Monday, February 14, 2005

The Real Me

As bloggers take on -- and take down - the mainstream media (MSM), such as Dan Rather or Eason Jordan, it seems to me like a feeding frenzy is beginning. Rather and Jordan were hounded by conservative bloggers without much help from liberal blogs. Some on the left even defended those two, but, in the end, they came down.

Those on the left have taken on, and have brought down Jeff Gannon, who asked favorable questions at White House press conferences. Turns out he might be -- horrors! -- gay. Oh, and he's reporting under a pseudonym (he's really James D. Guckert). I won't go into all the irony of the left accusing someone of being gay. Like it's a crime. Well, it is in some places, but not in this country.

Now, it's Libertarian Girl in the crosshairs. Quite honestly, I never went to the site, but here's the deal. The blogger pretended to be a libertarian girl. Turns out it's some dude. This should come as a shock to no one who have ever entered a chat room. Not that I know anything about that. Hey, I need to tell you story one day about being a lesbian stalker. But, that's for another day.

About Libertarian Girl, here's the picture "she" was using:

Turns out she's a he. And Catallarchy discovered the information, which I found via Wizbang. While the site is still up, no one knows if this hot, up-and-coming blog will benefit, or collapse.

Which blog is next? Again, that's something no one knows. But it's not going to be me. See that little picture up at the top of the page? It's me. It's an old picture. I'm about 44-45 years older than I was when it was taken, but it's me. And, as further proof, here's the full picture, which includes my Big Sister (who is now 5'4"):

My name is "Basil." It's really my name, on my birth certificate and everything.

Anyway, as the feeding frenzy begins and blogs start taking each other down, my preemptive strike, which really doesn't tell much because there's really nothing to tell, should keep me out of the sights of eager attack bloggers.

And when they've chewed each other up, me and a couple of others will be left standing. So you better be nice to me.


  1. no, basil, you won't go down with the others. you will, however, make funny responses to the headlines reporting their demise.

  2. and Big Sister (who's now 5'4")...that's quite the "i can't believe that you want me to smile while i'm standing this close to my cootie-ridden baby brother" smile that you have in that pic....

  3. oh the hypnotoad ad on sarahk's site!

  4. And You Thought Those Gay Penguins Were Confused

    Well whatdya know! It turns out that Libertarian Girl is a Libertarian Guy. Catallarchy gets to mount this trophy on the wall. I've read Libertarian's blog a few times, never lingered there much. (I've never been able to figure out

  5. I saw a debate on CNN yesterday about whether or not bloggers can be considered legitimate journalists. Maybe, maybe not. I think it's just becoming more and more important to remember that old adage "Don't believe everything you read."

    Clearly, if you put yourself in the middle of controversy, be you a blogger or a TV/print reporter, you can expect that someone will try to take you down. Thus, I'll never reveal the "real me" on my blog. I think I have a right to remain anonymous. Of course, anyone with half a brain could use "Whois" search to figure out my true identity, which is no doubt how they pegged that Gannon/Guckert guy. Guess he also had some porn sites registered under his real name. So what? Doesn't everybody?

  6. I post anonymously as well.

    However, my nickname amongst my friends is Reckers, so if any of them come across my blog, they'll know it's me.

  7. Oddybobo Unmasked, Sorta

    Ok, I am going to follow Basil's lead and tell you that while no one will likely want to "take me down" cause quite frankly, who the hell cares about whittle ole' me, I am going to tell you that I operate under the assumed name of oddybobo because my r...

  8. Who I'm not.

    As basil pointed out in the real me after bloggers brought down Dan Rather and Eason Jordan they've started to turn on each other. Catallarchy discovered that Libertarian Girl actually has a dangling participle, Wizbang has the pictorial proof she's ...

  9. Basil, are you trying to provoke me? I appreciate that you link to me (though I wish some of your readers would click through) and I am deeply grateful that you solved the problem in my sidebar, but really, come on now, the issue is not that Gannon was gay. He was a prostitute! Last I looked that was a crime and don't you think a White House background check would find that kind of thing? If it was a female prostitute in the White House press corps, that would be a story, no?

    Truth be told, I think the hypocrisy of someone who is writing anti-gay stories (since removed by Talon News but found by left-leaning bloggers) who turns out to be gay himself is of note. Was it newsworthy that Stom Thurmond had a child by a black woman? No?

  10. First, no, I am not trying to provoke you. Or prod anyone to provoke you. However, your post on your site says that Jeff Gannon "was once a gay hustler." If the issue is that he was a prostitute, then it should have read "was once a hustler" or "was once a prostitute."

    Let me put it to you like this. When I was a newsman, I reported information relevant to the story. If a man robbed a bank, and was on the loose, and his description was being released to the public, I gave his race, black or white or whatever. On the other hand, if he robbed a bank and was caught, I did not mention his race. He was a bank robber. Not a black bank robber. Not a white bank robber. Just a bank robber.

    Why is Gannon a "gay hustler" and not a "hustler" or a "prostitute?" If gay doesn't matter in the accusation, why bring it up?

    In the Strom Thurmond story you cited, mentioned of his black daughter is relevant because of his racist past. In fact, that is the story. If homosexual activity by a gay-basher is an issue, then, yes, you have a story. But I see nothing about Gannon's gay-bashing. All I'm seeing it that he was gay.

    I'm pointing out that those on the left, you included, keep bringing up the "gay" angle, not a "gay-who-bashes-gays" angle. By just mentioning "he's gay," it's his sexuality that is brought up as the issue, not any hypocisy on his part.

    And that itself strikes me as a little hypocritical, what with the left claiming to be the inclusive side of the spectrum, and saying that things like sexual preference don't matter. Then the left brings it up in every mention of the story that I've seen.

    This is not directed at you personally, but at you on the left in general. I guess I should say "y'all" what with being all southern and everything.

    If I came across as trying to provoke you, then please accept my apologies. That was not my intent. But do try to see your post from my eyes for a second. Yes, we on the right do that on occasion, so return the favor, huh?

    And, to others reading this: do visit Joe's site. Yes, he's on the left. But he seems like a nice guy. If only we could bring him around to the "right" way of looking at things.

  11. The "provoke" comment was meant in friendly jest.

    If it is not being made clear by folks, me included, that the guy was anti-gay, I am remiss. In my posts, which I try to keep brief, I do assume a level of knowledge in my readers, or a level of curiosity that will have them click through to the links. In fact, I try to foster that. Gannon was an anti-gay writer, his anti-gay material has been pulled from the Talon News site, then found again and posted by AMERICAblog and others. The links in my posts lead you to all of that and more.

    That aside, the newsworthy hypocrisy here is also that of the anti-gay administration, favoring a closeted gay reporter. That's a legitimate reason for mention of "Gannon's" gay activities. And if there's a question, I believe it has been amply demonstrated that he was favored and I consider anti-gay marriage by definition to be anti-gay. I have friends and family that have voted in favor of the anti-gay marriage amendments in their states. They think they're tolerant and not anti-gay. My goal is to help them see they're wrong.

    For now, prodded by you, I'm trying to put together a post on why I am in favor of "outing" and believe it is legitimately newsworthy. Meanwhile, a sweet little post I wanted to write today on the time my dog wandered away, sits unwritten.

    As to my political persuasion, I would think me moderate, but my Upper West Side heritage, my belief in government as a check on corporate power and a valuable regulator of civic life, my lifelong Democratic voting record, and the Right's redefinition of what is "liberal" has me squarely situated there. In that context, those that I think liberal are off that map!

  12. I look forward to your upcoming post. Any well-thought post will prompt thought from the thoughtful. Hmmm. I may need to read that last sentence again.

    Thanks again, and I'm glad you didn't think I was trying to provoke anything. As for me missing your comment being made in jest, let's mark that up to me really not wanting to offend. To be sure, some people, if I offend them, I could care less. However, having exchanged correspondence with you away from the public eye of the blog, you have fallen into the category of someone I wouldn't want to offend. You seem like a nice guy. And the world needs more nice guys.

  13. The Real Me

    ... As bloggers take on — and take down — the mainstream media (MSM), such as Dan Rather or Eason Jordan, it seems to me like


Please choose a Profile in "Comment as" or sign your name to Anonymous comments. Comment policy