Skip to main content

Impeachment talk got you down? Unashamed Lefties giving you heart palpitations? Having a hard time herding the cats lately? Congratulations, you have attained a state of Rovian enlightenment. Choke on it.

What a place this has become. It makes me incredibly sad to pop back in here and see the sorry state of affairs... the general's dutiful lieutenants torpedoing the credibility of anyone who dares "step out of line." There was a day when we didn't hold our ideals in such contempt. There was a day when we didn't hold each other in such contempt. There was a day when the attempt to marginalize fellow Democrats by calling them Rovian Plants and Republican Tricksters only came from the rabble down here as opposed to from dKos lieutenants disguising them as innocent diaries. Fuck that. It's different when it comes from the vaporous powerbook-toting laurel-sporting toga-wearing digital demigods, and you know it. The specific instance I refer to is but a small symptom of the disease that threatens to hobble this community.

Shame on you for casting dispersions (okay, aspersions, but I won't fix it because it makes me laugh) on those who aren't up to your standards by saying outright that they sit on their asses and do nothing for country and party. There's a sweeping generalization for you. Shame on you for using your almighty power to besmirch other who are on your side. (This even happened at least once in a concerted effort to drive traffic to another blog. It's fucking disgusting.) The organized effort to drag everyone to center and to marginalize those who cling to their ideals is troubling. It's a hollow victory indeed when we get there by forsaking our principles.

These types of things occurred many times leading up last November, but damned if they didn't go into overdrive when we were handed our asses. So much hard work went into that effort. People here poured their entire souls into the work of sending Bush back to the depths of whatever hell he came from. After all the anguish and the tears I suppose it was only human to look up, dry our eyes and start searching within our self-loathing ranks for a scapegoat. "Damned liberated women. Fags. If only we'd been less liberal. Maybe those Republicans are on to something." You think this idea is ridiculous, even as you subtly herd your minions in that direction.

The penalty for not falling in line? Public humiliation/vilification. Banishment. Un-recommended diaries. A stern talking-to and a bloodlust driven mob scene. Maybe even a troll-rating here and there. Ouch. Say it ain't so. The reward for scenting the blood in the water at dKos and high-fiving each other and pretending we're clinging to a higher ideal when we're actually clinging to nothing? Have a 4. Let me recommend your diary. Here... have a reason to exist. Say something else. I like you. Handjob, Heather?

Bite me.

Whether or not censorship is occurring at dKos is irrelevant. I'm not addressing that. The real crime is happening when we're tearing each other down. You. You reading this now. Your motives are questionable. You will compromise yourself into irrelevance.

Perhaps our boat is slowly sinking, but take care when you start looking around for things to throw overboard. You might need these people someday.

Originally posted to theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 12:45 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  And whatever you do... (4.00)
    ... don't talk about torture.

    If it ain't in the Bible, it ain't science!

    by Bob Johnson on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 12:44:10 PM PDT

    •  YESSSSSSSSS! Go Theoria! (4.00)
      Bout time.  WTF took you so long? And where the Hell you been?

      You can't always tell the truth because you don't always know the truth - but you can ALWAYS be honest.

      by mattman on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 12:54:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  <cough> (4.00)

        Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

        by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:41:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  WTF Didn't Anybody (none)
          tell me where he was before now?

          I'm having a lucid episode right now, but still how did I miss that?

          Thanks.

          And have a cough drop on me.

          You can't always tell the truth because you don't always know the truth - but you can ALWAYS be honest.

          by mattman on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:53:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  you didn't ask DUDE (none)
            (like I fucking knew)

            (he he, snicker)

            that's it, I'm outta here

            •  I Gotta Joke For Theoria And You (4.00)
              Dick Chaney dies and goes to Hell where the Devil greets him saying "Sorry, Hell is full just now what with all the Republicans and such.  We'd have to throw somebody out to let you in."

              Dick thinks about it and says, "Well, please throw out somebody and let me in.  Don't like the idea of Limbo."

              Devil says "Ok, let's look around and see if we've got a place you can fill."

              Devil takes Dick to a room and there is George Bush pounding rocks into little gravel over and over.

              Dick sez. "No, I don't think I can do that, got a bum shoulder.  Anything else?"

              Devil takes Dick to another room and there's Rumsfeldt swimming around in a pool filled with turds.  Every time he takes a breath a turd floats in.

              Dick sez: "Can't do that either.  Can't swim."

              Devil takes Dick to another room and there is Bill Clinton staked out naked with a woody big as a posthole digger.  Monica is leaning over him doing her thing.

              Dick sez: "Hey, I can do that!  Put me in there."

              Devil sez: "OK, Monica, you can leave."

              You can't always tell the truth because you don't always know the truth - but you can ALWAYS be honest.

              by mattman on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:10:42 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  And a belated hello... (none)
        ...to my old friend. I hope you are well.

        Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

        by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 10:56:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I've Fallen Through the Looking Glass (4.00)
      What in Hell is going on here?

      Theoria complains that DHinMi and others are tearing the community apart, so he writes a pissy, sarcastic missive that seems to have as its aim...further tearing the community apart. One of its primary goals seems to be to alienate the readership/commentariat from Kos and other administrative/front page members of the community.

      Right on!

      Of course, Theoria has a bigger goal, which is a juiced up, fighting mad activist base that doesn't take no for an answer. But DH also had a bigger goal, which was not banging your head into a wall, getting hurt and looking foolish, when you can spend the time doing other things (like building a bulldozer) that will eventually allow you to actually take down the wall.

      Neither of those goals is bad. The disagreement can ONLY concern the execution of those goals. People, stop pissing in your beds. It's nice and warm for a moment, and then it gets cold, sticky and stinky.

      I say that as someone who has a marked tendency to get pissy myself...but I've never believed in the saying that only he who is without sin should cast the first stone.

      </rant>

      the spirit is restored by wounding

      by jd in nyc on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:43:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So it took me all fucking afternoon... (none)
        apparently fighting my own damned team, to realize that there is MAJOR subtext in this whole thing.

        I didn't recognize "the general" as Kos. I didn't recognize ANYTHING as what, apparently, it is.

        Not only do I feel like a foolish asshole, I feel slightly -- no, TERRIBLY -- betrayed. Here I am, defending the honour of a friend in the face of accusations that now appear to have a basis in fact, to a credible degree.

        And I await further exegesis before taking ANY more missteps into the bog.

        Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

        by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:50:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not being Theoria and all... (none)
          I think "the general" referred to General Clark.

          Not Kos.

          But I believe that this blog is INDEED in a state of sort of a red state/blue state civil war.

          The BLUE states being the so-called "centrists"...the bulldozer builders, the DHs etc...and the RED states being the Theorias and their juiced up, fighting mad base. (I know...I am using red and blue as hot and cool, not left or right. Didn't work poetically the other way.)

          But what Theoria is complaining about here is the tendency of said bulldozer builders to try to bulldoze the red staters by the use of empty arguments, dispersionary tactics like off-point arguments, and apparent mass talking point-style attacks which include a LOT of ratings abuse.

          Mass action against the firebrands, in short. Organized, spontaneous or some combination of the two.

          Well, I'll tell you the truth. The blue TACTICS do not bother me so much. All's fair in love, war and politics, and this situation has elements of all three on one level or another. If similar tactics were being used by people who were committed to full disclosure of the truth to the American people instead some borg-like set of Zombies marching on into Washington going "I SALUTE you, General" and "We serve at your pleasure, sir." I might just get a little hot under the collar (I kid you not. Go here to read some of the CREEPIEST responses to a communication from a major political candidate that I have ever read in my life.), but when the strategy is used to paint people as Ratpub agents and/or anti-Semites (In another recent dust-up here) by some lock-step fools without a thought in their heads except allying themselves with a "winner" (A SURE losing strategy if ever I have seen one, especially if that "winner" also prevaricates about the use of military force to back up economic imperialism in the Third World.) or defending themselves from imagined slights at the expense of good thought...THEN I start to get REALLY pissed off.  

          It is their STRATEGY, their AIM  that pisses me off.

          Not necessarily the means (the tactics) that they use to get there. (Although I weill admit that these kinds of tactics seem to be used more by lock-steppers than out-of-the-boxers.)

          Have we not lost twice in succession to BushCo by trying to tread the middle path? When are we going to try STRENGTH instead of conciliation? When are we going to try to build a fucking battering ram instead of a bulldozer, and take these fuckers DOWN?

          The probable answer is "Never", it is beginning to seem to me.

          But I keep on trying...

          Later...

          AG

          "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

          by Arthur Gilroy on Wed Jun 22, 2005 at 12:47:39 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not too fond of Clark, eh? (none)
            I don't share your dislike; I've never been a Clarkista, but I admire the man, and as far as I'm concerned it's great to have him on our side.

            But Theoria is, indeed, referring to Kos as "the general" and to the FPs and TUs like DH and Armando as his "foot soldiers, lieutenants," what have you..

            WHich disturbs me greatly.

            Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

            by Maryscott OConnor on Wed Jun 22, 2005 at 02:13:21 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  You must find markos schizo, then (none)
            Because he was one of the earliest bloggers promoting a more aggressive Democratic party that didn't accept Republican framing and didn't back down.

            You must not have been here during the Dean wars, when Kos kept defending Dean against those who would compromise away the Democratic party by trying to find a new middle ground each time the Republicans shifted to the right with a new demand. Kos still does that.

            But then, I'll bet you haven't thought too much about the history of the man and this site or tried to reconcile it with your accusations. They're absurd on the face of it to me, who has been here pretty much every day from the beginning (of the scoop site, anyway).

            The only argument that makes any sense to me here against Kos, Armando and other supposed "minions," is that by coming out aggressively against tactics that are deemed to be counterproductive, the zeal and self-confidence of the base is diminished. In other words, Kos is harshing their buzz.

            But there is NO disagreement here about whether the Democratic party should continue down the path set by Clinton and followed by (non-populist) Gore and Kerry that has lost the White House, Congress, and (almost?) the Supreme Court. There is only disagreement on whether specific accusations and projects will bear fruition, or whether the focus of our new muscular approach should be elsewhere. Kos, DH and others (including myself), think its a mistake to call for impeachment because the current situation is totally unlike Nixon in 73 or Clinton in 98 in that now the same party controls Congress and the White House.

            And from this you gather that there is some kind of demand for compromising, lock-step obedience to the Word of Kos? It's all so juvenile. You want to claim your reaction is more than that, but it isn't. You could have argued that Kos should frame his criticisms so that he makes his point without being so harsh and lessening the ardor of the activist base that visits here. But you, and others, went way beyond that into accusations of character, group-think, etc., etc. It's all so stupid, so out of touch.

            Final thoughts: if Kos disagrees with the call for impeachment as a smart strategy, what was he (or DH) supposed to do?  and do you really think that simply coming to the conclusion that devoting large amounts of energy to impeachment is a waste of time means that one is an appeaser, a triangulator, a back-bone lacker? If so, how do you reconcile that with the full history of the people you're criticizing (not just one or two incidents, but the full history)?

            the spirit is restored by wounding

            by jd in nyc on Wed Jun 22, 2005 at 05:17:15 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Was this aimed at ME? (none)
              Because... I'm not criticising anyone, least of all Markos or Armando...

              Misplaced response, perhaps?

              Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

              by Maryscott OConnor on Wed Jun 22, 2005 at 05:22:54 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  I do not find Markos (none)
              yet. Except remarkably absent from any visible tinkering with the ebb and flow of this site. A stroke of near genius, I believe, to let things happen as much as possible without interference from admin, and the most important reason that this blog has so grown in power over the last couple of years. And you are right, I was NOT here during that time. New since mid-May, actually.

              I do find dKos itself more than a little schizoid, though.

              Being new has its advantages. Not knowing the ins and outs of the site's history, I don't know what I am supposed to think. About individual posters, about perfectly evident power blocs in action on the site, about Markos, about Armando, about DHinMI, about apian, and Theoria, about yourself...about the whole cast of this series. Thus I am free to observe and act without many preconceptions.

              So let's get down to the words in your post here. (Y'see, preconceptions being pretty thin I have to deal with what people say, not what I think they are supposed to be saying.)

              1-You say: "I'll bet you haven't thought too much about the history of the man and this site or tried to reconcile it with your accusations."

              I answer...WHAT accusations? Against whom, precisely? Against Markos? MUST be, in the context of your post. In the post to which you are responding, the first thing I said was: "I think "the general" referred to General Clark. Not Kos."

              I am "accusing" Markos of NOTHING, other than perhaps running a blog where laissez-faire policies may be coming to a point where they are beginning to be counter-productive to some degree. I think that a number of people have figured out a way to game the ratings system  that REALLY polices this blog and are in the process of isolating, minimizing or plain driving out people who do not agree with them. Apparently, Theoria has come to the same conclusion.

              I OBSERVE this. Up close and personal, because I have borne the brunt of this attitude quite often since I have arrived here. Is it organized? Spontaneous? A little of both, I think. I have had private conversations with some kossacks where they informed me that about the Clark suppoorters, for instance, "It used to be possible to get into their web sites and see them planning their attacks on people all over the internet.  Now they have their list serves and several of their web sites closed. I call them ClarkNazis.  It is not all Clark supporters, just a handful that act like this, but they are a fungus on Al Gore's
              internets." And this person names specific kossacks as part of this movement. One of whom was all over me before I said a damned WORD about Clark, just on general "He's an out-of-the-boxer with some talent for expressing himself, therefore he is a threat" principles. Was this a "conscious" decision, or just some reflexive attack like that of a moray eel darting out of a cave to take a bite out of crime? I really don't know. Again...probably a little of both.

              But the ratings abuse threatens the integrity and success of this website, which is FOUNDED on a certain freedom of expression and thought.

              So I am making some noise about it.

              Maybe someone in power will listen.

              Maybe not.

              2-You say: "The only argument that makes any sense to me here against Kos, Armando and other supposed "minions," is that by coming out aggressively against tactics that are deemed to be counterproductive, the zeal and self-confidence of the base is diminished. In other words, Kos is harshing their buzz."

              I am sorry,...and this is not a snark...but I do not understand this paragraph. Perhaps you could rephrase it? MY point is that counterproductive tactics (rating tactics, mostly) are being used here by those who would stifle dissent of certain kinds on this blog in the name of "solidarity" or some other such cloud-filled word, and that if Markos does not take SOME kind of action...altering the ratings system, allowing only a certain number of ones and zeroes to be used by kossacks within a given period of time, something...this will result in a mortal wounding of the site.

              Given the freedom to debate without fear of banning, things would work out quite nicely, I believe. (IQs being what they apparently are on BOTH sides of the fence.) Since I HAVE no "fear" of banning because as I have stated early and often on other threads, if what I am saying IS successfully troll-rated out of here by the lock-steppers because of its content then this blog is doomed to shooting stardom and it will have absolutely NO beneficial influence on the outcome of the larger contest that is presently going on for the soul of the United States. It will be BushCo vs. BushCo Lite and from that point on the disease will progress to its inevitable crisis and conclusion, whatever that may be.

              3-You say: "But there is NO disagreement here about whether the Democratic party should continue down the path set by Clinton and followed by (non-populist) Gore and Kerry that has lost the White House, Congress, and (almost?) the Supreme Court."

              No?

              That's not what I have been smelling.

              There is TREMENDOUS disagreement.

              You actually have people here who think Lieberman is a DEMOCRAT, fer chrissake!!!

              Who with a straight face say that Biden ain't such a bad fella, after all. I mean, he has to vote in favor of his state, and MBNA IS his state.

              Right?

              Right.

              And LOADS of people who think General Clark is the hottest thing ever.

              And loads more...I am one of them, to some reluctant degree...who think that the apparently centrist Hillary Clinton is da man. Da woman. WhatEVER. I think that she is running a long term game to get elected, and that at heart she is the same woman who said "The great story here for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president."  and "I have to confess that it's crossed my mind that you could not be a Republican and a Christian." But I also think that the tactic is going to backfire and she either will not get nominated BECAUSE of the implicit contradictions in her history, will get nominated and be defeated by Rovian flip flop attacks, or will indeed GET elected and be hamstrung by the compromises that she had to make in order to be nominated and elected.

              But that's just me.

              I'm a worrier, don'tcha know.

              And then there's Howard Dean. Who on a recent dKos 2008 Presidential straw poll WAS NOT EVEN MENTIONED as a candidate. Whassup wid DAT!!!??? OK...he said he was not going to run because hew was taking the chair at the DNC. But REALLY, folks. This is POLITICS. And he is by FAR the strongest candidate, mano á mano in the electoral ring. Tired of lame, halfway measures like Gore and Kerry? Take one Dean pill every 12 twelve hours for the duration of the campaign and call me in the morning.

              The morning after the election results come in.

              4-Impeachment? Every time the word is said in public more sleeping undecideds hear another faint wake up call. Trumpet it from the ROOFTOPS, as far as I am concerned.

              IMPEACHMENT!!!??? Try these motherfuckers for crimes against humanity. If the media dam ever breaks and the American people really get wind of what is up at the highest levels of this government, every Ratpub functionary who wants even the SLIGHTEST chance to be re-elected would vote for impeachment just to save some part of his or her own ass.

              4-And here is where it gets interesting. You say: "And from this you gather that there is some kind of demand for compromising, lock-step obedience to the Word of Kos? It's all so juvenile. You want to claim your reaction is more than that, but it isn't. You could have argued that Kos should frame his criticisms so that he makes his point without being so harsh and lessening the ardor of the activist base that visits here. But you, and others, went way beyond that into accusations of character, group-think, etc., etc. It's all so stupid, so out of touch."

              Now I have not the time to research every line that I have written since I joined, collate all the responses, and make some sort of chart that would clearly state the percentage of what I have said that deals with Markos in ANY sense, but I will GUARANTEE that it would be miniscule. And you have sailed into my conscious view for the first time today. (DhinMI has been a TOTAL drag, however, and if you ally yourself with him as your previous paragraph implies, I imagine you can be a real pain in the ass as well. Subtler, though. MUCH subtler.)

              The DEMAND is not to "The Word of Kos". Frankly, I do not yet know exactly what "The Word of Kos" is. The demand that I have felt is more to hew to the "The Reality-Based Word", only I have yet to ascertain exactly what that "reality" is, except in the negative. As in...whatever I am saying, that ain't it, and here are a whole bunch of ones and a few zeroes for your trouble. Thak you and goodbye, please drag your piles on outta here and deposit them in some other shitbox.

              Only...and here's the interesting thing...I am ALSO getting loads of fours for the same damned posts!!! Which says to me that there are LOTS of people here who smell the same rot creeping in behind the wallboard of the site that I do.

              And I have NOT been zeroed and oned out of here.

              Nor am I leaving voluntarily.

              5-The last whole third of your supposed response to my post has to do basically with impeachment, and I am beginning to at least partially understand the statement I mentioned in #2 above. "...by coming out aggressively against tactics that are deemed to be counterproductive, the zeal and self-confidence of the base is diminished." I guess that refers to impeachment.

              Well...I have written damned little about impeachment, and NOTHING about it on this thread. In fact, after the first sentence of the original diary (where it was used as part of a humorous list of supposed irritants),the NEXT times it appears are in the comment to which I am responding. YOUR comment.

              Is this a red herring or simply a particular obsession of yours?

              Either way...it doesn't have anything to DO with what I am saying (and Theoria is saying as well) , which is that...sigh...one more time:

              There are power blocs on this blog that are using ratings abuse and sad debating techniques in an "effort to drag everyone to center and to marginalize those who cling to their ideals..." (Theoria's words, and good ones, too.) Organized, spontaneous or some combination of both, those who are in positions of power here had best look to their roots and alter this trajectory before they find themselves rootless and just another ineffectual left-centrist blog rooting around in the political humus for the occasional truffle while the REAL pigs snarf up all the real POWER.

              THAT'S all that I am saying.

              Over and out.

              Later...

              AG

              "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

              by Arthur Gilroy on Wed Jun 22, 2005 at 09:47:36 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  The title to the above post (none)
                should be:

                "I do not find Markos anything" yet.

                The continuing inability to edit comments after posting is the single most frustrating technical aspect of this site. It should be addressed, if at all possible. I run a MUCH smaller, shoestring website operation that deals in specific professional matters, and my forum has this ability.

