Unlimited Terms of Endearment Part XXIX, Anatomy Of A Smear
or Howie's Politically Philanthropic Pornography
I might just ascribe the smear campaign to bitchiness, had it begun immediately after Great Falls, Montana's district court tossed out their ballot measures on September 13. Or even had it begun when, on Thursday, Montana's Supreme Court allowed the ruling to stand. In fact, that is breaking news, since only Montana papers seem to have noted the triple-initiative defeat:
[read the rest HERE. the news piece is a nice summary of the whole year-long Howie Rich & Friends mess in Montana]
But, alas, this smear campaign dates at least to September 22nd:
At some point, one of Howie Rich's many organizations -- perhaps Americans for Limited Government, perhaps U.S. Term Limits, undoubtedly one of the "Chicago" clusters of paired 501(c)3 and 501(c)4 organizations -- at some point, one or more of their operatives was assigned to track and smear me.
Sounds paranoid? It is, in fact, a well-considered hypothesis, completely in line with the facts. I invite you to judge for yourself, because this isn't a column about how injured I feel, or how unfairly I might feel treated. It isn't about potentially libelous actions taken as a way of negating an effective investigative series, and can almost certainly be taken as a high, if left-handed compliment.
After all, when a member of the media's "untouchable" caste -- the bloggers -- warrants the political attention of an organization that has spent $13.2 million (as estimated this week by the Center for Public Integrity) so far this year, it must mean that that blogger is considered a threat of some sort.
How do we know this?
Well, let's take a look at the producer of their "Sopranos" flash commercial (since removed for potential copyright violations) Political Media, Inc.
Here's what Political Media say on their website (and, presumably, tells their clientele):
And, the tenor of these attacks was discomfitingly personal:
So, let's watch the slime-trail of personal smears against me, because they tie everyone very neatly together.
On September 18, the blog "Initiative Is A Good Thing" appeared.
And then, on September 25, this repellent little piece of work appeared:
(Quoting the "Langora" hit piece)
What is astonishing is that, at the end of dumping this barrel's worth of pus and slime onto the page, "Helen" protests that her delicate sensibilities (as a prude, one supposes) have been offended:
First, he explains (from the original post) lamely that he couldn't "trackback" what he was reposting. Then, having decided to withdraw the piece in question, he easily finds the link in question:
A prudery that gleefully posts material that offends its own sensibilities ... or perhaps which failed to achieve its own objectives.
There is something, ultimately, unjust that no prude has ever been arrested for his drooling prudery; no bluenose ever tried for her delicious retelling of the obscenity that offended her; no censor ever jailed for leading a witch-hunt. But, as Coyote says, he is "a prude."
That's it, exactly as retroactively posted. [Fun Fact: the link to the nasty little "Sopranos" flash movie that was removed was posted by Coyote on September 29 in the same spot: ]
The point here being, golly, isn't it an amazing coincidence that Coyote would publish the piece in its entirety the day following its original posting in a new blog, just the same way that he posted the attack on Kulongoski within hours of Kulongoski's challenge to Howard Rich?
I don't think that this sort of thing happens entirely by coincidence. But, recall what New Media, Inc. says: we need to use the digital media for our political campaigns. And New Media is a place that we shall return to another day.
So: this interconnection of anonymous and semi-anonymous blogs is certainly a phenomenon. It should also be noted that "Initiative Is A Good Thing" ("Citizen-Activist") had already linked prominently to NWRepublican in their sidebar. They also link specifically to the "Who Is Hart Williams?" smear in that same sidebar, one of the only two postings so self-honored. (The other one is their attack on the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center's howierichexposed.org website, entitled -- with great originality -- "Who is Howard Rich?" The link doesn't work, however)
There's one last slur that day that should be seen before we play connect-the-dots between anonymous players here.
September 26:
I use the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition, 2000:
from WordNet 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
As it is, it is symptomatic of the "factual" nature of the smear, which is why I haven't bothered rebutting most of the distorted or false allegations.
It seems a sidelight, but it is a useful sidelight: the entire attack is based on a sort of "look down your nose" sense of effete, elite disparagement that distorts facts to create a skein of innuendo and general creepiness. The psychobabbled pseudoanalysis is only matched in its offensiveness by its very irrelevance. (see the definition of "dead agenting" and a different analysis of the smear and "Helen's" anonymity at 'Really I Must Protest']
[NOTE: for a comparison of writing styles between the "Helen Langora" pieces and another 'official' ALG attack, see Part XII ]
None of which has anything to do with Howard Rich's shenanigans, please note. And the shenanigans continued:
In the comments section of that smear piece, the following characters show up to foolishly heap derision.
Gee: Coyote/Piccolo, who was co-petitioner on the failed Howard Rich Term Limits petition drive in 2004, and "Irresponsible Spender" from the SPEND Oregon "parody"/attack blog, AND (Silence Dogood) Kurt Weber, co-petitioner on THIS year's term limits initiative, whose signature was on all those FOIA faxes demanding public employee email records a couple weeks ago?
Oh, in two months, there are hardly ANY other comments on the "Citizen-Activist" blog.
So: ALL of the comments from Howard Rich operatives that day. You don't suppose they're emailing each other, do you?
That confluence of comments on the brand-new "Citizen-Activist" blog MUST just be a coincidence. There you go.
But the interconnected smear continued: In the hysterical -- either funny or just plain hysterical -- response to BISC's www.howierichexposed.org site, a "parody" page was put up entitled www.angryleftexposed.com which has this strange, snarky page:
http://www.angryleftexposed.com/profiles/kos.html
Notice in the lower left hand corner, it says:
And, when you go to the ALG site,
Now, we read the page:
Unofficial motto: "Someday I'll be famous! Although I disdain fame and all its trappings ... please, let me be famous! *
Which is my September 29, DailyKos diary entitled "ALG smear of DailyKos diarists only tip of iceberg."
I can take solace in the fact, I suppose, that I am now a thorn in someone's side on the order of Al Franken or Michael Moore. Certainly they are complimenting me in a strange left-handed way to attempt such a "guilt by association" ploy.
And the following paragraph ...
That's right. The "Helen Langora" smear piece. Funny that it would be a link three days after the September 26 post. You don't suppose "Helen Langora" works for ALG do you?
Finally, there is the weird accusation of some weird "hack" on my part with the asterisk-flagged (*) statement at the bottom:
Given the "Editor's note" we can safely deduce that I had inadvertently stumbled on the ALG webmaster checking out page links. To which I can only say, had you not linked to my page, I may not have known about the "angry left exposed" page for a week or more. Your fault, not mine. Didn't mean to be so quick. Sorry.
But the "Langora" smear piece resurfaces again October first (and again on Oct 26), this time in the grubby paw of Laird Maxwell, on the Sun Valley blog in Idaho.
Maxwell had been in an extended blog debate with Nils Ribi, a Sun Valley City Council member about his "This House Is My Home" (Prop 2) Howard Rich/ALG-funded initiative, but then, evidently frustrated, decided to write this vicious little love note:
And then, watching that blog, I found Maxwell again, a month after the original posting of the "Langora" smear piece:
(Confronted Maxwell again; again he ran away.)
What finally traces the wiring of the stealth network is this strange, circuitous link on the "Citizen-Activist" blog, October 26 (same day):
The linked page on "commentses on obscure blogssesss." is that same page on which Laird Maxwell posted his comment (at 9:31 AM, please note). At the end of the "Citizen-Activist" blog, with the effusion of serpentine ssssssss'es it says: posted by Helen Langora at 8:20 PM.
Jeepers, but that's a quick response from Helen! And odd that Laird links back to her in the morning, and she writes about it by that evening, closing the circuit: the smear has become self-referential. Certainly there is a very high probability of a direct exchange between the anonymous Langora and the ominous Maxwell.
Confused? You and me both, Gentle Reader. But can we safely conclude that this whole attempt to smear me is coordinated? That seems a safe conclusion, recognizing that it is merely a fair conclusion and not a dead certainty.
But can we conclude that ALG money is behind it?
Without any doubt. The Angry Leftitus website is proof of that. Without question ALG money is behind part of it.
The ONLY questions, in fact, is how MUCH of it is ALG money, and how much money?
[One casually wonders whether that money came from one of the 501(c)3 fully tax-deductible "public education" charities, or from the 501(c)4 not-tax-deductible BUT we-don't-have-to-tell-you-where-we-get-our-money foundations.]
The FACT that ALG money has been used in an attempt to discredit my reporting is, however, indisputable.
Unfortunately, the "discredit" portion hasn't been working.
Becky pointed out on Preemptive Karma:
You may note that they seem desperate to change the subject of their shenanigans. Thus far, they really haven't been very successful. The smear was launched in earnest.
But it ain't playin' all that well in Peoria.
So: what do we have?
How about this: In understanding the history of one such smear, we get a sense of ALL the "new media" smears they're running like this.
This isn't about personal vindication. The point is that I'm not the only one. (Nor even the only one who is painted as "hostile" to women):
This in defense of philanthropy?
Good lord.
We have to question the "civic virtue" of ballot propositions being pushed in this manner. If the arguments are this sleazy and vicious, then shouldn't the ballot measures be seen in precisely the same light: sleazy and vicious?
