Aug 14 2012

Rick Green Has Posted My Comment!

Well done, minions, well done!



Link to Rick Green’s post where I commented … stay tuned …


Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    Ophelia Benson


  2. 2
    W. Kevin Vicklund

    For those trying to find it, it has the following timestamp:

    Chris Rodda on August 12th, 2012 12:51 am

  3. 3

    Sure, he posted your comment, but look at how he did it.

    Your comment appear in the middle of the pack, essentially buried unless one is willing to scroll through the comments specifically looking for it. It doesn’t show up at the bottom of the comments where most people will go looking for it, nor does Green even bother to address it. In fact, if you look at his latest comments from that post, all he did was remove all moderation.

    I see no indication anywhere that Green has acknowledged your criticism, as he said he would. Unless people keep pressing him on this, he’s just going to ignore it and claim it never happened.

  4. 4

    Well done Chris!

  5. 5

    I am not seeing the response at the link…do you have the time stamp?

    and the retort for some of the other criticisms is: “that writer is not christian enough to criticize”…nnnniiiicccceeee

  6. 6
    Chris Rodda

    Oh yeah, Recreant, I already figured that was why he removed ALL comment moderation, but all the other comment are demanding that he post MY comment, which sill make people deliberately look for my comment. These people really don’t think things through.

  7. 7
    Chris Rodda

    He hasn’t responded to it, kantalope, he only took it out of endless moderation and posted it.

  8. 8

    Nice work Chris. Hang in there.

  9. 9

    And not to derail or bogart the comments but what is with the Alinsky bit in the new headline? Is Alinsky some kind of dog whistle code word for wingnuts that I don’t know about?

  10. 10

    It just occurred to me that “moderate” is an inappropriate term for what Green was doing. A better term might be.. I’m not sure. Is it possible to turn “fanatical” into a verb? Maybe just settle for “immoderate.”

  11. 11
    Chris Rodda

    Hey, everybody … If you’re a new commenter here and your comment doesn’t get posted right away, be patient. I’m not rejecting your comment. I’m just trying to focus on writing my book about Barton’s book, which is even more important now to get out as quickly as possible, and will only be checking back here every once in a while. I have my settings set so that I have to approve a new commenter’s first comment. After that initial approval people can comment without moderation. I’m not censoring comments like Rick Green, of course; I’m just keeping annoying pingback comments and trolls like mabus from getting through.

  12. 12

    He does say he let through some comments but hasn’t had time to respond yet.

  13. 13
  14. 14
    RW Ahrens

    For those who want to see Chris’ post at Green’s site, it is at:

    August 12th, 2012 12:51 am

  15. 15

    I put this in on Green’s thread that was linked by Ed Brayton, above:

    Most of Chris Rodda’s material comes from simply looking up the footnotes and citations David Barton uses in his books. Somewhere along the line David must have realized the the vast majority (if not all) of his market audience would never look up (and actually read) a reference document, especially if he showed a picture of himself holding said document. I suspect it started off slowly, but eventually he found the power of being able to make up anything he wished, as if truth, to be ultimately, and irresistibly, corrupting.

    The truth always comes out, and now that it has, leading conservatives are distancing themselves from Barton both on the grounds of Barton’s misuse of their trust, and to avoid loss of their own credibility from the blowback.

  16. 16
    Chris Rodda

    He let through ALL of the comments, meaning mine along with all of those demanding he post mine, but said he won’t have time to respond to them all. Translation: He posted my comment but isn’t going to respond to it because he can’t argue with what I said.

  17. 17

    Is Alinsky some kind of dog whistle code word for wingnuts

    Yep. “Community organizer” and all that. Of course, most of the wingnuts are to iggernant to know who he was.

  18. 18

    My lord, I haven’t seen so many “cutesey” illustrations at a website since Geocities, as are on Green’s latest dreck.

  19. 19
    Chris Rodda

    Hell, I had to ask someone who Alinsky was, and I’m supposed to be taking my marching orders from him! Do you really think the wingnuts know anything about him except that Glenn Beck said he was a “scary dude?”

  20. 20

    He has a new blog post up now, of course he’s not actually responding to anything in anyway. Just blah, blah, blah.

  21. 21

    Hell, I had to ask someone who Alinsky was, …

    You must not have been keeping up on your Beckology.

