Amazon Ads

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

The Post Plague Year Rules for Commenting

A couple of things before we begin:

First, here is Winston Churchill's quote that you need to reference:

In war, resolution; in defeat, defiance; in victory, magnanimity”

Second, here is what a reference to the Plague year means. Understand, a lot of anger what occurred and the context therein. Now, onto our show.

I once simple rules abouts Comments and commenters, I discussed back in this post. Given how the world (and I) have changed, it is time in the Valley to refresh those rules.

My sister works in the Film and TV Industry, when she is not dealing with folks on set, the rest of us are "civilians," compared to the rest of the people she works for. On the Hill or in politics, I look at people who show every four years who get involved as "Civilians," too. I also learned the rules of engagement from machine politicos a long time ago.

I learned a few simple rules (from democrats), and I lived to see all of them broken. Proud of yourselves? The rules I originally learned:

Never attack a Politician's family under any circumstances (unless they play the role of partisan on the battlefield) or a politician under these three places: Sickbed, Death bed, or Waters Edge. All three were broken in the last 8 years.

The new Rules:

1) Do NOT Comment Anonymously unless you bring something other then insults. I once had a anti-semitic Blogger (who knows nothing of the word Magnanimity) leave an insult comment with no links to his Blog (unpublished). I argue in these posts in good faith. I expect you to do the same as well. If you must argue in the negative, leave a name and a Blog (or if no Blog, a name). Unlike that Anti-semite Blogger I just linked to, I have tolerance for other people's ideas. When you have a Blog, you stand for your ideas, I respect that.

2) Don't call me Treasonous when I've heard you calmly associate yourself with people who wished the assassination of President Bush. I've discussed the loose talk earlier in the Valley. Every thing mentioned there was explained away. No "we're sorry we said that, it won't happen again," No "this was too far," Before I give a radical proposal, I always start with If XXX happens, the I propose YYY. You don't like the proposals, hey, by acknowledging the words said during the last 8 years are OK, you basically said, I could wish for assassination of Democrats too. Karma, live with it.

3) Bring some worth to the Conversation. I don't claim to know everything, but I argue a point, refute it or support it, maybe teach me something new. Stupid people always think they are the smartest in room. Ivy league educations do not confer respectability with me, ideas do.

Now, my rhetoric is amped up, and the Democrats have everything across the board -- what can tone down my rhetoric? If Democrats (Bloggers, comments and politicians all) listen, I might be more open minded to your ideas. For now, no. Here is what Democrats must do:

A) You won. Yet, since winning, I have yet to see any magnanimity from the winning side. And Conservatives and Republicans are supposed to tone down our rhetoric? No, no and no. "In defeat, defiance," If you don't like it, move to Venezuela, their leader there doesn't like opposition voices either. Stand by your views and be Magnanimous.

B) As mentioned before, the movie industry is nearby. Stalker blogs are bad in general. The anti-semite Blogger has never of of Speaker Tip O'Neill and President Reagan after 5:00PM. They became friends after a daylong battle. Stop with the stalking Blogs, like this one and this one. Learn of Speaker O'Neill and Reagan. After the past 8 years, we don't have to reach out; You on the Left do.

C) Most civilians look at whomever in the White House as the party in charge. Understand our defiance and bring back the Old School Rules of Enagagement. All politicians bring their kids on the campaign trail, respect that. If we on the Right went after Malia and Sasha, the way you on the Left go after Palin's children (and then excuse the crassness), we would never hear the end of it. What is needed is a Democratic Martin Luther willing to bring a modern 95 Theses to the Daily Kos, Huffington Post, MSNBC and Air America. Hint: It's already been written. It's called "All Politics is Local," by Speaker Tip O'Neill. Lead by example or STFU.

D) Clean your own House. You don't like Rush or Ann Coulter. I've already written how to lower their audience. By continually needing Republican Emmanuel Goldstein's, we defend our people twice as hard. If you don't clean up your rhetoric, don't be all hissy with ours. Start with the stalking Blogs.

E) There is a troll on the Althouse Blog who never engages but is a perfect representation of how the Democrats and Liberals show no magnanimity. Show me that you on the Left want engagement (We don't always win, neither do you) and not dominance, then I'll listen. Acknowledge when we on the Right are right. Why won't the left clean up their trolls?

Do those things and my rhetoric subsides. Other then that, welcome to the Valley. I await your comments.


Bookmark and Share

4 comments:

  1. It's a shame, sir, that you criticize the behavior of others, and then justify acting in that same way because "they did it first." As I've said to you before on this blog and elsewhere, change begins with you and with me, one by one and conversation by conversation. If you believe something is wrong when done by that side, it is equally wrong when done by this side. I'm not quite sure whether your argument is that bad behavior is justified as retribution, or justified because it works, but either way, I take issue with your saying that bad behavior is justified.

    And honestly, Joe, I think you're better than that, anyway. Perhaps I haven't been around long enough, but I haven't even seen you engaging in the kind of rhetorical behavior you're justifying. So far, you've been every bit the gentleman, treating me and my "liberal" ideas with respect and consideration. (And if I may be so bold as to say,) I believe I've been respectful to you and to your ideas, as well. If you ask me, I'd like to see "do as I do, not as I say" be your motto and advice to others, because in spite of your words, you are not exhibiting the boorish behavior you're nevertheless advocating.

    I'm sorry you don't approve of my "stalking" blog (stalking blog?), but American Nihilist is the result of several bloggers who were being attacked by a single blogger, banding together to offer a more unified response. (Sadly, it hasn't worked out that way, but the theory was there.)

    Ironically, AmNi is the closest I come to behaving vengefully and successfully, as you suggest. While I'm preaching "turn the other cheek" and you're preaching "an eye for an eye," AmNi most certainly has "eye for an eye" aspects to it, and yet you're listing it as something not to do--which is either a purely partisan statement, since the person who gets much of the attention there is from your side of the aisle, or is your exhortation in contravention to everything else you say, to "turn the other cheek."

    I'm fine with people judging my words and deeds everywhere I post them, but I would appreciate it if folks would consider all that they see of me, rather than just those parts that paint me in a particular light. Ask yourself whether I've initiated bad behavior, or whether I have instead responded to it. Ask yourself how I treated you in our first encounter, and whether I treat anyone as an "enemy," or one of "them." How closely do I live up to the rules and standards I set for others? I'm willing to accept that I'm not perfect, but I don't believe that my AmNi blog is anything more than a response to a man who treats others poorly. Yes, it does occasionally cross the line, even as far as I'm concerned (though not generally by my own hand, I'm happy to say...), but mostly, it is just another opinionated blog.

    I hope you're not saying that I risk my ability to comment here or my chance to be your internet friend by continuing to maintain a blog to which you do not approve. I find our conversations interesting and enlightening, but would give them up in a heartbeat rather than gaining/keeping my ability to comment here by giving up my ability to post there. I trust you understand, and would do the same...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Respac,

    I can still say something your doing is wrong and still carry on conversations with you -- but as i said in the post: Lead by example.

    Here in hollywood, in the Industry, the idea of "stalking," ended in the death of a sitcom star. By promoting a "stalking Blog," it is a first step down a path that Speaker Tip O'neill's peopele would not have done.

    For me, the rules of engagements have changed. I cannot be "above the fray," when people on the Left casually attack a child of a polictican, offer excuses for assasinating one or jusy show no consideration that we live in a two party system.

    Where are the people standing up for better ruleof engagement to keith Olbermann? Chris matthews? Rhandi rhodes? You think any of those names would listen to anything a Conservative would say?

    All I want (and have been wanting since December 12, 2000) is for my former party to clean up their own act before judging any of the Right. has it happened? NO. Will it happen? You have a coalition of AmNi, that is a lobbying group right there. Personally, I would love to see the efforts begin.

    I've already ofered the "how" to stop Coulter and Limbaugh -- no one on the Left understands, to stop them, they have to stop proving them right.

    Respac, I am not going to stop you from commenting here. Your arguements are clear, and you underrstand the beauty of the two party system.

    But it is undercut by AmNi. I like our discussions and I am happy that you respect differing opinions.

    This post comes out because, I had to say, with the words and deeds of the past few years (and the past few months,) I have to say, "enough is enough,"

    I believe we are all Americans, some with different opinions on how to make this nation great, but how much "dissing," am I supposed to take?

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Blogger gods have deemed my full comment too long, and thus it appears here, instead: Immoderate Monk: The Golden Rule compels you. Please go there to get every juicy drop of wordy goodness.

    Let's see if I can summarize here, however, so this comment isn't a total loss...

    "Lead by example."

    I could certainly live in a world where everyone treated others as well as I believe I do, but I'm pretty sure that we all should lead by example, or at the very least, follow the Golden Rule, and treat others with at least as much respect and consideration as we would like to receive from them in return.

    My "stalking Blog"

    As I said in my last comment, AmNi is kind of an "eye for an eye" endeavour, but the posts are generally in response to attacks, not attacks themselves. There are some exceptions, of course, but generally, the eye we take is in response to the eye we lose.

    Altogether, my AmNi blog has posted fewer screeds about Dr Douglas than he has about Andrew Sullivan alone, in the same period of time. (And he has posted screeds about others too, of course in that same time period) So again, what is it that designates one a "stalker blog," and the other not, and are you sure the labels ought not be switched?

    "I cannot be "above the fray,"

    I don't know that anyone is suggesting you be above the fray... *I'm* saying that one can condemn the individuals who do bad things without doing bad things in return, and without blaming everyone in a given party or on a particular side for the acts of individuals in that party or on that side.

    "Where are the people standing up for better rules of engagement to Keith Olbermann? Chris matthews? Rhandi Rhodes?"

    Many of them are pointing at Bill O'Reilley, Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh and claiming they did it first, and we won't clean up our act until they do, which is a sentiment that may sound vaguely familiar. (And I'm sure that the defenders of Bill, Ann & Rush can point to those liberals that preceded them as having started it, and that those who defend those early libs have still earlier conservatives to whom they point, and so on, and so on, and so on...)

    "All I want (and have been wanting since December 12, 2000) is for my former party to clean up their own act before judging any of the Right."

    It is possible that individuals in your former party are correct in their criticisms and judgments about individuals on the right, whatever their own sins may be. I don't think one should use Democratic party sins to excuse or ignore Republican party sins, or vice versa.

    "I believe we are all Americans, some with different opinions on how to make this nation great, but how much "dissing," am I supposed to take?"

    As little as you give, I'd say... Sometimes one needs to reply in kind to individual "disses," but often it is possible and right to be the better man, and turn that other "other cheek" (by which I mean an ass cheek,) and walk away, to confront another day...

    ReplyDelete
  4. JSF, I am not as you have seen a student of the old school style of politics as practiced from 1932 to the present.

    Many within the establishment find my unwillingness to stake a permanent position on either side of the political fence disconcerting and unnerving.

    But, when you have seen what I have seen done what I have done and been cast aside by both major parties one tends to distance oneself.

    My approach to politics is rational and philosophical a melding of the Thomistic and Oriental philosophies.

    For example, the Minnesota Senate race rencently concluded in favor of Al Franken in my opinion did neither party any credit. The endless cycles of wrangling prevented Minnesota from having an effective voice within the upper chamber of the Congress.

    The current propensities towards recounts and the involvement of the judiciary that was initiated by the disputed Presidential election of 2000 diminishes the creditability of the major parties by placing personal and political agendas before the welfare of the Republic.

    ReplyDelete

Welcome to the Valley! Please comment about the post -- Keep to the subject and try not to curse. If you say something, stand behind it. Anonymous posters do not stand by their convictions. And if you feel the need to personally attack the author, you can only do it under your real name. Now, the world awaits your words:

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...