                Why not this one?

                AG

                "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

                by Arthur Gilroy on Wed Jun 22, 2005 at 09:56:13 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

  •  It's not about censorship (none)
    It's about not loosing sight of our real goals and needs and seeing the forest for the tress and all that.  Bush won't be going down for anything, so wasting too much time on impeachment and such is just that, when its time that good be spent working on more realistic goals.  No one said do give any attention to these issues, it was just a call to not loose sight of winable battles, like swweping the midterms instead.
    •  I got new for you... (4.00)
      Unless Bush implodes, there is no sweep of midterms.  Just because Congress is unpopular, doesn't mean any single congressman is at risk of loosing his seat.

      The only way congress is going to swing is if Bush's situation becomes worse.  He needs to be torn down as far as possible.

      Until people are embarrassed to even admit they are republicans (which comes from support of the president, down) there will be no swing in congress.

      I say throw everything you've got at Bush.  It may not get as far as impeachment (I know that is extremely unlikely) but don't let off the pressure.  Don't stop using the "I" word, and no, that is not taking your eye off the ball.

      The only way republican seats will be lost in congress is if the entire republican party gets a black eye due to Bush's policies, actions and inactions, and his and Delay's illegal actions and abuses of power.

      •  :cough: :cough: (4.00)
        Well, that's some news.  But I don't believe it as it pretty much flies straight in the face of reality.  As in "actual results" reality.  Usually, the winning Presidential canidate's party has an increase in Congressional seating.  These are called "coattails."  This has happened in 21 of 25 presidential elections in the 20th century.

        In mid-terms, the opposite is typical.  In 23 of 25 mid-term elections held in this country, the President's party has LOST seats.  Regardless of the President's popularity.  The exceptions were 1934 and 1998.  

        Ironically, the President' party lost more seats than gained in four wins that I know of.  Typically the second-term winners.  Though Eisenhower lost seats both times...  Further, the coat-tail effect of a President helping his party to win more seats has diminished over-time due to more "split ticket" and independent voters.  As have the "mid-term" results.

        "I think every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the ass." -- Barry Goldwater

        by DraconisRex on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:34:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  asddf (4.00)
          We may pick up a few seats, but we would need to hold all our current seats and pick up 16 more seats to take back congress.

          The very people who are barking that talk about things like impeachment is a waste of time and "not reality based", are the people who think there is a mathematical possibility of taking back congress.  

          I think both are extremely improbable, but still think that the best bet for taking back congress or even making minor gains IS cutting off the government head (figuratively, not literally) by tearing down Bush and ruining the Republican brand.  I don't think Republican voters will support a Democratic candidate at this point.  I think the best we can hope for is to make Repubs embarrassed to vote for their own guys and stay home.  I say pound them on Iraq, pound them on Delay, pound them on privitization, pound them on millitary service, pound them on DSM, pound them on corruption, pound them on the deficit, pound them on lying, just keep pounding them on everything they do.  

          And yes, this might help pick up a few more congressional seats.

      •  And don't forget Ohio (4.00)
        The stink from Ohio makes DeLay look like a novice crook.  The admirable Toledo Blade now reveals that the governor and attorney general of the state knew about Coingate and the $215 million shortfall from the Workman's Comp fund before the election.  Bush got a lot of money from the principals in Coingate.  And the Republican government in Ohio covered it up until the election was fait accompli.

        So this stink is now on Bush directly. Expect revelations of illegal contributions to the Bush campaign from the Noe's.

        The Blade describes this as the largest political scandal in Ohio history.  It appears likely that Ohio could end up becoming a blue state again.

    •  Unless... (4.00)
      enough people start taking that crazy rigged-voting conspiracy seriously, there won't be any Democratic sweeping of anything but our own hearts and guts off of the floor.

      It's possible to multitask, to pay attention to the bigger questions and issues while also working hard on the ground and in the trenches.

      Thanks for this diary. I hate seeing anyone on the left suckered into eating their own, and we seem so ravenously happy to do it.

    •  WADR (3.33)
      how can some barnyard animal (and I'm not referring to you, rather the know-it-all whose diary started all this) whose main interest seems to be the Detroit Pistons speculate about what someone else on the far end of the internet spends his/her time, and make sweeping and negative generalizations about those speculations. Bull-Shit.

      You catch my drift: Should we all speculate that because he wrote a diary about the Detroit Pistons that he is gonna be going to Pistons games and obsessing over the Pistons box scores, when he should be doing something else, that somebody thinks is more constructive?

      Ridiculous, self-righteous, BULL SHIT.

      Why would a liberal, Kossack, progressive or Democrat buy the Washington Post?

      by seesdifferent on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:07:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm no expert (4.00)
    but I'm pretty sure someone's integrity must've been impugned in there...
  •  May I make a suggestion? (none)
    Shame on you for casting dispersions

    aspersions.

    That was really the only thing that stood out.  Carry on.

    --- Idealist (n) - An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup.

    by dspiewak2634 on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 12:46:37 PM PDT

    •  dispersing aspersions, maybe (4.00)
    •  Sorry... (4.00)
      Call me... "Mugsy."

      Liberal Suckfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

      by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 12:50:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  PLEASE (4.00)
        Seriously, I'm a recovering Mojoholic. That shit is worse than crack, so keep it to yourself. I've seen it ruin so many lives.

        It continues to this day.

        Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

        by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:02:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sorry... (4.00)
          I'm going to continue to rate you up, because I do not want to lose your voice here nor do I want you to have to try to moderate yourself in order to be able to stay.

          And douchebag storm conditions being what they are on this blog...that is EXACTLY what will happen if you do not store up some mojo nuts for the nuclear winter that some people will attenmt to rain down upon you if you continue to express these kinds of thoughts.

          If you are REALLY a mojo addict...try mojo tea. You can make it progressively weaker as you kick and still keep some mojo around the house for those cold winter days of summer.

          Or...just squint your eyes when you look at the ratings part of each post.

          That's what I do....

          Whatever...good luck.

          Later...

          AG

          "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

          by Arthur Gilroy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:12:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It doesn't matter. (4.00)
            Once you think along these lines, you are already dead.  It may be minutes, hours, days, or even years, but the Thought Police will disappear you.  You are already dead.
            •  Not if those of us who see what is happening (4.00)
              stand up and shout.

              And RATE.

              Do not play their game and rate down.

              But DO rate UP those who are creeped.

              (Committee to Re-Elect the Past?)

              Listen, kn74.

              There are more of us than there are of them.

              Really.

              That is ALWAYS the way with power creepers.

              They work and work and work away, and one day...there you are.

              Creeped out and wondering how.

              Wondering why.

              I personally think that it's genetic. The right has no corner on the market...as can be plainly seen by what's happening here. The American Communist Party of the '50s was FULL of these folks. Believe it. So is your local PTA, more than likely.

              Their political affiliation is a matter of chance...born into one wing or another, rebelling or not rebelling against their birth destinies. But their STYLISTIC approach...their TACTICS...always and everywhere the same.

              Creeps to the left of me, creeps to the right. And here MOST of us are, wondering what the hell is happening.

              Well...fight BACK. Don't let them push you around. Don't give in when the Thought Police come a-rate rate rating at your door. OR the doors of your friends, neighbors and allies.

              FIGHT.

              AG

              "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

              by Arthur Gilroy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:07:45 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  My mojo experience contradicts (4.00)
                I posted a DemocracyNow interview with Wes Clark.

                The interview was excellent, but edgy and I expected troll ratings that never came (a 4, 3 and two 2s).

                Nonetheless, I lost TU status after that post.  Which is fine, but I expected to lose it the old fashioned way--by peer review and not "divine intervention".

                I post this as an observation, not a complaint, to note that it appears to me that the mojo rules are subject to manipulation.

                Regards, Hal C.

                •  Ya THINK??? (none)
                  AG

                  "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

                  by Arthur Gilroy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:40:32 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I do (none)
                    but I posted a hard-hitting from-the-left interview of Clark on Armando's diary, which was the equivalent of a high hard one on the inside corner of the plate.

                    So it was my time to get hit by a pitch.

                    But you never expect to get drilled in the on-deck circle is all I am saying.

                    Hal C.

                    •  Listen, Hal. (none)
                      The laws of power are the same EVERYWHERE.

                      Damned near.

                      And here they are.

                      From the prophetess Billie Holiday
                      ---.

                      GOD BLESS THE CHILD
                      Billie Holiday / Arthur Herzog Jr.

                      Them that's got shall get
                      Them that's not shall lose
                      So the Bible said and it still is news
                      Mama may have, Papa may have
                      But God bless the child that's got his own
                      That's got his own

                      Yes, the strong gets more
                      While the weak ones fade
                      Empty pockets don't ever make the grade
                      Mama may have, Papa may have
                      But God bless the child that's got his own
                      That's got his own

                      Money, you've got lots of friends
                      Crowding round the door
                      When you're gone, spending ends
                      They don't come no more

                      Rich relations give
                      Crust of bread and such
                      You can help yourself
                      But don't take too much
                      Mama may have, Papa may have
                      But God bless the child that's got his own
                      That's got his own

                      Mama may have, Papa may have
                      But God bless the child that's got his own
                      That's got his own
                      He just worry 'bout nothin'
                      Cause he's got his own
                      ---

                      That about says it.

                      Or...in the words of Kossack RedDan, one of the people who was recently involved in troll rating myself and another poster almost out the door on another thread (His sig...):

                      The only way to ensure a free press is to own one.

                      Which ALL of these troll raters are trying to do right here.

                      Own.

                      Take control.

                      If you are on a website whose power holders disagree with your batting stance...expect to EVENTUALLY not only get hit in the BATTER"S box...expect a lock-out.

                      Bet on it.

                      The only question is...and efficient power holds it cards TIGHT to the vest, be it trillion dollar power, blog admin power, or any OTHER kind...

                      The only question IS...what does the power REALLY believe?

                      With  another subquestion...is it in agreement with itself, or a house divided?

                      We shall see.

                      Here, and in the BIG media as well.

                      We CERTAINLY shall see.

                      EVERYONE has an owner...even if it's just himself.

                      AG

                      "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

                      by Arthur Gilroy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:49:51 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Mmm (none)
                  Can you explain?

                  Are you suggesting that mojo is turned on and off by admins?

                  Admins can ban people. But TU status is fully automated. It can't be given or taken away by admins.

                  Not to say we couldn't program that in if we wanted, but we haven't. And I don't know why I'd want to waste our time doing that.

                  •  Thanks for the clarification (none)
                    The post in question received a 4, 3 and two 2s and TU status suddenly disappeared.  I am glad to know it was coincidence and I am quite happy being an average untrustworthy user.

                    Thanks for the clarification,
                    Hal C.

                    •  lack of mojo make Hal C untrusted (none)
                      you not post often, you lose mojo magic

                      mojo must be replentished EVERY day, or Hal C lose magic

                      Hal C must take pot shot at Armando, or make nice nice on C & J EVERY DAY to replenish mojo

                      why Hal C think it called DAILYKOS

                      the great and almighty god of mojo has spoken

                      to tell you the truth Hal, KOS has had it IN FOR YOU all along

                •  Sometimes your handle can break (none)
                  It happended to my old one.  One day it was fine, and the next my diaries, comments, and ratings were gone.  I  still kept TU but I couldn't do anything w/ it but look at hidden comments.  I lost a whole year's diaries and comments, but now I have this new handle which proclaims my love of both New Avenger's best character and Black Bush in 04!  I can see all my diaries, comments, and ratings and once again have TU status.  
                     The moral of this story is that sometimes, you just gotta dump the old and go for the new.  And anyways, tech support will never return your emails.
              •  did you say genetic (none)
                Some Politics May Be Etched in the Genes

                Although the two broad genetic types, more conservative and more progressive, may find some common ground on specific issues, they represent fundamental differences that go deeper than many people assume, the new research suggests.

                "When people talk about the political debate becoming increasingly ugly, they often blame talk radio or the people doing the debating, but they've got it backward," Dr. Alford said. "These genetically predisposed ideologies are polarized, and that's what makes the debate so nasty.

                "You see it in people's eyes when they talk politics. You can hear it their voices. After about the third response, we all start sounding like talk radio on some issues."

                •  Yes I did. (none)
                  GENETIC.

                  And I no more need corroboration from the mediocre, lying motherfuckers at the NY Times for THAT idea than I do for any political idea I might have.

                  Again...I trust my own eyes and ears.

                  Let the "scientists" catch up with reality, if they dare.

                  So I'm sitting in the Atlanta airport on Saturday morning, waiting for a plane into Miami so I can make a connection to Key West to play a concert. And I'm looking at the face parade. (Better than listening to the nattering of the professional liars overhead on CNN as they go about their business of hypnotizing the already sleeping, right???)

                  In come two related families...4 or 5 kids between them with one on the way, two brothers and their wives. White, southern working class, headed for Florida to take the kids to Disney World or some other resort. 3 or 4 of the kids were just the normal sub-5 years olds...fear and daring crossing their faces like clouds on a plain day, surrounded by the hustle of a grown up airport. Nice folks...nothing special, just nice folks working their way through life. Baseball caps, Lite beer on the weekend, shorts and T shirts, "Mommy!!! I gotta go POTTY!!!" working folks.

                  Except for one.

                  The youngest.

                  Still in a stroller...probably just learning to walk. A girl. Fearless and aware. In COMMAND, with no apparent effort. In contact with all four parents, getting what she wanted by glances and head nods as much as anything else. More orange juice. No...not the bagel. Thank you VERY much. Please. Without a WORD. A young social genius, without ANY doubt in my mind. The older children unconsciously deferred to her; people sitting in seats around her IMMEDIATELY noticed her, and she them.

                  Preternaturally aware and totally positive.

                  An infant queen.

                  There is almost no other possible explanation for this girl's power and talents EXCEPT genetics. She has obviously grown up in the same house as her siblings, been treated the same way insofar as her power will ALLOW the parents to treat her.

                  But she is DIFFERENT.

                  Sperm meets egg...and POP!!! "You" are made.

                  Your "tactics"...your talents.

                  In what directions they are APPLIED...that's nurture.

                  Democrat, Ratpub, Musilm, Baptist, free thinker...nurture. Or reaction AGAINST nurture.

                  But how you deal with those strategies...THAT'S largely nature.

                  Hard to teach a counter-puncher to be an attacker.

                  Hard to teach a hustler to deal in straight-ahead action.

                  And hard to teach a natural-born Borg to think out of the box OR to suffer the attempts of others to do so either.

                  Genetics.

                  God must have SO loved the Borgs, because he made so MANY of them.

                  And granted them such POWER...

                  Life's a bitch, ain't it?

                  Later...

                  AG

                  "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

                  by Arthur Gilroy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 08:10:59 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  This confuses me. (none)
                    Unless she is adopted, the kids all share the SAME DNA... So you're saying, what, her preternatural confidence is some latent gene? Kind of like how 4 kids can be short and the 5th comes out gargantuan?

                    Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

                    by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:08:27 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Not True (none)
                      Unless there's identical twins, the odds of getting the same chromosome pair matches is ridiculous ... some of this skill could be due to genetic combinations unique to this one child ...
                    •  The whole "science" thing is largely (none)
                      a crock of shit, Maryscott.

                      Really.

                      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." William Shakespeare, Hamlet.

                      Still true.

                      What is BEYOND DNA?

                      Do you really think that we have reached the end of the line?
                      That's what they have ALWAYS thought. Until the NEXT thing is discovered. The NEXT layer of the infinite onion is uncovered.

                      The same "science" that now considers the idea of DNA as orthodoxy would have scoffed at the idea as little as 100 years ago.

                      The same "science" that claims it understands the laws of heredity cannot cure or prevent the common cold.

                      I can. I've been doing it for over 20 years, after suffering through the usual miserable "cold" sicknesses as everyone else for 20 years or more while still under the spell of "science".

                      I can cure migraines, too. Not just mine...yours as well, if you have them. No drugs, just meditation and easily followed dietary ideas.

                      No pain. Nada.

                      I'm not bragging here, just making a point. I'm certainly not alone in these abilities. Once you free yourself from belief in much of the modern religion of "science", things can get very interesting.

                      I mean...it's ALL hereditary.

                      Why would differing noses and hair colors in a set of siblings be accepted as "hereditary" and not emotional or mental differences?

                      And what I am trying to SAY here with this little airport vignette is that we good hearted Democrats seem eternally surprised to see the same kind of Republican-like lockstep action at work in this Democratic blog, but the reality of the situation is that this sort of Borg work is NOT party-dependent. That it is a hard-wired tendency among MANY people who are involved in political work, regardless of party affiliation or level of activity. The little girl in the airport will be TAUGHT certain attitudes and beliefs by her family that will send her in certain directions, but no matter whether she ends up a Southern Baptist matron or Bathsheba of the Alabama faction of the al Queda Brigade, SHE WILL ALWAYS be a queen of some kind.

                      And the Democratic Borg workers who are busily scurrying around dKos troll rating those with whom they do not agree or those who are saying things that they simply do not understand (and thus fear) are GENETICALLY set up in EXACTLY the same way as the easily observed Ratpubs who are doing the same thing at the top of the administration heap in DC or in your local Town Hall.

                      They are just doing it in a different scene.

                      It is in their GENES to act that way.

                      That's all I am saying.

                      And that this kind of genetic makeup carries a great deal of power in the world. It is evolutionarily advantageous, which is why there have so many of them in important positions in business and politics from time immemorial.

                      The Man In The Grey Flannel Suit, 21st Century version, Democratic subset.

                      Don't be surprised.

                      Simply fight back.

                      Individualists are genetically predisposed to perform THEIR actions as well.

                      And we have ALSO survived.

                      The eternal push and pull.

                      Well, in the eternal push and pull...y'gotta push BACK.

                      That's all that I am saying.

                      We must push back.

                      Later...

                      AG

                      "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

                      by Arthur Gilroy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 10:14:19 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  I suspect a genitic mutation here (none)
                      and it ain't IN the story AG told

                      have you read this guy, what cha think ???

        •  The verdict on this diary entry (3.00)
          At first I decided it was too long, and I didn't read it.  Aside from the vocabulary mistake.

          Then I did.

          I am now suing for that 1:30 of my life back.  You should really be arrested for pimping out Internet dramawhores.

          --- Idealist (n) - An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup.

          by dspiewak2634 on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:22:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  There is nothing more helpless and irresponsible (4.00)
          ... than a man in the depths of a mojo binge.

          Don't trust 'em no farther than you can throe 'em.

          by RonK Seattle on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:28:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Welcome back, Theoria. (4.00)
        Now stop stealing my name or I shall disperse asspersons all over you!

        BUSH: Like a rock...but dumber.
        Stewart/Olberman 2008!

        by mugsimo on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:01:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  WMDs (3.60)
      Weapons of Mass Dispersion.

      A web tactic designed to counter points made by original thinkers.

      Send out a bunch of little bot brains to disperse the energy into comments about douchebags, "reality-based" ideas as the only REAL way to go (of course, never defining the word "reality" thus dispersing the energy even FURTHER afield), complaints about writing styles and so on until the forest AND the tress are so far away that the entire point has been lost.

      Dispersed into the cenrist mind-meld that is the ESSENCE of "dispersion".

      WMDs.

      Nice.

      AG

      "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

      by Arthur Gilroy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 12:57:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  How about... (4.00)
      Dispersing aspersions?

      Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

      by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:22:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Fight the power (4.00)
    you fearless rebel you.
  •  The saddest thing I've seen on kos today (none)
    is this diary.

    America: It's a good IDEA for a country ...

    by Tony Seybert on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 12:49:20 PM PDT

  •  YES!!! (3.66)
    Good on ya, theorialives!!!

    Put up a tip jar, because I have a suspicion you are gong to needsome mojo if you continue to voice these doubts.

    The lock-steppers'll come after you, too.

    AG

    P.S. "I like you. Handjob, Heather?"

    Priceless!!!

    "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

    by Arthur Gilroy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 12:51:03 PM PDT

    •  Oh, Michael... (4.00)
      I take it from your rating, Musing, that the term "lock-stepper" is hitting the poorly concealed sore spot on your ass?

      Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

      by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:17:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So...theoria (4.00)
        Should I take your mojo jones reference to mean that you cannot even HANDLE the stuff?

        Because I have been fighting this fight on another front for the better part of a day and when I went to the ATM this afternoon, I fully expected to get a "1" when I looked at my bank balance.

        A couple of "4"s here and there would be MUCH appreciated.

        AG

        "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

        by Arthur Gilroy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:24:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  That 1 from musing... (4.00)
        confuses me greatly.

        Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

        by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:36:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  And so it begins. (4.00)
      Like this comment REALLY deserved a "1".

      See?

      Get yer mojo where ya CAN, theoria.

      AG

      "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

      by Arthur Gilroy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:18:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Give up now! (4.00)
    That's what Rove wants.

    That's what they told the Iraq's

    That's what they told the Viet Cong.

    That's what the Russians told the Afghani's

    If a republican suggests something, do the opposite!

    "It's about the accountability, stupid." Thomas Davis 2005. BringVisibility.net

    by Tomtech on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:01:18 PM PDT

  •  Why yes (4.00)
    I will take that handjob. Thanks!

    "I heard Tom DeLay's blood was in the water and the sharks were circling him, but unfortunately, it turned out to be a metaphor"

    by George on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:11:26 PM PDT

  •  I come to praise Theoria, (4.00)
    because he would not stay buried. He pushed the button and dissapeared, and now his ghost returns to point a despising finger in our collective face.

    His writing and his balls made him instantly distinctive. His divorce posts brought out the support of so many, and then a mild creepiness from others. He fought for so long to find a place to stay in New York. Just a floor to sleep on, for the love of god.

    But something happened in New York. Something Ugly, documented in pictures and posts and that we never really came to terms with, and it's like our own theoria never found his way back.  The pale shadow that returned was already angry. Something else happened and then he was gone.

    We were poorer, we maggots who remained. No one could fill his place. No one could do for us what he did so well.

    And now his ghost is haunting us. We didn't bury the body correctly and the spirit is angry. Pity us because we were never invited to the funeral: it all happened in the dark of night. What happened? What can we do to put him to rest?

    A person's right to say what happens to their own body is pretty critical.

    by thief on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:11:40 PM PDT

  •  yeah... (4.00)
    ...it seems dKos as a community is in the midst of some kind of change.  Whether this is an organized effort to marginalize and/or purge those who have "unorthodox" views doesnt really matter to me.  Sometimes mob mentality is more detructive than an outright agenda.  

    For me, personally, it become all too obvious that there are a handful of positions that one can take, and no matter how finely tuned the argue one makes for them they attract the 0, 1 and 2 ratings.  I freely admit to sometimes getting caught up in the nonsense, as I said, mob mentality.  So, if anyone cares, here is my "List of Unorthodox Views, or, A Surefire Way to Get Other Members to Pile on 0's, 1's and 2's, No Matter What Defense You Give for Your View."  Please feel free to add to it.  

    • Suggesting John Kerry ran a shitty campaign and lost the race because he is, in fact, a flip-flopper.
    • Howard Dean is not the savior of the Democratic Party
    • We should start a drive to impeach Bush and Cheney.
    • BushCo has pretty much already succeeded in gaining complete power.  

    Now, I feel that I must add a disclaimer here and say for the record that I do not necessarily hold any or all of the above views.  These are just the ones that I personally have seen people troll-rated into oblivion for having.  

    "Whensoever the general Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force."
    - Thomas Jefferson

    by Billy Shears on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:14:05 PM PDT

    •  I wasn't troll rated (4.00)
      But was flamed all day for suggesting maybe General Clark doesn't have exemplary judgement.

      I don't know.  First time it's happened to me here.  And by one of the more "respected" members.  One I liked.

      But I crossed a line.  Blasphemed.

      I was put in my place.  

      SO I guess you should add "Don't criticize Clark" to your list.  Wish someone woulda told me what the rules were.

      ...

      I like this diary.  I don't know what the hell the problem is with people who go around deciding which of us is reality based or not.  I don't get it.  Seems mean and egotrippy.  I mean we all obviously have the same basic complaint and goal.  Just a lot of discussion about what to do about it.  

      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." -Voltaire

      by poemless on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:37:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You mean (none)
        people dared to disagree with you and actually expressed their disagreement?

        Oh, the horror.

        We all go a little mad sometimes - Norman Bates

        by badger on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:04:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, that isn't what I meant to say at all (4.00)
          people disagree with me every day.

          Why would that upset me?

          I think it was the level of dialogue (name calling) and the supposition that I had some ulterior motive other than just discussing a candidate.

          "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." -Voltaire

          by poemless on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:24:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  If that's the case, (none)
            I'd assume you won the argument, if that matters.

            If your posts were well-reasoned and readable, then you got to make your point. Someone calling names or making ridiculous accusations is just going to look foolish in most cases.

            We all go a little mad sometimes - Norman Bates

            by badger on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:40:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Relally? (3.60)
        FUCK Clark.

        If you want me to go back to the place I was born , tell your corporations to leave my country (Leon Gieco)

        by cruz del sur on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:27:29 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Fucking Troll (4.00)
          See?!?!  Told ya so!

          ;)

          (snarkety snark)

          "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." -Voltaire

          by poemless on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:37:32 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Go ahead Ban me :-)) (4.00)

            If you want me to go back to the place I was born , tell your corporations to leave my country (Leon Gieco)

            by cruz del sur on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:48:00 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Look, (4.00)
              Who said anything about banning?

              I am just trying to make the point that others look to this site to be the touchstone, the voice, of the realitybased community, and your insistance that Clark should be fucked is not backed up with any facts or logical argument.  And my greatest fear is that that makes me look bad in the eyes of whoever I perceive is looking at me.  I want respect, damnit.  And your coocoo clock assumptions about Clark and Fucking are making us look like a bunch of idiots to the lurking Freepers and MSGOP blowhards!  Got it?

              Good.

              "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." -Voltaire

              by poemless on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:56:10 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'm just (4.00)
                 a masoquist and want punishment. Please ban me!!

                If you want me to go back to the place I was born , tell your corporations to leave my country (Leon Gieco)

                by cruz del sur on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:12:01 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Sorry (none)
                  I'm not really into that.

                  But plenty of people are.  Like Dan Savage says, keep looking.  It's a big world.  You will find someone out there willing to accomodate your needs.

                  "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." -Voltaire

                  by poemless on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:24:15 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  Hey Owlswater (none)
            You lost your sense of humor. Start digging arround, maybe you"ll find it.

            BY THE WAY IF IT MAKES YOU HAPPY YOU CAN DECRIESE YOUR RATINGS BY TWO.

            By the way: have a great day :-))

            If you want me to go back to the place I was born , tell your corporations to leave my country (Leon Gieco)

            by cruz del sur on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:09:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Somebody... (none)
          didn't get the joke.

          Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

          by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:53:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You know what's weird? (none)
            Owlswater is just under 21000and he has no diaries, but even stranger is that he has not one comment.

            Dam I was going to get out all of my personalities, and troll rate him past oblivion.
            (Forgot to say that one of my personalities is a tough sadist) :-))

            If you want me to go back to the place I was born , tell your corporations to leave my country (Leon Gieco)

            by cruz del sur on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 07:01:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Man (4.00)
      Here's what's weird about this; I have personally seen many, many people troll-rated or even run out of town for having views that are simply too moderate, centrist, or gasp conservative.  As a not particularly liberal person, I've felt that I've had to step lightly around here since Day One.

      Posts that I've personally gotten troll-rated, or otherwise got dogpiled on, for:

      --Suggesting that perhaps the best course of action in Iraq is not to pull out immediately.
      --Saying that Bush and company, though misguided and wrong, are probably doing what they honestly think is best for the country most of the time.
      --Taking issue with counterproductive and offensive (and off-base) rhetoric, such as throwing out Nazi comparisons left and right (most recently by quibbling with kos over saying "Torture under Saddam is just as bad as under US Command").
      --Taking issue with draft scare-tactics before the election.
      --Fighting back when people start blanketly badmouthing the South.    
      --Generally trying to advance the view that our political opponents (i.e. half of the nation) are not just braindead hicks and/or puppet-masters of evil, but are human beings with honest disagreements over public policy.  

      There have been many, many more over my few years here, that's just off the top of my head.  But if you suddenly feel oppressed around here for being too liberal, welcome to the world of those of us who are conservative/libertarian/centrists.  Forgive me if I'm not overflowing with sympathy.

      If you've ever troll-rated somebody for having a civilly expressed viewpoint that you felt was "too Republican", go sit in the corner and stfu.

      (p.s. that wasn't directed at you specifically, just a general comment).  

      What's the difference between Iraq and Vietnam? Bush knew how to get out of Vietnam.

      by glibfidget on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:42:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Feel like lettin' 'em have it? (none)
        Let 'em have it here:  the new "STFU" thread.
      •  I hear you... (none)
        I've had many of these thoughts myself, and considered writing a diary about some of them, because they're viewpoints that are unfairly chastised here.  But I didn't because the inevitable response would be, "If you don't like it here, go somewhere else."  Which is ironic because it mirrors one of the right wing slogons, "If you don't like America, leave."

        "A simple lie will be believed by more people than a complex truth." - TrueBlueMajority

        by starkness on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:40:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  OK, well, one at a time (4.00)
        --We will have to pull out sooner or later, and someone will be the last man to be asked to die for a mistake. So it might as well be now. If you disagree, you belong over there, in the military. Period. Not expecting some other person's child t die for this. There is a word for people who support a war and don't volunteer to go fight it. That word is not chickenhawk. It's an older word: Coward.
        --If Bush and company were not enriching themselves personally through their policies, it might be possible to argue that policies designed to create the biggest gap between rich and poor since the Gilded Age were chosen with the best interests of the country in mind. But they are, so it's not.
        --It doesn't matter who's doing the torturing. It's evil. It's worse if you know full well that a lot of the people whom the U.S. is torturing -- including some who have been tortured to death are absolutely innocent and have no information about terrorism. Seen Marathon Man lately, asshat?
        --Scare tactics about the draft? At least that was a genuine concern for many of the people raising the issue. A much more realistic thing to scare people about than the idea that we would more likely suffer terrorist attacks with a Democrat in the White House. We don't have a draft yet, sure. But the night is young.
        --The South sucks. Period. It is still the only region in the country where using rascist code language wins you elections. It is still the only place in the country that will only vote for a Democratic candidate for president if he's from there. It is the asshole of the nation, the place that gave us slavery and lynchings. The region that lives completely off of the government teat while complaining about government programs. It is a place of resounding hypocrisy, a place that exalts it, a place that has made hypocrisy the apex of its cultural achievement. There is a large minority of people who live there who are great, but as a whole, the region sucks. It's just contemptible.
        --If you want to think that people who support an administration that lies about every single policy from war in Iraq to the clean air act, from water purity to social security are not brain-dead hicks, be my guest. But it's not a view I respect.

        That said, troll-rating just because one disagrees is totally lame. If I read you advancing one of these idiotic views I'll just go puke in a corner somewhere.

        The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

        by expatjourno on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:41:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Huh. (4.00)
          I pretty much hold ALL those "idiotic" views. Except for "the South." I think the South is just as purple as the rest of the country -- their assholes are just more vociferously assholish than elsewhere -- or maybe it just seems that way 'cause of the accents.

          Puke at will.

          Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

          by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:57:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Vociferously? (none)
            What an image!
          •  Uuuuuuuuuuuurp! (none)

            The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

            by expatjourno on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:05:36 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Actually, I may have been a bit hard on the South (none)
            I enjoyed my years in Winston-Salem. Went to the most marvellous school. Of course, I'm white and my parents were reasonably affluent.

            But there may be some ambiguity in my post about which views I considered pukeworthy. I was taking issue with glibfidget's views.

            The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

            by expatjourno on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:22:34 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  You forgot... (4.00)
      Israel.

      Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

      by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:38:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ah yes... (none)
        ... thanks.  

        We'll definately add that one to the list:

        - anyone who thinks that Israel really doesn't have a right to exist, and/or is the root cause of the vast majority of international (esp. Middle Eastern) problems, and/or is the anchor for all US foreign policy, is obviously an anti-Semite and/or a GOP plant.  Therefore, anyone having this or a variation on this view deserves the full attention of troll-raters.  

        Thanks, Maryscott, for adding this to the list.  

        "Whensoever the general Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force."
        - Thomas Jefferson

        by Billy Shears on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:43:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, what IS it about Israel? (none)
        Advancing views perfectly in line with Israel's Labor Party -- or, on the issue of settlements, in line with the the views of the majority of Israelis -- gets you labelled anti-Semitic in this country. Very annoying.

        The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

        by expatjourno on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:48:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Actually... (none)
          It doesn't matter WHICH views you hold about Israel. Post an opinion -- any opinion -- and prepare for flameage.

          Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

          by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:58:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And this is where alysheba chimes in... (none)
            ...with reflections on precisely this matter, courtesy of one Dana Milbank (the Kossackian opposition of whom happened to make DHinMI's recent list of useless endeavors) who happened to quote Ray McGovern...

            "Israel is not allowed to be brought up in polite conversation," McGovern said. "The last time I did this, the previous director of Central Intelligence called me anti-Semitic."

            ...then proceeds to prove McGovern's point beyond a scintilla of a doubt, showing that a single cross word spoken against Israel will be met with two full paragraphs of focused propaganda...

            Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), who prompted the question by wondering whether the true war motive was Iraq's threat to Israel, thanked McGovern for his "candid answer."

            At Democratic headquarters, where an overflow crowd watched the hearing on television, activists handed out documents repeating two accusations -- that an Israeli company had warning of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and that there was an "insider trading scam" on 9/11 -- that previously has been used to suggest Israel was behind the attacks.

            So, I'll fucking say it again:

            If it is desired that Israel have a place in the modern world, she must somehow learn to exist separate from religion. If she desires to be inseparable from religion, all pretensions of having a rightful place in the modern world must be dropped immediately.

            You can have the meat or you can have the cheese. Put them both in the same sandwich and all of a sudden...

            ...it ain't kosher.

            •  Phrase (none)
              If it is desired that Israel have a place in the modern world, she must somehow learn to exist separate from religion. If she desires to be inseparable from religion, all pretensions of having a rightful place in the modern world must be dropped immediately.

              Two questions:

              1. Do you believe the same is true of Iran?

              2. By "dropping pretension of having a rightful place in the modern world," does this mean that other nations, groups or individuals may do whatever they please to "Israel"? In other words, "Israel" (whether as a nation, or its individual citizens) has no rights to speak of? If not, then what does that phrase mean?
              •  Answer. (4.00)
                On #1, my answer, without a moment's hesitation, is yes.

                If we can agree that modern governments are secular, representative and tolerant of both diversity - in all its forms -  and personal freedom, there are scores of countries who have no place in the modern world, Iran among them. What, after all, is the point of holding elections if the actions of those elected may, at any time, be summarily overturned by a cabal of theocrats, as happens to be the case in Iran? Or in any of the Middle Eastern monarchies/dictatorships? Or in North Korea? Or in Sudan? The list is long and smelly.

                On #2, may I say that you've proven Ray McGovern's point nearly as well as Dana Milbank did.

                How on Earth you drew from what I wrote the inference that any nation - whether it conforms to the tenets of modern governance I described above or not - can be batted about by the rest of the world, or somehow has no soverignty, or whatever it is you were trying to imply, is utterly beyond me. You leapt into precisely the sort of hysteria we've come to expect - as MSOC described above - as soon as someone DARES to raise a question about Israel.

                Do you somehow not see this? Do you somehow not understand that, in resorting to childish binaries like these, you're actually amplifying the notion that it's impossible to have a realistic discussion about Israel?

                Don't you get it?

                So, as you asked, "what does that phrase mean?" It means that, until American Jews see fit to allow open and honest discussion about the state of Israel - its actions, its intentions, its influence - that nation remains, by definition, inseparable from a religion. And nations which are inseparable from religion clearly do not fit the paradigm of modern governance. Therefore, modern nations have an obligation to push these stragglers toward reform. And when a modern nation finds itself giving billions of dollars in foreign aid, loan guarantees and military hardware to such a state, it has not only the obligation to demand reform, it has every right to demand it.

                The tricky part is that - as far as Israel goes - reform has a domestic component, too. And as long as people like you make sure the issue never even reaches the table, reform is a long way off.

                And that pains me. Especially since the nation in question has just been caught spying on my country for the third fucking time.

                •  Place (none)
                  Actually, my question about your phrase was an honest one. I was offering the only interpretation I could come up with. (I thought about your post for a while before posting my comment.) Please allow me to explain why I drew the conclusion I did.

                  If, for example, I don't have a rightful place at a private club (say, I am not a member), then the club is perfectly within in rights to boot me out. The owners might even be allowed to use a certain amount of (non-excessive) force to do so.

                  If I don't have a rightful place at a college (say, I was not admitted), then the school can bar me from campus and make sure I don't try to hang out in the dorms or audit the classes.

                  Perhaps most simply, if someone said to me, "David, you don't have a rightful place in this world," I would conclude they thought I should be killed or exiled. I think these are pretty fair understandings of what it means to "not have a rightful place" somewhere.

                  So if a nation does not have a rightful place in the world, then what does that mean for other nations? By analogy to the college situation, it might mean that the nation in question should be shunned, cut off, barred from intercourse with other nations. By analogy to the club situation, it might even mean the nation could or should be dealt with forcibly.

                  Again I say, I was only trying to understand your meaning. It was not clear to me that it meant "modern nations have an obligation to push these stragglers toward reform." It was not clear to me because, as per the interloper at the club or college who "does not have a rightful place there," it would not occur to me that the college or club has an "obligation to push the interloper to reform."

                  In any event, I am glad to better understand your position now. I hope we can continue to have constructive discussions in the future.

          •  "You have opinions, I draw conclusions" (none)
            Bill Moyers!!!

            God, I love this place... thanks ALL!

            The surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that it has never tried to contact us. -- Calvin and Hobbes

            by SteveK on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 10:15:36 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  John Kerry's campaign (3.75)
       Does anyone here suggest he ran a great campaign? The guy lost!

       I think the real problem isn't that people jump over these things because they are "unorthodox", it's that they do it by abusing the moderation system. If I say John Kerry ran a shitty campaign and explain why I think so (i.e. He lost against the worst president in American history therefore his campaign is implicitly shitty) and you don't like it then you can say so by clicking the reply button. Don't troll rate solely because you disagree with what someone writes. If you don't feel like saying something then don't do anything at all. It completely ruins the moderation system if we don't use it how it is intended.
       We've gone through this before last time we got a big influx of new users here, it looks like it's time to do it again. Kos should just go dig up that post and throw it back on the front page. Also, we need some kind of metamoderation so we can weed out people who abuse what we've got.

      And John Kerry did run a shitty campaign, and Howard Dean is not the savior of the Democratic Party (if anyone is, it's us).  

    •  Don't forget to put on that flame list.. (none)
      talking about the voting shenanigans that went on in Ohio, and using that situation as a spring board to change the voting rules.
  •  Somebody Sure Is... (3.47)
    ...defensive.
    •  It hurts, DH (3.66)
      I loved this place. The mind-bending shit that it went through leading up to the election is almost forgivable, but the poorly disguised purge taking place now that you've all become bitter center-shifting mouthpieces in a very poorly conceived effort to regain power makes. me. weep. Especially when others are so profoundly called to task for being righteously pissed about it. There is so much behind-the-scenes soap opera bullshit driving blogitics since November that it makes me want to hurl. In fact, I just threw up in my mouth. (Had to throw that out there.)

      Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

      by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:27:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Huh (3.00)
        If I had any idea what you were talking about, I might have a response.  But I have no idea what you're talking about.

        And purge?  You honestly think there was or is some kind of purge going on?  Really, you believe that?

        •  La, la, la I can't hear you! (2.57)
          If I pretend that I have no reading comprehension, then it's like you never wrote anything at all.

          A person's right to say what happens to their own body is pretty critical.

          by thief on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:39:36 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I'd like to know more about this "purge" (4.00)
          that some of these awfully defensive posters are talking about. They keep whining about their unpopular ideas and how they don't care if they get troll-rated ... and then nobody troll-rates them. I'm sure thay have had a handful of low ratings here and there (as have many of us, including myself, but I didn't write a whole diary about those meanies that gave me a 0) but I suspect they are exaggerating because every time I look into it, I find that they are just a bunch of cry-babies.

          America: It's a good IDEA for a country ...

          by Tony Seybert on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:41:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I believe it. (4.00)
          I see the way the "center" is being defined, which in turn defines the "other".  Unfortunately, the problem with calling this or that thing/event/ideal "reality-based" is your point of reference.  Calling people "wingnuts" or saying they aren't based in reality is hardly inclusive, and to me it's downright marginalizing, and also insults the diversity of our community.  

          Example: when something falls inside this reality-based center, there's a push for the front page, for people to give this as much attention as possible.  Contact the media!  Call/write your senators and representatives!  Tell everyone you know that nothing you do today is as important as this!  Well, that's because you see truth in it, or truth as you define it or see it.  When someone comes across a rumor or belief that falls outside the center (the 9000 dead in Iraq diaries come to mind), they want people to see it.  They want to talk about it because they think it's important, and they see their truth in it.  I believe that these people have as much right to diary those stories (and have those stories debunked as respectfully as possible), even if many of us don't see them as true.  The community will decide what is reality-based and what is not, but only if everyone is allowed to post without being trashed.  The blood in the water analogy is perfect, and I see it in just about every hot topic or diary that I read these days.  I also see it when FP'ers write diaries that are thinly-veiled attacks, and they do it because they have a position of responsibility here, given by Markos, that empowers them.

          So yes I see the purge, but what I see is based on some very strong (and at times, hateful) reactions to those who openly, boldly express views that have been defined outside the "center" of dKos.  Call me paranoid and defensive, or call me a Republican, rate me with 0's just for disagreeing, but I don't care.  I'm living in my reality-based world every minute of every day of this horrible administration, and we should be all fighting against the same enemy instead of each other.

      •  OK, I Think... (3.72)
        ...I have some idea that you believe there's some grand scheme to purge people from Daily Kos.  I guess that says more about the guy who claims he loved the place but left in a snit with no explanation for why and asked that his account be purged than it does about me or anyone else who actually stuck around here and worked to keep the place worth saving.

        Funny how so many of the people who accuse others of being spineless don't ever stick around to work and fight for what they claim they care about, but then just blame everything on everyone else.

        •  Here I am.. (3.50)
          ...Biatch.   ;)

          There came a point leading up to the election where my eyes were burned out of my head from all the pissing in the wind. If you think there was a way to be heard in that shit storm, please let me know. I grew weary from banging my head against that cyber-wall, and took the fight to the analog world. Isn't that what you were bitching about earlier? I don't count posing on a blog as working and fighting for what I believe in.

          (Apparently, I have a second wind.)

          Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

          by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:50:58 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Community (3.50)
          I was going to say that if you very publicly and clearly leave a community, that makes you particularly unfit to analyze and criticize its goings-on in the time since you abandoned it. But perhaps such an observation is too reality-based?

          I've been around this site longer than almost anyone but Markos and a handful of others. I've seen predictions of its death a million, million times over. I've heard the "DailyKos used to be cool, man" line more times than I can count.

          And yet, here the site still is - different, yes. Changed in ways that have rendered it functionally "dead" to some former users, sure. But still ticking.

          •  Well said. (3.50)
            Frankly, when one publicly and clearly leaves a community and then comes BACK to criticize it (or whatever), it says quite a bit more about the poster than the community he criticizes.

            Theoria LOOOOVVVEESSS it here! He can be an instant superstar, why wouldnt he come back?

            This site TOTALLY ticks, yo.

            Reigning Welterweight Female Piefighter since 1998

            by ablington on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:29:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  He also very publicly and ... (4.00)
            clearly stated his reasons for leaving had little-to-nothing to do with the state of the cmmunity itself; rather, it was his "analog" life that needed tending to.

            And as I recall, "theorialives" appeared shortly thereafter. It's not like the guy stalked off in a GBCW huff and hasn't set foot here since.

            And another thing: given how much of himself he put into this site in its earlier days, maybe it's just me but, I happen to think that gives him just a wee bit more leeway in the criticism department. Or is there an expiration date on respect won in the past?

            How come so many people are getting all defensive and personal today?

            HAHAHAHAHA (sorry -- I just typed that and nearly gagged on the naivete simultaneously)

            Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

            by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:57:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Ha... (4.00)
              I thought your gag reflex was gone.

              Now stop stalking me!   ;)

              (don't stop)

              Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

              by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:59:44 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  I will retract the first part of my statement (none)
              until Jeremynyc comes back (was that his name?) and more appropriately utilize it then.

              Reigning Welterweight Female Piefighter since 1998

              by ablington on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:20:19 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  How come? (none)
              Because this diary is stupid and does nothing but promote divisive herd mentality.

              And I don't give a flying fuck about mojo. Zero my ass to Neptune.

              •  I don't give zeroes to non-trolls. (none)
                But as you have employed the passive-aggressive "Troll rate me if you must" gambit... Nah.

                Have a 4 -- maybe if you gather enough of them, you can go down to the CafePress and buy yourself a sense of humour and perspective.

                Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

                by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:38:56 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  And if (none)
                  you gather enough ass kissing from your sychophants here, perhaps you can buy yourself some credibility.
                  •  Wow. (none)
                    You sure put me in my place, there, pal.

                    Incidentally, it's:

                    S-y-c-o-p-h-a-n-t-s

                    Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

                    by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:01:58 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Would you believe that (none)
                      I've seen this same dynamic more times than I care to remember? ... People actually resorting to correcting other's spelling?

                      If you're done pissing now, I'll stop too.

                      •  The spelling thing... (none)
                        has more to do with my OCD than the pissing contest.

                        I don't know why we got into it, I probably started it, but yeah, I'm perfectly willing to drop it if you are.

                        Unless you insist on continuing to make nasty comments about my friend. Call me crazy, but I tend to believe that friendship involves defending one another against verbal attacks. There is certainly a lot of validity to the criticisms posted here about the diary, its divisive quality and so forth... but there's really no reason to attack the diarist personally.

                        Which, of course, I'm not even sure you've actually done -- the sniping has gone on long enough for me to forget if you did or not.

                        Eh -- long day, hotter than hell, fever crept past 102 degrees a couple hours ago, can't hold down any food -- maybe this isn't the most productive use of my time this evening...

                        Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

                        by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 08:15:32 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

            •  Respect (none)
              Or is there an expiration date on respect won in the past?

              Oftentimes, for better or for worse, there is - especially in a dynamic community. One cannot rest on one's laurels forever. If you, for instance, had written a diary such as this, I'd give it a lot more cred.

          •  Amen David (4.00)
            I've been less active as a poster for the past couple of months but watching the way things have gone over the past couple of days only strikes me as more of the same.  We're in yet another phase of "End Days at Daily Kos" and the attendant stress that the community experiences every 6 months or so.

            For the uninitated, here's a brief timeline of previous Crisis Points:

            Beginning: Markos creates Daily Kos after reading Jerome Armstrong's MyDD.  When MyDD shuts its comments, having been  driven to the point of extreme flame wars after inheriting a wide mix of commenters and readers from Taegan Goddard's Political Wire, which killed comments a short while before, many people migrate to Daily Kos.  For a while, right-wing attacks from PW and MyDD regulars like the infamous AC prove difficult to deal with, but the community weathers the storm

            November 2002: Midterm Nightmare. Dems do poorly in midterm elections  Some leave Kos in rage saying the place is detached from reality (as many of us, myself included, sincerely believed that we were gonna cream the GOP, retake the House, bolster our strength in the Senate, and retake the gov mansion in FL).

            Early Summer 2003: Deanapalooza. Markos publically jumps on the Dean bandwagon, many posters decry that DKos is just a Dean mouthpiece.  DKos is proclaimed to be DBD (Death By Dean) The Great Flame Wars Begin (of especial note these days is that this is when many of us were introduced to Armando thru his highly effective defenses of Clark, with other now famous posters also rising to stardom often thru their postings in favor of non-Dean candidates).

            January/February 2004: Iowa/New Hampshire.  Dean falls and Kerry rises.  Many say this is proof that DKos is again out of touch and is little more than an echo chamber, with no real benefit to politics in the real world.

            April 2004: The Fallujah Comment:  The right-wing, led by jealous blogger Instapundit, attacks Kos for being un-American since he said he felt little for the American mercenaries killed at the bridge in Fallujah, noting that these were the same people who wrecked such havoc during the 1980's in El Salvador.  DKos is red-flagged by the right-wing writ large as something dangerous.  Some in the community are outraged at Kos' comment as well.

            Summer 2004: The Big Time. Extremely positive word of mouth and media exposure floods the site.  Thanks in large part to the strength of the community and the success of prior main page bloggers like Billmon, Steve Gilliard, and Steve Soto, Daily Kos becomes the preeminent blog of the left side of the Blogosphere and the largest political blog on the web.  New posters flood the blog, many of which bring a greater degree of anger and confrontation.  Many old-timers claim the character of the blog is being lost through success.

            November 2004: Defeat. The loss of the 2004 election under somewhat dubious circumstances leads to many people demanding that Kos openly support Black Box Voting's claims in the hopes that this will lead to public pressure and investigations.  As Black Box Voting's leader is of questionable credibility and the evidence is not all there, Kos demures.  Many become outraged that Kos would not fully support this program, with the result that intra-blog relations are cool for some time.

            Present: Kos continues to grow, having already spawened tens of websites from front-page posters and famous communtiy members.  Famous members of Congress routinely post diaries and even comment.  Kos prepares to speak at an FEC event futher cementing his position within politics in general.
            Many claim that Daily Kos has now become too mainstream and is attemtping a political purge of those deemed too leftist and revolutionary.  The episode is intensified when a former front-page poster returns to state his unhappiness with the current status of the blog. It is believed by many, however, that once again, Daily Kos will defy death and continue to grow, moving forward towards the strengthening of the Democratic Party and the return of the Democrats to power.

            Never wait for miracles.

            by Wanderer on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:02:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  When you read that last bit- (none)
              Are you supposed to be reciting the words of world dominationin an ever-increasing howl? You know, kind of like you were channeling Dr. Strangelove?
            •  That gets a 4 (none)
              For pith alone.

              Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

              by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:03:57 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  you forgot the source of this kerfuffle (4.00)
              the heated discussions over whether the NYC protests would be another '68 riot and destroy kerry and the left's chances with "the heartland," and then the Shut Your Fucking Pie Hole series, where all dissent was pecked at like chickens on a spot of pink, in the service of "unity" (which IMO was more of a call for unanimity). that late summer to pre-election tension is what reemerged after the loss in november in the rash of fingerpointing and scapegoating, and is probably the main source of a lack of mutual trust that drives the oldtimer feuds.

              crimson gates reek with meat and wine/while on the streets, bones of the frozen dead -du fu (712-770)

              by wu ming on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:09:19 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  History (4.00)
              This is an excellent capsule history. Usually when I see histories like this, I tend to disagree with bits (or large parts). But this conforms almost exactly to what I have observed here.

              The only thing I might add is one phase from around Jan or Feb 2003 through the summer. This was the period when Dean began to build a ton of steam and the Dean wars first began. It's principally important because most people either forget (or don't know) that Markos NEVER ranked Dean first in his cattle calls until the very end of June/early July. (In fact, I think he never got higher than third until that point.)

              This is important because many people have "accused" Markos of being a "shameless Dean supporter from the start" (or some such malarkey), when Markos was very skeptical (I'd say "realistic" - and I was an early Dean supporter) about his chances. There was plenty of negativity about the site in those days, as Deaniacs felt under seige (which, in the earlier days, they often were), until the tide eventually turned and supporters of other candidates felt under seige (which I think they also were to a certain extent).

        •  Grat timming (4.00)
          to start fighting among ourselves. Just when things are starting to look not so dark and gloomy, we start a cat fight. Personally I think both of you are a bit of the mark.

          Anyone wants to dare tell me what the fuck I should say, think or do??? I have always posted what I thought, I always said what I believe. If ANYONE doesn't like it PLEASE, skip my post, troll rate me if you want. But please, spare me the grief.

          If you want me to go back to the place I was born , tell your corporations to leave my country (Leon Gieco)

          by cruz del sur on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:41:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  seanleckery (4.00)
        I call you out, toad.

        Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

        by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:54:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Brilliant (none)
        You've written the ultimate bullet-proof diary. If anyone criticizes it, that's just further evidence that there's a "purge" going on. Brilliant, just brilliant.
      •  huh (4.00)
        I don't get it either.

        There's a difference between people saying they should shut up, and saying that people should know what they're talking about.

        I didn't take DH's diary as saying people should shut up.  I also don't think people should shut up.  In fact I've been quite aggressively on record opposing those who say people should shut up.

        SYFP, STFU, and all the calls for yellow-dog forced unity - I hate that crap.

        So I dunno.  If people want to defend the practice of posting bad content, then okay... but there's absolutely nothing wrong with pointing out bad content and arguing that we should be generating better content.  (Even though I think a better solution is to focus on structural methods to achieve that goal.)

        Politology.US - Politics and Technology in the United States

        by tunesmith on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:22:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Your definition of "bad content"? (none)
          O ye open-minded, respectful one, appears to be anyone who has "the wrong ideas about things".

          "If you knew me, you'd know that I have patience for those with open minds.  And compared to many, I've spent a huge amount of time participating in respectful conversations with people who had the wrong idea about things.

          But I get really frustrated when people are going down roads that undermine their actual goals, and then refuse to listen when that's pointed out.  I'll attack absolutism and close-mindedness, no question.  I'll keep doing it.  Their delusions are a waste of my time, yes, but more importantly, they undermine the principles and goals of the people holding on to the delusions.  Maybe some of these folks are a lost cause, but the people that listen to them aren't."

          •  yep (none)
            that's pretty funny.  I completely stand by what I said.  If it offended you, please feel free to insert "what I took to be" before "the wrong idea...", because that's what I meant.

            My whole point was about abusing facts, which is the part that you glossed over in your protests.

            Remember that the conversation was a bit meta.  I don't actually recall ever making light of viewpoints that you have about various issues.  From what I remember, I thought we actually agreed with each other.

            By the way, I noticed a couple of other responses of yours that I hadn't seen since I had moved on to other diaries.  For one thing, of course I don't support a multiple-choice quiz "test" for new members.  That's silly.  I said it precisely because it was silly, to underscore the point that we simply can't prevent the occurrence of political beginners on this site.  My other comments later on spoke more about ways to make the education process easier, through features such as "best-of" dkos diaries with great information, a souped-up search enhancement, etc.

            If people are going to be offended by the simple observation that we've got people here that are less politically experienced than others, then whatever.  It's the truth.  Nobody was suggesting that we purify our ranks of them, though.  That's completely the opposite of what I believe in.  I just want to find more efficient ways for the community to collectively become as politically effective as possible.  And a major part of that is in aligning realistic goals with effective action.  And I can't help that it's true: there's a lot of unrealistic goals and ineffective action here.  I am very much one to be frustrated at that reality.  But I am not usually one to be frustrated at a person engaging in that, because we're all at different points in the process.  The exception for me is when a person is deliberately not listening to input that would actually help them, as we saw regularly in the whole exit poll brouhaha.

            Politology.US - Politics and Technology in the United States

            by tunesmith on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:23:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  OH!!! Theoria!!! (none)
      Looks like we have some similar enemies!!!

      Look who's weighed in with a snarky quip.

      HIYA, big fella!!!

      You're as consistently wrong as Dick Cheney. Quite an achievement.

      Welcome in.

      AG

      "Let the intelligent read and understand, and let the ignorant stay that way." From the earliest known piece of writing. A Mesopotamian shopping list. Nice.

      by Arthur Gilroy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:30:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think there's a difference... (3.88)
    Between "ideals" and "random wingnut blather that doesn't accomplish anything but making us look stupid."

    Yeah, I said wingnut.  You don't think there are liberal wingnuts?  That the Republicans have the market cornered?  Think again.  

    There is a difference between being concerned about troop management, for instance, and saying that Bush is preparing to legalize the draft right after the election.  There is a difference between WANTING Bush impeached and pushing the line that he will be any day now.  There is a difference between presenting arguments that Bush's views on religion and state impede his ability to govern, and frothingly trying to convince somebody that Bush believes we are in the end times and is working to trigger Armaggedon.  There is a difference between getting lost in the majesty of your own fantasies ("Wouldn't it be AWESOME if every young person in America showed up to the polls in black hoodies?!  Eminem is going to mobilize the youth of America!!!") and actually pushing solutions.  There is a difference between, say, working to combat discrimination (or even advancing ideas in that area) versus crucifying yourself over a pie ad on a website.  It's not about pushing the party this way or that.  It's about the difference between being a very liberal progressive activist and being a virulently unreasonable ineffectual wingnut jackass.  

    There's nothing wrong with a social group doing a bit of soul-seeking, self-evaluation, and taking stock.  The only people that object to that are people that tend to benefit most from hiding from the truth.  

    Anyway, I thought the reality-based-community-check diary was a breath of fresh air.  You're free to stick to your way of doing things though, of course.  See how that works out for ya.

    Man.  I have a feeling a lot of people are going to hate this post.  heh.  :)

    What's the difference between Iraq and Vietnam? Bush knew how to get out of Vietnam.

    by glibfidget on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:25:47 PM PDT

    •  Absolutely... (4.00)
      Hell yes there are leftie wingnuts. Certainly, saying that impeachment proceedings are about to begin may be silly. This, however, is the risk you run whan you have things like diaries. Yes, others may recommend those diaries based on some fantasy. Yeah, it may make Kos look silly for a moment, but it's not like mercenaries and the women's studies set don't make us look silly occasionally. If the mighy dKos image is that feeble at the hands of the diaries, get rid of the diaries.

      The instance above, however, is a small sample of the subtle ways in which middle-management is apparently conducting a larger purge. Go and reread the diary I mock. Look for the signs, my son.   ;)

      Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

      by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:37:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  They get two diaries a day (none)
        just like eveyone else.  What's the problem?

        "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine

        by Cathy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:43:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes! (4.00)
        Ban the Diaries!

        They cause too much trouble those diaries.

        Well, at least those that don't fit the group-think.  You know the ones.  "We" don't like those.

        </snark>

      •  it's not just about "image".... (none)
        It's about combating bullshit when you see it.

        I don't know where you got the impression that that shouldn't include the far-left, just the centrists.  

        What's the difference between Iraq and Vietnam? Bush knew how to get out of Vietnam.

        by glibfidget on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:03:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'd be willing to drop the "image" (4.00)
          argument too if it's being seen as some sort of shame of the left, the extreme left, or anybody who has an opinion I disagree with or opinions that might hurt the Democratic party.  But, that's not what the "image" argument is to me.  It's about furthering the energy and ideas exchanged hear into tangible political action and having the credibility to do that.

          I think for some of the objection is a dogged principle:  Diarist have wholly free and unchallenged access to Dailykos readers.  I think there is genuine dismay that if we want to be influential we will become homogenized  and institutionalized rather than the lovely, heady, free-wheeling rebel days.

          But there's been some base accusations made about people who have chosen sides.

          "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine

          by Cathy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:21:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  So you'd rather this just be an (3.50)
        echo-chamber for kos and only kos???? that seems exceedingly lame... (sorry)

        The diaries are a way for individuals to get their voices heard and for us get info out there very quickly... yes, sometimes there's some lame diaries (often there are lame diaries), but if enough people think it's worth reading then it gets recommended, that is democracy... you have the right to choose whether you think a particular diary is important/relavant/interesting or not... and leave it at that... we don't have to look perfect all the time, and we don't have to worry about what we look like all the time...

        oh and complaining about the "people of influence" here when you seem to be one too is kinda weird... I refer you to a comment below where you are referred to as "the theoria"... I've never been prefaced with a "the" in my life...

        Hmm... The Loki....

        "There is no spoon."

        by L0kI on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:38:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Theoria... (none)
          was once a "person of influence" here. This is no longer true, though if he wished to be, he could, at the drop of a pillbox, resume his former position as a Trusted Abuser.

          Then again, perhaps he's simply too humble to have presumed himself as such.

          HAH!

          Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

          by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:07:57 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  excellent. (none)
      Finally, someone puts it in a way that makes me reconsider my initial instinct to recoil from DH's diary.

      Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

      by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:59:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  but that's just the point (4.00)
      here is a difference between getting lost in the majesty of your own fantasies ("Wouldn't it be AWESOME if every young person in America showed up to the polls in black hoodies?!  Eminem is going to mobilize the youth of America!!!") and actually pushing solutions.

      that wasn't a fantasy. we did mobilize the youth of america, and eminem's song got loys of us fired up to go accomplish that.

      it is a hollow political movement that is ashamed of its dreamers.

      crimson gates reek with meat and wine/while on the streets, bones of the frozen dead -du fu (712-770)

      by wu ming on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:14:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  On the other Hand (4.00)
    "The real crime is happening when we're tearing each other down. You. You reading this now. Your motives are questionable. You will compromise yourself into irrelevance."

    You know, some people make themselves irrelevant by never compromising.  Just a thought....

    •  There's compromise... (4.00)
      And then there's being assimilated. Where will the line be drawn between being a Democrat or Republican? For you it may be abortion. For him it may be gay rights. For her it may be minority issues. You can only give up so much ground before actually winning is no longer a possibility.

      Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

      by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:43:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well, (4.00)
        in response to this, let me offer an absolutely  heretic question:

        Why is it so damn important to draw that line?

        There are republicans that support both a woman's right to choose AND gay rights.  Just as there are Democrats who are pro-life and against gay marriage.

        I'm just sick of this zero sum game of winner take all where "THEY" must be wrong about everything simply because of the (R) behind their name and "WE" must be absolutely correct because of the (D).

        It sounds very similar to "You're with us or against us".

        •  It's important (3.94)
          It's important for a number of reasons.

          1. We're approaching the point where we're going to be cutting loose those that depend upon us. Yes, some R's dabble in gay rights, womens right, stc, but not enough to make a difference. It's not a traditional R stance.

          2. The motives make a world of difference. R's have successfully painted liberals as America-hating pussies (yeah, I said it!) and our response is to try to disprove it by running from the ideals that make us liberal. This is just what they want. Abandoning those planks in our platform because we think it will help us win (it will not) is despicable.

          We've been talking about branding for a long time here. I've been bitching about it here for years. Burger King will never overtake McDonald's by being more like McDonald's. We'll never beat the Republicans by being more like Republicans. Wishy-washy flip-flopping bullshit has already been shown as a sure way to fail.

          Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

          by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:02:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  So (4.00)
            I guess the centrists within both parties (and without) have no place at the table in this view.

            Only the two extreme ends are to be left to their eternal battle with no "pussies" willing to compromise on either side.

            Sounds pretty bleak to me...

            •  No (3.78)
              There's plenty of room for the centrists as long as they make room for the rest. If they're going to to start pushing people out of the big tent... fuck them.

              Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

              by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:18:35 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  You have completely mischaracterized (4.00)
              the left in your little encapsulated "guess".  But, that probably shouldn't be such a surprise, if you take dKos as representative of the "left". Its important to remember that even those at the left most flank of the Democratic Party are light years away from "the left".  The whole bloody political system has shifted so far to the right that the "centrists from both parties" (whom you bemoan have no place) are to the right of the rest of the world. The center is always a derived position, never one particularly anchored.  I've always had trouble understanding how anyone would purposely seek out a position that isn't one (if you follow my drift here). But in US political culture, that is the ideal: a position that isn't one, but is derivative.  

              In a democratic society some are guilty, but all are responsible. -Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel

              by a gilas girl on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:41:40 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  You're against me (4.00)
          Thr (R)s keep winning when it counts. They keep pushing policies that make centrists irrelevant. They are pushing right, the center goes along, and thus become their ally. The center doesn't matter then. It doesn't exist if it doesn't stand for something, and resist that which it doesn't agree with.

          If you're are gay, being reclassified as a non-citizen isn't academic. It's real, and it screws up your life, and it takes away the luxury of 'just wanting to get along.'

          If you're a woman, why should you give up the right to choose?

          It's not heretical to want to ignore the present political differences. It all american.

          A person's right to say what happens to their own body is pretty critical.

          by thief on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:32:25 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Bingo! (4.00)
            They are pushing right, the center goes along, and thus become their ally.

            Bravo. That, in a nutshell, is the whole point that seems to be missed by the dKos orthodoxy. You cannot chase, appeal to, coax, or assimilate to the center. The center is an artifact of inertia, an effect of the extremes.

            Show me, for example, a list of great centrist thinkers. There aren't many. "Centrist" is just another word for the undifferentiated mass of people contented with the status quo. Centrists will never change anything for better or worse. They just follow -- and follow slowly -- the center of political gravity. They have shifted to the right not because they were courted by unprincipled rightist suckups, but instead because they were courted by unprincipled leftist suckups and the whole center of gravity shifted to the right.

            The real difficulty with the compromise position of the so-called American left -- and I stipulate that there is no such creature worthy of the name today -- is that it is attempting to compromise the inalienable rights of a majority of Americans in order to appeal to the mirage of centrism. And that is, ultimately, what we are talking about: women, gays, the poor, and minorities collectively constitute the majority of the population. For anyone other than affluent white evangelicals to vote for Republicans is to vote against their own interests. That's what the left needs to be communicating. It is not that leftist, progressive positions are unpopular; it is that the left has done a truly miserable job of articulating them at the same time the right has done an excellent job of articulating its positions.

            The solution, at least according to the orthodoxy here, is to move to the right. They call it centrism, but that obscures the bare reality that for a leftist to chase the center is to move to the right. And the center will move with it.

            If there is any single political lesson to be learned from George Bush, it is that a clearly stated, bold and uncompromising position appeals to vast swaths of the public. Judging from what a colossal mess he's made of things, and how his popularity has gone into freefall only now, the public will forgive almost anything as long as you don't resort to namby-pamby, spineless centrist poll-chasing. How many times do the Republicans have to shove a general election up our collective asses before we take the hint?

            Support Our Troops: Send the Commander-in-Chief to the Front!

            by eodell on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:35:09 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Well (none)
            there it is then.  All black and white, one way or the other.

            Unless you are on the most leftest (my term) side of the left, you have no place here and are a vichy dem, appeaser, repug, etc, blah, blah, blah...

            Funny, isn't this diary all about those way out there on the "keeping it real left" complaining that there is no place for them?

            Quit with the irony references people and start working the hypocricy angle a bit more.

            Just silly.

            •  Reading comprehension was never your forte (none)
              Nobody is saying anything like what is in your comment.

              One more time: Believe what you want to believe. Be a moderate. Be left. Be conservative. Stand up for those beliefs against the liars.
              But if you play nice with the neo-cons, you're going to get cooties. And we don't want those cooties.

              A person's right to say what happens to their own body is pretty critical.

              by thief on Wed Jun 22, 2005 at 07:29:46 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  How fucking profound. (none)
        So when do you graduate?
  •  I don't know... (3.93)
    I seem to piss people off when I tell them the truth as I see it, only the people I seem to piss off are the ones you seem to be defending, so I kind of wonder who the purists are ...(other than me of course)...

    I think (for me) it really just amounts to one of those "If you can't take the heat..." things, because I've always felt that any opinion worth having was worth defending, and if you can't defend an opinion logically or anecdotally, then if probably deserves to be shot down...and if you can't handle having one of your dear opinions shot down (by captains, lieutenants, privates, whatever) well, then politics may just be a tad harsh sport for ya (not  YOU theoria, but the amorphous plural "you") ...

    I don't find it necessary to be rude to anyone (although at times I find it enjoyable), but then again, I would absolutely vomit if we decided that this place should be the special olympics of politics, where every voice is just as valuable as every other one gosh darnit! Sorry, but to me, some people are really stupid and others are really insightful, and then there's me and you. (ha.) So, I welcome your admonishment of those who admonished the other admonishers to begin with. Consider me adomonished, and yadda, yadda, yadda...anyway, you can't keep a good idea down, so I'm not worried about censorship, or tearing other people down or whatever, truthful, hard-hitting, realistic (or idealistic) prose will always sell papers...although sex sells better (see the pie wars.)

    No, YOU need to mow the lawn.

    by PBJ Diddy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:34:46 PM PDT

    •  That's the Heart of the Matter (4.00)
      Some people get pissy when somebody questions their opinions, and some even go so far as to assert that those who don't bow down before their brilliance must be getting paid to not agree with them.

      Talk about narcissism.

      And you're right, if you can't or don't feel obligated to defend your opinion, why the fuck bother to post it in an open forum?  

      •  Those are the TRUE liberals... (4.00)
        Some people get pissy when somebody questions their opinions

        ...and my (cynic's) dictionary defines liberal as: "Someone who is tolerant of everyone unless the have a different point of view".

        After all, TRUE tolerance means tolerating intolerance from others too. That's why I never touch the stuff.

        No, YOU need to mow the lawn.

        by PBJ Diddy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:46:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  i see a problem with an unwillingness (4.00)
          to hold yourself up to a minimum of reasonable arguments.  Like saying to someone, could you please not scream your conspriacy theories at the the top of you lungs like you are breaking legitimate news?  And when asked to consider that it makes us look like an unserious bunch, lacking good faith standards about putting out public information?  Predictibly the suspicions that you might just secretly covet total and complete censorship, support a hostile takeover that shuts up certain factions, you've gone all arrogant and intolerant...

          "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine

          by Cathy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:55:18 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Why? (3.00)
          Why must I tolerate intolerance?  Must I also tolerate, say, child molestation?  Racism?

          Sometimes, ever so often, there is a right and a wrong.

          •  Because, intolerance (4.00)
            is also known as "free speech".

            Molesting a child is illegal (and immoral) but calling a wing-nut (of either variety) an idiot is neither. And while it is immoral to call someone an idiot because of the color of their skin, it is NOT immoral to do so because of the content of their ideas.

            Also,intolerance of the right-wing philosophy is a fairly universal trait on this blog, and it is hypocritical to accept intolerance of only the "wrong" points of view, since by definition a point-of-view is subjective.

            No, YOU need to mow the lawn.

            by PBJ Diddy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:54:38 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Great call, PBJ (4.00)
              We indeed do not tolerate idiotic right wingers, and we are barely civil to mild mannered right wing thought.  And I am glad of that!

              So there's a selective cry for total and complete lack of intolerance that's being called for.

              "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine

              by Cathy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:07:18 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Not coterminous (4.00)
              Maybe it's just me, but I've always thought that intolerance can, and frequently does, go beyond expression of thought into manifestation of conduct.

              Perhaps when it does, though, it goes by a different name.

              Food for thought.

              •  well, (none)
                it's a good point, but I suppose the differentiation would be that in this society some very mild behaviors can be proscribed, but even the most heinous thoughts cannot.

                Ends justifying the means is what you're referring to, and yeah, people cite their beliefs to rationalize bad behavior all the time, but the only excuse I ever buy is self-defense!

                No, YOU need to mow the lawn.

                by PBJ Diddy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:43:40 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  I'm not familiar with any right wing philosophy (none)
              Is that becasue there isn't any,  I've never heard it, or I refuse to hear it?

              Though I would guess that any "philosophy" of a partisan nature (left or right) is actually just a complicated justification for am exisiting, unexamined belief system.  

              When all else fails...panic

              by David in Burbank on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:55:48 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  See (none)
                Plato, Heidegger, Scheler. I'll give you more if you so desire.

                "Neither falsehood nor appearance and beauty are 'foreign' to truth. They are proper to it, if not its accessories and its underside." - Luce Irigaray

                by lucid on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:30:01 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Plato??? (none)
                  I wouldn't call Plato "right wing" philosophy.

                  Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

                  by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:44:39 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Ideal state (4.00)
                    run by Philosopher Kings? Benevolent rulers protecting their subjects by hiding unpleasant truths from them? All in there.
                    •  I love The Republic (none)
                      It's an unattainable ideal, but still a lovely fantasy.

                      Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

                      by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:58:45 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Really? (4.00)
                        That book gave me the creeps. Read it sophomore year as a philosophy major, and ...

                        ugh.

                        I prefer messy possibilities, and have always been suspicious of something that describes some tranquil, stable ideal.

                        You're not alone though. I knew some folks in school that LOVED that book.

                        •  Funny thing (none)
                          I loved Plato in college. I did all these Derridean readings of "Timaues" and the like. It wasn't until I turned against post-structuralism and really got a handle on the historical tension between epistemology and ontology that I started to recognize the real political implications of Plato's 'theory of ideas'. [I also loved Heidegger until around the same time - go figure].

                          "Neither falsehood nor appearance and beauty are 'foreign' to truth. They are proper to it, if not its accessories and its underside." - Luce Irigaray

                          by lucid on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:07:36 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  I think the most comforting part... (none)
                          of the "Republic" fantasy is that it is an impossible one. You can never start from scratch with your Philosopher King, because s/he'll always have the remnants of whoever raised her/him.

                          Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

                          by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:08:16 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  This is actually a critical point that makes (4.00)
                            Plato 'right wing'. In the Republic the Philsopher King is the one with the proper mettle to literally take posession of the truth. This mettle is something inherited, not learned, by the philosopher king - it is literally created in him/her by the 'true world' of the ideas. The Philosopher King then literally 'becomes the truth' - as with Nietzsche's critique in 'Twilight of the Idols' - "I, Plato, am the truth".

                            The political left believes in 'becoming', in change, progess and learning. The right wing believes there is a 'true world' out there that people of proper breeding must usher into existence.

                            "Neither falsehood nor appearance and beauty are 'foreign' to truth. They are proper to it, if not its accessories and its underside." - Luce Irigaray

                            by lucid on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:14:19 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You've convinced me... (4.00)
                            Now I'm petrified there's a little right wing asshole inside me, just waiting for the right moment to burst out and make me out as having been a liar all my life...

                            Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

                            by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:19:53 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No worries MSOC (4.00)
                            I think you're much to grounded in reality for that 'little right-wing asshole inside you' to make an appearance.

                            Besides, there ain't no such thing as purity - we all have our dark secrets, private fantasies, and hidden bigotries. I think it matters much more what you do and how you treat people than whatever ugliness might be lurking the crevices of the mind.

                            "Neither falsehood nor appearance and beauty are 'foreign' to truth. They are proper to it, if not its accessories and its underside." - Luce Irigaray

                            by lucid on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:25:36 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  Plato was one of my primary foci in grad school (4.00)
                    He is basically the father of 'fascist' ontology, as I would call it. He was adamantly opposed to democracy in Athens & in a typically philosophically obscure manner argued for the reinstatement of aristocratic rule. He used the Sophists [who were the founders of secular humanism and the staunchest defenders of democracy] as straw men to construct a heirarchical order in which identity was something 'inherited' (Greek - ousia, traslated as "substance" in the history of philosophy)rather than made [as with Protagoras - 'of that which is, that it is, huamnity is the measure']. Though his mentor Socrates somewhat staddled the divide between Plato and the Sophists (though that is debatable) Plato himself blamed the Sophists for his death.

                    I can send you a paper I wrote on the 'Noble Lie' in the republic if you're interested. e-mail me at

                    kurt
                    at
                    lucidproduction
                    dot com

                    If you want to see a copy.

                    "Neither falsehood nor appearance and beauty are 'foreign' to truth. They are proper to it, if not its accessories and its underside." - Luce Irigaray

                    by lucid on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:54:15 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Also (4.00)
                    As a side note, the neo-cons are philsophically referred to as "Strausians". Leo Straus (and his star student Allan Bloom) were both ardent Platonists.

                    "Neither falsehood nor appearance and beauty are 'foreign' to truth. They are proper to it, if not its accessories and its underside." - Luce Irigaray

                    by lucid on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:57:28 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  This has always been a compliment: (none)
              "She does not suffer fools gladly."

              Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

              by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:04:21 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Absolutely fucking classic (none)
        "Some people get pissy when somebody questions their opinions, and some even go so far as to assert that those who don't bow down before their brilliance must be getting paid to not agree with them.

        Talk about narcissism."

        Of all the people who possibly could have written the above, I find it astoundingly ironic that it comes from the very person who very, very recently suggested that people who don't follow his line of thinking might very well be paid Republican spies sent to infiltrate dKos.

        •  Are You Immune To Irony? (4.00)
          Do you take everything literally?

          Do you not understand the concepts of satire and parody?

          Those are all rhetorical questions, because the answers are obvious.

          •  I originally had "must"... (4.00)
            ...then changed it to "might very well" because of the semi-snark.  Maybe, as you said above when you plead ignorance of theoria's point, it's just that you aren't very funny.

            Regardless, the basic point stands, and is as follows, so you can't plead ignorance again: you seem to fit very well into the aforementioned Cynic's Dictionary definition of liberalism, that is, a liberal is someone who is tolerant of others, except those who think differently than they do.  You've practically been clubbing the dKos community over the head with it recently, and it got old and sad really fast.  But I guess FPers get special rules applied to them, since Armando is allowed to behave like a troll in the majority of the comments that he posts, without any repercussions.  Personally, I prefer the FPers who don't abuse this double standard, but whatever.

            •  That's my One Big Problem w/ (4.00)
              Armando. Not the double standard -- I'm well aware of that double standard, as I tend to benefit from it myself at times.

              But I've said it to him before, as have many, many oldtimers; his response is that he is ann ashole and this is how he argues and that's all there is to it.

              So, I am left with the choice to accept him as he is, or spend a lot of time berating him for berating others. I choose to accept -- until it becomes intolerable and then, knowing nothing I say will make a damned bit of difference, I simply leave the room. As it were.

              I'd wager there are many who might very well say the same of me. In fact, I know there are -- I could name half a dozen right now. I could also name half a dozen people with user IDs in the single digits who absolutely despise me and my persona here, to say nothing of my style of posting and at times even my politics.

              So I guess what I'm saying is... well, what am I saying? Live and let live? You can't please everyone? Life is hard -- have a cookie. I don't know WHAT the fuck I'm saying.

              Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

              by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:11:39 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Actually (4.00)
            I perfectly understood your satirical comment, DH.    You have been misunderstood.

            But it appears the vast majority of people did not.  Maybe you should be wondering why a bunch of otherwise intelligent people assumed the worst of your joke.  That kind of reaction doesn't just arise spontaneously overnight.  It usually happens because there has been a persistent pattern of that sort of message transmitted over and over.

            If you blow a dog whistle enough times, you can switch gears and sing La Traviata, but it will sound just like a dog whistle to a lot of people.

            Which is why this blog has lost a lot of active female posters, or if they have not disappeared, they have come to see the community very cynically.  Same reason.

            •  wait a sec (none)
              People actually thought that DH was suggesting that the folks making those arguments were Republican trolls?

              I completely missed that.

              That's hilarious!  Okay, that's now the biggest laugh of the day.

              DH, you gotta laugh.  Even though it's sad.  You gotta laugh.

              Politology.US - Politics and Technology in the United States

              by tunesmith on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:33:14 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Awesome (none)
                That's pretty awesome, isn't it? I had no idea anyone actually thought that's that what DH was saying.
              •  Irony impaired (4.00)
                Not you.

                Quite a few others, though.

              •  For the record... (none)
                ...it wasn't the diary that got me, but his first comment in it, in which he stated that he was 80% sure that there were no moles running around dKos.  That, to me, says something along the lines of "yes, this is snark....I think."  That's why I describe it above as semi-snark.

                Regardless, ignore the content and continue the circle-jerk, by all means.  I'm used to that sort of behavior after mostly lurking here for a year or two.

              •  Not necessarily "trolls" (none)
                as in coordinated attack w/ roots at the highest levels of gov't  (some people here have a tendency to give dkos a little too much credit sometimes), but just dickheads (young republicans, et al) trying to get a laugh. Think a lamer version of Jesus' General. Obviously there's no way to really tell, but I'm just saying it's not entirely un-feasible (infeasible? ... whatever).

                pay no mind to us, we're just a minor threat

                by arb on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:02:38 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Hmm. (none)
                Not having read any of the comments in the diary's discussion, I missed that. REALLY? People actually thought it was a serious accusation?

