BEIJING – President Barack Obama prodded China about Internet censorship and free speech, but the message was not widely heard in China where his words were blocked online and shown on only one regional television channel.

Irony? Serendipity? Coincidence? Or just plain pwned?

“I’m a big supporter of non-censorship,” Obama said. “I recognize that different countries have different traditions. I can tell you that in the United States, the fact that we have free Internet — or unrestricted Internet access — is a source of strength, and I think should be encouraged.”

Hmm, we’ll see how that non-censoring thing will work out as Democrats put together plans to take down Conservative talk radio. Oh, and then there was that little spat with Fox News, initiated by the White House.

Obama may have been hoping to set a personal example for China’s leaders when he said he believes that free discussion, including criticism that may be annoying to him, makes him “a better leader because it forces me to hear opinions that I don’t want to hear.”

Spat. Fox News. Fight with Limbaugh. Fight with Hannity. Joe the Plumber. Kevin Miller. Barbara West. Hiring Cass Sunstein, a man who is all about censoring the Internet.

Look, I applaud Obama’s cajones in answering the question in that manner as he stands on Chinese soil. Kudos to him, in all seriousness. But, considering his own opinions and actions here in the US, he really does not have the moral authority to lecture the Chinese.

Just for reference, Pirate’s Cove is banned in China, along with my test site. Not sure about Stop The ACLU or Right Wing News, since the site designed to tell you if your site is blocked has been taken down. Unsurprisingly, The Huffington Post is now unblocked in China, though, the Huff Post’s opinions are farther left then the Chinese governments. But, they have blocked I Can Has Cheeseburger! That’s just mean. See here and here for lists of some who have been blocked.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Get ready because I am going to slap George W. Bush around a little bit. Now, don’t get me wrong, it isn’t like I hated him. After all I voted for him twice. There was a lot that Bush did that I supported, mostly on the security and war fronts. But, I really stood against his domestic agenda almost completely. I was against no child’s behind left alone — er, I mean no child left behind — I was against the bailouts and against the drug benefit for seniors program. I disagreed with his “compassionate conservatism” narrative because it really was just an excuse for a little less big government than what the Democrats full-blown socialism would have been. About the only thing he wanted to do that I supported, the privatization of Social Security, he never pushed hard enough to implement.

With that in mind, George W. Bush made his first major appearance before the general public today in a speech announcing the George W. Bush Institute, a new public policy think tank to be housed in the Bush Presidential Library at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas.

Mr. Bush wants his new institute to foster free market policies, small government thinking, education, global health and “human freedom”… to which I have to ask, so where were you for eight years on these things Mr. Bush?

During his speech, Bush said that with the $700 billion bank bailout he implemented in the waning days of his presidency he “went against” his free-market instincts. He said it was one of the “most difficult” decisions of his presidency. I’d say he failed the test. Juxtaposing his bailouts with the free-market, small government policies that he wants his new institute to push causes one to raise an eyebrow, of course. How do past actions jive with his future policy ideals?

To be sure, Bush will have a lot to live down in this vein. Mr. Bush’s newly appointed executive director of the G.W. Bush Institute, James K. Glassman, recently found this out first hand in what one might have thought would have been a friendly environment for him.

Glassman appeared as a guest speaker at a breakfast meeting at the State Policy Network’s 17th Annual conference held earlier this month in Asheville, North Carolina. SPN is a sort of trade organization for conservative state policy think tanks. Glassman was there to speak on Internet freedom (as opposed to net neutrality) but after his address not one question was asked about his ideas on the Internet. Every question thrown his way had to do with the Bush’s bad decision on TARP and what the audience considered his bad drug benefit program and his disastrous education policies.

Glassman saw his subject overwhelmed by the distaste a conservative audience had for his boss’s policies. I think this will be a harbinger of things to come for the projects that the Bush Institute tries to implement, at least until people stop being so angry about his presidency.

Now, let’s be clear about a few things. The Bush administration was pretty good on free markets. His work with emerging markets like India and Colombia, not to mention long-time trade partners like Canada, Mexico, et all, was great. But his bank bailouts went completely against free market principles.

As to education, a real conservative would rather see policies that denudes the federal government of all powers in this area. With no child left behind, it was plain that Bush felt that the federal government had a legitimate and growing role in education.

Still, I hope that the new George W. Bush Institute is successful in fostering only the best, conservative ideas and policies and helps the country and the world move more toward self-reliance, the free-market, and the like. It remains to be seen if his new organization will do that. But we can hope.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

In a case that raises questions about online journalism and privacy rights, the U.S. Department of Justice sent a formal request to an independent news site ordering it to provide details of all reader visits on a certain day.

The grand jury subpoena also required the Philadelphia-based Indymedia.us Web site “not to disclose the existence of this request” unless authorized by the Justice Department, a gag order that presents an unusual quandary for any news organization.

Kristina Clair, a 34-year old Linux administrator living in Philadelphia who provides free server space for Indymedia.us, said she was shocked to receive the Justice Department’s subpoena. (The Independent Media Center is a left-of-center amalgamation of journalists and advocates that — according to their principles of unity and mission statement — work toward “promoting social and economic justice” and “social change.”)

The subpoena (PDF) from U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison in Indianapolis demanded “all IP traffic to and from www.indymedia.us” on June 25, 2008. It instructed Clair to “include IP addresses, times, and any other identifying information,” including e-mail addresses, physical addresses, registered accounts, and Indymedia readers’ Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, and so on.

Clair turned to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which dug into whether Big Government is supposed to be able to behave like this.

Under long-standing Justice Department guidelines, subpoenas to members of the news media are supposed to receive special treatment. One portion of the guidelines, for instance, says that “no subpoena may be issued to any member of the news media” without “the express authorization of the attorney general” — that would be current attorney general Eric Holder — and subpoenas should be “directed at material information regarding a limited subject matter.”

Still unclear is what criminal investigation U.S. Attorney Morrison was pursuing. Last Friday, a spokeswoman initially promised a response, but Morrison sent e-mail on Monday evening saying: “We have no comment.” The Justice Department in Washington, D.C. also declined to respond.

Kevin Bankston, a senior staff attorney at the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, replied to the Justice Department on behalf of his client in a February 2009 letter (PDF) outlining what he described as a series of problems with the subpoena, including that it was not personally served, that a judge-issued court order would be required for the full logs, and that Indymedia did not store logs in the first place.

Morrison replied in a one-sentence letter saying the subpoena had been withdrawn. Around the same time, according to the EFF, the group had a series of discussions with assistant U.S. attorneys in Morrison’s office who threatened Clair with possible prosecution for obstruction of justice if she disclosed the existence of the already-withdrawn subpoena…

For more info on this alarming example of applied Obamunist Transparency:

Bankston has written a longer description of the exchange of letters with the Justice Department, which he hopes will raise awareness of how others should respond to similar legal demands for Web logs, customer records, and compulsory silence. “Our fear is that this kind of bogus gag order is much more common than one would hope, considering they’re legally baseless,” Bankston says. “We’re telling this story in hopes that more providers will press back and go public when the government demands their silence.”

Hopefully liberals who believe in at least some of the fundamental principles of liberty that make America America, will awaken soon to the nature of what they have wrought by allowing the Moonbat Messiah and his gang of sleazy neo-Marxists into the White House.

On a tip from nancz. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

I guess we shouldn’t be surprised, but a Washington D.C. based Muslim named Khadeeja Nuur has created a FaceBook Page offering prayers for the recovery of Fort Hood murderer Dr. Nidal Malik Hasan.

The page seems to have been started sometime before Friday at 3PM and she features this main message in her information section:

Together we pray for the recovery of Dr. Nidal Malik Hasan, MD. May Allah see fit to return this loyal son of Islam back to perfect health. Sallalahu Alayhi Wa Sallam.

Initially, it appears that a few Muslims celebrating Hasan’s evil actions were leaving messages in hopes that Hasan gets well, agreeing with his actions, or at the very least justifying them.

A Graal Reborn, for instance, leaves the message that, “killing is bad I agree but being forced to do somethnig [sic] you don’t want to do and being the minority standing up to the majority is respectable no matter who you are.” And Alex Gould wrote, “I pray to Allah that he may recover soon.” Later a fellow going by the name Abu Soleiman Al-nase wrote, “nidal malik is a brave mujahid,,he did jihad ,,he did kill the killers (american soldiers) that was going to iraq and afganistan [sic] to fight the islamic nation…my greeting and pray for him,,we will never forget you brother nidal.”

For her part Khadeeja Nuur hoped that people wouldn’t condemn Hasan as President Obama has refused to do. “President Obama has been mindful enough to not condemn Dr. Hasan. So how dare you all do so,” she writes.

Of course, once many FaceBookers found out about the page it began to fill up with fury, outrage, and anger that Nuur would dare make such a page wishing the murderous Hasan well. She eventually pleaded for other to “please keep this discussion board civil.” She pleaded for “civility” several more times before giving up on that plaintive plea. One wonders how “civil” Hasan her idol was being as he gunned down helpless, unarmed soldiers and civilians at Fort Hood?

Nuur switched tracks by Saturday and began to ask for financial contributions to groups such as CAIR and the AAI.

As the Zionist media continue to portray Dr. Nidal Malik Hasan as a villain, it is vitally important, now more than ever, that we take a unified stand against Arab/Islamic defamation.

To that end, please consider giving, as generously as you are able, to these outstanding American-Arab/Islamic-interest organizations:

(Here she lists them and gives links which I refuse to do)

Still, it is a bit amusing to see that 95 percent of the messages posted on Nuur’s FaceBook well-wishing for the murderer Hasan are posts attack Hasan and Nuur for their jihadist hatemongering.

Perhaps if you are a member of FaceBook you might have a minute to give Khadeeja Nuur a nice welcoming message for her new FaceBook effort?

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

I have been missing from the site for several days and I’d like to explain why. I attended the State Policy Network 17th Annual conference in beautiful Ashville, North Carolina. Here is what I found:

Some final thoughts on the State Policy Network’s 17th Annual Conference.

It was invigorating to be able to share a conference with so many folks of like mind, a conservative, free market, liberty-minded mien. And with nearly 500 participants, the biggest conference they’ve yet had, it was something very worth attending if you are interested in furthering these sorts of policies among the various states.

But I have to say one thing that this conference proved and it is something that is, in the end, detrimental for the country. This was a 500 person conference where each participant spent no less than $1,000 to attend, many spent far more. There we saw free market think tanks from every state all trying to find ways to defeat the extreme Obama left. We have all this effort, all this money, all this time spent to defeat liberalism all in evidence at the conference. While that is good because it needs to be done, the sad thing is that it has to be done in the first place. The fact that this conference gets bigger every year and that more and more people from across the country have created state policy organizations to fight the un-American left is sad, when you get right down to it.

