« The Massachusetts Way | Main | Deeply Offended by Obama's Color »

La, La, La, I Can't Hear You

Most liberals handled this weekend's march on DC the same way a five-year-old child handles something they don't want to hear -- by putting their fingers in their ears and repeating la, la, la, la, la....

"La la la. I can't hear you." That's what la-la liberals spent the entire weekend saying when confronted with the reality of the September 12 march on Washington. Confronted with an oncoming tsunami, many on the left spent the weekend quibbling over how many drops of water it contained. Others ignored it completely.

...The phrase "conservatives taking to the streets" is one that I have not yet gotten used to hearing quite yet. But as foreign as it still sometimes seems to me, it must be 100 times more difficult for liberals to grasp the concept. I get it. I understand that they must be in shock.

I understand that they are desperate for any way to change the subject. But to look at pictures of throngs of people stretching on for blocks and blocks and blocks and blocks and to try to pretend there were only a few thousand there is delusional. Many of those on the left may have convinced themselves that their eyes really didn't see what was there, but I suspect they know exactly what is happening. They are just not yet at a place where they can face the reality of it.


Read the rest at Townhall.

Update: Just another "la la la" moment -- this one from Charles Gibson.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/36758.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference La, La, La, I Can't Hear You:

» Enigma Underground's American Live Wire linked with ACORN Continues to Fall

Comments (31)

Lorie, I have to call you o... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Lorie, I have to call you on this one.

First, if you are going to post on Wizbang, it seems to me that you should post the whole article here. If someone starts reading a post here, they should be able to finish it here.

Second, IIRC there is a long-standing taboo against trying to drive readers to another site specifically for the purpose of increasing its readership (such as one's personal blog). I am not saying that was your intent here, but it does seem odd that you would cut off your own post and then tell folks that to read the whole thing at Townhall; it gives the impression that you think Wizbang is second-rate to Townhall, and that comes off as, well, elitist.

You're better than that, OK?

Let them be in denial...it ... (Below threshold)
mag:

Let them be in denial...it won't change the fact that many people in this country have it with most politicans.
I think Obama's election brought all this to thr front burner. It was a wake up call for us that we are not a leftist (I am not critizing liberal, I mean far out leftist) country and we have to do something about it.

last year SLIME magazine cl... (Below threshold)
Flu-Bird:

last year SLIME magazine claimed the conservative movment was over. Shows why you cant ever trust a liberal left=wing rag like SLIME at all

And you expected liberals t... (Below threshold)

And you expected liberals to roll over and abandon their agenda because some number of people took to the streets?

Did you (royal you) roll over in your support for Bush's wars when the anti-war liberals took to the street? Did you abandon your belief in free markets and open trade after people protested at World Bank meetings? Did you renounce all of your racist practices when a million men took to the streets of DC?

No, I figure you ignored them, you laughed at those pushing huge attendance numbers, you said that the marchers weren't representative of the people at large, and that the marchers were were stupid and naive.

And so liberals are doing the same thing when anti-Obama marchers show up. Big surprise.

And as a tactical matter, the best way to change the subject is to minimize and marginalize the opposition. It is much easier to ignore a fringe than a mass uprising... so it is to be expected that the other side would do all they could to paint the protests as marginal and lightly attended.... and to follow that up with claims that the marchers are racists to boot.

You're exactly right. They... (Below threshold)
jim m:

You're exactly right. They don't want to hear about Democrat screw ups and corruption. They don't want to hear about conservative protests and action.

Michelle Malkin has this on her site. http://michellemalkin.com/2009/09/15/acorn-watch-charlie-gibson-and-the-ostrich-media/

I heard it live when it happened and I couldn't believe it. Charlie Gibson laughing off the admission that he has not yet heard ANYTHING about the ACORN scandal nor has he heard about their defunding from the Senate.

This is not just ignorance, but it is the left willfully keeping themselves and (in the case of the media) others in the dark.

Just like 9/11 they want to pretend that nothing happened; that there isn't anything to worry about. Government can spend, spend, spend. There is no end to the money and hardship will never happen. Leftist politicians are as pure as the driven snow and Obama will soon bless us all with the founding of a new Utopia.

fools.

