I don't see a lot of value in bringing bloggers into a political campaign.  For me, the principal value in blogging is that bloggers provide us with a perspective that is a little bit outside, and not encumbered with the political considerations that a campaign must concern itself with.  The Amanda Marcotte situation is a good example.

I've often thought about the role of "campaign blogger" to a campaign.  In my case, for my Dad's Senate campaign, I absolutely thought of myself as a representative of my Dad (in my case, I didn't have much of a choice).  I believe it allowed me to be a much more effective interface between the campaign and the netroots.

It's a little bit hard for me to understand the value of an "official campaign blogger" who doesn't represent the candidate.

Sarah
(Carter for Nevada)

I was there and enjoyed it, though as a practical matter I think a larger area is needed for the post-panel schmoozing.  I hate trying to squeeze past people in a narrow hall to get to the bar or the loo.

That said, I had tried to comment on Ari's observation about the right's "perpetual outrage" and constant demands for disavowal of this or that liberal blogger.  In the context of Ann Coulter, I wanted to point out that the intrepid Mike Stark of Calling All Wingnuts has caused half the wingnutosphere to totally lose it by, of all things, getting a photo of himself with Michelle Malkin!!!! gasp!  He's a stalker!  (Seriously, check out the comments on the thread.)

But I felt a larger value of what Mike has done (and hopefully we'll get more of his audio soon) will be to point out not just the Ann Coulters we know about, but the commonplace people who say even more outrageous stuff.  I want to see a continuous thread of "Hey, winger blogger X said this at CPAC!  Do you disavow this, Mr. McCain?"  We have to get ahead of the moral outrage ball, at least until both sides stop playing the stupid game.  We are going to need more people like Mike to ferret out what these people say in their secret conclaves out of the public eye to strip off their public masks.

But that said, I feel I must be thankful for Coulter.  Like Bull Connor in the civil rights era, she has shown the public what the real face of movement conservatism is.  As a prominent civil rights activist said in a documentary I saw a while ago "If Bull Connor hadn't existed, we'd have had to invent him."  It's the same for Coulter, because she strips away the facade that their movement is all about well-considered ideas and policies, and exposes that at their core they are just power hungry bigots.

I was very happy to have attended last night.

I didn't expect it, but was very glad that there was no "eating our own" going on at all, although there were certainly shades of disagreement in the panel discussion.  

It was encouraging to see people pick up other's people's points, and re-state and refine them as the conversation went on (it obviously could've gone on for hours).  That mirrors well what blogs CAN do, at their best.

I do think the language, the manner of communicating, is changing, and that what individuals write on blogs now has the potential for explosiveness within a political campaign that it might not have in five/ten/two years, as people come to understand the nature of blogs better (which I believe people will).  Lindsey's "warthog" comment (which got the biggest laugh of the night) is right now right on.  

Luckily, the bloggers who are the most potent thinkers to me are all young enough to remain candidates for being brought inside political campaigns once the time becomes right...if they want to.  The value of an "outside" voice cannot be underestimated, and right now, people like the bloggers who were at The Tank last night serve a valuable purpose much like Bill Hicks once said by "standing outside the circle as the 'groupthink' congeals, and saying 'wait a minute."  (Paraphrase)

A good night.

I heard Pink Floyd's "Wish You Were Here" on the radio yesterday. This lyric brought to mind candidate bloggers:

Did you trade a walk-on role in a war for a lead role in a cage?

Free-lancing vs. PR

I remember a friend once describing the difference between being a free-lance writer or getting a corporate PR job. They could make a lot more doing corporate PR. Heck, they might even have a lot bigger audience. The problem is they' always be writing someone else's views. As a free-lancer they could follow their interests and passions, insert their viewpoint.

For a national campaign where I have no existing personal connection with a candidate, I'd much rather have a walk-on role in "this war" than a leading role (full of restrictions) on a campaign.

Help Keep Wild, Wonderful, West Virginia Blue

Isnt the real "wedge" between the Candidates and the netroots being created by the incredibly harsh and purposfully damaging attacks and slanders on some (all) of our leading candidates by many of those commenting on these sites?

damn, wish i was on the right coast last night.

here on the left coast whenever bloggers get together we just have fun and party.

I live in NY, read blogs like an addict, have been to other events at the Tank, and would have gone to this in a heartbeat had I heard a peep about it.  How on earth did I miss this?

j1 j2 j3 j4 j5 j6 j7 j8 j9 j10 j11 j12 j13 j14 j15 j16 j17 j18 j19 j20 j21 j22 j23 j24 j25 j26 j27 j28 j29 j30 j31 j32 j33 j34 j35 j36 j37 j38 j39 j40 j41 j42 j43 j44 j45 j46 j47 j48 j49 j50 j51 j52 j53 j54 j55 j56 j57 j58 j59 j60 j61 j62 j63 j64 j65 j66 j67 j68 j69 j70 j71 j72 j73 j74 j75 j76 j77 j78 j79 j80 j81 j82 j83 j84 j85 j86 j87 j88 j89 j90 j91 j92 j93