"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 You have an uncanny ability to provide proper historical reference for what has been happening without the short-sighted screaming and pomp that seems to exist everywhere else.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.

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

so happy in this field! and ack (or ick), those e-mails are hilarious. :< :P :>

Al, Sorry - meant to put this in my previous comment... Any advice that you can offer on the most productive way we can petition your credentials to the DNC would be appreciated. Hopefully we as a group can help out on this matter.

Longroad - If I offended you with my chess and checkers comparison back then, I apologize for my tone, but not for the content, because I thought you were freaking out over something you needn't not freak out about. C'mon, the shot didn't hurt that much! You'll recall that the superdelegate in question came out on June 3 on the same afternoon that many others did, clinching the nomination for their candidate. Some of them had decided to "hang back" and not declare until then because they were still working over other undeclareds to do the same. Now, I still think that was a smart way to play chess. Even people that do terrible things sometimes do something right. A stopped clock is right twice a day! As for the "man enough" talk, that kind of posturing doesn't move me one way or another. Your questions would have been stronger without it.

Those e-mails are incomprehensible. It's feigned outrage over the mere mentioning of the FOUNDER of community organizing, Saul Alinsky, whom Hillary Clinton even wrote her thesis about in college. Surely this: "Obama campaign -- who [sic] has informed me it wants nothing to do with this sort of propaganda" has to be a lie.
Also, Plan Jericho was a lot more controversial (I personally agreed with it, but I can imagine donors getting nervous about it), so why react to the mentioning of Alinsky and not to Plan Jericho?
I reckon she did it to distance herself from the "far left" to somehow appease her donors and the Cranky Women for Hillary, so she could keep her job.

It also just irks me to no end that it's people like Deb K. who (currently) own the power structure of the party. Bah. It's so obvious that she is incapable of understanding the greater context of this election...the underestimation, for example, of the small donor base is such a huge mistake, and upon reading the above emails it becomes obvious that it's really not just an error in judgment but also that the party leadership seems to lack the imagination necessary to envision and embrace activist movement. Add to that lack of vision a worship of money and power, and you've got a powerful recipe for a very stagnant political stew. Yuck. I'm so glad, though, that all of this has come out. It really just helps energize people like me, I think, who have been fed up for so long but lacked the tangible evidence to point to what, exactly, we are fed up *with.* Here it is in black and white--the very attitudes we must work to eradicate. Identifying the underlying attitudes makes activism that much easier, no?

Sent this email to OnlineTeam@demconvention.com Hi, You're probably already aware of this, but Al Giordano, who until about a week ago was the main blogger of the www.ruralvotes.com/thefield site, had a hulabaloo with the owner of the site and is now posting 'The Field' from http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield instead. He was originally going to go to Denver to blog the convention, but the credential is apparently staying with ruralvotes instead of moving with the reporter voice. Please consider either transferring the blog credential assigned to RuralVotes/thefield to Al Giordano at narconews.com, or somehow add a credential for him. Al Giordano has been a vibrant, important voice during this election and it would be a real shame to not hear from him during the convention. Thank you for considering my request, Carol Gaupp

I dont mean to insult you by asking this. You have press credentials up the ying-yang as a long-time published print journalist, publisher of your own paper, founder of a journalism school, and for being one of the genuine originals in online journalism. In my opinion, you have more credentials to be at the convention than other political bloggers some think are in the vanguard of the field.

However.

If there is something you need us to do, holler. I donated about $200 over time early on in the year. Strange that my nose said "Wait" for the convention push. I was going to send you a dutiful amount of money in early August with instructions that it only be spent on vices.

No the checkers thing didn't hurt at all actually. Maybe my post made it sound that way but truly it didn't. ".. man enough..." yeah maybe i should have left that out... hell it sounded good at the time.

You're a smart guy Al don't ever turn to the dark side.

P.S. i hope that in the future if you do think i'm talking crap you call me on it and please don't hold back.

Al,

I also think it's pretty disingenuous of Deb (and Rural Votes) to pretend that, if it didn't work out, the site would "go dark" with a big "thank you" to its readers. As of right now, Rural Votes has said nothing about it. In fact, they've censored those who do. And, what's worse, it links the former Field straight to their new, crappy blog where the authors are getting about 3 comments per post. What a ridiculous situation.

Also, I'll help out with whatever it takes to get you your Convention pass...we need you there!

This seems another generational disconnect--I don't find any of the organizers you cite remotely shocking. I'm on the cusp of 40, and this was all before I was born. It seems there's a segment of the Dems that fears anything with organizers will turn into '68. (I'm an independent, so as a guide to what the mainstream will and will not tolerate....well, a post about the Rules for Radicals as applied to all candidates in the race is way within bounds.)

Sent an email to OnlineTeam@demconvention.com requesting that Al have credentials, since it was his writing that so many were anxious to read. Thanks to those who posted the address and saved me some searching.

I felt a bit uncomfortable reading Deb's hair-on-fire emails, but clearly she got what she wanted: a fallow field that is now "dark."

Al, you know you have the readership to re-raise the money to go to Denver -- in fact, I am more willing to give now than before -- but your credential that ruralvotes is (apparently) holding hostage seems to me is the main issue. You see it that way too?

I read thru those emails twice and nowhere does she actually denounce and reject you.....

Hillary Clinton's senior thesis was about Saul Alinsky. Obama was trained as a Saul Alinsky style organizer and he still considers himself one.

Hell. Alinsky himself offered a job to Clinton.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/24/AR200703...

"I basically argued that [Alinsky] was right," Clinton told The Washington Post in 1993."

"As first lady, Clinton occasionally lent her name to projects endorsed by the Industrial Areas Foundation (IAF), the Alinsky group that had offered her a job in 1968. She raised money and attended two events organized by the Washington Interfaith Network, an IAF affiliate.

IAF organizer Michael Gecan, who has met with Clinton several times, said her Wellesley work was often an icebreaker: "She would always say, 'I did my senior thesis on Alinsky.' "

Chicago organizer Gregory Galluzzo, Obama's former supervisor, who likes to describe himself as Alinsky's St. Paul, believes that Obama's exposure to the organizer's liturgy taught him that wisdom can emerge from the grass roots.

Deb and RuralVotes are what's wrong with our party. In Deb's Party the only thing that matters is the opinion of the donors.

In Obama's party, in our party what matters is the grassroots, the people. Beacuse we're donors too and together we are stronger.

Please tell us how we can help get you credentialed Al. At this point I would write the DNCC but if you think we shouldn't or if there is somewhere else to contact please let us know.

Whew!

Hi ALL, Al I sent in for a refund for the significant contribution I made, but have heard nothing. After reading this post I just sent another email to the address you posted and it was NOT pleasant what I wrote especially my thoughts on the so-called "Cranky Hillary Women" who are waiting for a disaster to happen. HOW PATHETIC that anyone who calls themselves progressive would even entertain giving them ANY credence.

With your regard to the question about donation returns; I e-mailed Deb on Saturday about returning the $15 I donated (I'm a college student so I'm poor), and have thus far received no response from Rural Votes. I don't expect I will hear anything from them, nor see that $15 again. My intention was to re-donate it to the new field site, but alas, I will just have to scrounge up $25 to donate here instead.

One of the things I found so ironic about the e-mail, is how a person so involved with "rural issues" was so obsessed over a donor from... San Francisco! I have long wondered about Rural Votes real mission, and I thus far have been unable to deduct a mission from their website either--other than to promote "rural issues", and that can be defined as anything. Oh well, the money is a small loss to me, I am more angry with the premise that some guy from San Fran is more important than the 400 fieldhands that organized from this blog.

I originally emailed ombudskoz@ruralvotes.com on Sunday requesting a refund of $50 I donated through PayPal to send Al to Denver. I forwarded the message to debbyskoz@cs.com on Tuesday in case that was a better address. Have not yet received any reply, nor a refund in my PayPal account. It is not a huge deal if I don't get the money back, it is more the principle of the thing.

One one level, I have some sympathy for Deb K as the focus of The Field had been shifting since Obama locked down the nomination (stressing the importance of the community self-organizing itself). But I really don't know what she expected in hiring you on ... did she perform a google search and read up on your journalistic resume? Did she think she was hiring a company man?

I also realize that we're only getting one side of this story -- three full emails from her, none of the previous emails sent (if any), and only a summary of the email(s) you sent back. The implication is that this isn't the first conversation you've had on the matter. Sometimes people say dumb things when they're emotional and/or frustrated, I feel I need to give her some benefit of the doubt. But a few things are clear: 1) She exercises editorial control over ruralvotes.com. 2) She is willing to base these editorial decisions on the complaints of Democratic party officials and donors -- not the thousands of readers and small donors to The Field @ ruralvotes. If she had respected her readers and small donors, she could have simply asked them "are you OK with the direction Al is taking this blog?". She has the email addresses of many small donors (including mine). She did not ask my opinion on the matter. 3) She has disrespected readers of The Field @ ruralvotes by not posting any explanation about what happened. Even a simple "Al has moved on -- thank you for your support!" would have been appreciated. 4) She has disrespected the small contributors by raising money in a fiscally irresponsible (if not deceptive) manner. Donations raised for specific programs run by the nonprofit (like 'Send Al to Texas') should be kept separate from the general operating budget.

I send a modest $20 back in February, I have not contributed since then. I'll be sending a contribution to support your writing here soon.

Yeah right. More like it moves elsewhere and all its readers Google their way there.

I see The Back Forty, party-approved, line-toeing type stuff, is averaging 1.23 comments per post.

I don't know what "valuable resources" you think you lost Al, but your talent and your new-found prominence are far more valuable assets than the paltry paycheck and mediocre web-mastering Deb was providing.

Looking forward to reading more about the election and less about Rural votes.

to "matt" and this is the reply i got:

"Mr. Giordano's work for hire payments were appropriately made from sources of funds including yours. Thank you for your help during the course of a successful RuralVotes project, RuralVotes' The Field. All our best to you and we hope you continue to check on RuralVotes as we work for progress in all of America."

Thank you Carol. I used your note as a basis adding a little.

It has come to my attention that the credentials which were secured by RuralVotes for the purpose of sending Al Giordano to the Democratic Convention in August have remained with RuralVotes after the two recently parted ways. Many of us made donations to RuralVotes specifically for the purpose of sending Al to the Convention on the understanding that he would have the necessary credentials.

As an ardent follower of Mr. Giordano's cogent, compelling and superior reporting/blogging on the Primary and General Election campaigns, I would like to request that credentials be granted to Al Giordano, so that the thousands of us who follow and delight in his analysis/reporting may have the benefit of his certain-to-be excellent reporting on the Convention in situ.

Many thanks for your consideration of this request.

name, address, contact details
Registered voter with Democrats Abroad.

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.

Kevin, I took a look and if number-of-comments is an indicator their last few blog entries have had essentially zero readership. 2 comments, 6 comments, 1 comment, No comments, that level. So their traffic has to be tanking.

Yep, that'll convince donors you've got a vehicle worthy of funding.

Bruce - There is a report with "reporting" (on the offshore drilling issues in the presidential campaign) below this one. And there are others farther down. You can skip over the "inside baseball" if you like. However, readers have been asking in the "reporting" posts for more of an explanation, and I think we can do both.

I followed those upthread and emailed the Dem Convention to get Al credentialed.

Al--the inside game stuff in MA is what makes sense to me, the rest, re Alinsky I still cannot get my head around. As you say--off to greener pastures.

Here is what I sent to the DNC: You may be aware that one of the credentials you issued has become the subject of some controversy. The credential was issued to Rural Votes for its blog, The Field. The Field's content was provided exclusively by Al Giordano and the credential was awarded based on his work and readership. However, as a result of a dispute with Rural Votes, Al has now moved The Field to a new home - http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield . All of his readers have followed him there. The two writers now providing content at the Rural Votes Field location are from another Rural Votes blog called The Back Forty. Those two bloggers did not provide content on The Field previously and were not included in your committee's evaluation of the blog's qualifications. Traffic to Rural Votes, as evidenced by the number of postings, is now negligible. Al Giordano has provided an inordinate amount of fabulous content during this election season and was the sole basis for the awarding of the credential. Unfortunately, Rural Votes has declined to provide him with the credential. I would request that the DNC either transfer the Rural Votes credential to Al at Narco News, for whom it was intended, or provide an additional credential. Thank you for your consideration. There is also a comment section at the list of credentialed blogs: http://www.demconvention.com/credentialed-blogs/

It seems that the word Radical combined with the name Alinsky set this off. It's doubtful that the throwbacks even read the piece through. It's a mind set, not an age issue, btw. My first presidential campaign work was for JFK, and I'm not locked into any age old ideology, or fear of words and names. Take the title and name away from the offending document, and how many would have noticed or cared. Some might have cheered. The ability to grow and change with the times is something Deb has failed at.

I also wonder if she bought the HRC steamroller argument at the time she hired Al, and has regretted ever since the morphing of her new community into a force leading the Democrats in a different direction.

I didn't realize that was little nothing was it!

Ms Deb K represents the Dems way more than Al. There is little difference between the Dems and the Pugs, just ask Gore Vidal, Huey Long or for that matter, Saul Alinsky.

"In the late 1940s and early 1950s, American liberalism and the Democratic Party, in alliance with the state, settled accounts with their opponents on the left in the purges. The consequences of that process for political, social and cultural life have been disastrous."

"The Democratic Party was discredited in the 1950s and 1960s, identified as it was with anticommunism, corrupt machine politics, Jim Crow in the South and, eventually, the Vietnam War. The angry, mass protests outside the Democratic convention in 1968 did not come out of the blue. The repackaging of the Democrats, their respectability on the ‘left’ is of relatively recent origin."

The Clintons finished off what was left through the auspices of the DLC and the final and complete neoliberalization of the party.

Anyone who thinks Obama is going to be any different is smoking crack. If you are looking for change you need to look in the direction of Ralph Nadar. At this point in the US ship wreck you could even look in the direction of Bob Barr or Ron Paul

Deb K is just acting within a great tradition

I'm an ex-pat living in Canada. During the primary season people would ask me who I was supporting given that the US political system is so corrupted by the corporate state. I always said that I supported Obama because although I could not vouch for the integrity of his talk, I was impressed by the organization of people that was growing in support of his candidacy. I thought that the possibility that things would actually change in my country was based entirely upon people's ability to organize and stand up to intimidation and fear mongering. I would say that maybe Obama would be surprised that people would really believe what he said in his speeches. The South American people who turned away Bechtel were my model for what was possible here.

This whole flap with Deb K and Rural Votes tells me that the fear and quest for power is insidious and strong. What I would like to see here on this website is some education so that we, as small donor individuals, can turn back this message that is already being disseminated by the corporate press about Obama the radical. I'm not a community organizer and have never thought of myself as a subversive. I'm an ordinary person who has been horrified to see what has been happening to my country since 2000 and more horrified to see that this "new" degradation of "American values" has actually been happening for ages. I want to do something to change this. And I think that there are people on this site who have lots of experience. I'd like an education. And I would like the no drama approach. This comment by John Slade was helpful. http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/gotta-love-the-welcome-wagon-i... More like that would be great.

Hey Al,

Thanks for posting the e-mails. Some would consider it bad form to post e-mails, but in this day and age, people should know better, especially those involved in politics. I was offended by Deb's use of the term "lavender man." I'm from San Francisco (born, raised, and probably will die here) and I've been called a number offensive names (wetback, fag, etc.) but never in my life have I heard someone call a gay man a "lavender man." We're not in the 50's. The e-mails she sent are ridiculous, and rather cowardly. You can't please everyone if you're a "middle of the road" self-described "moderate." In politics, these are the "friends" that betray you and roll over during a critical debate, as many "moderate" Democrats have done before. There are things worth fighting for, like our civil liberties, and we should use whatever means short of violence at our disposal. This includes the Rules for Radicals, which Ms. Kozikowski found to be so controversial.

Peace out and hopefully you can still go to Denver.

-Jorge

back in your corner. After recieving those you couldn't play nice. Not the fact that she sent you even in her first posting what was pretty much a "dear john" letter, you could have played nice with that. Nope, the problem was the chicken littlism. I understand you couldn't stay quiet about that not even to get your credentials or money and you couldn't stay quiet in the begining, get the agreement and then go all narco on her because then the playing nice would have been just a photo op.

So, okay things got to the breaking point and as in most divorces a few got sent to the landfill. However unless Deb was helped by Daniels (and I don't mean Charlie) even more than her emails even suggest there's got to be more back story. So I'm waiting on pinioned knee to hear what happened in prior communications. There's a guy/gal over on Kos that says he knew you both before and thought that it was a marriage of strange bedfellows and that your history showed you might be willing to dig under the chicken wire to gain your freedom. (my words)

In the meantime Deb's gotta be shaking in her pumps. If Al's saying he was censored by her was bad, being pilloried by your own emails has got to be worse. I think she can count out on any donations by lavendar men from San Fran in the near future, and what did she call Hillary supporters (like her mom) "cranky" or something? What is a petard (as in hoisted on) anyway?

Is it possible that Deb hasn't listed on the ex-Field that Al has gone for the explicit purpose of trying to keep the credential?? Bruce, I assume this is the last post we will have on the Rural Votes issue. I'm not trashing Deb, per se, as much as I am looking at what it represents for the divisions within the party. I think that's highly relevant to what we are trying accomplish.

When you start to get the sanctimonious “what do you think you’re doing?” and “how could you do this to me?” statements it is definitely time to pack up camp.

I have to say those emails seem contrived. It's like when you are ready to break up with your partner but you don't have a good reason, so you make up something to fight about so you can storm off in a huff. Perhaps Deb was angered by Al's popularity. Perhaps she felt the Field was overshadowing the rest of her organization. Or maybe she was getting pressure from Hillary loyalists. But there's just nothing about the Saul Alinsky post that is inflammatory. Al has posted things far more controversial than that.

Deb and these "donors" have no idea what a "Radical" is. As I read this event this has nothing to do with Alinsky, radicals or Kopkind. This is nailing the plywood up after the baseball broke the window, complete with the finger wagging and the threat of a repair bill. Whoever brought the report of the donors planning to strongarm BO upthread you caught the drift of this event.

One lesson I take from this is that we need to rely on ourselves and whoever doesn't set off the BS meter.

The new *NEW* notation on the new (go figure) comments is cool. The IT dept is really cooking with gas over there! (Does everyone see that or just the co-pulishers?) It really is amazing you guys have handled the transition so well with only a few hiccups.

Al, I've been following the Field since last year and it's my first port of call during this election season. I really appreciate what you have created and the hard work you do. And that this can mostly happen through the amazing convenience of the internet. And the ending you have documented with RV didn't surprise me that much, I was never real clear how your mission and RV matched up. And I feel like email did no service to the way this ended. Much of my own work is at the community level here in Portland trying to enrich collaboration between neighborhoods and developers and the city. While emai is great for sharing data and logistics, I find it horrible at working through differences and finding common ground and building deeper levels of trust, even in our differences. While I find the internet amazing for organzing and fundraising and sharing info, I think we also are good to appreciate it's limitations. I'm not suggesting the outcome with you and Deb/RV would have been any different, but I think something was lost in the medium.

I concur with Erik @6:44 ... what was she thinking? Did she not even google Al's writing prior to the invite to collaborate? No one who spent even a few minutes doing so would assume a partyline kinda guy! I mean... narconews??? c'mon! Makes one wonder what Deb's intent really was... That said, I poked around the ol' place a few minutes ago, and there remains a link on the home page: Superdelegate says, "Convince me, but be nice." Click here: A Field Exclusive. What I found curious is that it does not link directly to the Back Forty, but to "The Field is under construction!" Al, who "owns" the name? Can they simply replace "our" Field?

I too have contacted the DemCon asking that Al be granted convention credentials.

With no response from RuralVotes nor Deb, I also finally contacted my credit card company and they will refund my account and will bill Groundspring. When refund is posted, it goes to new fund I hope will be set up to Send Al to Denver.

One last observation: The prose or lack thereof--almost incoherent word-pasting--in the emails you shared is very revelatory of the state of mind of the sender.

A friend who has also served as a community organizer, starting also in Chicago, tells me he has tried to organize in Maryland and run into an incredibly inert group of Democratic "bigwigs." So . . . what a wake up call they'll get.

I cannot believe Deb contacted Obama campaign or that they said what she asserts.

Jesus Reyes, "Ms Deb K" does not represent the Democratic Party. She does not represent, she is not a symbol, she is not an example, and she is not the norm. If you think that the Republicans and the Democrats are one and the same, you are a goddamned fool. Do you honestly believe a President Gore would have done the same things as President George W. Bush? Really? His environmental policies, his foreign policy, his domestic policy would be indistinguishable from Bush's, according to you? Ralph Nadar is an attention addict and Bob Barr is off his rocker and a real problem for McCain.
(This post was edited by me to remove the last sentence. Email me if you have any questions. - Al.)

for sharing the story.

I'm not one that posts much, but I read and check in with your blog several times a week.

I'm really hoping you will be in Denver to report.

I spend a lot of time working with very divergent groups of people in order to reach consensus so that we can achieve greater goals focused around health care, and I have to say that I never enjoy dealing with those who exhibit the histrionic tone represented in Deb's emails. Her brand of reactivity doesn't point to someone with much authentic political skill...but more importantly, her emails are indicative of someone with no genuine interest in dialogue. Makes me wonder for how long her mind had already been made up (e.g. closed).

No matter now. Ruralvotes is no longer bookmarked; I won't be giving them any more hits.

I requested a refund, and added that while I was not going to comment specifically on all that prompted the split, that there were...

"...two points that should have been very simple and clear in this incident:

1. I should not have had to find out by accident what happened to Al's blog, and should not have had to find out how to request my refund by accident while wandering in a thread entirely unrelated to your website (Ruralvotes).

2. I should not have to question for even an instant whether the more than $5,000 raised specifically to send Al to Denver will in fact be used for that purpose.

To my mind, the points I list above are about integrity and courtsey. Pretty fundamental, non-partisan, non-radical stuff."

The positive aspect in all of this is encompassed in what I said when I concluded my email requesting a refund:

"That amount plus more will be forwarded to Al whose blog site will, thanks to this incident, be receiving monthly donations from me. This has been a great lesson for me that it's worth it to provide regular support to voices and sites that I value rather than just donating a couple of times a year. I profoundly value Mr. Giordano's work and journalistic voice regardless of whether I agree with every aspect of what he has to say."

After that, I contributed $100 to the Fund for Authentic Journalism. I can't give that much every month, but I will contribute every month (I see there's an option to sign up for a recurring contribution).

Next I'm emailing the onlineteam@demconvention.com regarding the credential.

Al - PLEASE let us know if there is anything more we can do/other people or groups we should contact regarding the credential.

Al Ijust recived this today, amazing how these things go. Panel Discussion of David Sirota's The Uprising
Thursday, June 19, 7:30 pm
In These Times, 2040 N. Milwaukee, Chicago, IL

In These Times welcomes David Sirota for a panel discussion of his New York Times bestseller The Uprising: An Unauthorized Tour of the Populist Revolt Scaring Wall Street and Washington. Sirota will be joined by Thomas Geoghegan, Barbara Ransby, and Laura Washington for a provocative conversation about the history of The Uprising and its roots in Chicago's activist politics, from Saul Alinsky's community organizations to the 1968 Democratic convention and beyond. Signed copies of The Uprising will be available at the event.

David Sirota is a senior editor at In These Times, a syndicated columnist, the author of Hostile Takeover, a co-chair of the Progressive States Network, and a senior fellow at the Campaign for America's Future.

Thomas Geoghegan is a Chicago-based labor lawyer. His most recent book is See You in Court: How the Right Made America a Lawsuit Nation.

Barbara Ransby is an associate professor of African American Studies and History at the University of Illinois-Chicago, the executive director of The Public Square, and the author of Ella Baker and the Black Freedom Movement: A Radical Democratic Vision.

Laura Washington is a senior editor at In These Times, the Ida B. Wells-Barnett University Professor at DePaul University, and a columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times.

Unsubscribe pfindlay@citlink.net

In These Times contact

P.O. Box 1912
Mt. Morris, Illinois 61054
United States

phone (800) 827-0100

...for casting Deb K as Ms. Marvel?

way back when you had the solicitation for comments to convince Deb to endorse Barack, I smelled something odd then. her replies were totally ingenious. and made little sense. the whole effort seemed like a sham to me so I said so in my comment.
after that I always thought it odd that you were reporting from that site Al. actually I do not see why you should be part of any group or organization. the Internet does not really require that. so I hope this frees you to reach your true potential. good luck and the best, you have been a great asset to all of us. keep up the work. we love your journalism and advocacy and see no problem in combining the two.

...can be followed here

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/ruralvotes.com

It isn't in real time, so it may take a few days for the effect to be seen.

And look for increased traffic here:

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/narconews.com

Thanks Tara,

The highlighted "New" is yet another feature available to co-publishers. Other Co-publisher features:

-No approval needed for your comments to be posted
-Edit your comments
-The "New" comment option you mentioned
-The ability to rate comments
-The ability to publish articles on our "Narcosphere" website. (Please read the history and guidelines of the Narcosphere).

If anyone else wishes to become a Co-publisher, please visit this page.

This is what I just sent:

Oh, I'm so angry right now.

-------------
To whom it may concern:

In light of your action and words against Al Giordano's blog at your site, I request that you immediately reimburse the amount indicated in the receipt below. I have waited to hear from Al the reasons of the sudden move, and he has now been kind enough to provide us with the gory details. Turns out "Rural Votes" is a totalitarian outfit, infected with a severe case of Chicken Littlism.

As an early Obama supporter, volunteer, and yes, funder myself, I find your attitude towards Al's article ridiculous, and frankly abhorrent. Your opinion, and that of your "funders", of Al's writing is irrelevant. We, the people, are funding him.

Nor is your attitude in keeping with Barack's approach to dialog, don't even try to pretend this is about "protecting" Barack - he doesn't need your kind of destructive "protection". You are simply buying into the kind of fear that has held us collectively back for far too long, and in doing so, mimicking the totalitarian right. No wonder you couldn't bring yourself to endorse Barack when it mattered. As Michelle Obama aptly said: "Fear is a useless emotion".

Send my money back. Now.

For me, one of the most memorable lines from will.i.am's "Yes, We Can" video is "we are not as divided as our politics suggest."

I now have my doubts.

Al, first, thanks for the story. I agree with an earlier commenter who mentioned you are selling yourself a little short. You were able to move the entire blog to a new location and have all the old hands back double time, while the Back Forty does a couple comments a day.

More importantly, I was wondering if you could offer your thoughts on what was meant by the phrase "we are not a debating society" from DK's original email. Did this mean that she wasn't going to debate with you personally, or is she so effin insane as to think that we (America) is not a debating society. We (America) certainly haven't been much of one during the past 8 years and well, everyone knows where that's gotten us.

Peace, and by all means let us know what we can do, if anything, to help insure that you are in Denver.

I believe I chose the right term yesterday because those professional suicide notes Ms Kozikowsi sent to Al are a perfect example of the work of a control freak party regular.

