counter statistics

Thursday, March 31, 2005

Lloydletta out of town - light or no posting over the weekend

I'm going to the Log Cabin Republicans convention in New Orleans. I may, or may not have access to the computer.

I've added CentralFront blog to my blogroll. Check out this blog. It covers a number of issues in a thought provoking manner. Central Front is the blog to get Mike Rogers on the record.

Carson from MinnesotaLiberal comments:

I think the whole commit suicide thing is pretty cheap. Someone who would commit suicide because they have been outed as gay could just as likely be committing suicide because they are in the closet and are afraid of coming out. And how many people have committed suicide because they are afraid to come out because of people like Ed Shrock.

Is it something to be concerned about. Yes. But people need to be responsible for their own actions.

If Bill Clinton had committed suicide because the someone outed him as having cheated on his wife, would we hold that person accountable for Clinton's suicide?? I really doubt it.

People do sometimes commit suicide when their lives unravel. An recent example of this was the Minnesota Lottery director, who killed himself, when an audit of the lottery showed some monkey business. At the same time, if Rogers account was correct, then Carroll was playing a nasty game by saying he was planning on killing himself.

Ann Haight commented:

Rogers is more than welcome to debate me. I do not, however, do phone interviews.
Anne Haight

Central Front gets Mike Rogers on the Record


Michael Rogers admits to calling GayPatriot's place of employment on two separate occasions. The purpose of the calls was to speak with GayPatriot directly. In the first call he spoke with the person that answered the phone, a lady, and asked to speak with GayPatriot. According to Rogers, he was not available and he left a message that he would like to speak with him regarding a posting to the GayPatriot website which possibly had legal ramifications. He also said he made it clear that he was not accusing GayPatriot of anything. After a period of time when he had not received a return call from GayPatriot, he called again. When asked directly if he was at any time threatening during these calls, Rogers denied such allegations. He did however say that GayPatriot was the public representative for his firm. As such, Rogers felt he had the right to speak with the shareholders of the company regarding the actions of GayPatriot as those actions could be viewed as detrimental to the company and that he subsequently told GayPatriot this.

I asked Rogers if he had seen the posting in question. He stated that he had. He said that he immediately felt as if his life had been threatened. The posting, in his opinion, appeared to be a "hit list." Rogers said he had seen this sort of tactic used before against doctors who perform abortions and felt that someone would take this posting to be a call to do violence against him. He felt threatened.

Rogers related that he did speak directly to GayPatriot about the posting and told him of his feelings. At this point he says that GayPatriot began speaking in a loud manner and told Rogers that he was going to kill himself. Rogers said GayPatriot repeated the claim that he was going to kill himself and hung up the phone. Rogers was shaken by their conversation and was going to call the police because he was actually afraid that GayPatriot could possibly follow through. Rogers then said that GayPatriot called him back and told him that he only did that to make a point to Rogers.

Rogers has been actively involved in revealing the sexual orientation of several prominent figures. According to Rogers, GayPatriot said he was trying to show Rogers how that felt and asked him how he would feel if someone did actually kill themselves because of something Rogers had said or wrote.

Read the whole thing. Central Front has also asked Bruce Carroll, who blogs as GayPatriot for an on the record interview. I hope that Bruce will step up to the plate and talk to Central Front.

Clarification of previous post about the Mike Rogers/Bruce Carroll catfight.

I wrote:

Lime Shurbet is benefiting big time. He's going to have to prove that his blog is beyond the other blog that got silenced temporarily by Mike Rogers.

Lime Shurbet pointed out that people might think that was no longer up. That's not the case, GayPatriot is still being maintained by Dan Blatt, GayPatriotWest, who has identified himself publically on that blog.

Wednesday, March 30, 2005

GayPatriot vs Blogactive Cat Fight Continues

My post reporting on Ridor's tale about his unpleasant experience with GayPatriot has spawned a little spat on Lloydletta's comments between Ridor and Mike McConnell.

Lloydletta webstats tell me that people are coming to this website by searching for Mike Rogers. More and more right wing blogs are covering the Mike Rogers (Blogactive) vs Bruce Carroll (GayPatriot) catfight. Mike Rogers responds to the story the comments thread on Blogactive.

A few posters (using some inappropriate language) have asked me to open this up to more debate. Please.

I've now challenged Andrew Sullivan (get this, he claims he is too busy writing a book to debate the issue), Bruce Carroll (aka Gay Patriot) -- immediately after I challenged Brucie to a debate he bailed from blogging. -- Mind you, Not only did I offer him a debate, but I told him I would do it at the National Press Club (Bruce said the Human Rights Campaign was too left wing to be a neutral ground)...I also said I would allow HIM to pick the moderator. go.

Debate? please many more times to I have to offer that I will debate before people believe me?
Mike Rogers 03.28.05 - 11:24 pm

I respond:

Mike, I don't buy this.

That doesn't make sense, Mike. It doesn't address the question - did you call Bruce Carroll's boss and secretary to complain about him. Why not just call Carroll - and challenge him politely to debate you?

I've written you twice now requesting an interview to give your side of this.

Lime Shurbet has now started a "Forced Outing Watch" blogroll.

Forced Outing Watch
March 30th, 2005 at 6:13 pm by Robert in Blog Updates, Good Causes, Blogroll Additions

The new blogroll is up!

You can become a member of the Forced Outing Watch Blogroll by emaling me a request with “FOW” in the subject line. Once you have been added, you will receive a confirmation email with the code to add the blogroll to your site. You can also place the Michael Rogers “Wanted” parody banner on your site.

** Update ** 6:48 PM

The image is optional. You do not have to place it on your blog if you are not comfortable with it.

Now I wonder if I applied to have Lloydletta added to this blogroll, whether a Lloydletta vs the Minnesota Organization of Bloggers type soap opera would follow.

My post on the Washington Blade Blog erasing their claim to have been the first blog to report on the GayPatriot Exit from the Blogosphere has drawn comments from Mike Demmons of GayOrbit.

I beat them all. I posted my story at about 10 minutes afte GayPatriot posted his story.

Not that it's that big of a deal.
Michael | 03.30.05 - 8:36 pm | #

But if we're gonna play firsties!!!!

Can I blogroll you? Ooops. Already done.
Michael | 03.30.05 - 8:37 pm |

Noone ever needs to ask permission to blogroll me. I just checked my blogroll and Gay Orbit is on there. I very much appreciate getting added to the GayOrbit blogroll.

Wizbang has commented on this story. The Anti-Idiotarian Rotwiler is behaving like his breed:

Of course you've now all seen the new poster on the right, outing Hamas-sexual Free Speech Hater Michael Rogers for the slimy, fat turd he really is.

Well, it looks like the site we got the thing from,, has been down since early this morning. It could just be a server burp, but those things usually don't las this long (or maybe it's just because we've been spoiled rotten by our wonderful providers at

But worry not. You're more than welcome to use "save as" on the one at this site, should you decide to join the ever-growing right and left Coalition Against the NetKKKops.

That one isn't going anywhere, Michael "FuckHeaD" Rogers. We want everybody in the world to recognize your fugly mug in a split second and know just what a lowlife, dumpster-diving shitheel you are.



And the Black Helicopters are circling. . .

Lime Shurbet is benefiting big time. He's going to have to prove that his blog is beyond the other blog that got silenced temporarily by Mike Rogers.

Developing. . .

Powerline, Mitch Berg and Box Turtles - Oh My! - Reprise

Lloydletta reported earlier on the bickering at Powerline Blog over John Hinderaker's rather pathetic attempt to cook up another Rathergate story. Scott Johnson (Big Trunk) posted about his doubts on the story and Hinderaker (HindRocket or Rocketman) had a rather predictable hissy fit. Mitch Berg of Shot in the Dark later stopped by to comment. I posted the entry where I respond to Berg to the MN Politics National list and Charlie Swope responded.

Whatever the origins of the memo concerning the political usefulness of the Schiavo situation, the views expressed in it are completely consistent with
other established declarations by Republican leaders. For instance, this from Tom Delay:

"'One thing that God has brought to us is Terri Schiavo, to help elevate the visibility of what is going on in America', Mr. DeLay told a conference organized by the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian group. A recording of the event
was provided by the advocacy organization Americans United for Separation of Church and State."

Americans United for the Separation of Church and State did us all a service by recording and exposing this. I've heard the audio of this on Ed Schultz's show on Air America. If any readers has a link to the audio, please let me know.

Heritage Foundation Sponsoring Intelligent Design Creationism Event


Next Up: A seminar on the "flat Earth theory" as contrasted with the "round Earth theory".

Hat Tip: Pharyngula.

Tuesday, March 29, 2005

Anti-Gay Activist Declares Fatwa on San Diego Party Chair for Speaking to Log Cabin Republicans

Ron Nehring is the San Diego County GOP Chairman. He's one of the best campaign trainers in the nation and has done some truly amazing things for the SD GOP over the past few years. He recently agreed to speak to a Log Cabin event. James Hartline, an "ex-gay" anti-gay activist issued a fatwa on Nehring for this yesterday.

Who is James Hartline? He's gotten in the news recently pushing the Bishop of San Diego to deny a Catholic funeral to a gay bar owner in the area. The Bishop has since reversed himself.

According to the San Diego Union Tribune, Hartline claimed he engaged in four discussions with Catholic bishop Robert Brom, successfully conning the bishop to single out the alleged sin of nightclub owner John McCusker as different from all others, and to deny McCusker's family a Catholic funeral.

After the bishop apologized to McCusker's family, Hartline felt so betrayed that he made public the voice mail he had received from the bishop. "James, please take my call, I have to explain how it's all wrong and how I was done in. We need to talk and we need to meet. Please call me back immediately" In a second message, the bishop sounded more urgent: "This is Bishop Brom begging you to call me back. I did not cave in. I stood for our position and I still do, but I need to explain, and I need your help."

It will be interesting to see if Nehring kowtows to this wacko's tactics. Hopefully he will tell Hartline to go Cheney himself.

Developing. . .

UPDATE: Added this to Beltway Traffic Jam

More GayPatriot Drama

From comments by Ridor, a liberal critic of GayPatriot's:

I noticed something interesting on that blogsite -- they kept on deleting my comments when I pointed out that I never stalked FagPatriot. He wrote an entry much earlier that he got a restraining order. Excuse me? I do not know who he is, nor wanted to. I live in NYC, I have no intentions of hunting him down. I just emailed him telling him that I do not appreciate him to change the subject by taunting my English which is 2nd language (ASL is my first). I find it very racist and offensive. He then retaliated back with a copy of my email with (sic) on every sentence. I told him that he's a f***ing prick for doing that.

Suddenly, he got on his blog and claimed that I harassed him for weeks and cussed at him many times. I did *not* cuss at him until he made fun of my grammar, that's when I shot back.

And suddenly, everyone coddled him and blasted me. That was uncalled for and unfair, guys.

Me is the Ridor

This whole "stalking" accusation is getting old. A blog set up to counter my Dump Michele Bachmann blog accuses me of stalking. GayPatriot at one time would send multiple and repeated emails to Log Cabin staff and board members when he first started his blog.

I don't know either Ridor or Gaypatriot personally, so I don't know who is telling the truth on this one. I do know Dan Blatt (GayPatriotWest) personally - mostly by email, but I have met him. I can't imagine Dan doing something like what Ridor has claimed to anyone - even if he strongly disagrees with the person. Dan is a genuinely kind person.

Ardsgaine makes a cogent point in response to Christian Grantham's latest entry on this drama:

If we are talking about standards of civil debate, as opposed to what must be allowed under the first amendment, then a wanted poster is an incitement to violence that has no place in political discussions. Caveats about "peaceful debate" can be read as a cynical attempt to establish plausible deniability.

Rogers may very well be a slime bucket, but that's not the way to deal with him. I don't blame the ISP for taking it down. I wouldn't want to be a party to that either. Find another way to spread the message about what he is doing. You don't have to engage in hyperbolic propaganda. People don't need to be beaten over the head with a club to see that his actions are wrong.

And let's reserve the word 'terrorist' for people who have murdered, or are part of a conspiracy to commit murder. The fear of being outed has to be a good bit lower on the scale of things than the fear of being blown up, shot or beheaded. I don't think it quite rises to the level of 'terror'.

As far as Christian's title for that entry: "Blogosphere Jihad Continues: Another Blog Silenced" - puhleaze. That's a bit over the top since what he was talking about is an ISP not wanting to host a blog with this on the sidebar.

I've written Rogers requesting comment. So far no response.


UPDATE: Lime Shurbet has found a new hosting provider. From the provider:

Content cannot be defamation by definition unless it can be shown that the content is inherently and deliberately untrue. In your particular case, a simple google of “michael rogers gay” brought me to an article by The Independent (UK) about the very bullet points you have listed in the graphic, with quotes from him related to that subject. Further searches reveal other stories by regular journalistic outlets as well, with and without quotes. Suggesting people email him to voice their opinion of his actions is also not an actionable offense, since a look at his own site has links for email to the addresses you have listed - since he is inviting contact via email, and lists available addresses, your posting of them poses no violation of any of our policies or of any statutes. It is your opinion that his actions are as you describe them, and people are free to agree or disagree as they see fit, and post their own opinions, if they’d like to do so. In addition, there is nothing in your graphic that urges any violence against anyone - it reads, in fact, more like the sort of online boycott calls that go around from time to time. Therefore, we would take no action related to complaints by the individual about this item on your page other than to suggest he take it up with you.


Abuse Investigations
Hosting Matters, Inc.

Here is Lime Shurbet's call:


Systematically conducting outing witch hunts against gays who do not believe in radical liberal anti-American ideals.
Repeated violations of privacy of gay Americans.
Conducting systematic civil liberties attacks on gay Americans.
I repeat GayPatriot's Call:

Let’s do something about these gay terrorists who have infected our community with their hatred and self-loathing bigotry of gay Americans who wish to live their lives in peace.

I urge everyone to repeat GayPatriot's call, mindful of the need for peaceful discourse. Post this call to action on your blog. You can also email Rogers to voice your opinion of his slimy tactics at the following addresses (make sure to post these too):

Unlike GayPatriot's post, where it was unclear what he was calling on people to do something violent or benign with the "let's do something about these gay terrorists" call, here it is clear this is a call to email Rogers. I disagree with the term terrorist to refer to Rogers, just like I disagreed with the ad posted on Move-on's site which compared Bush to Hitler. Both those claims are over the top.

I hope Gay Patriot changes his mind, and starts posting again. I'll be using these emails to contact Rogers to attempt to get his comment on the story.

Washington Blade Blog Mistates Claim to be First on Gay Patriot Story

Steve Koval blogs for the Washington Blade. He picked up on the GayPatriot story yesterday. Earlier today, he posted this:

Yesterday, this blog was the first to report on the decision by Gay Patriot, an anonymous gay conservative, to end his postings, the same day he put
online photos labelling as "Gay Terrorists" two Washington D.C., outing activists ? Mike Rogers and John Aravosis.

I sent Steve a note of correction:

Steve -

I thought your coverage of the GayPatriot story in the Blade has been good. However I take issue with one of your claims:

You claimed that the Blade blog was the first to cover the Gay Patriot Exit. That's not true. My post on the subject was March 25 - and I referenced 3 blogs that had covered this - Lime Shurbet, Central Front and Gay Orbit.

Here's my post - it's mirrored on both my outlet radio
and Lloydletta blog.


I cced this to Christian Grantham, Michael Demmons from GayOrbit, GayPatriot, GayPatriotWest and R Kane from Central Front.

Now Steve has changed the wording of his post:

Yesterday, this blog reported on the decision by Gay Patriot, an anonymous gay conservative, to end his postings, the same day he put online photos labelling as "Gay Terrorists" two Washington D.C., outing activists — Mike Rogers and John Aravosis.

A correction, plus appropriate citations would have been better.

Koval's entry did point out that Mike Rogers had identified GayPatriot as Bruce Carroll of Alexandria Virginia who had written this oped in the Washington Blade.

Rogers confirmed today that he contacted Gay Patriot's employer in an effort to reach him about the "Wanted: Gay Terrorists" post. Rogers also claimed that Gay Patriot is the pseudonym for Bruce Carroll, a former Log Cabin Republican activist who lives in Alexandria, Va.

Blade readers may remember Carroll for a controversial op-ed column he penned last April criticizing gay activists for pushing so aggressively for marriage equality. In it, Carroll issued a call that is ironic, if he is in fact the Gay Patriot who will not reveal his name:

What is needed is a fundamental and, most importantly, mature awareness campaign across the country about what it is to be a gay or lesbian American today. We all need to be willing to come out of our closets — proverbial or not — and let our friends, family and work colleagues know who we are.

A phone message left for Bruce Carroll has not been returned. However, Gay Patriot West, the only remaining contributor for the Gay Patriot site, confirmed that Gay Patriot had received the phone message left for Carroll. Although Gay Patriot West refused to divulge his own name, Bay Windows reported in January that he is B. Daniel Blatt and lives in Los Angeles.

Koval's blog entry was an example of good blog reporting. He did some fact checking. He got comments from Mike Rogers and he attempted to confirm directly with Bruce Carroll that Bruce Carroll = GayPatriot.

Koval's entry did beat Christian Grantham on covering the story. Grantham got the on the record story. However Grantham also hosts the GayPatriot website, so he and Carroll have a business relationship.

Monday, March 28, 2005

Christian Grantham Gets Gay Patriot on the Record

Here's an update to a story I've been following: why has GayPatriot has quit blogging. Last night GayPatriot emailed me the story Christian Grantham broke here.

Christian posted the complete text of GayPatriot's post:

Wanted for crimes against the gay community. Wanted for repeatedly conducting outing witch hunts against gays who do not believe in radical liberal anti-American ideals. For repeated violations of privacy of gay Americans. For conducting systematic civil liberties attacks on gay Americans.

WANTED! Let's do something about these gay terrorists who have infected our community with their hatred and self-loathing bigotry of gay Americans who wish to live their lives in peace.

I didn't see this post, but understand it included pictures of both John Aravosis and Mike Rogers. The conservatives commenting on this post thought it over the top.

Hmm, c'mon now GayPatriot. You are more than capable of writing convincing arguments against John Aravosis and Michael Rogers. This is eerily familiar to weblistings of abortion doctors.

While "terrorists" could apply in the true definition of the word, it is a bit salacious since most modern people think of terrorists using physical violence. Idiots reading this posting might be tempted into doing something stupid. This has a bad "Law & Order" episode written all over it.

Lets fight arguments with arguments, not namecalling.

And, GP, while I appreciate your vigor and fire on the issue, Mickey is right -- this is a little over-the-top. While I'm not uncomfortable with calling them "terrorists", because, in the strictest sense they are, it probably would be better to stick with "hatemongers and bigots".
North Dallas Thirty | Email | Homepage | 03.25.05 - 12:06 pm | #

I would venture to suggest "terrorist" goes a bit too far, it's kind of the same as when lefties say that sleep deprivation or putting a wet blanket on a terrorist's head is "torture."

Calling them "Extortionists," I wouldn't have any problem with. "Bullying Hypocrites," ditto. Given the way they act toward those who disagree with them, you could make a case for "Fascist Bullies" as well.
V the K

I think a commenter on the Independent Gay Forum says it best:

Calling someone a "terrorist" would probably be a cause for a libel lawsuit; it certainly isn't in the normal realm of the back and forth of vigorous political debate.

GayPatriot went over the top and beyond decency, and it sounds like Rogers did as well (the proper response would be to contact an attorney, not to harass your opponent at his place of employment).

This whole thing is a soap opera and both sides deserve each other.
Mike Silverman

I do not believe that calling someone a terrorist is libelous. That is an opinion. However calling Gay Patriot's boss at work was not the action of someone who fears being stalked. Gay Patriot doesn't mention his workplace on his blog - so there's no good reason for bringing his employer into it - except if the motivation is silencing Gay Patriot. It was the action of someone wanting to escalate the situation.

I contacted John Aravosis this weekend, and he told me he did not know about why this happened, though believed the "terrorist" post had something to do with it. I just emailed Rogers at to get Rogers' side of the story. Rogers claimed in comments to Christian's post on the topic, that Christian had gotten the story wrong. So far, Rogers has not contacted me.

The comments thread is quite heated - and Christian Grantham and Rogers are trading accusations.

Powerline, Mitch Berg and Box Turtles - Oh My!

Mitch Berg stopped by to comment on my post about infighting at the Powerline Blog.


So many facts, to say nothing of interpretations, wrong. So little time.

John had as much to do with breaking "the 61st Minute" as Scott did - the original post was merely Scott's. Scott will agree with me there.

That's not the way I heard Scott Johnson describe the story during the CSPAN taping of the banquet. Scott put an item in about it before he left for work, then got to work and found 50 emails on the topic.

As to the memo; Rocket and/or Deacon may be right, but you seem to be trying to de-emphasize the fact that the NYTimes DID see Democrat staffers passing the memo around. The odds that GOP staffers would do something so transparently, self-destructively stupid are certainly possible, but infinitesimal.

ABC News story: March 19, Washington Post story: March 20, New York Times story: March 22. By the time the NY Times got the copy of the memo, it was being distributed by Democrats. After the blog speculation that the memo was put together by democrats, then 4 members of Santorum's and Martinez's staff contacts In the Agora with their story. Staff of moderate republicans on the hill would have a huge motivation to leak this particular memo.

Assuming that Republican staff isn't stupid enough to put out a memo like this is a weak assumption. Sen. John Cornyn's staff sent out an advance copy to the press for Cornyn's speech to the Heritage Foundation that included this gem:

It does not affect your daily life very much if your neighbor marries a box turtle. But that does not mean it is right. . . . Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife.

Cornyn's press secretary later wrote Andrew Sullivan to let him know what happened.

For what it's worth, Sen. Cornyn did not, in his speech to the Heritage Foundation, use the 'box turtles' quote. The Post was given a copy of remarks 'as prepared,' but Sen. Cornyn did not like that passage, and did not use it. The Post, which did not attend the speech, reported the quote nonetheless. Sen. Cornyn said that he did not think that statement appropriate, that's why he didn't use it. I've advised the Post of this fact.

The staffer who wrote this should have gotten fired. No word on whether the staffer still works for Cornyn.

Mitch again:

You keep hoping, Eva, but the GOP just ain't gonna commit suicide.

I'm hoping moderates in the party will show more backbone and stand up to the nonsense from the Levitical wing of the party. Chris Shays' (R, Connecticut) speech on the house floor, and subsequent appearance on Hardball last week impressed me alot.

Sunday, March 27, 2005

Howard Kurtz from WaPO mentions Powerline pushing another MemoGate

Powerline, Michele Malkin, In the Agora and other right wing blogs have been claiming that the widely reported "Talking Points" memo about the Schiavo case distributed to Republican Senators was a fake. Republican Representative, Chris Shays of Connecticut mentioned this memo when he was on Hardball this week.

This memo said among other things:

This is an important moral issue and the pro-life base will be excited that the Senate is debating this important issue.

This is a great political issue, because Senator Nelson of Florida has already refused to become a cosponsor and this is a tough issue for Democrats.

Hindrocket over on Powerline has been hoping this will be the next forged documents case at the same level as Dan Rather and is claiming that the memo was actually written by a Democratic Staffer. The evidence? The memo was unsigned, not on letterhead, referenced the wrong bill, and riddled with spelling errors.

Now there's some internal dissention between Hindrocket and Big Trunk at Powerline whether this memo was a fake or not. Big Trunk posts:

At In the Agora Joshua Claybourn reports that four staffers of Senators Rick Santorum and Mel Martinez accused a renegade aide to Sen. Harry Reid of distributing the purported GOP talking points memo to the media and claiming Republican authorship. Michelle Malkin isn't buying it


Michelle possessses a gimlet eye for doubletalk. Her take on the anonymous staffers is causing me to wonder whether the talking points memo didn't in fact originate somewhere on the GOP side.

Predictably Hindrocket defends his view.

Nonsense. I agree with Michelle that in its current form, the anonymous accusation carries little or no weight. But that isn't the point. The New York Times reported approximately a week ago that DEMOCRATIC AIDES distributed the memo, while claiming it came from the Republicans. Has anyone asked the Times reporter to identify the Democrats he saw passing out the memo? I haven't. That would at least be a starting point toward figuring out where the memo actually came from.

Howard Kurtz comments on this:

Powerline which played a role in exposing CBS's National Guard memos, is wondering about the Republican strategy memo that, oddly enough, fails to list an author:

"Confirming what we reported, ABC News has admitted that it knows nothing about the origins of the 'GOP talking points' memo that it first published. An ABC source writes:

"the memo discussed a republican bill and was distributed to repulbican senators. That's what we reported. we are obviously not going to divulge our multiple sources. I appeciate your questions, but believe you are approaching this from the wrong end. We asked numerous sources -- all confirmed that senators had received the memo in conjunction with one of the bills on the floor. For three days none of those sources has given us any reason to think there is more to the memo than a particularly naked expression of the politics of Shivo case.

"Try to ignore the spelling. ABC first reported the memo as a bombshell that disclosed Republican strategy. Now it says that the memo 'discussed a republican bill' and was 'distributed to [some] repulbican [sic] senators.' Whatever ABC may think of the 'politics of the Shivo [sic] case,' the network admits that it knows nothing about who authored and distributed the memo.

"UPDATE: I should have made clear that this email wasn't sent to me, I got it from another blogger who has had extensive communication with ABC on this topic."

Maybe the Powerline gang is right. But knocking down an unsigned memo by reporting an unsigned e-mail?

Hindrocket has the predictable hissy fit here. Hindrocket should identify the blogger where he got the email. Did he get full headers from the email, and verify whether it was actually sent by ABC News?

It was Big Trunk - not Hindrocket who posted the 61st minute post that got so much attention. Hindrocket seems to be the most wacked out of the three Powerline bloggers. Deacon seems the most reasonable.

Developing. . .

Welcome Americablog Readers

I get a link from John Aravosis's blog. Lots of John's readers are stopping by Lloydletta.

Welcome! Take your shoes off, and comment....

I got a few comments on the developing story on Fox News Commentator, Tammy Bruce and whether she gave the Minnesota Family Council her permission to use her statement in their "talking points" favoring the Bachmann Amendment.

Marty Andrade:

Actually, I really hopes she answers the "gay gestapo" question.

And why do all my comments make it into posts?

Not complaining, any press is good press...
Marty Andrade 03.26.05 - 8:34 pm | #

Well I give you good press, Marty.... What are you complaining about. I'd like the answer to the Gay Gestapo question also - though to be fair, David, not Tammy mentioned the Gay Gestapo in relation to my email.

North Dallas Thirty writes:
Nicely done, Eva....thank you for keeping me looped in on matters. I understand why David might be a little frustrated, but jeez, it's not a difficult question!
North Dallas Thirty

Go figure..... I'd encourage people to write Tammy yourselves to get clarification. Her email address is Feel free to cc some other Fox News personalities such as OReilly ( and Sean Hannity ( I cced Andrew Sullivan - ( who wrote back wanting to be kept in the loop on this story.