The Open Left

Update [2007-7-9 14:45:20 by Jonathan Singer]:If you're looking for Matt and Chris' new site, Open Left, it's available at OpenLeft.com.

Jon Chait wrote a long and coherent cover story in the New Republic on the netroots.  As smart as he is, Chait doesn't really get what the blogs are about.  He portrays us as a disciplined group of vicious propagandists, liberals with attitude who win regardless of the obstacles put in our way by more detached liberals and party regulars.  We emulate the right in our strategic ruthlessness, and promote partisanship above all.

I just don't think that's right.  Here's a piece I wrote in TPM Cafe that tries to situate us historically. Basically, we're a group of people who feel very betrayed by the leadership of our country, our media, and our party.  We care about ideas because bad ideas implemented tend to kill lots of innocent people, and we don't like that.  We are liberal because we believe in liberal ideas, and by and large, we've been proven correct.  The Iraq war was a terrible idea.  Bush has been a horrible President.  Running on Iraq in 2006 was a good idea.  Stopping Social Security privatization was possible and necessary.  A 50 state strategy made sense because a wave election was foreseeable.  Don't trust the telecom companies with the internet.  Let's figure out this global warming thing.

We don't necessarily distinguish between politics and policy, or activism and journalism, and we don't pretend that there is an above the fray and an 'in the muck'.  Most of all, we respect ideas because ideas, when implemented, have immense power.  Ideas matter.  Conservative ideas have affected us personally, whether it was growing up in a suburb or having no health care insurance.  And to the extent that you create ideas or appropriate ideas and organize around them, you can build a new society.  That's what the right did, which is why we respect the right.

This is sort of the kernel that Chait gets wrong.

The netroots are scornful of single-issue liberal groups--or, really, any liberals at all who are not wholly dedicated to the cause of Democratic victory. As Stoller has written on MyDD, "To the extent that I have a political hero, it's probably Grover Norquist, not Ralph Nader." The netroots' dream is of a liberal army of grassroots activists, pundits, policy wonks, and politicians all marching more or less in lockstep.

I guess sometimes unity makes sense from a strategic standpoint, but the lockstep idea is a bit silly.  Boingboing, Grist, and DailyKos are very different places, yet it's possible to situate all of them under this big tent.  If there is a core philosophy to what I call the 'Open Left', it's a respect for pluralism, openness and participation.  We like to hash things out.  And hashing things out tends to create a sense of community and natural discipline, since you kind of figure out where the obvious areas of agreement are and move in that direction.  

I guess most of all, and this is why I can't call Chait's piece particularly insightful, we don't gloss over substance or fake civility.  More than any other forum with the exception of town halls, the internet allows us to learn what our politicians are going to do.  Where else are you going to find arguments about a cap and trade versus a carbon tax?  Where else are you going to be able to read about net neutrality resolutions in California, or offshore drilling in Virginia?  The local blogs are incredibly substantive in their states, and I like to think that we go into depth into subject areas on MyDD and the rest of the blogs as well.  And let me point out that Moveon's emails are incredibly rich with information, so this is not just a blog thing.  It's a moment in history where the public is much smarter and mature than the elites, and we're kind of representing that.

We have serious problems in this country.  We're looking at 20 years of stagflation, a tremendously scary climate problem, nuclear proliferation, and the need to demobilize about a trillion of a useless militarized economy.  This is stuff we care about and need to work on.  What the blogs and the Open Left represent is the outlines of a way of working on these profound problems.  I wish Chait had gotten to that, instead of rehashing the 'they are mean and partisan and editors don't check everything they wrote so sometimes it's wrong'.  He's a smart guy, and I'm sure he'll get there.  But he's not there yet.

Update [2007-5-2 0:33:11 by Matt Stoller]:: Let me clarify a bit, since some of you think that the piece is good. It's not. It's dishonorable and quite silly. Chait called the netroots prone to dishonesty and propagandizing. What he thinks is propagandizing is actually talking about stuff we think is important and want to see happen. If Chait wants to call us dishonest he ought to, oh, point to some systemically dishonest pattern in our work. Which he doesn't do. And that's not ok.

