I Just Can’t Even

So. There was this.

Showing HERE.

If Bill Schmalfeldt wants us/the world at large to believe that WJJ Hoge and his “cult of personality” are responsible for his wife’s death, then Bill Schmalfeldt needs to take responsibility for his obsession with WJJ Hoge that caused his wife’s death. I would submit that if Bill Schmalfeldt had not been a creepy cyberstalker cry-bully, there would not have developed anything that Bill Schmalfeldt would decide was a “cult of personality” that would then be responsible for the death of his wife. His wife who BEGGED him to stop harassing WJJ Hoge and to let it go. BEGGED HIM! AND HE REFUSED TO! Husband of the year right here, folks!

If what Bill Schmalfeldt says is true about his wife, then Bill Schmalfeldt ALSO needs to take responsibility for the death of Michael Malone.  Because reasons. That Bill Schmalfeldt decided were so. Goose, gander, sauce and all that.

Bill Schmalfeldt just forfeited the last scrap of his humanity card. Well done, DUMBFUCK! Well done!

And just a note. Bill Schmalfeldt doesn’t get to re-write history. We have all his contemporaneous statements as things were going down. ALL of them. Let’s just say that his memory? Loves to twist and turn things around. Then again, this is a day that ends in “y” so I shouldn’t be surprised in the slightest.



About The Dread Pirate Zombie

Member of the Zombie Horde and Lickspittle Minion. Out to eat your brainnnsssss. And a few other sweetbreads because they are so nomm-y. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

50 Responses to I Just Can’t Even

  1. Neal N. Bob says:

    I do so hope that these allegations find their way into the amended Lulzsuit VI complaint. It will be …illuminating. There are more than a few things in that post that could lead to fascinating avenues of discovery. At least one material assertion therein (and, no, I won’t be saying which one) is contradicted by William’s other public statements on the matter.

    If one is suing on the basis of one’s “sterling character,” one should endeavor to tell the truth in public about all things at all times. Put another way, you cannot be a liar and then claim that others have damaged your reputation, at least not with any prospect of success.

    On the other hand, William wouldn’t be William if he started doing the smart or logical thing.

    Liked by 5 people

  2. JeffM says:

    On some days, Witless Willie inspires me to humor, and on others to sobriety. Today, I don’t know which mood I am in.

    I find appalling the modern tendency to criminalize everything. Probably before I die, I shall be reading about the lifetime incarceration of some unfortunate nicotine addict for farting third-hand smoke in public. So many things are now criminal that I would not be surprised if several whom Willie the Wonder has annoyed, offended, or merely disgusted have committed criminal but perfectly moral acts. I’d advise against doing anything criminal to far-from-Wee Willie because of the potential legal consequences even though I might approve morally. If it was, as it possibly may have been, a crime in some jurisdiction for someone to cause horseshit to be mailed to Willie without all the proper paperwork, taxes, and consumer and public health protections required by statute and implementing regulation, there was nothing immoral about it, and his reaction was highly entertaining.

    On the moral side of the ledger, Weeping Willie has nothing to complain about. People are doing to him what he has done to others. Actually, they are doing less to him than what he has done to others. He tries to interfere with others’ employment; others try to interfere with his residence. It is far easier to find a new apartment than a new job. Indeed, if Roy is correct, nothing done to Willie would be immoral however criminal it was. (As you can see, my moral code is profoundly un-Christian; I find turning the other cheek to be mere incitement of the Yahoos.)

    Of course, morality demands that things done to Willie not risk harm or even inconvenience to the innocent. It would be both criminal and highly immoral to fire bomb an old peoples’ home just because the management let Willie an apartment. So, in the vanishingly small chance that any of you are contemplating such use of explosives or combustibles, I beseech you earnestly to banish such thoughts to the realm of fantasy.

    Liked by 1 person

    • We must remember that the only person to suggest that his apartment was going to be firebombed was himself, when he claimed that management were afraid that was going to happen.

      I personally would love to know who put that idea in their heads, because it wasn’t one of us.

      Liked by 4 people

      • JeffM says:

        Not exactly LG. It is of course conceivable that Willie alone has expressed such fears. It is also conceivable that the management of the residence facility expressed such fears to Willie: they were after all gullible enough to take Willie in to begin with. That is why in my opinion the residence facility and one or more of its agents must be joined to the latest suit. Once we delve into the realm of the conceivable, the possibilities become incredibly numerous. Taking the sparest view, either the management does have fears and expressed them or Willie has lied. I will not simply ASSUME without evidence that Willie told that particular lie.

        Liked by 1 person

        • True, we don’t know for sure that the management are afraid.

          So, there would seem to be two possibilities
          a) Bill told them that someone had threatened him (likely a falsehood, it certainly wasn’t a zombie or lickspittle) causing them to fear
          b) Bill never told them, and is telling us a falsehood.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Neal N. Bob says:

            “True, we don’t know for sure that the management are afraid.”

            That’s what depositions and discovery are for. If a DUMBEFUCK ever figures out how to serve someone properly – and in six lulzsuits, he hasn’t – I suspect that he’ll learn that in short order.

            If I wind up being miraculously included, something that William’s going to have to work,/> for, so it’ll probably never happen, I have a discovery list that will quite literally take his breath away.

            Liked by 2 people

          • Neal N. Bob says:

            William does seem to have this interesting tendency to make inflammatory assertions, toss them in lulzsuits and assume that no one’s going to challenge them, despite his well-deserved reputation for not telling the truth about anything.

            Liked by 2 people

      • Minemyown says:

        Remember Bill is associated with a convicted bomber.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Live and Learn says:

        Canticle and Juniper Courts and Cardinal Management has no doubt come to realize they screwed the pooch by not taking a closer look at Billy before letting him put them in the center of a Category 5 shitstorm


    • wjjhoge says:

      Cheek turning can only go so far. Eventually, one runs out of cheeks to turn, especially after a couple of ass-kickings. Moreover, I don’t believe that Christians are obliged to turn someone else’s cheek to be slapped but rather are obliged to protect the innocent.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Wasn’t turning the other cheek simply in regard to insults, and not physical threats?

        Liked by 2 people

        • Just A Thought says:

          Yes, the initial slap to which we were exhorted to turn the other cheek was understood at the time to be am insult not an assault. In fact, the turning off the cheek was not only to refrain from engaging in insults in return, but to challenge the other person to halt the insults and to basically dare him to step it up to assault (as to hit the left cheek with the right hand requires a punch) and brave the repercussions of that.

          Liked by 2 people

      • JeffM says:

        I shall defer to your knowledge of Christian morality. I do note, however, that I was not limiting my argument of moral reciprocity prospectively to protecting the innocent from future harm but extending it retrospectively to vindicating the victims from past injury.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Toastrider says:

        “Do not injustice to another,
        defend the weak and innocent.
        Let truth and honor always guide you,
        let courage find the light within.

        Stand up when no one else is willing,
        act not in hatred or in spite.
        Be to this world as a perfect knight,
        even if it means your life.”

        –The Cruxshadows, “Sophia”

        Liked by 2 people

  3. Dr_Mike says:

    There have been times when I’ve wondered if Bill is being deliberately obtuse, or if he truly is stupid enough to believe what he writes.

    I’ve come to embrace the power of And.

    This is a novel interpretation of events…

    Liked by 1 person

    • I would submit that it is not novel. At least not novel for him. He sees himself as the shining beacon of good that is being tormented by the forces of evil. That means that all past acts must eventually be interpreted in that light. This means excusing things away, turning them to fit the theme, fit his own narrative. He does this every single time.

      How many times does he have to distort realty – DOCUMENTED REALITY – before he realizes that he’s not what he thinks he is? I think it will go on forever because this kind of delusion is all encompassing.

      And now that I’ve written a small novel, I realize that you might have meant “novel” to be “amusing, quaint and possibly as far away from reality as possible.” That works for me too. lol

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Neal N. Bob says:

    And what meds would those be? How would they be prescribed if William hasn’t had a doctor for six months?

    Oh, I do hope that this gets to discovery!

    Liked by 3 people

  5. Pablo says:

    So now Blob is cult obsessed, and Hoge is Moby Dick once again. That being the case, it really makes no sense that he’s not suing him. It’s like Ahab chasing halibut.

    Liked by 6 people

  6. Dianna says:

    Bill Schmalfeldt is a hypocritical liar.

    He is extremely fortunate that I am not a vengeful sort.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. lorddewclaw says:

    Yeah… Right. A “cult.”

    Your just pissed, Derpasaurous Maximus, that John has posts that get into triple didgits… where you have to rely on your self created sock “Mark in MD” to get a single comment to one of your garbage posts.

    The answer is right in front of that dick dented melon of yours, Dumbfuck….

    You suck. Your life sucks. Your blogs suck. Your writing…. your “comedy…” it sux donkey balz.

    Because a group of people come to the conclusion that you are a huge piece of shit… does not a cult make.

    Get bent, dumbass.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Grace says:

      Derpasaurous Maximus.

      I chuckle everytime I see you refer to the Deranged Cyberstalker Bill Schmalfeldt by that name, lord. lol!


  8. There is no debate as to whether or not you should be murdered, Shakes.


    • I would agree. There is no debate. No one should do that sort of thing. I, and others, know that you are just responding to that nonsensical tweet that he posted insinuating as such here: https://twitter.com/YouGetNoQuarter/status/688503158318968836

      Please remember that Bill takes every opportunity to twist things around. He will, invariably, take this as a DEATH THREAT ELEVENTY, and I would like to disabuse anyone of that notion.

      Liked by 1 person

      • JeffM says:

        In Willie’s mind, he is the hero of the saga rather than its buffoon. A mention of unspecified hypotheticals in a conversation about the difference between morality and legality and a little play on words about “no debate” are transmogrified into evidence that a “cult” is seriously considering his murder. No one is contemplating his murder because his public buffoonery is far too entertaining for anyone to be ready to bring down the curtain.

        What is the source of this cult nonsense?

        He decided that it made sense to investigate someone else’s files. A bit weird, but there are conceivably legitimate reasons for going through files that are apparently open to the public. He finds in those files a blank form. He decides that the form, though blank, is to be applied to him (because he is the hero). And he further concludes that a blank form in someone else’s files justifies him sending an email to someone who has repeatedly said that communications from Buffoon Bill are unwelcome.

        The implication of the email is that Hoge owes a (completely imaginary) duty to Weeping Willie to disclose if the form was filled out and sent to anyone. The email explicitly says that Belligerent Bill will graciously overlook the offense of having blank forms, provided that they have always remained blank.

        The email is published. People have hysterics over Bill’s latest bumptiousness, and he mistakes the raucous laughter for the solemn rituals of a cult.

        Liked by 3 people

  9. Rob Crawford says:

    It’s telling that Bill has never expressed “cargiver guilt” or concern that HE didn’t do enough for his wife. Perhaps it’s an emotion that’s hit him in private but… Bill can’t even keep his bowel movements private. Rather he’s decided his personal villains are to blame, despite them having no contact with, no responsibility for, his wife.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s