I've been thinking about this ever since it first happened and have come up with a few ideas. I'm sure and WP have already kicked these around, and perhaps have e-mailed/IM'd with others on "what to do." So, forgive me if my comments are somewhat belated, repetitive, or have already been rejected.
As I see it, given your outstanding coverage of the Cindy Sheehan, DSM, Conyers investigations, the affidavits in re "latest scandal of the week", I thought that I'd take the liberty to check out a few things.
I'm pleased to report that your reputation doesn't appear to have been affected. Your standing in the blogosphere is stellar; your links to your site appear to have been consistent; and you continue to have highly positive comments from both DC, in the forums, on other blogs, and by the Whispering Campaign.
This says nothing of your other pursuits, achievements, and accomplishments which are far too numerous to share here.
Given your formidable status, it is unclear to me what would prevent someone with your negotiation, skill, and mental ability to simply prove to all one thing: Nothing.
There is no need for you to prove anything. You need not consider yourself burdened with the requirement to justify your existence to anyone; nor are your accomplishments in any way diminished by a single comment.
Moreover, as you and WP have well put it several times, when one has an issue with something, it is their responsibility to deal with it. IN that spirit, I have taken your wise counsel and simply accepted "my issue" as mine, and it is not appropriate for me to discuss my specific observations, concerns, or topics when they are of no interest, concern, or relevancy to the larger issues you well cover on all media forums: Potential for impeachment, war crimes, voting rights, etc.
Thus, in my view given your statue that simply overshadows that of any of your peers, you simply can wave your hand, and the problem would go away by:
Offering your accusers the opportunity to guest blog, and let the blogging community see them for who they are, and that you and your fine intellect can easily outmatch them;
Offering your accusers the chance to appear live on radio, unrehearsed, and let them freely discuss their evidence, and let you show that your record, performance, and conduct is without question beyond reproach.
You have the power to choose whether you do or do not let this become an issue.
I offer the above comments simply because both you, WP, the other bloggers on this site, and your audience have taken the time to give me feedback which has been most helpful. In that spirit, I trust that given your wisdom you will soon find a solution, and this will be resolved.
That said, I recall the words of someone I respect who also blogs here: Winter Patriot. Sometimes someone needs step outside their own shoes, appreciate your difficult requirements, and understand that the world does not necessarily revolve around a single person, issue, or topic.
That is wise. And I have though a great deal about those words. I believe, given Winter Patriot's wisdom, both of you will find a way to use this to your advantage. Given your public acclaim, the audience need not be proven anything for they already trust you.
The burden of proof rests with those who dare to suggest otherwise. If you truly desire to end this, there is an easy way and that is to allow your opponent to publicly collapse; or you can choose to continue to be annoyed by something that is but a wisp of dust in your shadow; or perhaps there is a deeper meaning to the source of your irritation.
The challenge shall be to use your skill, wise counsel, and novel approaches to rise above this. I trust given your great accomplishments this too shall simply prove to be a passing wind on a sea where far greater things shall be explored: The Good Ship Friedman.
Indeed, perhaps this incident could prove to be a useful mirror; perhaps there is something about your accuser that you may desire to have as a quality; perhaps you have something about the way that you do your things that you are not aware that can be improved. Perhaps there is something about their writing, word choice, or way they have presented their information that you desire to embrace as a higher standard for yourself.
Indeed, perhaps there are some things that they are doing that your admiration is something that is presently confused with confusion. I am only speculating.
For example, suppose there is something about the way that they have constructed their website; or allowed others to freely discuss issue; or their terms and conditions that are freely spelled out on what is or is not appropriate. These may be factors that are well established on your blog and are of no concern.
On the other hand, perhaps your accuser has specifically said or shaded something in a manner and form that is novel. Perhaps they have specifically stated "how to solve a problem". Indeed, perhaps "their approach" to an issue reminds you of something that is familiar, but also uncertain.
Perhaps your accuser has delineated in express terms the requirements they have for civil discourse, and they have done so in a manner that is unlike your own. Their approach, although unfamiliar, may be something that you and your peers may desire to embrace. Perhaps, after great though and careful consideration you may choose to define the issue as something that the need not gather your concern.
With a long note like this, I normally would have sent an e-mail or posted it on my blog. But I understand that there is a large volume of e-mail that you receive, and there has been some concern of late as to the links that I or others may include.
I wish to apologize for desiring to provide information to someone who is as busy as you, but do so in a manner that is accessible.
My thought was that given my long messages, it would be of great respect to your, Winter Patriot, and your intelligent readers that if they chose to skip over my material, they could do so with little movement of their mouse/scroller.
My goal is simply to share with others what I have been thinking. In that spirit, I have grown to admire your concise writing skills and formidable power and astuteness in quickly embracing complex issues and succinctly stating them. Your sill is something that takes many years to develop and it it not something that you should question at any time, nor should you fear that your audience ever doubts.
Going forward, I would hope that in the future that should I write something that I find of possible interest to you and your readers that they will know, on their own without me calling attention to myself, that there might be something for them to review.
