« Citizen Media Comes To Washington | Main | Kicking The Daily Kos Hornet's Nest »

Ron Paul And David All

In politics and in life, people who can't win arguments often tend to get personal, indiscrimately attacking their rivals rather than sticking to the subject at hand. That's what happened this week as Republican bloggers debated the decision by RedState to ban supporters of GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul from the site.

The target in this case: GOP new media consultant David All. The personal attackers: Erick Erickson of RedState; another GOP e-politics expert, Michael Turk of Kung Fu Quip; and blogger-turned-campaign-aide Lance Dutson, who is working to re-elect Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine.

All's cardinal sin was not toeing the GOP line as envisioned by RedState. At his techRepublican blog, All joined Ed Morrissey of Captain's Quarter's in scolding RedState for banning Paul supporters.

"Generally, Republicans need to welcome Ron Paul (and all others willing to wear a Republican banner) to the debate and the discussion," All said. "If Ron Paul doesn't win the nomination, we need him to actively endorse and support the winner so that his supporters will use their energy to defeat Hillary [Clinton]."

It was a relatively mild criticism when compared with Morrissey's argument that "this doesn't hurt Paul's credibility as much as it does Redstate's." But rather than merely disagree with All about the "retarded vulture fringe" as he had with Morrissey, Erickson got personal.

He accused All of "riding our story into the media spotlight as a professional tech consultant" and of being "too enamored by the technology the Ron Paul supporters use." "I really don't want David being the tech strategist on the right the media goes to for comment if he's more dazzled by the bells and whistles than by the cause," Erickson wrote.

Turk, a competitor of All's in the e-politics world, took the attack up several notches with a post headlined "I've Lost What Little Respect For David All I Had Left."

"David is, by all accounts, a master of self-promotion," Turk wrote. "It's entirely possible that he made a conscious choice to take the contrarian position solely to further his agenda of making David everything that David can be. ... I think David is calculating and has come to the conclusion that taking these positions gets him noticed. I think that's why he took his post against RedState and circulated it to the media (as Erick alleges)."

When All responded, Turk pounced again. Among other things, he criticized All for not having embraced efforts to improve the RightRoots online fundraising site that failed miserably last year and for instead building a competing site, Slatecard.

Dutson, who still writes at Maine Web Report while serving as the Internet strategy director for Sen. Collins, rounded out the third component of the David All attack machine, and like Erickson and Turk, he had a chip on his shoulder about something All had written. Dutson voiced his irritation at All for having supported the Google search engine in a spat over a Collins advertising campaign.

"David All is providing a crass misrepresentation of the work that the rest of us are doing, he's proffering poorly deduced theories about how the right should use the Internet, and he's allowing the traditional media to paint Republicans as inept and childish when it comes to technology," Dutson wrote. "I've been fortunate enough to work with some extremely talented people in this world over the last few years, and it really bothers me that David All has become the public face of what is in reality a remarkable group of people."

He added that the GOP should not allow "self-appointed, self-serving hucksters like David to pass themselves off as leaders on the tech-right."

That was a whole lot of verbiage expended on David All -- none of which served to further the debate about whether RedState made the right call in banning anyone who supports Ron Paul.

Posted by Danny | 02:15 PM

Comments

Redstate's attack on David All reveals what they are really about: suppressing Republican dissent. They want us all to be neocons.

What ever happened to the Republican Party Platform? Ron Paul is the only candidate who really sticks to the platform, and he has stuck to it for 20 years in Congress. Paul is so committed to reducing government that special interests don't even contact him anymore because he does not take their money. Neither does his campaign right now; he refuses corporate donations.

I didn't even know about Dr. Paul until a few weeks ago, but the man speaks volumes; he speaks truth and he speaks it from the heart--while our other candidates will say anything to win the primary.

J.P. | 10.27.07 03:17 PM

Ron Paul doesn't need redstate.com. We do thank you for all the free press. (:>)

Jim Brown | 10.27.07 03:19 PM

Truth is, the 30% needed to defeat Hillary will NOT vote for the nominee, but they would if Paul were the nominee. 7.4% of the GOP in NH are for Ron Paul..and their votes are needed.

But then again isn't this what the status quo wants, Hillary?
Does it matter that they are republicans?

Who are the real phony republicans?

NH_GOP | 10.27.07 03:19 PM

Yes and this is why I no longer read anything that is on Redstate's website, rather than have a serious discussion about a topic, they call everyone who disagrees with them names like a bunch of children.

I think it is odd that in the past week or so since they have banned Ron paul supporters, there have been more articles about him than ever before, but who cares it is their right to ban us ron paul supporters and we will just let them have their childish little website, they don't ever offer any real aurguments anyway.

chad | 10.27.07 04:14 PM

Frankly, I had never bothered with Redstate at all and then I noticed in my news search results that they had started to ban Ron Paul supporters mainly because they don't believe. It’s become clear to me and many other people that Redstate is less about conservatism and more about Bushism. One longtime user says that he was banned from Bushstate for no apparent reason. He suspects that it was because he dared to criticize Bush for not being conservative enough:

http://lonewacko.com/blog/archives/004786.html

These guys trash anyone who dares to disagree with Dubya on anything. Tell me, is No Child Left Behind "conservative"? How about the trillions of dollars we go into debt for the war that is funded in large part by the Chinese? Billions for NEW Medicare entitlements? "Conservative," too? Hmm... maybe that is why all the real conservatives are voting for Ron Paul.

Colette von Hessen | 10.27.07 04:17 PM

Can anyone get RedState.com to ban Ron Paul support again? His meetup membership has spiked for several days now since this teapot tempest has raised his name recognition another notch. I think those of us who support him should ask ourselves what we can do to get RedState.com to ban not only Ron Paul's name, but perhaps the words "liberty", "property", "peace", "sound money", "privacy", "non-intervention" and "reason". We can tell them that stuff just annoys the hell out of us. They'll understand.

John Howard | 10.27.07 07:10 PM

The RedState mentality is not capable of intelligent, civil discourse. It's easier for them to just ban what they are incapable of engaging. If anyone looks a little closer, and sees the nature of their goose-stepping, chicken-hawk mentality, the ban can only be viewed as a huge positive for the Paul campaign.

bastiat | 10.27.07 07:51 PM

I agree with Chad. The little boys over at redstate are behaving like a bunch of schoolyard bullies. Since banning RP supporters from commenting, they have written more articles about RP than before the ban. Why is that? Envy, maybe? Perhaps a change of name to "greenstate" would be more appropriate!

Larry | 10.27.07 07:52 PM

I have heard from inside sources that this is all just play acting. Actually, RedState has been purchased/taken over by the Clintons who are pretending to act like Republicans so they can spread the rumor that real Republicans don't like Ron Paul. The Clintons are terrified of Ron Paul and have now taken to infiltrating so called conservative blogs pretending to set the Republican agenda.

It is actually quite clever, except it is backfiring on them. RedState is starting to look hysterical. If it were possible, I would say they are sounding shrill and panicky. The Red has clearly turned from Republican to Communism as they kick out all rational discussion and attempt to dictate the only possible discourse.

Now, they are attempting to bring people to their site by publishing as many Ron Paul articles as possible. They all have flattering titles, but I don't bother to click on anything to do with that site so I have no idea what they say after that.

It really is a shame that more Republicans aren't up in arms about the Dems infiltration of their sites. But I guess they are too blinded by their own hatred to see it. Oh well.

We are witnessing the implosion of the neo-cons. It is about time. And it is very funny.

Alan | 10.27.07 08:47 PM

It's amazing that neocons like RedState won't engage in any genuine discussions. Either you're 100% for them or you're against them. Where do you supposed they learned that?

Name calling is not discussion. It is the province of fools. It is the province of RedState and the other fake conservatives.

Dave | 10.27.07 09:48 PM

Thanks RedRumState and your bosses in the GOP establishment. Trash the candidate & his supporters that's bringing in independents and libertarians back into the GOP, people who were apathetic and never gave a crap about politics before Paul came along, but then trash them some more when they stay home or vote 3rd party in the general because you ran your RINO turd of a candidate. Brilliant strategy, simply brilliant. Dr. Paul should break his oath and run as a 3rd party candidate and ram it up the GOP's ass.

Brian | 10.27.07 11:11 PM

If I were Hilary, or any of the corporate sponsored 'major' candidates, I would indeed be worried. However, these candidates are so out of touch with the intelligent American people -- THINK Giulani at the South Carolina debates: Giuliani told Americans that he had never heard the argument that American policy in the Mid-East might engender Anti-American sentiment. WOW! What planet is Giuliani sleeping on?

Pauline | 10.28.07 10:01 PM

You know that RonPaul2008 gets more hits per day than redstate ever has? Also, last week, RonPaul2008 caught up with DailyKOS in webviews per day? That is something RedState wishes that they could do.

Republicans better wake up, ignoring the paleo/libertarian part of your party is what got you a big loss in 2006 and its shaping up to do the same in 2008.

Whats really the difference between Hillary and Giuliani?

NOTHING!

Jason | 10.29.07 12:19 PM

Post a Comment