Lawdy! Four Years, and Still No Sign of Learning

A favorite trope among the zombie horde is “STOVE HOT! NO TOUCH!” It’s a short and simple way of saying that when you touch the hot stove and burn yourself, humans usually learn not to touch a hot stove again.

Unfortunately, some people just can’t help themselves. I was perusing through archives on other sites and hit upon THIS old post on Hogewash. And what do I see? Bill Schmalfeldt. Attempting to shut up people from saying things he doesn’t like them saying – namely from quoting him accurately and then giving their opinion of what he said. Seems, ummm, familiar, doesn’t it?

Kind of funny. He’s memory-holes just about everything he said, while Hogewash still is up with nothing deleted. So much for the guy who really wants us to know that he stands behind everything he’s written.

How’s that hiding behind the NINJANUNS working out for him?

Advertisements

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.

33 Responses to Lawdy! Four Years, and Still No Sign of Learning

  1. Neal N. Bob says:

    “Memories, pressed between the pages of my mind….”

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Jane says:

    The freak has to delete everything because it can’t possibly remember all of it! What do you mean, “stick with the truth and you don’t have to worry about remembering what you’ve said/written previously”?? Dementia addled freak can’t remember that either!

    Liked by 2 people

    • one handle and stick to it says:

      “Cheddar Injection ‏@hotcheeseshot 2m2 minutes ago
      Jane — How can I be faking my PD and still have PD-Dementia? #parkinson’s”

      Um, because over-indulgence in Johnnie Walker Red causes stoopid?

      Liked by 2 people

      • Avenger Watcher says:

        Jane didn’t *say* “PD-Dementia”….

        TK just can’t quote accurately any of the time, can they?

        Liked by 2 people

        • Jane says:

          GMTA, Avenger Watcher. History has shown anything asserted by the dementia addled freak is highly suspect, whether it’s deliberately lying, or too dementia addled to understand the truth. It’s good practice to always look for the lie in its words, and there’s usually at least one to be found.

          Liked by 2 people

      • Jane says:

        bwahahahaha Nice stawman the dementia addled freak erected there – be a shame if something happened to it, you know, like facts. For example, I don’t recall ever describing dementia addled HappyMyWifeDied TheMerryWidower as having PD dementia, nor do I recall commenting about what I believe about its medical diagnoses. Frankly, the mental diagnoses are much more relevant, imo.

        Dementia addled freak gotta spew dementia addled nonsense; but don’t worry, the dementia addled freak can practice law in federal courts perfectly. bwahahahahaha

        Liked by 2 people

      • MJ says:

        He doesn’t have PD. He’s been lying about it for years. So he managed to get a few holes drilled in his head. Is totally meaningless when there is no long term care. He’s just fat and its killing him. He needs PD to be relevant.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. one handle and stick to it says:

    “Some bozo calling himself the Liberal Grouch…” Had his number from the very beginning.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Paul Krendler says:

    As easy as it is to find every event at every other blog where anyone has mentioned #ToddlerStalker #DUMBFUCK #BillSchmalfeldt, it fairly boggles the mind that every attempt to locate #ToddlerStalker #DUMBFUCK #MisterIStandBehindWhatIveWritten #AndCubScoutsToo #BillSchmalfeldt’s first mention of any of his stalking victims is only available at an archived link.

    Methinks that be, well…queer, be it not?

    Liked by 2 people

    • If I was rummaging about on a website not controlled by him, how can I be stalking him? It would be more correct to say I was stalking WJJ Hoge. But then again, who WOULDN’T stalk that site. Hogewash has some neat stuff in its archives, The star pron is not to be missed for certain. And there are NUMEROUS posts not mentioning the Milwaukee Cheddar Injection (that moniker probably runs afoul of some decency laws somewhere I’m sure – STELLAR CHARACTER boys and girls!) in the slightest.

      So then what would he characterize all the hits he makes on THIS website? For example: Feb. 7, 8:10 p.m.; Feb 7, 11:25 p.m.; Feb 8 9:55 a.m.; Feb 8, 10:57 a.m. I know that Illinois law characterizes that as STALKING. And if he thinks that Krendler=Grady and since Krendler is a poster on this website as well as a contributor… why then he’s breaking the Illinois Stalking Order (or whatever that one is called) against him. Again and again. Oh, but let’s not mention that Grady has posted here as well. That would be HYPERTECHNICAL I think.

