Booman is dead right.

I choose that as my headline advisedly because last I heard Booman thought I was an ass clown and I am.  I’m a member of his site and I could have and could be contributing much more.

I”ve also stolen many good ideas from him about how to run a site and build community.

Still my suck up skills are insufficient to the depth of my depravity and I expect no thanks from this-

Perhaps because his wife is such an avid reader of blogs, Edwards’ campaign tapped right into our zeitgeist. He came out with our insight front and center. You want Edwards’ message? Here it is: ‘Fuck David Broder, fuck Joe Klein, fuck Chris Matthews, fuck FOX News, fuck Tim Russert, fuck Mitch McConnell, fuck Big Oil, Big Pharma, and Big Defense. We don’t need them. They won’t negotiate in good faith. They’re stacking the deck against us. And we can beat them by telling the truth and getting organized.’ That’s Edwards’ message, and that is the message we have internalized both through our successes and our failures.

What’s funny is that Obama is saying many of the same things, in his own way. The policy differences between Edwards and Obama are minimal. But Obama’s tone deaf to the blogosphere. And, as a result, the blogosphere didn’t trust him. Take Armando:

…we do not criticize Obama’s political style on aesthetic grounds; we criticize his style because we think it will not work to actually EFFECT CHANGE. We believe that despite his being touted as the change candidate, his political style is the one LEAST likely to achieve progressive policy change.

His ‘style’ will be ineffective. Why did so many of us conclude this? It’s because we have watched Tom Daschle, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi try to negotiate with the Republicans (in the minority, the majority, no matter) and it does not work. We have watched the Dems talk tough and then back down time and time again. We’re done with conciliation and we don’t believe bipartisanship is possible without first crushing the Republican Party down to a stump.

This totally encapsulates my argument on tactics of us against the Villagers.

Bravo Boo.

24 comments

Skip to comment form

    • kj on January 3, 2008 at 12:34

    Perhaps because his wife is such an avid reader of blogs, Edwards’ campaign tapped right into our zeitgeist.

    is a fighter who ‘don’t brook no bullsh*t.’ @;-)   Thanks, Ek. Read Booman, will read Krugman too.

    • dkmich on January 3, 2008 at 13:09

    Why the hell is the front page of dkos more like a cold, glossy magazine than a blog?  Why has the blogosphere sat the primary out?  Jerome, Chris and Matt are the only ones (that I read) where the primary has been front and center.  Ms. Laura practically apologies for supporting Edwards, kind of.   WTF is going on?  This is not the blogosphere I fell in love with in 04.

     

  1. His ‘style’ will be ineffective. Why did so many of us conclude this? It’s because we have watched Tom Daschle, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi try to negotiate with the Republicans (in the minority, the majority, no matter) and it does not work. We have watched the Dems talk tough and then back down time and time again. We’re done with conciliation and we don’t believe bipartisanship is possible without first crushing the Republican Party down to a stump.

    i’ll tell you this: if these clowns were trying, all along, to negotiate, and it’s the lack of that one skill that has our american backs up against the wall, then we are in worse trouble than i thought.

    it’s one thing to try and deal with complicity; it is quite another to deal with untapped amounts of inability. we are here because the Democrats can’t negotiate?

    i don’t think so. is Booman that much of an idealist? and all the other “in the know” bloggers? this is what they think? the democrats can’t negotiate? we’re here because dems elected with a mandate don’t know how to wield that mandate to get things done????

    holy shit. and WTF. and knock me over with a feather. then why are we re-electing any of them? somebody explain it to me… please.

     

  2. The blogisphere and the grassroots have been bypassed by the Democratic party because they can. They prefer a complacent resigned constituency that allows them to continue their dance. Close elections work for them. It allows the the extreme to become the norm.

    Obama’s calls for consensus is no shock to me he used to post appalling diaries at DKos before he became a ‘serious’ candidate. The two I remember dealt with how we should all get comfortable with the Christians and the second was about the benefits of the corporations, don’t bite the hand etc.  

    Unity 08 just flat out freaks me out. I’ve learned on the net and in my local party how politics work. I can see that this stinks. I’ve come to the conclusion that the political machine, status quo, whatever, doesn’t really want to increase the voter pool they are happy to just shuffle the the same voters from one side to the other and jive them into thinking it’s not us were helpless and we need to all get on the same page and unite. This is not reality this is a fake out. Bait and switch.

    Edwards isn’t being shuffled to the back of the deck for nothing. He has recognized out loud the heart of the matter and they don’t want this election to be about that. Were just supposed to be happy that the blatant fascists are leaving, but are they? What does this mean all this kiss and consensus talk? Once again the election will be tight and who ever squeaks in will define this as our new reality.  

               

  3. We often whine that the Democratic Party does not heed our wishes. Yet, maybe, we need to examine our own culpability in this matter.

    Women as a segment of the population are most strongly against the occupation of Iraq and comprise the majority of the support for Hillary Clinton even though she has stated that she will continue the occupation of Iraq.

    Obama was one of the biggest proponents of the idea that we need a bipartisan agreement to end the occupation (magical September) and for the last several months has campaigned further right than any other Democratic candidate. Even after his lack of concrete action on Iraq, his tirades on FIXING Social Security, his allowing an anti-gay minister an opportunity to spew his filth during his campaign and all the other right wing talking points he has embraced, a large segment of the Progressive community still supports him for president.

    Why should the Democratic leadership pay any attention to the Progressive community when too many of us are willing to reward those who campaign against everything we say we stand for.

  4. Makes wrong seems a viable preference.

    Have to say, Edwards is my choice for so many reasons including the labor, little people, two Americas, and those things he has focused on that are a huge part of the country and life in it that by-pass the other candidates who talk so much about things that don’t affect all of us unless we put on suits and ride elevators to get to our day job. Issues that affect even those people such as food and domestic violence, rural issues, standing up to the money and so much more.

    My impression is Edwards has been brave and started saying these things which resonated with people and caused the others to notice and start talking about them as well. So in that way he’s been a great leader in pulling the Democrats back to the left from the giant sucking right to show he can be the change so many are craving now. If he’s not the nominee I sure hope he’s chosen as the running mate since he’s pulled the others to be more people’s candidates which is to our benefit if they end up with the ticket.

    Not interested in being part of the E-Supporters over at the orange though. Some really unpleasant people.

Comments have been disabled.