Amber does something that I find extremely helpful, which is allow people to follow along on the personal and practical problems and solutions and triumphs and regrets associated with the practice of doing politics. I am amazed with the number of conferences and organizations she and Rusty are participating in and organizing. Political action, so I’d like to think, does have this personal content to it that cannot be removed in favor of dry commentary about who voted on what bill or appropriated which funds. I don’t think I’m the only lurker/commentor who finds her struggles so openly discussed and available to be helpful and educational. That shit’s hard work, and learning from her mistakes and successes, thoughts and opinions, on how it’s done is beneficial. But perhaps none of that is considered political.

I mean, being one of the two founders of the Georgia Podcast Network ought to be it, for whatever standard is out there. But maybe that’s not political, but rather “technical”?

Oh great. Another “work in progress”. Now that’s tedious. If you can’t get your shit straight, go back to the drawing board.

And now, ladies and gentlemen, we shall observe the complete silence from Dave. Since he has no argument.

Or he’ll come back comment on anything else. Misdirection is also key in Rovian politics. I’m talking…I’m not answering your question…but I’m talking. (But he also missed the Message class, so who knows.)

Prove me wrong, Dave. I do so love being proven wrong. Address Sara’s post in a substantive way. Yes, I said substantive. Not like your “aw shucks” approach to my question. And (here’s where I get the Repubs IRL and they can’t run away), if you can’t do that, maybe you should re-think your position.

I think, Dave, that the problem is we who go to the same events, post on each other’s blogs, are part of the same social and media networks, etc. have a better sense than you do from a daily perusal of whatever blogs you find in a Technorati search of who is actually contributing to political discourse in Georgia.

And I say that with full recognition that many would argue, perhaps legitimately, that I am *not* one of those people. At best, occasionally and tangentially. My blog is about personal stuff and legal issues primarily, secondarily about politics and even less so about Georgia politics than national. So I still just don’t understand why I was included but Amber still won’t be even after all of this discussion and pointing out her role in things like PodCamp and the Georgia Podcast Network.

Maybe your answer will be to un-include me, and hey if that’s how you want to play it then so be it. Or maybe you should consider expanding your tent just a little even if it means that you might get discussions about feminism, sex workers, or sex clubs. For plenty of people sexual freedom is a political issue.

Sex-shaming women, yawn… wake me up when we get to the sex club….

It is absurd to divide people into good and bad. People are either charming or tedious. - Oscar Wilde

Dave, for someone with a background in communications I have to assume you’re either not skilled in your field or you’re being deliberately obtuse. Your answer to my question is meager at best and simply boils down to, “I’m not communicating well.”

I agree. You’re not.

Here’s a tip: If I can’t trust BNN’s own description of what it is, how could I possibly trust its content, recommendations or ratings?

Work on your credibility.

………………..

I’m tempted to tear into some of the other bs in that post (what is “in the news” and what is “political” - are blogs only to re-spin what MSM packages?), but I actually have some work to do. Maybe later.