Patterico's Pontifications

5/1/2018

A Note About My L.A. Times Op-Ed on the RedState Firings

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:50 am



In my L.A. Times op-ed about Friday’s firings at RedState, I concluded with this statement:

No one media outlet is crucial to the conservative movement, but RedState did represent a rare place where conservatives were still allowed to express negative opinions about Trump in a freewheeling and robust manner. Now it’s a safe space for Trump supporters. The site is still there, but the ideal is gone.

If I had written the op-ed today, I would have used the term “safer space” and not “safe space.” That’s more accurate, and more fair to the people who still work there.

I wrote the op-ed Friday morning, two hours after learning the news that six of the most vocal critics of Trump at the site had been fired. It was a criticism of management, not of the remaining writers. The point was that management has a goal of making the site a safe space for Trump fans, and by firing a crop of loud Trump critics all on the same day, in a rude and unexpected fashion, they sent their message loud and clear. (As for the “rude and unexpected” part: according to The Atlantic, editor Caleb Howe “got the news while driving from his home in North Carolina to Washington to meet with Townhall Media, the arm of Salem Media which owns RedState, about Facebook strategy.” That’s cold.)

There has been some pushback on Twitter from some of the remaining writers, who point out that there are still Trump critics at the site. That is true. Since the firings, a few pieces critical of Trump have been published. For example: No, President Trump Does Not Deserve The Nobel Peace Prize; Don’t Get Angry About Mean Insult Comics If You Helped Put One In The Oval Office; and President Trump Continues To Walk Back Campaign Promises Regarding Wall’s Funding And Planned Parenthood. I’m very pleased to see that and I have shared the pieces on social media.

However, let’s not pretend that the firings weren’t designed to send a message. The people purged on Friday were some of the loudest critics of the president. And some of the defenses of Salem that I have seen — that the firings were based on traffic, or on the cost of the contracts — are just not true. The people let go included a mix of traffic earners; some were consistently the highest traffic earners, some posted more sporadically and were not. I’ve also learned more about the cost of the contracts, and there are definitely people who remain who get paid more per click than people who were let go.

Nor is it true that Trump criticism killed the site. Ben Domenech made that charge in his newsletter yesterday, but his analysis was laughably wrong. For example:

No, this was an ideological purge. They just didn’t get everyone. But they did get most of the loudest voices, and sent a message to the rest.

In short, if the people at RedState are feeling defensive, it’s understandable — but any defensiveness results from the decisions made by management. Management had every right to make those decisions, but the way they did it was (in my view) unwise, and had a lot of collateral consequences that they didn’t think through. One of those consequences was a very public perception that the site has made a sudden lurch in a pro-Trump direction. If the remaining writers are hurt by that perception, they should blame management’s decision to purge the loudest Trump critics in one day, not the people who pointed it out.

With one exception (a poster who goes by the moniker streiff) I respect the remaining writers at RedState. Some of them are among my favorite writers on the Web, after Dana and JVW. Folks like Kimberly Ross and Jim Jamitis have consistently written pieces opposing hyperpartisanship — and it was pieces like that, more than anything else, that made me proud to be associated with RedState.

Two things are true at the same time. The remaining writers are people of integrity who won’t knuckle under to threats. At the same time, management has sent a shot across the bow: vigorous criticism of Trump is not welcome at RedState. How that tension resolves remains to be seen, although signs since Friday are positive.

Some may think that no message has been sent by management. If so, I think that’s naive. But at least some of the remaining writers seem to understand that the message is to get in line — and they are saying they’re not going to do it.

Good for them. I wish them luck.

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

239 Responses to “A Note About My L.A. Times Op-Ed on the RedState Firings”

  1. RedState is a “safe space for Trump fans”, like your site is a safe space for Trump critics. But, it’s okay for your site and not for theirs. Sounds like classic anti-Trumper logic.

    random viking (6a54c2)

  2. 1. The fact that you’re still here polishing Trump’s knob makes it look to me like this is a pretty safe space for pro-Trump sophisticates such as yourself. You’re welcome to leave at any time and go back to Streiff’s house if that bother’s you, Trump humper.

    Gryph (08c844)

  3. Quatro!

    Anonymous (7d6683)

  4. RedState is a “safe space for Trump fans”, like your site is a safe space for Trump critics. But, it’s okay for your site and not for theirs. Sounds like classic anti-Trumper logic.

    Who did I fire for supporting Trump?

    I know you have some kind of bullshit claim that you have an article for me to publish. I know it’s rhetorical but if you actually have one submit it. I don’t promise to publish it in advance because I don’t publish bullshit but if it’s sound and reasonable I will. And if you write and I don’t publish it and you’re pissed off, you can put the whole thing in comments and let readers decide.

    But I know it’s all rhetorical bullshit and you’re not actually doing it, so stop pretending you are.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  5. Besides, I’m pretty sure the metaphor comparing this blog to RedState doesn’t hold up in the least.

    Patterico is a staff of one. I’m new here, but unless I am sorely mistaken, I don’t think anyone gets paid to write here, let alone makes a living off of writing here.

    and…

    Pat has never banned someone who disagrees with him. I’ve gone back and looked through a lot of archive, and I’ve never seen it happen.

    So yeah. “Tu Quoque?” Not quite, Trumpalos.

    Gryph (08c844)

  6. Who did I fire for supporting Trump?

    As I said in the other thread, there are literally hundreds of sites and outlets that can say they never fired a supporter of Trump — only because they never hired any in the first place. So, with that alone, you have good company with Mother Jones, DailyKos snd The Nation, and that ilk. Thank heavens those outlets are around to save us from an “authoritarian” media landscape.

    I will gladly submit something to you. I expect nothing, except your time to read it at your convenience, and I would be more than happy and appreciative with just that, as I’m sure time is a rare commodity for you.

    random viking (6a54c2)

  7. I, for one, would love to see random viking’s post. If I don’t see it here in one week, I’ll assume he was lying about it. Ball’s in your court, viking.

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  8. Salem’s origins are in Christian programming.

    It’s particularly sad they’ve been co-opted by greed.

    Ed from SFV (291f4c)

  9. As I said in the other thread, there are literally hundreds of sites and outlets that can say they never fired a supporter of Trump — only because they never hired any in the first place. So, with that alone, you have good company with Mother Jones, DailyKos snd The Nation, and that ilk. Thank heavens those outlets are around to save us from an “authoritarian” media landscape.

    I have never “hired” anyone to write. I am incredibly blessed to somehow get Dana’s and JVW’s insights for free. Don’t ask me how I do it. I don’t know.

    Your analogies suck. Do better in the piece you submit.

    Patterico (e91ae1)

  10. I, for one, will gladly pay you next Tuesday, for a hamburger today.

    Shorter John McCain: “I am dying, so I don’t have to lie to the voters anymore to win re-election.”

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  11. No, guest contributors don’t get paid to write here. (But we may or may not be keeping a running tab!) We do it because we love to write and the state of our country matters to us. Patterico graciously provides us a platform to express ourselves. With that, I have never seen him shut down Trump supporters or oust them from the commentariat for dimly voicing their support of him. They are free to praise him as they like. And for those of us who have been critical of Trump in posts, we have taken the hits for it from commenters. I have been mocked, criticized, been called names, etc. by Trump supporters for being critical. And I wouldn’t have it any other way. Who wants to be in a safe little bubble where only my POV is allowed? Patterico certainly provides a “safe place” – for everyone of all political stripes. And everyday the comments sections gives proof of that. Somehow, though, Random Viking seems to have missed this…

    Dana (023079)

  12. Dimly = simply

    Dana (023079)

  13. President Trump’s controversial right now, but that will change when the gestapo FBI stops their insane vendetta and people see the results of his policies.

    I look forward to that day, cause this anti-Trump stuff’s become dreary and tedious and melodramatic.

    Meghan’s poor pitiful daddy – he’s gone full King Lear.

    But spring’s here now, crisp and tardy.

    This is when we plant for so the harvest is bountiful.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  14. So they didn’t fire all the Trump critics and they are still posting Trump criticism.

    And if they continue to post Trump criticism what exactly was the message sent?

    harkin (fcacaf)

  15. Seems like there’s a business opportunity for someone to right the wrongs of the Salem purge you’ve alleged. Just sayin…

    crazy (5c5b07)

  16. harkin (fcacaf) — 5/1/2018 @ 8:53 am

    Lagom.

    I think that was the point.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagom

    SarahW (3164f0)

  17. And if they continue to post Trump criticism what exactly was the message sent?

    harkin (fcacaf) — 5/1/2018 @ 8:53 am

    The most effective critics aren’t there any more, so we don’t know what insights will be missed, unless you take the trouble to find and read all the fired writers. We also don’t know if the remaining writers will continue to print meaningful or watered down criticism. It’s hard to find the time to search out different opinions. That’s why aggregators like Instapundit and Red State are popular. It has an impact when they both apparently decided to reduce their Trump criticism.

    DRJ (15874d)

  18. Either that or “lay off.”

    SarahW (3164f0)

  19. The most effective critics aren’t there any more, so we don’t know what insights will be missed, unless you take the trouble to find and read all the fired writers.

    Maybe they can guest post here until they get back on their feet?

    BuDuh (fc15db)

  20. No, this was an ideological purge. They just didn’t get everyone. But they did get most of the loudest voices, and sent a message to the rest.

    What was the motivation of the owners of RedState? My assumption is they wanted to make a change in the editorial outlook of the site for business reasons. That is, they believe that the site was not getting enough traffic and that the change would improve the site’s traffic over time.

    I don’t know any of that for a fact. It just makes sense from an economic point of view. Sending messages doesn’t. If they want to send a message to their writers, it is much easier to just send the word down that they are no longer interested in Trump attack pieces. I suspect that the owners looked at their staff and made their decisions based on who they thought would be willing to work under the new conditions. If a writer takes every single opportunity to find an angle to go after Trump, then that’s probably a writer who won’t be useful to them in their new direction.

    Of course, it may be the case that they are willing to print pieces that are critical of Trump’s politics, if done from a right-leaning POV, but that they don’t want smear pieces or stuff that just repackages lefty criticisms and directs them at Trump.

    There is something that is true in both show business as well as opinion pieces. You have to get the butts in the seats. You can make the most beautiful art in the world, but if nobody is buying tickets, what good is it? Same goes with political commentary. If you have the most insightful commentary, but nobody reads it, how much of a difference are you making?

    Maybe it isn’t all about the money for the owners of RedState. Maybe they are more about having an impact on the political discussions of the day and just don’t think they are having that effect with the non-stop Trump bashing.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  21. Are you saying Red State only wants appropriate, respectful Trump criticism and kept the writers who did that already?

    DRJ (15874d)

  22. Are you saying Red State only wants appropriate, respectful Trump criticism and kept the writers who did that already?

    I am speculating about the motivations of owners who I couldn’t even name about their business decisions regarding a site I have rarely visited of late. I used to before Trump, but I got out of the habit after Trump came along.

    I just doubt that they fired people to send a message.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  23. My assumption is they wanted to make a change in the editorial outlook of the site for business reasons.

    the site had a nasty and hateful tone

    shrewish and sour

    petulant, too

    my guess is this is what they’ve tried to remedy

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  24. I should say that I doubt they fired writers to send a message to their other writers. No doubt they realized that they were sending a message about their change in direction to the public in general.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  25. it’s like when a restaurant does a new menu

    please to enjoy these new flavors they say

    we gave them a lot of thought and we hope you find something you like

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  26. I tried to summarize your comment fairly. I am not trying to put words in your mouth but that’s how I read it. I can’t tell if you agree with my summary or think I missed the mark.

    It occurs to me that many people, perhaps even the Red State owners, view Trump as the CEO of America. If so, I understand why they think we owe Trump respect and space/time to do his job. Your comment reminded me of that.

    DRJ (15874d)

  27. Ok, you doubt that was the intent but doesn’t competent management anticipate the consequences of their actions?

    Did Salem ostensibly (*) frame its decision in economic terms (“While these changes are painful, they were necessary once we reached the conclusion that we could no longer support the entire roster of writers and editors.”) to avoid those consequences?

    (*) I say “ostensibly” because you can also read “no longer support” as an ideological rather than an economic reference.

    DRJ (15874d)

  28. “…shrewish and sour……petulant, too”

    This describes my view of Laura Ingraham at times. While I often agree with her she is very hard to listen to.

    harkin (fcacaf)

  29. It occurs to me that many people, perhaps even the Red State owners, view Trump as the CEO of America. If so, I understand why they think we owe Trump respect and space/time to do his job. Your comment reminded me of that.

    I somewhat agree with what you are getting at, but not the owing respect part. True, there is the respect that is owed the office, but that doesn’t mean the man is owed respect. But, if you are talking to people on the right, which I think RedState wants to do, you are likely to put a lot of people off if you use the tactics and distortions of the left.

    To use an example I commented on recently, calling Trump an authoritarian is wrong, not because it is disrespectful to Trump, but because it is false. It is built on distortions straight out of the left-wing media. When you keep on doing stuff like that, many off the people you are trying to communicate with just roll their eyes and stop listening. If you want people to get your substantive disagreements with Trump, you have to make your criticisms substantive.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  30. They didn’t fire the loudest Trump critics, they fired the best ones. They kept the lesser anti-Trump lights, IMO.
    And we agree on this: streiff is a jackass.

    Paul Montagu (e6130e)

  31. There are Trump critics, and then there are Trump critics. One type is unbiased, and points out mistakes (in their opinion) like for example the wisdom in signing the budget monstrosity. The other does the same, but cannot restrain themselves from also including personal insults to the man and anyone who defends him. In fact, they can’t even write about a positive thing about an accomplishment without it.

    The first is much more effective, and while the second may get plenty of clicks, being no shortage of supporters ready to defend Trump and themselves, there may be an overall drop in readership because there is also no shortage of people weary of being insulted.

    I never read Redstate, and I don’t know if that’s the case in this situation, but I do know for myself I have no problem with constructive criticism (even if I don’t agree with it), it’s the constant drumbeat of hate that turns me off. Especially when even acknowledgment of accomplishment comes off as damning with faint praise, and any defence is disregarded as “Trump worship” and the defender dismissed as a “Trump humper”.

    the Bas (3bcea0)

  32. Patterico describes Trump as authoritarian according to the dictionary definition. He gave specific reasons — Trump’s decades-long praise for actual dictators. How is that false?

    DRJ (15874d)

  33. Patterico describes Trump as authoritarian according to the dictionary definition. He gave specific reasons — Trump’s decades-long praise for actual dictators. How is that false?

    Which dictionary are you reading?

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  34. Salem owns it and will take it in the direction they want to. For better or worse. That about sums it up.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  35. you know who was very authoritarian person was Mr. Christian Grey he was like you have to do what i say

    and you didn’t talk back or he did a spanky on you

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  36. Patterico,

    I started reading Redstate because of your links (to your articles). I have no reason to read their content now. I’ll stick to this blog where I like the content and enjoy the writing.

    Thank you for all that you do.

    Ryan (da3b66)

  37. Opinions are like elbows.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  38. Trump’s this, Trump’s that…

    Yada, yada…

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  39. Authoritarian:

    Definition of authoritarian

    1 : of, relating to, or favoring blind submission to authority had authoritarian parents

    2 : of, relating to, or favoring a concentration of power in a leader or an elite not constitutionally responsible to the people an authoritarian regime

    — authoritarian noun

    I used the term in the first sense, and Patterico the second.

    DRJ (15874d)

  40. When has Trump acted as an authoritarian? From what I’ve seem he’s very respectful of the separation of powers.

    Before the election there was no end of detractors making this charge and making dire predictions on how he would act on this authoritarian streak of his. None have come to pass.

    the Bas (3bcea0)

  41. He praises dictators.

    DRJ (15874d)

  42. It’s a defense to say he doesn’t act like a dictator — we could discuss that, too — but he does praise them.

    DRJ (15874d)

  43. I read some of RedState, and had some interest in reading what commenters had to say. And then noticed no comments being posted… don’t know what was behind that decision.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  44. It’s more a question of who Trump HASN’T praised than who he has, lol.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  45. Loose tongues and thin skins don’t go well together.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  46. What was the motivation of the owners of RedState? My assumption is they wanted to make a change in the editorial outlook of the site for business reasons. That is, they believe that the site was not getting enough traffic and that the change would improve the site’s traffic over time.

    Your assumption is incorrect. One of the fired writers was the most read writer on the site, generating more hits than any other contributor. If the site wasn’t getting enough traffic, you’d think they’d keep their most popular writer.

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  47. How about his political opponents, Haiku? Did he praise Jeb and Rubio during the primaries? Isn’t demeaning political opponents on a personal basis (as opposed to discrediting their arguments) an authoritarian tendency?

    DRJ (15874d)

  48. not if the opponents are deserving

    did you see lil babby roob roob this week?

    Rubio echoes Democratic criticisms of Republican tax plan

    pouty little girl

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  49. Praising political opponents in primaries is filed under “Highly Improbable Occurrences”…

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  50. He praises dictators

    OK, do you consider Mubarak a dictator?

    the Bas (3bcea0)

  51. Unless a politician knows he/she is toast and is looking to gain something for said praise.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  52. Then Trump should support the Republican plan and tell people why he thinks it is good. Remember the difference between the Message and the Messenger? It’s much easier and more entertaining to attack the messenger, especially if you don’t understand the message, but explaining the message is the way to build lasting support.

    DRJ (15874d)

  53. i love my tax cut

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  54. Isn’t demeaning political opponents on a personal basis (as opposed to discrediting their arguments) an authoritarian tendency?

    Well! For one will not sit around and let you accuse Patterico of having authoritarian tendencies!

    the Bas (3bcea0)

  55. The Republican plan was to fund Planned Parenthood with a bloated Omnibus. After Trump supported the Republican plan, he became an attacked messenger.

    BuDuh (fc15db)

  56. All’s fair in love and politics.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  57. Trump has admired tough dictators for a long time.

    DRJ (15874d)

  58. He praised all those dictators prior to the election? It is almost enough to sway a vote. For some.

    BuDuh (fc15db)

  59. Sounds to me like he admired strength, not dictators.

    “When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it. Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength. Our country is right now perceived as weak … as being spit on by the rest of he world …”

    Emphasis mine

    the Bas (3bcea0)

  60. Google, twitter and Facebook all shadow banning and censoring right wing speech…no biggie

    6 writers getting fired from a site with a traffic count of less than a couple hundred thousand a day….authoritarianism.

    Got it

    Hi (b08ed9)

  61. the dictator thing’s very picayune set against the decidedly unauthoritarian way he’s behaved in office

    nobody in history ever moved this aggressively and purposefully to unshackle americans from government diktat

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  62. What about praising strong leaders for democracy, the Bas? Why pick dictators?

    DRJ (15874d)

  63. Let’s look at Patterico’s 3 examples:
    1. Trump refused to accuse Putin of murdering journalists.
    2. Trump praised extra-judicial killings of those in the drug trade in the Philippines.
    3. Trump was in favor of how the Chinese government handled the Tiananmen Square incident.

    Even under Miriam-Webster 2nd definition, the first two don’t make the cut. Refusing to criticize is not the same as favoring. Putin is a fact of life. We don’t get to replace him or change the constitutional makeup of Russia. We have to deal with him. Criticizing him for human rights violations in Russia is one strategy. Some may feel that is the best strategy in order to best advance America’s interests. Trump use a different strategy. Instead of criticism on issues not directly related to advancing the USA in the world, Trump focuses n projecting American power. Criticizing Putin for is actions within Russia don’t do that But, that doesn’t mean that Trump favors Putin or is seeking to help Putin solidify his hold on Russia. Putin has already accomplished that well before Trump ever came along.

    As to Duterte. Obama already had screwed the pooch on that one. Some think that Obama was just a blithering idiot and that the way he managed to hurt American interests in everything he did was just his incompetence. Others think that he was deliberate and actually brilliant in getting away with what his true goal was: diminishing the USA in the world. Doesn’t matter which is true, he did the same with Duterte. Obama’s preening moralizing directed at Duterte pissed him off and Duterte started to move the Philippines out of the US orbit into China’s. Trump wanted to reverse that destructive result. So, in a private phone call, Trump said great job on your drug war. Trump did not mention the killings; nobody did on that call. Trump accomplished his goal. Duterte expressed a commonality of interests regarding the Norks, and relations between our two countries was on the mend. Of course, someone leaked the transcript of the call, so it became public, but still, the only mention of the extra-judicial killing was by the press. Trump never mentioned them. Had Obama not already made an issue out of it, Trump would not have had to clean up the mess and wouldn’t even had to smooth Duterte’s feathers.

    As to the decades old interview with Playboy. Really? He was making an evaluation of the tactics. His previous comment was on the USSR and how he thought things there would lead to violent revolution. He then contrasted how the Chinese did things with Tiananmen Square as the example.

    None of those are examples of favoring a an authoritarian form of government. Trump is no authoritarian, and any attempts to paint him as such are misleading at best.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  64. What about praising strong leaders for democracy, the Bas? Why pick dictators?

    DRJ (15874d) — 5/1/2018 @ 10:47 am

    Most of them are dead, unfortunately.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  65. What about praising strong leaders for democracy, the Bas? Why pick dictators?

    Na, that’ll never happen.

    the Bas (3bcea0)

  66. Your assumption is incorrect. One of the fired writers was the most read writer on the site, generating more hits than any other contributor. If the site wasn’t getting enough traffic, you’d think they’d keep their most popular writer.

    You are overlooking the very last couple of words that you quoted, “over time”.

    If, to make up some numbers, you are turning off 85% of your intended audience, then the person who is most popular with your 15% isn’t likely to be your best bet in reaching out to the 85%. You have to look at what you are doing to drive away that 85%.

    So, sure, initially, you are going to piss off your loyal 15%. But, over time, you are hoping to attract that 85%.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  67. Lagom.

    I think that was the point.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagom

    SarahW (3164f0) — 5/1/2018 @ 9:19 am

    Bastante.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  68. It has an impact when they both apparently decided to reduce their Trump criticism.

    DRJ (15874d) — 5/1/2018 @ 9:20 am

    Less filling. Tastes great. Maybe they can have a full neverTrump dish and just warn people about it like they do about peanuts at Panda Express.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  69. Before the election there was no end of detractors making this charge and making dire predictions on how he would act on this authoritarian streak of his. None have come to pass.”

    So true – the amount of hand-wringing over the Handmaid’s Tale like camps for women and concentration camps for gays and Muslims were a hoot. It was always about what to expect in Trump’s America.

    Not so authoritarian it turns out.

    harkin (fcacaf)

  70. Also, to be pedantic, we are a representative Republic, not a democracy.

    the Bas (3bcea0)

  71. You are overlooking the very last couple of words that you quoted, “over time”.

    I didn’t overlook it, it just doesn’t make sense. As a business decision, firing your most popular writer — meaning that you’ll generate fewer hits now — in the hope that at some unspecified future time your site will be even more popular is nonsensical.

    If there was more demand for writers uncritical of Trump at the site, then those writers would have been generating more hits.

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  72. Maybe it isn’t all about the money for the owners of RedState. Maybe they are more about having an impact on the political discussions of the day and just don’t think they are having that effect with the non-stop Trump bashing.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438) — 5/1/2018 @ 9:27 am

    It could be like the New Coke Conspiracy Theory where they get rid of expensive sugar cane and come back later with cheap corn syrup.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  73. I didn’t overlook it, it just doesn’t make sense. As a business decision, firing your most popular writer — meaning that you’ll generate fewer hits now — in the hope that at some unspecified future time your site will be even more popular is nonsensical.

    Perhaps this will help you understand.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_purge

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  74. Not so authoritarian it turns out.

    harkin (fcacaf) — 5/1/2018 @ 11:04 am

    The shovel ready dig your own grave authoritarianism wasn’t quite…shovel ready.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  75. what’s authoritarian is when you have the Nazi-trash men and women of the FBI deciding for you who your president should be

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  76. Are you saying Red State only wants appropriate, respectful Trump criticism and kept the writers who did that already?

    DRJ (15874d) — 5/1/2018 @ 9:31 am

    It’s hard when Red State is the face and Salem is the man behind the mask. You know what I mean. It’s like Soros and The Koch Brothers.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  77. If I had written the op-ed today, I would have used the term “safer space” and not “safe space

    I wonder: Is there some specific criticism of Trump, or the Republican Party, or the conservative media, that the Never Trump people who weren’t purged DIDN’T make but the ones who were purged did?

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  78. 14. harkin (fcacaf) — 5/1/2018 @ 8:53 am

    And if they continue to post Trump criticism what exactly was the message sent?

    It could be that, like with censorship by the goverbnment of China, what they wanted to stop was a secret.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  79. 10. Better:

    Shorter John McCain: “I am dying, and if I am not dying, I am getting very old, so I don’t have to lie to the voters anymore to win re-election.”

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  80. How did John McCain get into this thread?

    nk (dbc370)

  81. It would be great if the Generic People’s NeverTrump could take credit for Kanye West tweeting Thomas Sowell quotes, but they can’t. It’s hard to sway people with negative examples, just ask smokers and single mamas.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  82. How did John McCain get into this thread?

    nk (dbc370) — 5/1/2018 @ 11:28 am

    Paul Ryan pushed him over a cliff in a wheelchair.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  83. I just doubt that they fired people to send a message.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438) — 5/1/2018 @ 9:38 am

    Who are they, Mozilla?

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  84. Apparently the Southside Crip are Never-Trumpers.

    harkin (fcacaf)

  85. It occurs to me that many people, perhaps even the Red State owners, view Trump as the CEO of America. If so, I understand why they think we owe Trump respect and space/time to do his job. Your comment reminded me of that.

    DRJ (15874d) — 5/1/2018 @ 9:45 am

    You reminded me of a conversation I heard the other day between Stefan Molyneaux and a caller. This lady’s husband scored a 9 on the Adverse Childhood Experience test (that’s bad). He was telling her that she and her husband need to confront the parents about what happened to him as a kid. SM is now an atheist or agnostic but he doesn’t mind throwing in Christian references and philosophy. He was basically saying you are honoring your parents by confronting them about their mistakes. You don’t do them any favors by ignoring them and you can’t start taking responsibility for your own parenting mistakes until you resolve your own conflicts.

    I guess what it comes down to is in the way you confront people with their mistakes. Since not Trumpers or NeverTrumpers aren’t in a position to directly address Trump maybe their columns are like an email blast they send out hoping Kelly Ann Conway is reading them. The constant barrage, though, tends to turn off those who are sympathetic to constructive criticism just as much as constant Trump praise turns them off.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  86. 74.

    The Truth About the Rural Purge

    I think the comparison of RedState’s ideological purge to the Rural Purge of 1970 is a poor comparison for a few reasons.

    Firstly, the Rural Purge had nothing to do at all with ideology. In fact, Fred Silverman was installed as programming head at CBS precisely because his predecessor had no desire to cancel the shows that network brass wanted gone. Unless there’s a demographically sound reason for RedState to dial back the Trump criticism, they could have saved just as much money on contracts by randomly picking names out of a hat — and yet they didn’t. Nobody associated with RedState to my knowledge has denied that the RedState purge was ideologica; nobody at CBS ever said that the Rural Purge was.

    Secondly, the Rural Purge itself was no guarantee of success. The reason CBS continued to climb in the ratings was because they had hit shows that appealed to popular sentiment in population centers. Some shows, such as The Brady Bunch and The Partridge Family, were renewed for multiple seasons not because they were ratings hits, but because they did well “in the Demographic” of 18-49, younger people with disposable income who were considered most likely to spend it. This formula didn’t enjoy universal success, as Fred Silverman’s three years at NBC from 1978-1981 were considered disastrous, and it took years for NBC to recover after Brandon Tartikoff succeeded him.

    Gryph (08c844)

  87. Perhaps this will help you understand.

    You’ve shown an unwillingness to research your own assumption. Here’s some homework for you:

    Among political opinion sites, where did RedState rank, in terms of hits per day?
    Among the sites that ranked higher than RedState, how many were completely uncritical of Trump, how many were completely critical of Trump, and how many were a mix of both?

    And don’t tell me to do the research. You’re the one that made the assumption (also called pulling stuff out of your nether regions), you should do the research to back it up.

    Otherwise, your assumption is just hot air.

    Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71)

  88. There’s a reason people were reporting that all the Trump critics had been fired from Red State: not only were all the people fired Trump critics, but every writer who had EARNED A REPUTATION PRIMARILY AS A TRUMP-CRITIC was fired. Sure, there are other Trump critics still employed at Red State, but those authors aren’t best known for their articles critical of Trump.

    There’s also a reason that could explain why some of the Trump critics are still employed there: PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY that the firings were ideological in origin. This way Red State management can claim the firings were not ideological, and anyone who misses the forest for the trees will believe them.

    The most effective propagandizing occurs gradually. If you eliminate all expression of an unapproved perspective (such as NeverTrump) in a media outlet at once, it arouses suspicion in the audience. However, if you eliminate those voices gradually, you can retain the guise of honesty. Red State appears to be employing the gradual route towards becoming a propaganda wing of the state.

    I personally believe that the ones fired recently are only the first iteration of Trump critics to go, and that Red State intends to fire the rest at some point(s) in the future. Something that corroborates this point is that, at the same time the writers were fired, there were reports from many anti-Trump commenters and anti-Trump diarists that their accounts had also been locked, as well as reports from previously-banned Trump fans that their access to Red State had been reinstated…making it appear even more like an ideological purge. However, after public outcry that Red State was purging all Trump critics, the accounts of those Trump critics were suddenly and *magically* reinstated. That looks like a liaison “fix” so it wouldn’t appear to be what it actually was.

    Red State claimed the firings were economic rather than ideological in origin, but there are two factors that contradict this notion. First, if it were purely economic, they would have fired ALL the top-paid authors, not just the top-paid authors who were anti-Trump. Second, in what universe do “economic reasons” dictate firing a low-paid author whose articles regularly earn the top number of views per month? It doesn’t take much business savvy to know that you’ve got a gem you don’t want to lose, if you can get such massive traffic to your website out of an author you don’t pay very much.

    Some people have claimed that the firings were due to the critical tone of the authors, rather than their critical content. If that were true, Streiff’s mockingly bitter and strident tone would have ensured his firing – but he is still employed there.

    I just have one word for Red State: if your reported ‘fact’ can’t survive counterarguments from prominent Trump critics, it isn’t fact; it’s either opinion or propaganda (and I’m leaning more towards the last option). Second, the only articles I will continue to read at your site are those written by Trump critics, because I want to ensure them many page views so that they keep their jobs, and I also wish to ensure that – if you DO make the mistake of firing them – no rational being will fall for your farcical excuse that you had to let them go for “economic reasons.”

    LJ (9188cd)

  89. Good piece by Caleb Howe, thoroughly rebutting Ben Domenech’s remarks on Redstate traffic. It shows that the formula of including all stripes of conservatives actually worked.

    Paul Montagu (e6130e)

  90. Good piece by Caleb Howe, thoroughly rebutting Ben Domenech’s remarks on Redstate traffic. It shows that the formula of including all stripes of conservatives actually worked.

    Great point, good article, and kudos to Daily Wire for publishing it.

    LJ (9188cd)

  91. You’re the one that made the assumption (also called pulling stuff out of your nether regions), you should do the research to back it up.

    Do you know the owners of RedState? Have they divulged anything to you other than what they put out in their public statements? No? Guess what, you, and everyone else who answers that question “no” and then speculates about alternative theories of what is really going on is “pulling stuff out of [their] nether regions”.

    Here’s some homework for you

    Do your own damn homework. If you have a point, prove it. Don’t rely on me to research your crazy theories.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  92. Firstly, the Rural Purge had nothing to do at all with ideology.

    Sure it did, though not as directly. CBS wanted to capture the younger viewers. They felt that their current hits, populated with rural characters and centering on those sensibilities and values, while popular with both rural and older viewers, were not what the younger crowd was looking for. It’s not that CBS disagreed with the messaging in the shows, but the messaging was part of what people saw.

    Secondly, the Rural Purge itself was no guarantee of success.

    No, it wasn’t. Neither is RedState’s strategy. But, that’s what they are attempting to pull off.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  93. My favorite remaining authors at Red State are:

    1. Kimberly Ross – the indomitable truth teller, she applies her ethics objectively to both sides of the aisle and won’t budge when partisans react against her rebukes

    2. Sarah Quinlan – the unconventional-thought crusader, she always has a unique perspective, or addresses (in thorough form) topics others don’t, which is both refreshing and fascinating

    3. Jim Jamitis – the incisive journalist, he views all of politics with a studied, cynical eye and comments sardonically

    My favorites who are now gone were:

    1. Caleb Howe – the consummate “happy warrior,” his articles were always funny and often diplomatic even though they were controversial

    2. Patterico – the deep analyst, slow to jump to conclusions, he wrote from a well of insight and sometimes delved far into the details of the news so you could come away satisfied that you really understood, and never flinched from stating the unpopular truth

    3. Susan Wright – the ever-sparring debater, she aptly employed clever turns of phrase and doggedly applied ethical standards to Donald Trump, even when Trump fans bullied her for it and insisted that Trump must be immune to criticism from the Right

    LJ (9188cd)

  94. 93. Let me say it again, Mous: RedState has not denied firing people for their Trump criticisms. Would someone somewhere mind trying to explain to me in some plausible sense how a purge of Trump critics is supposed to benefit RedState and Salem at least IN THEORY? I can understand what the motivations behind the rural purge were; it was a sea change in marketing/advertising methods as demographic analysis was becoming more relevant to television network advertisers.

    The RedState purge? I don’t get it. Is it cause I’m dumb? I mean, what happens if Trump runs in 2020 and loses? That’d look pretty silly to put one’s eggs all in that particular basket then, wouldn’t it?

    Gryph (08c844)

  95. When a Roman legion mutinied, they did not behead every mutineer. Only one out of ten. It’s where decimation comes from. The rest went back to the ranks. Think about it.

    nk (9651fb)

  96. RedState has not denied firing people for their Trump criticisms. Would someone somewhere mind trying to explain to me in some plausible sense how a purge of Trump critics is supposed to benefit RedState and Salem at least IN THEORY?

    RedState has also not denied firing people for their views about Ted Cruz. RedState has not denied a lot of things. That PROVES nothing.

    My theory, as I have previously stated, is that they have come to believe that their site is associated with the more rabid form of NeverTrumperism. That is, some of the people working there only wrote in term of how horrible Trump is on a personal level. So, they fired the ones who could be described as a one-trick pony. They are not prohibiting any and all criticism of Trump, but want to see it toned down.

    Patterico’s criticism of Trump’s trade policies are something that he could make in a less insulting way if he chose to. But, he doesn’t choose to do that, sticking more to the facts and economic theories. Instead, he will call Trump stupid. The Dummy in Chief, or whatever the phrase was he used. It is Patterico’s absolute right to make that criticism in that manner if he chooses. But, if RedState may very well think that that kind of rhetoric drives more people away than it attracts. They may be wrong. Perhaps their traffic will crater and never recover. But, it’s not crazy to think they might have more success with a different tone on their site.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  97. @87/93. I worked for CBS back in the day and know the story from the inside well- the lesson echoed down the corridors of Black Rock for years. The internal demographic data is a closely guarded; dictates ad rates and such. Silverman read it right. Likely Salem read the data akin to CBS, albeit on a smaller scale.

    But if you want to pick apart a similar, classic ‘content versus corporate’ tussle to debate from a RedState/P POV, revisit the Smothers Brothers versus CBS. Tom and Dick can still dine out on it. But corporate won that one, too, albeit on a technicality.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  98. 97. I’m not attmpting to prove anything, Mous. What I’m saying is, the Rural Purge comparison (which I did not initially make) doesn’t make sense to me, as CBS was trying to lower the average age of its viewers so that those watching the advertising would spend more money than the rural, older demographic. I understand that.

    What is RedState’s PURPOSE for firing Trump critics? What kind of reader do they hope to attract that they didn’t before? I’ll say it again: I’m not trying to prove anything, outside of asking someone to explain this to me so I can understand it as well as I understand the rural purge. Just what is Salem trying to accomplish here that would benefit them in the long-run?

    Gryph (08c844)

  99. 98. How familiar are you with Silverman’s stint at NBC? I find it very amusing that the guy who oversaw the rural purge as head of programming at CBS went on to oversee one of the darkest periods of NBC’s history.

    Gryph (08c844)

  100. “I don’t get it. Is it cause I’m dumb?”

    Well, if you have to ask…

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  101. @100. The formula isn’t an absolute– 1981 wasn’t 1971, either. The demos are always changing; confidential audience research is expensive and the rare consistency in numbers has always been golf. There’s an art to the science. But that data is as valuable as gold and usually extremely hard to access- on a need to know basis, even internally. BTW, Brady Bunch and Partridge Family were ABC programming, not CBS. But the industry axiom of corporate running the show, not the talent appearing on it, holds. The Smothers Brothers battle w/CBS corporate is more apt for this debate from a RedState/P’s POV. But again, they fought the good fight but lost that one to corporate, too.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  102. What is RedState’s PURPOSE for firing Trump critics? What kind of reader do they hope to attract that they didn’t before?

    RedState’s GOAL is to increase their traffic and, presumably, make more money.

    You must be aware that, on the right side of the political spectrum, there are more pro-Trump people than anti-Trump people. There are many more that while not being pro-Trump, are at least willing to give him a chance. If you have a site that is dedicated to attracting the anti-Trump people, you will drive away many of the pro-Trump people as well as those willing to give him a chance.

    Therefore, if you are unsatisfied with the level of traffic to your site and are looking for ways to grow, you have to think about all those people you are driving away. One possible tactic: stop pissing off all those people that actually voted for Trump. Note: that does not mean that you can never criticize Trump. But, if everyday you skim the headlines and look for the best hook to stick it to Trump, the people who like Trump are going to get sick of it sooner or later.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  103. 103. Then they are doomed to failure, since the purged writers were among their top pageview producers. The Rural Purge didn’t result in higher ratings, Mous. But that wasn’t its purpose. Its purpose was to get a younger demographic, and in that regard it was a success.

    One might reasonably argue that the Rural Purge did, in fact, represent the beginning of a decline-in-importance for raw ratings numbers. Cable networks today make very little money off of their advertising compared to how much they rake in from carriage fees.

    Gryph (08c844)

  104. Anyone else notice that we’re not seeing weekly ISIS videos of beheadings or the other heinous crap that went down during the Obama years? Well, neither does the media. They’d rather focus on the porn actress, and the other horseschiff.

    And how about that stalwart Mueller leaking those dumbass open ended questions he’d like to ask Trump… 5 questions about Trump’s tweets… questions about Comey… what was he thinking about during their dinner… his phone calls… what happened to the Russian Collusion?

    Rat bastard attorneys can be counted on for what amounts to underhanded, criminal activity of their own.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  105. Col H, do you realize that Trump’s team is a possible source for that leak?

    Kishnevi (5cc98a)

  106. Then they are doomed to failure, since the purged writers were among their top pageview producers.

    You assume that their realignment is complete. They will most likely be hiring new writers as time goes on. Too soon to tell how successful they will be. Undoubtedly, they will lose some of their visitors that they had up until now. But, there may be those who, upon hearing about the changes, will give them a try. Some bloggers who haven’t been linking them before, may link them now.

    You are fixated on just the people who were their regulars up until now. You are not taking into account those that did not visit before, but might be willing to visit now.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  107. The Rural Purge didn’t result in higher ratings

    You can go back and dig up the numbers if you want, but they likely traded up w/t fresh programming.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  108. Col H, do you realize that Trump’s team is a possible source for that leak?

    Aw c’mon, actually reading the first sentence of the article is cheating!

    The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, recently provided President Trump’s lawyers a list of questions

    Dave (445e97)

  109. Kishnevi, do you realize it’s more probable that they are not responsible?

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  110. 108. I did look at the numbers. Some of it was a trade-up, but not all. Primetime programming was where a lot of the hits came from at all three of the big broadcast networks, but the hit they took in daytime and evening ratings was made up for somewhat by the use of cheaper programming, like game shows. If not for the rural purge, Barry & Enright never would have had a rehabilitation like they did. ABC in particular gladly traded raw ratings points for a higher percentage of the target demographic.

    Gryph (08c844)

  111. In the absence of any evidence of collusion, why would any attorney advise the president to meet with Mueller?

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  112. Mueller’s a sick and sleazy FBI joke

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  113. 110. Actually Col H, it’s at least as likely the leak came from Trump’s side…

    Kishnevi (5cc98a)

  114. Questions for Mueller…

    Isn’t it true that in 2013, the largest bank of England, HSBC, was being investigated by federal authorities for laundering billions of dollars for the Mexican drug cartels, channeling money to the Middle East, specifically Iran, which is in violation of law?

    Isn’t it true that Robert Mueller, former director of the FBI and now the special counsel to investigate the alleged “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia… isn’t it true that Mr. Mueller was the chief counsel at HSBC… the same bank that was laundering money for the cartels?

    Isn’t it true that HSBC was a significant Clinton Foundation contributor? That Bill Clinton was being paid about $200,000 for his speeches at HSBC events… and this is while Mrs. Clinton was the Secretary of State? No conflict of interest there?

    Isn’t it true that HSBC was basically let off the hook with a $1.2 billion fine – which was paid by shareholders – and none of its officers, managers, directors were charged criminally or terminated?

    Mr. Mueller isn’t it true that you took US Uranium to RUSSIA FOR HILLARY CLINTON? Isn’t it true you assisted Clinton in the sale of 20% of US uranium?

    Mr. Mueller did you receive any monies or position appointments due to helping secretary Clinton?

    Robert Mueller is an expert at making nothing look like something.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  115. Actually Col H, it’s at least as likely the leak came from Trump’s side…

    Virtually certain. The leak gives Trump another lie to use in his campaign to undermine the rule of law.

    OTOH, leaking the questions does nothing to help Mueller, either legally or in the court of public opinion.

    Dave (445e97)

  116. It was enough– and again, replacing long in the tooth programming reahing a shifting audience. Roone Arledge saved ABC from itself; applied ABC Sports techniques to ABC News and soared. If the bells, whistles and multi-boxed graphics of today’s television screens make your eyes twitch, thank the late Roone Arledge.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  117. 117. Roone Arledge will always stand out in my mind as the guy who put “Dandy” Don Meredith in the booth with the late great Howard Cosell. Two guys who could barely stand each other, and a pairing which probably directly led the NFL to its cultural dominance today, which fact I am less than happy about as a gamer/techie geek.

    Gryph (08c844)

  118. @118. The brilliance there was to expand the audience– to reach women, at home/whubby on a Monday night. Again, new demographics. It worked.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  119. In Trump’s case, the victim is being targeted by the machinery of the federal government and fair-minded people should make it plain that this is not acceptable.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  120. 119. It did work in the end. And given that, no Trump supporter has explained to me why or how getting rid of top-tier pageview generators could possibly benefit RedState. I am absolutely gobsmacked. Unless RedState is somehow using Facebook to obtain demographic information it couldn’t get otherwise…

    Gryph (08c844)

  121. And given that, no Trump supporter has explained to me why or how getting rid of top-tier pageview generators could possibly benefit RedState. I am absolutely gobsmacked.

    Let’s try this one more time. Imagine two sets of people. Set A is 100K. Set B is 35K. Let’s say RedStae’s current visitor pool is set B. But, they believe, they have a shot at those people in Set A. Problem is, the people who are so good at catering to what Set B wants, absolutely pisses off Set A. In order for RedState to appeal to Set A, they have to jettison the very people who are so beloved by Set B. Most infuriatingly to those in Set B, the writers they love the absolute most are also the ones that are so annoying to those in Set A.

    RedState made the choice to go after those in Set A, even though they knew they would lose many of those in Set B. As much as they may hate losing their formally loyal visitors, it’s a numbers game and Set A is just plain bigger than Set B.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  122. you’re overthinking it maybe Mous?

    nevertrump’s a mass of contradictions

    screechy yet droning

    smugly morally superior yet wholly unable to restrain themselves from taking that cheapest shot du jour

    conservative yet kind of a lot looking forward to icky sticky cameltoe being the next president

    the adults in the room yes yes yes, hurling the same damn sippy cups every damn day

    this is not a business model

    this is not performance art

    it’s a desperate cry for relevance in a whirl that has no particular use for them

    this is ragnarök

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  123. excuse me I meant *Mr.* Mous, Mr. Mous

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  124. @121. You don’t know the depth of the data; likely few do except management. OTOH, your pitch fits w/arguing that CBS should have kept the Smothers Brothers and not found a figleaf technicality to jettison them. They fought it and lost.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  125. @122. If you view content as product to market that’s a fair assessment. It’s a cold business.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  126. 125. I’m not as familiar with the Smothers Brothers as I am with other programming of the time. I know that’s the show that Mason Williams made his bones at (and achieved fame with “Classical Gas), and I also know that many musical acts that would have never been on Ed Sullivan found a niche with the Smothers Brothers instead, though I couldn’t name but maybe one or two of those.

    Gryph (08c844)

  127. Yes, some people have “daddy issues”.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  128. An white guy just aggressively demanded to know if I was from Winnipeg. I said “Hell No” and denied Ted Cruz thrice before the whistle blew.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  129. @127. Look it up. It became a problem between the brothers and w/CBS brass. They and the writing staff (Steve Martin was one) pushed content and network censors to the limit, mostly w/political and social satire and commentary about the president, the war and social issues of the time. Some regional CBS affiliates began to edit the program down the line or refuse to carry it due to content and the network censors kept fighting w/t brothers gutting the scripts. W/only three networks at the time, it was a high profile fight. It finally ended w/Paley personally cancelling the show, firing the brothers and the writers– on a network technicality, but quieting the controversy was the likely reason.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  130. Isn’t it true that Robert Mueller, former director of the FBI and now the special counsel to investigate the alleged “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia… isn’t it true that Mr. Mueller was the chief counsel at HSBC… the same bank that was laundering money for the cartels?

    I’ve seen you post this multiple times, Haiku, and it’s not true. Mueller never worked for HSBC. Comey did, but not as a counsel, he was part of a panel to “combat financial crime after the bank paid $1.92 billion to settle money-laundering probes.”

    Davethulhu (7e7722)

  131. the site had a nasty and hateful tone

    shrewish and sour

    petulant, too

    my guess is this is what they’ve tried to remedy

    …by firing me.

    Why, thanks!

    Patterico (115b1f)

  132. Forgot to activate the filter.

    *activates filter*

    Ahhhhh. That’s better.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  133. Patterico,

    I started reading Redstate because of your links (to your articles). I have no reason to read their content now. I’ll stick to this blog where I like the content and enjoy the writing.

    Thank you for all that you do.

    Thank you, Ryan. Positive words mean more than you might think.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  134. Sounds to me like he admired strength, not dictators.

    “When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it. Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength. Our country is right now perceived as weak … as being spit on by the rest of he world …”

    Emphasis mine

    Sounds to me like he admired the kind of “strength” shown by mass murder of protesters.

    That’s, um, a dictatorial action.

    Your phrasing badly ignores the reality of what actually happened at and around Tiananmen. It would be like saying praising Duterte’s handling of the drug war has nothing to do with extrajudicial killing. Dishonest, IOW.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  135. I was so shaken up I screwed up my articles. Wanna fight aboot it?

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  136. LJ,

    Your comments on this thread, like every comment you have left so far, have been a delight. We are definitely kindred spirits and I appreciate your kind words.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  137. 115. Mr. Mueller isn’t it true that you took US Uranium to RUSSIA FOR HILLARY CLINTON? Isn’t it true you assisted Clinton in the sale of 20% of US uranium?

    Actually, no, it’s not true that Mueller “took US Uranium to Russia for Hillary”. As for the Rosatom purchase, word of their corruption didn’t make it out of the National Security Division of the FBI, according to The Hill, which I wrote about here, so that information never made it to the CFIUS. How this “assisted Clinton” is unclear because it’s unclear if Hillary was even involved on that committee. As for HSBC, the stories are coming from the likes of Infowars. Not very credible.

    Paul Montagu (e6130e)

  138. …by firing me.

    nonono

    i just didn’t wanna pick on rhymes with poosan bite

    she found her niche and I’m ok with that

    but tone is everything

    tone my friend is the critical term what’s applicable to any and every medium, and it’s not banal it’s IMPORTANT

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  139. Paul Montagu and Gryph, it has been great having you guys here too.

    It’s very striking how the addition of a few extra sane voices changes the dynamic.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  140. @127. Gryph, this is what Patterico wrote: ‘However, let’s not pretend that the firings weren’t designed to send a message. The people purged on Friday were some of the loudest critics of the president.’

    That’s a valid point; similar to the position and argument the Smothers brothers made against CBS back in ’69 when they were cancelled.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  141. When a Roman legion mutinied, they did not behead every mutineer. Only one out of ten. It’s where decimation comes from. The rest went back to the ranks. Think about it.

    nk (9651fb) — 5/1/2018 @ 3:58 pm

    I heard that one in ten was picked out and the other nine had to beat him to death. I hate that the word has drifted from ten percent to practically ninety nine percent.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  142. A few extra sane voices and a comment script, and reading comments here is actually fun again!

    Patterico (115b1f)

  143. Thanks, Patrick. I left the GOP five years ago after 33 years in the GOP because I saw where this thing was going.

    Paul Montagu (e6130e)

  144. the scientific study say if your comment lands in a gray horizontal you have 29% less comment heft than if your comment lands in a white-pixel horizontal

    but what if you comment lands in a yellow horizontal

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  145. I’ve seen you post this multiple times, Haiku, and it’s not true. Mueller never worked for HSBC. Comey did, but not as a counsel, he was part of a panel to “combat financial crime after the bank paid $1.92 billion to settle money-laundering probes.”

    Not that the Trump Adoration Society is interested in honesty or accuracy, but the whole idea that a lawyer who works for a client with a legal problem is somehow automatically tainted by that work it is disgustingly unfair and unAmerican.

    Sometimes, in their desperation to drag everyone down to the Trump’s level of immorality (admittedly a difficult task!) they will even suggest that a lawyer who worked in the same firm as ANOTHER lawyer, who represented somebody with a legal problem, is corrupt.

    Sure, if the lawyer is personally involved in the shady/illegal dealings, like Michael Cohen with Spanky, or Hillary Clinton in her Rose Law Firm days, that’s one thing.

    But representing people with real or potential legal problems is what attorneys do…

    Dave (445e97)

  146. But if you want to pick apart a similar, classic ‘content versus corporate’ tussle to debate from a RedState/P POV, revisit the Smothers Brothers versus CBS. Tom and Dick can still dine out on it. But corporate won that one, too, albeit on a technicality.

    DCSCA (797bc0) — 5/1/2018 @ 4:24 pm

    Tell us about the long, long ago before NDA’s were invented.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  147. @147. ‘Mom liked you better,’ PP.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  148. @118. The brilliance there was to expand the audience– to reach women, at home/whubby on a Monday night. Again, new demographics. It worked.

    DCSCA (797bc0) — 5/1/2018 @ 5:35 pm

    Before Don Merideth could reach them, apparently.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  149. That’s, um, a dictatorial action.

    Well, maybe you’re right. Perhaps he should have just mentioned Lincoln killing 800,000 Americans as an example of strength.

    the Bas (3bcea0)

  150. 119. It did work in the end. And given that, no Trump supporter has explained to me why or how getting rid of top-tier pageview generators could possibly benefit RedState. I am absolutely gobsmacked. Unless RedState is somehow using Facebook to obtain demographic information it couldn’t get otherwise…

    Gryph (08c844) — 5/1/2018 @ 5:46 pm

    I’m not really into following sports but I have heard that super smart experienced managers make dumb trades quite often.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  151. Not that the Trump Adoration Society is interested in honesty or accuracy, but the whole idea that a lawyer who works for a client with a legal problem is somehow automatically tainted by that work it is disgustingly unfair and unAmerican.

    I think it’s fair to make a judgement about a lawyer who decides to do pro bono work for those in Gitmo. They have a right to lend their talents to causes important to them, and I have a right to form an opinion about who they are.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  152. @127/@147:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08DnYRJhHks

    This may likely knock the wind outta Hoagie 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  153. 131… My mistake… the FBI Director of the at that time was Robert Mueller. Comey, who later replaced Mueller as FBI Director, was a member of the HSBC board of directors. The case was settled by Loretta Lynch, who then was U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. And the AGOTUS was Eric Holder.

    The Obama DOJ permitted HSBC to pay fines to avoid facing federal criminal indictments after HSBC admitted criminal responsibility for helping Mexican drug cartels and terrorist organizations with ties to countries like Iran launder hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign sources in the U.S. banking system.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  154. And Jeff Sessions could stand in for either one: http://youtu.be/oghxf-HS6go

    urbanleftbehind (24e2ff)

  155. Deputy AGOTUS Rosenstein has no legal right to refuse to turn over documents to the Congress.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  156. thugbitch Rosenstein be frontin

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  157. Traffic or reads is a terrible argument to base staffing decisions on. It’s one small factor. Businesses fire top producers all the time. Sports teams let go of top scorers every year. Every season TV shows are replaced by new shows that perform worse. Last Man Standing being a great example.

    Letting a top read go says nothing in of itself.

    Nate Ogden (223c65)

  158. 154 wouldn’t it have been hypocritical of the Obama administration to hold HSBC accountable for laundering cartel money to the same administration selling them guns?

    Nate Ogden (223c65)

  159. 158. Except that it happened. And there had to been some kind of motivation for it. And nobody seems to want to talk — except to admit the undeniable, which is that people were let go on the basis of their criticism of Trump. And here we are.

    Gryph (08c844)

  160. so this is a thing what’s gonna happen on America in t minus 3 days and counting

    After receiving shocking news about Avery’s father, Jane and Weller must hunt down an elusive criminal. Meanwhile, Patterson’s father helps the team in the lab.

    “Patterson’s father” is the Mitt Romney-style pedophile in the picture what poses as a scientist to sneak up on small children and force them to watch dancing gyrating trannies

    while Jaimie Alexander laughs haughtily

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  161. 130. That’s news to me. I didn’t realize that Paley himself was responsible for the cancellation. Damn shame. I remember seeing Tom and Dick on TV appearances they made since then, but it was never quite the same.

    Knowing more about the circumstances behind the Smothers’ cancelltion certainly does nothing to quiet my unease about l’affaire RedState, though. I wish the person or people responsible would come right out with the whole, unvarnished truth. I know…fat chance, right?

    Gryph (08c844)

  162. 140. You flatter me, sir. I’ve never been much for echo chambers, but it’s nice to know that I’m at least normal enough to avoid the nut hut. 😉

    Gryph (08c844)

  163. the stunned, dethroned solidarity of the OBushinton joint-incumbency under which the political confidence of the country largely eroded

    this.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  164. @162. Gryph, watch the video in #153. That’s just a sample of what they’d pipe out every Sunday night. CBS caught heat from ‘certain sections’ of the country over their content where the network affiliates were trying to sell advertising. It just came to a head and the Boss found a way to end it. Wait and see if Salem keeps ‘tweaking’ other platforms in the quarters to come.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  165. 165. Yup. I see what you mean. Considering that RedState s**tcanned apparently top-tier talent for being anti-Trump, and then published 3 anti-Trump pieces over the following weekend, I don’t think the drama is over. If this plays out like the Smothers Bros. drama, the RedState drama is just getting started.

    Gryph (08c844)

  166. oh goodie goodie gumdrops

    the RedState drama is just getting started

    and me without my red hat purple blouse

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  167. but i got my umpteen cats

    and i got my sprite

    i got my

    orange crush

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  168. Romney-style pedophile

    Mr. Feet, I see you make Romney/pedo comments from time to time. What do you base that on?

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  169. Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not elections. I believe Leigh Corfman. Her account is too serious to ignore. Moore is unfit for office and should step aside.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  170. Got it.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  171. The fact that you’re still here polishing Trump’s knob makes it look to me like this is a pretty safe space for pro-Trump sophisticates such as yourself. You’re welcome to leave at any time and go back to Streiff’s house if that bother’s you, Trump humper.

    Gryph (08c844) — 5/1/2018 @ 8:14 am

    Besides, I’m pretty sure the metaphor comparing this blog to RedState doesn’t hold up in the least.

    Patterico is a staff of one. I’m new here, but unless I am sorely mistaken, I don’t think anyone gets paid to write here, let alone makes a living off of writing here.

    and…

    Pat has never banned someone who disagrees with him. I’ve gone back and looked through a lot of archive, and I’ve never seen it happen.

    So yeah. “Tu Quoque?” Not quite, Trumpalos.

    Gryph (08c844) — 5/1/2018 @ 8:19 am

    I just have one word for Red State: if your reported ‘fact’ can’t survive counterarguments from prominent Trump critics, it isn’t fact; it’s either opinion or propaganda (and I’m leaning more towards the last option). Second, the only articles I will continue to read at your site are those written by Trump critics, because I want to ensure them many page views so that they keep their jobs, and I also wish to ensure that – if you DO make the mistake of firing them – no rational being will fall for your farcical excuse that you had to let them go for “economic reasons.”

    LJ (9188cd) — 5/1/2018 @ 3:06 pm

    Forgot to activate the filter.

    *activates filter*

    Ahhhhh. That’s better.

    Patterico (115b1f) — 5/1/2018 @ 6:44 pm

    LJ,

    Your comments on this thread, like every comment you have left so far, have been a delight. We are definitely kindred spirits and I appreciate your kind words.

    Patterico (115b1f) — 5/1/2018 @ 6:50 pm

    Paul Montagu and Gryph, it has been great having you guys here too.

    It’s very striking how the addition of a few extra sane voices changes the dynamic.

    Patterico (115b1f) — 5/1/2018 @ 6:51 pm

    A few extra sane voices and a comment script, and reading comments here is actually fun again!

    Patterico (115b1f) — 5/1/2018 @ 6:54 pm

    Heck of an echo chamber in here. All you need to do is insult the President and his nominal supporters and you’re sane. If you don’t, well…

    NJRob (408c95)

  172. 172. Considering that any praise I or Patterico, or anyone else for that matter, has for the president will be dismissed as inconsequential and/or ignored, allow me to welcome you to Block City Central, Trump humper.

    Gryph (08c844)

  173. Back atcha, Exalted Dem Phlegm😀

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  174. Welcome to 8th Grade Mean Gurl Central, Rob.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  175. You can’t even make this stuff up.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  176. 175.

    Colonel Hates Block Lists
    He Doesn’t Speak In Haiku
    He needs a new name

    Gryph (08c844)

  177. The Haiku Master
    Gryph Can Talk In Haiku Here
    The Colonel Does Not

    Gryph (08c844)

  178. 172. Heck of an echo chamber in here.

    As defined, an echo chamber is…

    an insular communication space where everyone agrees with the information and no outside input is allowed.

    From what I’ve seen in this very thread, this place is the opposite of an echo chamber. As I’ve said here and there, words and phrases mean things.

    Paul Montagu (e6130e)

  179. I’m happy to be blocked by those who prefer to stay in their bubble. May they never be graced with a contrary idea or facts to oppose their opinions.

    NJRob (408c95)

  180. 179. Outside input is allowed here. Rob and the Colonel are just sore that I don’t have to listen to them anymore.

    Gryph (08c844)

  181. block lists are okay
    until they’re used to achieve
    sexual release

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  182. Which has obviously become the case around here.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  183. @167. You can be a drag, Mr. Feet.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  184. Goofy bastards.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  185. Can’t read the Colonel.
    All his lines are total blanks.
    I laugh at him now.

    Gryph (08c844)

  186. Spunk Gets in Their Eyes

    They asked me how I knew
    Their thinking had turned Blue
    Oh, I of course replied
    Something there inside ended up deep fried

    They said one day this script
    On them will be flipped
    Oh, when their ass got fired
    They must realize
    Spunk got in their eyes

    So they play their Mean Gurl games
    This place just ain’t the same
    Yet today the truth has flown away
    Could be gone to stay
    Now laughing friends deride
    Tears they can not hide
    Oh, so I smile and say
    When a lovely flame dies
    Spunk got in their eyes
    Spunk got in their eyes

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  187. Colonel is poet
    His poems are not haiku
    Needs a new name now

    Gryph (08c844)

  188. Colonel,

    your words are always welcome and appreciated. Thank you.

    NJRob (b00189)

  189. 99

    What is RedState’s PURPOSE for firing Trump critics? What kind of reader do they hope to attract that they didn’t before? I’ll say it again: I’m not trying to prove anything, outside of asking someone to explain this to me so I can understand it as well as I understand the rural purge. Just what is Salem trying to accomplish here that would benefit them in the long-run?

    It appears RedState is a small part of Salem so perhaps the top dogs at Salem aren’t paying too much attention. They may have told the RedState editor (or whoever is in charge) to cut the budget by x% (Salem hasn’t been doing too well lately) and the editor just fired the people he didn’t like and kept the people liked.

    Or Salem may have been trying to position themselves for the midterm elections. In the transcript of their latest earnings call they attribute their audience drop in 2017 to the fact that 2017 was an off-year after a Presidential election year when people usually are less interested in politics. They were hoping to do better in 2018 since midterm election years while not attracting as much interest as in Presidential election years are better than off-years. However the increase in traffic in election years is primarily from partisans looking for cheerleading for their side. Anti-Trump commentary from the right isn’t going to attract these partisans.

    James B. Shearer (a9b467)

  190. Fore of an Eagle

    The a$$ end of a Lion

    On a sandstone face

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  191. 190. Not sure I necessarily agree, but that explanation sounds much more plausible to me than some of the tripe the Trump humpers have been spewing at me.

    The math just doesn’t add up though. And something is not passing the smell test. CBS was never known for being conservative. We’ve always prided ourselves as conservatives on being “better” than the other side, whatever the hell that means. Now? I’m not so sure anymore.

    Gryph (08c844)

  192. 95

    The RedState purge? I don’t get it. Is it cause I’m dumb? I mean, what happens if Trump runs in 2020 and loses? That’d look pretty silly to put one’s eggs all in that particular basket then, wouldn’t it?

    That’s not how it works, they would just start cheering for the new leaders.

    James B. Shearer (a9b467)

  193. 193.

    That’s one thing I find particularly disappointing about Trump and his supporters, you know. They seem to think he is as entitled to re-election in 2020 as Hillary felt entitled to the office in 2016!

    Gryph (08c844)

  194. I wonder if Patterico would have been writing critical LaTimes op eds if RedState had fired a bunch of pro-Trump writers. Writers on political sites get fired for political reasons all the time and I don’t remember Patterico getting upset about it before. But perhaps I missed it.

    James B. Shearer (a9b467)

  195. 195. The one thing that the RedState purge is utterly lacking in this time is plausible deniability. Nobody can turn around at RedState and give another explanation for what happened that doesn’t involve somehow admitting that they fired people for being Trump critics.

    AND…

    The fact that three critical articles showed up in their pages over the past weekend does not bode well for the ethics of how it was done, in my opinion. If that’s the best they can do for plausible deniability, they won’t be getting my eyeballs anymore. As always, YMMV.

    Gryph (08c844)

  196. @192. CBS was never known for being conservative.

    Believe Bill Paley was what we’d called a ‘Rockefeller Republican’… and ‘conservative’ was relative w/him: he made CBS employees sign loyalty oaths during the McCarthy era, was friends w/Ike and Nixon as well. But read his NYT obit– it’s an amazing life of a true media mogul.

    https://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/27/obituaries/william-s-paley-builder-of-cbs-dies-at-89.html

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  197. 195. I wonder if Patterico would have been writing critical LaTimes op eds if RedState had fired a bunch of pro-Trump writers.

    At the risk of mindreading, I’d say it’d depend on the truthfulness of the stated reasons for the purge. I’ll also note that pro-Trump writers are not falling all over themselves to defend the ones who were purged, perhaps because they’re as aware as anyone that it was ideological, not economic.

    Paul Montagu (e6130e)

  198. 198

    … perhaps because they’re as aware as anyone that it was ideological, not economic.

    It could be both you know. Salem stock is down over 50% in the last year. That’s the sort of thing that is associated with economic problems and layoffs.

    James B. Shearer (a9b467)

  199. Salem stock is down over 50% in the last year. That’s the sort of thing that is associated with economic problems and layoffs.

    Maybe I’m wrong, but it’s hard to believe that Townhall/RedState/HotAir/BearingArms/Twitchy show up anywhere but the last decimal place on Salem’s balance sheet.

    They own something like 150 radio stations and a large-ish book publishing company, plus various and sundry other media ventures.

    Web sites are low overhead, but RedState (according to the graph) gets 5-6 million pageviews per month; that hardly seems like a basis for making sums that would matter on a large corporate scale.

    According to the 2016 annual report, digital media advertising (which includes the Townhall group of sites) was 17% of revenue for Salem, but this also includes other sites including their (Christian) “Salem Web Network”.

    The Salem Web Network site claims 69 million site visits per month vs. 2 million for Townhall and presumably somewhat less (based on Alexa rankings) for HotAir, RedState and Twitchy.

    So it looks like the Townhall sites are roughly 10% of Salem’s total web visitors per month, and if they are 10% of the digital advertising revenue, that would make them 1-2% of Salem’s revenue stream.

    Dave (445e97)

  200. It could be both you know.

    That’s doubtful. Caleb Howe’s piece on Redstate traffic fairly well puts to rest the notion that the fired writers hurt the site’s bottom line.
    Personally, I have a conundrum. Despite my opinion that streiff is a jackass, he did restore my diary-writing privileges yesterday. Do I continue to write content that is more critical of Trump than not, do I continue to be a dissenting voice as a person now in the minority, or do I say the hell with it because they fired a half-dozen writers based on bulls**t pretenses.

    Paul Montagu (e6130e)

  201. That’s doubtful. Caleb Howe’s piece on Redstate traffic fairly well puts to rest the notion that the fired writers hurt the site’s bottom line.
    Personally, I have a conundrum. Despite my opinion that streiff is a jackass, he did restore my diary-writing privileges yesterday. Do I continue to write content that is more critical of Trump than not, do I continue to be a dissenting voice as a person now in the minority, or do I say the hell with it because they fired a half-dozen writers based on bulls**t pretenses.

    Paul Montagu (e6130e) — 5/2/2018 @ 4:58 am

    And this right gere is the problem. You come at it as you’re automatically going to write pieces critical of President Trump. No objectivity at all. You’ll just find something you don’t like and focus on it. That’s petty and doesn’t advance anything except the left’s political goals.

    NJRob (408c95)

  202. 201. Go ahead and go back there if you want. I seriously wouldn’t think any less of you. But you should probably be aware that what happened on May 27 could be just a shot across the bow, so to speak.

    Gryph (08c844)

  203. Where is all Trumpkin praise for Hillary Clinton when she “does something good”? Or is it that Hillary Clinton only does bad things, while Trump sometimes does good things?

    Leviticus (97cc6c)

  204. If Hoagie, NJRob, ropelight, Haiku, etc. could dig up a single comment on this blog that has said anything remotely positive about Hillary Clinton, I would love to see it.

    Leviticus (97cc6c)

  205. There was one that said something along the lines of “that lady sure can put ‘em away”… much praise for her ability to drink many of her countrymen under the table. Wait… I think I wrote that one.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  206. Maybe the firings will remain a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma…

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  207. Colonel still at it
    Still no haiku can be seen
    When will his name change?

    Gryph (08c844)

  208. It will be studied for years to come… like teh disappearance of Michael Rockefeller… did he get lost in the jungle of New Guinea or was he barbecued and consumed by local gourmands?

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  209. whippersnappin’ gryp
    like a bum on teh doorstep
    there is no there there

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  210. The firing to be talking about is Mueller’s. Trump has never had as good an opportunity to fire him, over Sessions’ and Rosenstein’s heads if necessarry, after the leak of The Questions to NYT, and he’s not likely to have a better one in the future.

    nk (dbc370)

  211. Can You See Me? Jaime Hendrix

    Can you see me writing comments on yo’ blog
    Whoa yeah!
    Can you see me, ‘rico ?
    Baby, please don’t grieve
    Yeah, if you can see me doing that
    You can see in the future of a thousand years

    Can you script me?
    So that I won’t be around
    Yeah, slick
    Can you hear me ‘rico?
    Laughin’ cuz you put me down
    What’s with you?
    If you can hear me doing that
    You can hear a slow train coming from a thousand miles

    Ah yeah
    Can you hear me?
    Singing this song to you
    Ah, you better hold up your ears
    Can you see me, ‘rico?
    Singing this song to you
    Ah shucks!
    If you can hear me sing
    You better man up like you’re supposed to do

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  212. If Hoagie, NJRob, ropelight, Haiku, etc. could dig up a single comment on this blog that has said anything remotely positive about Hillary Clinton, I would love to see it.

    Leviticus (97cc6c) — 5/2/2018 @ 5:50 am

    She and her fellow leftists are very good at pushing the ideology of slavery and making the public think it’s good for them.
    There you go. Enjoy Leviticus.

    NJRob (b00189)

  213. 202. That’s petty and doesn’t advance anything except the left’s political goals.

    I’ll just say that you don’t know me. When Trump was elected, I vowed to judge Trump as he went, focusing more on what he did than what he said, and I don’t intend to change that approach. From that perspective, I’ve been more critical of his decisions than supportive, and I don’t see his behavior changing, but I’m open to being pleasantly surprised.

    Paul Montagu (e6130e)


  214. 213.If Hoagie, NJRob, ropelight, Haiku, etc. could dig up a single comment on this blog that has said anything remotely positive about Hillary Clinton, I would love to see it.

    Leviticus (97cc6c) — 5/2/2018 @ 5:50 am

    I could be missing something but I don’t recall ever saying any comments were positive for Hillary. They just don’t seem as dedicated to opposing her and her Marxist philosophy as they do to badmouthing Trump on a constant basis.

    I will tell you one thing, Leviticus and that is Hoagie, NJRob, ropelight, Haiku, etc. are conservative partisans, not moderates and not liberals. As such we are against the leftist democrats, socialists and communists and since Trump is currently none of these we are not against Trump. Should he decide to adopt Hillary’s ideology we’ll flush his a$$ down the toilet like any other pinko. Until then, he is the duly elected president and I approve of most of his policies….so far. It does not mean we like the “man” but we will not abort the “mission” because the leader is imperfect. BTW, every single professional politician in this country is a turd so if you are looking for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ to lead America to glory you’re looking in the wrong place.

    Rev.Hoagie (1b0402)

  215. 215. Sorry, Hoagie. Donald Trump was best friends with the Clintons when it suited his purposes. Now that it suits his purposes to be the anti-hillary, the orange chameleon has changed his political colors. There are pictures out there to prove it.

    The Trump humpers’ constant refrain of “at least he’s not Hillary” reflects nothing but their fear of Hillary. That’s extremely weak tea when it comes to a reason to praise Donald Trump for anything.

    Gryph (08c844)

  216. I will tell you one thing, Leviticus and that is Hoagie, NJRob, ropelight, Haiku, etc. are conservative partisans, not moderates and not liberals. As such we are against the leftist democrats, socialists and communists and since Trump is currently none of these we are not against Trump. Should he decide to adopt Hillary’s ideology we’ll flush his a$$ down the toilet like any other pinko. Until then, he is the duly elected president and I approve of most of his policies….so far. It does not mean we like the “man” but we will not abort the “mission” because the leader is imperfect. BTW, every single professional politician in this country is a turd so if you are looking for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ to lead America to glory you’re looking in the wrong place.

    Rev.Hoagie (1b0402) — 5/2/2018 @ 6:58 am

    Well said. Thank you.

    Sorry, Hoagie. Donald Trump was best friends with the Clintons when it suited his purposes. Now that it suits his purposes to be the anti-hillary, the orange chameleon has changed his political colors. There are pictures out there to prove it.

    The Trump humpers’ constant refrain of “at least he’s not Hillary” reflects nothing but their fear of Hillary. That’s extremely weak tea when it comes to a reason to praise Donald Trump for anything.

    Gryph (08c844) — 5/2/2018 @ 7:02 am

    And Reagan was once a Democrat. Your point other than using any excuse to constantly insult people who don’t hate the President?

    NJRob (b00189)

  217. Anyone know where Jay Caruso, Caleb Howe, and the others end up? It may be too soon to know but I would like to continue reading them.

    DRJ (15874d)

  218. 217. That I hate the president and insult those who don’t are mischaracterizations of my beliefs, Trump humper. That Reagan was a Democrat has absolutely ZERO to do with the fact that Donald Trump would sell out his own mother for a dollar. And you have yet to prove me wrong about that.

    Gryph (08c844)

  219. He’s just following instructions, Rob.

    Colonel Haiku (af8791)

  220. Trump has never had as good an opportunity to fire him, over Sessions’ and Rosenstein’s heads if necessarry, after the leak of The Questions to NYT, and he’s not likely to have a better one in the future.

    So the fact that his own attorneys leaked the questions Mueller sent them to the press gives him a good opportunity to fire Mueller?

    Dave (445e97)

  221. That I hate the president and insult those who don’t are mischaracterizations of my beliefs, Trump humper. That Reagan was a Democrat has absolutely ZERO to do with the fact that Donald Trump would sell out his own mother for a dollar. And you have yet to prove me wrong about that.

    Gryph (08c844) — 5/2/2018 @ 7:30 am

    These words say otherwise. You’re a child and will be treated as such.

    Now take your ball and run home.

    NJRob (408c95)

  222. 205.If Hoagie, NJRob, ropelight, Haiku, etc. could dig up a single comment on this blog that has said anything remotely positive about Hillary Clinton, I would love to see it.

    You might find one from me but ages ago and only in reference to her support of the America’s space program. She was a space advocate; it was a personal interest of hers. It was HRC who pushed Bubba down to KSC to witness John Glenn’s shuttle launch and as SoS occasionally referenced it as a projection of American values, technical prowess, leadership and ‘power’ while visiting other nations. But space hasn’t been high on the national agenda for several administrations.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  223. 222. Try again, knob polisher. I’m an equal opportunity politician-hater. My “hatred” for Trump, such as it is, reflects my hatred of all politicians.

    Gryph (08c844)

  224. I’ve seen people given time off for calling other commenters less than “knob polisher”, but perhaps different standards for the approved set is just accepted anymore.

    the Bas (3bcea0)

  225. 225. Awww. Poor widdle Bas. Did I hurt your feelings? 😛

    Gryph (08c844)

  226. 201

    That’s doubtful. Caleb Howe’s piece on Redstate traffic fairly well puts to rest the notion that the fired writers hurt the site’s bottom line.

    He appeared to claim the fired writers were completely on commission being paid a fraction of the advertising revenue they generated. I find this difficult to believe but even if true it doesn’t take overhead into account. Was the site as a whole profitable?

    James B. Shearer (a9b467)

  227. 190

    Or Salem may have been trying to position themselves for the midterm elections. …

    Adding to my earlier comment, I don’t read RedState so I don’t know who advertises on the site but in election years I would expect you get a lot of candidate ads asking for money. “Help John Smith flip the Senate seat in West Virginia for the Republicans and President Trump.” That sort of thing. Such candidates aren’t going to be enthusiastic about a lot of page views from never-Trumpers who are unlikely to donate.

    James B. Shearer (a9b467)

  228. High class. New breed. If I wasn’t mistaken I’d think he was one of our former leftist trolls just with a new identity pretending to be so concerned.

    NJRob (b23c23)

  229. He appeared to claim the fired writers were completely on commission being paid a fraction of the advertising revenue they generated. I find this difficult to believe but even if true it doesn’t take overhead into account. Was the site as a whole profitable?

    Why don’t we look at what Caleb actually said, rather than James B. Shearer’s opinion about what Caleb “appeared to claim”?

    The actual analytics reports are internal. They are used to calculate ad rates and in some cases, like at RedState, used to calculate the pay for the writers of content generating the traffic.

    . . . .

    Domenech says “you can’t afford to pay writers no one wants to read.” The writers that were fired from RedState on Friday were all paid on traffic only. That means they don’t earn money if they don’t generate it. So, actually, you 100% can afford to pay writers no one wants to read if you only pay them if people read them. Which is how RedState writing actually works. You get paid only for readers you actually generate, and only a share of the ad revenue.

    So a writer who generated 100,000 page views kept only a portion of the ad revenue and the rest went to RedState. This was designed specifically to prevent the “you can’t afford to pay writers no one wants to read” problem.

    I can guarantee you that we were paid on traffic only because I know how we were paid, and that’s how we were paid.

    I don’t know what RedState’s “overhead” is. The “overhead” at a site like mine consists of paying the server costs and occasionally paying a Web master for various tasks. There will be greater overhead at a larger site employing several people and paying them for their writing, for obvious reasons.

    I know that when they set their per-click rates, they set them at a level that would allow them to make a profit when compared to what advertisers were willing to pay. Whether advertising rates changed over time, I don’t know. I was not an executive. I was a writer.

    I hope that helps.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  230. Heck of an echo chamber in here. All you need to do is insult the President and his nominal supporters and you’re sane. If you don’t, well…

    Extraordinarily aggressive and rude, much like your earlier comment to me in another thread:

    So Chris Harris is a leftist that hates religion, but worships at the altar of man made climate change, but he’s a fellow traveller because he hates Trump and stood up for free speech once. Sounds like Bill Maher.

    I’ve been seriously considering adding you to my personal comment script list, and these comments have me very close to doing so. As in, one more rude comment from you and I’m adding you. Not banning you. Blocking you so I can’t see you.

    Your complaints about Gryph’s responses don’t take into account your initial aggression.

    I thought about responding at length about Sam Harris, talking about the fact that I no doubt disagree with him on many topics, but that his deep commitment to freedom of speech and opposition to political correctness goes far deeper than the statement that he “stood up for free speech once.” But then I saw your initial comment in this thread, which mocks my appreciation of several of the new commenters — including LJ, who is a positive delight — as if it were solely based on their insulting Trump.

    And I realized that you really don’t appear to be interested in dialogue. You appear to be interested in making pronouncements that distort other people’s positions to satisfy your own sense of self-righteousness.

    How dare you insult LJ, in particular, who as far as I can tell has been rude to nobody here, and has been a positive breath of fresh air?

    Having typed all this out, I’m amazed that I haven’t already added you to my comment block list. I feel that somewhere in the back of my head, I have a memory of decency from you, buried in all this unnecessary aggression and distortion.

    So I’m giving you one last chance to convince me. But I have an itchy comment script finger and it makes me happy. And reading the kind of crap quoted above makes me upset. And evidently makes some of the new commenters I am cultivating upset as well.

    So, you do you, and I’l react accordingly. And I’ll remind Gryph that the blocking script is editable with considerable ease.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  231. Oh. I hadn’t read all the comments. Looks like Gryph is one step ahead of me.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  232. I’m happy to be blocked by those who prefer to stay in their bubble. May they never be graced with a contrary idea or facts to oppose their opinions.

    I have said that I am happy to read contrary opinions. I add to the comment script people who, in my own personal opinion, are aggravating without sufficient redeeming values to justify the aggravation.

    This could be because they are overly aggressive, because they distort what I say and/or make strawman arguments, because they whine in a non-constructive manner about the content of my posts, or any combination of the above or similar characteristics or actions.

    You can call that being in a bubble — and if you do, that’s further evidence of you being annoying and undeserving of my attention.

    It’s a personal call on my part. I have done it on Twitter for years and have finally decided that I would be happier doing it here too, at least as long as I feel the desire.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  233. These words say otherwise. You’re a child and will be treated as such.

    Now take your ball and run home.

    NJRob (408c95) — 5/2/2018 @ 8:37 am

    He and the other Mean Gurlz run home and pour their tiny little hearts out in their pink diaries.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  234. tiny bubbles

    in the whine

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  235. It appears RedState is a small part of Salem so perhaps the top dogs at Salem aren’t paying too much attention. They may have told the RedState editor (or whoever is in charge) to cut the budget by x% (Salem hasn’t been doing too well lately) and the editor just fired the people he didn’t like and kept the people liked.

    Always fun to read uninformed speculation from a guy who really wants to make an annoying point and doesn’t care that he has no idea what he’s talking about.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  236. Anyone know where Jay Caruso, Caleb Howe, and the others end up? It may be too soon to know but I would like to continue reading them.

    Jay is an editor at the Dallas Morning News if memory serves. Not sure about Caleb..

    Patterico (115b1f)

  237. I’ve seen people given time off for calling other commenters less than “knob polisher”, but perhaps different standards for the approved set is just accepted anymore.

    The Bas,

    Context is everything. NJRob has been very aggressive today.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  238. Context is everything. NJRob has been very aggressive today.

    Patterico (115b1f) — 5/2/2018 @ 9:02 pm

    Except that my first post was listing insults by other posters and then you.commending them.

    They, especially Gryph, were rude and insulting and I responded in kind.

    You claim it’s insulting to have to defend yourself from people calling you never Trump all the time yet you fall to acknowledge how it is the same responding to the petty insults of anti-Trump associates who love to delve in the muck.

    Why is that?

    NJRob (4c8e7b)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.7773 secs.