  22. 22

    From an (unfortunate) Beckology expert; according to Beck, Alinsky’s book! “Rules For Radicals”, is ONE of us “godless, Progressive’s, (ie: code name for Commie)”, “Bibles”. And no, I’m not kidding. 2 of our other “Bibles”, are “The Coming Insurrection”, by “The Invisible Committee”, and George Lakoff’s new book, “The Little Blue Book”. Apparently, along with the extinct, (but not REALLY extinct according to Beck), the manifesto’s of The Weather Underground, (NOT the actual weather website ;), and the “Black Panthers”, have ALL become our “marching orders”. As ludicrous and confusing as this sounds-the self-described & appointed Leader of the Tea Party has actually convinced HIS “minions” that we live and die by these publications.
    Just FYI for everyone; to follow up with his, (Beck’s), attempts to head off the “incoming” to his “best friend”, David Barton, (July 25th, Beck’s TheBlaze.com began a series on Barton’s critics, & Barton’s response. I HIGHLY recommend the “video chat” where Barton “took questions from theblaze audience”-for humor’s sake. ;); Beck published yet another piece on Monday, spent half his show today trashing & belittling Barton’s critics, and announcing that on Thursday, (Aug 16), his entire hour of “GBTV” will be with “David, de-bunking the latest Progressive claims”. YES, you DO need a subscription-HOWEVER, they allow you 14 days free before they start charging-so you CAN sign up for this one show.
    Beck DID say that “it may take more than one show because of all David’s original documents”,…and I’m planning on taking notes-if not recording. Although, I’m sure that as usual, Barton will wave his papers in front of the audience, (yes, beck has an audience), once again claiming that “it’s ALL IN HERE, word for word,…and I’d pass these around except that they’re very old,very valuable documents, but trust me, Glenn knows its in here!!”. And the audience ooohss, aaaahhhhs, and gives a rising applause to their “REAL history teacher”.
    May all that is Good in this world, protect our kids & grand kids from this crap….

  23. 23

    Your minions did you proud. The usual mindless christian nation drivel was there but there were a lot of supporting posts, not just asking for your post to be let out of moderation. Many cited other Barton lies. Green clearly turned off all moderation for the post.

  24. 24

    PS. For those that don’t know, Beck said today that his publishing “arm” would take on the publishing of Barton’s book, (which apparently will be a “New Addition” to “clarify” his claims. Should be interesting. ;)

  25. 25

    Rick Green did not post all the comments. Mine is still wasting away in oblivion.

    On August 11, 2012, I posted this comment to Green’s blog:


    Concerning your statement in this article:

    “In the meantime, I’m still waiting for someone to show me a specific inaccuracy or false claim by Barton.”

    Chris Rodda has offered to do just that.

    Ms. Rodda has volunteered to give you specific inaccuracies and false claims. She replied to you in a comment to this very blog post which for some reason, sits in “awaiting moderation” purgatory.

    Ms. Rodda is not one of the “elitist” professors whom you attack ad nauseum in your post. She does not resort to “innuendo” as you accuse so many of whom do not support Mr. Barton’s work.

    Her comment in your queue does not contain foul or anti-religious language so why not publish it?

    The pursuit of truth is a noble necessity for homo sapiens.

    Present the controversy so readers can see and judge both sides. Please allow Chris Rodda’s comment to become visible for all your readers to see. Please respond to Ms. Rodda’s acceptance of your challenge.

    Ms. Rodda is not attempting to make money* from her examinations of David Barton’s works, she only wishes to provide information so your readers may decide for themselves.

    *(Chris Rodda’s book critiquing Mr. Barton’s work is available for free from: liarsforjesus DOT COM /downloads/LFJ_FINAL.pdf
    and the footnotes supporting her work, with links to original material, can be found at: www DOT liarsforjesus DOT COM /footnotes.htm
    so readers can see and decide for themselves the truth of Mr. Barton’s assertions’. )

    [I added an asterisk before the parentheses at the bottom (in this writing) that I had forgot to include in the comment I posted on Green's blog. Within the bottom parentheses I also altered the web site address' to stay out of This Week in Christian Nationalism's "moderation purgatory."]

    I may have been too overt in using some of the same whistle phrases as used by the religious conservatives.

  26. 26

    Wikipedia says that the Tea Party folks use Alinsky’s book to help them organize.

    Is it that Alinsky is vaguely Russian sounding and therefore communist?

    This Rick Green guy, I dunno, is there a better or more common word for antirealitarian?

    “The playing field has been leveled. We are experiencing one of those rare times in history where the rich and powerful do not have the advantage they use to have.” —while I assume he is gonna vote for the dancing horse owning Koch brother’s supported candidate?

    “You can’t just walk into NBC and demand your own show.” —Because that was, I am sure, very common back in the nineteenneverteens.

    Refers to Chris’s “book” in scare quotes…because that is the mature way to promote debate unlike Hitler and Alinsky…I guess.

    “I am gladly recommending to you Ms. Rodda’s book because it is further evidence of EMPTY criticism that reminds me of clouds without rain.” He will not however lower himself to actually point out any specific criticisms or counter facts. Which amounts to offering an EMPTY criticism that reminds me of not even bothering to offer clouds to obfuscate his empty position.

    “The problem with Ms. Rodda’s posts and book is that they come nowhere close to answering my challenge for “specific inaccuracies” or “false claims” in David Barton’s book on Jefferson.” —I don’t think he knows what any of those four words means.

    “Yet she spends page after page giving unrelated information about businessmen and pastors like Manasseh Cutler…” — and then he spends a paragraph talking about baseball? Project much? And “Aaron Morse on August 12th, 2012 5:18 am” shreds this criticism.

    So far Mr Green has yet to impress.

  27. 27

    In case anyone is having trouble finding the specific place where he put the comment, here is the direct link to what Chris wrote.

  28. 28

    I am very happy to hear that Beck is going to keep publishing Barton, i.e. lashing himself to the mast of a sinking ship. Unfortunately, he will probably make money off it because he has millions of sheeple who will shell out for a copy, but making this mess bigger just makes more tar to stick on the whole of the Religious Right.

  29. 29
    Chris Rodda

    kantalope @ 26 … I LOVE the word “antirealitarian.” It’s FREAKIN’ perfect! I don’t care if it isn’t a real word. It just became part of my vocabulary! In fact, I’m gonna start using it right now, and go post it on my Facebook page so that other people start using it, too.

  30. 30

    I believ that “minion” is both the singular and plural form of the word. The Pixar movie is changing that convention though.

  31. 31

    Rick Green appears to be trying to weasel out/move the goalposts on his challenge:

    This is an addition to his “Alinsky and Hitler” article

    *This sentence originally was poorly and hastily worded to say “Yet not a single article can point to a single factual error, quote out of context, or misleading claim” when what I meant was that none of the articles containing the innuendos pointed out any of those specific examples. In other words, I was referring the articles I had just read that caused me to write the post. Of course David has made mistakes, just alike any other prolific writer, and I even referred to that towards the end of this post and David has been very open and up front about the fact that anytime errors are pointed out and proven, we correct them. I also thought I was very clear in asking for proof that David had created a false picture or conclusion, not that he got some date or something wrong.

    This is a post in the comments of the “Ready to Rumble article”

    Rick on August 15th, 2012 6:16 pm

    BJ, I’ll personally admit that the wording of that sentence is in error. I was referring to those articles not pointing to any specifics and not until I read your post just now (I just happen to glance at the email notification I get from WordPress…haven’t had a chance to read but a few of the hundreds of posts the last couple of days) did I realize that taken by itself, that sentence sounds like I’m saying Barton has never made a mistake and He is the first one to say that’s crazy. Of course I didn’t mean that and I apologize. I’ve just corrected the sentence to say what I meant:

    “Yet not a single one of these articles points to a single factual error, quote out of context, or misleading claim.”

    As I say in the correction on the blog, entirely my fault, my mistake, written too hastily!

    So I certainly agree that Barton, myself, and any other writer has factual areas. Barton is very forthcoming about that and we always correct any errors that are pointed out.

    That is totally different from accusations that he makes stuff up or is misleading or lies.

    My response to this:

    ah58 on August 15th, 2012 8:55 pm

    Rick said,

    “So I certainly agree that Barton, myself, and any other writer has factual areas. Barton is very forthcoming about that and we always correct any errors that are pointed out.”

    So can we expect Mr. Barton to address all the errors pointed out to him and correct them in the new printing of his book? This would be the perfect opportunity to do so since he’s getting a new publisher and they will be putting out a new edition.

    Will the new printing, for example, correct his assertion that there are verbatim Bible quotes in the US Constitution? How about the implication that Jefferson tried to import a religious college into the US?

    Should be an interesting answer. I’m pretty sure there will be quite imaginative justifications proffered as to why Barton won’t correct his known “outed” errors.

Leave a Reply