« KENNEDY CAMPAIGN RELEASES STOLEN AD VIEWED BY KLOBUCHAR CAMPAIGN | Home | MARSHALL INDEPENDENT: BLOGGER SUGGESTS DRAMATIC RISE IN ’03 FIGURES COULD BE HIDING SLUSH FUND; LOCAL DFLER CALLS IT LATE-SEASON SMEAR TACTICS »
ATTACK MDE DAY IN THE LIBERAL BLOGOSPHERE
By Michael B. Brodkorb | September 26, 2006
Today was an amazing day in the liberal blogosphere in Minnesota. I don't think any blogger in Minnesota has been the target of such a coordinated assault like I was today with over 10 posts attacking me on 6 different blogs.
The majority of the attacks focused on a one-time payment I received from Michele Bachmann's campaign. This payment was properly and legally disclosed on Bachmann's FEC report over three weeks ago. I will remind my friends in the liberal blogosphere that I am under no legal obligation to disclose a professional business relationship with a campaign on my personal blog.
But my ethics are not governed by legal interpretations. This is why I have gone through the unprecedented efforts of creating a disclosure page on my blog. This page has taken longer to produce than I expected, but it will be posted in the next few days.
I previously wrote on Minnesota Democrats Exposed:
Bloggers in Minnesota do a great job of policing other bloggers with undisclosed professional connections to campaigns.
What I learned today is that liberal bloggers do a great job of policing conservative bloggers with undisclosed professional connections to campaigns. But liberal bloggers have no interest in policing other liberal bloggers even if their conduct damages the reputation of the blogosphere.
I believe there are liberal bloggers with undisclosed professional connections to campaigns. I know there are liberal bloggers who fail to post disclaimers on posts discussing their clients. I strongly believe there are numerous nervous liberal bloggers tonight who are worried about similar posts attacking their lack of disclosure. Don't worry, you won't be reading any posts attacking you Minnesota Democrats Exposed.
I have written before that the ultimate responsibility lies with each individual blogger to ensure they operate their blog without an inherent conflict of interest. As I am a Republican operative who exposes Minnesota Democrats, I am continually aware of my responsibility to disclose any conflict that could tarnish the effectiveness of my blog.
MY LIFE IS ONE BIG DISCLOSURE
What my friends in the liberal blogosphere fail to recognize (I thought of this as I was driving home from a phone bank) is that since I have chosen to work in politics I can't hide how I make a living. My life is one big disclosure.
You are able to attack my work for Mark Kennedy, because FEC rules require expenditures to be publicly reported. You are able to see that I was paid a one-time fee from Bachmann's campaign, because it was publicly disclosed. You are able to attack me for my work with the Campaign for St. Paul's Future, because it was publicly disclosed. You can attack my previous employment with the Republican Party of Minnesota because it was properly disclosed.
Is this fair? Yes, it is and I wouldn't have it any other way. My life is one big disclosure.
In a matter of minutes, anyone with an internet connection can find out more about me than you can your average blogger. I've got nothing to hide.
Sadly, I would like to express my personal disappointment in the conduct of Robin Marty from Power Liberal. Yesterday, I received an email from Robin asking for confirmation that I make $4500 a month as a part-time consultant to Mark Kennedy's campaign. I decided to call Robin on her cell phone and I informed her that I am technically paid $4583 per month.
I asked Robin why she was asking and she said she was writing a post about "the salaries of staffers on U.S. Senate campaigns."
I was very surprised when I read Robin's post and discovered what her story was actually about.
Upon further thought, I believe Robin's answer to my specific question was technically accurate, but purposely deceptive. I left numerous messages for Robin to contact me today, but I haven't received a return phone call or a response to sent emails. I assume that Robin's lack of response is a evidence that she may be embarrassed about her conduct.
Robin achieved her goal of writing a post attacking me, but in the process she lost a fan of her work and an ally in the blogosphere.