After all, we only have THEIR word that Howard Rich is just a nice guy helping out "local activists." You know, like Laird Maxwell and Kurt Weber.
Now, all of this must, finally, be weighed against the oft-repeated canard that Howard Rich is a "philanthropist."
If this is, in fact, so, then he is not engaged any form of philanthropy with which I am acquainted -- especially given the actions of his operatives in pursuit of that "philanthropy."
A strange philanthropy, indeed.
But then, this is all just crazy "conspiracy theory." Right?
Courage.
.
I might just ascribe the smear campaign to bitchiness, had it begun immediately after Great Falls, Montana's district court tossed out their ballot measures on September 13. Or even had it begun when, on Thursday, Montana's Supreme Court allowed the ruling to stand. In fact, that is breaking news, since only Montana papers seem to have noted the triple-initiative defeat:
Initiative ruling standsHaving spent so much money and hidden their money so well in Montana, it must come as quite a disappointment to lose all three ballot measures in Montana for fraud less than two weeks before the November election.
By MIKE DENNISON
Missoulian State Bureau
HELENA - Three conservative-leaning initiatives on the Nov. 7 ballot are invalid, a unanimous Montana Supreme Court ruled Thursday, and any votes for the measures will not be counted.
The court's ruling upholds a Sept. 13 decision by District Judge Dirk Sandefur of Great Falls, who said the measures should be tossed because of "pervasive fraud" by out-of-state, paid signature-gatherers ...
[read the rest HERE. the news piece is a nice summary of the whole year-long Howie Rich & Friends mess in Montana]
But, alas, this smear campaign dates at least to September 22nd:
Coming soon...the Exposer of Foul Deeds, the Sunshine of the West, the Vorpal Sword, the hypomanic, the "published writer of thirty years" (Thirty Years, Folks!! Thirty Years!!), the Legend In His Own Mind...it's Hart Williams. Ta da!According to the American Heritage Dictionary (4th Ed. 2000)"Hypomanic" means "A mild state of mania, especially as a phase of a manic-depressive cycle." This will not be the last time that I will be slyly accused of mental illness -- a foully fascinating debate tactic -- please note.
At some point, one of Howie Rich's many organizations -- perhaps Americans for Limited Government, perhaps U.S. Term Limits, undoubtedly one of the "Chicago" clusters of paired 501(c)3 and 501(c)4 organizations -- at some point, one or more of their operatives was assigned to track and smear me.
Sounds paranoid? It is, in fact, a well-considered hypothesis, completely in line with the facts. I invite you to judge for yourself, because this isn't a column about how injured I feel, or how unfairly I might feel treated. It isn't about potentially libelous actions taken as a way of negating an effective investigative series, and can almost certainly be taken as a high, if left-handed compliment.
After all, when a member of the media's "untouchable" caste -- the bloggers -- warrants the political attention of an organization that has spent $13.2 million (as estimated this week by the Center for Public Integrity) so far this year, it must mean that that blogger is considered a threat of some sort.
How do we know this?
Well, let's take a look at the producer of their "Sopranos" flash commercial (since removed for potential copyright violations) Political Media, Inc.
Here's what Political Media say on their website (and, presumably, tells their clientele):
The landscape of political marketing is changing. The Internet is blazing a path to a direct democracy. The traditional media of yesterday is no longer the primary source of information for voters, constituents, and advocates.http://www.politicalmedia.com/
Digital Media is changing our politics. The World Wide Web is already a powerful influence on the public's access to government, the tactics and content of political campaigns, the behavior of voters, the efforts of activists to circulate their messages, and the ways in which topics enter the public discourse.So, it was interesting when, in the latter half of September, any number of attack blogs began relentlessly churning out bits and pieces ridiculing, attacking and smearing the opposition -- whomever the opposition was considered to be. Some had been set up in the summer or the spring, but several more were of September vintage.
Political Media is shifting the understanding of citizenship in a historical context, promoting a (sic) interactive cyber-democracy and growing an online community.
Political Media is on the forefront of the new media.
Take a moment to review our proprietary state of the art multi-channel marketing tools, and schedule a phone consultation today.
And, the tenor of these attacks was discomfitingly personal:
SPEND OregonNow compare that to the counterattack launched by "NW Republican" on August 28, when Governor Ted Kulongoski challenged Howard Rich to come to Oregon and explain why he was paying all those initiatives on the Oregon ballot:
Our goal is to spend Oregon into the Dark Ages. Join SPEND Oregon and become part of The Wentz Gang. We need volunteers to put lipstick on our pigs and drown Rainy Day Amendment voters in the bathtub. Endorsed by Gov. Nesbitt. Trust us. SPEND it now.
July 21, 2006
About Us
SPEND Oregon is primarily Oregon government unions' best-trained political hatchetmen who know exactly how to hurt our state and take Oregon down the wrong path....
Everybody knows that Tim Nesbitt is and has been the real Governor of Oregon the last 4 years. Now we have the "Governor-In-Name-Only" Kulongoski acting all weird and calling for a debate of M48 supporter Howard Rich.And, while the poster, "I Am Coyote" a/k/a Ted Piccolo has admitted that he's worked for Howard Rich in the past, there is no hint that this is anything other than a "Republican" common sense position. He quotes the Measure 48 Official Press Release in its entirety (although I have abridged it here):
DON MCINTIRE OF THE RAINY DAY AMENDMENT COMMITTEE RESPONDS TO KULONGOSKI DEBATE CHALLENGEPretty nasty stuff in defense of Howard Rich. There's more where that came from. Lots more.
To Tim Nesbitt, AFL-CIO boss, and to his "yes" man, Governor Kulongoski:
Thank you for your letter, which offers yet another reason for Oregon voters to support the Rainy Day Amendment. It reveals, after all, the fact that Oregon's Governor has no clue as to what's going on in his own state.
I must say, though, you might want to check your facts before releasing such an error-ridden note to the public ... As a Chief Petitioner, I accept the challenge to debate the real leader of the government class in Oregon - Tim Nesbitt, recent President of the Oregon AFL-CIO. I will debate Mr. Nesbitt as many times as he would like between now and election day. Oregonians would be well served to find out more about the "power behind the throne" in our state. I suspect such a series of debates would reveal much about what's really wrong in Oregon. If Mr. Nesbitt is unavailable or unwilling, I'd even take on the second in command, Governor Kulongoski.
So, let's watch the slime-trail of personal smears against me, because they tie everyone very neatly together.
On September 18, the blog "Initiative Is A Good Thing" appeared.
And then, on September 25, this repellent little piece of work appeared:
Who is Hart Williams?Clocking in at 2007 words (3221 words that day, since there is also a dual PBS/Hart smear also posted that day), it is a gutter-level attack of the most vicious sort. Since I am the subject of it, I won't attempt to characterize it further, except that it lowers the bar a couple of notches with compelling insights like this one:
As I noted earlier, last Friday's PBS/NOW video on this year's crop of tax-limiting, property-rights-defending initiatives credits Hart Williams and his blog Boregasm with figuring out that these initiatives all get some (or much) of their funding from a common source ....
From Hart's point-of-view, many things are conspiracies. Spies, conspiracies and connecting the dots figure in much of how he experiences the world.more tinfoil hat stuff is heaped on:
In 2004, Hart ran for state assembly in Oregon, losing in the Democratic primary with less than 10% of the vote. During this race, he got into an endlessly dragged out and messy fight with his local Democratic party. They responded by kicking him out. He details this on his website. His exposure of the Democratic Party of Lane County, Oregon uses many of the same words and concepts that Hart brings to his writings about Howie Rich: shenanigans, secretive power structure, claims about allegedly illegal dealings and so on and so forth.In other words, I'm a stone loon. But it gets worse:
I ended up finding him to be a terribly sad figure. He reminds me of the occasional political activist one meets who is extremely, extremely bright, capable of tremendous passion and engagement, who longs for connection with others, and who has a hard time finding that connection. Hart, who now prepares tax returns, made a living over the years writing pornography ...and [same day]
Hart has a long history in the hardcore pornography biz, which outside of the precincts of the kooky left, makes him a less-than-fully-ideal spokesperson for the anti-initiative crowd...and
In 1997, he produced his own adult movie, Moyst, which had additional production work in 2001 and which he started to market in 2003. (Here's an internet posting where he gives away a free download of some audio from the movie in an attempt to promote it.)The weird conclusion seems to be that not only am I a pornographer (which is bad - except, ironically, to libertarians), but that I am a BAD pornographer:
"Moyst" received a lukewarm notice in 2003 in AVN (Adult Video News). Reviewer Mark Kernes says: "It's not clear exactly what the objective of "Moyst" is. If it's to turn on the viewer, it's only marginally successful."
That observation must be the kiss of death for movies in this genre...
(Quoting the "Langora" hit piece)
I understand that Williams is a frustrated adult porn writer and producer who bitterly failed in that business and now prepares tax returns.And, of course, "Helen" psychoanalyzes me as being a woman hater or something like that:
He also wrote a diary about what attending the [1998 World Pornography] conference [at the Sheraton-Universal in Hollywood] was like. In the diary, he comes back again and again to a sense of grievance about the way the actresses treat (or ignore) him, In what may be a case of wounded pride or sour grapes, he resorts to belittling the actresses ... What can I say? These actresses really pushed his buttons...Gee. That's a hell of a long way from whether or not Howard Rich, the "philanthropist" is financing stealth initiatives for secretive reasons of his own. Like, a couple solar systems away. Maybe half a galaxy. A looooong way, at any event.
