The Love You Take...

In reply to: Donald Douglas - American Power: There's Nothing You Can Do That Can't Be Done...:
------------------

While you did manage to add one or two more "liberal mean boy/girl" quotes than Hillman did "conservative mean boy/girl" quotes in his post from two months ago--one of the benefits of being the one to reply, for sure--there is no doubt that there are mean boys and girls all across the political spectrum.

To suggest that either of you proved that it is liberal or conservative politics that makes folks mean, however, is just stupid. Assholes are assholes because of nature and nurture, and for the most part, assholes are willing to prove that they're assholes in every facet of their lives... ...including politics, obviously. Trying to make any kind of generalization about a whole category of folks based on a few quotes from individual members of the group is both logically and morally wrong.

Good song with a great message, though... The key to it, I think, is to start within yourself. "The love you take is equal to the love you make," after all...
---------

Submitted for moderator approval 2/26/10, 7:53 AM (IM blog time)

The First Amendment and the Continued Free Speech of Donald Douglas

In reply to: American Power: Libel Blogger David Hillman (Swash Zone) Workplace Harassment Fail, and in particular Donald's beliefs about what I said in a comment at The Swash Zone earlier today:

Donald Douglas: The Swash Zone community is actually struggling to devise even more crudely devious methods in their jihad to eviscerate my First Amendment rights to freedom of speech (with emphasis added):

repsac3: Where bigotry and other morally repugnant acts are concerned, I'm all for sunshine; publicize the nasty things that people say and do as much as possible -- which, by the way, is one of the reasons I'm opposed to moderating such things away. Sometimes it's good to confront and be offended by the things people say and do, and to see that as many other people as possible are offended right along with you. Rather than hide bigoted blog comments, I say highlight them, repeating them as many times as it takes for people to get good and pissed off at the people that post them. (In fact, if the lawyer's don't object, I'd suggest posting all of the threats and other nonsense received via e-mail, as well.) I'm all for blog posts, letters to local media--including the LBCC college newspaper--with full quotes and context, tweets, facebook posts, submissions to "Worst Person in the World" segments, and any other means that uses sunshine and/or moonglow to highlight the bad acts Donald Douglas and those like him engage in.

The only problem, of course, is that there are no "threats and other nonsense" or "racism" or "harassment," or whatever.

-----------

Dr. Douglas, I have no interest in silencing you. In fact--as you yourself quoted--I'm in favor of spreading your words far and wide. You are a good example of what is wrong with some on the right, and the more you speak, the more evident that becomes. So, I promise you, the last thing I want is for you to stop speaking out just as you have been. I believe you to be a bully and a bigot (politically, societally, and yes, racially, as well), and I'm all too glad to have people read what you post and see it for themselves.

As far as your first amendment rights, you should know as well as I do that none of the bloggers or enemies you mention in this post or any other have the power to threaten your free speech rights. The first amendment protects all US citizens from GOVERNMENT action against the things we write and say, not private action. You and I are free to post whatever we wish about each other, free from fear that the government will do anything to silence either of us.

I suppose you (or I) could harm the other's online reputation to the point that no one trusts me (or you) anymore, to the point that the injured party might just as well shut down their blog(s), but not only wouldn't that be a first amendment violation, everything the victor posted to destroy the reputation of the loser would be protected by it... which is just as it should be...

Other than accusing you of bad acts--which is something that I'm sure you find distasteful--exactly what part of the paragraph you quoted from my comment do you disagree with? Do you believe that people shouldn't draw attention to the bigoted or otherwise nasty things that others do and say in public, and ask that they explain and/or apologize for them? Is it wrong to write blog/twitter/facebook posts, or letters to news outlets about them? Leaving aside the fact that in this case, I'm trying to shine the bright, sunny spotlight on your bigoted comment, exactly what is it in my words that you disagree with, considering the fact that you do many of these same things to the people with whom you disagree, every day?

