7/26: HRC, DLC, Baby, You And Me!

July 26, 2005 12:31 PM | Permalink |

Note for web readers: At the risk of turning the Blogometer into a see-saw of a web column, today we're putting the regular Blogometer up top, and the SCOTUS Special at the bottom. To go directly to the SCOTUS coverage, click here.

The Hotline's Blogometer takes the daily temperature of the blogosphere.

In recent days, liberal bloggers have been asking a variation on a question made famous during Watergate -- what did Pres. Bush know about Valerie Plame's CIA classification and when did he know it? Now, conservative bloggers are expecting Senate Jud Cmte Dems to ask another question reminiscent of an earlier era -- is Judge John Roberts now or has he ever been a member of the Federalist Society? Both may well be soon-forgotten tangents to the SCOTUS confirmation and leak investigation. Yet in partisan battles such as these, one can never be sure.

The Blogometer noted yesterday that discussion about the investigation's Karl Rove angle seemed poised to slow down considerably, and today this is all the more apparent. Several widely-read conservative blogs have now expressly sworn off all coverage of minor developments, and even liberal bloggers find themselves talking more about the OH 02 special election, the labor split, the DLC meeting, and Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA). The Patrick Fitzgerald investigation issue is far from dead, but the Rove aspect has moved to the back burner while other tangents move forward. The announced Senate Intel Cmte hearings related to the matter are already attracting comment from both sides, and the reputation of an ex-CIA official and WH critic is coming under scrutiny from conservative bloggers.

Today's edition also features the results from a poll testing WH'08 GOPers' popularity, plenty of harsh words for the DLC (and Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) by association), and our latest Blogger Spotlight.

DLC: Don't Go Chasing Waterfalls

At the DLC meeting in OH last p.m., HRC called for a "cease fire" between the liberal and centrist wings of the party. At Daily Kos, Markos Moulitsas scoffs: "Please. The DLC has always been at the forefront of intra-party mud-slinging. They're just finally being called on it ... If she wanted to give a speech to a centrist organization truly interested in bringing the various factions of the party together, she could've worked with NDN. Instead, she plans on working with the DLC to come up with some common party message yadda yadda yadda. Well, that effort is dead on arrival. The DLC is not a credible vehicle for such an effort. Period."

A number of left-leaning bloggers are similarly down on the DLC, its goals, its net effect, and so on. Dem activist David Sirota: "Instead of working to debunk these right-wing stereotypes, these insulated Beltway snobs seem to only feel relevant if they reinforce the right-wing stereotypes parroted by Fox News and the Republican Party. It just shows that for Democrats who want to win -- and not just preserve their status on the Washington cocktail party circuit -- the DLC is really part of the problem, not the solution." Hullabaloo's Digby responds to DLCer Will Marshall's contention that the left has rejected traditional patriotism, and needs to embrace it. Digby disagrees: "I don't know who he's talking about. We all have the same frame of reference as everyone else who has lived in our time. We live in the new reality too and we've come to grips with it -- we simply don't agree with their prescription for dealing with terrorism and it has nothing to do with Vietnam or patriotism."

MyDD has a message for Dems challenging Clinton in WH'08: "You cannot possibly hope to challenge her by somehow out-DLCing her. Your only option is going to be to look to outside sources of power within the Democratic Party that she would not have a stranglehold over, such as labor and the netroots."

RedState's Charles Bird opined on HRC's move: "This is smart politics on Hillary's part ... Joining the DLC will allay concerns of moderate Democrats. If she can develop an agenda and at the same time bury the hatchet a little with hardliners such as moveon.org and dKos, this can help maintain her prominence." Conservative Professor Bainbridge doesn't think she can pull it off: "Fortunately, I don't think this attempted coronation is going to sit well with the Deaniac wing of the Democrat party."

DLCer Marshall Wittman posts to his Bull Moose Blog from the meeting in OH, prior to the critical posts referenced here. He praises the Dems assembled, calling it them the "future of progressivism in America." Writes Wittman: "The Moose avers that netroots are fine but grassroots are finer."

INTEL HEARINGS: You're Nobody Until You're Leading An Investigation

At TPM Cafe, site founder Josh Marshall notes that Senate Intel Cmte chair Pat Roberts (R-KS) "has announced that he'll begin an investigation not into the origin of the Niger forgeries or the outing of Valerie Plame, but into Patrick Fitzgerald's on-going criminal probe." Marshall: "Still more the matter with Kansas." Daily Kos header: "GOP to investigate Fitzgerald"

Center-left Brendan Nyhan questions Marshall's implication that Roberts is doing the political bidding of the WH: "This is close to an accusation of obstruction of justice. And Marshall has no proof; he just asserts that the White House is involved. Didn't Democrats used to object when the GOP acted like this during the Clinton years?"

Conservative Tom Maguire: "Since the chairmen are Republicans, these may not be the most comprehensive probes in the history of Washington." However, with Oliver North in mind, he adds, "a dramatic witness can derail the most careful stage management. Hmm -- whom might the Dems attempt to cast in this role? No, Joe, put your hand down, we are looking for a fresh and at least potentially credible face. Valerie? The nation would tune in, certainly..."

The Mahablog: "'Scuse me for being jaded, but where Republicans are concerned I do look for an angle. I expect the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence will be careful not to address the Rove-Plame issue specifically. We'll see."

ROVE: Going On Strike Until Headlines Improve?

A front-paged diarist at Daily Kos headlines a post: "The SCLM Headline We've All Been Waiting For: 'What Did The President Know?'" (Note: SCLM stands for "So-Called Liberal Media".) The 7/25 column by the Washington Post's Dan Froomkin carries the above-mentioned Watergate-era question. The diarist quotes from the Froomkin column, and adds: "Thank you Dan Froomkin, for putting it out there. His White House Briefing in today's washingtonpost.com is music to my ears."

QandO's John Henke writes, "I'm throwing in my hat" on the Plame investigation. "There's plenty of room for speculation, but there's also plenty of room for uncertainty. I'm happy to wait for the Fitzgerald Report, and I'd imagine I'll accept his conclusions with little problem. I've no particular love for any White House official, and I've little interest in protecting established wrongdoing." Right Wing News comes to roughly the same conclusion: "[U]ntil there's some actual news of substance to report, I've relegated the whole Rove/Plame story to the 'Dullsville file' and don't plan on putting everyone to sleep by pontificating endlessly on the newest minor details released to the press via anonymous leak..."

Liberal Daily Howler, on a David Von Drehle profile of Fitzgerald: "A brilliant, hard-nosed prosecutor who 'got his fill of rich and powerful people' as a youth? If we were a leaker-gone-wrong in the White House, we'd be asking: Who hired this guy?"

Wizbang's Jay Tea: "A while ago, Kos over at Daily Kos decided to 'clean house' and get rid of a some of the slightly more insane barking moonbats that have taken up residence there." Tea links to a Daily Kos diary (via LGF) which compiles an extensive timeline for the careers of Rove, GOP operative Roger Stone, culminating with the Rathergate scenario, featuring an appearance by Jeff Gannon. The diarist aims to show that Rove, Stone, Karen Hughes and Dan Bartlett were responsible for disappearing Bush's TANG records and delivering bad forgeries to Bill Burkett.

ROVE II: What's More, He Was Also Cousin Larry From "Perfect Strangers

In a weekend post at RedState, contributor and Balloon Juice proprietor John Cole points out that some ex-CIA agents who signed a recent letter to the House leadership accusing the WH of outing Plame (hosted at Josh Marshall's Talking Points Memo (PDF)) also participated with controversial Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) in a 7/22 hearing where it was suggested that the Bush admin "ignored warnings or may even have had a hand in" the 9/11 attacks.

Other contributing RedStaters note that one is Larry Johnson, who has recently appeared on Marshall's TPM Cafe criticizing the WH (see 7/13 Blogometer). Then RedStater "Nick Danger" points to a 7/10/01 New York Times op-ed by Johnson, titled "The Declining Terrorist Threat" (which Danger had originally posted to FreeRepublic on 9/11/01). Now PNAC's Gary Schmitt has a story up on the Weekly Standard site, "Meet Larry Johnson," which draws largely upon this last fact.

At TPM Cafe, Matt Yglesias responds in particular the Schmitt article: "[T]he relevance of [the NYT op-ed] to Johnson's writing and speaking on the Plame case utterly escapes me. But of course it doesn't really escape me. This is 'slime and defend' at its best. Joe Wilson said some stuff that was politically inconvenient for the White House. So the White House had to say some mean stuff about him. ... Now Johnson comes along and says the right is making stuff up, so it's time to go after him. Simple as that."

Conservative Protein Wisdom, on the prevalence of CIA agents hostile to the WH: "Jesus. Does anybody have a tougher job than Porter Goss?"

OHIO 02: Can A Single Blog Post Constitue A Smear Campaign?

MyDD assesses on the OH 02 special election which the liberal netroots have been cheering on: "One month ago today, the Cincinnati Enquirer ran a story on the special election entitled "GOP counting on ads, Dems on shoe leather" ... Well, it is indeed true that [Dem Paul] Hackett is massively out-canvassing [GOPer Jean] Schmidt, but now Schmidt's financial advantage has been entirely wiped out. ... If you can't make it into the district to help canvass, his Act Blue page is on the verge of passing 3000 contributers (right now it stands at 2,982) and $150K (right now it stands at 148.3K). The netroots shave done an excellent job helping Paul out in this campaign."

Pro-Hackett OH 2nd blog quotes Schmidt adviser Eric Minmayer as commenting on Hackett's service in Iraq: "I understand that Hackett did not participate in combat at all. It is still dangerous over there as I can personally attest. Let's just not act as though we led marines in combat if we did not, okay..." The quote comes from Minmayer's blog.

At Swing State Project, Tim Tagaris has a roundup of coverage, and in a diary for Daily Kos, he calls it the "'Swift Boating' of Hackett."

Last p.m., Minmayer writes at his own blog: "Let's clear up the hornet's nest about Hackett's service in Iraq. Earlier today I sent an email to him asking direct questions" about the nature of his service. He lists the questions, and concludes: "Dear readers, I will post the reply, when I get one. This is not disrespect, this a legitimate list of questions considering his ad implies he led marines in combat."

WHITE HOUSE '08: Does Romney Have Actual Supporters, Or Are Conservative Bloggers' Opinions of McCain And Frist Just That Low?

Over the weekend, conservative Patrick Ruffini hosted his 3rd WH'08 poll: "In February, it was a free-for-all with most potential candidates ('too hot'); last time it was a series of coldly calculating two-way matchups ('too cold'). For this one, I'm simulating a five-way between George Allen, Bill Frist, Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and Mitt Romney ('just right')." Results as of this a.m.:

     Candidate    Votes    %age
     Allen         2778    37.5
     Giuliani      2542    34.3
     Romney         886      12
     McCain         706     9.5
     Frist          434     5.9
     NA              62     0.8

Last p.m., Ruffini looked at the results (which were essentially the same), with a breakdown of preference-by-referring blog.

At The Corner, John J. Miller and K.J. Lopez both link to Romney's Boston Globe op-ed explaining his contraception bill veto, in which he states: "I am prolife." Lopez summarizes, "in essence, Romney's announcement he's not running for reelection and is running for president."

LABOR: Union Station

Lefty labor blogger Nathan Newman, on the labor split, at TPM Cafe: "[T]he effects of the disaffiliations will be that we'll see some experiments, probably now in both the remaining AFL-CIO unions as well as in CtW, on different organizing strategies. There may be some gains from some healthy competition and maybe some losses from repetition and wasted resources, but this is not some epic divide in the labor movement, like the old AFL v. Knights of Labor, AFL v. IWW, or AFL v. CIO fights." In all, he thinks "people are making too much" of the split.

Libertarian Vodkapundit speaks for many on the right re: the AFL-CIO breakup: "Unions had their time. Way back when, workers were treated as chattel, or worse. Unions gave a negotiating voice to those without one, and (sometimes) a mailed fist to hit back at the Pinkerton goons some businesses used to keep their workers oppressed. But those days are long gone, and so is most of the unions' utility. ... Would competition be good for the union movement? Undoubtedly. But it's also sweet, sweet justice for a particular labor union which tried to all but outlaw competition for labor, itself."

Citing the labor split and Roberts' relatively warm reception, among other issues, Viking Pundit declares: "What a great day to be a Republican. All of our traditional enemies are split, demoralized, and increasingly irrelevant..." PoliPundit's Alexander McClure says the same thing: "So, the AFL-CIO is breaking apart, and major Democratic donors in New York City are giving to Michael Bloomberg, as if he needs the money to win re-election. So much for the old Democratic theme song Happy Days Are Here Again."

But RedState's Mark Kilmer thinks it probably "shouldn't hurt the Dems"

SANTORUM: How Many Pointed Questions Did The Post Choose To Leave Out?

Lefty Steve Gilliard on Sen. Rick Santorum's (R-PA) 7/25 Washington Post live chat: "The Post had NO questions about his getting a free ride for homeschooling his kids, his wife's lawsuit, the Schiavo fundrasing or his gay aide? Much less his rabidly homophobic comments. Why the hell not? They had ONE question about his blaming Boston for priestly pedophilia. Instead, people were treating his idiotic book like Dr. Phil wrote it. I wonder where the tons of hostile questions went, or did they just 'avoid' them."

TERRORISM: "The Metrics" Was Pretty Cool, But The Sequels Sucked

NRO's Mark Levin, at The Corner: "McCain, having thoroughly screwed up the financing of federal elections, is on to his next subject -- interrogating detainees. I have no problem with Congress's constitutional oversight authority, but legislatively spelling out the circumstances and conditions of interrogations, which McCain and others are now seeking to do, is a completely different matter. ... Issues arise during war that do not lend themselves to broad legislative mandates."

Mark Leon Goldberg at TAPPED: "Assuming -- and I'm going out on a limb here -- that a good metric for measuring the success of the global war on terrorism is the frequency of significant terrorist attacks worldwide, the dramatic increase of such attacks since 2003 implies to those who value empiricism that the Iraq War was a strategic blunder in the war on terrorism. Even if we were to smoke the Stephen Hayes pipe and believe that Hussein and bin Laden were full partners, that still wouldn't change the fact that the Iraq War has utterly failed to diminish the frequency and deadliness of Islamist-inspired terrorist attacks around the world. Might be nice to see the Standard acknowledge that."

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: Sassy!

Liberal hawk Roger L. Simon noted yesterday a.m. that CNN.com has featured most prominently the "accidental shooting" of a Brazilian man by London police, such that it "pushed the bombings themselves off their front page, as well as the subsequent bombings in Sharm el-Sheik in which many dozens were murdered (quite intentionally, not accidentally) by homicidal Islamists."

MISCELLANY: On The Hustings

In the 7/25 Blogometer we noted criticism of AEI scholar John Lott re: a canceled debate with the U. Chicago Federalist Society; over the weekend, Lott gave his side of the story at his blog, John Lott's Website.
Righty Michelle Malkin talked on the phone with PA LG Catherine Baker Knoll CoS Sal Sirabella, who was then drafting a letter of apology (which Malkin later posted) for Knoll's having disrupted the funeral of a Marine killed in Iraq (see 7/25 Blogometer). Malkin relates: "Sirabella read parts of the letter on the phone, and it will include boilerplate pablum about how Knoll "supports the troops" and is "sorry for the misunderstanding" ... Sirabella says that Knoll has no plans to make herself available for public comment about her obnoxious crashing of Staff Sgt. Goodrich's funeral. She will not hold a press conference. She will not take phone calls from the media. She will not address constituents who have complained or veterans who have protested. If Knoll thinks the letter is going to put things to rest, she clearly misunderstands the situation."
As the Times of London reports, the Guardian has fired journalist Dilpazier Aslam, who is the member of an extremist political party but did not disclose this fact before writing a controversial op-ed after the 7/7 attacks. As the Times notes, right-leaning UK blogger Scott Burgess is largely responsible for reporting the Aslam's affiliation. Burgess' first comment on the subject is here; his; last p.m., he provides a round-up of his own coverage here.

BLOGGER SPOTLIGHT: The Bowers Mission

Today the Blogometer talks to lefty Chris Bowers, who blogs at MyDD.

What is your full name?

Christopher James Bowers

What is your age?

Where did you grow up?

I grew up in Liverpool, New York, about two miles north of Syracuse, New York

Where do you live now?

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in University City.

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

I work as a blogger and a political consultant on labor/Internet matters. I have worked as a union organizer, but my experience in electoral politics is entirely at the volunteer level. I have never worked for the mainstream media.

When did you start blogging and why?

I started reading blogs in 2002 in order to look for information on the midterm elections. MyDD and Daily Kos were the first two blogs I found. I was immediately hooked because the amount of information on elections found there far surpassed mainstream media outlets. I started blogging for MyDD, which I still blog for, and Swing State Project, which I no longer blog for, on the same day: April 29, 2004.

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

That is a really tough question. I have a lot of posts that I am very proud of, but I suppose my all-time favorite might be "Gallup's Shame," which can be found here. The reason I chose this one is because around one week after I wrote this some of my friends began asking me questions like "do you believe Gallup has too many Republicans in their polls?" These tended to be my less politically engaged friends who never read my blog, and they had no idea I had played a big role in helping push that idea into the mainstream. A couple months ago my girlfriend made a comment like "well, if Bush is only at 45 in Gallup, then his approval must be much lower in reality," without knowing I had helped push that idea. It makes me feel as though I have contributed to the national discourse, if only in a small way.

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

Monday through Friday, I blog for at least eight hours a day, starting around ten and ending around six. Often I will also put in a few hours in the evening, usually looking for stories to write about the next day and moderating the MyDD community. On Saturday and Sunday I put in half days-around four to six hours. Overall, I probably blog for sixty hours every week.

I try to write longer posts than the average blog, I also try to produce a significant amount of original research, with less focus on The Big Story of the Day than the average blog. I produce around twenty-five posts every week, averaging a little over 1,000 words each.

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

Jerome Armstrong [of MyDD] is, and always has been, my favorite political blogger. This may sound like I am sucking up, but it is the truth. MyDD was the first blog I ever found, and it was always my favorite. I truly admire his grasp of politics, strategy, elections and organizing. Also, not only do we share the belief that the primary purpose of blogging is action and agitation, no other individual is more responsible for building the progressive netroots than Jerome. He is the progressive Blogfather.

As far as non-political blogs go, I choose Rob Neyer. He has completely changed the way I look at baseball.

Who is your favorite mainstream media columnist?

Matt Bai in the New York Times magazine is my favorite political writer in the MSM. If that doesn't count, I'll go with Grance Franka-Ruta, even if it irritates me that I am a year older than her. If she doesn't count, then I'll go with Frank Rich of the New York Times.

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

"The Daily Show"

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

New York Times, Washington Post, Yahoo News, and Google News. Until recently, National Journal as well, but I'm having trouble with my password.

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

I cycle through about fifteen or twenty blogs every day: Daily Kos, Political Wire, The Gadflyer, BOP News, Donkey Rising, Atrios, Washington Monthly, Talking Points Memo, Buzzflash, Billmon, Liberal Oasis, Oliver Willis, BooMan Tribune, TalkLeft, Seeing the Forest, and Swing State Project.

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

Around once or twice a week. Sometimes I read free ones on the subway, or buy the New York Times for trips on trains and planes.

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

I imagine that the MSM will continue to adopt certain elements of blogging, like having more bloggers come on as pundits, and having more of their columnists start blogs. At the same time, as blogs continue to draw away the hard-core political audience from the MSM and receive more credibility, I imagine that coverage of political news will continue to decline in the MSM. This will result in a blurring of the difference between inside and outside. Already, with the Republican Noise Machine, it is becoming difficult to tell the difference between "regular" and "alternative" news sources. My sense it that trend will only accelerate into a truly post-modern news landscape.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Four Years Hence

At Protocols of the Yuppies of Zion, "Asparagirl" writes, "I have not gone soft on the war on terror. But I have gone rather silent on it lately, and there are several good reasons ... chief among those reasons is the refusal to become a repetitive Cassandra. When you spend months writing long screeds about your views and fears about the war, about how widespread and terrible it could potentially become, about the emergent anti-Semitism on the Left being the cliched "canary in the coalmine", about Europe's vulnerable people and foolish leaders thinking they are magically safe from terrorism, about the delusional cognitive dissonance in the Arab Muslim world that both celebrates 'martyrdom' and simultaneously denies that its main perpetrators and victims are Arab Muslims, about the strain of self-hatred that runs through too much of the West, and so on, and so forth... well, why retype it all again when it just becomes that much more apparent three years later? The appeal of saying (or blogging) "I told you so" is universal, but no one really wants to be right about such gloomy, bloody things."

LEST WE FORGET: This Is Your Hearing!

At WuzzaDem, John Roberts' confirmation hearings turn into a game show. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), as a contestant on the "Dating Game": "Good morning, Judge. If I were a Tootsie Roll Pop, what would do to me if you wanted to get to my chewy Tootsie Roll center?" Actually, several game shows. We've already said too much.

° ° ° ° °

BLOGOMETER SPECIAL: Reds

What the blogs are saying about Pres. Bush's pick of John Roberts for the SCOTUS:

FEDERALIST SOCIETY: Witness

Under the header "Have You Ever Been a Member of the Federalist Society?" Volokh Conspiracy's pseudonymous Juan Non-Volokh posts a list of questions that Sen. Pat Leahy (D-VT) asked judge Edith Clement during her '01 confirmation to the Fifth Circuit. Among them: "What does it mean to be a member of the Federalist Society as a judge?" and "Do you share a judicial philosophy with the Federalist Society?" and "Did you consider resigning from the Federalist Society when you became a judge? If not, why not?" He later updates to note that some of Pres. Clinton's nominees were asked similar questions re: the ACLU.

Objective Justice hosts a blog post "carnival" for legal bloggers -- "Blawg Review #16"; for plenty of links to different thoughts on Roberts, his nomination, his background and likely impact, check it out.

PULPIT POLITICS: Opiate Of The Mass?

Liberal TAPPED's Jeffrey Dubner quotes from Jonathan Turley's LAT op-ed, which relates the story of Roberts telling Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) that he would "recuse himself" if the law "required a ruling that his church considers immoral." Dubner: "Oh, I don't see how that could be a problem. He'd only have to recuse himself from abortion and gay-rights cases... and maybe the death penalty... and perhaps pornography cases... and possibly questions of church-state separation... and, I suppose, poverty and social justice issues... and then there's the moral acceptability of war..."

Under the header "The Catholic Test Again?" Power Line's Paul Mirengoff comments on the same op-ed: "It's not just Federalist Society members and 'hangers-on' that some liberals would like to exclude from the Court; it's also Catholics who believe deeply in the teachings of their religion." Meanwhile, Power Line's Scott Johnson writes: "Some liberals would like to exclude from consideration for the Supreme Court anyone who belongs to, or has 'hung out with,' the main organization for conservative lawyers in the U.S. This is part of their ongoing effort, recent election results notwithstanding, to define the political mainstream as including liberals and moderates, but not conservatives."

SPECTER: He Is Haunting Conservative Bloggers

National Journal's Beltway Blogroll collects instances of conservative bloggers turning "a critical eye toward" Senate Jud Cmte chair Arlen Specter (R-PA).