      And he wonders why we call him a creepy stalker.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Jane says:

        Dementia addled and self-described HappyMyWifeDied TheMerryWidower wants so badly to be the stalked instead of the stalker. This is because it has no concept of what actual stalking victims suffer. If it ever got a whiff of real stalking, it would run rolly walk jump on the scooty puff (It’s red. Vroom VROOM!), and race to hide behind the ninjanuns, emitting a high pitched shriek the entire way, and leaving a trail of fear pee in its wake. Unless the scooty puff collapses under the weight of the morbidly obese freak.

        However, as long as it remains so unbelievably repulsive, that dream, like virtually every other dream its had throughout its FAILed existence, will never, ever happen.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. JeffM says:

    Why I never heard of such a thing: a defendant in a defamation case doing research on the plaintiff.

    I guess someone might conceivably argue that the plaintiff’s past might be relevant in a defamation suit. For example, if the plaintiff was arguing that being a DUMBFUCK was a statement of fact rather than an epithet or statement of opinion, then the defendant might have a most legitimate reason to look for truly stupid acts committed by plaintiff because, you know, truth is a defense. And then there is the whole aspect of damages to reputation. A person’s reputation is created in part by that person’s past words and deeds.

    Now that I think of it even those who have just been threatened with suit by someone might conceivably have a quite legitimate reason to research the prospective plaintiff.

    I guess it’s all conceivable, but surely it is unprecedented. So I can see why witless persons might even think that such unusual research is a tort.

    (Every time Lee Stranahan comes up, I feel compelled to clarify that I found his take on the Steubenville rape case to be morally quite obtuse and to be open for DUMBFUCKS to MISCONSTRUE as supporting rape, but then I also feel compelled to add that the resulting response by some to Stranahan, his wife, and his children was morally appalling.)

    Liked by 3 people

    • Rob Crawford says:

      That’s what DF was going on about?

      Don’t tell me — Stranahan’s position was against forming a lynch mob. Because the Progs sure we’re more interested in a lynching than an investigation in that case.

      Liked by 2 people

      • I think that was the gyst of it for the most part. But Lee was being, as Jeff said, morally obtuse for a lot of it. And that’s what set off the tweets that led to the posting of the Stranahan’s address by BS in response to OccupyRebellion saying that someone could rape Lauren while Lee was gone if they wanted to. Because they thought that Lee was advocating rape. And people that do that deserve to be raped. Or their wives raped. Which BS decided to help along by providing the info to do so. So very helpful, he is!

        Yeah, that goes over REALLY WELL when brought into court. Ummm hmmmm.

        Liked by 2 people

    • JeffM says:

      Rob

      What motivated Stranahan may well have been the lynch mob atmosphere, which I agree was disgusting. But his POSITION was that the Attorney General’s investigation into whether any adult was at fault with respect to the rape itself or to the rape’s investigation was excessive and vindictive. It is worth reviewing what came of that investigation.

      One person was prosecuted for, and pled guilty to, stealing school property. She was sentenced to a drug rehab program in lieu of jail. Apparently, Lee Stranahan finds drug rehab cruel and unusual punishment. I disagree..

      One person was prosecuted for and pled guilty to spoliation of evidence in violation of a court order. He was sentenced to 90 days in jail, 80 of which were to be forgiven in exchange for a year of community service. Apparently, Lee Stranahan finds it inhumane to jail people for spoliation of evidence in a rape case. I disagree.

      Charges of tampering with evidence and obstructing justice against the superintendant of schools were dropped on the day of trial in return for his resignation. Without a trial, it is impossible to know what all the the relevant evidence was. Lee Stranahan may have been privy to some of that evidence so he may know better than I whether the charges were an abuse of prosecutorial discretion.

      Two school employees were charged with failing to obey mandatory reporting laws. Arguably, such laws may be morally wrong. I disagree, but I can see the arguments on the other side. If, however, employees in the schools find it against their conscience to obey those laws, their proper course is to resign, not to collect their salaries and simultaneously flout the conditions of their employment. Charges were dropped in return for 20 and 40 hours of community service respectively. Apparently, Lee Stranahan finds this unduly harsh. I disagree. Moreover, his apparent tolerance for ignoring mandatory reporting laws can be construed as condoning rape. (I do not believe that was his intent, but arguing against mandatory reporting invites misconstruction unless very carefully framed. And Stranahan was not framing his words carefully; in fact, it is unclear whether he was even attempting to argue against mandatory reporting.)

      One person, a volunteer coach, was charged with contributing to consumption of alcohol by persons legally under age. The series of teen-aged parties during which a minor first became comatose from excessive alcohol and then was raped started at the house of the person charged, I find the legal age for drinking alcohol absurd, but people violate the law at their own risk. The coach was originally sentenced to ten days in jail and a year of probation. Apparently, Lee Stranahan finds this excessively punitive. I disagree given what ensued. (Unfortunately, the punishment for this person escalated drastically because he admitted to violating his probation twice, once apparently for a bar fight and once for drunk driving.)

      A violent crime was committed against a minor. Prosecutors are supposed to investigate violent crimes thoroughly. Once such investigations start, they frequently turn up, as happened here, evidence of other wrongdoing, minor and not-so-minor, What followed were punishments that many might find quite lenient. Lee Stranahan’s ranting about how awful it was that an investigation occurred or that punishments were imposed was morally obtuse.

      The Stranahans have my sincerest sympathy for what Witless Willie subjected them to, but that does not require me to find that Lee Stranahan has good sense or a reliable moral compass.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Completely agreed. I like your assessment. I didn’t follow the situation as well as I probably should. But in no way did Lee’s actions warrant Occupyrebelltion saying people should rape Lauren and the Bill posting the address.

        Liked by 1 person

        • JeffM says:

          Agreed. If, as I believe probable, Lee Stranahan got blinded emotionally by the mob shouting for scapegoats and consequently wrote something foolish, the way civilized people respond is through reasoned criticism of the foolishness, not by inciting rape. But the social justice crowd are fine with any kind and any degree of retaliation, including rape, against those with opinions different from theirs. They are scum.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Rob Crawford says:

        No problem — I didn’t follow what Stranahan wrote.

        Like

  6. Neal N. Bob says:

    Am I the only one that’s noticed that William almost sounds like Greta Garbo in lulzsuits, but he’s constantly trying to engage the people he alleges are tormenting him on social media? It’s almost as if he enjoys the attention.

    It’s a pity that no one’s saving his assorted ravings to demonstrate that to a court.

    Oh. Wait.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Neal N. Bob says:

      One could further argue that the regular memory-holing of everything William has ever written displays what law-talking types call “consciousness of guilt.” If his writings are so innocuous, why do they constantly disappear?

      Liked by 3 people

    • one handle and stick to it says:

      And if only those judges had put those NINE restraining orders against Schmalfeldt on paper.

      Oh. Wait.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Rob Crawford says:

        My favorite part? The DF declaring the court orders against him the result of some tricky conspiracy. They’re not handed out like popcorn — you have to show the court a pattern of behavior. Doxxing people, for example, is a great bit of evidence for stalking, and using what he thought he learned to taunt, threaten, or harass his target seals the deal.

        Plus, each one he gets makes the next one easier. He not only shows a pattern of stalking his current victim, but a DOCUMENTED past history of stalking these nine others to the point courts ordered him to stop.

        At some point a judge is going to be concerned enough to request a mental evaluation. Or to grant one as a request of a petitioner.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Neal N. Bob says:

          I’ve read what I believe to be every filing and motion that William has ever put before a court, with the exception of his divorces.

          I can only describe the reasoning therein as being symptomatic of what the medical community will someday call “Shaken Schmalfeldt Syndrome,” traumatic brain injury complicated by deepening mental illness and aggravated by discount scotch. Victims of Shaken Schmalfeldt Syndrome often present themselves as experts in law, medicine and journalism, despite their longest-held job being that of a truck driver.

          Liked by 5 people

  7. Black Betty says:

    PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT:

    Liked by 3 people

  8. Minemyown says:

    https://billysez.wordpress.com/2015/12/15/zombies-really-dont-go-in-for-this-sort-of-thing/#comment-4895

    Now think of those screenshots printed up on 36″‘ x 48″‘ poster board and placed on poster display stands in front of a jury.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Speaking of blasts from the pasts, I found this an for a sec I thought it was an old Schmally viseo dating profile. But then i started laughing instead of screaming, and it was okay.

    Liked by 4 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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s