Wednesday, February 14, 2007

...and then there were none.

Now that the second one has officially stepped down, all the flap over the two chicks tapped as "Official Bloggers" for the Edwards campaign has left me more stumped than anything else.

For starters, "Official Blog" makes about as much sense to me as "jumbo shrimp". All the best blogs on teh intarw3bz are some gal or guy, basically on their own stick, giving their view of the world. Not the Dems' view. Not Edwards' view. Theirs. The very thought of being someone else's diarist is bizarre, at best.

Second, what nutjob signed off on these particular two bloggers? I'll admit that I've never read them, and probably never will, but come on! From the excerpts I've read, this was about as dumb as it would be for some GOP candidate to tap Emperor Misha I and Kim du Toit to be their mouthpieces on the net. Not just a poorly researched choice, but honest-to-Wotan Strategic Intercontinental Stupidity. In a modern election campaign, every bit of muck that can be raked will be raked. If the lady that answers phones for you once blurted out "Shit!" in the middle of her third grade school Christmas play, it will be all over the internet as soon as the guy who played one of the wise men recognizes her name.

So ixnay on the "Official Bloggers": If a blogger likes you, you get the ink for free, the blogger keeps their indie cred, and everybody's happy.

This post sponsored by the Ron Paul For President Campaign. Just kidding.


Rustmeister said...

Kim could be my blogger when I run for Prez.

That's next on the list, right after I prove I'm Anna Nicole's babydaddy.

Jeff said...

I'd love to see Kim Blog for a Presidential Candidate. That'd be an interesting campaign.

Big Brother said...

I'm the "Official blogger" for the "Orwell/Kafka in '08" campaign.

Really. I just haven't done a very good blogging job yet.

Rob (Trebor)

markm said...

I might like a candidate who was willing to stand behind what Kim says, but I wouldn't expect him to win... But Kim's mild compared to these hateful foul-mouthed prejudiced harridans. I also wonder if Edwards engaged in misdirection (talking about their anti-Catholic rants rather than their opinion that the Duke lacrosse players must be guilty of rape just because they're white and male), or if he's actually so obtuse that he didn't notice that his bloggers are in favor of railroading white boys, evidence be damned.

Of course, "evidence be damned" seems to me a fair summary of Edwards exploits as a trial lawyer. Who needs evidence when you can channel dead babies?