-
Where Jill Will Talk Like She Writes
-
The White House Project
Print This Post
Mar
31
On the subject of identity theft
Filed Under Politics | 7 Comments
No one should feel forced or be forced to give up their free speech rights because others abuse that right through the availability of anonymous commenting. Likewise, no one’s free speech rights should be usurped by others, through the mechanism of anonymous commenting.
Rules or no rules, ethics or no ethics, morals or no morals - call the set of lines a blog author draws anything you like. Maybe these boundaries most closely resemble those in women’s lacrosse, a game in which, until just this year, there were literally no boundaries unless and until you ran into people on the sidelines. Then, you knew you were out of bounds.
But the bottom line for me is that when the way in which those who participate in blogs jeopardize the validity of the very medium itself, by using the very tools designed to allow as much expression as possible - such as anonymous commenting - against the very people who’ve set up shop to allow that expression - such as those of us who write and/or maintain blogs, the likelihood that no one will take any of us seriously and that the medium will forever be seen as a big ole mudpit increases unacceptably.
That might be fine for some folks. Each blogger decides for himself or herself what’s acceptable.
But each blog host also has a choice to make about the tone he or she wants his or her blog to project. Allowing commenters to rule the roost, play nasty tricks and blacken the good efforts of others who hope to increase and enhance debate and news dissemination degrades the otherwise free flow of ideas governed in general by a common interest in having an open and honest discussion.
Don’t like my word choices? Don’t think I make sense? Don’t think I have a brain cell in my head? Don’t think I should be here saying what I like? Think I’m too self-righteous?
Then don’t read my blog and don’t try to impersonate me.
Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but identity theft and defamation is illegal.
In the meantime, a hattip to those who understand my point, you know who you are and I appreciate your taking the appropriate actions. It would be a shame if you now feel that you can’t link to whichever blogs you want to because your anonymous commenters ridicule and abuse the freedom your blog offers, for that itself is a form of coercion against your free speech rights.
Good luck sorting it out. Good luck to us all for trying to sort it out.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:50 pm March 31st, 2006 in Politics | 7 Comments
Print This Post
Mar
31
Duck…duck…GOOSE!
Filed Under Politics | Leave a Comment
Child-sized handfulls of pulverized corn kernels rain down on the translucent green necks of the male mallards. The sound of the water’s rush blends with the truck rumbles, cellphone chats and children’s greetings of, “Hi Duck! Duck? MALLARD!”
From step to step to water’s edge, three sidestep and scurry toward the most densely packed inlets, butts up or chests raised with wings outstretched like a sunbather who wants to maximize her warmth by increasing exposed surface area.
“How many do you have left? Whoa! I’ll need more - I could use some more…”
“I’m going to save mine!”
“I’m going to save some, too!”
“Oh, Duck! You are so cute - just do one at a time - they might get enough….”
The leafless trees let the sunshine in. No shade, few shadows.
Little brother says, “Hey - look over there - some ducks.”
Big sister says, “They’re geese! Not so close!”
High pitched bird calls flutter and add to the background, like the last moments of CBS Sunday Morning with Charles Kuralt, when nothing but sound and the credits roll.
“One mallard!”
“Two mallards!”
“Three mallards!”
“Hey look - more ducks trying to get the ducks over there!”
A mother’s heart leaps with a child’s stomp on the muddy soil. “Don’t get so close!” Still a chill in the air.
“Oh! I’m goose! Goose…goose…goose…duck!”
Spring can’t be far away.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:12 pm March 31st, 2006 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Mar
31
On the subject of identity theft
Filed Under Politics | Leave a Comment
No one should feel forced or be forced to give up their free speech rights because others abuse that right through the availability of anonymous commenting. Likewise, no one’s free speech rights should be usurped by others, through the mechanism of anonymous commenting.
Rules or no rules, ethics or no ethics, morals or no morals - call the set of lines a blog author draws anything you like. Maybe these boundaries most closely resemble those in women’s lacrosse, a game in which, until just this year, there were literally no boundaries unless and until you ran into people on the sidelines. Then, you knew you were out of bounds.
But the bottom line for me is that when the way in which those who participate in blogs jeopardize the validity of the very medium itself, by using the very tools designed to allow as much expression as possible - such as anonymous commenting - against the very people who’ve set up shop to allow that expression - such as those of us who write and/or maintain blogs, the likelihood that no one will take any of us seriously and that the medium will forever be seen as a big ole mudpit increases unacceptably.
