I just censored the comments of someone responding to my 1 September post on Homophobia. The correspondent and I had an earlier exchange during which I was referred to as ignorant. That's surely not a problem, because on many subjects, I am ignorant.
But the rebound exchange got to be outside the bounds of civil discourse, so I canned the comment. You get to do that kind of thing when it is your blog.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
Good for you!
I went back and read the chain of comments. His final comment to you was the textual equivalent of punching like a girl. "I brought it, you couldn't handle it!" Wooh! CW, you better watch out.
Darn... now I’m interested in what the comment was. Oh well...
On a different subject, after reading Woodward's most recent installment, I am puzzled by one of your blogs. Do you still believe Bush has been engaged and very bright? It seems more like he wasn't able to comprehend briefs/answers that differed with his pre-conceived answers, which frankly tend to line up pretty close to your own. Thus he keeps pushing until he achieves / gets / hears what he wants. His lack of intellectual curiosity and personal belief in his own instincts (gut) are largely the reason we are in the position we are today: large, growing and perhaps unmanageable debt; divided, strategically adrift, alienated from the populations of many of our traditional allies. His job was to ask what is next. Explain to me why that plan will succeed? What are the risks? Etc… He frankly failed – thus he is not bright in my eyes -- rather a bully that is about to lose his bully pulpit.
I fear that young CW has run aground in a sorta reverse polemic journal(ism) way. I caution master CW to read Lord Acton's dictum and then contemplate his navel.
What are your thoughts on censorship and on censoring this site,
As the owner of the blog, you exercise the right to invoke the "Shut the F*ck up" button. I firmly believe that the 2nd amendment does not apply in the blogosphere.
Thsntht--I invite your attention to the very first blog entry on this site, June 25. The rules of the blog are there, and my correspondent broke all of them. All four. That is, in the post I deleted.
As for Anon (here), I come away from these articles feeling even better about Bush. He was engaged, he was in charge, he was confident, he knew his role ("if I lose confidence, so will everyone else"). His detractors have tried for so long to convince us that he was a puppet of Cheney, and I never bought it. He ran the show. Lack of intellectual curiosity? I'm not sure I believe that. He sought out opinions OTHER than those of his "generals on the ground", and he got folks to tell him all was not lost...which dovetailed nicely with his own feelings.
Disagree with the policy, disagree with the execution; I have no problem with that. But just don't think of him as dumb, distant, not in charge, a puppet of his VP.
Post a Comment