The Republic of T.

I’ve decided I’m not going to write anything today. That isn’t to say that I’m not going to post today. I’m posting this now, aren’t I. If I find something someone else has written that I can blockquote and wrap a few paragraphs of my own around, then I’ll post it. If I can think of one idea someone else hasn’t already covered, then I may post about it.

But I’m not going to write anything today. I’m coming to the conclusion that being a writer and a blogger are two different things. I want to be a writer, but the reality is that I’m a blogger. Most of the time blogging is the wrong medium for what I really want to do.

(more…)

This is why I hate using third party sites to post media like video playlists and slideshows on my blog. They disappear, and sometimes take the content with them. Case in point: two sites I’ve used to post image slideshows here.

One, Imageloop, has morphed into ima.gy, exclusively mobile platform for sharing photos via iPhone and iPod Touch. Good for them. Bad for the content I’d posted there. (Which I can’t seem to access anymore.)

The other, Slide, is shutting down in March 2012. So, I’ve either gotta move it or lose it, content-wise. But really, why bother? It’s just as likely that I’m going to move it to another platform that will vanish as well.

That’s why I lean towards using plugins, frankly.

Here we go again. Every time I hear news of the "death" of one medium or another, I take it with an entire box of Morton’s. But for the latest report on the death of blogging, I may need stock in a salt mine.

I talked to AdWeek about my worries about the future of the blog; regular readers of this one know I’ve shifted from jumping on mini-news, politicians’ utterances, and interesting links — which now invariably break on Twitter — to using this space for scoops and thoughts that need a few more characters to flesh out.

In any event, my doom and gloom thoughts:

Twitter, Smith says, is “sort of draining the life from the blog.”

“Where people were hitting refresh on my blog because they wanted to see what my latest newsbreak was, now they’ll just be on Twitter, and I’ll tweet it out and they’ll see it there,” he says. “What I’m doing right now is just incredibly old school. I might as well have ink all over my fingers and be setting type.”

And my boss seems to agree:

“I’ve had this discussion with Ben, and I think what Ben is wrestling with is, ‘Are blogs as viable and essential today as they were four years ago, or is Twitter in the process of replacing blogs?’” VandeHei says. “Can a blog still thrive as robustly today as it did four years ago? The answer might very well be ‘No,’ that it’s much harder for a blog to get and keep and cultivate that audience today than it was four years ago because of that competition, of Twitter pulling away that conversational immediacy element from the blog world.”

If our culture has degenerated to the point that anything that can’t be said in 140 characters or less isn’t worth saying, then perhaps Michele Bachmann, the tea party, and Fox News are exactly what we deserve.

(more…)

I’ve been so busy with work and family that I’ve fallen behind on my email. I didn’t know I was in the running, but apparently this blog has been voted one of Circle of Moms Top 25 LGBT Parent Blogs.

What are the best blogs written by or for LGBT parents? Is there a writer out there in the blogosphere who truly tells it like it is for LGBT families and makes you feel like someone out there gets it? Is there someone who is providing much appreciated connection and support through their blog? We want to hear about them!

Voting closed on May 13th. I didn’t check my email soon enough put up a post asking for votes, so I’m even more surprised. Back in March, I was included in their top 25 Daddy Blogs. That was another pleasant surprise.

Well, it’s always nice to be included. Thanks, Circle of Moms!

I don’t remember the last time I was nominated for a blogging award (check the sidebar), or included in a list of "top" bloggers in any category. So I was a bit surprised to learn that this blog has been nominated for Circle of Moms’ Top 25 Daddy Blogs.

We all know about the mommy blogger phenomenon, but what about daddy bloggers? Told from daddy’s perspective, these dads share what it’s like to be awoken by their loud screaming kids at 6am, finding the right barrette for their daughters’ hair and chasing after toddlers in the snow. Help us find the Top 25 Daddy Blogs by April 5, 2011 by voting for your favorite blog. Questions? Contact catherine@circleofmoms.com.

Go check it out!And, if you do, I’d appreciate your vote.

I won’t be blogging much today. Actually, probably not at all. I’m busy with work this afternoon, and I’ll be busy with the boys this evening.

Speaking of the boys, I realize I have posted any pictures for a while.

(more…)

Right now, there are about three or four things, news items and such, that I’d like to write about. Some I’ve wanted to write about for more than week. In the meantime, I’ve actually had to read what everyone else has written about those topics — as I’ve been trying to find time to write about them — and realized it’s taken me so long find time to write about them that if I managed finally managed to do so now, I’d pretty much just be repeating what everyone else had time to write while I didn’t.

And, as I’m writing this, I’ve already thought of something I’d like to write about the Shirley Sherrod story that I probably won’t be able to find time to write about until sometime next week — when it’s not likely to be news anymore, and almost nobody will be talking about it. I’d probably be better off just linking to what everyone else has (and will) write about in a couple of digest posts.

And I find myself asking, what’s the point? Is there a point in me writing what most people can and probably have read somewhere else? Is there a point in just posting a link and a blockquote? (Again, something most people can and will read elsewhere before they find their way to this particular blog?) Is there a point to me writing an extra thousand words or so — as I have many times — in the course of even trying to find an angle or an insight that’s even just kinda sorta unique? When it comes to blogging, is there value to just being a voice in the choir? Does it help?

Lately, I’ve also experience deja vu upon reading about a story or topic that’s caught fire, that I wrote about weeks or even months earlier. (Sometimes I attempt to resurrect those posts from oblivion, by linking to them in a new post.) I’m reminded of the philosophical question, “If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”

Is there a point at which having something to say is really having nothing to say? Is it the point at which it’s already been said over and over again? Does only become something to say when a somebody says it? Or is it nothing to say when a nobody says it?

Is there anybody out there?

I write like
P. G. Wodehouse

I Write Like by Mémoires, Mac journal software. Analyze your writing!

Apparently, according to this website.

(more…)

I’ve never considered myself a “professional blogger.” That’s mainly because I’ve never come close to making my living off my humble blog. So, I’m light years away from being in the same set as those who have, like Markos and Aravosis, just to name a couple of political bloggers who come to mind. Nor can I claim to have built a personal media empire a’la Josh Marshall. Nor have I ever counted myself among the “Haves” of the blogosphere, as defined by the New York Magazine article a few years back.

Nor can I count myself among the bloggers who have hitched their blogging stars to various media outlets — Sullivan (The Atlantic), Klein, and Yglesias (ThinkProgress) come to mind, now joined by Nate Sliver who’s taking FiveThirtyEight to the new York Times.

I’m not even sure what professional bloggerdom feels like, but I’ve always been pretty sure wherever I’m at ain’t it.

Then I read Chris Bowers’ eulogy for the amateur blogosphere.

(more…)

Well, maybe. But not until President Palin’s second term. Via Jill at Femeniste and Jezebel’s Anna North comes this bit of insight from Harvard Law School 3L Stephanie Grace, who felt the need to clarify her statements after a dinner conversation with fellow law students about race:

… I just hate leaving things where I feel I misstated my position.

I absolutely do not rule out the possibility that African Americans are, on average, genetically predisposed to be less intelligent. I could also obviously be convinced that by controlling for the right variables, we would see that they are, in fact, as intelligent as white people under the same circumstances. The fact is, some things are genetic. African Americans tend to have darker skin. Irish people are more likely to have red hair. (Now on to the more controversial:) Women tend to perform less well in math due at least in part to prenatal levels of testosterone, which also account for variations in mathematics performance within genders. This suggests to me that some part of intelligence is genetic, just like identical twins raised apart tend to have very similar IQs and just like I think my babies will be geniuses and beautiful individuals whether I raise them or give them to an orphanage in Nigeria. I don’t think it is that controversial of an opinion to say I think it is at least possible that African Americans are less intelligent on a genetic level, and I didn’t mean to shy away from that opinion at dinner.

I also don’t think that there are no cultural differences or that cultural differences are not likely the most important sources of disparate test scores (statistically, the measurable ones like income do account for some raw differences). I would just like some scientific data to disprove the genetic position, and it is often hard given difficult to quantify cultural aspects. One example (courtesy of Randall Kennedy) is that some people, based on crime statistics, might think African Americans are genetically more likely to be violent, since income and other statistics cannot close the racial gap. In the slavery era, however, the stereotype was of a docile, childlike, African American, and they were, in fact, responsible for very little violence (which was why the handful of rebellions seriously shook white people up). Obviously group wide rates of violence could not fluctuate so dramatically in ten generations if the cause was genetic, and so although there are no quantifiable data currently available to “explain” away the racial discrepancy in violent crimes, it must be some nongenetic cultural shift. Of course, there are pro-genetic counterarguments, but if we assume we can control for all variables in the given time periods, the form of the argument is compelling.

In conclusion, I think it is bad science to disagree with a conclusion in your heart, and then try (unsuccessfully, so far at least) to find data that will confirm what you want to be true. Everyone wants someone to take 100 white infants and 100 African American ones and raise them in Disney utopia and prove once and for all that we are all equal on every dimension, or at least the really important ones like intelligence. I am merely not 100% convinced that this is the case.

Please don’t pull a Larry Summers on me,
CRIMSON DNA

Woah.

Well, I’m glad she cleared that up. Now, where to begin?

(more…)

Via Skippy comes the sad news of the passing of blogger Al Weisel, a/k/a Jon Swift.

this is the saddest news we have had to report in a long, long time.
the blogger who was known as jon swift has passed away far too soon @ age 46. his mother posted this message on the comments on his blog:

(more…)

Michelle Bachman’s “Superbowl of Freedom” (or “Bachmannalia”) was not the first protest with such attention grabbing signage, but merely the latest. September saw Glenn Beck’s 9/12 marchers descent upon Washington. Again, they brought their message-bearing signs and posters.

And their signs made their message and motivation clear. (more…)

I often say that there some people who just aren’t wort talking to when it comes to politics and social change, because they are never going to be on your side. But Shannon’s conversation with two right-wing protesters at Atlanta Pride has got me reconsidering that. [Via A World of Progress]

As I was leaving the park, I saw the two men again at the exit.  One was an angry, obese man and the other was a young guy who didn’t seem quite as hate-filled.  I’ll call them Angry and Young.  Angry was still shouting out to people, “You’re WICKED!” and I just decided to speak with them to see if I could get them to embrace their hypocrisy.

… Me: Do you honestly hope to draw anyone here to Jesus Christ with these tactics?  You both embrace the love of law more than you embrace the law of love.  Jesus never did anything like this.

Angry:  “Yes he did!  He went on an angry rampage!”

Me: He did go on an angry rampage at the temple because they had allowed it to become a money machine where people were selling goods for worship and price-gouging people who had to come from afar to pray and offer sacrifices.  He was disgusted by how the priests allowed it to become a business, not a house of worship and praise.  His anger was directed towards the church, and I have a sneaking suspicion he feels the same way about it today.”

Young: The Bible says that…

Me: The Bible says, in James, that true religion is this: to visit the widows and orphans in the time of their affliction.  When was the last time that either of you visited widows or orphans in the time of their affliction?  And be honest because God will hold you accountable for every word that you utter on judgment day.

Angry: (crickets)

Young: What do you mean?

Maybe it’s just a question of how you talk to them. I’m not sure I’d have been cool-headed enough to pull this off. Read the rest. It’s well worth it!

After thinking about it for a while, and noticing other bloggers doing the same, I’ve decided to adopt a more relaxed schedule of blogging. It’s time for me to realize that my life doesn’t fit the intense schedule of writing every day. Or at least publishing every day. Nor does my traffic justify or require putting that pressure in myself. (Speaking of which, does anyone still read this thing?)

And, let’s face it, the kind of writing I do and the stuff I write about doesn’t lend itself to that cycle. It’s time for me to let go of that, and all I’ve attached to it, and just focus on the kind if writing I want to do.

So, effective immediately, I’m adopting a schedule of posting on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. I’ll still post digest posts, because I’m still reading every day. I might also post “asides” on my “off” days.

Hopefully, the result will be better writing on my part, less frustration, and a better balance between writing and the rest of my life.

Dare I hope? I mean, I’ll never be on American Idol anyway. (Too old. Wrong voice type: baritone.) But the Washington Post is borrowing a page from the Idol handbook.

You’ve got an opinion, but do you have what it takes to be heard?

Here’s your chance to put your opinions to the test — and win the opportunity to write a weekly column and a launching pad for your opinionating career!

Start making your case.

Use the entry form to send us a short opinion essay (400 words or less) pegged to a topic in the news and an additional paragraph (100 words or less) on yourself and why you should win. Entries will be judged on the basis of style, intelligence and freshness of argument, but not on whether Post editors agree or disagree with your point of view. Entry deadline: Oct. 21, 2009 at 11:59 p.m. ET.

Then get ready for the great debate.

Beginning on or about Oct. 30, ten prospective pundits will get to compete for the title of America’s Next Great Pundit, facing off in challenges that test the skills a modern pundit must possess. They’ll have to write on deadline, hold their own on video and field questions from Post readers. (Contestants won’t have to quit their day jobs, but they should be prepared to put in about eight hours a week for three weeks.) After each round, a panel of Post personalities will offer kudos and catcalls, and reader votes will help to determine who gets another chance at a byline and who has to shut down their laptop.

Eyes on the prize.

The ultimate winner will get the opportunity to write a weekly column that may appear in the print and/or online editions of The Washington Post, paid at a rate of $200 per column, for a total of 13 weeks and $2,600. Our Opinions lineup includes a dozen Pulitzer Prize winners, regulars on the national political talk shows and some of the most influential players inside the Beltway. We’ll set our promising pundit on a path to become the next byline in demand, the talking head every show wants to book, the voice that helps the country figure out what’s really going on.

So what are you waiting for?

So, what am I waiting for?

Well, it’s actually too munch like Idol. After all, a popularity contest is pretty much assurance that the most mainstream “talent” wins.

And that means I’d have to make a decision. I’ve accepted that the kin of stuff I blog about and the way that I do it doesn’t lend itself to attracting a broad audience. Enter a contest and — assuming I make it past the first cut — I’d have to change that if I want to win.

And I’d want to win.

Why?

(more…)

(Ed Note: This post was actually written yesterday, but never actually published because I didn’t have time. True to form, I stayed up until 2:00 a.m. last night writing a post about Henry Louis Gates’ arrest. This morning I discovered it was never published either, and if it still exists, is on my computer at home. Which means unless I can find time to rewrite it during the workday, even though I’m not even supposed to be writing this note write now, it probably won’t see the light of day. After all, who’s likely be reading on a Friday evening? Few, judging from statistics. And by Monday it will all have been said. So, lesson learned? The universe is telling to give up. I shoulda just gone to bed.)

I joked with someone yesterday that lately I don’t write about anything until a week after it happens or nobody cares — or cares to read about it anymore. It took me a week to finally write about George Tiller’s murder, and another week to finish with it. It took me a week to finally write about finally write about the Sotomayor hearings, and I’m not done yet. (Though now I question the point of doing so when it will take me another week to finish, during which I’ll not writen about a whole raft of things.)

In both cases, the subjects were so exhausted by the time I got to them that I had to reach pretty far to find something to say that hadn’t been said a milion times already.

(more…)

I’m launching a new weekly feature here, for a couple of different reasons. One, I’m betting that it takes less time to write about the things that I want to write about, but am not writing about, than it does to even try to write about them. Two, I’m hoping that — since, as a result, I have trouble deciding what to write about when I do have an opportunity — any readers who might still be out there can tell me which of the things I haven’t written about they’d actually be interested in reading about.

Here are the things I’ve wanted to write, tried to write, or started writing this week, but didn’t have the time to actually write.
(more…)

This post at The Best Article Every Day reminded me of a meme I launched years and years ago, on USENET. (I told you it was years ago.)

Let’s say you get your hands on a brand new Time Machine. Whether it’s the old-school H.G. Wells chair model, or a tricked-out DeLorean, you’ve now got to decide what you’re going to do with your new toy. But before you run off and start messing up your life, sleeping with your grandmother, and investing in Google stock before the Internet was invented, we’ve got a few ideas for you. Here are 15 moments in time, both past and future, that you may want to just witness before you go and do what you’re inevitably going to do, and ruin everyone’s universe.

I can’t claim to have invented it, since I got it the idea from a book (and apparently plenty other people have thought of it). But I thought it might be fun to launch again. (If anybody’s out there.)

(more…)

If you’ve read this blog for any length of time, you know I have a tendency to write long, deeply-linked, and researched posts from time to time. You also know that my quantity of my posts (though I hope not the quality) has gone down in the past couple of years.

In light of this, it occurred to me today that I probably only have it in me to do one of those types of posts — which I admit are my favorite to do — per week.

Case in point, I’ve been working on a post about the murder of George Tiller as it relates to the concept of the conscience clause and its use in recent years. I’ve been working on it for about a week, and it looks like I won’t post it today. Maybe tomorrow, if I’m lucky.

That got me wondering. Is there a good time, from the readers’ perspective, to publish a longer post? Is Monday a better time because it’s more likely to be read? Is Friday almost guaranteed to mean it disappears into oblivion? I guess this is really a question about your reading patterns, in an attempt to adjust my writing rhythm.

So, If you care to help me figure it out, take the poll.

Oh, and if you want the back-story, it’s after the jump.

(more…)

iv

You know my friends, there comes a time when people get tired of being trampled by the iron feet of oppression … If we are wrong, the Supreme Court of this nation is wrong. If we are wrong, the Constitution of the United States is wrong. And if we are wrong, God Almighty is wrong. If we are wrong, Jesus of Nazareth was merely a utopian dreamer that never came down to Earth. If we are wrong, justice is a lie, love has no meaning.

~ Martin Luther King Jr.

Obama and other Democrats have not said as much to LGBT activists. In fact, their actions could be interpreted to say “Please, don’t make me do it now.” As my own exchange with Pelosi suggests, Democrats seem to be taking the “rising tide” approach. Fixing the economy can help same-sex households in the same way it can hep the rest of the country. Universal health care — if it includes the kind of public plan Obama ran on — helps same-sex couples and their families by divorcing health insurance from both employment status and marital status.

Health care reform could certainly remove obstacles to health insurance for gay couples.

(more…)