Saturday, September 01, 2007

Surprise! More Lies From Psychotic Jonathan Mark

To borrow a phrase, it seems that I've "touched a raw nerve" from the "admittedly touchy" Jonathan Mark, he of the life so empty that he is devoting his time to "investigating" anybody remotely related to GOP candidate for the 51st District, Faisal Gill, and spinning elaborate smears that Faisal supports and/or is involved in their allegedly or concededly illicit activities.

By Mark's creative standards, I am involved in the Jack Abramoff scandal because Ralph Reed and I were acquainted while both studying at Emory University, and am responsible for the murder and assault committed by a man with whom I occasionally smoked cigars, and once had a drink.

For that matter, I resided in Prince William County at the same time as Lorena Bobbitt.

Of course, given that Gill has held positions of trust and high-level security clearances within to the Bush Administration, and has been investigated and cleared by those who are paid be suspicious, and the content of Mark's remarks, it is utterly clear that Mark's unhealthy fixation on Gill arises from his abject racism.

A few days ago, I noted Mark's latest smear, attempting to attribute Gill's law partner's alleged misdeeds to Gill.

Now, never mind that lawyers in partnership, even if they are working on the same case, rarely are aware of every jot and tittle of work performed by other lawyers, let alone mere law partners, whose association may be limited to sharing office space. Mark, of course, offers little or nothing in the way of facts about the way Gill's law firm operates (Mark is, of course, not likely to be able to do so, as is no one not a partner in the firm). And, of course, never mind that the shared civil liabilities that arise in the partnership context do not extend to shared criminal liabilities.

Today, Mark decides to utterly misrepresent my post, claiming that:
Unrepentant Faisal fan James Young wonders why I don't commit suicide and credits me with the worst Virginia blog article ever.
As is typical of Mark, the misrepresentations are serial. To be sure, I am "unrepentant," but apparently unlike Mark, I try very hard to avoid doing things which I should regret. But the truth ends there.

Addressing themin order, first, I am not a "fan" of Faisal. Faisal is a friend, an ally in numerous political disputes, and a fellow Board member of the Prince William Taxpayers Alliance. He was the superior candidate for the GOP nomination for the office he seeks. Moreover, he is now the GOP nominee for office in an ensuing election, to whom I therefore owe a debt of honor as a member of an official Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia, the Prince William County Republican Committee. Calling me a "fan" is just Mark's way of belittling honorable behavior, of which he clearly has little understanding. By way of comparison, Mark has himself written about how he was denied membership or cashiered from an official Democrat committee when he betrayed his obligations with regard to Democrat nominee (and Congressman) Jim Moran.

Second, I don't "wonder[] why [Mark] do[es]n't commit suicide." To the contrary, I merely note that "Most people with that little to live for would simply put shotguns in their mouths and pull the trigger." I spend very little time "wonder[ing]" why Mark does what he does. To the contrary, he is an admitted ideological Democrat, and his posts and comments demonstrate his racist attitudes. Very little to "wonder" about there.

Third, I don't "credits [him] with the worst Virginia blog article ever." I say his "may be a candidate for the dumbest post in the rather short history of the Virginia blogosphere" (emphasis added), for the reasons stated above regarding law partnerships.

One sentence; three misrepresentations. That must be some kind of a record.

With such an apparently limited ability to comprehend the meaning of simple words, it is little wonder that Mark is able to craft his elaborate smears.

13 comments:

Kathleen Keish said...

Mr. Young,

My name is Kathleen Keish, a student reporter with The Scoop '08, the first-ever national daily student newspaper, and it is both a non-profit and non- partisan publication. As you can tell from its name, the focus of The Scoop08 is the 2008 presidential race and all of the people, policies and big ideas shaping it.

For this website, I am the Jim Gilmore correspondent and am doing my first article on his dropping out of the race. I found your blog from a comment you posted on his official blog. I was wondering if you would be interested in commenting on his race and his dropping out. If so, please e-mail me at kk155806@ohio.edu to set up an interview.

Thank you very much.

Kathleen Keish
Jim Gilmore correspondent
The Scoop08 | http://scoop08.com
Tips/Contact: 937.554.6837 (Mobile)
E-Mail: kk155806@ohio.edu

Patriot Games said...

So Jonathan Mark was wrong for opposing Jim Moran? Sometimes it's better to put country over party. Mark was right to do so with his putrid and corrupt Congressman. A pity that you're not so patriotic as to do the same with your Alamoudi-ite, Jihad Faisal.

James Young said...

"Patriot Games," huh? Gotta find a way to bar comments from pseudonymous cowards, too.

No, he wasn't "wrong" for opposing Jim Moran. And thank you for the hackneyed phrase. Of course, defending Faisal against JM's is not about putting "country over party." It's about putting truth over innuendo and lies.

Mark WAS dishonorable for opposing Jim Moran while attempting to maintain his status within the Democrat Party. Add narcissism to his list of mental disorders, because he seems to believe that all should change to suit him.

As for my "Alamoudi-ite, Jihad Faisal," what makes the various investigative authorities wrong, and JM and you right?

Patriot Games said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
James Young said...

