Let's just pretend I said what you assume i would say. That way I don't actually piss anyone off or offend their sensibilities. Okay?
This is just to much of an oppurtunity for me to respond, but I'm trying to be less abrassive and angry. Really I am, Al.

OK - that is fine...and actually a useful technique. So lets put that stuff you and I would say back and forth in a box and stow that is the basement and then still ask the underlying question about just blogging and not the relative politics. Why has this season of change been less loud? Is all of blogging quietening or is it that the right is louder but not so loud as it might be watching it's era of supremacy come to a close as the left watched in, what, the mid-90s?

Traffic is up across the board at the political blogs I read. This would suggest that, if anything, blogs are more important to facilitating conversation and circumventing the mainstream media choke hold than they were last time round.

Also, I doubt the Republicans will lose the Senate this time out. I would also be unsurprised if the purported Democratic lead for House seats turned out to be a result of biased opinion polls. The only poll that counts is in a few days.

I am surprised by your cynicism. Can anything be unbiased? And if you could point me to any discussion that would be helpful. All I see is jingoism and even that is in decline given the obvious embarrassment that is the focus of the jingo.

I see nothing cynical in point out media bias. Do you think charges of "jingoism" are cynical? I certainly do not think it is cynical, for example, to point out Rush Limbaugh's bias. That said, he recently came under fire for lifting his topics of conversation from several right-wing American polibloggers without crediting them. And whatever the truth of that charge, his bias precedes blogging and current jingoism is mediated by radio and not the internet.

"And (his) current jingoism..." There is, of course, plenty of internet-based jingoism as well.

I think too much is made of media bias, especially given the lack of anything but the anecdotal which exists at a degree to be expected in any profession. And comparing Limbaugh, for example, to a newspaper is comparing, of not apples and oranges, perhaps windfalls to the perfect grade "A" fruit - calculated lies v. the normal and unintentional range of human capacity. The jingoism of blogs is somewhere in between - far less truthful or helpful than the MSM even if it is compelling. And, of course, if there was no MSM there would be no political blogging as it is all derivative.<p>But that is not really my point. It is the absence of meaningful primary use of the medium that is odd. Where is the blog fest by politicians and movements? That is the thing that never really took off beyond 2004. Also, where is the citizen journalism we were promised? Those things have faded as expectations for the format. All we really see is the sorts of silo-based mutual affirmation groups not requiring a foot in reality. I do not see that as discussion.

Flea may be right. The repubs are still strong in many ways, and Americans will vote for them again because they don't want married gay couples to get abortions. YES, I do think Americans are pretty darn shallow sometimes in their political tastes and thinking, and I have made that point before. No matter how it turns out in '06, and I hope at least my congressional district goes dem, plan on people finally waking up to the economic realities and the cost of the war in 2008. That one could be a sweep, if the dems put up some strong condidates.

Ahh, I think I am following the bouncing ball now. Well, the Deaniacs failed and the Kossacks have a near perfect record of backing losing candidates, a trend I expect to be continued when they lose Connecticut to Joe Leiberman. As high-profile organized bloggers as activists have been a near complete bust for the Democratics - a kind of latter-day McGovernite poison pill - I suppose it is unsurprising there was be less attention paid to them this time round.

I do not believe the clear distinction you make between the MSM (which to you is apparently limited to the Globe and Mail and the BBC with the odd Toronto Star piece thrown in) holds water. There are plenty of columnists and radio hosts who also blog and more and more bloggers making their way into the dead-tree media and television as time goes on. Perhaps you imagine TorStar editors are like those librarians you hanker after. The world has moved on, my friend.

That last one was directed at Alan... I agree with gr, however, that gay abortions are a Republican get-out-the-vote strategy. Keep in mind Conservatives north of the border pulled the same stunt the last two times out and I expect will do so in future.

If the Democratics had any coherent policy on the war they would sweep this election.

I know, Flea, the dems could beat the drum loudly, against the war and make some headway. I notice the Foley thing is being quickly swept under the carpet by the vast right conspiracy. Living in a liberal enclave, though, which has comparitively few military families, it is easy to forget that most of the US is quiet about their opposition to the Iraq war, worrying that they will seem unsupportive of the troops. Of course, keeping them home to begin with would have been the ultimate way to support the troops, but that is why the opposition is not more vocal.

Actually I think it is the blogs that have also been moved on from, frere Flea. I do agree with what you are saying but the world has kept spinning farther along. The glacial force which moved the media and events themselves into the blogs has also moved on from them. MSM columnists don't really blog: Wells, for example, has no comments and they all still toe the corporate line. Again - where are these vibrant discussions?<p>And the tangent is well made. There is a general lack of quality leadership on both sides of the border. Maybe they are connected - maybe that is why there is a clear desire to keep away from the participatory internet, why it is a lesser shift than imagined would be the case. No one really wants to be held to account in the way that, say, I do quite aware that my initial suggestions will be corrected. But that makes this is a discussion as we three do not always agree on many points but can actually develop ideas collectively. I do not see that happening in the political realm now as I did two years ago. In fact, Garth basically was removed from the national-ish ruling-ish party for doing so.

I think the problem is you are not reading the interesting parts of the blogosphere. There is plenty of vibrancy out there and, at least among the folks I read, traffic is up.

As for the war, I was referring to the Long War, not its particular front in Iraq. As far as I can make out the Democrats have no policy except old fashioned isolationism, recently only to be found among the Coughlinite paleocons. The Copperhead position was wrong in the Civil War, wrong for those years it left Britain and Empire to stand along against Hitler and it is, if anything, even more wrong with benefit of hindsight. Give me a Pearson Liberal or a Kennedy Democrat and would have a centre-left party with something to say. As it stands, the only prayer of the left is the incompetence of the right. Neither bodes well for facing down nuclear armed religious maniacs.

That may be. I have called for interesting links but have not found any luck that way. That is the failing of the logging of the web. And as for this:<blockquote class="smalltext">Give me a Pearson Liberal or a Kennedy Democrat and would have a centre-left party with something to say. As it stands, the only prayer of the left is the incompetence of the right. Neither bodes well for facing down nuclear armed religious maniacs.</blockquote>...not only do you think more clearly than I do but you write well, too. I play at games about this stuff. I will go to the Dixie Chicks tomorrow night as I went to Billy Bragg a few weeks ago and I will listen but mostly to the excellent music. But I, too, do wish for a centre-left party with something to say, who would fight for both tolerance and inclusion but also demand tolerance and inclusion from those tolerated and included. I want a leadership that can be, when needed, the boot in the crotch militantly upholding reasonableness.

Repeat what I said earlier.

Amen, Alan. Amen. Rights also demand responsibilities. Too many folks forget that.

Well... in spite of the lack of a coherent, non-isolationist foreign policy, the Democrats are doing just fine. (Look to the Republicans.)

In 2008 for the White House, maybe not so much. But that's where the foreign policy leadership is needed, anyway.

As for the blogs -- they have normalized. Some are good, some are not so good. Like people.

NOT SURE HOW TO REACH FLEA: Ok, the SL goth dance video is NOT goth by any stretch. two reasons in my book:
1) the setting is too average--needs to be dark, spooky, surreal, like a cemetary, old house, chandeliers maybe, something like that.
2) that was NOT goth music. I don't know what it was.

Joe Trippi argues on NPR's <i>Morning Edition</i> this morning that new forms of internet media have been introduced between 2004 and 2006. I am not convinced as he says things like "the better candidates understand that they have to get involved with MySpace" and that YouTube was not previously available. He did not explain how these media have been more influential this campaign.

Suspect our answer may depend on whether Sen. George "Macaca" Allen gets re-elected.