We examine the ups and downs of Kevin Kelley and his attacks on the conservative blogosphere.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
We are terminating our efforts here. From the beginning, this site has been considered by us to be a waste of time except for the continuing slander of a fellow who decided that I and my blog(s) needed to silenced. Apparently, he has moved on with his work and left me behind, just as I prefer.
The silliness of the fight is over. What he never knew is this: the blog was never given an HTML code and really did not get out on the web to any serious degree.
In due time, this site will be deleted. Just want to be certain that the fight is over.
Conservative activist John Smithson, who doubles as a right-wing blogger and pretend Christian, has decided to step up his attacks against the character of this website (mainly myself) by creating a website specifically targeting myself.
Response: anyone see a problem with Kelley's whining about my so-called character assassination and his use of the phrase "pretend Christian?" I have made it painfully clear to anyone who can actually read with comprehension that this sight is here to defend myself from his continual attacks. Understand that weeks ago, he left off printing my complaints making this site necessary. - jds
Smithson's website, titled "Midnight Review - Exposed," basically copies articles from this website and attaches lies to them to try and convince the reader that I am a fraud, but the funny thing is that Smithson doesn't even try to hide his idiocy. He claims that he had created the website as a way to offer a rebuttal to my articles regarding him because I refuse to post his comments - a claim that is ridiculous because I have posted numerous comments from Smithson in the past.
Again, the last 8 to 10 rebuttals sent to his site remained unprinted, thus the reason for this blog. - jds
I have recently enforced comment moderation and the reason why Smithson's comments have not appeared on this site is because he has violated the terms of use numerous times, including in his comments plenty of insults against this website (which he has now decided to post on his own blog). Those insults (to date) include insults against this author's employment status, insults against this author's education, insults calling this author a pervert or sex offender, insults calling this author a drunk, and veiled threats that he will find out where this author lives. If Smithson were to actually post a comment without an insult (and that includes baseless attacks), this blog would post it
It is easy to make up stuff especially when you disallow rebuttal. Let this genius come to this site. We have no rules of exclusion in our comment section except for advertising types. Does Kevin come to this site and take me on? Tell us Kevin, about your work habits.You post throughout the work day and your profile tells us you had to quit school after losing your job. No mention of going back to work. So, again I ask, "Still living off your wife?" Straighten us out on your educational record; we mention your AA degree. Did we miss something?? What are you doing cruising Craig's List - looking for theological/political material as per one of your posts? No slander, just questions - jds
Lets take a look at a couple of Smithson's posts where Smithson takes lying to an all new level:
In the image above, Smithson writes that I created a video that shows me supporting Florida Governor Charlie Crist and that I pretend to be interviewed. Smithson is referring to this video produced by the Charlie Crist campaign: Funny but Kevin presents the video and states "not my best interview." Clearly, he takes credit for what he now claims was none of his creation. The original post is on this site. -- jds
Maybe Smithson didn't notice that at the end of the video it displayed the legally required "paid for" message, or that the video was posted on Charlie Crist's YouTube channel. Does Smithson seriously believe that I organized an event at the local plumbers and pipe fitters union to fake a video showing my support for the governor? Can Smithson explain the existence of the governor at the event? My photographs of those in attendance, including my picture with the governor?
Smithson's claim is ridiculous. I also wanted to point out one other thing about his post - the title. Smithson wrote that I pretended to "interfiew" those at the Crist event. This spelling error is quite funny, but also something Smithson does quite frequently, and hypocritically at that - Smithson recently posted an article attacking a grammatical error in one of my headlines (Smithson must have grabbed a screen shot before I corrected it) Moments before he chides me for a typo, he goes "off the plantation" grammatically. One thing Kelley does as a matter of course, is to confuse verb tenses. No big deal, but he was the first to offer up this type of criticism. Look at the paragraph above. "I also wanted to ....." should read "I, also, want to point out . . . " - jds
Unlike Smithson, I correct any errors in my posts. The original title of the article above was "Sarah Palin Violated The Constitution Of Alaska." I added the "Did" in the beginning and forgot to change the "Violated" but after proofreading my post after I published it I fixed the headline. It's been almost two weeks since Smithson's "interfiew" gaffe and still no correction. Kevin misses the point. His socalled "misspelling" example is really an Old English version of the word. - jds
I also wanted to point out that Smithson wrote that I claimed to live in New York, but anyone with half a brain would see that on the "About Us" page I state that I am "originally" from Brooklyn and that I was attending school in Florida. Does that sound like a claim that I currently live in New York?
