Item via email, in response to this post:
Several friends are BCC'd, who I think may attest to the falsehood of the accusation of "elitism" Lemmen makes against me and others. It has always been my belief that loyalty is a matter of reciprocal obligation, that loyalty must be earned by long and faithful service, and that no one can command an undeserved loyalty of others.
If someone puts in 10 years of diligent toil with a company, he is in a far more compelling position to expect that the company reciprocate his loyalty than is the fellow who got hired last week. However, if a man believes the company's treatment of him is unjust, that his continued loyalty is wrongly scorned, he is morally obligated to leave and seek employment where his services are duly appreciated, rather than to become that awful thing, the Disgruntled Employee who spreads misery and discouragement throughout the organization.
Some of you may remember that in April, I was so profoundly discouraged that I actually quit blogging and was only persuaded to return through the earnest solicitations of Smitty and others. They convinced me that my services were yet valuable, and that my despair was unjustified. So I have resumed and continued blogging, and hope that I have in the past five months done some work to deserve the continued assistance and support of my friends.
Now, I know for a fact that the only reason Ali Akbar has been "doxed" and smeared is because he rallied to the defense of myself, Aaron Walker and others targeted by Brett Kimberlin. Similarly, Lee Stranahan has been targeted for smears because it was he who declared "Everybody Blog About Brett Kimberlin Day." The furtherance of these hateful smears by Paul Lemmen — and his claim that we are somehow guilty of "elitism" — bring us to confront a simple question: Who the fuck is Paul Lemmen that he thinks he can get away with this?
What has Paul Lemmen done to earn and deserve your trust?
Well, now, there's a good question.
But really, isn't the onus on "Champagne McCain" to prove that he's just one of us?
It's true that he invited me to the Scott Brown (as it turned out) victory celebration, and that I was able to meet up with him and Da Techguy in Manchester, NH, again at his invitation, along with Jay Tea of Wizbang. It's true that he has been of enormous help to numerous bloggers, most recently providing the cash for Zilla to start up Batshit Crazy News, which was Stacy's idea. It's true that he has hit my tip jar when I've been scratching for cash, and that he's linked me here and elsewhere on numerous occasions, and that he's just about the only other blogger who ever calls me up (excepting now and then Film Ladd), mostly just to chew the cud.
How he affords his Italian suits and his diamond-studded walking stick, his Ferraris, the enormous gems that glitter on his fingers, or the caviar, I will never know. Neither is it any of my business. I will never forget motoring up the cedar-lined drive to his manse overlooking the Shenandoah, and wondering how he could have purchased that stately domain on a blogger's salary—and with all those children. The missus greeted me politely in the foyer before whisking me to the gallery, where were gathered notables from government and media corporate bigwigs, all enjoying his excellent armagnac whilst McCain regaled them with tales of high hobnobbery. The dinner was sumptuous, and I omit detailing it only for brevity's sake. Later, he bested me deftly at his regulation snooker table in the billiard room, and offered me a fine Cubano from a box given him by Leon Panetta, and showed me his library, populated top to bottom with leather-bound first editions of classics in various languages, not only of Europe. We sat on the veranda and conversed on lofty themes, before I retired to my room, put up by the sweetly attired maidservants, whose decolletage I shall never forget.
I say it is none of my business. I am happy for him. The well-groomed horses gambolling on the elevated pasturage, the chinoiserie, the footman footmen [thanks for the correction, Stacy], the gardeners (who happily went about their business both on the grounds and the rambling hothouse), the girls in French frocks practicing on their harpsichord, the young men reciting their Latin under the watchful ear of their tutor . . . who would not be charmed by such a display?
Elitist? Why, he sent a man down to the village to fetch me a PBR. Rubbish.
I, for one, hope that Stacy McCain will continue to bless us with his bloggings, the fruit of that noble brow which I have sometimes been fortunate to behold. I do not know why he bothers with me, nor do I understand why he would condescend to be injured by Paul Lemmen, whose choices in life have sometimes been regrettable, but I have reflected from time to time that he cares, God only knows why.
UPDATE: And now, a ditty by Butthurt Bacharach, in honor of @rsmccain's #TalkLikeAButthurtDay:
You see this guy? This guy's in love with you.
You're obligated to reciprocate,
Or I will blog a post or two . . .
Telling folks that you're bad, you've led me on,
And I've been had.