The left has become so pervasive, so detrimental to America’s economic, social, and military health that these 500 people who are representing many thousands more in their employ, who have invented their various organizations to save the livelihoods or many millions of Americans yearning for a return to America’s greatness, have been forced to take time out of their lives and money from their pockets to fight the left.

Many conservative groups are late to this game as the left has been doing this for many decades. But the fact that so many have come into being shows that the fight is not going ignored by the right. So, even as it is a shame that the fight has to be fought at all, it is heartening that it has been joined.

And lastly, this on the use of the Internet among these groups. In my discussions I found that some of these think tanks have good web presence, some are just feeling it out, and some have no web presence at all. But here is the worst part. Few of them really have a general public friendly out reach on line. As all of you who know me understand, I am all about putting current events and issues in reader friendly pieces of between 300 and 500 words length. Just enough for people to get the idea of what is going on and then links to sources for the reader to find more depth.

I wish that more of these think tanks and policy organizations had blogs that had short, easy to read, public friendly entries where people could get fired up about the important issues. Sure a 500 page white paper is a necessary thing and great to have but these sorts of things are only read by other think tankers and political wonks. Such long, dry, in depth research — much as it is needed — cannot appeal to the general public. And, whether these groups understand it or not, it is the general public, the voters, that they need on their side. Not just other policy wonks or mere politicians.

In any case, I know that all these organizations were in various stages of increasing their web presence, but they need to do it at light speed, not leisurely. I hope that they do get in gear.

My previous posts on the SPN2009 event:

SPN 2009 Conference: Final Day

State Policy Network Conference Update

The 17th Annual State Policy Network Conference

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Leader? Mheh. Never thought of myself as such. I just do what I do and well, if others follow my lead occasionally, then that’s great. On leadership qualities in general vis-à-vis the political blogosphere, I do believe that it helps, at least as far as a willingness to get out in front of an issue and let yourself be heard. It’s easy to fall in with the side you agree with once a consensus has developed, but a consensus will never develop unless somebody is willing to jump out and make a claim in the first place. And in that respect, other bloggers are far more active and deserving of credit than I. But yes, it’s important that somebody stakes out a claim. You don’t want an issue to become an issue after it’s become a non-issue.

Did you intend to become a leader, or did it come naturally? How much responsibility comes with this role, and how serious do you take the role?

I can certainly say that I never had any intentions in that direction. I didn’t even have an idea that it would grow like it did. Honestly, when I started I was just looking for a place to rant, somewhere to put down my unrestrained opinions, but I didn’t really expect anybody other than maybe a few wandering by to be even remotely interested. If anybody had suggested that the site would end up with a readership in the thousands, I would have laughed at them. So no, there was no ambition whatsoever involved in my creating a site. It was actually only because a few fellow commenters at another site suggested that I do so and I reluctantly had to admit that I liked the idea. And the rest is history. I guess it’s just the way I’m wired.

Responsibility? Well, if you DO acquire a readership that trusts you and your opinions, then you DO have a responsibility, in my opinion. Not just to yourself, after all you don’t want to make an ass of yourself and especially not when it turns out that somebody is “listening” (or reading, more accurately), but more importantly to the readers that have come to trust you and your honesty and integrity. Obviously, everybody should remain critical of anything they read, no matter who writes it, but it’s also a fact of life that, over time, you come to trust some people more than others and, as a result, you’re more likely to take what they say at face value because they’ve always been truthful and on the money in the past. Some might say that that’s not your “fault” if somebody trusts you “too much” and therefore accepts a half-assed statement of yours without doing the fact-checking, but I disagree. *Technically* you’re not responsible for somebody believing you too readily, but morally and ethically you are, if you ask me. I mean, if I were to put up a post leading to a massive protest against somebody innocent based on poorly vetted information on my part, then I sure as Hell would feel partly responsible. And deeply ashamed for having made an ass of myself and, more importantly, made an ass of people who have come to trust my judgment. So yes, that responsibility should lead you to be more careful with what you put up there. Of course, nobody’s perfect, I know I’m not, so every once in a while you’ll post with your foot in your mouth, so to speak, and that’s where it’s important that you come out and own it while accepting the justified criticism.

Bottom line: If you want people to trust you, then you’ve got to earn it and you’ve got to take that trust, when earned, seriously.

Of course, with MY readers, who are a highly skeptical bunch, bless ‘em all, I’m in no big danger of anybody taking anything I write too seriously without checking it first. I like it that way.

How has the blogosphere changed for the better since you first began? Do you consider yourself a pioneer?

The blogosphere was already there when I started. Only barely, which is why I consider myself one of the “Old Guard”, but it was there. I wouldn’t call myself a pioneer, though, even though I got in well before the pool turned into an ocean. Has it changed for the better? Yes and no. Yes because more speech is always a good thing. People need to put their opinions out there instead of keeping them to themselves where they don’t do anybody any good. Not to mention that a lot of people keep their opinions to themselves because they’re not sure that anybody, or enough somebodies, feel the same way. That’s not true, as I learned myself. I honestly never dreamed that there were that many pissed off people who were sick and tired of being “politically correct” out there, people who believe, think, speak and feel like I do. That encouraged me and, from what I hear, encouraged others, a lot of them readers of mine, to go out there and make themselves heard too. I think the expansion of the blogosphere, indeed the whole online networking aspect of it, is very much responsible for the fact that we’re even *having* Tea Parties today. People are tuning in, people are learning that they’re not alone and people are learning that they, too, have a voice that not only needs to be heard, but that there are others more than happy to listen.

How has it changed for the worse?

On the other hand, the massive expansion of the blogosphere has meant that it is much more difficult for a newcomer to make a name for him or herself. If you have a burning desire to make a name for yourself online, it’s a steep hill to climb nowadays. But it’s not impossible. We see new names popping up all the time, it’s just that the bar is higher. So if your primary goal is to establish a huge site and really make waves, then you’ve got your work cut out for you. But if you’re just, like I was, looking for a place to rant that you can call your own, then it’s the same as ever. The upside is: If you truly do stand out, if you’re really bringing something new to the table, then you’ll make it. But it’s much harder to make that splash now than it used to be.

What changes for the better and worse do you see in the near future for blogs?

If you’d asked me that question 7 years ago I’d have been wrong then too, so why not be wrong today? I could never in my wildest dreams have imagined that the blogosphere would become such an engine behind forming popular opinion and movements or, for that matter, being successful in areas where the main stream media have failed. If you’d told me that one day the blogosphere would be instrumental in bringing down administration officials, for instance, I would have told you that you had to have been smoking something illegal in all 50 states. But if you want my two cents, I see it growing stronger. It’s already a well known fact that more and more people are getting their news and opinion from the ‘sphere with every passing year. And I don’t see people getting less informed as a result, as some Eeyores of the past have suggested. Don’t underestimate the intelligence of the average American, is what I always say, and don’t underestimate their ability to adapt to an ever bigger load of information. People haven’t become less critical as a result of the mass of highly opinionated news they can get from the ‘sphere. Quite to the contrary, if you ask me. The problem in the past was that almost everybody only had one source of information, and that was the “accepted wisdom” of the main stream media monopoly. Now they have ready access to numerous different opinions, takes and interpretations of the same news item. And when people hear two diametrically opposed views on an issue, the natural reaction is “both of them can’t be right”, which spurs critical thinking. That’s a good thing, and I only see that getting stronger as the ‘sphere becomes stronger.

The only thing better than free speech is more free speech. It *forces* people to think for themselves because there isn’t any longer a cookie cutter “conventional wisdom” beamed into your skull every night on the news. You have to pick sides now.

Also, we’re seeing media biggies realizing that there’s something to tap into there and giving us a bigger bullhorn as a result. Glenn Beck is a perfect example. The media is realizing that there’s something going on and that works for both us and them. That too is going to grow.

The downside, as some might say, is that with the growth of the number of people having a public opinion, the message is going to get watered down and confused. I’m not too sure about that, however. Again, I think people are too smart for that. They know how to sort the wheat from the chaff. What’s important is that everybody gets a say. If they’re good, if they contribute, they’ll float. If not, they’ll find another outlet and somebody else will take their place.

Right vs. Left, who is faring better in the blogosphere and why?

Currently, the Right is doing better as far as getting things going and making a difference is concerned. Getting people out for the Tea Parties was a huge success for the Right, doing the vetting that the MSM won’t do of Obama’s administration is another huge success. Why? Well, the obviously disastrous policies of Obama’s administration is the most glaringly obvious factor. It’s a lot easier to get people to pay attention to you when they can see that you’re right just by looking around themselves. It’s not hard to get the public ear about idiotic policies when the public is getting laid off to the tune of hundreds of thousands of people a month. It’s not hard to get people to pay attention to the argument that nationalized healthcare is a bad idea when you have hundreds of examples of failures from the rest of the world with not one success story. It’s not hard to gain traction for the opinion that the current administration are screwing up royally on foreign policy when all of our allies AND enemies are laughing at us. In other words: it’s not hard to gain the ear of the public when the evidence supports everything you say.

The other factor, and that helped the Left a lot from 2001 to 2008, is that it’s easier to mobilize people who are the underdogs. When your point of view is not the one being shared in Washington DC, then it’s a lot easier to get yourself out of your chair and doing something. Being ignored makes you angry. The Left got what they wanted, Democrat control of both the White House and Congress. It’s harder for *them* to get their troops mobilized with that as a fact. What would be the rallying cry for them now? We need a Democrat elected G-d as well? Fire all of our elected representatives? Help a Republican win the White House? It’s always easier to get people out of their chairs when they’re in opposition.

It’s been said, conservative blogs seem to fare better when a liberal is in power? Have you seen this since Obama got elected?

See the above.

There seems to be a split in the conservative and moderate side of the Republican party. What are your predictions on the direction this will ultimately go?

I honestly don’t know. There are two possibilities: Either the “moderate side”, actually the “elitist establishment side”, prevails and the GOP sinks and becomes a third party, or they reform and get back to what made them different from the Democrats. The latter will mean that we’ll get back on track quicker since it will take time to build a party that can take over from the GOP, so obviously I prefer that solution. And signs are promising. The NY-23 race is a good sign, for one. It looks like conservatives ARE willing to make the “favored candidate” lose rather than elect a RINO and, no matter what the outcome, the message will be clear. If Hoffman wins, then the RINO wing are soundly defeated. If he doesn’t and the Democrat wins (Scozzofava is a dead horse now), then the message is the same: We want somebody who represents us. We don’t want to have to choose between two liberals and if that means losing an election, then so be it.

That’s the only direction that will bring this country back on track, and I speak from personal experience. Once you allow incrementalism because it’s “not as bad as the other side”, then you’ve basically conceded the fight. You’ll lose just the same, it’ll only take a bit longer.

In the conservative blogosphere, do you see cliques that have developed? If so, can you expound a bit?

Cliques? Well yes, but I don’t take it all that seriously. Birds of a feather flock together and you tend to network more with people that you know. That doesn’t mean that you don’t like the other ones, it just means that you tend to read their sites a lot more frequently and, as a result, link or read them more often. I’m as guilty as anyone. Being of the “Old Guard” I tend to read blogs from that group more often because I always have. They were there when I started, after all. But that doesn’t mean that I ignore new ones or “gang up” with “the boys” just because. I’ll happily pick a fight with one of the Old Guard if I think they’re wrong and I’ll just as happily side with a new guy or gal if they think the same. If I’m made aware of it, that is. So yes, there is sort of a “clique” thing, but it’s not a conscious “us vs. them” issue, it’s just people that have always been on my read list and therefore tend to stay on it.

Are there any new blogs without money backing like breitbart’s that you see potentially becoming a major influence in the future or growing to more success?

Honestly, I can’t come up with an example. But that’s not because they’re not there, it’s because I don’t have as much time as I used to have and because there are so many new blogs now.

Do you see twitter and facebook expanding influence amongst bloggers?

I don’t “get” twitter at all. To me, it’s like blogging without wanting to put any energy into it. But that doesn’t mean that it won’t be important and, as a matter of fact, it might be. I see Facebook as more of a force, really, because of its networking aspect. It’s a way to spread the word to people who just want to hang with their friends and don’t really have an interest in blogging but, then again, Twitter might do the same thing. The bottom line is: the more people talk together, the more they get together with people they don’t necessarily live next door to and who aren’t their immediate family, the greater the likelihood that they’ll get turned on to checking out some sites.

Do you ever see blogs becoming something lucrative or is this only for the very talented and lucky bloggers?

As a business model, no. In a very few cases, maybe, but I wouldn’t quit my day job over it, and I speak as somebody who runs a moderately successful site. It won’t pay the bills. Yes, my readers most certainly *have* helped me (and others) in times of desperate need and I can’t thank them enough for it, but it doesn’t replace a pay check. Granted, I’d *love* to be able to do this for a living, but it’s just not going to happen. The supply of opinion is so huge that the price of it has to approach zero and, in many ways, that’s a *good* thing. It releases you from the obligation to produce output since nobody’s paying for it anyway and it makes it more likely that somebody will actually pay attention because there’s no price of admission. And what you write is not dictated by “what will make a buck” as is the case with old media. “If it bleeds, it leads.”

As a blogger, you have no monetary restraints on what put you there.

If I wanted to be a journalist, I would have taken the hit and slept through three years of journo school.

Do you think influence is one of the main hopes bloggers have in what they are doing? Is it more about venting for some? What percentage of each would you estimate?

I think that the majority of bloggers, like I, are in it to vent. Yes, we’d love for somebody to read it and agree with us, who wouldn’t?, but the main issue is that we want to say it out loud and in public. There might be some who are in it to become movers and shakers but they, if you ask me, ought to get their hands dirty and get in the game instead. And they’d have my support too. Opinion is all very good to get people moving, but you need people in positions where the actual decisions are made to get anything out of the movement.

What advice do you have for other bloggers to become more influential and successful?

Keep doing what you do. If you really want to create a stir, get to work and dig up something that nobody else is talking about. Then do the research to make sure your opinion is solid and spread the word. Be you. Don’t be afraid to stand up in a crowd and don’t be afraid to get booed out. Get your facts and arguments in order before you start shooting your mouth off. And be different. Don’t do something that 600 other bloggers are already doing.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

You are considered a leader in the conservative blogosphere. How do you feel leadership qualities are essential in making a difference in the political blogosphere?

Does anyone set out with such a goal? I did not. But I wanted to make a difference. I wanted to be heard and I thought my clarity would help me be heard, and I thought that the nature of my thinking was seldom being articulated and not in a forceful, passionate way. I speak for the smallest minority in the world: the individual. My political party is capitalism. I think the Constitution is as close to a religious document as you can get. America is the most noble experiment in human history: noble, moral, benevolent and successful. My goal at the outset was preserving the America I grew up in – fighting for the free, protecting and defending the individual’s rights against majority tyranny and minority plotting. And that is still my goal.

I don’t know if leadership qualities are essential in making a difference in the political blogosphere, but integrity is. And so is an uncompromising work ethic. You have to say what you mean and mean what you say. Walking the walk, talking the talk — at least that’s the requisite on the right blogs. The left has no morals, no ethics, no values. What is required on the left is viciousness. The more vicious, the more successful the blog. The left and right blogs are as different as night and day.

Did you intend to become a leader, or did it come naturally? How much responsibility comes with this role, and how serious do you take the role?

I did not intend to become a leader. I don’t know that I am. I certainly don’t see myself that way. The responsibility is to the work. Always. And despite what difficulties you might encounter, you stay true to yourself and what you believe, no matter what the cost.

I take the role of online journalist and alternative media outlet very seriously.

How has the blogosphere changed for the better since you first began? Do you consider yourself a pioneer?

I think I was late to the party with Atlas Shrugs. I started in February 2005. The blogs on the right were well established – Malkin, Powerline, Little Green Footballs before he turned traitor and defected. But I thought I had something more to say and so I jumped in.

I wanted and still want to help build this medium. If I help to pioneer that effort, I will die a happy blogger.

How has it changed for the worse?

