Warning to BR Bloggers

As you know Jim Bacon has transferred some or all control (not clear) to the Thomas Jefferson Public Policy Institute, a conservative think tank.

In all the years I have known Jim, I know that he has stood for the finest values in freedom of speech, the media and of ideas. The Institute does not.

At their request, I wrote an article for the upcoming e-zine edition. But I didn’t like their editing and protested. Then they censored the item (I managed to post it as a blog item just before this) for the upcoming e-zine saying the “tone” was wrong. I was also told I was off Bacons Rebellion. I didn’t realize they were my new bosses.

Fellow bloggers, I may not agree with all of you and we’ve had some rather lively exchanges. But I deeply respect all of you and fervently hope you all can maintain the right to express your ideas without filters or “tonality” checks by some politically-charged institute that obviously has its eye on grant money and smooth connections. If this is the case, your good work will become high minded and inoffensive pablum.

I can’t reach Jim. He never would have done this. But be warned.

Respectfully and in friendship (Let’s see how long I have access to the blog)

Peter Galuszka

Share this article


(comments below)


(comments below)


15 responses to “Warning to BR Bloggers”

  1. Anonymous Avatar

    Goodness, this is troubling news to me as someone who just started reading this blog in search of a successor to the soon to be defunct RK.

    Was it the report on Mr. Goode and Ms. Drake that they found offensive? I was planning to post a comment thereto suggesting your analysis was comprehensive and accurate but a bit too gentle regarding the retired Representatives’ records.

  2. Anonymous Avatar

    I am not sure what the “tone” problem is. It sounded just like what one reads from “respected center right think tanks” about those who won in the November elections.

  3. Anonymous Avatar

    Those hot shot GMU Neo Cons know how to build a big tent.

  4. Norman Leahy Avatar
    Norman Leahy

    That’s not good to hear, Peter. Not good at all.

    I wonder if Jim knows about this?

  5. for myself – there ARE blogs that ARE “moderated” and as long as they say that – up front – then those are the rules.

    And BR is “moderated” .. and has rules…

    but the line is crossed when the “moderation” becomes not according to the stated rules and arbitrarily according to unspecified… ad-hoc.. after-the-fact criteria …

    .. in which.. I would have no shortage of ugly invective to describe..

    .. such Blogs do exist.. though.. but once I realize that the Blog is operated that way ( many industry blogs do operate this way – like for instance, when you ask the folks at “Behind the Plug” to give examples of existing Clean Coal Plants – they ignore you) – then.. that blog has no credibility.. and goes off the list of places to visit …

    and if enough folks think that way about a blog – off it goes into oblivion – where it deserves to go IMHO.

    One of the modern-day phenomenas that many of us find upsetting.. is the ability for a different entity to take over a known brand – and to change it – in ways that we don’t like.

    That’s life though.

    That’s why they say …”like it or lump it”… so if the BR “brand” is to morph into a censor-uber.. it will be …lumped (and a shame) – but life goes on.


  6. I’m not quite sure why a blogger.com blog would have “control.” If you don’t like it, there are three easy and free steps to create “Bacon’s Rebellion, Mark 2.”

    Censorship of ideas and documents in dead in the Internet age. That said, in looking at the toll anything that doesn’t move point-of-view of the foundation, I’ll probably be the next target. Tried to look at the Form 990s to isolate who’s bankrolling the place, but I got tired before finishing. I suspect it would be a familiar cast from the CATO and Reason crew (ie. lots of toll construction rent seekers).

  7. Anonymous Avatar

    As a routine non-blogger but avid reader, interested in credible pieces representing a varity of viewpoints, this response to “Gooze Views” is not un-predictable but nonetheless revolting. It tells a story that should continue to have the light of day on it. Was the word “revolting”? used. Purposeful misrepresentation is not to be tolerated by those masquerading their actual lineage and obligations. Commmission, omission, whatever–it’s still to be challenged. The cost is too high to do otherwise.
    It took guts, Gooze

  8. E M Risse Avatar

    Can we all agree that without Jim Bacon, it is not “Bacon’s Rebellion” and not Bacon’s Rebellion Blogspot?


  9. Anonymous Avatar


    We would all like to know when you find out what is on the Form 990 and other souces.


  10. This is strange and unwelcome news. My impression of Jim Bacon was of a straight shooter, and in the past he has openly announced changes to the zine and blog. Is there some way to check the facts?

    I don’t have any knee-jerk reaction to “conservative”, but any “think tank” should have a more rational approach to vetting their content… and perhaps said think tank will be making some announcement here that the guard is changing? Anyone? Bueller?

    Dr. Risse:
    Agreed. If Bacon has left the building, literally or figuratively, then let’s find a new home for the lively, rational, open discourse that resided here.

  11. Groveton Avatar

    Bacon is not the problem – he never was. I have annoyed Jim Bacon to the point of distraction. My three month long “descendants of Pocohontas” diatribe being but one example. And, yes, I know that the Bacon family consider themselves to be descended from Pocohontas. Whether Jim is part of that family or not – I don’t know. But I have never been censored. I have never been asked to change anything I have ever written.

    However, I kind of saw this coming. BaconsRebellion without Jim will not be the same. I have done what Bob suggests and started a new blog. Anybody who regularly contributes articles here or posted comments here is free to do the same on my blog. My only rules are: no cussing, stay on topic, no personal attacks on others on the blog (Pocohontas and her descendants are fair game).

    I hope the Jefferson Institute changes their approach. There is no reason to have one blog or even just a few. So, I hold out hope that BaconsRebellion will survive. I have avoided topics on my blog that overlap with this blog.

  12. E M Risse Avatar


    Good for you!

    Two thoughts:

    You did not provide a link to the Blog.

    It is not the ‘right’ to post comments that is key, it is the right to start a string.

    Who else do you propose to put on the masthead?

    Also see note to Peter G in response to his Jim Bacons explanation.


  13. Groveton Avatar


    It’s a karma blog. Everything is part of karma. Put out the facts, allow the usual respones and wait for karma. Eventually, the right comments (pro and con each other) create a karma all their own. Aggresive debate is always the best way to the truth.

    Tell me the truth now:


    See you there.

  14. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    PG: I thought the editing of my first article for the new e-zine wasn’t so hot either.

    But, I decided to give them the benefit of the doubt on the first go. If they edit against my druthers, then we’ll have a chat.

  15. Anonymous Avatar

    Thanks J.A. Bowden,
    When are we going to get together?



Leave a Reply