Liberal Blogger Caught -You live by the Blog, you die by the blog!

Richard Hobbs's picture

Liberal Blogger Caught Red Handed

I've not been paying quite as much attention to all of the different posters' personalities on this site. I have a hard enough time remembering who hack, git, and muddle are, to actually be able to differentiate as adroitly as many on here do, to the subtle differences/similarities between certain anonymous posters.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, so much of what is posted on this blog is nothing more than graffiti and thats a shame.

But I thought I'd share with many of you that your "real" identities are easily discovered, especially if "they" want to find you.

In the linked story, a good liberal democrat, found his way onto a conservative blog and began spewing out all of the classic hate speech that they attribute to us all of the time. He feigned his disgust with teacher's unions and wanted them to know how bad they were, when in fact, he was part of the teachers' union and was trying to spout off vicious lies and charges in order to make the conservatives look bad. Fortunately he was caught, and, as I'm sure you will not be aware, Cal can do the same thing.

So for those of you who "think" they are anonymous, "think" again. You are not.

And again Cal, Please hire Git to clean up the site! You really need a couple of seperate Blogging categories. One for Sports, one for local politics and one for National Politics and maybe one for all. I'm tired having to search through the blogs to find substance, while bloggers are "testing" the blogs or posting football scores online.

These are my rambling and disjointed comments and opinions, if you don't like these, I have more insane ideas to share.

Richard Hobbs's blog | login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by Swinger on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 11:25am.

You admit you are insane. Everyone else knew it all along. Now why don't you get the help you need instead of spewing your hatred? Your picture is very telling indeed. Just look at the eyes. They are the window to the soul. Your soul is corrupted. You give Republicans a BAD name.

AF A-10's picture
Submitted by AF A-10 on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 11:55pm.

"These are my rambling and disjointed comments and opinions, if you don't like these, I have more insane ideas to share."

If you are tired of wading through disjointed "stuff", you might start by not blogging frivolously; you know, like trying to tell democrats in the democratic primary why they shouldn't vote for the guy they like. I'm just saying. Did you see that Obama got more votes in DC, Maryland, and Virginia than McCain and Huckabee combined? Wow, man. I, as well as my fellow democrats and cross over republicans and independents are pumped up! I wish you could experience this type of excitement over your canidate. But I'm felin it man!


Kevin "Hack" King

Submitted by sageadvice on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 8:52am.

I can understand the 85-90% black vote for Obama in the primaries, but why are they wasting their allegiance?
He can not beat Clinton this time, and the prestige he gains by going all the way will just organize the haters even more for the next time!
It is also highly unlikely that Clinton would pick him as a VP since she will get those votes anyway in the general election.
So what is it all about at this late time? Pride instead of intelligent thought? Nobody has ever done more for the black race than Bill and Hillary Clinton and you must know that. We are not electing an icon, but a President for us all.
There are however many high-placed positions in a Clinton administration for someone such as Obama, but he won't get them under a republican administration!
I think maybe McCain will lose the general election due to Bush's legacy, but I intend to vote for him anyway as I see him as the best seasoned and reasonable one of the three running.
My man, Biden, didn't make it. Too straight talking for voters.
Give some thought to our country before you vote, that doesn't mean you shouldn't vote for Obama, necessarily.

JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 9:10am.

After last night, Clinton now has to win 55% of the rest of the delegates. If Obama wins even a slight majority in Wisconsin (which it certainly looks like he will at a minimum) then Clinton must win 57% of the remaining delegates.

How do you figure that he cannot beat Clinton? And your questioning his “going all the way” and “what is it all about at this late time” seems to suggest that you think he should give up and withdraw. You do know that he is ahead in the popular vote, has more delegates and has a lot more money?

Seems to me your advice is more flawed than sage.

Submitted by sageadvice on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 12:14pm.

We are talking about the end game here. Not today.
Gore got more popular votes!
Obama has won almost all of the big states, if not all, he is going to win. It may go to the convention for settlement but I see happening there what happens to many when they get to the general election ballot box, they go with the least gamble.
Money didn't get Obama where he is---Bush, and many blacks who kicked in small amounts did.
Just as evangelicals did for Huckabee!

We still vote our wishes instead of for the best candidate. You know: religion, color, gender, speaking ability, war, family values expressed (like our republican friend caught just recently in Georgia, the new Speaker).

JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 2:12pm.

