I’ve been taking down the poem-comments of Todd Zaino not because of their political slant but because they are clutter. They’re childish, repetitive and often not on point. If Todd wants to start a blog and publish his poems, he should. At the moment, he’s trying to hijack mine, and it’s just a big nuisance. If he did two a week, they could stay up. At the moment, he’s averaging three per post.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
21 Responses to Just to be clear…
- -- ADVERTISEMENT --
- -- ADVERTISEMENT --
Colin,
Did you miss the classes on free speech while in high school and college? Earning your living in the radio and newspaper industries…you’d think you’d be first in line to protect free speech.
Jay has it right. Freedom of speech refers to our right to speak without interference from the government. If I hand in a piece of crap to the New Yorker and they refuse to print it, they are not depriving me of my right to free speech. They are simply setting a standard for quality. If you want to publish your poems, start a blog. The government will not meddle with it, because of free speech. This is my blog. You do not have an unlimited right to clutter it up with rubbish.
And Todd did you miss the part where they talk about how it applies to the government not a mewspaper columnist and his blog comments? Hush child and write your own blog where you can delete Colin’s comments as you see fit.
Todd, you have proven yourself capable of writing stupid, obvious poems AND prose. Lighten up on Colin, dude. He has no obligation to post every one of your moronic poems. You know that. We get your point.
Todd, if it helps to take away the pain you’re enduring from having your posts removed, I admit that I usually just skipped them anyway.
Colin, thank you. If Todd feels a limerick coming on, it certainly is not difficult to publish it to his own blog. There are plenty of free resources on the Web for doing this.
Speaking of the Interwebs, ask them to define “limerick” and the first result is “a humorous, frequently bawdy verse…”. What I think makes these little mind-burps tiresome clutter is that they reach neither of these standards, but the form masquerades as literary commentary.
Sorry, Todd. Just sayin’, dude.
Stay strong Colin…
Full disclosure – I haven’t seen any of Todd’s poems and so cannot comment on their worth or lack thereof. I am also in full agreement with Colin as to his right to delete them.
All that said, I found Todd’s lengthy comment above pretty darn funny; although, if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, Colin should feel quite flattered.
I think that if Todd could be brief
He might find that, to his relief,
He could share his perspective
(And even invective)
While Colin put up with his beef
Perfect form, real rhymes, very nice.
Thank you, ma’am!
Nice job Patrice
“Slavish” and “hyjack” both Colin called me
Won’t find either in my family tree
To Wit is blog number one
Only trying to keep it fun
Such a joy for all when words are open and free
Great Weicker editorial today on the horrors of one party rule and the cash corruption that goes with it. While rooted in Watergate the targets are obvious.
Voter apathy isn’t the answer to systemic corruption.
It’s a companion piece to his comments ragarding one party rule in CT during his visitation at the old State House where he blamed CTs present problems on one party rule. Cash corruption inevitably follows.
http://ct-n.com/ondemand.asp?ID=7888
The CT NEA and AFT affiliates denied CT $300 million in federal education dollars. AFSCME destroyed SustiNet during union negotiations. The unholy alliance of Democrats and public sector unions needs addressing.
The racketeering problem in the unholy alliance needs addressing.
Speaking of one party rule, the news out of Washington has President Obama pushing the limits on Presidential rulings, signing orders, and mandates expecting all of them to go to the SCOTUS for decision.
It’s full blown FDR ‘stack the court’ psychosis.
Rather than pass the Dream Act during his first two years with Democratic majorities we get the rather cynical use of unconstitutional Presidential mandates on birth control and immigration that are sure to be overturned by the SCOTUS.
Even the CSMonitor is pondering the Imperial Presidency.
From the New Republic
>> Imagine the precedent this cwould create. President Romney could lower tax rates simply by saying he will not use enforcement resources to prosecute anyone who refuses to pay capital-gains tax. He could repeal Obamacare simply by refusing to fine or prosecute anyone who violates it.
So what we have here is a president who is refusing to carry out federal law simply because he disagrees with Congress’s policy choices. That is an exercise of executive power that even the most stalwart defenders of an energetic executive — not to mention the Framers — cannot support.<<
It gets better with impeachment rumors (failure to perform the duties of office) and Thursday's expected SCOTUS rulings on Obamacare.
Huh. Imagine that. (And by “that” I mean “the relationship of this comment and its self-added children to the topic of this post.”)
How unfortunate that clumsy limericks have paved the way for removing vampire comments.
Since this comment reads just like a blog entry, how exciting for the masses it would be if you were to use it that way and start your own.
I recall that Todd is teacher. I have serious problems with “educators” who don’t undertstand that First Amendment protection applies to intrusions/abridgements of (speech, association, press and religion) from a STATE actor. I hope his students are able to learn this important doctrine elsewhwere!
And I hope that I learn to type sometime soon. Mea culpa for the typos. Also, my prepositions could be better. For now, be relieved that I am not teaching your children my bad habits.
Free speech is under attack. Conservative writers are now facing threats against themselves, their families, and their livelihoods merely because they’ve aggressively investigated the history and funding of radical liberals.
Ali Akbar is president of the National Bloggers Club, a coalition of 300 conservative bloggers who reach millions of readers, has been targeted by these vicious attacks on himself and, even worse, his family.
Akbar has seen his mother’s home photographed and placed on the internet. He has also received formal notification that he may soon be sued for publishing truthful information about radical liberals and their wealthy donors.
The ACLJ will be providing legal representation to Akbar and his organization of conservative bloggers who are facing threats and intimidation tactics by those opposed to their viewpoint. We will aggressively defend their constitutionally-protected free speech rights from these unwarranted attacks.
As Akbar told the ACLJ, “I’m grateful for the support of the ACLJ, and I’m confident we’ll defeat any and all legal challenges to our fundamental right to free speech. We will not be deterred in our quest for the truth.”
In addition, a number of conservative bloggers have been targeted with a dangerous and illegal tactic that’s become known as SWAT-ing – (making false 911 calls sending police to the homes of bloggers, claiming a crime has occurred.) The tactic has been used in retaliation for posts that conservative bloggers have written.
SWAT-ing and other intimidation tactics to silence conservative viewpoints are quickly becoming a favorite tool of the radical left.
Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) has recognized this growing problem and is calling on Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the SWAT-ting cases to see if federal laws have been violated. In a letter to the Attorney General, Sen. Chambliss wrote:
Any potentially criminal action that incites fear, seeks to silence a dissenting opinion, and collaterally wastes the resources of law enforcement should be given close scrutiny at all levels. . . . Regardless of any potential political differences that may exist, threats and intimidation have no place in our national political discourse.
The ACLJ has a long history of successfully defending free speech, and we look forward to defeating this latest attempt to threaten and intimidate conservatives into silence.
Why Jay, how nice of you to comment here! Too bad you didn’t let us know where you can be found, so we can enjoy you even more:
http://aclj.org/free-speech-2/bloggers-free-speech-rights-under-attack
What did you just try to prove here, Todd? Did you say anything new? Anything that will move anyone to your side? I guess the most important thing is that you feel better. I hope you do.