My Twitter Feed

December 14, 2017

Should Anonymous Free Speech Apply to….THEM??


I have not often written about other blogs, and I don’t think I’ve ever written about a conservative blog or blogger, but I’m about to.

There was an article in the Fairbanks Daily News Miner about the aptly named blog Conservatives4Palin. Let me be on the record when I say that I generally disagree with everything I find on Conservatives4Palin, including the name. Frankly, if it were me, I’d lose the “4”. It reminds me of Toys R Us, which bugs me too. I think if you’re going to spell something, spell it.   But I digress.

So, my disagreement with the message being duly noted, in this particular instance, I back Conservatives4Palin 100%. Wait before you throw stuff at me.

Rep. Jay Ramras (R), has become the target of criticism by Conservatives4Palin for his attendance record this session.  Ramras has been criticizing Governor Palin for being absent during these last days of the legislative session. Who hasn’t? And Jay Ramras doesn’t like being criticized. Who does?

But all that aside, the article brings up a couple interesting arguments leveled against Conservatives4Palin. The first is that the people that run the blog are not from Alaska.  Heck, a couple of them aren’t even from the United States! Thus, the reasoning goes, they couldn’t possibly have anything to say that has any real merit.  At least that’s the implication from Palin spokeswoman Meghan Stapleton.

Based on the content, Stapleton surmised the site bloggers are from the Lower 48. She acknowledged the banners linking to SarahPAC are a concern.

And the final sentence in the article reminds us:

The Web site’s bloggers include two living in England and a former Alaskan living in North Carolina, she said. None of the writers live in Alaska.

There are plenty of people who would argue that the focus of the governor herself is on those who live “Outside” as the article puts it.  At the very least, this is a politician who has been, and still is very much on the national stage.  Should we tell bloggers in the rest of the world that only Palin supporters in Alaska have legitimate opinion, or the right to blog about the governor?  I have said before that this is one of the key advantages to anonymous blogs.  The reader is forced to deal with issues, not with personalities.  I, and you, should be able to decide what we think of the governor being out of town during the final days of the session, whether the person we’re responding to lives in Spenard, or Sussex.

Now, I fully agree that it’s more of a challenge for “Outsiders” to understand some of the quirks and absurdities of Alaskan politics.  (Democrats wanting to drill ANWR?  Republicans wearing “Where’s Sarah?” buttons?)  Even those of us who live here find it challenging sometimes.  And you wouldn’t be able to get an organic feel for the pulse of the local community.  But if a blogger at Conservatives4Palin says something stupid and uninformed, we have the ability to call them out on it, and they have the option to correct it.  If they do, we give them credit.  If they don’t, they are discredited, and we don’t read anymore.  Free market blogosphere.

Mansour said the blog isn’t funded by any organization, and is solely the effort of the bloggers, who paid $10 for a blogger ID and another $10 to register that.

Ramras isn’t convinced.

“I would encourage whoever is behind Conservatives for Palin to step out of the shadows,” he said.

Hmmm.  Where have I heard that “step out of the shadows” analogy before?

Speech from “the shadows” is protected by the first amendment, whether you like the speech or not, and whether you like the first amendment or not.  Anonymous political speech in particular is essential in the public debate.  It is not always easy to express a dissenting opinion, and our right to anonymous free speech protects us “from the tyranny of the majority.”  This means we are allowed to be controversial, rude, incorrect, brilliantly insightful, idiotic, or any combination of these things.  The first amendment is, and must be, blind.

Anonymous communications have an important place in our political and social discourse. The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that the right to anonymous free speech is protected by the First Amendment. A much-cited 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission reads:

Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.

Those who have chosen a life of public service are to be commended.  They have stomachs of iron, and thick hides.  They understand that they must step out into the ring, make themselves vulnerable and prepare to be assaulted for their beliefs and their behaviors.  It’s all part of the package.  But private citizens have many vaild reasons to speak from the shadows. 

Back in 1798, the government under the Adams administration decided it would be a good idea to make it a crime to publish “false, scandalous, and malicious writing” against the government, or government officials.  It was called the “Sedition Act” and history has not been kind to it, nor to Adams for signing it into law.

The Sedition Act was set to expire in 1801, coinciding with the end of the Adams administration. While this prevented its constitutionality from being directly decided by the Supreme Court, subsequent mentions of the Sedition Act in Supreme Court opinions have assumed that it would be ruled unconstitutional if ever tested in court. For example, in the seminal free speech case of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the Court declared, “Although the Sedition Act was never tested in this Court, the attack upon its validity has carried the day in the court of history.” 376 U.S. 254, 276 (1964).

No matter how much we disagree with political speech, even if it is “false, scandalous or malicious writing,”  if we value our constitution, and our own freedom of speech, we must embrace the entire concept of free speech, not just the speech we like.

The Conservatives4Palin blogger interviewed for the News Miner article chose to identify herself on the blog.  But there are other bloggers on the site who have not, nor should they, in my humble opinion.  There are many reasons to speak “from the shadows”.  Sometimes people out in the sunshine don’t speak at all, and any loss of discourse is a loss to all of us.  Free speech is a right extended to everyone, not simply those who have nothing to lose.

So, to all the anonymous bloggers out there on the left, the right, and in the middle, I salute you and I will speak up to defend your right to speak as you choose, and say what you choose. (group hug) 

OK, now I’m back to my corner.

UPDATE:  [Just a quick note – Please keep comments on topic and respectful.  C4P has written a supportive response, and linked here, so we may have guests come to call.  I trust that we’ll all stay civil on both sides, and use this as an opportunity, hopefully, to acknowledge that we have a place of common ground.  If the ACLU can do it, so can all of us!  😉  Thanks!]



199 Responses to “Should Anonymous Free Speech Apply to….THEM??”
  1. Daisy Daisy says:

    Repeating because I forgot the all important parenthesis!

    The following is from VO’s blog –

    “Anyway, AKM has written an entry supporting the right of bloggers at C4P to speak freely. And I salute her for that. We’re all believers in the Constitution here at C4P, and we recognize that no matter how bitterly we disagree with our opponents, no matter what their political persuasion, they are still Americans, and human beings deserving of respect. (Except the Trig Truthers, they’re just subhuman scum.)”


    VO – I think that your use of phraseology betrays your inner sentiments. There should be no exceptions or else we become somewhat akin to the Nazi’s who wanted to erradicate all views apart from their own. Is that how you really think?

    Please never ever, ever call human beings sub-human scum.

    We don’t do that here.


  2. Daisy Daisy says:

    Anyway, AKM has written an entry supporting the right of bloggers at C4P to speak freely. And I salute her for that. We’re all believers in the Constitution here at C4P, and we recognize that no matter how bitterly we disagree with our opponents, no matter what their political persuasion, they are still Americans, and human beings deserving of respect. (Except the Trig Truthers, they’re just subhuman scum.)

    VO – I think that your use of phraseology betrays your inner sentiments. There should be no exceptions or else we become somewhat akin to the Nazi’s who wanted to erradicate all views apart from their own. Is that how you really think?

    Please never ever, ever call human beings sub-human scum.

    We don’t do that here.


  3. gg says:

    You mean people throw their hat in the ring, completely unaware that they are fair game for all and sundry? Pigs fly, the Easter Bunny lays eggs, Santa Claus actually makes all those toys he delivers on December 25…

  4. .
    Thanks, crystalwolf aka caligrl [April 18th, 2009 at 12:10 AM], SameOld [April 18th, 2009 at 12:23 AM], califpat [April 18th, 2009 at 12:27 AM], Tealwomin [April 18th, 2009 at 7:40 AM], Say NO to Palin in Politics [April 18th, 2009 at 7:55 AM].

    Anyone who is being stalked or harassed on the Internet, or in real life by people encountered on the ‘Net should check this out: You have rights: Electronic harassment and stalking violates Federal and many States’ laws, and may bring criminal prosecution and/ or civil judgments.

    If you have any links to updates of these laws in your State, or Federally, feel free to post them in the comments on my blog, yawl.

  5. MonaLisa IS MY NAME! says:

    You’re right, Sauer. VO will never see that what (s)he does to ADN and its advertisers is wrong, just as (s)he’ll never see the hypocrisy of demanding ADN control its commentators while feigning inability to control C4P’s commentators.

    What VidO seems to have never considered is that these kind of tactics are actually throwing gas on the fire of Palin’s political demise in AK. Palin’s style of governing has always been a (populistic?) one. She’s always ‘put stuff out there’, and if it proved popular, she ran with it. By blindly, vocally and over-enthusiastically supporting EVERY move Palin makes, C4P et. al. are actually superimposing their opinions over those of genuine Alaskans, thereby mucking-up Palin’s ability to ‘read’ her constituents’ wants and needs (arguably one of SP’s most valuable skills). More and more Alaskans will begin to feel alienated, and Sarah will have to devote more and more personal energy to damage control.

    One can argue that the effects of this have begun showing more and more lately.

    How many celebrities went into a personal and professional death-spiral from having too many yes-men in their entourage?

  6. sauerkraut says:

    Of course VO didn’t come back. The reason is simple: VO’s stance is indefensible. And what VO does to the ADN – because they disagree with the free speech exercised there – is reprehensible.

  7. UK Lady says:

    Well said eyeonyou – came back to see if VO had any more to say – guess not.

  8. EyeOnYou says:

    VidOmnia Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 5:50 PM
    For instance, you’ve got people like John ZIegler getting themselves arrested outside the Katie Courtic award ceremony to make a point.

    He went there to cause a problem and did so. He was not “arrested” but detained for refusing to follow the rules. He is miffed that Katie Couric was getting an award and stated so quite plainly. I watched his video and he proved himself to be nothing more than a petulant little child. His claims of being manhandled and roughed up are the most ridiculous claims I have ever seen especially after watching the video.

    VidOmnia Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 4:17 PM
    Kajo, I understand what you’re saying but surely you don’t expect me to control what my commenters say.


    So wait, you are complaining about the lack of moderation on the ADN while defending your lack of moderation on C4P?

    VidOmnia Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 12:42 PM

    Our only rule is that we don’t allow personal attacks, slander or defamation about other posters, Governor Palin or her family, or anyone else. Those comments get deleted

    Uh, I beg to differ:

    gardunne63 said…
    Seriously, ‘Cuda needs to hold a press conference and go all Ayn Rand on the Inbred Mo-Fo’s in her state.

    April 19, 2009 1:07 PM

    I guess calling the people of Alaska “inbred mo-fo’s” isn’t considered, slander, a personal attack or defamation? And before you or anyone else says they didn’t see it, comments prior to and after this post were deleted but this was allowed to stand.

  9. crystalwolf aka caligrl says:

    I think I get it now 🙂 c4p is always very angry about akm store here. Well of course they are ‘cuz its her store and they can’t screen shot and send to anyone! Maybe we should do the than thing to them, when they allow Obama slander and smear and send to SarahPac and whomever sell that palin oil book? I goes both ways….. ❗

  10. Professor Geezer says:

    VidOm, when I posted at C4P, not only did you censor me, but you or (whoever was running your website that day) also later made a crack about my IP address. Now THAT is a direct threat to revealing my identity online. So your tactics are pretty awful.

  11. UK Lady says:

    Having read all the posts on this thread, I will say only one simple thing.

    I notice VO completely ignored and sidestepped the one point that always angers me about Palin.

    He will not talk about the anger and violence she whipped up in the campaign, This is known to have raised the threat level to the Prez and his wife and children. Unforgivable vileness which will not be forgotten or forgiven by the majority of voters, ever.

  12. michigander says:

    Lee 323 – Well said and the everyday Joe would be in jail for doing the same thing or less.

  13. michigander says:

    marjtoo – It’s 3:30 A.M. here so I’m whipped but if I read you right (as in correctly) I like what you said and thanks for saying it. I think many people feel the same way.

    We voted for Pres Obama. He didn’t create this mess.
    He said from the get go it’s gonna take time and a lot is up to us as far as changing our ways and patience. My simple interpretation anyway.

    Can we deal with now NOW rather than attack and divide ourselves? I like “Yes we can” over “No we can’t and by the way who will be voted Pres. Popularity in 2012” This is BS and potentialy destroying us as a country. Sorry for the rant, just sad and tired.

  14. Lee323 says:

    Regarding # 44 VidOmnia Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 1:23 AM
    “At C4P, our issue is not bashing Obama or drafting Palin for President – frankly, we don’t care what she does in the future. The issue is righting a wrong – the unjust smearing of a decent American woman who stepped up to get involved in government.”


    It sounds like C4P has stepped back from supporting “Palin the Politician” to a more general and lofty purpose of fighting the dragons of the “unjust media.”

    If so, why not change your name to something like “Conservatives4MediaEquality”…C4ME ??

    Hmmmm. Probably wouldn’t work. Since Palin’s name and notoriety still sells….you wouldn’t have as much traffic to the blog. Pity.

    It is my impression from several of your posts here and elsewhere, VO, that you have an earnest, fine intellect that is well-disposed to fighting lofty battles against dragons of injustice. So, it pains me to point out that while C4P is entirely entitled to censor or limit comments that hash around Palin’s personal life on their own site, it’s actually not your right to pressure other sites (like ADN), to follow your personal code of censorship. Free speech is….free speech. Period.

    I personally could care the less about Palin’s personal life….In fact, I don’t believe I’ve ever read “People” magazine.

    Not to put too fine a point on it……but the death threats and death “posts” against our lawfully elected President of the USA trumps a thousand times over the silliness, gossip, and so-called “smearing” posted about Palin. There’s serious work to be done in this country by all of us and I just don’t have the patience for a pity-party for Palin.

  15. Dictators and dictators wannabes use tactics of censorship while openly encouraging public and verifiable discourse, they would fake opposition to identify those who oppose them and or to brag about their longevity in power in spite of the opposition.

  16. VidOmnia says:

    sauerkraut, when we contact advertisers we’re just exercising our free speech, and harnessing the power of the free market. The free market and individual liberty is what conservatives believe in.

    You’re certainly free to do the same thing. You can buy products from the advertisers. You can contact them and tell them that you support businesses whose ads appear next to comments that call their governor “white trash”.

    But it’s probably going to be a hard sell to a small businessman in tough economic times, who is trying to connect with a market in Alaska which is somewhere around 60% pro-Palin (according to the last poll I saw). Even many of those who disapprove of Paln’s governance would quail at the tone of those comments.

    And the ADN is a business, too (albeit a failing one). Its parent company, McClatchy, has lost almost all of its value and is on the verge of having its stock delisted from the exchanges. People are saying that if MNI doesn’t declare bankruptcy soon, it will lose all chance of saving itself, and the printing presses will end up being sold off to Thirld World countries.

    So I would say they have an interest in preserving the ad revenue they still have.

  17. marjtoo says:

    sandra in oregon, #126:

    I’m not necessarily a ‘conservative,’ although I am a registered Republican (who just could NOT vote for a Palin ticket).

    I, too, wish there were more “…conservative voices which were well modulated and responsive rather than reactive.” But sometimes, that’s true on both sides.

    The thing is, if we tossed out ‘party affiliation’ and ‘conservative vs liberal,’ we might realize (as many polls have the past few years), that a large majority of us ARE the almost-despised ‘middle-of-the-road’ thinkers.

    A good, back-and-forth civil discussion can certainly be informative, if people could just open their minds and forget that it’s actually the politicians who want/need to keep this division (of party leanings), in order to … Ahem … get the votes.

    That being all said: Many Republicans as well as Independents voted for Obama (or perhaps against Palin). That’s a hopeful sign that many voters were using their minds, maybe?

  18. sauerkraut says:

    Really, VidO? I can sign up as sauerkraut and my comments will appear?

    Amazing how that isn’t what happened.

    Besides, you are wrong on denying the lack of anonymity. Sure, you can do it as you do but do not ever claim to support anonymity when your site refuses to do so.

    As for what you folks do with advertisers, it’s not just making them aware. If you do not know how that is so, then you shouldn’t be sending in screen shots. Advertisers know what’s there… it’s when you take that extra step that economic pressure is applied. And that’s where your economic terrorism comes in. Pretty funny that that type of pressure is applied by someone who isn’t even part of the advertisers target market (perhaps not even an American).

  19. marjtoo says:

    Regarding ADN and the blocking of comments: Mine have not shown up at all for over a week (except in my profile list).

    Last night, I was there at the ‘right time,’ maybe … Many comments had the message that it was being reviewed for abuse, and you could click on it if you wanted to read it. Not a single one or the dozen or so I read was offensive, but every single one was critical of Palin.

    Pat Dougherty sent a very nice e-mail after I wrote to her, explaining their policy, and explaining that their program for the comment sections would not allow them to take off the abuse button. They apparently have almost given up trying to read all the reports of abuse, so for the most part they are just deleted without being reviewed. She also said they are trying to ‘tweak’ the program to try to solve the problems of the report abuses.

    The childishness of those who report ‘abuse’ that doesn’t agree with their own views is almost beyond my comprehension … but at the same time, I see this same childishness and vindictiveness in their ‘idol,’ so … Shrug …

  20. VidOmnia says:

    sauerkraut, asking people to get some kind of ID does not violate anonymity. Celtic Diva does the same thing as we do. I don’t care what name people choose, so long as they choose a name. If you wanted, you could comment at my blog under the name “sauerkraut” just as you do here.

    And how is it “economic terrorism” to show advertisers what comments appear next to their ads? They’re spending the money, don’t they have the right to know what their money supports? We don’t demand that they do anything, we just let them know what’s going on. Presumably they contact the ADN, which has the perfect right to control what appears on their website.

    Protesting is not “censorship”. We protested the material that appears in the ADN’s comment section, as was our right to do. We would expect people to protest if racist comments appeared there – and we objected to the sexist and classist comments that appeared at the ADN in the same way.

  21. marjtoo says:

    Just to let y’all know I’m an ‘outsider’ … living in the Midwest.

    I want to keep track of everything Palin says and does so that I have even more ammunition than I did (which was quite a bit more than most of my relatives, friends & acquantances here in the ‘lower 48’ had!) during the past presidential campaign, JUST in case she decides to run for POTUS in 2012.

    I’ve learned so much about Alaska, and Alaskans, these past 6-7 months. I appreciate the knowledge that especially Mudflats and ADN have allowed me access to. You’re great people …

    Well, okay, most of you are–I’m excluding those who are so rabid about Palin … but who can’t really tell me why they are so supportive. Uh … I get answers like Intelligent, Compassionate, Fair … so far, I haven’t seen much of that in what I’ve read about her.

    Again, thanks for letting an ‘outsider’ sometimes put her two-cents worth in.

  22. sauerkraut says:

    welllll… musta used a bad word cuz my last post got blocked by the filter.

  23. sauerkraut says:

    168 VidOmnia Says: April 18th, 2009 at 6:04 PM

    State all the facts you want. If Palin says something on the public record and then doesn�t live by it, fair game! But stay off her personal life or her kids, because that�s going to provoke a pretty savage reaction from people who believe in civilized behavior. That�s why I enjoy reading Mudflats or Amanda Coyne, because we can differ but remain civil.


    There is nothing civil in practicing censorship, VidO. Which is exactly what you do if you deem something related to Palin’s “personal life.” I’ll agree that the comments about her kids can get distasteful, but certain things related to Track and Bristol are relevant in the public policy arena. And nearly everything about Palin’s “personal life” (whatever the definition of that might be) is relevant because she is an elected politician.

    If you disagree with any part of this comment, feel free to review your state’s constitution, my state’s constitution and the federal constitution. If you are not an American, then you are SOL. Non-Americans are welcome to comment, etc., but they are not welcome to censor our comments about our politics or politicians.

  24. sauerkraut says:

    162 KaJo Says: April 18th, 2009 at 5:03 PM

    VidOmnia Says:“Kajo, I understand what you’re saying but surely you don’t expect me to control what my commenters say.”

    Of course not, but you’d think….they could stay on topic, at least with the person they’ve joined in debate.

    Why parse the meaning?

    VidO wrote this somewhere above: “We reluctantly took the step of requiring commenters to get an ID after a long period of asking people to select names, which didn’t work out. When you have 10 or 15 commenters in a thread all using the name “anonymous” the conversation becomes impossible to follow.”

    If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and smells like a duck, chances are that it is indeed a duck. No one can be a supporter of anonymity if they disallow the comments of those who choose to stay anonymous!

    In addition, who gets to decide what is or is not slander about Palin? It appears that a number of relevant items are deemed slander by c4pee and removed. Just because c4pee does not want to discuss it or because it casts their politician of choice in a bad light does not make it slander. But disallowing comments related to those undesired topics is censorship of the worse kind. When the censor’s pen is wielded by someone who is not even an American citizen, then something is really and truly wrong!!!!

    c4pee wants to have it both ways: they want to determine what can be discussed and they want people to think that no censorship occurs.

    Censorship does indeed occur at c4pee. With regularity and by admission. Denial of our ability to comment anonymously also occurs on the c4pee site. As well as that disagreeable tactic of going after businesses, ie, ADN, that allow comments which c4pee deems distasteful (see VidO’s comments at 159 and 168). That type of behavior is economic terrorism at its worst, dirty dick nixon tactics at its best, but certainly behavior which should not go unanswered.

    Tina Fey has a righteous phrase to use for people who act as the folks at c4pee do… you can guess it. The Ramones had an entire song that addresses the type of censoring which goes on at c4pee.

    It may take me a couple of days to compose my thoughts, but I certainly will address VidO’s comments on my own blog in a couple of days. Let’s see if he/her has the courage (stupidity?) to do to me as they did to the ADN.

  25. 172
    michigander- The thread has given a platform(food) to hear from c4p, it was understood that a conversation with members of c4p was going to be had on the topic of anonymity and freedom of speech, naturally the topic derailed into Sarah Palin and the reasons c4p defends her.

    I have listened to Sarah Palin and read about her policies and way to govern. My knowledge of her precedes her supporters.

    I defend c4p right to choose their identity and their freedom of expression that is why I do not visit their site. I would not have any thing to contribute to and they must certainly would have censor me.

  26. winkwinkWA says:

    Yes BB I admit I was foolish to think they would listen to anything against Sarah, I have learned my lesson and I too will stay in my own backyard.

  27. Bronislawa Blumschaefter says:

    I agree w/Basheert, who is courteously content to play in his own happy backyard. C4P has every right to do what they do; they have their own little forum for it, and they’re not bothering me. To go over there looking for a fight would make me like those people who go to IMDb take the trouble to log on to the message board of a film they don’t like, and expect all the fans to defend their right to like a given film or TV show. Life’s too short for foolishness like that.

  28. Cynamen Winter says:

    @ Bronislawa Blumschaefter Says:

    ….THEN got mad at her own party for trying to create some kind of inoffensive persona for her.
    I concur…for the McCain camp was well aware of the sheer levels of Palin’s incompetence that they were dealing with, in essence perpetrating a fraud. Truth be known, they were merely trying to save face and not put that brand of ignorance on full display. Btw, she probably now realizes that she should’ve blinked; not winked.

  29. michigander says:

    AKM nor Snoskred fed VidOmnia, commentors did and VidO from what I have seen responded in a very controlled manor and didn’t bite. That being said I agree with some of the principles VidO said. I don’t believe Palin would defend the same principles which is sad. Do I support Palin, absolutely not.

    I also think some people get too caught up playing a political game and the world goes down the drain. It’s not a frigging game. If we continue in this manner it is self destruction. Inevevitable but why speed it up )o:

  30. winkwinkWA says:

    Vido–I have made comments on c4p and never said anything like you mentioned above, and I have been deleted, called names and even berated for using 2 words (GROW UP) in caps. You allow a lot of name calling from your side of the fence so don’t try and feed us this crap. C4P is just like Sarah you can give it but you can’t take it. Goodbye and good luck with the Ice Queen, your going to need it.

  31. crystalwolf aka caligrl says:

    VO:“Palin is erratic because she’s going through menopause”. When we see those comments at the ADN or anywhere else, we screenshot and copy them – then forward them to the advertisers whose ads appear next
    Is that not censorship? GINO is 47 and could very well be going through meno, although that is someones personal opinion. How is that smearing her?

  32. AKM, Snoskred,

    May I request that you, please, ban VidOmnia from posting here? VidO can e-mail you and let you know what her/his opinions are in any given issue.

    Please, save us the heartburn. @168 I have learned everything I would ever need from c4p.

    VidO accomplished her goal; It has me enraged and constrained. My mind is racing with words you have never seen printed hear!

    Please remember the rules about Trolls.

    You have fed Vido, Please do not feed her again.

  33. VidOmnia says:

    not 4 palin, we don’t tolerate any Obama Birther comments or other things like the Obama/Vera Baker affair allegations – those allegations are ridiculous and get deleted immediately. When I say “attacks on the Palin family”, I mean comments like “Bristol is a slut” or “she is not Trig’s mom” or “the Palins are trailer trash” or “Palin is erratic because she’s going through menopause”. When we see those comments at the ADN or anywhere else, we screenshot and copy them – then forward them to the advertisers whose ads appear next to them.

    State all the facts you want. If Palin says something on the public record and then doesn’t live by it, fair game! But stay off her personal life or her kids, because that’s going to provoke a pretty savage reaction from people who believe in civilized behavior. That’s why I enjoy reading Mudflats or Amanda Coyne, because we can differ but remain civil.

  34. VidOmnia says:

    Kajo, I totally get what you’re saying. In my opinion, here’s what’s going on:

    There’s an old military axiom that says “Be careful of the enemy you choose, become you will become much like them and they will become much like you.” Basically it means that enemies learn each others’ most effective tactics and adopt them – like how Americans became utterly ruthless fighting the Japanese, or the Russians adapted blitzkreig tactics against the Germans.

    People on the right have watched the tactics of the left for a long time now – and they realize how effective they were. So now they’re adopting them. For instance, you’ve got people like John ZIegler getting themselves arrested outside the Katie Courtic award ceremony to make a point. Protesters take to the streets in Tea Parties. Mobies make comments at progressive blogs.

    As for Palin supporters, they watched the tactics of diversion and ridicule. Say what you will about Palin’s mayoral and gubernatorial record (and there is plenty of room for discussion and debate), those things were never substantively discussed during the 2008 campaign. How much mention did you see of ACES or AGIA vs. stuff like Tina Fey parodies or campaign wardrobes?

    So these people, many of whom frequent my site, are itching for revenge. They’re going to mock Palin’s opponents within an inch of their life, divert discussion to relatively minor things like teleprompters or DVDs, and viciously gossip about the families of prominent Democrats. It’s beyond my or anyone’s control – it’s human nature and it’s happening everywhere. I even have conservative friends who are assidiously reading Alinksy’s “Rules for Radicals” with the specific objective of employing the tactics against Obama and the Democratic Congress.

    Welcome to the new order of American politics. Better learn to live with it. Another wonderful legacy of the Baby Boomers.

  35. TBNTJudy says:

    OT, but here is a video of what Sarah had to say about whether Hillary Clinton was being treated unfairly during the Presidential campaign. I think she needs to heed her own words..LOL

  36. priceless says:

    In other words, vid. If we STATE FACTS about Palin and her lack of what was that word Larry Sabato used? Oh yes, GRAVITS, and her out and out lies, we get banned? I’ve been banned because Idared bring up the fact that her morals are less than stellar. It’s a do as I say, and not as I do world for her. He has a double standard. One for her, one for us. Too bad her standards are lower than those she claims she wants us to abide by.

  37. not 4 palin says:


    Re Conservatives 4 Palin, you say you go after advertisers who support attacks on the gov’s family.

    I wonder what you think about conservatives (such as Palin), who made attacks and still are making attacks, against the President and his family?

    DId you know that the secret service talked with Palin during the campaign and told her that her incendiary (and inaccurate and misleading) rhetoric had caused the death threats against the President, his wife, and their two daughters to increase significantly?

    And did you know that she refused to back down?

    And to this day, conservatives question his birth certificate and then get angry if someone question’s the Gov’s baby’s birth certificate.

    I, for one, am not interested in her baby’s birth certificate, as it is not relevant to her policies. But I am interested in how the right responds to what appears to be a very hypocritical position.

    Thank you for listening,

    Sarah (not that one)

  38. Snoskred says:

    Can I just take a moment to remind everyone – you really can’t post entire articles from news sites or blogs here. There are copyright issues. You need to post just a link, or a small quote and a link.

    I am sure you would all agree that you would not like to see entire Mudflats posts put on other blogs without a link back to the flats.

