Separating Right and Wrong.

A few weeks ago, blogger Two-Putt Tommy took a cheap shot at Sen. Norm Coleman through his wife, Laurie Coleman, who is promoting a hair dryer holder called Blo & Go. I didn't write about his juvenile stunt at the time and don't plan to now, because I thought it was in bad taste and not at all germane to Coleman's performance as a senator.

But I am interested in what Tommy said since.

The point is correct: even when the shot is open, even when the target damn near asked for it, doesn’t mean it’s still right to take the shot.

I was wrong. Taking that shot at Mrs. Coleman is a shot I should not have taken. The point I was going after with the complaint to the State Of California was the financial aspect; that’s where I should have focused. It’s where I’ll focus, in the future.

What brought about Tommy's change of mind? He listened to a Coleman partisan's point of view and reconsidered. He listened to a conservative blogger who just this week published his reckless speculation that Coleman's opponent, Al Franken, had forged the signature of a doorman at his apartment building.

Tommy's shot at Coleman was well-documented by comparison. Yet he was open to the thinking from the other side, which is a progressive characteristic. Meanwhile, good luck getting Mr. Right to admit he was wrong.

Comments

[Michael B. Brodkorb]

Charlie: I never wrote or "speculated" that Franken forged a signature.

[Mark Gisleson]

Good grief. Barack Obama goes through months of living hell over things his pastor said, yet a US Senator's wife starts up a very suggestively named business and is off limits?

I've lost count of all the Democratic candidates I've voted for who lost elections because of massive coordinated criticism of their spouses. Maybe it is the low road, but having been taken there repeatedly by Republicans over the last forty years, I don't see why it should be off limits now.

How much money has Laurie Coleman made, and who are her investors?

[The Other Mike]

Here is my take-away from the Colemans...he has flip-flopped on being a family values kind of guy. Remember last election cycle all those ads with the soft pictures of Normie and Laurie and their two children sitting on their porch and chatting.

Total fiction. Because after the flip, we see the reality of Laurie jetsetting out to Hollywood to her Blo N Go lifestyle, Norm out east a DC madam away from a scandal, and whatever happens to their children happens.

Which is it Norm, which Norm am I voting for...or against?

[anonone]

I take comfort in the fact that there is special ring of Hades for Norm even if he wins the election this year. It is near the bottom of Dante's famed Inferno and reserved for hypocrites whose only sole reason in life is for their own advancement.

[Charlie Quimby]

I guess I was "wrong," although by your standards, I never named you in my post, so technically I never said "Michael B. Brodkorb" speculated.

Michael, if you want to be cute, of course you never literally wrote or "speculated" what you went to a great deal of effort to imply. And your distinction-slicing response here simply puts your extremely impoverished sense of ethics on display once more.

Professional assassin that you are, you carefully donned the rubber gloves first. (I assume you keep the moral blinkers on at all times.) Then you shared speculation you could attribute to "several sources" that you discretely failed to name. Of course, you never said "forged" — you noted "striking similarities" and your discriminating commenters did the rest.

[MNObserver]

Wait, you mean that a graphic with the two signatures morphing into one, followed by the comment "The graphic on the top of this post is an overlay of the two documents. The signatures look very similar." ISN'T speculation that they were made by the same person, implying directly that one was a forgery?

The American Heritage Dictionary defines "to speculate" as "to engage in a course of reasoning often based on inconclusive evidence."

The only question is when it is that Michael is not speculating.

[mrw]

Charlie and MNObserver, I have to take issue with your attempt to cast doubt on Michael Brodkorb's handwriting analysis skills. Mr. Brodkorb is a recognized expert in the field, with a portfolio dating back to 2004. I invite you to examine his past work before rushing to judgment.

http://tinyurl.com/5ow6hk

[Michael B. Brodkorb]

MRW: I’d like to ask you about videos - videos posted to YouTube during the 2006 elections.

[Charlie Quimby]

Good catch. I'm astonished that he didn't call out the Blog House's Tim O'Brien for signing as well. Oh, wait, that might irritate the wrong people.

[Dan Larson]

Three cheers to Mr. Tommy for having the courage to change his mind and do the right thing - a characteristic that is unfortunately in short supply.

To Mr. Gisleson, I would suggest that honesty serves the public better than slander regardless of whom its aimed at.

To Mr. Brodkorb, I would suggest you consider how reckless slander not only damages your ability to influence those of us in the electorate who are open to your views but also disgraces our entire political system.

To Mr. Quimby, congratulations for a very even-handed assessment. I regret having ignored 'The Divide' recently - a mistake I hope not to make again any time soon.

[TwoPuttTommy]

Folks, the sexual innuendo I wrote was wrong. Period. Should not happen.

Well, except in cases like Larry "This Is A Good Place For A Date" Craig, Mark "What's Your IM Name, Little Page?", David "Vote For Me; Sex-Scandal Livington Has To Go" Vitter, where the target is a politician who clearly has crossed the line. Family, though, should ALWAYS be off limits - and I was out of bounds.

What I wrote about Mrs. Coleman in the Complaint did nothing to further the conversation.

I'd like to point out, however, that admitting an error is often not accepted graciously among those on the "right". Remember how Kline wielded Coleen Rowley's apology about the Colonel Klink episode, like a sledge, the whole campaign?

And I'd further like to point out what Blue man said, which is getting lost in the discussion:

***
More Intimidation On The Righty Blogs

You may recall the controversy back in April over "Drew Emmer" exposing the personal information of Karl Bremer.

True North and Minnesota Majority posted this information as a tactic of intimidation for Bremer's opposition to a Veterans for Freedom program at Forest Lake High School.

Bremer served his nation honorably.

It's become standard operating procedure for right wing bloggers and their commenter's to vilify, harass and intimidate those on the left, especially those that have honorably served their nation.

Yesterday, the right wing blogs, once again failed to disappoint.

http://tinyurl.com/4xomqs

The rightwing blogs - Mr. Brodkorb's included - allows significant internet intimidation to occur. Michael claims he's opposed to it, as he claims it's happened to him, but his acquiescence to posts by the likes of Swiftee and his ilk indicates otherwise.

Lastly, Michael's claim that he never wrote or "speculated" that Franken forged a signature is simply bogus - as Anyone noted. About that, I wrote: ***Yesterday, Brodkorb ignored Sack’s cartoon and started a post that essentially accuses Franken of forgery, without accusing Franken of committing forgery.***

Far too many times, Brodkorb is not only a part of the political divide problem, he IS the problem.