Filed under: Morons — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on May 29, 2007 @ 7:31 pm CEST
There are idiots… and there are idiots:
Ah, yes, another example of ‘Moderate’
I’ve been saying this for years, and this proves it; The “Moderate Voice” ….Isn’t. They keep trying to deny it, and then they keep coming up with garbage like this and proving me correct.
I see where their requiring logins to make comments, now. Could it be that they’ve had to much negative reaction to their version of “moderation”? I suspect so.
One scrolls a bit down at BitsBlog and what does one see:
You must be logged in to post a comment.
O sweet irony.
It is always sad when small bloggers think they can get more hits by attacking bigger, more successful blogs. They make themselves look pitiful, don’t they?
I always wonder what drives people to act like this. Why do they attack bigger blogs? If you don’t like a certain blog, don’t read it. It really is that simple. Don’t like TMV?
Move along, there are plenty of other blogs out there.
Share and Enjoy:
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments
policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or
willfully misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid use of vulgar language as well as racial, ethnic, or religious slurs.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email.
1 Jim Martin
May 29, 2007 @ 7:40 pm CESTmvdg
Maybe you should have ignored him. Irony?
2 Interested
May 29, 2007 @ 7:46 pm CESTlol Touché Jim
Your right though Michael. I’m a big fan on personal responsibility - if you don’t like it - turn it off, click off, close it down. whatever.
The worlds an offensive place - get used to it.
3 mvdg
May 29, 2007 @ 7:54 pm CESTJim: this isn’t the first time that someone attacks TMV, it happens quite often (always the small blogs). Normally I ignore them, but today, well, today I felt like responding.
4 Jim Martin
May 29, 2007 @ 8:00 pm CESTMaybe it will work for Libby and I. Look out!
5 Rich Horton
May 29, 2007 @ 8:02 pm CESTI’ll admit this seems a particularly stupid thing to complain about, and being hypocritical to boot makes it all the worse.
That being said, a place like TMV that makes a specific claim about what kind of site it is supposed to be, DOES leave itself open to being judged by those very same values. For example, if QandO, an avowed libertarian take on the world, starts spouting socialist doctrine people can legitimately call them on it, right?
I myself have a snarky comment about TMV in my blog roll. I feel that over the last year or so the weight of new writers have shifted the feel of the site considerably. Back in 2005 if I had left a comment on a TMV contributor’s home blog I never would have been greeted with a string of obscenities and other put downs as has happened to me recently. I was first attracted to TMV because it wasn’t anything like the DK or LGF, and every time I see it take a step down that road I feel that are failing to live up to the basic premise of the site.
Joe Gandleman was the first blogger of note who ever took the time to send me an email saying that he had read and enjoyed my site and I will always appreciate that, but that doesn’t mean I will not try to hold the site up to the higher standards it was supposed to represent in the first place.
TMV is fair game for criticism, even from small blogs. But, you are right, it should be fair minded criticism and not the crapola BitsBlog offered up.
6 mvdg
May 29, 2007 @ 8:05 pm CESTRich: there is a difference between debating an issue and lashing out. This post at BitsBlog was nothing but lashing out. It served no other purpose than that.
If a TMV contributor writes something you don’t agree with: go ahead, explain why. But that’s not what BitsBlog did here.
I’m not sure what you’re referring to there.
7 C Stanley
May 29, 2007 @ 8:31 pm CESTMichael,
I agree with you about this particular criticism but I have to say, I haven’t found that it’s been constructive at all to raise legitimate criticism at TMV about slanting to the left. I’ve basically given up and decided if it goes too far, I’ll probably just read and comment far less there (uh oh, I’ve tipped my hand- hope no one tries to see how far they have to go to get rid of me!) I’m not sure there’s much that Joe can do about it (which is probably why he just seems defensive about it) but he seems to attract more left leaning commenters. I think if he could add a couple more thoughtful conservative bloggers it would help, but I don’t know if that’s possible.
I know that no blogger can please everyone all the time, but I do think that some criticism can be constructive and should be accepted in that spirit as much as possible (that of course, doesn’t include the comment that you quoted which was obviously not meant to be constructive).
8 Rich Horton
May 29, 2007 @ 8:36 pm CEST“If a TMV contributor writes something you don’t agree with: go ahead, explain why.”
Oh, I’m not a shy person, so you don’t have to worry about that.
“I’m not sure what you’re referring to there.”
It was at Michael Stickings place during the whole Pandagon brou-haha (If you are really interested it is here, and to be fair it wan’t Michael himself who displayed the bad behavior but one of his co-bloggers. Michael came in later and was far more level-headed. And as I go back and read the exchange, my characterization of a “string of obscenities” is simply wrong…it is more just a string of put downs. I get called a “jackass” but that is no big deal. I get called worse than that by my wife.
9 kritter
May 29, 2007 @ 8:37 pm CESTHmmm, I like it just the way it is. There’s a couple of libs, a couple of centrists, a couple of conservatives, a neocon or two and one or two that I can’t really figure out. In any case no ones forcing anyone to read it.
10 Rich Horton
May 29, 2007 @ 8:40 pm CESTSee, if kritter likes it, it has to be wrong.
11 mvdg
May 29, 2007 @ 9:16 pm CESTRich: I read the thread at The Reaction and I have to say, I think that Michael handled it quite well. He was reasonable and saw that it got out of hand, he put some water (not oil) on the fire. Her.: well, I understand that you weren’t too pleased with it, but, again, I’m looking at Michael who is a TMV co-blogger, Her. is not.
And Michael did well.
Christine: I agree completely. There is nothing wrong with honest criticism. I receive criticism like that (not as to my person, but about TMV) sometimes and it’s constructive. We can improve TMV if we listen to constructive criticism. However, in this post I’m not talking about constructing criticism, it’s about little bloggers, attacking bigger bloggers for the hits.
I think that I do a good job
We also have Jason Steck and Marc Schulman. They don’t poist that much anymore, sadly, but one can one do about that?
Anyway - if you’ve got ‘issues’, that’s not a problem, send an e-mail, leave a comment, etc., but lashing out isn’t a good way
12 kritter
May 29, 2007 @ 10:01 pm CESTWell, Marc Schulman and Jason Steck get blasted a lot at TMV, so that may have something to do with it. Marc has finally stopped writing posts urging us to attack Iran, thank goodness!
13 kritter
May 29, 2007 @ 10:03 pm CESTI wonder if the complaints concern posts that provide viewpoints from other parts of the world(not yours MvdG). They sometimes annoy conservatives, because they remind them that American policies are not that popular internationally.
14 mvdg
May 29, 2007 @ 10:08 pm CESTGood point.
Kim: I always appreciate Marc’s contributions to TMV, and Jason and Marc are two great bloggers. It’s a shame that certain commenters attack them like they do.
Anyway - appreciate the input
Now look at my right sidebar. I updated it. Someone something nice to say about this blog?
Please?
Anyone?
15 Interested
May 29, 2007 @ 10:18 pm CESTHad the same thought myself when I saw anti-American slogans/words on the subways, alley’s, etc in Berlin during 1989 & 1990. (right after leaving the wall and East Berlin) And the same - however lesser degree in Paris & Rome in 85
umm - you da man?
16 kritter
May 29, 2007 @ 10:19 pm CESTI do like your blog-even though I am not a conservative, mvdg. Very thought provoking topics. Some days I like it better than TMV, but don’t tell Joe, lol. I do read pretty much everything he writes because he is a true moderate.8)
17 Michael van der Galien
May 29, 2007 @ 10:22 pm CESTLOL thank you, thank you. I will add
“You da man” - Interested
“I do like your blog” - Kritter
to the sidebar to ‘brag’ about it
Ah, we’re having good ol’ fun here
Kim: I agree, Joe is truly a moderate and a fantastic blogger. And thanks for that compliment
18 C Stanley
May 29, 2007 @ 10:48 pm CESTI think that the extremely negative comments that bloggers like Marc and Jason get are what annoy me the most (well, that and Shaun’s hyperbolic rhetoric). I expect the international posts to be somewhat slanted and I don’t mind seeing that perspective at all. In fact I don’t even mind left slant or criticism of America (fair criticism, that is) in general at all. The annoyance factor at TMV for me is pretty much related to people who feel they are nonpartisan and centrists but seem to apply double standards to the two parties. Kim, you may think I’m talking about you (LOL) since I do get into debates with you quite a bit. But I don’t make that criticism of you because you’ve acknowledged that you are a moderate Democrat overall (not overly partisan but you lean that way) just as I admit to being a conservative and a Republican (though not a knee jerk one). But there are a number of people who will swear two ways to Friday that they have no allegiance to either party but they constantly refuse to hold the Democrats to the same standards as the GOP. When pressed for why they come down harder on the GOP there is always some ‘reason’ (I don’t think the strikeout tag works here or I would have stricken through that and written ‘excuse’).
As to my comment about conservative bloggers at TMV, naturally I didn’t mean that you weren’t pulling your weight, Michael- it’s just that you have a lot of ballast to try to balance out on the other side! And frankly, I find Marc and Jason’s posts are not the type which go over well with people who aren’t already conservatives; I often agree with them (not always, but fairly often) but I know immediately that they’re not going to persuade others. I like them both so don’t want to be too critical, but I think their style contributes to the attacks in the comment section because they leave themselves vulnerable to that. Plus, one thing that mitigates some of those attacks on you, Michael, is that you obviously don’t carry water for any politiician or party and you’re always willing to post negative things about conservatives when the criticisms are deserved. Marc and Jason are more predictable in how they will view certain things and which topics they choose to write about.
And I’ll have to give some thoughts to come up with a nice pithy compliment for your sidebar, Michael!
19 kritter
May 29, 2007 @ 11:03 pm CESTWell it was style and content for me, CS- at least with one of them. I don’t want to go into the specifics, because they are not here now. But their posts and the international posts get the most criticism (I guess Shaun gets his share).
‘Kim, you may think I’m talking about you (LOL) since I do get into debates with you quite a bit. But I don’t make that criticism of you because you’ve acknowledged that you are a moderate Democrat overall (not overly partisan but you lean that way’
No, CS, and if you were I wouldn’t take it too personally, lol. Every commenter has their own problem with double-standards. How many self-described “independents” are out there who always vote for the same party?
20 Jim Martin
May 29, 2007 @ 11:19 pm CESTWell speaking as a liberal I would say that TMV is definitely moderate.
Some posts I say, Oh yeah! Other posts I mutter Assholes.
And other times I thoughtfully reflect on why there are no moderates like this in congress. Good moderates positions are good for everyone.
TMV covers the political spectrum but ends up in the middle.
21 Interested
May 29, 2007 @ 11:22 pm CESTExactly the crux of TMV’s situation
If your left you find it moderate or right of center.
if your right you find it left of center
22 kritter
May 29, 2007 @ 11:40 pm CESTYes, but if you go to the right wing sites they bash Pelosi, Reid , Kennedy and Clinton 24/7, lefty sites bash Bush, Cheney, Gonzales and Rove. At TMV everybody gets their fair share.
Besides, I get bored in discussions where everyone is in agreement. Most people think they’re moderate even when they’re not, so that is where you get a wide range of viewpoints.
23 Interested
May 29, 2007 @ 11:42 pm CESTSorry Kim
What’s the point?
24 kritter
May 29, 2007 @ 11:50 pm CESTMy point is that I was explaining why I like TMV, interested. Some of the posts seem right of center, some seem left of center and some are centrist. But if you go to left or right sites there’s almost no variety in the posts or the discussion, so its like talking to yourself. Boring. But then I like to argue- not everyone does.
25 Interested
May 29, 2007 @ 11:56 pm CESTalright you seemed to be responding to my post - ergo why it made no sense.
26 kritter
May 30, 2007 @ 12:08 am CESTWell we never have much of a connection in discussions- usually you don’t understand me so its ok.
27 Jim Martin
May 30, 2007 @ 12:11 am CESTSorry Interested but the only reason I consider myself liberal is because Bush and his supporters compelled me to get as far away from them as possible. The smell did it, actually.
You should read my entire comment. There is a broad spectrum of comments at TMV based upon the subject and the writer. It still averages in the center.
I would love to be in the center but it just isn’t possible. I consider Bush and his supporters to be fascists and I consider the far left to be just aimlessly stupid, but since these are my definitions I would rather be stupid than a fascist.
28 kritter
May 30, 2007 @ 12:19 am CESTI can usually live with a centrist position, and don’t like the far left much myself, Jim Martin. The problem is that if you’re against the war and don’t like Bush, many people assume you agree with the Michael Moore/Rosie O’ Donnell types on everything.
29 C Stanley
May 30, 2007 @ 12:21 am CESTWhy set up a false dichotomy of fascist or stupid though, Jim? Can’t you say that you find Bush to be too authoritarian (I assume that’s what you mean by fascism since surely there is a lot in the true definition of that word that doesn’t fit at all) and you find X liberal to be too illogical so you support Y who’s a moderate conservative and Z who’s a moderate liberal? Or even if you don’t find anyone in the moderate conservative camp right now, explain what policies you might support like that?
30 Jim Martin
May 30, 2007 @ 12:24 am CESTBeing against the war and opposed to Bush puts me squarely in the mainstream. Michael Moore is an opportunistic prick and Rosie is well, irrelevant. Well, except in the movie League of Their Own. I liked her in that after all, she was acting.
I write down what I believe and what I feel. It stands on it’s own. You can visit my blog and tell me where I’m wrong. I’ll listen.
31 lthomas
May 30, 2007 @ 12:27 am CESTDon’t tell anyone but I stopped reading TMV.
Michael’s blog reminds me of a student I had two years ago who came to class with his dad. I welcomed him and he sat in on the lecture and afterwards he and his dad approached me.
“My son says that you teach History like you are a republican.”
I could only respond by chuckling. “Good. that means hes paying attention in class.”
“Well I am a card carrying teamster.” He responded with fire in his eyes. I figured this is it. Im going to be gunned down by Jimmy Hoffas killer.
“I sent my son to college so he doesnt have to carry a teamster card.”
“I give you permission to fill his head with Republican things so he understands that carrying this card is more of a ball and chain then it is a way off the block” Or something to that respect. I was pretty surprised to be honest.
32 Jim Martin
May 30, 2007 @ 12:31 am CESTCstanley
You can check with MvdG, I don’t find any politician in the congress to be moderate on anything. The republicans with the exception of Hagel are lock-step right-wing or they are in an at risk district.
There are more shades of moderate on the left as they had to be more to the center to be elected in last fall’s election.
Again the terms are risky, fascist or authoritarian, whatever. The term for Bush is incompetent and that’s my problem with him.
I would support honest reform of the tax system, adjustments to Social Security and some sane Immigration law that secures our borders and does not persecute those that have come here seeking work and a better life. That is after all what we are about. Where Immigration is concerned I am talking about a miracle.
33 Interested
May 30, 2007 @ 3:10 am CESTThanks - I did and said
34 Interested
May 30, 2007 @ 3:20 am CESTNot too surprising - same here.
It wasn’t all that bad up to the 06 election. Then it didn’t take long to go downhill imo. You had some sparse folks on the left who I felt - had some really great information and well thought out before the 06 election. To being just another meaningless troll after it. Some were posters some were commentators.
The 06 election there changed the makeup a ton. It was so very charged up to it you had folks who were attacking each other left and right - and other people who if you dissented in any way shape or form - felt they were being attacked.
Of course it’s somewhat left slanting. Even with the comments here in this post - (excepting Michael) there are only 2 “Conservative” posters mentioned - and then it’s talk after talk about how hard their posts are received - yet at the same time it’s still called a Centrist type of blog. 1 + 1 2.
Left slanting by itself isn’t necessarily bad for there is nothing to state that Right slanting ones have the monopoly on ideas and theories - But it’s only not necessarily bad if the posters try as they may to be fair and look at both sides of the issue before posting. And that’s what I found is really missing from TMV these days.
35 Michael van der Galien
May 30, 2007 @ 10:15 am CESTThanks for the feedback about TMV people, hopefully it will help us improve the blog.
LThomas: LOL - I’m the student in this case? Then who is the father?
Christine, regarding your looong comment: good analysis.
Jim, I agree: there are no moderates in US Congress. They do not exist. Some are less partisan than others, but no moderates.
If people dare reach across the aisle, they are immediately accused of being a Dino or Rino.
36 kritter
May 30, 2007 @ 11:09 am CESTUm, if you were to read TMV today there are—–posts lauding our progress in Iraq, posts condemning Chavez for his takeover of some of the media stations and also condemning support for Chavez over at Kos, a post informing readers that Mitt Romney will donate his salary to charity if he wins the presidency, a post announcing Bush’s new pick for president of the World Bank, and a post extolling the virtues of supporting moderate Muslims to counteract extremism. Yes there’s also a couple by Shaun Mullen, but most of the content is not liberal/leaning at all.
37 Bithead
May 30, 2007 @ 12:20 pm CESTThe comment I made was not so much as regards the concept of having to log in to make a comment, as it was the recent change of that policy.
As for comments about another blood, could it be that you’re making water Terry comments about another block so as to attain your own larger hit rate?
That snark aside, I’m not attacking on other blood because it’s more successful. As I have said repeatedly on my site over the years, it’s about the ideas. The name claims moderation. Clearly, and particularly in the example I cite, they’re nothing of the kind.
38 Bithead
May 30, 2007 @ 12:25 pm CESTFunny thing; I got into a months long fight over doing exactly that, there.
39 mvdg
May 30, 2007 @ 12:30 pm CESTYeah. I’m criticizing you and defending TMV to have more hits. That’s right.
Bithead: honest, constructive criticism is no problem, it should even be encouraged. You, however, do not offer constructive criticism in that post, you simply blast TMV and leave it at that.
40 Bithead
May 30, 2007 @ 1:45 pm CESTMostly because I don’t have any patience for somebody claiming that they’re something they are not.
And if the charge doesn’t fit you, how is it that it fits me? And how is your criticism any more constructive, then was mine of TMV?
Sorry, the arguments simply do not wash.
41 mvdg
May 30, 2007 @ 1:50 pm CESTBithead: you attacked TMV, now you want me to have a constructive debate with you? That is laughable. I called you out, that is all.
I have no intention of having a constructive debate with someone like you.
42 daveinboca
May 30, 2007 @ 3:54 pm CESTThe fever-swamp nitwits like Bithead are often the most difficult to post on—they need a very thick cocoon to sustain their surreality-based community’s mindset.