“Black heritage. Whoo hoo! That is teh awesome. I goin' be try'n escpe from de massa's house to be goin' to dis heah black her'tge trail. Y'sm sir!" - [Posted by Donald Douglas to THE SWASH ZONE: BLACK HERITAGE TRAIL, BOSTON, MASS. at 10:27 PM, February 17, 2010]
--------

Submitted for moderator approval 2/23/2010, 12:59 AM (IM blog time)
------
As of 2/25/10, American Power Blogger Donald Douglas has not allowed this comment to appear.

Blogging While Employed - Where is the line?

In reply to the following comments at the Swash Zone post "THE RACIST BIGOT WHO TEACHES AT LONG BEACH CITY COLLEGE":
Octopus - 2:57 PM, February 22, 2010
Octopus - 3:37 PM, February 22, 2010
Capt. Fogg - 4:17 PM, February 22, 2010
(You only need click on the first link; the others are the next two comments, in order.) ((The original post was deleted in October, 2011. The links now go to my recreation of the post, via web cache and e-mail records.)
------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm sorry if I offended anyone or spoke out of turn as regards whether or not one should contact someone's place of employment for actions they take online. My issue isn't so much with Professor Douglas' legal rights (though perhaps an argument can be made on those grounds, as well), but with the morality--and just as important--the effectiveness of doing so.

I maintain that potentially criminal acts (harassment, threats of violence, ...) should be handled by the legal profession, and acts that impinge on your use and enjoyment of one's google blog should be handled by reporting such acts to google. It isn't that I'm opposed to reporting abusive acts by immoral actors; it's only that I believe we should report such acts to the officials and agencies who are empowered to act on the reports we make.

Where bigotry and other morally repugnant acts are concerned, I'm all for sunshine; publicize the nasty things that people say and do as much as possible--which, by the way, is one of the reasons I'm opposed to moderating such things away. Sometimes it's good to confront and be offended by the things people say and do, and to see that as many other people as possible are offended right along with you. Rather than hide bigoted blog comments, I say highlight them, repeating them as many times as it takes for people to get good and pissed off at the people that post them. (In fact, if the lawyer's don't object, I'd suggest posting all of the threats and other nonsense received via e-mail, as well.) I'm all for blog posts, letters to local media--including the LBCC college newspaper--with full quotes and context, tweets, facebook posts, submissions to "Worst Person in the World" segments, and any other means that uses sunshine and/or moonglow to highlight the bad acts Donald Douglas and those like him engage in.

Long Beach City College is not responsible for anything their employee, Donald Douglas, posts online, any more than the places any of us work for are responsible for our online posts and comments. He's not speaking on the college's behalf, and they cannot--and should not be able to--control his private thoughts and actions. (again, just as I wouldn't want anyone on this side of the aisle stifled from speaking by our employers.)

I absolutely believe that LBCC ought to be paying attention to the things Donald Douglas posts, because in using his position as an LBCC associate professor of political science to bolster his internet credibility, I believe he is harming their "brand," but that is up to them to research, determine, and deal with.

I understand that some feel justified, but I just don't agree that complaining to his college superiors for acts that are not in any way related to his job is ethically correct or practically productive. If there is a legal case for harassment or threatening behavior, the college will find out about it soon enough, and I suspect that that is where the ethical SOP's would come into effect.

I feel kinda bad that we disagree, Oct, (& Fogg, & rocky, ...), but I just can't go with you on this... I don't think it's right, and I don't think it'll work, besides. I hope we can continue to act in concert where we can, but this ain't one of those times...
---------

Submitted for moderator approval 2/22/10, 5:25 PM (or so, IM blog time)
--------
UPDATE - 2/23/10 - This comment was posted at the Swash Zone blog for 18- 24 hours, and then removed by the blog owner, for content. This is the first instance where a comment of mine did not appear / was removed from a liberal blog.)

UPDATE - 10/15/11 - The whole blog post was deleted from THE SWASH ZONE sometime in the last few days. I re-created what I could of the post from the web cache and my own records here, but 12 comments originally appended to the post were lost...

What Can Our Government Do For Us?

In reply to: First Lady: Childhood Obesity Threatens National Security | Homeland Security, and the third comment, in particular.
---------------------------

As to whether the US government has any role to play in the health and welfare of Americans, I think that ship has already sailed. How much of a role has and always will be determined by the politicians we elect to represent us. Now, I want those I vote for to use the power I lent them to speak up about issues like this, just as I would were I elected. Obviously the person who commented above me feels differently.

I'm really not so sure that the issue of obesity is political, in the sense that much of anyone in any political party is in favor of it. At best, it's a question of whether or not one believes that we should empower the people we elect to spend tax dollars or political capital on combatting it, or leave individuals to fend for themselves without the guidance and resources that the government can provide. And there we simply disagree.

All I can say to those who feel that government has no place in this issue is that you needn't avail yourselves of those resources if you don't want to. It would be nice if we could all allocate where we each want our tax dollars to be spent, so that you and I wouldn't have to pay for anything we each don't value or believe our government should be doing, but instead we elect people to do that on our behalf. And right now the people that we elected are willing to put money into helping us stay healthy, which you don't like but I do, as well as some things that you like more than I... That's just the way it goes in a representative democracy...
------------------

Submitted for moderator approval 2/21/2010, 9:06 AM (IM blog time)

Will Donald Post it, or is the Self-described Lion Really a Lamb?

In reply to: American Power: Leftists Are Liars, and I'll Show You...
-------------------------------------------

Comment in reply to the one Donald quoted here, but posted at my blog:
---
Donald, I replied to your attempt at moral relativism before you even wrote it. That the commentary Frisch wrote is more disgusting than yours in no way absolves you, regardless of what you happen to believe.
If you honestly believe that she deserved to have people contact her department chair because they didn't approve of what she posted in her personal/political dealings online, then I don't see how you can argue against people who disapprove of what you post online contacting yours. To suggest that there are different standards for those people you disagree with than there are for yourself makes you an absolute hypocrite.

As I said in the post, neither of you deserve(d) to be attacked at your schools for non-school related behaviors, unless those behaviors are unlawful or dangerous. I'm sorry that you seem to disagree, and prefer to be so morally inconsistent and intellectually dishonest.

If you believe there are distortions or lies in what I've written, you ought to be able to point them out. No where do I make the claim that you've ever wished someone's child dead. What I said was, you made disgusting comments at a post at a leftwing blog. The links are there for anyone who wishes to read the comment and decide for him-or-herself how disgusting it is. As far as making the comparison between your situation and that of professor Frisch, I'm pretty sure it was you who brought up the story and compared it to your own, not I. (Granted, you preferred to paint yourself in the role of her victim, Jeff Goldstein, but it's obvious that you're at least as much the perpetrator, as I showed.)

And while I understand that you want to change the subject, aside the one article we both quoted, nothing written by anyone at the Daily Kos has any relevance here. (But thank you for proving my point about your inability to discern individual authors and their individual posts from the site and it's readers as a whole.) Similarly, this isn't about me. I didn't make the bigoted remarks... I only posted about them. If the shoe was on the other foot, you would've done just the same. (Hell, you're trying to spin the story in your favor as it is...)

I do not worry that much of anyone--and most certainly not anyone whose opinion I value--will buy into your beliefs about my morality, Donald. I've spoken my piece about what I believe to be right, and unlike you, I'm not bending and twisting to protect my friends and crucify my enemies.

Writing disgusting things on the blogs of those with whom we disagree is wrong--no matter who does it.

Contacting the place of employment of a blogger with whom one does not agree--even if they write disgusting things on the blogs of their perceived enemies--is wrong--no matter who does it.

I note that you have so far not permitted my trackback leading to this post appear at the post to which it replies, even though I submitted it several hours ago, and you have made several posts since. Perhaps it was just an oversight, given how adamant you are about the fact that Fogg's comment did appear.

And seeing as how you repeated your comment above at a new American Power post, I hope you'll be gracious enough to permit this rebuttal to appear there, as well. I'll paste it in (along with a comment or two specific to that post) & send it just after posing it here.

(You're not under any obligation to allow my comments on your blog, of course, but it'd be odd not to, given how powerful you imagine yourself to be against we detractors, n'all... I mean, you are the Lion King, right?)
-------------
As far as your former student, I did not rebuke him or his comments in any way. In point of fact I agreed with him & said I was glad to hear that you are not the person in the classroom that you are online. I also reported that I have heard similar things from other students. (True, I did say I found it hard to believe, given how poorly you behave online, but not that I didn't believe it. And yes, I did also wonder whether you will continue to separate your politically partisan self from your political science professor self... I won't back down from that. I do wonder... ...and only time will tell.)

Finally, this isn't some plot to destroy you. (First off, I'm the guy writing that folks shouldn't contact the places of employment of their political foes, so I don't quite see how you can claim I'm a part of any kinda plot to do much of anything.) YOU made the unprovoked & bigoted comment at the Black Heritage Trail post. All I did was get offended, and write about it on my blog, which as I said above, is pretty much the same thing you do here on this blog. You're welcome to explain how the following comment can be taken any way but with offense, because I don't see it...:

"“Black heritage. Whoo hoo!

That is teh awesome. I goin' be try'n escpe from de massa's house to be goin' to dis heah black her'tge trail. Y'sm sir!"
-------
Submitted for moderator approval 2/20/2010, 11:35 PM (IM blog time)
-------
For reasons I leave for the reader to suss out on their own, American Power blogger (and self-described "Lion King of the savannah") Donald Douglas refused to post this comment at his blog.

On murdering Rush, and censuring news

In reply to: American Power: As Disgusting as Joseph Goebbels?:
-------------------------------

"planning to murder Rush Limbaugh when I suggested he be fired"?

Nope, not at the link you offered, Don, but at this one: American Power: Executing Rush Limbaugh??)

And as long as I'm leaving links, a trackback regarding bigotry, and this whole "cyber-bully" kerfuffle: Donald Douglas: “Black heritage. Whoo hoo! That is teh awesome. I goin' be try'n escpe from de massa's house to be goin' to dis heah black her'tge trail. Y'sm sir!"
----------------------
Submitted for moderator approval 2/19/2010, 'round 6:00 PM, IM blog time...

And my comment was seemingly approved, and then removed, too, judging by my e-mail...

repsac3 has left a new comment on the post "As Disgusting as Joseph Goebbels?":
Posted by repsac3 to American Power at February 19, 2010 2:18 PM

(You only get the e-mail if the comment is posted... And what's really funny, is that the next (& currently only) comment posted there, begins "It's Leftists that constantly insist upon censuring news they do not approve of - regardless of its objectivity or closeness to the facts." - Cuffy Meigs, commenting @ American Power: As Disgusting as Joseph Goebbels?, February 19, 2010 8:25 PM... "censuring news they do not approve of..." Preach on, right-wing brother Cuffy... Preach on...)

Confronting Bigotry, While Respecting Personal Expression

In reply to: THE SWASH ZONE: THE RACIST BIGOT WHO TEACHES AT LONG BEACH CITY COLLEGE:
--------------------

Anybody who's read my blogs knows of my thoughts regarding Dr. Douglas. I am appalled and amazed at some of the things he says and does, and his "faux black dialect" commentary is some of the most offensive stuff he posts. Half black or not, the guy talks like a racist, and taken together with his penchant for attacking men with whom he doesn't agree by suggesting (if not actually saying) that they're gay--apparently believing that gay men are not "real" men and thus less worthy of respect--exposes him as the bigot he is. (And that's to say nothing of his anti-muslim posts & commentary.)

It certainly doesn't surprise me that he would post something so offensive as this--:

“Black heritage. Whoo hoo!

That is teh awesome. I goin' be try'n escpe from de massa's house to be goin' to dis heah black her'tge trail. Y'sm sir!"

[Posted by Donald Douglas to THE SWASH ZONE: BLACK HERITAGE TRAIL, BOSTON, MASS. at 10:27 PM, February 17, 2010] (This comment was subsequently removed by a blog administrator.)

--but as frequently happens with things Professor Donald Douglas posts, I'm left wondering why he would stoop so low. (I mean, I know what I think... What I wonder is, what was he thinking, that would make him say such a thing?) Is he opposed to Black history and heritage? Does he have something against the trail in Boston? Does he think it's unamerican to speak of slavery, because it reflects poorly on America and the necocon catechism of American exceptionalism in all things?

All that said, I have to come out against contacting his employers directly. It's one thing to blog about his offenses, and even go so far as to post that the relevant folks at Long Beach City College should make themselves aware of the things he's writing online, should anything he says reflect poorly on the institution and it's reputation, legally or otherwise. (Dr. Donald Douglas is the only professor at Long Beach City College I know anything about... But if I were to know someone who was considering attending, and had a choice, I would certainly advise against going there, on the off chance they ended up having to take a course with the guy. And were I a parent, I would make the admissions department aware of that, too.)

But knowing about the things that Donald Douglas and all their employees are doing that may reflect poorly on Long Beach City College is their responsibility. While I certainly agree that Donald's bigotry is a matter about which they ought to be concerned, those of us on the blogesphere who disagree with him don't have the underlying grounds to speak to the school about it. We are not students or the guardians of students. He is not being a bigot or trolling our blogs in his capacity as a Long Beach City College employee. (The closest he comes is whipping out his position as a college level PoliSci associate professor and essentially yelling "respect my authoritay!!!" in his best Eric Cartman voice. Which in my experience over the years, generally only leaves folks saying "He's a professor? Really?!?) When he's blogging, he's just another private citizen, albeit a bigoted one. And just as we wouldn't want anyone contacting our employers because they disagree with the political or social views that we sit here and write about in our spare time, we shouldn't be hounding Donald at his job for what he does as a private citizen... ...not unless we have a good reason, anyway (such as being the parent of a student at the school, or God forbid, in one of the man's classes, for instance.)

I'm not saying that Long Beach City College shouldn't be aware of what Donald Douglas says and does in public, or care how his words and deeds may reflect on the institution... I'm just saying that I don't think it's our place to tell them quite so directly, if they don't already know...

That's my two cents, anyway... (And yes, I am aware of the shit-storm that may result from my tossing my pennies out, on this issue (perhaps even an ill wind or two blowing portside, even)... I'm prepared to deal with whatever comes, just as you folks are, I'm sure... In retrospect, perhaps I should've said something sooner--not that I expected anyone to change their tune on my say-so, but for the same reason I did so now; right is right. Honestly, I just figure it was a one (then two) time thing that would blow over and fade away of it's own accord... But it doesn't seem to be going that way...)
--------

Submitted for moderator approval 2/19/10, 2:48 AM (IM blog time)

UPDATE: I see Donald Douglas didn't like Octo's post, either... Can't imagine why... American Power: Swash Zone's Cyber-Bully Harassment Escalates!

A few quick things:
1) Donald Douglas' calling anyone a cyber-bully is highly pot/kettle. Barely a day goes by that he isn't attacking someone--often personally, with name-calling and insinuations that have nothing to do with the subject at hand--for what they believe and say politically or socially. And because of that...

2) seeing Donald Douglas once again playing the victim card -- even though I agree with him to a certain extent, as far as this subject goes -- strikes me as pretty damned hypocritical and sad. While I agree that contacting his place of employment without grounds to do so (being a LBCC student/parent) is wrong, his whining about it as though he does nothing to provoke such reactions in people (part of the very definition of a troll) is nuts.

