Friday, January 20, 2006

"Tolerant Intellectuals" provoke blog shutdown

Having received my share of hate mail, I can appreciate how the Washington Post must feel.

"The Washington Post shut down one of its blogs Thursday after the newspaper's ombudsman raised the ire of readers by writing that lobbyist Jack Abramoff gave money to the Democrats as well as to Republicans."


Now the Post is a fine paper, albeit a decidedly liberal one. Just as the Washington Times, also a good read, slants to the editorial right. But when WaPo ombudsman Deborah Howell pointed out the well-known, incontrovertable fact that sleaze merchant Abramoff contributed to BOTH parties (as most lobbyist do), the tolerant, intellectual crowd that abhors talk radio, Fox News, and uncivil discourse lost their collective minds.

There were so many personal attacks that the newspaper's staff could not "keep the board clean, there was some pretty filthy stuff," and so the Post shut down comments on the blog, or Web log, said Jim Brady, executive editor of washingtonpost.com.


This is NOT an isolated example or anomaly.

I once sent an email to someone who posted a comment on the Huffington Post. This person scoffed at the idea that Christians in Muslim countries were subjected to violence and intimidation (to put it mildly). I simply pointed out that whatever his views on G.W. Bush, the Iraq war, the war on terror, or Christianity, it did not serve his cause to pretend that anti-Christian bigotry and violence in Muslim countries was a fiction. That very day three Christian girls in Indonesia were set upon by a Muslim mob and beheaded. I also gave examples of government oppression of Christians in Muslim countries. I thought this might start a dialogue. Silly me.

I received a five-page, single spaced, torrent of abuse in which every obscentity known to man was used (including the new obscenity, "Halliburton"). The "long time reader and commentator" on the Huffington Post accused me of 1) not having a college degree (I have two), 2) not living on either coast (guilty!), and of having "some bull***t job like a Walmart greeter and basket pusher."

Ah, there's that innate sympathy for the working class.

People who know me (brownshirts, Wallmart employees, and other fascist scum) will tell you I have a libertarian streak a mile long. This often puts me at odds with other conservatives on certain issues. Depending on what subject is being discussed to death, I have been accused of having "liberal" ideas (only classical liberal, surely).

So why do I identify myself as simply a "conservative?" Why not adopt some phony, third-way position? Because the right side of the aisle, while sometimes (IMHO) mistaken, are sane, decent folk. The other side, currently trolling the WaPo blog, are freakin' nuts.

Besides, why would I want to hang with the crowd that wants to do for Islamic fascism what Alger Hiss did for the Soviet Gulag?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home