This blog is dedicated to the memory of David Weintraub, who took on insidious astroturfers and won.

Sunday, December 30, 2012

Attorney Jay Leiderman Wets His Pants In Public

*** Correction/Redaction

It was not Jay Leiderman but some other lawyer out 35 grand for the Commander X fugitive schtick.

FINE ***

That's Jay Leiderman. He's a Neal Rauhauser associate suing Patrick "Patterico" Frey on behalf of Nadia Naffe. Admittedly he looks respectable in the above photo. However, you can see what he actually looks like in this YouTube video.

If you take a real good look at him, he is what he is. A triple F in DFQ2 code speak.

He doesn't come across as very intelligent. That lines up with his being out 35 grand due to Commander X jumping bail.

According to his bio info, he was a public pretender for over six years. Isn't that special? I guess the money wasn't good enough. So Jason went into private practice. Apparently he will represent anyone no matter how despicable the crime. Ever hear of attorney Stanley Cohen? Leiderman has a similar kind of schtick.

Let's look at Frey. He cybersmeared Ron Brynaert as a violent SWATter without any proof. He even cherry picked that 911 audio report.

He should be disbarred for that. Period. Subsequently, Jay Leiderman should be disbarred for cybersmearing me while working with internet criminal Neal Rauhauser. The following is very bizarre and literally forces donkeytale to admit I am in the running for ARGTOZ blogger of the year. That's an acronym for alternative reality game top of the zeitgeist morning to one and all.

I'm almost over the flu but not quite, so the rest of this entry will have to be mailed in. Here are the crucial copy and pastes from a recent Jay Leiderman court filing.

60. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that FREY had a persistent problem with supporters of his blog “taking matters into their own hands” and going after the targets of Deputy District Attorney FREY’S ire.

61. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that in this case, FREY called PLAINTIFF, essentially, too stupid to attend Harvard University for any reason other than affirmative action (PLAINTIFF is African-American) and FREY told his sycophants where, exactly, on Harvard’s campus PLAINTIFF could be found.

62. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that one FREY sycophant in particular, who went by the sobriquet “Socrates,” was, around February and March of 2012, close to FREY. Socrates was known as a dangerous and unstable harasser and he lived in the Boston area close to PLAINTIFF. This caused PLAINTIFF a great deal of emotional distress. She was forced to seek the protection of the campus police department and to make all of her Harvard information was made private.

63. Based thereon, PLAINTIFF feared for her safety, as she was informed and believes and based thereon alleges that FREY was “ginning” up Socrates and other sycophantic followers to potentially attack her and harm her physically.
Ok, everybody on three. 1... 2... 3: That's retarded! That's some pretty crazy stuff. This ain't Blues, fairleft, or Stu Piddy from Soapblox having a conspiratorial meltdown.

Jay Leiderman is meant to be an attorney and have gravitas, and not simply be some two bit, hack lawyer.

Ok, I gotta wrap this up. How better to do so than by posting some tweets?

tweet fully visible in new window

tweet fully visible in new window



Anonymous said...

Very impressive.

It's a wonder that Naffe didn't sue you as well for being a potential harasser since you 1. Live in Mass.

2. Read Patterico's blog.


This so-called attorney suffers from LDS.

Logical Deficiency Syndrome.

I think you should sue him for even involving you.

Tell me that this lawsuit has already been tossed.

The law cannot take this blogshiite seriously.

None of it is serious.


All keyboard lawyers need to be disbarred.

Immediately and a law passed that any plaintiff's attorney (jailhouse or otherwise) filing any suit for any reason regarding solely internet contretemps shall be sentenced to 5 years solitary confinement in Gitmo and/or forced to spend the entire sentences with nothing but fairleft diaries as his/her only contact with the outside world.

Make one example and that will end this lawfare nonsense once and for all.

socrates said...

Patterico posted some of her private info. There's no one to root for in this.

Thanks for acknowledging the basic point that any lawyer who would put that out about me, all lies, should be disbarred for being a smear merchant.

It's outrageous I have yet again been involuntarily entangled in some idiotic smear hoax.

You can't make this shite up.

socrates said...

I should have put up a poll.

1) Clearly Jay Leiderman wet his pants

2) He actually squirted out some #2

3) That's simply vulgar to go with too much information

4) Oh I get it. It's a supertroll schtick co-opted from Larisa Alexandrovna.

She said Mark Singer had wet his pants.

How'd that secret exoneration work out for Bwett? He got big bucks from the US government for false incarceration?

Then there are all these wingnuts bloviating blah blah Bwett Kimberlin this that.

I was on it over two years before them.

The rumor mill says Stacy McCain might be editing past writings so as to help Mandy Nagy look better.

It was my scoop. Mine.

I know I made a difference and still do because I keep getting attacked.

The zeitgeist has wet its collective pants. Fake right and fake left have become one big blur.

Any word on Zilla's -sock puppet- buddy Amusing Bunni?

socrates said...

Cross-posted from The Crying Wolfe Blog (wordpress):

There’s no justification for Mandy Nagy having thought I worked with Neal Rauhauser. Aaron didn’t believe me. He went on for many words trying to show how easy it would have been for Ron to have doctored her email.

However, I went straight to Mandy who confirmed she had actually said that. And that was late in the game back in 2011. I think that was October but would have to double check.

I can’t believe she actually believed that. It seemed more of a ploy to mess with Ron’s head concerning me. Ron used to pester me about why I included Andrew Breitbart in my emails. It seemed fairly straightforward why I would have. The person suing me had a website devoted to sending Andrew to prison. I thought not only that Breitbart would help me, that he would get right on it.

Mandy’s the one who said Breitbart wanted to meet me. That might have been a lie because he never wrote back even once.

Brooks Bayne made some good points here and there on the story in regards to the connection between myself and Mandy. It’s unfortunate though he is such a Holocaust denier and overall some form of blog whore.

Mike’s correct that people like us deserve to have our voices heard and on our own terms.

Mandy and Aaron used to pester me on my writing style. It’s too bad. It’s how I write. It’s my blogging signature.

Anyway, one of the best feelings I have developed over time is that Mike is a regular guy and we will always be friends no matter what considering that both of us were used in the same scam.

Ron gets cut some slack because he too has been put through the rinse cycle. Unfortunately, Ron apparently has had some personal issues to work through and those have enabled the scammers to create limited hangouts centered around us three victims.

Ron’s the guy who had felt it so important at the beginning to Brynaertise myself and Mike while palling around with Lipton and Kenoma. It’s very unfortunate what happened to him too. But I will never forget how Ron smeared both myself and Mike. It was probably in pursuit of the “big scoop.” I do think deep down Ron Brynaert is a good person.

Anonymous said...


Google is your friend, but you probably also lie, refight the same battles over and over, and smear Google when you're in a bad mood.

How many times are you falsely going to claim Leiderman was the lawyer who lost bail money for Commander X?

Anonymous said...


You should also google Stanley Cohen's clients since you keep ignoring the fact that he has represented many people you probably admire, which I mentioned to you before.

That said, he's also a smearing wackadoo who stands up for all hate speech and who apparently doesn't pay taxes but has crazy conspiracy theories about why the government wants him to. Maybe he's senile or did too much dope. Got me.

When you're reporting on lawyers, you should try to be more careful

(uh oh, cue long tirade about how it's okay for you to call me a supertroll - which i don't even give a shit about - but the most vile crime ever committed to say the same about you...)

You need to develop thicker skin to withstand criticism from, um, the only three people on the left that have largely stood by you and don't smear you. And stop getting fooled by wackos and fraudsters on the right who easily manipulate and social engineer you over and over and over and over again.

Anyway, good find on the video!

Anonymous said...


You're way off. Jackie Brown is QT's best film and while the gold watch story is the best part of Pulp Fiction, the uma, travolta scenes and every single time Samuel Jackson is onscreen are pure magic. Pulp Fiction has been unfairly slammed just because lots of crappy movies tried to rip it off. Nearly every single scene in PF plays off the culture shock theme. They don't talk about what Big Macs are called in France just because it's funny.

Jackie Brown is the best movie made out of an Elmore Leonard book (Out of Sight is awesome but it's not really about anything...QT turned Jackie Brown into a meditation on aging when he was still pretty young) and since EL is probably the only writer who is better at dialogue than QT that's saying a lot.

And Inglorious Basterds kicked ass. Reservoir Dogs is QT's 4th best film (but I haven't seen Django yet so that might change).

Natural Born Killers is probably QT's best script, but even though Oliver Stone did an awesome job directing it, I'd still rank NBK behind JFK, Nixon and Salvador.

True Romance is the best film Tony Scott ever directed, by far, but that's only due to the legendary Hopper, Walken scene and the incredible shoot-out scene at the end which turns from chaos to poetry to depict death at top speed.

And From Dusk to Dawn is pretty fucking rad, too.

Anonymous said...

I actually read that article by Jay just the other day.

"Individuals seeking child pornography have always utilized social media sites as gathering places, because it is not feasible to wander through your local grocery store and share with people that you like child pornography. The anonymity the Internet offers is a real benefit to clients who are into this kind of thing."

Page 11.

socrates said...

I don't "lie or refight the same battles over and over,"

That's bs.

You wet your pants using Brett Kimberlin as a source.

What you call refighting battles is actually the simple pointing out Ron was a dickhead who cybersmeared me without proof.

I corrected the bail mistake in the diary. Thanks.

socrates said...

It's rich irony indeed to witness Ron reduced to posting as Anonymous. That's what I take away from this.

socrates said...

Why is Ron Brynaert running interference for Lane "Qritiq" Lipton?

Anonymous said...

I did see jackie Brown, but it was during a certain holiday during a certain New Years vacation in Miami with a certain female who I was certainly in love with deeply at the time but who also had a certain long term BF who would eventually marry her. We had a glorious four days warmly ensconsed in memory bank, part of which was going to see the movie.

SEE my "Wings, Flutter" masterpiece, the first version ofwhich appears on this blog, for more details)

I vaguely remember it for being somewhat boring and chafing at the length, wanting to get back to the hotel room as quickly as possible to do the nasty.

So, I can't exactly say that i was in objective film critic mode when I saw it.

I do recall many familiar shots of working class LA in the story and also in Pulp Fiction that enlivened both movies for me.

I like Pulp Fiction, it just didnt stay with me. And frankly, I found the Samuel L. Jackson character and subplot tiring after about halfway through. I do concede that QT perfected a sort of cinema blogging technique that is interesting and reminiscent in a way of the 1960s work of Paul Morrissey.

But I consider Reservoir Dogs easily QT's best because it's a fully formed drama. Perhaps hs only one. The rest of QT is pastiche, it is enervating work but after awhile it peters out into nothing every single time. I think this is why he plays up the B movie theme, because most B's also tend to start strongly and peter out. It is something of a crutch.

Django had the makings of a great movie and perhaps would have been if it simply had ended with an escape scene from Candyland. Instead it went completely over the top into fantastical nonsense for another 30-45 minutes.

My son saw Inglorious Basterds and said it was extremely similar to Django, substitute Jews-Nazis for slaves-Old South, but was less exciting.

He gave both movies 2.5 stars out of 4.

I think that's about right.

Anonymous said...

By the way, I also used a similar tchnique to the one Tarantino used in Pulp Fiction in my semi-masterpiece "The Snake's Eyelids." This was not done consciously but I realised it after the fact.

Both PF and TSE revolve around separate stories that are woven together with time periods jumbled and out of order.

Anyway, HNY Ron and Soc...may 2013 be a great year, or at least an improvement over 2012...I have some stories percolating but am unsure whether effort required to keep wolf away from door will allow me time to concentrate enough to get them out properly.

Blogging addiction 12 step program is the focus of one.

Ironically, it will require a relapse in order to tell the story correctly...


Anonymous said...

Django would have worked better for me as a buddy flick. The Dentist-bounty hunter mentoring the freed slave in the killing arts.

Those were the most clever and exciting parts of the movie. When teh love interest rescue came to fruition it quickly lost dramatic steam.

Perhaps the wife rescue could have remained the goal just over the horizen as the duo "wanted dead or alived" its way across the country.

This would only have required a handful of other bounty hunter bits.

A picaresque buddy flick.

In the end, the dramatic tension could have been between the partners, who in the end have a conflict, racially based, that resolved in one killing the other,or they break up, with Django recognising a different form of slavery, that of still being tied to the whims and direction of Whitey.

In this case, that is how I see the movie anyway, with the fillmaker being Whitey.

I can't imagine that a black person seeing this film would be satisfied with it in the final analysis. Some of it is quite good, the hard honest look at slavery for one thing, and the anti-romaticisation of the white slavers, but unfortunately the QT tendency to overly romanticise the black hero destroyes the movie and keeps it firmly in forgettable B territory for me.

Anonymous said...

The Snake's Eyelids:'s+eyelids+donkeytale&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

socrates said...

I watched The Killers from 1964. Tarrentino was always doomed to just below greatness because Kramer had already perfected the technical crime drama.

Bresson was the French version but he used a dumbass technique which required the actors to always keep a straight face and show no emotion. You don't have to be Dr. Bones to want Spock to show some humanity once in a while.

Sometimes it's best to sit back with an idiotic but exciting Chabrol over a brandy.

Haha, kidding on the brandy part. Was a joke.

Anonymous said...

Another theme in Pulp Fiction is that time is the enemy, which is why the scenes are out of order. Many scenes deal with characters racing against the clock.

The pacing of Jackie Brown is slower, because it's a meditation on aging. There's only a few younger actors in the cast, and they're kind of immature...but so are the older characters. You really should rent it again, since it's a masterpiece, and contains DeNiro's last great acting performance.

How the heck can you give a grade to a movie you never saw? Inglorious Basterds was almost universally praised, but I've heard Django has similarities.

Reservoir Dogs loses points because much of the movie is ripped off from City on Fire. And calling it "fully formed" but without explaining why you think that is puzzling. It's actually the opposite of "fully formed", and that's one of it's charms.

And there are tons of other things in Pulp Fiction, that stand out, although Tarantino ripped off (when I use ripped off when talking about Tarantino, I'm using it lovingly, although he really should have given credit to City on Fire) two key things from Jim McBride's Breathless remake, which happens to be my second favorite movie of all time after Cronenberg's Videodrome. The daylight shots of LA and soundtrack sound editing are homages to Breathless, and while Tarantino has mentioned that in some interviews, he probably should have talked about it more, since the film is still obscure (QT wanted McBride to shoot True Romance).

QT used to come to Kim's Video, and he was a cool guy. One day we had Pontecorvo's Burn playing on the TV, and he couldn't remember the director's name. Plus I once got to leave a legendary message on his phone, about how he had to return some Adam Sandler videos which were a month overdue, heh.

Anonymous said...

Janis at the top of her game, ironically only a short time prior to her death. This song almost perfectly captures the mood of the era. A timeless masterpiece. The look on her face as she accepts audience applause at the end says it all.

This also a particular favourite from the "fabulous 60s." If you grew up in LA during the late 60s you know exactly what I'm talkin bout.

socrates said...

Lazy dumbasses could log in but nooooo

Anonymous said...


The 1964 Killers version was shot by Don Siegel and is inferior to the 1946 version by Robert Siodmak. Kramer had nothing to do with either, and never did a crime drama, so I'm not sure who you're confusing him with. The 1964 version is still really, really good, but QT's influences are European, and there's been tons of great crime dramas made by many different directors from Stanley Kubrick's The Killing to Roger Avary's Killing Zoe (he was Tarantino's Pulp Fiction co-writer).

John Ford is one of my top three directors, but it would be absurd to say that he perfected the western, since Anthony Mann, Clint Eastwood, Sam Peckinpah and Sergio Leone obviously made brilliant films, too.

Tarantino doesn't even show the robbery in Reservoir Dogs, and I don't even think he has - technically - ever made a crime drama, although Jackie Brown is sort of one, it's mostly about getting old. It sounds like you're criticizing QT, without even being familiar with his work.

Hitchock, Ford, Jean Renoir on my alltime list and - in this order - my modern top five: Michael Haneke, Oliver Stone, Cronenberg, Quentin Tarantino, Wong kar wai, but there are many, many more that aren't far behind, and Wong Kar Wai kind of fell off. I need to see the QT flick, but I want to see Haneke's Amour even more, since I suspect it might sweep the Oscars for Best film, director, actor, actress and screenplay, and I'd be pretty psyched if that happened. Haneke is not only heads and shoulders above every director working today, he seems to get better with every film he makes, since my list of favorite films with regards to him are pretty much sequential. I still haven't seen In a Better World which beat Haneke's The White Ribbon for best foreign film at Oscars in 2010, but TWR should have been up for best picture (ten fucking movies were nominated that year but not the best one, wtf).

Anyway, I highly recommend Mann's westerns with Jimmy Stewart, if neither of you saw any of them. Stewart is kind of intense - Vertigo mode - and it's hard to pick a favorite from the 5 they did together:

socrates said...

I'm looking everywhere for Brynaert proof of his fighting Connell hoax in real time or virtually any time. He was The Raw Story editor in bed with that Velvet Revolution devised election fraud convolution.

socrates said...

I am the Edward G. Robinson of supertrolls. That is what I take from all this.

Anonymous said...

I think we are talking about different meanings of "fully formed."

Maybe "fully realised" dramatically is a better way to put it.

Whn you left RD you had the sense of the conclusion, of a statement being rendered.

In the rest of QT that I have seen, you have more the sense that along the way he lost interest, or ran out of time, or got bored. When I leave the theatre after one of these I isnatntly forget the movie completely. It doesn't stick. And it could have gone on forever

As I said, I thinksome of this may be by design, the B movie schtick, but as Soc says, it keeps QT below masterpiece quality.

And for me, Pulp Fiction captured the B movie exploitation asthetic completely. I'm not sure why he feels the need to try to keep recapturing it...and failing to do it anywhere near so well...over and over.

Except I guess, he needs the money?

Django is more disappointing because the beginning held so much promise and then it just sells down the river into poor hackdom. Ersatz is a spaghetti western quality that just becomes crap in Qt's hands.

QT shows up at the end, the worst parts of the movie after its gone completely off the rails, looking bloated and very worn out. A perfect metaphor for the movie and the filmmaker himself.

I do recall DeNiro being really good in Jackie Brown and I recall being hot for Pam Grier too, although maybe that was a case of transferance, under the horny circumstances I found myself.

Yes, I do recall also the aging theme. OK. It was a pretty good movie. But kinda bland and dull. Meandering.

3 stars. I give Pulp Fiction 3.5, mostly because of the Willis subplot and character. For me, that was a classic masterpiece in itself and what I mean by "fully formed." Its a complete story. I also liked the Gold Watch because it perfectly reflects the manhood issue faced by every working class kid of the Boomer generation.

Grandpa foought in WWI. Daddy fought in WWII and Son backed out of Vietnam.

That is the issue of manhood for my generation that will never resolve.

Luckily, for you youngsters, the Boomers broke the chain and you don't suffer the Freudian trauma.

In so many ways I see the baby Boom as the end of the industrial age but not the beginning of the New Age we so desperately believed we were. Chickenshit is what we were, too.

A chicken bridge to a dubious future at best.

Most reprehensible with the slide to greed Reaganism starting in the 80s.

But that's another story for a different thread.

Gold Watch would have made a great film on its own. The rest, while entertaining, not great. just the first and best example of the pastiche quality that we now see in every Qt film.

socrates said...

Oops on the Kramer mistake. Sorry.

socrates said...

I'm sensing a lot of passionate spam. That's what FDL would say.

Anonymous said...

I havent seen Kill Bill or Inglourious Basterds, and its been what like 20 years since Reservoir Dogs, so admittedly I'm not a slavish QT cineaste but now you are trying to diss me personally, so I'll just ignore that and let me comments speak for themsleves. You can take or leave them.

Why does it matter that he doesnt show the robbery? It doesn't. In fact, as I recall he does show the robbery play out in bits and pieces from each character's recall of the events and that to me was one of the most effective dramatic techniques employed in the movie.

Not original, of course, but an effective use of that style to keep the movie well paced and interesting

Anonymous said...


Sometimes you act like a broken clock, but with a 13 on it, which means that there are certain times that aren't ever right even once a day.

I've answered and re-answered the questions you keep asking and stupid things you smear me with, but you either have a bad memory or get your supertroll gears stuck too much.

This will be my last comment here for a spell at least, because I'm tired of re-defending or re-explaining the same shit over and over to you.

Happy New Year to both of you.

Anonymous said...

OK, I saw the Breathless remake too.

Are you sure you aren't being manipulated by the soundtrack more than the movie itself? That might also explain some of your QT preferences. The soundtrack in jackie Brown was better and more memorable than the movie itself.

Comparing Richard Gere to Jean Paul Belmondo? Srsly? And I cant even remember who was the chick in the remake with Jean Seberg?

I have a hard time rating films and books, there are so many great ones that had huge impact. I'm going with the Hustler, Farewell My Concubine, Chinatown and Night of the Shooting Stars among my top level. Im sure there are others.

In a Lonely Place, the Godfather part II, the Hairdresser's Husband.

There are so many.

Anonymous said...

One more comment for Donkeytale.

How the heck is Pulp Fiction a b movie? It's an art film - packed with stars and name actors - and probably the most entertaining one ever made. You don't have to agree with my opinion, but it sure as heck ain't a b movie in any way at all. I'm not dissing b-movies, since Reservoir Dogs and even Death Proof are both great ones. Reservoir Dogs is a b-movie with European influences, and many people think it's QT's best, but I prefer Jackie Brown, Pulp Fiction and Inglorious Basterds.

I love arguing film but sometimes I get annoyed when people start bringing in personal emotions, since it ignores the fact that real life intrudes on viewings. Unless the movie is total garbage, one viewing isn't really enough to judge it on. I've left theaters thinking what I just watched was extraordinary, but then a second viewing sometimes makes me change my mind. After I saw Brooklyn's Finest, I thought it might be the greatest cop film ever made, but when I saw it again recently I realized it was still very good, but I had overpraised it.

Anonymous said...

I lied. One more.

"Except I guess, he needs the money?"

What the heck are you talking about? If QT needed the money, he'd sell out and, um, stop making art films. That's a strawman argument, dude, and you know it.

Inglorious Basterds and Django weren't made to make money, and have little in common with QT's previous films. They are historical revisionist movies that contain many of his trademarked touches.

Anonymous said...

No,I agree with your assessment in this comment completely.

PF is not a B movie at all. meant to say it is the B movie aesthetic that QT utilizes so well.

I realise I sometimes get carried away with this schtick. Nothing personal meant. There is no right or wrong when it comes to movies we like or hate. And you are on target that the way we view and recall films cant be separated from our life experiences, which makes all criticism even more personal.

Sorry if I offended. Didn't mean to. I enjoyed this exchange very much.

And I agree with much of what you say about Socrates here, as well. His quality of udder denial of being exactly himself what he accuses others of being and doing is one of his timeless qualities. In a perverse way, it is what makes him so compelling.

But as a movie critic, he adds nothing.


There needs to be editors in blogging, as in movies and in life and all would be crackerjack all the time.

Don't go away, Ron.

Come back, Shane.

Anonymous said...

I do disagree with you on Django.

Go see it and tell me that the artistic choices aren't flagrantly compromised.

I'm not saying QT is a sell out for the money, its one of the possibilities. He may just not have had the ability to pull off the conceit, or got bored, was rushed o finish for a Christmas release. Alls Im sayin is I felt very disappointed that he botched what started out as a classic for the ages.

Something definitely got in the way of potential greatness with this movie.

Maybe he needs a writing partner or someone else to script the thing entirely. Not a crime to be a great director working from someone else's material. Srsly, Im trying to be helpful here, because QT is an excellent filmmaker in many respects.

Gold Watch wasnt his story either. And as you said, but I wasnt aware, Reservoir Dogs wasnt his story and neither was Jackie Brown.

Anonymous said...

Also, yes, Jimmy Stewart in Vertigo and also the one with Grace Kelly where he spends the entire movie holed up in his apartment spying on his neighbors and concocting his own fantasy version of their, that was a fucking great great great movie...and I can't remember the name without googling it.

Grace kelly in black and white at that age....ooh la la.

And it matters that I got to see it when it played first run as a kid.

Hitchcock of course. The master of the inner narrative. The Graham Greene of cinema.

Rear Window! God, how I loved that film.

Also another saw first run as a kid, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, Jimmy Stewart. Duke Wayne. John Ford.

Also using the flashback technique to great efffect.

Anonymous said...

Ron, your film knowledge and comments much appreciated here.

I dont see many movies these days but you've intrigued me on Amour.

Thanks for this.

Ignore Socrates habit of repetitious schtick meistering the same ol same ol. Its what he does. He can't help himself. Don't let it bother you. As we say in 12 stepdom...Powerless over my emotions, powerless over other People.

Zen-like. Let the acrimony roll off yur back.

Easier said than done but worthwhile state of being whenever attainable.

I keep hoping that someday he'll move onto newer pastures for his blogging talents.

Ok. I'm done. I'm done.

Anonymous said...

OK, I lied. Upon googling Rear Window was released in 1954 but I swear the first time I saw it was a Saturday matinee, circa 1960, in my hometown Flea Pit....and definitely Liberty valance, released in 1962...also a matinee and also B&W.

IMHO, all films should by law be available in B7W for those who treasure them that way.

SEE my

Anonymous said...

SEE my classic dairy "Theatre, The Movie" for details

Anonymous said...

I love talking film, so I'll stop saying last comment etc. I just will limit my comments to film, when our host decides to go around smearing me across the web. Deep down, I'm a good person? Fuck you.

Your comments on QT had nothing to do with my last comment drama queen stuff. It's the smearing that bugs me some times.

Sorry, Soc, that I don't sign in here all the time but I think all my comments are clearly identifiable. I just don't always sign into google and I have to change my passwords - which are complicated so I don't get hacked - all the time. I'll try to remember to put an RB at the end to signify it's me, though.

I'm not sure you'll like Michael Haneke's films, since his key trait is to not provide answers and his films often never explain everything, which is maddening to some people. Caché and The White Ribbon are two of his best, but they are puzzles with many pieces missing. I think Amour might be a little different, and more of a traditional film, but I try to deliberately avoid articles, since I like to be surprised.

Amour won at Cannes but might have stiff competition from Zero Dark Thirty at the Oscars, but probably will appeal more to older voters (again, that's assuming it's more traditional than his earlier work. The White Ribbon was the closest thing to a mainstream film that Haneke ever made).

I like Rear Window but it's not one of my absolute favorite Hitchcock films. After Vertigo, my next choices always seem to change, but they are usually the ones that star Cary Grant or Jimmy Stewart.

Music is definitely a factor in my criticism (aside from Vertigo, The Man Who Knew Too Much and The Young And The Innocent are two favorites that brilliantly use music), but the songs or score have to be used in the movie in an artful way not just to sell a CD. Judgement Night has a brilliant soundtrack but the movie is shit, for example.

It's how McBride incorporates the music which makes his version of Breathless - in my opinion - superior to the original, even though I love both. Belmondo and Seberg are both better, but Gere is still quite good (Gere's best work is in Days of Heaven and probably An Officer and A Gentleman) and Valerie Kapriski isn't much of an actress at all. McBride uses a section from a Philip Glass composition as Kapriski's theme and he deftly intersperses it with a more ominous piece for Gere...and songs by Elvis and Jerry Lee Lewis. The original Breathless had groundbreaking film editing - the brilliant use of jump cuts during conversations - but the remake's greatest feature is the music editing (not the songs itself, but Pulp Fiction even uses some of the same surf music cuts).

The remake also uses pop culture references like The Silver Surfer (hence the surf music) and Jerry Lee Lewis, in part, to show that they can have deeper meanings. Kapriski plays an architecture student, and the film is also an homage to Los Angeles itself. There are many themes in the movie and I also see stuff I didn't see in multiple viewings. But I've probably seen it close to a 100 times, and it definitely ranks as my most-watched film.

People are often surprised when I hail Breathless, so I usually end up watching it with them and explaining what I love about it. There's a brilliant 360 degree camera movement in the film that reverses, and if you watched the movie today, you'd notice that the colors, sounds, music, editing etc. all greatly influenced Pulp Fiction (but in a loving manner). Aside from Tarantino I never heard anyone praise it, but Videodrome and Breathless have been my two favorite movies since I saw them in the early eighties when they were released.

Anonymous said...

The use of color is something that is often overlooked in film criticism. Even terrible movies often explore themes with colors that most film viewers never notice. I was watching Breaking Bad for a third time (probably the best tv show of all time) with my ex a few months ago and we had a lot of fun spotting the use of colors which signify different emotions etc on the show. Purple means lying, for example. Any time a character is being dishonest they are either wearing purple on their body or it's in the background or the lighting changes the colors to make it look purplish.

I enjoy reading Socrates' takes on film since he has pretty good taste and enjoys watching classic cinema. I like all genres but horror, noir, and Asian cinema (Japan, China, Hong Kong, Korea, etc.) especially. I think my attraction to Asian cinema is because they often mix genres, especially in Hong Kong, but people sometimes think I mean martial arts films when I talk about it. There are many great martial arts films, but it's the use of lighting and colors that make them stand out, and most of my favorites in Asian cinema are either Wong Kar Wai art films or Hong Kong gangster movies which involve guns, and no martial arts or even swords.

I probably will see both Django and Amour this month so I'll get back to you on the reviews. But I usually rely on Netflix or Bluerays (movies are too expensive to see in the cinema...i was completely broke when Prometheus came out last year and I'm still dying to see that). Last night I watched I Love You Phillip Morris which was quite good, and Jim Carrey and Ewan MacGregor were both brilliant in it. I never liked Carrey before, but he was robbed of an Oscar nomination, since even though it's not a dumb comedy, he uses his trademarked schtick to play the role, as opposed to The Truman Show where he sleepwalked.

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance is one of my favorites, obviously, since my journalism usually involves probing propaganda. "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend," is the famous line from that movie. But The Searchers is my favorite Ford and for Renoir it's Grand Illusion.

Anonymous said...


I forgot to put RB after my comments...and I forget about Martin Scorsese when talking about favorite directors, which is pretty dumb, since Mean Streets and Taxi Driver are in my top 5 favorites for all time. The fifth film in my all-time list shouldn't shock anyone: JFK. And JFK gets the same bad rap that I often get. It presents multiple theories, not just one, which is one of the main reasons why it's one of my favorite films, and, an influence on my journalism.


Anonymous said...

Rear Window is not really my fave Hitchcock either but it's up there. So many are great its hard to choose among them. Seeing it in the theatre makes all the difference. Movies were meant to be on the big screen, espeically in the grand old fashioned theatres such as the Art Deco palaces still going strong in LA. However, movies are also quite costly and few are worth the price of a ticket. So I'm not suggesting anything.

Strangers on a Train a pretty good one, although overplayed on TV for some reason. Rope is another favourite of mine and little seen.

My second wife was a cineaste and we lived in LA for several years and took in as many classic flicks, foreign flicks, cassvettes, other oddities as much as possible in Hollyweird where of course they put a wide variety on regularly. This was 80s so still 3-4 bucks for a matinee as I recall and I was making pretty decent money back then.

Especially to see the oldies but moldies on the silver screen at places like Graumans Chinese Theatre is truly something special.

"Sunset Blvd" stunning on the big screen.

I realize that some pictures depend on colour to make points. Simply, I prefer B&W. It's just me. I grew up on B&W oldies. Thats why I would ideally like to see the movies offered in both formats. Although I know thats not possible, it's my preference. It definitely changes the experience of the movie when its in B&W.

I figured you were huge on the musical aspect given your choice of Breathless and Jackie Brown.

I enjoy it too of course, but it can be overly manipulative when it makes the film seem better than it actually is. Saturday Night Fever of course couldn't have been made without the BeeGees soundtrack but thats somewhat different aspect as the music was created as part of the process.

Superfly, ditto. Good blaxploitation film, too, a trendsetter, but both Mayfield and the Gibbs made something more memorable than the films.

I'm a huge fan of Asian cinema, Chinese and Korean especially as my wife is from there and watches a lot on the internet. Some really clever comedies actually.

They have pretty decent TV drama too. I'd say on the whole better than the US TV product, and surprisingly more grapically violent/sexual/emotional than the US product, especially the Chinese.

I'll be interesed in your take on Django.

I see that you like the early Scorcese movies best, sort of how I feel about Reservoir Dogs.

How about Something Wild with Liotta, Daniels and griffin? That was memorable for the tunes and also a disturbing and I though timely movie with the clash of the counterculture and the conformist reaganite yuppie 80s.

Anonymous said...

Actually, as a writer myself, I like the work a lot more when it doesn't explain everything and forces you to participate with your own imagination.

Although I tend to over do it, myself and describe too much.

That's not what I was getting at with the "fully formed" schtick at all.

I meant more that the narrative, plot development, character interaction, made the correct dramatic progression, were thematically integrated.

Hard to define but the final product felt whole and memorable for it.

Some stories can run 500 pages and not be fully formed. Think many bad "serious" American novelists since the mid 20th century who may have written one good to almost great novel but kept chugging away after the fact. I'm thinking the not quite good second novel for a Mailer, for instance. Stylist, no question. Great artistry and intent. Absolutely.

But the final work just doesnt quite match the promise which makes it even more disappointing. If they didn't clearly possess the talent for it wouldn't matter. But coming so close and not quite getting there bothers me more.

OTOH, Chekhov nailed it completely in several very short stories.

Anonymous said...

My concept in telling any story is that there is that there are a variety of decisions to be made and generally there is only one correct one. And that leads to the next one.

Of course this sets the bar impossibly high. very few hit the right note every step of the way thru the story. Most go off track at some point and lose the thread completely.

The very best are the one that seem spontaneous, quirky, surprising and random but are of course a result of the creator making conscious decisions thruout the narrative as it develops. The puppet strings aren't showing at all.

BTW, my favourit Scorcese film is King of Comedy, which I think exhibits these qualities quite well and of course is most surprising because it is not a typical Socrcese vrhicle and DeNiro completely plays against type.

But I thought the film was a clever, low key almost sweet natured yet savagely funny attack on the demented, schizo nature of celebrity-crazed Americans and our shallow, fake persona-filled pdehumanising culture.

Anonymous said...

Saturday Night Fever is a GREAT movie...even if you hate the music...

i prefer seeing movies on big screen but hi def tv has made things better....but i still haven't seen tree of life yet....terrance malick is a director that it's almost a sin to watch at home....thin red line was one of my favorite theater experiences...although it's not one of my fave films (days of heaven is his masterpiece..followed close by badlands)

ill catch up on the rest later

i love black and white....but obviously color adds a lot. i would never say color films are more superior.


Anonymous said...

Norman Mailer is my favorite author of all time...and his masterpiece is his fourth novel An American Dream.

I think Why Are We In Vietnam? is another top notch book, but my second favorite book is probably Harlot's Ghost, one of his last.

I love Something Wild, that's Demme's best film.

American television kicks everything else's ass today. Breaking Bad and Mad Men alone would be enough to make American TV superior to film etc. but every single show on AMC is fantastic and F/X has great shows, too. On the regular networks the only great show - not including Parks/Recreation, Community and The Office - is The Good Wife. That show is fucking awesome..and it's very hip to the web. All the characters are grey instead of black or's bizarre it's on CBS since they never did a show like that before. Ridley Scott produces it...Tony Scott did, too, but he tragically killed himself.

Please, please, please do yourself a favor and watch Breaking Bad, since even though Mad Men is the second best show on TV, Breaking Bad is like light years better.

Anonymous said...

I agree that King of Comedy is one of Scorsese's best...I rank it above Raging Bull.

But I think my third favorite is Gangs of War, which I love more and more each time I re-watch it. The Departed was good, but the Hong Kong movie it was based on Infernal Affairs is much, much better...especially the ending. I was psyched to see Scorsese win..

I wish I saw Hugo in the theater since I don't want to see it without 3-D.


Anonymous said...

Funny thing is I really disliked the BeeGees in general, except a few of their songs one that I played and sang in my own band (massachussetts) and the Nights on Broadway. The SNF disco oversaturated the radio

The music got overplayed to the point it made you want to break your antenna, and I purposely avoided the movie for several years due to it.

But once I broke down and watched it on TV I discovered that inside the movie the music was perfect.

I usually don't care much for Travolta as an actor, he's so limited, but man he was truly special in that role. Born for it.

As for logging in, I've told Socrates many times what a hassle it is, especially on a cell phone.

I use gmail a lot for business too so I have to keep logging in for "donkeytale" and then back out again for my work and its just not worth the time, especially for comments, which another one may pop in my head in afew minutes. I could be logging in and out all day at times.

Besides, our identities scarcely matter, its the brilliant cross-talk that counts.

We're like the blogging equivalent of the View.

socrates said...

What an absolutely dreadful dialogue between Ron and donkeytale. They are basically talking over each other.

Same goes on whenever Ron is confronted with having been an immoral dickhead.

He never owns up to it.

Ron Brynaert was part and parcel of fake leftists everywhere up until the last year or two. When the Connell conspiracy theory was in full bloom, Ron was signing off on its stupidity as executive editor of Raw Story.

Look at how the asshat can't fess yup to having been wrong about Mike and Lane. Mike is not a fraud. Something Ron kept saying yet never proved. He was praising Lane Lipton as ohhh so one of the few to trust.

Ron sucks, and I will not lose any sleep if he simply goes away. Dumbass hypocrite blocks me at twitter yet comes here as Roy Brynaert to do his anger schtick and drop down F bombs.

I'm sure many newspapers right now are perusing through his 50,000 tweets and wondering how to sign him up to a contract before he gets gobbled up elsewhere. NOT!!!!!

Anonymous said...


Travolta was awesome in Saturday Night Fever, Urban Cowboy (a great underrated movie), Pulp Fiction, Broken Arrow, and especially Face/Off (he's not only better as nic cage than nic cage as him, he's awesome as the character himself).

I completely agree with you about the Bee Gees, except I never got tired of "Night Fever". I've been a huge fan of "Nights On Broadway" mainly because of the SNL Timberlake sketch.


That's the worst Three's Company episode of all time! And I don't understand why you keep going on and on about that re-run!!!

Jack Tripper NEVER had a threesome with Janet and Chrissy, or any of the roommates that tried to replace her.


socrates said...

Right there. He didn't respond to one thing mentioned in my previous post.

socrates said...

My fundamental scoop on Kimberlin and Friedman was a profound bit of trollbusting, I must say. Ron Brynaert missed the boat and smeared me for it.

Anonymous said...

I still say Travolta's best work was as a sweathog.

"I said Ba-ba-bar-barbarino."

He is a good actor but for me not on the top level. I haven't seen everything he did and fell asleep during Get Shorty (pissed in my pants drunk and there may have been a bit of marijuana involved as well) so can't say about that one but it was highly acclaimed. Of course, his comical Twisting dance scene with Uma Thurman and the heroin overdose were great bits, but Tim Roth sticks in the memory from that scene as he does also from Reservoir Dogs. And as we've discussed, Jackson truly carried the interaction Pulp Fiction (he's also phenomenal in Django, by far the best in that film) although I found him ultimately tiresome in the PF role that may have been because of too much of a good thing. The movie was too long, as were Django and Jackie Brown.

Bruce Willis for my money in Pulp Fiction and he of course also carried Moonlighting, which was at times scarily brilliant sophisticated satire for network TV. This was also the age of Roseanne another superiour comedy. Never a fan of Three's Company. In that period I recall the Tom Hanks before he was "Tom Hanks" TV comedy about the guys in drag that was very funny but lasted only one year. I'm also a sucker for the first Bob Newhart. Suzanne Pleshette was h.o.t.

My age showing there I guess. This may or may not surprise you but I was in a decided minourity in not finding the original SNL very funny at all and seldom watched it after its initial fad-like success. Chevy Chase was OK, But I think Belushi and the Roseanna Danna chick highly overrated. Steve Martin made the show and he wasn't even a regular and of course Bill Murray.

Yes also to the Eddie Murphy/Joe Whatshisface era and of course, Wayne's World is a timeless classic that stands the test of time, like Beavis and Buttthead.

I find myself to this day quoting lines from WW as if it were Shakespeare.

"Led Zeppelin didn't write songs that everyone liked. They left that to the Bee Gees."

Talladega Nights has a similar hold on my son who can repeat wholw scenes and do all the lines for each character in character. I tried to steer him towards theatre and he won a role in a play as a freshman but he's more into history poli sci debate and pre law. Ugh. College tuition coming up shortly. I'm destined to die penniless and work until I drop.

Anonymous said...

Urban Cowboy came along at a dark time for me personally, the early 80s yuppie ascendancy.

The world had changed irrevocably for the worse and those early premonitions have only proven out in spades down through the years.

I reacted in the only way I knew how, which was to party, drink, smoke and snort as much as possible pretty much daily.

I worked for a time in a warehouse in Boston where I caught a break, the owners youngest son, also a hard partier college man took a liking to me and told his dad, hey this guy is a lot smarter than your average warehouse schlub you ought to find something more useful for him to do.

Soon, I became a favourite of the office manager and they had me do some higher level stuff. The office eas separated from the warehouse by several was down the street from North Ststion and the warehouse was all the way down to the end of Hanover Street at the Harbor across from the Coast Guard base on COmmercial Street.

They were worlds apart sociallly as well. The owners were Wellesley types, small business people. The dullest of the three sons workd in the business. The smartest actually went on to become a successfull sports media type, working I believe for UPI in the beginning, then moving up through the Hartford Courant and today I think if he's still around maybe ESPN or SI. I'd have to google him to be sure.

The yongest was in college and I was onlya few years older but we both loved to party and spent his summers at the warehouse, usually up on the roof smoking weed and drinking beer talking sports and chicks and stuff as soon as the days work was done, usually by 1-2 pm.

Soon enough my fellow warehousemen became jealous of my "status" with the bosses and started giving me a hard time. There were a few fist fights, even.

It wasnt like I was making any more money, in fact I was low man on the totem pole. It was just dumb proletarian schtick.

One day I cam home wiith a black eye and bloody nose and my first wife hit the roof. She personally drove down to the company and gave the owners hell and then went to the warehouse and gave the supervisor hell too.

It was embarrassing. She was a magnificent woman one of a handful that I stupidly let get away from me over the years because I am an unrepentant looser.

But I could never go back after that. She decided I was way too smart to be working such jobs. The problem was we were both from Cali and had arrived shortly before in Boston knowing no one and so were barely surviving with a less than one year old daughter to boot.

So, she bought me a cheap suit and te and dropped me in the Financial District and said "dont come home until you find a job."

It took several weeks actually but I finally caught on somewhere but never really happy there either.

Except for after work partying with all the pretty girls who filled the offices in those days. I chased them and chased them and lost all concept of self worth in the process of getting high and getting laid. Shame is now my lifelong companion.

The rest of my life is a tale of successive personal degradation occassionally enlivened by brief periods of personal success and even fewer of personal enlightenment.

So anyway, I digress. Urban Cowboy. hated that mechanical bull shit that was even popular in Boston. Again, I missed the movie but when I saw it years later I did like it, but mainly because of Debra Winger.

Anonymous said...

Couple more quick comments perusing the thread....Cary Grant and Jimmy Stewart cannot get enough acclaim as actors in my mind.

People tend to say that the great fillmakers they worked with made them but at some point you have to consider the actor's alchemy was also a large part.

Stewart did receive a lot of acclaim, Oscars and so forth but Cary Grant was also an immense and extremely versatile leading man as adept with self deprecating humour as he was with romance and psychological thrillers.

I dont think he ever really was taken seriously enouigh during his time because he was the epitome of the handsome debonair leading man.

I can see that you are serious student of film. I had a close friend from high school, who appears in some of my schtick as "Ricky Ricardo Joaquin" who has a masters in film from UCLA. If he wasn't such an unrepentant hard partying looser like me he may have gone on to better success.

He does have a few things up on YouTube from back in the day but he worked the news/documentary track. Usually he would get fired because of his bad attitude, drinking and drug habits which we formed together in hi skool and neither apparently ever lost.

Last I heard of him he was still in LA, fighting health problems and penniless, living with one of his kids. I should probably get in touch but what to say after all these years? I guess I could forward some of what I wrote about him (Snake's Eyelids for one) but he might be insulted. Probably not. I'm not sure why I don't contact him, actually, mkaybe its too much like looking in the mirror.

Another digression. Where I was going was I spent some time at UCLA myself, one quarter actually before getting married and running off to Boston, on financial aid and took several film classes, so I understand but never fully appreciated the technical aspect of filmmaking.

Like people going on and on about Citizen Kane and then seeing it in film class and thinking it kinda flat and non-moving for all its technical achievement.

My favourite Welles film is Touch of Evil, not the least because of his own role as the corrupt sherriff. What a great character role from the former leading man.

I doo appreciate the difficulty in making movies but am not qualified to comment on the technical aspects since I realise I know nothing about it. I approach film more as a drama critic, and again without even the technical stagecraft knowledge.

I did re-write the script for Ricky's masters project which he received an A (although in those days they may have given everybody an A at UCLA film school...I got A's in the two film classes i took, too and hadn't a clue what I was doing there). His film was a meditation on the Doors, believe it or not, some 20 years before Oliver Stone's take, which I found fairly dull, actually.

I can't say Im a huge Stone fan either, although I liked parts of JFK, I don't think Garrison quite hit the nail in his investigation.

To this day I believe the assassination was a mob hit and while some people tied to the CIA may have had some extraneous involvement to say the CIA was secretly behind it is as tin foiled as the thought that 9/11 was an inside job. some rogue CIA eleemnts operating in concert with mobsters? Sure, no question, but as an official act?

Sometimes a lipsticked pig is just a pig wearing lipstick.

The Mob had plenty of motive and plenty of means.

Anonymous said...

correction: "I appreciate but don't fully understand the technical aspects of filmmaking."

socrates said...

For an anonymous coward, donkeytale sure does get extra self-indulgent at times. Though since he played an anti_third party twenty year old at Booman Tribune, one can never be quite sure whether Donk is being honest or taking a piss on the blog carpet.

And as predicted, fake journalist Ron Brynaert has no responses to legitimate questions.

Hmmm, I guess Ron no longer has problems with donkeytale going off-topic on my milieu zeitgeist pertaining entries.

socrates said...

Jimmy Stewart was miles ahead of Cary "Tennis" Grant. But there have been much, much better than even him, especially his earlier years of pure schmaltz. He turned out to be a deranged wingnut too like Reagan.

I will give Elia Kazan, another fascist, props for being an excellent film maker. However, anyone who supports Ayn Rand is an idiot. No debate.

That's what I take from all this.

socrates said...

I have arguably been the #1 trollbuster of all time. I don't think I was. But to see Ron try to steal my destiny through sheer lying and manipulation makes my blood boil.

I'll admit Weintraub was overrated for trollbusting. He was one of the best. He done good finding the UGOG files.

I should figure out how to upload a copy of it from my old computer.

Point is that Ron Brynaert's supertrolling has gotten beyond stale. This is my blog. He blocks me at Twitter. He's got nothing.

His blind spot is not conceding his huge f***ups. (notice how I don't go salty sailor talk? It's not that difficult to act as an adult, Roy.) I nailed the connection between Raw Story and Brett Kimberlin. Ron has tweeted and posted a lot of garbage in regards to myself. He either smears me or is stealing my work a la Mandy Nagy.

Props to Ron for being smart. Sure thing. But alas, I beat both him and donkeytale in actual academic training. They can wank off together all they want to. Problem for them though is people can see how Ron has skirted every major gripe I've had with him.

He doesn't play fair.

socrates said...

Dave Weintraub did beat down big time trolls in real life. Maybe he can be considered the best after all. I thus recant my previous statement. Sorry for any inconvenience. Thanks for your time and consideration.

~~ the king of blog ~~

socrates said...

Addendum post: We at DFQ2 are in beta process of formulating new catch phrases and schtick experimentation for the 2013 season.

god bless the audience

Anonymous said...

I've had a great time chatting with you, Donk. Perhaps we can move this to a different section of the Internet, since I can't deal with Socrates anymore.

He keeps smearing me with vicious crap, and pretending that slight slaps on the wrists from me are grievous insults.

I will continue to link to Soc and read his blog, but his jealousy-fueled mania is too much for me to take, and, frankly, frightens me. If I stay away, perhaps he'll stop raging against me and smearing me with right wing crap.

I've been fighting the bullshit lefty blogs since 2004, yet Soc pretends I was part of the problem. It's an absurd argument. My critiques of the liberal blogosphere is probably what I'm most infamous for. I've explained the Connell thing many times, but he either has a bad memory or doesn't care about truth.

Unlike Singer, I never trusted BK. I used him as a source for one photograph, one line in one article (which was true), and a few tweets that I was pushed into making because an extremely scary and violent troll attacked my family. I apologized for the few tweets I made that turned out to be wrong. Singer still pretends that his New Yorker article on BK isn't horseshit, and I knew that story was horseshit when I first read it, which is why I never really trusted him. Yet, Singer - who never broke a single story in his career - is defended and I'm smeared, essentially because of a tweet. And because you smear everyone with nastiness, then cry like a fucking baby when hit back.

Soc, you are lazy. You write half-ass posts, and think that admitting that they are "mailed-in" is an excuse. Unless readers are extremely informed, your reporting reads like inside baseball.

Anonymous said...

You have not and have never exposed Brad Blog as a fraud, because you're too lazy to actually finish reporting on the Connell story or closely examine his other stuff. I've spent 20 months working on stories related to Brad, but it's the HBGary story that I've mostly been probing, since it ties to my main focus: security firm/dirty tricks fraudster Neal Rauhauser.

I'm not going to diss people or embrace them, just because you have a bug up your ass, Seth. The things you say about me are vile and full of lies. While I'm nice to you, praise you, give you credit, and I even defended you against Leiderman the other day.

I'm still probing and working on all these stories, yet you keep pushing me to make final judgments, when there are still many pieces missing that I'm trying to figure out.

I'm done here forever, because I see that the best thing to do is stay away. Even when I'm nice, I'm smeared. It's just wrong, and I don't appreciate being called "immoral" which is bullshit, and you're crying because of one f-word response for you smearing me at a liar's blog.

Seth, I blocked you because you butt into interviews I'm conducting on Twitter and smear me, and because you often make mistakes because you're lazy or forget shit. And I'm never going to unblock you on Twitter again, because you actually smeared me with the bullshit hoax you fell for, carrying water for a scary dude who sued me in a crazy conspiracy theory. That was the final straw for you on Twitter.

I will link to you and defend you when you are wronged. But you should be ashamed, Seth, since you lash out at people who like you, and you're back to defending liars.

Anonymous said...

You also often lose your temper and make violent quasi-threats too much, Seth. You also often say things that I believe are sexist, gay-baiting or racist.

And, worst of all, much of your blogging consists of insulting people over their looks, focusing on bad photographs. That's just wrong. And it's why you're a super troll, Seth. How a person looks shouldn't matter at all, unless they're being entirely deceptive. People gain and lose weight, and have bad days, and you get off on finding the worst photos to mock them.

What does your education matter? Who cares, Seth. Shut up. There are many brilliant writers and artists who never even finished high school. Yet you seem to be under the delusion that your degrees matter when you lose an argument.

You owe me many, many apologies, Seth. And - unlike you - what I write about you is truthful and is backed up. You just keep smearing me with lies and I can't take anymore.

I'll probably always read your blog and tweets, because I think you have great vision. Stop being lazy and do some real reporting...and stop smearing people when you're in a bad mood...and maybe - if you care - we can have cool convos and work together again. But never on Twitter, you're blocked for life because you had the fucking audacity to smear me over AW.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Ron, great commentary, always helps me too to bring out some buried memories to the surface, too. Rather than join in Socrates stands outside and pisses all over himself acting like a manbaby inthe process. And not seeing nor caring how stupid he makes himself appear.

For instance, Soc calling me 'self indulgent'is rather like the Sun calling Death Valley 'hot.'

While of course it is true and if anything I implicitly trumpet self indulgence as a schtick to be representative of the baby boomer generation as a whole, what is all amateur blogging anyway in the final analysis if not a (supremely time wasting) indulgence?

Like, how sad if its even half your existence is stuck in a self created cyber cage of your own making.

[projection alert]

Ron, there is always pffugee camp. No one pays attention there to anything. Although bet you a dollar to a donut, once we break out the siskel/ebert schtick there will be Socrates perseverating the same ol same ol.


This is why I love the whiteysphere!

socrates said...

Ron Brynaert is garbage and should be put in an asylum before he hurts himself or someone else. I've got better things to do than deal with his lies.

Ron Brynaert wet his pants the last couple years. Period. That was especially done through his insane support of Brett Kimberlin while smearing me.

Other than that and perhaps also with his hanging out with trolls cyberstalking/smearing me, Ron is not even alive to me. He means nothing. He's the human equivalent of a house fly.

The hypocrite liar posted a link to a leaked driver's license picture and called me pineapple face or something. Ron Brynaert = hypocrite. And let's not forget that Ron is scum. Neal is scum. So is Ron.

I used to think Ron was ok for being a human being for deep down his problem was his public insanity. I do believe the latter, that he's batshit insane, but now I believe it's deep down where Ron Brynaert is scum.

The douchebag continues to avoid the truth and posts more lies. As Anonymous. And while blocking me on Twitter.

He has been running interference for fake leftists for close to ten years!

Ron Brynaert told me Patrick Swift was Neal Rauhauser. He told me Mike Stack was a fraud while Lipton Lane was a sincere sweetie.

Ron thinks because he buries his smears in 50,000 tweets and dm's, that they don't exist.

Ron should quit the internet and go away. Or at a minimum he should stop harassing people he has already cybersmeared.

Is he a nutjob or paid to act like one? That's been the question. It still is. Hey, he could be both.

Ron Brynaert is 100% pure fake left. None of us know why he was canned by Raw Story. What we do know is that he supported them and Brett Kimberlin/Friedman for many years.

Real journalists don't post hundreds of lies. Mark Singer is a good person and accomplished writer. Ron Brynaert is scum and a failed internet personality.

That's pretty much what I take from all this.

Ron Brynaert is a dickhead and very slimy. He has blind spots which result in him looking very retarded. Seriously, how does Brynaert expect his ad hominems against Singer to look?

Ron Brynaert was in bed with the con artists who produced the Michael Connell hoax. He did nothing to stop it but continued to take in his income.

Then when the only person exposing BK/Brad emerged, he smeared me and supported Brett Kimberlin.

Ron's a twisted asswipe.

socrates said...

Donkeytale, here's a promise. Simply go away and I will not miss you. Brynaert has already been socratised and filed away for the chump sellout he was. You are that persistent turd that somehow keeps popping up after flushing.

It's obvious both of you are seeking attention. I can do just fine and dandy without either of you.

Anonymous said...


Your posts are full of lies.

I said you looked like CookiePuss on twitter after you smeared me, and kept mocking my looks. Newsflash, Seth, you're no Jude Law. I don't believe I've ever mocked anyone over how they looked at any blog I've ever owned, but it's possible I did. If you really think that's a way to catch me in a lie, go for it, Seth. It would be the only time anyone ever actually proved I've lied.

Criticizing Singer because he fell for Kimberlin's lies, yet still insists he might have sold pot to Quayle, doesn't count as supporting Kimberlin, you absurd super troll. I've always called BK a liar and hoaxer, but you pretend I defended him like Leopold and Larisa did.

I bet you're working on a post to smear me right now. Have fun.

I'll still read and link to you when you do good work, but I'm going to try to ignore your lies and smears about me, since I don't want to waste time feuding with you.

I still like you, Seth, so this is crazy, you have my twitter, so call me maybe.

socrates said...

Unless he starts logging in, I am not going to allow any further posts written by Ron as Anonymous. Letting donkeytale do that is bad enough.

The bottom line with Ron Brynaert is he's creepy. He gets too personal. I have better things to do than reinvent the wheel that Brynaert has been in bed with Brett and Brad. He was the executive editor of Raw Story while the Connell hoax was in full bloom for crying out loud. Recently he was being frontpaged by internet con artist Brad Friedman of BradBlog.

Look at the jumbled nonsense he wrote above: Criticizing Singer because he fell for Kimberlin's lies, yet still insists he might have sold pot to Quayle, doesn't count as supporting Kimberlin, you absurd super troll. I've always called BK a liar and hoaxer, but you pretend I defended him like Leopold and Larisa did.

Ron posts things without any proof. Mark Singer does not believe BK might have sold pot to Dan Quayle. Mark Singer is an accomplished journalist. Did Ron even study Journalism at Syracuse? He is clearly either insane or is the proverbial agent provocateur. Ron clearly supported Brett Kimberlin last year. That is not open to debate.

He wants to be viewed as an internet journalist yet hangs out as a troll now on my blog after being buddies with internet trolls Lane Lipton (Qritiq) and Kid Kenoma.

Ron tweeted that Aaron had to be pulled off by nine guards. He smeared me while protecting Brett Kimberlin.

The question remains whether Ron is insane or merely acting insane.

Anonymous said...

maybe this will get your stale socratising ass in gear and finally up your game.

You are the Kevin Garnett of the whitsyepshere.

talented, old hat and resting on your laurels, 1-2 titles, which don't really compare with the all time greats.

Pareene, as I recall, weighed in on Kimberlin Day and seems to be completely missing the point that fakes lefties also play the scam game, they just arent as good at it, or the trollbusters have an impact stopping them in their tracks, or soemthing.

Still, this thread calls your name. You should consider taking your talents to that thread.

Anonymous said...

Oops, meant to say "Kendrick Perkins."


Anonymous said...

And for the casual reader who needs his homework done for him, here is the original Pareene story.

Be sure to read the update and the comments.

I, an anonymous coward, am in the company of gratenes....

socrates said...

Yawn. I'll take a pass on it. Didn't Beck have high praises for me on his show with Aaron and Frey? Now you want him socratised?

He's kind of funny. It doesn't mean I agree with any of it. Geraldo is usually closer to my world views.

Rivera will only grow in stature as we continue marching through the new millenium.

socrates said...

It feels like we are in the end times for blogging.

These are my cherry pie days. I can't be expected to come up with anything new.

socrates said...

Dude, you're recommending I read slanted bias on something I experienced. That'd be like seeing a game in person then watching the tv videotape. It's redundant.

Anonymous said...

No. I'm recommending you Socratise the fake left as in "both sides suck."

You could broaden your horizons into Alex Pareene/Salon land.

I'd do it for you but busy busy busy.

Or, if thats not making it move how about Alex Jones?

Anonymous said...

Pareene already knows who you are. You would have credibility.

Besides he seems as blind as most liberals to the fact that the lefty blogs are just as money grubbing at the top and middle.

The right seems to grub all the way down to the lowest rungs.

And of course, more dollahs.

Greenwald and hamsher scam seems a natural for Salon, since GG used to post his schtick there.

But I guess, your done, your done.

Except for the same constrictive milieu thats been overhashed.

Anonymous said...

Sorry for the double post altho pat stadding reules.

[dyslexia alert]

My New Years rez is to give up blogging except for my literary schtick as part of my 12 step program.

Ironically, my first piece will be about my blogging addiction 12 schtep schtick.

Which of course is part of my addiction. Layers of the onion and all that.

socrates said...

I deleted the double post in case anyone is wondering wtf you were talking about.

The story's cooked, Bro. All of a sudden you want back in?

socrates said...

What is all this chatter about Alex Jones? Intuitive socratisation says this is Attention Whoring 101.

socrates said...

I'll be back. This is an unpaid gig.

Joseph Camp said...

I have recently been the victim of jay leiderman libel and smear campaign. Please contact me at so that I might learn a few things from you. I have also filed a bar complaint against Jay Liederman in California because of it. it is complaint number 14-11096 and is currently pending. Thanks for taking a moment and getting in touch with me I have ample evidence of Jay Leiderman stalking and harassing me, and using individual online such as Neal R. to do so as well.

socrates said...

I recommend people not contact this Joseph Camp person nor click on any of his links.