This crap will not stand unchallenged

Lately, some of our readers who comment regularly on stories and sometimes post blog entries are also trying to rewrite history in real time, especially when it comes to lying outright with claims that I censor comments which are critical of me.

On Friday, WWWexler posted a blog item at 10:58 a.m. in which he claimed I censored his comments on my Friday commentary about Keith Olbermann and said I had banned or would be banning him for being critical of me. He said:


When a website solicits comments on their articles and then censors them because they don’t agree with the content, one has to wonder what the exchange really is.

The purpose seems to be to generate hits by creating controversy. Since this is a commercial site, that’s to be expected. However, when this gets to be the sole purpose of the site, then it makes itself irrelevant as the goofy positions it takes.

I was banned from this site previously for retorting to a personal attack from another poster. I’m about to be banned (or already have been) for daring to contradict Doug on yet another of his wild-ass stir-the-pot anti-left articles.

I haven’t censored a damn thing he said.  He posted a comment on the Keith Olbermann commentary thread at 8:28 a.m. claiming he had been banned. Yet if he had been banned for any reason his comment would not have appeared. It did and I responded to it at 8:49 a.m. and LadyWolf posted a response to his comment at 8:51 and he responded again at 9:48 a.m. He he posted a follow up comment on his blog item at  claiming his resposne to LadyWolf had disappeared and reappeared. That’s impossible. When an item is deleted here it is deleted foreever and cannot be restored.


When I pointed out that he was lying, he chose to stomp off mad with a farewell post of "have a good life" rather than face the music. His blog post headline called me a coward. Yet his failure to stand up and face the music for being wrong suggests to me that the cowardice was not mine.

Had this just been a problem with WWWexler I might have let it stand but then Ted Remington, another poster who has upped the ante of accusations lately posted this on WWWexler’s blog:

The attack on Kucinich must not have happened because it appears to be gone. Hunh. I could have sworn I put in a criticism about Doug’s not practicing what he preaches. I must have been dreaming about the last season of Dallas.

I am, as are you, disturbed that criticism of the man behind the curtain appears to have disappeared. I wonder if the "story" about Senator Clinton’s "stealing super-delegates" has disappeared. I seem to recall that Doug dismissed criticism by saying, "The headline stands." Maybe it stands in the bit bucket now. I don’t know how to look for old stuff like that but I think I will have a scout about and report back.

(These are two paragraphs from his full comment.)

There has not, of course, been any "report back" from Mr. Remington. I suppose it is possible that he does not understand that when an article cycles off the home page it is archived and can be located either through our search engine on the home page or by looking at the achieve list by topic. Since Kucinich is a member of Congress it might seem to occur to most people to look first under the article listing labeled Capitol Hill, which is on the menu at the top of every page of Capitol Hill Blue. Had he simply clicked on the Capitol Hill link, he would have found the Kunich article, with all 42 comments intact, listed as the sixth article down (articles are sorted by date with the most recent first).

Likewise, the article about Hillary Clinton "stealing super delegates" is about politics and the election season so it might occur to some that such an article could be found under Politics. When you click that menu item at the top of the page, you get a listing of political stories. You have to go back a few pages since the article ran nearly two weeks ago but there it is with all 30 comments intact.

When I set up both the comment system for stories and later added the reader blogs, I did so to allow readers to comment on the stories and to post their thoughts about the political process. I have never censored a deleted a comment that was critical of me or this web site but I have deleted comments that attacked other readers of Capitol Hill Blue or which violated the rules posted at the bottom of this and all article pages of the site.

I did not, however, establish these commenting systems so readers can make unfounded charges that I "censor" comments or make other false claims about me or Capitol Hill Blue.

So let this be a warning to the WWWexlers, Ted Remingtons, Pablos or any others on this site who seem to have a personal gripe with me. When you make a claim about me or this site it had better be true and you had better be able to back it up with facts. Otherwise, I will remove such irresponsible and untrue crap and I will throw you off this site.

Comment on issues, comment on the articles and comment on what I write. Criticize me if you wish but stick to issues and what I write. Do not manufacture claims or make charges that are not true. That’s your right to comment but you do not have the right to lie about me or this web site. If you do those lies will be the last words you ever post here.

–Doug Thompson