Mr. Bootstraps-"the blogsosphere is a meritocracy", is a rich kid AND former CIA? Priceless. I've long thought Markos was hollow (far worse than being mearly shallow)...

I wonder how this will pan out across the blogoverse? There will be plenty of in-fighting, I'm sure.

Whoa, indeed. That's pretty messed up.

how strange it all seems. his life and where it goes. counterintuitive. right wing family, right wing politics, republican, CIA...BOOM: "Progressive Democrat"! biggest political blog in the world. molds discussions and where to send money and what is valid to debate and what is tinfoil.

i suppose it would be tinfoil to speculate too much on what happened after his six month training period at the CIA? just...decided it wasn't for him? thought blogging would be more fun? blogging with a fake poor bootstrap boy persona? oh, it's just too much. all my Conspiracy Theory circuits light up at once and immobilize my tongue.

that post i linked to, tho, is so far competing fiercely for "craziest thread of the year."

I have never followed the Kos site -- it just wasn't off the scale enough for me. But it does seem that he is hardly a supporter of privilege or the U.S. right wing. His main sin was to claim a humble background. Bad boy, Kos!
I can honestly say I have tried to read the site, but found it mostly soporific. I might have read it three times in three years. I just don't "get it". On the other hand, I do admire anyone that can come up with a scheme to make a very good living from writing what they want to write, and fake-o life story or not, Kos gets my respect there.
Also, in a period where public cynicism is the norm he has tried mightily to get people involved with the political crisis. As Nez says, this should be interesting in Blogsylvania, Left and Right. I just hope it does not distract too much from the idea that Bush and Cheney need to be impeached and publicly flayed for good measure.
Just a suggestion.

i only wish DailyKos were putting their weight behind impeachment. suggest it, i say.

Well if you must know, I nearly go recruited to the CIA myself. They where scouting in my High School (sort of a mentoring program) and my school boards scores where high enough (similar to the SATs) that I could be considered. My parents quickly shot down the idea, but back in the day I thought it would be cool to be a spy of sorts. Thank to my parents I did not go down the route (or join the military). Who knows what would have happened then.

that diary raises some questions about Moulitsas's accounts of his background, but it doesn't offer any proof that he actually worked for the CIA. the headline is shocking, but once you get into it--there's not much fire behind the smoke. we have enough enemies without making up new ones.

WOW...flashback. Back in the university years, late 60's early 70's, where it was hard to tell sincere activists from agents provocateurs I found it much more effective to join the YAF. I was a one man cell.
I certainly can not say that this (being an agent provocateur) is what is/was going on in the Kos situation, but as Nezua notes, the molding and shaping of discourse is easily controlled. It might be a more important function of the site, if nefarious goals are being considered, in picking out, supporting, and even nudging along the more radical elements for identification and further monitoring. Ya' gotta watch those rascally peasants!

As I understood it, Marcos interviewed for a CIA position which turns out to be a lengthy process - a far cry from actually working for the CIA. Apparently the dude seems to be just fine with the CIA, and if Francis Holland's contentions are correct it appears there are enough skeletons in the family closet to seriously question his motives.

Kos has been getting ripped on recently.

I've never doubted that Kos has supported the status quo more than he has dismantled it. To have ever considered him a 'poor immigrant' represents an ignorant world view. The fact that he was born in Chicago, was able to return to El Salvador, and then come back to the United States, should immediately tip anyone off to the fact that his family was not among the worst off in El Salvador. I spent 18 years of my life in Guatemala and anyone from there knows that the ability to travel with that sort of freedom is a privilege that a select few Central Americans get.

While someone's personal life is important, it certainly informs their perceptions, it has always been the policies Kos advocates for that should inform readers he is not an advocate for real change. No candidate he has supported has won, and worst of all Kos is against supporting third party candidates that take away from the Democratic vote. If anyone really thinks they are going to get anywhere with the present political system of the U.S. they're wrong. The U.S. is not a democracy as the vast majority of incumbents win, and if you're lucky you get a choice between two candidates, maybe three, that don't represent any real kind of diversity.

Don't even give Kos this kind of attention, Nez, he really doesn't deserve it.

i agree with your summation, kyle...i just couldn't resist! these facts are so...salacious.

The newer facts are even more shocking than the ones from yesterday. Read:

The Indictment of Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA by Justice and History, by Francis L. Holland.

Everybody who knows how to use Google should be Googling every aspect of Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA's life right now. Just think: This guy is holding a candidates forum where several Democratic presidential candidates will appear this August. Yet, the more people learn about Markos Moulitsas, the less they will want to be associated with him, as the link above shows.

I think he has some explaining, but to be fair, embarrasing family backgrounds are not uncommon and creating your own narrative to better cope with it isn't unknown. But his support of the CIA is naive at best and his Reagan years even after being so close to the dirty war is a bit witless. I had a diary there but quickly lost interest because of the slightly 'groupthink' ambience and an oddly humourless puritanical vibe. I don't know his official positions on a lot of things but my instinct is he is more establishment than anti-imperial for instance.
At worst though this looks like shaping and managing dissent. Have the Kossacks been had?

Well how about it Francis Holland: Is he, Kos,just trying to distance himself from a painful past, does he have a need to shape opinion, is he getting paid to shape opinion, how long will it take until this conversation gets around the Web Block, who are those other Zuniga people exactly, and if the Kos commenters and posters {this is a very large group of people} feel like they have been had, what might be the political fallout from that? I wish Gilliard was around to say something.
My feelings when reading almost all of left Blogsylvania {I seldom bother now, for years it has been mainly far far left or anarchist that I do look at}is that they are really moderates who are far left of the Neocon Rightwing radicals. I find that their political directions are not anywhere as dynamic as I think the country needs to get itself away from collapse, but I have been away from the U.S. for so long I just don't understand the thinking there at all anymore, left right center or braindead. It is all rather mysterious to me. But I do try to understand.

Ehhh... I'll consider the source. Trust me, if there was much to this the Freepers and others would have been all over it long ago.

I mean, come on, My Left Wing?(one of the blogs this has been posted to) That blog is so loony, I sometimes think that it's an agent provoceteur site.

Come on, the only reason you posted this is because you hate Kos. It doesn't sound like you even believe it yourself.

The seething jealousy in parts of the left blogosphere would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

Every circular firing squad post like this is another victory for the right-wing.

i am not some Warrior for the Left Wing, firstly, so check your premises before we go any further.

and pray tell, since you are very insightful into my brain: why is it, exactly, that i "hate Kos," and explain how my enmity came to be. i'm short on entertainment this eve. floor is yours.

Bruce,

okay, i'll admit it: i don't read the daily kos nor know what it is but, that said, i think everyone that has ever worked for the CIA should have their identity published. the CIA rapes, murders, colonizes. i personally think it is the responsibility of journalists to bring these things to our attention when they first find out. nez is not saying we sould believe the post without researching the facts ourselves and i doubt he has ever declared hatred for the dude (from what i've read, he doesn't seem like a hateful person). and what is there to be jealous of? some guy with a blog?

Okay, Bruce from Missouri, you've piqued my curiosity: how did you come about these amazing mind-reading skills to be able to conjure up this alleged "hatred" for and "jealousy" of Kos you contend is locked deep within the recesses of Nez's mind? And from an internet connection no less? I mean this would have to be somewhere in the man's unconscious mind, as I'm sure not seeing it anywhere on his blog. By all means, do tell, Bruce...or as y'all say in Missouri, "show me."

Maybe I was innacurate about whether or not you hate Kos, but everytime I have ever run into you, or come over here, you and your commentariat are way off to the left, and I made an assumption based on your friends. To say you aren't way left is kind of laughable.

When you re-post a screed like that with the comments you did, without you considering the source, how can you assume anything else about you, than that you are part of the fringe-o-sphere that wants to take Kos down.

Bruce:

1. either provide a quote or proof that i "hate Kos," or retract your statement. you were not "maybe inaccurate." you were completely wrong and out of line.

2. what is a "commentariat"?

3. what is "off to the left"?

4. who are "my friends"?

5. when did i deny that i was "way left"?

6. do you have things to say about "the source," or am i supposed to negate the source based on your simple derision and naming it "the source"?

7. what is the "fringe-o-sphere"?

8. i do not care if Kos is down or up. but someone who is deeply involved with one of the TWO parties in America needs to disclose the kind of stuff that is contained in that post. if that post is inventing facts, it is doing much better at inventing than you are. you oughtta get your game on if you want to convince people here that the linked post is, as you say, but a "screed," which i assume means, to you, it has no validity.

these questions are not tongue-in-cheek. they are a way of finding your lexicon, to me. a way of finding your frameset. i know mine. but your words assume a lot, and i dont want to assume in kind.

1. either provide a quote or proof that i "hate Kos," or retract your statement. you were not "maybe inaccurate." you were completely wrong and out of line.

Okay, I can't read your mind, so I will retract that. There are really only 2 reasons to post that, either Kos-hate, or you are trying to be the National Enquirer or Weekly World News. Looking back at comment #5, I guess you posted it for the giggly gossipy reasons.

2. what is a "commentariat"?
It is a term I've seen several left bloggers use to refer to refer to their regular commentors. Use of the term is not an insult. I probably picked it up from Atrios. Therefore, your Commentariat is your regular commenter base, nothing more, nothing less.

3. what is "off to the left"?
In a continuum where say, Atrios is center-left, and Twisty is way left, I would put you far closer to Twisty than Atrios. Typically, the area of the left blogosphere where most circular firing squads start. Off the top of my head, the area of the blogosphere responsible for attacks on Jessica Valenti, Kos, and Jesus' General in recent months.

4. who are "my friends"?
The people who seem to follow left blogular controversy in a pack. They showed up in a pack at Jesus' General when you were getting heat for the Jolie post, they showed up again during the Gilliard controversy, they showed up at Feministe during the war on Jessica Valenti. Generally, a lot of people in your commentor base, and yourself who seem to get more out of attacking fellow lefties, than out of fighting the real enemy. I'm not going to name names and invite a dogpile on me, but you're a smart guy, you can figure out who I'm talking about.

5. when did i deny that i was "way left"?
Here's the quote: "i am not some Warrior for the Left Wing, firstly, so check your premises before we go any further. "

6. do you have things to say about "the source," or am i supposed to negate the source based on your simple derision and naming it "the source"?
The source is an ex-Kossack who (according to commentors) was thrown off of Kos for being just a humongous jerk. He seems to have started another blog that is just him ranting about Kos(Truth-about-Kos), and also posted it on MyLeftWing, where last time I checked in MaryScott was ranting and raving about Kos de-linking her during Blogroll Amnesty Day...more axes to grind. If someone with credibility follows up on this story, and finds something to it, I might actually read it and follow the links. What little I did read seemed to be making hay out of the fact that there are other people named Zuniga, and some are rich, and some are bad. big deal. There are other people with my last name who are rich and/or bad, doesn't mean I am.

7. what is the "fringe-o-sphere"?
The circular firing squad people. The people who rip on feminist bloggers who are going to YearlyKos.

8. i do not care if Kos is down or up. but someone who is deeply involved with one of the TWO parties in America needs to disclose the kind of stuff that is contained in that post. if that post is inventing facts, it is doing much better at inventing than you are. you oughtta get your game on if you want to convince people here that the linked post is, as you say, but a "screed," which i assume means, to you, it has no validity.

Unlike the original poster, I work for a living, and don't have time for it. Once again, if someone serious follows up on it and proves something, I might take it seriously.

I will say, that while I rarely read beyond the front page at Dkos, it is one of the best organizing tools the left has. Any succesful attempt at bringing it down would be a strictly pyrrhic victory.

And to Kyledeb: Going all the way back to Stephanie Herseth in 2004, Dkos has supported plenty of winners. Saying otherwise is regurgitating right wing talking points. He has said time and again that he supports some of the no-hopers to force the party to move left.

Thank you for retracting your comment, Bruce.

And for paying close attention to my blog and where I post and what happens when I do. People who comment in various places are not my "friends." They are humans with keyboards. And trust me, they will not always be in agreement with me.

I'm sorry you think my saying I am not a warrior for the Left is equivalent to "my politics are not on the left end of the spectrum for the most part." And mostly, I'm sorry you are so wed to this Left/Right dichotomy. What I meant was you can't scare me by saying my actions will help "THE RIGHT." That was why I commented about not being a warrior for the left. Make more sense? This "left-right" war is not mine.

PS: Being called an "ex-Kossack" doesn't magically negate or dissolve what a person has to say.

PSS: Did I get you right on Point 8???? You cannot refute the post because you have a JOB and yet you have time to come here and spray bitter spittle about that post (which you have NOT researched and cannot answer and cannot even intelligently summarize) all over MY blog?

You are a trip, Mister Bruce. A trip!

Did Kos support Stephanie Herseth? Is that something to be proud of?
She recently voted in favour of SOA/WHINSEC a training base for torturers and death squads closely allied to CIA activities and in the 80's provided many of the graduates who perpetrated appalling crimes in El Salvador, my friend wrote to her to ask why and got a form bullshit letter. Is she an example of the great politicians we can expect ?
http://maskofanarchy.blogspot.com/2007/06/congress-woman-stephanie-herseth.html
Also-

She is a member of the New Democrat Coalition. As a Blue Dog Democrat, however, she opposes her party's leadership on some issues on which there is disagreement between conservative South Dakota and the more liberal Democratic national leadership. In the 2004 general election, she was endorsed by the NRA, and she supported President Bush's call for a Federal Marriage Amendment.

There is something rotten in the state of Denmark.

and an addendum, i don't mean to say with all my talk of humans mit keyboarden, that i don't think of some in my small circle of malcontents online as "friends," i do. but i'm saying please. every wave of threadwar that goes on cannot be tied to me, even if the people are arguing respect for the Brown™ at Feministe or at JG or whatever is going down. i love seeing solidarity, but what the hell do threadwars have to do with anything regarding holland's post is what i am SAYIN man.

I don't ask anyone to believe anything just because I say it. How would I know that MAMZ opposed gays in the military back in 1993 unless I read it in MAMZ's own words:

http://truth-about-kos.blogspot.com/2007/08/kos-editorial-opposes-gays-in-military.html

Now one of the Kos lovers will urge you to ignore this link because, after all, I am a Black man who was banned from DailyKos and who now posts at MyLeftWing. Don't those facts alone disprove anything that is in the links that I post, even when I link to Kos' own words and to Salvadoran Government documents?

In my opinion, it doesn't matter WHO gives you the facts when the links prove to be valid. That's the point of links, isn't it? COLD HARD PROOF is the currency that we deal in at blogs, and that's exactly what you find at the "The Truth About Kos." COLD HARD PROOF that MAMZ is a fraud and a fake.

When you read in MAMZ's own words that he opposed gays in the military in 1993, and ridiculed President Clinton at the very time that Hillary was trying to pass a program of national health care, then it becomes obvious why I want to discredit Kos. He OPPOSED everything the Democrats were trying to do and supported the Republicans when we last had a Democratic president.

Now, MAMZ has repositioned himself, attacking Hillary Clinton from the left instead of from the right, like before. Am I the only one who notices that, from the left or the right, MAMZ is still attacking the Clinton and he is attacking the two Democratic front-runners for the presidency - Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Why are they doing this at the 96% white DailyKos? Is it perhaps because they simply cannot tolerate the idea of a woman or Black or Latino president, and they want to impose John Edwards on us (or ANY WHITE MAN WHATEVER), as long as it's a white man?

Why is the 96% white DailyKos so intent on supporting a white male candidate who only polls at 9% nationally? I'll tell you why! It's because they couldn't care less what Black people and Latinos think. They are white male supremacists and that's why there are more Blacks and Latinos at the Republican national convention per capita than there are at YearlyKos and DailyKos.

If anyone can prove that one of my links doesn't support what I'm saying about MAMZ, then I will apologize. But that hasn't happened yet and MAMZ's supporters aren't even trying to disprove my links. How can you disprove the speech in which MAMZ says he spent six months training at the CIA? How can you disprove the published essay in which MAMZ says he opposes gays in the military?

When MAMZ told us his family was neither rich nor important, how can you disprove the online photograph and article in which a representative of MAMZ's family business says that they have an enormous hotel conglomerate on El Salvador's most exclusive beach, the Costa del Sol.

MAMZ is a liar and a fraud (and very possibly a CIA agent) and there's just no getting around it.

One of the bigger things that kills me about this whole immigration movement bullshit is the bullshit argument that Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, etc. were somehow "stolen" from Mexico by the big, bad, evil USA. Oh, because, that's right, Mexico was such a peace loving utopia with the most magnanimous leaders this world has ever seen until we provoked them into finally taking up arms (and, they would have us believe, they did so begrudgingly). GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK. Ever heard of the Constitution of 1824??? Where was your fucking peace-loving Mexican Utopia when Santa Anna decided to wipe that Constitution with his ass??? If any nation was ever a war-mongering, land-grabbing nation it was Mexico, and Spain before it. We stole the southwestern states??? Go cry me a river. Apparently history began when Mexico lost their land. Bullshit.

The only thing someone who professes this bullshit can say, while still being honest, is that we won, they lost, and they are bitter about it. And it's not as if their culture made such a huge impact at the time to even claim that it was a de facto Mexican state. This isn't the Rhineland. This isn't Alsace-Lorraine. The culture(s) in these regions, be they American, German, Scandinavian, Irish, American Indian, or anything else, not only rivaled but overpowered the "overwhelming" Mexican influence they claim they had. These regions were more Americanized than angry Mexicans today could ever hope to believe (why do you think Santa Anna rescinded the Constitution of 1824??? Texas was becoming too American and too hard to control under Mexican rule.). Most Mexican culture that is now commonplace in these regions is because of the gracious, freedom-loving culture of the US that embraces other cultures and allows outsiders to practice their customs freely, not because these regions are just "so obviously Mexican". If Mexico wants to claim these regions as their own, then I suggest they order their "army" to gather both their rifles, get on their squadron of mules, and just try to "take it back". Otherwise, shut the fuck up, stop taking advantage of a putrid welfare system, and, hey, here's an idea, maybe try to improve your own damn country instead of holding the US responsible for it being the shithole that it is.

the gracious, freedom-loving culture of the US

my GOD thank you for this morning laughter. and um. don't you think your comment is just a smidge off-topic in this thread? hmmmmmmm? unless your anger is somehow associated with the content of this post? you tell me.

a note: please read someone's blog just a bit more before you make the assumptions you do. i was born in the USA. the USA is more "my country" than mexico, and as a citizen and human being with a brain i have every right to criticize it. perhaps in your life you just swoop into places and start spewing your shtick without checking out your surroundings. but it sort of makes you look foolish.

and pssst. we are taking it back. raza grows and grows and knows no border. check your stats, check your census. we are here, we were here before, we will be here tomorrow. and judging from the vitriol and hostility coming from your mouth, maybe it's not Mexico that is the "shithole." just a thought?

Also, my furious friend, your very first sentence offers a piece of disinformation that I cannot overlook. Aside from the redundancy of the word "bullshit"—which is not disinformation, just proof that you woke up a little pissy today and without your Thesaurus—the Immigration Movement has nothing to do with the idea that Mexican land was stolen!

The former is about what has made the USA up since the original (invasion/genocide perpetrated by the) immigrants who came from England, and what still makes up the motives of migrants who reach toward this abundant land: migration and hunger and hope. That is what the Immigration Movement is about. It is about hope and hunger and dreams. The same as which I assume your own ancestors acted upon when they came here, whenever that was.

The latter idea is not mine, though I do personally subscribe to it. However, (this part is important, lean in): I am not "the immigration movement." I am one fellow who owns a blog.

But trumped up wars aimed at stealing resources of others is not a new behavior of this nation, though still a popular one, if we look to the Middle East for proof.

So, you're saying that kos is a fraud who is possibly a CIA agent which means he's covert/clandestine HIDDEN all because he used to be a Republican & lied about being an poor non-influential immigrant?

MAMZ should help get more Democraps to join the Ron Paul r3VOLution!

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

CIA control pet international Agents etc. LIST OF
CIA control pet international Agents etc.
LIST OF NAMES CIA control pet international Agents etc.
Timothy Leary?
Allison Legge
Joe Parise
PET
Sarah Johnson
Charlie Chrisawn
Carvalho Rasmussen
alex jones
tyrk ozoz
Ralf andersen
Tom Zajkowski
Colin Butler
Pia Kjærsgaard
Bjarne Bo Larsen
Cynthia Dame Logan
Jens ( Peter) Mortensen
Pam Hughes
lars 'moslem'
Kareeme Tucker
Germany
Danish royals
jack harmes
INTELLIGENCES
Jens Mogensen? Henrik Sass Larsen? valerie plame ? karl rove? johnny hansen hardington thomas christensen lebrecht 322 boligforening dupont
OSAMA BIN LADEN
Svensson
Koskinen
Julita Brown
Victoria Mortensen
Tiitinev
DF
george tenet
HM
Jeppesen Dataplan
Crowell Aviation Technologies, Inc.
Lockheed?
Devon Holding and Leasing Inc.
Aviation Specialties, Inc.
Keeler and Tate Management LLC
Rapid Air Trans Inc./Rapid Air Transport Inc
Tepper Aviation, Inc.
Stevens Express Leasing Inc.
LCF
Premier Executive Transport Services,Inc.
Aero Contractors
Prescott Support
Maggie Gravelle
Villy Søvndahl
Charlie Chrisawn
Shane Fitzsimmons
Amber Smith
camre mogens?
Ehmsen
israel
batluder
Inger Serup
Juha Leppanen
Tracy Tilly
Kenn mortensen
putin
lars 'moslem'
A. fogh Erasmussen
NATO
Nicholas Turza
mi5
Jens Mogensen ?
cameron
Gregory Asherleigh
Julita Brown
internet
PAUL NYRUP?
hollywood
above