Reading that exchange made me very angry. He flat out lied about you Tan, calling you “evil” and a “douche”. How ought to look on the mirror.
He has to be somewhat threatened by you, because what in the hell else caused the CATLADY to have such a hissy fit I wonder?

Ps: Hunter Wallace posted this on VNN, it’s short but worth reading:

“The Wild Boys of Counter Currents”:
Greg Johnson has raised over $40,000 from White Nationalists this year alone … and he uses it to commission articles about underage boys having gay interracial sex.

Counter-Currents has been implicitly queer since the beginning, but this is the first time I have seen it explicitly spelled out like this.

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=167271

Not familiar with the guy, but reading through the comments, I quickly came to that conclusion as well. Smart, but as a consequence of his lack of character, unfocused and (also as a consequence) unable to resist ad hominem.

Comparing me to Auster? That hurts.

Auster’s insistence on “precise and accurate language” was by no means a weakness. In fact, it’s why it was so important to mercilessly attack and expose him, lest others mistook his understanding of intellectual integrity for intellectual integrity itself.

I commend Tan for his insistence on precise, direct language. He raises the bar, and in so doing exposes the frauds and weaklings.

What’s really funny is that the insistence on precise and accurate language echoes exactly what Auster tended to say about people like Mark Steyn and Melanie Phillips when they would refuse to mention immigration and Islam specifically. He had a point, but his absolutism in rejecting outright anything that didn’t meet his own standards was a weakness. It didn’t and doesn’t mean that Mark Steyn isn’t saying anything worthwhile. Same goes here.