May 30, 2002
Burnt to a Crisp
I'm burnt to a crisp and have little to offer. No new whimsey such as the Tim Tam Scandal. No metablogging about journalism. And especially, no fighting the good fight.
(Not to mention that I'm faced with two immediate book deadlines.)
So, Forgive me, but I'm taking a short break.
In the meantime, there are excellent postings that follow through on the weblogger as journalist posting, including Jonathon's: Just Say No and Dorothea's Blogs and Journalism. And a Dave Winer survey.
There's also excellent material related directly or indirectly to the Blog Burst posting (see Allan and Mike Golby).
(Update: Congratulations to AKMA on reaching tenure! Now that you're safe, BibleBoy, why don't you bring in a Navajo shaman to perform a Blessing Way on your office. Take that tenure out for a spin.)
Yesterday, instead of talking about the Blog Burst, perhaps I should have started a Blog Build instead - bringing together webloggers who see no shame in wanting to find the truth, to understand all sides, who aren't interested in fixing blame, and who want to find a peace that's not bought at the end of a gun or within the trigger of a bomb.
Wait a sec. I already have. And they're listed to the left.
When reasonable people remain silent, only the mad and the foolish are heard.
Ta.
Posted by Bb at May 30, 2002 09:44 AM
"Instead of talking about the Blog Burst, perhaps I should have started a Blog Build instead - bringing together webloggers who see no shame in wanting to find the truth, to understand all sides, who aren't interested in fixing blame, and who want to find a peace that's not bought at the end of a gun or within the trigger of a bomb. Wait a sec. I already have. And they're listed to the left."
The righteousness makes me ache.
You abandoned the weblog last time I got after you, too. Coincidence, I know....
Bye.
Jesus Christ, Josh. Give it a rest already. You're like a five-year-old kid constantly screaming "I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you!"
From Josh's blog of May 20 2002: "It gets old to keep saying it, but it always needs saying: our enemy is not just al Qaeda, but Islamism around the world."
Go play bully boy elsewhere Josh; anyone who can say that -- and believe it -- needs some serious help.
To paraphrase: Your righteous arrogance makes me puke. And, while we're at it, why don't you allow comments on your individual blogs that others can read?
As my daughter would say, you're a 'woos'.
"When reasonable people remain silent, only the mad and the foolish are heard."
Yep. You done said it.
Hey, Josh. Now that you no longer have Bird to dump on (although her breaks aren't exactly that long), how about an answer to http://pagecount.blogspot.com/2002_05_19_pagecount_archive.html#85109511? I have had to recuse myself from many conversations because I can't qualify my status. I might not get tenure because of it. Please. It's all up (or down) to you.
I finally see the issue I've had with Shelley's postings over the last few months. Something that's been gnawing at me about them.
I thought it could the cyclical nature of the breaks she takes, but that isn't it at all. Her sharpest posts don't always immediately precede them. Nor do her most controversial ones.
Yet for me I knew it had something related to the Palestinian issue. Something that included things happening not only here in the US, but also in the Middle East and in blogland.
Calling her postings biased also didn't quite fit. The accusation is too vague, too far off the mark. Yet it lingered inside me for months. I wanted to email her personally and ask her if she held a bias... that's how much it lingered.
Instead I just refrained from commenting. And as my personal life moved on over the last month I also visited less frequently. Hence, reading her postings and all the comments from the past few days all at once.
And it hit me. A few postings ago, in the comments. Shelley replied to something in a way that suddenly made me know what I've seen seeing for a while now.
Her exact words were "...please find in this weblog anything that specifically puts the pro-Palestinians 'in a good light'."
I can't. Not once. But, let's switch 'in a good light' to 'in a bad light'. Let's consider a count of critical postings. And that's when it hit me.
Over the last few months, the number of criticisms of the actions of anti-Palestinian groups largely outnumber those postings critical of actions of pro-Palestinian groups. And that IS a bias. One she most certainly has a right to have and to speak on. But a bias nonetheless.
I say this with the utmost respect and objectivity. With absolutely NO personal attack meant. I very much appreciate her directness and the opportunity she affords me to comment here, in her personal space. Which is why it's taken me so long to understand what I've been seeing. It's a very tough issue, and every single person on this planet has some sort of bias.
You know, Dave. I owe you the deepest appreciation for taking the time to find me out. You're absolutely right. I am biased against anti-Palestinians. In fact, it's past time to confess all.
I am biased against:
anti-Israeli people
people who dislike brocolli without trying it first
people who actually like liver - only pod people would eat liver
racist people who pretend they're otherwise
people who don't like dogs because they bark and do a doo-doo without realizing that a dog is the one creature on earth who will always think you're perfect
anti-Islamic people
people who are cruel to animals
people who triple knot their shoelaces (note that I am a double-knoter, which explains this bias)
people who talk about baseball for more than one hour a day, unless they're professional baseball players
professional baseball players, because they make too much money for hitting a ball with a stick - I'll do this for free
anti-Semitic people
people who spit on the sidewalk - cultural perogatives be damned, this is disgusting
people who stick hotdogs up their noses
people who stick hotdogs up their, well, you know
people who get turned on when you mention RSS, and positively pant when you say OPML
George W Bush, for embarrasing us in front of that part of the world that he's not trying to blow up
people who don't like sex - how can you not like sex?
people who won't hike in the woods - how can you not like hiking in the woods? You probably don't like sex, either, in which case you're crap in my book
people who burn books
people who tell me my favorite diet Pepsi with a lemon twist tastes like carbonated furniture polish (you know who you are)
anyone who doesn't like Marvin the Martian - how can you not like Marvin the Martian? You probably don't like sex and walking in the woods, either. You're disgustingly depraved.
anyone who can look at a picture of a cute little kitten and not go "ahhhh" - this is how we test for pod people.
people who "write the truth" knowing full well they're biased, and then scream bias at others when they call them on it
Enron executives
Britney Spears
anyone who doesn't think Shannon Campbell has the voice of an angel - because she does (and because she can easily kick my butt)
chickens without feathers
people who pollute
people who get on my case because I pull content or comments - you can kiss my 40+ year old but still sexy butt
people who hurt my weblogging friends while hiding behind a screen
people who post anonymous nasty messages at weblogs
COBOL
people who spit and froth at the mouth when they rant
Pat Robertson
Ashcroft
people who cover themselves with the American flag while grinding all that is precious about the US into the dirt
war
oysters
TV reality shows - even though one of my best weblogging friends likes them (we all can't have good taste)
soap operas
and people who feel they have a right to ask me to explain myself
So Dave, thanks for your effort. I feel much better now that all of this is in the open.
What Shelley said.
Well, some of it. I positively abhor Pepsi w/ the lemon twist and I was glued to the screen for the entire season of The Amazing Race 2.
Especially the part about that Shannon girl. She'll kick your friggin' arse.
Sorry. I really didn't mean to upset you. But now that I have, I guess I'll speak it straight out....
Methinks you doth protest way too much.
Methinks your WORDS say one thing - that you have no bias against people who may be critical of how some Palestinian factions choose to act - yet your ACTIONS say something completely different - care to count the postings where you criticize factions who act out their Pro-Isreali feelings versus those postings where you criticize factions who act out their Pro-Palestinian feelings? It not even close.
Methinks you love to post very blunt criticisms of everything you wish to - and you have that right. But while you dish it out well, you don't always take it... how many times have you shut down your weblog this year? Or taken breaks? Before today I could count the months of this year on one hand... don't think I could count your flame-on-burn-outs on one hand though.
Methinks you really are getting weary. First sign is usually a thin skin... and I certainly did not cross a line previously. I never asked you to explain yourself. I only pointed out something that was bothering me. Something inconsistant in your words and actions.
Methinks I have gotten weary too. Weary of all this unrealistic holier-than-thou stuff here. Weary of all this kiss-ass because Shelley is never wrong commentary. Weary of these people who feel they are going to make one bit of difference. I mean they must feel this way because they take themselves sooooooo seriously.
Byeeeee.... and I wish everyone the best! LOL.... it takes all kinds. I love humanity!
Hey Dave, I've always enjoyed our discussions. They've been mind expanders. Feel free to e-mail me dude.
"Over the last few months, the number of criticisms of the actions of anti-Palestinian groups largely outnumber those postings critical of actions of pro-Palestinian groups."
Dave, bullshit, and you know it. On the blogs, the rabid right has been ripping into the Palestinians left, right, and center for months without fear of reply. Give me the URL of one pro-Palestinian blog and I'll mail you 100 vehemently vituperative, propagandist, and, often, overtly racist anti-Palestinian blogs.
You are "evil-empire" people. For lack of targets and, being frustrated with each others back-slapping bonhomie, you so-called "pro-Israeli" bloggers go for the next best thing like rabid dogs, i.e. those critical of someone tipping his country into the abyss.
Don't waste your time building critics of state-sponsored IDF actions in the Occupied Territories into Palestinian apologists. I'm nobody's apologist and nobody's spokesperson but my own. If you agree with that with which I specifically disagree, come on over and give your take on any issue I raise (if you're prepared to post your URL).
More, it appears the need to cast policy critics in the role of "pro-Palestinian, pro-bombing, pro-terror" supporters derives from a paucity of interests among so-called pro-Israeli bloggers. A quick trip through the sites of several who've lambasted Shelley of late shows an unhealthy preoccupation with visiting death and destruction on others, be it in Iraq or any other country targeted by the U.S. military industrial complex.
Flag-waving patriots upholding the maintenance of tolerance, democracy, and peace around the world? Don't make me laugh. I read the blogs.
"people who "write the truth" knowing full well they're biased, and then scream bias at others when they call them on it "
Yep. Mike - you can take that to the bank. So can Dave. So can Shelley and everyone else out here writing a personal blog.
I *am* biased. That's why I refrain from posting on my weblog about this stuff.
"Flag-waving patriots upholding the maintenance of tolerance, democracy, and peace around the world? Don't make me laugh."
Guess what? I am proud to be an American dude. And I am critical of the governement when I feel like it.
That's an American's patriotic duty.
Now you can hunt out the far right's weblogs and continue to point a finger at them or the left's. In my estimation there are an equal nuber of each. Prominent blogs on both sides of the debate. Although I am not aware of a right equalvalent to IndyMedia. Too many individualists to organize that way on the right. The best I've seen them pull off is the war blogger phenom and that latest 'blog burst'.
But better yet - you can find those of us out here that are centrists like myself. A liberal centrist I maybe. 'New Democrat' as we're called if you need a label. But we're out here. Right along side the 'New Republicans'. They are out here too. Saddly I don't think there *ever* will be an IndyMedia like centrist site. If most are like me they watch both side of the debates like a bad tennis match wanting to take the fucking tennis ball and throw it from the stadium.
Being patriotic somehow precludes you from being tolerant? Now that's bullshit.
I've been told by too many people that my story would never have occured in any other country and I believe them.
Read a better selection of blogs Mike and Dave.
I've posted up a series of sites on the left and right at my site.
I suggest reading them all. Open your mind.
Now, Mike, Karl - didn't your mamas ever tell you it wasn't nice to steal other blogger readers? Trying to entice folks to your weblogs with juicy angry bits and promises of fairness.
Naughty. Naughty. Good thing I like you both.