I took their best shot, and... that was it?

So I said something pretty stupid last week. I served up the wingnuts a big, juicy softball. They went into a tizzy, led by Instapundit.

And for a while, I was actually pretty worried.

But the final tally was -- about 30 hate-filled emails, about 15,000 hate-filled visitors, and the pulling of three advertising spots that are going to be replaced in less than a week. (I had two emails today about people wanting to advertise despite the controversy.)

That was it. Oh, they're doing their best to turn me into the devil, and they're making racist comments about my heritage and family and threatening to kick my ass -- you know, typical right-wing shit.

But if that's the best they can throw at me, I'll simply echo Kerry.

Bring it on.

•  Defending Markos

  They are only going after this site and its community because it raises money for Democrats And because they know that Iraq is spinning out of control.

  by Stirling Newberry on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 12:58:11 PM PDT

  •  Yes

    
    Exactly, this is the Blog version of MoveOn's "Hitler Ads."

    by CTDem2 on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:16:02 PM PDT

    •  Speaking of MoveOn...

      That's where my next donation to the glorious cause is going, not to the wimps who run when yelled at by freepsters.

      Not to Kerry.
      Not to Frost.
      Not to any of the dang fools who run when a Republithug threatens them with a secondary boycott.

      Damned pansies, the lot of them.

      - Superskepticalman

      by Superskepticalman on Sun Apr 04, 2004 at 01:26:07 PM PDT

  •  You can tell the right wing's gutless scared...

    When they attempt resort to the secondary boycott.

    They don't boycott Daily Kos; after all, they keep coming back to want to see you squirm.

    They go after your advertisers. Although if Frost is as pansy-assed as he would appear to be, maybe Texas Democrats need a progressive with guts more along the lines of Jim Hightower.

    Still, the shorter Tacitus should be:

    "We were mercenaries once and young."

    - Superskepticalman, seven years active duty Navy, not a "contract soldier"

    by Superskepticalman on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:34:27 PM PDT

  •  Threatened to kick your ass?

    Markos Zuniga vs. freeper thugs: I know who my money's on!  The 32-year-old Salvadorian gun-bunny, of course!  

    By the way, I noticed your birthday.  The coup in Chile as your second birthday and the tragedy here as your thirtieth!  Wow.

    by teenagedallasdeaniac on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:13:51 PM PDT

  •  wingnuts

    Is there anything more pathetic than wingnuts when they're desperate.  This administration is falling apart and there is nothing they can do about it but spit, sputter and flail their arms.
    Keep up the good work kos and everyone here.  People are listening.

    by Mark H on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:53:18 PM PDT

  •  I hope you feel flattered

    you're in very distinguished company. although, if you include condemnations by anne coulter, it isn't a hugely EXCLUSIVE group...i think she's probably consigned about half the U.S. population to the innnermost circle of hell by now....

    by gracchus on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 03:00:56 PM PDT

  •  Pulled ads

    Who were the three who pulled their ads?

    by israelfox87 on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 03:47:46 PM PDT

  •  our Kool-Aid acidtest ??

    They are only going after this site and its community because...

    You may have pegged their motives correctly, but Kos has handed them a the kind of weapon they know how to use expertly.  

    A read of the wingnut blogs shows they are taking that weapon to many battlefields beyond this site and our community.

    You are a highly perceptive analyst, Stirling. I'd ask you to analyze our Kool-Aid drinking habits on this one.

    Also, at the risk of sounding brash (even rash?), I'd like to request that you read my longer posting approx. 150 comments down. I'd sincerely appreciate your response, because you know politics better than I do.  Hope this request ain't too cheesey, but I taste Kool-Aid, and would like to hear from your pallette.

    by Civil Sibyl on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 04:00:33 PM PDT

    •  oops, palate, not pallette (n/t)

      by Civil Sibyl on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 04:06:14 PM PDT

  •  What Happened? Is It True?, Is it True??

    ...that Kos exposed an NOC Intelligence Agent, working the field of WMDs, and her network of contacts, on WH orders?

    ..then Kos accused Richard Clarke of being a racist against condi?

    ...then Kos started to suggest, without evidence, that Richard Clarke as gay?

    ...then he recommended cutting combat pay, making troops pay for the return home from iraq, make the wounded pay for their hospital meals, and send them into hell's inferno without enough body armor, food, shelter, and armored vehicles?

    ooops, no that was right wing nuts/traitor bob novak on the first two, and neo-con stooge Wolfie on the 3rd, and shrub and dumbsfeld on the last.

    We know who the traitors are.

    by Al Rodgers on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 04:35:45 PM PDT

    •  x

      "We know who the traitors are"

      ..that is Novak, the leakers, and the blind GOP supporters.

      by Al Rodgers on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 04:50:06 PM PDT

  •  Conspiracies

    Okay, I think I am losing it for sure. Hillary has finally taken hold of my brain. It's X file stuff.

    Hey, Truthout got hacked. They've been down for days. Humm..any relationship?

    by oofer on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 05:21:46 PM PDT

  •  Theatening to kick your ass..

    Well, this has been interesting.  I'm actually growing more and more concerned about the sheer volume of flat-out bloodlust and hatred on certain sites, and am analyzing some of it, maybe I'll do a write up when I get the chance.

    Kos, seriously, if you're getting blatently threatening messages and I don't doubt that you are, keep careful documentation on that shit.  I'm guessing 95% or more of it comes from bloviating armchair commandos who couldn't kick Jimmy Hart's ass, but you know, the more I see arguments on blogs turn into threats of actual physical violence, the more I think it is necessary to draw the line before it escalates any further.  It's not just uncivil and unethical, it's probably illegal and they have absolutely no business doing it.   As a woman perhaps I'm less likely to brush threats of violence off than guys are, but well, bad shit has happened to friends of mine, and I'd much rather take threats overly seriously and get called names for that.  So if I got a message that I determined was crossing the line I would not hesitate to contact the authorities.

    by daria g on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 08:22:43 PM PDT

•  One of America's grievances about the British

  In 1776, straight from Tom J.:

  "He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation."

  Mercenaries, totally unworthy of the leader of a civilized nation since 1776.

  by Me on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:00:36 PM PDT

  •  Hey, You! (Who, Me?)

    A lot of prominent Brits weren't happy about this practice either.  Employing the Hessians and other German mercenaries was a matter of great controversy in Britain at the time, and was deplored by a number of prominent British statesmen.  Here is what the Earl of Chatham, William Pitt, a/k/a Pitt the Elder, had to say about it in the House of Lords on November 18, 1777, when the news of the disaster at Saratoga had not yet reached London:

    "You may swell every expense and every effort, still more extravagantly; pile and accumulate every assistance you can buy or borrow; traffic and barter with every little pitiful German prince that sells and sends his subjects to the shambles of a foreign prince; your efforts are forever vain and impotent--doubly so from this mercenary aid on which you rely; for it irritates to an incurable resentment the minds of your enemies--to overrun them with the mercenary sons of rapine and plunder; devoting them and their possessions to the rapacity of hireling cruelty! If I were an American, as I am an Englishman, while a foreign troop was landed in my country, I never would lay down my arms--never--never--never!"

