Posted on 08/25/2011 10:17:23 AM PDT by Maelstorm
Yesterday, on the front page of Redstate.com, Erick Erickson lashed out and wrote a blog smearing Jamie Radtke with completely false attacks by publishing libelous pejoratives in hopes of damaging her reputation.
Erickson wrote his column in response to a report on another blog that he had told Radtke, “My bosses are HUGE [George] Allen friends, not just fans. They are socially connected. So I’m having to tread carefully in this.”
Erickson, after confirming that he had made the statement, wrote a vicious blog that defamed Jamie’s character.
“Erick’s blog goes beyond the pale,” Radtke stated. “He crossed the line by publishing complete falsehoods. Now, it is his responsibility to admit he did wrong, set the record straight and apologize – and that is what I am asking Erick to do.
“This kind of scurrilous behavior and treatment has been repeatedly carried out on tea party leaders and conservative candidates who dare challenge the good ‘ole boy Washington Establishment. This attempt by the Washington Establishment to destroy the tea party and their candidates must stop. Enough is enough.
“What is most important is that we focus our attention on beating a President and his liberal Democrat friends who want to fundamentally change America. I encourage the tea party to stay determined and committed to fight back against the negative narrative on us and let’s defeat Obama and his liberal cohorts.”
Carter Wrenn, chief strategist for Radtke’s campaign, stated that a formal letter from legal counsel had been sent to Erickson demanding a retraction. “To put it as bluntly as possible,” Wrenn said, “Erick Erickson made an untrue and malicious attack on Jamie Radtke yesterday and repeated it again today. He should retract his statement, admit it is untrue and apologize for his mistake.”
(Excerpt) Read more at radtkeforsenate.com ...
Take a moment to view a few of her videos. She doesn't sound like a drunk to me.
http://www.youtube.com/user/RadtkeforSenate
I don’t know what to think about Erick.
When he was vying for Herman Cain’s radio show, he was very nice and complimentary, they shared the time slot some, seemed to get along great. Not long after he was established in the timeslot, he started slamming Cain.
If I recall, he’s turned on Palin and others the same way.
I’m not sure what his deal is.
Erickson is childish.
Erick Erickson is a jerk of Biblical proportion.
“I’m not sure what his deal is.”
His “deal” is like so many others in the 21st Century. He’s turned a blog into a launching vehicle to his own celebrity status. Like so many who try, and some succeed, he’s taken the bluster of his web log and parlayed his opining into jobs, speaking engagements, and various other forms of celebrity-level social relevance. Because of Red State and it’s traffic, there are some who equate that to wisdom. Erickson, like so many others, turned the daily vomiting of his blog opinions into cash, via radio gigs and ad revenue from his site. The truth is he’s just another garden-variety, prima-donna blogger narcissist. His blog’s success actually makes him believe that what he thinks matters to the rest of us. Or ought to. Yawn.
I think this is just a case of misunderstanding and I don’t believe the Radkte campaign is blameless however there is no excuse for conservatives to be acting this way with eachother. However the idea that Eric would go nuclear on Radkte and call her a drunk over this misunderstanding was stupid and the more I think of it really just ugly. I thought it was inappropriate for the Radkte campaign to release a personal email exchange but to call Radkte “a drunk” was not just a smack at her but also at the Tea Party she has played such a very big role in. I followed the whole stream of events on twitter and while I do think Radkte has an uphill battle but I’ve getting a bit tired of the efforts to shut out and marginalize any normal person who dares approach the idea of being elected to political office. Now Red State was gracious to host Radkte and give her a slot even though it was unplanned but the whole thing had to have made her uncomfortable especially with the email suggesting that unseen forces were conspiring to limit her campaign coverage. Geeze they might as well have told her they were giving her a mercy slot.
I hate when this stuff happens because I like everyone involved.
Erickson is a douche bag but I think Radtke has proven herself unfit for primetime with the rambling speech that was supposed to be an introduction of the film maker and her campaign’s leak to Politico.
You missed the Radkte melt down entirely and the Erickson heads up on Radkte, obviously. Burned, Radkte is desperate and gone nuclear.
It’s so much easier to just go with the one sided interpretation offered up here, which is basted in rage that Redstate is no longer so enamored with the Palin slow dance and leans toward Perry given it’s Romney without him. Unforgivable. Expect a permanent pile-on to continue here.
I can’t find any indication that Erik called her a drunk. He posted reviews of her speech by others who said she looked like she had been drinking. When she complained, he apologized for that, although not very kindly, suggesting that it was not a good thing that she came across as drinking if she wasn’t.
The odd thing is that Erik doesn’t even support George Allen; he simply doesn’t think Radtke can beat him (I agree with him on that count). Is there any candidate in the primary race who could? I don’t know, but there is at least one other candidate who has gotten some pretty good buzz, I juts can’t remember his name right now so I guess it wasn’t THAT good a buzz.
Allen’s candidate for a state senate seat in my county (Tito the Builder) lost to a more activist, maverick candidate (Jeff Frederick, former RPV chairman). Allen seems like the “safe” pick, and I am not as bearish on his general election prospects as Erik is, but he doesn’t inspire chills and thrills.
Unfortunately, by making a big deal of this, the whole world now knows that her “speech” made her look like she had been drinking — she has elevated this to a big deal, and now others are posting their impressions of her speech and it isn’t going well for her.
One of her supporters at RedState has even said he was sorry for all the nice things he said about her in the introduction he gave for her speech.
I wasn’t at the speech; I assume there’s a youtube somewhere so I guess I could see why some people thought her speech was incoherent. I just think sometimes it’s best not to draw too much attention.
Threatening to sue a blogger because he posts comments from ordinary people who said bad things about you isn’t usually a wise use of your campaign money.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.