Blogging Guidelines For Virginia Political Bloggers

It seems some of us here in Virginia have no idea how to behave ourselves in the blog community. After looking around for a bit today on several Virginia blogs I think I can now offer my conservative friends some guidelines.

• Posting images that depict the victim of the enemies of America in actual circumstances and conditions is not to be accepted. (note, graphic un-retouched photo, deemed by most on the left as inappropriate for viewing.)
• Posting images that depict the body of a dead baby, being held aloft and being blamed on Americans is perfectly OK. (note, graphic un-retouched photo, deemed by most on the left as completely appropriate for viewing.)

The following guidelines will help you decide what type of posts are accepted by the ethics police on the left.

• Posting an e-mail, from an unsubstantiated source, describing unverified divorce proceedings of a prominent Virginia couple, neither of which hold elected office, that is good. (note, the e-mail has been removed by the blogger, but it promises to return.)

Allow me to interrupt myself for a moment. It's been brought to my attention in the comments that I cannot substantiate nor verify that Ben's post regarding the e-mail was unsubstantiated and unverified. That is true I suppose, since Ben' does not mention anywhere in the post just how he substantiated and verified it. I now return you to the rest of this post.

• Posting, in the headline, a word that my mother would have smacked me for using is also good.

• Posting, again in the headline, another word that my mother would have smacked me for using, yep, you guessed it. That too is very good.

And last, but by all means not least. From the man who would have you believe he is way beyond reproach ethically, two more from Waldo Jaquith;

• Making an accusation of an extramarital affair which was provably false, yet not removing that post from his own blog, even after being called on it.

Yes, you can delete someone else's entirely truthful blog, yet leave such scurrilous accusations on your own blog and still proclaim yourself to be ethically superior to most of those on the right. (note, Waldo does retract the statement, but way down the page where it's less likely to be read. Personally, I would have placed the retraction in the original comment, but apparently I don't know as much about ethical blogging as Waldo.)

• Posting an unsubstantiated conversation with an undisclosed person who relayed an unverifiable secondhand conversation they had on a plane about unsubstantiated allegations that a prominent Virginia politician had abused his ex-wife. That too is deemed to be perfectly alright ethically.

Waldo is placed on a pedestal by many on the left (most notably F.T. Rea) as the epitome of ethics. Waldo himself actually believes this, and Terry does himself no favors by perpetuating the myth.

What I've learned from all this is that in Charlottesville ethics don't matter, aesthetics do.

Geesh... In the words of Jerry Fuhrman, just shoot me now.