1 Sounds like you're starting to get an inkling as to why Google has to filter you out. They've got their brand to protect, and don't want to be associated with threatening content. I've been on left-wing and right-wing discussion boards, and the left-wing boards police their objectionable content (death threats and the like) much better than the right-wing boards do. Lefties are also a lot less likely to make the threats in the first place. I'm sure someone here could quote some instances of that sort of thing on left-wing boards, but they're generally removed when pointed out. Here, as on other right-wing boards, they tend to be left alone or even encouraged. I commend you for taking a step in the right direction, Vin.

2 Case in point. (Although changehappens gets points for originality - killing people to use them for chum. Nice.) I should add that it isn't just the boards that Google is taking umbrage with - it's the content, as well. You're completely within your rights to taunt Muslims, post Muhammad cartoons, and the like - just don't expect a corporation like Google to go along with it (any more than Viacom did with South Park). I'm sure Google still links to counterterrorism blogs - just ones that conduct themselves in a more civil manner. Don't blame Google for making a business decision. Rupert Murdoch would do the same thing.

3 This isn't a forum, it's a blog. Big difference. I could care less about Google, Google is just a thing. I care about people, like my good friend Rusty Shackleford, and his reputation, which is being tarnished by some commenters.

4 OK, fine. I'm just saying your cohorts cared enough to post about it, and linked to two other blogs that did, too. Just thought it was ironic that die-hard capitalists couldn't see it as a business decision, rather a conspiracy by "left-leaning Google". Left, right - they go wherever the money is. Pardon me for ranting on in your thread. I'm done now.

5 How about killing everyone but Jennifer Love Hewitt, Alyssa Milano, Tiffani Theissen and myself?

6 Now it's been a couple months since I've spent any time reading a left-wing blog, but personally, I always found it odd that the left-wing sites rarely (and I mean very rarely) featured a dissenting voice, respectfully or otherwise. Think they're over-policing? I do. I've posted at Kos, DU and HuffPo and seen my comments disappear or never appear at all, even though I took special pains to be respectful. They have the right to delete anything they want, but in doing so, they present an inaccurate picture and promulgate a single and narrow view. Some people feel more comfortable sitting around and patting each other on the back with no challenges cluttering their world view or monitors. It's not for me though. We get a lot of dissent at Jawa. And a lot of healthy argument that is bound to produce a few insults. Sometimes it goes overboard with the threats and the "kill 'em all" comments, but ... I think the real complaint being made here is not as Theo suggests, that Jawa is too hateful for Google news feeds, but that Google regularly features "news" sites that consistently disseminate glaringly false information and obvious propaganda while eliminating other sites almost arbitrarily. There are far too many instances belying their "fairness doctrine" and "pecking order" assertions. I guess it's all in "how" one promotes hatred and encouragement toward ill action. Just do it subtley and look "official" and voila! you're in. Google shouldn't remove Jawa from its news feeds because of complaints or for not censoring its comments, but because it's a blog and not set up as a real news site. Google has a blog search function. We don't see Kos or DU or command-post in their news feeds, but we sure have HuffPo and uruknet! The fact that Google's officers and staff do not hide their leftist, even socialist, views doesn't help them. The fact that they so willingly censor content for certain markets doesn't lend much credence to their denials. The fact that for years now you can still type in "failure" and George Bush's bio is still the first result doesn't help.

7 The left-wing blogs often delete comments at the drop of a hat when those comments disturb their fragile view of the world. Anyone who disagrees with the left-wing consensus is often instantly branded a "troll." Daily Kos, for example, has a ruthlessly efficient post deletion mechanism. In my case, I learned that just asking questions about the post deletion mechanism can get you branded as a troll. Once a poster is branded a troll, his or her posts will be summarily deleted, as nothing he or she says, no matter how well-reasoned and rational, is considered worth listening to. The left perceives a need to control speech, while the right-wing blogs are generally much more accepting of free speech. This is a microcosm of the world. Where the right runs things in the world (e.g., modern Europe, the U.S.), we have often seen noise, disagreement and disorder. Where the left runs things (Soviet Union, China, Cuba) things are generally much quieter and orderly. Some may believe it is because communists are just a lot happier. I don't. Free speech, while it certainly has its benefits, also has its attendant costs (dissention, hurt feelings, mixed messages to outsiders, etc.). Controlled speech, while it has its own benefits, often carries a much greater price (fear, supression of good ideas, gulags, massacres, etc.).

8 Very well put, Ragnar.

9 Theo, and any other libturd who reads this, you are liars and hypocrites, as well as enemy propagandists, and will never be taken seriously by anyone with a brain as long as you continue to be so. Google News carries lots of pro-jihadi websites where they make regular exhortations to kill non-muslims, but are they getting dropped? No. Liberals are scum, you know the rest.

10 Can you just shut up and kill someone or try to so we don't have to listen to your inane rantings anymore? I'll even give you my address and you can come and try for me. How about it, IM?

11 >>Theo, and any other libturd who reads this, you are liars and hypocrites, as well as enemy propagandists, and will never be taken seriously by anyone with a brain as long as you continue to be so. Google News carries lots of pro-jihadi websites where they make regular exhortations to kill non-muslims, but are they getting dropped? No. Liberals are scum, you know the rest. Seriously, kid, you listen to way too much Insane Clown Posse. Put the CD down, drop the copy of Rage, take off the trenchcoat, and re-integrate into modern society.

12 I'm all for excluding rabid ranting - it detracts from the quality of any Blog and makes the host look dumb and besides, anyone who can use a computer can express themselves in better ways if they want to. I'm all for excluding repeat trolls as well, but then since I'm too lazy to create a blog, my opinion doesn't count for a whole lot in such matters.

13 >>>The left-wing blogs often delete comments at the drop of a hat when those comments disturb their fragile view of the world. That's why I don't bother with Leftwing blogs. First they force you to register, and if you don't tow the party line your comments get deleted even when you walk on eggshells to be respectful so as not to get deleted! But yet in their minds they're all about "free speech." lol! when you point out the obvious to them, they say the 1st Amendment only applies to government, not private entities and if you don't like it just leave.

14 The common masses are morally incapable of handling freedom and must have right imposed upon them.

15 I disagree about your collective ascertions that liberal blogs police content any more than right wing blogs. Look at the big ones- LGF, Red State, The Freepers... They all ban without warning if you question their dogma or sanity... On the majority of Lefty blogs, you're definitely going to be labeled a troll for dropping rascist, ignorant, disruptive, or abusive comments, but rarely are you banned outright without warning. That's a Pajamas Media/ Freeper M.O. To my knowledge, I've never heard of a lefty blog banning without several warnings... No offense to this fine sight, of course. As for the Google thing, well, no shit, they don't want to be associated with hate speech. Call it what it is. Terms like "Gutter Religion" (Grey Turkey) Or sweeping baseless denegration of a race of people is hate speech. Just because some don't have a problem using it (being comfortable in your own rascist skin must feel good) doesn't mean its acceptable for public consumption. It's just a sign of the growing ignorance in some quarters. More Education would be a good start. Read a book, for christ's sake. I've been to Northern Africa- yeah, it's a troubled region, but that doesn't mean they couldn't use some honest help into the 21st century. People's people, ya know? Just the situations that we find ourselves in differ.

16 >>>Look at the big ones- LGF, Red State, The Freepers... >>>They all ban without warning if you question their dogma or sanity. Blue Patriot, that's not true. If you spent any time at all at LGF you'd know a Lefty troll called "Gordon" has been posting their for years. He gets harrassed, but he never gets deleted and he hasn't been banned. Now compare that to my treatment at Kos. Not ten minutes after I post a comment it's gone. That's the God honest truth. So why bother.

17 OK, Carlos, I had the exact same treatment at LGF, Confederate Yankee, and Free Republic. In fact, I never got to post a second comment after disagreeing with someone at FR. Just banned. I think we agree that civil discourse is probably best, that some people don't like to hear discenting opinions, and people with their own blogs can do WTF they want. YEAH, AMERICA!

18 >>Now compare that to my treatment at Kos. Not ten minutes after I post a comment it's gone. That's the God honest truth. So why bother. Well, here's the thing, Carlos. Since I've been here I've seen you post almost nothing but strings of insults and profanity. In fact, the very first post I saw from you was exactly that, and it continued through the rest of the thread. To some extent you've shown an ability to have a rational discussion, as in the "Cold, Hard Cash" post, but the majority of what I've seen from you is still irrational and profane ranting. As an observer here, what do you think is more likely to me to be the cause of your ban? That you were mistreated, or that you were just being abusive and you were banned for it? This is why I hate blogs and bloggers. All this whining, yet, for the most part, it seems to me that all the people being kicked out of left/right/up/down/over/under blogs are simply being treated like children because they were acting like children. As an aside, my experience with LGF was a bit different. I trolled them twice for kicks and got banned the second time. I would note however that while I was banned for merely trolling, two other people who threatened to beat me up and, in one case, stab me, still post there. The message this sends, of course, is that if you annoy us, we'll ban you, but we don't have a problem with our members making death threats. So, yes, I deserved my ban from LGF, but at the same time they sure seem to have a highly suspect notion of what constitutes "bad behavior".

19 The key term there is annoyed. It's more the overall level of annoyance that gets you. TxMxP thinks he was the first annoying thing that ever happened. I doubt it. probably just the straw the broke the camels back. Wrong place wrong time.

20 Are you implying that LGF doesn't ban blatant trolls? I will assure you, they do, when/if they're discovered, as do most other sites.

21 >>>So, yes, I deserved my ban from LGF, but at the same time they sure seem to have a highly suspect notion of what constitutes "bad behavior". TmMxP, "bad behaviour" is where commenters personally harrass other commenters, kinda like what you constantly do. You see, I have stong opinions about Liberalism, and the Left, and radical islam, etc. It's no secret I loathe them. But I generally refrain from personally harrassing other commenters who happen to be Leftwingers. I let them say their peace and respond to the substance of their comments without feeling the need to personally attack them-- the way you do. That is unless they themselves are personal harrassers-- like you are. Then I feel free to get on their case and make their lives miserable while they're on this blog. I've found they don't last very long here after that. You're getting pretty close to the point.

22 Carlos, this is the very first thing you said to me: >>You come hear to troll, and then you pretend outrage when you're told to fuck off. lol! Lefty orwellianism knows no bounds. Come hear with a respectful attitude to argue the issues, and you'll be treated respectfully. Otherwise kindly fuckoff. After I took exception to Bluto issuing a string of epithets, threats, and insults as a way to ask that another poster stop being abrasive. WHO is the harrasser here?

23 Suddenly everyone seems obsessed here with "rational discourse." I actually like a fair amount of random ranting. But then I actually like heavy metal. TxMxP: you say that you hate blogs and bloggers - I don't understand why you continue to read and comment. I think you just don't like people with opinions different than yours, and you are trying to either change them, or stop them.

24 JC personally sees to it that ratings go up and numbers increase!

25 TxMxP, like I've told you numerous times before, if you come here with attitude (in that case towards Bluto), you'll get attitude back. But if you come here realizing you are on other people's turf and act respectfully you'll be treated respectfully in return, at least by me. I treat people they way they deserve to be treated. Doesn't mean you aren't allowed to blow off steam from time to time, but you came here and were rude right off the bat.

26 First of all, I have no interest in "stopping" opinions. I defy you to find one example of where I've tried to do any such thing. Second of all, there's nothing wrong with trying to change opinions. I realize that some on this type of site feel otherwise, but I happen to think that honest dialogue between competing ideologies is usually better than worse. Finally, I hate blogs and bloggers for the simple reason that they basically stop anything approaching honest dialogue. Most people who hold strong enough opinions to rant on things seem to also have an amazing lack of perspective on those opinions, and a complete and total lack of evidence to support them. I blame things like blogs for that problem because they create echo chambers where the most "amusing" post wins, no matter how devoid of any actual information it might be. I'd rather try and fix that problem (though I realize I can't) than just ignore it. Besides, why do you care? If your opinion is so firmly rooted in fact that it won't change, the worst that can happen is that I'll give you the opportunity to exercise your arguments so you can better make them in the future.

27 Wow, a halfway decent back-and-forth between liberals and conservatives on the internet. Maybe there's hope for us, after all. Being an independent thinker (but not necessarily and Independent) means applying the same standard to both parties. In other words, if the situation were reversed, would you argue the same way? Or are you parroting party talking points? Example: Would conservatives be up in arms if Bill Clinton was trampling on the Constitution or spending us into monstrous debt? Or do you defend the $90,000-in-his-freezer Democratic congressman, yet say nasty things about Tom DeLay's indictment? etc. etc.

28 I don't like ANY of them. As far as I'm concerned this entire ridiculous government is out of control and has been since at LEAST Nixon, probably before that. I'm sometimes inclined to think that the entire thing started falling apart after the Spanish-American war. However, at the moment the "right" is in control and it's tearing things apart, so that's who I complain the most about. When the liberals are in control and everybody has to wear a fanny pack to filter their farts in case it might kill a common housefly, then I'll be up in arms against them. All I want is to be left alone. I hate politics. I hate government. But I can't just ignore them because they're constantly forcing their way into my life. If it's the liberals, they're trying to tell me I have to put something new on my car to improve the emissions or I can't put a manger scene on the sidewalk by my house (although I'm not religious) because it might offend some mysterious shadowperson in the bushes. If it's the conservatives they're telling me I can't watch certain TV shows because they're "bad" for showing a nipple or I have to worry about them snooping on my damn library records. I just want left alone. I don't want to be fighting with everybody all the time. But, frankly, if I have to bash heads to try and temper some of this insane radicalization that's going on in this country, so be it. That goes for BOTH sides because BOTH side are constantly trying to screw me.

29 Hey, TxMxP - that's a swell bubble you're living in. You may live enough of a hermitous existence not to affect anyone, but I doubt it. Government is a very necessary "evil", because without it, we'd tear each other apart, quite frankly. Humanity isn't exactly a noble species. Government keeps us (sometimes) playing by the same rules and (sometimes) keeps us safe. No one said it's perfect - all the better reason to get involved and right what's wrong with it.

30 I don't want anarchy, I want a small system of government that provides a structure in which people can resolve material differences. What we have now is a government that's trying to provide a ready-made solution for every single problem in the country so that people don't have to address their own issues.

31 TxMxP: you write: "First of all, I have no interest in "stopping" opinions. I defy you to find one example of where I've tried to do any such thing." then you write: "...if I have to bash heads to try and temper some of this insane radicalization that's going on in this country, so be it." regarding LGF, you write: "I trolled them twice for kicks and got banned the second time. I would note however that while I was banned for merely trolling, two other people who threatened to beat me up and, in one case, stab me, still post there." I say: I think trolling for kicks is one way of stopping opinions. I think it's a little ridiculous to admit to be trolling for kicks and then be annoyed because someone slams you back in a manner not to your liking. And you're annoyed because they still post there. Were they trolling for kicks? Probably not. As Howie noted, it sounds like annoy is the key word here.

32 "I want a small system of government that provides a structure in which people can resolve material differences. What we have now is a government that's trying to provide a ready-made solution for every single problem in the country so that people don't have to address their own issues." Now THAT I'll get behind one hundred percent.

33 Heroic, Trolling for kicks, in this case, sounds more like going to a site like LGF when your political flag blows to the left. You know that the majority of opinions may be counter to your own, but you go to that blog for the lively discussion, or to laugh at the monkeys, or whatever. That in itself isn't wrong, but you cross a line when you tear down meaningful discussions for the sake of name calling, topic hi-jacking, etc. We all could probably be accused of being a bit quick to jump on a person who's first post has an obvious slant that opposes our own. "Shut them up and shut them down."

34 How do you figure I'm "stopping opinions". What action have I taken that is preventing anybody from stating their opinion on any matter on this or any other site? How does trolling do that? I'd argue to the contrary, in fact. When you troll people, half the time you wind up with BETTER discussions than if you just left them alone. If it weren't for slashdot trolls, there'd NEVER be a decent discussion on that site. And when I say "bash heads", I mean like what I'm doing here. My coming in here and forcefully stating my opinions in no way prevents anybody from stating theirs. To the contrary, you'd be hard pressed to argue that it hasn't ENCOURAGED people to state their opinions. >>...then be annoyed because someone slams you back in a manner not to your liking. Uh. Yea. Sorry for finding death threats directed at me offensive. >>Now THAT I'll get behind one hundred percent. But, it will never happen because people are too busy radicalizing on either side of the fence.

35 TxMxP: I think you're too pessimistic. There are a number of decent blogs out there where rational discourse and good ideas are being discussed. I won't recommend any because that is something that is determined by the reader. But I visit a few that are quite reasonable and logical and the comment sections are populated with some very smart people. I tend to lean a little right. (According to a couple people here recently though, I'm anywhere from a socialist to a bigot to a nazi and today I go called a hypocrite.) I'm not so unreasonable though and I can dish it out, but I can take it too. I only get worked up when someone keeps telling me I'm wrong on just about every thing I say and like anyone else here, I'm not ALWAYS wrong. I know that looks like one big run-on sentence and it probably is, but well, I just want to be clear.

36 The problem here isn't liberal vs. conservative and who carries the biggest stick. It's the problem that the MSM caused and it's now returning with the likes of Google. The MSM squelched diversity on the airwaves. As a result the internet became a competiting way to express almost overnight. Well done too. Now here comes Google, using public infrstructure, much like the public airwaves the MSM uses, trying to impose its own vision of acceptable thought. Anyone that has read MyPetJawa for about 10 minutes would know its edgy, opinionated from the right but not hate. How many other sites are excluded from search engine results at Google because Google doesn't like them? Or how many sites are returned but so low in the hierarchy that nobody would scroll down to find it, just because Google may not like their editorial slant? Censorship sucks anyway the cuts are made. Today it's from the left, tomorrow it could be from the right.

37 Isn't it wonderful I slipped through the cracks!

38 Guys, why do you bother trying to speak truth to these lefturd trolls? They lie in every post, and if they ever utter the truth, it's by accident and they repent immediately and tell a lie twice as great to cover it up. They're liars and idiots, and you're not going to get anywhere wasting your time on them.

39 Blue dress patriot by his own admission above is a troll.

40 Notice blue dress patriot now decides for us what is acceptable for public consumption. Thats exactly what the mad moolas in islam decide also. Don't know who this marxist prick is but he sure doesn't believe in freedom of expression for all. Only for his commie leaning leftard buddies. Change your dress leftard sissy.