Regarding blogs, Dan K. Thomasson of the Scripps Howard News Service wrote via Deseret News:
Whether or not the staid world of national politics is ready for these undisciplined rants and diatribes remains to be seen. But if there were doubts about the perils of relying too much on these newest of media darlings during the coming campaign, there is already ample evidence to change one's thinking. When it comes to bloggers, what the candidate buys he may not be able to live with, given a general insensitivity to political correctness, accuracy and decent language.
Yes, we're obviously dangerous, we need to focus more on stories like these recent and wholly irrelevant gems from the MSM:
AP via CBS: Romney Family Tree Has Polygamy Branch
NYT's Political section: Obama Had Slaveowning Kin
MSNBC: The senior thesis of Hillary D. Rodham, Wellesley College class of 1969
I admit it. Try as we might, I suspect blogs will never consistently achieve the level of the MSM. Though I suppose it might be fun to stoop down once in a while.
Actually, here's a piece featuring quotes from several bloggers. Content warning - it's a little more serious than much of what you generally find in the MSM, except for all those recent, riveting stories on Anna Nicole, of course.
WASHINGTON — If being president is like living in an alternate reality, running for the job may be best accomplished in the virtual one.
More than ever, presidential candidates are attempting to harness the power of the ever-growing blogosphere, and they're finding that independent writers are increasingly able to influence their success.


Awwwww. Are the wittle weftists scared of the big bad bloggers?
Posted by: Hard Right | Saturday, March 03, 2007 at 02:13 AM
I was talking to my Dad about the surge (I believe we talked this morning). And I said, "wow the troop surge is going well isn't it." I had just read on Ac of Spades that dozens of AQ terrorists were killed in al Anbar. My Dad told me he didn't know... I said "well haven't they covered on CNN that the violence has dropped sharply"
"They haven't really been covering the war on CNN since the surge."
Doesn't that just say it all, after they are done critizing how GW Bush is sending out troops to die, they don't talk about the fact that... it isn't happening that way...
Posted by: Jeff | Saturday, March 03, 2007 at 08:41 AM
And they can't connect the dots like we bloggers do. Click here: http://moneyrunner.blogspot.com/2007/03/unified-climate-theory.html
Posted by: Moneyrunner | Saturday, March 03, 2007 at 10:52 AM
The surge is going well - hahaha. The Iraq clusterfuck is entering year 5 and the silly little 'surge' is NOW going well. You sheep are priceless. Stay the course!!!
Posted by: BobInStamford | Saturday, March 03, 2007 at 11:53 AM
If computer journalists are parasites, then I hope that they carry a fatal disease. Let the ink spilling prevaricators of doom contract terminal carpel tunnel syndrome.
How would newspaper coverage of the war on terror be different if say, all of the main stream media's reporters pockets were brimming with Saudi petro dollars? Can you tell me?
They are all fear mongers and traitors who don't deserve the privlege of living in a free country.
They are the enemy of modernity.
How many times have we seen stories like
Y2K.
Bird Flu.
The next ice age.
world warming.
Appease the Soviets.
Nuclear Winter.
China Syndrome.
DDT is killing birds.
Spotted Owls.
Let all the olde timey scribblers die a slow painful death, sucking the marrow out of their reverse mortgages, until there is only enough money to pay off the estate tax (which they are in favor of), leaving any of their pampered poli sci(anti American) educated progeny, who will be forced to compete with Mexican laborers for a job, destitute, bereft of inheritance, and financially incapable of procreating.
Good riddance.
Posted by: Papertiger | Saturday, March 03, 2007 at 11:55 AM
Bob, you must be very familiar with the term "sour grapes" by now.
Posted by: Jeff | Saturday, March 03, 2007 at 01:56 PM
Sour grapes? Its you 'patriots' that are irrelevant these days. No one wants to even be associated with your stuttering fool of a leader. Hey, why not tell some more made up stories. You seem to be good at that on here.
Posted by: BobInStamford | Saturday, March 03, 2007 at 04:09 PM
Bob... I mean, where do I start? Sour Grapes doesn't mean irrelevant... The only thing that's irrelevant is me saying sour grapes, and you taking a jab at the President when you have no rebuttal! A real liberal! You will always be a winner in YOUR heart.
Posted by: Jeff | Saturday, March 03, 2007 at 04:47 PM