I Hate Andrea Valentine TOO! She is a TOTAL terrible bitch. Nuff said. She doesn't take care of herself either.

I don't know about hating her, but she certainly is sensitive about disagreement or even questioning her views. She allows any sort of obscenity or polemicism if the commenter agrees with her, but any comment that dissents she bans the commenter from her site and deletes the comment. This is comment she deleted from her site:

Why do you persist in describing all the people against this invasion as being of one monolithic block? You expressed such outrage when you thought that I wrote that about prowar people (which was a misinterpretation) but NO such outrage toward other commenters who persist in labeling anti-war people as being of one persuasion. There are many different reasons to be against this war: distrust of Bush (who has been shown to lie or misstate to get his policies effected), worry about increased terrorism, instability of the Middle East, a possible devastating effect on our economy and well being, the risk of death to our soldiers and Iraqi civilians, etc. such that people from all walks of life and ideologies are question the need for war. I don't understand why you can't understand that.

Pretty terrible, huh? She also keeps banning IP addresses. If she keeps that up, nobody will be able to comment on her site. I don't know she bothers with a comment section.

Your absolutely right. I posted a comment on Harris' site once and she deleted and tried to ban the IP address (unsuccessfully I might add... computer science is not her forte). So much for debate and open dialogue. I also suggested that she remove the comments section, if she wasn't interested in opposing opinions. She called me a cunt and deleted the post. I think she's highly reactionary, and crude.

I quite like Andrea Harris. Yes, she's got a short fuse. Then again, it's her weblog, and if you don't like it, don't go there, ya know?

She has very little interest in debating people. Not everyone is into that. [shrug]

That Reuters Apache helicopter argument that caused her to rant was so rediculous. Talk about a fallacy of non sequitar. I don't think she is that smart - she just enjoys the power of banning to piss them off because she can't come up with a logical argument if she wanted to.

Logic! OMG LOL.

i h8 andrea harris

My main beef with Andrea Harris (whose site doesn't seem to be loading as of this [hopefully not-to-be-banned] comment) is that she has a particularly baldfaced way of wanting it both ways: on the one hand, she postures like a pundit with opinions and insights into politics and culture. On the other hand, she seems bereft of ideas, except to agree with ideas that other people put forward. So when someone like myself wrongly assumes that she's got something to back up her ideas with and actually attempts to engage her (at her own level and in her own tone, no less), suddenly I'm a "troll" or I'm "banned" or blah blah blah blah.

I don't particularly want her to agree with me -- though an admission that her beliefs are pretty convenient (i.e., you can believe whatever you want to believe when you're sheltered from the consequences of your beliefs). I just don't want my silence to imply assent.

Hey, she's got the right to be as much of a hack as she wants; but she's still a hack -- with one of the most promiscuous blogrolls I've ever seen. Stars like hers rise and fall with regularity. I haven't seen anything on her site to indicate she's got staying power beyond her own referral logs.

My main beef with Andrea Harris is that via her format, her posting style and her (absolutely promiscuous) blogroll, she's set herself up as a political/cultural pundit: someone with opinions and ideas about what's going on in the world. All of her "non-verbal" blog clues say, "Read me! Read me! Read me! I have ideas! I use Moveable Type(tm)!"

Yet, when challenged on her ideas (or lack thereof), suddenly her referral vacuum becomes just a lil' ole down-home website. And wipe yer feet on the rug, hon.

There's nothing wrong with posting a link and writing, "I agree with this! When will those Idiotlogues ever learn and just vote for Bush and shut up!" But those aren't ideas. Those are big ditto-marks based off someone else's ideas. Again, she has the right to do it -- but she seems to want credibility without any of the responsibility, and it's annoying.

Stars like hers rise and fall on a regular basis. I've seen nothing so far to indicate she has any staying power beyond her referral logs.

Well,

I got banned by Andrea yesterday, but she has every right to do so, and after all, I did respond skeptically to her whiney entry about not being able to write anything interesting that day due to a 'sinus condition'

It's her blog. If she wants to limit its audience to creepy web stalkers who'll actually click onto her Amazon wishlist link and buy her an 'offering' , that's her business.

She's one creepy lady--sort of like Ann Coulter with a beanie baby collection.

i think she's hot

A poem for Andrea Harris:

A
N ew
D ay.
R ain
E nvelops
A ll.

H earing
A ll,
R eceiving
R eason,
I
S urrender

B rave
L ady.
O ld
W raiths

M ay
E ntwine

T he
O uter

M ists.
A ll
R eason
S catters.