John Aravosis on politicstv.com

http://www.politicstv.com/

kinda cute. Editorial kicks ass, too.

The Bush Doctrine: Just Do it.

Calling your readers "dumb" and "assholes" who don't understand your "nuance" represents more arrogance than I care to tolerate. And not acknowledging an error of fact even when you've edited your post to correct it just adds to my chagrin.

More background, if desired...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1302871

It has been a little testy over there the past couple of weeks. LOL. I know that he's had some real nazis posting on the threads he's done about the Russia gay pride and Mary Cheney stuff. Then he's had some libs tear him up, too..honestly I dont' know how he finds the time to do it. I know he's been a little touchy but by God the commenters have had bugs up their behinds as well about every little thing under the sun...So I'm torn

I am trying to remain neutral...I really like this new guy A.J. and I really like that I can say pretty much whatever I want in the comments...I've bitched more about queer stuff on that blog comments section in the past couple of weeks than I have in the past ten years...I just have to go somewhere to get it out.

Anyway, thanks for your links, I'm off to read them. Aravosis would have to kill Bambi or something to piss me off enough to boycott him, because of Gannon and Dear Mary and some of the other stuff he's done. People are too soon to forget, I think. I think he needs a message board and to get it moderated and let people just tear each other up. I think he's going in that direction.

edit: ah yes, the Canada thing...I remember the fur flying over that one. For some reason I didn't read that post..I think because I already didn't know enough about it and since we aren't bombing or threatening to bomb Canada (today) I passed on it. But I know people were pissed about it.

I don't often read blog comments or post to them, but I couldn't let him misrepresent Canadians, so I was among many who asked that he acknowledge a simple mistake, so I posted as much (as "tuvor"). I kept following the comments, and I was flabbergasted when he started the name-calling.

It was late, so I just figured he was drunk and would apologize in the morning. Well, I figured wrongly and decided there were other blogs out there I might enjoy reading.

Hey, by the way, idgiehkt, welcome to DU!

My first thought was "LOL, was he drunk or something"?

Then he went on to talk about how the problems there have been increasing, and I understand that because I have noticed it too. He's probably about tired of it by now. Or maybe he and the hubby are fighting or something. I don't know. He did have a bit of a melt-down there, though, I will give you that. But it was nice of him to change the post...and then people bitched because he didn't ANNOUNCE that he changed the post. We shall see. He got similar flack over the thrust of his Russia article, when he said Putin was following Bush's example...people were saying, no Putin is a thug and if anything the reverse is true. I don't really know, but I think he just wings that stuff out there in a hurry and sometimes uses a little too much hyperbole. I definitely remember now turning off of the Canada article because I was like 'innoknowledge' right at the beginning of it. I just gots to have my out queers so bad right now it's not funny, and he's a safe place for me to go...I'm surrounded by people who think that they are cool with it when they aren't and that is hurtful, so I'm not giving up on John right now. Maybe he will be less reactionary after the changes to the site happen.

I know the 'big girl' thing was a fiasco too, LOL. I didn't like it, but I didn't complain. I don't think I have complained on there. I guess because it's still essentially a blog, which means a monolithic point of view, pretty much, love it or leave it.

is that you can't move very far before you fall off.

The thing I hate most about us being so gung ho to attack each other is that the very diversity of opinion we profess to embrace is not embraced at all; it's just judged, and sometimes most smarmily. Some of us are instantly ready to judge the performer rather than the performance based on minimal information; how much more difficult is it to say "but what about" or "I disagree and here's why" and still respect that someone else has a different opinion for their own reasons.

that was really vague. I'll give it a shot. John Aravosis was on a pedestal. (?) Some people think he has fallen off. (?)

Gay people are attacking each other too much. Or people are attacking him, but the gay stuff doesn't have anything to do with it. People shouldn't judge him, they should judge his performance, they should agree to disagree or have an actual debate about how they disagree and on what points.

That part I feel funny about because I kind of don't feel like he really has the time. I could be wrong about it. But then, he did go off in that thread in several posts like Tuvor mentioned. We both thought he was drunk though, lol, which I guess I should not say because I don't even know if he drinks. I definitely think it became more a pissing match than a debate, but at that point I think he was fed up from hearing nothing but constant bitching for a few weeks.