1/30/2005
Terry Turner watching dems interests
Terry Turner recently visited both Cao’s Blog and the Wide Awakes Website, touting the mantra, that he’s “watching Washington” and wants to hold the republicans responsible. You can see his blog here.
Yet, there is a vast array of evidence on the net that he’s watching out for the dems interests, and is trolling conservative websites, leaving less-than civil messages and even sending rude emails.
Interestingly enough, when he tried to gain entry to the Wide Awakes discussion forum and we denied him entry, he sent me this email:
Always a pleasure to talk to a right winger whose views border on facist beliefs is silencing debate.
I guess I’m stuck with the 20,000 page views per day on my site to get my word out. And by the way, I allow debate on my site — even from the extreme right. At least one of us believes in American ideals.
I will continue to view the Wide Awakes and still offer my point of view to keep yours sharp and accurate in your cause.
Good day to you as well.
Now here is where it gets interesting. The Wide Awakes group is not an ignorant bunch of hicks, you know. Here’s a link to our rules of Engagement, here’s a link to our statement of purpose. We encourage debate, but that’s not the purpose of our forum. We welcome dissenting opinions on our blog, it only makes us better at what we’re trying to accomplish.
It was pointed out to me by one of our astute bloggers, Ogre, from Ogres Politics and views, who did a little research on this guy’s website:
20,000 page views? I’m not buying that one. Ranked #9035 in the ecosystem, inbound unique links: 5 (all links from left sites). Technorati shows 75 links from 15 sources. No sitemeter counter displayed. Maybe he hits reload a lot.
Seems like this guy is a little “stuck on himself” when he stretches numbers that are so easy to verify.
Beth, at My Vast Rightwing Conspiracy, had this to say about hiim:
Eff him. I have no patience for people who live to pick fights. Ask him if he’s ever heard of the Alliance, the Watchers of Weasels, the Right Wing Attack Squad, the Command Post, Milbloggers or any one of the multitude of other groups (I won’t even bother with the lefty ones, because I can’t name one off the top of my head)…for the most part, blog groups or group blogs are for the like minded to work together. If he wants to “debate,” he can use his own bandwidth to do so, or (politely) leave a comment at Wide Awakes. My thinking is that the forum is more along the lines of the Rottweilers’ chat room (although anyone can get in there, leftards wouldn’t last long if they tried). Friendly talk among the like-minded.
Oh, and tell him “stifle” is not spelled “stiffle”. Sorry, I had to say that because I think he sounds like an asshat. 
And she was pretty strong on this because she continues
Like I said, eff him. I agree, there’s no way he gets 20K visits a day unless he hits refresh a lot! (LOL) Besides, what kind of debate would it be if he’s already resorted to name-calling (”facist”–nice spelling, AGAIN). What a jerk–what makes him think HIS point of view is either “sharp” or “accurate”? I’m halfway tempted to say let him in so I can chew him up and spit him out. Dumbass.
He has the habit of attempting to spread disinformation as was published some time ago on the Club For Growth blog.
Don’t swallow what this guy is telling you, he stretches the facts until they’re out and out lies, and he’s a name-calling dem who masquerades as someone who’s trying to hold Washington responsible-when, in fact, he’s one of those extreme dems who considers republicans fascists, much like the George Soros breed of socialists who’ve taken over the democratic party who call people “racist” without even knowing their name.
IMO, he not only sounds like an asshat, he’s proven himself to be one. Nuff said.
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
NIF linked with Iraqi Vote Day!
January 30th, 2005 at 8:17 am
Go get TT gang!
January 30th, 2005 at 8:31 am
Heh. Love it! Nice take down Cao.
January 30th, 2005 at 10:19 am
Iraqi Vote Day!
Today’s Dose of NIF
February 5th, 2005 at 6:41 pm
What Cao fails to mention is that I was simply trying to post a comment at the Wide Awakes site and thought I had to register. I never expected my nasty reply to her nasty reply to my button click to be broadcast publicly.
But that’s a matter of professional ethics in the writing game. And I’ll let Cao slide as she seems new to the profession.
It also allows me to include elements of her private communications to me. Such as the snide e-mail that prompted my “fascist” comment:
“’ Debate” may be the cornerstone of this republic, but “debate” is not the purpose of the Wide Awakes forum.”
OK. Silencing dissent seems to “border on fascism.” But I don’t believe I ever called her one in that statement.
But Cao seriously misrepresents our email communications by leaving out the exchange before that:
“I seek only to post comments to your forum.
“Debate is the cornerstone of the republic. To stiffle [sic] debate from an opposing viewpoint is to weaken your own position. To silence opposition comments is to debate only strawmen — and that dilutes anything you might say, defeating any purpose you might have.
“Only by challenging debate, do you have a forum. Without opposing viewpoints, you have only a mob.”
As I said, and pointed out, I merely wanted to comment at the site — never to be a contributor. I enjoy debate with conservatives – practically all my friends lean to the right.
As far as no site counters, there is a “Who Links to Me” text link that shows at the bottom of the right column. Last I looked, it had Yahoo! Showing 8,200 links to “Watching Washington.”
I apologize of the typo in leaving the “s” of “site.” I have a cumulative total of 20,000 page views a day based on data supplied to my colleagues and employer for the professional site I work for, along with the group blog I write for, and Watching Washington. I’ll keep my empoyer and friends out of this fight if you don’t mind.
The “Club for Growth” headline is an opinion. Just like my commentary or Cao’s are opinions. That’s what we do. It is not proof of “disinformation.” WW gets plenty of visitors from “Club for Growth” and was even one of the original links in their new Social Security blog’s blogroll. Check out their site if you don’t believe me.
As for those of you who can determine my character based on a couple of typos, I’m amazed at your abilities. You really should be working for the CIA or something. Maybe you could find some WMDs just by checking the watermarks on Saddam’s stationery.
Here, I’ve been called “asshat,” and “dumbass.” In comments at “The Wide Awakes” Cao has called me “ugly” with “Glen Campbell hair.”
I must say it’s refreshing for a guy who’s been cussed by Clintons and reamed out publicly by a Rockerfeller. Such insults as “ugly” only make me feel young. I haven’t recieved such meaningless insults since kindergarten — well, since I was 8 for the “Glen Campbell” stuff (he was big then).
February 5th, 2005 at 6:50 pm
You overestimate your importance in my world, buddy. Or anyone else’s for that matter. Someone pointed out to me that for someone who doesn’t know me I may come across as a *****, but–I’m just being myself
No, you didn’t try to “register” on the Wide Awakes Site, you tried to gain entry to the discussion forum which is not open to outsiders. And then when you didn’t get your way and I banned you from there, you called me a fascist. You’re twisting the facts around a little bit to suit your agenda, what a surprise.
Ethics, I suppose, is in the eye of the beholder. I’m just telling it like it is. Email is not a secure form of communication, as I found out fairly recently. It’s for that reason you should never communicate account numbers or credit card numbers via email; you don’t know who can see your email stream. The fact that what you said to me was completely out of line, and the fact that I published it, well too bad. You should be more careful next time. I’m not a reporter, I am not bound by the rules of reporting or gag orders so have at it, if it makes you feel better.
I have read both sides of the equation as far as “email ethics”. On one site it said “the old rules do not apply”, indicating that email can end up in a place where you never intended it to be. So you should always be aware of what you say in emails as though it is going to be posted on a billboard somewhere. In this case, your bombastic prevarications have been exposed, and I honestly can’t say I’m sorry.
February 5th, 2005 at 7:47 pm
Oh *dear*. Seems like Mr. Turner is someone who doesn’t cope too well with rejection. (Which is odd — You’d think the Dems would be used to it by now.)
… But then it must be remembered that Mr. Turner is the sort of person who likes to name-drop Clintons and Rockerfellers, and use the size of his hit counter as proof of — well — the number of people visiting his employer’s website, as it turns out. Bearing these facts in mind, the phrases ‘over-inflated’ and ’sense of his own importance’ spring readily to mind.
Be that as it may, Terry (may I call you Terry?), I really think that in order to avoid working yourself up into this kind of ankle-snapping frenzy in future you should read the rules of a forum before attempting to post there. Because, with us Wide Awakes, they are actually pretty simple: ‘A private group for discussion by the writers and supporters of the Wide Awakes.’
Now ask yourself the following two questions:
1: Do I write for the Wide Awakes?
2: Am I a supporter of the Wide Awakes?
I’ll give you a clue, Terry. The answer to neither of these questions is ‘yes’.
February 5th, 2005 at 8:08 pm
I guess I’m not getting what he wants here. He wants discussion when his site is nothing but headlines and a brief description with NO commentary (at least the posts that I’ve seen.) If you look at his posts, he references the news source, so I guess you could say he is paraphrasing the story.
If he wants to express his opinion, why doesn’t he express them in his own blog? Does he need our thoughts and ideas on a subject before he conceives his own or just object to ours? I have not read any of his “opinions”.
February 5th, 2005 at 8:09 pm
I thought you meant Ted Turner! Hehehe
February 5th, 2005 at 8:10 pm
RottyPup,
Excellent assessment of this bloke, have a pint on me.
Also, I like your blog, it has enlightened me on the sad state of affairs in the UK and the EU. You remind me of some of the wonderful people I met in your country while on business there in the summer of 1981. Keep up the good fight!
February 5th, 2005 at 8:18 pm
Well, Cracker, he did come over to Wide Awakes…he posted on the Fairtax thread (and didn’t respond to the points made), he posted on one of the Social Security reform threads (and also didn’t respond to the points made)…I really don’t quite know what to make of it except that the unfairness is all in his mind. The fact that we’re exposing it–that’s not all in his mind, that’s true. But if he’s a “responsible” reporter type, then he should be able to take the heat for what he’s written…no matter where it’s written, whatever the form.
Interestingly, he was posting at Wide Awakes while I was waiting for a response from him regarding why did he want to gain access to the forum? He’s having a memory lapse or something about the differences there, because he was clearly posting on the Wide Awakes site at the same time he was trying to gain access to the forum. He didn’t respond to me until I banned him.
Hehe, Paul, you kill me.
Nobody’s ever heard of this guy, but if you ask him, he’ll tell you he’s been on TV, and he’s a reporter, and he’s rubbed elbows with more important people than me. I think the world is full of more important people than me, so what’s his point? I dunno. 
Actually he’ll tell you all that even if you DON’T ask him.
February 5th, 2005 at 9:29 pm
“Asshat” doesn’t begin to describe this fellow. In fact, it insults asshats worldwide.
For a proper adjective to describe Mr. Turner, let’s take a trip back in time to the Victorian era, when people used language with an ease and grace that makes today’s talking heads seem like incoherent little monkeys.
The word is “cad.”
A cad is “a man who acts with deliberate disregard for another’s feelings or rights” according to Websters. We should all email Webster and tell him to put Mr. Turner’s picture next to the word as an illustration. (Maybe if we put his web address up he’d get those mythical 20,000 hit per day we’ve heard tell of).
I’m gonna take a guess here about what Mr. Turner is talking about when he says he was a reporter whose shining face and blow-dried hair was “available” to 54 million homes.
There are news outlets that, for a subscription, will supply small market TV stations with “Reports from Washington.” I’ll bet our friend Turner worked for one of those services. The idea that he did any investigative reporting is loony. They may have “investigated” when the cherry blossoms might emerge or “investigated” where some Washington harridan got The World’s Ugliest Dress.” But that would have been the extent of his reporting. That and reading regurgitated reports from AP, UPI, or Reuters on what’s going on.
The closest this guy got to a Rockefeller was eating an oyster. And as far as getting reamed by Clinton (or was it Rockefeller?), we all know Bill’s propensity for unusual sex…maybe that’s what the cad is talking about.
February 5th, 2005 at 9:33 pm
At least Timmy at NIF openly admits his blog is a Link Farm and is honest about it, maybe somebody else ought to realize exactly what it is he has there
thanks, guys. I’m off to bed and will be back on tomorrow. Comments are in moderation and won’t appear until they’re approved.
February 5th, 2005 at 9:53 pm
Ah, yes. I worked for CONUS Communications, a subsidary of Hubbard Broadcasting. We were the company that invented the satellite truck and pioneered SNG. Hubbard also laid the groundwork for a major part of DirectTV — the home satellite system. Our unofficial motto was “The Most Famous Name In Television You Never Heard Of.” Every one in commercial TV is familiar with CONUS, though the general public never heard of us. The division was phased out after 9/11 when advertising revenue dried up.
As an reporter, I won more than 15 awards (including an Emmy). Honored by the AP, SDX, and invited to the Poynter Institute — not that that means much to a novice.
As an investigative reporter, I exposed organized crime links that bankrupted a local truck line, illegal drug manufacturing, launched a series that changed state law making that drug manufacture more difficutl, and my biggest coup — was the first reporter in the US to report that the US was launching “Operation Desert Shield.”
During my time in Washington, I followed money trails of political campaigns, exposed waste, fraud, and abuse in government. This was a franchise called “Watching Washington” that had roughly four times as many regular viewers as Bill O’Reilly currently has.
Outside of journalism, I have written for both Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign and Donald Rumsfeld’s as SecDef, managed a Congressional race in the the number one targeted district in 1996, and served as an informal advisor to Governor Frank White — one of only two men to ever defeat Bill Clinton in an election.
And to the fellow who says I only post headlines — then how does that make my site “watching out for Democrats?”
Either I’m only posting headlines — or I’m commenting. Part of the power of blogging — as Matt Drudge has pointed out — is the selection of headlines a person posts. That amounts to commentary — in addition to the snide remarks I put in MY headlines and posts.
As for Cao and her sudden brush off when I fire back — if I don’t matter, why do I rate a special post on your site?
And if I was banned from “Wide Awakes,” why do my comments still appear there?
And surprising that no one mentions the 8,200 inbound links from Yahoo! either.
February 5th, 2005 at 10:02 pm
Who cares? Nobody. Except you, and we can all tell how important you are to you.
You were banned from the FORUM, you nincompoop.
February 5th, 2005 at 10:52 pm
Terry, give it a freaking rest, you are a damn loser with an over inflated sense of self-worth. If you were as important as you say, I don’t think you would waste your time trying to draw attention to yourself on our much more visited sites. By the way Sir Asshat, if you had more viewers then Bill, why the Hell are you not on the air now? CNN, CBS, and MSNBC not far enough left for you? Sink in to oblivion and be gone.
February 6th, 2005 at 7:56 am
Mr. Turner, as you are too young to have had any effect on my campaign I feel as if I am capable of commenting in a non-judgemental fashion. I will ramble if you don’t mind. You have an obsession with your presumed popularity. I personally have never seen you on TV and would not change this post even if I had. I applaud your success, congratulations, but I don’t talk about myself to impress (number of deployments overseas, combat, job skills that would scare the weak hearted etc..)others as you seem to. You must see how your 20,000 hits comment was somewhat disingenuous, as you have admitted to counting several sites, some of which you choose (employeer) not to disclose, which is fine with me, I don’t care. I personally do not mind your comments on Wide Awakes, but if you respond and a counter response come in to refute yours (SS in particular) please continue to debate it and not ignore it as it make it look as if you just did a drive by post. If your intent is to get us to comment on your site, well, that will not work. I stopped responding/posting on liberal sites shortly after starting, my education was quick and insulting (by this I mean that most liberals are short fused and attack on principal when they do not have valid arguements, as most don’t). We at WA’s talk behind the scenes so regardless of your attempts to influence us to view your site(s) or turn to your way of thinking, you will fail. My suggestion to you is to make thoughtful comments in agreement or disagreement, read the responses, and attempt to refute them, or come around to OUR way of thinking. That is all I have to say on the matter. As for our personalities, you may not like some of the comments of some of our posters, but we are all individuals with different techniques to handle dissenting comments, we have different fuse lengths (ability to put up with dissenting views) and this makes us individuals. We applaud individuality because we believe in personal responsibility and not the group mentality (collective/socialist/communist) of the liberals.
February 6th, 2005 at 8:05 am
Excellent rebuttal, and your cool head prevailed, Richard Nixon. Alas, this man has a problem with little details as he can’t discern between the Wide Awakes Site and the Forum. We should just allow his ranting and step aside to let him pass as he plants his drive by postings.
February 6th, 2005 at 9:32 am
And Cao, you can’t get it through your head that after attempting to post a comment at the site and having the comment disappear into the ether, I thought I had to be a registered user to leave comments. That’s when I mistakenly signed up on what turned out to be the Forum. I never wanted to post to it — only comments — if you’d read my email to you at the beginning of this mess you’d see that was the first thing I ever said to y’all.
I didn’t realize the time delay involved in a comment appearing on the Wide Awakes website.
I tend to post a quick comment on EVERY site I visit, to let people know someone agrees with them or disagrees with them. I figure that’s what comment sections are for.
As far as an inflated sense of self-worth, sorry again, but your posters certainly tried to project a deflated sense of my worth. I was just setting the record straight.
I would think it would be acceptable to defend myself. That’s all I’ve tried to do.
February 6th, 2005 at 9:37 am
I’m not listening anymore, Terry. I can publish the actual email and embarrass you more, if you like, so if you want to keep harping on this, I’ll just have to post another piece on your ridiculous claims to celebrity. (Which–it looks like I’m going to do, anyway.)
I’ll say this one more time and if you quit banging that spoon on your highchair maybe you’ll hear it: Your comments were published on the site at the same time you were trying to get into the forum. There wasn’t that long of a delay-there isn’t that long of a delay here, either. And it was right after you were banned from the forum that you called me a fascist. All the while you were hitting and running both here and at Wide Awakes so–your story is a little bit far-fetched IMO. If it didn’t matter to you that you were banned on our forum, then why would you attack me about your precious ‘freedom of speech’? Seems as though you have your facts mixed up.
February 6th, 2005 at 9:42 am
And ****, I don’t expect to change any minds any more than you do. I can’t imagine anyone with shorter fuses than I’ve seen here — launching into ad hominem attacks as your first response.
February 6th, 2005 at 9:43 am
Cao, I already posted the original email.
February 6th, 2005 at 10:13 am
Ok the gloves are off and I’ll go back for the whole thing.
February 6th, 2005 at 11:02 am
Mr. Turner, we do not have to agree, but we can discourse civilly. I have not insulted you. Even though I chose a pseudonym of a man who was called “****” don’t use it with me, as I am unsure with out inflection from your voice and body language if it is an insult as in calling me a member of the male anatomy. If you do not like what someone says, I suggest following my example of ignoring them, now I just told you to ignore some of my fellow posters, but they are adult enough to understand this is not an insult to them, it is merely a different style.As for short fuses, rest asure, I have been lambasted by some who I know and see on occation (why they are that stupid I don’t know, but my wife wont let me beat them up, my no flame policy only applies on the blogs not person to person, but that is another story) regardless. We have all made our points. One last suggestion Mr. Turner, stop e-mailing Cao, and instead post everything, as we all end up seeing the results eventually. Have a pleaseant if somewhat chilly day everyone.
February 6th, 2005 at 12:42 pm
Oh, you’re that Terry Turner…you know the one who….Uh, hmmm, nope never heard of you.:roll:
February 6th, 2005 at 8:33 pm
Sorry, Richard. I always liked the nickname “Tricky ****” and I mean nothing negative by calling you by the short version. And I didn’t mean that you personally launched ad hominem attacks on first response. That was the inflection you may have misunderstood and I apologize for that too.
And Cao, as I said, I already posted the original email. Post #4. That’s the one where I pointed out I merely wanted to comment.
If you really don’t want me to comment, don’t put up a post specifically attacking me. What do you expect from a combat veteran, that I’d roll over and go whimpering off because someone said something bad about me.
February 6th, 2005 at 8:36 pm
uh oh. Now you have my attention. What’s this? Combat veteran?
Look, Combat Veteran. I can’t help it if you don’t understand where I’m coming from, I’ve been talking plain English as far as I know. I showed clearly in that post exactly the reasons why what you’ve been saying sounds so ridiculous. Take it however you want, I don’t think I called you an “asshat” in that one.
The claims about the forum versus the blog, for example. The fact that you were posting comments on the blog while I was waitinf for a response from you in email about why you felt you should be in the forum. There is a link to the forum on the upper lefthand corner of the blog.
When people want to join the Wide Awakes, it’s usually as a blogger. But then you popped into the forum. I get an email about someone joining the forum and have to approve it. But apparently some other administrator approved it, and you were “in”. So I waited for a response from you that never came until I banned you. But you were always posting comments on the blog.
So I really don’t understand what it is you don’t understand. It’s really goofy to me.
February 6th, 2005 at 8:44 pm
Jesus! Now he’s a combat veteran.
It’s great that he’s telling us all this stuff that is absolutely impossible to rebut…or prove for that matter.
What’s next? Last astronaut to walk on the moon? (Unless your name is Cernan, don’t even try that one).
February 6th, 2005 at 8:51 pm
I’m trying to get ready for bed and the comments have been flooding in for the last couple of hours. Hey guys, I’d really like to party with you but I have stuff to do tomorrow.
I don’t want to cut off the discourse but…I gotta go. Comments are in moderation and will be going into the queue until they’re approved.
Hawk, I don’t even know what to say to this guy. He makes the most amazing far out statements and when he’s called on it, he’s a freakin’ victim and I’m “attacking” him. Sounds like a liberal, doesn’t it? I am not responsible!
Now this combat veteran thing…I don’t think I’ve ever heard a vet say it quite like that before. Usually they say I was in Vietnam, or like one Marine I met at work, who was in Nicaragua over the Contra thing. They usually don’t come out and say “I was a combat veteran.” Unless your name is John Kerry. Did I tell you I was in Vietnam? When they see pictures of my sons in uniform, they usually ask about them in a shy sort of way and eventually they tell me they served, when, what branch, what MOS, etc.. But they don’t blurt out “I am a combat veteran”.
Anyway, I gotta go. Cya.
February 7th, 2005 at 10:12 pm
It looks to me like Terry Turner does have a claim to fame. . .
The most famous person no one has ever heard of!
May 16th, 2005 at 10:20 pm
Just found out about this old controversey. Tex is one hell of a writer, one hell of a journalist, and gets a kick out of telling how he stirred up this old hornets nest.
Anyway, love your blog Cao. It’s a hoot and raises some hell.
And Tex says to say Hi! He loves you too, even if he don’t agree with your POV.
May 17th, 2005 at 5:14 am
I could give a rat’s *** about what “TEX” thinks about squat.
May 17th, 2005 at 12:09 pm
LOL - good gawd; I’ve been reading these comments and just shake my head, wondering why people attack Cao because she expresses her opinion.
She’s no better or worse than anyone else who posts comments here, or on any “Internet Medium” … we’re all just people sitting at a keyboard, pounding keys wanting people to understand only us — get over it.:mrgreen:
My Rule Of Thumb has always been:
Take what you want; give what you can; and leave the rest.
I’ve rubbed elbows with ******** all my life, so that makes me feel very important.:grin:
Beyond that, I’m not a Combat Veteran — just a “Seasoned Viet-Nam Vet”.:lol: