
Dateline: 6/11/06…
At the moment, I’m cruising at an altitude of about 27,000 feet (well, give or take…I wasn’t really listening to the pilot when he did the announcement. But it was something with a "7" in it…), and thinking back on the rush of activity that was YearlyKos. And I’m, frankly, a bit overwhelmed by the experience.
Meeting everyone and putting faces and names and screennames together.
Meeting a whole host of bloggers that I e-mail with and/or post about their posts after they’ve posted about one of mine.
Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
(By the way, the in flight movie is "Failure to Launch." It’s a bit predictable, but definitely has some amusing moments. And Zooey Deschanel? Good snark.)
Anyway, I’m half watching a movie, half running my brain through the lessons of YearlyKos, and I keep coming back to something that I talked about with the folks from LinkTV, and then later with Murray Waas. About the interaction between the political types who attended the conference and the folks from the netroots who attended – and the relationship between the two. And whether any relationship exists at all.
Where is it going? Are we a group of people to be used as an ATM? As boots on the ground where needed for a campaign and then ignored? Or is it something more akin to a partnership – something where there is give and take, and a respect on both sides of the equation?
Personally, I’d prefer a partnership. It strengthens the Democratic party to have input from outside the bubble and from outside the Beltway consultants who never seem to be in it for the win, but seem like the percentage is the most important thing regardless of the ultimate results or how the job is done or whether they’ve ever really been effective at it.
Here’s the thing: everyone in this thing we hang out in that I like to call the blogoverse…we are all real people, with real problems, with real day to day issues, with concerns about foreign policy, about economic issues, with paying our bills, with filling our tanks with gas, with feeding ourselves, about…well everything these days, hmmm?
The strength of the netroots is in the aggregate power of the individual voices. We don’t always speak with the same voice but, honestly, I don’t ever want us to do so. Issues get tested through the arguments…all of the arguments – and if a particular proposal or solution cannot stand up to some criticism, then it isn’t really a very good idea in the first place, now is it?
But when we do speak with the same voice – very powerful.
And one thing that came across loud and clear at YearlyKos? We want the politicians to represent us – really represent us, not just the big donors, not just the lobbyists, not just the whomever happens to be writing checks today crowd, but US.
And journalists? We just want them to do their jobs and tell the truth about how things are and dig into the meat of the story and toss the phony balance crap out the window. A lot of them honestly try to do that – and we ought to stand up and applaud them when they do. The reporters who are trying to fight the good fight, to be honest and do their jobs deserve our support – because heaven knows that some of them aren’t getting it from their management.
Every person in this nation of ours is valuable. From the most wealthy philanthropist trying to use their power, influence and financial windfall to help others through some charitable foundation to the drunken bum passed out in the doorway near some bar in the seediest part of town. There is some value there somewhere…it may just be a little lost.
We spend an awful lot of time tearing people down in this nation of ours, but not nearly enough time building people up to their full potential. Making it clear that they can make a difference – in their own lives, the lives of their family members, and in their communities.
You know. Nothing big. Just…um…feeling like all of our voices matter to the people who are supposed to be working for all of us. And for themselves as well. And that we are all working to make things better…not just to hold things at some sort of nasty stalemate so one side can hold onto power while the other side can hold onto their piece of the pie, too.
Which leads us to where we go from here. Any ideas?
PS – Mr. ReddHedd says we’re at 35,000 feet. No idea where I got the "7" thing…maybe it was that second glass of chardonnay…
PPS — And now I’m off to Take Back America. Whew…exhaustion does not begin to describe my morning. But it’s awfully good to be home and playing with my peanut. Hope everyone had a safe trip back to their destination as well.
(Found this amazing photo on Cliff Burns’ website. Wow — some absolutely gorgeous shots here — and everyone should take a bit to browse. I promise you’ll find something here that will make your Monday a bit better.)



148 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Rrootttzzz! hell yeah!
Don’t forget Poland!
Fitz (libby hearing today!)
I’m lovin me some Tom Curry this mornin. See MSNBC.com for his byline. Smackin’ Barbara Boxer upside the head (in public tjis time).
off topic, sorry
I need some examples of msn’s concervative reporting please
I am in discussion where those on the other side are claiming msn is “hopelessly liberal”
Christy THANKS!
And back off on the caffeine a little(?), honey, so you’ll last thru what you want to/have to do. I can’t believe you’re sitting on that plane working. You must have adrenaline squirting out your ears from the YKos excitement overload.
[Fellow Smithie(?) AND fellow grownup hyperactive kid(?).]
I’m sure I speak for many others in letting you know, we’re so-o-o proud, having you there at YKos representing all of us stay-at-homes. We were there in spirit, savoring every dispatch from the front. Can’t wait to catch up on all the details.
BRAVO on a fantastic job. ;->
me to me at 5 — a perfect example is the WaPo’s reporting on Abramoff — saying that he gave to Democrats when he did not give one dime — Jane’s Maryland Moment post and the surrounding ones have all the details…
I think you’re exactly right Christy. In many ways, what you’re raising here is what makes the personal, non-digital interactions between bloggers, netroots activists, journalists, politicos, and regular citizens so important. When you talk to someone on the phone, meet with them in person, plan events, brainstorm over dinner or drinks you’re able to really get down to brass tacks. You can have a flow of ideas that isn’t quite so free over IP. Most of all, you get to actually know someone and gain a fuller picture of how their life informs their political views and writing.
All of this is why I was so disappointed I didn’t get to go to YearlyKos. The flip side, though, is that YKos is part of a model of increasing our connection as a political community. The Roots Project, Blogging Liberally, Drinking Liberally, and all the other cosmopolity-type events take place in the same mode on a daily basis. The defining factor in all of these events is that the
blogosphereblogoverse becomes less a community of voices and more a community of people.Christy,
My MDroots friend Jim Preston will be attending the Take Back America conferance I think.I look forward to his take on it and yours.(we’re in the pic at the top of the CtG discussion thread.Rep.Hooley was great!)
Maybe we’re a group of people to be used as a replacement for, or at least a supplement to, Shrum/Carville/Brazille etc. A politician posts on a blog and receives many ideas from the commenters, people of all walks of life and points of view. The politician walks away with an aggregate message that has been pre-brainstromed and pre-screened by a willing focus group. Blogs remind me that “two heads are better than one.”
FDL got mentioned in an article By Dick Polman
Philly Inquirer Political Analyst
“Any Democrat who defends Lieberman is denounced.
Sen. Barbara Boxer of California was here the other day, and when asked about the blogs’ push for Lamont, she defended Lieberman. A blogger from firedoglake.com promptly posted this comment about Boxer: “She’s an idiot.”
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/14796475.htm
Fire — Caught your panel on C-Span, bravo!
The “fifth estate” was all I could think of listening to folks like yourself — who years ago and before one-party rule, would be muckrakers, aspiring journailists, young legal beagles, maybe young congressionals — an array of Americans that cared about where we are going in the world! The future. Well, they have all been co-opted, to be polite about it.
(I wanted to say “bought”)
It’s up to the citizenary, The netizens! Keep up your work — it is worth it and having an impact. Thanks for that. I’ll promise to keep reading and contributing in some way.
-JK
At Vegas blog-fest, it’s not politics as usual
Democratic presidential hopefuls flock to Yearly Kos gathering
By Tom Curry
National affairs writer
MSNBC
Updated: 2 hours, 7 minutes ago
LAS VEGAS – Could this past weekend’s Yearly Kos convention — the conclave of 900 activists sponsored by the Daily Kos web site — turn out to be the most significant political gathering of 2006?
Here’s why it might be: The next Democratic presidential nominee will have to go with, or go over, or go around the left-populist-progressive wing of the Democratic Party…
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13190686/
_____
Not bad.
I was thinking about how some of the coverage focusing on the interaction with the big-name politicos, and it’s true that there was lots of cheering and most people were pretty excited about that (though there were plenty who were skeptical.) And it occurred to me that there’s a parallel in science-fiction conventions, with which I have quite a bit of experience.
In that community, people get very excited at meeting a big-name writer and hearing them speak, but even so, it’s very clear that’s not what it’s about. The main thing is the community. A signed book, a handshake, and a speech are things we can tell our co-workers and non-activist friends and family about, but the thing we rave about to anyone who will understand is our time with each other, and the ferment of ideas that went on there (and seamlessly online with those who were there virtually and in spirit.)
So being star-struck for a bit is okay. Enjoy it; it doesn’t mean we’ve been co-opted, or that we’re “merging with the media and mainstream politics,” whatever that means. The presence of these “stars” means that what we’re doing is having an influence, which will spur us not to fold up our tents because we’ve “made it,” but to do more, and build on what we’ve accomplished.
Christy–
Congrats! Plame panel was great. I also watched on C-Span. I was wondering about what the head count is for the convention. The Post and the New York Times said 1,000 but I thought it would be quite a bit larger.
Do you know what the numbers were?
me to me at 5: Eric Boehlert has a good list in his response to the Post’s review of Lapdogs: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..22791.html
what worries me is that the two parties have roughly the same foreign policy, excepting mavericks like russ feingold — the only reason they seem to be differing about iraq is that we’ve lost the war there & americans don’t like being on the losing side, so elements in both parties are trying to shift blame
according to juan cole, an iranian official says america doesn’t need to attack iran: america attacked afghanistan & set up an islamist republic, & america attacked iraq & set up an islamist republic, but iran’s already an islamist republic, so why attack?
america’s destined to fail as a country unless it comes up with a foreign policy that deals with reality — rove’s strategy of letting our domestic politics of religiosity dictate our foreign policy is bound to fail — everything we touch overseas turns to crap because although america’s gone bust, our glorified chicken hawk leaders [including hillary] don’t realize that our paymasters, china & japan, are calling the shots & are treating america as a useful idiot
On my way TO the airport to spend a day breathing yet more crappy air. Change planes in DFW and then on to Boston where I “hop” on to the bus that takes me 5 miles from home where my spouse will show up to carry me into the car. That’s about all I’ll be able to do by then.
Tomorrow I will start to think about what’s next after sleeping in my own bed with my cats and a silent ceiling fan (if needed) instead of the infernal hotel air/noise machines.
There are lots of flicks over at flickr of the event, over 400 and counting. I hope to have some more to add later.
Thanks and blessings to all who worked on YKos, all who came, spoke, shared, challenged, and inspired!
And to those who were at home rooting us on!
Later . . . . . .
OT-The Libby case has a status conference today at 1:30 p.m. (eastern). Maybe we’ll get a Fitz sighting, unless one of the other team members will handle this one.
Lots in salon.com today on YKos. 2 lead articles, plus more in “War Room” and “Daou Report”.
That’s gotta help.
oxide says 10 – I think you’ve got a good point.
And salon.com coverage (which usually leads to msm finally being forced to cover stories they’d rather ignore) shows the YKos was a TERRIFIC idea.
firedoglake.com et al. are like the dog that finally caught the bus. ‘cept this doggie knows how to drive. Ha!
The Plame panel was wonderful. Watched it again this weekend.
It’s thrilling to see the MSM acknowledge YKOS. This is getting good!
TANK @ 11
Interesting piece at Philly.com – thanks!
Here’s a taste:
There are definitely places on the left side of the ‘nets that match the description Pohlman puts up. On the other hand, there are places like FDL. Given the fact that I’m here and not elsewhere, that tells you which place I’m more comfortable in.
[And let’s not get back into any of the viteruperate yelling, the screaming, and the hollering about ending sentences with a preposition, shall we? Thank you.]
Pohlman couldn’t say what he did about the Plame panel, for example. Here’s a group of professionals – not 6 figure political professionals, but lawyers, journalists, film director, and government officials – offering their passionate analysis of a government run amok and a media that largely has its head in the sand.
Could Pohlman say what he’s saying about the CTG effort of the Roots Project? Doubtful. This was a group of folks engaged in a strategic action to reach out to Congress in the best way possible – one on one, personal contact in the office of the hill. They were backed up and supported by folks like those here at FDL. No angry, whining, attitude-laying nastiness in that action, just good old fashioned person-to-person politics.
As Jane pointed out in one of her many postings from Vegas, there was a certain amount of “let’s gather around the geeky boys to learn about blogs” from the MSM types, leaving her (blessedly) free to mingle with the firepups, set up for and decompress from the Plame panel, etc.
Any ideas? Let’s keep on going with our brand of professionalism – professional patriots (in the Glenn Greenwald sense of the term), holding our elected representatives, our media outlets, and each other to account.
The politicians have to be able to take the bracing dose of reality that we offer them. There’s many that get elected who fall into the sycophant trap, where they start to get all this positive reinforcement from their staff, lobbyists and companies who benefit from their actions. It’s hard to take criticism from others as a result (trust me, I have watched the ex spouse become a toadie for special interests since his first election to office 9 years ago–that person is not the one I married lo these many years ago).
Anyway, what we offer politicians is an unblinking unvarnished look at what is truly going on. Many would prefer not to know (can anyone say Boxer here???)
Eric Alterman backs up Colbert and says Truth is for Liberals
me to me 5 –
About MSNBC, try Matthews in general — Glenn Greenwald has a good post on him describing himself this weekend as “a huge fan” of Condoleesa Rice — http://glenngreenwald.blogspot…..upies.html — and then there’s always the homoerotic stuff Matthews has done about Bush, most notably on Crotch Stuffing Accomplished Day:
“We’re proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who’s physical, who’s not a complicated guy like Clinton or even like Dukakis or Mondale, all those guys, McGovern. They want a guy who’s president. Women like a guy who’s president. Check it out [at which point the visual was of Bush’s stuffing]. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. It’s simple. We’re not like the Brits.”
(5/1/03)
Peterr 22 -
Vituperation? I got two words for ‘em:
Ann Coulter
and 4 more:
Republican Pundit and Spokeswoman.
Leopold has a new article on Truthout about his reporting on Rove, and the mysterious “Sealed vs Sealed” case in DC.
Grudgingly, have to agree slightly with
Jake at 20.
Loved watching and hearing the panel, but the “snark” that’s so delightful in the blog atmosphere doesn’t necessarily go over so well in the televised panel discussion (and/or interviews )on serious topics.
‘fraid it could too easily lead to charges that bloggers are too smug & elitist. That’s a charge that might be picked up in a hurry & used to hammer down your important message.
Just be a little careful, that’s all.
Panelists might want to review the tape and see what they think. Hate to quibble over possibly just a minor thing. The panel was wonderful!
Jerry…LInk please?
Old political habits die hard I think.That comfy bubble makes alot of people very overprotecitve.But if the old ways of doing things no longer work(or become corrupted),it’s time for something new.I don’t know when America got scared of being innovative,but somewhere along the way alot of this was lost.
It makes so much sense to let regular people have some consultant-type status,but it’s a rare thing to actually see it happen.If I had my way,consultants wouldn’t come from think tanks and other places in the bubble,ever.Has anyone ever tried gathering constituents together and seeing what they can come up with?Why not?A panel of 20 citizens could probably hammer out a lot of very good ideas for everything from platforms to commericials.Would it hurt to try it?
Good news for me this weekend,though off topic:
Last week I mentioned Frances Moore Lappe’s latest book,Democracy’s Edge here,but I had also posted about it over where I guest blog.This weekend her office contacted me via email and want to use my post on their website.I’m supposed to call them today to give them permission.I guess Francis liked what I had to say quite a bit.Wow.
Like all relationships growth will take place regardless of the wishes of the participants. I imagine the relationship will start off very friendly and warm. Lots of phone calls, dinners, late nights “just talking” maybe even an ocassional gift. After a while a degree of familiarity will set in. Backs will be getting scratched all around, but the friendliness will settle into familiarity. Years go by, elections pass like the seasons and one day you wake up as an ATM machine. Being vigorously pumped for funds yet no longer having influence. Cast aside for a younger, cuter political group(with c-cups).
It’s an ugly process but it’s all part of nature taking it’s course.
I think the so called snark on the panel was not only appropriate but necc. I also thought by calling out Byron the nerd about his Comstock faxes was brilliant, and larry correcting all his WRONG reporting was brilliant. The people on that panel knew exactly what they were doing. So all you komodo dragons who like to eat their own, find somewhere else to eat. It is about time people speak truth to power and let these reporters et al, know WE know what they are doing, and that included SNARK!!!!!!
“…Where is it going? Are we a group of people to be used as an ATM? As boots on the ground where needed for a campaign and then ignored?…”
That’s how the arrogant NV Democratic Party made me feel in 2004. They can kiss my Irish ass.
My wife and I pounded the precincts for Kerry for months nonetheless (via MoveOn PAC) right up till 6:50 pm election night, but I have a VERY bad residual taste in my mouth over NV Dems.
OfT: MSNBC Question of the Day
Should Guantanamo Bay prison be shut down?
Yes
61%
No
39%
* 420 responses
Jason Leopold’s Sealed Vs Sealed story http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/061206Z.shtml
thanks *ilson46201, very much
*ilson,
Nooooo!not Leopold again!I wanna read the story/I don’t want to read the story.
My Kung Fu is strong,I will not read the story.
OfT: washingtonpost.com’s Daily Politics Discussion
Dan Balz
Washington Post Chief Political Reporter
Monday, June 12, 2006; 11:00 AM
Balz was in Vegas covering YKos for the WaPo.
An Angry Old Broad @30: She SHOULD like what you say. I’ll bet sales jumped that week. I know that I ordered Democracy’s Edge on your review. My interest was piqued.
The Susan Page, USA piece titled ‘Dems Slipping in State Races’ comes off as a piece used soley to demoralize Democrats. It should be titled: Karl Rove Seeks to Piss on Democrats Parade.
It opens:
(Snip)
“WASHINGTON -The political landscape has gotten friendlier for congressional Democrats over the past six months, but the party’s prospects for scoring big gains in governors’ races now look more difficult.”
*So the title could have easily been ‘Dems looking to make gains in Congress’
The next two paragraphs point out the damaged economy in Michigan…”Michiganders are furious at life, so they’re furious at the governor,”..says a Dem pollster…and in Wisconsin we learn that the Democrats are just plain corrupt….”In Wisconsin, Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle is increasingly vulnerable, in part because of ethics controversies in his administration”
*Then there is this line:
“Among the nation’s 10 biggest states, Democratic prospects since the beginning of the year have gotten tougher in four, California, Georgia, Michigan and Pennsylvania, and better in one, New York.”
I don’t know that the Dems were EVER expected to win Georgia…so why that is tossed in is a mystery…..California seems to have closed up..Page could have mentioned it is because Arnold is distancing himself from Bush and pushing Democratic ideas like environmentalism and an increase in the minumim wage…As Pennsylvania–the last poll I saw had Lynn Swann tanking badly and Rendell ahead by 20% points….that was touted as a big pick-up opportunity for the R’s early on…In NY Spitzer is WALKING away from a state that has been in the R column for a decade or more by about 50% points..In Massachussetts another state that has been in the R column for almost 2 decades it is looking strong for a pick-up.
“….prospects have improved elsewhere, including Arkansas and Colorado, both now rated as toss-ups. “There has been some give and take,” he says.” So two reliably red states are slipping into the D’s column, but the story is that Dems are slipping in races…races that were considered tough..especially for Granholm of Michigan….Florida under the care of Bush’s brother is a clear tossup too and the last I saw Rhode Island’s Carcieri(R) was slipping in that bluest of blue states.
*In conuclusion, the story is soft as a bag of week old shit. Page has weak analysis, trumps up D’s losses, downplays R’s losses and makes it look like polls from a year ago were a done deal.
Susan Page gets a big fat F on this slice of steaming doody.
-GSD
Christy, you guys totally rocked!! We are so proud of what you have accomplished. Now so many more people will see, thru C-Span and other recordings, what we are doing.
We were envious that you got to meet each other. On the home front I had dinner with a Congressman and gave him Glenn’s book. This story and a piece on mental illness and Iraq veterans available on my new blog.
Perfect take on GOP Pundit and Spokeswoman mAnn Coulter:
http://content.todayscartoons……439e9df116
Maybe we’re a group of people to be used as a replacement for, or at least a supplement to, Shrum/Carville/Brazille etc.
The netroots/blogosphere is a tremendous open-source pool of knowledge, talent, and strategic thinking… that the Democratic establishment wants absolutely no part of. It’s mystifying – at least if you assume that the Democratic establishment is in it to win elections and advance liberal policies. If you assume that they’re in it to preserve their comfortable lives by serving corporate lobbyists and not rocking the boat, then it makes a lot more sense.
Redd, what was yout perception of the “political types’” reaction? Were they engaged and interested, or were they just smiling and nodding and looking for the exit?
And responding to that vile excerpt Peterr posted @22 – screaming is kind of a natural response when you have something important to say and the people who need to hear it aren’t listening. It’s a sign of frustration and exasperation.
(Bloody ‘ell. Connection problems – I apologize if this double-posts)
From the TO article Jerry Mentions:
Leopold writes:
“When told about the Sealed vs. Sealed indictment filed in US District Court, the legal experts became intrigued about the case because they say that most federal criminal indictments are filed under US vs. Sealed and that they rarely come across federal criminal indictments titled Sealed vs. Sealed, which to them suggests the prosecutor felt it necessary to add an extra layer of secrecy to an indictment to keep it out of public view.
“The question here is that nobody who I have spoken to – top criminal attorneys, law professors, etc. – is aware of the left part of the case title having been sealed,” said one former federal criminal attorney. “That the right-hand side is sealed is almost pro-forma. But, what is not known is whether the US Attorney can seal the left hand part of the case title on his own.”
The fact that the indictment has been under seal for more than a month also suggests that it involves a high-profile investigation, he said.
Additionally, it’s entirely plausible for a federal prosecutor to obtain permission from a federal magistrate or a judge, have an indictment unsealed for the limited purpose of having parts of it read to a defendant and his or her attorneys in an attempt to have the defendant cooperate with an investigation to avoid facing further charges, legal experts said.”
It seems to me that recording an indictment under “sealed vs. sealed” is a surefire way of making sure it gets lots of attention without divulging anything else about it. Intentionally or not, this would certainly be an excellent pressure ploy.
Panel snark: I thought it was GREAT. Makes you real people showing confidence.
Consultants do more than framing political messages — a lot of winning elections has to do with the nuts&bolts: filing dealines, campaign committee financial reporting, district demographics, realistic budgeting, fundraising scheduling, etc. I’m volunteering planning already for a friend on a City Council race for November 2007.
Get involved with actual elections and ask questions. Old-timers are glad to share political experience with you! They like to see Democrats win…
Have a look at what BobcatJH has to say about Coulter supporters(No name calling-just well reasoned facts)
http://hughesforamerica.typepa…..ulter.html
DMM, I’m not as strong as you . . . I read it.
Actually, it didn’t strike me as much beyond good reporting. Here’s what’s in the record – “Sealed v. Sealed, case # 06 cr 128″ – and here’ why that’s so odd . . .
He speculates – acknowledging it as such – that the could be Fitz and Rove re Plame, but could also be Peter Zeidenberg (one of Fitz’s colleague on the Plame case) who is also working on the Abramoff/Safavian mess. He notes as well that the grand jury works with other cases. (Has The Note gotten that message yet, Christy?)
Compared with other stuff, this is pretty tame. I read it as Leopold trying to give his earlier report some context – not a bad idea, and would have helped his case if he had done so earlier.
Which brings us to Christy, looseheadprop, and other FDL lawyerly types out there –
Sealed v. Sealed, not US v. Sealed?
Are Leopold’s unnamed “legal experts” including a “former federal criminal attorney” correct, or do you smell something odd here?
apologies for the las post! I didn’t mean to C&P so much!
I wouldn’t want to weaken anyone’s kung fu!
BobbyG:
The Labor and Power panel at YKos held up Nevada as a shining example of a place where unionized workers are a force to be reckoned with. So I asked the question “then why did Kerry lose Nevada?” Answer: Nevada is still a red state. I didn’t think much of that answer, but there you have it.
Eric Boehlert over on HuffPo, giving blogger props:
“…Today, sites like Media Matters, Firedoglake, Crooks and Liars, Altercation, Atrios, Digby, Talking Points Memo, the Daou Report, Eat the Press, the Daily Howler, Daily Kos, the Horse’s Mouth, and scores more factually catalog the disheartening phenomena of the D.C. lapdog press. And they do it based on what the MSM has printed and broadcast–not the wordy, insider back story about why reporters did what they did. (After all, most news consumers are never privy to those back stories.) I do the same thing for 300 pages:
• When the New York Times for five weeks during the 2000 campaign refused to even acknowledge the Boston Globe’s page 1 story detailing how Bush had walked away from his Texas Air National Guard duties, that’s rolling over for Bush.
• When CNN made sure to obtain prior approval from the Pentagon for the retired generals it was going to use during its Iraq war coverage, that’s rolling over for Bush.
• When nearly ever major news organization in American announced in 2004 that Bush had secured a re-election “mandate,” despite the fact he clung to the narrowest win for a sitting president since Woodrow Wilson in 1916, that’s rolling over for Bush.
• When “Nightline” during the first two years of the Valerie Plame investigation devoted just three programs to the topic, compared to the 19 Whitewater programs “Nightline” did during the first two years of that investigation, that’s rolling over for Bush.
• When CNN reported last year that anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan had been arrested outside the White House along with “several others,” when in fact she was arrested along with nearly 400 people, that’s rolling over for Bush.
• When ABC’s The Note announced earlier this year that Bush’s newfound rhetorical flourishes were sure to restore his “approval rating back over 53% any day now,” that’s rolling over for Bush.
• When the Washington Post falsely reported that Jack Abramoff had given money to Democrats, that’s rolling over for Bush.
• When Time magazine reported in January that Bush had suddenly “found his voice”
and that relieved White House aides “were smiling again,” just weeks before the president began his collapse in the polls, that’s rolling over for Bush…”
I didn’t attend the conference, but one thing strikes me as likely to happen. We are an open-source group, which is great for finding mutual support and generating and communicating ideas and experiences. It is also a meritocracy. We go to the sites, and we look for the diarists and commentators who we have learned by experience have something to tell us that is worth listening to.
But political action is different. I was listening to Paul Begala yesterday morning on NPR, and he was giving a generally favorable review of Ykos and the larger movement it represents. But he said something important: the establishment will only listen if we can show that we can deliver votes. Money is not enough.
Delivering votes, as many of us know, requires organization, and organization means a degree of hierarchy just to maintain a sense of direction and orderly administration. Participatory democracy is a great and essential thing, but we can’t all participate with each other — there isn’t enough room and not enough time. I would love to meet EmptyWheel, but in truth, what have I got to say to her that she doesn’t already know or needs to know? Her time is more valuable than anything I might give her.
At some point this movement will become hierarchical; there will be leaders and followers. We are still in the sorting phase. The challenge ahead is how to preserve the kind of openness that gives us strength while creating a structure that can help us achieve power.
I don’t know the answer. I’d love to be able to be part of the solution.
Christy & Jane,
Great job at YearlyKos. I watched as much as I could on CSPAN, and loved it all.
I REALLY enjoy reading your witty thoughts and ideas at FDL, but seeing you and your panel members in person was fantastic.
Keep up the fight!
Thanks from all of us in middle america.
Peterr at 48 — you know, a sealed case could be pretty much anything, including a settlement in a civil matter. The DC Circuit deals with a lot of governmental issues, subpoenas, injunctions, and the like — and you have to imagine that a LOT of them touch on national security matters these days. I try not to read anything into that, as I said at the time when everyone was discussing it the first time through. Sealed matters, especially in drug and other ongoing criminal investigations, can be very common. Until it’s unsealed, it’s really just best not to speculate.
lina 50 -
We won Clark County for Kerry, but lost the state overall. Everything outside of Clark County is WAY red(neck).
For me, the attacks on us as a limited interest group, amateurs, not funny, etc., are a hopeful sign.
It means that the political consultants, journalists and know-it-alls who treat every honest action as contemptible, or predictable, or useless, have noticed that we aren’t taking their advice, and that there are a lot of us. Worse still, we may have figured out how to make a lot more of us, and then they may find themselves transformed into the braying jackasses they always would have been but for the armor of conventional wisdom.
It’s a struggle for meaning, folks — always has been. We’ll win some and lose some in this battle, but it isn’t really about winning or losing. It’s about living in a world where you can trust people to do the decent thing when no one is looking.
As Dr. Lizardo said “Character is what you do in the dark.”
P.S. Has anyone else noticed that Dr. Lizardo was a kind of manic caricature of Mussolini? I loved John Lithgow when he was doing stuff like this. As a more standard Hollywood villain in stuff like Cliffhanger, not so much.
The “Sealed Vs Sealed” story comes across as nothing more than musings by Jason Leopold; the same musings that any one of us has had over the last month.
What it doesn’t have is anything of newsbreaking substance much less of significance.
Hey Jason, about those sources you promised to “out”…
Re the blogs and their screaming . . .
I’m sure that if, say, the Gore 2000 campaign or the Kerry 04 campaign released the back and forth strategy memos, emails, and transcripts of phonecalls, there’s be nothing but sweetness and light as the political professionals ironed out their winning strategies. Oh wait a minute . . . Had an Emily Littella moment there, folks. Sorry about that.
Blogs are out in the open, professional campaign strategy conversations often are not, and there’s a place and a time for both openness and confidentiality. But to say that one is vituperative (what a fun word!) and loud, implying the other is not, why, that’s just . . .
Better watch myself here. Almost started screaming. Which, as Eli @ 43 pointed out, is not always a bad thing.
Leopold needs to STFU.
Curry: Which 2008 candidate will the Kos universe back? Will next year’s Kos convention — which Vilsack said will be “hopefully in Des Moines” — amount to the first primary of the 2008 race?
Warner is working hard and spending lot of money to woo the Kos universe. “Let’s keep dating!” Warner joked as he ended his speech Saturday.
Whatever comes of Vilsack’s and Warner’s, I LIKE Curry’s suggestion.
I stand corrected.
Thanks indeed for being “real”, guys.
Guess I’m too much of a nervous nelly sometimes.
So much at stake, and sooo want to get beyond this repug gang & start picking up the mess they’ve made ;->
Lotus,
Perhaps we should make the location for next years KOS convention New Hamsher.
-GSD
Yes indeedy, GSD.
Obviously a Leftist is a person who questions a mainstream media report; an extreme lefist is one who fact checks same; a radical leftist is one who lists the inaccuracies and publishes them on the internet.
BobbyG…Leopold has EVERY right to work, have a job, speak his mind…..NONE OF US should deny him that right, don’t like him or what he has to say…don’t read it…just like I don’t read most of the MSM
back to the nuts&bolts of elections: you don’t have to be a lawyer to grasp basic election law but it always helps to have one handy to answer questions. Again, political oldtimers know what’s allowed and are glad to share info to help Democrats win elections…
It’s not only netroots the politicians want to squeeze money from and then ignore. They use our tax money and then lie about it. Check out this article from Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/…..s-in-iraq/
Just like bu$h in his speeches, the congress says something publicly (passed an amendment unanimously that says no permanent bases in Iraq), then Friday afternoon when everyone is abuzz about Dead Zarqawi, they strip the provision from both house and senate bills. And who is going to foot the bill for this work (that’s already in progress)? You and me.
John Casper 38, I haven’t checked your link yet, but did you catch Balz misspelling Tom “Mattzie”’s name the other day?
Your post reminds me of my sister’s story of when she began her sparkling new marriage, 2 people used to living alone, lots of hopes and dreams, things to learn about each other … and the first time that the concept of housekeeping dropped in for a visit on their blissful new life … she went to change the sheets, he headed out to shoot some hoops, she threw herself in front of the door and drew him back into the fray … he commented that his mom had always kept house, he didn’t know how to change a pillowcase or clean out a refrigerator, and her reply, “WELL HONEY, LET ME SHOW YOU HOW!” My point is, it’s up to us to set the standard of how we are treated and be ready to back each other up, just like FDL’s does, every time there is some confusion in the minds of those we encounter. Together.
To Christy’s question of where do we go from here:
There is a third option other than boots on the ground or partnership available and that would be to find within netroots people who actually are willing to become politically involved and thus have a direct impact on politics. The best representation of progressives is direct representation, people who are inspired to serve in electable office.
A news article confirming my theory that Ann Coulter slipped away from her tryst with like minded hater and terrorism advocate, Abu Musab Al Zarqawi.
Someone must have given Mata Skanky a headsup.
http://www.rawstory.com/showou…..55,00.html
-GSD
Hey, all. . .
I’m at the airport in Vegas: it’s enabled for public wireless. Very cool. My flight should begin boarding in about 30 minutes.
The establishment wants to coopt the blogosphere. It won’t work.
On the one hand, they want to lure some of the insecure, naive or unprincipled into their orbit, their tribal system of advancement, social access and control. They’ll pick off a few over time.
On the other hand, they want to silence the bite in our voices because that would effectively neuter our effectiveness. Progressive were polite for decades. It got them ignored.
There are many of us who are progressive movement people, whose loyalty is to common people and the common good, even before party. Some of us are not aiming to make a career in politics, and so that gives us greater freedom. Others of us will and should make careers in politics, and make a decent living at it. I hve no problem with them making money. They deserve it. Cashing checks is not selling out if your don’t compromise your integrity or begin to work against the interests of the people as you do it. I know some among us will flame and deride anyone who tries to make some money at this, but they shouldn’t. Watch instead how these budding professionals act, what they say, what they write and who is paying them. We should hold them to accountability, but not automatically flame them.
Mike McCurry is a case in point. He made a bad choice: he represented a corrupt, dishonest client and got called on it, to his own career detriment. He lost his good name, fast. He’s upset about that, and dislikes those he sees as young, naive, angry and judgmental. But if he had simply advsed his client to be honest, and if he had refused to comprimise his own integrity for the sake of his client’s dishonest argument against the consumer and the common good, he would have been fine, if a little less wealthy in the near term. He brought this on himself.
I should stop now. This is beginning to feel more like a post than a comment.
Geez – I am so far behind this morning, it’s killing me.
Adie posted something upthread about being uncomfortable with the snark, and I wanted to respond.
If all the Plame panel had been about was the kind of hate-filled screeching one can hear from the right-wing at any given moment, Adie might have a point. Yes, there was some pointed snark, where appropriate, but all in all, the panel itself quite politely and rationally and articulately, pointed out the failure of the MSM and the administration to report the facts and tell the truth. Sorry, but I think a gentle barb here and there is not only appropriate, but well-deserved.
Yes, it’s true – as my dad used to tell me (frequently) – it’s not just what you say, but how you say it, and we don’t want to be tuned out because our delivery turns people off. However, considering how much there is to be angry about, and how frustrated we are at the magnitude of the fight ahead of us, I think we have shown remarkable restraint, have maintained a level of truth and honesty that is unmatched on the other side of the divide, and we should not cower in fear if we allow ourselves to be human.
Christy, when you have the next free moment to blue-sky some more (hopefully not too long from now), I’d suggest some mental role reversal.
Suppose you’re a progressive candidate now. What can the netroots do for you? Why would going that route be more likely to help you win than just accepting what the consultants would tell you? How would you organize your campaign differently? What, if anything, would you do and say differently in a netroots-based campaign than you would in a conventional one?
I think we have a little experience to draw on, learning from Rodriguez and Busby and Tester and (so far) Lamont. Someday I think we’ll be in a very strong position to help shape policy up-front, but we’re not there yet. We are, however, very good already at vectoring resources to selected campaigns than need help.
Having enough resources to be competitive is a necessary condition for a successful campaign, but it’s not a sufficient condition. Candidate and message also are important. In the cases of Rodriguez and Busby, we helped them get back in the game, but each eventually, barely lost anyway. Tester, stronger on the message/candidate front, won handily. Lamont’s coming on like gangbusters.
So right now, we might be able to fill some resource/enthusiasm gaps for the right candidates/campaigns. Using the resulting clout to shape candidates/campaigns might await more results (i.e., once we’ve demonstrated our formula for winning, we’ll get more campaigns interested and see more willingness to run on a “netroots agenda”, whatever that might be).
If Pachacutec were here he’d recognize this process (if I haven’t buried the lede too deeply) as moving through the Rogers adoption model. Right now, we need (1) a stable, explainable concept of “winning with netroots” and (2) proof that concept works.
Now let’s tie in the Roots Project. This piece is critically important because it bridges from keyboards to votes (or at least resources that are the precursor to votes). This is where the partnership aspect gets paid off, because this is where direct interaction with candidate/campaign closes the feedback loop. We’re giving them what they want, so they need to deliver for us, and they’ll be listening to what we ask.
Eventually, candidates will know what positions to take and how to campaign if they want netroots support. Right now, it’s all a journey of discovery for them and us. But you’re asking (IMVHO) exactly the right question at exactly the right time.
Apologies for the rambling, it’s early here and I’m just getting my first taste of coffee.
Jack Cafferty on CNN quoted approvingly an Email from a viewer snarking that the death of Zarqawi eliminated a suitable marriage prospect for Ann Coulter …
Franco at 65: “Leopold has EVERY right to work, have a job, speak his mind…”
Yup, all that is true but…it is generally thought that a newsperson like Jason, a reporter if you will, is in the business of reporting news!
When that person is given a very public news soapbox and doesn’t report news, but instead gives us idle speculation, I like BobbyG, think he should climb down off that soapbox and go quietly away…sorta like STFU!
The consultant issue is closely related to the bubble issue. The ideas and opinions of knowledgeable people across the country are ignored by the insiders in DC.
When the Center for American Progress was organized, I wrote a letter to John Podesta, suggesting that he not staff it with DC people, but rather reach out across the country, looking for actual policy expertise. I know a guy here who is progressive and smart and enormously experienced dealing with health care issues. He would have made great contributions to the Center.
I did not get a response.
If the blogoverse makes an impact on voting, say in Connecticut, then maybe we can be uneasy partners.
Mad Dogs says
June 12th, 2006 at 7:46 am
Franco at 65: “Leopold has EVERY right to work, have a job, speak his mind…”
Yup, all that is true but…it is generally thought that a newsperson like Jason, a reporter if you will, is in the business of reporting news!
When that person is given a very public news soapbox and doesn’t report news, but instead gives us idle speculation, I like BobbyG, think he should climb down off that soapbox and go quietly away…sorta like STFU!
_____
Thanks. That was really my only point. Leopold is just wasting bandwidth with his weak speculation. Making himself look silly in the process.
It’s not an idea as much as an observation, but maybe it will spark something for someone else:
Larry Johnson’s presence on the Plame panel was huge, IMO, and highlights something else that FDL is damn good at. Here’s a guy who tells a bunch of progressive bloggers, in essence, “I’m not one of you – I’m a conservative (or I thought I was)”. Why was he there? Because FDL, for all its snark, deals in facts and informed speculation. We challenge not only the media or BushCo, but each other as well. We keep each other honest (see Christy @ 54 – thanks!), and we keep things civil. Sure, we snark, but Jane, Christy, and Pach do a great job at keeping the real trolls at bay.
For folks like Larry, that’s an opening to a discussion. Don’t know where he would stand on tax cuts, corporate mergers, environmental policies, etc., but the fact that we were able to connect with him on an issue of mutual, and paramount concern, says to me that we’re doing a good job here.
We’re figuring out how to talk and act beyond ourselves in ways that others need to learn.
This just in from MSNBC: Hurricane warning issued for Florida coast as Alberto strengthens.
Drudge has a funny picture of a bunch of KOS conventioneers wearing tinfoil hats….
That and he’s trumpeting George W. Bush’s latest accomplishment–an increase in murders and rapes.
-GSD
“From the most wealthy philanthropist trying to use their power, influence and financial windfall to help others through some charitable foundation to the drunken bum passed out in the doorway near some bar in the seediest part of town. There is some value there somewhere — it may just be a little lost.”
Even the bum is just minding his own business. Unlike the “respected” rich folks, like Bush, Cheney, etc. It astonishes me how so many Americans get SO upset by “bums,” yet love the evil wealthy. Not very bright, are they?
I keep hearing about the Dean 50-state strategy, but I’m not sure what it is.
I can tell you, however, all the strategizing in the world is not going to win elections. Getting people to the polls wins elections.
I wish people would wake up to the fact that phone banking is a waste of time, energy and resources. I wish campaign organizations would spend that money and energy getting out the vote on election day.
It’s not brain surgery.
My flight is boarding – bye guys and gals.
I think you/we just keep on keeping on and spend a little less time examining our navels. It too one hundred years from Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation in 1864 to Johnson’s signing of the Civil Rights bill in 1964 for Africans in America to get and keep full voting rights. Justice is a long haul. We Shall Overcome.
Also on MSNBC: “Troop Talks. Bush huddles with aides to weight Iraq strajee.”
Playing politics with soldiers’ lives. This is all about JAR and mid-terms.
Adie, I disagree with you about snark not going over well on TV.
That’s what made The Smothers Brothers so great. And “That Was The Week That Was.” And Laugh-In. And…you get the idea. It’s funny AND true. Barbed truths hit home, you see.
on getting the progressive message out– or not, Kathleen Reardon has some good advice in “The Rope To Hang Themselves’ and Other Non-Liberal Strategies,” on Huffington Post today.
52:
I like your idea that the blogosphere as a meritocracy. It is so true.
That trait makes us (the merit-bestowing readers) an almost elitist group of the exceptionally well-informed. Will we be able to counter this tendency by finding ways to present our abundant knowledge in easily digestible nuggets for the average voter AND the average Pol? I am confident that we will.
(It would be better yet, if we could engage the average non-voter, too, but I would rate that a miracle if it should ever happen.)
*ilson from the previous thread, I’m behind a barracuda for my e-mail, plus I have a lan at home (firewall with that) and a dsl router, and not much gets by these things. Thanks for the concern. The thing is, much, if not most, spam doesn’t even make sense as advertisement. It’s nonsense or keywords. I keep trying to find the purpose behind it all.
lina (83) and all other Firepups with a burning desire to know:
Collection of the efforts to date on 50-State Strategy:
http://www.democrats.org/a/par….._strategy/
Documentation from the 50-State Strategy Kickoff:
http://www.democrats.org/a/200….._agend.php
One more link to follow in a separate comment.
READ IT. IT’S NOT JUST PHONEBANKING. It’s highly focused. However there remains a crying need to do phonebanking as well as canvassing so that voter records get validated, so that Strong/Lean Dems are identified before the primary and before Election Day. We also need to identify the swing voters and softening Repugs for different approaches prior to that time. GOTV isn’t the end-all-be-all, either, as 2004 clearly showed.
Ann Coulter, the Ray Finkel of Republican spokesmodels (probably not safe for work)
…Laces out!
;>)
LinaH: the point of all that extra verbiage is to pad the message to try to get it past spam-filters. It’s a constant battle of good versus evil: nefarious spammers trying to outwit protective programmers.
2nd comment on DNC’s 50-State Strategy:
This is a presentation that explains the stategy; the numbers are incredibly straightforward. (Sorry, optimized for IE; see the second link in my previous comment for more viewing options.)
As I see it, whatever we do as the netroots should supplement and reinforce this effort, maybe from the top-down so that the bottom-up grassroots can do their job more effectively.
Part of that effort will be opposition research — taking it to the opposition in a way that softens the facts on the ground when our canvassers and phonebankers make their approach.
I enjoyed watching you on cspan while we got it! What a wonderful convention of fabulous people. I’m so energized from it. I’m 62 and was frustrated beyond words, when Bush took office. Devastated when he took us to Iraq. I read all the National Newspapers online, every single day, and with articles written by people like James Risen, it didn’t take long to know that Bush was lying to us. Feith was rewriting intelligence, so on and so forth. I discovered the blogs just before the 2004 election, and it was like opening the door to sun light after a 4 year long dark spell. There were real people out there who saw it too. There were real people who wanted to do something about it. That’s what this is all about. It’s a way to communicate, and fight for candidates who can return this Nation to the people. All the petitions that we sign and forward to family and friends just builds and builds this internet community. The Blogs are the absolute “rebirth” of the Democratic Party.
Next order of business is S.2917, the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2006. Without this, it’s over !
“The vituperative yelling, the screaming, the hollering – they’re amateurs trying to play like professionals. Yet we see all these Democrats starting to hire them, pay them for advice. It’s crazy. The real question is whether this new medium will amplify their voice to the point where it distorts our party politics. They are not a bellwether of what Democrats generally think, They are just another interest group, flying to Vegas to have a convention.”
Please note that the strategists are themselves making vituperative personal attacks. In fact, one could argue that they started the personal attacks business with their derisive sneering down their noses at the blogosphere.
They, as a group, have the same sense of entitlement that Holy Joe has for his seat. They’re the ones who should be getting the money–regardless of their failure rate, and regardless of whether the result is a representative government.
Oh, and just by the way, once they’re getting paid, they’re not amateurs anymore.
Last night, 60 Minutes re-ran a Mike Wallace interview with Mel Brooks. As you can imagine, a lot of it was huge fun, and the ran clips of a bunch of Mel’s movies. Toward the end, Mike Wallace asked him about his apparent preoccupation with Hitler. After talking a little about being in the army in WWII, Mel got completely serious and said this:
I’m violating the rule that says “whoever brings up Hitler first, loses” but Brooks has a point about humor. For those who are filled with their own self-importance, humor is the thumbtack (yes, I’m talking about you, punaise) that bursts their bubble and reminds the rest of the world that their waste products produce the same odor that everyone else’s do.
Who gets upset at humor? Bubbleheads. Media bubbleheads, political consultant bubbleheads, blogger bubbleheads – all of ‘em.
Some may want to cut tackses, but I say “tacks ‘em till they bleed.”
Rayne at 91:
I disagree re 2004. GOTV is exactly what won that election for the Republicans. Church buses drove people to the polls in eleven states so they could vote on the gay marriage amendment.
[OT] – ACLU is up to bat today in the Michigan wiretap case. http://tinyurl.com/qlu2f Send them good thoughts. Despite the fact that they defend separation of church and state, I think prayers that are strictly voluntary and non-state sponsored would be ok too.
ACLU was a four letter word in my home growing up, but given how much is on their plate with this administration, I’m think something more tangible than prayers and good wishes may be in order. http://www.aclu.org [/OT]
Its gonna be a partnership whether they like it or not.
Blogging is not a term that tells you WHAT messages or missions are in play. Blogging is just HOW the messages get around. But, McLuhan would be delighted to note, that HOW is beginning to strongly effect the WHAT.
Many who read blogs also write, and certainly comment. So what? So we are a growing constituency that has now got the very strong habit of talking back to our media. DLC can go ahead and make some cowardly plank for the party to promote out of a gutless pandering for some marginal conservative votes. The stink from we, the talk-back press, will mount and the net effect will be noticeable even to the for-profit press [aka MSM]. They will be printing “the dems are in disarray”. The Democratic party may hope we’ve got their back but they will soon learn if they don’t already know: its a handy position from wich to kick their butts.
Christy,
Wow. This question is of no small importance to me as I struggle to determine the best ways I can continue to participate in the process. I guess you could color me disenfranchised.
That’s because I come at this from a bit different perspective than many of your readers. For one thing, after more than 30 years of voting mostly Democratic, I no longer consider myself a Democrat. I can no longer condone what I see taking place in the Democratic party.
For me, the Kerry debacle was the absolute last straw. And if that hadn’t done it, certainly much of what has passed for Democratic leadership over the past two years would have been. Yes, I voted for Kerry in 2004, but I deeply and sincerely regret having done so. By doing so, I only enabled my own defeat.
At this point I’m quite comfortable declaring no party affiliation at all. I’ll support and vote for Democratic (or other) candidates when I believe they’re positions are a close enough match with my positions. I’ll donate to candidates, regardless of party, who I believe can make a difference – e.g. Ned Lamont & Paul Hackett. I continue to write frequently to my representatives. And I participate, where possible, in actions and projects that I think are goods ideas – most recently, the CtG net roots project. I have a Democratic Senator who I think, while not perfect, has done a very reasonable job. I will continue to support him.
But I’ll no longer give Democrats the benefit of the doubt. In addition, I’m no longer vested in the concept of party unity. When Kerry was nominated, I had visions of a party unified — all walking off the cliff together like so many lemmings (Note: Lemmings don’t really do that, but Democrats most certainly do.). But at the urging of many people, I put my feelings aside, bought into party unity theory and voted for Kerry. The rest is history.
Sorry, but I’ve seen this game played this way for way too long to buy into that approach any longer.
When Markos said on MTP that:
it was pretty clear to me that Markos seems to think that the entire net roots community is just a small subset of the whole Democratic party. Dems with ‘puters. I think this error in judgement. Perhaps it is to be expected — after all, Kos is heavy vested in the Democratic party mainstream — and maybe Kos was only talking about card-carrying Democrats.
While a great many of the net roots community may consider themselves Democratic party members, not all do so. There is a real, palpable and justified anger at the Democrats that Markos appears to be momentarily discounting. (I say momentarily because clearly Markos does understand that.) The mainstream Democrats have not even acknowledged this, let alone begun to address it. As a former Democrat, when Kos says “we’re all going to get behind” Lieberman, I can assure you that he does not speak for me.
Bottom line for me is that, yes, I could certainly be convinced to support and work to elect certain specific Democratic candidates. But I will no longer support people like Joe Lieberman in the name of ‘party unity’ — I think that sends absolutely the wrong message. This is not “The Return of the Archons” and Lieberman is not Landru.
Get Out The Vote is made of several components. Canvassing either door to door or by phonebanking identifies who your likely voters are. On election day, phonebanking and polling-place tracking sheets identify the progress of folk actually getting to the polls. Making transportation available for some voters is one small part of GOTV but ya gotta know who will vote for ya and who needs transportation.
Re: Leopold. As always, I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt. At least until Sealed v Sealed is, well, unsealed.
Peterr
This idea is at heart of emptywheel’s commentary during the Plame panel on the importance of creating characters. Steno Sue. Holy Joe. Capturing the essence of a participant inside the beltway bubble through a satirical nickname is very effective theatre. It simulataneously exposes their inflated self-importance, and pricks it.
new thread
Redd,
Great post…always thinking ahead.
Amazing job in Vegas. The panel was excellent.
The future of Democracy was done proud.
~
I kept thinking that it would be wonderful to hold statewide conventions similar to YearlyKos. I know it would be a wildly difficult to pull off and we couldn’t likely do it in every state the first time out. But imagine. It would be lovely to take this energy and connection between the Democratic electeds (and wantabe electeds) and the grassroots down a level.
Perhaps one or more of the Roots Project group (fellow Washington State folks listening?) might take this on.
Byron York has his latest hit piece up on Kos:
http://article.nationalreview……hiNTQzOTY=
There was some discussion this weekend on how we need to engage York in political discourse … that we have to be careful not to be pejorative, and instead engage him in substantive political discussion. Yeah, right.
York and the other kool-aid drinkers are not interested in a substantive political discussion – because they would lose and they know it. So instead they trot out the same Rovian tactics. First, trivialize the discussion by personalizing it, and then smear the person making the argument. Rovian Political Tactics 101.
There are those who say we should do the same to them, but I would rather see us educate the MSM and voters on what they are doing, and somehow find a way to inoculate the voting public from this type of trash. Maybe Geoffrey Nunberg’s book ‘Talking Right’, could give us some ideas. Maybe it would help if we identified the three main Rovian tactics and called them out as soon as Drudge, Fox, NR trot them out. For example:
1. Using strawman
2. Personalizing and smearing
3. False Framing
(I don’t know if that’s the list – it’s just a suggestion.) Here is the link to Nunberg’s latest article:
http://www.rawstory.com/showar…..commentary
Take yourself back to what the atmosphere was like just before the founders wrote the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. There was a radical shift in the way the social contract was to be executed. It was (sorry to use the over used phrase) a paradigm shift.
I don’t believe that it is inevitable that an hierarchy develop in order for netroots to be effective because we, as an entire society, are undergoing a fundamental shift in our view of how power is distributed. In many ways this time seems very much like the enlightenment.
I would like to see sessions of visualizing alternative futures and then having a sort of natural selection of the viable ones that we can take action on.
*ilson,
a quick note of thanks for ALL your very practical advice on getting ‘em elected, and how to deal with ‘em once they are in office.
I certainly carry the collective wisdom of this community with me in my volunteer work – but your nuts and bolts ‘hints’ have saved me so much time, allowing me to learn more and do more. my fellow gophers think I’m all smart and kewl b/c of you. I sharpee’d over the W on my ‘what would willie do’ bracelet and replaced it with an *
thanks, just wanted you to know all your experience is being put to good use
For more stimulating ideas, look at Lakeoff’s site for the Rockridge institute. I liked his whole idea of “framing” that he presented at the conference.
http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/
Anne at 73, and now Margo at 87
Thanks for your comments. Hate to drill this rather OT topic totally into the ground, but wanted you to know I TOTALLY agree with what you guys have said, & would like to apologize for stirring up such a hornet’s nest over not much.
I’m not at all uncomfortable with the snark. Love it. It lets us all let off steam, as well as definitely helping get a point across.
I guess I mostly am guilty of misusing the word “snark”.
The thing I thot I heard was the occasional flavor of “inside joke” -iness to a comment here or there. Judging from all your reactions, I must have been totally wrong about that. I do admit I was listening to the panel with one ear, while trying to work at other things, so to speak, and not totally concentrating enuf to be sure.
Please please don’t get me wrong. Agreed(!), we HAVE to have liberal doses of snark ongoing or we’d all go crazy. And, YES, it does indeed help get the message across. Use it all the time in my other life.
So-o-o- carry on, dear gang, with what’s shaping up as a terrific discussion, per usual.
I’ll be back to lurk after checking on my newly hatched bluebird family next to the weedpatch where I’ve somehow allowed our salad greens to hide ;->
I keep coming back to something that I talked about with the folks from LinkTV, and then later with Murray Waas. About the interaction between the political types who attended the conference and the folks from the netroots who attended – and the relationship between the two. And whether any relationship exists at all.
I think Boxer’s endorsement of Lieberman answers that last question. Personally, I’d want to get something going with an alternate sort of medium like LinkTV and forget the rest.
Great photo. You might enjoy giving FotoFeed a look as well.
There’s a really good article in today’s LA Times about language and how democrats need to frame the message better, and have a better script, not use the right’s script.
Here’s the LA Times article again.
http://www.latimes.com/news/op…..commentary
lina (98) — Why do you think those Repug voters showed up in those buses? The buses don’t just arrive at the corner and the Repug voters just get on the bus. The Repugs spent more than two decades (four, if we go back to Goldwater) building a media machine that actively encourages Repugs to think a particular way; they wound it tightly into their infrastructure, from both a political standpoint (Young Republicans being the best example) and a social standpoint (churches being the biggest example). They’ve made their fortunes with direct marketing, developing databases that document Republican buying habits, using those same databases to find the right marketing promotion to use on a particular segment of their base to sell them on fear and loathing to encourage a mindset and ultimately GOTV.
And you think Repugs just did better GOTV to win in 2004?
That’s exactly why Dems lose.
Re: Leopold
I believe it was Emptywheel who commented on this at the end of the Plame panel. I don’t have the exact quote in front of me but it was in essence a recommendation be suspicuous whenever any reporter uses anonymous sources, whether it’s Leopold or Matthews or anyone else. And that we are are far better off to pay attention to the substantive material – court filings, etc.
I couldn’t agree more.
Christy,
First off, I got to watch a good deal of YearlyKos via AA Radio and CSPAN. What an inspiration. I caught enough of the vibe to encourage me to de-lurk more. Your post identifies a grave danger for this emerging progressive movement. It would be a same to have this co-opted by money and slick politicians. On one of the panels I watched, someone said (David Sirota or Matt Stoeller?) that the progressive movement should keep itself outside of the Democratic Party. This really made sense to me. We can grow ideas, form narratives, and organically direct local actions. But if we become too enmeshed in party politics we could lose our soul and readers.
William Timberman 54 – Dr. Lizardo is my favorite Lithgow, too, although he was pitch-perfect in World According to Garp. And while we’re on the subject of cult sci-fi, where the heck is Max Headroom? Not currently playing on US TV.
What’s next? Local activity – get involved in a local race, walk the precincts, get your wild-eyed radical self ;) known to your neighborhood as someone to go to with questions on issues. I actually had two neighbors this primary knock on my door to ask about the ballot, I think because I always have lawn signs at election time and I make no secret about my politicital inclinations.
This is about building OUR machine, our attack and response teams, our own case. I was chatting on Sunday with a Brit cameraman making a documentary on bloggers for the Sundance channel (not out until next April). They’re going to follow both left and right blogs in the run-up to the next election and then do some post-mortem. Anyway, he chuckled as he mentioned our tameness in politic discussion as compared with Britain. We used to have REAL discussions in this country about issues. That’s been shut down in favor of personal attack, and it’s time we brought it back. I say stand up loud and proud for what you believe, without stooping, don’t make it personal.
(Coincidentally, last night I caught about half an hour of CSPAN’S broadcast of the British Parliament in action and it was fascinating. Debate is an art form, for sure, over there and they probably practice in front of the mirror to get those fierce looks down for the audience.)
My point is, we on the left can stand to make a little noise. We on the left have been too intimidated by the noise machine. We on the left have every right to our politics, every right to stand up for what we believe.
And let’s see if we can get the Presidential debate rules changed. It’s ridiculous that they can’t actually debate, answer each other’s questions and follow a point to its conclusion.It’s not a debate, it’s a commercial.
Certified Organic #1
If I could make one suggestion towards standards for future Progressive Blog relevancy it would be that the movement establish a simple brand for recognition and certification purposes. A sort of Consumers Reports Certified Organic assessment equivalent for endorsing politicians and media figures.
We all know what general principles the Progressive Blogosphere hopes to achieve- this should be standardised for mainstream reference and then used to assess politicians and the media for voters and consumers, respectively. Food, drugs and automobiles are just three examples of items that are continually graded for their toxicity and lethality.
Politics and media are arguably more dangerous over the long term. A proper assessment should be made for these two bedfellows not only in regards to their overt affinity for Progressive values but also an analysis directed towards their covert connections, in particular.
Am I missing something?
How come I haven’t seen anything about election fraud being discussed at the YearlyKos. If the Republicans steal one more election, this whole blog thing is just so much bullshit.
Busy morning, no time at all…
But this situation reminds me of a startup challenging an industry: challenging all aspects of an industry, including entrenched competitors and partners, the press, customers, and the distribution channel.
The thing you have to do as a unique and innovative startup is, as you gain size and value, continue to do what you do best. If you change your system to emulate the old school companies in order to “fit in”, you will lose what makes you unique and valuable. Only by continuing to do the core innovative thing that makes you unique in the industry can you continue to grow and change the industry.
It’s OK to shift and change to accommodate growth in your own group and growth in understanding and need in your ‘market’, but do what you do best. Let the industry change to fit you, and give them time to make the changes.
The key in this situation in business is that the mainstream ‘old school’ players in the industry will come around to your way of thinking, it just takes a few years. They change to emulate your innovative viewpoint. They grow to understand and eventually integrate your innovation.
Certified Organic # 2
The Internet has been an amazing resource in assessing covert connections (both historical and current) over the last several years, growing exponentially in its ability to connect the synapses of a collective conscious awareness of potential elitist agendas.
Accordingly, specific attention should be given to secret society memberships of these characters (the usual suspects… Skull and Bones, Scroll and Key, Trilateral Commission, Bildergerger, Council on Foreign Relations) that would negate or thwart Progressive Democratic values and its accompanying free market capitalism. (Bet you never would have thought this guy was a member of the same secret society as Bob Woodward…
Preserving these values transcends Democratic or Republican party affiliations. These central values, despite manipulative wedge issues, are a vast majority. Their elitist interrupters need to be properly identified. Then let the voters decide.
Nader did it with food labels and seat belts; Progressives need to start with politics and the media.
Tie a certified seal of legitimacy to a grass roots financing structure for candidate support and you will have an excellent beginning of the end of elitist interference and the start of Democracy’s detoxification IMHO
~
marksb,
I think your business analogy is quite appropriate. I’m just a little bit concerned that some people think emulating the Republic machine (talking points, everyone repeat the party line, no disagreement, own the media, automaton mode ON, rinse and repeat) is best.
Republicans own that vehicle. We should seek new modes of transport.
Mac @ 121
Absolutely correct.
If they hijack the Internet too they will only proceed to endorse their their criminality as legitimacy.
Then the corral will be permanently closed and the elitists will rule.
There was a column in our local paper on Sunday, “Future holds a third party, rising from the center” and as I read it, it occured to me that there is already a party in the center and it is the Dem leadership. Our party of the left has been left behind.
Sorry for skipping the comments and writing this “reply” to your post…
It appears that the blog people are desparately wanting a systemm that works. One that it NOT corrupt and paid for and owned by richa nd already powerful interests whose only goal is to hold on to power and get richer.
The politcal system we have has gone terribly skewed and it is but a shadow of what we want it to be, what we believe it to be, what they tell us it is.
We scream the truth, ask for the truth from the blogosphere, but they don’t really listen. The players are mostly pretty currupted. Look at what Boxer said after her speech at YK… She supported JoMentum who is “unsuportable” from a progressive perspective. BUT HE IS A DEMO encumbant and so she plays the game. If this wasn’t a wake up call for the Bloggers, I don’t know what is.
This is going to be a very long haul.
We need to either take over the dem party.. unlikely… or build a new one.
How about starting a new one and asking the progressives to run on the new party as well as their former affiliation. And we can run some of our own candidates. And when there is enough support perhaps the party could really break out and stand on its own.
Power and wealth beget more power and wealth and they are NOT going to give it up and do a thing for “the people”…
As they see the bloggers growing in grass roots influence, they DO want out support and the potential for power that we represent. But if they play like “old style” polititians… forget it.
The dems should be voting solidly against EVERY repub legislation. Let them win it in straight party line votes. Let them own every thing completely that they want to do. Why is there ANY dem complicity?
The progressives were asleep as the power elite took it all.. the media, in consolidation, the taxes… as in tax cuts for the rich…. contracts as in war profits… our rights as in the patriot act and the NSA and AMUF powers which are BS… the phoney 9.11 report… they stole the elections, have packed the court and made libral worse than a 4 letter word.
I think the change will come not from gradual electoral change… but from total economic collapse of free market unfettered capitalism.
We ARE heading in that direction with the pyramid scheme of deficit spending and living on credit. It is only a matter of 5 or 6 more years and than the real hurtin starts and then and only then can something new and progressive arise where there is some sort of justice and equity for all. But we will have to think about how many people this planet can carry, because we are overcrowding ourselves out of existence.
As hopeful as it was to see the bloggers come out from their lairs… we are still powerless to make change and although some fear the power we seem to have… they mock it so easily from their perches of power.
The roots project was a good idea, but you need to have a seed project and plant progressive BLOGGERS in every congressional office… even under con cover if necessary. YOU think everyone is reading the truth, but the fact is the congress critters are in their ivory and limestone towers listening to lobbyists mostly and their own echo chambers.
Redhead don’t stop doing what you are doing… but we need some more agressive tactics. The truth is simply not enough… people don’t care about the truth when they can make money without it.
Christy:
Good to apply the face to the name. Great Plame panel on Friday.
I think its okay to live with a certain level of what I like to call “creative uncertainty” with how the relationship develops between the blogosphere and the politicians, as well as the press. There needs to be a tension there so that no one takes any one for granted.
That means we need to be exacting on ourselves as well the politicians we scrutinize and support. And heaven knows the press needs a constant jolt of electricity to stay awake.
Creative uncertainty between the blogosphere and the rest is a needed tension. No one should get cozy. We already know what THAT produces.
The comments below are for FDL and its loyal chorus of commenters, alike:
The thing that bothers me about the ability to work with and interact with other Democrats through the blogs is that I am often left feeling that, although I share the attitudes and concerns of what you all call “progressives,” I am left out of true participation in the process. My thoughts are either ignored, or misunderstood. It may be a generational thing, and maybe, I should just leave off commenting and let the rest of you do your thing the way you think it should be done. But, so much of the thinking, sometimes, is too much on the surface, getting into petty analysis of things that don’t matter, and the bigger picture gets lost.
Attacking politicians, such as Boxer, who has an overwhelming sympathy for most of our causes, backed up by action where it counts, is stupid. A courteous letter to her office, or a phone call would be a finer way to let her know what you think about Lieberman, and your criticisms of her, and anyone else who passes in your cross-hairs, would have more posibility of having an impact.
For instance, TPM is mentioning that our dear Sen. Feingold has his “finger in the wind” about Net Neutrality. Are you going to bash him as hard as you bashed Boxer for Lieberman?
I guess, what I am wishing is that the blogs would progress to, is social intercourse with more meaning than rant, which, on occasion, it does with excellence, e.g. Christy’s Posts, or Emptywheel’s intelligent writing. The rest is clever and sometimes witty, but pretty shallow for someone of my age. Maybe,I should take up the refrain my sister is fond of saying when we counter contemporary behavior we can’t identify with, “It’s time to die, Sister.”
But, I’ll hang around, if only to chide “progressives” for not sounding more humane when they talk about what they want to accomplish, politically. I’ll hang around to nag that folks be more sensitive in labeling other people, so that “progressives” don’t end up sounding like bigots of a new order. Name-calling is not the same as emptywheel’s use of character signifiers. She is witty, intelligent, AND on target with the foibles of her intended targets, as is Christy, in her own way. So, less name-calling, more genuine originality when it’s angry-at-the-abominable-Republicans-time.
I wonder how many of the politicians, at least those on OUR team, actually read our blogs?? That would be a good start. I suppose that one of the first and perhaps one of the greatest uses of the blogs is to act as a watchdog, of the media and of the politicians. If we could only get our guys and gals on the hill to READ the damned things then perhaps they would be able to make more headway in the great debates of our times. It just seems to me that when we see our folks on the talking head shows or whereever else that they just don’t have their stuff together most of the time. And a little perusing of the key blogs would, it seems to me, do wonders to provide them with some facts and maybe some talking points. Take Boxer for example….her comments seem to indicate to me that she doesn’t really know why we’re pissed at Joe……which indicates that she doesn’t read the blogs.
Dear Margaret,
With all due respect, because I know you are coming from sincerity, manners in politics these days get you exactly nowhere. When the “other side” can say on national tv things like 911 widows and orphans are whores, it’s time to take the gloves off and join the fight on their turf. You want us to sit down, shut up and then raise our hands to see if they’ll acknowledge us? Ain’t gonna happen anymore, on either side.
In your daily life, manners matter. When it comes to politics, they are playing by an entirely different set of rules and we lose if we don’t play by them, too.
I’m an optimist Redd so here’s my two centavo’s.
The GOP monstrosity soon gets sinbinned.
Much as their kissing cousins the Marxist and National socialist brethren.
The new two party paradigm soon settles down to democratic socialists Vs libertarian socialists.
The demsoc’s have representational politics with access for sale – the libsoc’s have delegates simply empowered to report back to the base. They do not make decisions on their own and each one of them is recallable, rotatable and fully transparently accountable at all times.
This paradigm shift will be described as revolutionary and the counter-revolution will take the form of a ‘ Butlerian Jihad’ or genaral attack on all computers. To avert that I suggest we do what the original CHEKA did and set up a ‘ TRUST’ in order to lure the enemy ‘ in deep’.
Apart from that service I don’t envisage us borrowing anything else major from Leninism ( I actually despise Lenin as ‘ Stalin Lite’.)
Basically if ‘ keep-a-goin’ we will find our haven and we must be doing something right to last 200 rat years.
calvin commented last week on exactly this point with some C and Jers. That was in response to a post which raised similar issues. The gist was that the institutional types are paying some attention, but to what degree and to what purpose? calvin’s point was that the organization types will only understand “brute force”. A/K/A: a power base. For example, if Ned Lamont wins, it will be HUGE. They understand the force of numbers in terms of people and money.
Can the collective “we” take over the party, precinct by precinct, or by virtue of forming a myriad of groups which, in turn, become a large coalition? Or, might change take some other form?
It is important that the collective “we” not have our “leadership” co-opted and, when “we” gain control, don’t become what “we” turned out. That is a monumental task. If one has studied sociology, one knows that it may be next to impossible. The institution takes on a life of it’s own and becomes self-perpetuating. It becomes what it was. It is the nature of bureaucracy. And, it’s tough to get things done without one. You are referred to the works of Thorsten Veblen.
Anyway, that’s what calvin remembers from his soc classes. Of course, one has to keep in mind that calvin was usually a bit hung over. Thus, the paucity of detail. That, and the passage of way too much time.
Redd, it’s very interesting that a number of people are having thoughts and concerns similar to yours. I think that it is probably pretty meaningful and needs to be explored/discussed.
calvin can envision any number of scenarios. The key will be making those scenarios ourselves and not having them imposed.
YK: The dance has begun.
We’ve always been boots on the ground, at least for the national campaigns. In the ‘72 election, I was in California, and joined with others through the local DEM apparatus to work for George McGovern. At the ripe old age of 23, I was chosen by the group of volunteers who were geographically connected, to organize our group. We spend several months of long hours and hard work canvassing in person and on the phone for McGovern. When the primary process swept into California, we were all shoved aside by the professionals of the campaign. They didn’t even much care about what had been accomplished up to that point in time, and started with their own set of records, their own agenda, and we were more than welcome to do what they needed grunts to do. They were probably right in all of that — what did we really know about what needed to be done to get out the vote? Or how to sell McGovern’s policies and person to the people in our neighborhoods? But it stung. A lot.
Mommybrain, you make my point for me. Namecalling is not the same as identifying character traits which can then be given catchy names, like “holy joe.” When Democrats and their blogging friends sling vituperation at the other side, it’s weakness, and it plays into the hands of those who will exploit it.
We want leaders who have integrity, dignity, and the ability to articulate ideas. Loudmouth, cursing ranters don’t serve the cause; they demean it. Do you really want to hear Russ Feingold use the same kind of language as Coulter, to express his outrage at the denigration of the Constitution? We HAVE to be better than the Republicans!
Margaret advocates manners and civil discourse and mommybrain’s advocates this position.
I believe we should use each tactic as effectively as possible. Let me give you an example. If I lived in PA this is an outline of the letter I would write to Sen. Specter.
o FISA my #1 priority
o So proud that you were my Senator (B.S. of course) when you – List 1st time he said he was going to take action (reference specific claim) to correct the illegal NSA Domestic Spying Program.
o Encouraged when you – List 2nd time he said he was going to take action (reference specific claim) to correct the illegal NSA Domestic Spying Program.
o Hopeful when you – List 3rd
o Skeptical when you – List 4th. (etc. down the line, lost count of #times)
o No longer believed you when you – Last statement made
o Final paragraph – Senator, as a Christian, I think that oaths taken with your hand on a Bible should be honored. If I can no longer trust you to uphold your oath of office to protect our Constitution, I will do everything in my power to replace you with someone who will.
Basically, I am very politely trying to manipulate the hell out of him but since I started out with the sugar of being proud of him, I have increased my chances of his staff reading my letter and taking it seriously. To me, this is an effective way of taking the gloves off. Works much better than saying outright – you are a lying sack of shit – while still delivering the same message.
What I find lacking in parts of the Progressive Blog World is case specific tactical and strategic thinking. Let me use the current Lamont campaign as an example.
Elsewhere I have called attention to Bill Clinton’s analysis of CT voting patterns in his Autobiography, Chapter 17, beginning on p. 174. Clinton, while at Yale Law School cut his eye teeth on managing a campaign in 1970 — the Senate race of Joe Duffey, a peace candidate running for the Dem ballot line against Tom Dodd who was then under indictment. In the end, it was the campaign that elected the Republican Weicker.
Post election, Clinton tried to learn lessons, and he deals with them. What made it impossible to link the voting interests of the normally Democratic White Ethnic voters with the message of the Duffey campaign? Why did Duffey not attract more minority voters? For Clinton, these were important lessons. And since he wrote a chapter about it all — we too can learn the lessons and ask them of the Lamont Campaign.
I assume that CT has changed since 1970 — fewer white ethnic working class voters, more minority Black and Hispanic voters. With all the reports out of CT — I don’t see a strategy for turning on that segment of the Democratic vote for Lamont. (and I am reading the local papers there as I follow things.) One thing Progressives absolutely have to do is be inclusive — to made certain movement is inviting and open to all — and if the Lamont campaign does not have the strategy for this, then it will crash. (and I want Lamont to win.) The best I can offer is criticism and a nudge from this distance — and perhaps a small check, it is people on the ground in CT who need to read Clinton’s analysis, (Understanding he is a pretty good Political tactician who learned some lessons in CT.) and see if it can be actualized this summer. It would be far more productive for our cause to attend to this than it is to Bash Boxer et. al. on the endorsement matter. In fact, Boxer will endorse Lamont if he wins the primary by a nice margin that looks toward a November win. That’s what elected officials do.
I rather doubt that Hispanic and Black Democratic voters in CT read blogs or are much influenced by what they read on the net. There are other networks of communication we need to comprehend, and learn to work with easily.
In a way, Kos is probably one of the most interesting assets Lamont has, should he message it correctly. Kos is Hispanic, an immigrant, served in the Army, and has been a great success in the IT world. Lamont needs to spread the Kos love in Bridgeport, but not by blogging. That’s tactics — using your assets so as to heighten your message. And this is what good political pro’s know how to do because they have been around the pike several times, and know how to learn from both mistakes and successes. And frankly, that is the kind of folk wisdom we all need to acquire and respect.
Margaret,
My name is mommybrain for a reason. I didn’t make myself as clear as I should have.
When I say take of the gloves and join the fight on their own turf, I don’t mean mudslinging or screechy name-calling (although I do have a fondness for snarky nicknames). What I mean is not sitting on our hands and taking whatever they dish anymore. It makes us seem weak.
I mean speaking up when they trash us and defending our positions LOUDLY AND PROUDLY and not letting them determine the direction of our conversations anymore. I realize I’m not one of the finer minds here and can’t always express myself with the eloquence of Mary or Rayne or Peterr, not to mention Jane or Christy, but I don’t mean we should bring the level of our discourse down to meet them.
We do need to start fighting back, not playing dead. And we’ll do it on our terms, not theirs.
This is the only convention anyone will attend where the point of the exercise is to meet eachother. And we did so with so much joy. Attending the panels where our virtual voices were given a room and a podium is so much gravy. Dividing up into regions and states and swapping emails for Roots organizing was a tremendous bonus. There was a shortage of outlets to recharge laptops, so when we found an outlet in the hallway, we swiped chairs from neighboring rooms and formed another community – all communities need a source of energy! Also, a very big THANK YOU to the crews who set up the wifi infrastructure.
MOblue’s example is much more like what I meant.
FYI, you can now view the video of the Plame Panel discussion by visiting http://fora.tv. I understand the video is also available on C-Span.org but I couldn’t get it to work (also, with fora.tv you don’t need to have RealPlayer installed).
This was the best discussion panel that I have ever seen. Wow! And Cristy was awesome.
Margaret at 129,
I agree with you.
Further, it seems to me that most of our favorite political blogs are mostly entertainment. I know I am entertaied. And they are supportive of good purposes. So more than entertainment, but still not organization for political action.
Generally, I would hate to see the free-wheeling discussion go away. And I don’t think that it will.
However, getting a lot of people charged up about this and that from time to time is not enough for sustained political influence. That is not really a criticism of FDL or any other site. It just points out that new challenges lie ahead — if we choose to take them.
In my view, the best hope for slowly changing the routines in DC (routines — not a couple votes) is to start with an organized and non-partisan effort to document what goes on there. For all the bluster on this site and elsewhere (some by me), there isn’t much true information about what happens day to day.
The devil is in the details. And no one — no one — makes any effort to record or make available that infomation.
I think a consortium of universities would have the money and reputation (and source of rotating “reporters” — students) to do the job best.
Other things are also needed. But sunshine first.
Bloggers are the new journalists. I’m remembering the 50s and 60s, when an array of new voices spoke out in small papers, The Village Voice for example, and later became mainstream journalists; and in the late 60s and early 70s, when women’s voices bloomed in leaflets and small papers, and those women went on to writing careers, besides changing the landscape. In both cases people with no ‘journo creds’ burst forth to crash through the media firewall.
What’s happening now is much, much bigger: the democratization of research.
Alice at 143,
I think you are correct, and that the phenomena is valuable.
For decades, I have annoyed countless friends forever griping about the lack of insitutional memory in the news media. I think bringing some institutional memory to the discussion has been the number 1 positive influence of blogs.
Valuable, but not enough. Principally, I think, because blogs apply themselves to media discussion. So the scope of comment by blogs is pretty well established by what the media chooses to cover in the first place. And those initial choices are woefully inadequate.
In addition, I think there will be cultural hurdles for bloggers impeding any next step forward. It is a different process to criticize others to your like-minded readers than it is to propose a useful step and gather a coalition to make it happen.
I think both processes are needed.
At the moment, we see only the first.
A LURKER SPEAKS
Truth be told, all the neo-cons who go-along with the shrubs maniacal evil regime can be explained in Alex Gibney’s documentary on Sundance “The Human Behavior Experiments”. In this film we watch a single person filling out an application in room go call for help when they see smoke come into the room from under a door. Later in the same room , 3 people notice the smoke, look around, see no one get up and ignore the smoke. One guy actually waves the smoke out of his face so he can continue unabated. Is there a better metaphor than this for what’s happening in America? I loved watching the live feed of YKOS and felt somewhat empowered but very few people (relatively speaking) are watching US. We know the ass-kissing main-stream media have “Gone Fishin” and that the roots movement is the future but we must find a common language that we bring to the table. I am stuck in Texas, my partner a progressive democrat active duty USAF physician. All of our military friends are Dems and all of them are out of the loop. We must find a way to infiltrate the major media, find a way to stay IN the news cycle. People out here really do think the bloggers are ‘19 year old high school dropouts in their parent’s basement’. We need to dominate the dialogue. I wanted to join the conversation and am willing to do what I can to futher the dialogue. Thanks for all that you the Blogeverse do.
Swim
Well, that 35,000 feet is about 7 miles up-the pilot probably mentioned that….
Hey, its Christy Hardin on C-SPAN!
I believe the last time I saw you, you were playing a trombone….
Go ‘Jackets!
vca