The whole thing is irrelevant to anything important. Particularly on the day after our primary when we ought to be figuring out ways to beat the GOP, it seems instead some are more interested in continuing fights that started before the primaries...

How about doing the virtual equivalent of "taking it outside," and make this site about the important stuff!!!

Why do you suppose RK has become so popular over the last couple of years...?

Because this has always been a place where the vast majority of the content has been relevant, reasoned, intelligent, and focused on Democratic success...

But lately, it seems to be one flame war after another, and you have just escalated another one that did not need to be escalated.

I understand the impulse to want to attack back when you are attacked....particularly when attacked unfairly. But trust me, people are pretty savvy at recognizing an unfair attack when they see one. Respond and move on. Escalating only encourages more of the same...

You are too good at what you do to get dragged down into these pointless flame wars. Your track record speaks for itself...stay focused on the important stuff and these attacks will be exposed for what they are.

The best way to defend yourself is to make a difference, which you have up to now...make those attacking you irrelevant...!

RK has always been a breath of fresh air...

I'm not saying he shouldn't have laid out the particulars in his response to Burke... which he did...but to escalate it into a "war" really seems highly counterproductive...

The way to make attacks like that meaningless is to make the attacker irrelevant...

How came out looking like a hero last November...You and Lowell, and the rest of RK who worked hard to get Jim Webb elected...or folks attacking Webb and his supporters...?

That battle was won by winning...not by hurling the last insult...

Also, where did Lowell hurl insults at him?

It sounds like this is the type of person who wants to kiss and make up when his candidate wins the primary, but wont lift a finger at any other time.

I say replace him and put in someone who believes in Democratic(big D and little d) principles.

If we sweep these issues under a rug in the name of Democratic unity then we'll be allowing the very problem we're fighting against to perpetuate.  Rock.  Yet if we fight we're using up time and creating turmoil within the party which isn't good for unity or winning seats in November.  Hard Place.

You may be comfortable with the workings of this political machine and therefore think there is no Rock.  I'm glad for you.  It's an easy decision then - make peace and get on with preparations for November.  And if you say you're not comfortable with it but are looking only at the bigger picture, you're doing just what they want.

We're not comfortable with the machine.  We weren't fighting against Smyth because we couldn't think of anything better to do - we were fighting because we don't believe in the type of government she and Connolly are running.  We're fighting against people like George Burke who tell us we're hurting the party by standing up for what we believe in rather than mindlessly towing the party line - a line that just happens to be defined by the very people we're fighting against.

It's better to have it out now than in September.

Connolly and Smyth are using the methods of the Republicans that we decry.  So why should we support them just because they have a D next to their name?

For as long as I've known you, and been pleased to write on RK (partly because you quickly stomped on male ego trips and neurotic, childish rants), this entire brouhaha is unbecoming of you, no matter what you perceive to be the provocation.

So Mr. Burke had some fun (in his view). We have known for a long time that the blogs are not beloved of the Establishment, why give them ammunition?  Why give the republican right-wing such hilarious told-you-so material? It's beginning to sound like the psychotic rants on Daily Kos, which you and I have both deplored.  Chill out, man. I will read no further, and say no more until you all grow up; it is not worth the time and effort.

Connolly would certainly say yes.  Remember he said that he "needed Smyth."  Well, dirty fighting in the HAll campaign got him Smyth.

Yes, I agree, I remember this guy well and he was ridiculous....I think seriously he made the above incorrect assumptions and was simply spamming to stop Webb esp. in the primary but still, he comments are beyond the pale.

Stay Away from the Jewish Shtick
Webb bloggers (paid and volunteer) should keep quiet about Peggy Fox's Jewish question and whether or not Allen has a Jewish ancestor.

Webb is doing real well right now so don't blow it by giving Wadhams and Company an opening to revisit the Joe Stanley hooked-nose cartoon controversy from the primary...

From September 18, 2006, in the middle of the Webb-Allen race.  Nice to see a top-ranking Democratic official bringing up the supposedly "anti-Semitic" flier from the spring.  VERY helpful as we tried to take back the U.S. Senate for the Democratic Party.  Thanks George!

P.S. Great advice, by the way, to stay away from Peggy Fox's question and George Allen's bizarre responses ("casting aspersions," "I'll eat a ham sandwich").  As it turns out, that was a major turning point in the campaign.

