Burnt Orange Report

Here is an appropriate response for you!

Andrew D -- Where Are Your Disclaimers?

Andrew D, I just read your sanctimonious and highly biased piece asking insidiously where Kos' and Jerome's disclaimers are... when I found out, only after reading all of your worthless drivel, that you are an employee of Texas state party. Martin Frost's home state.

I think it is completely unethical for you to post such a piece given your admitted bias (only at the end where people have to read the whole stinking thing). It is even more unethical for you to post it all the way at the bottom. Given that blogs are a new form, shouldn't you be holding yourself to some higher ethical standard? For shame, sir.

The subject of MyDD and dKos disclaimers has come and gone. No one is unaware of these facts who has been paying attention. You can cry all you want, but it won't amount to a hill of beans. No one is claiming to be a journalist. What you think? No one gives a shit. Take a freaking hike.

"If we ever want blogs to be taken seriously we have to live up to very high standards."

Who gives a shit about your sanctimonious standards. Go take a long walk off a short dock.

Speaking of standards, since you are so in favor of them, you should have listed your disclaimer up front before I had to read that pile of crap. Also, since you admit bias, I choose to completely ignore your whinings.

I'm going to quote from the post you just commented on:

When I talk about party matters I note (as I will note here) that I am an employee of the Texas Democratic Party and that nothing I say is meant to be representative of the views of the party, its staff, its chairmen, candidates, office holders, executive committee or contractors.

Wait a second... I did just say that! I didn't ask Kos to make it point 85 font and flashing lights- I said he should put it somewhere, and he doesn't. Its not a bash, its a suggestion.

Andrew D, still listening? Hope so, because michael in chicago has another great point about your unethical blogging.

"Why is it that they come to MyDD and dKos? After all, both the bloggers running these sites are obviously biased, have said they don't give a shit about academic arguments over ethics, and still continue to blog in a completely partisan way for the candidates they think would be the best for the party, progressive Democrats, and the blogosphere.

Hmmm. Why do they still come and post here complaining?

Maybe it's because these are just everyday Democratic blogs? If they think that, then they don't read much. That can't be it.

Could it be because they think people reading these blogs will agree with them? That would make them just stupid, so I dont' think that's it.

Maybe it's to get a good word in for their candidate. Of course, what better way then insulting the bloggers that people like to read. Nope. That can't be it.

Oh yes. These two blogs are two of the most highly respected and well read political blogs in the Blogogsphere. Even with their "ethics" lapses, the audience is here and remains here and is growing.

You come to dKos and MyDD and bring up this shit, because you are trying to hurt Kos and by extension, Dean. Why? Because these websites get attention that you could only dream about. So, you use this 'ethical' schtick in order to wage politics for your guy. Who you admittedly are biased for. Not too freaking ethical for someone preaching ethics. Hypocrite.

"Wait a second... I did just say that! I didn't ask Kos to make it point 85 font and flashing lights- I said he should put it somewhere, and he doesn't. Its not a bash, its a suggestion."

Yah, and I have a suggestion for you. See above. And I was bashing too. 'Case you missed it.

I would just say that I don't think that its necessary to put up a disclaimer for previous employment. One should put up one for current employment. Unless Kos or Jerome are working for Dean at the moment then I don't see the need for any disclaimer - and I believe that they've said that they have not done any paid political consulting work since last fall.

BTW, I have revised my ethical standard that you must live up to. You should now PUT A DISCLAIMER BEFORE EVERY COMMENT THAT YOU MAKE otherwise you will fall outside of my invented standard. For the sake of blogging, Andrew D, do it.

thanks for posting this

Sorry, but this is BS. Blogs aren't newspapers, they're blogs. They're not going to replace newspapers.

Neither Jerome or Markos are journalists, so they're not "very well calling themselves journalists"

I have to agree with Andrew D on this one. Kos and Jerome want to be media stars and that is at least part of their agenda. I'm no Frost backer ... quite the opposite, but Andrew's points hit home

I'm just sort of throwing this out there, but both sides are sort of right o this. Andrew's right, bloggers are journalists and we need to have some kind of ethical standard we can all agree on. Disclaimers are a good start, and most of us adhere to that. Andrew puts his disclaimer in every post, I put that I work for the Waco Tribune-Herald as a sports/news clerk in almost every post at the bottom in italics, and Markos had a disclaimer during the period he worked for the Dean campaign.

But we can't very well have disclaimers in every post for every campaign we've ever worked on or every person we've ever contributed money to or had business dealings with. For anyone who's been in politics for any length of time, that would soon become an overwhelming task.

And the other side is right, on that mark. Bloggers aren't, strictly speaking, journalists like we're used to. It's a new kind of journalism. It's journalism because we uncover truths and find facts, but we also express opinions. Ann Coulter is a journalist, even though just about everything she writes is made up and she's crazy. We're already ahead of her, so that's something to be thankful for.

But the point is, we all know the point of this is not just to inform but to motivate people as well. dKos and MyDD are trying to motivate people to want Dean to be chairman of the DNC. I see nothing wrong with that since no one is pretending it is objective news content when it's opinion. People who may happen on their sites will realize they are reading opinion, so I don't see any need to totally divulge all financial dealings with every Democrat.

Well... atleast someone is standing up for the Republican wing of the Democratic party. BTW, I'm biting my tongue really hard not to go on.

A question, actually (non-snark)... do we want to be taken seriously? I remember a quote from (I think) Ralph Reed, fundamentalist Christian/GOP organizer, which was roughly "I want to be invisible. You'll never know we hit you until it's all over." If what we're doing is less journalism and more activism/advocacy, why would we build up statesman-like credentials? Credibility is between you and your audience, and if you're not out for profit, that audience can remain small, focused, and narrowly-targeted.

For what it's worth, though, I see a strong parallel between your argument about Frost/Kos (where Kos makes a foolish remark in a marginal part of his own site, gets criticized broadly, and Frost withdraws his support) and the situation now between vocal Dem activists and Frost (Frost makes a foolish claim in his locally-targeted ad, gets criticized broadly, and loses part of his base of support). Frost probably got letters about the Kos fiasco, and now some DNC reps are getting letters that say "No Roemer or Frost" instead of just "No Roemer." I had forgotten Frost was one of the advertisers who took his ad down, but it does show the, hmm, "political ecology" of the online Democrats in an interesting way.

The treatment that Martin Frost has received from Dean supporters and DAILY KOS is unmerited.

I think that the attacks on former Congressman Martin Frost are also quite illuminating. As a result of DeLay's redistricting machinations, Martin Frost found himself fighting for his life in a distinctly unfriendly political environment. DeLay and his minions doubtlessly used the most scientific computer modeling techniques available to guarantee that Frost's new district (beyond even purple) would fall to Sessions. The only way for Frost to win was to put distance between himself and the Big City, Northeastern and West Coast Liberals that by and large dominate the Democratic Party and its machinery. Of course, Frost wanted the voters to know that he was a Texas Democrat, not an effete Northeastern Teddy Kennedy-style Democrat.

Martin Frost had to engage in some hyperbole even to make this case. He is a moderate Democrat, even Liberal on a few issues. Frost was not a Stenholm, Sandlin, Turner or Edwards. (Temporarily redistricted out of politics, Turner did not even run last cycle.) Martin Frost, like Lampson, was somewhat to the left of these four.

Nevertheless, Martin Frost had a choice. Former Congressman Frost could either stand and fight or surrender the playing field completely to the right wing Republicans. To his credit, he fought and fought hard. Like a number of candidates that DAILY KOS backed, Frost ran from the Democratic label and sought to distance himself from the Liberal Senator Kerry and the generally very Liberal Democratic leadership of the Congress, which is to say people like West Coast Liberal and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, not to mention Senate Minority Leader Daschle. Nonetheless, the Liberal tag still dragged Frost down to defeat, as it did in the case of DeLay's other intended victims, with the exception of Chet Edwards. We Democrats lost a lot of good Congressmen in Texas because of this devious, albeit highly successful, Republican strategy.

The Republicans used this same strategy, minus the DeLay redistricting, across much of Red and Purple America. Throughout the South, Democratic Senate candidates such as Castor, Tenenbaum, Bowles, and even John (not to mention John's erstwhile Democratic rival, Kennedy) had to find a way to try to neutralize the Liberal Democratic image with which the Republicans successfully saddled them. In Georgia, the Democrats couldn't even find a serious candidate to run as their nominee, even though the seat was held by a nominal Democrat, the renegade turncoat Zell Miller. This same insidious phenomenon haunted Democratic House candidates in Red and Purple districts in the South, Border States, Midwest, Great Plains, and Southwest.

DAILY KOS (indeed, KOS himself) is being extremely hypocritical in lodging such accusations against Martin Frost and, indeed, against Roemer. Quite a number of the candidates who received favorable treatment and even endorsements on the Kossack Blog found themselves obliged to use the same tactics as Frost did down in Texas. Chandler, Herseth, Carson and Knowles, all Kossack darlings, used these tactics, to a greater or lesser extent. Even Tom Daschle sought to make South Dakota voters forget just how Liberal he was and, incredibly, ran away from Democratic label on a number of issues.

Ironically, even now, the Kossacks are pushing a Bob Casey, Jr., senate candidacy in Pennsylvania. Casey is pro-Defense, anti-abortion, and pro-2nd Amendment. Casey would agree with Beinart, not with the likes of the Kossacks and MoveOn.Org. He would run as an updated version of a New Deal or Cold War Liberal, likely not wishing to have any association with the ultraLiberals and "Rad-Libs" over at DAILY KOS. In some ways, Casey might make Lieberman seem like a raging Liberal, even on cultural issues. It doesn't stop there. In Rhode Island, the Kossacks are pushing the prospect of a Jim Langevin Senate candidacy, apparently having tired of one of their favorite RINOs, Lincoln Chafee. Langevin is very much anti-abortion.

Dean supporters and Kossacks, should take a look at how the last presidential election went on a county-by-county basis, with counties going Bush shaded in Red. The resulting sea of Red, which engulfs virtually the entire geograpic expanse of the country, is rather startling. Last Sunday's Washington Post magazine shows just such a map, which illustrates the present state of the Democratic Party and the distance it has to go in regaining national political dominance, even if Kerry did much better in the actual numerical vote totals. The Democratic Party really, truly does need to re-learn the value of coalition building, a lesson that the Party knew only too well from FDR through LBJ. We need to practice Big Tent politics and not just talk Big Tent politics. The rhetoric coming from Dean supporters and Kossacks shows that many don't really believe in the Big Tent concept, except when it suits their convenience. There must be room in the Democratic Party for Liberals, Moderates, Doves, Hawks, Blue Dogs, etc. There must be room for Culteral Liberals (pro-Choice, pro-Gun Control, pro-Gay Rights, pro-Gay Marriage, anti-Death Penalty, etc) and Cultural Conservatives (anti-Abortion, pro-2nd Amendment, anti-Gay Marriage, pro-Death Penalty, etc).

Martin Frost is hardly a Bush-Lite Democrat. If Liberals regard him as that, then we really are in trouble. Take a look at Frost's ideological ratings, listed in places like The Almanac of American Politics 2004. In 2001 and 2002, Frost received ADA ratings of 85% and 95%, respectively. In those same years, Frost received ratings of 25% and 4% from the ACU. I am sure that somebody out there in the Blogosphere can come up with more up-to-date ratings. However, I doubt that they would be any more damning than the figures I just cited. Now, with regard to party-building, Frost picked up House seats for the Democrats in two consecutive cycles as DCCC chairman. Now that makes him, along with Simon Rosenberg, much more knowledgeable and adept at nationwide party building than Mr. Dean.

I cannot understand why Kossacks are so adamantly supportive of Howard Dean in his DNC bid. Dean has no experience, or very little, at party building. In Vermont itself, Dean was succeeded by a Republican in the State House. In the Vermont Congressional delegation, the only moderate is Jeffords, a former Republican and now an independent. Sanders is a Socialist, who simply caucuses with the Democrats because he regards them as better than Republicans. (Note: Sanders is right there.) Dean was a horrible presidential candidate, whose own campaign imploded, despite the massive amounts of money that he and Trippi raised on the INTERNET. Dean did not exactly show much success in promoting his chosen candidates in November. Dean hurt Kerry and Edwards in the general election by pulling them to the Left. This hardly bolstered the credibility of Kerry-Edwards.

Kossacks evidently think that the future of the Democratic Party lies in the West in places like Montana and Colorado. However, if Dean had gone out to those two states to campaign for the Salazar brothers and Schweitzer, his support probably would have been the "kiss of death." Schweitzer had to choose a Republican running mate, Bohlinger, to prove to Montanans that he was nothing like the Liberals of the National Democratic Party. Meanwhile, the Salazar brothers did not exactly cozy up to Senator Kerry. I think that they would have been even less thrilled if Dean had been the Democratic candidate for President.

Some Kossacks say that the Democratic Party should write off the South and other expanses of Red America. How are we going to regain control of the House and Senate if we do that, let alone regain national political dominance? Others may believe Dean's present rhetoric that the Democrats should compete in all 50 states, but Dean hardly showed an ability to do that in the primaries. Frost, Roemer and Rosenberg have shown far greater knowledge of Red State politics than Dean, who couldn't even carry Blue State Voters in the Democratic nominating contest. It is rather telling that Trippi himself prefers Rosenberg to Dean.

Why can't Dean supporters just make their case without calling Frost and Roemer Republican or Bush-Lite Democrats? I personally would prefer Frost, Roemer, or Rosenberg to Dean. However, I think it is now mainly a two-man race between Dean and Frost. If Dean and his supporters believe that their current tactics against Frost are going to work, then let them use those tactics. However, they should remember that centrist Democrats, pro-Defense Liberals and culturally conservative Democrats will be watching this race with a view as to whether the Democratic Party really is a Big Tent and whether they have a place in it.

I see that somebody in a comment on the post below provided updated ideological ratings for former Congressman Martin Frost. As I said, Frost is a moderate-to-progressive Democrat, not a Bush-Lite Democrat, as DAILY KOS alleges.

As far as DAILY KOS and ethics are concerned, if KOS were a journalist, then he would doubtlessly be guilty of ethical lapses. However, KOS is not a journalist, but a propagandist or pamphleteer of Cyberspace. KOS is the Michael Moore of the Blogosphere, which is itself a rather bad indictment of him, as far as I am concerned. Just as nobody should mistake Michael Moore for a true documentarist, nobody should mistake KOS for a journalist or an objective analyst of the American political scene.