dailykos - Gawker

posts about #dailykos more →
Hate Speech Against Malia Obama On Conservative Blogs
Left-Wing Blogs Try on Extortion as a Business Model
Liberal Blogosphere Proves Trivially Easy to Destroy
Baseball Stat Geek Knows Exactly How Much Obama Will Win By
Once again, Vanity Fair leaves geeks at the kids' power table
Blogger Banned Over Edwards Scandal Posts
Do Lefty Blogs Have To Be Boring?
The Most Liberal Sites In America
Drudge and Kos readers are addicted
Please Welcome Drudge to the World Wide Web of 2003

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

raincoaster
07/13/09

In reply to Hate Speech Against Malia Obama On Conservative Blogs
Oh, troll-baiting has a long and honorable tradition online, but ONLY if he then goes meta and writes a The-Making-Of story discussing how he felt guilt pangs while baiting the trap, but mastered them "for the sake of the truth."

Or...is this just a Vancouver thing? Passive-aggressive is very Canadian. You could just as well have written this as an "Foreign National Employs Disinformation Campaign Against Patriots" or whatever.

PS: the Sun is not what you'd call left-wing, just so you know.

PPS: the new comment order positively encourages not reading the comments before commenting. Who am I to go against the flow?
Reply

raincoaster was starred raincoaster was unstarred

Mediahohoho
07/12/09

In reply to Hate Speech Against Malia Obama On Conservative Blogs
I think the equivalency thing people are doing with the Palin / Letterman thing is fascinating. And dumb. Fascinatingly dumb. To point out the most obvious difference, the Letterman story was promoted and fueled by none other than Sarah Palin. But I guess this sort of false equivalency is what we're in for over the next 4 to 8 years. Any cover will do, right?
Reply

Mediahohoho was starred Mediahohoho was unstarred

PaisleyPajamas
07/13/09

@Mediahohoho: Spot on. Barely half a year has passed in the Obama Presidency and this is the gauntlet that's been thrown down. The inability or obstinence to admit that an 11-year-old girl--who has never voiced any sort of political point of view--doesn't deserve this sort of racist hostility thinly veiled as "tit for tat" is willingly and pathologically ignorant. It paints a pathetic portrait of a group who don't possess an ideology--just a lot of projected anger.
Reply

PaisleyPajamas was starred PaisleyPajamas was unstarred

If_I_Had_a_Poodle
07/12/09

In reply to Hate Speech Against Malia Obama On Conservative Blogs
the one good thing about all the extreme ugliness coming out of the mentally chanllenged haterz on the right is that it really does bring the spotlight on them and it makes clear that so much anti gov, anti social welfare spending, anti decent social safety net spending, anti civil society, anti tax, anti anything speech has, at its core, exactly this kind of hatred. as lee atwater said,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Atwater

Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.

And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."[7]

Reply

If_I_Had_a_Poodle was starred

MaelstromInTheMiddle
07/12/09

In reply to Hate Speech Against Malia Obama On Conservative Blogs
Being a Republican these days is a character flaw. Lincoln is turning over in his grave.
Reply

MaelstromInTheMiddle
07/12/09

In reply to Hate Speech Against Malia Obama On Conservative Blogs
Hypocrisy: Republicans get their panties in a knot about Letterman’s joke about Palin’s unwed teenage daughter getting knocked up while attacking the daughter of the president of the United States for the color of her skin.
Reply

jodark
07/12/09

@MaelstromInTheMiddle: Hypocrisy: Leftists not condemning a famous old man on national television for a joke about statuatory rape, then getting bent out of shape by commentors trying to out-jackass each other on their small corner of a vast internet. They have a right to say it just as Letterman did, but let's remember to condemn things equally. What they are saying is just as bad as what Letterman said, for all the same reasons. However, both have the right to say it. You will find that once this gets to conservative pundits such as O'Reilly and Beck, they too will condemn it, as it is abhorrent.
Reply

jodark was starred jodark was unstarred

topsy
07/12/09

@jodark: Stupidity. Condemning a man without the slightest idea of what he ACTUALLY said. Go find out. You'll be surprised.

Edited to add: For some reason, it says I approve and promote your comment. Not even close.
Reply

Edited by topsy at 07/12/09 8:29 PM topsy was starred topsy was unstarred

braak: You are, as usual, completely correct.
07/12/09

@jodark: It's funny, I remember getting my nose out of joint about Letterman's remark. But then he apologized about it, like, the next day.

I mean, not the second apology which happened a week later, but the first apology. What's that about, do you think?
Reply

jodark
07/12/09

@topsy: I read what he said, watched what he said and know the whole story behind it. I even predicted that if the shoes were on different feet, like this event, it would just switch who was angry. But let's not forget that these are just jackass commentors and Free Republic has chosen to permit them to say what they want on their website by not deleting them. Their choice, and they chose to allow their commentors to exercise their freedom of speech. I guess you should sue them for it and force the government to moderate the internet, since free speach can make people angry.
Reply

jodark was starred jodark was unstarred

jodark
07/12/09

@braak: His first apology was a half apology, which didn't condemn the joke itself, but said he meant someone else and just made an excuse. The second apology was much better saying the joke itself was wrong and in bad taste, which was the right thing to do, given his status. The commentors on that site are idiots, however that page needed to be heavily promoted in order for it to make a splash in even the blog-sphere news.

Like I said, both are wrong, but one was shouted nation-wide in an instant, where is this is being continually promoted to bring light to negativity on the other side. I'm sure you could find some eco-nazi website that discusses their hatred of anyone who drives a car and thinks they should be killed, just as you can easily find the main page for the KKK pretty easily.
Reply

jodark was starred jodark was unstarred

Sigerson
07/12/09

@topsy: Don't reply to the trolls' posts as you "promote" them by doing so. The burden of that star of yours.
Reply

Sigerson was starred Sigerson was unstarred

ShanghaiLil
07/12/09

@jodark: For the 4,000th time, the First Amendment guarantees the right to speech that is free from government interference. It does not guarantee you the right to say whatever you want on a privately owned web site. No one has advocated that "the government moderate the internet," but some have suggested -- entirely appropriately -- that Free Republic moderate its own website. That's the beauty of free speech: you have the right to say it, and I have the right to call you an asshole for saying it, and to throw you out of my house if you say it in my living room.
Reply

ShanghaiLil was starred ShanghaiLil was unstarred

Amrita Rajan
07/13/09

@jodark: If you can't see the difference between a comedian making fun of a 19-year-old who gets knocked up and then sets herself up as a poster child of abstinence thanks to her delusional mother's need for attention and a bunch of idiots on a website making racist comments about an 11 yr old wearing an age appropriate T-shirt ... then you have a serious problem of the stupids.
Reply

Amrita Rajan was starred Amrita Rajan was unstarred

raincoaster
07/13/09

@topsy: When you reply to someone in steerage, you "promote" their comment so the great unwashed can read what you're replying to. Just drive on, pretend the little people don't exist. Or, that's what The Dark Lord wants you to do, anyway.
Reply

raincoaster was starred raincoaster was unstarred

MaelstromInTheMiddle
07/14/09

@Amdesi: I went looking for the like/hitchhiking thumb/thanks for stating succinctly what all of us were thinking button, but no could find it. So, I guess I'll just reply in archaic web 1.0 fashion.
Reply

Edited by MaelstromInTheMiddle at 07/14/09 1:07 AM

maude_flanders
07/12/09

In reply to Hate Speech Against Malia Obama On Conservative Blogs
First of all, there's nothing rebellious about a peace sign on a t-shirt...plenty of department stores and teen clothing stores put them on (girls', and seemingly girl's alone...irritating) t-shirts, pants, dresses, sweaters, etc. etc. Anyone who isn't 100, living under a rock or in Bumblefuck, Midddle of Nowhere would know that. That's not a political statement (what's WRONG with the peace sign, anyway? Is it just the universal sign for "dirty, anarchist hippies"?).

Second...that's some brave shit, going after an 11 year-old.

How much consideration do these people merit---they're grotesque, but they're laughable. How much of the voting population do they make up?

Who am I kidding...it's bad enough there's an audience for political herpes like the Palins; THESE people are just the sprinkles on their shit cake.

Reply

maude_flanders was starred maude_flanders was unstarred

atlasfugged
07/12/09

In reply to Hate Speech Against Malia Obama On Conservative Blogs
Free Republic actually called Chris Parry a loan-shark for providing microcredit loans through kiva.org. I suppose that makes me a loan-shark, too. So, let it be known that if that Ugandan farmer doesn't pay her loans back, I'll be flying over there and busting some knee-caps.

[www.democraticunderground.com]
[www.freerepublic.com]

(Disclaimer: Click on the last link at your own peril. Reading that site may cause you to lose faith in humanity).
Reply

Edited by atlasfugged at 07/12/09 5:04 PM atlasfugged was starred atlasfugged was unstarred

JaviDecimal
07/12/09

In reply to Hate Speech Against Malia Obama On Conservative Blogs
The irony of Freepers calling others "ghetto". I guess they don't realize what kind of intellectual ghetto they find themselves in.

These spineless cowards cannot be taken seriously. They may readily release such nasty racism online under the guise of anonymity but in real life they would never dream of openly exposing their vile innards. So their words are pretty much worthless as they have no integrity. I feel sorry for them for they will never understand or treasure the scale of human diversity.
Reply

JaviDecimal was starred JaviDecimal was unstarred

Dürer's Rhino
07/12/09

@I ♥ Bitchy Trampolines: Intellectual ghetto. Well said.
Reply

Dürer's Rhino was starred Dürer's Rhino was unstarred

Baroness
07/12/09

@Dürer's Rhino: Except for the "intellectual" part. God, people can be horrid.
Reply

Baroness was starred Baroness was unstarred

Conchie Birdie
07/12/09

In reply to Hate Speech Against Malia Obama On Conservative Blogs
Not borderline morons, totally senseless, complete morons.
Reply

Conchie Birdie was starred Conchie Birdie was unstarred

ChillbearLatrigue
07/12/09

@Conchie Birdie: I was going to make the same point. No call for politeness here. It would embarrass morons the world over to be lumped in with these people.
Reply

ChillbearLatrigue was starred

Foster Kamer
07/12/09

In reply to Hate Speech Against Malia Obama On Conservative Blogs
Well, this one's developing fast: Parry responded to the accusations by Free Republic here.

Down the rabbit hole we go...
Reply

Edited by Foster Kamer at 07/12/09 3:39 PM Foster Kamer was starred Foster Kamer was unstarred

momof3wildkids
07/12/09

@Foster Kamer: What happened to the ability to click a link directly?
Reply

momof3wildkids was starred momof3wildkids was unstarred

Foster Kamer
07/12/09

@momof3wildkids: Wait, huh? What's up? Clarify.
Reply

Foster Kamer was starred Foster Kamer was unstarred

momof3wildkids
07/12/09

@Foster Kamer: I had to cut and paste the link to Mozilla that was a part of your original post in order to access the website. I am unable to click on the web address and reach it directly.
Reply

momof3wildkids was starred momof3wildkids was unstarred

Foster Kamer
07/12/09

@momof3wildkids: Funky. Is anyone else having this problem?
Reply

Foster Kamer was starred Foster Kamer was unstarred

jasonelias
07/12/09

@Foster Kamer: Yep, Firefox isn't having a good day today, the pages won't load. Safari and Explorer are fine.
Reply

jasonelias was starred jasonelias was unstarred

atlasfugged
07/12/09

@momof3wildkids, @ jasonelias: What versions of Firefox are you using? I'm using 3.5 and it works fine.
Reply

Edited by atlasfugged at 07/12/09 5:14 PM atlasfugged was starred atlasfugged was unstarred

Pope John Peeps II
07/12/09

@Foster Kamer: Yep. I posted a couple of links over at Giz, and the same thing happened. Address didn't automatically link like it used to.
Reply

Pope John Peeps II was starred

atlasfugged
07/12/09

@Pope John Peeps II: Do you mean when you paste a link into comments the link appears in the posted comment as a text URL? That definitely doesn't work like before. You have to manually insert the link using <a href="URL">.
I think momof3 and jasonelias are describing a different issue, though. All of the links included in Foster's post and in his comments seem to work fine in Firefox 3.5. Apparently, the links don't work for them, however.
Reply

Edited by atlasfugged at 07/12/09 5:43 PM atlasfugged was starred atlasfugged was unstarred

Pope John Peeps II
07/12/09

@atlasfugged: OH. Yeah, I was talking about the fact that before, when you posted a link address, it just automatically created the link. Now you have to Href it which is boring. I didn't realize other people were just not seeing links. I'm with Firefox 3.0.11 and my links show up great.
Reply

Pope John Peeps II was starred

momof3wildkids
07/12/09

@Foster Kamer: It is working for me now, but it is moving painfully slow to load comments.

Reply

momof3wildkids was starred momof3wildkids was unstarred

jasonelias
07/12/09

@atlasfugged: I'm not even sure which one I use, it's ok now.
Reply

jasonelias was starred jasonelias was unstarred

raincoaster
07/13/09

@Foster Kamer: Yes, I've had that problem since the new comment system went in. Links are not live.
Reply

raincoaster was starred raincoaster was unstarred

allyzay
04/09/09

In reply to Left-Wing Blogs Try on Extortion as a Business Model
hey, kos et al, ever heard of ad networks? i mean jesus this is what american spectator looked like yesterday:

you can pay your bills without shaking down non-profit organizations, assholes. get one (1) business manager over there.
Reply

allyzay was starred allyzay was unstarred

Mike Jahn
04/09/09

In reply to Left-Wing Blogs Try on Extortion as a Business Model
I spent several months last year in nonstop slandering of Sarah Palin and didn't get so much as a bologna sandwich.
Reply

Mike Jahn was starred Mike Jahn was unstarred

blix
04/09/09

@Mike Jahn: Take comfort in the fact that among moose you are a god.
Reply

blix was starred blix was unstarred

Perhaps Not
04/09/09

In reply to Left-Wing Blogs Try on Extortion as a Business Model
What's this muffling all the sanctimonious "journalism should be objective" howling in the far-left echo chamber? Why... why it's giant wads of sound-absorbent cash!

Congratulations, shills. You are now merely less successful at huckstering for bucks than Fox News.
Reply

Perhaps Not was starred Perhaps Not was unstarred

eatsshootsleaves
04/09/09

@Perhaps Not: I think it's acceptable for journalism not to be objective (in fact, throughout American history we've seen that times when the press was most ideological was also when people were the most politically active and informed). I think it's even acceptable to promote fundraising for a political candidate or an interest group. The problem comes when you are tying your coverage of a candidate or an interest group with that candidate or interest group paying you, instead of your actual feelings toward a candidate or interest group. That's completely intellectually dishonest.

I've never really liked any of these bloggers (except Crooks & Liars, damn), but the hypocrisy and corruptness on display is incredibly surprising.
Reply

eatsshootsleaves was starred eatsshootsleaves was unstarred

If_I_Had_a_Poodle
04/09/09

@Perhaps Not: objective journalism got totally pwned by the bush era of people who felt ok just standing up and telling lies
Reply

If_I_Had_a_Poodle was starred

Kari's Favorite Mark
04/09/09

@Perhaps Not: These guys are not journalists nor do I think they really hold themselves out as such. They're advocates, pure and simple, for a particular political view, and that's what they do and they do it well. They are partly responsible for the success the Dems have had and there's no reason why they should continue upaid. Limbaugh and O'Reilly get paid, why shouldn't these guys?
Reply

Perhaps Not
04/09/09

@formerly it takes a lot to laugh: That's not a bad point (although Limbaugh and O'Reilly do claim to be - and O'Reilly is sort of right - journalists), but I'd argue that these guys are representing IDEAS, not individuals. Liberalism is a great idea; Ted Kennedy is an idiot. If Ted Kennedy pays you to report on how great he is because he's liberal and then kills somebody with his car, you're suddenly in a pickle, whether you agree with his professed philosophy or not.
Reply

Perhaps Not was starred Perhaps Not was unstarred

Kari's Favorite Mark
04/09/09

@Perhaps Not: Yeah, but they're asking for ads from think tanks and advocacy groups, not individuals.

Fox' advertisers (corporations) have agendas but for some reason when Fox advocates lower corporate taxes or less regulation, no one complains about how their agenda matches up nicely with their advertisers'.
Reply

Perhaps Not
04/09/09

@formerly it takes a lot to laugh: I complain about it all the fucking time!
Reply

Perhaps Not was starred Perhaps Not was unstarred

ADismalScience
04/09/09

In reply to Left-Wing Blogs Try on Extortion as a Business Model
So what we're saying is that lobbying groups should advertise political messages to their most dogged, frothing advocates on platforms who don't even claim objectivity. Come on blogs, at least the New York Times does the whole fig leaf thing with guys like Kristol. And Rupert Murdok occassionally apologizes for when his mouthpieces are racist or reactionary. That's the trouble with blogs - they're too good at finding an audience; one specific audience of like-minded groupthinkers.
Reply

ADismalScience was starred ADismalScience was unstarred

eatsshootsleaves
04/09/09

In reply to Left-Wing Blogs Try on Extortion as a Business Model
I think you've got this wrong. I don't know if it's a useless idea for these organizations to advertise on liberal blogs. Sites like Daily Kos actually have a proven fundraising capacity -- remember the Michelle Bachman backlash? Never underestimate the power of angry people with money.

You're right that people who read liberal blogs already have a propensity to give money to PACs and campaigns. Additionally, people who read Cat Fancy magazine have a propensity to buy twinkling balls, but that doesn't mean that it's a bad place for twinkling ball manufacturers to advertise (quite the opposite).

And yes, the comparison of Daily Kos readers to kittens chasing after shiny toys with bells on them was entirely intentional.
Reply

eatsshootsleaves was starred eatsshootsleaves was unstarred

allyzay
04/09/09

@eatsshootsleaves: it's not wrong for these organizations to advertise on blogs -- it's basically wrong for these blogs to shake them down and treat these organizations as if they are their only possible advertiser. that's the issue here.
Reply

allyzay was starred allyzay was unstarred

eatsshootsleaves
04/09/09

@allyzay: Yeah, I know (see another comment I made for this post). But the post also says that there's no valuable reason these organizations should advertise with these blogs -- which I don't think is true.
Reply

eatsshootsleaves was starred eatsshootsleaves was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

SUBSCRIBE TO Gawker

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment