As you know, I posted this story here yesterday about RFK Jr.’s report in Rolling Stone. It was also posted as a diary at Daily Kos and it made the recommended diaries list with over 400 comments. In my diary I criticized those in the media, the netroots and in the Democratic party who had attempted to limit discussion of this, to me, very important topic.
Armando took exception to my diary and to the RFK Jr. article to which it refers, claiming that the RFK’s report was “horshit” and that the thread of comments to my diary reconfirms Markos original action “to ban the fraudsters.” I disagree with those assertions by Armando, and told him so in my reply.
I am reposting his comment and my response here so that you can judge for yourself. Armando is welcome to respond further here if he wishes, even though he has said he will not engage me “in reliving November and December 2004.” Follow me below the fold for the complete text of his comment and my reply.
First Armando’s comment:
Steven
The Rolling Stone article is complete horseshit.
This is a rehash of all of the worst theories.
Robert Kennedy, Jr. should be ashamed of himself.
He has destroyed the issue of voting reform forever with this.
I will not engage you in reliving November and December 2004.
Suffice it to say that this thread is the worst indictment of the fraudsters and reconfirms that Markos was right to ban the fraudsters.
I imagine he will have to do it again.
Hooray for Booman Tribune, a big influx is coming your way.
“All knew that Armando was an Armory of Wisdom. But then, who are these with whom Armando crossed verbal swords?”
by Armando on Fri Jun 02, 2006 at 11:24:40 PM PDT</blockquote
And now my reply to his remarks:
Actually Armando it’s not complete horseshit
I was there. I was actively engaged in the hash the GOP made of the Ohio election.
I helped prepare affidavits for people who had been denied the right to vote even a provisional ballot. I downloaded and distributed to our volunteers copies of the Federal Court Order prohibiting election officials from using the fraudulent lists the Republicans had prepared to challenge voters. We had numerous instances where the polling officials had never been informed that those lists were illegal. We had polling places that were demanding ID for every hispanic or spanish speaking voter, in violation of state and federal law. We pleaded with the Board of Elections to provide more machines to many, many precincts where there were long lines to vote and waits of 3 hours or more, all of which the BOE refused.
Everything Kennedy describes in his article about suppressing the vote in minority districts I heard from the volunteers who were calling in to our field office for help on how to challenge the actions of the polling place officials to deny people their right to vote. You can claim such things didn’t happen if you want, but I know for a fact that they did occur, and they certainly weren’t confabulated or imagined by our volunteers, nor were their reports of these abuses “horseshit.”
Now we can argue all you want about the validity of the exit polls, etc. which is what I imagine you are referring to as horseshit, but the fact remains that when a recount was ordered, the officials in Ohio worked to rig the recount effort. A special prosecutor has brought charges against three election workers in Cleveland for violating the law in order to ensure that ther would be no hand recount of ballots (which by coincidence was where I worked for Election Protection). You of all people should know that no one acts to game the system unless they have a very good reason to do so. If there was no concern about what a hand recount would show than why were these officials risking a felony conviction to ensure no hand recount of Cleveland’s ballots took place? By the way, here’s the link to one of the stories about these indictments: LINK.
Frankly, while I respect your intelligence, your writing ability and the forceful manner in which you present your arguments, you are wrong to attempt to silence people about this issue. If you had been with me on Election night in Cleveland I find it hard to believe that you would be taking the absolutist position you are asserting now. Indeed, I find it hard to believe even though you weren’t with me on election night.
You last statement implies that Markos should ban people for discussing these topics. That’s a fine example of progressive thinking. I’d expect that at FreeRepublic where one gets banned for anything that doesn’t toe the official party line, or at RedState, little green footballs,or any other number of conservative sites. But I don’t think you can make this issue go away simply by banning more people, nor is it a topic that deserves to be suppressed.
You want to make the Democratic Party stronger? Censorship isn’t the way to go, sir.
“I just had the basic view of the American public — it can’t be that bad out there.” Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.
by Steven D on Sat Jun 03, 2006 at 07:25:34 AM PDT</blockquote
Some typos from Armando’s and my posts were corrected in the text displayed above, but no substantive changes have been made to the content.
horseshit or horshit?
Me and my two left thumbs!
I call horshit [horsemanure] back to him. I am so very glad I left that site! I now have my sanity to prove this. What is with this person, armando? Does he think like a fasist or what? sensoring comments to make it look like one is nuts except him. His ego is less becoming to that of bush’s IMHO. bless his little heart, that he just might wake up and smell the coffee for once in his little life. Shame on him and for kos for allowing him to be his normal self. ‘Nough said. They seem like little pampered runabouts, if you ask me. I sure hope that Booman gets his ears full of their crap when he is in the yearly…..except for the good speakers on the program, I do not think I could stand the likes of their mentality.
Sam and Janeane put Kos in the position he is in by featuring him so prominently on the Majority Report. Do you guys think Sam and Janeane know how badly Kos is treating those try who support and promote voting rights at DKos?
Maybe we need to inform Sam and Janeane about this situation. Maybe Sam and Janeane could act as arbitrators on this?
Who is Armando, really?
I don’t know his background. Where did he work before becoming the gatekeeper at Kos?
I want to know too, Lisa. He seems like a bitter little man, if you ask me. He seems better fit to be on the republican websites, if you ask me. If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen is what I would like to tell him. I detest someone such as this….
Kos has enforcers that he used to ensure discussions at DKos flow the way DKos want to to go. Armando is one. DHinMI is another. There’s a few others
Anyway…whenever someone disagrees with Kos on an issue, Armando, DHinMI, or one of a few others hit the threads and insult the person who has disagreed with Kos until they either stop posting, or they are baited into a detonation worthy of of a pile of negative ratings and banning.
Armando can get pretty rude, but (IMHO) DHinMI is probably the rudest, most insulting, most offensive person to claim to be a progressive on the internet. DHinMi and Armando are so insulting and offensive they should have been banned within days of signing on. Instead, they were made front pagers by Kos. That’s becasue they serve Kos’ needs. Kos just sends Armando or DHinMI to cuss at someone now. Kos doesn’t “dirty his hands” with that sort of thing anymore.
DH gives MI a bad rep!
I often wonder who exactly it is that DH works for… s/he’s certainly not on the same side as me.
I know who Armando is but am not at liberty to say since it’s a no-no to out people’s real identity on the blogs. However I will say that what I learned confirms my suspicions that — to say the least — Armando is not a progressive in the same sense that many of us are.
I personally do not respect his “forceful way of expressing himself” one single bit. He is inexcusably rude and shoves his opinions down other people’s throats. He is a self-appointed policeman on DailyKos and I doubt that Kos himself realizes the extent to which Armando bullies people and attempts to suppress discussions that threaten his (Armando’s) agenda… whatever that may be. Any ideas?
I think Armando’s derogatory comment about Booman getting an influx of new subscribers is disgusting. I’m a veteran of the Ohio Diary Wars; I was very vocal about my belief that the election was hijacked and became the target of some very vicious verbal abuse from Armando. I received my only troll ratings from him and his gang of thugs for expressing an opinion he didn’t like. However, I was never under even the slightest threat of being banned from that site, so to me Armando’s threats of people getting banned from Daily Kos are just so much hot air. Where does Armando get the authority to threaten people on behalf of Markos? Armando is not even a front-pager anymore.
Recently Armando put up a diary full of threats and insults towards another diarist, that got onto the rec list, and then Armando asked everyone to unrecommend his diary so that he could delete it. Markos was on his book tour at the time, and I had to wonder if maybe Armando did not want Markos to see his diary?
Since Armando was so viciously rude to me, I have never read one single diary that he posted, not even his “apology diary” since I would only be interested in a personal apology for his insulting behavior… but won’t hold my breath!
HAH! Armando was one of only two (I think) people that I ever troll-rated here!
He’s just rude.
Who is Armando really?
I know that he believes that the US was justified in dropping atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
The problem we had was that we had one uranium bomb and one plutonium bomb. If we had had more bombs we might have been more willing to do a demonstration for the Japanese on some atoll somewhere.
That would have been my strong preference. We could have attempted to get the Japanese realize they stood no chance in light of our new weapon. Under the circumstances, I understand why we were reluctant to wait or use one of the two weapons we had, and the only of its type.
I don’t think we needed to follow up Hiroshima so quickly with Nagasaki. We probably could have convinced Japan to surrender after Hiroshima if we had been more patient.
In retrospect, it was probably a good lesson for humanity that the bombs were dropped. If they hadn’t been, the first nuclear strikes might have been far larger and catastrophic.
In retrospect, it was probably a good lesson for humanity that the bombs were dropped. If they hadn’t been, the first nuclear strikes might have been far larger and catastrophic.
On the surface that sounds reasonable until one considers the monumental tests in Nevada and that the US scientists had a very good idea what the aftermath would be. A ‘good lesson’ at the cost of 100,000 lives plus the wounded who died agonizing deaths later on? No, my definition of “liberal” would preclude justification of Nagasaki and Hiroshima on any basis whatsoever.
I think I read somewhere he is a lawyer who lives in Puerto Rico. And I know he is somewhat older like most bloggers, apparently.
Armando is a lawyer. He lives in Puerto Rico. He is an extremely handsome young Latino. . .probably about Kos’s age, mid thirties. Unfortunately he beleives his own PR and has an ego that would serve several dozen men. Saw several pictures of him in early dkos meetups, dreamy looking but that ego of his makes him totally without merit. It detracts from his looks and intellect to the point that I can’t imagine any woman wanting to play nice with him. Probably any men either. A very angry persona he has. He sees himself as the premier arbiter of logic. . .and only his logic counts.
Sometimes he is downright human. A saving grace, I suppose. I never had any run ins with him but I never wanted to either.
Let’s just say the Latino part is right in the above.
Well, okay. He says he is a lawyer, or at least during my time there he said he was. I have nothing else but his word to go on. He looked mid-thrities to me in the pictures, but then everyone is younger than me, so it wouldn’t be the first time I made a mistake. If he has more years than that, then he certainly carries them well. If he is not the handsome dude in the photos that it was identified as Armando, then, I guess I’ve been snookered. . . also not the first time that has happened.
I actually had a fairly good relationship with the guy, as far as dkos commenting experiences go. I just knew his short fuse and I didn’t attempt to debate with him. His opinions and mine often at polar oposite ends. But that’s okay. Everyone’s entitled, in my view.
It was the “ganging up” attacks on persons and their ideas by whomever it is/was that seem to follow that mode of expression that left me less than enchanted with participation at the orange place. Those who enjoy it there, more power to them. Just not my cup of tea. And I am sure I was not missed by anyone when I left, either. I certainly made no great contributions there. I did meet and come to appreciate a whole bunch of very nice folks at the orange place.
I don’t particularly like calling individuals out for anything, so I broke my own rules by my original comments above. I’ll work on that one.
Fortunately there are plenty of places for people to go and find an attitude and atmosphere that suits them, so I am not concerned about what happens at other sites so much, although I dislike mass purges or bannings. But then, not my site, not my call.
Lawyer he is — I took that for granted. He’s in his early forties, so you weren’t off by much. As to ‘handsome dude’ — well, maybe ladies are the better judges of that…
Personally I don’t have strong feelings about him either. My first impression still holds, to wit, that his good and bad traits constantly cancel out exactly in a puff of smoke, yielding a big, almost fascinating nothingness.
Ah, yep! LOL. . .you said it perfectly.
Steven,
I saw the comment this morning, but hadn’t seen your reply. I think that all in all, the tone in the fraud diaries these last few days has been civil. I found that encouraging. Well…then along comes Armando calling horseshit. For an attorney his comment was just ignorant of any facts to backup his asserstion. Then there was the requisite threat of banning. Par for that course. I wish he’d stop…he’s scaring me ;o) And then of course came the backhanded swipe at Booman Tribune. Pretty effing petty for someone who is held in such high regard by so many. Other than that…I have no comment, except this: You keep doing what you’re doing. In the end, what Armando thinks about this subject means little to nothing. But definetily sliding towards the nothing side.
But IS he held in high regard by others?
Maybe he was the only one who volunteered to do some heavy lifting to get DK off the ground. I don’t know. I’m asking.
I know a lot of people who post on DK. But I don’t know any who “highly respect” Armando. It’s pretty much the direct opposite.
Yes, he is. Even as someone who generally only posts in RubDmc’s diaries over there, I’m aware of his popularity. He’s blunt to say the least. And many times I agree with him, especially his positions on the Supreme Court, but there is a culture there that he plays well with when he makes comments like this one. And within that culture, or clique, he is immensely popular.
Armando the writer is a different animal from Armando the commenter.
Yes, I’ve noticed that as well. But then I write generally shorter comments too, if not quite as brusque.
Armando is an excellent writer, thinker and researcher, it would be nice if it was possible to separate that out from all of the personal attacks he litters his comments with. Judging from the times on dKos I went back through those comments, though, he seems to have a burst about once a week of being a complete asshole to anyone who he perceives as disagreeing with his exalted wisdom. It happens to often to be some rare occasional aberration from an otherwise sane individual.
I haven’t checked in almost a year so maybe he has changed, at one point last summer he was at least trying, but judging by this outburst it doesn’t seem like he was successful. I know you like Armando, but at the very least imho he needs a therapist to help him control his anger. He doesn’t act like any other liberal I know.
He doesn’t act like any other liberal I know.
I don’t think he is–just too inconsistent and too much of a bully. And I don’t think that his writing or research is that great either–have found too flaws in his arguments so many times…
I will say that he is does do a pretty good cut and paste though.
Oh really?! has he two types of personality? I od not care for his writting so I stay clear of him…Now I know why…:o)
Animal seems to be the operative word.
I think of them as brownshirts. Those are Armando’s enforcers, and Armando is Kos’s enforcer. Just because he is immensely popular with a small group of loudmouth assholes doesn’t make him popular on the site as a whole. When I have disagreed with him in the past, there were more people who agreed with me than Armando, even though most of my comments were deleted before people could read them.
Go check out some video game sites, or some sports websites, etc. Probably a majority of the people who post on the net are very rude and offensive on a regular basis. A sad but true fact of regular internet users.
Anyway, the same “l33t d00dZ” that fill most other websites with %^#*@^@# show up a DKos and cheer for Armando, DHinMI, or one of the other DKos enforcers when they go into tantrum mode on someone who has committed the cardinal sin of disagreeing with anything Kos has ever said.
I’m late responding to you here, Shalimar, but I’ll say this: as soon as folks figured out how to ‘game’ the ratings at Kos, the community became fertile ground for cultish behavior on the basis of colorful personalities. Ergo, every cult figure had his/her own little crowd of enforcers.
Given the ‘lowering of the bar’ regarding the level of discourse & you’ve got a nice little rabble coming to your defense at every turn, regardless of the detriment to community that divisiveness entails.
& these are folks who can’t seem to understand Bush’s continued popularity!
Witness as these little cults take root & you tend to view some of your fellow community members as none too bright.
Yeah, I read through the last week of Armando’s flame wars and it all read like a bunch of 12-year-olds arguing. While I sympathize to a degree with his critics just because, no one came across particularly well. I’m surprised anyone finds wasting time on that kind of thing to be productive, especially since Armando and friends have the keys and they’re never going to leave or admit they were wrong about anything. What’s the point?
The one thing that has changed between last year and last week: It used to be easy to find the flame war threads on dKos just by looking through Armando’s comments and finding the ones where people gave him low ratings. No one seems to ever give him low ratings for his more offensive remarks anymore, the only way I know of to find the flame wars now is to look for comments where he has used profanity in the subject line.
Ps: From your other comment, I was online including dKos on election day 2004, I didn’t even have a television then so monitoring on the internet was all I did that entire day. I remember what it was like that night, but I didn’t feel like talking about politics for at least a month after that so I didn’t see much of the aftermath. If I had, I probably would have quit dKos much sooner.
I suspect he was angry that I called him out in the diary itself as an example of netroots leaders who have blocked discussion of this subject. I can’t say for certain because he didn’t mention that in his reply. In any event, I hope my response was the right one. I tried to keep a measured and civi tone. I can be shrill when it suits the occasion, but I really don’t want to get into a mudslinging contest.
Why worry about your response Steven. You are one of the most level headed, thoughtful writers I know of. He attacked you with insulting language. In that environment you are no longer required to measure your reply. Let it fly man.
Actually Armando was lucky it was Steven D, instead of me! I’d have let him have it GOOD!
I believe there is a pattern of selective censoring going on at several former (note this term) progressive sites. MyDD and KOS are joining the behavior of “Kicking Ass” over at the DNC of banning any threads critical of what their perceive poltical strategy has become. By definition once that occurs, nothihng new and meaningful can happen on the site as it becomes groupthink only tolerated and mainly becomes a cheerleading exercise. That only continues until a loss or win at an election when people then find themselves forced to think again. They do not then know how anymore because thinking may cause disagreements and they do not want to get banned!!. Censorship of legitimate commend on any site is a sin!
By definition once that occurs, nothing new and meaningful can happen on the site as it becomes groupthink only tolerated and mainly becomes a cheerleading exercise
Already been a cheerleader, the pay sucks and the only people who really care you are a cheerleader are your low self esteem mother and dirty old men who sit in the front row on the bleachers to get a better view “of the game”!
Yeah – what really gets my goat is the stuff that should be censored, like one word comments that add nothing but noise to the debate, off topic pictures, etc. If they cleaned THAT out, that would be great. I’d hardly call that censorship. That’s more like cleaning graffiti off the wall.
Steven, I think your response was definitley appropriate and not at all shrill. You made valid points in describing what happenned in Ohio, especially as you described your experiences and those of others.
As for the threats that Armando made–all I can say is that I haven’t been banned, and, in all honesty, I am at the “I don’t care point.” If Markos wants to ban me, go ahead!
Fact of the matter is that that orange thing is not the center of the universe, although some think and act like it is. I don’t understand that mentality, I really don’t .
Back to the Armando comment–It seems to me that, although he claims that he is an attorney, I have trouble believing that. Especially in light of his lack of respect for the opinions of others and this
Like it or not, the blogs are a part of the press. (Notice how many traditional newspapers have one?) Taking that a step further, as blogs are alternative media, why ban people and censor ideas?
Yeah – as has often been said, “freedom of the press” belongs to those who own one.
No one starts a media organization to tell the truth. They start a media organization to tell the truth as they see it, the side of the truth they feel is not being given appropriate weight.
I’m less offended by bias in the press or blogs than I am by the ridiculous claim that they are NOT biased! If people just let their biases hang out, and give us the facts that support that bias, things would be better. It just infuriates me that Fox dares call itself “fair and balanced” when I hear kids who don’t know better (and adults who really should) echo that back to me. Fair and balanced my ass.
In the old days every city had a Republican newspaper and a Democratic newspaper. Sometimes several, plus papers in German or Polish or Yiddish, a Union paper, and so on. There was no concept of unbiased news reporting; you could pretty well count on your paper to present the news in a certain way.
We seem to have gotten away from thinking about the press that way, which is a bad idea, because every news outlet has its biases. Some are more subtle than others, some hit you right over the head (we can all think of one example right off the bat), but it’s always there. So the best way to “consume” the news (it’s a terrible word, but it will have to do) is to have numerous news sources and synthesize them to get to your own interpretation of the world around you. Looking back at when I was a kid I used to be crazy for shortwave radio, but I could only listen to outlets like Radio Havana Cuba for so long because I got tired of hearing about American “neoimperialism.” I look back now and realize that I could have learned something from that. (But what did I know, this was back before I even got out of high school.)
My second or third job was for a Polish Newspaper, so I know exactly what you mean. (Paper is no longer in existance however.) Actually wrote a couple articles for too–they were translated by anohter person–my late father said (who could read Polish) told me that too much was literally lost in the translation. Hell, I was still in high school–actually haven’t thought about that in years!!!!
“freedom of the press” belongs to those who own one.
hmmm….intesting quote in this thread…..
I’m late with this. I just joined. But I suspect his getting angry with you had more to do with his own inflated ego than anything else. He believes his own hype over there. Just check with the melodramatic “farewell” post he had since he was outed. He has to be the center of attention. He has to be the big shot. And although I do sometimes agree with him, I am really tired of the cliquish assholes over there.
It’s resembling some sort of high school journal site the way more and more people simply seem to be vying for attention. I get it that people are passionate and want to be read and related to. But there is a point when you have to stop and ask yourself if what you’re doing matters.
I think he feels like some sort of cult celebrity, and what you witnessed had nothing to do with his political beliefs but was just a diva moment.
I like DK because I can be alerted to stories I might not have heard elsewhere, but I find myself staying away for longer and longer periods at a time because of things like this.
I also take issue with any progressives simply dismissing election fraud. There is so much evidence and so many people know what happened. How can it not be worth looking at a little closer? It’s too important not to. If someone wants to simply dismiss it, fine. But to get so hostile about it? I’d expect it from the freepers, too. They post a lot at DKos about what it means to be progressive or how the Democrats need to act, but are taking the tone of freepers.
Supersoling! You know how I came to even do this blogging stuff was scouring the internet the day after the elections trying to figure out what the hell had happened and eventually found Bradblog! I lurked for like forever!
For an attorney his comment was just ignorant of any facts to backup his asserstion.
Here in Germany, it is an article of faith among lawyers that a strong claim is better than a weak argument.
Here’s a saying I learned in law school:
If the law is on your side, pound on the law.
If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts.
If neither the facts nor the law is on your side, pound on the table.
Seems to me that Armando is pounding on a big orange table.
I x-posted Bush Grasping At Straws (which quoted Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s report and linked to it) at dkos
One comment:
Another re: Mebane’s reputation as being VERY highly respected
And Stephen – I loved your diary. I was so glad to see it rocketing up the charts there.
I was not surprised when Armando came in, like Yosemite Sam, steam coming out of his head, shouting “Thur was no damn frawd in this here election! Anyone who says otherwise is a knucklebrain.”
I can understand people who don’t want to believe that. But I can’t understand why anyone would be – as Armando, Lindeman, Mystery Pollster, and Manjoo are – more intent on criticizing those who raise questions than criticizing the reason the questions arose. Our election system is broken. Severely. To deny that is simply to deny reality.
I like to go to Kos because I like trying to reach a different audience. But I must say – the intellectual level of discourse here is far superior, and the policy of allowing a broader range of discourse both necessary and refreshing. We’re losing more rights in our lives everytime I look around. I’m so glad we’re not losing them here at Booman.
I like to go to Kos because I like trying to reach a different audience.
Only reason I xpost my Part D diaries there.
It’s like New York to BT’s . . . um, well, Seattle I guess. I’ve done studies. A diary over at Kos gets something like 20 times more readers than when I post here. But, there’s something different about the culture over there that makes me more comfortable over here. Maybe it’s the pace of the discussion, maybe it’s the tone. Maybe it’s just because everybody over here knows and tolerates me. Hard to say.
Maybe it’s because the simple rule here is:
“Don’t be a prick.”
I think that’s one of the big reasons this site has the tone it has.
Not meant for you, but as a New Yorker I must defend our kinder, gentler version of prickishness ;o)
yeah, stifling my inner mid-atlantic prickishness is an ongoing battle.
Hey, can a chick be a prick? Because I have a hard time stifling my midwest, Great Lakes, moved to the South™ prickishness more than I like to admit.
Living in MI all of my life, I know exactly what you mean!!!
It’s love, Omir. Those young folk can’t seem to be happy unless there’s a battle going on. Hopefully we are older and wiser – been there, done with that.
Like Jon Stewart says – don’t be their monkey.
Think that has gone to people’s heads. And, I have said this repeatedly–seems like all the better writers at the orange thing either get banned or leave. Have to wonder about that…
that they actually need a daily “diary rescue” column, to direct people’s attention to good diaries that drop off the recent list. Here that’s not a problem — usually diaries stay up long enough for people to read, think about, then come back later with a cogent comment or argument for/against the diarist’s viewpoint.
Over at the Orange Empire, if you read something you have to respond right away, else the diary will disappear into the Ether(net). That’s probably why you see a plethora of pithy, one line comments in many diaries over there…for most folks it takes a while to come up with more than one sentence (unlike folks like me who don’t know when to shut up… lol).
I appreciate when I go over there and see familiar names, but it’s always good to come home… 🙂
And, there are times when they don’t put the really good ones on Diary Rescue! Like I said, I xpost my Part D writing there and I have seen a few gems that get ignored even for the Diary Rescue thread. I can’t tell you how many times I saw a diary there that consisted of one paragraph that included a link to an article and ended with, “Let’s discuss this.” That is pathetic, IMO.
more intent on criticizing those who raise questions than criticizing the reason the questions arose.
This is a really good point, and it reminds me of how critics of the war were treated by war supporters before the war. In fact, it reminds me of how the Bush administration operates on the whole: ostracize the critics, even the ones who are known to be intelligent and well-informed in their own areas of expertise,and ignore the deeper and legitimate reasons their questions arise. So much can be learned/done by people who look not only at, but also beyond specific criticisms to the deeper problems that inspire them. It feels like a desperate attempt to hold down a manhole cover so the surface traffic can keep moving–oblivious to the deep water below that threatens to burst forth and blow the cover off everything.
If you don’t think there was fraud, and you have good arguments against its existence make the arguments. Why focus your energies on the “fraudsters”?
As something of a fraud agnostic, I’ve never understood why the anti-fraud crowd is so obsessed with the people who are arguing that fraud happened and so interested in silencing them. And of course such tactics just play into whatever conspiracy mongering exists on the fraud-happened side.
We should at least be able to have a rational conversation about whether or not fraud occured without engaging in witchhunt tactics. In a free society, bad ideas should be argued against, not silenced.
The answer’s very simple: these people are not progressives. They want to move the Democratic party far, far to the right. The best way for them to do this is argue that the country’s moving to the right, and the best way to do that is to argue that far-right candidates consistently and legitimately win elections.
If far-right candidates can’t win without cheating, their favourite argument falls apart, and people like kos and Armando stop being useful to Party leaders.
I think they’re more or less perfectly happy with where the Democratic Party is…which is pretty far to the right.
I honestly don’t see any sign that they want to move it further to the right.
I would agree that they definitely don’t want to see it move to the left (see this post for more of my thoughts on this issue).
But none of this quite answers my question above. They don’t need to ban people or silence “tin foil hatters” to accomplish their goals. What ever happened to repressive tolerance 😉 ?
They do want to be farther to the right. For example, they want to jettison the (mostly superficial, at this point) women’s rights and gay rights planks, and possibly even the anti-war plank.
As for why they need to ban people, it’s the same reason that Schumer doesn’t want open primaries. Most of their audience (or electorate, in Schumer’s case) is to their left. They need the support of said audience/electorate to achieve their goals, but do not want to actually work with said audience/electorate, or compromise with them in any way. Thus, the only way to get the co-operation they want is to pretend that theirs is the only valid opinion/candidate, and censor anyone who makes a credible argument/presents an electable candidate.
They need the left. The left doesn’t need them.
I certainly agree with your last sentence:
They need the left. The left doesn’t need them.
why the front pagers there are so insistent about not dealing with the whole issue is that they’re trying to be taken seriously by the power players in DC, and feel that the whole range of discussion that’s outside the pale that gets labeled “CT” only threatens their reputation as sober wannabe pundits and mediators between pols and the unwashed masses.
in short, they are gradually being controlled by the same anxieties and desires to fit in that controls the national media’s reporting of the same issues. what one values (in this case, “reputation” and “respectability”) can be used as leverage to control you, or better yet, to get you to control yourself preemptively.
it’s a lot less sinister than it looks. the principle at work is not unlike high school cliques.
A quick reminder. COINTELPRO’s existance is a proven fact of history.
Why did sinister operations like COINTELPRO work? Because a couple of people with sinister motives were able to play off standard sociological constructs and make a whole bunch of good people do bad things to good people.
I would venture to guess the majority of the people working in the Nixon White House that did so much so wrong were decent people that had good intentions going into the situation. A couple of sick, twisted people created the environment for so many to do so much wrong.
