Touchy, Are We?

Someone is back on the “if you don’t say stuff in the way I want you to say it, you can’t say it” bandwagon.

Screenshot 2016-04-30 07.33.24

I have a purely rhetorical question. If “absolutely EVERYBODY” whom Bill Schmalfeldt has doxxed “asked for it” by “leaving profane comments” on his latest weekly REBRANDED! websites, just where, praytell, is the “profane comment” I left? Oh. That’s right. I have never commented on Bill Schmalfeldt’s websites.


After throwing his little “LEAVE IT ALONE!” temper tantrum, Bill Schmalfeldt then proceeds to his vulgar descriptions and untrue accusations against a person. Oh look! His tell that’s he’s butthurt is showing!

Screenshot 2016-04-30 07.32.44

There is a problem here. I don’t post a single thing that Bill Schmalfeldt doesn’t post very publicly online. Okay, well a day or so ago I posted something ELSE that exists on the very public interwebz that is a commentary about what he does. How does highlighting and commenting on public postings constitute stalking? Only in his mind, I suppose.

Now Bill Schmalfeldt’s reaction? I could care less if he has one, honestly. If I did want him to have a reaction, that is simply trolling, not stalking. Even if he never gives a reaction, I will continue to highlight his awful behavior to others, his hypocritical lies, and other things that I believe need to be collected for others that will need to understand how to fight back against Bill Schmalfeldt when he turns on them if they do something he doesn’t like. The key to fighting back against a bully is to have the right ammunition. I believe that information and examples are the appropriate ammunition.

Now my friend and co-blogger Paul Krendler over at The Thinking Man’s Zombie? Yeah, he’s got a different perspective. He is, of course, Bill Schmalfeldt’s accurate mirror. And that ALWAYS gets Bill’s goat.

Screenshot 2016-04-30 07.35.27

Psssst! Earth to Bill Schmalfeldt! You ARE interacting with him. lol

But really and truly, when you don’t have any better way than to express how helpless you truly are against someone’s reporting and opinions, what do you do? Well, if you are Bill Schmalfeldt then you photoshop them into a classical portrait that ends up conveying a meaning completely opposite that which you want it to mean. *snort*

Screenshot 2016-04-30 08.37.13

Go check out our friends Dave and David over at The Artisnal Craft Blog. You won’t regret it, I promise!


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.

53 Responses to Touchy, Are We?

  1. wpdavidd says:

    What about all the faildoxes? How did /they/ ask for it?

    Liked by 4 people

  2. JeffM says:

    It’s OK for Witless Willie to demand a death certificate from someone, but it’s not OK for anyone to demand such a thing from him. Because he is a “journalist,” meaning a professional snoop. Getting paid for something MAY indicate superior ability, but it does not ensure any moral superiority as any whore demonstrates. Furthermore, journalists have no rights not accorded to any citizen.

    I have news for the witless: public commentary on public acts and public speech is not trolling, not stalking, and not defamation. So when he reads such commentary he is not gathering evidence of anything.

    Not that Krendler requires any help in defending himself, but clearly fictional pieces are also not defamatory. And, by definition, Krendler can’t be trolling anyone who is banned from Krendler’s site. The holes in Willie’s understanding need caulk.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Jane says:

      The boy scouts don’t sell caulk, so the loathsome loser can only write disgusting fantasies about cub scout caulk.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Pablo says:

      I’m sure John Hoge appreciates Blob’s admission that he was working in a paid capacity for Breitbart Unhinged. If the monkey were educable, I’d never suggest that it might be in his best interest to STFU. Delightfully, this monkey is not educable.

      Liked by 3 people

  3. JeffM says:

    Oh and where were the obscene comments from “Vinnie” or the Causey’s?

    Anyone may appropriately be mocked for FAILURES at doxxing. Now we can all agree that mockery is not always appropriate in response to every kind of act. I am not aware for example at mockery aimed at anyone who showed videos of the interior of a home accompanied by information about whether the female resident can raped without risk of intervention from a resident, adult male. That sounds like the sort of thing that professional journalists do, but everyone knows that mocking professional journalists is simply beyond the pale.

    Liked by 7 people

    • Jane says:

      Likewise, endangering children by making false complaints to protective services isn’t something to be mocked. Despised, yes, of course, along with reviling the malignant monster who’d endanger children.