Um...okay.
Hart's complicated attitudes toward women come through in other writings as well. Here he attributes an unattractive mercenary streak to his first wife...
What is astonishing is that, at the end of dumping this barrel's worth of pus and slime onto the page, "Helen" protests that her delicate sensibilities (as a prude, one supposes) have been offended:
I forget to mention Hart's blog entry entitled "Katie Couric, Whore" which I do not have the stomach to re-read. [Note: Too bad. It's a damn fine post, phony prissiness notwithstanding. - HW]This is an apt transition back to our old friend Coyote, who posted the smear in its entirety on NWRepublican on September 27th (the next day) and THEN (when it didn't fly) deleted it by October 3rd:
First, he explains (from the original post) lamely that he couldn't "trackback" what he was reposting. Then, having decided to withdraw the piece in question, he easily finds the link in question:
Because I could not find a way to trackback from Citizen Activist, I will repost the Citizen Activist story here. Most interesting is the end where he cries out to people to STOP SURVEILLING him. NOTE: I have not had time to check all the links to see if they work. If you are still really curious and they DON'T work then go to C[itizen-] A[ctivist] and try them from there.A strange prudery: to first post the smear in its entirety with glee, and THEN to take down the post claiming it was too salacious for the readership. If it was so awful, why post it? And, having posted it, why suddenly withdraw it?
WARNING: the following material contains content that may be offensive to some individuals. If you find issues of pornography particularly offensive as well as bad language you may not want to read any further.
In case folks did not notice, I have delted (sic) the copied content in this post. The reason? It was just too tawdry for me. You can go visit Citizen Activist if you would like to discuss it over there. Or you can read it there and discuss it over here.
So, call me a prude.
A prudery that gleefully posts material that offends its own sensibilities ... or perhaps which failed to achieve its own objectives.
There is something, ultimately, unjust that no prude has ever been arrested for his drooling prudery; no bluenose ever tried for her delicious retelling of the obscenity that offended her; no censor ever jailed for leading a witch-hunt. But, as Coyote says, he is "a prude."
That's it, exactly as retroactively posted. [Fun Fact: the link to the nasty little "Sopranos" flash movie that was removed was posted by Coyote on September 29 in the same spot: ]
The point here being, golly, isn't it an amazing coincidence that Coyote would publish the piece in its entirety the day following its original posting in a new blog, just the same way that he posted the attack on Kulongoski within hours of Kulongoski's challenge to Howard Rich?
I don't think that this sort of thing happens entirely by coincidence. But, recall what New Media, Inc. says: we need to use the digital media for our political campaigns. And New Media is a place that we shall return to another day.
So: this interconnection of anonymous and semi-anonymous blogs is certainly a phenomenon. It should also be noted that "Initiative Is A Good Thing" ("Citizen-Activist") had already linked prominently to NWRepublican in their sidebar. They also link specifically to the "Who Is Hart Williams?" smear in that same sidebar, one of the only two postings so self-honored. (The other one is their attack on the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center's howierichexposed.org website, entitled -- with great originality -- "Who is Howard Rich?" The link doesn't work, however)
There's one last slur that day that should be seen before we play connect-the-dots between anonymous players here.
Monday, September 25, 2006I will note that no specific thesaurus is cited. And, Gentle Reader, this lexicological dig wasn't enough, evidently, so, the following day "Helen" posted:
The book on "shenanigans"
If you read BISC or Howie Rich Exposed or Sandlapper or my personal favorite [link = http://www.hartwilliams.com/blog/blogger.html ], you will see the word "shenanigans" deployed over and over...and over...again.
So, I think to myself, do these good people not have access to a thesaurus? Did Hart learn nothing in his years of writing the Penthouse Forum letters?
In my public-minded way, I looked it up in a thesaurus so I could give them some style suggestions and now I get why they keep using the same word. There aren't any interesting alternatives:
Main Entry: shenanigans
Function: noun plural
Text: 1 playful, reckless behavior that is not intended to cause serious harm -- see MISCHIEF 1
2 wildly playful or mischievous behavior -- see HORSEPLAY
September 26:
I'll have to ask Hart if that's a shenanigan. I think so, but I'm not sure if I've learned how to spot them yet.Let's clear this up, right now (since not only am I a woman-hating conspiracy theorist and a not-very-competent pornographer, but am, evidently, incapable of using the precise term I'm looking for (and too disgusting for our two "prudes.")
I use the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition, 2000:
she-nan-i-ganOr, as long as we're playing dueling dictionaries:
n. Informal
1.
1. A deceitful trick; an underhanded act.
2. Remarks intended to deceive; deceit.
Often used in the plural.
2.
1. A playful or mischievous act; a prank.
2. Mischief; prankishness. Often used in the plural.
[Origin unknown.]
from WordNet 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
shenaniganMy use of the term was, in fact, precise, minus a carefully selective thesaurus search -- which is odd, since definitions are usually found in dictionaries. Only synonyms and antonyms are generally found in thesauri. Were this not the hallmark of this "hit" research -- cherry picking to form the most unfavorable possible interpretations of quoted writings -- it would go unremarked by me.
n 1: reckless or malicious behavior that causes discomfort or annoyance in others [syn: mischief, mischief-making, mischievousness, deviltry, devilry, devilment, rascality, roguery, roguishness] 2: the use of tricks to deceive someone (usually to extract money from them) [syn: trickery, chicanery, chicane, guile, wile]
As it is, it is symptomatic of the "factual" nature of the smear, which is why I haven't bothered rebutting most of the distorted or false allegations.
It seems a sidelight, but it is a useful sidelight: the entire attack is based on a sort of "look down your nose" sense of effete, elite disparagement that distorts facts to create a skein of innuendo and general creepiness. The psychobabbled pseudoanalysis is only matched in its offensiveness by its very irrelevance. (see the definition of "dead agenting" and a different analysis of the smear and "Helen's" anonymity at 'Really I Must Protest']
[NOTE: for a comparison of writing styles between the "Helen Langora" pieces and another 'official' ALG attack, see Part XII ]
None of which has anything to do with Howard Rich's shenanigans, please note. And the shenanigans continued:
In the comments section of that smear piece, the following characters show up to foolishly heap derision.
"Irresponsible Spender" writes:Irresponsible Spender is the person who runs and posts on the SPEND Oregon website cited earlier. And then, there is "I Am Coyote," confirming (with just the mildest bit of baiting on my part) that he's Ted Piccolo:
Hart, it's not that you were a pornographer ... it's that you weren't good enough at it to - er - stick. Can you share the details of how BISC recruited you? That would make a juicy story. 10:17 PM
Sorry to burst this particular angle of your conspiracy theory but I am not Irresponsible Spender or Helen.And then, "Silence Dogood" (Ben Franklin's old teenage Boston newspaper pseudonym) says this:
I post under my own handle.
Oh and it is no big secret as to who the Coyote is. After all I have been in the Oregonian a number of times as the author of NWRepublican. Even as recently as last week on the FRONT PAGE.
7:58 PM
Even though Brandy Alexandre spat Hart out back then, the MSM are swallowing it whole right now. Now that he's a celebrity, Hart needs to go on Nip/Tuck for one of those foreskin augmentations. He's worn his a little thin.Except that you'll note that "Silence Dogood" is ALSO the poster on oregonfoia.blogspot.com . Kurt Weber of Oregon's own CitizenFOIA -- a/k/a "Citizens In Charge" Eric O'Keefe, Chris Kliesmet, Leslie Graves, Paul Jacob et al.
3:57 PM
Gee: Coyote/Piccolo, who was co-petitioner on the failed Howard Rich Term Limits petition drive in 2004, and "Irresponsible Spender" from the SPEND Oregon "parody"/attack blog, AND (Silence Dogood) Kurt Weber, co-petitioner on THIS year's term limits initiative, whose signature was on all those FOIA faxes demanding public employee email records a couple weeks ago?
Oh, in two months, there are hardly ANY other comments on the "Citizen-Activist" blog.
So: ALL of the comments from Howard Rich operatives that day. You don't suppose they're emailing each other, do you?
That confluence of comments on the brand-new "Citizen-Activist" blog MUST just be a coincidence. There you go.
But the interconnected smear continued: In the hysterical -- either funny or just plain hysterical -- response to BISC's www.howierichexposed.org site, a "parody" page was put up entitled www.angryleftexposed.com which has this strange, snarky page:
http://www.angryleftexposed.com/profiles/kos.html
Notice in the lower left hand corner, it says:
WANT THE FACTS?When you go to getliberty.org, you get Americans For Limited Government. And they admit ownership of the "Angry Left Exposed" (ALE, get it?) site.
Visit getliberty.org to join our mailing list...and help fight Angry Leftitus today!
And, when you go to the ALG site,
Board of Directors: Executive Committee MembersSo, "Angry Left Exposed" is paid for, by and through the aforementioned gentlemen. That much is clear and indisputable.