Tags: blogs, netroots (all tags)

Comments

35 Comments

Re: The Open Left

I thought he was pretty much spot on. It is the most cogent analysis of the liberal blogosphere to my mind that I have read yet.

by alarabi7 2007-05-01 07:35PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

Are you Chait's Mom, because otherwise your comment makes you look like you have zero clue about the internet.

by Bob Brigham 2007-05-01 09:01PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

He portrays us as a disciplined group of vicious propagandists, liberals with attitude who win regardless of the obstacles put in our way by more detached liberals and party regulars.  We emulate the right in our strategic ruthlessness, and promote partisanship above all.

If only we could be that successful...  I hope someday we WILL reach that level of effectiveness, but, we still have a long way to go.

Until then, it is a learning process...

Thanks,

Mike

by lordmikethegreat 2007-05-01 07:35PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

Chait said: "The netroots' dream is of a liberal army of grassroots activists, pundits, policy wonks, and politicians all marching more or less in lockstep."

I think this can be dismissed as an another instance of status quo types feeling correctly threatened by the collective intelligence which the nettroots emobodies. Sure, we have our Instpundits and Redstates (who can be, as Lieberman said, 'vitipuratively toxic'). But really, the netroots are comprised of people who EXPRESS THEIR BELIEFS irregardless of what the privileged Washington crowd  happens to be saying.

Personally, I think all the so-called liberals - in addition to the corporatist/statist who wear their allegiance on their sleaves - who criticize the netroots are in fact fearful of real participatory democracy. They have been seduced by the classist, establishment line that democracy only works if you have a ruling class.

As evidence, I reference the major, agenda setting blogs, who consistently (sometimes exclusively)  post articles which merely  CORRECTS THE RECORD from lies and distortions to a representation based in fact. I believe that what the educated elites, who think they are entitled to 'set the agenda', really fear is an educated electorate.

by scudbucket 2007-05-01 07:50PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

Nicely stated, Matt.  I can't speak for the writers (who can?), but as for your readership, I believe you've well described where a great many of us are coming from -- the motivations driving us to this medium and its content, and the benefits we're deriving from it.  Keep up the good work, y'all.

~Rob McC

by Rob McC again 2007-05-01 07:59PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

I in general liked the article. It did have some valid (though I disagree with them completely) criticisms, such as the dividing on the left vs. dividing on the right (we are the left-wing party so, we on the left win). It recognizes that we are a serious force, and one that is helpful to "the movement." He did miss some significant things, but overall it was well written.

by pierredude 2007-05-01 08:13PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

He pretty much called us liars.  Don't cut him slack on that.

by Matt Stoller 2007-05-01 08:28PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

Speaking of "propaganda", anyone remember this cover for "Ahmadinejad's Demons" from an issue of TNR last year?

http://www.darrelplant.com/blog_item.php ?ItemRef=672

Or the "Populism" issue with Hugo Chaves spray-painted on a wall with an article subtitled "Hugo Chavez, Jean-Marie Le Pen, and the revolt of the natives"?

I love bold imagery, myself. Soviet art from the 20s and things like WPA posters are simply beautiful, but I'm not looking forward to years more of the 21st-century equivalent of the buck-toothed, spectacled Japanese caricatures from the World War II era applied by TNR and its ilk.

by darrelplant 2007-05-03 07:28PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

we're a group of people who feel very betrayed by the leadership of our country, our media, and our party.  

That's pretty much what started me blogging, actually right after the last presidential election to keep my despair under control.

by findingavoice 2007-05-01 08:19PM | 0 recs
And I found likeminded people

in the blogs.  And one rare leader those days in 2003 --Gov Dean.

by jasmine 2007-05-01 08:54PM | 0 recs
When we don't care what the Chaits

say about us, we'll be a movement. Meanwhile, we're potential struggling to be more fully realized. :-)

by janinsanfran 2007-05-01 08:34PM | 0 recs
Jon Chait is a dick

Although maybe I shouldn't be so hard on him, being very little acquainted with the man or his works. Takin' it on your say-so Matt, as thousands will. What, he has a column or something? Who gives a rap. It's like reading an essay of Lord Macaulay about some long forgotten statesman and you are kind of fascinated by all the in-and-outs and what a fine job the great one does tying him to his time, his peers, and all that was important around him. But the man himself? An utter cipher.

by MikeB 2007-05-01 08:38PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

Take (perhaps unimportant) exception to this part:

Where else are you going to find arguments about a cap and trade versus a carbon tax?  Where else are you going to be able to read about net neutrality resolutions in California, or offshore drilling in Virginia?  The local blogs are incredibly substantive in their states, and I like to think that we go into depth into subject areas on MyDD and the rest of the blogs as well.

Cap and trade versus carbon tax arguments of great depth are easy to find on the web and in scholarly sources, all outside the blogosphere of which MyDD is an important part.

Net Neutrality, on the other hand, being a subject vital to the blogosphere, is an issue on which we have unique expertise and depth of argument. Same with many state/local issues.

by demondeac 2007-05-01 08:40PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

Good point.  I was talking about the internet space in general, not just the political blogs.

by Matt Stoller 2007-05-01 08:43PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

Stoller is right, it's not a good article. There is no "propagandizing" in the netroots any more than any other politically motivated organization or magazine with a political agenda. We advance our agenda from our point of view. Are we supposed to push our agenda on somebody else's terms?

by afertig 2007-05-01 08:41PM | 0 recs
Any FP try propaganda

They will be eaten alive.

Netroots are very sophisticated to fall for propaganda.

Because netroots are very educated--39% post grad.  

by jasmine 2007-05-01 08:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Any FP try propaganda

We should've taken a few more bites outta Matt for how closely he tied O'Hanlon to Edwards in his previous post, and I say that as someone who leans Edwards at the moment, but doesn't quite trust his transformation ... and who thinks we should do everything possible to move Edwards in the right (left) direction.

The fact that the author of a foreign policy book Edwards found enlightening appeared on the Hugh Hewitt show is perhaps slightly telling, but I'm not sure we can really judge a candidate to any degree by the media appearances of authors he or she cites. I'm a PG Wodehouse fan. You know what that means, right?

On the other hand, I'd be fairly surprised if Edwards's real foreign policy advisors hadn't pulled some truly dumbass shit. I'd like to pressure Edwards based on that stuff, instead ...

by BingoL 2007-05-02 03:22AM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

Chait has no clue, but readers of TNR couldn't be more misinformed so it will probably be applauded by the idiots in Chevy Chase and Bethesda.

by Bob Brigham 2007-05-01 08:58PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

We are liberal because we believe in liberal ideas, and by and large, we've been proven correct.

I have to remind myself periodically that this is what separates us from the right-- as much as it annoys me to admit it, the grassroots right probably felt the way we feel now, back in the oh-so-degenerate sixties (and this is another reason why feelings alone are a damned poor substitute for informed debate).  The difference is and always has been in our respective visions of what this country should be: my position is that the liberal vision is simply a better one, and history almost always puts us on the side of the angels.

Oh, and Chait's piece is mostly annoying... but the worst part by far is the comments, with the TNR subs patting themselves on the back for being so much more civilized than those nasty Kossacks.  I do try to follow discussions over there, and except for the commonly-held belief that Marty Peretz is batshit crazy, it's the worst kind of beltway blather imaginable, like a college bull session without the mitigating/anesthetizing effects of booze.  

by latts 2007-05-01 09:06PM | 0 recs
Left?

Jon Chait does not get it.  The netroots transcend left and right.  It is about American values and the American people.  

May be, it's just my warped perspective as a European immigrant but if one looks at the evidence in some ways, our frames and our politics capture not only lefty ideas but also most of what is good about conservatism.

We are fighting to preserve the United States Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, but also support for veterans and veterans candidates.  The netroots also support responsible fiscal policy by opposing cronyism and other financial crimes.  And while the Republicans might not get it, in the end good conservatives have to be environmentalists.

We are struggling to preserve the middle class, which real conservatives ought to embrace as well.

Jon Chait is just trying to paint us into a corner.  We love liberty, America, and America's values.  That's something that the Republican party has abandoned a long time ago.  And that is why they are losing and we are winning.

by Hellmut 2007-05-01 09:28PM | 0 recs
Propaganda

I don't think propaganda is a bad thing, and I don't think Chait thinks it is either. It doesn't mean lying or being dishonest, it means spinning and framing things to make your side look good and the other side look bad. This is very important and necessary for any sort of "progressive movement," and it's also entirely respectable. Daily Kos exists for this express purpose.

