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.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Wait. What cartoon was that?
If this is the standard by which blogs are listed on a blogroll, then I might as well remove 99% of them. I don’t condone calling John McCain “McSame” or “McLame” so there goes most of the blogs on the left. I don’t condone calling Tim Kaine “Timmy” so there goes most of the blogs on the right.
Just a reminder – I said that individual blogs have the right to make their own decisions about who to include in their blogroll. My beef is not with them – it is with Lefty Blogs.
Vivian,
Do you believe what Mimi is doing is deliberately inspired by hate or rather some adrenaline rush from the nomination fight playing itself out? You know her personally, what do really think?
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.
skep – I don’t know Mimi personally so I really have no idea about her motives.
Woohoo! 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.
RD –
Were you speaking to me?
I had said that it was LeftyBlogs’ business to do what they felt they needed to.
??
No, I think it was MB (Mark Blacknell).
Ah. 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).
MB:
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.
Deliberately left off the list 😉 That criteria would eliminate almost everyone.
Hmmm. 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?
In 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.
Working to get John McCain elected president is not supportive of progressive values.