jump to navigation

WAR! … and political blood sport. 24 July 2006

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

      

A clutch of links about Lamont, Lieberman, Kos, Whacks and some (imo) scrambled political whacking.  Not in agreement with it all… but hey, blood sport and frankly!, are there any identifiable “sides” left in an every man/woman on their own Democratic party? and so on….

The Salon piece by Colin McEnroe makes some points however (the ad is short) and their graf on Maxine is revealing [is she clear that Lamont is a member of Brookings, rather more significant than any online, ginned-up, fake "progressivism", much less, forgive me while I laugh, insurgency] and this is the close:

If Lieberman’s sudden discovery of the black vote doesn’t work, of course, the Clintons will cut Lieberman loose like a sandbag on a sinking balloon. They already have, sort of. Each has made separate statements promising to support the Democrat chosen by party voters in two weeks, so no matter how many nice things the ex-president says in Waterbury, we should understand that today’s Joe Cool could be Aug. 9’s Joe Who?

But maybe the ploy will work because Waterbury is, after all, a lucky charm for Democrats. And it’s one that speaks to both Bill Clinton and Joe Lieberman’s dimly remembered roots. In 1960, John F. Kennedy abruptly added a Waterbury stop to his campaign schedule, and 40,000 people stood around until 3 a.m. waiting to see him. He spoke from the balcony of a beautiful and storied old hotel, the Elton. The night was celebrated by historian Theodore White as a turning point, and Pierre Salinger called it the greatest moment of that campaign. It’s a story both Clinton and Lieberman would know well, or would’ve known back in 1970. In the ensuing years, each has parked some of his youthful ideals and gotten behind the wheel of the shiny new centrism. And the Elton Hotel has become an assisted-living facility.

Time is pitiless.

hmm About where it is at.  Depending on what happens this could get more cut throat after August 8.  Blood splatter.  Or, they slink off. 

Who knows. 

Weekly Standard weighs in… looking at the KosWhackian FP, the diaries, the silence and the noise on Israel – Hizbollah – Lebanon War.  Their broader assumptions leave me rather cold, but then I am waaaay on the other side of the river from the WS operatives. 

NY Mag with a multi-page take. Good photo montage heads it up (I am not all the way thru it)… [thanks to observer for links]

AND correcting a mistatement I made down in the previous thread, the Quinnipiac poll is larger than I had thought:  2,502 polled by phone.  Possibly the ”278” stuck in my brain is a sub group…

AND:   Ann Althouse has a few things to say about Kos, silence, WS, being “quoted” in the NYT (a comment from a thread) and whatever it all really is, in her opinion.  [thanks to Deepest Troat]

It has been entertaining watching the designated Thugs patrol Dkos threads.  Big issues, party dissension, Mid Terms (polls polls polls polls, hey! wanna poll?) and STFU about a vicious killing border war/invasion/collective punishment that we back, fund and provide the armaments for.  Not fucking likely.

Oh and yeah, Warner is supporting Lieberman (or now, then they all scatter like bugs), but the blogs nudge Boxer (fine! whatever!) and Warner is making nice at the DLC summer Conversation in Denver for endorsement, kind words, whatever he can find. Not quite the same sales event as in LV…

Boyz?  Boyz?

… more to come… the wretched war grinds on.  

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

Continuing right along on the well-marked road:

Taking a peek at Blogometer… and what do we find.  A gathering of Kaus looking at Dickerson (both at Slate) looking at Warner – and some nostalgia elsewhere for Vis Numar days (Jerome and the Stars):

WARNER: Dawning Of The Age Of Aquarias

Kausfiles picks up on Slate colleague’s John Dickerson profile of ex-VA Gov. Mark Warner noting that Warner is supporting Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) against blogger-fav cable co. exec. Ned Lamont (D) and asks: “After all, Kos snipes at Sen. Dodd and Senators Boxer and Biden for their support of Lieberman in the primary. How is Warner any different?”

Kaus concludes that DailyKos‘ founder Markos Moulitsas friendship with Warner employee Jerome Armstrong must be the answer.

Dales at RedState offers a more obscure explanation poking fun at Armstrong’s past: “Through 2008, Uranus would conjunt his natal Pisces Chiron, while Saturn would transit over the natal Uranus. And we all know that it will be Uranus, with its sudden, unexpected awakenings, rebellions, and lightning-like strokes, that will intermittently clamor for our attention in the next four.* … * Actual astrological terms and phrases, as the link demonstrates, from paid Warner consultant Jerome “Vis Numar” Armstrong!”

Be glad I did not bother with the Righties laughing at Kerry… who would have backed Israel in the current mess as much as Bush. Utterly beholden to Israel.  One War Party.  One promises (if you don’t look behind the curtain) less brutality. Neater, lower-cost war.

Unless you think that Durbin, who really spoke as needed (floor of the senate, the FBI FOIA cable, the apology) to the horror runs this joke of a party?

Handmaidens.

Bob Parry on Bush, Osama, ’04 and the push – pull within and without S Arabia – and other Arab nations. 

CIA analysts recognized that bin-Laden saw Bush’s policies – such as the Guantanamo prison camp, the Abu Ghraib scandal and the Iraq War – as playing into al-Qaeda’s hands by creating a new generation of Islamic jihadists and undermining pro-U.S. Arab governments.

“Certainly,” CIA deputy associate director for intelligence Jami Miscik told a senior meeting of CIA analysts, “he [bin-Laden] would want Bush to keep doing what he’s doing for a few more years,” according to Ron Suskind’s The One Percent Doctrine.

As the CIA analysts reviewed this internal assessment, they grew troubled by its implications.

“An ocean of hard truths before them – such as what did it say about U.S. policies that bin-Laden would want Bush reelected – remained untouched,” Suskind wrote. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “CIA: Osama Helped Bush in ’04.”]

With the Wapo page 1 take on Pakistan [thanks madman] and their bomb making – things are going swimmingly.  We are swimming in the precursors to ever widening fire and blood.  Dr Strangelove and the old rubric, learning to love the bomb isn’t working for me so well these days…

”Elections matter”, if you get a chance to vote for someone real (no point getting lost in “liking”).  Sadly Bush IS real, very real.  Post-coup, I keep saying.

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

Asia Times has several good pieces, but this one has some specifics as to ordnance Hezbollah has.  Apparently they have a few tanks as well, old but I suspect a wretched tank is better than none at all:

Hezbollah’s impressive arsenal has taken some professional observers and large parts of the news media by surprise, though as yet many of its potentially most lethal weapons have not been used and probably won’t be until a full-scale Israeli invasion has been launched.

They are believed to have significant quantities of Russian AT-5 Spandrel, AT-3 Sagger, a few AT-10 and a number of US TOW anti-tank guided missiles. Huge numbers of Russian RPG-7 and the Iranian-built version, the Saghegh, with a lethal 80mm tandem HEAT warhead, 82mm B-I0 and 107mm B-11 recoilless anti-tank guns, supplement 60mm, 82mm and 120mm mortars, vast numbers of anti-tank and anti-personnel mines of Chinese, Russian, Italian and Iranian origin.

Plentiful quantities of explosives and a proven ability to produce highly effective improvised explosive devices (IEDs – booby-traps and road side bombs) round out the inventory. It also has SA-7 and perhaps some SA-14-man portable surface-to-air missiles and twin 23mm ZSU anti-aircraft guns in southern Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley.

Lordy.  Onward, if we dare…

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

Dahr Jamail, transcript dated today, from Beirut on Democracy Now! with Amy Goodman.

hmm.  Ynet News weighs in on the detention center being speedily built at the Filon military base to house captured Hezbollah fighters, Lebanese captives.  The Israelis quickly dispensed with early plans to make use of a facility dating to the British Mandate (deemed too small).  Speaks to big plans…

Danny Schechter!  News Dissector is not a silent Blahhg!  a long list of links and snips and quick takes.

Condi to the holy land has gone after describing in her best ‘let them eat bombs’ manner, that the plight of Lebanon is a part of the “birth pangs of a new Middle East” and said that Israel should ignore calls for a ceasefire.

Pearls, ‘gamos and I bet a kiss from Bush for luck.  What does a girl need?

Ooops! Forgot to add, panel at AEI on C-Span 1 (Pletka in charge!).  Everything is going really well in Iraq.  I am guessing, just a taking a flyer here – that a higher daily death toll and things would be  …  … better?

Nur al-Cubicle translation:   Analysis: The cards held by Hezbollah by Mouna Naïm, Lebanon Correspondent for Le Monde.

From Sean Paul at Agonist:

”Ever yearned for the perfect answer to this question, the magical silver bullet guaranteed to make people pay attention? Well, look no further than this New York Times headline:

U.S. Speeds Up Bomb Delivery for the Israelis

And the headline is complete with this wonderfully distracting and playful photo of Israeli propaganda leaflets falling from the sky.”

   leafletting

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

Update, 4:30 pm.

Wolcott on the war inside Lebanon – with clips from Gilliard and Billmon.

Free market.  Or something like that, from Business Week.  Maybe the real reason she packed her Ferragamos.

Operation “Peace for the Gallilee”.  Photog from IC-Creations tagged along with a reporter from Ma’ariv newspaper – during the Hizbollah shelling of Kiryat Shmona.  They went up to where the IDF were shelling Lebanon across the border.

About these ads

Comments»

1. pyrrho - 24 July 2006

I wish you could address the Warner inconsistency at dkos.

I may, but I don’t follow Warner or kos close enough to have even realize that kos hadn’t complained about this (I’d expect at least an apologia about why it’s ok).

And I don’t read kos that much… if he hasn’t criticised Warner he ought to be called on it -at- dkos.

2. NYCee - 24 July 2006

Hey mcat and others.

Looks like you are seeing what Ive been seeing, marisacat, on WJ. Along that line, caught Oliphant (Brooksie counterer filling in for Shields on PBS News Hour/Friday) saying in his oh-so-cautious, understated way that the polls are showing ten percent more Americans against Bush’s support of bombing or his lack of ceasefire/diplomacy re Israel/Lebanon situation. He noted this in that obliqueish, Oliphantish way. (This is in contrast to about 90% of Israelis who support it) He softened it. Attributed it to our memories of bad exp in Lebanon before, we are Lebanon shy, is his coloration. And he did not fail to emphasize that Americans DO think Israel is justified in doing what its doing. Oh Jesus. Har. But he eeked out his point. Brooks skated by in response, saying its Bush’s bad mojo and the images… Lehrer actually pulled him back and said, You DO mean DEAD people, by images! Brooks likes to breeze past our carnage. And Israel’s. Such smoke and mirrors and trying to have it both ways, while smoothing the hawk way, that Brooks. He oughta work out a stage act with Tom Friedman.

Well, here’s the news hour link, if you can suffer the Brooks (Bush doing good on Lebanon!) but I notice they airbrushed out Lehrer confronting him with “dead people” … Guess we must keep up appearances and all that. I am sure I heard that and he was quite pointed about it.

Dont listen much to Franken or AAR anymore, but sometimes switch on tail end when I get home from work. Caught a little Al Franken with Ornstein at end of show today, discussing Lebanon. They were both very uncomfortable. Ornstein said, actually said, “I guess the context it should go in (Lebanese civilian slaughter) is …” well, to paraphrase, he compared it in numbers to Iraqi slaughter, a Lebanese week to an Iraqi day, to make it seem not so bad for the Lebanese. Ugh. He did an apologist dance, basically. Lots of emphasis on bad Hezbollah, bad invasion of border, bad presence in Lebanon (I have read that the Israelis were the ones who crossed the border… then were captured)

Al Franken teeters that way. He is very uncomfortable discussing Israeli wrongs or our ME dilemma. Really anything Israel/Palestine. Donates to Israel. Very much a “dont note the elephant in the middle of the room” on the ME. Iraq Iraq Iraq. That’s okay to talk about. Much like our front pagers, it seems, and as you note, it seems many are noting this. But even AF is talking about it more, and had Rabbi Lerner on the other day, who Franken says, is to the left of him on I/P … but at least he did let him talk. Seems Lebanon is hard to ignore, wedging some of the meeses out of their holes. Smokin ‘em out. Speaking of which, I wonder why Kos doesnt invite some savvy folk to fill in his big blog ‘blanks’ on the issue. Dems dont do evenhanded though. Sigh. Caught in the reins, I would bet. Evenhanded is a bad, bad word. (Pelosi says so!)

3. gong - 24 July 2006

Huh, NYCee, this afternoon I heard Lamont on the radio ducking questions about Israel and Lebanon, trying to talk about Iraq instead. Sounds pretty similar to what you heard. If only he’d also talked about fundraising, it would have been a total blog experience in about two minutes.

Kos has up a response to Kaus re Warner. Short version: Warner endorsed but isn’t campaigning. A legitimate distinction IMO. Which is not to say I’d base anything much on it.

4. NYCee - 24 July 2006

pyrrho:

Kos responded to Kaus, basically saying, it’s the stumping, stupid! He claims that only those who stump for Lieberman get his wrath. However, this does not appear to hold true for the Big Dog. While he called Boxer a “profile in cowardice” for slinking out (some such descriptive) to do the dirty for Joe, in the same post he praised Clinton for doing the same. Seems, in his book, that makes Clinton look “big” and Lieberman look “small” because of Joe’s past sins against Clinton re impeachment imbroglio.

5. NYCee - 24 July 2006

Yes, they feel safe on Iraq, gong. It is terribly hypocritical. Much as I loathe Brooks and Rightwingers on many a score, their criticisms of the ‘left’ blogs at least provide some sort of check, some sort of public criticism and embarrassment, even though, of course, they are often shameful in their positions. But at least the RW bloggers, as far as I know, voice themselves clearly on the ME. Kos and co dont even offer up anyone’s position for a debate. They could offer more than one, even, and say, what say you, powered people? Where are we on this? What might I learn from you? I know this is numero uno issue, really, for our nation, despite all the distractions and sweeping under the carpet. Look, it keeps busting thru. Let’s take a look. Let’s talk.

But they dont dare. They perpetuate our horrible taboo instead, which makes a mockery of our much-vaunted first amendment and, less importantly but I will say it anyway, makes them look ridiculous and cowardly. (talk about profiles in …)

Btw, Lamont made the same “right to defend” statement on Israel, from Dem TP Central as did all the other locksteppers, too. Except those 7 in the US House, we must note. Conyers is still doing good. Even on this.

Then there is Tasini, Hillary’s NY primary opponent, a Dem, a true blue thru and thru liberal, who lived in Israel, who had family members who lived there and were killed in the conflict. He joined Code Pink at US embassy (I was going to go but it was thundering and raining too bad by the time I was ready) last Friday to deliver a letter demanding a cease fire and demanding a diplomatic solution to the crisis. He is miles better on I/P (ie, sane) than 99% of the Dems (in public, anyway). Against NAFTA. Always against Iraq and for a pull out date. On and on. Universal healthcare v Hillary HMO mess we got. Anti death penalty. Yet, nada word on him on the blogs.

Then there is Hillary, hawk squawking with the lobbies last Monday that bombing civilians and countries to dust is good, if it’s by Israel. This, after breakfasting at ‘super secret’ Murdoch fundraiser for her. He just LOVES Hillary! (Owner of FOX!!! NY POST!!! WAR MONGERS’ RAG … fit for fish mongers wrapping, only). A Thatcher wannabe on Iraq for 2008 buffing and polishing. Ugh ugh ugh. One of the biggest pharma donor recipients in senate, a Tasini volunteer told me (this I have to check).

Wouldnt all that make a lovely contrast piece for PROGRESSIVE people powered bloggers? Tasini v Hillary: A contrast of true progressivism v selling out. Take a leaf, DEMS.

But not a whisper. Nary a word.

6. marisacat - 24 July 2006

Dkos FP Blogger exchange over Big Dog vs Feingold and Lieberman

I just cannot bear to put it up in the post.

LOL

7. marisacat - 24 July 2006

there is a page at the Lamont website, full support for Israel and some “muttering”… pretty much what I would expect.

But as this drags on, he is gonna get asked more, say in October, should he win….

But NO PROBLEM, for years Democrats have said Iran is the big worry.

LOL Have to laugh.

8. NYCee - 24 July 2006

Oh my. That exchange was quite illustrative… of what happens when you must scapegoat one while giving all others a pass. Sometimes you just cant square the circle. The unexpected can happen. You might just get … busted!

Caught in the weave of the tangled web…

I give Feingold no pass on what is described he did re Clinton/impeachment. Which I just found out about. Ludicrous judgement call on his part. There are priorities re ethics. And bad consequences for prioritizing badly.

I also find him pathetic on Israel/ME. Cant “second guess” Israel Just like the rest of the locksteppers.

When I brought it up on Kos on Feingold’s diary, a fan of his (I was one, but not fanatic, just supportive) said, oh, he just said that as a quick retort during a Q&A. I told her that when it comes to the ME conflict, there is no such thing as an off the cuff retort by an elected official… not in our landscape.

9. marisacat - 24 July 2006

I told her that when it comes to the ME conflict, there is no such thing as an off the cuff retort by an elected official… not in our landscape.

I agree with that. Really tho it is just the 8 with some slight nod to those who called “present” and some small notice for whoever purposefully missed the vote.

BBC had absolutely HORRIFIC film of the evacuations, but small boats to a bigger warship (it looked like, big gray thing) of S Lebanese. Mothers and children (in one case a baby( torn apart… ABC to its limited credit had some film from the same departure area.

VERY reminsicent of NO.

10. gong - 24 July 2006

Not second-guessing Israel would be okay, I guess, if it weren’t for all that aid money and all those weapons. That’s the real hypocrisy, IMO.

11. marisacat - 24 July 2006

exactly… if they were not our surrogate. The glee of the retired generals and the smugness and the openness of how this all works out for all concerned has been some of the worst of it.

ugh.

12. Madman in the Marketplace - 24 July 2006

Kos is a republican.

Republicans have no need for logical consistency, as they operate on “faith”: in tribe, religion or the holy market.

therefore …

Kos has NO need to be consistent re: Warner, Clinton and Boxer.

QED

13. Deepest Troat - 24 July 2006

BMT is taking a stab at the silence now.

by BooMan
Mon Jul 24th, 2006 at 08:50:33 PM CDT It’s not only Markos, but Kevin Drum, Josh Marshall and others that have explained their unwillingness to discuss the conflagration in Israel. The rationale varies, but the underlying problem is the same. The left wing in this country is generally critical of Israel’s settlement policy and supportive of a negotiated settlement along the lines laid out by Bill Clinton in 2000. Yet, the vast majority of American Jews are Democratic voters and important as activists and fundraisers for the party.

There is no better way to splinter the left than to put the behavior of Israel front and center in the national debate. The Republicans will offer their uncritical support for anything Israel does, and the left will flounder about trying to appear fair and balanced. There will be no shortage of anti-Israel comments to cite emerging from the left blogosphere, even if only from the diaries of community sites and the comments. And, no matter what “big-name” bloggers try to do in the way of coordinating the message, there will be plenty of ammunition to bring to the Jewish community as evidence of ambivalence or distaste for Israel from the left.

At Booman Tribune, we will continue to cover this story as we see it. But I am under no illusions. I have already been attacked for anti-Semitism. The Weekly Standard has already been trolling through the orange threads for the most inflammatory anti-Israeli comments. Our politicians are completely prostrate before such accusations.

Hmmm….methinks somebody has been taking a peak at a certain blog. ;)

14. marisacat - 24 July 2006

well there is more than a little commentary around about it…and some criticism of the Silence of the Blogs (or as I would say, Blahhhggs)… LOL not just here… ;)

I was surprised that Althouse commented (see link above) and Blogometer has had the continuing ‘non comment comments’ from the Firsters (re-naming the “A-Listers”, LOL, derivative of Frist!)

There is no better way to splinter the left than to put the behavior of Israel front and center in the national debate. FP at BMT

Kill a new media for openess and trash the left, all manner of the left as well as a wide range of dissident voices, invite in Republicans, run Webb and Casey and champion Lamont as both brilliant and progressive.

That’ll at least tick off The Left!

what a gas the boyz are.

15. observer - 24 July 2006

Billmon’s piece of a day or two ago (to which you linked, marisacat) is representative of what seems to be the consensus: Israel is losing this encounter. While they did manage to capture one village inside the Lebanese border, the costs were high, and the rockets continue to rain down on the northern third of Israel.

Counterpunch and Antiwar.com have had some interesting pieces, and there’s the Debka.com site that should be read skeptically. This piece summarizes and mentions an earlier Lind piece that talks about how the U. S. and Israel are stepping into a trap.

In a nutshell: Israel will not be able to disarm Hizbullah. Israel and the U. S. will be the big losers with the Arab allies of the U. S. and the Lebanese Christians also suffering. Big gainers: Hizbullah, Iran and Syria. Even Hamas to some extent.

Future forecast: the U. S. and Israel will not react to this defeat by adapting their strategy, but by upping the bet and increasing the levels of violence.

What is crazy is that both governments may enjoy short term political benefits from the loss because both populations are so afraid to face new realities and the political opposition in both countries is so clueless and divided.

A bleak outlook for both the U. S. and Israel and for those who have the misfortune to be targeted by these dying empires.

So let’s talk about polls.

16. observer - 24 July 2006

Counterpunch has linked a “blathersphere” piece today that has been out in print for a while. It’s here.

A bit from it:

In political terms the blogosphere is like white noise, insistent and meaningless, like the wash of Pacific surf I can hear most days. But MoveOn.Org and Daily Kos have been hailed as the emergent form of modern politics, the target of excited articles in the New York Review of Books.

Beyond raising money swiftly handed over to the gratified veterans of the election industry both MoveOn and Daily Kos have had zero political effect, except as a demobilizing force.

The effect on writers is horrifying. Talented people feel they have produce 400 words of commentary every day and you can see the lethal consequences on their minds and style, both of which turn rapidly to slush. They glance at the New York Times and rush to their laptops to rewrite what they just read. Hawsers to reality soon fray and they float off , drifting zeppelins of inanity.

17. observer - 24 July 2006

Robert McCain is interested in Lefties getting their moneysworth.

We know how Kos feels about the idea of someone looking into how he spends all that money brought in by dKos.

18. marisacat - 24 July 2006

observer…

I had tried to bring up the blathersphere piece a couple hours ago and the link was not good. Thanks so much for getting a good link.. and for the McCain too…

19. observer - 24 July 2006

I realized after I posted the comment that the linked piece is older. The new article is still not working, but it sounds interesting.

20. D. Throat - 25 July 2006

Here is another one:

As progressive bloggers focus on ousting Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman from office for his alleged disloyalty to Democrats, in Virginia, another candidate who embodied the Republican cause has infiltrated the Democratic Party. But ironically, the bloggers support this former Reagan official.

Jim Webb, a Vietnam combat veteran who served as Secretary of the Navy under President Reagan, is not only the new darling of the national netroots; he was recruited to run for office by Internet activists.

A major shift is exactly what Virginia’s top bloggers had in mind when they heard Webb was mulling the race. “Webb was potentially a transformative person for the Democratic Party,” said Lowell Feld, a government employee and founder of RaisingKaine, one of the top political blogs in Virginia. After doing some research and meeting with Webb, Feld said he was convinced he had the right résumé, attitude and constellation of positions to win. Webb was a forceful opponent of the Iraq War before it began, presciently arguing in September 2002 that unless the United States wanted to “occupy Iraq for the next thirty years,” policymakers should recognize that no “absolutely vital national interest” was at stake to justify a “unilateral war” that could compromise the fight against international terrorism.

21. observer - 25 July 2006

Interesting piece about paid thread thugs from another source–the military.

It seems everybody is doing it. Why haven’t I been recruited?

22. observer - 25 July 2006

On more thing: I saw this the other day and found it to be quite an eye opener. And it comes from Fox, Hume and Cameron in the early days after 9/11 before everybody had gotten their memos about who the enemy was.

23. NYCee - 25 July 2006

This is an excerpt from the NY Mag article you linked re Joe/Ned race, marisacat.

The quote:

Lieberman’s inner circle smells a whiff of anti-Semitism in the antiwar camp. “There’s a fringe that thinks Bush went to Iraq for oil, and Lieberman went into Iraq for Israel,” says Dan Gerstein, a former communications director to Lieberman. But the majority of Lieberman’s opponents are simply disappointed that the senator continues to support what they see as the Bush administration’s disastrous foreign policy.

This is said with no attached analysis. Of course, that is not the reporter’s job (however, he opines on Joe’s “disingenuous” remark on something else) but I suppose what strikes me as problematic is the lack of analysis the reader may bring to the words. A non-astute or uninformed reader might not stop to think – Hmmm… Camp Joe charges antisemitism for saying Joe, who’s Jewish, supported the war for Israel’s sake. But people also say that about neocons who arent Jewish, eg, Bush.

This notion inserted (probably reflexively) by Camp Joe is exactly the sort that builds an electric fence around the topic. There is absolutely nothing antisemitic about this opinion in and of itself.

24. Deepest Troat - 25 July 2006

Boo wrote that Jeff Goldstein called him an Anti-Semite. When you go to Goldstein’s site, Goldstein writes something pretty interesting.

Perhaps somebody needs to get the Booman Tribune added to that new supertopsupersecret Townhouse list. To, you know—alert him to the fact that the all the bald anti-semitism bubbling up from the left is really just a nefarious a Rovian plot. Because when a long-established lefty site breaks message—as Booman has—it makes it much more difficult to constrain one’s “experiences” with racism to the “far right”, not to mention far more difficult for progressives to control the narrative through a gambit of coordinated, “unified messaging.”

And controlling the narrative—first by bending it to fit your will, then by repeating it until it becomes provisional “truth”—is at the heart of a progressive “activism” that, let’s face it, has failed to win people over using an unrigged marketplace of ideas.

Boo is on the attack now. Just playing into the “defending oneself” trap. Some folks will never learn. It never worked for the Dems and it will not work for the boyz.

25. observer - 25 July 2006

Jake Tapper’s interview on Nighline last night with the “world’s most powerful liberal blogger has lots of fun things in it. Here’s one:

MOULITSAS: The day I take advice from Republicans on what’s best for the Democratic Party is the day I become a Republican. So I’m really not that interested in his characterization.

Now a lot of people try to make that argument that, you know, the bloggers are pulling the party to the left, right. At YearlyKos, the first Democrat to agree to speak was Harry Reid, who is an anti-abortion, moderate-to-conservative Democrat. The second was Mike Warner, the governor of Virginia, who’s a moderate-to-conservative Democrat. One of the favorite personalities on the blogs is Gov. Brian Schweitzer of Montana, who is a moderate-to-conservative Democrat.

This has nothing to do with the left. This has nothing to do with the right. It has everything to do with standing up for what principles we all agree on. And whether you’re a conservative Democratic or a liberal Democratic, we have shared values and we have to stand up for those, and we have to be proud to talk about them and promote them and not shy away.

And those Democrats who do so, whether they’re conservative or Democrat (sic), get a lot of support. And those that don’t, whether they’re conservative or liberal, don’t.

TAPPER: I guess I don’t understand — I don’t understand what issues you’re talking about. Clearly, Joe Lieberman believes what he believes. You disagree with it, but he believes what he believes. But on other issues, you think that groups like the abortion-rights community on certain candidates should just suck it up and let a pro-life Democrat win a Senate seat because that’s the best chance that the Democrats have to capture that seat. And I don’t — when you talk about ‘shared values,’ I guess I just don’t know which values you’re talking about. Lieberman votes with the Democrats most of the time. But on some issues, he doesn’t — Social Security and Iraq …

MOULITSAS: We’re talking about some of the two biggest issues.

TAPPER: But, I mean, which are the issues that you’re talking about?

MARKOS MOULITSAS: We’re talking values. I’m not talking issues. Democrats are too focused on — Democrats are too focused on talking about issues when they should be talking about values.

You can also learn a little about Kos’s real love: his music.

26. marisacat - 25 July 2006

that nightline text is a hoot. Back to the old Schweitzer shit about values v issues. That tag line one of the Blog Maids wears on her comments.

And Boo, well. What to say.

I am glad Tapper called Kos on the abortion scheisse.

Vicious little creep. Selling blogSnotLand votes over womens’ bodies.

BTW… Ensign is up with his bill on criminsalising taking a minor across state lines for an abortion. Every R trope is trotted out. I am guessing Reid will trot right up and Vote YES like he always does.

27. raincat100 - 25 July 2006

Observer, reading that transcript gave me a headache. He manages to contradict himself every couple of sentences. Squirmy he is. I like the part about how begging for money is demeaning.

28. D. Throat - 25 July 2006

Kos is scum:

JAKE TAPPER: What inspired you to sit down on that day, in 2002, and start blogging?

MARKOS MOULITSAS: This was early 2002, it was in the wake of the Afghanistan war, kind of in the run up in the Iraq war. It was a very stifling environment for liberal voices — they simply did not exist, they were quieted down. If you criticized the president on any issue, domestic or foreign, you were accused of being un-American and unpatriotic.

MOULITSAS: I don’t even begin to worry about that. It’s not an issue. And in fact, I’ve been starting to work out what, you know, what my political philosophy is, and it’s actually not necessarily in tune with the Democratic Party itself. It’s a very libertarian approach to politics where we don’t need government for a lot of things where government is involved in today.

MOULITSAS: Oh, very much so. Yes. Absolutely. But I’m very much libertarian. I mean, personally, I do not like, say, abortion. I’m very much against abortion personally, but from my libertarian leanings indicate that I’m not going to be telling people what they should or should not be doing.

MOULITSAS: Well, I didn’t say I was a libertarian. But on government regulations, I think there’s probably a lot more government regulation. I think small businesses are over-regulated. There’s definitely a lot of places where we can make common ground with libertarians. Obviously, civil liberty issues, Bill of Rights type of issues, the infringement of this government on, you know, spying on people and listening into their phone conversations and the elimination of habeas corpus. A lot of these issues are really disturbing to me from the libertarian standpoint.

and this:

People accuse me of being a king-maker and gatekeeper and they say, ‘Well, you know, your support for Jon Tester in Montana was critical, and your support for Jim Webb in Virginia was critical.’

The reason I supported Jon Tester in Montana and Jim Webb in Virginia is because the locals, the local activists, the local bloggers, the local activists groups were really, really inspired by those two candidates. They came to me and they said, ‘You know what? This the guy to watch. Pay attention — he’s incredible, he’s the next rising star in our state.’

yeah just real people…

A major shift is exactly what Virginia’s top bloggers had in mind when they heard Webb was mulling the race. “Webb was potentially a transformative person for the Democratic Party,” said Lowell Feld, a government employee and founder of RaisingKaine, one of the top political blogs in Virginia. After doing some research and meeting with Webb, Feld said he was convinced he had the right résumé, attitude and constellation of positions to win.

Lowell Feld is Netroots Coordinator for the Jim Webb for US Senate Campaign.

Just another republican in DINO drag..… this is who Kos “listens” to as the voice of grassroots Democrats… a man that has never been a Democrat… hence Webb… and Warner …. and Kaine.

Well one good thing is that Kos has finally come out of the closet and admitted that he is NOT even a Democrat.

29. marisacat - 25 July 2006

well I read taht on the road to the debate that Allen and Webb had… this past weekend .. there was not a single Webb yard sign.

Now IF that is accurate, whaddup Kaine people?

And which campaign will the little union operative move to next, to “volunteer”…?

30. pyrrho - 25 July 2006

dt,

I’m glad you quoted the “I’m very much libertarian.” followed in the very next answer with “I didn’t say I was a libertarian”.

It’s funny he says there are a lot of things “we” agree with libertarians since “we are a libertarian” if we’re kos.

I believe in liberty, the problem with libertarianism is it’s not well founded, and not about liberty. It’s about using property as a fundamental right, which is unworkable… property is not about liberty. Property is important, the right to property is important, but it’s based on other, actual, rights, not the other way around. The other incoherence of “libertarianism” as it’s currently understood is this idea of small government. Libertarians do not actually believe in small government because they say the government must enforce property rights, and therefore the government must be many times larger than any parties in a property dispute to have power to ejudicate it.

I’m not a big fan of owernship, I believe it’s all about relationship more than ownership, of course, you’re welcome to disagree.

31. gong - 25 July 2006

pyrrho, I think that’s exactly right.


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 169 other followers

%d bloggers like this: