Thursday, July 01, 2010
Democrats Taking Back the Tennessee House is NOT Based in Reality
Despite our minor dust-ups over the years, Randy Neal (aka "South Knox Bubba") is a liberal blogger who I do respect. No, really. I'm serious. Randy does excellent work.
Randy is very strong at analysis of past events, and he probably missed his calling when he didn't go into investigative reporting. That plays to his strength.
But where Randy isn't good is in predicting election results. That's actually being kind. He sucks like a bilge pump. (I mean, he's no Mike Silence, so perhaps I'm being a little harsh...) He lets his heart have the final say after his head has done all of the legwork. You can't let that happen, because you're setting yourself up for heartbreak. I may not have wanted Barack Obama to win in 2008, but I didn't say that McCain was going to shock the world a few weeks out from Election Day. Likewise, I looked at wonks that said that Jim Bryson would stay within single-digits of Phil Bredesen in 2006 like they were mad. (Said wonks know who you are.) I think the world of Jim Bryson and believe this country would be a better place if more people gave of themselves as he does, but that didn't stop me from lecturing them that a 29-point beatdown was coming. (Even I couldn't see the 39-point margin of victory in that race, but at least I didn't let what I wanted - a win for "Big Jim" - overshadow by predictive skills.)
Which leads us to Randy's post over at KnoxViews today. Randy maps out how the Democrats can take back the Tennessee House this year. Yes, this year, in a year where Democrats are going to be dragged down by a national perception that they are mortgaging America's future for more government control and that the Democratic leadership is incapable of handling problems, from the mundane to the catastrophic. I thought 2006 was a toxic year for Republicans, and, generally, that ended up being correct. I don't think that even comes close to how bad this year could be for the Democrats. If the Republicans quit bickering amongst themselves (and I only mention that because some of the pseudo-Republicans, like the Republican Liberty Caucus, are only in this for themselves and could try to burn Rome since it can't be Eden), this could be a solid year for the Grand Old Party.
Randy's post should make most Republicans in Tennessee see how close we are to our goal of being able to draw the district lines in a manner that makes sense (take a look at our congressional districts for an example of districts not making sense) and eliminates the Democratic safeguards that have been allowed their Party to remain relevant at a time when they clearly are not in the Volunteer State.
Some of Randy's Republican targets are hilarious. Debra Maggert? REALLY? Look, Debra and I had a pretty bad turn this year about her ill-advised attempt to open up our juvenile courts to public eyes for crimes of a sexual nature, but Debra is VERY popular in her district. Same goes for Beth Harwell. And while I may like Nathan Vaughn and believe his loss in 2008 to be one of the few races I have incorrectly called this decade, I just don't see his momentum in Kingsport. Not now. I've been up in that neck of the woods recently, and areas where he had pockets of support are securely in Tony Shipley's corner now. Same goes for Matt Hill. My views on his effectiveness as a legislator aside, he is liked very much by his constituents. (Think Stacey Campfield - not many bills passed of consequence, but his supporters will do ANYTHING to help him secure victory.) I don't see Hill losing to Mrozek.
The bottom line is that the Democrats shouldn't buy the snake oil that Randy's selling. Perhaps they should look at the reality of the situation and ponder, "What if the GOP wins ALL of the up-for-grabs seats?" The number of seats actually in contention is probably about 7. If the perfect storm of Republican down-ticket momentum occurs, the Democrats could realistically be staring a 60-39 deficit square in the face.
And that's before we get the redistricting pen...
Randy is very strong at analysis of past events, and he probably missed his calling when he didn't go into investigative reporting. That plays to his strength.
But where Randy isn't good is in predicting election results. That's actually being kind. He sucks like a bilge pump. (I mean, he's no Mike Silence, so perhaps I'm being a little harsh...) He lets his heart have the final say after his head has done all of the legwork. You can't let that happen, because you're setting yourself up for heartbreak. I may not have wanted Barack Obama to win in 2008, but I didn't say that McCain was going to shock the world a few weeks out from Election Day. Likewise, I looked at wonks that said that Jim Bryson would stay within single-digits of Phil Bredesen in 2006 like they were mad. (Said wonks know who you are.) I think the world of Jim Bryson and believe this country would be a better place if more people gave of themselves as he does, but that didn't stop me from lecturing them that a 29-point beatdown was coming. (Even I couldn't see the 39-point margin of victory in that race, but at least I didn't let what I wanted - a win for "Big Jim" - overshadow by predictive skills.)
Which leads us to Randy's post over at KnoxViews today. Randy maps out how the Democrats can take back the Tennessee House this year. Yes, this year, in a year where Democrats are going to be dragged down by a national perception that they are mortgaging America's future for more government control and that the Democratic leadership is incapable of handling problems, from the mundane to the catastrophic. I thought 2006 was a toxic year for Republicans, and, generally, that ended up being correct. I don't think that even comes close to how bad this year could be for the Democrats. If the Republicans quit bickering amongst themselves (and I only mention that because some of the pseudo-Republicans, like the Republican Liberty Caucus, are only in this for themselves and could try to burn Rome since it can't be Eden), this could be a solid year for the Grand Old Party.
Randy's post should make most Republicans in Tennessee see how close we are to our goal of being able to draw the district lines in a manner that makes sense (take a look at our congressional districts for an example of districts not making sense) and eliminates the Democratic safeguards that have been allowed their Party to remain relevant at a time when they clearly are not in the Volunteer State.
Some of Randy's Republican targets are hilarious. Debra Maggert? REALLY? Look, Debra and I had a pretty bad turn this year about her ill-advised attempt to open up our juvenile courts to public eyes for crimes of a sexual nature, but Debra is VERY popular in her district. Same goes for Beth Harwell. And while I may like Nathan Vaughn and believe his loss in 2008 to be one of the few races I have incorrectly called this decade, I just don't see his momentum in Kingsport. Not now. I've been up in that neck of the woods recently, and areas where he had pockets of support are securely in Tony Shipley's corner now. Same goes for Matt Hill. My views on his effectiveness as a legislator aside, he is liked very much by his constituents. (Think Stacey Campfield - not many bills passed of consequence, but his supporters will do ANYTHING to help him secure victory.) I don't see Hill losing to Mrozek.
The bottom line is that the Democrats shouldn't buy the snake oil that Randy's selling. Perhaps they should look at the reality of the situation and ponder, "What if the GOP wins ALL of the up-for-grabs seats?" The number of seats actually in contention is probably about 7. If the perfect storm of Republican down-ticket momentum occurs, the Democrats could realistically be staring a 60-39 deficit square in the face.
And that's before we get the redistricting pen...
Labels: 2010 General Assembly Campaigns, Blogging, TN Democrats
Monday, June 15, 2009
A Case Study in Dealing with Political Bloggers
A.C. Kleinheider details an excellent account on how one politician and his staff effectively dealt with a liberal political blogger here in Tennessee. From my own personal experience, I have found this to be more the norm in the past couple of years (and certainly an improvement from blogging's infancy).
Labels: 2010 Tennessee Governor's Race, Blogging
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Point of Clarification
At least one prominent blogger misread the intentions behind my post yesterday on the Tennessee Governor's race in 2010. As a point of clarification, I wasn't talking about issuing an endorsement. I was talking about joining on with a campaign. From the phone calls and e-mails I have received since the post, it appears that most people read the post as it was intended.
As an aside, I would like to write about bloggers endorsing, though. Some people think it's a ridiculous exercise. After all, why should a candidate care if a person who has as few as 200 daily readers (for a small blog) or as many as 350,000 (for a large blog) formally endorses their candidacy? If the issue is exposure, it can be very important for a candidate to have a blogger posting about events, positive stories, and copying press releases. This practice plugs people into campaigns in a way that a bumper sticker (which is another positive campaign tactic) or yard sign (ditto) cannot. So the knock on endorsements certainly can't be on the exposure side of things.
I think the main knock on blogger endorsements - particularly by other bloggers and the mainstream media - is that the blogger really doesn't have the expertise or the knowledge to make an informed endorsement. It's the "Who cares what he/she thinks?" argument. But let's look at that argument from another point of view. Who do you think knows more about Tennessee politics and political issues - A.C. Kleinheider or Dwight Lewis of the Tennessean? Sean Braisted or Marcy Bryant of the Chattanoogan? David Oatney or Jack McElroy of the Knoxville News Sentinel? Angelia or Robert Houk of the Johnson City Press? Yet, all of us - especially bloggers - point to every newspaper endorsement in a contested race like it means something.
After 2006, I have made limited to no endorsements in races. In 2006, I created a questionnaire that several candidates for the 1st District Congressional seat completed and returned. That led to an endorsement, and I still think that's the best way of going about endorsing candidates. If bloggers are going to endorse candidates, I encourage them to go about it in a professional sort of way, even if it means embracing a time intensive undertaking. Get out there and meet the candidates - you'd be amazed at how many of them will join you for some questions over iced tea if you'd just ask.
However, an endorsement is still an endorsement. What I was talking about yesterday was joining a campaign. Although I helped in spots in the various 2008 Tennessee races (and I am quite proud of that work, mind you), I didn't serve on a campaign. That was for various reasons, including helping Angela rebuild her private practice at my firm after she left the worst agency in all Creation, the Tennessee Department of Children's Services. Angela's practice is alive and thriving now, so I don't have such limitations. That is the reason for yesterday's post. It wasn't for an endorsement.
As an aside, I would like to write about bloggers endorsing, though. Some people think it's a ridiculous exercise. After all, why should a candidate care if a person who has as few as 200 daily readers (for a small blog) or as many as 350,000 (for a large blog) formally endorses their candidacy? If the issue is exposure, it can be very important for a candidate to have a blogger posting about events, positive stories, and copying press releases. This practice plugs people into campaigns in a way that a bumper sticker (which is another positive campaign tactic) or yard sign (ditto) cannot. So the knock on endorsements certainly can't be on the exposure side of things.
I think the main knock on blogger endorsements - particularly by other bloggers and the mainstream media - is that the blogger really doesn't have the expertise or the knowledge to make an informed endorsement. It's the "Who cares what he/she thinks?" argument. But let's look at that argument from another point of view. Who do you think knows more about Tennessee politics and political issues - A.C. Kleinheider or Dwight Lewis of the Tennessean? Sean Braisted or Marcy Bryant of the Chattanoogan? David Oatney or Jack McElroy of the Knoxville News Sentinel? Angelia or Robert Houk of the Johnson City Press? Yet, all of us - especially bloggers - point to every newspaper endorsement in a contested race like it means something.
After 2006, I have made limited to no endorsements in races. In 2006, I created a questionnaire that several candidates for the 1st District Congressional seat completed and returned. That led to an endorsement, and I still think that's the best way of going about endorsing candidates. If bloggers are going to endorse candidates, I encourage them to go about it in a professional sort of way, even if it means embracing a time intensive undertaking. Get out there and meet the candidates - you'd be amazed at how many of them will join you for some questions over iced tea if you'd just ask.
However, an endorsement is still an endorsement. What I was talking about yesterday was joining a campaign. Although I helped in spots in the various 2008 Tennessee races (and I am quite proud of that work, mind you), I didn't serve on a campaign. That was for various reasons, including helping Angela rebuild her private practice at my firm after she left the worst agency in all Creation, the Tennessee Department of Children's Services. Angela's practice is alive and thriving now, so I don't have such limitations. That is the reason for yesterday's post. It wasn't for an endorsement.
Labels: 2010 Tennessee Governor's Race, Blogging
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Snow Day
I took advantage of court and meetings being cancelled due to the weather to tend to the sidebar on this blog. A few dormant blogs were put on hiatus or erased entirely, and a few blogs were added (and those additions were long overdue).
The rest of the day has been spent playing with Leo and watching DVDs. (He's sleeping right now, so The Dark Knight is playing, a welcome break from Elmo and Backyardigans.)
Everyone is ga-ga over the Inauguration, which is their right. I just choose not to be. I've been to my share of Inaugurations, and its much ado about nothing. It's a series of rhetorical speeches, parties at taxpayer expense, and fantastic fundraising opportunities for the party in power. Those things don't excite me when my guy wins. (I probably would have gone if I knew the candidate, but that would have been out of respect for him or her; I consider that to be part of loyalty to friends and candidates, not personal enjoyment.) Why would I be uppity about the opposition party's candidate being sworn in? Besides, it appears that all of the networks - including the treacherous FoxNews - are plenty excited, enough to make up for my apathy.
As a taxpayer, I am a bit concerned about the Inauguration. I keep hearing price tag estimates around $150 million. That would be three times the most expensive Inauguration in United States history. During a time when people are losing their jobs, bedrock American corporations are liquidating their assets and seeking protection from their creditors under bankruptcy laws, and consumer spending is sinking to a level not seen in my lifetime, I would have thought a little financial restraint - maybe as a sign of actual modesty - would have been called for. Apparently not.
The rest of the day has been spent playing with Leo and watching DVDs. (He's sleeping right now, so The Dark Knight is playing, a welcome break from Elmo and Backyardigans.)
Everyone is ga-ga over the Inauguration, which is their right. I just choose not to be. I've been to my share of Inaugurations, and its much ado about nothing. It's a series of rhetorical speeches, parties at taxpayer expense, and fantastic fundraising opportunities for the party in power. Those things don't excite me when my guy wins. (I probably would have gone if I knew the candidate, but that would have been out of respect for him or her; I consider that to be part of loyalty to friends and candidates, not personal enjoyment.) Why would I be uppity about the opposition party's candidate being sworn in? Besides, it appears that all of the networks - including the treacherous FoxNews - are plenty excited, enough to make up for my apathy.