I would not be surprised if Obama took two of the big three left: Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania. Clinton is now in the position that Giuliani was in, facing a string of loses week after week with the withering media attention that brings while hoping for a big win to turn things around. It will take a miracle for Clinton to make it now. The super delegates are mostly elected officials themselves, a lot of them up for re-election. They are not going to rescue Clinton unless she can show some strength. Even the Clinton people are saying they must take Ohio and Texas. If they don’t, it’s over. If they do then they have to take Penn too. If they don’t, it’s still over. If Obama takes either Ohio or Texas and stays close in the other it’s over. If Obama wins everything this month, a high possibility, then Clinton can take Texas, Ohio and Penn by 53% (unlikely IMHO) and still be behind in delegates at the convention. She’s stuck in the 30-40% range. I don’t see how she suddenly picks up 20% more in March than she’s doing now after losing the rest of this month.

We will see.

Watch for the super delegates to start endorsing Obama.

Richard Hobbs's picture
Submitted by Richard Hobbs on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 12:16am.

I'm there for you Hack. Glad you are enjoying your euphoric time while drinking the kool aid of symbolism over substance. Hells bells, I think he might get Creflo Dollar to run as his VP and you'd have a winning combination. Heck, Creflo has more experience than Obama in running a business, and he sure has more charisma, since that happens to be the most important quality we have in a candidate.

But it ain't over until the fat lady sings, and yes, I'm referring to Hillary.

The Super Delegate and the votes from Michigan and Florida still have to be counted. As has already been mentioned in the news, Hillary is working those phones, getting her lawyers ready to "count all the votes." Seems a bit ironic that you would disenfranchise your own illiterate masses, and instead put the fate of your party in the hands of a 21 year old super delegate in Wisconsin, who became a Democrat while in Kindergarten. (Yes, he did say this tonight, he told his parents to vote for your very own Bill Clinton, while he was busy finger painting signs. . . "Its the Economy Stupid!")

Democrats really do think this way, as I heard this kid tell Anderson Cooper tonight, that the Super Delegates are better informed, since they are party activists, and they have more knowledge since they are having one on one meetings with the candidates. The elite arrogance of those in the Demcratic party amazes me. You really have little control over your own candidate. What a democracy!

It so very, very funny, if it weren't so sad.

I wonder who the Islamist terrorist hopes will win? Do they have any super delegates?

BTW: if Barack picks Richardson as his VP, talk about a Demographic homerun. That would be a cake walk if the election were today. Too bad we have 8 months of RACISM to endure. Yep, thats when anyone with an R in front of their name, or from Fox News, asks any question to Obama for which he can not answer. And trust me, those questions will come and the goofy little rock star called Obama will have to deal with it. (I guess you've heard that Barack's past hasn't really been vetted yet, haven't you? Can't wait to see some of his writings during his formative years coming out in the news. That's going to be rich!)

Its going to be a fun election.

JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 8:59am.

Obama graduated summa cum laude from Harvard and was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. While this alone does not qualify him to be President, it does give me a degree of confidence that he will be able to withstand the questioning from whatever former shoe salesman or male porn star FOX is passing off as a reporter when the time comes.

You’re just mad that Hillary isn’t going to win.

As to the Islamist terrorists, obviously they will be pulling for the party which will continue the war that provides them with recruits and a training ground. Your party.

Richard Hobbs's picture
Submitted by Richard Hobbs on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 9:41am.

C'mon Jeff, you have some real credibility here on these blogs, so don't screw it up by letting your political biases influence your sound debate points. (Unless you are sniffles or mudcat or muddle or whoever. I hope you don't post, anonymously.)

Yes, O'bama went to Harvard and was elected class President. It says a lot that you have to go back to his post-graduate school work to promote his credentials for being the leader of the Greatest Country on Earth. I suspect he will defend his lack of experience and liberal policies much better than you or other members of this blog. He is a very talented speaker.

But to suggest that the terrorists are rooting for McCain, because they like the war on terror? Well that sounds really good but its nothing but BS. Sort of like me suggesting that 4 years of Obama might be like a vaccine shot. You have to take a bit of the virus, in order to build up an immunity to it. But that's just pompous talk, no one from the Right will actually vote for Obama. (Even Ann Coulter will come around.) And no one from the terrorists organizations wants another Republican in the White House.

Which reminds me of the big uproar in Colorado last month, when at a democratic fund raiser or some type of political event, someone mentioned that if Obama is elected, we will have to change the name of the White House. A tempest in a teapot brewed there for a few days. This election will be fraught with just such examples. Like trying to sleep in a cage with a big white elephant, you never feel comfortable enough to really close your eyes; always a bit uncomfortable in pretending not to notice the white elephant while feigning sleep; so also will be the debate when it crosses over to racial issues. Journalist will use silk gloves in attacking Obama out of fear they will be called racists. The thin skinned liberals will be screaming racism at every turn.

But I digress, please tell me that you have some real good talking points about how the terrorists really truly believe that having their entire organization completely in turmoil, in having their leadership killed, and with the ever growing confidence in the civilian population of Iraq that they believe they are in a better position now, then they were 5 years ago. What you want to believe, doesn't make it right.

Besides, I would have thought you were a bit more conservative than Obama, but I guess I was wrong. I would have thought you would prefer Hillary or McCain over this extremely liberal fellow.

JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 10:45am.

Don’t be changing the subject in the middle of the stream (to mix metaphors).

I wasn’t going “back to his post-graduate school work to promote his credentials for being the leader of the Greatest Country on Earth.” In fact, I specifically said that I was not using it as a qualification for his becoming President.

I was responding to your snarky (my kids taught me that word, I like it!) comment about, “…Fox News, asks any question to Obama for which he can not answer. And trust me, those questions will come and the goofy little rock star called Obama will have to deal with it.”

I remain confident that Obama can handle questions from the media wing of the Republican Party.

Of course the terrorists organizations are pulling for the Republicans to the extent they understand our politics. They can’t rely on the Democrats to continue to have the US military stay bogged down in a stalemate situation in Iraq. A Democrat might make the Iraqi government actually have to function instead of being willing to prop them up without any pressure for a hundred years like McCain has promised to do. Might even go after bin Laden.

When you write about their organization being in turmoil and their leadership being killed and so forth, I noticed that you didn’t mention that there were no al-Qaeda terrorists in Iraq before the war. Bush’s strategy has been a bigger boon to al-Qaeda than any of them could have possibly imagined: diverting the military from Afghanistan, overthrowing Iran’s major enemy, providing a radicalizing environment in the Middle East to foster new recruits. Why on earth would bin Laden want a Democrat in charge when he has all that going for him?

Intelligence Puts Rationale For War on Shakier Ground

Denise Conner's picture
Submitted by Denise Conner on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 8:45pm.

"I was responding to your snarky (my kids taught me that word, I like it!) comment"

Are you sure that you didn't learn "snarky" from "Sniffles 1-5"? Puzzled

Snif to Denise: "even with all of your trademark snark" &

"Why not put aside your standard snark and meta-commentary"

It's getting hard to tell the two of you apart these days.
Laughing out loud

Thanks again for your advice from long ago: "Really Denise, if you read this and care to respond in the future, you should do your own homework and know or semi-know what you're for or against (and why) to the point of defending it beyond one post. Sometimes, using facts will help, especially if they are on your side. Study Richard Hobbs blogs."

BTW, is this quote an example of snark [combination of "snide" and "remark" -- "nasty," derogatory comment(s) made in a malicious, superiorly condescending way]? Puzzled

sniffles5's picture
Submitted by sniffles5 on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 12:25am.

Well, heck, we've put up with Richard Hobbs' incessant race baiting for this long, another 8 months of his trite racial commentary won't matter much one way or the other.

Git Real's picture
Submitted by Git Real on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 2:33pm.

Cal and I have already narrowed the field of phonies down to several bloggers. It is our belief that the blogging of Sniffles and Main Stream are actually bogus monikers created and utilized by the conservative blogger Cogitofay. Cogito has properly been reprimanded and warned in his effort to discredit the Left by posting in the same manner as the phoney liberal teachers union blogger that you referenced. It just goes to show, that we should have known all along that bloggers like Sniffles and Main Stream were too extreme to have ever been considered 'real' by the good readers of the Citizen.

But, it is not only the conservatives that have egg on their faces from having phoney identities. We've also discovered that Hack is the true culprit behind the false and multiple monikers we've come to know as The Beav & Larry Wicker. Rest assured we're also keeping a close eye on both Jeff C and Mike King. Not to mention that Sky Spy is under heavy suspicion of being Steve Brown.

I suppose the most shocking revelation of our intensive investigation was finding out that Dollar - Nitpickers - D Smith - Bonkers was actually Cal's very own John Munford. Shocked

Goodness..... What are we gonna do with these guys? Puzzled

In regards to Democrats, Republicans, gangs, and other scads of coterie Kool-Aide drinkers; Remember this..... Eagles Don't Flock

Submitted by sageadvice on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 8:58am.

Who would believe that a fine upstanding journalist, such as Cal, would ever work with such as you to hold threats over the other bloggers?
You seem to be "possessed" with names on here! Why is that?
Is it that if you know everyone's name maybe you can hurt them more?

hutch866's picture
Submitted by hutch866 on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 11:20am.

You must be the one possessed with names your on at least the 6th one so far.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

Submitted by skyspy on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 8:38am.

You finally admit I'm the real Steve Brown. Good job, doesn't that feel better?.

BPR's picture
Submitted by BPR on Tue, 02/12/2008 - 2:43pm.


Thanks, I needed that laugh.Smiling

"Hope Changes Everything"

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.