November 22, 2005

11/22: F/X

Note: Thanks to Thanksgiving, the Blogometer has the rest of week off. Happy Turkey Day, and we'll see you next on 11/28.

Just in time for Thanksgiving, the flow of news has slowed to a trickle. The talk last p.m. and this a.m. centered mostly around televised appearances by VP Cheney and Washington Post editor Bob Woodward. In the latter case, an apparent glitch on CNN -- superimposing a large black "X" over Cheney's face -- drew more attention than the substance of his remarks, and arguably complemented Bush's door gaffe during his China visit. If there's any significance to the story, it's that the conservative bloggers who are usually quick to allege media bias rather quickly accepted that there was no partisan chicanery afoot. But the rumor mill continues to spin. Meanwhile, there are new developments in the Jack Abramoff case -- the plea bargain and coming cooperating testimony from ex-DeLay aide/Abramoff partner Michael Scanlon. For whatever reason, the Abramoff case has never attracted widespread speculation of the sort Plamegate did -- but those who mention it seem to understand that its repercussions could be far-reaching. And in other news, MSNBC's Chris Matthews is catching heat from the conservative blogosphere over remarks he recently made in Toronto.

CHENEY: Remind Us When Matt Drudge Last Broke A Legitimate Story?

VP Cheney's latest speech defending the Iraq war -- at AEI on 11/21 -- got more than a bit of comment last p.m. One was from conservative Ranting Profs, which called the Washington Post's report on the speech biased for discounting progress in Iraq. Another was liberal Matthew Gross, who opined: "Rewriting the history now will be a lot harder than it was to craft the fictions before the war, when only gut instinct could tell you that these men were lying. But now the reality-based community has one thing on their side that the illusionists don't possess: memories. And memories don't lie." Post header from MyDD's Scott Shields: "Cheney Attacks, Still No Victory Strategy." In the speech, Cheney said: "Although our coalition has not found WMD stockpiles in Iraq, I repeat that we never had the burden of proof; Saddam Hussein did." Blogs for Bush concurs: "Given, no doubt, in Cheney's rather flat speaking style, those few words clearly state why we went in and demonstrate the absurdity of the so-called 'anti-war' position."

But the speech really drew attention for the the suspicious "X" superimposed on the screen during a few moments of CNN's coverage. Drudge Report led the charge, and before long there was alleged video from CNN at The Political Teen. But right-leaning The Shape of Days -- which offers technical discussion of the frame-by-frame footage -- calls TPT's version bogus. Conservative Robot Guy begs to differ with Shape of Days; he also goes to frame-by-frame analysis, analyzing the formula that compares the slo-mo on TPT's video. Over the course of a few updates, readers persuade Michelle Malkin that the real one was indeed a glitch. Crooks and Liars: "Just another made up conspiracy by Drudge." The Political Teen's Ian Schwartz responds to critics: "I don't see how Drudge got owned, he just reported the facts. There was an 'X' over Cheney's head, correct? Like Drudge, I never claimed otherwise. I am just saying that when I posted the video I was being as impartial as I could. I did not give an opinion or claim that CNN was up to no good nor did I say the opposite." He also writes: "If there is an expectation for a retraction, there probably won't be one unless the video it self is fake. I am waiting to get the word from the source that sent me the video to explain what they want done." IntoxiNation thinks frames were dropped from Schwartz's video, and explains what the "X" was: "That is a cue in that appears before a show starts. Sometimes you will see the same thing on broadcast television. It is just telling the operator where to stop the video at so it is ready to go when its time. This should put to rest the Matt Drudge conspiracy theory that CNN was out to get Cheney."

TV Newser follows the story and reax. Conservative Pundit Guy isn't so sure: "CNN claims that the 'X' flash was made by a control room engineer, who happened to be operating an 'effects' board when a button was pushed by mistake. No word on how an effects button can be pushed 'by mistake' multiple times." This a.m., Drudge Report is now back with a follow-up, reporting there is a senior investigation underway: "A well-placed CNN insider claims a control room staffer "laughed" when the image appeared shortly after 11 am." At Hit and Run, libertarian Julian Sanchez is apoplectic at those calling this a subliminal message: "If you noticed it, it ain't subliminal. More importantly, though: Have we really reached the point where upon seeing an obvious technical glitch in a live TV broadcast, the first reaction of many people -- not folks living in mom's basement among stacks of old John Birch Society newsletters, mind you, but widely-read and well-remunerated pundits -- is 'subliminal brainwashing'? Really?"

Going back to the speech itself, David Corn calls it "both defiant and yielding." Re: his praise for Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), Corn says: "Clearly, the White House (maybe after polling) had concluded that it could not win a ground war against Murtha. It was waving a white flag." Marc Cooper: "After a week of dastardly attacks from the White House and its congressional supporters, openly suggesting that critics of the Iraqi war policy are aiding and abetting the enemy, Cheney extended an olive branch ... and then accused war dissenters of aiding and abetting the enemy!"

ABRAMOFF: If The Nays Have It, Does It Have Ney?

Josh Marshall: "A few days ago a fellow blogger sent me a post in which he incorrectly stated that Ney was not running for reelection. I pointed out the error -- he'd confused him with retiring Ohio Rep. Mike Oxley (R). But I told him not to feel bad since he was right. Ney is retiring too; he just doesn't know it yet." In somewhat related news, Marshall plans to launch a new site soon, TPMmuckracker.com -- probably a repository for interesting documents, a la the former TPM Documents page. Swing State Project's DavidNYC: "Ney is claiming he was an innocent dupe of Scanlon's, and also claims he's cooperating with the prosecutor. But Libby 'cooperated,' too, and the result was a perjury charge." Fired Up! Missouri ties the Scanlon story back to MO Gov. Matt Blunt (R). Guest-blogging at Political Animal, Carpetbagger Reporter Steve Benen recalls conservative activist Paul Weyrich recently saying to the Los Angeles Times about Scanlon: "That one has the potential for blowing into something far larger."

PLAMEGATE: Wired

Last p.m., Bob Woodward went to defend himself on "LKL." Did we learn much? Doesn't seem like it. Whether because conservatives just don't watch Larry King, or they just don't have much invested in Woodward, all the commentary we saw came from the left. AMERICAblog live-blogged the Woodward appearance, calling B.S. a time or two. CAP's Think Progress posts partial transcript and comment; they call it a "disingenuous attempt to rehabilitate himself." TV Newser has the transcript. Hullabaloo's Digby scoffs at Woodward's claim that he was critical of Pres. Bush's admin: "It's quite clear that Woodward doesn't understand why he is given all that access." Emptywheel at The Next Hurrah has been trying to determine "which journalist had been on the verge of publishing an article in late June 2003 naming Joe Wilson as the then-unnamed envoy to Niger." While still leaning toward Miller as being that journalist, Emptywheel describes a "plausible Woodward scenario."

CONGRESS: What's It To You, Bubp?

At Huffington Post, Max Blumenthal looks into the background of the Marine referenced by Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH) on the floor of Congress on 11/18: "A quick glance at" OH state Rep. Danny Bubp's "background reveals him to be a low-level right-wing operative who has spent more time in the past ten years engaged in symbolic Christian right crusades than he has battling terrorist evil-doers. And throughout his career, Bubp's destiny has been inextricably linked with Schmidt's. Bubp may be a Marine, but his view of Murtha as a 'coward' is colored by naked political ambition." Mark Kleiman piles on Schmidt. Think Progress quotes Bubp as saying he's never spoken out against Rep. Murtha specifically. Conservative James Joyner weighs in: "While we'll likely never know the exact details of the conversation in question, I tend to believe Bubp here -- especially given this obvious lie from Schmidt's office" that her speech was "never meant to disparage" Murtha.

PENTAGON: Doesn't White Phosphorous Help Fight Osteoporosis?

Think Progress: "A formerly classified 1995 Pentagon intelligence document titled 'Possible Use of Phosphorous Chemical' describes the use of white phosphorus by Saddam Hussein on Kurdish fighters" -- they quote from a '95 Pentagon report: "IRAQI FORCES LOYAL TO PRESIDENT SADDAM ((HUSSEIN)) MAY HAVE POSSIBLY USED WHITE PHOSPHOROUS (WP) CHEMICAL WEAPONS AGAINST KURDISH REBELS." Think Progress: "In other words, the Pentagon does refer to white phosphorus rounds as chemical weapons -- at least if they're used by our enemies." Daily Kos: "Saddam tortured, we torture. Saddam used WP chemical weapons against insurgents and civilians, we use WP chemical weapons against insurgents and civilians. Like torture, the apologists try to justify our use of such abhorrent techniques, oblivious to the fact that our moral standing is in tatters and our credibility beyond repair. We aren't just losing the war in Iraq, we are losing our credibility in the world." Protein Wisdom digs deeper into the Pentagon report, which states that after Halabja, Iraq used WP on Kurds instead of nerve gas "BECAUSE THEY WERE AFRAID OF POSSIBLE RETALIATION FROM THE UNITED STATES (U.S.) LED COALITION." He summarizes: "You'll note that the clear inference here is that Hussein was aware that the use of WP in artillery rounds or fired from helicopter gunships would NOT bring retaliation by the US-led coalition, whereas the use of nerve gas would have" -- and that whereas Saddam used them specifically on civilians, the U.S. used them on insurgents. John Cole: "When you make up claims and redefine what is and is not a chemical weapon in order to accuse our units of using 'chemical weapons' on civilians, you are smearing our guys."

MIDTERMS '06: Eliot ... Ouch

New York Observer's Politicker backs up a New York Post report that Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is backing Dem GOV candidate/Nassau Co. Exec Tom Suozzi over AG Eliot Spitzer (D): "The animosity dates back, at least, to Eliot's decision to prosecute Wall Street firms who are Schumer's fundraising base. The jostling over Chuck's possible run for Governor certainly didn't help. And here's an interesting little addition to that story that didn't surface at the time. Eliot knew as well as anybody how hard Chuck would have been to beat. And it's my understanding that Eliot would not have challenged Chuck for the gubernatorial nomination had Schumer decided to run."

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Lysenko Acid Dramedy

At Crooked Timber, Univ. of AZ prof Kieran Healy catches GMU prof Todd Zywicki referring disparagingly to Univ. of MN prof P.Z. Myers as a Lysenkoist. After Healy first complained, Zywicki updated to remove the charge. Healy comments: "Your self-correcting blogosphere at work. At least he saw that the charge was indefensible, I suppose." At Volokh Conspiracy, Zywicki clarifies in a couple updates, stating: "I deleted the second paragraph of the original post in order to avoid spurring a debate that goes beyond what I was trying to raise here, and one that has been discussed extensively elsewhere."

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: The Gospel According To Matthews

MSNBC's Chris Matthews is coming under fire for a speech that, as quoted by the Toronto Sun, has some thinking he meant al Qaeda merely has a "different perspective." Matthews: "The period between 9/11 and Iraq was not a good time for America. There wasn't a robust discussion of what we were doing. ... If we stop trying to figure out the other side, we've given up. The person on the other side is not evil -- they just have a different perspective. The smartest people understand the enemy's point of view, because they understand what's driving them." Damian Penny isn't sure whether to give Matthews benefit of the doubt, but at The Corner, Rich Lowry posts a letter arguing he did mean al Qaeda. Power Line's Paul Mirengoff: "Matthews is basically adopting [ex-CIA officer/"Imperial Hubris" author] Michael Scheuer's line (see below) that the Bush administration needs to understand the enemy better. But Scheuer is more intellectually honest than Matthews because he at least admits that Bush has a theory, however misguided, about the enemy -- that it hates us for what we believe. Matthews, by contrast, smugly claims that Bush hasn't even tried to figure out the other side." Little Green Footballs posts about the controversy as well.

MISCELLANY: The Slow Courtship Of The Greens And Neocons

Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) posts to RedState a short entry touting a Frank Gaffney "op-ed touting my plan to help America realize its fuel independence by 2015 as the right plan for America's fuel independence."

PAJAMAS MEDIA: Step 1. Collect Pajamas ...

At OSM, Roger L. Simon and Charles Johnson announce, "We are re-assuming our identity as Pajamas Media ... the whole experience of being caught with our pajamas down has been a bit embarrassing, but in the end, when we realized we could get our beloved name back, we were overjoyed. So a warm, hearty thanks to all of you who expressed your displeasure with our phony identity. They explain: "Back at the beginning" the "suits ... decided that we should act like grownups, and being as yet somewhat immature -- at least as businesspeople -- we did as we were told. Which is how, one day, we ended up sitting around a conference table listening to representatives from a 'branding" company' What followed is still a bit of a nightmarish blur, but it involved a PowerPoint presentation on the history of names, and such probing questions as, 'If you were an animal, what animal would you be?' (Which is how we almost ended up as Jellyfish Media.)" They also announce Baldilocks' Juliette Ochieng will be their contact point with the blogosphere at large. Brendan from Open Source, the company whose name Simon and Johnson appropriated, is gracious: "What's nice, actually, is how all this got worked through. Other blogs picked up on the possibility of conflict before we did; other blogs offered advice, for the most part constructive, to both us and Pajamas Media. Lawyers were consulted, but not resorted to. This is a good thing; apart from being cheaper, it engenders trust and confirms that this system -- this infinite number of fact checkers -- works."

But the OSM debacle engendered enough criticism that even this step back isn't enough for everyone yet -- Arguing With Signposts dismisses the announcement as "PRspeak" and gives it a fisking. The Young Curmudgeon: "Their note about it makes them sound unserious and like they don't know what they're doing." OSM critic Ann Althouse: "Will the site fill up with exciting, interesting material? Because it's the lack of good stuff to read that has always been their main problem. Did the guys-in-suits make that happen?" Jeff Jarvis is more forgiving: "Yes, sometimes having money can cause more problems than not having it. If you can't afford a branding agency, then you trust yourself."

Otherwise, announcement should be welcome news to non-participant One-Handed Economist, who writes: "Pajamas Media was at least sort of catchy, and shared a sort of inside joke with the rest of the blogsphere. 'Open Source Media' is vague, makes me think of Linux, and tells me nothing about what they actually plan to do." It already is to participant La Shawn Barber: "We are the pajamahadeen and ought to say so." Instapundit: "About time: I liked that better anyway. As the Insta-Daughter said, 'Pajamas sounds cheerful. Open Source Media sounds... educational.'" TalkLeft: "I admire Pajamas for admitting their mistakes and getting back on the horse."

Another Pajamas Media profile has gone up -- Adam Bellow, possibly replacing Luke Ford (see 11/14 Blogometer).

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Early Warner

TNR's Michael Crowley writes at The Corner, a young Dem operative recently told him that outgoing VA Gov. Mark Warner (D) is the WH'08 candidate "all her friends want to work for, and that the buzz reminds her of how people felt about John Edwards back around 2001. That's only worth so much, of course. But it does suggest that Warner will probably have an easy time snapping up talented campaign workers," which might be one reasons for "political journalists to hype a candidate's early credibility."

LEST WE FORGET: Beware Of Steve

Is the current front page Orange County Register ad creepy or what? Note: It's not creepy unless you're seeing CA 48 special election candidate Steve Young.

NOTES AND ERRATA: Hawkins & Dove

In the 11/21 edition, we mistakenly attributed to John Hawkins of Right Wing News a sentence about Pentagon torture allegations that he certainly did not write. It has since been removed.

Posted by at November 22, 2005 12:28 PM