« Tax Simplification vs. Tax Reform | Main | Watch the skies »

April 11, 2013

Comments

I hope you don't get rid of the blogroll--I use it all the time. I come here, then click on the link to digby, or to Krugman or Ta Nehisi Coates or occasionally Balloon Juice or others like Unqualified Offerings. I even use the Greenwald link, which is dumb, since it takes me to Salon and then I go from there to the new location at the Guardian. Force of habit.

It also reminds me of the existence of other blogs that I might visit someday if they are still around.

Yeah, me too. I agree with Donald. Please, don't get rid of the blog roll. In fact, the only thing that really needs changing is the Authors and Alumni. And maybe the other stuff above those things.

One more vote for keeping a blogroll.

(Of course, it would be nice to clean up/revise the links, eliminate dead blogs (unless, I suppose, you want to keep them anyway) and add others of note. Just like on, you know, every blog website there is.)

But I too use it for navigation or to satisfy the need for more content on late intertube-surfing evenings.

I have both notable articles and notable links which I feel compelled to leave as especially important.l When it finally becomes impossible to keep them up I batch the lot and put them up as a separate post on a page listed on my homepage. Mind, that's with articles. With sources - blogs and more - I co post at Delicious and Diigo, with Yahoo and Google Bookmarks waiting should failure occur. And Bookmarking gives one a topical index/tagfile. Not to mention the Community does the same - and have Searchable finds. BTW I am oldephartte on Diigo, opit on Delicious and currently oldephartte.blogspot.ca

Just don't lose the kitty!

Sure, it's Guilded Age. On the other hand, it costs nothing to run it, and clearly some people do use it. It probably wouldn't hurt to reorganize it a little, in addition to some pruning and perhaps even some additions.

Once or twice a year I spend a couple hours sifting through the blogrolls of favorite blogs, looking for new voices to add to my reading list. ObWi's blogroll changes so slowly that it's not very useful in that search.

Vox populi, vox dei, I guess. I'm not sure how many of the links are dead, but I'd like to have a second list underneath of regulars' blogs, if anyone is writing one and wants it included. Just toss it in the comments. opit, can I include yours? And a thumbs up for the name!

I second the others. Please don't delete the blogroll. I use it several times a week to reach other blogs I read. Perhaps I'm a dinosaur from the 00s, but please humor me.

Don't forget to add Ugh to the authors list on the left!

You have a blogroll?

I'm conflicted about this: Which is more horrifying? The crime, or the utter lack of coverage of the trial?

Seriously, on the day the last "mainstream" media outlet folds, I will laugh, then spit in their direction. Maybe I won't wait for the spitting part.

Brett, Scott Lemieux from LGM had this and updated to link to this Sarah Posner piece

I have a feeling that these are not the conclusions you would draw. Discuss.

That's your explanation for why the media section at a trial for mass murder of innocent children was empty? Because it was some kind of niche story? Nah, it was about as much a niche story as Timothy McVeigh on trial, or Jack Kevorkian on trial.

It's not _my_ explanation, I'm in Japan, so what I see is rather constrained. I was simply pointing to this as some writing on it that I had read before you posted and encouraging you and others to discuss it.

I'm not precisely sure which article of the two I linked to you are discussing and and the fact that you posted your comment within 12 minutes suggests that you aren't really reacting to what was written, you were simply grabbing a point. In fact, I don't see where either link uses the term 'niche', so I think you are reading something that isn't actually there. We are welcome to persuade me that I'm wrong, but I think you will actually have to identify the points that you feel support your characterisation of a 'niche story'.

re: reader blogs

Well, I dunno if it counts -- we disguised our blog as a webcomic (the rationale being that even our friends might not read a bunch of essays about "classical" music, but they'd probably check in on our comic once in a while) -- but if you'd like to list it I'd be more than pleased.

www.classicalmusicisboring.com

However, if you decide it doesn't qualify I won't be very hurt.

/poor attempt at self-promotion

Weird. I hit the front page and got 3/15 “dem blogging gods” as the first post.

Nice to see there are a few posts after that.

Hello back at you LJ and Count.

Nice to see you on the front page Ugh.

Hello all and happy spring.

LJ, read both, I just read fast, and apparently hit the computer right after you commented. And, while neither used the word "niche", that seemed to sum up the explanation for why I don't see this covered on the front page of my newspaper the way I did Kevorkian.

What really horrifies me about this story is that Gosnell operated this way for years, while a regulatory system was in place we're told shouldn't permit this to happen. An incredible number of people had to be aware of it going on, some of them in positions responsible for it not happening.

I think this is evidence that the supposed regulatory barriers to elective late term abortion and actual infanticide have been defeated, that the LaPolt Snows and Singers of the pro-choice movement, who hide behind the moderation of the larger membership, have achieved regulatory capture.

We don't really have any reason to suppose Gosnell was alone, that there aren't more out there doing this. The systems that were supposed to prevent it have been subverted. We have to face that, and do something about it, and even people who are moderately 'pro-choice' should be able to agree to that.

Brett, there will always be people who break the law, sometimes with apparent impunity for decades. When abortion was simply illegal, it's not like it didn't happen. You might not personally know where to get one, but it was pretty likely someone you knew did. You might not be able to afford one, but others did. And, as in this case, sometimes it was not done competently or safely (for the pregnant woman).

Which is all by way of saying, any regime (whether for regulation or total prohibition) is going to have cases where it doesn't work. If you are going to argue that something should not be allowed at all, or should be regulated differently, you need to show that your preferred regime is not at least as subject to failure as the existing ones.

Not to say you can't argue for change for other reasons. Just that, if you use regulatory failure as one of your reasons, you need show rerason to believe that your preferred approach is better on that point.

As long as I'm pointing out cleanup things, I should maybe also point out that liberal japonicus's link under "authors" is broken.

Brett, I really don't understand what you mean by 'niche'. Lemieux at LGM says

The fact that the exploitation of poor women, predominantly of color, hasn’t been subject to extensive coverage is pretty much the ultimate dog-bites-man story.

that seems to be the opposite of a niche.

But whatever niche story means, you seem to have some complaint about something, but I have no idea what it is. While the second person pronoun can imply 'everyone', you said 'that's your explanation', which suggests mind reading on your part. You are welcome to put together a list of links for further edification, you can explain why you feel the way you do.

wj's points seem to be on target to me, and I don't see how a case like Gosnell does anything but reinforce the warnings many pro-choice supporters have said about the dangers of pushing abortions back to back alleys.

Thx Sniffnoy, that has been fixed.

Also, if any other folks would like to point out what blogs in the sidebar have changed urls, that would be a huge help. If not, I'm going to just load the whole list and delete the ones that are broken.

And right now, bob and opit are slated to go up in the brand new section 'blogs of the hoi polloi' (ok, maybe not that title, but you get the picture) if you have a blog and you are a regular commenter (which can be self defined) please let me know and I'll put it in the list. as I said, both bob and opit's are fine, but I can imagine a case where I'd get a blog that I really wouldn't want to put up. So put it up in the comments where the blog can get the thumbs up or down.

That makes it sound like it is survival of the fittest, but it's really not, it is just that I can imagine someone wandering by and having a blog that is really problematic and I want to make the decision making transparent.

I suppose if abortion was banned outright and a story emerged about a coat hanger abortionist, some conservatives would say that should that liverals were getting around the law. And if the newspapers didn't cover it, well, that's the liberal press!

Note. also, the reference to mass murder. How many conservatives have shown any concern about the civilian deaths in Iraq?

Nearly everyone thinks its OK to kill under some circumstances. COnservatives get upset about the killing of a pre-person or potential person with no consciousness or awareness. They don't care about the deaths of people who are capable of suuffering if the killing is done by a Republican administration.

Kill baby in womb:evil! Kill lots of babies plus kids of various ages and adults outside of the womb in unnecessary war: not an act of sufficient seriousness to think about much.


Anyone who is serious about moral qualms related to abortion will be promoting birth control and the morning afer pill. Otherwise the outrage experessed is just self-aggrandizement, in my opinion.

Gosnell should be prosecuted and those responsible for the regulatory lapses disciplined, fired, or prosecuted if the law was broken.

I'm personally against abortion, though I don't see what that has to do with safe, regulated abortion services, seeing as how abortions will happen regardless of what I think.

I'm also against euthanasia.

I'd prefer, since no one asked, that Louie Gohmert be given the personal responsibility for raising and supporting all unwanted fetuses, but if that happened, I' d have to reconsider my opposition to euthanasia, for myself, since I wouldn't want to stick around to learn how those poor kids turned out.

Plan B would be to have Social Services swoop in and remove the fetuses from Gohmert's "care", probably because the paint on his walls contained excessive amounts of lead, stupidity, and toxic asshattery..

At any rate, if regulatory capture has occurred on behalf of the Gosnells of the world, I suspect, contra Brett, that utopian libertarians are behind it, and what we are seeing is precisely what we had when abortion was illegal, but notoriously unregulated -- a bloodier mess than required.

Better that the kids are born and mowed down in their first grade class during show and tell along with their teachers under our current Second Amendment interpretations.

Yes, yes, my preferred method for these atrocities would be that the kids and their teachers be stabbed during show and tell, but the advantage is here is that most or all would at least live to show their scars and tell the tale another day.

I noticed the other day that a middle-aged female fetus was at the Ohio State house the other day objecting to the conservative opposition to expanding Medicaid under ObamaCare. She has cancer, no insurance, and no doctor will see her.

Probably the doctor was playing golf with Louis Gohmert and discussing ways that once dead, the woman could be born again without availing of safe abortion services so that she can re-live her current desperation.

As some conservative [email protected] pointed out the other day, if the woman were to have the privilege of going through fetus-hood again AND she had a gun, she could shoot Gohmert and the doctors who won't take her case and feel somewhat more secure in her rebirth into this world of howling nonsense.

Thanks for the offer - my "following" of your blog is fairly recent, but I enjoy it. Mine--active about seven years now--is also broad in content: politics, sports, the arts, obits and discussion of fame, and, of course, the ever-popular random topics.

chinshihtang.blogspot.com: "Stoner"

Notes for the blogroll
What you have redirects OK, but Andrew Sullivan is now actually at: http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/

Thanks wj! Any others? If your favorite blog's link is broken, only you can save it!!!

We have to face that, and do something about it

I think that conservatives have no more business hijacking and glorifying the scene of an awful crime to accomplish their desired legislative ends than do liberals.

i like Drum's meta-coverage of the Gosnell story. short version: right-wing media has been heavy of editorials about the lack of librul news coverage of the story, while not providing any news coverage themselves.

because what's most important here is being able to scream about liberals.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad