Hey, Netroots! How About Driving The Conversation On Iraq?

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 06:45:41 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Chris Bowers insists that the Netroots really do matter - but now about issues now - but about the 2008 election:

No matter the trend, and no matter the cause, I still think that this holds an important lesson for the progressive blogosphere: we still have the ability to drive the conversation on the 2008 Democratic primary. It was through the combined efforts of the progressive blogosphere that Clinton ended up going on record defending lobbyists. Once that happened, her comment received extensive news coverage, and has now been used as an avenue of attack by both the Obama and Edwards campaigns. During it all, we discussed the incident with our large, primary voting readerships.

Terrific!! The Netroots drove conversation on a "phony issue," as Matt Stoller concedes. Woo hoo! Hey Chris and Matt, how about driving a little conversation on ending the Iraq Debacle?

Oh BTW, the Netroots really did not drive the phony dispute on lobbying - it was MSM reporter Matt Bai who took over the "Netroots" Debate with this nonsense and created the MSM headlines the next day. Can the Netroots stop trying to pat itself on the back for a while and actually try to drive the conversation about something that actually matters? Like, say ending the Iraq Debacle?

Update [2007-8-9 19:51:49 by Big Tent Democrat]: Irony alert for the day, Bowers criticizing the MSM for, get this, not focusing on the larger issues:

I'm not saying that candidates should not be held to their words. What I am saying is that the media should focus on larger issues and clearer contradictions. . . . Why don't media sources focus on these larger issues and holes in all campaigns . . .?

Hey Chris, because the Netroots drove the conversation there. Nice job. It ill behooves you to complain when Tom Edsall focuses on the "lobyying issue" after you just celebrated driving it.

< Principles | Rudy's Morbid Campaign of Mendacity >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

TalkLeft's DMCA Infringement Notice Policy

Hey, Netroots! How About Driving The Conversation On Iraq? | 56 comments (56 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I can't get past the first paragraph (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by andgarden on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 06:58:20 PM EST

of the Bowers piece you link to in the update. I really can't bear to read him psychoanalyze himself the way he does.

Why don't we push to change course in Iraq? I can think of two reasons: 1. distraction (impeachment and 2008); and 2.insiderism (we have decided that we're really clever, and that trying to end the war in Iraq won't work). Of course, what's interesting is that the two reasons are somewhat contradictory.

I can't get past (5.00 / 2) (#6)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:04:04 PM EST

the cognitive dissonance.


LOL (5.00 / 2) (#7)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:04:29 PM EST

there's an unconfirmed rumor that bowers's screen saver is a mirror.

"oh, mirror, mirror on the screen, who's fairest blogger of them all?"


I am not one (5.00 / 2) (#9)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:07:33 PM EST

to criticize anyone else for narcissism.

I do not mind the, um, "self reflection," I mind the disingenuousness and the triviality of the focus.


: that too (none / 0) (#12)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:13:04 PM EST

but never pass on an easy dunk

LoL (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by Maryb2004 on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:24:09 PM EST

And then the magic mirror shows a picture of Jerome and says "Alas he is more fair than thee."

All blogger mirrors show Jerome, of course.


what happened over there (none / 0) (#25)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:32:19 PM EST

Its hard to keep up. I know the two started their own garage band, but I never looked into the why and when.


Don't know either (5.00 / 1) (#32)
by Maryb2004 on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:41:38 PM EST

It's a three man band though. Ya always gotta have a drummer while the other two sing lead.


: Heh (5.00 / 1) (#38)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:46:36 PM EST

: what I wannna know is... (none / 0) (#35)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:45:17 PM EST

..who are the band-aids? huh, huh?? wink, wink.

Sorry to correct you but (5.00 / 3) (#13)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:14:13 PM EST

last I looked, Senators were members of Congress and Presidential candidates in particular can really drive issues like . . . . getting out of Iraq.

I would also note that Chris Bowers does not write at the Great Orange Satan's place.

May I also point out to you that Markos and I remain good friends, as his reference to my sending him some info on the DLC in a FP post yesterday should make clear.

Please address the substance of what I write in future.

Martin and Lewis (none / 0) (#18)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:19:13 PM EST

Woo Hoo, to quote Krusty.

