"Lessons" Is a Seven Letter Word

... that's going to leave a mark.

At this point, it's probably all for the best.

Al,

Thanks for putting this together, I know I'm not the only one who's been waiting patiently for the reasons behind this snafu (and I'm not sure about the n part, but I think it fits as well as the other letters).

I will admit to not having given to your original Denver fund, but I have done so since you've moved to the FAJ.

Keep on telling the truth, and I do hope RV (I loved your line about "whose mission, after six months of working for it, I still haven’t heard stated in a manner coherent enough to explain" - I will admit that I'd been meaning to ask you) comes to their senses, at least with regard to the funds they collected on your behalf.

Peace,

Jim in NYC

I had no idea it had got this bad.

Al, take it from me: The Alinsky excuse is a dodge. The REAL reason is your refusal to bow down to the nut jobs -- many of which sound suspiciously like agents proschlockateurs to me like the guy who cybersquatted on an HRC domain and is now claiming he just "recently" converted to McCain.

Actions speak louder than words eh? RV showed their true colors...which were shades of yellow.

This outcome is unfortunate but not to be worried about. Your keen insight reminds us all to pay attention and reject the unacceptable around us. What has been most interesting for me to watch is the absolute fear that clouds the mind of those who realize now that the playing field is truly changing. Although deeply unfortunate, this example of what happened at the ex-Field is yet further proof that we are on the right track.

Thanks for sharing the truth with us Al.

Peace.

Al -

I have followed your page on a daily (if not more) basis since the start of this fascinating primary season. You have an uncanny ability to provide proper historical reference for what has been happening without the short-sighted screaming and pomp that seems to exist everywhere else.

I am a young voter who has been passive and disillusioned for years, a vocal, yet previously inactive opponent of the glaring problems in our country. It is because of Senator Obama's campaign and journalists like you that I am becoming an active American citizen, an agent of change rather than just a grumbling consumer.

I understand where Ms. Kozikowski is coming from, because it fits 1990's-style politics to a T: anyone who has money and the ability to shout "I'm offended!" about ANYTHING becomes the most important constituency and must not be alienated at any cost. I had to laugh when Ms. Kozikowski wrote about how she thought you were getting 1970 and 2008 confused. I think that politics will be a MUCH different animal once more politicians like her realize that 2008 is a far, far cry from 1996.

Anyway, thank you for maintaining your integrity and continuing to bring us all up to speed with the political climate as well as diffusing our natural chicken little impulses. I haven't donated to you before, but I'm going to donate now. It's more important than ever to keep blogs like this alive and healthy.

I had posited the other day that this was all about the Benjamins, but I see that it was also about some Pollito Chiquito problems. That comment I sent in, BTW, never appeared, but I do know that the new system was overwhelmed. I donated a small amount to Al and the aggravation involved will not merit asking for the refund. Yet, I do not think Al should remain unable to report from Denver. It's not out of any kind of solidarity that I feel for Al, it's for my own damn selfish self.
What kind of convention will that be without Al there? I'll redonate the original amount.
I believe that someone over there in the Demo Party Office in Chicago OWES Al a big freebee
as long as we are talking Benjamins. If that happens, I hope Al buys some lovely present for himself with my donation. He more than deserves it. And the petty money paid to him for his talents at RuralVotes is abysmally embarrassing.
I am reminded again why I do not blog.
I am sorry for the drama Al, and I am SURE you will get to Denver. I'm one of your readers that used to comment when there were only three comments. Go, baby!

much like the operations of her site, apparently. If Deb Koz thinks kowtowing to big donors and "Cranky Women for Hillary" are in the interest of rural voters, then maybe she should get a job at CNN - I hear they thrive on that sort of thing. I could sure use some more party hacks telling my Tennessee vote what's important to me.

Since you asked, I sent an email on Monday and haven't heard anything back yet. I'm assuming that there is just so much traffic that mine hasn't been reached yet.

I used the ombudskoz@ruralvotes.com address...

Al - I thought you were so dead on with this:
"If Ms. Kozikowski and her organization are... letting wealthy individuals dictate what can and can’t be said on their website based on the simple fact that they have money and might give it to her group, it is they that have not yet entered 2008..."

How does writing about the Weathermen (sometimes critically) as a journalist make you a member of the Weathermen?!

I told Deb she could keep my money, and I meant it. It's a hard lesson to me -- to always be sure where your money is going and only give it to organizations you trust -- that apparently I needed to relearn. The loss of hard-earned money reinforces that lesson. That said, ruralvotes won't get another dime from me nor another website hit. And I promptly turned around and donated to the Fund for Authentic Journalism here (so lets hope I learned the right lesson). RV will see their site hits and comments drop dramatically. And an army of donors has been turned away. The first rule of fundraising development is that you start out with small donations and involve people in your organization in a stronger and stronger way. That opportunity has been dramatically and drastically lost for them as has much good will. I can't see that gamble paying off. It's very similar to what Clinton donors tried to pull with Howard Dean & Nancy Pelosi, who apparently has a backbone. Those people are running around strong-arming left and right...I can't wait for them to see their power shrivel right before their eyes. dewberry

Hey Al,
Glad you're out of there, it wasn't a good fit anyway, never did get the rest of the site, or visit it more than once.
Anyway, yours is one of the main blogs that keeps me in touch with my better self, music, humor, history, shenanigans and even politics.
Fly us to the moon...

I asked for a refund for my $50 and was told that'd be no problem. I wrote back to ask when I could expect it and have had no reply, so it looks like another prompt might be needed.

What an arrogant fool Debra Kozikowski turned out to be. And the guy they have over there now, his name escapes me, is trying to copy Al's style too. It's quite sad really.

As an extremely rural guy I am still mystified by the complete lack of any analysis of the massive, long term, disastrous and historically mistimed Farm Bill. And I said that
in comments numerous times. All the same, as good as he is at what he does, Al never really fit in at RuralVotes and RuralVotes, instead of making the equation work somehow, have now killed the Golden Goose.
But what do I know? Maybe RuralVotes will receive all kinds of donations now that the evil and alien revolutionary Al has been purged.
To what end will those funds be applied? Shall we keep tabs?

Great job keeping a cooler head while dealing with that drivel. I donated 25.00 for you to go to Denver and emailed Deb last Saturday. She did refund me and will donate here from now on.

Al, What could we do, collectively as Field Hands, to petition the DNC to give you blogger credentials for Denver? I'm betting that the Democratic nominee's convention organizers could be persuaded by a suitable show of solidarity.

Is the "offending" post available to read anywhere? I'd like to see what all the fuss was about.

That said, seems just as well to me that The Field has gone out on its own. Let it be independent. Let Al say what he wants. That's what the internet is for.

It really does seem indicative of something much bigger going on within the party construct, doesn't it? The party mainstream--the big donors, the party droogs, the figureheads--they just can't seem to get past their self-importance to realize the depth of change that is sweeping the electorate right now.

And self-importance, I think, is the right descriptor. I mean, really. Deb censors you because "three" Obama donors found your work incendiary? So what, anyway? Is she saying that because they found your post on her (smallish) website to be inflammatory that they would take their marbles and go home, never again to support again the Obama campaign? Ridiculous. As if you, or Ruralvotes, claim to speak for the Obama campaign in any capacity.

I just find the whole thing nonsensical. And disingenuous. Because upon further reading, it seems that the Obama donor would be reticent to donate to Ruralvotes, not the Obama campaign proper--am I correct in that reading? So, you've lost her the money for her (now impotent) website from one individual "party-brass" donor--but she's lost herself a fiscally generous, bipartisan, activist readership in the thousands? Short-sighted, hubristic, and absolutely illustrative of the absolute necessity for the kind of change for which we Fieldhands are agitating. One thing this episode really drives home to me is just how much of the status-quo fear is driven by the almighty dollar. Appalling.

a) Does Deb not know how to pick up the phone? b) She and the types of supporters she references are the type of non-figher Democrat that has done the party so much damage. Obama doesn't run scared from Alinsky or other things, why should they? It reminds me of your post the other day of the Obama tribute to that minister. You'd think he'd stay away from church for the rest of the election but he doesn't - he marches straight into that big, "scary" black church. I'm so sick of the cowering Democratic stereotype that fits all to often. c) Regarding RV's mission, when I exchanged emails with Deb on this she used the words "progressive, populist and ground movement." That seems contradictory to the status quo she is supporting. d) Shit - the credential is really gone?? Nothing can be done? If we get all our money back, they wouldn't have the money to send Tracy or Sean (that would kill me)so they'll sit on it for spite?? Any chance of getting another one? e) Deb says the Groundspring transactions take longer and she's working on mine. f) Where's the "with a big thank you to the readers for their participation??" I think it's pretty safe to say that none of us readers feel we got anything but a slap in the face. g) If the missions didn't fit and Deb wasn't comfortable with how things were going, fine. That's her prerogative and it was her website. But the way it was handled on her end in a) pulling the piece and b) going dark on the whole thing just could not have been worse.

As requested, status on my request for a refund, so you can get a feel for how much they kept. I hadn't donated much, just $20 to the 'Send Al to Denver' fund. I have received the refund (via PayPal), and prompted donated it (and a tiny bit more) to 'The Fund for Authentic Journalism' here. After reading the above emails from Deb, I'm stuck by how disrespectful they are. And what an odd way to start a discussion about a post she disagreed with. The first email could go into a book on how not to manage people.

Oh no she didn't!

Jesus, this woman is batshit insane. Conducting a self-initiated McCarthyesque blackisting of the only contributor that made RV worth a bookmark in my browser, and using such an embarrassing descriptor to describe a member of the LGBT community to boot. I think that phrase went out of style back in the 50s when Confidential Magazine was obsessed with ferreting out closeted gays in Hollywood.

I'm unemployed and broke, but I will scrape up a few $$ to contribute to the Fund for Authentic Journalism.

I think I started reading your blog when Andrew Sullivan linked to it one day. I was a little bummed when it seemed you were going to be mixing content with the Back Forty. But what the heck. I waited for the content to mix. There was no mixing. You just disappeared completely. I hit "The Field" link a lot of times. I hit refresh a lot of times. And yet. Nada. So finally I turned to that most invaluable of all resources: Google. And here you are. Who knew. I was really confused after reading this post & 4 included emails. Finally I made it back to the original offending post. I'm working on my sense of outrage. I'm having some trouble. Perhaps after I finish chuckling over the Cranky Women for Hillary line.

Oh well. Cheers. And time to change the bookmark.

Al, you are being too modest here:

I still have my integrity and the trust of thousands of readers, maybe including you.

 

I wouldn't be here and many many others with me if we didn't still trust you. I split the difference so I asked for the latest donation back (USD 100) - and got a few e-mails back - no refund though. But I'm now a happy co-pub here.

 

Update: Just got the Paypal refund heads up.

"Ms. Kozikowski,

A few weeks ago I donated $25 dollars to your organization's action fund via Pay Pal to send Mr. Giordano to the DNC convention in Denver. I would like to request a refund of my money given that the money will no longer go to said cause. The Paypal receipt is reproduced below.

Ordinarily I would not quibble over such a paltry sum, but there a many competitive House and Senate races this cycle and I figure my donation won't be missed, overshadowed as it is by "real" fundraisers.

Jonathan Greenberg"

I almost feel bad being so snarky, but the censorship is unforgivable.

And I'm terribly biased given that my father worked with the SDS.

I'm not sure if anyone will see this comment buried down here, but Hillary Clinton's senior thesis was essentially a defense of Saul Alinsky, relating him to activists such as Eugene Debs and MLK.

Thank you for posting this so we could all know the backstory. What a mess and really disappointing, but sadly too typical for a lot of folks who are in positions of authority in state parties, etc.

I was interested to read of the Massachusetts angle, especially about State Rep Bill Strauss, who I know from the Dean campaign days here in Massachusetts. He is a really good guy, in my experience, tho more conservative than me & he worked his butt off for Dean here in MA and in NH in 2004. In fact, I was in a MA state delegation of electeds and grassroots folks that went to Iowa for Dean (ie "we're from Kerry's state but let us tell you why we're not for him") for the primary.