And what's more, they have the nerve to say "don't be negative" and use words like unity. Is it just me, or do they mean don't be negative toward us? It's okay for them to be negative, and okay for them to win primaries by breaking promises to be positive and running absolute crap. Meanwhile, we're just expected to shut up and support them.

RK, Jim Webb, etc seems to be the direction people want Democrats to move.  We want straight talkers, not muckrakers.  And certainly not corporate lobbyists. 

If they tell you to shut up - that's an indicator of how much they value democracy.  Who are these elitists who think they alone should be choosing the people that represent us?

I think RK should declare war on the elitist way of doing things.  Decisions on whom the party supports should be decided in living rooms, not boardrooms.

RK is like a virtual living room - where real people discuss real issues important to them.  I like this blog much better than KOS and I don't think your revulsion at the behaviors exhibited by a few and your subsequent response is out of line. 

Good for you - fight for what is right.

Exactly how is engaging in a pissing contest with George Burke going to accomplish anything...?

But the thing is, this kind of politics does not help the Democratic Party, and it must be opposed.  However, I agree that "declaring war" is not necessarily the right way to go about it.

That said, I consider myself a soldier in the cause.

But finding the right candidates to work hard to support in October and November is very important.  Also, after that election, the leadership battles for FCDC, Congressional District Committees, and other committees will be happening starting in December.

So, I'd say, it's going to be some rough Holidays this year.  The grassroots needs to identify a competent, motivated, and capable candidate for FCDC Chair, and get more people into the district committees so we can boot the Strong Arm Gang out of power.

That is the constructive way to answer this kind of dirty, nasty, undemocratic politics.

It's people like you, Mr. Burke, that make people in Virginia think the REPUBLICANS are the Big Tent Party.  You're close minded views on great Democrats like Jim Webb are the only thing that can stop the blue tide surging through Virginia. 

I will also never forget John Jennison, Connolly's campaign manager and member of the Providence Committee which was spearheading this ill-conceived effort, heckling poor Ms. Moore as she addressed FCDC.

This machine must be stopped or the Democratic party will pay for their abuses.

I could no longer remain silent about his [Lowell's] recent tirades about Democrats and Fairfax County issues that were, more often than not, inaccurate, downright false, edited to highlight your opinion, nonsensical, or just plain nasty.

Well George, given that attitude about accuracy, fair play, and avoiding being nasty, how do you feel about Linda Smyth's absurdly false, negative, attack on Charlie Hall for being a Republican? 

There is nothing Republican about Charlie Hall, his actions, or his beliefs.  In fact, I challenge you to present Mr. Hall to any number of conservatives like Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, anyone on Fox, or any conservative on your street and ask them if Charlie would fit in their party.  Let us know how well that goes.

Anyone even vaguely aware of the situation knows damn well that this was dirty politics at it's worst.  Linda and her supporters intentionally crafted and continued to push a message that Hall was a Republican.  Whether directly or indirectly, that was the crystal clear message. 

It's dirty cheating politics.  The voters who were not following the race would have seen Linda's mailer and walked away thinking that Hall was a Republican - the worst thing a person could be who's running in a Democratic primary.  It is pure deceit intended to trick uninformed voters into voting for Linda because Charlie "is a Republican".  And George, I know you're wise and experienced enough to know that this was the purpose and goal of such a lie.

That is as low and dirty as it gets. 

So George, step up and justify this behavior.  Why should the people who were part of this outrageous and completely phony smear campaign remain part of the Democratic party?  Elected officals, leaders of the party no less, created and spread flat out lies about another Democrat in order to get Linda re-elected.  These supposedly honest leaders stabbed one of their own in the back for their own benefit.

What do you think YOU are doing for the Democratic party in Virginia?  If you've got a complaint about Lowell, be a man and tell him to his face.

ptooey.

Middle:  Eileen Manning, who trashed Webb last year like no one else, and is in the middle of most FCDC nastyness.

Far Right:  Steve Bunn, who hopes to ride Eileen and George to the Chairmanship of FCDC at the end of this year.

Did you author the blog entries that RK and NLS are attributing to you?

Ronald Reagan had this maxim "thou shalt not criticize a fellow Republican," and look how successful the GOP were when they followed that? 

Also, thank you Lowell. As for you, "presidentialman", tune it out until it becomes relevant to you. But don't try to take away the sole venue I have for expression of my opinions.

Now I do think you can't judge a forum by the cover. Every forum has a different mood to it, and Raising Kaine might die by following what I laid out. If you want to promote my diary, fine, I really don't care. I hope more people comment on things that I have written, but I'm not going to go get my panties in a wad if they don't;a lot of people that blog here are really passionate and partisan-in the best sense of the word. I'm more cool and rationale, taking on my heroes moods-JFK-that comes out in a non hellraiser way. People go where they go. I gather people have built up a good repitoire with Lowell during the campaign than with me. I'm not under any illusions, I was in philosophy class avenging my bad grade and sad to say working. And I must say, with Bush shredding the Constitution,before the Dem wins, it was,and still is, a great time to take a philosophy class because of stuff like Gitmo, you get into is torture right or wrong. And my professor loathed Bush and Cheney, the best rants. I also took a class on the 60s which talked about Vietnam, and well I'm thankful that I did those things. I want to better my grades to get into GMU.

Getting back to the thread, I also think that I was trying to build on what other people said. I think several of the first comments are on why are we in a petty argument/war. Thus, I don't really think I'm saying anything new here.

Other "issues" I'm still trying to figure blogging out,so I try different things in here. I know my tech stuff but there are people that are so much better than me.

"Also, thank you Lowell. As for you, "presidentialman", tune it out until it becomes relevant to you. But don't try to take away the sole venue I have for expression of my opinions." This is just a blatent attack. I am not trying to take this forum away from you. Quote from my post where I say I'm trying to take this forum away from you?  What I said is, is this sliding into irrelavancy, there were at least three other posts before mine that said basically the same thing. All I'm saying is hey they make some interesting points, you know what, I think maybe I agree with them. If you're picking on me where are your accusations to them? People mentioned on how they used to like DailyKos but those days are long past. They thought of Markos as a God.  I saw a 60 minutes interview with him, other than that, I've never really had much to do with that board. Never had an account,never knew what DailyKos was. But I can put two and two together, and after reading their posts and checking out it for myself, I think they're right. Also, I guess it was Lowell who made the comment that at Kos they think all the Democrats have to march into with San Francisco and NY City that are leaders in being blue and damn those red state Democrats. Lowell said oh how he forgets the realists. Also I think it was Lowell who said Kos curses a run by Bob Kerrey because he is in bed with those Republicans, and Lowell pointed out he worked for Jim Webb doesn't that count as a plus to have him. 

Again all I'm giving is advise, no one has to take it. 
One last thing, I think this board has some smart people who make politics their full time job. They've posted a lot of things that I wouldn't of cared about and its been an enlightening experience. I may not care that much about the local stuff but I care about this board.

"I go here because its a site I like and know about it. Maybe because its summer and the big campaign of 06 where everyone wanted to get on board is over, that a lot of people aren't here ,or,another reason  is that,and I learned this the hard way, Lowell needs a co poster that posts a lot like Lowell. I don't mean to say he needs to agree with Lowell, just that he posts as many times as Lowell. I've got nothing on Lowell, but the reason for this is to tell people that this isn't Lowell's own personal sandbox. 10 out of every 1 diaries are Lowell's.  It doesn't help that Lowell "declare's war" in these diaries."
-presidentialman

These two are rebuking Lowell and adding their constructive criticism.  Then its my post where I also rebuke and add constructive criticism. Why are we going after Lowell, same reason Rob is defending him, he started the thread. A nice clean and logical explanation for everything. Please get your facts straight then you can distort them at your leisure.

Since Webb won, no thanks to George Burke ... it would be nice if the local dems could relegate him to Bernie Lambert status and burn him at the voting stake. What a shithead!!

As for the future of RK ... I think it's bright blue!! I say that because the draft James Webb movement confirmed in a big way what came to be in the Tim Kaine campaign ... that Lowell and his contributors can say with pride and certainty that they MADE A REAL DIFFERENCE!!!!  A Big and Lasting Difference. Old Bosses and Hacks have a new and active group they have to account to ... the internet bloggers, who aren't easily duped.

Too bad you were outed George Burke .... but the crap you put out is yours to keep and you shall now forever be tainted with the stench!!

Keep Truckin RK!!  Keep Fighting!!!

It didn't help that TPP was apparently oblivious to the actual writings and philosophy of his namesake.  That irked me more than anything.  If you're going to take on the personality of a noted writer, at least deliver on the advanced billing.  TPP never did.

