Once AGAIN responding via diary because we cannot comment on front page posts.

When Josh Marshall says Obama should have campaign in Kentucky the last few days, how does he define the last few days? He had an 8,000 person rally on May 12 after all. So sir, update tomorrow on what you meant?

PS: The most likely source for the right wing talking point on this matter comes from Mark Levin over at National review.

Just a short blog to congratulate Josh Marshall on the birth of his new son Dan.

He seems like a good kid so far!

I don't like Matt Stoller. I've never liked Matt Stoller and I don't think I ever will. However, that doesn't mean he doesn't write or do a lot of worthwhile things and in that vein I'd like to draw attention to this post he made on Open Left. In it he details 5 things the Obama camp is doing:

Voter Registration
Obama Organazing Fellows
Money
Field
Message

He says that there are feelings and rumors that Obama is subtly discouraging people to fund third part progressive organizations and links this to Obama's attempt to control the entire party as a means of building a new political arena to engage in--that is, it's one of his methods of changing the tone. As Stoller says, he doesn't intend this as a criticism against Obama and points out that it is indicative that the Obama team really does "get it." Stoller wonders if it'll work on the Republicans the way it has to win him the Dem nomination, but what does it mean for the blogosphere right now?

Stoller sez: You know all that old-style Washington politics preventing real change?
 As hard as it might be to handle, in a lot of ways he means that those
of us who believe in partisan hard edged combat are part of an outmoded
system.

And again, I'll stress that he doesn't mean this as a criticism. This is the opposite basically, of the image Edwards portrayed. In many ways Edwards positioned himself as a blog favorite and never got enough traction to stick around. Edward's lack of success relative to Clinton and Obama helped me rethink several assumptions and made Clinton's "I am a fighter for YOU!" speeches largely ineffective on me.

There are a couple issues I'd like to bring up that Stoller does not address.

1. The Future
The one concern I have with this, is that while Obama himself I think is a good person to make this change, what happens after at most, 8 years when he is out of power? If the movement is tied into him as opposed to institutions it begins to crumble away. In many ways this is what happens with Clinton in the 1990s and led the disasters of the early 2000s. Now that disaster had to do a lot with the WTC attacks and the fear that most of the country felt could only be alleviated by handing over their rights/critical thinking abilities to Bush who does not know how to do anything. Stoller to his credit recognizes this at the end, when he says we need to figure out how to move the country in a more progressive direction. But it's a sentence at the end for now and he avoids stating the main point, without Obama whether in 2016 when he runs out of terms, of earlier if he runs into a bullet, what happens to this movement?

2. Were/Are the bloggers part of the problem.
Yes and no. Now there are certain bloggers who Obama wouldn't consider part of the problem, and I'm thinking those who focus more on policy (think Ezra Klein or Matt Yglesias) or new media (TPM) or are just too moderate to get riled up about much (Kevin Drum). But agitating blogs and I guess DailyKos is a good example, are a bit different. They are part of the problem, but they also weren't.

Now I realized that Obama considered us part of the problem back in January and late December and it took me a while to come to terms with it but I did. I did because I think Obama's way IS a better way, and with the ultimate challenge of Global Climate Change facing our species we can't afford to do anything less than the best we can. We were necessary in our time, when we were the only ones battling Bush, and had to provide 99% of Democratic backbone, but those days are starting to pass. In many ways we'd become a victim of our own success as we showed Dems that fighting does not equal defeat (think FISA, except for Steny Hoyer who needs to get taken out behind the woodshed by the Prog. Caucus but I digress). In many ways we were necessary to battle the VRWC, but with destruction of the government by the republicans they have lost a huge amount of power. They can continue to scream but it does far less good, and that means we can focus on something else than just fighting. In the end, I see the blogosphere as having bought time, and pushed aside enough space in the discourse for a candidate like Obama to emerge and try and completely change everything.

Frankly, I think it will be a relief when we don't have to spend our energy keeping our foot on the necks of the GOP anymore. I don't want to live like that, 51% keeping the other 49% down, until they switch. I would much rather live in the culture/country that Obama is trying to build. If we have to we can always pick up the fight again, but don't be too busy fighting that you miss an opportunity for real peace.

I point any visitors to this post by Josh Marshall on the mothership. In particular, take a look at this statement: "But in this case, as Editor & Publisher of TPM and TPMmuckraker,
I'm considering endorsing Dann's decision to stay in office at least
for a few weeks so that we have enough time to dig into this story and
wrench as much schadenfreude from it as possible."



Schadenfreude is taking pleasure in someone else's bad luck--and
apparently Josh Marshall feels a little of it, or enough to joke about
it.



But Dann is a fellow Dem.



I'm not calling for the kind of corrupt blindness that Republicans
routinely practice, but I find it offensive for someone ostensibly a
Democrat to take pleasure in the very public fall of a fellow Democrat
from office. Dann likely should go, But it's nothing but a black eye
for Democrats. Why does Josh feel happiness at this train-wreck when he
didn't seem to for Spitzer's fall?



As I've said time and time again, Josh Marshall needs to remember that
he is a Democrat/Lefty first and foremost. That's why the site did so
well. Look it's clear he's not that serious. But it still feels like a
betrayal and remains my greatest criticism of TPM.

Am I piling on the over-worked staff of the TPM media empire? Absolutely!

Why? Well I expect better, and I expected that TPM would be able to hold out as it was while the most heated Dem Primary in a generation (1992-2008) raged across the land, with important contests in all 50 states (except those states HRC loses, those don't count and allow me to welcome Vermont to the ranks of oblivion).

Okay, so technically what's wrong?
I constantly have to log in, I'm talking every 5 minutes.
I can't seem to get spaces in my profile, no matter what HTML I use.
I couldn't even access the "Blog Now" link until last week. I just got a blank page.

What's socially wrong?
Lots! Look, I tended to talk "smarter" here than at DKos or other sites. That was a function of the beautifully embedded way comments were structured. You could follow an entire conversation between posters much more easily than now and thus could really get into a tone of conversation.

And that's another thing. Columns. I liked the column format before. I could look and see, hey, who's clustered to the top today and what are they saying? It was an excellent way to keep a good handle on the articles of the day. Now those get crowded out. It's not easy to keep up and you have to dig a long way through, which, with the clunky interface takes sometime. It's difficult for a site to pull this off, Kotaku can do it. DKos can mostly do it, but things just get buried here now.

Finally why can't I rate someone? Just recommend--and not even comments?
I'm a narcissist about intellectual things, I craved positive ratings. I'd love to see that aggregate score and examine who recommended me for what and who thought I was an ass and troll-rated.  My theory is that the ratings were a huge part of why comments became conversations. When you scrolled and saw someone have a high rating on a comment you had the little bell go off in your head "Oh, lots of people think that comment is worthy!" and then you'd go read it and maybe join the conversation.

And you STILL can't have comments over on the mothership! I wrote to Sullivan about this earlier (as he had a poll 60-40 against comments) and it drives me crazy.

Well in conclusion about the only thing I really like so far is the profile pics that are attached the comments.

Look, I really liked TPM. I still do to a point. That's why I'm harsh. I want you to to better because I know you can, and above all, actually address the problems. Even something as simple as "Well I don't see it as a problem" is better than silence.