Chait is right. Movements are about winning. Intellectual debate is simply a subordinate goal.

P.S. I had no idea this website was originally about finance and astrology. Quite an evolution to what it currently is.

by Korha 2007-05-01 10:11PM | 0 recs
TNR Has Been In The Toilet For 25+ Years

Ever since they backed Reagan's terrorist war in Central America, shilling for the right has been part of TNR's mix.  So of course their house writers are going to get all hysterical over people striving for honesty, consistency and principled action.  What else is new?

They can't see the wide-ranging debates and vast differences that characterize much of the left blogosphere on a wide range of issues?  Well, gee, they couldn't see the holes in Bush's Iraq War propaganda, either, so near-total blindness seems to be part of the package as well.

The thing is, we're smarter and less prejudiced than they are.  TNR has some very good, very smart writing from time to time, and folks in the left blogosphere are smart enough to realize it. We don't wildly over-generalize the way TNR true believers in the Chait/Bienart mode do.

This isn't rocket science. Once upon a time, TNR was able to pretend that they had the smartest people in the world writing for them.  It was never true, of course.  But they had reasonably smart people writing for them, and their weren't a lot of other places for equally smart or better, similarly-inclined people to get published regularly for a wide, general audience of politically oriented people.  Well, that's no longer the case, and boy, is TNR pissed.    At bottom, it's just as simple as that.

by Paul Rosenberg 2007-05-01 10:56PM | 0 recs
Re: TNR Has Been In The Toilet For 25+ Years

Well said.

I'm also interested in why we're smarter than they are, and I think it's largely institutional. We're huge, and the cream often rises to the top. There's always gonna be a few people in the Open Left (a term I love) who are more knowledgeable on any single issue than the TNR journalist assigned to write on that issue. Just makes sense. So to the extent that we identify and listen to those people, the best of the blogs remains the best.

BTW, the other day, I saw 'Paul Rosenberg' referenced in some obscure backblog post many, many links away from MyDD. A pretty good example of my point ...

by BingoL 2007-05-02 03:30AM | 0 recs
Shoving the Overton Window Left, Hard

Shystee made another one of his diagrams on the Overton Window that defines the boundaries of acceptable discourse at any given time, and makes these points, which I think are profoundly right:


Definition and discussion of the concept is below. The main points I want to convey with this image:

- There is, or there should be, a constant tug-of-war on the edges of the Overton Window on any issue.

- There is a place for everyone and anyone along the Left side of the rope, as long as we're all pulling in the same general direction.

- The current location of the Overton Window is so far to the right of any objective political spectrum, that what are now considered Extreme Left Positions are really not extreme at all.


In particular, there's a place for, er, the extreme:

The way to shift the Overton Window is by moving the edges, by pushing ideas that are even more extreme than what is actually desired.

Chait doesn't get any of this.

Chait's "lockstep" notion is particularly silly. (Not even Big Orange does this). It's silly because it's not true, and it's silly because it would be a bad idea if true. To reiterate:

- There is a place for everyone and anyone along the Left side of the rope, as long as we're all pulling in the same general direction.


Exactly because ideas matter, we don't want everyone marching in lockstep. Our ideas have to bubble up from the citizens, since our--make that "our"-- elites have betrayed us in the realm if ideas in the same way they've betrayed us everywhere else. We need the ferment.

by lambert 2007-05-02 03:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Shoving the Overton Window Left, Hard

Amen. What the establishment Left, the Clintons, Rubin, Lieberman and the rest, fear from the netroots is a loss of control of the movement, and a true liberal noise machine that moves the dialougue. When Norver Grovquist and Doug Wead, and Karl Rove can frame the debate with no opposition then we get RNC talking point noise, and Conservative governance like Katrina, and Iraq. The netroots push the debate to the left, which is where most Americans are on issues like National healthcare, Iraq, the minimum wage, and NAFTA/ free trade/ illegal immigration/ illegal employers.

by Johnnei 2007-05-02 05:56AM | 0 recs
TNR=bullshit central

They promoted the Iraq war, and many of their writers continue to shill for it.  They are also promoting some of the most incendiary lies about Iran, like the notion that they are close to getting a nuke.  Look at the recent article by Dennis Ross, the guy Clinton put in charge of the Israeli Palestinian peace negotiations.  If you want to wonder why that fell through just look at the bullshit he is peddling on Iran.

by Dameocrat 2007-05-02 04:33AM | 0 recs
And his point is?

...He portrays us as a disciplined group of vicious propagandists, liberals with attitude who win regardless of the obstacles put in our way by more detached liberals and party regulars.  We emulate the right in our strategic ruthlessness, and promote partisanship above all....

Aside from the fact that you're supposed to try and want to win in politics, blogtopia (y!sctp!) ain't some factory turning out leftist clones for the army that will crash their party and take away their cocktail weenies. Last time I looked around here it was an unruly conglomeration of people from outside the beltway.

While were at it, can you fix a detached liberal the same way you fix a detached retina?

by Michael Bersin 2007-05-02 04:36AM | 0 recs
oh!

i wondered why i was getting traffic hits from this diary.

thanks, mike!

as to the point of the diary, i must say that this is one of the more cogent analyses of the chait piece that i've seen.  well done, matt.

of course chait accuses the left of walking in lockstep, because that's what the hardly-ever right has been doing for 12 years or more.

sure, they got power, but now it's crumbling, because lock-step doesn't adjust to reality, and reality always wins.

in other words, chait is simply projecting onto us what the right does.  he can't possibly imagine a political ideal winning any other way (say, by being correct).

by skippy 2007-05-04 03:31PM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

I personally found Chait's piece a mixture of insight and bullshit - with the ratio being about 3 to 2 in favor of the bullshit.  I'm a regular reader of every blog that Chait mentions by name, and I kept on thinking, "WTF?!"

Take his DLC paragraph, for instance:

This ethos of political detachment among liberal intellectuals finds its natural counterpart in the strategies of the DLC. The DLC's basic idea is to embrace the political center--a model that is incompatible with movement politics. Movements require unanimity against external critics. The DLC model not only permits divisions among Democrats; in a sense, it relies 'upon them. The premise of the DLC's strategy is that the left wing of the party is unacceptable to the majority of voters. The answer is to explicitly disavow that left wing--to create a Third Way between the left and right poles.

Exactly how is a centrist movement that has as its premise the need to disavow the Democratic left, any sort of 'natural counterpart' to an 'ethos of political detachment' among intellectuals' of any sort?  

Here's what a detached, scholarly intellectual would do: she'd define what was meant by the left wing of the party, find out what it stood for on a group of major issues, and see what polling had been done to get a feel for whether the voters found those stands acceptable or not.

We know how that would turn out.  The lefty netroots are in harmony with the majority of the American people, and there's little evidence to demonstrate that the DLC speaks for much of anyone anymore.

by RT 2007-05-02 05:11AM | 0 recs
Chait Does Not Get It (Mostly)

Chait's contention that the blogosphere is involved in the "propaganda" misses the most important thing about the blogosphere - the interactive nature.  The most useful/entertaining parts of mydd and dailykos are the comments sections, where I ordinarily find information and links that deepen and change my understanding of the issue.  (Of course, sometimes I find trolls, hijackers and random double posters).  The whole point of propaganda was the centralization of the message, which was then to be drummed into the masses.  

Chait's idea that all blogs on the progressive side march to a called tune simply is wrong.  As much as Mickey Kaus would like people to think that there is a secret e-mail of the day which is spread to the progressive blogs, the stories that get pushed are the stories that engage the readers/commenters.

The only thing that I think Chait got right is that there is a difference between electoral blogs and wonk blogs.  Outside of election season (post-Labor Day plus four weeks into local primaries and four months into Presidential Primaries), I am more partial to talkingpointsmemo and washingtonmonthly, because I am very happy to read progressive substantive articles/threads.  On the other hand, mydd does a much better job of covering labor/union issues then anyone else.

by Ephus 2007-05-02 05:43AM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

Having read Crashing the Gate recently, I was struck by its descriptions of how conservatives have plowed millions of dollars into think tanks that churn out position papers, nurture political candidates, and provide talking heads for the MSM.  As the book points out, there is nothing like that in scope on the left.  The liberal blogosphere, however, is in effect a distributed think tank that accomplishes the same goals in a radically different ways.  As Stoller puts it:

"We like to hash things out.  And hashing things out tends to create a sense of community and natural discipline, since you kind of figure out where the obvious areas of agreement are and move in that direction."

To this, I would add that hashing things out focuses our vision, hones our ideas, and details the strategies and tactics that are most likely to make our vision and ideas a reality.  This is what the big think tanks of the right do for conservatives; the distributed think tank of the liberal blogosphere can and should do the same thing for progressives.  

[Excerpted from a longer post in Framed.]

by jftrumm 2007-05-02 05:56AM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

...and by the way Chris, I am intrigued by your title, "The Open Left."  Have you explained that term in greater detail somewhere?  I like it.

by jftrumm 2007-05-02 05:56AM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

The main thing about the Open Left as it is taking shape over the Internet is that it is a web-enabled self-organizing movement aimed at overthrowing the status quo in American politics. IMNSHO, its  underlying goal is to foment a progressive political revolution to undo the damage of 30 years of government by corrupted politicians in both major political parties beholden to the corporations that are running both the U.S. government and the economy.

The movement is directed by its self-selected members. They comprise a large spectrum of people who are activists in some self-determining way. They adopt their own courses of action without being forced to adhere to any dogmas, orthodoxies, formal organizations or political parties. People opt into and out of the movement and dialogue on their own free will.

This dialogue among the members of the movement can comprise statements of fact, interpretations of fact, opinions and polemics, to name just a few components. Because the movement is driven by a web-based conversation on websites like MyDD, which involve millions of people who post or read posts on a daily basis, the movement is constantly evolving and EXPANDING.

It is leaving the major political parties and its candidates in the dust. I would bet that more people read and contribute ideas to MyDD and DailyKOS than read and contribute ideas to the websites of political parties or candidates. I would also bet that the candidates' spend as much time reading what is said on the political blogs as what they receive on their websites because the blogs are where the political action is.

Bottom line: the "Open Left" and left-leaning progressive blogs are the leading edge of political change in America. The candidates, political parties and pundits are Johnny-Come-Latelys to this party which, overtime, will reshape the face of American politics and American political parties.

by Nancy Bordier 2007-05-02 06:52AM | 0 recs
Re: The Open Left

Thanks for that explanation, Nancy.  I have some reservations about how much influence an internet-based phenomenon such as you describe has in terms of actually getting people elected; I think some bloggers overestimate their importance.  However, I agree that their influence is on the rise.

Does the "open" in the name refer to open source--i.e., the idea that anyone can take an idea and improve on it?  Or is there some other etymology I am missing?

by jftrumm 2007-05-02 09:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Chait

I actually found Chait's article to be a fairly accurate representation of the "netroots", written for (and by) an outsider.  The parallel with the '60s "New Right" and its road to success in the '80s is well put forward, and is in line with what Gov Dean has often discussed. I know that many here might wish to believe that the 'netroots' or 'Open Left" is de novo, wisdom sprung from the head of Zeus, but it is a good thing to trace one's own history and place -- and often an outsider like Chait can be of help in that.

I've been reading (and contributing) to Kos and DD and others since the Dean campaign, and I greatly appreciate what has developed. I am an older '60s New Leftie, and I admire the commitment, practicality and effectiveness of this younger generation. Our generation had a passion that was much attached to particular leaders, and that dissipated when they died (and for a variety of other reasons). I think we were much more romantic and idealistic, and I dont say that as a compliment.

I didnt particularly like Chait's snark-laced dig at Markos' "libertarian Democrat" thesis, with which I identified when Markos first discussed it.  No matter. Chait has his attitude, just like most folks here have their attitude (look at all the comments on the DLC). Sometimes it can help to hold back on your feeling of being attacked and take what you can from (perhaps pseudo-) intellectuals like Chait.

And I found Chait's discussion of 'propaganda' to be fair and important.  I have no problem with propaganda, as long as it is generally grounded in reality (i.e: reality-based, rather than faith-based). FDR was a master of propaganda and mass communication. Of course, so was Hitler, on the other side of the coin.    

Keep up the good work, but keep perspective.

by Randy Foote 2007-05-02 01:54PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads