Happy 6th Blogiversary, ST blog!


Can you believe I forgot my own anniversary? :o

It was 6 years ago this past Saturday that I decided to start blogging my thoughts on the issues of the day, primarily as a result of being disgusted – once again – with the liberally biased nature of our mainstream media. My first post was a defense of Rush Limbaugh during the controversy over the comments he made about Donovan McNabb, and 6 years later, I’m still hammering the mainstream media because they’ve only gotten worse.

I don’t have the highest traffic numbers, and don’t have the highest number of linkers back, but the longer you blog, the more you realize that it’s not about the amount of attention and/or accolades you may receive, but instead about making your voice heard, whether you have a gigantic audience or not. It’s about getting the word out, whether 2 million people are hitting your site a day or 2,000. Just one person reading what you have to say can be influenced to your side of the debate, or inspired enough to get involved for the first time. Not only that, but intrepid bloggers oftentimes do the digging that the mainstream media won’t do, finding out things about certain movers and shakers in Washington, DC whose shady, questionable pasts would otherwise continue to stay swept under the rug. Others in the blogosphere have made it their life’s mission to painstakingly document the liberal bias alive and well in the mainstream media. There are many more niches covered in the blogosphere as well; it would be impossible to mention them all here.

From time to time I get first-time bloggers emailing me asking me for advice, and what I tell them is, more than anything else, they must remember to stay true to who they are and their respective beliefs. I tell them to not join in with the chorus if they feel differently about an issue than most people do, but at the same time don’t be purposely contrarian and deliberately provocative just for the hell of it. Conservatives are contrarian provacative by nature, simply due to the fact that what they say typically goes against the conventional wisdom about things like “cultural norms” and political correctness. There’s no need for juicing up provacation; we can, have, and will continue to do fine provoking the status quo just being ourselves. And there’s also no use in trying to “be like” another blogger. Be yourself. You’ll be much happier and more fulfilled as a blogger in the long run. Just trying to be like someone else won’t get you anywhere. Readers and other bloggers alike appreciate uniqueness and individuality, not just someone in it to solely be a “me, too.”

I’d also like to send a shout out to one of my blogging heroes, Ed Morrissey, whose 6th blogiversary was on the same date as mine. He started out blogging at the Captain’s Quarters blog, where he worked hard and garnered a large following, and then moved to blog alongside AllahPundit at Michelle Malkin’s Hot Air blog, one of the premiere blogs in the ‘sphere. Here’s to many more, Ed!

I can’t add much more to what I’ve said in previous blogiversary posts (five, four, three, two) except a lot more thank yous to everyone who has continued to visit and support this blog, and to the newbies who have started visiting the blog in the last year and as a result made it a frequent stop in their blogosphere travels. I look forward to the next year of not only this blog growing, but myself and my readers growing together, also.


The ridiculous lengths some Polanksi supporters will go through to defend “their guy”


Just when you thought you’d seen it all. Check out Patterico’s blog (here and here) for mountains of evidence that the associate producer of a sympathetic Polanksi “documentary” from last year has been posting anonymous comments in several threads Patterico wrote about the topic, comments she wrote in attempts at both defending Polanksi and personally attacking Patterico.

The moral of the story? If you’re going to mess with Patterico, prepare to be verbally b*tch-slapped.

Related to all this, Mark Steyn puts the final nail in the coffin of the Hollyweirdos who have defended Polanksi over the last week in response to his detention in Switzerland:

Let us stipulate that Roman Polanski has memories few of us would wish to bear. He is the only movie director to have had three generations of his immediate family murdered – his mother, by the Nazis; his wife and unborn child, by Charles Manson’s acolytes. The only reason he didn’t wind up with his parents in Auschwitz is that, when he was 8, his father cut a hole in the barbed wire of the Warsaw ghetto and pushed his son out.

In a movie, the father would either die or survive for a tearful reunion with his boy. But after the war Polanski’s dad remarried, and the new wife didn’t want young Roman around. By the age of 13, the pattern of his life was set: That hurried escape through the wire of the ghetto would be only the first of a series of hasty exits.

In Swingin’ London, he made his name with “Repulsion” (1965), in which Catherine Deneuve descends into schizophrenia and kills a man she believes has come to rape her. He hit Hollywood with “Rosemary’s Baby” (1967), in which Mia Farrow is impregnated by the Devil. You could make the case that these films reflect the psychological burdens of his childhood – if it weren’t that they’re almost freakily literal pre-echoes of the violence in his adult life. In 1969, Sharon Tate and four others were murdered at Polanski’s house by a group called “Satan’s Slaves.” “I remember,” wrote Joan Didion, “that no one was surprised.”

One sympathizes. Except that there are millions of children of the Holocaust struggling under the burdens of the past – and only one who deals with them as Roman Polanski does. Working on the film “Chinatown,” the writer Robert Towne found it hard to concentrate at the director’s pad, what with “the teenyboppers that Roman would run out and take Polaroid pictures of diving off the f***ing diving board without tops on. Which was distracting. With braces.”

Braces. Cute. Harvey Weinstein, the man behind the pro-Polanski petition, rejects the idea that Hollywood is “amoral”: “Hollywood has the best moral compass, because it has compassion,” he told an interviewer.

Let us agree that Hollywood bigshots have “compassion” for people in general, for people far away in a big crowd scene on the distant horizon, for people in a we-are-the-world-we-are-the-children sense. But Hollywood bigshots treat people in particular, little people, individuals, like garbage. To Polanski, he was the world, you are the children; now take your kit off and let’s have a “photo shoot.”

Make sure to read the whole thing.

Cross-posted to Right Wing News, where I am guestblogging for John Hawkins on Sundays.