RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

  1. It’s overused a lot by many but Shirvell does appear to be a self-loathing closet case. I read through Shirvell’s blog yesterday and found it to be way beyond simple disagreement with Armstrong’s views. It truly reads like a man obsessed with Armstrong, who possibly has a crush on the young man and cannot deal with it due to his own inner demons. I mean yes, you can find similiar rhetoric from say AFA or TVC, but the stalking of a college student and his friends? When you add to this that he is a public official and this goes waaaaay beyond even the extreme Right groups I’m familiar with. He should be removed from office because it doesn’t appear to me that he can properly do his job at least where gays are concerned and Armstrong or anyone else he becomes obsessed with in particular.

    Oh yeah, one more thing: doesn’t he look like Pee Wee Herman??? :)

    Comment by John — October 1, 2010 @ 12:25 pm - October 1, 2010

  2. John, either you’ve been reading between the lines of my post — or have independently reached a conclusion similar to my own.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — October 1, 2010 @ 12:33 pm - October 1, 2010

  3. Ha! I was bored at work yesterday (slow day) and actually read all the posts at Chris Armstrong Watch. Why I subjected myself to that I don’t know, must have been reeeeaaaaallllllyyyyy bored! It was rather like looking at a gorey vehicle accident where you feel compelled to look even though it repulses you.

    I understand the blog is locked now but you can see them all the posts via Google cache.

    Comment by John — October 1, 2010 @ 12:45 pm - October 1, 2010

  4. I can’t bring myself to read his so-called blog but if there were any doubts in my mind this guy was a closet case who is majorly J-E-A-L-O-U-S that Chris Armstrong is living college life as a well-adjusted young man honest and open about his orientation and who has the potential to be a leader of the future; they were dispelled after watching video of that interview with Anderson Cooper. It was so obvious he was throwing any and all pat answers at Anderson so he wouldn’t let on what his true feelings are. Self loathing and self-torturing say it all about this character. This falls under stalking.

    Comment by PopArt — October 1, 2010 @ 12:50 pm - October 1, 2010

  5. John, I didn’t read the post, merely learned of the story while watching Shirvell on CNN while doing cardio. I didn’t hear a thing he had to say, but he just looked, well, unhappy. And then, I read the story and, well, something seemed, well, amiss.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — October 1, 2010 @ 1:03 pm - October 1, 2010

  6. Well the posts on his blog show the man’s obsession even more than what little was reported in the articles I’ve seen. He even goes after Armstrong’s friends and accuses at least two of them of being gay. He also targets Armstrong’s parents. We’re talking full names, addresses, Facebook screenshots, the whole works. It read like a full-on rant against someone he hated the fact he had a crush on. Sort of like how little boys would punch or pull the hair of little girls they liked in school. Really twisted to see in a grown man who is also a public official. Ironically, I myself would have political differences with Armstrong (the proposed “gender neutral” dorms at UoM for starters) but this was so beyond the pale that all of that was pushed aside. Obsession is a fascinating but chilling thing to watch.

    Comment by John — October 1, 2010 @ 1:12 pm - October 1, 2010

  7. Sorry to say Dan, but the Nation’s best liberal arts college (U of M)does make mistakes in training and educating its students. Michigan’s AG, Mike Cox, also made a mistake in not taking action sooner. Stalking and bullying conduct is wrong.

    It was wrong when the gayLeft (Mike Rogers) was doing it against GayPatriot founder Bruce Carroll… and it’s wrong in this case. I wish the state and federal laws would catch up to cyber-bullying and stalking conduct for ill intent.

    But in the meantime, could we leave out the gay-centric fantasy of str8 males stalking us for sexual conquest… it’s a fantasy better left for the porn industry to interpert and explore.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — October 1, 2010 @ 2:04 pm - October 1, 2010

  8. This guy reminds me of Michael Heath here in Maine. Creepy. Yes, Mr. Cox should’ve acted sooner.

    Comment by Jim Michaud — October 1, 2010 @ 2:08 pm - October 1, 2010

  9. What a silly question. If they leave who would the regulars have to interact with? Sometimes I think those leftist are shills so the regulars can vent.

