Who threw whom under what bus?

Kidist Paulos Asrat writes:

I don’t know who this blogger is, but he seems to associate himself with Atlas Shrugs, Gates of Vienna and others.

He just did a PhotoShopped image of those who’ve been thrown off the Charles Johnson bus—I found it at Diana West’s blog. You are not there, nor are people asking why not (they’re still waiting for Geert Wilders to appear, for example).

Some of these bigger names obviously aren’t supporting you, and as I noticed, Spencer hasn’t responded to the awful comparison of you with Charles Johnson on his Jihad Watch blog comments, besides making this comment himself.

I know all these anti-jihadists have made contributions, whether scholarly, or just dissemination of information, but as far as I know, although all of them seem to speak volumes about the evils of jihad, I don’t think any of them has made attempts to delineate how to tackle this problem. This weak link on their part is very dangerous. And they are not eager, for whatever reason, to incorporate your ideas to strengthen their link. But others (besides the VFR crowd) need to hear them. I get the feeling that they’re secluding you into a corner. I hope my impressions are wrong.

LA replies:

Of course they’re secluding me, or, more accurately, I’m simply a pariah or non-person in their world.

LA continues to Kidist:

I shared our exchange with a friend, who wrote back:

Thanks—I have also been pondering this question but have no answer yet. Some of these people are so insecure that they do not see reality clearly.

I would tend to argue that you were never ON the CJ bus so hard to be thrown off it, however, your treatment at JW/GoV was disgusting

I replied to him:

Yes, that ‘s true of course. I had no connection with Johnson at all prior to the attack on me at LGF. So the “throw under the bus” trope does not apply to me.

Kidist replied:

Yes, good point re not being on the bus originally. Still, CJ seems to think you’re of the same lunatic, Eurofascist supporter fringe that he’s put these others in, thus technically you’re their ally. Which of course is a moot point for these “kicked-of-the-bus” anti-jihadists, since your ideas are just “too marginal” for their cause.

LA replies:

Yes, you’re right. If anyone threw me under the bus, it’s not CJ, but several of the people whom CJ threw under the bus. I’m so unpopular that I’m a pariah among the people whom CJ has turned into pariahs. :-)

LA writes:

By the way, I still don’t know who originated the expression, “to throw someone under the bus.” I believe I asked VFR readers a few months ago if it was Sailer, since his article about Obama throwing his grandmother under the bus was the first time I saw the expression, but I never got any feedback on that.

James M2 writes:

Here is an article from the etymology blog The Word Detective, “Words and Language in a Humorous Vein,” which attempts to answer this question.

LA replies:

Ok, it did not, as I had thought, originate with Sailer’s comments on Obama, it’s been around for years.

The below exchange is part of a longer correspondence. I post just this part of it for the moment to correct a certain possible misimpression of what I was saying in my exchange with Kidist.

A reader writes:

I would be interested to know what ‘seclusion’ means in the context of a free internet. can you explain how you have been secluded? you mean simply your non-appearance in the photoshopped image? maybe the guy who did it had just never heard of you, or was not interested in you or you blog. is that not possible? the people in the photo are overwhelmingly those who have physically attended counter-jihad conferences in europe or the states and are part of an emerging ‘team’ of sorts. I very much doubt there is a ‘seclude auster’ thing going on, though I can ask the blogger in question if you like (I have met him). would you like me to do that for you? I would hate to think you were sitting there in front of your screen, not only about to see obama elected president, but feeling secluded from your rightful comrades in europe.

LA replies:

I did not say anything about the picture, Kidist discussed the picture, and in fact I posted the comment from another correspondent who said—and I agreed with him—that I would not have belonged in that picture since CJ had not thrown me under the bus. Yet you’re under the impression that I feel aggrieved at not being in the picture! So you’ve reversed my meaning 180 degrees.

It’s really something. I’ve been torn apart, described repeatedly as a psychopathic loser, liar, ego-maniac, totalitarian, a tyrant who refuses to deal with people if they criticize me, a person who demands absolute agreement, a person who excludes all comments from my site unless they are sycophantic, a character assassin (even “the lowest form of character assassin”), the moral equivalent of Charles Johnson (“two sides of the same coin”), and a monster whom all decent people should avoid. And how do you interpret this situation? That I’m complaining about not being in a picture. Thus you utterly misrepresent and trivialize my situation.

On “secluding me,” please read my comment again, I specifically corrected the idea that I’ve been “secluded,” to saying “I’m a pariah in their world,” which is certainly true.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at November 03, 2008 11:27 AM | Send