Witness the current Virginia blogosphere imbroglio over Waldo Jaquith's exercise of his editorial prerogatives over his indispensable blog aggregator. Waldo was offended by a posting by a pseudonymous blog which reproduced a picture of an American beheaded by Islamo-fascist radicals in Iraq, deleted the post, and de-listed the blog. Being one of the more thoughtful on the Left side of the blogosphere, Waldo opened a discussion on the issue. As I said there:
While there’s not a lot politically upon which you and I agree, Waldo, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: your aggregator is “indispensable.” And while I disagree with your decision to remove GDD, it is your privilege to do so. Personally, I would remove all blogs posted anonymously/pseudonymously, but that may well be a different discussion. I guess my questions are two: (1) would GDD have made such a post if his name were attached to it?; and (2) would you have delisted, say, Viv Paige or yours truly if either of us had made such a post?Enter F. T. Rea, among the more pretentious of the far Left in the Virginia firmament. As is typical with his posts, F. T. makes broad accusations about those with whom he disagrees ("How many of the same ilk also claim that any questioning of the utterly failed war policy in Iraq has been tantamount to treason?" To answer that question, to the best of my knowledge, none), and offers an utter non sequitor ("how many of them yap out of the other side of their mouths that burning an American flag is not political speech?" If old F. T. doesn't know the difference between speech and behavior, it is far too late to try to explain it to him now) to attack his opponents.
F. T. does what all pretentious boobs do when they want to censor others: they posture as the mature voice of sweet reason. 'Problem is, F. T. himself hardly qualifies. He describes as an "utterly failed war policy in Iraq" which has liberated 25 million people and led to three successive and successful free elections. His own blog is a virtual cornucopia of Bush Derangement Syndrome, i.e., advocating mockery of the President, and accusing him of Orwellian behavior,
One expects peurile behavior from those who have to make up false charges to attack the eminently disputable foreign policy decisions of the Bush Administration (as are the foreign policy decisions of virtually every Administration), and to attack inconveniently factual and effective commenters with sophomoric rhetorical devices calling into question their easily verifiable credentials, , ultimately simply deleting their comments.
I don't agree with Waldo's decision to delete an offending post, and to de-list the offending blog, but I recognize that it's his privilege to do so. Neither do I agree with those who are highly critical of Waldo's decision and are engaged in a virtual jihad against him.
But defending Waldo's decision with the always-unjustifiable sanctimony which so frequently characterizes the far Left hardly supports a decision which, while subject to dispute, was certainly one which was Waldo's to make.