« Home | Does Pres. Bush Hate Minnesota? » | Sen. Kelley Blogging » | Habeas Corpus » | Stormin' Norm Part 2 » | Same-Sex Marriage » | Business Communities » | Strib Oopsie » | 2006 Campaign Strategy » | Shocked » | Klobuchar Blogging » 

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 


Dammit, Inside Minnesota Politics. This is stupid and you know it.

I don't know how really stupid it is. I actually went back and looked at the post that MDE used the IMP picture for, and it was an attempt to use it as proof that Hatch was taking illegal campaign contributions, even though the picture used didn't really say anything about what was going on. I would probably react the same way if someone attempted to use something I had just put up on my site as proof to try and slander a candidate.

I'm interested in hearing from IMP to see what was the actual impetous from his side.

I'm an opponent of litigiousness. I think that there was a common sense solution: ask MDE to take down the offending image, or even send a cease-and-desist letter, but take a step or two before moving to the lawsuit. It seems to be a pretty blatant attempt to conclusively reveal MDE's identity; in fact, I'd be pretty surprised if IMP continued to pursue the lawsuit if they're successful in getting that information.

In any case, a lawsuit (except in extreme cases) should be a last resort.

It has to be an attempt to unmask MDE. Since it's a civil suit they would have to prove actual monetary damages to collect anything. Since that would be virtually impossible, the only conceivable reason for going forward with this would be to force MDE (or Domains By Proxy) to respond to a subpoena.

While I don't like the method chosen for this I'm not a big fan of anonymous blogging, either. (Sorry, NSP!) Especially when it's used as a way of avoiding criticism of the ad hominem slime and slur tactics that MDE practices. This "anonymous revolutionary war pamphleteer" canard that MDE and MN Lefty Liberal keep using is an awfully thin fig leaf for what is pretty obviously little more than a two-bit MN GOP attack blog.

A much more constructive way of going about it would be for the state DFL to have it looked into as a violation of campaign finance laws, which it very well might be.

In general, Smartie, I agree with you; anonymous blogging isn't ideal. The problem, however, is that in this Internet age, these things stick around. I'm a college student, and among other things, in ten years I may not want an employer or prospective employer to know about and read the lefty blog I wrote in college. I have a lot of respect for David Trinh, still in high school and blogging at Minnesota Blue using his real name. I'm just not willing to do it. MDE hasn't even conclusively been exposed, yet he's got people posting his (suspected) name and address. All political bloggers are playing with a little bit of fire, and the heat's just a little too much for me personally.

"The problem, however, is that in this Internet age, these things stick around."

Exactly. So even upon removing the picture, he has still possibly caused harm to IMP.

Again, I don't know, since I've only seen one side of the story. IMP could have a legitmate excuse for doing what he did that is neither overly litigious under the circumstance, nor just an attempt to expose. I like to wait to hear rather than jump to defense, especially when it's the defense of someone who hides behind his anonymity to make often wrong and sometimes slanderous attacks.

Post a Comment

Links to this post

Create a Link

Contact NSP