Conservative Blogs Rock!
December 9, 2005 6:20 PM Subscribe

Conservative Blogs Rock! NEW YORK In an argument sure to be challenged in certain sectors of the blogosphere, a story in The New York Times magazine coming up this Sunday declares that conservative blogs continue to best liberal blogs in political and electoral influence.
posted by Sagres (51 comments total)

And.....where exactly is this right-wing MeFi?
posted by mystyk at 6:26 PM on December 9, 2005

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

(Didn't think a Chicagoan could speak New York, didja?)
posted by eriko at 6:26 PM on December 9, 2005

Things haven't really rocked since Nirvana.
posted by Balisong at 6:30 PM on December 9, 2005

You mean this isn't the right-wing Mefi? That explains everything...
posted by loquax at 6:30 PM on December 9, 2005

RIGHT WINGERS CONTINUE TO SPEND MORE TIME AT HOME IN FRONT OF COMPUTERS THAN BAR-HOPPING LIBERALS... DEVELOPING...
posted by tapeguy at 6:37 PM on December 9, 2005

Conservatives, by contrast, skillfully use the Web to provide maximum benefit for their issues and candidates.

True, but that's necessary if you want to get paid. Not surprisingly some of the conservatypes blogs follow the logic of incessant repetition of theme "more plausible reasons to despise them librlus, therefore we must be right" often taken out of context or contextualized so to please certain audiences. Truth is economically used , in the sense that only the truths that are useful are displayed.

Some see that as misleading audience by suggesting them how to think..some call it advertisement, some other supporting the cause or propaganda.
posted by elpapacito at 6:39 PM on December 9, 2005

I'm with elpapacito. I've always wondered at the commentary on "strategy" and such regarding politics. It seems to boil down to (mimicry): "we're influencing people so much better here" without regard to subject matter.

Anyway, it's Metafilterites who rock (apparently).
posted by Smedleyman at 6:44 PM on December 9, 2005

This must be some hitherto unknown definition of "rock".
posted by Hildegarde at 6:44 PM on December 9, 2005

Um, isn't influentiality also a function of who's in power, and it sure ain't the liberals these days...?
posted by twsf at 6:46 PM on December 9, 2005

a theory exists that more conservatives have management-type desk jobs that allow them to surf more during the work day while listening to Rush (Limbaugh, not 2112),

while the idealistic liberals are actually out there, you know, workin
posted by tsarfan at 6:52 PM on December 9, 2005

The article makes a great point about blogs like Kos and company and how there's alot of in fighting that goes on there. That's a double edged sword, of course - You have the benefit of hopefully intelligent discussion going on about a topic or person in the post or comments of such a site, but then you have the other side picking up on that and possibly using against the candidates vetted in the discussion proces.

Also
Fox News and Rush Limbaugh exclusively use "news from the blogsophere?"

I thought CNN and the various local newspapers were the first to do that. Or at least the tech geared places.

(In the meanwhile, let me include a shameless self-link to an in construction project to change some what the article claims...
Victory06.org )
posted by tozturk at 6:55 PM on December 9, 2005

twsf, Yes, but they said electoral influence too.

Conservative blogs follow the well-designed strategies emploied by the republican party for delivering their message. Liberal blogs are all over the map. Heck, liberals don't even trust other liberals with a "message". I don't think this is actually a weakness for liberals though. The Catholic Church was pretty much always "on message" in its long war with science, but look who won.
posted by jeffburdges at 7:01 PM on December 9, 2005

I havn't read the article, but it seems like they just said that conservative blogs are more plugged into the conservative noise machine then their liberal counterparts.

It dosn't help that there is no Liberal noise machine (except for the blogs, that is).

Anyway, I'd love to see the amount of money rased for candidates by conservative blogs compared to liberal ones.
posted by Paris Hilton at 7:03 PM on December 9, 2005

Paris Hilton made exactly the point I was going to. Blast. And it feels really strange writing that first sentence.
posted by my sock puppet account at 7:28 PM on December 9, 2005

If the liberal blogs didn't have to spend so much time correcting misinfomration from conservative blogs, maybe they'd have more time for creative writing too.
posted by VulcanMike at 7:36 PM on December 9, 2005

It's misinfomration, I tell you! Utter misinfomration!
posted by VulcanMike at 7:37 PM on December 9, 2005

Won't people simply read what they agree with? How many people will actually read, on a daily or even semi-daily basis, let alone actually listen to, the views of blogs that are the opposite of their own political ideology? For instance, a liberal reading metafilter might read a link on a conservative blog, but will they actually return thereafter to read updates? I mean, I'm sure that it happens, but I'm sure its more the exception rather than the rule. And the following sort of proves my point.

Crowley then comments that what really makes the conservative blogs allegedly more effective is the infrastructure provided by Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and others--"all of which are quick to pass on the latest tidbit from the blogosphere."

In short, conservative 'news' refers its conservative viewers/listeners to conservative blog. So I don't see how these blogs will have much influence outside of the conservative readership who already read them.
posted by Effigy2000 at 7:38 PM on December 9, 2005

well shit, I agree with everything written above, and have nothing to add.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 7:54 PM on December 9, 2005

Conservatives continue to use media in a dogmatic fashion. Look at the "idolization" of its champions as if this in some raises the level content that is being portrayed. Finally, it creates a safe isolation and doublespeak that passes itself for reality.

However, for those of us that live beyond the confine's walls it sure feels nice to not have to wed myself to cultural dogma that looks as antiquated as it does empty.

Simply put..better to be alone on a hill than grazing like the sheep below.
posted by Mr Bluesky at 8:00 PM on December 9, 2005

Conservative blogs are effective in the same way that Raymond Shaw's squad was effective in making the case that he was the kindest, warmest, bravest, most wonderful human being that they had ever known in their entire lives.
posted by deanc at 8:06 PM on December 9, 2005

Sure, con blogs are united behind their talking points, but what does that say about them?
posted by clevershark at 8:11 PM on December 9, 2005

Paris Hilton - Anyway, I'd love to see the amount of money rased for candidates by conservative blogs compared to liberal ones.

I don't know about the conservative blogs, but I can tell you that Kos endorsed and raised money for 16 House & Senate candidates in 2004, all of whom lost.

I'm almost positive that the total amount raised (via Kos) was well in excess of $100,000.
posted by pruner at 8:19 PM on December 9, 2005

This is the one thing that makes me sick about the professional corporate media. They reward strategy over integrity. Sure the liberal blogs are more interested in the truth but look how incredibly effective the conservative blogs are with their lies. Shorter NY Times article: Effectiveness is sexy - truth is soooo 20th century...
posted by any major dude at 8:20 PM on December 9, 2005

blah blah blah
posted by bat at 8:27 PM on December 9, 2005

deanc writes "Conservative blogs are effective in the same way that Raymond Shaw's squad was effective in making the case that he was the kindest, warmest, bravest, most wonderful human being that they had ever known in their entire lives."

Well put.
posted by brundlefly at 8:39 PM on December 9, 2005

... declares that conservative blogs continue to best liberal blogs in political and electoral influence.

This is a surprise?

The right stays on topic and has managed to conflate repitition with reality. If you say it enough, say it loud enough and say it in enough places fiction becomes reality.

When you march in lockstep it's hard to skip a beat.
posted by cedar at 9:00 PM on December 9, 2005

It seems on television and talk radio (and now blogs), that conservatives just have more to talk about. They sit and talk about the liberal war on Christmas, or something of the like, while liberals rarely go into attack mode.
posted by matkline at 9:25 PM on December 9, 2005

Sure, but then that's because liberals tend to insist on something being real before yapping about it.
posted by clevershark at 9:30 PM on December 9, 2005

Yeh know, as one of MeFi's token libertarian leaners, let me say there is no political movement more in love with "unpopular truth" than the libertarians. They've got a Cassandra complex, it seems. They'll let the country go to hell, so long as they don't have to compromise their principles, make a single pragmatic stand, or - god forbid - help the poor.

