This isn’t exactly a GBCW diary, but I wanted to give you guys the perspective of a casual user/commenter to the BMT. In particular, I’d like to explain why I’ve been visiting and reading less Booman in the past few weeks…
I’m a run-of-the-mill daily blog consumer. I’d say that I represent a sizeable chunk of the blogging population in that I’m not completely enmeshed in the culture/community of [parts of] the netroots, but I’m definetly headed in that general direction.
Every day, I read DK, MyDD, HuffPo, GlennGreenwald, TPM, and Eschaton. Booman trib used to be included in my daily reading list, but now I only visit intermittently. I also read parts of the NYT, LAT, and WaPO, although I have basically ZERO trust in the msm.
Two years ago, before I was aware of liberal blogs, I trusted these ‘institutions’ and thought that media narratives mattered and actually reflected reality. I thought that free trade was real, that globalization was inevitable, and I thought Bill Clinton did a really good job as president.
Clearly, I don’t think those things now. Liberal blogs have essentially ‘radicalized’ and ‘partisanized’ me.
I’m positive there are many others like me, and I’m positive that this is a GREAT thing for America.
I was essentially turned from a politically passive MSM consumer into a Democratic Partisan with solid ideals. I’m a 23 year old law student, with no income, but I gave a good $300 to Democratic candidates last cycle (Tester, Webb, Brown, Sestak, Busby, DNC, and others I forget).
So that’s me — and the fact that I’ve become mroe and more committed to liberal causes has one concrete starting point: Daily Kos.
I know, that’s the last thing you wanted to hear, but it’s true. Daily Kos introduced me to the blogosphere, and Markos’ rhetoric was exactly what I needed to get engaged.
And that’s why I’ve become disenchanted with Booman. Because front page diarists on this site have attacked Markos — they weren’t criticizing him, they were attacking him. And, despite Markos’ faults I know that there are still a whole bunch of lukewarm Democrats who are going to stumble on to Daily Kos (like I did) and become energized/inspired.
I’m not saying that you’re all purity trolls. I also happen to really like Booman (the actualy guy) as a writer/diarist. Still, knowing that there are people who are willing to ATTACK Kos over some small stupid comment… Knowing that there are commenters who are hashing through his past, and his ruling-class roots… Knowing that there are people who attack a person (or a SYMBOL) that has been so, so good for our movement…
That makes me not want to patronzie this site. Kos MAY be a hypocrite. So was MLK (in that he was a documented adulterer).
It doesn’t matter, because the more powerful/influential Markos is — the better. At least in the short/medium term.
I’d rather you guys focus on real issues — wonky, philosophical, you name it. Dissent is important, and even productive. Attacking Markos the way FP’ers on this site have — that’s counterproductive.
I suppose you mean me when you refer to “front pagers who have attacked Markos” over “some small stupid comment.”
You should be willing to name names. Though I think your criticism is a little late. My last post about Markos and the Kathy Sierra affair was almost a month ago. Since then I have not posted any front page diaries criticizing Mr. Moulitsas or Daily Kos. Go back and check my front page posts if you doubt my claim.
As for whether my criticism of Markos was justified or not, I’m not here to argue that issue, which has already been hashed over more than enough times to not require further regurgitation and chewing. You have your opinion, and I have mine. So be it.
However, I find it strange that you come to this site now, weeks after the fact to dig this issue up again, and to defend Markos once again (he was, after all defended by many who posted comments in the threads to my front page posts here regarding Kos and his statements about Kathy Sierra), especially since the front page posts since then have had little if anything to do with Daily Kos or Markos. If there had been a constant drumbeat of anti-Kos front page diaries here, I could see the value in posting this diary as a counter argument to the dominant theme of our front page.
But that hasn’t been the case. I’ve moved on. The last front page story I posted about Markos was dated April 15th. I had my say, and moved on to other topics, as have the other front page writers here. So, I can only presume that your purpose in posting this diary is to stir the entire controversy up again. That seems rather pointless to me at this time, but maybe others feel differently.
In any event, you can choose not to read Booman Tribune if you wish, but don’t kid yourself that your decision is based on the fact that the front pagers here are all rabid Kos haters who can’t get over our anger or animus, and continue to stick it to him on a regular basis. It just ain’t so.
Okay.
First, I don’t have any hostility towards you, although you were certainly the front page poster I was refering to. I believe that we’re a part of the same movement and I respect the fact that you contribute to the progressive blogosphere. Markos comment was SMALL (in that it was short and clearly not well thought out) and STUPID, in that it was stupid for him to post it. He obviously wasn’t fully informed. I’d also like to note that although I was refering to you without naming you (which was lazy/disrespectful on my part), I also refered to several commenters (who weren’t you) that brought up Kos’s family history in order to discredit him. Your posts certainly legitimized these people, and they were ‘attacking’ Markos. Although my post was clearly Kathy Sierra inspired, I was trying to point out the power of Kos as a political symbol and trying to clarify what kind of dissent/criticism is productive vs counterproductive. I’m still of the opinion that the more powerful Kos becomes, relative to the MSM, the better. That opinion could change, but probably not in the short/medium term.
