BuzzMachine

The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.

Pissing off your friends

108 comments on Pissing off your friends

Pissing off your friends
: Michael J. Totten says the Democrats are “mainstreaming the fringe,” just as the Republicans did a decade ago.

Or put it another way: They’re pissing off their most likely allies, not a good strategy (as they themselves have said frequently these days). Says Totten:

Wesley Clark and his rival Howard Dean are doing what the Republicans did twelve years ago – stirring up the fringe for votes and attention. They are letting loose forces that will not soon vanish, that cannot be accomodated, that will be their own undoing.

I know of so many people who have never supported Republicans who are shaken and disillusioned by what is happening to the Democrats. I don’t know of a single person, anywhere, who is moving the other direction.

The damage will last a long time.

He included me in that list.

108 responses to “Pissing off your friends”

  1. Tom Grey Avatar
    Tom Grey

    But Bush’s huge deficits are also making small gov’t Reps uncomfortable, with nowhere else to go (not even Harry Browne’s Libertarians, yet; not really).
    Winning as end in itself is becoming more important than the policy enacted after the win — for both Clinton (kudos for NAFTA and welfare reform) and Bush II. Perhaps it has long been so, but the Cold War was hiding it.
    The Dems are in danger of becoming the save-a-dictator from America party. NOT a noble job.

  2. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Totten has really not heard of any Republicans anywhere moving away from the increasingly psychotic and anti-democratic road their party is being taken down? Then he’s not paying attention. At all.

  3. Eric Deamer Avatar
    Eric Deamer

    I always listen especially attentively to the input of a pseodnymous poster who calls those who disagree with him “psychotic”.

  4. Dean Avatar
    Dean

    I’d venture that Judaism is in deep, deep trouble, since there exists not only “Jews for Jesus,” but also http://www.jews-for-allah.org/

  5. Yehudit Avatar
    Yehudit

    Dean, if that’s not a non-sequitor can you explain how? Or maybe it’s deeply ironic and I’m just not getting it.
    Anyway, I fisked the Jews for Allah site last year, and the guy who runs it is a bit of a schlep.

  6. Yehudit Avatar
    Yehudit

    Anyway, I belong on that list too, although I was never a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat with a big D, and have been put off by Dem race-card politics before. But I never voted for a Republican, and I will this year.

  7. brb Avatar
    brb

    Dr Slack.
    Do you have any evidence that the wet behind the ears creator of that site has ever even voted Republican? Has he published pro-Republican pieces in the past? Otherwise, he is just a crank, similar to the red-necked Alabama auto mechanice who says he is going to boycott French wines and send his wife to Rome shopping instead of Paris.

  8. hugh macleod Avatar
    hugh macleod

    The British Labour Party got taken over by the far-left in the 1970’s. Result? They were out of power for 18, count ’em 18 years.
    18 years of nuthin’ just to keep a few quasi-Maoists happy? Why bother?

  9. Dean Avatar
    Dean

    Yehudit:
    My “thought” process (such as it was) is as follows:
    Dr. Slack claims that, because there are Republicans supporting Dean, this suggests that there are “Republicans anywhere moving away from the increasingly psychotic and anti-democratic road their party is being taken down”.
    If that is the case, sez I, then the fact that there are “Jews for Jesus” and “Jews for Allah” should be viewed as evidence that the Jewish faith is in trouble, somehow.
    Personally, I wonder just how many Republicans have come out for Democrats (never mind specific Dems), and suspect, as w/ Jews-for-Jesus and Jews-for-Allah, that this is both a truly fringe piece of the larger group, and that the mere existence of such groups, in and of itself, does NOT denote that the main body is necessarily somehow acting in a bizarre (never mind “psychotic”) manner. But I didn’t enunciate that latter part, so my apologies for being opaque.
    Hope this clears up the previous comment?

  10. EB Avatar
    EB

    I don’t think Dean is McGovern, I think he is Barry Goldwater.

  11. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >Do you have any evidence that the wet behind the ears creator of that site has ever even voted Republican? Has he published pro-Republican pieces in the past?
    Fans of irony take note. Do you have any evidence that Jeff Jarvis has ever voted Liberal? Has he published pro-Liberal pieces in the past?
    What a rube.

  12. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    Y’know, Robert, do you find that when you talk to people at parties, they have to go to the bathroom a lot?
    You’ve made your point… and made it… and made it…
    Do you have anything else in life to say? Or are you that sad?
    Can you prove to me that you have a life? Because I haven’t seen any evidence of it here. And if you can’t prove you have a life, then clearly, you must be dead…. Or you’re just pretending to be.

  13. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    “Psychotic and anti-democratic” refer to inconsistencies like this (noted in a column by another disillusioned Republican, Daniel Lee):
    “I’ve been a Republican my whole life but when you pass a so-called Patriot Act that authorizes the government to hold American citizens suspected of terrorist acts in confinement, indefinitely, without legal representation … how is this patriotic … how does it ensure freedom and liberty … how does this display reverence for the Constitution?
    “I’ve been a Republican my whole life but when the only thing you change about our airport security screeners is who pays their salary, how does this make us safer and how does this relate to our belief in smaller government?
    “I’ve been a Republican my whole life and I have heard radio commentators talk about how “those who are willing to trade liberty for security deserve neither liberty nor security.” Well, if this is so true when speaking of gun control, how is it so untrue when pushing our need for the Patriot Act and racial profiling?”
    Lee’s sentiments are far from uncommon. The truth is, large numbers of moderate Republicans are feeling increasingly alienated by an Administration that apparently has no time for their views or values. If “psychotic and anti-democratic” is too spicy for you (this on a blog that just finished comparing Howard Dean to a thumb? f*cking please… but I digress), try “dishonest, contradictory and of questionable competence” instead. The damage will last a long, long time.
    Now Dean, you think it doesn’t imply anything bad about the GOP per se that the moderates are leaving their ranks? But then, there are probably specific policies that could piss off the moderates and tempt them to leave a party’s ranks. My guess is that would be your defense of Totten’s post, now wouldn’t it? Your “Jews for Jesus” comparison would be just as silly a response to him as it was to me.

  14. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Oh, and about Totten’s piece itself: this no different from Dems seizing on Bush’s out-of-context quote about “dictatorship” as a way of claiming he wants to rule America as an emperor. It’s game-playing, not serious debate.

  15. Eric Deamer Avatar
    Eric Deamer

    Doctor Slack:
    Wow, one allegedly former Republican Middle School teacher and driving instructor in Seattle is thinking about changing parties. I’m convinced. That’s all the evidence I need of a widespread trend.

  16. Swopa Avatar
    Swopa

    You’ve made your point… and made it… and made it…
    As opposed to Jeff and Michael Totten, who I guess are just posting the “Boo hoo, they’re driving us out of the Democratic party” theme for the first time. :-)
    Welcome to blog utopia, where more people can talk past each other more quickly and more repetitively than ever!

  17. Dean Avatar
    Dean

    Doctor Slack,
    My point is simply that the existence of web-sites CLAIMING to be GOPers-for-Clark/Dean/Bernie Sanders does not prove:
    1. That there is some kind of substantial shift away from the GOP (as one person asked above, what is the evidence that the site is even started by the GOP, never mind that it represents anything substantial at all);
    2. That there have always been some folks who are contrarian. To flip Robert’s repetition on its head, if there are GOP folks who’ve never liked a GOP candidate (and now prefer Dean or Clark), what makes them representative of the larger body?
    Now, one COULD say that Jeff Jarvis and Michael Totten might be every bit as unrepresentative of liberals—that, in fact, most liberals are quite happy w/ Howard Dean/Wesley Clark/Dick Gephardt. That might be true—the point here is that I fully recognize that possibility. The polls in November will, I suspect, resolve this issue. (And, no, I’m not one of those predicting a blow-out for the GOP.)

  18. Roger L. Simon Avatar
    Roger L. Simon

    Sure anecdotal reports of changed positions by one blogger or another are just that… anecdotal. But Doctor Slack and others on here are not facing reality. Almost all the recent polls show Bush trouncing any of the listed Democrats in a landslide. Something has gone wrong here for the Democrats. Doctor Slack and the others may choose to deny this reality, but if they continue to do so, they will never change it.

  19. Sandy P. Avatar
    Sandy P.

    I want to make a point when arguing about our deficit – econopundit has put up a few times our deficit v. Western Europe’s based on 1990 figures reported in 1997.
    What’s not being mentioned – and would be very interesting during call-in shows to those who harp on the deficit – what about pension liabilities?
    Western Europe was in worse shape than us, and if new numbers are available, might still be even worse. But everyone focuses on the deficit.
    GOVERNMENT DEBT AND PENSION LIABILITIES AS PERCENT OF GDP (1990)
    ===net conventional debt=======net pension liabilities
    CANADA===52================121
    GERMANY==22================157
    ITALY====100================259
    UK=======27================156
    US=======35=================90
    —
    We might be doomed, but we have a lot of company.

  20. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >You’ve made your point… and made it… and made it…
    Do you have anything else in life to say?
    This is an entirely new topic. I realize you right wingers are slow, so I’ll rephrase my question.
    Why does brb want evidence of that person really being a Republican who is turning away from the party yet accepts without evidence that you are a Liberal who is turning away from the party?

  21. Steve in Houston Avatar
    Steve in Houston

    Any early bets on who will be the Democrat Pat Buchanan in Boston this year?
    I nominate Al Sharpton.

  22. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >Almost all the recent polls show Bush trouncing any of the listed Democrats in a landslide. Something has gone wrong here for the Democrats. Doctor Slack and the others may choose to deny this reality, but if they continue to do so, they will never change it.
    A democratic candidate has not been selected yet, so any polls vs. Bush are indicative of nothing. Why, because Dean supporters probably don’t answer when asked who would win an election between Bush and Clark and vice-versa. However, once there is a decided candidate, all democratic supporters will answer the question and that will show a truer picture of the level of support for Bush and the democratic nominee.

  23. Swopa Avatar
    Swopa

    To follow up on Robert’s point, I’d add that Roger is not only exaggerating current polls but showing a poor grasp of history, in terms of how meaningful such early-election-year polls are.
    Almost all the recent polls show Bush trouncing any of the listed Democrats in a landslide.
    In early June of 1992, Clinton was third in the polls (behind both Bush and Perot), with only 24% support. Five months later, he was elected president.
    Things change, Roger. Especially when lesser-known non-incumbent candidates get the opportunity to make their case directly to the voters.

  24. Eric Deamer Avatar
    Eric Deamer

    I realize you right wingers are slow
    I may not know what a “real liberal” is, but I recognize a real troll when I see one.

  25. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    Almost all the recent polls show Bush trouncing any of the listed Democrats in a landslide.
    Define “landslide,” with specific eye towards the Bush/Brown polling numbers.

  26. Angus Jung Avatar
    Angus Jung

    “As opposed to Jeff and Michael Totten, who I guess are just posting the ‘Boo hoo, they’re driving us out of the Democratic party’ theme for the first time. :-)”
    On their own blogs. If they start going to your blog and trying to convince you that you’re not what you say you are, then you might have a point. :-)

  27. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    Robert:
    I’ve decided you’re not really Canadian. Canadians have a sense of humor. You don’t. Canadians are not bores. You are. Ergo, you cannot be a Canadian. I expect proof of your Canadianism! Or else you are just a fraud, just an Icelander trying to wear the Maple Leaf!