That might be fine for some folks. Each blogger decides for himself or herself what’s acceptable.
But each blog host also has a choice to make about the tone he or she wants his or her blog to project. Allowing commenters to rule the roost, play nasty tricks and blacken the good efforts of others who hope to increase and enhance debate and news dissemination degrades the otherwise free flow of ideas governed in general by a common interest in having an open and honest discussion.
Don’t like my word choices? Don’t think I make sense? Don’t think I have a brain cell in my head? Don’t think I should be here saying what I like? Think I’m too self-righteous?
Then don’t read my blog and don’t try to impersonate me.
Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but identity theft and defamation is illegal.
In the meantime, a hattip to those who understand my point, you know who you are and I appreciate your taking the appropriate actions. It would be a shame if you now feel that you can’t link to whichever blogs you want to because your anonymous commenters ridicule and abuse the freedom your blog offers, for that itself is a form of coercion against your free speech rights.
Good luck sorting it out. Good luck to us all for trying to sort it out.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 7:50 pm March 31st, 2006 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Mar
31
Duck…duck…GOOSE!
Filed Under Politics | Leave a Comment
Child-sized handfulls of pulverized corn kernels rain down on the translucent green necks of the male mallards. The sound of the water’s rush blends with the truck rumbles, cellphone chats and children’s greetings of, “Hi Duck! Duck? MALLARD!”
From step to step to water’s edge, three sidestep and scurry toward the most densely packed inlets, butts up or chests raised with wings outstretched like a sunbather who wants to maximize her warmth by increasing exposed surface area.
“How many do you have left? Whoa! I’ll need more - I could use some more…”
“I’m going to save mine!”
“I’m going to save some, too!”
“Oh, Duck! You are so cute - just do one at a time - they might get enough….”
The leafless trees let the sunshine in. No shade, few shadows.
Little brother says, “Hey - look over there - some ducks.”
Big sister says, “They’re geese! Not so close!”
High pitched bird calls flutter and add to the background, like the last moments of CBS Sunday Morning with Charles Kuralt, when nothing but sound and the credits roll.
“One mallard!”
“Two mallards!”
“Three mallards!”
“Hey look - more ducks trying to get the ducks over there!”
A mother’s heart leaps with a child’s stomp on the muddy soil. “Don’t get so close!” Still a chill in the air.
“Oh! I’m goose! Goose…goose…goose…duck!”
Spring can’t be far away.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 6:12 pm March 31st, 2006 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Mar
31
Duck…duck…GOOSE!
Filed Under Politics | Leave a Comment
Child-sized handfulls of pulverized corn kernels rain down on the translucent green necks of the male mallards. The sound of the water’s rush blends with the truck rumbles, cellphone chats and children’s greetings of, “Hi Duck! Duck? MALLARD!”
From step to step to water’s edge, three sidestep and scurry toward the most densely packed inlets, butts up or chests raised with wings outstretched like a sunbather who wants to maximize her warmth by increasing exposed surface area.
“How many do you have left? Whoa! I’ll need more - I could use some more…”
“I’m going to save mine!”
“I’m going to save some, too!”
“Oh, Duck! You are so cute - just do one at a time - they might get enough….”
The leafless trees let the sunshine in. No shade, few shadows.
Little brother says, “Hey - look over there - some ducks.”
Big sister says, “They’re geese! Not so close!”
High pitched bird calls flutter and add to the background, like the last moments of CBS Sunday Morning with Charles Kuralt, when nothing but sound and the credits roll.
“One mallard!”
“Two mallards!”
“Three mallards!”
“Hey look - more ducks trying to get the ducks over there!”
A mother’s heart leaps with a child’s stomp on the muddy soil. “Don’t get so close!” Still a chill in the air.
“Oh! I’m goose! Goose…goose…goose…duck!”
Spring can’t be far away.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:12 pm March 31st, 2006 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Mar
31
Charu Gupta attended last Friday’s Meet the Blogger debate between Democratic Attorney General candidates, Subodh Chandra and State Senator Marc Dann.
Here’s her article on Chandra, which includes a nice picture of him at Talkies. Haven’t read it yet, but I look forward to doing so.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:34 am March 31st, 2006 in Politics | 4 Comments
Print This Post
Mar
31
Remember this post that anticipated the 3/28/06 release of the Center on Education Policy’s Year 4 No Child Left Behind report?
Here’s a link to the entire report, broken down with links to individual sections.
Here’s a link to the pdf on the Cleveland Muni schools.
What are we losing when 71% of districts report the elimination of subjects in the curriculum? Where will our kids and our country be in five years, in ten years, in twenty, in thirty, as a result?
If you don’t care, you should.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:19 am March 31st, 2006 in Politics | 14 Comments
Print This Post
Mar
30
Charu Gupta attended last Friday’s Meet the Blogger debate between Democratic Attorney General candidates, Subodh Chandra and State Senator Marc Dann.
Here’s her article on Chandra, which includes a nice picture of him at Talkies. Haven’t read it yet, but I look forward to doing so.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:34 pm March 30th, 2006 in Politics | 4 Comments
Print This Post
Mar
30
Remember this post that anticipated the 3/28/06 release of the Center on Education Policy’s Year 4 No Child Left Behind report?
Here’s a link to the entire report, broken down with links to individual sections.
Here’s a link to the pdf on the Cleveland Muni schools.
What are we losing when 71% of districts report the elimination of subjects in the curriculum? Where will our kids and our country be in five years, in ten years, in twenty, in thirty, as a result?
If you don’t care, you should.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:19 pm March 30th, 2006 in Politics | 14 Comments
Print This Post
Mar
30
Charu Gupta attended last Friday’s Meet the Blogger debate between Democratic Attorney General candidates, Subodh Chandra and State Senator Marc Dann.
Here’s her article on Chandra, which includes a nice picture of him at Talkies. Haven’t read it yet, but I look forward to doing so.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:34 pm March 30th, 2006 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Mar
30
Remember this post that anticipated the 3/28/06 release of the Center on Education Policy’s Year 4 No Child Left Behind report?
Here’s a link to the entire report, broken down with links to individual sections.
Here’s a link to the pdf on the Cleveland Muni schools.
What are we losing when 71% of districts report the elimination of subjects in the curriculum? Where will our kids and our country be in five years, in ten years, in twenty, in thirty, as a result?
If you don’t care, you should.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:19 pm March 30th, 2006 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Mar
30
The enigmatic enemy
Filed Under Politics | 17 Comments
I got to thinking about enemies yesterday.
What is an enemy?
What makes them an enemy?
Why are they an enemy?
Why would I have enemies?
How could I have enemies?
What have I done or said, or haven’t done or said, that would invite someone to feel hatred toward me, intend injury to me, or oppose my interests?
This thought process comes on the heels of encountering, and engendering some of the nastiest emotions I’ve ever read on a blog - Brewed Fresh Daily, the now-defunct Buckeye Politics and Daily Kos rants included (I’m not a regular reader of Kos, I can’t follow it - far too schizo for me, but I’ve read a few sets of comments when directed to specific posts, or diaries, or whatever they are).
Here is the kit and kaboodle. Last I checked, the total number of comments (mine included) stood at 59.
I’ve re-produced some bits below for readers who don’t feel like clicking over. I want to reiterate: this post isn’t geared toward the blogger responsible for Right Angle Blog, though I thank that blog’s commenters for the fodder.
The quotes have no names because none of the commenters left any that went anywhere - I mean, what fun would it be if they actually owned up to being an actual person who actually would say these things to someone if they were ever actually in the presence of the person they’re attacking?
Right Angle, or RAB, is a conservative blog with a slant toward the GOP. I read it daily because it presents news and opinions, from all factions, that I imagine are important to its core readers. As a source for information that Republicans review, care about and should know in order to assess how well they’re doing, or not doing, I’ve yet to find (what appears to be - since I don’t know precisely from what corner it emanates) a local blog that’s better. Other conservative blogs I read regularly include Michael Meckler (Columbus), just recently Newshound (Northwest Ohio) and NixGuy (who, btw, also quoted something from me this week and, when you google the blog, you get a prompt that says, “Did you mean “nice guy?” and I don’t know where it’s based) and The Keeler Report (not sure where it’s based either). I’ve read Lincoln Logs for at least a couple of months now (based down near or north of Dayton I think) - and I enjoy it immensely. I’ve commented to Meckler and on Lincoln Logs, as well as RAB.
Without further delay:
“I heard that pro-abortion pinkos are easy. Maybe there is something good about finding a solid secularist woman. So, Jill, I lost my phone number. Can i have yours? HAHA”
“What you have here is a great example of how the leftist media hates conservatives. This person is not responding to Blackwell, or even Petro, she is responding to a media image of Blackwell and to an extent, Petro. To many in the media, if you somehow don’t support every lefitst cause, you have three eyes, and tail, and you are the newest totalitarian menance. Dollars to donuts she has nevre heard or read anything Petro or Blackwell believes in that hasn’t been transferred to her in a 30 second sound bite or a newspaper article. “
“Who freaking cares what that self-important psuedo-intellectual has to say anyway??I read her blog once to see what she had to say about the idiot that is Capri Cafaro.Talk about the ramblings of a haus frau!!!”
“To all of the Republicans who read this, go to that HAG’S blog and see what she reads.Teresa Heinz Kerry in drag!!!What a liberal piece of garbage. After reading her comments on Blackwell, I think I’m going to go and campaign for the guy!”
“RIGHT ANGLE BLOG, YOU ROCK! BUT PLEASE DON’T REFERENCE ANYMORE OF THAT LIBERAL TRASH! GET A JOB LADY!!!!(The sad part is I’m tring to be civil).”
“You freaking rock!!!! Thanks for saying what I could not express because of the bile that was choking me…….”I like Jim Petro, but I won’t support him over a Democrat”.It shows what a partisan hack piece of crap she is!!!!!!!!”
“She is a cute blond. Its always a shame when they talk.”
“Hey Yenta Jill,I’m trying to support my family, I don’t have time to maintain a stupid blog. Quit living off of your husband, put your worthless G-town diploma to good use and go get a job!!!On second thought go make me some pie…..”
“I read RAB for a reason. If I wanted to hear what Yenta Haus Frau had to say I would read some other unbelievable crap like the Huffington Post.I like discussing these issues with other conservatives (and Petro supporters too) ha-ha.You know I would probably vote for Joe Lieberman, not for his party, but because his positions on the issues reflect mine. I have also voted for Dems on the local level and I would have voted for Hackett over Dewine. He’s way left of DeWine but at least he isn’t a RINO sell out. Ask Self-Important Yenta if she has ever supported a Republican…..”
“Maybe it’s time to repeal the 19th Amendment.”
To set a few things straight: RAB and I have corresponded before, and since these comments were posted. In general, I respect his work. Second, he posted a link to this entry of mine and that’s what got the spew flowing. As with any other blog, I only comment when I have something to say.
One commenter responded to my suggestion that others read my blog before ripping me apart made an attack that said something like, “And this promo brought to you by…”, to which I responded, “Your host, you idiot, which you’d know if you read the original post that led to this entire comment thread in the first place duh.”
No, actually, I didn’t write any of that stuff that begins with ” you idiot.” Not that I didn’t want to.
The RAB host took some ribbing for even creating an entire entry from my Petro MTB post. But whatever - he’s tough enough.
So some of the questions that have lingered in my head and to which I sincerely would like answers:
1. Jim Petro - Ken Blackwell - Bob Bennett - George Voinovich - Mike DeWine - Betty Montgomery, all of Ohio’s other statewide elected officials, the GOPpers in the state legislature and in the U.S. House of Representatives, the county GOP party chairs:
Which of you wants to take responsibility for the folks who wrote such vitriol in your defense, in your party’s defense? Do they represent your core? Your fringe? Your proud, your few? Do you hope their children grow up to speak just like them and treat engagement in the political process with similar narrow-mindedness? How do you suppose they treat their wives or husbands, their employees, their employers, their pets, consumer service representatives, their mother and their father?
2. How big a person does it take to use intimidation through nasty anonymous comments and hope that someone who makes some sense goes away so that the anonymous folks don’t have to face information that threatens their position, or threatens to threaten their position? How big a person does it take to use ridicule and sexist slurs against someone who thinks differently?
3. If individuals using such tactics believe that their positions and their causes will succeed and will be the best approach for this state and this country, why would they bother to even try to intimidate and ridicule with empty name-calling rather than persuasive assertions about why in fact their positions have traction and merit?
The answers: Fear, fear, fear.
Fear that others speak truth too.
Fear that maybe they’re not right, or their candidate isn’t right. That their logic and their numbers of supporters are ephemeral at best.
Fear that if you read, pay attention to or, God forbid, come to agree with the different approaches or ideas or beliefs, you’ll have to acknowledge the cracks in your philosophy and then figure out what to do with those cracks: pull the rug over them, fill them in, or maybe open them up wide and see if there isn’t some other, better opportunity by accepting the weakness and figuring out how to turn it into a strength.
Oh, no, can’t do that - that would be weak itself, wouldn’t it now?
So instead, those who feel threatened demonize - in the same way they accuse others of doing to candidates on their potential ticket. Why that tactic works for them but not against them, of course, makes no more sense than wasting energy by being scared of people who seek to learn about, through discussion and blogging, both sides.
Demonization allows for slander and personal attacks. It allows people to avoid and distract and re-route responses to the feared arguments against a cause toward the individual making the feared argument, rathen than against the argument itself, since to levy a response to the argument would mean that you’d have to actually think about why you champion any particular position, as opposed to just blindly following others who tell you what you should believe.
Demonization is also de-humanization. And if you can’t see me as human, if you can’t see a potential threat as human, if you can convince others that a potential threat isn’t human, then, you believe, you can organize hate against that enemy and drown out any humanity possessed by the enemy.
When I heard that Jill Carroll was released today, I thought about some of her first words that reflected how she was treated, and not mistreated. I can’t say if she began to “identify” with her captors. But one of the reasons Carroll was and is such a sympathetic figure is because reportedly she was a friend to Iraqis. She worked to tell their story, not demonize them, but humanize them, in all their glory and fault.
This doesn’t serve the war against terror very well, especially in the case of keeping up morale against insurgents. But even insurgents are human, too, at some level. And how many talk show hours that have been dedicated to the topic of why Islamic extremists, or anyone for that matter, would hate the U.S. have mentioned the fears of Western culture as an enemy to this group? They’ve demonized us and made us the enemy, and we demonize them so that they become an enemy upon which we justify spending hundreds of billions of dollars to destroy. Even though neither side started out as demons.
Likewise, I was demonized and treated like an enemy in order to neutralize any value in what I had to say. Commenters had to re-cast what I’d written, what RAB quoted on his blog, as “liberal garbage” and the pile-on began, rather than argue it apart with a stack of logic about the cracks in what I’d said about Petro.
But I’m not the enemy. My thoughts and beliefs and arguments and efforts at learning aren’t your enemy either.
Your failure to understand or seek to understand your weaknesses, to learn from anyone who addresses those cracks in your foundation, is your enemy.
I know you are but what am I? A classic sibling rivalry retort, valued only for how annoying it is when repeated endlessly.
Likewise vapid comments that disgrace whatever contingent will own up to being proud of people who leave comments like the ones posted above.
Annoying, but, in the end, vapid, valueless and only hurtful to your own cause.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 7:37 pm March 30th, 2006 in Politics | 17 Comments
Print This Post
Mar
30
The enigmatic enemy
Filed Under Politics | 17 Comments
I got to thinking about enemies yesterday.
What is an enemy?
What makes them an enemy?
Why are they an enemy?
Why would I have enemies?
How could I have enemies?
What have I done or said, or haven’t done or said, that would invite someone to feel hatred toward me, intend injury to me, or oppose my interests?
This thought process comes on the heels of encountering, and engendering some of the nastiest emotions I’ve ever read on a blog - Brewed Fresh Daily, the now-defunct Buckeye Politics and Daily Kos rants included (I’m not a regular reader of Kos, I can’t follow it - far too schizo for me, but I’ve read a few sets of comments when directed to specific posts, or diaries, or whatever they are).
Here is the kit and kaboodle. Last I checked, the total number of comments (mine included) stood at 59.
I’ve re-produced some bits below for readers who don’t feel like clicking over. I want to reiterate: this post isn’t geared toward the blogger responsible for Right Angle Blog, though I thank that blog’s commenters for the fodder.
The quotes have no names because none of the commenters left any that went anywhere - I mean, what fun would it be if they actually owned up to being an actual person who actually would say these things to someone if they were ever actually in the presence of the person they’re attacking?
Right Angle, or RAB, is a conservative blog with a slant toward the GOP. I read it daily because it presents news and opinions, from all factions, that I imagine are important to its core readers. As a source for information that Republicans review, care about and should know in order to assess how well they’re doing, or not doing, I’ve yet to find (what appears t