Before Tony, There Was Daylin

BillLawrenceOnline.Com ^ | 6-13-11

[Tribune7]

Way before Congressman Tony Weiner's Twitter escapades, (Pennsylvania) State Sen. Daylin Leach (D-17) had his own issue with the internet.

While Leach didn't flirt with indecent exposure or corruption of minors on the blog he ran in 2005 while a state representative for the 149th District, he did write some pretty weird things that one would prefer not to have come from the mind of someone who makes our laws.

These include, as per this archive of the blog, LeachVent, things like:

People think bachelor parties are an American tradition, as American as apple pie, or racial profiling.

Whether it’s a singing debut or a custody hearing, whether your wife is arranging a surprise party, or your friends are arranging an intervention, whether you are hosting a bake sale for your glee club, or a pig roast for NAMBLA, I will be happy to publicize it.

Leach killed the blog after negative publicity in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

[Tribune7]

The point is not excerpting in general. Many sites have to be excerpted for copyright reasons

The reason for that is why?

If one institutes a policy that benefits one's opponents -- even, actually especially, unwillingly -- one should include one's supporters in that beneficial policy.

Conservative bloggers should excerpt their stuff solely as a matter of principle.

Now, does it bother you that hits from FR support the NYT?

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

I think you are being intentionally obtuse. The argument is NOT about the NYT or other sites that have to be excerpted.

Here is Jim Rob on the subject of bloggers and blog pimps:

"I have no complaint if a good conservative blogger posts his own material to FR, not as an excerpt to drive hits and discussion back to his blog, but rather to impart useful information to OUR readers and to promote and join in on the discussion and conservative activism HERE on FR.

If a blogger can’t or refuses do that, and if he constantly complains or fights with our participants over it, then I’d just as soon he doesn’t post here. It’s not my job to make his content or his presentation or cooperation acceptable to our readers. That’s his job. And if he cannot do it or refuses to do it and continues posting brief excerpts only and obviously attempting to draw away our participants while loudly complaining about it, then I have no sympathy for his complaints and the more apt I am to ban his account and blog.

Furthermore, I’m not big on “rules.” You won’t see me posting rules for bloggers. The rules for bloggers on FR are the same as the rules for everyone else. If you are a good conservative activist and are willing to work with US on OUR goals and causes and not against US, then you’re welcome to post to FR. But unless we say otherwise your blog material should be posted to our bloggers forum and it would be best if you do not excerpt your own material and if you would actually join in on the discussion here on FR. We’re not really that interested in driving OUR traffic to YOUR blog. But if our readers see that you post useful information then they might start reading your site and that’s fine by me."

552 posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2010 5:06:19 PM by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Nuke the corrupt commie bastards to HELL!!)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2636843/posts?q=1&;page=501

[Tribune7]

I think you are being intentionally obtuse.

I think you can't answer a simple question: Does it bother you that hits from FR support the NYT?

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

This is not about the NYT. How do you not get that? Did you even read Jim Rob's words from the last post? If you did and you still think that somehow this discussion has anything to do with the NYT then you are more dim than I originally thought.

Right now it appears that your only tactic is to divert from the original topic, bring in stuff unimportant and irrelevant to the discussion and then accuse me of dodging. Lame-o.

[Tribune7]

This is not about the NYT.

This is about a simple question you won't answer LOL.

Yes or no, does it bother you to support the NYT?

If it does, why don't you do something about it?

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

Fail. Obvious diversion is obvious. And repetitive.

Did you even read Jim Rob's words btw? Hmmm?

[Tribune7]

Fail.

Somebody still has not answered a question.

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

You still have not gotten a clue. The NYT has NOTHING to do with your blog. They are not coming here pimping their material for hits like you are. So, why the need to excerpt? You still are dodging the question. ;-)