By JC
First off, I’d like to thank Skink (aka lizard) for offering me a place to vent a little, and maybe write something of interest. He and I had a good conversation this morning, and will be developing some ideas on where to go from here.
I’d love to continue to share a blog space with him, as when I first met his writings, and later his meat space personage, I recognized someone who was passionate about his writing and desire to get to the thick of things, and not let the political party fishbowl get in his way. Of course, when you chuck bricks at the fishbowl, sometimes the blowback is harsh, if not predictable. Liz has never been shy about rocking the boat, even when it might threaten his livelihood.
My inclination is always to do whatever I can to support the efforts of people to speak truth to power, empower the rebels. Occasionally that may not dovetail with my opinions or understanding of the facts, or world view, but I am willing to defer to the passion of young people motivated by necessity or virtue. I honor those who are willing to go the extra mile to get to the root of the matter, and learn from their efforts and mistakes. I have seen in lizard a willingness to slice through the bullshit and get to the core of the issue — whether it be geopolitics, the national political-corporate syndicate, state and local politics, or community issues… and then to take the time to be a family man and pursue his own personal creative efforts. He is the true “energizer bunny”.
So I am honored to be able to continue our collaboration! We may decide to expand our blogging or change venues and invite some other folks in and try to provide a unique view of politics and policy, the environment, social issues, and culture from the local to the global that no one else in Montana is doing. So stay tuned as we move on from here.
Next off, I’d like to thank those of you that dropped by 4&20 to offer your thoughts and well-wishes, and who have commented over the years, and to those who have emailed , texted and twittered their support. Blogging is a time consuming and often thankless affair, and without readers and commenters it is just self-gratification. Seeing how people respond to new ideas and information always has been my goal, and to learn from those responses. And to those who have written in the past like Duganz and Problem Bear at 4&20 and have contributed to a wider view of the world, thanks!
Jay may have been quoting diminished reader numbers as his raison d’être, but my take on it were that readership numbers correlated with posts: as the number of posts (and bloggers) rose, so did the readership. And as the number of posts (and bloggers) declined, so did the readership. The responsibility for readership decline is lies more on those who have not written (myself included) than those who have. So this is just another glimpse into his CYA approach to blogliness.
Through blogging I get a good glimpse into how others that have different views of the world think and react to material I come across and write about — that helps me keep from getting too comfortable in my own bubble. Being a good ole Montana boy, full of frontier libertarianism, folks like Swede and I have much in common, though politically we can be miles apart. I like to believe that some of the people who I have sparred with over the years would make for good company and conversation over a cup of coffee. I do value genuine conviviality, as opposed to the glad-handing fakeness of politicians and their entourage, or the phoniness of those who desire closeness to the purveyors of political power and patronage as epitomized by Jim Messina or John Podesta and the Messina wannabes like Jay Stevens or Matt Singer.
I have tried to learn to make my blogging more about ideas and conversation than about personalities and individuals. At that I admit to some failure, and have had to resort to my own internal blacklist to not respond to certain individuals, or to some hot-button issues. I like a good fight as much as anyone, but beyond a point it becomes counterproductive. Learning how not to get my buttons pushed in cyberspace has definitely helped to not do so in meatspace. But I do retain the right to waive my goal of being a gentlemanly blogger when it comes to those, like Stevens, who put politics and winning before just about anything else. And I’d like to thank those who over the years have pointed out to me that my toxic commenting really was counterproductive to furthering the conversation.
I’d also like to thank jhwygirl for having let me into 4&20 to write and pursue my thoughts. I hope that she finds what she’s looking for if she returns in ernest to continue her blogging there. She has a great take on issues in Montana, and hopefully democrats won’t stifle that part of her writing! Over the years we have had good friendly relations, and I hope that can continue, even if we end up taking some blogging pokes at each other now that we write from a distance.
As to the professional blogger and carpetbagger, Jay Stevens, I should have known that he’d eventually resurface when the Montana Dem party decided that Liz and I were not going to help them in their electoral efforts. I’ll not be returning to write at 4&20, and no doubt some of you are slobbering in your auto-felatio grandiosity at Jay’s treatment of Liz and I. But with excommunication comes liberty, and the freedom for us to write as we please and not have to look over our shoulders. I bear Jay no ill will, but it is open season on his democratic cheerleading efforts.
