After literally weeks of work; I’m excited to show off a nearly-finished project: A wordpress-powered photo album:
My goal is to create an easily-managable posting and upload system that allows average wordpress users to move their photo library OFF of flickr (or your favorite photo service) and self-host. Click on the image itself for a lightbox preview; and click on the photo title for a higher-resolution version with comments. A few bugs remain; but feel free to Take a peak!
The first of many photos of Boston… there’s a lot more where this came from!
Merely mentioning the name “Andrew Breitbart” in certain circles is certain to cause the average blood-pressure to rise to dangerous levels very quickly. A former Drudge Report editor and Huffington Post consultant, Breitbart currently manages such sites as BigGovernment.com and Breitbart.com — both of which chronicle the hypocrisy what Breitbart sees as the dangers of the liberal agenda. As one would expect, this makes Breitbart somewhat of a target for the left; in fact, it would not be unreasonable to say that Breitbart threatens the left because of his fearlessness in attacking their agenda.
What surprised me over the course of the last week was just how threatened the left is by Breitbart… particularly when he starts putting his toes in the water of the liberal media outlets. None of this was more evident than when he was asked to contribute articles to the recently AOL acquired online magazine… The Huffington Post, a bastion of progressive thought. Once the left saw Breitbart encroaching on the pages of their sacred media outlet, cries of outrage began to fill the internet(s). If you follow the twitterverse like I do… outrage was everywhere:
cdashiell @ariannahuff It doesn’t matter where you put Breitbart. As long as he’s contributing to HuffPo it makes you illegitimate.
@ColorOfChange applauds @HuffingtonPost‘s decision 2 keep @AndrewBreitbart from front page of its site
Penny_G So sad @andrewbreitbart kicked out of another party (@huffingtonpost) tht he desperately wanted 2 b seen at#playthevictim
And, of course, my favorite:
knoxkp so the racist @andrewbreitbart got turfed! Nice. means i can keep reading the huffpo. FU reich wing! #p2#tcot
Now, the prevailing pretext for this outrage is that Breitbart engaged in Ad Hominem attacks against Van Jones, founder of “Color of Change” and former Green Energy Czar to President Barack Obama. In particular, Breitbart said that Van Jones was a “commie punk” and “a cop killer-supporting, racist, demagogic freak”. Now, Breitbart has documented his reasons for his statements on his website… and while I’m not sure he was entirely justified in going as far as he did, he certainly was not creating these allegations from whole cloth. Furthermore, its not as if the Huffington Post is the New York Times, either. I read the HuffPo fairly regularly and expect to hear outrageous opinions. In fact, I can only imagine that this is exactly the image Adrianna Huffington intended to create for her paper. And, its not as if this is the first time Ad-Hominem attacks have been carried out by bloggers who write for the Huffington post, either. Breitbart is taking the opportunity to document the editorial hypocrisy for their selective decision to ban his articles from the homepage.
In short, what we see here is what happens when liberals encounter ideas and people that threaten them. Instead of ignoring the idea, or writing posts that debunk the accusation, they demand the writer should be silenced… banned from the paper. The very people who claim to be such passionate supporters of free speech seem to (in practice) only support free speech that re-enforces their world view. As soon as critical voice enters their realm — they simply reject its validity and attempt to destroy the person speaking.
In fact, I’ve written about this topic before:
[Liberals] cannot stand hearing such a favorable picture of Bush and they lash out with all their hatred and prejudice. Instead of offering constructive analysis and alternative perspectives… they simply disqualify the idea up front and avoid the difficult task of rational discussion.
Now, I have spoken in generalities… I admit. Not all Liberals are incapable of rational discussion (I have a number of liberal friends who are actually quite gifted rhetorically). Even so, perhaps the more important lesson to learn from this squabble is this: Liberals will always tell you who they fear by who they try to destroy. And if the attacks on Breitbart are any indication, he really threatens them.
Most things in Washington don’t really surprise me these days. We’ve been arguing about the same handful of issues now for decades now… and the lines are pretty clearly drawn. However, sometimes the standards of decency are so ignored… lowered to a point of being immeasurable that it causes one’s jaw to drop. Such was the case yesterday with the statements and actions of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California). She has decended so low, she has fallen off the gutter and into the sewer. I cannot think of a more damaging blow to the office of the Speaker then the one Ms. Pelosi has inflicted with her unvarnished scorn directed at Gen. David Petraeus.
This from the Politico:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) warned Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker on Thursday “not to put a shine on recent events” in Iraq when they testify before Congress next week.
“I hope we don’t hear any glorification of what happened in Basra,” said Pelosi, referring to a recent military offensive against Shiite militants in the city led by the Iraqi government and supported by U.S. forces.
The Democrats hammered two themes: The war in Iraq has stretched the military dangerously thin, and the enormous cost of the war is threatening the health of the U.S. economy.
Underscoring the Democrats’ economic points, Pelosi asked why U.S. military in Iraq and Americans back home are paying more for gasoline than the Iraqis are.
“Our troops in Iraq are paying about $3.25 a gallon for gas in Iraq, comparable to what we pay here, while the Iraqis are paying $1.36 a gallon,” Pelosi said. “This is a raw deal for the American taxpayer.”
Let me get you straight here, Mrs. Pelosi… Gen. Petraeus better not “put a shine” on Iraq… OR ELSE WHAT??? or else your gonna lecture him from behind the safety of your title and elevated podium? Spare me. How dare you threaten the commander of our armed forces to limit himself to the message YOU obviously don’t want the American people to hear. And why, may I ask, might this be? What, may I ask would be SO TERRIBLE about the members of congress and the American People hearing good news from Iraq… the success of the joint coalition force in Basra? Is it not clear to anyone listening to you that the crux of your credibility (what little you have) rests on the failure of the American mission in Iraq?
The fact that you demand a report that matches your preconceived notions of the facts shows that you have no interest in his opinion anyway and are content to believe the academic assumptions of your favorite editorialists writing from behind some Manhattan cubicle instead of the the eye-witness accounts of the person responsible for dramatic changes on the ground. You’d probably be better off not even showing up given that it’s just going to be a waste of your time.
Oh, And one more thing. The best concern you can muster in fear of the upcoming the Patreus report is the fact that Iraqis are paying $1.36 a gallon for gas compared to the U.S. price of $3.25? Great… insincere concern from a Representative who has done NOTHING in her 3 years as Speaker to lower gas prices one penny. They DRILL for it, Mrs. Pelosi… It’s that simple. You hypocrite! You put every hurdle possible in front of oil exploration and drilling and then have the audacity to whine about how those who ARE drilling for it are getting better prices. Just go back to California already. You have singlehandedly energized more Republicans to vote in this election then McCain ever could.
I recently started subscribing to the Stanford University’s itunes podcast and I just finished listening to a speech by Alan Dershowitz discussing the Mideast turmoil. My impression is that his perspective is an incredibly balanced one — one that I feel (and which he clearly points out) is missing in the larger mideast peace debate.
If I can sum up the viewpoint in one word, it would be pragobjectimatic.
I challenge any of my readers who have their ax to grind against Israel to listen with an open mind. I think you will be surprised with his positions.
