Back in 2004, I was commenting on this great blog called “Polipundit”, and I got an e-mail from the site owner. Seems he wanted to go on vacation, and wondered if I and a few other commenters might be interested in writing a few articles while he was out? I did, and the results were pleasing for everyone. Thus a temporary gig became a team of five talented writers addressing the interests and issues of Conservative thought. We didn’t always agree, but we respected each other, and Polipundit.com shot onto the radar screen of the Blogosphere in a major way; during the Presidential Debates of 2004, we sometimes had more than a hundred thousand people visit in a single day.
But the topic of Immigration, specifically the crisis of millions of people crossing the southern border illegally into the United States, became too hot to handle, it seems. It did not help that the Rabies Wing of the Republican Party started it’s own vendetta against the President, after he chose a nominee for the Supreme Court who was not on their pre-Approved List, and it got worse when the President suggested that a deal allowing a company based in the United Arab Emirates, whose record as an American ally in the past quarter-century is arguably the best of any Arab nation, was not a threat to U.S. Security, and would actually be a good choice compared to the alternative, which essentially would be selling the lease to an Asian company with strong ties to Communist China; the knee-jerk reaction was to demand ‘No Deal!’, thus damaging relations with a key ally, souring the credibility of American integrity in business contracts, and allowing the People’s Republic of China a coup all in the name of ego. So, when the emotionally-volatile issues of Border Control, Illegal Entry into the U.S., and Immigration Reform came up all in the same package, the chances for cool and civil discussion were all but nil. And some who were already angry at the President went over the cliff to complete madness, taking up the weapons of the Left which until so recently they themselves had mocked. I noted Friday that it said something, something less than noble, when people were already attacking the President for a speech which had not yet been written, much less delivered. But as important as these issues are, for this column they must be set aside except that they served as forces in the environment which led, however undesired, to a show-down of sorts.
I saw what was coming, from the tone and verbiage Poli used in his attacks, to say nothing of his myopic topic selection. In short order I was attacked by readers who wanted to disrupt my threads, rather than let readers discuss the issue; I elected to remove certain useless and derogatory posts, and so “bootlicker” was joined by “fascist” in the names I was called. Yet I made a point of remaining at Polipundit, because silencing one side of an issue, especially when it has its own validity, does nothing to resolve the matter or advance the discussion. I don’t think Poli and his mob ever quite grasped that I too support the priority of building the wall first, of enacting substantive penalties for hiring illegals, and of establish reciprocity in our terms with Mexico – I simply do not think we can expect the White House to take us seriously, when we accuse our President of deliberate deception or outright treason; in fact I maintain that it works strongly against us. Poli’s response was hardly honorable; he quoted some of my posts, but out of context, and openly mocked my position, without offering a functional alternative, or acknowledging the cost of his proposals. This led to some sharp reaction from the other writers, as recent posts showed.
Ironically, if I had been allowed my posting at Polipundit.com, I should have taken some issue with Alexander’s last post; while the speech was good it ducked certain points and was flat wrong on others. But I never got that chance. Midway through the evening, I tried to pull up Polipundit.com to see what Poli’s take on the speech was, and found I could not reach the site. I later learned through e-mails that Poli had taken down the site himself, apparently angry with Alexander’s post. I also read through those e-mails, that Polipundit had decided to try his hand at Autocracy.
He requested that we not discuss the content of our e-mail discussions while we sorted out our differences, and out of respect for the man, I will not cite any specifics from those exchanges. However, when I read the site this morning, I not only saw Poli’s and Alexander’s threads about last night’s speech, but also Lorie’s “Goodbye” post and Poli’s reaction to it. That last post by Poli was, at best, unfortunate. What bothered me the most, was a false inference or two left by Poli about the character of the debate and disagreement; he was sadly disingenuous on the matter, which further damages any chance for repair. And I do not know a single person whose mind and mood are improved by an ultimatum, especially one which amounts to “Surrender Or Else”. Of course, Poli made the matter moot by locking out everyone early this morning. And that was that.
Moving on, the first steps are obvious. I will continue to blog here at ‘Stolen Thunder’, and more regularly for politics. Lorie will continue to blog at ‘Byrd Droppings’, which is always worth your attention, I promise. As for Alexander and Jayson, I would hope we can lure them into a group blog, for all kinds of reasons. Somehow, it has not yet occurred to many bloggers that a group blog can work in much the same way as a magazine, with different writers for separate issues and perspectives, but that’s fine with me – I believe that our new blog would skyrocket to success, or at least be successful to my standards. Also, I love the community aspect to the multi-writer blog, especially with the reader comments.
Well, I see I have topped a thousand words, so even I think I have said enough for now.