Steve Grayce.

Steve Grayceset up an account at Wikipedia.  He made a couple edits that were the same edits as every other “Herschelkrustofsky” nom de plome — obsessed with getting the original subtitle of Chip Berlet’s High Times article in, for instance.  Apparently he made three edits in quick secession, in fact, which lead to his temporary ouster.  He then challenged his temporary banishment.  And was then banned permanently because he was, in reality, none other than  Herschelkrustofsky, the famous Jewish clown on the Simpsons.

Also in familiar to previous “Herschelkrustofsky” puppets, though new as pertaining to new events, Krusty the Clown deigned to remove the reference to Molly Kronberg’s libel suit from the end of “Larouche Criminal Trials” case, when by any measure the article warrants a couple sentences as a post-script.  We also see Krusty’s attempt at forcing newly Larouche’s rewritten history into the Court Trials itself.  Will Weback, ever too gracious in too accomodating these compromises, “added a little more about LaRouche’s allegation.”  Actually, what needs to be added in terms of Larouche’s response to Kronberg’s lawsuit is the reference from the LPAC release as this being part of the British plot against Larouche due to them bring down Obama’s Health Care policies and his opposition to the Iraq War.  A similar feeling I’ve had with respect to both Kronberg’s wikipedia article and Duggan’s — get the craziness there, and don’t white-wash it.

The surreality of this is shown in the manner that they have, in the past, commented disparingly of the use of a college newspaper here and there (one of the people who had any reason to pay attention for the past decade), while “Leatherstocking”, in question for a source, pulled up a college newspaper (as well Italian sourcing and something else — I am having trouble finding this and don’t consider it worth my time trying any harder.  There he made the amusingly bald  statement that “I forgot your search engines only bring up negative references to Larouche.” )

Meanwhile, Krusty’s tag-team member, the sort of “Good Cop” of this “Good Cop / Bad Cop” routine in terms of retaining a permanent presence, comes out with:
Another point of dispute is that recent edits have highlighted the two WP:COATRACK articles on the LaRouche list, Jeremiah Duggan and Kenneth Kronberg, without giving similar emphasis to other articles on the LaRouche list that depict LaRouche in a more favorable light, such as Amelia Boynton Robinson. —Leatherstocking (talk) 01:05, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Reading the Robinson wikipedia article, I would think that a reference to a recent interview where she expressed great admiration and pride in the presidntial election of Barack Obama should be placed there, as a means of balance.  She likes Larouche and she likes Obama.  Make of that what you will, and I do make of it something but I’ll bite my tongue.

In other news, some amusing clips have shown up at youtube.  And stuff.
This strikes me as important enough to plop from out of my commenting in the comments section.  Barney Frank’s letter to the editor.  Also from out of Boston, they get a sentence or two in a piece about a John Kerry thing.  Funny that, as the Cult leader, in their fantasy world, “took over the Party” and rallied under John Kerry toward victory… or at least to the next hub ub — John Conyers and allegations of irregularities in Ohio.  Also worth mentioning, page A25 of the  Washington Times article for September 3rd has a photo of two Larouchies holding a sign — (first google find here) and is conflicting with the editorial bias of the article and newspaper — unless the Washington Times wants to claim the Larouchies as a legitimate source for their oppositon.

This entry was posted on Friday, September 4th, 2009 at 12:22 pm and is filed under The LaRouche Challenge. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.