I voted for Jim Webb in the '06 primary.  I canvassed and donated for Jim Webb's campaign throughout '06 and I co-ordinated GOTV efforts with Sue Langley in my home precinct.

I also canvassed and donated to Andy Hurst's campaign.

As I got to know the local Democratic activists, I joined the Providence District Democratic Committee and the Fairfax County Democratic Committee.

I did those things based on the example of Chris Bowers that Democratic activists should make the party stronger and do more than vote.

As a resident of Merrifield precinct since 2004, I saw Linda Smyth's involvement in the revitilization plan here and also her immediate involvement when there was a crime issue in our neighborhood.  Before that, Linda had also come to my homeowners' association meeting and made herself available to us.

And so this year I volunteered to be Linda Smyth's campaign manager.

It was only after I got involved that I learned about the local opposition faction headed by Becky Cate.  Becky Cate is a local activist who butted heads with Gerry Connolly and never forgave him for crossing her.  After losing the 1993 caucus, Cate worked for Republican Jim Hyland instead of Connolly endorsed Linda Smyth.  There were many Democrats who were personally upset about the whole situation.

But Lowell never goes into the personal animosity that motivates the people (like Ben Tribbett, who managed Cate's 1993 campaign) constantly attacking Gerry Connolly on the blogs.

Gerry is a strong, liberal Democrat who makes no apologies and knows how to fight back.  We need more elected officials like Gerry.

And yet Lowell is always more concerned with whether a particular candidate is paying attention to his blog and kissing his ring.  Lowell actually condemned Linda Smyth in part because she didn't take part in Lowell and Ben's blog talk radio "debate".  (Again, Ben is Becky Cate's former manager.)

Well, from my perspective as a volunteer and activist, we should always do what makes the party stronger.  Lowell doesn't seem to care about that.  Instead, Lowell seems to care about who makes Lowell feel more important.  To that, I have several choice words for Lowell.

Lowell suggests that it was a smear campaign for Smyth to question Charlie Hall's Democratic credentials, even though those questions were only raised publicly AFTER Hall admitted in the Washington Post that he had discussed his campaign strategy with Tom Davis, the top Republican in Fairfax.  In addition, Hall's campaign and Lowell also accused Linda Smyth of being a Republican on many occasions.  Lowell also flippantly accused Gerry Connolly and Linda Smyth of being corrupt and Lowell promoted at least one diary that accused Linda Smyth of being a racist.

And now Lowell wants to claim that we should purge the local party of "thugs" like George Burke who engage in "dirty" politics?

Lowell doesn't see all the vicious attacks he launches regularly as counting against him.  He only sees the rebounds coming back at him as vicious attacks.  Well, I am someone who first got involved in politics through blogs, and I can see that Lowell Feld and Ben Tribett are total disgraces.  I challenge them to take this fight to people on MYDD like Chris Bowers and Matt Stoller.

You want a war, Lowell?  Fine.  But you best know that I am going to take it right to your house.  And you better go buy some coherent ideas and not just sad and empty accusations.  I want a stronger Democratic Party in a place that has been riding a blue wave.

You are just not as important as you think you are.

Sean Corey
Vienna, Virginia

Also, I wouldn't call Gerry Connolly a "liberal" Democrat.  He's blocked a living wage for Fairfax County that Arlington and Alexandria have.  A living wage only pays people at the POVERTY line, and I don't think anyone that opposes that can be considered a liberal.  Of course to believe Gerry on this, he really really wants a living wage but Virginia law won't let him do it.  Funny how that "state law" doesn't apply to Arlington and Alexandria.  *end snark*.

So, why should she have gone on the show?  Most Democrats do not appear on Fox because it is hostile territory.  In this instance, you were just like a Fox talking head.  That is why it is relevant that Sean Corey mentioned you and the farthest thing from bizarre.

2)  "As a resident of Merrifield precinct since 2004, I saw Linda Smyth's involvement in the revitilization plan here and also her immediate involvement when there was a crime issue in our neighborhood.  Before that, Linda had also come to my homeowners' association meeting and made herself available to us.

And so this year I volunteered to be Linda Smyth's campaign manager."

So, are you obtuse or just trying to be cute in parsing Sean's words?  He obviously stated that he was Linda's campaign manager.  Moreover, you could have just checked it out here.

3)  Lastly - and perhaps most importantly as it bears on the (witting?)ignorance of some posters on what FFX can or cannot do vis-a-vis land use and other matters during the Hall/Smyth comments on RK and NLS - Arlington Co. and the City of Alexandria are not legally structured the same way as FFX relative to Richmond.  Arlington and Alexandria possess greater autonomy than FFX.  Heck, FFX cannot even put reflective strips up on stop sign posts to better notify blithe drivers and protect our children.

When Ben or anyone else makes comparisons between FFX and Arlington or any Virginia city, beware.  It is apples to oranges.  The Dillon rule makes life in Virginia very difficult for localities, especially in NoVA where progressive politics are quashed by retrograde members of the General Assembly.

But of course, no matter what anyone writes at this point, it will be meaningless to Ben or Lowell or a number of other posters here.  Y'all have to save face because you supported a candidate who fudged the FFX Board's track record and cherry-picked information like there was no tomorrow - especially considering the amazing Republican turnout on June 12.  Everyone knows that the Republicans came out for Hall.

Do not worry yourselves too much.  You have supported other great, progressive Dem candidates in the past.  I presume your impressive record will continue to some extent.  But, being suckered by a skillful public relations professional happens.  Just move on.

Politicians and Policy Makers are Responsible for Their Comments...

Dude,

This site sure takes Harris Miller to task for his comments, dissecting every nuance.

Webb said what he said.

Yeah, and Burke said what HE said, and should be hled responsible for HIS comments.

Also, I would note that Burke kept up a steady stream of often vicious criticism of Jim Webb and the Webb campaign even AFTER Webb was the Democratic nominee.  Is that appropriate coming from a high-ranking Democratic official, posting under a pseudonym? 

Finally, why don't you address the issues that Eric, Deborah, Charlie Hall and many others have raised in recent weeks about Connolly's and Smyth's lies about Charlie and his supporters (who came THIS close to defeating the Machine)?  Instead, all we seem to be getting from you guys is more of the same, no acknowledgment that Smyth almost lost, no acknowledgment that maybe the Hall voters had some issues deserving of attention, etc.  Is that the style of government that the Connolly/Smyth/Burke faction espouses?

Please cite some legitimate sources for this information.  If you're trying to convince us that we were "suckered" you'll need to do a little better than "Everyone knows...".

Some Democrats are raising grave concerns about Leslie Byrne taking such an active role in Webb's campaign, particularly in light of the fact that Webb spoke on behalf of Republican legislative candidates in Maryland just before the 2002 election.

Webb appeared at a rally in Annapolis hours before the 2002 election to endorse the candidacies of GOP Maryland House of Delegate candidates Nancy Almgren, Michael Collins and Herb McMillan and Maryland Senate candidate Andy Smarick.

These Republican endorsements by Webb came two years after he endorsed George Allen and George Bush in the 2000 elections.  Webb's Republican endorsements came at a time when Webb had allegedly switched allegiance from the Republican Party to the Democrats.

What's the story here... and does Leslie know this?

It's not like Leslie to be uninformed.  I can only surmise that she was misinformed.

I'm not interested in talking about what George Burke may or may not have said in some anonymous comments.

I am interested in taking a long hard look at you "reform" Democrats whose candidates don't put the word "Democrat" on their campaign literature or yard signs and who play nice with bloggers who promote suggestions that the opponent is a racist.

You want to have a war about who is a sleazy hack, Lowell?  You want to compare and see which one of us has more Democratic bona fides and which one has more petty ego trips.

Let's go.  Keep digging.

Sean Corey
Vienna

But first, I've got to correct you in a big way.  An awful lot of your comment was directly attacking Lowell - which in many ways was wrong.  The big thing you missed is that this was not just Lowell, but myself and may others who either were, or became, strong Hall supporters.  Your fellow Connolly/Smyth supporter George Burke was just on yesterday talking about getting the facts right - you should try following that advice because it wasn't all Lowell.

Onto the questions...

Since you were Linda's manager I'm not going to go into detail with these questions because you're already familiar with the issues.  But if you try to dodge the question based on these short versions you'll get called on it.

1. Why did Linda not make herself more available to debates or forums, either online or in-person?  She was given plenty of opportunities and made herself available only once - at the LWV debate.

2. Why didn't Linda step up and do the right thing at the LWV debate?  Anyone who has ever seen a debate knows damn well that the participants take turns answering questions first.  Yet when the issue came up, Linda did not say a word about fairness, honesty, or integrity.  She simply kept her mouth shut so she could maintain an unfair advantage.

3. Many of us, including myself, have said that the accusation of Charlie being a Republican is a flat out lie.  Since you and Linda are the accusers, the burden of proof is on your shoulders.  Please provide proof that Charlie is, as you claim, a Republican.  And please don't embarrass yourself or insult everyone's intelligence by saying Charlie's meeting with Davis is your proof.

Lowell was the one doing the most posts and the most promoting of diaries on this race.  He has also been the most aggressive of the main bloggers on this race.  I know you all voted to endorse Charlie and I had no problem with that.  It was Lowell's behavior -- and then his temerity to continuously say that our side was sleazy and no class -- that has motivated me to comment.

Regarding your questions:

1.  I cannot and do not speak for Linda on this, but in my view it was more important during a primary campaign for Linda to (i) keep doing her job; and (ii) go out to meet with potential Democratic primary voters and neighborhood leaders directly.

The driving force behind Charlie's campaign was a group of motivated local activists who hate everything associated in any way with Gerry Connolly.  Trust me, their voices are already heard.  Over and over again.  These folks can?t stand Gerry personally and disagree strongly with several decisions that have been made, and so they condemn the whole county government and the public hearing / citizen task force processes as corrupt.  They are not going to be persuaded by anything Linda says and they would be certain to constitute 50% of the crowd at any debate or candidates forum.

In addition, the other 50% of the crowd at any debate or forum would be members of the "evil corrupt establishment" or "Connolly machine".  So essentially all of the people Linda would be talking to at a debate are either her die-hard opponents or her die-hard supporters.  It makes more sense to me for Linda to talk to other people who live in the District and who have a history of voting in Democratic primaries.

For the record, Linda was meeting with community leaders and residents in Holmes Run Acres on the night of Lowell and Ben's blog talk radio.

2.  The fact that you blame the debate snafu entirely on Linda illustrates my point about the usefulness of debates.  We did not choose the LWV or The Connection to host the debate.  We had no input into the decision of who would moderate.  I agree that what happened was a mistake ? but it was the moderator?s mistake and the moderator quickly and forcefully dug in her heels when she was questioned about it.  The last thing anyone in a debate wants to do is try to ?take on? the moderator.  The whole situation was bizarre and awkward, and it?s just not fair to demand that Linda should have jumped up to tell the moderator how to run the debate.

3.  Charlie may or may not be a progressive, a conservative, a Democrat, a Republican, or maybe at heart he?s a moderate Christian Democrat in the vein of Konrad Adenauer.  I don?t know.  What I do know is that local Republicans wanted Charlie to win; that Charlie talked to Tom Davis about how and whether to run against Linda; and that there were a bunch of reports of communication and coordination between Charlie?s side and local Republicans.  The only piece of this story that Linda?s campaign communicated to voters was the piece that was verifiable and on the record ? because Charlie Hall admitted it in the pages of the Washington Post.

And here is where I get to the skinny:

Over the course of the campaign, this blog became a non-stop eruption of venom against Linda Smyth, Gerry Connolly, and to a lesser extent the Board in general.  They were all routinely dismissed as corrupt and dishonest, mere cogs in some Tammany Hall style ?machine.?  (Which really made me laugh as the unpaid campaign manager who had Linda?s entire campaign in a box in the trunk of my car.)  Linda was accused of everything up to and including being responsible for Metro cars with broken air conditioning.  Connolly was described as having fangs.

And Lowell encouraged all of this and often led the way.  The worst single thing he did was to promote a diary to the front page that not only accused Linda of being a Republican (so I guess it is OK for one side to question party loyalty?), but also strongly implied that Linda was a racist because she didn?t vote in the 1989 primary for Doug Wilder.

Lowell should have been ashamed that post was even on RK, but instead he promoted it.

And, unsurprisingly, the post in question was apparently inspired by a similar post that was a bit more subtle by none other than Ben Tribbett over at NLS.

And now Lowell and Ben call their opponents sleazy.

Damn, that is some cheek.

And it?s not just the appalling double standard, I also think that Lowell and Ben have a very bad idea of where they should fit into local politics as bloggers.  Bloggers should be organizers and activists, getting people like me to volunteer and get involved in politics.  Bloggers should NOT be self-appointed arbiters of what is acceptable political discourse.  In the case of Lowell and Ben, it is absolutely clear that they have no idea about what is acceptable political discourse.

