A month or so ago, Raising Kaine had a conniption fit because Tim Hugo quoted a diary from their web site in a political advertisement.
The diary was from a long-time, well-known and respected Democratic Activist, Nate de la Piedra. He was a regular contributer and diarist at RK. He worked on the Campaign team of a democratic candidate for Hugo's delegate job. He's the executive directory of the "Next Generation Democrats".
But the left-wing blogs all thought it was shamful for a candidate to actually USE a quote from this respected democrat, who claimed that Hugo's opponent was a liar. They even found some so-called "unbiased" people to quote in an article for the Washington Post denouncing the use of what they called "unsourced" "anonymous" comments in political ads.
Now, here we are a month later, and the Democrats have been caught using a child to argue their case for SCHIPs. And they have been caught using a family that works hard, is not anybody's idea of "poor", and who already QUALIFIES for the existing program, to try to argue for expansion of the program to people a lot richer than they are.
And worse, they have been caught holding this family, and millions of other poor families, HOSTAGE, denying them the health care they need in order to blackmail republicans into supporting their rediculous new health care program for people making $30,000 MORE A YEAR than the Frosts, for "children that are over 13 YEARS OLDER than the Frost children.
Having been confronted with the evidence that the Frost family had choices, had money, is in fact a solid working family which normally the Democrats would attack mercilessly, the Democrats have responded by accusing the opponents of SCHIP of "attacking a 12-year-old-boy". Of course, they don't call him that. They usually call him "brain-damaged", or "disabled", or some other word meant to put him down, essentially attacking the boy to make him seem more pathetic so that we don't treat him like a human, but instead see him as something to be pitied.
Maybe the Frost parents LIKE the idea of democrats suggesting they are all pitiable himan beings, but I wouldn't put MY family in that position. Further, a political party that focuses on people's disabilities and difficulties to win through pity rather than through the power of their arguments is actually sad.
But to get to the point. In order to accuse the opponents of "attacking" the family, they are using ANONYMOUS COMMENTS in blogs!!!! And in fact, the left's lackeys in the mainstream MEDIA are quoting anonymous comments in a blog in order to suggest that ALL republicans are attacking them.
So a month ago using "anonymous comments" from a blog (which were in fact sourced DIARY entries from a well-known democratic activist who had actually RUN THE CAMPAIGN against Hugo's opponent and was in a unique position to know the truth) was considered unethical, but NOW using anonymous comments from a blog is proof that the "republican party" is attacking a family.
When called out on this, Richmond Democrat actually argues that since the commenter is a "regular" at the blog Redstate, he's in fact a "well-respected republican". Which is exactly the argument the liberal blogs rejected last month when lambasting Hugo. I note that in Hugo's case, the GUY was well-known, while in this case the guy is only "well-known" in his own mind and the minds of his fellow contributers at his blog, Redstate (which I don't read, but I might have an account at -- I posted a couple diaries there a while back to counter some inaccurate stuff at the blog).
I can tell you that at the sites I post to, nobody is praising Redstate OR this blogger, we are all lambasting him. Michelle Malkin had it right when she attacked him.
It is a sad, pathetic political party that singles out a couple of anonymous comments from a guy that his own side is denouncing , and falsely uses those comments to try to DECEIVE the public in order to drum up support for a bad idea they can't defend on the merits.
Frankly, I'm getting sick of politics, and it's crap like this, with people who I assume are at least mildly educated posting things that I know they can't possibly believe, simply to WIN.
I don't know what would be worse though, the thought that RD is faking his outrage to score political points, or that he is actually believes what he is writing.
I have strong convictions, a strong adherance to what I consider a conservative philosophy, and a desire to elect republicans for the most part, unfortunately because political party is important.
But I will not lie for anybody. I won't defend the indefensible. I won't write stuff that I know is stupid just to score political points.
I COULD do it. I'm very good at it. I could out-Jonathan-Marks Jonathan, I could out-Kos Kos, I could out-RK RK.
SOmetimes I wish I was a liberal, so I could lie and cheat and say whatever I want and pretend I care about people and argue to steal money from people I don't like to give it to other people I don't like but want to support my party. It's much easier to be a liberal, because you don't really have to think about anything -- you just write a speech and hand it to a 12-year-old to read on National Radio, and sit back in the knowledge that if anybody attacks what you said, you can just accuse them of attacking a 12-year-old.