i've got enough going on in my life. and blog wise, i've got stuff i need to say. i've been working on an entry for almost 2 weeks now. i've been checking it with my ex-husband because it has to do with him. i've been checking it with c.i., jess, jess's parents, kat. any 1 who will look at it, i've been checking it with them. it's a very personal entry and it's honestly consumed more time than i ever intended. hopefully i will finish it soon.
yesterday i didn't work on it at all. i just focused on the thing on bob somerby ('to bobby') because that was important. he's a strong voice and someone needed to say 'you're a strong voice but i think you're missing the point.' that mattered to me.
this afternoon i get an e-mail. i've spoken to the guy on the phone since. i am enraged.
not at him but at the asshole who tried to bully him.
'rebecca, you were focusing on the positive, remember?'
i was trying to. i was damn well trying to.
let me explain something to the asshole who sent the e-mail to my newest best friend. you've got a public relations nightmare on your hands. i didn't get a degree and work my ass off in that field not to know a meltdown in progress.
it's time for some damage control on your part, asshole.
1st step, apologize to the kid you trashed. that doesn't reflect on you or on your organization.
the kid writes post some comments. he's trying to be funny. he points out that bill scher's liberal oasis is doing strong work today, that there's strong work at the daily kos today, that there's strong work at the common ills and that he likes my entry from yesterday 'to bobby.'
apparently there's not only no free speech at this site, there's also no criticism of the person compiling.
'rebecca, what's the "this person" shit? you're sounding like c.i.!'
i wish i could have gotten ahold of c.i. i left three messages and when i called the 4th time was told that due to the meetings, c.i. hadn't seen any of the previous 3. if i could speak to c.i. i could probably figure out a way to make this a more peaceful post. a less angry 1.
but from work c.i.'s off to save roe which isn't to slam c.i. or ava who are working their butts off on this. (while i spend day after day trying to get a post together that will tell a story that needs to be told in a way that doesn't hurt my ex-husband who i would never want to hurt.) but if i could talk to c.i. i'd be calmer and know how to address this. i was able to reach mike and he helped but i am still so damn mad.
so let's get back to my newest best friend because that's what the kid is. he's my friend now and don't fuck with him.
he's a kid who's into blogs. he likes a lot of blogs. he came across mine 2 weeks ago. he knew the common ills because buzzflash linked to an entry monday. he found me because c.i. plugged my post 'to bobby' this morning. he loves the work that bill scher does and knows bill from the majority report (which is my hero janeane's show). he got into the daily kos because of that show too and because he thinks kos gets worked up about the right issues.
listening to him rave about liberal oasis, the daily kos and the common ills, i could tell this kid is passionate and concerned about real issues. if he wasn't he wouldn't be going to those sites.
so he goes to this site (not a blog) and posts on how there are really stories that aren't being talked about. he does that yesterday. 1st time the kid's ever done anything like that.
he tries to be silly and make it amusing. today's his 2nd day. he calls himself the ombudsman of the site and makes some more jokes and links to bill, kos, c.i. and myself.
'what happens next rebecca?'
he checks later and his posts are gone.
he gets an e-mail telling him he is now banned from the site.
the asshole, at a left site, blogs a rave on about michelle malkin.
now ask yourself, at a left site, what the fuck is the creep doing using valuable space to cover michelle malkin?
the comment the kid made went 'you might think ___'s plumbed the left and the lefties if all that's left is a hearts & flower to michelle malkin. here are 4 stories that matter.'
the same asshole, same day, is also plugging a republican who's posted on the huffington post.
a republican. so the kid jokes 'step out of the gop closet.'
and guess what?
the kid is banned.
the kid receives nasty e-mails. not 1, but many. and is told he better apologize. which he does. i wish the kid had written me first. i would have told him 'you tell that prick to go fuck himself.'
instead the asshole 'appears' (i'll do a c.i.!) to be implying that bill, kos, c.i. and myself will not be linked to. because either the kid writes 1 site (maybe the asshole means all 4, the asshole doesn't seem that smart) or is posting as kos, i guess. or 1 of the members of the common ills that you read 'erika e-mails to note ...'
i would have told the kid don't you dare apologize. all 4 of us aren't going to be hurt or lose any readership (members for c.i.) because of this asshole not linking to us.
i don't get linked to. i use too many 'fucks' and talk about things that bother tight assholes.
i still get read even by my 'buds' at centrist.org. so i would've told the kid, 'don't apologize.'
i would have told him 'bill and kos are untouchable. more people hear them on air america than ever visit that site.' as for c.i., i don't know what the asshole thought.
if you missed it, c.i.'s stated 'do not ask for links.' c.i.'s told the members that at the site. the common ills had the support of buzzflash and others and it grew by word of mouth. it never depended on asshole for readers because it's not about readers. c.i. has 'members.' i joke and kid and mock about that but they are members. they will weigh in. they will determine what gets covered and what doesn't. they wanted more opinion and as i've told you, c.i. is not really into that. c.i. is into facts. but what do they get now? opinion.
if it were a blog, it would be a hell of a lot different.
i will write whatever i want. if i lose a reader, tough. if a reader thinks 'i don't want to hear about michael phelps butt crack' my attitude is 'then go somewhere else.'
i started this site when a friend of mine got attacked. so i don't take attacks well. as will be obvious when i finish my post i've been working on forever, i went through a very dark period and it's only through this blog and what i put up here that i'm able to come out of it.
i had to make the most painful decision of my life and i don't regret that decision but i won't kid that it was easy.
elaine was on my case to get out more since last summer which is why i have. but until i started blogging i was really just marking time. people sometimes write in and say that since i don't work i must be so lucky. while i'm very comfortable thanks to my ex-husband, my life hasn't been so lucky. (and though i haven't given money to the asshole's site, my ex-husband has. they're now cut off. 1 phone call was all it took. he didn't give that much to them because they're not that important, let's be honest. but he did give every now and then because he's a democrat and he likes to support charities.)
when something unfair happens to any 1 i am enraged because i feel that something truly unfair happened to me. the asshole attacking the kid may seem small potatoes to some people but i do not respond well to this shit.
on the phone with mike i was so pissed about this i started crying. that's how mad i am.
who the hell does that asshole think he is to treat the kid that way.
let me say that 1 more time, the kid received nasty e-mails.
the kid was put over a barrell (which is probably why i am so damn pissed) and forced to apologize when he hadn't done a damn thing wrong. he apologized to the creepy asshole. he then did an e-mail to bill, kos, c.i. and me (and to the asshole) apologizing to us.
now maybe it's because i've found myself in a position where i felt i didn't have any other choice that i could read his e-mail and tell how hurt he was. he was to the point and direct and very brief. and that's how i've been about the choice i had to make. (which is why the post i've been working on for almost 2 weeks has been so hard to write.)
i know what it's like when there are no other options and you do what you have to do. i read that e-mail and tried to call c.i. then i e-mailed the kid my phone number and said 'please call me about this but if you don't i am not mad at you and you do not owe me an apology.'
the kid called an hour later. that asshole destroyed that kid.
i told him over and over, 'you didn't do anything wrong.' and he didn't. this isn't his fault.
this is prissy asshole who can't take a little criticism and wants to act the big man.
in my experience, the guys trying the hardest to act the big man are usually the guys with the smallest dicks. and usually they can't get it up and if they can, they can't keep it up.
i don't know if that's the asshole's problem, i'm just speaking from my own experience.
and it's not just 1 asshole. seems like the whole site wants to rain down on the kid IN MY OPINION.
you got 1 idiot screaming 'there's no free speech here' and how the comment is abusive and all this other bullshit.
and he gets told that he's plugging his own site or sites meaning the kid's either a kos member or a common ills member or else the kid writes all 4 sites.
hey asshole & idiot, every damn word up here, i write my own damn self. every period, every comma. every lower case word. i'm damn sick of men who think they can degrade women's accomplishments. (and readers, you know what a sore topic that is for me.) so right away i'm pissed.
'you might want to try to be less obvious.' or some such bullshit spoken like some old british woman on 1 of those pbs sitcoms.
so we're not just talking about an asshole, we're talking about a prissy asshole.
bill scher is cool and laid back and i don't know that he'll read the kid's e-mail or, if he does, i don't know that he'll get how forced the kid sounds, how humbled due to being bullied. i'm told kos reads all e-mails. i'm betting kos will be pissed judging by his support for the little guys and gals when he's talking on the majority report. but i also know from that site that there are millions of things going on each day and kos may not have time to address it even if he plans to. c.i.?
since the bullying has to do with our 4 sites, c.i. might say 'you know talking about this would be self-referential and i don't like to do that.' i hope that's not the case. but it could be. if so, that leaves me to defend the kid.
and you damn well better believe that i'm going to.
this kid liked something i wrote. he liked it so much that he wanted to share it with others.
and i'm not going to thank him by saying 'them's the breaks, kid.' i'm not going to do that.
this kid saw something in my messy writing that spoke to him and he wanted others to know about it.
that and all the above makes it personal for me.
i've never thought i'd be linked or covered by any 1 covering blogs. i use 'fuck' far too much. i'll talk about men's bodies in a way that's shocking. sadly because in this day and age a lot of men are pretty sheltered if they're not aware women talk about sex.
but it's okay. i have enough readers who are into what i write about.
and i had to dig deep and be brave in ways that the asshole and the idiot will never understand.
even if we were to talk face to face they'd muster a 'i'm so sorry' whispered quietly but they wouldn't grasp it. they can't because they'd never have to face a choice like that.
after that choice, i can face anything. that's why when women write and say 'i wish i had done like you and kept commenting on politics but the e-mails were so mean' i can write back and say 'i understand.' the e-mails are mean. they're evil. but that's okay. there is nothing that any 1 can ever do to me that will be anything like what i've already been through.
so i can be tough. and i can say 'fuck you' when it's needed without worries or concerns about it.
and i have no worries or concerns about a dipshit fuck ass who thinks it's okay to bully a kid.
if you were in the room with me right now, you'd think i was courtney love. i have to keep stopping to spark up another cigarette or storm around the room while screaming.
i will not be silent on this. that kid needs an apology. the 4 of us that got smeared need an apology to but i'll settle for that kid. he didn't deserve this shit.
his only mistake was in going to a site that decides to copy the nation and create a comment section. but unlike the nation, you can't criticize. ari ('long cock' as i like to fondly and lustily think of him) will get on and comment back. he's not going 'oh you said you didn't like my post! you're banned! you're banned! and i'm banning all the sites you like to!' he didn't pull that shit.
ari's a fucking adult. this asshole who thinks it's okay to bully a kid is a fpouty little baby.
see in their comment sections only certain types of comments are allowed.
for instance, you can't criticize the asshole. you can't point out that with all that's going on in the world, wasting time at a site for the left on michell fucking malkin is wasting time. you can't point out that, having applauded 1 republican already today in the limited space that the asshole uses, perhaps then focusing on and linking to michelle malkin was a mistake.
you have to nod.
now you can curse. you can fucking curse and put out any half-baked conspiracy theory and those comments stay up.
but if you dare to criticize the asshole, dare to joke that the asshole might stink, you're banned.
and you're not just banned, you get nasty e-mails.
that is fucked up.
that is so totally fucked up.
the asshole needs to apologize to the kid. the idiot needs to apologize.
i've spoken to the kid, i've read the e-mails, i know what went down and it was disgusting and it was undemocratic and it was not behavior for the left.
you can find out all about, all the specifics, in tomorrow's gina & krista round-robin. after i got off the phone with the kid (yes, c.i.'s correct, i do live on the phone - partly because after i had to make my choice i didn't want to be around any 1) i called up gina and said 'let me tell you what just happened today.' they're interviewing the kid.
i asked gina how many people go the round-robin and it's around 800 now. they've had to bring in shirley and eli to help them send it out to everyone friday morning. (or when they do their specials 1 that pop up during the week.)
the asshole and the idiot need to apologize. and the site needs to quit trying to copy the nation if it's not going to allow people to disagree with them.
ms. musing let's you disagree. i go there all the time. i never post but i go all there all the time. they have lively and funny debates in their comments. christine never screams 'how dare you criticize me! you are banned! but if you grovel, i might let you come back!' she may say 'that's not what i was trying to say ' or she might say 'good point i'll think about it.' she doesn't scream 'a plauge on you and the people you like!'
the asshole's site obviously needs traffic. as c.i. can tell you, they've said verboten to tom hayden. they're having some identity issues. they won't be getting traffic if they're attacking the people who come to the site.
this kid didn't post right wing nonsense or curse and scream or blame it on some ethnic group. (probably he'd still have his posts up there if he had.) he offered a critique of what was up there.
he tried to be funny and even put in damn smiley faces ":)" so it was obvious it was a joke.
but he crossed the asshole's line by criticizing the asshole. then it was 'unleash the hounds of my ass' apparently for the asshole.
that's not cool. i'm not going to shut my mouth and pretend it is.
i don't need a link from the asshole, i don't want a link from the asshole. i don't need him to ever mention my blog. he is nothing to me but a stupid asshole who thinks it's fine to bully kids.
if we were at a bar, i'd tell him off. after i told him to stop staring at my tits. i'd tell him to get his little limp dick, prissy ass away from me and to get a fucking hair cut because that picture of him that i saw is a nightmare. what are those? ringlets! shirley fucking temple time?
he must really look the big man while singing 'on the good ship lollypop.'
he needs to lay off the kid. apologize to him. the kid has no interest in ever visiting asshole's crappy commentary again let alone posting there. if asshole had a problem with his comments, he should have told him. he shouldn't have deleted them, then banned him, then gone on to bully him in e-mails.
that's not okay with me. that's not alright. that's not how the left behaves.
if asshole disagreed he could have commented in the comments the same way ari or christine does. he didn't have to go total rambo-asshole on the kid.
and i think it was cowardly. the way it was done behind the kid's back was cowardly. and then wanting to bully him afterwards and tell him he better apologize?
asshole's lucky this happened online and that it happened with a kid because otherwise someone would be kicking the asshole's ass right now.
asshole's site needs to fucking figure out what it is because what went down wasn't left, wasn't democratic. and asshole's fucking suggestion that the kid 'write a letter and maybe it will get posted' fuck that shit.
the site made the decision to offer comments. that was a choice. to then come along and have a hissy fit because someone dared to point out that you're blowing it in your lousy posts that are embarrassingly bad. and the kid didn't say that. the kid was nice. doing jokes with smiley faces for god's sake.
but i'm saying it. you're embarrassing. you don't know what you're doing. it's obvious.
c.i. only linked to you because the uk members like pru and gareth thought you were interesting. they changed their minds long ago. your dick commentary, your commentary on dick size, they didn't care for it. or the other bullshit topics that you comment on.
hey i'm a glass house. i talk about dicks and cocks. (cocks are a compliment, dicks aren't - you're a dick.) but i'm not pretending to bring you the left world in five minutes or less.
you're trivial, your fluff, your bullshit. you're rona fucking barrett in need of firing so that some 1 who has their shit together can do the job. and rona barrett is apt. what the asshole is doing is running a little movie mag and the kid wanted his movie stars highlighted. the asshole was going on about lindsay loham and hilary duff and the kid wanted some 1 he liked, some 1 that spoke to him, highlighted.
after all of this, there's a freak out e-mail. it comes when the asshole gets copied the e-mail that the kid sent out to bill, kos , c.i. and myself. it leads to 'i wish you hadn't done that.' yeah, be nervous because now people know what you did. be very nervous because you should be ashamed of yourself.
instead asshole offers the only smart thing he ever said 'start your own blog.'
i'm telling the kid too. i'm telling the kid you can rip that asshole apart. i'm telling him 'i will help you start your blog. if you decide to, i am there for you.'
why is that? because no 1 deserves to be treated that way (by asshole and idiot). if the national review had done this shit, it would still be disgusting. it wouldn't be surprising, but it would be disgusting. that it came from the left is not just disgusting, it is shocking. and if you think your behavior was appropriate you have a lot to learn.
if you think i give a goddamn fuck if you link to me or not, you've got a lot more to learn.
i don't need your asshole link.
and let me be clear to all my readers, if some 1 ever tries to bully you, don't apologize on my account. i don't give a goddamn fuck about any bully or what they might do. they can kiss my ass. and you can tell them that. you can say 'i'm not going to apologize to you, you fucking prick, and rebecca won't care because she says kiss her ass.' don't think 'i've got to protect rebecca' because i can take anything. i have walked through fire and been burned bad enough that some asshole not linking to me doesn't even rate an eye roll.
and as for the other three, kos and bill are untouchable. nothing's going to hurt them certainly not a little asshole. c.i. is blog ignorant and will tell you that. every rule that should have been followed was broken because c.i. didn't know any of them. that's why it's not a blog. it's a 'resource/review.' but the way that thing got set up, c.i.'s untouchable. rob's comments about thinning the herd aren't jokes. he's serious. and c.i. doesn't laugh about it. c.i. agrees that if you're not against the war, if you're not pro choice, you need to go somewhere else because there are more than enough people (members) who are concerned. and 1658 e-mails on sunday, according to ava, are too damn many.
if you're with the program, c.i.'s happy to have you aboard. but if you're not, and c.i.'s put this up at the site, i'm not talking out of school, the days c.i. enjoyed the common ills most was when the membership was so small that every e-mail got a personal reply. if the common ills dropped down to 5 members, c.i. wouldn't shed any tears. and people who thought jim and i were too rough on c.i. in that roundtable when we were talking about e-mails don't get that no 1 has that kind of time. even with ava helping out on sundays, there's not enough time. and this is just trying to read the e-mails not write back to members and visitors.
for my readers, you know i've been working on a post and some of you have wondered what it was. it's obviously a very personal 1. i didn't intend to tease it out and have kept my mouth shut about it. kat, c.i., jess's parents, elaine and a host of others have been very helpful and very patient. my ex-husband has been wonderfully supportive. i will do my best to complete it this weekend. maybe i'll get it up tomorrow. most of you know the topic from the gina & krista round-robin. i talked about it a little bit there. now i could be like asshole (who would never have to go through it, you know why i say that) and post something superficial. but if i'm going to talk about it for the 1st time at length, i want to be sure i'm clear in it.
jess's mother has been especially helpful. i've told you all how cool she is but there have been times when i've just been reduced to tears and she's talked me through it. if you ever wonder how jess turned out so cool, just look at his parents.
the asshole steers you to michelle malkin and you're supposed to find something nice to say or not say anything at all.
is that the site's policy or just the asshole's?
if it's the site's policy, there's a problem.
if it's the asshole's policy, he needs to rethink it. but before he does anything, he needs to apologize to the kid.
for those of you who don't get the round-robin, i had an abortion. that's the post i've been working on. it was the right choice. and it was the only choice. but that didn't make it any easier for me. when kat did her post and was talking about how no woman had to justify that choice, she was talking about me. she's been very supportive and each time i've finished another draft, she's read it and asked, 'rebecca, are you sure you want to go into that' about some detail.
if i'm going to tell it, i'm going to tell it all the way. i'm editing only for my ex-husband.
i agree with kat that no woman needs to explain her medical procedure. but there was a lot of e-mail after the round-robin went out from people, women and men, saying that the little bit i said helped them or spoke to them.
if you read the round-robin you have an idea of what i went through. but with roe under attack, i feel like the best thing i can do, my part, is to talk about it and to talk about what i went through.
it's not easy to write. and tomorrow will be 2 weeks that i've been working on it. don't expect it to be a writing masterpiece. but it's been very hard to dig all this up. i didn't work on it yesterday. c.i. and elaine both urged me to take a break from it and focus on something else. which is why i did the 'to bobby' thing yesterday.
but it's like the woman i told you about who inspired all of us with her talk about 'think about the 1 thing you could do and when you think oh i can't, do it.' this is 1 thing i can do. i don't know if i'll have it pulled together by the weekend, but i am working on it.
'to bobby' was done out of love and respect for bob somerby. and c.i. stopped talking when it was obvious i was going to write about it. but when i said, and i didn't put this in yesterday, 'look you and elaine are telling me that i need to take a small break' c.i. said, 'joan baez. use that as your model and it should be a breeze to write.' and it was a breeze and it was nice yesterday not to have to dig into all the inner crap for 1 day. and i did feel like i could face the issue today and write some more on it. then i got the e-mail from the kid.
i won't be silent while some 1 is wronged. or while some 1 is bullied into apologizing when there's no apology needed from the kid.
my ex-husband, as i said in the round-robin, was very supportive throughout. he didn't bully me. but a choice had to be made on what was more important: what i wanted or the type of life a child was going to have. fate bullied me. and i won't stand for it while some kid is bullied.
or act like it's okay because the asshole is with some psuedo big site online.
i can't be hurt anymore. so don't let any 1 bully you on my account. they can take their best shots at me and they'll just slide right off me because i've already had to make a hellish choice and i lived through it. shit like the asshole doesn't even qualify for minor league.
and what a world he must live in if the thing that causes him to lose it is some 1 questioning him.
what a lofty, pampered life he must have had.
when female bloggers write me and say 'thank you for talking about how we get treated' i mean, you're welcome, but i don't back down. there's nothing i can ever face again that will be as difficult.
when i made an offer to a male blogger that he could talk and it would be in private, that was sincere. and my concern over his anger and his hurting himself with it was sincere. even some 1 that hates me, and he really hates me, is some 1 i will reach out too if i think they need some 1. this kid needs some 1 and i could care less what the asshole does or doesn't do to me personally as a result of this post.
the kid kept saying 'rebecca, i don't want to get you banned over this.' i kept telling him, 'you are now my newest best friend and if i've got you as a reader, i don't need anything or anyone that asshole might be able to steer my way.'
i'm no saint. but i don't back down and i don't bow my head and i don't ask permission to say what i want to say.
as i told centrist.org, i am your worst nightmare.
i am the woman who won't be cowed.
i won't be silenced.
you can't woo me with flattery.
you can't bully me.
i've already been through the worst that could ever happen. i could lose a limb tomorrow or suffer some illness and it would be nothing compared to what i had to go through already.
so bullies who hide behind e-mails and think they're big shots when they bully kids or ban them for stating the obvious don't scare me.
if you want to support the kid, read the round-robin and don't visit that site again unless the kid's gets an apology. today it was beat up on a kid, who knows who'll be targeted next.
i'll close with a thank you to mike for listening to rage until i was calm enough to post. mike, my bookend, if you were a little older, i'd be so into you. instead, i'll just stand on the sideline and appreciate all your gifts (brains, looks and soul).