9/11: You've Come Along Way Baby

The contrast between the unity and compassion of 9/11/2001 and the bitter recriminations 9/11/2006 is perhaps starkest in the blogosphere, especially in light of ABC's "The Path to 9/11" docudrama. As noted below, blogs were just in their infancy five years ago today, and one wonders how such an attack would have played in a more mature (read partisan) blogosphere. Opinions vary widely as to who is to blame for the deterioration of comity since 9/11, but whoever is at fault, 9/11 promises to be a highly politicized issue for years to come.

The left side of the blogosphere was dominated by discussion of ABC's "The Path to 9/11" docudrama which aired opposite NBC's premier of "Sunday Night Football" 9/10. AMERICAblog led the charge throughout the weekend and liveblogged the broadcast including:

• Disney/ABC defames Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger: "Disney/ABC just broadcast a scene that never happened. Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger refuses to give the order to capture or kill bin Laden, even though our guys had him in their sights. Only problem, it never happened."
• Disney/ABC defames American Airlines in worldwide broadcast: "Well, so much for edits. Disney/ABC just blamed American Airlines, falsely, for ignoring a warning on their computers about Mohammad Atta boarding their flight. It's a lie."
• Disney/ABC burns American flag: "I just think it's kind of interesting that they did."

AMERICAblog also obtained an early copy of the film and previewed scenes for readers:

• Nice. Now I'm watching a scene where a movie of President Clinton is being projected on a screen, it's footage from some Clinton speech, and a Taliban guy walks up and shoots several times at Clinton's head, you see a good 5 or 6 or more bullets make holes in the screen in the middle of Clinton's head, just like he's assassinating Clinton.
• Okay, so right after the falsified and defamatory scene where they blame everything on Sandy Berger, the lead Afghan guerilla fighter, Masoud, says "Are there any men left in Washington, or are they all cowards?" (Note to Sandy: They just called you a coward, and this video already went out to 1,000 opinion leaders in the press - you've already been defamed.) But it gets better. Immediately the show switches to video of President Clinton testifying on tape about the Monica Lewinsky matter.

Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo looks at a Providence Journal review of the film that includes, "The two-part, five-hour ABC special airing Sunday and Monday at 8 p.m. on Channels 5 and 6 is compelling and confounding, gripping and disturbing. And it's all completely true," and comments: "Why all of ABC/Disney's bogus disclaimers don't mean jack." And DK at TPM notes that overseas disclaimers ran once, not through out the broadcast.

MyDD has video of a Courage Campaign demonstration outside Disney HQ and AMERICAblog has a ten point action plan to punish Disney for the "defamatory show."

Righty blogger reaction to "The Path to 9/11" was mixed but definitely trended positive as they weekend drew on. RedState "is proud to present" video of six segments of the film under dispute. Outside the Beltway offers synopsis of all six segments and Hot Air has edited and unedited versions of the infamous Berger/bin Laden assasination clip.

Instapundit liveblogged the file and "thanks to the miracle of the international dateline" has one reader's review of the miniseries conclusion: "I actually felt less inclined to indulge in recriminations having just watched plane number 2 smash through the tower again. On the politics though - Condi does not look good, but as a consequence of cluelessness rather than being a jerk. On the other hand, there are some scenes with Albright and Ambassador Bodine (in Yemen where the Cole was attacked) which I hope are true because if they are not, would be really unfair. ...

News Busters has a rundown of 9/11 Commission co-chair Thomas Kean's and Commissioner John Lehman's appearance on "This Week" including from Kean: "

Oh, of course, it should be aired. I mean, I'm not for censorship or not allowing people to see things. In my experience with these people who've been working in the film they've been responsive to criticism, mine and other people's, and have made changes that were necessary. I haven't seen the final cut. It's a miniseries. It's not a documentary. It's not done by ABC news. It's done by ABC news entertainment, but as I've seen it, I think it'll make a contribution.

Ms Underestimated watched Nightline's post-docudrama show and was not happy: "What a load of crap! Is this another way ABC bowed to the Clinton's legal team? Richard Clarke, shoving everything off onto George Tenet, for all the screwups that happened. Can you say "scattered, smothered and covered" alibis? Richard Clarke had the POWER to order Tenet to strike and he did not. He apparently has/had no balls, but that is a surprise to whom?"

Meanwhile Betsy's Page was just happy to have Berger back in the news again: "One benefit of the controversy surrounding Path to 9/11 is that people are beginning to remember that there was once a National Security Adviser named Sandy Berger who later stole Top Secret documents from the National Archives. Director Blue reminds us what documents Sandy Berger stole from the National Archives.

Finally Kausfiles looks at Max Blumenthal's worries in The Huffington Post over "The Path to 9/11" director David Cunningham ties to "the right-wing evangelical group Youth With A Mission" and isn't impressed. Kaus writes:

Maybe I'm complacent about the threat, but isn't that a little like worrying about the growing anti-Zionist foothold at The New Republic? If you put Hollywoods's entire network of right wing people in David Horowitz's living room, you wouldn't have much trouble getting to the hors d'oeuvre tray. If you tried to put Hollywood's network of left wing people in the Los Angeles Convention Center, the fire marshal would close it down.

Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo looks at the Washington Post's 9/10 article on GOP plans to get personal and local this fall and focuses on the man "chosen to head up the effort" Terry Nelson. "Nelson has the unique distinction of being tied to two of the biggest cases of Republican campaign corruption in the Bush era. Nelson was implicated in the infamous New Hampshire phone-jamming scandal and he was an unindicted co conspirator in the political money-laundering case which ended Tom DeLay's career." Matt Stoller at MyDD also digs dirt on Nelson under the header "Scared Straight."

Over at TPM CafeReed Hundt looks at GOP plans to go negative and advises:

The White House campaign is nationally only about the war on terror and locally is about going negative in very specific ways, person by person. The goal is to boost their own turn-out and drive down ours. ... Democrats need to stop worrying about being middle-of-the-road so as to be pleasing to independents, and focus on their own allegations, charges, and offensive measures, both nationally and in each local race. ... Finally, the so-called netroots need to pay attention race by race to scandalous and corrupt behavior by the Republicans. The netroots can create newspaper coverage and even television news about this behavior, but without the instigation at the Net level such news is not likely to be reported in the mainstream media.

Conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt looks at the same WaPo article and sees "simple agenda-journalism of the sort we should expect in great waves between now and November." he points out that the first ad in the campaign hits Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) on border security and asks: "Are there any editors left at the Post? If the story is supposed to be about using "personal issues and local controversies," how exactly does an ad about illegal immigration fit the premise?"

Finally Kausfiles passes along a thought from a reader: "Have you already mentioned that if Schwarzenegger's redistricting had passed, the cake would be baked because the Dems would pick up at least five seats in California instead of zero?"

Under the header "No to Bipartisanship, Yes to Investigations and Accountability" Matt Stoller at MyDD argues Democracy Corps conclusions on this falls elections have a narrow view of what a positive agenda can mean:

"For current hacks in DC, it means to implement programs or 'get something done', which if I were cynical I would point out is another way for them to funnel patronage to their friends. For voters, a positive agenda could very well simply mean investigations, because investigations to find out what's been going on in government are the first step to fixing government."

Also at MyDD, BooMan breaks down likely committee chairs should the Dems take the Sen.

At Power Line John Hinderaker looks at the Sen. Intelligence Committee report on pre-war Iraq intelligence and Sen Dem threats to ABC and writes: "I think it's really important to work hard to get a Republican majority in the Senate, so the Dems won't be able to pull stunts like these!" DK at Talking Points Memo responds: "I've been going back and forth on whether this is the sarcastic post of a conservative irritated with Republicans on the Senate Intel Committee--or some bizarre new GOP meme that the Dems really control the Senate. If it's the former, it's lame humor. If it's the latter, well, where to even begin."

Meanwhile Captain's Quarters points to Sen. maj leader Bill Frist (R-TN) efforts on pushing border security in the Sen and adds: "If Frist can push through an overhaul of border defenses in the south, then the GOP rank and file will have a long-sought victory and will turn out in greater numbers. If the effort gets blocked by Democrats and moderate Republicans despite the efforts of GOP leadership ... then angry conservatives will turn out in greater numbers to defeat the obstructionists."

Mcjoan at DailyKos makes the case that the New York Times set up cable exec. Ned Lamont (D) on his recent trip to DC. Mcjoan looks at a 9/8 NYT article on a Lamont dinner with reporters that focussed almost entirely on Lamont's reaction to the Lewinsky Scandal and then notes the NYT 9/9 article headed: "Lieberman Points Out a Turnabout by Lamont" which includes edited portions of an email Lamont sent to Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) sent during the scandal. Mcjoan decries NYT's "sloppy" reporting of the content of the email and concludes: "So the whole idea that Joe just happened to remember corresponding with Lamont about this issue eight years ago, and that his staff just happened to stumble across this e-mail sent eight years ago, and the subject of the Lewinsky scandal just happened to have come up at the Lamont dinner just happens to stretch the limits of credibility."

Greg Sargent at TPM Cafe takes the AP to task for their write up of the Lamont email. Sargent argues that the AP failed to note that "Lamont repeatedly wrote that he was "reluctantly" praising Lieberman." Sargent concludes: "What this whole episode (fed for a full three days now by the Lieberman campaign) does prove is that Joe Lieberman is still an enabler for the GOP, and is proud of it." DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas added his thoughts on the mental capacity of those who question Lamont: "What this incident proves is that while Dan Gerstein might be the stupidest man in politics, the reporters covering this race are even more stupid. I mean, they lack even basic reading comprehension skills." Atrios thinks there ought to be more to the story: "A rather important - and perhaps legal - question is why a campaign aide has access to constituent letters to Joe's Senate office."

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas looks at Sen. Conrad Burns (R) new television ad attacking State Senate Pres. Jon Tester (D) on national security and snarks: "This is what an incumbent Senator with nothing else to run on puts on the air. Did you know Tester is pro-Al Qaida?"

Intelligent Discontent has audio of 9/10's Tester/Burns debate.

John McIntyre at RCP Blog congratulates those that recognized Sen. Bob Menendez (D) was going to have real trouble with State Sen. Tom Kean Jr. (R): "Charlie Cook moved it to a toss up yesterday, and with the news of the federal probe into Menendez's finances along with continued polling showing Menendez stuck in the high 30's and low 40's, expect the full consensus to move towards the reality that this race is indeed a toss up."

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas celebrates the new Mason-Dixon poll showing ex-Navy Sec. James Webb (D) closing to a 46%-42% gap with Sen. George Allen (R) and has video of Webb's first television ad set to air 9/11. Kos is not happy that the ad heavily features Ronald Reagan while not mentioning that Webb is a Dem, but his "confusion gave way to a bit of delight given the reaction by the Republicans. In short, they flipped. They even enlisted Nancy to try and hit back." Kos concludes: "That Allen has done nothing to negatively define Webb is a stroke of great luck for us. Allen could've done it early given his huge cash advantages, but that strategic blunder is now letting Webb define himself as he sees fits."

Not Larry Sabato takes a closer at Nancy Reagan's letter to the Webb campaign and argues: "It's very clear from that sentence that the people writing Nancy's letter never saw the ad. Someone took advantage of Ms. Reagan and clearly did not tell her the truth of what was actually in this ad."

Too busy watching the Hawkeyes narrowly defeat the Orange, Caucus Cooler sent their intern to Iowa Christian Alliance's "Friends of the Family" dinner. The intern reports:

As far as the real contenders go, Mike Huckabee was the only one that came in person. He didn't speak and he mostly stood around talking to those who approached him. I talked with him briefly about what he was doing in town this week and he mentioned a couple of State House and Senate candidates he was campaigning for and said that he was really concerned about helping them right now and not worrying about 2008. (yeah right). I didn't see any of his staff with him.

As far as Presidential staff goes, Romney had a table and I saw Jeff Fuller and Chad Airhart sitting with some other Romney people. Frist also bought a table. Marcus Branstad was there, but I didn't see Brian Kennedy. McCain's Iowa staff members, Chuck Larson and Matt Gronewald were at a table with Jim Kurtenbach. No sign of Pataki's staff or any ITR people, which I thought was strange.

The Blogometer is putting the finishing touches on a blog directory of the top 50 trafficked blogs which includes an item in each entry indicating when each blogger entered the medium. It's noteworthy how many of them began in the wake of 9/11. On that note Instapundit links to a Wiredarticle arguing that 9/11 had give birth to the blog phenomenon:

When the world changed on Sept. 11, 2001, the web changed with it. ... While phone networks and big news sites struggled to cope with heavy traffic, many survivors and spectators turned to online journals to share feelings, get information or detail their whereabouts. It was raw, emotional and new -- and many commentators now remember it as a key moment in the birth of the blog. ... "Back in 2001, blogs were still very much the geek toy of the Slashdot set," he [Matthew Yeomans] said. "(But) this collective tragedy demanded a forum to be shared by people all around the world who wanted to talk about what happened with anyone because it was the only way of making any sense of it. Were it to happen again, blogs and social networks would play an enormously cathartic role."

Wonkette keeps the mood up beat this 9/11 with a list of other anniversaries from the day including:

• In 1918, the Boston Red Sox won the Series...and they wouldn't do it again for 86 years.
• In 1962, the Beatles recorded their first single - "Love Me Do" backed with "P.S., I Love You." Ringo was only allowed to play tambourine and maracas. Later, Lennon & McCartney would be noted for their lyrics.
• In 1985, Pete Rose hit #4,192 and took Ty Cobb's record. Later, Rose would be shamed in a gambling scandal. But he's still Pete Rose.
• Brian De Palma turns 66! And Moby is 41!
• And on September 11, 1941, ground was broken on a gargantuan new War Department building called The Pentagon.