The worst

Hmm. Okay, but what criteria are you using for judging the quality of blogging? I mean, clearly the positions du Toit advocates are beyond the pale, in terms of–oh, let’s say basic humanity. But does he do a bad job of blogging or a bad job of imitating a human being?

My vote goes to Perry de Havilland, for his distrust of govt telling _him_ what to do combined with his trust of the US and UK govts telling Iraq what to do, and his opposition to Big Govt initiatives combined with his rabid support for the war in Iraq – the biggest govt initiative in some time. His distrust of all govt claims outside of claims of success in Iraq (which he takes at face value) is a pain to read, as is his refusal to accept responsibility for any negative results of the war he demanded and agitated for.

He’s just a military socialist. He supports govt every bit as much as any economic socialist, just as long as they’re blowing sh-t up. That looks cool on CNN.

Oh don’t be ridiculous! He doesn’t represent real conservatives in this country. No-one I know takes him seriously. Typical paranoid leftist kerfluffle!

I thought Kim du Toit was a French woman too.

Maybe it’s time for us to sit back and let the Warrior Class men and women take care of things for awhile.

Hey, maybe we could have a double feature:

“Irma la Douce” and “Kim du Toit”

Being so close to Shirley MacLaine ought to send Mr. du Toit into an entertaining fit.

Some of the choices here are pretty vile. Others (Mickey Kaus for heaven’s sake?) just show that for plenty on the left as on the right, “bad” means “someone I disagree with.”

As annoying as Kaus’s liberal-hating liberal schtick could be for progressives, esp. during the Presidential campaign when a liberal victory was a matter of real urgency, I’ll venture to say that when he told us he couldn’t stand Kerry, he unfortunately had a point.

I think the majority of the nominations over at Lawyers, Guns and Money are way off. Jeff Jarvis, Andrew Sullivan, kaus and even Reynolds aren’t as bad, and most aren’t that close, to du Toit, Powerline, LGF, Michelle Malkin, or Adam Yoshida.

True, but he doesn’t have an audience like du Toit. (Does he?) (re: Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler)

Mischa has the Offical Glenn Reynolds Seal of Approval. He’s not as popular as DuToit but he’s more popular than the following:

Ezra Klein
Michael J. Totten
Fafblog
Mark Kleiman
Catch.com
The Panda’s Thumb
Tacitus

Gotta be Powerline.

Nah, it’s easy on reading his stuff to tell what he is and what motivates him and like that. Personally, I can’t stomach InstaPundit who pretends to be the soul of reason and is intellectually dishonest, both with himself and with his readers.

MKK

You know what pisses me off about Kim du Toit? The tacit endorsement of frangible or pre-fragmented ammunition, like the Glaser safety slug. That stuff doesn’t work. He’s also a big fan of the Hydra-Shok, which is really just a cheap gimmick. I mean, whatever, Hydras basically work, but they’re nothing special.

I was only able to adjust his attitude slightly. It used to be that he would explicitly recommend Glasers. It took considerable effort, but I managed to get him to shut up about the Glasers and give proper consideration to a well-engineered jacketed hollow-point such as the Speer Gold Dot.

Thing is, his commenters still talk about frangible ammunition, and he hardly ever sets them straight. Nothing short of willful ignorance can explain it. Anyone who is willing to spend top dollar for ammunition should be steered directly to the Cor-Bon PowRBall.

“I think the majority of the nominations over at Lawyers, Guns and Money are way off. Jeff Jarvis, Andrew Sullivan, kaus and even Reynolds aren’t as bad, and most aren’t that close, to du Toit, Powerline, LGF, Michelle Malkin, or Adam Yoshida.”

But, again, it depends on the crietria (which isn’t to say that yours are wrong, just that there’s more than one way to look at it.) Ideologically, it’s true that Kaus and Jarvis are more palatable that the Powerlines of the world. In terms of the formal quality of the blog, however, Kaus is just horrendous. At least Powerline don’t have imaginary editors, and at least they have no pretense about being Republican hacks.

Of course, Kim du Toit (and the Anti-Idiotarians and LGF) has that ‘hey, look at this utter shit’ factor, where a link to ‘The Pussification…’ gets e-mailed out to huge groups of people who will nearly puke when they realise that there are people out there who fantasise about killing all Africans and yet still hold down a job and have a family.