@ "leftfielder," you get the Roy Cohn award for pooh-poohing suggestions of McCarthyism in your troll yesterday. LEFTfield indeed!

Finally, we will learn if those people still blogging at Puerile Dolts have any credibility at all if and when they resign from that now hopelessly discredited operation. Otherwise we have to assume they intend to collect the money bamboozled from small donors Ms Kozikowski holds in such low regard.

As ever, I'm proud to stand with you, Al. And I am proud to be a part of this august forum. Barry Crimmins

Al - I am not in the least surprised. For me, it's just suspicions confirmed. I have not received my refund yet or even an answer after I sent the details of my contributions, but we shall see. I went ahead and donated here to help you get set up. I sent the following e-mail to the online team just now: I am writing concerning the press credentials for Rural Votes. Those credentials were given to the Rural Votes internet site based on the large number of participants who were reading and commenting on the work of Al Giordano, political analyst and writer extrordinaire. Due to some unfortunate censorship issues, he was forced to take his work and his readers to another site (Narco News) and Rural Votes is not permitting him to take the press credentials. All of the traffic on that site was due to Al's work. The Democratic party should pull those credentials from Rural Votes and put them in Al's name. It is the only fair and proper thing to do. Thank you.

I’ve worked with Al Giordano for some four and a half years now. He’s more than once bailed me out of what appeared to me, at those times, a sinking boat. You will read comments in places on the Net, usually from folks who don’t even know Al, who claim he has a rep “for not playing nice” or some such bullshit. All I can tell you, from firsthand knowledge, is that Al isn’t about “playing” anyone’s game. He’s in this for real, and from my point of view, for the right reasons. What happened to him at Rural Votes happens to most of us, in smaller ways, like a thousand knife cuts, each day at our jobs, in our churches and almost everywhere where people gather under the umbrella of hierarchical power. Most of us take it, for arguably legitimate reasons – the mortgage to keep a roof over the family’s head, the kid in college, the health care insurance for the little tots, etc. But Al doesn’t, and has always been prepared to pay the price for those principles. That scares people in power, particularly because Al is an extremely talented individual and, in almost all cases, way smarter than the people trying to give him orders. I could go on, but the bottom line is that this situation at Rural Votes isn’t a case of Al “not playing nice”; it’s a case of Al clearly walking his talk. He doesn’t suffer this course in life for praise, fame or money, or to entangle anyone else in his struggle who does not first accept it as his or her own struggle, at least as I see it. As I said, there will undoubtedly be a pushback by detractors and opportunists who will seek to spin this as Al’s fault (or the favorite insurance-claim option of joint liability); it’s the nature of human nature and the Net. That’s why, to me, the bigger question in this Rural Votes flap doesn’t revolve around what Al chose to do, but what we, individually, would have done – and more importantly will do going forward. We may not individually be in a position to stand up to abusive power in all the ways that need to be done every day, but we can all stake out some ground along that fault line where power threatens to collapse justice, and collectively that will move us all forward. That is the lesson learned from Al’s actions in this case for me. That is the philosophy behind Narco News; that is the life Al Giordano practices, as I see it – for what it’s worth. From the Editorial Policy of Narco News “There is too much racketeering happening on the Internet, often wearing an "alternative" gloss, in which third parties try to imply credit to their own publications for the labor done by others. We try to be an example of a different path, one that respects and acknowledges the hard work of writers and reporters, and that features original reporting or original translations to a new language. If you are reading it here, chances are you are reading it here first. … In sum, Narco News is not here to make money. We are here to practice Authentic Journalism, at the service of the people.” http://www.narconews.com/docs/disclosures.html

That was one of the most troubling emails I've seen in a while. And i've read the "Obama is a gay secret, communist muslim" ones. The most troubling thing about them is that they are coming from a "super" delegate or member of the party, sounding like she is insane. Now i know why she didn't endorse Obama until the primaries were over. It wasn't because her constituency voted for Clinton, is that she was somehow not convinced about Obama judging from the fear of an "Obama funder" please. She is sounding like a 90's clinton politician. Simply insane, she sounds so incoherent in her emails. Like Michelle Obama said: "Fear is a useless emotion"

First, I bet Deb is chugging a few margaritas tonight.

Second, I wonder whether if Rural Votes had played fair, paid Al, made sure he kept his credentials and money donated for him to go to Denver, that he would have felt compelled to post in this much detail.

And last, many of the grass roots Democrats in the greater Seattle area are very progressive, come up with great platform planks and ideas, after which the Washington State Dem. Party poo-bahs change everything to conform to the current centrist Democratic Party ideals. I don't think Deb is unique, not at all. Pretty sad.

Al,

I wonder how much value there is for you to be affiliated with an established site, as opposed to having your own stand-alone blog? Seems to me you're capable of generating plenty of traffic on the merits of your work, and I would think there is a lot to be said for being liberated from the editorial constraints of a site like Rural Votes.

I might have stayed to read the work of Tracy and Sean, but I am so disgusted by the way RV handled this. This simple erasing of any trace of the Field without any word to the readers, combined with refusing to post any comments about the situation shows such a stunning lack of a respect for the people who have come there that I will not read the site. The whole thing makes me feel rather ill, actually.

Al --

After reading "Lessons," all I can say is that (1) you are right; (2) she is wrong; and (3) the state of journalism is precarious indeed if you can't have a friggin' discussion about so-called "radicals."

Has anyone over at the Ex-Field ever read John Stuart Mill?

Okay, read LTBL's comment at 7:17, and don't you picture Al as one of the chief conspirators in Chicken Run?

I find the parallels to Rules for Radicals much more interesting in terms of "Look, here are these old principles and yet we can see how modern political operatives are using them, especially Karl Rove." It's just like reading Sun Tzu.

Chalk me up as another one who has requested a refund of his donation and so far received no response whatsoever. Unless I receive a response by tomorrow, I will contact my credit card company and contest the charge.

than Rural Votes. And I agree with others who said it was never a good fit. If a convention press pass can be obtained by other means, then this is really the best thing that could have happened.

Al, it's only a matter of time before wider exposure to your analysis brings you many big opportunities, if you are interested. The Huffington Post pieces are a great first step, but I see no reason why the editors of the Nation, Mother Jones, Rolling Stone, etc. would not jump at the chance to sign you on. I think now is a great time to think big.

Well, I don't get this paranoia. And I don't buy into it. I recall seeing some early letters of Hillary Clinton and her admiration for Saul Alinsky. What was most shocking to me this campaign season was seeing old footage of Hillary speaking to the board of Walmart and praising them for their values.. sheesh..
Well, I just think this is the moribund party and is mindset, which is being supplanted by the Obama trained volunteers. Too bad some people can't move with change.

...is that they did exactly, EXACTLY, what Saul Alinsky said they would do:

They studied his work with life-and-death rapt attention, while the liberals -- the very people Alinsky was trying to aid -- shied away from him and his icky (and highly successful) tactics.

Look at Ralph Reed, for example -- hell, look at all of the "Christian Right", including the anti-choice groups. They saw what Alinsky had to say about hiding one's true goals from the mass of one's supporters unless and until you had established a "rapport" with them. They used that wisdom and turned it into single-issue politics: Where you use opposition to abortion to create groups whose real goals include gutting the very social programs that would take care of all the unwanted babies that would appear.

Reed was very, very emphatic about not letting the general public know his true goals:

It's like guerrilla warfare. If you reveal your location, all it does is allow your opponent to improve his artillery bearings. It's better to move quietly, with stealth, under cover of night. You've got two choices: You can wear cammies and shimmy along on your belly, or you can put on a red coat and stand up for everyone to see. It comes down to whether you want to be the British army in the Revolutionary War or the Viet Cong. History tells us which tactic was more effective.

-- Ralph Reed, Los Angeles Times (March 22, 1992), admitting that he wants to deceive us regarding his true aims

I want to be invisible. I do guerrilla warfare. I paint my face and travel at night. You don't know it's over until you're in a body bag. You don't know until election night.

-- Ralph Reed, Norfolk Virginian-Pilot (November 9, 1991)

None of that is surprising. Gutless wonders, these traditional machine Dems. I've been calling myself a Democrat ever since I settled in her 15 years ago just to make it clear that I wasn't some fundamentalist wacko. This kind of crap reminds me why, in the rest of the country, I'd call myself an independent.

I hope we or she or someone gets you the money and we can steal credentials from some unsuspecting passer-by. In the long run, it's good riddance to Rural Votes. With friends like that, who needs Republicans?

It's 8:00 and I have to leave the office, so I plagiarized lizabroad's email to the convention guys. I hope she can forgive me; I'm up to my ass in alligators and the cats are probably starving.

Who won?

Lenore - If I had won either of those games I probably would have mentioned it. My rival was just needling me, too, for not mentioning here that she cleaned my clocks. But that's ok. I get a rematch tonight. And, as somebody above mentioned, Ex-Field is also a seven letter word!

...and it will also show my age, but I am going to cave in anyway. Ever since this incident came up with ruralvotes, I've had an old Phil Ochs song stuck in my head: "Love Me, I'm a Liberal" For those who don't know him he was a (gulp) radical folk singer back in the day. I won't quote the whole thing, never fear, but here are the two verses that sparked me when the censorship happened. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that Phil's wonderfully bitter and snarky lyrics should still ring true today:

"I go to civil rights rallies,

And I put down the old D.A.R.

I love Harry and Sidney and Sammy,

I hope every colored boy becomes a star.

But don't talk about revolution,

That's going a little too far.

So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal!

I vote for the democratic party,

They want the U.N. to be strong.

I go to all the Pete Seeger concerts,

He sure gets me singing those songs.

I'll send all the money you ask for,

But don't ask me to come on along.

So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal!"

It's a lot of years of political activism and community organizing later for me, but Ochs still nails a certain segment of the "progressive" community that apparently still thrives today.

I have to say that it seems deranged that anyone could be offended by discussion of Alinsky. I mean, the press has been happily mentioning him when discussing Obama and his background as an organizer, and I can't imagine what sort of Democrat would flip out about it. I only ever went to ruralvotes to read Al's work, and having looked at the junk on the site, I can't see any reason to return. My guess is that Al was a bit too good for the boss - and she saw a day when "her" site would mean, as it did, nothing more than the place where Al worked. That freaked her out, she cooked up some of the most pathetic emails I have ever seen, and decided to reassert her "authority". Of course, by behaving like an idiot she lost her authority, the star of the show, and her credibility as a Democrat. Impressive, for a touch under two hours of "work".

I did wonder about the great "write to superDeb" farce. I was unimpressed by her non-endorsement in the extreme, and felt that the whole write in had been just one long exercise in ego-stroking for her. Anyway, the good news is that Al remains his authentic and radical self, we don't have to deal with Madame de Koz anymore, and we can still read the good stuff here. Viva Al!

As a former teacher who constantly "bucked the system" to teach the best ways for my students (instead of what the bigwigs who hadn't been in a classroom in 30 years thought was "the only right way"), I can't say I'm surprised.

As Michelle O said this a.m. on "The View" (probably the 3rd time I've ever watched that show--the 2nd time was when Barack was on), we have A LOT OF WORK TO DO!

Money's been really tight in our household, and I hadn't had a chance to contribute to the "Send Al to Denver" fund; but as soon as I get a few extra bucks, I'm becoming a co-publisher!

But as a PFLAG Mom (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays), that disgusting "lavender man" comment REALLY pissed me off! That's not even counting the absurdity of a "rural" person taking her marching orders from the Big, Bad City of San Francisco!

That comment alone makes Deb no better than Bill Clinton saying *veiled* racist comments and then expecting people to not think that was what he was really thinking! (I'm NOT calling BC or HRC *racists*; but just that people pull out those types of words and comments when they're backs are against the wall because they think everyone else thinks like that, too--so that's how THEY will get over!)

We not only have a lot of work to do; we have a lot of teaching to do! Haven't these people even TRIED to learn anything from Barack Hussein Obama? (I already know the answer to that question...sadly.) Senator Obama NEVER pulled out any *stuff* about HRC when it would have been so easy for him to do so; he even said last night that he would never make Cindy McCain a *campaign issue*...when there is so much...well, never mind.

Al, whatever we have to do to get you some credentials for Denver, let us know...

BTW: the only way I know how to EMPHASIZE my points w/o HTML is using CAPS...I'm sure that as the webmeisters here at our new home continue working on the site, the easy way to get to the HTML will be there again...

...to lose a game of Scrabble. Al, if you lose again, I think you need to come clean with us. Honesty, right?

It's been a bit of a ride during this bitter divorce, but I'm in the right place now, my tray table is up, and Ommmm....Ommmm....

I'm no spring chicken, but for past 30 years have received my news, almost exclusively,from NPR, Chgo Trib, my local paper, and a few mags. But, January and February came, and decided times were too important to stay in my shelter. Jumped into cable news & national news/opinion sites. Since monitoring/sorting these venues is not my full time job, it took awhile. Jeesh, what a jungle.

Found your site a couple of months ago - fine writing and finer analysis. I quoted you and described you on my community site as 'calm and accomplished.' My mostly democratic community don't 'trust' obama, but they can't quite articulate why :)
Am so pleased you are writing and available again.

For the record, i made my first contribution on June 4, $75, groundspring, debit card. And most definitely sent it to 'send al...' or 'keep al writing' - as I had to wait a couple of days for those buttons to appear. Rural Votes seemed to be my only choice for a few previous days. I have emailed to both addresses but have had no response yet.

Let's work on getting you to Denver. For tonight, we're all imagining you there, eagerly awaiting your news, and cannot imagine Denver without you.
Best. Luck.

Scrabble, Al, really? That's the best you could do on a Wednesday night?