You need to watch that documentary that just premiered on Sundance Channel named “The Human Behavior Experiments.” It goes into the social psych research done on why good people do evil…
“Documentarian Alex Gibney (ENRON: THE SMARTEST GUYS IN THE ROOM) revisits three famous behavioral studies to explore some perennial questions about why human beings commit unethical acts under particular social conditions. Reconsidered are Stanley Milgram’s obedience to authority experiments, in which subjects willingly inflicted pain on another person; Philip Zimbardo’s alarming prisoner and guard role-playing study; and Columbia University’s 1969 experiments which illuminated how being in a group can cause a diffusion of moral responsibility.”
..however, I do not argue with ignorance. I choose to pick my fight better than someone such as this person. I enjoy intelligent conversation vs. to this type of chatter from him. Let it go, for he is is just showing himself to be the ass that he really is to everyone.
VOTE ONLY BY MAIL! VOTE ONLY BY MAIL!
AN UNPAID POLITICAL ANNOUNCEMENT
That doesn’t solve the problem. Absentee ballots are not only counted by computer, but in California, they’re not even subject to the 1% audit.
DON’T VOTE BY MAIL! DON’T VOTE BY MAIL!
In fact King County, Washington (where Seattle and most of its largest exurbs are located) has decided to go with all-mail elections starting not too long from now. Oregon does all its voting by mail too, if I remember right.
Voting by mail does not solve all of the problems of the election process, but it does solve one. At least there is a paper ballot involved. I’ve been advocating for voting machines that do nothing but help you make your choices and print out an error-free ballot for you — but I usually get shouted down at Big Orange as soon as the words “voting machine” leave my fingertips. But that’s another subject altogether that has nothing to do with Armando. 🙂
Paper ballots is indeed half the battle. Auditing the paper is the other half. Because if the paper is only used in a recount, fraud can go undetected. In several states – maybe all? – the person asking for the recount has to pay for it, and they’re wildly exspensive, so most candidates don’t ask. With a substantive audit, it would be much harder to get away with fraud large enough to alter an election.
In the Washington gubernatorial election last year we had a situation where the vote was very close and in favor of the Republican candidate. I’m going from memory here, but I think the procedure — by law — was that if there was a small enough difference in the vote count it triggered an automatic machine recount. The difference had to be pretty small, something like 1% or 1/2%. Anyway, this was done and the Republican candidate’s margin shrank.
At that point the Democratic candidate had a choice. She could go with the results of the machine recount, or she could put up a bond to pay for a hand recount. If the hand recount came out in her favor, she would be declared the winner and get the bond back. Otherwise she would have to pay for the recount and the Republican candidate would be declared the winner.
The Democratic candidate, Christine Gregiore, was under a great deal of pressure to concede the race and not face the possibility of having to pay such a large sum of money. I don’t remember how much it was, but it was pretty substantial. Seven figures or close to it. At any rate the state Democratic party eventually put up the bond, the hand recount was done, and Gregoire won the elction by 129 votes (and got the money back).
This seems like a sensible way to handle a recount, and I gained a great deal of respect for our secretary of state, Sam Reed. Even though he is a Republican, he resisted a great deal of pressure to accept the Republicans’ interpretation of the law and conducted the process with integrity. Would that we had more Republicans like him.
Right. That’s pretty common. But that’s only for very close races. The problem I’m talking about is a 6% swing, like we saw in Ohio. Kerry would have had to pay for a recount if he requested it.
And btw – that was one (of a few) areas I disagreed with Bev Harris on. She used that race as an example of one she felts the Democrats stole. I think Gregoire won. Harris contended that in every recount, more Democratic ballots appeared as if from nowhere. I believe they were recovered. She implied they were added.
The one thing that Republicans were right about in the whole sorry mess is that King County really needs to clean up it act with regard to elections. So maybe some good came out of it (other than Rossi not getting into office, of course).
Actually it solves more than one. Perfection is unrealizable in any human system.
That doesnt mean we shouldnt strive for something better than the current 19th century rip off.
And in Oregon, you will note a nice little side effect:
Democrats win the local elections and have regained one of two statehouses in the last election cycle.
no more standing in line in the cold ghetto winter for 7 hours only to be told they have no record of your registration….
That’s a solvable problem we absolutely SHOULD solve. (We is misleading, since “we” didn’t create that problem.)
I just SOLVED it!
“We” may not have created the problem, but “we” are just as guilty by perpetuating it. You feel it is your duty to trudge down to the polls.
Even though there have been well documented, repeated egregious examples of fraud at the polls from both Democrats (remember RFK Jrs Uncle got some help in 1960) and Republicans (remember 2000 and 2004)for more than 100 years?
Plus precinct polling has proven to be less than efficient or fair, shall we politely say, in the poorer, minority laden areas?
So you dont favor change to benefit younger, poorer, minorities,liberals and Democrats?
I dont mean to pick on you, but some of your statements are just too ripe for the picking.
Sorry. I’ll stop now. :)(:
So either 1) Oregon is full of honest people, or 2) Dems are gaming the elections. I know California is NOT full of honest people and sure as heck wouldn’t want that here.
I’ll stick with mailing it in, primarily because we have an intensely serious voting official who is very careful about the system(s) available. Yeah, the ballots are scanned in, but I trust that system far more than Diebold.
Neither (1) nor (2) come close to being true statements and I’m not sure how you deduced these two points you make?
There is no gaming involved in my discussion. Less gaming by anybody in reality plus the ultimate in convenience and privacy, which has lead to increased voter turnout in Oregon, especially in local elections.
Since conservative, older, wealthier voters tend to vote in higher percentages at the polling place currently than do poorer, younger,liberal ones (for whatever reasons, whether fraud or not)the larger the increase in voters (especially for local races) the larger the percentage of younger, poorer more liberal voters will logically occur.
This argument may not matter to you unless you favor a return of elected officials whose politics skews more to the center and left of the dial.
If you are a republican than your argument makes sense. If you are Californian, I would think you would be ecstatic to be able to stay home instead of being stuck in one more of the long lines which make up about half of daily life out there in the golden state.
Oh – another problem to voting by mail.
How do you know your ballot arrived?
How do you know Republican operatives don’t go hang with the late night crew at teh post office, with the underpaid staff, and offer then a few bucks to “lose” mail from certain districts?
I am a firm believer that it is not only our right, but our civic duty, to march to the polls, and put our ballot in a place where lots of people will be able to keep an eye on it.
If you don’t think ballots can’t get lost, read “Down and Dirty” – if ballots at the polls can get stolen, how much easier to steal them before they even reach the polls?
The CIA opened domestic mail for years. Now, they probably have more sophisticated methods. But they had what they called “flaps and seals” teams that would snag mail, with and without the Postmasters’ knowledge, and steam mail open, read it, put it back in, and mail it along. Or intercept it and not pass it along. If people think voting by mail is a good idea, I can only say, bless your naive good-natured honest heart, but realize that you just made it easier for someone to game the election.
If I mail a letter from Brighton, it takes forever–as it has to go thru either/both Royal Oak and the Detroit Post Office. And when I lived in Harland, it was even worse, as I had a Fenton mailing address–then throw in Flint and Royal Oak. If I mail a letter from Howell, it is there the next day, as Howell mail goes to Lansing bypassing all of that–and I live 10-12 miles from the Howell Post Office. So, IMO, voting by mail can be tossed out the window.
Like many people, you have no actual understanding of how the mail process works. I wouldn’t expect that most people do. As a 20 year vet of the USPS, I will tell you if there is an actual living, breathing supervisor or any other employees (even small offices have many on hand) that are near by, it is almost impossible to to “toss out the districts absentee ballots”. Mail sorting centers now ship trays of mail, sorted by machine, that are sorted by devlivery address to the route carrier. Where it is a government office, they would have hundreds of trays of letters and either they would pick them up at the Post Office or a postal employee would deliver them a truck load. These numbers are very will documented as to how many pieces of mail (yeah, we know how many there are in each tray) were sent and delivered to the recipient. Also, all postal employees are spied on by closed circuit camera and or actual persons in an overhead catwalk with oneway windows. Very difficult to do anything to the mail without being caught. Now what the receiving person for the company or government office might do with the mail once turned over to them is possibly another story.
I happen to think that most employees, postal or otherwise, are basically honest. . .but there is no doubt that there are always a few that choose to be dishonest for whatever justification they conjur up.
All trash containers in the post office are gone through prior to them being dumped into dumpsters. Hundreds of
ballots intended for the Government office would not go unnoticed. A clerk goes through every piece of each carriers “undeliverable” mail (you all call it junk mail)to veryify that it is okay to throw it out. First Class mail is either forwarded or returned to sender, only bulk mail can be discarded unless it requests an address or forwarding, in which case even it can not be discarded.
Thank you for pointing out how so few don’t understand the USPS system. I’m a 10-year vet, and it still amazes me how little people know about how things are done.
I’m going to address the specific of this that were so misleading and ill-informed:
How do you know Republican operatives don’t go hang with the late night crew at teh post office, with the underpaid staff, and offer then a few bucks to “lose” mail from certain districts?
This is the most hilarious.
The “late night crew” at postal facilities that have one are often the most heavily staffed, as far as the processing of mail goes. In my city, the numbers of employees working the night shift are in the hundreds, if not thousands. It’s also unionized. People are always keeping tabs on each other’s work hours and dying to find examples of any favoritism going on. Somebody would have to draft a lot of employees and supervisors to pull off a good election theft. The more people, the more who know and let slip the truth. It would be known if someone came in and bribed people, and the people learning about it will include Dems who won’t hesitate to call a Congressman or the Postal Inspectors, and never mind how a Union would really have a field day with it.
Besides, it’s our damned job to make sure your mail doesn’t get lost. It’s a federal offense when we’re caught messing with it. I don’t think they’re going to give me a big defense fund if I’m caught. I’m not going to Leavenworth for the Republican party. Not even the wingiest of our wingnuts would.
If you don’t think ballots can’t get lost, read “Down and Dirty” – if ballots at the polls can get stolen, how much easier to steal them before they even reach the polls?
It’s a LOT tougher. They’d be better off breaking into the election office or into USPS collection boxes to dig out the ballots (hoping nobody sees them while they’re doing it!), because those are just about the only ways most postal employees would let them near it. We do a damned good job of protecting mail. The process for protecting the collection box keys alone would blow your mind.
I’m not even gonna dignify the CIA remarks except to say that, if it were done without Postmaster knowledge, it was happening far further up the chain than your scenario would permit. That means some people in Washington were going along with the scam. And note that most of the mail was returned to the mainstream. A very few got “lost,” probably no more than normally does in the course of a postal day.
—
…has worked for the USPS for 22 years and I think it’s hilarious when people think the Post Office can’t be trusted to deliver mail. Give me a f**king break!
Hey, always glad to see another USPS worker. Your points were very well taken, thanks for adding to the comment.
You are right, some of the supposed scenarios are just down right hilarious. Seems like if you are going to write about something like bribing postal workers or stealing ballots from the post office, you might want to do some actual research and find out just how implausable it is. I don’t think most people actually know how important protecting their mail, getting their mail delivered to them, and preserving their privacy is to postal workers.
I always get a chuckle out of people who suppose postal workers are lazy and just sitting around yacking away their time in some plush office somewhere. And the thought that a mail carrier has a nice little stroll through their delivery route. . .absolutely hilarious. Most of the people that don’t make it through their 90 day probationary period when they are hired just can’t take how hard the work is.
As I said, most people have no idea, and I guess they really don’t need to know, but it would be nice from a public relations stand point if they had some basic understanding of what it takes to get a letter or package from point A to point B, as well as how physically and mentally demanding the jobs can be.
Wrong.
Not talking absentee. Talking all votes by paper sent thru snail mail. Check out Oregon recent history.
Democrats are now creeping into power in a state where both state houses were controlled by Republicans. Now one is controlled by Dems.
Check out the vehemence with which Republicans fought the Oregon ballot measure.
Research before you conclude falsely and in line with the Republicans.
Until our county executive decided to make the switch (again, I don’t remember all the details, but know where to find them) you had two choices in King County. You could show up at a polling place, or you could declare yourself a “permanent absentee voter” and receive your ballot in the mail. You could then either mail it off or drop it off at a polling place. About 70% of the county decided to declare themselves permanent absentee voters, so they just decided to convert everybody over.
I don’t know how they’re going to handle homeless voters and the like but I’m sure there will be provisions for them.
In a way it’s kind of sad. I remember our elementary school was a polling place when I was a kid and they’d have the gym roped off during elections so the grownups could vote. There’s just something American about going to the ballot box (says a guy who has always voted absentee) . . . but then we don’t all own farms and ride our wagons to the polls anymore.
Debra Bowen, who is running for Secretary of State in California, suggested recently at a fundraiser that people obtain the absentee ballot, but take it directly to the polling place so you know it gets into the hands of election officials. Not bad advice.
Been doing that for awhile.
I’m fine with that. I’ve done it before when it got down to 5:00 on election day and I hadn’t filled out the ballot yet. In fact there could even be a provision for collection points in the King County vote-by-mail plan. I’d have to go look.
Just did that yesterday in the SoDak primary. I handed it right to the election official and saw her put it in a box. Guess that’s as good as it gets, right? 😉
Dont be fooled by your own nostalgia. Nostalgia is a trap.
Remember the poll tax? Remember the systematic disenfranchisement of minority voters at the polls for the last 100 years….your reasoning is excellent. Your nostalgia meaningless. Let it pass.
Good on King County for seeing the light that shines down below in Oregon…
See the comment I just made above.
Voting by mail makes it that much easier for someone to steal or corrupt the paper record.
I know it’s been working in predominantly rural, honest Oregon. But how would you know if your vote arrived? Do you get a receipt from the registrar saying, got it and here’s what was inside?
Also – voting by mail allows vote buying. When you vote at the poll, in secret, no one can know for sure how you voted.
There are a lot of reasons I think voting by mail is naive.
In Australia, btw, it’s the law that people HAVE to vote. Miss an election, you get a warning. Miss three, you get a very hefty fine. Even if you are overseas, you are expected to go to the nearest embassy and vote. I wish we had that here. I think if people HAD to vote, they’d pay more attention to politics, read more, etc.
How do I know they got my ballot? I went to the county elections website and looked it up. It shows that I voted. It doesn’t show how.
As for messing with the ballots at the post office, you’re getting into serious, and I mean serious kim chee there, because you’re compounding election fraud with mail fraud. Theft of postal mail is a pretty serious offense. Not that they might not try, but like I think I said earlier no system is 100% foolproof. There’s a famous photo of Lyndon Johnson and some of his buddies from rural Texas posing in front of some ballot boxes they stole to rig an election, for instance.
And if you don’t get your ballot? There’s a number you can call at the county elections office. It’s plastered on the side of every single bus in King County for at least a month before the election, along with reminders to do things like fill in the ovals all the way nice and black. In English, Chinese, and Spanish, at least.
I will be the first to admit there are problems with voting by mail. But there is no perfect system, and we have to just do the best we can. Up here, mail seems to be a pretty good compromise, especially since as I said 70% of the county’s voters were already doing it.
And hey – don’t get me wrong. If Dems are gaining, I see that as a very good thing. But if I were a Republican, I’d be doing what they’re doing now. Making noise and protesting, while trying to figure out a way to game it the next time around.
People at the bottom of the food chain are the most in need, and the most easily corrupted. I wouldn’t trust my vote to a postal worker. Not in Los Angeles. Not in California. Evidently I could trust it to one in Oregon, for now.
I wouldn’t trust my vote to a postal worker.
Coupled with your “bottom of the food chain” comment, you seem to imply full-time federal employees with full benefits have the morals of say, Kenneth Lay. “Low income” does not equate to “criminal”.
After all of the different bureaucracies that I have dealt with, at the state and federal levels, especially in the past year, I have heard the following too often:
As a result of this repeated bullshit:
On a related note, I will say that there is one agency that I had a problem with in the beginning, but since then, NO problems at all: Section 8!
And, if the post office would spend as much on their staff (and actually getting their work done) as they do on “commemorative”/designer stamps, I am sure that my opinion of them would also increase. Have a feeling that the latter view is held by many.
None of what you’ve written above indicates a failure to move pieces of mail successfully from point A to point B. Especially within one County. Nor does your frustration with the problems you’ve encountered justify your previous comment.
I’m sorry, but, that indicates a problem. And as I said, if the post office would invest as much in actually moving the mail, as they do in commemorative stamps, I still believe that its operations would be a lot smoother.
Going to Howell to mail important letters is getting to be unaffordalbe w/the price of gas these days. (I live on SSI.)
Your excuse rings hollow. The mail works. You have 30 days to mail it in.
Another problem re: vote by mail (4.00 / 2)
And, much of the important info is to another county or another state!
Please see my comment above about postal workers.
HERE
For the most part most people have no idea about the mail process or what postal workers do. It is discouraging to continually hear the derogatory comments about postal workers that are so freely made with so little information. Is the USPS hierarchy a total screw up? Yep, it is. And since they have attempted to remake themselves like a corporation (since 1972) they have only gotten worse. They are so top heavy in management it is a wonder anything gets done. The view of management towards workers is that they couldn’t possibly know how or what to do and they have no worthwhile input ever about anything. It is the closest thing to slavery you will ever see. Do your work, keep your mouth shut, and we don’t trust you at all ever about anything.
I know mail appears magically in your mailbox most every day. But the process is very involved and takes a tremendous amount of work to get it there. Many billions of pieces of mail every year. My small substation in Idaho Falls (60,000 people) recieved 350,000 pieces of mail every day that had to be sorted and delivered, and mail being sent out of our area 275,000 pieces every day. And the management idea is to do this process with at least 2 less employees than it requires in every phase of the operation. The stress level for employees is staggering.
Just know that regardless of what you may think about work ethic at the postal service, the employees that actually do the work are driven like cattle, and regarded as less than drones. Too many chiefs and never enough indians.
I know mail appears magically in your mailbox most every day.
My criticicm of the Post Office is that they should stop pretending to play gift shop by selling all of that commemorative crap and focus their energies on delivering the mail. Seems to me that a cost/benefit analysis of the above expenses v. the trade off in adequately staffing all of their offices/substations/whatever you call them would make a hell of a lot of diffence to their employees and the public.
You are so right. The corporatization of everything in America. The “gift” ideas are the brain child of Washington DC Suits who have never worked a day in the postal service before hired at their high paying plush jobs as the know all, see all corporate heads. And these gifty ideas were fought tooth and nail by companies that already sell such items, saying it is not fair for the quasi-governmental agency to be in competition with them. No one that I worked with at the “worker” level was ever enamoured of the idea.
Concentrating on delivering the mail would be an excellent idea. Having enough people to actually get all of the work done every day is another idea that seems like a no brainer! All my mangers ever heard from their mangers was how many positions can you eleminate? They got bonuses and nice ones ($1500-$5,000 at supervisory level and $50,000 at District head level) for cutting workers. So they made all of the clerk’s jobs a hodgepodge of run here and do this for 10 minutes, run there and do that for 20 minutes, run back and do something else for 5 minutes. . .but keep an eye out for who else might need help. When every time-management study known to man shows this is the most inefficient way to asign work there is. Far less work actually gets done, too much running from here to there.
But this is a job where ALL of the work has to get done every day no matter how busy it is, or how long it takes. Carriers, at least in our offices, were supposed to spend whatever time it takes to sort up their mail for delivery (3 to 4 hours every morning) and then complete their deliveries to from 750-980 stops in 3 hours and then get back in the office and do their end of the day work in the hour or less they have left. Stress fractures and achilies tendon tears are significant injury factors for carriers. Supervisors constantly ripped carriers to shreds for not being able to do what often seems humanly impossible.
The postal management style is very authoritarian and there is no excuse or mitigating circumstance for not getting the job done when “they” think it ought to be done. (yes, there are some exceptions with good supervisors and good management skills, just not enough of them to make a difference) We had a “no talking” rule in our post office, meaning fellow employees were not to converse with each other until the end of the day.
You can see it is a fun and interesting place to work.
Most employees would love to give the best service on earth. We were never allowed to.
Before my traumatic brain injury–managed a lawn and garden center. Have an idea of the expenses of the those damn gift shops (and the mark-up) are. Instead of wasting $ on continuously subsidizing a loss, the Post Office should hire more people. And, if that is done, the stress level of the employees would be way down, service would be better, and as you mentioned that time management study. (I would bet there is a kickback to someone for that unnecessary crap!)
No doubt there are kick backs and plenty of other such nonsense. The USPS buys in such quantities that it has to be an enormous windfall for someone. What the USPS pays for such items in quantity, we could have sold at half the price of retail outlets, but thankfully some agency or some law forbade it, so they are in line with what local retailers sell such items for. Which also means that they make obscene profit on such items.
I lost it totally with the FEDS when a shipment of tool items for our local post office use came in. . .all of the tools made in China and delivered to our Post Office by UPS. . .our competitor. Government office OPM does not use the Postal Service, but UPS. Great, huh. And no US made tools? Geeze!! That was more than 10 or 12 years ago.
Big Business rules Washington and everything it does.
And no US made tools? Geeze!! That was more than 10 or 12 years ago.
Are you absolutely cetain it was that long ago??
OPM=???
OPM = Office of Personnel Management.
Came pretty close to getting a job there fresh out of grad school. They have some psychologists there who develop measures of emotional intelligence, and so on. For a stats geek like me, that can be fun stuff to play around with (I get joy out of studying the psychometric properties of psych tests – yes, I really do need help!).
Timing is everything – they called me the day after I’d already accepted another job offer – and honestly I’d prefer being an obscure professor in the “middle of nowhere” than an obscure researcher in the Belly of the Beast.
Thanks for the info re: OPM!
And your remarks about timing were relevant as well. Like I said upthread, I am getting interested in software and the only reason that I can think of is that I have had so many computer problems in the past, I am interested in seeing what I can do myself, as opposed to taking the computer in to get fixed. I think I am turning into a geek.
Pie was a defining moment obviously, when Colorado Democrats who are women greet you at a book signing with pie to acknowledge that you’re visiting the area of the universe they inhabit this can also be sort of a warning…….sort of a profound pie delivering moment wouldn’t ya say? When you have to make all of your new front pagers women because you have fucked up so badly I would say that is sort of profound also. I have never wanted DailyKos to become any sort of fucked up place ever…..but it makes its own bed and dreams dreams that it is so so so grand but it is only simple and only powered by the people who choose to visit and participate! Because the pond is a democratic blog run using democratic principles it grew during all of this. I suppose if Armando has all the skills of the Great Carnack, this will be another defining moment also and my favorite blog and my favorite place in whole world to hang will sell bigger ads and Booman will never have to get a real job and abandon me! I am not Armando though so I woefully cannot predict any of this! We have all known for a really long time that this is honestly a progressive place to hang and debate is considered a “Good Thing” here. Nobody has to be bigger, or badder, and nobody in the universe has been granted rights to all the correct answers and solutions. Means we have to share and learn how to get along…..AIN’T LIFE A FUCKING BITCH! If a story doesn’t have legs, it doesn’t have legs and nobody has to call anybody names here. Sometimes it appears that a story doesn’t have legs and then we get us some new facts on here and guess what? It grows legs! This is not Jarhead Democrat Central thank God. I have to live with so many Jarheads everyday I prefer to not seek any further input from that particular brand of connecting neurons, I’m full up here!
And I have a low threshold for sarcasm and snark, as it usually adds zilch to the debate. The snark level at DKos has become really high, and I think that hurts the site. I’m glad there seems to be a minimum of that here. Anyone can snark. Not everyone can, however, carry on an intelligent, reasonable discourse. 😉
Swear, was talking about all this and husband pointed me to this vid. Here’s Johnny/Armando Teaching DLC Talking Points about Theft in Ohio!
There will be no room at the table for those who fought against voting rights.
Those who were in power and voted against the Civil Rights Act in 1964 may have found it easier in the short term to “get along” on Capitol Hill and vote against the Civil Rights Act. Long term, an on-the-record vote against the Civil Rights Act was a career-ender. Kos/Armando ended their long-term career prospects in the Democratic Party by their terrible treatment of voting rights activists. Kos/Armando will be as radioactive in the years to come as “Democrats” like Lester Maddox and George Wallace became.
This whole thing is like the global warming “debate.”
There are some people who seem to think that global warming is a bunch of hooey, that we don’t know what causes it, et cetera, et bleeping cetera. Fine. They have a right to their opinion, I suppose, even when it intersects at right angles with reality.
But they don’t seem to have a good answer for the question: Even if we don’t know what causes it, what harm is there in guarding against it? At worst there will be a few extra people to laugh at for screaming that the sky is falling, and some folks will have made a great deal of money who might otherwise not have. But isn’t the risk of not proceeding with global warming mitigation greater than the risk of proceeding?
Similarly, even if you happen to believe with all your heart, in contravention of the apparent facts in evidence, that there was no voter fraud in Ohio, what is the harm in protecting the single thing that defines our democracy? Unless, of course, you stand to benefit from the subversion of the process. At worst you’ll have gone overboard in protecting the fundamental defining characteristic of our country. At best, you will have made sure that the will of the people has not been thwarted by a cabal of thieves and thugs. Perhaps you’ll even have done something to take our country back from the cabal.
Oh, and if the election fraud coverage brings a few more people to BT, I have only one thing to say. Welcome.
fortitude. “Some” obviously don’t have it.
Wow, and don’t I know it. I sent a scathing rant off to Farhad Manjoo last night. But smack in the middle of it, I got something totally wrong. I had sent the mail (you can read it here with a subject line of “Farhad, you ignorant slut.” I had to send a retraction titled, “Farhad, I’m an ignorant slut too.” Painful, but the price of integrity is high.
right out of your shorts. “Sorry” just wilts one for the next 24 hours! IT GETS EASIER THOUGH IF YOU PRACTICE A LITTLE!
Armando’s got his hip designer orange blinders on and he’s not going to part with them. I have a feeling that even if people like Blackwell were being frogmarched for vote fraud, Armando would still have a hard time accepting it. So what?
Steven, if you get dumped from DKos, you won’t be the first or the last. Their loss. Armando’s post positively drips with threats and sarcasm and that’s the side of him that really turns my stomach. It doesn’t sound as if he even bothered to read RFK’s entire article. He reminds me of a kid who screams and blocks his ears when confronted with things he doesn’t want to hear.
As for the 2004 election, I’m with you… and with RFK Jr. Keep writing about it, we’ll keep reading it and spreading the word.
Funny – I said the same thing to Manjoo re his article – re closing his ears to what he doesn’t want to hear.
I’m guessing that the officially sanctioned dKos position is still against election reforms, no?
Why do I suspect they’re going to be shocked at how poorly dems do in the 2006 elections?
Oh they’ll say they’re all about election reforms. But they won’t let you talk about WHY you need election reforms, because that’s a conspiracy theory, yada yada.
As far as I can tell from my longtime dKos involvement, the reforms generally discussed mainly involve finance.
Which is only a small part of the problem.
Money or the lack thereof does not define everything! I know that Kos thinks so but that’s his own headtrip. Many times the rich have lost power to the people. It doesn’t take money to beat money….it only takes truth! DailyKos gets sadder by the day as blogs blaze new trails. Open mindedness, truth, integrity…..all the things that anybody who has really been a true leader of people has placed first on the list of must haves and must continue to cultivate!
If the site basically exists in order to elect Democrats to office (as I believe it does) via engagement in the electoral process, what good is it to honor the proposition that the process is thoroughly broken?
If you weren’t at the site as the ’04 election results played out, Shalimar, let me tell you: it was a real freakout. The community, on the whole, was so thoroughly convinced that ‘Bush was toast’ (to quote a prominent contributor) that the flipped outcome really sent folks over the edge. The howling & moaning were unbelievable. Many of us were online all night as the returns came in, helping keep people’s minds together. It was like a massive crisis intervention.
Part of the reason why Bush’s ‘win’ was such a deep shock to so many, I think, was that the irregularities, as they appeared, had to be snuck under the wire & were summarily left there. Approach the possibility of Bush’s ‘win’ beforehand & you’d barely get a whisper of response, while everyone had flocked to the ‘Bush is toast’ opinion & showered it with grateful love.
That the community on the whole had been so poorly prepared for the results of criminal engagement was quite sad, especially as there were so many ways to see it coming.
So as to begin to FIX it, of course. You won’t fix what you don’t believe is broken.
That’s right — you’ll just continue throwing your time & money at it in hopes that it works, just as many threw their money at Kerry in hopes that every vote would be counted.
The result? Kerry got the money.
That the community on the whole had been so poorly prepared for the results of criminal engagement was quite sad, especially as there were so many ways to see it coming.
This result over there would have happened criminal influence or not. I am sure the “Kicking Ass” site went through the motions anyway of such shock after the 2004 election as well. You see, whenever anyone tried to point out how ineffective John Kerry’s wishy-washy style was playing out there in the heartland, they would be banned from the site. The only poeple thus left there were in a cheerleading fairyland that could not handle any reality when it finally showed up.
I predict that in part is what happened at KOS, and furthermore, I think KOS now is in even a worse state to accept any difficulties as they are now totally cultivating pure group-thing, no reality welcomed! Censorship has its downside, and it relates to a dulled sense of reality!
Let me take this one step further to illustrate how I think people at this site are better prepared to deal with long term reality than over at KOS. The current KOS mentality on the women’s reproductive freedom issue is to overlook it because the country is perceived so conservative that we can never win if we stick to a principle of backing women’s freedoms to control their own bodies. Now this might get them a few more votes this next time around, but in the long run, it will badly hurt the party because when the women wake up after Roe is overturned to their second class status, they will not be able to purely blame the Repubs anymore. I think we progressives can see the longer term benefit of clearly defining what we stand for and sticking to it. When these women do finally wake-up, a long-term progressive commitment will be reward as a principled outpost against intolerance!
Yep — groupthink is the primary problem.
Steven I came in late on reading this, but I’ve always thought to myself, what kind of site can call itself democratic, progressive or even informed if it quells speech or different opinions. There’s always more than one way to look at things and definitely more than one opinion on anything discussed.
To shut down any communication that is not within your talking points just reminds me of the old soviet block nations that will have no other views except their own. Which in turn makes me wonder with all the shouting about how the news is handled by the right, how is this any different?
Of course I could be wrong, but I have yet to see it or have the difference explained.
what Armando says, to be nice he does like the spotlight.. look at me I’m Armando, Look at me. He was over at MLW the day after MSC write-up in the Wash.Post.
Once again who cares?
He was over at MLW the day after MSC write-up in the Wash.Post.
Armando’s GBCW posted on MLW on 2/08/06
He had a damn good pity party going! (With some exceptions.)
Hey the spotlight shines, “Look at Me” is there..still trying to be nice…
http://www.soapblox.net/myleftwing/showDiary.do?diaryId=7532
Better there than here!
When your “style of debate” is to frequently tell everyone who disagrees with you that they are too stupid and ignorant to have a real debate with, it shouldn’t be surprising that most people don’t want you around.
Am curious about the number of people who have moved from blog to blog because they don’t want to be around him.
I don’t know. I personally didn’t leave dKos because of Armando, though it was him I was arguing with. I left because the brownshirts troll-rated every comment I made in the thread and I saw no reason why those that were completely unrelated to the disagreement should be disappeared too. It’s a little silly but that was my breaking point, they handed out zeros to everything I wrote just because I was the writer. The real disgusting thing is that I was arguing that spreading possibly false gossip about Jean Schmidt right before the special election last August made us just as bad as republicans (the winning-is-all-that-matters strategy Armando was pushing), and certainly wasn’t defending Schmidt as a person.
I wouldn’t leave here if Armando started posting on the front page, but I have no intention of ever replying to anything he writes again. I am capable of co-existing as long as I don’t engage. Like it or not, liberals tend to be alot more sensitive than average. Most of the time this is a good thing.
I left dkos because it was just too damn big with too many bullies. Also, I did not at all agree w/the censorship (IMO) that was going on.
I read that one that americanforliberty linked to (and the comments). That was enough for me to realize that, if he does post here, I won’t even waste my time reading anything he writes.
I’m not sure dKos is as big as it seems to be, looking at the big posts it doesn’t seem like there are as many comments as for example Atrios gets for just about everything he posts. The bullies, on the other hand, are obvious and ever-present. This place is alot better, the only drawback is that sometimes it’s hard to tell if anyone has read a diary or comment. Page views would be a nice stat to put on the page in addition to feedback if it was possible.
Not going to happen. They’d quickly demonstrate that kos’ reader stats are so much hot air, and that most readers just skim the front page, which would kill his ad revenue.
None of the last 24 front-page posts at Daily Kos have as many comments as this diary, which I think suggests that site traffic isn’t what it used to be before all of the defections.
Silly question here:
If “The Rolling Stone article is complete horseshit” and “This is a rehash of all of the worst theories,” then why does Armando worry that “He has destroyed the issue of voting reform forever with this”?
EIther there is a problem needing voting reform, or all the accusations are false. How can he claim that there is no problem, and then lament that no voting reform will occur.
That’s 4 year old reasoning.
If the election in Ohio was so ordinary, suppression of the vote in Democratic strongholds was not intentional and vote rigging did not happen, then Blackwell and the Republicans would have welcomed a recount to prove all was square with the law. A honest recount was prevented. It is the Republicans who have to prove the count had integrity and I will forever believe that Bush stole the election.
I didn’t state anything as controversial as RFK, Jr. did. I said there were so many questions that there needed to be a full FBI/Justice Dept. investigation into Election Day ’04 and electronic voting machine technology. I asked Kos how he could refuse to even support a Federal investigation, and he banned me.
I had been pretty involved in online activism before that incident, but I mostly gave up. Tried sticking a toe back in the water here and there, but my attitude was so defensive because of the way I was treated by Kos, Armando, DHinMI (possibly the most rude and offensive progressive on the net… DHinMI makes Maryscott O’Connor seem like Sister Mary Rose McGeady). When I did stick my nose in here or there, I never stuck around long. I’m awful bitter about the ugly, offensive manner in which that all went down. I’m disabled. I internalized all that ugliness, and I ended up really ill for a time from that mess, and I can’t do that to myself again.
The voting rights issue is too important. If Kos and Kos’ lieutenants are going to continue to try to marginalize voting rights activists, then we need to remove Daily Kos from it’s position of primary importance in online progresive activism. Kos is doing to the voting rights issue what Lieberman did to to those who were against the Iraq War.
We need to move progressive net traffic to a website in which someone is not fighting against us as often as Kos is.
would have been banned for this! Okay, so Kos was the first guy to come up with the blogging for the Democrats thing. All of us starving Democrats showed up at his site and began having a meeting of the minds and energies and then some people were abused by Kos just because Kos was THE FIRST ONE in all of this and therefore could. I’m so sorry that you have experienced this. Please know that I personally treasure the personal energy of others. At the end of every single day on planet earth it is all that any of us really have!
Every time there is a major new piece of evidence that comes forward that supports the case being built to prove that voter fraud happened in ’04, Kos goes on a banning spree at DKos.
That’s why there are so many references to the bannings of “fraudsters.” Kos banning a new pile of voting right activists is a regular occurance at DKos.
I’ve shared an opinion similar to yours, afs, in that I believe it’s time to render dKos irrelevant, in terms of its impact.
I’m one of those who continually sent folks over to Kos pre-Scoop because it seemed a worthy community, with a rather big tent in terms of informed political outlook & world view. (The dialogue at the time, as well, was remarkably civil & generally involved words with than one syllable.)
I continued to do so as the Dem primary race heated up. However, when one eventually realizes that one’s contributions are no longer needed — as a concerned voter, as a feminist & as an individual who came into maturity before the reign of Bush the Elder — I will no longer link to the site & I visit it rarely. If my contributions are no longer needed, then they’re no longer needed.
It’s important that we don’t internalize manifestations of ignorance, regardless of the source; we just note it & move forward (or away).
I think it’s worthwhile to read the diaries over there, because there are some very good things being written. Not all of them, of course; you could go blind and crazy.
Let me recommend a site called Netvibes that a friend of mine turned me on to. Among other things, it lets you aggregate RSS feeds of sites so you can see the headlines of several sites all at once. I currently have a News page with feeds from Google News, the BBC, Reuters and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. My “Politics” page contains headlines from Bootrib, the Bootrib diaries, Huffington Post, Daily Kos, My Left Wing, Orcinus, Raw Story, Firedoglake, Crooks & Liars and Russ Feingold’s Presidential blog. I may someday add more. This way I can see at a glance what stories are hot and which ones I might want to follow up on.
Thanks for the recommendation, Omir.
I have no problem with Kos having A blog, and keeping that blog focused on whatever Kos wants to focus it on. I have a problem with Daily Kos being THE blog.
Daily Kos has become the progressive “website of record.” Kos has demonstrated he doesn’t have the type of temperament to be able to handle the role of being the guardian/gatekeeper of the progresive online community.
I’m figuring dKos is THE blog strictly on the basis of site stats. Ergo, I now avoid contributing to that. 3+ years is quite enough.
Scoop software has contibuted much to DKos becoming the primary gathering point of the progressive net community. Scoop is lightyears better than any other software out there for managing a big net community.
Kos knows how to design good software, no doubt about it. Unfortunately, Kos’ people skills are nowhere close to the level of his software design skills.
FWIW Rusty from Kuro5hin designed Scoop. The new Ajax features Peeder implemented for Kos.
By any chance do you know who designed the new Ajax features Peeder? (Just curious, as I am teaching myself about software.)
Peeder I think designed them himself, but I’m not sure. he may have a diary where he talks about them over on dkos.
also, for some info on ajax and web 2.0 you can check out:
http://codinginparadise.org/projects/tutorials/
http://www.telerik.com/default.aspx?pageid=2692
It really suprises me how much I am getting interested in software–I never thought that would happen!
Scoop was released under the GNU General Public License
AJAX was designed using ASP.NET. ASP.NET is Microsoft software using standard Microsoft (paid, closed-source) licensing.
How is anyone allowed to use software licensed like Scoop (released under a GNU license) with closed source software like ASP.NET?
no clue.
alls I know is that the site is built on scoop and that the new features they integrated are ajax (maybe they’re ajax-esque but OS?).
ASP.NET is the crap that is used on the Medicare.gov website!
AJAX is a concept that has multiple implementations. See the wiki page for the history.
I think in the last 12 moinths or so that you are exactly right with this comment. Censoring obvious legitimate commend is not a progressive value! Keeping the tone civil is an overall positive value, but that is NOT what is going on over there now!
DHinMI makes Maryscott O’Connor seem like Sister Mary Rose McGeady).
As I read this thread I’m reflecting on the fact that the nice thing about Markos and Armando is that they’re mammals.
My feeling is that they continue to deny there was fraud because if they admitted it they’d have to deal with it. I live in Ohio, and I know there was fraud. It’s not theory, it’s fact. A “red alert” lockdown in Lebanon, Ohio? There’s nothing there but the Golden Lamb (very old inn) and lots of antique stores. Let’s just say it’s definitely not a target-rich environment for a terrorist attack.
What is the point of trying to shut down these discussions about voter fraud? The only thing I can figure is that the people shutting down these topics are getting something in return. What you may ask?
Access to the Democratic elite?
Publishing deals?
Face time on the idiot box?
Name recognition?
Political power?
In the meantime, those of us who live in reality need to get to our city clerks’ offices and sign up to work the polls during elections.
In Ghandi’s diary of just a few days ago, BooMan instructed me not to say negative things about people from DKos.
Therefore, I’m not going to express all of my opinions about Armando. But I have a lot of them!
Steven D, you are, of course, absolutely write about all of this. And Armando, as usual, is wrong.
To be clear, I did not say that.
The policy is not to write diaries that are critical of Daily Kos front-pagers unless you are willing to also cross-post them over at Daily Kos. The reason for the policy is because we had a rash of diaries that made personal attacks against front-pagers at Daily Kos and it was turning this site into an anti-Daily Kos site. Rather than ban criticism, I merely made it a condition that personal criticism be cross-posted.
It worked very well. Very few people are as willing to talk shit about Kos’s front-pagers over there. So, the diaries dried up over here without me having to censor anything.
I never said people couldn’t be critical in comments.
Ghandi’s diary was a violation of the rules because he did not (because he could not) cross-post it. I let that slide. Partly I let it slide because I didn’t notice the diary until it had a lot of comments in it. Partly, it was out of respect for Ghandi and for Chris Floyd.
It’s difficult to always apply the rules equally. In that case, I made the decision to allow it.
Does that mean nobody that has been banned at DKos can be critical of DKos in a diary here?
I believe that some of that has occurred in the past when the CaCa has a hit the fan. Surprisingly, it seems that many people here are willing to help cross post because we have a few people here who really believe that freedom of speech thing super seriously!
I misunderstood, I guess. I thought you were objecting to a comment I made about Plutonium Page in Ghandi’s diary thread, where I was responding to someone else’s initial mention of her.
I’ve never written a diary going after a DKos person, frontpager or not. And I certainly won’t ever do that here–since I’ve been banned from DKos because some people like Armando didn’t like my views on one issue.
***
In particular, my comment was this: “That comment should not have been troll rated. It’s Plutonium Page, the uber knowitall, who should be troll rated, if anybody.
Back when I was on DK, I had a diary about the risk of nuclear strikes on the U.S., a topic I continue to be concerned about. She made a comment, pompously stating that my concerns were ignorant, because you need plutonium for an A-bomb (which is hard to get), not uranium. This is from someone with “Plutonium” in her name who pretends to be a scientist. I corrected her, pointing out the the Hiroshima bomb was a uranium bomb and it’s standard to make A-bombs from enriched uranium. I immediately got jumped and beat up real good by legions of her fanboys. She’s one of the main reasons I’m glad to be gone from that site.
thereisnospoon and others were clearly wrong to troll rate this comment, in my opinion. “
And your response was: “As fascinating as all this is, do we really need to have an extended rehashing of shit that happened at Daily Kos over here?
Do we need a ratings war here, so we don’t have to discuss ratings wars from other sites?
Everyone knows, or should know, that I am not a big fan of bringing orange unpleasanantness over here.
It’s out of respect to Ghandi that I didn’t ask him to erase this diary, since it is technically against the rules to post a diary attacking Kos’s site unless you cross-post it there. And, in this case, I know that is an impossibility.
But it is still against the rules for a reason. I don’t want us to become an anti-Kos site, or the place every banished Kossack comes to stir up shit.”
*****
Re-reading that, I think you DID express opposition to rehashing of shit that happened over there, which is just what this entire front page post is about. You said you don’t want to bring orange unpleasantness over here. Thus, I took this to mean that you were instructing me (or, one might say, nouging everybody) not to rehash DKos shit generally.
I don’t understand how my comment there violates the standards, but this entire Armando thread does not. But that’s okay. I understand it’s a delicate area.
I’m not trying to be argumentative, by the way, just trying to understand.
From what you’ve just said, I guess I’m actually free to dump on Armando in this thread. But since that has already been done quite well, I’ll refrain.
Well, we’re talking about 3 different things here.
There’s ghandi’s dairy, which was against the rules, but I made an allowance for it. I can accept criticism for allowing it, since it is not a consistent application of the rules. But, I am happy to attempt to justify my reasoning.
Then there was the thread, which was not against any rules, but which seemed to be getting to a ridiculous point when it started examining the ratings wars from Daily Kos. I merely expressed my opinion that it was ridiculous and letting people know I found it annoying. It was not against the rules.
And then there is Steven’s diary, here. I don’t tell other front-pagers what to write or not to write. Steven could cross-post this, but I think that would just inflame what is already a tense situation. If he wants to, that’s his decision.
Just for clarity: there are things that make me uncomfortable and that are not against the rules. I am friends with some of the DKos front-pagers and former front-pagers. I am friends with Chris Bowers and Duncan Black. When I see them criticized on a personal level, especially when that criticism is what I consider inaccurate or hurtful, them I do not like it.
Their ideas are another matter, and I wrote a diary yesterday that disgreed with Chris Bowers about the RFK story’s impact.
I consider Armando a friend. But he makes the choice to treat people with contempt, and I don’t complain when it gets it back in return. To be honest, he doesn’t shy away from criticism. He can take it. He doesn’t need me to protect him, and I won’t when I think the criticism is fair.
We often exchange emails that could be called a frank and direct exchange of views. And then we kiss and make-up.
In this case, he’s acting like an ass.
Thanks. That’s clear.
at KOS if you have been banned over there??
you can’t.
Armando is the Bill O’Reilly of the liberal blogosphere. Despite his ill manners, despite his “this is the way it is, so shut up” attitude, there are still those who think he has something to say.
To all those who can defend someone like Armando, all I have to say is this: you will be nothing but a hypocrite if you defend Armando then criticize those who listen and enjoy Rush Limbaugh and that brand of commentary.
Armando is simply a liberal fascist, ready to do the bidding of his masters, preventing discourse considered forbidden, and using nothing but expletives to make his point.
Armando is but one of the reasons I think DailyKos is a cancer to the progressive movement. Markos Moulitsas is the other. To them, power is the only goal; issues and agendas only get in the way. Sadly, I see that this thinking is becoming mainstream in the world of liberal blogs. It is unnecessarily causing a huge divide among those who want real change and those who only want to change the names in power.
A little less well known, but significantly more offensive in the outrage per word ratio.
if I keep throwing funny shit into the middle of this discussion. I can’t help it though. When things in life get a little hairy and a little freaky WE MUST TAKE LAUGHTER BREAKS! This keeps everybody sane and away from the kitchen butcher knife.
I think this is a good comment from “splash” over at Digby’s place:
Saying the election was stolen is different from saying there are serious questions about it, and there’s no reason why each contention cannot exist side by side. Even if RFK didn’t prove his case as convincingly as he claims to have, that doesn’t mean the case is closed. I havent heard anyone say that the Salon article has proven that the election was demonstrably held fairly. After all, where is the burden of proof, especially given all the demonstrated irregularities?
Which may not be appreciated, particularly from a semi-lurking newbie like myself…
I understand that Armando is not liked here. Many people, myself included, do like him. Does that make me a member of “his gang of thugs”? Maybe so.
But I’d like people here to perhaps consider this…he called “horseshit” based on what he believes, and because of that, past personality conflicts and a sometimes abrasive posting style, he’s a “facist,” and is “no better than a Republican”? That people who defend him are hypocrites? And that his opinion isn’t welcome? Is anybody seeing the disconnect here?
The bottom line is, your diary was #1 there, another on RFK’s article was #1 for more than a day. There have been numerous diaries on the subject in recent days. Yet they are being accused of suppressing your voice, etc. You say in that diary:
Your tip jar said, “How dare I?” There were any number of comments that questioned the motives and loyalty of those who disagreed. People were called cowards for not being on the same page. Someone saying “horseshit” back isn’t unreasonaable, especially since they’ve never hid their feelings on the subject.
And for the record. I’ve always believed that voter suppression, vote manipulation and outright fraud decided the 2004 Presidential election.
I doubt there would be a diary here if Armando had JUST said “Horshit.” Armando said “Horshit”, stated he supported previous purges of voting rights activists from DKos, and threatened a new purge.
BIG difference.
Having just read his comments in the diary, here is the only one where the subject comes up. He says:
First, that he supports kos’ position on this is certainly no secret. But this isn’t a threat…it’s a comment saying that a diary calling out kos and Armando on the subject will no doubt generate (“I’d imagine”) a new rash of the kind of diaries that are banned…as I described it in a post at DK:
Of course Armando threaten Steven with banning for THIS thread…
Armando: “Suffice it to say that THIS thread is the WORST INDICTMENT of the fraudsters and reconfirms that Markos was right to ban the fraudsters.” (caps emphasis mine)
Armando said THIS thread was as bad as anything that had ever been posted in the past. That means he’s saying it should be banned.
BarbinMD, please stop trying to play semantics with us as if we were a bunch of net newbies. Everyone at DKos and here at BT knows Armando is threatening Steven with a ban for THIS thread.
Playing semantics? No. But it’s rather funny…I should stop. You ask about my “twisted logic.” I’m trying to play you. It’s almost like I have a different view of something and you want to suppress my opinion. Ironic, eh?
I proved Armando did threaten to ban Steven with banning for this thread with Armando’s own words . I proved Armando’s threat was NOT to ban other “high weirdness” diaries that may follow as you suggested.
Your response, BarbinMD? Change the subject from Armando threatening to ban Steven D to an attack of me as quickly as possible.
That was straight out of the Rove playbook. Never attempt to defend where you are know you can be proven wrong on substance. Change the subject as quickly as possible and attack the messenger.
Translation: BarbinMD knew Armando’s threat to ban StevenD couldn’t be defended.
No, you didn’t prove anything. You gave your opinion on what Armando said, I gave mine.
And I changed the subject and attacked you? You’ve accused me of twisted logic, playing semantic games and now I’m using the Rove playbook? What a bitch I am for attacking you so.
I proved with Armando’s own words he threatened to ban Steven for this thread. Since I posted that, all you have responded with is various personal attacks on me.
You have a choice BarbinMD. Defend Armando threat of a ban of Steven for posting this thread, or show by your continued refusal to address the issue that Armando threatening Steven with banning for posting this thread cannot be defended.
You made this exact same post elsewhere in the thread, which I’ve responded to.
BarbinMD quotes from Armando’s comment:
I imagine he will have to do it again.
Definition of threat:
Encarta® World English Dictionary © 1999
So Armando is giving us “a sign that something undesirable is going to happen” and that is — by definition — a threat. I just don’t think you can quibble with that, especially in the context of scores in not hundreds of similiar threats that have been made by Armando whenever he has wanted to suppress ideas that he disagrees with.
Barb
I like what Armando writes most of the time, and on many issues we are in complete agreement. But I don’t like threats, implied or otherwise.
Now he can call Kennedy’s article horseshit if he likes, and I said as much in my response to him, but I also tried to point out where I believed it was dead on correct based on my own personal experience.
I also believe, as I said, that trying to limit discussion of a topic because some perceive it to be risky, or that it threatens their own reputation because it may be viewed by some as a “conspiracy theory” does the progressive movement no favors. We regularly condemn the media and Democrats for timidity and self censorship in the face of conservative criticism, or even the fear of such criticism. I contend that censorship (or whatever you choose to call this) of this topic at Daily Kos and elsewhere fits within the exact same mold. How can we have an honest and informed discussion in progressive circles if certain topics are deemed off limits, and how can me obtain electoral reform (something Armando says he supports) unless the case can be made as to why such reform is necessary?
My point is, you aren’t being censored. Discussions on the RFK article aren’t being suppressed. Back in the height of the post-election diaries, people like Georgia10 were writing frequent, well-received diaries on the subject. And again, the threat (or implied threat) isn’t for diaries like yours, as its status at #1 shows…so your voice is being heard, isn’t it? Doesn’t it follow that Armando’s (or anyone else) voice should be heard too?
Now I’m sure some will say that he attacked, didn’t want to discuss, threatened…well consider these remarks from that diary:
Those comments are quite a bit worse than calling “horseshit” in my opinion. What do you think your response might be if someone suggested you were in league with unnamed groups to undermine the Democratic Party? Or the false accusations of “silencing any voice”?
Barb if you don’t consider his comments about banning people a threat, and a form of censorship through intimidation, then we will just have to agree to disagree.
Well, I said more than that, but I agree, we disagree. And I addressed that “threat” in a post above.
Barb-
Steven specifically called out Markos and Armando in his diary. Whatever the merits of what Steven said, it wasn’t a whole lot different that the comments that Armando was responding to. In other words, it’s hard to see how a banning that addressed some of the commenters in the thread wouldn’t also, of necessity, include Steven.
Moreover, Armando seems to be saying that RFK Jr. is an unreliable source, in the mold of Wayne Madesen, Capitol Hill Blue, and Jason Leopold (the newly banned sources at Daily Kos). Therefore, anyone that doesn’t dismiss the substance of the Rolling Stone article is subject to banning. That would included a clear majority of the Kossack community, and it constitutes a major escalation in the fraud wars.
By advocating a purge under such vague terms, he is a making a major error. It would be extemely harmful to the Daily Kos community if any such thing is carried out. Even the suggestion is harmful…and definitely a threat that stifles the debate over Ohio.
Isn’t it pretty obvious that was Armando’s goal? They have gone to great effort to avoid a debate, they think it makes us look like loons.
On that note, if Armando claims to support election reform, why threaten Steven when citing a very well written/documented article that demonstrates the need for election reform?
This is starting to make no damn sense!
I read everything Armando wrote in Steven’s dKos thread. He claimed 3 separate times that Kennedy’s piece is full of lies, so it’s pretty clear he doesn’t feel that it was well-written and documented. He didn’t provide any examples beyond saying that the exit poll arguments were bullshit, but he did say he would write more about this later so I assume he will be writing the dKos front page counter-fraud post.
Armando claims conspiracy theories hurt chances of legitimate reform. I completely disagree, but how do you argue with blind faith unsuppported by any evidence? Beyond that, his idea of election reform involves evening out the money so democrats can compete on an even playing field, not rooting out the systematic fraud that he doesn’t believe exists.
I’m looking forward to his post. I’m not a statistician so I don’t know how to judge the exit poll debate, but I am interested in reading how you can possibly refute the rest of the article. It is clear just from the Republicans who were caught that there was a massive national effort to suppress turnout and invalidate registrations and votes in minority areas and I want to see Armando pretend that it didn’t happen.
Salon has a piece by Farhad Manjoo that covers most of the usual arguments against what’s claimed to be wrong w/ the version of events covered in RS. He writes something like it everytime this issue heats up.
IIRC, a dispute over an article about the ’04 vote is the reason Jason Leopold no longer writes for Salon.
Thanks. I wish I could read it, but where it says “Click on the sponsor logo to read this article” on Salon’s site, I no longer can see a sponsor logo on my computer to click. I have emailed Salon about this in the last few weeks but they haven’t answered.
It can be pretty buggy over there sometimes. He hits the usual arguments.
There is a diary at daily Kos refuting his refutation, for what it’s worth.
Part of me is curious as to what it would really say, but another part of me knows that it will be just more of the same…I doubt if I will even waste my time.
True, it probably won’t cover any new ground. What I want to see explained by naysayers is the county faking a terrorist threat so no one could watch the vote count. That pre-planned behavior is so bizarre it should have received national media attention for weeks, and I can’t of any non-nefarious reason to do something like that.
Neither can I, but, he will dream up something.
Again, I think you’re misreading that one comment he made on the subject, which I’ve discussed elsewhere in this thread.
What he said about RFK is that he lost all respect for him for relying on what he considers debunked information. IOW, his opinion. Where is the suppression of discussing RFK’s article? Where was the censorship against Georgia10, Renee, Conyers, etc. when they wrote about election fraud? People who have offered sourced information and analysis haven’t been shut down.
The escalation in the fraud wars seems to come from StevenD’s original diary, this one and a couple of others…all while the RFK diary was on the rec list…complaining that they aren’t allowed to discuss election fraud.
As I suggested earlier, perhaps Armando’s angry response was a result of the diary itself calling him out (as you yourself said) and some of the ugly accusations made about him, kos and the site. I’m sorry to see that those are being dismissed as unimportant…I think they added to the situation, as does this diary.
But I’m not going to keep this going. Clearly I have a different viewpoint on this than many here and as has been made clear, this viewpoint isn’t particularly welcome. As I said in another post, ironic, eh?
your view is welcomed by me.
You seem to be saying that it is okay to overreact, which I would tend to agree with…provided you issue a mea culpa after the fact.
Your other argument doesn’t work for me. Threatening to ban content doesn’t become meaningless just because the content has not yet been banned. Saying an issue has been discussed in the past doesn’t challenge the wisdom of banning it in the future.
If RFK’s article, and the vast majority of the facts within it, are suddenly verboten, then we’re headed for a train-wreck.
As I’ve said, I don’t think it was a threat. He said that judging from the thread (not the diary), he imagined there would be bannings in the future. And judging from the comments basically calling kos and Armando GOP operatives who are suppressing any and all discussion of election fraud, I’d imagine that he’s probably right. This whole thing will lead to a whole new slew of fraud diaries…and that will inevitably include a repeat of the speculative claims, video proof, Bev Harris nails it, diaries. But banning diaries that claim fact without proof is not banning content. And speculating about the future isn’t a threat.
And you seem to be a minority of one given that I’ve now been accused of using Rovian tactics, along with my “twisted logic” and semantic games, with those comments being uprated…I’d say that differing viewpoints aren’t welcome. I’m using Rove’s playbook? Sheesh!
Armando did say “he imagined” there would be bannings.
Armando used the term “worst indictment” in regards to
the thread.
Wee bit of a difference in the level of accusation present in Armando’s actual quote, and the language in your re-wording of Armando’s quote there, don’t you think, BarbinMD?
Should have been “Armando did not say” at the start of the body.
As you are well aware, I’ve provided the exact quote of Armando’s alleged threat more than once.
You provided very “creative” re-imagining of Armando’s wording that clearly wasn’t close to the actual words Armando chose to use.
I have provided the exact quote more than once, as you are well aware.
… have questions.
I have addressed, several times, why I don’t think Armando’s post was a threat. But again, I read it as: based on the comments in the thread of that diary, the kind of diaries that led to bannings in the past (claiming speculation as fact, poorly sourced), would no doubt be cropping up again, leading to further bannings. That’s not a threat, it’s a prediction.
So what you are saying is it’s fine for Armando to say RFK, Jr. article was shameful, but to even mildly suggest that that any actions of Kos, Armando, DHinMI. could have possibly been detrimental in some way to the Democratic Party is so unreasonable that the author is deserving of being silenced?
Sounds like Kos, Armando, DHinMI are awful thin skinned for people with potty mouths like theirs. Sounds like they have an expectation of being “owed” a freedom of the form of criticism they dish out on such a regular basis.
Don’t put words in my mouth, respond to them and act as if you are responding to what I actually said.
Of course Armando threaten Steven with banning for THIS thread…
Armando: “Suffice it to say that THIS thread is the WORST INDICTMENT of the fraudsters and reconfirms that Markos was right to ban the fraudsters.” (caps emphasis mine)
Armando said THIS thread was as bad as anything that had ever been posted in the past. That means he’s saying it should be banned.
It would be extemely harmful to the Daily Kos community if any such thing is carried out.
I don’t believe that the folks in charge have much interest in ‘community’ (although, being, as always, more concerned with appearance over substance, they are concerned with maintaining the image of ‘community’.) Right now they’re gearing up for the JLieber “shut your fucking pie hole” stage of the election cycle.
It’s a business, first and foremost, and a business more concerned with furthering the careers of people like Markos and DHinMI than developing ‘community’. They don’t want a ‘community’, they want what petey called ‘an army of dittoheads’.
There is censorship and outright banning goin on there now. Banning has happened to quite a few lately, and it is hard for you to say that ain’t happening. As for censoring, any malicious outcome to a poster, such as being pushed around by a group of related group of thugs or losing your TU status base on a legitimate comment has the effect of stopping legitimate thought and fostering group think.
I am very aware of this sort of behavior, and I have to tell you that in the last 12 months, free speech and expressions of progressive ideas is not being fostered at KOS. I believe the site will begin to lose creditbility soon if it has not already!
What kind of twisted logic did you apply to determine that being threated to be banned from DKos is not censorship?
The issue is not Armando’s profane interjection. The issue is Armando threatened people who discussed the issue of voting rights with banning from DKos.
The issue for me is even funnier. If they do do a mass purging, urging the exiled to come here, then I will get pissed off emails about how this site is so anti-Kos. As though it isn’t anti-Kos because they banned people or pissed them off and encouraged them to come here.
Everyone knows I’ve tried to allow exiles to vent while trying to prevent this site from becoming identified as the anti-Kos site. Now, he threatens to give me a huge new group of angry and alienated exiles, and no doubt will blame me if they dwell on their feelings about the matter.
It’s no wonder we fight like latin lovers. But, it doesn’t sit well with me.
You might consider the confrontational nature of the diary itself, the comments suggesting that kos and Armando are secretly working to undermine the Party, that they aren’t allowed to discuss voter fraud…while discussing voter fraud…might have led to that angry remark about the new influx. Of course, following up that diary with a frontpage story here about Armando’s reaction probably isn’t helping to prevent an “anti-Kos” image either.
So what you are saying is it’s fine for Armando to say RFK, Jr. article was shameful, but to even mildly suggest that that any actions of Kos, Armando, DHinMI. could have possibly been detrimental in some way to the Democratic Party is so unreasonable that the author is deserving of being silenced?
Sounds like Kos, Armando, DHinMI are awful thin skinned for people with potty mouths like theirs. Sounds like they have an expectation of being “owed” a freedom of the form of criticism they dish out on such a regular basis.
No, that’s what you are saying. Don’t put words in my mouth and then respond to it as if you are answering me.
I proved with Armando’s own words he threatened to ban Steven for this thread. Since I posted that, all you have responded with is various personal attacks on me.
You have a choice BarbinMD. Defend Armando threat of a ban of Steven for posting this thread, or show by your continued refusal to address the issue that Armando threatening Steven with banning for posting this thread cannot be defended.
I think you are making this unnecessarily binary.
The thread and the diary are two different things. One Steven is responsible for, the other he is not responsibile for. Moreover ‘the thread’ is made up of dozens of individual comments, and cannot be considered as one thing. ‘This thread’ does not apply to each an every comment within it.
You say:
Armando says:
This is perceived to mean, Armando threatened to ban StevenD and anyone else who tries to discuss election fraud (content) in the future. I disagree completely. How I read it?
After reading the threads that include comments about DK suppression of any and all discussion about election fraud (factually incorrect) and accusations that he and kos are secretly working against the Democratic Party (ugly and baseless), Armando says that he imagines there will be a re-emergence of the kind of fraud diaries that are banned…speculation offered as fact. And if that happens? Then yes, they would be banned. That’s not a threat, it’s speculation about future events.
Yes, I’m speculating about Armando’s response, which is exactly what those who consider it a threat are doing…assigning meaning and motivation to his words. IOW, we have a different opinion.
And btw, the title of this diary? Misleading at best…he didn’t call horseshit on the diary, he called horseshit on the Rolling Stone article.
First of all, I have not personally attacked you. You however have said I used twisted logic, played semantic games, and use Rove’s playbook. Who is making personal attacks here?
Second, you didn’t prove anything. You offered your opinion on his words, as did I.
Third, it is ridiculous for you to demand that I defend this “threat” when I’ve outlined (more than once) why I don’t believe it was a threat.
And calling it my “continued refusal to address the issue” is ignoring that I’ve addressed it several times.
Armando actual quote used the term “worst indictment.”
Armando’s actual quote states a level of accussation towards Steven that your creative re-writes to not come close to representing.
Armando’s actual quate states Steven’s diary and the thread that follow indicate Armando considered this thread the equal of the worst examples of any diary that has ever been posted at DKos on this issue.
skewed against him! It’s a Latin thing. No kidding, I dated a sexy latin guy one time. Sad thing is, he thought it was “normal” to have more than one girl…..not in America dude! So he comes to my house to question my breaking up with him. I lay it out there. He grabs a steak knife off of my kitchen table, opens his shirt and tells me that if I do not love him he will stab himself in the heart. Says nothing about the other girl and there being two of us and that being an issue for me…..THAT DIDN’T MATTER. I still don’t get it! The only thing I did get was scared and grabbed the phone and called 911 before he bled on the rug or something. Turns out he was just expressing his “passions”. The police officer was not amused!
BooMan, it took time for me to make a space for myself here at the pond as I disengaged from dKos, but were the site apparent to me as primarily ‘the anti-Kos’ I certainly wouldn’t remain.
I’m here & not there because of the community you’ve allowed to grow & take shape in this space. What BT is about will quickly become apparent to any exiles & they’ll choose to take part (or not) on that basis — not reactively vis a vis dKos.
Thank you WW. We have our own identity here that has little, if anything to do with how any of us feel about other sites. Imo one of the greatest assets here are the activists, and Booman’s patience, and willingness to engage in thoughtful arguments with those he differs with greatly. He sets the tone. That is what is attractive about the pond.
You uprated someone who accused me of using “twisted logic.” Was that a thoughtful argument with someone the poster differed with?
Saying that someone uses twisted logic is not a personal attack. It’s an attack on that person’s argument.
And it’s disconcerting to see anyone get taken to task merely for uprating a comment. We’re generous with the “4s” here, which is to be commended rather than criticized.
I disagree…saying I used twisted logic without actually addressing what I did say, is an attack.
And “taking to task”? I asked her a question based on a comment she made.
She’s a he. You might be the only one around here who doesn’t know that.
Armando lumped everyone in that diary into the fraudster category. He didn’t say that certain commenters were fraudsters, he said the wole thread. He then made threats of banning. You know…I’m not the only one around here who sees it that way. The fact that your opinion of this is in the minority here says less about our opinions than yours. Then, just for good measure, he took a a cute little immature swipe at this whole website. You defending that is twisted logic to me. You may be a twisted person, but that’s not why I uprated the comment.
Thanks for confusing me with a woman. I’ll take it as a compliment.
My opinion is in the minority so that says less about what I believe? Obviously I know that you aren’t the only one here who believes what you’ve said, I just didn’t understand that opinion was a majority rules kind of thing.
It’s called democracy. As opposed to a minority rules kind of thing at other places.
So this is a democracy where the majority opinion means more? I didn’t realize that. My understanding of the atmosphere and level of discussion here was different than that. My apologies.
Actually, my comment here is wrong, insofar as it describes this place. People are never shunned or banned here for dissenting, or having a minority opinion. My uprate of asf’s comment was a kinder gentler way of disagreeing with you and the comment that asf replied to, than if I had downrated your comment. At which point I would have been obliged to tell you why I downrated it. Downrating, let alone troll rating comments is rarer here than when Bush is able to string two coherant sentences together :o)
I don’t want to argue with you over my uprate of someone else’s comment. It merely means I disagree with you. Alright?
Yes, I thought it was wrong…to put it mildly…although from some of the comments here, it certainly seems to be the case (my Rovian tactics, twisted logic, semantic games, creating quotes, shifting the focus, attacking the messenger, “cluttering” the thread, who might be a twisted person, and all that).
I wasn’t arguing about your uprate, as I’ve explained, I was asking you about the disconnect between your previous comment and then considering that post excellent. Because the poster didn’t address what I said. As I pointed out elsewhere, I did not call you out or anyone else that uprated it. I asked you a specific question about a specific comment.
And with that, you have the last word.
Kudos on the “last word” comment. Superior and dismissive at the same time.
Sorry, but an attack on your reasoning is not an attack on your personal attributes. Saying that you’ve used twisted logic falls within the grounds of fair debate. Saying “You’re wrong,” is not the same as saying “You’re a stupid git.”
And you called out supersoling (who is a guy, btw) for uprating a comment. Generally speaking, that’s not a tactic I support.
I’m not going to engage you any further because it’s really rather silly. As you admitted being a newbie who mostly lurks, I thought you might be interested in how our style of discussion tends to differ from certain other sites. But perhaps not.
Engage me further? That’s funny. As I said, my reasoning wasn’t addressed, so to respond by saying “an attack on your reasoning is not an attack” isn’t engaging me in the first place, is it? But thanks for your thoughts.
No rules here against attacking someone’s reasoning. That’s what debate is all about. Please stop pretending that you’re being personally abused when all that’s happening is that people disagree with you.
Personally abused? Yes, that’s what I’m claiming. Along with all the personal attacks I’ve made, right? I asked one poster a specific question about a specific comment and a rating they gave. And that becomes me claiming that I’m personally abused?
Interjecting intent and meaning that’s not there because you disagree with my opinion? I can see how Armando’s comment became a threat.
Asking someone “specific questions” about their ratings is all too often used as a bullying tactic to discourage people from giving high ratings to opponents. Supersoling graciously explained his rating, which he did not have to do.
At this point all you seem to want to do is pick a fight with someone. Not a game I care to play.
In fact, you are so intent on shifting the focus of this thread from Armando and Kos to attacking me personally that you are even making personal attacks against those who gave my posts good ratings.
That’s as desperate an attempt to pull an “attack the messenger” distraction that I can remember seeing on a progressive website in a while.
Okay, you win. I’m personally attacking you (even though I haven’t), I’m attacking others (even though I haven’t), and I’m shifting the focus (even though I’m not).
And your last line? Amazing and ironic. Amazing in that you’ve made multiple posts attacking and making accusations against me, and ironic given the reason for this diary in the first place…
I’m the one who keeps reposting that quote.
Armando said Steven was responsible for one of the worst threads ever posted at DKos.
I’m the one who keeps having to remind barbin what the thread is actually about.
The one time I got in a tangle with Armando was because he called me out for uprating one of Madman in the Marketplace’s comments. That you’ve also called me out for doing the same thing, while defending Armando’s nasty threats and insults is an indication of how different the two places are, and what counts as a legitimate reason to clutter half a thread, and what doesn’t.
I didn’t call you out, I asked you a question based on your comment. I posted Armando’s quote, laid out my reasoning for disagreeing and without what I actually said being addressed, I was accused of twisted logic. So I was curious as to how you consider that a:
I’ve explained why I didn’t think Armando’s comments were a theat. I don’t think it was, so that’s means I’m “cluttering half the thread.” I suppose I wouldn’t have been cluttering if I had just agreed with everyone else. My apologies.
And my apologies for mistaking you for a woman. Based on a comment you made recently, I thought you were.
And my apologies for mistaking you for a woman. Based on a comment you made recently, I thought you were.
Congratulations Supersoling. Seems that you have successfully integrated the feminine side of you with that silent warrior. Its one of the reasons why we all love you so much.
Thank you. That’s nice of you to say. Now if only I could re-integrate my former thinner self with my present aerodynamically challenged self, I’d be good to go ;o)
she’s one of their thread bullies. You’re better off ignoring her.
Thanks. Kinda had that feeling…
Well, if she brings her kossian bully tactics back to the pond, I imagine she’ll be troll-rated by a pissed-off old lady wearing tie-dye. That’s not a threat, of course. Just a prediction.
You just won my “roffle of the day” award.
roffle * 3
🙂
You uprated someone who accused me of using “twisted logic.”
As unfair as it may seem, I suspect that a good many readers found some things wrong with your reasoning. You’re actually going to start complaining about a ‘4’ to someone who disagrees with you, are you?
Barb,
If you don’t know already, maybe you should be aware that giving “4’s” out around the pond is one of the biggest guilty pleasures many here enjoy. There is a completely different community expectation about that here. And Supersoling could perhaps be the “King of the 4’s.”
So, if you need an excuse to take offense, I guess you can feel free to do so. But its not necessary.
I didn’t take offense. I questioned the rating based on his comment within the same thread. I didn’t call out everyone who uprated the comment. I asked one person for an explanation on the disconnect between saying that the willingness to debate those who differ is the best thing about BT, yet uprating someone who says “twisted logic” without addressing what was said.
I questioned the rating based on his comment within the same thread.
This is the first time I’ve seen someone here question a ‘4’ given to someone else because that person disagreed with them. I don’t believe that the thin skinned and ever capriciously enforced ‘you cannot uprate other people’s posts’ rules apply over here…at least I’ve never seen them debated. Were they debated I would argue that such arguments and rules are profoundly lame.
Why you coming over here to pick fights, anyway?
Because Armando tried it once before, six months to a year ago. His ego still hasn’t recovered from the drubbing he took. So every time someone posts something here showing how loony he and kos and DHinMI are, he sends some of his flying keyboard monkeys over here to fling some shit around, so he doesn’t have to face that again.
Thank you.
That’s possibly the best answer to a question I’ve ever received on a blog.
The latest set of keyboard monkeys has been disappointing due, I think, to prolonged exposure to centrist koolaide and lifelong, unchallenged delusions of competency. One wishes they would send over someone who presented something of a challenge….
It’s a classic double bind situation for you. You’re damned one way or the other. So it goes.
I have an open thread every monday at my blog – any potential Big Orange refugee is more than welcome to have at it over there. I wouldn’t mind the extra traffic, and I’m sure you could do without the headache.
Checked out your blog and it looks like you have some interesting ideas, definitely seems like it is worth seriuosly digging into!
Why, thank you muchly!
🙂
You’re welcome! 🙂
StevenD,
I missed your diary. Gald you posted this bit. Seems to me like you are a first round winner by TKO. Pretty clear who is in a better position to write authoritatively on the issue.
Tiring of people trying to limit acceptable debate. That’s why most are here, I’d suspect. You done good. Hope you don’t think twice about it. Unless it is to pat yourself on the back.
Daily Kos has a policy about CT or Conspiracy Theories, they don’t want any posted. If you do, you’re flamed from the outset whether you post the diary or comment.
The problem is what constitutes a conspiracy theory is very loosely defined. A few “enforcers” seem to decide for themselves what is CT and a potential target of their rudeness.
Unfortunately, some have lumped Robert Kennedy, Jr’s excellent article into that category. Anyone reading the article can see that with 76 footnotes this piece is well-researched investigative journalism, not a conspiracy theory. I learned about the article through a diary posted on DKos.
We have a President who has been “elected” twice under suspicious circumstances- that, alone, is worthy of discussion/investigation.
The net effect of DKos’ No CT diaries is that discussion is eliminated on some very timely subject.
There are other sites to read, other points of view, other blogs, like this one, welcoming discussion.
Keep your inquiring mind open.
I didn’t read the diary (by the time I would have had the chance, it was already loaded up on comments, and I’m not the kind who’s patient to sit and wait; also, I’ve been working long, long hours), but I’ve read most of the RFK article, and a lot of it makes sense. I just posted a diary over at dKos about the 2004 election and electoral reform in general. It’s shameful how much has been swept under the rug.
I really do not like Armando. His pieces are generally well-written, but he is an awful commenter who rarely adds anything of substance. DHinMI used to be decent, but I know he’s been more churlish of late. I usually ignore the top people over there except for ones I have a lot of respect for (G10, Hunter, SusanG, Meteor Blades, DemFromCT, etc.)…most of them are on their high horses, to say the least.
It’s no surprise they are being defensive. They shut down discussion prematurely on a threat to the foundation of democracy.
I’m a Canadian and I did not follow closely the Ohio glitches but I knew that almost all of the so-called glitches favoured Bush. Now, what are the odds?
as far as I’m concerned, anyone who decries this article and what it puts forward is now my political enemy. because they certainly are not on the same side as I am if they have a problem with exposing these things. they probably would poo-poo Greg Palast’s excellent reporting on this too.
Armando is a proven hysteric. Thru thousands of diaries, FP call outs and comments.
They hunt in a pack, that bunch, it is old time Dem thuggery updated a bit – and support factions within the party. Denial is useless, too many have read them for years now.
The DLC types swept into Dkos in spring / summer of 2003, were welcomed, possibly even expected/invited by the “important shit” blogger (never a liberal, never a progessive himself, a sort of tiny power monger, basically a semi-convert from a Republican childhood)… and the DLC types, NDNers have camped there ever since.
I have no idea why they ever masked the game. It came fully out of the closet post loss 2004.
About it in a nutshell. Oh and a lot of “tulipmania” in their numbers game. Many ghost registrations… and thousands are gone. Try looking at your own registration. Then check 4 in each direction, or 10 in each direction. See how few people are around – as in active. My own guess is active is well under 20K… at best….
Marisacat, UID #97.
There as of late summer 2002, began posting November 2002.
Banned last weekend of August 2005.
Yes, it is weird to object to the conduct of the government in its control of our lives, suppression of our freedoms, spying on us, etc., and then deny us the discourse on the white elephant in our living room, what happened at the last election, especially in Ohio. I don’t get it and I’m very disappointed that those who have taken such a leadership role in standing up for our rights, refuse to discuss this issue–perhaps the most significant issue–of our electoral functions. Alright if you want to disagree, but why refuse . . .?
Your statement describes exactly how I feel. I find it bizarre that seemingly intelligent people would ignore huge stacks of evidence that there is something very wrong here. The dynamic is similar to pretending there was no systematic child abuse in the Church and then blaming the victims. I don’t understand the knee-jerk response to this subject, except that I see these people becoming celebrities and they are starting to self-muzzle in order to keep their status.
I don’t claim to know what all the answers are, but the subject is worthy of very serious investigation.
Steven, Late, late, late to the “party”. You were right, Armando was wrong, and rude. Period.
during the “voter fraud” era (which is probably why I never got banned) was that the voter fraud is not the ultimate issue, but that we have a government that makes the idea of voter fraud plausible.
My mom-in-law sums it up quite well: “I firmly believe that man [GWB] was not elected in 2004.” How many other people feel the same way? And to see the Democrats roll over and play dead on this issue, and to see “leadership” as portrayed by Markos, Armando & Co. quash all discussion as if they were Karl Rove ordering the Secret Service to escort protestors out of appearances by Bush or Cheney, is very discouraging. Hell, if I was going to yKos this coming week, I’d be tempted to wear a T-shirt that says, “Ohio ’04: We Wuz Robbed!” and see if I’d get thrown out. (Bet Refinish69 could design a doozy for me. 🙂 )
I can see banning folks who post “conspiracy diaries” that show no research, no thought, just a bunch of “what ifs” and rumors. But to see folks who consider themselves “the future” of the Democrats smack down a good journalist like RFK Jr., just because he connects the dots and they don’t like the picture, is dismaying to say the least.
I’ve been visiting dKos a bit more recently — I think I’m going to be cutting back my time (besides, I’m heading out of town for two weeks starting next Saturday and will be too busy to haunt the blogospheres…).
that just occurred to me this evening…if we’d had an honest investigation of the “election irregularities”, perhaps then the Bush misAdministration wouldn’t have thought they could get away with the NSA spying program and all the other law-bending and law-breaking activities they’ve been indulging in.
I wonder what the folks in Iraq are thinking about this — are we going to institute the Republicans’ version of “democracy” where it’s rigged from the start, regardless of how many purple fingers you show?
because Crossed Swords is such a dismal failure.
and a little more inviting maybe a few of us would go hang over there once in awhile.
nah. he’s not the problem. he interacts very little. But the conservatives he’s managed to attract are just braindead wingnuts. It’s like beating up on little kids.
and a few of the comments had me scratching my head as to how we were going to do this “crossed swords real debating of the facts”. I think it was a great concept and I’m trying so so hard to avoid slamming the right but FUCK…..WHAT A BUNCH OF LUNATICS WHO SEEM TO BELIEVE THAT IT IS NOBLE TO PLACE YOUR NUGGET IN CEMENT SO THAT IT STOPS MAKING ITS OWN CONNECTIONS AND DOING ITS OWN PROBLEM SOLVING AND THEN JUST BOW TO THE EMPEROR! I thought we all got on a bunch of boats and high tailed it across the ocean so we wouldn’t have to do that shit anymore!
yep. lazy and brain dead. Pretty telling that the real debates occur between the liberals.
But just to be clear, I find Armando to be a prick in general. I wasn’t defending his poor manners.
The continued ad hominem sniping between the so-called “fraudsters” and the so-called “realists” is a bigger problem than Kennedy’s article. For us folks out in the provinces, it looks the same as the inside baseball inside the beltway.
Would both you and Armando take a deep breath.
As a political strategy, we have two objectives:
(1) Ensure that the cost of voter fraud is raised in the 2006 election. Better anticipation. Better response. Better lawyers. Better sense of when to use those lawyers. And more willingness of candidates to challenge results (one only has to mention Washington state and Rossi in the same sentence to show that it is not unheard of in Republican circles). The Kennedy article provides an outline of the areas that were vulnerable in 2004. They are:
…
A better diary would pull all of this information together again. And yes, I’m disappointed that state and local Democratic leadership has not done more to ensure that these get covered off. It leads to the appearance that Democrats would do the same thing if they were in power. Or maybe in certain local areas that they do the same thing.
The focus for the next six months has to be ensuring that this time around the majority of the American people will find out what is going on before the election. So that the attitude is not as dismissive when the usual suspects get caught.
(2) Getting an independent investigation with subpoena power or power of discovery. The issue here in 2004 was timing and standing. Kerry blew it on timing because no one wanted a Democratic-initiated rerun of 2000 (exactly what Rove anticipated) and everyone else blew it on standing. It’s a funny thing, no judge considers the suppressed voters to be injured parties because they of course have no evidence. All of which is to point out the enormous difficulties in getting the obvious – an independent investigation.
The danger to progressives of this continued acrimony is that the numbers we need at the polls will not show up to go through the motions because “it’s futile”. Exactly the wrong strategy. Regardless of how foregone a conclusion the election appears to be, a mammoth turnout of progressive voters might just be able to catch enough of the Congressional Districts that haven’t been fixed to shift the numbers in Congress.
This is not the year to refuse to vote in a sham election because one is so morally pure and will not sully one’s principles.
So stop trying to prove something in court before the investigation has gotten access to the facts that could convince. The focus–prevention and investigation.
Armando, and those who support him are the one’s who need to take a breath. Steven was on the recieving end of more of their brownshirt bullshit. Then this site was attacked. Steven take a breath? Bullshit
Where does Steven imply in this diary, or the original at dKos that people should refuse to vote? Where does he say that he, you, we, are morally too pure to sully our principles? Nowhere. More bullshit.
Ah…more of the get on board with the program, and get us a majority.
It certainly is not more of the get on board and get us a majority sentiment, although getting a majority would be a real test of what Democrats in Congress are willing to do.
I am really saying that critics of the view that Ohio was stolen are asking for convictions before there is an investigation. And I am saying that Robert Kennedy Jr has provided enough evidence presented in a short brief to have probable cause for investigation. So why not run with that and push for an investigation. I mean a real honest-to-God subpoena power or discovery independent investigation.
And I am saying that if you fail to vote in 2006, you are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of doom. So go through the motions anyway. Lightning might strike. It doesn’t have to be a Democratic majority. So if you see some way to have a independent progressive candidate get 150,000 votes in a currently Republican Congressional District, go for it.
And I don’t give a rat’s ass what Armando did to Steven D or any of that other inside the blogosphere crap. Yes, Armando should take a deep breath too.
Ignore Tarheel as well, supersoling. Another thread bully.
Armando’s pulls this stuff just so people will react to him. He’s an attention freak. For Armado, it doesn’t matter whether he gets his fix positively through diaries or negatively through name calling and vitriolic, obnoxious comments. So long as people keep responding, he gets off. Don’t fall for his silly game.
And that’s all the effort I will expend on Armando.
I haven’t felt like fighting about it all because their are a lot of folks on the ground tending to this business. I choose to feed the energies addressing election theft, fighting about it all just takes ever so much stupid effort. I do think that Steven needed to address Armando on this the one time that he did and now we can all get back to work doing what we do to ensure election integrity. When new information emerges we will share it and when anything MSM get on board the election integrity train we can share that too and Armando can say Horseshit and we can address that and then go happily back to work again.
Steven,
As usual, I’m with you on this one. At DKos, if a diarist is not one of a few so-called or self-styled “heavyweights” there is very little one can do to get heard. Banning opinion is simply the worst end of this kind of elitist continuum that I found there and why I only post on Booman Tribune.
The Democratic Party’s great strength (but also the source of its weakness)is its propensity for divergent opinions exuberantly expressed. The reason why Armando and others at DKos feel like they are herding cats is not so much because of the independence of the cats, but for the mistaken self-identification of the herders.
The reason why Armando and others at DKos feel like they are herding cats is not so much because of the independence of the cats, but for the mistaken self-identification of the herders.
Being ignorant of some of the (to me) arcane acronyms of the blogosphere, I have no clue what ROFLAO means. I hope it’s something good. So thanks I think.
rolling on the floor laughing my ass off…
in this case, the ‘my’ has been dropped in the interest of additional brevity.
Funny, that’s what I did when I read what it meant. Thanks.
I found this spoof of the dKos Troll Wars at Huffington Post. It’s pretty damn funny…until you realize how sad it is that much of the good writing and efforts to deal with important issues is overshadowed by the assinine and petty bickering that goes on over there. It’s a shame really.
Daily Kos Troll Hunters
It is not the quantity of the discourse, but the quality that matters.
So DailyKos has more page views than the next three “progressive politics” sites combined–so what? The level of discourse there has been going steadily downhill since the “pie wars”.
I scarcely recognise DailyKos now–it is but a a coarse semblance of its former self.
I used to learn things there. Now I’ve learned not to go there.
Armando is a huge part of the reason, but he can’t lead if nobody is willing to follow. What disturbs me is not that Armando the bully exists, but that there are so many ready, willing, and able to follow him through the gates of Hell and back.
Do forgive me if I misquoted Mr. Shakespeare, as it’s been some time, but:
The fault, Horatio, lies not in the stars but in ourselves.