You do bring up a great point - gunner is maniacal about anything to do with blogs, and here, he was so off the hook that he missed the ironic poo he stepped into. And he stepped into it up to the top of his noggin.
He would have no doubt blown Michelle Malkin and Andrew Breitbart off in the early days because they were mere “bloggers” or “internet writers.” And yes, all this kind of attitude does is empower the professional conservatariat - in other words, the establishment and the main stream media types. Is that really who we want to empower?
Because most seen here are plagiarists with self delusion problems.
He would have no doubt blown Michelle Malkin and Andrew Breitbart off in the early days because they were mere “bloggers” or “internet writers.”
Research will reveal to you that I did indeed do so.
I would again. Upstart posers need to be challenged.
Otherwise we could end up with homeless smacktards
writing blogs while stealing unsecured broadband.
When your medium is the sewer, one must expect filters.
You know, that *is* probably what he wants to do. There are always going to be some folks out there who lackie up to those they perceive to be in power, regardless of any other factors. HG strikes me as being that sort of individual - doesn't think for himself, doesn't want anyone rocking the boat, doesn't want any challenges to his (self-given) authority to be the "blog police" on FR. Like I said previously, this actually ends up hurting FR in the long run, because people who actually want to find alternative sources of information that extend past the MSM and National Review Online will go elsewhere. FR certainly doesn't have a corner on the market of conservative internet information, and if FR tries to act like a gatekeeper, smart people will just phase FR out of their daily web routines.
Personally, they'd be smarter to just leave the filtering out of the truly drek blogs away from the good ones to Freepers themselves, and stop worrying about whether some bozo gets five hits off a post on FR.