It feels a little hard to believe, but we’re marking another milestone on the site today: 9,000 posts in a little over 4 years.

Many, many, many thanks to my fellow contributors who have written thousands of thoughtful posts. And many, many, many thanks to all of you who read and comment everyday.

Here’s to the next 9000!

Cheers,
Justin

UPDATE:

Soon we’ll be over 9,000!!!!!

Thanks bubbles!

I’ve heard quite a bit of back channel chatter about the last two posts on the blog and I wanted to explain how I was responsible for the topic even showing up here in the first place.

Doug and I are friends on Facebook and he feeds his posts through his profile. I saw the bowing post and we had the following conversation…

As far as John’s post, well, I give everybody the same access to post when I invite them to have an account. That means he can come and go as he pleases. And that policy is my responsibility too. (Although I’d prefer the headlines were less sensationalist than what John wrote, and have told him as much.)

So, not that I want this to turn into a prolonged fight over the protocols of bowing, but if you have an account here to blog…tell us what you think.

In any event, hope this clears up any confusion.

Also, I hope you don’t unsubscribe because of a couple posts rubbed you the wrong way. After all, that’s sort of the point of this site.

I found this over at Power Line and I’m reprinting it in full…

I’m delighted to be collaborating with Joe Trippi, one of my favorite liberals, on a bipartisan project to support America’s veterans. The project is called the Eleven Eleven campaign; the objective is to get 11 million Americans to contribute $11 apiece to support America’s vets. The campaign will be internet-driven, and all bloggers are invited to participate. Here is a description of the campaign:

This Veterans Day marks the beginning of The Eleven Eleven Campaign — a nationwide campaign by BeyondTribute.org to change the way America honors its Veterans.

The objective of the campaign is simple: to get 11 million Americans to donate $11 to support America’s Veterans. We’ve made giving back to our Vets simple through a national Text to Give Campaign (simply text “VETS” to 85944 to contribute).

Contributions are distributed directly to Beyond Tribute’s 11 coalition partners, who specialize in providing direct services and advocacy for Veterans of all eras and conflicts, including World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, Persian Gulf War, and the present day conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We’re asking bloggers from around the web and across the political spectrum to join us in making this Veteran’s Day a holiday not about sales in the stores, but about making a difference in the lives of our Veterans.

To that end, we’d like to invite you to a special campaign announcement call for bloggers this Monday, November 9th at 8 pm ET/5 pm PT. Join Gold Star Mother Ruth Stonesifer, Democratic political consultant Joe Trippi and Power Line blogger John Hinderaker to learn more about the campaign and how you can help make this November 11th a day when bloggers come together to support our Vets.

Please RSVP to the conference call here:

http://action.eleven-eleven.org/t/5400/signUp.jsp?key=2817

Dial-in Number: 1-213-289-0500

Participant Access Code: 4670471

The Eleven Eleven Campaign begins on Veterans Day, 2009 – but it continues every day until our goal is reached: bringing 11 million Americans together to change the way America honors its Veterans – moving beyond tribute to action and support.

The organizations that will receive support from the campaign include groups like American Gold Star Mothers, the Wounded Warriors Project, the VFW Foundation, and more. If you have a web site, please join us on the conference call tomorrow at 5 Pacific, 8 Eastern for more information. Thanks!

Do you have $11 to spare on November 11th? Hope so, but if not please promote this on your blog and/or social spaces so the word is spread far and wide.

Also, do check out some of the other categories, as there are many great blogs (and bloggers) that are nominated every year.

First, E.D. Kain of The League of Ordinary Gentlemen and New Majority has started up a new health care policy blog over at True/Slant called American Tory. It’s a must read in only its first week.

Then Bill Dupray of DC Republican Examiner and Patriot Room gives you political horse race analysis from the conservative perspective on American Conservative. You’ll see me sparring with Bill often on how 2010 will shake out, so don’t miss the fireworks.

Last, but certainly not least, Rick Ungar (formerly of Culture 11) presents The Policy Page, a blog focused on health care from a very informed, liberal perspective.

