RAND PAUL/VAN JONES 2016
Here's an easy way to tell when your position isn't a conservative one. When you're standing with Van Jones, your position isn't a conservative one. When you're standing with Code Pink, then your position is not a conservative one.
No amount of noise or chest-beating is going to change that.
The Republican Party has taken a severe beating in the last year. With so many hopes down the drain, some will take a victory where they can find it, even if it's a younger version of Ron Paul.
There are Conservative sites that are positively giddy about Rand Paul getting positive mentions from John Cusack and Van Jones. Code Pink's endorsement is being treated like some kind of victory.
Are we really getting worked up about getting a pat on the head from the left? Are we all Paultards now or are we all RINOs now?
Or is finding someone to the left of Obama to side with... supposed to be a victory for conservative principles?
"Will the Left finally get the Tea Party now?" Breitbart's site asks. If Andrew Breitbart were alive, he could have answered that question in one four letter word.
The left "gets" the Tea Party. It gets it as a middle class bourgeois defense of its property and rights against the the rule of the left.
That is what the Tea Party is. That is what the Left is.
Even saner heads are calling Rand Paul's filibuster a political victory. The only place that it's a victory is in the echo chambers of a victory-starved party. And to Code Pink and Van Jones who are happy to see the Republican Party adopting their views.
The "brilliant victory" was that some Republicans tried to go further on the left than Obama on National Defense. Maybe next they can try to go further left than him on Immigration, Gay Marriage and Abortion.
And if that doesn't work, Rand Paul and Jon Huntsman can get together on ending the War on Drugs.
Most Americans support using drones to kill Al Qaeda terrorists. Most Americans don't know about the filibuster or care. Most Americans want political and economic reforms, not conspiracy theories.
The Paul filibuster was about drone strikes on American soil, the way that Obama 'only' wants to ban assault rifles.
This isn't about using drones to kill Americans on American soil. That's a fake claim being used by Rand Paul as a wedge issue to dismantle the War on Terror. Now that he manipulated conservative support for that, he can begin moving forward with his real agenda.
Rand Paul is on record as opposing Guantanamo Bay and supports releasing the terrorists. He's on record opposing drone strikes against Al Qaeda terrorists in Pakistan, saying, "A perpetual drone war in Pakistan makes those people more angry and not less angry."
This position is no different than that of his father. The only difference is that Rand Paul is better at sticking statements like these into the middle of some conservative rhetoric.
It's the same trick that Barack Obama pulls every time he gives a speech.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) blasted fellow GOP Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Thursday, saying the two “think the whole world is a battlefield.”
Like Ron Paul, Rand shifts the blame to America. It's not Senator McCain who thinks the whole world is a battlefield. It's Al Qaeda.
Here, in the middle of Rand Paul's drone rant is what he really stands for and against.
It's one thing to say yeah, these people are going to probably come and attack us, which to tell you the truth is probably not always true. There are people fighting a civil war in Yemen who probably have no conception of ever coming to America.
The people fighting that "civil war" are tied in with Al Qaeda, including the Al-Awlaki clan, whose scion, Anwar Al-Awlaki helped organize terrorist attacks against America and was linked to 9/11.
Friedersdorf (Andrew Sullivan's underblogger) goes on to say we do know the U.S. drones are targeting people who have never pledged to carry out attacks in the United States, so we're talking about noncombatants who have never pledged to carry out attacks are being attacked overseas.
Think about it, if that's going to be the standard at home, people who have never really truly been involved with combat against us. Take Pakistan where the CIA kills some people without even knowing their identities. This is more from Friedersdorf.
Think about it. If it were your family member and they have been killed and they were innocent or you believe them to be innocent, it's going to - is it going to make you more or less likely to become involved with attacking the United States?
This isn't about stopping Obama from killing Americans. This is straight-line anti-war garbage.
You know, or how much - if there's an al-Qaida presence there trying to organize and come and attack us. Maybe there is. But maybe there's also people who are just fighting their local government.
How about Mali? I'm not sure in Mali they're probably worried more about trying to get the next day's food than coming over here to attack us.
And a politician reciting Michael Mooreisms like these is supposed to stand for a "Conservative Victory"?
I think that's a good way of putting it, because when you think about it, obviously they're killing some bad people. This is war. There's been some short-term good. The question is, does the short-term good outweigh the long term cost, not only just in dollars but the long-term cost of whether or not we're encouraging a next generation of terrorists?
Is this the new conservative position now? That killing Al Qaeda terrorists only encourages more terrorism?
Are we all Paultards now?
The other thing about this is, is you need to try to understand who - who are these terrorists? Members of al-Qaida. There are no people walking around with a card that says "al-Qaida" on it. There are bad people and there were bad people associated with the terrorists. We've killed a lot of them who were in Afghanistan training and part of the group that attacked us. But there are terrorists all over the world that are unhappy with their own local governments. Some of them are unhappy with us, too. But to call them al-Qaida is sometimes a stretch, and sometimes open to debate, who is and who isn't. But then they use other words, and words are important. They're either a member of al-Qaida or associated forces. I don't know what that means.
And here is the ultimate point.
This isn't about opposing drone strikes on Americans, it's about using that to salami slice the debate to get to his real agenda which is opposing drone strikes on Al Qaeda.
Ultimately we as a country need to figure out how to end war. We've had the war in Afghanistan for 12 years now. The war basically has authorized a worldwide war.
This is Rand Paul's position. It's the position of anti-war protesters in 2002. It's Barack Obama's original position before he discovered that war wasn't so easy to end.
If you stand with Rand, this is what you stand with.
Everyone can do what they please, but if you're going to stand with Rand, then let's be clear about his positions and agenda. And be clear about whether you share them or not.
No more dressing this up in "Rand Paul is standing up for the Constitution." That's the same dishonest claim his father made for years. And none of the even more dishonest, "Drone strikes on Americans in cafes" nonsense.
That's not what this is about.
1. Do you think that the United States is murdering innocent Muslims and inspiring terrorist attacks?
2. Do you think that if we just leave them alone, they'll leave us alone?
3. If you think all those things, then wasn't the left, which has been saying all these things since before September 11, right all along?
Is Van Jones agreeing with you... or are you agreeing with Van Jones?
One blogger called the filibuster the biggest Republican victory since the midterm elections. Sure. In one case, the Republican won the House of Representatives. In the other a guy who believes that drones are a New World Order conspiracy got to trend on Twitter at night for a few hours.
For years Ron Paul supporters believed that flying a blimp and googling Who Is Ron Paul would lead to the people coming over on September 11 being caused by American foreign policy. It hasn't and it won't. Every Paultard victory was an imaginary triumph that took place in their own bubble. Now the Republican Party is climbing into an even smaller version of that bubble.
And then a few years from now we can celebrate every one of the Paul clan's publicity stunt complete with the No Drones blimp while losing by a landslide to Hillary Clinton.
The lesson that the Republican Party refuses to learn is that you don't win by abandoning conservative values.
You don't win by going liberal on immigration.
You don't win by going liberal on government spending
You don't win by going liberal on social values.
And you don't win by going liberal on national defense.
You either have a conservative agenda or a mixed bag. And Rand Paul is the most mixed bag of all, because the only area that he is conservative on is limited government.
If the new Republican position is open borders, pro-terror and anti-values, then what makes the Republican Party conservative?
Reducing conservatism to cutting the size of government eliminates it and replaces it with libertarianism. It transforms the Republican Party into the party of drugs, abortion, illegal immigration, terrorism... and spending cuts. And the latter is never going to coexist with a society based on the former.
This isn't the popular thing to write. The popular thing to write is to praise Rand Paul for his political theater and to call it courage. And then maybe to timidly dissent in one or two areas, while praising him as the future of the Republican Party.
But if Rand Paul is the future of the Republican Party... then the party has no future.
I don't blog on Sultan Knish to be popular. If I did, I would have embraced Paul Ryan as the savior of the Republican Party, back when that was the thing to do. I would have never criticized Bush until 2007 or so when it became legit. And I would be busy evolving on gay marriage and immigration.
Still I considered not writing this. It would have been easier to throw up some easy observations about Obama. And move on.
But I regret not speaking out in the past as much as I should have done. And while it would be easy to let this go, to let Rand Paul have his anti-war moment and let Marco Rubio have his immigration moment, so they can run in 2016 and show how wonderfully diverse our party is while bringing in the 'kids'... I don't believe that we can win through political expediency that destroys principles.
We tried that in two elections and we lost. Watering down what we stand for until we stand for nothing at all except the distant promise of budget cuts is how we walked into the disaster of 2012.
John McCain in 2008. Mitt Romney in 2012. Rand Paul in 2016. And what will be left?
To be reborn, the Republican Party does not need to go to the left. It doesn't need to stumble briefly to the right on a few issues that it doesn't really believe in. It needs to be of the right. It needs to be comprehensively conservative in the way that our opposition now is comprehensively of the left.
If we can't do that then we will lose. America will be over. It'll be a name that has as much in common with this country, as modern Egypt does with ancient Egypt or as Rome of today does with the Rome of the imperial days.
And we will be able to distract ourselves with the latest political gimmick. The latest piece of theater.
Conservative media voices have been growing incoherent lately, adopting positions that contradict their last positions and the positions that they will take a week from now.
We are suffering from a conservatism without context where each day and each week's position exists in a vacuum and is not guided by bedrock principles.
Too much of that same media has become guided by attacking Obama. Not by attacking Obama from conservative principles, but just by attacking him. And the problem with that is when you define yourself by attacking Obama... you become defined by Obama.
Conservatives are defined by positive principles, by the presence of values, not by negative principles, by pure antipathy. We attack Obama because of what we believe to be true, not because we believe that everything he believes is false.
The slippery slope is that when you become defined by what you attack, then you lose sight of what you do stand for. And then suddenly you find yourself standing on the same side as Van Jones and Code Pink.
Reagan said that conservatism is a three legged stool. Social, fiscal and national defense. Either we have all three. Or we have nothing.
There are Conservative sites that are positively giddy about Rand Paul getting positive mentions from John Cusack and Van Jones. Code Pink's endorsement is being treated like some kind of victory.
"Will the Left finally get the Tea Party now?" Breitbart's site asks. If Andrew Breitbart were alive, he could have answered that question in one four letter word.
The left "gets" the Tea Party. It gets it as a middle class bourgeois defense of its property and rights against the the rule of the left.
That is what the Tea Party is. That is what the Left is.
The left is not concerned about the Constitution. It does not care about civil rights. It cares about taking over. Allying with the far left against the middle left is allying with the people who really want to enslave you to further radicalize the system.
If the Cold War should have taught us anything, alliances like these end with the duped handing a victory to the left.
We can fight the left. We can fight the Islamists. Or we can cheer a man who is pushing the agenda of both.
There's nothing conservative about that.
THE ROUNDUP
Rusty at The Jawa Report has a comprehensive and well thought out piece on the strategy for Obama and Rand Paul. I don't agree with all of it, but it's well worth a read.
Since the majority of the American people have not actually read the Holder memo on drone strikes, they simply do not know that the Administration never asserted a right to assassinate Americans on US soil.Sure. Politicians play to their base. It's a careerist game. The real story isn't in what they say, it's in what they do. Don't read their lips. Read their votes.
Rand Paul knows this.
What he's asking the Administration to do is prove that they don't believe something which they never claimed they believe.
I can't believe that even he believes the slippery slope argument that he's making. I'm also not sure the political game he's playing or what he thinks he'll get out of this. He's certainly getting a lot of attention and a lot of support from the Right.
...
Which is why Holder's answer is so puzzling. If the administration wanted to clear the air why didn't they just tell Sen. Ryan, "No, we can't do that"?
Isn't the answer simple? They don't want to clear the air. They want to keep this political maelstrom going. They want to distract the American people from, well, everything!
$16.5 trillion in debt.
The worst recovery in US history -- ever!
Millions of people unemployed or underemployed.
And no end in site of the economic misery. Obama's failures are simply the new normal.
But, look kids, the Republicans are so nutty!
Rand Paul may be scoring some personal political points by trying to drag this thing out for as long as possible. It may help him with several elements in the base.
Lisa Graas, a Kentuckian who has been a big proponent of three legged stool conservatism has her own comments on the Rand Paul circus.
I’m sure many will claim this means I don’t care about civil liberties. To the contrary, what I see is a lot of people making an argument that (whether true or not) is going to have the opposite effect that you desire.
Remember back in olden times when most people who identify as conservative understood human nature and acted as such? Good times. Good times.
A HUG FOR EL DIABLO
Hugo Chavez’s grand Bolivarian Revolution, his answer to Kim Jong Il’s Juche, Ceauşescu’s Systematization and Oceania’s Newspeak has halted in its second phase, as the sovereign territory of El Comandante’s indigenous biological reservations was overrun by a capitalist invasion that Cuba’s Socialist medicine was unable to fend off.
The Bolivarian Revolution have been preempted by a meeting with an important revolutionary leader known only as El Diablo.
Chavez, who has built alliances with Iran’s Ahmadinejad and Cuba’s Castro, is reportedly hoping to sway El Diablo to his point of view, but initial reports, based on all the screaming and burning smells, suggest that the negotiations between the two revered Socialist leaders are not going well.
El Comandante Chavez, Wraps Up Bolivarian Revolution, Meets El Diablo
A SWING
Washington. D.C. — President Barack Obama, injured during a golfing mishap, died Tuesday afternoon after a struggle with an aneurism complicated by a stroke, the government announced, leaving behind a bitterly divided nation in the grip of a political and economic crisis that grew more acute as he languished for three days, silent and out of sight, as American and Cuban doctors worked day and night to bring the president back to consciousness.
Michelle Obama, the First Lady, told reporters on Martha's Vineyard that it wasn't her fault that her much-beloved husband died so quickly after what sources said was a severe tongue-lashing of her husband after the golfing incident, and denied any responsibility for aggravating what was already a serious medical condition
... no, no. It's just a satirical piece from Edward Cline on Rule of Reason
WHILE THE FILIBUSTER RAGED, THE REAL STORY WAS UNFOLDING
Even as government officials applauded the arrest of Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, Osama bin Laden’s son-in-law and an al-Qaida spokesman, his transport to the United States stirred a debate among lawmakers who appeared caught by surprise by the news.
Abu Ghaith was apprehended, transported to New York and charged with conspiracy to kill Americans, according to court documents unsealed Thursday. Abu Ghaith appeared alongside his father-in-law in a 2001 video in which they took responsibility for the 9/11 attacks and warned of more.
Abu Ghaith’s trial will be one of the first prosecutions of senior al-Qaida leaders in the United States. Upon taking office in 2009, President Barack Obama said more foreign terror suspects should be charged in American federal courts, as part of his goal to close Guantanamo Bay.
Republicans in Congress would like to keep Guantanamo open and have strongly opposed bringing terror suspects on U.S. soil.
“And when we find somebody like this, this close to bin Laden and the senior al-Qaida leadership, the last thing in the world we want to do, in my opinion, is put them in civilian court. This man should be in Guantanamo Bay,” Ayotte said.
THE RED SCREEN
The American movie theater industry is largely in the hands of a small number of companies. Half the movie screens in America are controlled by only four companies, Regal, AMC, Cinemark and Carmike.
AMC is the second largest theater chain in the country and it owns around 22 percent of the movie theater screens in the country. And it has been sold to China’s Dalian Wanda Group.
Aside from the usual economic impact of such a move, Dalian Wanda Group is now in the position of controlling what movies are shown in American theaters.
Communist China’s Hollywood Takeover
BETTER RED AND DEAD
If you wake up each morning wondering which Che t-shirt to put on today and your only non-Che t-shirt says, “I went to see the embalmed corpse of Communism’s Third-Greatest Mass Murderer and All I Got Was This T-Shirt”… boy does Venezuela have a great tourist destination for you.
The good news is that at least Latin America has some pyramids, even if they had a different purpose, so when the next shlock filmmaker wants to reenact Night of the Chavez, they can just bundle up the dead dictator inside one of them and film the story of a bunch of explorers looking for Chavez’s buried 2 billion dollar fortune only to experience the Curse of the Dead Socialist Economic System.
If You Liked Lenin’s Tomb, You’ll Love Chavez’s Tomb
IF ONLY SHE HAD BEEN WEARING HER HIJAB
An Islamic mufti in Copenhagen, Shahid Mehdi, has sparked political outcry from the left-wing Unity List and right-wing Danish People’s Party, after stating in a televised interview that women who do not wear headscarves are “asking for rape.”
“Women are not entitled to respect when they walk around without a Hijab. They are to blame for it when they are attacked,” Imam Shahid Mehdi said.
Now, however, he is accused of pulling his penis out and chasing a 23-year-old woman around in a park in Malmö in August 2012, according to the court in Malmö.
During the interrogation he refused to plead guilty and believes that the accusation is based on racism because he has Pakistani roots.
Muslim Imam Claims Women Who Don’t Wear Hijabs are “Asking to be Raped”, Arrested for Trying to Rape Woman
HOW MANY DOES IT TAKE?
According to a study by the Congressional Research Service, nearly 47,000 illegal aliens flagged for deportation between 2009 and 2011 were instead released by the Obama Administration, and 16% of them went on to commit further crimes, including 19 murders, 3 attempted murders and 142 sex crimes
Since this time only a few thousand are being released, they probably won’t commit more than a dozen rapes.
How Many Women Will Obama’s Freed Illegal Detainees Rape?
HOW ROBERT SPENCER WON AND 'LOST' A CPAC AWARD
I was surprised and honored that Jihad Watch was among the nominees for the People's Choice Blog Award, sponsored by Right Wing News and TheTeaParty.net, to be awarded at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) 2013.
As you can see from the vote above, Jihad Watch won decisively, getting over 50% of the vote in a field of fifteen. And I received confirmation of the victory from one of the organizers of the CPAC blog awards when I asked him when voting officially ended:
But as time went by and no announcement was made of this victory, and the voting continued despite my having been told that it officially ended last Friday night and that I had won, and the promised links and other placement promised to the winning blog didn't materialize, I started to wonder. So I contacted the organizer who had written me telling me I won and asked him what was going on.
The positive outcome of this is that Robert clearly won showing that his work and his importance can't be suppressed.
CPAC can keep Robert Spencer out of a hotel, but they can't shut down what he has to say even now.
KNIFE MEET BACK
Hillary Clinton and Richard Holbrooke, the eternal Secretary of State in waiting, another Clinton man, are the heroes, and the White House and Obama are the villains.
The purpose here is to disengage Hillary Clinton from the upcoming disaster in Afghanistan in preparation for her 2016 run. As in Benghazi, the theme is that it isn’t her fault. It’s Obama’s fault. It’s the fault of the military, the CIA and the White House.
The Clinton Gang were right on every single issue, from opposing the Afghanistan surge to opposing an Afghanistan deadline, to supporting negotiations with the Taliban at the right and not at the wrong time and supporting the takedown of Bin Laden… while Obama’s people were always wrong.
Hillary Clinton Already Shifting Blame to Obama for Afghanistan Disaster
IT'S OBAMA'S WORLD, WE JUST LIVE IN IT
Obama’s Brother Accused of Beating his 12 Wives While Running for Office
The U.S. health care system is ramping up to implement a massive new coding system called ICD-10. It’s a bland name for a system capable of coding thousands of colorful injuries. A full 68,000 to be exact, as opposed to the 13,000 under the current ICD-9.
Take these, straight from ICD-10:
Hurt at the opera: Y92253
Stabbed while crocheting: Y93D1
Walked into a lamppost: W2202XA
Walked into a lamppost, subsequent encounter: W2202XD
Submersion due to falling or jumping from crushed water skis: V9037XA
Reason #41 Health Care is So Expensive: Medical Codes for Being Struck by a Turtle at the Opera
Are Islamists Trying to Drive Christians Out of Benghazi?
Obama Claims Al Qaeda Defeated, Al Qaeda Claims It Has Scud Missiles
Is MSNBC Using Chinese Spam Bots to Trend on Twitter?
Egyptian Protesters Accuse Kerry of Muslim Brotherhood Membership
Code Pink Stages Massive Anti-Israel Rally Consisting of 4 People, 8 Cardboard Boxes
CRAFTSMANSHIP
This is from the New York Times and from David Brooks, neither of which are recommendations, and while there is nothing new here, it's interesting to see the in-crowd slowly waking up to the new Jewish reality.
Nationwide, only 21 percent of non-Orthodox Jews between the ages of 18 and 29 are married. But an astounding 71 percent of Orthodox Jews are married at that age. And they are having four and five kids per couple. In the New York City area, for example, the Orthodox make up 32 percent of Jews over all. But the Orthodox make up 61 percent of Jewish children. Because the Orthodox are so fertile, in a few years, they will be the dominant group in New York Jewry.
Pomegranate looks like any island of upscale consumerism, but deep down it is based on a countercultural understanding of how life should work.
Those of us in secular America live in a culture that takes the supremacy of individual autonomy as a given. Life is a journey. You choose your own path. You can live in the city or the suburbs, be a Wiccan or a biker.
For the people who shop at Pomegranate, the collective covenant with God is the primary reality and obedience to the laws is the primary obligation. They go shopping like the rest of us, but their shopping is minutely governed by an external moral order.
Meir Soloveichik, my tour guide during this trip through Brooklyn, borrows a musical metaphor from the Catholic theologian George Weigel. At first piano practice seems like drudgery, like self-limitation, but mastering the technique gives you the freedom to play well and create new songs. Life is less a journey than it is mastering a discipline or craft.
For the record, I set foot in the Pomegranate supermarket once. And that was it. I don't much care for Whole Foods or any version of it that make conspicuous consumerism trendy. And the loss of Friedman's on 13th Ave, a genuinely good all-around supermarket, left a real hole in the neighborhood, much like the loss of Kosher Plaza a decade earlier.
COALITION GAMES
I was too disgusted with the EY election and the subsequent coalition games to write anything on the subject. And while I do sympathize with the Haredi situation, let me just say a few things.
1. The Haredi willingness to vote for any horror for other people so long as their yeshivas get paid is at the root of many of Israel's problems. If it wasn't for their corruptibility and for Shas, the entire mess of accords and agreements, the murder of countless Jews and the destruction of thousands of Jewish homes would have never happened.
2. With that in mind, the Haredi high horse in regard to Yeshivas has very little moral backing. When you are willing to destroy other people's houses to get money for your schools, it's open to question whether your Mosdos deserve to survive.
3. Any threats to boycott settlements should be considered very carefully in light of the amount of money that Haredi institutions receive from Modern Orthodox donors in the United States. Yatza schara be'hefsedoh.
4. The other sides are hardly clean, but the Haredi world never seems to perform any communal chesbon hanefesh. Individuals do, but communities never, and that is a major problem because how can you practice, al telech aherei rabim lehatos, if you never question your own rabim?
A RETURN TO CATALONIA
The aristocracy is, of course, our coastal elite, the five or six million high earners who live near the Pacific Ocean from the Bay Area to San Diego. They are more likely to administer both our inherited and natural wealth, symbolized by everything from top universities, Hollywood, and state government to Silicon Valley, Napa Valley, and California finance and natural resources. Their children, if industrious and motivated, are prepped at Stanford and Berkeley, interned at proper law firms and government bureaus, and usually inherit enough of their patrimony and early enough to afford the $1,000 per square foot price that a Newport or Atherton keep costs — along with its flocks of attendant nannies, gardeners, neighborhood security guards, and maintenance people.
The middle is still shrinking. They are mostly the over three million who have left California for no-tax Nevada or Texas, or crime-free Idaho, or sane Wyoming and Utah. High-paying jobs in manufacturing, construction, and energy are disappearing. The aristocracy, whose religion is the green government, believes that to extend the conditions of its own privilege to millions of less well-educated and less correct-thinking others (e.g., build new affordable condos alongside interstate 280, open up the Malibu hills to low-income development, start drilling for oil and gas in the Monterey Shale formation, build some more dams to ensure irrigation water, widen the 99 and 101 to three lanes from northern to southern California) is to destroy the hallowed lord-serf system altogether.
The aristocracy sails in the summer, not powerboats. In winter, it tends to ski, not use snowmobiles. Its SUVs are Volvo and Mercedes, not second-hand Tahoes and Yukons. Ideally, its kids go to UC, Stanford, or USC, not to CSU campuses in Turlock, Fresno, or Bakersfield. The aristocracy believes in noblesse oblige, but it is a funny sort of one: shutting down a quarter-million acres of farmland is good for all of us, especially for a three-inch bait fish, and even for the farmworkers and managers who must lose their jobs for a just cause. Keeping derricks out of the coastal panorama is wonderful for rich and poor — and really, who would want a smelly job anyway out on a nauseous oil platform?
...from the great Victor Davis Hanson's Beautifully Medieval California
SITE NOTE
Anyone on the Blogspot domain has probably noticed a major increase in spam. I have been trying to cope with it as much as possible, but it's becoming time consuming and exhausting because too much garbage is getting through.
I don't have a solution to the problem, but I am going to experiment with putting comment moderation back on for a while and approve comments manually so that the comments section isn't filled with volumes of garbage.
It's not my preferred choice, but some of the latest comment spam contain links to malware and sites that steal passwords, and leaving them up for a day is just not an option. Hopefully Blogger will tackle this problem soon.
Your comments are going to be posted, there is just going to be a delay.
No comments:
Post a Comment