Written by Voice of Liberty on December 23rd, 2011
A while back the Albany Times Union started up a so-called “Tea Party” blog. Initially, it was at least partially stocked with actual Tea Party bloggers. Well, actually just two. That was, however, at least more than they have at the end. Which was none.
That is, unless you count Bill Claydon (see DailySok “Where’s Billdo”), renowned producer of graphic fetus videos and piston-like comment-replier (a “jump-the-shark” tactic Bill uses to bait the Lefties and artificially pump up his comment counts by providing near-concierge-level replies to every actual reader-submitted comment; effectively doubling the comment count).
Here’s Bill (or “Billdo”, a nickname he earned due to his non-appearance in any Albany Tea Party events prior to his TU blog career, like the famous “Waldo”).
Mike Huber, or Mike “Hubris”, as many of the current TU News bloggers and journalists call him behind his back, self-styled “Blog Czar” and “Interactive Audience Manager” had this to say on 10 November 2010 in his little blog:
Background: We launched the Tea Party blog in June with four women and three men, all local and all agreeabeseven bloggers. I removed two bloggers in early September, after one posted a gruesome photo in violation of our terms of service. The second blogger was removed because, after a lengthy email correspondence, we decided it was best to end his association with timesunion.com blogs. We frown on bloggers using our online space to test the limits of common decency.
At the time, the remaining TP bloggers and I were unsure whether to continue with the blog. They’re busy people. They volunteer to write this blog, and now their names were unfairly tainted because of the actions of their co-bloggers. Who needs the aggravation? Ultimately, we met and talked things over and they collectively decided to continue. Good thing. Otherwise, the terrorists win.
Wow, did he just say “Otherwise, the terrorists win.“? Hey Mike, I think the Terrorists “won” when they became part of the Times Union Green Blog.
Jeff Jones
Jeff Jones has been an environmental lobbyist around the Capitol for more than 15 years. He represents the Natural Resources Defense Council, Land Trust Alliance, and New Partners for Community Revitalization. He also directs the New York State Apollo Alliance, a coalition supporting green jobs in an emerging clean energy economy.
Wow, this sanitized version of “Green” Jeff Jones is a far cry from his salad days as an Actual-Terrorist and fugitive and member of the Weather Underground. Yep, the TU Green Blogger is that Jeff Jones.
And now he blogs for Mike Huber.
What a joke.
For anyone who doesn’t know the back story, as the 2010 Elections heated up, Mike Huber took to logging into the TU “Tea Party” blog and deleting comments and forbidding content that he didn’t like.
Here’s a related snippet from the Metroland coverage:
Well, the Times Union likes the Tea Party blog when it generates tens-of-thousands of page views and drives the click-ad revenue through the roof.
But they only like it when it is the sanitized and familiar view of the Tea party. Like the FBI version of the border. A nice, thick blanket over the body. Little folding numbers. You know – “we love guns” and “we hate commies” and “Progressives suck” and “we love God” and all that standard fare the far-left commenters churn on.
But when it gets too edgy, or ruffles some feathers, they start to cringe and censor. The Staff at the Times Union recently challenged the TU Tea Party bloggers to answer the question: “Is the Tea Party nothing more than a shill for the Republican Party?”, after a mind-numbingly repetitive series of Republican candidate-centric articles by a TU Tea Party blogger who doubles as a Tea Party Co-Organizer (at least since he became a TU blogger anyway). But, more recently, the TU Staff prohibited any content or material related to the Albany Tea Party / Capital District Tea Party Leader.
Mike Huber also logged in and deleted comments that a savvy (former) TU “Tea Party” blog reader posted detailing an internet search that he had conducted that “outed” a chronic TU commenter, “nick c” (or google site:timesunion.com “nick c” to see how your tax dollars are spent), that turned out to be an on-the-clock stateworker, posting blog comments all day day long from his cushy state job at DMV. No wonder Carl Paladino was “mad as hell”…hehe…
Anyways, for the record, I guest-posted (and also for the record – completely without Valerie’s prior knowledge) an edgy piece with an after-action picture of some Mexican Drug Cartel shootout carnage. Mike Huber (aka Mike Hubris) fired Valerie and Kevin, the only 2 TU bloggers that were actually even remotely associated with the Albany-Area Tea Party movement.
The Times Union’s loss. The DailySok’s gain. We got two grassroots activists and terrific bloggers, and neither is a paid National Republican Congressional Committee employee, or spouse thereof.
And Mike Huber got the “DailyBill”.
And Fonzy on water skis.
For anyone not familiar with Mike Huber, Tu Blog Czar – see below (WARNING NSFW – This is a funny claymation depicting Mike Huber’s head being evacuated from a dog’s rectum).
For the record, I’d rather be a Huber-labeled Terrorist, than an asshole like you, Mike.
T’is the season for religion in general and Christianity in particular to come under attack by the not-so-tolerant anti-god folks. Having pretty much eliminated any references to Christmas in our schools and other public spaces (Holiday Trees anyone?) they can now put all their energy into the battle against nativity scenes and Tim Tebow.
At such a time it useful to consider the role religion plays in a free society and what the founders of our republic thought of its importance to a people who wished to be self-governing. It’s hard to argue that our nation’s tilt toward secularism has produced a more virtuous people so what might more personal religiosity as well as moral and ethical introspection do to improve our current situation?
While the founders differed in their personal religious beliefs, they still honored the Judeo-Christian worldview which influenced western civilization. They also recognized the need for the teaching of morality and republican values in the young American population. “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people, said John Adams. “It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
George Washington agreed. In his farewell address he argued that religion and morality were “indispensable supports” of the fledgling nation. “The mere Politician, equally with the pious man,” said Washington, “ought to respect and to cherish them.”
As adherents to John Locke’s philosophy of natural moral law the founders believed, in the words of Samuel Adams, that an American citizen retained the right to “worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.” This belief was codified in the First Amendment to the Constitution which states, in part, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .” Taken at face value it is hard to see how that translates into first graders being forbidden to eat cupcakes off Santa Claus paper plates at their celebrations-formerly-known-as-Christmas-parties but in my nieces’ upstate New York elementary school that is exactly how far anti-religion fervor and political correctness have been taken.
This begs the question of why religion threatens so many people. Certainly we’ve all heard the contention that evil acts committed in the name of religion outweigh the good. This is a specious argument for two reasons: first, it is impossible to know how many good and decent acts have been carried out by people of faith, especially since small daily acts of kindness rarely makes the news; but even more obviously one can argue that much more evil has been perpetrated by leaders and regimes that claimed no connection to religion whatsoever, but were in fact officially atheistic. Mao Zedong, Josef Stalin and Pol Pot were not exactly known for their piety. They were, however, officially sanctioned heads of state so should we look into abolishing government?
This actually gets a little closer to why religion threatens some. A self-governing people need less external control, which makes much of government unnecessary. When neighbors take seriously the commandment to love one another, and provide such services as meals and rides to the doctor for those in need, these state-sponsored services become unnecessary. When families care for their children and their elderly we don’t need state-sponsored daycare and seniorcare. When families form in the first place we don’t need as many poverty programs. A community of compassionate, benevolent and committed people like those often produced through adherence to a religious creed takes care of its own so the state doesn’t have to.
On an individual level these people can also be threatening because they demonstrate that there is another way to live, a way that demands more of us than we sometimes wish to demand of ourselves. The attacks on devoutly and unabashedly Christian Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow illustrate this point.
Tebow has been excoriated for dropping to a knee in prayer after throwing a touchdown pass, sporting biblical verses on the paint beneath his eyes and thanking Jesus first and foremost after every game. During the off-season he participates in mission trips to third-world orphanages and generally walks the walk of which he talks. It’s a little puzzling that behavior such as this is an issue in a league where it is estimated one out of five players will be arrested at some point on charges of anything from DUI to domestic assault to murder but some commentators and players have made it so and the young man has been roundly criticized.
But Tebow also has his defenders and they are starting to include the majority of Americans. Even when we ourselves do not live up to high standards of behavior we usually admire someone who does. This coincides with our appreciation of religion and Christmas in particular. According to a recent Rasmussen poll the number of religious Americans is on the rise and eighty-eight percent of American say they celebrate Christmas. In light of these numbers a lot of us are wondering why the remaining twelve-percent get to call the shots when it comes to the upcoming holiday.
There is nothing “offensive” about a nativity scene on public property and wishing someone a “Merry Christmas” is not an attempt to convert the non-religious. Both are merely universally understood expressions of love and good will. Exposure to religious ideas and symbols does not harm psychologically healthy people but provides guidance and comfort to many. The Judeo-Christian worldview is the foundation of many of our American values and should be accepted as such. Tolerance should go both ways.
Audrey Pietrucha helps coordinate the Vermont Liberty Alliance. She can be reached at vermontliberty@gmail.com.
2 visitors online now 0 guests, 2 bots, 0 members All time: 72 at 12-27-2010 09:50 pm EST Max visitors today: 14 at 03:31 pm EST This month: 31 at 01-18-2012 05:06 pm EST This year: 31 at 01-18-2012 05:06 pm EST