3/29: Full Plate
Between the resignation of WH CoS Andy Card, elections in Israel that turned out poorly for everyone the average American has heard of and the Senate battle over immigration, we wonder how bloggers with regular jobs got any work done yesterday. Developments in Iraq and Afghanistan gave bloggers good excuses to take extra breaks as well.
Also today, we report on two potential WH '08ers who cut through to the blogosphere. One blogger wonders whether Card's resignation is part of a larger push for MA Gov. Mitt Romney's (R) WH bid, and several others note, with varying degrees of approval and skepticism, Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) slated speaking engagement at Jerry Falwell's Liberty U.
Finally, for those of you interested in a more academic debate, two heavyweights of the modern neoconservative movement duke it out over just where that movement's headed. If you're in for the political junkie's equivalent of a cat fight, this brawl's for you.
BUSH: They're Daring Us Not To Use Lame Card Puns
Yesterday, we noted the reaction of PowerLine: "Yawn." Reaction rises a bit above that level, speculation doesn't break much new ground. Andrew Sullivan: "Bottom line: this is better than nothing, but also merely the minimum necessary. Maybe there's more to come." 
Daniel Drezner: "What's amazing to me is not that Card has resigned -- it's that there are so many people who have been working at high levels in this administration for six years and show no signs of leaving." UNCoRRELATED: "Card controls access to the president and has undoubtedly ruffled some feathers over the years. His resignation allows for a 'reconcilation' of sorts with members of Congress who may have felt annoyed at not having more face-time with the President." The Sideshow: "The problem is the policies, and Card didn't set those. No one was calling for Andy Card's head. Rumsfeld's, sure. Cheney's -- oh, yeah. Rice's -- yes, and well before she got her new job. Karl 'Security Breach' Rove's? Uh huh. And Bush's, f'sure. But Card? Please." Outside The Beltway: "Unless [Bolten] comes up with some bold new policy initiatives, it is unclear how this move will bolster the president's sagging poll numbers." BottleOfBlog "There's only one guy who could resign and make the executive branch run any better at this point. And he ain't going back to Crawford just yet."
Craig Crawford offers five reasons this won't help. First among them: "He wasn't the problem. ... Card was a glorified scheduler who took a back seat to Vice President Dick Cheney and his own supposed deputy, Karl Rove." Meanwhile, Ankle Biting Pundits hears from sources that Card is leaving to play a "significant role" in Romney's (R) WH bid. New Donkey also doubts the "fatigue" excuse: "Fatigue from what, exactly? I mean, it's not like this administration has been terribly active in terms of meeting the big domestic or national security challenges facing the country, right?"
What about the new guy? Think Progress says: "Josh Bolten's record suggests he will not be a strong enough voice to stand up to" Bush, Cheney, Rove and Rumsfeld. Left Coaster points to Bolten's role in the Medicare Part D legislation. Bull Moose: "The distinguishing feature about both of them is their loyalty to the President. Loyalty, indeed, is a worthy virtue. But, this is a moment for creativity and boldness. And Bolten for Card isn't exactly bold."
RedState floated the idea of replacing Bolten at OMB with Club for Growth pres/'04 SEN candidate Pat Toomey (R). "Getting Pat Toomey on board, putting Pat Toomey on the team, could enliven fiscal conservatives who haven't had much to shout about from this Administration since the President's tax cuts. It would also help the resume of a talented conservative for when or if he decides to seek public office in the future." Club for Growth's blog responded.
IMMIGRATION: We Wonder If McCain And Feingold Had A Quarrel Of Sorts. That Makes Kennedy The Rebound
Folks are starting to analyze the bill passed by the Senate Jud. Cmte. At Red State, Leon Wolf says the McCain-Kennedy bill isn't perfect, "but it's a surprisingly good one, and the Republican Senators who voted it out of Committee absolutely do not deserve to treatment they have received in some quarters of the conservative blogosphere." Captain Ed: "Immigration stalwarts might hope that the House approach will prevail in the joint conference committee that will reconcile the two bills, but that hope appears fading at best" Steve Soto sees signs that the GOP is "Stepping Back From The Political Abyss" on the issue, except for Senate Maj. Leader Bill Frist, "who apparently feels that he cannot allow Specter to substitute his bill for Frist's more extreme proposal if the GOP caucus isn't with Specter. What Frist and the GOP caucus miss however is that they will lose huge politically this November if they let Specter, McCain, and the entire Democratic caucus beat their brains out over this for a couple of days. And the only person who will look like the imbecile that he is will be Frist himself." Off The Kuff looks at demonstrations in TX 3/28 and also at how it's impacting state campaigns. Michelle Malkin, meanwhile, highlights the upside-down American flag at a CA demonstration.
Glenn Reynolds highlights some key points about the debate: "It's not really about security. It's only sort of about economics. A lot of it is anger at Washington. The debate stinks. It could be poison for both parties." Daily Kos' Darkside wonders why people would trust a "helpless" admin to solve the immigration divide. "With a competent admin and an independent Congress, even one[s] we might not care for generally, there would still be hope that they're really going to hammer out a half-ass, intermediate-term solution to illegal immigration. ... But then grim reality comes crashing in." Dean's World looks at it from the minority perspective: "It is blacks (along with legal Latinos) who bear the brunt of illegal immigration, in employment rates. And it is lower-income black communities that are often overrun first with illegal immigrants, who drain social services that should go to citizens and legal residents. ... If black folks must follow the law, then no special rights for anyone else. And no way should illegal immigrants immediately get rights that took centuries for blacks to acquire."
John Cole just can't get into the issue. "To make things even worse, I don't have any desire to educate myself about the current Senate/House legislation. The way I see it, a wall is impractical, not granting amnesty is pointless (does anyone really think we are going to round up all the illegals?), I am not convinced by arguments that illegals are an economic drain or boon (if I had to make an uneducated guess, I would argue it is a wash), and if terrorists want to sneak bombs in, they will find a way that does not involve illegals." His only view is that the feds should help border states with any immigrant-related expenses.
WHITE HOUSE '08: Give Me Liberty Or Give Me A Better Speaking Gig
McCain will deliver the Liberty U. commencement address, having reportedly improved ties with Falwell. Paul Mirengoff: "McCain may be unsuccessful in courting enough conservatives to win the nomination, and that's my hope. But if he's the Republican nominee, he will be running against Hillary Clinton or someone to her left, not against the John McCain of old. As such, he'll have a lock on the centrist vote." Georgia 10: "Ah, a full embrace of the man McCain referred to as 'pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance.' My question: will Tim Russert ask Senator McCain if he agrees with Falwell's comments?" Carpetbagger Report: "McCain has no excuse for this. If he's capable of feeling shame, this would be a good time for it. This is, after, the same Falwell that McCain (accurately) criticized as 'an agent of intolerance.'"
AP reports on Dems' terrorism plan, to "eliminate" Osama bin Laden. Nodding approval from AMERICAblog. The Agonist: "Finally the Democrats are talking about the ideas progressives have been developing for 5 years. Finally Democrats, instead of gnashing their teeth about 'getting a plan,' have put together a smart, hard-nosed and realistic appraisal of the global situation and have presented the American people with real choices, not rhetoric." Captain Ed disagrees: "They shrewdly selected Osama as a focal point, reminding the country that after over four years, the Bush administration hasn't captured the terrorist leader. ... However, the Bush administration has isolated the AQ leadership and forced it back into Pakistan, as well as killed off or captured most of the operational leadership in the organization." RightWinged: "Here come the no plan Democrats shouting that they have a better plan, but offering nothing but more Bush bashing and insane promises again."
Daily Kos' Georgia10 looks at Gallup's poll ranking the top 10 issue items, and reminds readers of DCCC chair Rahm Emanuel's proposing universal health care, "A practical proposal which, by the looks of this poll, may widely appeal to the American people."
RedState and some other conservative blogs are discussing fines handed to Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA) stemming from a '96 eavesdropping case. "So, if you are keeping score at home, that would be one House Democrat to zero current Congressional or White House Republicans who have been found by a court of law to have participated in illegal domestic surveillance of political opponents."
And Democracy Now publishes an interview with ex-Sen. Gary Hart (D-CO). Both a transcript and audio are available.
ABRAMOFF: We're Off On The Road To Jail, We Certainly Do Get Around
Convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff will be sentenced today for his role in a wire-fraud scheme. TPM Muckracher notes: "The defense team for ... Abramoff is pulling out all the stops as his first trial enters its sentencing phase." While his lawyers claim Abramoff is broke, Sisyphus Shrugged (in a long and very detailed post updating us on the course of the trial leading to sentencing, including just about every link to every document on the case you'd want to find) inquires: "Raise your hand if you think this guy doesn't have money hidden overseas." TalkLeft also offers lots of documents, and calls Abramoff's attys' tactics "great, creative lawyering." Sentencing Law and Policy agrees. Noting letters to the judge on Abramoff's behalf, including some from his children, Roger Ailes responds: "If I was the court, defense counsel's happy horseshit would make me want to throw the book at Abramoff with extra velocity."
ISRAELI ELECTIONS: We Called It -- Likud's In Trouble
Yesterday's elections in Israel drew comment from across the spectrum. As expected, Ariel Sharon's Kadima party won the most seats, with 28, though they had expected better results, and Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party fared much worse than expected, finishing fifth. See the Jerusalem Post for the full wrap-up. New Republic's Yossi Klein Halevi also pens a summary in the L.A. Times. Vital Perspective posts Israeli TV's preliminary exit polling, and An Unsealed Room posts actual results. Her conclusion: "The Likud has been smashed to pieces." The Corner's John Podhoretz: "So the polls are closed, and the story is: Oy." New Donkey summarizes: "Israeli elections appear to have confirmed the much-expected mandate for Ariel Sharon's creation, the Kadima Party, to lead the next government, though with fewer Knesset seats than expected. The real shocker, however, was the collapse of Likud under Bibi Netanyahu, who wrested control of the party from Sharon: it will apparently be the fifth-ranking party in the next Knesset." The Politiburo Diktat sees the results as a positive, and tries to count seats Kadima can use to form a coalition: "If these results hold up, Kadima should be able to begin its unilateral withdrawal." AMERICAblog isn't so optimistic: "Passing anything is not going to be easy." Peaktalk agrees and sees trouble ahead for the coalition gov't: "Israel needs a broad national consensus to give effect to Ariel Sharon's vision and while Ehud Olmert can probably make things work, there will always be a risk that such a fragile coalition may fall apart at a critical juncture." Hugh Hewitt sees a short-lived coalition.
Low turnout was the talk of a number of blogs as well. Fewer Israelis than ever turned out to vote. Captain Ed thinks low turnout "shows that the Israelis have given up on the hardliner approach to stand their ground wherever Israelis live." A Blog For All notes turnout as well, and Dutchblog Israel, who worked the polls yesterday, offers his thoughts on turnout. Meanwhile, soon-to-be-official PM Ehud Olmert has called on Palestinian Pres. Mahmoud Abbas to resume negotiations on Israel's permanent borders. Steve Clemons at The Washington Note: "This is just hopeful news -- but it's important for proponents of negotiations not to get carried away with illusions." Paul Mirengoff makes an international point: "It's interesting, but not heartening, to compare these fragmented election results, in the context of low voter turnout, to the crystal clear Palestinian election results. A people who knows what it wants has a big advantage over a people who is unclear. And when the former wants destruction of the latter, things become scary."
IRAQ: Maybe It Was Just An Advisory Election
3/28's report in the New York Times that the U.S., through Amb. Zalmay Khalilzad, is pressuring Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari to step aside had the left up in arms. AMERICAblog gets the most worked up: "Clearly Iraq is such a mess that Bush is now getting desperate. There is no other way to explain why he would take such a drastic, heavy-handed, and full-of-potential-backfire approach to dealing with the Iraqi prime minister. I think the administration has decided that it's going to be all out civil war - well, it already IS all out civil war, but what Bush now has decided is that Iraq is LOST if the current guy remains in power, and thus they aren't worrying about harming Iraq's democracy, or provoking the shi'ites into joining the anti-American insurgency, simply because Bush already knows we're toast, Iraq is toast, if we stick with the status quo." DailyKos' SusanG: "So those vaunted elections were for ... what exactly? Remind me again. I thought it was to usher in an era of democratic self-determination for Iraqis." Brilliant at Breakfast: "The Bush Junta believes that democracy and free elections are only a good thing when they produce the desired result." Lefty Bluememe concurs. Righty Outside The Beltway agrees to some extent, but offers an alternative explanation: "Such interference goes against the very idea of 'democracy' that we are supposed to be fighting for. On the other hand, installation of an inept government unable to meet basic security needs is in no one's interest." Lefty Road To Surfdom, tounge firmly implanted in cheek, concludes: "If the Iraqis don't accede to Mr. Bush's request, the solution is obvious: invade and force regime change." The Lunch Counter supports the move, linking al-Jaafari to radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Meanwhile, Power Line thinks there's more evidence of Saddam Hussein making deals with Russia, and moving nuclear materials out of Iraq.
The AP's Shaw reports that Abdul Rahman, the Muslim who converted to Christianity and was threatened with death in Afghanistan, has disappeared. California Conservative notes that Rahman sought asylum in several countries, and that Italy had offered him a home, though it's unclear if he's left Afghanistan already. A Blog For All, Jihad Watch, "Jack Lewis", Michelle Malkin, Sister Toldjah, In The Bullpen, Freedom Folks, Justin Gardner, Ace Of Spades, Below The Beltway, Jawa Report and dozens of others all comment. The Volokh Conspiracy sees Afghanistan's treatment of Rahman as part of a larger problem of democracies that continue to oppress people. Glenn Reynolds points to a report that claims that Rahman's case has generated interest about Christianity in Afghanistan.
SCOTUS: Did Hamden Wear The Same Thing As Anna Nicole?
Justices heard oral arguments in the case of Hamden v. Rumsfeld 3/28, and the Los Angeles Times reports some bad news for the WH on the matter, which deals with presidential authority to set up military tribunals for purported war criminals. Despite being asked by a group of retired admirals and generals to recuse himself from the case (per Washington Post), Justice Antonin Scalia heard the case "and appeared to be the Justice most amenable to the government's position," according to the American Constitution Society. SCOTUSblog, whose author's firm is co-counsel to Hamden, reports on the case and recaps the hearing. Lawyers, Guns and Money calls Scalia a hypocrite and offers previous instances in which Scalia has chastized other members of the court for straying from judicial norms. Even with Scalia still on the bench, Donklephant notes, based on other justices' questions: "It doesn't look good for the government right now." The Left Coaster and TalkLeft reach similar conclusions.
BLOGS VS. THE MACHINE: ACLU Gets More Biz
Jeff Jarvis laments: "The FCC has outlawed the single most essential word in political discourse and protest: bullshit. This is not only an absurd misinterpretation of our community standards and another perilous attack on our First Amendment, I also believe it is a violation of our civil rights worthy of court challenge. Get me to a lawyer, I think we now have the basis for a citizens' suit."
BLOGS VS. THE MSM: DeLayed Quotation
Washington Post's Milbank writes on the redemption of Ex-House Maj. Leader Tom DeLay and his appearance at the Vision America conference in NW DC 3/28. Milbank's piece is taken to task for misquoting The Corner's Tim Graham, who responds to the piece and to what he sees as an anti-evangelical, anti-conservative bias in the Post. NewsBusters piles on.
MISCELLANY: Seriously, People Go Crazy About Their Time Zones
Some quick hits: Hit & Run thinks the FCC needs a lesson on the IN time zone system. Captain's Quarters celebrates the end of anonymous holds in the Senate, but is discouraged by other reforms being tabled in a bill passed 3/28.
THOUGHT OF THE DAY: So Is This Civil War?
For those of you in need of some serious mental exercise, an interesting debate between two pillars of the modern Neoconservative movement continues to simmer in the MSM, but lately it's spilled over into the blogosphere as well. First brought to our attention through a New Yorker review of his new book, "America At The Crossroads," the debate centers on Johns Hopkins Prof. Francis Fukuyama's split with Neoconservatives. His main target: Syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer. Round I: Fuyukama's book. Round II: Krauthammer's response, posted at RealClearPolitics and elsewhere, in which Krauthammer derides Fukuyama's "Road to Damascus moment." Suffice it to say, the debate gets nasty quickly, though the fundamental philosophy of neoconservatism is laid bare for all to see, and it's pretty interesting. Just about all the bloggers weighing in, though, take Krauthammer's side, including Wizblog, Jim Rose (who holds an "ideological funeral"), D.C. Thornton, Captain's Quarters, Instapundit, Sister Toldjah and Hugh Hewitt. Just a few come down with Fuyukama, including JustOneMinute, lefty Matthew Yglesias.
Round III still to come.
Ever written a long post, paper for school, article, letter to Mom, etc., just to delete it by mistake right when you've finished? Well, you're in good company.
Also, Fat Dude is on vacation in Iraq. That reminds us, it's a good thing the State Department issued those travelwarnings . And we'd heard Fallujah was lovely this time of year.
Have you subscribed to the Blogometer e-mail alert? No? Well click here and be the first to know when we've posted.
