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 May 26, 2005 12:00 PM
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.
