Jun 26 2007

Closing Down Comments?

Published by at 3:10 pm under All General Discussions

OK folks, the comments section of this blog is being underused by serious commenters and fouled by people who whine about insults as they fling them left and right. Sadly, the comments section is losing it purpose for me – the owner of this little old site. So I put it to a vote.

Keep Comments Up? – “yes” or “no”.

Please just vote in the comments. I have had it with the BS and it is a pain to keep monitoring the comments for spam and finding just a bunch of crap once the spam has been removed. We have 1300 registered users, but only a handful comment. I get the feeling they are bogarting the comments and have chased others into silence. I know I avoid them most days. Anyway, please vote. No promises from me I will honor the vote.

My time is precious and when I take a day off for a big event like today’s vote and the losers come thrashing in with angst and anger it really questions the utility of the comment section. It was never meant to be a “bitch and moan about AJStrata” section.

Update: Seems the trend is to keep the comments and ban the nasties. I am glad to hear there are more folks reading than posting the garbage, which is what I suspected since the traffic level only drops a bit when I challenge the orthodoxy. I will keep the comments on. And if posters can’t be civil (as the amnesty hypochondriacs seem incapable of doing)….

Well – we shall see. After listening to Sean Hannity whine all day about how our democratic processes was shoving something down his throat (simply because his side took a loss) I realized a lot of people do not love this country as they profess so much to do. True love of country is demonstrated in how one loses the debate, and does this while still supporting America. It is not demonstrated in how one acts when they win.

The far right has done a disservice to this country in the way they are losing ugly on this. Hannity was crowing about how he has had the same position on immigration for years and how this was something to admire. Well, Bush (and others) have held their positions for long times. So if it is admirable in Hannity, it must admirable in Bush. But Hannity did not admire his adversaries – he belittled them and puffed himself up. I realized after getting totally repulsed by Hannity’s hissy fit that there is possibly some good to come of this. And it is probably better to demonstrate a better option than following in the footsteps of those who cannot tolerate differences of opinions. The comments will stay open, if only to prove to the hypochondriacs there is a better way.

118 responses so far

118 Responses to “Closing Down Comments?”

  1. Cepik says:

    AJ,

    I vote to keep the comments open. The dissenting voices are fine too, this is one of the few blogs that can let you see both sides of the issue. Even when people get snarky it doesn’t detract from the discussion, it just highlights their angst. I haven’t posted before because I’d rather read, but I figured I chime in for this.

    Keep discussing it y’all, just try to stay civil

  2. apache_ip says:

    OK folks, the comments section of this blog is being underused by serious commenters and fouled by people who whine about insults as they fling them left and right.

    Translation –
    Damn! This really sucks! With the exception of the reading and comprehension challenged, no one agrees with me. I guess it is time to close down the comments.

    Have no fear, AJ. I am setting up a blog as I type this. Just waiting on GoDaddy right now. We will still comment on your articles, even if we have to do it elsewhere.

    Hopefully, the blog will be up and running by morning. It will be available here –
    http://www.RideItIn.com

    And I won’t shutdown comments when those who comment disagree with me. And I won’t pretend as if the “serious commenters” are inexplicably MIA. Riiiiiiight. Those of us currently commenting are the “non-serious” group. We are the bench warmers for the “serious” group. The “B team”, so to speak.

    The insults just don’t stop with you, do they AJ?

  3. dave m says:

    Keep the comments, please.
    AJ, if you want to see some goofy comments check out the beeb’s
    comment boards!

    Here I’m going to try and say something intelligent about our
    new immigration bill.

    It’s no big deal.

    Predictions of gloom ON ALL SIDES over-egg the political
    importance of this bill. It does not spell doom for America OR doom
    for the Republican Party. Their conservative base might have been
    harmed if the bill failed and they could be blamed by the Dems
    come 2008, but now that it has passed it will largely drop out
    of the news.

    By 2008 the average voter will remember that there was a big
    fuss of congressional politics and umm, the thing got passed.
    So what?

    Only the pundits, the bloggers, and those who leave comments
    on blogs (!) will be interested enough to historically remember
    the battle – even there it is a small battle.

    President Bush cannot run again and all anger that the conservative
    base retains is probably a motivating force, to not stay home in
    2008.

    The issues for that election will be the war in Iraq, the war in Iran,
    healthcare proposals, oil, and something called “global warming”.
    The immigration bill won’t get a look-in.
    Whichever party wins overall control in 2008 will probably nudge
    that law in their chosen direction, and I therefore conclude that the
    bill’s passage will improve Republican chances in November.

  4. Terrye says:

    I have been reading AJ’s posts for some time. I was reading him before the whole immigration debate.

    The thing that has disturbed me about the posters on immigration has been their lack of respect not only for AJ, but for anyone who disagrees with them. One of the reasons this has not done the damage to the Democrats that it can do to the Republicans, is that the Democrats are using populism to mask their opposition. The not so subtle anti hispanic anti Catholic anti immigration stuff we see and hear from some on the right is not present in their rhetoric.

    Now, no doubt those who like to argue with me will go cut and paste some response of mine that was snarky or whatever, but overall from the gitgo,from the outset they entered this debate with the sole intent and purpose of humiliating and inimidating anyone who did not agree with them. They have no boundaries.

    They have accused their opposition of being part of a conspiracy or of being liars and they never let anyone alone. They just can not. I will respond and because I do I draw fire from them, but if every now and then they would display some of the respect for others they demand for themselves…I know I would let it go.

    I think we need to deal with this issue. I think that if this bill actually passes the Senate, it still has to be reconciled with the Strive Act in Conference. In other words, this is not all there is, there will be changes.

    In the meantime the hardliners’ sole contribution to the process will be to dissect each and every statement made by anyone and everyone in the hopes of finding a “gotcha” moment.

    They will create problems, make outrageous comments and threats and in the end if it passes they will threaten to take their marbles and go home. They will not contribute anything positive or productive.

    We have always had immigration in our history, the idea that we do not and did not need it is ridiculous, the question is how best to manage it so that it is a positive for the country rather than a negative.

    Back in the late 90’s when Gingrich was Speaker of the House, the economy was beginning to grow and there was a need for labor and so around 95 more people began to come. In fact Fred Thompson was voting for more foreign labor to be let into the country. Check his voting record for the late 90’s.

    Now if Gingrich and the other conservatives had been half as interested in making secure the borders part of their contract with America as they were in putting the screws to Bill Clinton, they might have accomplished something.

    But they were not and they did not. They just ignored the problem. The same GOP House members who had a fit about this did nothing when they had the political clout to do it.

    And we need to deal with it. It is too important to just ignore.

    So now I expect FE {who will not leave anyone alone} and Retire {who really did make a crack about my dead Grandmother} and Bikerken {who accused me of being hispanic} jump all over me.

    I am to the place where I just don’t respect these people or care about what they think. So jump away.

  5. Terrye says:

    And as far as whether or not this is amnesty, many of its detractors are supporting a defacto silent amnesty, they just do not have the guts to admit it.

  6. satrist says:

    Terrye, good posts.

  7. AJStrata says:

    Stevevvs,

    Here is your challenge. The minor glitches found, many of them phantom glitches that are over hyped, are nothing compared to the progress we can make and the ability to hone in on the criminals and malcontents here illegally – THEY are the critical national defense risk. Not nannies. Now for the last time you in opposition need to recognize this position is reasonable and laudable, and simply different from what you want. Ed Morrissey is wrong on this issue. I don’t develop my views by which blog they are on.

    Now if you and the oppostion (not you so much) cannot respect these views as legitimate, and purge your side of the hotheads like FE and Apache who run around like chickens with their heads cut off (making about as much sense) then yes, you will be ignored along with your issues. It is a very simple formula – R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

    My views have not waivered because the silly 18 month provisional status means we are sifting the bad apples out of the good apples. The mythical inability to proces a criminal record check (who in their little fantasy world got the idea this was some kind of ‘background’ check beyond convictions?? Too funny).

    I doubt it will happen so I don’t try any more. Why should I worry about Bikerken’s lame views when in a snit of frustration he says I have a 5th grade mentality for cheering the win on my side of the debate? All of the opponents came on here to add their snide and insulting remarks (as I predicted they would) because of what? Because the system they claim to love produced a result they did not like. Talk about 5th grade mentalities!

    My positions are reasonable and I answered all issues. When the opposition can learn to lose and debate with respect for others is the day this issues stops destroying the GOP.

    Comments stay open. But FE, you need to chill out. I am near the end of my patience with your insults to everyone here including me. This time there will be no returning.

  8. stevevvs says:

    Hey AJ,

    Where to begin?
    In the U.S. we have a process for legislation. Bills are proposed, discused and changed in committies, and debated. This bill is trying to do away with the normal processes. It was devised by a few, no committies were allowed to see it, no expert testimony, limited debate, limited amendments, and now less than 48 hours between votes, and only 30 hour of debate is allowed.
    I guess for me, this skipping the legislative process to pass something that a majority of Americans do not want, is in itself, un American. I could understand this happening in a Dictatorship, but we are suppose to be a Representative Republic. Quite frankly, many of the people we elected to represent US, are not listening to us, the majority. If we are a Republic, or as others say, a Democracy, well then, where is the Democratic process here?

    These minor glitches, to many, myself included, are not minor at all. I completely understand the desire to do something, I too, want to do something. But any honest, sober assesment, I would think, would have to conclude that we first must have operational control over our borders, before we proceed further. Otherwise, if we just look to history, the same problems we had in 1986, and that we have in 2007, it would seem, will still be with us.
    Frankly, I’ve never thought we could deport multiple millions of people. But we certainly can make it undesirable for them to be here illegaly. I can not find a single problem with the current laws, other than, it would seem to me it should not be a mistemenor to come here illegaly. The problem, as millions of Americans see it, is in enforcement of those laws. I really believe that if we had the Will to enforce them, we would find the way to do it.

    I understand some, from your view, go overboard from time to time. I certainly, in your view, would have to be included in that group. But lets face it, everyone does. Everyone has their opinion. Who is right? Who is wrong? Probubly both are at times.

    If I were you, I’d set a limit on posting on a topic. Let everyone post, and perhaps, have two to three follow ups, to answer others. It would limit debates on both sides, just like they are doing in the Senate. If you think it’s fair there, then it should be fair here too.

    My positions are reasonable and I answered all issues. When the opposition can learn to lose and debate with respect for others is the day this issues stops destroying the GOP.

    See, many disagee with that statement. Are they wrong? It really depends on one view, don’t you think?

    I’ve got to go, finishing up my Alien News stack for my friends that want it.
    I hope you all have a good day today, take care.

  9. stevevvs says:

    Mark Steyn had this to say, I’d have to agree:

    There’s something creepy about a political class so determined to impose a vast transformative bill cooked up backstage in metaphorically smoke-filled rooms on a nation that doesn’t want it. It’s an affront to republican government and quasi-European in its disdain for the citizenry. It’s hard to imagine Senator Trenthorn Lotthorn as an EU Commissioner but his position on this immigration bill is basically the same as that of Jean-Claude Juncker, Prime Minister of Luxembourg and European “president”, on the EU constitution. When asked what difference the referendum result in France would make, “President” Juncker replied:

    If it’s a Yes, we will say ‘on we go’, and if it’s a No we will say ‘we continue’.
    Same with the immigration bill. I think I say somewhere in my book that the first line of the European constitution is: “We the people agree to leave it to you the people who know better than the people.” That suits the US Senate, too. They’ll teach this one as a textbook definition of “bipartisanship”: both parties gang up on the electorate.

    I may not make it back here today, but that saves bandwidth, so, it’s a good thing!
    Take Care folks!

  10. AJStrata says:

    Stevevvs,

    The left says the same thing about the Iraq war…..

    So now you give them an excuse to surrender. Nice job.

  11. AJStrata says:

    Stevevvs,

    You failed. I did not ask you to agree with my view – I demanded it be respected. Which is not something the amnesty hypochondriacs can do. Your issues are minor nits that can be fixed. Terrorists amongst are not. While I respect your right to have screwed up priorities, I do not call you a traitor for being so naive!

    LOL!

  12. DJ_Drummond says:

    Over at Wizbang!, I too have had to sort out what to do with comments that neither advance the discussion, nor show resp[ect to other readers. But going back and reading comments left from years past, I realize that the comments testify to the impact of the article.

    Dogs bark even when they have no reason. When someone posts garbage on a thread, they prove their own limits and many times inadvertently prove the writer’s point in the original article. So, if someone posts a worthy comment, it’s right to respond, either in debate or in asupport. But just ignore the dog poop.

  13. stevevvs says:

    While I respect your right to have screwed up priorities, I do not call you a traitor for being so naive!

    LOL!

    I guess I could put you down as well, but I’ll take the high road.

    You failed. I did not ask you to agree with my view – I demanded it be respected. Which is not something the amnesty hypochondriacs can do.

    Again, I won’t resort to the low road, and name calling.

    The left says the same thing about the Iraq war…..

    So now you give them an excuse to surrender. Nice job.

    Again, I won’t resort to the name calling.

    Take care AJ, see you at some point in the future.

  14. AJStrata says:

    Hey Stevevvs,

    Lighten up! Right???

    LOL! yeah, right. The point is still the same. And get over the name calling BS. “Amnesty Hypochondriac” is a mild poke at the source of the oppostions resistance minus all the facade they put on. Much better than ‘traitor’!

    The faux hurt feelings is really getting tiresome. Either dance this dance or don’t. I was opposed to this battle from day one, but the far right chose to go ahead and took it into the sewer immediately. El Presidente Jorge, the traitor, still has my support and a slam on him is a slam on me. Wake up folks. The civil war is not over.

    The issue of the comments being closed down was not to stop hurt feelings. It was to stop reading the same old broken records. We get the fact we are traitors and Un-American for supporting our President (there’s that ludicrous irony again) – Hannity and Ingraham remind us of our crimes everyday.

  15. For Enforcement says:

    AJ said:

    and purge your side of the hotheads like FE and Apache who run around like chickens with their heads cut off (making about as much sense) then yes, you will be ignored along with your issues. It is a very simple formula – R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

    Comments stay open. But FE, you need to chill out. I am near the end of my patience with your insults to everyone here including me. This time there will be no returning.

    I wonder how you determine that someone is running around like a chicken with whatever?

    R-E-S-P-E-C-T. I notice you spelled that out. Trying to figure out what it mean?

    Anyhow, I’m notifying you officially that I am now Chilling out. I now agree 100% with what you say. I am 100% for the illegal aliens being given amnesty. Your arguments(even tho you didn’t make any) have won me over. So if you need any apples polished, after Terrye has finished with them, send them down and I’ll polish them for you. How could I have ever doubted your wisdom.

    I am now a devoted follower. I promise to never disagree with you again. I hope I have made myself humble enough that you will continue to let me comment here to praise you and your infinite wisdom.

  16. thecentercannothold says:

    For Enforcing Hypocrisy -and Idiocy (see above) Exponentially

    You promised never to comment on immigration again ten days ago or more. I wouldn’t take his word AJ, the hypocritical crank can’t distinguish between nouns and verbs and we hardliners on immigration don’t need his “help.”

  17. For Enforcement says:

    Centerofthebunghole You promised never to comment on immigration again ten days ago or more. I wouldn’t take his word AJ, the hypocritical crank can’t distinguish between nouns and verbs and we hardliners on immigration don’t need his “help.”

    that was a month ago, and I said I would not comment anymore because of the shrill namecalling.  I thought it would help, but it made no difference.  

    I’d like to remind AJ that you are the one that called him a liar, and I asked him not to ban you for that banning offense so you could continue to put your stupidity on display daily,  thankfully he let you remain, and you have truly been a role model for stupidity.  I thank you for that display of courage.

    Actually, I figure you’re so stupid you didn’t even realize what you were doing,  but whatever. the stupidity is your actions, not your name (verb vs noun) but you don’t know the difference anyhow. 

  18. thecentercannothold says:

    a month is “ten days ago or more.” And….

    “Yeah, FE doesn’t resort to name calling. “I wouldn’t have thought there were 64 idiots in the Senate,

    I see you don’t understand sentence structure and tense correctly at all. being an idiot is an action, not a name.

    you should stop digging, you’re in a hole.”

    YOU USED IDIOT AS A NOUN, AS “READER” CORRECTLY DISCLOSED. CLOWN.