Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Sorry, But This Is A Boring Post -- It's About My Life and An Anonymous Campus Leftist's Obsession With It

Well, friends, I've really made it into the big leagues! I've got my very own impostor on Twitter. You know, Twitter, that thing that only self-promoters and high-school students use? Yeah...

Anyways, I've sought to correct some of the stuff posted about me by responding on Twitter, but it kind of bores me, so let me debunk some of the silliness on here. Is this beneath my dignity to validate with a response? Is it trying too hard to be funny but coming off as pathetic? You betcha.

But I'm waiting for a pizza, so I might as well give it a shot. Here goes.
  • I didn't meet my fiancee on Craigslist. I'm not engaged -- still officially in a relationship on Facebook, though that might change some day -- and I only dated three women from Kansas City. (We went to the movies, the library, and Chipotle, respectively.) I met my girlfriend at a free-speech/academic conference in Philadelphia where I was a speaker a few years back. (That's actually where the photo the impostor stole was taken.) I found out she lived in L.A. and asked her out. The rest is history and, if I'm lucky, perhaps it'll end as a Shakespeare comedy. 
  • I didn't buy a mattress off of Craigslist. I bought two mattresses as well as lots of furniture and appliances. I disinfected all of it and always slept with the sheets on. I don't apologize for being poor and I won't apologize when I'm rich. I don't ask for sympathy for being poor, nor will I feel guilty when I have gotten mine. I'm not, after all, a liberal.  
  • I didn't cause a race riot at high school. The school's response to a free speech conference where we defended Bill Bennett's right to speech caused a day of classes to be suspended where a bunch of liberal teachers asked students how they felt as black students, multi-racial students, etc. after there was a dust up. Some black students -- though obviously not all -- on campus seized upon the temerity of me saying that I think students should be treated equally on the basis of their race was racist. Go figure. I challenged a bunch of them to a debate and won. 
  • I wasn't a source for anything The Boston Globe ever wrote. That's a rumor that comes from my cheating ex-girlfriend who is about as reliable a source as she was a girlfriend. (This is kind of a long story how it got started, but I figured she couldn't be trusted, so I told her I was and wanted to see how fast it got around. Apparently, almost as fast she did.) When she got to campus and people found out that she was Charles Johnson's girlfriend, she tried to disassociate herself from me by making things up about me. Kind of lame, to be sure, but hey, there's a reason she's my ex. 
Just who is following my imposter's tweets? A man is known by both the friends -- and the enemies -- he keeps, so let's go through a short list:
  • A student government official who promised a lot and delivered none of it. (Yeah, she's a Democrat.) Though I like her as a person, I repeatedly called her on it. Nothing personal, but I think that the press should actually, you know, criticize the government.
  • Andrew Bluebond, easily one of the most dishonest students on campus and despite the gender studies' major he clings to, something of a jerk to women. Bluebond famously once defended government schools while omitting that he went to a higher-end private Catholic school. When I called him on it, he told me to shut up. 
  • My ex-girlfriend. Need I say more? 
  • Lowell Reade, the head of an anti-Israel group on campus that fancies the fiction that Israel is an apartheid state. (I happen to actually like Lowell, even though he has some batty politics.)
There's a crucial difference between me and my anonymous interlocutors. I tell the truth and attach my name to everything; they lie anonymously. That's why this Twitter page is a perfect metaphor for who most of my critics really are -- cowards who traffic in sloganeering snark all the while dreaming of being witty. 

That his tweets are broadcast in 140 characters compounds the beautiful counterproductivityIt's as if this writer decided to help me out by playing into the stereotype of the anonymous cretins who dwell in the comment section. Thanks for gift wrapping the present!

Ah, but who do I return the package, too? But hey, if anyone knows who is running that page, I'd like to know because if there is one thing cowards hate it is having to explain themselves to their peers. I might even throw you some cash and, as per always, I'll keep your name secret. 

Let's make the final weeks fun.

48 comments:

Lowell said...

Great post Charles! (I'm not being sarcastic by the way).

But I do just want to say that Twitter is quite notorious for having humorous accounts that impersonate others, such as the BPGlobal Public Relations account that started tweeting after the oil spill. That was a great one. Or fake Steve Jobs, that's another good one. It's quite trendy in the Twitterverse, so it's (hopefully) all in good fun. And hey, it comes with the territory, I suppose. But for the record, I'm not the one running the account.

Also, I do happen to be the first follower of the twitter for the actual blog (@claremontcnsrv), which to my disappointment, has never had a tweet. Whether you like Twitter or not, it's quite a force to be reckoned with in the media world, and you would probably get even more readership if you added a tweet button to your pages. Just my two cents.

And right back at you, Charles: I happen to actually like you too, even though you have some batty politics!

Anonymous said...

Fucking awesome Charles. Excellent post. Using the truth as a sword is simply the best strategy. The cowardly, corny twitter page guy must feel like a fool now. Charles is winning. I can't believe those lib dummies would toss up such a slow pitch for ya...

Anonymous said...

I bet Wilner is running that page. He has both the motive and requisite lack of creativity. Great post Charles. You shoved the truth right up their asses.

Anonymous said...

Checkmate is right! Well played.

Anonymous said...

CJ-- any concern that Wilner will physically attack you around campus? Even though his target assault victims are female, I am curious if you feel threatened? If so, I think you oughta report it to the Dean of Students.

Great post, btw.

Anonymous said...

looks like someone REALLY got under charles' skin!

Anonymous said...

I like how the Twitter loser is FREAKING OUT.

Lowell said...

You guys definitely don't understand Twitter...

Anonymous said...

When someone takes the time to make an ironic twitter imposter twitter page about you you know you've arrived. Congratulations Charles and the CC!

Anonymous said...

This was an awesome post. The twitter loser has nothing on you. The posts are pretty boring. If they are going to make up lies, why cant they at least be more creative? Focusing on your bedsheets - really? Who cares. I'm sure many students sleep on beds without bedsheets in those disgusting dorm beds. I hope twitter loser hasn't aspired to be a tabloid writer - or to do any type of writing for that matter. Btw,your ex-girlfriend seems like such a total bitch who is not over you.

Anonymous said...

I've never responded to anything you've posted before because as much as I like a good debate once in a while, I don't want to get into anonymous internet arguments. I'm sensitive and do take things like that personally. I decided to risk it, however, and comment, because when I clicked your link to read the impostor's twitter page, I also noted that you (Charles) have been responding to some of the tweets to try to debunk some of the rumors.

I've had something like this happen to me before where somebody posed as me on a message board and said really inappropriate things. This was in middle school, so I'll be the first to admit that at that time, it really upset me and I cried over it for a few days. The fact that you have commented on these tweets shows that this has obviously affected you - affected you enough to write a blog post on it. Your post tries to show how strong you are and how you don't need to stoop to the impostor's level, but I think it's okay to admit that you are a human and can be sensitive and that something can hurt your feelings. This doesn't affect you as a journalist, it actually helps you connect to your readers.

A lot of people dismiss you, and I will even say that you have written something about me in your blog before that definitely hurt my feelings. But I actually respect that this twitter impostor affected you enough that you want to set the record straight - it's okay to show your vulnerabilities sometimes. As much as I wish you would erase the post you wrote about me (it was some two years ago but I still think about it,) I at least now see a new side to you.

I'm a Claremont College alum but I started reading this blog again when your first post about Michael Wilner surfaced on facebook, so now I sporadically check up on what's been going on. Good luck with graduation and your future endeavors.

Anonymous said...

Her name is Tina Nguyen, and yes she is.

Anonymous said...

Even though I read your blog off and on (I'm a Claremont College alum but I started reading again when your first Michael Wilner story surfaced on facebook,) I've never left a comment before, because even though I don't mind a good debate once in a while, I don't like being anonymously harassed on the internet. I'm sensitive and even though I try not to, I still take those things personally.

I decided, though, to risk it because when I clicked your link to see the impostor twitter account, I noticed that you responded to many of the tweets, trying to debunk the rumors. The twitter account affected you enough to respond - affected you enough to write a blog post about it. I know you want to appear stronger and smarter than the impostor and show that you won't stoop to his/her level, but I actually respect, as your responses show, that you are human and are sensitive and are just as vulnerable as anyone else.

I don't think showing this vulnerability will make you less of a journalist, but rather help you connect to your readers. This impostor account had to have affected you, and I think it's okay to admit that some of the comments are hurtful. If I'm reading you wrong and you actually aren't hurt by anything anyone says, then I'm sorry to jump to conclusions, forgive me.

Something similar happened to me in middle school; somebody posed as me on a message board and wrote very inappropriate and untrue comments. I will be the first to admit that it really upset me and I even cried over it.

About two years ago you wrote an article about me that was hurtful, which I still think about sometimes. But I do have respect for you as a journalist and now, as somebody who has finally shown how they are affected by public scrutiny. I do wish you the best with graduation and your future endeavors.

Anonymous said...

That shit didnt hurt Chuck's feelings. He thrives on this stuff.

Charles Johnson said...

I don't mind being attacked. In fact, I welcome it, so long as it is substantive. The one thing that I have wanted my four years in college is someone to be my interlocutor, to go toe for toe with me, to debate, and to fight.

Why do I want that? Batman needs the Joker; Superman needs Lex Luthor. I leave it to my readers to determine whether or not I am the villain or the hero, but I want nothing more than to have a serious adversary that I can respect.

Instead, my critics have to write about me shitting on the floor. The worst part is that I didn't shit on the floor. It's sad, really. I wanted higher education. Instead, I'm confronting anonymous cowards who don't even have a sense of humor. It's pathetic.

Anonymous said...

Chuck, for what its worth, I am a CMC graduate and took a shit in the stair-well at Francisco Torres towers at UCSB in 2006. It was hilarious and we all had a good laugh. I believe you when you say you didnt do it, but even if you did....

Anonymous said...

I posted the two comments that are similar above, the long ones. I thought my first one didn't go through so I re-typed it. Feel free to erase one of them so that it doesn't clutter the comments.

Charles Johnson said...

I didn't do it, though sometimes I wish I had. If accused of a crime and convicted in some minds, you might as well do it after a point... Frankly, I'd be more inclined to defecate in North Quad, though perhaps no one would notice.

Anonymous said...

hahaha. nice. I lived in and love North Quad, but still find that funny...

Anonymous said...

a serious adversary? anyone who tries to pose an alternate opinion just gets personally attacked, you self-promoting fuck. you have no kindness and no decency in debate.

it's not worthwhile to even point out your errors because of the risk that you launch a months-long personal attack campaign against that person.

that's why you haven't been able to drag people into the mud with you.

Yoda said...

Anon 4:04 is right. You're not an honest journalist, and you routinely use petty personal attacks to distract from the issues at hand. Why would you add that Bluebond is a jerk to women? It's 1. untrue, and 2. completely irrelevant to what you're trying to say. You take pleasure (or at least pride) in ruining people's lives, so no one wants to cross you publicly because you're not worth it.

Han shot first said...

Wrong you are, Yoda.

Bluebond is a bad, bad, bad dude. I was on the Port Side with him and he's everything that people accuse Charles of being.

Anonymous said...

My mind has been blown.

Anonymous said...

Andrew Bluebond? I already dont like him. Please provide details...

Anonymous said...

anon @ 4:04p.m

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE answer my many calls to demonstrate an instance where Charles has published something false? I have written 5+ invitations on the comments sections asking anyone who opposed Charles to demonstrate where he has stated non-facts? Instead of calling him a "fuck", why dont you substantively attack his reporting? Is it because he speaks the unvarnished truths and that hurts your feelings and the feelings of the d-bags you defend?

Anonymous said...

Still waiting for an example of a falsehood published by Charles...

Waiting...waiting...

waiting...

Anythign false said about Frangieh? Wilner?

Waiting...Waiting..

How can you not like Charles when he has done nothing but factually accurate (albeit harsh), well researched, and verified reporting?

Waiting for an example...just one falsity...waiting...

Anonymous said...

I am an alum of CMC and have never met Charles. However, I am impressed by his balls to report on issues that are unpopular, and, perhaps, not well-received by the powers-that-be. I am shocked by the way the administration has ignored important concerns, and swept others on the rug. I dont know this Wilner character, either. He sounds like a few of the people who were in my class, though. I am also surprised that people would defend him in light of the uncontroverted fact that he struck a woman in the face. I am also surprised that he got off with what sounds like a 'slap on the wrist'. Charles may not be popular amongst the liberal portions of the student body -- but you gotta hand it to him for reporting on these issues. You dont have to read his blog, and you dont have to make comments. If you dont like what he is doing, I would think the best thing to do would be ignore him and lit him fizzle out. Instead, you encourage his fervor by commenting, reading, and keeping the issues alive. You make twitter pages aimed at insulting him, and are too short-sighted/dumb to see that this is a compliment which only confirms that he has sent you all into a tizzy.

Good work Charles. Shame on the college for not taking your investigative findings more seriously, and shame on your critics for handling you so poorly. You definitely do not have any worthy adversaries that I have seen -- Just a bunch of crybabies without a factual basis to be complaining.

I just took the pittance of a donation I send to CMC each year, and donated it to the CC instead. Not necessarily because I agree with everything written on the CC, and not b/c I dont love the school, but because I am embarrased by the administrations cowardly reaction to Charles, and annoyed by the student body's inability to know how to properly cope with opinions they dont agree with.

