But this thread is not like that last example, which would be a completely made-up story.
I’ll agree that Doors has misrepresented what that blogger wrote, since it’s clear he or she is not talking about real impeachment (note the quotes around that word in the part the OP quoted from the blog), but just wants her ousted from her leadership role in the party.
I appreciate you’re having said that. I don’t remember you starting a lot of Pit threads, but there are plenty on the left who do, so you’ll have ample opportunity to call them out as you have done here.
Note to elucidator: It’s my impression that ThinkProgress does a pretty good job, but they are first and foremost an agenda driven organization. As such, they are pretty much guaranteed to play fast and loose with the facts, even if they don’t outright lie. I lost a certain amount of respect for them when they posted that blurb about McCain and the Discovery Institute, brought to our attention by **Diogenes **in this thread: John McCain has officially jumped the shark. They made it sound as if McCain were going to TDI to give a speech on Creationism, which was not even remotely the case.
What difference does it make? I often start SDMB threads based on news stories I first encountered in Democratic Underground or Free Republic or other politically-slanted blogs; it’s a fair practice I’m prepared to defend. If it’s something interesting and relevant, why wait until it shows up on the website of the Washington Post? It might never show up there anyway; that doesn’t make it unimportant.
Screw you, mind-readers of the SDMB, regardless of ideology. I’m tired to death of being told what I’m really thinking, no matter which rock it comes from under.
Yes, I hear about things on librul blogs and whatnot, and sometimes start threads about such things here.
But (a) if you ask, I’ll tell you.
And more important, (b) such blogs are pretty good about sourcing their stuff; they generally share the SDMB ethos of backing stuff up with cites. If there’s a story someone is pushing, I’ll go to the cited material and decide for myself if it’s any good. I’ve been known to make the occasional wrong call, but that’s my fault, either for my failure to vet properly, or my bad judgment, or whatever.
Finally, in response to your post @49, I’d say a blogger promoted by these people isn’t exactly nutpicking while their cred is to some degree attached to her. Pajamas Media’s star has long since faded, but they started off with a pretty decent splash, and lots of Big Names. The Kos diarist that Doors has brought to our attention was promoted by nobody but her/himself.
(TDK - WTF?? Nobody ever slips cassettes under my door with juicy stuff on them. Dammit. :))
It might be worth pointing out to him that he wasn’t relying on a particularly reliable source. Hard to do that if you don’t know what the source is, and whether it was just having a bad day, or whether it can be counted on to serve up stuff like this.
I do too. The difference is, does this story strike you as a news story? Should it matter to anyone at all? Do you think it will ever show up on the pages of the Washington Post? Should you ever have heard of Ward Churchill, to go back to a more prominent example?
Perhaps I’m in the minority in being uncomfortable with this kind of thing. That’s okay. I’ve spoken my mind on the matter.
I don’t really think it matters, which is how I interpreted Doors’ response. He never claimed that he read it first on Kos. I doubt he did. But again, so what?
I wondered when someone would make that connection.
BTW, RTF, when did Doors do what you claimed he did, re: nutpicking. He only attacked that particular blogger, and didn’t generalize about lefties or even Kossies (or whatever you want to call them).
Dude, it’s the Pit. If Airman Doors thinks it matters, then it matters, at least for ranting/venting purposes. If that disgusts you, stay out of the Pit.
Actually I think this story, such as it is, is fair game for GD, insofar as it illustrates the hard-line divisions over policy and strategy that affect every political camp, and how politicians can hardly ever measure up to the standards set by their presumptively sympathetic bloggers.
I think this gets into what I meant by coming by it honestly. Suggesting that he needed to vent implies some personal outrage, which is not only overblown , but he wouldn’t have even experienced had he not been fed this non-story in the first place.
Ah fuck it. Rock on with your bad selves. Don’t let me be the wet blanket on the venting of the heartfelt outrage regarding the opinions of … melvynny.
Do you think that means his name is Melvyn and he lives in NY? What a fucker! Get him!
Because if you’re not familiar with how Kos operates you might assume that something written in “a Daily Kos diary” represents a popular or widespread belief among Democrats. You might not realize that there are hundreds of new diaries posted at Kos every day, some of them by total fringe nutters. If it doesn’t make it to the “recommended” list it’s just some guy ranting by himself on a street corner.
He read a blog and Pitted the blogger. Unless you’re making the case that the blogger was trolling and we need to hire ourselves a telepath to find out his true intentions, I can’t see what better source he could possibly find.
It was unclear who had posted the work in question, hence who he was criticizing, without following the link, which was one of the problems.
To those familiar with the site, there’s Markos Moulitsas, who posts as kos, then there’s the other front-page bloggers, and then there’s the diarists and commenters, i.e. the rest of us. A “Kos blogger” other than Markos would presumably be mcjoan, or DarkSyde, or SusanG, or Devilstower, or one of the other front-page bloggers.
So I don’t think Doors hangs around DKos. It’s clear that he isn’t all that familiar with the site, and he got the story from someone else who’s not familiar with the site, and Doors not only couldn’t tell that this was some nobody, but was incapable of telling us in his OP whether it was just some nobody, or whether it was someone that Markos had vetted to be one of the front-pagers.
The “blogger” in question has posted a grand total of **two ** diaries on Daily Kos. The one in question and one back in October of 2006. I can understand pitting someone who’s actually a respected voice in the blogsphere like Kos himself or Atrios or Josh Marshall, but why single out some random nobody?
If **Doors ** thought the diary was stupid, why not just post a comment on the diary itself and unrecommend it? Why come here and link to it?
Back at you, bud. Once I see Door’s quit stooping to find the very last piece of dirt he can dig-up on anything and/or anyone remotely associated with the DP, then I’ll believe his so-called “change of heart.” All I keep seeing now is someone seething with contempt at the very notion that his political foes were right all along and trying to pick at all sorts of irrelevant nits to show just how bad both Parties are.
But hey! He is in the US Forces…with all the due reverence such a job appears to imply in your country.
You keep on saying this. Can you show me why you believe people here are responding differently to Doors on that account? (And if not, why the repeated non sequitur?)
Because I’m part of this community and I take part in discussions that interest me. If **Doors ** cared so much about this particular Kos diary, why wasn’t he debating it over there?
I could go on to Red State or Free Republic right now and find a dozen comments by random nutters even stupider than the OP. People calling for Henry Reid to be jailed for treason or Ted Kennedy to be executed. Political message boards are full of random clueless crap like that.
No, what happened is that **Doors ** read the diary somewhere else – here, maybe – and, not knowing how Daily Kos operates assumed that “Kos blogger” implied a level of endorsement that doesn’t exist.
