BlogHer - Bobby Jindal - Comments

It's getting redundant

Jaime Lafond — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 11:02:27 -0500

I've enjoyed your posts and the debates that they spark, but they are starting to sound all the same. The Dems are hypocrites, I get it! And just an FYI, so are Republicans. You could go back and forth all day with examples of the hypocrisy. So...can we do something new? Maybe? Huh?

I Made No Such Promise - Wrong Is Wrong

Gena Haskett — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 19:32:59 -0500

Obama made a bad joke about the Special Olympics - go get him, let him know and the reason behind why you were offended. I can live with it. If that is what was most important item that conservative folks picked up on in the Leno appearance yak it up.

It was not. It was when earlier he said that it was necessary to support AIG because it was interlinked many banking and financial institutions that if AIG had crashed the whole banking infrastructure would have gone down with it.

I dunno, that was a radical statement to be investigated, examined, followed up on or utter a "WTF haven't we been told?" But you pick you battles.

I don't care about political party affiliation; if I have a concern or I believe it is wrong I will state my beliefs. I hope that I consistently point to facts to back up my beliefs.

I've seen Dubya cartoons, video and performance pieces. Most were on administration policy but there were some that attacked the man physically or intellectually. I looked but didn't laugh. Just shook my head and moved on.

Presidents learn it comes with the job. It might even be essential to a democracy that we can respond in humor or sarcasm.

What some conservatives/Republicans need to get through their heads is that you cannot do it just because of Obama's race or ethnic background. You can't use foul stereotypes to make your point.

Because even African-American Republicans are having to speak out on the insensitivity of what seems to pass for conservative humor and commentary. It ain't funny. It is exclusionary and painful. Maybe that is why the do it, to rally the non-POC troops to hold together until 2010.

Now according to what you said about Reagan they should not do this; they should have kept quiet about the e-mails, talks shows and blog posts that they have witness and kept it to themselves?

No, they should not. No, they can't. How can they deliver the message of conservative values if others in your party are spitting in my face?

How can I hear what you have to say when certain aspects of the conservative movement that sum up my life and other lives as nothing more than a hand out affirmative action existence, no matter who we are, what we do or achieve?

There are extremists on both sides of the spectrum. They can be ignored or corrected. But it is harder to discern what is acceptable within the mainstream conservative/Republican sphere when it comes to issues about disagreement, dialog and disrespect.

They got the disrespect part down pat.

Gena - Out On The Stoop

What I like About Frum

Nordette — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 14:52:21 -0500

Before I even get to his ideologies, what I like about Frum is that he doesn't waste time creating drama by defending people on the right who use hate speech with "Well, Joe Lefty did it too!" like we're all six year olds or as though by pointing out one of your opponents said something offensive too that makes your guy/girl's nonsense o.k.

Nordette: BlogHer CE. Blogs @ WSATA & UMBOP. @Twitter

My issue is the other double standard

Erin Kotecki Vest — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 10:19:00 -0500

The one that didn't allow nearly this much sanity or leway when a Daily Kos blogger wrote about Palin's family. The entire Left was vilified.

Now this is just one random blogger guy on the Right? That's exactly what we all said about the one random blogger guy on the Left before. Apparently that didn't really count.

And why was it so much easier to defend Palin and get up in arms about "feminism" but there is no outrage on the right when the First Lady is attacked?

Just as lefty bloggers like Feministe and Shakespeare's Sister called out sexism against Palin, it would be nice to see the same done by bloggers on the right for Michelle Obama.

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain

New Majority.com

BarbD — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 06:52:44 -0500

Have you ventured over to David Frum's new website? I think you'll appreciate it.

I am neither a conservative nor a Republican, but I'm hungry for common ground. Frum and his friends are part of a movement to remake the Republican Party into a more moderate, inclusive organization. I may disagree with a lot of what he says, but I also agree with a fair bit as well.

I don't know if we'll ever get back to more civil discourse. And yet, I'm not sure how we can resolve the problems we face unless we re-learn how to work together, in our larger interest.

We can't have it all, whichever side of the conservative/progressive divide. But we can resolve to talk about our differences civilly, and learn how to compromise again. This "my way at all costs" approach just isn't working.

One word: Hellzyeah.

NOfreelunch — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 23:35:06 -0500

"People were up in arms over this column, after retiring their "Bush is Hitler" and "F*ck Bush" placards first, of course." "Forgive me if I've somehow missed it, but it seems that respect for the office of the presidency is a new phenomena for some." Yep.

"If only there had been an equal reaction to edit out the soundbite of our president cracking a joke about the Special Olympics." Yeah. Obama apologists stuttering out ridiculous justifications on that one--even supposedly activist special needs parents! WTF?

"I'm all for vehement disagreement but I'm tired of spending the time
crafting a thoughtful message only to see or hear someone make some
idiotic "Obama go back to Africa" remark." I know. I KNOW.

"That being said, I'm equally tired of the double-standards. I'm tired
of the remarks like those in my first paragraph distracting attention
away from more important matters like our newly-quadrupled deficit.
It seems like so many of us are more embroiled in winning an argument
as opposed to winning the best future for our country, thus the
hen-pecking, the name-calling, the ridiculousness. People are going to
slip up in remarks. People are going to say ignorant things. Everyone should meet the same, single standard."

Thank you. For once I feel like someone just climbed inside my brain and put my thoughts into print.

Dana, you said you would

evilslutopia — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 20:23:59 -0500

Dana, you said you would respond to the alleged hate speech if someone could offer you PROOF. It's been a few days since we provided actual audio of Rush Limbaugh saying one of the quotes Erin attributed to him.

So are you going to keep your word and finally respond, or not?

The Evil Slut Clique

EvilSlutopia

Wow, I'm late to this party.

shelleyp — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:46:28 -0500

Wow, I'm late to this party.

Dana, I love reading your posts. It's like a textual version of Clue. And I wanted to say, stick by your guns. Don't allow the commenters to lure you into a debate. You just continue repeating the same thing, over and over again. It's perfectly acceptable to refuse to engage with others until every single one of your demands is met.

Personally, I couldn't be more delighted by the state of affairs within the Republican party. I think it's wonderful that Limbaugh is getting the recognition from True Conservatives that he deserves. I'm especially looking forward to appreciation of him increasing over the next two years, before the mid-term election.

It's time the conservatives realize that the Republican party is no longer their party. Perhaps they'll even show their displeasure by their votes. True democracy in action, and more power to 'em.

You're also extremely right (pun not intended)--it is time for the conservatives to embrace their conservatism, totally and completely. No more of this moderate wishy washy stuff; no more compromises, or trying to find a middle ground, or embracing of bipartisanship. Pick a mark and stand by it and if elections are lost, who cares? Isn't what's important that you stand by what you believe?

The only thing I didn't care for in your post was the use of the term "menstrual", as in "These are the people who completely go menstrual when anything critical..." That's really playing to the boys at the expense of the girls, by catering to that old chestnut about women responding passionately or angrily because "it's that time of the month". I'm surprised to see this type of phrase in a post at Blogher.

Other than that, stand by your beliefs. You go, girl.

Thank you

Jill Miller Zimon — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 23:31:47 -0600

For the compliment:

"More lovely civil discourse from you, Jill"

Re your writing this:

"For a variety of reasons, I've chosen not to use my name...although as
you've pointed out at least three times on another thread, you can find
it easily enough if you feel so compelled to look."

Please provide the links - I saw the one, which I provided in this thread already, and for which I take responsibility. There are another two?

Jill Writes Like She Talks

Can I try, in my own rather ignorant way?

nelle2nelle — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 20:48:42 -0600

I am probably older than most around here, what with memories of presidents actively stretching back to JFK. I was around for Ike, but well, he never caught my attention like JFK did.

Anyway, over the time since, both parties, liberalism and conservatism, have evolved. Think of the social issues that were front and centre then, think of how they are different now.

And of course, there was escalation in Vietnam, and the subsequent reaction.

When Nixon was president, setting aside what we all most recall about him, his political outlook largely was left of most in the Republican party today. So too Gerald Ford and Nelson Rockefeller.

Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, and Gerald Ford idealogically, in terms of at the time they were in office, are not far apart. Differences, but not huge differences.

The country moved right in the 1970s, I could feel it, and recall thinking it at the time, it was quite dismaying. And that is where we've pretty much camped out since, with the political centre to the right of what it was when I was in my first year of college in 1972.

Now, as if along a slide slip fault, the country has jerked back left, and as it did, the GOP, and many prominent media conservatives, were caught standing behind a wall that just disappeared - in their skivvies.

When we are caught so unaware, our inclination is to panic; alternatives buzz through our minds, trying to latch on to something, anything to react postively to the change. It usually takes a deep, calming breath to reset and get our wits about us again.

The right has to move left, I know that sounds unthinkable, but the left had to move right, and did, with Bill Clinton. Now the right is up, and it has to think on whether the right as constituted 8 years ago makes sense in the America of right now.

People in the US turn left when they hurt economically, and they are hurting now.

When Steele made his comment, I thought this was a good thing, he was doing what is ultimately necessary, moving away from the Limbaugh type conservatives. The GOP could do worse than to start looking toward Christine Whitman as one to guide them idealogically.

Instead, the remnants of power on the right, powerless except amongst those relative few (percentage wise) who still cling to the 2001 ideal, exert this power to prevent the party from changing as is necessary. The chance will come again, it must come again, but are those on the right ready to adjust to changed circumstance?

If they do not, then the right will fail to provide any significant natioanl political competition for at least a dozen years.

In my opinion. ;-)

llhaesa

Thank you...

nelle2nelle — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 20:29:30 -0600

It was a sea change for me, something I've never done in my life.

What is weird is that start to present, more than 1000 book pages worth of story, I can see how my writing has grown significantly, so in that regard it is encouraging!

When starting, I was tentative, not sure about having it out here for people to read. Little by little, others challenged me or I challenged myself in new ways, and now the setting gives me the ability to tackle issues, given the protagonists are decidedly activist.

A few weeks back I did one on Myanmar, and for the first and only time, I used an actual name - the head of the junta there, and well, lets just say in my writing, he is out of work. ;-)

The latest writing is with Beirut, where I try to take a horrific and yet show the city in a better way than most of us are probably used to seeing, and delving into an issue where there is some disagreement between feminists here and there - wearing hijab, and did it in my own way.

The incident in Beirut is also (so far) told from three different perspectives, one being first person, a writing approach that is as challenging as it is fun, definitely my favourite to do, but a rarity, with, if I recall correctly, 8 of 321 story elements written this way.

OK, so I'm totally off subject here, but I appreciate your asking. I put a lot of me into that writing, as we all do with our respective work, of course.

llhaesa

Anonymity

Denise — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:06:59 -0600

Anonymity is not a crime and it is not a community guidelines violation on BlogHer.com.

People have the right to choose their level of transparency and their choices should be respected. There is never a time when it's ok to call someone out because they do not use their full names, their real names or any other recognizable identifiers.

If at any time a member of this community feels concern over an "anonymous" member or an "anonymous" member feels she is being attacked for her anonymity, I would like to be contacted at denise@blogher.com

I would like to add that whether you're anonymous or not, if you are engaging in discussion or activity online that can be traced and referred to by other members of the community, then odds are it will happen. For that reason I always tell people that they have to be ready to own their online personas (all of them) in all arenas. We really never know when our activity in one place will be noticed by those we interact with in other places.

We're way off topic here. I'd like to suggest we move back to the original topic - Who IS in charge of the GOP and conservatism?

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings

It's not a names issue, it's an authenticity & credibility issue

Nordette — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 17:47:49 -0600

When people use anonymity to throw bricks and hide their hands, anonymity is an issue. When people go online and pretend to be something other than what they are to create confusion or derail conversations with a hidden agenda or to undermine a website via subterfuge, anonymity is an issue. Think stalker, think troll, think political operative, think paid spammers for products.

If you don't do that, then your real name or anonymity is a nonissue.

I'm not talking about Norma156 right now because I don't know her. I'm talking about anonymity issues in general.

Nordette: BlogHer CE. Blogs @ WSATA & UMBOP. @Twitter

More lovely civil discourse

Norma156 — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 17:15:30 -0600

More lovely civil discourse from you, Jill.

"...you attempted to present yourself as one way, when in fact you've written contradictory opinions in other forums."

"I'd perceived in the comments you wrote in that BlogHer thread to
appear as if they were very veiled attempts to present yourself in a
very calculated way that just didn't ring complete."

"That's no threat, Norma, unless you really want to stay hidden and hope
people don't go looking to understand where you're coming from."

So in the course of one post you suggest that I'm a liar and that I'm somehow "hiding" by choosing not to reveal my name.

This represents civil discourse? This represents heated debate?

Huh?

I have blogged, if that's what you call leaving comments on various posts, for a relatively short time, maybe eight or nine months.

Before beginning to follow blogher, I posted on Alphawoman under the same Norma156 for a few months, immediately before the election.

I no longer post there very often because the topics discussed are almost exclusively romantic and relationship issues, however, occasionally I do as there are one or two people there whose opinions I value.

I invite any of you to visit that site and read what I've written. Some of the posts are more personal than comments posted here, but in no sense are opinions, particularly political opinions, contradictory to anything I've written here.

Dana is a contributing editor to this site. I would expect her to reveal her identity. I am not. For a variety of reasons, I've chosen not to use my name...although as you've pointed out at least three times on another thread, you can find it easily enough if you feel so compelled to look.

Norma...

Denise — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 16:29:33 -0600

Email me about this please. denise@blogher.com

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings

BlogHer - Bobby Jindal - Comments

It's getting redundant

I Made No Such Promise - Wrong Is Wrong

What I like About Frum

My issue is the *other* double standard

New Majority.com

One word: Hellzyeah.

Dana, you said you would

Wow, I'm late to this party.

Thank you

Can I try, in my own rather ignorant way?

Thank you...

Anonymity

It's not a names issue, it's an authenticity & credibility issue

More lovely civil discourse

Norma...

My issue is the other double standard