April 20, 2006
4/20: The Empire Strikes Back
Reactions to the 4/19 WH shake-up abound across the spectrum. Few have good words for Scott McClellan, and theories abound on the true motives behind Karl Rove's "demotion." Lefty bloggers see Rove-like fingerprints on ICE's recent round-up of what the AP calls "illegal workers." Like so much else in politics, the simple task of naming often betrays ones policy conclusions. For righty bloggers, ICE rounded up "illegal immigrants" while lefties describe them as "undocumented workers." Looks like the AP did a decent job of splitting the difference.
Meanwhile, heavy hitters on the left think they may have A New Hope to the GOP Death Star: "the common good." If you're a little fuzzy on what that exactly means, you're not alone. But not everyone is mystified, and those who aren't can't wait to jump on the bandwagon.
McCLELLAN: Kickin' A Man When He's Down
Not many kind words can be found for Scott McClellan. Lefties either thought he was a complete disaster or that he could have been better had he not been working for such a controversial president. Righties don't have any bad words for the man, but there's a dearth of good things to be said about McClellan's tenure also. Some good reax: 
Gun Toting Liberal: "For certain, Scott McClellan's done a great job when you consider that his job description was basically, to lie about and spin on what the President's been up to since the last press conference to the American People." Matthew Yglesias: "Scott McClellan's tenure as White House press secretary has been objectively disastrous...Liberals and conservatives really ought to be able to agree on this -- there's no policy implications whatsoever." Arianna Huffington: "Yesterday, rejecting the mounting demands for Don Rumsfeld's head, President Bush made it clear who's making the calls ..."I'm the decider," he declared, "I decide what's best." But today, commenting on Scott McClellan's resignation, the president was singing a different tune ... What gives, Mr. President? Are you not really The Decider but actually The Decidee -- buffeted about by the uncontrollable whims of others? So, with Rummy, you decided not to accept his decision -- but with McClellan you did. Very decisive. Sorry, Scottie, I guess this means the president is just not that into you." The Carpetbagger: "McClellan's announcement hardly comes as a surprise. McClellan has enjoyed few real allies anywhere outside the West Wing. The reporters don't like him (he's evasive and dishonest); Republicans don't like him (he's neither articulate nor persuasive); and Dems don't like him (he routinely lies and attacks their patriotism)." Other lefties with takes: Done With Mirrors, Alternate Brain, Bark Bark Woof Woof, and Middle Earth Journal.
Righty reax: Stephen Spruiell at NRO: "It's not that Scott McClellan was a bad press secretary. It's that he is not the right press secretary right now. A White House press corps this hostile and guileful calls for a press secretary who's equally tough." Captain's Quarters: "McClellan's exit comes as no shock to anyone. He performed well enough, but lately has seemed either overmatched by the hostility of the White House press corps or just out of gas. The exchanges between McClellan and the gaggle have become increasingly personal, and the tension has not helped with getting the president's message out to the electorate. When the press secretary becomes the story for weeks on end, the communication process is broken."
While reports of the WH's new choice include Torie Clark, Rob Nichols, Mark Corallo, Dan Senor, and Brian Jones, the web's most talked about choice is Fox News' Tony Snow: Agitprop: "We fully support Snow for the position. From falsely claiming that Joe Wilson said his wife was not undercover to mucking up the theory of evolution to lying about Navy documents in defense of the Swiftboaters to his tax-the-poor beliefs to his lap dog stance towards the "administration" to his legendary tolerance -- well, this makes him the perfect candidate! Who better to lie to us than the familiar, pleasing visage of a Fox News Bu$hCo stenographer?" Left Coaster: "So, how could Bush make the White House spokesman assignment even worse than he made it with Ari Fleischer and McClellan? Well, why not make the connection between the White House and Fox News complete? " Gun Toting Liberal: "Frankly, I'd hate to see that, because Tony Snow, despite being a dedicated Republican, seems to be a pretty classy guy, and I base that analysis strictly upon the class, respect, and dignity with which he has treated callers with opposing viewpoints on his talk radio show the times I have listened in. I'd just hate to see this guy become the next "villian" for the Administration, but you've gotta do what you've gotta do I suppose." Demagogue: "If our talented Decider-in-Chief hires Snow does that mean that FoxNews can stop claiming once and for all that they're a real news channel instead of a Republican propaganda machine?"
Other left takes: Tapped, The Democratic Daily, NewsHog, and Think Progress
From the Right: Prairie Pundit: "I do think Tony Snow's personality would fit well with the job and his work on talk radio is probably pretty good practice for responding to media questions." Hit and Run: "As a Tony Snow fan, I have to concede that this is the kind of career move you'd be a fool to turn down, but I still say: Don't do it, Tony. You're too good for that."
Who ever the White House chooses Attytood can come do HR at the Blogometer any time: "After it was rebuffed by Tony Snow, Torie Clarke, Joe Klein and Jeff Gannon, an embattled Bush White House finally introduced a new press secretary to replace the departed Scott McClellan: Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf ("Baghdad Bob). ...Al-Sahaf also had some strong words for special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald: "He's not even [within] 100 miles [of Karl Rove]. They are not in any place. They hold no evidence in the West Wing. This is an illusion ... they are trying to sell to the others an illusion."
ROVE: No Soup For You!
Bloggers from all sides are speculating that Rove's downgraded portfolio may be due to a possible revocation of his security clearance. Think Progress gets the ball rolling: "An important question has not been asked: Will Rove also give up his security clearance? ...In November, Newsweek wrote, "Having his security clearance yanked would not require Rove to resign as deputy chief of staff to President Bush. But it would prevent him from taking part in policymaking that relates to national-security issues, which would mean a much-reduced role in the Bush White House." ...Rove has now resigned his policy-making post and is focusing primarily on politics. Given Rove's public intentions to make national security the focus of the 2006 elections, the White House should reveal whether Rove will be doing his political job while holding a security clearance." Other reax:
Firedoglake: "I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that Rove's shift anticipates a big push to have that clearance revoked, and it avoids the embarrassment of losing the loftier job title as a result." King of Zembla: "We find it telling that the Decider-in-Chief stood by one of his men -- the radioactive, universally-despised Don Rumsfeld -- and demoted another. Is Mr. Rove expecting to follow his colleague Scooter Libby into the dock, and if so, is his reassignment a pre-emptive move designed to blunt an onrushing scandal?" Taylor Marsh: "Contrary to all the trumpeting of Rove's demotion and demise, I believe the reality is much different. If anything, it's a head fake meant to excite the base, titillate the opposition and distract the Democrats from what's really going on. Rove is not only safe, his partnership intact, but needed desperately by Bush. They simply cannot afford to lose big in the 2006 mid-terms, which is something that is a real possibility." Democrats.com: "Karl Rove gave up the policy part of his job for a simple reason: he's about to be indicted and frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs, thus making Joe Wilson's dream come true."
Also with lefty thoughts: The Carpet Bagger, TPM, and The Democratic Daily
Captain Ed's thoughts are a good reflection of righty opinion: "Karl Rove will leave the policy portfolio behind and work exclusively on the upcoming elections. That hardly qualifies as a surprise, either. ...Most of us expected Rove to informally drop the policy-wonk persona once the 2006 primaries came close. This only makes that reassignment official. The GOP needs a fully-engaged Karl Rove in the election, especially since the polling has looked somewhat grim for the Republicans, at least nationally. With the party squabbling and a testy debate about to break out about the direction of the party, Rove can lend his formidable talents to bringing political unity among the factions."
DEMOCRATS: What's The Big Idea?
In a web exclusiveThe American Prospect 's Michael Tomasky puts forward a new guiding principle for the donkey party: "The Democrats need to become the party of the common good. Democrats can stand for an idea: the idea that we're all in this -- post-industrial America, the globalized world, and especially the post-9-11 world in which free peoples have to unite to fight new threats -- together, and that we have to pull together, make some sacrifices, and, just sometimes, look beyond our own interests to solve our problems and create the future."
None other than kos himself felt the need to respond: "Tomasky argues that the interest groups must be tamed and a leader must emerge to symbolize this transcendence from the individual and his or her pet cause, to something much bigger, much more inspiring. ... Tomasky's dream candidate is Gov. Brian Schweitzer from Montana, though he's still committed to fixing the mess Republicans made in Montana and won't be available for national duty until the next decade. Others might and hopefully will emerge. But it's clear that the future of the Democratic Party isn't the current collection of constituency and issue groups. It's committed, movement-building progressives who fight for higher principles than narrow self-interest, and sell that vision to an American public that isn't as selfish and self-centered as Republicans would have everyone believe."
Atrios also chimed in, but with a little more doubt: "Tomasky does a good job of fleshing out the potential pitfalls, as well as recognizing that it may just be his inner idealist talking. But I think many people do want to feel a part of something bigger than themselves, something they feel is a force for good. What the Democrats still don't have is a philosophy, a big idea that unites their proposals and converts them from a hodgepodge of narrow and specific fixes into a vision for society."
Chuck Pennacchio fan Fact-esque doesn't think the current Dem PA SEN candidate lives up to Tomasky's creed: "If you believe what Michael Tomasky wrote about Democrats needing to become the party of the common good, and how being part of a cause greater than themselves will resonate with voters, then you should be out canvassing for Chuck Pennacchio. ...if Casey is your guy, then I don't want to hear anymore about ideals and the common good and how important Democratic values are to you, because you will have proven that not any of that is true."
Also with thoughts: Digby Blog, Shakespeare's Sister, Interesting Times, and Prairie Weather.
IMMIGRATION: Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don't
Responding AP reports of an ICE raid that netted both illegal workers and their employers, TalkLeft questions the timing of the sting: "The poll numbers are down, immigration is the hot new issue, and the administration needs to look like it's doing something. It's time to look tough. ...Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been quite tolerant of the business community's desire to employ aliens who haven't been authorized to work. If ICE made a serious effort to hold corporate executives accountable, the GOP's corporate base would howl in protest." Righties unhappy with past enforcement also asked why now. Riehl World View: Pardon me if I question the timing. Though I hope it's the start of an on going trend and includes deportation. Oh, but wait a minute, they need only turn around and come back in." Right Wing News wants to know why it doesn't happen more often: "On the other hand, since we can do this under the current laws, why aren't we seeing it 3 or 4 times a week? I mean let's face it, folks, if "ICE actually busts a lot of illegal immigrants and their employers" is a big story, it's a pretty good indication that ICE isn't getting the job done. The very fact that this story is making big news just goes to show you that there is an immigration enforcement problem in this country."
Not everyone is pessimistic though. Betsy's Page Highlights a Howard Dean appearance yesterday and concludes: "If what Dean said represents the view of Democrats, then you would think that a compromise would be available. Do the tough border control and then work on legalizing those who are here. That's what Dean says he wants and the position that the Democrats are going to start advertising as their own. ...Secure the borders first, with a fence if need be, and then talk about legalization. Now, if Howard Dean can just convince his associates in the Congress, something could perhaps be worked out." If any new proposal looks like the Senate's latest effort then PoliPundit wants none of it: "The McKennedy amnesty drives me nuts. McKennedy would add about 60-80 million Democrat votes over the next 50 years. In its scope and impact, it is nothing short of the extinguishing of the Republican party, and our Republic. Nothing else matters as much. Not tax cuts, not partial-birth abortion, not Iraq, not the Supreme Court. McKennedy is the one issue on which there can be no compromise.
BLOGGER SPOTLIGHT:
Today the Blogometer talks to Betsy Newmark
What is your full name?
Betsy Newmark
What is your age?
49
Where did you grow up?
In a suburb of Chicago.
Where do you live now?
Raleigh, NC
What is your occupation?
I teach at a charter high school in Raleigh. I teach American history, both an AP class and a honors class, AP U.S. Government and Politics, and a seminar elective on the American Revolution and Civil War.
Have you ever worked on a political campaign or for the mainstream media?
No
When did you start blogging and why?
I started in June of 2002. At first I thought it would just be a fun thing to do and that I could use it to put up links to stories that my students would be interested in. I could put up a link to a story that demonstrated something about a concept we talked about in class and then refer kids to my blog for the exact link.
As I got more political in my focus, I de-linked the blog from school website and just looked at blogging as my private hobby and not something for my students. At our school, we try to be very careful about inflicting our political beliefs on the kids and so I wanted to feel free to give my political opinions. Some of my students have found my blog through Google or having heard about it from other kids, but they recognize that it represents my private opinions and is not part of what I do in class.
What has been your favorite post, or favorite story to write about, in that time?
Since I teach a class on AP Government and Politics, I particularly enjoy stories about politics that relate to the theories that we study in political science to see if what is happening in the real world carries out what the theoreticians think happens.
It was a particular thrill during the election when I would live-blog the debates or election night and I realized that thousands of people around the country were checking in to see what I was saying.
I also enjoy blogging a bit on education. I'm a teacher at a charter school and I have strong feelings on the values of charters and school reform. I also have my own experience on the worthlessness of education schools and the whole teacher certification process. I've gotten a lot of good responses when I've posted on education issues. People seem thrilled to find a conservative teacher out there.
Describe your typical blogging schedule.
On school days, I get up at 5:30 am so that I have a chance to blog before school. I may get a chance to check in on my lunch hour, but I usually am busy with students then so I don't get another chance to check the blogosphere until after dinner when I sometimes get another hour or so to blog before I get to work on grading and lessons.
And what is your average output?
Anywhere from 5 - 10 posts a day. Sometimes, I'm just a linker pointing out interesting stories; other times I have time to put up more of my own opinions and analysis.
Who is your favorite political blogger?
That's hard - there are so many. I like Hugh Hewitt a lot and enjoy his radio show - I think it's the best political radio talk show out there. I regularly read Michelle Malkin, Powerline, Captain Ed, Instapundit, and Polipundit. All the usuals. And there are dozens of others that I check in every day.
Favorite non-political blogger?
Well, my family also blogs, so they are my favorites. My husband posts on economics and various other stories that interest him. My older daughter posts on education reform as well as other stories that catch her eye. I don't know if there are any other families out there who are blogging, but it's a tie that we share. Since my daughter lives in Arlington, VA, it's a cool way to find out what she's been thinking about.
Who is your favorite mainstream media columnist?
Charles Krauthammer and Mark Steyn
What is your favorite television news program, either network or cable?
Special Report with Brit Hume. I don't miss it - if I'm busy, I watch it on tape. I love Hume's wry humor and his skill in interviewing guests. I also enjoy the roundtable. It is one of the most intelligent and civil political roundtables out there.
What MSM-produced websites (i.e. newspapers, magazines) do you visit on a daily basis?
Washington Post, Wall Street Journal. I also check in at Lucianne.com as an easy to navigate aggregator of stories that I might find interesting. I read National Review and Weekly Standard and the American Enterprise Magazine also.
What non-MSM websites (i.e. blogs) do you visit on a daily basis?
There are all the ones I mentioned above. I use my Blogroll as my favorites and scroll through those pretty regularly. I love National Review Online and all the auxilliaries that they've created on the Court, media, higher education, etc. James Taranto's Best of the Web column is a very fun take on the news, although that is sponsored by WSJ. I read Joanne Jacobs on education issues and she links to a lot of good edubloggers. I also enjoy getting legal analysis at Volokh. The Anchoress writes interesting posts. John Hawkins at Right Wing News has always been a site that I check out. There are so many out there. People send me links all day long to what they're writing. I just wish I had more time to put into reading it all.
How often, or do you ever, read a newspaper in its dead-tree (i.e. print) form?
I read through the WSJ most days. That is it. I can get a free copy of the Raleigh News and Observer at work, but I don't get much time to do more than check out education stories there and some local coverage. All its national coverage is just from other news syndicates. So, I actually do very little dead-tree reading.
How do you see the new media and old media affecting and influencing each other in the next five years?
They already are. The new media, by which I assume you mean bloggers, is mostly surviving off of getting information and material from the old media. A few bloggers are actually uncovering new information, but mostly bloggers rely on getting information from others and then adding their own analysis and opinions. I think more and more reporters and/or analysts are starting to read bloggers on a regular basis. Michael Barone is a good example of a MSM writer who is fully plugged in to the blogosphere. I've heard that Brit Hume reads blogs regularly. That little segment at the bottom of the hour on his show called the Grapevine mostly comes from things that bloggers have put up earlier. I think this trend will just continue. I expect that it will soon become a requirement of reporters, analysts, and political operatives to check in on what bloggers are saying. Bloggers on the right and left have already become part of important stories and are influencing politicians. They are becoming outlets for political campaigns. I think this trend is just going to grow and grow.
THOUGHT OF THE DAY: And I Thought Creating An Album Was So Hard
Freakonomics fan/musician/blogger Thomas Dolby Describes how his most recent "album" was created: "MTV News published a story, ostensibly about a row between me and another musician. At the end they mentioned that I am about to go out on tour, which is true. At least a dozen web sites and blogs picked up on the MTV story, and quoted from it directly. So far so good. Then Steven D Levitt ... mentioned in his widely-read blog that he had lunch with me in Oxford last summer. As a footnote he stated that I'm back with my first album in 15 years. Hold on -- did someone say 'album'? This is the first I've heard of it. But since Steven's blog, I've seen at least 5 mentions of my new album -- and in fact two of the journalists I did interviews with this week asked me whether I'll be playing songs from the new album in my live show. Next my agent called and said he has two labels interested in distributing me. I'm not kidding."
LEST WE FORGET: How To Get To Sesame Street
For those of you longing to recapture some cherished childhood memories, Folded Space has an impressive collection of archived "Sesame Street" clips, linked via YouTube. One commenter noted: "This is the best post EVER. Thank you, thank you, thank you!"
Posted by Conn Carroll at April 20, 2006 12:29 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.