Kelley writes in the above - "I also wanted to point out that . . . " Again, this should read "I, also, want to point out . . . "
I have your script telling me you live in New York. But of course, you will now deny that post. Whatever. One thing I want to clear up is Kelley's claim that I have threatened him, physically. Another lie. I have stated that I might take a trip to Orland and talk to him, face to face, something, of course, he would never agree to do. Maybe he should post my actual comment but if he did, it would contradict his claim so he TELLS the fools what I said rather than publishing my words. Nevertheless, could he and his wife misconstrue my comment? Certainly and so I restate my comment. No physical threat was intended. I meant exactly what I originally wrote, confirmed in this post - jds.
In addition, I wanted to shed some light on this other blog post by John Smithson that supposedly exposes myself - a post alleges that I had published a political blog from 2002 to 2004. That is a lie.
The website Smithson is referring to is a blog by a man by the name of Kevin Kelley. Smithson believes this is me, but if you look at what Smithson wrote, you would realize that he does not understand what he is writing about. For instance, he wrote that this "Kevin" person "quit the blog sometime before his 15th birthday." I have written numerous times that I had voted for President Bush both times, as well as other politicians, such as Jeb Bush (both times) and Ric Keller (all four times).
How would I have voted for these people if I supposedly quit this other blog when I was 14 years old in 2004 when these politicians were elected to their first terms prior to that year?
The answer is that I was not a 14-year old boy in 2004 who operated a political-themed blog.
I think these two examples highlight perfectly the attention to detail Smithson lacks. He maliciously posts false information on the internet to intentionally defame myself - he even states that is his intent in his original mission statement:
Just trying to draw out more information about you, who you claim to be and what you think. It worked as of this Kevin Kelley post. I don't know if you are pretending not to be the author of the mention blog, but , of course, you are. I got the link FROM YOUR SITE. -- jds
If you read the screen shot above (click to enlarge) you will see where Smithson wrote that his blog "is dedicated to the trivial pursuit of exposing this charlatan." That "charlatan" is me, although there seems to be very little exposing going on on Smithson's new site. He continues with his lie that I plagiarized the name of his website and copy the content on his website. After reading the two examples I had given above exposing John Smithson, anyone can plainly see just who is telling the truth...
What's odd is that Smithson's whole problem with you could easily be solved by him just acting with any kind of decency.
This back and forth started with his coming here out of nowhere and throwing accusations around. Then when you tried to have open discussion he either ignores it, or twists your words around.
C, give us examples of Kelley seeking "open discussion." You are smarter than this. Maybe you don't know but I have repeatedly offered Kelley response opportunity on my political blog. We can set up a page dedicated to this purpose. I have kept a 10th page reserved for this very thing. Bring it on, I say.You see, when it comes down to ending the BS of this back and forth, Kelley is the one who refuses. The same invitation is offered to you, C. If you want to debate the issues, great. No rules except the use of "teabagger" and the "f" word. Anytime. This whole thing ends when he stops posting slander on his site. It has been two weeks since he wrote anything about me, this particular post being that last post. If he is done, so am I. But if he is going to continue to try to shut down my blog ( a truly BS thing to do - its what women do ) no deal. I have not tried to take his blog down. Maybe that's the way you libs fight. That crap doesn't work with me. And the blasphemy of my head on Christ's body has to come down - both and all incidences. This blog stays up as long as his posts show up in the web, but I will stop posting, here. What you do not know, Craig, is that I have not entered any codes into my HTML code for this blog nor do I post key words. That is the only reason this blog is not everywhere on the web. Consider THAT as a sign of compromise on my part. Understand that if Kelley wants to continue the fight, I know how to play the game better than he thinks or imagines. Understand that I am as serious as a heart attack. Tell you comrade to knock it off and take down the Christ pics and it is over. --- jds
You then focus more on his blog, discover some hypocrisies with his accusations and point them out. He then reverts to personal attacks and abusive language. When you start moderation to avoid having to weed out his blatant disregard for common courtesy he opens up his "libel/slander blog" about you.
If Smithson really was honest about wanting to settle things with you all he needed to do was ask nicely for you take down any copyrighted material if you had any, stop his accusations which have been proven incorrect and not include personal attacks with his comments.
Basically, if he acted as if he was conversing with you in real life on the street or in a cafe rather than as an "anonymous" online persona.
I have no patience, C, for moronic discourse and slander. I have documented his slander. His use of the picture of Christ on the cross, his cut and paste of my face onto that picture is what seriously set me off. He crossed the line on that one. He no longer deserves any of my consideration. He is a godless jerk for doing such a thing and I have no intention of walking away from this guy. I have downloaded BOTH articles with that godless picture in it - a blatant copyright infringement and a slander against God. You want to know what got him under my skin? It was that crap. --- jds.
Most likely, his John Smithson online presence is an act to drive traffic to his site and get attention, in which case it's probably working as he benefits from your higher traffic
Understand, C, that the only numbers you have on Kelley's site are HIS numbers. There is a reason why he does not carry any stat counters on his site. anytime Kelley wants to challenge my numbers, and he does so with regularity, he can put up some money and I will cram them down his proverbials. I carry four stat meters on my site. I get no traffic from Kelley. I know where all of my traffic comes from. Nothing from Kelley's site.
Sep 17, 2010 ... Smithson's website, titled "Midnight Review - Exposed," basically copies articles from this website and attaches lies to them to try and ...
Editor's notes: of course Kevin Kelley is the source for this little jewel. He cites "lies" but cannot come up with a single one.
Understand that the reason for this ridiculous blog is the fact that Kelley will not print my responses to HIS lies. So, I make my case here. Will he challenge me, here? Will he debate the issues presented?
He is a Conway Road bum who does not work for a living, pretends to be college educated (he does have a general ed two year AA degree) and is willing to lie about most things that come to mind.
He has almost no traffic on his blog - taking more than a year and a half to build up 400 hits on his profile. In contrast, most blogs (mine included) record around 1600 profile hits in the same period of time. He pretends to out "hit" my blog, the real Midknight Review, but does not carry an exposed state counter anywhere on his blog. The only public counter is his profile counter and shows a monthly "hit" average of around 30. Pathetic AND HE KNOWS IT. Several of his readers have come over to Midknight Review and return via his blog site. Interesting.
Our comments line is an open forum. . . . . . you can write whatever -- except advertising. Bring it on Kevin.
Another well worded headline by the AA Degreed, Kevin Kelley. Anyone and everyone makes mistakes such as this but Kelley uses such to ridicule those whom he dislikes. We thought we would return the favor.
I have challenged Kevin Kelley on his charge that my claim to be a licensed contractor is false, calling me an unlicensed contractor. In fact, I was a General Engineering Contractor and, again, a General Building Contractor in the State of California. I retired a couple of years ago.
I challenged Kelley to a $1,000 bet. He refused then charged me with being a hypocrite - of being a fundamentalist Christian who "gambles."
Moronic. This coming from a young punk who accused me of falsifying my profile. Rather than saying, "sorry" or taking back his baseless charge, he tried to turn the tables.
This is a man who does not work, sits around his big lot corner home, in Orlando, and does what home alone men do who visit Craigs List. We know he does this because he took one of his story lines - in total - from this list.
In a recent blog post by right-winger Christian blogger John Smithson, he pointed to an arrticle discussing the president's 2009 speech in Cairo, stating that Obama's speech used Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf as inspiration, and because of this Obama is a Muslim?
Of course Smithson never says Obama is a Muslim, but look at his headline: "Obama used Muslim notes to prepare Cairo speech - but of course he is not a Muslim."
And then there is this line Smithson wrote:
Is Obama a Muslim? Probably not BUT he sure as blazes acts like one more often that he should. One thing for certain -- it is perfectly understandable as to why 24% of this country thinks he is Muslim (NY Times poll).
Looks like Smithson is attempting to plant some seeds of doubt.
You know what? I wrote an article in college about Egypt - does that make me Egyptian?
Editor's note: what on earth is Ms Kelley talking about here. I wrote about Obama and I am a Muslim? I wrote about Obama and I am . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Obama. Moron.
Probably not...
In regards to Obama's Cairo speech, what did Smithson expect him to talk about? Did he expect Obama's speech writers to just let the president wing it on such a sensitive issue?
Editor's note: the reader is advised to actually visit my blog, Midknight Review, and see what I wrote. It is for certain that Kelley has no clue.
If you haven't noticed, a frequent topic on this [Kevin Kelley's ] blog is John Smithson, a conservative Christian blogger who had made numerous baseless claims (as well as a meaningless "cease and desist") against this website. One particular subject matter is copyright infringement, mainly because Smithson had claimed that this website plagiarized the name of his similarly named website.
While Smithson's claims have been thoroughly debunked, it has come to the attention of this blog just why Smithson believes he is allowed to copy other people's works while attacking others - his son is a singing wrestling champion!
Editor's notes: Kelley took my blog name, Midknight Review, dropped the "k" and began writing political commentary. That is what we know. My blog was here first. If he was making any serious money, we would go after him. But we know that he lives off his wife's income and is worth next to nothing. Besides he is not worth the time to pursue. We do what we do here, just to get a little bit of defense out there to counter what Kelley writes onto the web. We have actually challenged him on two issues - offering to put up a $1,000 on each claim. If he were telling the truth, he would have tried to take the two "bets."
In a response to a thread on a religious message board Smithson frequents, someone posted a question regarding copyrighted material and if it was okay to post them online - here was Smithson's response:
And I think that you can duplicate what is written if you do not profit from it and/or it is not duplicated as a course of business (as a church does with their singing or a buisness does with the birthday song -- have you noticed that no business actually sings "Happy birthday to you .." It is because of the stinking law.) What G does is not in view. My Son is a worhsip leader and has his own band --------------- I will ask him. He will know because he is a State and Valley wrestling champion who sings.
I must have missed the part on the bar exam where they discuss musical scales and submission holds.
Smithson later commented on the thread that since no music or videos were posted, then they were okay, so by that logic it is safe to say that all printed material is free for the taking.
And Egon said "Print is dead..."
Editor's notes: this is one of the most disjointed posts Kevin Kelley has written about me. After reading or rereading his post, ask yourself this: exactly what is Kelley's official compliant? Understand that this jerk has taken time to search out my name on any number of conversation sites. While that is perfectly legal, these sites deal with subject matter that is a little above his pay grade.
The following is a Kevin Kelley post on his blog, Midnight Review. He steals the painting of another, without permission, of course, and blasphemes Christ as he puts my face on Christ's body. He is a non-practicing Catholic that needs a little Fatherly advice from one of his pastors.
John Smithson is a ex-contractor and fundamentalist preacher who also fashions himself as a conservative blogger, but recently he did something very interesting that raised the eyebrow of this author - he wanted to make a wager of $1,000 to compare the site traffic of both this site and his.
The wager was not about comparing site traffic, his site compared to mine. He called me a liar when I cited my traffic, as I addressed a post to my readers. The numbers I used came from my site meter. I challenged him with a $1,000 wager. I would have given a non-partisan observer copies of my site information proving the truth of my claims. Instead of taking the bet, he now has made up a whole new charge. When I challenged him to put up or shut up, he knew the jig was up on THAT lie and is now trying to save face. Moron !!
What made this request very interesting is that Smithson claims to be a fundamentalist evangelical Christian - in the Stone-Campbell tradition - yet here he was wanting to gamble, which is considered by Campbellites to be a moral wrong, and this isn't the first time Smithson had made a bet to boost his ego. It appears Smithson is defying the neo-puritanical foundations of his faith, but then as we had reported in the past, Smithson isn't really that religious - sure he claims to be a man of God, but in the past he had called fundamentalism "political and sectarian," and since Smithson describes himself as a fundamentalist, that would make Smithson "political and sectarian."
More silliness. For starters, apparently he does not know that I have not been a "Campbellite" for more than 30 years. Secondly, I have never thought gambling was wrong except when you sell house and all to finance a gambling addiction. Finally, he has no clue as to the tenets of the Stone-Campbell tradition. He blasphemes Christ so what do any of us care about what he says next, about anyone's faith ??
While we are discussing the hypocrisy of religious zealotry, I wanted to also mention that Smithson had called the above image "blasphemous." I had found that interesting because a while back Smithson had cut-and-paste from another website a list of things that offend Muslims, with depictions of Mohammed being one of them. It would seem that Smithson is offended by what he perceives to be Jesus on the cross, so it is easy to come to the conclusion that Smithson shares something with Sharia law.
Did it ever occur to Smithson that the Romans crucified many other people then Jesus? Maybe the image was a reference to the Japanese practice of crucifixion... So why don't we ask the fellow whose picture he stole and abused without permission?
I am also reminded of Smithson's assertion that Dietrich Bonhoeffer is one of his personal heros. Bonhoeffer was inspired by the liberation theology he observed in Harlem, New York - a belief Smithson had constantly attacked the president for allegedly adhering to. Of course Smithson believed Bonhoeffer was not a liberation theist because "black liberation theology" was not named until later. This is a silly argument - just because something wasn't officially titled means it did not exist? I guess Christianity didn't exist until people started calling themselves Christians. . . .
Obama is a Black Liberationist. He was indoctrinated for 20 years in this thinking. Black Liberation theology came into existence in the 1960's and touts a black Christ, a theology that benefits black and not whites and is full of redistributive tripe -- all from the white man to the black man. Bonhoeffer was a German Reformed theologian mentored by Karl Barth -- a man I have spent nearly 7 years studying. Did Bonhoeffer attend a black church, on occasion? Probably. Did that make him a black liberation theologian in spite of the fact that no such theology existed in his day? Absolutely not. In fact, Kevin Kelley would be laughed out of town by another number of hundreds of theologians and pastors, including Catholic pastors, for making this claim. He will find absolutely no one who makes such an argument. Moron.
Basically, Smithson has exhibited a complete disregard for his faith when it inconveniences his narrative. Don't like what someone is saying? Attack their character and make baseless accusations. Don't like what you see? Return to faith and attack the religiousness of it. Don't like the facts? Just ignore them and create a new set of facts. The hypocrisy is amazing...
This could have been an autobiographical sketch !!
Note that Kelley will not post my responses to his lies. Again, that is why we have this ridiculous blog.
The blog was all about Kelley. He hints that folks think he is sometimes "too deep" in his writing. Deep would not be our world , but whatever. His claim to fame didn't last long and he quit the blog sometime before his 15th birthday.
It is a goal of The Midnight Review to offer a wide range of beliefs and opinions, and so we are proud to offer the opportunity to the online community to contribute to The Midnight Review, not just by adding comments either, but by actually granting permission to The Midnight Review to publish an article of their own.
By doing so, any person has the opportunity to become a "Featured Author" of The Midnight Review.
This page will serve as a home for featured author profiles.
As expected, The Midnight Review would trust anyone who becomes a featured author to exercise a level of respect in their work, avoiding libelous accusations, insults, or plagarism. The Midnight Review also guarantees the intellectual ownership of articles supplied to this site, and such articles will remain the property of their creators.
Here is Kevin Kelley. See if you can find him in the video, pretending to a support of Crist, just standing around in the crowd.
In this interview, made by Kelley, himself, he pretends to be another voice in the crowd supporting Crist while making the video !! Also, we learn that he really lives in Florida, despite the claim that he lives in New York.
Here is a video from Charlie Crist's Campaign event in Orlando at the Plumbers and Pipefitters union hall. I am about halfway through - not by best interview but not terrible:
Here is a summary of some of the issues of the campaign and where Crist stands:
Dedicated to the environment, Crist aims to restore the Everglades and conserve Florida's natural resources. Unlike the new conservatives who hate Republican president Teddy Roosevelt for being a "progressive," Crist mentions him on his campaign website.
Crist supports strengthening the education system, as opposed to other candidates who wish to eliminate the Department of Education, as well as all other government oversight - presumably so they can start teaching Christianity in the classroom.
As governor, Crist oversaw billions in state spending and the reduction in property taxes, saving taxpayers money.
Unlike other right-wing candidates, Crist has fought for senior citizens - seniors make up 17% of Florida's population. Crist has worked hard to make prescription drugs more affordable, created and protected programs ensuring the safety and care of Florida's seniors, and has vowed to preserve Social Security.
While he supports repeal of the health care reform bill (which I oppose), he differs from other conservative candidates in that before it ever comes to a vote, Crist wants a replacement ready to take it's place. He has also stated that not all of the health care is bad and would like to keep parts of the bill that are good (right-wing candidates believe the entire bill is bad).
As governor, Crist vetoed a controversial abortion bill that forced women to pay of an ultrasound and hear the doctor describe the fetus - victims of rape or incest would have to prove their victim status in order to become exempt from the law. Designed to try and shame women into choosing not to go with abortion, the bill was an attempt by state conservatives to impose their moral beliefs on the individual, placing government in between the doctor and the patient. I believe Crist had made the right decision in vetoing this bill.
10 - You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.
9 - You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.
8 - You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem believing in a Triune God.
7 - Your face turns purple when you hear of the "atrocities" attributed to Allah, but you don't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" including women, children, and trees!
6 - You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky. My Personal Favorite!
5 - You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.
4 - You believe that the entire population of this planet with the exception of those who share your beliefs -- though excluding those in all rival sects - will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering. And yet consider your religion the most "tolerant" and "loving."
3 - While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking in "tongues" may be all the evidence you need to "prove" Christianity.
2 - You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.
1 - You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do about the Bible, Christianity, and church history - but still call yourself a Christian.
Understand that Kelley has accused this editor dozens of times for not following accepted rules of copyright law. Here, Kelley quotes without mentioning the author of the article. In fact, if one does not click on the hyperlink, one might assume that Kelley actually wrote the article.
Saturday (isn't honesty one of those principles or virtues Beck talked about). Beck also invoked Washington while describing the inspiring experience of visiting famous tourist destinations around the nation's capital. "I have been going to Mt. Vernon," he explained. Holding out his hands for emphasis, he declared with emotion, "I went to the National Archives, and I held the first inaugural address written in his own hand by George Washington."
It was an eyebrow-raising revelation and certainly an original image: Beck cradling the actual words of the first president. But would the persnickety gatekeepers of the nation's historical legacy at the National Archives allow some talk show bombthrower to put his mitts on a rare (and fragile) artifact? The answer, it turns out, is no way. Beck was not telling the truth.
Beck did receive a special VIP tour of the archives, arranged by an as-yet unidentified member of Congress. During that tour, he did get a peek inside the "legislative vault," which isn't open to ordinary visitors. But Archives spokeswoman Susan Cooper insists that Beck didn't lay a finger on any precious documents, much less George Washington’s inaugural address. That would be a major violation of policy. "Those kinds of treasures are only handled by specially trained archival staff," she explains. Cooper acknowledges that someone at the archives did show the document to Beck, but that was the extent of it. Regarding Beck's claim that he held the document, Cooper says that seeing such documents for the first time can be a very emotional experience. "I'm certain it was a figure of speech," she says.
How can we trust a man who has continually lied to his audience?
