May 31, 2005

5/31: Europe Non Troppo

Foreign issues took center stage in blog conversations as the U.S. took it easy this Memorial Day weekend: including France's rejection of the EU constitution and a New York Times report about how the CIA transports enemy combatants. At home, we detect an uptick in stories and arguments about Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) running for POTUS. Meanwhile, a new blog/website goes online this a.m.: TPMCafe. And, last but not least, Oliver Stone.

TRACKBACKS: Drudge IS Big -- It's The Stories That Got Small

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

• Despite prominent placement on the front page of the Drudge Report since last night, a teaser for the book by Washington Post reporter John Harris about the Clinton WH has attracted a moderate level of attention. Most of the interest owes to its implications for Sen. Hillary Clinton's (D-NY) presumed WH '08 bid. Among the higher-profile blogs following the link: conservative Neal Boortz and liberal Pandagon.
  
  

  >> Conservative The Anchoress offers: "My theory: this is the press' way of helping Hillary in her '08 presidential run. Publish all this sensational crap now, and in two years, it's meaningless and forgotten." Lorie Byrd asks: "Is America Ready For Another Soap Opera Presidency?"
  
  

  >> Liberal "Atrios" reposts Sally Quinn's Washington Post article, calling it the "biggest self-indictment of the beltway kool kids ever written." David Sirota picks up on the article and writes: "What is truly nauseating is not the corrupt and cliquey insiderism -- it is the outrage over lying about sex, and the subsequent silence we've all experienced from the media/political Establishment when it has come to the current administration's lying about war." DailyKos concurs.

WAR ON TERRORISM: Is This Any Way To Win A War?

New York Times on apparent CIA-controlled civilian front company Aero Contractors, which controls planes used in moving about terror detainees, and which "can go places American military craft would not be welcome." Talk Left's Jeralyn Merritt terms the fleet "Ghost Air" after the term "ghost detainees." Hawk Bill Roggio at Winds of Change asks, "If you are al Qaeda, and you are interested in interdicting or attacking CIA air services that transport captured high value targets, how would you go about finding out how the CIA is moving these prisoners around?" The answer is "Read the New York Times."

"Armando" at DailyKos quotes from a Washington Post story wherein Gen. Richard Myers is mentioned as saying that "the U.S. has done a good job of humanely treating detainees." The article also has him saying "the U.S. was doing its best to detain fighters who, if released, 'would turn right around and try to slit our throats, slit our children's throats.'" Armando's take: "That inspires confidence in the humane treatment that will be offered General Myers. Boy, it suuuure does."

Little Green Footballs links to an AP version of the story, and comments on Myers' statements: "In a world where millions of people rage over the nonexistent 'abuse' of a book, and where Amnesty International compares Guantanamo Bay to the Soviet gulag, Gen. Richard Myers tries to bring some sanity back into the discussion."

Hawkish moderate Andrew Sullivan, on a Washington Post report that analysts involved in making pre-war WMD judgments have since been promoted: "It's a Bush administration meme. If you screw up, you get promoted, as long as you're a team player. If you really screw up, you get a Medal of Freedom. If you screw up to such an extent that it cannot be ignored, then you find a couple of low-level grunts to scapegoat. If you get something right, but Cheney got it wrong, you're fired. Is this really a way to win a war?"

EU VOTE: Non!

The French vote to reject the EU contitution is widely-discussed, mostly by right-leaning bloggers. Next up, as the AP reports, it's the Netherlands' turn to vote. PoliPundit, on the "undemocratic" nature of the Dutch standards: "A yes vote needs only 45 percent, no matter the turnout. A no vote needs 55 percent, with at least 30 percent turnout. How very fair!" Instapundit notices the same.

Conservative humorist Mark Steyn, who has a considerable online following, slams the "Eurofetishists." As quoted by USS Neverdock, Steyn writes: "'Europe' has fallen behind America in every important long-term indicator, from economic growth to demographics. 'Europe' is an indulgence the real Europe can't afford."

Right-leaning Instapundit offers a brief round-up to writers who see French protectionism and skepticism about a "Greater Europe" as keys to understanding the "no" vote. Under the header "Red State/Blue State France," conservative Power Line posts an image of the French results, region by region. Lyon and Paris are blue like U.S. major cites; more rural areas are colored red. Post title:

Lefty Max Sawicky offers some reasons why the "no" vote was good for the French economy. Meanwhile, The Left Coaster says: "The European worker has everything to lose and nothing to gain no matter which way the EU vote went."

Libertarian Charles Paul Freund approvingly cites a Washington Post op-ed by David Ignatius, which is heavily critical of French pres. Jacques Chirac.

INTRODUCING: The Marshall Post

At his blog Talking Points Memo, ex-Washington Monthly/ writer Josh Marshall this a.m. debuts TPM Cafe (first mentioned by the Blogometer on 4/21). On the About page, he describes it thus: "TPMCafe is a public meeting place to read about and discuss politics, culture and public life in the United States. The site hosts both blogs and public discussion areas."

The overall effect is less like the Huffington Post, another group project spearheaded by one individual, and more like National Review Online, with its multiple, complementary blogs.

The front page, nicknamed "The Coffee House," features familiar to left-leaning blog readers: Steve Clemons from The Washington Note, Ed Kilgore from New Donkey, Mark Schmitt from The Decembrist, plus Columbia prof Todd Gitlin, "60 Minutes" producer David Gelber, and left-moving policy wonk Marshall Wittman. This section has been active since at least 5/27, though only went public today.

A secondary but key feature is a page titled "Table for One," which will feature a rotating cast of guest-bloggers. From 5/31 to 6/3, the guest-blogger will be ex-Sen. John Edwards (D-NC).

Matt Yglesias has relocated his personal blog to TPM Cafe, changing his URL from http://yglesias.typepad.com to http://yglesias.tpmcafe.com. He announces this in a final post at his old address.

Other sections include "America Abroad," about foreign policy, and Warren Reports, on the middle class.

CONG. TRAVEL -- Not Just About DeLay Anymore?

Conservative Captain's Quarters' Ed Morrissey notices: "Caitlin O'Neill, who works for [House Min. Leader] Nancy Pelosi, forgot to file her disclosure form (PDF) for a trip she took to Havana, Cuba. O'Neill ... identifies the purpose of her trip -- as an official duty of Congress -- as 'religious education.'" Morrissey: asks "Has religious education become an official government duty? What would Pelosi's allies at the ACLU say about that?"

Moreover, the "entire cost of O'Neill's trip was borne by the Universal Life Church," which offers free online ordination. More: "So perhaps the House Minority Leader can explain why Caitlin O'Neill went to Cuba in the middle of last December for five days as a guest of a fake church that issues mail-order ordinations."

WHITE HOUSE '08: Like A Roller Coaster Of Hillary

Reuters treatment of VP Cheney suggesting that first lady Laura Bush would beat Clinton in WH '08. Outside the Beltway and others treat the remarks in a light-hearted manner.

Liberal Oliver Willis, on HRC critic Peter Paul calling the aquittal of Clinton's fundraiser an "indictment": "Up is literally down with these yahoos. Rosen was acquited, and that somehow shows that Hillary & Co. are guilty. Somehow."

Righty Tom Maguire replies to recent Hillary Clinton statements, including where she says she is "not one who feels comfortable setting exit strategies," with sarcasm, terming it: "Leaving Iraq While Waiting For Godot."

In a post titled "A Mitt Romney Candidacy is Not Remotely Viable," Mormon blogger Way Off Bass argues that many Christians have seen LDS "as a cult for far too long" for MA Gov. Romney to win the GOP primary.

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: We Go Away For A Weekend, And When We Come Back It's All About The Clintons Again

Conservative Patterico's Pontifications expands on the L.A. Weekly's Jeffrey Anderson article suggesting Los Angeles Times reporter Richard Serrano had a sealed document damaging to one of ex-Pres. Clinton's pardons in 1/01 and yet did nothing about it. He write: "Serrano has a reputation as a dogged investigative reporter, and he seems to come up with a lot of scoops. I sincerely doubt he hid the existence of this document. But the L.A. Weekly story raises a lot of questions about why The Times sat on the information about Horacio Vignali for months, until it was otherwise made public by Congress. ... I have sent Serrano a link to this post and asked him if he can shed any more light on this."

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: Will You Or Won't You?

Mickey Kaus identifies the New York Times' likely TimesSelect subscribers: "1) Dems Desperately Seeking Cocooning Content"; "2) So rich they can pay $49.95 a year for it"; "3) So poor they can't afford to subscribe to the NYT's paper edition (which includes TimesSelect)." He argues that "the area of overlap between these three circles is not huge."

Left-leaning prof Brad DeLong again criticizes departing New York Times public editor Dan Okrent for criticizing Times columnist Paul Krugman without citing an example.

DEMOCRATS: "Dear Dems" Lives On In The Blogosphere

An online column by The New Republic's Kenneth Baer discussing the plight of "hawkish liberals" leads dovish Matt Yglesias to write that many Dem voters don't like Dem insiders much, and proposes "spending more time trying to convince liberals of the merits of our views, and less time re-enforcing the impression that we're just opportunists searching for votes out there in some ill-defined center."

Liberal Patrick Nielsen Hayden of Making Light -- formerly Electrolite -- joins the debate via Eschaton observes: "The reason so many in the Democratic 'base' are infuriated over being lectured by the likes of Peter Beinart and Joe Biden about the need to 'get serious about national security' is that the people delivering the lectures are precisely those who were wrong about one of the most important national security questions of our time."

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Liberal Dance Machine

Last week at the Huffington Post, liberal Max Blumenthal (son of ex-Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal) and right-trending hawkish lefty Christopher Hitchens traded several antagonistic posts. First, Blumenthal criticizes Hitchens for having "defended" Holocaust denier David Irving. Second, Hitchens dismisses Blumenthal, adding: "If I replied to all the slander that appears on blogs, I would have no job and no life." Third, Blumenthal returns with further accusations about Hitchens' alliance-making, taunting: "Dance, Hitchens, dance."

Liberal Marc Cooper: "Cowardly isn't nearly strong enough to characterize this blast of raw sewage from young Blumenthal. He doesn't have the cojones to just come out and declare Hitch is pro-Nazi. He merely tosses around as much innuendo as his two little hands can scoop. Roll over, Senator Joe. This is McCarthyism stood right on its head." Cooper calls Blumenthal a "Leninist Liberal."

A handful of blogs pick up on all this, including one who calls Cooper "Hitchens' press secretary."

IN THE STATES: If Only John Lee Hooker Had Lived To Blog

Perennial TN gadfly John Jay Hooker has started a blog. In his latest post and others recently, he keeps tabs on the "Tennessee Waltz" arrest of 4 state lawmakers, including Rep. Harold Ford's (D) uncle. One of those he links to is GOP state Rep. Stacey Campfield, whose blog 1st reported that the elder Ford appeared to have resigned.

MISCELLANEOUS: Good Bye Lenin!

At her personal blog, right-trending moderate U. WI-Madison prof Ann Althouse spars with Marymount profs Jason Rosenfeld and David Gilbert, the latter of whom joins her discussion board. At issue: Gilbert's casual praise for V.I. Lenin and Althouse's objection to the characterization.

The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz profiles centrist Jeff Jarvis of BuzzMachine, who has raised hackles on the right and left, and who left S.I. Newhouse's Advance Media recently to work on several online projects, including one with the New York Times.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: If We Don't All Chip In, Who Will?

Josh Trevino at conservative RedState and liberal Kieran Healy at Crooked Timber both offer reflections on military service for Memorial Day. Healy, like left-leaning media journalist Dan Gillmor, offer criticisms of current U.S. foreign policy. For a lengthy round-up of mostly right-leaning Memorial Day posts, see TacJammer.

LEST WE FORGET: Throwing The First Stone

Lefty Marc Cooper retells a story on the occasion of "the precise 19th anniversary of the drunkest I ever got. The story even has a celebrity news hook. Because the drunkest I ever got was with Oliver Stone." Cooper, on waking up out of doors: "And the next thing that happened... or let me be more precise... the next thing I remember, I was soaking wet. Drenched. The sprinklers had gone off and I was laying right on top of one. It was 6 a.m. on the dot, and the hotel timers had gone off."

NOTES AND ERRATA: What's That Je Ne Sais Quois I Can't Describe?

If you haven't already noticed, the Blogometer looks and feels a little different today. As we always said, this is an experiment. As we make a few changes over the coming week, we'll explain what we've been up to. Stay tuned.

Posted by at 12:00 PM

May 27, 2005

5/27: Five Sides To Every Story

Yesterday, multiple reports that the FBI had received complaints of Koran abuse were discussed widely throughout the blogosphere, left and right. Today, it's a bit different. The Pentagon says the detainee who first made the Koran-flushing story has now retracted it. Conservative bloggers have seized on this report; liberal bloggers have all but ignored it. The Washington Post reports primarily on the substantiation of 5 cases of "mishandling" of the Koran, mentioning the retraction only in later paragraphs. The conservatives are quick to note this. A few liberals pick up on this Post story; they don't know what to believe from the Pentagon anymore -- in short, they don't.

The delay of John Bolton's vote is also a topic for discussion, as is the fate of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a troubling development for House Maj. Leader Tom DeLay, and rumors of trouble in VA LG Tim Kaine's (D) GOV campaign.

TRACKBACKS: Reuters And The Right, Together At Last

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

• Conservatives, typically no fan of Reuters, nevertheless widely cite the Reuters report on the retraction. The Post story also drives plenty of debate. Linking to one or both: La Shawn Barber's Corner; USS Neverdock; The Anchoress; The Moderate Voice; Little Green Footballs; Obsidian Wings; Michelle Malkin; QandO; Power Line; Hugh Hewitt; Ranting Profs; Michelle Malkin; Think Progress; Corrente.
  
  

  >> Right-leaning Roger L. Simon: "Newsweek's last line of defense just went down the drain. Even Howard Kurtz may not be able to help them now." Conservative John Cole, who had been inclined to believe the Koran-abuse story: "Seems to me the military comes out of this looking better than they ever had. Again- transparency is bad why? All these rumors are now DEAD." Betsy Newmark: "The only reason this is a story is because of the Newsweek non-story. The military is being admirable open about what went on. And it sounds tremendously inconsequential. And the toilet does not seem to be involved, does it? What I would really like to see is that each story include information near the top about how Al Qaeda operatives are trained to lie about their treatment because they know that the media will get all outraged in all sorts of allegations that make the US look bad."
  
  

  >> Left-leaning UCLA prof Mark A.R. Kleiman: "Just because some detainee at Guantanamo says one of his guards put a Koran in a toilet doesn't mean it happened. That should be obvious. On the other hand, just because Lawrence Di Rita says that the detainee in question has recanted -- without providing his name or the text of what he is supposed to have said, and of course without providing any opportunity for any reporter to interview him -- doesn't mean that the detainee has actually recanted. ... Anyone who says he's confident that the Koran-flushing happened or didn't happen is either a liar or a fool. We just don't know, and there's no actual way to find out." Demagogue: "We're told that the incidents of desecration were "minor," but one questions whether the same people who dismissed any reports of desecration can be trusted to accurately characterize the nature of that desecration. But don't expect the conservative commentators who attacked Newsweek for failing to do its fact-checking to level a similar attack on the Pentagon."



• Those discussing the Bolton case pick up on reports from the AP and CNN.com. Those who do the linking: Corrente; Captain's Quarters; The Left Coaster; Angry Bear; David Sirota; PoliBlog. The Political Teen has relevant video.
  
  

  >> Conservative Scared Monkeys: "I would really remind Democrats not to get so smug and overplay your hand. Less than 72 hours after Democrats and the idiot 14 claims the Republic was saved, the Democrats have filibustered. Do you really think there is an appearance of doing the work of the American people?"
  
  

  >> Liberal Ezra Klein: "Looks like the opposition party has decided against going quietly into the sweet night. Good for them. Indeed, I think this may be more important than it appears on first glance. Aside from the obvious utility of holding up Bolton, the power balance in the post-compromise Senate was really up for grabs. ... Rejecting Bolton -- with a filibuster no less! -- proves that the Democrats don't see what happened in the judicial fight as binding them in future confrontations.

JUDGES: A Dime's Worth Of Difference

Conservative Ed Morrissey, on his "Not One Dime" campaign: "I have made clear from the beginning that I would continue to support Republican candidates that demonstrate a backbone and a commitment to the principles they so loudly espoused in the fall of 2004. People like me worked our hearts out to give the Republicans a solid majority in the Senate so that they could lead, especially on judicial nominations. Instead, we have leadership that has proven itself unable or unwilling to rise to the task they themselves set in the election. That's what the Not One Dime campaign targets. When we donate to the NRSC, that money gets distributed by established party leadership in the Senate to campaigns around the country, as the leadership sees fit. That power essentially ties incumbents to the current leadership, because in order to ensure that they get enough funds to have a shot at winning, they need to be seen as supportive of the people holding the purse strings. If the NRSC hasn't got any money of its own, the leadership loses that influence, and the candidates have to put their loyalty elsewhere. ... The GOP needs new leadership in the Senate. It doesn't need millions of dollars flowing into the NRSC that will only strengthen Frist's grip on that position over the next year."

Dem ex-Senate aide Mark Schmitt call the compromise an "optimal experience" for the Senate compromisers: "All the preening self-satisfaction that many noted in the Senators' presentation Monday night appeared to me just glee at being able to do this thing that they love. It's why they are there. Many of them -- the best of them -- slog through all the campaigns and the fundraising and the committee meetings and the rest, just to get to those moments. ... And they have really been denied the opportunity to engage in this basic Senatorial need for a long time."

BOLTON: Intercepted

The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto terms Bolton "Ambassador Phil Connors."

Liberal Steve Clemons, who has been pushing the NSA intercepts angle for weeks, writes in a post titled "I Am So Dizzy: We Won Another Battle": "This is a victory... another one. The media has been CONSTANTLY WRONG. Ok... I am going for a drink. There is still room for faith in American democracy, the rights of the minority, and standing by principle. John Bolton is NOT someone America can be proud of at the U.N. He is not someone of the sort of impeccable credentials, standing, and vision that we should be making our Ambassador in the convocation of nations in Turtle Bay on Manhattan."

Belgravia Dispatch: "Steve knows I respect his evident passion that Bolton isn't the right guy for USUN. But the problem that occurs when a blog becomes a monomaniacal crusade is that you can get a little (or a lot) carried away. Regular readers know my support of Bolton has been caveated. I won't rehash the reasons ... But the point here is that Steve has been darkly hinting that this NSA story was a huge horror for weeks now. But, at least as best I can tell, it really has no legs."

DELAY: Not Out Of The Woods Yet

Lefty Charles Kuffner gives a rundown on the TRMPAC civil suit, where a judge found the treas. of Tom DeLay's PAC violated election codes by not reporting funds raised. Kuffner: "The actual ruling strengthens the prosecution's case against them. Maybe this will increase the pressure on them to try to cut a deal."

Liberal Tapped: "There's been something of a lull in the press attention on DeLay and other congressmen's ethical woes recently, which has provoked some crowing from Republicans. ... But obviously a press feeding frenzy can't be sustained at fever pitch indefinitely. What's going to keep the heat on DeLay and his buddies is a succession of actual processes and events that will require press coverage and will be happening over the course of the next year or so."

REPUBLICANS: Look Out For The Neo-Gs

DLC's Marshall Wittman: "Since the Schiavo case, the Moose [i.e. Wittman] senses that there is increasing discomfort within Republican ranks about big government, religious right over-reach. The veto threat against the stem cell bill must increase the unease among many GOPers regarding the power of the Dobsonites. You don't have to be a pro-choice, Arlen Specter Republican to be uneasy with the rise of the theocrats. Indeed, prominent pro-life Republicans in Congress are bucking the social conservatives on stem cells. The 'neo-Goldwaterites' are Republican center-right voters who are fiscally conservative-libertarian, defense hawks who are repelled by the inordinate power of the religious right. They are not necessarily moderates -- in fact they have a deeper commitment to balanced budgets and limited government than the Bushies. Watch for the 'neo-g's' to play a significant role in the '08 Republican Presidential primaries as the conventional Bushie-cons divide the spoils of the religious right. And Barry's band has a natural leader who is truly the heir to his political legacy."

A few liberal blogs take note of Jim VandeHei's Washington Post story, titled "GOP Tilting Balance Of Power to the Right."

Ezra Klein: "Coming from a paragon of neutrality like VandeHei, this is a primal scream of an article -- the roar of a longtime government reporter sick to death of watching the beat he covers being burned to the ground. And beyond mere shock value, it's the most concise, clear, and wide-ranging explanation of what Republicans have done to the government I've seen." The Left Coaster: "It makes one wonder where WaPo was when the Ship of State hit the radical iceberg! Has it really gotten to be so bad that even the Washington Post has finally taken note and dared to publish this 'revelation' as if it were news to the rest of us?"

ABORTION: Can Dems Luntz The Abortion Issue?

MyDD's Jerome Armstrong, on how Dems should handle abortion: "Frank Luntz told the Republicans to say that they too were for the environment, that they too were environmentalists. The Democrats snickered, but it worked, and has served to neutralized that issue ever since. The Democrats said, no you are not. And the Republicans replied, yes I am, I just don't want the government to stifle economic growth through regulation. Boom. The debate was immediately re-framed over the issue of government intrusion, and Democrats were left holding the bag. ... So if a politician says I am pro-life and Democrat, lets hear them out. The Republicans will snicker and respond, no you aren't. And if the politician responds by saying yes I am, I do not like to see abortions, but will not legislate or have the government intruding into this private decision between a woman, her family, and her doctor. That's a politician that belongs in the Democratic Party. And boom, this is a politician that's going to put the Republicans on the defensive." DailyKos agrees.

Conservative Jon Last at Galley Slaves comments: "What a genius! Peter Beinart has a lot of work to do."

IRAQ: Zarqawi Death Watch

Righty Will Collier at VodkaPundit: "I'm hearing quite a bit of chatter through the USAF contractor grapevine that Zarqawi is dead. The only reason I mention it here is, the rumor is apparently rampant at Hurlburt Field, home of the Air Force Special Ops guys, some of whom would be in a position to know such things. Take it for what you paid for it, but I certainly hope the murderous son of a bitch is assuming room temperature in Hell."

Conservative Austin Bay: "Has Zarqawi been wounded or is he dead? Or is he being 'withdrawn from the combat zone?' I raise these questions because at this point in time Zarqawi may be more valuable to Al Qaeda as a 'mythic warrior' or 'ghost.' It's tough to kill a myth and darned hard to kill a ghost. Here's the argument: Zarqawi's damaged goods, physically and politically. From Al Qaeda's point of view, and possibly Saddam's henchmen, it's time to get Z-Man out of Iraq, and then have Al-Jazeera and Newsweek turn him into Robin Hood."

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: Maybe 'Blogs Vs. The NYT' Would Be More Accurate

Ace of Spades HQ, on the New York Times' falling share price: "Hot Tip: Sell the MSM Short."

On the eve of France's EU vote, Man Without Qualities writes that New York Times columnist/economist Paul Krugman's contributions to internat'l trade are being completely ignored: "It's a wild, uninhibited intellectual Gallic free-for-all on the nature and consequences of international trade! Almost everything is up for discussion! Except, of course, that nobody, absolutely nobody, cares to talk about anything Herr Doktorprofessor Paul Von Krugman ever wrote, thought or believed on the topic de jour! Some things just don't matter at all."

Washington Post's Howard Kurtz e-mails Instapundit to correct the impression that Kurtz thought the Post's 5/26 story on the FBI memos "vindicates" Newsweek.

Hugh Hewitt interviewed the Washington Post's Dana Milbank on his radio show last p.m. Hewitt's producer posts the transcript at Radioblogger. Quickly addressed is the matter of ABC News' Terry Moran saying the press has an anti-military bias. Says Milbank: "Karl Rove has put it this way, and Ari Fleischer's put it this way, both of them in the last few months, and have said there seems to be a left-wing bias in the media. I don't dispute that. What they say, though, is the overriding bias is one towards conflict, rather than ideology, and I think they're right about that, too. But the one area where I think people have an overwhelming sense of respect in this business, is the military. Now that doesn't neccessarily extende to the civilian leadership at the Pentagon, and for good reason. So, I think maybe it will be more useful to make a distinction between the troops in the field and the political figures in the Pentagon."

ELECTIONS: The Stamp Act

RedState's Mike Krempasky: "So I imagine that postal reform simply ain't the sexiest issue that you'll read about today. But just last week, the American Association of Political Consultants scored a win for the little guy - and on the side of competitive elections. In essence, the AAPC fought back an effort to increase political candididate's postage rate from the current 19 cents to the full 37 cent first class rate. Small, local, or underfunded (read: challengers) campaigns would be hit the hardest and as a rule, I'm for anything that reduces the amount of money an insurgent candidate needs to challenge the establishment. Kudos to the AAPC."

IN THE STATES: Is Kaine Able?

Commonwealth Conservative, on Kaine's "rudderless" GOV campaign: "The base is wondering what's going on in this campaign, especially with respect to failing to stick around at the NAACP event, and then failing to return the calls of the [Richmond Free Press] (which led to the unflattering front page story about Kaine). What's bizarre about the fact that Kaine's camp didn't return the RFP's calls is that the Free Press comes out every Thursday. The NAACP event was last Friday. Kaine's campaign had plenty of time to return calls. ... I'm hearing definite rumblings among Democrats -- plugged-in Democrats -- that the Kaine ship is rudderless and had better pick up the slack soon, or they'll still be trying to nail down their base in September. At some point, you have to wonder if heads aren't going to roll at Kaine headquarters."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Time Flies

Markos Moulitsas, yesterday: "I almost didn't notice. Today is the three year anniversary of Daily Kos. That's three years in regular time. 15 years in Internet time. 21 years in dog time. And 478 years in blog time."

LEST WE FORGET: Richard Johnson

The Phallic Logo Awards.

NOTES AND ERRATA: Correctamundo

Yesterday the Blogometer wrote about an ad/button/logo created by right-leaning bloggers to protest a liberal activist for outing gay conservatives. What the Blogometer did not notice at the time was that the story was ... how shall we put this? Two months old. The Blogometer pledges to look more closely at the date stamp from here on out. Hat tip: RedState's Krempasky.

Posted by at 12:00 PM

May 26, 2005

5/26: Believe It Or Not!

The big news this a.m. is the latest developments in the Koran-flushing allegations from Gitmo. Multiple outlets carry reports on FBI memos revealing that the detainee's claims were first made as far back as 4/02. After a week and more of this story, viewpoints tend to be pretty well locked in. Those inclined to believe the charges see it as partial vindication of Newsweek; even if their source was wrong, the story was right. Those who tend to dismiss the allegations deem the detainees as not credible and argue it's simply old news. Bloggers on both sides link to the source documents as provided by the ACLU and implore the reader to make up their own minds.

Meanwhile, the averted filibuster showdown remains a hot topic. Elsewhere, a number of right-leaning blogs are fighting back against a left-leaning activist known for outing gay conservatives, stem cells are debated and more shots are taken at the New York Times. Plus, we present our second blogger interview.

TRACKBACKS: It Probably Isn't Fair To Keep Calling This The "Newsweek Story," But ...

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

• Reports by the Washington Post, Reuters and AP are all widely-linked by bloggers on the left and right. Among the many: The Moderate Voice; Oliver Willis; Rox Populi; Wizbang; Michelle Malkin; INDC Journal; Murdoc Online; Charles Johnson; Pacific Views; Just One Minute; Steve Soto; Get Religion; The Sideshow; Liquid List; Balkinization; Ranting Profs; DailyKos; USS Neverdock; Tapped; Power Line; Silent Running; BuzzMachine; Citizen Smash; Think Progress; Captain's Quarters.
  
  

  >> Silflay Hraka: "As a lawyer, I know what proof is. At a minimum, it's enough facts to make the occurrence of an event more likely than not. I'm not sure the collected allegations add up to proof. ... On the weight of the evidence, the Koran abuse allegations aren't credible. Have some guards probably treated the Koran insensitively? Probably. Is it anything like the horrors portrayed in the articles and by Michael Isikoff? Highly doubtful. But don't take my word for it. Read the source documents yourself, and make up your own mind." · Right-leaning Balloon Juice disagrees: "Right now, Isikoff and some folks at Newsweek are ordering a big glass of STFU for their critics." · At The Corner, John Podhoretz says the Koran flushing stories might be true, but also writes: "It's also very possible that the whole thing is an Al Qaeda distortion game of the sort discussed in the infamous training manual uncovered in Manchester, England -- in which terrorists were instructed to use the softness of liberal democracies against liberal democracies should they get captured. These are sociopaths we're talking about here."
  
  

  >> Rising Hegemon responds to Podhoretz: "Yes, since they have been deprived of due process, in some cases, for more than two years now we can just assume they are all Al Qaeda terrorists right? Now, THAT'S AMERICA!" · This Modern World predicts the media will report the Pentagon's version: "Because it doesn't matter how many times the Pentagon lies--they want to believe, and always will. They are Charlie Brown to the Pentagon's Lucy, but without the anguish. They lay on the field after the football has been snatched away and do not even notice that their clothing is lying in improbable heaps around them, do not realize that they have been played for fools once again." · Liberal-leaning ex-Army atty Phillip Carter: "It's possible that this allegation would spread itself and replicate itself throughout the detainee population. But given the totality of abuses alleged at Gitmo and elsewhere, there's a lot of circumstantial evidence to suggest that these incidents were real. I recommend reading through the FBI records yourself, and coming to a conclusion based on your evaluation of the surrounding facts. When you add all up these allegations, do they seem credible to you?"

JUDGES: Everything But The Duck-And-Cover Drills

Right-leaning Decision '08 creates a sidebar button for bloggers who are not completely aghast re: the filibuster compromise to identify as part of the "Coalition of the Chillin.'" It states it is "dedicated to the proposition that the world didn't end on May 23, 2005."

Lefty journalist David Corn reports on seeing Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) discuss the "no-nuke" compromise at an Alliance for Justice luncheon. Said Durbin: "I wish we could say today that we won, that the nuclear option is behind us ... But we all know the real battles are ahead. ... I know many of you are disappointed. I understand that, and I share that." Adds Corn: "According to Durbin there was one GOP senator who 'was our perfect ally -- every Sunday morning.' That is, this senator would appear on the Sunday talk shows and sound 'reasonable' (in Democratic terms). But when Durbin and other Democrats subsequently spoke with him this senator said he was having second thoughts about his remarks. Durbin did not ID this fellow. But my guess: Senator Chuck Hagel. Durbin said he suggested to [Senate Min. Leader Harry] Reid, 'why don't we schedule the vote on a Sunday morning.'"

Power Line, on the 56-43 confirmation of Priscilla Owen: "By contrast, Ruth Ginsburg, whose history as an ACLU lawyer and activist could have made her a more legitimately controversial figure, was confirmed on a 97-3 vote. Historically, Republicans have never adopted the Democratic tactic of first smearing, then voting against judicial nominees with whom they disagree politically. It will be interesting to see what the Republicans do next time we have a Democratic President.

Duncan Black from Eschaton seizes on this line by the Washington Post's David Broder: "If -- as many expect -- [John] McCain and [Senate Maj. Leader Bill] Frist find themselves rivals for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, the gap in their performance will be remembered." He responds: Um, no. No one gives a shit. ... It just isn't the case that there are two sides two every issue, there are courageous people who can forge a compromise if they want, and that compromise is intrinsically better than the original two positions. More importantly, it just isn't the case that the electorate is especially enamored with compromise. McCain's popularity, largely a media creation thanks to friendly copy written by happy well-lubricated journalists during his primary run, had nothing to do with his being a 'moderate' or a 'compromiser.' It had to do with the perception that he was 'independent' and an 'ass kicker.'"

Tapped's Sam Rosenfeld agrees, calling it the "fetishization of 'compromise,'" and singles out AEI's "sturdy institutionalist" Norm Ornstein as having "reflexive goo-goo eyes for any sign of centrist deal-making and compromise," despite being "the man who a few weeks ago wrote the definitive argument for the illegitimacy of the nuclear option."

BOLTON: Enough Already

Belgravia Dispatch quotes from the 5/30 New Yorker article on McCain, which depicts him asking demanding questions of a German official re: negotiating with Iran. The official is quoted as saying, "Was it helpful? Surely not. I don't think he was interested in listening to why we believe this is the best way forward. John McCain is like a charging bull. He loves to fight. That morning, it didn't win him new friends." Belgravia Dispatch responds: "Oh, what a pity. I'm sure McCain would be devastated to hear this. I have to say, reading this kind of risible crap gets me in the mood to say let's all get behind John Bolton, shall we, and send him to [U.N.] soonest."

STEM CELLS: So Much Deliberation, So Little Impact

Power Line's Paul Mirengoff, on stem cells: "On balance, while I admire [Pres.] Bush for taking a principled stand on the issue, I tend to think he's taken the wrong stand. On the one hand, I agree that the human embryo in any form or context has intrinsic moral significance. On the other hand, to the extent that embryos at fertility clinics that are going to be discarded anyway can be used for potentially life-saving research, a pro-life argument arises for supporting the research. "

Ed Kilgore at New Donkey, on Bush's position: "He's not for banning federal funds for research on existing stem cells, mind you ... He's not for banning research so long as it's funded by somebody other than Uncle Sam. And most importantly, he's not for banning the deliberate creation and destruction of embryos at fertility clinics, even though that is where all of the 'destruction of human life' goes on. But those aren't all the 'anti-life' practices George W. Bush doesn't seem to be against. The only possible rationale for his position on federal funding of stem cell research is that he shares the hard-line Right to Life movement belief that human beings deserving the full protection of the law exist from the moment of conception. So why isn't he calling for ban on IUDs or "morning after" pills? (To be sure, his FDA is trying to make it harder for women to get morning-after pills, but if there's been any talk of a ban, I haven't heard it)."

Conservative Baldilocks writes, "'discarded' embryos" are the "dirty little 'secret' of the fertility industry; the detritus of the 'agony of infertility,' as if one must have progeny from her body at all costs; even the cost of her other *existing* progeny. One is reminded of the well-to-do woman who, pregnant with triplets, aborted two of them. Too inconvenient, you know. Sophie's Choice, perverted."

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: Tough Choice

Vanity Fair's James Wolcott is the latest liberal blogger to criticize ABC News' Terry Moran for his appearance on the Hugh Hewitt show (see 5/20 Blogometer): "Moran told the hoot owl that there was indeed, as conservatives have contended, 'a deep anti-military bias in the media.' ... What rot. Show me the implanted media sneer against the police and FBI. Since 9/11 it's become almost sacrilegious to question, doubt, or accuse anyone in uniform involved in security enforcement. And the press has been pretzeling itself to show respect to religious pro-lifers and fundamentalists to the point of Moran's own network doing a full hour on 20/20 devoted to Jesus's resurrection (which they treated as a historical fact, not mythic fantasy)."

The Left Coaster: "Here's a hypothetical question for you. Let's say you have only two news choices: Fox News or Al Jazeera. Which one do you pick? I'll get the ball rolling for you. I'll take Al Jazeera over Fox. Plain and simple. What say you?" The first commenter chooses "Pravda in the Brezhnev years."

Riffing on the New York Times' pay-to-read-the-columnists plan Slate's Tim Noah recently asked readers to put dollar values to each Times columnist. NYC-focused Gawker follows up: "Both of today's Times columnists, added together, do not equal one Maureen Dowd ($3.42). Someone's gotta do something about this, it's getting embarrassing."

BLOGS VS. THE WORLD: Even If They Can't Replace The MSM, They Could Displace It A Bit

Jeff Jarvis of BuzzMachine, on the number of blogs in existence: "If all this is only about bragging rights, it doesn't matter. Brag away. Debate at will. Who cares? The power of blogs is not about the total or the biggest (that's so old-media-think, so mass) but instead about the rising volume of individual conversations. BUT ... if this is about advertising, then we do need to establish real numbers." He lists several things that will be needed to do so, including "We need to measure the unique value of citizens' media, finding measures of influence and conversation-starting and such. (See the discussion Ross Mayfield and I had with others over, in Ross' words, the need to move past measuring impressions to measuring the impressed.) This is the unique value of citizens media -- it's about relationships, conversations, influence, not just about the coincidence of a word on a page."

Red State Rant posts an interview of ex-Sen. Zell Miller, featuring questions by writers for VodkaPundit, Betsy's Page, Power Line, Evangelical Outpost and other widely-read blogs. Read part 1. Read part 2.

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Out And About

Update: While events in this section are accurate, they also took place... gosh, this is embarrassing... two months prior to this edition. See 5/27 "Notes & Errata" for the published mea culpa.

The Outlet Radio Network blog reports, gay activist Mike Rogers -- best known for outing ex-Rep. Ed Shrock (R-VA) in late '04 -- "continues to target critics in an ongoing saga of an online jihad within the blogosphere. This time the target was LimeShurbet.com, a blog whose site was taken down overnight by the site's commercial service provider. According to sources, Lime Shurbet had taken GayPatriot's 'WANTED: GAY TERRORISTS' post and created his own 'wanted poster' targeting Michael Rogers and John Aravosis (Americablog). Rogers alerted the service provider which then shut the site down." Note: Lime Shurbet is back up as of this a.m.

The copy accuses Rogers of "Systematically conducting outing witch hunts against gays who do not believe in radical liberal anti-American ideals," and for "Repeated violations of privacy of gay Americans." The ads implore readers to "voice your disgust at his TERRORIST TACTICS!" and includes multiple e-mail addresses at Rogers' website. Among those posting it: Classical Values, Haight Speech, Gay Orbit and the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler.

At The Corner, Warren Bell writes of reading James Wolcott's blog post "Little Bully Lobbies Big Bully into Doing Its Bombing," "Wolcott's take on this past weekend's AIPAC conference. His version of reporting seems to be culling sources from the Financial Times and the Corner, and then he mixes in his own tangy New York snark, resulting in something a bit more nauseating than" a childhood memory of feeling "slightly sick feeling and a sadness about not being smarter" after walking out of the sideshow at a local fair. Wolcott has taken his own shots at The Corner recently (see 5/18 Blogometer).

WHITE HOUSE '08: What's A Senator?

Blogging for Bayh, on the difficulty of being a sitting senator running for POTUS: "I truly do not think that most voters really pay that close attention to whether their candidate is a Governor, Senator, or Congressman. Some might actually not even know the difference in those jobs, which is a sad fact for our social science instruction in the U.S. Did most voters know that Kerry was a Senator, NOT a Governor? I really don't think many did. They just knew he was a Massachusetts politician. Or Edwards? Governor or Senator? WE know. But many do not. I don't think Evan Bayh being a sitting U.S. Senator in 2008 will make a dimes worth of difference to the American people."

BUSH: Great Moments In Oratoristical History

Quite a few liberal bloggers seize on the following Bush quote: "See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." Crooks and Liars has the audio in MP3.

BLOGGER SPOTLIGHT: The Amazing Pandagon Adventure

The second installment in our ongoing series of twice-weekly interviews with the bloggers quoted by the Blogometer. Like the Hotline's Staffer Spotlights, everyone gets the same questions. The difference is that here we add URLs. Today we talk to Amanda Marcotte, one of two bloggers at Pandagon.

What is your full name?

Amanda Marcotte

What is your age?

27

Where did you grow up?

I was born in El Paso but went to high school in Alpine, a small town in West Texas.

Where do you live now?

Austin, TX

What is your occupation? Have you ever worked on a political campaign or for the mainstream media?

I work in education and have never had any kind of political or media experience.

When did you start blogging and why?

I had grown addicted to reading blogs and just thought instead of commenting on others, I'd start my own, which was Mouse Words. A year into Mouse Words, after winning the Koufax for Best New Blog, Jesse Taylor invited me to Pandagon, where I currently reside.

What has been your favorite post, or favorite story to write about, in that time?

Tough call -- my blogging style isn't as day-to-day news dependent as most bloggers, so I write a lot of humor pieces mocking articles that promote backwards gender stereotyping.

Describe your typical blogging schedule. And what is your average output?

I blog in the morning when I get up and in the evening when I get home. I write 5-6 posts a day on average.

Who is your favorite political blogger? Favorite non-political blogger?

Right now I'm in love with Pam from Pam's House Blend. Favorite non-political blogger is Flea at One Good Thing.

Who is your favorite mainstream media columnist?

Probably Molly Ivins, who's of course a hometown woman.

What is your favorite television news program, either network or cable?

Don't watch TV news, unless it's the local news. It gives me a headache.

What MSM-produced websites (i.e. newspapers, magazines) do you visit on a daily basis?

Salon and I read the news off the AP wire.

What non-MSM websites (i.e. blogs) do you visit on a daily basis?

Too many to count, though the one blog I read everyday no matter what is Feminist Blogs, because it's a great place to read many of my favorites in one place.

How often, or do you ever, read a newspaper in its dead-tree (i.e. print) form?

I do read the college paper nearly everyday, but other than that, I don't read print newspapers.

How do you see the new media and old media affecting and influencing each other in the next five years?

Contrary to the high aspirations of many bloggers, mostly conservative bloggers, blogs are not journalism. They are, however, opinion writing and they are beginning to wield influence over mainstream opinion writing.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: How Insular Are Online Discussions?

At Crooked Timber, Northwestern prof Eszter Hargittai previews a survey on the linking and cross-ideology debate between liberal and conservative bloggers: "We found that about half of the links represent what we classify as straw man arguments. The liberal bloggers in our sample are more likely to engage in such cross-linking than the conservative bloggers. However, we also found some evidence of substantive cross-linking. In these cases bloggers may either agree or disagree with the other person, but they do address the content of the other blogger's post. Also, we did not find that bloggers address the substance of those who resemble their point-of-view very often either. ... Overall, it would be incorrect to conclude that liberal bloggers are ignoring conservative bloggers or vice versa. Certainly, liberal bloggers are more likely to address liberal bloggers and conservative bloggers are more likely to link to conservative bloggers. But people from both groups are certainly reading across the ideological divide to some extent." A nifty-looking but somewhat opaque graph that goes with the overall study -- to be released soon -- is available here.

LEST WE FORGET: That's Not A Miracle, It's Lard In A Jar!

Posting the nutritional table for Hellmann's Real Mayonnaise and asking his "science-minded" readers to weigh in, Steve at The Sneeze wants to know how long a healthy adult could live "eating only water and mayonnaise." There is much disagreement in the 107 commetns that follow.

Posted by at 12:00 PM

May 25, 2005

5/25: Middling Progress?

It's all about the moderates. Many on both sides of the jud. debate remain displeased with the senators who brokered the 5/23 filibuster compromise, but the blogosphere in aggregate is speculating about whether their relevance will last beyond this episode, on the GOP-controlled House's passage of new stem cell legis. and on a rumored Social Security compromise. Even the notion that they saved the prosperity of the D.C. metropolitan area is floated.

Meantime, conservative blogs are buzzing about a report in the Boston Globe that John Kerry has signed Form SF-180 which would release his military records as he promised on "Meet the Press" earlier this year. The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto describes the Globe story as asking "the question that's on everyone's mind, or at least the mind of everyone who gets his kicks by cruelly tormenting ex-presidential candidates." Indeed, the PoliPundit blog had kept the question current by creating and offering to all takers a "SF-180 Clock." This is day 115.

Plus, the MSM starts to pick up on "EasonGate II," the left goes after ABC's Terry Moran, and the truth about "Blogebrity" comes out.

TRACKBACKS: Will This Report Last A Week?

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

• Only 1 MSM-originating story seemed to spur any more than a handful of posts in the last 24 hours, and that 1 is an a report in BusinessWeek suggesting that Senate Dems, GOPers and the WH are "inching toward compromise." It seems to attract the interest of liberal and conservative blogs about equally, and neither side likes the sound of it: Talking Points Memo; Tapped; Brothers Judd; DailyKos; Angry Bear; The Corner.
  
  

  >> Liberal TX blog Pink Dome: "This is one of those moments that Democrats manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. We had it won. President Bush is still out there touring the countryside and the polls show no one wants private accounts. .. You know, the one time we said "This is all or nothing guys. Just hang in there and we can talk about this after the Bush presidency if you really want to." They couldn't f---ing do it. They couldn't even last 6 months."
  

  >> GOP Bloggers: "Once again, why bother voting Republican if it means blocking originalist judges and raising taxes? If a Republican majority in the House and the Senate follow up a surrender to Democrats on judicial nominations with tax increases, you can mark this day as the day the Republican majority began to disintegrate."

JUDGES: Where The Debate Was Yesterday, Except With More Time To Think Of Clever Put-Downs

Left-leaning Lawyers, Guns and Money: "There are those who are characterizing this a victory for the center. If by center, you mean '14 Senators who self-identify as centrist' than maybe you have a point. But if you mean 'centrist politics' you're dead wrong. Let's be frank about what this deal did: fancy promises with out clauses big enough to drive Mack trucks through aside, this deal did one tangible thing: it sends three judges to the Senate floor ... [and] whatever they represent, it isn't centrism."

Righty Hugh Hewitt: "Slate says 'conservatives are furious' before pointing to my blog entries on the subject. That's not completely true ... I think it is far more accurate to say GOP activists -- of all ideological stripes, including big-tent, Arlen Specter-supporting, party-first folks like me -- are furious because they know what the "deal" does to the NRSC and the effort to build a lasting majority. You can stray on Social Security and private accounts and be a good Republican. You can vote to keep ANWR closed and be a good Republican. You may favor abortion rights or same sex marriage rights (though not their imposition via court diktat), and you can even vote against any particular judicial nominee on sincere grounds, and be a good Republican. But you can't sell out the Constitution. And you shouldn't sell out good people unfairly slimed by extremists of the left. The gang of seven did both."

Liberal Nathan Newman: "This deal is perfect for the moderate GOPers. Filibusters are allowed only on judges that the moderate GOPers say may be filibustered. And those moderate GOPers get to vote against those candidates that are filibustered, playing the double game of keeping their conservative bona fides while claiming to uphold traditions of the Senate. As for the moderate Dems? Nothing. They betrayed other Democrats while gaining no real new power. If the Democrats as a group had decided to go for the deal, it might have reflected a tactical win for the Democratic caucus, but this is just a stab in the back."

Mark Noonan of Blogs for Bush: "All conservatives want to do something about the betrayal by the Spineless Seven; but what to do is the big issue, right? Some want to punish the whole GOP, but I see that as self-destructive; it might even lead to a President Hillary Clinton on January 20th, 2009. Mustn't have that. So, how about we concentrate our efforts on getting rid of the Seven, or at least putting enough pressure on them that they might even think that a laudatory editorial in the Washington Post isn't worth betraying their own Party? We could call it Seven PAC; a political action committee designed to gin up and support primary opponents for each of the Seven as well as helping to support GOP efforts against the seven Democrats involved."

Dem blogger Oliver Willis is selling T-shirts and other apparel mocking through the DIY merchandising store Cafepress. The image used on each one is a picture of Senate Maj. Leader Bill Frist above the word "MEOW."

Late 5/23, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) weighed in at DailyKos, saying: "This is not a good deal for the U.S. Senate or for the American people. Democrats should have stood together firmly against the bullying tactics of the Republican leadership abusing their power as they control both houses of Congress and the White House."

Conservative Slowplay, weighing John McCain's Tradesports WH '08 trading value: "The only thing resolved in this so-called 'deal' is that if John McCain wants to be president he's going to have to win the Democratic nomination. This may be a good time to sell McCain short in his bid."

STEM CELLS: Is It Alive?

Centrist Jeff Jarvis, in a post titled "The moderate revolution": know it's too much to hope for, but how I do hope that we have the stirrings of a moderate revolution against the fringers. The end of the filibuster standoff is a start. We know it worked because it pissed off people on both sides. Next comes an effort to find a middle ground on stem cell research -- following the quite moderate opinions of Americans. ... There is a real opportunity for the middle to take the lead. I believe a moderate candidate who could make it through the primaries would win the White House. The only question is who."

RedState recommends that Bush veto the stem cell bill headed for his desk: "Effectively, this bill directly overturns the President's 2001 policy. Now that it has passed the House, it will inevitably end up at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. ... RedState is a Republican site first and foremost, and we recognize there are those in our party who disagree with this position. We respect their well-intentioned conviction. But we refuse to feign respect for any political ideology that reduces a human life to an object of science, whose value is solely determined by its utility to society. We fundamentally reject that ideology, and we call on President Bush to reject it as well."

Righty Dean Esmay, on vetoes: "Contrary to what some in the comments to our earlier thread suggested, the fact that the President's party controls congress does not explain Bush's incredibly low number of vetos. Presidents FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Carter all enjoyed similar circumstances throughout most or all of their Presidencies, and used the veto infinitely more often than this President has."

CAP's ThinkProgress sizes up the bills actually on the floor, writing: "A second bill being offered by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) would provide federal funds to research stem cells from umbilical cords, a procedure that can only reliably produce blood cells. The umbilical bill is a canard, proffered by radical conservatives so that they can say they're supporting something. As Roll Call reports, right-wingers hope the umbilical cord bill will 'give cover to conservatives who oppose federal funding for embryonic research but are wary of getting on the wrong political side of the issue.' ... If Bush vetoes federal funding of embryonic stem cell research as he has pledged, he and other right-wingers should at least be honest with the facts and not provide false hope to an American public seeking true scientific progress."

Conservative Otto Parts, on the House vote: "On the Elephant side: 50 votes in favor of research, and 180 against. 22% and 78%. On the Donkey side: 187 votes in favor of research, and 14 against. 93% and 7%. So you tell me: If you were looking for the political party that demonstrated a greater diversity of opinion on The Big Issues, which one would you choose?"

BOLTON: You've Come A Long Way, Bolton

Liberal think tanker Steve Clemons, who has led the opposition to John Bolton, tracks the developments as the confirmation vote draws closer, writing: "[T]here are rumors that the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is actually investigating Bolton's use of this NSA intercept material and attempting to ascertain whether Bolton compromised national security by mishandling and inappropriately using the intelligence information he gathered from these intercepts. It is remarkable that the Senate would consider a vote on any nomination in which there was such a major outstanding concern."

Conservative Mark A. Kilmer writes, Bolton has caused Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) "to wet his pants. He took the unusual step of writing a 'Dear Colleagues' letter to the 99 other Senators," which says in part: "In these dangerous times, we cannot afford to put at risk our nation's ability to successfully wage and win the war on terror with a controversial and ineffective ambassador to the United Nations." Kilmer comments: "This seems to be as much about Voinovich saving face as it is about John Bolton. Voinovich cast his lot early and vocally, and any change now would make him appear to be hypocritical and irresolute. He is."

WHITE HOUSE '08: Kerry's Apparent 180 On Form 180 Has Blogs Doing A 360

Right-leaning Tom Maguire at JustOneMinute: "From the Boston Globe we learn that John Kerry has signed the Form 180, and is now rummaging about for a postage stamp. OK, time to put some money on the table, metaphorically, anyway, and ask the following question -- what are people looking for? ... Our pick -- if we could see one set of records, it would be the application for Kerry's first Purple Heart. We reprise the controversy in more detail here, but briefly, our question is this: Is there a witness statement that resolves the question of who was in the three-man skim boat that fateful night?"

Righty Kevin Aylward: "As with all things related to John Kerry and his military service, the shortest distance between his biography and the truth seems to be a circuitous trip around several different spin cycles."

Righty Ed Morrissey: " It may be the end of summer before any records are produced ... and it could be a cold day in Hell before all or any of it gets released to the media. In fact, Kerry could argue that signing it was all he agreed to do. When, he could say, did I commit to sending it to the Navy? You FOOLS! Mwa-HAHAHAHA! All kidding aside, Kerry only agreed to sign off on the SF-180. He didn't agree to release every document that results from that request. ... Somehow, with Kerry's track record, I suspect he'll find a rhetorical loophole he's left to allow him off the hook once the file arrives from the Navy."

Conservative Michelle Malkin: "Last summer, "Unfit for Command" author John O'Neill said if Kerry signed SF-180, reporters or anyone else could obtain all of Kerry's military records from DoD. 'If he executes Standard Form 180, he would no longer be the gatekeeper, the gatekeeper would be the U.S. military,' he told the Washington Times. ... Either O'Neill was right or Morrissey is right, but not both. I'm sure the blogosphere will quickly figure it out."

Right-leaning Truth Laid Bear: "Here's the question I have: does the fact that he has signed and submitted (when/if he actually submits it) the Form 180 allow those with knowledge of his service to go on-the-record publicly? I refer specifically to the broad hints that we heard right before the election that Kerry may have received a less-than-honorable discharge, and that former Secretary of the Navy William Middendorf might confirm that --- but couldn't because doing so would be a crime. If he signs the 180, does that let Middendorf (or anyone else) talk?"

BLOGS VS. THE MSM I: Foley Artists

Last week the Blogometer pointed out a story originating from the conservative blogs, about newspaper union official Linda Foley, who claimed that U.S. troops were targeting foreign journalists in Iraq. Now the Chicago Sun-Times has a report. JunkYardBlog follows up.

Liberal Mahablog comes to Foley's defense: "Like it or not, Ms. Foley is not pulling these charges out of her butt. [Body and Soul] has documented incidents that look suspiciously like journalist targeting. ... It is clear that either these journalists were deliberately targeted, or the troops involved were being unusually careless even by war zone standards. Certainly, it bears outrage. Investigation also seems in order. And proper investigation was what Ms. Foley requested; last month Ms. Foley sent a letter to President Bush critical of the "investigation" into these incidents so far."

A FoleyGate blog has just opened up for business, similar to the RatherGate blog from late '04. And speaking of, some of the bloggers behind RatherGate have just opened a new blog to follow stories of a similar nature: Media Slander.

Blogger Arthur Chrenkoff writes in an e-mail to Power Line, which John Hinderaker posts: "Ted Koppel will be again reading out the names of American soldiers fallen in Iraq and Afghanistan since last year. I've got a modest proposal to Ted Koppel and 'Nightline': why don't you read one day the names and show the pictures of the 170,000 or so American servicemen and women stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan who every day are working their hardest to ensure that democracy takes root, terrorists are defeated, and these two countries have a chance to build a better future for their people." Hinderaker adds: "Soldiers have been dying in the line of duty for a long time -- even in peacetime, theirs is a dangerous profession. When did the left suddenly start caring?"

In response, lefty Political Report headlines a post "Power Line sucks ass" and proposes: "Any hackers out there wanna take a shot at their site?"

BLOGS VS. THE MSM II: More Newsweek Fallout

Charles Johnson from Little Green Footballs reports: "Newsweek's Washington Bureau Chief Daniel Klaidman appeared on Al Jazeera TV on May 19, and told the Arab world that, despite their retraction, Newsweek is 'neutral' on whether any of this happened." He cites a partial transcript, with Klaidman saying: "We are neutral on whether any form of Koran desecration took place. There are allegations out there, but the allegations have not been subjected to the kind of scrutiny or legal processes that normally are."

The 5/20 Blogometer moted that ABC's Moran appeared on Hugh Hewitt's radio show, where he stated that some in the MSM have an anti-military bias. Liberal Eschaton posts his work e-mail address and writes: "Terry Moran has accused his colleagues, some of whom have of course served in the military and some of whom have spent time getting their asses shot off covering war zones of having a 'deep anti-military bias.' Email Terry and ask him just which of his colleages is afflicted with this particular bias. Sounds like something a reporter should let us know about."

Lefty Steve Gilliard: "Terry Moran sits in Washington every day while his collegues run around and risk getting killed by the Iraqi resistance and US Army. And the Army shooting you is a lot better than having your head chopped off. Which is a daily risk. Daily as in when you wake up in the morning, going to bed at night is a gift. ... I think it's a gross insult to say reporters have a bias against the US military."

BLOGS VS. THE WORLD: Murder, He Blogged

Steven Den Beste points out a blog post that helped solve a murder; the final entry to the ToTo247 blog by 19-year-old Simon Sek Man Ng of Queens identifies the man who minutes later, according to police reconstruction, killed him and his sister. The New York Daily News has a report. Ng's final post is here. When we last checked, there were 255 comments on the post, many simply saying "R.I.P."

RELIGION: Pick Your Blasphemy

Little Green Footballs posts the text of a resolution sponsored by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) proposing that the House "recognizes that the Quran, the holy book of Islam, as any other holy book of any religion, should be treated with dignity and respect." LGF calls it the "first tentative step toward a blasphemy law in the United States." Blogs for Bush adds: "Pandering to terrorists is the first and worst thing; the enemy propaganda is that our troops desecrate the Quran (Koran, whatever, like I really care how it is spelled...) on a regular basis, so here is Conyers pandering to this enemy propaganda. In addition to that there is the amazing, insulting bit that Conyers (a liberals liberal) is trying to get Congress to protect the Koran while the left routinely insults and slanders the Christian religion."

AmericaBlog's John Aravosis posts a photo and provides an external link "to the US Department of Defense's own Marine Corps Web site. It shows a photo taken May 5, 2005 in Iraq. It's a photo of a US tank dubbed the 'New Testament' -- the name of the tank is written across its barrel. The even funnier part is that this photo MADE IT PAST military censors and the DOD Web page with the photo on it even brags about the name 'New Testament' in the caption. So some jerk at the Pentagon knew exactly what this was about and found it funny enough to put on their Web site, and it passed various level of review. Lovely." Andrew Sullivan adds, "when our own military seems to be advertizing an explicitly Christian identity in Iraq, then it's time the president took action. Whoever in the marines allowed this tank to be defaced in this way needs to be removed from his post. It's an outrage - to both the New Testament and to our mission in Iraq."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY -- Filibuster : Washington :: Microchip : Palo Alto

In a post titled "McCain Saves The Palm," Slate's Mickey Kaus cites a McCain quote in the New York Times, on the right and left jud. lobbies: "Think of all the money they are going to lose." Skeptical, Kaus notes: "Without the filibuster ... senators in the minority party wouldn't be nearly as big a deal. ... Even most majority party senators would see some of their power drain away if the Senate ... majority could exercise its non-filibusterable power. Individual majority senators would be less like princes to be wined, dined and fawned over and more like party backbenchers. Corporations and interest groups wouldn't need to spend a lot of money bribing them either."

More: "The filibuster's infrastructural role has powerful multiplier effect: It means not only that obscure minority Senators attract millions in campaign contributions. while the aides of obscure minority Senators aides find pleasant $250,000 jobs as influencers with vital "access." It means that those Senators can afford to hire well-paid fundraisers to funnel those contributions, while interest groups need direct mail experts to raise the money to make their own "access" producing contributions, and all these people need restaurants like The Palm to feed them and brokers to swap their houses and mechanics to service their Acuras and Audis. Thanks to the Senate's precious right of unlimited debate, a wave of prosperity sweeps over the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area! Funded by the rest of the country. The filibuster is to Washington what the computer chip is to Palo Alto -- the technological basis of prosperity."

LEST WE FORGET: Outbreak

Last week we stumbled across the website Blogebrity, which purported to be a magazine focusing on bloggers-as-celebrities (see 5/20 Blogometer). We speculated then that the site was a promotional tool for another website; it turns out we were wrong, but close. The website is actually an entry in a contest sponsored by liberal-leaning performance artists/activists at Contagious Media, previously known for a well-publicized prank on Nike and the satirical website Black People Love Us. Gawker Media founder Nick Denton, a "Blogebrity" target, is also involved. The contest will award cash prizes to a completely new website that receives the most unique visitors over a 3-week period ending 6/9. Blogebrity is currently ranked third. The contest also produced Autoblogger, which, coincidentally, occupied this space in the Blogometer on 5/20. Other worthy entries include Crying While Eating (in the lead by a substantial margin), 2nd-ranked Ring Tone Dancer!!!, and the Miss Beazley Bush game.

Posted by at 12:00 PM

May 24, 2005

5/24: Deal Of The Century

For the second time since the Blogometer was brought forth into this world, we have a day with almostly literally only one issue on the table. The first was the passing of Terri Schiavo. Bet you can guess what it is today.

There are roughly 6 lines of thought on yesterday's compromise resolution, and without the time or resources necessary to conduct a survey worthy of the Pew Research Center, the Blogometer assumes they are more or less equally prevalent:

• Conservatives who are pretty sure the left got screwed worse than they did.
• Liberals who are cautiously optimistic that this won't be so bad.
• Conservatives who are how howling with anger that the GOP has sold out again.
• Liberals who are howling with anger that the Dems have sold out again.
• Those who have no idea what to make of all this, on the left or right.
• Those in the middle who are just glad it's over with.

All about equal, except perhaps for the last one (if you're writing about it, you probably care). And "anger" is not quite accurate; "disappointment" is probably more accurate. A lot of the reaction can be summarized by the mixed reaction at 2 activist blogs on either side, the conservative RedState and liberal DailyKos.

DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas: "It's not a good day to be Bill Frist. He looks weak, unable to control his own caucus. His winger friends go ballistic. They get some judges, sure, but ultimately, we can filibuster Bush's next Supreme Court nominee unless he picks a moderate."

RedState co-founder Mike Krempasky: "This deal is bad for conservative activists -- but a whole lot worse for the Democrats. The best upside, of course, was watching the coverage of the press conference close -- and to see Harry Reid waste several hundred thousand dollars of liberal interest group cash with his little 90-second ad. Heh."

From the comments at DailyKos: "Perhaps part of the deal was that the Republican senators would vote down [Priscilla] Owen, [Janice] Brown and some of the others. They'd get their up or down, but the result would be down. That would be a pretty good deal for us. Of course, if we choose to invoke the 'extraordinary circumstances' clause with a supreme court nomination, presumably the Republicans would feel free to try this nuclear option again."

RedState commenter "Nick Danger":

[D's:] Ok, it's settled then. We let the two women through, and then we're back to square one on the white males, right?
[RINOs:] Deal.
[R's:] <crickets>

TRACKBACKS:

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

• The AP was first up, as usual, here and here. All commentary is below, but here are some of them, broken out according to ideology:
  
  

  >> From the left: The Mahablog; Demagogue; No More Mr. Nice Blog; The Sideshow; Corrente.
  
  

  >> From the right: Protein Wisdom; PoliPundit; Southern Appeal; Professor Bainbridge; PoliBlog; The Corner; Spoons Experience.
  
  

  >> From the middle: Joe Gandelman; Begging To Differ; Centerfield.

CONSERVATIVE REAX I: Sometimes You Feel So Saad

John Hawkins of Right Wing News did an interview with Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS), in which he asked: "The deal that was cut on judicial filibusters: in your mind, good deal, bad deal? Would you prefer to have gone nuclear or do you think we're better off with the deal that was cut?" Brownback: "I'm still digesting that point. I was ready to move forward. It seemed to me that it was time to move forward. We had showed every restraint, every caution. We had worked closely with the Democrats to move these (judges) forward. ... It seemed like we would have a cleaner case and set-up for a Supreme Court nominee had we moved on through and that was probably the thing that actually secured the deal with a number of the Democrats not to allow us to exercise the constitutional option."

The Anchoress: "It's gonna be a long cold day before the [GOP] sees a dime of my money. A long. Cold. Day. Can someone please explain to me why, with 57% support from the nation (under-reported, of course), the GOP caved on this?"

At The Corner, Ramesh Ponnuru asks whether a rules change is still permissible in this Congress, and notes the wording of the compromise "seems to allow for some Republican wiggle room if Democrats act contrary to the deal's 'spirit.' Republican signatories -- especially [Lindsey] Graham, [Mike] DeWine, and [John] Warner--should be asked to clarify their reading of the deal's ambiguities."

Captain's Quarters, on the GOP sacrificing Judge Henry Saad: "Saad may have sealed his own fate with his ill-advised e-mail attacking Debbie Stabenow in 2003, and the GOP may well have sacrificed him for that reason. ... Saad got tossed under the bus, although it may come from a failed confirmation vote rather than a filibuster, no matter what Reid says. If Reid demands a filibuster and all seven Democratic signatories support it, it will qualify as 'bad faith,' resulting in a resurrection of the Byrd option. I think all seven GOP signatories agreed to oppose Saad in a floor vote."

ConfirmThem: "It is not compromise, but capitulation. And I say that as somebody who did agree that a certain form of compromise was acceptable. ... I guarantee you there was horse-trading in there concerning pork and other matters. And I guarantee you that not a one of them gave a thought to the havoc they have wrecked on these nominees' lives. Shame on them all. Fie on them all. Disdain for them all."

Heritage's Mark Tapscott: "I said months ago that Senate GOPers are terrified of offending Senate Democrats. Now we will see the Senate GOP leadership desperately searching for a way to share in the glory that even as this post is being written is being prepared by the MSM to shower upon Senate 'moderates' of both parties who 'saved' the Senate and the federal judiciary from the Extreme Right and the Evangelical Christian Theocracy."

Meanwhile, a handful of conservatives are pleased.

UCLA law prof Stephen Bainbridge, on those who are upset: "Will somebody please get these folks some cheese to go with their whine? I find these reactions not only short-sighted but also surprisingly unconservative. They reflect a willingness to put possible short-term partisan gain (and I emphasize the word possible) over both principle and long-term advantage. ... The filibuster is a profoundly conservative tool. It slows change by allowing a resolute minority to delay -- to stand athwart history shouting stop. It ensures that change is driven not "merely by temporary advantage or popularity" but by a substantial majority. Is it any wonder that it has usually been liberals who want to change or abolish the filibuster rule?"

Conservative Jawa Report lists 5 reasons why the GOP won, including: "We have given up nothing. The Dims promised not to filibuster unless under extraordinary circumstances. The other two nominees can be brought to the floor and if filibustered the Dims can be made out to be liars because the 3 most arguably extreme judges have already been allowed through."

PoliPundit's Alexander K. McClure is another: "In short, this is the submission of the minority to the will of the majority. Democrats and wobbly Republicans can spin it as they will, but you, my readers, will I hope see otherwise."

Blogs for Bush live-blogged the presser.

LIBERAL REAX: Win, Lose Or Blog

Jesse Taylor at Pandagon: "Democrats win, basically. But they win in a way that is neither sure nor particularly productive in the long term."

Slate's Mickey Kaus writes, "the mere postponement -- until, presumably, a Supreme Court seat opens up -- favors the Democrats, for the reasons outlined earlier. Bush will need to nominate someone who will either avoid or win such a somewhat-less-likely filibuster battle when the stakes are high enough for the bulk of the voters to be paying attention."

Oliver Willis: "No doubt that this is a win. Why? Because the filibuster is still a part of our political system. Checks and balances have been preserved. Yes, we will get some right-wing judges, but less of them. Frist is angry. Dobson is angry. If those two wet blanket extremists will be upset, I'm happy. Period."

The Left Coaster disagrees: "While it's entertaining to watch the caterwauling from the wingnuts who were baying for blood, let's keep things in perspective: under the compromise agreement, Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owen -- the worst of an already odious lot -- are well on their way to receiving lifetime appointments on the federal bench. No matter how you slice it, this prospect is disheartening, to say the least. This may be a tactical victory for Harry Reid, and there's certainly the lingering question of whether he would have had the 51 votes needed to defuse the nuclear option. But from a long-term perspective, this agreement is nothing to be smiling about."

Steve Gilliard: "This is a major defeat for the theocrats. This is what happens when amateurs play at politics. Dobson was under the delusion that he could control the Senate ... This didn't work."

A blogger at DailyKos quotes from a long list of apoplectic conservatives at Free Republic. A sample: "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Ezra Klein, analyzing the signatures on the agreement: "Lincoln Chafee writes like a kid, [Mary] Landrieu's got the best handwriting (followed by [Susan] Collins and [Olympia Snowe], proving that women do indeed possess superior penmanship, maybe to make up for those inferior math and science skills (kidding!)), the majority seem to drop a number of letters from their names, and the senator on the lower right is clearly trying to hide his/her identity."

The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum: "I guess I'm puzzled. A bipartisan group of 14 senators has agreed to a last-minute compromise that will avert Bill Frist's attempt to end judicial filibusters for good, but the text of the deal only mentions five nominees. ... [W]hy aren't [Richard] Griffin and [David] McKeague mentioned? Presumably, not mentioning them is equivalent to "no commitment," right? So why not say so? What am I missing here?"

Blogenlust: "Feelings on both sides seem to be mixed at this point, and I'd have to say I feel the same way. On the one hand, we still have the filibuster, but on the other hand, the "extremist" bar has just been raised to a level that makes me a bit uncomfortable."

Crooks and Liars has perhaps the most complete round-up of reaction from both sides.

MORE REAX: Stuck In The Middle

2 conservatives and 1 centrist who just aren't all that exercised about the issue:

Instapundit: "I'd probably care more about this issue if Bush looked likely to appoint some small-government libertarian types to the bench. Since he doesn't, I don't."

Outside the Beltway: "Hopefully, this issue can stay away for a while. I was among the very many Americans who could have cared less about the bickering. And, like Steve, I found both sides to be hypocritical. It was power politics, not principle, all the way through, and it frankly had me turned off most of the way."

BuzzMachine's Jeff Jarvis: "So the filibuster meltdown option is avoided. And a good thing it is. I don't think the people would have tolerated political war and a congressional shutdown. ... I call moderation a virtue."

WHITE HOUSE '08: How Frist And McCain May Fare

A headline to an Ipse Dixit post says it all for many: "McCain And Frist Kiss 2008 Presidential Race Bye-Bye."

But not all. Conservative Robert Tagorda writes, John McCain "seems poised to reap most of the benefits. Unfortunately for him, the next presidential election is still four years away. Only a small number of Americans will remember this episode then, and primary voters, who represent the biggest hump to his political aspirations, will give him few -- if any -- points for the moderate gesture. But at least he gets to overshadow Bush and Frist for a couple of press conferences."

The more common sentiment is from "Jayson" at PoliPundit: "John McCain's national political career is over. All that's left for him is a Perot-style third-party run, and just like H. Ross already proved, along with George Wallace, and John Anderson, and Ralph Nader, that's not a growth industry."

Conservative Southern Appeal: "Note to Sen. Frist: You are the Senate Majority Leader, so act like it for a change. McCain totally out maneuvered you and yet you probably won't do anything to punish these GOPers who have spit on the Constitution, not to mention spitting on those Republican supporters and voters that helped put them in a majority."

The news for Frist is pretty much all bad, with 1 somewhat unlikely exception.

Liberal South Knox Bubba: "So the good news is that cooler heads prevailed, and Senators John McCain and Ben Nelson are the heroes while Sen. Bill Frist is the goat who comes out looking like an idiot. (I saw somewhere that he had cots brought in for an all-nighter. What a drama queen.)"

Liberal Brains and Eggs: "Frist's presidential aspirations (that's the only reason he was doing this, for 2006 and the evangelical bloc) exploded on the launchpad. And John McCain's got stronger."

Conservative humor site The Nose on Your Face reports on a fake poll to make a point: "A just released Zogby poll shows that the word "frist" has leapfrogged dozens of other more established slurs to become the put down of choice on school yards across America."

Only The American Prospect's Tapped sees some chance of victory: "If the nominations of Brown, Owen, and Pryor don't constitute extraordinary circumstances, what will? This only delays the nuclear option and may even weaken the Dems' position at that point; if these nominees can be traded so freely, why oppose any of them? Bill Frist just said it himself: 'All options remain.' And here we thought Frist couldn't possibly come out a winner."

IN OTHER NEWS: What There Is Of It, Anyway

JustOneMinute: "A deal on filibusters? Then two other stories should move to center stage." He provides links to details on France's coming vote on the EU constitution and the stem cell bill.

MaxSpeak, You Listen!'s Max Sawicky offers his latest "MaxSpeak Maxim": "The Newsweek affair distracts attention from the underlying importance of the Koran riots in Afghanistan: the tenuousness of the U.S. imperial project in the Middle East. Journalists and politicians dwell on it out of ignorance, self-centeredness, and most of all, to avoid facing up to the monumental U.S. foreign policy quagmire that they have had a hand in creating."

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: Guess Who?

DC-based righty Bill Ardolino notes that the print edition of the Washington Post includes a "picture of a protest sign that reads 'Newsweek Deserves to be Banned,' with a caption of, 'The Koran story is a new wedge in the culture wars between left and right.' Obviously, since those on the 'right' are the ones shellacking Newsweek, it would appear that some right wing protestors have expressed that 'Newsweek Deserves to Be Banned,' which is a pretty fascistic sentiment. There's one problem with this appearance: you can't tell from the close cropping, but the sign is actually from a rally of Indian Islamists," who are visible in differently cropped versions of the picture. More Ardolino: "The WaPo's version only shows the sign, and they've effectively projected the impression that some domestic right-wingers are clamoring to ban Newsweek, by using an artfully presented and captioned picture of Islamic protestors expressing decidedly non-Western sensibilities regarding censorship."

Liberal Daily Howler objects to departing New York Times public editor Dan Okrent's criticism of Times columnist Paul Krugman: "According to the exercised editor, Krugman "has the disturbing habit of shaping, slicing and selectively citing numbers." Beyond that, Krugman is 'ideological' and 'unfair,' Okrent says -- and he seems to say that the slippery scribe selects his misleading numbers in a fashion designed to 'please his acolytes.' These are very nasty charges. But in the style of classic hit-and-run bullies, Okrent provides no examples of his target's troubling conduct, and he bravely offers these ringing complaints in his final public editor column, depriving Krugman of a chance to respond (and knowing he wo't have to defend himself against the complaints that will come)."

BLOGGER SPOTLIGHT: Blog 'Em, Danno

Note: Starting today, the Blogometer will run twice-weekly interviews with some of the bloggers we quote. While a handful of bloggers are established writers well-known in political circles, the vast majority are not. Therefore, we'll try to give you an idea just who these writers are. Like the Hotline's Staffer Spotlights, everyone gets the same questions. The difference is, in the Blogger Spotlight, we add URLs. First up is Daniel W. Drezner.

What is your full name?

What the blog says -- Daniel W. Drezner

What is your age?

36

Where did you grow up?

I lived in seven different places by the time I was ten -- after that, I grew up in Avon, Connecticut.

Where do you live now?

Chicago, IL

What is your occupation? Have you ever worked on a political campaign or for the mainstream media?

I'm an assistant professor of political science at the University of Chicago. During the 2000 campaign, I was an unpaid advisor for Bush-Cheney (one of my mentors in graduate school was Condoleezza Rice).

When did you start blogging and why?

I started blogging a year after the 9/11 attacks. I had been reading blogs for quite some time. After 9/11, it was only natural that the politically oriented blogs started talking more and more about foreign policy. While I read much of interest, it struck me that none of the prominent bloggers had any advanced training in international relations. There was a niche to fill.

What has been your favorite post, or favorite story to write about, in that time?

I posted a lot about offshore outsourcing when it first became a big issue. I posted so much about it that I decided to write something more substantive -- which became my Foreign Affairs piece "The Outsourcing Bogeyman."

Describe your typical blogging schedule. And what is your average output?

I aim for a post a day -- sometimes I do more, sometimes less. My main times for blogging are first thing in the morning and late at night when my children are asleep.

Who is your favorite political blogger? Favorite non-political blogger?

Like blog posts themselves, the answer to this question is very transient -- my faves shift from week to week.

Who is your favorite mainstream media columnist?

[No answer.]

What is your favorite television news program, either network or cable?

With two small children, I have zero time to watch news on TV. I do still get nostalgic for This Week with David Brinkley, however.

What MSM-produced websites (i.e. newspapers, magazines) do you visit on a daily basis?

The New York Times, Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, Economist, and Slate.

What non-MSM websites (i.e. blogs) do you visit on a daily basis?

Instapundit, Andrew Sullivan, Virginia Postrel, Marginal Revolution, Brad DeLong, Crooked Timber, Volokh Conspiracy, Brad Setser, and Belgravia Dispatch.

How often, or do you ever, read a newspaper in its dead-tree (i.e. print) form?

I read the Chicago Tribune six days a week and the New York Times on Sunday and when I'm traveling.

How do you see the new media and old media affecting and influencing each other in the next five years?

I see co-optation and symbiosis mostly, though I'll be very interested to see how blog syndicates (e.g., Pajamas Media) perform and whether old media will put more of their content behind a subscription wall.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: If The Daily Show Hadn't Already Used "Kim Possible," We Would Have

The New Republic's Noam Scheiber, on something completely different: "That someone managed to affix a piece of paper denouncing Kim Jong Il to a bridge in North Korea, film the result through a hole in a cigarette carton, and smuggle the footage out is certainly intriguing. I downloaded the six minutes of film to view this record of civil disobedience and to see some shots of life inside the kingdom. ... To tell the truth, the film is not unfailingly riveting--or especially colorful. But, as the Los Angeles Times points out, the filmmaker was taking some chances: "[E]ven the slightest criticism of Kim Jong Il can result in execution or deportation to a prison camp. Under [North Korean] law, three generations of a family can be punished for the crimes of one member." Fair point. And, at least, it's hands-down the best North Korean film of 2005. Kim must be jealous."

LEST WE FORGET: Cruise Control

Defamer posts a series of amusing-to-bizarre screen captures from Tom Cruise's appearance on "The Oprah Winfrey Show": "Film is a visual medium, and Tom Cruise is perhaps the biggest film star in the world, so we're going to photoblog Cruise's Oprah appearance as fast as we can upload the images. Really, words would only get in the way."

Posted by at 12:00 PM

May 23, 2005

5/23: Internecine Blogfare

Say, where did the judge/filibuster talk go? While blogs devoted to the subject comment on the developments from the Sunday shows, the hot debates lie elsewhere.

Many are still occupied by Newsweek's "Korangate" and subsequent developments. By now the initial conservative anger at Newsweek has been eclipsed by related developments, hardening suspicions that reporters who came of age during Vietnam are permanently hostile to the U.S. military. But they disagree over whether or not reporting on military abuse cases are "anti-military" or not.

Meanwhile, a number of liberal bloggers heatedly debate the wisdom of NARAL's endorsing Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) for re-election, as reported by the Providence Journal. Some are angry that a traditionally Dem group is supporting a GOPer, others argue this is a smart move, prioritizing ideas over the party's immediate fortunes. In this instance, abortion becomes a proxy for the overall debate over the future of the Dems.

The surprise hit of the weekend is an op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle column by Bay Area writer Keith Thompson, who announces in the headline that he is "Leaving the Left." Many on the right cite it approvingly; some on the lift dismiss it out of hand, while others challenge Thompson's assumptions.

Also kicking around the blogs: Howard Dean seems to have escaped "Meet the Press" without sustaining much damage, liberals criticize of the media's take on Sen. Rick Santorum's (R-PA) "Hitler" comment, Sen. George Allen's (R-VA) pro-life credentials are questioned, and a stringer for the New York Times and CNN admits she participated in the protest she covered. Plus: Biglongwordsthatcontinueforeverwithnoendinsight!

TRACKBACKS: Hunting Thompson

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

• Newsweek's announcement that they will change their standards is widely quoted by the left and right, but the link is all they -- Scared Monkeys; The Sundries Shack; Rex Hammock; PressThink; Colby Cosh; Morning Sedition Blog; Andunie; Irregular Expression; RatherGate -- agree on.
  
  

  >> From the right: Captain's Quarters: "Did it make sense to anyone at Newsweek that interrogators would get better response from Islamists by desecrating their holy book? It didn't pass the smell test for me when I first heard it, and it still doesn't to this day." Michelle Malkin quotes Newsweek as now reporting that mishandling of the Koran occurred in "fewer than a dozen log entries from the 31,000 documents reviewed so far," and comments: "The truth seeps out. Too little. Too late."
  

  >> From the left: Political Animal: "Newsweek and the rest of the media need to get up off their knees and start fighting back. They've done enough apologizing." Democracy Arsenal writes, the fallout is "just beginning," and offers several reasons: "That similar stories that have been corroborated by credible sources"; "The underlying level of anti-American sentiment that allowed a single news report to trigger deadly riots throughout the Muslim world"; "The White House's apparent imperviousness the what these revelations mean for top U.S. foreign policy priorities"; etc.

• Bloggers linking to Thompson's essay: Roger L. Simon; Instapundit; Travelling Shoes; Barcepundit; Ed Driscoll; Brainster; USS Neverdock; Half-Bakered; Michael J. Totten; A man in the arena; Brothers Judd; Michelle Malkin. More on Thompson follows further into this Blogometer.
  

  >> Right-leaning Secular Blasphemy: "The article describes to some extent the development of my own thought ... Now the left seems reduced to preserving social welfare on the home front (which in itself can be good) and on the international stage, all that is left is hatred of Israel and the US."
  

  >> Liberal TBogg: "Oh my goodness, our ranks have been thinned once again by another 'I didn't leave the party, the party left me' Former-Liberal-Looking-For-A-Book-Deal."

• More than a few bloggers are moved to point up an AP story about sex offenders receiving Viagra: This Modern World; TalkLeft; Eschaton; Julian Sanchez.
  

  >> Moderate Joe Gandelman: "File this one in the Amazing But True Story department."

NEWSWEEK -- And Everything After

Riding Sun, an American expat in Tokyo notes the Japanese cover of Newsweek featuring a U.S. flag in a trash can and the title "The day America died." The blogger, "Gaijinbiker," notes several aspects of how the Japanese version portrays America in a more negative light than the U.S. version, and adds: "It's one thing for Newsweek to actively promote the notion that America is a 'dead', 'rotting' country overseas. But it's quite another thing indeed to hide those efforts from its American readers. If Newsweek really thinks America is dead, and our flag belongs in the trash, why won't it tell us?"

Hugh Hewitt: "It is almost inevitable that more anti-military stories will surface, powered by more leaks, all designed to discredit a war effort that is all too obviously succeeding in Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon and hopefully elsewhere in the Middle East."

Conservative John Cole, an Army vet, responds in a very, very long post: "Reporting on abuses that have been committed by our troops, in our name, is not anti-military. While I am not arrogant enough to attempt to divine the motives of every journalist who reports on such abuses, Hugh appears to be up to the challenge. I find his attack on the reporting of the outrageous abuses ... to be both disturbing and disingenuous." Libertarian Radley Balko agrees: "The myopic filter through which parts of the pro-war blogosphere view what's going on overseas gets depressing. ... That's why I like John Cole. I don't agree with him on foreign policy. But with posts like this one, you can at least take his position knowing that he's given it careful thought and consideration, and is willing to call out his own when necessary."

Moderate Andrew Sullivan, in a post titled "The Spin on Torture": "It has gone chronologically something like this: "It's not true. It's not true. It may be true but it's not torture. Okay, it's torture, but isn't official policy. It may be true and official policy, but we changed the policy and we uncovered the abuses ourselves. It may be true, it may have been widespread, but we've punished the culprits. It may be true, it may have been widespread, it may still be happening, but all these reports are old news." Well, give these guys points for effort."

T. Bevan from Real Clear Politics notes the similarities between Newsweek's "debacle" and the pre-election revelations about al-Qaqaa: "Unfortunately, it's the same mentality that allows Newsweek to get lazy with its sourcing and fall under the assumption that the worst rumors and allegations circulating about U.S. forces are true."

Lefty David Corn writes, "today the White House was quick to denounce the unauthorized release of photos of Saddam Hussein in his underwear. It did not move fast and apologize for the death -- that is, murder -- of Dilawar and the other abuses disclosed by the Times."

Tim Blair posts a picture of a Baghdad family laughing at an image of Saddam in his skivvies from the Sun, and captions it: "The Arab Street responds to Saddam's underpants humiliation: They're laughing at Saggy Hussein."

Righty Dean Esmay: "One of the more tiresome canards I hear when I say the press is intentionally destructive in its war reporting is the lie -- and it's an outright lie, I won't grace it with the notion that it's a simple misunderstanding anymore -- that this means the press is supposed to cover up evidence of misdeeds or failures or casualties. Or that this means the press is not allowed to criticize those in power."

TalkLeft: "It really is inexcusable that the military knew almost immediately what happened but waited until after his very public memorial service three weeks later to tell the family. Was the military using Pat Tillman to keep its image afloat, in the wake of the newly announced Abu Ghraib scandal?"

DEMOCRATS: NARAL Asserts Its Right To Choose

Ezra Klein, on NARAL's decision: "Stupid stupid stupid. ... A Democratic majority is going to protect the right to choose even if one or two of its members are uncomfortable with the concept. A Republican majority is going to work feverishly to abrogate it even if one or two of its members, like Lincoln, support choice."

Daily Kos' Moulitsas: "One of the key problems with the Democratic Party is that single issue groups have hijacked it for their pet causes. So suddenly, Democrats are the party of abortion, of gun control, of spotted owls, of labor, of trial lawyers, etc, etc., et-frickin'-cetera. We don't stand for any ideals, we stand for specific causes. We don't have a core philosophy, we have a list with boxes to check off.

Dem Left in the West: "Democrats don't get to expect 100% loyalty from issue groups. The DSCC and many in DC have been actively moving to the center on abortion issues, thinking that will save them. NARAL is understandably responding, defending the beliefs of their members. If some folks at Daily Kos or Ezra Klein have donated to NARAL thinking that their contribution was aimed at electing Democrats rather than protecting reproductive freedom and women's health care, they misunderstood. NARAL is an independent group. It gets to do as it damn well pleases."

David Sirota writes, if those bloggers "have a problem with NARAL endorsing Chafee simply because he is a Republican ... it means folks still just don't understand how important an ideological (as opposed to partisan) infrastructure really is." More: "Conservatives inherently understand this -- its why conservative organizations sometimes go after Republicans from the right ... And make no mistake about it -- this ends up benefiting the Republican Party far more than if these groups only acted as non-ideological partisan operations. These groups create conviction activists and political leaders who are unified around an ideology/issue, instead of what we have on our side too often: people who are ideologically fluid and don't know exactly what they stand for other than having a 'D' after their name."

Oliver Willis responds to Sirota: "The conservative movement ... certainly didn't get to their level of prominence by shooting themselves in the foot and putting their pet issues up and above what Ford referred to as 'Job One': Getting Republicans elected. In this decision, NARAL is following the playbook that has left Democrats, and the left in general, marginalized."

DEAN: Without A Scratch

Most discussing the Dean's "Meet the Press" appearance quote the MSNBC.com transcript. Several conservative blogs, including Wizbang, note the following Dean quote: "But the thing that really bothered me the most, which the 9-11 Commission said also wasn't true, is the insinuation that the president continues to make to this day that Osama bin Laden had something to do with supporting terrorists that attacked the United States. That is false. The 9-11 Commission, chaired by a Republican, said it was false."

A Wizbang commenter brushes it aside: "Much as I think Howard Dean is the ne plus ultra of moonbats, I have to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one. I think he just mis-spoke. As for Russert's not catching it, well, kaka occurs."

Among the others who note the error: DalyThoughts; Orrin Judd; Jackson's Junction provides the actual video.

WHITE HOUSE '08: Will Allen Have Trouble On His Right Flank?

A writer at RedState comments on Sunday show appearances by Sen. Allen and Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA): "[W]e saw two of the brightest Republican stars for the 2008 Presidential stakes embrace the same position in favor the use of 'surplus' (their word, not mine) embryos for medical research. Apparently they haven't yet learned that opposing cloning and Partial-Birth Abortion does not earn you a pass on pro-life issues. RS readers are surely familiar with ... Romney's attempt to chuck a few bones to the pro-life community on the issue -- which have thankfully met with almost zero success among any of the pro-life leadership. But you may not be familiar with the need of Virginia Senator George Allen to do the same. ... it's time for pro-lifers to consider him in the same category as Gov. Romney: no matter their positions on other matters, these two Presidential aspirants are only as pro-life as smart politics dictates."

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: Correction Insurrection

Right-leaning blogger Steve Bartin notices an interesting New York Times correction: "A NYT article written on May 6th concerning the Bill Frist demonstrations failed to mention: 'The writer, a freelance contributor who is a Princeton student, did not disclose to The Times that before she was assigned the article, she had participated in the demonstration.' Since virtually all NYT writers are registered Democrats these things can happen."

Conservative Polipundit: "I found an article about the Princeton demonstrations at CNN.com by the same 'reporter.' Note how the article includes all the subtle tactics that the lying liberal media uses every day ... Only people who support the liberal agenda are quoted. Conservatives are entirely ignored," "The liberal agenda is portrayed as bipartisan," "Negative words are used when Republicans are mentioned," "The last word goes to a supporter of the liberal agenda." Comments "Polipundit": "This 'freelance' reporter is well on her way to becoming another drone in the lying liberal media's legions."

Princeton student Joel Thompson appears in the comments: "Knowing the author personally, I have to add my own comments. She's a nice person. We disagree politically, but I don't think there was any malice or intention of bias on her part for this article. ... She should have known better. However, knowing her, I can attest that it's more likely she just never thought about it that way." Another commenter responds: "Sorry, Joel, but this is exactly the problem with the MSM ...they don't seem to think about it that way."

More commentary on the New York Times' upcoming TimesSelect program charging $49.95 per year to read the opinion columnists from Man Without Qualities' "R. Musil" who quotes from outgoing New York Times Public Editor Dan Okrent's final column: "Paul Krugman has the disturbing habit of shaping, slicing and selectively citing numbers in a fashion that pleases his acolytes but leaves him open to substantive assaults. ... William Safire vexed me with his chronic assertion of clear links between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, based on evidence only he seemed to possess." "Musil": "Pay $49.95 for that?"

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Left Behind

RedState and Power Line are 2 more blogs to give the Thompson column mentioned above a positive mention.

But "Armando" at DailyKos disagrees, and quotes Thompson as such: "Leading voices in America's "peace" movement are actually cheering against self-determination for a long-suffering Third World country because they hate George W. Bush more than they love freedom. ... I began my activist career championing the 1968 presidential candidacies of Robert Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy, because both promised to end America's misadventure in Vietnam." "Armando" writes: "There is more pseudointellectual drivel there, but I have just 2 questions for this pale imitation of [left-to-right convert David] Horowitz: (1) Did (and do) the people of Vietnam love freedom when he was cheering on Ho Chi Minh? (2) What do the Swifties think when he tells them that their service was a 'misadventure'? The intellectual bankruptcy of the Right is manifest."

Thompson writes his own blog at Sane Nation, where he comments on reactions: "Because the piece got picked up by several right-of-center online publications, it's not surprising that my musings got a decided thumbs-up. Here's what surprised me, and what I find heartening: A large number of self-described SF Bay Area readers (more than 200 at last count) said I had given voice to their largely unexpressed doubts about what the left has become."

BLOGGERS VS. THE WORLD: Come Together, Right Now, Over Me

Lefty blog DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas: "A little over a week ago, I received a full briefing on the progress of the Yearly Kos convention planning, leading up to the big even in the summer of 2006. While sympathetic to the goals of the project, I watched from afar, afraid to jumpt the gun lest initial enthusiasm fade. Planning a convention is serious business, requiring serious time commitments. But what I was shown was impressive, to say the least. So I'm aboard."

SANTORUM: Palpatine = Hitler

Lefty Judd Legum at CAP's ThinkProgress, on the Washington Post's equivalence by Santorum's "Hitler" comments and Sen. Frank Lautenberg's (D-NJ) "Palpatine" comments: "Never mind that Santorum compared his opponents to a reviled historical figure who murdered millions and Lautenberg's comments involved a fictional character in a summer movie. Treating Lautenberg's and Santorum's comments as equivalents created the balance the media wanted."

Conservative Patterico's Pontifications quotes from a New York Times editorial: "The judicial nominations debate reached a new low this week when a Republican senator compared his Democratic colleagues to Hitler."

"Patterico" objects: "A 'new low'?? Evidently the editors haven't been reading their own paper again. The paper ran an AP story on March 3 which reported that Democratic Senator Robert Byrd had compared his Republican colleagues to Hitler. ... Conservative bloggers have almost unanimously condemned Santorum's ridiculous Nazi comparison. But for New York Times editors, it's only a 'new low' when a Republican does it."

Tapped's Jeffrey Dubner asks, "who's not on the cloture petition? How about Rick Santorum, he of the competing '08 campaign?"

SOCIAL SECURITY: E.J. The Egregious

Libertarian Will Wilkinson takes on E.J. Dionne's 5/19 Washington Post column. Writes Dionne: "For the first time in a long while, core liberal principles are actually winning in a public debate. The idea that Social Security is an insurance program and not an investment plan is gaining traction." Wilkinson responds: "Why E.J. Dionne thinks deception is a "core liberal principle" totally eludes me. Here are two options about Social Security as insurance. (1) It is not insurance. (2) It is "insurance," in some loose sense. But then so is (a) means-tested welfare or (b) mandatory personal retirement accounts plus a safety net. If (1) is true, then Dionne's claim is a lie. If (2) is true, then saying that Social Security is insurance does nothing to tell us why we ought to prefer the status quo over (a) or (b). As it happens, there is NO "core liberal principle" that I can think of that supports the fevered defense of America's badly structured historic welfare programs."

STEM CELLS: SoKo Helps?

Lefty Chris Mooney: "It's very simple for research proponents in Congress to explain that their bill would not license federal funding for this kind of research (even though I personally wish it did). Yet at the same time, they can clearly cite the South Korean breakthroughs to play the scientific nationalism card -- why the hell are we so far behind the rest of the world? (I'm not endorsing scientific nationalism in general, just pointing out that it's politically potent.)"

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: If You Thought Writing Doesn't Pay Now...

Centrist Jeff Jarvis: "I read Stephen Baker's post on the BusinessweekBlogspotting blog recounting lunch at a Korean restaurant (note outsourcing irony) with a media exec who argued that we will soon the rise of a new kind of newsperson. ... Baker and lunchmate think these people will be higher paid because of their multimedia skills. As editors, that may be true (though multimedia skills are today the birthright of the young: no big deal). As reporters, I think, however, that there will not be a scarcity of talent and eagerness out there -- witness the blogs -- and so payment for reporting could decline."

LEST WE FORGET: Sometimesitsjustfuntowritelikethisevenifit'sreallyreallyhardtoread

In a post titled "Marktwainsgermanwarning und Yoda," Donald Sensing runs a letter he never got printed in the Washington Post from '94 (relevant to a debate in the letters section at the time) about the Yoda-esque peculiarities of Deutsche: "In German biglongwordsthatcontinueforeverwithnoendinsight there are. Bigdeal. Two biggerproblems there are. First, in the Germanlanguage, verbs at the end of sentences or clauses go. In normalconversation, which is a question or which is a declarativestatement vocalinflection indicates. But in the writtentexts, only at the endofsentences with a period or a questionmark when you the difference can tell isn't it? Second, negatives the noun not verb modify. What the ruleimpact of this in English try to imagine would be. ... Richard Nixon would have said, 'I a notcrook am.' Connie Chung to the Newtmother would have said, 'Why not you to me girltogirl it whisper?'"

Posted by at 01:42 PM

May 20, 2005

5/20: A Tale Of Two Stories

The activity on the political blogs today brings into sharp focus the tendency of the blogosphere to focus, equally and simultaneously, on stories that are getting a wide airing in the MSM and those that are not.

The "are": A New York Times report on U.S. military findings about the deaths of 2 Afghans in captivity and related charges against American soldiers. The timing of the article feeds the Newsweek controversy while to some degree diverting attention away from it. There is widespread disgust and outrage concerning the charges, though it is expressed more reliably by the left. For many on the right, this is a further example of the MSM's habit of undercutting the U.S. military.

The "are not": On the Senate floor yesterday, Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) called Dems' jud. filibusters the "equivalent" of Adolf Hitler occupying France. That didn't go over so well. This is probably as good a point as ever to explain a term that is almost universally understood in the blogosphere, but rarely shows up elsewhere: Godwin's Law. The term originates from online message boards (something of a precursor to the blogosphere), where debates would often devolve into unchecked hostility. In 1990, atty Mike Godwin posited: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." In such cases, the discussion is pretty much over. In short, the adviso is to refrain from calling your opponents Nazis -- you'll just look stupid.

Meanwhile, the blogosphere is hopping with plenty of other news: conservative blogs are calling attention to a newspaper union official who claimed the U.S. military is purposefully targeting journalists -- remarks reminiscent of those that cost ex-CNN exec. Eason Jordan his job earlier this year. Travis Co., TX DA Ronnie Earle, who is investigating House Maj. Leader Tom DeLay, comes under fire for criticizing DeLay at a Dem fundraiser. And the filibuster debate continues to run hot. Plus, there's plenty of Star Wars talk out there again today, but we've left it out. If you're looking for blog discussion of "Revenge of the Sith," Technorati has you covered.

TRACKBACKS: Maybe The NYT Was Jealous?

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

• The New York Times does not lack for attention: Matt Yglesias; Arthur Chrenkoff; Huffington Post; This Modern World; American Entropy; Silflay Hraka; War and Piece; DailyKos; Instapundit; AMERICAblog; BuzzMachine.
  
  

  >> Right Wing News, in a post titled "Liberal Hostility To The Military": "For example, part of the reason Abu Ghraib has gotten so much attention & the press keeps churning out 2 and a 1/2 year old stories about soldiers working over prisoners is because liberals can use it to smear the troops. 'See? That's what they're all like behind closed doors! Sadistic savages.'" GOPer John Cole takes the charges more seriously: "These may be isolated incidents, but when a lot of shit starts piling up, as it is, you have to be flat out dain-bread to ignore it. Given the tin ear of my party lately on the issue of torture and abuse, that might just be the case."
  

  >> TalkLeft: "You can read the actual documents here. They were not cooked up by Newsweek or the liberal media. Or even the dead men's defense lawyers. What will be the Adminstration's response? Take your choice: (1) It was the work of a few bad apples, or (2) There is no credible evidence to support these claims." Liberal Angry Bear sarcastically titles a post on the subject "Damn You, Newsweek!" More: "Now anything bad that happens in Afghanistan or Iraq over the coming days will be the fault of the New York Times; anything good that happens will be due to the Newsweek retraction, and the Bush administration's leveraging thereof. It's perfect." Liberal Rising Hegemon: "It says a great deal about why American policies are going to shit. Many regular Corner contributors and other, even worse, troglodytes, of course, don't think you should know any of this."



• It's worth noting that the first available transcript of Santorum's speech was posted to the lefty amateur news site Raw Story, and in the absence of any MSM outlet picking up on it this morning, it continues to attract at least as much attention as the Times story above. Among those linking: Political Wire; PoliBlogger; Life in Bush's America; The Moderate Voice; The Airing of Grievances; Signifying Nothing; Fear of Clowns; The Heretik; The Left Coaster; Thoughts from Kansas.
  

  >> Further down in today's Blogometer is a round-up of takes on Santorum more substantial than "Trackbacks" was designed to handle.

JUDGES: There's A War On, You Know

"DavidNYC" at Daily Kos: "One claim the GOP likes to make is that they were justified in blocking many of Clinton's judicial nominees in the 90s because they were in the majority in Congress. ... Only problem is, that story isn't true. Even when the Democrats held a 56-44 advantage in the Senate in 1993 & 1994, the Republicans still tried to stop nominees they didn't like." The judge was ID atty John Tait, and "DavidNYC" quotes from a '94 Lewiston Tribune: "Two months ago, U.S. Sens. Larry Craig and Dirk Kempthorne successfully blocked Tait's confirmation hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee." He adds, GOPers are "trying to rewrite a period of history (as they often do) that's just a little bit beyond the edges of recent memory. Of course, we won't let them."

Conservative Power Line catches ABC News doing a "rewrite" of their own, reporting that GOPers filibustered the civil rights act, and commenting: "If you check ABC's site now, you'll see that they have silently corrected the error. I would have thought that pretty much everyone knew that it was Democrats who filibustered the civil rights act. The fact that this howler got by the eagle-eyed editors at ABC raises, once again, the question whether the fabled multiple levels of editing and review that the MSM are always telling us about actually exist."

Liberal Marc Cooper: "Fighting to oppose objectionable presidential judicial nominations is an honorable and worthy cause -- but it's about number seventeen on what should be a list of real political priorities. This is not going to galvanize some new Democrat majority. Quite to the contrary."

Captain's Quarters: "I've held off mentioning the Not One Dime campaign, where Republicans have pledged to withhold all 2005 contributions to Senate campaigns and the national party until the GOP forces a vote on the Byrd option and eliminates filibusters on judicial confirmations. Now that Bill Frist has moved to do that, we need to make sure that we continue our pressure on the individual Republican Senators to ensure they support the motion when it comes up for a vote. Please call the Capitol switchboard at 202-225-3121, and ask to speak to at least one of the 'wobblies' today." He offers a few tips to potential callers, including: "Don't just be polite; be friendly and sympathetic. The staffers are not enemies, and they're overworked and underpaid."

At TalkLeft, atty Jeralyn Merritt compiles a list of previous posts arguing why jud. nominees Priscilla Owen and Janice Brown should not be confirmed, and encouraging readers to call their Senators, provides a Senate phone number for them to call.

DailyKos diarist Bob Johnson: "The real issue isn't abortion or gay marriage or religious nuts controlling the Republican Party. And we better pull our heads out of our behinds and get the big picture or we risk losing a lot more than just the filibuster fight. The battle over judges is about MONEY. Greed. Exploitive capitalism. What all battles are over with the Cheneys and Roves and DeLays of the world. Rove and Cheney don't care about abortion. And, I suspect, they don't care about the religious right, either, except as these zealots serve to further their own Rovian Republican goals. ... Rove and Cheney want to stack the courts with pro-corporatist judges. Period."

DELAY: Run, Ronnie, Run

Right-leaning blogHOUSTON, on Travis Co. TX DA Earle's negative comments about DeLay at a Dem fundraiser: "Money and politics are and will forever be intertwined. blogHOUSTON advises readers to be wary of politicians, bloggers, pundits, or anyone else who sanctimoniously suggests one political party is somehow more pure than the other on the topic of money and politics." Conservative JustOneMinute picks up on the post as well. His headline is aimed at Earle: "Activate The "Auto-Discredit" Function." Conservative Pejmanesque: "Go ahead. Investigate Tom DeLay. But maybe get another prosecutor."

Liberal, TX-based Off the Kuff: "I'm not going to claim it was a smart idea for Ronnie Earle to give a speech at a fundraiser for a brand-new Democratic PAC. ... Stick to civic groups and reporters until these cases are resolved, Ronnie." More: "But let's say for a minute that he is blinded by partisan zeal ... Let's not forget, he's planning to retire soon, and I'm pretty sure one or more of his executive assistant DAs will want his job when he does. Are they all equally blinded as well, to the point where they can't see their own ambition and the effect such a fiasco would have on it? Don't you think one of them might have seen the writing on the wall and resigned loudly, so as to maintain political viability for later? You'd have to believe in the irrationality of an awful lot of people to think otherwise."

Liberal Glenn Smith: "Many years ago I represented one of the Democratic officials Earle indicted. Despite claims of partisanship, Earle has prosecuted many more Democrats than he has Republicans. In any case, I was young and stupid, and tried to make Earle the issue. My client pleaded out."

SANTORUM: You Can't Do That On Television

To see a WMV file of Santorum's remarks, click here. To see it in QuickTime, click here.

At Eschaton, lefty Duncan Black draws attention to Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) comparing Senate Dems to "Adolph Hitler in 1942": "Once upon a time an organziation called Move On ... ran a little ad creation contest ... and a couple of them admittedly crossed the line by making Bush/Nazi comparisons. Those ads were yanked immediately by the organization, but are nonetheless used to this day by the liberal media to smear Move On as an irresponsible 'extremist' organization. Now we have the junior Senator from Pennsylvania comparing the entire Senate Dem caucus to Adolf Hitler. Will the 'Move On' standard of the liberal media still apply?" At Tapped, Jeffrey Dubner asks the same question. "Digby" at Hullabaloo just assumes that's how it will be.

New England Republican, on Santorum's comments: "I miss the days when we would just say I don't agree with you, let's vote. That being said, no Democrat could really attack Santorum over it considering their leadership has all said something similar." Liberal Arch Pundit, on the same: "For the record, I don't think Santorum is a fascist. I do however think he's a jackass. I thought Byrd's reference was dumb, though it was within a fairly complicated discussion of the issues---this is just craven stupidity."

Dem blogger Oliver Willis lists GOP blogs that hadn't mentioned the Santorum comments as of 8:18 EDT on 5/19: Instapundit, Power Line, Blogs for Bush, NRO's The Corner, GOPBloggers, Andrew Sullivan, LaShawn Barber, Michelle Malkin, RedState.

One of the few top right-leaning bloggers to note it early on is John Cole of Balloon Juice, who titles his post "Senator Godwin." He quotes Santorum and comments: "Sometimes I just want to start bitch-slapping people." Later he updates to promote a comment to the main body of the post: "This may be one of the best comments ever: 'In Santorum's defense, he is really really dumb.'" Another is righty UCLA prof Eugene Volokh: "The precise nature of the equivalence with Hitler, I regret to say, escapes me. And in the absence of such equivalence or at least a very close similarity, it seems to me to be both unfair and in bad taste to compare your adversaries to Hitler, even when the analogy -- a rather weak analogy, as I mentioned -- is simply to his hubris rather than to his atrocities."

David Sirota: "These extremists are so out of touch and out of control that they will say anything -- no matter how offensive -- to get their way, even if it means contradicting themselves in the process." Santorum Cybergate: " Who let the (GOP attack) dogs loose? Who? Who?? WHO??? What a surprise, it's... TRICKY RICKY SANTORUM"

BLOGS VS. THE MSM I: Easongate Redux

JunkYardBlog: "Eason Jordan has an imitator. Her name is Linda Foley, and she is the International President of the Newspaper Guild. According to this site, she is also president of Communications Workers of America, the nation's largest broadcast and journalism workers union. Foley is, therefore, a big deal." At the '05 Nat'l Conf. for Media Reform she said: "Journalists, by the way, are not just being targeted verbally or... ah, or... ah, politically. They are also being targeted for real, um... in places like Iraq. What outrages me as a representative of journalists is that there's not more outrage about the number, and the brutality, and the cavalier nature of the U.S. military toward the killing of journalists in Iraq." And: "They target and kill journalists... uh, from other countries, particularly Arab countries like Al --, like Arab news services like Al-Jazeera, for example. They actually target them and blow up their studios with impunity..."

JYB's B. Preston adds: "Linda Foley had better offer proof of what she said or step down from her jobs. Tossing up unsubstantiated smears of the US military, especially in light of what Newsweek's smear led to in Afghanistan last week, is unconscionable and unacceptable."

The post has picked up a number of links throughout the conservative blogosphere since it was posted, and Preston has since added updates.

BLOGS VS. THE MSM II: Moran Goes To The Front Lines

ABC News WH corr. Terry Moran, who asked WH spokesperson Scott McClellan the question about who "made him editor of Newsweek," went on Hugh Hewitt's radio show on 5/18. Radioblogger has the transcript.

Wall Street Journal's James Taranto quotes Moran: "There is, Hugh, I agree with you, a deep anti-military bias in the media. One that begins from the premise that the military must be lying, and that American projection of power around the world must be wrong. I think that that is a hangover from Vietnam, and I think it's very dangerous." Taranto adds: "It may be that the bad habits the media learned during those years will fade away as older journalists and executives retire and younger ones move up the ladder."

Ace of Spades HQ focuses on a more contentious segment, where Moran "says the White House has no right to criticize the press. That whole dissent/accountability thingee seems to run in only one direction." He adds, Moran "accuses Hewitt of practicing 'demagoguery,' and seems strangely uninterested (shock!) in Kerry's failure to release his full military records, as he promised."

WRKO radio in Boston has replaced its weekend Newsweek Internat'l radio feed with a radio show hosted by the bloggers from Pundit Review.

BLOGS VS. THE WORLD: Little Old Bloggers From Pasadena

Calblog's Justene Adamec announces: "As the influence of blogs grows, more often bloggers are gathering news directly in addition to commenting on stories from the traditional press. The Bear Flag League is putting together a summer conference on bringing bloggers and newsmakers together." The event will be held 7/17 in Pasadena. Sacramento Bee columnist/blogger Dan Weintraub is the featured guest. The Bear Flag League is a loose association of mostly right-leaning bloggers from CA.

WHITE HOUSE '08: The Third Way?

Ex-Reagan aide Lyn Nofziger writes, "the law of averages says that one day a third party will have the right issue(s) and the right candidate to win the presidency. And right at this moment, far fetched as it seems, that that day might arrive as soon as the presidential election of 2008. I'm beginning to believe the issue is there and what is needed now is charismatic candidate to rally Americans in support of that issue. The issue: open borders and illegal immigration. ... If the day comes when terrorists launch another successful attack within the U.S. and it is found that the terrorists walked across the border from Mexico how will the president explain it? How will congress defend its refusal to act? ... It seems obvious at this moment that both parties have become complacent about the problem. And in politics complacency, as the Democrats learned in the Republican sweep of l994, is the sure road to defeat." Note: No permalinks -- see 5/19 post.

MD-based conservative David Wissing, on the expected protest of ex-NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) at Loyola: "Unfortunately [Cardinal William] Keeler decided he would rather make this personal between himself and Rudy Giuliani instead of celebrating the graduation of these kids. Feel free to disagree, but I still believe ... Keeler is dead wrong in this case and it is unfortunate because I am sure he is a sincere person."

SOCIAL SECURITY: Another Twist

Andrew Sullivan: "One of the intellectual gurus behind Bush's social security plans has withdrawn his support for private accounts. Right now, I'd be happy to have real cuts, Pozen's means-testing scheme, and voluntary add-on accounts. Bush could claim victory -- and he'd be right. It would be a victory to wrestle social security onto a more secure footing. Then maybe we can get to grips with the Medicare nightmare."

IN THE STATES: Kilgore Gets An Assist

Commonwealth Conservative: "I hear that the Republican Governor's Association is going to begin running ads on Friday on behalf of ['05 GOV candidate/AG] Jerry Kilgore (though Kilgore's campaign evidently had nothing to do with the ads). I don't know what they are going to say, but I'm told that they are powerful."

WA liberal blog Horses Ass, on '04 WA GOV candidate Dino Rossi's (R) strategy in contesting the election: "In recent days, the Rossi camp's spin has veered away from the felon vote, and back towards the 'total mess' thesis ... an unsurprising tactic considering the number of offsetting illegal votes the Democrats have alleged. But this shift is also likely due in part to the report" -- summarized in the post -- "recently issued by the Democrats' expert witness, Christopher Adolf, who effectively exposes the Republicans' data as 'unrepresentative', their methodology as 'flawed', and their entire case as 'hopeless'." Note: No permalinks. See "Rossi's hopeless case."

Dem-leaning Our Senate cites a poll showing Rossi leading Sen. Maria Cantwell (D) for '06, and writes: "Lucky for us, its very unlikely that Rossi will run. However, with only a 47% approval rating, Cantwell needs to get her campaign going now."

Conservative NYC blog Slant Point: "Slant Point will be offering regular interviews with Republican candidates running in New York this year. I recently had a chance to pose ten questions" to NY SEN candidate Adam Brecht, "a young PR exec who has been campaigning since last year" against Sen. Hillary Clinton. Other blogs to do interviews with Brecht recently include Alarming News and GOP Bloggers.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: File Under 'We're Pretty Sure This Is Just A Clever Marketing Campaign'

Not so much a thought as an amateur investigation into a slightly unbelievable website:

The Zero Boss brings our attenton to the announcement of a supposed forthcoming glossy magazine that will put bloggers on the cover: "Hold onto your hats... it's Blogebrity magazine! Because, you know, Nick Denton and Wonkette don't get nearly enough coverage. ... And what kind of f---ing name is Blogebrity? It sounds like someone trying to say "celebrity" while vomiting. It's one of those words that should be pronounced by a doctor, and suffixed by '...and that's why you only have six months left to live.' I mean, this is cruel and unusual. Why would anyone hate bloggers enough to want to make celebrities out of them?" The widely-read Instapundit cites the Zero Boss post and writes: "This is a parody, right? Please let this be a parody."

Blogebrity indeed looks to the Blogometer like an obvious parody, and its recently-launched associated blog is conspicuously short on content. A Whois search shows that the site was registered on 5/8 by an L.A.-based company called the Gawp Network. Gawp appears to be represented on the web by Gawp Daily, which at looks a bit like Denton's Gawker and reads like Denton's Sploid.

An e-mail from the Blogometer to "Blogebrity" was not returned by deadline. We'll update this if/when we hear more. The exercise reminds us a bit of James Lileks' investigation (scroll to "April 5 update") into the "Virgil King of Code" blog ads, which he found to be sponsored by Audi (see 4/8 Blogometer).

LEST WE FORGET: If There's Anything A Blogger Likes More Than Blogging, It's Not Blogging

AutoBlogger is the website for a fictional product which "uses a sophisticated Artificial Intelligence algorithm to 'read' the public entries of your journal/blog to triangulate a sense of your writing style. From that point forward, any time you hit a writer's block, want to take a vacation, or simply wish to step away from your computer for a few days, AutoBlogger can be set to take over, using what it has learned about your posting and writing patterns to author original content in a voice consistent with your existing prose." The faux campaign is modeled on Apple's "Switch" ads, including a video similar to Apple's TV ads (featuring website creator Kai Chang). There is also a testimonial page. Some highlights:

"Arianna Huffington": "Do you really think most of the halfwit 'celebrities' who contribute to my blog even know how to write a complete sentence? So really, it's not like anyone noticed when I switched to AutoBlogger anyway."

Daily Kos' "Markos Moulitsas": "You think I have time to blog? Fighting right-wing corporate interests is a full-time job, all the more so since we've been abandoned by the DNC. Screw them."

Wonkette's "Ana Marie Cox": "Before AutoBlogger I was called a profanity-laced and sex-obsessed vain, young, foul-mouthed tramp. With AutoBlogger, I can finally live up to the hype."

Posted by at 12:00 PM

May 19, 2005

5/19: Not So Long Ago, In A Blogosphere Far, Far From Ease ...

So, we were wrong in our prediction yesterday that the filibuster was likely to be the hottest story on the blogs this morning. Principally, the Blogometer managed to forget that the final installment in the new "Star Wars" trilogy opened last night. Meanwhile, nothing was resolved in the Senate yesterday, and few bloggers bothered to follow the debate on C-SPAN. Plus, news that CBS was canning the Wed. edition of "60 Minutes" impacted around the same time. And the Newsweek/Koran story continues to spin off new sub-controversies.

This is not to say that the Pres. Bush's jud. nominees and the Senate showdown were ignored -- the issue still loomed large. But mostly people want to talk about "Star Wars."

TRACKBACKS: Flush With Embarrassment

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

• A widely-cited column by Anne Applebaum of the Washington Post -- a corporate cousin of Newsweek -- is noteworthy for 2 reasons: 1) it offers a defense of Newsweek that even many conservative bloggers agree with, and 2) it claims a confirmed report that Gitmo detainees themselves put a Koran into a toilet at one point. The piece attracts 3 types of posts: those attracted to it for reasons 1) or 2), and those who simply link because it is there (as we've mentioned before, the Post is one of the newspapers most linked by the blogosphere left and right). They're all here: The Sideshow; OxBlog; Obsidian Wings; The Corner; Talking Points Memo; telescreen.org; Searching for a Better Way; The Ward Report; Sierra Faith.

  >> Conservative QandO concedes on 1): "I know many of you would be happier to have me flog the dead equine of Newsweek's hideous error, but the fact is the story was believable. I mean, we've actually killed several of these prisoners in captivity. What's a little Koran-flushing compared to that? ... You don't get to have it both ways. You don't get to defend torture, then complain because the Muslim crazies take it amiss. Or because our own press is too quick to believe that you mean what you say. That's just disingenuous." But not all are persuaded. Conservative Bill Rice writes: "I think her defense of Newsweek is not a defense at all, but rather reads as an attack against Sec. Defense Rumsfeld, the Bush Administration, and Pentagon to obfuscate the real culprit that caused almost a score of deaths, the MSM."

  >> Regarding 2), an Instapundit reader finds the "buried lede" about "confirmed" reports about the terrorists abusing the Koran themselves. Picking up on that post, JustOneMinute's Tom Maguire finds only an unconfirmed reports of same in statements by Gen. Richard Myers and Pentagon. Maguire writes, "my confidence in the WaPo is not at its peak just now, and since she does not even hint at a source for the news that this report is now confirmed, I would love to see some reassurance on this point."

• Jacques Steinberg's New York Times reports on the cancellation of the "60 Minutes" spinoff. Linking: TV Newser; Scared Monkeys; War and Piece; "Roger Ailes"; Little Green Footballs; Romenesko.

  >> Conservative Michelle Malkin: "Coincidentally enough, the feature story on tonight's show is titled, "Who's gonna get whacked?"

  >> Liberal Pandagon quotes Outside the Beltway as writing: "A news program simply can not exist without believability," and comments: "It also can't exist without viewers, and 60 Minutes II has been getting its ass kicked in the ratings since before the memo scandal ever occured."

JUDGES: Is There Anyone Who Still Feels Strongly About This The Same Way They Did Six Months Ago?

Right-leaning John Cole: "I am sitting here listening to Dick Durbin talk at length about Priscilla Owen on C-SPAN, reciting a long list of alleged sins, and I can't help but think the Democrats erred tactially on this. While I am in no way ceding that what Durbin says about Owens is true, it is impressive to hear someone talk for such a length of time about one person and not find any adjectives to describe the person but 'extreme' 'outside the mainstream.' If the Democrats had really filibustered, and sat and talked at length like Durbin is now, they probably would have been able to stop all of the nominees."

Tapped's Jeffrey Dubner, on the same: "[T]oday's beginning of the end makes for some seriously engaging C-SPAN. My first impression is that, as we've said before, Bill Frist is vastly overmatched. Just watching him try to announce his scheduling intentions and deal with clarifications and questions from Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, and Pat Leahy, it was clear that they're more than up to the task of knocking him off course procedurally and substantively."

Ex-RIAA chair Hilary Rosen, at the Huffington Post: "I've talked to several senators in the last 24 hours. Several things are going on which have and haven't been reported ... a majority of the Democratic Caucus is ready to vote and lose. They are convinced that Frist will use a combination of presure and leverage to hold enough votes. And their theory goes, they can still fight on each individual judge and try and get moderate republicans to vote against an anti-choice or radical nominee. They believe that the Republicans will overreach if they win this one and that it will have a 'Schiavo'-type backlash -- times ten. And plans are to try and make sure that happens."

It's a Frist-fest at Daily Kos, where "Armando" discusses on the role of ex-Senate GOP aide Manuel Miranda, who controversially downloaded a controversial Dem memo on obstructing Bush's jud. nominee's in early '04: "Miranda's breaking the law has led to Frist's breaking the Senate rules. That is what the Republican Party has become in a nutshell." Later, Markos Moulitsas posts a testy exchange from early this a.m. between a DailyKos reader and Miranda himself.

Meanwhile at The Corner, National Review's Jonah Goldberg questions his own magazine's apparent change of mind regarding filibusters.

NEWSWEEK: The Isikoff Kiss-Off

Lefty David Corn: "I know, I know. Never try to give someone constructive advice. Yet I'm at it again. My pals at Media Matters have dumped on my friend Michael Isikoff. In my most recent "Capital Games" column," which is included in the post, "I attempted to broker a ceasefire and remind the MMers that the real enemy is the White House that is fully exploiting the Newsweek mess to undermine an already weak-kneed media."

National Review's Beltway Buzz on "scene over at Newsweek this week": "The publication has received a number of threats against staff members. Perhaps not surprisingly, a number of cameras and reporters are staked outside the Newsweek offices attempting to interview staff members as they enter and exit the building. Since offering his resignation, Michael Isikoff to the best of my knowledge has not returned to the Newsweek offices. He is 'lying low' for the time being and in a 'pretty bad place' regarding his feelings on the fallout from his reporting. I have also learned that the Newsweek staff is having multiple meetings to discuss the ramifications from this story, debating their use of anonymous sources and approach to coverage."

More: "I am also learning that the official reaction to Newsweek's error is different than the public face put on by the administration. There were 11 days between the publication of Isikoff's report and the first complaints from the Pentagon. In the meantime, Pentagon officials went back and forth on whether or not they had found evidence of mistreatment of the Koran. Though they disagreed with the toilet flushing assessment, there was much disagreement over whether or not an equivocal statement could be made that 'no such activity' had ever been witnessed."

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: The Mathematics Of Blogging

Andrew Sullivan defends his focus on allegations of torture at Gitmo and responds to Glenn Reynolds' sharply-worded critique (see 5/18 Blogometer): "My careful, fully documented criticisms of the U.S. treatment of detainees have been made not because I am anti-war or anti-military. They are because I am pro-war and pro-military. Does Glenn really believe for a second that idiotic tactics like brandishing fake menstrual blood or Stars of David at Muslim inmates are good interrogation practices? Does he think these excrescences have helped gain any useful intelligence in any way? The problem with these abuses is that they are evil and stupid; immoral and counter-productive, as so many experts in interrogation will testify."

Non-Fat Latte Liberal: "Instapundit is wrong to call this the press' Abu Ghraib. Unfortunately, though, Sullivan's rebuke leaves much to be desired." Noting the letter Sullivan quoted to establish Reynolds' under-reporting on Abu Ghraib, NFLL writes, "this is so hopelessly biased a 'random sample' it's laugh-my-ass-off-able. His categories of 1) admonishment 2) playing down and 3) discrediting as anti-troop are cherry picked, ill defined and apply only to Abu Ghraib. Further, number of posts is simply not a measure. ... Gauging the number of posts per subject is ridiculous, besides not taking into account length it can never account for tone or feeling. Network news word counts, the most common measure liberal/conservative bias, work because the network has control over exactly how long everyone talks and, by choosing their guests, even what is said. Blogs are such a radically different beast that word counts, while better than post counts, would be a similarly rough measure because link provide so much content and have varying relevance."

Reason's Matt Welch selectively quotes from "the last 36 hours in the life of the world's most strangely compelling celebrity blog" -- the Huffington Post -- at Hit and Run -- Kathy Ireland: "Can anyone tell me, are they going to bring back the draft? I have three sons -- all nearly teenagers -- and am terrified that they will. Why don't they make it that just Republican kids get called up?" Norman Mailer: "Who, indeed, was Isikoff's supposedly reliable Pentagon source? One's counter-espionage hackles rise. If you want to discredit a Dan Rather or a Newsweek crew, just feed them false information from a hitherto reliable source. You learn that in Intelligence 101A." Diane Keaton: "And the fact is, Los Angeles is a city."

In a later Hit and Run post, Nick Gillespie adds: "As Matt W suggests below, all you have to do is scan the site to realize that it reads like a red state parody of blue state jackassery, one that can only do damage to liberal causes worldwide."

BLOGGERS VS. THE MSM: The De-Linking Begins?

The New York Times' decision to start charging for access to its op-ed columnists seems to be having some immediate consequences. On 3/17, liberal Kevin Drum wrote at Political Animal: "This isn't the biggest deal in the world, but I think I'm going to stop linking to New York Times op-eds and columns starting now." On 3/18 he followed up with a lengthy post on the decline of newspapers, concluding: "The reality is that television isn't going away and classified ads won't be returning to newsprint anytime soon. Is there a way to make money on the web by cooperating with bloggers, instead of locking content away from them? I don't know. But newspapers and bloggers are symbiotic at this point, and both would do well to think harder about this."

STAR WARS: Nothing But Star Wars, If Only You Could Bar Wars, Let This One Stay ...

Right-leaning VodkaPundit's Will Collier gives the movie a thumbs-up (warning: spoilers) writes of the movie's political content, "the alleged Bush-bashing stuff has been completely overblown. Trust me on this one. If you get offended by this movie on political grounds, you probably also go into a frothing rage when the car in front of you turns on its left-turn signal. If it weren't for the dumb press coverage, you wouldn't even notice the supposed 'controversial' bits."

Huffington Post's Sandy Frank points out the unfortunate acronym derived from the title of Episode III.

Bloggers frequently organize to create "carnivals" such as long-running Carnival of the Vanities and Carnival of the Capitalists. Now Michelle Catalano hosts "Carnival of the Force." Among her links: "Darth Vader Superstar", what appears to be the final post at the recently popular Darth Side blog. Pro Cynic is putting together a "Nitpicker's Guide" to Star Wars, film-by-film, even for "Empire Strikes Back": "Not to be a prude for realism, but asteroids do not move by themselves in the way they are shown in The Empire Strikes Back. This was the first time in the Star Wars series that I had a problem with the realism." Courtney's Blog posts photos and tickets from a Modesto premier last weekend, including pictures of Mark Hamill and his autograph. There's even a "Star Wars" podcast.

Patrick Ruffini's GOP/"Star Wars" Photoshop contest is well-worth checking out.

Let's not forget that cruel phenomenon of a couple years back: the Star Wars Kid.

Topically off-topic, Dan Drezner gives a shout-out to two other decades-old geek obsessions -- "Star Trek" and "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy," with links to other top bloggers writing on those subjects.

BuzzMachine, in a post titled "What a relief": "No more stories about dorky Star Wars losers without lives waiting in line for a damned movie."

IN THE STATES: Reed It And Weep ... Sure, That Pun Is Overused -- But Just Because It's Been Abused Elsewhere Shouldn't Rule It Out For Use When It's Especially Apt, Such As Here

Liberal Ed Kilgore, on emerging details about GOP operative/GA LG candidate Ralph Reed's involvement in the Jack Abramoff scandal: "After the original Abramoff scandal broke, with Ralph professing ignorance and innocence about his pivotal role, some politically knowledgeable people in Georgia figured he'd brazen it out, while others thought it would eventually derail his campaign. Now he's got a whole new set of allegations to deal with, exhibiting a clear pattern, and a guy as smart as Reed will be hard-pressed to explain why a man as dumb as he claims he was in these capers should be elected to statewide office."

Liberal Burnt Orange Report, on Sen. Mitch McConnell's (R-IN) speculation about Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) being promoted to the leadership: "These KBH rumors are getting a bit silly. What's next? Will she be offered a spot on the 2008 Presidential ticket if she does not run for governor?"

MISCELLANY: The Internet-Only Controversy Of The Week

Power Line first posted, has been following and adding reaction to graduation ceremony remarks by Pepsico pres. Indra Nooyi at Columbia Business School last weekend. Their 1st post from 3/17 is here. A lengthy compilation of responses can be found here. This a.m., the New York Sun carries an article about it.

Weekly Standard's Jon Last, at Galley Slaves: "Makes me proud to be a Coke drinker."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Ambrose Bierce, Resurrected

Garance Franke-Ruta at Tapped pronounces the following "Devil's Dictionary"-esque line, by Jonah Peretti of the Huffington Post, "an era-defining gem": "What I have learned from RatherGate, Newsweek, and the right wing bloggers: A blogger is a person who fact checks everyone except himself."

LEST WE FORGET: Guests Of Honor

&c. guest-blogger T.R. Frank: "Since every blog must weigh in on the Newsweek Koran story, I will do my part. Go to Google (it's here: www.google.com) and type in "Koran + toilet." If, after reading through the 99,900 results (most recent count), you feel the matter remains underdiscussed, send TNR Online a splenetic email written only in capital letters."

Per Rumsfeld's statement that "People need to be very careful about what they say ... people need to be careful about what they do," perpetual Wonkette guest-blogger Greg Beato offers a diagram who should watch what they say, who should watch what they do, those who can say anything, and those who can do anything.

Posted by at 12:21 PM

May 18, 2005

5/18: Furious George

After several days of intense coverage, the fracas surrounding Newsweek's retraction is now no longer the clear top story. This is not necessarily because the furor has dimmed. Rather, the fight over Pres. Bush's jud. nominees comes to a head on the Senate floor today, and that's grabbing some attention. Depending on what happens, this could well dominate discussion on the left and right by this time tomorrow.

Also going 'round the blogosphere: MN Gov. Tim Pawlenty's outreach to bloggers in his state, "Gorgeous George" Galloway's feisty appearance before the Senate cmte investigating his role in the U.N.'s oil-for-food scandal, and a rift between leading bloggers Andrew Sullivan and Glenn Reynolds widens, attracting gawkers.

TRACKBACKS: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Filibustered

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

• The Washington Post evaluates the deal-making process, and is the starting point for a number of bloggers, left and right, to discuss the coming showdown. Others just link to it in passing. Meanwhile, the Village Voice's Nat Hentoff, himself not a strong supporter of Judge Janice Brown, nevertheless mounts a defense of her against criticism from Dems and the New York Times editorial board.

  Among those linking to the Post: Obsidian Wings; Michelle Malkin; Charging RINO; Just a Bump in the Beltway. And those to Hentoff: Shot in the Dark; The Corner; Football Fans for Truth; Laffin at the Left.

  >> Mother Jones' MoJo Blog: "The latest rumored deal would confirm all of Bush's nominees but perhaps the two worst -- Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owen -- and Democrats would keep the right to filibuster nominees in the future, including potential Supreme Court nominees. There's no shame in that." Liberal MF Blog, on the Hentoff piece: "What Hentoff misses is a larger point as to why Justice Janice Brown should not be given a lifetime federal judgeship: Justice Brown has a track record of being hyperbolic and crude in her legal reasoning, and has shown a penchant for politically-motivated ideological attacks that are inconsistent with judicial sensibilities."

  >> Right-leaning Betsy Newmark notes that the Post fingers Judge Henry Saad as a likely castoff, and writes: "If Saad became infamous as the one nominee that everyone agreed to throw over, the implication would be left out there that his file was indeed dirty and that even the GOP agreed about that. But, the poor guy doesn't know what is in his file so he can't defend himself against these vague insinuations. That would be truly despicable of the Senate to allow his reputation to be permanently besmirched." Black conservative Robert A. George, on Hentoff's detailed defense of Brown: "Sadly, it's also unfortunate that this information is not promoted more by Republican and conservative supporters of Justice Brown. As noted here, though, they seem more interested in reminding everyone of her 'umble, 'umble beginnings than of what she actually, you know, thinks."

• Left-wing British MP George Galloway's televised appearance before the Senate investigative cmte led by Sens. Norm Coleman (R-MN) and Carl Levin (D-MI) is the subject of much talk, and The Scotsman's version is widely cited. And getting some links from the Crooks and Liars posts a video file of Galloway's testimony. Linking: Harry's Place; The Brothers Judd; Instapundit; MyDD; "Roger Ailes".

  >> Libertarian Unqualified Offerings: "It's certainly true that George Galloway's speech yesterday left no wiggle room. He's either a big perjurer or has delivered the most ringing rebuke of Congressional malfeasance since 'Have you at long last no shame, Senator?' But what that means, Senator Coleman, is that it's put up or shut up time for you, now." Liberal Washington Note: "George Galloway just tore the smug triumphalism and conceit of Senator Norm Coleman away in one of the great orations of the year." Captain's Quarters: "The Scotsman notes that Galloway appeared evasive and deceitful during direct testimony and never did provide any answer for the evidence and testimony that has exposed him as corrupted by UNSCAM bribes ... He probably will be surprised that his act failed to fool the people who know him best, even if it did appear to bedazzle American media yesterday who kept repeating his opening statement at the expense of the actual questioning that destroyed it."

  >> Two non-linking but on-topic posts representative of the fight: A DailyKos diarist: "George Galloway is a member of Parliament for Bethnal Green and Bow and stands (falsely) accused by conservative US senators of taking bribes from Iraq in an oil-for-food scandal. His statement before the US Senate is a truly righteous, withering, and devastating critique of the US position in Iraq." The text of Galloway's speech is reproduced in the post. Righty Charles Johnson: "I just haven't been able to bring myself to visit the lefty blogs to see what they're saying about George 'Burn in Hell' Galloway's appearance before the Senate today, but I'd be willing to bet they're doing handstands of joy and singing hosannas in Galloway's name. OK, let's pop over to Markos's Hate Hole [DailyKos] ... yep, just as I thought."

• In a column for Tech Central Station, Univ. of TN prof Glenn Reynolds notes that David Gergen -- "pretty much the standard measurement unit for conventional wisdom" -- has echoed his observation that the Newsweek scandal may be a "tipping point" in the decline of the MSM. This is one of those columns that picks up a number of links, but not much commentary (so far). Among those noting its existence: The Anchoress; 10k snooker; Ed Driscoll; Betsy Newmark.

  >> Rex Hammock: "Glenn Reynolds asks if this is the tipping point in the decline of main-stream media? I see it rather as death by chinese water torture."

NEWSWEEK: Everything You Know Is Wrong ... Or At Least We Can't Prove It

Righty Tom Maguire: "The latest Dem talking point on the "Newsweek Lied" debacle is that Newsweek had nothing to do with it -- why, Gen. [Richard] Myers himself said just last week that the local commander thought the Newsweek article had nothing to do with it. ... Works for me. But having agreed that the military was spinning a bit (or a lot), let's ask a few related questions - (a) what can we make of the Washington Post and NY Times coverage that quite clearly blamed the Newsweek article in their lead paragraphs? Were these biased attempts to further discredit the military, or responsible, accurate journalism?"

Lefty Juan Cole: "It is being yet again alleged that Newsweek has formally retracted the Guantanamo Koran desecration story ... So far this is the same "retraction" as Sunday's, which is that they were wrong to source the story of Koran desecration to a forthcoming Southern Command white paper on Guantanamo. It says nothing about whether the Koran desecration occurred, or whether their government source accurately reported seeing a US government text documenting it.

Centrist Andrew Sullivan quotes WH spokesperson McClellan saying Newsweek should help "repair the damage" and asks: "Does McLellan [sic] really want the press to report more widely on what has been going on at Guantanamo Bay? Does he really want more stories about forced nakedness, female interrogators using panties and fake menstrual blood, and many reports from former inmates about deliberate misuse of the Koran? Well, let it rip, I say. The press's response should not be to whine about the Bush administration pestering them. It should be call McLellan's [sic] bluff."

GOP operative Rich Galen: "If Newsweek were a chemical company, and something it did led to the same number of deaths, I guarantee you Donald Graham, the Chairman and CEO of the Washington Post Corporation would be sitting in front of a Congressional committee by next Wednesday."

Liberal August J. Pollak: "So now there's a bunch of right-wingers who are pitching the desecrated Koran riot story with the line 'Newsweek Lied, People Died.' Get it? It's funny, because it's making fun of what all the anti-war people said when 1,700 Americans were killed based on lies they were warned about but didn't listen to. What, don't you have a f---ing sense of humor?"

Conservative Pejman Yousefzadeh, at RedState: "I probably shouldn't even bother to write this because life is short, but it appears to be important to point out to Andrew Sullivan and his snide and newfound fan [Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum] that in all likelihood, the reason 'conservative bloggers' are upset and angry about the Newsweek screwup is that it cost lives in the Middle East and it could have cost a lot more lives as well."

Instapundit's Reynolds appeared on Hugh Hewitt's radio show with PressThink's Jay Rosen to discuss Newsweek. Afterward, he writes: "Newsweek's admission of ignorance regarding the consequences of its reporting was truly stunning. ... Remember all the talk about the Enron scandal, and how free enterprise was at risk if greedy corporations didn't clean up their acts? Well, I'm afraid that press freedom is at risk if it's seen as a vehicle for out-of-touch corporations to peddle defective products without fear of consequences." Full transcript of their appearance is available at Radioblogger.

JUDGES: The Art Of The Deal

ConfirmThem links to the draft of a Senate compromise (PDF) which would confirm all judges but Saad, Owen and William Myers, the comments: "Dumping any of these nominees would be unreasonable, and would really set a horrible precedent that the minority can complain long enough and loudly enough to ultimately defeat a majority-supported judicial nominee. A deal would be great, but only if it's fair."

Elizabeth Edwards has a lengthy post on the filibuster fight at the One America Committee blog. It begins: "I have had just about all I can listen to of the Republicans and the 'nuclear option' of eliminating the filibuster for judges. So I want to vent, and what better place? I don't particularly want to use the word Republicans to describe Senator [Bill] Frist and those who will vote for him if it comes to that, because there are a good number of Republicans -- enough, I hope -- who recognize that Senator Frist's actions are not a principled stand for the Constitution but are simply a degradation of the institution for a short-term political advantage."

At Tapped, The American Prospect's Matt Yglesias praises National Review's Ramesh Ponnuru for questioning Janice Brown's position on judicial activism, writing: "Good for him. It would be nice if more conservatives would put their ostensible support for judicial restraint to the test in this case. Of course I think it also would be nice if the Democratic line on the judiciary hadn't gotten so extremely filibuster-centric. Obviously, with the nuclear option on the table, they need to talk process a bit. But it's worth keeping the substantive issue -- should people like Judge Brown really be in the federal judiciary? -- as close to the front as possible."

DELAY: The Decline Of Steve Moore?

Liberal Carpetbagger Report's Steve Benen, on Steve Moore and Free Enterprise Fund running nat'l ads defending House Maj. Leader Tom DeLay: "I'm not in the habit of giving DeLay's friends advice, and if the right wants to spend six figures on dumb ads I don't want to stop them, but from DeLay's perspective, isn't this message counter-productive? Here we have a nationally televised commercial telling Americans a) that Tom DeLay is facing a series of scandalous charges; and b) the media is taking the charges seriously. Naturally, the ads also help boost DeLay's name recognition at a time when his scandals have started to fade from the headlines. Is it me, or do ads like these actually help Dems bring DeLay's problems to the public attention?"

SOCIAL SECURITY: What's News?

Blogs for Bush's Matt Margolis: "Via the Social Security Choice blog, I learned that "the Cato Institute issued a new advertisement listing 450 economists, including 5 Nobel laureates, from across the country who have publicly endorsed personal accounts for Social Security." That was the first I'd heard of this, because, sadly, the media never reported on it." Libertarian Radley Balko: "My employer ran ads last week announcing over 450 economists -- including 5 Nobel Prize winners -- back private Social Security Accounts. Seems like a story the media should have picked up."

For what it's worth, Rep. Robert Wexler's (D-FL) SocSec proposal has generated exactly zero buzz in the blogosphere Technorati shows no recent mentions of Wexler.

Liberal economist Max Sawicky: "Went to another forum on Social Security this morning. It's a dirty job, etc. etc. ... Comparisons of market returns -- the riskless Treasury securities, bonds, and stocks -- presume some kind of blank slate, as if a generation of workers with no elderly dependents was launching an old age retirement program from scratch. In reality, SOMEBODY pays for existing claims," a "guaranteed minimum" and "transition costs." More: "All of these somebodies' payments reduce the apparent average return in investment accounts (either individual, or collective). The relevant comparison is not between stocks and government bonds, but between a market-oriented investment scheme and the status quo, where the reform calculation contemplated all the ancillary features of the policy partially enumerated in the preceding paragraph."

BLOGS VS. THE WORLD: Pawlenty Of Attention

Conservative Ed Morrissey writes about a visit to the gov's mansion "for a reception intended to honor new media" in MN. Among those invited were John Hinderaker of Power Line and writers for Bogus Gold, Patriot Blog, First Ring, Kennedy vs The Machine and Fraters Libertas. He writes, "this shows that people in power have noticed the effect that we have on debate, and have started to take us seriously. A few months ago, the notion that Governors and Senators would concern themselves with the pajamaheddin seemed fanciful and somewhat self-congratulatory. Now it seems almost an inevitability, and in Minnesota, a reality."

Kennedy Vs. The Machine, on the visit: "The Governor - or someone on his staff - is to be commended for fostering good will among the center-right blogging community. These are the folks who will provide cover during the looming special legislative session during which Pawlenty's 'no new taxes' pledge will be put to the test like never before. And it goes without saying that if there is to be a bid for higher office, it will not hurt to have these folks on board. It would be universally acknowledged by those who had the privilege of attending this evening that we were in the presence of a rare talent."

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS I: Sullivan V. Instapundit

Mickey Kaus quotes a partial post from Instapundit without comment: "Andrew can be excitable. A while back he apologized to me for some of his criticisms during the election, and more recently he has apologized to his readers for his waffling and defeatism on the war last spring. Perhaps he'll apologize for this at some point in the future. But, I confess, I find the question of what Andrew thinks less pressing than I used to."

INDC Journal comments: "Every sweet word a righteous fix of calm, common-sensical, economical, brutal rejoinder punditry, a soothing antidote to Sullivansteria."

Sullivan, on Reynolds writing extensively about the Newsweek story as "the press' Abu Ghraib" but having not expressed much "admonishment" for the actual Abu Ghraib scandal: "Instapundit's coverage suggests that he believes that the erroneously-sourced Newsweek story is actually more offensive and important than what happened at Abu Ghraib."

"Ace" at Ace of Spades HQ writes, Sullivan "seems to have found a whole new group from whom to curry favor. Again he cites a Daily Kos contributor as authoritative. Shocking? Not really. As I have said from virtually the first day of this blog: the man has always been a self-absorbed solipsistic narcisstic huckster. So am I, of course. But I'm admitting it, you know?"

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS II: Cornered

Lefty James Wolcott notes the "helluva shortfall" in National Review's recent fundraising drive (collecting about $25K of the $100K goal) and comments on new developments at NRO's The Corner: "the introduction of a new primate -- John Podhoretz -- has upset the delicate ecosystem of the NRO's Corner that has metastasized into the site. Before everyone knew his role. K'Lo [K.J. Lopez] was the drafty Bride of Christ. Andrew Stuttaford was the English correspondent who relayed news from Britain no one cared about. John Derbyshire was the Evelyn Waughish eccentric. Jonah Goldberg was the aging frat-boy fun guy, surfer cable TV with his Star Trek phaser remote control and hyping his upcoming college speaking engagements at Roy Cohn Community College."

SlantPoint posts a weird picture of Arianna Huffington and Jeff Jarvis.

IN THE STATES: V Is For Villaraigosa

Marc Cooper: "The landslide election of a Spanish-speaking liberal Latino to preside over America's second largest city carries huge political symbolism especially at a time when the national immigration debate is simmering. And before [Mayor-elect Antonio] Villaraigosa even takes over his new office, it makes him an instant player in the future battle for Arnold's state house."

The Los Angeles Times maintained an election blog during the final week of the mayor's race. Conservative Hewitt, who contributed "The three reasons I am pleased Antonio will win" for the blog, complains at his personal blog that the newspaper didn't update its blog all day long on 3/17: "This race was over when the polls opened, and the refusal of the Times to blog the race during election day reflected the paper's old media values of pretending to be objective and a pretentiousness that is wildly amusing. As though they lacked the staff to make it work or that a Times' blog would impact a landslide."

WHITE HOUSE '08: Tim Vs. Tony?

Captain's Quarters' Morrissey, on Gov. Pawlenty (R-MN): "John [Hinderaker] and I both want to see Governor Pawlenty consider a run for the ticket, which may be not just viable if he wins re-election here in 2006, but may be more probable than some will think. He has a natural gift for winning the center, a skill which allowed him to turn Minnesota red in 2002 and later on give him formidable approval ratings."

Hewitt, in his comment on Villaraigosa, cross-posted to his own blog: "Let me be the first to mention Antonio as a possible vice presidential candidate in 2008. Mickey Kaus take note."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: On Blogging And "Blogging"

Cathy Seipp interviews Andrew Breitbart, former Drudge Report contributor and now producer for the Huffington Report, on the term "blog": "On one hand, it is kind of patronizing for mainstream media types to play that term up, but most bloggers don't seem to mind. So I guess I'm agnostic on the nomenclature. That said: over the last 5 or so years I've been drawn into the emerging blogosphere more than Drudge. I not only like reading blogs. I like meeting bloggers of all stripes. I think that the bloggers as a collective are helping to build a media future that undoes so much of the problems that have made the public so skeptical of journalism."

LEST WE FORGET: Fake News Is Almost More Popular Than Real News

IowaHawk's Onion-esque treatment of the Newsweek flap is a popular one with a number of right-leaning blogs. Headline: "Newsweek Lutefisk Story Sparks Fury Across Volatile Midwest." Lead graf: "Decorah, IA -- The debris-strewn streets of this remote Midwestern hamlet remain under a tense 24-hour curfew tonight, following weekend demonstrations by rock- and figurine-throwing Lutheran farm wives that left over 200 people injured and leveled the Whippy Dip dairy freeze. The rioting appeared to be prompted, in part, by a report in Newsweek magazine claiming military guards at Spirit Lake's notorious Okoboji internment center had flushed lutefisk down prison toilets. Newsweek's late announcement of a retraction seems to have done little to quell the inflamed passions of Lutheran insurgents in the region, as outbreaks of violent mailbox bashings and cow tippings have been reported from Bowbells, North Dakota to Pekin, Illinois."

Posted by at 12:53 PM

May 17, 2005

5/17: These Guys Are Nothing If Not Predictable

The retraction came, and focus in the blogosphere has shifted slightly (though not entirely) from attacking Newsweek for running the story to an overall focus on journalistic practices. Put simply, this is seen by conservatives and others as another blatant example of how the MSM's liberal tilt, whether intentionally or not, leads to bad press. That slight shift reflects the suspicion many have, that the Koran-flushing incident is probably true.

On the left, there is more of a defense building for Newsweek than there was yesterday in the immediate aftermath of the mag's announcement. First, they question why the administration is so quick to attack Newsweek for running with single-sourced information when the Iraq war was launched on what they say is similarly suspect information. Several point out that the administration did not refute the report when it had the chance, and in fact previously stated that uprisings in the Mid East had nothing to do with the Newsweek report. Finally, there are those who suspect that the admin is jumping on this story to divert attention from others, or that there is a "Rovian" conspiracy behind it.

Elsewhere, the still-looming-but-not-yet-imminent filibuster showdown is still generating some talk. The New York Times makes no new friends by deciding to charge for some online content. The Cheney for Pres. talk sparked some more speculation on '08. And some stories getting linked but not necessarily generating their own discussion include violence in Uzbekistan, and the question of whether the new Star Wars feature is bashing Pres. Bush.

TRACKBACKS: One-Trick Pony

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

• Newsweek's retraction is reported widely, and AP's account seems more prevalent. Linking: Captain's Quarters , Power Line, PressThink, First Draft, Rising Hegemon, Oh, That Liberal Media, Begging To Differ, PoliPundit, Michelle Malkin. Linking to the New York Times: The Moderate Voice, Talking Points Memo, The Belgravia Dispatch, Althouse, Roger L. Simon, The Corner. To others: Silent Running, Little Green Footballs, Patrick Ruffini, Scared Monkeys, Winds of Change, Instapundit, Patterico's Pontifications.

  >> Protein Wisdom, on the retraction: "No word on how Newsweek plans to retract the 17 deaths and hundreds of injuries caused by its eagerness to demonize the US military in general, and the Guantanamo Bay interrogators specifically."

  >> Lefty Josh Marshall: "[L]et Newsweek's reporting stand or fall on its own ... . But do not miss the fact that the White House and the political appointees at the Pentagon are exploiting this in every way they can -- even going so far, it would seem, as to declare as a moral certainty claims that only a few days ago they professed to believe were false."

• Today Editor & Publisher's report on a media poll is also widely linked, with some bringing the findings into discussions about the Newsweek flap. Linking: Moderate Voice, RealClearPolitics, Tim Blair, Instapundit, Outside The Beltway, Ezra Klein, Daily Thoughts

  >> Conservative Glenn Reynolds: "I'm a big fan of freedom of the press. I think it's too bad that the journalistic profession is ruining things for everybody through the hubris, irresponsibility, sloppiness, and outright agenda-driven bias of its practitioners."

  >> On the poll's finding that 43% of Americans believe the press has too many freedoms, moderate Joe Gandelman writes: "NOT good news for the press. This means gradual encroachments on press freedoms could succeed in the U.S. They would just have to be gradual enough not to create a big controvery."

NEWSWEEK: Opposites Retract

Conservative Glenn Reynolds: "It's not as if journalists don't know how to be exquisitely sensitive about their reporting when they care to be: Media organs, for example, don't normally report the race of those who perpetrate crimes, for fear that such reports might reinforce stereotypes or lead to lynching. But passing along unfounded rumors that reinforce enemy propaganda in wartime, and lead to significant diplomatic and military problems in a friendly country doesn't, apparently, rise to the level of importance required to trigger such sensitivities."

Captain's Quarters contributor "Aileron" writes: "Newsweek ran the story knowing that it would excite the passions of the world's muslim population. Contrast this with the media's refusal to show pictures of our fellow citizens jumping out the the world trade center. We were told that such pictures would unneccessarily anger the American people and lead to violence against Muslim Americans. Separate post on Newsweek "blaming the Pentagon." A Michelle Malkin reader remembers that Newsweek agreed to a non-disclosure agreement with John Kerry in '04: "Agreeing not to air Kerry's dirty laundry during a political campaign is fine and dandy. But not airing Gitmo's dirty laundry during the War on Terror would be a compromise of journalistic ethics."

Righty John Cole: "I find it difficult to believe that even the bizarre Arab culture would be moved to riot over the Koran in a toilet and not, say, the numerous abuses at Abu Ghraib. That is just a tough sell for me, and I would recommend some people look up post hoc ergo propter hoc."

Vodkapundit: "As of yet, there's been no public word from the bogus story's authors, Mike "Spikey" Isikoff and John Barry. Since I haven't read anybody else saying it yet, I'll jump up and be the first: they should be fired, at a bare minimum. The editors who allowed the bogus story to run should be fired. Richard M. Smith, the editor-in-chief of the magazine, should resign in disgrace, or be fired himself."

Righty Jim Geraghty: "[S]omething tells me this one is going to be bigger than Rather. There was something goofy and absurd about the whole CBS memo mess ... This latest journalistic train wreck is just ugly. Dead Afghans, calls for jihad, threats of more violence, Islamists rejecting the Newsweek retraction ... This can still get worse, and there will be no laughs in this one." Geraghty also reports that the whole story isn't eliciting a violent reaction in Turkey.

Lefty Steve Soto links to a State Dept. story, quoting Joint Chiefs chair Richard Myers saying Afghani riots were not related to the Koran story.

Barely lefty Marshall Wittmann: "Before the Pentagon strikes a holier than thou line on accountability, the civilian leadership there should take a hard look in the mirror. Secretary Rumsfeld and the gang have hardly stepped up to the plate regarding the horrific errors on their watch ranging from the failure to prepare for the Iraq occupation to Abu Ghraib."

Lefty Kevin Drum: "The Taliban stages a resurgence every spring, anti-Americanism has been on the rise for some time, and the rioters in Afghanistan are responsible for the riots in Afghanistan. The Newsweek story is clearly just a pretext, and another story would have done just as well given their obvious animosity toward America. Under any other circumstances, conservatives would heartily agree. The phony outrage over this is just a cynical excuse for the usual press bashing. Newsweek should buck up." More: "As near as I can tell, the Pentagon has demonstrated more genuine outrage over this incident than they did over months and months of disclosures of similar (and worse) actions at Abu Ghraib. It's revolting."

Think Progress writes, WH spokesperson Scott McClellan "lectured the media about a 'journalistic standard that should be met' before running with a story. Fine, but isn't there also a political standard of accountability that should be met as well? ... When confronted with an anonymous source who provided faulty intelligence that the President relied upon to go to war, McClellan chose not to talk about standards of accountability that should be met."

Keith Olbermann calls for McClellan to resign. "Whenever I hear Scott McClellan talking about 'media credibility,' I strain to remember who it was who admitted Jeff Gannon to the White House press room and called on him all those times. Whenever I hear this White House talking about 'doing to damage to our image abroad' and how 'people have lost lives,' I strain to remember who it was who went traipsing into Iraq looking for WMD that will apparently turn up just after the Holy Grail will -- and at what human cost." More: "The news organization turns to the administration for a denial. The administration says nothing. The news organization runs the story. The administration jumps on the necks of the news organization with both feet -- or has its proxies do it for them. That's beyond shameful. It's treasonous." David Corn makes a similar point at The Huffington Post.

Winds of Change writes that if liberal bloggers can't be convinced the story is untrue, "what do you think can be said for the Taliban propagandists" and other enemy groups? "This is the ultimate result of all of this and there is not a damn thing that Newsweek or the US government can do about it. ... [S]ome of the nuttier stuff that is repeated here that we kind of shrug off as crazy talk can have deadly consequences when it gets repeated overseas."

Steven Brandt at The Huffington Post: "Newsweek getting 'caught' like this has Karl Rove's stink all over it. Am I the only one who sees this pattern at work? ... one that is destroying the credibility of the press?"

NEWSWEEK, PART II: Press-ing The Flesh

NYU's Jay Rosen writes: "The question the magazine should have to answer is why it ever thought sufficient such a meager reliability level for a story of this kind." Rosen details ways that pressure on journalists has increased, and continues: "Under these conditions, it is imperative that journalists in the United States raise their standards for reliability, because the consequences of being wrong -- for themselves, for their profession as a whole, and for others far removed -- are graver."

Media critic Tim Porter writes: "When is this self-destructive obsession by the press with "scoops" and "exclusives" going to end? ... The value editors and reporters place on scoops is a vestigial remnant of the day when such things mattered -- when New York, for example, had a two fistfuls of daily papers that would rush out Extras with the latest 'exclusive' lede topping a running story. ... That day is gone. News today is a continuum. It flows ceaselessly from producer to consumer and, more and more, back again to the producer. It can be stopped and recorded for consumption later, it can be sampled at any hour of the day or night, or it can be ignored altogether, as it increasingly is. This news environment needs a new set of values."

Tapscott's Copy Desk: "For whatever reason, it appears Newsweek's reporters and editors forgot Journalism 101's First Rule: You don't publish a serious allegation that could seriously damage or destroy an individual's reputation, put somebody in physical danger or place public safety at risk if you don't have two independently verifiable sources."

Patterico's Pontifications: "The Newsweek controversy has reopened a debate about what standards are necessary for publication, especially when there is only one source for an assertion, and that source will not go on the record."

Ace of Spades HQ: "In a perfect world, they want two sources. But one of those 'sources' can consist of the 'in the gut' feeling of the liberals running our media that the story 'feels right.' And if the gut-level political response of our liberal media is that a story is false -- like, for example, that George Bush is not, in fact, retarded, or that we're actually making solid progress in the War on Terror -- they're going to need more than two sources for that assertion, the extra sources needed to counter their political feeling that the story isn't right or isn't 'good for America.'"

The Light Of Reason writes of "Bush supporters and war hawks": "Censorship is what they're after, and don't let them tell you otherwise."

Hit and Run: "[I]f we're to ladle out blame for the pending First Amendment collapse on journalists who have a dispute with one source, let's save a drop or two for commentators who have encouraged their readers to believe the falsehood that professional reporters have been showing up to work all these years to carry out a specific agenda to undermine America."

Hugh Hewitt: "[S]ome blog critics at the PersonalDemocracyForum were arguing that blogs' day has already passed. I pointed out to the audience that the Newsweek meltdown again underscores the value of the medium in that the blogs are relentlessly pushing the story of Newsweek's screw-up which is the only antidote to the damage done."

The Moderate Voice, on general blog reaction: "If you read even differing opinions you see a consensus -- that this issue is far from over and Newsweek's statement has not defused it. Will some people (in the press or administration) be looking for new jobs before this controversy has completely run its course?"

FILIBUSTER: Wake Me When It's Over

Liberal Markos Zuniga: "After several attempts at compromise, [Senate Maj. Leader Bill] Frist [(R)] has decided that his presidential ambitions are more important than an effective Senate. He will now attempt to impose the will of the majority on a minority against long-standing Senate tradition."

vCaptain's Quarters, on AP's report of a new Dem offer: "I find it highly interesting that the Democrats now consider Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor to be acceptable for the federal appellate bench. Remember, only a few days ago Reid referred to these nominees as 'bad people' and told Nevada schoolchildren that Brown wanted to take America back to 'Civil War days'. Either they're willing to pay that price to hang onto their newfound obstructionist tactic, or Reid likes to lie to schoolkids."

Left-leaning Marshall Wittmann: Frist "is a truly a Senator of distinction. While he has performed admirable humanitarian work and is evidently a talented surgeon, he will likely be remembered as one of the worst Majority Leaders in the history of the Senate. Dr. Frist has consistently put his political ambitions before the interests of the institution. At every point, he has refused to achieve a compromise to forestall this confrontation." More: "While the Democrats have come too far in this filibuster confrontation to capitulate, they should also avoid placing themselves in a position where the Republicans can attack them as the party of 'no.'"

Think Progress runs a list of quotes from GOP Sens. and questions Frist's assertion that he has the votes for rules changes.

The Moderate Voice offers a prediction: "[I]f the 'nuclear option' goes through and American politics becomes dominated by social conservatives with no attempt at consensus building, moderates move to the Democratic party. Why? Because the GOP could scare them in that direction. Would that be enough to offset a solid social conservative block? Uncertain. THE BIG IF: can the Democrats nominate someone appealing to centrists who could still excite the party's left wing? Also uncertain."

BUSH: We'll Always Have Patuxent

David Corn, on the Bush bike ride: "The Bushies can't admit a mistake. ... When national security adviser Stephen Hadley appeared on Fox News Sunday yesterday, he was asked about the decision not to clue in Bush. No surprise: he said everything went fine. What happened that day, Hadley maintained, is 'how the system's supposed to work.' Really? Is it national security protocol to clear out the White House and not inform the guy who lives there? Suppose that the threat had been real. ... Would we want the president working on his heart rate instead of being briefed, assessing the situation, and preparing to make what could be a difficult decision?"

Chris Mooney: "For recreation, Bush goes bike riding in wildlife refuges--clearing everyone else out whenever he's around--even as he then turns around and cuts their funding. What a jerk."

DEMOCRATS: Don't Look Now ...

Liberal Steve Soto cites a quote from Pelosi spokesperson Jennifer Crider, in response to Rep. Waxler's SocSec plan: "This is not the Democratic plan." Soto: "Excuse me, Ms. Crider. What exactly is the Democratic plan?"

Captain's Quarters on GOP outreach to African Americans: DNC Chair Howard "Dean has done little to appeal to anyone outside of his lunatic-fringe Leftist base of International ANSWER and MoveOn fanatics ... . Meanwhile, [RNC chair Ken] Mehlman wisely moves towards engagement with the most lock-step of the Democratic factions ... . The Democrats cannot survive the defection of more than 15% of the African-American vote in presidential elections or even in upcoming Senate races."

IRAQ: Blood On U.S. Hands

The Left Coaster notes a Guardian story, which stated: "the Bush administration was made aware of illegal oil sales and kickbacks paid to the Saddam Hussein regime but did nothing to stop them." Lefty Steve Soto: "What exactly is the penalty for aiding and abetting a terrorist, as Bush himself described him ..., when Saddam was allegedly a threat to the United States? And why is Bush not guilty of treason?" Political Animal, on same: "None of this excuses the sordid behavior of UN officials in all this, but it does show that they were hardly acting alone. Every country on the Security Council played a part in this scandal, including us."

Billmon dreams of 2010 war crimes tribunal featuring some familiar faces.

BLOGGERS VS. THE MSM: Newsweek Has Company

Political Animal, on the New York Times starting a paid-subscription online service: "I predict that's going to go down with New Coke as one of the all-time bad marketing decisions in history." Galley Slaves: "TimesSelect has 'bust' written all over it." The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid: "This will have the consequence (unintended?) of making it far more difficult for bloggers to dissect Times columns."

The Corner's Tim Graham notes that the Washington Post headlined an article about Peabody Awards being given to ex-CBS anchor Dan Rather and "Daily Show" host Jon Stewart "Anchors Comic and Serious Win Peabodys." Graham: "After reading that quote, I'd put Rather in the Comic category. The Post meant Jon Stewart as the comic, but they could have started the story: 'Two fake news anchors accepted awards last night....'"

BLOGGERS VS. THE WORLD: You Win Some, You Newsom

The San Francisco Beat reports that the SF Ethics Commis. last month approved amendments to campaign finance laws that leave blogs unregulated.

WHITE HOUSE '08: Handicapping The Field

The Corner has lots of '08 talk. Ramesh Ponnuru: "Two or three years ago, when Jeb Bush '08 was a hot idea in D.C. Republican circles, I thought the idea was crazy. Now that it's not a hot idea, I think better of it. The dynasty issue would be a problem -- one mitigated but not eliminated by Hillary -- but everyone else has a problem of his own that's just as bad if not worse." More: "It does strike me that there is room for a candidate who is socially conservative, fiscally conservative, and a hawk. Those are the mainstream positions of the Republican party, but there's no strong candidate yet who represents all of them."

John Podhoretz reports: "Like Jim Geraghty, I have it on very, very, VERY good authority that Dick Cheney will not be a candidate in 2008. I'm also hearing, from not as good an authority but a decent one, that McCain won't run either. What this means is that for those who want a defense tough guy, Rudy has to be taken seriously. ... I think Tim Pawlenty should get a look or two, because he will get those looks in 2007."

K.J. Lopez: "Rudy has already reached a political and cultural legendary zenith. Why would he want to ruin that by running for president?" In a separate post, Lopez: "I'd like to see Rick Santorum stricken from the '08 potentials. He's young, he can go back on the list for '12 if he wants. I just want all the Santorum energy going toward winning reelection in '06, no small feat."

Goldberg: "Two readers have asked me why no one has mentioned Andy Card as a potential presidential candidate. All I can think of in response is, Because he's Andy Card." There's plenty more on the site.

IN THE STATES: Yes, There Are TX Dems

Off The Kuff talks with TX SEN candidate Barbara Radnofsky (D): "What's motivating her to drive across the state (actually, to ride while her husband drives), keep crazy hours, and carry two Blackberries and a cellphone, is the belief that the country is off on the wrong track and needs to get things right. 'If I thought things were going well, I wouldn't be running,' she said to me several times." More: "She argued strongly that you can't limit the field for statewide offices just to people who started at the county or city level and spent 20 years working their way up the ladder. New blood is good, and besides, that career arc excludes anyone who spent those years working in the private sector and raising a family."

Blogging for Bryant writes that while '02 GOV nominee Van Hilleary (R) "thinks his losing gubernatorial campaign is a positive attribute for his '06 U.S. Senate campaign, he still hasn't articulated to voters a reason for why he's running for Senate instead of Governor again." More: "[Y]ou'd be hard pressed to find a [Gov. Phil] Bredesen [(D)] voter from 2002 who now wishes they'd have voted for Hilleary."

MISCELLANY: Ladies Night

Kuwait-based blogger She Writes provides a first-hand account of the Parliament granting women the right to vote.

Warren Bell, unsatisfied with the term "blogosphere," has been fielding suggestions for a new term. His first stab: "the number four bus to Oak Park." Ace of Spades HQ sides with "Shadow Media."

Scared Monkeys calls the Cannes Film Festival the "Hate America" Film Festival.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: It's Just A Movie!

Balloon Juice's John Cole: "Star Wars has gone a long way to make my life a lot happier -- much more than I can say for a lot of other Hollywood endeavors. In fact, I might just pop in the Empire Strikes Back in tonight. So everybody just lighten up. This isn't about Republicans or Democrats or George Bush or the United Nations. It is about millions of people like me who are going to go out and watch the last installment of a movie series that has been making them happy since they were kids. Quit trying to spoil it."

LEST WE FORGET: In L.A., This Is Like An Indie Film To 11/04's Summer Blockbuster

Actress Diane Keaton writes at The Huffington Post: "Today is Election Day in Los Angeles. But save for the last-minute barrage of TV ads and scare-tactic mailers, you'd barely know that the city will be heading to the polls to pick its next mayor. ... Los Angeles is a city. ... And yet, no one seems to care that we're about to decide who will be in charge of those things for the next four years. Interestingly, this same disinterested town was extraordinarily energized during the presidential election. Which makes me wonder if the love of the blockbuster out here has infected the way we see everything."

Posted by at 12:56 PM

May 16, 2005

5/16: Newsweak

Newsweek says it's sorry, but the blogs are clearly not satisfied. The mag's apology of its Koran-flushing story is overwhelmingly dominating discussion today, with most of the ire coming from conservative blogs. Everyone criticizes what is seen as a poor reporting job, with questions raised about whether the MSM weighs any possible impact its stories might have. The strongest talk has been that the MSM is overtly trying to undermine America's efforts abroad by running sensational stories. Some bloggers on both sides point out, however, that just because Newsweek admitted mistakes doesn't mean the story isn't true. A few voices on the left criticize the reaction to the story, believing that another "right-wing conspiracy" is in the works to snuff unfavorable news. This story will likely continue to dominate bloggers' attention, with Reuters now reporting that Muslims believe Newsweek "reacted to U.S. pressure."

There is other news out there, though it's tougher to find (and we'll need to catch up with tomorrow). There is some remaining fallout from the non-endorsement/approval of John Bolton's UN Amb. nod. Filibuster talk remains a presence, with a growing number of conservative blogs looking into whether Senate Min. Leader Harry Reid (D) may have broken rules by referring to a confidential FBI file on the Senate floor. Both sides take interest in MA Rep. Barney Frank's (D) criticism of DNC chair Howard Dean's remarks about House Maj. Tom DeLay (R). And should we expect to see more and more Draft Cheney talk?

TRACKBACKS: Does It Get Any Bigger?

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

• The list continues to grow, but among those commenting on Newsweek's Koran story: Captain's Quarters, Austin Bay, Instapundit, Daily Kos, Little Green Footballs, Buzz Machine, Andrew Sullivan, Ace of Spades HQ, RedState, Crooked Timber, Eschaton, INDC Journal, Michelle Malkin, USS Neverdock, Mudville Gazette, The Anchoress, Outside The Beltway, Patrick Ruffini, Pejmanesque, PoliPundit, Power Line, Roger L. Simon, WizBang, The Moderate Voice, Patterico's Pontifications, The Huffington Post, The Left Coaster, Beltway Buzz, Pardon My English, Dean's World, Secular Blasphemy, The QandO Blog, Hit and Run, Armavirumque, No More Mister Nice Blog, The Poor Man, Ranting Profs, Daimnation, Talk Left, Scared Monkeys, Black Five, Brothers Judd, Gateway Pundit, Uncorrelated.

  >> Blogs for Bush posts under the header: "Anti-Bush MSM Kills"

  >> Conservative Austin Bay: "History may see Newsweek's fatal 'Koran flushing' story as the US press' Abu Ghraib."

  >> Daily Kos: "Newsweek has good sources for its allegations, but has backed off because it finds itself in a dicey, ill-founded public relations nightmare. Newsweek has foresaken journalism to save what it perceives as its own hide."

  >> Righty Jeff Jarvis: "This mistake cost people their lives, put the lives of our soldiers in the Mideast at risk, damaged the American position in the effort to defend itself and spread democracy, and damaged the already tattered reputation of journalism. And to what end?"

NEWSWEEK: With Us Or Against Us?

Righty Jayson Javitz at PoliPundit: "[T]he media has gone from being an undeclared enemy to being an actual, overt, and hostile combatant in the global war against terrorism.

The Corner's John J. Miller: "I've read this 'apology' several times now. It continues to strike me as incredibly limp -- an awful lot of passing the buck on to sources. It is a reporter's job to know when sources are credible and when they are not, and that's doubly true when the sources demand that their names be kept out of stories. Newsweek needs to do way more groveling." USS Neverdock: "[H]ow many in the world will read this admission? And of those who do, how many will conclude that Newsweek was pressured into this admission by the government to quell the riots?"

Conservative Ed Morrissey: "Newsweek ran an explosive story based on a single, unnamed source that it knew would cause a huge effect on the Muslim world, at precisely the moment when we need to ensure that people understand that we're not at war with Islam. It's just a little late to say, 'Oops, we're sorry.'"

Outside The Beltway: "I understand ... the pressures journalists are under to get to press as quickly as possible. ... But given the high profile Newsweek has and the incredible sensitivity of the allegations at hand, they had a duty to be damned sure they had it right before running with the story."

Moderate Roger L. Simon: "[T]here is a strong argument to be made that this is more serious than Rathergate. This is journalism at its most insidious and dangerous. Newsweek may end up having to fire some of its editorial staff, as well as the reporters involved."

The Radio Equalizer: "Even if the details were in fact true, should it have been published, knowing full well innocent people would die as a result? ... At a minimum, Newsweek's entire team of reporters and editors responsible for this fatal disaster must resign as well as face legal liability, for the destruction of human life their report triggered. Free speech must be protected, in journalism as well as in society, but what they did is equal to yelling 'fire' in a crowded theatre."

NRO's Jonah Goldberg: "Flushing a Koran down a toilet -- and telling the press about it -- would certainly constitute a huge blunder. But how many of us were saying "there's no way that can be true!" when the story first broke? ... Running the story, under those circumstances was idiotic. That it ran in the Periscope section shows that they didn't really even think about what they were doing."

Ace of Spades HQ: "If a quote or purported fact portrays Republicans, the military, or America generally in a positive light, they check it to death to make sure they're not spreading propaganda. But ... if the quote or purpoted fact portrays those in a negative light, it pretty much gets into print with only the most cursory once-over by the editors. If it agrees with their basic world-view -- if it feels 'right' in their gut -- then in runs. Fact-checking comes later... after a couple of newly-minted corpses."

Righty blog Wizbang: "[B]ring on the abuse, the sanctions, the penalties for Newsweek. ... But don't hold them liable for the deaths. To do that is to excuse the real people to blame -- the rioters themselves."

Lefty Marshall Wittmann: "Before the Pentagon strikes a holier than thou line on accountability, the civilian leadership there should take a hard look in the mirror. Secretary Rumsfeld and the gang have hardly stepped up to the plate regarding the horrific errors on their watch ranging from the failure to prepare for the Iraq occupation to Abu Ghraib. Perhaps Newsweek is only following Rummy's example."

Liberal Juan Cole: "As a professional historian, I would say we still do not have enough to be sure that the Koran desecration incident took place. We have enough to consider it plausible. Anyway, the important thing politically is that some Muslims have found it plausible, and their outrage cannot be effectively dealt with by simple denial."

Lefty Avedon Carol at Eschaton: "But you recognize this pattern, right? It's the fabulous Karl Rovepoison the messenger approach to news. Don't like reality? Make up a new one!"

FILIBUSTER: Sprung A Leak?

Michelle Malkin, on Reid bringing up judicial nominee Henry Saad's confidential FBI file (see 5/13 Bloggers Vs. The MSM): "Needless to say, if a Republican Senator had pulled this kind of stunt, the ACLU and privocrats would be screaming bloody hell." Captain's Quarters: "He claimed to have gotten information from the two Democratic Senators from Saad's home state, Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin, but if that is the case, then those two Senators may have broken the rules about confidentiality in regards to the file."

Left in the West: "The right-wing media machine's cylinders are firing." Lefty Bob Brigham, noting that the Justice Dept. is investigating: "The GOP political assassination push leading up to the filibuster is now being financed by your tax dollars."

Basie! features an interview with Bob Dole. Dole, on rules changes: "I would sit there and sit there and look at every possible alternative before you start tinkering with the rules. .. But the so-called option, whatever you call it, is a last resort. I think I may be wrong, but I still think there's going to be some kind of a deal struck where both sides can interpret it the way they want."

MyDD cites a poll that indicates most Americans don't care about the filibuster fight. "I am not saying that this issue is unimportant, but we should remain aware that this is not something voters care about. Whoever "wins" this fight will win on their own, without much fanfare, and with no real electoral implications (except, of course, in the Republican Presidential primaries)."

Ace of Spades HQ links to a story reporting that Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and other Dems have supported changing the rules in the past. "Of course there's been flip-flopping on the issue by both sides. ... But there has been a great deal more flip-flopping on this issue by Democrats. ... Were nominees blocked [under Pres. Clinton]? Yes, but here's the distinction the media seems unable to appreciate: The Republicans were the majority party in the Senate at that time (as they are now)."

Conservative "Patterico" thinks Senate Maj. Leader Bill Frist (R) is taking cues from his blog.

BOLTON: All George

Blogs for Bush agrees with James Taranto in asking how OH Sen. George Voinovich (R) could say that Bolton would be fired from a corporate job if Voinovich had never worked in the private sector.

Beltway Buzz talked to Sen. George Allen (R-VA) about the vote. Allen, on whether a vote will be delayed until before Memorial Day: "When it comes to Bolton, people are going to talk a lot. But if we let him sit out there for weeks, more false accusations are going to come out there. Even when they are shown to be false, it will hurt him. But once we get to his vote, I think we will have the support." Allen, on a possible Dem filibuster: "It is a concern, but I believe if they filibuster, it will be another example of their obstructionist, negative approach. I think there are enough people on their side who are smart enough to know that."

DEMOCRATS: Brutally Frank

Michelle Malkin on Rep. Frank's reaction to Howard Dean at the MA Dem convo: "If he keeps this up, I'm going to have to start calling him the Maverick Barney Frank."

Captain's Quarters notes a Washington Post report that unions were protesting Wal-Mart's involvement in a Cong. Black Caucus fundraiser: "This may well portend a bigger problem for the Democrats as they struggle to hang onto their Left while pursuing the center. If the unions insist on purity -- if they object to every overture made by the Democrats to mainstream business, and especially if they make a public row out of it -- the Democrats may wind up losing them to the Greens or another fringe party on the Left."

Conservative John Hinderaker, on Dem leaders: "Is the current leadership of the Democratic Party an embarrassment, or what? ... Dean and Reid, with their increasingly thuggish conduct, are making Nancy Pelosi look like Winston Churchill. But that's mostly because she's been keeping her mouth shut lately. ... We said not long ago that Howard Dean is a ticking time-bomb for the Democrats. It looks now as though Harry Reid is in the same category."

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Love Or Hate, She Got What She Wanted

Outside The Beltway, on The Huffington Post: "The reviews have been mostly negative so far, but the Huffington Post is already at #14 in the The Blogosphere Ecosystem ... . Clearly, the old adage that any publicity is good publicity holds for the blogosphere."

WHITE HOUSE '08: Insight, Or Just Meaningless Buzz?

Blogs for Bush is excited that Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward seems to be floating Cheney's name for consideration for '08. "[H]is negatives are set in stone, much as Hillary Clinton's are. Those who dislike Cheney will continue to dislike Cheney; but as a majority doesn't dislike him, he's got a chance at winning. Woodward, of course, could just be talking to hear himself speak, but he has in the past been able to ferret out bits of inside information....so, how knows? As for me, the Dream Team of 2008 is Cheney/Rice."

President Boxer thinks Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) scored a win debating Sen. Allen on "Hardball." "She really wiped the mat with Allen, including masterful moments such as, when Senator Allen wouldn't stop talking in an attempt to monopolize the time, Senator Boxer said, 'George... You're filibustering me here!'"

PoliPundit notes the Los Angeles Times' story on the impact of reapportionment on the Electoral College: "Add this to the fact that, in 2004, Bush carried 255 House districts, and enough states to elect 62 senators, and its not much fun to be a Democrat politician today."

IN THE STATES: California Scheming

Lefty Marc Cooper, who plans to vote for '01 candidate/city councilor Antonio Villaraigosa (D), writes about a phone message he received from Mayor James Hahn's (D) campaign. "It was quick and to the point. Basically, she said, I shouldn't trust Hahn's rival in this Tuesday's election because he -- Antonio Villaraigosa -- is a Mexican gangbanger who hates Jews. ... The only amazing part about Hahn's raw sewage campaign is that it so closely mirrors the smear he used in 2001 to hose out Antonio. It's not always better the second time around, though. ... His only chance of being re-elected is to depress the voter turn-out so low that only he, his sister, some loyal labor hacks and a few hundred scared white people are the only folks casting ballots."

RedState looks at the GA LG race.

MISCELLANY: Closing On A Down Note

Richard "Bradley" Blow laments at The Huffington Post the potential closing of the Groton sub base: "Working-class towns, New London and Groton live close-to-the-bone already. They depend on this base. Closing it would mean the loss of some 10,000 jobs. The ripple effect would be unemployment, bankruptcies, shuttered stores and restaurants, crime and drugs. ... I hope this decision was made on the merits. The stakes are too high for it to be about politics. If the Groton base closes, people's lives will be devastated, and a proud Connecticut tradition will become only a bittersweet memory."

Pejmanesque has a request to those who criticize the new Star Wars for its supposed critique of US policies: "Perhaps more time should be spent papering over plot holes and enhancing the dialogue and the acting before such tangential issues are considered. Just a thought."

The Philadelphia Inquirer today launched its own blog, Blinq.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Getting The Message

Right Wing News links to an interesting map about the "backlash" to gay marriage decisions.

LEST WE FORGET: From The World Wide Graveyard

We don't know if we're the only ones, but Hotliners this weekend received some spam from an e-mail address on the "clark04.com" domain name, which used to be home to a site promoting Wesley Clark's WH bid. Strangest element? That the text of the e-mail was in German.

Posted by at 12:03 PM

May 13, 2005

5/13: Believe Or Not, George Isn't At Home

Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) is drawing all the attention for his yes/no vote on UN Amb. nominee John Bolton. Conservatives are positively outraged by the defection, calling him everything from "gutless" to "traitor" to "back stabber." One particularly outraged blogger promises retribution for Voinovich's misdeed, should he run for re-election in 5 years. Some lefty bloggers lament another example of GOP hypocrisy while others praise his indy spirit, and hope this is a sign that the nomination is on life support.

Two other stories are permeating the blogosphere. Righty blogs think they have again caught CBS on deceptive reporting, claiming the net edited comments from Ken Starr about the filibuster to turn them against GOPers. On the other side, lefty blogs are abuzz over The Nation's report about claims against FDA appointee W. David Hager.

Elsewhere, CBS isn't the only MSM target today. Will GOP moderates save the day on filibusters? John Kerry continues to get bashed by the left. Who is fact-checking the fact-checkers? And yes, even Darth Vader has a blog.

TRACKBACKS: Et Tu, George

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

• No one Bolton story drives the swarm today, though AP's seems to be the most linked: Tbogg, BrothersJudd, The Left Coaster, The Hedgehog Report, Pennywit.

  >> Conservative Mark Noonan: "I have never been so outraged by the actions of a fellow Republican in my life."

  >> Liberal Oliver Willis: "Spineless. Simply, absolutely, spineless."

• The Nation's Hager piece is all over the left. Linking: Lean Left, No More Mr. Nice Blog, Ezra Klein, Hullabaloo, The Mahablog, Begging to Differ, Pandagon, Chris C Mooney, The Left Coaster, Tapped, Left in the West, Hit & Run, Political Animal, Eschaton, "Roger Ailes", Daily Kos, Oliver Willis, The Gadflyer.

  >> Lefty Matthew Yglesias: "To be as clear as possible, what we've got here is criminal conduct, not a 'sex scandal.' Breaking the law is never a private matter, especially when it's this sort of criminal conduct and the perpetrator has these kind of public responsibilities."

BOLTON: Boy, George Is In It Now

Blogs for Bush: "After spending a good deal of time sliming Mr. Bolton, Voinovich had the nerve to say that he likes John Bolton, but that he wants the Committee to send Mr. Bolton to the Senate without a recommendation. ... In 2010, I'll remember who stood where in the past."

Confirm Bolton: "Sen. Voinovich's stupidity has lost out to his gutlessness, as he's at least going to allow Bolton to go to the floor for an up-or-down vote." Arena Of Ideas posts under the header: "It is official, Voinovich is an idiot."

Conservative Eric Pfeiffer: "George Voinovich asserted that Bolton would have been fired from his job if he had worked in the private sector. Thing is, Bolton did previously work in the private sector. It was when he was hired as a lawyer that the controversy surrounding Melody Townsel emerged. But Voinovich says even though he missed the first two Bolton committee hearings he's read 'all the papers.' So, surely he knows this. Right?"

The Corner's K.J. Lopez: "If Republicans lose seats in 2006 because of big losses (Bolton, judges...), it will be their own fault, if this is the way they run a majority. And no one is going to regret it more than [Senate Maj. Leader] Bill Frist, who will never be president."

Power Line: "The significance of this sorry episode, I think, is that the Democrats hand-picked Bolton as a nominee they thought they may be able to defeat. Despite the innumerable cheap shots launched against Bolton, it appears that the Democrats are going to lose their gamble."

Liberal Steve Soto: "Bushco will still push for a total victory no matter how much of a cretin Bolton will be shown to be in the coming days. But by the time this slug sits his ass in the chair in New York, he will be damaged goods and totally compromised, as he should be."

Righty John Cole at Balloon Juice: "Anyone who thinks Bolton can go in there and 'shake things up' and actually change anything is fooling themselves and fails to understand that the very nature of the UN is one that the assembly is made up of people who have their own national interests at stakes. ... I would rather he nominate someone else, but it won't matter. In six months this will not even be an issue other than in hysterical MoveOn.Org fund-raising e-mails. I have complete faith in the capacity of the United Nations to chew up and spit out whoever we send there.

Michelle Malkin is on "Maverick" watch. Beltway Buzz posts feedback from some irate GOPers.

FILIBUSTER: Voices Of Moderation

Daily Kos' "Armando", on the New York Times' story on moderates and the filibuster debate: "It is the [James] Dobsons and [Pat] Robertsons who run the Republican Party. The most extreme elements in the Republican Party call the shots now. But the moderates now realize it."

Blogs for Bush on a new compromise offer by Senate Min. Leader Harry Reid (D): "No deal, Senator. You see, we don't need your 'help' in confirming nominees; we won the election, we have a majority in the Senate and, by God, we'll see President Bush's judicial nominees approved."

A number of lefty blogs take issue with this FactCheck.org "clarification" of a Dem pro-filibuster ad: Crooked Timber, Eschaton, Poli's Blog

HAGER: More GOP Dirty Laundry

Lefty Amanda Marcotte: "Lest you think that his objection to non-marital sex is some great principle instead of a matter of control, The Nation will set you straight. Dr. Hagar is fine with extramarital sex that he gets to choose." Begging to Differ: "I'm a bit unsettled by the use of sexual revelations in order to score points in fights ... . And yet here I am, linking to these stories. The most immediate justifications are always close at hand: the hypocrisy of those who associate themselves with a moral crusade and yet decline to live by its standards; and, more importantly, the outright criminality of people who commit acts like those of which Hager is being accused."

No More Mister Nice Blog: "If this story gets traction, it's just going to lead to lots and lots of shouting. Fine distinctions, like the one between forced and consensual sex, will get lost as the mud flies. The more 'reasonable' pundits will say this is just a nasty divorce, he said/she said, yada yada ... and then, I suppose, will blame Bill Clinton for the fact that a story like this could get into the press at all."

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: More C-BS

The Corner's Ramesh Ponnuru: "CBS, AP, and other outlets reported earlier this week that [Ken] Starr had said that getting rid of the judicial filibuster would be a 'radical, radical departure from our history and our traditions, and it amounts to an assault on the judicial branch of government.'" In an e-mail, Starr said: "In the piece that I have now seen, and which I gather is being lavishly quoted, CBS employed two snippets. The 'radical departure' snippet was specifically addressed -- although this is not evidenced whatever from the clip -- to the practice of invoking judicial philosophy as a grounds for voting against a qualified nominee of integrity and experience. ... In the interview, I did indeed suggest, and have suggested elsewhere, that caution and prudence be exercised (Burkean that I am) in shifting/modifying rules (that's the second snippet), but I likewise made clear that the 'filibuster' represents an entirely new use (and misuse) of a venerable tradition. ... [O]ur friends are way off base in assuming that the CBS snippets, as used, represent (a) my views, or (b) what I in fact said."

Patterico's Pontifications: "CBS took a quote criticizing the current practice of Democrats, and transmogrified it into a criticism of a proposed plan of action by Republicans." Power Line: "As we have noted repeatedly, the mainstream media have pulled out all the stops to support the Democrats on the filibuster. This, though, would appear to be over the line." Moderate Mickey Kaus tries to sort it out. Other commentary: Little Green Football, Blogs for Bush, Pejmanesque, WizBang

From The Note: "Democrats are so thoroughly spooked by John Kerry's loss --- and Republicans so inspired by their stay-the-course Commander in Chief -- that what is hands down the biggest story every day in the world will get almost no coverage. No conflict at home=no coverage." Daily Kos: "This is ABC News saying that unless there is conflict at home, a war that kills dozens a day, including Americans, will not get coverage? That as long as people are 'deferrential' to an unpopular president, they're not allowed to cover the carnage in Iraq? This is what the US media has become? Absolutely unacceptable." Agreeing: Brad DeLong, David Sirota

Washington Post's Hurt reported that Reid discussed a court nominee's confidential FBI file on the Senate floor, an act the article said could lead to his expulsion. Daily Kos quibbled with the account here, here, here and here, calling the article part of a GOP smear campaign against Reid and noting that the "confidential" matter Reid discussed had been discussed in several published articles, including one written by Hurt himself.

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Habemus Parody

It didn't take long. Huffington's Toast is now online.

BUSH: I Hear MD's Got Some Great Biking

Lefty Jon Robin Baitz at The Huffington Post: "The president has every right to go for a bike ride. But to me, his bike riding is in fact, a provocation; he has entirely mastered a kind of perfect anti-gravitas. Will he, as the leader of his country and his party, ever admit, like the ombudsman of the New York Times, to handling anything poorly? Or will he just go on riding his bike, sticking to the old plan, while blood pools in foreign streets and his party sells itself in bits and pieces to religious fundamentalists. For votes."

Michelle Malkin calls the bike flap "The Left's New 'My Pet Goat'": "These people can't make up their minds. First, Bush is too lazy and slothful. Now, he works out too much. He overreacts to terror threats. He underreacts to terror threats."

Crooked Timber is happy to see that Hotel White House is open again.

DEMOCRATS: Another Voice For Unity

Ex-Al Gore speechwriter Elie Attie writes: "[H]ere's what's starting to worry me: Democrats enjoy these internecine arguments a little too much. Maybe it's in the nature of liberal thought--a kind of self-scrutiny, almost to the point of self-loathing, that makes us fight ourselves even more loudly and violently than we fight the other party. Intellectually, it's admirable, even responsible. But as party-building, it's becoming a bit of a problem. ... After two razor-thin presidential elections (one of which we actually WON), can't we be a bit more confident that our platform isn't a total shambles? I've always thought that if Democrats did start their own Fox News Channel, at the first programming meeting someone would say, 'gee, we really ought to get some conservative voices on here for balance...'"

WHITE HOUSE '08: The Stop Kerry Movement In Full Swing

Liberal Markos Zuniga, on John Kerry: "Of the serious primary candidates, he was the worst we could've nominated. ... The man had no reason for running. He had no message beyond 'I'm the most electable'. ... And while his 'most electable' drivel helped propel him into the nomination, it left him ill-prepared for the general campaign. ... One more note -- campaign insiders will tell you that no one loved Kerry. ... People who worked for Dean, Edwards and Clark all passionately loved their man. The campaigns stuck together. Why? Because the campaigns were based in the candidates' home states. Hence, staffers had to move to work on those campaigns. They had to make a sacrifice to uproot and travel to a strange city on behalf of their guy. That commitment was real. ... Kerry's campaign was based in DC. The staffers didn't have to make a commitment to their candidate beyond taking a different bus or metro stop." More: "I'll support Senator Kerry to the end of his career, I will not support 'I am now an outsider if it'll help me in 2008' Kerry."

PoliPundit notes Sen. McCain is sponsoring a bill with Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and writes under the header: "McCain's 2008 GOP Primary Chances Sink Lower: Reach Absolute Zero"

IN THE STATES: Is He Running Against Arnold Or W?

Basie!'s Jonathan Singer interviews CA Tres/GOV hopeful Phil Angelides. Some highlights: "I would say the following: if you really look at Arnold [Schwarzenegger], he is increasingly a mix of George Bush and [ex-MN Gov.] Jesse Ventura. He shares the same agenda as Bush in so many respects, but is beginning to look more and more like Jesse Ventura in the conduct of the office."

PoliPundit comments on the PA GOV, AR GOV, CO GOV, MO SEN and VT SEN races.

Eugene Volokh comments on the federal judge's decision to strike down NE's same-sex marriage ban.

MISCELLANY: Gun Owners For Rice

Glenn Reynolds, on Condi Rice's interview on "LKL": "Now that she's Secretary of State, she has an opportunity to press for treating the right to arms as an international human right. ... Surely a right to defend oneself against massacre -- particularly when, once again, the international community has failed miserably to prevent genocide in Darfur -- is as plausible as those others."

WWJD, politically speaking? A reader at The Corner has some clues.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: A Marriage Of Convenience

WizBang takes a look at the religious right/"South Park" conservative detente: "[SP consrvs] are a force to be reckoned with, and not to be taken lightly or for granted. They will have their say on the American body politic, and right now they're aiming their fire at the opponents of the Religious Right. They're sinners doing God's work. The smartest thing the Religous Right can do right now is to simply stand back and let them wreak their havoc, with occasional words or gestures of support. There will be plenty of time later to bring them to the Path Of True Righteousness and Redemption. In the meantime, though, they're doing plenty of good on their own."