  28. John Thacker Avatar
    John Thacker

    While an interesting enough point, Mr. Jarvis, any discussion should take into account that a decade ago Republicans obtained one of their greatest electoral triumphs ever, taking the House of Representatives and the Senate, the former having remained in Democratic hands for 40 years.
    Now I know he’s referring primarily to 1992, but he also claims that the GOP’s performance in 1992 put him and others off the Republicans for many years. How can one necessarily reconcile this with the election results of 1994?
    I agree that a blog with many entries and a pronounced discussion is more persuasive than a generic “Xs for Y” homepage as a piece of anecdotal evidence, and possibly of a trend, however.

  29. Mithras Avatar
    Mithras

    Totten has taken Clark’s quote out of context, distorted it, and then from that spun an indictment of the entire Democratic party.
    Here is the link to Clark’s statement in its entirety. (Don’t be afraid, it’s short.) Clark was pretty clear that he was criticizing Bush rewarding Halliburton and other American companies that have connections with the administration. That is the context of Clark’s remark, “I’m one of those people who doesn’t believe in occupying countries to extract their natural resources.” Totten then says, “Wesley Clark is obviously implying that some people do think we ought to invade other countries to steal their resources.” So, Totten goes from occupy in Clark’s statement to invade, and voila! Clark must be endorsing the it’s-all-about-oil accusation.
    This is just dishonest and wrong. Why is Jarvis perpetuating it?

  30. John Thacker Avatar
    John Thacker

    The other problem, “Doctor Slack,” is not only has the Bush Administration steadfastly refused to engage in racial profiling, even where it might be useful, much to the annoyance of some conservatives. The security screening process is undoubtedly more annoying and invasive for ordinary, unlikely to be terrorist Americans than it would be otherwise because of this reluctance to engage in racial/ethnic/age-based/religious profiling. OTOH, many do believe that that is an acceptable price to pay for upholding neutrality and ideals. In any case, that particular criticism is false.
    Many of Bush’s moves that have upset conservatives are in fact moderate moves, moves to the center. Like Clinton, Bush has governed as a moderate, especially since his first year or two in office. (Of course, this doesn’t mean that the two are identical on all issues– while on some issues Bush is certainly to the Right and Clinton was on the Left, on others Clinton tacked to the Right enough and Bush compromised to the Left enough that Bush may have ended up to the left of Clinton.) Clinton certainly upset many liberals (and leftists) but because of moderate policies; that definitely does not prove that he was on the far left.

  31. brb Avatar
    brb

    “Why does brb want evidence of that person really being a Republican who is turning away from the party yet accepts without evidence…”
    Where did I do that? Why do you answer a question with a question? (Hey, he started it.)

  32. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    Mithras: Thanks for the link. But after rereading both Totten and the Clark statement, I don’t think I agree with you on this. For the benefit of all, here’s the entire statement to which he links:

    Clark Comments on Latest Misguided Bush Efforts to Isolate U.S., Reward Halliburton and Make U.S. Less Secure
    Today, General Wesley Clark said, “I’m one of those people who doesn’t believe in occupying countries to extract their natural resources. I think you buy them on the world market. We need a success strategy for Iraq that will end the American occupation by putting an international organization in place, have United States forces report through NATO, and work to turn this problem back to the Iraqis.”
    Clark Advisor Chris Lehane added, “George W. Bush’s rewarding of campaign contributor Halliburton makes it clear for all to see that he is of big oil, for big oil, and ‘buy’ big oil. At the end of the day, he’s putting the special interests before our national interests. General Clark is campaigning on a New American Patriotism to put the national interests before the special interests.

  33. Mithras Avatar
    Mithras

    So, Jarvis, what does “Latest Misguided Effort” in Clark’s 12/10/03 press release refer to? The invasion?
    It’s taken completely out of context. There may be other evidence that Clark and Dean are “mainstreaming extremism” – but this ain’t it.

  34. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >I’ve decided you’re not really Canadian.
    And you are right to question it. I haven’t offered up any proof that I’m Canadian, you only have my word on it. But if you want proof, just go to my blogsite. It’s there. Including the brand new Paul Martin Ass-Kiss-O-Meter.

  35. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >Where did I do that?
    Um, above where you said, “Do you have any evidence that the wet behind the ears creator of that site has ever even voted Republican?”

  36. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >This is just dishonest and wrong. Why is Jarvis perpetuating it?
    For the same reason he is pretending to be a liberal. To make liberals look bad.

  37. EB Avatar
    EB

    I wrote a java script that removes the word “liberal” and relaces it with “Chalupa.” I recommend everyone use it, since that way people who want to say they are chalupas can be, and people that aren’t, won’t be and then everyone can stop arguing about it.
    I didn’t really write that java script, but I wish someone would!!! :^)

  38. Swopa Avatar
    Swopa

    EB,
    Taco Bell and the NBA have a promotion in a lot of cities where if the home team scores 100 points or more, each fan gets a free chalupa.
    So I don’t think it’s a good idea to promote confusion between “chalupas” and “liberals.” :-)

  39. Susan Avatar
    Susan

    A Presidental candidate telling a citizen to shut-up is extreme. It is the Presidents duty to support freedom of speech not stifle.
    The fringe thinks it is okay to have a dictator for a President. Not very liberal of them.

  40. Angus Jung Avatar
    Angus Jung

    “So I don’t think it’s a good idea to promote confusion between ‘chalupas’ and ‘liberals.’ :-)”
    Yeah, the difference is that I can eat chalupas, whereas liberals can eat me. (Just kidding! Although feel free to use that, liberal-haters.)

  41. Swopa Avatar
    Swopa

    It is the Presidents duty to support freedom of speech not stifle.
    Been to a “First Amendment zone” lately, Susan?

  42. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    When Reagan told the moderator to shut up because he bought the microphone, it was bold and decisive.
    When Dean told a heckler, after giving the heckler three minutes to make his point, to let Dean talk, it was Dictatorial.
    The difference between the incidents?
    A. The moderator was supposed to be there. The heckler was not.
    B. Dean is a Chalupa, Reagan is not.

  43. Andy Freeman Avatar
    Andy Freeman

    > I haven’t offered up any proof that I’m Canadian, you only have my word on it.
    Why would a Canadian care whether Jarvis claims to be what passes for “liberal” in the US?
    > But if you want proof, just go to my blogsite. It’s there.
    Really – where? What posting/feature/etc couldn’t have been done by a non-Canadian?

  44. Mithras Avatar
    Mithras

    Totten has updated his post, and continues to miss the point. Clark was obviously referring to the Halliburton no-bid contract and the scandal over the sale of gas at inflated prices. To leap from that to saying that Clark is claiming that the motive is to steal Iraq’s resources is stupid and wrong.

  45. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    There may be other evidence that Clark and Dean are “mainstreaming extremism” – but this ain’t it.
    I agree.
    And thanks to those who disposed of the “landslide” stuff already.
    I agree that a blog with many entries and a pronounced discussion is more persuasive than a generic “Xs for Y” homepage as a piece of anecdotal evidence, and possibly of a trend, however.
    The Republicans for Dean blog, linked second in my original post, averages over a hundred comments per thread. I’d say that qualifies as “pronounced discussion.”
    My point is simply that the existence of web-sites CLAIMING to be GOPers-for-Clark/Dean. . . does not prove . . . That there is some kind of substantial shift away from the GOP
    No, in and of itself it does not. But if we do accept those sites as bona fide Republican sites (and we have no particular reason not to; certainly their former GOP allegiance is no more questionable than the ex-liberality of Totten’s gallery of fellow travellers), they certainly call into question Totten’s credibility as someone who, when he says “I don’t know of a single person, anywhere, who is moving [toward the Democrats],” should be taken as any kind of barometer.
    I don’t pretend my claim is any less anecdotal than Totten’s — it’s not as though I’ve done a scientific survey on the matter — but it’s not especially more so.
    That there have always been some folks who are contrarian.
    And other folks who are curiously selective about applying that label.

  46. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    Andy King Of The Obtuse:
    Yes, he could be trying to fake you out and pretend to be a Canadian by posting things on his blog that only a Canadian or someone obsessed with Canada would post. Of course, in cyberspace, he could be a dog.
    He is posting a lot of stuff that leads people to believe that either he is trying really hard to appear Canadian, or that he actually is Canadian.
    Our propriator wants us desperatly to believe he’s a Chalupa. So desperatly, that he’s posted protests that he is a Chalupa over and over. What he’s never done, which is distinctly different than the so-called-Canadian, is actually post something that leads us to believe he’s a Chalupa – except for his repeated insistance that he is, in fact, a Chalupa

  47. Scott Partee Avatar
    Scott Partee

    … and could easily have included me, too (had he known I exist, of course).

  48. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >Really – where? What posting/feature/etc couldn’t have been done by a non-Canadian?
    What Hipocrite said.

  49. hugh macleod Avatar
    hugh macleod

    Tony Blair once said a wonderful thing (this was before he became Prime Minister in ’97):
    A journo asked him why his policies weren’t more left wing (i.e. more akin to the politics of the average Labour Party activist);
    “Look,” he said, “if we win the next election we’re going to have to govern the whole country, not just the people who voted for us.”
    Right now the far left of the Dems are controlling the Democrat agenda, and it’s going to cost them dearly. The average, middle class, hard-working, reasonable, moderate voter has no interest in a candidate that lets his platform be taken over by the “in your face” activist, right or left.

  50. Swopa Avatar
    Swopa

    Our propriator wants us desperatly to believe he’s a Chalupa
    Well, they do say, “You are what you eat.” And I believe he’s already posted a confession along these lines . . .

  51. Andy Freeman Avatar
    Andy Freeman

    > He is posting a lot of stuff that leads people to believe that either he is trying really hard to appear Canadian, or that he actually is Canadian.
    And that’s proof that he’s Canadian….
    I note that my first question went unanswered. I’ll repeat it.
    >> Why would a Canadian care whether Jarvis claims to be what passes for “liberal” in the US?

  52. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    Hugh, you’re behind the spin curve. Dean is too liberal is last weeks dispatch from the RNC. He’s pessimistic and angry now – try to keep up.
    Beyond that, other than opposition to the War on Iraq, which you must clearly see as an acceptable, mainstream position, the same as I see support for the War on Iraq, what exactly is too liberal about the direction the Democratic party is taking? Is it, perhaps, the deficit reduction? Perhaps Clark’s tax plan is too progressive? Perhaps it’s the belief that people deserve affordible healthcare, but also doctors that don’t cut off the wrong leg?
    Just trying to figure out what it is that we’re too liberal on.

  53. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    What liberal economic or social welfare policies does Jeff believe in? It’s clear to me that not supporting liberal foreign, social or economic policies makes one not a liberal. It’s not exactly clear how being interested in American politics makes one not a Canadian.

  54. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >Right now the far left of the Dems are controlling the Democrat agenda
    I keep hearing this nonsense, but nobody has yet given any examples of how the far left have hijacked the Democratic agenda. Care to try?

  55. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >Why would a Canadian care whether Jarvis claims to be what passes for “liberal” in the US?
    I don’t care. I’m merely pointing out that his claims that he is a liberal are empty and dishonest.

  56. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >And that’s proof that he’s Canadian….
    Yes, as far as the blog world is concerned. Whether or not I am one in real life is another question. But that is irrelevant, since I’m not questioning what Jeff is in real life, I’m questioning how he portrays himself in the blog world–which is as a right winger.

  57. Dean Avatar
    Dean

    The comments here have left me very curious:
    Is simply supporting the war enough to make one a right-winger? If so, then are John Kerry, Dick Gephardt and John Edwards right-wingers (since they voted to support the war)? Conversely, then, shouldn’t NOT supporting the war make Dean a Lefty (or at least a left-winger)?
    And, if Howard Dean can be described as moderate (or at least have his supporters challenge those who doubt that to “prove” he’s a Leftist), then what is the basis for saying that Jeff Jarvis is a “right-winger”?
    Finally, why does it matter whether Jeff Jarvis, on his own blog, makes himself out to be a conservative, a liberal, or a moderate? Especially if, as Robert says, it’s not even a matter of whether Jeff Jarvis-the-person is a liberal but Jeff Jarvis-the-blogger??

  58. Angell Avatar
    Angell

    Clark is often taken out of context–no one really knows where he stands–he wobbles like a spinning top–what he says today will be retracted tomorrow–he is a liar! And an idiot who almost started WW3.
    January 12, 2004
    THE RETIRED GENERAL
    Tape Shows General Clark Linking Iraq and Al Qaeda
    By EDWARD WYATT
    ANCHESTER, N.H., Jan. 11

  59. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Is simply supporting the war enough to make one a right-winger?
    No, but if that support is fervent and intransigent enough it often results in behaviour indistinguishable from a right-winger.
    , if Howard Dean can be described as moderate . . . then what is the basis for saying that Jeff Jarvis is a “right-winger”?
    Carping at the lead Democratic candidate is obviously in the interests of those whom that candidate is likeliest to challenge, which is the (increasingly) heavily right-leaning GOP.
    why does it matter whether Jeff Jarvis, on his own blog, makes himself out to be a conservative, a liberal, or a moderate?
    In the grand cosmic scheme of things it doesn’t matter one whit; Jeff Jarvis could be a purple antelope for all I care. But since he has seen fit to aggressively claim the title of “liberal” and has posted repeatedly (and shrilly) to that effect, the subject is fair game, and it’s worth wondering why he’s doing so and if the claim is legit.

  60. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >Finally, why does it matter whether Jeff Jarvis, on his own blog, makes himself out to be a conservative, a liberal, or a moderate?
    Because in the context of the blogoshpere, it is dishonest to claim you are a liberal and then set about bashing liberals. That sort of thing reeks of a right wing propaganda tactic.

  61. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    No, simply supporting the war is not even remotely enough to turn a liberal into a right-winger.
    However, if your only policy position is supporting the war, and you spend the rest of your political time bashing liberal candidates, then yes, you are a right-winger.
    John Kerry, Dick Gephardt and John Edwards all have other policy positions that are liberal.
    Kerry has proposed a Health Care plan that would allow all Americans access to the FEHBP plan. He has proposed guranteeing health care for every child by extending the CHIP program up to 300% of poverty level incomes for children, and extended to the 6 million single and childress adults who are below the poverty line. Bush proposed that people not be allowed to get more than $250k from their doctors insurance companies if someone cuts the wrong arm off.
    Gephardt believes in a tax system that would fully fund a comprehensive health care plan for the middle class. George Bush believes in a tax system that allows the wealthest Americans to shoulder less and less of the financial burden of running the country.
    Edwards proposes an education plan that doubles the $3bn that the Federal government invests in teacher training, and proposes a nationwide program that would pay for the education costs for students who make a five year commitment to teach where qualified teachers are in short supply. Bush proposes that we vigorously test all students all the time, and in the event that students fail the tests, the school they came from is defunded. He then failed to fund the increased spending that went with this initative.
    Dean, along with all the 5 real candidates for the Democratic Nomination are all moderate-liberals. He is center-left, but he is not “far left”
    Why does it matter? Because with the “I used to be a liberal but…” bullshit that we see all the time, the debate is poisoned. If he really “used to be a liberal but…” then he’d be talking about something liberal, instead of just spouting RNC talking points. The debate is poisoned.

  62. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Clark is often taken out of context–no one really knows where he stands–he wobbles like a spinning top–what he says today will be retracted tomorrow–he is a liar!
    He changed his mind about Iraq and al-Qaeda, obviously. A lot of people who believed Bush’s earlier claims have done the same. I’d love it if Clark could simply admit this — if there were a political climate that wouldn’t immediately spin such an admission as, oh, “reinventing himself” (remember that phrase?) — but unfortunately there’s no capital for him in doing so. When Bush has stood up manfully and said, “okay, I was full of shit about WMD’s and I screwed the pooch on international diplomacy, not mention planning the damned war,” then I’ll get exercised about Clark.
    And an idiot who almost started WW3.
    Funnily enough, the first people to fling the term “idiot” are often the last who should be using it. Leaving that aside for now, though, I’m curious as to where you get this little tidbit.

  63. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    People who were against the humanitarian effort in the Balkans believed that a run-in between Clark and his Russian counterpart over a landing field almost turned into World War III. They are, of course, reading propiganda from Genocidal lunatics, and can be comfortably ignored. It’s a smear with the level of credibility of “Clinton ran drugs from Mena.”
    Queue wingers arguing that he actually ran drugs from Mena.

  64. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    Robert: Go haunt another house. You are the most incredibly boring, humorless, unsubtle, insipid human being who has ever crossed my path. I’ve just had a half bottle of fine cabernet and so you are now getting the blunt and very liberal me: Buzz off, bozo. You think I should invite you into my house to insult me? Wrong. Leave. Please. If you had the slightest sense of humor or deftness of thought or language about this, I’d enjoy the tussle. But you bore me. Silly.

  65. Swopa Avatar
    Swopa

    Note to self: Cabernet goes with chalupas.

  66. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    Swopa:
    We may disagree but at least you have a sense of humor. Bless you. Prost! -jeff

  67. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >Leave
    Why don’t you just do what any other right winger would do and ban me from posting comments.

  68. Angell Avatar
    Angell

    Even Clinton believed what Bush does. I don’t think Clinton was a stupid man, or a liar about WMD–I believe the same with respect to Bush. I’m not convinced the weapons were not shipped to Syria or Lebanon or Pakistan. After all he had lots of time, thanks to France and Russia and Germany. And if he had no weapons, why not allow inspection and end the sanctions?
    In congressional testimony in March of 2002 Robert Einhorn, Clinton’s assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation, summed up the intelligence community’s conclusions about Iraq at the end of the Clinton Administration:
    “How close is the peril of Iraqi WMD? Today, or at most within a few months, Iraq could launch missile attacks with chemical or biological weapons against its neighbors (albeit attacks that would be ragged, inaccurate, and limited in size). Within four or five years it could have the capability to threaten most of the Middle East and parts of Europe with missiles armed with nuclear weapons containing fissile material produced indigenously

  69. Floyd McWilliams Avatar
    Floyd McWilliams

    “Why don’t you just do what any other right winger would do and ban me from posting comments.”
    Trolls: You can’t live with ’em, and they get a pleased passive-aggressive look on their face when you shoot ’em.

  70. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Trolls……….We can live without them.

  71. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    No, Robert, I’m hoping you have the good sense any social being would to move on — not to another site but to another topic. So, how’s the weather up there?
    Look at the picture. You’re dealing with a real person. Me. You think people like having other people walk up to them with insults? I don’t.
    Do you know why I turned from pacifist to war-monger? Because I watched people die on September 11th. I was damned near one of them. I saw the bastards come to kill us. I saw the need to protect my children from them. This is very real to me. It’s not just some topic for online blathering. I was a ’60s pacifist — I would have moved to Canada if not for a high draft number — and I had to face my generation’s Hitler face-to-face on that day and realized that I had an obligation to protect my own from this evil. I also then realized that I could not fight just to protect my own. I saw the killing fields of Iraq and saw our obligation to protect them from the evil we had allowed to stay in power. This is not mindless chatter to me, mate. This is life and death, good and evil, right and wrong. So please stop treating this as some glib exchange of snipes. Move on to intelligent discussion of something or just move on.

  72. KJ Avatar
    KJ

    OK Canuck……..Your banned.

  73. Angus Jung Avatar
    Angus Jung

    “Funnily enough, the first people to fling the term ‘idiot’ are often the last who should be using it.”
    Same goes for “psychotic.” Or “Doctor.”

  74. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    > I saw the bastards come to kill us.
    None of them were from Iraq.

  75. Robert Avatar
    Robert

    >Trolls
    From page 8 of the Republicon playbook.
    When all your ranting and raving have still not persuaded your opponent to your point of view, label them. Suggested terms are America-hater, Saddam appologist, terrorist supporter, troll.

  76. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    Robert: Go f yourself.
    I breathed the debris of death that day. I saw what mass murder is first hand.
    I see now the mass graves of the dead in Iraq.
    Our dead are their dead and their dead are our dead.
    Mass murderers are mass murderers.
    They do not need to be the same. They still still.
    Bin Laden killed people in front of my eyes and he must be caught.
    Saddam killed people in Iraq and he was caught.
    This is a humanitarian issue. This is a liberal issue.
    And now, please, just shut up.

  77. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    Robert: Before you comment again, please go here and listen.

  78. Angus Jung Avatar
    Angus Jung

    “When all your ranting and raving have still not persuaded your opponent to your point of view, label them. Suggested terms are America-hater, Saddam appologist, terrorist supporter, troll…”
    …neocon, right-winger, rube…

  79. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    Well said, Angus.

  80. Angus Jung Avatar
    Angus Jung

    “Well said, Angus.”
    Yeah, this Robert fellow is a bit of a joke. Not worth getting worked up over.

  81. Jeff Jarvis Avatar
    Jeff Jarvis

    No, Robert just left a couple of incredibly offensive comments. That’s that.

  82. Michael J. Totten Avatar
    Michael J. Totten

    Robert has an activist mentality. That’s why he doesn’t understand.
    Jeff is an intellectual. The mentality, and the priorities, are completely different.

  83. Jim C. Avatar
    Jim C.

    Posted by Robert at January 12, 2004 03:19 PM:

    >This is just dishonest and wrong. Why is Jarvis perpetuating it?

    For the same reason he is pretending to be a liberal. To make liberals look bad.

    Liberals don’t need Jeff Jarvis to make them look bad. They’re succeeding brilliantly on their own.

  84. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    Was it but last week that Jeff wrote “Swopa:
    No, I just ignore fools.”
    Yes, in fact it was.
    Yet, there are about 70 comments of valid material, but what get’s responded to? The Lowest Common Denominator.
    A thousand times you have been asked to tell us what you think about social and economic policies. A thousand times ignored. Yet a troll says you reek, and he is instantly accorded a score of responses and a front page banning.
    Whatever.

  85. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Even Clinton believed what Bush does.
    There was plenty of disagreement among knowledgeable people — most importantly the former UNCOM inspection team, who had the most direct knowledge — about the nature of the WMD “threat.” It was easily the issue that would have won me into the war camp if I’d been convinced: so, when it looked like Bush & Co were trying to pass off speculation as fact, and like key problems with pro-war case about the “unaccounted for” weapons and the usefulness of inspections weren’t being addressed, I got suspicious. Soon, suspicious enough that I came to largely disbelieve the WMD rationale.
    Here’s the thing. If I had those suspicions, I’m willing to bet that many of those who claimed to believe Bush had them, too. See, there was a lot of political gamesmanship going on in the runup to the war. 1) Some people were trying to present the Bush team a face-saving way out of the corner they’d talked themselves into; 2) others were eager to cash in on the war as a way of levering money out of Washington as “allies;” 3) others were just afraid of Washington, or ideologically attached enough that they felt they best served American interests by giving Bush the benefit of the doubt. My money is on Clinton as an example of 1).

  86. Dan Z. Avatar
    Dan Z.

    Jeff, I have to say that your story of being there on 9/11 is very moving, but it also profoundly encourages me to discount your politics. When people are too close to a tragic event, they often end up with large emotional deficits, and spend the rest of their lives being controlled by them. They lose the ability to look at the situation the way most people do and see the big picture.
    I don’t think I’m saying anything new or shocking here — if your kid gets killed by a drunk driver, suddenly drunk drivers become the biggest focus in your life. But there’s a tendency to overcompensate to fill these emotional needs. And when I read your writing, I often see the same thing happening.
    I wonder if you’ll take this as an attack, because I really don’t mean it as one. Your reactions are more than understandable. But you do bring up your 9/11 bona fides often as a way of stifling criticism, and I thought I’d let you know that, to me, it doesn’t help your cause. It just reinforces in my mind how personally traumatic the events of 9/11 were to you, and how you’re still too wounded to be politically trustworthy as an analyst.
    Again, I hope this doesn’t sound too harsh. But I know I’m not the only one out there thinking this way, and I thought you should know.

  87. angell Avatar
    angell

    Personally, I can’t think of anyone more qualified to speak against terrorists than those directly affected by their actions. It’s easy to preach tolerance when they haven’t driven planes into your tall buildings or incinerated people you didn’t know. I’d bet we’d all have a different point of view if we were directly affected. 911 should be considered as traumatic by the entire human race and we should not forget 911. 911 made me realize what a naive fool I was prior to that date–and how foolish we were to keep allowing attack after attack and looking the other way. It just made them braver. People like Jeff need to speak up. Political correctness can be deadly.

  88. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Political correctness can be deadly.
    In all kinds of ways — especially when there are parts of the political body who are trying to pimp that atrocity for preset partisan agendas. I will never forget watching a GOP senator on CNN standing in the shadows of the collapsing twin towers, corpses still smoking in the rubble behind him, declaiming about how it was time to stop spending money on education and build a missile defense. I couldn’t believe my eyes, or my ears.
    No-one is likely to forget 9/11; however, that event cannot be expected to produce a magical policy consensus about how to combat terrorism and hatred. It would deeply dishonour the dead of that day to allow them to be used as a bludgeon by special interests or for politically correct causes — and if “politically correct” means anything, it has to apply to the RNC spin machine and their prescribed reading of events as much as it does to anyone else.
    I respect Jeff’s feelings on the matter, but I expect all parties of the debate to be able to recognize that 9/11 can impel very different explanations and different policy solutions. That’s basic. That’s democracy. Al-Qaeda can attack people, but only we can dismantle democracy.

  89. Richard Cook Avatar
    Richard Cook

    Hipocrite:
    I think the 250k limit in the plan is for punative damages. If the doctor cuts the wrong arm off the victim still gets medical care for life.
    Also the problem I have with the Democratic proposals for most things is that they always revolve around only looking at solutions from the “what government can do for you” angle. No mention of any free market remedies for problems (and there are some good ones out there). Why not be able to send your child to a Catholic school that is giving good education and paying for it with a voucher. The seeming rejection of private solutions because they are from the private sector leaves me cold.

  90. thinker Avatar
    thinker

    Jeff – would it be possible for you to take some of the empathy you felt for 911 victims and think about how people in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan feel when THEIR loved ones are killed or maimed by American bombs?

  91. angell Avatar
    angell

    Democracy can only offer freedom as long as it is not used against others with equal rights.
    A society should give us all freedom but at the same time protect us from others who abuse it. Most democracies are extremely reluctant to “address” in a political or legal sense, religious groups, political parties or ethnic groups from within their society, simply because their freedom is guaranteed by its very constitution. And because there are those who scream racism and bigotry.
    As soon as these groups’ behaviour becomes politically destabilising or a clear and proven danger to others (like, say, a terrorist threat)….then that may need to change. What good is freedom if it allows your enemies the freedom to operate in your country unhindered??

  92. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    What good is freedom if it allows your enemies the freedom to operate in your country unhindered?
    “What good is freedom” indeed.
    Well, some might say that freedom is what distinguishes Western civilization and makes it worth fighting for. That view is perhaps oversimplistic: most people are more likely to fight for their homes, the people they know and the culture that’s familiar to them, and freedom doesn’t prosper long in an atmosphere of insecurity. However, given that our freedoms are with good reason the single most universally admired part of Western culture, I think we should be stubborn in the extreme about giving them up and look hard — damned hard — at anyone who proposes we should do so. Any other approach basically hands terrorists a veto on whether or not free societies get to exist; that, to me, is completely unacceptable.
    “Liberty for security” folks had better be able to bring solid, fact-based reasoning to the table about why their proposals make us safer, how their proposals enhance or detract for our freedom, what specific issues about the specific event they’re responding to that these proposals address. Very little that has happened in the so-called War on Terrorism thus far even remotely fills this bill. There’s precious little evidence, for example, that 9/11 can be attributed to our “freedoms,” but plenty of evidence that it can be attributed to disastrous bureaucratic and intelligence failures that need fixing.

  93. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    And thinker: good question.

  94. Angell Avatar
    Angell

    Nothing ticks me off more than 19 two faced murderers who had often tasted and enjoyed Western decadence, blended into our tolerant multicultural societies, were generally accepted and learned quickly how to exploit our credulity,our freedoms,and the democracratic principles that they pee on. They used our freedoms to help them kill. They thanked us by stealing planes and killing our innocent. If scum like that deserve the benefits of democracy and freedom then we have a problem. I refuse to make it easy for terrorists–if it takes a dozen Patriot Acts, I am for it. I have nothing to hide. I want to make terrorism very very hard for the little guys that may have a desire to meet some virgins and hit tall buildings.

  95. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    See, I’m trying to understand, but the first, instinctive response I have to rants like that is: “you’re a capitulator. You believe these people deserve a veto over freedom, and you’re willing to endorse that as long as it gives you a macho feeling of ‘fighting them.’”
    I’m not saying that response is right or wrong, but it’s there.

