7/22: Implied Society

What the blogs are saying about the SCOTUS vacancy:

Most on the right initially shrugged off the Ann Coulter column criticizing Pres. Bush's selection of John Roberts for the open SCOTUS seat, but there is in fact an emerging subset of conservatives who are concerned about his conservative credentials. His lack of a paper trail put Coulter and some conservative bloggers on notice, and the widely-read "PoliPundit" (founder of the aptly-named PoliPundit) is alarmed by liberal Harvard law prof Lawrence Tribe's assessment of Roberts -- Tribe "does not recall Roberts as a political conservative" at Harvard. PoliPundit: "It'll be months, or even years, before we know if Roberts is just another Souter." This sets off an intense debate in the 135 comments that follow the post.

Moreover, the initial assumption of Roberts' membership in the Federalist Society has been revealed to be a mistaken one, and as we'll see below, there are a few concerns. Their qualms tidily mirror the nonchalance of many liberal bloggers, as noted in this space in recent days. The dissenters bear watching, but by and large Roberts has the solid support of the right.

FEDERALIST SOCIETY: Whoops!

As the Washington Post corrected on 7/21, Roberts is not a member of the conservative/libertarian Federalist Society, contrary to numerous previous reports. Bloggers comment:

• Right-leaning Southern Appeal's "JoelL": "By and large I am satisfied with the nomination ... However, I find it odd that at this point in his career we don't know more about where he stands." He updates later with news that Roberts is not a Society member, he adds: "Now I am a little more concerned."
• Conservative "Patterico": "It seems like yesterday that I was talking about how [Los Angeles Times'] David Savage often seems to get things wrong on the law and the judiciary -- to the detriment of conservatives, naturally -- when the Washington Post gets them right. (To be fair, the WaPo got this one wrong initially as well.)"
• Liberal Ezra Klein: "Both sides think, deep down, very secretly, that he's the sort of conservative they like, either an extremist or an impostor. Sounds much like Clinton, where New Democrats thought he was their boy, liberals though he was their boy, and he ended up being circumstance's boy. But were I conservative, I wouldn't be so relieved that folks in the know were flooding the airwaves with assurances."
• GOP Bloggers: "The immediate near-unanimity of the 'Right's' coronation of Roberts ushering in a new right-ward shift left me even more uneasy since all of this was based on ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE. Anytime I see potential group-think so quickly form, I recoil even further. ... Why do we give the money we give, lick the stamps we lick, write the letters we write, register the voters we register, relentlessly blog the critical messages we blog, and vote overwhelmingly the way we vote when there are just as many arguments to be made that we have just nominated the next David Souter as there are that we have nominated the next Antonin Scalia?"
• Conservative Power Line: "It is striking how little of John Roberts's thoughts on issues of concern to conservatives can fairly be deduced from his public commitments or comments. ... I wish we had more to go on, but I agree with Judge Roberts's former summer clerk. 'My best guess' is that Judge Roberts is one of us."
• Left-leaning Corrente calls the Post story "mysteriously unenlightening" and notes that membership is secret and identification with the Society is up to the member: The headline should read that Roberts says he isn't a member of the Federalist Society, or, even more precisely, can't seem to remember whether he was or not. Look, I don't care if Roberts lied to us. He's a Republican, so we expect that. But should someone with a memory that bad really be on the Supreme Court? Why, he might forget about the Bill of Rights! Oh, wait..."
• Economist Steve Verdon: "Everybody update your talking points."
• Liberal Blue Mass Group asks: "Is there something that bugs him about the Federalist Society? ... Did he just never get around to sending in his fifty bucks? Hard to say. But his non-membership does carry just a hint of a suggestion of the possibility that he's not the hard-core, team player, belt-and-suspenders right-wing activist that the Dobsonites so desperately want on the Supreme Court."

REPUBLICANS: Nah, He'll Do

Conservative WILLisms is less concerned, noting that his employers have given predominantly to the GOP, and Roberts' personal contributions have been to GOPers only. While "at least one" Dem may raise objection to Roberts' BC'00 contribution, this and other info "ought to put conservative Republicans somewhat at ease."

Hugh Hewitt: "I haven't gone back to check yet, but my guess is that the nomination of the relatively young William Rehnquist in the fall of 1971 was met with some hard-core conservative opposition..." He also expects Bush's next pick to be a better-known conservative, adding, "and when that happens, perhaps [Roberts skeptic] Fred [Barnes] will see that there was a plan: To put Roberts into the O'Connor chair, and Judge Luttig into the Chief's seat, both of which minimized out-of-the-gate opposition."

And RedState, which is organized as a 527, announces its formal endorsement of Roberts: "The Directors of RedState.org, Inc. urge the Senate to move forward promptly with the confirmation of John Roberts, give him a fair hearing, refrain from partisan hyperbole, and confirm him to the United States Supreme Court."

MISCELLANY: Dressed To Bork

Power Line's Paul Mirengoff asks, can Senate Dems "afford not to go after Roberts big-time? The key liberal interest groups aren't backing off. Yesterday, the president of NOW publicly compared Roberts to [Robert] Bork. These folks are "all dressed up," and the Senate Democrats may pay a price if they deny them "someplace to go."

Liberal blogger Micah Holmquist went up with a post originally titled "John Roberts should be questioned about his involvement in Iran-Contra" -- until he was tipped off that the John Roberts involved back then was not the same John Roberts. As per blogger etiquette, the post remains where it was, albeit struck-through to indicate the author knows the info is incorrect.

Right-leaning David Adesnik responds to Sandra Day O'Connor's take on Roberts -- "He's good in every way, except he's not a woman" -- at OxBlog: "I would have been much happier if O'Connor said that she can't stand John Roberts, but that what's between his ears matters far more than what's between his legs. If there is one institution in this country that should be protected from affirmative action, then the Supreme Court is it."

Bench Memos posts Sen. Chuck Schumer's (D-NY) list of questions for Roberts.

PrawfsBlawg: "While not approaching the florid prose of Justice Scalia, Judge Roberts' opinions have some interesting rhetorical characteristics -- amounting to what I might call the judicial version of 'compassionate conservatism.'" The style "consists in expressing demonstrative sympathy for the unfortunate 'victim' of official action, while at the same time proclaiming that no legal remedy exists."

GOSSIP: How Much Of This Tongue-In-Cheek? (P.S. This Is Why Bloggers Get A Bad Name)

Left-leaning Wonkette draws conclusions about Roberts' personal life based on the New York Times' Roberts profile.

• Univ. Madison-WI prof Ann Althouse writes, "the same notion crossed my mind. I do think the NYT piece was subtly constructed to plant this idea."
• In a widely-linked post late 7/20, Confederate Yankee noticed similar comments being made on liberal blogs about Roberts' family.
• Incidentally, this is the same profile that caused liberal Eschaton to deride the Times as "Pravda on the Hudson" (see 7/21 Blogometer).

FAMOUS LAST WORDS: Wet Blanket Alert

GWU prof Daniel Solove, at Balkinization: "We're really grasping at French fries, I think, to fuel our speculation over Judge Roberts. The only thing we can say for sure is that we have so extremely little to go on."

BLOGOMETER: Pretty Soon We're Going To Need A Flow Chart

Undoubtedly the biggest story this a.m. is a report by Bloomberg's Richard Keil that testimony before the grand jury by WH aides Karl Rove and Scooter Libby doesn't match up with testimony by reporters Tim Russert and Bob Novak. Libby says Russert told him that Valerie Plame helped send husband/ex-Amb. Joe Wilson to Iraq; Russert says this is not so. Rove says he learned of her from Novak, who gives a "somewhat different version" of the story. Rove's testimony also differs from that of Matt Cooper re: whether they discussed welfare reform during a key conversation. Liberal bloggers swarm to spread the news of these developments and attempt to figure out what it means. While many conservatives are focusing more on the John Roberts SCOTUS nod, others can't avoid mentioning the Bloomberg report.

Meanwhile, yesterday's Tube attacks and ongoing confusion cause many to think hard about terrorism; liberal bloggers discuss the OH 02 special election; plus, a right-leaning author makes waves on CNBC, and then in the blogosphere.

TRACKBACKS: Now Bloomberg Is The Popular One!

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

• CAP's ThinkProgress posted the full text of the Bloomberg article late last p.m. and, on a number of liberal blogs, gets primary credit for it. Plus, Raw Story scooped everyone else (including Matt Drudge, whose website still didn't have the news as of 9:00 this a.m.) with news that the Bloomberg story was coming. It's gloss is a bit different from Bloomberg's, heading their story: "Bloomberg reveals Rove, Libby gave false testimony." It's also similar to the Murray Waas story in the American Prospect, noted in this space on 7/20.
  
  

  >> Liberal Oliver Willis: "Sort of ironic, when you consider the GOP's past 'anger' towards those they considered to be lying under oath..." · Steve Clemons: "These guys took America into war and have relied on lies and deceit to accomplish much of what they have done. They are the most responsible for puncturing the mystique of American power, moral authority and status in the world. It is when America is showing its limits that allies will not count on us and enemies will move their agendas." · MyDD: "No matter what else happens, this will turn the media firmly and permanently against the White House. They clearly are trying to send reporters to jail to cover up their treason. The cliquish media will not forgive them for that."
  

  >> Conservative Kevin Aylward: "I'm still wholly underwhelmed by the story, but given the details that have emerged (and are likely to emerge), it's just about time that both Rove and Libby take one for the team and step down." · Decision '08 holds out for more info: "Clearly, somebody has perjured themselves (well, fairly clearly -- nothing's too clear in this thing), but who?" · At The Corner, Jonah Goldberg just notes: "Interesting."
  

  >> More reax, all from the left -- Echidne of the Snakes; Rising Hegemon; Daily Kos; Suburban Guerrilla; Political Forecast; Preemptive Karma; Max Blumenthal; onegoodmove; Jesus' General; Tennessee Guerrilla Women; Rubicon; TalkLeft; Dadahead.

ROVE: If You've Got A Modem, They've Got A Theory!

Inspired by a New York Times account of the INR report and the Iraq trip, Josh Marshall asks: "Ever wonder why George Tenet's July 11, 2003 mea culpa about the Niger uranium snafu seemed so protective of the White House? Maybe that was because it was written by Karl Rove and Scooter Libby."

JustOneMinute, the conservative blog following the Plame/Rove story most closely, states: "I believe there may be a substantial, ongoing press cover-up in the Plame leak investigation. Various White House staffers claim to have heard about Ms. Plame from reporters, but not many reporters seem to have been subpoenaed..." He cites a New York Times report that Russert told Fitzgerald that "he did not know Ms. Plame's name or that she was a CIA operative and that he did not provide that information to Mr. Libby." Pace parsing of Rove's statements, JustOneMinute wants to know: "[D]id Russert tell Libby that Joe Wilson's wife tapped him for the Niger trip, without giving a name? Did Russert say she was an 'analyst,' not an 'operative'?

Captain's Quarters thinks the evidence available makes it less likely the memo was the leaker's source, in part because "the memo referred to Valerie Plame by her married name, Valerie Wilson. She wasn't 'outed' under that name..."

RedState's "Leon H" considers the New York Times' account of whether Rove saw the INR memo: "I have been a fierce defender of Rove throughout this entire mess, but I have steadfastly maintained that if it turns out that Rove did learn of Plame's identity from classified sources, and did intentionally leak that identity to the press, I won't stand behind him. I'll not be dragged down to the level of James Carville, defending the indefensible on technicalities and throwing my own self-respect under the bus for the sake of my party." For liberals who might use the post "to make a ridiculous 'Republicans Jumping Off Rove's Bandwagon'" argument, he adds: "Rove denies having seen the memo, and I still believe him. If Fitz tells me differently I'll be the first to bite the bullet and demonstrate the difference between a Republican partisan and a Democrat partisan: I'll call for his resignation, rather than defending the indefensible."

NRO's Media Blog highlights instances from yesterday's widely-circulated Washington Post report on the INR memo marked "(S)" for secret (see 7/21 Blogometer). The article was co-written by the Post's Walter Pincus, whom Media Blog points out, "was one of the reporters who granted Joe Wilson anonymity so he could leak his lies about Niger and damage the Bush administration," and when the admin. "tried to tell Pincus that he'd been had -- that Wilson's wife had engineered the trip -- Pincus didn't write about it because ... he 'did not believe it true that she had arranged his Niger trip.'"

Anonymous Liberal weighs several possible scenarios to explain what is happening with prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation, suggesting that "someone is playing a very high-stakes game of chicken with" Fitzgerald, who "must be furious. Whoever it is is practically daring Fitzgerald to indict him/her. ... Rather, whoever it is may be gambling that, absent [Judith] Miller's testimony, Fitzgerald won't have enough evidence to prosecute and will therefore elect not to. That's a pretty big gamble." More: "It's also possible that Miller's source has come to the conclusion that an indictment is inevitable and is now attempting to minimize the possible evidence that could be used against him/her at trial."

A blogger at TPMCafe asks, in the header: "DID CONDI PUSH THE 'WILSON'S WIFE SENT HIM STORY'?"

TERRORISM: Different Worlds

• Ace of Spades HQ responds to shirts reading "I do not consent to being searched" -- which are themselves a response to reports that NYC will start searching MTA riders' bags (the shirts were also featured prominently at the Drudge Report) -- writing: "So, the lines are drawn on t-shirts. Some will refuse to acknowledge that people want to kill them, and will, whether deliberately or not, aid terrorists by causing problems in searching bags. Others accept the world as it is and have decided they'll do what is necessary to live." Confederate Yankee responds with T-shirts that say "I do not consent to being blown up"
• Jackson's Junction hosts video of Australian PM John Howard castigating a reporter re: the London attacks. A number of pro-war bloggers link; Instapundit calls it a "devastating response to dumb press questions about Iraq." Little Green Footballs calls it "brilliantly crushing..."
• Vanity Fair's James Wolcott notes the "dispute between Michael Kinsley and Mark Danner in the letters section of The New York Review of Books over the Downing Street Memos. Kinsley thinks they're of trifling importance. Danner disagrees. And sees in Kinsley's blithe dismissal a symptom of the press's failure to confront the deception and full dimensions of the Iraq debacle." Wolcott sides with Danner, and moves on to defend the notion that Britain's involvement in Iraq was a cause of the 7/7 bombings -- despite "official erasure attempts, the British people sussed out the fine mess Blair had helped get them into by attaching himself to Bush's missionary hip."
• Right-leaning GayPatriot notes the possible convergence of 2 big stories this past week -- the attempted 2nd strike on the Tube and the execution of 2 gay teenagers in Iran -- now Islamists have made threats against gay clubs in the UK. In an earlier post, Andrew Sullivan commented on the Iranian hangings, posting the photo now widespread across the blogosphere, of the 2 teens moments from execution: "I'm amazed that we haven't seen more targeting of gay clubs or venues by Islamist fanatics. And I'm saddened that more gay organizations haven't rallied to the war against Muslim religious fanatics."
• Liberal prof Juan Cole announces that he's "been trying to trace the influences on and organizational contacts of the July 7 bombers in London," and posts partial results of his research.

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: If Nothing Else, Bernie Gets The Blogosphere

Right-leaning The Political Teen hosts video of ex-CBS reporter Bernard Goldberg being "ganged up on" during a segment on CNBC's "Big Idea" to promote his book ""100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (And Al Franken Is #37)"; one was BuzzMachine's Jeff Jarvis, who writes that Goldberg "went bonkers" first, "snarling at" host Donny Deutsch "for no good reason." Goldberg's allies include conservative bloggers; Captain's Quarters contacted CNBC and notes that another "Big Idea" guest had a similar experience, concluding that Deutsch's show "has a history of this kind of Jerry Springer antics, and that those invited to participate in on-camera interviews on the CNBC show may want to reconsider." Left-leaning Crooks and Liars also hosts the video, and comments: "If I write a book attacking 97% liberals, I should expect serious grilling about the content by liberals." Captain's Quarters later points out for conspiracy theorists" that Goldberg's 7/21 appearance on "The O'Reilly Factor" marks his "ninth appearance on Fox since the release of his book..."

NRO's The Buzz: "What does Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank have against Texas Senator John Cornyn? For two days in a row, Milbank has published inaccurate or misleading statements concerning Cornyn and President Bush's Supreme Court nominee."

SPECIAL ELECTION: Can He Hackett?

Guest-blogging at Sirota Blog, Matt Singer notes, nat'l Dem orgs. are sending volunteers into OH 02 on behalf of Paul Hackett, and warns: "Here's a secret: no likes out-of-staters." The GOP "realizes this and has been building a neighbor-to-neighbor program across the country. Instead, we try to nationalize a Congressional race that is competitive because of localized ethics issues." He snarks: "We can only hope they give these out-of-staters orange hats."

Stygius: "For the sake of its own vitality, the Democratic party needs military veterans like Hackett. It injects the experience and perspective into a party needing to craft good national security policy. Unfortunately, this race has been way too far off the radar screen up til now, given it will be held on August 2.

MISCELLANY: If The BiMonSciFiCon Isn't Geeky Enough For You ...

• In Philly over Labor Day weekend, there will be Eschacon, a liberal bloggers conf. centered around blogosphere heavyweight Duncan "Atrios" Black, author of the blog Eschaton.
• NRO contributor Cathy Seipp partially transcribes an interview of Wonkette's Ana Marie Cox by Kausfiles' Mickey Kaus. Cox, responding to Columbia Journalism Review's description of bloggers as "a lynch mob of salivating morons": "I would call CJR thuggish prudes."
• The Operation Yellow Elephant campaign (see 6/21 and 7/7 Blogometers), started by liberal satirist Jesus' General, is profiled in Seattle's The Stranger.
• Daily Kos and MyDD both gloat about Rep. Katherine Harris' (R-FL) slow fundraising start for her SEN '06 bid. Kos: "That's gratitude for you, GOP style. You steal an election for them, and this is how they repay her." MyDD: "My only worry now is that she won't be the Republican nominee."
• Centrist Andrew Sullivan, on the Sudanese gov't roughing up NBC's Andrea Mitchell: "She asked the right question. [Sec/State Condoleezza] Rice did right. I think we know what that thuggish government is about. If they do this to the entourage of the secretary of state, can you imagine what they do to domestic dissenters?" Liberal Marc Cooper snarks: "Let the Sudanese government be warned: In the view of the U.S. government, killing 200,000 people in Darfur and displacing another 2 million or so is one thing. But roughing up NBC's Andrea Mitchell? Well, that is quite another!"

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Even Worse Than Illinois Nazis

Vic Matus, at Galley Slaves: "At last night's sweltering game against the Colorado Rockies, some four seats down from me sat an older fellow, a white male probably in his 60s, overweight, and wearing knee supports. As I scooted past him to get to the aisle, I noticed a small tattoo on his lower leg. It was greenish blue in color, no thicker than a Sharpie. But there was no mistaking what it was: a swastika. 'That's a prison tat,' said one of my colleagues. I guess everyone has their favorite team, even a member of the Aryan Brotherhood. But I also couldn't help hoping he and his buddy would get lost somewhere in Northeast Washington after the game."

LEST WE FORGET: Now That You Mention It, "Twisting Your Mind And Smashing Your Dreams" Does Describe A Lot Of Philosophical Thought ...

At Crooked Timber, philosophy prof Harry Brighouse notes a Humboldt State call for papers on Metallica and Philosophy:

"Possible themes and topics might include, but are not limited to, the following: Search for Meaning -- 'Frantic' and 'Through the Never'; Nuclear Fear and Politics -- 'Fight Fire with Fire' and 'Blackened'; Capital Punishment -- 'Ride the Lightning'; Politics, Economics, and Ethics -- '...And Justice for All' and 'Some Kind of Monster'; The Problem of Evil -- 'Creeping Death'; Alcoholica: Free Will and Addiction -- 'Master of Puppets' and 'Fixxer'; Appearance and Reality -- 'Enter Sandman' and 'Escape'; Foucault and Metallica on Madness and Insanity -- 'Sanitarium' and 'The Frayed Ends of Sanity'; Truth -- 'Eye of the Beholder'; Hypocrisy and Inauthenticity -- 'Leper Messiah' and 'Holier Than Thou' ... Selling-Out, Commercialism and Marxism: Why did Metallica start making videos?; Napster and Intellectual Property; Group Identity and Personal Identity: Are the group members the same persons they were 20 years ago? Is it the same group it was 20 years ago, given the changes the members have undergone and given the changes in bass players?"

Brighouse comments: "I thoroughly approve of the Pop Culture and Philosophy series, but would have to rule myself out of this one."