*Moonery:  (a goatard from Gabby at The Goat Gazette) is defined as conduct indicative of barking (or yodeling, whining, yapping, etc.) moonbats.

PowerlineBlog points out the bias and flagrant misrepresentation in the ABC and New York Times' editorial portrayal of Justice Scalia's absence from Chief Justice Roberts' confirmation on September 29.

No, Scalia was neither vacationing nor on a "junket" in Colorado. 

He was there lecturing approximately 10 hours a day at a conference, scheduled in October 2004.  In preparation for the conference he had compiled a 400-plus page study guide.

And it's not that these MSM sources were not provided a full accounting of Scalia's schedule.  Both were given complete details of conference planning and schedule. 

It simply suited the MSM "story lines" to represent that Scalia had intentionally skipped Roberts' confirmation.

As Powerline concludes, the public should not have to wonder why MSM chose to reference Justice Scalia's lecture as a "junket" while not mentioning similar "junkets" by two more liberally-leaning members of the Court.

Moonery.  Moonery pure and simple.

Now ask why so many of us continue to blog.  If you have any doubt, that is.  While we may never eliminate the slant and bias in MSM, we will reveal it.

Gull picked up on a previous post from here which included a comment by Thespis:

I think that there will be a strong blogger influence for at least the next ten years or more. The authors and contributors might change, but it is an excellent outlet for those of us without others to listen to our constant rants on various topics.

I have only been blogging since September. Doing a good job requires more time than I can give since I work for a living. I am sure that others feel the same.

Hang in there! I have appreciated all of the support and encouragement from those at your wonderful site.

I read and write as much as possible. Let's all vow to do the same.

I need a blogging partner or two in order to keep everything fresh, timely, and new. There are too many days when I can not get to it at all, yet I constantly think of stories.

I hope that Blogging does not go the way of "mood rings" and "pet rocks" from the 1970's.

Not if Gull has her way, Thespis!  Both she and I have our priorities (as do you) and we never expected to blog more than for the entertainment (enlightenment?) of our cohorts over at Pogo.com!

Her post sorta speaks for all of us.  (It's expanded from comments to her previous post -- a followup from this blog -- reposted here with permission!)

I really don't think the level or content/context of personal blogging will change too much overall in the near future.   

No matter what folks say, however -- readership is always a motivating factor in and to the life of a blog.  

With few exceptions (two being the bloggers who responded to part 1!!!), most of the blogs I read are political in nature. 

As with most of us -- I enjoy reading blogs that write about what I'm interested in!  My family is grown and out on their own. (They would croak if I blogged about them -- and we talk/email every single day!  They'd know who told!!!!)   I work full-time and am pretty self-centered when it comes to creature comforts and/or who gets new shoes this month, who controls the remote or when to do the dishes or take out the trash.  I no longer attend PTO meetings or drive kids to soccer practice or softball games.  I've replaced bridge club with online poker because I don't have to bring a covered dish.  I'm interested in personal health issues because I have a few; I'm over-60, opinionated AND sensitive to the LACK of blogging (and community-building) for my generation.  And I happen to enjoy raising hell about/dissing the hypocrits who pretend to care about my welfare and well-being under the guise of policies that follow party lines.  Plus, I enjoy blogging AND I'm sufficiently foolish enough to believe that I have something important to say.  Most of the time, anyway. 

But I digress.

I anticipate a movement to impose a code of standards to political blogs in the near future.   (Not sure it will work, though.   MSM seems to adjust their "standards" whenever it's politically expedient -- so why should bloggers be held to "assigned" standards?  And if Congress gets involved -- you can bet your sweet bippy it will be a political move to curtail the impact of political blogging!)

Many MSM outlets that use blogs (or allow comments by email, for example) don't normally allow comments (or prescreen them) -- for obvious reasons.  There is little control over the content of comments and they don't want their institutional authority challenged ....  (You might also note that some "popular" political blogs encourage flaming and vile comments.  Without substance, it's one way to attract readers.  Direct from the Say-It-Ain't-So Department.) 

IMO, bloggers have become guardians (the Fifth Estate) of the guardians (if journalists are the Fourth Estate) of democracy (first, second and third being the judicial, legislative and executive Estates).  Media institutions don't like having their slants, perspectives and opinions challenged.  Soooo -- in this respect, BLOGGING (i.e., factual corrections, debate, counter-points, other perspectives, etc.) is being down-played by the very institutions bloggers are challenging!

A blog by any other name will be the same?  I agree.  I remember spending $20 for "snapshot" software in the mid-90's for my Vietnam photos (with comments) and how "proud" I was to be on the cutting edge (complete with scanner attachment to transfer old slides to digital files).

What's the future of blogging?  As Movin' suggests -- some types/formats of blogs may become less plentiful, but their role and function will expand as technology expands.

There are now regular college lectures available on iPod .... many blogs offer optional iPod broadcasts .... and the indispensible wireless phone system allows emailing, texting and imaging to and from anywhere.

(If you aren't following references in this thread and haven't read Movin's post at http://journals.aol.com/movinon203/MovinOn/entries/1683 -- do so.)

I actually envision more political bloggers to begin offering "optional venues" for readers not confined to landlines, laptops or PC's!

And my bet is on bloggers winning the media war with MSM!

 

Comments/reactions are always welcome, by the way.  (I've only deleted one comment ever -- and it was to keep my young niece from reading a few words I'm sure she'd probably seen on a bathroom wall.  But not on MY bathroom wall.)

Bold type above for my emphasis. 

We've referenced the Fifth Estate before.  To ensure that MSM is kept "honest," independent bloggers have to survive -- especially the "part-time" grassroots bloggers who aren't dependent on advertising, think-tank endorsements, talking heads circuits or college speaking fees.   If links, "co-ops," teams or rings are necessary -- let's have them! 

It has not been pretty or void of grandstanding by various democrats -- namely Teddy Kennedy and most recently his protege John Kerry. 

But barring another total disaster (other than the behavior of democrats during the Judicial Hearings meetings), Alito will be named to the Supreme Court of the United States.

It's time to move on to the next hurdle (i.e., opportunity for barking moonbats to mount another assault on GWB) -- not the least of which will be yodeling lessons for John Kerry -- unless, of course, he comes down from the ski slopes and slides back into Washington to perform his elected duties.

::::practicing a welcome-home-Kerry yodel:::: 

Flippity flop, it's gotta stoppppppp
You're timing's wrong -- best change the songgggg
Avoid the slopes and White House hopes --
Give it up, you moonbat, youuuuuuuuuuu!

I've been contemplating recent blog-blather (someone wrote it and it didn't seem important enough to flag) that has fluttered around in the back of my mind ....

RE: blogging will "die out" in a couple of years.  Rationale:  people will grow tired of writing for/to themselves and surfing will find new venues.  Makes me wonder ....

Our actual contributor list here has dwindled (though their names remain because we continue to meet for poker a couple of nights a week) ... three of us do the bulk of sporadic writing on this site while our associates are experimenting with their own.  Makes sense!

I've noticed that the more popular/successful blog sites become, the less owners actually blog!  Rather than expound on topics, they link to other expounders.  It's more like they are preening their replacements ....

I read fewer and fewer blogs.  I'm down to approx. 10 that I read daily via Bloglines.  I seldom comment on other blogs.  Most comments sections turn into free-for-all's in which the blogger's thesis is used as a springboard for one-up-manship ... Maybe it is meant to be this way.  It may, however, be "infiltrated" to discourage serious commenters from posting. 

Is this a sign of the times?  Will blogging decline?  Will MSM reclaim control of the world as THEY want us to view it?

I hope not.

--Rhet

Gullspirt over at Perish the Thought (her "good" report following a biopsy gleefully received, I endorse the fact that she calls herself a wuss over those tiny little stitches in her nose.  Joking, Gull.  About the wuss part, anyway.  Honest!) contacted me last night about an email she had received from a good friend .... inviting her to sign a petition being circulated by the Methodist Church (see link below).

"Something" didn't jive with her or with me.  This is her response -- which I also endorse.

-------------

  Molly.  Molly.  Molly.   Now the demmies have an intellectual, fact-skewing, slobber-spewing Deaniac with a sharp pencil on their hands.

What's with this say-no-to-Hillary rage, huh?  Was it your turn to write the monthly party-line jolt?  You know, stir up the masses?  Rally the moonbats? 

It's not often you get to see a vengeful mother-figure literally eat her own.  Even if she does sharpen her fangs with skewed statistics.  A rather amusing read, however.  Especially when it's a democrat turning on her cohorts.

Observers aren't necessarily impressed, though.  Post-menapausal flare-ups don't wash well in Washington or from the campaign trail.  Not even from the Senate podium.  [Reference: Dean, Clinton, Murtha, Kerry, etc.]

Oh, well.  As one observer noted, even a broken clock is right two times a day.

Hat tip to Talking Points:

Are we to assume that Democrats who have also received donations from Abramoff's "clients" are free of tainted money?

MSM wants you to think so.

If you read the basic misinformation, you will note that, while no one has been named or publicly charged in the investigation, the MSM "suggests" several Republicans will be charged. 

Their proof?

"....Democrats are trying to link Abramoff with Republicans. This is like when Republicans tried to link James Carville to Democrats. Link him to Republicans? He's been a professional Republican and major GOP power-player for a quarter-century.

All the "factual claims" [noted by Talking Points] "appear to be willful distortions, or statements with omissions so great as to be meant to confuse."

"How can the public know what's happening in their government when the reporters of the news seem so bent on misleading them?"

Enter the Fourth Estate, the blogosphere:  guardians of the "guardians of government."  Hopefully, the role of the blogosphere will neither too little nor too late.

Uh huh.    (The Captain's coverage is thorough.) 

OhSahMe blew it on 9/11.

                                                           It's our whistle now.