I’m a blogging neophyte for sure: I’ve been blogging now for a full eight months or so while Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs has been going strong for ten years. Through his content and style, Mr. Johnson has practically redefined blogging from a personal online journal into a legitimate form of journalism (while forever enshrining himself as the protagonist of “Rathergate” in the process) and a powerful vehicle for expressing both political opinion and thought.
In fact, reading LGF over the past several years has inspired not only my interest in blogging, but also my interest in national and international events; and as I learned about the world, I simultaneously learned about myself. LGF enabled me to find my own voice, develop my own ideological foundation, and not be afraid or hesitant to logically and passionately express it. More often than not I agree with Charles on matters regarding Islam, national security, and even share some of his concerns regarding religion in the political/public sphere. Unfortunately, however, we have diverged recently over matters of political principle and especially over issues affecting the individual and the encroachment of the state into what should be the sanctity of personal liberty and freedom; as I’ve waxed as a blogger, LGF and I have waned as ideological companions.
I first noticed his predilection for roaming off the conservative reservation last year during his skirmishes with Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch and Pam Geller of Atlas Shrugs. In time, it has became readily apparent that we never really agreed on anything politically or philosophically fundamental for that matter (I don’t believe in liberalism/progressivism, the demarcation between faith and reason, and conflict between Enlightenment ideals and Christianity).While I share his concerns regarding the religious Right, I don’t understand his myopia regarding the greater threat to our liberties posed by the religious Left. We also differ, according to his interview below (see “Johnson” tab), on the issues of gay marriage (and inevitably in how we construe both the meaning and purpose of marriage) and abortion (which I do not support on moral and cultural grounds nor for its original, intended purpose). So in short, au revoir LGF, forbidden Capulet to my forlorn Montague. As we part I leave with an ode and fond remembrances of our furtive, yet “star-cross’d”, dalliance:
I have a dream.
I have a dream that we will live in utopia.
Everyday will be rainbows and unicorns.
And we will love one another in multicultural unity.
In diversity and healed through The One.
Denali, The Great One. Immaculate.
The ones we have been waiting for are we.
And The One.
Earth healed. Humanity human.
Immaculate.
Within the following crunchy tabs are a soft nougat of Playa tastiness: The Charles Johnson interview with E.D. Kain of The League of Ordinary Gentlemen, Victor Davis Hanson diagnoses Obama’s Blame Bush Disorder, and the end of a long goodbye.

The Evolution of Blogging: An Interview with Charles Johnson
by E.D. Kain
Few bloggers have had quite as controversial a career as Little Green Football’s Charles Johnson. Johnson began blogging in earnest back in 2001 after the attacks on the twin towers, and continues putting out content at a furious pace nearly a decade later.
He is perhaps best known for playing a key role in the resignation of CBS’s Dan Rather following the forged Killian document scandal. He also played a role in bringing attention to altered photographs in the Adnan Hajj photographs controversy. In July 2008, LGF identified that photographs of Iran’s nuclear missile test had been altered.
More recently, Johnson has locked spears with many on the right over issues such as Obama’s birth certificate, creationism in schools, and “Obama Derangement Syndrome.”
He helped found the popular new media site, Pajamas Media, though he has since fallen out with the publishers and, as of September, has removed all links from Little Green Footballs to Pajamas Media.
I had a chance to exchange emails with Charles Johnson about his experience as a blogger and the current state of affairs on the war on terror and the conservative blogosphere.
Little Green Footballs was launched as a web design firm in 2001. What inspired you to change course and begin using the site as a blogging platform?
I started the LGF blog as part of the web design business. Blogging was still pretty new back then in the depths of the past; most people still called them “weblogs” and not “blogs,” in fact. I wanted to learn about the technologies involved, so I originally started with Blogger, then moved to Graymatter, one of the first open source blogging tools.
So was LGF initially a web-design blog, or did it have a political angle to begin with? When did it begin to take its current shape? And what eventually led you to co-found Pajamas Media?
LGF did cover some political stuff, but it was primarily a techie sort of blog before 9/11. After the terror attacks, I began focusing on the threat of radical Islam.
By the way, a postscript to the previous answer: the entire LGF blog is now composed of my own custom-designed software.
At that point in time you were fairly well aligned with much of the conservative blogosphere which unified behind the war on terror. Lately that seems to have changed. More and more LGF seems to be distancing itself from the right. What’s changed? Has national security become secondary to economic issues, or does it run deeper than that?
National security is still an important issue. But the main reason I can’t march along with the right wing blogosphere any more, not to put too fine a point on it, is that most of them have succumbed to Obama Derangement Syndrome. One “nontroversy” after another, followed by the outrage of the day, followed by conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory, all delivered in breathless, angry prose that’s just wearying and depressing to read.
It’s not just the economic issues either. I’ve never been on board with the anti-science, anti-Enlightenment radical religious right. Once I began making my opinions known on issues like creationism and abortion, I realized that there just wasn’t very much in common with many of the bloggers on the right. And then, when most of them decided to fall in and support a blogger like Robert Stacy McCain, who has neo-Nazi friends, has written articles for the openly white supremacist website American Renaissance, and has made numerous openly racist statements on the record … well, I was extremely disappointed to see it, but unfortunately not surprised.
I’ve always written the truth about my opinions, and I have no intention of changing that policy now, just to fit in with a “movement” that has gone completely off the rails.
Do you think there is any chance the right can reorient itself, or is the right-wing blogosphere’s daily outrage symptomatic of deeper failures from within conservatism?
Also, where do you see yourself politically these days now that the War on Terror is under the purview of the Democrats?
Without making any prediction — that’s above my pay grade — I think the Republican Party has a serious deficiency of real ideas, and the few popular ideas they do have are about pandering to the religious right and regulating private morality: abortion, gay marriage, etc.
I always thought “conservatism” meant the opposite — staying OUT of people’s private lives. In fact, in my opinion this is one of the main problems with the conservative movement today – the dominance of the religious right, which seeks to impose its own narrow belief system on the entire country.
Where I see myself politically — same as I ever was, Independent. George W. Bush in 2004 was the first time I ever cast a vote for a Republican President.
Little Green Footballs has helped break some big stories, do you think there’s room for bloggers to play a role not just as opinion-makers but as investigative journalists as well?
Yes, definitely. Bloggers with significant followings can call on the “group expertise” factor as well, to find out information and get perspectives from many angles. There’s a downside too, though — because bloggers on the fringes may try to make a name for themselves by floating poorly investigated or even false stories. We saw this recently in the story about Barack Obama’s supposed “college thesis,” a story with no credibility that originated at a blog known for posting unlabeled hoaxes, that was picked up and reported by Michael Ledeen and Rush Limbaugh.
Just as with news organizations, there are some bloggers that are more credible than others. Usually, they’re the ones who’ve built an audience and a reputation by being scrupulous about fact checking, and by quickly admitting and correcting errors.
Do you think the blogosphere has had a net positive effect on journalism at large?
One way to answer that: five years ago, not a single newspaper or broadcast journalism website had a blog. Now they all do. The rapid success of the format argues pretty convincingly that it’s a positive development — although it’s probably also contributed to the financial downturn for print and broadcast journalism as well.
As with most human endeavors, it’s a mixed blessing, because the rapid dissemination of information through blogs, and the possibility of remaining anonymous, also enables the spread of conspiracy theories and other fringe ideas. But on balance I believe the decentralization of reporting and journalism has been a very positive development for the free flow of information — one of the most important functions of our modern technological society.
Charles, thank you very much for taking the time to do this interview.
link to interview here
My dream is just hoping Obama will find someone other than Bush to blame all his problems on by 2012.
National security is still an important issue. But the main reason I can’t march along with the right wing blogosphere any more, not to put too fine a point on it, is that most of them have succumbed to Obama Derangement Syndrome. One “nontroversy” after another, followed by the outrage of the day, followed by conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory, all delivered in breathless, angry prose that’s just wearying and depressing to read…
I’ve always written the truth about my opinions, and I have no intention of changing that policy now, just to fit in with a “movement” that has gone completely off the rails.
- Charles Johnson
It is ironic that while Mr. Johnson complains about Obama Derangement Syndrome (ODS), he fails to criticize Obama’s own Blame Bush Disorder (BBD). As Victor Davis Hanson observes:
Friday, November 13, 2009
What Bush Inherited, and What He Left Left Behind by Victor Davis Hanson
In other words, Bush inherited the regular “stuff” that confronts most presidents when they take office. What is strange is that Obama has established a narrative that he, supposedly unlike any other president, inherited a mess.
At some point, Team Obama might have at least acknowledged that, by January 2009, Iraq was largely quiet; Libya was free of WMD; Syria was out of Lebanon; most of the al-Qaeda leadership had been attrited or was in hiding; a homeland-security protocol was in place to deal with domestic terror plots; European governments were mostly friendly to the U.S. (unlike during the Chirac-Schröder years); and the U.S. enjoyed good relations with one-third of the planet in China and India.
The fact that in the Bush years we were increasingly disliked by Ahmadinejad, Assad, Castro, Chávez, Kim Jong Il, Morales, Ortega, and Putin, may in retrospect seem logical, just as their current warming to the U.S. may prove to be cause for alarm, given the repugnant nature of these strongmen.
Bottom line: Obama’s second year as president is coming up, and it is long past time to move on and let historians judge the Bush years.
link to post here
As part of the long goodbye…
I ain’t sayin’ you treated me unkind,
You could have done better but I don’t mind.
You just kinda wasted my precious time,
But don’t think twice, it’s all right.
-Bob Dylan
Don’t Think Twice, It’s Alright:
[flashvideo file="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLOwZ_c71Yc" width="600" /]
It just wasn’t meant to be.













No doubt about it, the party is over.
All over the print and electronic media this week, the poobahs and pundits are predicting major Republican gains in next year’s elections. What is their basis for so bold a prediction? Historically, the party of a sitting president always loses in the midterm elections. It is as natural as autumn following summer. However, they fail to take into consideration one crucial factor: this is no ordinary time.
Given their weird behavior in the last year or so – and given the fact that they will only continue to self destruct in coming twelve months – I cannot foresee them gaining any serious ground in either the House or the Senate on Election Day next. In fact I can only see their numbers diminishing even further. By this time next year, Sarah Palin will be yesterday’s news – count on it.
We can only hope that out of the carnage of the GOP’s destruction will come a third party that is a tad more moderate and thoughtful – and I must emphasize the word “Hope”. Than ain’t never gonna happen, baby! It’s easy to predict that the Democrats will be running things for a long time into the future. The problem with that little scenario is, as Machiavelli said, “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” – and the Democrats already have more-than-their-share of corrupt political hacks. For every Russ Feingold there are about ten Max Baucuses. If the Democratic Party is going to be taken seriously in their self-proclaimed roll as the “the party of the people” (and that’s getting harder to believe by the day) they need to be purged of their dead weight.
http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY