McCain Asks Supporters To Campaign On Blogs 889
Vote McCain in 2000! writes "McCain is not the stranger to technology some think him to be. McCain is now asking supporters to stump for him on blogs. Republican Web 2.0 consultant David All was effluent with praise for this outreach, calling it 'smart' and 'unique.' McCain's blogger outreach section has a handy list of political blogs which might be interested in hearing about McCain, such as the DailyKos, Crooks and Liars, and Think Progress. You can even report your posts to the campaign and 'receive points for your success,' though the page doesn't say what exactly the points are good for." Slashdot is not on their suggested blogs list. Can't imagine why.
Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Interesting)
No, I have to admit it was trollish (not flamebait, though--I was actually hoping for a chuckle or two). Heck, I'll gladly accept the karma burn for it.
The sad and sorry thing is that I am a registered Republican, and I will probably not be voting for McCain, I definitely will not be campaigning for him, and I certainly will not encourage others to support him. Back in 2000 McCain was a person whom I could respect--one who stood up for his principles. Today it looks like those principles have been prostituted on the altar of political expediency and "electability."
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Insightful)
Which, to my mind, is what one has to do to get elected. This isn't McCain's fault, it's the fault of a shallow, lazy electorate that here's the word "issues" and flips the channel to watch Survivor.
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Insightful)
Which, to my mind, is what one has to do to get elected. This isn't McCain's fault, it's the fault of a shallow, lazy electorate that here's the word "issues" and flips the channel to watch Survivor.
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Interesting)
By the way -- the summary article got something wrong:
McCain is not the stranger to technology some think him to be
No, the McCain *campaign* is not a stranger to technology. McCain most definitely is a stranger to technology [huffingtonpost.com]. When asked whether he was a Mac or PC person, he responded:
"Neither, I'm an illiterate that has to rely on my wife for all of the assistance I can get."
That's right. A president who, this day in age, doesn't know how to use a computer. Makes his policies on tech issues make a lot more sense, though. Back in 1999, running for the White House, this was remotely excusable. Today, it's just sad. A year ago, I set up a older woman who has brain damage with a Linux desktop and net access and she uses it just fine.
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:4, Interesting)
I think it's an interesting contrast that Barack Obama [youtube.com] knew that a bubble sort is a bad way to sort a million 32-bit integers. Although I think it's necessary, I'd hate to see a debate on technology between the two candidates.
On second thought, maybe I'd love to see one. They could have Ted "Series of Tubes" Stevens moderate!
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Interesting)
Go on, explain to me how someone who doesn't know how to use a computer is expected to remotely understand the issues at hand. At least Senator Ted "Tubes" Stevens, the butt of many jokes on this site, uses a computer.
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Informative)
First off, she's a friend, not a customer. Secondly, no, she doesn't have a full time job or juggle dozens of issues at a time, because she has *brain damage*; she's on disability precisely because she *can't* do any of those things. But even she can manage to use a computer.
No, using a computer doesn't automatically make you an expert on tech issues. But it makes you basically a patsy for whoever you choose to be your advisors on the issue because you have no personal experience to compare it to. And McCain's advisors, by the way, are telco lobbyists.
Um, the guy CAN'T USE A COMPUTER! (Score:5, Insightful)
That's my opinion, it's not a flame, it's just a very serious well-deserved dissing. Donate karma to this post, the neocon squad's on the way.
Re:Um, the guy CAN'T USE A COMPUTER! (Score:4, Insightful)
Computer skills are absolutely no indication of ones abilities. The are absolutely no indication of ones understanding of 'tech' issues. The delusion that one has to have 'x' skillset to understand 'y' issue (or issues) is one nearly unique to Slashdot. (Especially since 'y' issue is utterly unrelated to being able to use a computer.) I don't see machinists from Boeing complaining that any candidate does not understand labor issues because no candidate has been a machinist. Etc. Etc.
