At one point during our FDL caucus on the first day of the convention, Ana Marie Cox was standing out in the hallway with Byron York and Pach hailed them inside.  York came in and sat down, but as Wankette teetered through the crowd on a pair of spindly legs shown to ill-effect in a set of shorts I’d seen on the markdown rack at Barneys (others wisely having steered clear), she looked like some self-fashioned Marie Antoinette afraid that the unwashed masses were going to mob her.  After that the only place I ever saw her was in the media room, safely protected from the dirty horde.  Tap tap tap, intrepid girl journalist, where’s that guy from the Weekly Standard.  

Her previous career may have been launched by a wilingness to coarsen political discourse by talking about the things she inserted into her rectum, but at Time she seems to have changed positions.  TBogg alerts us this morning that her new stint seems to be on her knees:

It’s aparent Cox isn’t quite bright enough to understand the dynamics of what is going on either in politics or with the netroots so I’m sure she must go to someone for an explanation, and Instacracker is as good as the next I suppose. (Talking about things she doesn’t understand seems to be her new specialty — or maybe not, I never really read her so it’s possible I just didn’t notice.  I’ll certainly take the trouble to do so now.)  But in the interest of being helpful to another gal, I thought I’d give her a brief history lesson and let her know why I said it.

Or better yet, how about one from one of TBogg’s commenters?  You know, those things that Wankette never had.  All those dirty, dirty people strolling around she could never really figure out any use for.  R. Porrofatto reminds us of this Washington Post quote (suffering from link rot so I’ll cite Swopa):

In 1990, while sheltering more than 100 Americans at the U.S. Embassy and diplomatic residences, Wilson briefed reporters while wearing a hangman’s noose instead of a necktie — a symbol of defiance after Saddam threatened to execute anyone who didn’t turn over foreigners.

"The fact that somebody worked in the White House for a particular administration does not brand them," said Chester A. Crocker, an assistant secretary of state under President Ronald Reagan.  He called Wilson "eminently professional."

"He stuck his neck out in our behalf … He worked so hard to keep us from falling apart," recalled Roland O. Bergheer, 75, a Bechtel Corp. manager who was trapped in Baghdad. A conservative who lives in Las Vegas, Bergheer added: "I love Joe Wilson. … I don’t give a damn what his politics are." 

I realize this isn’t on a par with, you know, being willing to degrade everything you touch by acting like some drunken public slag and treat people like lepers without whom you wouldn’t be where you are today, but it will have to do.  

“With all due respect, because I know you are coming from sincerity, manners in politics these days get you exactly nowhere. When the [’]other side[’] can say on national tv things like 911 widows and orphans are whores, it’s time to take the gloves off and join the fight on their turf. You want us to sit down, shut up and then raise our hands to see if they’ll acknowledge us? Ain’t gonna happen anymore, on either side.

Mommybrain, I could not possibly disagree with you more on this one. The goopers don’t hold exclusive title to the rules they play by, it’s true — but that’s no concern of ours because our project is (rather than learning to play their game by their rules) to impose our own game’s rules (#1 of which is “Integrity every day in every way”).

That said, I also disagree with Margaret’s first graf. What’s going on at FDL is never primarily superficial (though some of it is, because we’re sane human beings and want to stay that way). Rather, I think it’s our nice balance of serious weightiness and comic relief that keeps this multilogue fizzing so creatively along.

That one is, I grant you, tending to the superficial — but just as often, I watch our finest-minded Firedogs (Jane, Christy, Pach, Mary, Peterr, looseheadprop — and that’s just for starters) trotting about until they Find the Bone (i.e., something absolutely crucial to further our efforts on behalf of our nation’s well-being).

Jane did not mention that at one of the panel discussions, it was announced (by ReddHedd) that Wankette had lost her reporter’s notebook containing notes for a story she was working on, and would anyone who found it please return it. My first thought was, how awful. My second thought was, how could any reporter let that happen? Jane’s post suggests one answer…

Like another commenter, I would appreciate someone identifying the people in the photo. Some of us didn’t make it to YearlyKos and haven’t seen the faces that attach to names. In general, I think, it’s a good idea when posting a photo of people to identify the people in the photo. Just a thought…

Ana Marie Cox was coughed out of the Gawker media machinery, who’s sole purpose is self-promotion. Is it any wonder she parlayed ass-fucking into weenie-eating? She’s been part of the cocktail party circuit since the get go. Her Wonkette efforts amounted to little more than Entertainment Tonight changed to be on the web instead of TV and covering politicians instead of celebrities.

Bustednuckles at 13: That’s my congressman, sigh. He’s actually really good on a lot of issues (he’s a charter member of the Out of Iraq Caucus, hosted Murtha speaking in his district while he was getting swiftboated, he spoke on one of the shout shows about Schaivo and acquitted himself well, etc.) But he does have a tendency to periodically shoot off his mouth and get himself in trouble.

That said, the Sun Gazette, assuming it’s the successor paper to the Northern Virginia Sun, is the most (only?) conservative local paper, and I wouldn’t put it past them to make him look as bad as possible. (It rings a little false to me; I’ve never heard him use profanity at a public event, for example.) It’d be interesting to know the actual context. Unfortunately, no one else is likely to have taken notes, so if I find someone who was there after this many days, they probably won’t remember any better.

From a longtime lurker and occasional poster I just wanted to say what a kick it was to watch Jane and Christy on the Plame panel on CSPAN. I was so excited and happy to see it I watched it again on the CSPAN archives! I want to say a hugh thanks to Jane, Christy, Pach, TRex and all the moderators and commenters for providing a community to come to and feel a part of — and to feel that there is hope yet to turn our nation around.

It doesn’t seem that vital to pay attention, but halfway through the act, a Yearly Kos volunteer stops by the conversational knot I’m in and shushes us. It’s the first sign of militancy and while they may not be reaching for the bayonets, the audience stomps and hoots when Moulitsas takes the stage.

It is a place where gut feelings are tempered and shaped by intellect without losing any punch, which I believe is more effective than a no-holds-barred approach. I have no interest in being pulled down into the mud to wrestle with those who confuse mud-slinging with debate; that demeans me, and by extension, whatever it is I’m trying to say.

With respect to Margaret’s comments, what Jane said about Boxer - and what many echoed in the comments - was not mud-slinging. Boxer stuck her foot in her mouth, at a time, and in a place, where there is little tolerance for getting the facts wrong. Sending her a polite note on Crane’s stationery might be appropriate if Jane had noticed that Boxer’s bra strap was showing, but not for having misstated a central issue in a pivotal primary race.

Jane, I couldn’t agree with you more about W-ette. I was never taken in much by the W-ette phenominon, its content or the hype around it. I always seemed like a less caustic, less reichwingnut and web-based replication of the Ann Coulter phenominon (not even a real picture of her, just a slightly anime-influenced cartoon), which is NOT something to celebrate about today’s political commentariat.

IIRC he used to be a Republican and Larry Johnson is a self proclaimed conservative. Both of them have put their country before party loyalty. One day, that will be an important point in the history books, when Wankette won’t even warrant a foot note.

Frankly, I am so glad you and many of the women there flew under the radar. You got more done and made more of a difference while the young bucks “ran interference”. When things change, the establishment sycophants won’t know what hit ‘em.

Yes, it’s in-crowd. But it’s also important. Ana Marie Cox is the DC punditocracy’s pick to represent liberal bloggers, and she’s never been either of those things. The problem with her isn’t how vapid she is, it’s that she writes for Time under the pretense of being part of the liberal blogosphere. Whenever a blogger ethics panel is formed by the ethically-challenged corporate media they use her as the liberal representative. At which point she spends all of her time trying to sound witty by making insulting comments about people like Al Gore.

You don’t seem to understand: Ana has always gone for conservative guys. It was even weirder when I knew her in the early 90’s, since everything that came out of her mouth was man-hating pseudo-feminist crap that someone else had thought up for her. Why would she go on about the evils of conservative men, only to populate her crotch with them?

I don’t think FDL is superficial. I come here because it’s mostly not superficial, as far as Christy’s Posts and some of Jane’s about Plame are concerned. But, at times the meanness and just plain nastiness of Jane’s posts, especially about other women, seem terribly off the beam we should be riding to victory over evil Repubs. (And thanks, for agreeing, that integrity is #1 concern.) Who the heck cares about Wonkette? Cox is totally irrelevant.

Bustedknuckles at 42: Wow. Shushing her because she’s decided “it doesn’t seem that vital to pay attention” and is being an asshole at a public event is just a short step from becoming a torch-bearing mob willing to take up bayonets to wherever Kos directs us. That’s some serious self-centered attitude.

You’re right of course, Cox is totally irrelevant. While Cox is, at times , clueless, she seldom takes herself as seriously as Coulter or Malkin. I’ve certainly never taken Cox seriously, never seen her as an ‘expert’ on any subject you’d care to discuss with your mother.

I really wish people would stop acting as if readers get any input about what our blogmistresses blog. If a topic doesn’t interest you, you’ll know immediately from the picture and the headline — and you’ve got a mouse that clicks, right? These continuing editorial “recommendations” are a pain in the ass (sorry if that’s a W’ette trademarked phrase).

Plus mentions of “assuming a position” and “on her knees” … why do I feel like I’ve just walked into the girl’s washroom at a low-class roadhouse at the height of the evening. Cattiness does not become anyone.

FWIW, I watched the C-Span broadcast, the forum on the Plame affair was great - fabulous! Good work by all. Everyone came across as professional, determined and dedicated and in all, you gave me hope and inspiration. That’s pretty much what I want to remember and that’s why I’ll *always* read this blog.

Boxer’s foot-in-mouth enthusiastic support of Lieberman at YKos was the equivalent of announcing her support for a segregationist at an NAACP convention and then not understanding why the reporter even raised that question at that particular venue. The progressive blogosphere’s opposition to Lieberman goes to the heart of many of the issues that define us.

Earlier today I called Boxer’s office. I (very nicely) asked how could Boxer have done this at the convention. Did she not care? Or was this a failure of her staff to inform her? If she didn’t care, why did she bother to come and address us? If it was a breakdown of communications, is there something we could do to remedy that?

I might as well have been speaking to a brick wall. The staffer said she had taken this down and would pass it on. I asked about a response and was told I would have to get Boxer’s ear for that. I asked how I would do that and was told she didn’t know. End of conversation.

Sombrerofallout — You’re about 5 minutes away from being banned. You’re always implying some kind of secret knowledge of what goes on at Time Magazine and if you aren’t willing to make more than loaded insinuations you’re out of here. I’m not going to have that kind of bullshit game playing on this site.

Wolf’s Sit Room just had a couple pieces on YKos. One of their cyber babes did the screen touch routine…mostly relying on old pics/websites. Clearly they shoulda been there. When your biggest point is that Warner spent $50M on the party, you are totally clueless.

Jeff Greenfield on the other hand gave an historical perspective of the power of people-driven movements, starting with the civil rights movement’s beginning in churches. A thoughtful piece, well reasoned. Too bad he hadn’t actually been at the event. He and YKos would likely both have benefited. And yes, he gets netroots…and old media.

She goes to somebody else’s convention. Talks loudly enough during a session to be a distraction, attracting the attention of a volunteer “shusher.” Then has then nerve and/or utter lack of self-consciousness to write that her shushing was “the first sign of militancy.”

Never let it be said her ‘observations’ were factual: [continuing] “. . . and while they may not be reaching for the bayonets, the audience stomps and hoots when Moulitsas takes the stage.” Mebbe so, but in the AirAmerica broadcast audience response came across as quite restrained.

Part of what makes FDL great is the incredible wit and snark — those are tough to find, and precious commodities. Both Jane and Christy have the gift. Lots of online humor often comes across as mean and vulgar, so we’uns like our delicious FDL snark.

When I say take of the gloves and join the fight on their own turf, I don’t mean mudslinging or screechy name-calling (although I do have a fondness for snarky nicknames). What I mean is not sitting on our hands and taking whatever they dish anymore. It makes us seem weak.

I mean speaking up when they trash us and defending our positions LOUDLY AND PROUDLY and not letting them determine the direction of our conversations anymore. I realize I’m not one of the finer minds here and can’t always express myself with the eloquence of Mary or Rayne or Peterr, not to mention Jane or Christy, but I don’t mean we should bring the level of our discourse down to meet them.

This thread seems a bit tetchier than usual, eh y’all? We’re all in decompression from the weekend, even those who didn’t have to travel. Not a good time to take what Jane or anybody is saying as Grade-A 100%-pure Her, Him, or Me. But it IS a good time to allow all concerned a bit of extra space and time to come home to themselves. Yes?