It's amazing how much the '... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

It's amazing how much the 'elite' say they KNOW, yet now feign ignorance.

Charlie "Bush Doctrine" Gibson: 'ACORN, whats up? Oh, hahahahahah...I wasn't aware of that.'
SIX days, Charlie, its been COMMON KNOWLEDGE! But Charlie lives in his own bubble in New York and "didn't know". You pretend to know everything else Charlie. Or is it just selective memory.

Then we have Baghdad Bobby Gibbs - "Best White House Spokeman EVER!" - "We were unaware". Yeah "the most plugged in administration EVER was "unaware". Leftie sites have been buzzing for the last week, hoping that only 'hundreds or a few thousand' would show up. But Team Barry was "unaware". The Team that knows EVERYTHING. "Unaware".

Come 2010, the elite main stream press and the White House are going to get smacked up the side of the head. Wonder if they'll still be "unaware" then.

The MSM is already denigrated by 63% of the public. Team Barry's figures aren't far behing. AND BOTH ARE TENDING DOWNWARDS!

Steve, just look at what yo... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

Steve, just look at what you are saying. You are arguing that liberals should treat the millions of people who have showed up at protests and town hall meetings over the past eight months the same way conservatives treated the Obama worshiping throngs. In case you didn't notice, that didn't turn out so good for conservatives. But by all means, stick with that strategy. Hope it works out as well for you all as it did for us.

If you are being honest you have to admit the tea party protests are something unlike anything we've seen in decades. The makeup of the crowds is very different, the means of organizing very different, etc. What is hilarious is seeing a protest of a dozen people covered as a huge event by the liberal media during the Bush years, yet when hundreds of thousands showed up at tax day tea party protests all across the country, in all 50 states, the media barely acknowledged them. They didn't do much more for the 9/12 march on DC.

In the past, that strategy might have worked, but now there is the internet, talk radio and Fox News. You can't fool the people as easily as in the past. They don't have to rely on ABCBSNBCNN for their information anymore.

Steve Sturm: I want to than... (Below threshold)
JustRuss:

Steve Sturm: I want to thank you for such a wonderful post. Granted it is hard to tell if you are leaning left or right in your argument (I assume left) but if you are a lefty, you are the nicest most honest lefty I have seen on here in as long as I have be reading. For the time being at least, I do NOT consider you atroll by any means and I welcome more responses like yours.

And you expected liberals to roll over and abandon their agenda because some number of people took to the streets?

I doubt anyone actually expected a favorable response from the Democrat controlled Federal Government. I was not there in person, but in spirit. I pray that either A) We are all dreadfuly wrong about the march to socialism or B) they wake up and stop it themselves. But I believe it more likely that C) they will ignore US(royal us) just like the Republicans seemingly ignored liberal protestors.

Did you (royal you) roll over in your support for Bush's wars when the anti-war liberals took to the street? Did you abandon your belief in free markets and open trade after people protested at World Bank meetings? Did you renounce all of your racist practices when a million men took to the streets of DC?

The anti-war liberals were not ignored, they were considered and rejected because at the time intelligence indicated the threat and they honestly believed. I still maintain that Afghanistan was the correct course of action, and I am happy Iraq is no longer under Saddam Husein's control though I would have preferred a few sniper shots instead.

However the problem is, the anti-war folks reminded me too much of video's of Vietnam and Korea protesters, almost militant themselves at times. And the peaceful ones were too much like peace loving hippies who can't stand any violence even if it is justified. Just my opinion, wrong or right.

I honestly missed the World Bank protests completely, so you are right on that one as far as I am concerned.

The Million Man March to ME was an amazing movement with a flaw. I am from Missouri, I have been to southern states, I have been to big cities. And at the time of the March I did not see the kind of racism they were trying to tell me existed. Even today I still do not see racism behind every wrong against minorities. In fact, I think that most Minority issues are caused by culture in those communities not by other races. I also believe that Affirmative Action as it stands now is a form of Racism against White's who most of the time have never done anything to harm a person of color OTHER than to be white. If that isn't racism I don't know what is.

So no, I did not return to my racist ways, and I do not believe that 80% of the nation did either, because they were not racists before or after that March.

No, I figure you ignored them, you laughed at those pushing huge attendance numbers, you said that the marchers weren't representative of the people at large, and that the marchers were were stupid and naive.

See above, in some cases naive. Never stupid.

And so liberals are doing the same thing when anti-Obama marchers show up. Big surprise.

And as a tactical matter, the best way to change the subject is to minimize and marginalize the opposition. It is much easier to ignore a fringe than a mass uprising... so it is to be expected that the other side would do all they could to paint the protests as marginal and lightly attended.... and to follow that up with claims that the marchers are racists to boot.

Your last paragraph hits the nail on the head,

Unlike any response I listed to your examples, in your final remark you indicate that they KNOW the marchers are at least partially correct, but it is easier to label them fringe or racists and then ignore them. Than to face the truth.

That is why conservatives are marching. They are tired of unresponsive or in some cases proactively and willingly ignorant government (Bush Administration included). They want spending cut, they want a return to the founding principles of the Constitution as intended by the framers. They, and I, do not see any nuance in the document to be "interpretted" and do not believe in a "living document" which changes with time.

Democrats like to see nuance in everything, they twist peoples words, or the words of the law, to suit their argument. When it comes to the HealthCare bill(which was NOT specifically the point of the 9/12 march despite claims to the contrary by the left) our issues do not stem from what is IN the bill specifically but by what is left unsaid or intentionally? vague to be reinterpretted at a time of their choosing. This the "YOU LIE" comment that has the conservatives up in arms. Liberals point out that technically there was specific language in the bill to address illegals. While we like to point out that there is nothing in the bill that says how to check if they are illegal or not!

Illegals get healthcare, jobs, social security numbers, welfare, food stamps, state and federal grants and college tuition assistance as it stands now. Why would it be any different with the proposed American National Health System (my name, nothing official)?

Finally, I am not, nor have I ever been, nor do I have even a tiny bit of racist in me. Skin color does not matter to me at all, if I have a problem with a person of color it is because of their attitude or their actions. I have the same exact problems with "White" people.

If Communists/Socialist/Marxists/Liberals/Democrats do not want Race to be an issue, then why do they bring it up at every turn? Especially when The rest of us would be completely content to ignore skin color/ethnicity altogether?

By refering to "Negros" or "Blacks" or "Hispanics" the LEFT are the ones being racist though they claim it is beneficial racism. The fact is the Left were on the side of slavery in the civil war and afterward they began claiming to be completely cured and only wanted to help these people.

They created "Project" type housing which concentrated people of color in inner cities. Created Welfare which commitedd lower class minority families to single parent homes to be eligible for assistance. Which then caused problems with the youth, who already being grouped tightly in these "Project" housing areas were ripe to form gangs and cause violence.

Face it, the left is responsible for keeping minorites down more than the right ever was. There are lower class white folks who do not qualify for that housing, partyly because race pushes minorities to the top of the list, and partially because organizations like ACORN are created specifically to help minorities get this much needed government assitance.

Thus the lower class white kids grow up in trailer parks instead of inner city housing projects. They have a completely different culture which lends itself to making a better life yourself and advancing themselves through education or sheer will beyond the station their parents were born or fell into.

The kids from the "Projects" are raised with an entitlement mindset, that the government and the "Man" (read WHITE man) owe them something.

The kids from the trailer park are raised with the mindset that you don't get anything for free and you have to work for what you get. Your position in life is your personal responsibility not the responsibility of anyone else including the Government.

2 guess which are Democrats and which are Republicans.

It also shows why minorities who ARE able to make something of themselves and better their situation in life become Republicans or at the very least Conservative Democrats. When you earn what you have, you do not want anyone who has not earned it taking your hard earned money for any reason.

This liberal was at home ov... (Below threshold)
James H:

This liberal was at home over the weekend.

Me a liberal? If only my f... (Below threshold)

Me a liberal? If only my friends were here to dissuade you of that silly thought...

Lorie, that's not what I said. Bush supporters ignored the anti-war protests because they were convinced they were right and because they believed the protesters were not representative of the public as a whole... which is exactly the same thing in reverse now: liberals think they're right on health care and government spending and don't believe the marchers represent anything but a fringe element. I'm not saying one is right and the other wrong, I'm simply pointing out that both sides act the same way, albeit on different issues. And since the right ignored and sought to marginalize the lefty marchers, it stands to reason that the left would now do the same to the right.

And you're deluding yourself if you think Fox, internet and so on are accomplishing much. Most of the people who matter (the mushy middle who both sides need in order to win) don't spend their time watching Fox or reading conservative web sites... or marching in protests. They still get their news from the MSM. Glenn Beck may get a victory here and there but he is a non-entity to most of the public. Apropos of the cliche, if only conservatives are listening to Glenn Beck (and reading Wizbang), is he really doing all that much... other than preaching to the choir?

And JustRuss, I don't believe the liberals think the protesters are at least partially correct as much as they realize that impugning their opponents is a time-proven way of ending the debate. Thus, calling one's opponent a racist does not indicate a lack of belief in the underlying issue, doing so is but a tactic used to advance the cause. The opponent has to immediately start defending himself rather than continuing to attack (see how it's being done re: Joe Wilson calling Obama a liar). It's akin to calling an anti-war protester anti-American rather than taking the time to debate the merits of Bush's not-so-excellent adventure in Iraq and Afghanistan (and, remember, that isn't coming from a liberal).

"When you earn what you hav... (Below threshold)
jim m:

"When you earn what you have, you do not want anyone who has not earned it taking your hard earned money for any reason."

I'd add that it also explains why conservatives give far more to private charities which typically give people a helping hand and not a handout. Liberals keep their money, giving little if anything to charity, and expect the government to solve all the icky problems of life by papering them over with taxpayer money.

"Liberals keep their money"... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

"Liberals keep their money". Sure do, just ask the Kennedys about off-shore Trusts.

Ask Timmy Giethner and Charlie Rangel about how to avoid paying taxes but just not declaring income. WARNING: It's against the law unless your a Democrat!

As for charity, Democrats are all for it, as long as it's TAXPAYER money. For a Democrat, 'Charity does not begin at home'.

"And you're deluding yourse... (Below threshold)
Lorie:

"And you're deluding yourself if you think Fox, internet and so on are accomplishing much."

Tell that to Van Jones and ACORN.

Lorie: in the big scheme of... (Below threshold)

Lorie: in the big scheme of things, Acorn and Van Jones are insignificant pieces of drivel. Congratulate yourself on those two scalps, on winning a couple of minor skirmishes... while Obama chugs merrily along raising taxes, imposing new regulations, getting 90% of what he wants on health care reform (with the remaining 10% only deferred, not defeated) and letting Iran get nukes and so on. Did Fox and the Internet keep Sotomayer off the Supreme Court? So, you get Van Jones and Acorn, both of whom will be replaced by someone and something else just as bad... and Obama gets his judge on the Supreme Court for the next thirty or so years. Yeah, Obama is quaking in his boots fearing Fox.

First off Steve, politics h... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

First off Steve, politics has been and always will be a death by a thousand cuts. What is significant about Van Jones and Acorn is people actually noticed Obama is a mere mortal. He isn't what he said. That is a start.

Conservatives did not cheer lead for GW Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan, we were grown up and knew there are things going on there that we don't know and might never know so who am I to second guess him. Guess what? Obama found out the same thing. Notice the no change and actually more troops? How about Gitmo, a little harder then he thought.

Steve, you have some growing up to do for the "world perspective". Be patient, you'll learn. ww

WW: how can people notice O... (Below threshold)

WW: how can people notice Obama is mortal if the media they follow doesn't cover the Van Jones and Acorn stories?

I am not saying Fox equals ... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

I am not saying Fox equals the sum of every other media outlet on television, which the liberals own. I am just saying people are now getting their info outside of the traditional, network news means and that will only grow and grow in years to come. There are actual, real world consequences of that. Van Jones and ACORN are small in the grand scheme of things, but if those scandals and all the other information people are getting outside the MSM continue to cause Dems and Obama's numbers to plunge there will be very real electoral consequences. In one year, if things continue as they are now headed, the Dems could lose the House. No matter how you spin it, that would be a huge deal with enormous consequences. I don't know what will happen a year from now. That is an eternity in politics. It is possible things will swing back the other way, with the help of the MSM, and the Dems will win additional seats. I don't think that is going to happen, but we just don't know right now. If I were a Dem I would be scared to death right now. The people have other ways of finding out what is going on.

If the Dems lose the House ... (Below threshold)

If the Dems lose the House (which I hope will happen but am not holding my breath) it won't be because of Van Jones or Acorn or Fox, it will because the economy continues to s**k and/or we've been attacked again and the mushy middle takes out their frustration that things aren't better by punishing the incumbent party.

Doctrinaire conservatives (such as you) like to think your concerns are shared by the public at large, that they care about the same things as you do... such as how many czars Obama has or whether Holder let off the Black Panther Party or whether Obama fan afoul of the Constitution in forcing Wagoner out of GM.

But the people who aren't conservative, by definition, aren't going to think the way you do, they're not watching Fox and hitting Drudge every hour and watching Breitbart videos. You say they have other ways of finding things out. True, but they don't care to (why would they, when half of them probably can't name their own Congressman?) To them, this is all background noise. Their focus is on whether they've got a job and the price of gas and whether they feel safe in their neighborhood and whether the local teams are winning and so on... in other words, the up close and personal issues, not the (to them) static noise of things doctrinaire conservatives focus on.

And my point is that conservatives will not win power (in their own right, as opposed to having it handed back to them when the liberals screw up) if you keep thinking that everybody thinks like you do. That was my point of my first comment: you get all excited about the number of people marching and how the MSM doesn't cover it... while the people whose votes you need aren't giving either one more than 15 seconds of thought. Start focusing your effort on the issues they do spend their time thinking about and you've gotten 80% of the way back to reclaiming power.

end of rant.

...in the big sche... (Below threshold)
...in the big scheme of things, Acorn and Van Jones are insignificant pieces of drivel.

Yeah, and Watergate was just a botched two-bit burglary. Insignificant drivel. Good thing nothing ever came of it, otherwise, your argument would be completely laughable.

"Doctrinaire conservativ... (Below threshold)
apb:

"Doctrinaire conservatives (such as you) like to think your concerns are shared by the public at large, that they care about the same things as you do"

Uh, no Steve. Conservatives know the stupid and childish public out there - the one that believes it's smart enough for the grown-up chair of decision making.

Eventually the level of teh Stoopid elevates to the point where the true moderates pay attention to the grownups and toss out the liberal lunatic fringe. Unfortunately (and eventually) the conservatives see their guys are crooks, liars or not really adults and toss them out to leave an opening for the children to run amok again. Lather, rinse, repeat.

The best we can hope is that more people see the treachery of never-ending piles of debt for our children, sober up, and really purge our political system of the entrenched power whores occupying DC.

Steve Sturm: If nobody but ... (Below threshold)
Madalyn:

Steve Sturm: If nobody but right-wing republicans watch Glenn Beck or read blogs like Wizbang, there sure are a lot of left-wing libs posting comments on sites like this and dissing Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, M. Malkin, etc. Stop and think a minute about what you said. The MSM is now basically defunct, and I would bet my last dollar (if I have any left with Obama in office) that Charlie Gibson, Robert Gibbs, Rahm Emanuel, etc, and even Obama watch Glenn, Bill, etc. That is the ONLY way they are going to know what is going on in the world. Your MSM has stumbled in this race and can't even crawl over the line. Pretty pathetic. Guess they are waiting for Obama to bail them out. I suppose that is why they are kissing his rear. Some people have no shame. At least we are proud Americans, unlike Obama and his gang of thieves.
Just my opinion and I state it proudly
Madalyn

Madalyn: if Charlie Gibson ... (Below threshold)

Madalyn: if Charlie Gibson watched Beck, then why didn't he know anything about Acorn?

oregonmuse: great non analogy, equating Van Jones and Nixon's dirty tricks campaign. and if you remember your history, it wasn't the break-in itself that got Nixon in trouble but rather the ramifications of his attempt to cover things up.

And Apb: you're right about the cycle, but it isn't so much as public starting to listen to what you call the grownups as the public taking out their frustration on whomever is in office. The mistake Bush and Obama both made is thinking that their election represented a mandate for whatever they wanted to do rather than a repudiation of their opponents/predecessors... and you're making the same mistake if you think that the GOP gaining next year is because the public is all of a sudden enamored with the GOP.

And 'my' MSM? geez, you ju... (Below threshold)

And 'my' MSM? geez, you just don't get it, do you? Pointing out that Fox doesn't have the impact you think it does in no way amounts to a defense or endorsement of the MSM... but go ahead, and see what you want to see in my comments rather than what is actually there.

Steve - If Charlie Gibson s... (Below threshold)
Madalyn:

Steve - If Charlie Gibson said he didn't know anything about the destruction of ACORN, I can almost guarantee you he is fully aware of it. You as a person over the mental age of 7 knows that. Don't play dumb. There's too much of that on Obama's team as it is.
Madalyn

Steve -My take isn... (Below threshold)
apb:

Steve -

My take isn't GOP vs Dems - at this point they're both nothing but the same pack of rats fouling the Nation's nest and expecting the little folks to pony up.

There are some members of the GOP that are adults, in my lexicon. The rest are the same slime that are making laws for their own benefit, and somehow managing to blow any concept of accountability out of the water.

Through the merry pack of fraudsters in the MSM, the Dems somehow managed to orchestrate a "culture of corruption" that somehow doesn't include them; the lid's still on the Rangel fraud; Jefferson and his mystery cash; Feinstein's military contractor-husband's largesse; Franklin Raines; Dodd; why continue?

The cycle tends to prove out the true party of 'tax and spend;' we've got 'em now. In that case, there's no mandate FOR the GOP - it's a mandate AGAINST the Dems.

Damn shame there's no party that's really on the side of the Nation.

Steve Sturm: Your not a lib... (Below threshold)
JustRuss:

Steve Sturm: Your not a liberal, that explains a lot; and it goes to show another difference between lefties and the rest of us. We are able to see both sides of the issue and make informed decisions. They look at the issue, ignore what they don't like, and blindly charge forward safe and secure in the knowledge that its the intent that matters, not the result.

As for the rest of your arguing with GarandFan and others...I think you might be acting a bit childish on purpose for the sake of prolonging the debate.

At least your responses are mostly well thought out and make sense from a slightly different point of view. As opposed to lefties who have only emotion based arguments and NEVER admit when they are wrong, unless it will make them look better to do so.

oregonmuse: great ... (Below threshold)
oregonmuse: great non analogy, equating Van Jones and Nixon's dirty tricks campaign. and if you remember your history, it wasn't the break-in itself that got Nixon in trouble but rather the ramifications of his attempt to cover things up.

That's exactly my point; the thing started out as a two-bit burglary and then snowballed into one of the worst political scandals in our country's history. Pretty much all of Nixon's "dirty tricks" had been used by previous presidents against their political opponents, so he wasn't exactly blazing new territory (track down a copy of the out of print book "It Didn't Start With Watergate" for more information on this), but the media, which had been binging on NDS for close to two decades, saw their chance at long last.

So for you to immediately dismiss the ACORN scandal as "insignificant" demonstrates only your inability to see anything that is more than 2-3 inches past your nose.

Right now, Acorn is insigni... (Below threshold)

Right now, Acorn is insignificant. Might it turn into something that brings down Obama and/or leads to the Dems losing control? Maybe, maybe not, but neither you nor I have the crystal ball that knows for sure. My comments are based on how things are now and not based on wishful thinking....

justruss: yeah, sometimes I can't resist tweaking the true believers, they're just too easy. I know I should take pity on them... but gee, when they go off and say ridiculous things like Acorn is analogous to Watergate...

My comments are ba... (Below threshold)
My comments are based on how things are now and not based on wishful thinking....

In other words, as I said, you can't see much past the nose on your face. I think everyone on here already knew that, though...

Charlie Gibson is like a gu... (Below threshold)
btenney:

Charlie Gibson is like a guy I work with.
He is so slow.
How slow you ask?
So slow that if he fell off a ladder he would go in to overtime before he hit the ground.

Since mainstream media i... (Below threshold)
MF:

Since mainstream media isnt covering the news, the next steps are for the protestors to go to the news




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy