This is exactly what Z. said that Trippi "hired" Jerome and Kos to buy influence on their blogs... Kos boew a casket and threatened that she would never work again in "the field"... but this is exactly what she said...
Bloggers are hired to keep other people off of their sites and to gain influence with their audience...
From my reading of Kos, DD and a few other sites, it seems that many progressives and Dems view the nomination of Miers as a good thing. I see things like "we could do worse" and "makes Dems look good," with lots of attention paid to Reid's floating of her name and conservative disapproval with her nomination.
These messages are paid for by Simon Rosenbergs 200 million dollar "Think Tank"... kinda like Armstrong Williams.
I know there are calls for Hackett to run for the OH 2nd again. He got 48% in a CD where Bush got 64% against Kerry. I would rather he run for statewide office in Ohio. Hackett built a movement in the 2nd CD. He can build a movement in Ohio. Neither of the current Democratic candidates for Governor that are running, Coleman or Strickland, are all that exciting for Ohioans.
I know Hackett has said that he would go back to Iraq, but the battle for Ohio has been engaged. He needs to stay at home and finish the job. Hackett should run for Governor of Ohio. Or, if Sherrod Brown decides not to run, Hackett should run for the US Senate seat against DeWine. Either way, Hackett's calling in 2006 is to run statewide in Ohio.
Governor 2005-6 :: Tue Aug 2nd, 2005 at 10:31:34 PM EST
A win by Paul Hackett was always a longshot. Scratch that. Winning the Ohio 2nd, a district that went 64-36 for Bush in 2004, seemed more of a punchline than a longshot. Yet, in closing a yawing gap in one of the reddest places in the country, Democrats have accomplished something significant. Indeed, the National Journal 's Charlie Cook called the narrow 52-48 margin of victory for the Republican "a very serious warning sign for Ohio Republicans that something is very, very wrong."
The partisan configuration of the district was why, a few months back, the race was written off by the Democratic Party organizations in D.C., as a hopeless cause. By way of contrast, the online activists--or 'the netroots"--of the Democratic Party saw a chance to rejoin the fight with the Republicans. Their turf, our turf, so what-- it's time to engage again was the attitude. Maybe the conventional wisdom of the D.C. Democrats was true, and Hackett didn't have a chance, but that didn't matter. For those of us working to create a reform movement within the Democratic Party to regain a 50-state footing, the opportunity was what mattered.
Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett also happens to be the sort of candidate who appeals to the netroots. Here he is, in one of the reddest of the red House districts in the nation, and when he's asked about the prospects of gay marriage, he says: "Gay marriage--who the hell cares? If you're gay you're gay--more power to you. What you want is to be treated fairly by the law and any American who doesn't think that should be the case is, frankly, un-American." The Cincinnati Post , in their endorsement, lauded Hackett as a "Libertarian Democrat... We like Hackett's candor. We're impressed with the freshness of his ideas. We believe his experience shows him to be someone who is action-oriented." Indeed.
Hackett, like a lot of Democratic candidates who have been embraced by the netroots, speaks the truth, regardless of the circumstances, and doesn't back down when attacked for having spoken it.
Paul Hackett's success means we can expect more of what Howard Dean first tapped into--the growing movement within the Democratic Party willing to take the Republicans head on about the direction of this nation. While the Republicans would turn us back to a day where everyone is on their own, the Democrats offer a vision of the world that acknowledges we are all in this together. The implications of the netroots embrace of Paul Hackett should be clear to the Democratic organizations and politicians that represent us: run as a person that means what he or she says, and we will go to the mat with you--taking it to the Republicans on their turf if need be. If the Democrats can do this across the nation in 2006, we will win back the majority in Congress.
Paul Hackett was the first step in resuscitating the party after the 2004 defeat. The special election in California's 48th congressional district is up next in a couple of months. And in 2006, there will be 232 Republican seats in the House up for re-election, and not a single one should be left uncontested, or only lightly challenged.
To make this happen, the Democratic organization that runs the congressional races--the DCCC--and the netroots activists will need to work in tandem
he reason Paul Hackett fell just short was because of the Republican strongholds in the suburbs of Cincinnati. The suburban counties of Claremont and Warren--counties targeted by Democratic strategists as "winnable"--proved to be solidly Republican. However, Hackett won rural counties in Ohio counties like Brown, Adams, Scioto and Pike--96 percent white, lower-income, higher-unemployment counties that Democrats have forgotten and the Republicans have shafted.
Democrats haven't shown up in these places for years, so in 2004, Bush beat Kerry by 28 percent in Brown, but Hackett won by 28 percent in 2005; Bush beat Kerry by 28 percent in Adams, where Hackett won by 4 percent; Bush beat Kerry in Scioto by 4 percent; where Hackett won by 30 percent; Bush beat Kerry in Pike by 4 percent; where Hackett won by 26 percent.
Rural America is not sold on the socially extremist agenda of Republicans to outlaw abortion, intimidate the teaching of science and allow the government to intrude into the personal lives of its citizens. If they were, then the president of the Greater Cincinnati "Right to Life" group, Republican Jean Schmidt, would have swept these rural Ohio counties. Rural America is ready to become Democratic again. For Democrats, going after this weakest link of the Republican majority is the path to the congressional majority in 2006 and the presidency in 2008.
Paul Hackett didn't win, and to some that may mean everything. However, choosing not to challenge Republicans in every district, even seemingly hopeless ones, has important ramifications on winning in swing-district races. If we do not start contesting every district, we will not become a national party again. With the rapidly growing ability of the netroots to recruit and support Democratic candidates in long-shot contests, we can boost these candidates' chances. With a little help from Democrats in D.C., we can make a national Democratic Party a reality for 2006. If we are going to truly challenge Republicans about the direction of our country, we don't have another day, or another election, to waste. Let's run 232 Hackett-like operations against the Republicans in the elections of 2006, and plenty of swing-district wins will walk out of the wilderness on Election Day.
The GOP are delivering to their base a THEOCRACY which is against everything the US Constitution stands for and you have the freaking nerve to say the Democrats should not expect to be given basic human rights by the Federal government.
This is the most ridiculous disgusting thing I have ever heard...Go tell Simon Rosenberg to shut the hell up... and I can tell him where to shove his "think tank".
What is so vile is that your type of Democrats aligned with the DLC/NDN who sell your owm mothers for a lobbying contract... now how personal is that.
Were are turning into a facist state and the Democrats are playing like the Washington Generals to the Harlem Globetrotters.
We are not talking about protecting illegal drugs were are talking about basic human rights. A women'a right to her own body and in 2007 it looks like African Americans are going to lose their right to vote with the non renewal of the Voting Rights Act... welcome Jim Crow laws... and now they will have the SCOTUS to back up all of their IDEOLOGIES.
WASHINGTON, Oct. 3 U.S. Newswire -- Fr. Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life and president of the National Pro-life Religious Council, thanked President Bush this morning for nominating a replacement for Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in a timely manner, and called upon the Senate to do its work in an expeditious way as well.
"Our prayers are with Harriet Miers this morning as she begins this important process. We trust the President's judgment and his determination to fulfill his promises about the kind of Justices he wants to see on the Court.
"It is the judgment of certain liberal Senators, however, that gives us more concern. The demand that some make for preserving the current ideological balance on the Court, or for more "mainstream" nominees, is ridiculous. Do we have a more "mainstream" Constitution in some generations but not in others? Or do they think it is up to the Justices to re-write the Constitution? In short, there is no Constitutional requirement that Justice O'Connor's replacement should be a clone of Justice O'Connor.
"The place for arguments about ideology and mainstream positions is in political races. For the purposes of confirming nominees to the Court, the focus should be on qualifications to be a Justice, not on personal views on controversial issues."
This revelation comes on top of one early this month that Roberts did pro bono work helping a gay rights attorney argue before the Supreme Court that a Colorado law discriminated against homosexuals.
Such revelations are likely to further worry conservatives who are concerned that Roberts may be the next David Souter -- a man who appeared to be conservative as a nominee, but turned out much more liberal when he actually became a justice.
At the exact same time, though, liberals continue to fret that Roberts really is a dyed-in-the-wool social conservative who will help carry the court to the right.
Even so, reports of his involvement echoed on conservative talk shows Thursday, generating outrage and disbelief. "There's no question this is going to upset people on the right," Rush Limbaugh told his radio listeners. "There's no question the people on the right are going to say: `Wait a minute. Wait a minute! The guy is doing pro bono work and helping gay activists?'
"What do I think of him? Beats me. Just searched his hearing transcripts on the right to bear arms and found nothing. How is he on federalism and other limits on government power? Beats me again."
Great. O'Connor with a penis.
I'm supposed to be happy about this?
7 of the 9 Supreme Court justices were appointed by Republicans. 3 of them are acceptable, which shows you how incompetent Republicans are at choosing judges.
Frankly this conservative is completely underwhelmed.Bush might think he's got some sort of mojo going on, but if Roberts doesn't turn out to be a solid conservative, and not another O'Connor, then the GOP is screwed.
I know a lot of conservatives who have been adding up the support given, and lack of results received from the GOP. I've been asking a lot of conservatives to name which issues or agendas the GOP has come through on for conservatives.
It's a damn small list.
Sigh. F***ed by the GOP, yet again. I'm done. The GOP's donation letters go into the trash and the next time I vote might be 2008 or maybe 2010. The GOP better not expect me to give a rat's ass about them in 2006.