Amusing Notes

Through all the problems I had trying to bring the blog back, I hadn't bothered to look at who's been visiting lately. Then I found profound amusement to notice folks like CBS News and The New York Times, one of the Seattle papers and a few other "big names" have happened by.

But you know what? The people I'm always happiest to see are the regulars. There's someone from a local library system, for example, who stops by often, and a number of others - and I think you know who you are - that always make my day. I also love it when someone new comes by and starts coming back.

I don't do the blog to get noticed by the big guys (I know how to get them here and choose not to do it) but because I think it's important that normal Joes - and Janes! - talk about what's happening, share their perspectives, and try to make sense of what is going on.

I say this because I've been re-evaluating many things lately and one of the things I've wondered is if I should continue to blog. It does get me some negative attention and has cost me a few contracts because (even when the folks there say they agree with my positions) I can be so blunt that they are concerned that what I do might attract unwanted attention in unrelated realms. Doesn't matter that I keep my worlds very separate - some bridging happens.

I could tell you about the really nasty year-plus in which, after an article of mine appeared on the front page of a Los Angeles newspaper, got me on a "religious right nut case" hit list. It was a serious list, too, in which my name appeared with other "horrible, horrible antiAmericans" like Bill Clinton, Mario Cuomo, and yes, even the last Pope. Everytime my byline appeared anywhere, some nut would write to the publisher telling them I should be silenced. My crime? I showed that too many special interests were trying to "Disney-fy" the Internet and silence too many voices. This was during the big Telecom act in the late 1990s that was eventually thrown out by federal courts - and some brave judges. It's those types of judges - who read the law and try to respond fairly, despite threats - that we see being warred upon now by Tom DeLay and his type. We need judges like that as much as we need places other than the mainstream media to get our information.

This weekend, several have dropped notes ("look at this" or "thanks for saying that" or "it's nice to have a sane place to go" or other personal things) and I came on this morning to see many of you and... you know what? I don't think I can chute the blog.

We need each other, perhaps more now than ever.