    Using mercenaries is simply wrong, period.  I might also add that I think Washington's Trenton victory had some personal score-settling behind it.  The commander of the Hessians had apparently committed some atrocity after the Battle of Long Island, killing a number of Washington's men who had surrendered.  That seems so often to be the case when mercenaries are involved.  As I mentioned when I posted this link yesterday, if anyone has any details about this, please correct me, or fill in the blanks.  I'd do some Googling myself, but we're going on vacation this afternoon, so my computer time is limited.  Thanks in advance.
    

    "L'enfer, c'est le GOP!" - JJB, from an idea by oratorio

    by JJB on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:16:27 PM PDT

    •  The American Revolution and British Politics

      The best History Professor I ever had (Walter Simon -- evolution of English Constitutional Government was his specialty) offered a perspective on the Colonial Rebellion that is not widely known.

      George III was not only a tyrant on this side of the ocean; he tried to use the war to defeat his enemies in Parliament, and re-assert the all powerful Imperial Crown. Just like George AWOL Bush.

      The American Revolution was Britain's Vietnam -- a war of national liberation for the natives, and a war of colonial domination for the invaders.

      But the most interesting part of the story, is that the British Partiamentary Opposition used the War as a vehicle to defeat the King and Tories. Both Lord Howe and Lord Cornwallis were sympathetic to the opposition -- and while they were loyal Britions, their hearts were not with the King. There are tales of Lord Howe dancing the night away with an innkeepers wife, while General Washington and his troops dragged their cannon across the frozen rivers to escape from New York. My Professor said these stories miss the point -- if Lord Howe really wanted to destroy the rebels, he could have done it; but time and again, defeat after defeat, the Continental Army survived to fight again.

      When Burgoyne was defeated at Saratoga (American Hero -- Benedict Arnold) it gave Ben Franklin what he needed to persuade the French to join the war. (Message to King George -- you have screwed up royally.)

      When Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown, the power of the Crown and the wing nut Tories was broken, and the power of the British People and their Parliament was restored.

      May the same fate befall the Tyrant in the White House.  

      by Charles K on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:17:56 PM PDT

      •  LeftCoaster -- The New And Improved Hessian

        Pessimist has a great post at LeftCoaster, that riffs on the British use of Hessian Mercinaries in the American Revolution.

        by Charles K on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:29:27 PM PDT

      •  First Civil War

        I think it is more accurate to describe the "revolution" aas the first civil war.  It pitted neighbor against neighbor, families were split, etc.  It was a civil war based on ideology, economy, and political representation.  It was not Us v. Them, Everyone was "Us/Them" in terms of being rooted in Brittish culture.

        Civil wars are the most brutal, every casualty is on the same "side"

        We have portrayed the founding fathers as being "American" but they were Brits who happened to think differently.  The military actions and "terrorist activities" if you will by groups like the "Sons of Liberty" and the "Green Mountain Boys," and later the use of guerilla tactics, were indeed revolutionary in terms of warfare and viewed as "cowardly" by European standards.

        This line of thought opens us up to the ghastly possibility that - gulp - our country's roots are firmly planted in the soil of "Cowardly acts of terrorism."

        by Gearhead on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:35:28 PM PDT

        •  Addendum

          On this last thought, we will remember that history is written by the victors, that rebels are morphed into "freedom fighters" and so forth.  Studying US history from a European perspective is fascinating.

          What is absent, however, from this discussion, usually, is how the indigenous population was treated by both "sides" in this first war.  That Sam Adams et al. dressed as Native Americans when perpetrating the "Boston Tea Party" is telling.  They wanted to divert "blame" for the incident onto another population rather than taking "credit" for their defiance.

          by Gearhead on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:41:01 PM PDT

          •  tea party

            not that it really matters, but my understanding of history is that it was pretty clear at the time that the perpetrators of the "tea party" were white new englanders, not native americans, and the costumes were just a symbolic gesture. so "blame" wasn't diverted at all.

            - marc

            by whopundit on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 06:31:12 PM PDT

      •  That's Interesting

        Thanks for posting that view, it's new to me.  Well worth considering.

        Well, my wife, son, and I are off on our Holy Week pilgramage to Las Vegas (and Death Valley -- day trip).  I won't be back for a week, must say I'll miss the give and take from this fascinating place.  Give 'em hell, Kos!  See you all on Easter!
        

        "L'enfer, c'est le GOP!" - JJB, from an idea by oratorio

        by JJB on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 06:30:42 PM PDT

      •  No Worries

        We are all gonna see the Moron in the Whitehouse do the perp walk.

        And those toasted mercenaries were seriously stoopid.

        Wonder which one of them decided to go cruising in Falluja.

        They should make sure in the future that their hired guns have IQs bigger than their sock size.

        Darwin was right.

        by mattman on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 11:47:10 PM PDT

      •  No Worries

        We are all gonna see the Moron in the Whitehouse do the perp walk.

        And those toasted mercenaries were seriously stoopid.

        Wonder which one of them decided to go cruising in Falluja.

        They should make sure in the future that their hired guns have IQs bigger than their sock size.

        Darwin was right.

        by mattman on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 11:48:27 PM PDT

    •  More history

      Post from yesterday: 14th-century mercenaries were replaced by Europe's first standing army.

      by dotpeople on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 05:02:20 PM PDT

  •  The American Revolution

    The commonalities between the Tories and the Right are those of a shared mission of despotism, treachery, and self-interest. Even James Madison, not to mention James Otis would have given Scalia a tar and feather outfit and a one way ticket to Canada.

    by citizen k on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:19:11 PM PDT

    •  We wouldn't want him

      As a Canadian, I can say that in today's Canada, there is no room for Scalia.  Send him elsewhere, thank you very much.

      It is amusing to see the Canadian right distance itself ideologically from the American right.

      by Gearhead on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:23:12 PM PDT

      •  Absolutely

        Although I have to point out that Canada wouldn't be the country it is without the United Empire Loyalists (that is, the losing side in the Revolution -- which as you point out, was really the first American civil war) settling in so much of Southern Ontario.

        We've actually made a pretty good thing over the years out of taking in American dissenters. They usually turn out to be very high quality immigrants. The last big group were Vietnam draft-dodgers.... we may need to do it again pretty soon; let's hope we still have the nerve.

        by Canadian Reader on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 04:22:17 PM PDT

        •  Blush

          by Gearhead on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 04:59:39 PM PDT

        •  Can we come, too?

          My wife and may want to get in line...  How much room do you have?  I played rugby in BC for three years, and developed a somewhat utopian idea of Canada.  I am worried that if I lived there, the romance would disappear.  I am trying to balance that with the possibility that it is as good as I thought.  In any case, I feel like the last set of battles to save our country from radical conservative idealogues is being fought right now.  It's nice to know that there may be another option besides paying into a society that models itself after the worst qualities of every empire the world has ever known.

          I got this spam email the other day...  and notably, I saved it.

          Immigrate to Canada

          An immigration company has ten years history of immigrating to Canada with rich experience, good reputation and the most reliable guarantee: No charge for any unsuccessful case and even no down payment. Is there anything to guarantee more reliable than like this?

          Canada is a beautiful and peaceful country.  Think of that, all the citizens and immigrants can have free medical insurance in this country.   Canada is a dual nationality country.  You can keep your nationality even you become a Canadian citizen.  You can get more information about Canada and Canadian immigration from Canadian government website: http://www.cic.gc.ca.

          The categories undertaken include: skilled worker class immigration, investor, entrepreneur and self-employed class immigration, foreign students immigration, family's reunion, visa of studying abroad, etc.

          For free consultation, please call 905-415-1728, or fax your resume to 905-415-1750 . Also can send e-mail to: [e-mail]  
          Company's address: 7100 Woodbine Ave. Suite 110 (Steels and Woodbine), Markham, Ontario,
          L3R 5J2, Canada

          =========================

          ÖÐ×ÊÔ´¹«Ë¾"http://www.net001.net">http://www.net001.net ÌṩÓòÃûÏÈ×¢²áºó 4;¶¿î;Ö÷»úÏÈ¿ªÍ¨ºóÊ& #213;·Ñ·þÎñ,
ÖÐ;¿ÉÍË¿î¡£ÌØ»Ý

          5. ;Ƽö£ºÓòÃû+100MÖ÷»ú²¢
             
          84. ;½ËÍ5¸ö10MÆóÒµÓÊÏ䣬
              
          95. ;¿ÄêÖ»Ðè350Ôª£¡£¡

          ʹÓü«ÐÇÓʼþȺ·¢

          3. ;¬ÎÞÐëͨ¹ýÓʼþ·þÎ&#
          241. ;Æ÷£¬Ö±´ï¶Ô·½ÓÊÏä

          £¬ËٶȾø¶ÔÒ»Á÷£¡
          ÏÂÔØÍøÖ·£ºhttp://www.lovexin.com£¬¸ü¶àÃâ·ÑµÄ³ ¬¿áÈí¼þµÈÄãÀ´Ï¡ 3;¡­

          by steina on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 06:37:33 PM PDT

          •  Plenty of room

            And all in all, it's a pretty good place to live.

            But, you know, it's a real country. Populated by real people. Which means... it's not a romantic utopia. Those only exist in people's imaginations. Nobody gets to live in a utopia.

            If you do come to Canada, bring your determination to make the world you live in a better place with you. You'll still need it -- and we need it too. We can always use more people like you. Any country can.

            But right now, I think the US needs you more.

            by Canadian Reader on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 08:25:33 PM PDT

      •  Please take back David Frum!!

        This despicable piece of Tory bullshit needs to go back to Canada, where they know what to do with him.

        by HollywierdLiberal on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 04:29:08 PM PDT

        •  Keep him, please!

          We sure as heck don't need that tool.

          And he's a neocon, not a Tory.

          by tameszu on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 11:43:59 PM PDT

    •  Cruel and unusual

      AND as an American, I object to the practise of tarring and feathering.

      So there!

      by Gearhead on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:34:45 PM PDT

      •  It's cruel

        to the chickens who provide the feathers for the chickenhawks.

        by ogre on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:34:44 PM PDT

    •  Tar and Feathers - Fine But

      don't you dare send that scumbag to Canada.  It would be tantamount to a declaration of war on that decent nation.

      by mattman on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 11:54:48 PM PDT

•  Word

  by the threat is democracy on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:01:11 PM PDT

•  Excuse my ignorance...

  ... but what are you talking about?

  by miasmo on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:01:41 PM PDT

  •  Mercanaries.

    On either Thursday or Friday Kos basically said that he cares about our troops, but he doesn't care about the fate of mercenaries who make their way to war zones in order to earn $1000 a day doing dirty work.  A sentiment I agree with completely, but one that's easy to distort.

    This was in the context of those 4 mutilated American mercenaries, whom most of the media kept referring to as civilians, as though they worked for the Red Cross or something.

    by Go Vegetarian on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:07:12 PM PDT

    •  thanks

      I read that. I was not aware of the attacks. I read this site all the time. I didn't realize it had such a high profile.

      by miasmo on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:17:03 PM PDT

    •  Or Like They Were Defenseless Tourists

      Like poor Leon Klinghoffer, cruelly murdered by terrorist psychos.

      I'm disgusted by what was done to the corpses of these men, but they were legitimate targets for the guerillas who killed them.  It's a war, people get killed.  And unlike the Marines and Army soldiers, these guys chose to be there.
      

      "L'enfer, c'est le GOP!" - JJB, from an idea by oratorio

      by JJB on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:20:33 PM PDT

    •  We invaded them ...

      What did we expect them to do? That is what is so amazing about the media and the administration. Hey, I have family in the military. I don't want any of them to die. I don't want the Iraqis to die. But our military invaded them. They have every right to defend themselves by whatever means necessary - the same way we are doing in Afghanistan trying to find bin Laden.

      by radiotony on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 05:21:13 PM PDT

  •  A mini shit-storm blew up

    At this hour it is the topic of the moment at Atrios, but the emotions are bleaching out and the questions mounting up?  What were these guys doing that put them where they were?  And most striking, why are the Marines essentially ageeing with Kos?  If you know anything about Marines, you know they do not leave their dead behind.  Never.  And they will take great risks recovering them.  Their response to the "contractors"?  Oh well, dead is dead.

    At a minimum this suggests something less than a "Hey we are all in it together" attitude.

    by Bruce Webb on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:15:44 PM PDT

•  Another Silver Lining

  This is a great boon for Jane Mitikides, the one advertiser to ignore a right-wing smear campaign.  Now, apart from John Kerry, she's the one direct recipient of kossacs' largesse.

  And she deserves it.  Apart from helping the Kerry campaign and parties, why shouldn't that extra financial boost go to those who have the integrity to stand with their friends?

  by Go Vegetarian on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:03:42 PM PDT

  •  Bingo-

    And I seem to recall a reported drop-off in donations taken in per blog ad after things "opened up" and there were lots of different candidates advertising for the first time.  The Freepers are just causing us to concentrate our donations.

    by Patton on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:04:30 PM PDT

  •  I get to vote for Jane!

    I was so pleased to see that her ad was still up after the Essentially Empty Kerfuffle (EEK) over Kos's feelings about mercenaries.  I guess we can't express anything but great love and concern for all Americans, unless they're slighly liberal, like Colin Powell, and then it's alright to suggest blowing them up.
    Robertson wants to bomb Foggy Bottom
    Of course I would have voted for Jane anyway, even if she hadn't been brave enough to continue her ad. She's running against Mike Turner. Bleah!

    by Cowalker on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 05:05:30 PM PDT

•  I admire both your comments & articles

  It's easy enough to make statements that you know will be accepted.  But to share ideas and feelings that go against the grain, is very brave.

  You stood up for those beliefs and feelings, clarifying them in your powerful article in a way that proved why this blog of yours is so successful.

  Thank you.

  by katiebird on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:04:02 PM PDT

•  Kos and Communism

  I actually thought you might get some praise from some right-wingers, for going after the Communists in El Salvador.

  I guess now that Islam is the offical enemy, they've forgotten about the bolsheviks. My, how times change.

  by benwaxman on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:07:44 PM PDT

•  Kos, You're Funny

  Kos, you're funny. You try to deflect the issue of what you said about 4 dead men. You said, "Screw them." That is why you have people upset. Don't try to use the race card. I was born in Honduras and I find what you said to be despicable. So, don't be using my Central American heritage as your shield. You still have not apologized to the families of the 4 men who were brutally murdered. At least many of us were able to post your disgusting comments because you deleted them. Have some intellectual honesty, Kos. Don't try to hoodwink your many readers.

  by tgalvin on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:08:11 PM PDT

  •  Murdered?

    I thought Iraq was a war zone.  I thought the four men in question were part of an occupying force.  If you want to talk about murder, what about all the innocents being killed by the foreign occupiers in Iraq and the death that waits around the corner due to exposure to DU.

    That, my friend, is murder.

    by Gearhead on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:11:43 PM PDT

  •  Dude

    Did you read the post?  He said he's gotten e-mails.  Have you read them?  Didn't think so.  I've visited some of the sites bashing Kos and they are indeed taking cheap shots at Kos' family, so it wouldn't surprise me at all that some of the guys in sheets are also sending more private messages.

    by DelRPCV on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:13:02 PM PDT

  •  On the first day of the war

     We dropped a bomb on a residential neighborhood restaurant on the off chance of nailing Saddam.  Didn't work.  But they were able to pull out a teenage girl in pieces.

    I have thought about that girl a lot.  I suspect you haven't.  At no point have I seen a single war-supporter shed one tear or express a minute of regret for the 'collateral damage' we created by turning a crowded city into a 'free fire zone' - free fire at least if you are US.

    If someone had shot an RPG at those four, and missed, they would have returned fire and by almost every single report I have seen would not have been overly concerned by stray rounds taking out innocents.

    People/US soldiers are burning to death almost everyday in Iraq.  Supporters of the war could give a shit - until it gets shoved in their faces on TV.

    Kos has nothing to be ashamed about, still less apologize about.  But everyone who thought, and still worse, still thinks this clusterfuck of a war is worth it should be hanging their heads in shame.

    Its war, people die, people die in really horrific ways.  If Kos feels more badly about some soldier who has no choices, as opposed to a veteran freely choosing to put his body into harms way in a very well paid gig, well good.  I feel the same way.

    by Bruce Webb on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:32:56 PM PDT

    •  Absolutely right

      War is hell and should be avoided.  Now we are learning that lesson again at too high a cost.  The Iraqis will have decades of coping with the aftermath of DU exposure and two generations of wounds to heal, not only from the cruel dictatorship of Saddam, but also from the reckless "liberation" and the selling off of thier assets, industry and economy to American mega corporations.

      Yet again we see that we are doomed to repeat history.

      The horror of war is imbued in every fiber not only of the civilian population, but in the hearts and souls of the returning US military.  The Guardian sheds light on how the Pentagon is treating the men and women who are risking their lives in Bush's illegal war.  And we have heard how the wounded are treated at home:  having to pay for their meds, prosthese and hospital rooms out of pocket.

      And people laughed and continue to laugh and ridicule us protestors - the "peacenicks."  Nick Lowe has is right:  "What's so funny 'bout peace, love, and understanding?"

      by Gearhead on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:43:07 PM PDT

    •  ambiguity

      I feel the same way.

      Please clarify, Bruce.

      Do you feel nothing for the four killed in Falujah?

      Do you say "screw them?"

      Kos said above that his comments were "pretty stupid" -- showing his nobility winning out, imo.  Do you agree with Kos's original comments, or the sense he expresses now that they were stupid?

      (I've developed a respect for you.  This is a sincere question.)

      by Civil Sibyl on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 04:34:36 PM PDT

      •  It's more nuanced than that

        But a guy that freely chooses not to reenlist, who takes his hugely expensive training, and walks away leaving his buddies behind, then subsequently chooses to return to that very same environment, so he can be a hireling for Halliburton?  Let's see "I could take that training and climb around the mountains of Afghanistan trying to locate and kill the guy that killed 3000 Americans" or "I could take that training and jump on the gravy train of a very dubious private company so I can protect a company that is openly ripping off the US for billions".  Lets just say that my feelings are a little different than they are for single-mother Lori from Arizona who is equally dead.

        by Bruce Webb on Sun Apr 04, 2004 at 10:44:18 AM PDT

        •  thx for responding...

          Thanks for responding.  You're not being totally clear about my exact questions, but I understand and appreciate what you did write, and don't feel it right to ask for any more specificity.

          by Civil Sibyl on Mon Apr 05, 2004 at 12:48:56 AM PDT

          •  No I wasn't responsive

              because I wanted the heat to die down a little.  But I thought about this all day.  The initial reaction to the "comment" was to demand a black or white answer to what is a gray question.  And what I see on subsequent threads is giving some validity to the notion that the challenge to Kos was entirely unfair.

            The best counter-example I could come up with was Rachel Corrie.  Since she was run over by an Israeli Defense Force bulldozer the near unanimous response from the Right, and certainly the people at sites like LGF was that "she knew what she was doing, she went there as a volunteer".  And you didn't have to go far into the threads to find something stronger than "screw her".  Well we are talking about an American, a young American woman from my area who was by my lights deliberately run over by a bulldozer seeking to tear down the house of a pharmacist who had not been linked to any terror activity, simply to clear a security corridor.

            Until every war apologist that ever lived crawls up to me apologizing for bombing wedding parties in Afghanistan, dropping bombs on Canadians in that same country because some hot dog was flying well below where he should have been and couldn't be bothered to read a map, cutting through an Italian gorge and cutting a ski gondola cable and sending a dozen people to their deaths, or repeatedly running a bulldozer over a young American girl, all without any real consequences at all, they can pretty much take their selective outrage at this incident and shove it up their orifice of choice.

            People die in war.  Accept it or reject the war.  Don't expect me to share your outrage about a single incident.

            by Bruce Webb on Mon Apr 05, 2004 at 11:33:21 PM PDT

            •  selective: outrage? assumptions? moral feeling?

              I asked you those questions because your true feelings about the Falluja Four's deaths were not apparent.  I wanted to understand where you were coming from.  I didn't want to make assumptions or impute attitudes/opinions/feelings onto you.  Your last message is a very clear explication of your feelings about the men's deaths and desecration, and I appreciate the time you took to write it.  

              Still, I have to say, you have (rashly, perhaps?) imputed attitudes onto me that I simply don't feel.

              1. I don't expect you to feel what I do.
              2. I don't feel outrage per se over that single incident.

              Also, to clarify, I've been strongly opposed to our invasion of Iraq.  Bush is a cancer.  His invasion is wrong, gross, and stupid.

              More details on #2:
              I never expressed, nor do I feel -- great outrage over the men's deaths in Fallouja.  As for the killings themselves -- they sadden me somewhat, but they are far less tragic than thousands of other deaths there: of American uniformed soldiers, innocent Iraqi civilians, and Iraqi conscripts.  The Fallouja Four took their chances (for money) with wide-open eyes, and lost.  Sad but not outrageous.

              Their desecration is sickening to me, and is to any feeling person who views it without an attitude of intense demonization towards the men.  Any desecration violates a liberal or soulful conscience, whether in a Muslim, Christian, Hindu, athiest, Iraqi, American, Jew, Palestinian, etc.

              I'm sickened but not outraged by the Fallouja desecrations.  I'm not outraged because Americans have done the same and worse repeatedly throughout our history.  I know of dozens of atrocities much worse even than the examples you mention -- which are outrageous more for their heedlessness than their deparvity.  Even your Israeli example, while illustrating depraved malice, pales in comparison to some other American atrocities.  Like you, I put the bodily desecration of the Fallouja Four in that context.  Still, it's nasty, no good, and breathes bad voodoo for the killed, for the perpetrators, the cheering mob, and any unenthralled bystanders.  It's sick.

                                           ***

              I think we agree in points of fact, and in tempering outrage with context.

              Here's where we probably disagree fundamentally, however: I don't let the moral cretinism of the Neocons influence my own moral feelings or sense.  (Or at least I try not to.)  I agree with your principle that selective outrage is disingenuous.  But selective non-compassion is likewise twisted.  The liberal heart feels natural disgust at bodily desecration.  It's also natural for my anger at our hypocritical opponents to overwhelm my heart and moral sensitivity.  But I refuse that.  I won't hold my sense of disgust at desecration hostage to whether some rightwing fools see the light and come apologize.  I choose not to give them that power over me.

              Our interaction has been worthwhile, Bruce.  I not only understand your thoughts and feelings better, I also see more clearly some things I only vaguely felt before.  Thanks for conversing.

              by Civil Sibyl on Tue Apr 06, 2004 at 10:37:54 AM PDT

              •  You should note

                  that I don't directly impute those motives to you.  And I will allow that your belief that:

                "Their desecration is sickening to me, and is to any feeling person who views it without an attitude of intense demonization towards the men.  Any desecration violates a liberal or soulful conscience, whether in a Muslim, Christian, Hindu, athiest, Iraqi, American, Jew, Palestinian, etc." is authentic.

                But without much more evidence I will not extend any credit to the scum that inhabit LGF.

                Blowing up a wedding party in Afghanistan and excusing it with "maybe there was a terrorist there" is just as despicable as anything done in Fallujah last weekend..

                I am not religious.  I believe dead is dead.  You have a different belief.  Fine.  But most of those people who are attacking Kos on this have posted numerous laughing comments on Rachel Corrie being run over by a bulldozer.  Because she chose to be in the place where she was, therefore it was okay.

                Well anyone who feigns distress over what four volunteer mercs endured after they were dead, and yet aligns themselves with those who laugh about what Rachel endured after she was run over alive with an IDF bulldozer deserve nothing.  Disavow that in the strongest terms.  Demand that every politician that refused to condemn Rachel's death delink from every right wing blog ever.  Or otherwise I will unlinquish some strong language.

                Because you are lying down with the swine here.

                by Bruce Webb on Tue Apr 06, 2004 at 11:57:19 PM PDT

                •  descent to piffle

                  Because you are lying down with the swine here.

                  That's a bit much Bruce.  I have nothing but condemnation for the various American and Israeli incidents you've cited here.

                  Do you say such because I may share some shred of an opinion with with them -- that what Kos said re "screw 'em" was questionable?  

                  By that token, you lie down with genocidal dictators.  E.G.: Like you, Pol Pot didn't believe in God.  

                  You don't wallow with Pol Pot and I don't with those LGF imbeciles.  It's ludicrous to paint people with such a wide brush based on selective shared opinion.

                  The conversation has turned ridiculous.  Not worth it.

                  Also, you're imputing when you make statements about my beliefs re god and death.

                  by Civil Sibyl on Wed Apr 07, 2004 at 09:58:52 AM PDT

                  •  Black and white

                    You were sharing a logic with the LGF folk.  That by condemning the use of paid mercs with a certain indifference: "screw em", in the face of a war that has killed untold innocents in horrific incidents that resulted in fragmentary babies and burnt schoolgirls Kos has somehow committed an offense that required an apology.  Kos is far down the list of people who need to apologize.

                    You reacted to one act captured on video with outrage.  Kos and I have been reacting with outrage since before the first bomb dropped.  Because we know, me from reading, he from personal experience what war means.  It means people being blown to bits and being burnt to death.  In your personal belief code there is a huge difference between being torn to bits before and after death.  To me dead is dead.

                    That mob has four deaths on its conscience.  Bush has thousands, or would if he had a conscience.  By continuing on this tack you are playing into the hands of the warmongers.  That may not be your intent.  But that is the result.  You have been played by those who would use selective outrage at one incident to attack the anti-war Left.

                    And you need to wake up.

                    by Bruce Webb on Thu Apr 08, 2004 at 06:05:16 AM PDT

                    •  feeling frenzied lately, Mr. Webb?

                      The rabid cannot hear, and hence cannot converse.

                      Reading this or that simplistic accusation can be humorous, but wastes time.

                      by Civil Sibyl on Thu Apr 08, 2004 at 09:41:21 AM PDT

    •  Mercs

      I feel grief and rage at the killings of the 4 mercenaries.  The deaths are tragic in many ways.
      It's tragic that we're so understaffed we have to resort to using mercenaries in the first place.  Their deaths were awful and unnecessary.  They knew the risks and were payed well, but they didn't deserve the desecration.

      I agree that the American media treats American deaths as much more important than Iraqi civilian (or Afghani) deaths.  I don't think we'll ever know the true toll this war has taken.

      Kos was right to apologize for his words.  I believe they were taken out of context, but his clarification was needed.

      by Unstable Isotope on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 04:46:11 PM PDT

      •  Really?

        The death of four men who take money to kill is tragic? Will the eventual death of Saddam be tragic? There are 6 billion people in the world and more than enough greif and suffering to go around.  My heart doesnt really go out to Mercs.

        by coheninjapan on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 10:30:37 PM PDT

      •  Grief and rage?

        I have posted enough here but one final thought.

        If there had not been video of this would we have even known? or Cared?  Would the simple story, in print, have had any kind of impact? We know now that over 60 of these armed civilians have been killed to date, they drew exactly zero coverage.  You can bet that if the Americans had been able to secure the scene and confiscate the video you would have seen nothing.  And these four would have just been another paragraph in a news story - just like the five soldiers killed in one incident on the same day.

        I hope you are filled with grief and rage, I know I am, but it didn't start with these four contractors, and if it comes right down to it their deaths didn't really add much.

        by Bruce Webb on Sun Apr 04, 2004 at 10:58:48 AM PDT

  •  deleting

    Why do people keep saying Kos deleted this comment. It's still there. It disgusts me that people are accusing Kos of re-writing history, when he clearly didn't.

    by Bundy on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:27:30 PM PDT

  •  "race card"

    Saying you grew up in a war zone and therefore may have different opinions about them than others isn't "using the race card".

    He explained that he said what he said out of anger and that he thought it was stupid of him to say. But we all think what we think and I don't think any of us need to appologize or explain any further than he already has for what we think. No matter how distastful it might be to others. Just because someone hurts your feelings doesn't mean you should expect to get an appology out of them.

    We already have enough people out there trying to be thought police. We don't need any more.

    by cshardie on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 06:34:24 PM PDT

  •  Povracito

    You think that what Kos said is despicable?

    Go join the mercenaries and express your rage on Iraqis. Don't sit there posting your umbrage, computer warrior.

    Call Blackwater today.

    Getting toasted is IN the job description. But it does pay well.

    by mattman on Sun Apr 04, 2004 at 12:10:25 AM PDT

•  Go Kos!

  Whether or not you felt that remark was stupid, you said it from the heart, with passion. That's what this is all about. That's why the rethugs are so scared this time.  We are not the old limp liberals.  We are not going to back down from a fight.  We are pissed at what they have done to our country.
  Fight on Kos!

  by surfk9 on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:08:51 PM PDT

  •  The wingers never apologize

    for their remarks.

    Rod "Terrorist Teachers" Paige
    Ann "Treason" Coulter
    Sen. Jim Bunning saying one of his Democratic opponents looks like Saddam's sons.

    by Unstable Isotope on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 04:48:21 PM PDT

    •  paige apologized

      coulter is a joke.

      by wah on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 11:22:08 PM PDT

•  ridiculous

  that this got the amount of attention it did...but this was a good test to find out how many people and who has been paying attention.

  I've said this elsewhere. The only careless thing about this was "screw 'em" and I've seen kos say "screw 'em" about just about everything. I bet he says it a lot in real life. Just be careful with that--a lot of us thought the Dean scream was treated reprehensibly too, but we couldn't change the outcome.

  by JMS on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:09:36 PM PDT

  •  Kerry dumped dKos?

    Well, did he read EVERYTHING?

    If he did, did it make him THINK?

    I hope Kos publishes it!

    This is the BEST WAY to get things out in the open, on the table, vent, spew, run out of steam...but stick it out.

    I mean, I saw that threat. It was chilling. About the photo of Kos.

    But I've really learned a lot from all this, and expect to keep learning from it.

    Put it somewhere special, Kos.

    by greenbird on Sun Apr 04, 2004 at 12:48:23 AM PDT

•  Your courage

  I stand by you and your advertisers.

  by eyelessgame on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:09:52 PM PDT

•  Nice Mea Culp

  I'm sure I spelled it wrong.

  However, glad to see that you admitted to a misstatement. However, since the wing nuts are having little to pin on Kerry of any substance, they are reaching for anything they can to make fellow American citizens look unamerican.

  Just keep up the good fight.

  by Rook on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:11:18 PM PDT

  •  Almost

    Just put an "a" after the "p."

    And if you really want to say you're sorry, it's "mea maxima culpa" ("I have greviously sinned").  Being a choirboy in the days of Latin masses leaves it's mark.
    

    "L'enfer, c'est le GOP!" - JJB, from an idea by oratorio

    by JJB on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:25:20 PM PDT

    •  Thanks!

      Hey, thanks, I'm sure I'll misspell it again in the future, though. I rarely have use for the words......

      Oh, ok, I have to use them all the time, I just don't take the time!

      by Rook on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:31:25 PM PDT

    •  hey JJB

      Being a choirboy in the days of Latin masses leaves it's mark
       I ain't gonna touch that one.

      by ctkeith on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 05:00:17 PM PDT

    •  I'm sure it leaves its mark (n/t)

      by KissyO on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 10:21:17 PM PDT

•  Bring it on

  Amen!  Kos stood tall, Jane stood tall, and we are right.  I'm in all the way- time, spirit, and money.  Let's roll.

  by burg on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:12:53 PM PDT

•  ...And those who allowed these deaths are Patriots

  
  Now, having read Kos for a year and a half, I'm pretty confident that his comment was an emotional reaction that didn't reflect his true underlying thoughts.  I think the comment was not well thought out - but as I noted in a thread earlier, not so easy to judge:

  1. This is more a symbol of the much more difficult format of blogs over other news media, than anything else.  Kos was responding, emotionally, in a thread.  It's the kind of thing you might do without much thinking.  He responded with anger, and directed his anger in the wrong direction.  But it's not like this is a medium with editors and much official scrutiny.  Not only was there nobody to give Kos a nudge and suggest he should rethink his emotions, but also, it was such a minor comment (in terms of the setting, not the content) that he might not have felt the need to think it through himself.  

  2. Kos is in the infuriating position of having to defend himself, while the people who made the decision to attack Iraq pretend to be patriots.  Kos is clearly angry that this war happened at all, that people died unnecessarily.  If he'd had the ability to stop this war, these mercenaries still be alive today.  And yet, the people who sent them to die can accuse him of being insensitive in reacting to their death.    

  Infuriating in that light, no?

  by CTDem2 on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:13:56 PM PDT

  •  power of a meme, re-memed against one

    Exactly.  

    It's like the Dean scream meme.  

    • the outpouring of a single emotion, untempered by broader considerations of fact or feelings
    • its intended meaning highly tied to local context
    • easily "re-memed" by opponents for viral and media spread to huge additional audiences
    • disturbing to a majority of objective people encountering it outside the original context, including to swing voters and Democrats
    • potential for damage to cascade and multiply
    • engenders Kool-Aid quaffing among many supporters*
    • raises questions of leader's judgment, among non Kool-Aid drinkers
    • leader admits error, more or less, but hasn't sufficient reach to contain its damage in other venues

    (*Do I risk a stoning for saying this? Non-Greek Sibyls and other wannabe prophets sometimes ain't loved in their own country, as a Hebrew prophet once said. No matter, Kos knows I love him -- Platonically -- to reference another Greek.)

    by Civil Sibyl on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 05:04:53 PM PDT

•  remember....

  Commercial interests will eventually consume all the blogs like yours. The money pull wins every time. That is what has happened in American politics.

  I wish it were not so.

  by CheezeBall on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:13:57 PM PDT

  •  Not so

    I bid the advertisers a gracious adieu. I don't fault them for pulling out.

    But like I said, I have two new advertisers this morning alone to replace those three. And it's only 8:30 a.m. There are lots of progressive advertisers willing to stick it to the right wing.

    And ultimately, I don't NEED the advertising. It's nice. It's helping me get out of massive debt and put something away for Aristotle's college fund. But I don't need it. And that gives me the freedom I value above all else.

    by kos on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:18:43 PM PDT

    •  All Hail Kos!

      I commend you for (among other things) your gracious attitude towards those who pulled out.  I doubt I could have managed to remain so calm about it, particularly since they probably got thousands of dollars they would not otherwise have received from your regulars (and I'm sure they were so outraged by your remark they returned all the money in addition to pulling the ads).

      At any rate, congratulations for having weathered the tempest in the teacup.  And if the ads are to be jettisoned, please let us know so we can make the needed contributions.
      

      "L'enfer, c'est le GOP!" - JJB, from an idea by oratorio

      by JJB on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:35:08 PM PDT

    •  Screech Monkeys

      I understand the pragmatism of pulling ads. The right wing screech monkeys can make things difficult for any candidate, let alone one fighting for his/her life. It's not as simple as just setting out the facts with these people.

      The screech monkeys take something, spin it in unison, then shout it at the top of their lungs until it becomes larger than fact. My guess is that this will blow over pretty quickly though.

      That said, I hope you have a nice little waiting list for the advertisers who return once the heat dies down.

      by JoeWPgh on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:39:45 PM PDT

    •  Protecting Themselves

      I also have been impressed by your understanding of the advertisers who pulled.  Of course, as I'm sure you're aware, the sh*tstorm isn't entirely over, because this is precisely the kind of thing that the other side will use as a cudgel over those who do stick with you.  Expect it to appear in opposition ads from Mitakides's opponent and anyone else who stays (or comes) here.  That's just how they work, as you know better than anyone.  I truly hope it doesn't hurt the growing relationship you have with Dem higher-ups.

      Needless to say, if you are ever put in a position of need by advertisers pulling, there are plenty of folks who post here who would be willing once again to support you directly.

      by sdf on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:04:12 PM PDT

      •  Double edged sword

        Expect it to appear in opposition ads from Mitakides's opponent and anyone else who stays (or comes) here.

        How many right-wing candidates are advertising on the right-wing blogs? Without even following the RW blogs I can assure anyone that if they really want to play Snip-The-Quote, "Oh The Horror" they'll lose that game.
        

        by Thumb on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 04:06:46 PM PDT

        •  muck game

          They'd lose due to vulnerability, but only if we had the energy and interest to play that game.  They have the personality for it, and have done so, won so.

          Such petty tactics and shrill malignance feel mucky and wearisome to me.  Can people of liberal heart long fight in that way?  Hard to fight ignobly.  Yech.  Gotta...find...a better...method.

          ...to win swing voters.

          As for firing up our base, Bushco gives plenty of ammo w/o the need to muck about the wingnut blogs.

          But you were talking about denying blogs funds, and Repubs donations from rightBlogs.  Maybe others here would have the stomach for that fight.
          

          by Civil Sibyl on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 05:20:41 PM PDT

    •  Yeah, let us help too

      Is there a way to halp support this site?  I don't know what your audience size is like, but a few bucks from even a couple hundred people ought to help, and I bet you'd get a lot more.

      by David in Burbank on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:10:05 PM PDT

    •  How do we give to your site?

      I have never paid much attention to whether you can voluntarily "subscribe" to this site.  I would gladly pay for the privilege of reading and participating in this community.

      by CharmRWC on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:29:51 PM PDT

      •  I don't need the money

        Thanks for the offers, but I'm doing just fine. I'll let you guys know if it becomes an issue, but I doubt very much that it will.

        And for the record, I love you guys for offering.

        by kos on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:43:32 PM PDT

        •  Good man!

          Don't retract. You just print a snail mail addy and we'll respond.

          What we need to understand is that those scumbags make the most ourageous LIES about people who won't walk in lockstep with them.

          by mattman on Sun Apr 04, 2004 at 12:31:03 AM PDT

•  public figure

  Well, it did make WSJ's Best of the Web. It might get to Hannity yet, and we have yet to see whether the GOP opponents of your sponsors make use of the free ammunition ornot. I'd be a bit more cautious before declaring victory.

  The real impact of this is that you're the highest-profile Democrat on the web, and you gave your own opponents an easy shot. The fact that this site WILL raise over $1m for Kerry and the DNC by November is part of the equation.

  Your response to it has been as a blogger, which I think ignored the fact that you aren't one anymore. As the apex of the grassroots, you're in the gray area of the Establishment itself (especially given your visionary goal of the blogsphere as a medium for influence on the political process as a whole).

  As such, you don't have as much room to maneuver as you used to. Martin Frost's rationale for withdrawing his ad is obvious to you and this is why you bear him no ill-will. But what you've failed to recognize from this affair is that your position is closer to Frost' than to a typical influence-less blogger like myself.

  I don't think anyone should "watch what they say" because "theres no time for comments like that, there never is" (to quote Ari Fleischer). But neither do I think that you can invoke the "I'm just a blogger" defense any longer. At the very least your comments may yet prove damaging to Jane Miktikades etc, at worst they could be integrated into the evolving smear campaign against half of America that the GOP is drafting in BC04's undisclosed location.

  And unlike Atrios or Tacitus, you don't even have the cover of pseudonymity. I've been on the receiving end of a rightwing-pile-on myself - so I  know and share your instinctual feeling that free speech means free speech - but public figures don't have as much free speech as the rest of us.

  by azizhp on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:14:14 PM PDT

  •  at the end of the day

    I think kos has a better grip on the realities of his situation than some of the other people around here who don't want to acknowledge that there might have been something offensive about A) the content of the original post, and more importantly for the situation at hand B) the tone of the post. I don't fault kos on his reaction. I think some of the people around here are showing the sort of naivete that gets "liberals" in trouble all the time.

    by JMS on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:29:32 PM PDT

    •  neither do I

      Kos has a right, as do we all, to have an emotional reaction, and post it to his blog (the original was a comment, after all, not a frontpage post - comments are supposed to have a lower threshold).

      I just wanted to go on record as disagreeing that the impact has been zero. There are costs. I fundamentally agree with Instapundit said about the affair:

      "Free speech: His blog, his choice on what to write -- and your choice on what to think about it."

      As liberals who want to win, we cant pretend that there aren't consequences to what we choose to do within our rights.

      by azizhp on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:36:23 PM PDT

      •  Never ever

        cite Instahack and expect any respect from me.

        Find someone else to support your point - coming from that punk weakens your argument, which was fairly marginal anyway.

        Of course people draw their own conclusions - duh.

        by Armando on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:46:26 PM PDT

        •  low expectations

          indeed

          by azizhp on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:51:59 PM PDT

          •  Flogging

            on behalf of Instahack puts you on suspicious ground - as you say, you write and I draw my conclusions.

            Your point, whatever it may be, lost potency.  Physician heal thyself.

            by Armando on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:56:34 PM PDT

            •  quoting Instahack?

              "as you say, you write and I draw my conclusions."

              actually, that's as Glenn says. Are you also quoting InstaHack?

              by azizhp on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:06:53 PM PDT

              •  You got me

                Good one.  Boy, do I feel stupid.  Sort of like Kerry when he says 'bring it on.'

                Score your cheap points, tells me a little bit more about your motivations.

                by Armando on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:12:08 PM PDT

                •  Misdirected

                  Armando, I think there's some misunderstanding here. Aziz is the guy who founded Dean Nation, the first Dean blog.

                  He's one of us, one of us!

                  by hamletta on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 05:50:52 PM PDT

                  •  Well Didn't Dean Say

                    something about saying anything to win means you lose?

                    Did aziz miss that one?

                    by mattman on Sun Apr 04, 2004 at 12:41:02 AM PDT

                  •  Why take your lead

                    from Instahack?

                    For the record, I criticized kos for his original comment, stting I expected a clarification and expression of regret.  kos, to his credit, stood up and corrected his remarks.

                    aziz, citing instahack, said it wasn't good enough.  I responded, and continue to believe, that citing instahack for your source of disgruntlement was a grievous error, and frankly, not likely to convince, at least me. Instahack is a pathetic idiotic GOP whore.  I for one will not play his game ever.

                    I leave it to you guys if you want to join aziz in playing the instahack game.  Include me out.  

                    by Armando on Sun Apr 04, 2004 at 12:50:48 AM PDT

                    •  Huh?

                      When you said, "Score your cheap points, tells me a little bit more about your motivations," I got the impression you had mistaken Aziz for a RW troll. That's all I was talking about.

                      by hamletta on Sun Apr 04, 2004 at 02:20:16 AM PDT

                      •  I did

                        and that's why.  To me, it seems worse if aziz is being duped by instahack into joining the all-out assault on kos.

                        He (kos) said he was wrong and stupid.  Need he say more?

                        BTW, aziz was not exactly kind and gentle with me, so the outrage at my language seems a little one-sided.  

                        by Armando on Sun Apr 04, 2004 at 12:20:50 PM PDT

      •  Yes but

        constantly apologizing for having a set of beliefs that fall outside of an easy "conventional wisdom" (and especially one like this that is easily demonstrated to be WRONG,)is worse than saying I believe something different; I have had a different set of experiences and I stand behind them.

        What gets "liberals" in trouble is not their beliefs, but the fact that they don't stand up for their beliefs when the right demonizes them for them.

        The people who are saying Kos is/was wrong are the cowards in all this to me; being willing to say something uncomfortable but true; isn't that the kind of "straight-forwardness" that the rethugs like to say the right wing has, they don't like "pc" talk.  Well, the positions saying we should all be outraged at the deaths of those 4 military vets for hire is about the pc-est of pc that I can imagine.  Its EC, emotional correctness, or GC, grief correctness, OC, outrage correctness, or maybe just NIC, National-identity correctness.

        That's pretty cowardly: refusing to move one iota and demanding a perfectly clear-cut and inflexible set of emotional responses. What could be more doctinaire? You must "feel" this way or else there's something wrong with you???  That's where indoctrination really begins.

        by a gilas girl on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 06:49:40 PM PDT

    •  Yes, But Then

      "I think some of the people around here are showing the sort of naivete that gets 'liberals' in trouble all the time."

      While you definitely have a point, the real s**tstorm should be over Bush's remarkably tasteless "where are those goshdarned WMDs?" joke.

      And that's the fault of the media, and the American public.
      

      "L'enfer, c'est le GOP!" - JJB, from an idea by oratorio

      by JJB on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:38:16 PM PDT

    •  Exactly

      The wingnuts don't care that kos expressed regret, said he was wrong and that he made a stupid remark.

      Frankly, they don't care about the four security contractors who died, they care more about ripping the creator of the leading Dem blog.

      What I hope is that this ends it.  kos, leave it after this entry - there is nothing more to say.

      by Armando on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:38:28 PM PDT

      •  Yup

        I'm done.

        by kos on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:59:16 PM PDT

        •  Good

          FWIW, I think you handled the aftermath just right.

          by Armando on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:06:45 PM PDT

        •  Hey Kos

          I beleive in the long run this will be a blip on the screen. Of course you have had to deal with the B.S. of sucess. All in all some people will look here to find there own conclusions and I would not doubt that you increase traffic. I remeber reading the post and must have just assumed you were on a rant like most of us. I was on the same page as your clarification. All loss of life Is Bad. Some we relate to more but it is a natural thing for many people to value American life more than innocents in other lands. This is one difference between most of us and the freepers. And in my view is why frost pull his ad. Texas being the poster child for the ME ME its all about Me theme.
          I was just generalizing my impress of the majority and hope I don't upset any of our friends from Texas. If I am wrong on this assumption please clarify what the majority tx. mind set is Brent...

          by Davinci on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 06:31:49 PM PDT

          •  An Un PC comment from a liberal

            The loss of all INNOCENT life is a tragedy. One less asshole is fine with me...BTW...if you accept money to kill you fall into the asshole category in my book.

            by coheninjapan on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 10:55:38 PM PDT

  •  Kos' predicament

    I do think there is much truth in this post by azizhp.  DailyKos is bigger than Markos now, bigger than any of us.  The trade-off for having this kind of influence is a loss of privacy and, to some extent, a loss of the ability to control the message about oneself.  And, power and influence draw those who want to pull people down even apart from the vitriolic campaign we are involved in.  That just makes it doubly bad.  As we are all read now by a wider audience, maybe we do all have some responsibility not so much to watch what we say, but how we say it.

    by Mimikatz on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:36:23 PM PDT

    •  well said

      I saw on Steve Gillard's blog that he sees the response from teh right as an assaulton Kos' free speech. That's simply untrue. Kos has and always WILL have a right to free speech. But Kos' speech has more power than, say, mine - and with great power comes great responsibility. It's NOT my call as to whether Kos should "watch what he says" - and frankly I prefer Kos uncensored.

      But it's also NOT Kos' call to declare victory and that the entire affair had zero consequence.

      Free speech, like all rights, is encumbered by responsibility.

      by azizhp on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 01:39:50 PM PDT

      •  I Doubt

        Dean would agree with your stance.

        by mattman on Sun Apr 04, 2004 at 12:48:54 AM PDT

  •  The Right