Daily Kos Joins the GWOT

I live near (8.83 / 6)

people classed as terrorists, by the American Gvernment do my shopping probable at the same places. I wonder if one day I bump into them if I am suddenly classed as terrorist sympathiser.

With the amount of people being classed as terrorists everyday, pretty soon everyone will live near one.

---

by: Sage @ Thu May 17, 2007 at 23:13:17 PM CDT

So I guess Kos is banned from his own site? (6.33 / 3)

Hunter says:

There is ZERO tolerance on this site for anything that even HINTS at being supportive of terrorists or terrorist groups, regardless of cause: if some posters find that iron-clad requirement too restrictive, then those posters are roundly encouraged to leave.

In his response to the grisly torture and murder of five American mercenary soldiers in Iraq--clearly a "terrorist act"--Kos wrote on 1 April 2004:

  Every death should be on the front page (2.70 / 40)

Let the people see what war is like. This isn’t an Xbox game. There are real repercussions to Bush’s folly.

That said, I feel nothing over the death of merceneries [sic]. They aren’t in Iraq because of orders, or because they are there trying to help the people make Iraq a better place. They are there to wage war for profit. Screw them.

by kos on Thu Apr 1st, 2004 at 12:08:56 PDT

Source:  Removed by Kos

Kos later took down his original post in support of terrorists, but of course the quote survives, even if the link does not.

As for the terrorist act that began it all:

Four US mercenaries are torched, dismembered and hung in Iraq

by Ernesto Cienfuegos
La Voz de Aztlan

Los Angeles, Alta California - March 31, 2004 - (ACN) In a scene reminiscent of George Romero's "The Night of the Living Dead", four US mercenaries suffered a horrific and gruesome death at the hands of about 30 Iraqis near the town of Fallujah early this morning. The four US mercenaries employed by Blackwater Security Consulting where traveling in two SUV vehicles when they were ambushed and their vehicles set on fire. A large crowd of angry Iraqis approached the torched vehicles with shovels and rocks and pulled the four charred corpses out onto the roadway. Two of the bodies where dragged throughout the town's streets. The other two were dismembered and one was decapitated. Two of the torsos were then taken to a bridge that crosses the Euphrates River and hung like animals. The crowd, in addition, took one leg and one arm, tied ropes on them with a rock on each end, then swung both of them over electric power lines.

Source:  http://www.aztlan.ne...

Photos of the gruesome deaths of the mercenaries:

---

by: Alias Mister Smith @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 00:30:16 AM CDT

I'm SO glad to have been banned from DailyKos! (6.25 / 4)

I agree with whomever suggested that we should start a group of those who have been banned from DailyKos. 

(Actually, I already have helped to start an international group for Blacks who may have been banned from DailyKos and MyDD or other whitosphere blogs (or not) and who want to work together for Black self-determination.  It's called the Afrosphere)

So, they did me TWO favors by banning me from DailyKos:  (1) By inspiring me to write about the Whitosphere vs. the Blackosphere and thereby helped catalyze the founding of the Afrosphere, and

(2) By banning me they saved me the trouble of resigning over the exclusion of Palestinians and over DailyKos joining Bush's War on Terror. 

We've all got to remember five nearly-secret but very devastating facts about Markos Moulitsas:

(1)  His family was on the side of the oligarchy in the civil war in El Salvador;  The Rehabilitation of Markos Moulitsas

(2)  When Kos was old enough, he joined the US Army, even after US government interventions killed over 100,000 people in El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua;  The Truth About Kos

(3)  Kos went to work campaigning for Henry Hyde, who was best known as a rabid Republican anti-abortion campaigner;  The Truth About Kos

(4)  Kos admits that he voted for George H.W. Bush (the father) in 1992 and worked on Bush's campaign. The Truth About Kos

(5)  Explaining why he was a Republican, he said he favored "states rights," which has always been a rationalization and a code word for preventing the federal government from enforcing constitutional protections of the rights of Black people (and now also women and the disabled).  The Truth About Kos

Is there anything MORE that we need to know about Kos, aside from when he will become a Republican again?

"Only after we change that which seemed essential do we realize how natural the "new normal" really is and how inevitable it always was."

---

by: francislholland @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 02:06:21 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks for these facts and insights. (3.00 / 2)

My fear that Kos had merely used the Left Wing base of the Democratic party as a resource for monetary gain surfaced strongly when I understood that he was exploring another untapped resource, rabid baseball fans. If you look at daily site visits on blogs dedicated to specific baseball teams and other sports teams, you will understand the potential: except for Daily Kos, they are among the largest on the internet. In fact, quite a few exceed the size of Little Green Footballs, the next largest political site to Daily Kos, by having twice the number of daily visits. The advertising potential is great.

Considering that Kos got his start in blogging Democratic politics when Dean hired a company started by him and Armstrong, it would be interesting to know more about them. I am not saying that he is not on the up and up, but somehow, the notion of a "conservative Democrat," in my mind, brings up associations with Dixiecrats and other party undesirables like the "yellow dogs."

What the hell is a conservative Democrat in someone who switched parties after being a Reagan Republican? This guy allegedly doesn't care about civil or human rights issues. How much does he care about the traditional social-liberalism of the Left Wing that overwhelmingly visits Daily Kos? Is he also neutral about poverty and wealth inequality?

Silence is not an option. It merely helps to perpetuate human rights injustices.

---

by: shergald @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 07:14:32 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm not really concerned with Kos-bashing (4.67 / 3)

in general.  As far as I know, Kos is still up to his elbows in diapers and has no idea of the repressive and anti-libertarian policies being promulgated in his name on his site.

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 08:56:11 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Kos bashing is not the issue. (0.00 / 1)

The issue is: what does someone mean when they say I own the blog but not the content, then proceeds to influence the content through volume adjustment or frank censorship (banning)? IP is both a civil/human rights issue and a foreign policy one. Therefore, banning has consequences for its expression (the content). What is the thinking here?



Silence is not an option. It merely helps to perpetuate human rights injustices.

---

by: shergald @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 16:50:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

A group only of the 'cool' banned members (7.00 / 1)

There'd have to be some sort of gatekeeper, probably me.

I'm important, and everyone else is too. - G.K. Chesterton

---

by: fairleft @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 10:19:33 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm so glad (4.50 / 2)

MSOC wasn't intimidated by the Kos bullies who came here to make it a little k.

They haven't given up, but it appears that they are now laughed down here.

---

by: sometime @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 17:27:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wel, I disagree that these killings were terrorism (6.83 / 6)

Terrorism is a deliberate political act.  The killings of the contractors were an act of war, or at the least a case of mob action in the middle of a war.

And this is the problem with Hunter's policy:  it tends to extend the definition of terrorism until it encompasses any activity someone wishes to condemn and repress.  "Terrorism" becomes "whatever the Decider says it is."  Which is precisely the tactics of George Bush and Karl Rove, the same tactics used by the Communist witch-hunters in earlier decades.  First, apply the label, then condemn by association: 
Are you now or have you ever EVEN HINTED at supporting terrorism?

I think Kos was wrong not to have ANY sympathy for the contractors, as they are human beings who met terrible deaths, with families who grieve for them.  But then, so are "terrorists" human beings, with families who grieve.

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 07:19:07 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

As it applies to the IP conflict.... (5.25 / 4)

people who wish to appear informed about the issue of terrorism in Palestine ought to take in the documentary, Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land.

Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land

Some excerpts on this issue from some of the participants:

Rabbi Michael Lerner, Founder & Executive Director, Tikkun Magazine: “When you have a population that is being occupied, when their fundamental human rights are systematically being denied, when they are not allowed to move from city to city and place to place, without a huge amount of harassment, when they are being subject to torture, when people are essentially in desperate conditions, it is not a surprise that they are going to be very, very angry. There is no understand by the public media, or the American media, what creates this circumstance. Israel occupies, people strike at Israel against that occupation. They use means I think are wrong means, namely, the terror, and then Israel imposes punishment on the entire people, which creates a climate which makes it easier to recruit.”

Major Stav Adivi, reserves, Israeli Defense Forces, Israel: “we have to understand that these (suicide bombings) are the effects of the occupation.”

Robert Jensen, Professor of Journalism, University of Texas-Austin: “In contrast to the international press, in American media, there is a reversal of cause and effect in that the occupation is framed as a response to the suicide bombings. All of the Palestinian actions are attacks and Israel actions retaliation, is meaningful. Retaliation suggests a defensive stance against violence initiated by someone else. It places a responsibility for the violence on the party provoking the retaliation. In other words, Palestinian violence like suicide bombings is seen as cause and the origin of the conflict. Since the September 11 attack on the US, Israel’s PR strategy has been to frame all Palestinian actions, violent or not, as terrorism. To the extent that they can do that they have repackaged the illegal occupation as part of the war on terrorism."

News headlines from the documentary: “This is Israel’s war on terrorism. F16s hit a Palestinian neighborhood in the Gaza Strip this morning...The case the Israelis are trying to make: this is no different than what the US is doing in Afganistan (air attacks in the West Bank...Prime Minister Ariel Sharon declared on television tonight, that he was determined to root out what he called ‘the terrorist infrastructure.’”

So the Palestinians, who just happens to be fighting a long and incessant military occupation that the UN has called illegal, are now part of the war on terrorism.

Kos or some of his dimmi administrators have now taken Daily Kos down this path of deception.



Silence is not an option. It merely helps to perpetuate human rights injustices.

---

by: shergald @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 08:23:35 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Hunter the Dkos Killer (5.00 / 2)

He's the problem over there, along with the trollhunter mob (who chase their troll fantasies while being unable somehow to see that the I/P diaries are overrun by 'neocon Israel' trolls).

I'm important, and everyone else is too. - G.K. Chesterton

---

by: fairleft @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 10:21:38 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Contractors (0.00 / 0)

There's an interesting story on Democracy Now by the mother of one of the contractors who says the contractors were forced to go on this mission against their better judgement in an unprotected vehicle.

Shes' really convincing.

Stu Piddy....a free range human

---

by: Stu Piddy @ Sun May 20, 2007 at 01:35:54 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Saw that (0.00 / 0)

Just as the contractors are beyond the law, they are beyond its protections.

They get paid liberally, but they also can get totally screwed.  And their billionaire Repubican-contributor owners grow bloated like ticks with their blood and the Iraqi blood they shed.

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Sun May 20, 2007 at 08:57:54 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

"Screw 'em," though hidden by Markos... (6.40 / 5)

motivated by -- shame? cowardice? -- god knows what, CAN be found. You have to take a circuitous route, but you can find it. Ironically, the people who dug around and FOUND Markos's shady, dishonest, cowardly hidden passage are none other than the Worst People of the Decade (insofar as blogs go) -- Little Green Footballs.

Ironic as hell, too, when I consider the colour scheme going on now; we have Little Green Footballs and Little Orange Mothballs -- green and orange -- the two fighting factions of Ireland represented by the orange of the Protestansts, declared terrorists by the Catholics, and the green of the Catholics, declared terrorists by the Protestants. Of course, the Protestants did have a leg up, considering their backers were an official government -- kind of like Hamas, ony elected by smaller margins...

Anyway -- here's how you get to Markos's "screw' em" comment -- and again, think about this: that comment can arguably be considered to be what MADE Markos and Daily Kos what they are today. And now he disavows it:

LINK:

Fuck 'Em

That's a static post I created:

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:20:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

RE: Static Posts (11.00 / 1)

Unfortunately, at this time only Admins and Editors can create Static Posts. I don't like that restriction, and have petitioned Soapy to change it to a more egalitarian system, whereby all members can avail themselves of the static post option; it's too useful to restrict it to a few people.

I apologise for waving a carrot in front of you that I then discover you can't eta. I had no idea till just now that it wasn't available to everyone. I am hoping that Soapy can change that with a tiny bit of code added to the source code...

Stay tuned for an announcement to that effect.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:29:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You did that once before, (5.33 / 3)

describing in great detail the "post-date" function, to one of us mere mortals who have no such powah

I suggest making one of your sockpuppets a regular user so you can see what things look like for the rest of us.

Cheers!

"Truth has no time of its own. Its hour is now -- always, and indeed then most truly when it seems most unsuitable to actual circumstances."

---

by: roysol @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 15:38:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Miss Blue, you're abusing the troll rating. (0.00 / 0)

A) I am not a troll.

B) This post is not trollish in the least.

This is your first warning, sweetcheeks. You have seventeen more to go. Then I will REALLY start issuing severe warnings.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 12:35:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

GWOT? (4.00 / 4)

Maybe it is because I hate acronyms that I had to look this one up to understand what it meant. It is quite appropriate. In its myopia, Daily Kos has become a portal for Israeli propaganda, as discussed in the documentary, Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land.

Kos, along with GWB, Sharon, and the Israeli propaganda machine, is now fighting the global war on terrorism against the Palestinians right on his site. It would seem that the poorly informed, naive, and hotheaded Hunter has taken Daily Kos down this path of lies to its own detriment.

One suggestion: spell GWOT out in full.




Silence is not an option. It merely helps to perpetuate human rights injustices.

---

by: shergald @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 07:24:53 AM CDT

Here is an example of how such policies work (7.00 / 7)

to suppress free speech and the free exchange of ideas.

I would like to have a (3+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
  litho, davidincleveland, Jagger

substantive discussion of Anna's diary, which does explicitly state why she posted the AAMB statements & her opposition to violence towards civilians, but if I do, will I too be banned? It is posted at her blog and at EI, can I know now whether linking and/or quoting such material will be allowed?

by jon the antizionist jew on Thu May 17, 2007 at 02:36:45 PM PDT

[ Parent ]

  *
  I don't see why that would get you banned. n/t (0 / 0)

  by Hunter on Thu May 17, 2007 at 03:46:32 PM PDT

  [ Parent ]
  o
  Well (3+ / 0-)

  Recommended by:
  litho, anonymousredvest18, npbeachfun

  Was it the words that were bannable or the sentiment?  If the words were, in and of themselves, bannable, then Jon should suffer the same punishment for posting the same words.  If the sentiment (promotion of violent terrorism) was bannable, well, you've been offered repeated evidence that Anna had no such sentiment.

  by weasel on Thu May 17, 2007 at 03:52:09 PM PDT

  [ Parent ]
  +
  I suppose it depends on how he presented it. (0 / 0)

  If it was a transparent excuse to post the same thing, with the same sentiments, then I suppose you have a point.  I can see how you would get banned for it. ...

  by Hunter on Thu May 17, 2007 at 04:05:01 PM PDT

So now, under the new Zero Tolerance policy, everyone must be constantly in doubt whether whatever they say MIGHT possibly be construed by some so-called reasonable persons as MAYBE HINTING at support for "terrorism".

What this means is, terrorism can no longer be discussed on DKos at all, since it is always possible that in attempting, for example, to define what terrorism is, a person might make a comment that some other person MIGHT be able to construe as support for terrorism.

Out of fear, then, of banning, no one will ever bring up the subject at all, and the forces of repression, who want to brand everything they oppose as terrorism, will be triumphant.

Indeed, this will certainly become the newest tactic of reactionaries who want to stifle dissent and debate on any topic, not just the Palestinian one:  Accuse their opponents of supporting terrorism.

This is precisely the tactic of George Bush in attempting to quash opposition to the Iraq War, those of us supporting withdrawal of the troops:  It will "encourage the terrorists."  "We will leave Iraq to the terrorists."

Hunter further widens the hole when he characterizes the militant who was quoted as "part of a group that kills people."

Well, the US Army is a group that kills people, so now, according to Hunter, anyone who says "Support the troops" is a supporter of terrorism.  Hunter seems to be entirely ignorant of the fact that armed resistance to a military occupation is a legitimate activity under international law.  That "groups that kill people" are not necessarily terrorists.

But it is no longer allowed to say so on Daily Kos, as some "rational [or prejudiced] person MIGHT take this as a HINT that it is terrorism they are supporting instead of the legitimate struggle for freedom.

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 08:53:03 AM CDT

It is evident, I am sorry to say.... (3.83 / 6)

that Hunter is either a contradictory jerk, or Kos has come to a point that conformance to the AIPAC/DLC line is essential for the continuation of the Left Wing of the Democratic party. This used to be the constituency which subscribed to "people powered" politics. Well, it looks as if the "people" here are being led again, away from Left Wing politics rather than toward it. Kos will now determine what is and what is not "people powered."



Silence is not an option. It merely helps to perpetuate human rights injustices.

---

by: shergald @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 09:32:14 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

shergald (0.00 / 0)

I responded to your last comment directly below, but for some reason it didn't append to your comment...nonetheless, it's for you...

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 09:40:03 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Don't worry, the boundaries are obvious (11.00 / 1)

The 'Democrats on Israel' span the horizon from Nancy Pelosi to Steny Hoyer. Any diary within that vast expanse of opinion is acceptable, anything outside it is not. Obviously, criticism of terrorist Israel are _clearly_ out of bounds, while criticism of terrorist Hamas is in bounds. Spotlighting the criminal occupation of Palestine is _clearly_ out of bounds, while spotlighting criminal acts of Palestinians is in bounds.

Another way to get comfortable with the new self-censorship is to read the speeches Democratic Party leaders give at the annual AIPAC convention. I don't think they should be too hard to find, but here's a review of one: 'Nancy Pelosi Gives a Pep Talk to AIPAC'.

I'm important, and everyone else is too. - G.K. Chesterton

---

by: fairleft @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 10:31:59 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It's become a joke (5.00 / 3)

Fortunately the "aura of inevitability" to Moulitsas's ascendancy has been trashed. There's now the opposite aura of inevitability.

---

by: peeder @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 13:23:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I've Only Been Gone From There (7.33 / 9)

for about 3-4 weeks, and my leaving was voluntary, but I am, unsurprisingly, astounded at the change in tone and content on the site in even such a short period of time...

Is this really the site where I spent whole working days online in my office?

Rather, it was, but I don't recognize it any more.

People being flamed for grammar, sentence structure, acronyms in the Diary titles...

Daily Kos has gone to the dogs (and please, no fucking pootie pics in response...)

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 09:34:59 AM CDT

That is almost my exact trajectory (8.25 / 4)

I haven't been banned, I just got sick of the palce. For me it started with the cartoon frenzy and has been down hill from there. Now I check out other progressive blogs and I hope that serves to get them some added revenue and build their readership.

---

by: tanya @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 11:43:02 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

When I occasionally go back... (7.00 / 7)

only to see how the people on DKos respond to essays I read here on or another blog, I can't believe how the tone has changed.

There is very little real discussion -- you either fall in with the DKos line or you are attacked and flamed.  I suggested that I did not want to vote -- not that I was not going to vote, but simply that I had no enthusiasm for voting -- and 5 or 6 people jumped all over me, screaming that I had to vote because otherwise the "evil rethugs" would win. 

I am sure there are people who find DKos to be a great place to go, to find information, to give opinions, and to talk to people who think very much like they do.  I have found that I don't think like them, and do not feel welcome there anymore (I left several months ago).

Obama 2012.  Because he didn't piss off enough people the first time around.

---

by: Joools @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 13:35:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Miss Blue Has a Problem (7.80 / 5)

with opinions being expressed, methinks...luckily for her, MSOC actually permits dissent on her site...what a novel fucking idea...

Hey Miss Orange, have you ever paused to consider that your drive-by ratings are actually more amusing than anything else?

...I think by now, a "1" rating from you is to be considered high praise...

Can't stop smiling...thanks, Miss Orange...you made my day...

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:02:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Woo! (6.50 / 2)

I got a "1" from Miss Blue.  Wow.  I feel like the cool kids suddenly decided to let me sit at their table.
I keep giggling, just because of Miss Blue's little ole "1"...

Obama 2012.  Because he didn't piss off enough people the first time around.

---

by: Joools @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:26:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Getting a 1 from Miss Blue is like sleeping with Paris Hilton (9.25 / 4)

Sooner or later, everybody does it.

---

by: Alias Mister Smith @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 02:28:40 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sorry I missed your comment. (0.00 / 0)

I have been under the weather these last few days and it has been difficult keeping up. Thanks for your feedback. To say the least, it is well targeted and I afraid too accurate. I keep just missing on the well known saying, success breeds contempt? Or something like that.

Whatever. Some change has been in the making for some months now, and apparently Hunter, the underling, has orders to take out a major sector of American foreign policy. The word is that Kos doesn't give a damn about civil/human rights issues. Well, I suppose that is a sentiment that lingers from his old Reagan Republican days. Hunter is just trying to make a living and he can no longer entertain views that are his own. It must be scary being a second-rate writer and trying to support a family on a small blog salary. I can afford to be second-rate, but not everyone can.

In any case, I have been absent most of the time and I'm glad I caught your post.



Silence is not an option. It merely helps to perpetuate human rights injustices.

---

by: shergald @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 16:29:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks Back Atya, shergald... (0.00 / 0)

feel better soon...

This Hunter fella, if he actually is deriving his living from Dkos, had better start stocking up on food stamps...this well has reached Hubbard's Peak...

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 17:12:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yup, I believe he is a "fello" which I think means (0.00 / 0)

he is paid, a regular Kos underling.



Silence is not an option. It merely helps to perpetuate human rights injustices.

---

by: shergald @ Sun May 20, 2007 at 08:01:22 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Kos Isn't Going to Determine Shit (6.80 / 5)

if his Lamont campaign is any indication...that powder's spent...

Just look at the daily hits...already on the decline from its peak...

First of all, blogging was a fad, as all crazes are and will continue to be...the fact that we are all still blogging doesn't change the fact...more and more people are drifting away from it, leaving the hard-core bloggers kicking around...and it seems to me that DK is doing everything in its power to drive away that core group...

In the end, who gives a shit?

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 09:38:37 AM CDT

It is the way of the Internet (7.50 / 4)

and inevitable.

More than that, though,  DKos is the victim of its own success.  It peaked at the last election.  It has exceeded critical mass and is now a political collapsar, sucking in the contentious, the flamewarriors, anyone with a cause they are fanatical to promote.

DKos now means money and power and influence, and these things invariably mean corruption.  I saw it over there all the time, the threats - "Democratic candidates won't want to be associated with a site that ____"  And once again, power crushes truth.

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 10:18:13 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

The problem is (8.50 / 2)

that very few of us are doing this for the purpose of learning and pondering different political ideas. We're all here, basically, to influence people politically. Some of us have the luxury of having the facts and basic human decency on our side. Others don't and their options are to ignore certain sites or disrupt them.

Even with a politically astute and real liberal like Maryscott managing this site, there will still be the  problem that those without the facts and justice on their side will either go away from here (so we'll end up mostly just talking to like-minded folks) or they'll disrupt.

I'm important, and everyone else is too. - G.K. Chesterton

---

by: fairleft @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 10:38:53 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just so (9.00 / 2)

And "influencing people politically" = "spread propaganda."

This was one of the charges against the Palestinian diaries - "this is just propaganda."  Well, we are ALL doing propaganda.  We are all attempting to spread our ideas [and this is what "propaganda" means in Latin - things that must be spread.]

The problem isn't with propaganda, it's with people who try to poison the seeds before they can sprout, to keep the ideas from being heard.  The problem is with the censors.

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 12:48:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Propaganda Is Embedded (10.00 / 2)

in the American psyche, unfortunately, methinks...

I was watching "Crude Awakening," a documentary about peak oil, last night, and at a certain point, I turned to my wife and said in amazement, "No wonder Americans think it's their birthright to drive big cars and buy gasoline at prices cheaper than soiled underwear- look at the propaganda they've been sucking up since the 50's..."

If you've seen this documentary, and seen the utterly appalling "information about oil" that was spewed on the airwaves in the heady days of post-WWII, you'd know exactly to which I'm referring...just watching those clips made me dizzy...

Bushco...propaganda personified...

A little off-topic, but I felt the need to share...

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:22:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I am not here to influence anyone. (7.00 / 3)

My belief system, my politics, the way I interact with the world, everything revolves around my core philosophy, which is basically "every single person has the right to decide for themselves."

Which means that while I will tell you what I think -- I will voice an opinion quite readily -- I am not trying to change your mind.  I often refine my opinion when reading an essay and the comments, even if I have a strong opinion to start with. 

I would have to disagree with you about having the facts and justice on any one side -- no group has the monopoly on right and justice and truthiness. 

There's my problem.  I really believe that everyone has the right to voice their opinions.  Everyone has the right to believe whatever they want, even when it is so completely wrong-headed in my view.  Even when those issues are causing huge disruptions in our society and culture -- abortion, same-sex marriage, abstinence only education, religion in school and government, and on and on and on.  No group, left, right or center, has a monopoly on being correct. 
 

Obama 2012.  Because he didn't piss off enough people the first time around.

---

by: Joools @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 13:26:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

the facts and justice are often on one side (8.50 / 2)

Overwhelmingly so, I think, sometimes, and here are four examples:

1. It's on the side of the Palestinians and not the Israelis who are occupying their land. The occupation is unjust and illegal, and the dehumanized brutality of the repression is visible to anyone who looks.

2. It's on the side of the vast majority of Iraqis who want the U.S. to leave, and not on the side of the occupiers.

3. It's on the side of the scientific consensus and not those who tell us the planet is not warming.

4. It's on the side of a single-payer government health insurance system for all, and not on the side of the health insurance industry.

5. It's on the side of those who want a massive reduction in the U.S. war budget, and not on those who scare us into letting it invade and militarize the planet.

Many of us want to influence others by getting them informed and hoping they'll fight for justice after getting informed.

But if that's not your thing, that's fine, and I look forward to reading and being read by you. I was just doing a little 'meta'...

I'm important, and everyone else is too. - G.K. Chesterton

---

by: fairleft @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 13:45:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I would disagree that those are exclusively liberal (0.00 / 0)

or left wing feelings.  My husband would agree with all of them, and he is a moderate.  I know some serious right-wing types who would agree with some of these as well. 

In practice I have not seen much influencing going on here on the internets...most people come with preconceived ideas, and find an online community that matches them. 

I think it would be very frustrating to try to influence people to act.  Maybe that's why we have all these meta explosion.  I view MLW and other internet sites as entertainment and information, which they do very well. 

I think that people will be far more influenced by real life actions than by arguments and discussions on the internet.  I was a brownie girl scout leader and it was a chance to model strong, smart girl for those little girls.  The whole time I was trying, through the program, and through example and encouragement, to help the girls learn that girls are smart and strong and independent. 

Obama 2012.  Because he didn't piss off enough people the first time around.

---

by: Joools @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:18:03 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

that's very important, (0.00 / 0)

what you did in the last paragraph, and what (so many!) others do that is similar. I try not to neglect that either, doing good in close, personal ways and relationships.

I'm important, and everyone else is too. - G.K. Chesterton

---

by: fairleft @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 01:33:28 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I should have added, in the first comment. (5.00 / 1)

that I do not find anything wrong with you or anyone trying to influence people.  I think there are people here who are very good at presenting arguments and information and opinion in a persuasive way, much more so than at some other sites. 


Obama 2012.  Because he didn't piss off enough people the first time around.

---

by: Joools @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 16:02:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

to influence others (8.00 / 2)

I do see that as part of it, but not really in the sense that the primary thing is to influence myself... I take from this on-demand medium to learn, I share what I think I have learned, or the questions I have learned, which is not for influence but for self-expression... then, it can be a pleasure to see an influence, after the fact, not as a motivation.

this is an important issue to me because the internet is an on-demand medium, NOT a publishing medium... the word "publishing" applies to certain parts of the technical methods, but the basic information design is very different for an on-demand peer-to-peer network.

sort of a pet peeve, and a tangent, within the context of your comment it's true-enough that we are here to influence/affect or something akin to that... but strictly we are best off if we remember we are here to learn and retrieve information, even if we wish or pretend otherwise.

-pyrrho-

---

by: pyrrho @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 18:50:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm just saying I write my stuff (9.00 / 1)

to influence people. But I was just writing about my involvement in the Israel/Palestine issue. I think that's what most of us on both sides are attempting to do in those debates.  Maybe I didn't make clear that I was talking about just the "Israel/Palestine issue context". I also have learned a heckuva lot along the way, and appreciate very much the superior (to me) wisdom and knowledge on both sides of the issue.

I'm important, and everyone else is too. - G.K. Chesterton

---

by: fairleft @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 01:39:04 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Me too, I just pretended (8.17 / 6)

to pick up some street cred. With this admission, I'll probably get banned here for resume perjury.

"I haven't been banned, I just got sick of the place."

It became an out house since after the elections.

---

by: Lestat @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 13:53:29 PM CDT

Which terrorists / terrorist groups? (9.00 / 6)

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:08:12 PM CDT

MSOC, I Have a Query For Thee (7.67 / 3)

about Miss Blue...wtf?

Let me expand...as a MLW neophyte, I've noticed that Miss Burnt Orange, she of the drive-by ratings (we're number 1!!) has a very low U.I.D., and was wondering if Miss Orange is a once-valued Dkos'er who soured on MLW when you soured on Dkos?

I can't reconcile her absolute repudiation of any criticism of La Boite Orange with the low U.I.D. (I know I'm gonna fuck up one day and write in some other variation of those same letters)...

Do you have an answer to that riddle?

Is she your Kos-Kop, or just a contrarian?

Or just silly?

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:16:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Under her comments listing, (7.50 / 2)

she made two comments when she first signed up, July 2005, then was gone until a couple of weeks ago.

She showed up to rate up and down in the AbiRgtenMtdAemNocDraOt (got that? I don't want to invoke his name) flame wars, was called on it by blogmom, and responded once, to say she wouldn't respond.

Sad, but not actionable, by our properly meager rules, here at MLW.

Cheers!

"Truth has no time of its own. Its hour is now -- always, and indeed then most truly when it seems most unsuitable to actual circumstances."

---

by: roysol @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 15:52:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Don't Get Me Wrong... (7.00 / 2)

I wasn't implying or indicating a desire or need for "action" on the part of Miss Burnt Orange, just wondering what the deal was...

As for AreyouReallyMadAtNoDamnedOranges, what happened there?  I'll tell you what I know/think I know and you can fill in the blanks...this meta shit is so over, yet so fascinating once you know one or two of the Playas...(and no, I ain't talking about beaches in southern Mexico...)

- He was one of the founders of Dkos?  Or just one of the early ones?

- He had a falling-out with the Republican in Dem's clothing, the blogging boywonder?

- He came over here, even though he'd had some sharp words with MSOC over the dkos blogroll?

- He in turn fell out with MSOC here, over I have no fucking clue what,

- Miss Burnt Orange is his Secret Service, sworn to take a bullet for him or dkos?

This is about all I know about the blog war...am I sniffing the tail or somewhere in the weeds?

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 16:08:34 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Something like that, (8.33 / 3)

and I'm sure there's a fair amount of behind the scenes backstory that we are not privy to.

I don't think a founder, but a charter member, and an Admin, for quite a while.

The falling out, over there, was over some 'betrayal", I know not what. He stated he was leaving there of his own accord, but acted so badly on his way out, that they banned him.

He has come and gone here, a few times, blogmom cajoled him back.

The falling out here, was blogmom foolishly promised to "protect" him, which was clearly not possible. He has made way too many enemies over the years, and they hound him mercilessly.

I should feel bad for him, and I feel bad that I don't feel bad for him. He acts like such a class "A" jerk, I can muster no sympathy.

As for "Miss Burnt Orange", I have no idea at all.

Hope that helps ;-)

Cheers!

"Truth has no time of its own. Its hour is now -- always, and indeed then most truly when it seems most unsuitable to actual circumstances."

---

by: roysol @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 16:33:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sweet Clarity...At Long Last (6.00 / 1)

many thanks...I guess she's just an enigma wrapped in a mystery...or is that a fortune cookie?  Fuck it...

Ignorance is bliss, in certain things...I shall remain so and let the meta float over my head like so much gossamer...

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 16:55:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I was mentioned (0.00 / 0)

Except for me being a Class A jerk for whom you have no sympathy, your comment is wrong in almost every particular.

Would it NOT be better to not act as if you know what happened with me and daily kos, since you do not?

Or is it more fun to pretend you do know?

---

by: Armando @ Sun May 20, 2007 at 01:35:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Armando and I have not had a falling out. (6.00 / 5)

We have an understanding: When one of us thinks the other is full of shit, we say so. Neither of us takes it personally, ultimately, though sometimes we get mad and it takes a few days to get over it and apologise or just email and say, "Hey, we're still okay, sorry I flew off the handle," or something to that effect.

We have often opined that if more people could establish the kind of Rules of Engagement that we have with each other, there would be less hostility and flame wars online -- though perhaps not a LOT less, because when we're "in the moment," both of us are as caapble as anyone, if not more, of being total assholes. The salient difference being, we always come back to center and affirm our friendship and mutual admiration.

I believbe it's called maturity, but I may be mistaken. Some people (who are at present Dead to Me) have made it their life's work to state in as many different wasy as possible that I am a moronic dupe, deluded by Armando and used by him at every turn, akin to a battered wife who always forgives her abuser when he comes back with a couple wilted calla lilies and a limp apology.

Those people (who are at present Dead to Me) are wrong, of course -- but since it seems to give them an almost sexual pleasure in devising new and ever more insulting ways to proclaim this theory of theirs and make known my worthlessness and pathetic, miles-long list of character defects, who am I to take away their chew toys?

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 17:45:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm sorry, I should have been clearer, (10.00 / 1)

The "falling out" as TMWNP termed it, and I repeated, was with MLW, or even more specifically, with the "cult of MLW", which makes me see red, as it was intended to.

I also based my conclusion on what's available publicly, he took you to task for not decrying the abuse he was getting. Thanks for the clarification.

Perhaps I should have said naive, instead of foolish, WRT your thinking you could protect him. I surely hope you don't think I meant anything like this,

I am a moronic dupe, deluded by Armando and used by him at every turn, akin to a battered wife who always forgives her abuser when he comes back with a couple wilted calla lilies and a limp apology.

I understand that he could have valueable contributions, if he wasn't a lightning rod. The problem is you can't unring the bell, and history takes over.

Cheers!

"Truth has no time of its own. Its hour is now -- always, and indeed then most truly when it seems most unsuitable to actual circumstances."

---

by: roysol @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 19:22:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Miss Blue needs to be banned (0.00 / 0)

For abuse of the troll ratings.

What the fucking fuck?  The "1" ratings are amusing, but troll-rating THAT post?

I've had it with Miss Blue.

Yeah, I know, ratings don't matter.  But Miss Blue isn't here to discuss, she's here to give driveby troll ratings.  If she can encourage a few friends to sign up, or create sock puppets, couldn't she conceivably troll rate a post into oblivion?

That ain't cool babe, that's chili, and chili ain't never been cool.

---

by: Alias Mister Smith @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 02:31:22 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It Isn't Cricket Either... (0.00 / 0)

sorry, the British blood in me boils forth...

Ah, Miss Blue, Miss Blue, Oh, Why the Strife?,
Within Thee, Seems, Lies Squalor and Strife
Whether From Spite or Ill Humor
You're Nothing But a Tumor
On the Ass of Life...

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 10:12:21 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Miss Blue. Oy. (8.25 / 4)

This morning I picked through this thread and uprated all the comments that she had unfairly slammed with 0s and 1s. I also have an annoying tendency to put misplaced grocery items on the right shelves when I'm shopping, and pick up litter in other people's yards. It's a little compulsive, but I've really dialed it back in more recent years.

I know Maryscott considers the ratings unimportant, but, for whatever reason, it thoroughly disgusts me. It's just such weak, passive-aggressive, pathetic behavior. If something upsets a person so much, just fucking say it, and give a person a fair chance to respond. It's a way to be abusive without saying something abusive and exposing your rank hostility to logical scrutiny. Fucking childish.

"What fresh hell is this?" -- Dorothy Parker

---

by: Curmudgette @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 18:30:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

She's starting to entertain me (11.00 / 1)

especially if she's the same 'Miss Blue' trollhunter who wields power so destructively over at dkos.

But over on our planet however she's the weakest of weaklings . . . Reminds me of a very old Star Trek episode, I think.

I'm important, and everyone else is too. - G.K. Chesterton

---

by: fairleft @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 01:49:44 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm seriously asking for Miss Blue to be banned (3.00 / 1)

Enough is enough.  This driveby troll rating stuff is grating on my nerves.

---

by: Alias Mister Smith @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 02:33:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm _so_ not into banning people (0.00 / 0)

a little rude rating can easily be ignored.

My feeling is that if someone acts many many times in an _old-fashioned_ troll manner, ban her or him. Otherwise, let's just press our personal 'ignore' buttons. (Yahoo, when it had message boards, had an "ignore this user" function that worked very well (until you reached their 25 users limit, which any sane person on those boards quickly reached).)

I'm important, and everyone else is too. - G.K. Chesterton

---

by: fairleft @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 02:50:41 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not a fan of banning, either (4.00 / 1)

IF the person joins the discussion and actually posts something.

Driveby troll ratings as your only "contribution" to the blog is, to me, the very definition of trolling.

That's why I said Miss Blue needs to be banned.

---

by: Alias Mister Smith @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 03:42:33 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Take her ratings ability away (0.00 / 0)

she can still speak.

---

by: sometime @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 11:56:38 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

About Miss Blue: (7.50 / 6)

How do I put this?

Miss Blue seems to have an unhealthy obsession with all things Kos and MSOC. It has been several days since I last posted at Daily Kos, that Day Which Will Not Only Not Live in Infamy But Whose Date I Have Already Forgot and yet...

Here she is.

After months of whining in discussion after discussion of my diaries at DKos that she was sick of me, that I was SO awful, that she wished I would just Go Away Already, months of proclaiming for all to hear that Daily Kos would be a better place without me in it...

Here she is.

Seems to me the best way to get away from someone would include NOT visiting that person's own BLOG, but...

Here she is.


--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 17:54:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Send Her Some Flowers, (7.00 / 1)

I'm sure she's just very, very impressed and admiring of you and, like the schoolyard tom-boy, can only show her affection by acting violently and contemptuously towards the object of her fascination...

Barring that, I have no fucking clue as to what ails her...

But I'll take the "1's" any day!!  A little comedic relief never hurt anyone...yet...

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 18:18:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

MSOC (1.36 / 14)

You are a liar.  If your readers want proof, my comment history is very, very easy to find on Dkos.  Please do a little research.  It may take awhile, as there are thousands of comments, but go ahead - you have nothing better to do than complain about another blog anyway.

You will find, in the oldest comments, several months, in fact over a year, of thinking MSOC was talented, smart, witty, and insightful.  Then comes a period of questioning, apologizing for her regular missteps, insults, and misinformation. 

At the last, you will find exactly 2 diaries in which I told MSOC exactly what I thought of her.  And it ain't good.

As to your second lie, I told MSOC I would HAPPILY meet her in person to repeat to her face exactly what I have written to her.  As she requested, by the way.

Lie number three - I have low-rated strictly the comments that were lies.  Plain, unadulterated lies.  And I have been on this site a total of about a dozen times.  That is hardly a dent in my life or blogging time, so don't flatter yourself.

I do not go into MSOC's blog to write diaries telling the world what a piece of shit I think she is, how crappy her blog is, or how stupid her blog rules are.  All things MSOC, with her utter lack of manners or self-restraint, did on Dailykos.

Further, the absolute fairytales that have been spread about the banning of MSOC, the I/P fanatics, and a few others could only be spun by chemical inducement, insanity, or self-delusion on the scale of GWB.

This will be my last visit and post on this farce of a blog.  I am done wasting my precious time.  This was done on a bet, that I lost, and the bet is paid.

Looking forward to meeting you MSOC.  I'll be the sane one.

---

by: Miss Blue @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 22:56:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

P.S. (1.17 / 6)

The bet?  After MSOC was banned, I took someone up on a bet that she would trash DKos/Markos on her site every chance she got.  I said she wouldn't do that.  She'd get it out of her system with a good rant and be done with it.

Obviously, I lost the bet.

---

by: Miss Blue @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 23:00:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Miss 'Dad Was a Hard Core Marine' Blue (8.00 / 1)

Please continue to monitor and rate our posts! Your zeroes and ones provide us warmth and comfort as we stray from the true path.

I'm important, and everyone else is too. - G.K. Chesterton

---

by: fairleft @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 01:55:48 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Why do you care? (7.00 / 1)

I'm very curious about this because it seems from my POV to be just a wee bit obsessive.

---

by: Buckeye BattleCry @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 11:04:25 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Maryscott is many things (6.00 / 2)

but she is most certainly not a liar.  Indeed, I've found her to be brutally honest, about herself most of all.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 23:11:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It seems You are the liar (8.67 / 6)

Lie number three - I have low-rated strictly the comments that were lies

See here, here,here,here,here. Not a lie among them. Opinions you may disagree with, but not a single lie. And rated 0 or 1 by you. And thats just today.

PS. MSOC was talking about your posting history here, not at dkos.

to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance .  G. Washington

---

by: Kane in CA @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 23:18:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You know what's funny about that? (7.50 / 2)

Can you be a troll on the site you own ;-)

"Truth has no time of its own. Its hour is now -- always, and indeed then most truly when it seems most unsuitable to actual circumstances."

---

by: roysol @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 23:50:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

what an honest interaction (9.50 / 4)

and whomever lost the bet had to come rate people low here?

fantastic of you.

markos betrayed our trust, and he has convinced many more people that the Democratic party only wants to use them.

He's the new nader!  unintentional.

-pyrrho-

---

by: pyrrho @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 00:30:10 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Weird (0.00 / 0)

whomever lost the bet had to come rate people low here?

Yeah.  That's fucking weird.

---

by: Buckeye BattleCry @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 11:07:06 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Here's your troll rating (9.00 / 1)

Yes, you are a troll.  You're here to flame and disrupt, not to discuss.

Maryscott's not a liar and she's not something that's even worse--a coward.

Which is what you are.

---

by: Alias Mister Smith @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 02:34:42 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

That was for Miss Blue (0.00 / 0)

Not Pyrrho, obviously.

Damn these margins.

Sorry, Pyrrho.

---

by: Alias Mister Smith @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 02:35:19 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I couldn't help myself! (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 11:03:13 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Please don't get our hopes up (8.50 / 2)

This will be my last visit and post on this farce of a blog.  I am done wasting my precious time.  This was done on a bet, that I lost, and the bet is paid

Be still my beating heart.

Actually, I rather doubt that your time is precious.  I have a bet that you'll be back, troll rating this weekend, and I've already got plans to spend the money.

And so your "participation" in a political forum is determined by a childish wager along the lines of, "If you miss skipping a rope 50 times in a row, ya gotta eat a worm, Billy!"

You're 52 years old?  Really and truly?

Color me astounded.

---

by: Alias Mister Smith @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 02:39:32 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Awwww! Thanks for the welcome! (9.00 / 1)

IT's a cake!

I noticed the enhancements.  I'm a plain-text kind of poster, with no notion of how to produce those graphix thingies and colors and stuff.  But it does rather attract attention.

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:58:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I found Hunter's explanation (7.00 / 7)

less than compelling.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:28:51 PM CDT

I found it to be (9.40 / 5)

total unmitigated fascist bullshit, myself, and would have explicated my views at length, had I been enabled to.

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:59:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'd offer to post a message from you (6.33 / 3)

but I'd probably be banned.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 15:03:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

"Less than compelling" (7.33 / 3)

Paul, you're too nice.

---

by: Alias Mister Smith @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 17:45:03 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

That's called hypobole (7.33 / 3)

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 18:25:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

British understatement (6.00 / 1)

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 23:12:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You're not British (0.00 / 0)

or did I miss the memo?

But examination of the available data leads only to the conclusion that the biggest beneficiary of the Bush Presidency is Warren Harding. (Steve Mirsky, "Antigravity", SciAm 10/05)
Lex clavatoris designati rescindenda est. (Latin for All Occasions)

---

by: mirrim @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 23:47:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Hush, you (0.00 / 0)

another impertinent Irishwoman!

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 00:00:58 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I work for a Kiwi (7.00 / 1)

Aka a New Zealander.

"There's a bit of concern" = start digging foxholes and hunkering down, the shit's gonna come in heavy

Yeah, I love it.

---

by: Alias Mister Smith @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 02:41:45 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Last I saw (10.33 / 3)

I haven't gone through every one of the comments in that diary in which Hunter descended from On High to issue The Word of God, but last I checked the general consensus seemed to be that the admins were being way too draconian.  Not everyone agreed with the every aspect of the diary, but people were generally supportive of the notion that the admins are being too heavy-handed.

I'll repost my main comment in the diary:

Well, none of you asked me! (21+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
  mickT, bumblebums, litho, redrobin, mcfly, weasel, InStride, ybruti, davidincleveland, anonymousredvest18, sofia, another American, Jay Elias, npbeachfun, Ptah the Great, callmecassandra, bigchin, howardx, heathlander, Terra Mystica, ocdiamond

And while I don't agree with how you characterize everything in your diary, I agree with the general thrust. That's more important than nitpicking over perception or tone.

I don't know why many of these people have been banned, because it seems like the site administrators don't tell them.  Whether that's true or not, I'm not privy to those decisions, I know only what people say here. And it just seems like there is a hair-trigger on banning right now. Several people who have been banned are longtime members of the community. Maybe it's wrong to draw a distinction between them and relative newbies like Sabbah and Annainpalestine, but it seems to me that the longtime users deserve the benefit of the doubt. They have proven themselves over time.

In any case, regardless of whether you agree with that last sentiment, I feel that there ought to be a warning system in place. If someone violates the fair use rules, issue them a warning. If it happens a second time, then perhaps they can be penalized or banned. And for fuck's sake, give a reason for the action.  This is a political blog, not The Word of God.  That goes for any perceived infraction, not just copyright infringement issues. How about a warning, first, and then banning if the warning is ignored?

And just a word on the AnnainPalestine situation. I didn't see the original quotation that was deleted. Shergald claims to have posted it at MyLeftWing.com. I say "claims," because he has a deserved reputation for dishonesty. But assuming for sake of argument that he did indeed post the original quote, I saw nothing objectionable in it. Let me repeat that:  I saw nothing objectionable in it. There was nothing there I couldn't have read, that I haven't already read, in the New York Times, in Haaretz, or seen on CNN or MSNBC.  So it just seemed ridiculous and excessive. 

So a final word -- I don't think that banning the I/P topic is a desirable solution under any circumstances. It is a foreign policy issue, and it is therefore damned relevant to Democratic Party electoral politics. As much so as any other foreign policy issue. So fucking what if it might hurt Democratic electoral prospects to talk about criticism of Israeli policies? Hey, talking about defense spending hurts Democratic electoral prospects, as anyone who has been sentient for the past 30 years knows damn well.  So I'm going on record, so that everyone can take due note (and that includes you, Shergald, because I know you are reading this and will spread lies elsewhere) -- banning I/P discussions is NOT acceptable.

And note the bipartisan mojo.  People on both sides of the I/P debate have generally been critical of the zero-tolerance policy, and supportive of the notion of continued discussion, contrary to the incorrect characterizations some people have posted here.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:37:23 PM CDT

At least 14 diaries since Wednesday (0.00 / 0)

have been posted as of this time.  So debate has hardly been snuffed out.  And the overwhelming majority of those diaries are critical of Israeli policies.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:41:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well, It Would Be Difficult (8.00 / 2)

to find any actions worthy of praise on the part of the Israeli government, now, wouldn't it?

Not a snark, just an observation from a non-combatant...

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 15:50:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Really? (10.00 / 1)

Taking in Jewish refugees from Ethiopia?  Providing schools and health care?  Offering aid and assistance to the US following Hurricane Katrina?  Offering aid and assistance to Iran following a devastating earthquake there recently (sometime in the past two years)?  Are you sure that in the day to day administration of an entire nation, you can't find a single praiseworthy act or policy?

Or haven't you bothered looking? 

You were better off with snark.  As an observation, it comes across as stunningly uninformed.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 17:09:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wow...You Have Me Confused (0.00 / 0)

with someone who actually gives a damn what's going on in Israel.  I couldn't care less if they all kill each other, as they seem bent upon doing...and while I'm married to a woman whose Christian-Arab parents were driven out of Haifa in '48, who also doesn't seem to give a damn, I will admit to you that I am only aware of Israel through the international press and its progressive website, Haaretz...neither of which are as eager to overlook Israel's actions as are you...your prerogative...

That said, I'm sure you have no problem with the current American administration, and I imagine that your defense of Bushco would be just as strident as it is of Israel, in light of America's charity work around the world...fuck everything else, right?

My Left Wing, in fact, should just shut up, right, 'cause we're all sure that the current administration has done some good things while in power?

Just checking...

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 18:38:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

That's the problem with certainty (0.00 / 0)

"That said, I'm sure you have no problem with the current American administration, and I imagine that your defense of Bushco would be just as strident as it is of Israel, in light of America's charity work around the world...fuck everything else, right?"

That's the problem with certainty. When you are wrong, as you are in this case, you are wrong to a T.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 19:11:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes, Hunter's policy (6.00 / 2)

was highly objectionable to posters on both sides of the issue.

I was surpised and pleased to see the strongest analysis coming from another American.

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 15:02:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

That surprised you? (7.00 / 3)

Then you haven't been paying attention, or rather, you've been paying too much attention to the nonsense from Shergald that all the pro-Israel, rightwing Zionists are trying to snuff out debate.  The fact of the matter is, most people on both sides of the issue want the diaries to continue. We want to find a way to avoid banning the topic. Speaking as leader of the rightwing Zionists, I have no problem with the topic, I have no problem with criticism of Israeli policies. However, as I have said on multiple occasions, I do have a problem with strident, inflammatory, over-the-top rhetoric.  And it is a simple and obvious fact that most of the strident, inflammatory, over-the-top rhetoric comes from the people who are, for lack of a more elegant term, in the pro-Palestinian group.  Some of it comes from the pro-Israel group, too, but not nearly on the scale or frequency of the other side.

And therein lies a chief flaw with the diary.  It contained some inflammatory rhetoric that turned me off, and was largely unnecessary towards the bigger issue of whether the admins are being Stalinesque.  I think that had that rhetoric been edited out, you would have gotten quite a few of the so-called "rightwing Zionists" to have put their name to the diary, too. And that would've sent a quite powerful message to the admins.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 15:15:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I Find the Term "Pro" Anything (6.00 / 2)

that has to do with human rights to be a very unfortunate term...it implies that the situation is an argument to be settled with black and white finality...

I'm pro-human rights...I see violations on both sides...

I'm pro-humanity- I see little humanity right now in either the occupied or the occupiers...

"Pro" Palestinian or "Pro" Israel?  How could I be, unless both sides are monoliths?

I'm pro-common sense, and since this conflict revolves around tribalism and religion, I see little of either on either side...

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 15:48:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It was a gross simplification (0.00 / 0)

used to save my comment from having to include a 16-volume digression on all the various gradations into which each individual reader and commenter might fall.  And I indicated as much, by acknowledging that it wasn't a very elegant term.  So was there a reason for calling further attention to my use of a self-admitted flawed term?

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 17:12:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm Re-Reading My Comment (0.00 / 0)

to you, and I simply can't find any spot in it where I personally take you to task for the use of the term "pro" - I can't recall exactly my state of mind while writing it, but the tone of it seems to merely concur with your statement that it is not an elegant term to apply to the conflict or two either side.

I believe you're being overly sensitive, for my reason in having brought it up is the same as yours...I dislike it...

Perhaps I erred in attaching the comment to yours, where it seemed to me to be the place to jump into the conversation...if you object to people stating their opinions in comments appended to yours, I will undertake never to do such again...

TMWNP

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 18:30:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

S'OK (0.00 / 0)

It's an inelegant shorthand, and it doesn't really do justice to either side, but everyone seems to know what I mean when I use it.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 19:09:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I Think I Can Understand (0.00 / 0)

the passion on both sides, and the ahem, "touchiness," for want of a more articulate phrase myself, over comments that could either be innocuous but may contain or be thought to contain a hidden barb...

As I said, I don't have a dog in this fight other than to utterly deplore the situation on both sides- I'm of mixed race, so I find tribal conflicts quite boring, and rather mentally retarded...I can't belong to a tribe myself, and so don't see the logic in tribal conflicts at all...

But others, such as yourselves, are not me, and hold quite passionate views, and so it would perhaps be prudent for me to avoid wading into such a contentious issue with the odd comment or quip that may inflame...

My apologies, and I look forward to discussing other things with you...this particular topic, I think I will leave to others...

Peace.

TMWNP

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 10:21:42 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

You want a dog? (7.50 / 2)

My neighbor has a cute little fluffball...I could probably poach it and get it to you UPS ground.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 13:54:13 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No Thanks (0.00 / 0)

Our neighbour has an American Bulldog/Rottwieller/SomeBigFuckingKillerDogType that he leaves tied up outside all day, with no company...at this point, the bugger goes after anything (squirrels in the trees, birds, you name it) and won't shut.the.fuck.up...every time I go outside to hit some golf balls into my net, he goes "ballistic..."  I'm gonna commit a crime against the canine species one day...

Then again, perhaps I could feed your little fluff-ball to the RoarsLikeNiagaraFalls dog...

I'll get back to you...

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 14:33:04 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Time to hit the golf balls at (8.00 / 1)

the dog.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 14:59:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I Demand that MSOC Create a New (0.00 / 0)

Comment category....after 8, 9 should be "LMFAO," unabbreviated...followed by 10 for Right the Fuck On....and so forth...

That's a LMFAO comment, friend...thanks for the chuckle!

TMWNP

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 15:45:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Rotten Rottwieller? But they're so cute ;-) (0.00 / 0)

Cheers!

"Truth has no time of its own. Its hour is now -- always, and indeed then most truly when it seems most unsuitable to actual circumstances."

---

by: roysol @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 18:41:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Correction: Pitbull...My Other Neighbour (0.00 / 0)

told me what breed of devil lies beyond the separating fence...oh, Joy...

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Sun May 20, 2007 at 08:54:04 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I was not surprised to see (0.00 / 0)

AA opposed to the bannings.  That's not his style.

I was surprised to see the strength of his support for the aspects of the diary that Hunter fatheadedly condemned.  I would certainly have given his comment an "11" if that had been possible.

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 18:33:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I have followed another American pretty closely (0.00 / 0)

and was surprised by his support too. But not by yours.

I'm important, and everyone else is too. - G.K. Chesterton

---

by: fairleft @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 03:01:28 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't know if it make any difference to you, Paul, (5.00 / 1)

but for the record it was Deward Hastings who posted the deleted text.

He didn't say where he got it, to establish it's provenance.

Cheers!

"Truth has no time of its own. Its hour is now -- always, and indeed then most truly when it seems most unsuitable to actual circumstances."

---

by: roysol @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 15:46:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You're totally sweet, Paul. (3.00 / 1)

Except that I have been the subject of too many of your angry posts against what you repeatedly called "Israel bashing," I would believe your anti-censorship leanings. Not only do you want diaries and essays which are critical of the Israel government to stop, you especially want me to stop featuring Israelis and Palestinians and anyone else in the peace movement to stop making Israel look bad.

Well, Paul. If Israel wants to stop looking bad to the world, it will have to change its behavior. Censorship and blackout of news about it continues to do to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza will not work in the long run. Everyday, Americans are learning more and more about the reality and that reality is easily provided in the form of simple facts, even pictures, and undeniable truths.




Silence is not an option. It merely helps to perpetuate human rights injustices.

---

by: shergald @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 16:56:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Keep lying (6.00 / 1)

My record on banning the topic is very clear, and out there for anyone to see -- I am against banning the I/P topic, both here and at DailyKos. Well, you may not be able to see my comments there, because you've been BANNED, but everyone else can. So if folks want me to stop calling you a pathetic liar, you might consider no longer telling lies. Just a thought.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Sat May 19, 2007 at 17:20:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Your posts to me in the past speak for themselves. (0.00 / 0)

Can you please link to evidence of this charge, "pathetic liar" something you have repeated many times?



Silence is not an option. It merely helps to perpetuate human rights injustices.

---

by: shergald @ Sun May 20, 2007 at 07:57:56 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sure (0.00 / 0)

Just look back over every comment you've made in the past week, in which you assert that I want to ban the I/P discussion at DailyKos.  Everytime you say that, it is a pathetic, baldfaced lie.  Every single time. And since you are such a pathological and shameless liar about my views, why should anyone believe anything else you say?  You lie to the good people here at MLW. You lied to the people at DKos. You lied to your buddies at Evenhanded Democrats, and they booted your sorry ass because you were such a fucking liar.

Like I said before, everytime you open your mouth, you set the Palestinians back even farther.  If ISM hired you to be their paid blogger, they are wasting their money. But I'm sure GIYUS would put you on the payroll, given how effective you've been at discrediting yourself in the eyes of anyone that can exercise critical thinking skills.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Sun May 20, 2007 at 12:51:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Here are the links (0.00 / 0)

http://www.myleftwin...

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Sun May 20, 2007 at 12:52:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

That's just a list of my diaries on MLW. (0.00 / 0)

Are you suggesting that the diaries pathological lies?

Come on Paul. Let's have the links. Or are you willing to concede you are making false accusations and consequently a liar yourself?



Silence is not an option. It merely helps to perpetuate human rights injustices.

---

by: shergald @ Sun May 20, 2007 at 15:15:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Diaries and comments (0.00 / 0)

And yes, you read me correctly -- I am saying that everything you write here, whether it is a diary or a comment, is so riddled with lies, that it is virtually impossible to find the rare comment that isn't mendacious.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Sun May 20, 2007 at 19:08:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I believe I have been Enhanced! (8.00 / 4)

---

by: Miss Mannered @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 14:49:10 PM CDT

Bully for you (7.00 / 3)

Now take out the trash.

MLW Bylaw 10.342.63(a) -- Newly-enhanced users are responsible for taking out the trash.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 15:03:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I Didn't Picture You (8.00 / 1)

as one for cosmetic surgery...

Alas, TMWNP shall remain proudly un-enhanced...except for these frontal veneers...

Can we say "frontal" on this blog??

---

by: TheManWithNoPoint @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 16:58:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Why didn't you link (5.00 / 2)

to the entire text of Hunter's comment from which you excerpted?

I'm not falling down on any side of this issue because I wasn't involved and frankly, I don't understand enough about the impetus, the diary and comments in question, and the issues to have an informed opinion.  But it's just bad blogging to simply pick a portion of a comment out, plunk it in a diary, and not link back to the original text.  I had to go to a search on Hunter at Daily Kos and then pick through all of his comments to find from whence it came.

Here's a link to the whole comment.

And not for nothing, reading the entire comment at least adds some perspective for informed opinion, whatever that might be.

Have you seen my fucking blog?

---

by: RenaRF @ Fri May 18, 2007 at 17:10:23 PM CDT

Sometimes, an excerpt is enough. (9.00 / 1)

For instance:

Now, please note, I have provided a link to the entire comment from which I culled this quote -- but if I hadn't, it' not as if one could misinterpret this quote, as if somehow the CONTEXT could mitigate it in the least.

Not that the one has anything to do with the other (vis a vis the quote you're referencing and the one I am)...

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---