Does this stuff count as a campaign ad? Is Richardson paying for it? I know progressive/liberal blogs get criticized for being tools and mouthpieces for Democratic politicians. Usually though they defend themselves against such slurs and proclaim some semblance of impartiality in their study of the game. Will volunteers for Hillary, Edwards, Obama, Biden, Dodd and the rest be given equal time here? Maybe I missed the blog's offical endorsement of Richardson for President.
Posted by steve duncan at September 5, 2007 10:35 AMNice campaign ad.
Why it's like Princess Sparkle Pelosi's troll coming here during the last election and telling us all of the wunnerful things she was going to do in the House LeaderSheep. All of it was utter bullshit.
Posted by phidipides at September 5, 2007 10:44 AMAs far a I know, other candidates are receiving equal time, and my posts should not be considered as an endorsement of Bill Richardson by The Left Coaster, but as a candidate supporter diary bringing you information about the Richardson campaign.
Posted by Ken Camp at September 5, 2007 10:45 AMWill volunteers for Hillary, Edwards, Obama, Biden, Dodd and the rest be given equal time here?
Scroll down, steve; note the call for volunteers to write about the candidates. The proprieters of this blog are trying to provide full coverage of all the candidates - you want to volunteer?
Posted by iamcoyote at September 5, 2007 10:48 AMScroll down, steve; note the call for volunteers to write about the candidates. The proprieters of this blog are trying to provide full coverage of all the candidates - you want to volunteer?
Posted by iamcoyote
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coverage? Reporters "cover" a story. Is Mr. Camp's post "coverage"? Maybe it is in the same sense Sean Hannity covers the Clinton campaign. What little I know of journalism leads me to believe a little praise and criticism get dished out, along with a heaping amount of demonstrably neutral observations. Maybe Mr. Camp could flesh out his coverage and detail some of Mr. Richardson's shortcomings, foibles and potential deficiencies were he elected President. You know, in the interest of accurately "covering" the candidate.
steve, if you want smear, I'm sure Fox "News" will give it to you. You want to tell people how to run the blog - email Steve Soto. Or, instead of complaining, why don't you refute the points Ken makes? Blog posts are pretty much just an opportunity to add your two cents to the discussion. And complain about the unfairness of it all, I suppose, but I find discussion more fun.
Posted by iamcoyote at September 5, 2007 11:13 AMsince steve duncan didn't get it the FIRST time:
"Scroll down, steve; note the call for volunteers to write about the candidates. The proprieters of this blog are trying to provide full coverage of all the candidates - you want to volunteer?"
Posted by Gay Veteran at September 5, 2007 11:21 AM"Does this stuff count as a campaign ad?"
I believe there's already a precedent on this one:
But thanks for playing!
Posted by ann at September 5, 2007 11:30 AMHow about we do this? Instead of everyone seemingly wanting to call what Mr. Camp does coverage we label it advocacy? I know iamcoyote and Gay Veteran won't protest an accurate description of what Mr. Camp is offering, right? And does this blog want offerings of advocacy for other candidates or contributions of a more impartial nature from readers? I'm not against fields of ponies, just an acknowledgment an ass escapes the barn occasionally.
Posted by steve duncan at September 5, 2007 11:31 AMsteve, if you want smear, I'm sure Fox "News" will give it to you.
Posted by iamcoyote at September 5, 2007
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why is calling for Mr. Camp to comment on anything less than wonderful about Mr. Richardson equated with a desire for "smear"? Geez, it's been awhile since I visited this site and I had no idea the collective skin had became so thin. Get me a physical address so I know where to send all the hankies.
To tell you the truth, steve, it's really not all that important what it is. You don't like it, don't read it - or respond to it. What it is to me, is Ken's first post, and though it's not my cuppa tea, I'm not gonna bust his ass too much for it, because I've had a couple first posts before, and found them to be nervewracking. I guess your criticism will be helpful in the long run as he hits his stride, but sheesh, you've made your point, now go bash Erin down below, she's got an Obama/Oprah ad up that's gettin' no love at all! (thank goodness Jeff hasn't put up a Hillary post today, we'd never hear the end of it...)
Posted by iamcoyote at September 5, 2007 11:38 AMCoyote, color me a little gunshy at this point. 8)
I wanna talk about Obama today, luckily.
Posted by Jeff Dinelli at September 5, 2007 12:03 PMHeck, the more, the merrier, Jeff. You should have a leather hide by now, anyhow, as lively as the Hillary threads get.
Posted by iamcoyote at September 5, 2007 12:17 PMDon't like what I posted or how I wrote it? That's ok, please refute the points I made if you'd like and present your opinion. Or, tell me what you'd prefer to see in a Richardson diary. What do you want to know about Bill Richardson? That's what blogs are about: two-way communication.
"Instead of everyone seemingly wanting to call what Mr. Camp does coverage we label it advocacy?"
Nope. It's coverage. Read the legal opinion I posted.
Posted by ann at September 5, 2007 12:35 PMCoyote, you're right, I'm tough as nails at this point, but I have some funny stuff on Obama I wanna throw up there, we don't have a reporter for him, yet, so I can't get in trouble.
I'll look at Hillary a little later, too, see what she's up to. I know she made a statement about Social Security yesterday.
Posted by Jeff Dinelli at September 5, 2007 12:57 PMI used to have high hopes for Richardson...but frankly, the more he talks the less interest I have. Let him get up to about 22% in the national Dem polls, then we can start picking on him in earnest.
Posted by T2 at September 5, 2007 01:14 PMI have some funny stuff on Obama I wanna throw up...
Jeff said "throw up"!
Ken, Welcome.
Though I support Edwards at this point, I feel Richardson has V/P potential.
Well, it still reads like a campaign ad. Okaaayeee, I gave it a second read. It still reads like a campaign ad. Okay, okay! It's not a campaign ad. Jesus.
But others seem to have different opinions about Richardson and ask "questions". Something about Richardson and women. Why the NRA likes Richardson.
And that little thing about no city except Santa Fe can raise minimum wage over the limits for five years. What is that about? Couldn't be...big business? Why, something like that could keep New Mexico 47th in per capita income in the United States.
You know, and those growing rates of incarceration in New Mexico and Richardon getting packed in the ass with donations from GEO seem like a real problem to me. What the hell is a GEO? Why, the former Wackenhut...a big ass company that runs private prisons. Is he getting some from CCA, too? I know Florida kinda paid GEO way too much for prison space..wink, wink, nudge, nudge. Maybe Hispanics incarcerated in New Mexico are providing the same sweetheart deal?
Hey, and did that real estate investor in New Mexico get his highway interchange on his property? That was a pretty cheap $85,000.00 to pass Richardson's way if he did.
And god damn it, thanks for setting me straight, Ken. If you hadn't bothered to tell me just how christ-like Richardson was in his concern for the common man I would think some of the donations he's been taking would indicate otherwise. You know, Advance America contributions and lending it's jets and stuff to him. A Pay Day lender. Man, those are some decent folks!
Posted by phidipides at September 5, 2007 09:17 PM