Update: Mighty fine reviews on the YouToobage.
What utter hypocritical bullshit, Charles.
After a suspiciously steady two-month increase, it appears that some of the bought bots have bailed and the aberration is in correction mode. He’s still trending downward – he was at #414,056 on January 1, an average drop of 11.7K per month. Compare that graph with this rocky road and it’s obvious that something was tweaking his stats.
Chirpty.com has the answer with a free infographic, and they even provide a list:
|CIRCLE 1||CIRCLE 2||CIRCLE 3|
Those are the twitteroids Charles Johnson interacts with the most, by “liking”, retweeting, and/or communicating with. Some unsurprising names on that list, yet some are oddly missing. So how many people blocked the magical jazzy ponytailed Twitterpest? (Hint: There are more than a few.)
FYI – Added new archive category for Jim Hoft / Gateway Pundit. Fun stuff.
While wading through the LGF Archives for something entirely unrelated, I found this tidbit, and it’s somewhat relevant to current events.
Charles was referring to some people (and Jenny McCarthy in particular) who erroneously believe measles vaccines cause autism in children. Besides having to explain herd immunity to the unwashed lizards, he proves that he doesn’t know diddly about the Dark Ages, and seems to think that vaccines were available in that era.
“Some English historians will say if there is any kind of
‘Dark Ages’ in medieval history, it is during the earliest part of the Middle Ages, right after the fall of Roman power in Britain around the fifth and sixth centuries. Its a period that has few surviving written sources, so we don’t know very much about what happened then.”
That’s the generally accepted definition of “The Dark Ages,” a period in medieval times that have few written records, but you all knew that. I noticed that Charles refers to them often, and usually out of context, so perhaps a visual exhibit might be in order:
Joe Biden was promoting platform censorship and claimed that people died of COVID-19 because of Facebook. Charles is partially correct in that Facebook and others are actively squelching the free flow of information – the exact thing that tyrannical governments have done (and still do). Post anything you like as long as it agrees with The Office of Approved Opinion.
In 2009, Charles attempted satire and failed, yet he was accidentally prescient:
Charles wanted a Facebook account, yet he couldn’t do it. He spent much time castigating others for joining Facebook “groups” that (according to Charles) included neonazis, anti-semites and other unsavory types, and everyone in such a “group” were guilty by association. Robert Spencer joined one such group (either accidentally or due to their deception) and suddenly he became an anti-semite himself. Once Charles discovered that bizarre connection, all of Spencer’s Facebook “friends” became neonazis including Pamela Geller.
Due to his paranoia, Charles could never join Facebook without vetting EVERYONE who connected with him lest he be painted with his own guilt-by-association brush. He has no control – no way to ban anyone, no way to prevent others from reading his blog-pimping unless he kept his posts private. That’s a deal breaker for an attention whore.
Pure obsessive-compulsive paranoia, then and now; Charles Johnson gets a vicarious thrill watching the Censorship Games.
BTW, the LGF groups are still there, Charles.
The difference between the two is that Chuck C. Johnson is a loose cannon, while Charles F. Johnson is a loose stool.
Recently, Jim Hoft / The Gateway Pundit revealed what most of us already knew: Fact Checkers are biased rumpswabs, and he posted several examples in a post entitled
Bogus Fact-Check Site Used by Google Lists All Conservative Outlets as “Low Credibility” – But Lists All Far Left and Liberal Mainstream Outlets as High Credibility
Fact-checking is an imminent necessity because “you’re not intelligent enough to adequately read, research and or rationalize for yourself,” the socialist arbiters of truth proclaim, “so, you must rely on us to filter out the ‘fake news.’”
MediaBIasFactCheck.com, is a fact-checking [site] that prides itself as “the most comprehensive media bias resource in the Internet,” despite being run by an owner who was previously exposed for misleadingly claiming to be a journalist.
Besides his own site, he lists several other prominent conservative websites rated as “untrustworthy” including Breitbart, Daily Mail, The Federalist and Project Veritas, He follows up with the ratings for a handful of left-wing sites, and as expected, the reviews are all positive. But Hoft missed one.
Thread downstairs was getting kinda full. Had to do something about it.