Second, in response to the assertion that I should have posted this two weeks ago — you have a point, but I disagree. I think that posting something like this now is better, because we’re not in the middle of a relatively emotional controversy. Although the ‘Kathy Sierra flap’ is what spawned this diary, I was trying to make a general point about the growth of our movement, and what a positive effect DK in general and Markos in particular has had. I’m sorry if I come off as harping on the past — I was trying to make a bigger point.
Third, I’d like to respond to this:
This is what I said
As you can see, I never said that ALL FP’ers attacked Kos, or that they all hate him. I DO believe that there are FP’ers [you in particular] who are ‘willing to attack Kos over some small stupid comment’. I don’t know if you can get over your animus, or if you even have animus. I do think that posts like yours spawned counterproductive conversations and encouraged Kos hating commenters.
Apparently I was wrong in asserting that there were multiple FP’ers writing about Kos. I’m too lazy to go back in the archives and check, so, I concede that.
Still, the reason I’ve stopped visiting Booman daily is directly related to the sites tolerance for what I see as counterproductive criticism.
I’m not against dissent. Discrediting dissenters is stupid, dangerous, and terrible. People who don’t even consider dissenting opinions tend to be completely out of touch with reality. My point is that there IS such a thing as counterproductive dissent/criticism, and I DO have the right to essentially criticize your criticism. I care about the growth/unity/harmony/purity of our movement, and I’m sure that you do to.
You’re clearly a more accomplished writer than I am, and I’m glad that you’re on my side. But don’t dismiss me because I want to avoid counterproductive criticism.
I guess I can kind of understand what you are trying to say, but it seems totally off-base to me.
Most of the people at this site started off at Daily Kos, and many of them left for legitimate reasons. Understanding the reasons is essential to ascertaining the health of the movement you refer to.
If Daily Kos is sick, then the movement is sick. When you see me criticize Daily Kos is has to do with the sites hostility to dirty hippies, people that think the 2004 vote was rigged, people that refuse to trade in their principles (on choice, for example) and root for the home team, greens, independents, conspiracy theorists, feminists (sanctimonious or no)…etc.
Add to that the mirroring of right wing tactics done by the diary police there, and you have a problem.
Walk a mile in my shoes having to work with people that have been needlessly bullied, insulted, and dismissed by the Daily Kos management and told to come here if they don’t like it.
Then tell me whether I should ‘tolerate’ criticism of the orange place.
You should tolerate productive criticism. You should also understand that frontpage posts that are critical of Kos will spawn ad-hominem attacks in the comments.
Kos may well have “hostility to dirty hippies, people that think the 2004 vote was rigged, people that refuse to trade in their principles (on choice, for example) and root for the home team, greens, independents, conspiracy theorists, feminists (sanctimonious or no)…etc.”
Some of that intolerance warrants criticism. There’s also the possibilty that there’s no room in our movement for people who dwell on certain topics (not that they’re wrong, just that discussing those topics is destructive).
I guess it depends what your goals are. I think that if we want to change the political center in this country, a few people have to hold their noses now and then in order to maintain discipline. People who refuse to support a pro-life candidate who caucuses with dems, for example, are NOT good for the party, and they’re not even good for the issue of choice.
I dunno. If people here were bullied on DK, then they certainly have the right to be mad, BUT, if they can’t acknowledge the positive effect Kos has had/is having on America and calibrate their criticisms accordingly, they’re going to be outcasts.
It doesn’t mean that their beliefs don’t matter. It just means that they aren’t working towards the same cause ‘we’ (the progressive movement) are working towards.
It’s possible that 9/11 was an inside job. It’s likely that Bush stole the 2004 elections. Obsessing over those issues, however, is impractical — even decadent.
Meh, I don’t know where I’m going with this. I guess that I think most people should be satisfied with where our movement is going. It’s already had a huge impact on our media/political discourse, and I’m happy enough that I won’t complain about my pet issues.
I also think that there are people whose identity depends on being persecuted. People who love to complain about being ‘needlessly bullied, insulted, and dismissed’. That’s an inherently anti-social way to live, and politics is a social.
wow. thanks so much for coming over from dKos to tell us to STFU about issues that you think shouldn’t be discussed. One of my least favorite things about that site is the ever-growing list of things that must not be talked about.
also nice how you define yourself as progressive and people who disagree with you as not.
If Markos and dailyKos want to be as important as you think they are, they’d do well to borrow BooMan’s “don’t be a prick” rule. Discussions get rude and personal fast sometimes, and not just the Israel/Palestine ones. I think that site may still tear itself apart during primary season, if not before. Candidate diaries are ugly already.
Thanks BooMan and Steven for your great writing!
Ok, firstly, you were the one who was rude.
