September 30, 2006

Blogometer Extra

House Update

CO 04: Mus-Grave Situation

  Upstart Dem challenger Angie Paccione has come almost out of nowhere in what was thought to be an easy re-election year for staunchly conservative incumbent Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R) in Colorado's 4th.  CQ Politics has, per Greg Sargent at TPMCafe, "changed the rating of the race from 'Republican Favored' to 'Leans Republican.'"  And it may be Musgrave's unmovable rightness that is the root cause for the swing.  She recently declared at a so-called "values voter" Republican retreat that, despite everything else going on in the nation and the world, "gay marriage is the most important issue facing the country."  Potential voters seem inclined to disagree.

FL 16: The Folly Of Foley

  Friday morning, Tim Mahoney woke up in relative obscurity as the Democratic congressional challenger to an entrenched Republican incumbent likely to steamroll his way to re-election.  Within hours, Mahoney was the decided favorite to take the seat.  That's because Rep. Mark Foley (R) went from Congressman to unemployed pariah as news spread like a dust devil across the country of his illicit communications with a 16-year-old page.  As the story first spread, Foley and his team pooh-poohed it, saying (as John Aravosis at AMERICAblog reports) the messages in question "were entirely appropriate and that their release is part of a smear campaign by his opponent."  But then more and more e-mails and instant messages were released, and it became clear that this was much more than just simple hellos and goodbyes.  (We'll spare you the details in this column, but they're available for your viewing here, and be warned--they are graphic.)

  In quick fashion, the news made national headlines and before long, Foley had tendered his resignation with apologies--but curiously, no direct acknowledgment of wrongdoing.  By late Friday afternoon, revelations that House GOP leadership had been made aware of Foley's behavior for almost a year and done nothing--even while Foley sat on sex crimes caucus--began to spread throughout the blogosphere, and by the evening, Raw Story reported (using Roll Call as its source) that House Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) had offered "a resolution ordering an immediate ethics probe into the behavior" of Foley, the House passing it by a vote of 410-0. 

  Where this sordid story may lead and how much fallout will occur remains to be seen as details are worked out and culpability assigned, but this is certainly among the biggest stories of the election season so far, if not the political year... and it's turned the formerly unheralded Tim Mahoney into an instant frontrunner.

NY 26: Reynolds Green With Envy

  Incumbent Rep. Tom Reynolds (R), head of the National Republican Congressional Committee, is, as Greg Sargent at TPMCafe points out, "at risk of losing his own seat."  Sargent reports on a new poll showing Reynolds "clinging to a two-point lead over Dem challenger Jack Davis," whom Reynolds defeated in 2004.  "Interestingly," Sargent writes, "the Green Party candidate ... may decide the race," scoring 8 points on the poll.  And wouldn't you know it, right after the poll was completed, the Green Party candidate was apparently "knocked off the ballot ... making the race even closer," by presumably favoring Davis with left-leaning Greens looking for a home.

VA 02: That '70s Blow

  Jim Hoeft at Bearing Drift wants to "make this perfectly clear: ... I am not a paid blogger... Please give me more credit than that."  Hoeft's moment in the sun comes courtesy of his research that reveals Democratic congressional candidate Phil Kellam was "convicted of assaulting a woman in 1978 when he was a college student in North Carolina."  (Jon Frank at The Virginian-Pilot notes more accurately that Kellam plead guilty to, but was never convicted of, simple assault "after a confrontation with a woman after a traffic incident.")

  How did all of this information come to Hoeft's attention?  Frank at the V-P reports:

Tim Murtaugh, the campaign manager for U.S. Rep. Thelma Drake, Kellam's opponent, acknowledged that he traveled to North Carolina in August to check out an anonymous tip about the charge, get a copy of the legal document and talk to the victim.  However, Murtaugh said he did nothing with the information, insisting that the campaign was not responsible for the reports on the Internet.

The blog's editor also insisted he did not get the document from Drake's campaign.

  Regardless of the details, the story was out and Kellam camp damage control commenced at once.  Kellam himself acknowledged the incident and issued a statement of regret for his actions 28 years ago, and then lashed out at Hoeft, saying his post was "egregious, wrong and libelous."  It remains to be seen what impact the situation will have on district polling, but given the closeness of the battle between Drake and her challenger, it may tip things in favor of the incumbent, to Kellam's chagrin.

[Mike Sheehan]

Posted by Conn Carroll at 09:24 AM

September 29, 2006

9/29: Crossing The Great Divide

The Blogometer harbors no illusions that the divisions between the right and left blogosphere will ever be bridged. But we do believe that as the blogosphere continues to mature, bloggers' proficiency in projecting their influence outside of "a series of tubes" and into the real world will only continue. On 9/28, lefty bloggers are left lamenting their failure to get Dems to stand up to the GOP on torture and feel obliged to defend their record in contested elections, but could real-world victories be just around the corner? Sen. Conrad Burns' (R-MT) continued troubles point to a win for netroots primary-backed state Senate Pres. Jon Tester (D-MT) and netroots recruited ex-Navy sec. James Webb (D-VA) has a real shot of knocking off early WH'08 favorite Sen. George Allen (R-VA). If the netroots continue to honestly look at their strengths and weaknesses, as MyDD's Matt Stoller does 9/28, it might not be too long before the netroots can be proud of Dems again.

TORTURE POLITICS: The "Padilla Treatment" For All?

Discussion of the Military Commissions Act dominated lefty blogs 9/29. A sampling of reax:

• Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall: "As others have noted in more detail, this law allows the president to detain any US citizen in the United States and hold him or her without trial forever. All the president needs to do is find that you are an 'enemy combatant'. And it's entirely his call.
• Christy Hardin Smith at firedoglake: "It expressly forbids suspension of the writ of habeas corpus except under very specific and highly limited circumstances - and as we are neither dealing with a case of rebellion or invasion at the time of this attempted enactment of this torture law in Congress, I am really wondering on what leg they propose to stand when arguing constitutionality at the first legal challenge to this law."
• Atrios: "The writ of habeas corpus is one of those basic foundations of modern Democracy. Without it, words like liberty and freedom have no meaning. These are bad people running our government. Very bad."
• Unclaimed Territory: "even if there were a habeas corpus right inserted back into the legislation (which is unlikely at this point anyway), it wouldn't matter much, if at all, because the law would authorize your detention simply based on the DoD's decree that you are an enemy combatant, regardless of whether it was accurate. This is basically the legalization of the Jose Padilla treatment -- empowering the President to throw people into black holes with little or no recourse, based solely on his say-so."
• Matthew Yglesias: "There will certainly be challenges, but I wouldn't count on anything. The court-stripping issue hasn't been litigated all that much, but the idea that congress has the power to do this kind of thing has some real support from the text of the constitution. What's more, courts are generally disinclined to interfere in national security questions. And, of course, there's no particular reason to think that the Supreme Court's five conservative justices disagree with America's conservative politicians about this."
• Balkinization: "although the MCA attempts to eliminate judicial review, and in particular the writ of habeas corpus, it is by no means certain that it has succeeded. The suspension of habeas may be unconstitutional. Any such suspension must be consistent with the Suspension Clause of Article I, section 9."

Righty blogs were less concerned. The Volokh Conspiracy's Orin Kerr's even pens a defense of his non-posting on the issue. National Review Online's Jonah Goldberg turns to a reader for analysis on the habeas provisions of the bill: "This has nothing to do with American citizens or anyone who is voluntarily within the United States. In fact those who have been found to be Americans (e.g. Hamdi and Padilla) cannot even be held at GITMO (see John Yoo's new book, where he describes in detail how this policy was arrived at)."

Instapundit offers his own similar conclusions: "I've seen some people calling this an abolition of habeas corpus, but as I understand it, habeas is suspended only with regard to non-citizens. This removes a key danger of abuse, since the potential politically-motivated abuses that are most worrisome involve U.S. citizens, not aliens. And Congress quite explicitly has the Constitutional power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, though whether this counts as a "suspension" of the writ is open for debate."

Back on the left, there was also plenty of thoughts on the vagueness of the detainee treatment provision. DailyKos' Hunter first claims "McCain Torture Compromise Bill Allows Sodomy, Rape of Prisoners" but hen later recants: "Actually, now I feel badly about this post. It would be more accurate to say that it is "unclear" whether or not actual rape is allowed, or merely all sexual violence up to and possibly including rape. Some interpreters of the bill say yes: some interpreters say no, the torturer must stop the sexual assault at the point of entry. The Senate chose to refuse further debate on the issue, deeming that clarity unimportant."

Iraq war supporter and fierce Pres. Bush critic Andrew Sullivan argues for the nationalization of the election on the torture bill issue: "The only response is for the public to send a message this fall. In congressional races, your decision should always take into account the quality of the individual candidates. But this November, the stakes are higher. If this Republican party maintains control of all branches of government, the danger to individual liberty is extremely grave. Put aside all your concerns about the Democratic leadership. What matters now is that this juggernaut against individual liberty and constitutional rights be stopped."

LANDSCAPE: Put This in Your Poll And Smoke It

Chris Bowers at MyDD looks at end of September generic ballot averages for the past five cycles

2006: Dems 48.4%--Reps 38.2%. Democratic Margin: 10.2% 2004: Dems 45.3%--Reps 44.3%. Democratic Margin: 1.0% 2002: Dems 44.3%--Reps 42.6%. Democratic Margin: 1.7% 2000: Dems 44.5%--Reps 43.3%. Democratic Margin: 1.2% 1998: Dems 42.5%--Reps 46.0%. Democratic Margin: -3.5%

Bowers concludes: "[W]hat I want to point out is that our chances in this election are not like our chances in other recent elections. ... This is a whole different ballgame. This is nothing like the other recent elections."

Bowers finds further evidence of a Dem "Wave" in Des Moines Registerarticle reporting: "More than 50,000 Democrats had requested ballots, according to the Iowa secretary of state's office as of Wednesday, compared with just more than 11,000 Republicans, continuing a trend by Democrats in Iowa of emphasizing early voting."

Meanwhile Mystery Pollster has video of The Daily Show's Poll Smoking segment poking fun at the wide divergence in generic ballot results.

LANDSCAPE II: National Or Personal?

Conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt wants to put the growing "Senate-in-play meme" to rest. Hewitt argues: "Voters are smart, and they are concerned that the nation be defended. Which means that they will not be voting Democrat." Hewitt then looks at five Senate races, including MT, and then writes: "Rick Santorum is the only GOP incumbent facing off against a Democratic nominee pretending not to be in favor of retreat in the face of the enemy, and thus his race is the toughest."

Over at RCP Blog, Jay Cost has a lengthy post on the Senate landscape but concludes: "What I can say is that the theory upon which so many pundits have been relying, the idea of the electorate being magically transformed into a "nationalized" one that thinks about their pocketbook and Bush rather than the individual candidates in the race, is incorrect in important respects. They need to reevaluate. Otherwise, this will not be the first time between now and November that a result will surprise them so much."

CT SEN: Lieberman Under 50%!

The unofficial Lamont Blog has the go to lefty blogger spin on the latest Quinnipiac numbers showing Sen. Joe Lieberman (I) up 49%-39% over cable exec Ned Lamont (D):

• New Q-Poll out this morning, as Lieberman falls under 50% for the first time in Quinnipiac ... This is -4 for Lieberman from their last poll in August.
• The key differences seem to rest with "likely voter" models (the Q-Poll did not release RV data this time), as well as predicting which way unaffliateds will go - in this poll they break for Lieberman, in the most recent ARG poll, they break for Lamont.
• Ned's favorability numbers are still rising as Republicans and Independents get to know him (+6 since last month) while his unfavorable numbers are actually falling as more people form opinions of him.

Amarko55 at My Left Nutmeg adds: "To steal a line from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Universe, Do Not Panic! Yeah, I'd like to be up 10 but to be within 10 of a three term senator 5 weeks out is acceptable."

Matt Stoller at MyDD hits Lieberman for granting an interview to "the right-wing billionaire backed blog outlet" Pajamas Media: "Lieberman is throwing the whole party under the bus. It's time for 2008 candidates to step up."

MT SEN: No, They're Saying Booooo-urns

Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall looks at AP reports of Sen. Conrad Burns (R) use of a mocking Swedish accent and joking about the number of Italian-Americans at the Federal Aviation Administration and quips: "Conrad Burns (R-MT) working to keep on schedule to insult every ethnic group in advance of November elections."

NJ SEN: The Old Switcheroo II?

Following new reports of ethics troubles for Sen. Robert Menendez (D) National Review Online's John Podhoretz received "lots of e-mails about how New Jersey's Democrats will just dump" Menendez "in the next few weeks for former interim Gov. Dick Codey - just as Bob Torricelli quit the race and allowed former Sen. Frank Lautenberg to waltz in. Sorry. Not gonna happen this time. Tom Kean is just too credible a candidate, far more palatable to New Jersey voters than Doug Forrester was in either of his last two races. You can play that switcheroo once."

Also at The CornerJonah Goldberg argues Kean should pre-empt such a move: "I think Kean should make an issue of this now. He could say - or suggest - that this is standard operating procedure of the Democrats and that this buzz shows how corrupt the entire New Jersey Democratic Party is. ... The benefit of doing all this is that it would make it much harder for the Democrats to actually drop Menendez and it would prepare the public to react negatively to the tactic if they did.

Meanwhile, on the left Jason Zengerle at The Plank makes the case for dropping Menendez: "It's become fashionable among some conservatives to root for the Republicans to lose control of Congress this November so that it might serve as a wake-up call to the GOP that the party has lost its way. I thought I might try to start a similar trend among liberals: We should root for Bob Menendez's defeat in the New Jersey Senate race so that it might serve as a wake-up call to the New Jersey Democratic party that it really needs to clean up its act."

OH SEN: Life, Liberty, And The Pursuit Of Poll-Tested Cowardice

The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum looks at email from OH Dems promising to abandon Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-13) for his vote in favor of the torture bill and argues that despite his own dislike for Dem "poll-tested cowardice on the detainee bill over the past couple of weeks" such a decision would play right into Karl Rove's hands: "The leadership of the Republican Party decided after 9/11 to govern the country by trying to keep it in a state of permanent panic and tarring anyone who opposed their calculated panic as a weak-kneed appeaser. The way to fight this is not to give in to Karl Rove's political machinations, it's to fight them. It worked for Thomas Jefferson, after all, and Democrats consider him the founder of their party. They should take a lesson from him."

PA SEN: We're Gonna Need A Montage

Following Treas. Bob Casey's (D) repeated no shows at debates, National Review Online's Alex Charyna passes along a video montage of Casey non-debate clips from the Sen. Rick Santorum (R) campaign.

VA SEN: You Stay Classy, VA SEN

Under the header "Allen spits on women" DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas links to a Swing State Project collection of four separate examples "of Allen spitting chewing tobacco on women or little girls, all of them leaving tobacco spittle on their shoes."

Over at Raising Kaine, Eric posts a copy of "Allen's New Mailer" featuring a deer head in a mail box and writes: "I'm kinda hoping that I don't get one." TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent has video of Chesterton, MD resident Pat WaringHardball appearance claiming to have heard Allen use the n-word at a UVA rugby game in 1978.

VA SEN II: The Socially Liberal Paleocon

National Review Online's John Podhoretz argues that ex-Navy sec. James Webb (D) "is a brilliant and unclassifiable guy" who is "very close to being a paleocon with socially liberal attitudes." Podhoretz therefore finds it ironic "that his campaign has now staked itself on the incredibly dreary politically correct issue of "offensive language" dating back decades. Instead of being the philosopher-novelist candidate, Webb is instead on the line in the most dispiriting and unintelligent political contest the United States has seen in years."

Meanwhile Captain's Quarters takes the Washington Post to task for ignoring Allen's introduction of "a measure intended to benefit black farmers who missed a deadline for a settlement of a discrimination lawsuit against the Department of Agriculture" and instead painting "a one-sided picture" of the "mudslinging in Virginia."

Finally, Chad Dotson at RedState has video of Allen's new TV ad featuring female Naval Academy grads attacking Webb.

CONVENTION '08: Veepstakes Preview?

John McIntyre at RCP Blog looks at how each party's choice in convention site may foretell their eventual choice in VP candidate. On the GOP: "The Bush-Cheney ticket won 46% in Minnesota in 2000 and 48% in 2004. Governor Tim Pawlenty faces a tough reelection battle this year, but he's generally believed to have a slight edge. Assuming Mr. Pawlenty can take care of business this fall and remain reasonably popular through the summer of 2008, the 45-year old-will almost certainly be near the top of the short list for the eventual GOP Veep nominee." On Dems: "Don't be surprised to see the Democrats settle on Denver for their convention (Denver and New York are the finalists) and also take a long, hard look hard at New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson for VP and maybe Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano if Senator Hillary Clinton is not the Democratic nominee."

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas also argues that a Denver choice would provide the best opportunity to showcase Dem strength in the mountain west: "Colorado Democrats are about to build on their 2004 successes ... with even more dramatic victories this year -- at least the governor's race and one House seat, and potentially three additional House seats. By the end of this year, we should have Democratic governors in much of the Mountain West -- Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico. Republicans are down to Nevada (maybe) and their two lonely outposts in Idaho and Utah. Here we have a banner opportunity to deliver the party message straight into the heart of this new rising political force, and the party establishment wants to have their convention in frakin' New York?"

GIULIANI: Unlikely Emerald Ground Gainer

John Podhoretz at National Review Online notes Strategic Vision's latest WA poll has ex-NY mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) leading Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) 43%-24% with MA Gov. Mitt Romney at 7%. Podhoretz writes: "Don't get me wrong. I like Romney. But Rudy just keeps gaining ground in unlikely places."

CLINTON: It's "I Love HRC Day" For Andrew Sullivan

Andrew Sullivan posts the text of Sen. Hillary Clinton's (D-NY) speech against the detainee treatment bill under the header "The Goldwater Girl." Sullivan also has video of the speech under the header "Hillary's Break-Through Speech" and writes: "Someone finally says no to torture."

FRIST: Frist's Feckapoolaza

Power Line's Scott Johnson notes Senate maj. leader Bill Frist's (R-TN) success in securing a cloture vote for the Secure Fence Act 9/28 despite Kausfiles prediction that Frist would "flakeout" on the issue. For his part, Kaus now finds Frist to be "brimming with feck."

BLOGGER VS. BLOGGER: "The Fringe Right-Wing National Review" Strikes Again

Sirotablog takes Jim Geraghty "of the fringe right-wing National Review" to task for his Washington Timesop-ed on the relative success of "netroots" backed Dem candidates. Sirota notes: "there is a deeper point here: every single candidate on this list who lost was a challenger. ... Even the ones who were challengers in open-seat elections were running in states or districts that were HEAVILY Republican - states/districts where no challenger was even supposed to have a shred of a chance to compete, much less win. For the very few who don't understand why this is an important point, let me spell it out here: incumbents win somewhere in the neighborhood of 95-99% of all congressional races."

Sirota goes on to highlight the longterm importance of these challenges: "What he doesn't say, of course, is that the list is chock full of candidates who almost won in districts they weren't even supposed to be able to break 40 percent in. What he doesn't say is that these candidates were able to do that with the help of a political medium that has been at full speed for all of about 3 years - a political medium going up against a Republican machine that has been on overdrive for the last 3 decades."

