<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Republican Resurgence and the Myth of the Progressive Web?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.epolitics.com/2007/08/23/republican-resurgence-and-the-myth-of-the-progressive-web/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.epolitics.com/2007/08/23/republican-resurgence-and-the-myth-of-the-progressive-web/</link>
	<description>dissecting the craft of online politics and online advocacy</description>
	<pubDate>Wed,  7 Jan 2009 04:34:43 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Street Smart</title>
		<link>http://www.epolitics.com/2007/08/23/republican-resurgence-and-the-myth-of-the-progressive-web/#comment-124922</link>
		<dc:creator>Street Smart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:59:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epolitics.com/2007/08/23/republican-resurgence-and-the-myth-of-the-progressive-web/#comment-124922</guid>
		<description>I disagree.  Anyone who peruses both right and left wing sites cannot fail to notice the differences in quality and style of both posts and responses.  Major left wing blogs cite facts and figures to advance arguments and justify conclusions, complete with links.  A simple assertion of fact is usually criticized in the comments.  Many of the posters and commenters are obviously well educated and articulate. (Check dailykos, firedoglake, bonddad, thenexthurrah, hullaballoo).  Sure, you will also find posts and comments which are editorial in nature, but the majority are fact-based expositions.  Opinion is valid, as long as it is based on fact.

Right wing blogs, on the other hand, are editorial in nature and self referential in their citations of fact.   For instance, redstate may cite a Heritage Foundation "study' to butress an argument, without mentioning an EPI study which contradicts it. Some right wing sites simply assert facts which are not reality based.  The rhetoric is simply slogans and assertions of opinion. And the commenters simply express approval.  Posts which cite alternate facts or conclusions never make it onto the comment boards or are quickly deleted.  Left wing  blogs publish and discuss arguments, contradictions, etc. 

Demographics also contradict you.  The generation 18-29 is overwhelmingly liberal and Democratic.  This generation is the first raised with computers and is amazingly tech savvy. 

IMHO, conservatism is widely perceived as an intellectually vapid excuse for the destruction of the social and ethical conventions which made this country great.  And the more you read conservative blogs, the more clearly you can see the logical fallacies, straw man arguments,  and misrepresentations used to justify its deluded conclusions.  That, in a nutshell, is why the net is the bane of conservatism.  As long as reality based information is accessible on the net, conservatism is dead.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I disagree.  Anyone who peruses both right and left wing sites cannot fail to notice the differences in quality and style of both posts and responses.  Major left wing blogs cite facts and figures to advance arguments and justify conclusions, complete with links.  A simple assertion of fact is usually criticized in the comments.  Many of the posters and commenters are obviously well educated and articulate. (Check dailykos, firedoglake, bonddad, thenexthurrah, hullaballoo).  Sure, you will also find posts and comments which are editorial in nature, but the majority are fact-based expositions.  Opinion is valid, as long as it is based on fact.</p>
<p>Right wing blogs, on the other hand, are editorial in nature and self referential in their citations of fact.   For instance, redstate may cite a Heritage Foundation &#8220;study&#8217; to butress an argument, without mentioning an EPI study which contradicts it. Some right wing sites simply assert facts which are not reality based.  The rhetoric is simply slogans and assertions of opinion. And the commenters simply express approval.  Posts which cite alternate facts or conclusions never make it onto the comment boards or are quickly deleted.  Left wing  blogs publish and discuss arguments, contradictions, etc. </p>
<p>Demographics also contradict you.  The generation 18-29 is overwhelmingly liberal and Democratic.  This generation is the first raised with computers and is amazingly tech savvy. </p>
<p>IMHO, conservatism is widely perceived as an intellectually vapid excuse for the destruction of the social and ethical conventions which made this country great.  And the more you read conservative blogs, the more clearly you can see the logical fallacies, straw man arguments,  and misrepresentations used to justify its deluded conclusions.  That, in a nutshell, is why the net is the bane of conservatism.  As long as reality based information is accessible on the net, conservatism is dead.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Carnal Conservative &#187; Blog Archive &#187; News</title>
		<link>http://www.epolitics.com/2007/08/23/republican-resurgence-and-the-myth-of-the-progressive-web/#comment-123158</link>
		<dc:creator>The Carnal Conservative &#187; Blog Archive &#187; News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2007 18:47:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epolitics.com/2007/08/23/republican-resurgence-and-the-myth-of-the-progressive-web/#comment-123158</guid>
		<description>[...] Warner Todd Busts Out Teh Nye Quill  By Gavin M.  We'd never heard of this site before, but being curious fellows, we poked around a bit and found this post at Free Republic, which explains how Warner Todd found it. It's nothing but a quoted news story from the Waco Tribune. ...   Sadly, No! - http://www.sadlyno.com    Republican Resurgence and the Myth of the Progressive Web?  By cpd  ..... the list of websites for a targeted political search engine back in 1999, progressive/lib sites were grossly outnumbered, and there was no real lefty counterpart to the Free Republic (a then-vibrant online community) or to Drudge. ...   e.politics: online advocacy tools... - http://www.epolitics.com    Gawker Wants The New Republic Dead  By BHDC Staff  "How is the nearly ad-free New Republic surviving?" Doree Shafrir, a media writer for Gawker, asked earlier this week. She then goes on to say that they have fewer new ads than ever (apparently, but still more than Wonkette has ever ...   Big Head DC - http://bigheaddc.com [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Warner Todd Busts Out Teh Nye Quill  By Gavin M.  We&#8217;d never heard of this site before, but being curious fellows, we poked around a bit and found this post at Free Republic, which explains how Warner Todd found it. It&#8217;s nothing but a quoted news story from the Waco Tribune. &#8230;   Sadly, No! - <a href="http://www.sadlyno.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.sadlyno.com</a>    Republican Resurgence and the Myth of the Progressive Web?  By cpd  &#8230;.. the list of websites for a targeted political search engine back in 1999, progressive/lib sites were grossly outnumbered, and there was no real lefty counterpart to the Free Republic (a then-vibrant online community) or to Drudge. &#8230;   e.politics: online advocacy tools&#8230; - <a href="http://www.epolitics.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.epolitics.com</a>    Gawker Wants The New Republic Dead  By BHDC Staff  &#8220;How is the nearly ad-free New Republic surviving?&#8221; Doree Shafrir, a media writer for Gawker, asked earlier this week. She then goes on to say that they have fewer new ads than ever (apparently, but still more than Wonkette has ever &#8230;   Big Head DC - <a href="http://bigheaddc.com" rel="nofollow">http://bigheaddc.com</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
