Exposing the lack of compassion by conservatives and
debunking right wing hypocrisy at every opportunity.
As you probably could have predicted, the debate over the non-firing of John Edwards' new bloggers, Amanda Marcotte (Pandagon) and Mellissa McEwan (Shakes) is still raging -- especially over at the Senator's blog.
Amid the concern trolls, outright trolls, and sock-puppets from other campaigns, I fear there just might be a couple of folks who actually are waivering in their support of John Edwards for President because he elected to hold on to these very brazen babes who know the ins and outs of the blogosphere better than any professional consultant.
Okay, the "brazen babes" crack wasn't exactly PC. Certainly less provocative than what the Blogrrls have written -- and that's the point. Communication Theory 101: Know Your Audience. I am certain the ladies in question wouldn't be offended by that, so neither should you.
They are internet liasons, right? Minor staffers in the great sceme of things and relatively unimportant -- unless you're a blogger yourself. Then they mean a lot since they are your link to the campaign.
Would it matter if they were higher up the food chain and had written outrageous stuff? Stuff that isn't necessarily offensive, but nonetheless was certain not to injure mere feelings but destroy lives?
Let me remind everybody about the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) publishing it's calls for military intervention throughout the Middle East anywhere that would print it and using our preeminent military force to make the world safe for a global "commercial empire" -- during the Clinton administration.
In 1997 PNAC was demanding that Clinton preemptively invade Iraq, in writing.
The authors of that idiocy included former Bush officials Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Armitage, our last and next UN Ambassadors Bolton and Khalilzad, current Dept. Nat'l Security Advisor Elliott Abrams of Iran-Contra fame, and Bill Bennett (who advised us that if you aborted all the black babies, the crime rate would go down).
To date, all of them have enjoyed much higher positions within the administration than Amanda or Mellissa will ever hope to attain (Okay, Bennett's been on the radio since, but he was Reagan's Education Secretary.)
And to date, not one of these men have felt any consequences for a policy which has gotten over 3000 American troops killed, tens of thousands injured, uncountable hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed, millions of lives overturned -- all for a mission that will never be accomplished.
Calling for death and destruction, trying to create an empire from a republic and foisting a functional illiterate on us as the modern-day Ceasar to bring about this disasterous fantasy -- somehow didn't seem to matter to the conservatives who now tell us how immoral we are.
Why? Because they never were so disrespectful as to type "Jebus." So easily led we all are. So easily distracted by Nancy Pelosi's public transportation dilemma, Diapernauts, and dead golddiggers. Sad.
Hey folks, our helicopters keep falling out of the sky and we're sending even more kids to the slaughterhouse!
What kind of message are we sending the troops when when the Senate can't even properly debate whether they should have a debate on the war? -- And that story doesn't even rate a three minute talking-head smack-down against a "debate" on whether Obama's church is Christian enough. Poor guy just got finished explaining how he wasn't raised in a terrorist training camp and now has to defend the nationality of his name. How ridiculous.
Question: Areyou for or against abortion, contraception, social justice, and an end to unnecessary wars?
Better question: Are you ready to stop letting the right-wing noise machine dictate the terms of the debate? Are you ready to fight them? fight them to the death? Destroy their domination on deciding what is and is not suitable for debate in this allegedly free country?
Does it really matter that you don't like the way someone on your side of the issues expresses themselves as long as the guy on top that we're supporting acts in a dignified manner -- or at least doesn't manhandle German Chancellors?
You want unity? You want One America? You got it. Instead of being able to ignore us out-of-control bloggers, you now have the choice of dealing with us or turning your back on a candidate you profess to support. You can learn from us, and we can learn from you. That's what it's all about, right? Or do you want another tool of PNAC running things?
And don't think that Hillary won't play footsie with those warmongers as she triagulates if we don't put up a united front. The progressive online community has become skilled at heading off the right's distraction/destruction techniques. We can show how it's done, and if you join with us maybe some of your good manners will rub off in return.
Number one. You never, ever just let a swiftboating lie go unanswered, even if it's incomprehensibly innane. The bloggers went right at the original swiftboaters while John Kerry let the issue fester for over a week -- only to mount a tepid and ineffectual defense, hoping it would go away. There were many things that turned the last election -- but that was a catastrophe.
You don't even let a trollish comment lie hanging loose on a comment thread. There are a lot more lurkers than commentors, many of whom leave an argument agreeing with the last thing they read. You don't just let people leave a blog post with a false or purposely twisted impression.
The attack on Amanda and Mellissa was a similar swiftboating personal scalp-hunt, something every campaign should expect. In fact, there's another one that surfaced today from a campaign staffer (supposedly) on our side of the fence. (I have a feeling it wasn't team Kucinich. Can't be. He doesn't have any staff.)
The length of this last controversy was measurable in hours -- yet I know that with the combined fact-checking and information awareness abilities of the blogosphere, the next bullshit attack will be handled even quicker and more effectively. (And yes, decry that foul language illustrates only ignorance -- but sometimes you just go ahead and call that long-handled-soil-manipulation-device a spade.)
That's what John Edwards will find indespensible about Shakes and Amanda, and all their buddies. We bring both the shield and sword of the truth, something that has been hiding in the closet the last 12 years. And most important, we bring it fast.
The decision is made, and whether they want to resign or not, Amanda and Mellissa cannot leave unless the Senator permits. They serve, after all, at the pleasure of the next President of the United States.
Get behind this, now.
Amid the concern trolls, outright trolls, and sock-puppets from other campaigns, I fear there just might be a couple of folks who actually are waivering in their support of John Edwards for President because he elected to hold on to these very brazen babes who know the ins and outs of the blogosphere better than any professional consultant.
Okay, the "brazen babes" crack wasn't exactly PC. Certainly less provocative than what the Blogrrls have written -- and that's the point. Communication Theory 101: Know Your Audience. I am certain the ladies in question wouldn't be offended by that, so neither should you.
They are internet liasons, right? Minor staffers in the great sceme of things and relatively unimportant -- unless you're a blogger yourself. Then they mean a lot since they are your link to the campaign.
Would it matter if they were higher up the food chain and had written outrageous stuff? Stuff that isn't necessarily offensive, but nonetheless was certain not to injure mere feelings but destroy lives?
Let me remind everybody about the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) publishing it's calls for military intervention throughout the Middle East anywhere that would print it and using our preeminent military force to make the world safe for a global "commercial empire" -- during the Clinton administration.
In 1997 PNAC was demanding that Clinton preemptively invade Iraq, in writing.
The authors of that idiocy included former Bush officials Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Armitage, our last and next UN Ambassadors Bolton and Khalilzad, current Dept. Nat'l Security Advisor Elliott Abrams of Iran-Contra fame, and Bill Bennett (who advised us that if you aborted all the black babies, the crime rate would go down).
To date, all of them have enjoyed much higher positions within the administration than Amanda or Mellissa will ever hope to attain (Okay, Bennett's been on the radio since, but he was Reagan's Education Secretary.)
And to date, not one of these men have felt any consequences for a policy which has gotten over 3000 American troops killed, tens of thousands injured, uncountable hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed, millions of lives overturned -- all for a mission that will never be accomplished.
Calling for death and destruction, trying to create an empire from a republic and foisting a functional illiterate on us as the modern-day Ceasar to bring about this disasterous fantasy -- somehow didn't seem to matter to the conservatives who now tell us how immoral we are.
Why? Because they never were so disrespectful as to type "Jebus." So easily led we all are. So easily distracted by Nancy Pelosi's public transportation dilemma, Diapernauts, and dead golddiggers. Sad.
Hey folks, our helicopters keep falling out of the sky and we're sending even more kids to the slaughterhouse!
What kind of message are we sending the troops when when the Senate can't even properly debate whether they should have a debate on the war? -- And that story doesn't even rate a three minute talking-head smack-down against a "debate" on whether Obama's church is Christian enough. Poor guy just got finished explaining how he wasn't raised in a terrorist training camp and now has to defend the nationality of his name. How ridiculous.
Question: Areyou for or against abortion, contraception, social justice, and an end to unnecessary wars?
Better question: Are you ready to stop letting the right-wing noise machine dictate the terms of the debate? Are you ready to fight them? fight them to the death? Destroy their domination on deciding what is and is not suitable for debate in this allegedly free country?
Does it really matter that you don't like the way someone on your side of the issues expresses themselves as long as the guy on top that we're supporting acts in a dignified manner -- or at least doesn't manhandle German Chancellors?
You want unity? You want One America? You got it. Instead of being able to ignore us out-of-control bloggers, you now have the choice of dealing with us or turning your back on a candidate you profess to support. You can learn from us, and we can learn from you. That's what it's all about, right? Or do you want another tool of PNAC running things?
And don't think that Hillary won't play footsie with those warmongers as she triagulates if we don't put up a united front. The progressive online community has become skilled at heading off the right's distraction/destruction techniques. We can show how it's done, and if you join with us maybe some of your good manners will rub off in return.
Number one. You never, ever just let a swiftboating lie go unanswered, even if it's incomprehensibly innane. The bloggers went right at the original swiftboaters while John Kerry let the issue fester for over a week -- only to mount a tepid and ineffectual defense, hoping it would go away. There were many things that turned the last election -- but that was a catastrophe.
You don't even let a trollish comment lie hanging loose on a comment thread. There are a lot more lurkers than commentors, many of whom leave an argument agreeing with the last thing they read. You don't just let people leave a blog post with a false or purposely twisted impression.
The attack on Amanda and Mellissa was a similar swiftboating personal scalp-hunt, something every campaign should expect. In fact, there's another one that surfaced today from a campaign staffer (supposedly) on our side of the fence. (I have a feeling it wasn't team Kucinich. Can't be. He doesn't have any staff.)
The length of this last controversy was measurable in hours -- yet I know that with the combined fact-checking and information awareness abilities of the blogosphere, the next bullshit attack will be handled even quicker and more effectively. (And yes, decry that foul language illustrates only ignorance -- but sometimes you just go ahead and call that long-handled-soil-manipulation-device a spade.)
That's what John Edwards will find indespensible about Shakes and Amanda, and all their buddies. We bring both the shield and sword of the truth, something that has been hiding in the closet the last 12 years. And most important, we bring it fast.
The decision is made, and whether they want to resign or not, Amanda and Mellissa cannot leave unless the Senator permits. They serve, after all, at the pleasure of the next President of the United States.
Get behind this, now.
powered by performancing firefox
Subscribe via Email
2 Comments:
That's what John Edwards will find indespensible about Shakes and Amanda, and all their buddies. We bring both the shield and sword of the truth, something that has been hiding in the closet the last 12 years. And most important, we bring it fast.
One thing John Edwards will find out about "Shakes" and Amanda is that particular albatross will heat heavier and stinker the longer he keeps it around.
Would they like me to write a glowing recommendation for the Hillary campaign? :)
Funny thing about that old (er..."ancient") metaphor, the albatross only became a burden once the mariner killed it. As long as it was flying around, doing it's thing, it was a good luck charm.
I think your crystal ball has a crack in it.
POST A COMMENT