Ed Cone envy

Ed Cone has reached a blogging nirvana of sorts and I am jealous.

Only a blogger who has reached a certain pinnacle of success and total readership will ever get to experience the satisfaction that must come with having your every word scrutinized within its own category on one blog (which has increased Sam’s own readership, I’m sure) and so expertly parodied on another.

I now check the most excellent “Effed Up” as often as Drudge and not just for the parody of Ed’s posts.  In the hilarious comments, the mystery proprietor captures the essence of Ed’s “entourage” and feeds it back to us all through an unflenching, equal-opportunity and darkly tinted mirror.

While most everyone gets a good belly-laugh when they see themselves show up in Effed Up’s closed-to-everyone comments, the real Dr. Mary Johnson says she want’s to opt out… “…Have your fun. But I have asked nicely. I really do not want to play.”

Knowing how purveyors of parody operate, I don’t think I would have mentioned that.

This entry was posted in Blogging and Blogs. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. Posted April 19, 2007 at 7:05 am | Permalink

    Wait — I knew the posts were parody, but are you saying the comments aren’t real?

  2. dhoggard
    Posted April 19, 2007 at 7:35 am | Permalink


    Oh no. They’re real enough. Apparently a little too real for Dr. Johnson.

  3. The CA
    Posted April 19, 2007 at 9:23 am | Permalink

    I think it’s all good fun, and accurate on a number of levels.

  4. Posted April 19, 2007 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    David. I really wish that you and Sue and Roch and the rest would GIVE IT A REST. What part of (1) I have fairly good reasons to be “dour”, and (2) I’m not up for it right now, do you-all not get?

    The bullies need to back off. I’ve asked nicely.

  5. Posted April 19, 2007 at 12:55 pm | Permalink

    Dr. J is calling me out again? What I’d do now?

    $10 says it’s something only in Dr. J’s imagination.

  6. Posted April 19, 2007 at 1:14 pm | Permalink

    You can’t decide whether or not you’ll be parodied. That would sort of take the fun out of it.

    I laugh hardest at “Effed Up” when I’m the butt (sometimes literally) of a joke.

    Satire can be cruel — but at least this is GOOD satire.

  7. Posted April 19, 2007 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

    “I’m not up for it right now, do you-all not get.”

    I’m not trying to be anybody’s mama or anything, but when somebody straight up and publicly says, “I need a break,” maybe everybody could consider respecting that a little bit, huh? We don’t ever know what’s going on in somebody else’s offline world. Give her a little peace, people. Please.

  8. Posted April 19, 2007 at 3:34 pm | Permalink

    it’s much easier to not visit the blog than beg for removal. i highly doubt that’ll work. btw, didn’t ed ask dr. mj to not publish his email to her or something?

    oops. karma has a paddle.

  9. dhoggard
    Posted April 19, 2007 at 7:05 pm | Permalink


    I have gone in and edited your comment and mine to remove a word that offended you. Please accept my apologies.

    I truly had no intention of “bullying”. However, in light of the fact that you came out swinging so hard following Sue’s “Malignant” post a few days ago, I assumed you were steeled for a little ribbing. I obviously didn’t read your appeal to Effed Up with enough seriousness. And, again, I apologize for needlessly upsetting you.

    Michele, thanks for the nudge and know that I would have edited sooner but just now came in from work.

  10. Posted April 19, 2007 at 7:05 pm | Permalink

    Roch, I have a suggestion for your ten dollars. You really are a piece of work.

    Sean, let’s deal in reality for a minute. In the e-mail exchange you reference (which started with a pile-on at Sam’s), Mr. Cone popped into my inbox and called me a liar. He would like to deny or downplay it now . . . but he cannot because the exchange was published. That is “karma�. Edward is a journalist. He knows how “off-the-record� works. I suspect he wanted the exchange down (AFTER it was published) because he did not exactly come off as blogger-princely in it.

    I am in this blogosphere for unique reasons . . . reasons that HURT and HURT BAD and have affected EVERY DAY of my professional and personal life for the last nearly ten years. Now I KNOW that people like Roch and Sue and Ed and JR could care less, but I don’t measure my “success� in blogging by being parodied as one of Ed’s “entourage�. Because I’m not.

    Cara Michelle, thank you. You are a sweet soul. But you’re wasting your time. These guys and gals (so concerned with “civility� in our local blogosphere) don’t just kick when someone is down, they STOMP. I believe the word is “malignant�.

  11. Jim Rosenberg
    Posted April 19, 2007 at 7:49 pm | Permalink

    Dr. Mary is not a public figure. I was struck by how politely she asked for a break, and how it seemed to matter to her. If changing the tone means anything, it ought to include honoring a simple heartfelt request, no matter what the history. Karma means more than “payback’s a bitch.” It’s an always-available opportunity.

  12. Posted April 19, 2007 at 8:34 pm | Permalink

    I feel the emails should not be publshed because they were personal correspondence, Mary.

    I have no problem with the content of the emails

    It shows quite clearly that I was trying to tell you yet again that I do not have the hostile views about you that you constanty ascribe to me.

    It did no good. I regret that.

  13. Posted April 19, 2007 at 9:51 pm | Permalink

    Edward, we disagree about the e-mails. There are some things I will put up with and some things I will not. Being called a “liar” after (especially after everything I’ve been through) is decidedly in the NOT category. And FYI, it was a little “hostile”.

    Just like the early slams you leveled about my writing . . . the low-life/mean-spirited slurs against my mental status (Roch’s favorite) . . . the digs about not being able to find a journalist interested in the story . . . AND being targeted as a “malignant narcissist” by “Dr. Sue” (she of the “perfect” life rubbing my face in it). And you wonder why people come out swinging? Or why there are not more people subjecting themselves to this garbage? Get a mirror. Get real.

    I regret that I ever put any faith at all in the kings of “citizen journalism” in Greensboro, North Carolina.

    Now THAT was the real lie.

    And yes, Jim, it REALLY mattered.

  14. Posted April 19, 2007 at 11:52 pm | Permalink

    “the low-life/mean-spirited slurs against my mental status (Roch’s favorite)”


  15. dhoggard
    Posted April 20, 2007 at 6:00 am | Permalink

    But wait… I thought one of Dr. Johnson’s previous characterizations of Edward only identified him as a “prince” among local bloggers. How in the hell did he get elevated to kingly status and why wasn’t I consulted about it?

    Roch, did you authorize a coronation without informing everyone?

  16. Posted April 20, 2007 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    My, how short the memory is. Comment number five, Roch. You can send your ten dollars to the local homeless shelter.

    And David, I’ll note your “apology” lasted all of six comments. To answer your question (and if memory serves), sometime back Doug Clark coronated JR “King” and Edward “High Priest” of our local blogosphere. That makes Edward a “prince” of this particular “church”.

    Take it up with Doug.

  17. Posted April 20, 2007 at 11:17 am | Permalink

    I’ve had it. The woman is not well. Drop it. David, you’re a punk.

  18. Posted April 20, 2007 at 11:34 am | Permalink

    I have just decided David will be mu new bitch. Remember last time, asshole? I’ve been practicing. Prepare to laugh.

  19. Jim Rosenberg
    Posted April 20, 2007 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

    At 12:43 pm today, I personally witnessed David Hoggard consume cherry cobbler without the prior express approval based on a highly questionable claim of privilege supposedly conferred by approved cobbler consumer and Board of County Commissioners Chairman Paul Gibson. I’m sorry, David. I can’t carry this around for the rest of my life.

  20. Posted April 20, 2007 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

    Dr. J, you are not very reasonable.

    I wrote that your reasons for writing that I was some how giving you a hard time were likely “in Dr. J’s imagination.” You interpret that as “slamming low-life/mean-spirited slurs against [your] mental status (Roch’s favorite).” And thus prove my point. It was neither an attack on your mental status nor “my favorite.”

    That your ideas frequently seem to come from your imagination rather than from the facts at hand is not a comment on your mental state. It is an observation of your standards for accuracy and of your tendency to write things that are far from factually accurate and just, quite simply, not well-reasoned. If they didn’t include accusations against me, I wouldn’t care.

  21. dhoggard
    Posted April 20, 2007 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

    I’m ready to rumble, Fec. But as Rosenberg’s little (true) snippet above will attest, I have extraordinary powers of persuasion – and I KNOW PEOPLE – and will turn the world squarely against you. (Of course, I mean the rest of the world… not the part that is already…. oh, never mind…..) I’ll be yo’ bitch if you want and I’ll damn well enjoy it.

    Mary, my apology still stands. My comment was aimed – again in fun – at Ed. I figure that since this conversation is occuring at my blog that it might be OK to stay and talk. Thanks for providing me the order of ascendency and the source – but where do I fit in? My bloodlines are impeccable – my pedigree is above reproach. I’ll ask Doug if I can be king for a day or two. Being a pauper is getting a little tiresome.

    And, as for you, Jim. I ‘m glad you got that off your chest and into cyberspace. But, I wasn’t just using Chairman Gibson’s cobble clout. County Manager McNeil also offered cover for my clandestine dessert taking.

  22. Posted April 20, 2007 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

    Sorry, Dave’O. I looked at several themes, but nothing panned out. You’re simply not that bad a dude.

    Maybe next time.

  23. Posted April 20, 2007 at 9:21 pm | Permalink

    Roch, like Ed, your “explanations” of simple snark is tedious. I’m tired of boxing shadows with you.

    “The woman is not well”. No. Tonight I suppose I am not. I’m worn-out and very sad. FYI Fec, Cara Michelle is actually very wise. Something very bad happened this week . . . something I worked very, very hard to prevent (by following all of the rules I followed ten years ago . . . all of the rules that, of course, did not work and left me swinging).

    Those rules still don’t work.

    I don’t know what I’m going to do about it yet. But I’m going to do something.

  24. Posted April 21, 2007 at 8:38 am | Permalink

    I realize I’m coming to this conversation late, but wha?? Quoting Mary:
    “Sue and Roch and the rest”
    “Now I KNOW that people like Roch and Sue and Ed and JR could care less”
    ““Dr. Sueâ€? (she of the “perfectâ€? life rubbing my face in it)”

    Do we note a pattern here? I wasn’t even involved in this conversation and alluvasudden it’s my fault (and each comment grew the supposed abuse)? And I’m just a little tired of word twisting for self-aggrandizement. This exchange shows, (sorry CM, sharing facts does not equate to self-defined bullying), that it’s not a plaintive plea…it’s deliberate ‘publicize my case,’ (which Ed has responded to so well and so often, I’m not going to repeat it).

    Let’s quote Sue accurately:
    I wrote, “…my kids are perfect 1″

    The footnote reads:
    “1 Every mother’s children are perfect in my world.”

    Tell me that says that my world is perfect (instead of what it really says: my kids are great and so are yours) and I’ll fund Roch’s $10 bet. The intentional word-mangling to support a non-existent paranoia is way too unsubtle to be anything other than borderline ‘make-sh*t-up-as-you-go-along’ and see who takes the bait.

    For a team of people deliberately trying to ‘bully’ her, we do a bad job. I haven’t had time to see or visit with Roch for months (I work all the time) and Ed and I have been trying to have coffee scheduled for a while (see prior parens). If this is a cabal, we really suck at it. Methinks the doc doth protest a whole lot more than reality allows. And it needs to stop. Just who’s getting bullied ’round these parts?

  25. Posted April 21, 2007 at 10:25 am | Permalink

    Maybe you skipped over comment #23?

    Sue, go away. This conversation is over.

  26. The CA
    Posted April 21, 2007 at 2:30 pm | Permalink

    Anyhow, I agree with Killian…