Interestingly the same phenomena can also be recognized in companies, especially in media companies that need to deal with the unstable internet environment. As long term top-down strategic planning does not work anymore and big companies need to be fast, flexible and do their planning way more “bottom up”, employees need to say (and with successful companies get to say) more and more what they think is the right decision in this and this situation (Although some of the former strategic master-minds in big companies with their BCG-matrixes do have a serious problem with it – loosing power always sucks). “Grassroots” is important, but same thing here: Social-Network-tools in the company may on the one hand accelerate business and help developing and spreading of new ideas. But these tools may also lead to situations where – lets say – 100 employees all of a sudden circle around an idea that the top-management does not seem to be appropriate. And then, how should the management deal with these enhanced parallel power structures? The advantages and dissadvantages of “grassroots” are not only issues to politicians but also to business leaders – and will be more and more in the future.

Jeff Jarvis’ position implies that corporations who violate our privacy by helping the government with warrantless-wiretapping should face no penalties.

The problem is that corporations have no reason to ask for a warrant under that position.

I originated the idea for the site; I’m currently its primary moderator.

I became politically active when Howard Dean’s blog gave me the means to do so. I’ve remained active in the blogosphere, and in “real-space” since.

Hmmm… What have I done… Well, there was that George Allen thing… the Bill O’Reilly’s Fox News police thing… I was the originator of the report that led to John McCain making a hapless trip to Baghdad to “prove” there were neighborhoods safe enough for him to walk through… I helped to push the KSFO hate-speech radio into the pages of the New York Times, Washington Post and media trade journals… Most recently, I was the irritant that caused Rupert Murdoch to ring up the brass at NBC to beg them not to air video of my adventure at Bill O’Reilly’s house.

The simple truth is that if it weren’t for Joe Trippi and Howard Dean and their entire tech crew that discovered a whole new way to bring slews of new people into politics, well… I would most likely be watching a baseball game tonight instead of participating in this thread. (Go Yankees!)

How many more like me are out there? Hundreds. How do I know? I’ve stayed in touch with them.

One last thing: Joe Rospars – a former Dean tech guru – created the Blue State Digital tools that run Barack Obama’s website. Funny how we keep popping up.

The Dean campaign (and the Clark campaign) each served as an incubator that nurtured legions of new political activists. And the world is a better place for it.

My bad. Second reading show’s I overreacted. Oh, well, passionate supporter and all that. Besides, who doesn’t love ALL CAPS?

However, “I also find tragic irony in the fact that the best reason to vote for him is to turn around the Supreme Court..,” seems to insinuate the same thing. Oh, well, to each his own (and that is one heck of a good reason).

Fair enough, but that position didn’t get a single vote from the Supremes, and for good reason. (Read the dissents – they all said “It’s an individual right.”) Since no one thinks that the 2nd is a “right to join the Army” and state militias are under complete control of congress (otherwise Idaho would have already passed out M-16s to everyone), the “about militias” position is basically private armies.

IIRC, Sen Clinton said that the 2nd was an individual right before the decision came down.

Jimmy,
For God’s sake, please read before clicking. I did not say ONLY (and especially not in caps, as you did). I said best in lowercase.

Ryan,
No, that’s not what I would have been saying. Why don’t you say what you say and not try to say what I would say when I haven’t said it. OK? I would have praised him for standing by principle to bring down the need and influence for money in campaigns. But he didn’t do that so I couldn’t say that.

As for his constituents using the Obama website to voice their opinion I say “Great!” That’s what a free society is for. I disagree with Senator Obama on the whole immunity issue, but there are many, many other issues for which I agree with him. What Democrat — liberal or centrist — can’t see the positive in having Senator Obama as our candidate. Seriously!

So whether there is an internal faction rattling the cage for a specific vote against FISA, or twelve folks in Georgia screaming for free ice cream…I fail to see the uniqueness. Lobbyists are, also, constituencies…and sometimes they have something to offer for a “open mind.” Obviously, there are rules and guidelines attached to such “open minded” references…organizing on a website is no violation.

Finally, please lose the term “grass roots.” There has never been a successful candidate that comes anywhere near “grass roots.” Dean was far from such a candidate simply out of the fact that he called himself a member of a specific party (one of the two biggest I might add). The only way one could be a “grass roots” candidate would be to have a constituency of one….or one and a handful of clones who never read the newspaper.

JR

It’s hard to argue that the telecom companies were “forced” to participate when Qwest was able to opt out. The remaining telecoms capitulated for one reason – the hope of reaping possible political windfalls down the road.

If Obama had accepted public financing, you and others would be spreading the meme that he’s “too weak,” an “egghead who stands on principal” and “not tough enough” to win presidential elections. Now he’s a cold-blooded hypocrite.

Whatever. He’s damned if he did, he’s damned if he didn’t.

But now that he’s opted out, Obama will have a $200 or $300 million fundraising advantage over McCain. Without even getting into the fact that half of his money comes in small donations — the whole point of campaign finance reform! — to turn down that kind of advantage would be just plain stupid. Considering your attraction to the uber-cynical Clintons, I’m surprised you can’t see that. But, then again, the bitterness of the loss still lingers, huh?