Democratic Undeground disparaged again....Washington Monthly's blog

[iconoclastNYC]

"If nothing else, the internet is likely to usher in a golden age of backtracking. Either that or people are eventually going to learn to think for a few minutes before they blog.

I'll put my money on backtracking.

UPDATE: Then again, maybe not. Go scroll though The Corner and you'd almost think you were reading Democratic Underground. They're not going to have an easy time backing off some of that stuff."



http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_10/007250.php

[samdogmom]

1. Wow! What a jerk! I've read very few posts here that need to be

"backtracked". What is he referring to? Did he use any examples in his report?

If not--just a backhanded "compliment". Can anyone demand proof?

[bee]

5. I think he was referring to the right

saying that theyve been so harsh on Meirs, but when they realize they actually should support her, that they are going to have to backtrack. And I believe the reference to DU... was to point out that they on "the corner" sound the same as we do... except their bushies... and that they will have a hard time taking back those types of statements. I didnt read it as a jab at us.

[sweetheart]

2. backing off what?

I haven't backtracked one bit. Bush was a criminal in 2000 and he's
one now, and i've called him out the entire time. I am proud to have
nothing to backtrack about. Perhaps cowardly editors in the washington
monthly are busy crawling on their knees towards their financiers.
"oh sir, do you approve of our media spin?"... "Please let us
backtrack and fix any truth that we mistakenly print.." ha!

[dogman]

3. I believe it is being compared to DU because of the attacks on Mier.

And just like Frum's earlier post, it is out there and can't be taken back when they decide to tow the party line again.

[Seansky]

4. call dumb, but I read this a bit differently: Conservatives are sounding

like those blogging in Democratic Underground. I find that very useful to us...OK, I might have read this wrong.

[Bucky]

6. Isn't he just saying initial criticism of her was harshly personal?

Sadly, discussions in this community do degenerate into personal invective and mean spirited slights against Republicans whom we could quite easily polish off using the substance of their idiotic arguments. Instead DU has a large coterie of members who engage in childish taunts (using "Rethugs" and "Christofascists" and "*") instead of proper names for people we disagre with.

Drum's point was that, minus an appointment of anyone of even marginally judicial stature (or even experience) the right wing blogs are slamming the new appointment in severe and substance free language that in a few days they may have to eat with their crow. DUers should be insulted by this comparison. Mostly because it's accurate.

[applegrove]

7. Sometimes we speculate.