Saturday, October 08, 2005

I sense a disturbance in the force....

I've already chimed in on my opinion on the Hackett/Brown scenario. However it's gotten alot deeper and at times nastier than I expected. It's become pretty clear that if you don't believe Sherrod should run you should sit down and shut up. I'm not very good at either, and? Neither are some of these guys:

Tim Russo

2nd Ohio

With the opposing view and a comment in response by yours truly I felt was pretty good:

David Sirota

I'm glad I'm not paid to do this, as it keeps me out of that aspect of this discussion, I think it is one that people should be aware of. If I ever were to get to the point where I was working for a candidate I would make sure it was known, a little honesty would prevent alot of this.

UPDATE: Cleveland Plaindealer adds fuel to the fire.

The Hackett camp says it feels betrayed, since Brown, of Avon, assured Hackett face-to-face that he was not running.

"Sherrod Brown told the candidate three weeks ago that he was not entering the race, so the campaign was surprised at Sherrod's indecisiveness and change of heart," said Michael Brautigam, an adviser to Hackett. "Sherrod's entry into the race is not only dishonorable, it's disloyal to the Democratic Party and to democratic ideals."

Can't say I disagree, no one likes to feel like they were lied to. But it's okay, Sherrod said he was going to talk to Paul about his other "options" since Reid told him to work it out with Hackett. Why it wasn't suggested Sherrod be the one to step out of it? Think we all know the answer to that one and it is why I'll stay an Independent.

4 comments:

Hooda Thunkit (Dave Zawodny) said...

Lisa,
"I'm glad I'm not paid to do this..."

If you were getting paid, you wouldn't be posting as you, and your message would somehow be different.

Caution would stifle your free expression.

And, some of us would notice the difference ;-)

Unknown said...

That's true HT, I have a problem with bloggers being paid to do campaigning anyway. If they want to be campaign people who blog? That's cool as long as they are honest about the connection. I also am afraid if enough of them start doing that it's going to make it harder on the little guy as the government tries to regulate blog time as a campaign contribution. Alas that is how it goes though, you can't blame politicans for figuring out having the big blogs on your side is profitable.

Anonymous said...

What about someone who wants to blog and work for campaigns, but intends to keep them separate?

Like me, for example, I do campaign work and I have a blog. But I don't blog about the candidate, that way there's no conflict of interest.

What's your take on that?

Unknown said...

Marisa, I'm talking about bloggers who are getting paid by a campaign and are not open about it. If you did blog about a candidate you were working for and were open about it then it doesn't seem so "sneaky". All of us are going to have our favorites it's just to get paid to promote someone and not be honest that part of the reason you are promoting that person is because they are paying you that I take issue with. Call me old fashioned but it used to be you blogged about someone because you really supported what they were trying to do, not because of profit. Some of these guys that are getting paid go from candidate to candidate so they really are more like hired PR people rather than what most of us do when we blog.

I realize the idea of using well known bloggers to promote a candidate is going to grow. I just have some real concerns about how that will affect all of us in the end. Take Kos as an example, he has alot of influence so while I understand it would make sense for a candidate to want Kos to promote him or her, that doesn't mean I like the idea of the blogosphere becoming just another media tool where we all have a price.