3) I notice that in his AmPow post, Donald Douglas does not defend--or address in any way--the bigoted comment he made at The Swash Zone Blog that resulted in the "RACIST BIGOT" post.:

“Black heritage. Whoo hoo!

That is teh awesome. I goin' be try'n escpe from de massa's house to be goin' to dis heah black her'tge trail. Y'sm sir!"

[Posted by Donald Douglas to THE SWASH ZONE: BLACK HERITAGE TRAIL, BOSTON, MASS. at 10:27 PM, February 17, 2010] (This comment was subsequently removed by a blog administrator.)

THE RACIST BIGOT WHO TEACHES AT LONG BEACH CITY COLLEGE - THE SWASH ZONE - 5:36 PM, February 18, 2010

It seems someone at The Swash Zone decided to remove this post and all comments to it. But since I have several back links to this post and it's comments, I'm recreating it here, via it's web cache and my file of comments. I was also removed as a contributing author to this blog as a result of my comments to this post and elsewhere about this whole situation...

UPDATE: I should also probably clarify up top here (as I tried to do below) that while I backdated it to the date and time of it's original appearance at The Swash Zone on February 18th, 2010, this post was removed over there and reconstituted here in mid-October, 2011, and that there were originally 31 comments offered in reply to this post when it was at The Swash Zone; 30 appended to the post itself, and this comment, which spent about 24 hours attached to the original post, before it was moderated away for content and reposted here at this blog (in real time), instead. Unfortunately, the first 19 comments below (which, to clarify, are not necessarily the first 19 comments that actually appeared at the SZ post, though I believe the comments I do have are in the same date/time order as they were, there) are the only ones I can currently locate and repost.
-----

On family values and pretty pictures

In reply to American Power: Karen Allow and Baby LuLu:
-----------------

I'm fine with women exploiting themselves (or not exploiting themselves, for that matter). Having that choice is what freedom's all about, and I applaud her for telling her critics to STFU, whether it be about the photos of herself she chooses to post, or the make-up of her family. I feel the same way about her pix critics as I did about Meghan McCain's "boob" pic critics from aways back, and the same about her moral (& legal) right to be a single mom as I do about gay folks and their marital/family situations.

I'm all for less holier-than-thou criticism of people who don't live their lives exactly as you believe they should, and more live and let live.
-------------

Submitted for moderator approval 2/18/10, 12:55 PM (or so), IM blog time

Obesity is a Threat to National Security, say folks Left AND RIGHT

In reply to: First Lady: Childhood Obesity Threatens National Security - Rightside News, following a comment that rightly pointed out that member's of the top brass said this a few days earlier, and that the First Lady was repeating their claims.
--------------

Title of comment (You can title your comment at this site):

"And then there was Richard Carmona (Dubya's Surgeon General)"

“Obesity is not just a health issue,” said Richard Carmona, who served as surgeon general in the George W. Bush administration. Carmona is now with the Strategies to Overcome and Prevent Obesity Alliance (STOP), a coalition of consumer, government, labor, business, and health insurers that advocate “innovative and practical strategies” to combat obesity.

Obesity “affects our national and global security,” said Carmona. He said the U.S. has reached a “tipping point,” at which obesity “now impacts every aspect of our society, including the future of our health system.”

Obesity is crippling individuals and hurting American families, the workforce – even work productivity and the nation’s ability to be prepared for natural and manmade disasters: “When we look at one of the top reasons why young men and women fail to be retained on active duty in our uniformed services, obesity again rises to the forefront at a time when we need them more than ever.” - CNSNews.com - Health Experts Call Obesity A Threat to National Security

One can debate whether or not these folks are correct about the heath and societal risks that come with being a nation overweight, but it'd be a big mistake to claim there's some partisan bias involved in who's sounding the alarm on obesity...
--------

Submitted for approval 2/12/10, 8:50 AM (IM Blog time)