MY RESPONSE TO POLITICS IN MINNESOTA
I didn't think Sarah or Blois would make the situtaion any worse by commenting on Blois' lawsuit. I just lost $20.
##
Let The Games Begin
[Publishers' note: This story was written solely by PIM publisher Sarah Janecek. PIM publisher Blois Olson got to read it, but he was not allowed to change a word.]
[Since the publishers of Politics In Minnesota rarely sign their stories, it's nice to know that Sarah wrote this response.]
2006 certainly started out with a bang.
My co-publisher, Blois Olson, filed a lawsuit against a GOP blogger, Michael Brodkorb, who writes at minnesotademocratsexposed.com. A tough suit to file, because it's sooooo inside baseball.
[ A tough suit to file, because it's sooooo inside baseball? I was unaware the First Amendment was "inside baseball." I was unaware the concept of Free Speech was "inside baseball." It was a tough lawsuit to file because it is weak.]
If I were Blois, I would have done the same thing.
This is why I care. Blois did what other prominent public relations firms have done. He got started in politics after college and then started a public relations firm which evolved into not having political consulting clients. Some corporate clients care deeply about neutrality, partisanship and bipartisanship when it comes their PR guns.
Our stories in PIM about Coleen Rowley's failing congressional bid were not retribution for Blois' New School Communications not getting hired because New School didn't apply. End of story.
To the blogosphere. Opine away. Rip Blois apart. Rip me apart.
[If Blois' lawsuit had any merit, bloggers wouldn't. Better yet, don't tell bloggers what to do. Bloggers can make up their own minds without suggestions from Politics In Minnesota.]
But do let your conscience be your guide. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the late, great U.S. Democratic Senator from New York, said, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."
The publications entitled Politics In Minnesota--and the people who write them and opine in other media--always disclose a conflict.
[Sounds like a bet to me.]
UPDATE: I just received this from a dedicated reader of Minnesota Democrats Exposed.
Clearly Sarah is trying to humanize this thing by creating sympathy for Blois.
1. Blois started this. If he's been right all along why does SJ need to defend him?
2. Blois' life story is nice to read about, but this is about freedom of speech, not Blois' life story. That is the height of arrogance.
3. Blois is not the victim here. The courts are the victims of abuse (frivolous lawsuit) as are the bologgers who stand to lose their freedoms.
4. Wy Spano and DJ Leary were partisan Dems and so is Blois. Why else would Sarah want him for PIM?
##
Let The Games Begin
[Publishers' note: This story was written solely by PIM publisher Sarah Janecek. PIM publisher Blois Olson got to read it, but he was not allowed to change a word.]
[Since the publishers of Politics In Minnesota rarely sign their stories, it's nice to know that Sarah wrote this response.]
2006 certainly started out with a bang.
My co-publisher, Blois Olson, filed a lawsuit against a GOP blogger, Michael Brodkorb, who writes at minnesotademocratsexposed.com. A tough suit to file, because it's sooooo inside baseball.
[ A tough suit to file, because it's sooooo inside baseball? I was unaware the First Amendment was "inside baseball." I was unaware the concept of Free Speech was "inside baseball." It was a tough lawsuit to file because it is weak.]
If I were Blois, I would have done the same thing.
[Sarah, I wish you would have told me this before you invited me on your radio program last week. I won't make that mistake again.]
Clients, jobs, elections--they all come and go. Integrity and reputation last a lifetime. That's what this lawsuit is about. And, in that vein and to some degree, my integrity and reputation have been challenged, as well.This is why I care. Blois did what other prominent public relations firms have done. He got started in politics after college and then started a public relations firm which evolved into not having political consulting clients. Some corporate clients care deeply about neutrality, partisanship and bipartisanship when it comes their PR guns.
[If Blois is so concerned about "netrality" then why does he appear on TV and radio as a Democrat consultant. Why is quoted in the newspaper as a Democrat consultant?]
Another reason I care relates to Politics In Minnesota. Blois has continued the honest, rich and sometimes difficult tradition established by former PIM editors and political pundits D.J. Leary and Wy Spano. A tradition continued by this publication, the next generation of PIM. That tradition is that in our newsletter writing and political punditry, when an issue comes up that affects a client, we always disclose our connection. "Secretive spinning" is simply not allowed.Our stories in PIM about Coleen Rowley's failing congressional bid were not retribution for Blois' New School Communications not getting hired because New School didn't apply. End of story.
To the blogosphere. Opine away. Rip Blois apart. Rip me apart.
[If Blois' lawsuit had any merit, bloggers wouldn't. Better yet, don't tell bloggers what to do. Bloggers can make up their own minds without suggestions from Politics In Minnesota.]
But do let your conscience be your guide. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the late, great U.S. Democratic Senator from New York, said, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."
The publications entitled Politics In Minnesota--and the people who write them and opine in other media--always disclose a conflict.
[Sounds like a bet to me.]
UPDATE: I just received this from a dedicated reader of Minnesota Democrats Exposed.
Clearly Sarah is trying to humanize this thing by creating sympathy for Blois.
1. Blois started this. If he's been right all along why does SJ need to defend him?
2. Blois' life story is nice to read about, but this is about freedom of speech, not Blois' life story. That is the height of arrogance.
3. Blois is not the victim here. The courts are the victims of abuse (frivolous lawsuit) as are the bologgers who stand to lose their freedoms.
4. Wy Spano and DJ Leary were partisan Dems and so is Blois. Why else would Sarah want him for PIM?
6 Comments:
If I were Blois, I would have done the same thing.
Exactly why Sarah has absolutely no credibility even commenting on this story. Worse, she used her PAID SUBSCRIPTION-BASED publication to support someone who apparently doesn't believe in free speech. If I were paying for her rag, I'd cancel. But I knew better...see below...
Integrity and reputation last a lifetime.
I think the first time I ever ran across Sarah (or someone who looks exactly like her...which I doubt) was in 1990, or 1992, at the Republican State Convention. It was the first state convention I'd ever attended.
We were sitting in the back, left section. It was during some of the humdrum time when people were discussing resolutions and such. A boring time if ever there was one.
Sarah and a friend or two of hers sat a few rows behind me. Mocking. Making snide comments. Acting childish. Generally making a mockery of anyone she disagreed with. Especially anyone related to the pro-life side of the debate.
It was embarrassing.
It's one thing to disagree, it's another to sit there arrogantly openly mocking people. Disagree, no problem. But go to the microphone and have the guts to say so.
To my knowledge I've never met the woman and don't much care to now. But she is right, a reputation lasts a lifetime and she ruined hers for me one that one day 14-16 years ago.
(Should I await the lawsuit?)
This is really getting old... Have your day in court, Michael - but I'd rather read your political gossip - rather than about your pissing match with Blois.
I'm trying to get a grasp as to why this is considered a 'free speech' issue. Blogs are out in the public. You made an accusation. An accusation that is negative. If it is true, then no problem. Stand and fight. Good scoop. That's what blogging is for.
If it is false - and you made an error - then retract it.
More importantly, if your accusations turn out to be false - and you refuse to retract them - and what you wrote turns out to be something that could damage the career of another person, then that person has every right to sue.
In other words, freedom of speech does not mean that people can make accusations in the public arena that are either knowingly false or subsequently pointed out to be false.
Again, if what you wrote ended up being false, then how would your defense be 'freedom of speech"?
As I said and other DFLers have, it couldn't happen to a nicer guy. Blois is no friend of the Left. Ironic that only one coming out on his side in his defense is a noted Republican.
----
John,
in 1990 maybe Sarah was laughing and mocking you fakes because your endorsee for Governor was caught skinney dipping with underage girls. Such family values. Let's see where his stance on abortion would have been had the 14 year old gotten pregnant.
What happened you say?
Well, with a few weeks left and ballot deadlines closed, the Republcans had to abandoned their ethically challenged candidate and beg pro-choice, uber moderate State Auditor Arne Carlson to run. DFL Secretary of State Joan Growe and Attorney General Skip Humphrey, bent the law (unlike the GOP actions in 2002), and allowed Auditor Carlson on the ballot for Governor with only few weeks left.
Mind you, their candidate didn't die in a crash. He was busted for being the immoral two-faced pervert that the Party (including his campaign manager, young Tim Pawlenty) tried to shove on us as governor.
Carlson wins election, Sarah goes on as a GOP operative and the religeous fakes on the Right cry in their soup for a few years. Somewhere in there you made itto the legislature but, then wa discovered to be outside of the mainstream and tossed to the curb.
Hell I would have been laughing too.
Gee, it's nice to always have you around. You'd make a great fiction writer.
By the way, I liked Arne Carlson. Didn't always agree with him but I did like him as a Governor.
I just don't see how this amounts to denying MDE of his freedom of speech.
I also do not agree that anonymity = free speech.
I think that anonymity allows someone to speak without any sort of persecution or possibly retribution.
Just as we all have the right to speak freely (this has obviously not changed for MDE), one has the right to defend their name if it has been defamed.
However, I am not saying that I agree with this particular lawsuit. It doesn't seem to be up to snuff.
Post a Comment
<< Home