Tuesday, June 21, 2005

Scoop Blogging

Remember how I posted the Chris Bowers rant that the top right wing bloggers are an aristocracy, because only Redstate.org has a community style blog. Well this post sheds some light on one possible reason for the dearth of right wing Scoop blogs.

"As mentioned a couple of times on this blog, I have ambitions about creating a brand new Scoop site to create a new and vibrant blogging community. Well, I'm happy to report that we are close to getting it done. The basics of the site are set up and all that remains is to customize the features and settle on a good looking aesthetic design.
Of course, doing all of this is not cheap. Scoop sites cost money to build because they have a lot of features--as you can see by looking at perhaps the most famous Scoop site around. It allows for nested comments that are more responsive to one another, advanced instruments to prevent trolling and reader diaries that provide an excellent complement to what appears on the main page--and could be promoted to the main page as well. All of this allows for better commentary and interaction between bloggers and their audience. And all of this costs money to implement and maintain."

The DailyKos is a Scoop blog. Right wingers don't have sugar daddies & mammas like Soros & Terry Heinz, therefore they must have the ability to finance all ventures they chose to enter. Despite the rich Republican stereotype, I doubt that many conservatives have that much disposable income. Just because there aren't many conservative community style blogs doesn't mean conservative bloggers are aristocratic, if anything, it means the opposite.


The Liberties Enjoyed by the ACLU, Part II

Yet again, the ACLU is allowed to enjoy liberties that they wish to deny for the rest of us.

The American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico suspended its Las Cruces chapter Monday after learning that a member of the group's board was heading the formation of a Minuteman-style organization in New Mexico.....
"We will not tolerate racism and vigilantism in the leadership structure of our organization,'' Mitchell said. "They are repugnant to the principles of civil liberties and the mission of the ACLU.''....
"Las Cruces has a large number of passionate, committed civil libertarians,'' he said. "The ACLU intends to work with them to protect all people's civil liberties, regardless of their race, national origin or immigration status.''

So, it acceptable for those who singed up for the military to desert or refuse to carry out orders as "Conscientious Objectors", but is unacceptable for members of the ACLU to belong to organizations of their choosing & participate in activities they believe in.

Wouldn't it be more accurate for the ACLU to say, "protect the civil liberties of all people who agree with us", rather than, "protect all people's civil liberties". Because I'm pretty sure that Clifford Alford counts as a person, & they are not protecting his rights, they're violating them.

HAT TIP: Stop the ACLU


Bolting Bolton

Jim has stolen my thunder (again), so I'll just copy & paste from him.

Why are the Dems using so many obstructionist tactics on Bolton?

1. The first is that the UN is the dems' last great white hope. The UN, packed with socialists, may enforce by treaty on the United States such legislation as gun control, abortion, gay rights, etc, that the dems can't get passed in the Congress or may be in jeopardy if Bush appoints enough 'strict interpretation' judges to the courts. It also legitimizes opposition to the War on Terror. Doing anything to upset the status quo in the UN is therefore not in their interests, and John Bolton promises to thoroughly shake up that corrupt and ineffective organization.

2. The second reason is that they are flexing their muscles to demonstrate that they can and will block any but the most liberal nominee to the Supreme Court. They fear that much of their socialist agenda will fall apart if justices are appointed who can't find a right to abortion in the First Amendment, or a right to gay marriage in the Fourteenth, or a prohibition against capital punishment in the Eighth. By picking on Bolton as they have the appellate court nominees, they are sending a signal to the White House that it had better be very careful who it puts forth to fill any vacancies on the Court.

3. The final and most important reason is that the dems are doing everything that they can to make George Bush a lame duck as soon as possible. There is an element of spite in all this; they hate him and want him to fail. However, they are also looking at 2008 and they want the dem nominee to be able to point back at the previous four years and claim that the Republicans did nothing about Social Security / prescription drugs / War on Terror / pensions / budget deficit / you pick the issue. Never mind that they will be the reason nothing gets done.

I don't know if any of our lefty Senators have read those documents (written by a group of dead, white men) called the Constitution & the Declaration of Independence. It states that we are a democracy, governed by representatives freely elected by the citizens of the United States of America. That means that if 51% of Americans vote for Republicans, a majority of the citizens agree with the views of that party, & therefore, the views of that party prevail in policy matters & vice versa.

Yes, democracy is a "tyranny of the majority", this was a looming concern for the Founding Fathers, that is why we have a Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights ensures that any minority, is free to speak, practice the faith of their conscience, broadcast his views in via the press, gather with like minded compatriots & run for political office. These rights ensure that the political discourse remains open to all. But, these rights do not include obstructing the majority party. The majority party, became what it is as a result of an expression of the will of the people, therefore, to obstruct the actions of the majority party is to obstruct the will of the people. That is not the way a democracy operates, that's a dictatorship.

Sad, isn't it. I don't understand how the Dems think they are helping themselves by aiding & abetting people who want to kill them. Atheists are infidels too, in fact, they get no protection what so ever. While I heartily believe in debate, I do not believe in shooting my self in the foot.


Rude Americans & Civilized Old Europeans

An American & a German have dinner, can you guess who's rude & who's civilized?



A great site on for all wine enthusiasts. Is the French wine industry proof that pride, or should I say arrogance, goeth before fall?


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?