Say Anything Blog

What’s the deal with using the picture with Clintone?  Is that supposed to take away from his electability?

It’s a reference to “The Jazz Singer”...white guy pretending to be black.  They are trying to say Joe is a Republican in disguise.

So why with Clintone

So why with Clintone

Maybe because Clinton recently came out in support of Lieberman much to the chagrin of the Kos Kids.

This is derogatory .

Someone better call the NAACP, ACLU and Jesse Jackson ASAP. Painting Liebermans face while posed with Americas first black president is insulting.

So, Why isn’t the NAACP after them?

So, Why isn’t the NAACP after them?

Cause they’re all lefties.

OH!…

This will not be a high point in Ms. Hamshers carrier.

The New York Post (via Drudge) is reporting that both Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are going to campaign on behalf of Lamont… or rather, against Joe Lieberman.

Like the United Nations, the old guard civil rights leadership has managed to make itself largely irrelevant.  Sharpton is good for a laugh in a 90 second tv interview, and about the only oone that even cares what Jesse Jackson has to say is Cindy Sheehan.

reporting that both Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are going to campaign on behalf of Lamont… or rather, against Joe Lieberman.

Is ole Jesse going to go on an anti-Semitic rant like the time he called NY hymietown?

Jane Hamsher has taken down her photoshopped blackface picture of Senator Lieberman, with no apology, or even an acknowledgment that it was ever there.  Another “Get Out Of Jail Free” card for the racist liberal.  What a surprise.  That Arianna is so-o-o-o understanding and forgiving!

Meanwhile, Mel is still being discussed in the MSM, with no end in sight.  Maybe he should try blackface next…

I am a black male in Cincinnati, Ohio and find this incredibly offensive and idiotic. First of all; there is a myth that needs to be straightened out: IT WAS A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT THAT ENDED SLAVERY AND A REPUBLICAN CONGRESS THAT PASSED CIVIL RIGHTS...not some dim-witted Dem-Lib, so all you dumbass black liberal democrats need to take a good long look at your Democratic Party. take a look at what they’ve done for you these last 40yrs, that is, kept you in a perpetual state of rage and unreasoning for one purpose...to get your ignorant vote. Democrats and Liberals DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU, how long is it going to take for you to understand this? Don’t believe me, try moving in an affluent neighborhood in Connecticut or Rhode Island and see how welcoming your Democratic Liberal Neighbors are. Black people more than anyone, should be devout Republicans, all that we have ever asked for is a chance and now that we have it and even more, some of you wont even take it. Instead, you cry help from Dems and Libs and the Sharptons and Jacksons and the Gov’t and you’ll never figure it out...they dont care about you either. Here’s a hint: DO IT YOURSELF, contribute to society.

I am a black male in Cincinnati, Ohio and find this incredibly offensive and idiotic. First of all; there is a myth that needs to be straightened out: IT WAS A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT THAT ENDED SLAVERY AND A REPUBLICAN CONGRESS THAT PASSED CIVIL RIGHTS...not some dim-witted Dem-Lib, so all you dumbass black liberal democrats need to take a good long look at your Democratic Party. take a look at what they’ve done for you these last 40yrs, that is, kept you in a perpetual state of rage and unreasoning for one purpose...to get your ignorant vote. Democrats and Liberals DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU, how long is it going to take for you to understand this? Don’t believe me, try moving in an affluent neighborhood in Connecticut or Rhode Island and see how welcoming your Democratic Liberal Neighbors are. Black people more than anyone, should be devout Republicans, all that we have ever asked for is a chance and now that we have it and even more, some of you wont even take it. Instead, you cry help from Dems and Libs and the Sharptons and Jacksons and the Gov’t and you’ll never figure it out...they dont care about you either. Here’s a hint: DO IT YOURSELF, contribute to society.

LDS,

Damn!  That was worth posting twice.  Welcome aboard.

I for one think only an asswipe would pull a stunt like this.

remind me again why michael huffington married a greek woman?

Well it certainly wasn’t her superior level of intellectual compatability, nor her adroit conversational skills either.

Wow, North Dakota’s Most Popular Political Blog.  That means that you have, what, seven readers?

Asswipe.

I think Rob’s numbers are about 100,000 a month in unique visitors.

remind me again why michael huffington married a greek woman?

U, you put an unwanted ‘r’ in there, didn’t you?

Regards…

Well, well!  Al Jolson… the last person to put on blackface in public and have it accepted.  How appropriate. 

Do come back when you have something worthwhile to say.

Those of you who are Republican and think the internets are a series of tubes should skip this post.  There’s nothing for you here.  For the rest of you…

Let’s talk about this “100,000 a month unique visitors” stat.  I could be wrong, but the stats software/systems that I’ve seen consider a hit to be a “unique visitor” if the IP address of the visitor hasn’t loaded a page on the website in a set period of time (15 or 30 minutes, usually, depending on how the admin has it set).  That means that if some of you dweebs check in here once an hour from 10am to 10pm (and, admit it; some of you are here more often and over longer hours than that), the stat program will count each visit as a “unique visitor”.  So let’s say there are 30 days in a month, and the exact same 200 people check in here every day, 10 to 10, and 100 new people stumble upon the site during the day (but not all of them come back, or only come back occasionally).  That would pretty much make up the entire readership of this website.  [(200X12X30=72000) + (100X12X30=36000)) = 98,000]. 

Now, I know the above scenerio doesn’t describe NotSayingAnythingBlog’s traffic.  But it also leaves out a lot of traffic issues, like the fact that there are certainly offices where 2 or 3 or 4 people check in here a number of times over the course of the day.  Maybe there are 3 or 4 people at Democratic (NPL) and HippoCratic (GOP) headquarters [I’m talking about you, Brent] who each check in several times a day.  Maybe a few of the campaign offices have a few people who check in a bunch of times over the course of the day to see what’s been left in the stool.  Does the stats counter here exclude bots and spiders?  My little website got 190 bots and spiders hits yesterday (between midnight and midnight) and 52 so far today.  Some stats counters exclude those, and some don’t.  And there isn’t anything a stats counter can do to determine whether hits are coming from proxy servers.  The IP address of some proxy traffic can change every time a page is loaded, even if its the same person looking at the website.  That throws off the accuracy of stats counters. 

Then there’s the question of how many times does Rob and any other admins, posters or his mom and pop look at his own site?  He obviously does look at it.  Is it fair to count those?  Is his stats counter set up to exclude those (some do, some don’t). 

My point isn’t to suggest that this website doesn’t get any traffic.  I’m sure it gets plenty more than it deserves.  But the point is this:  100,000 unique visitors a month may sound like a lot of hits to someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about, but it’s not necessarily an accurate number, and it’s not necessarily a big number.  You HippoCrats like everything to be black and white, and sometimes there’s grey.  Deal. 

DailyKos gets some crazy number like a million a day (30 million a month?).  That’s probably a lot, but I’m not even sure about that.  And maybe this little site gets .3% of that?  I might be impressed, but I don’t know. 

The 100,000/month number doesn’t mean anything unless it’s broken down and explained.  I’m not asking anyone to explain it.  I’m just saying it doesn’t mean much.

So what’s your point.  I don’t think anyone disputes that the web site counting traffic is not perfect.

The Grand Forks Herald has a published circulation of about 30,000.  Do you want me to quibble about the readership of the editorial page.

The figure is interesting as a general comparison between different blog traffic. 

This blog is doing very well, but it’s got a ways to go to reach the big guys.

By the way, I happen to know that the internet is not a series of tubes.  Algore actually enslaved a race of tiny gnomes who race along inside of the wires.

My major point was that you wrote that this website gets 100,000 “unique visitors” each month and Ted Stevens, the Amish and the readers here might assume that’s a lot of traffic.  They might think a group of people the size of the city of Fargo reads this blog each month.  When you say 100,000 “unique visitors” view this site each month, I think that—if you have any integrity—you have an obligation to make sure people know the web lacky technical term “unique visitors” does not mean “unique visitors.”

I suppose my minor point is that you’re misleading people and I think that’s wrong.  Not out of the ordinary here.  But wrong nonetheless.

Moonbat says it all.

Rob’s numbers are very good.  He’s not in the big league yet but he might make it.  There’s only room for a few top blogs.

I think it’s fair to clarify what’s meant by “unique visitors.” But to say that I was misleading is stupid.  I said that I think his traffic is about 100,000 in unique visitors in response to a question some idiot asked. 

This is how blogs are measured isn’t it?

Finally I don’t think the Amish are spending their time on the computer what with the cow to milk by hand.  And I have it on good authority that Ted Stevens can’t read.

If Rob wasn’t successful you guys wouldn’t be trying to marginalize his success.

So, your point, mbm, is the 1,818,703 hits over 3 years is just 7 people over and over. What are you, 12? Come on, don’t hide your light under a bushel basket! Tell us what you really think. Dazzle us!

TH9:  I didn’t say 7 readers.  But, since you asked, 1.8 million page hits over three years averages out to roughly 1,660 page hits a day.  My website’s only been around 7 or 8 months and it gets almost 200 spider/bot page hits a day (sometimes more, sometimes less).  This place has to get more than that.  So now you’re down to 1,460 page hits by living human beings (and probably less).  Anybody who posts provides at least three of those hits [count (1) front page, (2) comments, (3) comment posted].  How many posts per day are there in here?  50?  100?  Whatever that number is, multiply by two and subtract it from our page hit total.  You and Whistler and a few others in here are multiple posters every day, I’m guessing, so you gotta take off all the hits for your multiple posts.  Pretty soon maybe you’re down to two or three hundred people and you’re talking about a group that’s substantially smaller than my high school class.  I’m obviously not saying 7 people.  But don’t think for a minute that it’s 1,600 people a day or 100,000 people a month.  It’s not.  You’re not having that much of an impact.  Get over yourself. 

Whistler:  Can we agree that saying this website has “100,000 unique visitors each month” is just a tiny bit misleading? 

If not, please explain why you think it’s not misleading.  You know why I think it is.  Explain why you think it’s not.  Enlighten me.

Connecticut resident here-
I really enjoyed being here in Bridgeport at the Mt. Aery Baptist Church to hear Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton speak for Ned Lamont - they got everybody standing, convinced and ready to volunteer.

Let’s focus on something else here, folks - like Social Security, Iraq, school vouchers (Joe loves em’, health care - you know, the important things.

My, my, you are a sexually repressed, hate-filled little person. Aren’t you now? Exactly who are you so upset about being misled? Name these persons to us! Or be gone with your email bulletin, talking points bullshit. Your boring me.

moonbatman: You’re speculating, and making up numbers to reinforce your agenda.  Y2K all over again.  You might be more convincing if you gave the “good” possibility to contrast with the “bad” scenario you propose, but since you are trying to put out a partisan hit on this site, you won’t do that.

Yea, and why no link back to “your” blog? Here is 2 more hits for your counter. Whats up with that lame-assed shit?

I got this link from Steven Spruiell on NRO.  I am adding it to my bookmarks list just to give that anally-fixated moonbatman heartburn.  Rob will now have eight readers.

LMAO...I thought only one black person at a time was allowed to be in Connecticut? Oh wait, must be Primary Time and the fact that they don’t actually LIVE there is enough of a securtiy blanket for those ‘decent’ folk on the North East Seaboard.

moonbatman spits, I could be wrong, but the stats software/systems that I’ve seen consider a hit to be a “unique visitor” if the IP address of the visitor hasn’t loaded a page on the website in a set period of time (15 or 30 minutes, usually, depending on how the admin has it set).

Here it is every 24 hours.

Now, I know the above scenerio doesn’t describe NotSayingAnythingBlog’s traffic.

Where is this “NotSayingAnythingBlog”? It sounds like it would describe one of your blogs.

Maybe there are 3 or 4 people at Democratic (NPL) and HippoCratic (GOP)...

Oh how cute! “HippoCratic”. Clever.

Does the stats counter here exclude bots and spiders?

For the most part, Site Meter does exclude the bots and spiders.

But the point is this: 100,000 unique visitors a month may sound like a lot of hits to someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about, but it’s not necessarily an accurate number, and it’s not necessarily a big number. You HippoCrats like everything to be black and white, and sometimes there’s grey. Deal.

What? Get over yourself asshole. 100,000 unique visits per month (it’s actually closer to 150,000) is an accomplishment of sorts for a blog.

I suppose my minor point is that you’re misleading people and I think that’s wrong. Not out of the ordinary here. But wrong nonetheless.

My goodness. Pull your head out of your ass because nobody is misleading anybody.

You know where the grey area really is in regards to the web counter numbers? This website has been mentioned on CNN, MSNBC, Chicago Tribune, New York Times, National Review Online, The National Journal, The New York Observer, The New Republic Online and quite a few others. The web counter, for obvious reasons, can’t tell you that.

I think you’re just jealous of Rob’s success. That’s why your small and petty mind felt the need to insult and obfuscate without really saying much. The same can be said of Al Jolson character. You guys are jealous and petty.

A strange discussion. But intaresting to read your thoughts