Amy Coffman Disdains the "Senseless World of Blogging"

Candidate for 44th District Missouri State Representative Amy Coffman visited this blog last week to set the record straight on a side issue (she agreed with every fact I had set forth) for the campaign. To preface her remarks, though, she explained that "the time has come for me to personally to address the banter to nonsense that, in my opinion discredits Democrats, the democratic process, and purports the senseless world of blogging and the damage I believe it does to campaigning."

Huh? Or, rather, how typical.

Shrugging off the hostility bristling in her comment, I served up a nice big softball and invited Ms. Coffman to tell me and my readers "What is the most significant policy difference between you and Jason Kander, and why is your position the correct one?" This weekend, in a tremendously kind and classy note, Ms. Coffman politely declined the opportunity to answer (as is her right, by all means).

Think about that.

Why would a candidate refuse an opportunity to deliver her most substantive message to thousands of politically-interested readers, many of whom will be voting in her race?

I will go ahead and speculate that the reason has to do with a desire to avoid "the senseless world of blogging and the damage I believe it does to campaigning".

Personally, I think it takes a lot of chutzpah for a lobbyist to accuse you, me and everyone else involved in the world of blogging of discrediting "Democrats, [and] the democratic process." But, I suppose it makes some sense from the perspective of the lobbying community. The uncontrolled and unpaid-for voice of public opinion is a theoretical threat to those whose business is conducted quietly by people who are paid to go to Jefferson City and make things happen. A blog post by some uncredentialed yahoo in his or her living room could undo a deal painstakingly constructed over countless lunches and dinners in the booths of Jefferson City's finest restaurants.

Perhaps, though, the discomfort with blogging comes from a concern that it coarsens the level of debate. As one who sometimes gets frustrated by the anonymice who spew unsupported venom in the comments sections, I understand the concern. On the other hand, I don't think I've ever seen an anonymous comment unload the profanity I saw directed at me by one of Ms. Coffman's most ardent supporters in person a couple weeks ago. Anybody who has been around political types knows that the gossip, trash-talk and cruelty dished out at a cocktail party could make blog commenters blush.

What's remarkable, though, is that the distrust and hostility toward blogs and those that read them has led a local candidate to refuse such a great opportunity, and to write so negatively about those of us who participate in the "senseless world of blogging". Some of us vote, and many of us host yard signs. Why would she accuse us all of discrediting the democratic process, when we're only trying to participate?

Amy Coffman was offered an opportunity to present her message to thousands of potential voters, but she refused. More disturbingly, she has voiced concern that those of us who read and write blogs are "discrediting the democratic process", but she refused the opportunity to elevate the level of debate by setting forth "the most significant policy difference between you and Jason Kander, and why is your position the correct one?"

I agree with Ms. Coffman that there is nastiness in the blogosphere, just as there is in the world of political insiders. I'm proud that I offered her an opportunity to rise above the nastiness, and saddened that she refused that opportunity, and that she voices such disdain for the rest of us.