I'm from Missouri

This site is named for the famous statement of US Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver from Missouri : "I`m from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." This site is dedicated to skepticism of official dogma in all subjects. Just-so stories are not accepted here. This is a site where controversial subjects such as evolution theory and the Holocaust may be freely debated.

Name:
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States

My biggest motivation for creating my own blogs was to avoid the arbitrary censorship practiced by other blogs and various other Internet forums. Censorship will be avoided in my blogs -- there will be no deletion of comments, no closing of comment threads, no holding up of comments for moderation, and no commenter registration hassles. Comments containing nothing but insults and/or ad hominem attacks are discouraged. My non-response to a particular comment should not be interpreted as agreement, approval, or inability to answer.

Wednesday, May 07, 2008

Fatheaded Ed is a certified megalomaniac

A new post by BVD-clad blogger Fatheaded Ed Brayton says in its entirety,

It looks as though my battle against the Bush administration over their denial of my FOIA request is going to go to federal court. Public Citizen has offered to represent me and the attorney I've been working with has concluded that we've got a case. She's drafting a complaint and we should be filing in federal court in Grand Rapids soon. Stay tuned.

A commenter asked what the FOIA request was about and another commenter named "Abby" responded by linking to Ed's previous articles about the subject. Ed then wrote,
.
Sorry, I just assumed -- wrongly, obviously -- that all my readers would recall the situation. Not a smart assumption unless I want to never have new readers, eh? Abby is correct, it's a battle over a settlement the administration signed with the EU, Canada and Japan over a WTO dispute regarding our online gambling laws.

You assumed that all of your readers would recall the situation? Your most recent previous article about the situation is dated March 13. Ed, you could have informed readers about the purpose of the FOIA request without even going to the trouble of writing text -- all you needed to do was just link to your previous articles.

In another recent incident, Ed was very indignant about some commenters having the temerity to ask him for his source of information.

Fatheaded Ed should be institutionalized as a board-certified megalomaniac. He thinks that the whole world trusts him completely and hangs on his every word.

A Merriam-Webster online dictionary definition of "megalomaniac":
2 : a delusional mental disorder that is marked by infantile feelings of personal omnipotence and grandeur

.

Labels:

6 Comments:

Anonymous Voice in the Urbanness said...

2 : a delusional mental disorder that is marked by infantile feelings of personal omnipotence and grandeur - Merriam Webster Dictionary

"I am an unrecognized legal genius." - Larry Fafarman

Wednesday, May 07, 2008 4:42:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

< board-certified megalomaniac >

Which board is it that does this?

Wednesday, May 07, 2008 7:33:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Voice in the Urbanness driveled,

>>>>>2 : a delusional mental disorder that is marked by infantile feelings of personal omnipotence and grandeur - Merriam Webster Dictionary

"I am an unrecognized legal genius." - Larry Fafarman <<<<<<<

You stupid fathead, my statement was just a retort aimed at the stupid trolls like yourself who say that I don't know anything about the law. But Fatheaded Ed actually believes the things he's said about himself.

As for my brilliant coup in my smog impact fee case (that California had lost federal-court tax-suit immunity by "leaving the sphere that was exclusively its own" (Parden v. Terminal Railway) by basing the fee entirely on federal law and regulations), I really can't claim full credit for that -- I just happened to stumble upon the precedent while browsing through Supreme Court cases at my local library. As I said, the state's attorneys did not even attempt to rebut the argument. There was NO oral hearing, NO written opinion, and no evidence that the judge ever read the briefs. The attorneys who defeated the fee in state court were first kicked out of federal court and they entirely missed making my argument. My argument was later supported by expert testimony in state court saying that the fee required the approval of the US Environmental Protection Agency. I don't know how many times I have to repeat this story before you lousy trolls get it through your thick skulls.

Anonymous said...
>>>>>< board-certified megalomaniac >

Which board is it that does this? <<<<<<

Whatever board commits people to mental institutions.

Wednesday, May 07, 2008 8:17:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Which board is it that does this? <<<<<<

Whatever board commits people to mental institutions.

If your statement is true, then Ed would be in an institution. Ed is not in a mental institution, therefore your statement is false.

Larry loses, again. This is getting boring.

Wednesday, May 07, 2008 8:41:00 PM  
Blogger anton said...

Newwebcasino.com - river belle online casino

Monday, May 19, 2008 7:03:00 PM  
Anonymous Joey said...

I don't see you arguing against his point just his character. Which is something defense attorneys do in my experience when the defendant is guilty and the facts aren't on his side.

Friday, June 27, 2008 9:31:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home