Local blogger gets press at the WashPo

On the front page of this morning’s Washington Post a local blogger and his efforts are detailed in a story titled, “Muscling a Web Site Into a Social Movement.” (The author is Nick Miroff.)

While it’s pretty plain that the author and his editors don’t care much for Greg Leticq I can’t help but provide some mild applause for their handling of the topic of Greg and his Blog, Black Velvet Bruce Li. For the most part, they report accurately on BVBL and the topics presented there. I did have a few items of minor complaint:

First, as Greg himself mentioned on BVBL this morning, Greg has never actually called Faisal Gill a terrorist. You can read Greg’s clarification directly, and I suggest you go do that.

Second, I just love the Post making a condescending remark about a blog “making up in passion what it lacks in proof.” That’s said as if the Post weren’t guilty of the same behavior. (Pot, meet kettle.)

Third, and most importantly, I don’t agree with or approve of the Post’s attempts to conflate the issues people have with illegal “immigrants” with “a general unease about the large influx of Hispanic residents who have moved to the region in the past decade…” I’ve said repeatedly and so have most of the rest of the conservative blogosphere that I don’t have any issue at all with legal immigrants. I have a problem with illegals – Hispanic or otherwise – who “reside” here. Those issues are not interchangeable. I’d like to see our legal aliens make more efforts at assimilating into American culture, yes. I don’t have a “general unease” about them, so long as they adhere to the law.

All of that said, I want to be sure my assessment about this article isn’t lost or overlooked. If the Post’s treatment of him seemed a little slanted, it was only a teeny bit slanted. Any bias in this article was extremely mild and I found it close enough to being completely objective that it’s hardly worth arguing over. In fact, this is some of the best objective reporting I’ve read in a long time when the subject was something the Post normally treats with disdain. Well done, Mr. Miroff.

And well done, too, to Mr. Letiecq. I’m glad you’re here doing what you do. The community needs you.

Advertisements

2 comments

  1. 1st, just so you know, I haven’t read Greg’s “clarification”. Because Greg has blocked me from accessing his site (not from posting, but from reading it at all). You can decide what kind of blogger is afraid to have people reading what he writes.

    But he most certainly DID call Gill a terrorist. He wrote a post, and he put the headline “The Terrorist and the Homosexual”. Those are his words, they were NOT in quotes. Sure, in the thread he back-tracked when people like me (I was allowed to read and post back then) noted that it was bad form to call Gill a terrorist.

    Then he came up with the excuse that “lots of people” were calling him that. I can’t speak to whether Gill’s opponent had supporters who were trying to get that label to stick — if so, Greg was helping them by putting the name on a post. Greg also ran a poll using those words — “who will you vote for, the terrorist or the homosexual’.

    But nobody I ran into on the blogs, or in our republican committee meetings, was calling Gill a terrorist. Even Jonathan Marks wasn’t calling him a terrorist. So my guess people weren’t really seriously calling Gill “The Terrorist”, and in fact Greg was trying to make the connection by using the term.

    Imagine how we as conservatives would fell if the Washington Post were to put “The Terrorist Speaks” in a headline about one of our candidates, only to argue they were just using the phrase “they had heard”? of course, Greg revels in the fact that he isn’t really a journalist, and therefore is not bound by any need to tell the truth.

    And if you are upset about conflating the fight against illegal immigration with a backlash against hispanics, you should read the comments in Greg’s blog. There are plenty of Greg’s supporters who come right out and admit they don’t care if the hispanics are legal or not, they just don’t like them.

    Just look at Greg’s comments about “Salsa Music”. And his comment about the ESL program. Sure, illegals mostly don’t speak english. But many legal immigrants don’t speak english, and children of legal immigrants go to school. Some of them are actually BORN here and are citizens, and school is their first real confrontation of the english language. Legal immigrants in that situation would look at what Greg said, and see a man who wants to deny their children, LEGAL immigrants or even CITIZENS, the ability to learn the language of our country, simply so Greg’s child can get more money spent toward HER education.

    I know that’s not what Greg meant, but it’s an example of how Greg and his supporters mix up “illegal immigration” with a general attack on all things hispanic.

    We oppose illegal immigration because they are here illegally, flouting our laws, and living in the shadows. If they were legal, would we be upset that they speak spanish, or play salsa music, or have large families, or let their kids play in the street, or grow corn in their front yards in neighborhoods with no HOA regulations? All of those are complaints at BVBL, and all apply to LEGAL IMMIGRANTS who are hispanic.

    Thanks for the opportunity to express my opinion.

Comments are closed.