MyDD's Chris Bowers links to Sirota and adds: "Memo to everyone: Democrats only flipped six Republican-held House seats in 2004, and two Republican held Senate seats. Of those eight flips, the blogosphere was heavily involved in three. Find me a progressive advocacy group with a win rate like that anywhere. When you only focus on challengers, you will always lose more than you will win. The blogosphere will always focus on challenging Republicans in their own turf--that is just the way we work."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Ya Can't Win Without A Good Ground Game

MyDD's Matt Stoller catalogues the strength of the netroots and then asks: "Where are we weakest?" Stoller answers: "I would argue that our understanding of field and our ability to discuss it are lacking." Stoller continued:

Over the next few years, the blogosphere will change the dialogue even more than it already has. My guess is that voter registration and mobilization is going to move (at least partially) online, and whole new segments of voters will respond to different messaging in somewhat unpredictable ways. We should get familiar with field. There are many ways to do so, of course. You can go phone-bank, you can canvass, and you can poll-watch. On election day, I recommend that if you're not heavily involved in an existing campaign that you become an actual poll worker. You can sign up at Pollworkers for Democracy. What I saw in the Donna Edwards campaign was a total lack of competence and ability in the Maryland Board of Elections, and I imagine that's true across the country.

LEST WE FORGET: For Proficiency In Stereotyping

Matthew Yglesias doesn't "want to get too crudely reductive here," but does note that despite a "entirely African-American staff" the "Mocha Hut on 13th Street" plays music that "bears on odd resemblance to . . . what's on my iPod." Yglesias then wonders: "Is it possible that there's some kind of gentrification consultant out there telling the Hut's management team what kind of music will appeal to the neighborhood's newer demographic?" But rather than complain about his stereotyping victimization Yglesias offers a personal request: "If so, can that person tell the owners of the Mercadito Ramos that they should refrigerate their Diet Coke supply?"

Posted by at 01:33 PM

Blogometer Extra

TERROR POLITICS: Survey Says... Scram!

  A new poll of Iraqi citizens finds that "seven in ten Iraqis want US-led forces to commit to withdraw within a year."  The poll was conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) for WorldPublicOpinion.org.

  Faiz at Think Progress excised meatier portions from the poll, the report of which can be found in a PDF file here.  Faiz summarizes:

A large majority of Iraqis–71%–say they would like the Iraqi government to ask for US-led forces to be withdrawn from Iraq within a year or less.  Given four options, 37 percent take the position that they would like US-led forces withdrawn “within six months,” while another 34 percent opt for “gradually withdraw[ing] US-led forces according to a one-year timeline.”

Support for attacks against US-led forces has increased sharply to 61 percent (27% strongly, 34% somewhat).  This represents a 14-point increase from January 2006, when only 47 percent of Iraqis supported attacks.

More broadly, 79 percent of Iraqis say that the US is having a negative influence on the situation in Iraq, with just 14 percent saying that it is having a positive influence.

Asked “If the US made a commitment to withdraw from Iraq according to a timeline, do you think this would strengthen the Iraqi government, weaken it, or have no effect either way?”  53 percent said that it would strengthen the government, while just 24 percent said it would weaken the government.

Asked what effect it would have “if US-led forces withdraw from Iraq in the next six months,” 58 percent overall say that violence would decrease (35% a lot, 23% a little).

  "An overwhelming majority," Faiz notes, "believes that the US military presence in Iraq is provoking more conflict than it is preventing."

  Chris Bowers at MyDD leaps on one particular item.  "Only 9% of Iraqis want the United States to 'stay as long as it takes' in Iraq," he writes. "That is one helluva democracy we are building in Iraq, when a foreign country occupies it indefinitely against the will of 91% of the population."

  Kevin Drum at The Washington Monthly comments on the poll, as well as two others with similarly disheartening results.  He quotes the Washington Post on the two additional surveys:

In Baghdad, for example, nearly three-quarters of residents polled said they would feel safer if U.S. and other foreign forces left Iraq, with 65 percent of those asked favoring an immediate pullout, according to State Department polling results obtained by The Washington Post.

The director of another Iraqi polling firm, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he feared being killed, said public opinion surveys he conducted last month showed that 80 percent of Iraqis who were questioned favored an immediate withdrawal.

  Drum wraps, "[T]he results are clear and discouraging for 'stay the course' fans.  The Iraqi leadership may be reluctant to see us go, but what are the odds that an occupation force can succeed in quelling violence if three-quarters of the population wants them to leave?"  Commenter Al retorts, "We're building democracy in Iraq.  We can't be distracted by polls.

TERROR POLITICS II: The Knights Who Say "NIE!"

  Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), the top Dem on the House intelligence committee, created quite a stir when on Tuesday she let it be known that there was a draft of a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) focused solely on Iraq, held up because "some of our leaders don't want us to see it until after the election."  It came shortly after the hubbub over the (different) NIE that President Bush released a few pages of earlier after pressure from many sides.

  As might be expected, the Harman revelation caught the notice of attentive bloggers, in particular the crew at Talking Points Memo and its sister site, TPMmuckracker.  First things first; did this Iraq NIE draft exist, was Harman talking straight?  Justin Rood at the 'raker said, well, yes and no.  "[It] was never a big secret," Rood writes; "After Democrats bellowed for one in late July, Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte announced Aug. 4 he'd whip one up."  A caveat, though: "There's scant evidence the report exists 'in draft form' -- Harman may have an inside track on the matter, but sources tell me the process remains in a nascent stage."

  His sources were right, if Homeland Security Advisor Frances Townsend is to be believed.  Josh Marshall at TPM: "[She] confirmed its existence but said it won't be released till January.  Townsend claimed the timing has nothing to do with the election, just the ordinary schedule."  He later added, "We're now hearing Townsend's statement in the briefing may have included some sleight of hand to confuse people as to which report is being discussed."

  Rep. Harman responded to Townsend's curious obfuscation with a followup letter directed at Negroponte.  Rood at 'raker quotes from it:

...Though you promised that the NIE would be completed "in a timely manner," senior White House officials have indicated publicly that the report may not be completed until January 2007.

This timetable is unacceptable.  Sectarian violence, which has reached record levels and continues to grow, is putting our troops - not to mention millions of Iraqis - at grave risk. ...

NIEs have been produced in as little as several weeks, as in the case of the 2002 report on Iraqi WMD.  While I understand the desire to be thorough, events in Iraq make it urgent that the Intelligence Community produce this NIE immediately.  If your intention is to delay this report until after the November elections, I do not think that is appropriate given that U.S. troops are at risk at this moment.

  Marshall digests all of this at TPM, writing, "The president says the election is supposed to be about national security.  So where's the report?  What's the delay?  What are they afraid of?"

  Rood has an answer:

In prognosticating what the upcoming Iraq NIE would say, Newsweek's Mark Hosenball reported two weeks ago that Defense officials briefing lawmakers were "paint[ing] a scenario in which Iraq could dissolve into civil war if Iraqi security forces don't soon get their act together." ... Seeing those conclusions leaked to the media -- that's an October surprise the White House would likely hope to avoid.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 05:53 AM

September 28, 2006

9/28: The Importance Of Pre-season

With the Washington Redskins finishing their pre-season schedule 0-4, many local Redskins reporters tried to stress that pre-season games were meaningless and that the Redskins were going to be just fine. Despite recently beating the sad sack Houston Texans, the Redskins are still only 1-2 and it is now clear that the offensive woes visible in preseason games are plaguing the Redskins in games that matter as well.

The voting that matters for WH '08 is still over a year away, but the blogosphere is playing host to virtual pre-season games today. After an interview with MA Gov. Mitt Romney (R) was posted on RedState a debate erupted over Romney's pro-life credentials. The debate is ongoing and the issue far from settled for Romney, but the give and take between pro- and anti-Romney forces at RedState ought to be just as valuable to political handicappers as the Redskins preseason was to football fans.

ROMNEY: Evolving In The Right Direction?

Following the 9/27 posting of MA Gov. Mitt Romney's (R) interview with RedState's Erick Erickson (which has been promoted back to the top of the page as of 9 a.m. on 9/28), Ben Domenech (of Washington Post plagiarism flame-out fame) posted an entry titled "Mitt Romney lies about abortion" with quotes from past Romney speeches and his line from the RedState interview: "I've never called myself pro-choice." Ben writes: "Mitt Romney tries to justify his position in the interview by stating that he's always been personally opposed to abortion, but did not want to impose his personal views on the populace. Even if that's true, consider this: by Mitt Romney's definition, Ted Kennedy isn't pro-choice either." Ben concludes that Romney's change is due to political calculations, not personal beliefs. The post lit up RedState's comment boards. A completely unscientific reading shows them running pretty even at first but trending pro-Romney as time wore on. Samples include:

• liberty2208: "Thank you so much for posting this information. It really lets me see his true colors. I didn't know too much about Romney but always thought he was on the side of Life and in step with us values voters. I guess I was completely wrong. We really need to look past his articulate speech and likeable demeanor and focus on what he really believes, what his core principles are. If he is lying about protecting Life and our values I wonder what else he has conjured up to try to deceive the conservative base???"
• Sami: "He is still my guy. There isn't going to be any substantive moves on Roe v. Wade in either direction. Mitt is still the man to reign in the spenders and fix soc.sec. as well as give new energy to healthcare changes.
• TheSnakeGuy: "Mitt is pro-life. I suppose you would rather have a democrat as governor in MA. Don't penalize the guy for getting elected. He has made politics in MA more conservative and the policy there is much more pro-life than if a democrat was governor their. Go Mitt!"
• Leverkuhn: "the Pro-Romney forces here at Redstate and in the blogosphere in general like to play fast and loose with the facts. Truthfully, I am not opposed to what Romney stands for so much as I am simply uneasy with the sense I get that he and his supporters would gladly endorse the eating of Irish babies if that would further their ends."

National Review Online's biggest Romney supporter Kathryn Jean Lopez looked at the post and added: "Romney's a leader, as more and more folks being exposed to him are seeing and noting. He needs to clearly communicate his commitment to a culture of life over these next pre-primary months as he has been privately, especially, and will, I betcha, in some big ways publicly. But as far as then-vs.-now kinda stuff, I'll take his convincing evolution over any in the reverse direction anyday."

MCCAIN: If We Can't Stop Him Now...

Commenting on the torture debate in the Senate MyDD's Matt Stoller worries: "I didn't use to be worried about a McCain candidacy, but what's becoming increasingly clear is that the Democratic candidates are simply unwilling to attack him. That's a serious problem. If Democratic Presidential candidates won't go after him now, after he faced a humiliating defeat by an unpopular President, just how are people going to go after him in 2008?"

LANDSCAPE '08: Sending Out An SOS

TAPPED's Ben Adler looks at how "[m]assive disenfranchisement in the closest swing states have marred the last two presidential" and calls for "progressives to focus on putting control of election oversight in the hands of competent and honest officials." Adler asks readers to donate to ActBlue's Secretary of State Project (SOS) "which attempts to raise money for incorruptible secretary of state candidates."

CONVENTION '08: What's A Little Non-Unionization Among Dems?

With GOPers nailing down the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul for their '08 convention, DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas is rooting for Denver. His second choice: "anywhere but New York." Denver based Jeralyn Merritt at TalkLeft adds: "A lot is riding on the unionization factor -- Denver's hotel workers are not unionized. But, as we reported here two weeks ago, the unions have dropped their opposition to Denver hosting the Convention. ... My advice to the DNC: Choose Denver. We're an important swing state. We were red, but we've been turning blue. We're closer to the heartland. We're clean and friendly and beautiful."

TORTURE POLITICS: Stand By Your Party

Cong. Dems are coming under fire from lefty bloggers for their handling of the detainee treatment issue. Reed Hundt at TPM Cafe writes: "When the Supreme Court ruled against permanent incarceration without legal process, I crankily warned that the Democrats would miss the political point: namely, that the R's would create a pro-terrorism, anti-due process bill and force a vote on it in the fall. ... I urged that the D's introduce legislation that mandated immediate trials, and that they insist that in the absence of trials the Administration couldn't get to the truth and couldn't adequately mete out punishment where deserved, and so was losing the war on terror. ... So Congressional D's did nothing. ... Now the D's are caught flat-footed, and the Netroots weren't on the ball. In my cranky view. This awful legislation will pass without much attention being paid." Also critical of Dems:

• Jane Hamsher at firedoglake: "As Digby always says, it's time to stop the Biden-esque exhortations about what Democrats should and shouldn't be doing and actually do it."
• Cenk Uygur at The Huffington Post: "There is no excuse. Democrats who vote for this bill because of cowardly political expediency will forever be tainted. We will never forget. This is the most un-American bill I have ever seen. ... Any Democrat who votes for this is the worst kind of coward. I am tired of giving them one more chance. Stand up, you spineless weaklings. You have the right to filibuster to protect all of us against this very thing. Use it!!!
• Arianna Huffington at The Huffington Post: "Back in 2002, many Democrats, afraid of being branded as weak on security, voted to give the president the authority to decide if and when it was necessary to invade Iraq. A power he quickly abused. So now, still wracked with the fear of perception, they seem willing to give him the power to decide if and when it's okay to breach the Geneva Conventions. Haven't the Democrats learned anything over the last 4 years? The only thing they have to fear is the fear of being true to themselves.

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas still urges readers to pressure Dems "to do the right thing," but takes issue with diarists who threaten to quit the Dems if they roll on torture. Kos writes: "Stop whining. Stop [kvetch]ing. And keep working to build a Democratic Party with backbone. ... And remember, this is a long-term process. Just like conservatives didn't quit politics when Nixon was killing them with new government programs like the EPA or OSHA, we can't take our ball home every time we lose on an important issue."

Chris Bowers hits a similar note at MyDD listing every recent anti-progressive bill that passed with some Dem votes and concluding: "Progressives need to be fair to Democrats, the majority of whom have come to side with progressives on virtually everything. Don't blame Democrats in general for rolling over to Republicans--blame the minority who regularly do that, and name their names."

Not all hope on the left was lost. Hunter at DailyKos argues the torture bill is exactly the type of issue the filibuster was invented for: " think there'd be some merit in delaying the Torture Bill a day or two, just so we can get a more concrete idea of what sorts of torture are or are not allowed to be performed on prisoners of the United States. You know, just flesh it out a little. Is waterboarding covered? There's been quite a bit of disagreement over that. What about broken bones, does that count? Fractured, or broken, does it make a difference?" Matt Stoller at MyDD describes defeat of the bill as "not impossible, but it's not likely."

There are many lefty heroes in the debate however. Atrios has video of Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL). Christy Hardin Smith at firedoglake links to video of Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), Rep. Ike Skelton (D-MO), Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL), and Rep. Doris Matsui (D-CA)

National Review Online's Kathryn Jean Lopez notes: "Only 34 Democrats voted for the House bill on terror detainees, but two of them were liberal Senate candidates: Sherrod Brown and Harold Ford."

Iraq war supporter and vehement Bush critic Andrew Sullivan posts video on the story of Canadian rendition victim Maher Arar and writes: "The bill now being rushed through the Congress makes it more likely. Just don't say you haven't been warned."

TERROR POLITICS: Blog Posts Are Bulletproof

Lefty bloggers have settled on their favorite quote from the released portions of April's National Intelligence Estimate: "We assess that the underlying factors fueling the spread of the movement outweigh its vulnerabilities and are likely to do so for the duration of the timeframe of this Estimate." "Recent former Defense Intelligence officer" AJ in DC writes at AMERICAblog: "Ladies and gentlemen, that's the ballgame right there. ... The assessment is saying that the main motivations for terrorism -- and the report puts Iraq at the top of that long list -- outweigh our ability to prevent it, meaning, essentially, that Iraq is more harmful than helpful in our counterterror strategy." Georgia10 at DailyKos ads: "Translation: We are losing the War on Terrorism. We are making terrorists faster than we can kill them, and a wave of violent extremism is spreading across the globe faster than we can put out the ideological fires. ... You cannot win the war against violent extremism with bombs or bullets. To quote the character V from V for Vendetta: "ideas are bulletproof."

Talking Points Memo Josh Marshall writes on the NIE: "The problem is that in Iraq we've managed to create a whole new rallying cry for a new generation of terrorists. And because they're more dispersed, both organizationally and geographically, we're really not prepared to handle the threat they pose. ... We've actually done fairly well in the actual War on Terror, in the sense of taking down the organization that attacked us on 9/11. Simultaneously we've both squandered hundreds of billions of dollars and a lot of valuable time and good will creating a new threat with the fiasco in Iraq."

At firedoglake, Sheldon Rampton takes the opportunity to promote his movie: "The Best War Ever."

TERROR POLITICS II: U.S. Policy On Iraq: The League Leader In Terrorist Creation Since 1996

For his response to the NIE , The Mudville Gazzette looks at Osama bin Laden's opinion on the topic in 1998: "The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post... Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million... On that basis, and in compliance with Allah's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims: The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim." Mudville also includes similar bin Laden statements on Iraq from 1996.

Iraq war supporter and vehement Bush critic Andrew Sullivan added his opinion on the NIE's conclusions: "As a supporter of the war in Iraq, it's clear that over three years later, it has spawned more terrorism, and is now causing more innocent deaths on a daily basis than Saddam's vile regime. Whether this was inevitable or a function of the way it was conducted will be debated for decades. ... The only arguments the Bush administration has left is that in 2050, historians may regard it as a turning point, and that leaving now would be even worse."

ETHICS: A Call To Remember

TPM Muckraker's Paul Kiel reports that Swift Boat Veterans for Truth veteran Bob Perry's Economic Freedom Fund (EFF) is behind "political calls" bombarding West Virginians and Iowans. Worse, caller ID is identifying other innocent companies as the source of the calls, causing An Event to Remember's Paige Barnes many headaches. EFF did not respond to TPM Muckraker's calls for comment.

KATRINA POLITICS: Are You Ready For Some Ethnic Cleansing!

Rep. Major Owens (D-NY) takes to The Huffington Post to explain that while we all "celebrate Monday night football" the federal government ought to have directed more of its funds to "renters in the ninth ward" instead of to the Superdome renovation. Owens notes that "62 percent of the dome renovation cost of 185 million dollars was provided by FEMA. This same agency has declared that it has nothing for permanent rental housing." Owens concludes:

Ethnic cleansing across the oceans in Darfur has been rightly denounced by most of the civilized world. My prediction is that the White House October surprise before the general election will be a very aggressive initiative against the genocide in Darfur. Regardless of the wrong reason, let us applaud doing the right thing in Sudan. Meanwhile, this generation of Americans must seriously contemplate the fact that our grandchildren will be ashamed of us for the official ethnic cleansing we are permitting in New Orleans.

LANDSCAPE: "Too Liberal" Too Many Times

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas looks at close races across the country and notes: "And speaking of the "too liberal" line of attack, notice how it has zero traction in Senate races this cycle? The places where it's being employed -- Tennessee, Montana, Missouri, and Virginia -- are turning on entirely other things."

MI SEN: What More Could A Conservative Want?

Oakland County sheriff Mike Bouchard (R) sat down with conservative Beltway bloggers 9/27. Right Angle Blog's Ivy Sellers writes: "All in all, I'd say Mike Bouchard is just about all conservatives could ask for in a representative -- he's a polite, well-spoken, pro-growth family man who understands the importance of being tough on security. He's also endorsed by the Club for Growth and Rightroots -- what more could you ask for?"

TN SEN: Putting The Pundit Back In Instapundit

Knoxville, TN resident Instapundit recounts what he told Beltway denizens about the race between ex-Chattanooga Mayor Bob Corker (R) and Rep. Harold Ford Jr. (D-09) while in town 9/27: "I think that Ford's got an excellent, and probably better-than-even chance at winning. That's because he's a very strong candidate with an excellent campaign operation. ... There's nothing wrong with Corker, but he's not as impressive on TV, and his campaign seems to be much less of a well-oiled machine. ... The race could still go either way, but the momentum is very much in Ford's favor at the moment. ... If Corker wants to win, he's going to need better ads, and a better-organized staff. Right now, I'd give the edge to Ford, who's already got both."

Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo is also bullish on Ford: "All the stars are going to have to be in alignment for Harold Ford to pull this off. He's got to run a kick-ass campaign, which he seems to be doing. Corker's got to run a feeble campaign. And you can check that box off. And the national tide's got to run in Harold's direction. But it may just happen."

VA SEN: I Know You Were A Racist 30 Years Ago, But What Am I?

Someday the blogosphere's coverage of this race may escape the '70s. That day is not today. Ryan Lizza at The Plank tracked down "53 year-old technical manager in the nuclear industry" George Beam who was roommates with Billy Lanahan who "was the third member of a hunting party" which allegedly ended with Sen. George Allen (R) stuffing the head of a dead deer into the mailbox of an African-American family. Lizza reports that one night over "beer at U Heights," Lanahan told Beam that the incident was not racial, but just a prank.

Eric Kleefeld at TPM Cafe followed up with Louisa County Chief Deputy Donald Lowe who reported that records from the era were spotty but that "AACP officials and other prominent figures has not unearthed anything like the doe-head story. ... but nothing yet implicating Allen." Not Larry Sabato also contacted the Louisa County Sheriff's Office and reported: "This is an active investigation again- I have the cell phone number of deputy working on the case." For his part, DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas wasn't getting his hopes up: "I'm not banking on this story being corroborated. But if it is, you'd have to think it would be the nail in Allen's coffin."

On the right, National Review Online's John J. Miller shot back noting that ex-Navy sec. James Webb (D) used the n-word in his fiction and argues: "A lot more people have encountered racial epithets from having read Webb's novels than from having heard Allen speak them (and Allen, crucially, has denied speaking them)."

Over at Raising Kaine, Webb Netroots Coordinator Lowell Feld looks at Team Allen accusations that Webb used the n-word while he was in college and agrees with Webb campaign press secretary Kristian Denny Todd that Allen's staff is "pure slime." Feld adds: "I couldn't agree more. By the way, can this campaign degenerate any further? And did we expect anything different with people like Dick Wad(hams), Chris LaSwiftBoatVita, and Scott "Hitler Ads" Howell in charge at Allen for Senate HQ? Hmmmmm."

At the official AllenHQ Jon Henke laments: "It's an incredible shame that the Democrats have chosen to make the Virginia Senate Race a campaign about what African-American Bishop Gerald O. Glenn called "character assassination" rather than about the many issues facing Virginia." Conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt adds: "At this rate, the Allen-Webb race should easily surpass 1984's Jesse Helms - Jim Hunt Senate race as the most dispiriting political exercise of the modern era. I know Allen and Webb both really wanted to make history, each in his own way. But I bet this isn't what either one of them had in mind."

Still on the right, Virtuconindustries reports from a Webb campaign speech in Alexandria, VA: "What struck me the most was that I don't think he said anything that Pat Buchanan would disagree with. Most of the speech was platitudes, but he did talk about two issues. One was that we should leave Iraq. The other was economic populism such as "sending jobs overseas". Webb criticized immigration, without even differentiating between legal and illegal immigration."

PEOPLE: Atrios Is Not A Gym Teacher

The fetching Amanda Congdon at AmandaAcrossAmerica interviews the once pseudonymous Duncan Black. Also, Arianna Huffington has video from behind the scenes at The Colbert Report.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: It Ain't That Simple

The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum has issues with a William Arkin post at Early Warning: "The simplistic story line that the Democrats are pushing is all about and solely about Iraq: withdraw U.S. forces, defeat the Republicans, tidy up foreign policy by giving human rights to prisoners and being nicer in the world, and voila, terror subsides." Drum responds:

I write a blog. That means I make sharp points in very brief posts. But even at that, nothing I've written could even be unfairly caricatured the way Arkin does, let alone fairly. Ditto for other liberal bloggers who are even sharper and briefer than me.

Some of these liberals think we ought to withdraw from Iraq and some don't. I think it's safe to say that virtually all of them believe that a less militaristic and more internationalist foreign policy would be a net benefit. But it's also safe to say that none of them - not one - believes this is all it will take to put a stop to militant jihadism. And yet, after five years of speeches, articles, symposia, and books by Democrats on national security, that's what Arkin writes.

LEST WE FORGET: What, The Iron Sheik Wasn't Available?

Right Wing News was "watching TNA wrestling via TiVo" when he came across the pro-illegal immigration character Konnan ranting "about America and white people (Incidentally, if you're trying to make pro-wrestling fans hate you -- and they were -- that's a pretty good way to go about it)." RWN concludes:

Whether you're a fan of pro-wrestling or not, it's worth your time to watch the video above because the characters appear to be nothing more than a personification of what people didn't like about those illegal immigration rallies. Listen to the rhetoric that they use and keep in mind that when a politician supports comprehensive immigration reform AKA amnesty, a significant percentage of the American electorate will see it as nothing more than a thumbs up to the sort of thing they're hearing from those wrestlers.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:37 PM

Blogometer Extra

TERROR POLITICS: Boiled Bubba Or Cooked Rice?

 The Bill Clinton-Chris Wallace brouhaha on FOX continues to make news 9/27.

  Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice wasted little time in issuing a response that was just as defensive, "refuting his accusation," Kim Priestap at Wizbang! writes, "that the Bush Administration didn't do anything regarding terrorism prior to 9/11."  Priestap quotes Rice in the New York Post:

"The notion somehow for eight months the Bush administration sat there and didn't do that is just flatly false - and I think the 9/11 commission understood that. ... What we did in the eight months was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding years. ... We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al Qaeda."

  Then progressive news site The Raw Story leapt on that, writer Larry Womack asserting that a 2001 memo to then-National Security Advisor Rice contradicted her statements to the Post.  Womack writes:

RAW STORY has found that just five days after President George W. Bush was sworn into office, a memo from counter-terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke to Rice included the 2000 document, "Strategy for Eliminating the Threat from the Jihadist Networks of al-Qida: Status and Prospects."  This document devotes over 2 of its 13 pages of material to specifically addressing strategies for securing Pakistan's cooperation in airstrikes against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

  Spencer Ackerman at The Plank adds to that, asking Rice to "stop lying about the plans your administration inherited."  He too refers to potentially damning documents, particularly a classified doc signed by Bush that, if made public, could settle once and for all who's telling the truth in all this.  Ackerman writes:

Rice insisted, "We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al Qaeda."  This has been her strategy since Clarke first went public in early 2004: to quibble over the meaning of "comprehensive."  The problem with that strategy is that, whatever the Bush administration was contemplating doing before September 11 about Al Qaeda, Clarke--who worked for the National Security Council--was its primary author and driving bureaucratic force.  Attack Clarke and Rice attacks her own plan.  So the only option she sees is to suggest, again and again, that NSPD-9 is significantly different from Clarke's 2000 plan.

NSPD-9 has never been released.  Jamie Gorelick, the 9/11 Commission member, hinted during testimony that Rice's characterization of it is incorrect, and Richard Armitage agreed with her.  ... But because NSPD-9 is classified, she couldn't go into detail.  Last year, Clarke's 2000 plan, the genesis of NSPD-9, was declassified in full.  If Condi made one phone call, she could have Bush declassify NSPD-9 and then this whole dispute would be settled.  Clinton and Clarke would be exposed as liars, right, Condi?  So how about it?

  Byron York at Nation Review Online attempts to bolster Rice's side by obliquely questioning the validity, along with the existence, of the Clarke plan handed over to Bush et al.  To wit:

...National Review talked to Georgia Republican Saxby Chambliss, who was then a member of the House, chairing the Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security.  Chambliss was perplexed.  “I’ve had Dick Clarke testify before our committee several times, and we’ve invited Samuel Berger several times,” Chambliss told NR, “and this is the first I’ve ever heard of that plan.”  If it was such a big deal, Chambliss wondered, why didn’t anyone mention it?

  Ackerman takes York for a stroll down The Plank, responding to the column's trumpeting of the Chambliss remark.  "Um, Saxby?  Did you read the 9/11 Commission report?  You know, the one that cites Clarke's plan again and again?  Start on page 196 and continue to page 214.  It's helpful!"

  Finally, Ackerman takes York to task over his other arguments to dispute Clinton.  He finishes, "[T]his story does not rely on Clarke's credibility: we have the documents.  Or one of them, at least.  Better luck next time, Byron."

BLOGGERS VS. MSM: Bunch To The Gut

  Elder press statesemen David Broder at the Washington Post has been on a tear lately, hailing what he perceives as a renegade centrist faction in the Republican Party standing up to the excesses of a president gone slightly off-balance, as well as a spirited, purposeful political body of moderate temperament emerging from the raging waters of the left and right.

  In a recent column, he praised GOP Sens. John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and John Warner for defiantly standing up against President Bush's detainee bill until changes were made to bring it more in harmony with constitutional, if not international, law.  A compromise was reached, which prompted Broder to describe the three "rebels" thusly:

These are not ordinary men. McCain, from Arizona, is probably the leading candidate for the 2008 presidential nomination. Graham, from South Carolina, is the star among the younger Republican senators. Warner, from Virginia, embodies the essence of traditional Reagan conservatism: patriotism, support for the military, civility.

That these Republicans -- and others -- were ready to join the Democrats in rejecting Bush's plan caused the White House to scramble for alternatives and House Republican leaders to postpone a scheduled vote.  The revolt goes well beyond three men.

What it really signals is a new movement in this country -- what you could rightly call the independence party.

  Broder expands on this concept of an "independence party" in a subsequent column, moved by "the independence being demonstrated all over the political spectrum these days."  He goes on to list former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA), Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Gov. Tom Vilsack (D-IA), former Gov. Mark Warner (D-VA), and--perhaps inevitably--McCain, Graham, and Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) as "independent members of both parties--those who are prepared to defy the dictates of their interest groups and clamorous extremes" who would make fine candidates in the 2008 presidential election.

  Inspiring stuff, if you're of like mind as Broder and able to look beyond the outrages of the here and now.  But there was one remark Broder made in his first column above that particularly stirred the ire of Attytood's Will Bunch.  A press man like Broder, Bunch credits the Post icon for inspiring his career ("[T]here was a time in my life when I very much wanted to be you") but traces what he perceives as the gradual burning out of Broder's journalistic ethos and the hardening of his cynicism in the post-Watergate years through the present.  Bunch writes:

You, and your colleague Bob Woodward, and so many others, grew to admire the callous art of spincraft you'd been trained to expose -- so much so that when Hurricane Katrina devastated an American city and betrayed a stunning indifference to the fate of the nation's poorest, you could only write that Katrina "opens new opportunities for [Bush] to regain his standing with the public."

  What prompted Bunch's passionate response to his former mentor?  In his "Independence Days" column, Broder wrote, "[Y]ou can see the independence party forming -- on both sides of the aisle.  They are mobilizing to resist not only Bush but also the extremist elements in American society -- the vituperative, foul-mouthed bloggers on the left and..."  We'll stop there, because that's likely where Bunch stopped as well.  His reaction to that perceived dismissive slander was thus:

Like you, I am a newspaper reporter, and I share some of your core values, including a commitment to journalistic digging and hard work, and an unwillingness to accept the pat and partisan answers at face value.

And yet, I am also a blogger – professionally, and I guess by temperament.  And when I see what is coming out of your hometown in 2006 -- ugly politics driven by fear, the chucking of the constitution and our deep-seated judicial principles such as the writ of habeas corpus – it can indeed make me very angry, so angry that there are times when, yes, I must sound “vituperative” on occasion.

  Bunch's buildup continues:

The night I became angry came in March 2003, the night that your friends and colleagues in the White House press room took a dive at a nationally televised press conference, and refused to challenge the president’s specious grounds for war.  I was furious over what my profession -- the one where you had once inspired me a generation ago -- had now become.  And frankly, a lot of people on the left side became angry, too -- because, frankly, nobody was listening when they were nice.  Protest marches of half a million got inside-the-A-section type coverage; at least a little vitriol finally got your attention, Mr. Broder.

  "[Y]our cynicism is degenerative disease," Bunch writes, "and it leads to paralysis."  He concludes:

I would have been much happier, frankly, spending my 40s the way that you spent your 40s, fighting for a Pulitzer Prize instead of fighting to preserve the basics of a democracy and a free press, the things that you and I and America were able to take for granted for so long. ... [T]his journalist will use every weapon in his arsenal to preserve the values that allowed our craft to flourish in America -- including the weapon of anger. That may offend you from time to time; I guess on some level I hope that it doesn’t. ... Either way, don’t expect me to apologize for it.

Because I won’t.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 05:52 AM

September 27, 2006

Blogometer Extra

TERROR POLITICS: Habeas Or Hey, BS!

  It all started out innocently enough last week with the seemingly reconciled Senate GOP crowing about how they'd come together for Bush's sake on his detainee bill.

  Some righty bloggers like Ankle Biting Pundits were wondering just what the heck the fuss was all about.  Patrick Hynes at ABP had this to say:

"To read the likes of Andrew McCarthy, Joe McQuaid and, sadly, our own BDP was to wander through a bizarro-Kosland where every conservative speaks about every move a single guy makes as if it will end the world as we know it. ... [O]ur own, beloved BDP has, unfortunately, been relentless while spewing vitriol in Sen. McCain's direction, not unlike an irate alpaca.  Over what, exactly?  Well, if Byron York is to be believed, and I tend to trust York’s reporting, the answer is: Not much, really."

  He quotes Byron York: "The Republican 'dissenters' never wanted to cripple the CIA’s interrogation program... Rather, they wanted to work out a way to make most of the program legal using existing American law, not the Geneva Convention."  Hynes sums up, "[S]o John McCain never wanted to weaken our war effort so badly that we'll all be forced to pray five times daily facing East?  Oh."

  Things might have inevitably faded away had it not been for the, as the New York Times described it, "unusual" Monday hearing in which a handful of US senators aired out some serious concernts they have about the bill.  The Times reported:

Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee sought to slow down the effort by President Bush and Congressional leaders to speed the passage of legislation on the treatment of terror suspects. ... Senator Arlen Specter ... described as "inexplicable" a provision in the bill that would strip federal court of jurisdiction over detainees not formally charged with war crimes. ... Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont ... criticized the rush to pass the legislation, saying its restriction of court access would perpetuate "the indefinite detentions of hundreds of individuals against whom the government has brought no charges and presented no evidence, and without any recourse to justice whatsoever." ... Senator John Cornyn ... who was the only other member of the committee present for the unusual Monday morning hearing, defended the bill ... "It is important to remember — and sometimes I think some forget — these are enemies of the United States captured on the battlefield."

  Monday's hearing re-ignited a blog bonfire whose embers had just begun to cool over the weekend.

  Christy Harding Smith at Firedoglake was riled: "We are better than this as Americans.  The rule of law is more important than covering George Bush’s butt in the short term.  And I will be damned if I am just going to roll over.  There will be accountability for this mess — and it starts with the election in November.

  Kevin Drum at The Washington Monthly tempers his disgust with ennui.  Re: Specter's "crypto-moderation," he says, "Why would a senior committee chairman actually do something substantive to back up a belief that pending legislation is an unconstitutional suspension of habeas corpus?  That's hardly worth fighting over, is it? ... And how about the Democrats?  Will they fight this?  We'll have to wait and see, but their performance has been pretty uninspiring so far."

  Justin Rood over at TPMmuckracker was inspired by a lawyer named Tom Sullivan, who appeared before the hearing and "sharply question" Sen. Cornyn, a supporter of stripping habeas corpus rights from the detainees.  Rood:

A partner in the white-shoe law firm of Jenner & Block, Sullivan has helped represent 10 Saudis held at Guantanamo Bay.  Three have been released; seven are still confined to the military prison.  He aimed his opening remarks squarely at Cornyn -- rarely does one see testimony so directly confront a lawmaker: "I've read the classified evidence.  I'm not free to disclose it, but I can tell you it's a sham.  There was no lawyer given to the defendants.  They didn't speak English, most of them. ... No cross-examination was allowed. ... Now, you call that due process, Your Honor?"

  Daily Kos's mcjoan even found among non-supporters of the habeas icing a curious figure: Kenneth W. Starr, he of the bazillion dollar Bill Clinton microinvestigation.  "'Kenneth W. Starr, a solicitor general under President George H.W. Bush, said in a letter to Specter that he [is] concerned the legislation "may go too far in limiting habeas corpus relief."'  It's even too much for Kenneth Starr, of all people."

  Finally, Orcinus pens a substantive piece intended overtly for the "values voter" mindset.  An excerpt from this must-read:

I've been hearing a lot of talk that the recent capitulation on American torture policy has demoralized many in the Democratic rank and file.  And understandably so; the Bush administration is plunging the nation into the moral abyss, and it seems that not only is there nothing we can do to stop them, but the people who are supposed to be fighting for us are self-evidently incompetent. ... I think they're mistaken. Republicans, in their hubris, have just handed progressives a valuable gift, an opportunity to win hearts and minds beyond anything they've done in the past decade.  Progressives just need to be smart enough to grab it. ... The baseline problem with torture, after all, is that it is prima facie immoral, a violation not just of the Golden Rule and basic Christian precepts, but of nearly any system of ethics.

  But it's hard not to feel the heat coming off Harding Smith's fiery call to action at the lake, as referenced earlier.  She declares, "From this day forward, getting out the Democratic vote is the single most important thing on my agenda between now and November — but I’m going to need everyone’s help.  I have damn well had enough."

[Mike Sheehan]

Posted by Conn Carroll at 02:26 PM

9/27: The Last President First Elected In The Blogless Era

The WH invited bloggers involved in the passage of S. 2590 to the bill's signing 9/26 and even allowed Pres. Bush to be photographed shaking bloggers' hands. And yet nary a mention in Bush's remarks about the bloggers present, let alone words of praise for their efforts. As MA Gov. Mitt Romney (R) sits down with RedState on 9/26 and NM Gov. Bill Richardson (D) provides a major sponsorship for MyDD, it's clear that WH '08 candidates are courting the blogosphere in their own ways. Whoever is the next Pres., it's a safe bet that when he or she invites bloggers to the WH, the transcript will reflect that they were actually there.

BLOGGERS VS. BELTWAY: Bloggers To Be Seen, Not Spoken Of

Townhall's Mary Katharine Ham was one of many bloggers "at the bill-signing ceremony for S. 2590, the Coburn/Obama transparency bill" 9/26. Ham has photos of Pres. Bush from the event and comments: "I kinda wish I'd gotten a more handsome one of him -- I do love it when he smirks -- but I didn't want to spend the whole time taking pictures." The event wasn't all smile for Ham though: "The President didn't mention bloggers or Internets or even people power in his remarks, which I thought was silly. One sentence and he would have been talked about all day."

Ham later attended a panel on partisanship sponsored by Pajamas Media at the National Press Club. Power Line's Paul Mirengoff was a panelist and reports: "The panel reached no consensus on 'how partisan is too partisan,' but most panelists agreed that the mainstream media is too partisan for an institution that purports not to be. My remarks focused on partisanship in the blogosphere. I argued that bloggers are too partisan if they are dishonest as to factual matters or are intellectually dishonest. Beyond that, it's a matter of taste."

Not all in attendance were impressed, Hit and Run's David Weigel thought the event felt like "a fringe political meeting" and didn't appreciate the tangents on "how the partisan MainStream Media was losing readers to the blogs because it was so very partisan, and so very mainstream, and they'd better watch out because bloggers are going to leave them choking on their bloggy dust trails. And this set the tone for the rest of the discussion, which turned to how quickly the liberal media and liberal professoriat could be upset by the soaring power of blogs/citizen media." Weigel did like the food though.

TERROR POLITICS: Withdrawal To Success

DemFromCT at DailyKos tells readers 9/26's release of selected portions of the April National Intelligence Estimate: "doesn't stop the bleeding. The discussion remains squarely about Iraq, and how screwed up things are. This is not what the GOP and Bush wanted." AMERICAblog's John in DC adds: "there's even more in here that is bad news for Bush. He's nuts to release this and claim that it helps him. The only "good" news in the entire document is that it says Bush has caught a lot of Al Qaeda leaders. Yeah, we know that. But the document makes clear that the danger remains, and is increasing, and the war in Iraq isn't helping."

Still on the left, Matthew Yglesias is tired of righty misunderstanding of the left's plan for success in Iraq: "Does anyone -- anyone -- on the right genuinely believe that those of us who favor withdrawal from Iraq do so because we don't think it would be a good idea to turn the country into a shining success? Of course we don't think that. We favor withdrawal because we don't believe that indefinite continuation of an open-ended military presence in Iraq is likely to generate success."

Talking Points Memo Josh Marshall reminds readers of Bush's history with selective declassification of NIE's but Kevin Drum at The Washington Monthly hopes the NIE will spark a debate about the Iraq "dilemma in its starkest form."

Many on the right argued the Dems had fallen into a foreign policy trap. Conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt writes: "egged on by the brilliant lights at the New York Times and the paper's leaking pals who believe that their reporting on the contents of classified report by unnamed intelligence analysts will persuade American voters of something other than the paper's reckless disregard for anything but its fanatical Bush-hatred agenda" Dems "have charged off into a political box canyon." Others on the right approvingly citing the NIE include:

• National Review Online's Kathryn Jean Lopez: "The New York Times Gets One Thing Right on Iraq ... In spite of themselves...."The current situation will get worse if American forces leave."
• Hugh Hewitt: "Read all of the declassified sections of the report. Nothing in it supports the Pelosi-Dean-Reid-Murtha Democrats' demand to cut-and-run from Iraq. Just the opposite in fact: "If democratic reform efforts in Muslim majority nations progress over the next five years, political participation probably would drive a wedge between intransigent extremists and groups willing to use the political process to achieve their local objectives."
• National Review Online's Mario Loyola: "So, in essence the NIE judges that the Democrats' proposal to leave Iraq's democracy to its own devices would eliminate the major opportunities it sees for diminishing the jihadi movement. Nice.
• Captain's Quarters: "First, the Democrats allowed themselves to get outfoxed on national security yet again by allowing themselves to get hysterical and seriously misrepresent the conclusions of the NIE. ... As the NIE concludes, a victory in Iraq would seriously damage the radical Islamist movement, perhaps even mortally. We have no chance to strike a blow against them by retreating. Democrats have badly misrepresented this report and offer the one solution guaranteed to result in making the problem worse -- as the NIE also concludes.

TERROR POLITICS II: Just One More Iraq Report Floating Around?

TPM Muckraker's Justin Rood reports Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) suggested "a second damning Iraq report" was "floating around the intelligence community." Rood continues: "Sources at the event say the document is not officially an NIE, although it was prepared by the National Intelligence Council, an community-wide intelligence body whose primary function is to prepare NIEs." Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall calls for both reports to be released: "The April NIE and this NIE that dare not speak its name too." Marshall later explains why the second report is not an NIE: "it's not been given the 'NIE' label because that would trigger reporting requirements to congress that the administration has wanted to avoid."

TERROR POLITICS III: Rising Star

Many lefty bloggers have been approvingly linking to the feisty foreign policy floor speeches of Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH).

TERROR POLITICS IV: "Lame Duck" Session Last Hope To Avoid "Lame Duck" Label

At TPM Cafe, Steve Clemons reports the cancellation of 9/26's 2:25 pm Senate Foreign Relations Cmte "business meeting" signaled the end of even "dimmest chance" John Bolton would be confirmed as UN Amb. Clemons writes: "Some have said that another effort could be mounted during a lame duck session of Congress, but there are several Republicans who will not feel bound by the White House in that circumstance; Dems as well -- who will vote against cloture on the floor of the Senate were it to get out of Committee then. So, it's over. Wow."

On the right, Outside the Beltway's James Joyner comments: "This is one of the more bizarre exercises in which we engage. The chief reasons to oppose Bolton for the post have little to do with Bolton but rather the fact that he an aggressive spokesman for the administration's foreign policy. Given that this is essentially the post's job description, not confirming him on those grounds is silly. Not at least going on record with an up-or-down vote is cowardly."

LANDSCAPE: If There Is Wisdom Here, It Is Not Conventional

MyDD's Chris Bowers looks at Dem leads in CO-07, IN-08, AZ-08, IN-09, VA-02, IN-02, PA-10, IA-01, CT-02, PA-06, KY-04, NC-11, WA-08, and IL-06 and declares: "we are already winning in enough districts to take the House." Bowers then runs down polling data from more races and concludes: "And that brings us to a grand total of 35 districts. Overall, Democrats lead in twenty congressional districts. One district is tied, and Democrats are within striking distance in at least thirteen more."

Over on the right, John McIntyre at RCP Blog sees Dems only gaining 10 House seats due to: "the economy humming at 3%+ growth, unemployment below 5%, the Dow near all-time highs and gas prices back below $2.50, these are not exactly economic conditions associated with a "throw the bums out" type of election." TAPPED's Ezra Klein responds: "Much of that strikes me as plausible, if not correct. The House races tend to be harder to predict, if only because there's less polling and data flowing out of individual districts than whole states. Moreover, the GOP's GOTV advantage will likely make the difference in a number of marginal races where Democrats lack sufficient funds to power major turnout operations."

CT SEN: To Save Ferris, Watch This Video!

Lefty CT Bob is having fun with his editing software again. This time splicing clips from Ferris Bueller's Day Off with a Senate roll call vote to poke fun at missed votes by Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT). The video is an instant lefty fave.

At firedoglake Lindsay Beyerstein catalogues the GOP friendly fundraising sources Lieberman has been forced to hang out with while Atrios has a profanity laced response to Lieberman's Iraq position.

OH SEN: Supporting Israel For All The Wrong Reasons

TAPPED's Sarah Posner argues Sen. Mike DeWine's (R) willingness to cozy up to the Christians United for Israel (CUFI) "shows not a toughness against the terrorists, but a spinelessness against religious fundamentalism." Posner is no fan of CUFI's support for Israel since the organization's motives "do not stem from a love of the nation of Israel, as Israel-supporting Jews in Ohio might expect. Rather, they seek a world-ending conflagration leading to the Second Coming of Christ."

VA SEN: But Who Are The Young Virginians For Racial Inequality Endorsing?

Ex-Navy Sec. James Webb's (D) new ad on Iraq is receiving high praise throughout the lefty blogosphere. DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas writes: "On too many threads, someone says, "I don't see Democrats standing strong on Iraq". That's bull[excrement]. There are plenty of Democrats doing so. They just need to get elected to do anything about it." TPM Cafe's Eric Kleefeld adds: "It contrasts images of Bush and Allen separately insisting that we "stay the course" in Iraq with horrific images of violence from the war. It concludes with Webb speaking directly to the camera and hitting Allen very, very hard. He says: "The people who failed to prevent this disaster are not the ones you can count on to fix it." Webb concludes: "We need leaders in the Senate-not followers."

Not on the air, but still flying around the web, the "Young Virginians for Racial Equality" have a video out questioning Sen. George Allen (R) about his civil rights record.

Over at Raising Kaine Webb Netroots Coordinator Lowell Feld has pictures from John Edwards campaign stop with Webb at Mary Washington and includes these Edwards highlights:

• "This election is about transforming America."
• "We need a man of character, strength and honesty who "couldn't tell a lie if his life depended on it" - Jim Webb."
• "In these elections, the future of the world is at stake."

Raising Kaine also links to audio from the Gov. Tim Kaine, Stephen King, John Grisham, and Webb event at the Paramount Theater in Charlottesville, VA. Feld writes: "And yes, all those guys - except for Tim Kaine - are FICTION

WRITERS. Oh, the horror, the horror! :)"

VA SEN II: Target Sabato

National Review Online's Greg Pollowitz looks at UVA prof. Larry Sabato's recent Hardball performance and wants to know if "the "n" word is a character issue today," then why did Sabato not bring it up when he moderated a debate between Allen and then Sen. Chuck Robb (D) in 2000?

Scott Johnson at Power Line chips in with an email response from Team Sabato explaining: "I didn't know these things until the past few months. People I know and who are very credible contacted me and shared the stories. Then reporters checked them out: I am not a reporter. Based on everything they learned, they believe the stories and so do I. Other things will determine the election, though." Johnson concludes: "I was inclined to take Sabato's original comments at face value based on his Sabato's reputation. I was mistaken. Sabato's irresponsible conduct in this matter -- passing on the "hearsay" of unidentified third parties as of his own knowledge -- should disqualify him as an allegedly neutral commentator on contemporary politics."

Matt Lewis at Right Angle Blog also devalues his Sabato stock: "On another note, I think it is a career mistake for Larry Sabato to be personally inserting himself in this story. While it is true that he has a unique perspective (having known Allen at the University of Virginia), I can't help but feel that this further diminishes his credibility as an analyst. His critics have long said that Larry would never turn down any opportunity to get in front of a camera (or be quoted by the media). Maybe that explains it? It will be interesting to see if he will be able to continue being viewed as an unbiased analyst ..."

RICHARDSON: Blogosphere Forecast Improving In NM

Chris Bowers at MyDD welcomed NM Gov. Bill Richardson (D) to the pages of MyDD as their new Governor Forecast 2006 sponsor. Richardson writes:

On Sunday, September 10th, I returned to New Mexico from Sudan after a successful mission to secure the release of imprisoned Chicago Tribune journalist and New Mexican Paul Salopek and his two Chadian colleagues. Our goal was accomplished through diplomacy, respectful face-to-face communication between me and President Al Bashir...

...That's why I'm committed to supporting and building the progressive online infrastructure we need to win now. It's why the Democratic Governors Association is stepping up our internet efforts to serve as a clearinghouse for information on races around the country and how people can get involved. It's why I've set up a page at ActBlue.com to highlight our candidates, and why it's so important to activate ActBlue fundraising for every state. And it's why I'm proud to partner with MyDD to sponsor the Governor Forecast 2006.

ROMNEY: Raves For Romney's New Rants

IA's Krusty Konservative announced state House Speaker Christopher Rants (R) signed on to MA Gov. Mitt Romney's Commonwealth PAC. Krusty writes: "Rants is the highest ranking Republican elected official in the state to sign on with a potential 08er."

Over at RedStateErick Erickson has audio from his interview with Romney and reports: "Governor Romney and I had a very engaging conversation about his transition from a guy who really did not put life issues on his front burner to a guy who now considers himself pro-life. We also talked about how his Mormon faith might affect people's votes in 2008. Governor Romney also explained his health care initiative in Massachusetts that uses free market approaches and individual responsibility to drive down government health care costs and we talked about governing as a conservative in a very liberal state."

Right Angle Blog's Matt Lewis surveys the scene and concludes: "Give Gov. Mitt Romney credit for a good week of assiduously courting conservatives. While many of his opponents are either ignoring traditional campaign methods (they are failing to raise money, build a team, etc.) -- or are offending conservative voters with their votes and/or comments -- Mitt Romney is going out of his way to do both. He is raising money, putting together a team, and wooing conservatives. This week, he gave a well-received speech at the Family Research Council, And his interview (posted today) with Red State is one more example of his willingness to court the conservative base."

TORTURE POLITICS: An Utterly Meaningless Language

Lefty bloggers are increasing the pressure on Senate Dems to filibuster the detainee treatment bill. TPM Cafe's Stirling Newberry calls on Senate min. leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to firm up his opposition and Newberry describes his fear of being personally kidnapped and tortured while traveling abroad in retaliation for U.S. prisoner treatment. AMERICAblog's John in DC debated Steve Malzberg on the issue for Paula Zahn Now.

Meanwhile, Atrios find the "Language of Religion" "utterly meaningless to me personally" but still links to torture debates at Faithful Democrats and Street Prophets.

On the right, Iraq war supporter and fierce Pres. Bush critic Andrew Sullivan sees the torture compromise as "one of the darkest hours for Western liberty in a very long time."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: From Purple To Blue?

Chris Bowers at MyDD looks at polls from CO GOV, CO-04, CO-05, and CO-07 and notes:

• In 2002, Republicans held the trifecta in Colorado. They also held a 5-2 edge in the congressional delegation, and both of the US Senate seats. Colorado was not considered a swing state in Presidential elections.
• After 2006, Democrats will hold the trifecta in Colorado. We will also hold at least a 4-3 edge in the congressional delegation, and quite possibly pull off an even larger edge. The US Senate seats are currently split. Colorado is understood as one of the top swing states in the entire country. By now, it might even be lean Dem.

Bowers concludes: "Now that is a turnaround. In four short years, a decidedly red state has turned first to purple, and then to a light shade of blue. The key is that the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy sought by progressives around the country is already operational in Colorado. All advocacy groups work together--no more single-issue ghettos. There is a booming local blogosphere that is both internally organized and that receives healthy support from the establishment. Media Matters has set up in the state to counter local right-wing media. The silent revolution is not only under way, but actually completed, as grassroots progressives have taken over the state party."

LEST WE FORGET: A Master Debater

Slate has posted "The George Allen Insult Generator" with insults for people who are "Arab," "Canadian," "A debater," "Fat," "Irish" and many more. Blogometer favorites include:

• Old people: "Hey there, Andy Rooney!"
• A gamer: "Hey there, thumb warrior!"
• A person with bad breath: "Pleased to meet you, Binaca!"
• A stamp collector: "How's it going, philateloser!"
• French: "Why, hello, Monsieur Caca!"

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:24 PM

September 26, 2006

9/26: National Blogger Unity Estimate

Who knew one little New York Times story was all it took to bring bloggers from the right and left together on an issue as contentious as nat'l security? The consensus is limited admittedly (both sides pressured Pres. Bush to announce at a WH presser this a.m. that officials will declassify the April N.I.E.), but it's important to note that when bloggers do come together, it's usually part of larger efforts towards more transparency and openness in gov't. And they usually succeed. On 9/26, Bush is hosting "bloggers" at the signing of the pork database bill that both the right and left blogosphere pushed hard for.

TERROR POLITICS: Malkin And Marshall, Together At Last

Talking Points Memo Josh Marshallspent the better part of 9/25 updating readers on responses from congressional offices to requests for the declassification of the April N.I.E. partially leaked 9/23. By late evening, Marshall was welcoming Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS) to "the party."

By early 9/26 the right's Michelle Malkin also thought declassification was "a good idea." Captain's Quarters, In From The Cold, and Power Line also all joined in.

TERROR POLITICS II: Looks Like They Managed To Keep The Power On This Time

AMERICAblog's Joe in DC notes 9/25: "The Republicans won't hold oversight hearings on Iraq. But, today, the Democrats will." Christy Hardin Smith at firedoglake writes of the hearings: "What is most notable about this criticism is that it is coming from newly retired high level officers who worked at the highest echelon of command structure at the Pentagon - planning for the war and, ultimately, then serving in Iraq or in a supervisory capacity over the conduct and problems that ensued once we landed there. And also overseeing the increasing chaos in areas in Afghanistan outside of Kabul."

AMERICAblog's John in DC chips in with links to testimony from: Major General John Batiste, Major General Paul Eaton, and Col. Thomas Hannes

TERROR POLITICS III: A Permanent Memorial To Fahrenheit 9/11

RedState updates a story that has "been picking up steam" inside the blogosphere and out. Arizona's own EspressoPundit first posted on the 9/11 memorial on the Capitol grounds in Phoenix 9/20: "The memorial is an elevated flat ring with phrases cut through the metal. Throughout the day, the sun shines through the ring and phrases become visible on the side walk." Phrases include:

• 07 01 02 ERRONEOUS US AIR STRIKE KILLS 46 URUZGAN CIVILIANS
• 06 03 02 CONGRESS QUESTIONS WHY CIA & FBI DIDN'T PREVENT ATTACKS
• VIOLENT ACTS LEADING US TO WAR 05 07 1915, 12 07 1941 08 04 1964 & 09 11 2001

RedState's Leon Wolf comments on the second line: "The second, of course, is designed to create a permanent memorial to Fahrenheit 9/11. Regardless of your personal view of the value of special committees and hearings, I don't think that there should be legitimate dispute that this kind of crap also does not belong on a memorial to honor the 9/11 dead."

LANDSCAPE: The New Two Americas

Chris Bowers at MyDD looks at 6 different LV polls taken in the last 2 weeks and notes that the results fall into 2 distinctly different camps: "These polls were all taken at about the exact same time. Differences of this sort cannot be chalked up simply to random error. I have never seen anything like this. One group shows a Democratic lead of 11-14%. The other group shows a Democratic lead of 0-3%. This is not simply a case of a few outlying polls. These groups of polling outfits are clearly polling two different countries altogether. Both countries exist. The issue is simply which country to we live in, and which country will show up when it comes time to vote."

Bowers concludes with a call to arms: "Here is the point I am trying to get across: It currently is equally probable that Democrats will sweep this election to a degree surpassing Republicans in 1994, and that Democrats will make only small gains in this election. The lesson of polling right now is that two possible nations have appeared before us, and we live in them both. The truth is not in between. Our work over the next six weeks will determine which nation we will live in for years to come: the nation with the huge Democratic sweep, or the nation with the extremely narrow Republican majority?"

LANDSCAPE II: RNC Chair Thinks GOP Will Win

The Right Angle Blog's Robert Bluey sat down with RNC Chair Ken Mehlman 9/25 and discussed "the GOP's prospects in November, what a Democratic-led Congress would do, the RNC's advanced get-out-the-vote drive and the role of conservatives in the blogosphere."

BLOGGERS VS. BLOGGERS: Your 2006 Campaign Blog Scandal Guide

Blogometer alum William Beutler at Blog PI has a detailed color coded chart on '06 election blog scandals including: Rep. Charlie Bass (R-NH), Rep. Ben Cardin (D-MD), state Sen. Tom Kean Jr. (R-NJ), atty Amy Klobuchar (DFL-MN). Items on the chart include: Aggrieved Parties, Accusation, The Accused, Internet Sleuth(s), Troublesome Blog, Sock Puppets, MSM Coverage, Blog Coverage, Outcome, Remaining Questions, and Ongoing?

VA SEN: The Blogometer Doesn't Actually Think Allen Loves Pigs

Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall posts video from UVA Prof. Larry Sabato's 9/25 Sen. George Allen (R)-used-the N-word Hardball appearance and notes: "Both men graduated from UVA in 1974." Also on the left, The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum surveys the wreckage and remembers an old story:

This story may or may not be true, but legend has it that during one of Lyndon Johnson's congressional campaigns he decided to spread a rumor that his opponent was a pig-[lover]. LBJ's campaign manager said, "Lyndon, you know he doesn't do that!" Johnson replied, "I know. I just want to make him deny it." I have a feeling that George Allen can relate.

Later Drum felt obliged to update: "I should probably revise and extend here. I don't actually think the charges against Allen are false."

On the right, Tom Bevan at RCP Blog takes issue with Sabato's claim: "tonight on Hardball he was just flat out wrong to declare in one breath that George Allen had in fact used the n-word and then in the next breath to tell Chris Matthews that he "wasn't going to get into" the specifics of how he knew the accusation to be true. You simply cannot make such a damning accusation on national television without backing it up. It's both irresponsible and unfair."

Back on the left, ex-Navy sec. James Webb's (D) Netroots Coordinator Lowell Feld at DailyKos reads The Weekly Standard's latest article on Allen sp Kossacks don't have to. Highlights include: "The article next turns to a lengthy, blow-by-blow, extremely unflattering description of the whole "macaca" incident. While the Weekly Standard does not believe Allen actually is a racist, it does call him an "oaf" and asserts, point blank, that Allen is "at odds with Virginia's future." A lengthy discussion follows about how Virginia is rapidly turning "blue."

Still on the left, TNR's Spencer Ackerman shares Allen's new GOP moniker: "Senator Macacawitz." And Raising Kaine links to a post from "Republican consultant" Doug Thompson at Capitol Hill Blue claiming Allen used the n-word when handicapping R