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:4, Interesting)
Says a lot about his attitude, though, doesn't it? I hope, for all our sakes, that the quote in question was completely facetious. Otherwise people are supporting a candidate who doesn't consider it worthwhile to sit down and learn how to check his email.
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:4, Interesting)
I can list a dozen ways he's shifted toward the neocons (off the top of my head: nation-building, torture, abortion, tax cuts for the wealthy in wartime, warrantless wiretapping, campaign finance reform) -- can you list some ways he's shifted to the left?
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Interesting)
In 2000, I registered Republican specifically so I could vote for him in the primary. Bush was just scary back then. (Turns out, I underestimated how scary).
I was part of the effort to encourage him to run again in 2004. He declined to do so, and instead threw his full support behind Bush and started supporting all of his policies, including support of continued torture of suspected criminals, which he was very loudly against up until that point.
He's no longer the man we knew in 2000. But, I'm willing to concede that that's most likely because we never really knew him, rather than because he's actually changed.
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Funny)
Oh great. First, he's a scary Muslim. Now he's a pervy homosexual!
When will this FUD end?!
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Insightful)
It's impossible for it to be worse than Bush, and Obama and the Democrats will have plenty of material evidence of how incompetent and corrupt this administration has been to still be able to drag out examples in an election 4 years from now. While I'm sure there will be some examples of Democratic malfeasance as well by then, the So-Called Liberal Media will be hard pressed to make it seem comparable.
Even Carter, for all his faults, managed to get Israel, Jordan, and Egypt to sit at the same table and sign a peace treaty. I honestly can't think of *one* thing on that scale that Bush and Co. has managed not to fuck up. Obama's biggest problem will be rooting out all the incompetent/fundamentalist patronage/nepotist Republican appointments that have happened in the last 8 years, since they'll all be trying to sabotage him. Kind of like the way Reagan sabotaged Carter's attempts to negotiate the freedom of the Iran US embassy hostages (a taste of Iran-Contra shenanigans to come).
I think the difference is that Obama is a lot more politically savvy than Carter. While he downplays the racism that his candidacy has stirred up, I think he does it because he knows it's politically necessary, not because he underestimates it. Given his and his wife's upbringing, he can't be unaware that there will be people trying to sabotage him. That said, he is going to have to deal with the economic disaster caused by 8 years of Republican fiscal and governance incompetence, and the country isn't going to be happy about some of the medicine pills he's going to have to make them swallow. Whether he'll be able to sell to the USA that it's the Republican incompetence that made him do it is another question.
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Insightful)
Saying something like "Obama is terrible for this country and should not be running for president. He doesn't have any good policies and he sucks." is bad.
If you post with elegance then usually you are received a lot more intelligently.
"Barack Obama has been working hard on his campaign but I just simply can't find a lot of things I agree with. It's strange but a lot of his plans and policies seem to not be backed by previous experiences or history. I will be paying attention to his campaign as I long to see him reach some qualified examples but until then I will probably be more on the McCain side. Good luck to both"
Thus I'm basically saying I don't like anything about him but changed up my tone and made it a smooth read instead of brash with lots of absolutes.
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Informative)
During the 2004 Election I was actually suspended from being able to post; heated debate to be sure, but there people who were throwing around curses, name calling, slinging mud; I did nothing of the sort - no name calling, no intelligence insulting.
My only crime was that I was going against conventional slashdot "wisdom." I supported Bush, I supported the war, and I made my opinions clear without stooping to petty insults and name-calling, and I was the one who got temporarily banned. I can't make any statements about everyone else who may have been involved, but I did see at least SOME of the posters who stooped to that level continue posting.
I said "screw it" and didn't even come back to slashdot for years. I really doubt anything has changed in that respect, but I decided that it was supposed to be a tech site that I occasionally got some information from, so it was silly to just stay away, but I have no doubt about why I was suspended from posting - it was due to a lot of negative moderation from people who simply disagreed with my opinion.
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Informative)
Were you posting from a different account? 'cos I'm looking at your posting history around the 2004 election timeframe [slashdot.org] (caution: link works only if you're logged in) and while some posts are indeed modded down, most of the time (actually all the times I checked) it's because they're offtopic. There's a comment about hating your sister in law that was modded down, and another about Slashdot moderation. For non-offtopic posts, you seem to have been left alone or modded up.
Perhaps there's a time-period I'm missing, but this looks like a case of Republican-persecution-complex to me.
Subject Datestamp Replies Score 1149 Re:Worldwide results [slashdot.org]*2004-11-01 13:5422 1150 Re:France may not affect America [slashdot.org]*2004-11-01 13:5022 1151 Re:Worldwide results [slashdot.org]*2004-11-01 13:4712 1152 I agree with the premise of the Ohio ruling [slashdot.org]*2004-11-01 13:2912 attached to The Votemaster Is...Andrew Tanenbaum [slashdot.org] 1153 Re:The "mamalian" eye & the "cephalopod" eye.. [slashdot.org]*2004-11-01 13:1812 attached to The Eye: Evolution versus Creationism [slashdot.org] 1154 Re:Amazing [slashdot.org]*2004-11-01 11:262, Funny attached to The Votemaster Is...Andrew Tanenbaum [slashdot.org] 1155 Sad... [slashdot.org]*2004-11-01 10:212 attached to Does Redskins Loss Presage A Kerry Win? [slashdot.org] 1156 Still too expensive.... [slashdot.org]*2004-11-01 10:1812, Insightful attached to Why Apple Should Port Games [slashdot.org] 1157 "The Millionaire Next Door" [slashdot.org]*2004-11-01 9:332 1158 It's just so sad... [slashdot.org]*2004-11-01 9:212, Flamebait 1159 Re:Does this mean Kerry will win? [slashdot.org]*2004-11-01 9:162 attached to Does Redskins Loss Presage A Kerry Win? [slashdot.org] 1160 Re:Why can't he just return it? [slashdot.org]*2004-10-29 14:272 1161 Re:Why can't he just return it? [slashdot.org]*2004-10-29 13:5812 1162 Re:Why can't he just return it? [slashdot.org]*2004-10-29 13:462 1163 Re:Why can't he just return it? [slashdot.org]*2004-10-29 13:1813, Insightful 1164 Re:Why can't he just return it? [slashdot.org]*2004-10-29 12:5122 1165 Re:Why can't he just return it? [slashdot.org]*2004-10-29 12:4512 attached to XBox Owner Sues Microsoft [slashdot.org] 1166 Re:It's easy to say that if you are not unemployed [slashdot.org]*2004-10-28 21:3212
Re:Spam for McCain! (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know who this "John McCain" is today, but he's definitely not that man I supported in 2000. I never thought I would see a John McCain who backed Bush, supported unprovoked preemptive wars, wanted to cut taxes at a time when the country is $9 *TRILLION* in debt, and sucked up to the religious right. But above all else, I NEVER NEVER NEVER thought I would see a man who was a torture victim and POW stand up and support that very torture by HIS OWN COUNTRY.
I was obviously naive to believe in him in 2000, to believe he was anything more than just another hyper-ambitious Washington scumbag who would sacrifice anything to win. I won't ever make that mistake again.
I guess he wants to hear from supporters. But this FORMER supporter wanted to chime in too.
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Funny)
If it weren't for the citizenship issues, I'd say Cthulhu in 2008!
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm with GP. I've been a big fan of McCain for years, but not so much anymore. First, he'll appoint at least one more highly religious supreme court judge who can't separate their duty from their religion, and Roe v Wade will be overturned. Second, McCain graduated as the 6th worst student in has class at the Naval Academy. Under a Rhode Scholar president, our GDP grew faster than any time since the 60s. Under a C student president, it grew the slowest. Third, while I can forgive the Keating Five blunder, why does he remain so chummy with lobbyists? Sixth, his lack of judgment in supporting attacking Iraq is hard to forgive. Finally, to a certain extent, experience == age. He may have a bit too much experience.
All that said, he's still a far better option than Bush Jr. I can at least respect McCain. Of the original field, he was my second pick, after Obama, and Hillary was my third. Overall I'm a rare happy political camper.
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, that was an excellent piece of disinformation. In a recent survey, 16% of the respondants believed that Obama is Muslim. It was an excellent tactic for a completely dirty campaign. Look at who the majority of your constituency is (white Christians). Find their worst fears (Muslims, stereotyped into all being terrorists). Tag that on your opponent.
Likewise, letting it be known that McCain is a well know pedophile, who flies to Thailand twice a year to molest prepubescent boys, would be dirty. Sure, it's an outright lie (or at least I hope so), but if 16% of the people who would respond to surveys believe it, that means a whole lot more people are whispering about it.
Oh my, don't vote for him. Think about the children.
Vote JWSmythe, write in candidate for the 2008 United States Presidential Election!
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Insightful)
A better example of disinformation was the constant linking of Iraq to 9/11. 64% of Americans still believe (as of 2005) that Iraq had strong ties to Al Quaeda. [harrisinteractive.com] It's shocking that anyone who can read could believe that Muslim extremists devoted to building a world based on fundamentalist Islam would have strong ties to a primarily secular dictator who happily executed fundamentalists, but there it is.
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Insightful)
Corruption - in the grand scheme of things, the parts of Obama's past that could be considered corruption are no where even close to being on the same level as McCain (or, not that it matters at this point, Clinton.)
Crony Earmarks - This one I agree with you on.
Dishonest Politicking - You're kidding, right? You are trying to say that Obama is more inflammatory in his remarks than McCain? Have you ever watched side-by-side a comparison of how Obama talks about McCain and how McCain talks about Obama?
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Insightful)
Thank you. This whole experience argument has always seemed like FUD to me. GWB had "Executive Experience" -- how well did he work out again? Lincoln went from a single house term, to private practice to being one of the top three Presidents ever (according to most historical rankings).
I'd rather have a President that is willing to listen to all points of view (including the opposition) and make an informed decision then someone with "experience" who surrounds himself with yes men and lives in such a bubble that he didn't even realize that gasoline was approaching $4/gal.
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Insightful)
I have a problem with $4 gass because Gas prices were fine even with all the strife going on in the middle east. Suddenly, an administration takes control whose top members have ALL worked with oil companies. Cheney has over $30 million of bonus money sitting in his pocket when he left Haliburton, yet is making our energy policy?
Republicans blocked an increase on taxes to oil companies profits, and ALSO blocked a TAX BREAK for companies investing in alternative energy?
I want Obama in the White House because he has no connection to this bullshit. That's why. His lack of experience also means a lack of connections.
Not to mention that Bush's administration is gone in months, and magically gas prices have increased nearly 90% in the last TWO YEARS? Yeah. That's not a coincidence at all.
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Informative)
To a certain point I actually think that's ok. You want people who are involved in industry to have a voice at the policy table because it's far too easy for politicians to hand down mandates while having no idea of how hard they will be to actually implement or how much they will cost. Any Geek should be able to appreciate this -- how many times has the PHB handed down an assignment while completely underestimating (or outright ignoring) how much money it will cost or how hard it will be to accomplish?
GWB's administration crossed the line when it gave the industry folks the ONLY voice at the table. This is actually one of the things that I don't think Obama gets enough credit for. He wants the health insurance industry and energy industry to have a seat at the table when policy is being decided -- he just doesn't want them to be able to buy every chair (to use his words). He isn't some kneejerk liberal that's opposed to business and making money -- he's opposed to businesses buying our Government and ramming their agenda down our throats at the expense of the greater good.
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Informative)
The real reason gas is so expensive, that no one is talking about, is that Bush borrowed so much money to fund his tax cuts and the war in Iraq that the dollar has been plummeting against the Euro [yahoo.com] and Yuan [yahoo.com]. Nice republican talking points there, but sorry, this isn't Fox. We actually check our facts.
Re:lack of experience a plus? (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to mention that he was more or less unknown to most people until this year. Hell, I had never even HEARD of him until late 2007...while I wouldn't say I'm politics obsessed, I do tend to keep up with things on a daily basis.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Funny)
MaCain's web site runs on Windows and uses HTML Tables. Obama's web site runs on Linux, and uses XHTML/CSS.
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Informative)
Obama is for Net Neutrality [senate.gov]
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:4, Insightful)
Joking aside I'd really like to know how this dramatic change came about.
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm optimistic enough to think that he's simply playing the game of politics now the way he thinks he needs to, to get elected by his own party (after seeing the dirty tricks and bullshit of Bush 2000), and that once in office when he no longer needs to kiss up to the neocon idiots who still hold disproportionate influence in the party, we'll see the old, genuinely conservative McCain assert himself and tell them all to fuck off.
I ju
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Interesting)
He was betrayed by those he trusted most... and it killed him. What you see now is a shell.
I'd like to believe that the John McCain of 2000 would have paid attention to a report predicting a terrorist attack on US soil, would have gone right to work upon hearing of the attack on the Towers, would have resolved the war in Afghanistan before starting another, would have set strict limits on the use of Guantanamo Bay, would have cracked down hard on abuses like Abu Ghraib, would not sacrifice the Space Shuttle, Space Station, Hubble, and the unmanned exploration of space, wasting billions of dollars, in order to distract the public from his mistakes, and would not simply have left all the decision making to others. Sadly, the McCain of today is not this man.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not sure about anyone else, but I ignore the rheteric until October, then I look for a summary of each cadidate over the previous 6 months. Obama's campaign is trying to call McCain "Bush Jr." while McCain is trying to label Obama as naive and vague.
I don't think McCain is Bush Jr. and I don't think Obama is naive (althought
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:4, Informative)
Across the spectrum of issues, Obama is mostly avoiding politics as usual, and is being straight-up with us, unlike McCain. For example, how will McCain save Social Security? No one knows. It's not one of his issues. How will Obama do it? He'll raise taxes and increase the age for receiving benefits. It's not a warm fuzzy answer, but a rare honest one.
He's the Same Faker (Score:5, Insightful)
Does anyone think it's just a coincidence that both McCain and Bush have become wastefully spending warmongers, now that the 2000 election is over? Maybe you should think about how they're just spokesmodel puppets for a Republican Party that cannot be stopped from wasting American lives and money destroying our government that interferes with corporate rule.
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Informative)
A Broader View of Human Rights (Score:3, Interesting)
I think we need to stop defining other parties in terms of our own definitions of what human rights are.
I mean, what if, instead of arguing over Democratic visions of human rights - redistribution of wealth, freedom of the press, and rights for minorities, and combined that with the Republican view of rights for entreprenuers, rights to keep and bear and arms, dispose of ones land as one sees fit, a
Re:A Broader View of Human Rights (Score:4, Insightful)
Just pointing out, 'redistribution of wealth' is something both sides do. One side believes in distributing it to the poor, the other side to the rich. Ever heard of trickle down economics? Redistribution of wealth.
As for land, well, if 'disposing of it as one sees fit' means 'polluting the fuck out of it' or 'not paying taxes on it' then I can't support that. If it means that, barring reasonable special cases where your actions impact others, you can do what you like with your land, well, we already have that. It's hardly a rallying cry.
People can and do put up Christmas trees in public squares all the time. Where do you live that they don't allow that? Even San Francisco has Christmas trees.
Sorry if I'm sounding like a dick here, (yeah, yeah, it's my MO) because I agree with your sentiment, it's the specifics that gave me a bit of a pause.
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
4 years ago we had something similar in my state on the ballot. It was a tax increase, but was worded you are either for clean air, water, and green spaces or you aren't (where is the option that I'm for a clean environment, but not the tax increase?).
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Insightful)
and that justifies us torturing people? (Score:5, Insightful)
And? So we should torture to?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Okay. Here's *MY* blog entry, Senator (Score:5, Informative)
Oh wait, you are an astroturfer, aren't you? You guys started quick!
Slashdot is not on their suggested blogs list... (Score:3, Funny)
Yikes (Score:5, Funny)
This is a terrifying job title.
Har har (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Har har (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder why... (Score:5, Insightful)
Because /. is neither primarily political, nor a blog, while the mentioned sites are both? Because there aren't a lot of disgruntled Hillary supporters here?
C'mon, Taco, you have lived through the careers of Lee Atwater, James Carville, Bill Clinton, and Karl Rove. Have you learned nothing about political strategy from the best in the business?
Re:I wonder why... (Score:5, Funny)
(And we like it that way! Get off our lawn!)
Dailykos?! Seriously? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Dailykos?! Seriously? (Score:5, Interesting)
I think it's a smart move: get moderate Hillary supporters to believe that McCain wants their vote more than Obama does. You saw shades of this in the praise McCain heaped on Hillary in the weeks running up to her exit. It could also be enough to give him the election in November.
Let's call this election for what it is. (Score:3, Interesting)
This election has come down to race, sex, and oil.
Obama won the nomination because he won every state that had a large black population, and they overwhelmingly voted for him, and then, he split the white vote with Hillary. So now, McCain is reaching out to those white voters and po'd women that probably won't for Obama.
The PO'd women is a huge factor. If McCain picked a woman as his VP -
Re:Let's call this election for what it is. (Score:4, Insightful)
Like Wisconsin, Montana, Vermont, Maine, Iowa, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, Alaska, Hawaii, Connecticut, North Dakota, Kansas, Colorado....
ugh, dailykos...... (Score:4, Interesting)
Every single negative stereotype you can think of about Democrats/liberals is exemplified by some of the comments on that site. Pulling out words like "racist" or "homophobe" in the middle of a conversation because someone has a principled disagreement with you. I asked once upon a time why that was any better than Republicans who pull out words like "cut and run" if you disagree with them -- needless to say that didn't win me many friends and I got about 30 replies explaining why it was "different" when Democrats do it as opposed to Republicans.
I consider myself a staunch Democrat and a liberal/progressive in most areas and that site still seems to extreme even for me. Half of the people that contribute there seem more interested in punishing the Republicans for the last seven years then they do in moving forward. They all seem to be extremely pro-Obama yet none of them pay anymore than lip service to the part of his message about disagreeing without being disagreeable and ending the partisan rancor in Washington.
I'm particularly concerned with the O'Reillyization of our political discourse. The manufactured anger. The one-sided reporting. Automatically assuming the absolute worst intentions of your opponents instead of assuming that they just have a principled disagreement with you. I flirted with Dailykos for about two weeks before my head started to hurt and I couldn't take it any longer. Ditto for Keith Olbermann. Tried watching him -- eventually came to the conclusion that he is little better than a left-wing version of Bill O'Reilly.
I would love to see a site where people on the left, right and center could come together to discuss the issues in a calm and principled manner. Hell for that matter, I'd love to see some real journalism that didn't slant to one side or the other. Closest thing I can come up with is the Newshour on PBS.
Yeah, that will make lots of friends (Score:5, Funny)
Not a stranger to technology, huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
You can't plan... (Score:5, Insightful)
He'll just end up coming across as creepy and forceful.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
McCain asking his supporters to blog on DailyKos is like MS or Apple asking their PR firms to work on web presence. I'm fairly certain that PR firms hired by companies like MS and Apple astrofturf -- but at least on Slashdot we have moderation to tune out some of it (and a realtively informed readbase), so it has to be fairly subtle to work well. I'm not sure I ca
Re:You can't plan... (Score:4, Funny)
I believe that in the biz that's referred to as "Mainstream Republican".
His wife doesnt have the time (Score:4, Funny)
He's computer illiterate (Score:5, Informative)
McCain is not the stranger to technology some think him to be.
Yes he is: McCain Admits He Doesn't Know How to Use a Computer [huffingtonpost.com].