    Please be respectful of other sites whether they be news websites or blogs or even websites that you do not agree with. 😉 They are respectful of us, so we need to be respectful in return.

    Please do not post full articles. Please do not post a quote without a link. If you do this and we spot your post, we will try to find the link and edit the comment, but if we cannot find the link we will have no choice but to delete the comment.

    If you need assistance with posting links, let me know. I could create a how to and put it on the forums if people are really having trouble with it.

    Usually it is as simple as highlighting the link in the location bar of your browser, copying the link by right clicking and selecting copy, and then pasting it into the comments area.

    Apologies for having to remind ya’all, but we do not like to edit comments and we especially hate having to delete them, so it is better for us to remind everyone. 😉

  39. KaJo says:

    VidOmnia Says:“Kajo, I understand what you’re saying but surely you don’t expect me to control what my commenters say.”

    Of course not, but you’d think….they could stay on topic, at least with the person they’ve joined in debate.

    As to the second point you made, “If you post an anti-Palin comment at a pro-Palin blog, you’re gonna get flamed.” Of course, that goes with the territory. No one with any sense expects otherwise. However, I said nothing about being flamed, nor did I complain about it.

    It’s true what Snoskred said (on P1), it applies to me as well as the people I’m talking about — if you don’t like what is being said on a blog, and you DON’T want to get flamed, just don’t go there, log in and comment.

    Personally, lately, I’ve tried to rise above the disagreements I have with just about every point made, every topic posted at C4P, and just glean the useful information from the many links posted (thanks!), and report them back here if they seem pertinent. I know I’ve been snarky sometimes, but I’m trying to grow those singed tail feathers out…so you won’t see me be snarky THERE.

    One more thing: You said on P.1 here “At C4P, our issue is not bashing Obama or drafting Palin for President – frankly, we don’t care what she does in the future. The issue is righting a wrong – the unjust smearing of a decent American woman who stepped up to get involved in government.”

    Dang. You could have fooled me. And I think you HAVE fooled a lot of your C4P followers.

  40. SMR says:

    Interesting interview on Bill Moyers last night with the creator of the Wire. He used to be a journalist in Baltimore, so has some interesting things to say about the devolution of newspapers. Since a lot of doogan’s frustration (and hatefulness?) allegedly stems from the internet blogger vs. newspaper reporter issue, I think it’s worth noting the perspective of a long-time reporter who does not share that bitterness. A relevant excerpt can be found at this link, and is worth reading, probably worth tracking down the interview in its entirety as well:

  41. Laurie says:

    @Canadian Neighbour…thank you for that explanation re; our hate laws. I am very proud and very grateful we have them.

    I believe in free speech….but not the kind that whips folks up into a frenzy dangerous enough that a person or a group of persons is in harms way. Like you…I giggled thinking what would happen to WAR if he tried his bull crap here. Ezra Levant is a Canadian version of the neocon…and he was charged under the hate crimes law. A powerful native canadian leader was also charged, for something he said regarding the holacaust.

    AKM…another great blog post.

  42. VidOmnia says:

    Michi, when did anyone ever threaten violence against someone at C4P? I would abhor and disavow that, and so would my co-bloggers. And we call ourselves barbarians because a lot of people seem to think that Palin supporters are a bunch of smelly uneducated rednecks. We don’t care what they think, so we’ll embrace that stereotype.

    We do go after businesses that allow slander and defamation against Palin family members, by supporting it with their advertising. Luckily, it seems to have worked, the ADN has finally cleaned up the worst stuff in their comment sections. I think anyone should be able to discuss anything about the Governor’s politics or policies, but the attacks on her family were abhorrent and beyond the pale of civilized behavior.

    Kajo, I understand what you’re saying but surely you don’t expect me to control what my commenters say. If you post an anti-Palin comment at a pro-Palin blog, you’re gonna get flamed. When I post pro-Palin comments here or at Shannyn’s blog, I get flamed. I don’t get worked up about it, it’s just a fact of life.

  43. KaJo says:

    And that goes for DailyKOS, too.

    Looking at it another way, why would I complain and moan about RedState or TownHall or FoxNews, either here OR at C4P?

  44. KaJo says:

    VidOmnia, one of the things that most amuses me about the lesser-known (and possibly lesser informed) commenters on “your” C4P blog is that when Celtic Diva sashays over there to drop a comment or two, or dispel a rumor, or correct a misinformation — someone always asks her to speak to something else that’s totally off topic for the reason she dropped by.

    I mean, why ask her about the price of tea in China, figuratively speaking? She’s an Alaskan commenting about Alaskan politics and social issues, not about international diplomacy or the federal budget or stimulus funding — except as it relates to Governor Palin’s expertise in the first, her stated opinions on the second, and her lengthy mulling-over the decision as to the third.

    And another thing, why complain to Mudflaters who briefly comment on C4P about this particular topic, “anonymous free speech”, about what HuffPo commenters say about Sarah Palin? What does THAT have to do with the price of tea in China?

    We’re here, you’re there, and if anyone has a complaint about HuffPo, I’d say, complain THERE.

  45. Michi says:

    AKM, I respectfully disagree with your defence of the right to the anonymity of the bloggers at C4P. If these bloggers were simply defending themselves against a right to free speech I would agree with you. But they do not. They use their shadowy selves to attack and expose people and bloggers who speak out against their icy queen. For instance if you read through their back posts you will see that they have exposed the business involvements etc of Palin detractors and they have even gone so far as to threaten violence against them. They liken themselves to barbarian hoards and I for one am not going to argue with them as they seem to have naively understood what it is they truly stand for.

  46. Bronislawa Blumschaefter says:

    Beautifully stated, Tree fitz. Be love, indeed.

    I agree with everything Lori says – anyone in the public eye, not because she was unwillingly thrust there by a random twist of fate, but because she CHOSE to be – needs to understand that if she doesn’t respond to questions and say what’s on her mind, people will become curious and the media will rush to fill the void. Palin went for weeks with a smug little smile on her pretty face, demurely refusing to grant interviews, THEN got mad at the media for trying to find out about her, THEN got mad at her own party for trying to create some kind of inoffensive persona for her.

  47. Tree Fitz says:

    Does anyone else wish that everyone was truly secure in their right to free speech and that no anonymity would ever be necessary because our society embodied the kind of principles that the Christian Son of God became human, as the Christian mythology goes, to help us get it right. The Christ said ‘be only love’. If everyone listened to others speech with loving equanimity, always accepting their right to say what they think and feel, and then, when making decisions that affect humans collectively, were able to integrate others feelings and thoughts on matters affecting the human commons without condemning those who disagree? This is what the gift of human life is about to me. The Christian mythology informs us that God gave us free will. We can choose at any moment to be only love. . . . . Or we can allow greed and fear to dominate us, because that is what we are doing. When someone, anyone, reacts negativity when another fellow being says “I think this”, they are being fear instead of love.

    I wish we were a more loving race, all the time. No more lack, no more war. Just humans all making the best lives they can for themselves and others.

    I know this sounds like sixties’ hippie stuff. It was also Jesus Christ’s message. I often wonder how many neo-cons and other conservatives, who so often present as good Christians, reconcile going to war and allowing some people to go without medical care or food, with their putative faith.

    Be love, that is what Jesus Christ taught.

  48. VidOmnia says:

    Sorry for not checking in earier (been busy with family and reading Mark Levin’s new book – #1 NYT bestseller, W00T). I’m impressed with the quality and thoughtful tone of the comments here.

    I do want to address an erroneous assertion that many people have made, that C4P “bans” commenters who don’t like Palin. This is flat-out wrong. Celtic Diva, for example, is a regular commenter on our site. Our only rule is that we don’t allow personal attacks, slander or defamation about other posters, Governor Palin or her family, or anyone else. Those comments get deleted. Anyone who parrots Andrew Sullivan’s Trig Truther claptrap is banned. (Though Google Blogger doesn’t allow us “ban” people, we just delete all their comments.)

    We reluctantly took the step of requiring commenters to get an ID after a long period of asking people to select names, which didn’t work out. When you have 10 or 15 commenters in a thread all using the name “anonymous” the conversation becomes impossible to follow.

  49. Lori says:

    I must agree with SameOld’s response to VidOmania’s post about unfair media scrutiny of Palin during the campaign.

    Palin was largely an unknown. For us lower 4’ers – raise your hand if you had ever heard of Sarah Palin before McCain announced he had chosen her as his running mate. I’m guessing there aren’t many hands raised. So Palin was announced, made a “put that in your pipe and smoke it” speech at the convention, and then refused to talk to the media. A vacuum was created. No one had any information on her and I’m guessing most people did what I did – turned to the Internet and started Googling.

    Weeks went by before the McCain campaing deigned to allow Palin to be interviewed. Does anybody remember the campaign’s comments about only letting her be interviewed if they were assurred that the interviewer would be “respectful?” Does anyone remember the campaign stating that they would allow her to be interviewed when they were damn good and ready and maybe it wouldn’t happen at all? This was VP nominee that no one knew anything about and had a running mate at the top of the ticket who was advanced in age and in poor health.

    When she was finally interviewed, Palin floundered badly. She was inarticulate and defensive. Blame the McCain campaign if you need to but if you do remember that Palin allowed herself to be controlled by them. Remember – she didn’t blink. She didn’t take the time to find out how she would be handled or, what her role would be. Or, maybe she did think to ask those questions and agreed to be handled in that way.

    If you believe Palin was treated unfairly by the press than you must also believe that she played a role in bringing it on herself.

  50. sauerkraut says:

    Amen to that, OCI.

    Funny how the palinistados forget about her secessionist tendencies. Death and glory, and all that.

  51. Sauerkraut said

    Most of us regular readers know what those things were (some still are) and I’ll not re-recite them here.

    Aw, why not. I’ll start:

    1. Todd’s membership in the Alaska Independence Party.

    2. Sarah’s video’ed welcome to their 2008 conference.

    3. Sarah being part of a campaign with slogan “Country First” when she’s palling around with secessionists who hate the US…and her husband officially was one for almost a decade.

    For some reason that third contradiction never seems to register with the Palinoids, particularly the ones who listen to everything John Ziegler tells them in some self-produced DVD.

    Funny how they love to claim we’re afraid of the gun-toting moose cooking lady, but they require she be treated with “deference” like she’s the demure little victorian lady with a bustle in a fainting room.

  52. crystalwolf aka caligrl says:

    Dr Chill,
    I see you battling it out with c4p 🙁 When they get tired of it you will be banned. Your not saying GINO is farting rainbows you are speaking the truth and they don’t like to hear truth about GINO.
    And I know you saw my post last night, before it was censored. I guess the c4p are reaching out and censoring everywhere it seems.
    I’m very sad about that. Very sad.

  53. sauerkraut says:

    44 VidOmnia Says: April 18th, 2009 at 1:23 AM

    I don’t think anyone can dispute that Palin was the target of more biased media attention than anyone in recent history. I’m all for putting Palin’s record under the microscope. But if you do that, you need to put her opponents’ records under the microscope as well in the interest of fairness.

    VidO’s comment, above, fails for a number of reasons:

    1) We can, and do dispute such an assertion. See, Bill Clinton Impeachment.

    2) Whenever someone complains and inserts “biased media attention,” then the red flag goes right up.

    3) The second sentence contradicts the end of the first sentence.

    4) If the focus is on Palin, then there is no need to compare against another person. She either stands on her own or not.

    5) There were many parts of Palin that were not covered by the MSM. Most of us regular readers know what those things were (some still are) and I’ll not re-recite them here.

    My opinion and I’m not changing it.

  54. Bronislawa Blumschaefter says:

    Since when does ANYBODY, pro, con or neo-con, have to be from Alaska in order to have an opinion about Sarah Palin? I don’t exactly consider those folks my kindred spirits, but they don’t, after all, call themself “Conservative Alaskans 4 Palin,” and the objection to the fact that they don’t sign their full names to every single post is some kind of idiotic new beef that’s being directed at a communication medium that evolved as it has precisely BECAUSE it gives people an opportunity to vent without having all the world showing up at their homes or places of business, looking to continue the discussion in real time, at the beefer’s convenience. They are not hiding “in the shadows;” they are blogging on the internet, and that’s how it’s always been done here.

  55. KaJo says:

    C4P is doing a much better job of moderating their own regulars who post there who comment in a most odious hateful way, much better than they used to. And far better than did a few months ago (which was the last time I read anything there).

    Speaking of Andrew Sullivan, recently he had a blog entry about the Levi/Trig picture, and that the whole Trig-gate issue may warrant further review — so one C4Per posted a really nasty death wish (on C4P) re: Sullivan. Someone else pointed out that the comment was inappropriate, so it was removed (but not before I saw it, and a lot of other people did).

    I used to read over there as much as I still do, but before, I also tilted at windmills — a fault of mine, I confess. I’ve stopped doing that over at C4P because it’s less tilting at windmills and more like putting your liberal finger in the right-wing-leaking dike.

  56. Tealwomin says:

    Say NO to Palin in Politics: thanks for the link, that made me cry – as a peace-time veteran, I find this way way past shamful. GiNO seem to makes sure that she gets every penny out of the state that she can…yet [again] she has her way. She’s UNqualified & more ppl are catching on to this fact…

    How does GiNo look @ herself in the mirrow…maybe there’s not a reflection, which would explain a hell of a lot!

  57. Canadian Neighbour says:

    WARNING: It’s long!! I’m not a ‘condensed’ writer!!! The brain wanders!

    When a person who chooses to hold a public office, it then allows for people to question, criticize, praise, any number of options, of that person or anyone in their employ, their position, their views, their issues. That person made the choice to serve in the public office. It may have required voting to solidify the person in that position, but it was their choice. Their public position has set them up with the ability to pass laws and programs that affect your lives and therefore they are subject to the criticism, accountability, etc. My thought has always been — Grow a set or get out!!! I find that the ones that are the most defensive are the ones that have the skeletons and are the worst at conducting the business for which they have been placed by vote in the position. I’ve done my fair share on political figures from local up the ladder to provincial heads here and government department management. Can’t type the names I’ve called them or your screen will explode!!

    For a comparison to outing a blogger — Was it necessary for the person at the Tea Party who on air called Obama a fascist or a socialist to identify themselves – No. It’s the same as those statements and lies that appear in the rag mags given by a ‘close family friend’. The sources protected by journalists/media. Books & movies have been made with the source never outed.

    The fact that I may live outside of AK and the US, is irrelevant in that it still remains that there is association between AK/US by way of the conducting of business by way of trade, by way of being the largest supplier to the US of oil/oil products, and of course, that ‘famous’ pipeline negotiated between AK and Canadian corporation/government. All these associations have some affect on my country, my laws, my life and therefore allow me a voice whether they like it or not. If Palin had succeeded in the election, there would have been even a more heightened ability of the conducting of business, governance across borderlines.

    As a Canadian, which I clearly identify in my name here, and noting in AKM’s writing above that 2 of the people from the C4P site are not from the US but from England, I have to state that neither I nor them are governed by your Constitition/Amendments. Your Constitition/Amendments are not ours. We have our own country laws i.e. Canadian hate crime laws inclusive of ‘sexual orientation’ (you’d be screwed WAR!) I respect your Constitution/Amendments, while I’m on the blog or of course visiting the US, but otherwise am not bound by it. I have to admit on many sites, the hateful responses and threats boggled me in that the site threatening a few weeks ago on a similar situation :), a call to police would have been legal here if it involved me, if only for a report to be made for any further ongoing threats.

    My visiting or not of those blogs is a personal choice I make. May disagree with them, but that’s their opinions. It’s like a TV show – I have a remote to turn show off. I don’t mind moderators on sites anywhere but I disagree with the control chosen that only allows for their view only and deletes any others. It’s those differing views that allows for healthy discussions to learn but we find outselves in a world that not everyone is as open minded to engage in same without the threats, hate, etc. Sad really.

    Ramras pushing the issue of disclosure of the identify of those bloggers — has no grounds to do so. Ramras must have picked up Doogan’s koolaid bottle. The more he lip flap, brings to light his insecurity in that his truth and more relevant, the lack thereof, is their usual downfall. Many on credible sites, as here, live in truth and will be their thorn.

    For those who don’t know some differences between Canada & US laws, your 2nd Amendment Constitution, allows for your right to bear arms. In Canada — that’s illegal. Try to cross the border into Canada with a gun. Celebs/people get stopped all the time. Unfortunately many stashing guns do get through in transport trucks, etc. In the UK, I believe it was only fairly recently (2003?) that police started to carry guns. Canadian cops do.

    In Canada, we have laws for hate crimes. WAR could easily have been charged on occasions. Some of the participants in the Tea Parties that appeared on TV on Wednesday could well have found themselves charged. There are a few TV/radio shows that could well issues here.

    For easy copying, I extracted this from Wiki:
    “Since 1966 the Canadian Criminal Code has included a penalty-enhancement provision for crimes “motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on racial group, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or any other similar factor.” The Code also “punishes anyone who advocates or promotes genocide, with genocide defined to require that acts be committed “with the intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group. Identifiable group in turn, is defined to mean any section of the public distinguished by skin color, racial group, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.” Section 319, adopting the same definition of identifiable group, punishes the incitement or expression of hatred against such a group.” Civil remedies are also available in Canada for discriminatory acts”

    An FYI issue not under your constitution/amendments/laws, but in the media at the moment, is the story of the airlines charging obese people for an additional seat. Here in Canada – that’s illegal. Obesity in Canada is a legal disability and therefore the airline has to provide the second seat if necessary.

    Okay I know as usual — I rambled — all over the place!! I do have to say as a person from the ‘outside the border’ and as I have been known to be blunt on this blog, that the reference ‘it’s my constitutional/amendment right to whatever’ (free speech, bear arms, etc.) said by so many in the US that is seen on so many news clips and the like, makes myself and I suspect others, laugh. It’s so over used, abused that it sounds at times more like a menu board than the importance for what they actually stand for. I am not saying that in the light of disrespect, but from the eyes of someone who sees from the ‘outside’

  58. sauerkraut says:

    btw – for those of you who believe c4pee does not censor, allow me to opine that forcing people to sign up for a google account instead of accepting open ID is tantamount to censorship by submission.

  59. sauerkraut says:

    AKM writes: “No matter how much we disagree with political speech, even if it is “false, scandalous or malicious writing,” if we value our constitution, and our own freedom of speech, we must embrace the entire concept of free speech, not just the speech we like.”

    To the extent the political speech is false and/or deliberately defamatory, I am going to disagree on the concept of embracing any such critter. Numerous court rulings agree with me. And keep in mind that there is “false, scandalous or malicious writing” which masquerades as political speech. I will never embrace that type of speech regardless of whether it targets Palin or Obama or anyone else. Yes, there is a grey line on some of this stuff but that’s not really the stuff of which I speak.

    As to people from the Lower 48 pasting their opinions about Palin all over the place, so what? If she wants to be on the national stage, then everyone in these 50 states has an affirmative obligation to pay attention. If, in the course of paying attention, certain people or groups of people come to certain conclusions and decide to voice opinions based on those conclusions (or even if not based on those conclusions), then those folks are entitled to voice their opinions. If Palin doesn’t want to hear those opinions then she need do only one thing: get out of the public arena.

    Let her get a job in the private sector and I’ll stop paying attention to her.

  60. BigLake says:

    @105 colibrimoon

    Absolutely; the difference between one who has class and one who never will.

  61. TBNTJudy says:

    @Rob in Ca:

    Agree completely with your comments. We need to remember that there are hateful, violent extremes on both the left and the right. Remember the Weather Underground?

    Personal attacks don’t serve any of us well, and as you mentioned, they tend to cause many to harden their convictions and become ever more polarized.

    After saying that, I admit that snark is sometimes fun, and I’m guilty of it myself. When I find too much of it here or anywhere else, I just scroll past to find the gems that await me.

  62. UK Lady says:

    @132 Say No to Palin in Politics

    Way beyond acceptable behaviour. I just posted on Shannyn’s blog that the Palinbots need to make another choice, this turkey ain’t gonna fly.

  63. This post is spot-on. As far as I am concerned, if speech does not cross the line into inciting violence or other illegal activities or being hate-speech, it’s all fine with me.

    I am smart enough to make my own judgments as the the veracity, accuracy and intelligence of a statement or series of statements without needing to know the name and zipcode of the blogger in question.

    On the question of visiting blogs with differing viewpoints, I do, and often. I think it is important to realize that there are other opinions and to try to understand the thinking (or lack thereof) behind those opinions.

    I do not comment at C4P, but I am interested in what they think is important enough to talk about. I am generally not impressed with their spin and they are certainly selective in the “facts” they choose to highlight. However, often what is left unsaid is as telling as what is said. I have, not surprisingly, occasionally found legitimate news that was “new to me” there. I would not have necessarily found it as soon (or at all) but for their rummaging in dark corners. If it is interesting enough, I will bring the information back here.

    If they post (and comment) pseudonomysly, so be it.

  64. nisperos says:

    The story of the watchdog blog at JBC Jax:

    Instead of anonymous bloggers in pyjamas, it was “beauty shop gossip” and the blogger was male…

  65. Basheert from Arizona says:

    say NO to Palin: I was hoping that would come up – I read it this am on Shannyn’s blog – the impact on soldiers in their 80’s and 90’s is appalling.

    Why DOES she do stuff like this?
    I’d like to believe she has staff who address issues with her – not sure though what they are doing.

    She is not proving very responsible to AK citizens. All she needs to do is sign.

  66. Basheert from Arizona says:

    My only experience with VidO was a scathing personal attack at me on Shannyn’s blog with the excuse being that “he was a vet” and my generation “spit on his father when he came back from ‘nam”. Without knowing anything about me – that was the response to a blog post.

    It truly is no fun posting on a blog that is simply a hero worship site. I believe the accomplishment of the AK blogs is educating the Lower 48 just who and what SP is and does with her office. Her travel dollars debacle with her family was the beginning for me. It appears as though she is always playing catchup and coverup for the things she does.

    Since she plans to try and get some type of nomination in 2012, all the information is relevant and so far, has been proven true. It will save much time during a future election when all information has been dug out, documented and discussed. I do not believe she is fit for office. And at this point, I have a real question as to whether she is mentally competent.

    This would affect our entire country. This information pertaining to her use of office is relevant and will possibly come into play. Everyone needs to know who and what she is, in order to decide for themselves if she is truly up to the task of a higher office.

  67. Say NO to Palin in Politics says:

    Okay, now I’m torked!!! Rediculous things like this is exactly what make Palin a POOR CRAPY politician, once again gang we now have to force or shame her into doing the right thing, ARG!

    Read Shannyn’s article and get the word out. Why does Palin do crap like this?

  68. sandra in oregon says:

    Basheert: Thank you for your response. The little kid in me sometimes wants to peer over the fence and make a face. I like your back yard.

  69. Basheert from Arizona says:

    lemonfair: I find it interesting that ADN is not aware of this. Surely people have let them know what is happening.
    Fair and balanced – this is a McClatchy enterprise. You may form an opinion as to whether or not it shows bias.
    They do appear to be reporting fairly accurately on the local news. Allowing a group of bloggers to take their political blog captive seems a bit out of tune – and distressing. It’s also unfair to individuals who post without realizing they are being deleted by bloggers separate from the ADN.
    I love Andrew Sullivan – he’s showing things people need to see but he definitely needs to warn people by linking rather than just showing.

  70. Rob in Ca says:

    I see plenty of hateful blog comments from the left and from the right. That is why this is one of my favorite blogs, because the moderation seems pretty much just right, and therefore this blog attracts and holds people who are civil. Disagreements still occur, and sometimes get a little heated…which is fine. Personal attacks are out.
    VidOmnia posts here now and then and while I disagree with many points, I appreciate the civility. If everyone here agrees with me, I am wasting my time here and learning nothing.
    It’s about ideas and arguments, not personalities. I think Sarah Palin is a poor Governor and an outrageously poor choice for VP…while at the same time having a personal magnetism that is unusual. That doesn’t mean I agree with the often personal attacks that I see. The stuff on whose child is whose is ridiculous, for example. That simply hardens the Sarah supporters.
    The lack of understanding of ethics in government, the use of her office for personal and vindictive attacks…those are things that speak directly to her fitness for office and she has not learned any lessons going back to being Mayor of Wasilla.
    So let’s keep the conversation going in this wonderful forum. I hope we will continue to hear some opposing views to keep this both interesting and informative. And AKM…my hat is off to you for finding the right balance for this blog while at the same time writing with such a unique and engaging style!

  71. lemonfair says:

    Snoskred – I take your point – especially agree with the futility and perhaps cowardice of complaining on site B about site A, instead of commenting on site A.
    Sorry you had trouble with Andrew Sullivan – I missed that image, thankfully. I originally found Mudflats through his blog, and although I sometimes disagree with him I appreciate the eclectic mix of his entries, and get introduced to some really good things I’d not be likely to find elsewhere.
    Martha – that’s really distressing to see that ADN is hiding comments from everybody but the commenter, intentionally tricking people into thinking their views are being aired. Did I get that right? Hard to believe. Throughout the campaign I thought they were fairly balanced in their news coverage of Palin – at least from the perspective of its being the hometown paper.

  72. Basheert from Arizona says:

    sandrainoregon: I agree however I also understand the reasons we differ. If you look at the individuals that are being supported, (and this isn’t just my view, our country has totally polarized) the bloggers that support individuals reflect the mindset and personality of the candidate or person being supported.

    In the case of Obama (and this is my opinion only), I am a liberal and I support his views. I find him intelligent and thoughtful – he is interested in science, ethics and (hopefully) peace and bringing people together. He gets with my views so I tend to go places where he is discussed positively. I also tend to want to converse with people who are not shrilly screaming at me in an effort to make me think their way.

    In the case of SP, her views are totally foreign to me. I try to understand but find her unexplainable. Her behavior is erratic and her views are unknown and change like the wind. I find myself disagreeing with her positions just on ethical lines. I also disagree with the tactics of C4P – they are very shrill in their views and don’t seem to allow anyone to post anything that is not in line with their mantra. That is their right on their blog.

    But rather than go to C4P to pick a fight, I find fun and humor here with people that in general, are in agreement that they prefer politicians with an intellect that is measurable.

    I agree C4P has their rights, and I have my right to choose to not visit them. Fighting really isn’t fun. And I learned a long time ago (something some C4Pers might think about), I will never change their minds or their views – but they will never change mine either. Stalemate.

    So I play in my own happy backyard.

  73. Say NO to Palin in Politics says:

    That’s our guy! Woot!

    New data out of the indispensable Gallup polling organization shows that President Obama’s average job approval during his first 90 days in office is 63 percent, the highest rating in its surveys during that critical time period in more than three decades.

    “Obama’s 63% quarterly average is well above the historical norm for all approval ratings, regardless of presidential quarter,” write Gallup’s Jeffrey Jones. “It ranks in the 74th percentile of all presidential quarters since 1945, and is significantly better than the 54% average rating for all presidential quarters.”

    How long can Obama’s honeymoon last? And how much can he get done before it ends?

    If you know the answer to those two questions, you likely know which side picks up seats in the 2010 midterm elections.”

  74. sandra in oregon says:

    I think many blogs are maintained for the self satisfaction of the people who dominate them. They are not trying to convince anyone to consider their viewpoint(s) when they attack dissent and call names. It often reminds me of the bully boys on a playground. (If you can yell louder and longer, you are right.)

    Often our concepts of “Freedom of Speech” are completely different. I do wish there were more conservative voices which were well modulated and responsive rather than reactive.

  75. The Rubber Room Hotel says:

    AKM again a great post.
    Because of the response by ADN to Doogans shenanigans, and the recent blocking of comments there. I no longer visit ADN or purchase there product, I also feel strongly about avoiding there advertisers. There are many other sources of news out there now.

    I have visited the c4pee site and always have a good laugh at there total lack of facts and the blind love of GINO. I don’t comment there because there is no point. But they have as much right to there opinions as I do to mine.

    I love the mudflats for many reasons but mostly it is common ground for me, a place to gather with people of the same general opinion as mine.
    I learn things here and even have had my mind changed on a subject or two by the well thought out posts and comments.

    As to the snark well snark is just plain old fun!

  76. nisperos says:

    Thanks AKM – brilliant as usual!

    Thanks too to grace (post 57) for this link:

    I wonder how many churches will be brought down for financial over-leveraging and ponzi schemes by administrative and pastoral staff (while those on top are receiving salary which is beyond what is comparable to their average member, not to mention a salary which would be inconsistent with scriptures which someone professes to believe in)?

    The scandal is NOT the anonymous blogger, rather it is the impingement on dissent, especially that which is presumably based on core beliefs. What this case illustrates is rampant domination, abuse of authority, and a cult of personality where it seems the rules don’t apply to certain people.

    Reminds me of the tactics of GINO…

  77. curiouser says:


    Another elected public official that doesn’t understand free speech/privacy…..shudders!

    Looks like a candidate’s position on free speech and privacy rights needs to become an election issue.

    I wonder how C4P defends Palin’s position on anonymous speech. And I am also confused by Meg Stapleton’s comments. Does SarahPAC not maintain control of where their links surface and why the specific concern for the C4P link to SarahPAC?

  78. AlaskaGuy says:

    @Aussie Blue Sky (#27)

    Hey! What are you trying to say?

  79. Lee says:

    AKM: Well done.
    SMR: Well done.
    Freedom of speech should apply to all, even them.

  80. Lunaluz says:

    I agree 100% with Chicago mom #96. I really like to try to get some understanding of the divisiveness between both wings. When I read how angry and bitter it gets, I wonder what good can come from it… what good comes from driving the wedge deeper and deeper between people… who is benefiting from this?
    I absolutely am fine with disagreement, as I have often said, It takes both wings for this republic to fly. Another fact I keep in mind.. whether we lean a little to the left or a little to the right, the vast majority of Americans are middle of the road. I also think the extremes from both sides do us a great disservice, the extemists scare away people from speaking out. AKM and anonymoose bloggers give people a forum and platform to voice their beliefs and thoughts.
    Oh and by the way.. I often think that the founding fathers are regularly spinning in their graves over the fact we have allowed the creation of a special class, politicians, that seem insulated from the majority of the people they represent. They have and acquire great power and do almost anything to keep that power in the hands of that chosen class. We pay the bills they reap the benefits of power and greed, somehow I don’t think it was intended to be that way.

  81. Lee says:

    TeleL: Your boss knows even if you are anonmously blogging. Those darn data trails just won’t go away. Just don’t spend to much time bloging or you will get a nasty surprise.

  82. Nickie B says:

    There are a lot of Alaskans I suspect like myself that read the ‘Flats but rarely post. I love this website and I don’t mind sharing it with peole Outside.

    I don’t bother with ADN either as they like to censor everyone leaving comments as well. Besides the ‘Flats writers are much more fun, so why bother with ADN for politics!

  83. TeleL says:

    Anonmously blogging is vital as we don’t want our bosses to know that we’re wasting company time by blogging on the job!

  84. GA Peach a/k/a Lance the Boil aka Crust Scramble says:

    @Basheert from Arizona

    Totally agree. I find that the more I push against something, the more it pushes back.

    People who are emotional thinkers not only don’t let the facts get in their way, they deny their existence.

  85. History repeats says:

    I think about the McCarthy era and how people’s lives and careers were destroyed. If blogs had been around at that time, people under attack would have known they were not alone and they could have created a safe network. Anonymous free speech is crucial to the health of our nation.

  86. Martha says:

    I found this on Andrew Halcros’ blog, and it lifted my heart to see a business person taking action. The ADN gets worse every day, removing postings that do not support Palin. The most articulate and factual are the first to go. I am personally boycotting the ADN and I am encouraging everyone else to do the same, until they allow free speech. Free speech is for everyone, everywhere.

    ADN cowers to Palin
    Submitted by AlaskanBrainDrain on Fri, 2009-04-17 13:07.
    It appears that the ADN has cowered and bowed to Palin by blocking hundreds of bloggers who were critical of Palin. You THINK your blog is on the news because you can see it BUT only you can see it, no one else. Palin wins the ADN hands down. She may have lost the AG appointment, the Senate Appointment, etc. but she has sent the ADN in a corner by their HUGE blockage of her critics. I was blocked and as a business owner, I stopped running my business ads. It put a hefty amount of money back in my pocket and I used work of mouth and other ways of promoting the business. ADN is shooting themselves in the foot with this cowering to the Palins. Yes, Palin’s thinking is disturbed, she has garnered the rest of the loonies to report “abuse” for any blogger on ADN who is critical of Palin. You get to a number of “abuse” and poof, you’re gone. Thank god for Andrew’s blog. ADN needs to acquire the same mustard as the legislators have gotten. Stand up, clear out and open up all the hundreds and hundreds of blocked accounts and start thinking this through a bit more

  87. pearl89 says:

    I go to C4P just to see what the other side has to say and how they say it. I do find their commentary totally slanted and biased. They often leave out important facts by omission. I have never commented because it’s not worth the aggravation to me. I am not going to change their mind and they certainly won’t change mine.

    I, too, am from NC and totally disagree witht the C4P perspective, but will support their right to express their opinions. It’s simple really, if you believe in the constitution and freedom of speech you cannot do otherwise.

    Suffice it to say, I am not a fan, but I do support their right believe as they will and to write and comment about it anonymously.

  88. katiebegood says:

    @ VidOmnia Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 1:23 AM
    “Do you think Joe Biden got the same level of scrutiny in the 2008 campaign as Palin? ”

    Yes I do. The problem for the right, with Biden, is that he has been a public figure for decades and is well known to the public. The right tried their hardest to find dirt on Biden (as they did with Obama) and the best they could come up with is some ridiculous plagiarism accusation.

    Sarah Palin was a complete unknown to most of the country. So, her vetting should have been expected by the right. The fact that they didn’t do their homework before picking her became apparent very quickly.

  89. #
    Alaskan Sisu Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 8:24 AM

    Technology has certainly been my friend in getting through these antics by our Governor since the day she took office. I just want all you folks out there to know that she did not change out of her persona after her failed VP nomination. Does Texas have such a group forming for Perry where they attack the bloggers of Texas like they do the Alaskans? I guess we can just add them to the other groups she has painted a target on with her public antics and double dared into the State of Alaska in record numbers. The technology tampering antics on the ADN put us Alaskan bloggers over the edge too, also. Get ready Texas. It takes adjusting to, like anything in life. P.S. I have an extremely hard time taking anything that comes out of Meg Stapleton’s mouth as fact so, also, too.

    This post should be in every page on the comments and blogs that dares to go to the root of the matter and the matter is about vindictive actions to score a point, is not about freedom of speech, it is just a tactic.

  90. UK Lady says:

    Say NO to Palin in Politics

    Thanks for the links at 97 and 98, made my day, still laughing my head off. May need to revisit the one on 98 in case I missed one of the double entendres 😆

  91. Basheert from Arizona says:

    I came to the “Flats last September like many of you. Since SP had been picked by MY Senator and questions were flying about her, the Flats certainly provided food for thought. At that time, it was obvious her election would affect the entire country, not just Alaska.
    The Flats is eclectic – it isn’t just about SP. It’s funny, we have Brian, and Brenda and that lovely lynx photograph. AK is humorous and a damn good writer (and yes I’m leaving the damn intact).
    I come here because it is friendly and fun, and we can disagree respectfully. We don’t have individuals who immediately delete anything we write that they don’t like to hear.
    Yes many of us are from the Lower 48 – but if SP runs in 2012, she becomes a problem for the entire country. And as good little citizens, and knowledge seekers, we want to see and learn as much as we can so we can form an opinion as to her suitabiity, qualifications, and general stability as well as her views.
    I totally agree with being able to blog anonymously – even C4P should have that protection. I do not go to C4P because they don’t seem to share The ‘Flats welcoming acceptance of alternate views.
    I grew up in the Pacific NW, and have been to Alaska many times and I love it. I live in Arizona where we have McInsane and Kyl – and I thought my political situation down here was crazy.
    Then I found you guys – I have laughed with you, cried with you, kept my fingers crossed with the W.A.R. vote with you – and I appreciate all of you.
    I suppose anonymity, I just find the way some of the C4P people use their delete and “report abuse” buttons.
    I also have chosen to avoid ADN because they do not appear to be in control and in fact, have obviously chosen to allow others to delete any comments they disagee with.
    It is our freedom to NOT go places that keeps us strong. Rather than go looking for a fight on a blog you disagree with, don’t waste your time.
    But C4P has a total right to remain anonymous. Even though I disagree with them, it is obvious that political blog strength depends upon ALL bloggers agreeing with the basic tenet that we can speak freely on our chosen blogs without being attacked or named or outed.
    The politicians must simply learn to work with the blog community. The newspapers will vanish – they are losing impact and being used as sounding board for PACs and rabid owners.
    C4P has all the rights we do and deserves the same respect we ask for.
    I draw the line with personal attacks of other bloggers though. We must play nice in this sandbox or they’ll try to close the park.
    Have a great weekend everyone!

  92. katiebegood says:

    2) Palin et al also make a huge mistake when they dismiss bloggers as “just people from out of state with no effect on Alaska.” ….First, unless they choose to disclose their location, “anonymous” bloggers may or may not be from Alaska.

    This is why I always wondered how they could say that most bloggers here are not from Alaska. The same way that Doogan said that most of his protest mail came from people outside Alaska, or even outside his district. How could he know that?

    I have a question. Does C4P allow posters that have an opposing opinion to post there? My experience with conservative blog sites is that they moderate them so that only supportive posts make it through, or they will ban you from the site if you post an opposing view. I signed up for an account at and posted “Conservatives often talk about freedom of speech and say that liberals are, for some reason, trying to censor them. But, if someone here posts an opposing point of view, their account is banned within the hour. Why the hypocrisy”. And guess what, my account was banned within the hour.

  93. Say NO to Palin in Politics says:

    hey, did I see Meg and Bill with Scarah in Indiana?

  94. colibrimoon says:

    @ BigLake regarding the dichotomy: I remember the blogging community debating President Obama’s comments and I also remember President Obama being confronted about his comments, the then candidate apologized for his poor choice of words and did the usual spin thing to smooth things over. Wayne Anthony Ross denied saying the words, being at Denny’s, and being a member of the group. There is a major difference to how each candidate responded to their separate but similar snafus.

  95. Alaskan Sisu says:

    Queen of Snark for Alaska 2009?

  96. Alaskan Sisu says:

    I can sincerely have a good belly laugh remembering some of the hilarious things blogged on this website through our long Alaskan winter. Here’s a HIP HIP HOOOORAY FOR having a venue that provides opportunities for learning, humor, release and whatever floats people’s boats. Snarc would be a cute name for a puppy.

  97. ChiCat says:

    Another excellent post, as usual. Free speech is a right to us all, and the right to remain anonymous is what protects us from people in power (not limited to gov’t, e.g. our employers have power over us…and our in-laws and neighbours can make life difficult too–lol) who may disagree with us. As long as no one is falsely yelling “Fire!” in a crowded theatre, it doesn’t matter who they are, what the name.

    Professor Geezer Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 8:24 AM
    Tangential thought:
    In defense of snark: snark is to 21st century rhetoric what wit once was, say, to 19th century rhetoric.
    I never thought about it that way, but I think you are right, Prof!

  98. Professor Geezer says:

    Tangential thought:
    In defense of snark: snark is to 21st century rhetoric what wit once was, say, to 19th century rhetoric.

    Many blogs are run on snark and this is why. They are popular, too. As the MSM and blogs become one, snark will remain as a component.

  99. Alaskan Sisu says:

    Technology has certainly been my friend in getting through these antics by our Governor since the day she took office. I just want all you folks out there to know that she did not change out of her persona after her failed VP nomination. Does Texas have such a group forming for Perry where they attack the bloggers of Texas like they do the Alaskans? I guess we can just add them to the other groups she has painted a target on with her public antics and double dared into the State of Alaska in record numbers. The technology tampering antics on the ADN put us Alaskan bloggers over the edge too, also. Get ready Texas. It takes adjusting to, like anything in life. P.S. I have an extremely hard time taking anything that comes out of Meg Stapleton’s mouth as fact so, also, too.

  100. Say NO to Palin in Politics says:

    Palintosis, problems in AK, lost popularity, GOP fringe figure,

  101. ChicagoMom says:

    I agree with oregonbird that there’s a big future battle brewing over the growing influence of bloggers. MSM is getting weaker by the day and those in power are not going to like the independence of bloggers.

    As for the wisdom of visiting sites we disagree with — I’ve visited C4P before, and again today, and while I disagree with them, I find it interesting to read their views and follow their logic. I think it’s important to listen to those I disagree with, and try to understand their thinking, and their values. I’m one who naturally tries to find middle ground, or at least understand what is bothering others. I believe in the importance of respectful disagreement. That’s what I love about AK Muckraker and this blog. If the internet were primarily for only connecting with like-minded communities, it wouldn’t be nearly as powerful as it is. The fact is, we exist in a world of unlike-minded communities, and need to live with each other under one united government, willing to address and balance the needs and rights of those diverse communities. The internet allows me to peek into the reasoning (and sometimes lack of reasoning!) of those I disagree with, and hopefully better counter their arguments or assuage their fears.

    For example, I have noticed, as others have said, that there seems to be a we-need-to-rescue-the-beautiful-damsel-in-distress note at C4P. To me, this means that it’s very important to keep criticism of Palin on a reasonable, calm level. Snarkiness only brings out the white knight, in these presumably male defenders, and I think, prevents them from hearing the legitimate argument. Besides, we have truth on our side, so we don’t need snarkiness, although I agree it feels good to vent!

  102. Ramras should have kept his mouth shut and began a recall effort. It Is warranted.

  103. C. Rock says:

    Brilliant Post AKM as usual .

  104. BigPete says:

    The Mouth that no longer roars

    Stapleton (like Doogan) is afflicted by nostalgia for the ‘good old days’-before the demise of newspapers and local t.v. news shows-when the topic of conversation could be more closely controlled by the mainstream media.

    It’s fitting that the new stewards of ‘the conversation’-anonymous as well as out of town bloggers-are discussing Stapleton’s frustrated whining rather than any talking points she might want to impose.

  105. GA Peach a/k/a Lance the Boil aka Crust Scramble says:

    nebraska mudflatter Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 7:48 AM

    Bravo AKM! Dignified and eloquent as usual. I only take one exception with the C4P response, and that is the continued reference to your site (and Celtic Diva’s) as “anti-Palin” sites. It is too bad that they only seem to read your posts relating to Palin, or her appointees. They are truly missing the heart of your site.
    They only have eyes for Palin.

  106. Say NO to Palin in Politics says:

    Big Slick, Martha,Lynn…….lol, thanks for the chuckles!!! you silly bloggers…..keep it comin.

    Oregonbird…….wow, some interesting things to ponder, eh!

    So many of you have voiced what I think better than I can this morning, lol, AKM, cosanostradamus, snoskred…….all of you! Blog on. Blog to the world.

  107. nebraska mudflatter says:

    Bravo AKM! Dignified and eloquent as usual. I only take one exception with the C4P response, and that is the continued reference to your site (and Celtic Diva’s) as “anti-Palin” sites. It is too bad that they only seem to read your posts relating to Palin, or her appointees. They are truly missing the heart of your site.

    I agree. It was actually Don Young that got me into this, but even so, I don’t think of myself as an anti-Don Young site. When writing on Alaska politics, it’s pretty difficult not to have a lot of commentary on Sarah Palin! 😉 There are many days when I wish she just wouldn’t do anything “comment worthy.” I prefer it when the blog reflects a mix of governor, congressional delegation, legislature, Stevens, Anchorage assembly, moose news, Corrupt Bastards Club, environmental issues, event coverage, national news and sometimes a little humor. Several of thos subjects (including national news) have had to take a back seat during the post Palin VP nominee era.

  108. Tealwomin says:

    cosanostradamus: loved your points, agree!
    gave me al good aff when I saw that Ol’ Dirty Bastard [aka Sweet Baby Jesus], was named.

  109. tigerwine says:

    Mae Lewis: Well said! In fact, for a while, lots of us thought AMK was male – so what?

  110. polarbear says:

    “I shall conclude this with my own Character, which (one would think) I should be best able to give. Know then, That I am an Enemy to Vice, and a Friend to Vertue. I am one of an extensive Charity, and a great Forgiver of private Injuries: A hearty Lover of the Clergy and all good Men, and a mortal Enemy to arbitrary Government & unlimited Power. I am naturally very jealous for the Rights and Liberties of my Country; & the least appearance of an Incroachment on those invaluable Priviledges, is apt to make my Blood boil exceedingly. I have likewise a natural Inclination to observe and reprove the Faults of others, at which I have an excellent Faculty. I speak this by Way of Warning to all such whose Offences shall come under my Cognizance, for I never intend to wrap my Talent in a Napkin. To be brief; I am courteous and affable, good-humour’d (unless I am first provok’d,) and handsome, and sometimes witty…”

    From Silence DoGood’s second letter (1722) long before the pen of Benjamin Franklin was detected in it. “Speech from the shadows” is an American tradition. Keep up the good work.

  111. MonaLisa IS MY NAME! says:

    The Logger came, and started cutting down the trees.

    The cows in the field nearby, seeing this, said to each other, “The Logger is cutting down the trees to make more fields so that more grass will grow! The Logger must love us and want us to thrive!”

    The birds in the trees nearby watched, too, as tree after tree fell. “The Logger is killing the trees and destroying our homes!” they chirped sadly in the quiet of the gloaming. “The Logger must hate us and want us gone!”

    But they each kept their own counsel.

    Six months later, the Forest Meadow Shopping Mall opened for business.

  112. watchingpaintdry says:

    Oh, the irony! Posting a picture of the Constitution – signed by 39 men who didn’t rely on anonimity.

    Hate to burst your irony bubble… Signer Benjamin Franklin wrote under many different pseudonyms. Signers Alexander Hamilton and James Madison were two of the three authors of The Federalist Papers, published collectively under the pseudonym “Publius.” So, yes. They did rely on anonymity to engage in political speech. And, the larger point is, even if they hadn’t, they defended the rights of those who did. They took the first amendment pretty seriously. AKM

  113. mae lewis says:

    When I read everyone’s comments, I am reminded of the fact that I don’t know who you are, either. Most of your tags don’t give away your actual identity. So, I can only judge by the content of your post. It makes for an intelligent discussion– ideas rather than who said it. That way, people are free to express themselves, and give serious thought to the exchange of ideas. The only people opposed to this line of reasoning are the ones who want to stifle free speech, regulate the media– don’t you remember the run-up to the war in Iraq? Anyone who offered contrary proof, a differing idea was labeled a traitor. Let’s hope that we’ve grown beyond that sad part of our history.

  114. GA Peach a/k/a Lance the Boil aka Crust Scramble says:

    If you don’t like the WAY C4P handles their site, don’t go there.

  115. MizzR says:

    Ripley, we all have our different approaches. I went first to C4P in defence of Celtic Diva and her decision to bring an ethics complaint against Sarah. Obviously, people disagreed with me, but at least I stated my case.

    You may think it’s not worth it; I think it’s worth it – we agree to disagree on this point.

  116. leenie17 says:

    I disagree with pretty much everything I’ve ever seen on c4p (on the rare occasions I’ve been curious enough to visit). I also have some serious issues with some of the practices they seem to promote, like organized efforts to censor opinions with which they disagree, like those on ADN.


    It seems that they have been placed in a position eerily similar to our own dear AKM that goes well beyond right or left, conservative or liberal. A politician has been called out for something they’ve done that a substantial number of people find wrong. Instead of defending their own actions, the politician attacks the bloggers in order to divert attention from their own misdeeds. Remember that old cliche? ‘The best defense is a good offense.’ Make enough noise about the messenger and perhaps most people will miss the message itself. Perhaps if the politicians were doing a better job and keeping their own houses a little cleaner, they wouldn’t have to worry about those darn pj-wearing, basement dwelling, anonymous bloggers!

  117. GA Peach a/k/a Lance the Boil aka Crust Scramble says:

    winkwinkWA Says:

    I don’t believe AKM has banned anyone for their comments on here, if we don’t agree with the trolls we move on and ignore them,not so on C4P, if they don’t agree with your opinion you are banned, so much for free speech!!!
    Actually, some particularly vile trolls have been thrown to the ‘flats.

    I’m against abortion, so I won’t have one.

    If you don’t like the C4P handles their site, don’t go there.

  118. winkwinkWA says:

    I don’t believe AKM has banned anyone for their comments on here, if we don’t agree with the trolls we move on and ignore them, not so on C4P, if they don’t agree with your opinion you are banned, so much for free speech!!!

    Actually, with those who repeatedly violate the comment guidelines, what I do is make it so that their comments automatically go to the spam filter. That way I can read before freeing them to the comments section. After the outing there were many “visitors” who were extremely inappropriate and were not here to foster any kind of discussion. So….while not “banned”, some posters are “moderated”. Just wanted to be clear on that. AKM

  119. GA Peach a/k/a Lance the Boil aka Crust Scramble says:

    Once again, AKM, you hit it out of the park. Thank you.

    I truly believe if the powers that be had been aware of the changes the internet would make in the dissemination of information, they would have done anything to shut it down. It has and is changing the world and I believe for the better. More and more we become community, and in a neighborhood it is harder to hold on to hate.

    Unfortunately, for some, i.e., Palin, Doogan and Ross, being ‘outed’ can be devastating to their version of the truth.

  120. debinOH says:

    I think we can all agree that those of us who come to this site do it because we believe that SP is NOT fit to become the POTUS or VPOTUS. I think we can all agree that the people going to pro-Palin sites believe that she IS fit. Let’s be honest there are scary people on both sides of the aisle. I don’t want my house burnt down, rocks thrown through my windows, etc. Therefore, I choose NOT to use my real name.

    There is also a HUGE difference between just blogging endlessly about SP without any evidence that she is unfit to lead our country. AKM isn’t just making stuff up. For example, the WAR issue. This man used his own words & mouth to scare the crap out of me. SP nominated this man which is evidence to me that she is either naive or nuts. The fact that he could he be considered a PUBLIC servant for ALL people is so disturbing on so many levels. Should AKM NOT bring this to our attention? What if it was your side – you have the right to do the same. Actually we need BOTH sides to bring CREDIBLE information to everyones attention because the MSM isn’t doing it.

    I will also state on record that the most horrible stuff I have read has been from the RR. I am not saying it is from the sites mentioned, but I think Obama is at more risk from being harmed than SP – that is for sure also too!

  121. MizzR says:

    Anonymous free speech is fundamental right, as confirmed time and time again by SCOTUS decisions. If it was good enough for Benjamin Franklin, it should be good enough for Doogan and Ramras, IMHO.

    I sometimes comment on this blog as well as C4P and Blue Oasis. I used to be a regular contributor to the ADN comments pages, but removed myself from their registration for a very simple reason. I believe politics influences the commentary in a way which stifles freedom of expression. Now, I know some will say the writers and editors for ADN, Daily Miner and Empire are just doing their jobs. But are they? Seems to me these days that bloggers – including the anonymous ones – are doing it for them. They will tell you there are legal reasons why they don’t allow the kind of open discourse you find on many blogs, but that argument simply doesn’t wash. Under the First Amendment, citizens are pretty much free to say whatever they like about politicians. Some of it is hurtful and untrue. But as we learned from the latest election cycle and others, the truth never hurts anyone except liars.

  122. Ripley on VACA in FL says:

    One of the most important tidbits of your blog, my Alaskan friend, is that you point out that once something has been thrown out there, discredited and left uncorrected, it becomes nullified, and all things attatched to it become same. We would all do well to keep this idea in place in our lives, too.

    I wil never visit C4P because the idea of trying to correct all the improper, wrong, fallacious and frankly inflammatory things would just be a waste of good time. And since I have been here on vacation, I ahve been trying to use my little bits of “free time” (read: “not at the beach”) to catch up on the proliferation of blogs here! Never mind reading someone else’s stuff, for which I have no willingness to do.

    Blog on, AKM. Remain above the fray and you shall always be free.

    Ok, off to the beach again!

  123. BigLake says:

    Two examples of free speech: (Not by bloggers, but certainly addressed by the blogosphere)

    One year ago (can you believe it?), Obama was raked over the coals for his comment regarding small-townspeople who cling to guns and religion in times of stress. Lots of reaction as to whether or not it was a ‘fair-game’ statement or just a private comment that got caught and released to the public.

    In 1991, Leah Burton sat near a meeting of DADS so that she could hear their plans for the legislative session. We all know what she overheard. And she put her name to an expose letter, knowing full well the wrath that would accompany it. Brave woman. And yet, how does her information differ from the Obama ‘fair-game’ information?

    It seems that Free Speech entails a certain dichotomy.

  124. Say NO to Palin in Politics says:

    Yep…….and that right to free speech gives Nick Tucker the chance to speak on behalf of the Natives publicly. Now we’ll see if the Gov. responds.

    Open letter to Governor Sarah Palin regarding the recent North Pacific Management Council Events
    By Nicholas C. Tucker, Sr.

    Please understand that this letter both a fact finding request and expectation of solid, honest answers. I would like it noted that we, in the 12 Northwest Arctic villages, 42 Interior villages, and the 57 Yukon-Kuskokwim villages deserve straightforward explanation to our Alaska’s motions and actions during the last North Pacific Fishery Management Council(NPFMC) meetings held in Anchorage.

  125. LED says:

    I firmly believe in anonymous free speech for all whatever there political persuasion. It is wrong for any elected official to say otherwise as they are sworn to up hold not only their state constitution but the constitution of the United States. I guess some of them missed that class.

    That said in many ways I think that this has come to a head with the help of Sarah Palin her self. She has had her own campaign against not just the MSM but sneeringly refered to pajama clad bloggers on many occasions. It is quite evident that she would love to shut all blogging down. Now other politicians have taken up her cry. Ironic ain’t it?

  126. Mike from Everett Wa says:

    I think we all have our right to privacy, whether we’re vocal with our criticisms or not. Just because I hail from the lower 48, doesn’t make my political opinion of something a Democrat or Republican does in your state (Or heck Hawaii or Some of the fringe territories like Guam) any more or less important.

    Public Political officials should examine the weather, so to speak. The political climate is quick to change on any given subject, an a good example of how its going to change is what people write.

    If the folks from C4P have their writes to post commentary on the workings of the political scene taken away, where does that leave the rest of us? Before I found mudflats I only had John Stewart to cling to for information. I couldn’t watch fox simply because I couldn’t agree with the tone of their “talking heads”, and CNN and msnbc were much the same way. It wasn’t that the news wasn’t important by any means.

    I was drawn to this blog because the news being reported was put in a light that I could endear myself to. I think that the folks who frequent C4P visit that site for much the same reason. While I often times don’t agree with the stuff on C4P, I think as a “Community” we should band together and defend our rights as commentators 🙂

    I’ll set aside my particular axe to grind an pick up this one along with c4p if it gets things accomplish 🙂 (Forgive me my punctuation abuse today I have enough OTC meds pumping through my blood to kill me stone dead(stupid plague)).

  127. lower 48 mudflats fan says:

    I just went back and read all the comments on the Cafferty article. Wow, check them out. If Palin is aimin’ for the Presidency, she sure has her work cut out. The only thing she could possibly do to overcome, or at least mitigate, the truly disgusted view most have of her is to keep her mouth shut and concentrate entirely on governing Alaska well, perhaps then acquiring some semblance of competence and gravitas. fortunately (for the nation, not Alaska, alas) those are the very two things that don’t interest her in the least.

    The lower 48 is overwhelmingly touched by the plight of Alaskans stuck with her in charge of their state’s well-being. Is there nothing you can do to recall her, or better yet impeach her? Ye gods, she’s shown enough incompetence.

  128. UK Lady says:

    45 lettersfromeurope Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 1:47 AM

    Lee323 @ 43

    Everything they said!!

  129. Edie says:

    ………back to just lurking zzzzzzzzzzz

  130. yukonbushgrma says:

    @ 65 Wolfe Tone Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 5:32 AM
    I read the the post (shown in its entirety at Progressive Alaska). I have a major disagreement about one point in Videmus Omnia essay:
    To characterize Mudflats as just an “Anti-Palin Blog” is like saying Bob Dylan is just another folk singer.
    Agree, Wolfe Tone.

  131. austintx says:

    Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.

  132. Wolfe Tone says:

    Doogan’s phobia about anonymity nothwithstanding, I firmly believe everyone has a right to express their opinion, even if I strongly disagree with them, or think that their thought process (if they have a thought process) is flawed in the extreme. So yes, even “they” have the right to express their views.

    I read the the post (shown in its entirety at Progressive Alaska). I have a major disagreement about one point in Videmus Omnia essay:

    To characterize Mudflats as just an “Anti-Palin Blog” is like saying Bob Dylan is just another folk singer.

  133. SameOld says:

    @ VidOmnia Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 1:23 AM
    “Do you think Joe Biden got the same level of scrutiny in the 2008 campaign as Palin? ”
    Biden has 30 years of political history, public discourse, public record. Palin refused to be interviewed except by tame interviewers and when she did, couldn’t answer. She never had a news conference, refused to reveal her medical status, obfuscated in her only debate, and treated her opponents with total disdain. No one knew who she was. We had the right to ask. We weren’t getting answers. It is rational to draw conclusions from the empirical evidence.

  134. Geneva FreeSpeech says:

    (waves) Hi C4P folks! As Evelyn Beatrice Hall said in describing Voltaire’s attitude toward free speech, I disapprove of what you say but I would defend to the death your right to say it. (I would add I don’t like a lot of what he said, either.)

    Glad we are all together on the importance of anonymous, public free speech. Of course my Representatives and Senators want my name–we have a legislator-constituent relationship. Blogging is another matter and must remain private.

  135. lower 48 mudflats fan says:

    Allow all to speak and be heard. My only confusion in that is when speech is used for firing up hatred and violence, but in a country of free speech, even this is allowed. Actions arising from the words, however, have consequences.

    A consequence of Palin’s campaign speeches inflaming hatred and fears is reflected now in the tea party fringes elements, uninformed, bigoted, frightened. In her they find a spokesperson, a voice. Anyone taking her lightly might look long and hard at that. Remember McCain’s only shining moment when he took the mike from an angry woman and said softly, “M’am, he’s not a Muslim”? The level of vitriol she had hiked exponentially in their crowds.

    And of course, not all speech is free. An article this morning, Palin featured:

  136. Diane says:

    You are right about free speech, where would we have been for the last 8 years?

    I’m sure that Sarah will not be checking where people live when she needs money for her ethics violations and her ’12 run for the Presidency.

  137. Tewise says:

    I agree with anonymity on this site and any other site. No one should have to the right to out anybody, because the same points that were made here for AKM are also the same for the other bloggers. As far as harassing goes if Mr. Ramras believes he is being harassed he has legal avenues to go why would he only want to name the bloggers and nothing else. VldOmi (sp) supported AKM the day he/she was outed and actually left it in the comment sections for us to read. VldOmi(sp) didn’t take a cheap shot at AKM then but just lent support because of the travesty of the act. Why are some of us not sticking to topic, this is about naming bloggers. Nothing else, nothing more.

  138. yukonbushgrma says:

    @ VidOmnia Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 1:23 AM
    “Do you think Joe Biden got the same level of scrutiny in the 2008 campaign as Palin? ”
    Biden didn’t have a 70-something-year-old, with a shaky medical history, as a running mate.

  139. yukonbushgrma says:

    @ Lee323:
    Yes, Phil’s 5 points were great!

  140. grace says:

    The exposing of an anonymous blogger, critical of a church’s pastor, happened in Florida recently, too, with the help of a sheriff’s detective & the state’s attorney’s office. Jonathan Turley wrote about it here.
    There seems to be a wave of people in positions of power who do not understand the concept of free speech.

  141. rebekkah says:

    I agree with the right to anonymous opinion. It’s like the older generation, in small towns, you see it everywhere, retirees, going to McDonald’s early every morning, having coffee, sharing the local, national news, they sit there pontificating on everything. Were an observer who overheard a remark by one of these elderly men/women offended, and were this observer to go to the local newspaper to broadcast this elder’s comment for all to hear, on top of naming the commenter, the community would be rightfully offended by the squealer.

    This newest expectation that bloggers should come out of the shadows, or even commenters is alike to sending spies to McDonald’s to listen to coffee-drinker’s comments and disclosing it to the public. Is that the next step? Pretty soon no one would be allowed to have an opinion, would be afraid to comment on the street corner with one’s neighbor. That to me is scary.

  142. michigander says:

    AKM – Thank you for this post. I love your style. You are one classy Blogger (o:

    Snoskred, I understand and agree with your comments here. And thank you and the other mods for all you do. No easy task, I know from experiance (o:

    I truly hope folks commenting here will respect and pay attention to AKM’s update.

  143. yukonbushgrma says:

    Yeppers, AKM … every right to anonymity.

    Ramras and Doogan should get together and write a book on exposing the anonymity of bloggers. Heh.

    I sincerely welcome our guests!

  144. Leota2 says:

    Bravo AKM! Never should we annihilate discourse of any kind. Nor should we seek to topple those with an opinion opposed to our own by “outing” to stop the flow of ideas. If other opinions bug us–don’t read it, but we should ALWAYS defend their right to keep making it.

  145. Greytdog Δ says:

    AKM: “There are many reasons to speak “from the shadows”. Sometimes people out in the sunshine don’t speak at all, and any loss of discourse is a loss to all of us. Free speech is a right extended to everyone, not simply those who have nothing to lose.”

    To which, may I add: It’s not a matter of “sunshine speech”, it’s a matter of fact that in our current society, the art of political-social-religious discourse too often degenerates into personal and oft-times threatening attacks, While the internet may indeed provide an identity shelter to anonymous bloggers, it is not a safe house. Identities can be rooted out and broadcast. If we who blog and write in comments on blogs are required to trade the right to privacy for the right of free speech, then any credence of democracy and civilized discourse is vanquished. Demanding that people step “from the shadows” in order to validate their opinion is, IMO, nothing more than fascism. The opinion stands on its own – to demand an identity is to seek to garner names for persecution. And that is unAmerican and more specifically, it is unacceptable rhetoric from a duly elected public official.

  146. Snoskred says:

    Lemonfair – there is quite a large difference between writing *about* someone or something that you disagree with, and visiting a site that you disagree with.

    By writing about someone or something you disagree with, it is possible that others will see your point of view, and perhaps agree with it. They might even change their mind.

    If there is a website on the internet which you completely disagree with, you do not have to visit it. I would not visit a site that was written by members of the KKK, for example. I don’t go to shock sites and sites that have autopsy images and dead bodies. I don’t believe those images should appear on the web, but I’m not in charge of the web, so all I can do is not visit sites like that.

    There may also be occasions where you agree with what is written, but you do not agree with the images that are posted. I stopped reading Andrew Sullivan after he posted an image of a childs head with no body which was taken during the recent Israel/Hamas situation. I do not agree with those kinds of images being posted without giving people a warning beforehand, and/or putting it behind a barrier so people have to choose to view it.

    I don’t like the fact that I had to stop reading his blog, because to be honest I really enjoyed it. However it was either that, or keep a bucket close by for the occasions when I was reading it, just in case. Frankly I do not enjoy throwing up, but maybe it is just me.

    If AKMuckraker suddenly lost her mind and chose to start posting images of that sort, I would have to stop reading this blog too.

    So I think you’re confusing the issue here.. 😉 I’m not saying people should not write about things they disagree with. I am saying if people read a blog they disagree with, they should not visit the comments section of a different blog and complain about what they saw on the blog they disagree with. I would suggest it would be better to disagree on the blog they disagree with but clearly some people do not feel comfortable with that.

    So rather than bring it to the comments section of a completely different blog, I would suggest not reading the blog. 😉 But that is just my opinion – which I am entitled to, and which is based on the fact that I read all the comments here not because I *want* to, but because I have committed to doing it to help AKM out.

  147. lemonfair says:

    Oh – and by ads I mean television and print ads during campaigns, not the ads that appear on blogs or websites. They are required to say who they are if they support a particular candidate.

  148. lemonfair says:

    Snoskred –

    I don’t quite follow your argument about not visiting sites if you disagree with the authors or commenters. After all, Mudflats spends much of its time disagreeing with Sarah Palin and other Alaska politicians. Neither AKM nor you needs to pay attention to Sarah Palin if you disagree with her.

    And while she’s an elected servant of the people and you could argue it’s your responsibility to follow what she’s doing, you’re assumption that anonymous bloggers who support Sarah Palin don’t have any connection to her might well be mistaken.

    If bloggers are to stay anonymous, what’s to keep government employees or campaigns from starting blogs? We know that the McCain campaign was encouraging its supporters to comment on liberal blogs, and at one campaign where I comment a lot we had a couple of (rare) conservative commenters with cogent arguments who would pop in now and then, and we wondered from content if they were professional Republicans.

    AKM’s point that bloggers should remain anonymous if they want to (which I agree with) raises the issue of why advertisers need to be out in the open (which I also agree with, but see as a bit of a contradiction).

    I’d appreciate your thoughts on this.

  149. dowl says:

    It is important that the Mudflats, AKM’s blog, defends the right of anonymity in political discourse. I appreciate AKM’s integrity and well-thought out engaging way with words. I have never been to Conservatives for Palin. I do periodically check out other Alaskan bloggers listed on this blogroll. I appreciate having questions raised, links provided, and the real civil discourse provided among ‘flatters.

    When I visit here, I trust what I read because I read and critically consider other sources that lead me back here. I do not comment a lot, I do visit the forum, and I appreciate the dedicated work of the Mudflats admin people.

    For me, it is important that local AK bloggers can better articulate what they see, feel, hear, and believe. Again, I appreciate local perspectives on local reflections about AK politics. AKM’s perspective is important to me solely because Ms. Palin appears to continue her quest for the White House.

    Write on AKM!

  150. oregonbird says:

    Did I mention that the other group dedicated to outting us would be politicians — you know, the ones with the abilities to finesse amendment rights, who prefer to enter the courtroom through the judges’ chambers?

    What do you suppose they’ll get up to, once they decide bloggers, as a whole, talk too much?

  151. oregonbird says:

    Get ready to protect that right, and line up some attorneys. We have legitimate cause for concern — and fear — over being outted as voices. That alone would brand us, but it will go further. Our jobs, our families, our lives will be threatened by political and corporate “personalities” — because those are VERY good threats.

    There will be blogs set up simply to out bloggers, and the monies spent on investigation will be difficult to trace. Our children’s schools will be identified, our work addresses and relatives’ phone numbers will be revealed, and slanders will be written — and those writings will truly be anonymous… untraceable. How deep are your pockets? How much protection can you truly supply?

    Very soon, bloggers will become targets — not in this slapdash, public personality got pissed off way, but as a dedicated means of retaliation. Murdoch thinks we, as a group, have decimated his powerbase and fortune. He’s not about to acknowledge that he missed the hard left into the 21st century — and neither are any of the other media corporations. An entire industry going down in flames… with quite enough money left over to do a lot of damage on the way down.

    On Countdown tonight — last night — I heard a commentator note that Palin’s chances at a presidential run would depend on her performance in the lower 48, because the news media wouldn’t be sending reporters and crews such great distances. Therefore, most Americans would be unaware of what was going on in Palin’s own administration. A forward-thinking, liberal show and a normally intelligent speaker — who still, STILL buys into the absolutely antediluvian idea that information is available only through selected, MSM venues.

    In a year or two, just how much damage bloggers have done, and will continue to do, to the capital of those organizations, is going to cause one hell of a backlash.

    That’s when there’s going to be a great purge. That may or may not be when bloggers band together, put together enough money to buy their own dream team of attorneys, and protect their precious anonymity. To protect their jobs, their families, and their rights.

    Of course, that’s just the Black Irish in me; although my gran always claimed we had a ‘touch of the sight’. For forty years, my mom and uncle sat up late at night, drank, smoked and traded their convictions that the Chinese would one day own the world and that Catholism would disappear back and forth like baseball cards. But what did they know?

  152. So we can lay the eternal argument that out of staters are not allowed to comment to rest for good, seeing who is writing C4P and we can also put the argument about anonimity to rest. What we cannot put to rest is that discussion has to be allowed even if highly critical and anonymous.

    So if the C4P visitors are on for tit for tat: How can they expect a Governor, who has slandered our President, not to come under heavy scrutiny? How can they expect a Governor, who was tagged for VP, not to come under heavy scrutiny for lack of competence and increasingly obvious double standards. Palin receiving more attention was the point of her nomination for Republicans and if it backfired, because of her lack of education and knowledge and sensistivity who is to blame, but those who chose to promote her without vetting her and her own mistaken confidence in her inflated image of self-importance.

    Don´t continue to defend her for the sake of the Republican party. It was a mistake. That is all. Start admitting it! You will be relieved. Start vetting for someone sensible, educated, efficient and gee if it has to be Republican. But stop wasting your time on the undeserving. The media might seem biased to you, because a lot of it is negative, but what if it is so negative because she is making a mess of her job? Then it is not biased. Just consider the possibility!

    You will find some former Palin supporters on here, who have seen the light, accepted the loss and dissappointment and will make sure to turn this sad experience into something better. They start by not being fooled anymore.

  153. VidOmnia says:


    I don’t think anyone can dispute that Palin was the target of more biased media attention than anyone in recent history. I’m all for putting Palin’s record under the microscope. But if you do that, you need to put her opponents’ records under the microscope as well in the interest of fairness.

    Do you think Joe Biden got the same level of scrutiny in the 2008 campaign as Palin? How often did you hear about his comment on FDR on TV in 1929, for example? Or the stories he told in the VP debate about a mythical Franco-American force that drove Hezbollah out of Lebanon?

    At C4P, our issue is not bashing Obama or drafting Palin for President – frankly, we don’t care what she does in the future. The issue is righting a wrong – the unjust smearing of a decent American woman who stepped up to get involved in government.

  154. Lee323 says:

    Excellent post, AKM.

    Related thoughts to your subject:

    1) Palin and others who dismiss blogging sites as the “bastards of news” do so at their own peril….well, at least the peril of being behind the curve on what’s really going on in the trenches. Blogging has become the “trenches” or the true finger on the pulse of the community. Phil Munger in his “Progressive Alaska” blog highlights this point with an example in his post “Five Things I Learned from the WAR Battle.” Excerpt:

    “Many elements contributed to the rather astonishing 35 to 23 vote against a man the Anchorage Daily News, mere hours before the vote, predicted would win it. Although three Alaska web-based news and opinion outlets – The Alaska Report, Just a Girl from Homer and Progressive Alaska – had predicted Ross’ defeat as early a late Saturday, April 11th, Alaska’s journal of record not only failed to lead the way in breaking the information that helped damn Ross and Palin, their editors wrote Thursday morning that “Alaska is about to get an attorney general named Wayne Anthony Ross.”

