cmaukonen's picture

    Another one bites the dust...

    By cmaukonen on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 7:11pm |

    One of the better posters at this blog has left. This is a shame. And the reason is the totally childish, immature, self centered and sophomoric comments made. Some even personal attacks that even the most repugnant right winger would not stoop to.

    Congratulations ass holes, you have just made his point in spades.

    Comments

    Oh, piddle.  I even took an F for him in Illiteracy or Whatever, and an A from you in Defensiveness. 

    What did he/you want?  Blood? 


    by we are stardust on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 7:36pm

    I would have to say that, all things being equal, Orion was being a bit thin-skinned for a political blogger.  But that is just my opnion.


    by Elusive Trope on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 7:52pm

    A blogger from MyLeftWing wrote a diary recently at my.fdl, and got riled when people didn't agree with her.  She had apparently quit blogging when she was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome, and couldn't take criticism, which she said was part of the disease.  Maybe?

    If so, Orion; it does make it more understandable, and you need to find ways and means of pretecting yourself, IMO.  Peace to you.


    by we are stardust on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 8:04pm

    To each their own path.

    One of best lines in a song which we should offer everyone is from Sarah McLaughlin's Fumbling Toward Ecstacy:

    Peace in the struggle
    To find peace
    Comfort on the way
    To comfort


    by Elusive Trope on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 8:42pm

    I think you are right Trope. With blogging, if you can't take the heat as they say.

    I have few (if any) friends here. Don't bother me none.


    by cmaukonen on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 8:46pm

    Was not at all sure what exactly was going on but it wasn't pretty.  

    I think Orion might have been able to handle one-on-one criticism but what looked like mobbing by a few commenters was too much.  

    Not sure which is more demoralizing being mobbed or being shunned.

     


    by EmmaZahn on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 8:53pm

    In the interest of fairness, he did havve those backing him up, including Genghis. 


    by Elusive Trope on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 8:57pm

    Yes, he did and good for them.  But there was no sense of the defenders being a group as there was with the attackers who seemed to encourage one another.

     


    by EmmaZahn on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 9:02pm

    True.  And anyone who was targetted by the "in crowd" in jr high can atest to this is something which can go the "core."


    by Elusive Trope on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 9:07pm

    This is nonsense, Emma. He wasn't a poor weak commenter being taken down by vicious multi-personed attacks in the thread. This was an experienced guy from a right-wing think tank who wrote a piece telling us how all liberals and progressives were condescending and elitist, and who then stayed up on his high horse and couldn't be bothered to do any detailed engaging in the comments. In fact, he made a comment to that effect. 

    The fact that - gosh golly gee - people who self-identify as liberals and progressives argued back at being called condescending is not "mobbing" in my books. It's more like when some singer walks on stage and insults their audience and gets booed.

     


    by quinn esq on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 1:31am

    Nonsense?  I think what you just did is what psychobabblists call 'invalidated' the impression that I got from a series of comments in the first thread after Orion put up the second.  I would link to them but....  That impression may well not have been what was intended but communication is difficult in the best of circumstances.  What you say or write may not be what others hear or read.

    You must surely be aware of how assertive and intimidating you can be.  You are a smart guy and if the esq is at all meaningful you are an attorney   You must know ways to disagree without being disagreeable.   So why do you do it?   Bad day?   Easy targets?  Just up to here with idiocy?  All of the above and then some?


    by EmmaZahn on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 2:37am

    God knows quinn can speak for himself, and I don't want to be accused of "mobbing" here, but come on.  How much traction have conservatives gotten by painting liberals as arrogant, condescending elites who want to spend Real Americans hard-earned tax dollars on  welfare queens in housing projects, Mexicans who want to take their jobs and receive free health care, and abortions for dirty little sluts who can't keep their legs closed?  These lies, and that's what they are (and no, the fact that somebody identifying as liberal on a blog condescended to you doesn't make it any less of a lie) are, IMO, literally destroying this country.

    And along comes Orion, billed as a conservative fed up with the excesses of the conservative movement, and welcomed to dagblog with much fanfare.  And he did write a couple of good posts in the beginning.  Then, although I'll admit I'm not a reader of everything he's posted here, I find that the last three posts I read are variations on the elitist, enterprise-hating liberal theme.  Although the language was softer than you would hear on Rush Limbaugh's program, the sentiments expressed would fit right in there.

    I'm at a loss why anyone who is a regular on this site would defend what the guy said, or be surprised that he was roundly criticized for it.  It was full of negative oversimplification and stereotyping, factual misstatements and logical incoherence.  In short, it was a poke in the eye of almost everyone who shares our politics, and a laughably bad poke at that.