The state party here in MA is INCREDIBLY atrophied and resistant to change/new people/new ideas, etc. (I realize this isn't unique to Mass, but it's really annoying in a supposed ultra blue state). Grassroots folks have been fighting for reform for years. Deb K's behavior is sadly all too familiar. I've sat at state Dem meetings & conventions and looked around at the crowd, average age 50-60 and realized that most of these folks have no vision of who will replace them. They also have no vision of the fact that there needs to be more racial diversity in the party, and more young people. And also they've spent 30 years not marketing the party and letting the absurd state GOP, which barely exists as an entity, demonize and define them as corrupt to the populace at large -- which has driven indie registration thru the roof and Dem reg way down.

Deval Patrick's campaign was the beginning of rebuilding and rediversification (race and age), and there was a detante of sorts between the Dem establishment and the grassroots who linked up to support Deval. It concerns me that the Clinton/Obama race has exposed festering fissures or created new ones between the establishment (Clinton) and grassroots (Obama) supporters that may have implications beyond the Prez campaign here in MA...I hope not.

Thought that was the reason, Al.

As I noted in my post about this on an earlier thread, the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) list Alinsky's book "Rules for Radicals" as required reading for all 21st C public relations professionals . . . not the most radical group in the country, and a group the Vice-Chair of a non-profit donor-funded org should be interested in emulating.

The reason why is that Alinsky's rules are the same rules as a PR pro's well-organized "roll out."

Too bad she's so unsophisticated. Or has so little knowledge of American 20th C history to know that at the time Alinsky was doing what he was doing, no one but rich white men had any real rights. People like blacks and women and workers under salary and safety siege.

And as I also noted in that previous post, my grandma said it best: "What can you expect from a pig but a grunt." (Said with her lilting gaelic brogue.)

I just emailed the DNC with a polite email asking them to transfer the credentials directly to Al since he has left RuralVotes. Here's an excerpt of what I sent to OnlineTeam@demconvention.com

Unfortunately, there have been some problems over at RuralVotes,
forcing Al Giordano to move his blog (and with it, its reader base) to
another site. Since the credentials are technically listed as being
assigned to RuralVotes, which had planned on sending Al to the
convention, I ask that you transfer the credentials to Al Giordano
directly. (There are no other journalists or bloggers of note left at
RuralVotes - I would argue that his blog is what put that organization
on the map in the first place.)

The list of credentialed blogs is here:

http://www.demconvention.com/credentialed-blogs/

Although it lists it as "RuralVotes", the link is to The Field's address specifically. Anyone with familiarity of the blogging world should know that it's Al that brought that site to prominence and is probably what got it credentialed. Those two things should be grounds for petitioning to have it transferred to Al now that they're disassociated.

This page about the credentialing process...

http://www.demconvention.com/blogger-credentialing-process/

...links to a PDF file which lists OnlineTeam@demconvention.com as the address to send inquiries. That would be the place to start. If that address bounces or gets no response there's always the general info@demconvention.com address which they list on the contact page.

and the organisation then was proud of being radical, espoused community organizing at its heart and tried to give its grants to the most grassroots farmers' organisations it could find. Saul Alinsky was referenced among office staff, on occasion. Using Farm Aid as a scaremongering tactic in relation to that post, in particular, is a sure sign that Deb is indeed out of her mind or quite ignorant or both.

I travelled with Mr. Nelson on his bus a coupla times between the County Fair performances from which he was donating the proceeds and before and after which he was meeting with farm organisations, to hear their stories and more importantly, to draw press attention which would otherwise have been very thin on the ground.

Willie Nelson was a community organiser in his approach to Farm Aid's efforts and the Family Farmers he wanted to support: he was the best listener I have ever met, treated all farmers with infinite respect, was masterful in shifting media attention at these events from himself to the farmers, allowed no drinking of any kind among his band, crew and roadies, and indulged in 'herbal remedies' with no qualms or quibbling. OT, but endearing, he also watched a sh'tload of golf and ate vienna sausages he cooked himself on the bus.

Finally, thank you, Al, for your integrity, your wisdom, your generosity and your clear voice for radical reality-based change. With you all the way.

Three funders. Haha. What an awful mistake.

Now I don't feel bad at all for attacking her "good friend" and fellow hack Mark Brewer during the RBC meeting threads. They're exactly the type of people I despise in the Democratic Party: more worried about keeping their job than they are keeping their integrity.

I applaud Al for doing the opposite.

This populist structural shake-up isn't going to be easy, and we can expect plenty of insiders, just like Deb, to act in the same manner over the next few months.

These emails are an astonishing indictment of your former host -- on so many levels:

1) She openly admits that she jumps to the tune of big funders;

2) She openly admits that she jumps to the tune of campaign operatives;

3) She openly admits that she wants coverage tailored to fit a certain political narrative; and

4) Most mind-blowingly stupid of all, she actually imagined that making these arguments would convince a popular blogger with a known independent streak and reputation for integrity to bow to her will.

Amazingly stupid on every level. I have to conclude that this is either a rather limited and corrupt mind, or else that she was champing at the bit to get you to quit. My suspicion is that this is a rather immature, ambitious person who could not the attention The Field has been getting.

It's called "Uncensored: The Narrative Is Not a Story of Technology." Scroll down.

It is more than sad to see that kind of behavior from a member of the Democratic party supposed 'leadership.'

"I am uninterested in the defense of Saul Alinsky and his worthiness -- we are not a debating society ... it doesn't matter what you think is right or wrong headed -- it is what it is -- and funders are running away as will the Obama campaign -- who has informed me it wants nothing to do with this sort of propaganda."

Those words say it all. I can not imagaine any person on the 'Obama campaign' supporting those words - and think the writer of those words is SMEARING both the Democratic Party - and the 'campaign.'

I remember an earlier comment on another thread, asking for help in understanding just WHAT it was Deb & Co. were so scared by? I support that questioner - I really can't fathom anyone being so weak, cowardly....

My ANGER is reserved, in case Al Giordano does not get the press credentials he earned.

It would take Deb 90 seconds to either acknowledge my two emails or, better still, log into PayPal and refund my $50. (I forwarded my PayPal receipts, dates, PayPal reference numbers, etc, for her ease of reference.)

But it's Day 3 of Deb Watch and nothing. No acknowledgement, no refund, nothing.

Tacky.

P.S. : I didn't ask for a refund of my "Keep Al Writing" donations I made in April and June—donations he didn't receive. But the Denver convention "special project" is another story. Those donations were for a very specific purpose, which now cannot be fulfilled.

Tara,

Try this number in California for Groundspring 415-561-6300.

I called them directly on Sunday and left voice message. They called me mid-morning on Monday and discontinued my recurring donation immediately. (Also sent an e:mail to donations@groundspring.org on Sunday. Deb sent an e:mail on my behalf on Sunday as well.)

Also called credit card company directly on Sunday and they stopped all payments to Groundspring for Rural Votes without any issue. If it's important to you, it's probably more direct, fast and efficient if you do it yourself...

with a big thank you to the readers for their participation.

One irony is I would gladly have donated more to RV if she was communicating about what she needed funds for. I'm guessing I'm not alone in that sentiment. I worked in fundraising of a large nonprofit for many years and would have volunteered help too. But she appears to be hooked to the idea of fewer and bigger money donors rather than building grassroots.

I don't know what if any ground rules you had working with Deb, but those 4 emails delivered in the 1.5 hours convey a sense of her losing her perspective. And it's really sad that she has let others demonize Alinsky and Kopkind for her.

But I enjoyed the new organization name she used: Cranky Women for Hillary. I heard a radio interview with one of their members just today, Delmarie Cobb.

Via this morning's First Read we see, in part:

News is out that Obama and Clinton will meet at a joint fundraiser on June 26 in DC. The AP says it’s an “effort to calm donors who remain frustrated with Obama's presidential campaign… Two people closely involved with Clinton's fundraising said the meeting had taken on added urgency after several of her money ‘bundlers’ complained that they felt their concerns weren't heard during meetings last week with Obama campaign officials in New York and Washington.” It's interesting that top Clinton donors feel as if they haven’t been treated well by Team Obama. What it shows, though, is that Obama's camp just hasn't been that reliant on big donors, and so this may not have been the priority it would have been for nominees who had raised money by more traditional means. Still, the fact that Clinton and Obama have to hold a meeting together with these donors indicates it was not an easy transition and there are a lot of donor egos that need to be dealt with.

So, there are definitely some DLC-era donors roaming the land who are a little peeved that Obama's army of tiny pocketbooks is diminishing their former ability to demand obedience.

That said, however, I'm very skeptical that so many of said Big Donors™ all happened to read that same post within the same short period and felt moved enough write Ms. K with the same misguided concern. It seems far more plausible that she read the post, googled Alinsky's name, had a conniption, and projected her "grave concern" on to non-existent others.

But even if its true and it all happened just the way she says it did, I submit that she learned the wrong lesson, took the wrong side. The way successful political and issue advocacy campaigns are funded is changing dramatically. She had the opportunity to embrace the change and propel her organization into a sustainable future built upon a broad distributed network of small donors. Instead, she turned back to the brittle model of bowing and scraping to a fickle few.

In any case, Al has a new home, Deb is best left to her fate, and we still have a lot of work to do to convince a stubborn remnant of fearful Democrats that everyone who was (or is) to the left of Scoop Jackson wasn't the freakin' anti-Christ.

Al,

Thank you so much for standing up to your beliefs. So sad that Deb is the epitome of Chicken Little if all she is worried about is donors and not the amount of people driven to her website for your content. It's one thing to disagree on the overall theme and core beliefs of a site, it's another to turn your back on a highly esteemed writer and his (very large) group of readers. The timing of this is odd since it seems like you've been fairly honest in all of your pieces and I STILL don't see what is wrong with the Alinsky piece.

And this frustrates me to no end:
"As for The Field, without a reasonable agreement it goes dark and is archived with a big thank you to the readers for their participation. End of story."

Never. Happened. What a slap in the face. To everyone except her. Thank you, my ass.
I need coffee, I am rambling.

PS: How can we help get you to Denver???

I didn't know anything about Alinsky, when I read about your blog leaving ruralvotes and going to the narcosphere. But I can use wikipedia and although the English version is a bit short, it still reveals that Hillary Rodham Clinton wrote her senior thesis on Alinsky's model.
The German version of Wikipedia came up with this link http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/24/AR200703...

Why, I ask myself, should anyone be afraid of naming a rather famous activist in connection with Barack Obama, when this connection is so obvious and when it is openly discussed in MSM?

By the way, the German Institute on Community Organizing cooperates with Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation and is part of a Catholic University.

Martin

(A) The Democratic Party hierarchy, from local committees up to county, state and national levels, is riddled with personalities like this Debra Kozikowski. With hope, Obama's ascendence will dilute and eventually end their gutless and corrupting influence on the party.

(B) Any activist worth their snuff knows that you either need to make sure you have enough donors to be able to stare down any funder who tries to yank your chain -- or else you need to lay down the law early with any big donors that there can be no strings attached to the money they donate.

(C) I wholeheartedly agree with the suggestion above to email the DNC to urge them to transfer A.G.'s credentials, since they were plainly meant for him and his blog, not for Rural Votes as an institution. I wonder what the party policy on such situations is.

I'm curious what the RV web traffic graph looks like in the last week, although I doubt it will be used as a selling point for more donors.

Al, Thanks so much for your thorough explanation. I think "clueless" is the thought that came to mind when I read Deb's emails. I did donate a small amount (only $10 -- it was a rough month!) through PayPal; I requested a refund, and was notified by PayPal that it was on its way -- never received any communicaton from RV. Hasn't cleared yet, but when it does, I'll be re-donating it here, and will be more actively supporting ($$) your writing. It's my first stop every morning! I'm interested in all possible ways of getting you to Denver.

So let's pursue the grassroots push of the credentials with the DNC.  OnlineTeam@demconvention.com is the address.  I think the key argument is that The Field was the website referenced in the credentials.  The Field has always contained content provide by Al although hosted by Rural Votes.  The Field has now moved and Rural Votes is no longer the host.  Therefore, the credentials need to follow The Field.  Any other thoughts?

 

I'll put up a note over at Fieldhands later.

Geez. I gotta say I'm disappointed... not only (obviously) in Deb and her handling of this situation, but also the fact that there isnt more "juice" to the story. Not that I was wanting (more) drama... but Holy Cow! Its all completely a result of Deb overreacting.

This fear of right-wing labeling, and the consequential kowtowing to even the THREAT of smears is exactly how conservatives cornered the market on morality for so long. Deb, along with many other's in the party, need to realize that if they plan on playing politics in 2008... It's amazing how much she could have learned if she would have actually read The Ex-Field.

Hey Al, you started mass producing that Chicken Little immunization yet?

The "additional comments" just above were mine. I'd add two more:

(D) It's pretty funny for someone to scream, "Alinsky isn't rural!" and in the next breath say "You've got to knock it off because someone in a big Californian city told me to get you in line."

(E) It's pretty disgraceful (and a piss-poor p.r. move) for Rural Votes not to even acknowledge the split with someone who had been their site's main draw. Whatever slim chance they had of retaining Al G.'s readership was lost when they failed to provide any explanation whatsoever for what happened.

I'd guess they saw a slight uptick in traffic post-Al, as people went to the site to rubberneck -- but that the next week will show a precipitous drop-off in visits.

How dare you Al? Scaring those Obama supporters with money!! LOL. translated: Scaring Clinton supporters who DK was soliciting for her own career goals. Thanks for sharing the actual emails. I have been curious for some time on the partnership that you had with DK and how it came about as I saw very little politically that you had in common with her. She most certainly should have known that you had not been fond of any type of big donor control of a party and that Obama's campaign was, from the very start, at odds with her view of how to support a candidate. And did you win the Scrabble game? Because by the time it was close to over you could have used the 7 letter word ex-Field.

Wait a second Al. She's playing the game...Hell this checkers player new that a long time ago but you too have played the game. That post bashing the crap out of me was itself crap. You know it and i know it...that was a Clinton move you pulled ..the fake anger...Well Sir don't get up on that high horse so fast about the this Deb stuff. You told people that Deb didn't come out because she was a chess player or something like that which was bull but people believed you Al. Now the question is are you man enough to admit it? Are you man enough to admit that you were talking crap to protect Deb. and all along you knew she was for Obama but was trying to protect her job.

ARE YOU MAN ENOUGH?

"Was my freedom of speech being offered up in ritual human sacrifice to the gods she calls “Cranky Women for Hillary” by someone trying to save her own hide?"

DING! DING! DING! I think that's got to be it. The ostensible explanation makes no sense whatsoever. What a freaking tool DK turned out to be. I'm sorry I wasted 30 seconds corresponding with her at the Ex-Field. But for once I'm glad I'm such a procrastinator -- I'd meant to contribute to the Denver fund but had not gotten around to it. At least I can be certain a contribution here would go to the rightful owner.

Al, I found the Ex-Field via a Wolcott link and was a reader and commentor back when you had 2 or 3 comments per thread too. It was wonderful to see you develop such a well-deserved audience. Your analysis has been indispensible -- you kept me sane, man.

If there's anything we Field Hands can do to help you get the credential you deserve, say the word.

This is one of the behaviors you have talked about Al. Success brings the lame and the lazy out to assert their illegitimate importance. When there was that fanfare before the primary in my state about a predicted win a gaggle of local pols, who had previously stayed away, started to show up and stand around trying to look important. If Deb is being remotely honest it sounds like one or two of these people pushed her chicken little button and it went off like an out of control car alarm.

I haven't come up with a good idea to help with Vik M's question. We need to identify the right fulcrum for the lever we can bring.