I’ve noticed over the years that the presence of an advert for the fitness and self defence videos of “Matt Furey”, a slightly pudgy bald man with a website covered in exclamation marks, is an absolutely infallible indicator of a website published by an idiot. I think that Google must have some special code that recognises wingers and morons and inserts adverts for Furey’s products.

My vote goes to Perry de Havilland, for his distrust of govt telling him what to do combined with his trust of the US and UK govts telling Iraq what to do, and his opposition to Big Govt initiatives combined with his rabid support for the war in Iraq – the biggest govt initiative in some time.

And how does this distinguish him from about 500 other “libertarian” hawks out there in the blogosphere?

Personally, I’d have to vote Andrew Sullivan, because I think he actually outdoes Instapundit in terms of “pretend[ing] to be the soul of reason and [being] intellectually dishonest, both with himself and with his readers” (as Mary Kay put it).

Kaus would be a close second, because his writing and presentation are just so godawful.

And how does this distinguish him from about 500 other “libertarian” hawks out there in the blogosphere?

Because he believes he will single handedly bring the UK to it’s knees by leaving in protest over their new national id cards:

I shall try to be out of Britain and have my primary residence in the USA by 2007 at the latest to avoid being forced to submit to this intolerable imposition… and I shall be taking my wealth generating assets with me.

Which is a view of his own self-importance well above the average ‘libertarian’ war-hawk who thinks he, and he alone, knows when to trust govts he otherwise considers totally untrustworthy and only trusted by rubes.

My vote goes to Paul at Wizbang. The substance and style of a Usenet troll, but without the charm. A couple of recent nuggets (pay particular attention to his nuanced interaction with commenters):

http://wizbangblog.com/archives/005469.php
http://wizbangblog.com/archives/005482.php

Me: And how does this distinguish him from about 500 other “libertarian” hawks out there in the blogosphere?

Scott: Because he believes he will single handedly bring the UK to it’s knees by leaving in protest over their new national id cards

Me again: Oh. You have a point.

and I shall be taking my wealth generating assets with me

That was absolutely hilarious. I see what you mean, Scott.

I think we need a sharper definition of what a blogger is. I understood (possibly quite wrongly) that Kaye Grogan and Mickey Kaus were columnists who submitted their stuff for approval (and payment?) to editors. Andrew Sullivan lives by blogging (or he did); he’s responsible for the begging weeks and the adverts or whatever. So with Sullivan, what you see is what you get. There’s no one else pulling the strings or stopping him when he’s off-message.

Is this a fair definition? (I don’t know; that’s why I’m asking.)

Is it out of order to ask whether BlogAds is reliable? I get lots of referer spam which purports to come from various sites and various IP addresses. I’m sure that’s doable for BlogAds stats (ie spam the site with multiple IP address and agent strings). (This would be unethical, and I’m *not* interested.) There’s also the fact that Kos leads Reynolds. But for Reynolds, you only need the front page (ie one page view gives the whole thing), for Kos, the point *is* the comments, so clicking refresh matters. Sorry, those numbers don’t mean very much.

As for my choices, I think we should draw some lines here. Adam Yoshida is pretty young — he’s around 20, and he’s also crazy, as in delusional and paranoid. If we include kids and loons, the standard drops (or lifts) incredibly. Reading Kaye Grogan’s prose, I don’t think she could be executed in Texas, even if she murdered most of the Bush clan while high on gasoline fumes; her IQ is too low for moral responsibility. Reynolds, I reckon I could have a beer with the guy; he mentions his kids affectionately, and he was very concerned about his wife (unlike Lileks who uses family as grist; and there are nicknames which are not cute, but betray the namer as a patronising asshole: roll on the day when Gnat spits “I hate you all!” and disappears for Haight-Ashbury); Kim DuToit has issues, and a very unfortunate name: the worst has to be the dog guy. He can’t spell “God” (it’s three letters; and his species backwards); he’s anonymous, but happy to expose others and suggest violence against them; he’s an egotistical shithead; and there are other reasons, but I don’t want to keep you.

dipnut: is there anything in the book that can’t be summarised in a “shorter” version as:

do loads of pressups

“…is there anything in the book that can’t be summarised as: do loads of pressups”

Yes.

