Are Men (and Women) Who Claim to be Leaders, But Won’t or Can’t Defend Their Positions, Leaders?

Ray, solid post and very diplomatically made points. I’m a mere poster here, but in my years of lurking I’ve seen “comments closed” only 2 or 3 times. Mike has closed them before, as is his right assuredly. Others, I cannot figure out. What I get confused about is I wonder what harm could possibly come from allowing people to comment. Lacking personal invective to me it seems harmless and should be allowed to continue.
But thats just me.

I can certainly understand Mike closing posts when the threads start containing epithets or otherwise grossly abusive language. That is certainly his right to discern and I respect that. I have not observed Mike do anything untowards in this regard and am not criticizing him. Overall, MND is a bastion of free speech, IMO, with a few notable exceptions.

Comments are never harmless, as ideas are the most dangerous things in the woirld.

They are even more dangerous when they expose the machinations of those who would manipulate the masses of hurting men who are statistically manipulatible into any action that the Totalitarianist Leader wishes.

So I warned, and so it is upon us, jsut as bridges and now the financial infrastructure is collapsing but repaiered by printing 38,300,000 dollars sucking more of the buying power out of the Dollar, making the People literally eat themselves and each other is just round the corner.

RAY! Your last sentence! Open your eyes please.

It’s a never ending theme. A self-proclaimed leader of the so-called men’s movement – slams whom ever does not do it his way. I like EG’s description of a movement from his earlier postings. There will many different approaches (some fanatics) they all play a role in the big picture. It seems that once a person believes they are “the leader”, then “if you are not with me” – “you are against me.” The interesting thing here is that all was cool until “This Leader” threw ALL of the first stones – every time.

“On websites such as this one (and others), in my opinion, some have even resorted to tactics like the deletion of valid posts and the turning off of comments to impose their biased viewpoints and restrict free speech. ”

I have made a policy decision to allow individual authors to manage their own threads. In general, most MND authors do not even avail themselves of this privilege, and so most comments – even inane ones – remain standing without interference.

In some cases – eg, Robert Paul Reyes – the author has elected to remove the commenting function altogether. In other cases – eg., Marc Rudov – the author may delete, edit or otherwise restrict “nettlesome” posters.

Here are the current post/commenting numbers for MND:

Blog Stats
There are currently 73,441 posts and 46,899 comments, contained within 84 categories.

In most cases, I do not interfere when it comes to posting comments. The rare exceptions are almost universally tied to abuse and/or thread-irrelevancy.

For instance, a poster named WLS has earned special consideration by his incessant attacks on various posters. After observing him for quite some time, I have concluded that he is either emotionally unstable or he is an active “plant” whose sole function is to disrupt otherwise productive discourse on this website.

As the editor of this site, I am MORALLY OBLIGATED to treat such malicious posting with a strong hand.

In other cases, I may “prune” comments made by people who — in my judgment — are posting for the purpose of spleen-venting or shite-disturbing (Thurston’s nasty and personal invectives against me are a good example – though as thurston himself can tell you – I will sometimes LEAVE such comments in place with annotations just to prove how inappropriate they are.)

I NEVER remove comments — no matter how nastily couched — that offer the redemption of useful facts or intelligent analysis.

Free expression is a big deal with me. Have a look at my article/website: George W. Bush: Stand Down and the subsequent comments there for a sense of how useful free expression is to an intellectual and policy enterprise like MND.

BTW – at the risk of exposing my own bias – I think MND is UNPARALLELED anywhere on the Internet in successfully melding civil discourse with critical debate.

OH the Irony! NEVER!? How about, “I stopped being a censor” is more like it.

I exposed you and you cannot recover. All you have left is Elder as the only credible individual here with a consistent message who is not a commentator. No offense intended to Ray who would like for the system to repent so he is really just raising awarmess of a symptom.

RAY! “Can you get me my Dad Back?” That is the singular quote of this entire mess. Do not stop what you are doing. I hope your picnic events continue to grow. The positive energy in such things is unstopable.

Mr. Sack’s endorsment of extra-constitutional rights for Men who want to use our sons as semen recepticles puts his credibility on a short timeline.

DRU, he did himself in from his position of superiority, entitlement, and elitism. I pinned him down too, as he focuses on the symptom of Marriage, when the fact is that he would not exist if most Men were raised to believe in marriage and the ones raised to believe in marriage were not raised to buy the Prisoner of Woman Marriage the Church sells.

DRU cannot see that the Mentality of the POW Church Marriage Model (which Cons hates so much) is operating by the same rhetorical position against men (men + bad) as the Women’s Temprence Movement as well which lead to the Suffragists movement.

Pathetic. So the 19 years he has wasted has lead him to spout the same conclusion as the Patriot Movement which he would call nut-jobs.

He hypocricy is so thick it can be sliced, pre-packaged in individual servings for the augmentation of bologna sandwiches.

Comment deletion is _pervsive_: both, it appears, by some blogwonks, and by the blogsite management.

Perhaps in some cases it’s for off-subject or egregiously `abusive’ material, but much of it is to remove hard information that simply runs against the self-promotion and financial interests of some bloggers, with which the site has strategically aligned.

It’s more like a corporate website, and is focused on entertainment rather than bring a platform for serious activism. Readers should understand that on certain subjects they are getting very far from a straight story.

It’s not my fault that telling the truth about California family law politics is construed as an `attack’ by Glenn Sacks, or about VAWA politics and the IV-D program by D R Usher.

I have never met the ‘Perfect Leader’. I have met some damn fine ones. I have even tried my damnest to emulate the best, often with comical result, but sometimes with good effect.

Do we expect too much?

There are several who write and comment here for whom I have the greatest respect but I do not expect them to be perfect, nor I to agree with everything they say, want to do, want me or us to do, or do themselves. Some indeed, occasionally dissapoint.

Closing ‘Comment’ is sometimes petulant. It is forgivable when based on track record and evidence of prior excellence. Arguments about it between the Leaders we have, men (and some women who occasionally post here) who have shown great courage and fortitude, is dissapointing too. But we must bite that bullet, perhaps discuss it, but definitly put it in context.

Leaders are needed in great enterprises. When the fate and progress of a civilisation is at stake – as it is with the matters more often than not discussed here – we rely on leaders to point the way and take a frontal position. These leaders emerge. When someone has amassed a great many smarty points they are entitled to be titled ‘Leader’ It is thrust upon them, rather than claimed.

Lets not beat around the bush here. Ray Bumhorst is a Leader. He asks that people join him locallyin his way of enterprise, perhaps even emulate his strategies elsewhere. I doubt Ray sees himself as anything but an individual guy who does his thing, his way, who just wants others to have a go too. He leads by his actions. I know little about Ray’s personal circumstances and I do not need to know.

David Usher has been tackling these societal issues for two decades. He has achieved a huge amount. His path is firmly rooted in experience and his own sense of priorities. He too asks us to join him. He leads by his actions. David sometimes gets up people’s noses by claiming leadership but frankly he deserves the title and gets frustrated when the troops ask silly questions or denigrate him. ( I am a troop David. Sorry if I can be annoying sometimes).

Glenn Sacks is a master of the medium who has done brilliantly with the internet for our benefit. He is a leader. He galvanises the troops like few others can. He gets stick too!

Mike LaSalle is a master of the medium too. A Great Leader. One of the quiet types like Eisenhower who make the most of his time in the office with all the damned paperwork. Mike is a Quartermaster. He Provides.

Generals, Colonels, Captains: they get there through this means or that. Usually earned. There were several in my Service time that I didn’t particularly like, but were worthy of following. Some had personal foibles that were a bit of a worry (I knew a Colonel – a chap – who wore a cocktail dress for dinner every month!) and whose personal drive though fierce, was not of my liking. No one was perfect. But most were damned good. Knowlege of how a General wipes his bum or how often he changes his underwear is not relevant to his leadership.

I was disappointed with David for closing his ‘comments’. I was frankly horrified at the personal comments made, attacking his family life. I can understand his frustrations and his being petulant, but not the anger and attack. Some self-restraint is needed.

But guys, please, no one is well served by Generals bickering in front of a parade-ground full of troops and throwing foibles and damaging personal remarks at one another. No one is well served by sniping from the rooftop. No one is well served by ridiculing tactical or strategic initiatives istead of analysing them.

I think it is time I leave the wacko men’s movement. We have nuts who blame ME for what feminists did, and they don’t like it when I turn comments off or remove the particularly nasty statements they make?

Most of the people commenting on this piece are the loonies of the movement. I did not invent divorce. I did not invent N.O.W. I didn’t make churches who were unable to figure out what feminism was doing to marriage while they were completely focused on abortion.

Finally, MND would not exist if you guys did something to reclaim marriage. The men who hang around MND know that the lack of legal protection for marriage is why they are here. Now, if you would rather attack me than get off your butts and help us go after N.O.W., then there is little I or anyone else can do.

The men’s movement has always been a whining fringe element. I know cause I used to do it too. But I learned something along the way, and have built a network of other individuals and organizations who now want the very same changes that you want. Its a complete shame that so many men in this paranoid movement are completely unable to see beyond their cozy miserable sandbox. Count me out, I have better things to do.

And, I am recommending to Mike LaSalle that Mr. Blumhorst’s column be cancelled. the man is hurting this movement very badly, injecting more invective and insanity into it than just about any feminist I know. There is nothing wise or honest or informed or intelligent about it.

This movement needs leaders, not destroyers. I see no editorial reason to continue letting a destroyer do his business in the living room.

David, ignore the loonies, stop reading their comments, and go about your business.

Censorship subverts accountability.

Real Men command accountability.

Sorry you cannot provide that Mr. Usher, but that is your decsion, not anyone elses.

USHER’s blog should be immediately canceled—if that’s really the way he wants to `debate’ differences of analysis, perception of the facts, sensibility, and opinion. (We’ll deal with Sacks later.)

Blumhorst is an all too rare, _honest_ man, despite being, however, a bit too on the reserved side IMHO. He endeavors to attract allies and adherents, and grow and enlarge the `movement,’ while his detractors conspire to consolidate power and exclusivive `leadership.’

A good leader is one who is in the trenches doing what needs to be done, takes the responsibility when it needs to be taken, but does not really want the power. I have met Glenn several times in person, and he certainly in my opinion fits the bill. He truly is uncomfortable getting recognition for his many accompishments, yet there he is being a leader regardless. When we were at a dinner the night before the DC conference with 30 other MRAs, and he had to stand up and introduce himself and what he has done, he took his time to introduce Jolly Stanesby as his personal hero.

Tom Golden, who runs Stand Your Ground, is another man who shows himself to be a true leader. Matt O’Conner is another one, who singlehandedly began the most visable fathers rights movement in the world.

I think the idea of having to choose one leader for any movement is flawed. The civil rights movement had leaders who differed so much you would not have expected them to be in the same movement, but they needed to address the issues in many ways, this many leaders were needed.

David Usher has been solid, reliable, and moderate. Ray has been active in ways which differ from David, but are no less valuable. It seems to me we’re shooting ourselves in the foot to compare them, to rate them, and to choose between them. I say both are needed and wanted, and they should perhaps just not try to change each other but coexist seperately but peacefully.

David, imagine the President, or even the candidates, addressing every fringe detractor or even overly enthusiastic endorser. No way, they stay above it. If the President stepped into the fray it would seem petty. That is leadership. I speak of no particular President mind you.
One hallmark of leadership is that the “followers” look forward to the infrequent times when he does speak among them and TO them.
I do not compare MRM folks to Presidents, but a certain adoption of this behavior could serve you well David. It would be far better then telling people who toil in very specific areas of the battle that they are stuck in sandboxes and fringe wackos, even if in cases it is true. And constantly threatening to leave is indicative of something (I need a psyc consult here to help me out).
I agree personal attacks and irrelevant invective has no quarter, but strong opinion and debate both do, and the credibility loss due to a “leader” staying in petty squabbles is far greater then that from fringe opinions and posts.
A leader will occasionally reground a debate by making brief statements of policy or belief, not by engaging in tit for tat.
Finally, I may not be popular for saying so, but gatherings on the mall in Washington are good for the MRM troops, but much like liberal awareness raising, it is little more then ribbons and bracelets in the big picture. To be clear, the motivational value is great and justifies an event. Change is grass roots, and people motivated when they leave there become grass roots activists. The gathering is not an end in and of itself though, lest we get sucked into liberal feminist thinking.
The reason I am in the sandbox of the church David and feel so strongly about in this regard is that you openly state near exactly what I believe about the church and about for exam ple the man blaming Promise Keepers. Then there is a diluted prayer portion of the gathering.
That is bad for Christians in general (the dilution) and very bad for MRM as it is insidious and sneaky…not on your part and maybe not on purpose by anyone. But it is.
.

bombbomb – “The interesting thing here is that all was cool until “This Leader” threw ALL of the first stones – every time.”

That’s an interesting theory. Who threw the first stone of, “Mike, kick this guy off the site!”? Whoa ho ho! That lump of coal award goes to DR Usher. (#10). Mr. Blumhorst encouraged the people to make up their own minds, but DR Usher wants the website owner to circumvent the peoples’ minds by burying his opposition.

Looks like your theory works beautifully.

David R. Usher said:

“Most of the people commenting on this piece are the loonies of the movement”

There we are throwing more stones. I suppose one way is to stop interacting, another way is to show grace. I’ve been trying to cultivate that trait in my daughter, so that she can command her life/interactions and have people like and respect her rather than coming across as a bitch. It seems, David, you are committed to interact your way or the highway. Grace is truly becoming a lost art.

“#

MMX said,

bombbomb – “The interesting thing here is that all was cool until “This Leader” threw ALL of the first stones – every time.”

That’s an interesting theory. Who threw the first stone of, “Mike, kick this guy off the site!”? Whoa ho ho! That lump of coal award goes to DR Usher. (#10). Mr. Blumhorst encouraged the people to make up their own minds, but DR Usher wants the website owner to circumvent the peoples’ minds by burying his opposition.

Looks like your theory works beautifully.”

Tales of My Looniness Have Been Greatly Exaggerated!

RUN DAVID! RUN!

Everytime he opens his mouth or types a word it proves what I said about him.

He is a little Marxist Brown Shirt. Historically speaking, the only difference between the the Stalinists, the Nazi’s, and America were the degrees of Marxism and who they claimed to be their enemies to get the Men to go die and Make War.

Welcome to the David-Marketplace of (only) David’s ideas.

Look how he flips out about my casual and causual observation of the Man=Bad rhetoric being the tool of Women’s Movements since the Women’s Temprence Movement, which came from??? ????? The Church!!!!! who also by the way now has 50% higher rates of disposal of Men than the non Bible Belt regions.

Why is that?

I have read some idea here about the Spiritual Revolution here is the 1870′s or 80′s brought in the redefined Feminized Jesus.

I have also read the comment that the Man=Bad rhetoric was around in the Victorian Era, where a woman could not even show an ankle 9even yet bound ina boot) in fear of arousing a man’s unbridled sexuality. That long table cloths that draped to the floor was for the specific reason of keeping men from being sexually excited by the leg of a table and coupling with it, as such things had been happening so much up until then. (really now….)

Even the History Channel in their series the XY Factor shows how the Scientific and Medical Intelligencia of the Victorian Era that gave us the now disintegrated therory of Evolution (as Homohabilis and Homoerectus were found in the same dig at the same level in the ground) invented devices to be used only by Dr.’s on women to remedy their hysteria. They are what are commonly known today as vibrators!

So much for the knowledge of the intelligent and well read.

Good thing government was kept out of such fields of reality to not have legislative jurisdiction.

NOT!

David, at least the son’s of Dr. Louis Leakey can admit their father and his evolutionary chart are a fraud. That there is no logical and proven fosil record to make the connections to make the disjointed theory of human evolution a fact.

You have to run away because you cannot admit to the Folly of every Women’s issue and issue pressed by Women for Government Control. You dare say not a single one has been correct and not caused nore problems than it complained of originally since the 19th Amendment, but you will proceed no further and blame only the 1960′s.

I want a leader who is not blind to the extent of the lies of the enemy.

Thurston – now you’re taking down evolution? Surely you jest. Evolution is God’s beautiful solution for life itself. And what in Allah’s name does evolution have to do with feminism?

You are rambling again… and seriously off topic.

I am not the paleontologist who had the headline on Foxnews.com 3 days ago.

I did not run the carbon 14 machine. So back off.

I just report the facts on this that Habilis and Erectus are now claimed by the paleontologist’s to have existed side by side for Millions of Years. Take another 1 or 2 off the Human Evolutionary chart where Richard Leakey removed 4-5 of the characters.

Even Darwin’s thesis on the last page states what you allude to regarding Origins, but the reality is that his mere thoughts on Origins denies not only the testimony of HIS WORD, but it has crumbled when the mere theory of evolution is continually tested by the bones and fossils continually dug up.

(Same as your bi-cameral universe graphic shows you clever except for the fact that G-D’s Universe is in present simultaneous existence with the one we are in right now. That HIS Universe did not have to cease to exist or reshape in any form or capacity for this one to exist.)

The truth is no longer hidden in collections, unpublished Articles and Books any more. The Internet has allowed entry of controverting evidence, the lie is over.

(Note: I do not think that the Moon god Allah has anything to do with anything here except perhaps the genital mutilation of women and the odd suicide bomber.)

In answer to the question I point to the rhetorical position held by the FemeSupremacists (Man=Bad). I have traced its Origins past the 19th Amendment and even to the Women’s Temperance Movement used to shame Christian Men into the foolishness of the 18th Amendment.

I even found the points about the covering of the legs of tables to reach further to the Man=Bad. That Era of Intelligence gave us Evolution where Women by their physical complexity over Men by their possession of Wombs are of a more intricate and sophisticated design, thus Woman Superior.

There is also the notion of Women being more Spiritual than men. That is another means of re-enforcing the Man=Bad position of the FemeSupremacists.

Playing off of physiological complexities the Marxist Evolutionists make easy cases that Women are the Superior Specie, and then go further to show that Men have fewer chromosomes. So women are more human than Men are because they have XX and Men XY. Now there is the discovery that when the male fetus is developing the testosterone that is released wipes out 10 Billion connections between the left and Right Hemispheres of the Brain (more FemeSupremacists ammunition against men).

I have received all of this inundation just like everyone else in school, the difference is that I am writing of it

The churches back this crap up all the way by their endorsements of not only Evolution, but also the POW Marriage marketed and enforced by the Churches. Men must be feminized because they are less human (having fewer chromosomes) and must be made compliant and controlled.

This crap, just like Evolution, just like it being completely wrong about women’s nature to orgasm, just like men’s attraction to household furniture (that men could not be left alone in furnished rooms), can be traced at lest to the Victorian Era and show that the War against Men has been going on at least since then.

Not the 1960′s like some nearsighted leaders are focused on.

Just so every one knows…. MND has been a Google News contributor since 2002. In all of that time, I have been able to balance “Free Speech” on MND with the editorial control required by Google News.

In practical application, I have seen to it that hard “news” stories from VOA and other news sources have been visible through a particular page (located here). This is the page that the Google News spider has visited once every 10 minutes or so – for the past five years.

Unfortunately, Google News has now changed its policy, and now EVERY article published on MND is being indexed by the spider.

This change has occurred in the past week. It has come as a surprise, and I received no prior (or subsequent) communication from Google that this was going to happen.

The result is that, in one fell swoop, I have lost the ability to PICK AND CHOOSE which articles published here go to Google News and which do not.

Since I do not believe that ALL articles published on MND are fit for submission to Google News, this puts me in a difficult position. Either I continue, allowing all MND articles to go to Google News – even those I think are unfit for wider dissemination – OR I must move all VOX POPULI articles to a separate domain.

Since I do not wish to offend the incomprehensible and fickle gods of Google News by sending them inappropriate articles, I have decided to move Vox Populi over to MND’s mirror site, BLOGWONKS.COM.

Failure to do so may result in MND being banned from Google News as happened to the website NEW MEDIA ALLIANCE.

That said, before I make this transition, I will make sure that BLOGWONKS.COM is completely up-to-date as an MND mirror, and that all MND users will have identical accounts at blogwonks.com.

COMMENTS will not be effected… MND’s comment database will be restored at blogwonks, so please don’t try to make a baseless charge of “censorship”, etc.

Once the transition is made, all former MND authors must post articles directly to their accounts at blogwonks.com. I will make sure that all blogwonks articles will be displayed on the home page of MND…

This transition will be very similar to the transition MND made when we closed the SEX AND METROPOLIS category and moved those links over to COUNTERPULSE.COM.

I hope this is all clear to everyone.

I will attempt to make this transition over the next few days… probably Monday or Tuesday.

I will try to keep service disruptions to a minimum, though past experience tells me that some people will still have a hard time making it.

FEAR NOT…. Every author and commenter on MND will have an identical account on blogwonks.com.

This is a transition in form only – it is not a change in SUBSTANCE.

Mike LaSalle
Editor, MensNewsDaily.com and Blogwonks.com

The difference between reformers and especially reform leaders, and media personalities—who are fundamentally entertainers—is very a propos the topic here: why the deletion?

“The difference between reformers and especially reform leaders, and media personalities—who are fundamentally entertainers—is very a propos the topic here: why the deletion?”

There’s been no deletion made on this end. I have no idea what happened. As far as I’m concerned, you may post it again, or as you wish. I’ve never deleted anyone’s comment(s) ever, and am not planning to ever do that.

Sometimes things are a little glitchy for me on this site. After I read one article and try to go to another, this site glitches up and tosses me completely out of my Internet connection. So far, I have not encountered that with any of my other Internet travels.

After Internet disconnection, I just sign on again and go back to what I was doing. I just take it as an Internet inconvenience, probably due to some pop up or security setting, or the like. I’ve heard recently the entire Internet is under some kind of new cyber attack by cyber punks and is running more poorly as a result.

Sorry for the digression.

Entertainment ability does appear to sometimes enhance the communication skills of leaders, IMO, but it does not make them leaders. Leadership skills can be taught in various courses, and leadership ability acquired or enhanced, but it’s too bad they don’t teach, “Personality 101 for Leaders.” Many leaders could benefit from exposure to that curriculum, IMO. I suspect we all could. I once attended an all day class on dealing with difficult people. Before the day was over, pretty much everyone I’d ever known fell under some trait of a difficult person, including me. That in itself was useful info.

An ability to communicate thoughts is also valuable to a leader, but what good is that to the most articulate leader if he/she is not thoroughly educated on the subject matter they profess to know, or he/she leads/teaches/lectures from a severely biased, agenda driven, exclusionary knowledge as is the case with gender feminists in Academic and other settings?

WLS made another one of his patented personal attacks…. bereft of anything positive, and more evidence that he is either perpetually hateful or (more likely) a paid shite-disturber.

Here’s what he wrote….

(Deleted) is not _for real_: he’s a media personality, not a reform “leader” in any sense. It’s beyond me how some people appear to miss seeing the aura of self-promotion that he radiates everywhere he goes, even if they don’t know everything that happens off stage. Moreover and very unfortunately, he’s absolutely unscrupulous in pursuit of his business interests: he’s arguably hurt and continues to hurt the children and fathers of California, and perhaps elsewhere. It’s not that he should be silenced—of course not—but the public ought to wise up to the bill of goods too many of them are buying.

This is exactly the kind of nonsense that helps no one.

It’s idle dart throwing.

WLS – to my knowledge, you have never made a comment here that is proactive or positive in any way. Your specialty is ripping down others who are actually doing something besides playing beerhall darts.

I am an extraordinarily patient man, but this burns my chaps… chaps.

Blumhorst, WLS, and a couple of others think that vicarious and vicious attacks on my work require me to defend myself. There is no defending oneself against irrational, angry individuals.

My record over the past 19 years speaks for itself. Those who do not understand how I am moving MR/FR issues into the world of legitimate politics will just have to watch. We now have real Christians, real Catholics, real Evangelicals, real women, real men, and real secular individuals all working these issues.

Those who write off all religions and all women and men’s rights leaders need to ask themselves a big question: If you know it all, then why have you never produced ANY results? If you know it all, go out there and do it yourself. If you can accomplish more than we do, my hat will be off to you.

Mr. usher.. I have witnessed youre impressive list of real world accomplishments!!
When all the smoke and dust settles, men/fathers/sons will thank you for youre real world legitimate politics approach!!

Men may be too angry or confused to see what you are doing!!!

do it anyway!!

And, debating some of the irrational pessimists here is like debating feminists. Its a complete waste of time, accomplishes nothing, You have to trust that the leaders of this movement know what they are doing better than anyone. We have lived through many mistakes the movement made, learned a few important things, and are doing things much differently than we did a decade ago.

It is working. Rudov is all over FOX, and creaming Lis every time. Sacks registers on the news map. Baskerville has networked into high level education and political circles. Google is pulling from MND. RADAR has had impact on the media, and is starting to be noticed in DC. I have networked into the Christian and political worlds. There are several others too. These things were pipe dreams about a decade ago, when nobody out there even knew a men’s movement existed.

What WLS and Blumhost dont understand is this: you can’t make people care about you by calling them names and lobbing turds at them. You can’t make people do what you want by standing on their toe and threatening them.

The best way to affect change is to put your arm around people, in a friendly way, and talk about how your answers will resolve their problems. Nobody gives a damn about our problems. They care greatly about their problems. When we show them that our answers alleviate their problems, then we get somewhere.

If the churches are on the ball they can play a major role in helping the MRM because they are already organized, have money, and have an audience (their flocks). One of the big problems in the MRM is getting people together. If people think the churches are not doing it right, maybe one thing to do is to re-educate the church leaders.

I forgot to mention Thurston. Anyone who thinks I’m a Marxist brown shirt reformer is suffering from a fatal case of spherical insanity. It is really sad — not funny.

Permitting this drivel on the MND front page only weakens the movement. When the rest of the world comes to MND to find out what the men’s movement is about, they mostly see insanity injected by the same core team of basket cases. That is why I publish on many other websites, because I know that a lot of people won’t visit MND more than once.

Discussion groups are where this sort of negativistic idiocy belongs.

Bart..you hit the nail right on the head!!!

Some educated church leaders sense what is happenning to men/fathers/boys..and are taking some responseability for the male abbandondment in our churches!!

I have connections to the Church. One is a personal friend of the Pope. Another is close to the Vatican, and has taken some of my recommendations to the Pope on his visits to Rome. The Vatican is, indeed, very interested. You can expect to see even more aggressive positions from the Pope on marriage. My goal is to see a “Pro-Marriage” sign right next to every “Pro-Life” sign in front of every church. When this happens I know we will be getting somewhere.

Folks really should attend the Rally on August 18th. This rally is proof that we are, for the first time in the history of this movement, tightly connected to individuals and organizations outside this movement who want the same things we do. We have the reform answers they need to resolve their problems.

If you don’t come to the rally, then you will be unable to understand what we have accomplished.

We see in post #30 and #27, vicious: vulgar obscenity, false allegation, ad hominem attack, and libelous statement made against my person. No specific references are even cited.
The poster further stereotypes my person by trying to include my behavior with that of another individual, that I don’t even know. That method appears similar to the prejudiced way gender feminists try to group and stereotype the entire male gender. I condemn post #30 and #27 in its entirety, for fallacious and libelous statements made against my person.

Someone said: “Permitting this drivel on the MND front page only weakens the movement. When the rest of the world comes to MND to find out what the men’s movement is about, they mostly see insanity injected by the same core team of basket cases.”

I have to agree. But if Mike does not have enough wisdom to oust the loony fringe, they should be ostracized by the rest of us. In my view, some have made themselves largely irrelevant and I scroll past their posts most of the time.

re Conservativation #16:

“David, imagine the President, or even the candidates, addressing every fringe detractor or even overly enthusiastic endorser. No way, they stay above it. If the President stepped into the fray it would seem petty. That is leadership. I speak of no particular President mind you.”

I don’t give a hoot what these idiots think. My reputation stands on its own two feet without explanation or defense.

My interest is in advancing MND to stop amplifying the front page petty insanity that lowers ITS reputation when the rest of the world accidentally lands on MND. When folks hit a website for the very first time, they make up their mind in about 30 seconds whether the website is worth paying attention to. I don’t think you will find too many people outside this movement who would find MND a useful source. There is so much fighting, insanity, and invective that it is difficult to find the good stuff. It does not take much idiocy to scare away the average intelligent reader.

MND should minimally be a top-20,000 site and could easily be a top-5000 site. It could easily accomplish this level of interest if it does the right things. Right now its about a 56,000 ranking. MND needs to walk away from the internecine trench war and focus on developing its stature and reputation as a source for brilliant thinking, news, and analysis spanning the mainstream-to-conservative scope.

This is crucial, because it is the only way to make FR/MR answers a politically-correct driving component of the larger family law / pro-marriage movements that are building momentum as we speak.

Now, I can certainly do my work without the MR/FR. I don’t want to do it this way, because it would be misunderstood. If the MR/FR continues to be dead weight on political advancement, it will find itself with fewer and fewer leaders who will even recognize it. This is exactly were the FR/MR movement is at presently. Since MND is the major website that should be handling these issues properly, I feel it is worth my time to help it develop to the stature it could and should attain.

Until evil, misandrist, gender feminism is completely deposed for being the tyrannical/totalitarian, political force it is, it is unwise, in my opinion, for men to marry, and especially to marry and have children (in or out of the Church). Given that American men are staring at the very real possibility of a radical, gender feminist, Hillary Clinton Presidency, I would encourage men to avoid marriage and family like the plague on men it has truly become, in my opinion. To do otherwise, is for men to be irresponsibile with their own well being and health, IMO.
Advocating men to marry and have children, without first and foremost advocating the return of originalist constitutional law (true equal protection, equal rights, and equal justice) is dangerously putting the cart before the horse, IMO. Advocating for men to marry and have children, without first and foremost remedying the misandrist abuses of gender feminism is dangerously putting the cart before the horse. Churches predominately have not worked to address or remedy the destructiveness of gender feminism on marriage and family, rather they have predominately blamed Father’s and men for lack of accountability, lack of responsibility, etc., and in my experience Calvinist Churches have been at the fore front of the accountability, blame and shame game against Father’s and men.
Marrying and having children under today’s gender feminist laws is, in my opinion, like the parable of Jesus, wherein he describes the man who built his house on sand.
Matthew 20 : 26-27 “…a fool who built his house on sand. The rain fell, the floods came, and the winds blew and buffeted the house. And it collapsed and was completely ruined.”
Having worked decades in the construction trade, I tend to believe it is mandatory for a solid foundation to be in place before further construction ensues. Such foundational assurity for men in marriage is not the case today, in either the Church, or the gender feminist legal system in America. Again, in my opinion, it is unwise for any man to marry today (in or out of the Church).

All,

I posted a short list of my more notable accomplishments to this piece, which Ray Blumhorst deleted to prove his point “Are Men (and Women) Who Claim to be Leaders, But Won’t or Can’t Defend Their Positions, Leaders?”

I did not start this idiocy. Ray and a few other nutcases did. Ray, we know who you are and what you stand for. If you can’t be a team player, go play ball for the N.O.W. gang. You are doing a great job doing their dirty work.

Post #39 is in error. There have been, and will be, no deletions made by me.

Furthermore, once again in Post # 39 we see: vicious, libelous, false accusations and ad hominem attacks made against my person, which I condemn in their entirety.

This is a strange post. The question at the top is;

***Are Men (and Women) Who Claim to be Leaders, But Won’t or Can’t Defend Their Positions, Leaders?***

What a silly question. Sorry, don’t mean to offend but I don’t get why this is being thrashed as something important. Leaders are always going to have people with Tall Poppy Cutters wanting to destroy them. And they will use what ever means possible. It should really be taken as a compliment when you piss so many people off because then you are showing you are making a difference and people are feeling the difference as in being uncomfortable. They wouldn’t even give you a second glance if you were no threat to them. But sadly, us humans are not invisible to verbal assaults. Leaders just like every human being is not able to defend themselves from everyone and they are not able to convince everyone they are doing something worthwhile. That’s why most at the top are ignoring people at the bottom. They can’t be bothered with the negative challenges and verbal or written abuse. For as many people who vote for a leader, many don’t.

Leaders are doers. Doers are not about words. Who cares if they delete posts or comments. I do it myself but it doesn’t change the fact that I move forward. And besides if you are actually looking to have winners follow you, it is a good idea to pluck those that unable at this stage to actually help. Then you can focus on using your important time to do positive things instead of wasting your time with negative.

What i think is funny is how this all started. Isn’t this over a very large gathering of people in support over men’s and children’s rights? Something that has been organised well and will help the cause? Don’t get what the problem is? Actually, I get the problem. People want to pull it to pieces but what I don’t get is why those looking in are so bothered with progress?

This nonsense is unacceptable.

MND is about to make a major transition, as I noted in item #23 above.

I will spend the rest of the day to make it happen ahead of schedule.

Ray wrote “Marrying and having children under today’s gender feminist laws is, in my opinion, like the parable of Jesus, wherein he describes the man who built his house on sand.” (Matt 20:26-27)

Nice. I like that. I’m going to recycle during my recruitment speeches.

mike..This nonsense is unnaccepteable!! and infantile!!

There soon will be whordes of young MRA’s looking for an education, and you must keep the ship floating so they may educate themselves!!

David (#39) said: “I posted a short list of my more notable accomplishments to this piece, which Ray Blumhorst deleted to prove his point.”

I remember seeing a list like that, but can’t remember if it was on this thread.

The father’s rights movement has a presence and some leadrership in England (watch the video).

http://www.fathers-4-justice.org

This the team one leader called to the cause.

http://fathers-4-justice.org/f4j//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=23&Itemid=45

They even have celebrity sponsors.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQeNwLsA058

That 37.9% of fathers have no access/visitation rights. (Source: p.6, col.II, para. 6, lines 4 & 5, Census Bureau P-60, #173, Sept 1991.)

That 40% of mothers reported that they had interfered with the non-custodial father’s visitation on at least one occasion, to punish the ex-spouse.” (Source: p. 449, col. II, lines 3-6, (citing Fulton) Frequency of visitation by Divorced Fathers; Differences in Reports by Fathers and Mothers. Sanford Braver et al, Am. J. of Orthopsychiatry, 1991.)

That approximately 50% of mothers “see no value in the father’s continued contact with his children….” (Source: Surviving the Breakup, Joan Kelly & Judith Wallerstein, p. 125)

Wake up America

I owe Blumhorst a partial apology. My list of accomplishments was posted in response to personal attacks by Karl an others. See comment #26 in http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/08/08/pro-family-rally-on-the-dc-mall-august-18-19/

The comment is as follows, posted on August 9, 2007 at 10:46 pm. Ray’s piece was published 13 hours later, on August 10, 2007 at 12:42 pm, accusing me of not defending myself. This movement is being killed by guys like Ray. It is this sort of sickness that is forcing me to seriously consider walking away from the men’s movement and letting it commit political suicide all by itself.

#

David R. Usher said,

For the newbies who think I’m just a cheerleader: Over the past 19 years I have (this is a very short list of accomplishments):

1. Forced Cosmopolitan Mag to stop publishing articles about terrorizing men. I convinced a major supermarket chain that Cosmo was not suitable for the checkout lane. All it took was one phone call from the president of the company to convince Helen Gurley Brown that it was bad business.

2. I think I’m still the only men’s leader ever quoted in Time Magazine — when I was an editor for the Liberator. See: http://www.time.com/time/international/1996/961007/cover.html
http://www.abs-comptech.com/First_Wifes/031r-101.html

3. Organized and themed the three largest protests in the history of the movement. The first was done over the objections of the leaders of the day — and I was labelled the “devil of the movement” for it.

4. In 1991 I got the first state law passed requiring child support modifications for reservists called into active duty. It took only 6 weeks to get it through both sides of the Missouri legislature. Nobody else has been able to do this in any other state.

5. I spent 10 years in an executive capacity for two leading Men’s organizations.

6. Brought about the resignation of Missouri’s most anti-family legislator. She named me as one of her three favorite reasons for resigning (I kept her legislation bottled up in committee for two whole years — and she gave up and resigned. The Post published my response too: “Kay has been at the helm of family law in Missouri for some 18 years now. During that time period every social indicator measuring the well being of Missouri’s women and children has declined substantially. I believe it is reasonable to hold her responsible for that”. The article is here but you have to pay to read it: http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=SL&p_theme=sl&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&s_dispstring=steinmetz%20and%20usher&p_field_date-0=YMD_date&p_params_date-0=date:B,E&p_text_date-0=1993%20-%201996&p_field_advanced-0=&p_text_advanced-0=(%22steinmetz%22%20and%20%22usher%22)&xcal_numdocs=20&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&xcal_useweights=no

7. Two judges had to resign the bench in Missouri after being identified on our “St. Louis’s Most Anti-Family Judges” billboards. Nobody would let them hear a case. One of them was a commissioner that got passed over for a full judgeship. That’s three out of four we went after.

8. Dave Blankenhorn cited my group in “Fatherless America”, see footnote 48, page 297 of Fatherless America, which is about the group I was president of at the time.

Now, before anyone here has the right to attack me, they better prove a better track record than I have accomplished. I put in my time, learned the ropes, and never got paid a nickel for it.

I write to pass what I know along, in hopes that we can develop 1000 men who are better than I am. These tools are at your disposal if you are willing to listen and learn.

Frankly, I am disgusted by individuals who can find nothing better to do than to attack the proven leaders of this movement or argue incessantly over trivialities. The problem is feminists. If you want change and power, you have to go out there and get it. If you pitch in and help, you will be remembered. If you don’t pitch in and help, you will be ignored and forgotten.
August 9, 2007 at 10:46 pm · Edit

If forgot to mention one other major accomplishment in Missouri in 1998: passing the toughest moveaway law in the nation. If a spouse wants to move (even across the street) that spouse has to get written permission from the other spouse before moving. Failure to do so is cause of automatic custody reversal. If the other spouse will not give permission to move, the move-away spouse can file for permission of the court, but has the burden to prove that the move is “in the best interests of the children”. Since this was passed, we have very few moveaway squabbles in MO. I also got on one-time automatic disqualification of the Guardian Ad Litem, and subsequent DQ for cause in the same bill.

N.O.W. hates this so much it is listed on their national website. I won’t tell you how I got this passed in a public forum. I don’t give away strategy where feminists can see it.

I’ve seen this list or parts of it more than once before, and remain unimpressed—even giving full benefit of the doubt to those aspects that aren’t completely credible.

It comprises gestures and symbols—scraping the bottom of the barrel rather desperately—not reforms or concrete changes, and at any rate doesn’t confer on anyone a right to lie, manipulate, and trample the efforts of others to engage the powers that be in the real world.

“I owe Blumhorst a partial apology”, says David Usher. I ‘ll say. Both of you are respected leaders in your own fields of anti-feminist endeavours and this invective and squabbling is damn unseemly. IT HAS GOT TO STOP. Both of you need taking behind the hangar and having a bit of sense knocked into you.

I want to see some attempt at burying the hatchet fellas. Let’s see some maturity and fellowship. You don’t have to like each other to work for the same end but you do have to be pulling on the same end of the friggin’ rope.

I can understand that being so openly public as both David and Ray are, that strains and pressures build up. Deal with it. We don’t need a Patton vs Montgomery spat spoiling the effort. We have an invasion to get on with.

Notice: I am at this very moment uploading the full MND comment database to blogwonks.com. I’m on dialup, so this will probably take a few more hours (the comment database is nearly 50 megabytes).

After I have completed this migration, MND will be shutting down the chatterbox.

I still believe most comments are very worthwhile, but the likes of WLS, dittihd, thurston and the other screwballs make it very unpalatable for me personally.

I will continue to allow more or less unrestricted comments at blogwonks.com, but MND is cracking down.

If people have a problem with this, you need to take it up with WLS, dickhd, and the other purveyors of chaos.

Mike LaSalle,

I agree with college activist on #44

This kind of gratuitous spear-throwing is what prompted me to resign from NCFM ten years ago, and to drop out of any active role in the men’s movement, and focus more on the larger political arena. It is destructive and just plain stupid.

Each person has his own role to play in achieving the overall goal we seek. Please, people, let’s stop this incessant backbiting and recognize that all of us have a valid and useful place in the overall effort, before the movement is discredited entirely.

Look, I don’t agree 100% with what everyone in the movement says or does, but I’ve watched these guys over the years, and they do accomplish good and useful things. Usher has been particularly effective in his admittedly limited realm in Missouri, for instance, and if others could mimic that effort elsewhere or if Dave had the support to expand his efforts more, we might actually achieve something.

I’ve also seen criticism of Sacks for making money off his activism and promoting himself, but isn’t that precisely how Rush Limbaugh became the de facto conservative spokesman for the nation, a man capable of making or breaking a candidacy? Seems to me that we ought to be encouraging Glenn, even if we don’t agree precisely with every position he takes, because the alternative to getting only most of what we want is getting none of what we want.

I think Ben Franklin said it best when he cautioned the American revolutionaries that, “We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”

I did not start these assaults, nor did I ask for them. I am completely sick of the nuts in this movement.

Julie, the article was merely trying to explain that people who claim to be leaders of a certain viewpoint (be it a Men’s Rights leader or whatever) should be able to answer questions, and discuss and defend their position in fair and open debate – sort of like the Presidential candidates are presently doing. If they can’t do that do they really have a position you want to follow? Are they really a leader you want to follow?

Those who have been watching this website for its entire six-year history are already aware that I am extraordinarily slow to anger.

However – as evidenced the events of 2002 – once my ire has been breached, all bets are off.

Back in 1998, when I lived in Marin County, I served as a juror on a highly publicized sanity hearing involving the disposition of a death row inmate named Horace Kelly. When the evidence phase of trial ended after about a month, my fellow jurors elected me their foreman. They did so, I believe, because they correctly judged that – while I am quite passionate – I am also resolutely fair, logical, and committed to the Truth wherever it may lead me.

My fellow jurors, on the other hand, were perhaps more typical of the average citizen: they were (IMO) less interested in analyzing the raw facts of the case, and more inclined make decisions on the basis of emotional reaction.

I’m certain they were all very surprised when I – their popularly elected Foreman – voted to find that Horace Kelly was insane – and thus should not be eligible for the death penalty.

The only other person who voted with me at first was a quiet Scandanavian woman who simply said, “I agree with Michael.” A third juror eventually changed her vote on the final ballot – but only after it was obvious that Kelly was going be found ‘sane’ by the majority.

The final jury vote was 9-3.

I was subsequently quoted by the New York Times, LA Times, as well as local TV news stations. ABC’s 20-20 visited me at home for an interview as well.

As I have already written elsewhere, I am not one for cameras, lights and the glaring fanfare of public attention.

I am simply not interested in fame, and I didn’t respond well to clamoring reporters. I think that’s why the 20-20 interview never aired on ABC.

A few days after the major media left, an anti-death penalty videographer visited me at my home and conducted an extensive interview with me. He incorporated much of this interview into a self-styled “documentary” on the trial.

I put part of this video on the web (LINK). My bits come in the middle and near the end of the clip. I’m labeled as the Jury Foreman with my real last name (which is not LaSalle).

The point of all this is to prove to any reader that I am NOT swayed by reaction, murky emotions, or by groupthink.

I will always follow my own conscience regardless of whom it may offend.

I have proven this many times before. I am about to prove it again.

In the next 24 hours – after I have backed up MND’s mirror at blogwonks.com – I will be turning off commenting on the home page.

All registered MND users and authors will have corresponding accounts at blogwonks.com. You need only log in with your usual username and password. If you have forgotten your password, you can reset it using the wordpress login screen.

Users and authors are invited to post articles and comments at blogwonks.com going forward. Links to blogwonks articles will be displayed on the home page of MND.

“I did not start these assaults, nor did I ask for them.”

I adamantly disagree. You appear to me to be trying to push a pro-marriage message and others have exercised their valid free speech rights in opposition to the dangers and damage effecting men by marriage. You apparently can’t handle that – people having an opinion different from your own on marriage. You appear to me to have been off the deep end with ad hominem attacks, name calling, and false accusations ever since. For someone who closed comments on his own thread, you appear very obsessed to come here and attack the free speech of others with impunity.

As far as leadership ability, personally I wouldn’t trust your leadership enough to follow you to the grocery store on the corner, and I seriously hope others give your exhibition of “leadership style” some serious consideration.

Before, I was not going to the August 18th event in Washington, because of the great distance, but now you can consider my absence at this point a boycott of the verbally abusive speech, IMO, exhibited by you on this thread to myself and others. How dare you say I am “doing the NOW gang’s dirty work,” in post #39. That is a very directly vicious, hurtful, and fallacious thing to say, IMO, and appears to say a lot about a person who would say such a thing, especially without even knowing the other person. In fact, it says nothing truthful about the person the statement is directed at, and I condemn that statement and all the rest of the, in my opinion, vicious, fallacious, libelous ad hominem attacks made by you in their entirety.

Good luck Mike. Thanks for all the times you have allowed me to post at MND. Best of everything to MND.

I want to see some attempt at burying the hatchet fellas. Let’s see some maturity and fellowship. You don’t have to like each other to work for the same end but you do have to be pulling on the same end of the friggin’ rope.

Yep.

I was just reading this book called Evangelical Feminism, A New Path to Leadership?, by Wayne Gruden, Crossway Books, 2006. It’s one of two books on evangelical feminism in the Church that I recently bought.

Here, on Pp. 33 seems to be somewhat of a restatement of what you say, from a Church leader perspective, who exhibits some real Christian leadrship principles, IMO.

“And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth… (2Tim 2:24-25).”

“No matter how seriously we differ with other brothers and sisters in Christ, we must we must continue to treat them with kindness and love. We must continue to report their positions truthfully without distortion or misrepresentation.

A number of egalitarian leaders today grew up in strict, harsh, even oppressive environments that taught “male leadership” from the Bible but did so without love or without respect and honor for the equal value of women in our Churches and before God, and without promoting and honoring the valuable ministries of women in their church. If you support what I say in this book, I ask you please be careful not to make the same mistake as others have made and thereby drive other gifted women into the egalitarian camp.”

It appears to me the same should be said by Church leadership about the way males are treated in the Church these days with all the witch-hunting of males going on in society, and the acquiescence by Churches to VAWA and other misandrist laws and policies.

Sorry Mike, I accidently hit the edit button on your post# 56. As you can see the spacing is now “off.” As soon as I was in, I realized I was in the wrong post so I exited and did not change anything you said in that post one iotta.

The criticism of Sacks that I’ve seen, and indeed tried to further, is NOT for his making money, but for his STIFLING AND IMPEDING OF GRASSROOTS ACTIVISM—which for all the world appears to be related to the priority he gives his media company and his self-interest in promoting himself as a personality.

If the latter observation is however, somehow wrong, that fact does not cancel the deep damage he’s doing to children and fathers unhelped by the cultivation of celebrity and production of entertainment, but yearning for family law reform where it actually counts.

WLS is just jealous of Sacks–every comment he makes reeks of his envy. He’s also jealous of other movers and shakers–Mike Robinson in Sacramento in particular, and also Mike LaSalle and anybody else who has any success. For WLS, there will always be some “reason” why whatever these gentelmen do isn’t right. The only way they can please WLS is to not be successful, and in these cases that doesn’t seem likely.

Well, I’ve always believed that a truly dedicated professional who is filling a needed niche with his/her services, should work to be so successful that he/she eliminates the need for his/her services entirely. A dedicated professional should work so hard that the problem they are trying to fix is remedied and their services aren’t even needed anymore – the job is done.

I think most MRAs wish most MRA professionals every success and realize that in today’s gender feminized legal system their services will be in need for a long time. Sadly, they will probably have problems with making a living, because they are trying to make a living amongst a lot of men who are financially broke. Sadly, they will probably have problems functioning, because gender feminists will just overwhelm them with the vast resources they have and the MRA professionals just can’t keep up.

A lot of MRAs are financially in the hole as far as the bottom line on their MRA work, but the need is enormous and the cause righteous. I have never encountered anyone in the Father’s and men’s movement who is getting rich off it. However, gender feminists, judges, lawyers, etc. seem to be doing okay off the systematic persecution and discrimination against Fathers and men.

Mike LaSalle – “In the next 24 hours – after I have backed up MND’s mirror at blogwonks.com – I will be turning off commenting at MND.”

Is this all about legal liability?

You are going to turn MND into a passing billboard on a vacuous highway to nowhere….

Man, you have invested so much of yourself…. time, energy, passion, and money…

And you are going to abort that idealistic project because you are currently disappointed?

Take a vacation, Mike, and reflect….

Go to anyplace “unwired….” for a few days….

Then, with composure …. decide.

(I personally recommend Carriacou … in the Grenadines. Even your cell won’t work there…)

That it’s true that there’s no one “in the Father’s and men’s movement who is getting rich off it” makes it all the more inexcusable that some compromise it so much to such petty purpose. The fellow who said Darren Mack had shamefully tried to exploit other fathers’ problems for the sake of his own rear-end is as good an example of how `it takes one to know one’ as we are ever likely to see.

That the gender feminists have “vast resources” is an unfortunate, unfounded urban legend that functions to excuse inaction and non-engagement in politics among fathers and men. The feminists have the upper hand at the moment because of past successes in capturing public support: they are now in organizational terms a true fringe effort, that prevails more often only because the opposition is even more pathetic.

Mike, your calling me any numver of names to describe one who is not altogether present is not going to change the fact that your little bicameral universe idea is crap in comparison to not only the beliefs of most of the People here who call themselves Chrisitans, but ORthodox Jews as well.

It is not going to change the short sightedness of the alleged leader you have put your stake behind.

It is not going to change the fact that he attacks at will and then censors his own blog comments.

It is about character Mr, whomeever you really are.

People see that.

Something better will one day come along, and you will be forgotten. As well as Stalinist Usher, and Mr. ‘I support extra-constitutional Rights for some perverted men to use your Sons and sperm recepticles” Sacks, and let’s not forget character assasin-Rudov.

Something better will come, and they will be forgotten. So will you.

Oh yes Mr. Usher, your list of accomplishments were already undermined by your own admission that after 19 years it has come to naught, as all legislation was undermined by judges and lawyers.

You pinned the tail on the Guild just as the Patriots have, and you dare to call others nut-cases…

I am happy I am not the only one who sees how much of a sleezy weasle you are and the same trecherous and treasonous DNA matter as your Grandmother.

Nothing you have said has surprised me at all. I know your type, you will lead many to nothing but exasperation.

You serve your masters well, so you need to go get a raise ao tell them you refuse to work for free anymore.

DadWith2Girls – with google’s policy changes, MND’s global profile has suddenly lurched much higher by magnitudes.

Here’s an example: As some people already know, I have just moved with my family to the Big Island of Hawaii, about 30 minutes south of Hilo.

Last night, in preparation for the expected hurricane, my 16-year old son and I were lashing down the bulk of or worldly possessions in the car port of our house. (The house is still being painted, so I am camped out with my three kids in an outbuilding on the property. BTW – I did not buy the house myself – it belongs to my wife. My credit is so trashed right now I couldn’t finance a dollar raffle ticket at the church bazaar.)

As we were crawling among the stacks of boxes and paper-wrapped furniture, a 5.3 magnitude earthquake hit, and suddenly the carport and everything in it seemed like it was bouncing on a trampoline.

As a California native, I have lived through many earthquakes, including the San Francisco earthquake of 1989. All I can tell you is that I am impressed.

After the quake, I walked back to the Ohana and wrote up a news report on the event, and posted it to MND.

In post number 23 above, I explained that the google news spider has now begun to index ALL posts to MND – not just my selections.

Last night I discovered that google.com has also changed its indexing policy for MND.

In the past, articles posted to the home page of mensnewsdaily.com were generally available on google.com after about two or three days.

An hour after I posted the article to MND (and I did NOT post it to MND’s home page), the article showed up as the first result at google.com for the search term “earthquake strikes hilo” (Try it yourself.)

Any person on planet earth who did a search for that term on google.com could read my article just a few minutes after I posted it.

That’s power, folks. And – to quote spiderman – with great power comes great responsibility…

Oppps…. here comes the hurricane. I’ll have to check in a little later.

Cheers!

“It is about character Mr, whomeever you really are.”

Oh, thurston, shaddup.

Are we fretting about internet aliases again?

Tell ya what, let’s have a little multiple choice test. Of the list below, which is the REAL name, and which is the spine-chilling internet alias?

1. Mike LaSalle
2. Rip Torn
3. Boy George
4. Elder George

As a product of a Christian Brothers education, I consider Jean-Baptiste de La Salle something of a spiritual father…

I have no idea where the other guys got their aliases.

“As we were crawling among the stacks of boxes and paper-wrapped furniture, a 5.3 magnitude earthquake hit, and suddenly the carport and everything in it seemed like it was bouncing on a trampoline.’

When the 6.7, 1994 Northridge earthquake hit the devastation was massive. Block walls fell on my property and all around the area, among other greater damage. Less than a mile from my house multistory apartments, pan caked and otherwise collapsed. The closest death in my neighborhood, an electrocution, was less than a mile from me. The 94 quake was about 8 miles deep, very shallow for an earthquake.

I pilled up the broken blocks from the block wall that collapsed onto my backdoor step and was happy (in a shaken way) my dog had not been sleeping there that early morning. A few days later there was a 5.0 aftershock, the biggest of the aftershocks as I recall. It too got my attention as the house swayed and shook. Months later after scores and scores of aftershocks, I suddenly froze in my tacks and starred at all those blocks I had loosely piled up the day after the big one of 94. Every single block was exactly in position I’d put it in the day after the earthquake. Wow, I thought, nothing subsequent to that 6.7 could even knock down a pile of loosely stacked bricks, but a 6.7 can tear down cemented together block walls like a child knocking over toys.

…one of many seismic learning experiences from the land of shaky earth.

I’m glad to hear the earthquake in Hawaii wasn’t any worse than it was Mike and hope you and your’s stay safe in the upcoming hurricane I’m hearing about.

UPDATE: The blogwonks database is all there… but I’m having trouble connecting up the comments with the articles.

Also, since I’m on dialup, my ability to move these large databases back and forth between MND and blogwonks is greatly restricted.

And then there’s Flossie. (Actually, up to now at least, all the worry and hype around these parts seems to be adding up to…. big surf. But then, the night is still quite young.)

I’m getting a lot of positive reaction from the MRA academic set over MND’s new editorial direction.

George’s followers, however, seem to have evaporated en masse… almost as though they had all received the same ‘boycott’ memo at the same time….

More proof Usher had it right.

Cheers indeed.

“More proof Usher had it right.”

About what?

#73: Proof that George is using MND as a recruitment ground in an effort to build a cult of willing followers.

Remember – George was a career Navy man. During his career, he must have become quite comfortable with all the obedient men around him. Now that he is retired, George may be attempting to rebuild his petty empire – but this time without the oversight of his superior officers.

Over the past few years of posting here, George has made an effort to gather a mailing list of followers. At this point he may even have a substantial list of these lackeys. The fact that so many of these flies have suddenly disappeared after I closed his last thread leads me to believe that George has ordered his followers to boycott MND in a kind of power play.

If my speculation is correct, then this is actually quite a good thing, because in doing so George has smoked himself out.

If my speculation is true, then this would be substantial proof that George really is entirely disinterested in advancing the sorry state of men and father’s in America.

Instead, George – like so many other apocalyptic and petty dictators before him – wants power. Just power.

All this BS about ‘patriarchy’ is merely a means to that end.