Sunday Discussion Group

August 20, 2006

Earlier this week, Roll Call had a report about how the Senate Dem caucus reacts to Joe Lieberman (I) between now and Election Day. The article suggested some Dems will go through the motions while quietly hoping for a Lieberman victory. Why quietly? Because some Dems are worried about the blogs’ reaction.

Another well-placed Democratic source said, “Publicly they have to support Lamont,” adding that if they didn’t they would be crucified by the liberal wing of the party and most notably the growing number of bloggers, which, as this source said, represent “the Democratic version of the Christian right.”

“They are a little bit scared of the bloggers,” the operative said of the party leadership.

Putting aside the Lieberman question, the notion that Democrats in the Senate would “a little bit scared of the bloggers” struck me as a candid acknowledgement of the netroots’ growing significance, but is it encouraging or discouraging that some of the party’s leaders in the Senate would be “afraid” of blogs and their audiences? And is the comparison to the religious right movement fair or unfair?

By most reasonable measures, the comparison is, at best, flawed. The religious right uniformly agrees on practically everything (politically and theologically), while even progressive bloggers routinely disagree on everything from strategy to policy.

For that matter, the religious right is in the habit of taking orders from an agreed upon authority. Bloggers aren’t in the habit of taking orders from anyone. (herding cats comes to mind…)

And I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention that the Robertson/Falwell/Dobson crowd want to push the GOP into advancing a vaguely theocratic agenda that is fundamentally at odds with the law and the American tradition. Bloggers tend to want to see an aggressive Democratic Party that advocates progressive ideals. They’re not exactly analogous.

That said, if the comments to Roll Call are accurate, there may be a certain fear dynamic that makes the comparison at least a little compelling. We may be at or near a point in which Dem lawmakers worry about how blogs and blog readers respond to votes/policies/priorities, much the same way the Republicans have to keep Dobson & Co. in mind. Moreover, the GOP party establishment looks at the religious right as a constituency that can rally and organize activists and deliver “ground troops” for the party on Election Day — and the Dems’ party establishment may see blogs in a similar role.

Many of you left some excellent insights on this subject on Monday, but let’s flesh this out a little more. How should the Democratic establishment look at blogs and blog readers? If they’re “a little bit scared,” is that a good thing or a bad thing? Are we another constituency group — like labor unions, environmentalists, civil rights groups — or is the netroots something new and altogether different?

Isn’t this what dems have been criticized for for a long time? They’re afraid that someone will criticize them a little, so they back off. They read something they don’t like in the paper about them, or hear something that a republican says about them, and they retreat. They’re worried if they say something critical about Iraq, they’ll be branded in the media as “soft” so they just hold back when they should be shouting from the rooftops.

Whereas the repubs do not apologize except for the most egregious circumstances, and they don’t care what people write . In fact, if the NYT or a blogger writes something about them that’s critical, even if it’s true, they attack the blogger or the NYT or whoever and put them on the defensive, question their patriotism and so on.

I think it’s time for dems to stop worrying about what anybody thinks and start doing the things they know are right. If somebody in the liberal blogosphere wants to slam them, they should stand and fight like a man (or woman.)

It’s also time for blogs to make sure they don’t start slicing dem candidates too thin – the recent criticism of groups like NARAL for supporting repub candidates simply because they’re pro-choice, which misses the greater point of majority party rule, is a good example of something that dem blogs should be careful of. First, get the party into power, then work to change those little things. But make sure not to cross the line and hurt our own chances.

Dems to power first, then the rest.

  • We are NOT just another constituency. Blogging isn’t a policy or a goal. There are no common causes inherent in blogging. Blogging is a new method of communication, one which requires at least comfort with computers and the courage to speak your mind and a skin thick enough to handle negative comments from others. It’s a (largely) unmoderated discussion, and it’s really open to anyone.

    What the Senate Democrats (and nearly all the GOP) don’t realize is that they’re dinosaurs. They can’t communicate, except with other troglodytes. They don’t like having their authority eroded by people (bloggers) who openly talk behind their backs. We’re like the kid in school passing notes around to each other without the teacher’s permission, only in this case the teacher has access to those notes, too, and can even pass his own around.

    No one can foretell where the blogosphere is headed yet. This same technology can be used to share extreme right politics, to promulgate religious fanaticism or any number of other superstitions. That’s just it – there is no policy, there is no content dictated by the medium. Saying the bloggers are an interest group is like saying that people who can speak constitute an interest group. I guess if everyone around you starting speaking Italian, you’d feel left out. But does that, per se, make Italians an interest group? You can always learn to speak Italian after all.

    That’s just it: after handing over power to the party bosses at all levels, ever since it got beyond the New England Town Meeting, we’re just finding a way to speak to each other and learn from each other. The old bosses should be afraid. They have nothing to contribute. In a very real sense, blogging is the technological fulfillment of Democratic and democratic ideals.

  • If Democratic leaders are afraid of blogs, it’s probably for two reasons. Differing views are rampant in the blog world, which the Dems may believe fractures the party even more than it is now. The other, and related, reason is that they can’t control blogs. In the era of relentless focus grouping, they can control the subject and, sometimes, the answers — like cherrypicking intelligence. The obvious solution is for the Dems to figure out what they’re about and quit pandering to the minority that always flirts with Nader.

  • Congressional Democrats are afraid of their own shadows, let alone bloggers. That’s why they’re in the minority and will remain so for the foreseeable future.

  • (herding cats comes to mind…)
    Cats have far too much sense to spend hours at a time on a computer!
    Bloggers seem far more like dogs, howling at all hours of the night at each other’s barking.
    ***********
    The net frightens all established power because it is an unregulated, and instant means of sharing information and forming opinion.
    Right wing groups are organizations -churches and gun clubs and count on loyalty from shared interests. There is a quid pro quo ..if you do this… I’ll do that… understanding .
    Bloggers on the other hand are free-range.
    The bloggerss tear down anybody, including each other, with inconvenient truths in a heartbeat. Blogging is an information sharing process not an organization, and should be feared by all those who harbor secrets.

  • Democrats worrying about how their votes may play to bloggers/blog readers can only be a good thing. If they were worried about being held accountable, I certainly think we would have seen stiffer opposition to the Alito and Roberts nominations, perhaps even *gasp* a filibuster. Or perhaps they would have rallied behind John Murtha’s plan to withdraw from Iraq. Or stood behind Russ Feingold’s censure resolution. Democrats have always had support from their base for these actions; they’ve just chosen to ignore it.

    The reason Democrats fear the “blogosphere” is because they have chosen politically expediency too many times. Blogs are fairly representative of the general mood of the base, and Democratic voters are looking for an opposition party not someone who’s going to go along to get along.

  • Another well-placed Democratic source said, “Publicly they have to support Lamont,” adding that if they didn’t they would be crucified by the liberal wing of the party and most notably the growing number of bloggers, which, as this source said, represent “the Democratic version of the Christian right.”

    “They are a little bit scared of the bloggers,” the operative said of the party leadership

    Based on this quote, I wouldn’t let the idea that we are a growing power go to our heads. I think there is an more reasonable interpretaion of it. Democratic Senators that back Lamont will have to deal with Lieberman face-to-face from now until November. This could be a little uncomfortable for them. The bloggers made me do it excuse will help easy the the social embarrassment of dealing with a spurned collegue, who by all accounts, is well liked.

    Let me emphasize that I think blogs are a growing power on the left. All I am saying is this quote most likely isn’t evidence of it.

  • I think in the short run it will be hard to avoid being seen as another “special interest” constituency. The most prominent Dem-leaning blogs do sit to the left of where most of party leadership is at present, and blogs (rightly or wrongly) are closely identified by the barely-computer-literate party establishment with MoveOn.org, which has been demonized by the right as just left of Mao.

    This is, however, merely a growing pain. It is inevitable that the blogosphere will break through the other side of that characterization and be seen, correctly (as many have already noted above) as a very diverse political “open mic night.” It really is more about a new way to organize and communicate than an entity bound by a single policy purpose. We are not Sierra Club or the NRA.

    I agree that Dems feeling accountable is a positive thing, and I think by using words like “scare” they risk alienating a large potential source of energy for the party, which is very short-sighted. If Dem leadership were smart (and if any of them read “The Wisdom of Crowds”) instead of complaining about blogs, they would assign staffers to peruse them as an absolutely free-of-charge think tank — their own Heritage Foundation of AEI delivered as a gift on a platter. Like any think tank, there is a lot of chaff. But I have also seen some incredible grains of brilliance here, in terms of strategy, messaging, communication, etc. Staffs could get a lot of ideas, see a lot of interesting brainstorming, borrow a lot of creative innovation if they would just open their minds and their eyes to what the blogs have to offer.

    Yes that would require them to see a fair amount of criticism that might be unpleasant. Again, I share the view that this can be a “battle hardening” process. Dems need to get thicker skin. Dems need to be able to come in here and defend what they are doing. If they can’t defend it here, how will they defend it on teh House floor, or against negative ads from the Rethugs in their districts? Being pressed by thoughful supporters is a plus, not a minus.

  • The so-called “Democratic Establishment” is not a monolithic thing. And, the bloggers are not the only “force” that leading Democratic politicians respond to, or fear.

    Many Democrats, particularly those from red States, have long focused their attention on how their comments and actions will play in their home-state Media. Many Democrats are semi-corrupt tools of wealthy donors and business interests, and they play on the prejudices of those donors/interests.

    The most outspoken Democrats tend to be the ones, who have a secure donor base, in relation to their ambitions. Congressman Murtha, for example, is the best financed Democrat in the House — if he was not so well-financed relative to his ambitions, I would worry that he was corrupt, but he’s probably made himself independent of the interests trying to buy him, just by collecting such a fabulous amount of money.

    The blogs are displacing the Media pundits as a source of critical narrative, but the netroots are not a secure and plentiful source of campaign finance, and politicians will have to learn a new balancing act, as they attempt to protect their campaign finances (and future career options) as well as their reputations among opinion leaders.

    The liberal blogs are, well, “liberal”, and the Media pundits of interest to Democrats had become brain-dead ciphers in the David Broder / TNR mode. So, there is certainly an element of novelty in trying to respond to the opinions of people, who, as Atrios has said, actually care about stuff.

    To some extent, I would expect Democrats might find themselves liberated by the switch from pundits to blogs, better able to be Democrats. For John Kerry or Hillary Clinton or Chuck Schumer, with secure Northeastern bases and secure funding, the switch may well prove increasingly invigorating over time. For red-State Democrats, like Harry Reid, becoming a hero of the blogs may be the kiss of death in conservative homestate Media, and result in a potentially fatal loss of popularity among their actual constituents.

    For conservative and corrupt Democrats, like Dianne Feinstein, the hostility of the blogs will be a minor annoyance, until it affects their homestate popularity, if ever that happens. (Does anyone, even in California, know that that witch is running for re-election?)

  • Bloggers aren’t owned by corporate dollars.
    This is freedom of the purest kind.

    And this scares the unholy moola out of both parties.
    Because:
    Loose lips can sink corporate ships.

    Recall that adage that used to dogpaddle off the tongues of cocktail party intellectuals:

    Information just wants to be free.

    It always caused me to snort.
    Information doesn’t want anything.
    Corporations however do.

    Given that “Information” is the lingua franca of our times….
    Coporations and their lackeys (governments) want to control and mete out and market what you read and see. They’ve hired lobyists who pay Representatives from both parties to assert their control.

    As of this moment… they cannot control the blogosphere.
    This frightens them… as well it should.
    As long as liberal blogs exist… they don’t have total control.

  • Blogging is one of the most democratic things to do in this growing authouitarian culture. Anyone who would be afraid of blogging is most probably not as small d democratic as he should be.

    Blogging is not flogging. Ideas, observations, debates, name-calling, semantics, opinions and other forms of informative communication take place in the blogosphere – all good things for a democracy.

    With such a shift as what Kali spoke to above on this thread, in reality, established vested interests are having a hard time exactly because they have lost (in real terms) the ability to better control the national narrative.

    It is a bit ironic that the leader of Iran, has a better insight as to the value of the blogosphere than some of our democratic leaders in the upper house of Congress.

    Lately I’ve been canvassing the speeches of a great American – Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. All his speeches would make for good reading in these times of authoritarian ascendancy. In fact, some one in the blogosphere may wish to begin posting Dr. King’s speeches and writings daily so all of us who are paying attention can learn how he and SCLC were able to stay disciplined enough to speak truth to power.

    Joe Lieberman is bastardizing the Democratic party for the sake of maintaining his power and prestige. His main abetters: the Republican party and its top operative “Crimes Against Huminity” Rove.

    I fear there is no honor left among our supposedly democratically elected leaders. Power corrupts, and authoritarian power debases our political heritage. Dr. King can offer great insight into this creeping dynamic of powermongering control over what should be a liberty and just minded nation. His decent and composed engagement is what we need more of in these troubled times. -Kevo

  • Compare for a moment the liberal/progressive blogisphere and Dennis Hasert’s Republican’t controlled House of Representatives. If Denny does not have a majority of his own caucus behind a bill, he won’t let it come to the floor, even if the whole of the House would approve it. Denny has an anti-democratic methodology in place to corruptly (earmarks, anyone) misgovern this country. He can achieve that because his caucus is scared and scarred by years of Democratic dominance.

    The liberal/progressive blogisphere has nothing like that. If I disagree with Ed Stephan or Tom Cleaver (two commenters here clearly to my left) I feel no requirement to accept their positions because a majority of the ‘caucus’ does. Because of this, the Congressional Democratic party shouldn’t be ‘afraid’ of us (though it is kind of cute if they are). They should just be willing to engage with us.

    As for the Lieberman issue. Lieberman, a very liberal Democrat by all true analysis, lost the primary (I hope and believe) and should lose the general election because he mouths the Republican’t and Bushite talking point that opposition to the continuing conduct of the war in Iraq is somehow treasonous terrorist enabling. This language, coming from the incompetents who have lost over 5000 American lives to terrorism and ill-conceived war, is just so disgustingly wrong that any who embrace it (Joe, for instance) deserve no respect or audiance from any real Americans.

    Lieberman might be coming back in January, though I doubt it. In anticipation of the possibility, some care in handling him is probably worthwhile. But I think the Democrats who openly support him before November deserve harsh critism and any primary opponents who stand up against them in two or four years deserve some consideration, much like the early support for Ned Lamont got him the attention he needed to make his case in the primary.

  • I was thinking about the difference between the rise of left political blogs and the previous version of the New Left this morning while I ran (fog jogging in the “June” gloom). When the leftists last had an impact in the 15 years of the “sixties” the ideology was very much wrapped up in a counter-culture package of personal style. People judged not only the ideas but the lifestyles. Now though, the Newest Left is a sort of meme machine or Greek Chorus. The ideas are released by people of various levels of articulateness in swarms of nano-memes that form into an ideological force that has to be listened to. (Sounds like a book by our favorite Climate Scientician–as the Simpsons would call him–Michael Crichton) The visuals are not an issue anymore. It’s just the Voices.

    The difference between the left blogs and the rightwing blogs is that on the right they repeat angrily and without imagination their same old ideology. Whereas on the left, there is by definition a mix of open-ended ideas that can actually create new paradigms. The left blogs create ideas. The right blogs spout off simplistic echoes of degraded Conservatism.

    Yes, I think the Dem politicians are afraid of the left blogs. And while they’re afeared they might actually think about what they’re hearing as well.

  • The blogs are a response to the stifling of real political debate thanks to the corporate near monolithic MSM. When various corps (such as GE, Westinghouse, ClearChannel, Infinity, Time Warner/AOL and 20th Century) moved to buy various news sources around the US, they began to take over the editorial content even though they denied vehemently they woud. Instead of getting community based voices to speak out on whatever subject, the editorial pages got the corporate approved syndicated likes of Tom Friedman, Ann Coulter and the lesser Blumpkin, er, Limbaugh. Part of it was to save money, but part of it was to homogenize politics. Was it any surprise that when Penn deregulated their electrical grid in the mid 1990s that suddenly electricity deregulation was the MSM’s lips as a policy of “choice” pushed on our dimwitted pols ALL around the world?

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The blogs (right/left/anarchist/whatever) are the information age’s guerilla warfare or 4th Gen for those who prefer the term. The blogs are not a vehicle of the powerful. They are the weapon of those who want to speak but for whatever reason don’t have the means or the connections.

    TPTB work when dissenters are divided and isolated from each other. Online blogs allow those who have similar ideas and views but are divided by geography and time to come together and share info. Judging by what I’ve read here, we are the smarter types who scare the bejeebus out of the powers that be because we can see thru their bullshit and right to their dark cores. When we read others posts, we get the seeds of knowledge or ideas planted within. They may not sprout for years, but they are there.

    It is like what happened during the Korean War when the Chinese thought they would be smart and lump all the troublesome UN POWs into one camp to isolate them from the rest of the POWs. It was the worst mistake they ever made as it became a breeding ground of dissention as the troublemakers shared their ideas and when they realized their mistake and sent them back to other camps, trouble began at the other camps.

    Without the internet, I suspect most of us would be yelling at the TVs or muttering to ourselves in darkened rooms ranting about the world (I know I would…Heh.) Online, we are no longer isolated or alone.

  • In fact, some one in the blogosphere may wish to begin posting Dr. King’s speeches and writings daily so all of us who are paying attention can learn how he and SCLC were able to stay disciplined enough to speak truth to power.

    By the way…

    youtube: I have a dream

    Nice ain’t it?

    To be able to watch what you want when you want.
    Of course your Big Corporate parents don’t approve…
    And your government nanny frowns grimly at your freedom…
    Social websites need to be controlled…. don’t they?
    And the left wing blogs?
    They need to be stepped on.

  • Personally, I think the blogosphere is still on the outskirts of the party and will remain so for quite some time. This is for a couple of reasons:

    1) Refusal to compromise, refusal to back down. The mask of anonymity (sp) is both great and troublesome for blogs. On the one hand it allows people to reveal their true feelings (thanks lgf- I never knew racism was so alive). On the other hand, it allows people to be more aggresive than they would be in real life. Yes, there are some brave souls like Markos out there who actively puts his name out, but I’d say those are the exceptions rather than the rules (for example, it was about a year before I knew CB’s real name- Steve Benen).

    2. Technology changes slowly- the older, the slower. Politicians are, for the most part, old. I mean Kennedy was considered young when he was elected, and he was 46. Perhaps when the generation that grew up with the blogosphere get older, the blogs wil be more prominent. Until then, we’re most likely stuck with “Series of tubes” comments.

    3. The ‘Alternative Media’ claim turned out to be bogus. For a while there, blogs were celebrating the death of the MSM, and their becoming a generations news source. Um, hasn’t exactly happened. Links for news stories are still presented from ABC, NBC, FOX News, CNN, etc. The number of stories the blogosphere has broken are a mere handful. The only stie doing independent ivestigations, as far as I know, is Muckraker, and even then it’s pretty lame (Let’s interview Bleu Corpas to confirm what he already said? Who? Exactly).

    While the blogosphere may become more powerful as time goes on, for now its stuck as a constituency, with power right next to the enviromentalists.

  • First of all, few politicians or folks in traditional media seem to understand blogging. I’m guessing they’ve visited a couple of sites with somewhat radical reputations, and then made the sweeping assumption that what they saw is representative of all left-leaning blogs. Obviously, this leads to a simplistic stereotype but no real understanding.

    Second, I’m guessing the vitriolic, often obscene and adolescent ranting on some blogs (most notably in the commment sections) are a turn-off. There are many sites I can’t deal with for those reasons. There’s an old saying to the effect that when you start screaming and cursing, you’ve lost the argument, and a lot of that goes on. If that’s all you see, you miss the real rational thinking that goes on.

    Third, few politicians or media-types grasp the extent of frustration that has been building on the left for some time. Years of unrelenting and usually unjustified attacks on liberals from those on the right, combined with an administration and Congress willing to shove a radical agenda down the country’s throat at any cost has gotten people fired up. Add to this the passivity — or complicity — of Democratic leaders and the media in the face of a radical, right onslaught, and yes, increasing numbers of people on the left and center are going to be angry, and justifiably so.

    Fourth, politicians and the media are so accustomed to simplistic, black and white thinking that they don’t know how to interpret what the left is saying. Granted, there are those on the left who are opposed to any war for any reason, but the anti-Iraq message from the left has been more nuanced than that. I, for one, felt that invading when and how we did was unjustified and potentially disasterous. Once we invaded, however, I sincerely hoped that somehow, some way, it might turn out successfully. Looking at the polls from those early days, many Democrats seemed to feel similarly. It wasn’t until incompetence in executing the war made success less and less likely that we began to look for an exit.

    So, yes, the media and politicians are afraid of the blogs because they don’t understand what the blogs are about. The blogs are popular because they vocalize what many voters are thinking. And until the blogs emerged, there was no public forum on this scale for what people were thinking. In that regard, the blogging constituency does represent something new — a window into voters’ minds.

    Blogs, as bottom-up communication, is I’m sure threatening to those politicians who are accustomed to telling us what to think, and answering to special interests whose influence may be disproportionate to their numbers.

    If I were a politician, I’d try to understand what is going on here in the Internet ether because its roots are in the real world.

  • I’ve read Jacob Weisberg’s article “Dead with Ned”, and it’s a clever llok at the secondary effects of Lieberm’an’s run, and the debate over the house elections continues on this page. BUT, democrats should be pretty optimistic for two reasons:

    First, that the center line of the argument over the “right” candidate on the national scale has shifted to the left, to a decision between a conservative and a (not-radically) liberal democrat.Ultimately isn’t that the long-term goal of liberal politics? to move the center to the left? to strand on the far-right the Bush neocons and the evangelical conservatives? After all, Republican opinnion on other social issues (racial discrimination, the need for social welfare) are today more liberal than the platform of either party 40 years ago. This is a natural progression. The Republican party isn’t going away – it aligns itself just to the right of the new center in order to draw in mainstream voters. It’s a sight for sore eyes to see the mainstream of Connecticut debating as they are between moderate and liberal democrat positions.

    Second, Weisberg warns that high Republican voter turnout on behalf of Lieberman will help the house republican race in Connecticut. Even if this were true, I’d expect an even higher democratic turnout since this electionhas gained so much attention.

  • I am enlightened by.. and in awe of…. the quality of comments in this particular Carpetbagger blogging community. A blog about blogging seems a good place to say thank you all. The right has good reason to fear the gathering of such of kindred minds and spirits.

  • Forgive me for being stupid, BUT….

    If Lieberman basically split the Democratic vote then sholdn’t it be obvious that a significant portion of the independents and Republicans would support the more centerist (or right of center) candidate in the general election?

    If it looks like Lieberman is going to win then isn’t it important to deal with him.

    I might be a pessimist but could you imagine a situation where the Democrats and Republicans each have 49 seats and New England elects two independents? Lieberman would hold the balance of power and could swing the Senate to the Republicans.

    I really can’t imagine him doing that but if the Democrats burn all the bridges to him then it might make sense for him to be the most liberal Republican instead of the 2nd (or 3rd or 4th or…) most conserative Democrate

  • If you want to know why the pinstriped pimps passing themselvesoff as “DC Dems” would be afraid of the “democratic wing” of the Democratic Party, go get David Sirota’s book “Hostile Takeover.”

    How many of these s.o.b.’s went along with “bankruptcy reform,” “tort reform”, and every other corporate/Republican assault on the American people? Most of these people are a more certain vote for Israel (whether that’s good for the real national interests of Israel or not) than they are for the American people and our own national interests. (And I don’t say that as some “anti-Jewish” comment, it’s merely the most recent example I can think of of the DC Dem establishment supporting the Likudniks of AIPAC over the real national interests of anyone – Israeli,American, Lebanese – associated with the latest disaster, and all to merely insure their income flow). The fact is, they don’t dare let the truth of their “progressivism” out into the daylight of public discussion.

    The only difference between Lieberman and 80% of the rest of these assholes is he’s a more obvious shithead.

