Wednesday, April 14, 2010

This "Political Huckster" Can Do The Math

In another development of the ongoing feud between this blog and The Midknight Review, conservative activist John Smithson has decided to call me a "huckster" now.  I continue to entertain this fraud because, well, it's kind of fun and a good break from my normal activities.  According to Smithson, my site has confused many conservatives looking for his site that spells "midnight" with a "k". 
What this fellow has done is to plagiarize the effect of our blog's name, pretends to be a "moderate Republican" and authors an attempt to co-opt the conservative grassroots concern. We caught him in the act and now he is pretending to be an innocent under attack by a more powerful, albeit, "wacko conservative " blog.

We have received email from folks wondering why we are putting out Democrat "talking points." We have to respond by pointing to the fact that this "The Midnight Review" is not " Midknight Review - new and revised." Those who are concerned have missed the fact that this fellow has omitted the "k" in the title of his blog. We must admit that it took us a few weeks to figure out what was happening.

Look, this Kevin guy voted for Obama, supports the Huffington Post and Think Progress, considers the freaks at MSNBC to be legitimate news casters, supports the murder of the unborn while pretending to a {practicing] Catholic, and claims the political association of "Republican" as he confuses the blogging public with his "The Midnight Review."

We note that this political huckster refuses to enter into a written debate with this author, and has never penned a critical review of anything that might be considered "Marxist/socialist."

Be not confused.
It is interesting. Smithson initially attacked me for plagiarizing his site, but now I am simply plagiarizing an "effect," whatever that may be. Apparently, in my attempt to shill for the Marxist/socialist agenda, I have confused those who really sought The Midknight Review. Those wanted to know whay I echoed Democratic talking points, and as Smithson points out, I am only "pretending" to be a moderate Republican. Smithson also adds onto the web of lies by claiming I advocate the murder of unborn children as well, which is interesting because I had never written anything favorable about abortion...

I had noticed a couple other things on The Midknight Review since the lsat article about my site. Smithson thought it was appropriate to post some self serving stats regarding site traffic. I was surprised at what I saw.

Smithson wrote in response to my earlier blog post the following:
My blog is received in more than 40 countries (it was 70 with the original Review), is located on more than 30 search engines world wide. My "charts and graphs" is used by a number of educational institutions in this country and others.

I have a first time visit vs repeat visit ration of 35 / 65 and was recently interviewed by members of the graduate school at UCLA.

Your traffic versus mine: understand that you are new on the scene. It is expected that your traffic will be less -- much less -- than mine. I score no points by making this comparison. That is why I have not gone there.

But regarding my traffic, exclusively, my blog with its several pages has had more than 39,000 hits in the three years I have been blogging (beginning with Barth and the Boyz) and 36,000 his since my Midknight Review came onto the scene a year and a half ago. You do the math.
I decided to do just that.  According to Smithson, who posted the traffic numbers for all of his blogs, the magic number comes to 834 for the month.  Now looking at the figures, I would think that "Midknight Review" refers to the original site that he had up for over a year and a half (hence the zero site traffic for the past month), while "Midknight Review II" would be the current incarnation.  Now am an unsure if his tracking software begins its tally at the beginning of each month or at the beginning of each 30 day period, so for comparitive reasons, I will assume that it starts tabulations at the beginning of each month.  So, to be fair, I have decided to load up my Google Analytics account to compare numbers for my one site to compare with all eighteen of his.  I had considered including the site numbers for my other Blogger pages, but since they do not relate to this page, I felt it would not be fair to include them, and so, below are the site traffic results of my page.

So, how do I compare to The Midknight Review?  I was surprised to discover that my site does pretty well for itself.  Comparing my site to "Midnight Review II", my site actually leads by 120 visits.  While Smithson claims to have a new visit percentage of  35%, mine is roughly twice as much, meaning the majority of visits to my website is twice as much, while Smithson's site receives more traffic from repeat visitors.  This is not necessarily a bad thing, because while Smithson's site receives more traffic from those who have already seen his site, the potential for gaining new repeat visitors is far less.  There is something else to consider when looking at these numbers -  the statistics I posted for The Midnight Review are for just one site, while as I stated above, Smithson includes the visitation of all eighteen of his.  My counter takes into consideration visitors who view more then one page, while Smithson's does not, meaning a visit will be double counted should one person go from one page to the next.  This is evident by Smithson's own numbers.  Yesterday, I had visited several of The Midknight Review's pages.  Smithson's chart shows that many of his pages had a single visitor yesterday.  That would mean that my visit was counted multiple times.

Now after seeing the numbers, and that my site seems to be fairing better then his own, I question why Smithson's readers are confused by the existence of my website, especially if the repeat visitation rate for The Midknight Review is 65%?  If his visitors can't differentiate between his site with a "k" and my site without one, and the fact that his posts state that they are posted by "jds" while mine state they are posted by "Kevin," then I would have to bring into question their intelligence, or better yet, I would have to bring into question their existence.  Smithson claims he has received emails questioning my site's content, but I highly doubt that.  I think Smithson is trying to make his site appear bigger then it really is.  Consider this - his original site, supposedly up for over a year, only received 12,104 hits, roughly equalling 1,000 hits a month.  Now consider his new site, which states it's all time traffic at 21,365.  That equals over 4,000 hits a month, but when you consider April is halfway through with, and his numbers only indicate that 533 people have visited his website, then double that number and you have the more realistic monthly total of 1,066 per month, which is much closer to the traffic of the original site, so where does Smithson get the 20k visitors from in only a couple months?  It seems Smithson subscribes to the mathematical school of thought favored by teabaggers... you know... the one that believed over a million teabaggers marched on Washington D.C. last year...

Prove me wrong...

P.S. I found it interesting that Smithson likes to make accusations, but when I offered one of my own (that Smithson plagiarizes articles), and that I offered photographic proof, Smithson was nowhere to be found to rebut. I guess all he is good for is spreading lies. There is a word for what Smithson is guilty of - libel.


  1. I posted this on my blog.

    Kevin, you favor the overthrow of Roe vs Wade?

    Did you vote for Obama?

    Think Huffington and Think Progress are not socialist rags?

    You deny support of MSNBC and its support of a spocialized State?

    I have lawyer friends that tell me your blog name is, in fact, plagiarism.

    So lets do this, I will say "you did" and you can say "I didn't" 0r we can talk about issues. There are four questions in this response that have to do with issues. Also, an answer to the following would be helpful.

    What is there about the Republican Party that separates it from the Democrats?

    Do you see Marxist/Socialism as the curse it is?

    fianlly, I guess I missed you assertion that I plagiarise. Sorry, your blog is not my regular reading list. It is my practice to cite sources for all material that is not of my authorship. Read the blog and note the pattern in this regard. I do consider this a serious matter. If I have failed in some instance, I need to know and I add the reference.

  2. Regarding Roe v. Wade? Yes, but I do not believe the banning of abortion should be absolute. Certain circumstances may permit the use of abortion.

    Obama? I voted for him. Proudly. What was my choice? Elect McCain and Palin? The thought of having Palin as VP and a heartbeat away from the presidency was scary. I read about her. I saw her interviews and watched the debates. She had no place on the national scene, let alone as a head of our government.

    Now the next few questions are weighted, and the answer isn't as cut and dry as you would make them out to be.

    Huffington Post and Think Progress? They are not "socialist rags," and while I may not agree with everything found on their sites, I find them to be informative.

    Not quite sure what exactly your asking about MSNBC? Are you asking me if I support them? I hardly support them. They are another news agency.

    The differences between Democrats and Republicans. They, in many ways, are very similar, but I see no need for me to answer that question. All one needs to do is look at each others political platform side by side.

    As for Marxist/Socialism being a curse? The two are different. Our economy has been a mix of socialism and capitalism, and has been since the creation of this nation. Just review the laws passed by Congress dating back to the 1700s, such as the federal government taking over state debts. To denounce aspects of socialism as evil would in fact attack the American economic system in it's entirety as evil. As for Marxism, I do not believe the entire economy should be controlled by the government. I believe that too great a portion of the economy is already controlled by the government, in the form of military spending, and reductions should take place.

  3. Now, as for your lawyer friends believing my website to be plagiarized? They must not be very good lawyers. The fact that my blog has a similar name as yours is by no means plagiarism.

    Plagiarism is an act of fraud, and can be one of a few things (according to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary):

    1)To steal the ideas of one person and to pass them off as my own,

    2)To use someone elses works without giving credit,

    3)"commit literary theft," or

    4) present as new an idea derived from an existing source.

    Based on that criteria, I see no possibility that I have tried to pass off your ideas as my own, used your work as if it were my own, "committed literary theft," or presented an idea (my website) as new when it was derived from an existing source.

    The only evidence that you have is that my website has a similar name and is political in nature. You have stated that you have blogged for the the past few years, but your previous blog has been defunct for a few months, and even if I had seen it, you did not hold a trademark to the name "Midnight Review," and as you can plainly see, I own the name "Midnight Review."

    A simple search will also yield that I have owned various names over the past 10 years that included the word "midnight," such as the now inoperative, or pretty much any website that is associated with my band.

    A lawyer would have a tough time arguing plagiarism. My website is spelled differently and the content, although similar in topic, is different. To try and prove that I somehow stole your idea and presented it as something new would require a miracle. You would have to show evidence that I had viewed your spam site prior to the creation of mine and that, and then you would have to actually identify the action of me trying to pass off your idea as something new and original, which of course you can't, because since I had never visited your site, there was now theft of ideas, and even if I had visited your website, there is still the matter of the spelling, which any court of law would prove that there were no reasonable expectations for you to have some sort of intellectual ownership over every spelling of the word "midnight." You apparently chosen to spell it with a "k". Had you spelled it correctly, you may have a leg to stand on.

    There is also the issue of the name you did choose. You could have selected "," or "," but instead you chose "," and when compared to my domain name, confusion would be highly improbable. When even doing a search for "midnight review," your site does not even appear in the top ten pages - mine is the second entry, which show my website has dominance over the combination of words "midnight" and "review." When searching "midknight review," yours appears first while mine shows up second... Based on these two searches, it would appear as if your site is the johnny-come-lately, and based on the fact that your new site was created after mine, I would think it would be pretty easy to argue who plagiarized who...

    That search was done on Google, the search engine that deemed your first website to be spam, so what if I use Yahoo? Searching for "midknight review," your site pops up, but Yahoo specifically asks if it was meant to be spelled correctly, and when searching under "midnight review," again, your site doesn't pop up...

    Face it. Legally, you have no idea what you are talking about. You don't understand what constitutes as plagiarism, and neither do your lawyer friends...

  4. Also, concerning voting for Obama -

    I had actually voted for Rudy Giuliani in the primaries and eagerly watched the coverage of all the primaries, and was aware that Rudy probably would not win (he had a poor strategy and placed all his eggs in one basket).

    I dreaded the thought of Huckabee as a running mate, and was somewhat surprised that Crist or Romney were passed up. In my opinion, McCain was playing the Hillary card, but in the end it didn't really matter. I think he would have had a better chance with any other candidate, but Palin moved the campaign ideological base farther right - I think farther right then expected, and as a result, Obama won by a huge margin.

    Conservatives also seemed to be in denial of any trail in the polls, and never corrected their campaign strategy. I remember watching news coverage that stated the polls misrepresented the truth and McCain was going to win by a landslide. Boy were they wrong...

    After the election, the GOP seemed to have adopted the thought process that they did not win because they were not conservative enough, which I think is a horrible mistake, because it excludes the moderate conservative, such as myself, but, they have been somewhat successful in branding Democrats as a bunch of radicals, which will help compensate at the polls this fall, but I don't think their strategy will work all over, and can be dangerous for them when the pendulum swings back the other way.

    The Tea Party is an interesting concept, but I think their purpose has been bastardized and exploited by both the GOP and far-right groups...

  5. Actually, I own, .org and a couple of other domain names - effective May 22, 2009.

    I also "own" midknightreview" at blogspot. Google shut it down but did not open that url to anyone else. Their decision is under review, btw.

    I will post your answers to my questions within the next 24 hours. I already have my publishing schedule set up. Fair is fair.

    My "self serving" numbers were offered to my readership, not because our spate. The numbers are not mine. I have four stat counters and each differs substantially from the others.

    Re the American Thinker article: the main link broke for some reason. Cat Corben's name could not be attached because it created a 3 inch space between the name and the text, itself. I am going to get Cat Corben's opinion with the above understanding in mind. Or you can - no problem. I doubt you and he have much in common but go for it. Suffice it to say that I give credit where credit is do and have hundreds of references to prove that point. In fact, it is a rather big deal to me in view of the fact that quite a number of my personal commentary has been used by others without so much as a mention -- and the "guilty" parties are other conservative blogger. Perhaps my credits were lost before the comments came their way.

    You consideration of the legal issue with regard to the misuse of my blog name is a rather important matter, to me. While your comments sound reasonable, they miss the point of infringement protection. We are in the very same "business" and your name is substantially similar to mine - these are important factors. In fact, in at least one of your longer articles, you have made a point of making the two names as similar as possible. Thanks.

  6. looking for his site that spells "midnight" with a "k".

    Kevin, perhaps it's not plagerism. Republicans love Ks, especially when three are strung together. ;-)

  7. Actually, Domains By Proxy, Inc. owns, and if you used DBP's service, you still don't own the name. Essentially, if you used DBP, you entered into a contract with DBP to have rights over the name while not becoming the registrar, which requires your information to become public in the "Whois" directory as determined by ICANN policy. DBP becomes the registrar, putting there name on record, while they then hold your information. Should service be canceled, then a transfer of ownership would take place...

    No matter what you offer up as proof, the answer will always be the same, and so I strongly insist that you cease making false accusations that my site is a plagiarized version of yours...

  8. And to be even more clear, is also owned by Domains By Proxy, Inc., and that domain was created December 18th, 2009. is owned by DBP too, and that domain was registered May 22nd, 2009...

    So you don't own the name you claim I plagiarize, and you don't even use those domains. They are all parked, except the ".com" version, which leads to a blank Word Press blog...

    As for the Google shut down to be under review, that has no relevance. The terms of service specifically state that Google retains "the right to modify, suspend or discontinue the Service with or without notice at any time and without any liability to you." Their decision to either delete your site or reinstate it has no impact on the status of mine.

  9. "Prove me wrong..."

    All Smithson could come up with to prove his point is this:

    "The numbers are not mine. I have four stat counters and each differs substantially from the others."

    It makes no difference if the numbers are his, or not. The fact is they do not substantiate his claims. Also, the statement that he has four counters, each differing is irrelevant. Obviously Smithson posted the numbers of the particular counter for a reason, and it would make sense that one would post the numbers that show the best information, which would mean the other three showed figures not as good.

    Not only does Smithson avoid facing the truth when it comes to others, it appears Smithson has a problem lying to himself as well...


Please share your thoughts and experiences in relation to this post. Remember to be respectful in your posting. Comments that that are deemed inappropriate will be deleted.