The Lessons Continue
Why do political campaign advisors urge against having an active blog or engaging in dialogue with opposition? Because it's bad enough to have negative linkage to one of your blog entries, but worse if they start hammering you with repetition. Most advisors will tell the candidate- dump the blog and ignore the blogger.
Consider the dialogue. I said I thought his analysis was too literal, extracting a few words at the expense of the spirit of the commentary. He turned that around to suggest that I should therefore never be taken literally, on anything, especially on policy issues. His third post willfully ignores the fact that my comments were on a radio network, which is an interest of mine, and tied it to my candidacy. It's a ridiculous stretch, but that's what opponents will do, which is why you shut up; stick to the talking points; be an empty suit; and if you're going to blog at all, keep it to tales from the trail and pictures with farmers, auto workers, and retirees.
Oh well, I guess it's just not my style. For one thing, I tend to agree with the Oscar Wilde wisdom on being talked about or not. I have faith that many of the readers of his blog will read what I've said and not find it a reason to actively campaign against me. True, others won't be so open minded, but that being the case, I probably never would win them over anyway.
Really, if anyone wants to put my picture and name in a prominent place on their blog, all I ask is that you link back to this blog or my campaign site and spell the name correctly: K-O-L-E. I'd be delighted if a 1,000 bloggers assailed my comments on Air America within the next three days. Or, perhaps Daily Kos could. That would be delightful!