I can't wait for this year's Labor Day Telethon.

Now, who to cast as Sinatra. did someone say, MSCO!! of course!!

"come here, you..."


Phil Hartmann (none / 0) (#19)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:20:23 PM EST

Alas . . .


who (none / 0) (#26)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:33:47 PM EST

the guy from SNL who got shot by his wife.

dude...don't got there, please!!


Did the funniest Sinatra (none / 0) (#29)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:38:34 PM EST

of all time.


Ah, Yes (none / 0) (#33)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:43:47 PM EST

Now I caught your reference. Phew. for a moment there...well, moving along, "The Sinatra Group" is still LOL timeless.

Also, the multilingual Reagan with photographic memory micromanaging Iran/Contra.


: Zactly (none / 0) (#37)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:46:06 PM EST

Is this deep throat? (5.00 / 2) (#16)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:16:30 PM EST

look acitizen, if that is really your name, word processors have a "find" and "replace" function, they could have easy hit F10 and asked Obama most of the same questions.

I wonder what the Edwards supporters (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by Maryb2004 on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:38:19 PM EST

think of this? I hung out with a number of them at YKos and they speculated that the whole thing was a setup of Clinton planned by Edwards (with willing, but not overtly planned, help from Obama). So all the netroots did was provide the venue.

Of course the Edwards group give Edwards a lot more credit than he deserves on a regular basis. imo

Umm (5.00 / 2) (#31)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:40:18 PM EST

Matt Bai would have to be in cahoots then.

He was the one that made the issue.

It is a phony issue imo BTW.

And I thought Bai was a blot on the event.


You aren't thinking like an Edwards supporter (none / 0) (#34)
by Maryb2004 on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:44:02 PM EST

He was just waiting for an opening and Matt Bai supplied it.

Yeah, it's a phony issue but aren't all campaign issues phony? That's why I hated that the campaign started so early.


Ending the Iraq Debacle (none / 0) (#36)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:45:32 PM EST

is not a phony issue.


and I notice (5.00 / 1) (#41)
by Maryb2004 on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:50:54 PM EST

that not one of the candidates really talked about ending it. Until after they were elected, of course. So ending it NOW is not an issue of any of the campaigns and, thus, not a real campaign issue.

It's a real life issue. But only a campaign strategy. Sadly.


That's the poisonous rationale (5.00 / 1) (#43)
by andgarden on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:55:55 PM EST

behind every recent Democratic capitulation. "We'll fix it when we're in charge." Even if that's true, it's completely immoral.


: I don't disagree (none / 0) (#44)
by Maryb2004 on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:58:10 PM EST

But the Netroots wants to (none / 0) (#45)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:58:16 PM EST

discuss "lobbyists."

The Netroots sucks.


I don't disagree (none / 0) (#46)
by Maryb2004 on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 08:02:51 PM EST

They used to be about truth. Now they are about influence.

Whoever "they" are. I'm never sure if we agree on the "they".


All of us (none / 0) (#47)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 08:07:18 PM EST

and all of them too.


: When I was at YKos (5.00 / 1) (#51)
by Maryb2004 on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 08:15:07 PM EST

I concluded that all of them would be better bloggers if they had jobs outside the blogging home. It would give all of them some much needed perspective (and, as an added bonus, it would make all of them stop whining about ad revenue).
The rest of us are perfect of course.

Just K st. lobbyists. (none / 0) (#50)
by oculus on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 08:14:27 PM EST

I don't really think its a big deal (none / 0) (#42)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:51:26 PM EST

if hillary could survive partying with rupert in mid-town and bringing in Terry Mac-Fleas, then taking money from lobbyists crept into the law diminishing returns.


What happened to Chris Bowers? (5.00 / 1) (#52)
by Alien Abductee on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 08:24:53 PM EST

He used to write some perceptive stuff. Open Left is such an abject snoozefest - I don't think I've gotten through a single posting there since they started up.

Even I'm not so cynical (5.00 / 1) (#53)
by andgarden on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 08:36:55 PM EST

as to suggest that perhaps dullness IS the point.


: Just putting that out there :D (5.00 / 1) (#54)
by andgarden on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 08:37:17 PM EST

Haven't watched the YK2 Pres. forum, (none / 0) (#1)
by oculus on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 06:55:25 PM EST

but I closely read mcjoan's FP post and J. Feldman's FP post. Apparently no question was asked the candidates on Iraq war because that's been covered, stump speeches, etc. So--I agree with you.

mcjoan asked about defunding (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 06:57:42 PM EST

Nobody cared.

I wish (5.00 / 1) (#55)
by taylormattd on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 11:09:36 PM EST

she'd had a little more time to do some follow ups and make sure they all went on record with an answer to that question. It was sure exciting to hear somebody actually ask that question. Joan seriously kicked ass in that debate. Again, I wish she'd had more time . . .


Well, all of it except you ;) (5.00 / 1) (#58)
by Militarytracy on Fri Aug 10, 2007 at 06:16:22 AM EST

I still don't understand why the (none / 0) (#4)
by oculus on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 06:59:32 PM EST

forum was moderated by someone other than a DK front pager. Inferiority complex? Better chance of making the morning papers?


: joan (5.00 / 1) (#56)
by taylormattd on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 11:11:18 PM EST

was a co-moderator with Matt Bai. But I agree that he was totally unecessary. I'd rather Joan had the opportunity to run the whole thing.

: You got me (none / 0) (#5)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:03:33 PM EST

Big mistake.

: unlikely (none / 0) (#8)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:06:52 PM EST

Bai interviewing candidates = dog bites man.
Talking snowman = man bites dog.

sounds like ground rules (none / 0) (#11)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:11:27 PM EST

I heard McJoan say that on cpan, sunday morning. first thing that popped into my head was -"that's the price they paid, to get hillary."

really considering all the silly things clinton said in defending al from and the DLC in 2005/2006, the orange dudes were too easy to bury the hatchet.

at this point in time, Clinton need$ the gra$$root$ more than they need her.


mcjoan sd. either here on or DK that (none / 0) (#14)
by oculus on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:14:48 PM EST

the decision as to who would moderate was made by someone other than her.


I believe (none / 0) (#15)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:15:09 PM EST

No, I am sure, that there was no agreement reached to get Hillary to come.


you mean like on paper? (none / 0) (#22)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:27:15 PM EST

we no need no stinkin agreement.

Now everyone turn your case book to chapter 78, "Statute of Frauds" or how Buddy and Socks ate my copy of the NIE pre-invasion survey.


Heh (none / 0) (#24)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:30:50 PM EST

But seriously, I am quite sure no deal was struck.


true, the ground has been plowed (none / 0) (#30)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:39:24 PM EST

but that's never stopped them before.

Diary number π - why impeaching cheney would lead to the uncovery of box 13 in Ohio.


: Heh (none / 0) (#40)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:47:44 PM EST

I think she wasn't about to dodge DK and (none / 0) (#17)
by oculus on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:19:11 PM EST

be criticized for doing so. She seems quite spunky to me so I would expect her to show up even if she is all-too-aware she is the last choice of most of DK.


The third choice now (none / 0) (#20)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:21:09 PM EST

No?


Maybe. Kos is mellowing. (none / 0) (#27)
by oculus on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:35:34 PM EST

I meant the straw polls (none / 0) (#39)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:47:29 PM EST

But Hillary has pandered a good deal.

Remember, that is a pols' job, to pander.


: As I recall an AP article b/4 YK2 called (none / 0) (#48)
by oculus on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 08:11:37 PM EST

Kos the spiritual leader.

are you kidding. (none / 0) (#23)
by RedHead on Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 07:30:49 PM EST

Clinton's camp so wants to Sister Soulja DKos, but they don't want obama to raise twice cash as much as she does. if only because the ad buyers get a fee for placing campaign commercials.

they're not sending peter whatshisname over to dk asking people to sign petitions for the sake of principles.


The first day of school yesterday (none / 0) (#57)
by Militarytracy on Fri Aug 10, 2007 at 06:11:19 AM EST

did wonders for me. A brief trip to Destin to get stung by jelly fish also keenly sharpened my focus on avoiding things that are translucent yet sting the heck out of ya for like forever ;)