Patrick McClarty, The Foolish Liar

“This is the same guy who once said Ireland should join the Commonwealth and he endorses Reverand Paisley.”

~ Patrick McClarty, Foolish Liar

My response:

“You’re a Foolish liar. Not only that, you misrepresent what I wrote.I have not “endorsed” Ian Paisley; I have however provided other information about him. I have also corrected false information that you published about him.”

Nothing like an Insane Thinker lying about someone’s position because someone produces other facts and corrects a falsely attributed quote, huh?

Update: Regarding the assertion that I said “Ireland should join the Commonwealth”:

This is an outright false misrepresentation of anything I have ever written about “The Troubles” in Northern Ireland, or anything I have ever believed.

Unfortunately at this time, I am unable to locate the what I wrote, and the context. However, anyone that knows me, and who has shared discussion with me regarding Ireland will know that I have never ever made any blanket statement that includes, “Ireland should join the Commonwealth.”

In fact, I have mused in the past about possible “Political” solutions to The Troubles might be, and included the idea that perhaps the population of Northern Ireland would consider a “unification” of the North with the Republic, if the Republic agreed to join the Commonwealth.

I also specifically recall also writing at the same time something to the effect that political solutions won’t be good enough; no peace can ever be fully realized until individuals start declaring their own independence from political and religious goals, and remove themselves from their tribalism.

For Patrick “Liar” McClarty to assert what he has about me is an utter and absolute despicable falsehood.

Second Update: McClarty Responds:

” Fine, “defends”–it’s changed. How about that? Fine lines and all…

And bravo for providing “correct” information on him. I’m sure you have his life details etched into memory.”

Defends? Well, once again, I imagine if correcting the record is “defending,” then I’ll be a defender of the factual and correct record. Anyone else have a problem with that? Seems that there is a lot of this type of nonsense going on right now, with folks not liking having correct records published because it affects their dearly held beliefs. So instead, we’ll malign the “record corrector.”

Still makes McClarty a Foolish Liar.

His Foolish sarcasm about Paisley’s “life details” should be quite obvious that indeed, he is a Fool.

8 thoughts on “Patrick McClarty, The Foolish Liar”

  1. Ian, check out my latest post on ” Political Pornographers, Exhibitionists And Provacateurs” — It touches upon this very issue. These people do not care that they are peddling lies. It does not matter. What matters is that they get a reaction – because reactions generate contreversy, contreversy generates hits, which in turn generates links which in turn generates over-all “blogging power”.

    Note that she-who-shall-not-be-named here, has blogged now for like the 10th time about Charles… my husband, claiming that he was a $10.00 an hour investment banker. Now, for anybody who bothers do to do the actual research, they will note that he only took that $10.00 an hour (which was more like $14.00 an hour Canadian) for a brief period of time, and it was on the understanding that it was to provide for his expenses while he was going to underwrite an IPO for the company in question which had the potential to generate over A couple hundred thousand dollars in profits for himself and the broker-dealer he was a 1/3 owner of.

    See – this is the trick of the agit-prop artist. Insert a tiny bit of fact, leave out the context and smear away, hoping that nobody will bother to research the truth and point out the “hanging in-mid-air-lie” unspoken but implied by the smear.

    Also note, that when unable to make their lies about *me* stick, in their attempts to get the prog-blogs dump me from the blogroll, they are reduced to telling such falsehoods about my husband… yet again.

    You are quite correct in how you are handling all this. Point out that this is nothing but fantasy/projection and lies on the part of the person spreading the lies. It won’t stop the lies – but if I had to run around trying counter all the lies told about me by some of the right-wingers, I’d have no time for a life, doing fun things with my family and friends.

  2. Thanks.

    This is not the first time Patrick “The Liar” McClarty has misrepresented what I have written or attributed words to me that were falsely attributed.

  3. just delink me from your blogroll. i’ve already done the same.

    here are your own words. wear them with pride:
    —————————————————————————
    If the South could compromise, and agree to be within the “commonwealth,” I bet you’d find a lot of folks in the North more open to the idea.

    My own sense says that might be the only hope in the long run.
    —————————————————————————–
    ok, so you’re saying the only hope for the troubles is for ireland to join the commonweatlh. That’s what you wrote. I’ll assume that you “want” the troubles to end, so you would wish for the republic to join the commonwealth.

    whether it is the republic post or pre unification is not important. the point is if you really thought states were useless you’d say “fuck it! the irish state should dissolve. ” but you don’t. libertarianism is a casual shirt you pull out and wear when it suits you. Seriously, when you have a july 12 posting ranting about catholics for the nth time, you should really drop the pretense of calling yourself “libertarian”. when you’ve beaten sleeping people for living, you don’t have the credibility to call the violence of Israel “evil”.