In numerous media interviews I have plugged the work of Robin and her blogs Power Liberal and DFL Senate. I won't be making that mistake again.
In closing, I will repeat that what my friends in the liberal blogosphere fail to recognize is that since I have chosen to work in politics I can't hide how I make a living. My life is one big disclosure.
You are able to attack my work for Mark Kennedy, because FEC rules require expenditures to be publicly reported. You are able to see that I was paid a one-time fee from Bachmann's campaign, because it was publicly reported. You are able to attack me for my work with the Campaign for St. Paul's Future, because it was publicly disclosed. You can attack my previous employment with the Republican Party of Minnesota because it was properly disclosed.
Is this fair? Yes, it is and I wouldn't have it any other way.
I'll fight a disclosure war with the liberal blogosphere any day of the week. I've got nothing to hide – do you?
Topics: Uncategorized | 51 Comments »
51 Responses to “ATTACK MDE DAY IN THE LIBERAL BLOGOSPHERE”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
September 26th, 2006 at 10:49 pm
All right, let’s find out who is paying Publius. I bet if $1,000 was put up as a finder’s fee, we would find out who is paying the bills. Who’s in for 100?
September 26th, 2006 at 10:55 pm
Mike, Obviously Leftys cannot tolerate honesty. I’t’s also equally obvious to me that lefty bloggers are dishonest hypocrites and live in darkness. You expose their lack of character, lies, double-standards and dialectic rants to the light. Their hope is to make your life so miserable so that they can continue to operate in the dark. Exposure is painful.
September 26th, 2006 at 10:57 pm
You do NOT owe anyone any information MB.
What is posted by law is posted for that reason.
This is a blog!
Unregulated and uncensored.
You could be robbing Lithuanian grandmothers every other tuesday to pay for this…your income is no one’s business here!
Posted on Michele’s site is enough.
White Liberal Guilt mavhine at work…cause that’s all they’ve got…with a heapin’ of jealousy!
Let ‘em eat dog buscuits!
They’ll all be Republican’s by the time their forty anyways!
Forge on! Mum up!
You see the cock-eyed things they write don’t you?
And Noah is under investigation by the FBI!
You are head and shoulders above that conduct and that ilk!
September 26th, 2006 at 10:58 pm
I really appreciate your integrety, It is really refreshing, and you really are setting an example for other bloggers, I just hope they would follow it.
September 26th, 2006 at 10:59 pm
Well that post wasn’t self righteous at all. But in all fairness, anyone who reads your blog knows that that there is a certain bias, thus the name, “Minnesota Democrats Exposed.” Clearly you’re going to go after Democrats. You want Mark Kennedy to win, and you’re willing to help out, and are glad to get paid for it. This isn’t really a legitimate attack. It would be, if you were a sort of mercenary blogger, but I doubt that you’d start posting mean things about John Kline if Coleen Rowley paid you to. You have an agenda, that agenda is clear to all that visit your site. End of story.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:00 pm
Maybe it never occurred to you that you tick people off when you knowingly distort “facts” to match your predetermined truth. Those that live by the sword, die by the sword. And no, before you start jumping up and down like a monkey, that’s not a threat.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:06 pm
Is this fair? Yes, it is and I wouldn’t have it any other way. My life is one big disclosure.
Mike, the question is not whether you’ve disclosed adequately–the answer, really, is no, but it’s beside the point.
The fact is that you’re being paid $4500 a month from the Kennedy campaign, and that you’re trying to claim independence from the Kennedy campaign at the same time. That just doesn’t wash. You can’t be a press consultant for Kennedy, paid more that his press secretary, and then go home at night and swap brains and become Mike Brodkorb, private citizen. It doesn’t work that way, and it’s–yes, Mike–unethical.
As for Robin’s horrid transgression–I fail to see it. You’re not owed a faxed copy of a story from a reporter just because it’s about you. Robin didn’t want to tip you off to the story’s content, but what she did disclose was accurate. And if you’re worth $4500 a month part-time, you should know that.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:07 pm
***I have written before that the ultimate responsibility lies with each individual blogger to ensure they operate their blog without an inherent conflict of interest.***
ROFLM(C)AO!!!!
Yeah, “right”.
MDE is the epitome of the collapse of credibility.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:13 pm
What a bunch of self righteous CRAP! “MY LIFE IS ONE BIG DISCLOSURE” is a straight out lie from someone who ran this blog for a long time without being willing to admit it was you!
You were hiding out throwing mud and being anonymous. You were outed by some blogger who saw your name on a post you emailed to your blog.
You are a liar.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:15 pm
Nut Up sugar britches.
If you want to destroy people for a living, don’t start crying when they start doing the same to you. In the few times that we have talked, you never stuck me as the sort of guy who would run crying to mommy when people started calling you names.
You have ridden the wave of credible blogger for far too long. Now it is time for you to reap what you have sewn. If you are proud of what you have chosen to do for a living, you should have no problem dealing with the consequences.
But seriously, quit your crying. None of us care.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:18 pm
Jeff: You’re simply wrong.
“That just doesn’t wash. You can’t be a press consultant for Kennedy, paid more that his press secretary, and then go home at night and swap brains and become Mike Brodkorb, private citizen. It doesn’t work that way, and it’s–yes, Mike–unethical.”
Why is it unethical?
September 26th, 2006 at 11:19 pm
Jeff: BTW: you’d loving nothing more than for my blog to go away. Just because you say it is unethical doesn’t make it so.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:36 pm
I find this whole string of comments hysterical.
Lefties who defend nonanswers and outright lies fro Entenza, Hatch, Klobuchar, Ellison, Walz. . . do you want me to keep going?
You arrogant nuts want to be critical of someone for not going above and beyond?
The credibility of the Left is shot. Give it up.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:38 pm
Sooner or later Michael the chickens come back to roost, (ie… and you will go back to wearing your chicken suit) or has that already happened?
September 26th, 2006 at 11:42 pm
It has been said that the way to combat speech is with more speech.
It is incredible to me that Liberals (that used to be a good word) don’t see it this way anymore.
Stand your ground Michael. The fact that you disclose anything is not necessary and should be a bonus for these anti-liberals who criticize.
Speech and debate are healthy, always.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:46 pm
Heff:
You are loopy here!
With intellect comes discretion.
MB uses his ability to discern fact from fiction.
His professionalism should not be in question here at all.
THIS is HIS Blog! Not yours!
If you don’t like it…go away!
I hope that your fussiness here stems from some unspeakable rash or something because you are not sounding rational to the rest of us!
MDE could state that the sky is falling and at what speed and over a specific DFLer and you cannot do a thing avout it. It is HIS Blog!!!!!!!!!!
He can collect aluminum cans and pay for this blog and his life if he wants to and it is NONE of your business.
So as they say on the Capitol One spots…
‘What’s in your wallet?’
Step up and tell us how you finance your life if you are going to post here buddy!!!! C’mon big guy!!! Who pays you what??? Show me the money! Or we will consider your comments tainted here too…which side of the bread and by who???
Or we won’t listen anymore!
Give it up!
September 26th, 2006 at 11:47 pm
The basis of many of our liberties came from the works of “Liberal” bloggers; the real Publius.
It gets frustrating reading people of that name (and their friends) critical of the exact type of dialogue they take the name of.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:53 pm
I think it is rich to see a bunch of commies try to post about how much value there is to any good or service.
To you useless wannabe bloggers who write every day against the creation of wealth, don’t tell any of us about what you think a job is worth until you learn that Marx is dead.
September 27th, 2006 at 12:01 am
Michael,
Don’t be discouraged by a couple of posts by a small group of people whose collective blog traffic only exists because you link to them.
While their mommies are letting them have blogger sleep overs, you are out earning a living.
That is a good thing, not a bad thing, no matter what the collectivists preach.
September 27th, 2006 at 12:08 am
Well, there’s only one way it can be ethical: admit, flatly, that you’re blogging for the Kennedy campaign as a paid staffer for the Kennedy campaign.
Come on, Mike: you’d laugh me out of town if I was taking even $500 a month from Klobuchar for anything, and then writing paeans to Amy’s wornder and hit pieces on Kennedy. You’d never accept that my writing was independent. And you’d be right. (And guess what? If any Dems are trying to play the same game, go ahead and out them. It wouldn’t be right either way.)
That doesn’t mean you can’t blog independently–you can. But you’re trying to have it both ways. You’re trying to be a paid Kennedy staffer and an independent voice. That doesn’t work–especially when your output spikes after you start getting paychecks.
As far as I can tell, you’re being willfully obtuse. So let me make this incredibly simple: either be upfront and blog for Kennedy (as Mark Gisleson did with Blog for Bell) or blog on issues unrelated to campaigns you’re working for.
Anything else is unethical, because you’re lying to your readers, and claiming to be something–independent–that you cannot possibly be.
September 27th, 2006 at 12:13 am
And Mike, I can think of about 5,000 things that I’d like more than to see your blog go away, including but not limited to a good ham sandwich, an extra hour of sleep, and $10,000 a month from campaigns to do part-time hit pieces on their opponents.
September 27th, 2006 at 1:20 am
Keep at it Michael, the shear fact that they hate you so much means that you are to good at what you do.
September 27th, 2006 at 1:50 am
In this age of wide-open bare-knuckle politics, who would run for high office, like US Rep or even Senator JUST for the money? It’s just not worth it. Today, hundreds if not thousands of amateur reporters–bloggers—are looking over your shoulder, at every comment, every vote, all the time. That’s a good thing, but because of that, the money is not enough. You have to want to accomplish something important to go through all that other … stuff. EVEN Amy Klobuchar could probably make a lot more money in the private sector as a board member and private attorney, and not lose all her spare time, not lose all her privacy, and not have 40% of her constituents think she’s a leftwing hack, which she is. Left or Right, I don’t think very many in politics are doing this for the money. If they are doing it for the money, they’re just not too bright.
September 27th, 2006 at 2:01 am
I was just thinking after I read that post “gee, my Journalism degree only came from the University of Minnesota, but man I don’t remember any professor ever saying you couldn’t write about whatever you are interested in in your own free time.”
I mean ok it isn’t Harvard, but I did get an A in ethics, so I think I’d remember that.
September 27th, 2006 at 2:12 am
If your life is one big disclosure, the why didn’t you disclose in the beginning? And why didn’t you disclose the Bachmann connection? If your life is one big disclosure, you would have. And it may not be unethical, but it sure does hurt your credibility, which is why I imagine you just had this meltdown blaming liberal bloggers for pointing out the facts.
September 27th, 2006 at 4:31 am
You’re obviously fair game for all the liberal blog posts, especially learning about who you’re paid to work for in politics. Having the tables turned is, well, more than appropriate.
I struggle with wearing different hats myself. I was paid (not much) to make an online ad for your best friend Keith Ellison, which I posted on Minnesota Stories and disclosed. Everything else I post is independent, though my bias is rather clear.
So I’m not sure what to make of Jeff’s comment. Speaking for myself, I try to be “fair and balanced” on Minnesota Stories while not hiding my heart of a liberal. On rare ocassions (once) I get paid to do something for a campaign that I already supported anyway. On New Patriot, the context is already a liberal blog and I feel free to be partisan there.
One other minor point – I think being a paid campaign staffer on an ongoing basis is ever-so-slightly different than a one-time paid consulting gig. Blogging is an ongoing activity and I think the campaign connection is indeed stronger and blurrier .
We’re definitely in a gray area, but I don’t think there’s anything unethical going on as long as you disclose who is paying you.
September 27th, 2006 at 5:44 am
Little thin skinned, aren’t you Michael?
What I saw was stories that revealed the amount you were being paid, and questioning whether that influences your blog.
It’s a fair question and a fair conclusion.
You have no honor when it comes to ruining people’s lives for your political gain, and you poison the party you claim to represent.
September 27th, 2006 at 6:17 am
Stop being so thin-skinned, Micheal. You’ve put yourself in this position, and you like it.
People are going after you, sometimes on thin logic? Well, that’s what you do to other people every day on this blog.
Get over yourself.
September 27th, 2006 at 6:45 am
I think it is a valid point to raise is when you advise a campaign on press issues, then, the question is whether you are blogging on behalf of the campaign or on your own behalf.
It’s also fair to ask all bloggers to disclose their relationships to campaigns. On Dump Bachmann, it’s pretty clear the message isn’t coordinated with the Wetterling campaign. In fact, I don’t think the Wetterling campaign is particularly fond of Dump Bachmann.
September 27th, 2006 at 6:45 am
Michael,
Let’s say I wrote post after post bashing private schools and proponents of vouchers. I did this all day long during normal work hours. And then after a few weeks someone caught wind that I worked for the Public School system. How could I honestly and effectively claim ‘independence’ when I have vested interest in the outcome, both personally and financially. I couldn’t, and no reasonable person could believe for an instant they could either. Why is that such a difficult concept for you?
You know what the real sad part is, we have to explain this to you and you still refuse to understand what is wrong here.
Flash
September 27th, 2006 at 7:36 am
HAHAHAHAHA! These lefty’s are pissed off because MDE makes more part time than they do all year!
Here’s a clue dingleberries; in this world, you gets what ya pays for. MDE has a track record of shredding scumbags like Keith X Hakim-Ellison and Matt Entenza into bite sized bits.
The format that MDE uses, setting his hook by degrees, builds anticipation….it keeps people interested and coming back. Besides, is just good, clean fun to watch all of you lefty morons twist in the wind awhile…hahahahaa!
MDE produces positive results and also demoralizes his opposition which is why the Kennedy campaign is getting a bargain, and they know it.
But hey, really, don’t get me wrong…there’s nothing wrong with working at the SuperAmerica either. Keep that coffee fresh and someday you goofballs will all be managers!
Hahahahahahahaaaaaaa!
September 27th, 2006 at 7:45 am
One bit of advice vis-a-vis palling up with lefty’s MDE..
“Robin didn’t want to tip you off to the story’s content, but what she did disclose was accurate.”
What did you expect from either Robin Marty, or Fecke, or any lefty for that matter…really?
These are the kinds of people who stoop to hire private investigators to dig up dirt about their own fellow party members and then e-mail the results to the oposition.
These are the people who have made a religion of parsing the meaning of is….if you know what’s good for you you’ll not be taking ANYTHING they say at face value….remember what happened when you agreed to talk to the Dumpster Queen?
Keep ‘em at arms length, and stick to shredding them.
September 27th, 2006 at 8:08 am
It goes around and it comes around.
One day you’re shaking Karl Rove’s hand and taking the big money, and the next you find you’ll say anything to keep it coming.
Keep looking for a good story.
September 27th, 2006 at 8:18 am
Come on lefties. Where is your cry for free speech. Does M.B. not have a right to his opinion and the right to express it. Why are you trying to silence him.
He is being honest about his affiliations. Just because he didn’t disclose his wage does not make him unethical. Half the liberal blogger out there don’t even disclose their name.
September 27th, 2006 at 8:19 am
Beward Mike, if they can’t throw enough “hate-speech” at you , these loonies will find somone you knew years ago to claim they heard you use the “N” word! If they lose the argument, they are reduced to charging their political enemies to racism. Sick puppies – all of them!
September 27th, 2006 at 8:43 am
[filtering out the lunatic noise]
Read Rew’s article.
The big problem she raises is that – contrary to your claims upon being hired by Kennedy – your coverage of the Senate race doubled and you’re being fed private information by the campaign.
Essentially, there’s abundant evidence to show you’re not an independent blogger. Again, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that, but your disclaimer rings false. Like Swiftee says, “the Kennedy campaign is getting a bargain.”
September 27th, 2006 at 8:57 am
Chuck: did you get paid by ellison’s campaign to create an ad? why don’t you disclose that on your blog everytime you post on Ellison?
September 27th, 2006 at 9:01 am
This thread has been enlightening. Liberals cannot stand it when the light of truth is shown on them, exposing their lack of morals and reason. When logic and truth is offered, they respond with name-calling and a profound determination to silence the opposition.
After they exposed Michael’s name (hoping to silence MDE), this blog became a more popular and powerful tool against them.
Michael, keep your light bright and your convictions strong. You have exposed Democrat liberals for what they are: empty shells with loud mouths.
September 27th, 2006 at 9:21 am
Chuck doesn’t want his registered domestic partner to find out Ellison paid him in “jujubes”…Bwahahaha.
Hahaha..oh wait, wait..I get it.
The lefty’s are parsing the meaning of “This is a reminder that I am a part-time consultant to Mark Kennedy’s U.S. Senate campaign. Minnesota Democrats Exposed is not created, endorsed, sponsored, or authorized by any political party, candidate, or candidate’s committee.”
Ahhahahahaha!
I guess that depends on what the meaning of “This is” is…right? Right?
Bwaaahahahahahahaaha
Here’s a clue goofballs.
It wouldn’t matter if MDE was still a full time permanent employee of the GOP. The crimes, lies, treachery, deceits and pandering of the left that he publishes for the world to see are always eventually proven as facts.
He’s dropped a big steaming turd of your own making into your party punchbowl and you’re all twisting in the wind…I-LOVE-IT!!
September 27th, 2006 at 9:24 am
I am amazed at the liberals on this site. Ok. let’s see, it’s an non-presidential election year, so the next biggest race at the top of the ticket is for U.S. Senate. Michael runs a blog dedicated to exposing the activities & tactics of Minnesota Democrats, and AKlo just happens to be one. She has a checkered past that she is trying to hide (lobbyist, ineffective & demoralizing manager of HCAO, carbon copy of the most unliked member of the U.S. Seante Mark Dayton) and local media outlets including her daddy’s paper are going to run cover for her right up until election day. Do you really think that Michael is going to ignore these things just because he’s getting paid to be a consultant to Kennedy? Has he not been doing this exact same thing long before he had these types of relationships? I’m not sure what kind of value system you’re basing your charges of “unethical”, but it certainly doesn’t ring true to me. This is a partisan blog and a damn good one, and if Michael held back and let AKlo coast to election day right along with the Strib I’d have to question his sanity.
At the same time, the same bloggers are making excuses for Noah’s lawbreaking (despite Chuck’s best efforts to obfuscate the issue he did steal intellectual property and pass it on to a competing campaign). That kind of hypocrisy takes a lot of chutzpah, but it’s what I’ve come to expect from the DFL.
September 27th, 2006 at 9:33 am
“All right, let’s find out who is paying Publius. I bet if $1,000 was put up as a finder’s fee, we would find out who is paying the bills. Who’s in for 100?”
I’m in for $100! I’ll check with Matt, but he’s pretty broke…
Hugs,
Jon-David
September 27th, 2006 at 9:38 am
I strongly believe there are numerous nervous liberal bloggers tonight who are worried about similar posts attacking their lack of disclosure. Don’t worry, you won’t be reading any posts attacking you Minnesota Democrats Exposed.
Chuck: did you get paid by ellison’s campaign to create an ad? why don’t you disclose that on your blog everytime you post on Ellison?
Well, that didn’t last.
September 27th, 2006 at 10:20 am
***Well, that didn’t last.
Comment by Jeff Fecke — September 27, 2006 @ 9:38 am ***
Pointing out that the collapse of credibility is complete.
September 27th, 2006 at 10:37 am
Well, Michael. Since you say your contract with the Kennedy campaign provides you with no additional material for your website, I would imagine you would allow liberal bloggers equal access to the candidate and the materials that you deal with over there, you know, just to keep everything on the level?
If not, I think the Kennedy campaign needs to start reporting this blog as an in-kind contributionm and then also amend all past FEC filings since you came aboard to make this correction as well.
September 27th, 2006 at 10:43 am
[Jeff: heh.]
This is exactly the point I’m raising. At what point does a blogger, of whatever political stripe, cease to become “independent”? How much do you have to get paid, or over how long, or how much volunteer time? Does it make a difference if you’re a paid staffer vs. a single work-for-hire or consultation gig?
I don’t think there’s a cut-and-dry answer, but these are all factors. I’m happy to bring up Ellison, even though it distracts attention away from your paid blogging for Kennedy, because I think we should discuss what really is fair for any political blogger.
I did a single work-for-hire ad for the Ellison campaign and disclosed that anywhere the ad was posted. Beyond that I’m not on Ellison’s payroll, so I don’t think it’s necessary to post a disclosure about the ad on unrelated, independent blog posts. If reasonable minds in the blogging community feel differently, I’m all ears.
Perhaps Kennedy isn’t comfortable with your tactics and smears (i.e. Patrick Timmons). Kennedy’s campaign provided you with transcripts of Timmons’ voicemail, for example. It’s that “joined-at-the-hip” level of involvement with Kennedy’s campaign that betray your blogging motives. You’re a paid attack dog for the Kennedy campaign on this blog – why not be open about it?
September 27th, 2006 at 10:48 am
I’m not paid to blog. It’s just that simple. I chose what I want to post. It’s all me baby.
September 27th, 2006 at 11:00 am
The thing I keep thinking about in reading these comments is: “consider the source” — that old Marxist trick.
In the end, Michael’s background and relationships are all that matter to our friends on the Left. It allows them, as they so often do, to avoid the painful facts.
`He’s just biased’.
Maybe. But what he says is the truth. And that’s more important.
September 27th, 2006 at 12:33 pm
May I be so bold as to ask Mr. Brodkorb a question? Did you or did you not write/make this statement?
“I couldn’t blog on Minnesota Democrats Exposed and work on a campaign. No campaign manager or candidate would allow me to continuing blogging on Minnesota Democrats Exposed and work on their campaign at the same time.”
If you did make the statement, please explain what has made you change your stance? It would seem that by simply getting paid by a certain campaign, you would be working for that campaign.
I want to say that I find the above quote to be a very honorable one, which is why I am asking the question.
September 27th, 2006 at 8:17 pm
I’m sure Gisleson could choose whatever he wanted to blog about for Ford Bell, and was getting paid about $4k less. You’re still a paid Kennedy attack dog on this blog. Ruff.
September 27th, 2006 at 11:01 pm
I’m trying to figure out why Tim Pawlenty or Michele Bachmann would have to pay someone so much money to write nice things about them or mean things about their opponents. Aren’t they worthy of such support from a true believer like Michael Brodkorb without the payout? I mean, what does it say about your popularity if you have to pay staunch supporters to write nice things about you?
Or, as some have pointed out in the comments, apparently Michael WAS a supporter before he was paid, but became TWICE the supporter he was once his pockets were lined. Before someone goes on another “it probably seems like a lot of money to a liberal” rant, the influence of the money on Michael’s posting patterns speaks for itself.
While money can’t buy you love, apparently it can buy you attack dog$ for right price.
September 28th, 2006 at 8:58 am
So Michael, why do you keep deleting my epithet-free comments?