July 31, 2006

7/31: CT SENometer

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas wrote early 7/31: "Those of you who are tired about reading about the Connecticut Senate race might as well take Daily Kos off your reading list this week. This is the stretch run, and while I'll still talk about other things, expect A LOT of "CT-Sen" tags." The Blogometer has occasionally received criticism for being the "Kosometer" but with just over a week to go 'til primary day, we have to admit to thinking the exact same thing. Virtually all of the big traffic lefty sites feature daily comments on the race, and once sporadic righty attention has also picked up the pace. The worst (best?) part is that the coming of 8/8 will probably not signal the end of CT SEN infatuation. Win or lose the postmortems will continue for some time and if cable exec Ned Lamont (D) wins, the race could be the top Blogometer story straight through November.

DailyKos diarist DemFromCT let Kossacks know at 1:00 PM EST 7/29 that the New York Times would be endorsing cable exec Ned Lamont (D) over Sen. Joe Lieberman (D) for the 8/8 primary. DemFromCT argued that the endorsement from "the pillar of northeast establishment" would make it difficult for Lieberman to paint "Lamont supporters as far-left blogger-driven fringe people." DemFromCT explains that "a vote for Joe is a vote for uncritical war (present and future)," and that the Lamont campaign is an opportunity "to have the debate on the war we never had ... and it's not going to be pretty for the people that took us there."

Talking Points Memo contributor DK noted the editorial "pulled no punches" in its critique of Lieberman's "warped version of bipartisanship." Christy Hardin Smith at progressive firedoglake believes the NYT exposes Lieberman to be "a more distinguished version of a concern troll, with his constant need to prop up the Bush Administration at every turn by scolding anyone in his own party who dares to question or disagree."

Richard Just at left by pro-Lieberman TNR asks: "Does The New York Times editorial page have amnesia?" and looks at NYT endorsements of NY mayor Michael Bloomberg and Rep. Chris Shays (R-CT). Just rejects the Times Liberman-as-Bush-enabler explanation and argues: "it's less about political substance than about raw betrayal. This is the troubling world view of many left-wing bloggers--who tend to treat liberalism as if it were a team rather than a political philosophy--and it is the world view that the Times has implicitly backed this weekend."

Ex-Lieberman aide Dan GersteinLieberDem has a lengthy critique of the Times endorsement as well including: "What was equally telling was the Times' minimalist appraisal of Ned Lamont. In endorsing a candidate for U.S. Senate in a time of war, the nation's preeminent newspaper could only muster two sentences on the challenger's qualifications -- one of which highlighted his inexperience. ... The truth is we don't know what Ned Lamont is, though by all appearances he seems to be more of a dilettante and an opportunist than a liberal or a moderate. And for the Times to blithely overlook that troubling fact, and tout the candidacy of a cypher who is clearly unqualified to be a U.S. Senator out of pique with Joe Lieberman's civility, suggests that Grey Lady has sadly been seduced by the Kossacks and blinded by the same anger that animates them."

Maura at My Left Nutmeg read The Hartford Courant endorsement of Lieberman and couldn't believe that Lieberman spokeswoman "Marion Steinfels wasn't sitting alongside the author dictating each word." Worst of all for Maura is the Courant's dismissal of "the invasion and continued occupation of Iraq as a single issue." DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas deals with the Courant endorsement by highlighting the Courant's recent history: "The Hartford Courant (which endorsed Bush in 2000 and 2004) goes with Joementum."

Matt Stoller at progressive activist MyDD is now in CT for the duration of the campaign. He reports: "Lieberman's got a fierce ground game, renting practically every van in the state. If you're a Democratic in Connecticut, it's likely you'll be hearing many times from the Lieberman campaign." Meanwhile, Natural Born Killers producer and progressive activist Jane Hamsher at firedoglake campaigned with Lamont and "superstar" Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) at a Temptations concert on the New Haven Green 7/29. Hamsher notes: "I doubt even Bill Clinton himself would've been treated like the hero Waters was by the largely African-American audience."

Connecticut Blog sees a big difference between Waters' CT appearance and the pro-Lieberman Sens coming to the state: "Passing on taking a train, Joe Biden (along with Senators Ken Salazar of Colorado and Daniel Inouye of Hawaii) flew into Connecticut as quiet as possible to support Joe Lieberman at another one of his unannounced events. Why are senators like Biden coming into Connecticut under a cloak of darkness, because Joe Lieberman is RADIOACTIVE. Unfortunately for senators like Biden, Salazar (ultimate betrayal) and Inouye), blogs have changed the way people view politics and get their news. Like Barbara Boxer, people won't forget the sheepish actions of these senators. At the very least, they should be strong enough to make their plans public.

Stirling Newberry at TPM Cafe amplified a Maura from MyLeftNutmeg post decrying Lieberman fliers found in car windshield wipers in Stamford, CT, that "imply that Ned Lamont is a racist." Maura describes the fliers as "The front of the flyer had a picture of Lieberman with Clinton and mentioned Lieberman's civil rights accomplishments of 40 years ago. ... The back was about Ned Lamont cancelling his membership in the expensive Round Hill Country Club in Greenwich, including a quote from the New York Times in which Ned acknowledged that most of the members of the club were white." Newberry comments: "Lieberman's campaign has crossed the line from electioneering to smearing, and may well, depending on the manner and content of the fliers, have ventured beyond the line of legality." Maura then adds in Newberry's comments section: "What makes me even more worried than these flyers is the whisper campaign that accompanies them. First it was hearing that leaders at black churches in Hartford and New Haven were telling people that Ned Lamont owned "millions" of shares of Halliburton. Then last night in New Haven a couple of people were saying that they heard there was a rumor going around that Ned Lamont's grandfather was a founder of the KKK."

Founder of conservative activist RedState Erick picks up on a weeks-old story on "Howard Dean's brother, now running Howard's PAC while Howard is away at the DNC" giving money to Lamont's campaign and comments: "I guess I missed this side avenue for Dean's 50-state strategy. If you are a ranking incumbent Democrat who dares to be critical, Dean will sick the lefty netroots and his PAC on you. I wonder if Harry Reid is starting to get worried about his next election? " Over at RCP BlogRyan Sager posts video of Lieberman's Clinton ad.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) scored no points with conservative bloggers from 7/29's New York Timesarticle on his relationship with Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY). RudyBlogger at RedState writes: "Read this well, because it goes to the heart of why McCain would be a lousy nominee against Hillary. He'd pull his punches. Rudy [Giulliani] wouldn't." Rose Billings at Human EventsRight Angle Blog ads: "The Times story also claims that Hillary initiated a vodka-drinking contest with McCain and a few other senators during a trip to Estonia in 2004. Kind of unsettling, if you ask me. Being pro-campaign finance reform and anti-tax cuts is one thing, but doing shots with Hillary is quite another. Run, Rudy, run!"

Ryan Sager at RCP Blog looks at the current push to revamp the presidential public-financing system and notes: " half of McCain-Feingold is absent from the current push. McCain, who can raise tons of private money -- remarkably, one has to note, for a "reformer" -- presumably wants to skip public financing. Feingold, who can't and who's involved in the current push, would be a direct beneficiary of the new system (talk about an appearance of corruption)." Dem atty Bob Bauer at More Soft Money Hard Law speculates on McCain's absence from the new public financing proposal: "A far more serious problem for McCain is the reception awaiting this proposal in the Republican primary electorate. It is a problem with two troublesome aspects for McCain. First, there is the powerful strain of antagonism within his party toward campaign finance regulation generally. ... Second, those voters suspicious of McCain on this issue are quite taken with him on another-responsible government spending, including opposition to generous slabs of "pork"-but the new presidential campaign finance proposal, unlike McCain-Feingold, would commit the government to the support of political campaigns."

The Caucus Cooler reports from Ames, IA, Commonwealth PAC's 7/29 event: "Romney gave a terrific stump speech. Started off by talking about the Olympics and then his recent trip to Iraq. ... He then took 5 questions, some of which seemed extremely staged, and he wasn't as impressive. He fumbled the immigration question a bit - not in that he gave the wrong answer, just that the answers didn't seem very polished especially given the fact that those are 2 questions you should be expecting."

Ex-Navy Sec. Jim Webb's (D) Netroots Coordinator Lowell FeldRaising Kaine looks at the Mason-Dixon poll and acknowledges, "At first glance, a 16-point lead for Allen doesn't sound very good for Webb," but goes on to highlight some Sen. George Allen (R) reasons to worry:

• "For an incumbent like Allen, with 97% name recognition (according to the poll), to be under 50% is very, very bad news."
• "People simply don't know Jim Webb yet. As Brad Coker, Mason-Dixon managing director, said, "It's only July ... undecided voters tend to go more for the challenger than for the incumbent."
• "Overall, we're right where we've been for weeks now, with an 8-10 point for George Allen in the dog days of summer. Sort of like Tim Kaine last year, come to think of it. And, just like last year, my guess is that Allen's lead will narrow sharply by October, to 0-5 points. At that point, it's anyone's ballgame."

Conservative Captain's Quarters looks at the same numbers and declares: "Webb probably damaged his chances in a recent debate when he admitted he had no idea what or where Craney Island is. Allen used it to brag about bringing home some pork, which doesn't speak well for Allen, but he scored an important point about Webb's lack of depth regarding Virginia's economy and politics." CQ the warns against complacency: "Allen still has not topped 50%, which provides some cause for anxiety. Allen can't afford to let up. However, if the Democrats counted on Virginians to end Allen's career, it looks like they're in for some disappointment." Right Angle Blog also has thoughts on the poll results including: "Webb was leading in only one area - the moderate-liberal Northern Virginia area, where Webb had support from 43 percent of voters compared to Allen's 37 percent."

Chris Bowers at progressive activist MyDD looks at CT SEN admits: "Whether or not this is what we intended (and I know, for my part, it kind of was), the Connecticut Senate primary has now turned into an all-out war between the establishment and the progressive movement. Within the Democratic Party, the stakes could hardly be higher, as this campaign has become a symbol of what the progressive movement can (or can't) accomplish. ... This is nothing less than a massive, nationwide movement on the part of the political, media and corporate establishment to keep the progressive movement from taking an ownership position over the Democratic Party, and leaving the media, political and corporate establishment in charge."

In a later post at MyDD Bowers highlights a specific example with a direct link to CT SEN: "If you want to know why Democrats keep losing, don't offer advice, follow the money and get your hands dirty. You see, Democrats aren't losing because they are stupid. Democrats are losing because a significant portion of the operative class is paid to undermine successful populist positions. ... Carter Eskew was the chief strategist for the Gore campaign in 2000, and his colleagues at the Glover Park group include Joel Johnson, a top Clinton White House advisor on communications and policy, Joe Lockhart, who was Clinton's spokesman from 1998-2000, and Howard Wolfson, a key Hillary Clinton advisor. If you're looking for a more accessible sense of who these people are, it's the senior team type characters from the West Wing. They all went into lobbying after the Clinton show was canceled. This is a HUGE problem. ... How does this machine tie directly into Connecticut? Well, Carter Eskew is Lieberman's ad man."

Right Wing News polled 225 right-of-center bloggers on whom they considered to be their "Least Favorite People On The Right" and 45 blogs responded.

16) Debbie Schlussel (5)
16) Michelle Malkin (5)
16) Dennis Hastert (5)
15) James Dobson (6)
12) Ted Stevens (7)
12) Olympia Snowe (7)
12) Bill Frist (7)
11) Andrew Sullivan (9)
9) Bill O'Reilly (10)
9) Chuck Hagel (10)
8) Jerry Falwell (14)
7) Lincoln Chafee (15)
6) Ann Coulter (17)
5) Arlen Specter (19)
3) Michael Savage (22)
3) Pat Robertson (22)
1) John McCain (26)
1) Pat Buchanan (26)

BLOGGER V. BLOGGER: Just Kidding

Inspired by the recent Patrick Hynesblogswarm ex-VA Gov Mark Warner consultant Jerome Armstrong took to MyDD to defend his role in an SEC investigation, bloggers working for candidates generally, and his astrological past. Beltway Blogroll has a useful set of highlights and here is Armstrong's full explanation of his astrology dabbling:

"The whole astrology matter is really just a lark that I have to laugh at myself with along with the crowd. You know, I grew up in a fundamentalist Christian family, and that whole mind set took some years in my late teens and early twenties to let go of holding as the absolute truth. Having had that experience, I came out of it with a sense or realizing that you can think you know it all, and not know it, and to not take one's own system of thought so self-righteously serious. Writing the articles under a pen name, associated to me the lack of seriousness with which I approached the matter of looking at politics through the astrological spectrum with, but to others I guess they thought I was hiding the matter. Obviously they don't go away, but I had them deleted from the site to make the issue clear about their relative weight in my political thinking. I found the whole accusation that it was a secret bizarre, given how anyone who was around MyDD during the 2001-2002 early blogging breakout days here, would have seen me linking to those writings as things I did. A bit arcane and strange... ok, live and let live and if you need a laugh on my behalf, feel free... just watch out for the beam."

Under the header "A Tale of Two Primaries" mcjoan at DailyKos compares Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) reaction to a progressive challenge from cable exec Ned Lamont (D) with Rep. Jane Harman's (D-CA)reaction to Marcy Winograd announced primary challenge. McJoan writes:

"Jane Harman, ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, had come under extensive criticism from the left. Her support for the Iraq War and her February 12 appearance on Meet the Press in which she expressed support for the NSA warrantless wiretapping program, energized the the progressive left to work against her. Winograd earned the endorsements of "Progressive Democrats of America, Southern California Americans for Democratic Action, the Western Region of the United Auto Workers union and a half-dozen presidents of local Democratic clubs."

"How did Harman respond? By trying to reach out to progressives and by listening. That included creating an account here at Daily Kos. In what were some often heated exchanges, Harman interacted with this community. And she listened to us. On June 1, the week before the California primary, she wrote:"

Now I know that many Kossacks don't agree with me on every issue, and many of you may even be supporting my primary opponent. But you may be surprised at how much we do agree on. You and I agree that the Bush Administration hyped and selectively released intelligence to build the case for war in Iraq. ... You and I agree that the drumbeat towards war in Iran must end.

"When confronted with a primary challenge from the left of her party, Rep. Harman understood that she had lost touch with an important component of her base. And she understood that she needed to find out why, needed to begin a conversation with those party activists and with the netroots community. Not only did she post diaries, she stuck around to comment. Not all of us agreed with her responses, and were adamant in telling her so. But we had an honest exchange of views and, amazingly, she began to take a harder line against the Bush administration. She came back to being a Democrat."

Captain's Quarters highlights a plan for peace between left and right MN bloggers from EckerNet.com: "Ok, I hope to be putting together a Battle Royale of the Blogosphere on a field of combat. Yes, I'm trying to put together a Minnesota Blogosphere Paintball game. The particulars are yet to be decided (or even thought about) but for now I am trying to gauge interest. Preferably I would like to have the teams be the Right side of the Blogosphere vs the Left side of the Blogosphere. So hopefully we can get enough interest from both sides."

CQ comments: "Ironically, shooting each other with paintballs seems a hell of a lot more responsible than obsessing over sock-puppetry to the point where bloggers deliberately antagonize one another, or than sending sicko suggestions about a blogger's two-year-old child, or engaging in DDOS attacks against ideological rivals. It certainly beats calling each other childish names instead of relying on rational argument, and that includes in the comments section here."

Posted by Conn Carroll at July 31, 2006 12:25 PM