Before we get to the Q&Q for this week, let me start with a word (well, it’s going to be a rant, really) about comments. I welcome comments on these blogs. In fact, in recent months I’ve noticed an increase in the number of comments and the number of commenters. Sometimes people even get into respectful discussions back and forth. This is great.
But here’s the thing. I’ve now pretty much abandoned my earlier policy of only posting comments by those who provide their full real names. I did that because many folks who write under a pseudonym have interesting things to offer, but I also relented on my rule with a good deal of regret.
I just don’t get why people won’t step up and identify themselves for all the world to see. Paranoia runs deep, I guess. I’m the former Mayor of Madison and while being a former mayor is hardly a revered position, it’s not exactly low-profile either. People know who I am. A few still recognize me on the street. And yet, if you haven’t noticed, I write a lot of stuff that, to put it gently, the Madison liberals in my very liberal Madison neighborhood might find challenging. I’ve left the entrails of liberal sacred cows scattered around the near westside, an area with a high concentration of vegetarians. And do you see me hiding behind an alias? No, you do not. And, by the way, I also identify myself using my full name when I comment on other sites, including Isthmus, the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.
So, if I can do that, what are you afraid of exactly? Do you really think that your comments are so incisive that you will suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous scorn should you be outed? Geez…
So, here’s the new deal. I’m going to continue to post anonymous comments, but be on notice that I don’t like it and I’m going to hold you to a higher standard. Any comment that I think is too sharply aimed, especially at an individual, I will not post if you don’t step up and use your real name. If you’re going to take a shot at somebody by name than have the tiny amount of courage it takes to tell the rest of us who you are by name.
Fair enough? Well, I don’t care whether you think it’s fair enough. I am the absolute, unquestioned ruler of YSDA. So there. Now onto this week’s quiz.
Here’s the quote:
“Breaking out of a prison requires force, not desperate appeals to the colonizer.”
- 1. That line was from:
A) Nelson Mandela commenting about resistance to apartheid.
B) Attica prison inmates justifying their uprising in 1971.
C) A coalition of Yale student groups attempting to justify the murders of over a thousand Israeli’s by Hamas terrorists.
D) Warren Beaty playing Clyde Barrow in “Bonnie and Clyde.”
2. A group of almost three dozen Harvard student groups issued a statement blaming Israel entirely for the Hamas attacks. The Harvard administration responded by:
A) Forcefully condemning the students’ statement.
B) Supporting the statement.
C) Condemning the violence while ignoring their students’ statement.
D) Saying nothing at all.
3. Hard-left Democrats who have been heavily critical of Israel in the past responded to the Hamas attacks by:
A) Supporting them.
B) Condemning them without reservation.
C) Trying to thread a needle by condemning the violence while calling for an immediate ceasefire that would have the effect of preventing Israel from responding.
D) Changing the subject.
4. Hamas’ official policy towards Israel is:
A) Try to work out a two-state solution.
B) Work with the Israeli government to ease tensions in Gaza and to allow more international humanitarian aid to reach the area.
C) Keep up these attacks until Israel comes to the bargaining table.
D) Drive Israel out of existence.
5. During their jail break, Hamas fighters found it necessary to:
A) Murder Israeli children in front of their parents.
B) Rape Israeli women.
C) Take 150 hostages and threaten to kill them.
D) Parade their victims through the streets.
Answers:
1: C
2: C
3: C
4: D
5: Sadly, all are correct.
That’s it for this week. See you back here on Monday.
Yellow Stripes & Dead Armadillos 
Concur with your name policy, sorry to see you need to bend it. Most of the childish arguments I see online would not likely take place if the individuals had to identify themselves. I get the need for some anonymity but the degree it’s used today is unproductive and allows many people to act like 2 year olds, which is a discredit to many 2 year olds.
LikeLike
No need to publish this…
I admit I am afraid to use my real name. That may be paranoia but there’s a history of the extreme left showing up at people’s doorsteps in Madison. I live alone and don’t have connections with any large network (which I thoroughly relish). I feel vulnerable.
You have some advantages… retired so impervious to being cancelled. One foot in Michigan. A spouse to give you better numbers. Any pets to worry about? And lets face it you would have never pushed back like this while still active politically. Can you at least admit that?
The most important thing is it should not matter when discussing IDEAS. I get the concern about trolling and personal attacks.
Stu Levitan used to rail against anonymous posters on the old isthmus forum. With his big ego I always thought it would kill him to post anonymously. Did you know he was IN “Gimme Shelter”? It’s true just ask him.
LikeLike
Actually, as I became disenchanted with the hard-left over my eight years as mayor, I did take them on. I was constantly under attack from Brenda Konkel and others on the far left.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The cloak of anonymity that allows people to spout lies, vitriol and conspiracy theories with no accountability is, perhaps, the worst thing about the internet. If you are afraid or unwilling to divulge your name, you should not post.
LikeLike