Last night was the first major election that bloggers have ever won for a candidate.
Here in Northern Virginia, where our readership is at very high levels, every major blogger supported Jim Webb over Harris Miller. Almost every single elected official in NoVA supported Harris Miller. Harris was also a "longtime party activist" who had support of much of the "leadership" (ha) of the local Democratic parties.
The Northern Virginia Results?
Jim Webb 40,611 (63%)
Harris Miller 23,836 (37%)
The rest of Virginia?
Harris Miller 48,507 (53%)
Jim Webb 42,558 (47%)
I don't see how anyone can look at these numbers and not give us credit for this victory.
Miller marketed himself as a tech guru but the real tech gurus marked Miller.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 01:05 PM
Jim Webbs wins primary = Ben Tribbett's head explodes. Film at 11.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 01:08 PM
He's still waking up and "head explosion" is just a bad hangover.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 01:11 PM
Ha.
Posted by: Not Larry Sabato | June 14, 2006 at 01:16 PM
Anon. 1:05 PM:
Shrewd comment.
Posted by: J.C. Wilmore | June 14, 2006 at 01:30 PM
I am amused at the vision of Ben's head exploding.
Posted by: PoshSpice | June 14, 2006 at 01:33 PM
I am hung over as well. Not that JC or anyone in the richmond crew has any idea why, but...
Posted by: phriendlyjaime | June 14, 2006 at 01:33 PM
Eventually every existing room will be too big for Ben and his ego to co-exist in with anyone else. He'll have to build a special containment center, and he and his outsized ego will need to interact with the rest of the world solely through this blog, which will shockingly quickly devolve into post after post about how great Ben is, and how super amazing wonderful Leslie Byrne is. There won't even be any attempt at analysis, just lots of self-referential fawning, interrupted now and again by pictures and name-calling of candidates who refuse to admit that Ben is the "SMARTEST MOST AMAZING POLITICAL MAN IN THE ENTIRE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, IF NOT THE WORLD, IF NOT THE UNIVERSE AND THE ONLY REASON IT'S ONLY THE SMARTEST MAN IS BECAUSE LESLIE BYRNE IS NOT OFFICIALLY A MAN." Not too long after that, Ben's ego will actually grow so big it will, in a worldwide first, actually develop physical weight and crush him in his sleep. He will die a virgin.
Head explosion now might be a better way to go.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 01:40 PM
"I don't see how anyone can look at these numbers and not give us credit for this victory."
While I believe that very much, unless you can demonstrate that the blogs swayed any opinion or that you even had 5,000 undecided primary voters reading the blogs, this is just silly.
And FWIW, while I voted for Webb yesterday, the pro-Webb bloggers made me much more inclined to vote for Miller.
Posted by: Not Ben | June 14, 2006 at 01:41 PM
Unfortunately, NLS, there is no evidence that bloggers swung the primary.
The theme seems to be that since Webb did well in NVA-and according to those here, NVA residents are the only ones who use the Internet or read blogs—then it must because those Northern Virgians are more politically astute and read blogs.
Not a great argument.
However, since by all accounts the Webb campaign was pitiful in most any other category, I will say that blogs may have deserved some credit. But it could also be argued that in NVA, many of the thousands of liberals that moved out of DC in the past 6 years were swayed more by endorsements from national Dems than Virginia blogs.
But instead of patting yourself on the back about a primary victory, NLS, why don't you wait to see if a win over Allen can be pulled off.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 01:42 PM
You know...
I have never met Ben-I have seen his pic on Perseverando, but I have never met him. I would like to, though, bc he seems really interesting. But he's got some haters here I have noticed, and I have to say-you all just make him seem more appealing.
I heart NLS
Posted by: phriendlyjaime | June 14, 2006 at 01:43 PM
Sounds like another case of the rooster taking credit for the morning.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 01:48 PM
Definitely get to know him, Jaime. To know him is to eventally hate him. No one starts out that way, but you can't actually know him without eventually despising him. It's sad, really.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 01:50 PM
Sounds to me like bloggers need to get off the net and knocking on the doors in SW VA.
Wire those people damn it!
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 01:50 PM
woah...what's pastor john talking about????
http://notlarrysabato.typepad.com/doh/2006/06/waiting_for_nls.html#comment-18547036
Posted by: Not Pastor John | June 14, 2006 at 01:51 PM
Harris Miller outspent Webb 2 to 1 and still lost... A sign of things to come for Allen? I hope so
Posted by: UVA08 | June 14, 2006 at 01:53 PM
I think he sounds funny. And hate takes too much energy.
I heart NLS
Posted by: phriendlyjaime | June 14, 2006 at 01:58 PM
1:40 Anon: Oh, wow. You crack me up. That's beautiful.
Jaime- You, my friend, need to get to know him before saying that you love him or hate him. Most people, when they really get to know Ben, end up not liking him too much. The sad part is, he's never quite sure why...
Posted by: Melissa | June 14, 2006 at 01:58 PM
Misc. coverage ...
Webb 'Revolution' :
http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?article=67097&paper=0&cat=109
Bob Lewis/Recent AP wire ...
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2075695
National Review:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTY4YTZhZWM2YmZmN2YwNGVkM2IwZTg0YmM0NWUwMDI=
Culpepper * :
http://www.starexponent.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=CSE/MGArticle/CSE_MGArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1149188464816
Daily Progress :
http://www.dailyprogress.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=CDP%2FMGArticle%2FCDP_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1149188462900&path=!news
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 02:01 PM
Well, whatever the reason-he certainly gets a lot of attention. I just find it really interesting and pretty amusing.
Melissa-never said I loved him, I just "heart" him. I'm not that easy. ;)
Posted by: phriendlyjaime | June 14, 2006 at 02:01 PM
Jaime- My bad. Most people don't "heart" him either though. Ben most certainly gets a lot of press though. Like a car accident, we cannot look away. Alas.
Posted by: Melissa | June 14, 2006 at 02:09 PM
Anon 1:40 I heart you.
Posted by: NotaBlogger | June 14, 2006 at 02:12 PM
It's interesting that Webb took NoVa - where voters are more likely to have Internet access and Tech Savvy. He didn't take the rest of VA. Will his campaign energy transition well from the blogs to the winding roads of the rest of VA? I hope so because of course Allen must go. But this is a word to the bloggers -- break away from your computers and give money and shoe leather to Webb in the rest of the state.
Posted by: DemMajority | June 14, 2006 at 02:13 PM
Northern Virginia voters generally are especially pissed off about UNFAIR negative campaign tactics, as reflected in the Kaine/Kilgore tally, and now Democratic primary voters in the Webb/Miller tally.
This is not all about bloggers. Blogs are increasing in reach and effectiveness, I would argue, but this is much more a combination of the following two things in NoVA:
1) Anger at UNFAIR negative attacks.
2) Democratic grassroots strength continually increasing across NoVA, and the grassroots' propensity for anti-establishment candidates.
PERIOD.
Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | June 14, 2006 at 02:28 PM
Not Harry F Byrd Sr. speculated that many of our electeds who endorsed Miller may be very out of touch with the grassroots.
I understand this idea, and think there is merit to it in SOME cases. However, I'd argue that moreso than they are "out-of-touch," they don't forget that the power structures of the NoVA Dem establishment remain largely an insiders group that Harris was a very influential member of. And money. Harris' support could've simply been largely about money.
Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | June 14, 2006 at 02:30 PM
The "dollar democrats" have for quite a while tilted towards those that fund them and not that vote for them.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 02:41 PM
Doug in Mt. Vernon:
Harris support from the NOVA insiders" (ie electeds) was about long-standing friendships with Miller. Most of the electeds who have been around a long time have known Harris Miller for years.
There was a lot of loyalty among that group. How could they not support him. Especially since many pledged their support before Webb even committed to running. Those electeds will do all they can to support Webb and beat Allen.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 02:44 PM
Someone said: "there is no evidence that bloggers swung the primary"
Someone with insight and wicked humor said: "Miller marketed himself as a tech guru but the real tech gurus marked Miller."
I don't think that the offshore outsourcing and H-1b visa replacement worker issue would have received the attention it did were it not for the bloggers. Individual, inquisitive voters doing Google searches would have found my articles and postings on IT worker/anti-outsourcing sites along with Matloff's and Sanchez' BUT they would not have entered the common discussion without the assist of bloggers.
I'd like to add that Sona Shah, who posted a letter on my blog was actually calling for Jim Webb discussing the issues she wrote about and directing people to web sites where voters could read material for themselves.
I have a posting on TMP, RK and DK today about how I believe the blogosphere swung votes among the tech savvy.
Posted by: info_tech_guy | June 14, 2006 at 02:45 PM
Bashing Democratic elected officials is not a good way to help beat Allen. I understand passions are still running high, but remember people, focus.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 02:46 PM
Webb won Lynchburg in part due to the Voter's League endorsement and also due to work by some folks on the LDC who believed in Webb.
Posted by: martha | June 14, 2006 at 02:48 PM
WTOP political analyst Mark Plotkin attributes Webb's strong showing in NoVA to the endorsements of the 11 current and former senators.
He said NoVA is Washington-centric and pro-Kerry. NoVA voters pays attention to such high-level endorsements. The rest of the state's voters give them far less weight.
The endorsements reached 10000 times more voters than the blogs.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 02:57 PM
Speaking of techies taking out Miller: this was the #1 hit on google for "Harris Miller" : http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002254.htm
This was the #1 google "Jim Webb" hit : http://www.jameswebb.com/
( I think there was a insider at Google helping Webb. Thanks, buddy !!! )
For inquisitive minds, it was an easy choice.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 03:01 PM
Anon 2:44. Exactly my point. Call it friendship, or call it inner-circle power concentration. It's all the same.
Trouble for Miller was, the power balance is shifting.
Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | June 14, 2006 at 03:02 PM
And I agree, we'll ALL pull together and fight it out against Allen. That was never a question in my mind. When the republic is endangered, there is no other choice.
Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | June 14, 2006 at 03:04 PM
Hu My name is Jim I have met NLS today and I voted with his family for Jim Webb yesterday in a Roanoke County Va where his grandma lives. Near where the hillbilly weather vane is. NLS is responsible for the people who voted in our community. Good work NlS keep it going I was a Republican and tired of the way they are handling the war. Tired of the way they handle Veterans affairs, tax breaks for the rich and job declines. Especially gas prices. Thanks again NLS for opening my eyes
Posted by: JB | June 14, 2006 at 03:08 PM
See? I stand by my statement:
I heart NLS
Posted by: phriendlyjaime | June 14, 2006 at 03:10 PM
I don't think the outsourcing issue really effected this primary in any substantial way......
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 03:13 PM
Melissa, is it like a car accident? Or simply circus curiosity?
Sorry Ben, but it was too easy.
But seriously Jaime, Ben's insights on politics are often quite good (despite his overly engrossed ego), and even if he sometimes can be rather (ok, extremely) shrewd/rude/sexist, he is not a bad person.
That's my take.
Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | June 14, 2006 at 03:14 PM
shrewd and rude are fine; I grew up in Northern Jersey.
::ducks::
Sexist? Hmmmmmmm, not sure about that one being a characteristic I enjoy.
Posted by: phriendlyjaime | June 14, 2006 at 03:25 PM
Did it ever dawn on you that there ae more Democrats in NOVA than the rest of the state? Gerymandering is a wonderful thing when you think about it. So don't pat yourself too much on the back.
Posted by: BDM | June 14, 2006 at 03:27 PM
"Outsourcing" issue did have effect: union support gave Jim Democratic respectiblity. Some of the few issues Jim and Harris separated themselves on the debates was "guest workers", "outsourcing" and "populism". Jim put it out there and Harris couldn't respond. Fine points on Iraq were another issue and who was the real Republican sympathizer and who was more electable were other issues. There are a lot of Americans more interested in solid middle class jobs than buying cheap crap at Walmart. Jim stood up for Mom and Dad while Miller stood up for Microsoft. A lot of Democrats don't mind throttling back "globalism" a little and Jim spoke their language.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 03:30 PM
your right, the candidates had nothing to do with it, it was all blogs. That makes so much sense
Posted by: this is sad | June 14, 2006 at 04:12 PM
Doug & Anon 2:44
1 current Northern Virginia legislator endorsed Webb and a couple of constitutional officers. Chap & Leslie aren't presently elected.
It wasn't that way last year. Whipple, Saslaw, et al. endorsed Puckett last year.
Certainly, some folks endorsed Miller out of long-standing loyalty, but not all of them.
Bottom line is that some senators seem to live in a bubble. Why was the Northern Virginia Democratic establishment was so quick to circle the wagons when confronted by an outsider?
Just as Joel Klein said in Time the other day:
"Liberals hunt down heretics, Michael Kinsley once wrote, while conservatives happily chase converts. Webb is a convert in a party that mistrusts converts. His candidacy is a litmus test for a party that loves litmus tests."
http://www.time.com/time/columnist/klein/article/0,9565,1200712,00.html
The establishment needs to open up a bit.
Posted by: Not Harry F. Byrd, Sr. | June 14, 2006 at 04:19 PM
I sacrificed a goat that three pregnant chickens to the moon goddess Góntia on Monday night to ensure Jim Webb’s victory. You bloggers had nothing to do with it, it was all me.
By the way, I have some leftover chicken pot pies and chevon sausages in the fridge if anyone would like some.
Posted by: Not Frank Purdue | June 14, 2006 at 05:06 PM
Hello, and begging for many pardons on confusion of differences. It was my colleagues and Samir, myself, that can be acknowledged for the victory of Mr. Harris Webb.
Posted by: Samir | June 14, 2006 at 05:18 PM
I think blogs a few things that helped Webb win:
1. Organize the draft.
2. Champion and craft the pre-campaign messages of "electability", "crossover appeal", "American Greatnesss", "nationalize this race / the 6th senate seat", and Webb as key to building an "enduring Democratic Majority for the 21st century."
3. Countering Miller's negativism.
4. Promoting anti-Miller memes such as "H1-B czar", "litmus test democrats", "atwater/Kilgore politics"
5. Energizing volunteers.
6. Messaging to volunteers, activists and electeds who read blogs.
That last little bit was key, I think, because at any moment Kerry or Shumer could check a blog and see a dozen devoted Webb-heads fighting for their guy.
Ultimately, I think the big wins NoVa came from the National endorsements, especially Kerry. I wonder if blogs didn't influence those national endorsements at all. I'd like to think they did. Who can tell?
I think bloggers did a great job of creating the necessary and impenetrable echo-chamber that made this primary a referrendum on "electability". Miller couldn't challenge it. Whenever Miller went off on how badly Dems need to get rid of Allen, he couldn't say for sure that he was the guy to do it.
It became conventional wisdom that he wasn't.
The effectivness of all this is just conjecture, but one thing is powerfully certain: Jim Webb is the best candidate to defeat George Allen, build the Democratic party across Virginia, and fight for American Greatness in the US Senate. Bloggers had nothing to do with that. That's all Jim Webb.
Posted by: Webb Defeats Allen | June 14, 2006 at 05:24 PM
On a serious note, I don't know if Webb can beat Allen, but I do know he'll poll 6-9 points higher than Miller. How does that range sound? Miller was looking at pulling 38-43 percent, I would say Webb is looking at polling in the 44-52 range, which is a good range for a challenger to an incumbent. If Allen makes a few mistakes or the economy starts to tank or really, just about anything that makes the national mood any more negative than it is now, then Webb polls even higher.
Right now, I say that Webb has about a 40% chance of winning, but the campaign, which will certainly be interesting, has not begun.
Posted by: Not Frank Purdue | June 14, 2006 at 05:36 PM
Bloggers and especially you, NLS, can certainly take a great deal of credit for the Webb victory. You did it by whipping up a new "base."
Unfortunately, you didn't seem to have much impact outside this relatively small base. It might be argued that some of the base-rousing oversold Webb to his detriment and was close to being "over-the-top," thus turning off some conventional voters.
Who knows? You won and congrats are in order. I think you know, however, that you don't have the ideal candidate you thought you did and absent further deterioration in Iraq and a new scandal or two, the road to victory is full of potholes and caution lights.
Let's just hope for the holy grail, an issues campaign with minimal personal attacks and distracting rumor and innuendo.
Posted by: Eraserhead | June 14, 2006 at 05:54 PM
Ben, you appear to be making a common mistake. You have declared blogs to be a CAUSE of Webb's NOVA performance, ignoring the possibility/probability that blog support for Webb was more an EFFECT of some other cause (e.g., Dem bloggers are pro-union, unions were anti-Miller, ergo bloggers were pro-Webb) or merely a coincidence.
Posted by: Ken Cuccinelli | June 14, 2006 at 06:26 PM
Eraser, I think that conventional voters can deal with heated blog discussions. The spin that bloggers drove sane people into sympathizing with "Miller the victim" and alsmost cost Webb the election is bad post game analysis. Political junkies, casual users and lurkers know pretty much what they're in for when the come to a partisan political blog. Most can take as good as they give. I don't think anybody was expecting a Suzy Derkins tea party around here.
Posted by: Head Erased | June 14, 2006 at 06:26 PM
Even though I voted for Webb, I was almost hoping he'd lose because of the horrid attacks on Harris Miller by Mr. Tribbitt and the like. There was a total absence of class throughout this entire primary season from this blog and others. It was just one snotty and scurrilous comment after another. Bask in your glory today. It won't last forever, and people will remember what a jerk you were long after they have forgotten the issues and candidates.
Posted by: Not Frank Hargrove | June 14, 2006 at 06:27 PM
I think the blogs overestimate their readership and their influence.
I think BLOGGERS and their readers were a big part, but that's because they were and are activists who do major things for candidates. The blogs are just another thing they do, and I doubt Ben and the gang would have sat on their behinds if they didn't have a blog.
If I were a democrat, I would be spinning this to say that Webb won the primary because he had broad-based appeal to the voters in Northern Virginia, NOT that he was an inept and hopeless campaigner who won only because a bunch of partisan activists used the web to smear his opponent into oblivion.
But that's probably another reason why I'm not a democrat.
Posted by: charles | June 14, 2006 at 06:31 PM
NFH, people don't come here to watch "Barney", they come here to watch "The Simpsons". Sooner or later everybody and everything gets lambasted in a forum like this.
Posted by: Erased Head | June 14, 2006 at 06:34 PM
I wasn't sure the impact we were having until I went door to door, and then on election day at the polls. After that I am very confident we threw this election.
Posted by: Not Larry Sabato | June 14, 2006 at 06:35 PM
Charles, please. "Attack the opponents strength" -K. Rove
Webb won handily in a hard fought primary with a grassroots campaign that overcame an agressive opponent who spent a lot of money.
Spin it anyway you want.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 06:39 PM
I highly doubt the Webb campaign would have publicly thanked the blogosphere both in speeches and on his website, including naming people outright, if he didn't think that the bloggers had an effect on the election. Cillizza also named them a winner of the day, and Allen, the Republicans and the Beyers as losers.
Get over it-the blogosphere did have something to do with the election, just as Webb's appeal did with the voters. The right wing is just continuously pissed off about the blogosphere bc they don't have their slimy fingers wrapped around it. Freepers vs Kos? Redstate vs MyDD? No fucking contest, none.
Posted by: phriendlyjaime | June 14, 2006 at 08:12 PM
Here's my spin:
Webb won spending narry a penny, nor a second outside of NoVA. Now with the party united and the national Dems seeing Allen's seat in play, Webb should have the resources to challenge Allen in every part of the Commonwealth to take the fight directly to his front door.
If I'm Allen or an Allen partizan I'm deeply concerned and I start talking about how everyone should play nice.
Oh! Look! George Allen's "swiftboat" smear artist guy is throwing out sunshine happy talk.
http://www.raisingkaine.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3078
Right on time. Happy. Happy. Joy. Joy.
Posted by: Webb Defeats Allen | June 14, 2006 at 08:12 PM
The Webb bloggers deserve props for this one.
Also, it's interesting to note that a number of Webb's volunteers worked on the Dean and Clark campaigns in 2004. Not all these folks were part of the blogger network (although there was undoubtedly some overlap).
Posted by: JPTERP | June 14, 2006 at 08:12 PM
tradesports.com has Webb offer at $20. Momentum is with Webb. Virginia primary is "in play".
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 08:26 PM
oops. I mean Virginia general is "in play". sorry.
Posted by: | June 14, 2006 at 08:27 PM
The low support in the rest of VA could come from the fact that near the end, Webbs campaign people really pissed us off. Article after article in newspapers all over the state, we were portayed as ignorants who didn't know any better. I'd like to remind his staff that this is the same area that Webb talks of in his book. Now I must say I did vote for Webb. But someone needs to light a fire under his staff because they didn't make it easy.
Posted by: ms.garlick | June 14, 2006 at 08:45 PM
Well, if blogging is all about attention seeking (which it is), then this sort of claim certainly is in-bounds, even if there is absolutely no empirical evidence whatsoever that blogs had anything to do with the election. How many unique hits does NLS and all the other bloggers get in a given day? This is a self-licking ice cream cone if ever I saw one.
On the other hand, as a Webb supporter, I thought he should have pulled in 60%. Perhaps his (poor) showing was due to the blogs - they pulled him down. Certainly I was more likely to support Miller because of the relentlessly negative, unfair, and off-base attacks on Miller that appeared in this blog and elsewhere.
Let's hope everyone pulls in the same direction and we can whip Allen. I would love to see his soft teeth shoved down his throat in November. I'd even let NLS do it and cheer him on!
Posted by: Interested Observer | June 14, 2006 at 08:52 PM
ms. garlick-
please back up those facts with some links to articles and any other report clearly written by a Webb campaign staffer pertaining to what you are insinuating. I never saw one, and I am wondering if it really was the campaign's doing, bc I had heard (and I hate to bring it up, the primary is over) that Harris Miller's campaign had the most pull over the VA media.
I'm not attacking, just interested in seeing what you speak of is all.
Posted by: phriendlyjaime | June 14, 2006 at 08:58 PM
If Jim Webb was really born fighting, why is he so willing to cut and run in Iraq?
point one: If Jim Webb got his wish for US Forces to leave Iraq, we would have never been in position to capture or kill Al-Zarqawi, Who was THE AL-QAEDA operative in Iraq;
point two: If Jim Webb got his wish for US Forces to leave Iraq, the battleground in the global war on terrorisim would be fought in the streets of Fairfax and Arlington instead of the alleyways of Ramadi, Fallujah, and Baghdad;
point three: If Jim Webb got his wish for US Forces to leave Iraq, the jihadist movement would sense weakness in the US position--declare victory in Iraq--and it would start to move aggressively against US interests worldwide, therefore expanding the war on terrorisim;
point four: Jim Webb has failed to lay out a vision for stopping the jihadist movement dead in its tracks, the Democrat vision of simply doing nothing to stop the jihadists invites swift defeat of all freedom loving people. Does Jim Webb still fail to realize that we are truly in the middle of a global war on jihadisim?
Posted by: All Natural Fancy Feast | June 14, 2006 at 10:14 PM
That's a pretty wordy attempt to cover Bush's failed war in Iraq which has served to destabilize the Middle East, create a civil war, and send gas prices over $3/gallon.
More fear-based ignorance from the shrill right. Welcome to the party. We figured you'd be along any time.
Here are a few talking points for you:
Say 9/11 a lot!
also, say flip-flopper, cut and run, blame America, and amnesty. Ohh, that'll be good.
The "fight the jihaadists in Arlington" image was choice. Keep on screaming that from the rooftops, as the right-wing extremists who now own your party sell the constitution to the highest bidder, and try to sell ignorance, hate, and greed as the word of God.
Welcome. I'm sure we'll be seeing you around.
Posted by: Webb Defeats Allen | June 14, 2006 at 10:38 PM
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! All Natural Fancy Feet aka Wayne Ozmore is cutting and pasting all over the place!
He's a CRAAAAAAAAAAZY fast cut and paster!
Posted by: phriendlyjaime | June 14, 2006 at 10:59 PM
And the Republicans begin! Mr. Ozmore, is that you?
