You all remember when Larry O’Donnell melted down on Hardball calling John O’Neil of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth a “creepy liar” over and over again?

Well this latest incident by Michael Hiltzik may top it.

It appears Hiltzik has been using at least 2 different pseudonyms to defend his own blog posts, and attack his critics.

Patterico has screenshots in the link provided above but here is an excerpt from Patterico’s post explaining what Hiltzik has done:

The thing is, the comments at my blog that Hiltzik praises here weren’t being made by some random commenter at a conservative blog, as Hiltzik seemed to suggest. They were being made by Michael Hiltzik himself. The bizarre part is that Hiltzik was simply praising himself. He used a pseudonym to make arguments against someone he already didn’t like, and then praised the arguments made by himself under that pseudonym.

LA Observed has some background on the on going blog war between Hiltzik and LA DA and blogger Patterico.

Hiltzik appears to acknowledge that he posts under his own name and two pseudonyms semi frequently on his blog and Patterico’s.

Ok no problem lots of people have different screen names for different uses. For instance I use a different name when I play video games vs. what I use here on the blog (by the way I use my real name often and anyone who wanted to know could easily find out who I am). I use the Real Ugly American moniker because it fits the theme of the blog, not necessarily to remain anonymous.

In the blogosphere, or message boards, or in video game communities, or the greater intraweb in general most people are anonymous. Reporters, Journalists, News Analysts, Talking Heads, and other opinion makers who do this for a living typically use their real names but its not unique, or bad intraweb etiquette for some well known famous person to use a pseudonym.

What is bad form, and cowardly, and has resulted in lots of people being run off of websites, blogs, message boards, video game communities, etc in shame and ridicule is using multiple names in an attempt to hide your already anonymous self to make a particularly offensive comment, or create phony allies for your arguments.

I have seen it first hand many times. People who do this become the laughing stock of the community and their ruined reputation lives on in infamy years after they have been excommunicated.

In an anonymous community the only thing you have is your name. People learn to trust it, or suspect every claim made by certain individuals based on their posting history.

What Hiltzik appears to have done (he may yet deny he is guilty of this unpardonable interweb sin) has brought many an anonymous 16 year old to tears and shame. For a professional journalist to be caught red handed is an embarrassment to not only him but to his profession and his employer.

If indeed Michael Hiltzik, Mikekoshi, and Nofanofcablecos are all one in the same, and he has pretended to be different people defending each other then the term “pulling a Hiltzik” will live long after his career is dead and forgotten.

***Update***

Hiltzik’s blog has been suspended by the LA times.

Notice from the Editors

The Times has suspended Michael Hiltzik’s Golden State blog on latimes.com. Hiltzik admitted Thursday that he posted items on the paper’s website, and on other websites, under names other than his own. That is a violation of The Times ethics policy, which requires editors and reporters to identify themselves when dealing with the public. The policy applies to both the print and online editions of the newspaper. The Times is investigating the postings.

Others blogging on this:

Flaps Dental Blog says Hiltzik is BUSTED and now the Los Angeles Times needs to FIRE him.

Blue Crab Boulevard has an exclusive photo of a Hiltzik commenter.

Sister Toldjah:

Having multiple IDs in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing, but if you’re using them to defend and prop up one of your other IDs, well - it’s a problem.

Independent Sources is reporting they outed “nofanofcablecos”as Hitlzik a couple of days ago

They have a follow up post today:

Since there are other topics in the world to write about we are pleased that the fun has moved over to Patterico’s Pontifications where Patterico carefully outlines a detailed analysis of Hiltzik’s self-congratulatory comments left anonymously at Patterico’s and other blogs, Three in One: Michael Hiltzik, Mikekoshi, and Nofanofcablecos

Captains Quarters says anonymity in itself isn’t deceptive

Most of us do so just to keep our politics out of our professional lives; it doesn’t deception, just caution, as the recent contretemps with Bill Hobbs demonstrated. If Hitzlik wanted to comment anonymously, under one consistent pseudonym, no one would really care.

However — and this is where Hitzlik gets intellectually dishonest — he used multiple pseudonyms in order to set up phony interactions between comments that he had written himself. For CQ readers, think if Monkyboy, Vinceman, and Bayam all turned out to be the same person. (They’re not, and this is only a hypothetical and no disrespect is intended.) Considering that they often disagree with my posts and other commenters and sometimes reference each other’s arguments, it creates a phony concordance when in reality it would be the same person posting over and over again. It’s dishonest, and it certainly appears intended for rhetorical intimidation.

*******Update***********

This will be a hot topic today but I have other things to do and I have said my piece.

Hugh Hewitt tries to apply the 1999 LA Times ethical guidelines (the latest available) to Mr. Hiltzik’s shenanigans.

It doesn’t look good for Hiltzik.

Sources should never be permitted to use the shield of anonymity to voice speculation or to make ad hominem attacks.

Ace of Spaces HQ has several quality posts on Hiltzik.

In this one Ace is not kind to Hiltzik or the left blogosphere in general.

Actually, I just wrote that because I think it might be fun to parodize the left by pretending that we think the “Hiltz Hit” is really, really important. Like they think that getting “The Nech” was.

But it’s not, of course.

Okay, he was a douche, and he deserved to be suspended or fired on general principles. What kind of insecure, needy douche needs to post messages praising himself under a different name?