Tuesday, February 15, 2011
one will check to see that her blog is so-o-o useless that 22,553,084 are more useful. If she had any self-respect left, she'd at least let her fellow bigots know what she left out before I do but...
I'm not even going to link to her rambling excuse for an explanation of why she publishes anti-Semitic rants. It's like watching a car wreck.
What a pathetic, deceitful, crazy eyed, self-pitying asshole Carol Moore turns out to be. Not much of a surprise there.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
So what does that then make Carol? A misandrist? A hypocrite? Or maybe just a "nutty old shrew," as suggested. Certainly the talking out of both sides of her mouth is what causes the drooling.
Here's what she "imagined" the last time she saw squirrel nuts:
("A)ny female - and most men - can guess what my real response to it was. (Hint, where's(sic) the rubber bands - or the anesthetic and the proper tools.)"Wingnut Carol, the Stepford libertarian, sees no problem with ideating violent castration scenes in her whacked out, imaginary world, and then uses her toxic rhetoric in a blog post. Figures.
I wonder, how goes Carol's search that she posted in her profile for some guy for her to cook for? Did she get any offers from any man so needy that he'd follow her direction to enroll in an appropriate twelve-step program? I don't think I could have summed up any better the need for some form of counseling for the couple but I think it was really just another of Carol's bigoted, misandrist slams.
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Here's to wishing Carol Moore a New Year devoted to her bettering her mental health.
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Of course Carol Moore, never one to be troubled by facts when advancing her various agendas, should they be unavailable, has what she calls her "guesstimate" to cover any such occasions.
In this case, she's posited that humans began solstice celebrations more than 40,000 years before the need for such observations, absent any facts to support such a ludicrous projection and based on her unfounded "guesstimate."
Way to pull useless shit out of your ass, Carol.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Here's what some of her fellow editors at Wikipedia had to say about her and her article:
"Article is on a non-notable political activist which has extensive editing by a party (Carol) with a conflict of interest... Merely promoting already famous ideas or being associated with notable organizations does not create notability in the general or specific forms."Amen.
"References should be about the subject, not written by the subject."
"One does not generate notability by writing about him/herself."
"Promoting famous ideas of others or being associated with notable organizations does not create notability..."
"Delete, and suggest a long hard read of our inclusion, reliable sources and verifiability guidelines."
"I never considered the "significant coverage in reliable sources" part of policy to mean "significant amount". The coverage is not significant. From what can be seen, she's mentioned in passing... She doesn't appear to have been the subject of any significant coverage. Promotional or not, the article doesn't satisfy inclusion criteria at this time."
"Delete - many, many violations in this article... The page right now has many, many soap violations which would require a complete cleansing of the sources as they seem more about selling a product than actually dealing with references. The article would be best if it was just completely destroyed and, if there is ever any serious coverage of her life by notable sources, then is rebuilt."
"Does seem riddled with (conflict of interest) issues (the ref list smacks of a mission), but beyond that, this simply doesn't meet our standard (for a biography)... unnotable local activist with no claim to significance."
The article on the immensely insignificant Carol Moore was deleted on September 15, 2009.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
UPDATE: Sadly, as with most things in her life, Carol's taken my meager parodic endeavor in the wrong way and it's prompted quite a response, laced with violent imagery, so typical from someone of her background, i.e. that of a supporter of murderers.
No, Carol. The pic wasn't meant to depict testicles, although it's awfully interesting that you became so fascinated by that aspect. Isn't it odd how a supposed feminist goes right to mutilation as a response method. Me wonders how Carol would react if some pathetic, raving sicko made a suggestion like hers, but about women? It's especially odd when you consider that Carol is one of those types who suggest that litigation is a recourse to any who might disagree with her wackiness, er, political views. Guess you blew that one, eh Carol? Didn't anyone ever explain to you at that law office that threats don't strengthen you position in a free speech case, especially when you've gone to such lengths to make yourself into a notable public figure? In fact, that usually closes that door for you.What I'd been looking for was an image for a nutty old shrew and that's as close as I could get, Carol - a rodent with, well, maybe your therapist can explain the idea to you.