    2) Palin et al also make a huge mistake when they dismiss bloggers as “just people from out of state with no effect on Alaska.” ….First, unless they choose to disclose their location, “anonymous” bloggers may or may not be from Alaska. Second, anonymous bloggers discuss and share information that can affect voting decisions of Alaskan voters. Third, many more “lurkers”, whether in-state or not, peruse the comments and discussion even if they don’t post themselves….constituting a larger volume of reader exposure than expected if just looking at the number of comments.

    3) As far as C4P and others…..I heartily agree that they have as much right to free speech as anyone….. BUT they don’t have the right to abuse a FLAWED system such as ADN has set up that allows them to block any anti-Palin comments even if the comments are within the bounds of site policy. Sorry, blocking other posters is not just “speaking from the shadows,” it’s a form of manipulation to effectively muzzle dissenting viewpoints….. a “tyranny” of it’s own kind, actually.

    SInce we’re talking about conservative blogs, there’s one question that I have that has never been adequately answered by Palin fans:

    If Palin is perceived by her fans as so capable, intelligent, experienced, and “pit-bull” tough,… why are they compelled to make so many excuses and defensive arguments for her? She blames. They blame. It’s everyone else’s fault for all her problems. What is this “damsel in distress” mentality? Does anyone in their right mind really want a distressed damsel ( or distressed yeoman) to run anything, least of all the country? This aura of constant hovering protectiveness by palinbots is exceedingly unflattering to the image of a so-called “leader.”

  155. Snoskred says:

    I should also add – I have stopped visiting the Anchorage Daily News too – I tend to believe that if a site supports something I do not agree with, I should not support that site with my traffic.

    From what I know about internet advertising, some ads are paid by impressions – that is just someone visiting the site. That could mean that by visiting the ADN, you are actually paying them money.

    I use adblock plus on my firefox, which generally means ads do not load – so if I wanted to go there and read an article I could. But after Sheila The Ear, why would I want to go there? The fact is, the independent bloggers are doing a better job of the news these days, anyway.

  156. Snoskred says:

    I have to say this.

    I read virtually all the comments here, every day. AKMuckraker, Charcoal Sniper P and I share the comment moderation duties.

    Recently, I have seen more and more people saying things about posts on c4p, or what is being said on Team Sarah – and a lot of these comments tend to be generally complaining about what has been said on those other sites.

    Newsflash. If you do not like what another website is saying, you have the ultimate power. You can choose not to go there.

    People who do not like The Mudflats are not being forced to read it by anyone holding a gun to their head. Nobody is being forced to read what is being said at other sites with opinions that you might not agree with. You can click on the little red cross in the top corner of the screen, and leave the site.

    I often read sites with opposite viewpoints to mine, and I try and take away any nuggets of information that I find useful. I try not to judge a site based on whether it is right or left or in between. I certainly would not go to the comments section of another blog (eg the mudflats) and complain about what is written on a different blog (eg c4p).

    They are entitled to their opinion – and their anonymity. They are entitled to say things I disagree with at the top of their lungs while standing right next to me. If they do that, I can walk away – just as I can choose not to read their site.

    I would ask others to seriously consider – do you need to visit a site which makes you want to post here in the comments section about it? If no, then don’t go. 😉

    No offense meant to anyone, I am just saying.. 🙂

  157. VidOmnia says:


    What personal harassment are you talking about?

    And I’ve done my best to answer graciously over at C4P. I’ll point out that I’ve supported AKM in her fight against Doogan from the very beginning.

  158. califpat says:

    Cosanostradamus: I totally agree. You hit the nail on the intolerant head.

    Lynnrockets: You are not only talented, you have a marvelous sense of humor. I love it!!

  159. Physicsmom says:

    AKM – what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. That’s the difference between us and them; we’ll defend their right to speak even as they try to deny us ours. Great post once again.

  160. SameOld says:

    cosanostradamus, I agree with you completely.

    The C4P folks can make any speech they wish. When they cross the line into personal harrassment, it’s time to get legal with them. Their server has to deal with it then because i am sure there are limits to behaviors in their contract. There is a major difference between embarassing someone for their public lies or public behaviors and outright harassing them as individuals.

  161. iac says:

    You have misrepresented the C4P bloggers in your comments, and certainly do them a great disservice to accuse them of seeking to destroy and to censor. As AKM acknowledges in her post, they call people like Ramras on their hypocrisy; they also criticize those who direct personal attack and hate speech at the Palin family. A great deal of effort is made by all the C4P contributors to research and to provide evidence to support argument. Political differences aside for the moment, it is clear that the most significant aspect of Mudflats is that the main blogger is a talented writer, and so are a number of her counterparts at C4P – not least Mansour herself.

  162. crystalwolf aka caligrl says:

    cosanostradamus Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 12:01 AM
    I certainly agree with all you said!

  163. SameOld says:


    This is definitely my fav!

  164. .
    In the early days of my exploration of the Internets, I posted things in various places under my “real” name. I quickly discovered how far into your “real” life creepy people on the ‘Net can reach. Since then, I only post using my nick.

    It’s my nick, I invented it, at least I thought I did. Anyway, it’s the only one I ever use, unlike many creepy right-tard trolls. Cosanostradamus is who I am on the Web. I never post anonymously; anybody who wants to argue with me is welcome to do so on my blog, if they do so in a civilized manner and use the same nick all the time.

    Idiots will say “Well what have you got to hide???!!!” They’re the very same idiots who don’t mind government surveillance of innocent American citizens, personal data-gathering by commercial entities for unauthorized use or sale, and video cameras covering every square inch of exterior & accessible interior space in the world. I ask them if they have doors on their house, or curtains, or if they wear clothes. WHY???!!! What have they got to HIDE???!!!

    Here’s the thing: Some things are private. Just for us and those we choose to share them with. Like, our whole lives; unless we choose to become celebrities. It’s a matter of simple human dignity, and personal security. But that doesn’t mean we don’t have a right to participate in the public discourse, or to protect our homes, businesses, friends and families while participating in public discourse. Anyone who doesn’t understand and appreciate this is either extremely stupid, or just extreme. Or both.

    The thing is, a right-wing psycho can go around loudly threatening the President, advocating the violent overthrow of the US government, and inciting hatred and criminal acts all his or her miserable life, harassing people he or she disagrees with politically, and only rarely will anything be done about it. If a reasonable left-of-center type speaks out peaceably against war or nuclear power or racism or homophobia, he or she may lose his or her job, get evicted from their home, have their credit ruined, be dragged into court for sheer harassment, be imprisoned and even killed just for advocating peaceful solutions to common problems, even within the existing system. History tells us that if you’re going to stand up for what is right in this country, you are at risk. And that’s bloody uncivilized. And I do mean bloody.

    The Right is by definition violent and intolerant, and refuses to recognize the rights and the humanity of those with whom they disagree. Anyone on the Left who doesn’t fear them is crazy. They don’t just throw epithets, they bomb churches and medical clinics. They turn dogs loose on people and lynch them. They think rape and torture are funny. As long as we have to deal with such mentally ill people, we have to take steps to ensure the safety of our home and family. The use of a nom-de-plume is not only a reasonable precaution, it has a long and respected tradition, from Voltaire to Twain to Dylan to Ol’ Dirty Bastard. It allows people to speak freely even in an oppressive atmosphere. Until we can educate or eliminate the worst elements of the far Right, aliases are a right and a necessity on the World Wide Web.

    I would include the right-tards in this. Unlike them, I would defend to the death the right of any man or woman to speak out, even if their words are unpopular, and especially if I disagree with them, under whatever name they choose.

  165. Far from Fenway fan says:

    Mudflats and C4P are both protected under the First Amendment and therein lies all similarity. Mudflats is a polished, reasoned, intelligent commentary on the currents events and state of affairs in Alaska. C4P is a name-calling, muckraking, throw-it-and-see-if-it-sticks rag. I went, I read, I returned.

  166. crystalwolf aka caligrl says:

    I ♥ lynnrockets 🙂

  167. lynnrockets says:

    (Sung to the Procol Harum song “A Whiter Shade of Pale”)

    She drives a Dodge Durango,
    Lipstick covers her cold-sore.
    Bristol and Levi on the tube,
    Starts the Palin-Johnston War.
    Todd’s sister was arrested,
    As was Sherry Johnston too.
    There was the “Arctic Cat” fiasco,
    Now Wayne Ross must bid adieu.

    She sure was no debater,
    She hates the Beluga Whales,
    She kills wolves and slaughters turkeys,
    Has a future like Dan Quayle’s.

    Said “No” to Stimulus Funds,
    And no bailout for the banks,
    But she took the money just the same,
    More “Thanks But No Thanks.”
    All of these things happened lately,
    Well after election day.
    Political future wasted,
    Like undeclared “per diem” pay.

    And so it’s all over now,
    Family members makin’ bail,
    Sarah Palin’s just a punchline
    To a joke in your e-mail.

  168. Aussie Blue Sky says:

    An Englishman?

    Color me surprised. Not! 😀

  169. Impeach_Palin says:

    Sarah Palin fires up the base

  170. crystalwolf aka caligrl says:

    Phil wrote this on his blog tonight: I think the turning point for me happened nine days ago, when it appeared people affiliated with TeamSarah, Conservatives4Palin and SarahPac might be willing to try to destroy the Burton family. That got me to spend several hours going through old Wayne Anthony Ross op-eds, looking for information that might help Leah Burton and her father, ex-Public Safety Commissioner, Dick Burton.
    I have seen them call her a “anti-christian” so-in so!
    Although they have the right to blog and free speech they deny it to anyone who doesn’t write “Gino’s farting rainbows” (thanks Jen, from IM)
    They have called us names here said we were responsible for, oh yeah a fire in wasilla “its probably one of those mudflats people”.
    So where does blogging draw the line? AKM,Palingates, IM, Phil, Shannyn all back up with links what they write.
    I don’t care where they live, but when they start hounding people for telling the truth about the queen that THEY don’t want to hear, its censorship and WRONG! JMO.

  171. BooBooBear says:

    Wish the Anchorage Daily News had your same thinking. The way they have handled their blogs is terrible. I did notice tonight it looks like they ahve taken their “report abuse” button off. hmmmmmm……..

  172. asiangrrlMN says:

    I heartily agree, AKM. Good on you for sticking to your convictions. I didn’t like it when you were outed, and I certainly wouldn’t like it if the moderators/writers for C4P were outed, either. Let’s hope that cooler heads prevail on this issue.

    P.S. It doesn’t matter whether we agree with what they say or not. It doesn’t matter if we think they are stupid, brilliant, or somewhere in between. We rallied around AKM’s right to use a pseudonym, and many of us do as well. We can’t have a double standard for other blogs, even if, no, make that especially if we disagree with them.

  173. nswfm CA says:

    So it looks like my tree carved with a heart around it might not be so far off after all.

  174. nswfm CA says:

    OK, Mansour should know. I read the article and not the comments, but if the article is wrong the N-M should fix it. It makes the paper look like they do shoddy reporting.

    Nope, I was the shoddy one. Someone else on C4P gave their name, and commented on the article and I assumed it was the same person. And you know what they say about assuming! 😉 AKM

  175. woodstove says:

    These stupid peasants, who, throughout the world, hold potentates on their thrones, make statesmen illustrious, provide generals with lasting victories, all with ignorance, indifference, or half-witted hatred, moving the world with the strength of their arms, and getting their heads knocked together in the name of God, the King or the stock exchange—-immortal, hopeless, dreaming asses, who surrender their reason to a shining puppet, and persuade some toy to carry their lives in his purse….Stephan Crane…….Too bad God made breeding so easy to figure out, otherwise there would be no Conservatives4Palin.

  176. OmegaMom says:

    Good on ya, AKM. I agree.

  177. DrChill says:

    Its worthwhile to note that one of the moderators on conservatives for palin was supportive about AKMs right to blog anonymously. Its nice to see AKM return the favor.
    Group hug.
    If “Attacking from the shadows” is about getting food to rural Alaska, protecting wildlife and the environment, upholding the law, attentive governance, exposing political shenanigans, promoting progressive politics and featuring Brenda, then I want more!

  178. InJuneau says:

    OK, Martha UYS, you’re funny too!

  179. InJuneau says:

    Oh, Big Slick, you’re funny!

    And, AKM, you’re right (well, not “right-right” but “left-right”)!

  180. Martha Unalaska Yard Sign says:

    Put your AG in, put your AG out…
    Put your AG in and we’ll shake him all about!
    You do the hokey pokey while we turn him inside out,
    That’s how we dumped the lout..!


  181. BigSlick says:

    Put your Right blog in, put your Left blog in, ya do the hokey pokey and ya shake it all about…

    Way to go AKM, I am proud of you for the integrity of this post.

  182. Martha Unalaska Yard Sign says:

    I don’t agree with ANYTHING I’ve read there, but they are quite entertaining. And they certainly have the right to blog and comment.

    Being NASTY and MEAN en masse via email and on line media commenting campaigns is beyond strange, though, and I do have a problem with that – no matter where the group originates.

  183. CA dreamin of AK says:

    Absolutely. We all have the right to join the discourse. And we have the right to remain anonymous. Some of us have to be.

  184. Nan says:

    You just said it all, and said it perfectly. Thanks for a spot on post.


  185. nswfm CA says:

    Mansour is female from the Fairbanks article.

    You are correct. I fixed it. Got confused with someone else… AKM

  186. Moose Pucky says:

    “Even those of us who live here find it challenging sometimes.””

    Well, that’s putting it mildly. Alaskans are tough!

    A Nana Moose, also.

  187. nswfm CA says:

    Well done. And thanks to those from this corner who go there, read and report back. Thanks for taking one for the Mudflats team.

    C4P still sounds like guy who has a crush on her and carved his initials on a tree, but maybe that’s just me…I keep expecting for a heart to be scratched around the name.

  188. mwThatOne.. says:

    Thanks for the education, AKM. As you may know, your opinion is valued, appreciated and needed…. sunshine, shadows, it’s all good.

  189. Enjay in Eastern MT says:

    I won’t agree with everything they say …
    but will defend their right to say it.

    Here Here to all anonyMOOSE Bloggers around the world.

  190. karen marie says:

    you hit it right out of the park, AKmuckraker!

    thank you very much.

  191. Corine56 says:


Leave A Comment