Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Thanks For the Memories

—

by

in

I have not written much over that past several months because I have been dealing with some family problems. I thought a brief article on the Dave Brat interview might be worth a comment. Boy,was I wrong.

I was upset at one of the responses to my Brat article and have decided that continuing to prepare and write an occasional article for this blog is not worth the time. I have never been accused of being a liar. It seems that some simply don’t understand the give and take, is not an excuse to call into question the basic values of one with whom they do not agree.

— Les Schreiber

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

27 responses to “Thanks For the Memories”

  1. Malcolm Baldwin Avatar
    Malcolm Baldwin

    I’ve been so busy with campaigns, grapes and sheep I’ve not paid attention to this blog for a few months until now, but reading this entry, and going back to the Dave Brat discussions, I must say I’m dismayed at the tone of some of the comments. They remind me of the Too Conservative blog here in Loudoun County a few years back — maybe it still exists — that featured right wing intemperance regularly, driving others of us away.

    I appreciate Jim’s attempt to invoke civility, but then out came the comment from a disgruntled “conservative” reader about Washington Post editorial lies. That’s the paper my liberal neighbor considers a Republican mouth piece! It’s one thing to disagree, but to accuse others, and the Post of lying is a pretty pathetic method of argument.

    So, I do hope that this Brat commentary doesn’t evince a lowering of the capacity of participants to listen before reacting, and when reacting to avoid personal attacks. Otherwise, at least for me, it’s back to tending sheep.

    1. Acbar Avatar
      Acbar

      You mentioned a blog that “featured right wing intemperance regularly, driving others of us away.” That sure does seem to be the modus operandi for political commentary these days (on both extremes) and it sure does leave anyone looking for an EXCHANGE of views, rather than partisan preaching, out in the cold. Jim’s got a good thing going here, but it’s fragile, and depends on the rest of us to cooperate. So, thank you, MB, I really don’t want anyone’s intemperence to drive us away, out in the cold.

    2. TooManyTaxes Avatar
      TooManyTaxes

      Have you ever tried to get a letter to the editor or an op-ed challenging Post editorials on Virginia issues published in the Post? Have you ever sent editors documents that contradict the “facts” set forth in editorials? They will not be published or be given a response. But send an op-ed supporting a Post position on higher taxes in Virginia or “bad Republicans” and it will be published.

      Over the years, I’ve sent Hiatt multiple fact-based explanations, including documents or links to documents, of why editorials were factually wrong or misleadingly incomplete. I have never received a response. Indeed, the Post never even published any news articles about UVA’s study showing overweight trucks caused more than $200 million in annual damage to roads and bridges but paid less than $4 million in fees. Google it. Moreover, Hiatt’s staff refused to allow that fact to appear in an op-ed, arguing that more than mere tax increases were needed to fix transportation. (Yet the very same paper interviewed me on multiple occasions about Virginia transportation issues.) I was told such a discussion was not appropriate for publication. Similarly, a discussion the MWCOG study showing higher taxes and massive construction of roads and transit would not reduce congestion in the long-term was not allowed to be published.

      Hiatt has repeatedly attacked Barbara Comstock for voting against the transportation tax bill, but never once even criticized Scott Surovell or Chap Petersen, Democrats who also voted against the same legislation. I guess that’s high-minded journalism in some people’s minds! Can you explain why it is OK for two Democrats to vote no on Bill A, but wrong for a Republican to do the same? Why is the Republican regularly hammered in editorial after editorial, while the Democrats are never even mentioned, much less criticized? The Post has regularly attacked the GOP-controlled Loudoun Board for sweetheart deals with developers, but closed its eyes to similar ones involving the Democratic-controlled board in Fairfax County.

      I’ve posted several times before that, in a phone interview with me, a Post reporter told me that, despite the Post’s policy that the editorial and news staffs are separate, the reporter was pressured by the editorial board not to write any negative stories about then-Democratic Governor Tim Kaine. Hiatt was in charge of the editorial board then. I’ve never identified the journalist by name because he/she was fearful of losing employment. High minded journalism. Or maybe the reporter was lying.

      And Messers Schreiber and Baldwin, I have many more examples of what sure looks to me like editorial board failure to comply with the Paper’s and general journalism standards. Based on years of observations and research, in my opinion, Fred Hiatt is the most dishonest journalist I’ve ever seen.

      Why should the Post be protected?

  2. Andrew Roesell Avatar
    Andrew Roesell

    Dear Les,

    I thought I read Crazy apologizing to you. Is that not sufficient?

    Sincerely,

    Andrew

  3. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    I guess I think the blog has taken more turns away from public policy issues and more towards social conservative issues of which I will admit I have less tolerance for at times and will work to find less acerbic ways to get my points and responses across.

    OTOH – there have been several here of late who have invited others to leave or to stop commenting, etc, and I guess my view is that if you don’t like what others say – and can’t comment civilly – then go find something else to occupy your time with.

    I initially read and sometimes go back and re-read Jim’s

    Blog Rules and Etiquette

    We request, though we don’t require, readers to use their real names when they comment. For those unwilling to reveal their real name, we ask that they use a consistent pseudonym so others can more easily track who is saying what.

    We have managed, so far, to avoid posting elaborate rules for participating in this blog. We simply urge contributors and commenters to maintain a collegial atmosphere. Direct all the fire and fury you want at another person’s argument, but do not engage in ad hominem attacks. The publisher reserves the right to delete any comments that violate this basic rule. Additionally, blog contributors have the right to delete any comments on their own posts only that they feel detracts from the quality of the dialogue.”

    Anyone who thinks things are out of hand on BR – I invite you to visit some others that I have – where if you are not called a moron or POS (piece of s___) and worse …. regularly – you feel ignored!

    finally – I’m open to any/all criticism of my behavior and style here. I’m a big boy and can take it and I often learn from it. We all can improve – and we all can learn – because, in fact, we all are ignorant – just on different issues – and that ought to be something for each of us to work on …..

    😉

  4. Andrew Roesell Avatar
    Andrew Roesell

    Dear Larry,

    Gracious question! You’ve been fine to me. I have no complaints for you. I was disappointed when Peter chose to leave in part over my comments. Does anyone else have any complaints of me? Thanks.

    Sincerely,

    Andrew

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      no probs other than the Dear and Sincerely which are slightly grating but highly preferred to moron and POS!

      ;-0

      1. Andrew Roesell Avatar
        Andrew Roesell

        Dear(!) Larry,

        I try to use them as “tone setters” for what follows and precedes. I use these at work, too. No one else does.

        Sincerely(!),

        Andrew

  5. CrazyJD Avatar
    CrazyJD

    Les,

    Sorry you feel the way you do. Not particularly sorry for my comments, except, as I said, for the last four sentences. Not a question of disagreeing with you. It’s a question of you distorting the facts to suit your purpose. You do not defend against what seems obvious from my juxtaposition of what Brat said and what you said he said. Instead, you are offended. My mistake was giving you the “out” by calling you a name.

    IMHO, your response resembles what I now realize is the standard approach of the left, almost as if it came out of a Saul Alinsky playbook. We’re seeing it in spades on college campuses at present: Instead of actually engaging on any issue, or defending what they say, the left simply disengages. Fall back position is to become offended. (See also, Yale student dropping F-bomb on Yale college master) In your case, you complain about my post and presumably, though you did not use these words, Larry does, my lack of civility. Then you take your ball and leave.

    Real “give and take”, as you put it, would involve you defending what you said against my proposition that you distorted the facts. Will you do so now? We’ll see.

    My own guess is, and its just a guess: you are frustrated that you got called out and simply left the playing field, both figuratively and, as now threatened, literally. My reaction to frustration is slightly different than yours. I confronted my frustration head-on and called you a name (though prevaricator has a slightly different meaning than liar. You could look it up), which didn’t need to be said because the facts I posed spoke for themselves to this audience.

    Les, I will be happy to respect your comments and point of view as long as you don’t distort the facts. Otherwise, if I’m conscious and not luuded out, I will call you out on it, though I will leave out the name calling. (That is, if you stick around and can get over being offended 😉

    Wonderful wry comment by a professor at Claremont McKenna in this morning’s WSJ: “When the leftists lacked power, they embraced free speech. Now that they have power, they don’t need it.”

  6. Malcolm Baldwin Avatar
    Malcolm Baldwin

    Too Many Taxes: Just to note that I’ve sent many letters to the Post to which I’ve had no response, although over the years a few have been printed. As for Hiatt’s liberal leanings, it’s amusing to hear in contrast my liberal neighbor decry his consistent Republicanism! My sense is that your positions are not exactly mainstream. That’s where the Post’s editorials lie, in contrast to the NYT’s on one side, and the WSJ’s on the other.

    For example, one of my last (again unpublished) letters criticized the Post’s endorsement of Chairman Scott York for reelection now as an Independent to chair Loudoun’s Board of Supervisors. (Thankfully, Phyllis Randall won.) Scott had run as a Republican and Independent (when I supported him) over the years.

    So, give the Post its due for its independent editorial policy — very critical of Obama’s foreign policy (as I have been) as well as the Republican’s (most recently on the party’s ignominious position on Syrian immigration — except for Christians!).

    Lastly, why not use your real name (assuming you’re not! 🙂 )

    1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
      TooManyTaxes

      Mr. Baldwin. Please explain the appropriateness of the editorial board’s pressuring reporters not to write critical articles about Kaine; and the constant attacks on Barbara Comstock for voting against the transportation tax hike bill, while maintaining silence on Chap Petersen and Scott Surovell (who also voted “no”). All while claiming to be an independent paper that complies with internal and industry standards. I know a number of its reporters who have indicated they are Democrats, but still try to address all sides of an issue, when they are not pressured not to do so by the editorial board. In contrast, the Post often publishes items contrary to its positions on non-Virginia issues. Why the difference?

      It’s not a matter of not publishing my letters & op-eds. It’s a matter of claiming to be an open platform but then only publishing “outside” pieces that support the editorial board’s position. The Post does not allow rebuttal to its positions on issues related to Virginia. It is not mainstream. It is dishonest. The Paper should either say it does not accept contrary opinions to its positions on Virginia issues or accept and publish them.

      As far as my nom de plume, I have been posting in accordance with blog standards, using the same name/initials for many years.

  7. Andrew Roesell Avatar
    Andrew Roesell

    Dear CrazyJD,

    Liberals like Larry, and maybe Les, too, still embrace free speech, but Cultural Marxists do not. There is a difference. We can still discuss things with these kinds of Liberals to some degree, though because of our different premises it is not an easy task for either side. We talk past each other frequently. Unfortunately, the Cultural Marxists seem to be proliferating a fast rate, owing to their influence in academe. That is my sense. But you are right, too, that Liberals, not being used to speaking with Conservatives who aren’t “Me, too, but not as much” Republican Establishment types, seem quick to resort to the “I’m offended, I’m leaving,” line. My question to such folk is this: How do you expect to negotiate in government legislation if you are unable to handle opposing views on blogs? It is good to maintain civility, but, the dilemma for us, as Conservatives, how do you maintain such a precious thing, when the terms of their arguments are “Manichean,” so stark and uncompromising, and an ever “upping of the ante”? And, what do you say when the Constitution, for example, is routinely violated by their actions? My earlier concern, on a different thread, of what happens when the definition of justice are inversions of one another, such as immigration, (“The right to immigrate” vs. The right to decide who can come) and rationality (“whites as keeping blacks from doing well in school and making them commit crimes” vs. Blacks not trying hard enough and misbehaving). These both can’t be true, can they? I think not. We just go ’round and ’round. Cause and effect cannot be agreed on. It is like two scientists meeting to discuss their science only to learn that they have two different models of physics, say. We seem to be saying to each other: “The world doesn’t work that way, you have it precisely inverted,” and, “the ends don’t justify the means.” “Guns kill people!” is another. But we are scratching the surface here.

    Sincerely,

    Andrew

  8. Peter Galuszka Avatar
    Peter Galuszka

    My points:
    I think Les’s complaint has merit. I have seen the tonality on this blog deteriorate from a friendly kidding with facts tossed back and forth to some kind of strange ideological purge. Frankly, the Dominion sponsorship doesn’t help because it lurks like a silhouette as if they are taking credit for the good stuff that does come on this blog.

    Second point: What the hell does the Washpo editorial page have to do with any of this? I am a regular contributor but if anything, they may be too neocon. I do not see them pulling punches. What I do see, however, is Jim pushing a lot of ideas from the same old right wing think tanks, especially the Thomas Jefferson whatever that once actually took over Bacons Rebellion in a very misguided arrangement that has thankfully ended.
    .

    1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
      TooManyTaxes

      Peter, please answer my questions about the pressure from the editorial board not to write anything critical about Kaine in news articles and the double standard with respect to Comstock versus Petersen and Surovell. Does the fact that you write for, and get paid by, the Post color your perceptions about the editorial board?

  9. Andrew Roesell Avatar
    Andrew Roesell

    Another thing. What we are experiencing, too, is that the non-partisan aspect of the “mission statement” of Bacon’s Rebellion is much more obtainable on pragmatic issues of land-use, transportation, energy, etc, Larry mentioned a change. I think that once you start talking about education and crime, then you, in our current political climate, are bringing in the issues that people are going to vehemently disagree on. So, you either leave the “red meat” issues out, and that includes education and crime, and immigration, and just look at “best and worst practices” in public administration from a technocratic point-of-view, or you keep it, but just adjust your expectations that the participants’ will start being more “emphatic” since now we are talking “near and dear issues.” That was the reason I became a participant from being a spectator when Peter G. started arguing against the Confederacy. My point to him was: Look, this is a “new urbanism” and “smart growth” blog, why are you doing this, you’re only going to alienate “real Virginians”, sorry, from the good ideas being discussed on this site, and their view of these things will be tainted by these sneers. But if Liberals really do want to start a discussion, then they should be prepared to “take it,” not just “dish it out.” That is why when Peter said he was leaving I was disappointed because, 1) I don’t think he should have taken on the Confederacy due to sensitivities, my own included, given the nature of this site; 2) If you do start something in a cutting way, then don’t be surprised that you get some things sent back your way. Before Peter, I was happy being a spectator, only. Also, Larry may be on to something when he suggested revising the Mission Statement, if there is going to continue to be “red meat.” That’s my view.

    Sincerely,

    Andrew

  10. salz Avatar
    salz

    Whoa, I came onto Bacons Rebellion this morning to wonder why Peter Galuzska (and I might have again misspelled his name for which I apologize in advance) is not covering the Massey-Blankenship trial for the Post?

    Seems to me that Mr. Galuszka (to reverse the spelling I usually screw up) has the background, better than anyone, to “see” the issues in that trial, due to his prior writing here on Bacons Rebellion and his book. But previously I had laughed that he left BR saying that the discussion had become too vicious because in my experience he was more critical than any other writer.

    Instead, I find all this, over the potential “distortion” of Mr. Bratt’s words. I, who claim Jack Trammell as a friend, do not find Mr. Bratt to be someone I want representing Virginia due to the ideologue aspects of his policies. But he is representing Virginia whether I want him to or not.

    I haven’t read anything — sans the aforementioned four lines which were immediately condemned and retracted — which I thought was out of bounds.

    As one who thinks of himself as “rabidly middle of the road” and one who often tries to point out the value of the “others’” opinions or ideas, I’m hoping that no regular commenter/writer quits over alleged, or real, slams of their ideas or writing or personality or…

    I would much rather MORE writers show up.

    Please let us remember that Abe Lincoln did not want to eradicate slavery in the South and Jefferson Davis, as a U.S. senator, had said very clearly that slavery would soon die of it’s own inconsistencies, but those two moderates were pushed into leading the most destructive war in our history by others unwilling to give credence to differing views.

    Please remember, as Mr. Bacon just recently pointed out, that the great early Civil Rights leaders, W.E.B Dubois and George Washington Carver, had profound differences in views on how to advance the rights of our nation’s Black citizens.

    First, we have to express our differing views; then we have to agree to disagree over them, but we can not stop talking about them or things like Timothy McVey (spelling), 9/11 and the Paris attacks, push moderates — even socialists as we see happening in France literally today — into corners which only benefit those intolerant of differing opinions. And which lead to…

    Please continue to discuss. Please. There are no easy answers to any of these concepts. NONE. If they existed, we would not be talking about these concepts.

  11. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    I appreciate all of these comments and take them to heart.

    Larry rightly observes that I have somewhat veered somewhat from the original guiding concept of Bacon’s Rebellion that tries to steer clear of “culture war” issues, particularly of the guns, god and gays variety. For the most part, those are zero-sum issues in which, if one side wins, the other side loses. I’ve always preferred to focus on what it takes to create “more prosperous, livable, sustainable communities,” which holds out at least the possibility of win-win outcomes.

    Like Americans as a whole, I have been drawn to the debate over the causes of and remedies for the inequality of wealth, with particular attention to inequalities between the races. It’s in that spirit that I have been writing increasingly about race relations over the past year. These are important issues, and I think I bring to the table a narrative (whether you agree with it or not) that is rarely seen in Virginia newspapers or on TV. My inclination is to continue writing about these issues, while remaining open to rebuttal and criticism in the comments and inviting anyone with opposing viewpoints to contribute to the blog.

    One of the great concerns I have about American society is the erosion of intelligent, civil discourse. We have plenty of blogs and website for people on the right and left to seek the confirmation of their own views, and plenty of places where they can go to engage in ugly invective, but not many where they can engage in a thoughtful dialogue with others holding different viewpoints.

    I ask everyone to respect the intelligence and integrity of the other participants on the blog and, above all, to refrain from ad hominem attacks. I know it’s not easy! Trust me, I’ve been tempted plenty of times! Just remember, the people you hope to sway with your arguments tune out when you start throwing around insults. Not only are such attacks uncivil, they don’t work.

  12. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    With Peter gone, and now Les, and with Don “the Ripper” Rippert on extended sabbatical, I’m the only regular contributor left. As much as I’m in love with my own prose, it’s not enough. I want more viewpoints. Fortunately, some fresh voices have begun contributing to the Rebellion on an episodic basis, and I hope there will be more.

    Most of the regular contributors of comments are competent, even gifted, writers themselves. I invite you, when so inspired, to contribute op-ed pieces for publication in the blog. God knows, you spend enough time writing comments — you might as well take a little more time, polish your prose and contribute in a way that everyone can see.

  13. Peter Galuszka Avatar
    Peter Galuszka

    Andrew, What the FUCK is a real Virginian?
    Am dying to know.

  14. Andrew Roesell Avatar
    Andrew Roesell

    Dear Peter,

    Speaking of civility! Well, in my mind, a real Virginian is someone who identifies and loves their home and community, the Old Dominion or Commonwealth of Virginia, its traditions of gentility and hospitality. Probably they were born here, but by no means all. I was born in D.C. and grew up in Alexandria and Fairfax, and love the land in my travels. I respect the pioneers who shed their blood and endured great toil and poverty, raised their families, and buried here. I respect the statesmen who gave America its founding documents, and their character of restraint and moderation. I think real Virginians do, too. This should not descend to the level of idolotry; for example, as much as I respect George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, I think i would have been a “Tory” knowing what I know. I respect the efforts to come to terms with slavery and end it, but it did not end. Virginians tried to be moderate in the great sectional conflict that ending in the appalling loss of life in the War Between the States. I think real Virginians respect that heritage of moderation and rule under law. I am proud that Virginia had a “kinder, gentler” Reconstruction than some other Southern states, and that when White Supremacy did triumph after 1900, something I do not share, that it was less onerous, again than elsewhere in the South. Booker T. Washington was a Virginian, and he is man i respect. The Virginia tradition of order, decorum, good manners are a flower of a civilized people. And you don’t have to be White, to share these things, too. To my mind, a Black person in Southside who shares this heritage is far more of a Virginian than most of the transplants from Yankeedom and the Third World who are domiciled in Northern Virginia today. Just because one is a legal resident and taxpayer of our great state, does not make one a Virginian in this cultural sense. So, that’s a start to a “definition.” I think it was the Duke of Wellington who famously observed that people sometimes said he was Irish because he was born in that country. He replied just because one is “born in stable does not make one a horse.” So, while my Virginianess is indeed debatable, having been raised in the suburbs of D.C., though some of my mother’s colonial ancestors were Virginians, the rest being from Maryland, I feel a closer kinship with Virginia, than the newcomers whose houses have covered so much of these parts over.

    Sincerely,

    Andrew

  15. Peter Galuszka Avatar
    Peter Galuszka

    Yipes. I honestly do not believe this mythology and is why i am probably better off not bothering with this blog. My prayer is that the virginia i know and love ( although technically a come here but from the south and not the north) will attract a much more diverse crowd that will make this place finally reach its potential. In the meantime, i’ll pass on the moonlight and magnolia and whips and gallows and the hypocrisy.

  16. Peter Galuszka Avatar
    Peter Galuszka

    Yipes. I honestly do not believe this mythology. It us testimony why i am probably better off not bothering with this blog. My prayer is that the virginia i know and love ( although technically a come here but from the south and not the north) will attract a much more diverse crowd that will make this place finally reach its potential. In the meantime, i’ll pass on the moonlight and magnolia and whips and gallows and the hypocrisy. Sorry andrew.

  17. Andrew Roesell Avatar
    Andrew Roesell

    Apology accepted, Peter. May you find your comfort zone where you will be happy. As for your wish for further “ethnic cleansing,” that I pray, God will forestall. But His will be done.

    Sincerely,

    Andrew

  18. CrazyJD Avatar
    CrazyJD

    Notice that Peter does not answer Too Many’s question about WashPo’s policy. Failure/refusal to engage? Desertion of playing field? I rest my case. Instead, Peter himself engages in what amounts to name-calling when, instead of challenging the ideas of the “same old right wing think tanks”, he simply hangs the perjorative on those organizations with the moniker: “same old right wing think tanks”. This is commonly known as one of the genetic fallacies, cited in the old standby, Essentials of Logic, as follows: …”attacking the source rather than what is at issue, namely, that which has been produced by the source.” 1968 edition, p. 342. You could look it up.

    By the way, is the above response uncivil? Having been so once and having correctly been called out by Jim, I sincerely want to avoid offending anyone.

  19. Andrew Roesell Avatar
    Andrew Roesell

    Dear CrazyJD,

    Yes, it is uncivil. The root of this hatred is envy, I believe. Envy seeks to destroy or otherwise harm the object of its hatred and cannot be reasoned with, ultimately. It is a spiritual sickness and its sufferer is tormented and held captive by it. But we can pray for them.

    Sincerely,

    Andrew

  20. CrazyJD Avatar
    CrazyJD

    Andrew,

    Not clear to me whether you are saying my post is uncivil or his? 😉

  21. Andrew Roesell Avatar
    Andrew Roesell

    Dear CrazyJD,

    My comment was not directed to you.

    Sincerely,

    Andrew

Leave a Reply

Read More