Over at MyDD, my jaw dropped when I read a post by Jerome Armstrong that advocated that the Democrats "strategically" imitate John McCain in allowing some offshore drilling.  This is on the basis of some half-assed polling data, with questions worded to practically invite the respondents to say they supported this oil drilling.  What was even more disturbing was that Mr. Armstrong was buying the Republican framing that doing this will reduce gasoline prices.  A very quick check of the facts will show that this isn't true, and, in fact, there is also a very easy pushback on this issue.  

more below the fold

If you want to know why Democrats have lost elections in the past 40 years despite the vast majority of Americans agreeing with Democrats on the core substantive issues, it is because of people like the few hundred dead end one percenters who showed up yesterday in Washington, D.C. in faux outrage to declare this situation "worst than slavery" and even had the chutzpah to photograph themselves with Larry Sinclair.  

If you want to know why Democrats have lost elections that should have been slam dunk victories for us, I submit to you the names of Harold Ford Jr., Lanny Davis, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ickes, Jerome Armstrong, Taylor Marsh, Zell Miller, and Alegre.   And no I don't want to hear about Bill Clinton.  Clinton never got 50% of the vote and his brand of politics gave us Newt Gingrich, Tom Delay, and yes George W Bush.

The bottom line is this --- If you want to be a majority party then we must remove these liars and scoundrels from our big tent.  For every dead end one percenter we remove from the Democratic Party, we'll pick up three voters elsewhere merely for showing the public that we are 100% serious that these corrupt, dishonest, and power hungry nutjobs do not speak for us.

Jerome Armstrong, like Harold Ickes, like Hillary Clinton is hell-bent on destroying Barack Obama's chances to win in November.

Simply because he doesn't want to be wrong or to lose. Some class there.

What follows is a fairly straightforward and perhaps all too simple cut and paste job from my own blog  Justice Addict  The original article is: Jerome Armstrong Is A Putz. If my etiquette in so eschewing cross-posting generalities is anywhere near as disorderly as the rambunctious harpies at the RBC meeting today, then let me know. For now, follow me across the jump for all the fun...

Many of the Obama supporters (like myself) on Mydd.com who have dared directly call Jerome Armstrong out for his shilling for Hillary Clinton, as well as the blatant racism and McCain worship that has engulfed his site, have been banned by this egomaniac "blogfather."  

Jerome (and his woeful site) is a has been.  He maintains his stature due to Markos's charity, but he has proven to be a biased mini-tyrant who stomps on speech at mydd.com.  Not only will I not go back there, I would like to put out this solemn call for others to avoid giving his barely Democratic site undeserved traffic.

Jerome Armstrong is at it again proving how low Mydd will go. Not only does Armstrong attack Obama over the new Pastor story, but threatens to ban Obama supporters from Mydd.

http://www.mydd.com/...

Obama has problems with not only women in general, but specifically Democratic women, whom have a negative 35% opinion of Obama, up from 21% in Feb, according to Pew. His letting this Clinton-hating speech hang out there with no specific denouncement, by someone whom he has deep ties with, isn't helping his unity campaign.

http://www.mydd.com/...

Are you a troll?  Of course I want the Democratic nominee to win. You know, I gotta feeling we are going to be doing some serious housecleaning here of the Obama supporters who think there can be no criticism of Obama at all.

by Jerome Armstrong on Fri May 30, 2008 at 12:22:30 PM EST

That is right the site owner of Mydd threatens to ban Obama supporters after protecting Clinton supporters.

Let me warn you, this is a rant diary about a once-legitimate political community, so if you don't care, you might want to move on now.

I've been active on Daily Kos for about four years now and I love the community. There have been some angry, heated debates, many of them involving Kos and other front-pagers. What I love about Daily Kos is that I can disagree with or criticize one of the people with administrator status on this site and not worry about that person silencing me rather than engaging me.

I had lurked at MyDD occasionally before and during much of this primary season, and it has only been within that past few months that I have begun posting regularly on that blog. Many of you post there as well and probably understand the harsh administration policies there. Many of you also know that Jerome Armstrong, the founder of the blog, loves to post anti-Obama material whenever presented with an opportunity.

Yesterday, Jerome Armstrong, founder of MyDD, finally confirmed what everyone already knows: that his site will officially brook no criticism of Hillary Clinton or, more to the point, her supporters.  In a front-page-posted diary, he warned critics of the site's rec-list-darling, Alegre, that anyone giving her negative ratings for her abusive, insulting, non-discursive attacks is subject to losing privileges or being banned.

This is a Democratic site. Clinton is a Democrat, and she has supporters here. If you are an Obama supporter, and don't like that, tough. Deal with it.

The problem, of course, is that Alegre is notorious for hit-and-run jobs on Obama supporters on the site - exactly the same kind of behavior Jerome is decrying.  And when, in a heated exchange between Jerome and commenters on the diary, this was pointed out, Alegre's ratings history was suddenly and inexplicably scrubbed, making it impossible to provide evidence of her own offenses.

This is also posted over on MyDD, in response to Jerome removing the recommending and rating abilities of over forty Obama users wholesale a few hours ago. For anyone interested in the sheer intellectual dishonesty, for amusements sake, drop by and check out the thread. In the meantime, here's my response for your enjoyment- perhaps I'll be joining Kos fulltime very soon.

I wanted to take a minute to acknowledge the blatant and outright disrespect- nay, disenfranchisement- Obama supporters have been shown on this site.

There's a reason why so many have fought so hard and sacrificed so much this primary season. It's because they knew that to be a citizen of this country is to have the right and responsibility to help shape its future. Not just to have your voice heard but to have it count. People have fought hard because they knew their rec/rate ability was at stake, and so, by proxy, was their children's futures.

Markos has just informed us that today is Daily Kos' six birthday.   Markos began this blog so that he and other like minded Democrats can lament freely at the direction of our country under President Bush, and also lament at the timidity of both the press and our Democratic Party in opposing the deceit and lies that were at the time leading us to war.

Indeed, reclaiming the Democratic Party and infusing it with a spine was perhaps the most important goal of Daily Kos, for only a strong and courageous Democratic Party can truly oppose the Bush Republicans, correct a conservative press, and protect all of the progressive principles we have fought for for so many years.  

We continue to hear the usual names as the talk about a McCain Vice Presidential running mate continues: Charlie Crist (Gov-FL), Bobby Jindal (Gov-LA), Mitt Romney, Tom Ridge, Meg Whitman (CEO-eBay), Fred Smith (CEO-FedEx) and, of course, Mike Huckabee. These individuals have been tossed around the MSM, as well as general circles of chatter. However, one name is suspiciously missing every time - that of Palin.

(crossposted with photos at The Dead Guy)

Yes, the votes that really matter are in:

In a presidential campaign where we have gauged candidates based on the color of their pantsuits, the health of their skin and the ability to throw a bowling ball, one critical test has been overlooked.

I am, of course, talking about how their astrological charts stack up.

Lucky for us, the United Astrology Conference was in Denver this week, with 1,500 devotees from 44 countries. On Tuesday, seven top forecasters took the stage in the downtown Sheraton and made like television political pundits, minus the screaming.

I'll cut to the chase: Six panelists predicted the election will go to Barack Obama, thanks to a Saturn-Jupiter conjunction spelling change. The seventh, Shelley Ackerman, saw an Obama win, but worried about Neptune doing something funky in January, endangering his chances of actually taking office. Her colleagues agreed the stars did look dicey in this respect.

As it has been discussed here at length, Jerome at MyDD has been displaying some interesting behavior.  I have long been a fan of both DailyKos and MyDD (and now also Open Left).  Having said that, it was a great ride together back in 2004 as we rode the Howard Dean ship through the highs and lows of the 2004 campaign - the blogs made me more politically active and aware than I have ever been before and I believe helped lay the groundwork for 2008 for Obama.

However, the constant dissing by Jerome of Obama on MyDD has me a bit confused. (I would have posted this there but there are so many hoops to jump through to become a certified member).

Jerome of Mydd.com is either practicing for a stint on one of the gawker sites, or someone needs to stage a progressive intervention, stat.  

In an earlier diary skjold wondered if MyDD was finally coming around.

I think the answer is forthcoming.  MyDD is becoming unglued.

I have been periodically visiting MyDD when my resolve has been high enough to withstand the fierce heat of fanatical devotion to a very flawed candidate and campaign (not to mention a brooding hatred of the 'Great Orange Satan'). And even though my preferred candidate is consistently belittled and slandered by almost all of the recommended diaries as well as most all of the posts of a certain 'blogfather', I couldn't keep myself away for too long. It's a bit like passing a terrible car-wreck on the freeway, a rubbernecking of sorts. A small part of me wants to understand what in the world is going through these democrats minds, to be so full of angst toward one of their own candidates.

Well, judging by my past few visits there, it looks as though alot (though not all of course) of them are finally starting to come around.

This is my first-ever diary, so please forgive any rookie mistakes that I may make.  (They will most likely be numerous).  Well, i've just been over to the frequently hillary-bubble world of mydd where a diarist has uncovered some possible links between Jerome Armstrong and Women's Voices Women's Vote.   You can check out the diary and accompanying raging debate here: http://www.mydd.com/...

Apparently, Jerome's firm WebStrong has been doing work for the group, but there has been no disclosure about this on the site, and (as of yet) no comment from Jerome regarding the unearthing of these accusations.  

(More of my anti-DD rants :-) )

I don't know why I go ever there.  Perhaps it's the occasional good article by Todd or Chris.  Ever the glutton for punishment, I head over there today and what do I see?  Jerome complaining that Obama is hypocritical.

Many of us are well-aware of Jerome Armstrong's lack of ethics. In 2003, the SEC launched an investigation into Armstrong based upon his actions promoting a stock in 1999 without disclosing that he was being paid to do so. During the 2004 campaign, Armstrong hid the fact that he was being paid by Howard Dean to blog in his favor. Although MyDD has not always been a tabloid blog site, it seems to inch closer and closer to it every time Armstrong signs on to support one of Clinton's inane policy proposals or to tout her demographic favorability or assorted poll numbers. MyDD, in the midst of this primary, has become the Fox News of the progressive blogosphere.

The question I have, though, is whether or not Armstrong is getting paid or being given some kind of favor of his incessant, singular focus on promoting Clinton? I don't have access to Armstrong's bank records, so I guess I can't prove anything - but I am beginning to suspect.