LEST WE FORGET: Star Wars Fans Can Go Too Far

Today's post at The Darth Side begins: "Big day. Receiving the Emperor. Ruminations on the Sith mission statement."

Posted by at 12:34 PM

May 12, 2005

5/12: Terror Time

Today there is a lot of discussion on several different stories. Just before the false alarm 5/11, buzz was building about ex-DHS Sec. Tom Ridge's comments about pressure to raise the terror threat level. The false alarm itself then became its own focus, with a mix of commentary on what happened and MSM-bashing for the way it was covered. The filibuster debate is still going on, but without major focus today as new developments are again in short supply. Instead, we get see an interesting debate over whether Pres. Bush was criticizing FDR for allowing the USSR to move on Eastern Europe, and if so whether he was right to say so.

In passing, UN Amb. nominee John Bolton is the subject of rumors about his personal life, which seems to be fueling a last-ditch effort by lefty bloggers to sink his nomination. Conservatives applaud The New York Times columnist? Really? Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) gets some '08 love. Midterms matter. And don't forget about the war.

TRACKBACKS: Terror Firma

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

• USA Today's terror alert story is widely linked on the left: Eschaton, Skippy The Bush Kangaroo, The Left Coaster, Political Animal, The Huffington Post, Hit and Run,No More Mr. Nice Blog, Bush The Idiot, Pam's House Blend, The Evil Petting Zoo, Burned Out Paranoid Democrat, Contested Terrain, Human Merely Being, Equilibrium4, Exit Stage Left.

  >> MyDD speaks for the masses: "Terror alerts have undoubtedly been used as a electoral weapon rather than as a safety measure."

• CNN's story about 5/11's terror scare story seems to have been the focus, with a few other stories mixed in as well. Linking: The Moderate Voice, PoliBlog, Outside The Beltway, Scared Monkeys, The Liquid List, Ranting Profs, Backcountry Conservative.

  >> Demagogue: "Some reporters noted that in the 20 minutes or so of chaos the rumors had already started to fly. Basically, no one had a clue what was going on. 9/11 changed everything, eh?"

  >> WizBang: "To most everyone else on cable news, please learn the difference between mountains and molehills. Geeze people, it was a stray aircraft. Pilots get lost too."

TERROR ALERT I: Ridge Over Troubled Water

Liberal Steve Soto: "So much for the Bush Administration having any credibility ever again on the issue of terror threats. But it doesn't matter now; he scared enough people into electing him for another four years."

Pam's House Blend: "I just want to remind folks that millions, if not billions of dollars were spent (and lost) as a result of these mindgames." Flickr has its own color-code system.

Corrente: "Undoubtedly [the admin] knew the alerts were not being well-received, and were even being laughed at, but they also knew that those alerts contributed, even if only below the surface of consciousness, to an atmosphere of fear, a wartime atmosphere which was going to prove essential in the 2004 campaign."

Talk Left: "The ineffectiveness of a system that doesn't tell people what or where the threat is or what to do about it won't be cured by replacing colors with a different symbol. [New DHS Sec] Michael Chertoff says he's looking for a better warning system. He should start by scrapping the existing one."

TERROR ALERT II: The Air Scare

The Moderate Voice: "Watching lawmakers flee for their lives was not a pretty sight (Nancy Pelosi told a reporter she left so quickly she left without her shoes). This raises the question as to whether the equivalent of high-stakes fire drills and established evacuation plans might be in order ASAP for the nation's capitol -- particularly for Congress. Cable TV news also showed Capitol Police holding guns telling people to run. Is there a better way?" More: "It would seem that letting the President and the city know about a possible terrorist threat before it is 'all clear' might be a useful goal in the future."

Michelle Malkin: "For the people who were evacuated and the pilots who scrambled to protect the zone and the law enforcement officers who made sure things ran smoothly and the rest of us who live in the area, this alert was no joke. But to the idiots at the Democratic Underground, it's another opportunity to bash Bush, hate America, and laugh in the face of a potential terrorist attack."

The Left Coaster: "'While D.C. panicked, Bush bicycled' That's your headline for the rest of the world. I'm sure all those Muslims and Arabs and whoever it was that we were supposed to be impressing with our mighty military might when buschco's resident lunatic neocon fascists decided to make "an example of" Saddam Hussein are mighty impressed by todays actions. Don't ya think?

The Liquid List: "OK, fine, do a couple of things on DC-area safety precautions, or significant lack thereof, but spare us the loops of jiggling cameras and breathless reporters. The fact that CNN reporters were momentarily frightened before hearing the all-clear does not an evenings worth of material make. It just doesn't."

David Corn at The Huffington Post: "[M]y pal Micah Sifry called and noted -- half-jokingly -- that it was very interesting that this had all occurred the same day that USA Today is reporting that former Homeland Security head Tom Ridge had said that the administration had overstated the terrorism alerts."

IRAQ: Turns Out Al Qaeda's There After All

Power Line agrees with the Washington Times: "Whether it's al Qaeda's last stand seems less clear. And, even if it is, [reporter Rowan] Scarborough wisely stops short of suggesting that we won't have to face like-minded and similarly lethal terrorist organizations down the road." Outside The Beltway: "To be sure, the presence of large numbers of foreign jihadists is a result of the war rather than a cause of it. Still, if "fighting them there rather than here" was a major rationale for the Bush Doctrine, then we've succeeded in that regard."

USS Neverdock: "As much as people on the left, anti-war activists and the liberal press would like it to be, the war in Iraq is not a civil war. Here is some evidence to support that. The Sunnis realised shortly after the Iraqi elections that they had made a terrible mistake listening to their religious leaders in boycotting those elections. They then scrambled to become part of the political process and now they have seats in the cabinet -- the Iraqi cabinet. Now comes news that the Sunnis are now joining the army -- the Iraqi army."

Marshall Wittmann cites quotes from an interview of Defense Sec. Donald Rumsfeld and writes: "[I]t is very clear that Rumsfeld isn't giving himself enough credit. He has transformed the military more than anyone could have ever imagined. Clearly, the army is already leaner as it lacked sufficient armor. Recruitment is woefully down. The military is painfully over-stretched. He forced the Reserves and the Guard to assume the role of the regular military. And by failing to prepare for the aftermath of the war, he helped assure that the military is forced to be bogged down in a protracted counter-insurgency war."

BOLTON: Not Without My Furniture

Raw Story reports that Hustler magazine's Larry Flynt "waded into the conflict surrounding" Bolton when he revealed Bolton's divorce records "and unanswered questions about his sexual past." The divorce records show that "Bolton's wife left him during a trip to Vienna" in '82 "and never returned." Records also show that "she took most of the couple's the furniture."

Flynt has contacted the State Dept. "asking that they confirm or deny allegations" of Bolton's conduct concerning his ex-wife and "alleged paid visits to Plato's Retreat," a swinger's club in the 70s and 80s (5/11).

Commenting on the story: Eschaton, Scared Monkeys, Pandagon, Outside The Beltway, Balloon Juice

Beltway Buzz is live-blogging the Bolton hearings today.

SOCIAL SECURITY: Miller Time

Conservatives love Matt Miller, who says in the NYT: "You'd never guess from the Democratic hysteria that President Bush's plan to 'progressively index' Social Security is an idea we liberals may one day want to embrace. So farsighted Democrats who want to (1) win back power and (2) use that power to fix big problems should quit carping about Bush's evil 'cuts' and punish him instead with what I call Responsible Demagoguery: harsh politics that leaves sound policy intact." BrothersJudd: "Unfortunately, there are apparently no congressional Democrats who fit the second parameter."

Matthew Yglesias notes the failure of United Airlines' pension program and writes that at the time SocSec started, employers already provided employees "with a pension when they retired. ... Under the circumstances, an additional super-secure retirement program wasn't really the country's most pressing need and a program design to create universal stock ownership might have been a better idea. Flash forward to the early 21st century, and all of that has changed. ... [L]ife has become much more insecure. ... [P]reserving -- and expanding -- universal social insurance is [necessary]. Social Security: Now more than ever."

David Sirota writes that Dwight Eisenhower "predicted the demise" of the GOP over SocSec, and offers a (slightly edited) quote.

BUSH: Y'alta Know

Daniel W. Rezner: "[Bush] could have framed his remarks of sympathy with the peoples of Eastern Europe in any number of ways. But, wittingly or not, he endorsed an interpretation of history that sees Yalta as the hinge and America's decisions there as having cast Eastern Europe into darkness."

Pat Buchananwrote: "Bush told the awful truth about what really triumphed in World War II east of the Elbe. And it was not freedom. It was Stalin, the most odious tyrant of the century. Where Hitler killed his millions, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot and Castro murdered their tens of millions." Vodka Pundit: "Would this nation have been acting justly, if we had not stopped at the Elbe, but continued on to Moscow? Yes. Would we have, could we have, asked that much more from our Greatest Generation? Flatly, no."

Balloon Juice: "Yes, it was regrettable, but I don't understand how any other outcome but Soviet occupation of the Eastern Bloc states was possible. Does anyone think that we could have simply bided time in Europe after VE day ... then finished off the Japanese, then after VJ day, shifted all of our assets back to Europe to battle an enormous, battle-hardened, entrenched Soviet Union?"

Lefty Katrina Vanden Heuvel has more suggestions for Bush's IPod, including Britney Spears' "Oops, I Did It Again," and U2's "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For."

DEMOCRATS: Lip Service

Reihan Salam writes at &amp;c: "How do Democrats push Republicans off the edge of the cliff? By embracing conservative values? Not even. Unfortunately for conservatives, liberals need only pay lip service to conservative values -- something they've had a hard time doing due to the power of entrenched constituencies that care first and foremost about winning the culture wars." Dems "who pass a threshold of giving adequate 'props' ... to devout social conservatives will have an easy time winning them over on pocketbook issues."

MyDD gives some reasons why races in '06 matter. Among them, winning posts that control elections: "For every [OH Sec/State] Ken Blackwell [(R)] we defeat and every [ex-FL Sec/State] Katherine Harris [(R)] we toss out of office, our ability to win elections improves." More: "Unless we rebuild our base locally, we will never have a real majority nationally."

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: Blogging About TV About Blogging

Jeff Jarvis writes: "CNN has the chicks reading the geeks. MSNBC started by having bloggers actually on the air and I thought that was good (being one of them). ... Everybody's reading text off a screen and, yes, it does make for a straight line. So what's the point? Well, sure, TV wants to get the geek-cool ruboff of this blog thing. But I think it's good that they're also promoting these new voices: The more the better. Have they found the right way to do it? Not yet."

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Celebrities, What Are You Gonna Do About 'Em

David Corn, on the "frustrations" of posting free at The Huffington Post: "Minutes after I had posted this serious-minded piece -- which placed me at the top of 'The Blog Roll' -- I was bumped from the penthouse by a posting by Greg Gutfeld, editor in chief of Maxim UK on 'nonsexual heroic celebrity fantasies.'"

In response to a UN Dispatch post complaining that Roger L. Simon is posting too much about UN scandal and not at all about positive things, Pejmanesque responds: "Evidently, the souls of the good people there are much too fragile to continue to stand the Blogosphere's ways. There is a time and place to demand fair and objective reporting, but that is usually when it comes to the mainstream media. It is the media that has the responsibility to be balanced in its coverage of the issues of the day, not bloggers who by and large are editorial writers. So it should come as no surprise whatsoever that blogging editorialists like Roger Simon are going to write about the issues that interest them--even if that means that he doesn't say 'on the other hand, the U.N. did these great things ...' in order to balance matters out."

WHITE HOUSE '08: You Think They'd Get It Bayh Now

Blogging For Bayh writes: "[T]he national media and public STILL have not caught on to what WE know ... that Evan Bayh IS no doubt the strongest candidate that we can nominate in 2008. ... Interestingly, the national media still is looking backwards toward Kerry, Edwards etc as potential 2008 candidates while [virtually] ignoring Evan Bayh. Maybe right now in May 2005 that is a good thing ... we don't want Evan to peak too soon. He still is 'new meat' for our party..he is still young (49) and fresh, and I just can't wait for the day ... and yes, it WILL come, that Evan will get his first Newsweek or Time cover."

IN THE STATES: Running With No DeLay

Off The Kuff interviews TX-22 candidate Nick Lampson (D). Lampson, on his strategy: "I actually don't plan to make Tom Delay the focus of this race. Let's face it, his name is in the paper an awful lot these days -- folks can make up their own minds there. My plan is to concentrate on introducing myself ... to the people of District 22."

New Donkey, on ex-Sen. Zell Miller (D-GA) appearing at a fundraiser for LG candidate Ralph Reed (R): "I thought perhaps his outrageous political behavior of the last couple of years would come to an end. I mean, what's the point of insulting your party when nobody really cares any more? Ah, but it now appears the fires of Zell's odd rage still burn."

RedState, on VA LG Tim Kaine (D) allegedly trying to " draw attention" to ex-AG Jerry Kilgore's (R) accent "in the hopes that it would cause a negative reaction to Kilgore" in urban areas: "I'm starting to think that this is the first real, major mistake by either campaign ... . It's already become evident that this issue has legs, and I think the Kaine camp made a real mistake in starting this whisper campaign against Jerry Kilgore, for many reasons. ... My opinion is that this is likely a symptom of a campaign whose candidate is not a native Virginian, and that is staffed almost entirely by nomadic, national Democratic operatives, and assisted by liberal, MoveOn.org types."

Based on a Rocky Mountain News report, Michelle Malkin urges readers to write Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper (D) about an alleged murderer who was an illegal alien employed at a restaurant he co-owns.

MISCELLANY I: Will This Iranian Election Be The Blog Election?

The Moderate Voice's Jack Grant has a lot to say about the RealID provision. "[I]t is difficult for me to overemphasize the effects that the Law of Unintended Consequences will wreak as a consequence of the enacting of this set of regulations will have." Grant is "very good at predicting trends," and asks: "How long before we have to submit to this ID being read to write a check? How long before we have to submit to this ID being read to use our credit cards? ... How long before various government agencies take advantage of the databases built up by corporations and other government agencies to make a 'profile' of everyone that they can run through an 'expert system' to find 'undesirables' that they can then put on 'no-fly lists', 'watch lists', or even prevent them from buying guns?"

Tiger Hawk offers his proposal for tax reform.

Global Voices reports: Iranian presidential candidate Dr. Mostafa Moeen "recently met with bloggers. ... Adventures of Mr. Behi has a detailed account -- in English! -- of the meeting."

God bless him, Jim Lampley defends his previous post about the 11/04 election being fixed.

John Podhoretz claims the new Star Wars is anti-Bush.

MISCELLANY II: Wendy's Edition, Just Because We Can

Lyn Nofziger's Musings (scroll down): "I don't know whether the people who work at my local Wendy's are here legally or illegally, but i do know that some of them don't speak English very well and understand it even less well. ... Sitting in my car in the drive through lane I ordered a Big Bacon Burger, which is a very good hamburger, and a large frosty. From there I drove to the pay window which was closed so proceeded to the window where they dispense your orders. There I paid a man who seemed to understand English and he in turn gave me two paper bags. ... I gave my wife her Frosty, reached in the other bag and got out my baked potato. So much for my mouth-watering Big Bacon Burger. ... I ate the potato, which is rich in potassium and contented myself with the thought that the anti-obesity gods were looking after my best interests. However, I also resolved that hereafter before I leave Wendy's I will check what's in the bag. It's either that or learn to speak Spanish."

The Moderate Voice: "TMV loves Wendy's which is a few minutes drive down the street. So today he craved chili. And he couldn't resist. 'I'll have a large chili,' he told the shift manager. 'Without the finger.' She cocked her head and asked him something so he said in Spanish. 'Queria un chili. Sin el dedo.' And she roared with laughter. See? Some people DO have a sense of humor. PS: The fingerless chili was great but the earlobe got stuck in my teeth."

RexBlog reminds us that it's free Frosty weekend.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Well, The War Is Part Of The Argument Now

Marshall Wittmann writes: "Under any circumstances, this partisan confrontation would be annoying and unnecessary. But, it is particularly distressing that our political leaders could not find a way to resolve their differences while the nation is at war. We have returned to a pre-9/11 politics with a vengeance. Forget about national unity, partisan advantage is job #1. If we had a President who was truly "a uniter and not a divider" he would put an end to this nuclear madness. ... Our soldiers are sacrificing their lives for the national interest. Why can't our political leaders put the national interest before their narrow partisan interest. Don't our troops and the nation deserve better?"

LEST WE FORGET: It's Not About The Referrals

Nykola, in her ways to "Blog Like A Rockstar" implores her fellow bloggers to "stop checking your referrals every hour on the hour. ... It's great to see who's linked to your site, but when it becomes obsessive, your motives are in the wrong place. The more you check your statistics, the more likely you are to be guided by what you see in those statistics. If you're out to be more than just an ordinary blogger, you won't be guided by the masses."

Posted by at 12:06 PM

May 11, 2005

5/11: Rotten Cheese

Without major developments in the main political stories of the day (judges, etc), bloggers are focusing elsewhere. Reports of possible electoral fraud in WI has caught the eye of some, while Iraq returns as a focus for others. As much as some dislike it, Arianna Huffington's blog still generates a lot of buzz. Today it is mostly about HBO Sports' Jim Lampley, and his belief that Vegas betting proves that WH'04 was fixed. Elsewhere, Pres. Bush's trip abroad is a minor topic, though many took note of the discovery of a grenade in Georgia.

TRACKBACKS: Dairy Queen Of Fraud

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

• AP's report about possible voter fraud in WI 11/04 is the story most generating buzz this a.m., mostly on right-leaning blogs. Linking: Captain's Quarters, Scared Monkeys, Michelle Malkin, Marathon Pundit, Power Line, The QandO Blog, Jack Lewis

  >> Conservative Ed Morrissey: "John Kerry's surprise 11,000-vote margin in a state most Upper Midwest political pundits picked for Bush now appears much more understandable."

• Lampley is the first "celebrity" blogger at The Huffington Post to elicit the scorn of the masses. Linking: WizBang, The QandO Blog, Fine? Why Fine?, Don't Let Me Stop You, duologue, Informed Sources, Eschaton, Brainster's Blog

  >> Hoystory sums it up: "Jim Lampley is a moron: If this is what we can expect from The Huffington Post, Arianna's new venture will be of little use besides pointing out how many in Hollywood are completely nuts."

VOTER FRAUD: Wisc-ed Away

Michelle Malkin, on possible voter fraud in WI 11/04: "Incredible, but no surprise to bloggers who've been on this from the get-go." Scared Monkeys: "What is the bigger crime. The City of Milwaukee having 4,500 more votes cast than REGISTERED VOTERS, or the fact that U.S. Attorney Steven Biskupic failed to work hard enough to get to the bottom of the issue? I think that both instances are reprehensible."

Power Line's John Hinderaker: "As we've said before, it is only a matter of time until voter fraud determines the outcome of a Presidential election. ... It could have happened last fall; that it didn't was entirely a matter of luck."

Standards &amp; Grudges: "Meanwhile Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat, vetoed a measure that would have helped prevent this type of problem. Apparently Democrats think its voter suppression and an invasion of privacy to require government issued ID to vote. Meanwhile, you can be required to present government issued ID when writing a check or to purchase tobacco, alcohol, lottery tickets, guns and pornography."

FILIBUSTER: One Moderate Falls From Grace, The Other Rises

Conservative Matt Margolis of Blogs For Bush thinks Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) should resign for urging the GOP to compromise. "There should not be a compromise that doesn't provide for up-or-down votes for any judge that makes it out of committee. I really wish I knew which side McCain is on."

RedState praises Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) for his remarks on the Senate floor 5/9. "Sen. Specter rightly acknowledges that the proposed compromises (both real and fictional) on this issue are a crock. They allow for irresponsible, short-term, selfishly motivated solutions that let the air out of the issue, instead of returning the Senate to tradition and letting the majority rule on an issue that they always have."

Filibuster Frist taking its show on the road to DC.

IRAQ: War Blogging

Michelle Malkin offers a good snapshot of Operation Matador, and what other blogs are watching.

Little Green Footballs reads this and wonders about possible involvement by Syrian troops.

Ace of Spades HQ, on this Washington Times report: "Five years from now the debate will be whether Bush and his "neocon madmen" actually planned this flypaper/mudpit strategy or if they merely blundered into it. It seems immaterial either way-- the basic strategy of the Bush Administration was to actively fight these bastards, rather than waiting for Americans to be butchered. Luck, as they say, is the result of good planning. Or good instincts."

Daily Kos has been focusing quite a bit on military recruitment. Here Zuniga looks at a "scandal," based on a CBS News report, of a recruiter pushing the limits as far as tactics. Here he questions a job posting that offers $60K for a security job, when soldiers are paid less than half that. Here he asks, if pundits like Fox's Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly are so supportive of the war and the troops, "Why aren't they using their influence to encourage military service?" He recently asked the same of the "American Taliban."

BOLTON: Chafee's In

The Left Coaster: "Senator [Lincoln] Chafee [(R-RI)] must have found a dead horse's head in his bed" because he's supporting UN Amb. John Bolton's nomination. Scared Monkeys: "The Republicans are falling into line ... [Dems] tried to pry the more moderate Republicans off and it failed. Senator Kerry ran an online ad campaign again Chafee, it failed. The Democrats ran a smear campaign against Bolton, it failed. God Bless these guys. It is not over yet, but [their] standing up for the majority to pick their own government is a huge achievement."

Conservative Eric Pfeiffer writes at "Beltway Buzz": "Though Chafee does receive much disdain from conservatives over his splits with the administration on several issues, John Bolton is an exception. I've said it before on the Buzz, Chafee has been rock solid on this issue and deserves credit for remaining firm in his principles despite immense pressure from the media and liberal advocacy groups."

BUSH: The Statesman

Lefty David Corn isn't to comfrotable with Bush cozying up to Russian Pres. Vladimir Putin: "This is a complicated relationship -- as are many diplomatic relationships. But Bush has partially boxed himself in by vouching for his friend Putin. It was a dumb move on Bush's part to personalize US-Russia relations in this me-and-Vlad way. After handing Putin a friendship ring, Bush may not be able to break up with him without causing real trouble."

Mark Noonan at Blogs for Bush not so subtly compares Bush to Winston Churchill, on the occasion of the 65th anniversary of Churchill becoming British PM. "[E]veryone who opposed his suggested policies vis a vis Nazi Germany was not just in error or mistaken in view, but flat and criminally wrong. Tens of millions of people paid the ultimate price for Britain and the world not paying heed to the man (sometimes completely alone) who identified the problem and proposed the only correct solution. ... President Bush is a man who understands the lesson of World War Two; his political opponents are an example of the unteachability of mankind."

DEMOCRATS: Look West, Look To Britain. Just Not The Northeast!

MyDD notes the high approval rating of Western Dem Govs in SuveryUSA's ratings, and observes: "Can there be any doubt that the party need to move left, I mean west?"

Liberal Oliver Willis writes that Dems can learn from the Tories' failure (if they haven't learned from their own). "Had the Conservatives actually been against the war in Iraq, there was a good chance they could have beaten Tony Blair, or at least damage him more than they did. Instead, they were stuck in a very Kerry-like mode, railing against the execution of a war that they voted in favor of." He also picks on Bob Shrum.

SOCIAL SECURITY: Robbing The Grandkids To Pay Paul

Paul Krugman's column about SocSec elicits scorn, this time from Mickey Kaus and Just One Minute. Moderate Kaus: "Bush isn't proposing a take-it-or-leave-it package. He's calling for a negotiation, in which the Democrats could soften the impact of his proposal by substituting some revenue increases for his proposed benefit cuts. You don't like the Full-Pozen "progressive indexing" scheme? Then do a part-Pozen! Make up the difference by raising the cap on payroll taxes--an option Bush has pointedly left open."

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: Who'd Admit To Teaching Jeff Gannon?

Attytood, a blog on the Philadelphia Daily News website, notes a post by WTAE-TV (Pittsburgh) anchor Scott Baker on the new Huffington blog. Baker claims to have "taught Jeff Gannon everything he knows about journalism." From Attytood: "It turns out he teaches journalism to young conservatives at the Leadership Institute School of Broadcast Journalism, founded by Karl Rove associate and former national Young Republican director Morton Blackwell. And anchorman Baker is not just their star instructor -- he's also a graduate (scroll down). ... So does it matter if the anchorman for a Pittsburgh TV station is an enthusiastic conservative? Well, it might ... if he also injected himself and his ideology into the heat of a presidential campaign, and there are signs that in 2004 Scott Baker did just that. Remember the Boston bruhaha when Teresa Heinz Kerry told (another) conservative journalist, Colin McNickle of the Richard Melon Scaife-owned Tribune-Review, to 'shove it.' Guess who the reporter was who reported the story, and whose cameraman captured the encounter between the two. You guessed it!"

Jeff Jarvis refers to the Spokane Spokesman Review's sting of Mayor West and writes: "In this age of transparency, acting like someone you're not and lying is not the way to get the news. Imagine if every blogger out there tried to run a sting operation on anyone else and published it on the internet. It's wrong and it's dangerous."

Patterico's Pontifications offers a comparison of an op-ed written for publication in the Los Angeles Times and the one actually published. "When you add it all up, it's clear that L.A. Times editors took a flawed piece about the [SCOTUS Justice/CJ nominee Abe] Fortas 'filibuster' and turned it into a masterpiece of deception. Be assured: this sort of editing occurs every day, in every section of the paper. It's just that you don't generally get the opportunity to see it for yourself." In an update, however, he wonders if author David Greenberg may have made the edits himself before submitting it.

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Still In A Huff

Not really blogger on blogger warfare, but it's because of blogs and posted on one. Marc CoopercriticizedLA Weekly 's Nikki Finke for her review of The Huffington Post, and offers her response. LA Observed is an amused onlooker.

Patrick Ruffini: "The Huffington Report will fail because it won't be true to its Hollywood self, where what matters is seeing and being seen, not the exchange of information."

Responding to Lampley's conspiracy theory, on the same site, no less, Byron York offers a sports analogy to explain.

Instapundit and Scripting News seem to be having a war of words stemming from a discussion about the Nashville bloggers convo.

BLOGPAC: All Politics Is Local

MyDD: "Since the election, our side of the blogosphere has excelled at nationalizing issues. We will continue to refine nationalization, but now we need localize. On the eve of the Nuclear Option, BlogPAC is rushing into deployment our regional infrastructure. This is a general call for Democratic bloggers to sign up and unite to wage politics online." Swing State Project is also involved, and adds some info.

WHITE HOUSE '08: Still Kerry-d Away

Mike Huckabee President 2008 claims that John Kerry's "Kids First" initiative "is a direct rip-off" of Gov. Mike Huckabee's (R-AR) "innovative" ARKids First program started in '97.

As conservative bloggers marked that it had been 100 days since John Kerry promised to release military records yet still had not done so, Just One Minute wonders: "OK - how do we know that Kerry has not...? Are we expecting him to hold a press conference to announce it? Does the Pentagon issue a press release as Form 180s come in?"

IN THE STATES: It's Handicapping Time

Markos Moulitsas Zuniga ranks GOV races. Most competitive (in order): NY, MD, IA, MA, GA, AL, AR, FL, AK, CA, HI. Dems should "have breezy reelection contests" in WY, KS and OK. He warns to keep an eye on IL, as well as WI if ex-Gov/ex-HHS Sec Tommy Thompson (R) enters.

RedState looks at SEN races in FL, VT, MD, MI, WV, WI, and NE. Overall: "NRSC Chair Senator [Elizabeth] Dole must be more effective at enticing top tier candidates. ... This could be a +3 year for Republicans if top tier candidates take a shot at the open seats and weak incumbents including [Debbie] Stabenow (MI), [Bill] Nelson (FL), and [Ben] Nelson (NE). It could also turn sour (Dem +1 or +2) if weak candidates allow easy Dem wins in open seats while money if funneled to the weak Republican incumbents including Chafee (RI) and [Rick] Santorum (PA)."

PoliPundit laments VT Rep/SEN candidate Bernie Sanders (I) strong showing in the polls, but offers this silver lining: "Sanders is an avowed socialist. Enough with the Kennedy tag! Now, we can run ads against Democratic Senators that read like this: 'Senator X votes with declared socialist Senator Bernie Sanders 100% of the time.'"

Pandagon's Jesse Taylor notes that OH Gov. Bob Taft (R) has the lowest approval rating in the aforementioned SurveyUSA poll. "The fact is that Taft is just ... well, a pointless politician, if such a construction makes sense. He's a conglomeration of three branches of Ohio Republicans - the religious, the economic, and the gun. The problem is, he's not really motivated by any one of those branches."

Swing State Project reports that Pittsburgh bloggers have rallied around mayoral candidate Bill Peduto (D).

MISCELLANY: Redistricting, Vegas Style

Matthew Yglesias refers to an alternate theory on redistricting. "Lets say we just didn't worry so much about where the district boundaries were places. Just leave the current lines in place. Then on Election Day everyone votes for their favorite candidate. But instead of counting the votes and giving the seat to whoever wins the plurality, you just count up the percentages. 58 percent Candidate A, 42 percent Candidate B in one typically not-so-competitive district. Then you spin the computer equivalent of a roulette wheel in which 42 percent of the outcomes have been assigned to the Candidate B and 58 percent of the outcomes to Candidate A. Whichever candidate's lucky number gets called gets the seat." Yglesias calls the theory "intriguing" but admits it "has some drawbacks."

The escalating scandal around Canada's liberal party is being followed by several bloggers, including Captain's Quarters, Balloon Juice and Outside The Beltway.

Hugh Hewitt is experimenting with revenue sharing.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: We're All In This Together

Contentious offers a post that is linked to by a few blogs, about what journalists and bloggers can learn from each other. What bloggers can learn from journalists: Fact-checking enhances credibility, Conduct interviews, ID sources, People like to distinguish fact from opinion, learn the law. What journalists can learn from bloggers: News organizations don't have sole jurisdiction over defining what's news, Give the audience a voice, people crave meaning and connection, not just facts, Blogs and feeds can help you cover your beat, Worry less about scoops and more about uniqueness, Advocate web-friendly changes.

LEST WE FORGET: Nothing Like A Good Sex Story To Get People Excited

Based on a Memeorandum snapshot, this AP story about a Brazil town declaring "orgasm day" is actually one of the most popularly linked topics today. We try to keep our eyes on politics here, but it's worth mentioning some of those who are interested: The QandO Blog, The Moderate Voice, The Corner, Instapundit

Posted by at 12:12 PM

May 10, 2005

5/10: Itching For A Fight

Again today, bloggers seem to be fragmented and focusing mostly on other bloggers. But filibuster talk is the lead domestic story, especially as it appears that the posturing might soon be coming to a head. It seems that some on each side will be unhappy with the conclusion, no matter what it is; for some winning the battle is more important, while others might rather have the issue. Compromise is promoted by some on the left, but they'd much rather win.

More interesting to bloggers is Arianna Huffington's new venture, and after 24+ hours there are many opinions to sift through. There isn't much of a consensus other than that bloggers seem to be peeved that celebrities are stepping on their turf. The New York Times' blog critique, and more so its internal reflection, is unsurprisingly still a warm topic. WH'08 buzz is again high today, with John Kerry generating most attention (mostly negative).

TRACKBACKS: The Fat Lady Is Warming Up

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

• Though not necessarily the focus of discussion, the Washington Times' report that Senate Maj. Leader Bill Frist (R) is ready to launch is generating the most headlines. Linking: Captain's Quarters, The Corner, Confirm Them, Betsy's Page, Southern Appeal, Uncorrelated. Also linked, the Washington Post report about Pres. Bush stepping in: Althouse, Hugh Hewitt, Talk Left.

  >> Beltway Buzz reader Kyle asks of the reported compromise: "By agreeing to 'extreme nominee' language and dropping 3 nominees, wouldn't the GOP be implicitly signaling that those 3 were 'extreme' and not worthy of backing, and allowing the Dems to call every future nominee they don't like 'extreme like (fill in blank of dropped nominee)'? All around it's a bad deal. The GOP needs to stand up for voting on the nominees, and the Dems need to have the courage to go on record for each and every nominee."

  >> Scared Monkeys, on Senate Min. Leader Harry Reid's (D) latest offer: "[I]f Reid is coming from such a position of strength why does he continually want to make a deal? Hardly seems like the thing one would do when one has the upper hand."

• LA Weekly's review of the Huffington Post is widely circulated, with many agreeing with the assessment. Linking: WizBang, Professor Bainbridge, Scared Monkeys, The Conspiracy To Keep You Poor And Stupid, Vox Popoli, LA Observed, Hugh Hewitt, Outside The Beltway, Michelle Malkin, The QandO Blog, The Corner, Pejmanesque, The Volokh Conspiracy

  >> Shot In The Dark: "Take some advice, Arianna. Go to Blogspot. Start 'Arianna's Joint'. Start writing. See if anyone cares about what you say on its own merits. Maybe show up at Keegans to talk with people who can actually do the job."

  >> The Moderate Voice: "IT'S TOO EARLY to pass judgement. Many blogs and news sites started out with growing pains. ... But a blog with celebrities and established journalists? Is THAT what people are clamoring for?? Judge for YOURSELF."

• Worth noting is the wide circulation of this Chicago Tribune story by Bob Dole ex-spokesperson Douglas MacKinnon about the media's obsession with missing white women. Linking: Right Wing News, The Talent Show, Pandagon, The QandO Blog, Unfogged, Rising Hegemon, Rexblog, Political Animal, Romanesko

  >> Chris C Mooney sums up the common sentiment: "MacKinnon makes a strong case that it's explicitly racist to focus news attention exclusively on the disappearances of white women. His article definitely should be read."

FILIBUSTER: Closure Coming Soon?

Rich Lowry reports at National Review Online's The Corner on a conversation with a GOP Sen. On the nuclear option: "We've been right at the 50 we need, although there may be some who don't jump one way or another until they have to. We may not have a hard count until there's a vote." On Roll Call's report of a compromise: "It's not a true story, but there's an element of truth to it." Lowry: The Sen "says, 'the view on our side is that Reid would like a deal.' But his caucus probably won't let him make one. He says Frist, in contrast, 'wants to pull the trigger.' That's partly a matter of politics: 'Our base views this as a huge issue.' Partly a matter of personal vindication in the struggle with the Dems: 'They've just been jerking him around in terms of his leadership.'" The Sen. also said he thought Bolton would be approved, that SocSec is looking "not great," and that immigration would similarly end in deadlock.

Bull Moose writes: "With the Lord as his Whip, Reverend Bill Frist M.D. is headed for pulling the trigger on the nuclear option. An inquiring Moose would like to know whether G-d calls the Majority Leader on a land line or a cell to deliver the latest vote counts in the battle to place persons of faith on the federal judiciary?" More: GOPers "are oblivious to the notion that they are increasingly perceived as right wing busybodies who are willing to reverse conservative precedents to achieve their ends."

Conservative Ed Morrissey: Nominee Priscilla "Owen may make a better choice than Janice Rogers Brown on paper, although I think that Brown makes a better choice given her life story and the nature of the attacks made on her by the Democratic caucus. ... If the key for the GOP is to ensure that the Byrd Option gets invoked so that the Senate can finally start moving on appellate nominees, then Owen may be the wrong choice. A big anticlimax on filibusters may win a battle but cost them a war."

K.J. Lopez at The Corner: "The Dems don't have the votes for a Griffith filibuster--that's why Reid's being so giving."

Righty Hugh Hewitt takes issue with this Washington Post account of the filibuster battle, which "has a lot of the Democratic talking points about the balance of power between the presidency and Congress, but is absolutely silent on the radical nature of the departure from precedent that the Democratic senators launched in 2003." More: "The fact is that Senate Democrats want to enshrine a new rule -- a 60 vote rule -- for judicial confirmations. If they want that rule, they should win some elections on the issue, rather than lose them."

Byron York notes at The Huffington Post that today marks the 4th anniversary of Bush nominating 11 justices. To date, three have been blocked. Confirm Them notes the jockeying of both GOPers and Dems to stall the Senate 5/9 to prevent Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) from speaking. "SOMEbody, or a number of somebodies in the Senate, seemed scared of what Specter would do."

BLOGGERS VS. CELEBRITY BLOGGERS: Huffing and Puffing

LA Weekly's review of Huffington's is probably summed up best in this line: "She has now made an online ass of herself."

Outside The Beltway, on the Weekly calling the site "the sort of failure that is simply unsurvivable": "One wonders by what yardstick Finke is measuring. ... [W]hile I remain dubious of the long term prospects of a 300-member group blog Huffington should get more than a day to prove she can do it."

WizBang's review is also linked to by several. His main complaint is with the celebrity bloggers. His conclusion: "Overall the right side of the page at THP (The Newswire) looks to be worth monitoring, while the left side of the page (The Blog) looks to be worth gawking at.

Althouse: "Nothing particularly clever or pithy coming from the celebs, and there's too much verbiage to give them all a chance. No one seems to have given much thought to how to write a blog. Have they even read other blogs?" Vodkapundit: "Huffington is a sort-of liberal who married a sort-of gay, sort-of Republican man who once sort of ran for the Senate. So maybe it should be no surprise her website is such a jumbled mess."

New Donkey writes that the blog is reminiscent of "George's Let's-Learn-Civics-From-Supermodels modus operandi." Referring to Huffington's quote that "the great thing about blogging is that your thoughts don't have to have a beginning, middle and end. You can just put a thought out there in the cultural bloodstream," Donkey writes: "Gee, what a great compliment to all us bloggers: our medium fosters the kind of incoherent rambling that Hollywood types can toss off between drinks, between photo shoots, or between divorces."

Among the pols posting at Huffington Post: Gary Harton Iraq ; possible CA GOV candidate Rob Reineron journalism ; Sen. Jon Corzine (D-NJ) on Sudan; and MA Rep. Ed Markeyon nuclear weapons .