Howard Rich, Chairman
Eric O'Keefe, Chair, Executive Committee
John Tillman
Ed Crane
Willliam Wilson (sic)
Now, we read the page:
DAILY KOS "BLOGGERS"Note that two nasty snarks are aimed directly at me. The links are:
Unofficial motto: "Someday I'll be famous! Although I disdain fame and all its trappings…please, let me be famous!* Just like Al Franken or Michael Moore!"
Hobbies: Being not as funny as Al Franken or as creative as Michael Moore-which really says something, people.
Special power: Crafting breathless rants while simultaneousy mourning their stunted pornography/journalism/science fiction writing career.
Sugar Daddy: To be determined…
Likes: Venting their deepest frustrations in life to the world; avoiding public places.
Hates: "Evil" rich people; apple pie; the voices in their head.
Kryptonite: Memories of high school.
*Editor's note: These comments were posted even before Angry Left Exposed went live!!! On a Friday night, no less! How do they do it over there? Is there no rest for the bloggy? Or is this all a side effect of Angry Leftitus?
Unofficial motto: "Someday I'll be famous! Although I disdain fame and all its trappings ... please, let me be famous! *
Which is my September 29, DailyKos diary entitled "ALG smear of DailyKos diarists only tip of iceberg."
I can take solace in the fact, I suppose, that I am now a thorn in someone's side on the order of Al Franken or Michael Moore. Certainly they are complimenting me in a strange left-handed way to attempt such a "guilt by association" ploy.
And the following paragraph ...
Special power: Crafting breathless rants while simultaneousy mourning their stunted pornography/journalism/science fiction writing career.links to: http://citizen-activist.blogspot.com/2006/09/who-is-hart-williams.html
That's right. The "Helen Langora" smear piece. Funny that it would be a link three days after the September 26 post. You don't suppose "Helen Langora" works for ALG do you?
Finally, there is the weird accusation of some weird "hack" on my part with the asterisk-flagged (*) statement at the bottom:
*Editor's note: These comments [my DailyKos blog, "ALG smear of DailyKos diarists only tip of iceberg"] were posted even before Angry Left Exposed went live!!! On a Friday night, no less! How do they do it over there? Is there no rest for the bloggy? Or is this all a side effect of Angry Leftitus?The mystery is easily solved: I had noticed a new referring link to my blog. So, I clicked on the link. And that was when I found "Angry Leftitus" and their smear.
Given the "Editor's note" we can safely deduce that I had inadvertently stumbled on the ALG webmaster checking out page links. To which I can only say, had you not linked to my page, I may not have known about the "angry left exposed" page for a week or more. Your fault, not mine. Didn't mean to be so quick. Sorry.
But the "Langora" smear piece resurfaces again October first (and again on Oct 26), this time in the grubby paw of Laird Maxwell, on the Sun Valley blog in Idaho.
Maxwell had been in an extended blog debate with Nils Ribi, a Sun Valley City Council member about his "This House Is My Home" (Prop 2) Howard Rich/ALG-funded initiative, but then, evidently frustrated, decided to write this vicious little love note:
Laird Maxwell Says:(I confronted Maxwell, but he ran away.)
October 1st, 2006 at 2:37 pm
Nils,
With all due respect, you are relying heavily on a poor lost soul named Hart Williams and his oddly-named blog, Boregasm.
I understand that Williams is a frustrated adult porn writer and producer who bitterly failed in that business and now prepares tax returns.
Here is a link if you are interested in finding out more about your source:
http://citizen-activist.blogspot.com/2006/09/who-is-hart-williams.html
And then, watching that blog, I found Maxwell again, a month after the original posting of the "Langora" smear piece:
Laird Maxwell Says:Funny, that sure mirrors the "Coyote" warning of a month earlier.
October 26th, 2006 at 9:31 am
Who is Hart Williams ??
Click here:
Hart Williams: A failed pornographer who now does tax returns and runs his creepy blog "Boregasm." This guy did most of the research that anti-Prop 2 opponents distribute on their web site, TV ads and false literature. http://citizen-activist.blogspot.com/2006/09/who-is-hart-williams.html
WARNING: Not suitable for children.
(Confronted Maxwell again; again he ran away.)
What finally traces the wiring of the stealth network is this strange, circuitous link on the "Citizen-Activist" blog, October 26 (same day):
The ring is in its pocketssess, yessss, and I will talk to my friendssesss at the Center for Public Integrity. I know I give them plenty of nice fisshhesssss. Millionsesss of nice tasty fishessss. Millionsess.(Charitably, one might presume that "Helen Langora" was attempting to be 'funny.' Uncharitably, "Langora" might be best advised against commenting on the relative sanity of others.)