  • The blogosphere is the incipient megacyberbrain of human evolution. Just as Cro-Magnon mastered fire and symbolic representation, and the Greeks mastered democracy in the great debating ground of the Pnyx, so bloggers are mastering coherence amidst the treacherous diatribes of cyberspace. It’s very new, but not different.

    The dinosaur is a popular pejorative for something large, unwieldy, out-of-touch and doomed to extinction. The little proto-mammals (Eozostrodon parvus and Eozostrodon problematicus) dodging among their scaly toes are often overlooked as our precursors. Insignificant and seemingly vulnerable they were the form of things to come — the incipient prototype. The future often lies hidden in small and insignificant beginnings. But I guess neither the Dinosaur nor the Eozostrodon had much inkling of their destiny.

    By the way, talking of Joe Lederhosen: How’s his health?
    — just asking.

    Vote Democratic and Americans live — better

  • Kali (#19), I agree with everything you wrote but especially “A blog about blogging seems a good place to say thank you all.” This really has been a new and pleasant experience. And thanks to CB for providing the … arena? salon? meeting hall? seminar room? certainly not the boardroom or house of worship.

    neil wilson (#20), Don’t mistake independents’ and Republicans’ supporting Lieberman as a move toward the center. It’s rather a cynical sell-out of their own nominee in order to prevent CT Democrats from making the move toward the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. Unfortunately, Americans have never been comfortable with party affiliation, loyalty, and the like (some Europeans make you pay annual dues to belong to the party). I grew up in California when they still had cross-filing. Makes one very cynical about party loyalty. When I worked for Phil Burton in San Francisco, the Burton machine would pay the membership dues so its people could massively enrol in political clubs which opposed them, just so they could vote such clubs out of existence.

  • From one proto-mammal to another, I like your slogan, Goldilocks.

    Vote Democratic and Americans live — better

  • If establishment Dems are in fact fearful of the Blogosphere, I think it is more a bad thing than a good thing. As Don B observed, it fits nicely into the “fraidy cat” meme that Dems are more worried about how their positions will “play” than the “rightness” (righteousness?) of their positions. Also, fear could lead Dems of good faith (assuming there are some) to attempt to dismiss and marginalize bloggers rather than try to constructively engage with them and their readers.

    Corrupt Dems know in their guts that the Blogs can be a means to their undoing. Joe Lieberaman, Democrat of national stature, expected that his seat in the Senate was unassailable. Some of his constiutuents felt otherwise and blogs helped focus attention on Lieberman’s failings and rallied support for his challenger. That had to throw some serious trepidation into the souls of many of Joe’s colleagues. If that fear causes them to hunker down, as Joe did, that deepens their estrangement from those with whom they share at least some common political ground. Not a good thing. Of course, if it somehow enables them to re-connect with liberal or progressive principles and encourages them to stand up for said principles, that would be a great thing. Color me cynical on that prospect. Politicians are by defiinition creatures in possession of outsize egos. Shrinking violets are not going to run for public office. Further, although those outsize egos should equip them to deal with the challenge, rejection, and outright ridicule that bloggers might heap on them, incumbents in “safe seats” (once upon a time Joe Lieberman) seem to develop a sense of entitlement that cannot brook the challenge that the relatively free-wheeling blogs pose.

    I believe it is possible for all the parties who have an interest in this debate to recognize that there is some inter-dependence on all sides and that legitimate debate is healthy. I think fear and the notion of being feared are obstacles to that end. I worry that politicians will reflexively try to stamp out things they fear, and that blogs – if they believe they draw power from being feared – will be less open to incremental success and compromise.

  • Dems scared of bloggers? Or Dems scared of associating with those labeled by the right and the media as paranoid, insurgencies, extremists, lefties, pro terrorist, divisive, partisan, etc. If the centrist dems think that centrism is their best strategy for regaining the white house and congress, then I can see why they may want to distance themselves from the bloggers. One early sign of this may take the form of some Senators’ soft support for Lamont while mutually picking fleas and ticks with Joe in the dens of the Senate. A more interesting and telling consequence of the Connecticut primary would have been if Lieberman had won and the blogosphere would have supported Lamont in an independent run. This would have given the dems good reason to really fear the blog community. The result is having the opposite effect — the bloggers are debating backing off on Connecticut. But for now, the dems, playing the centrist role, are betting that the blogosphere will vote with them. I am not sure that the dems should count the blog community as just another constituency group.

    And I have observed that often, some of the pundits and some politicians are repeating some of the same views expressed just a day or a few days earlier in the blogs. People are reading and at times repeating ideas expressed in blogs. There is some leadership, individually and collectively expressed, emerging in these blog communities. Power is draining from Washington in a process of decentralization. Scary for people like Leiberman who believe in central sources of power and authority, even if that is Bush. Scary for people who think that democracy ends when decisions about making war begin.

  • Bloggers represent a communications mechanism, not a special-interest group. There is nothing inherently political about the blogging process. There are liberal bloggers. There are conservative bloggers. There are middle of the road bloggers. Everyone has an opinion and blogs allow those opinions to reach an audience…sometimes an audience of thousands and sometimes an audience of one.

    What blogs allow is rapid dissemination of information to a broad audience, often more rapid and certainly more in depth than broadcast news. It’s no wonder that often shallow politicians and control-oriented broadcast outlets may cast a wary eye toward blogs. They can wield great power in defining and extending political debate. So, instead of the media companies determining what we should know, blogs allow the people to determine what’s important and what’s not, what’s discussed and what’ not, what deserves out attention and what does not.

    Politicians, by nature, are wary of too much public involvement because it can expose their weaknesses, and perhaps even expose their shenanigans. Let’s face it, as media ownership in this country consolidates more and more under the umbrellas of large corporate conglomerates, independent thought and objective coverage very well may – will? – decline. Blogs have the potential to supplant traditional media as the watchdogs of the people’s interests.

    Blogs are pushing more power to the people. That is a very good thing!

  • But I don’t get it — why should they hope for a Lieberman victory? What do they expect to get out of that which is better for them than a Lamont victory?

  • I think massing together of millions of individuals into a single concept — “the bloggers” — is hugely misleading and will eventually lead politicians and media down a dead-end alley. Within the blogosphere are myriad coalitions as well as myriad individualists who, like me, frown and wander away the moment any coalition issues its litmus test.

    What that amounts to, I think (I tentatively believe!) is that elections will continue to have huge surprises as people, in the voting booth, move away from straight-ticket voting and express their individuality and independence in unexpected ways.

    I was surprised to find, as a Democrat living in a different geographical region from most of my family and not in constant touch with most, how within a few months practically all of the Dems in the family (that’s the whole bunch of us, lifelong Dems, of four or five different generations and many different lifestyles, all of us on the left-hand side of the Party) decamped and turned Green or Independent. Without comparing notes.

    How much of this political shift is echoed in other families, other groups, other coalitions, I don’t think we know. What the blogosphere may have brought about is precisely what the media are missing when they rant on about it. Comparing notes among ourselves has fostered much greater diversity and individuality, not lock-step lefty or righty voting. And let’s not forget how much better informed many of us have become thanks to this interaction and research demanded of us as we try to communicate intelligently with each other. This has bounced right back at the MSM and has had a noticeable effect.

    Probably the real issue is not what liberal bloggers are up to, but what’s happening within the Democratic Party and to the rightward turn it has taken — and what organizing principle will replace it on the left or maybe take it back.

    Meanwhile, the scareder the Dem leadership get, the more enjoyment they will be giving this renegade!

  • Within the blogosphere are myriad coalitions as well as myriad individualists who, like me, frown and wander away the moment any coalition issues its litmus test.

    lol.

    The anti-community community…

  • As a liberal blogger, I say that polititions have nothing to worry about from me as long as they’re honest and agree with my view of the world. But I’m just one blogger tilting at windmills and on my own, not much to worry about. It’s when their (polititions) bullshit becomes so obvious that many bloggers speak together as one against it that they need to listen up. The MSM is not holding anyone’s feet to the fire if they’re from the right and that has got a lot of us frustrated. I believe many of us wouldn’t be screaming so loudly if we felt that our concerns were being given a fair shake. Check out how much time the MSM has given a ten year old murder mystery lately as to how much time they’ve given a judges ruling that our president has broken the rule of law if you don’t believe me. We deserve better from the MSM that their parroting of the right wing bullshit. Ignore us at your own peril.

  • Some get it, some do not. I think most of the fear is of the unknown. Setting aside the hopelessly disconnected (I’m sure we have a few who also think of the internet as bunch of tubes), many haven’t gotten a handle on who we are.
    The early conventional wisdom held that bloggers were far left ideologues in their 20’s. That made us a noisy, but impotent nuisance. Demographic research shows that the average blogger/blog reader is in their 40’s – making us fertile ground for fundraising for those savvy enough to reach us. That gives us some clout. But at the same time, many of us fall into that wonderfully ironic new category: The Irate Moderate. That makes us pissed off people with a little clout. If they can’t come to grips with that, they probably should be afraid.

  • But I don’t get it — why should they hope for a Lieberman victory? What do they expect to get out of that which is better for them than a Lamont victory?

    There are a lot of practical reasons. They’ve worked with Joe Lieberman for many years, so he’s a known quantity. He’s a reliable vote on some issues, able to reach across the aisle and build “bipartisan” support for legislation. That same attribute allows the Democrats to claim a veneer of “bipartisanship” when it counts. There are personal relationships at stake, also. Lieberman is also (and I think this is really important) a high profile fundraiser who’s able to rake in the cash for the Democratic Party.

    But it’s also because Lieberman and the rest of the Democratic establishment are incumbents. If Lieberman gets called on the carpet for his stance on the Iraq war, there’s a chance that will embolden challengers in other states and districts. After years of being safely re-elected only to find yourself facing a strong primary challenger has to be a bit unnerving.

  • To a point, I think that the bloggers might be viewed as antonymous to the Religious Right—but I think a better analogy would be to view the liberal/progressive bloggers as the Left’s version of swiftboating.

    Not all the boats are going to be in the same place; not all the boats are going to be running at the same time; not all the boats are going to be fighting all the same firefights. But when the swifties start tearing away at a Dem candidate, the bloggers have the opportunity to “slice/dice/chop/shred/julienne-fry” the opposing GOPper.

    Think of the bloggers and their legions as “Veg-O-Matics with attitude….”

    The blogs also have an exceptional power that needs to be exploited to its nth degree. In the past six months, what single political entity—or candidate—or issue—has sucked up so much energy from the Reich media-machine? Think of the millions of dollars worth of airtime resources that FAUXnews alone has invested in hammering away at the blogs. MSNBC, TNR, SnowFlake the Shallow—when they have to spand time fighting off the blogs, then they cannot spend that same time fighting of candidates. If they try to minimize the blogs by concentrating on smearing the candidates, then the blogs rip away with unanswered assaults. It’s a lose-lose situation for the Reich media lapdogs—and the numbers at FAUXnews show it to be so. Ratings? Down. Marketshare? Down. Advertising revenues? Down. Audience life-expectancy? (At least for O’Rielly)—Down.

    And having the blogs be on different pages of the overall playbook isn’t such a bad thing—it just means that they’re hammering away at the target from many different directions. Even FAUXnews can’t hope to counter an assault from all sides; from every direction imaginable, with the hope of fending everything off. The only way to do that is to have credible issues and ethical candidates. They’ll have that when Jerry Falwell declares me to be God….

  • I wish the bloggers would focus their laser-beam eyes on Virginia… I’m in the 6th district — the land which God may love, but which has been entirely forgotten/given up on by the Dems “above”…

    We will have a tight Senate race here. Our candidate is — IMO — to the right of Loserman on many issues, but I’m willing to swallow that, because he’s right on Iraq and healthcare (he’s calling for *universal* healthcare, glory be! A la Veterans Admin.) Can I forgive him if he’s wishy-washy on education and generally panders to the urban Virginians? Sure I can; it’s cheaper. You get a bigger bang for your dollar buying a radio/TV ad in an urban area than you get in a rural (voters scattered all over the place) one. Do I envy people in Connecticut who have the luxury of voting for someone who represents their thinking more closely? Sure I do. But I’m a pragmatic… for us, Jim Webb is a major change to the left compared to Allen.

    Unfortunately, Webb seems to have slipped through the visibility cracks.

    DSCC, as far as I know, is not plowing any money into the campaign, though, to give them credit, they do have Allen (opponent on the Repub side) as one of the “Snakes on the Senate” on their website (not Lieberman, though ). When it comes to money, he’s definitely an underdog: according to his (and Allen’s) funding disclosures, we’re talking about 6:1 proportion (though, perhaps, it makes him spend what he has more conservatively. Each of them seems to have spent about half of what they got).

    When it comes to visibility/name recognition, Webb didn’t have much of either, until Allen put his — dipped in macaca — foot into his mouth. And his events calendar looks *pitiful*; a couple of weekends here and there; “bankers’ hours”, one might say.

    I think Lamont is as safely placed as he can be for the moment and his support from the high-flown Dems is impeccable, if not whole-hearted. He can only go up and I think he will.

    But… Can the mightly blogosphere do something to help rid us of the Allen pest in Virginia?

    Yours, Henry II (and yes, I’ll be willing to crawl on my knees in penitence *afterwards* )

  • “The most outspoken Democrats tend to be the ones, who have a secure donor base, in relation to their ambitions. Congressman Murtha, for example, is the best financed Democrat in the House — if he was not so well-financed relative to his ambitions, I would worry that he was corrupt, but he’s probably made himself independent of the interests trying to buy him, just by collecting such a fabulous amount of money.” #9 Bruce Wilder

    “Independent of the interests trying to buy him””
    Who do you think gave him the money???

    “I would worry that he was corrupt…”
    Ever heard of “ABSCAM”?
    http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200601\POL20060113d.html

  • I am glad that the pols are a bit scared of the bloggers. However, I don’t think bloggers have the same kind of scare tactics with the party that the Christian conservatives have with the GOP. If they did than the Democratic party wouldn’t find it so easy to revert to their neutered positions. While bloggers have definitely shown their power, on the left at least, there are many competing ideas of what the party/pols should be doing, they don’t speak with a single and unified voice on all issues – beyond the beat republican candidates message.

  • The Dems are the do nothing party. They love their job right now and don’t want to change as they might have to actually work and fight for something meaningful. Oh those evil blogs and blog readers who want domocrats to act like true democrats and not a bunch of ineffective politicians.

    • Comments are closed.