You'd better love me, or I will say your ugly cuz . . .
This is my butt. You've hurt this butt.
The only butt attached to this guy!
If not, you must die!
Perhaps later I will get around to The Bangles, if Stacy doesn't first.
Paul Lemmen on September 19, 2012 at 1:16 pm said:
This is the problem with elitism. I am just an ex-con with a blog. One that participated in the Everybody Blog About Brett Kimberlin Day and other efforts to expose the Kimberlin/Rauhauser axis, who advocates for truth and transparency as well as accountability. Who provided information that the "elites" used, often without any recognition (until bluntly asked about it), a hat tip or linkage. Willing to take and use my work product but not quite willing to admit someone as disgraced as myself could ever be acceptable or accepted as a fellow blogger in search of truth.
Someone who hits tip jars, often emperiling my own living conditions, in the belief the need is greater than my own.
Indeed, who the fuck is Paul Lemmen? To so haughitily proclaim the emperor has no clothes? That folks have strayed into elitism, one of the direct causal needs that New Media is supposed to address, the elitism of the MSM? The less and less transparent and less accountable these titans of new media become?
Perhaps such a minor figure as myself causes such reaction because there may be a guilty conscience behind my questions and statements?
You decide, remember, I am a nobody, such a minor blogger that I am lucky to get over a hundred readers per day, much less per month than the elites get per hour. So I must toe the line and do as I am told, get in line and not question anything … exactly what many claim our opposition does …
Who the fuck is Paul Lemmen?
Dan Collins on September 19, 2012 at 1:38 pm said:
I honor your contributions, particularly those given at such cost to yourself, Paul, but I don't understand how Stacy becomes a target of your wrath. Each of us goes in and out of favor with others here in the 'sphere. There was a time, for example, when I would occasionally receive a link from Glenn Reynolds, but just because he no longer links me, that's no reason for me to denounce him. His attention is simply elsewhere.
Now, there are elites out there, and elitists, but no blogger who doesn't belong to a Big Operation is really among them. If you want to look for them, a good place would be to cover the Media Matters fiasco with the DoJ. As for Stacy McCain, he writes often and well, he does his research, he is generous to others, even if they don't seem to include you, and he scratches for every penny he makes. He's not a kingmaker. You might try to Google up Ace of Spades on the subject of blog celebrity.
You do marginalize yourself, unfortunately, when you seem to be saying that someone who has no obligation to take notice is stingy with their notice. In extreme cases, this can lead people into saying completely batshit crazy things, such as someone is plotting to steal their destiny.
I am a minor blogger, too. I wish that I were not; there was a time when more people read what I have to say; it's nobody's fault that I no longer enjoy such an audience. So what? Nobody's silencing me. I suppose that I could be more aggressive about courting attention, but it's too much work for me at the moment. If I were to court attention, I would do it in such a way as not to make myself obnoxious to those from whom I wished to have it.
Paul Lemmen on September 19, 2012 at 1:54 pm said:
You are still avoice to listen to as far as I am concerned. I only incleded the names of folks that I noted, in my opinion, had drifted into elitism. If you think I have no issue with the lack of acknowledgement, continue in that belief if you desire.
"You do marginalize yourself, unfortunately, when you seem to be saying that someone who has no obligation to take notice is stingy with their notice."
Yep. That's because no one knows of my work or the contributions made directly to both McCain and Stranahan that have never been acknowledged, in Stranahan's case, without my permission, prematurely publishing certain email (never acknowledged to have been provided by me), stealing the thunder of my posting of the data. No acknowledgement, no apology and to this day, not so much as a hat tip. Because I'm a 25th level blogger and so far beneath their notice …
EBL on September 19, 2012 at 3:28 pm said:
Paul: You have set yourself up for quite the challenge. It is hard to out butt hurt McCain. He is really good at that.
Paul Lemmen on September 20, 2012 at 2:58 pm said:
No butt-hurt.Poining out that St. Stacy ain't so saintly. If he truly had honor and respect for his word, my post would never have been written.
Adjoran on September 19, 2012 at 7:33 pm said:
One of the first things a writer learns is NEVER let another writer, editor, publisher, blogger, or columnist have a peek at what you are working on. Ownership comes from publishing, not before.
When a higher-tier writer receives incomplete information on an ongoing story, he will usually treat it as a tip. Unless you have a close relationship with someone and a clear understanding what you send them is off the record, you might as well gift-wrap it.
That's the way it goes. Maybe it isn't "fair." Have a tissue, Nancy.
Paul Lemmen on September 20, 2012 at 2:41 pm said:
Boo fucking hoo Adjoran. When Stacy is included, in real time, in the email exchange with Neal Rauhauser, after agreeing to not publish without my permission, the same as Lee Stranahan agreed to, then when Lee published without my permission, mere hours before my publication and Stacy links to Stranahan and continues to link Stranahan even though I published before Stacy did, the entire exchange not only one email, that is dishonorable and dishonest behavior. To this day, Stacy has not linked the posts regarding that trove of information to me, thanked me or linked to my post. A satirical butt-hurt post that offers as an afterthought that I have been helpful … in what has never been specified. When several people are involved in a process to get information and one receives those emails and shares them in real time with the agreement that no one publishes before me, the recipient of the emails and the operative running a deception on Neal Rauhauser, and publication is only with my permission and with proper attribution and linkage. To violate that is a disgrace and the act of someone who views themselves above the other, the very definition of elitist.
Cronyism is also a symptom of elitism. The whole NBC affair reeks of cronyism.
GrayzeL on September 19, 2012 at 1:38 pm said:
Just who the fuck is Paul Lemmen? Paul is a man with a very checkered past that I met online several years ago. He is a man that understand in his past he has hurt people and has repentented of that past. Paul and I have had our differences on line and in emails. At one time he fooled me with a very innocent con. I have had many discussions with Paul over this. Paul has had the courage to repent and ask my forgiveness. He has received that forgiveness. He entered this debate with honest questions about NBC. They were never answered. Why not?
EBL on September 19, 2012 at 6:17 pm said:
That is a legitimate question for NBC I suppose. Although it is not compelled to answer Paul.
Impolite Canadian (@TheImpoliteCana) on September 20, 2012 at 7:35 am said:
Say WHAT?? As a 501(c) 3 they have the OBLIGATION to disclose their info. ESPECIALLY the financial info. I think you should do some research on this before saying things you don't have a clue about. The CLAIMED they were a charity, they collected funds on that premise.
Sorry if this is blunt, but me and Paul have been spending MONTHS looking at IRS legislature. We know what we are talking about.
Impolite Canadian (@TheImpoliteCana) on September 20, 2012 at 7:41 am said:
Under Section 511, a 501(c) organization is subject to tax on its "unrelated business income", whether or not the organization actually makes a profit, but not including selling donated merchandise or other business or trade carried on by volunteers, or certain bingo games.[4] Disposal of donated goods valued over $2,500, or acceptance of goods worth over $5,000 may also trigger special filing and record-keeping requirements.
Note that "tax exempt" also does not excuse an organization from maintaining proper records and filing any required annual or special-purpose tax returns.[5] Previously, annual returns were not generally required from an exempt organization accruing less than $25,000 in gross income yearly.[6] However, from 2008 onwards, many such organizations must file a yearly "e-Postcard" known as Form 990-N, or risk losing their exemption.[7]
Failure to file required returns such as Form 990 (Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax) may result in monetary fines of up to $250,000 per year. Exempt or political organizations (excluding churches or similar religious entities) must make their returns, reports, notices, and exempt applications available for public inspection. The organization's Form 990 (or similar such public record as the Form 990-EZ or Form 990-PF) is generally available for public inspection and photocopying at the offices of the exempt organization, through a written request and payment for photocopies by mail from the exempt organization, or through a direct Form 4506-A Request for Public Inspection or Copy or Political Organization IRS Form request to the IRS of the exempt organization filing of Form 990 for the past three tax years. The Form 4506-A also allows the public inspection and/or photocopying access to Form 1023 Application for Recognition of Exemption or Form 1024, Form 8871 Political Organization Notice of Section 527 Status, and Form 8872 Political Organization Report of Contribution and Expenditures. Internet access to an organization's 990 and some other forms is available through information services such as GuideStar.
Failure to file such timely returns and to make other specific information available to the public also is prohibited
Zilla on September 19, 2012 at 1:21 pm said:
And that big fancy elitist blogger McCain stood up for me against the Democratic Underground back before most people had ever even heard of me, and like he does with you Dan, he also calls me just to say hello and see how I'm doing. Stacy has never been anything but a true and loyal friend to me – even if he is really bad about checking his emails.