                Yeesh. I guess we all need our radars recalibrated from time to time.

                Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

                by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:13:08 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Well, to be honest... (none)
            I was pretty sure you were talking about ME.

            : )

            Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

            by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:06:14 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  asdf (none)
            Do you not understand the concepts of satire and parody?

            Do you not understand the concepts of ;) or [/sarcasm]? (Maybe your deft use of parody went the way of your sense of humor)

            This is not a rhetorical question, because the answers are [obviously] not obvious to everyone.

            And, it's usually the jerks who use sarcasm to hide what they really want to say and then when called on it fall back on, "What, can't you take a JOKE!?!?"

            Dailykos will survive this all, but I still miss the days of Billmon and the two Steves (Soto and Gillard).

            The polls don't tell us how a candidate is doing, they tell us how the media is doing. And Diebold tells us who won.

            by Thumb on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:26:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Ummm . . . (4.00)
        Some people get pissy when somebody questions their opinions, and some even go so far as to assert that those who don't bow down before their brilliance must be getting paid to not agree with them.

        Physician, heal thyself.

        The polls don't tell us how a candidate is doing, they tell us how the media is doing. And Diebold tells us who won.

        by Thumb on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:16:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Irony (4.00)
        Questioning I can deal with.

        Defending I can do.

        It is calls for a sort of self-imposed thought police on diary topics and recommendations that "get me pissy."

        I said it before, your diary calling for restraint in posting/recommending "unrealistic" diaries was more than the presentation of an alternative viewpoint.  It was a call for conformity, written as an appeal to common sense.  It all but said "we have an obligation" not to be stupid, and implied that "stupid" is what I [ie, you] says it is.

  •  Speaking for all the lurkers... (3.80)
    ...and not taking any sides...

    This thread is off the hizzy!

    Let the piss and vinegar flow people.  :-)

    Create cognitive dissonance. :-)

    by cgilbert01 on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:38:29 PM PDT

  •  Aspersions have been dispersed (4.00)
    So much so that people don't even recognize a dispersed aspersion when in the midst of dispersing one about the aspersions dispersed by the original dispersers of aspersions.

    "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine

    by Cathy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 01:40:32 PM PDT

  •  I call bullshit (4.00)
    I'm not sure how conspiracy theories with no evidence constitute ideals.  The "Dkos infiltrated" diary was about crazy-ass conspiracy theories, which have always been an achilles heel for us, and which are constantly surrounded by meaningless, useless, distracting infighting over nonsense such as this very diary - you won't accept my crazy-ass theory, so you're a compromising right-wing apologist for Bush, and you're irrelevant.  And what's wrong with America.  

    It's about focus.  We have little enough without, to be specific, the constant calls for an impeachment that will never come.  Is Bush impeachable?  Well, it doesn't even require discussion.  Of course he is.  Will it happen as long as the Speaker and Senate Majority Leader have an (R) next to their name?  Again, it doesn't even require discussion, because you can bet your sweet fuckin' ass it won't happen.  So let's focus on what we CAN do.  

    I don't agree with everything that was said in the original infiltration diary, and in fact I doubt we've got many right-wing trolls behind the nuttery - we produce more than enough wackos on our own without their help.  But the diary did serve as a reminder that we need to focus on some realistic goals and solutions without letting ourselves be forever distracted.  

    And frankly, if we're not able to question who we are - if the folks who have risen to a certain level of acceptance among our self-selected group can't speak up and say "hey, let's tone it down a bit", why bother?  By writing this diary, you're insulting them and anyone who agrees with them.  Who's tearing who down?  My motives are questionable because I also believe impeachment diaries are a waste of our time and energy?  Well, fuck you.

    This reminds me of the candidates who complain when they lose to someone who "packed the audience" - that's what votes are about.  Get the most.  We have diaries that allow for ratings and recommending.  The ones that are most popular and most widely accepted rise to the top.  Should we abandon that, and check with you before recommending diaries?  Should we only recommend diaries that differ with Kos and DHinMI?  Please, do elaborate on how a system that requires acceptance by many for success can be improved.

    •  Just For the Record... (4.00)
      ...the "infiltration" aspect was a tongue-in-cheek parody of some of the more extreme examples of what I was assailing in that diary.  I've kept an eye out for Repub infiltrators, and we actually had one guy admit to it about a year or so ago, but almost all of the wingnuttery is sincere.  But as I argued on that thread, the effects of indulging wacky, bullshit theories aren't necessarily related to the author's purity or impurity of intent.  

      I agree with your comment, but I just wanted to make explicit what I assumed most would recognize but obviously, based on some of the comments, some folks didn't.

      •  Duly noted (none)
        And for the record, I read that diary at work, hence I got the overall gist, but wasn't 100% engaged, so apparently missed this nuance.

        I read this diary a couple times over, though, since I responded using naughty words.

        •  Per My Tagline (none)
          The same one I've been using forever, not everyone is intelligent.  Not everyone is capable of seeing the subtle satire or inside joke.  Unfortunately, you can, by pushing satire too far, induce people to believe the opposite of what you intend.  Those essential clues are imperative!

          Embrace diversity. Not everyone is intelligent.

          by FLDemJax on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:55:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Perhaps... (4.00)
      ...DH is a Republican Mole sent in to dilute the power of this blog to set the wheels of impeachment turning.

      Just an idea...

        ;)

      Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

      by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:05:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  How do we find out... (3.95)
      which conspiracy theories are actually accurate, and which are just crazy... if we shout down anyone who dares to voice their opinion that X is a conspiracy?

      Seems to me if something is going to be validated, first it has to be spoken. Likewise with invalidation.

      Most of the "crazy-assed" stuff is obviously crazy on its face. But sometimes a conspiracy theory comes along that, while at first glance appearing crazy, turns out to be true.

      Watergate comes to mind. Iran-Contra. Push polling. Diebold.

      Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

      by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:52:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  As you said - it's pretty obvious (4.00)
        if there's evidence, there's evidence.  But this being a self-monitoring and self-researching community, crazy-ass conspiracy theories reveal themselves as such in pretty short order.  

        I don't think anyone has suggested shouting down anyone who <insert thing you said in your first sentence>.  Rather, once something's been vetted and discredited, it's time to shout it down.  (btw, the impeachment example that I've been kicking around here really isn't a conspiracy theory, it's just an unhelpful distraction that may be useful at a later date.)  The claim that Bush ordered 9/11 is an example of this that I'm able to come up with at the moment.  

        Let's say someone keeps asserting this here at Kos, and every day writes two incindiary diaries with my favorite phrase "WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!" spiced throughout, but never provides real evidence.  Instead, links to obscure websites which have convoluted theories and links to even more obscure minutia and supposition serve as "evidence".  Commenters respond, every day, with links to documents that show Saudi Islamist nutjobs to be responsible for 9/11 (and with the occasional rant that Islamists wouldn't be so pissed at us if we behaved better).  Eventually, these diaries become overwhelmed with daily pissing matches over which evidence is real, who needs to WAKE UP, PEOPLE!!!, and who is just regurgitating long refuted nonsense.

        Does any of that sound helpful?  Instead, doesn't that sound like something that makes us look a little silly?  So, yeah, by all means if someone finds stuff and think it might be right, they should post it here so the many, many people who gladly leap to pitch in can prove or disprove it.  If they're right (Gannon/Guckert), it can be a huge boon for all of us!  But once something's disproved, to continue frantically and manically pushing it is counterproductive and hurtful to our cause.

      •  The penny & the feather (4.00)
        Absolutely, Maryscott.

        I'm sick to death of the phrase "conspiracy theory," even.

        Any talk of "conspiracy" is greeted with and smug tittering and snide little references to Reynolds.

        Please...

        What vacation spot in la-la land did these people just get back from?

        People conspire to do all sorts of crazy ass things, all the fuckin' time. For instance, they might, say, start illegal invasions, rob taxpayers through the DoD, rob social security, pretend to be compassionate towards the poor while obliterating all of their safety nets, or pretend to be Christians so they can misuse the language of faith to devastate the foundations of our government in stealth mode...

        Now those are the kinds of things I think of as crazy.

        As far as I'm concerned, it makes all the sense in the world for everybody not in the game to become deeply paranoid around dangerous, deceitful mother fuckers like that.

        Besides, a lot of things seem totally whacky at first blush. Who would've known what to say about the fact that a penny and a feather will fall to the ground at exactly the same rate of speed before somebody figured out that gravity's pull was behind it?

        "I call bullshit," or "Stop talking crazy, it makes us look bad," I suspect.

      •  In the immortal words of Ducttape Fatwa (4.00)
        One person's conspiracy theory is another person's business plan.

        Sell your cleverness; buy bewilderment.

        by lapin on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:28:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  yup (4.00)
        Calls to mind the ridicule I drew talking about the Contra/Cocaine operation in 1984, when all I had to go on was gossip in the dope scene...

        No-one who voted against the USAPATRIOT Act has lost an election. I am not currently Licensed to Practice in this State. Or Yours.

        by ben masel on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:45:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Try this one on for size (none)
        Just plain crazy conspiracy theory about the Bush campaigns being laundered through the FL and OH turnpike commissions. Have fun!
  •  it's too late (4.00)
    I am already complicit with this regime.
  •  This is THE Theoria???!!! <n/t> (none)

    "You don't lead by pointing and telling people some place to go. You lead by going to that place and making a case." - Ken Kesey

    by Glinda on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:05:33 PM PDT

    •  Yup! But I Wonder (4.00)
      at the lack of vulgarity a bit.

      You shoulda read some of the vintage stuff.  Wish it hadn't all gone.

      Miss it a lot!

      Fuck.

      You can't always tell the truth because you don't always know the truth - but you can ALWAYS be honest.

      by mattman on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:21:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ooh! Is (s)he done up in Blackglama? (none)
        "What becomes a legend most?"

        "You don't lead by pointing and telling people some place to go. You lead by going to that place and making a case." - Ken Kesey

        by Glinda on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:31:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Beats The Shit Outta Me (none)
          Maybe if I knew what "Blackglama* was I would know?

          Theoria is a dude.

          You can't always tell the truth because you don't always know the truth - but you can ALWAYS be honest.

          by mattman on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:06:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I've read otherwise (none)
            at one point, that was a raging debate.

            Sell your cleverness; buy bewilderment.

            by lapin on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:36:38 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Why do you think ... (none)
              I used the term '(s)he'?

              I know the legend!

              And I'm sure gender is a mood thing! As it should be.

              "You don't lead by pointing and telling people some place to go. You lead by going to that place and making a case." - Ken Kesey

              by Glinda on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:11:14 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  No Offense Meant (none)
                truly.  I hate exposing my ignorance of stuff and I really had no idea what it was about.

                Sincere apologies.

                You can't always tell the truth because you don't always know the truth - but you can ALWAYS be honest.

                by mattman on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:22:08 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Please! Do not apologize! (none)
                  That was just good natured banter on my part!

                  Am I losing my touch? Or is it just the "post-pie war" hangover? Remember I'm "Armando light" (may the goddess help me!).

                  Just STOP with the apologies ... at least to me!  I am NOT EVEN CLOSE to being that subtle when I'm offended.

                  In fact ... if you can't tell ... I'm offended that you think I was offended.   ;-)

                  "You don't lead by pointing and telling people some place to go. You lead by going to that place and making a case." - Ken Kesey

                  by Glinda on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:52:14 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  You must be a YOUNG laddie. (none)
            Blackglama is the fur company who ran the brilliant and (almost, apparently) immortal campaign...

            "What becomes a legend most?"

            With Legends posing in the furs.

            It sort of lost its glamour once the PETA folks started throwing paint in broad daylight on the street...

            Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

            by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:17:00 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  But no matter how you feel about fur ... (none)
              the legends were ... well ... LEGENDS!

              Yes?

              "You don't lead by pointing and telling people some place to go. You lead by going to that place and making a case." - Ken Kesey

              by Glinda on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:09:26 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Ancedotal Analogy (4.00)
    I visited something called the Hudson River Clearwater Revival this weekend. I hadn't been in about a decade, and it reminded me of the good old days of New York progressive politics.

    With notable exceptions like Senator D'Amato, New York was then ruled by Democrats. Democrats were the enemy or the too-slow allies, on issues like faulty, dangerous nuclear power plants, Hydro-Quebec, land overdevelopment. We had a lock. Even the Republicans here have to run with a green slant today because of the legacy of Love Canal, Shoreham, and Hudson PCBs. Or more accurately, because of the victories of people willing to stand up for progress against their overall allies.

    That's what needs to happen in the Democratic Party nationally, and on this site too. The people who want to choose their battles, who want to corral, and brand, and thin the herd, need to instead themselves be responsive to a stampede that can go on forever, and can gain strength.

    When important issues are made non-negotiable, and strong stands are taken on them, then progress can be made, momentum can be gained. There are those who think this isn't a revolution, that it is a little internal spat politically that moderation will ameliorate. Reality check, indeed, for them.

    It's true discipline is needed in a revolution. Bad ideas and BS need to be dealt with. But there is a huge difference between tackling individual problems, and taking a dampening stance against everything that rocks the boat. The boat needs rocking, dammit.

    •  Yeah... (none)
      What you said. I guess my diary would have been shorter if my brain worked a little more better.

      Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

      by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:14:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Your brain is working just fine. (4.00)
        I couldn't agree more with your diary--and the way you nailed the problem(s) point after point. There's been more than a little hubris-loaded ridicule raining down around here, and it only serves to discourage and demoralize people--people who are on our side. There's a big difference between honest disagreement/civilized challenges and the "tsk, tsk, (eyes roll) here we go again with the idiotic diaries" type of comments.

        I loved every thing you said. Thank you, Theoria.

        I *gladly* donated to ePluribus Media. Support citizen journalism!

        by nancelot on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 07:50:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  All egos checked at the door... (4.00)
    ... after going through the ego detector.

    I'm sorry, sir, but you'll need to be strip-searched.

    If it ain't in the Bible, it ain't science!

    by Bob Johnson on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:20:29 PM PDT

  •  I'm not entirely sure what all you're` (3.83)
    talking about...

    But I have a question,

    If we are to remain united, yet splintered into our interest groups, how are we to come up with a consensus or a united front when there is so much disagreement?  

    How are we ever going to agree on things like whether to push for impeachment or to focus on flipping the houses??  

    Both diaries made it to recommended, the one about impeaching Bush, and the one about criticizing the call to impeach, how is that one-sided? (Please don't take my tone to be nasty, I just want clarity in your post as I don't really understand).

    The community is becomming very large and people here are starting to get very personal about certain specific beliefs; I agree with you on that, but how does that stop? Natural leaders seem to fall into place, like posters that write good diaries regularly, and then people want to support them here (like anytime someone wants to criticize a point by armando (eg) they have to preface it with "I really respect you but," or "I know it's sacrilige to disagree with you, but..."
    and so forth...

    I do agree about ratings overuse... perhaps we should get rid of the rating system all together... but then how do we say "good job" to people without just writting a post that says "I agree" and then filling up the threads too quickly...

    I just kinda see the diary as complaining without offering solutions (again, don't be upset at the language)...

    help me...

    "There is no spoon."

    by L0kI on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:27:49 PM PDT

    •  Fabulous point (none)
      People's will, no matter where they come down on these showdowns, it's not being tamped down.  As you point out both diaries made it to the Recommended list.  

      "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine

      by Cathy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:42:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I also dance for nickels... (4.00)

    Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

    by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:33:04 PM PDT

  •  Well (4.00)
    It's one way to drive traffic to your blog.
  •  Theoria lives! Or is this Ghost of Theoria Past (4.00)
    with Theoria Present and Theoria Future to come?

    [aside: Theoria needs to change ending of name. Thanks to too much Latin, I thought Theoria was female. Now I think not. Can't think of Theoria as Cassandra anymore.Damn those months with a broken laptop.]

    Four months before the Dean campaign imploded, I had a series of conversations with a Vermont staffer about how to prevent what he saw as a rise in spinning away of people as frustration mounted. He dreaded a defeat as leaving many permanently damaged. Well, defeat we had. However, like fractals, going away is followed by coming back, irresistably. But back isn't there anymore, and those people are changed, gone, going, and here isn't where it was.

  •  Whiner. (3.50)
    DHinMI's diary actually spawned a lot of good discussion. And there was a well-stated reply by BooMan.

    However, this is just a bunch of whining "help, help, I am being oppressed" crap.

    Is this the best you can do to make your case?

    And what kind of a case are you making anyway? You bring out some broad generlizations on how those poor idealists are being oppressed, and top it all off with self-contradictory stuff like:

    The penalty for not falling in line? Public humiliation/vilification. Banishment. Un-recommended diaries. A stern talking-to and a bloodlust driven mob scene.
    [...]
    Whether or not censorship is occurring at dKos is irrelevant. I'm not addressing that.

    Yeah, sure, you're not accusing anyone or anything.

    And you wonder why there are people who don't take  some posts seriously because of stuff like this?

    This signature proves I am deep and philosophical.

    by Frank on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 02:54:58 PM PDT

    •  Weenie (3.55)
      No, I'm not addressing censorship. This is about marginalizing those who disagree by calling them Rove plants or saying that they do nothing of substance for the party... that they sit on their asses. When it comes down from the top, this is bullshit. I expect it from the likes of you and I, but not people like DH and Armando. I'm also not talking about ME being oppressed, so stop trying to be cool. And, your sig is pretentious and annoying.

      Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

      by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:05:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Top of What? (none)
        Maybe you didn't notice, but I don't post on weekends here anymore, and haven't since November.
        •  Oh, come now. (none)
          Just because you're no longer a FP doesn't mean you've somehow lost the extra respect that comes of having once been one.

          Which may be a bad thing for you, I dunno. We have great expectations of our shining stars, you know. When mere mortals stumble, it's no great surprise or disppointment, but when our heroes' feet are revealed in all their claymation glory -- look out below...

          By the by, can anyone tell how ill I am? I think this fever is bringing out a somehow more verbose and simultaenously less intelligible side of my writing... Terry's fever has finally broken -- just in time for mine to spike. Oh -- and the vomitiong is a LOVELY new feature...

          Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

          by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:23:36 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Clarification (none)
          I assume you mean you don't post diaries on weekends anymore, because I have a Sunday diary from  last January that you're all over.

          The polls don't tell us how a candidate is doing, they tell us how the media is doing. And Diebold tells us who won.

          by Thumb on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:35:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Ok, let's see. (4.00)
        Ok, so it's "help, help, they are being oppressed". Big difference.

        Also, you write:

        This is about marginalizing those who disagree by calling them Rove plants or saying that they do nothing of substance for the party... that they sit on their asses. When it comes down from the top, this is bullshit. I expect it from the likes of you and I, but not people like DH and Armando.

        ..and then in another comment, you say:

        It was obvious in DH's diary (which, for the record, is a tiny bit of what I was addressing) that he didn't really believe that Republican Dirty Tricksters (RDTs, from now on) were posting and recommending impeachment diaries.

        Could you at least be consistent?

        Oh, and don't touch my signature. It's deep, and philosophical.

        This signature proves I am deep and philosophical.

        by Frank on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:18:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Explain to me... (none)
          where the inconsistency lies there.

          "DH was not SERIOUS in his references to Republican tricksters"

          doesn't seem to contradict

          "marginalizing those who disagree by calling them Rove plants"

          Just because you aren't SERIOUS when you call them Rove plants doesn't mean you're not deliberately trying to marginalize them...

          Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

          by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:49:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Rove plants, why was it ever believed (none)
        that this was meant about regular users?

        "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine

        by Cathy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:23:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I am irrelevant! YAY. (none)

    When all else fails...panic

    by David in Burbank on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:06:43 PM PDT

  •  This is lovely (4.00)
    I'm enjoying myself here.  
    It's better than posting diaries and getting ripped to shreds.  

    And that "reality based" thing really sticks in my craw.  Both times I've been told to get with "reality" the first person didn't know  what words meant and the second person didn't what the facts are.

    I love it.

    dKos = Pirhana Tank.

    I am really happy here.

    You are lovely, Theoria.

    Who controls the media, controls the fates.

    by Apian on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:11:41 PM PDT

  •  Source of the phrase reality-based community (4.00)
    I am unclear as to the specific diaries you are referring to in this one, but it makes sense to me to remind all of the origin of the term, "reality-based community".  

    The source is an "unnamed" aide to George W. Bush speaking derisively of those of us who rely on the facts for our analyses and perspectives.  He meant it derisively:

    October 17, 2004, New York Times Magazine article by writer Ron Suskind, quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush:

    The aide said that guys like me [Suskind] were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued.

    "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality--judiciously, as you will--we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

    Essentially, GWB's aide was very cynically telling Suskind that our way of discerning reality, using the facts, is quaint, outdated and for saps.

    Further, he is saying that the Bushies, in pursuit of empire, are uninterested in the facts, rather they are creating reality.  What he meant was, "We're just going to make shit up".

    So from that many in the blogosphere became even further committed to being proud members of the reality-based community.  When people come to this blog delivering tin-foil hat theory as if it were factual, they do us all a great disservice.

    The best example I can provide of this is the diary that promoted a conspiracy theory about the Cessna that flew in the unrestricted air space over D.C. recently.

  •  Theo baby,... (none)
    I missed you so.  Anyway...Just a thought here...  Is it possible that the right wing propagandists have infiltrated and do their best to sow seeds of discontent?  I use as People's exhibit one...
    Go back and check out the dKos comments on that fateful night of the Dean scream.  I was cruising the blog that night and couldn't help but notice the subtle and not so subtle disparaging remarks coming from the commenters.  As I watched Dean being torn to bits, I also noticed that the negative commenters were not the regulars, not the people who usually commented.  Sure enough, the fire was lit and by the next day even Kos himself was dissing Dean.  A self perpetuating cycle.  By the time Kos was discussing what really went down in Iowa, the damage was done.  I really believe that outsiders had grabbed the mike so to speak and the flock just followed.  What say you, Theo?     Any thoughts on the matter?

    Energy is neither created nor destroyed; it only changes form.

    by SME in Seattle on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:25:36 PM PDT

    •  Missed you, too, SME (none)
      Let me say this much. It was obvious in DH's diary (which, for the record, is a tiny bit of what I was addressing) that he didn't really believe that Republican Dirty Tricksters (RDTs, from now on) were posting and recommending impeachment diaries. The point is, however, that the damage was done by the time you got in to see how the Rethugs had snookered us. (Never said "snookered" before!)

      Okay, fine, DH reminds us of this fact, making him a fine fellow again. Yeah? What about the part where none of these people lift a finger to help the party? I'm talking about a single diary. We can go back (and maybe I will) and collect all sorts of data backing up such a pattern.

      Why do liberals hate liberals so much?

      I have to go home this instant, but may check in later... sorry for the fragmented thoughts. (You're used to it, I know.)

      Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

      by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:48:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Because (4.00)
      this same tactic worked to perfection to blunt the Wellstone Memorial they learned how easily many of us on the left fall for these mock outrage events.

      And as the Durbin flap shows, they're still going to that well.

      The polls don't tell us how a candidate is doing, they tell us how the media is doing. And Diebold tells us who won.

      by Thumb on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:39:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This is an A paper. Thank you. (none)
  •  muah! (4.00)
    you're right.  i need to go pull my tinfoil hat from the garbage.  dhinmi had me all feeling bad earlier for being optimistic/gullible.

    "Private property means you get nothing"
    -Jeff Ott

    by mediaprisoner on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:32:47 PM PDT

  •  I just scanned 200 comments (4.00)
    and I don't have a bloody clue what this is all about.
  •  Nice to see you again theoria (4.00)
    And I couldn't agree more.

    "Neither falsehood nor appearance and beauty are 'foreign' to truth. They are proper to it, if not its accessories and its underside." - Luce Irigaray

    by lucid on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:44:44 PM PDT

  •  It's about "our" perceived credibility. (4.00)
    Unless one is omnipotent, one NEVER makes a decision with "all the facts" in hand. One has to make assumptions based upon the information that one has, be it incontrovertible or inferred.
    I believe Socrates is credited with the saying "the unexamined life is not worth living". As a man of science and faith, this means seeking out ideas, opinions, beliefs and behaviors that challenge what I "believe" I know. That is why I occasionally toss in my $0.02. I have absolutely no problem with opinions that differ from mine, be they "conservative" or "liberal". I applaud those who post for having an opinion and feeling strong enough about it to share it with me and everyone else.

    That being said, I am curious as to "why" those who post have the perception that they have shared and "how" it developed. Posters here generally have a high degree of ownership with their comments, and often make several points in defense of their perception that challenge the reader to accept them a priori.  When challenged here or on other boards, I attempt in my response(s) to not only share "what" my perception is, but also "why" and "how" I perceive it that way.

    In our society, the argument isn't really about the truth itself, it is about whose perception is closer to the truth. The problem comes when one voices a perception of the truth that is unpopular or inconvenient to society.  For example, Galileo's perception of the universe was closer to the absolute truth, but society at the time couldn't accept it and locked him up because of fear of what they couldn't understand. My perception, based upon the facts that I know and what I have inferred from my experience, is that it would take a bigger leap of logic to accept various "statements" posted as comments or diaries because they do not fit with what I am accepting and inferring as fact, based upon my perception.

    As I mentioned earlier, I believe "the unexamined life is not worth living" because I KNOW, by and large, that my perception is NOT LIKELY the absolute truth. All I can do is share my honest perception, which includes (for example) the most credible science at the time on a subject or my understanding of my relationship with God. I'll share the "what", and back it up with the "why" and the "how", because that is my perception of intellectual honesty.  People who are vociferous in the "what", but without a "why" or "how" behind the perception belong in the realm of the zealot and the ideologue, which I am sad to say I am not very tolerant.

    Holding this community to a higher standard than that expected in other "competing communities" where I often lurk (e.g., Redstate, Slate) may not change any minds, but it would make "our" perception here more intellectually honest.

    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are. - T. Roosevelt

    by ranger31 on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:45:12 PM PDT

  •  I think your dairy shows a lot of disrespect (none)

    inspire change...don't back down

    by missliberties on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:49:26 PM PDT

    •  Like I always say... (3.57)
      If you can reach just one person it makes the hard work worthwhile.

      Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

      by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 03:56:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •   I so don't get your point (none)
        or is the point of your whole dairy that everything is pointless,

        except your snide, sarcastic, so called irony and shining a light on your so called, brilliant wit

        And what is the point of that.

        Unless you are merely trying to entertain yourself by  creating
        a useless controversy.

        To me the point is that dairies get hijacked by people with extreme, intolerant and unyeilding positions which they think represents an uncompromising ideal of what a liberal should be.

        inspire change...don't back down

        by missliberties on Wed Jun 22, 2005 at 06:14:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Two Diary A Week Limit (none)
    Again, limit diaries to 2 per week instead of 2 per day and even some of the "Kossacks WILL Beat Bush to Mars!" diaries will at least have substance and evidence.

    "Victory means exit strategy" - George W. Bush 4/9/99 | Why Did They Hate America?

    by Addison on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:19:56 PM PDT

    •  That was the trailer (none)
      Kossacks WILL Beat Bush To Mars now a major motion diary...

      "Victory means exit strategy" - George W. Bush 4/9/99 | Why Did They Hate America?

      by Addison on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:58:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Nah. (none)
      Punishing the good and/or prolific diarists for the moronic behaviour of a few is not the appropriate solution.

      I'm not sure how much tweaking Kos can actually do, but it might be something to consider if he could build in a formula that requires a certain combination of time since registered/number of diaries posted/number of comments posted/number of recommendations in previous diaries -- something like that, mebbe.

      But I'm not much for sweeping changes here -- this shit irons itself out eventually, it always does -- and new, old and one-off problems always arise again. Such is life in the big blog-city.

      Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

      by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:29:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  All day, the postings were civilized (none)
    Even if it was "Open Season on Toby Day"
    Theoria, your reputation precedes you. As one of the "centrists" who happily followed DHinMI to TNH, I think that DHinMI values respect for truth and analysis more than forcing everyone to be centrist. Part of being centrist is needing a really good rant to be impressed or change your mind.

    "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, who am I? And if not now, when?" (Hillel was a liberal)

    by 4jkb4ia on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:30:16 PM PDT

    •  Coming to a C&J near you (none)
      A mental IPod rendition of "San Antonio Stroll" and Tim Duncan's lines for all 6 games.

      "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, who am I? And if not now, when?" (Hillel was a liberal)

      by 4jkb4ia on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:31:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  If I thought there was (4.00)
    a concerted effort to make dkos a respectable and responsible blog (said with nose in air) by somebody managing the diaries, I'd lose interest, fast.  Sounds like CNN or similar lameness.  People need a little excitement in their politics. Not all of us are lawyers...    
    •  Dude (4.00)
      If theoria is back, then respectability and responsibility are things we need not fear ovewhelming us here at dKos. And I pesonally couldn't be happier.

      Hostage smiles on presidents, freedom scribbled in the subway. It's like night and day. - Joni Mitchell

      by jazzlover on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 04:50:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  OK, here's my question. (4.00)
    I've read this diary, and all the comments. I read the diaries that preceded it, and their comments. I'm a frontpager. I'm not a controversial or confrontational frontpager, apparently.

    So, what is being asked here? What should I be doing right now? Rating someone up? Rating someone down? Banning someone? Unbanning someone? Is there an action I should be taking right now?

    Am I being asked to endorse even clearly false diaries, that are based on evidence that has been disproven time and time again? Sorry, I can't do that.

    Am I being asked to condemn posters who post well-researched but controversial work?  Not going to do that either.

    Should I be getting angry at the posts that ask people to be responsible about what they post? Should I be asserting that people can post whatever they like, because there's some sort of understanding that this is not only a news and advocacy site, but the personal playground of anyone who shows up here?

    Should I be taking the side that well-known posters don't get to engage in attacks against them or argue in other controversial issues, because it's "not fair"?

    Should I be getting angry at the posts that call out other users who have called out other users who have called out yet other users, in some sort of unending chain letter of Liberal Purity Tests that the rest of us are supposed to use to choose unyielding sides?

    Can I get royally ticked off at posters who use low ratings as a bludgeon against sets of people with philosophical or strategic disagreements, instead of correctly using them to rate down out-of-bounds ad hom. attacks or otherwise individually borderline posts? 'Cause that one I can get behind.

    We've got everyone's attention. I'm all ears. So what action can or should I be taking, as a result of these arguments?

    •  Don't do anything (4.00)
      reminding folks to behave themselves and be responsible is good, but otherwise a democratic marketplace of ideas is messy, and hopefully the cream rises to the top. When it doesn't, oh well, try again tomorrow.
    •  I think the last point (4.00)
      is the most important one. I've never actually been troll rated [though I've gotton a couple of 2's] even though I espouse pretty controversial opinions. I think it is generally because I either A. fly under most people's radar, or B. have the self control to not get into pissing matches. I have, however, seen tons of ratings abuse by all sorts of people, both long standing Kossacks who should know better & trolls. I think it sets a bad example for newbies when people use ratings as an agreement-o-meter, and the problem has spiralled out of control because of this.

      "Neither falsehood nor appearance and beauty are 'foreign' to truth. They are proper to it, if not its accessories and its underside." - Luce Irigaray

      by lucid on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:13:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Better than I could have said it. (4.00)
      I'm at a total loss for what this diary is really saying. Are we supposed to accept every bone headed diary that is so divorced from reality that it could be writen by Bush? Are we supposed to pat people on the head when they refuse to even listen to the tons of proof against their theory?

      I grew up a reasonable person from a reasonable family. I expect the truth from people and I expect them to be able to explain or defend their position. I expect honesty from people and return it. When I make a stupid statement I want to be called on it regardless of whether it hurts my feeling. I'll get over it.

      Every day we fight the lies from the right. If we can't accept when someone shows us that what we are saying is untrue we are no better than the right. This feels like intelligent dasign. We have to accept it because someone says it's true and if we fight it we are anti ?.

      I don't want to look stupid. I want facts and reality. I want to be proven wrong when I am wrong. I would hope that everyone else feels the same way. Otherwise show me what is different about you than the average talk radio listener and FOX news watcher.

    •  Thanks. (1.00)
      Nice to see another grown-up has arrived.
    •  Use that special skill of yours (none)
      to cut through it all, you know, the numbered and drafted outlines you turn out in five minutes?

      1. Caring about the credibility of the community ain't the same as wanting to shut people up out of shame of the left, the extreme left, hurting the party.

      2. If some infuential person seems to be singling YOU out, it's probably not as personal as you think. But, it's not like you can't challenge them anyway without presuminig that you are about to get tossed over.  Or, that your side is being squashed in the name of party unity.  There is plenty, plenty of stuff that regularly shows up on the front page and in the diaries that no one calls stupid, crazy, conspiratorial, but nevertheless is not comforting to the "party" people.

      3. There is way too much generalizing going on.

      4. Calling hypocrisy about intolerance but ignoring it when we will not tolerant rightish views (PBJDiddy) to the delight of most all of us.

      5. If a front pager is acting abusive, treat them no differently than you would any other user.  Confront them, explain, tell them.

      "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine

      by Cathy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:51:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Nothing. (none)
      It's just another storm. No need to jump into the eye unless you're up for getting blown into brick walls.

      Sometimes we just crave a little in-house drama; compared to the shitstorm going on in the REAL world, it's a semi-pleasant diversion to engage in arguments over issues where we actually O have choices and a little power.

      That's MY take on these things, anyway.

      Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

      by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:54:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Theorialives! (4.00)
    Don't be too mad at me for pointing out you're talking from scripture here, T:

    For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?  Matt 16:26

  •  Thank you, T. (4.00)
    Its amazing how fast troll ratings have been thrown around at people who are exploring idea here, which is a community, a place that by its own being is a place to float such ideas, not be punished for doing so.

    I'd bet you'd be hard-pressed to find a person here who is a true Kossack who DOESN'T believe Bush should be impeached. How many people believed that people should have civil rights while lynchings were occuring weekly, violence towards minorities occuring daily, racism every day. How many people believed that we should get out of Vietnam once they learned the facts of what was truly happening, not the glossy, rosey picture all administrations show of a war?

    But what if one of this "non reality-based" diares happens to change just one mind. Would it be worth it, that one of these diaries opens the eyes of just one more person?

    I say wholeheartedly yes.

    "In such a world of conflict, a world of victims and executioners, it is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners." -Albert Camus.

    by BrianL on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:20:06 PM PDT

  •  throw my vote in for "bullshit" (4.00)
    a lot of people read a diary like this and give it creedence, I bet.  I sure don't.

    I mean, it sounds so plausible- a lefty blog getting all censory- it's as if Republican criticms of the left were coming magically true before our eyes!  So I'll grant that this writer is good enough to obscure what's really going on, and figure that some readers are trying to figure out if this is really happening as the writer describes, or if it's bullshit.

    I suggest when assessing motivations, that one looks at what a person does rather than what a person says.

    Because despite what it says- all lovely notions I agree with- what it's doing is quite clear.

    It's trying to divide the dkos community.  

    And lines like "perhaps our ship is slowly sinking" seem to be trying to do far worse.  Things are heating up for Bushy this week.  The concerted effort to destroy dkos will come if it hasn't already.

    It will be hard to see.

    It will have excellent writers.

    But it will be spottable for its hidden assumptions of what liberals are ... and especially by what it does.

    What I see: A bunch of bullshit diaries get promoted, kos is as concerned as the rest of us, and when he takes the bait- bam.  Return of The King!   The most sharply divisive diary I've ever read.

    I think we know one thing:  they know how to get a recommended diary.  Good to know.

    I don't think I'll be posting again on this thread- this was just a vote.  For the calling "bullshit" option.

    This is kos, the guy who developed the most egalitarian idea sharing system I've ever seen.  This is the big dictator?  It's like calling Max Cleland unpatriotic.  It's fishy, I say.

    And of course, if this comment gets troll-rated away while I'm gone, that will just prove my point.

    •  He's not accusing Kos of anything. (4.00)
      It's just a rebuttal, dude. No need for over-dramatizing the already dramatic.

      Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

      by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 05:56:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, bullshit (4.00)
        The comment that blue florida made was spot on the fucking money. I'm surprised you don't see it.

        Iraq: Arabic for Vietnam

        by Coldblue Steele on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:51:37 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Abso-fucking-lutely (none)
          Not overdramtic at all.  See, I'm saying fuck and not frick.  Further proof that righteous anger is valid here.

          "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine

          by Cathy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 07:27:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Well, as I respect your judgment, (none)
          I will have another look at it.

          I've been riping off comments left and right in this discussion, wouldn't surprise me if some of them were off the mark. Got myself sucked into a moronic pissing contest with Omar, for example...

          Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

          by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 07:35:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Kiddo (none)
            Sorry to say, you have completely missed it.

            The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

            by Armando on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 08:11:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Okay, then. (none)
              I've missed it. I'll check it all out when I'm not so fucking sick...

              But I suspect I'm simply seeing the one side of the coin -- be it willful denial of the other side or an inability to see it, I know not.

              Christ, even my syntax has the fucking flu.

              Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

              by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:29:17 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Rest up (none)
                there are 2 sides to the story.

                Hell, I certainly did some things wrong. I took the wrong approach on the problem.

                However, I was called a corrupt shill, markos was called a corrupt shill, dailykos was called corrupt, and that is much worse than any sin I committed.

                To me it is simple, withdraw the smear, and peace be with us all. But to say that, stand by it, and ask me to pretend that all is a-ok?

                Well, I am not capable of that much phoniness. I am pissed at the attacks on our integrity and they know why.

                The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

                by Armando on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:39:29 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I COMPLETELY missed this entire... (none)
                  episode. It happened at LSF? Or here?

                  Not that where it happened is relevant. Link me, would you, because I'm starting to feel like an ASSHOLE.

                  Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

                  by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:41:48 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  It is a long story (4.00)
                    The short version - a lot of sniping at dailykos and markos and FPers from good folks, the folks at LSF. I think it was unfair.

                    But I overreacted and insulted them back in a way only I can.

                    They upped the ante by accusing us of being corrupt shills.

                    I went ballistic, where I still am.

                    I am prepared to own up to my mistakes. I have.

                    I hope they can do the same.

                    The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

                    by Armando on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:51:41 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  2 Cents (none)
                Based on what I've read tonight, I suspect it is your relationship with Theoria that is clouding your vision here.

                And in "reality" I think that is what the underlying topic here is: relationships within the site to those in "power".  

                People who are not FP/TU/recommended diarist/"kool kids" feel extremely threatened when those in the circle frown on their positions.  That would include the farthest left lefties and the farthest right centrists.  

                At any given time both can feel like an endangered species around here.

                Especially when the myriad acolytes of the few chosen ones decide to prove there sycophantic worth by piling on for a session of idol worshipping 4's or masturbatory 1's.

                •  Not really (none)
                  It's not that at all.

                  That's a cover.

                  I describe it to Maryscott below.

                  The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

                  by Armando on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:53:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Well, FUCK this. (4.00)
                  Yeah, I feel like an idiot. I still don't know what the fuck is going on, but obviously it's more than the face of it.

                  As for frowning and who's doing it -- well, maybe this is the perfect time to declare that I simply do. not. care. who's frowning on me -- as long as I feel I'm in the right. Which I most certainly do NOT feel in this whole discussion. Don't feel in the wrong, either  -- but should it become clear that I AM in the wrong, I'm perfectly willing to admit it.

                  Sigh. What a desolation -- I feel like a child caught between warring parents, with no discernible clues as to which one is going ballistic for no good reason. Or worse -- both have good reasons, but they are completely opposed.

                  Enough. I said I was checking out of this discussion, and I am. Anyone who feels like dropping me an email and enlightening me, please do.

                  Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

                  by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:59:20 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Nope. (none)
          Re-read it. Ascribing such insidious motives to THEORIA, of all people, is just plain wrong-headed. And Maybe I read Theoria's original post wrong, but I don't see him making this about Kos. Nor do I see this as any MORE divisive a diary than its inspiration, DHinMI's "Infiltration" diary.

          Nope. I don't see it.

          Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

          by Maryscott OConnor on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 07:38:14 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  If you don't see this (none)
            as an attempt to divide the community, which IS kos, then I guess we agree to disagree. Certainly we needn't be agreeable all of the time.

            While I was put off by DHinMI's first diary for "just the facts ma'am", I have come to realize that his intention was to improve the site; Theoria offers nothing to improve this site, but shamelessly whores his blog.

            Part of me wants to see Markos post on the sites that attack him, but he has taken a higher ground; I wouldn't, but that's just me.

            Iraq: Arabic for Vietnam

            by Coldblue Steele on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 08:12:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  See my last few comments, (none)
              scattered throughout. I'm seeing a very different reality than the one in which I thought I was participating throughout most of the day...

              Very disconcerting. I am nonplussed, to say the least.

              Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right.

              by Maryscott OConnor on Wed Jun 22, 2005 at 12:31:38 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  It's all implied (none)
            I wasn't looking for the redemption I was looking for the humor.  It wasn't there.  Not really, it was sort of dressed up like humor.

            "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine

            by Cathy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:41:57 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Sorry, I know you're sick... (none)
            But, I have to go back to why this really is more divisive.  Two things got in the craw about DHinMI's diary, about sitting around not working for the party or something and abhorrence toward "controlling thought" which is an overblown charge in my opinioin, but the rest was about what Dailykos has become, and by neglect, one has to assume Kos let it become by not giving a damn.  And it's all digs at all of us really.

            "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine

            by Cathy on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:48:30 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  So Who Pissed You Off (4.00)
    Why does everyone get pissed when other people have a different opinion?

     

  •  well said (4.00)
    Open and diverse debate is what being a "liberal" is supposed to be all about. Leave it to the Neoconfederates to march in lockstep. Think someone is wrong headed? Make your case. Have it out.

    Sadly, a certain contingent here is fond of shouting down contributions that they don't find valuable. Certain bullies like to distort and divide. That shouldn't happen in our party.

    •  Irony? (4.00)
      Certain bullies like to distort and divide. That shouldn't happen in our party.
    •  The General's Lieutenants (4.00)
      Who agrees with this statement?

      As the F[ront] P[age] over at dKos devolves into a mere party organ of the Vichy appeasers, I find myself sad that what was once a partisan blog where genuine debate occurred has now become a tool for the mercenaries who are willing to sell out the party that fought for social justice in the name of partisan gamesmanship and so-called "moral values."

      The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

      by Armando on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:21:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  context (3.33)
      since some don't feel the need to provide the link to a quote taken out of context, you can find it as comment number 12 in this posting at unbossed on April 26th, nearly two months ago. An angry comment in response to a posting that said:

      On Dem Fighters: Want 'em Smart Winners or Brave Losers?

      Our dear friend MiTM has made a cottage industry of ripping the Senate Democratic Leadership at every turn for everything. His new preferred term "Vichy Dems," reeks of sanctimony and shortsightedness.

      With his cheering section from Liberal Street Fighter, which has never met a Democratic leader it did not despise, MiTM has spewed and spluttered invective at every move Senator Harry Reid has made on Frist's Nuclear Option. You can read the mess in his diaries at dailykos.

      Just yesterday MiTM had a tantrum after hearing that Reid was "negotiating" with Frist on a deal to resolve the issue. Frankly, anyone who has followed this story, understood how Frist was beholden to James Dobson, and the PARAMOUNT Republican goal of eliminating, or cowing Dems on, the right to filibuster judicial nominees, would have seen at a glance that Reid's offer would be flatly rejected by Frist. Reid offered to accept the 2 least objectionable judges nominated by Bush IF Bush would approve a judge approved by Michigan 2 Dem Senators AND if Frist publicly agreed to not threaten with the nuclear option again.

      Let's repeat that - Bush gets 2 judges, Democrats get 1, the nuclear option get relegated to the waste bin and SUPREME COURT nominees remain subject to filibuster. First of all, this deal is a terrific deal for Dems. For those who don't know, it is the President who gets to pick judges, not the MINORITY Party in the Senate. Second, retaining the filibuster for SUPREME COURT nominees is THE issue here. Sure,we must block these awful judges like Owen and Rogers Brown (ed note: gee, I wonder how THAT turned out) - but remember what the big issue is.

      But forget all that. Reid knew his offer would not be accepted. Reid also knew that his offer would be news and that Frist's rejection of the offer would be bigger news. So what was Reid doing here you think? Anyone? MiTM?

      Ok, I'll tell you - Reid was presenting an image of reasonableness and moderation and forcing Frist to present an image of intransigence and extremism. And that is good why you ask? Well, let's see, since the GOP has gone off the deep end with Schiavo, and threatening judges and Delay, etc. - GOP approval ratings have gone in the toilet.

      On Frist's Nuclear Option, WaPo's poll released yesterday shows the 66% of Americans oppose it, while 26% support it. One more time, 2/3 of the American people oppose Frist's Nuclear Option. Now how did that happen you think? Because the extremist label has been pinned on the GOP - by their own doings and by shrewd maneuvering by Reid.

      But MiTM and his chorus will have none of this political shrewdness. He and his chorus want BRAVE STUPID LOSERS! I don't want to win smart he yells, I'd rather LOSE stupid and brave!

      Well, I disagree. I want to win. Especially on this critical issue. I think we have found the defeatists amongst us - and it ain't Harry Reid.

      My posts are out there for all to see. I do my best to provide context and links when I can.

      It is these kinds of hits and runs, nursed grudges and ground axes, deployed against people with genuine differences, that Theoria is pointing out in this diary.

      I would also compare my post with the kinds of berating, abusive and bullying that is regularly deployed by a certain person in this community.

      •  I stand by that (none)
        You stand by yours?

        See, I don't see where I called you a VICHY DEM or where I called you a CORRUPT SHILL or a TOOL FOR THE MERCENARIES!

        Yes, the context explains why you state that markos, me, the other Front Pagers and dailykos itself has sold out our principles to mercenaries.

        Riiiiight.
         

        The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

        by Armando on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:53:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  OPPRESSED (none)
          I've been rated marginal!

          I'm under attack! Woe is me.

          The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

          by Armando on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 08:23:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  armando, at least (none)
            you can rate people back... unless someone has altered your account too? nah, i didn't think so.

            by the way, go back and check that hideous diary you wrote a few days ago, you should check your and DH's last comments to me. funny how that guy Stevo (who i don't know from adam on Dkos) totally hit a bullseye. And DH's comments seem quite interesting with this development.

            Liberal Streetfighter, Left-wing served al dente.

            by wilfred on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 08:55:30 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Your comment to me? (none)
              That was so sweeeet.

              Funny how we can see the splinter in someone's eye from a mile away but the log in our own . . .

              So you think I am a corrupt corporate shill too?

              Madman stands by his accusation that we are.

              But I have no reason to be pissed, not at all.

              The funny thing is you think my quoting the smear of me is beneath me. I would think that if I was a corrupt hill very little would be beneath me.

              But your logic has suffered a bit in recent months.

              As for your rating power, that wasn't me.  You know I could give a shit about ratings.

              The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

              by Armando on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:10:02 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  i figured it wasn't you armando (none)
                but i'm surprised you don't seem to have a problem with someone going in and doing that, interesting. i guess that's what the really weak do though, use their power to do what their lame arguments can't.

                you are more comfortable thinking that i've changed when i am exactly the same guy fighting for the same things i always have. you are the one who has changed, you are virtually unrecognizable and it's a pity because i liked the former you quite a bit.

                Liberal Streetfighter, Left-wing served al dente.

                by wilfred on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:20:23 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The Motherfucker calls me a corrupt shill (none)
                  You think the old me would not jump down his ass Wilfred? Sorry, the old me would have done the same fucking thing.

                  Look, we have fundamental differences in view of how to get things to done. Never never never do I question your integrity or Madman's or Theoria's or marisacat's.

                  I believe you want most all of the same things I want.

                  Why have I changed? Because my integrity, markos' integrity, dailykos'  integrity, has been attacked. And to turn disagreement on approach into charges of corruption is beyond the pale.

                  The OLD Wilfred would recognize that and say, 'those guys are wrong, but they are not corrupt.'

                  Hell, the old Madman, Theoria, marisacat, etc. would have said that.

                  For some reason you think we are now the DLC.

                  I can't explain it. But I won't take it lying down.

                  The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

                  by Armando on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:25:57 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  hasn't questioned our integrity? (none)
                  from the same thread linked above:

                  Armando/Fernando - comment 19
                  LSF is filled with so much nonsense from folks who wish defeat upon the Democratic Party

                  Armando/Fernando - comment 26
                  Yoiur friends have told you that everything having to do with the Democratic PArty is bad and you see that as fighting for gays. minorities and social justice?

                  You know who else used to say that? Ralph Nader. You keep good company.

                  Armando/Fernando - comment 30
                  Lazy and stupid? Yes, you are apparently.

                  Do you have a rejoinder for why you are NOT like Nader?

                  How exactly are you HELPING MiTM?

                  •  You kidding? (none)
                    Where are you charged with corruption there?  "A tool for the mercenary shills?"

                    Was I wrong? Of course I was wrong. I retract all of it.

                    It was terribly unfair of me.

                    But there is no way you can compare that to calling us corrupt shils.

                    The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

                    by Armando on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:47:21 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  reading comprehension (4.00)
                      plainly, the "mercenaries" are the "centrist" party leaders. NOWHERE in that paragraph do I say that dKos is anything more than being used by them. Do I think that the championing of "centrism" by some of you is well-meaning? Sure. However, it ill serves the party base and our future as a party to continue to support leaders who would sell us all out. Nearly ALL of those judges are on the bench now. The rest will soon follow, and the nuclear option is in NO WAY precluded.

                      Anybody who isn't hysterical and can read can see that it is the traitors I call the "Vichy Dems" who are in the pocket of the corporations. I think it is wrong to back them. That does not give you the right to claim that I have stated that dKos itself is mercenary. Yet you keep miscatagorizing what I wrote. What is plain is that the blog front page has tried to help the Congressional Leadership get their message out and sell all of us that their course is the right one. I'm sure that has been done for what you think are perfectly strategic and justified reasons. You are wrong, and as the party continues to fail to really distiguish itself as more than just "not-as-bad" Republicans, it will continue to lose.

                      It happened two fucking months ago. Unlike Dick Durbin, I'm NOT going to apologize because you keep insisting that I deny something that I plainly didn't say.

                      •  Let's put it this way (none)
                        If that's what you meant, it's not what you wrote.

                        Simple as that.

                        But let me ask you a question, when I asked you to retract it, why did you not explain yourself?

                        Look, your explanation is pretty offensive, but so what? At least you accept we are not shills.

                        As for who is right or wrong, well, you know what I think.

                        One last thing, the Vichy Dems thing is really offensive. Why not just disagree with the views? Or if that is not good enough, call them idiots. The Vichy adjective is way over the top.

                        Anyway, I am glad we cleared that up.

                        Clearly, there is plenty of blame to go around.

                        I'll leave you in peace now.

                        The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

                        by Armando on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 10:34:22 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

        •  And now... (4.00)
          ...the last Tool from the Big Box of Tools has arrived. What took you so long?

          Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

          by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 08:23:58 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  the REST of my comment (4.00)
        leading up to the part a certain person likes to flog like a dead horse:

        Hello my fiesty but oh-so-wrong friend.

        Do we meet in front of the saloon just before noon?

        I do not accept your characterization that Frist caving makes my belief in a strong stance as being "wrong." Rove gave an interview in which he declared any deal dead, and as the White House's pet cat killer, Frist folded. Reid was offering him an out because they are "colleagues", not out of some great strategy. The continued willingness to dance to the right's tune on "moral issues" show that they still don't get that voters respect people who stand for something, rather than those who bend with the political winds.

        What you call "reasonableness" I call a lack of basic principles, and I will not modify that position.

        These are not horses to be traded, but lifetime appointments to extreme activists. Even as some kind of shadow dance for public consumption, being willing to "compromise" with extremists only demonstrates that Democrats still don't get why they lose. Go read about Janice Rogers Brown latest appearance in CT for a taste of the kind of "compromise" our supposed fighting Dem is willing to make:
        http://www.stamfordadvocate...

        As the FP over at dKos devolves into a mere party organ of the Vichy appeasers, I find myself sad that what was once a partisan blog where genuine debate occurred has now become a tool for the mercenaries who are willing to sell out the party that fought for social justice in the name of partisan gamesmanship and so-called "moral values."

        Enjoy the next 2 or 3 electoral defeats.
        Posted by Madman in the Marketplace at Tuesday, April 26, 2005 12:06:07

        I stand by what I write. I try, as best I can, to present what I think will be a more productive course for the Democratic Party than continuing to place corporate interests before the needs of American citizens. What I don't do is invade diaries I don't agree with with one line obscenity filled insults and depredations. I don't repost two month old disagreements without providing context.

        I leave it up to other members of the community to agree or not. I try to present my case as best I can. You can disagree, but I will not submit to the pack of mangy dog group attacks that a certain party and his other "centrist" buddies like to launch without calling bullshit.

        •  You stand by your accusation (4.00)
          that we are shill and Vichy Dems? That we are corrupt?

          Well, thank you very much. I was so wrong about you.

          What a welcoming tolerant gesture on your part.

          So nice that you think dailykos is run by corrupt shills.

          One question - what the fuck are you doing here among us dirty sellouts? Don't we disgust you?

          The SCOTUS is Extraordinary.

          by Armando on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:19:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Thumbs Down (4.00)
    Is it just me, or is what is going on in this discussion all smoke and mirrors.  Many commenters have postulated that their diaries were flamed for being too liberal.  Then many claim to be flamed because their diaries are too moderate, or even conciliatory.

    Hate to break it to ya, but in an open forum everybody is going to be criticized by someone.  If you have political aspirations or want to have an argument next to the water cooler, and you can't take the heat, then you will get your ass handed to you on a silver platter.

  •  The power of tinfoil squared (none)
    "It is wise, upon occasion, to introduce true randomness into your actions when opposing an existing order. The problem is that randomness, by definition, cannot be planned. Human emotion, however,  is a Random Factor, and thus it may be said that to serve the interests of one's own endocrine system is to serve Chaos."
     Gregor Markowitz, The Theory of Social Entropy

    No-one who voted against the USAPATRIOT Act has lost an election. I am not currently Licensed to Practice in this State. Or Yours.

    by ben masel on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 06:13:33 PM PDT

  •  hey guys (none)
    feel free and troll rate me because for some reason my account has been altered so i can't rate anyone.... hmmm, wouldn't be the powers that be abusing their privileges again? HA!

    Liberal Streetfighter, Left-wing served al dente.

    by wilfred on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 08:32:35 PM PDT

  •  now I don't want to get all historical on you all (none)
    but this reminds me of the battles the socialist and communist parties in Germany and Russia used to have.  I hope nobody ends up getting beaten and thrown in a river like Rosa Luxemburg, and if someone emerges who is Stalin like, I'm really going to be pissed off.

    Let us have a free exchange of ideas without all the accusations flying around, this is getting a bit ridiculas.

    I've been hanging around this place a long time, check my user number, and no matter how crazy it got back during the primary(i wrote a diary comparing Dean to Justin Timberlake), we all had a goal, let's not forget that we all want to change things for the better.

    We all want universal healthcare.

    We all want the gap between rich and poor to close.

    We all want the soldiers in Iraq safe, and to come home as soon as they can.

    We all want to smoke a big bowl of kind budd, and sleep with my girlfriend(ok, maybe that's just me).

    I hangout out on Kos because I figure we all share the same goals, am I wrong?

    absolute freedom for one individual undoubtedly limit's the freedom of another.

    by jbou on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 08:33:14 PM PDT

  •  This reminds me.... (4.00)
    ...of back in the day, when I was a serious board game collector.

    Now, I know, how nerdy, how dorky, how geeky.  Whatever.  My thing back then.  

    I got into it just as the whole idea of "collectibility" as a means of financial gain was about to come into being.  Collectible card games like Magic, being able to buy and sell imaginary items from cyber-based worlds for real cash, ad nauseum.

    Anyway, I parlayed a few good choices into better cash, and like topsy, it just grew.

    A lot of friends into the same thing wanted to know my secret, but there wasn't one.  I always told them, "Buy what you're willing to keep forever.  Beacuse one day, you might have to do just that."  Things worked, I learned form my mistakes, etc...

    One friend was determined to buy some of my stuff at a discount.  After much harassment, and because he was a friend, he got them for that discount.

    A couple of weeks later, the market went into a slump, and he blamed me personally for his inability to sell the games.  After about a year of his complaining, I offered to buy the games back, which he was happy to do, but still not so happy with me.

    I sold them for a profit, and he went off the beam again.  To the point that I rarely, if ever, hear from him nowadays.  Part of that was due to getting fired from a job he did better than anyone in his group, strictly because his boss hated his guts (the boss, thankfully, was laid off a year later), but I know I can never trust the guy now, though I'd help him if he was in a bind.

    My bottom line on this is that Kos had the guts to establish something that had no certainty of success.  And he made it work.  People contributed to that success, and I think ego, life kicking you in the backside, and conflicts with various egos of various stripes lead to lots of folks feeling used, others feeling that they can be obnoxious twits for their own benefit, hoping to ride the slipstream of whoever they favor at the moment, people who just feel the need to vent, whether worthwhile or assinine (and the latter are those who'll never, ever get theoria's humor), and people who are trying to do the best they can in support of Kos getting it, directly or indirectly, from all sides.

    I've never felt that I couldn't say here whatever I wanted to say.  But I also tried to say something that contributed to the conversation, even if it was just a joke.  

    I think when egos get truly, seriously damaged, it's time to consider your own blog to show how you'd do things your way.  When/If the wounds heal, I think you jump back into the conversation here, but try to keep your ego off to the side.  Especially when "real life" throws you an anvil (had a few of those, so I feel for those who do - but I also keep my poison pen to myself when I do...save my rage for where it will build, not tear down).

    Honesty, self-assessment, kicking butt when truly needed, listening beforehand intently.

    I don't consider DinMI or theoria as evil, but I do think both have to be heard and that both need to listen.

    It's been along day for me - I'm tired, and I'm probably rambling...but again, set the egos to one side.

    "Nothing is as difficult as not deceiving oneself" - Ludwing Wittgenstein

    by Palamedes on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 09:31:02 PM PDT

    •  Palamedes, I think you are the one (none)
      that has come as close as possible to squeezing something like a useful truth out of this diary.

      Personally, reading all these posts was a much better experience than seeing the Spurs lose game six!

      I do hope everyone here can eventually hear each other again--you are a fine bunch.

  •  The best "DOUCHEBAG" joke in the world! (none)
    Guy walks into a bar... 2:00pm in a bad mood.

    Bartender, jukebox and lady at the end of the bar.

    Guy says, "Give me a bourbon up and get the douchebag what ever she wants."

    Bartender says, "Hey Buddy, don't be talking that way she's a regular."

    Guy says, "Sorry Max, I just had a fight with my girlfriend and am in a bad mood."

    The bartender pours his drink and gets one for the lady... comes back and says, "That'll be $4.50."

    The guy says, "$4.50! Hell mine cost $4.00 what's she drinking?"

    Bartender says, "Vinager and water."

    The surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that it has never tried to contact us. -- Calvin and Hobbes

    by SteveK on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 10:25:36 PM PDT

  •  Done (4.00)
    This diary was less about changing things (ain't gonna happen) and more about putting certain folks on notice. This mainly applies to those punks from lesser known blogs who've been using this site as a bully pulpit in order undermine people whose voices need to be (and will be) heard. I apologize to those of you who can't grasp the situation due to not seeing this play out from the inside over the course of years. My bad. Just watch out, because these efforts will undermine the cause that this site could be so effective at advancing.

    Now that this diary is no longer recommended, I'll be a real whore and tell you one more thing. dKos is no longer my home. My home is Liberal Street Fight.

    Liberal Slugfest http://www.liberalstreetfighter.com

    by theorialives on Tue Jun 21, 2005 at 10:46:24 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site