Gay Patriot Header Image

A comment thread which shows the worst — and best — of blogging

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 4:30 am - May 3, 2012.
Filed under: Blogging,Civil Discourse

During the day yesterday, I guessed (before checking our incoming traffic) that we had been linked on at least one liberal blog given the number of hate commentscaught in the spam filter.  The filter caught smart comments as well,including fair critiques of my post; perhaps we can attribute those to Glenn Reynolds’s link.  (And at least one clever quip.)

Since I took the day off from blogging, I read more comments than I normally do and chose to rescue nearly every comment, no matter how mean, no matter how jaundiced a view of gay conservatives they offered.

Mike Jackson wondered, for example, if our blog had announced “an internal poll showing approx 22 of 24 writers were voting for John Kerry against Bush over the same sex marriage issue“.  I would not be blogging here if I had not e-mailed Bruce thanking him for his post telling Log Cabin to shove it for failing to endorse W. Although we criticized W for supporting the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), we still supported his reelection.

On the other side of the spectrum, Frank compared Republicans to Nazis:

The Republican party in Louisiana has forcibly filled a building with children, nailed the doors and windows shut, and set it on fire. The analogy to the Shoah is deliberate.

Another dressed up the standard cliche:  “To be gay and conservative, to be black and conservative, to be poor and conservative, is a contradiction in terms.”  Frog in a pot offered said cliche, “To be a gay conservative is the equivalant of a black belonging to the KKK.”  A very unoriginal amphibian he.

These comments showed the worst — and the best — of the blogosphere, the worst those who respond with attacks rather than arguments, the best, those addressing the actual substance of the argument and even teasing out its flaws.

Do hope those who offered the thoughtful comments keep coming back and keep commenting.  And do hope the others learn from their manner of discourse.

FROM THE COMMENTS:  alanstorm questions a left-wing cliche about gay conservatives:

”To be gay and conservative, to be black and conservative, to be poor and conservative, is a contradiction in terms.”

As usual, assertions offered with no supporting evidence, just another assertion that gays are “despised” because of who they are.



  1. Do hope some people around here read Chapter 7 of Brietbart’s “Righteous Indignation.”

    Because to be perfectly frank, attempting to argue coherently with a collective demonstrably uninterested in coherence is akin to bailing out a sinking ship with a spoon.

    Comment by My Sharia Moor — May 3, 2012 @ 9:52 am - May 3, 2012

  2. ”To be gay and conservative, to be black and conservative, to be poor and conservative, is a contradiction in terms.”

    As usual, assertions offered with no supporting evidence, just another assertion that gays are “despised” because of who they are.

    Of course, to be liberal and think is a contradiction in terms. For confirmation, see any liberal website.

    Comment by alanstorm — May 3, 2012 @ 10:34 am - May 3, 2012

  3. Of course, to be liberal and think is a contradiction in terms. For confirmation, see any liberal website.

    That was not so fifty years ago when issues were openly debated and liberals were able to make their case with a certain clarity of purpose and intent.

    It is entirely true today. Liberals now hide themselves in a cloak of moderation and do things by stealth, because they dare not be open and honest.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 3, 2012 @ 11:14 am - May 3, 2012

  4. Bruce certainly won’t like me doing this, but I think this is probably the best place to post a Twitter conversation we recently had.


    @GayPatriot If only your critiques of Barney Frank were as powerful as this one, I might’ve listened to you more.
    May 01, 11:37 AM via Choqok


    @AmysFantasies Are you frikkin kidding me? Our blog has skewered Barney Frank for 8 years. You weren’t paying attention.
    May 01, 8:09 PM via Twitter for iPhone


    @GayPatriot When did you post about Barney Frank supporting an anti-gay Democrat over a pro-gay Republican on your site then?
    May 03, 4:15 PM via Choqok


    @AmysFantasies If you don’t think we criticized Barney Frank…. then you have never read our blog.
    May 03, 4:47 PM via web


    @GayPatriot I’m only going to ask one more time. The link I posted cites a specific story about Barney Frank. Did you cover it? Yes or no.
    May 03, 4:57 PM via Choqok


    @AmysFantasies STFU. #BLOCKED.
    May 03, 5:00 PM via web

    He wasn’t joking either, he really did block me for this exchange. This is just hilariously ironic given the story here not too long ago about liberals being far more likely to block or unfriend people because of political disagreements, then Bruce loses it and blocks me because of three tweets asking whether or not he covered a story about Barney Frank that I think was very important and something that definitely belonged on this site.