BUSH: The Tightrope Over Tyranny

Lefty David Corn refers to Sudan and Eastern Europe, and writes of Bush's goal of spreading freedom: "[I]t is obvious that a wise and effective leader, to protect the United States and use American power and influence to help others overseas, has to juggle various needs and wants. ... Bush does indeed engage in his own balancing act -- though often making the wrong calculations. Still, he cannot resist the lofty rhetoric. One problem is, the rhetoric-vs-reality gap undermines his credibility."

DEMOCRATS: Teamwork?

Liberal blog The Left Coaster writes: "I don't know what it will take to pound home this simple message, but if [Dems] continue to insist on their own narrow interests at the expense of the greater interests of the country, they will surely gain neither."

UNITED NATIONS: Thanks. Now Explain What It Means

Roger L. Simon claims a Pajamas Media exclusive, posting an unedited letter from Oil-for-Food witness Pierre Mouselli atty. Adrian Gonzalez-Maltes to Paul Volcker, head of the independent inquiry into the program.

BLOGGERS VS. THE MSM: It's Times Like This ...

After ruminating some more over New York Times' Adam Cohen and his article about blogs (see 5/9 Blogometer), Jeff Jarvis has nailed down a definition for blogs: "Blogs are the voices of citizens in conversation."

The Moderate Voice, on the New York Times' attempt to boost credibility: "As the information age continues to race into a period where opinions and facts move at mega-second speed, the Times has to be ready to interact with readers faster and respond to its critics comprehensively and quickly if it wants to keep its longtime reputation. But it also has the responsibility in the interest of truth to point out instances where criticism of its work is not actually about truth, reporting quality, or news judgement but an attempt to go after it for ideological reasons (on the left or right) to neutralize it. The way to combat that? Quick response and increased interaction with readers and those pointing out flaws in the quality of its informational product."

Ace of Spades HQ, on the Times' report: "Quite frankly, the article seemed boring and technical. That was deliberate, I think. The writer was determined to break as little news about the Times' 'Credibility Group's' findings as possible."

Glenn Reynolds writes at MSNBC.com of the blog/MSM friction: "I think there's more going on than fear. ... [J]ournalists sometimes turn to bloggers in frustration and ask 'what do you want from us?' And the answer is always: 'To report accurately and honestly, and not confuse factual reporting with opinion.' If the Times does that, bloggers will be among its best friends."

The Left Coaster claims not a liberal but a conservative bias, and gives 25 examples.

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: The 25 Commandments

Right Wing News posts 25 pieces of advice for bloggers.

WHITE HOUSE '08: Kerry Not Doing To Well

Markos Moulitsas Zuniga criticizes Kerry in separate posts. First, on being a DC "outsider": "Kerry is a creature of the establishment. He embodies it. He may be sincere in his efforts to shed himself of that baggage, but that baggage comes with his territory." Second, on his statement about gay marriage: "Before the election I called Kerry a 'spineless ass' for his opposition (where none was warranted) of gay marriage in Massachusetts. Opposition that was clearly politically motivated given his past support on the issue. Well, my assessment remains operative."

PoliPundit has been counting the days since Kerry promised he'd release military records, and on this the 100th day comments: "I wonder why the good senator hasn't made good on his promise yet. Perhaps he's having trouble getting the form? To help him out, you could fax him a copy of the form. It's only 3 pages, and is available online here." The posting lists fax numbers for Kerry's DC, Boston, Springfield, and Fall River offices. "To avoid any confusion, you might include a cover letter which mentions the senator's promise, 100 days ago, to sign form 180 and release his military records. Please be polite."

Count liberal Steve Soto in for John Edwards '08: "It would be easy to dismiss Edwards as a guy who already had his fifteen minutes of fame. But that would be a mistake. The Kerry camp abandoned Edwards's 'Two Americas' message and misused Edwards from the moment they brought him aboard. It is also true that in the early polling for 2008, Edwards is the only one of the top three Democrats who runs within the margin of error to John McCain, who beats both Kerry and [Sen. Hillary] Clinton in head-to-head match-ups (10 points and 8 points respectively). And Edwards is the only one of the three who beats Rudy Giuliani outright. And Edwards' campaign consultant David Axelrod is exactly the kind of non-Beltway Democratic consultant I had in mind months ago who has won at a regional level with aggression and effective media."

More: "Sure, it's early, and yes, there will be new faces on the scene for the Democrats in 2008. ... The difference is that Edwards has been through the gauntlet once and seen how not to run a national campaign against a ruthless team of moral degenerates. And that kind of experience cannot be easily dismissed."

Marshall Wittmann, on Joe Klein's musings about a candidate Clinton: "[I] can attest from his conversations with smart conservatives that they genuinely fear a Hillary candidacy. They understand that Clinton uniquely can move to the center politically and they believe that she is more disciplined than her husband. More than most, Hillary grasps the Democratic weaknesses in the areas of values and security and is aggressively seeking to address them. Yes, the right will attack her viciously, relentlessly and with no mercy. But, they also realize that she would give as good as she got. The ugly truth is that if Jesus of Nazareth himself returned and dared to run on the Democratic line the righteous right would tar him as a bleeding heart vagabond who couldn't hold a job and that he needed a shave." More: "This is all not to say that Hillary should be the nominee, only that she shouldn't be ruled out."

Thune Watch is tracking the travels of newly elected Sen. John Thune (R-SD), who has traveled to 6 states in 6 weeks. "As South Dakota is put on hold awaiting news on Ellsworth, Social Security, and a Renewable Fuels Standard John Thune is flying around the country attending fundraisers in other states. Thune claims that he is working 24-7 on keeping Ellsworth open, but that sure doesn't appear to be the case considering where he is spending his time."

Red State's Mark Kilmer writes of the reconciled Gov. Bill Ownes (R-CO) and Frances Owens: "That she's taken him back, and that she seems as if she would be a dynamite asset, may have awakened a sleeping GOP giant. He would look good on any number of tickets."

IN THE STATES: Had His Phil

TN Gov. Phil Bredesen (D) has started a "blog" (hat tip, Instapundit). From Bredesen's first post: "Let me confess upfront: I won't be blogging every single day. But I will, on a regular basis, use this space to share my ideas on issues and provide personal dispatches from trips I take and events I attend, like the National Governors Association conferences. Stay tuned for more entries." Say Uncle comments: "He should open it up to comments. Now, say something of substance so that I may criticize it. ... Politicians really are seeing the power of blogs."

Kennedy vs. The Machine quibbles with NRSC Chair Elizabeth Dole's latest take on the MN SEN race. "Dole makes the same mistake we have seen by almost every other national political reporter who gets paid to look at these things. Dole calls ['04 MN-06 nominee Patty] Wetterling [(D)] the frontrunner while the race's overall fundraising leader, Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar [(D)], is ignored. Ms. Wetterling remains an extraordinarily sympathetic figure and may be formidable without extended media scrutiny. But the simple fact is that both candidates have agreed to abide by the DFL endorsement. ... Klobuchar's strength among the Party's elected office holders -- and the little matters of electability and fundraising prowess -- make Klobuchar at worst a co-frontrunner even in the instance of a primary."

Alexander McClure of PoliPundit writes on statewide races in FL: "[W]hile [AG Charlie] Crist [(R)] would easily win against any of the weak Democratic candidates, he may face a primary struggle with two other statewide Republicans, including [CFO] Tom Gallagher and [LG] Toni Jennings. The key for Republicans will be to convince one of these two to run for the Senate seats. Frankly, given how weak [Sen. Bill] Nelson [(D)] is, I'm surprised that not more Republicans have shown interest."

Some WA State Univ. "Accounting" students pulled a clever switch when Gov. Christine Gregoire (D-WA) took the podium to deliver the commencement address (Hat Tip, Ace Of Spades HQ).

MISCELLANY: It's A Seller's Market

Swing State Project's Bob Brigham writes: "In 2006, it will be hard to be relevant if you don't have a Netroots Organizer. To-date, some of the best talent has already been scooped up."

Tim Blair picks on Brian Boyko, who told the BBC 11/04 that he planned to move to England after graduation in light of Bush's victory. "Well, it's May now, but Brian is still stuck in Texas with all those gay Muslim spacegoats. His plan ... has changed: 'Brian Boyko ... plans to graduate in August of 2005. Afterward, he plans to relocate from Austin, Texas to Wellington, New Zealand.' Sure he will. That's why he's currently applying for jobs."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Overload

Oakland Mayor, AG Candidate, ex-Gov (et al) Jerry Brown (D) writes: "Scanning the TV news tonight, I was struck again by the massive and incoherent stimuli transmitted to American minds in the guise of national news. Is it a post-modern nightmare or Dante's Inferno? The rapid shift from one image or story to another -- now comic, now trivial, now tragic -- undermines one's critical faculties. Drug and car ads compete with murders in Iraq and a "nuclear option" for the Senate. The common sense questions ... get lost in the psychic distractions of a perverse media acupuncture of the mind. The public forum is overloaded with 'junk' news, science and politics."

LEST WE FORGET: Blogging Can Be Addicting

Andrew Sullivan: "It's time to come clean. I tried to cut down on blogging, and I have indeed changed my hours and patterns. But my name is Andrew and I am a blogoholic."

Posted by at 12:15 PM

May 09, 2005

5/9: The Times Sparks A Free-For-All

Almost every blog we surveyed had at least a link to the New York Times' article which, among other things, called on bloggers to adopt a code of ethics. Virtually no one who commented on the piece agreed with it, and instead bloggers ratcheted up their criticism of MSM journalistic techniques. The most common critique of Adam Cohen's work, and one with some merit, is that he makes sweeping generalizations of bloggers as a whole, and makes a few unsubstantiated statements as fact. The fundamental issue is, What exactly are blogs: a news source? Marketplace of ideas? MSM watchdog? Whether or not you agree with Rosen might depend on your answer to that question.

Elsewhere, Senate Min. Leader Harry Reid (D) and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) are the focus of filibuster discussion today based on weekend comments. Reid's "inflammatory" remarks are not necessarily shocking anyone, but Hagel's apparent dissent from the rules-change camp and reference to the GOP's blocking of ex-Pres. Clinton nominees draws heavy criticism from the right. Lots of WH'08 buzz today, focusing on Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and John Kerry. Arianna Huffington's new blog project debuts. Plus: Blogs know all your secrets.

TRACKBACKS: The Only Thing Better Than Reading A New York Times Op-Ed, Is Debunking A New York Times Op-Ed

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

• New York Times "Editorial Observer" Cohen's piece about blog ethics is the hands-down biggest topic. Linking: Ezra Klein, The Moderate Voice, Eschaton, The Anchoress, Oh, That Liberal Media, Buzz Machine, Little Green Footballs, The Mahablog, "Roger Ailes", Asymetrical Information, Althouse, Ed Cone, James Wolcott, Ranting Profs, Corrente, Tim Worstall, Instapundit, Mudville Gazette, Rightwing Nuthouse, Ideoblog, Free Range Librarian. Worth noting also are the blogs who link to a separate story about a Times panel report on how to build credibility: Buzz Machine, Ranting Profs, The Anchoress, Volokh Conspiracy

  >> Citizen Z: "[I]n 969 words Adam Cohen fails to cite anyone but himself calling for a blogger code of ethics. Nor does he point out any examples where the lack of such a code has caused problems for bloggers or their readers. Instead we're spoon-fed MSM generalities."

  >> PoliBlog: "Mostly, the Cohen piece strikes me as an attempt by a member of the MSM to try and put bloggers 'in their place' -- but without much to work with."

  >> Jeff Jarvis: Cohen is "trying to turn blogs into an institution, like journalism. But they are not. Blogs are all individual. ... Journalism is institutional, blogs are personal. Journalism has become dispassionate, blogs are passionate. Bloggers are just people, citizens, readers."

• Filibuster talk is big this weekend. On the left, focus is on AP report about Hagel's apparent break with the anti-filibuster ranks. Linking: The Left Coaster, Talk Left, Daily Kos, Alabama-Democrat, Florida Blues, Tommy Wonk, The Political Puzzle v2.0. Questioning what Hagel is up to: Confirm Them, Blogs for Bush . The right is equally fired up by Reid's latest remarks about Pres. Bush and nominees, courtesy of the Las Vegas Review Journal. Linking: The Asylum, DC Thornton, Michelle Malkin, A Kiwi In Vegas, Keeler Political Report, RedState

  >> Liberal Daily Kos: "Hagel strayed way off the reservation, to the point of completely undermining the Republican argument about judges in this one, beautiful sound-bite."

  >> Blogs for Bush: "Is Harry Reid still in 5th grade? There is no excuse for such juvenile comments -- while Bush is overseas no less."

BLOGGERS VS. THE MSM: OC Convention Center -- It's On!

New York Times' Cohen wrote: "Bloggers like to demonize the MSM (that's Mainstream Media), but it is increasingly hard to think of the largest news blogs as being outside the mainstream. ... Bloggers like to demonize the MSM (that's Mainstream Media), but it is increasingly hard to think of the largest news blogs as being outside the mainstream. ... The thing about influence is that, as bloggers well know, it is only a matter of time before people start trying to hold you accountable."

MSM outlets hold themselves to journalistic standards; "Bloggers often invoke these journalistic standards in criticizing the MSM, and insist on harsh punishment when they are violated," as in the case of Dan Rather and Eason Jordan. "But Mr. Rather's and Mr. Jordan's misdeeds would most likely not have landed them in trouble in the world of bloggers, where few rules apply. ... Many bloggers who criticize the MSM's ethics, however, are in the anomalous position of holding themselves to lower standards, or no standards at all. ... As blogs grow in readers and influence, bloggers should realize that if they want to reform the American media, that is going to have to include reforming themselves." (5/8).

Reaction was widespread. Mudville Gazette: "The blogosphere thrives because the mainstream media has failed to police itself. The blogosphere is self-policing and has been since day one - the endless variety of perspective, opinions, and voices ensures it. Cohen's effort to disparage those who are replacing him, to maintain some control of a dwindling readership and a diminishing importance is unsurprising but feeble."

Jesse Taylor writes on Ezra Klein: "I'm a bit torn about it. It's a lot hard to differentiate blog-to-blog than it is 'regular' media source to 'regular' media source. ... We could be held to the same standards that newspapers are, although there is no guild, no school of blogging, no way to train anyone to do it. There's also the fact that blogs are blogs precisely because they are a sort of unilateral fount of aggression - you find someone with a voice, a topic, and something to say that either pleases you or pisses you off, and you read them. ... And if you need any more evidence about how sordidly stupid this entire search for bloggers' responsibilities is," note that Wonkette editor Anna Marie Cox, who "at her peak, was more Lloyd Grove than Edward R. Murrow," was the only blogger interviewed.

Tim Worstall: "That he uses, as his first example of a blog The Drudge Report shows that he hasn't quite grasped the basics of the field, for of course Drudge is not a blog. ... In short, adopting the same system of journalistic ethics for each and every blog, for each and every blog post, would entirely cripple what blogs actually do."

Joe Gandelman: "The irony is this: We AGREE with some of Cohen's points about bloggers needing to live up to standards they demand of others. ... But Cohen's piece -- which does attempt to be thoughtful -- is so riddled with misunderstanding and generalizations about the nature of blogs and bloggers, where can we begin?" Gandelman then gives a point-by-point response to Cohen's claims.

"Attaturk" writes at Eschaton, on Cohen's statement that "more bloggers, and blog readers, are starting to ask whether at least the most prominent blogs ... shouldn't hold themselves to the same high standards to which they hold other media": "I've been reading Eschaton for about two years now, maybe more, I really don't remember asking this question, nor chatting in comments about such a thing -- and what do we not talk about in comments? ... If you cannot read my blog, or others, and tell what is humor and what is a rant and understand what weight they should be given, perhaps you should just stick to reading Entertainment Weekly. But thanks for acting like you've thought up an actual issue Mr. Cohen."

PoliBlog: "If a major blogger had circulated false documents to damage either the Kerry or Bush campaigns in a manner similar to Rather, there is no doubt that they would have suffered the same kind of scrutiny and criticism." Little Green Footballs: "The blogosphere is merciless in such cases, and any well-known blogger who tried such a stunt would be discredited, probably within minutes, and never trusted again." Ed Cone: "Beyond the legal penalties for libel that apply to all publishers, the ethics of blogging have to be self-enforced. There is no mechanism for enforcement, other than shunning by the tribe, and there are many tribes online." James Wolcott: "Of course, we're all concerned about getting it right. I try to maintain this blog to the highest standards of borderline libel. But I would politely suggest that the Times fire Judith Miller before it presumes to lecture lesser mortals in a mealy-mouthed manner." Ranting Profs: "The central argument here is that as the blogosphere grows and develops, standards and practices, particularly ethical ones, will have to grow and develop as well. Good point. But what really seems to bother the writer is that, after all, traditional media outlets have corrections policies. That's almost laugh out loud funny."

Asymetrical Information: "Blogs are an active slice of the journalists' and politicians' own stakeholding public talking back to them and, for better or for worse, there's bugger-all Mr. Cohen and his ilk can do about it." Ann Althouse: "We only have the readership we can attract with the strength of our own writing. We have to build that readership and keep it with constant writing. ... It's all a matter of whether the readers stay or go. In a sense, we're constantly getting hired and fired in tiny increments as individuals decide whether or not to click to our sites one more time. ... And the great value of the blogosphere is that, in this difference, we are constantly engaged in creating something new. Is that hard for MSM to adapt to, to get a grip on?"

Rightwing Nuthouse: "I make no bones about the fact that I'm conservative and biased about everything I write. What else would you expect from a site named 'Rightwing Nuthouse?' I mean, it's not like I'm trying hide anything! Now, if I'd called the site 'Leftwing Whackjob' and then put out a lot of rightwing propaganda, The Times could then accuse me of acting shamelessly."

"Patterico" writes at Oh, That Liberal Media: Cohen "has no factual support for these statements." He drafted an e-mail to Cohen, but "wasn't able to send" it directly. He instead sent it to Dan Okrent, and "asked Mr. Okrent to forward the e-mail to Cohen, or alternatively, to respond to my concerns himself." Stay tuned.

Pejmanesque: "Would someone care to explain to me how we bloggers are supposed to 'reform ourselves'? Shall we call a convention? Shall we lobby for blogging legislation in Congress? What exactly can serve as a better modus operandi other than bloggers being judged for the quality of their work and then either receiving traffic or losing it accordingly?"

The Anchoress notes that the Cohen piece appeared the same morning the Times is "talking about taking steps to improve its credibility."

The one quasi-supportive post we could find belongs to Ideoblog: "But it doesn't follow that bloggers should shun the idea of a voluntary code of ethics. While the wide open market in which bloggers function ultimately corrects errors, no market is perfect, and there are potential costs on the way to eventual accuracy."

FILIBUSTER/JUDGES: Traitor!

Daily Kos' "QWQ" imagines a Dem ad using comments from Hagel on ABC's "This Week." "So much for the argument that Democrats have engaged in unprecedented obstruction by blocking 10 nominees. As Hagel makes clear, the Republicans' hands are even dirtier because they blocked six times as manyClinton nominees."

Blogs for Bush, on Hagel's comments: "Does Hagel understand that the Constitution clearly states that a judicial nominee is confirmed by a simple majority of the Senate? Doesn't he also understand that Frist is not suggesting that we eliminate all filibusters? The Democrats have given no legitimate reason to oppose any of Bush's nominees. They even opposed judicial filibusters in the past. This is not principled opposition. This is partisan skulduggery. How can Hagel give any credence to the Democrats phony position on this issue?" Keeler Political Report: "Hagel pretty much had no chance to win the Republican nomination, but after reading this article about what he said this AM about judges on the Sunday talk shows, he serioulsy has no chance."

Moderate OxBlob, on the Washington Post's solution: "It seems like such an obvious and reasonable solution. On procedural matters, it makes no sense for ideology to come into play, especially since the Senate is so closely divided that the beneficiaries of any rule change may quickly become its victims." Conservative Paul Mirengoff at Power Line: "The Post fails to acknowledge that the Republicans have offered a compromise that would put an end to all methods of obstructing an up-or-down vote, not just the filibuster. The Post also fails to acknowledge that, although the Republicans had a majority in the Senate for most of the Clinton presidency, the Senate confirmed a higher percentage of Clinton's court of appeals nominees than it has Bush nominees."

Captain's Quarters notes the support of Sacramento Bee's Ginger Rutland for nominee Janice Rogers Brown: "This is the real Janice Rogers Brown, not some bogeyman dreamed up by People for the American Way and Ted Kennedy. Even her presumed political opponents in the California state capitol know better."

Joshua Marshall observes upon his return to Talking Points Memo: "When I left a week ago, the Princeton Frist Filibuster site was still a hastily-thrown-together operation, mainly serving up a slow feed of some student filibustering Bill Frist. Now, it's a whole elaborate set-up, with a media archive, lists of upcoming speakers and events, links to filibusters at other campuses -- amazing."

DEMOCRATS: When Harry Got Silly

Pejman Yousefzadeh writes at RedState: Reid "is well-known for his inability to utter a cogent and coherent statement without eliciting laughter and guffaws at him. So I guess that it should come as no surprise that he is now calling judicial nominees with whom he disagrees 'bad people.' No one knows, of course, what on earth Reid means when he says that people like Janice Rogers Brown want to take us 'back to the Civil War days,' and frankly, it probably does not matter what Reid means or where he got the transcendentally stupid idea that Janice Rogers Brown craves a return to antebellum America. It's probably just something his staffers fed him, and he took and ran with."

In a separate post, he questions why Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) can ask Bush for greater civility in the filibuster debate when Reid calls Bush a "loser." Hugh Hewitt: "On the appaling scale, accusing a distinguished African-American jurist of wanting a return to the era of slavery is simply reprehensible. Perhaps Senator Schumer would like to issue a statement on Senator Reid's disgusting attack on Justice Brown and the other nominees?"

DCThornton: "It's kind of amazing, though. For a 'loser', the President won re-election last November and his party holds majority in both the Senate and the House. So who's the real loser here -- other than the people of Nevada who are stuck with an embarrassment of a man from Searchlight as our senior Senator?"

MyDD refers to a Cato study of GOP and big gov't and writes: "While it is pretty clear that libertarians such as Cato are upset with Republicans because even the rhetorical support for small government has died in the Bush administration, I think many on our side seem to make a mistake of believing that we can appeal to economic libertarians with a promise of fiscal responsibility. It isn't exactly a secret that expanding the role of the federal government in our economy is part of both the New and the Progressive Democratic message. I somehow doubt that libertarians will start to vote Democratic because while our support for universal health care cuts at every fiber of their being, they like the idea that we will balance the budget when we pass it into law."

HUFFINGTON: The Reviews Are In

Power Line gives a pretty fair assessment of the Huffington Post, which launched 5/8: "The site's format is striking, with a home page that has the feel of a newspaper rather than a blog. Bloggers are featured down the left column of the home page, with a 'News wire' (headlines and photos linking to news stories) taking up most of the center and right columns; Harry Shearer's "Eat the press" feature runs across the bottom of the center and left columns. The format is impressive and attractive. The blog contributors lean heavily to the Hollywood left, although David Frum and Michael Isikoff are visible exceptions today."

Michelle Malkin comments: "Unlike a lot of observers, though, I don't think Arianna's going to fail. Arianna is very good at what she does, which is to collect people like curios and throw sprawling house parties for them--parties that attract never-ending hordes of looky-loos simultaneously bemused and repulsed by the grand spectacle of obsequiousness and megalomania dressed up as political dialogue." Keep an eye on Huffington Is Full Of Crap.

WHITE HOUSE '08: The Hillary Problem

Right-leaning blogs are abuzz over a possible scandal involving Clinton's fundraising, as detailed by the New Orleans Times-Picayune, New York Sun and New York Times. Righty John Hinderaker: "I can't help wondering why none of this constitutes a 'scandal.' ... If the indictment of [House Maj. Leader Tom] DeLay's aides by a long-discredited Democratic activist in Travis County, Texas, is a big news story, then why isn't the indictment of Hillary Clinton's finance director by the Justice Department an equally big story?"

A few blogs think this report about a new ABC series featuring the first female POTUS is meant to warm Americans up to the idea of a Pres. HRC. Some are also observing chatter of her demise, courtesy of Time's Joel Klein.

Conservative blogs are amused by a Boston Globe article that details how John Kerry is "adopting the rhetoric of a D.C. outsider." WizBang: "I can see him as a Washington outsider. After all, during his last run for the presidency, he missed so many roll call votes that it's possible a good chunk of the Washington establishment forgot he was a senator at all." Ed Morrissey: "Who's he trying to kid? He is the political establishment, and an embodiment of the lackadaisical effort that so many like to lampoon about DC politicians."

Right Wing News analyzes his Top 6 GOP WH'08 candidates. Listed in order: ex-NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Sen. John McCain (AZ), Frist, Sen. George Allen (VA), Gov. Bill Owens (CO) and Rep. Tom Tancredo (CO).

MyDD looks at a Marist poll of '08 candidates. For Dems: "It is interesting that the Anyone But These Three group ('other') is not very large. In fact, Unsure plus Other still does not even equal [Sen. Hillary] Clinton's (NY) current total. ... Also, there are a lot of 'New Democrats' listed among possible contenders, but outside of [WI Sen. Russ] Feingold, whose divorce might rule out 2008, there do not seem to be much in the way of progressives. Someone will have an opening to unite that wing of the party."

On the GOP side: "The 'other' vote collapsed because they stopped using [Sec/State Condi] Rice in the question. Rice, with high name ID and darling status among the conservative blogs and neocons, would have probably been a serious contender. Of course, she is not going to run. I don't think McCain has a shot in hell (2000 was his only real chance), but I do think Giuliani has at least an outside chance to win the nomination. He could win the entire paleo-con and independent vote in the primaries, and with the theocon vote divided that might just be enough. "

Conservative Jeff Joyner at Outside The Beltway notes McCain's advice to John Kerry writes: "I don't think anyone's underestimating Clinton. His advice is surely correct, though. Indeed, Clinton has shrewdly focused on her Senate duties first, not only building chits within her party but demonstrating that she was more than a show pony. Kerry would be wise to do the same if he wants another shot at the brass ring."

Swing State Project notes a local story about Sen. Evan Bayh's (D-IN) WH ambitions and asks, "While using the DLC to raise a campaign profile was a smart move 15 years ago, does it really benefit a candidate in 2008 to be seen as the DLC candidate? The fundraising potential of the DLC is waning and far less critical than a successful online strategy. But it is the liability of being seen as the DLC candidate that interests me. In the 2004, the DLC ruthlessly cut down Governor Howard Dean in the primaries. In our recent DNC Chair election, bloggers had their first taste of payback by quickly destroying any potential the DLC's Tim Roemer might have enjoyed. But DNC Chair isn't nearly as important to Party direction as choosing the 2008 Presidential nominee and I have to think that being seen as the DLC choice would be the kiss of death for a candidate."

IN THE STATES: The Meek Shall Inherit The Earth

NC Dem chair Jerry Meek writes at MyDD about the NC resident thrown out of a church because he was a Dem, and makes an appeal for Internet support. Meek: "When FDR was asked about his philosophy, he said, 'I am a Christian, and I am a Democrat.' Today he would be unable to worship in a certain church in North Carolina. This is a travesty for all of us. I would so far as to say that it's downright un-American. And I want all Democrats, Republicans, and Independents to stand up and say that a citizen's place of worship should not depend upon one's political choice. After all, once we start down this road, what's to stop the government one day from intervening in our churches directly?"

Amanda Morcotte at Pandagon says "outing" people in general is a bad idea, but makes an exception in cases like that of Spokane Mayor Jim West (R): "I want conservative politicians outed for gossipy reasons, of course. I'm human, after all. But mostly I want to stomp out disingenuous arguments. I want people to be afraid to lie. ... I want the fear of the lie to fall upon them, so that no one ever again pretends that we went to war with Iraq for a real reason and no one ever again pretends that he stands for 'family values' when he really just stands for himself."

Raising Kaine, claiming to be independent of any candidate, is keeping an eye on the VA GOV race in support of LG Tim Kaine (D).

MISCELLANY: Immigration, Terrorism and Unions All In One Place

Michelle Malkin attended a rally organized to protest against the RealID act, and offers some interesting insight.

Quite a few blogs link to a Times of London report that the capture of Abu Faraj al-Libbi, an alleged terrorist, may be a case of "mistaken identity." Eschaton: "So, the Bush Administration, once again, has falsely trumpeted some event as being a major victory. Our quality press, especially cable news, obediently complied, and after all the chest thumping has been hammered into what little there is of a typical viewer's memory it turns out to be --- a gross overexaggeration." Winds of Change disputes the report. Brad DeLong asks, "How Many Number Three Men Does Al Qaeda Have?"

Bull Moose writes: "America needs a strong labor movement as never before. With the rise of the Bush plutocracy, there is no counter-balance to the power of money. Yet unions have been in decline for the past thirty years. In large part this is the product of the changes in the economy and de-industrialization. But the labor movement has been slow to respond to these changes. ... Andy Stern is an innovative thinker who is attempting to recreate the labor movement to adjust to the changing economy. He realizes that politics alone is not the answer to labor's woes and it must return to grass roots organizing efforts."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: They're Always Watching

Mickey Kaus writes: "Today it's hard for politicians to wait out bad publicity because O.C.D.-like blogs are there to make sure the bad publicity doesn't go away. ... Example: How many days has it been since John Kerry said he'd sign Form 180 releasing his military records? Once upon a time an embarrassing promise like Kerry's might have been forgotten until the next campaign. Now he's nibbled to death by blogs."

LEST WE FORGET: Mission Accomplished?

This weekend was the Time Travelers Convention, as we alerted you to last week. Here's the update from the organizers: "The convention was a success! Unfortunately, we had no confirmed time travelers visit us. We did, however, have a great series of lectures, awesome bands, and even a DeLorean."

Posted by at 12:16 PM

May 06, 2005

5/6: The Favourite Topic

Based on 5/5's obsession with UK elections, it came as no surprise that it remains the hottest topic today. Several bloggers went live as returns came in, and the rest put their spin on what became the expected result. The general consensus is that PM Tony Blair suffered because of Iraq. Those on the right point out that another pro-war leader has been re-elected, but they also worry about what a Britain under Gordon Brown might be like.

The "religious right" is the biggest secondary topic, and only shows signs of growing. Most of the discussion centers around op-eds, with the KS evolution trial also coming up. Another MSM casualty gets the expected blog treatment. SocSec and Maj. Leader Tom DeLay have ups and downs. UN Amb. Nominee John Bolton sneaking through? And what's this about big bibles?

TRACKBACKS: Someone Had To Pay The Price

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

• The BBC's election coverage seems to be the main source of news. Linking: The Moderate Voice, Secular Blasphemy, Normblog, Patrick Ruffini, Talking Points Memo, WizBang, Crooked Timber, Eschaton, OxBlog, Austin Bay Blog, Political Animal

  >> An Instapundit reader observes: "[Australia PM] John Howard, George Bush, Tony Blair: Seems to me those that oppose Iraq are in the clear minority, at least on the one particular topic of the war in Iraq."

  >> Daily Kos' "Armando": "Iraq. Bush. Clearly Blair was slapped around because of them."

• The culture war is discussed all over in several contexts: op-eds by Chris Hitchens and James Taranto in the Wall Street Journal and David Brooks in the New York Times, the KS evolution dispute, and a proposed ban on sperm donations from homosexuals. Discussing any or all of these subjects: Ace of Spades HQ; Secular Blasphemy; Balloon Juice; Mahablog; Daily Kos; Pandagon; No More Mister Nice Blog; Tapped; Bull Moose; Outside The BeltwayFafblog; Countercolumn; Corrente.

  >> Hugh Hewitt, on the WSJ pieces: "Both accounts are well written, and Hitchens' particularly impressive invective raises the bar for the anti-Christian polemicists from whom we have been hearing so much in recent weeks. But neither writer gave us a definition of 'religious right,' though Taranto does speak of 'religious conservatives,' which is close to the mark of what the left means: Any believer in God who also votes Republican seem to be the target Hitchins is spitting at.

  >> The Politburo Diktat, on creationism: "I'm not making this up. This is really happening. Here and now. In the year 2005, in the U.S.A., a country that once put a man on the Moon."

• Howard Kurtz' report on now-ex-USA Today reporter Pentagon correspondent Tom Squitieri gets the most play in the MSM-unfriendly blogosphere. Linking: The Moderate Voice, Romanesko, Roger Ailes, Outside The Beltway

  >> Ranting Profs: "My sense is that the man has an excellent reputation. I've seen him both on political chat shows and when the DOD press briefings has been televised, and he's obviously very sharp. But it does seem that outlets surely are cracking down earlier and harder of late."

ELECTION '05: Now, They're Experts On British Politics, Too

Patrick Ruffini, Steyn Online, Andrew Sullivan, Jim Geraghty and Sortapundit are among those who live blogged the elections.

Moderate David Adesnik makes what is a popular sentiment on all sides this a.m.: "I'm glad Blair won. He risked his entire political career in order to support the war in Iraq simply because he believed it was the right thing to do. If I opposed the war in Iraq I probably wouldn't feel that way, but then again, I just might. It isn't often that a world leader makes such a momentous decision with so little consideration of his own self-interest."

Liberal Steve Soto, on the diminished Labour majority: "Well, at least in Great Britain, there is a political price to be paid for lying to your countrymen in order to get into a war." Sullivan: "Yes, the war was a major reason. But it's important to understand that hostility to Blair was not simply about the decision to go to war, but how he did it, how he appeared to have been less than forthright, and how this characterological duplicity reflected broader discontent with his management style on domestic issues as well."

Power line's Paul Mirengoff: "Early on, I viewed this election as win-win for the U.S. ... I don't think it's turned out quite that way, though. Blair's margin may not be large enough to enable him to govern effectively, given the leftist leanings of his party, and he may eventually turn over control to the less attractive (from our perspective) Gordon Brown. Nonetheless, Blair has made history with his victory tonight, and the three main leaders of the coalition that toppled Saddam now have all been re-elected."

RedState, on the CW that Brown will soon replace Blair: "The problem is that, in coming to power on the tide of Labour disgust and outrage, he will owe his leadership to people who are horrendous, namely, the hard-left, anti-Iraq, anti-American Labour hard core. He will work to keep them happy."

Hugh Hewitt compares Blair and Bush: "In one sense neither man has a successor standing by. Brown is simply not Blair when it comes to the international leadership Blair has exercised and New Labour as a whole would rather leave Iraq to America. No one has a clear feel for the heir to Bush's adamant commitment to national security and the spread of democracy. While Bush's successor is surely going to emerge from the Republican Party, Blair's is most likely to be found among the Tories."

Eric Alterman: "Britain's election today shames our own. It's not only that Blair has been forced to face actual voters asking actual questions about his deliberate deceptions, and that the voters will make him pay a price for treating them with contempt -- albeit far less contempt than Bush and a complacent media showered on us. It's also that the election is being held on genuine issues rather than the kinds of questions that would better serve a personality cult."

"Ben P" writes at MyDD: "I think this was definitely a blow to the New Labour 'project' as a significant, coherent intellectual and ideological movement. ... I sense that Blair has realized he has been rebuked too - his body language was very telling. ... BUT: strangely, at the same time, this result is also finally confirmation or (at least tacit acknowledgement) that Labour is now the natural party of government. People are just comfortable with them and the material things they provide - even if they are disgusted by the hubris and arrogance of the New Labour project - because a weaker party would have lost this election."

Lefty Matthew Yglesias: "I really should't offer up big ideas about the politics of a foreign country that I don't know all that much about, but just scanning over the math ... it's very hard to escape the conclusion that Labor would do well for itself to form some kind of formal alliance with the Liberal Democrats. The two parties policies don't really seem to be particularly different, especially once you take into account the fact that there's a certain vagueness as to what Lib Dem policies really are and a great deal of internal dispute within Labor."

Lefty Markos Moulitsas Zuniga observes: "Bob Shrum was 'helping' Labour. Looks like that losing streak of his will remain intact."

Quite a few blogs note the victory of ex-Labour MP George Galloway, who left the party because of Iraq. Liberal Crooked Timber: "While I'd normally welcome any indication of opposition to the Iraq war, I have to say that this is a deplorable result."

The blogs also seem to love the BBC's high-tech graphics and presentation.

CULTURE WARS, PART I: Pundits On The Pulpit

Right-leaning "Ace": "Taranto and Outside the Beltway nail it, together: It's one thing to disagree with religious conservatives. It's enough thing entirely to claim that they have no right to believe the things you disagree with in the first place, just because those beliefs are religiously-motivated. All of us have various factors that determine our political beliefs -- sex, race, sexuality, spirituality/materialism, etc. I find it rather absurd to claim as much as the left does -- and increasingly, much of the right -- that the fact that someone might have political beliefs shaped in part by Christian devotion means they are acting improperly by expressing those beliefs at all. This seems to be an attempt to simply win a debate by insisting the opposite side not even engage in it."

Conservative "Doverspa": "I believe James Taranto's article should be a must read for both Republican strategists and anti-traditionalist Democrats. His views reflect my own well. I am a Christian but avowedly not a member of the Religious Right. Nevertheless, Mr. Taranto and I find the intolerance on the left with respect to faith oft-putting and the ecumenical diversity of the Religious Right more in tune with the values of tolerance and diversity."

Marshall Wittman notes "that two conservative columnists take issue with the faithful. ... The right has become the mirror image of all they dislike about the left. Both the secular and the religious right kvetch about their victimization while they control at least two branches of government and their penetration of the media is thorough and growing. ... The left has an opening to both appeal to Republican moderates who are repulsed by the direction of their party and to the religiously observant who reject the leadership of the Dobsons, Falwells and Robertsons. The progressive approach should be as sophisticated and nuanced as Brooks' column."

Conservative John Cole sums up the Brooks piece as saying: "If you oppose the end of the filibuster in judicial nominations, you probably would have opposed the Emancipation Proclamation." Cole: "The debate at hand is not religion, per se. What is being debated is the role of a narrow view of religion in shaping and creating public policy." Secular Blasphemy: "The differences between the religious and the secular in deciding many ethical questions is not as clear-cut as many on both sides would argue."

CULTURE WARS, PART II: Evolutionary Thinking

Conservative John Cole: "At some point, people are going to recognize that faith is not a very useful building block for a logical syllogism or a good foundation for scientific inquiry. A belief in evolution does not preclude faith in God. On the other hand, teaching creationism does do damage to science."

Liberal Zuniga: "Amazing how today, in the year 2005, the GOP and its minions are still waging their war against science and reality. ... The American Taliban wants to create the illusion that Darwin is somehow incompatible with Christian dogma. It's not." Lefty Amanda Marcotte: "This is getting ridiculous. I mean, you'd think that Darwin wrote tracts on how all Christians must die or something. Is it me or are there a lot of people in the mainstream media who are deliberately stirring the s--- and going out of their way to make religious people paranoid? What exactly do these reporters think they have to gain by pushing us down the road to theocracy?"

Countercolumn: "As a theist, I regard evolution as one of the mechanisms in a greater theory of intelligent design. But I do not believe that the literalist, die-hard "new earth" creation theory stands up to the evidence available, or even close to it."

CULTURE WARS, PART III: Take It To The Bank

Lefty Amanda Marcotte: "Let's be honest here. The problem is that many conservatives believe and are actively pushing the idea that male homosexuality in and of itself creates AIDS, because it's 'dirty'."

SOCIAL SECURITY: Losing The Battle, Winning The War

Think Progress shows that Bush's 60-day tour isn't working in chart form. Conservative Matt Margolis: "Bill Clinton has given the Democrats some valuable advice regarding Social Security, via ABC's The Note, Clinton says, 'I think [the Democrats] need to come up with a plan of their own.'"

Lefty Matthew Yglesias"You need to go to war with the social insurance state you've got, not the one you might like to have. As it happens, we have one that's very heavily weighted toward hedging against retirement-related risks when I think we should be more concerned about health risks, income instability, and poverty more generally (Social Security, as currently constituted, has sharply reduced elder poverty but not actually eliminated it). If health, income instability, and poverty were better handled, then on the retirement front I'd be much more amenable to trading off security for more opportunity at securing windfall profits."

Lefty Oliver Willis, on a New York Times report that the Bush admin is warning the AFL-CIO that "union-run pension funds may be breaking the law in opposing President Bush's Social Security proposals": "So, the Bush administration has decided that union opposition to social security privatization and benefit cuts is somehow a violation of the law."

Lefty blog Daily Howler breaks down Bush's comments from recent SocSec forums. The gist of his post captured from the headline: "Bush has some gifts for America's mothers-disinformation, disrespect, phony fear"

IRAQ: Growing Scandal?

Liberal Jack Balkin: "These secret minutes of a meeting between Prime Minister Tony Blair and his top aides on July 23d, 2002, leaked by the Sunday Times, have put Blair in hot water just before the British elections today. But they should also raise some concerns about President Bush's honesty."

Liberal Juan Cole says the memo proves Bush doctored evidence in the lead up to Iraq. The "smoking gun" from the memo: "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." Cole: "It is not surprising on the face of it that Bush had decided on the Iraq war by summer of 2002. ... What is notable is that all this was not what Bush was telling us. Bush was lying to the American people at the time and saying that no final decision had been made on the war. ... [T]he 'justification' would have to be provided by 'fixing' the intelligence around the policy. Bush was just going to make things up, since the realities did not actually justify his planned war!"

USS Neverdock notes this report and asks: "Now, when is Bush going to start getting tough with the Saudis?"

FILIBUSTER: Look Who's Talking

Blogs For Bush assembles previous statements from Dems to form a new "rant" in favor of Senate rules changes. Among the statements: "The ability of the judiciary to do its job is significantly diminished by the slow speed at which judicial vacancies are filled. If people have a legitimate objection to a particular nominee, they ought to voice that objection and vote against them and try to persuade their colleagues to vote against them. But this is crippling the courts."

Matthew Yglesias writes at Tapped: "A Democratic offer to join the GOP in changing the Senate's rules through a proper vote (instead of the illegal nuclear option) that would end all filibusters, legislative or judicial, which put Frist in a mighty tough spot." GOP biz interests "need the filibuster to block labor law reform and an increase in the minimum wage. But social conservatives have managed to convince themselves that ending the filibuster of a small number of circuit court nominees is all that stands between them and the Kingdom of Heaven. Either decision the Republicans make will lead to strife and infighting. If they take the deal, that will generate good liberal outcomes over the long term. If they decline the deal, Democrats will be definitively planted on the principled high ground in case nuclear war (metaphorically!) breaks out."

ETHICS: It's A MAD, MAD World

Righty Pejman Yousefzadeh writes of the 5/5 Roll Call piece: "This story confirms my belief that for the moment, nothing will happen to Tom DeLay because Republicans could then go after Democrats. ... The fact that Democrats may have violated House rules ... does not mean that I am saying that it is okay for DeLay to have violated House rules ... . But each side has its finger on the ethics button, and it is a Mutually Assured Destruction situation if one side tries to proceed against the other. Which is why I think that in the end, people will back down and simply pass some kind of rule or resolution affirming the rules. After such passage, if there are any further ethics violations by a member on either side, said members will be investigated and subject to more trouble."

Moderate Joe Gandelman, on DeLay's "mea culpa": "Admissions of guilt or requests for public forgiveness have usually helped in American politics. DeLay has NOT admitted guilt or issued a plea for forgiveness. But he's softened his inflexible image a bit. This kind of speech will likely prove a net plus for him in terms of suggesting he's doing some soul searching -- but it won't totally erase his problems."

BOLTON: With A Little MSM Bashing Mixed In

Beltway Buzz's Eric Pfeiffer reports: Senate Foreign Relations Cmte Chair Richard Lugar spokesperson Andy Fisher "says he expects the [confirmation] process to end today as scheduled." Fisher: "We meet every day with Biden's staff. It would appear that we are near the end of the discovery process."

Jackson's Junction: "When Colin Powell appeared to be lobbying against Bolton's nomination as UN Ambassador -- it made all the headlines. ... Today, Powell's Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage, endorsed Bolton for UN Ambassador and where does the AP report it? In the 22nd paragraph of a twenty five paragraph story headlined: Biden Hints at Delaying Bolton Vote. ... This is the single most important development in the Bolton story in weeks and it's buried and then some. This is the end of the drama. Bolton will be confirmed.

Ace of Spades HQ, on a UN employee being questioned over the NYC explosion 5/5: Wow! It's a good thing we don't have John Bolton as Ambassador to the UN! That could alienate these guys and cause them to hate the West or somethin'!

BLOGGERS VS. THE MSM, GOOGLE EDITION: You'll Read What We Want You To Read

Moderate Jeff Jarvis is getting more and more nervous about Google, which plans to "accelerate" the web "by caching -- that is, copying and storing -- web pages to serve to you." Jarvis: "It's one matter when the search engine caches a page you can't get anymore ... . But it's quite another matter for Google to get in the way of serving current content. This means that the page is served from Google rather than from a publisher's server, which means that the publisher cannot count the traffic and serve targeted and dynamic advertising. It also means that Google is copying content on its servers and serving it from there and thus is violating copyright. "

Little Green Footballs: "Interesting. Google reacts to criticism of their obviously biased news division by placing a big bet on mainstream media: Google trying to patent news ranking by quality."

Moderate Roger L. Simon: "What they are really doing is turning their search capabilities into the instrument of a form of censorship never before devised. No matter what supposedly impartial algorithms are built into their ranking system, I would bet my house that they will be constructed to come to the conclusion that, say, CBS News is to be trusted far more than the bloggers who correctly showed the network's anchorman was lying. And all this will be done in the name of 'science.'"

BLOGGERS VS. THE MSM, PART II: Another One Bites The Dust

Roger Ailes calls Squitieri "that old Clinton-bashing hand" and comments: "Seems accuracy and honesty weren't as important back in the 90s. I'm sure the firing had nothing whatsoever to do with the subjects of Squit's reports: the Bush war dead and the Administration's grossly negligent preparations for war. James Joyner: "A shame. Squitieri's reputation was sterling and he was a solid reporter. Still, I failed undergraduate students for plagiarism less aggregious than this."

America Blog picks up on a theme we've seen mentioned here and there, criticizing ABC for "breaking its own rules" by allowing ads from Focus On The Family. "So, a 'conservative Christian MINISTRY' is using these TV ads to spread its 'faith-based advice' but that has NOTHING to do with a religious group or religion. If I were the UCC, I'd be setting ABC up for a massive federal lawsuit based on religious discrimination."

Conservative blog WizBang reads the Spokane Review's timeline of its investigation of the story of "outed" Mayor Steven Smith, and writes: "The Spokesman Review has two allegations from convicted felons they received via the whisper vine, for which there's no corroborating evidence nor apparently any criminal investigations. The paper has these two allegations shelved for several years, before mounting an online sting operation to prove that the mayor is gay. Once their sting establishes that the mayor is in fact gay, they use his homosexuality as an excuse to also report on the uncorroborated charges from 24 years ago. Is the paper stereotyping homosexuals as child molesters to make its case?"

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Why Kos?

Again, Jeff Jarvis: "I'm sorry, but I don't understand why the Guardian imported Kos to blog the British election -- and write lines like this: "Exit polls numbers have dominated the coverage of the election up until now, and it's no wonder. It satiates our desire to get some metric of progress, and it helps fill the dead airtime between the polls closing and actual results." [let's all use "satiate" in a sentence] -- when there are plenty of great Brit bloggers. No offense to Kos, but I'd rather hear another British voice."

BLOGGERS VS. THE MACHINE: Big Brother May Be Watching Soon

Orin Kerr at Volokh Conspiracy testified before the House Judiciary Cmte's Subcmte on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, and observes: "I was struck by the bipartisan sense among the Judiciary Committee members of the need for some kind of increased oversight of Internet surveillance practices. They weren't sure exactly what kind of oversight to add, but they were interested in exploring the issue. I've been arguing in favor of a particular remedy to this problem for a few years now, and we spent a bit of time exploring the approach during the hearing. I thought my proposed remedy might be of interest to a broader blog audience." Details follow.

LARRY FRANKLIN: Where's The Uproar?

Michelle Malkin is closely following the "scandal no one's talking about" involving Pentagon official Larry Franklin, who "was arrested for improperly passing classified information to AIPAC." Malkin: "Franklin's alleged actions are scandalous. The apologists and apathetic are troubling." Conservative Ed Morrissey: "I don't care if the documents were leaked by a Medal of Honor winner to Tony Blair himself -- releasing TS/C information to any outside source is by definition espionage and should result in the strongest possible government response. ... Even if the information never went any further than AIPAC, Franklin committed a clear and jaw-dropping crime, if these allegations can be proven. Those of us who were outraged by [NSA Sandy] Berger's destruction of top-secret documents should be just as outraged over these developments in the Franklin case."

WHITE HOUSE '08: Standing (With) Pat

Kenneth Baer writes at Talking Points Memo gives credit to the National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC) "for sticking it to" Sen. George Allen (R-VA) for not condemning Pat Robertson's remarks on "This Week." "Allen's spokesman dismissed the NJDC release saying that it 'takes Robertson's remark totally out of context.'" He then cites the transcript of Robertson's statement. Baer: "Putting it into context, how can the Republicans be strong in the war against terror, but embrace those who seek to belittle it?"

IN THE STATES: All Politics Is Local

MyDD is joining "the continuing effort" of Philly bloggers to "make a real impact in the upcoming District Attorney's race" in support of Seth Williams.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Real Reform

Mickey Kaus writes: "[T]here is a big risk associated with saving Social Security now -- the risk that we'll save too much. Nobody -- neither the President, nor Pozen, nor the Democrats -- is talking about radically reducing the size of the program, Australia style. They're all talking about saving a program that consumes somewhere from 12 to 17 percent of the national payroll. Once its financial imbalance is solved it will be virtually impossible to restructure. Voters will consider the problem taken care of. The system will be solvent-a tub resting firmly on its own bottom, funded by a dedicated payroll tax-so why talk about changing it?"

LEST WE FORGET: This Is Why Al Gore Invented The Internet

Many thanks to Ace of Spades for this gem. Best ... Parody ... Ever

Posted by at 12:19 PM

May 05, 2005

5/5: VE Day

We've stayed away from it in the past, but there's no avoiding it today. The hottest topic in the blogosphere is the British election. Luckily, many bloggers draw comparisons between the state of politics here and abroad. A snapshot of the discussion: Most see PM Tony Blair and the Labour party winning re-election. Where in past days expectations were of a marked drop in Blair's majority, some now speculate that the Conservative Party campaign of simply criticizing Blair did nothing to advance the party, and may end up changing little. Some directly compare that to the Dems' '04 all-Bush, all-the-time campaign. Otherwise, a Blair win is seen as good for Bush, so the issue generates less debate than commentary.

Otherwise, the developing story in New York City has bloggers speculating on what signficance the explosion may have had. Senate Maj. Leader Bill Frist's apparent move on the "nuclear option" is the hottest domestic topic, but the "culture war" is heating up as well. Other topics: SocSec, UN Amb. nominee John Bolton, and House Maj. Leader Tom DeLay are in the background. How's Iraq going? And Pawlenty feels the draft.

TRACKBACKS: Will He Or Won't He?

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

• The Hill's report that Frist is ready to "pull the trigger on the nuclear option" is the domestic political story generating the most discussion. Linking: Daily Kos, Tapped, Brothers Judd, The Decembrist, War and Peace, skippy the bush kangaroo, News O Rama

  >> The Obviously Supportive Confirm Them: "It will be good to have this whole thing resolved. ... Keeping these nominees off the bench by filibuster amounts to tyranny of the minority, and the majority of Senators should not be dictated to by the minority in this way."

  >> Liberal Sam Rosenfeld writes under the header "Frist '08 Death Watch": "The Hill ... nicely captures the rapidly escalating pressure Bill Frist is feeling to make good on his foolish promises on the nuclear option front. ... Those activists are clearly getting very impatient.

• The other story bloggers are just waking up to, and trying to figure out, is the explosion outside of the British consulate in NYC. AP and CNN stories get the most play. Linking: , No More Mister Nice Blog, USS Overdock, The Corner, The Jawa Report, Double Toothpicks, Murdoc Online, Scared Monkeys, Of The Mind, Late Final, Harry's Place

  >> NRO's Jim Geraghty notes that the explosion occurred at "3:50 a.m. New York time, about 8:50 a.m. London time. Yeah, I have a hard time believing the timing was purely coincidental." Michelle Malkin agrees, and calls it a terrorist act.

  >> GOP and the City: My tin-hat theory is that this is could be a 'test run' for a much larger act. The media is linking the explosions to the elections in the UK, but there could be something more going on and the UK elections could just be a diversion.

ELECTION '05: They Drive On The Left Side Of The Road

Speculation on results, and possible lessons learned. Marshall Wittmann: "In a few hours, Tony Blair and the Labour Party will likely prevail in the British elections. That is a good thing for us who graze in the progressive political center. ... Blair and [Pres.] Clinton blazed a third way path that at least temporarily caused international conservatism to lose their mojo. By transforming his party, Blair likely consigned the Tories to minority status for many years to come. ... In contrast, the modernization of the American left was aborted by the impeachment of Clinton. That is an effort that must be re-started if Democrats are to become the majority party once again."

New Donkey, noting Labour's lead in the polls: "It's been a while since any national election pretty much anywhere has given me much reason to smile." "Atrios": "The Tories have spent the last few years playing Democrats ("us too, only a little different!") so it's not hard to imagine why they've failed to capture the support of the voters."

Righty John Cole: "The outcome is a win-win for Bush. If Blair wins, the opposition will finally put to bed the Iraq war as a weapon, and Bush retains his strongest ally in Iraq. If Blair loses, Bush has an ally in the Tories on virtually every other issue." Conservative (not party, the ideology) Glenn Reynolds revisists his previous prediction: "If Blair loses or does badly, the press will say that the election was a referendum on the Iraq war and Bush. If Blair does better than expected, the press will say that the election was about local issues of no greater significance. (Either way, resentment of the Blair government's position on the EU and immigration will be largely ignored.)"

Kenneth Baer, guest blogging at Talking Points Memo: "A battered Tony Blair, an invigorated anti-war Lib Dem party -- it has the makings of a bad day for President Bush."

Burnt Orange Report says that since Labour is assured a win, might as well vote for the "fast-growing, progressive-minded, increasingly trustworthy party -- the Liberal Democrats."

TKS seems to have gone totally British. Political Animal: "Yawn. Tony Blair will win again and there will likely be no fights over dimpled chads or electronic voting. That sounds a bit tedious, doesn't it?"

CULTURE WARS: Scratching The Hitch

Companion op-eds in the Wall Street Journal spark debate, mostly centered on Christpher Hitchens' piece. Linking: Outside The Beltway, Ed Cone, Roger Ailes. Moderate Althouse: "Though I think Hitchens overstates how much of a grip the religious right had on American politics, I agree that they've overplayed their hand. He also aptly assesses the distance between the capitalism we rely on and the most fundamental statements in the New Testament, which 'tells us to forget thrift and saving, to take no thought for the morrow, and to throw away our hard-earned wealth on the shiftless and the losers.'" George Will's piece also attracts comment.

New Scientist reports: "Deaths from cervical cancer could jump fourfold to a million a year by 2050" because of "soon-to-be-approved vaccines against the virus that causes most cases of cervical cancer -- but there are signs that opposition to the vaccines might lead to many preventable deaths. The trouble is that the human papilloma virus (HPV) is sexually transmitted. So to prevent infection, girls will have to be vaccinated before they become sexually active, which could be a problem in many countries."

This story has sparked a lot of feedback, centered on the seeming contradiction of the desire to promote a culture of life while opposing contraception. Think Progress: "Family Research Council has spent so much time harping on the chance that HPV will be passed in ways other than bodily fluid transmission during sexual intercourse, yet is still opposed to this vaccine. Unfortunately, its past rhetoric is now coming back to haunt it." Righty Glenn Reynolds: "This seems to me to be a pretty weak argument -- don't prevent cancer, because fear of cancer might prevent premarital sex." Also discussing: The Corner, The Agitator.

John Cole, on the Buffalo firefighter who has woken from a coma: "Of course, there is a marked difference between someone who is minimally conscious after a brief coma and someone who has languished in a persistent vegetative state for fifteen years, which is why, after all, the lawyers for the Schindler family kept trying to assert that Mrs. Schiavo was in a minimially conscious state- because there IS a possibility for recovery for people in a minimally conscious state

Hugh Hewitt wasn't happy with a New Republic piece in which Ian Reifowitz says "the primary domestic threat to American pluralism comes from the Christian right." Hewitt: One of his mistakes "is to define a broad term, 'Christian right' by reference to the statements of one individual and one group -- neither of which is in any way representative of the broad group. It would be as if I made a claim that the Democratic Party believed 'x' because Michael Moore and the Greenpeace Board of Directors said 'x.'"

FILIBUSTER: Attack Of The RINO

Powerline notes the joint op-ed by ex-MN Sens. Walter Mondale (D) and David Durenberger (R), who was last seen endorsing John Kerry 11/04. "So far as I can determine, Durenberger holds himself out as a Republican solely for the purpose of advancing the Democratic issue du jour -- bipartisanship a la Star Tribune! It's a beautful thing." More: "The utter shamelessness of this column is a disgrace not only to Mondale, but also to the Star Tribune."

The Corner links to a Cmte for Justice post [PDF] explaining why the "Nostalgia Option" won't work

IRAQ: I Miss The Deck Of Cards

Power Line, The Moderate Voice, Winds of Change all note the arrest of Abu Farraj al-Libbi.

"Plutonium Page notes a report that 200 people have died in Iraq since the new cabinet was installed: "Does the Bush administration have any idea what they've done? Oh yes, I forgot. It's Iraq's problem now, right?" Little Green Footballs: "Did you know that Iraqi and US forces have captured at least 84 terrorists since the beginning of May?"

The folks at Political Animal debate whether or not Iraq has sparked a democratic movement in the Mid East. Follow it here, here, here, here and here. Winds of Change is an amused bystander.

BOLTON: Weak, Or Just Out Of The Headlines?

Conservative Jonah Goldberg: "It seems to me the anti-Bolton forces are in trouble. The whole essence of the serial abuser charge is the serial part. It seems like the anti-Bolton Dems can't come up with a real, clear, pattern of dubious or irresponsible behavior. If the Dems accusation were true it still wouldn't merit disqualifying him, but it would certainly be easier to prove."

DELAY: Dying The Death Of A Thousand ...

Think Progress updates on its "Drop The Hammer" campaign targeting corporations who donated to DeLay's legal defense fund.

IMMIGRATION: Slippery Slope

Conservative Mark Krikorian, on a provision in the Real ID bill providing ID cards for illegals: "The problem with this approach is twofold: First, any kind of official documentation provided to people who aren't supposed to be here helps incorporate them into our institutions and is one more step toward amnesty; and second, despite any disclaimers printed on the illegals-only licenses, they will inevitably end up being accepted for identification purposes anyway."

BUSH: Since When Does Proof Prove Anything?

The Left Coaster agrees with Buzz Flash, that a memo uncovered by British media regarding Iraq offers evidence needed to impeach Pres. Bush. But "[d]espite the fact that this is a slam dunk case for impeachment for high crimes and misdemeaners [sic], it isn't going to come about." Dems "aren't willing to take on the evil task of fighting for their country against those who have stolen it. because they still can't believe that the Republican Party is so totally dominated by those who have no moral values that they will apply to themselves as they do all others."

DEMOCRATS: That Darn Conservative Media

Liberal Steve Soto: "[I]t is a fact of today's media culture that this corporate GOP-friendly media will continue to bash the Democrats along these lines until next year, thereby reinforcing the GOP-scripted meme that the Democrats are obstructionist and have no solutions. Sure, it's inconsistent with what happened in 1993-1994, but we have a different media now than then. Also, perhaps the GOP and their friends in the media are fully expecting the Democrats to offer nothing of consequence heading into next year other than attacks against the GOP/Bush record. Would the GOP be prepared if the Democrats actually launched specific proposals as 'nonnegotiable' principles, and forced the debate back onto the Republicans for a change?"

BLOGGERS VS. THE MSM: Jarvis Abuzz

Jeff Jarvis responds to a column by NPR ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin, in which he states: "[T]he blogosphere has proven once again to be an amoral place with few rules." Jarvis: "NPR screwed up but when that's discovered it's the bloggers who are amoral?"

Jarvis also quarrels with ABC News: "The tawdriest angle in Prime Time Live's tawdry story about American Idol and Paula Abdul tonight was that ABC thought this was a news story worth an hour of prime time."

Morph writes an "Open letter to TV news people," lamenting the careerism common at most local TV stations.

Recently, Right Wing News polled righty blogs on their favorite columnists. Now, the site offers the left's Top 20, led by NYT's Krugman.

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Who Asked You, Anyway

Oliver Willis responds to a Patrick Ruffini post cited in 5/4's Blogometer. "So the argument is now whenever public opinion is so decidedly against you, you should simply disregard the opinion because something - anything - must be wrong with the polls. There's been a clear and consistent message since Bush brought social security to the forefront: the American people do not trust him and his party on this issue."

WHITE HOUSE '08: In MN, It's A Cold Draft

MN Gov. Tim Pawlenty is the focus of a draft effort with a new blog dedicated to him. One of the first posts notes the support of Grover Norquist.

Mike Huckabee President 2008 notes a dust jacket quote from VA Gov. Mark Warner (D) for AR Gov. Mike Huckabee's (R) new book. Warner: "Mike Huckabee has a great personal story to tell, and he tells it in a very compelling and practical way. He also is in a powerful position to make good public policy to help people get healthier. I've adopted many of his programs in Virginia."

IN THE STATES: This Didn't Take Long

Dump Sherwood has been launched. From the site: "We want a Conservative we can trust in PA10." Posts so far simply follow the MSM's coverage of Rep. Don Sherwood (R) thus far.

Michelle Malkin takes a look at the disputed WA GOV race: "Bottom line: if felons had been prohibited from voting last fall, as the law requires, [GOP nominee Dino] Rossi almost certainly would be governor today."

MISCELLANY: From Asa To Zell

Lefty Katrina vanden Heuvel updates readers on The Nation's soon-to-be-published "Republican Dictionary." "We are almost finished, but we still need a few more funny, sharp, and biting definitions. We need your help, specifically for words like 'The Patriot Act,' 'The War on Drugs,' 'Airport Security,' 'The House Ethics Committee,' 'Tom Delay,' 'Creationism,' "Crusade,' "Proliferation,' 'Blue State,' 'Red State,' 'The United Nations,' 'Zell Miller.'" Click here to offer your suggestions.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Working In Your Pajamas

Joe Gandelman on the developing Pajamas Media: "The more details that come out ... the more interesting (and enticing) it is. ... It would be useful if the writings of bloggers who usually started a weblog as a hobby could get be placed beyond weblogs and generate some income. One drawback for blogs is how identified they become with one particular viewpoint. If this new venture can recuit blogs from all over the political landscape to avoid it from being branded as a news service coming from one particular viewpoint its credibility will be enhanced. If it gets the reputation of being a kind of Fox News for bloggers its recruitment and usage appeal would be limited. And in the end, if it becomes too corporate, will bloggers have to ditch the pajamas?"

LEST WE FORGET: We're Stronger Than You

Chrenkoff offers a popular post about the "disadvantages of pissing off America."

Posted by at 12:22 PM

May 04, 2005

5/4: Back To Iraq

Iraq is a dominant topic of discussion today, spurred by several stories that offer evidence for virtually any opinion you have. The apparent discovery of a letter intend for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi leads those on the right to the conclusion that the insurgency is on the run, and the swearing in of a new Iraqi cabinet that the country is increasingly stabilizing. On the left opponents of the war see declining popular support for the war, and claim that Joint Chiefs Chair Richard Myers' report to Congress contradicts' Pres. Bush's continued assertions that the U.S. is both winning and sufficiently prepared for the fight.

Scanning other topics: SocSec is a hot topic, mostly centered on MFS Investment Management's Robert Pozen's role in forging a new proposal. Liberal bloggers seem worried that Bush may end up making an offer they can't refuse. On the filibuster front, the right has an idea for getting a public demonstration of support for Bush's nominees. Could the Terry Schiavo issue emerge again? The left looks ahead to 11/06 with strategy advice. And Laura Bush is still a hot topic.

Finally, we think it's of note how much the blogosphere is paying attention to British elections. Though we won't focus too much on the race itself, some are drawing parallels between politics here and across the pond.

TRACKBACKS: The Glass Is Half Something

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

• AP's report on the al-Zarqawi drives discussion, mostly on the right. Linking: Little Green Footballs, Blogs for Bush, The Corner, Outside The Beltway, Citizen Smash, No More Mr. Nice Blog, The Moderate Voice, all things unsaid

  >> A few blogs link to Captain's Quarters' analysis: "It won't be long before someone tips the Iraqis off to where he can be captured, or before someone simply puts a bullet into the back of his head to end the misery immediately."

• But on the left (though not exclusively), blogs link to CNN's latest poll, as well as stories about Gen. Myers' report to Congress. Linking: Informed Comment, Reasonable Prudence, Save Anything, The Poorman, Eschaton, The People's Republic Of Seabrook, Instapudding, Faithful Conservative, Napalm News

  >> Liberal Juan Cole: "This is the most dramatic public disavowal of President Bush's military policies ever. Many of the respondents were answering the question in the wake of Bush's press conference, in which he maintained that things were going just hunky dory in Iraq, something the headlines did not support."

• The blogosphere's focus on internal workings of the MSM is seen in chatter about an Editor and Publisher report that DC reporters want to cut down on the number of "background" briefings. Linking: Outside The Beltway, Daily Kos, Political Wire, Press Think, Fishbowl DC, Romanesko

  >> Liberal Eschaton: "As ridiculous as they are, the anonymous background briefings aren't the real problem - it's the Judith Miller pressjob, in which reporters dutifully report administration official pronouncements as newsworthy, whether or not they contain any truth, believing their job is 'not to collect information and analyze it independently.'"

IRAQ: Internal Disputes, But Success In The Field? Sounds Like A Majority Party We Know

Moderate Joe Gandelman ties together nicely the various Iraq stories, which include the al-Zarqawi letter, the swearing in of the Iraq cabinet, violence in the field, and a Pakistan Times report that al-Zarqawi's followers are ready to strike the WH or Vatican. Little Green Footballs, on the letter: "This isn't good news for the inmates of Democratic Underground or useful idiots like Mike Whitney, but the 'insurgency' is falling apart."

No More Mr. Nice Blog notes the similarity between this story and one reported in aNew York Times article from last year.

Liberal "Atrios" notes continued violence and writes: "I don't know what the solution is - more troops, less troops, a greater willingness to accept US military casualties, etc... But, we've turned every corner that there is to be turned and the light still isn't at the end of that damn tunnel. At every artificial moving goalpost we were supposed to engage in the Tinkerbell Gambit and clap louder in hopes that things would improve, but they don't."

SOCIAL SECURITY: Comp-ro-mise? Never Heard Of It, Don't Want It

Brad DeLong, a USC economics prof, writes of the "Pozen Pill": "I actually don't think it's a plan to kill Social Security--it's floundering around in the hope of gaining traction by proposing something progressive." Read more in his Slate article. Liberal Max Sawicky: "The Pozen approach is bankrupt, screw the middle class liberalism. It is Bush's boob bait for the bourgeois."

Liberal blog Gadflyer speculates on Bush's "endgame": "The president ... comes out with a rather painful plan to address solvency, but still continues advocating private accounts. Democrats don't like the new plan, and still don't like private accounts. ... This sets the stage for a Grand Compromise: the president will propose to drop his beloved private accounts, giving Democrats an apparent victory, if they sign on to some form of progressive indexing, giving low-income workers the benefits they have under current law, but slashing them for everyone else. The press will hail the proposal as a generous crossing of the aisle, and berate Democrats until they capitulate. If Democrats take the bait, it would be a disaster."

Conservative Patrick Ruffini writes that the media's and politicians' obsession with polls is "creating severe distortions in assessing where we stand on issues like judicial nominations or Social Security. And it leads to a more provocative question: even on a big issue like Social Security, why should public opinion even matter? Especially when it doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know." More: "If we free ourselves of this media contrivance that the public doesn't support Social Security reform, and recognize that's it's really indifference that can yet be turned positive, then imagine the freedom of action that gives to wavering Republican Senators and Representatives. ... This is no time to go wobbly based on bad reporting on conflicting polls. Screw it. It's game time. Let's go."

Non-blog Tech Central Station's Henderson and Hooper write under the header: "The Social Security Trust Fund is Irrelevant (Or How Al Gore Was Right)

JUDGES: A Symbolic Gesture?

Several blogs refer to what appears to be an old Patterico's Pontification post, where he proposes a so-called "Conventional Warfare Option." The GOP would force a floor vote "on a non-binding resolution of support" for each filibustered nominee "using the same parliamentary tactics that they propose to use to force a floor vote on the nominations themselves. But the resolution I propose would not have any real-world effect, other then to force all 100 Senators to state publicly whether they would support a particular nominee - yes or no."

The desired result would be a public demonstration that nominees would get confirmed if allowed to come to a vote. "Patterico": "When the public sees in the headlines that Judge 'Smith' received support from a majority of U.S. Senators, many will initially assume that Judge Smith has been confirmed. When people are told that, no, Judge Smith is still awaiting confirmation, the public is going to want to know why. And then, just maybe, people will start to get it." Linking: Ace of Spades HQ, Mickey Kaus, Raje's Rants.

Right-leaning "Ace" is among those who like the sound of it, but he wonders about a hidden danger: Sens. Collins, Snowe, Chaffee, McCain, and Specter "currently don't have to actually vote on these nominees; their allies the Democrats are doing the dirty work for them. Maybe they would defect on such votes, perhaps joined by Voinovich and perhaps Hagel, thus causing the tactic to backfire."

The Next Hurrah details connections between nominee Henry Saad's wife, Mara Letica, and the SBVFT. "[A]fter all the protests by George W. Bush, his campaign and the White House about being shocked--SHOCKED--to learn about the Swifties' scurrulous attacks against John Kerry, and their denials about any associations between the Swifties and the Bushies, some enterprising reporter might want to ask Bush or Scott McLellan or somebody else at the White House what they think about the wife of one of his filibustered judges giving $10,000 to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth to help them spread lies about John Kerry's military service in Vietnam."

BUSH: It's Always Better, The Second Time Around

Righty Pejman Yousefzadeh agrees with Eric Pfeiffer's take that Bush's first 100 days went just fine, thank you very much. "To be sure, things could be going better for President Bush, but it is bizarre to claim that things are 'going wrong' for the President when he is able to pass so much of his legislative agenda already. There is more to success than poll numbers, you know."

Andrew Sullivan links to a Cato study on "the transformation of the GOP into the big government, big spending party of Karl Rove and George Bush" and concludes: "Despite promises, things are not improving."

Moderate Jeff Jarvis, on Laura Bush's act at the WHC dinner: "And, with horse dick jokes, I do think it was a message to the religious right: 'We need to lighten up.'" Conservative Michelle Malkin: "Most of Mrs. Bush's humor at the correspondents' dinner was just right: Edgy but not over the edge. But I think the stripper and horse jokes were totally beneath her. Just put it to the other-shoe test: If it were Teresa Heinz Kerry standing up on the dais telling the same jokes, the conservative commentariat would be buzzing for the rest of the year about what a tasteless skank she is."

CULTURE WARS: Will This Resuscitate The Issue?

Ace of Spades HQ, PoliPundit and others link to reports about a firefighter who has woken up from a "brain damaged state." Conservative Mark Coffey: "Hmm...remind me again why it was so important to starve Terry Schiavo to death?" "Ace" can't resist a Michael Schiavo dig.

A few liberal blogs took note of FL Gov. Jeb Bush (R) declining to appeal a court decision allowing a 13-year-old girl to have an abortion. Liberal Amanda Marcotte: "Maybe he realizes there's just no way to appease the crowds that have their torches out and are fully prepared to righteously ruin another person's life, after Michael Schiavo managed to wriggle out of their grasp." Conservative blog WizBang noticed that the young girl had been in state custody for 4 years and opines: "Hillary was wrong. It doesn't take 'a village' to raises a child. It takes responsible parents. When the government can figure out how to fill all the potholes and eliminate crime, THEN maybe we can discuss them raising children."

Right Wing News also took note of the FL story, and in a separate post, offers simple advice for Dems who want the support of religious voters: "1) Like religious people. 2) Come across as genuinely religious, not as just using religion for political gain. 3) Support positions that are important to religious people. Is that really so difficult to figure out?"

DEMOCRATS: Talking Strategery

Liberal Oliver Willis gives some free advice for the '06 midterms: "Whether you're a challenger or an incumbent, you're running against the Washington Republicans and their total inability to work for America. The Washington Republicans are everything we hate about politicians - partisan, greedy, and elitist. ... Democratic candidates are not running against George Bush, but the combination of George Bush and the Washington Republicans. They are all part and parcel of the same inside-the-beltway malady."

Liberal Chris Bowers: "I have been called clueless for, among other things, demanding the Democrats run someone for all 435 House seats, every single time. This developing "scandal" about Rep. Bob Sherwood (PA-10) is but one example of why those who think this is a bad idea are the real idiots."

Matthew Yglesias, guest-blogging at Talking Points Memo, comments: "If there's no way to sell a particular good idea, then you put it on the back-burner and look at something else. What you don't do is have the political people figure out what the public wants to hear and then go have the politicians adopt whatever that happens to be as the talking point du jour. That leads to the sorry spectacle I've seen on C-SPAN in recent weeks where you have Democratic congressman up there pretending that somehow a Democratic administration could magically make gasoline cheaper or force China to solve our economic problems for us." He then offers some advice for tackling SocSec, which he's been discussing quite a bit in his stint at TPM.

Liberal blog Daily Howler wasn't too pleased with Nancy Pelosi's discussion of SocSec on ABC's "This Week." "The House Dem leader was hugely incoherent." Details follow.

DELAY: What's Good For The Goose ...

Reports that Dems also have benefited from trips paid for by Jack Abramoff didn't go unnoticed. Captain's Quarters: "The attempt to ensnare House Majority Whip [sic] Tom DeLay in ethics violations may be backfiring on House Democrats, whose own ethical closets have a skeleton or two making an appearance. ... No wonder DeLay wanted the ethics probe to continue. At this rate, he may well neutralize ten or twenty representatives on the other side of the aisle before anyone lays a glove on him." A number of righty blogs link back to this post, or raise the same point (Lorie Byrd).

Little Green Footballs links to a RightMarch.com story, which claims "the people running the big search engines are liberally biased, too -- and they're CENSORING conservative search ad results! A Google search of "Tom DeLay" yields many anti-DeLay sponsored links. "So, we took the time and spent the money so that our PRO-DeLay ad would show up too -- first." They copied an ad posted by the DCCC, but substituted "Tom DeLay" with "Nancy Pelosi." The site claims Google censored the ad, claiming that "Google policy does not permit ad text that advocates against an individual, group or organization." RightMarch urges readers to join their "media blitz" to alert outlets of the supposed Google bias.

BLOGGERS VS. THE MSM: Terry, Terry Bad

Hugh Hewitt takes to task WaPo's Terry Neal for his 5/3 story on the filibuster, saying the story "was straight from the Democrats' talking points." Neal wrote: "Eleven years ago, when Republicans were still in the minority, Sen. Orin [sic]Hatch (R-Utah) said the filibuster tool should be used because 'the minority has to protect itself and those the minority represents.'" That quote is offered by the People For The American Way. But that edited quote, "denied its context, is used to completely the opposite effect that Hatch i