September 16, 2005

9/16: Tough Crowd

Pres. Bush's speech last p.m. is not getting universal praise from conservative bloggers. While many applaud his tone and regained presidential aura, some are troubled by the big-gov't approach and other aspects of his speech. Liberal bloggers didn't tune in as many numbers, and the angle they're pursuing is a one-line report in the 9/15 New York Times stating that WH dep. CoS Karl Rove is "in charge" of N.O. rebuilding efforts.

Meanwhile, there's a lot going on that isn't related to Katrina. The FEC has announced that it will hear strategist Roy Temple's argument that his blog should receive the same exemptions as MSM outlets. There are a few new developments in the Able Danger case, and possibly one in the ongoing imprisonment of New York Times reporter Judy Miller. An ABC News reporter was apparently surprised by the pro-Bush post-speech reactions of some New Orleans evacuees. And there's even a bit of talk about SCOTUS nominee John Roberts.

BUSH SPEECH: Shirt Cuts

A round-up of blog reactions:

• Radio talker Hugh Hewitt: "Perfect pitch returned tonight, and the president's looks backward and forward were on target."
• Syndie columnist Michelle Malkin: "Maybe it's just me, but isn't there something tacky about having the leader of the free world reading a phone number from the teleprompter? Also, it's been three weeks and they're only now publicizing a number for Katrina families looking for missing relatives?"
• Conservative JustOneMinute's Tom Maguire: "Watching Bush's speech, my jaw dropped when he said that he was ordering the Department of Homeland Security to undertake an immediate review of emergency plans in every major city in America. What has been happening before now?"
• Liberal AMERICAblog calls it a "lead balloon speech" and cites an AP story titled "Viewers Skeptical Over Bush Speech": "The photo-op president just isn't getting the response that he used to get these days. After so many lies for so long, people either don't believe him or take a wait and see attitude."
• Libertarian Matt Welch liked the speech, and writes: "I also find it enduringly interesting that Kanye West really did seem to get under Dubya's skin."
• Headline by right-leaning Matt Szabo: "President Bush's Way-Too-Large Shirt Reinforces Small-Man Image." Kicking off an open thread, RedState's Erick Erickson notes: "His shirt blends in with the background lighting color." California Mafia asks, "isn't it protocol to wear a suit when you address the nation?"
• Lefty Steve Gilliard: "Watching Bush's speech tonight, I realized that there is no chance he will recover his presidency. His speech was a list of gifts, but lacked an element of responsibility, contrition. The true art of leadership is sacrifice."
• Ex-RedStater Josh Trevino: "Tax credits for rebuilding is okay. Urban homesteading is okay. The rest of the President's address from New Orleans? Everything one has come to fear within the past five years."
• NRO's Jonah Goldberg has a similar take: "[I]t sure sounds like we're heading for a really Great Society."
• Power Line: "You can call it FDR/LBJ liberalism, big government conservatism, or compassionate conservatism. I call it American-style pragmatism."

From the left as well as the right, some suggest Bush's speech will have a limited impact:

Democracy Guy's Tim Russo: "I didn't watch the Bush speech last night. I bet a lot of people who normally watch such things didn't this time. The collective disgust at this man deigning to speak to the country about his latest incompetence is almost palpable in the air. Hurricane Katrina will be a benchmark event in American history, for so many reasons. One of the most immediate is the utter liberation of criticism of the Bush administration. The endless deference to George W. Bush after 9/11 is finally at an end." Conservative Captain's Quarters: "Bush's uplifting speech, designed to inspire the confidence of the people most affected by the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, may have less effect than he hopes. He delivered it well and introduced intelligent plans for renewal, but" according to the Washington Post, "half of the New Orleans evacuees appear to have decided not to go back regardless of the circumstances." More: "If their allies do not return to New Orleans, they may lose the state to the GOP. Expect that possibility to fuel the Farrakhanish rumors that the Republicans bombed the levees on purpose to gentrify New Orleans, and the Democrats to continue their descent into Howard Dean nuttiness."

ROVE: The Unofficial Czar?

On 9/15 the New York Times' Elisabeth Bumiller and Richard Stevenson wrote, as the Washington Post's Dan Froomkin quoted from their story: "Republicans said Karl Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff and Mr. Bush's chief political adviser, was in charge of the reconstruction effort."

Josh Marshall has a caustic take on the speech: "Let's see. What was the problem with Michael Brown exactly? Let's see. No expertise or experience for the job. Got the gig because he was pals with Bush's political fixer. Also a political loyalist. So to learn the lesson and get back on track, to run the recovery, President Bush picks Karl Rove. That's great." He adds: "This is how repressive governments operate -- mixing inefficiency with authoritarian tendencies. You don't repair disorganized or incompetent government by granting it more power. You fix it by making it more organized and more competent. If conservatism can't grasp that point, what is it good for?" Over at Daily Kos, Hunter picks up on Marshall's 1st point and seems to think it means Rove has operational authority: "The person who is being placed in charge of the Gulf Coast rebuilding effort, in the wake of stunning government bungling of a national disaster due to political patrons who had no expertise in their ostensible 'duties' for which they were collecting paychecks: yes, Karl Rove. And apparently, nobody in the media has a problem with this..." The DNC played up this angle in a release last p.m., quoting the Times. Arianna Huffington sarcastically writes: "I love how the news that Karl Rove has been placed in charge of the reconstruction effort was buried in the ninth paragraph of a twelve paragraph New York Times story on Bush's big speech."

The nature of Rove's involvement has yet to be cleared up; based on the news clips going into the Bush section of today's Hotline, no one else has reported this.

KATRINA RESPONSE: Lingering Complaints

Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum notes Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) hinting he wouldn't extend Bush's tax cuts absent spending cuts, and comments: "Griping about spending is one thing, but when they start suggesting they might hold the line on tax cuts, it's clear that some serious rebellion is in the air."

More reax on the New York Times interview with ex-FEMA dir. Michael Brown: Right Wing News's John Hawkins (who as yet seems to have escaped the worst of Ophelia) summarizes Brown's assessment as that his "biggest mistake was not immediately realizing how incredibly incompetent the locals were in Louisiana, especially" LA Gov. Kathleen Blanco (D).

Michelle Malkin disagrees: "[L]et's face it: FEMA's performance under Brown was a joke. Just read [the NYT interview]. Start with his admission that he did not ask for federal active-duty troops to be deployed to New Orleans on the night of Monday, August 29, because 'he assumed his superiors in Washington were doing all they could.'" She cites other "clueless public comments" and mistaken judgments by Brown.

ROBERTS: All Over But The Countin'

Instapundit is troubled by CJ nominee Roberts' regulationist answer to a hypothetical question from Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY). According to Roberts according to Reynolds, "everything is subject to regulation under the commerce power. That it's a good answer as far as Schumer is concerned doesn't surprise me, but that it's the answer of a Bush nominee to the Supreme Court is damning, if not terribly surprising -- for the Bush Administration. Fair-weather Federalism, indeed."

Confirm Them posts a "must-read" wrap-up memo from Roberts allies Leonard Leo, Wendy Long and Jay Sekulow. They write, Roberts "hit it out of the park" in his testimony and will be confirmed, but "we have no expectation that the margin of victory will be very generous."

TAPPED's Jeffrey Dubner: "What, specifically, does Roberts agree with in Griswold v. Connecticut? It's been taken for granted that he agrees with the whole decision. But I really don't think this is what he said. .. [I]f I'm right, it's very unfortunate that no Democrat simply asked: 'Is the right to marital privacy a fundamental, constitutional right? Is contraceptive use an incontrovertible element of that fundamental, constitutional right?'"

Liberal MyDD wants 41 Dems to vote against Roberts to "make it clear we will not tolerate another stealth candidate who ducks and dodges endlessly. That is a number that will make it clear that we will not tolerate someone in the mold of Rehnquist, Thomas or Scalia in replacing O'Connor. ... The march of progress must not be reversed. The Congress must be allowed to engage in social investment."

Volokh Conspirator Erik Jaffe: "I am struck ... at the complete disconnect between the criticisms of many of those opposing Judge Roberts and a cogent view of the role of the courts. It seems that many of the criticisms are policy based -- x or y rulings would lead to bad RESULTS -- and make no reference whatsoever regarding whether such results are in fact the correct interpretation of the law (or the Constitution)."

A bit of backfill: On 9/13, Kevin Drum wrote: "I haven't been blogging about the John Roberts hearings, and I feel like this makes me a bad blogger. The thing is, the hearings are so obviously a Kabuki dance that I just can't get excited about any of the details. Is there anyone who seriously thinks that Roberts will sustain any damage during the hearings or that he won't sail through confirmation?" Daily Kos' Armando objected: "The Supreme Court of the United States has been the bulwark of the defense of citizens against the abuse of government. And has been for decades. Not interested in the details? ... Oh by the way, you know there is another appointment coming? To be honest, Drum's statement is reprehensible. Fine, don't blog about it. That's his prerogative. But to pretend it does not matter? Utter bullshit."

BLOGS VS. THE FEC: Push It To The Limit ... Walk Along The Razor's Edge

Late this summer, blogger and MO Dem consultant Roy Temple requested an advisory opinion from the FEC about whether his Fired Up! America website may be treated as a press entity and entitled to the standard protections. (For a summary of the request, see this Daily Kos diary from 8/24.) There now begins a 60-day period for interested parties to submit comments.

On 9/15 the FEC accepted the request, which is available on the FEC website, listed as AOR 2005-16 (PDF). The full request is 34 pages; for what it's worth, a reproduction of the Blogometer's 9/9 edition (we actually noted Temple's initial request on 9/8).

Ex-FEC staffer/FEC watchdog Allison Hayward observes, "the additional information says that Fired Up! is an LLC taxed as a partnership, and the partners are individuals. If that is the case, there's a nuance that possibly relieves the FEC from answering the press exemption question squarely. Partnerships may make contributions and expenditures -- and can make independent expenditures. They aren't banned under 441b like corporations and labor organizations. So, it would seem to me that independent commentary would be allowed (perhaps reportable) without reference to the press exemption, and coordinated commentary would be limited by the value of the contribution limit -- presently $2100 per election."

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: Not What The Framers Intended

A number of conservative blogs are buzzing about an ABC News segment that appears to not have gone as planned. News Busters reports: "ABC News producers probably didn't hear what they expected when they sent Dean Reynolds to the Houston Astrodome's parking lot to get reaction to President Bush's speech from black evacuees from New Orleans. Instead of denouncing Bush and blaming him for their plight, they praised Bush and blamed local officials." The Political Teen has the video. He notes, "Around the 17 second mark you can tell Reynolds cut her off to ask her another question because he was unhappy with the result." PoliPundit's Lorie Byrd has a round-up of reactions from conservative blogs.

Citing a report by OJR's Mark Glaser, Jeff Jarvis is appalled that the Pulitzer board is equivocating on whether they'll consider the Times-Picayune's post-Katrina related reporting. Pulitzer standards require journalism to be printed to be eligible, but the T-P had no printers to work with at the time and produced unique work online. An exasperated Jarvis: "Don't you just want to take them by the shoulders and shake hard and shout in their faces: Wake up! Your audience is online and you're not! ... You are not serving the public where the public is! You're fiddling with your rules and nobody but you gives a damn!"

ROVE-PLAME-MILLER: Judy Who?

Arianna Huffington: "Further confirming a shift in the New York Times' official thinking on the Judy Miller case, Exec Editor Bill Keller has let it be known" -- speaking at a CUNY discussion panel featuring Time editor Norman Pearlstine and Miller atty Floyd Abrams -- "that he is no longer 'an absolutist' when it comes to revealing the name of confidential sources. ... "The Times' new absolutist-lite strategy affords Miller the wiggle-room she needs as she tries to cut a deal with Fitzgerald. The question becomes, will the neocon sources she threw her lot in with give her the fig leaf waiver she is looking for?" Huffington picks up this bit from Jeff Jarvis, who live-blogged the event.

ABLE DANGER: Post Hoc Able Danger Hoc

Captain's Quarters writes, despite 5 "eyewitnesses to the Able Danger project who now insist" that it identified Atta, "the 9/11 Commission has publicly asserted that the program did not produce any such analysis" because there are no verifiable documents.

PoliPundit's Jayson Javitz quotes from the AP -- "A Pentagon employee was ordered to destroy documents that identified Mohamed Atta as a terrorist two years before the 2001 attacks, [Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA)] said Thursday." -- and comments: "I can't help but wonder what was written in the margin notes of the original documents Sandy Berger purloined from the National Archives and then destroyed. I have a sneaking suspicion the names 'Gorelick' and 'Cohen,' perhaps even 'Clinton,' might have been there."

DEMOCRATS: Singled Out

Markos Moulitsas, a frequent critic of interest group politics, applauds a Mark Schmitt American Prospect piece declaring the demise of single-issue politics: "Defenders of certain groups will be quick to charge, 'Kos attacks NARAL, so he's 'anti-woman'', or 'Kos attacks HRC, so he hates gays.' Fact is, those groups were created for a governing system where progressives had some measure of power, and those constituency groups could lobby for their causes in the halls of government. ... That formula doesn't work in today's political environment. And we won't have a governing majority until the energy expended in pursuing pet interests gets redirected toward getting Republicans out of power and getting Democrats -- even some of the imperfect ones -- elected to replace them." He adds, there is a "clear generational divide between people who came of political age in the 60s and 70s, and those of us who came of age after the Republican takeover of government (the last 10 years or so)." And "the new progressive organizations arising the past few years" such as MoveOn, DFA, bloggers are all "movement-based multi-issue organizations."

Matt Yglesias highlights 2 conflicting Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) quotes on the progress (or lack thereof) in Iraq: "The administration's line on Iraq -- it's all good just stay the course -- is at odds with the facts, but it's coherent. Most Democrats, meanwhile, warn that we're on the brink of failure, but it's too soon to give up. But they've been saying that for over a year now, and that can't be right. We can't perpetually be on the brink of failure. Calls to take one last stab at changing the course would have more credibility if I felt the callers would ever concede that, if the course isn't changed, it's time to start cutting our losses." He notes that ret Gen. Wesley Clark has the same problem.

IN THE STATES: NoVa Means "No Go" For Kilgore?

MyDD founder Jerome Armstrong, noting that VA LG Tim Kaine (D) is gaining on AG Jerry Kilgore (R) in VA GOV: "Gods, Guns and Gays are not working for the Republicans, I guess Ken Mehlman will just have to take back his apology for the Republicans having a Southern Strategy that embraced segregation if Kilgore has his way. That, and have the feds take away the local counties authority of making their own safety laws regarding the congregating of people on the sides of highways, public spaces, and the front of 7/11's." Meanwhile, Commonwealth Conservative sees some "very good news" for Kilgore in the same Rasmussen poll.

IDENTITY POLITICS: Offensive Patterns

Crooks and Liars notes the resignation of an Greenville (SC) Technical College official who resigned after twice calling N.O. refugees "yard apes"; liberal satire blog Jesus' General takes issue with a Daily Tar Heel columnist who wrote: "I want all Arabs to be stripped naked and cavity-searched if they get within 100 yards of an airport." At his News Blog, black liberal Gilliard portrays NRO's writers as Klansmen (Klanspersons?).

Little Green Footballs is astonished to see that CAIR Photoshopped a headscarf onto the head of a woman at a rally outside the U.S. Capitol building, ostensibly "to avoid offending CAIR web site readers."

BACKLOG: There's No Demi Moore In This Disclosure

On 9/13, RedState's Mike Krempasky discloses his work for the Edelman PR firm, noting: "[F]or obvious reasons, I will not always have the freedom to disclose my client list publicly -- but I can tell you that the other Directors of RedState will always have that information and the freedom to make decisions regarding the content at RedState."

INTRODUCING: Tapped

Last p.m. ABC News correspondent Jake Tapper launched a blog for ABC titled Down and Dirty. He writes in his 1st post: "Yo. Today begins the grand abc news blog experiment. Blogs being built on spontaneity and opinion -- neither of which big mainstream news organizations are particularly known for -- but we'll see how it goes ..." He lists a few stories he's been reporting on for "Nightline," then closes out: "Gotta go interview a pissed-off local government official, more later."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Twilight Of The Pundits

Kausfiles: "At first I wasn't sure that one effect of the post-Katrina 'emo' broadcast news trend -- unleashing Tim Russert to say what he really thinks, which turns out to be an even more overwrought and pompous version of the CW -- was at all beneficial. But now I realize it's just another manifestation of the faster news cycle. After all, it used to be that Washington journalists had an advantage -- they could go to cocktail parties and hear Russert himself spout the latest CW line in person a few days before he did it on national television. That gave them a head start in reacting against it and preparing the inevitable contrarian, anti-CW pieces. When you moved out of town, you lost a step or two. ... But now, increasingly, anyone with a TV can see Russert bloviate on the day's topic every night! This evening, for example, he more or less declared that the remainder of the Bush presidency would be devoted to Katrina -- to rebuilding the Gulf and, of course, solving the problems of race and class in America! If you think this view is a typical CW echo-chamber overreaction -- which it is -- you can now blog that point immediately. What's left for poor John Tierney?"

LEST WE FORGET: Notes From The Glue Factory

Don't say we didn't warn you first -- click on this link only if you really, really hate horses.

Posted by at September 16, 2005 12:30 PM