Yes, clearly the use of the internet in politics has dealt a crippling blow to liberal values. Just ask President Obama and the Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress.

Daily Telegraph bashes the Left? Who'dathunkit?

If you quote only the hyperlinked phrases you get: ...take more naturally... denies it... denied... here ...Guido... impotent rage... I say it again.

No, I don't really have a point.

Is this the guy who went on Beck's show?

Everything's going to be okay. I'm here now.

Ok, maybe in English politics words like Lefties and Libertarians mean different things than they do here. And maybe their political models are different than ours. So I might be misunderstanding the point of TFA.

But here in Murrica, the libtards are on the cutting edge of the online word.

VictoryCabal

I wondered about that too. It might have to do with being the opposition party. The rise of 'net driven politics came under Republican rule in America and Labour rule in Britain.

VictoryCabal: Ok, maybe in English politics words like Lefties and Libertarians mean different things than they do here. And maybe their political models are different than ours. So I might be misunderstanding the point of TFA.

But here in Murrica, the libtards are on the cutting edge of the online word.

It's from the Daily Telegraph. They just analyzed telegraph traffic for a few weeks and realized that those silly liberals have stopped using the telegraph altogether, clearly signaling the demise of their upstart political parties, unlike the conservatives, who still use the telegraph extensively.

The real reason the telegraph is still used by the conservatives is that they all get telegraph boys to operate the machines. Conservatives do so love their strapping 8-10 year old boys.

Meanwhile, liberals realized that it was all about the telephone and hot 20-something female operators. Just ask Bill Clinton.

VictoryCabal: Ok, maybe in English politics words like Lefties and Libertarians mean different things than they do here. And maybe their political models are different than ours. So I might be misunderstanding the point of TFA.

But here in Murrica, the libtards are on the cutting edge of the online word.

You don't really have a left wing in the US.

VictoryCabal: Ok, maybe in English politics words like Lefties and Libertarians mean different things than they do here. And maybe their political models are different than ours. So I might be misunderstanding the point of TFA.

But here in Murrica, the libtards are on the cutting edge of the online word.

Are libertarians actually independent anywhere else, or are they all just sworn enemies of liberals who don't have the balls to admit their real allegiance ?

Glasgowsfinest: Daily Telegraph bashes the Left? Who'dathunkit?

Which is funny considering the Telegraph has written some very helpful articles on the whole scandal to help out their friends inside number 10. Lying and obfuscating the truth, I know all newspapers do that, it's just surprising that the Telegraph wouldn't be entirely critical of the govt given the chance.

Glasgowsfinest:

You don't really have a left wing in the US.

That's the dirty secret no one in the U.S. likes to talk about.

Glasgowsfinest: You don't really have a left wing in the US.

I assume that you mean compared to GB. We do have a GB-style radical left, it's just marginalized horribly, and consists of about 4 people.

2wolves: That's the dirty secret no one in the U.S. likes to talk about.

Your two parties seem awfully similar to us foreigners.

Mind you, this is also happening in the UK. "New" Labour are way further right than they used to be.

I don't know about Britain, but I think the Internet has been used by both sides in America.

The Republican Party certainly is clueless, but how many frothy, irate libertarians have you met on the tubes scared of the Federal Reserve, talking about fiat money destroying us all? And the same goes for liberals.

In general, it's just a good avenue for all movements non-mainstream, since most anyone can do it. (Though, if you consider it, the internet is a quite ironic critique of libertarianism and capitalism in general, compared to its adherents beliefs).

Glasgowsfinest:
Your two parties seem awfully similar to us foreigners.

Mind you, this is also happening in the UK. "New" Labour are way further right than they used to be.

To be fair, consistency across the parties has many advantages. The problem is that the general trend of both parties needed to drift left 30 years ago, not right.

/The Illuminati should have realized this, and killed Reagan and the burgeoning movement of stupid and put in a smarter sounding liberal.

Glasgowsfinest: 2wolves: That's the dirty secret no one in the U.S. likes to talk about.

Your two parties seem awfully similar to us foreigners.

To be fair, we can also fool you by sewing a Canadian flag on our backpack.

The whole wretched saga of LabourList pefectly proves the point. From the moment of its inception, it has been a top-down rather than a bottom-up website.

[citation needed]

For bonus points, reference the 20 year association of Paul Staines with the highest echelons of the Thatcherite tendency of the Conservative Party.

Its zeal for the party line made it so dull that even committed Labour supporters stopped reading it.

Derek Draper has 50% more followers on Twitter than Guido Fawkes, suggesting that somebody is reading his output.

It was, in short, the precise opposite of what a blog should be.

Really ? Even if the contentions made were founded in reality, there's a hard and fast rule that blogs must be independent of corporations, political parties, or any other entity ?

The Telegraph supported Thatcher, didn't they? They can go to hell.

FarkinNortherner:
Really ? Even if the contentions made were founded in reality, there's a hard and fast rule that blogs must be independent of corporations, political parties, or any other entity ?

While corporations and political parties can have blogs- an unidentified relationship should be illegal for both entities.

Snarfangel: To be fair, we can also fool you by sewing a Canadian flag on our backpack.

Heh, to paraphrase most Farkers when they think that England is the same as the UK: "America, Canada it's all the same really isn't it, with those weird twangy accents and funny traffic lights?"

Glasgowsfinest: Heh, to paraphrase most Farkers when they think that England is the same as the UK: "America, Canada it's all the same really isn't it, with those weird twangy accents and funny traffic lights?"

American's aren't frowned upon as Colonial scum*

*this doesn't actually happen

The left is really much better at the interwebs than the right in this country. As a quick example, can anyone name a better designed/managed political blog than Daily Kos? They are really good, tech-wise. What's the most prominant Right Wing blog? Redstate? NRO? They suck ass.

Bored Horde: American's aren't frowned upon as Colonial scum*

Also, pretty much anyone with a backpack is fair game in Glasgow, regardless of flag - the Neds don't discriminate with their violence.

They are scrupulously fair in that way.

sloppy shoes: While corporations and political parties can have blogs- an unidentified relationship should be illegal for both entities.

Derek Draper's previous employment is both well known and listed in his biography linked from the site.

yah
we have 5 groups
pro-business
religous nuts
pro-labor
econuts
libertarians or some kind of centrist thingy

it is fun to watch how both main parties get derailed by the nuts which vote with them

and the people in the middle decide who gets elected
(seriously. the people on either side, rarely, if ever crossover and vote for the other. and no, I am not counting people who truly switch, for whatever lame ass reason)

/yes I know that I am missing 2 obvious groups old farts and gun nuts (I mean owners, please dont shoot me)

Blogs sure are important to people who read blogs.

FarkinNortherner:

Derek Draper's previous employment is both well known and listed in his biography linked from the site.

It's not just that though. A political party shouldn't be able to pass out talking points to MSNBC or Fox News.

SockMonkeyHolocaust: Blogs sure are important to people who read blogs.

I think the only blog I read is Engadget.

Is that a blog?

How does one define a blog anyway?

sloppy shoes: A political party shouldn't be able to pass out talking points to MSNBC or Fox News.

I agree that they shouldn't be able to enforce that their argument be made by the media (see Italy), but I cannot see any impropriety in PR being passed out by both sides of any given argument or, for that matter, in news outlets having obvious bias.

Sid_6.7: Glasgowsfinest: You don't really have a left wing in the US.

I assume that you mean compared to GB. We do have a GB-style radical left, it's just marginalized horribly, and consists of about 4 people.

The best part is that those 4 people really don't have to do anything. The crazy right-wingers write their agendas for them.

Ring-wing nutjob: "OMFGBBQ! Obama's going to take our guns! He's going to teach sex ed to pre-schoolers! He'll single-handedly destroy family values! He's socializing the country!"

