loved this one: (4.00 / 1)

And are there people who actually like ponies and pie, and don't just vote for those things in polls to be ironic? Again, I'm going with yes.

and loved the whole post.  thanks for this.

---

by: seabrook @ Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 16:30:31 PM CST

Yes, sure (4.00 / 4)

Especially if you consider the blogopshere all the people who comment and read and rec, etc. And it is, to some degree, but there's also a core of blogs (I'll call it the blog establishment, just to really annoy you) that includes this blog, Kos, TPM, MyDD, Atrios, Huffpo, Firegog etc, etc, you know which I mean, which tend to link to each other and echo each other points, almost never blasting each other, disagreeing only in the gentlest terms.

So yeah virtually every viewpoint can be found in the sphere, but there is often uniformity among the big bloggers. On Lieberman, for example, you were all united, and I'm glad you were, but diversity of opinion? Not really.

---

by: david mizner @ Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 16:33:53 PM CST

My only criticism of the criticism has been hair trigger reaction (4.00 / 1)

From which I was then criticized for!

Of course, I then criticized the criticism, of my criticism, of Bower's criticism of Obama.

But I think it ended there, because at that point, I fainted.

At any rate - for these 'early criticisms', it would be nice to take the various published reports, and then add a little rider, "if this is true, THEN", rather than going by the published report.

Final truth though, is that while the netroots was on Obama's side, we were tangential to Obama's election.  We didn't put him in power, though we helped.

As such, it seems to me there are two ways to go about criticism - and it would be nice to see a multi-level, nuanced, approach.

1. Criticism that goes after dimunition of a progressive policy goal.
2. Criticism of Obama, BASED ON HIS OWN STATED PRIORITIES.

For example - Lieberman.  It was never a stated policy that "Lieberman go down".  He has certain policy goals, and to that extent, OF COURSE he is going to follow through on those goals.  And not waste energy in other fights.

---

by: JC @ Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 16:43:52 PM CST

hmm (4.00 / 6)

Not sure it is fair to expect that people only criticize Obama on the basis of his stated positions and platforms.  Those on the right of Obama are certainly not going to hesitate to pull him rightwards of his stated positions.

To pull from your Lieberman example, he never had a stated position at all on what should happen to Lieberman during the campaign.  Is it wrong then to criticize the position he did take?  In the abstract, I can't see why.

Besides, he did spend energy on this fight - he took a position.  His Senate Lieutenants (Kerry, Durbin) went to work whipping for him.  

---

by: Daniel De Groot @ Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 16:59:24 PM CST

[ Parent ]

its really no different than (4.00 / 2)

the conversations that go on in every day americans lives whether it be at the coffee shop, the salon, the teachers lounge, or wherever -- the blog-osphere is merely a wonderful place for the sharing of views, thoughts, comments, and the like - regardless of which side you are on...it's the biggest town hall forum ever and it certainly has its pros/cons but its power has been witnessed and that is clearly evident...

---

by: nicholasclaxton @ Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 16:51:27 PM CST

Evidence (4.00 / 1)

I want actual evidence to discuss, not the crap that has shown up here and around the blogosphere (with FDL being one of the worst sites lately). I want to discuss actual policy proposals and actual statements from actual members of Obama's new team.

---

by: Semblance @ Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 16:58:20 PM CST

because they have nothing (0.00 / 0)

better to do? or they aren't busy enough?

i think it's safe to assume that
1. certain team members are on the sites reading/interacting
2. the obama team knows what the bloggers are blogging
3. the obama team has sent numerous messages just this week for feedback for that very reason. (change.gov)i have filled out 2 in the last 48 hours sharing directly via "his team" my thoughts
4. one should be weary of security measures given the internet.

---

by: nicholasclaxton @ Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 17:16:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

another fine post (0.00 / 0)

on a day of fine posts at openleft.


my web log.

---

by: matty fred @ Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 16:59:59 PM CST

Death by META (0.00 / 0)

Sorry for the meta, but could we possibly have less meta? Granted, this post seems to be addressing the excessive meta. Unfortunately, the only way to stop the meta is with more meta! But that means more meta-meta about the meta!

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!

---

by: fwiffo @ Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 17:05:25 PM CST

WTF (0.00 / 0)

is "meta"?


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

---

by: SpitBall @ Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 10:48:12 AM CST

[ Parent ]

It's a thing (0.00 / 0)

Wikipedia article about meta. It's best explained by example.

If you're blogging about the subject of blogging (instead of about technology or politics or some other topic), that would be meta-blogging. If you're having a discussion about discussions, that would be a meta-discussion. If somebody's whining, and you complain about their whining, that's meta-whining. If you're thinking about the nature of thought, that's meta-thought. If you're writing a computer program that writes or modifies computer programs, that's meta-programming. Etc.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!

---

by: fwiffo @ Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 20:40:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks (0.00 / 0)

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

---

by: SpitBall @ Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:52:45 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Some people in the progressive blogosphere (4.00 / 7)

I think some people in the progressive blogosphere are instinctively more comfortable with being on the outside rather than on the inside.  Some of us have grown so accustomed to attacking the palace, we've never had the opportunity to see our team in the White House and hold the majority in both houses of Congress.

Offering criticism of a Democratic administration is all together like building a new muscle, as is accepting valid criticism.  Part of the Republican downfall can be directly attributed to their unwillingness to offer any criticism of their own.  We can't afford to make that same mistake.  We must learn how to flex our muscles of criticism without attacking each other, while we must also learn to accept valid criticism when it is offered.

---

by: Kane @ Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 18:11:43 PM CST

less straw, more pie (0.00 / 0)

it's true that you can find examples of most any kind of behavior somewhere in the blog thing.

what's annoying is when people take an example from Minor Subcategory A and use it to characterize all the people in Large Category B. "i asked an Amish guy for money once and he wouldn't give me any. therefore, everyone who won't give me money is Amish." uh, no.

PS i could do without the ponies, honestly. but that's what coalition-building is all about.

not everything worth doing is profitable. not everything profitable is worth doing.

---

by: tatere @ Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 19:32:15 PM CST

It's true of course . . . BUT (0.00 / 0)

I'll bet if you gathered together all the conservative Republican evangelical fundamentalist gay rights advocates, you could fill up a basketball coliseum, or at least a big gymnasium.  The presence of exceptions, however, doesn't mean that the overall group isn't rather homogeneous--when the overall group is large enough, the exceptions can be pretty numerous even if group homogenuity is high.

That's groups in general.  As for the left-blogosphere, one thing that is distinctive about this group is that it tends to intra-communicate more than do most groups:  after all, its entire existence is captured within a technology that greatly facilitates communication.  And to the extent that the blogosphere, or any part of the blogosphere, forms a closed communications circuit, homogenuity naturally will be multiplied within the circuit.  That's what closed communications circuits do.

As an erstwhile, and long-time, Hillary Clinton supporter, I noticed what seemed a distressing and illogical amount of anti-Clinton homogenuity in the left blogosphere, and particularly in the great orange sector of same, some years ago.  It was eventually reflected in, for example, one poll last spring that showed that kossites were only 1/52nd as likely as the population at large to opine that Clinton was the Democratic candidate best equipped to handle American foreign policy.

I don't think TGOS' readership was formed of persons who got together because of their Clinton-aversion out in the real world and then decided to form an online community to discuss Clinton badness.  Rather, I think kossites were a random group of progressives who were on the average left-inclined enough and young enough  to initially be somewhat less Clinton-supportive than the Democratic Party as a whole--but that's not saying all that much.  I think that 1/52nd probably started out as 1/2 or 1/3 or 1/4 and then got subjected to the echo chamber.

JMHO, but there are some things about the sameness of many left-blogosphere views that I find a bit alarming. The existence of a very large group that is 52 times more likely than the population at large to accept Proposition X kind of gives me the willies.  Might this group grow?  Might 52 go to 300?  Proposition X to Propositions 1-999?

---

by: Trickster @ Wed Nov 19, 2008 at 22:12:58 PM CST

An alternate threory... (0.00 / 0)

would be the prevalence of certain opinions in the left blogosphere arises out of being more informed.

---

by: johnalive @ Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 08:02:23 AM CST

[ Parent ]