Little Green balls is the easy and obvious answer. That blog was a touchstone for so many of us. When he tried to destroy my reputation in November 2007 for not bending to his will and denouncing members of the trans-atlantic counter jihad movement, I knew it might be blog suicide. He was wrong, but he was king. My daily visitors went from 10,000 a day to 2,000. I was never linked by any of the big blogs ever again – Malkin, Instapundit, et al. Even when I broke big stories, like Obama’s campaign contributions from a Hamas refugee camp in Gaza.

But it was a valuable lesson. I came back without being part of the link chain or the blog clique. I built it back one reader by one reader. It’s better, of course. That way you are not slave to the link master.

Turning to the overall picture of the right blogosphere…. what has changed for the worse is the abandonment of the issue of Islamic supremacism by the big blogs — the most dangerous threat facing the West, more dangerous than Nazism, more insidious than communism and they won’t touch it. Of course Jihad Watch covers it comprehensively, but that’s what Spencer does. Islamic jihad is not a tangential issue. It is the defining conflict of our time.

What changes for the better and worse do you see in the near future for blogs?

Nothing will change for the left, they are smear machines. It’s what they do. It’s the currency they traffic in.

For the right blogs, the future’s so bright, I gotta wear shades. More and more people are flocking to the net in pursuit of the real news. They see that the mainstream media has become a corrupt activist media for the left. Americans feel betrayed by a media that did not vet Obama. They saw grammy and pop labeled racists and nazis because they didn’t want socialized medicine. People are waking up. It’s a very good time for us.

Right vs. Left, who is faring better in the blogosphere and why?

Moneywise, the left. They are well funded by Soros, moveon, media matters. But they are void of credibility, short on accuracy, big on invective. They traffic in smear. Very boring.

The objective of left wing blogs is to smear and destroy. Those blogs have become very sophisticated search and destroy machines. Alinsky ridicule is the MBO.

The right has created a new news media outlet. Alternative media is becoming as influential as talk radio. The objective of right wing blogs is to investigate and report the news the media won’t touch. And the right has done such a good job because it’s all low hanging fruit; no one else is doing it. ACORN, Rifqa Bary, Obamacare, the stimulus, the socialists and radicals in the White House ………. exposed by the blood, sweat and tears of right blogs.

It’s been said conservative blogs seem to fare better when a liberal is in power? Have you seen this since Obama got elected?

Of course! Obama is destroying the country. And the media is in the tank for him.

The county forgets how destructive leftist policies are. Clinton, Carter, Obama ….disasters all.

Americans have short memories, and they get seduced by a media that functions as the propaganda arm of the Democrat party. They go to bed with hope and change, they wake up to Obama.

If the media operated as an honest agent, the Democrats would have gone the way of the KKK decades ago.

There seems to be a split in the conservative and moderate side of the Republican party. What are your predictions on the direction this will ultimately go?

“Moderate” is a euphemism for directionless, void of principles. You can’t sit on the fence in matters of life and death and political philosophy. You must be vigorous, fierce in the protection of individual rights, limited government, Constitutionalism, low taxes. Rugged individualism.

In any compromise between good and evil, evil profits. Enough with the RINOs. They had their shot. They routed the party – they are done, finished, cooked. McCain was the final nail in the coffin. The DIABLOs ought to switch parties. Olympia Snowe is our worst nightmare.

In the conservative blogosphere, do you see cliques that have developed? If so, can you expound a bit?

Of course, it is very cliquey and it has swept some blogs with inferior content to undeserved rank/position because of regular big blog linkage. But so what? If you work hard, stay focused, love what you do, you can be successful. Atlas is not part of any clique. Check my referrals. No big linkage, but my numbers are big.

I think the blog cliques are tired and their content is tired too. They all sound alike. They don’t have to work as hard and it shows — their ranking reflects yesterday. Tomorrow will look awfully different in the blogosphere.

Are there any new blogs without money backing like Breitbart’s that you see potentially becoming a major influence in the future or growing to more success?

Tip of the old hat to Breitbart, alternative media’s William Randolph Hearst

There is a lot of new, smart, ass kicking blogs in America and Europe too. The most interesting blogs are the international blogs like New Zeal and anti-jihad blogs like the Finnish Tundra Tabloids that are doing incredible work exposing the scoundrels on the Hill. New blogs like Brave New Commie, Vigilant Squirrel Brigade, and summer patriot, winter soldier offer a refreshing new perspective. But guys like Vanderleun, who have been around awhile, are still fresh, original and delish. And Oleg at The People’s Cube, outstanding.

Do you see twitter and facebook expanding influence amongst bloggers?

Twitter had little effect, for me, until the Iraninan bloodbath. Then it was essential. I saw it make a huge crack in a walled off dictatorship erected in a oppressive, brutal, censored society. It was a Gutenberg moment. I worry still about Persian Kiwi. When he/she went dark on twitter, he/she was never heard from again. Marching for freedom and dying for tweeting. Devastating. And Obama’s callous dismissal of those marching and dying for freedom is a stain on American international policy that we will not long live down.

The only benefit for bloggers from facebook and twitter is to hook your blog feeds to these social networks. When you post to your blog, it updates your status and goes out to all of your friends and followers who repost it. It builds readership. I never actually tweet or post FB status updates, but my blog does. And Facebook made a difference – I am maxing out on friends now, which is wild. 5,000 FB friends and I have like two friends in real life.

Do you ever see blogs becoming something lucrative or is this only for the very talented and lucky bloggers?

It’s tricky. My blog is not a money maker. I don’t do advertorial stuff ever. I have some small maverick advertisers, but Atlas is mostly reader supported. Yet if not for the blog, I would never have gotten a big book deal from Simon and Schuster or a regular gig at Newsmax or a radio segment on Jaz Mckay or opportunities to speak. So Atlas is the heart of everything I do. Atlas Shrugs comes first.