Seriously. I'm not even sure where to start. You would have to be almost completely Inside Baseball, or over 50, to have more than a passing idea of who Saul Alinsky or Andrew Kopkind are. I would bet in excess of 70% of the traffic that passed that post went something like "oh, interesting theory," saw it within the context of the larger point of the article and moved on.

But someone seems obsessed with the wrong business model. You don't get donations from large donors without traffic, and without Al she's not generating traffic for large donors. Al was literally the goose that laid the golden egg for that site, and she killed it on behalf of three miffed donors and paranoia about her standing in Massachusetts.

As Obama has eschewed large scale donations, so could have Deb in this election cycle. Using Al as the tent pole, she could have worked to expand the site through small donations.

But hey, it is what it is, and here we are now at Narco News, sure to be the beneficiary of a smarter donation model.

Al, give me an address and I'll have one sent to you, sounds like you need the help. Ha! Enjoying thinking of your partner cleaning your clock!

Now I am going to ask for my money back! As I'm not well connected with the US GLBT community, does anyone know which GLBT organisations this homophobic organisation should be reported to? (And, yeah, I'm a man that loves men.)

BondiBeachViews

Hello Al,

I was first directed to you from James Wolcott's blog. His H/T's were always to you, individually, and only indirectly referenced the RV site. Must confess, I was not a consistent reader because the RV site just didn't seem to have an identifiable purpose, or if it did, it didn't resonate with me. Definitely look forward to reading you at your new home, although I agree with Basil--you certainly have enough support to have your own blog.

OT

HOORAY! Olbermann is going after "The Enron loophole." God, I hope KO keeps this up for two weeks to make people understand."

Deb seemed to be uncomfortable with unconventional ideas and political dissidence. For me she represented the moderate-rightwing of the Democrat Party.

That she accused me, a fledgling farmer, of being 'elitist' because of some of my unconvetional take on things, this signaled to me that she wasn't very cool. In the face of my qualms, I tried to be polite with Deb out of respect for Al's work (which I have been familiar for almost ten years now).

After years of being in economically marginal circumstances, the first time I pony up over a hundred bucks to support Al I am screwed out of it. I have to beg Deb to give me the money back so that I can re-give it to Al.

Deb's fucking over a farmer, putting an extra-burden (of getting the money and giving it to Al) on me when I am already putting fourteen hour days into my farm.

This is simply trite and tragic. If I was the government I would question Deb's designation as a non-profit--cause it seems that her overriding concern is to profit by taking my hard earned money while kicking me and Al in the face.

Don't worry Al, I will get the money you earned and that I promised you in the past.

We will get you to Denver--and Deb, if you are reading this I am taking the five bucks I gave on your behalf back. Remember, the five bucks I gave to you for your margarita? I am taking that money back. You're a fake.

OT

Wikileaks just released US Special Forces counter-insurgency manual FM 31-20-3, Foreign Internal Defense Tactics Techniques and Procedures for Special Forces; 2004 edition.
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/US_Special_Forces_counter-insurgency_manual_FM...

This sensitive US military counterinsurgency manual could be critically described as "What we learned about running death squads and propping up corrupt government in Latin America and how to apply it to other places". Its contents are both history defining for Latin America and, given the continued role of US Special Forces in the suppression of insurgencies and guerilla movements world wide, history making.

The document, which is official US Special Forces policy, directly advocates training paramilitaries, pervasive surveillance, censorship, press control, restrictions on labor unions & political parties, suspending habeas corpus, warrantless searches, detainment without charge, bribery, employing terrorists, false flag operations, concealing human rights abuses from journalists, and extensive use of "psychological operations" (propaganda) to make these and other "population & resource control" measures palatable.

Verified by Wikileaks editorial board. Since the manual is US Army doctrine there are also public references to the title and tables of content elsewhere.

I live just north of SF, and I've never heard of "lavender man."

I Googled it. The phrase appears in a 1919 issue of the New York Times: "I KNOW it is Spring because the Lavender Man is out with his little bags of mauve dust."

Maybe it's something she heard from her grandparents or something.

I too have just submitted a letter to attempt to convince the Democratic Convention's credentialing team to include the new Field, and more specifically Al.

I did want to add that I wrote to Deb on Saturday, requesting a refund for my $15 donation (I know it is a small amount, but it is the principle of it). I have not heard anything back from her or anyone at Rural Votes as of yet. I am saddened that Deb chose the opinions of a few donors over the opinions of many donors. I think in the long run she will lose both.

Just received a message from Deb. Said she will refund my donation. I understand that people have misunderstandings and personal differences. Ultimately, all Democrats are on the same team (and need to be if we're going to be successful going forward). I don't doubt that Deborah is a good person. But I'm glad Al found a home where he's free to speak his mind. Given the quality of his analysis, it's important that no one take it upon themselves to shut him down. Ultimately, his views are his own. None of it reflects on Obama (or even Deb -- I still don't understand those who make "guilt by association" arguments). If Ruralvotes perceived Al as being at cross purposes with their needs, fine. Not sure why they were so secretive about what had happened, acting as though he had never existed, deleting questions regarding his well being, etc. But lets let bygones be bygones. At a website audacious enough to call itself Narconews, it's hard to imagine anyone being fearful of seeming too far out on the left wing. Seems a far better fit.

Deb always seemed like a silly school marm, but her comments to you were completely abusive. Good on you for moving on.

Thank you very much for getting me through the primary. I found you right before WI and was able to weather the slings and arrows much easier ever since. Learned about Alinsky in social work school and proud to be in his lineage. Always felt guilty about not donating to Denver and was going to do it last weekend when the crisis hit. Glad I waited. I am sending $20 and will send more when I can. Oona

That's all they have. I am talking about the DLC-ish, traditional DNC party hack, cw-imbibers who live in the shadow fat cats they not-so-secretly aspire to play with and be one day when they grow up and become "adults." As so many above have passionately and eloquently stated, what we are witnessing in Deb K. is the kind reactionary virtual violence ("Lavender"????) that the "Hillary is a Fighter" meme-generators see as toughness. They are so incredibly out of touch and downright stupid. This abject living in fear of the big-bad GOP bully is such total crap. At the point that Dems like Dean and Dem-supporting blogs really got going in 2002, 2003, 2004, the key to Markos's term "crashing the gate" was staring down the GOP knuckle-draggers with utter and complete fearlessness. In the years since, we had the 2006 landslide, the evaporation of the conservative blogosphere as a forum for anything other than the distribution of company memos, and the real "Surge" in grassroots activism and financial participation at the site of the Obama campaign. The unifying theme? No Fear.

The simple fact is that Deb and her ilk are weak.

They deserve nothing more than the kind of ridicule Alinsky makes mention of in his "Rules."

We definitely need to organize around our local FieldHand chapters to pressure the DNC to transfer the ruralvotes press pass to Al. Quite frankly, if Tracy Russo has the nerve to accept a convention pass that she knows was never meant for her, then she is more of a pathetic hack than her shoddy and emotive writing already demonstrates.

As somebody above said, the pure banality of this whole situation is what is ultimately so damn infuriating. These people are simply so weak, so stupid, and so afraid of their own shadows that they are willing to do nearly anything, no matter how corrupt, disreputable, or vile.

Deborah @ 6:22. Exactly. Deb K's language--apart from her homophobic "Lavender"--is so antiquated. "Revolution"? Come on. That is such a mid-Cold War mindset. (It's obviously a cultural mind-set, and not an age-determined deficit; my mother in her late-60's is far more contemporary in her thinking, politics, and language than this DNC dinosaur. This is the same crap spewed by the worst of the worst vitriolic HRC enthusiasts. They can't even make a feminist argument to justify their non-feminist candidate. I have heard numerous female graduate students and undergrads state explicitly: "I don't have to vote for Hillary Clinton to consider myself a feminist." This was, for me, the most eloquent statement to come out of this whole darn primary season.

Just popping my head in here between Scrabble night games to realize "I have the best readers in the world." That's all a writer can ask for. Your pal, Al p.s. Lenore and Mary in Seattle: I won the first game tonight 355 to 301 through the surprise deployment of a Q word that doesn't require the letter U (which my rival was hoarding on the second to last play of the game). The word is QIS. Look it up in the Scrabble dictionary! And the Q fell on a double letter score. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming. (And all of you that have emailed, I will get back to you shortly.)

While I didn't know exactly what the mission statement was of RuralVotes, I still appreciated the dialogue with a lot of the people there, including Deb's in the comments. Reading these e-mails gives a completely different impression of who Deb is, and it just saddens me. I remember the glee with which Al posted Deb's Obama endorsement on the final day of the primaries, and it just seemed like everything was clicking. And now, something rather silly seems to have ripped apart that relationship.

I'm glad that you're going to keep writing, Al... and I'm going to see if I can get the money back that I donated. I sent an e-mail to someone but haven't received a response. Perhaps I'll try e-mailing Deb and see what she says. Otherwise, I may be talking to my CC company.

Congrats on winning the first game, Al.

I am not sure if others have pointed this out but to me the most annoying thing about Deb's emails was the ridiculous chicken little-ing. I mean really, somehow a post about Saul Alinski is going to make Obama lose the election. Has she learned nothing from boot camp?

I have said before and I will say again, Alinski is required reading in so many main stream disciplines. I do not understand the panic. Even if it wasn't main stream, how in the hell could a post from Al on the Rural Votes website possibly doom the Obama campaign campaign? (Sorry, Al, we love you, but you aren't that freaking important.) I mean, we survived Rev Wright for God's sake! Whatever! Anyway, if anyone has some insights into why these people had this completely chicken little reaction, I would love to hear it. I guess they are just in the old school looser mindset. IE let the other guy define you and play by their irrational rules. Well guess what! Not this time, not this year! WE will take this country back on our own terms!

to send Al to Denver, and emailed Deb last Saturday to please refund me via paypal. She did so promptly and I just donated to Al here. Al, for all of your chicken little warnings, Deb seemed immune to the innoculations. Oh well, you do have a couple of supporters who have your back. (SNARK).

I live just north of SF, and I've never heard of "lavender man."

I live in the East Bay and also never heard of "lavender man". It didn't seem right in context, so I made a mental note of it before reading the comments, but the first comment on the topic made it immediately obvious I had read an ancient slur.

And she was wanting money from this person, was she? Yikes.

I've only found The Field recently, for Al's reporting rather than rural issues. Not knowing the history, and seeing from both Al's comments and the responses that there seems to be a history, I've been reluctant to post much more than "welcome to your new home". But trying to raise money from people while privately insulting them eliminates that reluctance. There's no excuse for it.

Was "No More Drama" related to this sort of stuff? If so, it seems time for "Family Affair".

I have learned so much this last few months from Al and all the commenters here. As a woman who did not get to go to college, reading here every day was a class in political science. I can only add that I sent a email to the DNC asking them to transfer Al's credential and donated to Authentic Journalism. I could not imagine going forward this year without Al's uncensored voice. I need my daily inoculation.

Hi Al,
I have a question. One time I got in trouble with Deb for using the F-bomb in a comment. Does the new site come with new rules? Next time I have one glass of wine too many and get a little too worked up with the language am I going to get in trouble here? I mean censorship is censorship right? =)

Never heard of Alinsky before the big whup while I was off beating some lawyer up somewhere; I looked up and Al was gone. Thanks to Oona who posted on where he could be found right when I could see it before Rural Votes probably deleted it.

At first I thought maybe Alinsky was a familiar moniker for Al. Of course, the minute I found you all here I read the article closely. I'm too young to have heard about Alinsky, but I now see how he influenced just about everything that was going on in my youth. I've got a couple books on psychopathy on hold at the liberry, and I'm adding Saul on there for a little bedtime reading. I'm always astonished at how much more I don't know than what I thought I knew.

Al--damn those alternative spellings!! I am humbled by your vocabulary.

Carrie - Here at the liberated Field we don't follow FCC rules ("the seven words you can't say on TV" are allowed here, as long as they are used creatively and not to berate or insult fellow and sister commentators). I call them "HBO rules." Lenore - I have been instructed (at penalty of being sent to the dog house to sleep tonight if I don't) to report that I lost the second game tonight 352-282. Although my rival is nice enough not to invoke "Clinton rules" and declare that a one-one tie in games is really an historic victory shattering a glass ceiling into 653 shards.

For what it may be worth here's something from Wikipedia's entry on Andrew Kopkind:

"In the early 1970s he and his long-time companion, John Scagliotti, hosted the "Lavender Hour," the first commercial gay/lesbian radio show."

It's a fair bet DK was somehow referring to that.

Beyond the egregious nature of her emails I can't believe that the Rural Votes web site still has not informed folks that Al is not coming back. It amounts to fraud or theft; not from Al but from those readers who no doubt still keep coming back looking for 'The Field" not knowing that Al is gone for good.

'Lavender' is an very old 'code' word in GLBT community. Here in Australia, its current currency applies more to lesbians than male homosexuals. Although I acknowledge there is cultural difference between Australia and the USA, Ms Kozikowski's use of the word is extremely troubling - and the phrase can easily be interpreted as a double insult. To me, the addition of the word "himself" also seemed to contain an implication that Al is/was "lavender" too. Very troubling - I have requested the return of US$150.00 in donations.

BondiBeachViews

I guess I'm going to have to go through the hassle of requesting a refund of my $100 which I sent expressly via Pay Pal to send Al to the Convention. I really would prefer all the money go to Al that was specifically collected for the convention. I thought there were fraud or something laws about this. Is getting the money from RV and the creditionals a lost cause at this time?

I was particularly offended by Deb's comment to Al that he went further left and that it's not 1970. Actually the mood of the country is far closer to 1970 that it is to the 90's. I am so tired of right wing pandering passing as "middle of the road".

