Sources you use Sarah, but for me at least, it comes down to "Who are my allies?"

And HuffPo, while they may cover some good stuff, also runs articles from Obama apologists, about how we shouldn't get upset about anti contraception forced birthers being appointed to postions in charge of whether poor women get contraception. So that tells me, regardless over the outrage about Tiller, that they aren't my allies.

And Daily Kos, whose proprietor deems women's rights a pie fight, is not my ally.

And of course denigrate all those feelings, as invalid adolescent puling, because that totally invalidates their valid concern or objections, instead of defending the articles on their merit, because that's hard work I guess.

But since I don't think the USA PATRIOT Act is a good thing, I won't sign on to using against domestic terrorists. Cuz, yes Roeder is a terrorist. But agreeing with the PATRIOT ACT would make Ashcroft and Cheney my allies, and as I demonstrated earlier, I'm picky about my allies.

And if we believe this is terrorism, we need to act like it's terrorism.

Today an 88-yr old shot a guard at the US Holocaust Museum in DC.

Suspect is identified as 88-year-old James W. von Brunn, who decries Jews, blacks on rambling, racist and bitterly anti-Semitic website.

What should we do? Do we think that this individual should have been held indefinitely at a secret site due to his website?

Serious question.

of the good, IMNVHO.

By all means be choosy about your allies. Just don't let your feelings about the site source prevent you from checking out the content.

Further, abhorrent as the USA PATRIOT ACT is, why not put it to equal use against white male "Christian" actors? Or is it a special law reserved to use against brown people?

I'd like to see RICO and FACE used to shut down Operation Rescue in all its incarnations, frankly.

Rev Wright:

Wright said that when he went to the polls, he did not hold any grudge against Obama.

"Of course I voted for him; he's my son. I'm proud of him," Wright said. "I've got five biological kids. They all make mistakes and bad choices. I haven't stopped loving any of them.

Asked if he had spoken to the president, Wright said: "Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he'll talk to me in five years when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office. ...

As I mentioned in the other thread, hate speech isn't limited to "the right," or "wingnuts."

The only response available is to condemn without hesitation and to be fair in application.

and I think a great way to force repeal of a repugnant law like USA PATRIOT ACT would be to actually USE it as though it were a real law, instead of a convenient instrument with which to suppress selected elements of the population (notably females, brown people, poor people, and non-"Christian"s).

and his victim at the Holocaust Museum today did die.

Surely this is an(other) instance in which we see that the screaming fits the rightwing press had about the recent report on potential domestic terrorism oughtn't be allowed to force a rollback in the threat assessment.

More here on von Brunn:

Sergeant David Schlosser, spokesman for the US Park Police, said it was believed that two security guards returned fire and there were only two people injured: one security guard and the shooter.

The condition of the security guard was described as "grave" and the alleged assailant was said to be in a critical condition.

Fox News, NBC and CNN all said the gunman had been identified as James von Brunn, 88, a Maryland resident who has long been tied to hate groups and anti-government organisations, and served a prison sentence for taking a gun into the Federal Reserve.

If you also would link to Correntewire in your posts once in a while. And there is plenty more here where that came from.

but I've always thought the point of links was to bring in and make available information that wasn't already here.

and help develop the conversation/point/argument which is already present. I appreciate how powerful that tool is when Vastleft and Lambert use it. It's even better than tagging in the header and along the same lines. It also (and no small thing) acknowledges as a hat tip the work done by others here. It's a courtesy.

Also, your whole "shaming" of people into "rehabilitating" sites which they saw (or watched in horror, your pick) spread bullshit truthiness (and still traffic in it), is (IMHO) boring, counterproductive and generally hurts your larger goal. Compounding that, the information is in almost every case already available on non-truthy blogs like Shakeville, Avedon, etc..

It isn't our fault that Josh Marshall was kidnapped, that Kos became a worthless wasteland of (primarily) screeching misogynists, or that Huffington Post is, well, Huffington Post, it's their fault. But whoever said Salon was toxic? Slate, maybe....

in fact, is what I think is wrong with a lot of the blog-o-sphere -- and is harmful to the not-the-GOP community and to the causes of progress and liberals.

I don't want to be part of a blue "Free Republic" community. I don't want to be exclusive. I don't want to ignore good writers, good writing, or good information because it appears in places where, also, I find drek. See, drek is somewhat in the eye of the beholder -- I find a lot of drek in the Main$tream Media, for example, but once in awhile they come up with something good too (I read Science News, National Geographic, Texas Parks and Wildlife magazines at home; at the library I read Mother Jones and UTNE. Sometimes I'll buy Mother Earth News) -- just like beauty.

Am I a Kossack? Eh. I agree with many of the things written by many of the posters at DKos, and many of the things written at TexasKAOS and Burnt Orange Report. I disagree heartily with many other things at all those sites, as well.

Driving traffic? Haven't thought of that much, really, as it's a technical aspect of blogging I don't know / understand all that well. I've deliberately tried to get folks to read things I thought were well written or made a good point from time to time; but for the most part I use links as documentation, the way you'd use a quote or a footnote in a paper for, say, a class in high school or college. You know: here's what I found, here's where I found it, as a basis for what I either agree with, disagree with, or draw a conclusion from -- go check it out, see what you think.

Shakesville's not someplace I visit regularly. My bad, maybe; but it's like watching Oprah, I think: it's not a welcoming environment to/for me.

I like Avedon, though. I used to adore The People's Republic of Seabrook, but it's gone now. Likewise The Horse. I can take Somerby or leave him: his language is a little hyperbolic for me, and after awhile the depth of the paths he cuts gets almost self-mocking in its repetitiveness. You can, demonstrably, be so cynical you can kill irony single-handedly; similarly, the tone you use can overwhelm the information you're trying to impart, and I don't want that to happen when I write. So I try not to exclude sources and I try to get people not to let that "revulsionary reaction" keep them from checking out what's available. Note that the aesthetic of palatability sometimes has to give way to the practicality: Like Ziva told McGee about maggots, when you're hungry enough they're not bad eating.

The thing is, the blogosphere's in danger of turning into the M$M on the Intertoobz, I'm afraid: there are the voices you listen to 'cause they're the 'net equivalent of Sam Donaldson or Cokie Roberts or Walter Cronkite or Jim Lehrer -- and then there are the voices that are, like, the net equivalent of the poor sucker reporting a mine explosion for local radio at three in the morning. Some of what they can tell us is way more valuable than all the punditry plastered on dead trees, cable tv, and the Sunday morning talk shows combined. Just doesn't get any attention 'cause it's not ZOMFG Breaking NEWS RIGHT NOW!!!! even when it ought to be, and Carrie Prejean be damned.