jump to navigation

BBB: Another day, another dollar. :: WHUP the PUPS 7 July 2006

Posted by marisacat in 2006 Mid Terms, Big Box Blogs, DC Politics, Democrats.
trackback

   Billary...

Deb Orrin on HillaryBillary.  This must be coals to coals….

Back to reality!:  Really, can we get better dynasties?  Must we look forward to Chelsea and George P – Jeb and Columba’s son?  I don’ wanna.

iF you don’t have a headache yet and want one:   Busy month for Dems in Iowa.

And, Matt Taibbi is up in Rolling Stone, reporting on his 5 weeks in Iraq.

Listen! thank me;) it is not Lieberman.  Which is on offer by the check out stand everywhere else. Well nearly everywhere… 

But, let’s try to keep up (anyway):   Currry on The Debate… and! just to the right on the MSNBC page you can click and read a selection of DKos comments on Lamont…with Dkos identified as a big support site for Lamont.. 

Ah, Filler.  But not for free… you know what I mean?  Does this mean Dkos is part of the ”MSNBC family”?   Juuuust asking!  Unhand me!!

To be honest, I think Lamont did better than Curry seems to think. 

And, since Kos v TNR is such an issue… here is Crowley in The Plank on his take.  But honestly I have def seen that Lieberman before.  It was not new… it just did not come out for Cheney in ’00, nor was it on view during the however many terrible days of FL ’00.

OOOPS!!… hold up a fan, one that is turned on!  Incoming!  Duck! (better than Donate!)…

 Donkey Cons weighs in [thanks to observer] … they can count… and The Hill is … juicy.  Only word for it. 

A Democratic challenger need not pass any policy litmus test to earn endorsement; the four bloggers merely need to agree to go ahead. The endorsements depend on the candidate’s having won a measure of support from bloggers in his or her district.

What a crock!

But I still say… who picks the candidates?  Sorry, I never bought that it was the Boyz.  Alone.

According to the rate sheet, Daily Kos generates gross annual revenue of $832,000.

So how much of that moolah does the Moonbat Mullah give to support Democrats?

According to FEC figures, $3,850 in the past six years.

Remember that, while you read the latest article from The Hill, about La Blogga Nostra’s 2006 strategy.

And DonkeyCons links to several rightie sites (if we go in together we’ll be safe!)… and one makes the point succinctly

If, let’s say, Tester managed to knock off Conrad Burns, why should the netroots get credit for that when they’ve only delivered about 4.6% of his funding?

If, let’s say, I can convince a few big bloggers to get together and endorse George Allen over Webb or Burns over Tester, and our guys win, does that mean the righties get to stomp around and talk about how powerful we are while Republican candidates throw us $50,000 dollar parties? Please….

The blogosphere makes a difference, we really do, and it is better for a politician to have us on his side than against him. But are we kingmakers? Do politicians need to kiss our rings? No way.

hmmm.  I don’t care which side of the effing political bed that comes from, I agree.

I thnk Kos, Koswhacks, and tied-in sites (that hype the candidates or relentlessly deflect criticism) are choking on the hype (remember St Germain Dog).  It would have died of self-overdose sometime ago, but for fluffers… on the sites and off the sites. 

 Oh yes, yes… IMO.

Speaking of St Germain Dog (still in orbit around the sun, he thinks he is La Louchewaiting for a private session with Kos)… La Louche is around – and not orbiting other planets either.  Marisacat on plain old Vanilla AOL.

.

.

 As the World turns, the Blogs squirm.  Certain they are causing the earth to rotate…. there will be more.

**********************************************************************

WHUP THE PUPS update…. 4:06 am, PT…

Haloscan comment at Brainster… Staten Island Dems… and who they don’t want nosing in..

Let’s see … Ohio, check! they have heard of Kos and Jerome.  It did not go well.  VA?  CT?

Can I say again, I am so thrilled to be banned.  These guys are run-of-the-mill cons.  Flotsam that some Dems have latched onto – in a state of confusion.

And this from observer:

Then the Moonie Times had fun yesterday too. I was so surprised to hear that the Orangemen were not members of the Media Blogging Association. The guy is angling for a little of that $832,000 (It’s all for bandwith, you know. Joe Trippi provides their webhosting.)

See below, there is no viable link that supports that Trippi provides webhosting. …  *************************************************************************The Crash that Keeps on Giving Update… 9:30 am, PT

From a weblog at Signs On San Diego comes this tidbit [thanks observer!]… building off the Garance TAPPED piece of a day or so ago:

Now the American Prospect’s blog notes we could be on our way to seeing a showdown between unions and the Kossacks, given that they often disagree on which Dem to support, creating friction that might make it more difficult for the Dems to retake the House.

I don’t have anyone to root for here; I think that public employee unions (as opposed to private-sector unions) are powerful in a destructive way, and that the vituperative paranoia of the Kossacks makes them the Pat Robertsons/James Dobsons/Lou Sheltons of the left. My sole observation is that if the Kossacks alienate the unions in the same way they’ve alienated so many other nominally simpatico people, goodbye Democratic Party.

Please note the link, “nominally simpatico” to My Left Nutmegger is not working, but I get a 503 notice for the site url as well.  So, leaving the link in, the whole site may come up. 

And certainly everyday comes proof that, no matter what happens… Daily Kos is entrenched as “liberal” and “left”.  Neither of which it or Kos is.  Tho if one falls into a thread that is blissfully free of thugs, mockers, minions … ugh you know the drill .. in a heart beat literally,  often it is clear many posters still there are def to the left of the KosWhackian Leadership.

What a shame.

Addendum, if you look at the Garance Franke-Ruta Prospect piece, that followed The Hill article on how the Boyz pick candidates– essentially there is not much of a plan that they care to delineate, other than stretch R resources and provide challenges in districts… in frankness, I think they should advertise fully that the plan is NOT (necessarily) to win, but is strategic

But perhaps those who contribute money are clear on this. If you look at Garance’s article she discusses upcoming races as a possible clash between The Boyz/Netroots and older interest groups.  One of which is unions.  Melissa Bean (CAFTA vote issues) would be an example…  Garance provides several examples.  As well notes the spread of union backing to Republicans.

And yes there was union support for YKos. 

AND:  to keep it all together (a story/analysis that will not be going away) here is the link to the Noam Scheiber posting to The Plank that followed Garance F-R/Prospect who wrote on The Hill article.  Whew!

*************************************************************

ok!  MCat (accidentally) moved to full-on rumor central.  Some would say she is there already!! MCat is retrenching to trenches BEHIND the Front Lines:  

****There is no viable link about Trippi and Kos webhosting.*****

***************************************************************

Update Update, Blogometer on, what else, Lamont V Lieberman (no escape!).  Boyz def moved to a Center Ring.  Of a sort. : 

CT SEN: Thursday Night Fights

7/6′s lively debate between Sen. Joe Lieberman (D) and businessman Ned Lamont had the entire lefty blogosphere — and a surprising portion of the righties — watching. Washington Post has a complete transcript of the debate. Spazeboy has all kinds of video. Hotline‘s Jonathan Martin reviews the debate — as well as blogger reaction.

Those who think Lamont won the debate frequently charge that Lieberman was “rude” to Lamont. Atrios calls his round-up “Angry Joe.” DownWithTyranny!: “Wow, imagine if the mellow Joe we saw ‘debating’ his pal Dick Cheney in 2000 would have been as aggressive and assertive then as he was tonight in his rude front attack on Democrat Ned Lamont. [...]

Lamont fan Crooks and Liars has video of the post-debate analysis on MSNBC and thinks the coverage was fair. TruthDig critiques the two candidates’ net outreach and says Lamont is the clear winner.

Lamont’s campaign posts a debate fact check, offered a Debate Headquarters last night as well as a post-debate spin room.

Or this… 

Some, however, thought Lieberman, the much more experienced candidate, carried the day. Lefty Ezra Klein: “Lieberman won. No other way to put it. He pummeled Lamont. Even his body language had transformed — I always assumed him a relatively gaunt, small-framed guy. Tonight he looked one shot of jack away from ripping off Lamont’s head and eating his brains. Lamont, for his part, appears to have never had media training. Staring at the camera is the first thing you’re taught, yet his eyes were darting about like a pup transfixed by a fly. He looked small, nervous, and unsenatorial.”

Honestly, imo, Lamont did better than that… in fairness, it was a mismatch.   I had read that he stumbled in the presentation to the AFL-CIO… and that may have affected the night.  He ws very nervous.

I think more than a few Democrats will come down, more or less, here:

And, says lefty Brad Bauman: “I can’t help but feel that activists in my wing of the Democratic Party may be making a big mistake in throwing its support behind Lamont. … Sure I want to spit every time I think of the warm embrace and kiss that Joe shared with Bush on national television. Sure it infuriates me to think he voted for Gonzales’ confirmation (even though he wasn’t alone) and yeah, I am mad as hell that he continues to be a strong supporter on an illegal, immoral war that has done more harm to our republic and our standing in the world than anything we have ever done but Joe Lieberman is a Democrat, a loyal Democrat who has served our party and his constituents well in the Senate, has been a consummate gentleman, is deeply devout in his beliefs and frankly, deserves to be treated much better than this.” It shouldn’t surprise anyone that many of those who agree situate themselves in the middle or on the right side of the blogosphere.

I think the Boyz seriously misjudged what the “party” is all about.  Witness their wonderment at Barbara Boxer.  Which Arianna shares.

In other CT Sen news, Arianna Huffington asks: “What the hell is Barbara Boxer thinking?”

What the party is all about, is why I did not support Dean “going inside”… but it seems that Jim Dean and DFA (and in the past, it sometimes was a reflection of Howard… not sure what is up here) are fully on board with the Lamont move….

On vera… we can keep watching.

Blogometer has what is often called a cautionary tale…

7/7: Those Who Live In Glass Houses…

The Blogometer was once told a great story about a king who lived in a two-story grass hut when all others around him lived in one-story abodes. The king was cruel, and forced his subjects to build him a copper throne. When he got tired of it, he made them build him a silver throne and stored the copper one on the second floor. His rear end quickly stopped enjoying the silver throne, so he commissioned a gold throne and put the silver one next to the first throne, upstairs. Once gold began to bore him, he flogged his people until they built him a platinum one. Finally, as he sat in his platinum throne, his second floor collapsed, and the first three thrones — gold, silver and copper — crashed down on his head, killing him. Which just goes to show that those who live in grass houses shouldn’t stow thrones.

We have a larger point here, and it revolves around the current issue splitting large portions of Dems from what should be its natural base at this moment — angry activists ready to go out and vote for anyone with a “D” after their name. But bloggers want the best of all worlds, as last night’s CT Sen debate shows, and the previous week of events surrounding one entrant’s promise to seek independent status if he loses the primary, as well as blog reax to both candidates. They’ve asked for their thrones — an anti-war candidate, party purity, promises from party leaders to support a potentially weaker Dem nom over a decades-old friend and usual ally and similar promises from 3 top CT recruits Dems need to win to have any shot at taking back the House. [snip]

Ouch.

***********************************************************************

Double Ouch Update. 3:00 pm, PT

 From those friendly fellows who crashed Spasm in the Desert (Ach! Is it only a month ago?  Seems years ago!) comes this timely reminder on Joe.  That Joe, the only Joe there is (well… there is Joe Biden, a lot of the same problems, frankly).    You won’t regret reading this one.

Barking mad in Connecticut

We always knew Lieberman was a creep, but it just now came clearly into focus, for me at least, that he’s also insane. Thanks to the fine folks at antiwar.com, I found this speech, from 2004, delivered to the quaintly-named Committee On The Present Danger (which has to find a new Present Danger every so often):

What we are fighting against is an Islamic terrorist totalitarian movement which is as dire a threat to individual liberty as the fascist and communist totalitarian threats we faced and defeated were in the last century…. What we are fighting against is the prospect of a new evil empire, a radical Islamic caliphate which would suppress the freedom of its people and threaten the security of every other nation’s citizens…

A commie under every bed (still) and a radical islamist hiding in every Western garden, ready to fight for the Global Caliphate and Burqua-ize every woman.

Or was that Dobson Fallwell Bush and Rover?  And “Dark Side” Cheney?

***********************************************************************

Last Round-up on – or off – the Blahhgging Prairie… ;)  5:20 pm, PT

As a companion to the Lieberman 2004 speech, this Seattle P-I opinion piece from 2003, on Scoop Jackson (D-WA), a look at the long road to Iraq.

I saw these origins firsthand working in the Senate in the early ’70s after resigning from Henry Kissinger’s National Security Council staff over the invasion of Cambodia. Seen from the inside, Jackson’s Senate heft was considerable. Though a relatively small, unprepossessing figure as politicians go, he usually did his homework, could be incisive about important details his colleagues let slip and struck a shrewd balance between conviction and expedience. Much of his Capitol Hill power derived from his unique role, which he played well, as a northern Democrat with solid labor backing and other party credentials yet whose hard-line international view drew the support of many Republicans and the most conservative Southerners on either side of the aisle.

His belligerence also exerted (and still does) a kind of extortionist pull on liberal Democrats deathly afraid of appearing “weak” on national defense or in standing up to the Russians and anyone else. There was no question that “Scoop,” from the mountains and straits of the far northwest corner of the continental United States, caught the unease and reflexive combativeness of much of America in dealing with a planet we knew so little despite our power. Still, in the ’70s, a more worldly post-Vietnam moderation and sensibility in the leadership of both parties appeared to have passed Jackson by, leaving his chauvinism and foreign policy animus marginal, sometimes looking a bit crazed.

And a nice swipe at Scoop’s then aide, Perle:

As for Perle, he was a pear-shaped, slightly fish-eyed man of self-consciously affected locution, the too-hungry, too-sly and too-toadying aide familiar in bureaucracies public and private. His views were patently uninformed, and he wore his conference-room warrior’s zealotry no more gracefully than his expensive blue pinstriped suits. It seemed obvious that the bellicose policies he and Jackson embodied were not only wrong for America, but would also usher Israel into the ruinous isolation I and other admirers of its brave people most feared. “Scoop” & Co. would remain, I assumed, an extremist fringe. How wrong I was.

About these ads

Comments»

1. Deepest Troat - 7 July 2006

Deborah Rappaport family
2006 Election Cycle
Campaign For California’s Future — $125,000
New Democrat Network — $50,000
Music for America — $43,000
Grassroots Democrats — $21,500
ActBlue — $15,000
Uniting People for Victory — $10,000
Compare Decide Vote — $7,500

2. raincat100 - 7 July 2006

Sorry, this is totally OT, but I thought it was interesting:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003110078_postman07.html

I’ll make some fresh popcorn.

3. aemd - 7 July 2006

“…Joe Trippi provides their webhosting”

(Looks up. Sets beer down.)

Sounds interestin’. You gotta link for that? ;-)

4. observer - 7 July 2006
5. marisacat - 7 July 2006

hmmm observer, right at the moment that link goes to an error screen, I will try it again in a bit.

great tidbit.

6. Deepest Troat - 7 July 2006

One more thing, it looks like Mr Wikipedia Jimmy Wales wants part of the action. Campaigns Wikia

It’s time for politics to become more intelligent, and for democracy to really involve the people. Broadcast media tells you what to think and doesn’t let you get involved. It’s time to focus on what you need, what you care about, and the messages you want to get out.

His calling to all Blahggers and Operatives It is pretty interesting, Jimbo is trying to out muscle Markos.

I believe that together we can work, this very election season, to force campaigns to use wikis and blogs to organize, discuss, manage, lead and be led by their volunteers.

Opps there goes Marko’s beloved Scoop software.

It seems Jimbo did an Armando before Armando did it himself and that was edit his own bio on wiki.

In late 2005, a related controversy arose regarding Wales and the Wikipedia entry on himself. After Wired Magazine picked up on work from Rogers Cadenhead, Wales confirmed that he had (visibly and under his own name) edited his own biography on Wikipedia, a practice generally frowned upon within the Wikipedia community and even by Wales himself.

what was that saying …. oh yeah …. “some are more equal than others.”

7. observer - 7 July 2006

Here’s a real link, coming from the right, that tries to parse the goals of the netroots.

8. Deepest Troat - 7 July 2006

The real question is, which Unions are they trying to muscle out. Remember that Bowers and Armstrong have worked for SEIU.

In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that while I am not actually paid by SEIU, the only client I am currently paid to consult for is SEIU. Further, I have also been a member of the American Federation of Teachers, and an employee of the AFL-CIO itself–Chris

SEIU did pay Armstrongs company via RiehlWorld

9. Deepest Troat - 7 July 2006

Tin Foil Alert: Post maybe sound tin foily.

After reading Bowers post, did the KosWhackian Leadership cause the shake up in the Union. At the end of the post Bowers said in 2005:

Yes, union members are just about the only segment of the white and white male populations that vote Democrat, and yes unions are the progressive voice in the workplace, which is undeniably one of the most important ideological conversion mechanisms in the country. However, there are other segments of the white and white male populations that do in fact vote Democrat, including seculars, the GLBT community, and the Jewish community. Further, unlike the labor movement, which is shrinking in size, the secular population is exploding. … So while these unions may be splitting, and while this may cause more competition between unions, the value of maintaining the current structure is not in clear to me. What the leaders of this separatist charge, Andy Stern and SEIU, is doing seems to be working, as they are actually rapidly increasing in size at a time when overall unions are in decline. I, for one, am more willing to support a plan that seems to be working rather than one that seems to be failing.

And who was one of the co-sponsor of YKos? It sure was not the AFL-CIO.

10. Deepest Troat - 7 July 2006

The is the cache of the My Left Nutmegger

Not that much to it. It is your same ole same ole I got into a flame war over something that was thought to be anti-kos.

11. aemd - 7 July 2006

“Here’s a real link, coming from the right, that tries to parse the
goals of the netroots.”

I may be misunderstandin’ this, Ms. Cat does whip up some wicked G and T’s and what raincat did with the popcorn, well…

What I don’t see is “…Joe Trippi provides their webhosting” This is a strong accusation that needs verification. I don’t see anything in your posts that comes close to even justifying a rumor. And my standards are pretty low, I identify with Alice R. Bless her.

12. observer - 7 July 2006

Sorry gang.

That was snark about Trippi. Whenever anybody brings up how much the site is bringing in to Kos, the loyal defenders always talk about how much the bandwith much be costing him. Combine that with Trippi’s reputation coming out of the Dean campaign for taking some off the top for ad placement (no different from Shrum). Just a joke.

Didn’t think anyone would take it seriously. Plus aemd’s wink in the follow-up comment. I thought it was understood. The link is snark too.

Again, sorry for the misunderstanding. Just feelin’ loose on a Friday.

13. marisacat - 7 July 2006

observer

Oh don’t worry… It is my fault. I had planned ot put up a few links to Hillary “stuff” and the Taibbi piece in RS and sort of skip today. Both the Lead Cat and I are sick today…

But that Siren call of posting.. ;)

I read too fast and ”cut and paste” too fast.

Not to worry!

Thanks to aemd and raincat and Deepest Troat

14. marisacat - 7 July 2006

BTW, DT,

somebody searches everyday for “fucking troat” it appears in the list of search words that lead people to the site. A little odd.
But LOL no tin foil.

15. NYCee - 7 July 2006

No Joek, your comment re All-Joe-All-the-Time, MCat.

I mean, good on the antiJoe fighters. I’m behind them. Good riddance to that creep. But the netroots’ bandwagon is unenticing to me, as it is deafeningly silent when it comes to other more egregious Dem sell-outs. They are even given front page rose petal showers, as far as I can tell, simply because the color of their votes matches the color of their states (Redpublican). That’s the excuse, but the saving grace is that their silence is golden. So we are lucky to ‘have’ them. Take a leaf and hush up. Now Joe never learned Rule 1 about that. So he and he alone must pay. It’s the “alone” part that has bothered me.

How about this post (which you linked to before)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/6/125220/7668

where Kos puts Dems on notice by putting them in the good and bad list depending on whether they give IndieJoe their mojo or the no-go. Ben Nelson, beware! You finally got a (limp) wrist slap rather than a back slap. Well, not really. (Posters still got his back, for the most part. They know the red state drill.)

If I had been of a mind to advise Lamont AND Lieberman, as a party operative, I would have told Lamont to go for Connecticut and Lieberman to go to Nebraska. There Joe could set up house and challenge Nelson. That way we could actually get a more liberal Dem in both places. It might make everyone a little bit happier, no? Oh wait. Wouldnt work. (Rule 1) Joe never learned, like Ben, that, the way it’s playing with Kos & Co, silence (while red) is golden. Ben, that hushed puppy, would be their dog in that fight, too, I bet.

He will be exonerated in future for his Joe-love, too, wanna bet. It’s Nebraska, man, Nebraska! Fuggedaboutit. And Louisiana, Arkansas, Florida, Montana, New Mexico, Colorada…

What the fuck do they tell those people in those states, anyway, re how to sell Dems? How do you define a Dem unless you oppose their ‘Dems’? How does that 50-state strategy work? Dem values? Will the blogs drive them?

Values? Huh? It’s the strategy, stupid. Oh.

16. NYCO - 7 July 2006

Ya know, this video of Bush singing U2′s “Sunday, Bloody Sunday” is disturbing enough, but honestly, I have not seen as effective a visual depiction of the real nature of Congress and Washington these days.

Stuttering, repetitive, ritualistic, caught in an endless empty loop.

17. D. Throat - 7 July 2006

Why the sudden defensiveness?

Democratic operatives say the sea change is due to the June poll in the 2008 first-test state of Iowa, which showed Clinton trailing former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards.

“It’s the first poll anywhere in the country that hasn’t shown Hillary Clinton as the leader – and it’s in one of the most important places,” says a Dem strategist who’s neutral for 2008. “She’s supposed to be the front-runner, but she’s in an uncomfortable position with liberal activists over Iraq, and she’s responding with some unfortunate zigs and zags.”

The Des Moines Register poll in Iowa, where antiwar activists are strong, had Edwards at 30 percent, Clinton at 26 , 2004 Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry with 12, and Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack at 10.

Why is this not FPeed all over the so called “Liberal” Blogs… this is stupendous news? Gee instead we have the koswhacks proclaiming “Hill has a heart” and she is one of the good guys (in case of Lamont)… and a sudden backing away from Lamonts anti war stance…. not they are being paid or anything to say such things…. naaahhhhh!

If Hilliary is already losing her “leading-edge” to the likes of John ‘OABNTB’ Edwards (Once a bridesmaid never the bride)… then she leaves the door WIDE OPEN for other candidates with REAL appeal to enter the race *cough* GORE *cough*… who will NOT be considered a spoiler since her supposed electability and inevitability are proved to be doubtful.

I have already read one anti Gore diary on DK so far, nteresting bleating and commentary on Gore endorsing Dean over Lieberman in the primaries… go figure.

TFT (Tin foil time): I get the feeling that some of the “Draft Gore” people are not what they seem to be…. Hill is NOT a stupid woman I am sure she recognizes that her biggest rival is not Edwards, Kerry or Vilsack but Gore…

18. Deepest Troat - 8 July 2006

That is a good point, the person who started Draft Gore had done it before, but it was called “Draft Gore 2004

“We need somebody who can unite the different factions of the Democratic Party,” said Monica Friedlander, a longtime Gore volunteer who started Draft Gore 2004, which says it has secured $500,000 in pledges for a new Gore campaign. “Right now, it just feels like the party is splintering. Al Gore has the potential to bring the party together.”

Here is one thing for sure Matt Stoller’s hit piece on Edwards.

19. Deepest Troat - 8 July 2006

Why is it that some people never learn when it comes to representing the candidate and blogging. This issue was brought up with Stoller and the DNC

And that a look at this. Using other people’s money to defeat Bush’s Social Security meme but no work to show for it. Wouldn’t someone be proud of the work they did if they are being credited for knocking down a Bush meme.

20. observer - 8 July 2006

I remember the dKos diary discussed in this post: Don’t Cross the ‘Cult of Kos’ or You’ll Live to Regret It.

A (sometime) Kos Fightin’ Dem gets discussed by Malkin.

A basic question is asked.

21. marisacat - 8 July 2006

I was not in favor of Hackett. From folowing him closely, and I mean closely, he parsed the war as a politician does. VERY finely. He did not oppose the war at all. In any way. More of the “management” crap about Bush. I am not at all surprised he shoved back at Lt Watabe (think I have his name right) father.

Blogs crafted a Hackett to present on line. I folowed the campaigns on the ground in Ohio and I poked around in Iraq, Fallujah and his law practice. A type. And when the going got tough nd DC stopped stroking him he snapped.

LOL As I said I was not on his bus. Or Sherrod’s either.
I think DeWine has a good chance of winning. And I am unsure either Hackett or Sherrod could make the distance.

22. Deepest Troat - 8 July 2006

Sherrod has a shot if people start focusing the link DeWhine has with all those scandal, from Taft to Noe to Mark Lay and on downward.

And since the Dems are adopting the “win at all cost” attitude now might as well start taking pages of out of the Rovian playbook and make up shit up a couple weeks before the election. Something in the lines of, hey DeWhine bugged our offices or we were hacked into.

I figure once the Dems get into that type of campaigning, it is time to jump ship and form another party.

23. NYCee - 8 July 2006

Wow.

Observer, I hadnt seen that. I am really getting the Big Brother feeling from that episode (followed link to “Dont Cross the Cult of Kos …”). And it is only, sadly, reinforcing what David Brooks said about “rabid lambs.”

When that came out, I actually wrote a post on a diary complimenting the coining of rabid lambs, as I found it creatively interesting. Unlike the rest of the crowd, I liked it! Everyone else had piled on to denigrate the term, not only for the perceived semantic disconnect (knee jerk defensive: We are NOT that!) but even the style (Silly! Crap writer, Brooks. How can a lamb be rabid!) I did not comment on the semantic viability (I knew where I was!) but the post you linked certainly is a window onto rabid lambdom.

Apparently the writer of the much maligned diary you linked that questioned the ethics of consulting and blogging had comments removed and tags inserted, nasty tags, such as: “Concern Troll.” That is such a
“war is peace” type use of language, isnt it? I find it appalling and chilling that the use of such terms, like “Purity Troll” etc, have become commonplace.

And, to top it off, his diary was completely civil and gave Kos the benefit of the doubt. He was simply trying to have a discussion on a serious and meaningful topic that happened to involve Kos. He was actually doing a SERVICE to the community, as I see it, yet he was set upon like … well, like a juicy clover cupcake in a field of rabid lambs! :-)

Of interest is that the diary only had 29 comments (Well, originally 30, but apparently, behind the scenes wizards erased one of the diarist’s own civil comments written in his own defense against the mob. Wow. Again.) ie, it is telling that only a handful of zealots commented (Armando at top), plus one more levelheaded poster, actually, and the diarist in two posts. That speaks volumes as to all those who decided that potato was too damn hot to handle and steered way clear of that diary. They were right to do so too. Just a lurk will tell you so. But it also speaks to the chilling effect the suppressive tactics are having on the much-vaunted “progressive” community.

I am reminded of Brando (Kurz’s) followers in Apocalypse Now.

I am reminded of Lord of the Flies.

It is getting uglier. And the ugliness is veiled to those who practice it, perhaps by Kos’ own credo: This is WAR. Many seem to have taken that deeply to heart. It cleanses them of responsibility to behave openmindedly and to behave ethically. It increases paranoia. The spaces are narrowing. How sad.

Is there a mirror in the house?

24. marisacat - 8 July 2006

I just finished Silverstein’s own piece at his website AND his diary. (and thanks to observer for all the links)

And, to top it off, his diary was completely civil and gave Kos the benefit of the doubt. He was simply trying to have a discussion on a serious and meaningful topic that happened to involve Kos. He was actually doing a SERVICE to the community, as I see it, yet he was set upon like … well, like a juicy clover cupcake in a field of rabid lambs!

Thanks to NYCee for saying it better than I can…

25. marisacat - 8 July 2006

observer, I just finished the Gerahty piece (forgive my ignorance, i am guessing that is the same TG that contributes … at Nat Review)

anyway, going to post the Silverstein and the Geraghty in “Agitate”… LOL. They should fit in…

26. NYCee - 8 July 2006

Yes, it is interesting, Marisacat, how eagerly the military men are being snapped up. Caveat Emptor! I was never a Hackett fan either.

The other guy who reminds me of Hackett, who is he … name …not a pol or (so far) wannabe pol, but the vet who started Truth … (Truth Out?) was subbing for Malloy. He asked callers to speak to a particular aspect of the war and in his commentary he made the statement that “We all wanted this war to work out but (Bush messed it up, etc ..)” That angered me. I never wanted it to work out because it was PREVENTIVE WAR. Can anyone with half a brain imagine what BushCo in full Hubris Mode of that time and an Iraq war that “worked out” would have done next? Geesh. Nursery school simple. Onward ho, troops! Plus, it would have sanctified the very concept of PREVENTIVE WAR to a public that largely didnt seem to get how very MORALLY and LEGALLY and DANGEROUSLY wrong that was. I actually tried to call in to make the abovementioned points, but was prevented by the screener because my comment wouldnt have been on the designated topic.

If it had been Malloy, I wouldve gotten thru. Is it any wonder they put him on the graveyard shift!

27. NYCee - 8 July 2006

I’ve hear that comment

“We all wanted this war to work out once it started …

ad nauseum, from lots of people, such as Franken, Dem Pol XYZ, etc and so on. It is as necessary in order not to get decapitated politically, it seems, as NOT saying we must be more “evenhanded” in the Israeli Palestinian Conflict (and so MUCH more … Rachel Corrie dont play in NYC … etc.)

Utterly amazing. Our taboos are so much more powerful than our much-lauded First Amendment, arent they?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 168 other followers

%d bloggers like this: