Sophia's Identity Crisis

Anyone who reads Mt. Blogmore is sure to have come across the postings of commenter "Sophia." In fact recently, she's been posting in a flurry on the abortion topic over there. For example:
Friday was the final day of the task force’s life, and the day to create the final report. The right-wing Regressives had the majority of votes from the moment the task force was created, so they never had to consider science they didn’t agree with. Those Reegressives who were present included Benson, a twitchy little bug-eyed suit; Duenwald, senator from Hoven; Greenfield, about as bright as a white glow stick in a blizzard; Kraus, who has all the dullness of a butter knife. She can cut through soft butter, but nothing of substance. I swear there is not an ounce of creativity or energy or imagination in her entire body; Miles, who only spoke once, but was always sure to vote with her fellow men; Stransky, whose odd remarks you’ll read later; Unruh, from whom a scent of ill-defined but pervasive ickiness wafted; and Wachs.

As opposed to laying things out on philosophical grounds as to why she disagrees, Sophia from time to time resorts to the time honored tradition of personal insult, while remaining under cover of anonymity, other than her screen name. She disagreed with the people as in the passage above? Well, they are "dull," " dim" and "icky." Even though I don't care for Rush Limbaugh, deriding him as "Rush Limpballs" was another "sophism" I could have lived without.

Recently, until it was pointed out by a friend and colleague on Mt Blogmore, I hadn't noted this little passage. I found this interesting, intriguing, and I thought it might hold the answer to why this poster is propagandizing across the Internet and SD Blogosphere so much on the Abortion Task Force.

Remember, all these proposed measures were voted down, everyone of them. Makes you wonder what the regressives real priorities are.

Sophia: Since you were on the task force and understand the minority report so well, it would have been great if you could have summarized it for us. I think that is always more effective, for most people’s understanding, than a deluge of information. K.W.

Comment by Sophia — 12/18/2005 @ 10:44 pm
Whooaaaa. In responding to this post, Did Rapid City Journal Reporter Kevin Woster let slip a clue to who (the somewhat anonymous Mt. Blogmore poster) “Sophia” is?

It could have been an inadvertent slip of the typewriter, but “on the task force” is much different from “attended the task force.” So I looked at the task force roster.

Based on Kevin's comment, my initial suspicions were that it was entirely possible that "Sophia" might be Kate Looby ghostwriting. Tons of information on Abortion. A general dislike for conservative pro-life Republicans. And the rest.

So tonight, I did some research.

But my theory just didn’t jibe up with any evidence. Something was wrong here. Was I wrong about the identity of our mystery commenter who seems to hate conservatives with such a passion? Is our mysterious insulter someone else? The conclusion - Yup. I was dead wrong.

It’s not anyone who was on the committee. Not Kate Looby. Not Stan Adelstein. Not Brock Greenfield. Not Dr. Bell. That comment by Kevin only served as a red herring to throw me off the track..…

So the mystery deepened. Who is “Sophia”?

How could something this simple stump me. You know, “Me.” ‘PP’, sometimes referred to as “Professor PP”. The guy who calls himself a crack researcher. The guy who held a job as an investigator for about 5 years. The guy who unlike everyone else in the SD Blogosphere figured out who SD Blog Watch Man was. And I’m still kicking myself over doing it. (Come back SD Blog Watch man, come back).

So, I said to myself, "Self, I can’t be stumped so easily."

Going back and reassessing my assumption that Kevin spoke the gospel truth, I now started under the assumption that he meant “at” when he typed “on.”

I did a little research, and remembered some writings from Sophia on another weblog in the SD Blogosphere. I continued my research on Mt. Blogmore for clues to her identity. (Like Blue and Steve from “Blues Clues”). “Grew up on a farm”… "On earliest postings, listed home as Newell, " etc… And then, actually from information filed away in my head, and confirmed by another blogger, I came across it.

Originally, the information had been on the Internet for just a moment. It was there only briefly before anonymity was chosen. Through powers of deductive reasoning (despite being dimmed and abused by too many late nights in college) I’ve divined who it is. I’ve figured out the identity of “Sophia” on Mt. Blogmore.

I was actually a little surprised at the identity of this person who flings such disdain on conservative Republicans. Who calls Republican Legislators "Dim" and "Dull" for having a position which differs from her own.

At least when I give someone heck, I at least make the attempt to base it on a specific ignorant action. And those who feel my momentary scorn know who's scourging them. I don't go to any lengths to hide my identity. My screen name is about as un-anonymous as they come when coupled with my description about myself.

Ask anyone in Pierre who the PP is with six kids whose wife & kids are living in Brookings. I'd almost guarantee you won't have to go past asking three people. My name has often appeared in my comment sections, and other blogs have use my name from time to time, and it's no big deal. I use PP mainly to keep the crazies from calling at 2am, and also so new people will read this blog without being pre-prejudiced as to what it says. (Wait until afterwards to think I stink)

But anyway...... Because I think debate is what brings two opposing sides closer to an understanding, and I'm under no compulsion to release my evidence (which is there for anyone to find if they know where to look) , I'll just keep the Identity of Mt. Blogmore poster "Sophia" to myself. I still feel bad about SD Blog Watch Man, whom I might not have always agreed with, but he made me laugh. When I figured it out, he dropped his blog, and it only made myself and others suffer for my curiosity.

So, for those of you wondering, the information won't be released today. But let's leave it with a thought.

Today's "Jerry Springer parting thought?" You're never as anonymous as you might think you are on the Internet. So, argue, debate, and discuss. But try to leave personal insults out of it unless you're willing to publicly stand behind them. At least then people will see you have the strengths to stand behind your convictions.


Silas said…
Perhaps Sophia could find an internship with Sibby or those models of benignity at SDP.
Anonymous said…
If we can't make light of what can only be called a fools project involving many fools what are we then...uptight political geeks who travel hundreds of miles to listen to the likes of Napoli and Apa forgoing what can only be described as one of college footballs greatest games.
MJB said…
Making fun of foolish things is good, but I think PP's point was pride of authorship, as opposed to anonymous criticism.

Silas, you have to admit that Sibby and the SDP boys are certainly not anonymous.

And anonymous, making fun for "forgoing college footballs greatest game?" I'm sure you could have gone in a dark closet, tied your left hand behind your back, and spent your time more constuctively.
Douglas said…
I don't think "Sophia" has an identity crisis. He/she/it may have a job conflict with public posting.

I prefer to see real names attached to posts. I tend to take them a bit more seriously. It is nice to say, "We should just considered the quality of the content rather than the writer." Why sure. But, we don't really know the agenda of the writer, or if they are paid shills then.

In any case, "Sophia" posts much more information than quick slam scans of a collection of oily ideologues and political profiteers on a hopelessly slanted task force on abortion.

Incidentally, do you like "Marie's" benign always sweet comments at Mt. Blogmore, and "St.James", et al?
Anonymous said…
Special Guest Legislator" Senator Jerry Apa explained the deficit as being akin to spending in a checking account with a ready reserve. You write more than you take in immediately, but you have the ready reserve to cover the shortfall until you can replace it.

He said he doesn't consider that we have a structural deficit, we have a savings account to temporarily draw on.

A question was posed from the floor - "is State Government’s spending akin to the federal government spending out of social security?" Senator Apa noted, "No. We do not draw on any dedicated funds. We draw on the interest, but we’ve never violated the principal to fund state government." to that a little time to myself in the closet sounds good and more constructive. I wonder, did he have to explain the concept of the checking account as well?
Anonymous said…
Being a follower of Mt. Blogmore and its posters, I was excited to think I was going to learn who Sophia was, only to get to the end and find out zilch. Oh, well. I don't think Marie's or St. James or Lexrex's comments are as benign (your sarcasm noted BTW)as some of the others, like the sermons/philosophizing of DL, the blowhardiness of BDB, and the wacky comments of some of the ohters. All in all a good read there though.
PP said…
Now that I have a chance to get back to the post, Doug - you've hit the nail on the head with regards to her anonymity (and it was a old old post of yours that confirmed my suspicions).

Could I have outed her "big time?" Yes. Why didn't I? Because I wouldn't want to mess with her job because of her blogging.

Cheap way out? Yes. But just because I don't agree with her doesn't mean I want to do her harm.

She's not running for office and blogging surreptitiously, so outing her to everyone doesn't win me anything. It doesn't advance my cause. It wouldn't be anything more than kicking someone to the curb.

And after 18 years in the game, I hope I'm *a little* better than that. If not, I should be. So I'm just going to keep it to myself.

And anonymous - "Uptight political geek?" Political geek maybe, but uptight? I don't think anyone has ever accused me of that.

I'd describe it more as a phenomenal capacity for alcohol consumption (which has diminished with age) and a smart-ass mouth, coupled with an irreverent attitude which has gotten me into trouble more than once.

And if my choice is driving to watch a political forum (especially one that makes establishment politicians nervous about what will be said) or drooling in front of a television watching other people playing a game, you can keep your "foosball" (as Bobby Bouchie's mother called it).

I'm going to take a chance and watch something that might matter.
Silas said…
MJB (weren't you a coffee brand in another incarnation?):

Anonymous, no. Witless, yes.

I am trying to find out how to nominate Sophia for a Pulitzer for "Fush Limpballs." I do not personally know the cast of characterless on the abortion task force, but their work does indicate that species that lives on the enamoration of their own armpits and flatulence.

In this case, Douglas, the barbs do have a salience that the wire does not.
Steve Sibson said…
I can't help but to notice how PP has a problem with Sophia's use of personal insults, but then gives such glowing praise to the SD Blog Watch Man, who I view as the king of personal insults on the 2005 SD blogosphere.
PP said…
Sibby - Glowing? I said he made me laugh. And that's it.

And he's been gone what? 6 months now?
Steve Sibson said…

Remember this 7/25/2005 statment you made about the jerk:

"I think his blog is one of the best ones out there..."

Perhaps glowing wasn't the right adjective.

Popular posts from this blog

Why should we be surprised?

That didn't take long