If you come at Fox Business Network host Charlie Gasparino, be prepared for an onslaught of really mean tweets.
Ron Insana, a contributor at CNBC, found that out on Friday after he had the temerity to quibble with an advertisement for Gasparino that someone posted on Twitter.
“Charlie breaks it! Others follow,” read the ad, which showed Gasparino holding a photoshopped sledgehammer.
In response, Insana tweeted: “David Faber breaks news … ALL others follow!”
Faber is a fellow CNBC personality.
@SallyPancakes @CGasparino David Faber breaks news … ALL others follow!
— ron insana (@rinsana) November 7, 2014
Offended that someone would dare to question his status, Gasparino responded by calling Insana fat.
@rinsana @SallyPancakes GFY fat boy
— Charles Gasparino (@CGasparino) November 7, 2014
the nitrates from all those twinkies @rinsana ingests has warped his memory @SallyPancakes
— Charles Gasparino (@CGasparino) November 7, 2014
Insana protested the insult, pointing out that he’s shed 30 pounds. But that didn’t matter. Ron Insana will always be a “fat slob” to Charlie Gasparino.
@CGasparino @SallyPancakes Typically classy and I’ve lost 30 pounds. Find another insult and try to find some viewers while you’re at it!
— ron insana (@rinsana) November 7, 2014
@rinsana @SallyPancakes you will always be a fat slob i’d smack u silly but it wld be considered child abuse
— Charles Gasparino (@CGasparino) November 7, 2014
Insana managed to land a punch himself, likening Gasparino’s program to “the sound of one hand clapping.”
@CGasparino Your broadcast is the sound of one hand clapping. Ad hominem attacks are a sign of intellectual weakness, not physical strength
— ron insana (@rinsana) November 7, 2014
But this quarrel was mostly a one-sided affair. Gasparino continued his insults before pausing mid-rant for a live appearance on Fox Business Network, where he practically forced his colleague to talk about his feud with Insana.
“Don’t you want to talk about my Twitter war?” Gasparino asked Fox Business anchor Liz Claman. “An old colleague of mine, this guy Ron Insana, he doesn’t like the fact that they’re doing this advertising about me and he suggested — I mean, made all these nasty comments… Listen, I think, this is just my opinion, he’s one of the more unctuous human beings and people I’ve met in journalism.”
When Claman asked why Gasparino was “being mean,” he took exception.
“No, I’m not being mean. He was mean to me,” Gasparino said. “He didn’t like the advertising. He’s jealous of Fox Business. He’s jealous of what we do here.”
“And I will say this,” Gasparino continued. “I have left him in the dust, the disgusting slob that he is, I’ve left David Faber and all of them. I do every day. I break news, and I will scrape him off my shoe any time, any day.”
After that, Gasparino returned to Twitter to call Insana “a putrid balding disgusting fat-cat boot licking sycophantic douche” and a “friggen loser.”
i promise this is my last one: ur a putrid balding disgusting fat-cat boot licking sycophantic douche @rinsana
— Charles Gasparino (@CGasparino) November 7, 2014
dont pick a fight u cant win u friggen loser @rinsana
— Charles Gasparino (@CGasparino) November 7, 2014
Stay classy Fox.
Fucking 8th grader.
What a dick. No wonder he’s on FAUX business
Man, it’s like the typical name calling that occurs on message boards. Every time I’m critical of a politician or someone in the media, the right wing message boarders will attack me personally as if I attacked them personally. It’s pretty nasty.
Is there a name for the mental illness where by people engage in arguments by repeatedly insulting their opponent without offering any substance whatsoever, and then declaring overwhelming victory? I’ve dealt with a few such people, but hadn’t noticed a trend until seeing this guy do it. And one of their traits is using projection to declare that their opponent was hopelessly resorting to cheap insults because they had nothing better to say, when that’s all they were doing the entire time. And lastly, even their insults are of poor quality, so they don’t even have that going for them.
Because I can understand why people use insults instead of arguments, but I don’t understand how these people can ONLY rely on insults, while imagining this helps them win debates on substance. And then the worst is when they spend the second half of the debate running victory laps repeatedly, truly believing themselves to have thoroughly vanquished their foe.
And as much as you try to explain to them that they couldn’t possibly have won since they didn’t say anything real, you’ll only have them rub your nose in their victory yet again. And they’ll insist you’re delusional because you won’t admit that you lost. They see themselves as the judge and jury of all debates, and act as if there was some objective criteria by which they can be declared the winner. If there’s not a name for this, there should be.