August 04, 2005
8/4: Doing The After Math
Note: Because The Hotline is publishing four days per week in August, the next edition of the Blogometer will be posted on Monday, August 8.
Note for web readers: To go directly to the SCOTUS coverage (or what there is of it) click here.
The OH 02 special election is still on the minds of both liberal and conservative bloggers. On the right, several bloggers argue that Dem Paul Hackett's narrow defeat should not be taken as an indication that the Dems can make significant gains in the '06 midterms. Nevertheless, the left has already put its mind to building on the lessons of the race, identifying promising races and desirable candidates. Notable is one liberal blogger's harsh attack the DCCC for not fully supporting Hackett; he promises that the blogs will do their job for them.
Meanwhile, Pres. Bush's comments on the "war on terror" raise many an eyebrow, a fishy story in the Arizona Republic garners plenty of attention, and -- because this is our last Blogometer for the week -- we make note of some "Friday cat-blogging" on what is basically a Friday for us.
TRACKBACKS: It's Not So Much A "Bushism" As A "Bush Admin-ism"
Where the blog swarm is headed, who's taking part, and what they're saying:
- The Pentagon's attempt to relabel the GWOT (Global War On Terror) as the GSAVE (Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism) has been the subject of not a few recent blogger musings. But everyone has an opinion about Bush's reiteration that "war on terror" is still the operative phrase for him, if not the Pentagon, as covered by the New York Times.
>> A number of conservative/centrist responses can be filed away into the "Bush is right -- this is war" category: Mark In Mexico;, BuzzMachine; Althouse; Ace of Spades HQ; The Corner.
>> On the left, most responses fit into the "This admin. is full of morons" category: Skippy The Bush Kangaroo; Echidne Of The Snakes; Eschaton. To be fair, a few of the conservative responses fall into this category as well.
>> From the right: James Joyner: "I've never been happy with the phrase 'war on terror' because one can not eradicate a reaction with military force. Our enemy is not 'terror or even 'terrorism' but rather radical Islamists. Unless we find a way to rid the world of the madrassas and other breeding grounds for fanatics, terrorists will continue to multiply as their brothers are killed, much like Bush is right, though, that we are indeed at war and the alternative phrasing of Rumsfeld and Hadley does no better at capturing the essence of the fight while also being wordier and less elegant." · Orrin Judd writes, this is "why we Americans like the stupid ones to be president: clarity." · Balloon Juice: "Have I mentioned how much I hate the news in August?"
>> From the left: The Left Coaster's Steve Soto: "So, did anyone tell Bush what came out of these meetings of his own senior national security advisors that have been going on since January when this new language was cooked up? And how stupid are Andy Card and Stephen Hadley feeling now?" He also asks, "will Eric Schmitt and Thom Shanker of the New York Times go back and burn their sources who fed them the original crap that the new language 'reflects the evolution in Bush's own thinking'?" · Amygdala calls it the "Great War On Language": "Let me know what we're fighting tomorrow, okay? I gotta get some sleep."
MIDTERMS '06: The Dis(GOP)memberment Plan
Daily Kos diarist Superribbie lists the 25 most Dem-leaning CDs held by GOPers, meant as an initial guide for where to look for '06 gains.
In May, Swing State Project proposed MT state Senate Pres. Jon Tester (D) as its 1st '06 candidate to support, in his campaign against Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT). On 8/3 they remind their readers: "Watch this race, it is going to rock."
OH 02: Capped And Recapped
RedState recaps the race: "Hackett did not apologize for being a Democrat because publicly he never said he was a Democrat. Hackett criticized the President in small groups and nationally, but locally and in his ads he ran advertising making it look like he supported the President. Lastly, Hackett did not take a strong "Democratic message" into a Republican district. The only message he took was that he was an Iraq war veteran. In fact, while Hackett is vastly better looking than the Queen of the Damned look alike he ran against, at least with Schmidt it is clear from her website that she was a Republican. Hackett hid from his Democrat label."
Ex-Dem poli sci student Jonathan McPeak: "Mr. Hackett probably did as well as he did despite his rhetoric, not because of it. Even I could have been persuaded to vote for Mr. Hackett if he had not cursed at me multiple times when I met him at a debate last month ... Calling the President a chicken-hawk and a son of a bitch was rude, offensive and politically stupid. If Democrats had any clue as to how to behave like statesmen, they might not be out of power right now and Mr. Hackett might have won."
Volunteer Glenn Reynolds volunteers his thoughts at Instapundit: "Pundits and press always try to turn these by-elections into big leading indicators of the next election, but they're usually one-offs of no enduring significance. I think this was one of those." Reynolds, on why the conservative blogosphere didn't rally to Schmidt's cause: "Judging from what I read in a lot of blogs, I think that Bush's fair-weather federalism and general lack of enthusiasm for small government means that a lot of the base is less motivated."
DEMOCRATS I: The D-Trip Be Trippin'
DCCC exec. dir. John Lapp writes in a diary at MyDD: "I first want to thank Jerome Armstrong and Markos Moulitsas Zuniga for taking the time to come by" the DCCC. He adds: "On our website, by the end of the year, we will list every single Congressional District and those candidates who have the courage to file for Congress. And we will do our best to update it on a timely basis when new candidates have filed, with the latest contact information so that the grassroots and netroots can get involved." In the rather substantial post, he "challenges" the netroots to "help all Democrats. Get involved. Work hard. Donate money. Persuade. Motivate. Change minds."
>> Swing State Project's Bob Brigham responds in a comment below: "Right now, I think the DCCC is totally f---ing irrelevant (members of the media can quote me on that as some of your colleagues already have). ... The DNC is kicking ass with the 50 state strategy and the contrast between the DNC and the DCCC couldn't be clearer. If people want donate to some Fighting Democrats," he posts a link to BlogPAC. More Brigham: "I could really care less whether you get your act together, because as OH-02 showed everyone, we'll step up and do it ourselves."
Markos Moulitsas agrees with News Blog commenter James Powell, on what the progressive "litmus test" should be (noted in the 8/2 Blogometer). In full: "Does candidate 'distance himself' from the party and/or its leaders, or is he proud to be a Democrat? Does he talk like a bureaucrat or like a regular person? Does she make it clear that she opposes Bush and the Republicans? Does she back down when the corporate press/media or Republican pundits attack him, or does she stand by her words? Does he sleepwalk through the campaign, or does he act like he wants to win?" Adds Moulitsas: "Notice the complete lack of ideology."
AMERICAblog and Andrew Sullivan guest-blogger Franklin Foer ex-Speaker Newt Gingrich's comments in the Washington Post that Hackett's near-miss should "serve as a wake-up call" for the GOP. TalkLeft's Jeralyn Merritt: "Normally, I don't quote Newt Gingrich as an authoritative source. But I'm making an exception this one time..."
ROVE-PLAME-MILLER: Weren't The Liberal Blogs Going To Keep This Story Alive?
Liberal UCLA prof Mark A.R. Kleiman deems the following from the 8/3 New York Times a "smoking gun": "At one point, the aides were asked why [Time's Matt] Cooper's call to Mr. Rove was not entered in [WH dep. CoS Karl] Rove's office telephone logs. There was no record of the call, the person who has been briefed said, because Mr. Cooper did not call Mr. Rove directly, but was transferred to his office from a White House switchboard." Kleiman: "If you believe that explanation, I'll tell you another. Obviously, call logs aren't of any value unless all calls are logged: the whole point is to allow someone to say, months later, 'No, I know I didn't talk to X on that date; I've checked my call logs.' This reads to me like strong evidence that Rove and his crew knew at the time they were doing something they didn't want to get caught doing. In prosecutorese, that's called 'evidence of consciousness of guilt,' and it's extremely helpful in proving intent."
Under the header "Steal This Headline!" conservative Rove-Plame-Miller watcher Tom Maguire writes: "With a slow news month looming before us, enterprising journalists (and bloggers!) might be able to turn some of the following ideas into bylines": "Russert -- 'I Told Libby About Plame'"; "Joe Wilson Interviewed By Fitzgerald"; "Eason Jordan, formerly of CNN, Cooperated With Fitzgerald's Investigation"; "Conservative Journalist [NRO's Cliff May] Confirms Plame Spy ID Was Widely Known"; and "Former CIA Spokesman Documents Warning To Novak."
BLOGS VS. THE MSM I: Fall Of The Republic
Joe Gandelman at The Moderate Voice picks up the same Arizona Republic story as a number of other bloggers, explaining: "The American Center for Voting Rights Legislative Fund has issued a stinging report saying the Democrats were 'far more involved' in voter intimidation, suppression in the 2004 elections than Republicans." But soon after, Gandelman posted an update: "It turns out that there has been some controversy about this group itself perhaps being a GOP front group" -- a number of key officials were also BC'04 officials -- "The fact that this has been a controversy that goes back months certainly does CHANGE the context of its findings."
In fact, there has been some debate recently about ACVR's political objectives. As Memeorandum shows, liberal bloggers, including Jesse Taylor and The Brad Blog maintain it is a GOP "front group." Most conservative bloggers don't bother updating to note the controversy. Betsy Newmark does, and Ed Morrissey points out that a signatory to the report is a Dem consultant, Brian Lunde. For its part, the Republic removed the story (once available here) from its website; "Roger Ailes" digs up the Google cache of the Republic story. Brad Blog has a field day with it, rounding up other conservatives and news orgs. which ran the story.
BLOGS VS. THE MSM II: Sit And Spin
Think Progress is appalled that FNC's Bill O'Reilly said of the Gitmo detainees: "I don't give them any protection. I don't feel sorry for them. In fact, I probably would have ordered their execution if I had the power." Crooks and Liars has the video in WMV and QT.
Palestinian-American Harvard student Fatina Abdrabboh, who recently wrote a New York Times op-ed (much-derided by conservatives) about how her faith in the U.S. was restored when Al Gore picked up and handed back the car keys she had dropped while exercising on a campus treadmill, now has a less-optimistic op-ed in the Christian Science Monitor. Right-leaning James Chen comments: "Despite Al Gore's heroics, it may have been too little and too late to change Abdrabboh's mind about Americans. The pendulum has swung back towards her original view that Americans are, by-and-large, anti-Muslim." Chen bemoans the fact that "major newspapers like the New York Times and Christian Science Monitor continue to give a serial malcontent like Abdrabboh a channel with which to broadcast her distorted and truly paranoid views of American society. Her complaints about being watched and then ignored by non-Muslims -- all while living in the liberal enclaves of Ann Arbor and Cambridge -- are so trivial as to be laughable."
PULPIT POLITICS: I Believe In Angels ... Wah Wah Wah Waaah Wah (You Know, Like On Fox News)
Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum cites "outrage fatigue" as one reason why he didn't mention Bush's statement in support of teaching Intelligent Design along with evolution theory in public schools. He cites a few quotes from the WH'00 campaign, noting that it's nothing new. He adds: "Actually, what bugged me most about this whole affair was reading the faux outrage from Bush's conservative supporters in the blogosphere, as if they had no idea he felt this way before this week. Give it a rest, guys. ... You all knew what you were voting for when you put these guys in power. I'm happy to see you on the side of the angels here, but it's a little late to pretend to be shocked that the Republican leadership feels this way."
IN THE STATES: RINO-plasty
Univ. NV pres./NV GOV hopeful James Rogers is leaving the GOP. Lefty Hugh Jackson at the Las Vegas Gleaner is "taking credit," thanks to a 7/19 post, which first reported that Rogers had donated to Dems including John Kerry and Ted Kennedy.
Taegan Goddard finds a message (reproduced verbatim) from Amboy Duke Ted Nugent (R?) on his official website message board: "after as much gungho hardcore scrutiny, review & disecting as put forth toward any endeavor or consideration in my life, the Nugent family has decided that for a variety of reasons, I will not run for MI Guv in 06. We continue however to review ops for 2010 while maintaining upgrade pressure on all politicos for the very clear & obvious quality of life upgrades we have all listed here & then some. stay on course my friends. I am with you all the way."
BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Who's Who In The Blogosphere
Liberal Fables of the Reconstruction offers a clever, if acid "Conservative Blog Taxonomy." Targeted: Instapundit, Michelle Malkin, Power Line, Little Green Footballs, Captain's Quarters, Volokh Conspiracy, Hugh Hewitt, Dean's World, BuzzMachine, RedState. Liberals should find it very amusing. Conservatives probably will not.
INTRODUCING: The Adventures Of Barone Munchausen
Conservative analyst Michael Barone has launched a blog at U.S. News. He leads off with an interesting post explaining why the framers included an age limit to serve in the House and Senate.
THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Starry Night
Liberal DC blogger Kriston Capps, on the Basra murder of pro-war journalist Steven Vincent: "I was not kind to his work -- in fact, I have to own up to calling him a hack over a relatively insubstantial matter -- so it's with real regret I express my sympathies to Steven Vincent's family and friends in light of his tragic murder in Basra. Yes, it's too easy to cock off on a blog. Yet I don't think it's appropriate or even possible to consider all the morbid possibilities of this world when we do write about other people and their ideas. I don't feel particularly ashamed for using the word 'hack,' but I am sorry that I was wrong. Dying as a result of pursuing the truth is a display of integrity that should never be asked of a journalist."
LEST WE FORGET: Teenage Mutant Ninja Kittens
Catblogging (see Blogometer) is usually reserved for Fridays, but because we're on a short-week schedule this month, we present "The Kittays Can JUMP!" from the BruStru message board, an amusing photoset of feline acrobatics captured with a high-speed camera.
BLOGOMETER SPECIAL: 83 Pages, What Do You Get
What the blogs are saying about Pres. Bush's pick of John Roberts for the SCOTUS:
It took a day or so for people to read through Roberts' 83-page response to the Senate Jud Cmte questionnaire, but now the responses are starting to trickle in. The answers, released late 8/2, is available here.
Righty Carol Liebau, at Confirm Them is reassured that Roberts is, in fact, a conservative -- or was 20 years ago: "Here's hoping that Judge Roberts hasn't changed the vast majority of his views since his days in the Reagan Justice Department. But given their own shifts over the same duration, won't it seem a little silly for the Democrats to react like they've just discovered hidden writings of the antichrist?"
Conservative Power Line's John Hinderaker: "As has been widely reported, Roberts' answers include an essay in which he argues for 'modesty' and 'humility' on the part of judges. These paragraphs are worth reading because they give us a sense of what Roberts' style on the Court is likely to be, but it is hard to see how anyone could take issue with them. The Democrats are still trying, but they have yet to lay their hands on an effective weapon to use against Roberts."
Also at Confirm Them, conservative Pejman Yousefzadeh notes NARAL's criticism in a Washington Post story that Roberts gave "lawyerly answers" to some answers: "I admit to a few 'lawyerly' writings myself, but that may have to do with the fact that I am a lawyer. As is Judge Roberts. Having thought -- at least up until this point -- that 'lawyerly' writing was to be aspired to by lawyers, I have to say that I am at a loss to respond to this criticism."
Daily Kos' Armando notes that in the same Post article, Roberts is reported as having "approvingly quoted from a dissenting opinion by Justice Hugo Black in a 1965 court decision, in which the majority held that a Connecticut law forbidding the use of contraceptives was unconstitutional." Armando: "Roberts, unless he expressly states that he will not overturn Griswold and Roe, must be filibustered. There is no other way."
GAY RIGHTS: New Cause For Worry On The Right?
Among early reactions to the 8/4 Los Angeles Times report that Roberts did pro bono work on a noteworthy anti-discrimination case, this from Begging to Differ: "I'm starting to think that those who call Roberts the anti-Souter are just wishful thinking."
Libertarian-leaning McQ from QandO: "Seems to me, as I stated once before, that it is going to be almost impossible for anyone to take any sort of a campaign by the left to keep Roberts off the bench seriously. However, given the above information, I wonder what the reaction of the far-right (aka religious right) will be to this news?"
RELIGION: The Norm Show
At Balkinization, liberal Terrapin Mark Graber writes, "there may be a difference in the nature of Catholic opposition to abortion and Catholic opposition to capital punishment. Still, if Judge Roberts took his orders from the Pope, I suspect he might frequently vote differently than he actually does and will."
At NRO's Bench Memos, Gerard Bradley offers 2 "reasons why the hand-wringing over Roberts and religion is misplaced": "Does anyone doubt that if Roberts were pro-choice that we would not be having this discussion?" And: "Would someone please identify one moral norm that might be involved in some decision a Justice Roberts would be called upon to render, but that moral norm cannot be known by unaided reason? Does not John Roberts's own Catholic Church say of the norms that might be so implicated: They are written on the human heart? They are naturally knowable?"
CONFIRMATION: What's The Question?
A few liberal bloggers have started to suggest, or open discussion about, which lines of questioning should be part of Roberts confirmation hearings:
At CAP's Supreme Court Extra, ex-Justice John Paul Stevens clerk Eduardo Penalver points out that there should be "cert pool reports" available from Roberts' time as a clerk -- clerk-written memos advising whether or not the court should take a particular case -- and recalls that while such memos "should ideally be balanced and nonideological," sometimes "it mattered a great deal which case wound up with which clerk." He adds: "In light of the personal nature of the pool memos, a thorough reading of the memos Roberts wrote during his time at the Court would likely provide some valuable insights into his personal approach to the law. And, because they are just sitting in the Library of Congress, there's nothing that the Bush administration can do to block access."
Noting that liberal judges are comfortable with citing foreign court rulings on human rights whereas conservatives generally are not, liberal Mark Leon Goldberg at TAPPED writes, "the senators who will decide his fate could come close to determining the conservative cloth from which Roberts is cut by asking him if he sees propriety or value in citing foreign decisions in his own opinions."
From TPM Cafe: "To put it simply may Judge Roberts be asked whether he believes that adherence to the magisterium (or its infallible teachings) affects the health of his soul and his hopes of heaven? that certain/all of the Holy Father's solemn proclamations are infallible? that dissent from church doctrine is an act against the will of Christ Himself? E.J. Dionne, Jr., says questions may be asked. But what are those questions?"
DEMOCRATS: Always Let Your Conscience Be Your Guide
At TPM Cafe, Yale law prof Jack Balkin writes: "May a conscientious Democratic senator vote against Roberts? Yes, if he or she believes that appointing Roberts is likely to move constitutional law in a direction that the Senator believes is inconsistent with the best interpretation of the Constitution." More: "Things change, and someday, one hopes, the two parties will return to a less antagonistic relationship. But that happy day will not be hastened by Democratic acquiesence. The Democrats must earn reciprocity and respect through their resistance; otherwise the only peace they will obtain is through their total irrelevance."
INTRODUCING: Wire Post To Wire
Patrick Ruffini debuts a new service at his website: "SCOTUS Wire is an automated clipping service for the first blogged Supreme Court nomination in history. It aims to gather every news story and blog post on Judge John Roberts and lets you decide what's important." The feature is similar to his 2008 Presidential Wire, tracking stories from both the blogs and the MSM.
NOTES AND ERRATA
Questions, comments, reservations? Drop us a line at blogometer@nationaljournal.com.
Posted by at August 4, 2005 12:38 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.
