Updated: . . . . . by me. I’m not a fan of the Daily Kos, but the following post (in its last-updated form) is based on an imperfect understanding of events. To use a useful euphemism.
‘Bout all I can say is that Diarist SOJ is an idiot. Click on continue to read on, or mercifully let it rest.
von
This is complete idiocy.* What has happened to The Daily Kos? (Note that the linked post is not written by Kos himself, [Update: Actually, it appears to not have been promoted by Kos. Early reports were wrong.]**
No further comment — except that, in light of this latest bit of trash, The Daily Kos will be looking for another spot on the ObWi blogroll. (Since it’s currently on my blogroll, it looks like I endorse the site. I don’t, and haven’t for a long time.)
Any takers?
von
*Via Macallan at Tacitus, as well as Dean’s World.
**It’s worth noting that the post is being roundly condemed in Kos’s comments. Compare LGF (which is unselfconsciously criticizing Kos), where bigoted statements appear to be tacitly endorsed by Mr. Johnson (and, occasionally, overtly endorsed by LGF regulars).
Nice. Right up there with making fun of Andrew Sullivan’s sexuality. Apparently all the supposed hallmarks of progressive tolerance are kicked to the curb when the targets don’t play for the home team.
Hi, this isn’t promoted, unless I’m confused. And the commenters did a good job of explaining what’s wrong.
Yeah, we’ve been boondoggled. Something dredged up from the diaries is a far cry from something promoted to the frontpage. It’s still offensive, but now only the author is responsible, not Kos or the community.
You’re right:
Updated to reflect as much; updated to reflect the community’s resposne; still think that Kos belongs somewhere other than my personal blogroll.
Von, do your homework and read past the headline. Plenty of folks at Kos had issues with the headline and told SOJ so. And by the way he’s usually and very good Diarist who links to events worldwide that no one else seems to have. Also i posted already that plenty of my black friends use this term for both Colin Powell and Clarence Thomas so it’s not in some alternate universe, it’s just not your opinion.
wilfred, hey if my black friends do it can’t be anything wrong with it.
Von, do your homework and read past the headline. Plenty of folks at Kos had issues with the headline and told SOJ so.
Criticism accepted.
yes, yes, how offensive and stupid.
aren’t we getting tired of this game?
well Timmy, if you’ll re-read what I said, I didn’t say anything was wrong or right with it, wasn’t passing judgement. Just merely commented that black people i know had that opinion and so it is valid to them and they have much more experience with Uncle Tom in real life than you or I (unless you’re Timmy, the frisky black labrador wonder dog!).
not a subject likely to lead to a harmonious blog discussion – von‘s “let it rest” seems wise to me.
Do we really have to put up periodic reminders that Uncle Tom and Big Brother are fictional? It certainly appears so.
As at least one commentator already pointed out, not very far down the list of comments, it’s a great dissection of Colin Powell’s bullshit, but I had to fight to get past the headline and the offensive caption to the photo. Colin Powell spouts crap on command, but it’s racist to claim that this has anything to do with him being black.
I’m not a regular Kos reader, but it seems to me that his regular readers appear to be doing a sound job of criticizing him.
Not to change the subject — OK, fine, to change the subject:
Praktike — why are you now “asdf”?
i’m tired of praktike, and asdf is really easy to type as a replacement.
btw, ashcroft just said of Osama bin Laden “It is his faith, er face, that is the face of evil.”
brilliant.
So asdf is a makeover? Did it include a new haircut and clothing.
wilfred, in the neighborhood I grew up in, the common refrain was motherfu@ker and n…..r, course all of the liberal whites I knew tried to avoid it, the neighborhood that is.
yes, timmy. I now endorse George W. Bush as my Lord and Savior. “asdf” is just the vehicle to get me there.
asdf,
you’re right…resistance is futile
I’m with asdf and jkl;
Hey, Von, y’all could start a blogroll section of sites not approved of, but occasionally referenced in some form of outrage. DKos, LGF, Hesiod, you know. But that might be a little, um, hateful…. 🙂
Gee, y’all took all the easy, funny keyboard names. Anyone for hexadecimal?
Hey, Von, y’all could start a blogroll section of sites not approved of, but occasionally referenced in some form of outrage. DKos, LGF, Hesiod, you know.
I’m quitting my gig as self-appointed Champion of Blog Righteousness. Live and learn, I suppose.
eh Von nothing wrong with taking Kos down a peg or two just think of it as LGF.
von, no blood, no foul. You were a bit misled and life is short – and repairing mistakes transparently is admirable.
eh Von nothing wrong with taking Kos down a peg or two just think of it as LGF.
Oh, I’ll keep taking on DKos. I’ll just use the magic power of “facts”.
The disturbing part was the number of folks who agreed with Soj. Thing is, the entry is still under the Daily Kos moniker. Far as I’m concerned, if your name is on it, you own it.
Thing is, the entry is still under the Daily Kos moniker. Far as I’m concerned, if your name is on it, you own it.
Well, I didn’t see many agreeing with it; I saw some attempting (unconvincingly) to defend it.
As for Kos: I certainly would’ve shot crap like that down were I him. (But, then, I do/think/write quite a number of things that distinguish me from Kos.) But I’m not gonna ding him in these circumstances.
I must say, this craze for sudden name changes is a tad unusual.
Von..
No fair pointing out your own self-righteousness before someone else gets a crack. As to the post, yeah, stupid. As to jumping on the Ban Kos bandwagon — or whatever variant you prefer — that’s sorta stupid too.
You were a bit misled
Err…how so?
Or IOW, what are you talking about?
No offense, but neil’s criticism was asinine. All I did was link to the diary, and *both* links to Dean’s World and Soundfury mention that Kos didn’t write it. It is obvious from the link that it is a diary entry. It would be one thing if I mischaracterized the post, OR EVEN COMMENTED on it, but…
Hmm, perhaps “mislead” isn’t the verb I wanted – it has too much of an aura of intentionality – but I do think that to post something means to put a sign on it saying, “This is interesting”; that the fact that somebody made a stupid comment in a Kos diary and was called a racist for it by the community doesn’t rise to that standard (though the scenario von assumed would have); that the Instapundit style of many links and little text is apt to confuse the casual reader; that a sigh can be an eloquent comment; and that the confusion on the part of so intelligent a reader as von is evidence that backs my possibly asinine view.
Perhaps a month ago I followed a thread between two respected posters on tacitus.com – I think you and t-something – in which poster A used a particular meaning of a word without informing a confused poster B what he meant, and I found A’s apparent amusement at the situation unfortunate. Communicating in this manner is even harder than normal communication and in my view it’s responsible to bend over backwards to be clear and if necessary redundant – to bring critical link-level info to post-level.
Anyway, sorry if I offended you.
Agreed on all points, Harley. And I’m sure I’ll give you another opportunity to take a crack at my own self-righteousness/importance/etc.
And I — not Macallan — typed this bit of idiocy.
Rilkefan makes a good point, though, in his last post.
Rilkefan makes a good point, though, in his last post.
(Particularly with the “so intelligent a reader as von” line. I’d suggest only that the phrase “so so so so very very intelligent a reader as von” be substituted.)
rilkefan,
The apology is unnecessary*, as I wasn’t offended, simply confused.
Communicating in this manner is even harder than normal communication and in my view it’s responsible to bend over backwards to be clear and if necessary redundant – to bring critical link-level info to post-level.
What info would that be? It’s a serious question, as I’m not following you. Are you under the impression that I would feel differently about the post depending on who wrote it or where it appeared at Kos?
*though the gesture is appreciated.
That seems like the natural way to feel about the post in question, so yeah. I recognize a hierarchy of significance in the blogosphere and the inevitability of stupidity. I’ve for example seen some vile comments in long threads at tacitus.org, comments I felt were inadequately addressed by the host. I wouldn’t as a blogger post a link to such a comment without noting tacitus‘s response and why I felt he ought to have said more, because my reader might not wade through the thread to find that response and might not get my overall point if so – the reader might for example (I suppose) think that I felt tacitus.org as an entity was as tainted as if tacitus had said those things.
A line such as “Dumbass diarist at dKos draws a few defenders – an example of why Kos ought to reorganize his community” would in my view not have detracted from your post and spared us all this little discussion. Anyway, I’m not the one who was confused – ask von what would have been the minimum info he would have liked. Or post your policy that all post links must be followed before considering that post.
Anyway, since I apparently incorrectly assumed the answer to the question you just posed, and it’s relevant to the post in question, it seems to me the authoritative answer would have been a good adornment to that post.
Apropos, Kos replies to this controversy (a bit less incisively than I’d prefer but…)
ask von what would have been the minimum info he would have liked.
No, no, no. I followed the link and commented upon what I saw. I was not misled. I simply f’d up.
Apropos, Kos replies to this controversy (a bit less incisively than I’d prefer but…)
BTW, I thought the “Kos reply” was actually rather good.
rilkefan,
Well the answer is that I can’t believe *anyone* would write that kind of crap. It wouldn’t have mattered to me if it were an obscure unknown blogger who only has his mommy read his blog. I didn’t condemn Kos for providing the avenue, just as I wouldn’t point a finger at Tacitus if some nitwit wanted to expose their ignorance to the world via his comments. The post stands alone regardless of who wrote it or where it appears, and was so ridiculous that it didn’t deserve comment.
Fair enough?
BTW, what’s with Kos’ insipid “politics of personal destruction” absurdity? Did the VRWC make Soj write like an idiot?
Mac, I just don’t understand why, given the ubiquity of stupidity on the web, you chose to use your platform on tacitus.org to point to this particular instance. I found the “you-don’t-like-Condi-cause-she’s-a-black-woman” stuff as offensive and rather worthier of comment given the prominence of the source. And in general I find self-policing (see the post on this site re the let’s-lynch-Rumsfeld comment) to be a bit more useful. Perhaps a Dumb Diarist and Stupid CNNer post would have been useful. Anyway…
Mac, I just don’t understand why, given the ubiquity of stupidity on the web, you chose to use your platform on tacitus.org to point to this particular instance.
Simply answer — I was reading Dean’s World, followed the link and went “what the…” and thought Tacitus readers might like to see it as well. Wasn’t trying to make any great statement or anything, nor was I out looking for stupidity. I could just go to DU, FreeRepublic or here if I were. 😉
I don’t know: Kos’s response seems incisive enough to me.
The diary entry itself was thoroughly criticized on the spot – the best place for it. Kos’s response deals with the generality rather than the particular, writing:
Will I “gaffe” again in the future? Undoubtedly. Will diarists put up stupid diaries? Undoubtedly. Will the wingnuts agitate themselves into a tizzy over those things? Undoubtedly.
So let them. I’m not too worried about it.
Fair enough.
Jes – Ehh, I would have liked links to the diary post and the VRWC criticism, and I don’t think “questionable” or “stupid” is quite strong enough, and I don’t quite know what “gaffe” is doing in quotes. Also I would have said I was glad the community had responded strongly to the post, that the VRWCers had missed that too, that I have a policy of not pointing out such failings of my ideological opposites, and that I recommend others follow my lead. But then I don’t think that the grassroots have special wisdom and I’m not an organizational genius.
Just to be clear, I thought it was a good post – it just didn’t sing for me.