And the platforms of the party are ludicrously grandiose: abolish the income tax, return to the gold standard, end public education, disband the army... I could go on. I'll note, though, only among the farthest right wingers will you hear equivalent enthusiasm for armed rebellion against the federal government.

What's more, you think liberals have bad in-fights? Libertarians can't even agree on abortion! Or the roll of religion in government. Or, sometimes it seems, goddamned anything else at all. The philosophy of radical individualism makes any kind of organization damned near impossible.

"So, what?" you may ask; I'll tell you what:

DONT BE LIKE THOSE GUYS! To the degree that I am a libertarian, DON'T BE LIKE ME!

We (Americans, mostly, but I've got my eye on you Russians, Indians, Italians, and Chinese) are really fucking up the world here.

Yes, it's extremely important to be right (you can see how the Bush administration is falling apart for being wrong), but lets not be proud of the fact that the Republicans are kicking our asses. We need to win.
posted by Richard Daly at 10:06 PM on December 9, 2005

I'm almost positive that the total amount raised (via Kos) was well in excess of $100,000.

thing is, that's money from middle class paychecks, not from capital returns on monopoly rents earned a century ago.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 10:26 PM on December 9, 2005

To the degree that I am a libertarian, DON'T BE LIKE ME!

as a pseudo-libertarian (I want a libertarian society as much as proves practicable, which I fear really isn't much), I can whole heartedly agree.

Really, a sane Republican party would get my vote; all they need to do is ditch the war on the mildly redistributive state, stop pandering to the money bags and religious right, and stop trying to takeover the fucking world with bogus military adventurism.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 10:28 PM on December 9, 2005

Heywood Mogroot
Sadly, you've listed the modern Republican platform.
At this point, I want a Democratic takeover of the House just to keep Bush from fucking things up any worse. The ethics investigations and discovery hearings would be a fantastic bonus, though.
posted by Richard Daly at 11:14 PM on December 9, 2005

what does that say about them?

To me it says:

Conservative Bloggers smoke more rock than Liberal Bloggers.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 11:22 PM on December 9, 2005

When you march in lockstep it's hard to skip a beat.

It really sucks when you come to a bridge.
posted by ryoshu at 2:01 AM on December 10, 2005

In short, conservative 'news' refers its conservative viewers/listeners to conservative blog. So I don't see how these blogs will have much influence outside of the conservative readership who already read them.

Oh but it doesn't have to necessarily win more votes by convincing libs to vote rep. That would be some achievement, but it's very difficult as each other side is, generally speaking, very impervious to the opposite opinions or positions. Extremist from each
side even refuse to listen to apparently opposing arguments

See as Richard Daly throws his quick but decent provocation in the thread.

as one of MeFi's token libertarian leaners Sympathize by implying I'm one of yours so you'll lower your guard
they'll etc etc. Suddendly he's no longer with, but criticizing "them" as if he wasn't one of them but he's a leaner not a libertarian so he can bail out easily. Also "they" also is used to cast "them" as different from you, the reader. They are wicked !

And the platforms of the party are ludicrously opinion, not fact. only among the farthest right wingers equivalency to extremist, useful to cast them as more wicked then Osama. They are heathen !

Libertarians can't even agree on and there you go with a list of emotionally loaded points, like abortion or religion. It's hard to impose a party-line on such subjects, unless you're in a totalitarian party either agree or leave.

On a tangent: It really sucks when you come to a bridge.

Damn libruls resonance ! Libruls engineers with all their scientific mumbo jumbo invented a way to prevent our glorious compact united safe goosestepping !
posted by elpapacito at 5:53 AM on December 10, 2005

Anyone here think it's got to do with the level of negativity of Leftie blogs? Hate Bush, Bushitler, Stole the election, etc makes serious people sound like petulant children.

How many positive things have you seen written on the Daily Kos website? And how many candidates have they successfully helped elect?

Sometimes, I wonder if Markos Zuniga is on Karl Rove's payroll.

Bill Whittle at Eject Eject Eject projects cautious positivism. Atrios? All about the hatred of the right.

It goes on and on. I'm sure there are righty sites that are venom spewing as well, but it's not -the- pervasive theme (LGF excepted...).

To be treated like adults and taken seriously, act like adults. I've never seen any suggestions from the left on what to do about Iraq other than "cut and run" and "exorcise lieberman."

I'm serious about this. Go to the Kos site or Eschaton and find me positive posts supporting something instead of negative posts berating something. I'll wait.
posted by swerdloff at 9:53 AM on December 10, 2005

It goes on and on. I'm sure there are righty sites that are venom spewing as well, but it's not -the- pervasive theme (LGF excepted...).

Um, Free Republic? Instapundit? The Corner? Powerline?

Oh, and are you saying that if things happen to be really f@#$ed up in this country, which many of us believe, lefties shouldn't point this out?

BTW, if Atrios is too sharp for you, try Talking Points Memo... it's not as entertaining, but it's good for people who can't handle Duncan Black's sardonic tone.

I've never seen any suggestions from the left on what to do about Iraq other than "cut and run" and "exorcise lieberman."

Then you are not paying attention. Ever hear of a guy named Jack Murtha? He's proposed a very substantive plan for what to do about Iraq. Unless you subscribe to the notion that any proposal for drawing down troop levels is "cutting and running." In which case you are saying, "I refuse to consider any proposal that does not involve staying in Iraq indefinitely."
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 10:05 AM on December 10, 2005

Instapundit doesn't constantly spew venom. He's actually fairly well reasoned, even if you don't agree with him. Free Republic is the same as Counterpunch or Democratic Underground - neither respected nor mainstream.

I'm not saying that things aren't fucked up. I'm saying that pointing at a problem and say "oh oh you made a mess you made a mess look look he made a mess oh oh you're in troooouble" without offering alternative approaches of what to do is moronic and is one of the reasons that the left gets no respect.

Kerry ran for president as the "not bush" candidate.

I have heard of Murtha. For about a year now he's been calling for "cut and run." What else have you got?

I refuse to consider any proposal that does not involve staying in Iraq until the Iraqi government asks us to go because to put a timetable on it is to say "just wait until day X and then start your counterrevolution, ba'athists."

I've never read TPM. I'll check it out.
posted by swerdloff at 10:38 AM on December 10, 2005

Perhaps it also has something to do with the fact that the politics of the Left died sometime around 1994. All that's left is attempts to negate or moderate the agenda of the "Right."

Also, blame Howard Dean. Dick.
posted by ParisParamus at 10:46 AM on December 10, 2005

It goes on and on. I'm sure there are righty sites that are venom spewing as well, but it's not -the- pervasive theme (LGF excepted...).
Artifice_Eternity: "Um, Free Republic? Instapundit? The Corner? Powerline?""

That covers the blog exclusive sites, but don't forget all the right-wingers for whom blogs are a way of expanding the message, but not the primary channel. The aforementioned Coulter and Limbaugh fit in that category, along with several from Fox alone.
posted by mystyk at 10:47 AM on December 10, 2005

I'll be generous. Murtha is only slightly senile.
posted by ParisParamus at 10:49 AM on December 10, 2005

I will agree that the Left has no clear agenda. For nearly a decade, the Left has defined itself as 'anti-republican' instead of 'clearly-democrat'.

Part of it is because the nature of liberal philosophy involves discussion and consensus, while conservative philosophy involves deference to authority and lack of questioning. Liberals, by nature, are less likely to agree with each other, and more infighting occurrs while conservatives value knowing that there is no dissention in the ranks. It becomes easier for liberals to define themselves by what they aren't than what they are. But this alone isn't enough to sum it up.

Prior to 1999, that would be everything. Since then, liberals have lost ground on capital hill. They felt anger when there should have been determination. They practiced blaming when they should have invested in strategy. This is the second failing of liberalism.

This does not mean things aren't correctable. This is when liberals need to band together to show that all the idealism in the world that republicans can muster will never stand up in value to the sheer, hard facts that democrats have been trying to point out, but in a disorganized manner.

And yes, I'm pretty decently left of center.
posted by mystyk at 11:05 AM on December 10, 2005

I've never seen any suggestions from the left on what to do about Iraq other than "cut and run" and "exorcise lieberman."

And I've never seen any suggestions from the right on what to do about poverty other than handing money to people who're already rich.

Perhaps neither of us are listening very closely.
posted by verb at 12:48 PM on December 10, 2005

I have heard of Murtha. For about a year now he's been calling for "cut and run." posted by swerdloff

Yeah, uh. No, he hasn't.
But as a combat vet who worked his way up from an enlisted boot, became a drill instructor at Parris Island, was selected for OCS, went to Quantico and made his way up to Colonel and who became ranking member and is former chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Murtha has advised Presidents from BOTH parties (on the Philippines, Panama, Bosnia, El Salvador - does anyone even remember Ronald Reagan anymore? Hello?).
But yeah, I'm sure he doesn't know shit about war and strategy compared to people who had "other priorities" like Cheney. The man knows the war business from the bottom up.
So what else have you got sweetheart?

I'll be generous. Murtha is only slightly senile.- posted by ParisParamus

I'll be generous. You are a complete asshole.
Why do you hate people who have served their country? Seriously. Everytime I read your posts you disparage the military and the troops in some way or someone who has served their country if they happen to disagree with your viewpoint.
Why is he more senile than any of the other old-timers in office?
Is this horseshit slinging why "conservative" blogs rock?
Is he senile because he volunteered to serve in Vietnam?
Perhaps, like McCain when he was revealed to have ideas contrary to this groupthink bullshit his two wounds - for which he recieved two purple hearts - (yeah, I know only worthy of a widdle band-aid because it's such a chicken shit medal like Kerry) - he's senile because of that?
Or it's his Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry or his DSM from the Navy or maybe it's his Bronze star with a combat 'V' (do you even know what the fuck that means?) that means he's senile now.
Perhaps he's senile because he's not constantly cornholing the electoriate like Tom DeLay?

Seriously get a life.
posted by Smedleyman at 8:29 AM on December 11, 2005

Murtha is senile. He recommended redeploying troops to Okinawa. Senile senile senile.
posted by ParisParamus at 9:31 AM on December 11, 2005

What'ya expect, libs are mostly flailing anarchists.
posted by HTuttle at 1:51 PM on December 11, 2005

So Murtha says that torture doesn't work and that we need to get a viable exit strategy in play and for that you call him senile? What about other people? How about me?

I am an Army officer. And a liberal.
I work in the field of Military Intelligence.
I have a security clearance above that of most officers, but fairly standard within MI.
I have been in the position of seeing information deemed too sensitive to release publicly, that directly relates to Iraq exit strategies.
Same as #4, but with regard to torture methods, effectiveness, and reliability.

Would I be considered senile? I assure you that those points are perfectly accurate. Except for #2 and #3, all of the rest are accurate to Murtha too. Now we'll take it a step further.

No conservative voice has yet to put forward a viable exit strategy. Period.
Liberals have put forward numerous viable strategies, of which only a small fraction (~25%) would be considered by a rational person to be cut&run.
Murtha's proposals are not in that ~25%.
Many of the methods the US is using and claiming are not torture are considered torture by:
- The international community
- DOD and DA Doctrine
- International treaties the US has signed as a follower of
The methods being employed have a remarkably high success rate, if success is measured by 'getting the victim to talk' (over 90%).
The methods being employed have a surprisingly low success rate, if success is measured by 'getting accurate information' (under 20%).

lower

Just some food for thought, from one of the people tasked with keeping you free & safe. The very freedom and security that makes you able to spout your lies and misrepresentations without fear of reprisal.
posted by mystyk at 2:59 PM on December 11, 2005

So Murtha says that torture doesn't work and that we need to get a viable exit strategy in play and for that you call him senile? What about other people? How about me?

I am an Army officer. And a liberal.
I work in the field of Military Intelligence.
I have a security clearance above that of most officers, but fairly standard within MI.
I have been in the position of seeing information deemed too sensitive to release publicly, that directly relates to Iraq exit strategies.
Same as #4, but with regard to torture methods, effectiveness, and reliability.

Would I be considered senile? I assure you that those points are perfectly accurate. Except for #2 and #3, all of the rest are accurate to Murtha too. Now we'll take it a step further.

No conservative voice has yet to put forward a viable exit strategy. Period.
Liberals have put forward numerous viable strategies, of which only a small fraction (~25%) would be considered by a rational person to be cut&run.
Murtha's proposals are not in that ~25%.
Many of the methods the US is using and claiming are not torture are considered torture by:
- The international community
- DOD and DA Doctrine
- International treaties the US has signed as a follower of
The methods being employed have a remarkably high success rate, if success is measured by 'getting the victim to talk' (over 90%).
The methods being employed have a surprisingly low success rate, if success is measured by 'getting accurate information' (under 20%).
The methods being employed have an even lower success rate, if success is measured by 'getting timely/useful information' (under 15%).

No conservative voice has yet to put forward a viable exit strategy. Period.

You are either a liar or have not been paying attention. Then again I guess you get to determine what is "viable" and what is not.

Also, I call B.S. on your positioning yourself as some sort of person of authority as to what ' the general consensus is within the Intel community.'

I too have a security clearance, a lot of people do.
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 1:50 AM on December 12, 2005

"Senile senile senile."-posted by ParisParamus

Because if you say it three times it’s true. So, you’ve seen his medical records then? You’re his physician?
You served with him...oh no wait, that’s right you’re too chicken shit.
(See, I know that in the same way you know Murtha is senile)
But as a general principle, I refuse to not shit all over you every time we communicate because you not only refuse to engage in reasoned discourse you engage in this infantile pedantry. So fuck your mother in the ass you craven shitheel.

mystyk I assume you posted that twice because we’re senile.

“I too have a security clearance, a lot of people do.” - posted by Steve_at_Linnwood

Yeah, my mom is cleared for ‘secret’. Gramma too.
*shakes off insanity*

I’ll agree with you though Steve_at_Linnwood
that argument by authority is not the best way of making a point.

I could have been a member of someone’s general staff at Groom Lake for all anyone knows and had majestic level clearance. (I wasn’t....OR WAS I?)

And yes, plenty of exit strategies out there.
(Actually, I was at Groom Lake, a.k.a. Area 51 and I’m only posting it here because I’m under an assumed name and no one will probably see it)
But I’d trust Murtha’s ideas before I’d go with someone who’s only sat on their fat asses reading the party line from the RNC (or DNC) all their lives.
(No seriously, I wasn’t. I’ve never even been in the military. Really. I’m actually a very erudite 13 year old Maltese fisherman)
(Just kidding)
(...or AM I?)
posted by Smedleyman at 12:29 PM on December 12, 2005

“He recommended redeploying troops to Okinawa.” - posted by ParisParamus

Wow. I just read a broad spectrum of information on that topic. You mischaracterized what happened even in the reiteration of your own party line.
Jesus are you stupid.
posted by Smedleyman at 12:42 PM on December 12, 2005

« Older Bush Threatens U.N. Over Clinton Climate Speech... | Odd/Niche Magazines.... Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments

Conservative Blogs Rock! December 9, 2005 6:20 PM Subscribe

Conservative Blogs Rock!
December 9, 2005 6:20 PM Subscribe