Finally, I echo the challenge of the above posting to demonstrate an instance of false-reporting by Charles. If you cannot cite one, how can you criticize him?

Anonymous said...

Just because what he writes is true, that doesnt make it OK to publish. He may be technically right about Frangieh and Wilner, but that doesnt mean he should be writing about it.

Anonymous said...

anon @ 6:32

Thank you. I knew one of you dopes would finally admit it.

Anyone else? Waiting...

Anonymous said...

several things.
#1 Charles Johnson stated that Professor Frangieh supported Hamas, true, but he also said that Frangieh was in favor of terrorist suicide bombing. FALSE.

#2 Tina is an incredibly nice person and I have not once heard her slander anyone for any reason. unlike Charles Johnson who attacks anyone who is at all critical.

#3 Charles you have criticized Michael Wilner for removing posts from the forum, which as editor is in his control, and you clearly state above "I'm inclined to let whoever write whatever they want here, but if it attacks me, I may delete it." i think that wilner has the same rights, don't you?

Anonymous said...

Fail.

Anonymous said...

Those aren't false statements ya dummy.

1) you concede that Frangieh is a Hamas supporter, but is not OK with terrorism? Yea, and I am a big tobacco supporter, but cancer is unacceptable.

2) CJ's opinion that Tina is a piece of shit is just that, an opinion. Not a false statement.

3) Wilner violated the forum's policies. Charles is his own master when it comes to the CC. So, to answer your question, no - Wilner does not have the same rights in this case.

Was that really the best you could come up with? How sad.

Anonymous said...

Still Waiting...

Anonymous said...

This twitter feed is one of the funniest things I've seen in a while, a mocking Charles richly deserves.

Anonymous said...

Ready for a falsehood? "After Farina was assaulted by Michael Wilner..." That sentence is an accusation of a crime. One that Wilner has not been convicted of by a court of law, and indeed one that he was acquitted of by J-Board. That's a lie, and a malicious one at that. Assault requires the accused to have intent. Neither Farina, nor Charles has adequately done that, and no court, either in California or at CMC has either. Regardless of the police report, the contents of which are simply the reports of the alleged victim, no one has convicted Wilner of assault and to state that he committed the crime, is a lie.

Anonymous said...

Fail, again. Does Wilner deny that his fist came into contact with Farina's face??? If not assault, battery maybe?

Come on, cant you morons come up with a single definite falsehood made by Charles? Pathetic...

Anonymous said...

Battery also requires intent. Assault is to battery what attempted murder is to murder. So yes, still a lie. And a deliberate malicious one at that. Further, yes, he does deny his fist came in contact, as opposed to his flailing open hand as he was pushed.

Anonymous said...

"Come on, cant you morons come up with a single definite falsehood made by Charles? Pathetic..."

Don't feed the trolls, people.

Anonymous said...

HAHA. Yea, dont feed into their requests for specifics. Specific information is very tough for people without the truth behind them.

Anonymous said...

"Further, yes, he does deny his fist came in contact, as opposed to his flailing open hand as he was pushed."


Riiiiigghhhttt......

Anonymous said...

Did Wilner really call her BF a "loser"? What a coincidence that his "open hands" also "flailed" uncontrollably towards the "losers" girlfriend. Classic stuff.

Anonymous said...

CJ = Stag Legend

Anonymous said...

CJ is a damned star in my book.

Anonymous said...

"Further, yes, he does deny his fist came in contact, as opposed to his flailing open hand as he was pushed."

Oh boy will the DA have fun confronting that defense. Amazing.

Anonymous said...

Bump.

Anonymous said...
It definitely would be nice to clear up whether she was on drugs or not with a final statement. However - if she was, I still am not sure how that negates the fact that he physically assaulted or attempted to physically assault her.

Her being on drugs = hallucinating that he hit her?
Her being on drugs = her feeling more shock/pain than she would if sober?
Her being on drugs = taunting him?
Her being on drugs = her inability to know or remember what was actually going on?

Which one is it? Because either way she had markings on her face from it. I am failing to see how her drug use somehow changes Wilner's behavior. I'm also pretty sure that he never once said, "I didn't hit her" ...

April 20, 2011 8:04 PM

Anonymous said...

Hw DID not hit her, he was simply "flailing open hand as he was pushed.". Hahahahah.

Anonymous said...

How is it anti-Israel to support justice for Palestinians? Sounds like you're saying being pro-Israel is inherently unjust.

Anonymous said...

Hey Charles, if you hear anything about the Wilner case can you please update us? Thank you.