Skip to main content

I finally found the instruction manual for Delawareliberal (seriously)...

... even if I had to steal it from A Secondhand Conjecture.

There are a lot of folks--including liberals, conservatives, libertarians and everything else--who visit Delawareliberal and ... get handled a little more roughly than they expected. Sometimes they go overboard and ban somebody, which I think is not a good thing--but what the hell it's their blog.

Anyway, when they're running true to form, this would be the best summation of their standard:

If you expect to come here, spout idiotic opinions, write poorly, or just otherwise make an ass of yourself, don’t expect to be mollycoddled. If you are not smart, not funny, or simply don’t add to the collective discourse, you will be beaten like a Russian bride and sent on your way.

This is not quashing dissent. This is the cold boot of failure kicking you straight between the eyes. Just because the American educational system has taught you that everybody is a winner, and that you have some twisted right to have your opinion not only heard, but respected, doesn’t make it true.

Frankly, some of you need to be told that, objectively, you suck. And if you do, it will happen here. You have been warned.”


OK jason, geek, dv, pandora, cassandra, nemski, and DD--did I nail it successfully?

Comments

Hube said…
If you expect to come here, spout idiotic opinions

Which is more than ironic since they comprise the vast majority of DL blog posts ...

write poorly

Egad. Jason and DV, for starters, could give a grammar teacher a coronary.

or just otherwise make an ass of yourself

You mean like relishing in the illnesses/deaths of conservatives? Like referring to your political opposites as "evil?"

Yeah Steve, I think you covered it quite well.
Hube
Rats, you blew my game. Now I'll never get them to comment.
Anonymous said…
Steve - You nailed it. Hube is still bitter that we run everything due to his teams vast incompetence.
Anonymous said…
If you're referring to the national and local political "team," Geek, you couldn't be more wrong. The only bitterness I feel, however small, is directly related to the asininity your blog spews into the whole of the DE blogosphere, ¿entiendes, huevón?
Anonymous said…
Hube is just still smarting from that cold boot of failure being applied to his nose. ;)

And yes, Jason and DV give me coronaries with their grammar. Half the time I edit, and the other half I just drink.
Anonymous said…
I gots to type fast to keep up with the boot applications.

Yes. You nailed it.

Jason
Anonymous said…
I know DelDem -- I'm "evil." You said it yourself.

One of these days, though, you'll grow the f*** up and become a man.
Anonymous said…
I'm open for debate. What I can't stand are "talking points". Otherwise, I think you nailed it - or us!
Anonymous said…
Steve - I like you more and more each day. I get caught in the trap of angry venting quite often at DelawareLiberal and I occasionally regret this. To my mind the issue lies in the definition of terms. Yes, DELib is a political blog, but it is mostly an entertaining spoof. It’s hardly intellectual discourse, so what. I can get that elsewhere. I think some hold it to a standard it doesn’t hold itself to.

And Hube is an “adult” who reads comic books. Need I saw more?

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...