June 13, 2006

6/13: Left Behind?

Reaction to prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's Karl Rove non-indictment announcement is dominating the blogosphere 6/13. Gloating and truthout.org-grave-stomping are the order of the day for those on the right while those lefties who are commenting note the investigation is still ongoing and hope that further Bush admin. nefariousness will still be uncovered.

In other developments the progressive 'sphere continues to pull Dems in their direction. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) comes in for some, by now expected, lefty-blogger hate, but there's also lefty concern over a rightward drift in Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), and DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas also finds himself protecting his left flank over his support for ex-VA Gov. Mark Warner (D).

Not only does DailyKos support Ex-Navy Sec. Jim Webb (D), he thinks Webb represents everything the netroots wants in a candidate: "One of the main knocks against Webb is that he's a former Republican. And, in fact, a former Secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan. Far from a bad thing, this is exactly what we want: Republicans realizing that if they truly want a better America they need to switch to the Democrats. Republicans realizing that America's security isn't being strengthened, but weakened by the party of CIA agent outings and the Dubai ports deal. I'll be blunt. If Harris Miller wins, there probably won't be much of a Senate race in Virginia in November. If Webb wins, this race will catapult to the top second-tier and could become a top-tier race before long."

Berkeley bloggers aren't the only ones supporting Webb. Virginia Progressive: "I support Jim Webb and I want to tell you why. ... Jim is reliably pro-choice. ... On gay-related issues ... he supports civil unions ... Webb is opposed to the Constitutional Amendment (so-called Marriage Amendment) on the ballot in Virginia this fall ... Webb opposed the Iraq War before it started and has consistently spoken out against it ever since ... Webb can win in November."

VB Dems Blog offers more tepid Webb support: "I am the most shallow person on the face of this planet. Like many others, I have flipped and flopped on who to support between Harris Miller and Jim Webb. ... Here's where my shallowness comes in. I'm voting for Webb because most of my friends are. That's pretty bad, isn't it?"

The Virginia Centrist sees the primary more as a test for the blogosphere than the Dems: "In reality, Tuesday's election is a referendum on the liberal primary voters' view of Harris Miller or Jim Webb. However, in politics, perception is reality, and the perception is that tomorrow is a referendum on blogs and their role in primaries. ... I suspect that there are plenty of politicians in both parties who hope Harris Miller pulls this off tomorrow. For them, a Miller win will signify that bloggers shrill sense of self-importance is unjustified. This will be a great victory for Virginia politicians who miss the good old days (2 years ago) when they could legislate from the shadows, completely immune to any scrutiny from activists or citizens."

Feeling pressure from his own comment boards, Kos posted a lengthy defense of ex-VA Gov. Mark Warner's (D) 6/10 Las Vegas party:

Warner sent a strong message not just to us, but to the media and political establishments that the netroots matters. And in politics, $100K is pocket change. Better spend it on a blogger party where the candidate socialized with regular people than on bulls**t television ads or crappy consultants. ... Lost in the hubbub was the fact that Wes Clark also had a big bash for bloggers at the Hard Rock Casino with open bar. Sure, it wasn't the Stratosphere, but all such parties in Vegas cost serious money. ...All politics costs serious money. It's not a bad thing for us, or them, to have them spend some of it talking to us.

A completely unscientific survey of comments to kos' post shows the DLC is still hated and most Kossacks are weary of Warner:

• blogswarm: "He is with the DLC on policy, with the netroots when it comes to picking up the bar tab. That isn't a leader, it is a lobbyist."
• DeanFan84: "Jerome and Kos SOLD access. That is what happened this weekend. Frankly, I would have liked to have heard more from Tom Vilsack and Bill Richardson, who were also in attendance. What I wanted to hear was a dialogue about how the Democratic Party can fix its problems and move forward together. Instead Warner skipped over the dialogue in a show of power and glamour."
• landrew: "Wasn't it Kos himself...ho just told us a few weeks ago that the DLC was one of the worst organizations in the world - that it was a dinosaur destined for extinction?"
• Joe Buck: "My issue with Warner is that he seems to be adopting foreign policy stands from the DLC wing of the party. That's a recipe for disaster. ...Up until now, most Europeans distinguish between the American people and the American government. But elect a Democrat with neocon war-hawk ideas, and it's over; the hostility to Americans abroad is likely to go through the roof."

Still many Kossacks were willing to cut Warner and the DLC some slack. JTA: "So what if he gave a speech to the DLC or associated with the organization? It's not the republican party, last I checked."

TPMmuckraker reports that 40-year-old Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA) aide Jeffrey Shockey, who reportedly earned $2M in '05, is a senior citizen according to DC records. The senior citizen status "qualifies him for a major break on the taxes he pays on his home, a manse thought to be worth over a million dollars."

Talking Points Memo also followed up on earlier TPMmuckraker reports that Shockey claimed the House Ethics Cmte signed off on his extracurricular lobbying firm payments. Talking Points Memo quotes two readers, a Dem staffer and a DC campaign finance lawyer who doubt the veracity of Shockey's claims. From the lawyer: "If Shockey didn't get a written opinion from the House Ethics Committee then the Committee didn't approve his arrangement. Anyone who has ever dealt with the professional staff on the Ethics Committee will tell you that if you call and make an oral request for advice they will give you they best guidance they can given the facts presented, but that their oral advice doesn't constitute Ethics Committee approval for any proposed course of action."

Righty bloggers jumped all over Rep. Jim Moran's (D-VA) 6/12 "I'm going to earmark the s#1t out of it" comment. The Political Pit Bull noted some dissonance on the spending issue.

"Democrats pledge to restore responsible budgeting, and follow the strict rules of pay-as-you go. Fiscal responsibility will be the only option when we control the Congress." - House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, May 18, 2006. "When I become chairman [of a House approps subcmte] I'm going to earmark the sh** out of it!" - Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA), 6/9/06.

The Pit Bull finishes: "As bad as Republicans have been in terms of fiscal responsibility, I don't think I've heard any use such a, umm, colorful expression to imply that they'll increase the number of earmarks like crazy. But I'm sure it was just a slip of the tongue ..."

Righty Captain's Quarters quips: "So far, that may be the only specific action on the Democratic agenda for this mid-term election." And Blue Crab Boulevard concludes: "And this is why the Democrats are just not getting the traction they think they should have."

Lefty TPMmuckraker asks: "So this is how Dems run an anti-corruption platform?"

Matt Stoller at MyDD notes this Nationpiece on Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) and worries that Obama is: "an insider first, an institutionalist second, and a progressive third." Stoller theorizes: "One thing to consider is that Obama walked into the Senate. His primary opponent and his general election opponent both self-destructed. In some small way, he thinks of himself as a fraud who snuck into the Senate, undeserving of the attention he gets on a regular basis. He's never had to make that call to pull the trigger on the negative ads. He's never weathered the scandals. He's never been won an actual media intensive campaign. That might be why he's cautious."

Chris Bowers at MyDD has a graphic up analyzing Sen. Hillary Clinton's (D-NY) approval ratings' among Dems as they report more blog reading. Bowers: "The more frequently a netroots activist readers blogs, the less likely s/he is to have a favorable opinion of Hillary Clinton. While netroots activists who never read blogs have an opinion of Hillary Clinton roughly comparable to all Democrats, netroots activists who regularly read political blogs actually have an overall negative opinion of Hillary Clinton, at 45% favorable and 54% unfavorable. ...Given these rather remarkable numbers, the $640,000,000 question is whether or not blog readers really are the influential, cutting edge of Democratic public opinion, or whether we are an isolated group that has little overall impact on the sentiment of the Democratic rank and file. Considering results from the recent Iowa poll, the recent Connecticut poll, and the Montana Senatorial primary (among other things), I am strongly inclined to believe that the opinions held by progressive, political blog readers eventually come to be shared by a wide percentage of the Democratic rank and file."

Norman Solomon at The Huffington Post explains why HRC ought not be warmly welcomed by progressive 6/13 at the "Take Back America 2006" conference: "The Take Back America schedule set aside half an hour for a speech from Clinton but not a minute for any words from Jonathan Tasini, the longtime union activist who's running -- on an antiwar and all-around progressive platform -- against Clinton in this year's Democratic primary for senator from New York. ...It's sad to see that the progressive conference has excluded from the podium the vigorous primary challenger Tasini while featuring a speaker who has stood against the progressive agenda consistently for more than a decade on issues ranging from NAFTA to the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Tasini points out that Hillary Clinton remains for the war in Iraq, for so-called "free trade" agreements and for the death penalty.

The lion's share of blogging on the non-indictment of Karl Rove is being done by the right so far 6/13. Hot Air celebrates under the header: "Let the gloating begin." Meanwhile Another Rovian Conspiracy has a detailed take down of truthout.org's Jason Leopold and Marc Ash.

Lefty Christy Hardin Smith at firedoglake isn't ready to throw in the towel yet: "I've said this before, and I will say it again: unless and until I hear it from Patrick Fitzgerald, the investigation continues to be ongoing. Which means that there are still potential developments down the road, should the evidence (like handwritten marching orders on the Wilson op-ed in Dick Cheney's handwriting) lead there."

Also on the left MediaMatters makes sure no one forgets there is still the issue of Rove's security clearance: "As Media Matters has previously explained, both Rove's apparent confirmation of CIA officer Valerie Plame's identity to syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak and his alleged disclosure of her identity to Time magazine correspondent Matthew Cooper should trigger the loss of his security clearance under the Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement. ...Now that Rove is apparently no longer the subject of an "ongoing investigation" into the Plame matter, Media Matters hopes reporters will demand answers about his security clearance."

BLOGGER SPOTLIGHT: Gary Farber

Today the Blogometer talks to lefty funny-man Gary Farber, who writes Amygdala.

What is your full name?

Gary Farber. You don't get the unused middle name.

What is your age?

When I first got this q and a, 46; now 47.

Where did you grow up?

Born in Flatbush, Brooklyn, NY; moved to Midwood, Brooklyn, NY, when 3, though just slavishly following my parents.

Where do you live now?

Boulder, Colorado

What is your occupation?

Slacker.

Have you ever worked on a political campaign or for the mainstream media?

Have you ever worked on a political campaign or for the mainstream media? Trivial volunteer work on a smattering of campaigns, including John Anderson and Gary Hart in '80, Hart again in '84, Dukakis in '88, Tsongas, then Clinton in '92. Plus a smattering of local races; I first did some volunteering for Elizabeth Holtzman in Brooklyn in the Seventies, when she was my Congressional Rep.

When did you start blogging and why?

December, 2001; it was purely an extension of precisely the same sort of writing/linking I'd been doing on certain Usenet newsgroups, particularly the rec.arts.sf.* hierarchy (along with other sorts of writing more like blog comments), since 1995, which flowed out of the sort of writing I'd been doing for science fiction fanzines and amateur press association since age 12 in 1971; it's all one long flow/continuum for me.

I have a lot of opinions, though mostly I try to publically express them only on a smattering of specific subjects I like to think I have some minimal knowledge of; I've also always been a neophile, and like to share news about what excites or intrigues or cracks me up. It's part social thing, part attempt to Do Good, part attempt to justify my existence in the universe, part attempt to make it easier for me to find where bits of info I want to later refer to came from, part arrogance, and part why not?

What has been your favorite post, or favorite story to write about, in that time?

Geez, I've been doing this for more than four and a half years, and thousands of posts: who can sort that out? Things that still get hits at times from years past include writing about Site R, Cheney's favorite Undisclosed Location; using my knowledge of typewriter history to write about the Rather/Bush document questions, in which I first pointed out that many of the claims as to why they were forgeries were factually incorrect, but then had to conclude that the documents were nonethless clearly forgeries anyway (thus pleasing absolutely no one, which is typical for me); various things about science fiction, which field I essentially grew up in (I keep forgetting that even casual posts about Robert Heinlein wind up getting unexpected amounts of attention). "I've been following the NSA "Program" story with close attention, and now am also giving considerable coverage to the Haditha story."

Describe your typical blogging schedule. And what is your average output?

Have trouble keeping to a regular sleep/wake schedule; deal with insomnia by making lots of coffee; fall asleep again. As has been pointed out, I used to cycle between periods of not-much-blogging and 60-posts-a-day. In recent months I've been experimenting with trying to keep to strictly under 10-20 posts a day, hoping that more of them will actually be read by more people that way; since I seem to remain largely dependent on getting links from Bigger Name Bloggers to get read by more than a handful of people other than random search engine users, none of this seems to make much difference, so my schedule in the long term seems to consist of posting something, then six weeks or six months later, I point out to someone in their comments that I already posted on that Back Then.

Who is your favorite political blogger? Favorite non-political blogger?

I hate questions that ask for single favorites; I never have 'em. Among my favorites are, in random order, Jim Henley, Ted Barlow, Hilzoy of Obsidian Wings, Katherine of Obsidian Wings, Thomas Nephew, and, of course, the kings, Giblets, Fafnir, and the Medium Lobster of Fafblog!.

Who is your favorite mainstream media columnist?

I used to have several; now I mostly range from hating them to having only mild contempt for them. I think the form is problematic and too limiting: few humans can churn out quality in 500 words 3 times a week, or even 1500 words weekly, for very long. I'm not sure anyone hasn't suffered visible burnout after a few years. But columnists I once liked I'd be embarassed to name after their output in the last year or in recent years. (Friedman, Ignatius, once Dowd, etc.) I appreciate Kristof on Darfur, but not much on domestic politics; I still like Kinsley when he's on a roll, but sometimes he's awful; I can still get everyone to hate me if I say that I appreciate C. Hitchens for being stimulating, even though I think he's wildly wrong much of the time; I find British columnists such as Johann Hari and David Aaronovitch and Matthew Parris interesting.

What is your favorite television news program, either network or cable?

network or cable? I've not had cable in a long time, and never for long long periods, so my choices are extremely limited. I still watch fairly promiscuoulsy most of what the networks provide, both nightly and Sunday morning; the regular morning shows have become an insult to consider "news"; they're just long commercials, interspersed with crap and cooking segments, and I lost interest years ago. I don't let not having cable stop me from despising Bill O'Reilly; I do read transcripts. PBS Newshour, actually, come to think of it, is my "favorite," I guess; once Nightline, but not in umpty years.

What MSM-produced websites (i.e. newspapers, magazines) do you visit on a daily basis?

NY Times, Washington Post, often Slate.

What non-MSM websites (i.e. blogs) do you visit on a daily basis?

Mememorandom, Unqualified Offerings.

How often, or do you ever, read a newspaper in its dead-tree (i.e. print) form?

Not often; if I ever get back to a job where I'm commuting by mass transit, it would be either the local paper or NY Times.

How do you see the new media and old media affecting and influencing each other in the next five years?

Lots of sex and mutant babies.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Fight Club

Arianna Huffington at The Huffington Post looks at Rep. Jack Murtha's (D-PA) announced challenge to House Min. Whip/potential maj. leader candidate Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and concludes that a resolution of this fight before Nov. could benefit Dems takeover chances:

"I see Murtha's decision, and the debate it has begun to spark, as the perfect chance for the party to find its voice and clearly define itself -- particularly when it comes to Iraq, the paramount issue in American politics. ..."At the moment, the Democrats' equivocating position on Iraq is a major reason why they are failing to fully capitalize on voters' widespread desire for change - or, as the latest Democracy Corps poll puts it, "underperforming." Indeed, according to the poll [pdf], "there has been no improvement in feelings about Democrats in this change environment; in fact positive views of the party have actually declined over the past few months."

"The rapidly coalescing conventional wisdom is that a leadership race among House Democrats is the last thing the party needs heading into November, and plays right into the GOP's hands. ...By making it clear that the party intends to follow Murtha's call for immediate redeployment of our troops rather than Hoyer's Bush-lite approach, Democrats can draw a sharp contrast with the GOP (and isn't that what elections are about?) on the issue that has become the Republicans' greatest vulnerability."

"Rather than divisive, the leadership battle could prove decisive -- and mean the difference between winning and losing in November."

Still upset over soccer USA's absolute embarrassment 6/12? Want to take out your anger on other countries? Then Betfair World Cup has just the slick promo to relieve your anxieties (and of course entice you to lose all your $$$ on a sport you know nothing about). The World Cup Mascot Smackdown allows to chose a country mascot for yourself and the computer, and then you just start beating the crap out of each other. Mascots include a German Sausage, a Spanish Bull, and buxom Swedish beauty.

Posted by Conn Carroll at June 13, 2006 12:13 PM