Second of all, there’s a difference between being a progressive and part of a progressive movement. If you refuse to vote for a pro-life dem over a pro-life repub, you aren’t a part of the movement.
Finally, there are NO issues that shouldn’t be discussed. But don’t expect relatively radical/disturbing ideas to be acceptable to the mainstream. I wasn’t necessarily making any value judgements, but since you’re so excited to be taking this personally… Thanks. You proved my point.
It’s clear you like it better over there.
Bye!
Actually, I’m really enjoying this back and forth and I respect where you’re coming from.
First off, Markos is so not a Progressive. I’m not even sure I would like to call him a Democrat. I think he is an embarrassment to Democrats. I will agree that his site brought together many Progressives and Democrats and for that, I thank him. But, I am even more happy to see sites like this one where we are free to speak on any issue.
Second off,
“Second of all, there’s a difference between being a progressive and part of a progressive movement. If you refuse to vote for a pro-life dem over a pro-life repub, you aren’t a part of the movement.”
Bullshit. You might be a Democrat if you voted for a pro-life dem, but you sure as shit ain’t a Progressive. Progressive seek to strengthen individual freedoms and expand them, they do not seek to set the clock back 50 years. I don’t begrudge anyone who found they could not close their eyes and vote for Casey. The Democratic party failed us by choosing such a loser of a candidate and he only won because Santorum was so atrocious that he was to the right of Attila the Hun.
me take it personally? I’m not even one of the dozens of valued contributors here who were thrown off dKos. See below for how to take something personally!
if you’re responding to my use of the word “rude”, that whole paragraph is about dKos in general and not about you.
your distinction between “progressive” and “progressive movement” misses my point. Which is: I don’t accept your authority – or anyone else’s – to decide what’s good for “the movement”. Markos or BooMan or MSOC decide what’s good for their blogs; Howard Dean decides what’s good for the Democratic Party; but there is no Pope who speaks for the “progressive movement”, however you want to define it.
I wish I could understand why you think DK is a “progressive” site with a “progressive goal.” First, know that I am a member of the Orange place and have been since 2004. I still read there quite often. I am not only a progressive but an ultra blinkin bleeding-heart-liberal. Markos and DK are NOT progressive, though some who participate there are. Markos is a little bit left leaning Libertarian. I am not making that distinction, he is the one who says so. His ONLY goal, as stated by him, is to get Democrats elected. He is not always concerned with what type of Democrat as long as they are elected. No problem. It is his site and those are his views as he describes them.
For those of us who are actually progressives, or at least most of us who are, there aren’t any topics that “should not be discussed.” The thought police and the topic police are particularly not appealing to us. For those who think only certain topics are worthy or valuable…so be it.
I have made a lot of friends at DK and a lot of other blogs over the years. I have met some wonderful writers and even some very real friends. The fact that I still choose to peruse the Orange site a few days a week shows that I find a great deal of the information there is of interest and value to me. So Kudos and applause for Markos and all those early on that got the ball rolling!
But I don’t find the discussion of Markos and his statements that I find beyond the pale as “attacks.” They are just my opinions based on his statements of his opinions. I post my opinions at Orange and I post them here if the content here brings such topics up.
That we all do not agree is no surprise. That we express and define many varied opinions on a wide range of topics is no surprise. That we do and are capable of THINKING for ourselves and forming our opinions based on our particular knowledge and experience is Laudable!
What may seem small and insignificant to you may just as well be something quite significant and important to me. That’s how the real world works.
So, thanks for participating here and expressing your opinions. I respectfully disagree but welcome the opportunity to get to know you and your oppinons better.
Shirl
are people, I will start to respect you.
what are you talking about… that there SHOULDN’T be such issues?
because THERE ARE, overtly, declared… many.
Don’t talk about 2004 fraud, don’t talk about conspiracies from the leftist rack that imply wars are conspiracies to make money… and btw, don’t talk about markos’ business dynamics at other sites, turns out he rather doesn’t like that.
I’m going to maintain all of the discipline I can muster in my response to your ignorance and blithely made remarks about women’s right to choose. The very reason we are in the war against women we see today is because of people like Markos and the leadership of the Democratic Party who consistently and persistently tell us to hold our fuckingass noses.
Does the recent ban on late abortions being upheld ring a bell? How do you think we arrived at this, can you consider for just one lousy moment that maybe it was men like Markos telling us that the vaunted D after the name was all that matters, could it possibly be that the likes of Casey were thrust upon us by Markos way early in the campaign as if he was some kind of ‘golden boy,’ women’s lives be damned?
Grow the fuck up, we’re playing in the real world here and women’s lives will be lost and Markos, et al will most assuredly have blood on their filthy, little, weasely hands.
Go pitch your pro-life crap elsewhere, those of us who disagree with your thesis have work to do and it’s YOU and your ilk who have put us here, in the back alleys, in abortion wards, on the floors of our bathrooms, YOU and MARKOS are part of the reason for another abortion rights underground to exist, what you have to offer is despicable and lewd and it’s murderous to half of the population of this country.
Go oogle and worship Markos, you do nothing but fuckingass piss me the fuck off and I’m sure I’m not fuckingass alone in that.
I would like to know just why it is that these putative “leaders” of ours (and by the way, I do not consider Markos a “leader” by any stretch of the imagination or definition of the word) are supposed to be off limits when it comes to criticism — harsh criticism, even (an attack by any other name).
I didn’t elect Markos. and I cannot fire him. But I can damned well cll him on it when he behaves like a fucking asshole, and that happens more and more frequently — and yes, he banned me from Daily Kos last week for a bullshit reason that was quickly shown to be bogus. And when SHOWN it was bogus, he admitted — ADMITTED — that he didn’t care, that he was tired of my “drama” and would not be rescinding the banning.
Which means it’s Markos’s sandbox and we play in it at his pleasure.
What horseshit.
Just how many people making the same criticism and complaints will it take before peopel start realising that THIS emperor is starkers, too?
More and more, Markos and his followers resemble nothing so much in tone and temperament as Bush and HIS followers:
— Autocratic, arrogant, impetuous and utterly lacking in a moral centre. (that’d be Markos.)
— Unquestioning, unthinking, moblike in their response to dissent and resembling nothing so much as sheep in their conversion to “Four legs good, two legs better!” (That’d be his followers.)
And, of course, coming from me, a recently banned member of Daily Kos, any of them could now dismiss ANYTHING I have to say as merely the grumblings of a disgruntled ex-member. Unless, of course, they took the time to read everything I’d written in the past several months PRIOR to my banning, wherein the only difference is that I took a more POLITIC approach to my criticism.
But, like taking Markos’s word for it that his banning of me had an actual basis in his bullshit rules (which it did not — there WAS no copyright violation), none of the sheeple at DKos will bother to research; they will merely believe what they are told by their Fearless Leader and his Thugs, whose primary tactics now include open mockery of dissenters in the form of diaries directed at them, ganging up on them in discussions (and is there not a more telling sight than all of the front pagers appearing in lockstep in a discussion, repeating verbatim the same propaganda within minutes of each other?) and, of course, “auto” bans, which happen neither because of community ratings NOR because of Markos’s magic hand on high, but because the thugs themselves have the power to disappear people whom they consider to be “troublemakers.”
Stalinesque, indeed — fucking Stalin could have learned a thing or two from the Internet.
I’m glad I could provide you with a cathartic release, but this isn’t about you.
Every single criticism you level at Markos doesn’t negate the good he has done. That doesn’t meant hat you should ‘follow’ him, or hang on his every word — I don’t. I just recognize the importance of his voice and his style of rhetoric.
There are plenty of dems who aren’t involved in the blogosphere, who rely on the New York Times for political reality, but wish they could do more.
DailyKos is a gateway for those people. That’s a great thing. Kos, whether or not he’s smart, or well read, or tolerant of your beliefs, is an excellent gatekeeper. He may not be a great leader, or even a great person. He’s still good for the Democratic party.
Finally, ‘ranting’ IMO is arrogant and self-indulgent. It aparently allows you to get away with infering that I’m a sheep even though I’ve been reasonable and open-minded. It’s incredibly hypocritical to call Dkos readers sheep and then complain that they’re dismissive of you and your views.
I don’t think Kos is infalible, and I don’t think that he’s always right when it comes to policy, policing his site, or any other matter.
I do think that ad-hominem attacks against Kos are bad for the progressive movement/Democratic party. Not because Kos is a great guy or a great leader.
Why am I not allowed to think that?
Listening.
it is always about MEsock.
obviously you are a tadpole to the blahgasphere.
not everyone thinks it’s honest to pretend to act 100% selflessly and pretend to remove your own life and view from some idea being presented, since that is lying.
Politics is personal.
Real politics.
Getting paid and smokey backroom shit is not personal, that’s BUSINESS.
Take your pick, politics can be personal, or it can be just business, take your pick Miss Devore. … . Business it is then.
me a link to this post”
love the implicit disclaimer.
“Unless, of course, they took the time to read everything I’d written in the past several months PRIOR to my banning, wherein the only difference is that I took a more POLITIC approach to my criticism.”
Jesette Christ-what is it about you & aravia-you get banned from your favorite litter box, and go to other sites and insist that people must read your entire oeuvre, before they can assess you. Do you know how time-consuming that is? To say nothing about accomodating the deceased who must read with fucking pennies on their eyes!
Once upon a time you dressed so fine
You threw the bums a dime in your prime, didn’t you?
People’d call, say, “Beware doll, you’re bound to fall”
You thought they were all kiddin’ you
You used to laugh about
Everybody that was hangin’ out
Now you don’t talk so loud
Now you don’t seem so proud
About having to be scrounging for your next meal.
How does it feel
How does it feel
To be without a home
Like a complete unknown
Like a rolling stone?
You’ve gone to the finest school all right, Miss Lonely
But you know you only used to get juiced in it
And nobody has ever taught you how to live on the street
And now you find out you’re gonna have to get used to it
You said you’d never compromise
With the mystery tramp, but now you realize
He’s not selling any alibis
As you stare into the vacuum of his eyes
And ask him do you want to make a deal?
How does it feel
How does it feel
To be on your own
With no direction home
Like a complete unknown
Like a rolling stone?
You never turned around to see the frowns on the jugglers and the clowns
When they all come down and did tricks for you
You never understood that it ain’t no good
You shouldn’t let other people get your kicks for you
You used to ride on the chrome horse with your diplomat
Who carried on his shoulder a Siamese cat
Ain’t it hard when you discover that
He really wasn’t where it’s at
After he took from you everything he could steal.
How does it feel
How does it feel
To be on your own
With no direction home
Like a complete unknown
Like a rolling stone?
Princess on the steeple and all the pretty people
They’re drinkin’, thinkin’ that they got it made
Exchanging all kinds of precious gifts and things
But you’d better lift your diamond ring, you’d better pawn it babe
You used to be so amused
At Napoleon in rags and the language that he used
Go to him now, he calls you, you can’t refuse
When you got nothing, you got nothing to lose
You’re invisible now, you got no secrets to conceal.
How does it feel
How does it feel
To be on your own
With no direction home
Like a complete unknown
Like a rolling stone?
that you would ignore her claim that there was no copyright violation, and bitch about the request to refer to her work… read closely, she said it would be possible to see the same criticisms over a period of time, just put more diplomatically.
same applies to me… now people can say, and have, “oh, people that have been banned are just bitter”… which doesn’t bother me at all though it’s false, and the way to see that it’s false is to realize I’ve made the criticisms I’ve made freely whenever they came to me… though I too am far less polite about it now because, I have no hope of it getting better.
your kos is the divisive kind of anchor all the kossacks bleat about people like Nader or Kucinich being, “they may have this or that idea… but they are too…” or people say Hillary is.
What kos represents to people is not pretty, and it’s getting heavier, and YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN.
It’s funny that someone like myself would get banned, and yet people still think, “but can’t you pitch in, can’t you give us kos the benefit of the doubt, don’t you know that even though flawed we need to ring him in light and flowers? …”
and people are really confused looking… “why can’t you just do that? why be bitter?”
um, I for one am not bitter, things are peachy in my life, the areas where I might bother to be bitter, are going great, and when a chance for bitterness arrises there, I avoid it… so, perhaps it’s not bitter, perhaps it’s the internet, and what I write is what I think, and I SHOCKINGLY think markos is naive, bad for progressive politics, and an ass.
markos gets the part about being himself and saying what he likes, but he doesn’t meld that with the idea of netroots, even as he himself had originally cast it.
but markos should at least have not pissed off so many good liberal writers.
he’s history. but don’t worry, he’ll keep getting paid, I know that’s of great concern to you guys, and hell, me too, I want everyone to make a living… and like Imus, Markos can make a living even while being brought, with words, to face his own words and actions.
Why would markos be immune but not The New York Times… do you suppose the New York Times has not done anything good for liberalism, eh?
“but because the thugs themselves have the power to disappear people whom they consider to be “troublemakers.”
Yeah, I’ve been banned too – several times.
DKos is run by mafias, which enforce the LWCW (left wing conventional wisdom). If you disagree, you get troll rated. So fuck that mangy shit.
Odd quote from the subject of this piece.
“I read very few books.”
— M. Moulitsas
At least in the last year.
Mr. Moulitsas’ lack of background in the history of the United States, its politics, its culture, and matters both foreign and domestic, results in a thundering ignorance and shallowness that is reflected in his writing and analyses of American politics circa 2007.
Those who don’t understand the history of the United States, either recent or distant, don’t have a roadmap to the present; therefore, it’s little wonder that Mr. Moulitsas proves his shaky grasp of politics with embarrassing regularity.
In other words, is Ned Lamont the senator from Connecticut?
I rather suspect the only reading Mr. Moulitsas does on a regular basis is the sports page, his true passion.
But he’s still good for the party and the country. He’s an American. He’s poorly informed.
How dare he care about something?!
but he then went and told OTHER PROGRESSIVES “what to care about”… and you are fine with that.
we therefore can rest assured you don’t mind, on principle, telling people what to care about.
don’t go stealing my material from OG & P.
(Ok-it could have been arrived at independently)
In the vein of: “The George W. Bush Presidential library burned down, and both books were lost in the fire. And one of them wasn’t even completely colored in.”
What’s OG&P? Sounds like an electric utility company.
It’s den of vipers.
They have lanyards too.
Scary, huh?
this is not my beloved coldbluesteeleouttamoney.
I shall cry, if so. But only in the privacy of my watercloset.
I had to think about it for a bit before it came to me.
How old ARE those ladies if they’re taking credit for a joke that was antique in my father’s youth?
your father made jokes about kos? how prescient.
snicker.
oh, too funny …
Isn’t that kind of comment something you criticize DK for? Ganging up, belittling and whatnot?
That is precisely the mentality that frightens me. Much the way I would prefer that people in other countries didn’t see the word from the White House as representative of America, I would prefer that people not think that Markos speaks for the liberal blogosphere.
I truly haven’t seen any evidence that Markos shares many values with me, or is on the same “side” as me, except occasionally, as something of a fluke. Although, it’s hard to tell for sure, because I haven’t seen much indication of what his values actually are. What does he stand for, other than “winning elections”? What would he be willing to take a stand for, even if it might be unpopular?
I wrote a diary recently entitled The Main Thing, which addressed the issue of values and the “things that really matter”. I purposely didn’t mention Markos or his site. But the bottom line is, if I’m going to be involved in any “movement”, it needs to be about some greater good that I believe is worthy of my time and energy. Making the world a better place for all of us–not just people who are in “key demographics”. I don’t support Democrats out of some notion that they are my “team”. (Democrats rule! Republicans drool!)
The way you win power in our democracy is through politics. You use that power to shape society based on your values. Caring about these things is important.
Why is teamwork/solidarity childish?
Unions rule! Robber barons drool!
Trickle-down democracy. No thanks–not something I want to devote my free time to fighting for.
You came here for attention and you got it. I’m regretting the part I played in that, but am choosing now to move on to more productive endeavors for the rest of my evening.
This concern-troll has been a member for less than a month. Two diaries to his (?) name – both in defense of kos’ misogeny, no comments elsewhere.
I say good-bye – donuts may be coming!
Meh, I guess I can be considered a concern troll.
I think I’m a concern troll that wishes the best for you guys, though. I assumed that I could support Kos and be accepted here. I also think I kept a relatively open mind.
Either way, we are a part of the same movement and I do wish you success. I’m not sure where I came off as particularly hostile… but oh well.
already knows how to suck eggs.
That’s what she said.
And that is a set-up for a straw man diversion.
However, it isn’t childish, but worse than childlike, to continue supporting the degradation of one’s core values in the name of either teamwork or solidarity when those terms are used as noble-sounding but cynical cover for “all give and no take.”
Neither concept is a one-way proposition.
prove that you win power through politics… you win power through social movement such that the politicals come running and drooling.
I.e. the blogosphere itself, it looked to be an opinion power outside the party structure, it scared them shitless, they started to ape Dean because the blogosphere was lapping him up… THAT is how you change our democracy.
You do not change it, e.g. to be more pro-choice, by cleverly supporting pro-life people, and figuring putting them in a “pro-choice” party will somehow mean shit… AS IF doing that won’t just change the party.
see, you advocates for party think everything follows parties, and you couldn’t be more wrong, parties follow.
I’m a 38 year old black, gay man, with a partner of seven years and an adopted four-year-old son we’ve had since he was four days old.
I’ve been out since I was twelve and an activist since I was 18. In those 20 years, I’ve contributed to Democratic candidates, volunteered for them, phone banked for them, handed out literature for them, gone door to door for them, lobbied them, etc. This past election, I even took my son on a door to door lit drop.
I’ve also been an activist and educator on gay & lesbian issues for that long.
Having said all of that, let me ask a few questions.
On what issues may Markos be legitimately criticized?
What’s the best way to couch presumably legitimate criticism?
What issues are we to set aside? And for how long? What, if anything, does that say about the Democrats’ values?
To what degree does that mark a shift in values, and in what direction?
Is this a permanent shift? Why or why not?
(And, yes, I make a distinction between Democrats and Progressives. Some Democrats are Progressives and some Progressives are Democrats, but not all Democrats are Progressives and not all Progressives are Democrats.)
And if the Democratic party is drifting away from the issues that I’m working on every day, how should I handle that? Should I speak up about it?
And how do I know whether those issues are ever going to come off the back-burner?
President Wilson had more pressing issues to address and asked the Iron-Jawed Angels to be patient about women’s sufferage.
President Kennedy had more pressing issues to address and asked MLK to be patient about civil rights.
Who wants to add more to the list??
Interesting that in at least these two cases, movement was actually made, not by getting the party leaders to recognize the importance of the issues, but by going outside the party and applying pressure. I, for one, am glad that these groups maximized their criticism of the party rather than deciding to be patient with their requests.
His book, “Why We Can’t Wait”:
“Because ‘wait’ almost always means ‘never.”
Kos is not the president. Kos is not the party.
If Kos gets his way, and Democrats have a trifecta, then whatever issue you support will at least have a fighting chance. If he’s standing in your way at that point, by all means, please criticize him.
The way you get big things done is to organize. Criticizing Kos does not help us organize. I have not seen evidence that Kos is working against liberal causes. On the contrary, I have seen him support/raise money for candidates that are far more liberal than the DLC crop.
So what in gods name are you talking about?
If Kos is the establishment, then who the hell is Hillary Clinton?
If you’ll notice I didn’t say anything about Kos in my comment. I don’t usually bother criticizing him because, when it comes to the movements I actually care about – he’s pretty irrelevant. He’s been pretty clear that his goal is to elect Democrats – that’s it. And if you follow my comment…I’m pointing out that historically these movement did NOT necessarily see success by having Dems in office.
Ok, that’s fair.
Still, I think that having Dems in office makes it easier to accomplish what you want to accomplish. You still have to fight hard & threaten them, but republicans would be worse.
My reference was to Dr. King’s classic reply to the “wait for change, wait for your rights” line that politicians in power always peddle to anyone who demands equal rights and opportunity.
We can’t wait. We’ve already waited long enough. Why should we wait one more day to be first class citizens?
The Merm or whatever his name is, is the one obsessed with turning this into something about Mr. Moulitsas, who is at best a minor functionary of the DLC wing of the Democratic Party.
listen, you want to defend kos because he’s not REALLY that powerful, but also say your goal is to get him as much power AS POSSIBLE in an expressly unlimitted way.
but you want to talk about sense? is there sense in that?
We’re supposed to WAIT until you get markos even more power, and then speak? That’s what the internet is for?
Those are great questions, and they do a good job of exposing the slippery slope side of my arguments.
I think the crux of my contention comes down to this: you can’t argue that Kos has been/is bad for the Democratic party/America and be taken seriously.
When I see Kos criticized for essentially being a lazy blogger, and when I see commenters bringing up his family’s past, I think those people are being counterproductive and I don’t think they should be taken seriously.
When it comes to issues and policies any reasonable criticism is fair game. By reasonable, I mean thoughtfully considered, relevant, credible, etc.
Basically, people who criticize Kos should at least acknowledge that he’s good for ‘Our Values’. That doesn’t mean that I want them to put a disclaimer on their piece. I just don’t see how someone could believe that Kos has been bad for the Democratic party.
Even if the only thing he represents is ‘winning’, I don’t see how that hurts you. If Democrats are in power, it’s better for the gay rights agenda.
I’ve been blogging for less than two years, but I’ve learned a lot. Kos brought me into the fold. There are plenty of people like me.
Here is what I wrote:
Blame me for allowing some language that I found offensive if you want, but at least I explained my tolerance for it.
Aside from the fact that Markos represents very few of my values, I have a hard time seeing your point. What exactly has Markos accomplished other than building a user-friendly site that drew some writers whose talent far exceeds his own? Many of whom he’s driven away or banned. LOL. He’s made himself a nice chunk of change, but I don’t really see how that’s advanced the political process.
Uhh… that’s huge.
His site has organized, motivated, and radicalized Democrats.
Luscious Vagina and elise, and the woman who renamed herself to treat her kos addiction.
stop making me slap my knees.
dKos is a great achievement in many ways.
both of these are significant accomplishments. Of those blogs MerM mentions reading, I think dKos (and bootrib) are the only ones with the ability to have good conversations in the comments (this is scoop, right? sorry to admit my stupidity in such things.) The user-friendliness is a huge thing; so is the amount of really good analysis of just about anything. Though I know the official purpose of dKos is “electing Democrats”, I’m sure there are many like me for whom its primary value is filling the unmet need for accurate news.
Markos may have more to teach the world as a businessman than as a political pundit; he has been successful by delegating and plenty of business leaders never learn that.
Of course what I call “delegating”, Curmudgeon calls “getting great writers to give him their work and let him keep the payment”. Capitalism! dKos is the biggest and most significant of the progressive blogs; I suppose that’s why BooMan, StevenD and many of the other good writers here also post in orange. It’s also why chumps like me post there; I may have nothing to say, but thousands might read it.
Bullseye! Well, me anyway. If I hadn’t discovered dKos I certainly wouldn’t have put a couple thousand of my hard earned into politics last year – not one nickel to my unchallenged Dem rep and senator; nearly all to candidates I heard about at dKos or here. Of course, that included backing progressive losers like Angie Paccione and Ned Lamont.
I no longer post at Daily Kos. Just for the record.
If you weren’t already married to the coolest woman ever, and if I was just a wee bit younger, I would have your children. :>)
I have noticed Steve, and I support your decision. It is not the end all, be all. There are a gazillion other places where your voice would be heard, and it is a good voice.
It’s not user friendly. It’s left-wing-mafia friendly.
If you disagree with the LFCW (left wing conventional wisdom), you get troll rated for opinion.
There’s a larf. Dailykos, the place that invented the concept “purity troll” and tells all manner of leftist to “SYFPH” as “left wing”? Thanks for the chuckle.
Yes, on some issues. On others, you are correct. But the point is that differences on various SUBSTANTIVE and PERFECTLY REASONABLE policy issues result in troll ratings.
This doesn’t happen in other lefty sites. This happens all the time in right wing sites, however.
it’s allowed them to pat themselves on the back for how RADICAL they are, while still holding on to their Ronnie-love if they like.
it’s bigger, and I don’t have the time.
Probably one of the reasons you are having trouble grasping why some feel that Markos (and dkos itself) is not, and should not, be immune from criticism of both throwaway words and actions is precisely because you were introduced to political activism through daily kos… and daily kos is sort of like AOL was in the early days (and may still be, I don’t use it)… an internet in a box.
Insular, contained and ever circling among a few approved sites that reinforce the goals, themes and ideas of the circle – as evidenced by your reading list.
When you branch farther out, to people who are both recent and long time political activists (if not always Democratic Party activists like most on those sites) civil activists offline and online, civil rights workers, environmental, judicial, and women’s rights workers, people of color, feminists… (in other words, the “special interests groups” so denigrated by markos and company), you might begin to come to a slight understanding of the issues involved, the compromises that refuse to be made – and why.
The Democratic party cannot win at the polls without coalitions, no matter how many people write diaries on daily kos, or how many politicians or media persons kos (or any of the other “leaders of the blogosphere”… heh) sits down with, or how many big traffic is, so on so forth.
And you don’t build coalitions by refusing to both stand up for your own and also take on your own when needed. I would bet that Steven D garnered more goodwill (of people who vote, or may think of voting or may be tired of voting) by showing he would stand up with women who had been harassed against the dismissive and ignorant statements of the biggest “liberal” (cough) blogger than all those who said “they should just suck it up!” or “by criticizing markos you are wrecking the progressive movement!” and whatever other nonsense.
No, by criticizing markos (or BooMan or Bowers or Stoller or the FDL crew, or… ) when they say something inane, or by criticizing daily kos when it’s become like a right wing thug site, too wedded to the party and not to principle, or pointing out that they (kos and the others) are centrists calling themselves “liberals and progressives” who are thus making it seem as if actual liberals and progressives are on the fringe, and that leftists are on the other side of the world, people are growing the progressive movement.
They are just not growing daily kos.
Wow. Did you only recently register just to make these comments?
I also started at dkos but now fully recognize that the thrust there is election of Democrats and not the pursuit of a progressive agenda.
Markos has earned the criticism over his comments, and this wouldn’t be the first time. Ask anyone here about the pie wars if you have any doubts. Like it or not, he has become the face of liberal blogging, his comments should be chosen more carefully. His recent comments were a legitimate subject for a front page post.
because I got thrown off.
DKos is run by a group of mafias. The gay rights mafia enforces the requirement of gay marriage. The immigration mafia tells us that we must have no borders at all. The impeachment mafia says that impeachment must happen today.
If you disagree, you get troll-rated.
I don’t like troll rating for opinion, but that’s DKos for you.
“Gay mafia”. Uh-huh, yeah. Do they have jackets and secret decoder rings?
God, this is the funniest set of comments I’ve read in a long time.
I agree with the rating system at DailyKos. It’s just a tool for bullying and intimidation and should never have been instituted.
You want to fight somebody, fight with your words, not by gathering a small gang to troll-rate people into oblivion.
but I wanted to give you guys the perspective of a casual user/commenter to the BMT
Hey Jason,
three points:
Hey Colleen-
Hey Martin,
That’s great. You’ve loathed me for what reason, exactly?
I have noticed a bit of vituperative shrillness on your part as far as I am concerned, but more often I notice sheer idiocy, like the idea that Delaware Dem is trying to sockpuppet on this site.
Or, perhaps, you loathe me because I am ‘the biggest Casey supporter on the internets’ or because I am one of the Big Boyz, or because I am part of some centrist conspiracy, or who the fuck knows?
You are a regular fount of theories, none of which may even a modicum of sense.
For the benefit of others (from the litterbox, a gem of wisdom and logic).
This contains all the variant strains of litterbox lunacy.
This is the m/o of this crew.
Does it make any sense? No.
Why let a little thing like the facts get in the way of wild conspiracy theories (or paranoid schizophrenia, for that matter)?
I hope with his permission? Otherwise, I’m very much surprised at your use of the quote from the Cat Lady Blog, Booman.
it’s a little late to try to protect Jason’s google rankings. Google his name and you’ll get the idea.
Nah – generally speaking, when any of us do refer to you [which is far less often than you all imagine], we use a pet name. Your current one is MOB.
DD’s is now Luscious Vagina [I believe that was Miss D’s rather apt inversion of Lucius Vorenous]. We have several for Armando too.
you’re witty.
well, half, anyway….
To wit…her latest.
Get that? I find MerM’s argument on pro-choice people being non-progressive’s compelling. Same goes for my girlfriend. Thanks, Colleen, for not posting her name and employer. That’s progress. Worthy adversary? I’m trying to think of a worthy adversary for you. Jonah Goldberg seems about right.
Like I said…
half witty.
What’s scary is that apparently there do exist people who think that sort of thing is actually worth reading.
Not my problem, though; better things to do with my time.
who are you again?
I just rarely comment.
Same with lots of other blogs.