America needs a Conservative party

I liked reading this blog not only because the writer, Marcus, does a nice attack on a common enemy, Pogie (“It’s only been a day and Don Progreba has a hard-on for us”), but also because the writing has nice tone, reasoned and dispassionate. (He slyly refers to “Dan Progreba,” probably deliberate).

He also links to the Wiki definition of “political hack,” yielding this:

A political hack is a negative term ascribed to a person who is part of the political party apparatus, but whose intentions are more aligned with victory than personal conviction. The term “hired gun” is often used in tandem to further describe the moral bankruptcy of the “hack”.

‘Nuff said.

About Mark Tokarski

Just a man who likes to read, argue, and occasionally be surprised.
This entry was posted in Blogroll. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to America needs a Conservative party

  1. Rob Kailey says:

    Endorsing Coke because they share your disdain for Pepsi, eh Mark?

    Much of what has transpired between Pogie and the Copper Kid(s) has happened on Twitter. (You know, that very early morning time when all the birds are screeching a cacophony of gibberish at each other? Yeah, that would be Twitter.) I assure that the Copper Kids are no more reasonable and/or dispassionate than Pogie is. They have settled on a significant issue, but give it short shrift with seemingly only the weakest understanding of the relationship between state and fed in our marvelous security state. Ironically, as they proclaim their right to privately sext, they taunt Don that he will never figure out who they are, while it’s a certainty that the NSA will … thanks to their blog. What’s also ironically funny to me is that Don gets his money and funding from a clear source, his job as a teacher and debate coach. And yet you, Mark, Mr. ‘follow the money’ in a post lauding them don’t even bother to question who’s underwriting their efforts. In short, they are political hacks, just not as good at it as Pogie, and you’re just being petty again.

    I meant what I wrote at ID, that their blog will likely be short-lived. Their cause isn’t sexy, they haven’t linked themselves to anyone with a voice in the babble, and they haven’t yet created false commenters to show the appeal that attracts the GOoPer herd. In the video game of online politics, Pogie actually gave them an additional life, ’cause nothing attracts what passes for ‘conservatives’ like whacking on libruls. ‘They’ will probably last on Twitter, at least until these Young Guns find women folk they don’t have to purchase. The real question for me, Mark, is why do you care? Pogie seems to be a burr under your saddle as well as Lizard’s. Neither of you are very reasonable or dispassionate when it comes to him. So dish …


    • Well, there is the hack factor with Pogie, and his disdain for progressives.

      However, I think I just have to let your words rest here. They seem reasonable.


    • Greetings Gentlemen!

      Mark – We appreciate your comment regarding the blog. You probably won’t see us attack or even engage with Pogie anymore, it was an effective method for introducing ourselves to the blog world. Cowgirl is a bit more cagey about interacting with others whereas Pogie is just looking for things to write on. Oh, and you were right, we couldn’t help the Don/Dan play.

      Rob – Thank you for taking the time to comment on our conversation with Pogie. If you only followed Twitter you missed a good portion of our interaction; we recommend you checking out his blog posts and our comments as well. You are right on our short paragraph on privacy — it’s a huge topic and we look forward to writing more on it. As for the monetary cost to start our blog, it was ~$12 for the domain and hosting was $19.40 on Dreamhost (with a Lifehacker deal) for a year. So you could say we’re sponsored by a few days of beer money and some free time in the evening. All in all we are looking forward to sharing some thoughts on how we would like to see the #GOP in the future. It’s a pleasure to meet you and we look forward to future interactions.


      • Rob Kailey says:

        CC, I have read your blog thoroughly, as well as the Twitters (which frankly I tend to avoid due to the reasons I point out above.) Though I will likely be accused of patting myself on the back, it is a simple fact that I have been reading, discussing, writing, studying and commenting at blogs (much) longer than anyone else you will encounter here; longer in fact than anyone else you will encounter in Montana, save Dave Sherman of Greater Falls. I’ve seen why blogs succeed, I’ve witnessed why they fail, and more to the point at hand, I understand why people just give them up. So please,do not take my critiques as insult. They are simple and valid observation.

        As to the source of your funding, I frankly don’t care. The point is that you walked into a hornets nest of suspicion regarding “political hackery”. The most popular political blog in Montana claimed to be started in exactly the manner you describe as yours. Yet, the anonymity and bias led to even the mainstream Montana press claiming to have exposed the roots and faults of the “Montana Cowgirl”. (Now I am patting myself on the back. One of the many reasons that blog was able to survive the outrage shit-storm was due to advice I had given it’s author very early on.) One popular Montana blog actually drove away strong supporters and lost powerful authors because of the dread fear of losing their anonymity.. Those are the realities of ‘blog politics’. Make the right allies and you will have success. Make the right enemies, and you will come under intense scrutiny, and the point of blogging itself will evaporate for you. Just as in politics, knowing your history is a benefit. Either way, I only brought the topic up to tweak Mark for not following his own fundamental rules, one of which is “follow the money”. (Apologies for discussing you as if you are not in the room at your own blog, Mark. That is impolite.)

        As to the issue of privacy, you can minimize it all you want, but it does seem to be the focus of your input. It is an important issue, and one I wish I could believe that Republicants cared about at all. However, you appear to be making a big mistake in thinking that one paragraph of poorly stated analogy exposed by Don Pogreba will convince the rest of us libruls that he was right in his attack on you. Someone we are now both familiar with would call that “black white thinking”. I wrote many years ago that the holy worship of the 2nd amendment will mean absolutely nothing if we lose the rights in the 4th, 5th and 6th. Those are the rights that defend our privacy, and I sincerely hope that you do continue to scribe on those matters. Just please quit assuming that the left walks in anything like lock-step as the right is prone to do.


    • lizard19 says:

      well, I think I have made a pretty reasonable case against the humanitarian interventionism promoted by Don and Polish Wolf. and how has Don reacted to our disagreements over the years? petty attempts at mockery and marginalization. but you are saying, Rob, that Don is a better political hack than these young guns? on that we agree 😉


      • I find them both unwilling to face hard evidence, instead relying on wave-of-the-hand dismissals and low-quality American news reporting to bolster their condescension and low-information opinions.


      • Rob Kailey says:

        I think where we disagree, Lizard, is that I don’t see a moral issue with someone being a ‘political hack’. Any of us who write online are, to one reader or another. I guess I just don’t buy that a person can be defined by Wikipedia. 🙂

        Still, I do understand your problems with Pogie. At heart it was issue based. And, as a reader, I thoroughly enjoyed your exchanges with PW. Leaving hackery aside, there actually was often good information coming from both sides.


        • lizard19 says:

          PW is sharp, and to some extent willing to concede certain over reaches in our heated exchanges. I’d like to think I’ve done the same, acknowledging assholery where assholery was used.

          that said, what kind of assholery even makes this about us? because it’s not. I got to watch my kid today play a supporting role in Pinocchio. waiting for this adorable performance I checked my Twitter feed and got some pics of dead Palestinian children. I guess I could have not subjected myself to the body count, but that goddamn part of me wants to know always seems to get its way.

          maybe what I’m trying to say is the world is so deranged its beyond who we elect, IMHO.


  2. steve kelly says:

    How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Perceived (“left”) status quo vs. (“right”) status quo. The winner is: status quo. I’m lovin’ it. This may all end soon enough with WWIII or something like it. Will either party vote against the next neocon/AIPAC war? Where’s “gridlock” when it might actually do some good?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s