I have no doubt that Jay’s moves have been sparked by his and other democrat’s desire to continue to elect democrats, no matter how far to the right they have moved, how anti-union and environment they have become, or how owned by Wall Street their offices and elections are. It only took about 2 minutes of perusing Jay’s professional blogging gig on his “Soapbox” to uncover the following drivel professional wordage to understand his mindset:
The Unexcitable and Invulnerable Hillary Clinton
I am not excited about Hillary Clinton… And she’s the most qualified candidate… But is there anyone better suited for the job? Is there anyone else who has the knowledge of Washington, D.C. she does? Is there anyone else better able to roll up her sleeves and duke it out with a hostile, potentially rebellious Republican Congress?
No.
And that’s all you need to know about Jay and why he did what he did: making the blogosphere a little safer for dems to try and put Montana on the table for Hillary. I’ll be very grateful to not have to share blogging space with someone who has so transparently revealed himself to be nothing more than a professional democrat shill.
As to me, I have no illusions that blogging is either a suitable replacement for independent journalism, or a viable venue to persuade individuals about political candidacies. It is a great venue for people to share and discuss the limitless quantity of information available on the internet or debate policy. For me, blogging ultimately is about sharing what I have read and learned, occasionally seasoned with some personal experience, and discussing it with others — whether or not they share my opinion.
If I’m not learning something new, blowing holes in old and stale ideas, or advocating for the multitude of issues and policies I find important, then it’s really not worth me writing about. At heart I’m a policy guy and an activist, which always runs me up the wrong side of politicians and the law. I don’t care who the politician is, if they have bad policy stances, I’m willing to endure the consequences of pointing that out.
Calling out Jon Tester for his post-electoral handling of his promises to Paul Richards in 2006, and labeling his actions as “lies” probably has garnered me more hatred blogging than anything else I’ve written about. His rider on wolf management was just one of the heinous actions he has taken. His Logging Bill is another. His acceptance of bribes campaign contributions from Wall Street during the FinReg legislative runup while on the Senate Banking Committee is another example of his corruption that is emblematic of everything that is wrong with modern [democrat] electoral politics.
Attacking our country’s efforts to expand and consolidate it’s global hegemony also has resulted in significant blowback, including contributing to the blacklisting of 4&20 by many other sites. I never knew that McCarthyism was still so alive and thriving among democrats, or that trying to understand the politics, culture and history of a country like Russia or Germany could garner one such ostracism. If anything, it has revealed how small-minded and petty democrats have become; how ingrained in the propaganda emanating from the White House and Pentagon — as trumpeted by vestiges of a once proud print industry — they have become.
I wonder how long the purification will take until 4&20 is sanitized enough to be returned to blogrolls on democrat sites? Anybody want to place bets on when MT Cowgirl, Flathead Memo and Intelligent Discontent re-list 4&20? Funny that right-wing sites were closer ideologically to democrat blogsites than 4&20 under Liz and I, and were allowed continued advertising on their blogrolls!
Those sorts of actions by others is very telling, in that it underscores the importance of what we have written about. If we were far out of bounds of democrat thought, yet harmless and irrelevant, we would have just been ignored. That we have garnered the reactions that we have is very gratifying.
And that about says it for now. Till later… keep your minds open, and your fingers active!
[/long winded ramble]
JC
So lets see this from another perspective, JC. You were invited onto the property by someone who wasn’t the owner, squatted for years, and now the owner is supposed be all the these awful things because he kicked you off?
I’m just suggesting that it’s hard to paint yourself as a truth warrior when you say things as patently false as ‘you bear Jay no ill will’ or instantly run home to momma that it’s the Demoncrats out to ‘get you’, and caterwhal about the flaws of others. I wrote to you many years ago that embracing the Bush doctrine of “with us or against us” is a certain loser, politically, socially and morally. I’m enthused for Lizard’s efforts, and hope that you use your opportunity here to correct the mistake of Bushism.
“some of you are slobbering in your auto-felatio grandiosity”
that must have been meant for you.
Maybe it was. But if it was, it would simply offer evidence that everything I just wrote was true.