    To clarify, the article I posted is from Good As You and details occasions where Barney Frank placed partisan politics over LGBT rights, supporting anti-gay Democrats over neutral or even pro-gay Republicans simply because of the D next to their names. That’s utterly ridiculous in my opinion, and was exactly the sort of thing GayPatriot should’ve highlighted to the gay community. A vote for Barney Frank was not always a vote for gay rights, and voting against Frank may not have just been beneficial from a conservative point of view, it could’ve benefited those of a progressive agenda too!

    My beef was that the ‘skewering’ of Frank focused too much on Frank’s personality and the conservatism of his opponents, preaching to a segment of the electorate that was always going to oppose Frank and ignoring Frank’s usual supporters who would be repulsed by his actions in opposing pro-gay Republican candidates and more likely to switch sides or just stay at home rather than support a man willing to put partisan politics over LGBT rights. Whether or not the story was ever covered her is something I do not know, searching the site tends to be pretty difficult due to the lack of a full-text search and the unorthodox tagging system.

    This was the Twitter debate that got Bruce to block me and I’m sad it ended this way. I hold no particular animus towards Bruce over this and I would hope he comes to his senses. I was not spamming (three tweets over three days is hardly a deluge) and my concerns were genuine, I want to see you doing better in trying to unseat Democrats because solid, honest efforts to do so benefit everyone. You may keep me blocked and may even object to me bringing this up here, but those are my thoughts and I hope for all parties to be reasonable in this.

    P.S. I’ve saved this post in its entirety on my own side just in case it get deleted, and one upshot of this is that while I lost one follower, I gained two others while telling my story about it. One step back, two steps forward I guess.

    Comment by Serenity — May 3, 2012 @ 2:06 pm - May 3, 2012

  5. Actually, Pomposity, the reason Bruce blocked you is very straightforward: you’re a troll.

    If you think I’m enjoying this, I am. A lot. No matter who wins the next election, everyone else in this thread will have multiple reasons to hate them. As for me, I stopped caring about two months ago. Makes very little difference to me either way, so I intend to antagonize all of you as much as possible and have some fun.

    Comment by Serenity — November 5, 2011 @ 6:40 am – November 5, 2011

    Your lies don’t work here, child; we know exactly what you are like and what your motivations are, and we have zero qualms about calling them out.

    Now, since you slandered and lied about Bruce, explain why he should continue to tolerate you posting, especially since you yourself have screamed and cried and demanded banning of other people who you feel are only there to antagonize you.

    All this boils down to is poor, pathetic little Pomposity trying to lie its way out of its problems and demand that others follow rules that it will never under any circumstances follow itself. And that fact has now been made patently obvious to any and all observers.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 3, 2012 @ 3:24 pm - May 3, 2012

  6. Serenity,

    I did not read your stuff closely enough to try to synthesize your gripe.

    Would you mind distilling your beef into a short paragraph that makes it clear what is eating at you?

    Your shifting and dodging technique that drags on through myriad comments back and forth has become so tiresome that I really don’t think this is any longer a place for you to play that charade.

    There was a point where it was worth demonstrating how you dig the hole deeper and deeper and deeper until you declare lack of time or illness or something similar to escape.

    But everyone is pretty much underwhelmed by how you act out and your grabs for attention.

    So, maybe actually presenting a complaint in brief might be a way to get back in the action.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 3, 2012 @ 3:43 pm - May 3, 2012

  7. […] I wrote yesterday, I can often tell just from checking the spam filter when we’ve been linked by a left-wing […]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » A gay conservative blogger’s hunch on the Grenell Matter — May 4, 2012 @ 2:47 am - May 4, 2012

  8. I blocked Serenity on Twitter because he/she was hounding me and asserting we had never criticized Barney Frank. I informed he/she that he/she obviously never read this blog. I didn’t know that he/she was Serenity. Now that I do…. I’d like to add:


    Comment by Bruce (GayPatriot) — May 4, 2012 @ 2:20 pm - May 4, 2012

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.