June 14, 2006

6/14: Unstoppable

Dismiss them all you want but the Kossacks are now 2-for-2 in DEM SEN primaries (MT & VA). Looking at the latest development from CT and they could be 3-for-3 (and they just might do it a lot sooner than 8/8 if Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) decides to go independent). But as the netroots gets more successful, they're starting to realize they're shooting with real bullets. Lefty blogger consternation is growing on what to do if Lieberman does in fact elect to run against cable co. exec. Ned Lamont (D) as an independent in 11/06. Are Lieberman's crimes really so great that Senate Min. Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) wouldn't welcome him back into the caucus? Here's to hoping the drama plays out in full.

VA progressive blogger Raising Kaine, who has been behind Ex-Navy Sec. James Webb (D) from the beginning has plenty of 6/13 photos and updates from Webb HQ. Summing up the night RK writes: "Jim Webb's victory tonight is a victory for Virginia's netroots. Virginia's progressive blogosphere was not thrilled with the default candidate emerging earlier this year. So ... they drafted a Reagan Republican with a stellar resume to run as a Democrat and propelled him to victory in the primary."

DailyKos quotes UVA prof. Larry Sabato, "Jim Webb is George Allen's worst nightmare," and goes on to note where Webb's support first came from: "Webb was the outsider candidate for most of the race, and that establishment support really followed in the heels of the great grass/netroots support Webb built inside Virginia." Oliver Willis congratulates the netroots for supporting "the more pragmatic candidate." While Greg's Opinion wonders if ex-telecom lobbyist Harris Miller (D) might harbor some resentment.

Expo at DailyKos thinks Webb's strong showing in northern Virginia can be attributed to his blogger support: "People don't realize that Miller dominated the paid media. Absolutely dominated. Webb benefited from strong earned media, but that was more than balanced by Miller's strength in paid media. ... Guys, what in the hell happened here? ... The only two plausible explanations are (1) the extreme level of online activism for Webb, or (2) a major backlash against Miller for his negative ads. NoVa is one of the most wired and most politically-knowledgeable communities in America. In a low turnout election it's conceivable that NoVa voters, who are more likely to get political information through the web, ended up turning out and going for Webb big. It also makes sense that like in most low-turnout primaries, older voters (55+) tend to show up most heavily and they, already angry at politics as usual, revolted against a negative, politics-as-usual campaign from Miller."

Righty bloggers seem to want no part of a Webb candidacy:

• John J. Miller at The Corner: "This race will get a lot of national attention: It will take place right outside the DC media market, Allen is of course a contender for 2008, and Webb is an unconventional candidate who has the ability to make Republicans squirm. One bit of good news for Allen: Turnout was exceedingly low."
• Instapundit: "probably bad news for George Allen."
• Kathryn Jean Lopez at NRO: "A headache for George Allen but an opportunity, too, as his race for reelection becomes a national race-which some will consider to be a referendum on the war in Iraq."

Fellow righty Wizbang thinks Webb might be a one trick pony: "Considering what a political novice Webb is it's a safe bet that both Republicans and Democrats are in for many surprises as he is forced to take positions on issues besides the war in Iraq."

The vacationing Instapundit seems not to have followed the race to closely. He quotes a reader: "Don't you think it's also bad news for the left fringe of the Democrat party? I think it shows that voters will not support the Howard Dean-Kos-fringe and it makes for interesting times as Democrats try to find a presidential candidate for 2008," and then adds his own thoughts: "Yes, when Democrats move to the center, it's bad news for both Republicans and the Democratic far-left." Maybe by the time Nov rolls around Instapundit will figure out who the "Howard Dean-Kos-fringe" actually supported in this race.

Lefty bloggers are doing their best to force Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) to commit to support the winner of the 8/8 Dem primary. Many were up in arms over Lieberman campaign manager Sean Smith's 6/13 answer to WSTC/WNLK's Erik Campano asking whether Lieberman would support cable co. exec. Ned Lamont (D) should he win. According to My Left Nutmeg Smith said, "Are we going to support Ned Lamont? Ah, no!" Audio of the interview can be found here.

ConnecticutBLOG asks Dems generally: "How can you support a person who cares more about himself over the will of the Democratic voters in Connecticut? Joe's campaign just said the very thing we've been saying about Joe from the very beginning ... Lieberman is a Democrat in Name Only." While the unofficial LamontBlog wants commitments from CT Dems specifically: "Which Connecticut Democrats will support their party's candidate for senator after Lieberman abandons them? Malloy? DeStefano? DeLauro? Larson? Murphy? Farrell? Courtney? DiNardo? Let me know if you can find a statement on the record from any of these officials about unconditionally supporting the Democratic candidate for Senate in November. If not, please try to contact them, as well as any other prominent local or state officials. It's time to get the Connecticut Democratic party on the record on this."

The netroots are also still smarting over former Dem state party chair John F. Droney, Jr "Every single weirdo in the left wing will be there," Droney said. "That's what the Lamont strategy is all about." from the 6/13 Hartford Courant. Tim Tagaris at the official Ned Lamont Blog posts pictures of non-weirdo looking CT Dems from Lamont campaign events and comments: "Yup Real radical. If you support Ned, it would be nice to know what your job is. I've met a ton of teachers, students, manufacturers, etc. who support Ned-real radicals, right?" Atrios weighs in: "Only Lieberman Democrats and their kind seem to enjoy insulting voters instead of wooing them. ... Ah, reading through Lieberman's people distanced themselves from their supporter's comments. They're going to have to get all their people on the same page. Lamont can't be both a Republican and the darling of far left weirdos."

The ramifications of a Lieberman independent run following a progressive purge from the party is just now beginning to dawn on lefty bloggers. DailyKos acknowledges that no good could come from the situation of his own creating: "While on the book tour I ran into a top Reid aide. I pressed this aide on what Reid would do if Lieberman quit the party and went independent. After a bit of runaround, the aide finally said, "We have a Lieberman problem." ...I left it at that. My take was that they had no clue what they would do. No solution would be a good one. God knows that we in the netroots and grassroots would demand that committee seats assigned to Democrats should be held by Democrats (with an exception for Republicans who leave their party). But that would be a drastic action to take against someone who was the Democratic vice presidential nominee just a short six years ago."

Jane Hamsher at firedoglake reports on her questioning of Sen. Min. Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) from YearlyKos last weekend: "So I asked him -- if Joe Lieberman leaves the party, what will happen with regard to his committee appointments? Reid was very careful with his words, and very specific. He said that his letter written to delegates on behalf of Lieberman had made it crystal clear that he was endorsing Joe specifically because Joe was committing to stay in the party. But, I pointed out - Lieberman has since that time given several interviews where he has refused to run out the possibility of an independent run. ...Reid said it to me twice, and he chose his words very carefully: It's important for people to know that their actions have consequences."

The Take Back America conference is crawling with bloggers and libertarian David Weigel reported on the scene during Sen. Hillary Clinton's (D-NY) 6/13 speech for Hit and Run: "There's a definite tension at Take Back America preceding Hillary Clinton's 8:15 (or whenever she shows up) speech. ... One of the organizers for Draft Gore is speculating on the reception Hillary will get. "I really hope she doesn't get heckled or booed," he says. "I just plan to give her tepid applause." There are murmurs of agreement. There's no apparent upside for her in coming here. ... There are some boos; Code Pink and other activists have moved themselves up front, so it sounds like half the room is angry, but the ratio is more like one in 50. ... As soon as she starts talking about our troops and "keeping faith with them," there are shouts of "Bring 'em home." That stops her for maybe half a second, but she continues elucidating her non-position on the war, almost feeding off the angry rump of activists."

Common Dreams reported on the efforts of Code Pink at HRC's speech: "Fearing that CODEPINK would openly confront Clinton on her pro-war policy, the organizers of Take Back America entered into negotiations with CODEPINK a few days before the conference. "We had lengthy discussions where they pleaded with us not to protest during her keynote breakfast address," explained Gael Murphy, one of the cofounders of CODEPINK. "Instead, we were told that we could distribute flyers explaining Hillary's pro-war position to the crowd inside and outside the hotel, and we would be called on to ask her the first question after the speech. We agreed." ... A few CODEPINK women did manage to get inside the breakfast, however, as they were legitimate ticket holders. Once inside, the CODEPINK women soon realized that they had been deceived about the second part of the agreement: They would not be allowed to ask the first question, or any question, because Hillary Clinton would not be fielding questions from the audience."

Mahablog was also at the convo and reports a distinct lack of pro-HRC buzz: "Schmoozing in the hall with other attendees, one senses a lack of interest in a Hillary Clinton candidacy. The MSM has been telling us for years that Hillary is a "rock star" with party activists, but I'm not seeing that here. "She can't win" seems to be conventional wisdom."

Matt Stoller at MyDD thinks HRC is out of touch, but doesn't blame her: "I sympathize deeply with Senator Clinton. She has not lived in the real world since 1993 out of necessity. The vicious smears by the right-wing forced her to build a phalanx of advisors who protect her from feedback. This was necessary, but it carries a severe cost. That cost is that she lives in a bubble. It's a different bubble than that of Bush, but not as different as you might imagine. It is a bubble built of big money donors, right-wing beltway pundits, campaign consultants, and constituency group leaders."

Conservative John Podhoretz at The Corner believes HRC got exactly what she wanted out of the event: "There's a lot of talk about how Hillary's rep on the far Left has taken such a hit that she's going to have trouble getting the Democratic nomination. Come on. How does sounding responsible and sober about America's policy in Iraq hurt her? Scenes like this, if they continue through the campaign season, are going to get her elected."

Where HRC struggled Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) thrived at the Take Back America conference 6/13. Lefty Taylor Marsh: "To say John Kerry was on fire today at the Take Back America conference is an understatement. He was relaxed, confident and his message was clearly defined, without hesitation or reservation. He made it absolutely clear that he didn't intend to take any crap from Hillary Clinton, or anyone else for that matter." Video of Kerry's speech can be found here.

Lefty Los Angeles blogger Martini Republic sat down with The Democratic Daily'sPamela Leavy why she is such a huge Kerry fan:

MR: You just put together a small blogger conversation with John Kerry here in LA. You're now the Kerry Gatekeeper in the blogosphere. In fact, you're really been that for some time. You've been very close to the Kerry people since 2003, maybe even before. What do you think Kerry has to offer people that others in the Democratic Party do not?

Leavey: The Kerry Gatekeeper in the blogosphere...I guess that's a good description. I think a couple of people at the "Blooger" meeting here in LA expressed that John Kerry frequently does more in the Senate than many of his peers. From the day he went back to work in the Senate a few days after the election, he's been out there fighting for us. Some would prefer to not acknowledge that. I feel he deserves credit for what he does and so do my readers. On any given day we have new readers chime in and thank us for providing Kerry news and many who say they hope the Senator runs again. There were mistakes made during the campaign, he's working hard to correct that. He's changed a lot in recent months. Having spent some time with him twice in the space of a little over two months, at events here in LA, I've seen that change myself firsthand. There's not much I don't see eye to eye with John Kerry on. From education to the environment, the economy to healthcare, civil rights to perceived needs - I think Kerry gets what America needs. He's a brilliant man, very idealistic and also realistic - I relate to that because I too am very idealistic and realistic. I don't think anyone is more qualified to lead this country out of the mess it is in. I felt that in 2003 when I first got involved with his campaign, three years ago next month and I still feel that.

Catching up on his post YearlyKos press DailyKos didn't let IA Gov. Tom Vilsack's 6/11 (D) New York Timesswipe go unrefuted: "I won't be mean about it, since I'm glad he came to YearlyKos. I think engagement is a good thing, even from the guy who is running the DLC. But perhaps he should worry less about the DLC and me, and worry more about his potential bid. In his own home state of Iowa, Vilsack came in with just 10 percent support, fourth behind Edwards, Hillary, and Kerry."

IA progressive Political Forest also had unkind words for Vilsack, this time for a quote in the 6/13 Des Moines Register not supporting a date for withdraw from Iraq. PF writes: "I'm not sure what Vilsack is trying to do here. Going into the midterms of November, if Democrats don't have a solid policy alternative on Iraq, we're still going to get creamed in certain areas, even if we do make some pick-ups or gain control over one house of Congress. I respect Governor Vilsack for his work here in Iowa, but when it comes to Iraq he's terribly mistaken. You can't move up from 4th in Iowa polling if you think that the current course (no withdrawal) is going to work. Most Americans, 61% disapprove of Bush's current handling and course. Change is needed. Let's get out of there."

GIULIANI: Is Springfield In A Red State?

Former NY mayor Rudy Giuliani's (R) Manhattan Institute energy policy speech generated positive righty blogger buzz. Bryan at HotAir writes: "The fact is, lefties especially should note, if you want to reduce our dependence on Middle Eastern oil, you have to either a) find oil elsewhere; b) buy it from other existing sources; c) produce more oil from known US sources; or d) use something other than oil. ...So let's cowboy up and build some nuke plants. I used to scuba dive right next to the Comanche Peak nuke plant in Texas. I only glowed for an hour or two; otherwise no problem! ...He (Giuliani) still has some New York cleaning up to do on immigration and guns, though, before he can possibly win a GOP primary in a red state."

Fellow righty Decision'08 was also impressed: "I'm glad to see Rudy Giuliani talking up the prospects of nuclear plants. ...I don't how much political resonance this issue has (energy policy is not the most thrilling of topics), but it's good policy made somewhat inevitable due to declining alternatives. The sooner we embark on new nuclear plants, the better."

BLOGGER VS. THE WORLD: The Warner Party At YearlyKos: Day Four

Markos Moulitsas is still taking flak for ex-VA Gov. Mark Warner's (D) 6/10 Las Vegas party. Miles Mogulsecu at The Huffington Post worries that kos is selling his soul to the DLC: "I'm concerned that many in this sector of the liberal blogosphere can be bought off by a politician showing a little interest and stroking their outsider egos. ...Warner is another pro-business politician supported by the corporate-sponsored DLC. To the extent he has taken any positions (his speech was full of generalities and light on specifics), he is hard to distinguish from Hillary Clinton. ...It should take more than a few free Drinks and a shrimp on a stick in a Las Vega hotel to gain the support of the liberal bloggers."

Lefty Kevin Drum at The Washington Monthly worries that the party proved bloggers to be just another interest group: "Mainly, though, I wonder what the politicians thought of it. Do they really think the blogosphere is where the action is, or is it...just the "new Iowa" - except with speeches about direct democracy and net neutrality instead of ethanol and crop subsidies? I'm not yet sure about that. But in any case, should I really support a candidate just because he "gets the internet"? Whatever that means? I'm not sure about that either."

Kausfiles (no permalink, must scroll) jumps into the DailyKos fray wondering when the MSM honeymoon will end for Markos: "I rag on Markos Moulitsas for his 2004 "screw them" comment about the four American security contractors killed in Fallujah. That comment was more offensive than anything Ann Coulter's book is currently being criticized for. ...Yet Tim Russert and the rest of the MSM are falling over themselves giving respect to Kos. Is this due to a) liberal bias or b) Kos' seemingly determined Graydon-Carteresque attempt to make himself presentable** and join the club [$] he's been attacking? I suspect (b).

MURTHA: Stay The Course

Lefty Michael Crowley at The Plank doesn't see much news in the suspension of Rep. John Murtha's (D-PA) campaign for majority leader. Crowley quotes a Hill reader: " Murtha "suspending" operations means nothing. These races are all on the DL, and this just means there won't be public commitment lists. But make no mistake about it, the fissures have come through, the tensions will only grow and fester. Everything will be seen in light of whose side someone is on, whether they are a Hoyer person or Pelosi/Murtha person. This announcement is the rhetorical equivalent of trying to put Astroturf on the San Andreas fault."

Meanwhile, DailyKos not only wants Murtha to push Rep. Stenny Hoyer (D-MD) out of the leadership after Nov, he also wants Dems to replace Hoyer all together and move Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) out of leadership too: "Steny Hoyer is a real danger to House Democrats and must be taken out. Now was the wrong time to launch his challenge, but as soon as the elections are over, we need to make it a top priority of ours to help Murtha wipe Hoyer from the Democratic leadership. And Maryland Democrats, start looking around for a Hoyer challenger for 2008. You guys deserve better. I wouldn't mind a leadership challenge to Nancy Pelosi either, for that matter, but more than one congressperson has told me that's wishful thinking and won't happen.

Admittedly for different reason Hotline-alum Craig Crawford writing at The Huffington Post wants to see Murtha challenge Pelosi now: "Hey Jack Murtha, why stop at declaring yourself a candidate for "Majority Leader" if Democrats win the House? Challenge Nancy Pelosi now. Giving Pelosi as much benefit of the doubt as possible, I simply do not think the Democrats will succeed with her at the helm. For starters, Pelosi's miserable performance on NBC's "Meet The Press" (5/7/06) was as insecure, halting and equivocal as it gets - and her many appearances elsewhere have been no better. Pelosi might be a skilled backroom operator, but compared to Newt Gingrich's fiery crusade to GOP victory in 1994 -- well, there is no comparison."

Huffington Post commenter MrLion likes Crawford's analysis: "The Democratic Party is like the New York Yankees during the 1960s. They won five straight pennants at the start of the decade. Then something happened. Years of neglecting the farm system caught up to them. They finished below .500 four of the next five seasons. Which makes Nancy Pelosi the Ralph Houk of the Democratic Party."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Conservatism's Never Really Been Tried

Talking Points Memo isn't buying conservative pundit distancing from Pres. Bush. For TPM their case is beginning to sound like communist true-believers in deep denial:

"With all the efforts now to disassociate President Bush from conservatism, I am starting to believe that conservatism itself -- not the political machine, mind you, but the ideology -- is heading toward that misty land-over-the-ocean where ideologies go after they've shuffled off this mortal coil. Sort of like the way post-Stalinist lefties used to say, "You can't say Communism's failed. It's just never really been tried."

"But as it was with Communism, so with conservatism. When all the people who call themselves conservatives get together and run the government, they're on the line for it. Conservative president. Conservative House. Conservative Senate. What we appear to be in for now is the emergence of this phantom conservatism existing out in the ether, wholly cut loose from any connection to the actual people who are universally identified as the conservatives and who claim the label for themselves."

The Blogometer quotes Chris Bowers at MyDD almost daily. He consistently provides clear and poignant analysis on many subjects that the Blogometer covers. That said, Bowers can go a little over the top sometimes, especially when it comes to self-praise:

"A wise man once told me that he thought MyDD had better commentators than any other blog around. When I heard that, my reaction was a mix of dismissive gawfaws, and total agreement. Looking at the comments below my two posts today (here and here), I have no choice but to agree with the positive assessments. Given this, I just want to make one thing clear to some people who do not view MyDD as a place for thoughtful, strategic appreciation of the progressive movement: your days are numbered."

This is not a casual chat room. This is not another random political message board. When MyDD is fulfilling its mission, it is a place for serious people to make serious comments. I have always argued that bloggers should be taken seriously because they are serious people. Live up to that promise on MyDD, and you will be rewarded. Think this is child's play, and you will not be. That is my promise. That is my threat. Don't for a minute think that I won't follow thought on it, given proper time and attention.

As Jerry Seinfeld quipped: "It's that little bit of arrogance in the medical community, I think we could all live without."

Posted by Conn Carroll at June 14, 2006 12:25 PM