Radical left: "Hey, those aren't bad ideas..."

ZAZ: If you quote only the hyperlinked phrases you get: ...take more naturally... denies it... denied... here ...Guido... impotent rage... I say it again.

No, I don't really have a point.

and yet, you make more sense.

FarkinNortherner:

I agree that they shouldn't be able to enforce that their argument be made by the media (see Italy), but I cannot see any impropriety in PR being passed out by both sides of any given argument or, for that matter, in news outlets having obvious bias.

If the party has something to say, they can buy ad time.

But news commentators should not be allowed to take direction from the party leaders nor form an oligopy with each other.

And news needs to be public anyways, with private firms taxed to support responsible journalism. 90% of Limabaugh's and olbermann's salary should be funding public broadcasting.

namatad: yes I know that I am missing 2 obvious groups old farts and gun nuts (I mean owners, please dont shoot me)

You also left out ethnic/minority activists (on both sides of the ideological aisle) but that about wraps it up.

A good friend of mine spent the last two years in the political campaign trenches in Iowa, South and North Carolina. He has mentioned on numerous occasions that 99.9% of political blogging is absolutely terrible, and that's a sentiment shared up and down the campaigning hierarchy. The ability to raise money and coordinate real campaign events is far more useful than any blog or yard sign.

lantawa: Everything's going to be okay. I'm here now.

Hold me!

Let me get this staight:

Conservative blogger says blogs good for conservatives.

Isn't that kind of self serving?

All2morrowsparTs: Isn't that kind of self serving?

A self serving member of the European parliament, regardless of political hue ? Now there's a rare beast.

[/sarcasm]

Libertarian so im really getting a kick out of these replies.

Glasgowsfinest:

You don't really have a left wing in the US.

Concurrence. Depressed concurrence.

Left leaning sites: Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Think Progress
Right leaning sites: Redstate, Town Hall, National Review
Wharrgarbl sites: Puma Pac, No Quarter, Free Republic

I would immediately theorize that if you let an undecided person spend thirty minutes browsing each of these sites, seven out of ten will proclaim themselves left leaning afterwards.

I_Approve_Of_This_Message: I would immediately theorize that if you let an undecided person spend thirty minutes browsing each of these sites, seven out of ten will proclaim themselves left leaning afterwards.

No Hillaryis44?

Glasgowsfinest: You don't really have a left wing in the US.

just the moderate right wing (democrats, moderate, not zealot republican'ts, all four of them) and the far right (evangelical or pandering to them and loonies). anything left of center is WAY TOO FRINGE and won't sell enough commercials, so it's not really an option.

About the author of the lead article

Daniel John Hannan (born 1 September 1971, in Lima, Peru)[1] is a British politician, and Member of the European Parliament (MEP), representing South East England for the Conservative Party.

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that this article reflects his own politial bias.

DamnYankees: I_Approve_Of_This_Message: I would immediately theorize that if you let an undecided person spend thirty minutes browsing each of these sites, seven out of ten will proclaim themselves left leaning afterwards.

No Hillaryis44?

Are they still around? Damn. I figured Rove and Co. would only have them under contract until January.

I_Approve_Of_This_Message: I would immediately theorize that if you let an undecided person spend thirty minutes browsing each of these sites, seven out of ten will proclaim themselves left leaning afterwards.

If you limit yourself to LabourList and Guido Fawkes, I would theorise that seven out of ten will proclaim themselves sick to the back teeth of playground bullshiat masquerading as political debate.

lantawa: Everything's going to be okay. I'm here now.

Are you from the Internet?

I think Gordon Ramsey would call the author a plonker.

sloppy shoes: 90% of Limabaugh's and olbermann's salary should be funding public broadcasting.



Limbaugh makes just a wee bit more than Olberman. I'll bet Limbaugh's agent makes more than Olberman.



Also why do you think that much of anyone's money should go to the state?