I understand that Lefty Blogs has delisted Howling Latina. And other supposedly Democratic blogs are dropping the site from their blogrolls. The reason? Howling Latina is a proud advocate of PUMA. She dares to be a dissenting voice.
I thought the Democratic Party was a big tent. Have we gotten so out of whack that we only want to hear from the people we agree with? Heck, if that were the case, I’d be removing a pile of blogs from my blogroll – and don’t assume that the list would only be Republican ones.
When we start down the path of censoring the voices within our party, there is little that separates us from the Republicans. If your sensibilities are offended by those with whom you disagree, there is a simple answer: don’t read them.
Individual blog operators have the right to do whatever they want with their blogrolls. But I disagree with the decision by Lefty Blogs to remove Howling Latina because to do so, is an attempt to silence someone. (And we’ve seen plenty of that over at Blogger.)
It’s just not right. And because it’s my blog, I’ll continue to keep Howling Latina listed.
Mark:
I think that everyone is just guessing about the reasons Leftyblogs dropped Mimi. Here’s my guess: her posts became too offensive and irrational in tone and style. Her posts were no longer debate: they were fighting words meant only to cause ugly fights, not debate. I don’t think she was dropped for supporting Hillary Clinton or even the PUMAs. She was dropped because of her constantly escalating attacks and attempts to start fights, that’d be my guess.
You are certainly free to disagree with that decision and I don’t mind debating the point with you. In the end, it was Leftyblogs’ call to make in so far as Leftyblogs goes, and my decision as far as my own blog goes. I am comfortable with my decision.
Posted by The Richmond Democrat | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 8:49 pmskep – I don’t know Mimi personally so I really have no idea about her motives.
Posted by vjp | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 8:56 pmWoohoo! I still make the cut! (Now stop, before you get to something like cursing.)
~
SB – whatever it is, I don’t think it can be fairly ascribed to some post-primary adrenaline rush. I’ve definitely written some things in which the tone was set by exactly that, so I know what you’re talking about. And it’s what I was hoping explained things over at HL’s place for a while. But this far down the line? It ain’t adrenaline. I admire your sincere and credulous outreach to her, but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for a reasonable response.
Posted by MB | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 9:01 pmRD -
Were you speaking to me?
I had said that it was LeftyBlogs’ business to do what they felt they needed to.
??
Posted by Mark Brooks | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 9:18 pmNo, I think it was MB (Mark Blacknell).
Posted by The Richmond Democrat | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 9:21 pmAh. Richmond Democrat, I think we’re in general agreement about how we see the problem* – we’ve just come down differently on whether we think she’s irreversibly crossed that line out of the progressive camp.
*Except I very much disagree that it’s an issue of freedom of association (or of speech). Those are freedoms with respect to the gov’t, not to private actors (which we all are, here).
Posted by MB | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 9:32 pmMB:
I agree, and you are correct in your analysis of the freedoms. Because there is no government actor, there really isn’t any issue of rights. The question really is whether those of us who have de-listed Mimi Schaeffer were ever under any obligation to link to her in the first place.
I think that Mimi’s goal was to provoke a fight among Democrats. I don’t think she succeeded. Instead I see a relatively calm and respectful discussion about what it all means.
As far as whether or not she’s crossed a line out of the progressive camp, well I suppose it depends on how you define the progressive camp. But phrase the question a little differently and ask if she’s left the Democratic Party’s big tent, and I think that the answer is much clearer. Mimi is actively working to defeat the presumptive nominee of the party. It’s a choice she made consciously. We didn’t kick her out: she left.
The real question seems to me to be, if you leave under those circumstances is it possible to come back? I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but I don’t think Mimi Schaeffer is to be trusted anymore.
Posted by The Richmond Democrat | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 9:52 pmDeliberately left off the list
That criteria would eliminate almost everyone.
Posted by vjp | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 10:06 pmHmmm. That’s not really something I think is really a useful discussion. As noted above, I think she’s lost the plot, but I don’t bear her any ill will. And heading down that discussion topic road will only be hurtful. Not interested in it.
Now, with a bit of modification, I think *that’s* a topic that may well be worth some exploration. Lots of self-appointed Progressive Democratic Blogs in VA have gone well out of their way to do real damage to the candidate who turns out to be the nominee in a given contest. Should we trust them?
Posted by MB | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 10:07 pmIn Portuguese “Obambi” sounds REALLY more offensive than it looks because in Portuguese the same word used for deers is a offensive slang used against gays. I also don´t like Ms Clinton(*Really*). And I see bad taste on that cartoon, but not racism. Only black guys masturbates?
But I like Mimi´s Blog, and c´mon, you can´t deny that she supports progressive values.
Posted by Andre Kenji de Sousa | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 10:09 pmWorking to get John McCain elected president is not supportive of progressive values.
Posted by The Richmond Democrat | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 10:14 pmI never said I was okay with HL being taken down because she says things people don’t agree with. I meant it was predictable that as insulting and objectionable as she has been behaving in the past few months I can’t condemn the decision. She was determined to incur just such a response. That much was obvious from her relentlessly negative attacks on Obama AND his supporters over the past few months. She wasn’t merely expressing differences of opinion, but was reprinting anti-Obama screeds lifted directly from right wing blogs and commentaries, was taking snippets of information and drawing the most negative connotations about Obama and Obama supporters she could find, was extremely insulting to Obama supporters, adopting right wing terms like “Obamatrons”, “Obamaniacs”, etc. She was insulting and disrespectful toward anyone who disagreed with her.
If it were the government which de-listed her I’d be up in arms in a heartbeat, but that’s not the case. It was other people, all self-described progressives or Democrats or liberals, who were saying that enough was enough. In other words, they decided she crossed a line.
I asked whether there was a line. I never said there’s a firm, immutable line, but that a line may be justified under some circumstances. So my question for you is – is there a line? And if it isn’t this, then what is it?
Posted by Carla | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 10:33 pmYes they have. And how many of them have been shunned?
My line isn’t the same as your line, someone else’s line is different than both of ours. So your question has no answer.
I fixed the blockquote on your post. And that last sentence you quoted wasn’t directed at you, it was directed at everyone who felt that way (thus the reference to “y’all” )
Posted by vjp | Sunday, August 3, 2008, 11:27 pmMB @ 5:13 I didn’t say Mark Brooks was pompous and judgmental….I said his WORDS were. May I quote his words: “Bottom line? She is not progressive…” I believe that’s a judgment, isn’t it?
Where was the outrage when Senator Clinton’s anatomy, family, etc., was villified and slewn all over the internet and media? This lack of tolerance for another’s opinion (HL’s) to the extent that her blog will be removed from LeftyBlogs is really just FEAR of another’s opinion. It shows weakness and unsuredness.
Again, Vivian, you are the true big-tent Democrat and an excellent defender of the Democratic Party’s principles.
Posted by Sleepless in Virginia | Monday, August 4, 2008, 7:39 amPlease show me a Leftyblogs blog that was involved in this:
“Where was the outrage when Senator Clinton’s anatomy, family, etc., was villified and slewn all over the internet and media?”
I criticized certain aspects of Clinton’s record, but never attacked her gender or her “anatomy.”
Please show me another Leftyblogs blog that has behaved anything like Howling Latina.
Posted by The Richmond Democrat | Monday, August 4, 2008, 10:12 am