Respect is earned, not owed, and for Lowell and Ben to think that local politicians need to kiss their ring and stroke their ego is preposterous.  They are self-centered prima donas who think that it?s all about them.  And they don?t care if that means they end up actively undermining the strength of the Democratic Party in the county that is at the forefront of turning the whole state blue.

You want to improve political discourse in Fairfax?  Get better bloggers.

Sean Corey
Vienna

1. About Debating
You've got a decent point about who would show up to debates.  But this is true of many debates - supporters of each side comprise most of the audience.  If the "in-person" audience were the only ones who could see/hear the debate I'd agree with you.  The one debate was video taped and appeared on our blog (pro-Hall), the Fairfax Chamber of Commerce (pro-Smyth), and Fairfax Public Access (neutral).  The public forum/debate that Hall appeared in, that Linda didn't, was also taped and appeared here - but there were no copyright restrictions so anyone could have used that video on any site.  Point being, through video any head-to-head discussions were easily available to a much wider audience.

Also, the bigger the event, the more press coverage.  The local press did come to the Hall only forum but I suspect that had it been a real debate it would have received better coverage - which is good for Linda and Charlie both.

As for the blog talk radio we said time and time again that it could be rescheduled or an additional show could have been set.  There was a lot of scheduling flexibility on our part.  Charlie made many appearances on RK himself - something Linda could have done at any time because blogs are open 24/7.  The question of scheduling, which was the reason given that Linda would not appear in any of these public discussions, is just plain wrong.

2. The Debate Problem.
I think we're all in agreement that the LWV blew it.  That's not how a debate goes down. 

The problem I have here is that Linda never even tried to right a wrong she knew was happening.  A person with a strong sense of "fair play" would never have kept their mouth shut - even if it meant losing an advantage.  Linda is a community leader, an elected official, and she should certainly have the courage to stand up to one, admittedly obnoxious, moderator and demand fairness.

In the bigger picture this may be a minor point, but to me it speaks volumes about Linda's character.  She was free to make any choice at that one point in time and she made her choice to stay silent and retain her advantage.  Faced with a tough moral choice, the path she choose says a lot about her true character.

3. Republican Proof
I ask again - where's the proof?  You say that there's more to this story than what appeared in the Post (I sure as hell hope so after an accusation like that), so what is it?  Linda is the accuser.  She's accused Charlie of some serious wrong doing in the eyes of Democratic primary voters.  She has an obligation to provide solid proof.  This is even more important given that some people are saying Linda used this same dirty tactic (accusing a fellow Democrat of being a Republican) last time around.  I don't know much about that one, but the very fact that this is the second time Linda's been accused of using Republicanism to get elected, she very much does have to prove her accusation against Charlie.

Again you're way off in singling out Lowell.  Many people were involved in the Hall/Smyth discussions and posts on RK and it is wrong to imply it's all Lowell's doing.  He's is without a doubt the central figure in RK, but as we've told both friends and enemies many times, this is a community blog.  And in this particular race many people were involved - from both sides I might add.

Lowell is very passionate about politics and what is happening in the world around us.  And he writes that way.  He fights hard for what he believes in and defends himself and his positions vigorously. 

It's a style some people love and a style some hate.  I've been a part of RK from the beginning and I can't count the number of times people have made comments or sent emails saying that Lowell's passionate style of writing is going to "ruin everything for Kaine/Webb/Democrats/Fill-in-the-blank".  It hasn't happened.

Which brings me to my point about your inaccurate attack on Lowell...

It's perfectly valid to say that you hate his style, his passion, or even his opinions.  That's your opinion and your entitled to it.  But to say Lowell is a prima dona, or that he wants people to "kiss his ring" (you've said that twice now), or that he needs politicians to stroke his ego couldn't be more wrong.  There is no ring and there is no ego stroking being sought.  Yes, there are egos in blogging, but no one is doing this for stroking from politicians.

If this is what you really think then you don't understand Lowell or blogging.

2007 has been deju vu all over again. In 2003, Smyth attacked Cate as being a closet Republican. Fast forward to 2007 and she attacks Hall for being a closet Republican. Connolly attacked the citizens who organized the grassroots FairGrowth organization and opposed the MetroWest project as being closet Republicans. Does anyone see a trend here?

This is slimy negative politics and people on this blog are justifiably outraged by it.