26 thoughts on “Once again Kevin Binversie gets savaged by a commenter”

  1. What the hell are you talking about here Zach? He doesn’t even answer my charge about Heavenly Hills, LLC and just goes off on some unrelated tangent on Randy Hopper.

    That’s not ‘savaging,’ that’s piss-poor logic from a gun in Sun Prairie who’s clearly pissed his local paper is running my columns.

    1. Binversie: “Typed too fast there.”

      Maybe “[shot off your mouth] too fast there” would have been a more apt turn of phrase.

      Hey, then ‘gun’, rather than ‘guy’, WOULD have worked just fine.

  3. What charge, you nattering nabob? It’s not often I finish a news article/opinion and have to read it several more times in order to convince myself that A: I’m not dyslexic; and B: I’m not on LSD.

    Yep. That’s some crack investigative reporting there, Kevmeister. Emphasis on “crack”. You’d have to be smoking it to think that’s journalism.

  4. Kevin,

    If there’s anything that’s “piss-poor,” it’s your ridiculous joke of a news organization’s attempts to portray its coverage as non-partisan and unbiased.

    Time and time again your organization continues to beat up on Democrats and their allies – with flimsy, if any, evidence. Meanwhile, similar if not more egregious conduct by conservatives remains unmentioned in your stories. The hypocrisy and utter lack of balance in your coverage is plain as day. You’re a partisan hack, and you know better than to claim that your right-wing smear jobs rise to the level of journalism.

      1. Sure.
        ad hominem means you ADD more personal insults that attack the target’s character, appearance, Mama, dog, wife, and sexual prowess rather saying things that are remotely related to what the “debate” is actually about, while simultaneously showing no visible signs of intellectual capability beyond that of a single-celled organism.
        I’d also like to add that only a stinking pile of puss would even think of asking a question like that. Now get outta here, ya filthy animal.

  5. As we established early in the week kev, your blatant lack of research is glaring and it seriously damages a papers credibility to run something of yours as a real story. Good job eric!

  7. Kevin is proving more than anyone his lack of credibility. I’m all for that. Keep the column. Anything that makes conservatives look stupid is fine with me.

    1. I agree Jesse; I’d like to see Binversie’s “articles” carry some sort of disclaimer, because it’s not exactly as if he’s trying to be an unbiased journalist.

  11. Yawn. This is pretty juvenille and I didn’t even bother to read most of it. Wish there would be a focus on real issues.

    1. This is pretty juvenille and I didn’t even bother to read most of it.

      As always, fmsn, your intelligence speaks for itself.

    1. Jeff, I am pretty much referring to everyone, but Zach is only encouraging juvenille behavior with posts like these. A real topic to me doesn’t usually involve slamming one blogger who was slammed by another blogger. That’s just all back and forth garbage that isn’t worthy to think about or debate, in my opinion of course.

      1. Look, FMSN, it’s just juvenile to keep substituting “juvenille” for “juvenile”.

        That said, I have a feeling that you would consider this to be more of a “real” issue if Binversie was a liberal.

        In any event, if this issue isn’t “real” enough for you, why not just take a break from the peanut gallery for a minute?

      2. Forg I think the issue here is (to me anyway) is Kev is not just another blogger when his stuff gets put in a paper like he is a real journalist, with absolutely NO disclaimers. Being such he should attempt some kind of integrity yet all he does is push his propaganda.

        Unfortunately, some people would read his column and thing he knew what he was talking about.

        1. I disagree. Kevin isn’t like a real journalist; he’s just a two-bit hack who thinks he’s something bigger than he is simply because he scored a job fetching coffee for Sunspots Johnson.

  13. One last thing. . .

    When a wingnut like FMSN writes, “Yawn”, it really means that he or she can’t come up with a substantive defense.

    1. Predicatably this is the point in the conversation where the name-calling starts (gee doesn’t that indicate an inability to come up with a substantive defense?).

      Incidentally it was my first response where I said “Yawn,” which means there was no defense to make. My point was that I’d think there are better things to talk about than a blogger commenting about some other blogger getting savaged by yet another blogger. It’s personal and not issue oriented and of little interest or consequence. I thought the comment section existed for the purpose of expressing one’s comment on the post.

  14. Binversie and Wigderson are really the Lennie and Squiggy of the Cheddarsphere, though in this case the latter is spelled ” Sqwiggy”.

    Lennie B and Sqwiggy, just a polishin’ them turds!

Comments are closed.