      We’ve all heard terrible stories about foster care, but the grotesque ghoul didn’t care about the welfare of the children, only about its sick, twisted revenge fantasies. Had the loathsome loser been successful in its despicable efforts, the very least that would have happened is the children being mentally and emotionally scarred by being removed from their parents and home. As it is, the FAILed freak only managed to scar them by making them the subject of an investigation, and questioned by strangers.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Dianna says:

      Or mine?

      My sole communication with the Blob was in response to public threats he made.

      He lies, and lies badly.

      Liked by 5 people

      • JeffM says:

        Now, now Dianna, we ALL know that you shouted obscene insults at Witless Willie from the train.

        Liked by 4 people

      • Jeanette Victoria says:

        The same with me as well then wrote an letter to local law enforcement and lied publicly about a family member of mine talking to him.

        Liked by 3 people

      • paralleldino says:

        I’ll just leave this here:

        “The psychiatrist M. Scott Peck referred to narcissists as ‘People of the Lie,’ a phrase which he used as the title of a book he wrote on the subject of evil. In the book Glimpses of the Devil, he outlined a case of what he believed was actually a case of evil due to demonic possession, which he believed began when as a child, the victim chose to believe a lie, to make herself feel better. The young girl’s father had sexually molested her, but rather than accept that and deal with it, she convinced herself that her father was a medical doctor who examined her, and believing this lie made her feel better about what had happened. In Peck’s mind, once she was willing to believe this lie simply to make herself feel better, she was willing to believe all sorts of lies to feel better, including those of the demons that he believed then seized the opportunity of her weakened mind, and possessed her.” (Chapter 5)


    • There is absolutely NOTHING that can be said in defense of that. And it completely negates all of his “but I was being a journalist” arguments. No professional journalist would do such a thing to one of the spouses of the subject they are writing about. Not a single one.

      He’s a fraud. But we already knew that.

      Liked by 5 people

  4. Just A Thought says:

    If Stranahan was his business because he wrote for a website that wrote stories about Stranahan, the Schmalfeldt *is* DPZM’s business as she’s a writer for a website that writes stories about *him*.

    Liked by 8 people

  5. This Other Latin F*cker says:

    I hear that 3 year old that got a restraining order against Bill has a potty mouth.

    Liked by 5 people

  6. wjjhoge says:

    One of the lies in the Cabin Boy’s™ screed is that he was working as a freelancer for a publication that was writing about Lee Stranahan. That publication was Breitbart Unmasked Bunny Boy Unread, and Schmalfeldt (using his Liberal Grouch pseudonym) was the blog’s editor.

    Liked by 7 people

  7. popcornseller says:

    “If it’s not your business, leave it alone.
    (Now will come the Stranahan trolls…)

    Proving beyond doubt that The BLOB, Bill Schmalfeldt:

    1) is fully aware of his guilt in harassing the Stranahans (and others)
    2) is fully aware of his hypocrisy at the moment he “explains” his actions
    3) is trying desperately to cover up his actions by falsely hiding under the cover of journalism

    It then takes a voyage to “pretendyland” claiming that everyone it doxxed left “profane comments on my website.”

    First, which website? You mean there’s only one? Laughable.
    Second, as JeffM said earlier in this thread here, how does that explain “Vinnie” or the Causey’s? How does that explain Dave Alexander and Dianna and countless others?
    Third, as it likes to say, prove it.

    Ready DF. GO. There’s a good lad.

    Liked by 7 people

    • BusPassOffice says:

      Lynn, Lauren, Dee in Houston, My daughters, Hoge IV, Mrs Hoge, Aarons Wife, Nancy’s daughter, Chris Heather’s young 10 yr old cousin/niece. Chris heather’s mom, Ali Akbars Mom, Patrick Grady’s son, David Edgren’s son, Sarah’s granddaughter, Sarah’s Daughter………

      Liked by 6 people

  8. popcornseller says:

    O/T: David Edgren, please note one reason why our Zombie Mistress writes for and maintains this blog:

    Even if he never gives a reaction, I will continue to highlight his awful behavior to others, his hypocritical lies, and other things that I believe need to be collected for others that will need to understand how to fight back against Bill Schmalfeldt when he turns on them if they do something he doesn’t like. The key to fighting back against a bully is to have the right ammunition. I believe that information and examples are the appropriate ammunition.

    Liked by 5 people

  9. onlooker says:

    Did he substitute tortuous for tortious? I thought he used to collect a salary for knowing what words mean.

