Managing The Blogroll

It’s Saturday morning and it’s raining, what else am I going to do?

Anyway, I have three new additions.

In the other state blogs category is the Barista of Bloomfield Avenue. This one covers a few towns in New Jersey: Montclair, Glen Ridge and Bloomfield. Only a few of my readers will care about this one, but I think they’ll like it a lot.

Dangerous Intersection joins the national blogs. The subject matter is similar to Dispatches from the Culture War, but the tone is more reflective.

The third newbie is the Religion Clause blog. This one is mostly a news site; not much commentary. But the news is great. It’s nothing but, you guessed it, news about religion clause litigation.

While at it, I almost subtracted a few blogs, but decided against it. Some of the ones on my list, though they may have been interesting at one time, have devolved into little more than mutual admiration societies. The authors picked certain positions, and those positions are now axiomatic. There is no debate, or discussion, either you agree with them, or you are evil, stupid, or both. What bugs me is not that these folks have beliefs, it’s that they all take their beliefs as self-evident. Hence, in their minds, if you want to question them, there is something wrong with you. Anyone who disagrees is demonized.

If you want a non-blog example of what I am talking about, look no further than Bob Riley’s newest commercial, or Dick Cheney’s statements about the Connecticut primary. (Lest anyone think I am picking on Republicans, this is one of the blogs I almost axed).

In the commercial, Lucy Baxley is demonized because she is a “liberal” who voted for John Kerry and said she is inspired by Hilary Clinton. No definition of the word liberal is provided. Nor does the commercial explain why being a liberal, whatever that is, is a bad thing. No attempt is made to explain why it is wrong for Baxley to have joined 49% of the country in voting for Kerry, or why a female politician who has defined her own career in the shadow of a famous husband ought to be condemned for looking up to a female politician who has defined her own political career in the shadow of her famous husband. Just throw around the L word and the names of some yankee politicians, and that’s that. This may be “just politics” but it certainly is not productive.

As for Cheney, saying that the national Democratic party supports al quaeda because the Connecticut Democrats nominated a man who has questions about the Iraq war is outrageous. Well over half the country opposes the administration’s handling of the war, and the people of Connecticut just rejected an incumbant senator largely because that senator blindly supported the administration’s handling of the war. At the least, in light of these facts any rational person might stop to consider whether or not the war really is a good idea. Not Cheney. His mind is made up, and if you disagree, well, the only possibly explanation is that you are also a terrorist.

So long as that is our attitude – I’m right, and if you disagree you are an evil moron – then we are not going to solve any of our problems. Convictions are good, necessary even. But they must be subjected to reason, rather than blindly defended at all costs. Like it or not, we are human. No matter how certain we may be about something, there is always the possibility that we are wrong.

All that said, I left all the blogs in place. I don’t want to police based on content. Besides, some may bring the same charges against me.

Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: Blogging, National Politics

6 Comments on “Managing The Blogroll”

  1. beemergirl Says:

    Thanks for the Barista blog. A little more local,

  2. Dan Says:

    Hmm.. am I being too dogmatic on my blog? I may take some time to reflect on this one. Please feel free to call me out if I am, either via email or here. Sometimes it takes a friend to point out a flaw.

  3. Dan Says:

    Yeah, seriously. Do you think I’m too dogmatic?

  4. Wheeler Says:

    no. you have your opinions, but you give reasons for them, and you consider the opposition.

    i’m not opposed to anyone havin a strong opinion, lord knows i have one about a lot of things. what bugs me is folks who act like their opinion is self evidently true.

    what i mean is people who only cite some example of “liberal” or “conservative” actions and then assume that is enough to demonstrate the idiocy of the actor. sure the action may be idiotic, but i’d really like to know why.

  5. Tim Says:

    How come liberals always hate to be called liberals but you never hear of conservatives saying they don’t want to be called conservatives?

  6. wheeler Says:

    i don’t know any liberals who hate to be called liberal.

    my view is that both words are applied to so many different people and groups that they really do not mean anything.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: