Senator John Kerry’s official blog delinked Kos.
(via Andrew Olmstead, who gets blogrolled, sight unseen – I’m that impressed by the 133t b1ogging ski11z thus demonstrated.)
20 thoughts on “Well, put me in overshoes and call me a duck.”
Comments are closed.
Which is a meaningless and empty gesture since Kerry continues to use the site for fundraising purposes.
Mad props to ya, Thorley, but how’s about we give Kerry a chance to not screw this one up first? 🙂
Kerry did the right thing, period.
Ennh – to me it seemed like a dumb emotional comment from Kos, followed by a reasonably satisfactory explanation – unfortunately there’s not much space for d.e.c.s in this political environment, so of course Kerry will distance himself as much as necessary.
Something else occurred to me, if the Kerry campaign were sincere about distancing itself from some of the hateful comments about Americans being killed in Iraq that is coming from their base, why is there official campaign site still linked to the Democratic Underground?
there = their of course
why is there official campaign site still linked to the Democratic Underground?
So, if that’s the standard you want to employ, when do people start delinking LGF and Misha?
Look, notwithstanding my blogroll, I dislike DKos. (Indeed, I said so in one of my first posts on this website.) But I think the backlash has gone just about far enough. Kos said something stupid, his explanation is insufficent, and he’s not a good standard-bearer for his cause; move on.
This is getting nasty. His original comment was stupid and offensive, and the apology wasn’t quite sufficient but it was sincere & not a non-apology apology (“I’m sorry you were offended by what I said). Lots of people are bad at apologizing. And the original remark was in a comment to a diary post, not on the main site.
How do people feel about the connection between Bush and the homophobic bigots at the Family Research Council? Who say much more than one offensively stupid thing, never apologize in any way, and have more power and a much closer relationship to Bush than Kerry ever did to Kos?
Tac is sincere, I’m sure, but I find his reaction a little gloat-y, and overly influenced by his personal falling out with Kos. Instapundit and pals….well, you know what I think of them. Mark Kleiman comments are kind of ridiculous–Ann COULTER? One stupid & offensive remark does not transform someone into Ann Coulter, especially if they apologize–even if the apology is not as abject as it should be. Kevin Drum I more or less agree with, but I know SO many people who are bad at apologizing that it doesn’t really surprise me. And honestly, some people are so clearly motivated by a desire to take down a leading blogger of the left that I doubt a more complete apology would have made much difference.
Anyway. It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth all around.
Wassa “d.e.c.s”? Google was certainly not helpful in recognizing this.
I agree with Katherine’s take above, by the way, which is par for the course.
Wassa “d.e.c.s”? Google was certainly not helpful in recognizing this.
I agree with Katherine’s take above, by the way, which is par for the course.
Department of Environmental Conservation.
or “dumb emotional comment,” I’m guessing.
I took dKos of my RSS feed after this mainly because it made me realize, “Hmm, I haven’t actually been compelled to read anything on that page in months.” But Katherine is right. Calling what you said “stupid” is not a good way to stand by your words. Tac is popular with a wide range of bloggers because his heart’s in the right place overall and he’s not in an ideological shoebox, but he’s not exactly Mr. Congeniality.
Eh, and so ends the era of campaign ads on uncensored blogs.
I’m sure Tac is itching for Republican money. . and will probably get some until someone feels like digging through his archives, finding the stupidest thing he’s ever said, and then organizing a mail petition to candidate X saying “Do you really want your ads on the site of a person who said Y? PR disaster, I tell you!”.
The campaign against Kos is absurdly gleeful and. . let’s say. . asymmetrical.
I have to say, this is starting to piss me off. Glenn Reynolds has basically called for paving all of Gaza and the West Bank. Prior to March 11th, he was “joking” about how Europe needed more terrorism. All of this and no scourging from Tac and the rest of the crusaders. Yeah, it was a stupid damn thing for Kos to say, and it was damn stupid for him to say it. But Christ – if Little Green Footballs or Bird Dog were held to the same standard, nobody would link to LGF or Tacitus. This moved from chastisement to manufactured rage of the highest order to a partisan politcal stunt in a matter of hours.
Von wrote:
If Kerry (or his campaign staff) thought that it was important enough to make the gesture of delinking Kos from the official campaign site to seemingly distance themselves from his hateful comments about four Americans who were murdered in Iraq (while still raising money on his website), it seems rather odd that he would continue to link to a site like Democratic Underground which has a longer track record of putting out such vile garbage.
As far as the standard goes, I think that if the Bush campaign provided the same sort of links on their official website to a site that says “screw them” about Americans who are murdered by our enemies, then yes it too would be fair game for criticism.
“Which is a meaningless and empty gesture since Kerry continues to use the site for fundraising purposes.”
I don’t think the sort of ethic this implies should be followed by political campaigns and blogs is going to fly for very long.
Because if every single blog that fundraises for a candidate is to be scrutinized for possible offensive statements somewhere at some time, once, or one offensive link, pretty much no one will pass the test, no candidate can afford to do the exhaustive research and will take the risk.
Thus, pretty much the death of internet fundraising. That’s one possible outcome. A second is somehow limiting it to only Official sites. But I think the third is more likely: backing off from demanding Total Purity.
We’ll see in another year or four.
Atrios has an interesting comment on the purity issue and linking to sites:
Katherine wrote:
Actually it was pretty much a “non-apology apology” because at no point did he retract his “screw them” comment directed at the four murdered Americans and instead expounded on his earlier comments to attack both them and their motives for being in Iraq.
Putting aside the fact that there is no such thing as “homophobia” (disapproval of something or refusal to grant societal sanction and benefits to something does not equate fear), if we want to go through the array of “offensively stupid things” being said by groups close to the respective presidential candidates, I have no doubt that the Left would give us a lot more material to work with.
😉
Putting aside the fact that there is no such thing as “homophobia”
Your government disagrees with you Thorley:
Racial and Ethnic Minorities
This is only one example of government studies that take the existence of homophobia for granted.
Your saying it doesn’t exist doesn’t make it vanish.
A government study said that? Now, I don’t know what to believe!
Perhaps a good place to start is by believing that Thorley’s opinion on the matter hardly settles it.