The card has been played: Weak on Terror. Results in neutralized military background, paints victim as lacking will to defend Americans (Note: when played with "9/11" card, makes voters susceptible to emotional appeals involving Rudy Guiliani, firemen, and pro-war Republicans)
Response?
"Osama bin Laden" card: refutes "We're winning, we got Zarqawi" argument. 5 years after Pearl Harbor we had won, begun rebuilding Europe and Japan, and demobilized most of the Army. Failure to capture or kill bin Laden is the most damning indictment of this administration's inability to protect Americans and destroy al-Qaida.
"False Choice" card: refutes "fight them there or here" argument. Leaving Iraq does not mean we abandon Homeland Security, do nothing to secure our borders, and do not continue to monitor and combat terrorist activities. It means we move our troops out of Iraq, which should never have been lumped together with the war on terrorism.
"Military principle" card: refutes "if we leave we will be weak" argument. It is always preferable to defend positions of strength than to attempt to hold onto a tenuous position under attack. American troops are sitting under attack, often unable to return fire due to the civilian presence. By withdrawing to a defendable position, the terrorists must leave their civilian shields in order to attack, and full force may be used to great efficiency.
"Bullsh*t" card: refutes crazy, overblown, and irrational arguments. First, Democrats want to stop terrorists, but who are jihadists? When did we start fighting Islam? Second, leaving Iraq will not lead to the "swift defeat of all freedom loving people." It means we won't have troops in Iraq any more. All indications point to many freedom loving people all over the world who will not be defeated by these "jihadists" when we leave. Third, Webb knows we are fighting terrorists, but what is "jihadism"? Is that like fundamentalism? Are we at war with that? And since when, even in a global war with anyone, do we have to fight everywhere? Why not pick and choose where we fight in order to maximize our strengths and minimize our losses?
Oh yeah. Osama bin Laden. Shut up.
Posted by: Adam Sharp | June 14, 2006 at 11:06 PM
Ah, there it is! Thanks, Mr. Ozmore!
What's that I hear? No, it couldn't be! But it IS! Oh yes, that's the first strains of the "soft teeth/whiny throat/freedom AIN'T free/love it or leave it/red diaper doper babies/bunch a babies who love terrorism and hate America" symphony! Oh, and it's in the key of B flat; it's lovely!
Why, yes, kind sir, I WILL have a glass of that kool aid while I listen to the music! And please do leave some of that "your vagina is my damn business, not yours" literature with me, I will read it as I carve "death to all gays" over and over into this tree next to me, which I will then cut down bc the environment is a magical place, not affected by global warming, and God will keep us all safe and free from the oceans anyway, just like Bush the great said!
Yes, yes, PLAY THAT FUNKY MUSIC, WHITE BOY, PLAY IT LOUD! Wave as many flags as you can! Kneel down and pray, and never forget 911! NEVER FORGET!
Posted by: phriendlyjaime | June 14, 2006 at 11:17 PM
You know, people actually listen to the stuff he's pushing.
You might want to try combatting it instead of mocking it.
That is, unless you can get another 500,000 people who are just like you to vote in Virginia this year.
Posted by: Adam Sharp | June 14, 2006 at 11:47 PM
Adam Sharp,
Great work.
I will give Mr. Ozmore props for dipping his toe in tonight, but it really is a shame folks like him have convinced so many and cost America so much.
Posted by: Webb Defeats Allen | June 15, 2006 at 12:10 AM
Listen, I am, sorry for the sarcasm. It's just, you read it over and over and over agaiun, and sometimes you have to laugh at it.
Posted by: phriendlyjaime | June 15, 2006 at 08:34 AM
Fancy Feast--if you really are concerned about militant jihadists--you should have no problem deciding between these two options:
I would rather have a decorated war veteran who has actually fought first-hand in an asymetrical war, a man who served as assistant secretary of defense, a man who has served as Secretary of Navy guiding U.S. foreign policy decisions.
--OR--
I would rather have a college QB making decisions that effect the lives of our nation's service men and women.
The answer shouldn't be difficult. If it is . . .
Posted by: JPTERP | June 15, 2006 at 10:22 PM