October 06, 2005
10/6: QuagMiers
We've said it before, and we're likely to say it plenty more, but there's a lot going on out there. While the Harriet Miers SCOTUS nod arguably remains the top story, it's no longer crowding out other debates. Among the many threads of discussion we've been trying to stay current with:
- You'd think the 1st case of espionage in the modern WH would be a big deal. It is, but in a different week, it would be bigger.
- Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald appears very close to making a call on whether to make indictments in the Valerie Plame/CIA leak investigation; liberals are on the edge of their sats.
- Liberal netroots centers MyDD and Swing State Project are split, even amongst themselves on whether to support Rep. Sherrod Brown (D) or Iraq war vet Paul Hackett (D) for the party's OH SEN '06 nod.
- Miers' nod is no less controversial than it was 24 or 48 hours ago, but the infighting on the GOP side is more pronounced. See the Ed Gillespie confrontation, for one.
- FNC's Bill O'Reilly doesn't like blogs, and liberal bloggers don't like him. TV segments and blog posts ensue.
- The Senate voted 90-9 to set new rules on treatment of foreign fighters in U.S. custody; those paying attention are very encouraged.
- While there are serious questions about the indictment against ex-House Maj. Leader/Rep. Tom DeLay, there are other serious questions about acting Maj. Leader Roy Blunt.
- The bombing suicide of an OU student in Norman, OK looks less and less like a mere suicide and more like a suicide bombing gone wrong (er... maybe "wrong" isn't quite the right word).
Plus, we present our latest Blogger Spotlight, with AMERICAblog's John Aravosis.
MIERS I: Granted A Writ Of Certoblogi ... Er, Blogorari?
Conservative Stephen Bainbridge employs a "Bull Durham" analogy to illustrate his opposition: "Crash Davis was a smart and skilled baseball player, but he couldn't make it to the show because there were hundreds of other players who were even smarter and more skilled. Likewise ... there are hundreds of lawyers in this country whose resumes, smarts, and skills are as, if not more, impressive as Harriet Miers'." 
Ex-Bush speechwriter David Frum, much-remarked upon for having criticized Miers takes pains to state that he respects her and supports the Bush admin., but continues: "I am speaking out because there are so many others who want to speak but cannot. ... Their reaction to the nomination has been almost perfectly unanimous: Disappointment at best, dismay and anger at worst. Here's the tough truth, and it will become more and more important as the debate continues: There is scarcely a single knowledgeable legal conservative in Washington who supports this nomination." Captain's Quarters: "The push by more enthusiastic Miers supporters to consider her religious outlook smacks of a bit of hypocrisy. After all, we argued the exact opposite when it came to John Roberts and William Pryor when they" were up for confirmation. More: "We need to put an end to this line of inquiry about Miers. If this is all we get in terms of evidence on which to support her candidacy, then the White House and the Miers cheerleaders need to acknowledge their error. Otherwise, we will hand the Schumers all the ammunition they need to keep evangelicals and Catholics off the Supreme Court for the next generation."
At Political Animal, Kevin Drum figures the right's anger will be short-lived: "In the end, I expect that Republicans will all simmer down and toe the line on Miers. It's true that the White House sales job has been pretty transparent ... Everyone knows the easiest person to sell is another salesman. The pitch may be crude, but conservative senators want to be sold. After a bit of grumbling, they're going to put lipstick on this pig and head off to the prom. On the other hand, this time around it's going to be Republicans who want the nominee to respond substantively to questions about judicial philosophy." On the other hand, The Left Coaster predicts, "one of the following two scenarios is likely to pan out sometime in the next few weeks before Miers' nomination hearings. (a) Miers will withdraw herself from contention citing some yet-to-be-determined reason ... (b) Some Kerikesque fake problem will emerge from Miers' past, leading her to withdraw herself from contention, thereby becoming a strong contender for the next Presidential Medal of Freedom." At Eschaton, Duncan Black posts a series of clips from '81 wire reports, where Sandra Day O'Connor was described as "personally opposed to abortion" and conservative direct mailer Richard Viguerie was determined to defeat her, seeming to suggest a parallel with Miers.
PoliPundit supports Miers for SCOTUS, but laments: "Long term damage is done by her nomination: The message it sends to smart young conservative jurists is that they should keep silent about their opinions, and find some way to latch on to rising politicians, like Bush in Texas. Instead, we need young conservative jurists to fight for the cause every day in the legal system, secure in the knowledge that membership in the Federalist Society won't be held against them."
MIERS II: For The Defense
At Beldar Blog, Houston atty William Dyer quotes Dallas Co. Judge Merrill Hartman saying of Miers in a '96 Texas Lawyer profile: "I've had her in court. [She's] very good, very cool, very deliberate, very poised, never gets rattled, very centered and has a very matter-of-fact way of communicating to a jury that's very effective." Dyer, who has argued before Hartman, comments: "He's among Dallas County's most experienced and respected trial judges, a no-nonsense jurist who's quick on the uptake, extremely efficient and professional, and unlikely to gladly suffer fools. I don't believe he'd be inclined to engage in grade inflation, and words like these from a trial judge like him constitute high, rare, and well-informed praise." Dyer also lists an impressive number of attys, judges and others who know Miers, describing their contents: "Percentage thanking me for publishing factual and detailed information about Ms. Miers' record: 100 percent. Percentage expressing any doubts about her fitness for the Court based on personal knowledge and dealings with her: Zero." Evan Schaefer's Legal Underground has a substantial excerpt from the Texas Lawyer article on Miers.
An e-mailer to The Corner, on Bush and litmus tests: "He has a litmus test alright, but it's not 'Will (s)he overturn Roe?' (as everybody assumes) but rather 'Will (s)he set Jose Padilla loose?' ... Since it's been Miers' job to provide legal opinion about actions performed or considered by the Administration, the president must know very well where she stands on a multitude of legal questions pertaining to the war."
The Anchoress: "This woman has not even had the opportunity to appear before the Judiciary committee so that we can all get a sense of her, before she is either confirmed or dumped. One month ago, everyone on the right was saying to the left that the President was entitled to his nominee. Suddenly, this is not true?"
MIERS III: Everybody Was GOP Infighting ...
Even conservatives who are disappointed with the Miers nod are concerned that GOP infighting has gone too far: Betsy Newmark is irritated by "those conservatives who basically want to take their marbles and go home since they're disappointed in Bush's nomination. Fine, stay home next election. I hope your sanctimonious conservative purity is warm comfort through the years of Hillary's presidency." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's Jack Kelly writes at his Irish Pennants blog, the Miers nod may tell conservatives something bad about President Bush. Conservative reaction to the nomination tells me lots that ugly about us. The first thing I've learned from this controversy is that if I were in a foxhole with someone from the National Review crowd, I'd be alone in that foxhole after the first shot was fired. When the going gets tough, they head for the hills, with a few snarky comments." One such comment, noted by Hugh Hewitt, is Rod Dreher joking that Bush's next pick will be his dog Barney the dog: "After all, who can a man trust to be loyal more than his dog? I reckon the president knows Barney's heart as well as anybody's, and certainly Barney has no paper trail, unless you count stuff he chewed up when he was a puppy." Right Wing News disagrees with a Kelly comment that the "best thing" would be for Miers to be confirmed by Thanksgiving. He asks, would the GOP "benefit if a monument to cronyism" such as Miers were confirmed? "Even if she turns out to be up to the job, which is by the way an enormous 'if,' it'll take years for her to prove she has what it takes. Just imagine the bad taste that would leave in everybody's mouths and the damage that would be done to the party in the 2006 elections."
The Washington Post (and Hotline On Call) reported scuffle between Miers sherpa Ed Gillespie and conservatives at Grover Norquist's weekly meetings got lots of attention:
>> From the right: K.J. Lopez, at The Corner, : "I'm not looking to pile-on here, but Ed Gillespie, who I like a lot suggested, according to the Washington Post that the criticism of the Miers choice "has a whiff of sexism and a whiff of elitism." We've already been through the elitism. Sexism, too?" Junk Yard Blog: "Sexism has played no role in this firestorm at all. Elitism has, but it's a bit role, not a central one." Confirm Them contends the Gillespie confrontation is "not a bad thing. It's time that those putting Harriet Miers forward understood (1) the depth of anger among conservatives and (2) that we need more information than the general platitudes that have accompanied Supreme Court nominees like John Roberts. No, not commitments on how she would rule on cases -- but some insight as to how and why the President decided she should be the pick and why she'd be a good one."
>> From the left: Preemptive Karma says "it's patently clear that the GOP elite aren't interested in whether Ms. Miers is a strict constructionist or not. This snit is about ideology!" Demagogue asserts "Gillespie's attempt to hush conservative complaints with his 'sexism ... elitism' allegation was stupid. It reveals how defensive the administration is and how it miscalculated the Right's reaction to Miers' nomination. Having said that, to hear Lott and other conservatives raise the issue of whether Miers is truly 'qualified' for SCOTUS does seem like a cover for their real complaint -- she simply doesn't meet their ultra-conservative litmus test."
DELAY: An Indictment About Nothing?
On 10/5, the AP reported: "Tom DeLay deliberately raised more money than he needed to throw parties at the 2000 presidential convention, then diverted some of the excess to longtime ally [and acting Maj. Leader] Roy Blunt through a series of donations that benefited both men's causes." Among the recipients was the campaign of Blunt's son, now MO Gov. Matt Blunt (R). MO Dem consultant Roy Temple, who has been following the DeLay-Blunt connection and, starting on 6/9, this transaction in particular, has more. Generation Why? points out that Travis Co. DA Ronnie Earle wenth through 8 grand juries before he got his re-indictment on 10/3, on the same charges the 9/30 grand jury had rejected. He adds: "What's worse, Earle's staff admits to calling the members of grand jury #6 to ask them about strategy for going after DeLay on new charges. ... This case would be laughable if it wasn't obvious the primary objective had already been achieved -- that of removing" DeLay from the leadership.
ESPIONAGE: On The DL For The PI?
All yesterday, Drudge Report headlined the ABC News report on the arrest of Leandro Aragoncillo for spying on the WH; an ex-Marine, he worked for VP Cheney and previously for ex-VP Gore. Michelle Malkin expands on the story: "It's actually more widespread than the ABC News story indicates. There was another Filipino arrested with Aragoncillo last month -- Michael Ray Aquino." She points readers to more information at intel website CI Centre and the actual indictments, in PDF format. Some liberal blogs, such as Sadly No!, find this ironic in light of the fact that Malkin, who is of Filipino descent herself, authored a book defending WWII-era internment of Japanese-Americans. Noting these criticisms, Malkin writes: "If it means now that the White House will be applying extra scrutiny to naturalized Americans of Filipino descent working at the top levels of government and in the military, well, yes, I support that. It's obviously overdue." Just One Minute calls the story a "Good hype job! And a nice job of hiding some key info: a bit of research reveals that Aragoncillo was arrested last September 10, ... that his Marine Corps assignment at the White House ended in 2002, and that he was originally arrested for espionage activities in which he engaged in 2005 while working for the FBI in Monmouth, NJ. ...There does seem to be an emerging White House connection, which ended in 2002. That timing does not exactly leap off the page." Dr. Hartline asks "Why would they ask Richard Clarke for anything? Aren't his 15 minutes over yet? Now that he's not causing Bush major political damage, does anyone, even liberals, care about this guy?" Donklephant declares "He was arrested on September 10th! Why are we just finding out about this now?"
ROVE-PLAME-MILLER-LIBBY: Does This Make Fitzgerald Santa Claus?
Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall: "There were rumors flying around all day" that Fitzgerald "was about to indict one or more" WH officials, "perhaps as early as today. ... Another tale zipping around email boxes was that Karl Rove had received a 'target letter' a standard precursor to an indictment, but one I thought you got more than like a day in advance of the big day." He also suggests Bush' 10/6 war on terror speech "would seem to suggest some bad coming down the pike." AMERICAblog's John Aravosis: "I just talked to a source who told me that Karl Rove has been missing from a number of recent White House presidential events -- events that he has ALWAYS attended in the past. For example, Rove was absent from yesterday's presidential press conference to promote Harriet Miers." John Podhoretz throws some water on the report: "Not to be a Pollyanna on this subject, but the story is a) Reuters, which means that it's biased in the way it casts no information as information, and b) of course Fitzgerald's investigation is coming to a head, because his grand jury is set to expire some time this month. So either he will indict or he won't." Daily Kos: "The DC rumor mill is out of control. It's indictment mania! A dozen indictments? Two dozen? Who knows."
MIDTERMS '06: In Which We All But Turn Into The MyDD/SSP-Meter
On the eve of Rep. Sherrod Brown's (D-OH) announcement that he would challenge Sen. Mike DeWine (R) in '06, MyDD founder Jerome Armstrong wrote: "If Sherrod runs, it's because he wants to be the next Senator -- it's not a reaction" to the impending announcement of candidacy by ex-special election candidate Paul Hackett (D). "As Brown's email said last month, he was in the middle of moving, his family was against the run at the time (it appears they are not now). Personally, I think Sherrod has wanted to run all along -- he's certainly been putting the pieces together to do so for the past year. Look, we are still over a year out from the election, the idea that people can tie down a potential candidate as 'having had his chance' because he's not yet declared is laughable." Many in the comment section, however, feel differently. One draws a line between "Sunshine democrats vs. fighting democrats," analogizing it to CA GOV '06: "For the same reason I support Phil Angelides to take on [GOP Gov. Arnold] Schwarzenegger. He announced his candidacy when Schwarzenegger was still pretty popular. That shows courage. Now I am sure a plethora of CA democrats will run in a crowded primary." Meanwhile at Swing State Project, Bob Brigham lists 10 reasons why Hackett will get the nod, including "Paul Hackett's straight talk is loved by the press"; "Hackett positioned himself behind the other Democrats, but has a nation-wide base"; "Hackett has a 70% pt. lead in the netroots"; and "Hackett can win in rural Ohio." He adds: "Sherrod Brown is a waffle, Mike DeWine is toast, and Major Hackett is hungry." A commenter fires back with "The Top 10 Reasons Why This Post Is Full Of Crap," rebutting each of Brigham's 10 points, including 2 from above: "Its too bad that the netroots doesn't have a congressional district of their own. Besides, not many of them are old enough to vote anyway" and "Hackett won? Does that mean he's in Congress now?" Cleveland-based Democracy Guy, Brown supporter: "The vast majority of the blogosphere that's been pushing Paul Hackett to run for the US Senate in Ohio don't live here in, ahem, Ohio. ... Sherrod Brown has $3 million in the bank, and thus is allowed to decide when he wants to decide. PERIOD."
What Armstrong doesn't mention in his post above is that Armstrong built Brown's Grow Ohio blog, along with Swing State Project's Tim Tagaris. In one thread, he is accused of shilling for his employer: "If you can't help but abuse your pulpit and this blog in an effort to make money I don't think you should be a part of this community. I could care less who you are, what you've accomplished for the netroots or how great of a writer you are." Armstrong responds coolly: "What's cool about the free enterprise and the blogs, you can take off and go elsewhere if you don't like it." Brigham, who as noted above supports Hackett, shows up to defend Armstrong, but concedes: "Of course, some asshole will probably say I'm writing this because I was paid by Jerome's PAC" for a separate project. Another writes: "I have nothing against Brown, but I think it is common courtesy for Jerome to include an appropriate disclaimer when he posts on these issues. That doesn't mean I think he has bad motives, just that I think it's the prudent thing to do."
As for the SEN race 2 states down, Brigham makes the case for actor Ben Affleck's (D) rumored interest ina VA SEN bid: "The amount Affleck makes on a single movie is enough for a serious ante and his name recognition, good looks, wife, future baby, and access to political support would instantly make the race competitive." Chris Bowers, who had previously argued Affleck should not run, has now changed his mind. He cites the candidacy of ex-Pres. Carter son Jack Carter (D-NV) as one reason that's changed his mind. Writes Bowers: "Humble and tasteful, well-spoken and smart, liberal and instantly competitive--Affleck suddenly looks very good to me. With the way things are going, over the past three months 2006 has looked better than better for Democrats all the time. Let's keep that roll going. Run Ben, run."
TORTURE: McCain Isn't Everywhere, But Sometimes It Seems Like It
Washington Monthly's Drum is pleased with the 90-9 Senate vote in support of Sen. John McCain's bill to "oppose the torture and abuse" of U.S.-held foreign prisoners, but adds: "Of course, the bill still has to go through the usual conference committee charade, in which Senate conferees 'reluctantly' accept changes from the House designed to water down the bill, and then everyone who voted for the original Senate language 'reluctantly' votes for the conference bill. ... But it's a start." AMERICAblog: "I'm not terribly convinced that a veto threat by Bush is really worth much since he has yet to use it but as this is about torture, something that the Bush team seems to loves so much, we might just see it happen." Header from Univ. MD prof Marty Lederman at Balkinization: "Halftime Score: John McCain 90, Dick Cheney 9." Header from liberal Scott Shields: "Nine GOP Senators Refuse to Reject Torture." Andrew Sullivan: "I write this with tears in my eyes. Dick Cheney and George W. Bush got a mere nine votes to continue their policy of condoning or ignoring abuse and torture -- an extraordinary rebuke to their immoral, feckless and inhumane management of the war. Their threatened veto has been blown out of the water in the Senate." Instapundit's Glenn Reynolds calls the WH's "resistance" to the bill "a mistake": "If the White House thinks that the Senate's approach is substantively wrong, it should say so, but presenting it as simply an interference with the President's Commander-in-Chief powers is wrong. Congress is entitled, and in fact obligated, to set standards of this sort."
BLOGS VS. THE MSM: We're Sure O'Reilly Is Very Hurt By What Blogs Say About Him
This week, FNC's Bill O'Reilly has been running a series of reports on the blogosphere and the "viciousness" there that he argues (as he has argued before) is harmful to the political process. One of his main targets is liberal watchdog Media Matters, which is not itself a blog, although it does traffic in the blogosphere and employ a few prominent bloggers (Duncan "Atrios" Black, Oliver Willis). As O'Reilly has been running the series, a few liberal blogs have been watching. Before it even ran, CAP's Think Progress snarked: "We're sure it will be an informed, reasoned discussion, especially considering O'Reilly doesn't even read blogs..." Author/blogger David Kline, a guest on the 10/4 program, took issue with the segment he participated in: "Last night I appeared on the conservative TV talk show The O'Reilly Factor, ostensibly to talk about political blogs and the impact they are having on the American political process. Or so I was told by the two producers for the show who spent over an hour pre-interviewing me. Unbeknownst to me, however, the show turned out to be a total set-up job in which host Bill O'Reilly and guest Jed Babbin spent the entire time attacking the web site Media Matters for having posted commentary in the past critical of them both." More: "I wish I had managed to tell O'Reilly that, given his national forum and his audience of millions, he was just being a baby for whining about being criticized by bloggers." Think Progress also took issue with O'Reilly's claim that he had trouble booking the segment, noting that Power Line's Paul Mirengoff had been slated to appear, and fellow Power Liner John Hinderaker had advertised the appearance. Later, Mirengoff updated to note: "I won't be appearing on the Factor after all. They've decided to take the segment in a different direction." In the end, Mirengoff did appear on the 10/5 edition, to discuss Memogate/Rathergate and ex-CBS producer Mary Mapes' new book. Transcript is available at Musing Minds. The Political Teen has video in WMV; Crooks & Liars also has it in QT format.
DEMOCRATS: Did John Kerry's Plans Work Out So Well For Him?
Chris Bowers assesses the Dem agenda as put forth by DCCC chair Rahm Emanuel on 10/2's "Meet the Press": "The word 'Iraq' doesn't appear anywhere in the Democratic agenda. This is interesting since, major occasional news events not withstanding, Iraq has consistently been the number one issue for Americans for over one year now ... and among the top two or three issues for three years." He snarks: "Let's take it off the table, because that worked really well in 2002." Noting that Matt Yglesias notes that while House Dems as a whole are "avoiding" the Iraq issue, Senate Dems are issuing "weak" pronouncements. He argues that unity might be less important than many think: "We don't after all, elect our legislature on a party list system. There's no particular need for every House and Senate candidate to run on a unified platform. It is, however, a good idea for all the House and Senate candidates to engage with the issue and to try to say something relatively clear about it."
TERRORISM: Sooner Or Later, Cable News Will Have To Pick Up On This
The bombing suicide of OU student Joel Hinrichs looks curiouser and curiouser: Gateway Pundit details a few reasons why suspicions are growing: "Joel attended the Islamic mosque near his apartment, possibly the same mosque as Zacarias Moussaoui attended. His Pakistani roommate has not been seen by neighbors since the incident. The very volatile explosive Joel used is the same chemical that Shoe Bomber Richard Reid tried to use before his arrest. It is very rarely seen in the US and is called "Mother of Satan" by Islamic extremists. Perhaps the best roundup of MSM reports and blog speculation is at CA-based non-blog ZombieTime. Michael Wright of Bellacio argues that ex-Sen./OU pres. David Boren, "widely known as the mentor and patron of George Tenet, seems very interested in undermining the investigation. He is sending a strong signal to the police that he will not tolerate any conclusion that terrorism was involved." Righty Karol Sheinin points out that so far, the nat'l media has ignored it, perhaps because they can't "find a 'blame Bush' angle." She notes, a Google News search for Joel Hinrichs' name produced 207 results, whereas a Technorati search "finds 198 blog posts about him. And, for most of us, this isn't our job."
CALIFORNIA CABLE: Last Action, Action, Action, Action Hero
In a post titled "Arnold Resurgent?" Power Line notes: "In polling released Tuesday by Survey USA, the five propositions are all leading comfortably with likely voters -- one by eleven points, the other four by at least twenty. The survey only included a little over 500 likely voters on each issue, and there is plenty of time for voter sentiment to change. Still, a month out from the election, Arnold's bet is looking pretty good."
THE MARCH OF BLOGS: A Victory For Anonyblogging
Wilmington News Journal reports, "In a ruling that could help set national legal standards for free speech on the Internet, the Delaware Supreme Court sided with free-speech advocates Wednesday and rejected a Smyrna Town councilman's quest to unmask an anonymous Internet critic." Stupid and Wrong, which has been following the case, posts the decision in PDF format.
Paid Content reports, Weblogs Inc. founder Jason Calacanis has sold the company to AOL: "Among the other companies Weblogs Inc talked to included the usual suspects: News Corp, Yahoo and MSN... This is a very quick exit: the company was founded about two years ago, and took some money from Mark Cuban a year down the line." Jeff Jarvis: "Congrats to Jason. But AOL has a history of buying things and killing them."
Matt from Blackfive announces: "Simon & Schuster has agreed to publish a collection from military bloggers sometime in late 2006. I submitted the proposal and will be the editor and one of the many authors. We will bring together the best of the military blogs, the purest distillation of the myriad voices of this war. These bloggers provide a powerful insight into the military, the War on Terror, and the heart of our nation. By bringing these voices together, we offer the first real-time, “oral” history of a war while it still going on."
AU prof./CNN commentator/MD SEN candidate Allan Lichtman (D) declared that blogs are "the acid test" of anyone's candidacy -- and blogging on his website proves his qualifications. Lichtman: "You can't fool the people on the blogs. ... I ask any voter in Maryland to compare my homepage to any other candidate." In addition to Daily Kos, he listed MyDD and the Democratic Underground as his favorite political websites/blogs. Lichtman said he is running on "7th amendment rights" and opposes attempts at capping medical malpractice awards. He said, if elected, he will introduce legislation withdrawing the military from Iraq and a bill that would wean energy usage away from fossil fuels. He is against CAFTA, the Patriot Act, and the energy bill. (Kraushaar, Hotline reporting, 10/6).
BLOGGER SPOTLIGHT: Captain AMERICAblog
Today the Blogometer talks to lefty John Aravosis, who founded and leads the group blog AMERICAblog.
What is your full name?
John George Aravosis, but I don't use George. It's a Greek thing, I get my dad's name as my middle name. Not to get too "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" about it, but even my mom's middle name is George. I don't think she uses it either.
What is your age?
41
Where did you grow up?
Hint: Da Bears.
Where do you live now?
DC
What is your occupation? Have you ever worked on a political campaign or for the mainstream media?
Blogger. I work full time on the blog now. I'm also a political Internet consultant for lefty causes, have been doing that since 1997, but started working full-time on the blog this past February. I worked on the Chuck Robb re-election campaign in 1994. I worked as a stringer for The Economist in 1999 and 2000. And I currently am the political correspondent for Radar magazine.
When did you start blogging and why?
I started in April 2004 because I was furious with President Bush and couldn't hold it in any longer.
What has been your favorite post, or favorite story to write about, in that time?
Probably exposing White House suck-up reporter Jeff Gannon (aka James Guckert) as a $200/hour prostitute. Scoops like that prove God really does have a sense of humor.
Describe your typical blogging schedule. And what is your average output?
Wake up at 10am-ish. Blog, coffee, blog, lunch, blog, nap, coffee, blog, dinner, blog, friends, blog, TV, blog. Sleep at 2am-ish. Average output, geez, probably ten posts a day.
Who is your favorite political blogger? Favorite non-political blogger?
Atrios. I don't really read non-political blogs.
Who is your favorite mainstream media columnist?
Michael Kinsley. Though I also love E.J. Dionne, Richard Cohen, Frank Rich and Maureen Dowd.
What is your favorite television news program, either network or cable?
ABC News' "World News Tonight", and Jon Stewart, though he'd really be my favorite political show, tied with "This Week." (I don't do very well picking "a" favorite of anything -- see my response question 10.)
What MSM-produced websites (i.e. newspapers, magazines) do you visit on a daily basis?
Washington Post, New York Times, Reuters, AP.
What non-MSM websites (i.e. blogs) do you visit on a daily basis?
I get a LOT of my info from email tips my readers send me, so I don't regularly read a lot of other blogs - I'm usually alerted to anything particularly interesting that they've posted. Having said that, I check Atrios, Daily Kos, and Crooks & Liars the most.
How often, or do you ever, read a newspaper in its dead-tree (i.e. print) form?
I subscribe to the Washington Post and try to read it, though it often makes a good door stop.
How do you see the new media and old media affecting and influencing each other in the next five years?
5 years? According to the White House we'll have the Rapture by then and it won't matter (at least I understand that's their plan for the deficit). Seriously, five years is way too long a period to say. New media and old media have a fascinating relationship currently, we hate them but we need them since much of our content is from them. A lot of old media has been reaching out to blogs, sending us links to their articles, slipping us stories they can't/won't print, etc. And when we get big scoops, like the Gannon story, it still helps to have old media mention our blogs (and the story) to help make the story (and our readership) even bigger. So the relationship has already gone from combattive to symbiotic. In five years, I haven't a clue what it will be.
THOUGHT OF THE DAY: For The Birds
Left-leaning Democracy Arsenal notes visiting the House on 10/3, and watching as a receptionist tossed "public health posters about how to recognize bird flu and what to do about it" into the garbage, and asks, "why can't we fund a solid and generous public health system like most normal countries? Countries where public health is a high priority are far better prepared and defended against global pandemics and biological terrorism. Why does avian flu only get the urgency it deserves on a defense bill during wartime? Something is wrong with this picture." Atrios heads a post "Missed the Memo": "Seriously, I'm not downplaying the potential for a catastrophic flu pandemic, buth how did we suddenly go all bird flu all the time?"
LEST WE FORGET: Poetic Justice
Liberal poet-blogger Mad Kane assesses the Miers nod in one of a few new blog-poems:
Bush named the unqualified Miers
To the Court when O'Connor retires.
Her only credential?
She's Dub reverential.
And that should raise Democrats' ires.
NOTES AND ERRATA: Virtually The Same Mistake, 2 Days Running!
In the 10/5 Blogometer, we referred to left-leaning UCLA public policy prof Mark A.R. Kleiman as a "law prof"; we do know better, but apparently didn't yesterday. And the post attributed to him was in fact written by another contributor, Berkeley public policy prof Michael O'Hare. The Blogometer regrets both errors.
Posted by at October 6, 2005 12:40 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.