"Effluent" ? (Score:5, Funny)
"Republican Web 2.0 consultant David All was effluent with praise"
From the MacOSX Dictionary:
liquid waste or sewage discharged into a river or the sea : the bay was contaminated the effluent from an industrial plant.
See also:
http://www.google.com/search?q=define%3A+effluent [google.com]
Oh, wait. Politician talking about a propaganda plan. I guess effluent is the correct word then. Carry on.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I can help! (Score:5, Insightful)
John McCain is a 'miserable failure', much like George W Bush. (Google take note, please) McCain wants to continue tax cuts for wealthy Americans and corporations at a time of huge national debt and rising unemployment. He wants to continue giving $2 billion/week to Iraq instead of spending that money in the US to fix infrastructure or develop mass transit to reduce use of fossil fuel. He supports torture of terror suspects. He does NOT support a new GI bill to give money for college education to veterans. He stated that he wants terrorists to see him as "their worst nightmare" (stated in an interview on the Daily Show).
I'm happy to help him get his name out there. The more people understand what he's now running for (instead of 8 years ago), the better.
If I was McCain, I wouldn't worry (Score:3, Insightful)
Crooks and Liars? What an odd choice (Score:3, Funny)
I mean, look at a few carefully cherry-picked blog posts from there:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/11/would-mccain-want-cheney-in-his-cabinet-hell-yeah/ [crooksandliars.com]
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/12/john-mccain-wont-let-the-war-stop-him-from-golfing/ [crooksandliars.com]
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/11/new-moveonorg-ad-featuring-john-cusack-take-the-bushmccain-pop-quiz/ [crooksandliars.com]
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/11/mccain-showcases-his-foreign-policy-expertise/ [crooksandliars.com]
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/11/mccains-evangelical-problem/ [crooksandliars.com]
I didn't have to hunt far to find those, and I knew I'd find them even before looking, having seen a few posts from C&L in the past. Maybe McCain's old friend Putin, the president of Germany, tipped them off about that site.
Points? (Score:4, Insightful)
Or is that on a different scale, like gold stars?
Sounds fishy to me (Score:3, Interesting)
"McCain's blogger outreach section has a handy list of political blogs which might be interested in hearing about McCain, such as the DailyKos, Crooks and Liars, and Think Progress."
I don't know Think Progress, but DailyKos and Crooks and Liars are prominent left-of-centre blogs. People who post there are probably quite familiar with Mr. McCain already, though that familiarity wouldn't be the kind his campaign might like.
This sounds to me like it isn't really about campaigning for John McCain, though. It's about setting a bunch of true believers loose to swamp sites that offer opposing viewpoints with trolls. If what I've seen is any indication, these blogs can soon expect to be flooded with posts that feature all caps and lots of pure, unadulterated nonsense.
Define: "Grassroots" (Score:3, Insightful)
Grassroots: people spontaneously talk about you, support you. Their actions are unpredictable, because, well, they are people and are not guided by a central authority.
Monolithic: top-down approach where policritter issues organizational guidelines and tells people what to do.
Looks like McCain is using the monolithic model here. Oops.
I.e., astroturfing (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would slashdotters support Obama... (Score:5, Informative)
Obama is getting money in torrents from IP people from Hollywood to Silicon Valley precisely because he is a strong proponent of doing everything with intellectual property that many slashdotters would virulently oppose. Ultimately, this issue trumps, economically, every issue that influences humanity more than even the war in Iraq or even global warming. Then, to top it all off, he wants to chop NASA's budget. Do the people on slashdot who support him actually read his "Issues" section on his web site, or do they just stop at "Yes we can."
Re:Why would slashdotters support Obama... (Score:5, Insightful)
NASA is VITAL in furthering our technology and advancing our knowledge. But what good is that technology and knowledge if we can't even keep our roads in working order or keep books in our schools?
NASA is extremely important...but if delaying a few programs that NASA has planned means we can pay teachers more and put money into infrastructure...given where our country is at the moment, I would say that is a smart thing to do.
I don't like it, but that doesn't make it wrong.
Re:Why would slashdotters support Obama... (Score:5, Interesting)
In addition to that, many of the problems in public schools also go back to what and HOW the teachers are allowed to teach. Did you know that in certain counties, if a teacher does not teach the curriculum as dictated by county law, they can be fired? It doesn't matter if the kids understand what is being taught or not...teachers can be FIRED if it isn't taught in a specific manner.
Trust me, I used to think exactly that same way that you do. Now that I am able to see what my fiance has to deal with, I assure you that the problem is not incompetent teachers.
After talking to close to 100 teachers over the past two years, I gotta say...a LOT of the problem lies in the tools they are provided, not their proficiency in using them.
You can't be expected to build a skyscraper using wet paper bags and staples.
Re:Why would slashdotters support Obama... (Score:4, Insightful)
Instead of phrasing it "pay teachers more", you should think "enable schools to hire better teachers who command higher salaries".
Of course, a lot of other things would have to change, too. Public school is full of political bullshit where if you don't follow asinine rules as a teacher, they fire you. I know a handful of excellent teachers who were willing to work for the low pay because they enjoyed teaching that were either crushed or fired. Now they do something else that pays more and won't return to education.
Why slashdotters SHOULD support Obama... (Score:5, Insightful)
Barack Obama explicitly supports Net Neutrality ("I will take a back seat to no one when it comes to Network Neutrality"), media decentralization, and universal broadband access. He supports universal file/data formats ("we will put government data online in universally accessible formats"); and he understands the inherent risks to privacy created by our new technology ("Dramatic increases in computing power, decreases in storage costs and huge flows of information that characterize the digital age bring enormous benefits, but also create risk of abuse."). And if Obama advocates reducing the NASA budget (and I have no specific information about this, it would be nice if tjstork would provide a reference), such defunding would be a re-prioritization of spending only, as he "supports doubling federal funding for basic [scientific] research."
Furthermore, Barack Obama's policy regarding technology reflects a thorough and deep understanding of the underlying issues pertinent to technology and information. John McCain will never have any personal involvement in creating a technology policy promulgated by his administration; instead he will rely on his staff, who will inevitably rely on lobbyists. The fact is that John McCain knows very very little about these issues, and that he has also shown consistently that he has no problem giving industry lobbyists free reign in his campaign. Barack Obama understands technology, and won't compromise on the central issues.
Barack Obama's technology policy is located here [barackobama.com] on barackobama.com.
Another relevant link is a talk Obama gave at Googe, where he touches on many of these issues, here [youtube.com].
Finally, to conclude from the fact that Barack Obama has accepted money from the most consistently-Democratic industrial block in the US that he will necessarily back its most outrageous demands is logically spurious. tjstork writes that "he is a strong proponent of doing everything with IP that many slashdotters would virulently oppose." I do not have any information supporting such a claim, and I would ask tjstork to provide a reference. The fact is that slashdotters are very willing to balance the interests of IP "owners" against the interests of the general public and the interests of innovation. As long as Obama recognizes that there is a balance to be struck, and is willing to *act* knowing that things are currently out of balance, I am happy to support his positions on IP. If there is anything that Barack Obama is about, it is about creating a fair and informed balance between competing interests.
It seems to me that Barack Obama is almost, if not quite, the ideal candidate for the
Dailykos is NOT moderate (Score:3, Insightful)
'Moderation' to me means a willingness to at least listen to other ideas with an open mind. This is not exemplified by Dailykos.
'Moderation' to me means disagreeing with your opponents without being disagreeable. This [dailykos.com] is not an example of treating your opponent respectfully and trying to encourage a meaningful dialog.
They're mainstream American liberal, which is what the rest of the world calls moderate since the American conservative party is so far right of center.
No, I'm sorry, they aren't 'mainstream American liberal'. They are far-left on the American political spectrum. There's nothing inherently wrong with that and they are certainly entitl
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)