March 15, 2009
The Netroots Should Not Wonder Why They're Viewed as Intolerant

Reports of Kos speaking at this conference:

Kos says being a "comment Nazi" and banning right-wingers from comments was instrumental to Daily Kos's success.

Says it all, no? Needless to say, that's not how we do business at Sound Politics.

UPDATE: in response to Bruce at comment #6, which mirrors an question I had in response to a post citing a Tweet recently, citing Tweets is now perfectly acceptable for public figures. If one pays attention to the blogosphere, including MSM sites, Tweets from respectable figures are being quoted/cited. Whether that's MSM types like Jake Tapper and George Stephanopolous or established bloggers like Matt Lewis and Patrick Ruffini, such Tweets are viewed as credible. That's the new reality. Get used to it.

Posted by Eric Earling at March 15, 2009 02:41 PM | Email This
Comments
1. That's how they do things at Free Republic, too... but HA doesn't filter, either.

Posted by: demo kid on March 15, 2009 02:33 PM
2. Eric: You are spot on. But don't'cha know? The proper term is "Nutroots".

Posted by: Coug on March 15, 2009 02:33 PM
3. ". but HA doesn't filter, either"

BS! HA is one of the worst. Little Eichman Clownstein is a filter NAZI.

Posted by: Clownstein on March 15, 2009 03:18 PM
4. Hi all,

And it's appreciated.

--New Left Conservative # 1

Posted by: New Left Conservative # 1 on March 15, 2009 04:03 PM
5. Do you have any more substantiation of this comment than simply a tweet?

Posted by: Bruce on March 15, 2009 04:06 PM
6. "Says it all, no? Needless to say, that's not how we do business at Sound Politics."

Are you saying that NO one has EVER been "banned" from SP?

Posted by: KVIFan on March 15, 2009 04:13 PM
7. Bruce,

I could show you a few, but they've been filtered and cut...

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on March 15, 2009 04:45 PM
8. Of course, Kos coldn't let the base have anyone tell them precisely where they're off kilter - which is just about everywhere.

Posted by: krome on March 15, 2009 04:54 PM
9. @7 -

I've only banned one commenter, ever...and that was actually a truly insane nutjob on the right who had a very bad habit of totally taking over comment threads. In addition, I junked a comment from someone advocating what I recall was rape of a public official.

I can't speak with certainty for other contributors, though I believe Stefan has banned two commenters to my knowledge.

Posted by: Eric Earling on March 15, 2009 05:15 PM
10. Didn't think so. Therefore, topic moot!

Posted by: KVIFan on March 15, 2009 05:16 PM
11. @11 -

Ah, I see, the selective of banning of an exceptionally small handful of truly offensive commenters is the equivalent to religiously banning those with whom you disagree politically. Got it. Smooth thinking.

Posted by: Eric Earling on March 15, 2009 05:25 PM
12. @12 Eric - you see KVIFan is why America hates lawyers.

Posted by: Crusader on March 15, 2009 05:50 PM
13. Surely you've heard the 'people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones' saying. Point, Set, Match!

Posted by: KVIFan on March 15, 2009 06:38 PM
14. ...except that George Stephanopolous no longer has any journalistic credibility. In the morning, he has message crafting/strategizing meetings with democrat operatitves at the whitehouse, and then turns around and puts his "Look--I'm ABC's 'objective Chief Washington Correspondent'" hat on and pretends to report to the rest of us what the Whitehouse is saying (in the way he told the Whitehouse he would report it to their best advantage, btw). Whatever cred he used to have (and that's questionable as an ex-Clintonite) has vanished completely. I don't even know how ABC looks at itself in the mirror; and they better not be asking themselves why people don't consider them legit, at this point. If they have to ask, they've lost their minds (they seem to lost said minds, already, with the Stephanopolous arrangement already. They sure as heck didn't teach that one at J school!)

Posted by: Michele on March 15, 2009 07:02 PM
15. s/b "operatives"

Posted by: Michele on March 15, 2009 07:04 PM
16. Eric: I respect how you run your comment threads. While I do not agree with your politics, you have, in general, reasoned articles and other non-political stuff that is fun and enlightening.

Pudge, on the other hand, prefers to call people liars without any evidence and then shuts down the thread when he can't defend his ridiculous statements and even people who support his views have told him he is wrong.

Pudge cannot be wrong. Pudge is a legend in his own mind.

Posted by: correctnotright on March 15, 2009 07:45 PM
17. Oh hells bells. I barely understand twittering and now I have to grasp tweets!

SPEAK ENGLISH!

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on March 15, 2009 08:05 PM
18. The far left/progressives can be compared to Islamofascists and Al-Qaeda by their intolerance. However, they do not strike back by beheading captives, but figuratively would like to cut out the tongues of dissenters.

#17 - Pudge has more evidence than you dare to believe to call certain others liars. It's easy for those who don't sway his views to play the victim card and I have seen him swayed - he is more detail oriented than most. I have disagreed with him about some interpretations, but he gets the big picture correct a vast majority of the time. If you don't believe this, I suggest that you take a poll, but I doubt if you will because you know what the results will show.

Posted by: KDS on March 15, 2009 08:32 PM
19. Pudge's "evidence" = "weak crap". Pudge's ego = "supersized.

When I go against Pudge in an argument - he has NOTHING, calls me a liar and runs away or shuts down the thread after I eviscerate his wimpy third-grade level ideas.

If Pudge has "more evidence than I dare to believe", he sure has not presented it. I guess all that evidence is still constipated, because the rest of the crap he presented wasn't worth the TP it came out on.

Posted by: correctnotright on March 16, 2009 07:16 AM
20. "Needless to say, that's not how we do business at Sound Politics."

Not true. A number of people have been censored by Stefan on SP.

This makes your blog even more unlikely to be believed.

Posted by: Comment on March 16, 2009 08:35 AM
21. @21 Comment - Sound Politics complaining about Daily Kos is like a fly buzzing about a lion. Kos has how millions of daily hits? SP is lucky to get a few thousand.

Posted by: Crusader on March 16, 2009 09:06 AM
22. I don't think that was the point, Crusader.

Leftists do two things when their ideas are challenged: The lie and resort to name calling. Or they use outright censorship. It's how they've played the game for years on the college campuses they control in every state.

I used to challenge comments on HA on occasion. I was told by one of the regulars, "don't you realize this is a liberal blog?"

I'm not aware of anyone being banned here. Jim Miller tends to shut down threads when they get nasty or deviate from the original topic. I don't fault him for doing so. He doesn't ban anyone because of their opinions as far as I am aware.

Generally Sound Politics welcomes dissent. I've long suspected that the leftist "trolls" are often the same person, or small group of persons. One can generally predict their behavior which, once they are presented with factual evidence, invariably disintegrates into a volley of sometimes very nasty personal name calling. For example, I received this well thought out, mature response on another thread from longtime commentor "demo kid" a couple days ago:

"And your mind is "open"? Bull. You're nothing but a washed up old coot, imploding in on your own impotence, with no interest in anything except for yourself. Get off my lawn"

Here, I think most of us take these kinds of comments from members of the esteemed opposition for what they are. Extremely revealing.

Kos and leftists in general don't want actual debate, or any sort of discussion about political philosophy. Can you say "fairness doctrine"?


Posted by: Bill Cruchon on March 16, 2009 10:17 AM
23. Kim -

It would be helpful if you knew what you were talking about, since a regular read of the comment threads reveals dissenting comments on the right as well as the left, often from the same souls who are never banned. Any regular reader/commenter can confirm that fact.

However, based on a couple clues, I suspect you are our old friend "Conservative not Republican" who has also tried going by "Steve," Sue," and a number of other names.

You have been warned.

Posted by: Eric Earling on March 16, 2009 10:46 AM
24. @26 -

That means that if you are the same soul - the lone commenter I have ever banned from my threads - and start acting that way again, then yes, I will delete your comments without question. The very fact I've only banned one commenter ever might speak to what a moron we're talking about here.

Meanwhile, the stark deviation between your statements and the actual reality of my Sound Politics comment threads is both laughable and reveals your detachment from reality.

Posted by: Eric Earling on March 16, 2009 11:04 AM
25. "Kim" doesn't seem to recall a couple rather spirited discussions here I've had with Eric and others regarding the direction of the Republican Party. Count me as being on the more traditionally conservative side of the discussions.

I don't recall that my "dissent" was stopped in any way.

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on March 16, 2009 11:07 AM
26. Yep, it's the same moron. Same layout of comments. Same troll-like back-to-back comments. Same choice of words. If past patterns hold, next comes the array of complaints about RINOs, Dan Evans, and the Ted Bundy angle that "Conservative not Republican," "Steve," Sue," and now "Kim" falls back on when the meds wear off. Future comments from that soul in this thread and others will be banned.

And I repeat, as the only person ever to be banned from my posts at Sound Politics that's quite an accomplishment.

@29 - "Kim" doesn't recall much because Kim isn't playing with a full deck. If one were, however, I'd say regular commenter Hinton is a great example of someone who disagrees with me vociferously and sometimes with venom, but who obviously is free to post away.

Posted by: Eric Earling on March 16, 2009 11:18 AM
27. Yep. I wonder about the motives of someone such as "Kim". Could well be a leftist troll trying to come across as some sort of unhinged right-wing extremist. Who the heck knows?

I say it all the time. The most frustrating aspect of participating in a local political blog is not really knowing anything about most commentors. This particularly applies to the leftists who post here. Not one of them will reveal honestly what they do for a living, whether they have familes, etc. Yet knowing some details about a person's life is essential when discussing political issues. For example, a guy running a construction business might have an entirely different political perspective than someone who teaches at Seattle Central Community College. I think that's important, though certainly I respect the right to anonymity. I've never found the slightest reason to be afraid of using my own name in years of writing to newspapers, or blogging here, or even on HA.

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on March 16, 2009 11:44 AM
28. Heh, just noticed that "Kim" is doubtless the same person as "Max" at #3. Sheesh!

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on March 16, 2009 11:48 AM
29. @32: Good call, Bill. MaxKim is not very creative in his/her schizophrenia, as the first of the multiple personalities e-mail link is max@max.com, and the other is kim@kim.com . That last rant was a little disconnected.

Perhaps this is needed.

Posted by: yaddacubed on March 16, 2009 01:37 PM
30. Comments formerly from "Max" & "Kim" deleted. It is from our old friend, "Conservative not Republican," "Sue," Steve," etc...who among other things, has a very bad habit of spamming up comment threads with repetitive rants. Thus, the continuation of the ban.

Meanwhile, I think anyone who has dealt with the aforementioned clown in any comment thread will attest to the accuracy of comment #29.

Posted by: Eric Earling on March 16, 2009 02:23 PM
31. With schzoid Max/Kim gone,there is bound to be more hubris
flowing in cyberspace from correctnotright, demo kid, No facts, Bruce, Cato - the usual troll suspects with an occasional psycho-pervert thread thrown in to keep SP in the thick of these debates.

Posted by: KS on March 16, 2009 07:44 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?