April 13, 2005

4/13: Filiblustering

Although no one knows for certain if Senate Maj. Leader Bill Frist has the votes to exercise the "nuclear" -- or as some GOPers call it, "constitutional" -- option and end the practice of filibusters, that hasn't stopped bloggers left and right from commenting. It's definitely the top issue on the blogs today. As mentioned in yesterday's Blogometer, liberals are split on the matter -- with a surprising number eager to see Frist "pull the trigger." Less surprising, a majority of conservative bloggers want to see the same.

Meanwhile, a number of highly-trafficked liberal bloggers have been debating to what degree the Dem party needs to reassure the public that they care about family issues and are not, so to speak, the party of Hollywood. There is no real consensus, but many are skeptical about trying to appear more socially conservative.

After that, today is a bit of a grab-bag.

TRACKBACKS: One Good Tierney Deserves Another

Where the blog swarm is headed, who's taking part, and what they're saying:

• A New York Times report suggesting the GOP "may hasten" the fight over judicial filibusters drives much of the talk. Another story from The Hill is well-linked as well. Linking to one or both: Brothers Judd; Blogs for Bush; Blogenlust; Confirm Them; Althouse; Beltway Buzz; Southern Appeal; Daly Thoughts. Not linking, but on-topic: Pandagon, TalkLeft.

  >> Conservative Outside the Beltway: "If the GOP is going to do it, there's no time like the present. The "will they or won't they" speculation has been dragging on for months. ... The filibuster is an extra-constitutional device that has been modified numerous times in the past. The system of checks and balances is hardly in jeopardy."

  >> Liberal Talking Points Memo: "Across the board, Tammany rule in the House, keystone kops loyalty tests at presidential events, tolerance and emulation of crankish attacks on sitting judges. This Republican party just isn't a constitutionalist party. It's just not."

  Plenty more on the filibuster debate below.

• Today marks the first column by the New York Times' John Tierney, who replaces William Safire. Unsuprisingly, Times columnists frequently generate a lot of trackbacks. Today is no exception, as Tierney discusses the futures market Intrade, its success in predicting the '04 election and its predictions for the papal conclave. Linkers are mostly conservatives or Times-watchers: QandO; Tom Maguire; Outside the Beltway; Lying in Ponds; Random Birkel; Political Fictions.

  >> Right-leaning law prof Stephen Bainbridge connects it back to the recent John Poindexter kerfuffle: "Maybe they should have let DARPA keep its terrorism prediction market, after all?"

  >> Left-leaning Pandagon goes for the snark: "A new take on the same old e-markets crap - it's not just that they'll have a bunch of researchers coming up with the best information to make a profit, maybe we'll get someone to do something wholly unethical in the process ... and get a scoop!"

  >> Not linking but on-topic: Liberal Kevin Drum passes along a BBC story on papal odds, adding: "Personally, I'm plumping for Jaime Ortega. I don't know anything about the guy, and for all I know he might be somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun. But a Cuban pope would be kind of cool. After all, anything that annoys Castro can't be all bad."

FILIBUSTERS: Fill This, Buster

National Review's Ramesh Ponnuru: "I'm hearing that Republicans now have at least 50 votes to change the rules -- which means at least 51 if you add Cheney. Senator Byrd's hysteria helped pad the total. And if Michael Crowley's reporting in the New Republic is correct -- and I have no reason to think it isn't -- the Democrats have no idea what to do about it."

Conservative RedState: "If Frist changes the rule, so the Senate Democrats do anything substantive? My guess is that they absolutely have to if they intend to be taken seriously. This matter has been too publicly central to their agenda for too long, and through two electoral defeats, that they risk further marginalization at a time when they're leaping up and down, pleading to be taken seriously." The commenters run overwhelmingly in favor of pulling the trigger."

Lefty Mark Schmitt, who worked for then-Sen. Bill Bradley (D) when he delivered a filibuster, writes about that experience and adds: "Opponents of the filibuster argue that without it, the Senate would be a responsive, majoritarian institution. In fact, it would be a tightly controlled institution, like the DeLay House, just a lot less representative. The right of unlimited debate and unlimited amendment is a critical part of what makes the Senate an open institution, and losing it would be very costly to progressives at any time when they did not have complete control of both houses and the presidency."

Radio talker Hugh Hewitt has posted transcripts of separate interviews with pro-filibusterist liberals Nan Aron and Ralph Neas.

DEMOCRATS: Maybe Not The Party Of Streisand, But Definitely Not The Party Of Lieberman

On 4/11, Washington Monthly's Amy Sullivan argued -- with an eye toward Hollywood -- that "Americans are very anxious about the idea that people will do whatever they can get away with, and their perception is that Democrats are the ones who let people get away with things." At Tapped, Matt Yglesias took issue with that -- and unlinkable ex-Lieberman guy Dan Gerstein in a WSJ op-ed -- writing: "Feckless posturing a la Joe Lieberman, I suppose, where politicians will publicly denounce various shows, movies, or video games they find distasteful and then not do anything about it. That's better than censorship, and if it's really what the Democrats need to do to win elections I guess I'll live with it, but it's pretty silly." Yesterday, Sullivan responds at Political Animal: "So far, liberals don't seem to have done a bang-up job convincing Americans that those silly little things they worry about aren't that big a deal. I believe there are actually policies Democrats can pursue that don't involve censoring free speech or impacting how adults consume popular culture. But sometimes it's not about policies." Responding to the response, Yglesias writes that Sullivan/Gerstein are "playing a cynical political game" and adds, "if our disagreement is really just about political tactics, let's have the disagreement on those terms without castigating the less-cynical side as composed of insidious 'cultural elites.' If Amy really thinks there is something government ought to do on the merits to curb popular culture, then I'd like to hear what, exactly, it is."

At Eschaton, Duncan Black agrees with the last point, and adds: "Which policies? I'd like to hear about them. Because, otherwise what we're going to get is some grandstanding and nothing. Again, I'm all for some "feel your pain" speeches, but I'd prefer they're followed up with constructive policies which might actually make raising families a wee bit easier -- such as, you know, providing them with health care."

Oliver Willis writes that Sullivan is "advocating yet another plank of the me-too platform," adding: "I don't think such stances account for much among more than the far religious right -- who are already locked up in the GOP column (and considering their predilection towards killing judges, they can stay there). The only Dem who has made this a major issue is Joe Lieberman."

Rox Populi takes it in a different direction: "As smart as some of these bloggers are, I think they're missing a central point. It isn't "elitism" or the crazy-ass idea that artists of various stripes have these "rights of free expression" that we need to protect that drives production in "culture" or anything else. It's Capitalism -- with a big, giant f--ing 'C'. ... Now, if the people who watch the 700 Club were a giant economic force that liked buying shit more than heathens who like Survivor or CSI, you'd see Pat Robertson on ABC 7 nights a week. But, you don't. Do you?"

JustOneMinute and The Moderate Voice take up the issue of feral cats.

DELAY: Shays It Ain't So

Liberal MyDD points out that Rep. Chris Shays (R-CT) voted in favor of the ethics rule change that requires a majority vote to launch an ethics inquiry. "In fact every Republican member of Congress that fancies themselves as moderates, or not tied to the corrupt or is in a highly competitive district voted to gut the ethics panel." More: "The point of recounting this larger history that everyone already knows is to point out that while we may think Chris Shays is a nice guy, and is doing something right by speaking out by saying that Tom Delay should resign, he's already made the most powerful statement on what he thinks should happen to Republican members who traffic in corruption."

CLINTON: Hilliance?

RedState's Jay Cost has a lengthy post on Sen. Hillary Clinton. He starts with the "gospel" that HRC is a great politician: "I have never understood this. Where do her political credentials come from? It seems to me that she was a great supporting player to a good (though highly overrated) politician. She played the part of the forgiving, intelligent, driven wife with great effectiveness. ... Why is she seen to be a political genius? The answer to this question eluded me for a long time, perhaps because it is so simple. The plain fact is that Hillary Clinton is actually one of the worst politicians in national politics today. She is so feared as a brilliant politician only because she is such an obvious politician, which is actually the key mark of a bad politician."

KERRY: Keeping Count

PoliPundit's Lorie Byrd notes that John Kerry is soliciting stories from Iraq: "Share the story of a family you know that has endured hardship in service to our nation." A reader sends in her reply to Kerry: "Dear John, I'd like to share the story of my son's service in Iraq. However, first, can I ask... won't you share YOUR story by signing the SF-180 form to release your military records?"

Worth noting: At the top of the PoliPundit blog, the following has run for a few months: "[X] days ago, John Kerry promised, on national TV, to sign form SF-180 and release his military records. He has yet to do so." This refers to Kerry's "Meet the Press" appearance, where he told Tim Russert he would sign the form; today is day 73. Conservatives point it out from time to time -- such as Instapundit today -- but Dems who don't want a Kerry candidacy in '08 -- most notably Mickey Kaus have pushed it as well, considering it one possible way to get him off the stage.

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: Well, I Do Sinclair! And A Feather In Our Kaplan

DailyKos highlights a Broadcasting and Cable about how ex-Sinclair Broadcasting reporter Jon Lieberman was denied unemployment benefits in MD because: "We're going to have fun challenging Sinclair licenses as they come up for renewal."

From a story in the Daily Illini, MSNBC pres. Rick Kaplan, on blogs: "The bloggers' accuracy rates are good for baseball, not for journalists. A baseball player can make seven out of 10 at bat and be highly respected. If journalists are only right seven out of 10 times, this would be terrible." Ace of Spades HQ responds: "How's that for 'fact-checking' and 'accuracy'? A baseball player batting f---in' seven-hundred would, in Mr. Kaplan's estimation, have a 'good' accuracy rate, and would furthmore be 'highly respected.' Ummmm ... yeah. And a quarterback who passes for, say, eight thousand yards per game would be considered to be 'upper tier' and 'highly productive.'"

Late 4/12, several days after the GOP memo written by a Sen. Mel Martinez (R-FL) aide re: Terri Schiavo made news, "Armando" from DailyKos writes a letter to Washington Post ombudsman Michael Getler. His focus is the "stenographer work" done by the Post's Howard Kurtz for the "extreme Right Wing website" Powerline: "I charge Mr. Kurtz with gross incompetence as a journalist. I believe Mr. Kurtz has much to answer for regarding his performance as media reporter for the Washington Post. As Ombudsman, I believe this deserves your attention."

DailyPundit disputes the contention by Los Angeles Times columnist Robert Scheer that Pres. Bush "dispatched" Bill Bennett to Rome, and obtains a statement rebutting Scheer from Bennett's radio producer.

SOCIAL SECURITY: In Case You Haven't Noticed, This Issue Is Mostly Dormant

Liberal economist Brad DeLong continues his "Why Oh Why Can't We Have a Better Press Corps?" series with a criticism of a Washington Post editorial favoring Bush's stance on Social Security. The Post recommends dealing with Social Security now, even though Medicare is a bigger problem. DeLong responds: "Dropping a less important issue to deal with a more important issue is 'irresponsible'? In what quadrant could that possibly be true? ... What the Post editorial board does not say is that it has taken on the mission of helping the senior Republican politicians in their corrupt and incompetent irresponsibility by attacking people who actually have a clear view of America's relative fiscal policy challenges.

Meanwhile, pro-accounts SocialSecurityChoice.org's David Hogberg names Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) this week's "Social Security Ostrich," with the full Photoshop treatment.

IN THE STATES: She's Pro-Bush All The Way

Minneapolis Star Tribune reports that bloggers have posted photos of state Sen./MN 06 candidate Michele Bachmann (R) -- the chief sponsor of a state marriage amendment -- was apparently photographed hiding behind bushes at a gay rights rally. The Strib attributes the photos to Dump Bachmann, though they were first posted -- and are easiest to find -- at Eleventh Avenue South. Meanwhile, Students for Bachmann says the article "clear[s] the air" on the subject.

WHITE HOUSE '04: Tying Up Some Loose Ends

In the 3/'05 Vanity Fair, contrarian Christopher Hitchens wrote a serious-minded article alleging troubling problems with the OH vote. Yesterday, a diarist at conservative RedState rebuts Hitchens' article, point-by-point.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Yes, But Without The Drugs

Republic of Heaven: "A recent hypertext trail of posts and comments, which I followed from Obsidian Wings to Jane Galt, sparked some thoughts I've been entertaining about another paradigm that might be useful for thinking about at least some of what goes down on weblogs. In brief, the idea is that one things good weblog discussions and postings do is to recreate the important experience of late-night collegiate bullshit sessions."

LEST WE FORGET: Eye Of The Beholder

BlameBush's "Liberal Larry": "A great big Toot o' the Hooka to Portland's Mayor Potter for his courageous stand against gender fascism by refusing to endorse the Mrs. Oregon Pageant. In a thinly veiled attack on the Gay and Transgendered Community, the pageant has now officially restricted itself to females who were born without penises and are married to members of the Opressor Gender. The same right-wing lunatics who are destroying America with their religious idealism have apparently hijacked the annual pageant and turned it into some sort of beauty contest."

You can probably tell, but BlameBush not a left-wing blog; it's a parody of a left-wing blog. Just making sure.

Posted by at April 13, 2005 12:56 PM