All are worth your time, even if you have none to spare.

The last time we wrote a post that didn’t have at least one comment on it was in late September. So I just wanted to thank you for reading, writing and helping me continue this grand experiment in creating a place where we can agree to disagree without throwing bombs.

Well, sometimes. :-)

Onward and upward!

Ahhh Wordpress…I love you most of the time, but 5% of the time…

Moving on…

To all of those Donklephant commenters, this one’s for you…

How am I supposed to complete my English assignment on finding fallacy in political blogs when all you people keep backing up your sources!? Where are all the non sequiturs and equivocations!? I suppose there were a few hasty generalizations, but I need more please. Don’t make me read anymore politics!

So yes, while we often disagree it’s the way we do it that’s important. People are taking note and please don’t ever forget that.

Between multiple outside projects and general blogging malaise at the end of the summer, I’m fairly unmotivated.

Pile on top of that the fact that most of the people I invited to help out on the blog a couple months ago have either dropped out, barely done anything or haven’t even started (with the notable exception of Nancy Hanks. Thank you Nancy!) and, well, yeah…I’m sure you understand my frustrations.

Don’t worry. I’m not quitting. Just letting you know what’s going on, why it’s going on and how I’m feeling.

I’ll jump back on it soon enough, but expect the next week or so to be light as I get back into the swing of things.

The latest Carnival of Divided Government – Labor Day Edition has been posted at my home blog. The carnival is an irregularly scheduled compilation of links to new and traditional media commentary on the topic of divided government. I’ll highlight one link here.

This excerpt is from a 1959 letter written by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, and referenced in a recent New York Times Op-Ed by Max Blumenthal – “Ike’s Other Warning“.

Eisenhower wrote the letter in reply to one Robert J. Biggs, a WWII veteran. Biggs was dissatisfied with the level of discourse in Washington D.C. and thought the President was not projecting sufficient strength and certitude. He goes on to say that Americans need “more of the attitude of a commanding officer who knows the goal and the mission and states, without evasion, the way it is to be done.” Ike took the time to write a long, thoughtful and honest letter to Mr. Biggs:

“As you know, for four years our government has been a divided government, with the Administration confronted by a Congress controlled by the opposition–and the two working, if not in opposition, at least at cross purposes much of the time. An example is the sparring that seems to go on constantly over our defense situation–and specifically over our missile position. It is difficult indeed to maintain a reasoned and accurately informed understanding of our defense situation on the part of our citizenry when many prominent officials, possessing no standing or expertness except as they themselves claim it, attempt to further their own ideas or interests by resort to statements more distinguished by stridency than by accuracy.”

As an exercise to the reader, I suggest rereading the above paragraph substituting “health care reform” for “missile position” and “defense situation”.

Ike continues the letter, explaining in more detail the burden and responsibility that our messy, democratic government puts on the citizenry:

“Even if this division in the government did not exist, I doubt that citizens like yourself could ever, under our democratic system, be provided with the universal degree of certainty, the confidence in their understanding of our problems, and the clear guidance from higher authority that you believe needed. Such unity is not only logical but indeed indispensable in a successful military organization, but in a democracy debate is the breath of life. This is to me what Lincoln meant by government “of the people, by the people, and for the people. … But while this responsibility is a taxing one to a free people it is their great strength as well–from millions of individual free minds come new ideas, new adjustments to emerging problems, and tremendous vigor, vitality and progress.”

The legion of bloggers and pundits complaining about the tone of the health care debate, and the difficulty of passing a health care reform bill because the masses seems insufficiently appreciative, would benefit from reading Ike’s letter.

H/T – Septimus at The Whig Blog

More at Divided We Stand United We Fall

Earlier today a post entitled “The Rules Of Zionism” was published on the site by a new contributor. Upon reading it I felt the tone was entirely inappropriate, so I immediately took it down. Also, at mw’s request, I took his one-sided post down too.

So why did this happen?

On Donklephant, my policy with contributors has always been very hands off. Reason being is I’ve set up a platform to welcome a variety of voices to post and I trust that everybody will respect the spirit of the site. Given that, I don’t read posts from contributors before they’re posted. Generally this has worked and I’ve rarely had to take the actions I took this morning.

That doesn’t mean it won’t happen again in the future, but I wanted all of you to know how things work behind the scenes to offer more of an explanation as to why it was posted.

One last note, I took down all of the new contributor’s posts and he won’t be blogging here anymore since his tone obviously doesn’t line up with the spirit of the site.

Please feel free to ask questions in the comments.

Most of the new authors will be starting immediately, but some might chime in a bit later in the month given vacation and other commitments. However, my guess is that the number of posts you’ll see on Donklephant will almost double in the next month, which means now you’ll be even less productive at work. :-)

So then, let’s meet the new writers!

Daily Bloggers

1. Byron Tau of Heartless and Brainless will cover freedom of expression, intellectual property and first amendment issues, as well as anti-nanny state news and the ins and outs of the political process.
2. Solomon Kleinsmith, formerly of New Nebraska, is currently pursuing a Masters degree in Public Administration, with an emphasis in nonprofit management. He’ll be blogging about politics in general, but don’t be surprised if you hear him talk about ways moderates and centrist/mainstream independents can gain a greater foothold.
3. David Anthony Hohol of Relativity Online has lived in Dubai the last six years and during that time has also spent time in Syria, Iran, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, and Sudan. He’ll be giving us an insider’s perspective on issues facing the Middle East and beyond.
4. The blogger who will be known simply as “Jacob” joins us from outside of the day-to-day blogosphere, and brings to the table a sharp wit and a unique voice. He’ll be blogging on the weekends with longer form editorials and roundups of reader comments that were made throughout the week.

Guest Bloggers

1. Jill Miller Zimon of BlogHer’s Writes Like She Talks is a well known moderate blogger who has appeared on CNN and is running for City Council in Pepper Pike, OH. She’ll be joining us from time to time with thoughts about issues facing women and politics in general.
2. Nancy Hanks of The Hankster is a true political independent and will be covering news and opinion for independent voters.
3. And last, but certainly not least, Tully D. Blogg (yes, Tully from the comments section) will be mixing it up on any issue you can think of. But be forewarned, if you’re looking to debate him you better bring your A-game and a whole mess of statistics.

Also, in the next few months you’ll see a brand new design for the site that will feature dynamically gathered news, a more attractive design, threaded comments, the ability to sign in with your various social accounts and much, much more. I’m VERY excited about it and my hope is that you will be too. And if you want to hit the tip jar to help out a bit, well, I won’t complain. :-)

By the way, many thanks to all who applied. It was great getting a chance to talk to you and I look forward to continuing the conversations on this blog and elsewhere.

That’s it for now. Hope you enjoy all the new voices!

I wrote about this last week and I was pleasantly surprised with the number of people who’ve applied so far. Lots of great submissions and selecting the best has been difficult indeed.

However, since this is vacation season I wanted to make sure we weren’t missing anybody, so I’m posting this list of qualifications and expectations one more time just in case:

• You must understand the basics of blogging (linking to other sites, embedding pictures and video, etc.), and having a blog is preferred but not absolutely necessary.
• Good grammar and punctuation skills are a must.
• You can be affiliated with any political party or none at all. However, realize that this is a site that hews closer to the middle, so if you believe that the government should take over all means of production or perhaps you think the US should be converted into a religious state, well, you may not want to apply.
• You should be willing to commit to a minimum of 5 posts per week.
• If you’re engaged in multiple social media platforms (Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Digg, etc.) and are willing to use them to promote your posts, that would be a big plus.
• Be able to interact with the commenters on your posts and keep the conversation on track.
• Stay true to the spirit of the site and always make sure you keep your arguments sharp and your language clean.
• Opportunities for compensation may develop as we get closer to election season, but for right now these spots are unpaid.