They will crawl through the trash of the nasty hobbitsesses, won't they, my preciousssss?
And, oh, yessss. They have found it, my precious. The shiny good dirt. My preciousss. Yessss.
I will tell my friendsess the orcsess so they can post commentses on obscure blogssesss.
The linked page on "commentses on obscure blogssesss." is that same page on which Laird Maxwell posted his comment (at 9:31 AM, please note). At the end of the "Citizen-Activist" blog, with the effusion of serpentine ssssssss'es it says: posted by Helen Langora at 8:20 PM.
Jeepers, but that's a quick response from Helen! And odd that Laird links back to her in the morning, and she writes about it by that evening, closing the circuit: the smear has become self-referential. Certainly there is a very high probability of a direct exchange between the anonymous Langora and the ominous Maxwell.
Confused? You and me both, Gentle Reader. But can we safely conclude that this whole attempt to smear me is coordinated? That seems a safe conclusion, recognizing that it is merely a fair conclusion and not a dead certainty.
But can we conclude that ALG money is behind it?
Without any doubt. The Angry Leftitus website is proof of that. Without question ALG money is behind part of it.
The ONLY questions, in fact, is how MUCH of it is ALG money, and how much money?
[One casually wonders whether that money came from one of the 501(c)3 fully tax-deductible "public education" charities, or from the 501(c)4 not-tax-deductible BUT we-don't-have-to-tell-you-where-we-get-our-money foundations.]
The FACT that ALG money has been used in an attempt to discredit my reporting is, however, indisputable.
Unfortunately, the "discredit" portion hasn't been working.
Becky pointed out on Preemptive Karma:
Anyhoo, Ted [Piccolo], who obviously has his head up Howard Rich's ass, believes Rich never tried to hide anything, so voila, there is no conspiracy. I've been communicating off and on with a former Howard Rich insider who has repeatedly assured me that the group did NOT wish to be discovered. And it has been extremely clear, if you've followed Hart's research on Boregasm, that my source's assertions are correct - his group went to great lengths to cover their tracks. In fact, this person expressed shock when, once their secrets were coming to light, Rich, et al abandoned their secrecy and confirmed their involvement like it was no big deal.To which Coyote brilliantly shot back:
But let's get on with Ted's primary assertion: basically, he thinks Hart is a pervert; therefore, his theory that there was a secret conspiracy (which, unfortunately for Howard Rich and all the idiots on his payroll, is based on solid factual evidence) is nonsense.
Oh, on a slightly different note.[you might want to read the whole post and comment debate:]
Is there no comment about his involvement in pornography? I mean isn't that the exploitation of women?
Especially women who drop out of high school?
Oh I understand that women of legal age have the right to engage in such exploits. Hey it happens and there is a market for it.
However, call me uninformed, I have always had this picture of the stereotypical porn director/producer as being a pretty self-centered male who really has no personal concern for the women (girls?) he hires.
You know it is just not the type of guy I would want my daughter to associate with...
Coyote 09.27.06 - 12:49 pm
You may note that they seem desperate to change the subject of their shenanigans. Thus far, they really haven't been very successful. The smear was launched in earnest.
But it ain't playin' all that well in Peoria.
So: what do we have?
How about this: In understanding the history of one such smear, we get a sense of ALL the "new media" smears they're running like this.
This isn't about personal vindication. The point is that I'm not the only one. (Nor even the only one who is painted as "hostile" to women):
Friday, October 13, 2006Or consider today's "Citizen Activist" bundle of joy:
Tell Oliver Griswold: Stop Picking On Girls
... Today, let's talk about BISC Communications Director Oliver Griswold, and how he is picking on girls.
First, scroll down over these staff photos. Look like girls to me.
Second, go to Oliver's proud creation of a dossier on these girls.
I could say "more contemptiple (sic) McCarthyism" or I could just say "what an idiot Oliver is." ... (Helen Langora)
It's the Homos, Stupid
This in defense of philanthropy?Good lord.
We have to question the "civic virtue" of ballot propositions being pushed in this manner. If the arguments are this sleazy and vicious, then shouldn't the ballot measures be seen in precisely the same light: sleazy and vicious?
After all, we only have THEIR word that Howard Rich is just a nice guy helping out "local activists." You know, like Laird Maxwell and Kurt Weber.
Now, all of this must, finally, be weighed against the oft-repeated canard that Howard Rich is a "philanthropist."
If this is, in fact, so, then he is not engaged any form of philanthropy with which I am acquainted -- especially given the actions of his operatives in pursuit of that "philanthropy."
A strange philanthropy, indeed.
But then, this is all just crazy "conspiracy theory." Right?
Courage.
.
posted by ed waldo at 7:38 PM
2 comments
links to this post
