Monday, February 26, 2007


(note: glo is "scribe) Since the shakeup over at Boo, (and my royal hissy fit here!) I decided it was time to look for the light at the end on my OWN tunnel for a change, and I think I have found it. (in terms of where it works out best for me to spend my online time and energy, I mean). Since it does speak to larger "meta issues" going on now, I thought I'd share the outcome with you.

You''ll notice my name back on the contributer list here and you will also find me very involved over at ECFS . What you will NOT see me doing, ever again, is considering myself to be a "member" of ANY political blog "community", that is operated on a "top down management model". (Or any other online "community" operated and run by a single "owner".)

I will visit these blogs as I care to, comment as I care to, maybe even contribute something now and then, but I will not be joining any of these "communities." or considering any of them any kind of online "home base" . I really should have known better to ever fall into that trap again.

I take the concept of "community" (or "teamwork" , or "democracy" for that matter) seriously. I don't consent to join anything that I am not willing to invest in. This means freely contributing whatever I have to offer, and getting to really know and care about the other members, because this is my concept of what a "community" is. In return I get a sense of comfort and familiarity and "belonging" as a part of a group of other human beings..that I call a sense of "community". (Sort of like "Cheers": a place where everybody knows your name)

I think I have finally completed a long long lesson. For me, there never will be no more joining any top down, pyramid shaped organization. For several reasons:

1) I AWAYS end up breaking too many of the unwritten, unspoken rules and norms of "acceptable behavior or thought" (that all groups with a top down structure form )
2) I cannot tolerate having subtle yet real limits placed on what I can or cannot say or believe, without getting attacked or "shunned".
3) I cannot witness good people I care about tearing out each others throats out and nobody in charge doing anything about it, not in silence anyway.
4) I will NOT be pressured into taking sides between "insiders and outsiders" and being expected to support those in charge,when I do not agree with them, as the dues I must pay for continued acceptance by the "core community"who is loyal to the owner.
5) And when I am fully "invested" in a top down group, and it falls apart, I tend to get sucked in emotionally, which wreaks havoc with me ,stresswise and raises hell with my objectivity and clarity.

These are all dynamics I have experienced for a lifetime, on the job, in social groups, literally everwhere people organize themselves into groups based on a top down power based model, and I am DONE, hear me?! I am DONE with this! FUCK IT!

I LIKE being an "Other"! I was born with this non conformist nature, and I embrace it fully . At the same time, I am not a an "island", and I do enjoy and need the company of others and that elusive sense of "community", when I can find some of it.

Mo betta is NOT a top down power structured blog. There are several here with admin prvildges and from what I can see, whatever "power" that grants, is flowing in a circular fashion. The same at ECFS. Everyone posting there is in an admin, and so far, it is forming itself into a totally collaborative, circular shape, and flow.

So these are the places where I intend to hang out now, and contribute, for as long as they remain viable in a circular organizational structure. I have long been absolutely fascinated by wondering just what we could do together, if not forced to deal with the inevitable dysfunctions that will always arise in groups operating within a top down, power-over model.

(And I do not find it a surprise at all to find all my most favorite online "Others"right here, and also at ECFS! )

Oh. And for any drop in visitors here, who have been told that we are all bunch of sickos who have no lives at all and spend all our time "blog wrecking" just for the hell of it, you might want to stick around long enough to read all of what's here, not just the carefully selected chum you may have been hand fed.

(And to ductape, wherever you are: I know, I know, it took me awhile to really "get it", fully, but better late than never, huh? Thank you, my dear friend.)

Saturday, February 24, 2007

New ecfs site...

We are finally on our new server and URL for "Everybody Comes From Somewhere". Update your bookmarks appropriately! ;)

Threaded comments, forum, lots of goodness and whatever you want it to be... so if you didn't get an email with your new account info, email me... spiderleafATgmailDOTcom... and if you did, stop on by and poke around!

~ spider

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Handling the Problem of Dissident Bloggers in Gated Community Blogs

One of the noticeable features of American suburbia over the last couple decades is the increased tendency for the upper middle class to barricade themselves in gated communities. There are of course numerous reasons why one might choose to live in such a set-up, including of course the perception of safety as well as the perception of communing among like-minded neighbors free from the undesirable riff-raff that pollute the inner cities and whatnot. I've never of course actually lived in one of these neighborhoods, nor are there any prospects of me ever doing so (not that I lose any sleep over it, mind you). I have however visited a few of them, and they are indeed strange places. The houses are uniformly large (I've heard the term McMansions used to describe them) and similar in appearance. Yards of course are neatly trimmed. The air of similarity pervades the environment. Naturally, of course, there is a gate blocking one's entrance to these places and one must seek permission in order to be buzzed in. It's a bit easier to get out than to get in, perhaps not too surprisingly. Given that at the time that I was invited in to such communities by punks and goth wannabes who just happened to have well-off parental units, I am sure that my arrival would coincide with a depreciation in property values. The car I drove that had peace sign and Crucifucks stickers on it was probably a clue that I was one of the riff-raff that the neighbors had tried to escape.

With that long-winded introduction you might now ask me what any of this has to do with dissident bloggers. Have patience. We will make our way to this weighty topic momentarily. The gated communities are ultimately about having the right appearance, the right car, the right job, the right values. Deviations are simply not to be tolerated - as I am sure any upstanding member of the various neighborhood associations governing these communities will tell you. The pressure to conform has to be enormous. But again, keep in mind that we are dealing with upper-middle class America, here, which really hasn't evolved much since the days of Father Knows Best. The main differences are the spiffy high-tech gadgets, the bling, the Hummer in every driveway, etc. (in other words, mere window dressing).

To a degree, the phenomenon of "community blogging" is itself a middle-to-upper-middle-class endeavor (I told you I was going somewhere with this). Of course there is nothing inherently wrong with this state of affairs per se, but it does lead to some characteristics of these blogging communities which one must take care to notice lest one be subject to public scorn and ridicule. One must understand for instance that taking up space in a gated community blog is viewed as a privilege rather than a right, and that the moderators (who act as the internet equivalent of a neighborhood association) ultimately get to decide on who is privileged and who is not. There are some for whom the gate is not supposed to open. So it goes. Nothing is ever one hundred percent fool-proof of course, and just as one cannot always choose one's neighbors (or the guests of said neighbors), one cannot always choose one's blog members. Needless to say, when saddled with embarrassing neighbors, the association must take action - especially if the other neighbors have failed to do so. That pressure to conform is enormous, suffice it to say, and any good gated community has ample tools at its disposal.

In the gated community blogs, this pressure to conform usually takes on at least a couple forms: one is the in the form of using guilt and shame as a tactic to stifle nonconformist discourse. Those using this particular tactic can proceed in at least two ways. They could try to reminisce about "the good old days" when we "were all on the same side" and lament the current state of dialogue. Another weapon is to take on the role of the victim who has been "attacked" by the hordes of "savage" leftists. The tactic is most effective if delivered with a sufficiently stern motherly or fatherly voice. Sometimes the unruly member might fall for it, and clam up. Others, smelling the stench of manipulation, the embarrassing guests will continue as before, with maybe a flamewar or two added for good effect.

Another tactic I call "you're in danger of not being cool." Let's say the dissident blogger quotes a source considered taboo by the "Liberal Blogging Neighborhood Association." One can play the tactic thusly: "if you're quoting Justin Raimondo (a libertarian), you're just a step away from completing the transition to being a David Horowitz clone." Naturally, no self-respecting leftist blogger would wish to associate with neocon slime such as Horowitz, which is why the tactic can be effective in achieving sufficient conformity in order for the community to keep up appearances of respectability. Actually it's no different than the old junior high school trick of saying "if you keep doing x, you'll end up just like the weird dude who eats his boogers during pep rallies." Again, this tactic is only effective to the extent that the targets don't perceive that they're being manipulated (in which case, all bets are off, except for the endless flame wars that will continue for days on end).

If none of that works, there's always raw coercion. Some respectable member of the community (perhaps even a member of the neighborhood association) might simply go off threatening to clock the offending dissident blogger or even go so far as to threaten the dissident with the use of firearms. That particular tactic smells of desperation, and other than making one question the mental state of those issuing such threats, it's usually fairly safe to assume that the person making the threat will never carry it out. Ultimately, the threatener ends up looking stupid, losing respectability in the process, and the dissident bloggers go merrily about their business (don't forget the flame war!).

Somewhat more effective might be the threat of banishing the dissident bloggers from the neighborhood. To the extent that we humans are social animals who thrive on interaction and who become stressed out by excessive isolation, that threat can carry some substance up to a point. The weakness of that threat is that the internets allow for the formation of multiple communities that can subsequently become homes for wayward dissident bloggers, and some of those communities even exist sans the usual gates and guards and such. The gatekeepers using this tactic should also take care to avoid playing favorites, as leftist bloggers (both dissident and the more "respectable" alike) tend to be especially sensitive to injustices and what should have been a quiet gathering at the country club can quickly turn into a crowd at a pro wrestling match.

Such are the trials and tribulations of the blogging community gatekeepers, who find themselves having to deal with the community they have rather than the one that they wished for. There is another tactic that would be well worthy of consideration, and is one that I humbly offer as preferable: try listening to the dissident bloggers rather than view them as those weird aunts or uncles who must be kept hidden in order to keep up those appearances of perfect normality in blogtopia's Wysteria Lane. Doing so, means giving up the pretense of gated community perfection, and risks the potential for touchy and "embarrassing" topics to be raised (and dare I say it, even front-paged). The benefits though include added potential to learn and to perhaps even change a few opinions here and there (on all sides). Besides, a neighborhood in which all the houses look the same gets boring - wouldn't you much rather have a community with some color to it?

Credit where credit is due: blogtopia was coined by skippy; the term "gated community blogs" was coined by Ductape Fatwa.

Sunday, February 18, 2007

The Divisions of the Left

In the previous thread, Nanette posted a comment in response to this post by Maryscott O'Connor at My Left Wing.

I think Nanette's comment serves as a good jumping off point for the broader conversation about the divisions in the left-wing blogosphere and it expands on the point that many people want to aim for more than just winning elections for Democrats, which I had tried to address in this post.

Here's her reply to Maryscott:

Maryscott, while we all may be headed in the same general direction, I think people have, over time, come to the conclusion that no, we are not all on the same side. And we don't all have the same destination in mind.

(Some) women realized that at kos a couple of years ago and on into the present. Non mainstream white people learned that about kos, booman, mydd and even your site (all of which poll (or would, if they were taken at bootrib and mlw) at 98% or more white, and the rest various "other". Why do you think that is?

Leftists, those who don't believe in the political system as is... and don't believe in supporting it staying the way it is (which is basically what the BBB's are doing), also have found sometimes that their "home community" just really... isn't.

There is a huge gulf between those that want a tweak... and those that feel that what is really needed is a change. Most of the kos and kos satellite blogs - bootrib, fdl, mydd, mlw to a lesser extent, etc - and participants are tweakers. They've convinced themselves (especially the mydd'ers... good god) that, yes, they really can be THE progressive movement, even if their ranks are made up of primarily comfortably well off white males. Tweakers. A mile wide and an inch deep... because, as I mentioned to Stoller, when whatever burr is in their hide (war in iraq, Bush in white house, etc) is removed, the slightly discomforted will be comfortable again and go on with their lives.

I saw in your mlw post of this that you have a photo of a little kid and 'no war with Iran' or something... close to the text of "something that really matters" or something like that. I am anti-war. Not only anti this war, but anti all wars. HOWEVER... I will not coalesce with people and groups around being "anti-war" - well, not primarily.

I coalition with people who are pro social justice, pro environmental justice, pro human rights, pro human dignity, pro anti-racism, pro anti-imperialism and exceptionalism, and things such as this... with the knowledge that being pro these things necessitates also being anti war, and working to find and build solutions and alternatives. Changers.

The reverse isn't true, however... you can be as anti *this* or the next war as you like, and still not give a hoot about any of that other stuff. That's one place where many divisions arise, in my opinion.

Anyway, I think the divisions are perfectly fine. I believe the party operative blogs will be one vehicle (or group of vehicles) heading in one direction, following the routes they wish to go, making inroads in the party and so on and that those who have other views or goals will move in directions that they feel they need to go. And that's okay.

The rancor will fade, it always does - none should consider themselves immune to criticism however, as some seem to.

Some of us have had long discussions about the role of "The Others" in relation to the big box blogs and the wider political scene in general while trying to address the huge topic of American exceptionalism as well - a topic that affects domestic and foreign policy attitudes. Sometimes, they're not easy conversations to have but, imho, they are certainly necessary if we are going to try to work with each other. You have to recognize the divisions before you can deal with them and then it's a matter of figuring out what to do about them in a way that embraces the diversity of opinions, needs and goals. An age old challenge, to be sure, but one that the left-wing blogosphere needs to keep talking about in order to move forward.

Saturday, February 17, 2007


Don't ever underestimate these fuckers. They are fucking vicious. If one of them shows up where I am in the United States I will fucking shoot them. And I'm a pacifist. I'll be in Europe in about 30 days and good luck finding me there, fuckers.

I don't have a problem with someone disagreeing with me and you sure don't have to like me (or Boo or anyone else). But when you take it to the "next level" and start endangering totally innocent people, that's when it goes too far. These "paparazzi" are freaking psychos.

The difference between Boo and Britney Spears is she has the BUCKS to hire bodyguards etc. Freaking loons. It's just a fucking blog you freaks!

Night and day you can find me Flogging the Simian

by soj on Sat Feb 17th, 2007 at 10:20:31 PM EST

The level of hostile paranoia in that particular response to one of Booman's front-page screeds is indeed something to behold. I have just enough paraprofessional experience in the helping professions to recognize soj's ravings for what they are: the work of someone who at this moment in time is profoundly disturbed (I'll refrain from armchair diagnoses for what I think are obvious reasons). I would say that any threat of physical violence, which is essentially what this alleged "pacifist" has done, should not be excused. Whether or not it will over at the frogpond remains to be seen.


