This idiot is a member of Labour? Really?
I’ve already raised with Andrew at Bloggers4Labour the issue of the “NeoConservative? Moi?” blog; discussion of the subject can be read here. I have recently been reminded of this blog by some of the discussion over at Liberal Conspiracy, where someone has noticed said blog and it’s author Wien1938 (see the bottom of the comments section).
Wien has been commented on because of his hysterical reaction to the US election results, describing himself and the conservative movement in the USA as the ‘real leftwingers’ – not to mention because this chap is also flinging around accusations of illegality on the part of the Democratic campaign (though whether for President, House or Senate he doesn’t say, nor does he give any examples).
Wien1938 dismisses criticism of Sarah Palin as the whining of feminists who had to resort to victimhood to get ahead; evidently he hasn’t heard what Republican insiders have been saying about Palin not knowing Africa was a continent, or not knowing the names of the three NAFTA signatories. He also flagrantly ignores that Palin utilized her gender to the same degree as anyone who might have resorted to victimhood, right down to the sexual flirtation, winking in the debates and such.
With such double standards, I doubt that Sarah Palin’s flip-flopping will bother him.
Obama is apparently a far-leftist, who is ‘unfit to be President’, though no reasons are provided to support such an assertion. This is matched by his assertion of the “unconstitutional and illegal tactics of the Democrats”, again mentioned without substantiation.
He also displays a worrying lack of knowledge about the system of government in the US, worrying that Obama can sack the judiciary if he wishes. For all Wien’s worry about ‘unconstitutional tactics’ he evidently hasn’t read Article III, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, which provides Congress with the power to determine the arrangement of federal courts.
Justices cannot be removed except by impeachment. For the most powerful court, the US Supreme Court, this has happened once. Ever.
Now it would be easy for me to attack the political views of this blog and suggest that despite being a Labour member, he stands for literally nothing which the Party has ever stood for. If our terms are so broad as a vague statement about making people’s lives better, all the greatest butchers of the 20th Century believed they were doing that.
Whether or not they were is a judgment call, one we all make when relating ourselves to well-known political figures and ideas. I don’t think we should be afraid of making a similar judgment call in regard to Wien1938.
I have deep misgivings about this chap being registered as a Labour blogger on Bloggers4Labour, for the above mentioned political reasons. There are also issues of quality control; evidently the blog is not averse to making potential libellous allegations. Effectively “NeoConservative? Moi?” is a Harry’s Place troll gone pro. Are we seriously suggesting that were Michelle Malkin or Melanie Phillips registered Labour members, that we would publish their rantings?
This is the level of tripe which we’re dealing with here – and much more so than before, whenever my post was just to flag up the appearance of a wierd blog, I’m definitely in favour of Andrew removing “NeoConservative? Moi?” from B4L.
Hi David,
Thanks for mentioning this, as I don’t monitor Liberal Conspiracy much (my bad) and missed Unity’s comment.
What I’ll do is mull this over until Monday evening and raise the topic at B4L to see what others think, as this issue seems to be coming up more and more.
This guy is clearly batshit insane.
Yes, thanks for raising again David. I’ve thought of doing so myself but after the little Werner episode, when Andrew felt perhaps he’d acted perhaps a little too quickly at (my?)urging, I can see why he’s holidng back for a moment.
I still think he acted quite correctly throughout with Werner, who falls into an even clearer ‘not appropriate round here’ bracket simply because he comes over at least initially as more sane than Neo-Con Boy. As Tom says, NCB is simply a silly berk, and his site in itself is not likely to have much influence on anyone with a remnant of sense, but the principle of his being on B4L or not is abn important discussion, especially in respect of his (supposed?) membership and the possible negatvie impact that removing him from B4L would have.
In any case, and as before, it’s Andrew’s site, he puts in all the hours, and what he says will no doubt be fine by me.
Yeah, I had quick look at that blog. The guy is out for lunch and is a nasty piece of work actually. He accuses Johann Hari and the Independent of being anti-semitic.