Dialog with the left

Following is a dialog you may find at the link following, which I purposely do not hyperlink. Cut and paste if you must. http://liberalmedianot.blogspot.com/2009/02/music-and-meander-at-capitol-is-bust.html

The conversation starts when I repeat a comment I inadvertently wrote to the wrong post at the site unlinked above. Mr. G, the proprietor of the blog, said he would respond if I re-posted it to the correct thread, so I did.

The topic is his insistence that there were only 60-70 people who turned out at the Michigan Tea party. I saw his contention at Michigan Taxes Too Much. Twice. I knew this was incorrect.

The conversation takes a meander or two as I endeavor to keep Mr. G focused on his claim. It ends when his cavalry arrives spouting profanity (which I have bowdlerized below), and he insists I’m not being fair by not correcting every other blog as I did his.

I would not have bothered with this further at all, but I discovered that he had blatantly lied to me in the course of the conversation: I mentioned that he had posted his ridiculously low number as a taunt on other blogs at least twice. He replied, “It was exactly twice, and I did it to set the record straight.”

Apparently, he was unaware that the internet also permits me to read comments at For a Better Day, where he did it three more times. Thus the following ([snip] keeps bystanders out of the fray):

Blogger Hershblogger said…

OK, here you go.

You started by saying there were 60 people at most, now you’re up to 70.

Actually, you are quite wrong. The Freep pointed out there were between 200 and 250. The Capitol Commission put it at 300.

An actual count shows a bare minimum of 193. As documented here: Michigan Tea Party turnout

Your insistence on the lower number is pathetic, but hey, it’s your credibility.

1:21 PM



Blogger Communications guru said…

It is my credibility, Mr. Hershberger, and that’s why I am standing by my estimate. I was there, and I’m not going to change what I saw with my own two eyes just to conform to what you claim were there. The fact is I left my office in the Farnum Building at around 12:10 p.m. and I saw at a max of 70 people milling around. I stayed until approximately 12:30. I find it hard to believe as many people you claim were there just disappeared in 10 minutes. I have no idea where or how those numbers were reached, but that was not how many were there when I arrived. I have never heard of the “Capitol Commission.”

You can also tell Mr. Drolet that he is either lying or mistaken because I never went in the Capitol on Friday, nor did I go to the House Office Building because I do not work there.

4:35 PM

Blogger Hershblogger said…

Um, the question here would be, “What’s your explanation of the picture?” That’s the point about your credibility, and the point you are not addressing.

The picture was taken at 12:23PM, Eastern Standard.

What you saw with your own two eyes could at best be described as an estimate. I made an estimate too. I was wrong. I admitted it based on the evidence. Mine was off by a factor of 2, yours is demonstrated to be off by a factor of 4. Standing by it is not about facts, then, it is simply an assertion of your preference. Which would be fine, except you keep contending it is fact.

It’s OK you find it hard to believe, but so what? How do [you] explain the actual count in my picture, which is at least 3 times your first guess and almost 3 times your revised guess? What is your refutation of the Freep reporter, whose estimate is 4 times your guess and agrees with the fact that my picture doesn’t include everyone?

Mr. Drolet’s most important point was defending your claim that you were there.

5:32 PM


Blogger Communications guru said…

I would say you were very liberal with your counting. It appears you counted people coming and going from the Capitol, and it even looks like you counted some of the war protestors. Certainly a far cry from 300. Your photo is also an estimate. I never said my count wasn’t an estimate. But I’ll concede the point, and I’ll give you credit for 150. Make sure you do the same thing you did for me to other bloggers like Wendy Day so they can change their claims.

Mr. Drolet was wrong, and he is simply lying. But we saw that in his failed recall scam. I didn’t know my being there was in dispute.

6:19 PM

Blogger Hershblogger said…

Repeated insistence on a number, going out of your way to post it on other blogs as a taunt at least twice, and using it as some sort of triumphal denigration of the people you couldn’t even count straight: Well, that moves it beyond well beyond “estimate.” You insisted you were certain. Over and over.

In any case, I’m really not interested in what credit you’ll give me. The turnout question is settled, and I don’t care if you ever admit you were wrong. I just think it useful for people to be aware that you’ve been promoting your prejudice as if it meant something.

The photo is not an estimate. I was quite careful not to be liberal in my counting, including leaving several probables as question marks. I even noted 2 possible war protesters and eliminated them from my posted count.

That’s 2 that I already noted. I suppose you get to subtract 43 more and pretend there are no people outside the photo because of your convincing crowd estimation capabilities.

Finally, of course your presence was in question given an estimate that was off by 400%.

7:33 PM


Blogger Communications guru said…

It was exactly twice, and [I] did it to set the record straight. Both you and Day inflated the numbers. When I see a rightwing lie, I will call you out on it. I know what I saw, but I am willing to make a correction when shown I was wrong; and did so.

I admitted I got the estimate wrong and fixed it. When are you going to do the same?

8:06 PM

Blogger Hershblogger said…

Well, I said at least because I can’t follow you around everywhere.

You set the record straight by dividing the attendance by 4?

You still insist on a rightwing lie as the cause of your error?

I did not inflate the numbers as I have proven.

You call more than doubling your “fact” correcting the record, but it still leaves you a hundred people short of reality.

I already did admit my estimate of 120 was wrong.

9:27 PM


Blogger ka_Dargo_Hussein said…

Who gives a ***? It was a *** stunt to fool *** into equating the failing economy with Obama’s policies instead of leaving them at the feet of the *** in Chief…dubya.

Give the Republi-bots an out for their irresponsibility and they will take it every time.

9:48 PM

Blogger Communications guru said…

The two extremist rightwing blogs I posted on have not corrected their inflated numbers. When are you going to ask them to change their inflated numbers? I made an estimation; not an error.

10:03 PM

Blogger Communications guru said…

You’re right, Dargo. He wants to hassle me about an estimation of the numbers – only with me not the rightwing tools – but ignores the ridiculous and inappropriate notion of a tea party when the majority of Americans support the plan, ignores who got us into this mess and they were silent when Bush turned a surplus into a deficit with an unnecessary war.

It’s all Bush’s fault. I should have known.

3 thoughts on “Dialog with the left”

  1. Well, I admire your devotion to truth.Your emasculation of this looter was instructive. And it is an illustration of the difference between those who reason with their emotions and those who reason with their minds.Thanks for sharing.

  2. Oh, I remember this guy and his blog. I dealt with him about a year ago. He’s not playing with a full deck. I think I got banned from his blog. I must be doing something right. Brett

  3. Hahahaha Wow! So predictable! He went right to the “Bush Did it” routine!Weak.. so very weak..Lets lay it out there.. I was not a happy camper about Bush, but i still get a little cross eyed when liberals cannot argue facts, so they start talking about the failures of our previous leader.The MUST be a name for this phenomenon.