I shall leave it up to the good wisdom and experience of your readers, associates, other bloggers, and the chorus of colleagues who admire you to continue with their work.
I would like to apologize specifically to several of the bloggers who have posted here. My current comments are rather long, but I feel that given the continuing issue, that it is appropriate that I share this perspective.
My view is that sometimes people have something to say, not because they desire you to do or not do something; but because they desire for you to improve. That may be the key to what your accusers are saying.
Look at their accusation not as a personal attack, but as a message and feedback or opportunity for improvement. Indeed, perhaps the message and underlying feedback is simply, "We need not consider the response," and move on.
Once we make that decision, we make a decision to "cut off" and that should be the end of it. But there is something about this particular interaction that is novel. I believe your goal should be to seek to acquire the new perspective, feedback, and raised standard that will continue to improve your performance.
Do not look at your accuser as someone who is trying to do you harm; rather, use their feedback, as if they were an opponent, as simply that: A message.
A far greater problem would be if, despite your statute, you got no feedback. That would truly be a far greater disservice toward your end.
Thus, I believe your goal could be turned upside down: Look at this not as a challenge to surmount or resolve; but look at this as a doorway to learning a new skill, a new way of doing something, but acquire and embrace that skill in a manner that will pursue your greater dreams. That may be the hidden message of this accusation. Again, it is only for you to choose how, of if, you desire to use this catalyst.
Over the years I have had the good fortune to consider things. And I have rarely found anyone who has achieved so much as you. You should be proud of what you do; and know that your work continues to inspire those who you may not personally know.
Indeed, sometimes people look to you not because of who you are, but because of your ability to touch many. In that spirit, and by way of anecdote, that was my goal in sharing with you and your readers my personal anecdote of having a challenge with contacting others through e-mail. I had assumed, given your statute and well connectedness, that if there was a problem that could be solved, that it could be remedied.
Also, after careful review of the situation, I thought that I could look at the website of Raw Story and rely on that information: They list you as Raw Radio. Perhaps there is confusion on my part.
IN any event, given the apparent close association between Raw Story, BradBlog, and yourself, I was under the impression that if there was a real issue with communication problems that given the close proximity between you, Congressman Conyers, and Raw Story, that we could come to some sort of agreement or arrangement as to how we might resolve particular issues.
Unfortunately, my effort to rely on that public information failed; and I incorrectly assumed that the linkage between you, RawStory, and Congressman Conyers was something that could address my issue.
I mention this, because as you well know, a few months ago your blog no longer was listed on the Huffington Post. As I recall, this was somewhat unusual, and many of us were wondering what was going on. Indeed, with quick e-mails and a few short exchanges, it appears as though the technical issue was largely related to a copying error. Regardless the actual problem, from my perspective as a listener/reader/audience, I thought that BradBlog, you, and your colleagues had a special relationship with your audience: If you had a problem, you could rely on us to step in.
I did make several attempts to discuss my concerns with the HuffingtonPost; I didn't hear anything, nor did I expect to. However, at this point, I have learned that the number of comments is backlogged.
I only mention this because as these events were unfolding with the HuffingtonPost, I had a problem getting contact with others. I had hoped that, in the spirit of respect and admiration for your well connectedness, that you or others who read this blog might be of some assistance.
Indeed, I was given some special assistance by several bloggers who specifically reposted my links from this blog to the ConyersBlog. In that spirit, I had assumed, given the relationship between you, Conyers, and Raw Story, things could get solved.
But, imagine my surprise when, after posting a link about my thoughts about Ambassador Wilson, and my desire to have that information forwarded that I got asked about "what I was doing." I was surprised.
Indeed, I was more surprised, that given my problem with RawStory, that when I attempted to seek assistance, and outline my concerns, it was taken as if "someone didn't want to hear it."
OK. I accept that.
But imagine my surprise, when after careful review of your blog, I find no specific rules our outlines telling me how to post a quote, I suddenly get a lecture on "what is or is not supposed to happen."
Added to that, I was told in no uncertain terms that I had violated specific rules. OK. I see no rules, but I'll play along.
But then it really struck a nerve, when despite my desire to solicit your advice and assistance, I had personal information posted.
I don't mind that. I do hope that a small act like that is taken for what it is: An error.
But I do not see what could possibly have prompted the response: I, as a devoted fan, I believe rightly, assumed that if I was having a problem with RawStory, that you and Raw could address the issue.
Indeed, the links are to my cite. So, why would I believe that I was trying to "hide" something?
That is what I have learned: The great lesson, is that sometimes people take admiration, respect, and fondness in a way that is not intended.
Sometimes, those we most admire can do things that confuse us. Not because they desire to inflict harm, but they simply choose to do what they want to do to contribute.
That is what you accuser is trying to do: They want you to be better. They want you to be more that you currently are.
Your goal is to decide whether you want to let the admiration of your opponent turn into admiration of a loyal ally.
That is your choice. I choose you as my ally. I choose Winter Patriot as my ally. For you both intend to do good; and you both desire to achieve great things.
In that spirit, perhaps you might wish to make specific things clear. I, as a devoted fan, may be mistaken in my assumption that you and Arianna, John Conyers, and Raw Story are as close. I still assume you can simply get things done, if that is what you desire to achieve.
However, if you desire to "not solve" the issue with your accuser [whatever that is], then this will continue to fester.
Let there be not mistake: The fact that personal information has been posted about me is of no consequence. But I do take it as feedback of "what is possible" when someone desires to do something.
I shall be wary. I am glad that I can blog and write on my own site. And I am especially happy that I have taken the time to learn more of what can happen.
In that spirit, if there is something that you or the other bloggers would like to say to me, you are free to do so in your blogs and provide links. Or you can skip over this information.
Either way, know that any effort to intimidate me or anyone else or to dissuade others from speaking their mind and dare to be inspired by you will fail. You, in your infinite wisdom, have inspired others; they dare to speak out; and they dare to say things because you are a public figure.
As am I.
Who am I? My name is Constant. And I had the good fortune of being publicly recognized by the DNC and the Ranking Member on the Judiciary Committee simply for a few words.
With time, you may learn more. With time, I may choose to share more.
And with time, perhaps you will accept the information from your accuser as simply that: A gift. They dare to admire your status with a simple accusation.
Use that. And you will be better.
Or pass it up. And wait until you desire to improve at another time.
Either way, people dare to take the time to provide feedback. They are either useful or not useful; the information is either helpful or not helpful.
It is your choice whether you move on. Your adversary has only given you feedback. It is your choice what you do or do not do about it.
When you are on set, the PA will control the noise. At rolling, you are ready. Background is the ready command. And at action, it is real.
Choose whether you are prompted by the PA or rolling.
There is no right or wrong answer. But choose one that works for you. When you make your decision, cast aside all the other options, then proceed.
If needed, the director can adjust as you well know and do it over. Perfection is not required, unless that is the standard you impose on yourself.
We, your fans, do not put that standard on you. Your job, I believe is to raise your standard, and to permit yourself more flexibility and imperfection.
As all grains of sand or stones on the beach, each is different. Some are more bright or refined that others. But each of the grains and rocks when added, form the perfect beach. As do you and your fans form the perfect opposition to demand improvement in this nation.
Do not demand perfection of yourself. Simply choose your own standard, and promise yourself to do what you desire to do.
There is no right or wrong answer in life: Your answer is the answer that will work for you.
Thank you for giving me the chance to speak. I hope that in the future, if you or others would like to read what I have written, you'll know what do. Other than that, I may or may not be available.
Best wishes and I trust that you will respect the desire of some to maintain their privacy; while at the same time not expecting others to meet standards that you are not willing to demonstrate.
Others may or may not respond to you; given I have not had a response to my concern, I am not confused as to why this issue with your accuser is something that is annoying. Just as some choose to respond in their unique way, so too do others enjoy not responding when you need help.
Remember, if you need help all you have to do is ask. But if you offer to help, don't expect others to reciprocate; nor should your good faith effort to be civil be made with the others will reciprocate. Your gift of power is freely given; and your desire to have others assist you appears to be something you want others to give, but with the full expectation that future requests for reciprocation be ignored.
If you ignore other people when they have a bonafide desire to solve problems, then there is every reason to expect that when you have an issue, others will not respond.
Your adversary, now your accuser is simply doing what you have done to others.
Why are you most bothered by what is going on? Because he isn't responding to you.
Why does that annoy you? Because he, your adversary, most reminds you of someone you know well. Those who act civilly toward others, but apparently violate some arbitrary standard, appear to warrant a surprising response.
Indeed, your opponent is most annoying to you because your adversary and accuser reminds you of yourself. You see in him something you do not like about yourself, but have not faced.
At this juncture, your task is to decide whether you desire to address that, or wait until someone else freely walks along, thinks that you are powerful, and mistakes your connectedness with the ability to solve a relatively simple problem.
I had a problem that I thought you might be able to help me out with. I got slapped in the face.
Your adversary is simply doing the same thing. Your problem is that when your opponent does what you do and blows you off, you get upset.
You and Winter Patriot have given me the course to come forward. And I have made contact with a lady I most admire.
I am not afraid of being a public figure. You are.
That is why I am winning.
I did more by doing nothing that many will ever dream. I have 30,000 people who know my quote; and Winter Patriot has but a handful of links to his sight.
continue with your whispering campaign. It is but another route to the same objective. I, in my way, do what I think is right; and you and your colleagues do what you believe is right.
When you are willing to be unfearful of your status, you will find the answers. Until then, know that I and others will remain inspired, and continue to improve and find solutions.
That's what living in America under freedom and a constitution is all about. To move forward. Improve. And make things better.
So choose your path, commit to it, and don't look back at me, or others. You have the ability to move forward. Your challenge is to examine why you choose to react the way you do.
I think I know what the answer is. But the decision and work is up to you.
Thank you for inspiring me to thank Barbra Streisand for her kind remarks about me before the DNC and on her website. If you want to read more, Prissy Patriot was kind enough to run with the Exclusive.
"Beware the Leader"