When Atrios kicked off Blogroll Amnesty Day earlier this month, I doubt he had any idea about the blowback that would result when kos at Daily Kos decided to join him. The reaction to the culling of kos' blogroll was fast and at times furious throughout the blogosphere. skippy described the repercussions on site rankings. Renee in Ohio started a protest blog. Maryscott O'Connor tore a strip off of kos' hide. And that was just the beginning.

Since that time there has been a lot of analysis throughout the blogosphere about the much broader issue of the role of "big box blogs" (BBB) like Daily Kos as they relate to being privately-owned businesses whose main goal is simply "winning" elections.

I won't rehash all of those debates. I just thought I'd toss in my opinion about what's going on and how it relates to the position the Democrats and their supporters find themselves in now.

Anyone who's followed the American political scene on the BBBs the past few years knows the sheer agony, desperation and anger expressed about how Bushco has coopted democracy, justice and civil and human rights. All of those emotions were aimed at one thing: regaining Democratic control of congress last year. When that did happen (and it was quite a delicate win until it was finally announced that Jim Webb's win just barely gave them the senate majority), the BBB members could finally breath a sigh of relief. And that's what it was. It wasn't a massive celebration. It was more of a serious "what will the Democratic congress do now" reaction.

So they waited and patiently watched as the Dems put their first 100 hours plan into action. The thread underlying the 2006 elections for those bloggers and commenters though that had coursed through the electorate at large was the opposition to the Iraq war and the possibility of impeachment. After Bush announced his so-called surge, the Dems knew they had to proceed cautiously, all the while being criticized every step of the way by the right for supposedly having no plan and being divided. Those divisions were also obvious on the left-wing blogs where members were (and still are) fighting amongst themselves over whether to bring the troops home ASAP or to go with a gradual withdrawal; whether to cut off funding or not. No one on those blogs, from what I could see, thought Bush's plan was anything but a badly misguided policy.

So, what does all of that have to do with the blogroll amnesty blowout and the general unruliness on some of those blogs lately? Well, I think it became very obvious to some that, contrary to what kos had been preaching, simply focusing on "winning" was not enough. The Dems won. Now what?

kos has begun retooling his blogroll by linking to state blogs that are focused on electoral politics - omitting those that are more ideological in nature. As he stated clearly in 2004:

This is a Democratic blog, a partisan blog. One that recognizes that Democrats run from left to right on the ideological spectrum, and yet we're all still in this fight together. We happily embrace centrists like NDN's Simon Rosenberg and Howard Dean, conservatives like Martin Frost and Brad Carson, and liberals like John Kerry and Barack Obama. Liberal? Yeah, we're around here and we're proud. But it's not a liberal blog. It's a Democratic blog with one goal in mind: electoral victory. And since we haven't gotten any of that from the current crew, we're one more thing: a reform blog. The battle for the party is not an ideological battle. It's one between establishment and anti-establishment factions. And as I've said a million times, the status quo is untenable

As Renee in Ohio noted this week:

So, to recap. We have this guy who runs a blog and co-wrote a book, who in the process has aquired some celebrity. He uses phrases like "people powered" and "crashing the gate" as his *branding*. In the meantime, whether he has indeed "crashed a gate", or merely procured, for himself, a seat at the table, he's made it clear that he is not so interested in helping anyone else get in.

But even beyond that, he's in our f***ing way! He's become yet *another* moneyed arbiter of what news is "fit to print", as it were, and which voices will have a harder time being heard. And I *don't* make a living by blogging, but somehow squeeze it in around work and family, in what I ironically refer to as my "spare time"--because it's *that important* to me to make a positive difference.

And given the time and energy I, along with countless others, have invested in the project of taking our country back, I simply can't stand idly by while the tools of the revolution are co-opted by would-be kings.

And there's the rub. This so-called movement, this "revolution" simply comes down to "crashing the gate" to get into the halls of power. It's about becoming a part of the status quo in the hopes of somehow coopting it. It's about shovelling even more money into the hands of politicians from people who would much nore effectively support their pet causes like human rights, justice or the environment by donating to NGOs. I think some people need to take a long, hard look at the fact that even if the blogosphere never existed, the Democrats still would have won in 2006 because the American people were absolutely fed up with the war. The big box blogs attribute far more power to their efforts than they deserve and their members are starting to notice that, for all of the sweat and toil they contribute by writing free content for those sites, the people who run them are gaining notoriety and incomes on their backs.

There's a taste for a real revolution on the BBBs. That is painfully obvious when a diary like this extolling the leaders of the 60s counterculture movements has over 1200 comments from Daily Kos site members - the vast majority of whom applaud the diarist, One Pissed Off Liberal aka OPOL. To those who have followed the genesis of OPOL's participation at dkos, the irony of this oustanding show of support for his latest piece shouldn't be missed. Until even last week, some of the more conservative members on the site were bound and determined to silence his voice there.

The reason for the turning of that tide, I believe, is that many more kossacks now acknowledge that the kos "progressive" revolution has mainly been a figment of their imaginations. Think about it: the 1939 Frank Capra movie Mr Smith Goes to Washington showed "people power" in action. Thousands of telegrams were sent to DC to oppose Senator Smith (James Stewart) who was trying to expose graft in congress while hundreds of boys in his home state took it upon themselves to print and deliver flyers to inform the public of what was really going on in DC in order to support him.

Today's supposedly new-fangled technopolitical revolution led by kos (although he doesn't like to consider himself a leader), which is accomplishing exactly the same thing as that movie yet is somehow now being rebranded as being "progressive", amounts to one of the quietest revolutions in history - the only noise one often hears is the clicking of keyboard keys as one sends yet another e-mail to their congressperson or a letter to the editor to express how they feel about an issue. More clicking is involved to ship off yet another $10 donation or to write yet another diary. At the same time, many of those quiet revolutionaries heap disdain on those who choose to participate in actual street protests because they're just too "inconvenient" or "unruly". The idea of civil disobedience is definitely out. That's not to take away from people who are politically engaged locally. However, they most likely would have arrived at that position even with the BBBs.

So, what we're seeing is a perfect storm of still strong emotions that wants Bushco brought under control by a congress whose leaders have said that impeachment is off the table as they try to find some constitutional way to end the war in Iraq. Meanwhile, many liberals (not the centrists or the so-called left leaning centrists) on these BBBs are starting to realize that being beholden to the private company of Daily Kos, whose owner seems to care more about his interests than those of the strong ideologically-based voices on his blog (and those he used to include on his blogroll), is just not getting them anywhere. And they're crying out for more than mere "winning" because it too often coopts their values and social agendas. They've finally realized that their needs are not being and will not be met by sticking with the status quo that those blogs have become and the banishment from the blogrolls might have been just the wake up call they needed to rise up and reclaim their true paths.

Simply, they refuse to be stuck. More than that, they refuse to be caught up in the spiral of silence that grows each time those blogs become more authoritarian and restrictive through the use of bannings and ratings that make their uncomfortable comments disappear. They refuse to be subjected to bullying and harassment. And they have zero tolerance for site owners who let their disruptive and offensive friends get away with behaviour that would get other people kicked off those sites in no time flat.

There's a sense that there has to be more out there and there definitely is. Herding those liberal cats into a place where they can be more free is, as always, easier said than done. But to stay and fight where you're clearly not wanted is to, as they said back in those old hippie days, sell out. And there's already been more than enough of that.

And that's my 2 cents on the issue.

tale of two worlds - which Left are you on?

Just wanted to highlight this socio-linguistic diamond:
Sometime in early 1992 I was driving alone from Los Angeles to see some friends and celebrate Mardi Gras in New Orleans. I remember a particular stretch of Interstate 10 as I passed down from the mountains of Las Cruces into the river valley of El Paso. Off to my right, on the far side of the Rio Grande, stood Ciudad Juarez. It made for a sorry cityscape, with acres and acres of dilapidated housing. By contrast, El Paso was positively sparkling. I wondered to myself how two cities…two cities so far from anywhere, could be so different from each other. And it occurred to me that the answers lay in Mexico City and Washington DC…in the Constitution and rule of law on the one hand and incompetence and corruption on the other.

In our system of government nothing is more important than the separation of powers represented by the three branches of government: executive, legislative, and judiciary.

If we lose those checks and balances it will only be a matter of time before we lose everything. There will be nothing to distinguish El Paso from Cuidad Juarez. Our country will lose its unique characteristics that have made it so successful.
& where does this vile pile of steaming racist jingosim come from? Lou Dobbs? Tom Lancredo? David Duke?

naaanh . . . that pungent leftie analysis comes from Martin, proprietor, Booman Tribune

(& note that it's total ad hominem in the piece)

how utterly clueless can one get?

Frustration with the quality and limits of discourse around racial topics, along with rampant uncritical jingoism (err, Exceptionalist Theory) of the so-called self-proclaimed 'liberal progressives', was one of the reasons I found myself responding to DtF's invite to participate here last August.

Thursday, February 15, 2007

Marcotte on 'Why I had to quit the John Edwards campaign'

The gist of Amanda Marcotte's new article in Salon, 'Why I had to quit the John Edwards campaign' relies heavily on her belief that she and Melissa McEwan of Shakepeare's Sister were harassed without end by the right-wing nutjobs because they were "young feminists" who had dared to express their opinions about religion, reproductive and gay rights.

That's not the way I saw it.

I think that the gender of the bloggers Edwards or any other Dem candidate chooses to hire for their campaigns is mainly irrelevant to the right-wing smear machine. They simply dug through the archives of Pandagon and found posts they could attack them for. I believe the same thing would have happened whether they were female or not. Hillary's campaign hired Peter Daou of the Daou Report as her blogger outreach person but the right-wing has nothing to go after in his archives that would match the quotes pulled from Pandagon. Ergo, Marcotte was an easy target and Daou has been left unscathed - not because he's a man, but because there was no ammo to use against him.

It makes me uncomfortable that this affair has been turned into a new feminist cause celebre. I'm certainly not ignorant to the fact that the right has repressive attitudes towards women in general but I don't think this case ought to be held up on that mantle as an attack on "young feminists" or feminists in general - not when it can be interpreted as a simple smear job based on the political opinions and writings of the bloggers involved, regardless of their gender.

In other meta news: skippy has a new post up about the scourge of "napoleon syndrome by proxy" that's raging through the blogosphere.

Mo meta? Add it in the comments. Thanks.

Monday, February 12, 2007

New Old Meta

kos indulged himself and wrote a long meta post on Sunday nite to cheers from adoring fans. Others at My Left Wing were not among them, noticably liberalamerican and peeder, both of whom became the subjects of Armando's Big Tent Democrat's bloggy napalm campaign over at dkos. pyrrho came to their defence at MLW on Monday to try to stop the bleeding. (Good luck with that).

People like BTD, whom I quote above, do have a reason to be loyal, they HAVE gotten something. But see, kos doesn't favor my type of politics. Kos wants to defund the Sierra Club. I'm not totally against his politics, but they don't align well enough with mine for me to get anything out of an organization which has no formal promise to let me vote, and also, no informal promise.

That doesn't mean I'm an enemy, and as we have the same positions on some issues, we are still, according to me, allies. But calls for loyalty to the BUSINESS of dailykos are asinine. They are illiberal.

Private businesses are authoritarian in nature... and my politics is NOT authoritarian. What is so fucking confusing to people about that?

PS: dkos is making enemies among progressives, if dkos doesn't want to face that, it will anyway.

Amanda Marcotte has resigned from her blogging job on the Edwards campaign stating, "it [the Donohue wingnut scrutiny] was creating a situation where I felt that every time I coughed, I was risking the Edwards campaign." I figure she should have realized that when she signed up for the job.


Meta communication.


Any other meta tidbits I've missed?

Update! pyrrho has been banned from Daily Kos. Wow is all I can say...

Update: Melissa McEwan of Shakespeare's Sister has also resigned from her position on the Edwards campaign.

Saturday, February 10, 2007

No Meta

Whew. Let's just leave all that be and go help change the world and get to know each other at Everybody Comes From Somewhere.

See you there!

Friday, February 09, 2007

Meta Meta Mo Meta

Is it cabin fever? Winter wankery? Post election win partum depression? Meta madness?

No one's really sure.

What we do know, however, is that the blogosphere natives are extremely restless.

There was the recent meltdown at BooMan Tribune over the lack of enforcement of "the rule" (ie. "Don't be a prick".)

The huge blogapalooza blowout over kos's blogroll banishments. (skippy, MSOC, BooMan)

The all out attack against Adam the Soldier who was deemed by the powers that be at dkos to be a hoaxster without any proof but oops! it was all a mistake! Carry on and don't mind the fact that the big boyz just smeared the poor guy and banned him.

Whatever has caused all of this drama lately, one thing is certain: the trains have collided and all that's left to do now is to tend to the victims and clean up the wreckage.

Thursday, February 08, 2007

Edwards and the Netroots

The news of the day is that John Edwards has refused to cave to right-wing nutbar pressure to fire bloggers Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwen. Those unfamiliar with the dustup can read about it here.

Here's Edwards' statement on the matter:

The tone and the sentiment of some of Amanda Marcotte's and Melissa McEwan's posts personally offended me. It's not how I talk to people, and it's not how I expect the people who work for me to talk to people. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that kind of intolerant language will not be permitted from anyone on my campaign, whether it's intended as satire, humor, or anything else. But I also believe in giving everyone a fair shake. I've talked to Amanda and Melissa; they have both assured me that it was never their intention to malign anyone's faith, and I take them at their word. We're beginning a great debate about the future of our country, and we can't let it be hijacked. It will take discipline, focus, and courage to build the America we believe in.

Fine and dandy.

Edwards is being hailed by his fans in the left-wing blogosphere as a man with a spine today but there are definitely a few "howevers" attached to that praise. Some are disappointed that he didn't launch a full-fledged attack on the wingnuts who created this storm. Others want him to go after the MSM's shoddy reporting. Release the hounds!, they declare.

Perhaps the most telling aspect of all of this was statements from bloggers like Chris Bowers at MyDD, Martin at Booman Tribune and the crowd at Daily Kos that Edwards had better deal with this situation the way they thought he should or else he'd lose the support of the "netroots" - once again elevating the status of the "netroots" to near mythic proportions.

Did the netroots help get candidates elected? Yes. Although that sure didn't work in John Kerry's case, did it? Oh, but that wasn't the netroots fault. Kerry just didn't have that spine Edwards is supposedly displaying. Does the netroots raise money for candidates? Sure. But let's not forget about who really funds so-called democracy in the United States. Joe Netroot's $10 donation to his local candidiate is a nice gesture and makes him feel like he has power, but it's nothing compared to Corporate America's millions that are funneled into Washington every election cycle. So, while the netroots have some amount of people power, it is also very limited.

Democratic candidates won the last time around because Amercians were sick and tired of losing the Iraq war. I suspect the results would have been the same regardless of whether the netroots existed or not. Some factors are simply out of the netroots control. Remember the "macaca" moment that sunk George Allen and gave the win to Jim Webb? No netroots influence there - just serendipity.

Do the netroots have some influence? Sure. People who read blogs are often inspired to become active in their local races. They write about the issues to inform others. They raise a bit of money. Some netroots leaders end up being interviewed by the MSM. What is lacking, however, is the huge political machine that the right has been nurturing and employing for decades.

So the left's netroots movement may have actual power at some point in the future. As it stands now, however, it's still in its infancy and that power is very limited. That's why I thought those proclamations by bloggers like Chris Bowers were a bit laughable. John Edwards' campaign won't fail if he loses netroots support and for some bloggers to declare they'd abandon him over this issue seems to be a rather pompous display of overestimating their own power.

Frankly, what ought to be a major concern for so-called left-wing bloggers are the statements Edwards made at the Herzliya conference:

Cheryl Fishbein from NY: When you do learning of Jewish texts, you give credit to ideas of scholars who have helped you ask questions, I would like to give credit to my friends and colleagues who have had this same overriding question of shared a existential threat: Would you be prepared, if diplomacy failed, to take further action against Iran? I think there is cynicism about the ability of diplomacy to work in this situation. Secondly, you as grassroots person, who has an understanding of the American people, is there understanding of this threat across US?

A: My analysis of Iran is if you start with the President of Iran coming to the UN in New York denouncing America and his extraordinary and nasty statements about the Holocaust and goal of wiping Israel off map*, married with his attempts to obtain nuclear weapons over a long period of time, they are buying time. They are the foremost state sponsors of terrorism. If they have nuclear weapons, other states in the area will want them, and this is unacceptable.

As to what to do, we should not take anything off the table. More serious sanctions need to be undertaken, which cannot happen unless Russia and China are seriously on board, which has not happened up until now. I would not want to say in advance what we would do, and what I would do as president, but there are other steps that need to be taken. Fore [sic] example, we need to support direct engagement with Iranians, we need to be tough. But I think it is a mistake strategically to avoid engagement with Iran.

As to the American people, this is a difficult question. The vast majority of people are concerned about what is going on in Iraq. This will make the American people reticent toward going for Iran. But I think the American people are smart if they are told the truth, and if they trust their president. So Americans can be educated to come along with what needs to be done with Iran.

That's my bottom line: do you want John Edwards dragging your country into a war with Iran or not?

All of this netroots/blogger crisis stuff has just been a ridiculous diversion. You may want to grant Edwards a "spine" but you may regret that when it comes to how he might handle foreign affairs if he actually does become the president.

Update: The Catholic League has released its reponse to Edwards' decision. How pompous:

“Edwards said today that ‘We’re beginning a great debate about the future of our country, and we can’t let it be hijacked.’ I have news for him—the Catholic League—not Edwards—will decide what the debate will be about, and it won’t be about the nation. It will be about the glaring double standard that colors the entire conversation about bigotry.

“We will launch a nationwide public relations blitz that will be conducted on the pages of the New York Times, as well as in Catholic newspapers and periodicals. It will be on-going, breaking like a wave, starting next week and continuing through 2007. It will be an education campaign, informing the public of what he did today.

Reminder: Bill Donohue is The Catholic League's president and he can try to hide from his bigoted track record but it's well-documented.

What a hypocritical blowhard.

Tuesday, February 06, 2007


I would like to explain the meaning of compassion, which is often misunderstood. Genuine compassion is based not on our own projections and expectations, but rather on the rights of the other: irrespective of whether another person is a close friend or an enemy, as long as that person wishes for peace and happiness and wishes to overcome suffering, then on that basis we develop genuine concern for his or her problem. This is genuine compassion. Usually when we are concerned about a close friend, we call this compassion. This is not compassion; it is attachment. Even in marriage, those marriages that last only a short time do so because of attachment – although it is generally present – but because there is also compassion. Marriages that last only a short time do so because of a lack of compassion; there is only emotional attachment based on projection and expectation. When the only bond between close friends is attachment, then even a minor issue may cause one’s projections to change. As soon as our projections change, the attachment disappears – because that attachment was based solely on projection and expectation. It is possible to have compassion without attachment – and similarly, to have anger without hatred. Therefore we need to clarify the distinctions between compassion and attachment, and between anger and hatred. Such clarity is useful in our daily life and in our efforts towards world peace. I consider these to be basic spiritual values for the happiness of all human beings, regardless of whether one is a believer or a nonbeliever.

- HH The Dalai Lama

I think that speaks for itself...

Sunday, February 04, 2007



1. Medicine Purgation, especially for the digestive system.
2. A purifying or figurative cleansing of the emotions, especially pity and fear, described by Aristotle as an effect of tragic drama on its audience.
3. A release of emotional tension, as after an overwhelming experience, that restores or refreshes the spirit.
4. Psychology
1. A technique used to relieve tension and anxiety by bringing repressed feelings and fears to consciousness.
2. The therapeutic result of this process; abreaction.

That's what this place is all about (except for the medical purgation thing which sounds gross). It's a safe envirnoment to rant, vent, scream, swear, cry, laugh, hug - to just let it all out without any restrictions and I believe it is serving us all well in that regard because, even though we have no rules, we honour each other.

/end o' philosophical part

The comments section in spiderleaf's thread has become very long so consider this post Part Deux.

Through that process of catharsis a new blog has been born: Everybody Comes From Somewhere. (I still expect spidey to post a proper birth announcement here with a little pic of some kind so we can all fawn over how cute the new addition is. Apparently, she's been busy watching some game involving a pigskin. Ewww.)

So, we'll keep doing what we do best here: Mo Betta Meta

And the new blog will be a place for...well...that's being defined by the new community. I'll just call it "progress".

Now back to the catharsisizing catharsisization chatting...

Saturday, February 03, 2007

I'm responsible for global warming

So I see that Martin, aka, BooMan, is in full hate mode against me at his website. This will probably be my last diary on this website as I am certainly not trying to make myself a "martyr" as Martin seems to believe. Damn does that guy hate me. But then again I never was subservient.

It's so sad to see him continue to lie about me and go further and further down some fairytale road of his making.

To catch up: I was banned after asking for an apology from Martin after he posted comment after comment calling me names and impugning my integrity. If someone actually READS what I wrote I did not ASK to be banned. I asked him if he was still planning on banning me as threatened or if he would apologize and we could move on. He made his choice. Actually itching to do it. I was on the site when he posted his reply and when I tried to hit "reply" to his comment I had already been zapped. Martin, did you already have your blog terminal up and ready and pointed to my account? Very interesting. Kind of blows your whole "she asked for it" lie out of water now doesn't it?

But it does appear poor Martin is melting down. He has stopped making sense.

Let alone his utter hypocrisy in providing Tracy "warnings" and failing to do the same for me. I have NEVER said anything even remotely as vile and disgusting as that woman has. But BooMan loves his doublestandards. Or is it that he is afraid to ban a military wife? Yes, I do wonder what it is about Tracy that gives her such leniency from Martin. I thought it was because of CabinGirl, but damn, it's just a blog for buddha's sake. Or is it because - "I support the site and pay Martin what I can". I thought BooTrib wasn't allowed to take donations or payments, only purchases through the store? Or is that asking too many questions again?

Sooo... let's see if I can catch up on all the things I'm supposedly to blame for. It's pretty long list.

1. I have the power of mind control over supersoling and made him post a comment back in July saying that BooMan was letting his friendship with Tracy cloud his judgement.
2. I told catnip about him and CG even though at least, as super notes, 4 other people have said they knew and could have told her, or that others could have, since back in the days of YearlyKos; two MONTHS before I was supposed to have told catnip. And of course how can I prove I DIDN'T? How can you prove a negative? And BooMan refuses to provide proof, which I repeatedly asked for.
3. I caused the whole meltdown in July
4. My sole purpose at the blog is to shit disturb and cause controversy (I take it he's forgotten my recent diary "On the Road to Kingdom Come" surely a flamewar waiting to happen)
5. I lurk at his blog and don't always comment (did anyone know this was against the rules?)
6. I initiated the whole controversy in July
7. I got my wish in him banning me
8. I worked tirelessly to obtain my "martyrdom"
9. Being banned from BooMan Tribune is a "badge of honor" for me (this one is so funny I almost can't even keep typing. Martin dear, my life is not wrapped up in your site or any other. Wow.)
10. I'm a "big fat enormous liar"
11. Tracy was a saint when she first came back and hasn't been following me around the site baiting me since November and then did the same in my Gore diary... hey Martin, that may be why I've been lurking so much, or am I lying about that too?
[update] her comment baiting me and the massive thread beneath is now hidden. Well, at least I can provide the comment she decided to come at me with in my "Al Gore for Peace Prize diary". And she accused me of being disrespectful to him. Whadda maroon.
I heard the real reason you were banned (0.00 / 3)
from DailyKos was that you were outing personal details on Armando's life or something. Is that a smear too?

PMS Purchase More Shoes
by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 2nd, 2007 at 10:41:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Smears? (none / 1)
Grow up! (0+ / 1-)
Trollrated by:Militarytracy
Your baiting and switching, calling people Phycho bitches and fucking pigs because they do not agree with you is immature. Take that wonderful advise from your daughter and take a break from the blogs.

There was a time that I really felt for you Tracy and could not imagine being so conflicted about the war and having a soldier for a husband. Now you use it as an excuse to attack the very people that used to support you. Shame on you.

Frodo failed....Bush has got the ring!

by Alohaleezy on Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 06:47:56 AM PST

[ Parent | Reply to This ]

* [new] I am so much more grown up than you (0 / 0)
See, I don't expect something for nothing. I don't expect my soldiers to break one law but uphold other laws and call them criminals for not doing such insane bidding while I do nothing but bitch on blogs. I don't expect my soldiers to protect my country one day for me and then go to jail for me the next day, I'm not some spoiled little child with childish notions of how the world needs to be dressed up as a woman. I'm not so childish that I let Damnit Janet make up half truths about soldiers and demonize all soldiers while I pat her on the back and tell her how great she is and put her on a pedestal so she is even more enthusiastic about distorting the truth for military families right now. For joining that little beat the shit out of Tracy party at Booman you totally deserve to be called a bitch and psycho and Supersoling deserved to be called a fucking pig for what he wrote in my daughter's diary. If the world is so fucking big and there's a place for everybody as he said to her right there, he should have found a different place for himself other than that diary. My daughter asked me to no longer blog at Booman because you people over there are such assholes to serving military that it was dragging me down. I stand by every word I wrote over there to you and Supersoling. I am not sorry and I never will be and you people aren't going to walk all over me anymore while my family makes sacrifices you wouldn't dirty your little spoiled brat bitching American ass doing!

In the Pajamahadeen I'm Scooby-Doo!

by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 07:24:36 AM PST

[ Parent | Reply to This |Recommend Troll ]

Frodo failed...Bush has got the ring.
by alohaleezy on Fri Feb 2nd, 2007 at 10:47:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

My response? (And I suspect the real reason Martin banned me...)
Why Tracy, thanks for asking.

Actually, I was banned for one comment where I asked Armando if he was THREATENING TO OUT ME.

Within minutes Armando (supposedly not still an admin according to him) zapped that comment and me along with it.

Deliciously ironic isn't it?

Thanks for playing Tracy, I suggest you stop repeating lies as well.

Brother, you can believe in stones, as long as you don't throw them at me ~ Wafa Sultan

Jaded Reality
by spiderleaf (spiderleaf at gmail dot com) on Fri Feb 2nd, 2007 at 10:50:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

12. I was in email correspondence with him in July, yet he can't produce a single one to back up his statement because IT IS A LIE. Yet he is posting personal emails from catnip at that time. Sound familiar?

I really do want to take fully responsibility for anything else I may be responsible for, so if anyone else has things to add to the list please do so in the comments.

And of course, if you are just plain sick of me, feel free to ban me.

[update] And of course "without naming names" there are some members who:

there are certain members that are drawn to controversy like a flame. I think you can find them by looking at how many people posted their first comment in weeks in the 'outing bloggers' or 'Marisacat' diaries. Those same people will be shown to be at the center of all or most of the blowups we have had, going back to Parker, the cartoons, and the July spat.

Once again, it's all my fault. Who wouldda thunk it. I posted my first comment when Martin? I posted quite a few unrelated to your meta topics on January 29, 30 and 31st. Care to ammend your statement BooMan? The insults continue unabated from that fine gentleman.

[update 2] The dictator has spoken and continues to lie about me and the situation. He can ban at will if he doesn't like you. So much for the Community Council idea.

I'd like to drop this issue now, please. It's a dead horse at this point. I have listened to what people have said and I made my decision. My decision isn't going to change now. I issued a warning, and I have been clear that it will be enforced. We will probably come up with some clearer policy about how to deal with abusive language and then we will adopt that as a policy.

The banning that did take place is not related. That had to do with my personal opinion of that member based on what I know and what I think. It was personal to me. You poke me too many times and I think you are dishonest and ill-intended and...well...I'll leave it at that. Nuff said. It isn't a matter of fairness, that one member did this and got that. Separate cases.

Any member here that needs help or assistance or support is going to get a lot more leeway with me than someone I think is lying and has no respect for me and is meddling in my personal life.

And Martin, the two issues are so closely interrelated that I have to wonder if you are even reading and comprehending before responding to your community. Why did I bring up the issue of you and CG? Because you were both enabling Tracy's abusive treatment of the site members. Completely related.

[update 3]: The fun never ends at Fantasy Frog Pond.

So. For the last 24 hours his community has been struggling to save their site. BooMan has been scarce at best. Until Teach313 gives Tracy a zero for hijacking the Community Standards thread that currently has 175 comments and is at the top of the rec list (see above for her beautiful hijacking of my Gore thread that led to this).

BooMan's response:

I just say a troll-rating in the recent comments. I'm not following the context, I was watching re-runs of Curb Your Enthuisiasm.

How respectful. Couldn't even be bothered to follow the context. Watching tv and checking to make sure Tracy's okay and the traffic is still up. Just saw someone troll-rated St. Tracy and had to rush in to defend her. Claaaassssy Martin. You care so much about building a community and respect for its members.

[update 4] Well. This says a lot more than I thought it would.

NLinStPaul says:

Second Nature, I might not ought to go there, but I'm pretty shocked by what I think you said. So I need to ask for clarification.

That comment Boran2 quoted was a response to Supersoling - are you saying that he baits cleverly and uses humiliation and veiled threats?

And Second Nature's response:

No, I thought it was in response to spiderleaf. Pardon my confusion - I've read waaaay too much of this jr. high shit the past few days and I am done.

Ah, I see. That vile piece of hate would have been acceptable if it had been directed at me. Gotcha. How progressive of you.

All this is worth it Martin? Are you having fun?

[update 5] Nanette mentioned in the comments that a lot of visitors to BooTrib wouldn't know what is happening if they weren't TU's because Tracy's initial exchange is hidden now. So... as a community service, if anyone happens to stumble over here, this is the infamous and disgusting exchange in its most graphic. (and this is what Second Nature thought would have been acceptable for Tracy to say about me).

Re: Dear Mom (3.12 / 8)
I want to rescind my rating on the first comment if not physically, then in words.

No one here has intentionally hurt anyone. Everyone must find their space. The world is a big place and within it, space abounds.
by supersoling on Thu Feb 1st, 2007 at 12:07:37 AM EST

Know what Super? (0.63 / 11)
Now you are coming after my kids. Listen here you Son of a Bitch, don't you ever use my name in any diary ever again. I fucking hate you you pig. Fuck off and die! Go away and leave me and my family alone. Fuck You Fuck You Fuck You! If I could remove what you put up here I would. I do not want to erase my daughter's words because she has been through enough and she doesn't need that disrespect. So now I must find a way to prevent her from reading this diary again but if she does she will see that I did not allow you just hurt me again and take it. FUCK OFF YOU SON OF A BITCH! If you think I'm going to allow you to hurt my children you are dead fucking wrong. You, Janet, Spiderleaf........lowest life forms around and Leezy isn't much further behind. Stay away from me all of you!

PMS Purchase More Shoes
by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 1st, 2007 at 08:12:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Know what Super? (none / 1)
Wow! Someone is not allowed to ask questions of you? No one attacked you personally Tracy. You're "fuck off and Die" statement is way overboard.

Frodo failed...Bush has got the ring.
by alohaleezy on Thu Feb 1st, 2007 at 09:45:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Leezy, ask the question as many times as you (0.71 / 7)
want and ignore the answer as many times as you want. That's the game isn't it? But when someone asks you point blank if you think the U.S. military should be disbanded and the U.S. not have a military throw your hand over your mouth and say, "Oh no, that's not what I meant." What the fuck do you want from me you psycho spoiled brat "peace activist"? If this was about a job and money Leezy my husband wouldn't be in the United States Army. He'd be flying for a "security firm" making $12,000 a month tax free and we would live in the new mansion subdivision with all the other "security firm" families here! Get out of my daughter's diary you bitch.

PMS Purchase More Shoes
by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 1st, 2007 at 10:07:18 AM EST [ Parent ]

And yet I was banned.

[update 6] We've set up a temporary new home to keep the community going. Anyone who wants an account go to and set up a new account. Then send me an email at spiderleaf AT gmail DOT com and I'll add you as an admin to the site... you can then start posting diaries to your hearts content.

Everybody Comes From Somewhere

Please add to your bookmarks and blogrolls as appropriate :)

[update 7] Where it gets really pathetic and CabinGirl reappears to spew wisdom and address her communities concerns (remember, she is an admin, how becoming. And YOU WONDER WHY I ASKED MARTIN???):

question from the back of the room (none / 0)
I have one question, Tracy: are you still trying to out me?

I'll warn you once and only once: if you do that you place my life in possible danger from a former abusive spouse. See? We have all had our own life dramas going on. You're not the only one.

And oh, btw, I don't know "all of your personal information". Therefore, I couldn't have given it to anyone so stop lying about me. I just found that post yesterday and I was absolutely appalled that you would ever have considered such vengeance. I don't care how angry you were with me. That's no excuse.

I thought is was necessary to enlighten the rest of the community about this fact.

I'm with Oui on this. Your daughter supposedly spoke out quite loudly and clearly. I wonder why you have chosen to ignore that.
by catnip (llamg88 at on Sun Feb 4th, 2007 at 10:06:54 PM EST

Oh Goodness Catnip (none / 0)
I would never try to "out" you. Just thought that maybe my lawyer needed to talk to your lawyer about you giving my personal information to paramilitary people killing loving types is all. nuff said. I didn't want to say good bye to anybody so a new screaming match could start. Just let it die and go away for goodness sakes. That was ages ago so I know why you bring it up now.

PMS Purchase More Shoes
by Militarytracy on Sun Feb 4th, 2007 at 10:23:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oh Goodness Catnip (none / 0)
Searching for someone's identity sounds like a prelude to outing to me given your history of personal attacks. I take outing seriously. We've lost good people from this site because they do not feel that BooMan has not adequately addressed the outing issue. The black marks are piling up, MT. Take your own advice and get offline. I'm taking my own and ignoring the rest of this diary.

The BooDay Backstory Project
by Teach313 (teachSKIP313ATmacDOTcom) on Sun Feb 4th, 2007 at 10:46:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Listen Tracy (none / 0)
Don't you DARE try to make yourself the victim here again.

1. You accused me of giving your personal information to someone. Lies.

2. You did it on a website that anybody can find if they use Google. Smear.

3. Now you're accusing that member of the special forces - YOUR DIVINE MILITARY - of being a member of a paramilitary who loves killing?? And he IS a member of the special forces. That was proven to you in that ugly scotchtapefuckwad blog but you STILL deny it. Go over to his blog and tell him that he's one of those "paramilitary people killing loving types". I dare you. Maybe he's the one who should get a lawyer now that you've smeared him so viciously too. He had your number back in 2005 when you smeared the special forces - YOUR special forces that you slammed. YOUR military. And yet you've raged on about how the military gets no respect when you actually joined right in and slammed them. Hypocrite.

4. I told you I just found that post YESTERDAY and I deserve a straight up answer - not these lies - yet you just brush it off.

If you don't want screaming matches sweetie, stop lying and having wild tantrums. It's that simple.

You may still be fooling some people here but you stopped fooling me a long time ago.

And no, military counselors can't "fix" you. You need to make the choice to do that yourself.

That's all I have to say to you.
by catnip (llamg88 at on Sun Feb 4th, 2007 at 10:46:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: question from the back of the room (none / 0)
May 27th, 2006. Just checking, because that seems like 9 months ago.
by Second Nature (denn1214 - at- gmail dot com) on Sun Feb 4th, 2007 at 10:28:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: question from the back of the room (none / 0)
Hi Second Nature, I don't mean to jump into some fray here, but it appears the comment catnip linked to was dated October of 2006.

That being said, I certainly would not want to give the impressoin I support any attempts to find out peoples real identities, no matter how long ago it was!!!
by thetruth ( on Mon Feb 5th, 2007 at 12:06:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: question from the back of the room (none / 0)
And that's somehow significant because?

The Left End of the Dial v2.0 - An "American Solidarity" (Solidaridad Americano) Blog
by James Benjamin (the_bokononist at yahoo dot com) on Mon Feb 5th, 2007 at 12:25:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: question from the back of the room (none / 0)
Man, this thread is becoming the mobetterest ever.
by BooMan on Mon Feb 5th, 2007 at 12:43:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: question from the back of the room (none / 0)
I'm mobetta than you, neener, neener, neener!

Impeachment: It's not just for blowjobs anymore.
Darth Cheney goes first.
by CabinGirl on Mon Feb 5th, 2007 at 12:48:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Wow. CabinGirl, how old are you? Do you not find what Tracy did incredibly disturbing and offensive? Don't you care someone is attempting to OUT SOMEONE?? Your boy Martin surely did when he posted that horrific shit about Marisacat and made it the focus of his blog for a full day. Wow. You are truly pathetic. Good job exposing yourself. Guess I was right, eh. Tracy pays Martin a salary and you enable her behaviour. Fantastic. Do you know Ann Coulter by any chance? (I knew you'd recognize that snark, you used to appreciate it iirc...) She is looking to hurt catnip. End of story. And you are enabling her behaviour. Btw, that comment and exchange is now saved for posterity should the demons of deletion strike.

[update 8] Now this is the height of hilarity. Wow. Fantasy Frog Pond seems even more relevant.

Re: Check again. ( / )
Teach313, please read my comment again.

That is the tip of the iceberg. That blog exists to discuss the shortcomings (imagined and otherwise) of blogging communities.

Let me give you one example just so you get the general idea.

Somewhere in the depths of a thread who knows how long ago and who knows on what blog, Tracy made a comment that she sends me money whenever she can, or something like that.

I think what she meant, since she has never sent me a dime directly, is that she buys a coffee mug or a t-shirt or buys a book through my affiliate.

But if you go over to mobetta you'll discover that I haven't banned Tracy because of the healthy stipend she provides me with.

This is just a small sample of that stuff that the loyal members are writing and lapping up over there.

So, my skepticism about their sincerity when they come over here and lament what is happening to this community is just a tad bit hard to overcome.

And it has nothing to do with whether I am taking issues surrounding MT seriously. I am not taking ALL of them seriously. And certainly not from that crew.
by BooMan on
[ Read Story | Read Comment | Parent ]

Martin, are you fucking stupid? (sorry for my language but this is totally goddamn insulting to so many people's intelligence). "Somewhere in the depths of a thread who knows how long ago and who knows on what blog"... do you write the intros to Star Wars Martin? A thread long, long, ago in a galaxy far, far, away...

Except it was November 2006 on BooMan Tribune in response to spiderleaf when Tracy first reappeared, as linked to above.

Or should we be playing Clue? SOME BLOG? And I'm the liar.

Pathetic and soooo insulting to Teach313.

[update 9 - as I am still unable to respond to Martin's lies at BooTrib]
So... he waited until I had been banned at dkos to ban me so he could "add me to the list". Funny then how the first baiting comment of MTracy brought it up... (see above) and now he uses it as "proof".

But that was then, this is now. And BooMan's response:
You will discover that true blog wrecking is an art. It is performed repeatedly, by a very small number of individuals. And it is astonishing how much patience goes into it.

Almost everyone that has ever been banned here was banned at Daily Kos first, and then at MyDD. And many (I don't keep track) of the people that have been banned here were subsequently banned MLW. Each and every time they were banned they hurt the community because they had made friends. And they then went off and tried to pull as many friends with them as they could.
So, enjoy mobetta. Ask everyone there, the longtimers, how many blogs they've been banned from. Some people that are there commenting are not blog wreckers. Some blog wreckers are just kind of strange people that obsess on meta and read back through archives to discover any hint of biographical information that can be stored up and used for a rainy day when they might attack a blogger.

Whatever. It's a sick place and I advise against spending time there thinking you are seeing something real.

Yes, everything I posted above, including all the links to his own site an participants was a fabrication. How silly of me. Yes Martin, it is crystal clear now what the problem is.

And dear Martin, the measure of a person does not lie in how many authoritarian pricks they've pissed off enough to get banned. And doing so does not mean anyone claims a badge or honor either. Grow up and get over yourself.


{ps - I posted at BooTrib because I deeply appreciate so many of the members there. I did not want to leave. I just wanted the smears against me to stop and for the abusive poster to stop harming so many people in the community. But today is a new day and my snark has returned; hence the tone above. I am really hurt though, there is no denying that. I was attacked and lied about, and it continues even though I am unable to defend myself on the site. It isn't right. And to top it off BooMan refuses to delete my diaries or account. Why? Why not show compassion? Delete my account, I am no longer a member there. I appreciate sincerely and have so many people to thank for trying to set things right over there. Truly and deeply appreciate it. Thank you.}

Friday, February 02, 2007


It's been a while but I know you have things to talk about.