I've imagined doing that oh so many times in my blogging years. But Keith Olbermann actually did it at Daily Kos. We are not in the same class and I understand that, but it's always good to see how antagonism works for those not of the girly persuasion. Girls are supposed to stomp their foot when attacked but not guys:
For years, from the Katrina days onward, whenever I stuck my neck out, I usually visited here as the cliched guy in the desert stopping by the oasis. I never got universal support, and never expected it, nor wanted it (who wants an automatic "Yes" machine?). But I used to read a lot about how people here would 'always have my back' and trust me this was of palpable value as I fought opponents external and internal who try to knock me and Rachel off the air, all the time, in ways you can imagine and others you can't.
Now I get to read how we pre-planned our anger because 'beating up on the President has been good for ratings'.
If I can understand people's frustration with seeing a speech by a Democratic president criticized in a venue such as mine, why is it impossible for some people here to accept my frustration about the speech? You don't agree with me, fine. You don't want to watch because you don't agree with me, fine. But to accuse me, after five years of risking what I have to present the truth as I see it, of staging something for effect, is deeply offensive to me and is an indication of what has happened here.
You want Cheerleaders? Hire the Buffalo Jills. You want diaries with conspiracy theories, go nuts. If you want this site the way it was even a year ago, let me know and I'll be back.
Presumably Buffalo Jills are female cheerleaders?
The Internet is a weird not-place place, and can be a very rude one, true, because of that anonymity. It's also true that progressives and liberals (and feminists) are not terribly good at supporting each other. Just think back to the Democratic Primaries. But storming out of the room cannot be the final answer for most of us.
Incidentally, I spot something in that quote I've noticed before: The tendency to view a blog or at least all its commenters as one lump. Someone gets angry at a particular comment and suddenly it's the blogger who is at fault or the whole readership of the blog. This, too, may have something to do with anonymity and not seeing the many, many pairs of eyes which read on these sites. Then storming out of the room appears justified because the whole place is rotten to the core.