I like Texas populist Jim Hightower observation and the title of his 1998 book.
"There's nothing in the middle of the road but yellow stripes and dead armadillos."

Only a 653 collective score! My mates and me generally play for the good of the board and are disappointed when we score under 700 collectively - but really chuffed when we crack 1,000. And, yes, you've got to love what the Chambers Dictionary will allow. PS: and hyphenated words aren't allowed. ;)

BondiBeachViews

Did it ever occur to Deb to pick up the phone? That would be Communications 101 on the subject of serious disagreement. Even if she wasn't interested in productive dialog, or dialog for the purpose of resolution, you'd think she'd be interested in the repercussions of electronically-sent accusations: public display of the feud.

Al, Thanks for your blog. I've been mostly a lurker here [and will likely retreat to my comfort zone shortly] but I would like to hear from you on something if you'd care to comment. What I find fascinating is the fact that the moneyed interest in the party have such clear insight into what a threat is rising to their status and influence and yet he's hardly been publicly attacked from that angle at all. Of course Obama's method of organizing from the bottom up is not new. There's always been somebody to red bait and discredit the heck out of every attempt to organize along these lines since at least the 20's. I'm surprised Obama hasn't been overtly challenged over and smeared for his methods already considering the heat of the primary. It's not like it's all that difficult to scare large numbers of Americans into a frenzy. Am I just seeing something that isn't there? Policy wise Obama is often to the right of where I'd like to see things go so I have no idea about his motives. Still, what he's doing by pushing for people to be empowered at the grassroots level could hardly be more congruent with those on the left who have worked in the field for social change for about the last century. Interesting how muted the attacks on Obama have been along these lines. The few small efforts to go after him on the Weathermen connections, flag pins, etc. seems to have had almost no legs at all so far. Surely the republicans will be coming all out to attack him as unamerican and subversive at some point, no? How does the Obama camp deal with that when it comes up?

I guess your rival is not really a woman, to say nothing of a feminist, since she didn't rub your face in the fact that she beat you by 12 points in the second game, where you only won by 8 points in the first, showing that she has the momentum, and that in the end she won more total points...

Sorry, I regressed for a moment there.

Lavendar was a popular inside reference to pretty much anything gay or lesbian in NYC in the early 90's. What's unsettling about Deb's post is the use of code words throughout her emails. I agree with Al that she seemed panicked, blurting out all manner of things that reveal what she actually thinks about Al, organizing, radicalism, and--gasp--CHANGE. These are things she'll tolerate only so long as they give her what she wants, and then cast off as soon as she's sucked them dry.

This time, this election (our time, right?), I don't think the activists are going to walk away and let the Democratic party machine have its way now that primary season is over. Matter of fact, I think Obama's administration and all the legislators who get swept in on his coattails are going to be both supported and scrutinized as no other group has been. As others have said, this scares the crap out of Democratic operatives who never understood what was funny about that Phil Ochs's "Love Me I'm a Liberal", and never imagined that Pete Seeger's "Little Boxes" might apply to them. The last verse of Ochs's sing is particularly pertinent:

Once I was young and impulsive
I wore every conceivable pin
Even went to the socialist meetings
Learned all the old union hymns
But I've grown older and wiser
And that's why I'm turning you in
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal

Emailed Deb at debbyskoz@cs.com requesting a refund for the "Send Al to Denver" donation of $100, but no reply yet. Tonight I emailed donations@groundspring.org to credit my account, and told them Ms. Kozikowski had not acknowledged my request yet. If there is no response from either party, I will dispute the transaction with my credit card company. This is a fight worth fighting, because the refund will immediately be sent to the Fund for Authentic Journalism.

@Oona-You make an interesting observation. You may want to check out the first sentence of this link:
http://ruralvotes.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&I...

Now for that Bedtime Story:
Last Saturday night, while the Old Field was blowing up, a post appeared, stating that some of the BackForty's work would now appear on the Field. One commenter stated that he/she thought it was a great idea, since people needed driven to this site. I posted a comment to this individual that the BackForty link was directly ajacent to the Field and that "we are not cattle that need driven." Ms. Kozikowski responded to my comment: "I thought your comment was funny, although you might not have meant it that way. No cattle prodding here!"
Enough said! BTW, all those comments have been deleted. I checked.

...you should have played Scrabble with your partner online (see http://scrablous.com)! Then you could have seen the emails going by as you played and you could have talked Deb out of her hysterical snit.

Or not.

Personally I think Al inadvertently crossed Alinsky Rule #2:

2 ) Never go outside the experience of your people. It may result in confusion, fear and retreat.

That has to be a hard rule to stick to. Of course, we are Al's people more than RuralVotes, I suppose. So in that case perhaps it does not apply.

As for the Nested versus Comments for all, I tend to prefer nested but then when comment threads get over 20 to 30 I tend not to read them anyway.

I had to reset my password here at NarcoNews, it's been so long since I was here.

Anyway good luck here Al.

Jim, I do think there'll be a split over radicalism, but I bet it'll run along strange faultlines. But I think the split will run along the exact same lines that already exist between pro-Obamic and anti-Obamic camps. See, that meme is only a teensy little extension of the normal right-wing perception of Democrats, liberals, or just about anything other then themselves: we're all a bunch of Commie sympathizers, terrorist supporters, and socialists. Once you've decided Obama's an elitist liberal, it's not really that big a deal to add a Saul Alinski to the mix.

I can't figure out who the hell Deb thinks will be turned of by the "radical" smear. I mean, how many low-on-critical-thinking voters could there POSSIBLY be who weren't already taken in by Muslim smears, liberal smears, Black liberation theology smears, Ayers smears, racism smears, elitism smears, weak-on-defense smears, Michelle-said-whitey smears, unpatriotic smears, and rude-to-Hillary smears? Who are these people she's worried about? I'd like to meet one.

I mean, can you imagine? "I really admired Obama AND his wife, but that was before all this Alinsky crap came out. I'm just glad I found out when I did."

Plus, he's going to be smeared as a radical anyways.

Hooray for Democratic apologetics. Maybe if we apologize enough for everything under the sun, the Swiftboat attacks will bounce off Barack and stick to McCain.

"At first I thought maybe Alinsky was a familiar moniker for Al."

lol.

Land of Lincoln, I remember your comment and the reply it got. BTW: Due to exchanges of email between Ms Kozikowski and myself over the last few hours (afternoon here in Australia) regarding my refund, I am led to believe she is reading the new Field.

BondiBeachViews

particularly concerned about the smears succeeding. Obama has his "Not this time!" mojo working for him and the internet makes these kind of self organizing efforts far more difficult to suppress than in the past. Plus, the last 8 years have made people just rotten with wanting change. I'm pretty hopeful for Obama and even more confident of the future positive repercussions from what he's already done. His track record so far has been about perfect but I can't help but expect a real shit storm to gather at some point. Who knows, maybe history will cut us some slack and not repeat this time around but I have to guess that camp Obama is game planning for attacks far stronger and more sustained than what's come so far.

I think Deb was referring to a fundraiser waffling on donating money to one of her projects (RuralVotes or maybe something else that she does) and not to someone waffling on donating to Obama. I read the "Obama fundraiser" part as someone that already donated to Obama.

Aside from my curiosity about how Obama might or should respond to push back on his methods, I've got a pretty strong notion that the answer for how we should prepare is to organize.

Someone back up asked the traffic of ruralvotes.com and if there was any change. You can look for yourself:

http://www.alexa.com/
Simply enter ruralvotes.com

It looks like this:
http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/2695/alexia1dm7.jpg

Not much change yet I'm afraid.

in just that way. I should have said so, but got lazy. Speaking of which, for G's sake, feed those poor cats (but not, I repeat not, the alligators). ;-)

Oh, come on people, Deb represents the DLC. That shouldn't be a revelation. I've known since the "Convince a SD" thread what she was. It should be no surprise that she would throw a true Progressive such as Al under the proverbial bus. Hell, as Progressives, are we not used to this treatment by the Party? I know I left the party for just this reason, and I also know, Deb was a pandering shcmuch when I submitted my views to that thread. It was a nice thought we could make nice with those people, and as Progressives, that is what we do, make nice. Sometimes making nice is not the right course of action, if we cow tow now, we have nothing. Fight the good fight and screw Deb and the DLC, really. If we don't act now, and make our views known, then when?

Al - having taken last weekend off and then spending all of 10 minutes on Sunday night to figure out what the hell was going on and finding the new Field site I can commit to making the donations that will help you get to Denver. I have very politely asked Deb for my refund today so I will give her a day or two. Regardless of whether I get my refund I will donate again and again to help you get to Denver. I really appreciate your honest portrayal of the situation. And more importantly I appreciate your continuing on . . . because I can't possibly imagine getting through the GE and all the crap that the McCain and Republicans are going to hurl without your strong and honest analysis and support, frankly. So thanks!

Completely OT.

Dont neglect to catch Colonel Lawrence B. Wilkerson's testimony before the House Committee on Judiciary Affairs, today (Wednesday actually). He was Colin Powell's assistant. Feith was supposed to appear as well but wouldn't when he found out Wilkerson was appearing, and they let Feith off the hook to appear at a later date.

Wilkerson doesn't pull any punches. Calls them REMFs and wont describe the acronym except to say that that are "men safely to the rear of the real action."

If Wilkerson's candor is indicative of what's to come, bring it on.
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Wilkerson080618.pdf

My original thread is so far up, probably no one will notice, but as a former English teacher, I must give myself 30 lashes with a wet red pen!

I quickly wrote "they're" when I meant to write "their" when referencing BC and HRC.

It's completely OT and not really important, but I must keep my "grammar eagle eye" cred!

My heart is so happy that Al is back...

@ Susan Kitchens...as the founder and official (I think!) head of the Field Hands Ning Organizations, is there something the Group Leaders can do with their groups to make sure Al gets credentials for Denver?

I just got an email from Paypal that I am getting a part refund and when they say part a VERY SMALL part. I am ok with that because, I am sure my email made them angry so I am satisfied. I learned a big lesson from this, that is for sure. I am just so happy I get to read Al's work and be part of an incredible community.

While I am awaiting my refund from groundspring, I find it interesting that PayPal agreed to only a partial refund in your case. Did they give any reasons ? (making them angry doesn't count).

Sent to OnlineTeam@demconvention.com: Hi there - I am a contributor to a fund that was put together to support the credentialing and logistics of Al Giordano's participation at the Convention this summer. He was associated with the organization known as "Ruralvotes" at the time, but has since moved, having been actively censored by said organization. Those that supported him are now asking for their money back, to be redirected to his own fund. I would like to request that you consider shifting your credentialing from the Ruralvotes organization (which is linked on your site to Al's blog, The Field, at it's former host, Ruralvotes) to Al Giordano directly. As an organization that celebrates grassroots, especially with the ascendance of the current nominee, I'm sure you will understand my concern. Thanks so much! Joel Wiens

Al's credentials for Denver seems an unresolved issue. Tho' it stretches the truth to the breaking point for Rural Votes to keep them, given everyone knows it was Al's writing that brought the necessary traffic to their website for them to 'qualify' it's really a short time now til Denver.
Many of us have emailed the DNC. This is a REQUESST for someone who knows how to create Petitions Online, to create one for us. Explaining the situation, so we can all circulate it to our respective email lists,other blogs, and get the credentials for Al.
I know there are very 'tech' savy folks here,and at Fieldhands -
Let's Get Al to Denver. And give much deserved public attention to the Narcosphere while we're doing it!

Why the code? This sentence is so telling: "a lavender man himself from San Fran..." Well, here we have a two-fer: a gay man from San Francisco, oh, no!!!! Nobody in this century even thinks about using this terminology unless they are thisclose to objectifying the community. And what the hay does being a gay man in SF have to do with his phone call to protest the Alinksy posting? From what I can tell, nothing. She notes that he is a member of the Obama steering committee. Maybe that is what scared her but for her to take note of his sexuality in a "straight-outta-19th-century" twist is downright bizarre!

This is the type of thinking/mindset/meme that is being turned out in full force to push back the Obama candidacy: the angry black pastor; the angry black wife; and the famous bitter comment=elitist. It's a tactic of division that folks in power use to keep the power. It has no place in this campaign.

Then, there's this one: "I have now LOST two major funders this week alone and I have defended you to the hilt..."

And, this is what really steams me. I consult to non-profits; have run organizations and do fundraising, management, membership, and all the rest. Running a non-profit organization is to all about the mission. An organization has a reason for doing the work that is needed; a constituency to serve; and an impact to be made so the situation is CHANGED. CHANGE to make the lives of folks better and improved.

Non-profit fundraising is not about leaving lip prints on the behinds of funders. Funders have their own agenda. Sometimes they do this to make themselves feel better, bigger, and to be known as having the money and power to do their work. Sometimes it is to fit their particular agenda and the organization's mission may match that. If a funder changes their minds, so be it. It's just on to the next. It's like match.com. Gotta find the right funder for the organization.

And, clearly RV does not understand the relationship of their actual constituency to funding. Their constituency would be fired up to fund the work of the organization if they see demonstrations of the work improving people's lives. If they don't see it, well, it's difficult to raise $$$. In fact, many organizations have a tough time defending their work in relationship to their missions because there is no relationship. Sadly, RV and many many other organizations may fit this description.

The responsibility of donors is to be certain that the organization does the work that it purports to do. And if it does, well, support that organization all the way! If it doesn't, just move on to the next. There are too many organizations that are doing great work and need the support.

Al:
FWIW, I think Andy would be tremendously amused and gratified to see that the mere mention of his name in a blog post could cause such tremors. And I also think he would be immensely proud of you and what you're doing.
Micah
p.s. It's Sifry, not Sifrey

found the cached post written by Deb on The Field. It could not be more clear.

"It’s absolutely imperative that we send Al to the convention.

"Do you agree?

"But given that the prices of lodging and other related expenses are going to be a “Mile High” that week with tens of thousands of delegates, reporters and others converging on Denver, we need your support in advance to make it happen: reservations have to be made and paid for now.

"If enough readers of The Field donate or pledge a total of $5,000 by May 31, we’ll be able to assure that this historic convention will be reported live from Denver with all the accuracy, insight and investigation that has made Al Giordano the “must read” for political reporters and junkies throughout 2008.

"(Plus, I get a certain thrill thinking about going to some of the most important events accompanied by the notorious Al, who has the attention of nearly everybody, inside and outside, who will be there.)

"You can donate today, online, via one of two methods to The Rural Votes Action Fund:..." (Gives groundspring, paypal, and address to send a check to RV options.)

"So if you think this is a good idea, and want to read Al’s reports from the convention floor and every other corner he would report from in Denver, let us know in the comments section the amount you can pledge by May 31."

It's really amazing that Deb now thinks she can back out of this commitment when the purpose for the donations was so clearly stated. Blech.

Paypal informed me that "rural" was proposing the partial refund, not paypal.

So I guess Deb et al are using some kind of bogus formula on which to base these "partial" refunds....I normally would be upset, but I have much on my plate right now, and the email I sent blasting them is worth more to me than a full refund at this point. As I said everyday I am learning new lessons and this is a big one. I assumed that Al would be getting all the funds I donated, because his writing and analysis plus incredible intellect was worth much more than what I donated.Obviously we now know that was not the case. I am just happy that we can come here and enjoy and learn from what Al has to say.

There's a 70's song by the Guess Who song that came to mind after reading this post and Left Fielder's comments the other day... Sort of sad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLMF5GM0Kt8

Thanks, pal. Apologies for mispelling your name. Fixed. Now I'm off to the original post to fix it there. (When one's name is Giordano, one knows the slings and arrows of the butchering one's name.) - Al

Inspired by Joel, also sent to OnlineTeam@demconvention.com: Dear Online Team, RE: CREDENTIAL and AL GIORDANO / THE FIELD I am writing from Sydney Australia regarding the international coverage of your upcoming Convention and the Credential for The Field. During the Primaries I was a regular reader and commenter at Al Giordano’s The Field. I provided my fellow readers with a perspective from Australia regarding the New Politics and Mr Obama’s rise to become the Democratic Candidate for the next President of the United States of America. As you may already be aware, RuralVotes censored Mr Giordano’s writings last week in a most ungracious manner and The Field is no longer hosted by RuralVotes. Due to the circumstances surrounding the separation of The Field and RuralVotes, the vast majority of The Field’s participants (“Fieldhands”) have migrated to The Field’s new web host. Many of us are requesting RuralVotes to refund our donations. In passing, I note that prior to the separation Fieldhands were inspired to create their own independent online social network (http://fieldhands.ning.com/). Mr Giordano’s writing during the Primaries has been recognised by many leading commentators as the most incisive commentary of the season. James Wolcott, Contributing Editor, Vanity Fair, wrote in a feature article for that magazine: “Al Giordano, whose blogging about the ground war on RuralVotes’ “The Field” was one of the sensations of the primary season.” As a member of the Australian Journalists’ Association, MEAA (Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance) and the International Federation of Journalist, I do hope you will be providing Mr Giordano with a Credential so that his unique perspective on the unfolding US Presidential Election can be provided to both his US audience and his international readers from the floor of the Convention. Thank you, in advance, for your consideration of this matter and, like many other Fieldhands, I look forward to your positive reply. Yours sincerely, Michael Chapman MEEA Member No: 2977413 International Federation of Journalists Member No: AU 3245 Declaration of Interest: On Monday 16th June, 2008 I received co-publisher status at Narco News, The Field’s new online host.

BondiBeachViews

Big bummer you don't have credentials, Al. I was looking forward to your reporting. Ouch, the loss.

I would take the existence of the "horrified" "Obama funder" with a grain of salt (as I imagine you have, heh). In my young days, when I was a Buddhist associated with a particular teacher, I was struck by how often various instructions were attributed to him falsely, even on a very mundane level. Not in a premeditated way, but in the heat of the moment ("You shouldn't be doing that!"), the "white" lies slink out sneakily using a life of their own.

I don't mean to claim strongly that Deb is lying, hope it's not taken that way. I'm trying to make a comment on human nature and the flux of everything we read and hear.

re: @ suzy ---I think the petition idea is great even though many of us have sent emails to the DNC online team already. I have no tech skills so unfortunately I can't get it going.

Also, I would strongly recommend including in the petition itself the ACTUAL entire "Al to Denver" post from Deb K. (Mary in Seattle posted it here in the comments at @9:30 a.m.) as it makes it very clear that Deb was relying solely on Al's writing from Denver - not Tracy or Sean or herself.

Since it was referenced, I had posted the guts, here is the whole thing. Anyone can find it, google "Send Al to Denver" - the URL is long, or I'd post it:

Send Al to Denver: A message from Deb Kozikowski
By Deb Kozikowski

We’ve never seen anything like it before…

On a Thursday evening in August, in Denver, Colorado, the Democratic nominee will take the stage.

People all over the world will huddle around televisions, radios and computer screens to listen. We’ ll join them and you in listening, from the first burst of welcoming applause to the balloon drop, and with your help we’ll witness history and take you along all week to this splendid moment with unique stories from the floor of the Democratic National Convention.

As a superdelegate, I’ll be there doing my part. But you don’t want me wandering around aimlessly and alone, do you? Even while I’m on the floor, I’ll have to check my laptop to find out – from Al Giordano and his vast network of sources and Field Hands – what will be going on behind the curtains.

It’s absolutely imperative that we send Al to the convention.

Do you agree?

But given that the prices of lodging and other related expenses are going to be a “Mile High” that week with tens of thousands of delegates, reporters and others converging on Denver, we need your support in advance to make it happen: reservations have to be made and paid for now.

If enough readers of The Field donate or pledge a total of $5,000 by May 31, we’ll be able to assure that this historic convention will be reported live from Denver with all the accuracy, insight and investigation that has made Al Giordano the “must read” for political reporters and junkies throughout 2008.

(Plus, I get a certain thrill thinking about going to some of the most important events accompanied by the notorious Al, who has the attention of nearly everybody, inside and outside, who will be there.)

You can donate today, online, via one of two methods to The Rural Votes Action Fund:

Groundspring.org

Or you can click the PayPal link in the upper right-hand corner of this page.

Or use the comments section make a pledge to send a check made out to the:

Rural Votes Action Fund
PO Box 108
Chesterfield, MA 01012

So if you think this is a good idea, and want to read Al’s reports from the convention floor and every other corner he would report from in Denver, let us know in the comments section the amount you can pledge by May 31.

The whole world will be watching.

Sincerely,

Deb Kozikowski
RuralVotes

Since my request to Deb still is not showing up as a refund on my Credit Card, I too did some googling.

From Groundspring website:
"Once a donation is paid out to an organization, you will need to contact that organization directly to receive a refund for your transaction.

"If a successful donation has been made on our system and is charged back prior to disbursement, the organization is still responsible for the 3% processing fee. This amount will be charged on the organizations credit card of record. Donation chargebacks must be requested within the same month of the donation and, as a result, the donation receipt will no longer be valid. Once we have initiated the disbursement process, the donor will need to contact the recipient organization to receive a refund for their donation."

Assuming 'lil Debbie was telling the truth and not exaggerating at all, these circumstances really demonstrate the need to eliminate the StuporDelegate system. Had been thinking this for a while, but now this exercise in futility by Deb and her "friends" has convinced me we REALLY need to get rid of the superdelegate process.

Party Insiders acting with a sense of entitlement as they munch on cocktail weenies at BigMoney parties is a big reason why we have the problems we have today. "Organizing" is proving that their model is on the way out. We're a threat to their insulated worlds. This whole "We the People..." thing is too tough to control for them.

People like Deb and her "funder" friends can chose to think in new ways and adapt, or they can cling to the old models as they become increasingly irrelevant.

I am behind you all the way.

How about an "Al to Denver" post on Daily Kos? You have much well-earned respect there.

Chris C.
Laurel, Mississippi

This has to be the most pathetic demonstration of why the Obama campaign is so very necessary. The institutional Democratic party is a bunch of scaredy-cats. It's totally bizarre to see Deb freaking out about ALINSKY and the oh-so-scary word "radical." Did she think that Alinsky preached violence? It seems that from this line in her e-mail: "I am NOT ARMING A REVOLUTION."

Alinksy is Organizing 100, the basics and the graduate course. And that's what we have to do to take back the party and the country. I'm sure it is scary to a lot of party hacks.

Furthermore, Al, that diary of yours was absolutely brilliant. I read a lot of stuff, from academic journals to a huge variety of blogs. And that diary was right up there. I hope you take it and some other pieces and publish them in dead tree form someday.

with Catherine Cain's suggestion.

My own experience with getting my refund from RV was amicable and gracious. I think however, that the opposite can be said of RV's reprehensible treatment of the credential question.

It is clear to me, from Deb's now almost (but not quite) vanished post, that Al was the reason RV was even on the map and that it was value-added by Al that warranted the convention credentials. While I don't desire to cast aspersions upon Tracy Russo or Sean Reagan, I would be hearbroken to see them getting the credentials that Deb so evidently thought should go to Al. Not the least of the heartbreak would be knowing that their bloggery would be read and/or commented on by three or four people at the outside (if current trends continue). Hopefully the DNC is inclined to offer credentials to those whose excellence should be rewarded rather than solely to those who hew to the party line adopted by only one bandwidth of the party.

I have never done this before, but I googled "online petitions" and made one up (for free!) in about 10 minutes.

At first, I wasn't sure how to word it, so I put in TBD. Then I copied some wonderful stuff from you guys and edited it.

Hopefully the edited version will be up in a few minutes.

Hope this link works.

Online petition - A Petition to the Democratic National Convention to Credential Al Giordano

Al: if you want to change anything---YOUR name is there--email me and I'll send you the link with my password, etc.

I've GOT to get back to work to make some money to donate!

waterprise, if you sign up as a co-publsiher you can edit your own posts. I did that after I put in a there rather than a their...oh my! Yip, Deb's reading over here.

 

Thanks Waterprise AKA Pam I also put my comments on Field Hands - want to make sure we get it on HuffPo (the WHOLE story!) and DKos - so anyone who can post there would be able to put the Petition up. Just signed on as a co-publisher so there are 'new' symbols on here to confuse me even more. Hope this post is readable.

I'm betting these are the same kind of "major funders" who have supplied repeated anonymous quotes to the WaPo denigrating Dean's 50-state strategy (until it started paying dividends and they had to pretend to like it.) There are people who think they own the party and are very unhappy with those of us who have been working to make sure they don't any more.

I went to the link for the petition and don't see any text -- just the petition's title. Once you put that up there, I'll be happy to sign.

And I just donated over here to support Al's work.

OK Field Hands!

Here is the link to sign the online petition! There are still some edits that may not yet come up, but I *borrowed* the good stuff from the upthread Field Hands...

all you have to do it sign it!

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/credential-al-giordano.html

Like Susan says on the Field Hands Ning Group: "Community Organizing You Can Believe In!"

OK...I'm learning...all the edits should be completed by now.

Here's the CORRECT link:

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/credential-al-giordano.html

Sign, sign, sign!

It's also on the HomePage at the FH Ning Site...

So Obama has made it official that he is opting out. I'm not sure I understand the implications of all that - financially rather than politically that is. What are all the rules that go along with public financing??

I've posted a diary at Kos that touts the on-line petition. Is it too soon to start thinking about raising funds for Al's trip? Can we target funds sent to the Fund for Authentic Journalism?

Thanks Pam.

Oh, that was easy. I was signer #18. Can't wait to see how many we get! Go Al!

And thanks, Pam, for taking the initiative. One voice can change a room...

In retrospect, was the attempt to genetically splice Al Giordano to Tracy Russo an early attempt to dilute Al's point of view? Certainly seems that way to me.

Al,

TPMEC reports that Obama is cutting a radio ad for War supporter and conservative house dem Barrow of Georgia and is getting lotsa flak there from hardcore BO supporters.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/barack_obama_joh...

What's your take ? I am sorta disappointed at this latest stunt by Obama, I gotta say.

(BTW, can we get rid of the "subject" field altogether while posting ? It is only diversionary, not adding any value to the post)

and Steven (mayan)

Tara the public financing comes from that little check box on the IRS form and many people check no. In any case it comes with a specific limit to funds the candidate can spend, around $80 million I think. Barack has created an alternative broad based funding that is probably superior in amount as well as the degree of engagement it fosters in us citizens.

So this is OT, but I just read this article over @ politico:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11182.html

It discusses the possibility of Obama winning the popular vote, but losing the electoral vote, and hence, the presidency. Personally, I think its not going to be that close of a race, but was wondering what your (still very early) opinion of this possibility was, Al.

Also, I just can't imagine the American people standing for a repeat of 2000. Obama, I think, would also be much more aggressive than Gore was in resolving the situation correctly, and would have the grassroots strength behind him... but that doesn't really impact the Supreme Court and their decision if they step in. So how would that work out?!

Or maybe I'm just showing some initial symptoms of Chicken Little Syndrome, and its time for my booster...

I signed as petitioner #34!

