Chris Prevatt’s postÃ‚Â regarding Mike Tardif’s homophobic remarks has garnered quite a bit of attention here on the Liberal OC and amongst others within the blogosphere.Ã‚Â That post has received over 90+ comments since it was first posted on Friday and it even spawned another postÃ‚Â from Chris earlier today and that has caught fire as well.Ã‚Â Folks over at the Orange Juice have weighed in not once, but twiceÃ‚Â and the Registers Steven Greenhut took a swipe at it as well.
Despite all the attention surrounding this let me assure you that the post was not intended to attract readers to our blog by capitalising on the hurtful and bigoted comments of Mr. Tardif.Ã‚Â The reason for this post was to send a message that if you are going to slur people in a heinous fashion we at the Liberal OC will not stand for it.Ã‚Â We never pointed the finger at Mike Tardif we simply pointed out that someone at Tardif Sheet Metal was behind making homophobic remarks.Ã‚Â Mr. Tardif admitted he was the person who made the remarks and thus outted himself.
As a result of all of this we have seen folks get on their high horse and feign outrage.Ã‚Â While I truly believe that some of these folks truly stand by the principle of “privacy” for anonymous posters, I believe that others are wanting to use this incident as a means to attack the Liberal OC and in particular Chris and myself.Ã‚Â Ã‚Â Pedroza at theÃ‚Â Orange Juice is a prime example of this faux outrage.
How soonÃ‚Â folks seem to forget that on February 22nd of this year in a post by Art Pedroza they outted theÃ‚Â employees at Rutan&Tucker for being on their blog.Ã‚Â If Pedroza and company are so concerned about the privacy rights of those visiting and commenting on blogs why would they do this to Rutan&Tucker?Ã‚Â Why is it okay for he and the Orange Juice to display a screen shot of Rutan&Tucker’s IP address?Ã‚Â How is outting Rutan&Tucker any different from outting Mike Tardif?
Well the answer to all those question is very simply this, they like Mike Tardif and they have an axe to grind with Rutan&Tucker and Patrick Munoz.Ã‚Â Simply put it is hypocrisy.Ã‚Â At the OJ what’s good for the goose isn’t good for the gander.Ã‚Â All this faux outrage on some ofÃ‚Â their behalf is nothing more than an attempt to provide cover for a political ally and fellow opponent to Measure D.
Ironically the leader of this faux outrage Pedroza has taken the violation of “privacy” a step further.Ã‚Â “Do you want me to dredge up all your emails…I did save those emails Sean.”Ã‚Â He thinks it’s okay to postÃ‚Â private emailsÃ‚Â exchanged in confidence, but he now screams that the privacy of “anonymous” bloggers is somehow sacred even though there is no explicit guarantee of privacy.
Thomas Gordon’s post about thisÃ‚Â deals with Constitutional protections and others have used the First Amendment to shield Tardif.Ã‚Â Let me remind Thomas and the others that the Constitutional protections are there to protect us from the government not bloggers.Ã‚Â Unlike Pedroza, I do believe that Thomas truly believes in the privacy of “anonymous” bloggers and I respect his position, though I do disagree with him on this issue.
Let this be a reminder to everyone that the blogosphere does not offer us privacy rights.Ã‚Â If we write something there is a good chance that we can be exposed.Ã‚Â Heck, Commie Girl used a 10 year old phone message/conversationÃ‚Â and tried to pass it off as a letter written by me as a means to attack me.Ã‚Â So in the blogosphere anything appears to be fair game.
As far as the faux outrage from folks like Pedroza we should simply consider the source.Ã‚Â Let me remind you that this coward used the blogosphere to post a vicious attackÃ‚Â against Al Amezcua.Ã‚Â He even resorted to posting comments that he claimed came from Mr. Amezcua’s ex-wife and family members even though he could not back that up or verify it.Ã‚Â Chris’ post regarding homophobic remarks and Mike Tardif was quite tame in comparison.