I’m not an expert on calisthenics through the ages, so I can’t judge the value of Furey’s contribution in that context. I strongly doubt he invented any of the exercises; he specifically says he did not invent the main ones. Can there really be anything new under the sun?

Whatever. I like the guy, I admire him, I bought his book, and I’m glad of it. Your mileage may vary.

Yes, yes, I second your choice, Movie Guy. Nothing riles me as much as clubforgrowth.org (save instapundit during the election campaign). I’ve had to avoid it to keep my blood pressure in check.

I vote for Paul from Wizbang.

48 posts in and not one vote for Oliver Willis? Wow.

The problem here is that the meaning of “worst” is unclear. If it is rank incompetence at blogging, then yeah, Kaus is a champion (the first time I saw his site I was baffled about why anyone would link to that worthless drivel), and Wizbang is in the running. If it means someone who is actually competent at writing and organizing a weblog, but is peddling raw hate and stupidity, then sure, the usual right-wing extremists belong in there.

Powerline and Instapundit are in another category altogether, as sycophantic shills for Republican power.

I’m torn between Paul at Wizbang and Hindrocket at Powerline. Hindrocket is definitely a pretentious blowhard, but my experience with Paul ranks right up there with having a boil lanced on my ass. It’s bad enough when someone rants incoherently and cusses out his readers for responding to the very post he wrote. But when they start rewriting your comments and signing your name to them, that wins the prize. [Dan Akroyd imitation] “Mmm mmm. That’s bad blogging!”
So I’ll have to go with Paul.

Missed this.

More people read Kim Du Toit than Tim Blair and Matthew Yglesias combined. There’s a big audience for this stuff.

Well, yeah. So what? Du Toit was silly.

And more people listen to Don Imus or Howard Stern than listen to NPR. BFD. Imus and Stern are silly. One might seriously ask how many people believe that what they hear on Imus or Stern has anything to do with reality Similarly, how many people who listen to NPR believe that what they hear there has anything to do with reality?

The obvious distinction between Atrios and Reynolds is that Atrios allows for comments but Reynolds (at least the last time I was there) did not. As far as I’m concerned, that is a significant distinction.

If the metric is prominence divided by merit then the internet’s stupidest blogger, Oliver Willis, wins this one hands down.

Kim du Toit is a patriot for many natural born Americans to look up to. He was born and raised in one of the most vile government regimes on the face of our planet during the 20th century, perhaps coming in just shy of the Hitler regime. He has been there. He has seen what happens when big government is given free reign and is unchallenged by empowered citizens.

Only a fool would write him off as a neanderthal. He speaks for many well-financed and well-educated American voters. And unlike most lefty bloggers, du Toit is quick to point out when the home team is being foolish (such as the cited critique of Bush’s absent immigration policy).

Vilmar — have you no shame, man? Think of the poor bulls!

Why is it that no one mentions that Kim du Toit spent time in a South African jail for protesting apartheid?

If your going to pick the worst blog, you really should do it on page views, rather than on wether you agree with its position. Based on that, Kim has a pretty good blog. People visit because its interesting and well written.

Kim duToit is one of the five or six blogs I visit daily. I’d never heard of crooked timber until kim linked to it. Maybe you should be thanking him for sending traffic your way.

Michelle Malkin.

While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, it might be helpful if you gave substance behind them.

“I think he is bad because he is bad” is the sort of argument I expect out of a 6 year old.

So take a few hours, post a substantial piece, and try to SAY something instead of whining.

You state
————————————————-
He combines the quiet reasonableness of an Ann Coulter with the eliminationist rhetoric of Dave Neiwert’s worst nightmares.
————————————————-

And then you use this

————————————————-
u Toit was a finalist in “The Vicious Instapundit Blogroll Contest” for this post giggling at the bruises of war protestors. I could go on and on.
————————————————–

to validate your view.

A lot of words are written, but you aren’t saying much.

You guys need a good metric for “good blogger” versus “bad blogger”. And you need to use it consistently.

There are some bloggers who write well. Their work would be suitable for publication in a book of essays, for example. The only one of that type I’ve run into who wasn’t already a published author was Steve DenBeste.

There are other bloggers who write like they’re chatting with you in a pub. Kim duToit belongs in this second category.

In terms of style, his writing varies. At his best, he is an excellent storyteller with a good eye for a happy ending. (See his “Righteus Shootings” category for this kind of stuff.)

At other times, he will give his view of what is wrong with the world. In this category, the writing quality seems inversely proportionality to his rage on the subject. But that measure might give spotty results–a good, cold rage that has been long-thought-out will occasionally produce excellent writing.

You agreement (or disagreement) with his ideas shouldn’t affect this measurement.

I do agree with the guy who posted Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler. The Rott uses invective reflexively. Admittedly this does produce creative invective, but it’s rather like a guy who is always shouting when he talks. You always want to sit on the far side of the room. Plus, he has to shout louder when he gets really steamed.

Proposing Kim because you disagree with what he says is pretty poor stuff – damning his blog for rubbish content (which it isn’t) would be OK.
He makes people THINK.
I wouldn’t use Glazers or Hydrashoks either – JHP feeds reliably & does what it is meant to:-)

on the africa thing, in his defence he’s a south african native and has had the pleasure of witnessing the worst of that continent personally.

Which of course makes his call for the purging of the entire continent so much more reasonable.

As some of the others above have mentioned, what metric for determining the “worst” are you using? I must agree that there are plenty of bad blogs out there. Some are incoherent. Others simply boring. Frankly, from what I’ve read here, this blog belongs in that latter category.

I don’t agree with everything Kim du Toit (and BTW, the juvenile comments really raise the level of the debate, don’t they?) has written, but then I don’t expect to ever agree with everything written by anyone. He raises cogent points, and points to what he perceives to be errors or omissions. What I do expect, and receive, is an honest assessment of what he sees and thinks. I don’t think he has ever shaded his opinion or tried to mealymouth agreement with others. His opinion is there, straight out for view like a knife thrown into a tree. Simple, straight forward and understandable. It seems you are mistaking a lack of nuance wiht a lack of quality.

Your site certainly seems nuanced.

Interesting that self-styled progressives can’t help but make fun of someone’s name. I’ve seen it before with other names of non-leftists. How diverse is that? I bet what DuToit says as style and to blow off steam you actually feel and believe, just from the opposite side; criticizing DuToit would be wholly warranted if you divorce bits and pieces from context, but he is a remarkably well-educated family man. Most of you aren’t fit to wipe Powerline’s backside (and guys who say they are conservative and then act conservative are not hacks; for hacks, see Rather and Hannity) and are jealous of Reynolds, who is clearly a product of right place and time.

Kim speaks for many of us who feel that neither political party really understand or are willing to confront the issues that concern us. I have found his advise about firearms very insightful. Indeed, I purchased my first handgun and rifle based on his advise.
For the life of me, I can never understand why so many people believe that LGF is so hateful. All he does is gather news stories and present them in their own words, with clearly defined commentary. CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC could all take lessons.

Should read:

Du Toit wasn’t calling for a purge — he was just saying the continent of Africa would be much improved if every last African were killed.

So far, I haven’t read a single intelligent criticism of Kim duToit.
I’d back his judgement–and honesty–on the subject of Africa ahead of any other blogger (and any MSM “journalist”) I’ve read to date.
But then, I’m just another ex-army white African know-nothing.

Im just a high school student (therefore stupid and impressionable, unlike the greats of intellectualism whom have posted here) so dont take me too seriously, but since ive been reading du Toit’s site its gotten me a lot more interested in current events and active politically. I definately dont agree with everything he says but that doesnt mean i dont give credit where credit is due. If you read his posts and got past the blatantly anti liberal rhetoric you would realize most of his posts are about how to better humanity…. but maybe that isnt your goal.

None of you have read lennins tomb or the blogsites that say GWBush worked for Hitler, Du toit has observed with great accuracy the Euro bullshit going on over here and is widely travelled, he also saw the potential for good things in the middle east, you do not like his views, but does that make him wrong? nurture your free speach, in England we have lost ours. As for Africa he lived there, have you? is Rhodesia better off now? are the indigenious population well fed and looked after in a manner ther WANT? check the real history of this violent place and bring reason not lies to the table, no Du Toit is the voice of reason and his blog is well written and often gives links to his facts, you should read it more often.

I think you guys are living in the dark if you don’t see the masses that are flocking to Kim’s page. This is a BIG chuck of America, like it or not, Kim reflects the way alot of us feel!

And Hitler reflected the way a lot of Germans felt: so what? And no, this doesn’t count for a Godwin’s Law invocation: anyone who could write the eliminationist rubbish du Toit did, about a continent he only knows from within the confines of apartheid South Africa, deserves to be placed in Hitler’s company. Heck, not even Hitler had the audacity to propose that the world would be better off without ~600 million people.

Interesting how so many people can argue about the meaning of something (Kim’s Africa essay) that’s plainly and clearly visible for all to see. Did y’all fail reading for comprehension in middle school?

You can argue as to whether you agree with the content, but how can you argue about the meaning of the content? Kim’s writing is about as clear and unambiguous as it gets.

Do I agree with Kim? On this one, yes. I grew up in South Africa, and the post-Apartheid ANC-run New-South-Africa is a wonder to behold.

The Apartheid years may have been horrible, but the worst is yet to come.

Damn. Where’s Was (Not Was) when you need them?

I don’t agree with du Toit on a host of subjects; but as a blogger he’s one of my favorites. Why:
1) On a subject that we share – an interest on firearms – his blog in an invaluable source of information. Very few sites combine good technical information and easy readability for the uninitiated like Kim’s.
2) Disagreeing with someone’s poliltical stance(s) doesn’t diminish the quality of their writing. In the marketplace of ideas you don’t buy everything on display, but the display might make you linger a bit longer than you would’ve. Well written blather is still blather but it’s also still well written. Even when he’s spouting nonsense he’s at least entertaining (in a hyperbolic, could snap at any moment and kill you sort of way) which is more than can be said about most bloggers. Care to quote a clever turn of phrase from Reynolds, Sullivan, or Willis?
3) For all the sanctimony, the proof of commitment to freedom and equality of most of the critics here consists of a “Free Tibet” t-shirt and participation in a march in the park. You might disagree with the method’s that du Toit proposes to arrive there, but I do believe that he’s got the stripes to prove his commitment.
4) Unlike most sites, Kim actually addresses dissenting opinions. Keep it civil and you can argue until the cows come home, unlike a) sites that don’t allow comments (Instapundit) or b) sites where dissent is instantly labeled as a troll/banned/deleted (Atrios). My first response to du Toit’s blog was an email calling him a “curmudgenly old bastard”; he sent me a polite reply and answered some questions.

But since the criticisms have nothing to with substance and everything to do with emotions and rancor it kinda makes this post kind of pointless joke, doesn’t it?

What is it with these wingers and their farcical declarations of victory in the face of all available evidence?

Gosh, I wonder where they get that from.

Yeah, when all else fails, resort to playground name-calling and snide little ad hominem attacks.

It’s not my fault if you can’t tell the difference between someone calling you a name, and someone thinking it’s funny that you probably get called a certain, ironic-in-light-of-a-certain-writing, name a lot.

Hitler was a socialist, like many liberals.

He also claimed to be a “worker,” like many conservatives.

The difference between you and me is that I realize that this kind of argument is BS, and you seem to think it establishes some sort of intellectual dominance.

“The difference between you and me is that I realize that this kind of argument is BS, and you seem to think it establishes some sort of intellectual dominance.”

Why is this argument BS? Liberals hit us with “Bush=Hitler” lines constantly. I personally don’t think most liberal folks are like Hitler, but the fact remains that Hitler was a socialist who wanted the government to have a great deal of power. I view anyone who wants to empower government with distrust.

Hitler claimed to be a worker and that makes him like a conservative? Nice try, but who runs for office claiming to be a lazy bastard, or out of touch elitist? Hitler also loved dogs and children. So what?

Hitler claimed to be a worker and that makes him like a conservative?

Well, no. That was sort of my point — that that form of argument is BS.

A secondary point was that the “socialist” part of “National Socialist German Worker’s Party” probably shouldn’t be taken any more seriously than the “worker” part.

I also don’t understand why you would make fun of a man’s name.

You also apparently don’t understand that I don’t think his name is funny. I do think it’s funny that there are probably people running around right now mispronouncing the name of the author of a screed on “pussification” in that specific way. I think that’s funnier than a proctology manual written by “Seymour Butts.”