MyDD :: Which bloggers are now working with Rosenberg?

Which bloggers are now working with Rosenberg?

by concerned democrat, Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 01:29:04 PM EST

I know that his new NPI groups includes Trippi and Kos. I just don't know which others. I thought I read on here last night that Jerome was meeting with Trippi (this week-end?) Don't see it now.

I found this at Simon's blog recently, which led me to believe that this group was working with or perhaps for Wesley Clark as well...maybe part of the New Security Democrats. It looks like he met with NDN to discuss security. NDN meets with Clark

During the campaign for chair, I think BOP and/or Stirling Newberry were working with Simon Rosenberg just as Trippi was.

Stirling has a love letter about Wes Clark today at Daily Kos. Polls are all over Kos and here all seeming very accepting of Clark's huge win.

So I think I sort of know how people felt when they were talking about the bloggers working for Dean's campaign. It wasn't so much that there was anything wrong....it just boggled the mind trying to keep up with nuances and changing attitudes toward things.

I feel that way now. Sort of wondering about the changing landscape, the new acceptance of possibly skewed polls. Honestly, how I feel is that many of my favorite bloggers are aligning with NDN. NDN appears to be part of the DLC, PPI, and Third Way network. Their main goal is national security. Does that meeting with Clark signify a sort of quiet endorsement? Or not.

It is uncomfortable to feel the winds shifting and to not be sure which way they are blowing. Or why they are changing.

Tags: (all tags)

Permalink :: 14 Comments :: Post a Comment

Trying the link again. (none / 0)

http://www.ndnblog.org/archives/2005_04.html

by concerned democrat on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 01:34:56 PM EST

Jerome made a comment (none / 0)

that he was stopping by Trippi's ranch for a visit. He will report when he gets back. He is also working to finish the book he is writing with Markos.

This is a very good question. I've been getting a suspicion that NDN was going to be supporting the National Security Democrats.

If so, I'm agin 'em. I don't care which bloggers they are working with. I will be a single issue voter in 2006 and 2008. I will vote against a pro-war Democrat or a "stay the course" Democrat, I don't care what the stakes are.

If my vote was the difference between a Republican Senate and a Democratic Senate, but I had to vote for Feinstein, the Senate would go Republican.

by Gary Boatwright on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 02:08:25 PM EST

Re: Jerome made a comment (none / 0)

No matter what, there should be some transparency.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 02:15:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I've got to bookmark more things (none / 0)

I remember seeing a comic a month back with Bush in a canoe about to go over a waterfall and screaming "Stay the course!!!"

Iraq is fucked.

Could it have been done right? Perhaps. But that path likely involved the UN and the Arab League.

Any path that posited America without troops from so much as a single Arab ally was begging for an us-and-them scenario.

Not even our puppets in the Middle East, such as Egypt, wanted any part of this war.

Had we pressed the UN for a mandate, and then done everything in power to rbing the Arab League and the EU on board, we would have carried much more legitimacy into this business.

But, without that sort of legitimacy, this war is exposed for what it is: the first pawn moving forward in the budding Resources Wars.

In that light, America has two wars -- not one -- that it needs to get out of.

by jcjcjc on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 02:16:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

And another thing. (none / 0)

I also think that online news media who are working FOR a certain group should clarify that as well.

At the website of the Third Way, a DLC group of Democrats which include Lieberman and Hillary...it states that The New Republic hosted a forum for the group at the Aspen Institute. That indicates probable coordination of message.

In Ari Berman's article, The Strategic Class, he also mentions that Slate hosted such a conference (as well as TNR), though I have not found further reference.

I want to know when I getting spun around in circles. I want to know if posts are part of a group effort or an individual's unrequited love for a candidate.

by concerned democrat on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 02:29:38 PM EST

Sort of guilty? (none / 0)

For the record, when I was writing at DemWatch, I endorsed Simon's bid for chair (you can actually see a ton of his endorsements at his old campaign site). That said, I haven't personally had any contact with Simon or NDN (outside of being on their mailing list) since then.

The reason I mention this is that a lot of the blogosphere folks who've aligned themselves with Simon do so because we like where he's coming from when he talks about building party infrastructure. It's not a reflection of acceptance of DLC national security ideology, as seems to be your concern. I can't really prove that per se, but Markos would probably be the last person to ever align himself with the DLC, and he's working with NDN, so that should say something.

by Scott Shields on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 02:31:10 PM EST

I agree with a lot of what you say. (none / 0)

Actually I like what I have seen of Simon, but I need to know if he is a continuation still of the DLC mindset.

I think we need to know, as wolves in sheep's clothing are appearing all over the place. Here is a post about The Third Way which caught my interest. I had heard of them, but I did not realize how controlling they were planning to be on the Democratic agenda.

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2005/8/1/04759/79519

Again, will someone give me the html for posting a link. I have done it quite often, but today it is not working.

by concerned democrat on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 02:36:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh, and please tell me how to post a link here. (none / 0)

I thought it was just like at Kos and Booman, but I can't get that to work. I have posted links here before, but today the method does not seem to work.

Help.

by concerned democrat on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 02:31:38 PM EST

I find this offensive (none / 0)

I make money in the following three ways: I do some consulting for Jerome's company, I have a revenue sharing agreement on MyDD for Blogads money, and once and a while I receive things like a laptop from the community. That's it.

However, as a volunteer, I work with what, at least to me, is an astonishing number of Democratic groups and individuals. I work with whoever I believe can help bring about the sort of change that. Over the past year and a half I think I have made my vision perfectly clear through my writing here at MyDD. And it is all done for free.

What I particularly object to in this diary is the notion that you want to compile some sort of list of people who are working with a Democrat you do not like. That is nothing short of left-wing McCarthyism. Are bloggers who work with Rosenberg, who is more dedicated to helping to build a left wing message machine than anyone else in the country, worthy of being shunned, or something because when he broke with the DLC he didn't break far enough? Seriously, what the fuck do you want such a list for?

I don't know where the notion that bloggers have a hidden agenda comes from. I think we are perfectly upfront about which groups we associate with: BlogPac, DFA, MoveOn, NDN, The Online Coalition, Common Cause, Media Matters, CAPs, party committees, etc. These associations tend to be of the extremely informal variety. If that isn't good enough for you, I don't imagine anything else would be.

If it wasn't for someone like Simon Rodenberg, every Democratic staffer in the country would not have read the report Stoller and I put together on the blogosphere. If it wasn't for David Brock, how many right-wing smears would have gone unchallenged, no matter how many blogs trumpted them? If it wasn't for groups like CAPs, how much worse would blogger be in interviews? If it wasn't for groups like DFA, how inept and ineffectual would our attempts to send progressive, grassroots candidates to office be? If it wasn't for BlogPac, how much ad revenue would liberal bloggers have lost, and how poorly would we have done in the Social Security fight?

Any two-party system requires broad, interwoven coalitions. Many bloggers are trying to build that. The last thing we need to do is compile some sort of list so we can burn a few heretics at the stake.

by Chris Bowers on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 02:46:53 PM EST

Re: I find this offensive (none / 0)

No need to be offended.

There is a reason why organizations like OpenSecrets exists... because it DOES make a difference if a candidate to touting the environment when it shows that the biggest donors are oil companies or dirty industries.

So if this is asked of candidates, it should not be taken personally for the same to be asked of consultants... who can sometimes become more powerful than elected officials.

There are a few questions that have been niggling me for awhile. What is Rosenbergs OFFICIAL relationship to the DLC, not just heresay? I think that is a fair question since it was Lieberman who co-founded NDN.

Also, no one is suggesting that consultants should sign an oath of poverty or that they can not accept fees for work. If they are good they should command the most appropriate fees for their work. However, it does help with tranparency to know who is paying whom...

Second question...Is there a full list of the "Rich Liberals" that gave to the Democratic Alliance?

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 03:05:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It was not meant to be offensive. (none / 0)

It is expressing a vague feeling many have had lately about what is going on with the party.

I admire Simon, I admire all of you bloggers. No offense meant. Just a sense that 08 is here way too early, and there are agendas in place for our party that we don't understand.

I guess that is the way it is. No offense was meant. Sorry it came across that way.

by concerned democrat on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 03:02:35 PM EST

You're both right (none / 0)

Transperancy is very important. It is also important to work with people who share the goal of electing Democrats. There were MANY things about Clinton's presidency with which I took issue, but compared to Bush? C'mon. I think its important to ensure that the process by which the party's agenda is crafted is as democratic as possible. Our primary system allows a pretty decent opportunity to champion your idea of what the party should be. I wish more people were involved in it. The first step is being accomplished on wonderful blogs such as this. We are hammering out ideas and crafting a (hopefully) coherent message for our party. Feingold took a stand and caught some poll mojo for differentiating himself from the rest of the pro-war, anti-Bush Potentials. Us rank'n'filers want someone who has opposed this whole stupid war from the beginning like we did. If there is one thing politicians know, its how to position themselves to ride a wave of public opinion. I don't buy the idea that Dems should focus on security in the present sense of the term. Kerry tried to win (read: LOST) by saying the war was right but he would've executed it better. Baloney. So, yes, I am worried that these groups (NDN, DLC whatever) exert disproportionate influence within the party. But recent blog polls boosting Russ show that we may not be sheep to be led around after all.

by hazzcon on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 05:12:01 PM EST

whatever (none / 0)

I'm tired of full disclosure, for now on, the new rules are no disclosure;)

by Jerome Armstrong on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 06:35:15 PM EST

Thanks for the response. (none / 0)

I notice in your new post you refer to the blogsphere wondering. I was not aware of that when I posted my question today.

I am not a blogger. I take part on blogs, but I never asked a question like that before.

I only asked the question because of the easy acceptance of the polls. Because of the recent moves within our own party to emphasize building the military and to allow the control of women's rights.

I also asked it because of the recent meetings at the DNC with groups that want to regulate the rights of women. One of those groups did not support Kerry last year, yet they were allowed to announce their 95/10 plan at HQ.

It is hard to see the changing atmosphere, and be hesitant to question. I never meant it to be offensive. I respect this is your blog, and I will be careful not to offend again.

Sorry.

by concerned democrat on Fri Aug 19, 2005 at 07:06:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.