So, if you’re interested, drop me at line at justin at donklephant dot com and let’s talk. I’ll be making my decision on who will join the team this week and will announce it next Monday, July 14th…the 4th anniversary of the site’s launch!

Stay tuned…

I’m looking to add 3 bloggers to the roster, and the following is a list of some qualifications I’d be looking for and expectations I’d have:

• You must understand the basics of blogging (linking to other sites, embedding pictures and video, etc.), and having a blog is preferred but not absolutely necessary.
• Good grammar and punctuation skills are a must.
• You can be affiliated with any political party or none at all. However, realize that this is a site that hews closer to the middle, so if you believe that the government should take over all means of production or perhaps you think the US should be converted into a religious state, well, you may not want to apply.
• You should be willing to commit to a minimum of 5 posts per week.
• If you’re engaged in multiple social media platforms (Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Digg, etc.) and are willing to use them to promote your posts, that would be a big plus.
• Be able to interact with the commenters on your posts and keep the conversation on track.
• Stay true to the spirit of the site and always make sure you keep your arguments sharp and your language clean.
• Opportunities for compensation may develop as we get closer to election season, but for right now these spots are unpaid.

So, if you’re interested drop me at line at justin at donklephant dot com and let’s talk.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

So, I’ve been invited to join a cool new site called True/Slant and my first day was yesterday. No doubt some of you who follow my Twitter feed know this already.

Here are my first stories…

• Shorter Sanford: King David Didn’t Step Down, So…
• Nokia And Siemens Aiding Iranian Government?
• Iran’s Balloon Protest Paints The Sky Green
• Quote Of The Day – Whacko For Jacko
• 2012 Primary Calendars & Rules To Be Set Soon
• Mark Sanford Stays In Office. Lindsey Graham Supports?
• Romney In Prime Position For 2012 Run

So what does this mean for Donklephant?

Ultimately I think it’ll bring the site more exposure, but it may mean I post a little less original content here since it’s sort of a downtime in the political blogosphere as a whole and True/Slant is a paying gig. That means I’ll be crossposting content over here with a link to the story at True/Slant.

But it doesn’t mean that Donklephant is going away or anything like that. In fact, I’m working on a redesign that will make the site all shiny, new and easily shared with your social circles. Trust me, it’ll be cool.

Also, I’ve been toying with the idea of allowing more contributors on Donklephant and this has solidified it. I’ll have more details about that in a post next week.

As always, thanks for sticking with me throughout the years. And as long as you keep reading, I’ll keep posting.

Hey all,

Just found out about this blog and it’s disturbing. Basically, Iranian authorities are using Blogger blogs to ID protestors so they can arrest them.

Here’s how you can help:

• Visit the blog and at the very top there should be a button that says “Flag Blog.” Click that.
• This will send you to a page that features a bunch of different selections to choose from. Choose “Hate Speech” and then click “Continue.”
• Google will then ask if you really mean this and click that you want to “Continue.”
• If enough of us do this, the blog will be taken down automatically once it hits a certain threshold of complaints.

This is just one small way you can do your part and help out the folks in Iran who are fighting for their freedom. And if you’re on Twitter, PLEASE tweet about this and encourage your followers to RT it with this message: HELP! Iran using Blogger blogs to ID protesters 4 arrest. Please flag this blog as “Hate Speech.” http://tr.im/pnpa (pls RT!)

More as it develops…

UPDATE:
The blog has been removed!

Then here are 5 simple tips…

The purpose of this guide is to help you participate constructively in the Iranian election protests through Twitter.

1. Do NOT publicise proxy IP’s over twitter, and especially not using the #iranelection hashtag. Security forces are monitoring this hashtag, and the moment they identify a proxy IP they will block it in Iran. If you are creating new proxies for the Iranian bloggers, DM them to @stopAhmadi or @iran09 and they will distributed them discretely to bloggers in Iran.

2. Hashtags, the only two legitimate hashtags being used by bloggers in Iran are #iranelection and #gr88, other hashtag ideas run the risk of diluting the conversation.

3. Keep you bull$hit filter up! Security forces are now setting up twitter accounts to spread disinformation by posing as Iranian protesters. Please don’t retweet impetuosly, try to confirm information with reliable sources before retweeting. The legitimate sources are not hard to find and follow.

4. Help cover the bloggers: change your twitter settings so that your location is TEHRAN and your time zone is GMT +3.30. Security forces are hunting for bloggers using location and timezone searches. If we all become ‘Iranians’ it becomes much harder to find them.

5. Don’t blow their cover! If you discover a genuine source, please don’t publicise their name or location on a website. These bloggers are in REAL danger. Spread the word discretely through your own networks but don’t signpost them to the security forces. People are dying there, for real, please keep that in mind…

(h/t: Boing Boing)

First, Tully argues that anonymity doesn’t hurt the credibility of blogging…

Can you possibly set the bar any LOWER, Justin? Journalists have spent much of the last couple of decades proving that they deserve ZERO inherent respect for being journalists qua journalists, ably demonstrating that to much of the field objectivity had become little better than a mask to hide their blatant non-objectivity behind. This is just another form of the logical fallacy of the “argument from authority.”

Sorry, but in general arguments stand or fall on their own, not on the basis of who utters them. The recent history of “mainstream” journalism argues that as strongly as anything can. It mattered not one whit in RatherGate if Charles Johnson was named or anonymous; the “blinking memo” evidence he produced in moments stood on its own and could be reproduced and verified by anyone, and any impartial examination of Rather’s “evidence” showed that it was clearly quite suspect, that his stauts as a “journalist” had been used to lend it MUCH more weight than it deserved.

As others have pointed out, even the Founding Fathers recognized the principle of avoiding the fallacious argument from authority in a battle-of-opinion, and publicly debated the merits of governmental and political issues in anonymous/pseudonymous form precisely to (a) get away from the cheerleading and cult-of-personality issue and let their arguments stand or fall on their own, and (b) to put a buffer between themselves and those who would punish them simply for offering said arguments at all.

The question resolves to (at least) two distinct issues: the argument from authority (and the transparency argument is mostly a subset of that) and the idea that because the internet is NOT truly anonymous, that therefore anonymity/pseudonymity has no place in it. The first is self-demonstrably fallacious logic. The second is the same logic that, say, Operation Rescue has employed in publicly disseminating the home addresses and license plate numbers of clinic personnel and patients. It may be technically legal, but that doesn’t make it right. That anonymity/psuedonymity can be breached is not an argument against using anonymity/psuedonymity, only an argument against relying on it as an absolute.

In any case Whelan’s outing of publius (and publius’s personal baiting of Whelan) was irrelevant to the substantive arguments of either, and boils down to a conflict of personalities and a race to the bottom regarding who could best demonstrate that they could be the bigger jerk. (Obviously, Whelan “won” that heat.)

Then, John Burke sums up why remaining anonymous/pseudononymous isn’t a good call…

• Bloggers certainly have the right to use a pseudonym, but anyone who blogs anonymously should not cry about being outed at some point. If you stand to lose your job over what you’ve blogged, a prudent person would not blog. In Blevins case, he became influential enough as Publius to annoy another influential blogger who outed him. It’s also possible to be found out by your boss in a dozen other ways, even if your blogging is “a hobby.”
• It’s a hobby for almost everyone, in fact. Not much money here.
• Citing Hamilton, Madison and Jay gets you nowhere. A better analogy if you’re comparing us to the early days of the nation would be to the commonplace use of pseudonyms then to print malicious lies about one’s political rivals.
• While there are plenty of pseudonymous bloggers who are very nice and plenty of named bloggers who are very nasty, it’s hard not to believe that anonymnity fosters incivility, and over time, on balance, anonymous publishing coursens political discourse.
• Think of it this way: if every Sunday, The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal printed just one anonymous op-ed that slammed and slandered your favorite politician, would you think as highly of either paper as you do now?
• If not, then why should we not respect bloggers more when they put their names to their opinions? Not that we can force anyone to do anything, but we don’t have to take them as seriously, do we? And we don’t have to commiserate with them when a political rival outs them.

As stated in my previous post, I fall on Burke’s side and I sum it up as such…

The weight of the argument is hurt by the anonymous/pseudonymous nature of the author b/c the opposing viewpoint can take to other channels of communication and/or the argument will have to be taken up by people who can champion it via those channels, thus diluting the message.

Also, regardless of how you feel about the media, they’re out there everyday doing their thing and pushing everybody else to be transparent. So if you think bloggers can do the same thing behind an identity curtain, I’m sorry, but you’re mistaken. There’s less credibility in posting anonymously simply because of the mechanics of the media. Perhaps that will change in the future, but I don’t see how.

Last, let’s remember what the whole point of the post was. If you don’t want to get revealed, you may not want to blog. That’s what it all boils down to. The credibility issue was an aside. An important one, yes, but still an aside. Nobody was forcing Publius to write. Still, he felt compelled to. That’s fine. But there are consequences to that, especially since there’s a good likelihood that he lied to his employer and family members. So, is that really worth it? I don’t think so. After all, we live in the US and it’s not like he couldn’t find another job or agree to disagree with his family.

But don’t let us have all the fun.

What say you?

If you haven’t heard yet, a liberal blogger was outed over the weekend by a conservative blogger.

Fallout?

By and large, most of the folks I’ve read have come down on the side of the blogger who was formerly known as Publius. And hey, fair enough. I understand and respect the reasons why somebody would want their privacy. Also, the conservative did act incredibly immature.

However…

I also want to offer that those who want to remain anonymous in the highly public, emotionally charged atmosphere of the blogosphere are being a bit naive. I say this knowing full well that Donklephant has had its fair share of anonymous bloggers. Again, I respect everybody’s right to privacy if that’s the route they want to take, and I’ll never out you. But that doesn’t mean somebody else will feel the same way.

Listen, all bloggers (public or anonymous) should get into this game with a full understanding of the risks and consequences. You have to ask yourself if you really think it’s worth losing your job or alienating your friends and family just because you want to post your thoughts publicly. Because that’s pretty much what blogging boils down to.

Oh, and then there’s also that part where you let people comment on your thoughts. Most blogs do this, but there are notable exceptions like Instapundit and Andrew Sullivan. And sometimes comments can be great and you connect with some fantastic people, but it can also get really awful too and you run into some real nut jobs. And, unfortunately, politics brings out many more nut jobs than fantastic people. You have NO idea how many comments I delete that call for people’s deaths, are blatantly racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. It’s crazy. I’m not complaining, but that’s the reality and it can sometimes be a grind.

Also, is anonymity even appropriate? Wasn’t blogging supposed to bring about increased transparency? Aren’t we trying to demand the same respect as journalists? And let’s face it, the blogosphere has broken a few important stories, but by and large we’re all talking about the stuff that the mainstream media reports. That’s understandable given the time commitment it takes to break news, but the less transparency there is in the blogosphere the more it works to undermine our overall goals.

Please understand that I’m not advocating people being outed. But, as I said before, don’t be surprised if somebody chooses to at least tell people who you are if you choose to join the conversation. Anonymity certainly isn’t a right and it shouldn’t be treated as such.

One last note…why hide? Why not share your opinions with your friends, family and employers? I understand that the answer to that is alienation and retribution, but if you really feel compelled to blog in the first place I think you owe it to the people who are closest to you some transparency. And to that point, I listed my blog on my resume when applying for my present job and I even have it as part of my LinkedIn profile. Imagine if I hadn’t told them and they found out after the fact. Think they’d feel as if they couldn’t trust me? And whose fault would that be?

So there it is. I hope this added something to the conversation. Feel free to disagree, but do so respectfully.

Gee, sounds familiar…

And what’s the response from his blogosphere brethren?

Attack, attack, attack.

Ugh.