Sheena Smacks The Koop-dog

... with a rolled up newspaper, right on the nose.  And she did it all public like, with a letter to the Bozeman Chronicle.

Rep. Koopman there is a very big difference between a hate blog and blogs that offer criticism, and of all people you should know the difference. You parade around criticizing everyone who does not agree with your conservative philosphies. Does that make you hateful? You are not above criticism Rep. Koopman, and you need to be aware of that.

Sheena Rice is officially one of my heroes, now, (though I do wish she would update her site more often.)  Blogs have a particular power, but we also have a limited sphere of influence.  Far fewer Bozemanites will read my response to Walt's love letter to Koopman than will read Sheena's defense of what we do in our webspace.  As bloggers we can thank her for her well-spoken defense, as well as for raising awareness of our existence, both in this area and the areas we reach through links.

I know, full well, that when Koopman referred to our writings as "hate blogs", he was clearly focused on what I have written about him.  I've gone after the guy, tooth and nail, with rudeness, insult and vitriol.  To me, he will remain the lie monkey, until such point as he can recognize things for what they are, as opposed to what he wants them to be.  Calling our efforts "hate blogs" is just one more lie.  You see, I know what a hate blog is.  I've traveled the dark little threads that most good people ignore, and still do.  I've been to the websites that call for the nuclear destruction of entire religions  (Judaism as well as the followers of Islam).  If Christians want to feel all oppressed and embattled, then they are terribly naive about what their brethren would violently hope for others of different belief.  I frequently read a website where the standard ending of a post is:

"Rope, Tree, {category of person we "good" souls don't like}.  Some assembly required".

Now that's some serious hate.  Because I believe that forewarned is forearmed, I read the forums of  Stormfront.org, the polite online chat wing of the National Alliance and other racist assholes.  I've read far too many websites where bitter ex-husbands slander women in general because a woman had the temerity to stop putting up with their shit.  Not surprisingly, most of these men also pitch a fit that the awful "ragheads" make their women dress in burkhas.  Hateful hypocrites much?

No, gentle reader, this is not a hate blog.  Nor is Sheena's, or Matt's or any of the vaguely referred to "Democratic websites"  in Walt's fact-free snow job.  (And for the record, mine is not a Democratic website.  It is my kingdom, and my burden alone.  No one gets a vote here, but me.  Furthermore, my website is not, in any way, an affiliate of the Democratic party.  They do not control my content, or anything I write on their behalf ... or against them, for that matter.) 

We do not run hate blogs, and Roger knows this.  We just don't like him, and hence, in his passive aggressive mind, we are haters.  He's lying, yet again.  The lie monkey is still just avoiding the fact that substantive questions are being raised about him, questions he won't answer.  For instance:

What, exactly, is the relationship between liberty and governmental spending on behalf of the constituents?  (You know, Roger, those people who actually elect the government ...)  Why is spending for the common weal an affront to liberty?

What, exactly, has the Montana Supreme Court done that is so against the Montana Constitution that it should be censured, as you requested?

What is wrong with a city commissioner exhorting the citizens of the city to get involved in a serious issue?

How do you come to be in possession of materials which were not sent to you, nor ever meant to be in your possession?  Is your web of involvement in local government even legal?

What is the difference between cells expunged with a physician's help and those expunged by the will of nature, that one should be given living status and the other not?

How were our "incomes further eroded" by a budget that didn't increase our income taxes one single bit?

Seriously, these should be simple questions for Koopman to answer, given the heroic portrait that Walt painted of Roger.  These are the questions that us "hate bloggers" have been asking of the lie monkey.  There will be no answers, because, for Roger, it's easier to slander those who question him than to accept that he is open to critique.  Sheena was absolutely on target in pointing this out.  Let's hope that Bozeman listens.

Comments

[sheena]

Thanks Dude! Although you are right I do need to post more. I would use the "busy excuse" but that gets played out, so I guess I just have to say that I suck and will try better.

I have to say though, if Koop didn't like us then, he really isn't going to like us now!!

[Wulfgar]

Uhhm, no. No he won't.

Heh!

[Tony]

Wulfie, well said.
Keep swinging that hammer.
Hate blog. Right.

[Rocky Smith]

While we disagree on many things, I've never found you to be unreasonable nor your site a "hate blog". As long as you are using the truth, it's called free speech. If Koopman want to take pot shots at you, then he is only making himself look more foolish. Carry on, sir!