As this is not a forum for the comtemptible slanders of the Gill-haters, I have edited the previous comment by "Pariot Games," whom I suspect is actually Jonathan Mark, or a "Republican" who is attempting to smear Gill but lacks the courage and honor to do so openly.

"So then you are of the opinion that membership in a political party commands support even contemptible nominees like Jim Moran? I'd guess that 8th district Republicans won't be seeking your counsel, since it will only be through crossover voting that any Republican will ever have a chance in that district.

"You've made it abundantly clear that you put party over country. That makes you a bad American, Mr. Young.

[Smears against Gill deleted]

"You pillory Mark for opposing Jim Moran, but there is a honorable consistency. Those who blame America for all its foreign policy ills, and who would love to see Israel disappear in a mushroom cloud have found champions in Moran and Gill."

James Young said...

No, "Patriot Games." Like Mark, your lies are serial, which causes me to believe that you either are he, or more likely (as he at least has the courage to ascribe --- or lacks the sense to omit --- his name to his psychotic rantings) a Republican who is too cowardly and lacking in integrity to reveal his name. And I would note that --- akin to the frequent and false charges made against Conservatives --- you are contemptibly challenging my patriotism.

I am not of the "opinion that membership in a political party commands support even contemptible nominees like Jim Moran." I am of the opinion that CONTINUING "membership in a political party commands support even contemptible nominees like Jim Moran." If you have promised to support a party's nominees, but find that you cannot do so, then honor demands that you surrender your membership.

Mark, on the other hand, demanded otherwise.

So I don't "pillory Mark for opposing Jim Moran." I pillory Mark for demanding that he maintain a leadership post in an official Democrat committee while opposing him after retaining the nomination.

Likewise, your last sentence is equally nonsensical. Conservatives like myself don't "blame America for all its foreign policy ills"; that is a characteristic of those on the far Left, like Mark and his Democrat allies. And while I cannot speak to Moran's position on Israel, it is nonsense to suggest that Gill or most of his supporters "would love to see Israel disappear in a mushroom cloud."

Your fictions are creative, but that are, nonetheless, fictions.

Jonathan Mark said...

Just to correct this matter, in late 2005 I attempted to join the Lee District Democratic Committee. I was aware that one could not oppose a Democratic nominee and be on the Committee.

I told the Co-chair, Hugh Robertson, that since Jim Moran was not the nominee as of late 2005 I wanted to join. I said that if Moran was the nominee in June 2006 I would resign at that time.

Mr. Robertson and others told me that I could not join because they were certain that Moran would eventually become the nominee in June.

That was the second time that I had attempted to join the Democratic Party of Virginia. The first time was a year or two earlier. I attempted to join by mail. The Party kept my $35 application fee but did not contact me about whether I was admitted or not. I assumed that they had lost the application.

Young keeps claiming that I had an obligation to support Moran who I didn't care for as a politician, but I had no such obligation whatever.

Young speaks of me maintaining a leadership position in the DPVA, but I had no such position to maintain.

James Young said...

Fair enough, JM. But you don't reveal whether you opposed Moran in the preceding election. I have no problem with political committees considering an applicant's history in determining whether to elect them to membership (for example, I would consider Bob Byrd's ... er, David Duke's history were they apply for membership in a GOP committee.

Absent such a record, I would have voted to admit you.

Notwithstanding that concession of error (i.e., the claim that you were "demanding that [you] maintain a leadership post in an official Democrat committee while opposing [Moran] after retaining the nomination"), however, once again, you lie. I assert that "If you have promised to support a party's nominees, but find that you cannot do so, then honor demands that you surrender your membership." I state that you "demanded otherwise." You now state that you did not do so. I have no factual basis on which to dispute your assertion, but that does not license you to misrepresent what I actually said. But then, misrepresentations are your stock in trade

Jonathan Mark said...

I did not vote for Moran in 2002, 2004 and 2006. I do not expect to do so in 2008 either. He seemed to be a charming person with some good qualities whenever I met him, but he is a lousy congressman.

James Young said...

Again, JM, wherher you "did not vote" for Moran is really not the issue that a political committee has to consider, since your vote --- unless you reveal it, as you have done here --- is private. It is "opposition," publicly expressed, that has to be the standard, since even non-support (Harry Byrd's "golden silence"?) must be inadequate. And you still evade the substantive issue.

Jonathan Mark said...

I started the GoodbyeJim.com blog in December 2003 and blasted Rep. Jim Moran nonstop until March 2007, when I gave up. The people had spoken. Moran won about two-thirds of the vote in 2006.

My opposition to Jim Moran was thus public prior to the 2004 and 2006 elections.

James Young said...

Finally! We get to the issue. Were analogous circumstances at issue, I would have voted to deny you membership, as well.

You cannot legitimately complaint about being denied membership on an official Democrat Committee, as you opposed one of the party's nominees. Nevertheless, you have done so.

Jonathan Mark said...

I didn't know I had complained about it. I thought I mentioned it because you keep calling me a Democrat. I wanted to show that the Democrats where I live don't think I am one of them.

Believe me, I have no interest in being on the Lee District Democratic Committee. My interests are somewhere else entirely.