  96. angell Avatar
    angell

    No, the capitulators look the other way like they did for many years prior–and the attacks got bigger and better . And the capitulators blame the victims–not the poor oppressed rich murderers.
    I love to read stuff like this:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14205-2004Jan13.html

  97. Hipocrite Avatar
    Hipocrite

    If you have nothing to hide, please post your complete medical history, along with your insurance records, social security number, home address and phone number, and last three tax returns.
    If you don’t want me to have that information, why are you comfortable with Chief Wiggum having it?

  98. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    No, the capitulators look the other way like they did for many years prior–and the attacks got bigger and better
    And until Bush got into office, were usually foiled. No PATRIOT Acts necessary, just good law enforcement.

  99. angell Avatar
    angell

    — demanded the release of Sirhan Sirhan, the Palestinian assassin of Robert Kennedy, and others held in Israeli and European prisons. When President Nixon refused to negotiate, the terrorists executed two American hostages, Ambassador Cleo Noel and George Moore, first allowing them to write wills and last letters to their families.
    Black September was a terrorist arm of Yasser Arafat’s Fatah organization and operated directly under his orders. Israeli intelligence later provided the U.S. State Department with a tape recording of Arafat telephoning Khartoum from Beirut and personally giving the leader of the hostage takers the code word for killing the Americans: “Cold River.”
    That was 28 years ago. And for the next two decades Americans remained the targets of terrorism. While all the attacks on them took place abroad, hundreds were killed in hijackings of ships and planes, in kidnappings and car bombings.
    –The first major attack on American soil, the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, was blamed on Egyptian terrorists whose blind spiritual leader, Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman, was jailed in the United States two years later. But bin Laden soon joined forces with the Egyptians to create a “World Front for Jihad against Jews and Crusaders.”
    –Then followed the bombing of two American embassies in Africa, the attack on the USS Cole in Yemen and, finally, the horror of Sept. 11.
    Foiled, my little butt–you must have your head in a sandy dune if you believe that! Or you truly are a hypocrite. It is time to stand up to these murderers–the poor oppressed folk that they are.

  100. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    I’ll let the more moronic moments of loudmouthing in that reply go — this time — because in a way you have a point. The successes in anti-terrorism of the Clinton era were accompanied by a pattern of escalating terrorist attacks against American targets. (The ’93 bombing was, in fact, also an attempt to collapse the towers.) So I can be accused of oversimplifying.
    To put it more precisely, pre-PATRIOT Act era anti-terrorism measures thus far appear to be no less effective than those being attempted by the Bush Administration. If anything, international terrorism appears to have worsened. So, I’m not convinced of the seriousness of people who point at others and call them “hypocrites” and yap about “standing up to these murderers” as though theirs is the only conceivable solution. It doesn’t impress me.
    Now, if you had a coherent response to assessments like this, we could have a constructive discussion.

  101. angell Avatar
    angell

    Well, you tell me how we should appease the little terrorists and make them stop blowing things up! While you are at it impart your knowlege to people in Ambon,Kosovo, Armenia, Sudan, Nigeria, Pakistan, Lebanon ,Kashmir, Philippines,Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Algeria, Bangladesh, Lebanon, Iran – there is hardly a country that is not plagued by terrorism. Is US policy responsible in all these places?? Or is it something else–the real root cause?

  102. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Well, you tell me how we should appease the little terrorists and make them stop blowing things up!
    Sure, after you tell me when you stopped sexually molesting hamsters. Hear that sound? That’s the last dregs of your credibility circling the drain.

  103. angell Avatar
    angell

    Only after you tell me why you were in a coma
    for some 30 years, prior to 911.
    These are Bin laden blowings–I could go into the coverup of Flight TWA800, the Lockerbie bombing, the plane that nose dived into the Atlantic as the pilot screamed praise allah, but I’d have to write a book. And of course we appeased and looked the other way as we proclaimed mechanical problems and forgot to mention the bombs which caused them. And I still wonder about Tim McVeigh’s Iraqi buddies and how they vanished into thin air.
    1990
    The Gulf War and flow of overseas troops into the Middle East fuel bin Laden

  104. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    but to say terrorism was foiled prior to 911
    I direct you to the following statement from a prior post:
    To put it more precisely, pre-PATRIOT Act era anti-terrorism measures thus far appear to be no less effective than those being attempted by the Bush Administration.
    No-one is denying the existence of terrorism over the past 30 years. However, there’s no evidence thus far that Bush’s tactics are a better idea than what’s previously been tried.
    I’m not ruling in advance that anything Bush has done must be bad. I’m asking for a serious and detailed discussion of how effective the War on Terror has thus far been. It isn’t happening, by and large, and it needs to start happening.

  105. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Oh, incidentally…
    And I still wonder about Tim McVeigh’s Iraqi buddies and how they vanished into thin air.
    Conspiracy theories are not your friend if you wish to be taken seriously. Here’s a little rule of thumb: when you hear a rumour from WorldNet Daily, Fox News and Bill O’Reilly, a rumour is probably all it is.

  106. angell Avatar
    angell

    Got you Dr. Slack–only leftist rags for me from now on–BBC, NYT, Ha’aretz, LA times, CBC, ABC, Michael Moore, etc. I will be brainwashed in leftism.

  107. Doctor Slack Avatar
    Doctor Slack

    Yeah, the BBC and CBC are “leftist rags.” That statement right there speaks volumes about what’s really behind conservative “media bias” chatter.

  108. angell Avatar
    angell

    Al-Jazeera editor leaves for BBC
    The station was criticised for its coverage of the Iraq war
    The Arabic satellite TV channel al-Jazeera says its editor-in-chief has submitted his resignation.
    According to an al-Jazeera spokesman, Ibrahim Helal said he had had “a tempting offer” from the BBC.
    You will really love that Baghdad Broadcating Corp now.