I’m unclear just where the so-called cyberstalking is taking place or what the offensive posts are, so I assume the parties involved really just want the headlines stirred up a bit.

KOS’ unapologetic political censorship bugs me, though not as much as FOX news’ pretense of objectivity.

Values vary. Most women object to the “C word” as do men. Its just that men consider “the C-word” to be “committment”.

Alas most political blogs do not allow for careful assessment of fact claims, or even for non-ideological writing. Political writing, er, barking is not science: it’s more like Biff and Bunny and pals arguing in the cafeteria: you nazi! you pinko commie! etc. Logic, science, reason itself has little to do with it. When someone starts calling (or even insinuating) Hillary a nazi, the discussion has ended. Even on blogs not specifically concerned with politics, one notes this sort of “FoodFightSpeak.”

Absent careful data-based writing (even say “persuasive rhetoric” ala some of the Slate hacks) language become a sort of weapon–closer to say what Tony Soprano and pals do. You see this on DailyKOS as well: the regs specialize in a sort of thieves’ jargon, and then decorate the site with the heads of the villains–Hillary/Cheney/Lieberman’s heads mounted on the virtual wall (and then Cheney’s effigy like put in a dress). At least Hunter S. Thompson did his gonzo-satire with some class.

Though I am reluctant to support those who want to censor or moderate (or “troll rate” as the KOS comrades say), I understand to some extent TOS which commenters consent to by logging on to a site. It’s a contextual thing really, and moderators should be capable editors (which, unfortunately, many webmeisters aren’t). Obscenities, even racial epithets, might be amusing at times. Other times not. Threats unless done in jest or ironic are generally not cool, and often can get fairly nasty–but usually can be shrugged off (not always–online thugs are becoming more common).

Moderation and censorship often become a sort of “slippery slope”, however. This happened on KOS and other sites over the last few years. One might agree to not use obscenity or harrass anyone–fine. Moderators all too often mistake dissent for a type of harrassment or even threat (at least threat to ideology), however. Some Kossack reg. insists that Obama has solutions to any and all political problems, and those who object, in some strange leap of logic, are considered threats, troll-rated, and the apparatchiks slowly gain control of a site, and the web.