Kinsella vs Spector

Yeah, really... get a REAL blog... lusers!

Neiher one of these girls is to be taken seriously.

Umm, maybe losers would be a better spelling.

Lusers is the correct spelling.

Indeed. Both would benefit from the judicious application of a LART as well.

The difference between Paul Wells and Warren Kinsella is that Paul Wells has a razor sharp wit, and Kinsella thinks he's got one. For me, Kinsella's writings always conjure up visions of "Carrot Top", but with a turtle-neck sweater on. At least Kinsella "loves" punk. That's kinda cool, right?

On the other hand, Norman Spector is a genius. There's a man that knows what goes on in the world. I supect he doesn't have permalinks because he publishes on Shaw's member web space. Dunno if you can run blog software on there. He probably just updates the same page over and over. Someone should tell him about BlogSpot.

Well, I did say on Let it Bleed a couple of weeks ago that Spector is the Warren Kinsella of the Right.

We have to give Norman some credit for successful baby steps. He is now actually formulating more or less coherent arguments in his posts to The Shotgun, in contrast to his initial glib hit-and-run approach.

That said, he seems to be determined to cement his image as a pompous twit. His weird attack on Colby Cosh managed to avoid ever addressing Colby's actual argument, settling instead for fawning over Andrew Coyne's "legal training and ... firm grounding in Canadian history and politics." (I thought Coyne was an economist, but never mind.) He fetishizes the mainstream media (for obvious reasons), treats his Shotgun adversaries as idiot children, and openly derides bloggers because they haven't managed to break a Canadian version of Rathergate yet. (Which is an odd critique, when you think about it: it's not every day--or year--that big media outlets get desperate enough to release transparently forged documents in an attempt to sway an election. Give us time.) He gives political advice that could have come straight from the office of Brian Mulroney, circa 1992. Worst of all, he's (apparently quite deliberately) destroyed the formerly collegial atmosphere at the Shotgun by trying to dictate what everyone else should be writing about.

I picked up a newsstand copy of the Western Standard a couple of weeks ago, and while I found it understandably low-budget, I thought it was promising enough to warrant a subscription. I'm holding off on that for now. Spector can go or stay, but it's time he learned some manners.

My way-past-its-Best-Before-date theory is that Norm and Warren are actually the same guy, like Michael Caine in Dressed to Kill.

I've broken radio silence at the Shotgun to give Norm the Cole's Notes version of my writing portfolio, btw. However, I will not return until he leaves. This is not me being a diva (much); life is just too short to spend it with post-menopausal has-beens and bullies.

here is my take

Well said, mql. I wish I could bring myself to such a flattering view of Norman Spector as you have, but let's face it, the man's just a vain idiot. He knows nothing about history, politics, or law, as he proved in his ludicrous attacks on Mark Steyn and Colby Cosh. (Note, good old media maven Norman had never heard of Colby Cosh and thought he was "some blogger".)

I could put up with the stink of turd that permeates his every post, if there were anything of any value to compensate, but there isn't. It's like having an opinionated loudmouth get aggressively drunk next to you in a bar, but all day, every day.

Kate, you must have some credibility with Ezra and Kevin. Can you not convince them that letting Norman turn their blog into a toilet is a big mistake?

Kathy, you were right to walk out of there. As anyone who visits the Franksters forum will know, I enjoy a good, hearty all-out vituperation exchange, but that's not what I expect from the Standard. We have a right to serious and mature discussion and we're not getting it. And there's no point going back until we do.

Kate, Norman Spector is like some kind of awful fungus -- you get a little of it, and it takes over.

Even on the index to the right of the Shotgun where they list our recent posts it's like The Night of the Living Dead.
Norman Spector on Norman's Spectator
Norman Spector on Norman's Spectator
Norman Spector on Norman's Spectator...

If it multiplies, God help us all on the North American continent.

If he wants to present an argument for more attention to Canadian issues, why doesn't he just advance his point of view? Why does he feel the need to try to hurt other bloggers' reputations?

As for me, I'm an undesirable. An American. It's like Norman wants to post about American issues, but wants to eliminate American feedback.

"Well, we'll talk about you, but shut up"!

Does anyone have any ideas about how to deal with him? I thought Meaghan was the most awful troll, but I believe Norman has her beat.

If the owner of the site isn't going to control the comments section I don't think there's anything that can be done with a troll like him.

Once the old usenet groups got infested with a serious troll they were beyond redemption. They are gratified by any response, including insults.

Ignoring them just makes them shout louder and louder until someone, anyone responds to their infantile attention-seeking behaviour.

The idea that this pathetic old man was once our ambassador to Israel and a senior member of a Conservative government is pretty sad, when you think about it. Now he's reduced to whacking off in front of his computer 24 hours/day and trying to get attention from bloggers who just want the pathetic idiot to go away.

Ultimately it's up to the Western Standard to regulate conduct on the Shotgun. Kate once commented that she'd been rebuked by the moderator for using the word "crap," but other people's utterances that are unequivocally defamatory -- "genocidal fascists," for instance -- apparently go unpunished. This makes no sense, either in promoting the Shotgun as a useful forum or in limiting the Western Standard's exposure to legal liability.

I can't see any practical alternative to pressuring the Western Standard through letting subscriptions lapse or expressing of displeasure. Many people have already taken one or both routes; it remains to be seen whether the tactic succeeds. If it doesn't, the Shotgun will soon be "All Norm, All the Time." He'll undoubtedly attribute the absence of readers to the great erudition of his posts, which only political hacks and Globe and Mail commentators have the wit to appreciate. But Norm will assuredly never voluntarily stop posting his swill.

FWIW, there are finally some discussions going on behind the scenes. Hopefully, things will improve somewhat.

Time out.

Before you guys forget you were bashing ME, too, I just wanted to thank SDA for the animated photo. It shows me with far more hair than I actually have, and that can only be a good thing.

Okay, time out's over. Back to the bashing, please.

Nice try at a troll, Warren, but you just don't matter anymore.

Oh, I didn't forget. That was equal opportunity bashing.

If Warren could do more than talk a good fight, Norman would be a lampshade on his desk by now. Come on, warren ya wuss, show some mettle.