By now, many of you will have seen this post over at Sipsey Street, and this follow-up.
I understand many will feel this is a mistake. I think it's a discussion that needs to be had, and here's why: The info was allowed onto RedState, one of the most prominent Republican blogs.
I tried to post this comment, just to see how controlled that process is:
I think the responsibility is on RedState to explain. They obviously chose to allow the comment to be posted and then to remain on their site. While it's been pointed out the comment poster relied on a lefty blog, Red State has consented to host his charges.
I think it is unrealistic to then expect others not to discuss something with such potential implications that a major website, owned by a prominent conservative publishing house, has seen fit to propagate. And agree with it or not, many leaders "conservatives" listen to are raising loud warnings on this very subject--as today's top-of-the page headline from WorldNetDaily illustrates.
Like it or not, the discussion is upon us. I call on RedState to explain themselves in this, and either remove the comment in question or explain why they continue allowing it to stand.
I understand many will feel this is a mistake. I think it's a discussion that needs to be had, and here's why: The info was allowed onto RedState, one of the most prominent Republican blogs.
I tried to post this comment, just to see how controlled that process is:
Red State has a reputation for being a prominent Republican blog, not a site where spurious stuff is allowed to propagate. Why has this comment been allowed to be posted and then remain on this site for over 2 weeks? Certainly RedState mods could remove it if they wanted to. Why you have not would seem to be a relevant thing to wonder, as well as why a quiet effort on the part of named parties via legal counsel has not sought to compel removal. How are people supposed to see this bombshell and not discuss it further? Mr. Erickson-comment please?I could not post it in private browsing mode. When I turned off private browsing and tried again, I got this message:
Sorry, you must be logged in to post a comment.That means RedState requires registration, meaning they have the ability to ID the poster, at least a profile with an email address, meaning they could follow up if they wanted to. I advance moderate on this blog, and do so after-the fact at Gun Rights Examiner. And RedState has far more resources and access than I do.
I think the responsibility is on RedState to explain. They obviously chose to allow the comment to be posted and then to remain on their site. While it's been pointed out the comment poster relied on a lefty blog, Red State has consented to host his charges.
I think it is unrealistic to then expect others not to discuss something with such potential implications that a major website, owned by a prominent conservative publishing house, has seen fit to propagate. And agree with it or not, many leaders "conservatives" listen to are raising loud warnings on this very subject--as today's top-of-the page headline from WorldNetDaily illustrates.
Like it or not, the discussion is upon us. I call on RedState to explain themselves in this, and either remove the comment in question or explain why they continue allowing it to stand.