UPDATED: Speech that obviously needs protecting...

... because it cannot stand on its own merits.

For example:

Original prompt:

Look, I consider David Anderson, despite our strong, vehement and mutual political disagreements, to be a good person.

Response of pseudonymous blogger:

I don’t. anyone who can stand before lawmakers yapping away in the name of God and thinks he speaks for a majority while in our state’s capital to try and get a law passed that infringes peoples civil rights is a major league ass hole.

UPDATE: So today in two separate threads [here and here] the First State's Biggest Penis [which must go with the testicles] gets all touchy when he starts tossing around the term retard and gets called on it by both Mark H. (who has an autistic child) and [much to Delawareliberal's credit] liberalgeek. Both exchanges are worth reading for the sheer car-wreck you-can't-look-away feeling as you watch a man with absolutely no class dangle in the wind. Here are my two "favorite" comments:

Prompt:

Donviti, must you be a dick? If you plan to use derogatory words to describe other people, don’t get all pissy when they call you on it. Man up and say that you are sorry that he was offended by your label.

Pseudo-genius response:

To answer your first question. Yes.

I’m not sorry that he was offended by my label. Why should I be. Are you telling me that even though I used the word “retard” which is a medical term, though I realize I was being an asshole, that I now need to apologize to people that have autistic children? Autistic children are considered retarded? I had no idea that an autistic child was on par with a Down Syndrome.

so, if you are telling me that an Autistic Child and a DS child are both retarded, then yes. I FULLY and 100% sincerely apologize. In my ignorance I had no idea.

However, if a DS child and an Autistic Child are two different things then I’m not sorry. I made the comment knowing full well that “retard” was a slang word for DS and I did so knowing full well the repercussions of what would happen as well as to see the reaction I would get within the comments.

The outrage of course is me saying a harmless word, not the Quitter of Alaska using her child as a political agit prop

And this one:

Is using the word “retard” in a derogatory sense as bad as saying “nigger”?

If so, when did this happen?

This--after pretty much everybody explained in detail why retard is offensive, was followed by one of those to the extent I have offended anybody apologies:

I’m sorry, especially since now that I know I offended someone....

To which--as you can tell by his immediate response when called on this issue [I’m not sorry that he was offended by my label. Why should I be.]--you can only shake your head and wonder precisely who he thinks he is fooling.

All of which makes it particularly amusing when Mr. Bombast tries to hide, asking Mark H. to please not use his real name:

I know how much of an ass I am. If you want to waste the time to educate your readers, all 3 of them go the fuck ahead. I ask that you not use my real name of course as it is sort of a code among men and bloggers. Even comic book reading, coupon clipping reading ultra sensitive one like you…

Of course, the blogger in question is not anonymous--everybody in the Delaware blogosphere knows his name, many have drunk beer with him at charity events, and he even outs himself as a DL blogger in the local papers when it suits his purposes. As a matter of fact, if you Google the genius's pen-name and Twitter, should you be deprived enough to want his rants delivered to your mailbox, you will find that this genius actually has his real name in parenthesis beside his pseudonym.

So why, for this individual and his cohorts, is the issue such a bone of contention:

No, outting is not about responding to what you perceive to be a personal attack. The only reason you try to out someone is to intimidate or silence them. It is an attempt to silence someone’s freedom of speech. It is an attempt to stifle debate and dissent. I find it quite shocking that some local libertarians tried to discuss outting in a rational way this week given the real aim of outting. To each their own. I will say this, as long as Delaware Liberal exists, outting will be considered a cardinal sin in the blogosphere, not an evolution of the blogosphere. When this weapon is used against us or anyone, we will retaliate. Not in kind, but by 1) removing all links to the offending site from our blogroll, 2) banning the offender from our site, and most importantly 3) we will continue whatever activity that led to the outting tenfold. For example, Burris used outting to silence Kavips and his opinions of CRI and those involved with it. We will now be increasing our coverage and criticism of CRI. The acceptable response to that criticism and coverage is to deride it if you wish, defend CRI if you want, or to call us name. The unacceptable response is to silence the criticism by outting the pseudonymous critic.

Can a man with gigantic testicles [we know because he told us] be intimidated? He says not, even when his friends argue that attaching his own name to his political opinions would silence his freedom of speech:

Being a man is tough. Talking the talk is one thing, manning up is another. I know. I’m a man. I man up. I man up when I’m wrong and well, I dance a little when I’m right. Not a lot but a little. Sometimes, when I’m right I even sit back and let it shine on my private parts. I spread my stuff and let the glorious sunlight that is righteousness glow on my testicles that are the size of ripened Florida mangoes. Like one of those lemur looking things. Just laying there sunning. Basking. Not worried about an attack, not worried about nothing. Secure. Man. The shit. Mango’s hanging, dangling, ready for bangin.

Legs akimbo. Ahhhhhhhh Vitamin D baby.

You getting that? God damned awesome picture. You know how I confirm that I’m all man? Because I just wrote that. Appreciate it. I do. It’s god damned brilliant, graphic and disgusting all at the same time.

You'd think that Delaware's answer to Jack Kerouac would be damn proud to sign his name to writing like this:

It’s hard to fathom people coming after you when you are a such a huge tough guy with mango-nuts. I know! I know, I know, I know. I can’t believe it either, so when the question is asked I brush it off. I hardly think about it. Because quite frankly, who gives a shit. I’m secure in my testicular fortitude. I pay it no mind. I guess I don’t care. I mean, I’m on a blog right? I’m opinionated right? I have to sort of take what I give, no? I guess If I’m to have these huge swinging testicles, named bob and rob by the way, I’m going to have to expect to be attacked now and then. (I’m Looking down and Bob and Rob now, I sort of stop and think, “Damn who wouldn’t want to come after a guy with these?”)

People don’t like it when you are on top.

Except, of course, if you attack me and use my real name, my peeps will respond by declaring the nuclear option of the blogosphere.

noman, commenting at Delaware Politics, suggest that there is a different reason than intimidation or employer retaliation for protecting pseudonymity:

Most of the pseudonymous people aren’t hiding their identities - they have made their IDs known in the past and they are discoverable. They just prefer not to be search-optimized in Google. Which is a perfectly reasonable concern.

Interesting point, especially since several of our more prominent pseudonymous bloggers here in Delaware are once and future political candidates. Wouldn't want to have all your brilliant pseudonymity coming back to haunt you if you ran again for public office, would you?

Other bloggers are absolutely fine listing themselves all over the net as contributing editor to Delawareliberal and even banking on that credential to get invited to panel discussions at Netroots Nation. No links: do your own damn homework, and if you don't already know the individual's name you won't be able to find it from this.

So o be clear: I've not outed anyone, and I don't intend to do so. I have made allusions to public uses of pseudonyms and real names made by the bloggers themselves in order to cash in on their connection with their postings, but without providing any links. As for truly anonymous bloggers--like Anonone or noman or micreant--I would never even think to worry about it, and I won't allow comments here to be used for the purpose of outing anybody who has not already publicly outed himself or herself.

But to stand on your hyperbolic high horse and defend your ability to call your local political opponents assholes by name just because they disagree with you, brag about your big swinging testicles and how you're ready for anybody to come after you, while hiding behind the petticoats of presumed intimidation if any of the people who all know who you are in the first place actually call you by name....

That's not hypocrisy. It's simply cowardice.

You want courage: try being a gay man blogging in South Carolina, taking on the conservative bigots of the Palmetto State, well aware that only true anonymity is protecting you from people who have publicly declared they will come after your family, your job, and everything you hold dear if they figure out who you are.

That's somebody who's actually got big testicles, instead of some impotent dweeb who talks about them.