    But, here at dagblog, the emphasis seems to be much more on the language used than the ideas that language is expressing ("Pee'd on our rug?"  The horror.  The horror.)  If you look at the venality of the ideas expressed in that post and attendant comments, Orion's post beats anything said in response by a mile.   


    by brewmn on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 3:16am

    I say "nonsense," Emma, because you're describing the actions and interactions of other people here, including me. You're not just saying, "Oh, I feel happy/sad/yellowy this morning." In short, your comment includes me. So.... I'm saying, I don't really think the term "mobbing" was a great description. Someone who works for a RW think tank and comes here and tells people they're condescending, elitist and anti-business should expect a BIT of blowback. And this crowd being one of the politest on the political net, I'm not sure the "mobbing" was much more than being assaulted by Monty Pythons "mobs" of handbagging little old ladies.

    As for me, no, once more, not an attorney. The "esq" is for Eskimo, in French. Little joke.

    And yes, I know lots of ways to disagree without being disagreeable. And usually, I stay in that mode, and don't bother with the posts I regard as foolishness-dressed-up-as-argument, but rather, I just stick to the posts where people are actually being creative, or imaginative or arguing with open minds. For whatever reason (not bad-tempered, am actually feeling great these days) I seem to be happy going onto the insulting blogs and saying, "Hey! This is dumb, and insulting, and here's why."

    And see, people who write snotty and insulting posts, I don't much mind giving them a bit of it back. Orion's post was just such a snotty and insulting post. I commented, in some detail, about how and why it was. I repeat, I used detail, I took up any and all of his arguments that appeared to have substance, and I responded with facts, with experiences, with jokes, and then, with poo flinging. And nope, not sorry when I fling a bit of poo at a guy from the Heritage Foundation that just dropped a giant one on all liberals and progressives. I'm sorry if I get into a real grudge match in the comments with another comment - those are hard However, most of them work through, and I carry few grudges. e.g. I've fought with pretty much everyone here at some point, and we're mostly still talking. And if Orion comes back, I'll have no trouble chatting with him again.


    by quinn esq on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 12:53pm

    Sigh.  

    I always regret getting involved in these disputes.  There are so many more interesting things to discuss.  We all have our hot buttons.   Orion obviously hit one of yours but not mine.  And I love to read good righteous rants from time to time between dueling positions.   What I hate to see is between commenter disparaging of either the original poster or another commenter.   Did not like that sort of thing in grade school.  Still do not like it.  Never will.  And that is what I saw although I have no way of confirming it now unless Genghis can retrieve copies of the threads from backup.  Personally, I don't think it is worth the bother. 

    FWIW, no one did anything I myself have not been guilty of but I usually want a purge and a shower after.


    by EmmaZahn on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 1:09pm

    And I love to read good righteous rants from time to time between dueling positions

    Well there's finally a point were we differ, what do you know? Tongue out I don't. I'd much prefer reading what a participant in such a debate thought after they had gotten over all the emoting and thought about it and sat down and thoughtfully wrote about the topic. Myself, if I want to play armchair warrior, video games do it so much better, if I want to see role playing and emotions, there's drama and literature.


    by artappraiser on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 6:59pm

    But there are so few good and fewer still righteous rants. Laughing  

    And the duelling should be between fairly equal participants which is also rare.  

    I think John Cole at Balloon Juice had the best ones ever after the 2004 election and he was taking on those from his own Republican side.  Now that he is a Democrat he does not brawl nearly as much. 

     


    by EmmaZahn on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 8:24pm

    Now here is a fellow that I do admire. Ai Weiwei has been fighting for greater freedom of expression in his native China for years. He has become rather famous for his art, depicting the repression and injustice there as well as the harassment he himself has received.

    Frontline did a very good story on him. If anyone here works even half as hard and takes even half the risks Ai Weiwei takes in pursuit of their beliefs, I may sit up and take notice.


    by cmaukonen on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 9:01pm

    A documentary everyone should see: Burma VJ


    by Elusive Trope on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 9:10pm

    Yeah, this moron accused lefties of fomenting ethnic hatred, and we're the assholes.  Got it.

    Or, just maybe, you shouldn't engage in screeds trafficking in every rightwing slur against liberals on a left-of-center blog and expect to be praised for it (even though there were, inexplicably, a handful of commenters here who did just that).  And he didn't even have the guts to defend what he wrote, but instead depended on one of the moderators of this site to do it for him.  Pathetic.  Orion needs to get a new hobby.  If I want to read the garbage he was spewing in his last couple of posts, I'll go over to RedSate.


    by brewmn on Sat, 04/02/2011 - 11:29pm

    I don't know what happened here. I last checked in earlier this afternoon. Now the original post is gone. I assume that Michael deleted it. Frankly, I'm appalled.

    We founded dagblog in the spirit of freewheeling but respectful and open-minded debate from a variety of viewpoints. There are many people who contribute here that I frequently disagree with, but I make a point of encouraging all sides and have done my best to discourage vituperative attacks regardless of the position.

    Michael Orion Powell's contributions have always respected this spirit, and the few criticisms that he has raised about liberals have been far more restrained than the incessant attacks on conservatives, which represent a consistent theme at dagblog.

    Yet the comments here blaming Michael's thin skin, his Asperger Syndrome, and his audacity in challenging liberals on a liberal blog (gasp!) exhibit a lack of contrition, insensitivity, and a close-mindedness that I revile.

    I don't even know what to say except that those who excuse or even take pride in their role in pushing him away should be ashamed. I'm saddened and dismayed by this whole affair.


    by Michael Wolraich on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 12:23am

    the few criticisms that he has raised about liberals have been far more restrained than the incessant attacks on conservatives, which represent a consistent theme at dagblog.

    FWIW (not that much Tongue out but I am gonna pipe up anyway) I agree.

    I would like to add this. One strange difference I have noticed about this place (which was carried over from post-Obama-election days at TPMCafe Reader Blogs, but which I didn't see at the Cafe before that and rarely in other sections at TPM,) from all other forums I've spent time on, is a sort of tribal allegiance by a small group to the word "liberals," as if someone makes some generalized criticism of "liberals," they have personally insulted them.

    I have long believed that getting too personal in discussion, either in a bad way or good way, is detrimental to forums. I've just seen too much evidence that outlawing personal insults is healthy and encourages both growth in number of participants and in quality, and that the opposite leads to slow death, people just getting tired of it and dropping off and lurkers deciding against taking the time to register and participate.  And that getting too friendly is off-putting to many thinking of participating, the clique thing. And I've been encouraged by your policies here on that.

    But this phenom of  when someone makes a generalization using the word liberals, people take it so personally, like the word must be defended to the death,  like the person is talking about them by name, strikes me as just very strange, it puzzles me why this is happening, I'm used to the blogopshere being about people representing their own p.o.v. and not pretending to represent a group. The latter is why I think the personal insults are so detrimental. I'm used to people reacting to a generalization about liberals by saying "well, I consider myself a liberal, and I don't think that way," rather than finding it a call to playground arms like someone said "your mother wears army boots!"

    But this Liberal defender thing, It's like a proud admission of groupthink? I.E. Oh my, somone is slandering The Borg Liberals who all think exactly alike, and I must fight for the borg! I recall that someone on one of Orion's threads went so far as to  basically say to you that Orion had pee'd on the DagBlog rug. Like it's the home of that which is called Liberals, one must not say bad about Liberals. The extra absurdity: when you start a discussion among folks who label themselves liberals, they can't agree on what it means.


    by artappraiser on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 1:25am

    I would like either you or Genghis to defend what the guy said about liberals.  Genghis decided to go with the "but what he really meant was" tactic, and now you're going all meta on the commenters who criticized the blog.  In case you haven't noticed, I'm usually on the other side of the argument from several of the people to whom I assume you're referring; so, whatever relevance the bulk of your comment may have to the overall dynamics of the discussion here at dagblog, it has no relevance to this particular instance.

    I, for one, don't like it when someone spits in my face and tells me they're only doing it for my own good.  And, beyond telling him he was full of shit, I mainly pointed out flaws in his argumentt, such as an absurd overgeneralization (i.e., all liberals are arrogant and look down their noses at their poor relations in rural, aka the Real, America).  And then he posts a video by a Tea Bagger who doesn't like Christian Fundamentalists, but is willing to join force with them to defeat liberals as proof that liberals are arrogant?  Seriously, the only response to this is a hearty WTF?

    I could go on, like how he uses the music industry as an example of how conservatives reach out to people who don't share their political views, when the fact is nearly every major musical artist outside of mainstream country is a flaming liberal who nevertheless manages to sell product to people who I assume are not as liberal as the artists themselves.

    And, if he truly meant these two posts as constructive criticism, then why didn't he himself try to correct the misunderstandings, instead of saying "see, Genghis gets it" and then runs away.

    Really, if the guy can't defend what he wrote against the level of response it generated here, then he really shouldn't be blogging.  This was nothing.  Check out the responses to this blog criticizing the trend of indie artists recording songs on which they've played a ukelele:

    http://www.wbez.org/blog/jim-derogatis/2011-03-31/attention-indie-rock-n...

     


    by brewmn on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 2:03am

    Gee AA. You start off nice - with the talk about the dangers of being too personal, and of cliques - but then note that actually, there are fewer cliques here at Dag, and that the personal insults are much toned down compared to TPM. Then you say you haven't then been able to figure out is why people would take it personally when they're labelled as liberal or progressives or whatever. Try this.

    What happens, is that people get angry, and when they aren't allowed to be individually insulting, they tart up some general label or insult which they can then paste across a set of people they don"t like - like "Obot" or whatever - and so they do that, and then insult the shit out of the label. Cool.

    It's a simple two-step psychological process, and it gets readers backs up because... well, they're actually smart enough to figure out when they're being insulted.

    Now, if you'd like to see how it's done, you can just... why lookie lookie! Wee can look right at your very own comment here! See, you have certain people in mind when you wrote this comment, and you get to label them as "The Borg" and say that they all think alike, but you don't have to own it as a personal comment or insult, do you? No, what you can do if questioned is just fall back and say.... "Oh no, I certainly DIDN'T have anyone in particular in mind." 

    So. Did you? Or didn't you? If you did, then you just pulled the "use of a label to insult the shit out of individuals and groups" trick. But, if you didn't, then... well, actually your comment makes no sense, because it has no content - a set with no members. Which is why I keep asking people to please provide specific links when they say this sort of stuff, or quotes, or something, so we can all agree, disagree, but otherwise deal at somewhat arm's length with an opinion under question. Remember me asking kgb for that, when he was going on about all the peaceniks? Like that.

    And funny, it was me who mentioned pee'ing on the rug. Sorry that you took that so seriously, but I'd been researching old Lebowski quotes earlier that day, the one about "new shit has come to light" - remember that? So, it seemed perfectly appropriate - as well as funny - to describe why Orion was getting such a response. But gee AA, you forgot who said it. Managed to avoid naming any individual, because you hate that "personal" stuff so much. And yet, you managed to get your insults and hits in, on people who absolutely would know who you were talking about!

    And that's how you, as an individual, fight, AA. You fight through meta, through comments on process. Personally, I consider that to be passive-aggressive as hell, and so when I disagree with you, I tend to come fairly straight at you and tell you how, and why, and how hard I disagree. 

    And if I can add, I find your way of discussing things to be completely illiberal. There's nothing free or frank or open about it. It just smudges and smears all over people.

    Try these two things - they're easy! 1) If there's something you don't like, be specific about it. Quote it, link it, or comment directly to the person, at the time, about it. 2) Then, if you think you have spied a pattern and wish to apply a label, just say something like many/most/some/a few/all of people xyz. See, a qualifier! And it really only takes one, you know? Just add the one word.

    The odd thing about your comment AA, you know, you being upset about people reacting to the labels, is that you could be so smart, and yet... seemingly unable to grasp either the use of qualifiers (often just the one word long), or the use of specific quotes or names.

     


    by quinn esq on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 2:02am

    AA it is a mirror of the group think and reactions we see from the tea bagging right.

    To paraphrase Walt Kelly, "They have me the enemy and become them."

     


    by cmaukonen on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 9:54am

    If you don't know what happened here, maybe you shouldn't fire off the conclusions too quickly. 

    Like I said, I have nothing personal against this guy, and my only other comments on his previous blogs (such as on education) were positive ones I believe. 

    The first in this last series was a bad blog - which is no big deal. That it was a bad blog which also happened to lump his readers in for being condescending and elitist - that was less smart. But that he then failed to engage with people on his blog, but just threw up a new one, made him look bad - and was commented upon as such. I'd thought the comments put up on his first blog included a fair amount of detail, actually - more than his argument was worth. But he didn't want to engage. I'd say it was because he was feeling out of his depth. On the second blog, I used the word shit in a comment, asked him if he understood what the word stereotype meant and the word irony (I don't think he did) and then - whether it was that or another comment, I donno - he announced he was a grown up, tired of being treated with disrespect, and was leaving immediately. My next comment was something to the effect that someone who has worked for the Heritage Foundation has to have nerve to lecture about the proper way to treat people - but that one never even got posted, as he'd already hit the self-destruct button.

    Someone mentioned "mobbing" and similar silliness - but there was no one in the comments to mob. When a poster says stuff that insults the heck out of all his/her readers, and they say so, that's not a "mobbing." That's someone either getting the effect they're looking for, or someone clueless as to what they're really saying.

    You can say what you like, and maybe the guy's a friend, I donno, but his original post was not only weak, it was insulting. And when you insult your audience - and stand up and identify as one of the readers political opponents - it's no great surprise when people biff you back. When you can't then engage further, through intellect or wit, you just look like a blowhard - someone who likes to insult from above the break, but then can't take the heat. And to be from today's American Right, ex-Heritage or whatever, and then expect people to like your hand when you write insulting nonsense? Forget it. 

    So I'd go a bit easy on the reviling, and I doubt anyone feels "proud." And for a man of the Right, who tosses insults in peoples laps, with almost nothing beyond some stereotypes and a video to back it, and who then can't defend his ideas and runs away, deleting the entire trail of evidence (always an interesting move)??


    by quinn esq on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 1:22am

    I see on this thread many comments expressing sentiments ranging from "he deserved it" to "he can't take it." Some of these are silly rationalizations--"he didn't comment in the first thread"--or gross misrepresentations--"he called us racists." I see very few comments expressing any kind of regret. Do you regret his leaving, quinn?

    I've never met Orion in person. I invited him to dagblog after he contacted me about one of my CNN articles on Glenn Beck. I like his writing, and I appreciate that his background provides him a very different perspective from most of the people here. So I consider it a loss to dagblog that he's gone.

    But regardless, it saddens me when anyone feels forced out of here by hostility in the comment threads. It's not the first time this has happened. The hostility may be puerile, or it may be clever, but the message is the same: your ideas and arguments are not welcome here. The fact that many of us are able to blow off or ignore such hostility does not exonerate those who employ it.


    by Michael Wolraich on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 10:05am

    My thoughts, straight up, about Orion. I don't think he liberal Dagbloggers to argue back with much vigour, and when it happened, I don't think he could respond to it, G. And it was the latter problem which ripped a hole in his boat. He called people out, they came out, and then he didn't have the chops. In my books, the lesson is - get the chops, or don't call people out. 

    That stuff he wrote, about condescending and anti-business? We all, every one of us, know it was purest repetition of a straight-up RW insult/smear/"description" of the left. He added nothing to it, other than the "fact" that he markets to all buyers (?) and... a video from Teabagger trainers. Well, that wasn't much evidence or armour, and so, he got pelted. And melted. 

    Am I sad? Sure. I fight with people and then, almost always, have no problem, within hours or days, of walking past it and putting things on a new footing, or at least, dealing with new things as they arise. If he comes back, great. 

    But. YES, he did deserve some solid barracking for what he handed out. Unless Dag is to become a platform for drive-by dumps from the Right, then when they show up - and people pretty much all welcomed him, remember? - they'll get some back. And NO, he clearly can't take it. His last comment was about how he was a grown-up and didn't need this sort of disrespect etc., and then he deleted everything he wrote. So no, he couldn't take it. At least yesterday. Maybe he was having a bad day, we donno. I hope whatever it is, it handles it, and then, if he wishes, returns.


    by quinn esq on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 1:03pm

    Uh-uh.  You're the one guilty of gross misrepresentation here.  I assume you have access to the discussion thread after Orion's original post.  His exact words were that liberals were "fomenting ethnic hatred" by (I think, it wasn't completely clear) advancing the interests of minorities to the detriment of white, primarily rural, conservatives.

    So maybe you think quoting the guy is a gross misrepresentation of what he said.  But I think you and others are playing the racism card here, by unfairly claiming that we interpreted charges that liberals are "fomenting ethnic hatred" as "he's calling us racists."

    Look, you're in good company in thinking that internet discussions shed more heat than light, and too often get bogged down in pointless flame wars.  Obviously, I don't completely agree with that assessment, but there are several sites I enjoy that do moderate comments quite heavily.  So, if you're more concerned about civil discourse than bare-knuckled political debate, then you need to use a heavier hand when moderating both posts and comments, even if it means banning a really obnoxious post by your token conservative. 


    by brewmn on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 1:54pm

    And I would really, really like you, cmaukonen, Emma, artappraiser, or any other defender of the guy to either acknowledge that what he wrote was lazy, sloppy, Limbaughesque liberal-bashing boilerplate, or point to specific points that he made that leftists can adopt that will make them better, more effective advocates for liberalism. 


    by brewmn on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 2:37pm

    Er, where did I defend him? I just agreed with Genghis that the few criticisms that he has raised about liberals have been far more restrained than the incessant attacks on conservatives, which represent a consistent theme at dagblog.

    After that I talked about a strange us vs. them reaction that I see when "liberals" are generalized about here, which didn't have much to do with Orion's post. That was really meant for Genghis,  as a proprietor of theis website.

    And we're getting an "us vs. them" reaction from you right here. What's the point of picking this fight with us named?  You have a much deserved reputation for picking fights with people on forums. I sure hope you enjoy it cause otherwise I don't see much benefit. Why can't you just accept that people had different reactions? Why carry it further to like fight about something so unimportant as an opinion about a single blog post? What really is there to argue about? Do you also argue with people when they say they liked a movie or didn't like a movie?

    Don't you realize you are basically demanding here is that people here form a gang of bullies:

    to either acknowledge that what he wrote was lazy, sloppy, Limbaughesque liberal-bashing boilerplate,

    to attack a blogger? Why is that so important to you? Do you think a gang of conservatives should likewise come and bash Richard Day every time he does a posts on how dumb conservatives are?

    I didn't think it was a high quality post, but then a majority of blog posts on the internet aren't. I try my best to not waste my time on poor quality and get bummed out when I get dragged into reading or responding to it. As far as the bashing of the opponent topic is concerned, I could have gotten what he said on it in a hundred other blog posts, likewise for hundreds of conservative bashing posts, from a single Pew poll. I don't really like reading the same thing over and over again.

    Re:

    point to specific points that he made that leftists can adopt that will make them better, more effective advocates for liberalism.

    This is hilarious. You are demanding people get all worked up about Orion's post and spend a lot of time on it? You demand that I get as worked up as you are about a mediocre blog post and a topic that doesn't interest me that much? I refuse. I'm just not as passionate about Orion as you are. I don't know him, he's never done anything to me. Also I'm not interested in thinking up ideas for liberals, not my thing. I do have a mild interest in seeing what individuals might generalize about them, that I admit.


    by artappraiser on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 6:39pm

    C'mon.  When has DD ever written a disparaging remark about Republicans?  You're way out of bounds.


    by kyle flynn on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 6:52pm

    Kyle before I depart this thread, I must thank you for confirming with your comment that my comment was in fairly comprehensible English. I know I'm not the best writer and often have serious typo problems but I was starting to wonder whether I had slipped into another language or something. Wink


    by artappraiser on Mon, 04/04/2011 - 2:59am

    Do you think a gang of conservatives should likewise come and bash Richard Day every time he does a posts on how dumb conservatives are?

    Wow. Talk about low class and uncalled for, this fits the bill. One thing I could never figure out is how those who claim to be so above it all managed to make it into every blessed meta-thread.

    Some things never change. To me, somehow it is far more pathetic to needle the kind and gentle while pretending that one doesn't stoop to such vulgarities.

     

    Just sayin'.


    by Bwakkie (not verified) on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 8:30pm

    Are you that bwak?


    by Bruce Levine on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 8:41pm

    hiya Bruce.

    ;)

    I hope you are your lovely family are doing well.


    by Bwakkie (not verified) on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 9:14pm

    AA isn't dissing Dick; she is saying that almost all of his posts are arguably anti-Republican; I think it is an argument about parallels concerning Orion.  Not that I agree, but she is just speaking about similar pushbacks, I think.

    And yes; this is the bwak who gave you your hat, Bslev.


    by we are stardust on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 8:59pm

    I guess you'll just have to accept that some of us read it as a low class gratuitous insult. It's also quite inescapable that Dickon doesn't go onto right-leaning websites and post his material, now does he. If he did, he'd hardly whine at the lack of civilty.

    I had quite forgotten that you are the last authority on all things meta. No thank you, I'm quite happy to forget that factoid, once again.

    Later.

     


    by Bwakkie (not verified) on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 9:20pm

    Well Dickday has a blog up hoping to inject some levity into the day; go have some fun on it.  He'd like that, I'm sure.


    by we are stardust on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 9:54pm

    Just sayin'.

    And just totally taking something out of the context of a reply to brewmn and twisting it into nearly the opposite of what was meant by doing so. What the hell?! Gees. I give up. Like Emma, regrets serious regrets I evah said anything on this type of thread. There's some serious serious reading comprehension problems going on on it, that's for sure. And some of it smells of seriously sick personal motives, too, as in: why not take this up with your therapist or your therapy group, eh?

    BTW, as long as we're talking about taking offense, mho, you jumping in here without reading carefully, to supposedly defend old friends from another website, against a totally imagined insult that wasn't one,  when you never contribute any content or content discussion to this site, really doesn't help the situation in the least. At least not to me. It's creepy, it's like you're a mother hen lurking out there waiting to jump on anyone who you think (mistakenly in this case) might be picking on one of your clique.If I were Dickday, I wouldn't welcome your "help" in this regard, it might make people afraid to talk to him lest his mom lurking out there misinterpret what they said.

    I'm am outta here done with the group therapy, personal angst and exorcizing personal demons via role play on internet forums, back to content. Farging waste of time, I'll do this kinda shit with my family and friends because I love them but I am not going to waste my spare time on it with strangers on the internet.

    Y'all call me whatever names you wish, make me into whatever strawman or evil character you like, will not be responding or defending or explaining further. A thread like this just makes me thank the lord I keep my pseudonym separate from my real I.D. This has all been a useful reminder: none of that linking with Facebook shit for me, that's for sure..


    by artappraiser on Mon, 04/04/2011 - 2:47am

    You're right.  You didn't defend Orion.  You just used the offense that others took at his post to try to paint them as hysterical, thin-skinned  children.  I apologize for the mischaracterization.

    And, for someone who doesn't care about any of this, you sure have spent a lot of words in the service using it to make your point about liberal critics of conservatives being every bit as vituperative and awful as conservatives are about liberals.  I would just like you to spend a few of those words comparing the substance of the post and the comments it generated, instead of casting blame equally on both sides of America's primary political divide from your lofty perch on Mount Above It All. 


    by brewmn on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 10:38pm

    His exact words were that liberals were "fomenting ethnic hatred"

    Actually, the antecedent of that sentence (i.e., who was "fomenting ethnic hatred") was clearly ill-defined. So, no, those weren't his exact words. I don't have access to what he wrote, but I interpreted it to mean that liberals could learn from those who were "fomenting ethnic hatred". I explained how one could easily parse his sentence to mean that in that thread (which is now unfortunately deleted), stardust said that she still didn't get what he was saying, but I stand by my interpretation of what he wrote, especially given his history.

    I still think the post was one of his worst, and I agree with the notion that calling us conceited (or whatever phrase he used) was overreaching and unhelpful in communication, I do wish people had been a little more deliberate in attempting to understand what he really meant (and to help him communicate that better) rather than just what they thought he meant (the example I quoted above being an excellent example of that), and I especially wish he had toughed it out, just like others have done here when their posts have been brutalized.


    by Verified Atheist on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 6:56pm

    Uh-oh; don't look now but I'm getting brain-bleed just reading those (to me) utterly incoherent phrases.  ;o)  Odd you could channel the dude, seriously.  Me?  I toook the Crap Grades instead.


    by we are stardust on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 7:14pm

    My rough recollection is that he was pretty much just saying

    Be more racist and be more pro-business and you'll be able to be as great as the Republican party.

    Maybe true, but ... um... yeah whatever...


    by Obey on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 7:32pm

    LOL!  The sentence that twisted my little grey cells was that one VA mentioned, like: If you're not an ethic? ethnic hater, you can learn to Communicate with Conservatives", like Dale Carnegie gone crazy.  I kept trying to figure out if he'd left out some words, and several interpretations (each different) didn't much help. 

    Like it was axiomatic that most of us were ethnic... mmmm...dissers.  Beats me; as I said, I took the failing grade and left. Sure didn't want to have to wax poetic over capitalism, myself.  I'm the worst ad ever for that.  ;o)


    by we are stardust on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 7:47pm

    Sorry all, and though I thought his blog sucked, I read the "racist" lines the way VA did - i.e. I don't think he was calling us racist.

    Though if he was, I got more poo to fling.


    by quinn esq on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 7:52pm

    Ah, whattya you know?  Really, though; that those lines had to be interpreted by others meant I wasn't the only Idiot who couldn't read them as he'd (maybe) intended.  We all write Crap Blogs, and as AA says, most blogs are inferior.  ;o)


    by we are stardust on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 8:10pm

    VA, etc. probably read it correctly, on further thought.  But even their reading doesn't really contradict the subtext; namely, that liberals' goal of inclusion of minorities for full membership in the American family provides justification for white middle-and-working class Americans to reject liberalism.  Again, the whole post really was just a nicer version of a Limbaugh rant.  Yet, somehow, we're assholes for pointing that out.  


    by brewmn on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 9:04pm

    I freely admit that I'm one, and not always even smart, as you frequently are wont to point out.  That said, I never understood much of the blog, and if I have to struggle to suss out the meaning, I sometimes will ask once for clarification.  If it ain't forthcoming, I'd rather go play Tiddleywinks.  Seriously. 


    by we are stardust on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 9:20pm

    You and your Tiddleywinks ilk. 


    by quinn esq on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 9:56pm

    Tilkileywinks; yes.  What next?


    by we are stardust on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 10:18pm

    'Blaming his Asperger Syndrome'?  My comment was by way of explanation, empathy; and no, I don't regret anything I said.  I was trying to get him to explain what he indicated was a key to his post, yet it was incomprehensible to me unless I added words or changed the order.  Several people ran explanations for him (no help), but he just quipped again that at least Genghis understood him or something. 

    I didn't see the thread near the time he apparently pulled it, but as A-man said, he gotten taken to the woodshed far more that Orion did up until then.

    By the way; could you delete my Telethon post now?  I still can't figure out how to delete them, even when the site recognizes me. 


    by we are stardust on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 10:33am

    Cmauk. How about you find those insults which were so "personal" that "even the most repugnant right winger would not stoop to," and post 'em here. Ok?

    And if you can't, then you need to admit you're talking out your ass - and retract this nonsense.

    I think your "post" is nonsense, and you can't back it up.


    by quinn esq on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 1:25am

    .
    .
    Hi Quinn... It's been quite sometime...

     

    Maybe a case of this would be handy to have around when a blogger needs to toughen up the skin.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    O< QUACK!

     

    ~OGD~


    by oldenGoldenDecoy on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 4:54am

    I agree with Genghis that Michael Orion Powell is an interesting thinker and a good writer.  I also think it's good for us to have thoughtful conservatives around.  Arguing with Michelle Bachmann will not make you a better thinker any more than playing tennis against the one armed drummer for Def Leppard will make you a better tennis player.  We need some one like Powell here to push back and even knock us around a bit.

    That said, the post he wrote that precipitated him leaving wasn't his best.  The left has been dealing with the phony baloney charges of "hating capitalism" and "being condescending" since before FDR.  I've written for conservative publications and have even done a lot of time on both Fox News and Fox Business as a guest -- I don't tend to lead with "conservatives are heartless and uneducated."  For one thing, neither claim is true, it's just propsaganda.  Beyond that, I know that those sentiments are just going to inspire people on the right to ignore me.  It's far better to try to reach those on the right that I think can be reached, by pointing out how liberal social and foreign policies actually serve libertarians very well, or by arguing for what Brewmn here smartly calls "stakeholder capitalism" that will actually help conservative leaning small business owners.

    Powell's last post here was insulting.  Sorry, it just was.  But he laid out his arguments and people responded.  Nobody here held it against him personally.  Not every post that I write here gets a standing ovation.  Sometimes everybody says I'm just wrong.  Sometimes I just get a few clicks and comments.  It happens!

    Like Genghis, I don't think it's appropriate for us to tell other writers here to "man up."  People should write where they want, and for the audiences they want.  But I also don't think Powell's leaving is an indictment of the site or the people here.


    by Michael Maiello on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 10:53am

    Good God, going back as long as I have been around here and before that at TPM, pretty much like clockwork, once a month somebody blows a fuse and stomps off the blog. Most people end up coming back after a breather. I myself have needed a break every now and then. And I have nothing against Orion personally, but do we really need a special commemorative Blog of Recrimination in his honor? Should we make this a regular installment for all and any who decide to throw a hissy fit because they wrote that one blog that people found piss-poor? Or was this Orion fellow somehow super-precious in ways I cannot fathom?

    Seriously, there was nothing in the comments to merit his reaction, so if he's a reasonable person, he'll calm down, get his shit together and come back with better material and a more open attitude.


    by Obey on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 12:05pm

    Well, I thought Orion had been around before, here or TPM, and could figure out what happens with a bad post.

    While a premise of "Democrats don't know how to message" would have likely been greeted with nodded head, the "lefties can't organize/succeed because they hate money" bit didn't get traction.

    Add on the "GOP is trying to reach out, but the left just knows how to ridicule...." - yeah, right, we're nearing Jonah Goldberg territory. Obama spent 2 years "reaching out" and only got calls for impeachment, claims of terrorist and treason, unAmerican, etc.  While the typical "reaching out" comment from the right on say Nancy Pelosi?

    Really, this was an awful post. But I don't recall it turning terribly personal, just people noting how awful the points were. Hey, when Brew and I agree on a post, you know someone's jumped the shark.


    by Desider on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 3:38pm

    Hey cmaukonen.  "Asshole" is one word. 


    by kyle flynn on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 8:16pm

    This is probably the only comment this blog warranted.


    by brewmn on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 10:21pm

    How did I miss all this excitement?  Couldn't someone put the thread back up for those of us who sleep on a strange schedule...


    by jollyroger on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 11:22pm

    Busy at Wattree's blog.


    by cmaukonen on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 9:22pm

    I disagreed with Orion's premise, but I hope he didn't take my objections personally. I was mostly away from the net this weekend and didn't follow the threads very deeply.


    by Donal on Sun, 04/03/2011 - 11:41pm

    I hadn't read many of Orion's posts; the headlines just didn't drag me in. But only the last two appear to have been scrubbed from the archive. Some are pretty good. I had missed the one where he talked about having Asperger's syndrome, which can make social interaction awkward. As someone suggested upthread, that could help explain what many see as a thin-skinned overreaction -- first, declining to address commenters' criticisms, then taking his ball and going home.

    Genghis thinks people who took issue with his post should feel contrite. I now feel bad about him leaving, but nobody, to my recollection, told him, "Go away, get lost!" (The post is gone, so it's impossible to prove either way. I saw it as just another rough-and-tumble dagblog thread. I recall disagreeing with Orion, but not whether I actually commented. If I was rude, sorry.)

    Personally, I like the passion and vigor people here put into defending their positions. And the thoughtful effort, unlike the typical TPM exchange: "Troll!" "Poopyhead!" My feeling is that folks here (generally) are plenty polite; asking them to tone down the heat of debate in case someone takes things the wrong way would be a mistake. Call the egregious fouls, refs, but try not to slow down the game.

    Totally different point, but while I've got the floor: Way upthread, there's a quite meaty exchange between artappraiser and quinn (brew gets his reply to AA before quinn does). It goes a long way toward explaining the bad blood that's been generated by a string of posts, most recently Orion's. Basically, appraiser denounces incivility and personal attacks, and expresses puzzlement at the "tribalism" some people display when "liberals" as a group get caricatured. It's as if they feel "personally insulted," she says.

    My reaction was right in line with quinn's (I'm paraphrasing): "Hey! We can hear you; we're in the same bloody room, standing right next to you! Don't say, 'Liberals do this, liberals do that.' Don't hide behind criticism directed at some straw man. If I've said or done something that's BS or stupid, tell it to my face. Or to acanuck's. Or call out Michael Moore. Rachel Maddow. Bernie Sanders. Don't worry about hurting our feelings or theirs. Just make sure, if you're going to smear an entire group, that you've got an example or two that bolsters your accusation. Maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong. But at least we'll be having an honest discussion." Get it?


    by acanuck on Mon, 04/04/2011 - 1:40am

    Okay, guys.  I'm going to lok this thread before anybody says anything they'll later regret.  Lots of other cool places to play on the site!


    by Michael Maiello on Mon, 04/04/2011 - 8:39am

    Latest Comments