One “Buddy Mac” wrote today to castigate us for castigating Michael Arcuri for castigating Democrats who dare to be liberal. Among his other comments he includes this tidbit:
I’ll bet you’re a shill for the Robert’s campaign.
Personally, I think he’s projecting. But seriously, I do wish “Buddy Mac” had actually made a big, fat bet, because it’s the end of the month and the mortgage is due. See, we are not shills for “the Robert’s” campaign. We aren’t working for any campaign, officially or unofficially. We aren’t on anybody’s political payroll. Nope, no, non, nein, nyet, categorically not.
Needed to be said. Said.
That commenter obviously doesn’t know Irregular Times, or political blogs, for that matter. Does that person honestly think that any blog writing an article in favor of a political candidate must be a paid agent of the candidate. Jeez.
That, and the thing that the definition of the word shill includes the claim that there is a swindle involved. Does that Buddy Mac really allege that Les Roberts is involved in a swindle against the people of that district in New York?
Well, look, I can be sympathetic to that question to a degree. Go over to dailyKos and MyDD, two of the biggest political blogs out there, and they’ve done a fair bit of “consulting” work for candidates. They claim it doesn’t affect them, but still the appearance is there. And most political blogs have political advertising on them, heavily from campaigns at times, which means that the bloggers depend on campaigns’ spending to keep afloat. So there are a lot of people out there who are blogging and who are, one way or another, financially dependent on campaigns. We keep afloat by selling bumper stickers, buttons and shirts independently of campaign organizations. So we don’t really have an incentive to flatter campaigns, much less change our position for money actual, promised or implied. I think that difference is important.
Yeah, well REAL liberals and progressives don’t go around criticizing liberals for DARING to disagree with the official Democratic Party line. This Buddy Mac character doesn’t seem to have any respect for the role of dissent in democracy. We’re supposed to believe that good progressives get in line behind the leaders of the Democratic Party without asking questions? That’s not the progressive agenda I know.
Oh, I know a lot of progressives who go around criticizing progressively minded people for leaving their ideals at the door and voting moderate. I know a lot of progressives who are just progressives because that’s the team they picked when they turned 17 and that’s the team they’re stickin’ with.
I’m not saying that’s you. I’m just saying that not everyone on any side of an ideological argument is in the fray for the sake of ideals.
Do you think voting along progressive lines,like here in PA (let’s go Pinnachio!), this November will weaken our Democratic ticket to the point that the Republicans will once again triumph (like when Nader ran, and i voted for him)? Because if that’s the case i’ll be forced to throw in with the Casey contingent.
Good question, Tom. That’s the beauty of primaries. Pennacchio and Casey will square off for the Democratic nomination. You’ll get to vote then for Pennacchio if that’s your inclination. But if Casey wins the primary and Pennacchio loses, you still get to vote for Casey over Santorum (icky poo) in the November election.