"down ballot douchebag" designation diaries.  Here's the latest.  He's taken a shot at at least one Hispanic candidate under this disgusting category.

at any ethnicity.  If you've been following it, Ben has gone after any candidate -- white, black, brown, green, purple -- he thinks would hurt another candidate "up" the ballot.

That has nothing to do with race, and you know it.

Are you going to call anybody who thinks that a specific hispanic or black candidate sucks is a racist?  Or anybody who thinks a woman is a bad candidate is a sexist?  OR anybody who thinks a gay is a bad candidate is a homophobe? 

Sometimes, people are bad candidates regardless of race.  Ben is just pointing them out.

Annie, the diary's author, is disturbed by what she thinks is NLS's immigration phobia. I think she made an interesting observation.  I have never believed (or known) that NLS is a racist.  I apologize for making that implication.  I'd like to assume that his obsession with the Republican-blog immigration issue is just "filler".

But now to your point, Dan.  By your comments, are you saying you agree with Ben that this Democratic "down ballot douchebag" candidate is a "bad candidate"?  I hope not.  Ben could have easily written about why he thinks a down-ballot candidate might hurt the up-ballot candidate, without calling the candidate a gutter term.

I think the whole idea of calling one of the best Democratic candidates in the race this year a "douchebag" (Merriam: an unattractive or offensive person) is disrepectful, vulgar, and sleazy (not to mention sexist).  The Democratic candidate has an astonishing, and accomplished background and is working incredibly hard to get elected in this Republican-dominated area.  Brian Moran, Jim Webb, and Mark Warner, just to name a few, have weighed in and think he's an excellent candidate. 

it's just not black and white