On the subject of canvassing:

There’s one possible candidate who won’t be needing me to canvass for him this year.

Stevens, I couldn’t be prouder of all the work you’ve done for Loudoun and Virginia the last few years. Thank you for letting me be part of it.

31 thoughts on “On the subject of canvassing:

  1. BlackOut

    Public office, especially here in Loudoun is a contact sport. Thank you Stevens for entering the arena and advocating. I’ve not always agreed with you but I do honor your commitment to civic duty. Best of luck to you in the future.

  2. Loudoun Insider

    I have had plenty of not so nice things to say about Stevens Miller, but at least he helped get rid of the most obnoxious supervisor ever to walk the planet, took on the rotten LCPS land acquisition process, and stood up for the HOA redistricting plan.

    But hey, why isn’t Paradox13 here commenting on Stevens’ service? He comments on every other post on Loudoun Progress. Is it because he’s Kelly Burk’s lapdog and he’s probably still ticked off about Miller’s support for the HOA plan? Are they still talking about booting Miller from the LCDC?

  3. Epluribusunum

    Come on, LI. That’s pretty uncalled for. Have you seen Paradox comment on any post here in the last couple days? He hasn’t commented on mine, which has been by far the most active one. Seems to me there must be something else occupying his time.

  4. Epluribusunum

    I have to almost agree with you on the “most obnoxious supervisor” assessment, though – which is saying a lot – and possibly the most obnoxious campaigner as well. I recall the Maserati incident. Good times.

  5. Dave Nemetz

    Not that it’s any of your business, but yesterday was his son’s first birthday. I believe that takes precedence over reading and commenting on blogs.

    Grow up.

  6. Epluribusunum

    Well, there you go. Hopefully this will be a lesson on not jumping to conclusions and making dumb accusations of good, committed people with whom one just happens to have political differences.

  7. Paradox13

    I apologize for not being around much over the past three or four days. Apparently I have a job, family and kids that prevent me from obsessively monitoring the blogs for mentions of my pseudonym. I will definitely have to work harder to prioritize my egosurfing.

    LI, for what it’s worth, I have stood up for Stevens and thanked him directly on Without Supervision before (for example: http://stevensrmiller.com/wordpress/?p=916#comments). I’ve also talked to him and expressed my gratitude for his service in person a number of times since he was elected to office. Indeed, I suspect I’ve talked to Supervisor Miller more often in person about a larger variety of things over the past 12 months than you have.

    Furthermore, I do not accept the legitimacy of an anonymous political opponent judging the proper depth of my gratitude towards an elected Democrat. Stevens knows where I stand, and I how I feel about his service, and that’s enough for me.

    As for Supervisor Burk, I think she’s a fantastic elected official who has fought for Leesburg and managed growth with vigor and adroitness. I’m proud she represents me and proud to be a volunteer for her campaign. Indeed, I was inspired to start Leesburg Tomorrow four years ago when I was a volunteer for her first campaign for Supervisor.

    I’m sorry if my lack of care for online verbal banter and namecalling has caused offense. I will not, however, try to do better in the future. I’m too busy trying to make Loudoun a great place for my kids to let silly blog comments bother me.

  8. Loudoun Insider

    Typical hyper-sensitive liberals! Calm down. How are the discussions progressing about expelling Stevens Miller from the LCDC over his actions related to redistricting? Most of you commenting here are on the LCDC Ex. Com., so maybe you can shed some light on this LCDC spat.

  9. Epluribusunum

    It’s not necessary to use name-calling to make your points, LI. Please review our policy. It’s not asking that much to not use ad hominem attacks. Different people have different sensibilities about what is appropriate, so please respect the rules here.

  10. Liz Miller Post author

    Dearest LI, “Lapdog” is both belittling and sexist, and focusing on Evan in this thread was off-topic.

    You are very, very lucky to have had my three co-bloggers arguing in your favor. Please do not press your luck.

    Thank you.

  11. Loudoun Insider

    Lapdog is sexist??? News to me, but you folks are the arbiters of such things. To those not in the know, I was placed into moderation status for my use of the sexist term “lapdog” and have apparently now been let out. I don’t really consider that “very very lucky” but I guess I’ll stop pressing my luck!

    I will admit to derailing the purpose of the thread somewhat, but still do find it amusing that the LCDC is so ticked off at Stevens Miller for his vote on redistrciting that they considered kicking him out of the party. Both Loudoun parties continue to do their best to make themselves irrelevant.

  12. Epluribusunum

    I tend to agree with you here – it’s an ad hominem, but a pretty mild one. The moderaters here are not always going to agree on these things, and that’s fine.

    On the commenting policy in general, think of it this way: Our respective blogs are like our homes, and commenters are guests. At your house, you think it’s ok for someone like JY to saunter up to me and call my humanity into question with slurs I can’t cite here. I go there knowing that those are your house rules, and I don’t ask you to edit or censure him. In our house, we don’t think it’s ok for our guests to treat each other like that. We want the conversations here to have a different tone, and not require that others accept being insulted as the price for participating. We insist that people express their ideas without using that kind of language. It’s not necessarily right or wrong, just different. But these are our house rules, take it or leave it.

  13. Loudoun Middle Man

    Oh, come on. “Lapdog” is used often in the political arena and it isn’t belittling. If an elected official or activist is closely tied and supports or defends every position for one particular individual, it’s an accurate description. Just because something is describing the existence of a close political relationship doesn’t mean it has to be taken as an attack.

    Let’s put it this way. Do we think describing Steve Snow as a lapdog for Greenvest is accurate or ad hominem?

  14. Epluribusunum

    Couldn’t it be both? The question seems to be one of the way we express ideas, not the ideas themselves. All that Liz is saying is that the idea could be expressed without using an ad hominem.

    If people want to discuss the question of what is and isn’t an ad hominem (which would probably be an interesting conversation to have), or anything else relating to the comment policy, would you mind moving it to Liz’s post on that topic? Just trying to keep things tidy!

  15. Barbara Munsey

    [Liz says: I deleted the comment Barbara is responding to here. It DEFINITELY broke my rules and I've had it up to here.]

    And I still wouldn’t take more than this of the bait, because he isn’t on the ballot.

    As you were.

  16. Barbara Munsey

    Thank you Mrs. Miller. I got the feeling after a while that someone was calling, calling, calling SCREAMING my name….

    Kind of like the guy in The Warriors with the pony beer bottles on his fingers: “come out and PLAY-AYYYYY!”

    lol

    I’m not meaning to make light of your annoyance with some of what you’ve had to moderate. And I do thank you.

  17. Loudoun Middle Man

    Point was Epluribus that it wasn’t both. It wasn’t ad hominem.

    That was the point, and I read your comment in its entirety.

  18. Epluribusunum

    I understand, you were making a comparison and you used a flat out rude personal attack to illustrate. That’s why that one was removed, and we’re discussing this one. I get the difference.

    Because lapdog is a term that’s become so commonly used in politics, it’s been normalized. I think it’s going to be hard to know what is and is not considered an ad hominem by someone else, so I guess I would just ask for more tolerance from everyone when the perception of a word seems to be different for different people. Joe just highlighted the difference between their policy and ours, which to their credit works well. I’m thinking of adopting the final word “and if you have a problem with it I order you to go away now and never return.”

    I think the best rule we could all keep in mind is that if you wouldn’t say it to someone’s face or in front of them in their house, you probably shouldn’t say it to or about them here. It is a different level of civility that in no way constrains content or ideas.

  19. Loudoun Middle Man

    Obviously I used an example to highlight that when qualified by certain words, any word to describe someone or their behavior could be ad hominem. I’m sorry you felt that was a personal attack. It wasn’t meant to be. Again, it was meant to be an example.

    Go ahead and Google lap dog. Find some references to anyone, anywhere, other than this blog saying it’s sexist. In fact, the only thing that shows up is this blog. You can find a Jeff Schapiro article. You can find articles about Obama’s actual dogs. You can find columns about Scott Walker and the Koch brothers. The dictionary definition of the word is how LI used it.

  20. Epluribusunum

    Ok. This is where I will bow out because this is not my post. I didn’t remove your comment (and in fact I didn’t see it until after it was removed). Sorry, I didn’t make that clear.

    My general suggestion for a rule of thumb stands. It works pretty well, usually.

  21. Loudoun Insider

    I continue to be absolutely amazed at all of this consternation over the term “lapdog”. Wow. It was absolutely used in a common political context. I still refuse to accept that it is sexist in any way – I’ve never heard of such a connotation and therefore would not use it in a sexist manner.

Comments are closed.