    Comment by Roberto — October 1, 2010 @ 4:40 pm - October 1, 2010

  10. I, too, read (or at least skimmed) the entire blog yesterday, before it was locked. Maybe Shirvell has some legitimate concerns about the way Armstrong conducts business (and the secret society stuff, etc), but he went way, way beyond that. And way beyond the bounds of decency. He also drew some rather specious conclusions about Armstrong’s promiscuity from some FB comments that I read to be in jest. Hell, if you read comments on my page you could draw the same, and I’ve been in a monogamous relationship for more than 10 years. It’s called joking amongst friends, and Shirvell clearly couldn’t see it through his rage at this guy.

    Obviously Shirvell has 1st Amendment rights, but it appears this went beyond reasonable exercise of those. Notwithstanding that right, he IS an Attorney, and a Public Official at that. He shoudl also be subject to the Michigan Bar’s Rules of Professional Conduct. Rule 8.4 would tend to indicate he was in violation of his ethical responsibilities. MHO anyway.

    Comment by Neptune — October 1, 2010 @ 4:49 pm - October 1, 2010

  11. “We always wonder about those who spend so much time on our blog while telling us just how clueless and self-hating we are.”

    It’s because the hypocrisy of being gay and supporting the right-wing, anti-gay theocratic Republican agenda is just so stunningly, exceptionally obvious.

    Comment by David — October 1, 2010 @ 5:30 pm - October 1, 2010

  12. I never brought myself to read his so-called blog. But any doubts that he is an uber-JEALOUS closet case who can’t stand that Chris Armstrong is living life as a well-adjusted gay college student should have been dispelled by his interview with Anderson Cooper. He was desperately throwing out First Amendment arguments in a feeble attempt to throw Cooper off the scent (and probably continue fooling himself).

    This seems to clearly cross a line into stalker territory and considering his work in the AG’s office has real impact on peoples’ lives, we should be concerned about whether he is fit for his position.

    And Michigan-Matt: I don’t see any generalizations being made here any str8t/gay male fantasies. Shirvell’s actions are speaking for themselves even if they can’t be proved 100%. Can you see any parrallels between his rhetoric and that employed the currently disgraced Bishop Long who turned out to be preying ON instead of praying for young male members of his flock?

    Comment by PopArt — October 1, 2010 @ 6:09 pm - October 1, 2010

  13. But, David, you still don’t address the issue. If our hypocrisy is so obvious, why bother?

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — October 1, 2010 @ 6:20 pm - October 1, 2010

  14. B. Daniel, Republican Mike Cox’s employee Andrew Shirvell gives everyone a stark reminder of the fundamentalist anti-gay nuttiness lurking inside the state GOP.

    Michigan Assistant Attorney General Andrew Shirvell is just the sort of right-wing reactionary, anti-gay Talibunny fanatic who the GOP caters to this blog carries water for.

    Comment by David — October 1, 2010 @ 6:31 pm - October 1, 2010

  15. and please show us just where we carry water for such folks, David. Thanks!

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — October 1, 2010 @ 6:39 pm - October 1, 2010

  16. “and please show us just where we carry water for such folks, David. Thanks!”

    This blog is against same sex marriage, gays in the military (blaming Harry Reid as responsible for failure of DADT when EVERY Republican voted against it) calling a hate crime against a gay person a gay hate crime, (this blog calling pedophiles a “sexual orientation” it’s not it’s non-consensual sex with a minor and a crime) , to cite a few example among many.

    Btw, maybe you can direct me to a “Republican Environmentalists” blog (how’s that for an oxymoron) I’d love to post about the extreme hypocrisy there too.

    Comment by David — October 1, 2010 @ 7:05 pm - October 1, 2010

  17. Uh, please show me where this blog is against gay marriage (with a link please).

    And please show me where I’m against gays serving openly in the military.

    And where do these bloggers call pedophiles a sexual orientation. Links please!


    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — October 1, 2010 @ 7:10 pm - October 1, 2010

  18. Dan,

    Given that David can’t list his ‘violated’ civil rights but tries to claim tolerance while calling you sick and twisted, I can’t say we can expect any evidence from him anytime soon.

    Comment by The_Livewire — October 1, 2010 @ 10:26 pm - October 1, 2010

  19. It’s the same old Republican song and dance, and their gullible base has fallen for it every time for as long as I can remember. Every election, they run on nice fluffy slogans like “small government” and “spending cuts”, and then get elected and do precisely the opposite. Why? Because Republican states are the most impoverished in the nation and depend far more on federal subsidies and welfare than heavily Democratic states. And Republican legislators care much more about getting reelected than they care about their principles. That is why government spending has exploded under every Republican administration, even when the economy is strong.

    This time will be no different. Boehner is already refusing to commit to ending earmarks, because he knows that’s a promise his caucus will not allow him to keep.

    So if they get elected, all that will happen is that we’ll have a two-year-long freakshow and complete political gridlock. They won’t be able to pass any legislation, so they’ll probably do what Republicans do best. They’ll go on a witchhunt, this time against the Obama administration, and while the country goes to he!!, they’ll spend millions of taxpayer dollars on D.C. lawyers to investigate whether Michelle Obama once used foul language in front of a minor…. or something.

    Comment by Proud Liberal — October 1, 2010 @ 10:31 pm - October 1, 2010

  20. Kicked Puppy wrote:
    A bunch of blather not meaning much.

    Note how, despite Obama hanging ‘teh gheys’ out to dry on everything, and Harry Reid bundling them in with criminals to try to rally the base, he reflexively limps back to the Democrats for another ‘kick of love’.

    Kicked Puppy indeed.

    Comment by The_Livewire — October 2, 2010 @ 10:51 am - October 2, 2010

  21. They’ll go on a witchhunt, this time against the Obama administration, and while the country goes to he!!, they’ll spend millions of taxpayer dollars on D.C. lawyers to investigate whether Michelle Obama once used foul language in front of a minor…. or something.

    I hope their first “witchhunt” will be the Justice Department to find out whether the voting rights of whites are being ignored, as has been charged. Next I’d like to see the EPA hauled in front of the cameras to explain why they think they have the power to regulate carbon emissions – without Congressional authorization. I suppose after that we could get to the bottom of the whole Fannie Mae business. Yes, I’d like to see a whole bunch of “witchhunts” and if Democrats want to whine and complain that Republicans are guilty of X,Y,Z great! Let them bring evidence and we can nail those SOBs too. I’d like to clean house and if that means sicking both branches against each other to remove the Democrats and Republicans that have broken the public trust, I’m all in favor it.

    Comment by John — October 2, 2010 @ 11:29 am - October 2, 2010

  22. It’s the same old Republican song and dance, and their gullible base has fallen for it every time for as long as I can remember. Every election, they run on nice fluffy slogans like “small government” and “spending cuts”, and then get elected and do precisely the opposite.

    Huh. How’s all that hopeychangeyness working out for ya on DADT & DOMA repeal? Seen ENDA or UAFA yet?

    Comment by John — October 2, 2010 @ 11:32 am - October 2, 2010

  23. If the “social conservatives” who most oppose Gay rights are themselves Gay, then why are social conservatives getting the blame?

    Isn’t this a ‘Gay on Gay’ offense? (no pun intended)

    Comment by gastorgrab — October 2, 2010 @ 2:58 pm - October 2, 2010

  24. i share your disgust over shirvell’s comments, but the way you conflate your detractors with shirvell is rather slimy.

    Comment by Chad — October 4, 2010 @ 9:30 pm - October 4, 2010

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

**Note: Your first comment is held for moderation. Avoid profanity, avoid personal attacks on fellow commenters, and avoid complaining about personal attacks (even on you). Feel free to disagree with anyone, but focus on their ideas; give us the information that you think they overlooked.**

Live preview of comment

Close this window.

0.190 Powered by Wordpress