Washblog

I disagree with Josh.  I think he places way more influence and importance on blogs than actually exists.  There is a huge difference between making strategy, which we do not do, and informing strategy, which we do.  There is so much noise coming from the blogs that to think any coherent strategy or message could come from them is to dream a pretty little dream.

Josh, I know you're here - weigh in with us.  We comment on your bloggy-blog!

Switzerblog'll knock you out!

by switzerblog on Mon Jan 16, 2006 at 01:58:33 PM PST

---

We don't create or finalize party strategy here - we may discuss possibilities, but Frank Chopp doesn't ask us to bandy around what we should do with the potenial surplus this legislative session, for example.  While there may be discussion of what's going on in various legislative district races, again, the final word, let alone muchof the process, isn't posted here.

And like it or not, the "hive mind" aspect of the blogs allows for more individual participation, not parsing of policy from above, which can be a pain when the geneal mode is "whining" or "depressed", but which allows us to both "herd the cats" and allow those same cats to have their say, especially when they feel ignored or snubbed.  Emotions get flushed out eventually, and the desire to take action, and determining the best course of action, as individuals and not as part of a party or movement, then takes place.

And this is where the confusion lies.  DailyKos, as a prime example, is part of a strong responsive network, but not part of a strong proactive network.  And even if it were part of the former, it still is "our" gig, not that of the Dmeocratic Party, of which it and its individual politicians, will do what they think are in their best interests.  Sometimes they might listen to us, even work with us - but many don't and won't, save for fundraising.

Maybe when we realize a little coordination of effort is more necessary than both sides realize, then we'll have to be a bit more careful.  But at the moment, I believe the blogs don't serve the purposes perceived by Mr. Feit.

by palamedes on Mon Jan 16, 2006 at 11:26:44 AM PST

---

who've been leading us down the primrosed path of losing, losing losing for decades.

IF the point of the grassroots is to shut up and jump when Biden and DiFi deign to tell us how high to jump and where to jump,

THEN blogs are bad.

IF you think that ALL and ANY work for "the party" is useful for the betterment of the peon, vs. mainly useful for the benefit of the loser class living large shutteling in and outta DC, well,

THEN blogs are bad.

In my few posts here I reference a Dec. 1981 article about how f$#%ed Raygun's budget was, and the person interviewed was Raygun's budget man, David Stockman.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/budget/stockman.htm

WTF has being quiet for the DC Dem elite accomplished?  

Most of them have stayed in their positions of comfort and power ...

ummmmmmmmmm ... oh - if they weren't there then things would be worse !!

bah on josh.

rmm.

http://www.liemail.com/BambooGrassroots.html

by rmdSeaBos on Mon Jan 16, 2006 at 12:25:47 PM PST

---

This isn't something new but opinions and re-caps of political news is not revealing strategy.  If that is what Josh feels strategy is then I think he is on Paul Constant's "happy pills".  No offense Josh.  You keep writing... I'll keep reading.

by Jimmy on Mon Jan 16, 2006 at 12:36:06 PM PST

---

If Josh is right, and that the GOP kept behind closed doors between Goldwater and 1994, then it still isn't a good idea to play the same game as them. Politics isn't a zero-sum football type of game where you adopt your enemies strategies to win. (West Coast offense politics?)

Politics should be public, there should be public conversations about what's going on between office holders and citizens. Blogs (to some degree) facilitate that conversation.

________________
I blog here.

by emmettoconnell on Mon Jan 16, 2006 at 01:38:30 PM PST

---

The more we read each other's opinions, the less need we have need of him. That's where he's coming from.

Journalists at corporate media (and yes, that includes the Stranger) are like Mr. Jones in the Dylan song. Something is happening here and they don't know what it is.

When Josh (or any of the rest of them) has something meaningful to say -- and yes, that includes bloggers -- people will pay attention. In my opinion, this isn't it.

If perception is reality, then the world must be flat and the sun must revolve around it.

by ivan on Mon Jan 16, 2006 at 02:02:17 PM PST

---

Josh has a recurring problem with false equivalence.

Josh criticized Murray for asking highschoolers "Why was bin Laden popular in the Sudan?  Perhaps because he bought them schools, hospitals, and roads?"  Like any crime lord does to ingratiate itself with the locals. Josh further chastised the rest of us for being upset with Trent Lott's contemporous comments while supporting Murray's comments.

More recently, Josh eviscerated the state party for corruption, comparing a minor problem to the institutional problems with the national GOP.  Apparently, routine audits and taking constructive corrective action when problems are identified should be criticized.  Maybe the state party should have been more forthcoming.  I mean, really, who wouldn't trust sensative information with a proven supporter like Josh.  (I kid.)  I blogged about "Glass Houses" here.

So, I guess I have trouble accepting criticism about the negative effects of blogging (aka "free speech") from a one man wrecking ball, a person who has done plenty of damage to the state Dems, a person who apparently sees the world through some sort of twisted prism.

On the state party chair brouhaha...  

That was an unfortunate mess.  I myself am prone to shoot before aiming sometimes.  So I understand.  Andrew's young.  He'll learn.  He'll have to work hard to patch up his reputation and creditability.  I wish him well in that.

As for the bickering back and forth here, it's sickening.  

Everyone, save your ammo for the bad guys.  Like the Afghanis warlords said over tea during the Soviet occupation: First we kill the Soviets, then we kill each other.

by zappini on Mon Jan 16, 2006 at 02:28:23 PM PST

---

If Feit is trying to compare the left-blogosphere of the 2000s to the right-wing "think tanks" of the 1970s and 1980s, he clearly misses one major difference in their respective worlds -- the existence of the internet and constant availability of news and information.

It's impossible now to be "under the radar" in the way Viguere, Reed, and the rest of them were.  So many people are able to locate, study, and deconstruct everything these days.  Heritage and Cato and AEI could no more operate as they once did than can the DLC, MoveOn, or Progressive Majority in 2006.

You're only young once, but you can be immature forever -- Larry Andersen
Blogging at Peace Tree Farm

by N in Seattle on Mon Jan 16, 2006 at 09:54:57 PM PST

---