our founding fathers were slave owners. Different times and different standards. It makes zero sense to judge people today vy the standards of the 17th century. In the 17th century all Africans were slave owners. Slavery was common and accepted in Africa for thousands of years (and still is). In fact more white people were captured and made into slaves in Africa then black people who were captured and brought to America as slaves. -- But make no mistake, there are things we do today that both the left and the right embrace that will be considered to be disgusting in 200 years. Take abortion for example: I don't "like" abortion but I accept that it should be a decision between a woman and her doctor. I also think that once the baby would be vaiable out of the womb it should be considered murder. But at the same time I recognize that all abortion is immoral, arguably murder at any point in the pregnancy and it may be at least as bad as slavery was or perhaps worse. Does that mean if in 200 years the more enlightened people look down on abortions that everyone alive today who accepted it was a dispicable person??

Son of Sam Adams said...

Under an administration where being of Caucasian ancestry puts one under suspicion, claiming that carrying is "implicitly white" is not a winner argument. That's even before we look at ethics and collectivism.

hazmat said...

Since he didn't much care for David's advice, I left him a bit of my own. (And, BTW, he hasn't allowed a comment since David left his this morning. Telling, ain't it?)

I told him to go have advanced aeronautical intercouse with a laterally motivated pastry. Not that it'll get through his comment moderation or anything.

The idea that in the 220-plus years of history in this country, countless wars were faught to ensure this t*rd has the right to speak this kind of bile kind of galls me.

My wife is of Latino descent. She doesn't ever think of it, and neither do I. I've even asked her to drop the "R" card in situations where she was obviously discriminated against. She won't do it, and kindly asked me to not bring it up again.

Then a scumsucking leech on the buttocks of humanity like this comes along and sticks his size tens in his piehole all the way up to his hips. Then I get a little, shall we say, perturbed. This by insinuating my wife doesn't deserve the very rights I've spent the last 18.5 years of my life defending.


patriot_ohio said...

If you want to find a racist bastard, look first for a Federal Badge. This guy is the stereotype of every kind of bad cop, scumbag (apologies to honest scumbags everywhere) and Oathbreaker I have ever known. Glad I don't see his blog more often.

tyrantsbane said...

This was my response (below) and I am curious to see if the ass munch posts it:

Accusations of racism may indeed be the first refuge of a coward, as seems to be the case these days; though BEING a racist is indicative of BEING a coward. I support your right to be a homophobe and a racist as all citizens in this great nation have the right to free speech. Personally, I think racism and homophobia (if there is such a thing) are far over-rated, as each one of us has used some derogatory term towards some person at some time in our lives. Racism is emotional ignorance and is not a is a speed bump in the emotional development of some and a virtual Berlin Wall (pun intended) in the lives of others. You do seem to be a bit of a coward [hiding behind your alleged badge] and an asshole given what I have read of your blather. I too would like to issue a hearty "fuck you" for your slanderous assault on David Codrea, Mike Vanderboegh, and their naughty insinuation that minorities have any stake in Liberty. It appears that you have the ability to articulate thoughts intelligently...yet you sound like such a walking, talking colostomy bag. I am confused this the Blogoshpere version of one of those Federale robberies we hear so much of south-o'-the-border? It's like I have read your opinion and now I have been hijacked of my rational thought process in exchange for passing??? You do not have to accept my belittling of you on this page, as it is yours and nobody seems to be standing up for your ill-guided shenanigans; I will be copying this response and sharing it at War on Guns and at Sipsey Street. You may want to post it to avoid living up to the title of COWARD you are doing so well at living up to.
PS: Your badge means JACK SHIT to me :)
[tyrantsbane=Kyle III of prior posts, for those who care]

tyrantsbane said...

Oh yeah...and somehow we are the "hatriots"! WTF???

Unknown said...

Since Mr. Federale won't publish my comment (gee, there's a surprise), I'll try here:

David Codrea has an unfortunate habit of using needless obscenities (a trait he shares with many LEOs) and calling people he dislikes, including those he knows virtually nothing about (even decorated combat veterans), “cowards.”

Referring to you as a racist, however, is merely recognizing objective reality. I believe Mr. Grigg’s (his first name is William, not Norman) ancestry is Irish and Mexican; how does that make him “black”? Unlike you, the praiseworthy Mr. Grigg who you branded a “proto-anarchist” (you left out morally conscious, libertarian Christian) didn’t spend a career betraying his sworn oath by enforcing statutes which are often unconstitutional, unjust, and immoral.

If you seriously believe David Codrea, Mike Vanderboegh, and David Hardy are “Second Amendment Sellouts” then I suggest you consider joining the Flat Earth Society, an organization which caters to the cognitively impaired.

For someone who spells as poorly as you do [it’s “Barack” not “Barak” and (unless you’re British) “argument” not “arguement”], you might be a tad more careful before labeling other people as “morons.”

David Codrea said...

David Codrea has an unfortunate habit of using needless obscenities (a trait he shares with many LEOs) and calling people he dislikes, including those he knows virtually nothing about (even decorated combat veterans), “cowards.”

James: "Habit?"

To my recollection, this is the first time I've publicly used the "f" word in totality. A search just showed up 3 other occasions and they were all in quotes. I've been doing WOG for 5 years.

I typically even use asterisks on the "Sh" word. Total use I could find, again, quoting, is 5 times.

And if you'll notice this time, I gave a language warning to readers before proceeding. As is my HABIT.

In re using the word "coward," perhaps you could show me my "habitual" use of it--and the context. Unless someone has been acting like an anonymous troll or an authoritarian bully, I've not gone of of my way to use that word either. But I'm hardly going to avoid a word that is an appropriate description for someone's actions, decorated or not.

If you don't think someone anonymously attacking the reputation of others is cowardly, we will disagree. It sounds to me like it's personal--have we had a run-in before? I can't help unless you spell out the whys and wherefores, and Mike's forum here is not the place for that. Fortunately, I'm easy to contact by those who don't mind shedding a little anonymity.

j3maccabee said...

Two quick comments -
1`. HAZMAT gets the coveted 'phrase of the day' award for
"I told him to go have advanced aeronautical intercouse with a laterally motivated pastry."

and James and DAVID C -

2. Colon ( intentional spelling) Powell was a 'decorated' military man, and he is also a gutless, cowardly sellout and a traitor to all things American. So the terms 'military' and 'coward' are not mutually exclusive. Also ask John dirtbag Murtha about this when you see him.


Unknown said...


I strongly dislike Colin Powell and John Murtha, although for reasons which probably never entered your mind. The fact I dislike a person, however, doesn’t mean I share your lamentable immaturity of maliciously distorting a person’s name or embrace gratuitous vulgarity rather than use reason and empirical evidence to make a point. I would remain civil when speaking to a BATFE agent — even if I was driving a wooden stake through the creature's heart.

It was probably just an oversight on your part that you failed to cite a single instance of "gutless cowardice" or treason perpetrated by General Powell. It’s fascinating how leftists castigate Powell for behavior directly opposite to why you apparently brand him a “traitor.” From your blind nationalistic rhetoric, you must have loved the Sedition Acts of 1798 and 1918.

John Murtha died on 8 February 2010. Not being irrational, I’ll pass on your suggestion I should ask questions of a dead person. Ignoring the fact Murtha is dead, I have the same interest in meeting him as I do in prolonging the existence of Charles Schumer and the BATFE.

Newbius said...

Shockingly, my comment didn't survive moderation either. I used a bit more flowery prose than David did, but my message was essentially the same.

Also, just because the Founders were slave owners doesn't change the fact that they recognized, and put into place a structure for eventual remedy of, the immorality of slavery. The philosophical and moral correctness of the position that "all men are created equal" was and is sound. And, it lead to the eventual recognition as a practical fact, even though the then-current practice was at odds, that equality of opportunity is color-blind.

As it should be.