Huffington's Hypocrisy

What? The Huffington Post?   But I thought they were supposed to be the good guys.  They're good as long as you cow tow to their Spanish Inquisition tactics when you have something to say about one of their articles.  I suppose at this point you are wondering what the heck I'm talking about?

It all started this morning when I got up and checked the front page of the Huffington Post to see that Newt Gingrich may not have the money to actually run for President (Wow Newt- way to show you have fiscal management skills).  In addition to this interesting headline was another one directly involving my congressional critter, Darrell Issa.  Those of you who know me better know I have a plethora of pet names for him, including Darrell Issa-hole and Darrell the Douche.  However, now the company he founded and is still on the board of directors apparently hasn't been paying the tariffs on the products they are having manufactured in China.  Of course I, never at a loss for the written word, wrote the following comment:

 "As one of Sir Douche-a-l­ot's constituen­ts, I can't tell you how corrupt this guy is. In addition, he outsourced thousands of jobs in his district to China. Furthermor­e, if you go to the web page, it will claim that the products are made in the U.S.A!!! Why would anyone vote for this guy?"

Unfortunately, my comment never got published (which has become a daily occurrence for me- at least one or several of my comments will not be published with no explanation).  However, with this one I pressed it up.  I wrote them a note asking for the explanation why it was denied.  I received a response from Stephanie H., User Support Specialist, Huffington Publications.  This was Stephanie's reply:

"This particular comment is unacceptable because you use the pejorative nickname of 'Sir Douche-a-Lot' to refer to Rep. Issa. This name calling is unacceptable and does not contribute to the dialog. If you were to resubmit it with his name or anything other than insulting name calling, the comment would likely be approved."

Now I could understand if I used profanity and even if I name called another reader, but referring to a public figure in a satirical way?  Really?  What gets me most about this is that the Huffington Post makes money off of First Amendment rights and yet denies those same rights to other people!! In addition, if I were someone like Bill Maher or Jon Stewart and used this name, they would have printed it.  This is selective censorship coming from a company that calls itself a "communications" company.  In my book this makes them not very much different from Fox News.

And if you look at my comment I call Darrell Issa corrupt.  But they aren't upset about that name, but rather the name Sir Douche-a-lot!  That's like going to a movie and seeing a woman get killed and being upset because you saw her breast.  Seriously?  I was starting to think that the Huffington Post was a credible news organization after being fairly skeptical about it for a year or so now.  Now I find this!  

A credible news organization would realize that the point of the comment was very important- namely that this guy is no good and doesn't really give two hoots about his district, constituents or even the integrity of the position he holds.  I hope that everyone will keep that in mind before linking to any of their stories.  Arianna, is this what AOL has done to you?