Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

A Note for Ducky's Mommy

By Sam Huntington

In comments the other day, you graced us with your presence long enough to criticize all the ad hominem attacks against your darling little omelet. While I do admit that there are some of us who have nothing but contempt for Ducky, which he has earned over many years, it is not simply a matter of differing politics.

I did some looking into our archives and found the following contributions, little duck droppings left for us by your darling little piker back in 2005. Now of course, these remarks were directed against individuals he has never met and only knows from the expression of their opinions. It is only a sampling.  He has also assaulted high school students who occasionally post their essays at this blog as part of their assignments. As you read your little darling's tripe, you may note that if anyone dares to express an opinion different from his own, Ducky becomes openly hostile and frequently profane.  We have often thought that there is something quite odd about the dippy little duckling.  You know, mental issues. I only mention this on the off chance that you may want to take him to a family physician or perhaps your own psychiatrist. It would be the responsible thing for a mommy to do.



Begin quote from Ducky:

Why thank you Beak. I do like to give the fans a thrill now and again. Was this unilateral or did the whole crew join in?

About Jason ---- The sandbox libertarian who is so dumb that he gets his view of the Arab world from Raphael Patai, as I recently learned. Although the Arab countries certainly have their distinctive characteristics, the idea that 300 million people, from Morocco to the Gulf, living in rural villages, urban metropolises and (very rarely these days) desert tents, think with some sort of single, collective mind is utterly ridiculous but that doesn't stop Jason. I think Patai spent two pages on hospitality and charity, critical elements in Arab culture and two chapters on masturbation. Well, at least we know why Jason was so struck by Patai's work.



About Beak ---- The professional Kahanis. The Juden Uber Alles master of the universe. I'm quite happy that I get you so riled up.


About Beamish --- He is a football fan and hasn't had a creative though in several years apparently. He like Impressionism. Given his vapid personality that's no surprise.



About Always On Watch --- A harmless sort with good intention as she fills her students at the charter school full of tripe. I once described my uncle's experiences during WW II and AOW was kind enough to note that she approved of his character. Typical of the American far right she was not bright enough to see that she got it wrong. He earned the right to approve of her...she has never been tested and has earned the right to shut her mouth.




About Mustang --- The censor. The poor fool sitting at home singing "Freedom Isn't Free" and not even knowing he's been filled with so much crap by his marine experience that it is the world which is qualified to explain things to him and not vice versa. Unfortunately this is also true of other vets although I have developed something approaching a liking for Big Bubba.



About Farmer John --- An interesting sort. If he could let the great Books program move him past the 18th century there may be some hope.




Who did I leave out Beak? As the right wing war monger pussies start mouthing off about Howard Dean I started thinking about the efforts of the great socialist Jean Juares and his assassination trying to stop World War I. I was wondering if any of you 85 I.Q. lightweights had heard of him. Probably not although I suspect Jason is stupid enough to step in and try to blow smoke out his ass on the topic.

End Ducky Quote

Not long ago, you bragged about a relative of yours who proudly served in the military. Thus, you may yourself feel somewhat agitated to learn that your little toddler has nothing but contempt for those who serve their country in uniform. Noting, of course, that your little boy would never place himself in harm's way for someone else. How proud you must be to defend such a slug.

In the same post, one commenter made the following observation, which I think encapsulates how most of us felt about Ducky in 2005. She wrote:


“Many of us, from the Right and Left, Conservative and Liberal, Independent and Libertarian, have experienced at least SOME damage (some more than others) in the form of "mixed premises" that are rammed down our throats. 



"Our educational system was seized by the government back in the mid-1800s; then, while lying helpless in the clutches of a uniform code of "one size fits all," it was infested on a wholesale level by the Postmodernists, who saw in the captive minds of our children a MARVELOUS opportunity to further their goal of "deconstructing" our country.

"Duck has experienced the same thing that many Muslim children, who are, incredible as it might seem, born as normal human beings, experience under the heavy hand of Islam. The human brain is a remarkable entity, but it is not immune to every assault —either the Postmodernists' or Islam's.

"Quite frankly, Duck has some interesting points to make on occasion, but they are offered wrapped in so much hostility that they are experienced like a rock wrapped in whatever he has to say that is then thrown through our windows. As a result, most people immediately reject everything he has to say--the sort of situation that gave rise to the expression, "throwing the baby out with the bath water." 

By trying to make his points by using "ad hominem" so much of the time, he loses every case every time, even when he's right. Sorry--I should say "accurate," not "right.“

In essence, your claim lacks validity. Ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, particularly in questions of personal conduct, character, and motivation. Each of these are relevant. Moreover, ad hominem reasoning has both rhetorical and logical value, and this is especially true in the case of your duck turd: his points are always subjective and almost always incoherent.

So while I normally do not offer advice to people I don’t know, I’m prepared to make an exception in your case. It is this: do some research before you run your yap in the defense of a spineless bag of pus. And have a nice day!

54 comments:

  1. I hope you feel better now that you've gotten that off your chest? It must have been festering for a very long time. There's an old proverb somewhere that says we do our own reputation more harm when we we attack someone we don't like than we do the object of our criticism, even when the criticism may be warranted. Aren't we supposed to love our enemies?

    Heller Van Erve

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hellen,
    The point of Sam's post is informative. Unless one knows a bit about this history of certain bloggers, other bloggers might well conclude that quips in other threads are unwarranted.

    I'm not sure that festering was involved. In any case, Sam has written what he has written. I do give my team members free rein.

    The blogosphere is a public forum. As such, all of us participating in the blogosphere would do well to remember that what we have typed in may well be on public view long after we are dead and gone.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Here's my history. When light weights likw wig sniffer think they can use leftists as a heavy bag you get kind for kind.

    There have never been ad hominems leveled at me or the left in general?

    If you want to see if my statements about these posters are legit go look at some recent postings like mustangs belief that Boston brought the bombings on itself.
    That's the kind of mind you deal with with you wade into the fringe right swamp.

    A lot of these boards aren't like some rabies radio talk show where you have a call screener and I don't believe in a soft answer when dealing with the right.

    You think I'm going to try to discuss the latest column in the Nation on Paul Krugman? I'd give it a try but Sam would turtle at the first sign that his foundations aren't as sturdy as he suspects.

    It's like z saying that Michelle Malkin is early always correct. You folks live in a very flimsy tower and have often attacked when your foundational beliefs are in jeopardy.

    Want to discuss the Krugman article, Sam?

    Pop, Charts: On Paul Krugman

    ReplyDelete
  4. The fact that Ducky cites Krugman shows his intellectual vapidity.

    Krugman is boob bait for bolsheviks.

    "Spend you way to prosperity" is right up there with eat yourself thin...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Paul Krugman is an intellectually dishonest crapweasel. I post these links as a public service.

    Many are the Errors of Paul Krugman

    How To Cheat With Graphics: Paul Krugman Style

    Krugman's Voodoo Statistics

    Estonians Teach Krugman a Lesson in Economics

    Krugman's errors - a critique to Keynesianism

    A Couple of Krugman Kicks

    Freakonomics: Correcting Krugman

    Smart people caught on to his phony balony shtick and partisan cheap tricks years ago. People like Ducky bear out PT Barnum's timeless observation. There's a sucker born every minute...

    ReplyDelete
  6. THIS assessment from Sam's "article" seems fair, accurate ad well-phrased to me:


    Many of us, from the Right and Left, Conservative and Liberal, Independent and Libertarian, have experienced at least SOME damage (some more than others) in the form of "mixed premises" that have been rammed down our throats. 



    "Our educational system was seized by the government back in the mid-1900s; [NOTE: I'm sure she meant NINETEEN-hundreds] then, while lying helpless in the clutches of a uniform code of "one size fits all," it was infested on a wholesale level by the Postmodernists, who saw in the captive minds of our children a MARVELOUS opportunity to further their goal of "deconstructing" our country.

    "Duck has experienced the same thing that many Muslim children, who are, incredible as it might seem, born as normal human beings, experience under the heavy hand of Islam. The human brain is a remarkable entity, but it is not immune to every assault —either the Postmodernists' or Islam's.

    "Quite frankly, Duck has some interesting points to make on occasion, [NOTE: HEAR! HEAR! I AGREE!] but they are offered wrapped in so much hostility that they are experienced like a rock wrapped in whatever he has to say that is then thrown through our windows. [NOTE: Great analogy!] As a result, most people immediately reject everything he has to say--the sort of situation that gave rise to the expression, "throwing the baby out with the bath water." 

By trying to make his points by using "ad hominem" so much of the time, he loses every case every time, even when he's right. Sorry--I should say "accurate," not "right.“

    ReplyDelete
  7. @Van Erve

    Love and hate are strong emotions; Ducky engenders none of these. But thanks for stopping by.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Sam,

    Enjoyed the post. It put a smile on my face because I believe in Freedom of Expression. Anonymous quotes "Love your enemy" - which has nothing to do with free speech and everything to do with attempting to sweep critical analysis of free speech under the rug.

    My guess is that Ducky was rejected by a backwater paramilitary group in Arkansas years ago - hence, his self-hatred disguised as disdain. wink

    I imagine he also hates an intelligent woman (moi) who has worn a khaki uniform.

    But back to the post at hand. The internet allows all of us to speak, and also to be held accountable for our words. But it is a "safe war" in the blogging world. It is the war of words.

    Tammy

    ReplyDelete
  9. @ AOW

    I don’t think I have ever come across anyone quite so insipid, so extraordinarily hostile, or as profane than the duck. Accusing others of ad hominem attacks takes a lot of brass. Our friend Z has frequently said that Ducky hits below the belt; she’s right. His attacks on your student writers, many of who are still fragile writers, was a demonstration of the vilest conduct … and why it is impossible for me to regard him with anything but contempt.

    ReplyDelete
  10. @Ducky

    I write this with all seriousness and good will: get professional help. I’m almost positive it will do you some good, and it will provide a case study that will keep psychiatrists busy for years.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Dearest Ducky, it's so much fun to ruffle your feathers. But then, I think it's why you come here. You love the attention.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Why did I waste my time with his drivel?

    ReplyDelete
  13. It was good to see someone pull the bathtub plug on Rubber Ducky, as I like to call him. He is a thoroughly obnoxious leftist. I was especially annoyed when he accused Geller and Spencer of "bigotry" for exposing the Islamic threat. Now that Muslims have perpetrated yet another of thousands of atrocities, this time in Boston, will Ducky rethink what passes for thought in his noggin? Don't count on it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The article was not "by" Krugman, it was "about" him.

    And while I might agree with the author's tone, I don't agree with his underlying premise... that Marx WAS right and that Krugman is irresponsible for not recommending the FULL Marxian pogrom.

    Please. The Left IS the Discourse of the University and has completely "subsumed" Pop Culture. That you can't grasp the new Post-Modern Name-of-the-Father and build a completely new economic paradigm based upon the social relations of Rawls and brotherly love is hardly my problem.

    For the only real answer for optimizing the human condition doesn't lie in driving a stake through the heart of Free-Market capitalism. It lies in "reforming" it through the elimination of the Immortal Struldbruggs. Even the Izzie's follow this cornerstone(but unfortunately, coupled with a deadly bad political model). All that remains then, is to answer the questions as to "who, in the West, will do it first.

    And no, it won't require the establishment of a New World Order for the solution to succeed. The USA can do "Juche" just fine.

    PS- The Chinese 3 Represents is an express lane to Euro-Socialism, NOT "sustainability".

    ReplyDelete
  15. Well, Stogie, I have maintained that the pathology of the bombers in Boston is much closer to shooters like Lanza than any revolutionary jihadist.

    If you are led by the nose by the likes of Spencer and Geller it isn't a topic you can add insight to.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Krugman is a throwback to the failed "Blue" Liberal Economic Model. Of THAT, there is no doubt.

    And Obama's "Green" Model was doomed before it even started. For as Lazare Carnot stated 200 years ago, "progress is not possible without achieving GREATER energy densities"... NOT reverting to thirteenth century, less energy dense "windmills".

    ReplyDelete
  17. @Silverfiddle --- The fact that Ducky cites Krugman shows his intellectual vapidity.

    Krugman is boob bait for bolsheviks.

    -----
    Krugman is a bolshevik. See this is how it starts folks.

    This is what passes for informed comment. Now I don't hold animus towards Silverfiddle but it is obvious that discussion is not possible.

    I figured this out when I came to an understanding on his take on Hayek. I had originally thought he had found some way to read it as an economics treatise rather than a screed but that isn't the case.
    The unfounded thesis of the book is that any action by government in the market is a prelude to totalitarianism. Now it's absolutely ungrounded in history, political or economic but Silverfiddle believes it and therefore his response to anything is that it was caused by government interference.
    Renders any discussion pointless which is unfortunate but he does have a deep dislike for the left.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Corporations ARE government interference in the economy duckman. You can't create "immortals" w/o government slights of hand.

    ReplyDelete
  19. You bring up the question of why I post and I'll try to answer it woodster.

    AOW, is the one I have achieved a certain amount of rapprochement with.

    I think there are two reasons:

    1. I do have a genuine admiration for her in the matter of Mr. AOW's stroke and how she's handled it.

    2. My photography. She seems to understand there are some serious themes there. I'm not sure she can pinpoint what they are (I sometimes can't myself) but one theme is present in group shots.
    They are always ambiguous unless children are present. The people are in possible threatening posture, they aren't attending to each other or the physical space is divided to make communication unlikely.

    In fact, I don't put much faith in the ability of people to communicate. We try but unless we are talking to members of the same tribe it's very difficult.
    Social media and electronics don't help and I know AOW agrees with that.
    So we are probably stuck and I get as frustrated and angry as the next person but I do know that none of us have anything like a complete answer but the fringe right seems to believe they do.
    That belief is intensely fear driven as they watch the world change around them

    ReplyDelete
  20. @ Ducky: "Now I don't hold animus towards Silverfiddle"

    Yeah, you do. I provide links and facts, and you zero in on a rhetorical gloss.

    You're not dumb, Ducky, you're an expert at redirection.

    I did not call Krugman and bolshevik. I said he was boob bait for Bolsheviks, an you are walking, quacking proof.

    You worship Marx, although his crackpot economic theories have failed, often killing, starving and miring millions in the process, while the simple principles espoused by Hayek work every time, resulting in economic freedom, growth and prosperity.

    It must really suck being such a fanboy of a failed ideology. Probably explains your bitterness.

    ReplyDelete
  21. @ Ducky: "The unfounded thesis of the book is that any action by government in the market is a prelude to totalitarianism."

    A bald-faced lie. In fact, Hayek lays out many logical cases for government action.

    So...

    ...either you are too stupid to comprehend what Hayek has written,

    or you are ignorant enough to spout rhetoric you hear about him from leftwing propaganda fonts without checking it for yourself,

    or you have read him and you purposely lie about what he has written.

    Which is it?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Sam,
    I don’t think I have ever come across anyone quite so insipid, so extraordinarily hostile, or as profane than the duck.

    I didn't meant to imply anything about YOU! Rather, I was thinking of all those archived comments from Duck, comments which you cited in the body of the blog post.

    When I first started blogging, over at Big Bubba's blog Mindless Twit Magnet, Duck either stated outright or implied that I was a pedophile. I was new to blogging at the time and absolutely stunned. REALLY STUNNED! I was accustomed to dealing with people who engaged in civil discourse, not with those who hurled epithets of no basis whatsoever.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Duck,
    AOW, is the one I have achieved a certain amount of rapprochement with.

    After a very rough start -- as I mentioned in the comment just above this one.

    ReplyDelete
  24. @ AOW: Duck either stated outright or implied that I was a pedophile.

    Yeah, he's a real class act. The charm of Nixon and the fact checking integrity of Michael Moore...

    ReplyDelete
  25. ...and no sincere desire to discuss the topic that he himself presented.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Ducky showed up at my old blog and called a female commenter a dumb "C" word. That's when I blocked him.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I actually cut Ducky a little slack because I'm not a subscriber to the absurd idea that leftists are actually capable of rational thought.

    He's affectionately known as "Nostradumbass" around here because of his predictability. You can ALWAYS count on him to flaunt his imbecility.

    ReplyDelete
  28. BWAHAHAHAHA... HA! (I think Odie made an excellent point... as have all.)

    Just so you'll know, Ducky -- we're ALL ashamed of how you blasphemy our name, here at Duck Commander Headquarters! Don't look forward to EVER making a guest appearance on Duck Dynasty... AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!

    ReplyDelete
  29. He's hardly an imbecile, he's just a condescending knowitall trying to compensate for having an itty bitty pee pee and a major inferiority complex. That should be obvious? Sad really.


    --------> Katharine Heartburn

    ReplyDelete
  30. I don't really think his peepee size or lack thereof has any relevance to his general lack of intellect on anything substantive. After all, even women bloggers can reduce him to wishing for the death of (the then living) Andrew Breitbart.

    ReplyDelete
  31. never use that expression, mustang. I have to call foul.

    Could have been an insult but not that one.

    -----------
    AOW, I really don't believe I would have called you a pedophile (female pedophile, very rare).
    Well back in the day there were misunderstandings. I remember when you believed Beak's rather absurd contention that I didn't believe Muslims were responsible for 9/11.

    -----
    Odd you should bring that up, Beamish. Shaw has mentioned your obsession with urine.

    ReplyDelete
  32. The foul-mouthed Fowl calls foul.

    Oh, the calumny! The outrage, the slanderous injustice of it all!

    Poor Ducky, so misunderstood...

    You reap what you sow, jackass.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Odd you should bring that up, Beamish. Shaw has mentioned your obsession with urine.

    Says the man who believes well-lighted urine in a jar is art.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Duck,
    In my early days of blogging, I did not reveal that I am a female. In fact, when Beak introduced me via the electronic bar back in May 2005, he posted the following:

    I would like to introduce Always on the Watch to our community of Bloggers.He is off to a good start and many of you have met him ....

    I'm not sure when I finally revealed my gender.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Kut kut ka DAW kit!

    Kut kut ka DAW kit!

    KWAK! KWAK! KWAK! KWAK! KWAK!

    KOCKADOODLEDOO!

    KWAK! KWAK! KWAK! KWAK! KWAK!

    Dick Wilde

    ReplyDelete
  36. Personally, I love seeing how effortlessly Ducky pwns wingnuts here when he regularly exposes their hypocrisy.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I will let the above comment from Liberalmann stand as proof Liberalmann's idiocy.

    ReplyDelete
  38. AOW: I like to view Lester Liberalmann's comments as I do those little comic panels newspapers and serious magazines put in between the serious material to break it up.

    I feel sorry for him. It is obvious he is either mentally challenged or he has reading comprehension issues.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Note to Libatard and the other one: don't y'all have a place where you can hang out with your own kind?

    ReplyDelete
  40. "ad hominem attacks against your darling little omelet" I love the "little omelet" comment.

    Debbie
    Right Truth
    http://www.righttruth.typepad.com

    ReplyDelete
  41. Come on Baaaayyybeee, let's do the Ducky Stomp. Yeah come on baaaayyybeee, let's do the Ducky Stomp. Oh baby oh baby oh, do the Ducky Stomp. LOL

    Hey, no wonder you never 86'd the fool from your blog. He's too much fun to blog about.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Black Sheep,
    Well, sometimes we all need comic relief, don't we?

    Sam did a wonderful job with this essay. All those archived comments that he dug out!

    ReplyDelete
  43. Well, AOW, I doubt Sam would be so jacked up if I hadn't drawn some blood.

    Let's face it. This crowd isn't very deep.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Not very deep? Like not missing that the article is addressed to your mom over there progressively erupting in her pants every time we yell "Boo?"

    ReplyDelete
  45. There's people suffering in hospitals with amputations from this progressive leftist terrorist attack and she's crying about being a "victim."

    I think your mom has a crush on me, Ducky.

    ReplyDelete
  46. As I have said, before, we need to keep Ducky around. Who else has a different opinion about everything anybody discusses? Who else is always available to offer sometimes interesting, but off the wall comments? Ducky is the one to crucify. Every interesting blog needs its trolls and targets.

    We can't use Liberalmann for this duty as he doesn't know it when he has been insulted. He is not trainable, and will never "walk" intellectually.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I found this bit of wisdom on Instapundit.com.

    "GOOD ADVICE, from Neal Stephenson’s Cryptonomicon: “Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker’s game because they almost always turn out to be — or to be indistinguishable from — self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time.”"

    ReplyDelete
  48. I think your mom has a crush on me, Ducky.

    Blech … Don’t do it, Beamish! No shower could last long enough.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Damn!
    Y'all forgot me again. I want to play too.

    I disagree with most of you. Beamish understands Nostradumbass and the Left better than most of you ever will.

    Ducky isn't even close to intelligent, he's just a idiot studying for for the right to wear a "savant" suffix after "idiot".

    I'm serious. How else could an intelligent adult come up with
    the sentence above? ("Here's my history. When light weights likw wig sniffer think they can use leftists as a heavy bag you get kind for kind.")

    Heavy bag??? Oh, I see. He took a few to many to the head and spends a lot of time hearing hallucinatory bells and ducking imaginary birds. That must be why he uses the monicker "Ducky".

    His efforts to impress us with his, "vast knowledge and understanding", lead me to almost feel sorry for his diminished mental capacity. But I refuse to accept responsibility!

    The kicks I've delivered to his head weren't capable of penetrating his gluteus maximus let alone get his attention or penetrate his skull.

    His totally stupid statements prove that his reading comprehension skills are non-existent. How else would you explain statements such as -to paraphrase- ('The founders weren't concerned about a too powerful or large Federal government.') when such concerns almost scuttled the Constitution?

    His attempt to use a logical graph, to prove some bit of leftist tripe, ended in his disappearance from the thread when I thoroughly destroyed his postulate using every diagrammatic reasoning system that I could think of (and his own operators). What it did prove was that he was making it up as he goes.

    He is also known to have a physic and space time problems. (meaning) He needs a good physic (archaic use - a laxative), I don't know why anyone gives him the "space" to post and he doesn't seem to understand that effect comes after cause. (time).

    Oh, and Nostradumbass, You only think that leftists are used as a "Heavy Bag". Heavy bags don't come apart like wet Kleenex.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Warren,
    You are ALWAYS invited to play here. :^)

    You are so right to point out that Duck has a way of disappearing from threads when his "arguments" are shredded.

    And nobody shreds Duck as you do. :^) However, a few years ago, one of my students (high school) decimated him in a debate. I recall that, at the end, one commenter (from Australia, I think) said, "Well, that was rather embarrassing," in reference to the student's undeniable victory.

    I allow Duck to post comments for various reasons. Other bloggers do not allow him to post, and I fully understand why.

    ReplyDelete
  51. And the daily 'OOHRAH' goes to... WARREN!

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective