It all starts out with an amazingly un-self-aware post called “Why Do Those Who So Readily Revile Us Devote So Much of their Day to this Object of thier[sic] Revulsion?”
It’s a rambling essay, full the folksy anecdotal style of which GayPatriotWest/Dan Blatt is so fond. It’s like a little stream of thought that thins until reaching a leech bed of confused summation. I’m not sure if he’s upset that people criticize GayPatriot, or why he’s confused people sometimes have such a strong negative reaction to the site, or if he thinks liberals are secretly hot for conservatives and mask it through criticism. What I do get out of it is how clueless he seems to be about his own blog and the tone it takes. “Now, I welcome criticism…” he says. But as one banned from the site and knowing of a host of others, it’s simply not true. And if not banned, those that remain to post on the blog are attacked by the regular commentors like a pack of hyenas against a lone lion. Surely most critics have walked away from the trying effort to reason with the unassailable belief presented on the site.
“It’s just that I wonder why those who are ever ready to make assumptions about us, criticize us, sometimes in the most mean-spirited of language, spend so much time on our blog.” It’s a clutch the pearls moment for Mr. Peggy Noonan. First, I notice most of the critics in the comments know plenty about the site and the site’s philosophy, but it’s the denial by GayPatriotWest of that presentation that would lead him to assume critics speak from assumptions. And regarding “mean-spirited language,” the regular commentors are experts at the verbal slice and dice. I’d say the mean-spirited language starts there to protect their little den of incestuous conservative think. GayPatriot has always ignored such goings on when it was to their benefit. That lack of oversight makes them absolutely complicit in the devolution of commentary on their site.
Their commentors go on to summarily find that things like insecurity, fetish objects, and the “cruel and tragic” nature at the expense of their “cheeky and fun shenanigans” as motivation for their observations about critics.
The rest of today’s post follow with more intellectual dishonesty. They try to counter criticism they were not critical of Republican deficit spending during the Bush presidency. However, none of their criticism began until 2006, when it was clear the tide had turned with midterm elections. They were apparently OK with it for the six years they were in power but not when they started losing power. Also there’s no mention of criticism from late 2006 to late 2008, a two-year span where you’d think to find criticism of the additional complicities of Democratic majorities in deficit spending they use now as reasoning to castigate the economic stimulus.
GayPatriotWest then assert false observations about the projected deficit. He ignores how it came to be, rather taking the opportunity for pot shots against Democratic leaders who had little to no power during the Bush presidency. He ignores how much worse it could have been if Republicans (“I know nothing about the economy” McCain and the rest of those who relaxed oversight) had retained majority. He then rounds it out with hyperbolic question of how to fix the deficit, when the obvious answer – don’t elect Republicans – is clear.
Then another article asserts CNN “flops” in the ratings over tea bagging parties citing ratings news that finally sees Fox news besting CNN for overall viewership. It’s funny that Dan has to rely on the more critical analysis of his 20+ years younger nephew to fill the void of reasoning on his part. But the Blatt clan fails to consider beyond hypothesis for the one-day spike and the increasing viewership of Fox News over other cable news networks. They also fail to note that WWE wrestling, a kid’s show iCarly.com on Nickelodeon, reruns of NCIS and Spongebob Squarepants all regularly receive better ratings that the O’Reilly Factor in cable ratings, Fox’s highest rated show.
Again what GayPatriotWest, as usual, fails to recognize throughout his posts is that the blog advocates certain public policy philosophy. Those that persuade one way or the other have a huge stake in the outcome of that persuasion. If GayPatriotWest was ruler of the country of GayPatriotland, it would be more than acceptable for him to espouse and advocate the particular philosophies for all that chose to live there. But his words have resonance well beyond the boundaries of his blog. What he says and what he advocates affects far more than himself via this vehicle. So it’s both a right and an obligation for those that disagree to make themselves and their ideas known. GayPatriotWest doesn’t seem to like America as it is, and advocates for changes to philosophies of the Right. And when he insulates himself and those of similar mindset essentially telling critics to mind their own business, even about subjects that affect them, it’s more than time to call them on their BS.