Newspapers are history. The future belongs to the blogs. I don’t know what the business model will look like, I don’t know how the blog business will monetize, but it is the future. It will happen.

Do you think influence is one of the main hopes bloggers have in what they are doing? Is it more about venting for some? What percentage of each would you estimate?

Are influence and venting mutually exclusive? I don’t think so. Venting is the mother of great blogging. But it’s not enough to vent, you have to have answers, solve problems. Take them on. I do. I vent but at the same time, in the same post, and I state what should be done, what policy would work, what action Atlas readers should take if they agree.

Just venting is not interesting. It’s like having a spouse that’s always bitching, STFU already.

What advice do you have for other bloggers to become more influential and successful?
Advice?

Find your own voice (no matter how long it takes). Be prepared for a long slog. Blogging is a long term career choice, IMAO. No one gets famous overnight and has real staying power. You have to build an audience and they have to find you and make you a habit. That takes time. It’s a process.

Don’t be an echo chamber. Find what you love or care about passionately and give it everything you’ve got. Go out and cover the news. Always take your camera. Original reportage gets linked. Do you admire someone of note? Get an interview with him/her. Just call and keep calling. Thomas Edison said, genius is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration. Well, so is blogging

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

You are considered a leader in the conservative blogosphere. Do you feel leadership qualities are essential in making a difference in the political blogosphere?

Thanks. I appreciate that. As far as leadership – as conservatives we have to be confident in our positions. As leaders we have to understand that we are not in the minority because our positions are unpopular. We are in the minority because we have not been able to communicate our positions effectively.

Did you intend to become a leader, or did it come naturally? How much responsibility comes with this role, and how serious do you take the role?

I try to be consistent with my conservative positions. I don’t know if it came naturally. It came with a whole lot of work as you know.

How has the blogosphere changed for the better since you first began? Do you consider yourself a pioneer?

The biggest change since I started blogging in late 2004 early 2005 is the introduction of YouTube and videoblogging. When I started blogging videos were too expensive to post on a website. Today it is changing the blogosphere.

How has it changed for the worse?
Hmm.

What changes, for the better and worse, do you see in the near future for blogs?

Let’s pray government does not become involved. We all know that would be disastrous.

Right vs. Left, who is faring better in the blogosphere and why?

Conservatives. Definitely. This year we have ACORN, Van Jones, etc. under our belt. These were huge stories and wins for conservatives and the country.

It’s been said conservative blogs seem to fare better when a liberal is in power? Have you seen this since Obama got elected?

Traffic is up. Conservatives are scared… And the only place to get the truth today is on the blogs, talk radio, conservative websites and FOX News. The MSM is very corrupt.

There seems to be a split in the conservative and moderate side of the Republican Party. What are your predictions on the direction this will ultimately go?

Let’s hope the party can move to the right. The Maine senators are popular with the state-run media but have been disastrous for the country.

In the conservative blogosphere, do you see cliques that have developed? If so, can you expound a bit?

We all have our favorite blogs and websites. I try to stay out of petty bickering.

Are there any new blogs without money backing like Breitbart’s that you see potentially becoming a major influence in the future or growing to more success?

Tucker Carlson is behind a project. We’ll see how that takes off.

Do you see twitter and facebook expanding influence amongst bloggers?

Twitter and facebook are nice complements to blogging. The Twitter community is huge.

Do you ever see blogs becoming something lucrative or is this only for the very talented and lucky bloggers?

Let’s hope so. Let’s hope that conservatives start to recognize the value of the blogs. The left funds and treats their bloggers well. We need to continue to communicate our value to the conservative movement. There are many conservatives out there who are not familiar with the blogs. I see them as uninformed.

Do you think influence is one of the main hopes bloggers have in what they are doing? Is it more about venting for some? What percentage of each would you estimate?

We all like to be heard. We all want to feel valued.

What advice do you have for other bloggers to become more influential and successful?

Work hard. Promote your work. Be consistent.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

My friend Ken Marrero over at Blue Collar Muse has posted an interesting if not entirely infuriating story about GOP officials coming down on other officials and certain county employees for having the gall to talk to those eeeevil Arizona bloggers that have been doggedly reporting the corruption stories of county officials.

GOP officials of Maricopa County have been in a bit of trouble recently having been accused of wasteful spending, power grabs and criminal investigations. Marrero even notes that there is a Twitter feed used to needle these officials called CorruptAZSupes.

The barbs have been coming fast and furious and County Manager David Smith has decided to try and stop the bleeding. So, did Smith decide to clean up the Supervisor’s office? Nope. He’s decided to attack Republicans that have talked to the press and the bloggers. Classic shooting the messenger mistake.

Smith sent a letter to the County Attorney’s office demanding to know who had relationships with bloggers – or else! They even specifically demand to know about activity that might have taken place on an employee’s personal time and their personal computers! Specifically named in the letter is Michael Scerbo, the County Attorney PIO, who is SUPPOSED to be in touch with the media! While there are some traditional media outlets mentioned, blogs are specifically targeted. The Sonoran Alliance, The Cactus Alliance and Intellectual Conservative Arizona are all named in the letter as being eeeeeeevil bloggers that bad County Attorney employees shouldn’t have anything to do with.

This is akin to a digital witch hunt, a modern day, electronic HUAC. Are you now, or have you ever been a member of a blog?

Catch this nonsense as contained in the letter being circulated by Smith:

Have you, whether under your name, some form of pseudonym, or anonymously, ever posted a blog, note or other communication on the internet concerning Maricopa County, any of its affiliated constituents (as defined in the Ethical Rules)?

Within the last six months, have you communicated with any person, site or entity listed below concerning the entities of individuals set forth in question 1 (a list of persons and blogs follows)

Seriously? The County Manager of Maricopa County imagines he has the power and right to force individuals to report to him what blogs they’ve communicated with and with whom they are in personal, private communications?

Now, certainly there are rules regarding what information may be communicated by officials. There are absolutely ethical rules and limits on some information. Every lawyer knows his ethical limitations and rules. but this letter seems to me to go way too far and verges on a fascist sort of demand upon county employees.

Anyway, it is interesting that Smith’s first impulse is to attack the bloggers instead of clean up the corruption of his office.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

If you spend any time looking at social media demographics, there’s one stat you see over and over: women dominate the space. Facebook, MySpace, Twitter — all are more popular with women than men.

So it was a bit jarring this week to see that 67% of bloggers are male, according to the newest installment of the Technorati State of the Blogosphere report.

Admittedly, this isn’t a new stat. In least year’s report, Technorati’s survey put the male blogger ratio at 66%. But compared to the other mainstream social media activities, it seems bizarrely guy-heavy.

What’s the deal? Why is blogging a boys club at a time when women are such a powerful force in creating social media content?

Well, that’s a complicated question with a simple answer.

First of all, women like social networking sites more than men for a very obvious reason: women are inherently more social than men. Yes, men bond with their friends just as much as women do, but in very different ways. Whereas women will sit with their girlfriends and just talk for hours about their jobs, boyfriends, husbands, children, and so on, men will not. Men do not typically have those kind of relationships in their lives. So it’s only natural that women would be the ones drawn more towards social networking sites. Women can go onto Facebook and catch up with the people in their lives, and men just don’t do that. They might log on and send a quick what’s up to their buddies, but that’s about it. Women want to share pictures, play games, message back and forth. Social networking is another method of bonding with the people you care about, and let’s face it: men just don’t have as high of a priority on bonding as women do.

Second, women aren’t nearly as aggressive as men, nor are they as thick-skinned. This isn’t to say that no women are aggressive or thick-skinned, but I’m just talking in generalities here. Women tend to start blogging and then realize that it is a tough, tough world out here. You say something someone doesn’t like, and they don’t dispute your point calmly and politely with rational, well thought-out replies. They attack you, personally. They call you fat, ugly, stupid. They’ll call you a whore or a bitch or a slut. And these are the mild insults. A lot of women have no clue what they’re getting into when they start blogging. And when they see how rough it is, they quickly get out, because to them it’s not worth it.

Every conservative female blogger I know gets this kind of abuse, and it’s often sexualized. We all get it. It’s a fact of life when it comes to blogging. Michelle Malkin had to move because her family was threatened by a blogger who published her personal information — address, phone number, everything. There is nothing that is off-limits when it comes to blogging, and anything can be held against you. Anything can be used as leverage against you to make you quit, to make you give up. And frankly, there are not many women who are as tough as Michelle is, who would be able to keep going. For many women, it wouldn’t be worth it.

A lot of women also don’t like the competition factor. Men tend to be more competitive by nature, and there are plenty of women out there who just don’t want to have to fight for readers and advertising. Again, in order to make it as a blogger, you’ve gotta be tough. Some women can take it. Others simply can’t.

Now, here’s the thing. I don’t want there to be more female bloggers. I like the fact that I’m a minority in the blogosphere. It’s a huge selling point for me. I’m not afraid at all to say it. With so few women bloggers, it automatically makes me stand out, and that’s a good thing. Throw in the fact that I’m… ahem… well-endowed, shall we say?, and not bad-looking and it’s even more of a plus. Men don’t get those benefits. A great looking male blogger is not going to attract much traffic, because readership online is mostly male, at least when it comes to politics. A great looking woman, however, who can write well and is not afraid to take shots and shoot back is going to be very attractive to their male readers. It makes you stand out, and if the blogosphere suddenly becomes crowded with female bloggers, then I’ve just lost my edge. I’m a conservative. That means I’m a capitalist, baby, and when it comes to my being successful in the blogosphere, there is always going to be a level of competitiveness there. Competition is part of succeeding. There are thousands of bloggers out there, just as talented as I am, ready to work just as hard as I do if not harder. I have to be able to give myself that edge somehow, to enable myself to be successful. Being a young, conservative, attractive woman certainly does give me an edge. I’m not about to complain about being one of the few female political bloggers out there. I personally hope that doesn’t change. With that said, there are some fantastic female bloggers out there that I look up to and admire. Michelle Malkin immediately comes to mind, along with other amazing women like Mary Katharine Ham, Melissa Clouthier, EM Zanotti, Katie Favazza, Ericka Andersen, Amanda Carpenter… the list could go on and on. There are a lot of great, talented female bloggers and there are certainly no men trying to hold us back. There is no invisible barrier keeping women from being successful as bloggers.

And frankly, the people who think otherwise are just trying to find another way to exploit their status as the liberal-beloved “victim”. They need to get over it and start taking some personal responsibility for their blogging careers.

But then, that goes against everything liberalism stands for, doesn’t it?

Hat Tips: Melissa Clouthier and Little Miss Attila

Cross-posted from Cassy’s blog. Stop by for more original commentary or follow her on Twitter!

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post