Skip to main content

How the blogosphere works (or doesn't)...

So two weeks ago Tyler Nixon announced here that Mike Castle was running for Congress and that he supports him.

No surprise there.

Then Delawaredem references that post in Around the Horn a couple days ago and throws off the comment that he'd like to know what I think.

I answered and explained why I'm not supporting Castle (or Biden).

Then Eric Dondero of Libertarian Republican drops by, sees my answer to DD's post, goes back to find Tyler's original post, and suddenly we have

Delaware's Top Libertarian Endorses Republican Mike Castle of US Senate

Political Stunner!!!!


And in the process, Delawareliberal even gets a mention in passing at Libertarian Republican. I know they will be so proud.

Several observations are important in this:

1) Despite Eric's connections to Delaware he somehow misses the fact that Tyler was a fusion Republican/Libertarian candidate in 2008, and that Tyler--while possessed of strong libertarian credentials--has been a registered Republican throughout his political career.

2) Tyler has never claimed the title of Delaware's Top Libertarian, although his combined vote total in last year's election between Republicans and Libertarians has arguably made him the most successfuly candidate associated with the Libertarian Party of Delaware.

3) It would only be a political stunner--as everyone in Delaware already knows--if Tyler Nixon did not support Mike Castle, since Tyler has worked to elect or re-elect Castle as Governor and Congressman in virtually every race in recent memory.

And, oh yes,

4) Contrary to Eric's reporting, I doubt Delawaredem would claim to be the publisher of Delawareliberal, per se.

All of which goes to show you that while almost everything Eric wrote in the post was factually correct, the combined assemblage of the story presents an erroneous image of a segment of Delaware politics.

I don't think that was anything peculiar to Eric's reporting: he did fairly reasonable due diligence and got all his quotes and links correct.

But it does raise the point that when you read local coverage of politics anywhere being interpreted by people who aren't actually on the scene and personally knowledgeable about the players, you should be carefully skeptical.

Comments

Delaware Dem said…
Hmmm. Look at the damage I caused.
Anonymous said…
Just so you all know.The folks over at Delaware Liberal are NOT all that liberal. Three times I have posted there and three times they took my comments down. Why because I actually had the guts to tell the truth about the demoratic party in Delaware. The party represented by corporate Delaware through the leadership of:Castle, Carper and Carney.Carney comes from the same ilk as Carper! Each and every time the so called libs have taken down my posts. So please allow me to post my comments re: Carney here.

Those libs actually believe that Carney would support "the public option". Could'nt be further from the truth.

Four years ago, when Carney was Lt. Governor and was in charge of the Delaware Health Commission, the Delaware Health Security Act was presented to the Del. Legislature. It was the Single payer bill sponsored by Harris McDowell and signed on by 18 legislators.

There are 32 statewide organizations who had signed on in support of this vital legislation. Many of the leaders of these organizations contacted Carney and asked to have Dr. Floyd McDowell and 2 other leaders present their findings and legislation to the Health care committee. Carney as Chair, began to load up that committee with every Chamber person and insurance company lobbyist he could find. He never invited Dr. Mcdowell nor any of the leaders of those organizations to present. Carney then goes on WILM and at least three people called in to ask him "why are you keeping Dr. McDowell from speaking". Carney replied with this absolute lie. "OH I have met with Floyd McDowell several times"...a bald faced lie. Carney was in the pockets of the insurance companies just like his protege Senator Tommy "I never miss a hand out from special interests, Carper".

Its a sham that Carper is introducing the Opt in/Opt out lets the states handle health care, when he knows very well, Delaware the First State will be the First State to OPTOUT.

If you libs think you have a real candidate for national office in Carney (the no nothing about foreign policy), the brat who worked his way through the party, and not the brightest bulb in the box, is going to do anything different than Carper...think again fools.

Carney will do whatever he has to do to get elected. He will sell his soul as has Carper and Castle to the highest special interest bidder.

Delaware should kick all these cats to the curb and elect a citizen who we KNOW works for the people...Scott Spencer.

Delaware Liberal proves every day they are in the pockets of the democratic party. They are not progressive thinkers they are not even liberals...they are in a nutshell selling the true liberals and progressives down the river while they support every special interest candidate.
Eric Dondero said…
Of course you're totally disregarding the way this looks from a national political perspective. How very narrow-minded of you. Of course, the Castle race is of uptmost importance to Delawareans. But it's got national implications, as well.

And from that national perspective, my piece was dead-on accurate.

I honestly don't think people on a national scale one bit whether Tyler was a Libertarian - Repubican fusion candidate, or of his past affiliations with the GOP.

What matters is that he's a very prominent Libertarian in your State, and he just endorsed Mike Castle, in a very critical race of national importance.
Eric Dondero said…
BTW, you act as though I don't read Delaware Libertarian. I followed your blog and most excellent campaign coverage all last year.

It'd be a real stretch to paint Tyler as a "partisan Republican," as you seem to now be doing. Understandably, that's about all you can do, cause, as I can imagine, this might be a bit of an embarrassment to you, and other left-leaning Libertarians in the State.

Eric Dondero, 1986 Libertarian Party candidate for Delaware State House of Reps
Eric
Try not to be more of an idiot than you have to be.

Far from being embarrassed by Tyler he is my co-blogger here at Delaware Libertarian. Supporting Mike Castle this year is one of the few political things he and I disagree about.

But even Tyler would tell you that he is a life-long Republican first; not an embarassment just a fact.

The only "fact" you got "wrong," and I said as much, is that Delawaredem is not the publisher of Delawareliberal.

You may visit here often, but you did miss Tyler's post or you would not have picked up that info from me.
tom said…
"2) Tyler has never claimed the title of Delaware's Top Libertarian, although his combined vote total in last year's election between Republicans and Libertarians has arguably made him the most successfuly candidate associated with the Libertarian Party of Delaware."

Last year maybe, but not in the history of the party. Both Peggy Schmidt and George Jurgenson, running as Libertarian only, got roughly twice his total votes, but they were running for statewide offices. John Reda got a higher percentage of the vote than Tyler as the Libertarian in a 3-way race for mayor of Elsmere.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...