Jeff Goldstein has some more on the spat between Kos and The New Republic, Kos ever the paragon of moderation and reason, wrote this little missive:
That was obviously violated today as the New Republic betrayed, once again, that it seeks to destroy the new people-powered movement for the sake of its Lieberman-worshipping neocon owners; that it stands with the National Review and wingnutoshpere in their opposition to grassroots Democrats.
The magazine published, in its website, an email I sent to the list. There is nothing controversial about the email, but Jason Zengerle tried to spin it as evidence that there is a “smoke-filled room†and that I send “dictats†to other bloggers, controlling what they can and cannot write about. In a subsequent post, Zengerle went further, saying that I control the financial fates of much of the progressive blogosphere. My power apparently knows no bounds!
Ludicrous, all of it, but that’s the new rules of the game. TNR and its enablers are feeling the heat of their own irrelevance and this is how they fight it—by undermining the progressive movement. Zengerle has made common cause with the wingnutosphere, using the laughable “kosola†frame they created and emailing his “scoops†to them for links. This is what the once-proud New Republic has evolved into—just another cog of the Vast RIGHT Wing Conspiracy.
Goldstein notes the dripping paranoia from Kos:
The New Republic, by dint of its uppity presumptions to report news that, for Kos, violates what he believes is the necessity of a “unified message in the face of a unified conservative noise machineâ€â€”that is, by violating what he has determined is the official narrative stance of liberal progressivism (with Kos as decider-in-chief)—has surrendered its claims to authenticity. And in doing so, it has become, to Kos, “just another cog of the Vast RIGHT Wing Conspiracy.†You can’t be on the left and disagree with Kos. Or rather, you can’t be on the left and disagree with Kos publicly — which suggests that the defining characteristic of progressivism is fidelity to its officially-sanctioned narratives.
Goldstein is exactly right: the “progressive” movement is based on a particularly vicious sort of identity politics — those who don’t toe the party line get purged — witness Senator Lieberman and now The New Republic. Moderate, thoughtful Democrats aren’t wanted.
Of course, given that self-identified liberals are a tiny minority of the American electorate, the Kossacks are leading the Democrats towards political irrelevancy. And really, it couldn’t happen to a nicer group of people. Until then, centrist Democrats should watch their backs – the Kossack Kommittee on Vice and Virtue is out for blood and those deemed insufficiently “progressive” all have targets on their backs.
UPDATE: Glenn Reynolds has a huge roundup of links on the Kos payola scandal. I don’t think Kos has the level of control over the Advertising Liberally network as some claim, but there’s no doubt he has a sizable amount of power of the left wing of the blogosphere – and given the puerile nature of him and the other Kossacks, that’s not to his credit. Then again, it’s not as though there’s a paucity of nut-jobs on either side of the political spectrum.
My God! You’re obsessed with this man! For all the talk of Democrats being motivated by nothing but “hatred for one man”, you really should rethink your mandatory twice-a-day diatribes against your own baby-faced Lex Luthor with a funny name (that virtually nobody would even recognize), who you seem to despise mostly on the basis of his blog being more popular than yours.
While I’m certainly not a dyed-in-the-wool Kossack, I know enough about his website and its followers to call you on your bullshit. If Kossacks have a universal loathing for centrist Democrats as you claim, how did Brad Carson ever get endorsed by the group in 2004? And why is it that Kossacks overwhelmingly favored centrists Paul Hackett and James Webb over more progressive primary challengers Sherrod Brown and Harris Miller if your tireless daily ravings about them being uncompromising left-wing zealots were true? It’s not ignorance guiding your erroneous representation, it’s partisan manipulation. That’s certainly not unexpected coming from a guy citing the revelation of decade-old artillery shells as proof that WMD existed in Iraq, but it’s a continued self-imposed retraction of credibility you suffer from by anybody who isn’t already chugging the right-wing noise machine’s Kool-Aid.
It’s a slow week for news, and the Kosola story is one that’s worth investigating. Had Kos not tried to suppress it, it would have probably gone away.
Because the only thing the Kossacks hate more than centrist Democrats are Republicans. Kos has himself said that he’ll support even a moderate Democrat over a Republican any day. Furthermore, I wouldn’t call Hackett or Webb “centrists” by any stretch of the imagination.
Right-wing noise machine? Give me a break. When Kos is out there giving marching orders to other bloggers to not cover a relevant story, that’s a sign of where the “noise machine” really is – and given the puerile quality of Kos’ site “noise” is the right word for it.
“And why is it that Kossacks overwhelmingly favored centrists Paul Hackett and James Webb over more progressive primary challengers Sherrod Brown and Harris Miller if your tireless daily ravings about them being uncompromising left-wing zealots were true?”
In this case, it was more the fact that they chose to favor party “outsiders” rather than careerist hacks, despite their positions on the issues.
“Because the only thing the Kossacks hate more than centrist Democrats are Republicans. Kos has himself said that he’ll support even a moderate Democrat over a Republican any day.”
Which negates your entire premise of Kossacks only settling for far-left Democrats. They endorsed Brad Carson for heaven’s sake, a guy who voted with George Bush 50% of the time.
“Furthermore, I wouldn’t call Hackett or Webb “centrists†by any stretch of the imagination.”
Hackett was oversold as a moderate simply because of his anti-gun control stance but he was still to the left of Sherrod Brown. And James Webb used to work in the Reagan administration. What criteria exclude him from being a centrist? If opposition to the war in Iraq is the defining litmus test for “radical liberalism”, then Pat Buchanan, William F. Buckley, and Robert Novak are one and the same with Kos.