A Note on Yesterday

By: Lowell
Published On: 3/15/2006 2:00:00 AM

Yesterday, a relatively new contributor at Raising Kaine published an article which stirred up a great deal of controversy.  The author, Dan Geroe, is a hardworking, passionate young Democrat. Dan is also a strong supporter of Mark Warner and one of the best Democrats we know.  Although what Dan wrote came across to many, possibly most, readers as an "attack" on Mark Warner, it certainly was not intended that way by the author.  Instead, what Dan wrote was offered as an attempt - perhaps a bit awkwardly - to look out for the best interests of Mark Warner, a man who was a great Governor of Virginia and who we all hope will make a fine President of the United States some day.

Does Mark Warner need advice from his supporters regarding which candidate - Harris Miller or James Webb - he should support in the ongoing Democratic Senate contest? Apparently, the vast majority of our readers, as well as Democrats on several other Virginia political blogs, believe that Warner most certainly does NOT need it.  These readers may very well be right in this case.  Mark Warner's a brilliant politician who almost always knows exactly what he's doing.  On the other hand, here in the blogosphere we give advice to politicians all the time, whether it's telling Tim Kaine that we think he should oppose the estate tax repeal, or telling Jeff Frederick we think he's a bully.  Sometimes we're on target, and sometimes we miss badly.  That's for you all to decide.

Whether Dan's advice to Mark Warner on the Webb-Miller contest was a wise idea or not, we would point out that one of the goals of this blog - and the blogosphere in general -  is to encourage free discussion.  Along these lines, we are proud that Raising Kaine is a successful community blog where readers are encouraged to submit articles for publication.  We are also proud that Raising Kaine is a GROUP blog, with more than a dozen active and occasional contributors.  Of course, as is the case with group blogs like this one, the opinions contained in articles by particular individuals are not necessarily shared by everyone in the community, but are solely those of the author.  Believe us, there have been numerous times when a particular post has stirred up disagreement within the Raising Kaine community of contributors and readers.  This is obviously one of those times.

Still, we strongly support the concept that authors on Raising Kaine are free to discuss, within reason (a judgment call, of course), less-than-popular ideas or sentiments.  In this case, Dan's post caused an outpouring of dissent, and created a strong and passionate discussion. In our opinion, Dan's post - whether or not you agreed with its content or tone - served the spirit of free speech to which we at Raising Kaine are proud to aspire. 

Having said that, upon reflection it is clear to us that Mark Warner, one of the brightest lights in the Democratic party and in American politics, does not need our advice on matters like this.  In fact, many of us at Raising Kaine look forward to strongly supporting Mark Warner's future endeavors, including a possible run for President of the United States.  Some of us have already gotten involved in that effort.  Meanwhile, there's a contest between Warner's friend Harris Miller and Jim Webb, who is supported by 95% of us here at Raising Kaine.  That's where the potential for tension and conflict comes in, as evidenced by what happened yesterday.  We would like to apologize for any hard feelings stemming from yesterday's article, while strongly supporting Dan Geroe as a friend and Young Democrat with the right to express his heartfelt opinions.  Thanks Dan, for everything that you do!

And thanks to all of you, Raising Kaine's readers, for your comments yesterday; we appreciate them greatly, as we do your participation in our community.  Now, onwards to victory over George Allen this November!  On that matter, we think it's fair to say that nearly ALL of us at Raising Kaine believe that either Harris Miller or Jim Webb would make a far, FAR superior Senator than George Allen.  We hope you agree with us in this regard, but if you don't, please feel free to say so!

Thanks again.

Raising Kaine

Comments



Being critical and b (Adam Malle - 4/4/2006 11:33:49 PM)
Being critical and being negative are not the same thing.  One can be critical of someone's past decisions without attacking. Saying that someone doesn't deserve a medal or is a bad person because he/she oppose the death penalty is a petty attack that has no place in politics.  Opposing their position on war or the death penalty with your own personal stance and/or evidence is not an attack but rather a statement of one's own position.  If someone does have some past indiscretion, they should be called on it; but even that does not necessitate an attack on the persons character.  Pointing out the indiscretion and presenting evidence is sufficient to prove one's case.

Positive is running on our own vision rather than simply against the other candidate/party



I agree that the def (KathyinBlacksburg - 4/4/2006 11:33:49 PM)
I agree that the definition of "positive" is just a bit vague here.  Except for rare, unusual circumstances, we certainly shouldn't attack any candidate's character.  But, hey, it was party insiders who savaged some of the challengers to party orthodoxy in 2004.  And they still do it.  It is not attacking someone to question their suitability for the job -- or their lack of courage to speak out when we needed them most.  It would be if in doing so we dishonor the years of service a candidate had offered.  But raising concerns about the record, candidatees' support/or failure to support issues we care about, and their inability to distinguish themselves from a dozen others is reasonable. If we don't do that much, shame on us.