It was an apt description, certainly.
what’s wrong with squatting? they can help address mosquito problems in Miami and get elected Mayor in Barcelona. the latter, Ada Colau, cut her salary by 80%. Viva squatters!!!!
‘Didn’t say there was anything wrong with it, William Skink. (Would it be offensive if I keep calling you Lizard? It’s easier to type than your name.) But one should at least be realistic about what right and reason they have to do so.
no argument from me on his right to evict us. reason, on the other hand…
Terminology gets messed up, as in truth and accuracy. What Jay did is within his rights, and yet underhanded. He acts immorally, violating basic human trust. But it is completely legal.
I got a phone call the other night from a fund raiser, Police Protective or something, and I asked how much of contributions are kept by the fundraisers. The caller right away launched into a script, “we are required by law to inform you that ten percent or more of your contribution goes to find raising costs …”
“Ten percent or more” I thought was accurate, and not truthful. if it is 90%, he should tell me that rather than “10 percent or more.” in the same manner, Jay, if an honest man, simply says what he is doing and why. It is not hard to understand that lies are going on, covered by accuracy and legality. He’s got an agenda. Any fool can see.
ah, thanks comrade!
in addition to our chat today, I had a really good conversation with j-girl a few hours ago, and totally support her efforts to get back to writing. I think ultimately good things will come out of this shake up. I had a lot of fun setting up this landing spot, and j-girl said she’ll put up a link on the blogroll when she gets a chance.
Though party leadership is equally bought and corrupt, it has long been my impression that Republicans are more open minded and tolerant than Democrats – I am talking about personality types, not intellectual capacity, which hovers around 100 IQ for both. But from Republicans I get arguments about the rightness of their positions, often Randian in tilt (as in “why can’t you see how right we are?”) where Democrats tend to reflexively fall back on candidate virtues and then banning. They tend to be more faith based, letting their leaders do as they please, where Republican leaders do have to mimic their followers in stupid ideas and gestures.
The presence of so many authoritarian types in the Democrat blogging world to me indicates the presence of money pressure, blogging imitating politics. But blogger’s can be had for pennies, no doubt. It is hard to understand, as blogging does not change minds or affect partisan politics, but the parties do mind their fences and watch this show. It is a herd management tool, like those little border collies running around nipping at heels, disciplining the ones that might step out.
But honestly fellas, partisan politics is a sideshow. I do hope you’ve learned that. The 2016 contest is already decided, and it would not have changed things anyway. The illusion that we live in a democracy is important to the leaders, as it prevents real citizen uprisings. And it is important to citizens in the same way that praying to Jesus is to religious types – it says “I matter to them!” The one greatest obstacle that keeps this nation from claiming democratic status is our election system, a massive waste of pointless energy that could be used for real pressure point activism.
Steve Kelly was been working the trenches for years, suing people when they break the law, trying to be clever and trip up the money people, never paying attention to party labels … He is my ideal of the citizen activist. You’ll find him right now working with Garrity to advance NREPA, never having been fooled by the switch from Burns to Tester for a second. That kind of politics is the only thing that can be effective in a one party state, grass roots and focused on non-partisan purpose. If it does not succeed, so what. Neither would joining a party have an effect.
Mark, would you please tell the Democratic Party to hurry up and send me my check. I’ve been waiting for years now. I need some summer tires for my truck.
P.S. Love the name of your new site. Unfortunately, when you type it into a search engine, you get ads for Viagra. And although it’s his site and he can do with it as he pleases, I’ll ask Don to put Reptile Dysfunction on the ID blogroll.
I would appreciate that. I had the same problem googling and have to rely on my book mark. I think to get the domain registered there’s a small fee, though. I’ll look into it.
Pete, I’ve never for a second thought you get paid for anything. You do not run a Democrat blog that I am aware of. Nor do I imagine those getting paid are getting paid much. But a little does a lot.
I get paid pretty well as a gigolo but not so much for my writing.
From the Urban Dictionary:
ereptile dysfunction
A sexual dysfunction commonly found in reptiles. Dinosaur impotence.
A known cure has not been found.
That brontosaurus has ereptile dysfunction, he totally isn’t scoring
So I gave this new blog a look, via Pogreba’s trackback.
1600 words and all you’ve demonstrated is the answer to your own question. The reason people won’t read your blog posts on 4&20 — or anyplace else — is simple: you’re not saying something that interests them. Other than yourselves and the six career commenters who attach themselves like barnacles to every Montana political blog, how many hard-working Montanans do you honestly believe are going to choose to spend their time reading some pointless “long winded rambl[ing]” or Vogon poetry?
It’s adorable that y’all think quantity or frequency of blog posts has anything to do with readership, and that the quality of your content isn’t worth mentioning — in a 1600-word essay with no discernible thesis. Look: it’s swell that you have a vanity blogging platform, but don’t be shocked when the reading public isn’t terribly interested in watching you blog at your own navel.
Just one reader’s opinion, but sloppy semantics like using the word ‘democrat’ as an adjective instead of a proper noun, or not knowing when to use “Liz and I” instead of “Liz and me” are the hallmarks of weak thinking and hack writing, so you won’t be added to my RSS feed.
not being added to your RSS feed is really terrible news. I don’t know how we’ll bounce back from this disappointment.
I’m glad to not have your toxic and bitter voice here bisonburgher. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out. 🙂
I’ve always found myself and some of these guys more interesting than the “general public,” which usually doesn’t have a clue.
I suppose you aren’t sophisticated enough to know that when one says “democrat party” it is a slam against democrats, who insist that it is the “democratic” party. As to the rest of your drivel about grammatical errors and word counts and all, I’m terribly sorry that my first pass through a stream of thought ramble doesn’t cut the mustard in your book.
Then again, I’m sure that if you followed Pogreba’s trackback, then you’ve spent enough time at his blog learning all about how not to write…
Empty room save for guys holding rocks. An apt metaphor. Especially on a post which assumes to critique other blogs, with little or no basis further than the critique reacted to so harshly here.
Don’t be too quick now. I’ve been to blogs that draw more traffic, you know, like Cowgirl. It’s pretty vapid, liking Democrats hating Republicns, the usual fare. People eat that stuff up,like popcorn, which is all it is. In addition, JC and Skink are being punished for nonconformist behavior. You coming in to rub it in, you the ultimate conformist, is dark. Is there a full moon tonight?
Wow. Being punished by ‘striking out on their own’ without a readership already established by someone they have nothing but insult for doing, yes? There is nothing to rub in for anyone save you, Toxic. They will make it or break it on their own. I’m simply suggesting that grudges and venom aren’t a way to start a blog.
Come back to reality for a sec, son. Lizard and JC are doing nothing that hundreds of thousands of others haven’t done before them. They are creating a narrative on the Internet. They had that before but inherited a readership. That’s called a ‘legacy’. Now they have to build something on their own, or at least Lizard does because JC is still hanging onto another’s coattails. But, y’see, that legacy just doesn’t go politely away at their request, at least not on the ‘Tubes. I’ve written it far too many times for the message to be missed, to both of them and to you. Attacking potential allies is a perfect plan to remain alone and slaughtered, intellectually speaking of course. JC has written at length about how fearful he is of others applying a word to him. He should be quivering in a corner right now. But he isn’t because he sees reality enough to know that no one will do anything to him, save disagree. Still, attacking disagreement seems like smart course to get whatever message across? No, it’s really not. If you tell everyone how stupid they are for caring, then no one will care. It’s not conformist. It’s selfish. It’s foolish. Shout at the moon if you wish. The result will be the same.
I think my comment was about you.
And mine was certainly about you.
no one’s hanging on anyone’ coattails. we will just keep writing about stuff, and you, Rob, can keep talking about it in the comments 😉
Your writing, Rob, has an Alistair Crowley kind of depth to it, embedded messages, the need tor read backwards to find enclosed dog-whistle words for the very attuned.
Or maybe not.
Funny thing, there. Crowley believed that magic could bring down buildings, just like you. Of course he also believed that individuals could build them …
Lizard, do you recognize the irony of tasking someone to blog about *you* in defense of someone who was told to get his own blog at least dozens of times, and still requires you to do it? Didn’t think so.
I would respond if I understood what you are saying.
As I said: Didn’t think so.
Rob, I have evidence. You’re the magic man, trusting in authority figures, as your type do.