A comment making some (errant and untrue) claims regarding this newspaper and its work did not make it through the filter. However, if that person - who claims (ironically, given the subject of this thread) to be a "funder" of The Fund for Authentic Journalism (perhaps he doesn't get the memo that I don't hold "funders" views as any more or less important than anybody else's) - would like to write me directly about his "concerns" I welcome it. My email is narconews@gmail.com

We have over 30 signatures already! (I'm #6--almost forgot to sign myself!!)

THIS is why Deb and her DLC ilk are "scared"...THIS is *small d* democracy in action online!

I have learned so much since really starting to pay attention to the race last December and becoming a *blogoholic*...how to link to YouTube, for example! LOL!

I'm old enough to remember hearing President Eisenhower announce (on the radio!) Alaska and Hawaii becoming states; to *pull the lever* in 1960 with my Dad in the voting booth for JFK; marching with Dr. King in Detroit (and neither George nor Mitt Romney was there!); the civil rights struggles, the riots, the '68 Convention; all of the "ho-hum" Democratic candidates I voted for anyway; writing two letters of support to Bill Clinton during his *troubles* (he wrote me back on WH stationery!); all of the good stuff and the bad stuff.

Through it all, this government has been OUR government (even tho' GWB said it was "his"!)...we just have to remember that, and our Candidate is helping us to remember!

I was almost as much of a Chicken Little as a lot of us here...and we so much appreciate everything that Al has done for us and for sane yet exciting discourse and education.

There will NOT be censorship of progressive voices---not this time, not this year! Are you listening DK and DLC?

I wanna us to get HUNDREDS of signatures by next week!

There is a marketing maxim that for every one person who speaks up, there are 1000 who do not, for whatever reasons. So HUNDREDS of signatures will let the DNC know that there are THOUSANDS out there who want/need Al in Denver!

Are you listening DK and DLC?

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/credential-al-giordano.html

I was #42

Thanks, Pam, for taking the time to put together the petition. It was well done - short and sweet and to the point, very easy to fill out form and sign. Hopefully, all will do so, and those with posting privileges at other sites will spread it around.

I'm not a rec hound, however...I've posted a diary at Kos about waterprice's petition. I would like as many folks in the community to see it so I urge Fieldhands who are trusted users at Kos to go over and recommend the diary so that it doesn't fall into the sea of oblivion too quickly.

Here's the link:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/19/123350/442/602/538418

I was signer #41 on the petition! The sigs are adding up this afternoon.

How is Denver doing on getting the $$ to host the convention? Could they actually fail??

Steven (mayan) @ 1:13

The attempt to spice The Field and The Back Forty was an attempt to give a much-needed shot of adrenaline to a low-traffic blog. I never understood why Tracy Russo joined Al (before getting her own space) in the first place. To put it nicely, her voice and style never fit the personality of The Field.

And to stay on topic, I donated through Groundspring and haven't received any response from Deb yet. I didn't donate much, but I'm a student on a tight budget and every dollar makes a difference to me. As much as I would love to contribute here, I can't do so until I get a refund. Lesson learned. At least I had good intentions, I guess?

Tara,

By accepting public financing, you:

1. Are bound to spend a maximum of $84.1 mil on your presidential campaign once you become your party's nominee (after your party's convention).

2. Can only solicit private donations to pay for your campaign's legal and accounting expenditures (moneys have to be segregated in separate accounts.

3. Can only spend $50k of your own personal cash.

Tactically, this might become a huge issue in the time period after the conventions leading up to the election where Obama could have a massive cash-on-hand advantage. Kind of like deja vu, eh?

Thanks, Vik. I found this as well: "In 2004, President Bush and Senator John Kerry, the Democratic candidate, each opted out of the system for the primaries but not the general election. By accepting the public financing, they had to agree not to raise or spend any private money for the period after their nominating conventions. But when Mr. Bush raised some $270 million, and Mr. Kerry about $235 million, it became clear that major-party candidates could raise far more from private donors than from the public system." Clearly the system has not kept current. What is interesting about the McCain rebuttal is they say Obama is a typical politician and yet is the first to opt out since the system began post Watergate. Contradictory, eh? From what I've read, he seems to be taking a hit in the MSM for this but I think the 1.5M "public" donors, no lobbyist/PAC money to Obama or the DNC and the 527 argument can counter this pretty effectively.

we followed (among several others) rule 4: 4 ) Make the enemy live up to his/her own book of rules. Deb always shook her virtual finger at us when we were not being nice to each other, or to Tracy, and threatened not to listen to us (as a superdelegate) unless we could be civil. Well, we are not posting on Rural Votes because of her behavior. Also, I found this link Saul Alinsky influenced Obama and Patrick http://nalert.blogspot.com/2008/02/radical-saul-alinsky-influenced-obama... and this http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/obamas_alinsky_jujitsu.html sorry if this is a repost

I have sent a pretty clear and straightforward email both to DebbySKoz@cs.com and ombudskoz@ruralvotes.com with all details need of my PayPal donation, asking for a refund. That was 2 days ago and I haven't received a reply or any refund.

Any ideas on what should I do? I really wish to do this without drama so we can just move on.

1) Especially enjoyed Bill Conroy's comment. (And was wondering how to rate posts here).

2) I have a friend, an Iranian ex-pat, who pointed out that 65% of Iran was born post-Shah, so they have no memory of that era. They only know the Ayatollahs. And most of these younger Iranians are secular and pro-American. Remember, too, that the Shah was deposed just 29 years ago. As the radicalism of the Sixties was over 4 or 5 years before the Shah fell, what percentage of Americans would give a rat's ass about Alinsky, who was unknown to the majority of Americans even back then?

That's what too many of the Olde Democratic Village just don't getmost of those old bogeymen draw shrugs from 3/4ths of the voters today.

3) Perhaps among all those other credentialled blogs, they have more than one pass to enter the convention with, so perhaps inquiries can be made there. And the convention still needs volunteers to run the show, so that, coupled with a recording device, could gain you entry for some underground reporting.

4) As a descendant of a long line of dairy farmers from upstate NY, I have a lot of insight to the thoughts of rural voters. They don't have a problem with Alinsky; Bush is the radical that bothers them most.

5) And, as most of them play Scrabble and taught me what they know, here’s a few more seven letter words to consider (presumably, none of these people, influenced by Alinsky, will be permitted into Denver by the Democratic Leadership Cult/DLC either):

Alinsky
Kopkind
Sanders (as in Bernie)
Hoffman
Dolores (as in Huerta)
Clinton
Hillary and William
Kennedy (as in Robert)
Barack

And a few more, for good measure:

Farmers
Fertile
Friends
Respect
Liberty
Justice
Freedom
Anarchy
Antiwar
Miracle
America
Evolved
Society

and:

Jackass
Wankers
Screwem

head on over

I'm coming out of long time lurking mode to let other lurkers as well as other readers of this blog know that I just signed the petition to the credentialing committee.[I'm signer #56] I felt that the least I could do was to show my support for Al Giordano receiving the convention credentials he very much deserves for his informative, on-point, authentic writing.

Come on fellow [and sister] lurkers! You can sign that petition, too. I assure you that it was painless. :o)

Seriously, I really hope the letters and this petition succeed in getting Al the credentials he needs to report on this once in a lifetime convention.

amk @ 1:16 pm. That Greg Sargent at TPMEC gets riled up at Obama supporting a sitting Dem representative in Georgia is one of the pettiest and silliest non-drama dramas yet to come out of that horse's keyboard. Honestly, much as we all wanted Dem establishment figures including Pelosi (and Obama) to support Donna Edwards against Al Wynn in MD, such desires are just that. It makes no sense for a top party leader to actively seek to oust a colleague no matter how much he or she is unattractive to one constituency or another. We also wanted Obama to actively support Ned Lamont vs. Holy Joe. For Greg or you to get wound up about that non-issue is quite frankly unhelpfully myopic. Yes, we need to elect "better" Dems. (But if that was the case, why was Greg Sargent so thoroughly and overtly in the tank for HRC from the get-go and all the way to the present?) Greg will be doing this all season--carping on one non-issue after another as a way to project his disgruntlement onto strawmen's "buyer's remorse."

Don't buy it. It is a sham emanating from the "Cranky..." Club for HRC.

to both Ms Kozikowski's email addresses and to groundspring. I had contributed $25.
Vamos a ver que pasa.

Assuming 'lil Debbie was telling the truth and not exaggerating at all, these circumstances really demonstrate the need to eliminate the StuporDelegate system.

Or, at the very least, superdelegates like Deb who get to have thousands of times more power than the average Democratic voter on the basis of their adeptness at party hackery. Every member of the DNC gets to be a superdelegate? That's absurd and outrageous. The Jesse Jackson era reforms were supposed to eliminate most of them, but then, when nobody was watching, the DNC itself voted to reinstate itself. Outrageous. There's something to be said, I think, for elected officials and maybe State party chairs and distinguished party leaders getting automatic bids. It's pretty ridiculous for people like Deb to have it.

Anyway, what a ridiculous, ridiculous woman, and what an awful way of handling the split. That she still hasn't acknowledged it on Rural Votes is outrageous.

I agree Greg and Eric at TPMEC have a Hillary slant in many of their posts and I (and many other posters) have been quite vociferous on calling them out about that. So, I don't necessarily buy their anti-Obama BS.

But this case is quite different. Apparently, Obama is endorsing a pro-war, conservative dem who is up against a fellow, progressive dem candidate. He could have just as easily not endorsed either of them. And I don't buy the crock that Obama Presidency will not get the support from fellow dems, if they were not endorsed by him. I just don't see any upside to that endorsement - unless of course, you are willing to "open my eyes" :)

To All:
I guess "Lavender Man" could've been a weird smear, but I don't think it was. The Lavender Hour was the radio show hosted by John Scagliotti, Kopkind's partner. I think it was the first gay show on the air. So my guess is Deb meant somebody who specially identified with the show or the term [a 'Lavender man']. So I don't think she was being homophobic, but I also don't know how a Lavender Hour fan would agree with her about Kopkind.

Wow, after I read "No More Drama", immediately followed by "The Narrative is Not a Story of Technology", I remember thinking "This is real content - by far the best things I've ever read on The Field."

Al, you already had my admiration for your work, now you have it for your integrity. I guess the two are probably linked, huh?

Despite RV's inability to articulate it, I did have hope that their mission would cohere at some point, because I think there is a real need for a forum for rural voices. Rural America is far more heterogenous and complex both culturally and politically than it is ever given credit for. Ah, well, maybe I'll take the 13 rules and do it myself.

Sometimes money can contribute to the fullness of life by offering access to greater number of opportunities. It can allow you to test ideas and alternatives. But when money is concentrated it often acts as a filter. Filtering out challengers and alternatives. In this scenario, the market place of ideas becomes an investment strategy. This is what we have come to expect from politics.

An interesting phenomena of Obama's fundraising comes from the support of the "Common Donor", individuals not bundlers or an affiliation of groups.

This is only the beginning, we still have a long way to go to fix Deb's way of thinking. She is not unlike a great majority of Americans.

Oh yeah, let get over the drama.

WOW! leave the computer to 'sneak out' for a doc appt.- come back to sign the petition - and I'm already #85. Yeah, Fieldhands - taking control. We might even get our Democratic Party back. It's going to be so great reading Al's blog when he's in Denver. Oh, my, hope there's someplace near the floor allowing smoking :)

Went to RuralVotes website & found this on the homepage:

"The greatest menace to freedom is an inert people.”
- Judge Louis Brandeis

How's that for some irony? Dare someone to come up with something more ironic today.

A while back I was #91 on the petition to send Al to Denver.

Alinsky died in 1972. Kopkind died in 1994. I'm 51, have heard of both, knew they were lefties, but not much more than that. And certainly not so panicked that I'd withdraw my support of a website that mentioned their names!

Deb apparently has several aging milquetoasts whose puckered butts she must kiss. No wonder she'd rather share pecan pie recipes.

So, I didn't get a reply from Deb, but I got an email from Paypal saying the $100 was being returned from Rural Votes. Woot! Will be donating said amout here.

woohoo, Petition signature number 100, presente!

Ever since I read the article you linked to in this post about MarDee Xifaras being voted out after 28 yrs as a MA delegate to the DNC because of her support for Obama, I have been wondering if it's an isolated incident. I'm sure it depends on the state, but despite Obama's eventual SD lead, it seems like many party workers were pro-Hillary or had ties to Bill's presidency.

Can we expect 2012 SD's and Dem. party positions in several states to be filled based on an angry purging of folks who came out for Obama? If that were to happen, I'm wondering what ramifications there might be for the party. I doubt it would have much impact on Obama as president, but it seems a shame for people who backed a 50 state strategy to be pushed out.

I don't know how jobs within the party work, so perhaps I'm talking nonsense...

As a member of the minority community (GLTB) that could (and can) take offence at such statements, Scagliotti's use of "The Lavender Hour" was an early example of 'reclamation of the language'. It is like Afro-Americans using the 'N' word between each other - powerful and threatening to outsiders - and, for themselves, an effort to take the sting out of the slur and negate the destructive power of vilification in our day-to-day lives.

BondiBeachViews

Bless this man. He righteously skewers the nonsense at ruralvotes. http://www.barrycrimmins.com/

I have requested a refund of my $400 donation to Al at ruralvotes/the field. no response. I also suggested that we could consider a class action suit against DK. I am very angry at being taken advantage of. it is principle. I gave because I admired Al's writing and insight on the process. that is what I valued and why I contributed. what an arrogant twit.

Thanks Carol for that link.

To the anonymous poster @8:28 - That's lotta money.

To Al - What do we unfortunates do now ? My 4 mails to groundspring got zero reply.

It's too bad we have important work to do, because given Deb's very explicit solicitation, and the failure/impossibility of its fulfillment now (due to Deb's own choices) her failure to refund our donations has passed into conversion territory.

Add in her complete failure to communicate on the website, and, for many of us (me included) her failure to reply to (multiple) emails and the whole thing is getting surreal.

She could get a couple of volunteers or a couple of workers at $8 an hour and clear up all these refunds very quickly.

I am surprised that someone with her positions of responsibility and her public visibility is acting so unprofessionally, so rudely, and so irresponsibly.

What I find particularly galling is that some people have received the common courtesy of replies to their emails and some have even received the refunds to which they are entitled. But for others of us, absolutely nothing.

I'm not commenting under my normal user name as some have commented that Deb is reading these comments.

If I didn't have vital work to do, I'd file in small claims here in my very distant state and let her defend . . . .

was returned promptly.

$50 + $25 on May 20 and May 22 via Groundspring has NOT been returned. Requested on Sunday.

Has anyone has gotten a return when contributing via Groundspring?

This hassle is not sitting well with this grey haired older woman for Obama!

Just got an e-mail from groundspring essentially saying that all donations made in May have already been transferred to RV and I had to take it up with them about refund. Just forwarded the mail to Deb and Al giving her my options. Awaiting reply from Deb.

I'm wondering how people feel about Obama showing his corporate stripes lately.

Sent this email:

After reading around the net, I found Al Giordano, formerly of RuralVotes.org, to be the most clear-headed reporter on the primary race, and now on the general election. He’s humorous and knowledgeable. Al even inspired his fans to get some on-the-ground, local democratic organizations going.

However, his boss at RuralVotes censored him for quoting some 70’s radical I never heard of, as though it were a hot topic. I saw a fresh but historic viewpoint on the power ploys of politics, but his boss saw a threat to herself and her site’s centrist donors. I understand that the Democratic Party is moving right for the general election, but I’m distressed that freedom of speech could be sacrificed.

My point is the Al Giordano is an excellent writer with an enthusiastic following, who deserves press credentials on behalf of his audience, who’ve already donated several thousand dollars to send him to Denver. Unfortunately, the credentials given him are staying with his censor.

I just heard from GROUNDSPRING.ORG.
they can only refund donations made in June.
my $400 donations were made in april/may so RV will need to send me a check.
I will check with my visa card company. I am not hopeful as the donations were made through GROUNDSPRING. I will try.

what a waste of time and energy and money.

I wrote back, “You are out of your mind. There is no working with you any more,” adding my own opinions about the $7,400 raised to “Send Al to Denver” and to “Keep Al Writing” by her organization since April 30. (Only $1,000 from those funds were paid to me, and that was a month ago, and yesterday they dropped off a check for $773 to our counsel as owed for my labors in the first 11 days of June.). I can do the math: $7,400 minus $1,773 leaves $5,627 that was not spent for the purpose it was solicited.

Al, since refunds are not raining down, one thing we could do is for each of us to assign our rights to our contributions to you.

It still might be a pig in a poke, but at least it would be your poke.

In other words, instead of my having a claim for $50, you'd have a claim for $5000 or so, which might be worth pursuing.

Just something to think about.

I've been following this blog but not commenting for a few weeks. I signed the petition just now you're up to 140 people. The censorship by RV, driven by the same old fat cat donors is horrifingly abhorant.

Let's try to talk some sense into RuralVotes. Redirecting the Field's old URL to their other lackluster blog is just a really bad idea for all concerned. I've just sent this message through the RuralVotes contact form:

How about redirecting ruralvotes.com/thefield to the Field's new URL? Redirecting to another blog on this site is only going to piss off all the readers who come looking for Al Giordano's blog. In as much as this appears spiteful, it really reflects poorly on you. Please reconsider.

Dana - I respect your view (and you're correct that the aspiring Mall Cops of the Ex-Field have merely caused tens of thousands of readers to distrust and dislike them with such immaturity and obvious spite), but for the record:

I, Al Giordano, don't care if they link to here or not. I kind of like it that most of the readers found your way here without any help from them! It shows the intelligence of our readership and it's ability to find what is hid from it. And it makes it clear just how powerless such bad faith gambits reveal those people to be. A lesson for us all, not just the small-minded few that have blown it over there.

What concerns me much more - and I will chase these two until the heavens fall - is that they used my name to raise funds and they used your readership and the high hit count you generated to get a convention credential that their current low hit count would never have justified. And so until those two things are restored to their rightful owners - you, the readers - they're gonna keep causing unforeseen problems for their tiny organization everywhere they turn, including in places where they think, errantly, they're untouchable or respected.

 

It is NOT 1970, it is 2008 I am NOT ARMING A REVOLUTION. I have now LOST two major funders this week alone and I have defended you to the hilt -- so what do you do? You go purposefully more left and i was blinsided by a phone call b/c I hadn't seen it. The ultimate lack of respect. 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. How could you? How could you? This is NOT rainmaking, it is a destructo force tornado. And for what

 

I can't remember reading so many insults to writers and their readers in just one paragraph. It doesn't matter what the writer thinks. The debate doesn't matter. The worthiness of subjects doesn't matter. As a writer, even if you're a very good one, you are just a rainmaker to keep donors (advertisers) spending their money with your bosses. Yet one seldom sees it so obscenely stated as this woman does in this vulgar email, which I'm sure is because of her inexperience in running a successful publication.

That said, I am one of those who never quite understood what Al was doing at ruralvotes. I saw this Traci Russo being added to his blog and thought "this is not gonna work". I saw Al mention rural issues every now and then and between the lines it was just clear there were these editorial hints going on to keep it "on topic". I saw this convince a superdelegate thing and I thought "she's waiting to see which boat will float".

Even so, every once and a while one writes or works for a media outlet you may not that have that much affinity with but where, at least, they let you write - because you bring traffic, or prestige, or just because they like supporting good reporting. I thought it was something like that with Al and what will soon be known as muckheapvotes.com. But if such is the case, you're usually treated with respect.

"Respect" is however the last word that comes to mind reading the pathetic emails of Mrs. Korzakov. Tell you what? I'm sure she's thinking that she is actually entitled to these funds and the Denver accreditation because Al has cost her all these donors. And I'll tell you something else. Until she mentiones names and numbers, I bet you she is lying about most of these donors running away and upset phone calls, or at the very least heavily exaggerating. I just don't believe her.

Sorry to be so late with followup (from earlier post on later thread), it's been a >day< at work. 

This appears to be a better link re filing a small claims action as far as nuts and bolts:

http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=ocatopic&L=3&L0=Home&L1=Consumer&L2=Consumer+Legal+Resources&sid=Eoca

Just now had a few minutes to read a little at the above.  It's possible one has to live in Massachusetts to use its small claims court.  That hasn't been spelled out well in what I've read, a call to the clerk would be a quick way to find out.  The limit of a claim is $2,000 but it's possible for an award to be more than that in certain instances.  You can't file a claim until 30 days after a demand letter to the party has been sent, thus giving him or her a chance to rectify the situation.

I donated to RV for Al to write, but wasn't one of the Denver donors.   But I like the idea of the demand letter as a start, it also helps people get their thoughts straight.  And those letters, too, might be disseminated or cc'd to others.

Of course, if Deb and Rural Votes just behaved ethically, we could stop wasting energy on this.

Time to hit the road, it's Friday!

It's ironic that you were the Doctor of the Anti-Chicken Little Vaccines , working for a site led by someone with one of the worst Chicken Little complexes out there.

Somehow I also find it ironic that Deb is trembling in fear over placating "a funder in San Francisco." , when the thing that probably most hurt Obama in the campaign was his "bitter" and "clinging" comments about poor people in Pennsylvania to a group of funders in San Francisco .

Let's see how well they do at fundraising now that their hits have plummetted and they're getting 1 or 2 comments per post. Ouch. I felt guilty as soon as I typed that sentence- - it is hard to have such mean thoughts about a group i had thought was for the same things I was.  But their not using the money for the purpose it was solicited is just very wrong, as is keeping a convention pass that the blog got because of your campaign coverage. Everyone knows that.

I'm glad folks managed to come over here and regroup pretty darn quick, and all without RV having the courtesy to inform your readers where you had gone. Fortunately I already knew to check here, and a few people managed to put links up in comments on other threads at the old Field that stayed up for a bit before they were all deleted. 

Saul Alinsky, Al? Saul Alinsky being mentioned on a blog somewhere is suddenly a serious threat to victory in November 2008? Are you flippin' kidding me???

In any case, after days of trying to access The Field and getting redirected to The Back(side) Forty, and its compendium of the wit and wisdom of the multi-untalented Tracy Russo and the most-appropriately-surnamed Sean Reagan, I finally think of trying a web search and quickly find out the gory details. Wow! I had never before realized that StuporDeb (she who took the brave step of endorsing Obama just after he had wrapped up the nomination) herself was the head honchess of RV, but it all begins to make sense now. Hopefully, StuporDeb can soon acquire a new nickname, one familiar to most people from Massachusetts: "Diced-K."

Anyway, good luck at your new home. (And I'm thrilled, after my endless battles with RV's comment formatting -- or lack thereof -- to see that this site has a preview function for comments.) Just be glad, for Diced-K's sake, that you moved when you did; otherwise, you might have destroyed her fundraising operations outright by actually referring to Obama as a "progressive," or, worse yet, a "Democrat." Oh, the humanity!

 

It strikes me that most of us are sneaking peeks at the old host of the Field because:

1- It's tough to look the other way at the scene of a disaster.

2- We figure that eventually they are going to have to make some sort of statement, make some sort of acknowledgement of reality.

Well there's no denying the appeal of a good calamity so I won't try. However, there's almost no chance that Ms. Kozikowski is going to break her silence if she hasn't done so by now. Clearly she has decided her only chance is to ignore this problem until it goes away. Just as clearly, Rural Votes is what is going to end up going away.

The organization is to rural voters what the DLC is to Democrats-- an organization founded by insiders who have decided to announce they lead a group of people who never had any say in selecting those alleged leaders.

Anyway, my point is we should really try to limit our visits to Rural Votes. If we are checking that site a few thousand times a day, we are giving them the chance to make the case that it is still a very busy website. This could give them some ammo in the Battle of the Convention Credential. So why don't a few people deputize themselves and report to the rest of us once or twice a day?

Unless I need to research something for my writing, I will not be providing Rural Votes with any more traffic. I think we should all take a similar pledge.

Barry

 

Barry,

Great idea.  There's nothing to see at Rural Votes anymore but a few dead chickens on the side of the road.  I have been there twice to see what Field Hands may not have found there way over here.  I was able to then connect with them over at ning.  

Al,

 I don't know if it is possible to create a URL that doesn't have the word "narco" in it as some people have mentioned their network does not allow them to visit this website during work hours (one of them telling me the reason for still posting at RV, in fact).  I know my company may in the future, with continued growth and possible different regulators,  have a problem with it.  Is there some way to have an "aka" that would allow the narconews to be linked to it?  I actually have no idea what I'm talking about from an IT sense...LOL

The more I read Deb's tirades to you last week, Al, the more I'm reminded of an acquaintance of mine who, I believe, has undiagnosed bipolar syndrome. This individual can be the nicest person in the world when they are feeling normal, but, when their symptoms are acting up, they can go on just the same sort of rampage as Deb did with you. Suddenly, everything you've ever done is suspect and part of a huuuuuuuuge conspiracy against them, and they're justified in jumping online at every web site you frequent and posting rant after rant about your eeeevil motives, lack of character and supposedly-obvious psychological problems. Even when you try to clarify any misunderstanding on your part that sparked this reaction, they will reply, publicly of course, that they knew you would say that and its a lie just like everything you've ever written, then continue the personal attacks over and over again.

Sometimes, this acquaintance can go on like this for a day or two before returning to normal, but eventually you learn that you can't really trust them at any time, and take care to distance yourself in the future, just as it seems you have had to do with Deb.

It made me think: The bucolic farms and fields of Willimansett? The forest primeval of Aldenville? The howling wastes of Fairview? (OK, there might be something to that last one.)

I'm one of what's probably a relatively small number of people that's known both you and Deb in real life. (The handle I'm using on this post is the context where we first met.) Given what I know about each of you, the surprise to me was not this denouement, it's that you two ever started to work together in the first place.

Good choice to bring your blog back "home" and best of luck with it going forward. Now that Deb wouldn't have access to any back of the page information about me I may post here again on occasion, and when I get out from behind a short-term economic eight-ball that landed on me I'll toss you a bit of coin.

Toodles for now.

 

I just wrote to Deb asking for a full refund and telling her why.  We'll see what happens, but if and when I do get my money back it will all go straight to you here, Al.  And it was a decent amount, all told.

I'm really PO'd about how little made its way to you.

Also ticked off by their stupid trick of shunting your readers over to that pitiful placeholder, The Back Forty.  I've been insanely busy, which is why I didn't make my way over here until tonight.

Very glad to have found you again.  I missed reading you.

Just to update - in case anyone's still looking at this thread - I emailed Deb last night, and by this morning she said she had refunded me the money I donated to send Al to Denver.  She said:

We will happily refund monies donated to the Send Al to Denver appeal ... Mr. Giordano's past services were paid from online proceeds including yours.

So, it's something.  And a fast response.

 

 

Finally found my way to the new page: keep up the fantastic work and best of luck with the credentials "situation." Thank you for your insight.

Keep up blogging, Al.  Fuck RuralVotes.  I only went on that site to read you.

I was wondering where The Field had disappeared to!

I for one was very surprised when the damp squib 'backwards 40' took your place and I tried looking you up through the wiwkipedia article on you, but to no avail.

Hurrah for Google Search. Hope you keep on posting Al and now this is the new bookmark for me to read the real news and opinions rather then the dry cleaned and pre-approved ones from most other sources.