I have some exciting news. While Steven D takes a break from blogging to be with his wife during her recovery, Kid Oakland will be doing some blogging here. He has a project that I think is going to be fun and interesting, but I’ll let him introduce it.
I met k/o out in Vegas, and he’s a supercool guy.
And maybe we can get the book club back together and have a another photo fair? Any other group projects that we might enjoy? Gotta keep things interesting in the slow summer months.
That is great news, Booman.
k/o is top notch – looking forward to see what he brings.
k/o’s a great addition to the Trib FP…and a long time favorite of mine.
Kudo’s to you both, looking forward to his ‘project’.
As far as group projects go, I think we should get together and identify everybody who doesn’t think guinea pigs are cute and force them to include a guinea pig picture in all of their posts and comments. That should keep things exciting.
or we could start a petition to free the orange monkey.
Repeat monkeys? Lame. Anyway, he’s a gorilla and he’s not orange. He’s just sitting in some orange stuff.
Great idea. I have some shots of them stirfried and another of them stuffed with arugula and bbqed. Would we be required to include recipes?
Would it be OK if the python was in the picture with them?
I suppose you think this is amusing, young man.
(lol!)
think? he knows
I see the great guinea pig flame war of 2006 still rages.
and you’re the one feeding the fire! the fire which cooks the very pigs you love.
burn baby burn.
And by the way, I never said they aren’t good eats so by all means, include your recipes.
Play with your food much?!
Only if it trys to run away.
How exciting!!
Other than the chance to meet all the Bootribbers, the one thing that tempted me to go to Ykos was the opportunity to meet kid. His writing has had a huge impact on me. And I waited in vain for some of you who went to post pictures so I might finally get to see what he looks like. But to no avail!!!
I love KO!
As far as group projects go, it doesn’t get any cooler than the Cafe and The Lounge – I’m not sure there’s more cool to go around.
BooMan’s post on this year’s Senate races inspired me to see if wikipedia had any kind of summary page, which unsurprisingly they do (I really dig their little map). From there I clicked through to read about Bernie Sanders (the man likely to replace Jeffords in Vermont).
In his wikipedia entry, it says:
My question, is how is it determined which party an independent counts toward for these purposes?
The independent decides. But it’s yet another example of the two-party system grown malignant. Why should parties have any say at all in committee assignments?
Thanks. That’s what I figured it had to be, but it seems kind of…casual, especially compared to how stuffy most of the rules are in Congress.
So another question, riffing off your two party system comment : If there were, say, 10 members of the Senate from a third party, would they get to count as their own party (say, Green) and have at least one member on each committee?
That’s great news! Especially if he brings guinea pigs with him, although a hamster in a hat is okay, too.
Boo, I managed the BooBook Club for a while before I ran out of steam. Short attention span. Too few hamsters spinning my wheels. I don’t want to do it right now (stamps widdle foot!), but maybe Somebody Else will do it.
I’m looking forward to this, and wish Steven D and his wife all my best.
The project I’m working relates to how we in the progressive community interact with electoral politics. I’m interested in how we here at BMT define “progressive” when it comes to the ballot box. I’m also very much interested in coming together to debate and identify local candidates and office holders who exemplify the values of this progressive community.
As well, I may put up the odd post from the k/o point of view. In fact, look for one later this afternoon…
WOOHOO!
What albert said!
KO, great to have you here and the project sounds like a worthy one. And don’t worry, there are plenty of opinions on progressive politics on this site that people are willing to share.
Welcome aboard!
This is excellent news!
I’m interested in how we here at BMT define “progressive” when it comes to the ballot box.
Well I sure am willing to take a shot at this, at least from my perpsective as I cannot speak for an entire site.
First off in light of the supposed pragmatism now guiding the Democratic party, I must say that identification of certain inviolate progressive principles is a must; otherwise, you can quickly morph into the other side before you know it. Some political philosophy this pragmatism! As an aside, did anyone see how Hillary and the gang want Dems to embrace and show religion more because, well because why?? I am wandering off topic a bit so let me return.
Some but not all of my progressive party principles would be:
–A social guarantee of certain critical human rights on an egalitarian basis. These rights take into account the human condition of certain need fulfillment (such as Maslow’s pyrimid), and also the security that is due all people as they age and cannot cope like they did while young. To put it another way, a social security guarantee as one loses time they cannot ever repeat.
–Social policy based on Science and proven facts over propaganda and myths. On a related basis, a clear separation between religious beliefs and state power.
–True Democracy without elitism of a ruling class, and whatever it takes to bring this about and keep it happening.
–A fiscally conservative position in that what society does and mandates is paid for through progressive and thus fair taxation, and not through debt and taxing the least able to pay.
–Finally for now, a living here and now individual’s complete control over their body unless and except under the most extreme social emergencies such as an epidemic effecting many others in an extremely adverse way or when mental infirmity clouds one vision.
Well I am sure I could add and eleaborate to this the more I think about it, but let this maybe get the ball rolling if it has not been done before.
That’s EXCELLENT news! Welcome k/o.
Meeting k/o in Las Vegas was great. And supercool doesn’t begin to describe him. Add supersmart AND supernice.
And super-surprising too. I’ve never had anybody from California ask me about a specific local Missouri candidate before.
of course you invented supercool.
Let’s see….
supercool
supernice
supersmart
super-surprising
He may be all of those things, but he ain’t
Supersoling ;o)
Concerned about having competition? It’ll do you good 😉
Is it showing a little? :o)
Just a little. 🙂
Don’t worry, I’m sure you’ll win the superest of the supers contest. You’ll just have to work at it and not coast on reputation alone.
I’m looking forward to the campaign …
Man, you think you’ve found a nice alternative to the Daily Slog and who shows up?
mini DiHinMi
Next to DiHinMi, in late 2004/early 2005 Kid Oakland was one of the biggest detractors regarding open discussion of election fraud at the big orange.
I’d just like everyone here to take that into consideration when you read his stuff. I hope he won’t be making any predictions here, seeing how “right” he was regarding what an invalid topic voting irregularities was to discuss back when people could have done something about it.
Or maybe RFK Jr. is just full of shit. Is that it KO?
You are totally out of line here.
Please elaborate. Is it against protocol to hold someone accountable here?
I still have a hard time getting over the fact that I personally witnessed a rising movement of activists on dKos, who could have really made a difference, who could have gotten people to really listen, effectively get shut down and told thier concerns were irrevelent by a select few of the “more powerful” bloggers at dKos.
For all dKos isn’t, it is a MEGAPHONE. and it was very painful to watch the majority of voices there get silenced, cajoled and harrassed by this much smaller, but more elite group until the whole activist movement was effectively weakened. By the time Conyers got involved, the movement was already effectively dead in the water because of these people. I witnessed it in real time and was called insane, stupid, tin-foil head and worse many many mnay many times by the relentless and oh so sure of himself KO.
Are we not accountable for our actions? KO might as well have went to bat for the fascists and I don’t find it so easy to forgive the fact that the world might now be a better place were it not for him and those like him at that time in history.
I guess we’ll see what happens in November. If the shit happens again it is on KO’s head.
While I completely agree with you on this point:
Comparing k/o to DHinMI is just WRONG, and no way to welcome someone to the front page, IMO.
Thanks for the explanation.
Maybe he’s not as bad as DiHinMI overall, but they were on the same team at that time and tha’t what I’m remembering.
As far as welcoming him, why should I welcome him. No one welcomed me when I started posting here. Did they welcome you? What makes him so special that we should all have to welcome him.
I’d like to see booman be less like dKos, not more and I for one am not too happy with this development.
If I hated the Today Show, preferring to watch the CBS Evening News instead, I wouldn’t be too happy about Katie Couric coming over there. Wait a minute…..
Damn.
I was welcomed.
Maybe nobody liked you …
Being liked is not one of my strong suits.
I prefer being free to challenge conventional wisdom and feeling free to call bullshit when I see it. If I went around trying to be liked, or making friends here, then I’d just be a part of the overall circle jerk that goes on in these places.
In other words, I have no interest in trading puppy pics with you.
What I really wish is that blogs were more of a hardcore debate environment where bullshit wasn’t tolerated. If there’s anything I hate, it’s the blatant shmoozing and ass licking I see on scoop sites constantly.
Blecch.
Well, we wouldn’t want you to be a circle jerk by any means. Not if that would make you uncomfortable.
Reading this makes me really very sad because I was looking forward to trading puppy pics with you over the holiday weekend. What I really wish is that blogs were recognized for what they are, cheap entertainment for political junkies and geeks. Except, that is, for the vast majority of them that are dedicated to whether or not Leslie is totally in love with Bob from algebra. This is a medium born and bred in bad poetry written by teenagers.
You seek an environment where bullshit isn’t tolerated, but if I’ve read some of your posts and comments correctly, I gather that you were run off of another site by people who wouldn’t tolerate what they considered bullshit coming from you. I’m not trying to lick your ass here, but that sucks. I’m sorry it happened. Have I ever mentioned that I don’t care about Daily Kos? Have I ever mentioned that I think that whining and moaning about that site and its internal politics bores me to tears and strikes me as the stupidest sort of trite mastabatory bullshit available for public consumption? Probably not, but I tolerate a lot of bullshit and even accept that what I consider to be circle jerk bullshit is probably important to some people.
Here’s the puppy dude. Sorry you have to deal with my ass licking bullshit.
That is one scary puppy.
I’ll raise you one rodent.
I’ll see your rodent and raise you a rodent in a Santa hat.
You win! I cannot compete with rodents in hats. I’m bemused by this phenonema of hat-wearing rodents. They have plenty of fur so it’s not that their little heads are cold.
See, you very artfully, tastefully and subtly called me on my bullshit. That is cool.
My fascination with daily kos is that I feel a sort of responsibility to satirize what that site has become.
I think that anything that was once cool and has become lame BEGS to be made fun of. It’s part of the great equalizer. Someone’s got to do it.
I blatantly and rudely use this forum to do this because my own blog is very poorly read compared to this one.
However, what the dKos could have been was MUCH more than just bullshit entertainment for geeks. It was a venue where all of us losers who before could only scream at our TV’s had a chance to get together and organize. That is very powerful.
Unfortunatley, now the site IS just what you say. Entertainment for geeks. That’s a bummer, but hey the 60’s turned out to be a bummer too, so why not this too?
Thanks for the reply and the dog. Forgive me, but since my last comment I’ve spent a few hours in a bar with some friends from college, so this will probably come out all wrong. This medium may well turn out to be a bummer in the end, but I don’t think we’re there quite yet. We’re about a year and a half into the mainstreaming of political blogging and watching that transition take shape has been uncomfortable. A lot of us are in no mood to take that trip and we shouldn’t. Becoming respectable has nothing to do with why we got involved.
When I first started tuning into these things, there was Atrios and very little else. His site was pure catharsis for the anguished liberal cubicle dweller faced with the constant drumbeat of post 9/11 Bush worship from our SCLM. I still tend to feel that catharsis is the best part of this medium.
I had a point to get to (a lie?), but I’m tipsy and tired, so I’ll leave it for another time. Have a good night and don’t let the bastards grind you down.
Really classy Mary.
Remember, you’re at the green site, not orange.
some welcomes in the Cafe — if I missed it may have been an oversight; I was in the midst of getting ready for vacation mode. Anyway, belated welcome.
And you’re welcome to not click on a front page or diary written by anyone you disagree with…that includes my limited works…
I hope you’re going to do a diary about your trip.
With pictures of the scenic views.
got the electronics box out of the spouse’s suitcase, so I now have access to my camera cable. Not sure if the trip is diary-worthy, but you can expect assorted shots to creep up in the Cafe in the coming days/weeks/months…
Thanks (I think) for bringing this up. I wasn’t aware of KO’s position on the stolen election. If what you say is true then I’ll have to take that into consideration when reading him.
KO’s an original member of the dKos Rat Pack: DiHinMI, Armando, Eternal Hope and Kid Oakland.
Or more appropriately considering the ties to Warner and netroots consulting servies Kos provides, should be more accuratley referred to as the PAC Pack.
Not one of them ever saw an election fraud diary they didn’t hate.
I’ve read your comments here and checked out our interactions from the fall of 2004 on dkos and would just say this:
brian nowhere, I hope you read and find value in what I write here on BMT this next month. If not, I can respect that. I don’t take anything for granted, but I do hope that we can give and take with respect here. I can promise you that from my end.
Fwiw, I am trying to hear what you’re saying with these comments, and will think about your point of view.
As far as this quote goes:
I witnessed it in real time and was called insane, stupid, tin-foil head and worse many many mnay many times by the relentless and oh so sure of himself KO.
I can tell you, you must be thinking of someone else. That’s not how I operate. Or at least, it’s not the standard that I try to hold myself to.
I respect your reply, although it sounds a little like you’ve ben through marriage couseling “I’m hearing what you are saying and I am feeling an anger bubble rising” and I’ll consider that perhaps time has distorted my memory regarding our interactions somewhat.
Now that I think of it a bit more, I seem to recall that you and I may have been able to reach some sort of truce, I think Delaware Dem had a large part in that. I remember that time period being when the pejoritive tin-foil really started becoming en vogue at dKos and could have swore you had a hand in that, but considering how much weed I’ve smoked in my life I can never claim 100% certainty on my memories and don’t feel like rummaging through dKos archives so I will take you at your word and wipe the slate clean.
Welcome to booman.
You know, this should have been your first comment BN. I wasn’t that active at dKos at the time the tinfoil hat shit started, so when you made your comment above, I was inclined to give it some weight. But now you’ve found your way through the reefer smoke and the story changes.
Reminds me to blow off half the bullshit I read here and other places.
Tis true my friend. That’s why I always appreciate links and context when someone is throwing around insults.
Now, to be fair to Brian, I was at dkos when KO had his “fuck you” moment on Ohio. In fact, here’s his diary which Kos FP’d. This was written before Delaware Dem’s “Fuck Ohio” diary created such the shit storm. Which, funnily enough, seems to have been purged from the dkos site and is not showing up, except by linkage in Google results. Here’s a link to one of the diaries from back in the day which responded to it.
As the wars raged and the place got out of control into December, shanikka wrote “Folks Don’t Get It” in response to DD’s diary and changed quite a few minds, including I believe Kid Oakland’s. But, I can see from the almost full month and a half of SYFPH before Shannika and Georgia10 where Brian would have gotten the impression KO was a dkos kop.
But people change and KO is a fantastic writer and did himself proud by resigning from the FP of dkos over the Donna Brazile smear and subsequent “sista souljah” dustup.
So, long story short, there is a grain of truth in everything, but you really gotta be willing to dig to get to even half of the truth.
Thanks for backing your words with links Spiderleaf.
What I recall of Kid Oakland from memory was that he was a gifted writer. And I remember a little of his departure from the FP of dKos, though I wasn’t aware of the specifics. That’s why in my reply to Brian’s first comment I said, if this is true. To which he replied, it is true. Now he’s not so sure. Bugs the fuck out of me.
Agree completely. And I definitely think Brian unnecessarily created an issue here about kid oakland joining our FP. I’m pleased as punch he is.
I just did want to set the record somewhat straight so the confusion didn’t persist as to “who, what, where”.
Just as Boo acknowledges in a comment below, yeah, KO was wrong on the election, but we’ve all kissed and made up, in no small part because of the efforts of people like shannika (another fantastic writer), and Boo himself.
I’m glad you called him on it super; I’m also glad he came around himself.
What I said was true was that KO was part of the intelligensia of the time that quashed discussion of the voting irregularity issue. I still stand by that statement. He was a big part of the faction that felt that those of us who spoke up about it were embarrassing the democrats. Of that I am sure.
Since KO replied in a reasonable manner to me, i decided to give him the benefit of the doubt regarding the name-calling. He says he didn’t so I’m taking him at his word.
I haven’t changed very much about what I originally said, except a few minor details. The gist still stands, but because of the dignified response by him, I’m willing to see what he’s got to say here and do it with an open mind.
That is all.
For the excellent analysis. You nailed it.
I forgot about the Donna Brazile incident and KO’s subsequent resigning.
No prob, anytime. I unfortunately have a memory like a steel trap, especially when it comes to stuff like the travesty at dkos over Ohio.
I wrote diaries before the election about voter suppression and GOP voter intimidation in Ohio and elsewhere. I posted “activist clearinghouses” with links to groups where people could volunteer before the election to work on these issues. I never once backed off the importance of that stance…or of all the efforts, a la Conyers, to count all the votes…nor have I ever oppposed attempts to reform our election process and practice verified voting.
When you say that I said “fuck you” in my view that is just false. I invited debate with evidence…and looked at all the evidence carefully. There’s a difference. Check out the diary entitled, a link is not an argument. Fwiw, I spent careful time debating in numerous diaries with folks who, like you do above, mischaracterized me and at times used me as a whipping boy and blew off my sincere attempts to look at their evidence. Why did I do that? Because the issue as a whole was important to me.
Do I resent being mischaracterized? Sure, but that comes with the territory; I don’t expect that writing online will be like a walk in a rose garden.
Now, that being said, what I opposed most after the election was how Bev Harris manipulated the situation to confuse “voter suppression” with “outright fraud” and, from my pov, built support for HER particular agenda.
I haven’t changed my views about Bev Harris. I continue to see her work, which has positives and negatives, as having real problems. But, I agree with booman that Bev became this big “side issue” that distracted all of us…and that all of us need to come together on voting rights and election strategy going forward, not bicker about the past.
I respect that you wrote those diaries before the election k/o, but I think you are underestimating the importance of that diary I linked to in the context of what was happening on the ground in Ohio and at dkos, and your perceived ‘weight’ in the community.
When your diary came out there were people, on both sides, polluting the site with “you don’t care”, “you’re a lunatic” arguments, with the rational ‘fraudsters’ as it were, begging some frontpager to listen to the voices of the people on the ground, and instead, even though your diary may have been a ‘reasonable’ one, we, as a collective we, got the brush off, of the “fuck you” as it were. And yes, your diary, in the context of the situation on dkos and on the ground in OH was not one that built bridges. Instead it enabled those like DD or DHinMI, or whomever, to point to it and say “but kos agrees with us and it’s his site”, while dismissing the VERY REAL fact that there were African Americans and poor people who were literally crying for someone to come help them and to let them realize their democratic rights. In fact, if I recall correctly, there is a comment from me in your diary whos title is “Nothing wrong with an investigation”… but of course, no one chose to engage in that line of thought, it was all about debunking the “fraudsters”, and for sure, some needed debunking, but on the whole, in a democracy and a community, that figures itself out, but momentum can be gained or lost in the blink of an eye.
I don’t want to rehash OH, or the election wars, but I do remember your diary KO and it was not one that helped anyone, on either side come to terms with how to move forward. It may have been your intention to do so, but as a fact of history it did not.
But, like I said, I appreciate your writing and your character and am glad you participate here. But the past, in all its messy shapes still remains for people like Brian.
Man. I just re-read your diary. And it pissed me off all over again. This was written what, days after the election, when evidence of suppression, intimidation and ‘glitches’ were rolling in from OH and across the country. Poor people were reporting their inability to cast a vote, using any type of ballot, let alone provisional as you bring up in your diary, and you are telling people to forget about it, that it’s bad politics and to move forward into 2006, when the very will of the people was suppressed on the ground, by whatever means. So no, it may not technically be fraud, but it was a subversion of democracy… and the very thing Kerry said he would fight like hell to prevent. And you told everyone to get over it.
And with shoddy facts surrounding how the actual, on the ground, vote counting, including provisional ballots, was being handled in OH.
Sorry KO, that’s not a diary you can erase from memory or try to explain away. It served one purpose, to get everyone talking about how crazy the fraudster/ Bev Harris group was and away from the very real suppression of democracy, for which there was/ is an abundance of evidence… because that issue needed to wait for 2006 or 2008 according to your diary.
And that is still bullshit. And has done way more harm than good to the movement for election reform. You could have framed your diary as an action item for exposing GOP manipulations and classism and racism, but you didn’t.
Okay, I’m walking away. I’m still pissed as hell that you took the stance you did, but I am glad you are on the FP here now.
Maybe reading these will offer a window into the complexity of this situation. Maybe this “situation” is about something different than what it seems.
Here’s the powerful comment of yours that you reference above:
I agree that was a fine statement. I would have agreed with it then, and do so now.
Here’s a different comment where you make a similar argument but state…”We all need to rally behind blackboxvoting.org and ensure they have the resources they need to conduct their audit.” On that point, I would have disagreed and still do.
Finally, here’s your comments in the diary of mine that you mention. Now, you challenge me about that diary saying: “You could have framed your diary as an action item for exposing GOP manipulations and classism and racism, but you didn’t”. Shouldn’t the same standard apply to everyone?
However, far from “telling people to forget about it, that it’s bad politics and to move forward into 2006”, here’s what I actually said in that diary:
I don’t see how the above quote differs from your position except for my position on Bev Harris’ claims the election was stolen. And, yes, I still think it was, and is, bad politics to claim the 2004 election was “stolen”.
Now, here’s what Brian Nowhere was arguing at virtually the same time…and again, here’s Brian with Cedwyn challenging him on it.
Here’s a discussion with a whole bunch of folks…but, as far as I can tell, still no “fuck yous” are being thrown around.
This debate, it seems to me, is not about substance. It’s about tone. It’s mostly about “how” we say things, not the core of what we said, because, essentially, there was more agreement than not. Maybe that’s why the debate has been so vicious and has lasted so long.
When you look at what people actually said at the time, there’s broad agreement to “count every vote” “to investigate” “to stand up for our voters.”
Given that, what I don’t get is why, even when you’ve tried to be supportive of my writing here, that you still mischaracterize me. I have soul searched this question and realize that I can’t answer that question. Only you can.
I can tell you this, I got on a bus in 1988 as a 19 year old to turn out the vote in the New Hampshire primary for Jesse Jackson. I got arrested that same year in NYC protesting apartheid with non-violent civil disobedience. Election day 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 you could have found me at the West Oakland BART station dawn till dusk doing my damndest to make sure that every voter in that incredibly diverse community had been empowered to cast their vote.
So, I guess when you accuse me of betraying those same voters…or not hearing appeals for racial justice…when you say my diaries about voter suppression and racism are outweighed by how I made people “feel” about Bev Harris…I’ve gotta think that this debate is about something else; that it’s framed by the fact that we’re having it on the internet, where perceptions are based “screen realities.”
Election day 2004, I was challenged by an African American voter when I asked him if he’d voted. He said to me, “Why should I vote, when it’s rigged, when it won’t count?”
One may agree or disagree with his premise, and we may well do so. That being said, we can both agree that answering his question is something that is all of our responsibility, in fact it is vital to our democracy.
I appreciate this discussion because I think it can seek to clarify alot of issues that are still outstanding from 2004.
I did in the beginning support BBV, you are correct. But that was, in large part, based on the issues that were being raised on any number of sites including Michael Moore’s message board, the Ohio boards, etc. where people were quite clearly stating their votes were registering as Bush votes. After 2000, absolutely I want that investigated and would urge support of pretty much the only organization looking into the issues.
So no, not all BBV original supporters were loons and worthy of derision.
My larger point, was and still remains, that by stifiling the larger points of voter disenfrancisement and the issues surrounding the tactics used in OH, which by definition made us unable to discern the will of the people, it played into the rights and the MSMs hands to dismiss the whole issue as one of ‘fraud’. The right polices its own by changing the subject. The left could have done the same but instead chose to worry about appearances, which is largely what I read your diary as being about. Now don’t get me wrong, appearances are important, I’m in advertising for fucks sake, but it’s how you shape it that matters more.
And as much as you may be unwilling to own up to your role in shaping the debate and turning it away from the very serious allegations that were coming to the surface while complaining about any activism or allegations as turning off the voters we are hoping to reach, it is unreasonable to assert that those same voters, who stood in lines for 12 hours only to be told they were at the wrong polling station and wouldn’t be able to cast a provisional ballot, aren’t ALREADY turned off to the system and when NO ONE stands up for them decide, just as the gent in your story that “my vote doesn’t count, why bother”. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy after all. And that KO is my main point. By framing your diary in the way you did you gave creedence and cover to those who would brush it under the rug and not use the momentum of the ‘grassroots’ AND the ‘netroots’ to really push the issue of the elections to the forefront.
So yes, I agree with the substance of your remarks, but not the context in which they were delivered which was to keep the appearance pure. And we disagree on tactics and impact obviously. In terms of the “fuck you” moments, it was the whole tone of the site with the sides chosen and those able to ban freely doing so. That creates an atmosphere of fear and one in which even those, especially those, with legitimate different viewpoints, stay silent. And that was the effect of your diary.
Instead of changing the topic and addressing how we could, right here and now, while people were still screaming about it, like Conyers did, help the cause, including claims the election was ‘stolen’ (of course there is more than one way to steal something, not just the most obvious way), it was effectively shouted down so in the end, Conyers stood alone.
That, in my mind, speaks for itself.
I extensively cited your comments and some relevant others above. (It took some arduous work to find those links, btw.) I agreed with some strong statements you made. I sought out common ground.
To respond to that gesture by again completely mischaracterizing me is unfair.
You imply I made you out to be a “loon and worthy of derision.” I did not. I disagreed with you. Politely. Honestly.
You say I “effectively shouted down” those who disagreed with me. There’s simply no evidence for that. If anything, I’ve always invited more discussion, more evidence, and I’ve thoughtfully responded to comments that disagreed with me. That’s one of the things I’m known for. Witness how I’ve responded here.
You imply that I was engaged in “banning freely” people who disagreed with me while you have no knowledge of any of my history in that regard. In fact, I did no such thing. About the only thing beyond trolling that I consistently thought merited banning was threatening violence.
This is not the first time that you’ve used mischaracterization in this thread. It’s not the first time that you’ve left false impressions about me that others might pick up on and conclude that, unrefuted, must be true. At a certain point, that does no one any good.
Like I said to Brian Nowhere above, I promised booman that I would write some pieces here to cover for Steven D. I would hope that, going forward, you would judge me by the respect I try to give you and by what I contribute to this website.
It’s funny. I started this blog in large part as a protest against the attitude expressed by front-pagers at Daily Kos in December of 2004 about election fraud. I fought quite rigorously with you at the time. And we have come to peace over the issue. I do understand why others still harbor resentments, but I hope they will understand that you have come to understand where I, and a lot of others, were coming from.
As you said, Bev Harris and Wayne Madsen became side issues. Bygones are bygones. We all saw what happened in Ohio and we all know we got rooked. What to do about it is the question.
For me, it is impossible to go into the inner city and look the people in the face and tell them that their vote counts. So, what are we gonna do about that?
you are also mischaracterizing me and my remarks. I won’t go into it point by point, but I have also argued and disagreed with you politely. I just had a different point of view on your role and impact than you do. That’s not wrong, or a mischaracterization, it is my opinion and perspective, just as you have yours.
And as far as my remarks about banning, read that sentence again, I didn’t say “you banned people”, I was speaking about the FP’s and the site as a whole.
About the “loon” comment, yeah, that’s what many, many, at the site were calling those who supported Bev Harris. And your point about my one comment saying people should support BBV was to do what? It would appear it would be to immediately damage my credibility in all matters pertaining to the debates over the election and the subsequent wars on dkos. Otherwise why bring it up? I had actually said in my response to you that MANY of the fraudsters deserved debunking. I also said I agreed with the substance of your remarks, but not the tactics or impact. Just because I hold a different view of how things went down doesn’t mean I’m your enemy or attacking you, you know.
Anyway, I’m not arguing this anymore, I believe Boo when he says you’ve come to understand where we are/ were coming from. And I provided many links for people to go judge the diaries and comments and timelines for themselves as well. So the mischaracterization seems to be happening on both sides, no?
My larger point remains that absolutely NOTHING has been done to ensure the subversion of democracy will not re-appear in 2006. So, how do we fix that now that the momentum for change has been lost? How do we GOTV in the inner city when the first question will be — where were you when I was standing in line for 12 hours and then didn’t get to vote?
Are you telling me that you take at face value everything you read?? My advice, always question. That’s the beauty of the whole thing.
For the record, i was just trying to be cool after a bit of reflection. I do remember that KO and I came to an agreement to stay away from each other at the time, but the fact that KO was an instrumental element in the quashing of the voting irregularity discussion has not changed. I can tell you that my comparing KO to DiHinMI was perhaps a bit of a stretch so I am amending that.
I never purposely lie or distort when I post, but I am human. When I’m wrong, amke a mistake or am off the mark I try to admit it.
Sorry I hurt your brain.
yeah, but k/o and I made up a long, long time ago. DHinMI is a whole other story. Not even comparable on any level.
Wolf Blitzer is about to talk impeachment on CNN.
Is it related to the decision in Hamdan? I’m stuck in my cubicle.