7/14: The Hundred-Storyline Story

Apparently no one has anything to do during the summers, which allows everyone to comment on everything. And on days like today, there is no shortage of subjects on which to opine. While we type, the Tanzanian Ambassador to the UN is adding his two cents to the current flame-up in the Middle East, and we're sure hundreds of other bloggers are busy developing their own. That story in itself is enough to take up the entire Blogometer, and while we were tempted, we tried to restrain ourselves. It remains, however, one of those stories that can never be done justice because of the swarm it has generated.

Also in the news, it seems a former aide to Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) has conveniently tied up one of the sen's biggest critics as the two fire back and forth about that critic's employment history. Further proof is offered that Americans love lawsuits -- or that one ex-ambassador just can't stand to be out of the news. And at least a few bloggers help answer a question we're interested to see play out: What if Sept. 11th becomes someone's liability?

All that and a little weekend cowbell in today's Blogometer.

MIDDLE EAST: A Thousand Little Pieces

As tensions between Israel and much of the Arab world rise once again, the righty blogosphere is taking note, in a big way. A number of angles of the story are being followed, so we'll try and break them out.

The Dumb Ox leads off our coverage with a statement that represents much of the rest of the blogosphere's beliefs: "Israeli action is not aimed at a 'reprisal' (Reuters) for Hezbollah's killing and kidnapping of Israeli soldiers. Israel's attacks in Lebanon are aimed at isolating Hezbollah assets for their subsequent destruction. There will be no retreat until that task is accomplished in our humble opinion. Hezbollah's attacks and threats, some 70+ missiles launched into Israel since the invasion -- 2 killed and over 40 wounded -- and Euro-U.N. pleading will not and ought not prevent Israel's simple self-defense." Obsidian Wings sounds a more moderate note, detailing the conflict step by step, and concludes that some of this, at least, should be preventable by the U.S., if only. He concludes: "We currently have an administration that simply does not know how to do diplomacy. For all the talk about how Bush has now embraced diplomacy, I haven't seen any sign that this administration has any skill at it whatsoever, or that this 'embrace' involves anything more than the realization that the one tool this administration does like to use -- military force -- is off the table for now. And even if the administration had some skill at diplomacy, it has so thoroughly squandered the respect it would need to draw on at a moment like this that it would be very unlikely to succeed." And, says Legal Fiction, while Israel may have gone over the top, it "obviously ... has to do something. And I'm not saying that it shouldn't kill these people to defend itself. But there's a big difference in targeting terrorists and bombing the Beirut airport. Because the surrounding countries are such impotent jokes, they can get away with that for many decades to come probably. But that won't last forever. At some point, it has to stop. For Israel's own sake." Isreallycool is live-blogging the conflict from Israel, while Power Line's Joel Mowbray is sending dispatches from the region.

Yesterday's US veto of a UN resolution sponsored by Qatar condemning Israel's "disproportionate use of force" in attempts to get several kidnapped soldiers back has drawn comments from across the spectrum. TigerHawk: "This was a good veto to cast. It seems to me obvious that Israel's use of force has been extremely measured, all things considered. Indeed, it has not yet been sufficient to coerce the return of the soldiers held hostage by Hamas and Hezbollah, so whatever its proportionality it is manifestly inadequate." Michael J.W. Stickings: "This is one case where I agree wholeheartedly (well, almost) with the U.S. and find the U.N. to be, as some find it often to be, an apologist for terrorism and authoritarianism. ... I don't want to see Israel use excessive force (or the wrong kind of force) in Lebanon as it tracks down its enemies, and I certainly don't want this offensive to escalate into a broader war in the Middle East, but criticizing Israel for defending itself and for refusing to stand idly by as its enemies plot its demise makes little sense to me. You may not always approve of what Israel does, but at least show some understanding of Israel's predicament and some empathy for the Israelis themselves." European Secular Blasphemy, noting that while the US was alone in voting against the resolution, Britain, Denmark, Peru and Slovakia abstained: "Why didn't they vote against? It's rather simple: don't shoot at Israel and it will not shoot back! Would any European nation restrain from responding militarily if rockets were raining down on their civilians? Of course not! The mere thought is absurd. But Israel is obviously required to lie down and die whenever they are attacked." == Righty Stephen Spruiell parses the resolution and reaction by a certain US ambassador to the UN: "And then we have John Bolton, fighting the creation of incentives for terrorists. Did I read somewhere that moustaches are making a comeback? All of a sudden I feel like growing a solidarity 'stache." == Outside The Beltway, meanwhile, thinks the veto is ironic. Atlas Shrugs has a petition for supporters of Israel to sign.

Counterterrorism Blog notes that a missle that hit the Israeli city of Haifa, about 18 miles south of the Lebanese border, was manufactured in Iran. Kesher Talk, on Hezbollah's inability to control it's own troops: "As all the world now knows, rockets launched - presumably by Hezbollah from Lebanon -- have hit Israel for the first time. What is less known is that the Hezbollah leadership is denying responsibility for it." == The Jawa Report thinks an attack on Haifa is a bigger deal than the media is reporting. An Unsealed Room relates Haifa to Dallas: "Let me try to describe exactly how the Hezbollah's missiles hitting Haifa was crossing a huge psychological red line for Israelis. Imagine for a minute that there were terrorist groups sitting in Mexico. Every once in a while, they acted up, and there were incursions into small towns in southern Texas -- a missile was lobbed, the citizens had to go into bomb shelters. It would be horrible, everyone would wring their hands, every attempt possible would be done to stop it. ... Now compare that to a situation in which those terrorists got hold of longer-range missiles. They started firing into downtown Houston and downtown Dallas. And no one can tell if they might just start aiming for San Diego or Los Angeles. ... At this point, there will be no such thing as 'overreaction' when it comes to the average Israeli. The rubicon has been crossed."

Meanwhile, many bloggers siezed on a report that the Saudi gov't has blamed Hezbollah for the conflict. Liberty and Justice summarizes.

The Washington Post reports that Hezbollah attacks on towns and outposts in northern Israel may be costing the group support in Lebanon. Former AP reporter Christopher Allbritton, who now splits time between Lebanon and Iraq, writes: "[W]here to go from here? More fighting, it looks like. Israel today is starting to make bellicose statements about 'enforcing 1559' (which calls for the disarming of Hizbullah and other militias) and not letting Hizbullah back near the border (by a new occupation of a 1-km-wide 'security band' on Lebanese territory). This is a recipe for chaos, violence and renewed civil conflict, and it's very real and very close. But for Israel, keeping a bunch of weakened scorpions in a bottle may be exactly what they want. It's a crime that it's the Lebanese people who will get stung." Democrat Taylor Marsh, on 1559: "Lots of luck on that one. It's not going to happen, because as others have said, Hezbollah seems to be mirroring Hamas." == Carl in Jersualem: "If the result of this war is that the Lebanese government re-asserts control over the South and Hezbullah is no longer there, I think the IDF would withdraw and Israelis would be pleased. Of course, getting Hezbullah thug Hassan Nasrallah to agree to withdraw from the Southern border area is going to take a lot of doing. And that's why Israeli jets are bombing Dahiya." == Dan Drezner thinks varying coverage by US papers shows a lack of understanding of the story by the media.

Those keeping an eye on blogosphere reaction and rounding up MSM news include OPFOR, Assorted Babble, Marc Schulman (and here), War and Piece, Atlas Shrugs, Hot Air, The American Thinker, Blogs of War, Protein Wisdom

MIDDLE EAST II: The Iranian Connection

Anticipating spreading of the crisis, Iran has warned Israel not to lash out at Syria, which, according to Lebanon, is behind the recent Hezbollah attacks, according to Haaretz. QandO thinks Iran's involvement "would probably mean an increase in Iranian support for Hezbollah and it wouldn't surprise me if it somehow meant increased attacks on coalition forces in Iraq in an attempt to have the US to pressure on Israel to back off." Blue Crab Boulevard: "If I were [Syrian Pres.] Bashir Assad, I would not feel real confident right now, though. Psychos [Iranian Pres. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad] intent on bringing about the end of the world don't make real reliable allies." == DEBKAfile reports that Iran's Nat'l Security Advisor has flown to Damascus and will remain until the crisis has passed, and that Hezbollah acted on orders from Tehran. Hyscience summarizes. == Weighing in from an entrenched righty position, Mere Rhetoric: "On the same day that Iran threatens to declare war against Israel, the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France, and Germany reveal a package deal that would give Iran nuclear reactors. That is all." Joe Gandelman: "Has The War On Iran Begun?" One of his commentors: "we're all gonna die in like 3 years. watch." == Captain Ed, meanwhile, is one of the few righties who questions Israel's tactics, though he questions whether the country is acting in its own best interest: "It seems that the likely outcome of this war will be an Israeli victory, and a weakened Lebanon that will fall back into Syrian control. It seems like a mistake to me. Hopefully, I'm wrong, but I fail to see how destroying a nascent liberal democracy on its northern border makes Israel any more secure." == Bryan at Hot Air questions the timing of Iran's involvement in the situation: "At the very same moment that Hamas and Hezbollah, terrorist groups that ultimately answer to Iran, egg on war with Israel, which Iran's president has threatened to annihilate a few times over the past few months, North Korea is creating major turbulence on the other end of the world that just happens to involve a couple of US allies. North Korea had Iranian scientists on hand for its July 4 missile tests, indicating that Pyongyang never had any intention of doing anything other than launching those missiles -- including the big Taepodong-2 -- knowing full well what the international reaction would be. The Iranian reaction was apparently more important." == Right Side of the Rainbow follows talk of Iranian involvement. == Via The Moderate Voice, The Israel Project details Iran's connections to Hezbollah.

RCP's Robert Tracinski thinks this is just the beginning, and a number of bloggers jump on his conclusion that the current conflict is much larger than Israel, Lebanon and Gaza. His main point: "Iran is so desperate for war with the West that it is bringing the war to us, openly and willfully initiating a regional conflict that may soon involve three of Iran's proxies -- Hamas, Hezbollah, and Syria -- fighting against America's proxy, Israel. The danger for us is that, in seeking to avoid an unavoidable war with Iran, we have allowed Iran to start the conflict on terms that it believes will be most favorable to it." New York Sun's Twersky heads: "War on Iran Has Begun." Strata-Sphere agrees and lays out the plan: "We need to keep control of the terms in this dance. We cannot let Iran start manipulating us into awkward and exposed positions that they can exploit. The fact is we need some regional allies outside of Israel." == Dr. Sanity: "In all this, Iran is counting on the appeasement of both the UN and the EU; and they haven't been disappointed, have they?" == Digby: "I would not find it suprising for the Bush administration hard liners to work in concert with the Israeli hard-liners to gin up a crisis that ends up "requiring" action against Iran. It is to the political advantage of both groups to do so." Riehl World View has a decidedly different take on things: "If Iran strikes directly at Israel with a missile, they run the risk of a tactical mushroom cloud over Iran, possibly even Tehran. The biggest disappointment in all this so far is Bush and Rice talking about restraint. If that was anything other than a diplomatic flourish, Bush should get the hell out of the White House and let someone who wants to lead in." == Once Upon A Time thinks the Israelis "want a wider war. They've already decided to attack Iran. ... Is it too early for a drink?"

PLAME: Worst Kept Secret

This morning, ex-Amb. Joe Wilson and his wife, ex-CIA agent Valerie Plame, discussed their civil suit against VP Cheney, his ex-CoS, Scooter Libby, and Karl Rove. Word of the suit broke late yesterday, and seems to have received more attention from the righty 'sphere today than the left. A quick scan of the links at Memeorandum, and at some of the other big blogs generates only a few "hooray, let's finally get the truth"-type statements from Plame supporters, and far more "bring it on, idiots" celebrations from the right.

In Search of Utopia: "I am glad to see her doing this. The administration officials who did this knew what they were doing. They may be able to escape the law, but I think a civil court will relish the opportunity to look at this in a whole differn't light." Captain Ed: "Let's put Plame on the stand and really get to the heart of what she hoped to accomplish by promoting her husband for this task. I'd bet the lawsuit gets dropped in a New York minute -- and if not, the record of Wilson's prevarications should easily sink it."

The Next Hurrah: "the most intriguing bit about it will be the way that the named parties -- Cheney, Libby, and Rove -- attempt to counter this without ruining the story they've been telling in the criminal complaint. That tension, I think, explains the Novak bonanza this week. They sent Novak, not Rove, because Rove can't, yet, tell his side of the story without risking legal jeopardy." But a cautionary note: "Everything I've heard says that these kinds of cases are hard to win. So this may be more worthwhile for the way it exposes these thugs than any justice that will be done." == Chuck Keller at TPM Cafe: "She may win. She may be compensated. The culprits may even be punished. But it's too late for justice." == PoliPundit: "It's almost as if the Wilsons are just trying to keep the story that nobody cares about alive, even if it means they will be fully discredited in the process." == NRO's Mark Levin: "Yes, it will be a distraction to the vice president, but it will also be a great opportunity for Cheney and Libby's lawyers to pursue aggressively discovery."

Needlenose wonders: "Does this (along with the recent announcements by Karl Rove and Bob Novak) imply that Plamemania special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has given up any intention of prosecuting anyone for the Plame leak itself, and so has told Joe & Valerie to proceed without fear of interfering with any criminal trial?" Talk Left tries to figure out the timing, and guesses "there must be a three year statute of limitations lurking somewhere." Novak's original column was published 7/14/03.

Flopping Aces is among those on the right who give the complaint a thorough vetting. "I'm no lawyer but a law school student could drive a semi-truck through the holes in this suit." Tom McGuire gives his usual thorough take. == The Strata-Sphere: "Reading the filing all I see is a lot of hallway office gossip!" == Blue Crab Boulevard: "The discovery phase will likely be more embarrassing for Plame and Wilson than they will ever believe possible. I think Joe and Val just got themselves enough rope." The Reality-Based Community sees all these analyses, and says: "It doesn't seem to have occurred to them yet that their fantasy version of the events surrounding the outing of Ms. Wilson might be false, and that the act of bringing the suit shows that the Wilsons are confident that their reputations will survive whatever might come out."

MyDD and others on the left are linking to the Wilsons' Legal Support Trust. And just for good measure, some gratuitous shots at the Wilsons. Gateway Pundit rounds up photos of Wilson and Plame, always smiling, wondering just how distraught they really are. Ankle Biting Pundits says Plame has jumped the shark. "Honestly, about the only thing they haven't done to draw attention to themselves is launch a reality show."

CT SEN: Surrogate Cat Fight Goes On. And On. And On.

As the Blogometer reported on 7/13, the dust-up between Dem populist David Sirota and Sen. Joe Lieberman's (D) ex-comm. dir. Dan Gerstein continues. Originally Gerstein of LieberDem called Sirota a "fraud" with "chutzpah" for interviewing with Lieberman in '03 and now attacking him. Sirota thinks "the fact that Gerstein would write such a lie in black and white shows the depths of the desperation Lieberman's camp has reached." He then lays out what he claims is the real story.

Gerstein writes Sirota "does not in the slightest disprove anything I said about his seeking jobs with Lieberman.

Forward magazine's Kesslerreports : some Dems are nervous that "hawkish Jewish" Dems who see Lieberman "as their standard-bearer will either abandon the party or sit out" the election if Lieberman goes down. Steve M. at lefty No More Mister Nice Blog calls the possibility "nuts -- or at least it was until it appeared in print. Now, right-wingers will seize on this notion, repeating it endlessly, running it through the noise machine, until it becomes conventional wisdom. Once that happens, some Jews around the country might actually believe that rejecting their local Democrat is an appropriate response to a (nonexistent) anti-Semitic attack. If all this really is traceable to a Lieberman campaign spinner, then this person is willfully spreading memes that can damage the Democratic Party, just to save his candidate's hide. I've been skeptical about the value of the anti-Lieberman campaign at a time when we're desperate to get to 51 in the Senate, but this really pisses me off." LieberDem's Matt Smith doesn't agree with "ill-begotten sentiments that Jews should vote for Lieberman just for the sake of supporting home cooking. But from a purely strategic standpoint, it's difficult to deny that a prolonged, vitriolic assault on Lieberman would disaffect some Jewish voters who traditionally vote Democrat." Ryan Sager at righty-hangout RCP Blog believes "since 9/11 that a significant number of Jewish voters ought to be realigning to the Republican Party. The situation is, in some ways, analogous to the southern white realignment toward the Republican Party in the 60s and 70s. Southern whites had a historical attachment to the Democrats, but the Republicans more naturally represented their interests. Today, the home of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism -- not to mention weakness in the face of Islamic terrorism -- is on the Left, not the Right. Yes, the Right still has Pat Buchanan. But charges of 'dual loyalty' and the like are now far more common among, say, the denizens of Daily Kos and Democratic Underground than they are anywhere else. Supporters of Israel have no place in a 'netroots' Democratic Party."

WIRETAPPING: Arlen Specter, Admin Ally?

The New York Times' Lichtblau reports that the Bush admin has agreed to allow the FISA court to review its NSA wiretapping program, subject to approval by Congress. Strata Sphere loves the bill, but still isn't fond of the Old Grey Lady. Prawfsblog thinks the bill is no good, and analyzes it along with a similar measure introduced by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) earlier in the week. == Some on the left lambast Sen. Jud Cmte chair and bill sponsor Arlen Specter (R-PA) who had once been the program's chief GOP critic. Carpetbagger Report header: "Specter, true to form, caves on NSA surveillance." The Anonymous Liberal: "Specter is, evidently, a terrible negotiator because the White House got just about everything it could possibly want out of this deal." Balkinization: "[W]hat does Specter do in the wake of the momentous Hamdan decision, which put all the cards in Congress's hands? He introduces a bill, with Administration blessing, that gives the Administration everything it ever wanted, and much, much more." Glenn Greenwald agrees. == The Horse's Mouth and Kevin Drum each note that the bill gives the admin the option of submitting the program to FISA, not requiring its submission. == Crooks and Liars has video of CNN's Jack Cafferty going off on the compromise. Always a funny sight. And The Rude Pundit is truly rude. Bill in Portland Maine has a nice tongue-in-cheek rundown of just how the admin is treating Specter.

VOTING RIGHTS ACT: Living To See Social Security

The House defeated some controversial amendments introduced by Southern GOPers seeking to amend the Voting Rights Act, which lefty bloggers called no less than a triumph of good over evil. DownWithTyranny tagged the amendments' sponsors as "KKK-Republicans," calling them a "cabal of extremist Southern Republicans determined to destroy the Voting Rights Act with a series of killer amendments was beaten back and the Act was extended by an overwhelming margin: 390-33, with most Republicans joining all the Democrats in favor. Only the most vicious, unrepentent [sic] GOP racists and hard-core xenophobes refused to join in authorizing the extension." Steve Soto at The Left Coaster wrote, "Note the White House's lame support of the 'intent' of the extension, but they can't bring themselves to support the extension itself. They don't want to piss off that cracker base. I suspect that [DCCC chair] Rahm Emanuel [D-IL] can use that in swing districts this fall." Steve Gilliard at THE NEWS BLOG thinks House Jud Cmte chair James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) "saved the GOP from itself. Because the redneck coalition was trying to kill the Voting Rights Act, unaware of what kind of tool it would hand the Dems. Sensenbrenner shot down every one of their arguments and tossed their bull**** in their face. The fact is that Georgia is in federal court over their new voter ID poll tax law. It was slapped down twice so far. And these racist pigs had the nerve to say there was no problem? Why all they needed was a Stars and Bars and some butternut uniforms to show where their hearts were. These guys just don't care about a fair and just America, where everyone can vote, and even the GOP called them on it."

GIULIANI: How Soon Will It Be Called "Swift Boating?"

A new book reportedly calls ex-NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani's preparation for and actions during 9/11 a "grand illusion," attacking Giuliani for putting the Office of Emergency Management in the World Trade Center, making political appointees the heads of crisis-management-and-response units and did not help cross-communication between response services. Atrios writes that "second perhaps only to John McCain, Saint Rudy gets more scrutiny-free tongue baths from the media than just about everyone. This is all due to the incredible ability he showed on 9/11 to get on TV and appear calm and in charge which, while admittedly welcome after the president failed even that meager test of leadership, said little about his ability to actually oversee the competent management of an emergency." Greg Sargent at The Horse's Mouth wants us to "Keep this in mind: He recommended not one, but two disastrous choices to head the Department of Homeland Security. There was of course his former Police Commissioner, Bernard Kerik, whom Rudy aggressively lobbied for behind the scenes until his nomination imploded amid a spectacular fireworks show of ethical problems. But let's also remember that Rudy enthusiastically championed the current Homeland Security chief, Michael Chertoff, who worked for Rudy way back when Giuliani was U.S. Attorney. Chertoff, of course, was a key architect of the Bush administration's disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina."Shakespeare's Sister takes the book's claims to heart and now thinks she "may have to interrupt my McCain Can Blow Me Campaign to sling a little mud in Giuliani's direction when this tome hits bookstores. I never thought I'd see the day that another potential GOP nominee wound me up as much as McCain." RCP Blog's Ryan Sager only notes that "there will certainly be more where this comes from."

BUSINESS OF THE BLOGOSPHERE: Just Call Him Boss-Man

National Journal's Beltway Blogroll sat down with RedState CEO Erick-Woods Erickson to talk business.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: What Happens When Blogs ARE The MSM?

Newsbusters links to an iMedia analysis of blogs, which finds that blogs "are redefining how people experience the web and, in many ways, have helped precipitate the shift towards user-generated content on the internet." Some more interesting tidbits:

• "Visitation to blogs continues to grow rapidly," with a 56% increase during the past year to 58.7M visitors.
• Google's Blogger.com is the "top blog network."
• People between the ages of 12 and 17 are 21% more likely than average to visit blogs, while those 18 to 34 are 14% more likely to do so.
• Blog visitation "skews to higher income households."

LEST WE FORGET: There's Only One Cure

It's a miserable day in the world, so we'll lighten up your weekend by offering you a cure. In fact, there's only one cure, and that's more cowbell! (QT version here)

ERRATUM

The Blogometer's 7/13 post comparing Hugh Hewitt's style of discourse with DailyKos and MyDD may have misled some readers. Instead the Blogometer was highlighting a similarity in an argument used by both sides, namely that the left does not like Sen. Lieberman because he tends to enforce conservative critiques of liberals and that many on the right don't like Sen. McCain because of his willingness to enforce liberal critiques of conservatives (an example, McCain's attacks on talk radio and the religious right that Hewitt mentioned in his 7/13 post).