As a taxpayer, I am a bit concerned about the Inauguration. I keep hearing price tag estimates around $150 million. That would be three times the most expensive Inauguration in United States history. During a time when people are losing their jobs, bedrock American corporations are liquidating their assets and seeking protection from their creditors under bankruptcy laws, and consumer spending is sinking to a level not seen in my lifetime, I would have thought a little financial restraint - maybe as a sign of actual modesty - would have been called for. Apparently not.
Labels: Blogging, Economy, Inauguration, President Obama
Monday, November 24, 2008
Silence Versus Oatney - IN A STEEL CAGE!
Michael Silence and David Oatney have gone at it before, but Michael probably crossed the line when he decided to delve into what can be construed as a personal insult with his dead wood column this week. Somebody call Vince McMahon at WWE - we need to settle this with a "loser leaves town" match!
While I like Mike, it's been hard to take him seriously lately on anything political. In October on several occasions, he not only predicted a win in Knox County for Obama (where he lost by over 23 points) but also started cheerleading for a "seismic (political) event" for the entire state (and we all know how Obama did in Tennessee). With those predictive powers, I don't think that Mike will be consulted by Vegas on any betting lines in the near future.
Sometimes I wonder if Silence is too worried about appeasing his liberal blogging buddies (which dominate East Tennessee in numbers, admittedly) a bit too much. I'm sure that he doesn't see it the same way, but then again what do I know? I only read his blog every day.
Guess I'll be the "worst of the worst of blogging" subject for next week. Good thing no one reads the weekend newspapers after the Thanksgiving holiday.
While I like Mike, it's been hard to take him seriously lately on anything political. In October on several occasions, he not only predicted a win in Knox County for Obama (where he lost by over 23 points) but also started cheerleading for a "seismic (political) event" for the entire state (and we all know how Obama did in Tennessee). With those predictive powers, I don't think that Mike will be consulted by Vegas on any betting lines in the near future.
Sometimes I wonder if Silence is too worried about appeasing his liberal blogging buddies (which dominate East Tennessee in numbers, admittedly) a bit too much. I'm sure that he doesn't see it the same way, but then again what do I know? I only read his blog every day.
Guess I'll be the "worst of the worst of blogging" subject for next week. Good thing no one reads the weekend newspapers after the Thanksgiving holiday.
Labels: 2008 General Election, Blogging, KNS
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Link from a Dead Wood Column
Thanks to Michael Silence for including VOLCon in his regular Sunday column on blogging. It's always a nice surprise to open the Sunday paper and see that you're in it - and no one's calling for your hanging.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Returning to the Blogosphere
Sorry, folks, but I needed some time off for a few weeks to tend to several outstanding issues, including:
- widespread corruption and selling out of ideology within the Knox County Republican Party;
- Angela's parting of the ways with the Department of Children's Services, a State agency which proved to be severely anti-family and discriminatory when the chickens came home to roost;
- Angela's reintroduction to The Huddleston Law Firm;
- stomach flu that swept through the family and caused me to miss my first day from work for illness in nearly a year;
- a trip to Bristol Motor Speedway for the Food City 500;
- many, many wonderful moments with my son.
I've been busy, just not with blogging. Of course, I wondered if I even needed to come back after the unfortunate demise of Volunteer Voters. After BillHobbs.com underwent its facelift several years ago, VV at first filled a void, and then expanded as the functional clearinghouse of blogging information for Tennessee. It will be interesting to see if something else fills the void left by VV, or if we will have to work even harder as bloggers to remain connected as a statewide community.
Labels: Blogging, Firm Life, Knox County GOP, Leonidas, NASCAR
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
OK, so I've been tagged...
John Brown, the Appalachian Scribe, tagged seven of us after he himself was tagged by Glen Dean. Not wanting to have whatever bad might befall me if I failed to participate, I now humbly comply.
1) Link to the person that tagged you, and post the rules on your blog.
2) Share 7 facts about yourself.
3) Tag 7 random people at the end of your post, and include links to their blogs.
4) Let each person know that they have been tagged by leaving a comment on their blog.
Seven Facts About Me
1) I only attended law school so that I could open a few more doors politically, as I never planned on practicing law.
2) If I didn't live in Tennessee, I would reside in South Carolina.
3) I can claim blood relation to King John of England (yes, the bad one of Robin Hood lore) and Julius Caesar (special thanks to my grandfather for doing the legwork on that claim).
4) I was the first person to be named Executive Editor of ETSU's newspaper who had never set foot in a journalism classroom, and I was the first male to graduate from ETSU's University Honors Program.
5) My dream jobs are 1) Congressman from Tennessee's 1st District, 2) Voice of the Vols, and 3) Chief of Staff for Congressman Jimmy Duncan. (So you better watch out, Rep. David Davis, Bob Kesling, and Bob Griffitts...)
6) My son is named after three great leaders - David, the King of Israel who united the people of Israel; Davy Crockett, Tennessee Congressman and one of the Tennessee Volunteers who came to Texas' aid in 1836; and Leonidas, King of Sparta and defender of democracy at the Battle of Thermopylae.
7) I like to think of myself as "frugal," but many people probably label me "cheap." I cut coupons out of the newspaper every Sunday, and rarely do Angela and I dine out without a coupon or special of some sort.
So now I have to tag another seven people. I guess I'll choose Vance Cheek, Truman Bean, David Oatney, Sharon Cobb, Nathan Moore, Bob Krumm, and Ben Cunningham.
1) Link to the person that tagged you, and post the rules on your blog.
2) Share 7 facts about yourself.
3) Tag 7 random people at the end of your post, and include links to their blogs.
4) Let each person know that they have been tagged by leaving a comment on their blog.
Seven Facts About Me
1) I only attended law school so that I could open a few more doors politically, as I never planned on practicing law.
2) If I didn't live in Tennessee, I would reside in South Carolina.
3) I can claim blood relation to King John of England (yes, the bad one of Robin Hood lore) and Julius Caesar (special thanks to my grandfather for doing the legwork on that claim).
4) I was the first person to be named Executive Editor of ETSU's newspaper who had never set foot in a journalism classroom, and I was the first male to graduate from ETSU's University Honors Program.
5) My dream jobs are 1) Congressman from Tennessee's 1st District, 2) Voice of the Vols, and 3) Chief of Staff for Congressman Jimmy Duncan. (So you better watch out, Rep. David Davis, Bob Kesling, and Bob Griffitts...)
6) My son is named after three great leaders - David, the King of Israel who united the people of Israel; Davy Crockett, Tennessee Congressman and one of the Tennessee Volunteers who came to Texas' aid in 1836; and Leonidas, King of Sparta and defender of democracy at the Battle of Thermopylae.
7) I like to think of myself as "frugal," but many people probably label me "cheap." I cut coupons out of the newspaper every Sunday, and rarely do Angela and I dine out without a coupon or special of some sort.
So now I have to tag another seven people. I guess I'll choose Vance Cheek, Truman Bean, David Oatney, Sharon Cobb, Nathan Moore, Bob Krumm, and Ben Cunningham.
Labels: Blogging
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Cloak & Dagger Comments
Just a reminder, folks...
Just because you register for a Blogger ID under some random name and then refuse to have your profile viewed publicly doesn't mean that you're not trackable.
If you leave a libelous, inaccurate, or just downright mean comment, it will likely not pass through moderation and, if I wish because it's not that hard, I will find out who posted it.
Quit wasting your time and mine, OK Slick...
Just because you register for a Blogger ID under some random name and then refuse to have your profile viewed publicly doesn't mean that you're not trackable.
If you leave a libelous, inaccurate, or just downright mean comment, it will likely not pass through moderation and, if I wish because it's not that hard, I will find out who posted it.
Quit wasting your time and mine, OK Slick...
Labels: Blogging
Wednesday, June 06, 2007
When Shill Blogs Attack
Yes, I am supporting Fred Thompson, my former boss and a man I respect for what he is as much as for what he is not, for President of the United States.
However, if Fred hadn't jumped in the race and I was sullenly looking for a candidate, the recent ridiculous nature of the posts over at Evangelicals for Mitt would be enough to keep me away from the former Governor of Massachusetts. Seriously, folks...
Of course, to label them a blog is a bit of a stretch. They don't allow comments, and, in reading some of their posts (these two - where they write of people and situations they know nothing about - were real classics), it's easy to understand why.
Now some may say that one shouldn't judge a candidate by his supporters. In this case, that is hogwash. First, these aren't just your ordinary political fans. Access is key. Second, you can tell a great deal about a candidate by how his supporters act. After all, we (and I mean conservatives here) often link ridiculous comments by liberal moonbats with the candidate the liberal moonbat supports. In order to remain consistent, we have to do the same for our own end of the political spectrum.
Of course, this, too, shall pass. If Governor Romney keeps running fifth or sixth in debate after debate (which was thought to be his strength but has not been such in the South Carolina and New Hampshire debates), he'll be lucky to see mid-February.
However, if Fred hadn't jumped in the race and I was sullenly looking for a candidate, the recent ridiculous nature of the posts over at Evangelicals for Mitt would be enough to keep me away from the former Governor of Massachusetts. Seriously, folks...
Of course, to label them a blog is a bit of a stretch. They don't allow comments, and, in reading some of their posts (these two - where they write of people and situations they know nothing about - were real classics), it's easy to understand why.
Now some may say that one shouldn't judge a candidate by his supporters. In this case, that is hogwash. First, these aren't just your ordinary political fans. Access is key. Second, you can tell a great deal about a candidate by how his supporters act. After all, we (and I mean conservatives here) often link ridiculous comments by liberal moonbats with the candidate the liberal moonbat supports. In order to remain consistent, we have to do the same for our own end of the political spectrum.
Of course, this, too, shall pass. If Governor Romney keeps running fifth or sixth in debate after debate (which was thought to be his strength but has not been such in the South Carolina and New Hampshire debates), he'll be lucky to see mid-February.
Labels: 2008 GOP Presidential Primary, Blogging, Fred Thompson
Monday, May 07, 2007
Knox County Young Republicans Hosting Blogger Forum
I have agreed to participate in the Knox County YR's Blogger Forum, which is to be held at their next meeting on Tuesday, May 8th, at 6:30 P.M. The meeting is set for Green Hills Grille off of Kingston Pike.
I know that Mike Faulk will be there, and Brian Hornback has also said that he will try to make it. Feel free to show up if you can make it.
I know that Mike Faulk will be there, and Brian Hornback has also said that he will try to make it. Feel free to show up if you can make it.
Labels: Blogging, Knox County Politics
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Tennessee's Own Drudge Report?
Bill Newsome has created a new Tennessee news source, Newsome News. If you check it out (and you should), you'll notice some striking stylistic similarities to the Drudge Report.
It will be interesting to see if Newsome News takes off the way that Drudge did. There are certainly some media holes in this state - particularly in Middle and East Tennessee outside of Knoxville and Chattanooga - that could use more exposure to media in the rest of Tennessee.
Good luck to Bill in this new venture. It could certainly help with the dissemination of news across the state.
It will be interesting to see if Newsome News takes off the way that Drudge did. There are certainly some media holes in this state - particularly in Middle and East Tennessee outside of Knoxville and Chattanooga - that could use more exposure to media in the rest of Tennessee.
Good luck to Bill in this new venture. It could certainly help with the dissemination of news across the state.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Learning Through Ignorance
Instapundit has the following observation regarding downloads on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN):
Indeed. My Libel in the Blogosphere paper has moved up over 160 places -- from 1069 to 902 -- in the SSRN rankings since the Katherine Coble / JL Kirk / King & Ballow affair broke out.
That's interesting, indeed. I suppose it goes to show that some people - probably some of the larger law firms - don't want to get caught up in the same problem that King & Ballow did.
I suppose that's a good thing - that learning and understanding are coming out of this whole ordeal. I guess if no one gets damaged (and I'm thinking of Kat Coble here, not JL Kirk & Associates), then we have the spread of knowledge as a gained consequence of this episode.
Or am I being too optimistic for a Monday?
Indeed. My Libel in the Blogosphere paper has moved up over 160 places -- from 1069 to 902 -- in the SSRN rankings since the Katherine Coble / JL Kirk / King & Ballow affair broke out.
That's interesting, indeed. I suppose it goes to show that some people - probably some of the larger law firms - don't want to get caught up in the same problem that King & Ballow did.
I suppose that's a good thing - that learning and understanding are coming out of this whole ordeal. I guess if no one gets damaged (and I'm thinking of Kat Coble here, not JL Kirk & Associates), then we have the spread of knowledge as a gained consequence of this episode.
Or am I being too optimistic for a Monday?
Labels: Blogging, First Amendment
Thursday, April 12, 2007
An Ill-Conceived Demand Letter
Everyone is watching Kat Coble's drama involving the employment firm (and potential shakedown artists) JL Kirk & Associates, who apparently retained the law firm of King & Ballow in an effort to get Kat to take down a post of hers about a professional encounter with JL Kirk. First, Kat posted this comment. Then she received the certified letter. Then Kat posted the letter. Pay attention to the comments, because they are coming fast and furious, which tends to happen when Instapundit, Bill Hobbs, Professor Bainbridge, Captain's Quarters, and nearly every other blog takes notice.
While I love Hobbs' treatment of the story, the best post may be from Bob Krumm, who made sure that JL Kirk & Associates and King & Ballow will always be linked with this story via Internet searches with the words "scam," "fraud," "rip-off," and "con."
In any case, this is a real blunder by King & Ballow. Yes, the practice of issuing demand letters as a way of getting what a client wants without having to resort to actual litigation is widely used. However, you can't treat every case the same. You need to know when something is going to be attractive to media - local, state, or (in this case) global. This goes for civil suits (as the one being threatened against Kat), criminal suits, and even juvenile cases (because the media can request access on certain hearings there, too). If this case is going to make the media take notice (taking into account that mainstream sources oftentimes are agitated to action by bloggers), then you have to be perfect in your actions.
King & Ballow were not perfect here. Not by a long shot. They ignored the relevant federal caselaw regarding libel, opinions as free speech, truth as an absolute defense, and 1st Amendment litigation in general. And surely they knew (or should have known) that Kat would take this public. Anyone familiar with Kat's writings (and you have to assume that the associate who wrote this letter at King & Ballow would be so familiar, having referred to specific posts of the blog) knows that she doesn't take crap from anyone. They should have known that she would expand this conflict, and the public relations blowback against JL Kirk and King & Ballow would be more than significant.
However, the real culprit here is JL Kirk & Associates. They should have let sleeping dogs lie. I oftentimes read Kat's blog, but I didn't recall the particular post about her and her husband's experiences with the agency. The limited effects of her post would have gone away. Not now, though. We'll all remember this. They made the primary blunder in politics - never expand a conflict that you can't control. And looking at the blogosphere (83 blog hits on Technorati as of 7:34 A.M.), this story is about to spin out of control into the mainstream media.
Will JL Kirk do the smart thing and have King & Ballow draft up a retraction of their demand letter? Will they apologize to Kat? That would probably be the best thing to do, as it could minimize the damage. However, egos being what they are, that probably won't happen. Of course, the worst thing to do would be to file suit. I don't know how deep JL Kirk's pockets are, but I dare say that the economic ramifications of such a maneuver could sink their entire ship.
An aside: it just occurred to me that Senator Jamie Woodson's proposed bill from earlier in the year might have altered Kat's free speech rights in this case. I guess that just goes to show how bad of a bill that would have been. (Woodson pulled the bill after certain bloggers made a big deal about it, blaming its language on a third year law student.)
UPDATE: Welcome all Instapundit and Fark readers (who are traversing from Bob Krumm's site)! Feel free to look around while you're here.
Bill Hobbs, Professor Reynolds, Volunteer Voters, and Jay Bush have some updates. As many are saying, it is certainly in JL Kirk's best interests to quash this controversy and move on. A blogospheric legal defense fund is certainly a possibility to assist Kat Coble, and with the Media Bloggers Association getting involved, this would not be a case of David versus Goliath in the courtroom in terms of finances.
As SayUncle so poignantly put it: "In other news, don’t send bloggers stuff that makes you look like an asshat. They tend to blog about it."
Like I said (but Uncle said more colorfully), let sleeping dogs lie...
While I love Hobbs' treatment of the story, the best post may be from Bob Krumm, who made sure that JL Kirk & Associates and King & Ballow will always be linked with this story via Internet searches with the words "scam," "fraud," "rip-off," and "con."
In any case, this is a real blunder by King & Ballow. Yes, the practice of issuing demand letters as a way of getting what a client wants without having to resort to actual litigation is widely used. However, you can't treat every case the same. You need to know when something is going to be attractive to media - local, state, or (in this case) global. This goes for civil suits (as the one being threatened against Kat), criminal suits, and even juvenile cases (because the media can request access on certain hearings there, too). If this case is going to make the media take notice (taking into account that mainstream sources oftentimes are agitated to action by bloggers), then you have to be perfect in your actions.
King & Ballow were not perfect here. Not by a long shot. They ignored the relevant federal caselaw regarding libel, opinions as free speech, truth as an absolute defense, and 1st Amendment litigation in general. And surely they knew (or should have known) that Kat would take this public. Anyone familiar with Kat's writings (and you have to assume that the associate who wrote this letter at King & Ballow would be so familiar, having referred to specific posts of the blog) knows that she doesn't take crap from anyone. They should have known that she would expand this conflict, and the public relations blowback against JL Kirk and King & Ballow would be more than significant.
However, the real culprit here is JL Kirk & Associates. They should have let sleeping dogs lie. I oftentimes read Kat's blog, but I didn't recall the particular post about her and her husband's experiences with the agency. The limited effects of her post would have gone away. Not now, though. We'll all remember this. They made the primary blunder in politics - never expand a conflict that you can't control. And looking at the blogosphere (83 blog hits on Technorati as of 7:34 A.M.), this story is about to spin out of control into the mainstream media.
Will JL Kirk do the smart thing and have King & Ballow draft up a retraction of their demand letter? Will they apologize to Kat? That would probably be the best thing to do, as it could minimize the damage. However, egos being what they are, that probably won't happen. Of course, the worst thing to do would be to file suit. I don't know how deep JL Kirk's pockets are, but I dare say that the economic ramifications of such a maneuver could sink their entire ship.
An aside: it just occurred to me that Senator Jamie Woodson's proposed bill from earlier in the year might have altered Kat's free speech rights in this case. I guess that just goes to show how bad of a bill that would have been. (Woodson pulled the bill after certain bloggers made a big deal about it, blaming its language on a third year law student.)
UPDATE: Welcome all Instapundit and Fark readers (who are traversing from Bob Krumm's site)! Feel free to look around while you're here.
Bill Hobbs, Professor Reynolds, Volunteer Voters, and Jay Bush have some updates. As many are saying, it is certainly in JL Kirk's best interests to quash this controversy and move on. A blogospheric legal defense fund is certainly a possibility to assist Kat Coble, and with the Media Bloggers Association getting involved, this would not be a case of David versus Goliath in the courtroom in terms of finances.
As SayUncle so poignantly put it: "In other news, don’t send bloggers stuff that makes you look like an asshat. They tend to blog about it."
Like I said (but Uncle said more colorfully), let sleeping dogs lie...
Labels: Blogging, First Amendment
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Truth Be Told
From Dave Oatney's podcast:
"The problem is that when Rob Huddleston and I get together in the same room - it's like a big chatterbox. And that's pretty much the way it was at the Lincoln Day Dinner all night long. Rob Huddleston and I - chatter, chatter, chatter, chatter."
Pretty much. Dave, that's what happens when you hang around with attorneys - even conservative ones.
NOTE: Sharon Cobb is slated to be on Dave's show later on in the week regarding the Democratic Primary, and Rep. Stacey Campfield will also be on this week to discuss the porn tax and aborted baby death certificates. I can't wait to hear those!
"The problem is that when Rob Huddleston and I get together in the same room - it's like a big chatterbox. And that's pretty much the way it was at the Lincoln Day Dinner all night long. Rob Huddleston and I - chatter, chatter, chatter, chatter."
Pretty much. Dave, that's what happens when you hang around with attorneys - even conservative ones.
NOTE: Sharon Cobb is slated to be on Dave's show later on in the week regarding the Democratic Primary, and Rep. Stacey Campfield will also be on this week to discuss the porn tax and aborted baby death certificates. I can't wait to hear those!
Labels: Blogging
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Beefed-up Blogroll
In a much overdue move, I have spent the past few hours of the night auditing the VOLCon Blogroll. Old sites were taken off, sites were put on and taken off hiatus status, and many, many sites were added.
Take a look and let me know if there is anyone I missed who needs to be added.
Take a look and let me know if there is anyone I missed who needs to be added.
Labels: Blogging
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
A tough start to the week
My apologies for not posting over the past few days. Two days of "closing down the courthouse" when I was there for the opening of the courthouse can make for tough posting conditions.
That being said, I can empathize with Michael Silence's position. I have been approached by several different blog syndicators, but I have failed to sign on with any of them because I worry about how or if this blog could continue under certain circumstances - such as the weight of one's work like Mike is experiencing or conflicts of interest surrounding employment (such as I experienced when I was working as a State employee with the TennCare debacle).
This week has been tough on blogging, as it has been everywhere. My Mom called at the crack of dawn just to make sure that I was alive. When that's happening, you know things have gotten a bit too hectic.
I think I am in court on 17 different cases this week - and that doesn't count the ones I have picked up on the fly while I was in court working on another case. It's difficult to keep up with current affairs when so much is going on.
That being said, I can empathize with Michael Silence's position. I have been approached by several different blog syndicators, but I have failed to sign on with any of them because I worry about how or if this blog could continue under certain circumstances - such as the weight of one's work like Mike is experiencing or conflicts of interest surrounding employment (such as I experienced when I was working as a State employee with the TennCare debacle).
This week has been tough on blogging, as it has been everywhere. My Mom called at the crack of dawn just to make sure that I was alive. When that's happening, you know things have gotten a bit too hectic.
I think I am in court on 17 different cases this week - and that doesn't count the ones I have picked up on the fly while I was in court working on another case. It's difficult to keep up with current affairs when so much is going on.
Friday, December 01, 2006
A Milestone for Hobbs
Happy Fifth Blogiversary to Bill Hobbs!
When I was first contemplating joining the Blogosphere, I asked Glenn Reynolds for an example of a Tennessee-centric blog. He pointed me to Bill Hobbs, which is why I remain a loyal reader of BillHobbs.com.
When I was first contemplating joining the Blogosphere, I asked Glenn Reynolds for an example of a Tennessee-centric blog. He pointed me to Bill Hobbs, which is why I remain a loyal reader of BillHobbs.com.
Labels: Blogging