Zilla on September 19, 2012 at 3:24 pm said:
Oh, someone gave me a down twinkle on this? Pffft. Haterz.
Where's my freakin' smoothie?
Starless on September 19, 2012 at 5:45 pm said:
*up twinkles* for Zilla
and here's yer smoothie
Bob Belvedere on September 19, 2012 at 6:56 pm said:
Mucho Up Twinkles for Zilla!
Zilla on September 19, 2012 at 9:34 pm said:
Yay!
Lori F. on September 19, 2012 at 4:51 pm said:
I only recently had the pleasure of interacting with Mr. McCain; I did not know (or care) if he is "elite" (a word thrown about way too often these days); I guess for me I was struck by the enormous aptitude and talent he has shown in the short time I have "known" him. I guess I will stick with my belief that the true measure of a man's charachter is always revealed in his actions, not what they drive or serve you for dinner.
EBL on September 19, 2012 at 2:05 pm said:
Paul: We do have bigger fish to fry right now.
http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/2012/09/who-is-out-of-touch-with-american.html I am still smarting I did not get an invite to this shingdig. But maybe Matt Yglesias can score me a bottle or two from it.
Impolite Canadian (@TheImpoliteCana) on September 19, 2012 at 2:58 pm said:
Well,….
That email from McCain is just dripping of condescendence. ''Who the fuck is Paul Lemmen?'' I would answer that by asking a question of my own: ''Who the fuck are you, McCain?'' Really. Who are you to question motives behind the legitimate questions never answered by the NBC and Akbar? Because, really, this is how it started, right? (this is sarcasm, McCain did use some of Paul's stuff (the Rahauser emails) without acknowledging him and THAT'S how this started). Does he think his stat counter hits make him something special over us-poor-not-to-be-associated-with-ex-conmen? Nope. Not in my opinion. Not in the FREE WORLD we live in. His excrements have the same texture and smell as ours. Maybe he should remember that when he calls himself a ''neutral journalist''.
McCain does what he does. He choose to defend Ali, more power to him. Really. But when he TELLS us to be quiet about it until the election, and that we all are part of this left-wing conspiracy and that we are not intelligent enough to comprehend the implications of the subject, then I draw the line. Only an elitist and a SNOB who thinks his shit don't stink can make these comments. I had a VERY civil email chat with McCain last week, but yet he called me a troll on Twitter when I went after Stranahan. Attacking me AGAIN for doing what I believe is right, exposing frauds and ask the questions that even you asked, Mr Collins. I don't see McCain attacking you for it, but he sure does when it comes to Paul and me.
I'm not questionning McCain's past. Nor do I question the good he still does (Helping out Zilla is a great thing, no questions about it, and someone who helps my oldest online pal deserves credit for it. But when push comes to shove, if he shows dishonesty, I would do the same thing I did with many old friends: I will BULLDOZE him. Honesty MUST prevail. At all cost. It's all we have on the right.). But what he does wrong I will challenge any time I damn well please. He wants to get butt-hurt about it? Fine, but until Akbar comes clean about the NBC, McCain is in the line of fire for defending and supporting him, just like I am for defending and supporting Paul. When you pick sides in a fight, you take what comes with it. I did.
But what is really to me the proverbial drop that made the pot overflow, is that he would email YOU to whine about it, instead of going to Lemmen's blog and comment. Or better yet, fire that email to Paul. Why put you in the midst? To gain a sympathetic ear? To marginalize YET AGAIN the works and research of Paul?
And I think it's false to pretend that Paul marginalizes himself. He picked a side, and has been following the same line since. No flip-flopping, no turning of the coat. Just plain old HONESTY.
EBL on September 19, 2012 at 3:25 pm said:
I like Paul. I think he has a good blog. But I can understand Stacy not wanting to throw his friend Ali under the bus because Paul has questions. RSM is not the issue. If Paul want to pursue questions about Ali, he has a blog and can do so. He has the right to go out and persuade others to do so. But ultimately, if people are distracted…say because there is a big election coming up this November, Paul should recognize it is not personal when others don't jump up and join him.
And from what I have seen (and granted that is a narrow window) Ali is a good guy too. That Paul and Ali share a history of (in the past) being on the wrong side of the law are issues they both have to deal with. But I do believe in redemption and judging people of their current behavior.
Impolite Canadian (@TheImpoliteCana) on September 19, 2012 at 3:42 pm said:
Yeah, but what is Ali's current behavior? Snarking and attacking, possibly when drunk or something. I belive in redemption too, being an ex con as well, but when did Ali redeem himself over the ALA fiasco? How about using Breitbart's name for a fund that is according to Breitbart UNAUTHORIZED?
That's not honesty. Were not asking Stacy to throw Ali under the bus. We're telling him to STOP PLAYING DEXTROSPHERE GOD by telling us to shut up about it until the election.
EBL on September 19, 2012 at 6:21 pm said:
I remember his post. From what I saw, he was being dragged into it. Even if Stacy said not to pursue it on your own (and I am not sure that is what he was saying), you can pursue it on your own. But isn't this really a dispute between you guys and Ali?
Impolite Canadian (@TheImpoliteCana) on September 20, 2012 at 7:27 am said:
Well unlike some people, I will not reveal the content of the exchange that happened. But I can tell you that THAT'S what he said.
Ai'nt gonna happen. And he's in that line of fire for that, and because he used Paul's material (the Rahauser emails) without even an acknowledgment.
Jerry Wilson on September 19, 2012 at 3:21 pm said:
Bull.
Akbar lied about his criminal record when it was revealed. He has steadfastly refused to answer even the most basic of questions about the National Bloggers Club. He has responded to any and all questions with either silence or schoolyard insults, sometimes sent through someone else.
There is one person responsible for this fight, and it's Akbar. That, and Stacy insisting that any and all questions raised means anyone doing so is either a willing or unwitting Neal Rauhauser dupe.
Which, to put it politely, is quite insulting.
Dan Collins on September 19, 2012 at 3:51 pm said:
That may make Stacy credulous, but I hardly see where that makes him elitist.
Then there's the question who doxed Ali Akbar, and what their motives in so doing were. I'm going to guess that it wasn't out of an abundance of concern for the NBC.
Having said that, I will say as I have before that Ali ought to submit to a full audit, and that he should have come clean about his past.
Each of us has limited resources of attention. We bestow it where we think it's most important. Someone may believe at times that I am hollering up the wrong tree, and they might be right, but nobody has the right to demand that I bestow my attention where they would like to see it focused. One of the oldest comebacks, and one of the most reasonable, is, "Why don't you write about that, then?"
There are a lot of bloggers to whom I link a lot, and a lot of tweople whom I RT a lot, who do not reciprocate. The last thing I would ever do is try to browbeat them into reciprocity. I might tweak them, and I might tease them, and I might even link them in such a way as to suggest that perhaps they hadn't acknowledged my contribution or even that they'd not bothered with an attribution, but I'm not going to demand that they acknowledge me or my writing.
I have my sucky little pride.
Jerry Wilson on September 19, 2012 at 6:11 pm said:
I've pretty much given up any hope of any member of the Konservative Kool Kidz Klub linking to anything I write, so that doesn't bother me anymore.
I did get more than a little perturbed when my brother passed away a few years ago and the only response I got from either Ali or McCain was Ali calling me a "shitty family member" and Stacy said nothing. Come to think of it, he still hasn't said a word about my brother. Michelle Malkin responded once I was able to get her attention. Chris Loesch responded (would have been nice to have heard from Dana Loesch other than his "she says she's sorry too," but whatever). Stacy? Not a word. Thanks, friend, really appreciate it.
EBL on September 19, 2012 at 6:23 pm said:
I am sorry for your loss. I thank you for your brother's honorable service in Vietnam.
jefferson101 on September 19, 2012 at 7:01 pm said:
Why do we have to keep doing this Goddamn "Circular Firing Squad" thing?
If you have a problem with Ali, don't contribute to the fund he's running. If you have a problem with Stacy, don't contribute to him. Don't got to their websites. Just farging ignore them.
Why does it seem that we have to spend more time infighting than we do worrying about the real problems and issues? Apologies to anyone who is offended, but I'm getting totally sick of all the whining and butthurt from some quarters on this whole issue. Some of y'all (I'm particularly looking at you, Mr. Lemmen) have done some good work on this one. But you aren't the only ones who have.
Accept the linkage and recognition that you get, and go on to better things. If you are really good, we'll all keep coming back. Your traffic will improve, and your finances might, a little bit. If you are in it for the money, you might be disappointed. If you are angry because I hit someone else's tipjar instead of yours, you are not doing a thing to change my mind with all this.
FWIW, neither are the folks who are swarming on you for minimal or no reason, but there it is, for the whole crew.
I'm tired of listening to all the complaining from all quarters about the fact that 'so-and-so" is whizzing on your heads. I offer Matthew Chapter 7, Verses 3 through 5, for your contemplation. If the shoe fits….
Impolite Canadian (@TheImpoliteCana) on September 20, 2012 at 7:24 am said:
See, you missed the WHOLE FREAKIN POINT!!!
It's not that we want people linking to us out of the goodness of their hearts….it's about LINKING TO US WHEN THEY USE OUR FREAKIN MATERIAL!!!! Is that so much?? There could even be intellectual property issues in there.
I offer you Impolite Canadian 3:16: If you don't know what you're talking about…..
Meep on September 19, 2012 at 10:22 pm said:
There ain't no way I'm getting thrown into this tar pit.
Y'all have fun in there.
Starless on September 20, 2012 at 8:06 am said:
35 comments talking about a slap fight. Zero comments when I talk about the Left's disregard for the First Amendment. I'm gonna fold my arms on my chest and sit here feeling butthurt. AND NOTHING ANYONE CAN SAY WILL MAKE ME FEEL ANY BETTER!
Bob Belvedere on September 20, 2012 at 9:37 am said:
But if we say anthing, like that filmmaker in California, we might receive a knock on the door in the middle of the night!
Starless on September 20, 2012 at 11:20 am said:
You make a good point, but still NOTHING ANYONE CAN SAY WILL MAKE ME FEEL ANY BETTER!
Zilla on September 20, 2012 at 3:00 pm said:
How about a big cool Elitist Smoothie with Valium blended into it? And of course, some Preparation H.
Starless on September 20, 2012 at 5:34 pm said:
Throw in free birth control pills for life and I'll consider uncrossing my arms, BUT THAT'S IT!
Bob Belvedere on September 20, 2012 at 6:43 pm said:
'Valium'? No, no, no, ladies: quaaludes – that's the ticket.
Meep on September 20, 2012 at 10:07 am said:
Maybe I can get you a cushion. Or one of those hemorrhoid pillows.
Starless on September 20, 2012 at 11:19 am said:
Yes. A hemorrhoid donut. Thank you very much!
MM on September 20, 2012 at 6:56 am said:
Funny parody, but there is a difference between "elitism" and "elites," as those who write for a living well know. I think that telling folks to knock off asking questions that you think are ill-timed because you are a journalist (and they're not) and you know the subject of the investigation (and they may not) is, in fact, elitist. I cannot imagine RSM laying off a hot story because someone who had not earned his trust thought that the timing was bad, or because they were friends with the subject of the investigation.
Impolite Canadian (@TheImpoliteCana) on September 20, 2012 at 7:47 am said:
Ahhhh, one who understands….Thank you!
MM on September 20, 2012 at 7:50 am said:
Addendum: I like RSM's blog, and his chtuzpah. I hit the tip jar. I am one of the readers who encouraged him to keep blogging back in April. I just think he is wrong on this one.
Impolite Canadian (@TheImpoliteCana) on September 20, 2012 at 7:59 am said:
Same here except I never hit his jar. But as you say, he is WAY OFF on this issue.
GrayzeL on September 20, 2012 at 8:16 am said:
This is not a matter of liking or disliking. It is a matter of transparency. It is a matter of stealing others material and using it as your own. A person cannot be forgiven if they are too proud to ask for forgiveness. It is a matter that could have legal consequences. Paul has asked very simple questions. Why are not these questions being answered?
Dan Collins on September 20, 2012 at 3:28 pm said:
Someone tried posting as TheLonelyConservative, to talk shit about Stacy, using an anonymizing service. I nuked the comment. This is what crawls in when you open the door, people.
Zilla on September 20, 2012 at 4:49 pm said:
I saw that. It was saying exactly the same garbage, practically verbatum, that I saw someone spewing on Twitter just yesterday.
Dan Collins on September 20, 2012 at 5:04 pm said:
If you'd let me know in an email to which Twitter handle that belonged, I'd be obliged.
Impolite Canadian (@TheImpoliteCana) on September 21, 2012 at 5:13 am said:
No need for secrecy, It's CHARLES PATRICK ADKINS….