    Liked by 4 people

  10. fred.bloggs says:

    Sometimes, when someone has the wrong impression of how the Internet is, but has enough insight, empathy, self-reflection and understanding to be able to treat the Internet as more than a “magical black box” (H/T to Arthur C Clarke?), I use the following summary:

    “The internet has lots of information! Some of it’s even true!”

    Sadly, I meet a lot of people who treat the Internet as a magical black box that is “Ultra-Fast, Easy-to-Navigate, Everything Available For Free Library”, they come to me wanting to get something that’s not available (often related to copyrighted material), and then get irate with me when I start to try to indicate just how complex the underlying reality is (including large actors wanting to deliberately not cooperate in order to carve out Walled Gardens; also, the ability of the Internet to work as an astonishing large amplifier for malicious actors as much as for the Good Guys, so marginal spam/botnet operations can become profitable).

    At yet another level, interacting via plastic/glass/metal interfaces adds an inhuman layer that tends to make it easier for “inhuman” conversation to escalate, as direct non-verbal cues are missing to modulate the situation. This problem applies equally to ALL sides of the electronic interactions.

    A personal opinion: I’d like to see if Bill had the imagination/capacity to split himself into two abstract persons: One who is his own core, has his own values, and was wiling to stand up for his own convictions, and the other being his “journalism” persona, willing to suspend personal judgement, have cautious judgement about others, and be willing to offer “the benefit of the doubt” — which is one portion of empathy — in dealings with others.

    This really would only work if:

    (a) He was willing to let go of trying to rewrite the written portions of the past, especially the court cases (including specifically saying so in writing, and showing, over an extended period, perhaps 3-6 months, that he really meant it). This includes being willing to accept his portion of blame for past actions, up to and including any current and/or future court case(s); and

    (b) Everyone else in the picture was willing to cut him some slack, understanding that no-one is perfect, so would have a temporary ceasefire (guaranteed for one month?) once the written statement came out. Also, have someone designated to perhaps give him “three strikes” warning if he slipped over the line again.

    If the above didn’t work (I really don’t expect either side to agree to what I’ve written above), then
    sadly, the existing situation will probably resume again.


    A side-note on journalism: My personal opinion on Bill’s argument about journalism seems to be “Because I’m a journalist, it’s valid for me to suspend empathy in the interests of objectivity”. If that is his argument, then my feeling is that he’s choosing to make two entities mutually exclusive, that do not need to be so: You can be a good journalist, collect information as you proceed, and be careful to evaluate each piece in an objective fashion, but that you need not exclude empathy when choosing how to proceed in the investigation.


    • I, too, would like to see that happen. However, since Bill cannot separate the two sides (journalist vs. self) as he LOVES the “reporter in the story” style of reporting, it is not possible. Bill would have to re-write himself. It will not happen as he is not capable of that.

      Mind you, many people are not capable of doing that, which is why journalism stinks on ice, especially now-a-days when every time someone disagrees with you it’s because they are a “leftist” or a “RWNJ.” I tire of that sort of idiocy. If I disagree with you, it isn’t necessarily because of your political leanings. It may be because what you are advocating is just damn stupid. Stupid knows no political boundaries. If more people acknowledged that, then maybe, well, I’m not stupid enough to speculate that direction. 😉


  11. Sam says:

    Faced with this, bilwey doubles down on dumb, insisting that “asked for it by being a knob shine AND leaving profane comments” means the same thing as “”asked for it by being a knob shine OR leaving profane comments”.

    What a sad little man.

    Liked by 5 people

  12. JeffM says:

    It’s not exactly news that Witless Willie is touchy. You could do a retrospective of Willie’s top ten over-the-top reactions, one per day. I nominate for inclusion his filings when trying (unsuccessfully of course) to get AW disqualified as your counsel. I found the high point in those was his blubbering that, even though he had asserted that accusing him of dementia was defamatory, he had never imagined the accused might be such a cad as to mention Willie’s own previous admission of dementia. Yet tastes differ, and there are so many incidents to choose from. Some may find Willie’s days of frenzy over the carton from Slovakia or Slovenia to be unsurpassable. Others may remember his volcanic indignation that the picture of his dying wife sent by him to utter strangers was not cherished in strict privacy by the understandably nauseated recipients.

    Liked by 5 people

  13. one handle and stick to it says:

    Asset Watch…

    How much you suppose that chain would fetch at a forced debtor auction?


  14. Pingback: Breaking Stupid | Dave Alexander & Company with Ukuleledave and David Edgren — This is the original Artisan Craft Blog

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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