Maybe it's me, but I (John K. (John) - 4/4/2006 11:33:49 PM)
Maybe it's me, but I don't think this statement is necessary.  Sure, the post seemed controversal, but how do we expand our preconceptions without challenging them?  Personally, I don't think it was a bad post; I think it just went a little overboard with emotion.  But in the end it was Dan's opinion, and he has a right to express it.  We should focus on constructive criticism and arguements, and as Josh said, stay positive.  Keep stirring the pot Dan.  Bona fortuna.


Adam: In case oth (Josh - 4/4/2006 11:33:49 PM)
Adam:

In case others may not have understood the conclusion to which you, I, an universally others have definitively come, I'll just sum it up how we want the tone to proceed in this primary:

Positive.



It's a sad day when (KathyinBlacksburg - 4/4/2006 11:33:49 PM)
It's a sad day when Democrats can't discuss their reasons for supporting candidates -- or diagreeing with them.  Whether one agress with Dan or not, why trounce him?  And why would RK apologize?  The solution isn't to grovel to the powers that be even more.  They still don't get it, that government really does start at the grass roots and they dodn't get to decide everything. They think we have nothing to say about issues and that we must just fall in line.

I'm amazed they went off on RK at all.  You've been so profusely gushing about warner that I can't see where you've even given a thought to the other dozen or so who may run.  What if one of them is better?  You mention Feingold today.  What about him?  Hasn't he been there when courage was needed?  He's been a national leader.  But Mark -- and now, sadly even Tim, are busy rubber stamping the Bush adventure in Iraq. Yes there are more issues than Iraq.  For example, 

How would he solve the health care crisis, or build a consensus around a better foreign policy?  What are his proposals for balancing civil liberties and the need to prevent terrorism?  How will Warner deal with the effexts of offshoring on US jobs? 

How has it come to the point where reaching a budget deal (a governor's job) is now proof of qualification for national leadership? This is a basic requirement. 

Doesn't RK want to see how things unfold, examine Warner's positions on the details. 
It's no surprise I don't like bandwagons.  I've written of them before, but let's be real here.  I'd like to know where we'd be if courageous folks didn't speak out early and continue to do so over these past three years.  For all our pleading, though, Warner still doesn't get it on verified (auditable) paper trails.  This is fundamental. 

Nationally, finally voters agree with us for the most part on Iraq and a host of issues.  And it didn't happen by all of us sitting here, saying me-too to the most conservtive voices in the party or refusing to speak out about the direction of both parties.

I think the worst of all possible outcomes comes from the monolithic manner in which the party, including the state party, tries to swoop down and attack anone who poses another view.  Just what is the name of our party anyway?

Good people can disagree.  Have we forgotten that in the Democratic Party?  So, do not apologize.  You have been more than respectful of Warner.  You owe no one a backpeddle or distancing from what one writer said.  Are you that fearful you'll be disavowed?  And if so, have you lost your sense of purpose?

This is the best Democratic blog and likely the best blog overall in Virginia.  I sure hope you don't start running scared instead of raising issues.  The fact that you have taken courageous stands is why I read RK regularly.  So, please keep up the good work, the present post notwithstanding.  All the best...



Dan and I have had o (Adam Malle - 4/4/2006 11:33:49 PM)
Dan and I have had our moments of agreement and disagreement in several posts.  He is a great contributor to RK and I look forward to reading and debating his posts as a writer in the future.

His post, while raising some hairs, was extremely productive in that gave triggered a much-needed debate.  I think the debate clearly shows what direction our focus should be in this campaign



Thanks, Sean, that m (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:33:49 PM)
Thanks, Sean, that means a lot.  I hope to have a chance to work with you in electing Democrats and defeating Republicans sometime soon.  - Lowell


No, thank you guys f (Sean Holihan - 4/4/2006 11:33:49 PM)
No, thank you guys for just being here.  You are all obviously an important part of Democratic activism in Virginia.  Thank you Dan, for being active and supportive in Democratic politics. 

I also apologize for my role in yesterday's discussion as my response was certainly more on the offensive then it should have been.  I'm glad that it was posted and left out there.  I'm sure many people had some of the very same thoughts on their mind.

Thanks again guys, you're doing a hell of a job.