Saw this in the New York Times' blog that they've got going for the 2008 Elections... A Ban on Ron Paul Supporters.
How interesting! Redstate.com is one of the more prominent conservative/right-leaning blogs out there right now. A quick look at the site's top banner reads 'lefty blogs dominate the blogsophere... not anymore' more or less driving home the notion that generally speaking, leftists/liberals/Democrats/etc. tend to dominate the blogosphere (and perhaps one could go so far as other citizen-driven media? I'm thinking of the Obama girl and the Hillary response videos on YouTube).
But Ron Paul supporters are known for being very tech-savvy, as even the NYTimes author points out,
Now, avid Caucus [the NYTimes blog] readers know the Paulites are heavy-duty keyboarding fans of the Republican-libertarian candidate. They try to win every text-messaging contest out there. They complain on our site that Mr. Paul doesn’t get enough, er, the equivalent of ink on The Times’s Web site. We know many of them well.So what are the ramifications of refusing to let Paul supporters post comments about Paul on a blog like Redstate.com? What does this do to the pool of GOP candidates and how will it (or will it at all?) affect the GOP primaries? What if this happened in the 'lefty' blogosphere? What if a prominent blog were to prohibit any comments made about Dennis Kucinich? Other questions abound, I'm sure... but I'm curious to know what other people thought of this.
1 comment:
Just to be clear, I have no use for Red State (and little for Ron Paul, for that matter). But get used to the concept that this is a democracy and Red State can do whatever they damn well please.
PS: You can thank Atrios for my visit, someone who has more on the ball than your entire team.
Post a Comment