    Also, whether your A.D.D. afflicted mind can stomach it or has just repressed it, your constant defense of paisley and your BS stories about how some fictitious catholic woman voted for him as some kind of shield is about as plain a defense/endorsement as you will find. You’ve defended him on numerous occassions and even voiced very positive opinions about him.:
    —————————————————————————
    Rathlin Island is 100% Catholic, and is Paisley’s riding. In all of the recent elections, he has received almost, and one time completely, 100% of the ballots cast.

    Why? Because Paisley has taken a real interest in these people, and fought for things for them. If you base a man on his actions, and not just his words, then one must agree it’s hard to see how he thinks all Catholics are garbage.

    He’s even met with Republic Islanders, who by virtue of their demographics, were Catholics, to give them advice and assistance politically, in dealing with their issues with the Republic of Ireland.
    —————————————————————————————
    if i choose to characterize that as “endorsing” go ahead and get your panties in a bunch, because that’s a fucking judgment call. it’s subjective. It’s called an “opinion”.

    PS: just for extra fun, trying using your typical “red herring”, “false analogy” or classic “false sarcasm” to end an argument. Those win extra points for convincing the other side in one of your “debates”.

  4. I doubt the commonwealth would persuade many unionists to join the south. What does that get them – it doesn’t even mandate the queen as head of state (south africa for instance).

    that said, the spike in racist attacks in the north combined with the large immigration to the south are among the many reasons we want them less and less anyway.

  5. Mark, your comment might be interesting in a discussion about “political solutions,” however the point of this post was to show that McClarty lied and utterly misrepresented what I ever wrote or said.

    What I wrote about Ireland joining the Commonwealth was never written in the sense that “Ireland should” join the Commonwealth.

    Regarding immigration – yes, wonderful that finally, the Republic has been able to turn around it’s awful economic situation after all these years, and is now in a position to attract foreign investment and enjoy increased standard of living. That certainly was not a fact during the height of “The Troubles.”

    I myself can claim “Irish” Citizenship should I ever wanted to.

    My original comments were in response to Canadians who were going on about the whole thing, and talking about a re-United Ireland – I pointed out that I personally had no care at all about the matter; that indeed if a United Ireland fully provided for the liberty and inherent rights of all that reside there, it mght be a great thing.

    However, I contested that Ireland was ever “united” AND independent in a political sense and challenged these statements about a re-united Ireland to point out ANY point in history for any extended time where Ireland was ever “united” politically.

  6. “ok, so you’re saying the only hope for the troubles is for ireland to join the commonweatlh. That’s what you wrote. I’ll assume that you “want” the troubles to end, so you would wish for the republic to join the commonwealth.”

    Go ahead and make your silly assumptions instead of just reading what I wrote, Liar.

    The way your mind uses logic is astounding.

    “libertarianism is a casual shirt you pull out and wear when it suits you. Seriously, when you have a july 12 posting ranting about catholics for the nth time, you should really drop the pretense of calling yourself “libertarian”. when you’ve beaten sleeping people for living, you don’t have the credibility to call the violence of Israel “evil”.”

    It is no casual shirt at all. My July 12th post was not a rant whatsoever. Again, you lie.

    Your assertion that I’ve “beaten people” is again a lie. I have sent you the original post in the past for your own perusal. You are again, a Liar.

    Your characterization of “endorse” or “defend” is utterly stupid. You wrote some assertions that were false. I helped you correct them, and provided you with new knowledge that you did not have previously.

    I neither endorse nor support or “defend” Chretien, generally speaking, but if someone is going to make generalizations about his record, and there are instances of where this generalization is incorrect, I will correct it, if I can.

    Does that make me a “defender” or “endorser” of Chretien?

    You have a mystical, religious way of thinking about facts, Patrick “The Liar” McClarty.

  7. “just delink me from your blogroll. i’ve already done the same.”

    Naw, I kind of like the ‘Patrick “The Liar” McClarty’ link there.

  8. “Also, whether your A.D.D. afflicted mind can stomach it or has just repressed it, your constant defense of paisley and your BS stories about how some fictitious catholic woman voted for him as some kind of shield is about as plain a defense/endorsement as you will find. You’ve defended him on numerous occassions and even voiced very positive opinions about him.:”

    A.D.D. afflicted mind… is this an attempt at smearing me, or those afflicted with ADD?

    My “BS stories about….”

    It was ONE story, not “stories,” McClarty. Get your fucking assertions straight, will you?

    Do you have an iota of evidence that my story was BS or that the woman was a “ficticious woman?”

    No, you do not. In the context that I wrote about my experience, it is quite obvious that I was relating a story from my own experience. Did I keep notes? No. Did I take the woman’s name for future reference? No. Quite clearly, I cannot “prove” the story – but this does not mean that it is mythical or fictitious.

    Once again, your insane thinking at work.

    I’ve “voiced” “positive opinions” about many people with whom I disagree or believe have done despicable things. So what? Only an insane thinker would jump to irrational conclusions about my “support” or “endorsement” of the individual based on that.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top