December 18, 2006

12/18: The More Things Change ...

While plenty of lefty blogger criticism of incoming Senate Maj. Leader Harry Reid's (D-NV) endorsement of a brief Iraq troop increase can be found, some prominent bloggers were calling for a change in how the netroots treats Dem leaders; specifically a shift from focussing on what pols say, to what pols do. Not all Dems will be receiving the lighter treatment however. Rep. Ellen Tauscher's (D-CA) vote for the Iraq war, her perceived coziness with K Street and Pres. Bush, have already made her the netroots number one target for '08's primary season.

IRAQ: It's Time For A Change?

Reid's endorsement of a "surge" of US troops for Iraq drew wide netroots attention. Reaction was generally negative with some Reid defenders hoping he had a larger strategy in mind and others suggesting all criticism of Dem leadership should cease for now. Those firmly against Reid's statements include:

• Talking Points Memo's David Kurtz: "Harry Reid sips the Kool-aid."
• The Huffington Post's Cenk Uygur: "Harry Reid displayed classic Democratic plantation mentality on Sunday. ... Democrats need to shake the cobwebs out and realize they have been given power. They weren't given power so that they can continue to bow down to the absurd ideas of this out of control administration.
• Arianna Huffington: "Part of what has enabled this disastrous war from the beginning has been the willful delusion about who George Bush is and how he operates. ... As the old saying goes, there is nothing so permanent as a temporary solution. Except President Bush's incompetence, willful denial of reality and refusal to listen to the will of the American people. We don't need a surge of those any more than we need a surge of troops in Iraq.
• Daily Kos' Kargo X: "The political problem, of course, is the same one we've been dealing with all along. Fear of the "Dems are soft on the war/terror" meme. Or its evil twin, "We coulda won if it hadn't been for those meddling Democrats." But the time has come to cut Bush off."

Those hoping Reid has some other larger strategy behind his endorsement of more troops include:

• Atrios: "People seem to be upset that Reid sorta-endorsed the McCain/Lieberman plan to increase the number of troops in the short run. I don't really see it that way - no Senator can expect to micromanage troop levels in Iraq. Reid basically said that he's fine with any strategy which has the goal of getting the troops out by about next Spring. That, of course, isn't the McCain/Lieberman strategy."
• AMERICAblog's John Aravosis: "Reid may be using the troop increase as a backdoor way of getting a firm commitment to end our combat engagement in Iraq by 2008. By giving our commanders on the ground what they want - if in fact they want more troops - Reid and the Democrats are seen as supporting our commanders rather than undercutting the war effort, and ultimately being blamed by the Republicans for losing the war. But at the same time, Reid is giving our generals, and our commander in chief, one last change to fix things. And if they don't, we're out of there - the public will know that Bush has lost this war, Harry Reid gave him a fair shot, and it was the Democrats that finally got our troops home safely."
• Daily Kos' BarbinMD: "[i]t is true that when the troops are withdrawn from Iraq, additional forces will be required as a protection force. Hopefully this is what Reid was proposing.

TPM's Kurtz wasn't buying the logic behind a Reid gambit: "There are any number of problems with this reasoning, both politically and substantively, not the least of which is the assumption that Bush will send additional troops (check), it won't work (check), and then he'll be forced to begin a large-scale withdrawal of U.S. forces (right--just like he was going to be forced to do after the Democrats took Congress and after the ISG report). ... On the political side, 71% of Americans disapprove of Bush's handling of Iraq. Why are Democrats still looking for political cover?

Over at MyDD, Chris Bowers urges his fellow netrooters to tone done the Reid criticism:

We will also need to make a transition online. ... The latest blogswarm on Harry Reid is a particularly good example of the ways in which we need to transition ourselves. Simply put, our behavior today is not how we should be acting anymore. ... What our leaders say in public will quickly mean quite a bit less than what types of legislation and oversight they propose and conduct. For example, if one of our leaders makes a misstep in an interview on a staid, Sunday morning talk show about Iraq, that means a lot less than what that leader does or does not do to facilitate oversight, and what legislation that leader passes to help actually change course in Iraq.

I seriously doubt Harry Reid will pursue a course of policy that will lead to troop increases. If he does then that is when we need to oppose what he is doing as strongly as possible. However, if we instead throw all of our might against one poorly phrased sentence, we won't be able to mount a more serious opposition to a far more serious development. I mean, we go apoplectic all the friggin' time, we quickly turn the movement into a bunch of little boys crying wolf.

DEM FIELD: One Down, Two To Go

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas tells readers he "like[s] Bayh plenty in the Senate" and reminds readers that his 12/17 exit "would make Vilsack and Clinton the last two DLCers in the race. (And I mean that literally. Vilsack replaced Bayh as the organization's chairman.)"

Looking at Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) putative entrance into the race, Atrios argues there is still room for a progressive in the field: "I think the primary thing that an Obama run does is kill what was the long held conventional wisdom that the race would be between Hillary and someone who manages to emerge as the Not Hillary. Obama could've been the Not Hillary if he'd gone that path, but his knee-jerk tendency to triangulate has made that unlikely. So, right now we're looking at Hillary, Obama, and NotHillaryOrObama, who will probably be Edwards.

MyDD's Jonathan Singer also argues for a progressive alternative to Clinton/Obama but has other names in mind: "Like Atrios, I see John Edwards as being the frontrunner for this position, though he is not a prohibitive one. Should Al Gore decide to or be cajoled to run, he would likely be able to fulfill this role, though if he doesn't others, including Bill Richardson, Wes Clark or even someone else (though probably not Mike Gravel), could play the part. But the key is finding the one consensus candidate to fulfill this role."

EDWARDS: Runnin' With The Big Boys

Just returned from LA 02, MyDD's Tim Tagaris looks at news Edwards will announce his candidacy from New Orleans, LA, and comments: "Of all the candidates potentially running for the Democratic nomination, John Edwards is uniquely positioned to work storm and flood recovery into his central message."

Also at MyDD, while looking at the importance of card check campaigning to organized labor, Nancy Scola writes: "It's no secret here that Edwards wants to enter the election season as a champion of American labor, a friend to the union movement. ... He's courting the big-boy unions. And he's turned to former House Whip Dave Bonior to lead his possible presidential run. ... Bonior's the chair of American Rights at Work, a group whose raison d'etre is to help workers get unionized."

KERRY: Damascus Or Bust

The Democratic Daily's Pamela Leavey defends Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) from Boston Herald's Jules Crittenden's criticism of Kerry's trip to Syria. Leavey writes: "Considering the claims by so many right wing bloggers that Kerry is irrelevant, they all spend an awful lot of time giving him coverage on the blogosphere. Which leaves open the interpretation that Kerry is, as we all know, a huge threat to BushCo apologists in the blogosphere and the BushCo shills and hacks like Jules Crittenden."

OBAMA: Bad For The Brand?

The smaller fish in the lefty blogger sea are starting to defend Obama from big kahuna criticism of his positions and rhetoric. Unfogged takes on Atrios accusations that Obama has a "knee-jerk tendency to triangulate." UF writes: ""Triangulate" connotes what Hilzoy calls "bad bipartisanship:" compromising principles for political gain. But there's very little evidence that Obama has done that. And disagreeing with other liberals about issue X doesn't make one a triangulator, as long as one actually believes that liberals are wrong on issue X. I don't get the sense that Obama's religion, for example, is a put on. If you don't like his position, fine, but saying that he's triangulating adds a baseless insult to a substantive disagreement."

Atrios responds: "Anyway, to clarify - Obama's triangulation is more rhetorical than real. One can triangulate by picking a Third Way position, or one can triangulate by picking a position and calling it the Third Way and that's what Obama tends to do. ... It may be dishonest or he may genuinely mean it, and I don't much care. Dishonesty has an honorable place in politics. ... My problem with triangulation is that it's a way for a man to win an election, but not a way to build a party's brand. It's a short term strategy to benefit an individual, not a long term strategy to increase the size of the tribe."

In a separate exchange, IL's ArchPundit takes on David Sirotacriticism of Obama's "peddling the Great Education Myth." ArchPundit responds by summing up Obama's policy prescriptions for globalization woes: "Immediately after that passage Obama talks about how workers need a need social safety net, and spends about 10 pages talking how workers need better unemployment and trade adjustment assistance, and introduces the concept of wage insurance, expanding EITC, better bargaining power for unions, portable pensions, health care, bankruptcy reform to fix the garbage that was passed, etc."

RICHARDSON: Firmly For Withdrawal

Daily Kos' MissLaura gives credit to NM Gov. Bill Richardson for calling "for a firm date in 2007 for withdrawal from Iraq" while at the winter NH Dem meeting. Laura comments: "As Democratic presidential contenders begin campaigning seriously, Iraq is going to be one of the issues to watch; of the presumed candidates Richardson appears to be staking out one of the firmer positions for withdrawal."

GINGRICH: Bested By Bill Again

Ex-Speaker Newt Gingrich (R) received rave righty blogger reviews for his 12/17 Meet the Press appearance. The Corner's Jonah Goldberg writes: "I'm a critic of what appears to be his burgeoning front-porch strategy for the White House and I'm skeptical about his chances generally, but he really is the best conservative talker in America right now. He simply has no peer, save for Bill Clinton, in the ability to extemporaneously explain an idea - or beat one back - and sound perfectly reasonable in the process."

Also impressed, Captain's Quarters wonders if Gingrich's '08 strategy can pay off: "The lack of a credible conservative candidate also plays to this strategy. He can allow himself to get drafted late in the process, avoiding some of the internecine fighting of the early campaigning and perhaps even be a figure of unity within the GOP. Clever indeed. Gingrich has always been clever, but he has miscalculated in the past. We'll have to wait until Labor Day to see whether he has this time."

ROMNEY: He Does Have Great Hair

Eye on '08 has solidified itself as the go-to destination for Romney haters. Recent E'08 hits include criticism of Romney's SC staff, amplification of Christian Broadcast Network coverage of Romney's Log Cabin letter, and charges of "flip-flopping." The last item even drew a correction from New Hampshire Union Leader's Drew Cline who writes: "Some anti-Mitt Romney outfit calling itself eyeon08.com has included me in a list of "MSM" members down on Romney for flip-flopping on abortion and marriage. Not so. I haven't made up my mind about Romney yet. Nor do I have to. It's a long way to the primary. Heck, I haven't even interviewed him yet. But I do like his hair.

Over at The Corner, Rich Lowry shares "a top conservative strategist's" thoughts on Romney's recent troubles: "He thinks the gay and abortion flip-flops are uncomfortable for him, but certainly survivable and not any worse than we've seen from other Republicans who have won the nomination." The strategist goes on to warn Team Romney about overpandering though: "Romney got into the top tier partly by getting to the right on everything through various Massachusetts controversies. I can see how his announcement yesterday on illegals, though, might have made some conservatives begin to think, "Geez, you're really pandering to me."

The Right Angle's Matt Lewis responds: "Howard Dean made this mistake in 2004. Being the liberal/outsider/blog guy got him noticed -- but in the end -- it also brought him down. ... In retrospect, Dean should have used his liberal blogger image to separate him from the pack and get him into the top tier -- and then he should have pivoted into running a more traditional campaign."

In other Romney news, TN's Bill Hobbs compares Romney to Ronald Reagan after an event in Nashville, TN. Hugh Hewitt argues the '08 field will be decided on foreign, not domestic issues, and that Romney is his man for the war on terror. Right Wing News counters Hewitt arguing Pres. Bush "has been steadfast on national security issues and not so hot on the domestic side" before noting Bush's anemic approval numbers.

THOMPSON: Some Good Grubbs

IA's Caucus Cooler and Krusty Konservative both have nothing but good things to say about ex-HHS Sec./ex-WI Gov. Tommy Thompson in light of his hiring of Steve Grubbs to head up his IA efforts.

CA 10: Just One Ned Lamont Away From Being The Next CT SEN

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas posts a photo of Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA) with Pres. Bush from right before the Iraq war and writes: "That's soon-to-be-primaried Ellen Tauscher with you-know-who. ... And if you're wondering what a netroots-backed primary challenge looks like from day one, read this. We're going to have fun with this future race."

Kos' "this" is a Political Cortex post lamenting CA's 300th Iraq war death. PC's Blogswarm adds: "I am disgusted by Tauscher and I'm too pissed off to write what I really think. I don't mind swearing in blog posts, but I lack the words to describe how I fell about Ellen Tauscher."

Calitics documents the scrubbing of the Bush/Tauscher photo from Tauscher's official website and adds: "I really don't know what to think. Photos online don't just disappear unless somebody (in this case a federal employee) takes the time to remove -- or scrub -- the website of the photo. Why did this happen? Is this even legal?" Firedoglake's Jane Hamsher also noticed the picture go missing: "Don't worry, Ellen. We'll remember."

BELTWAY VS. BLOGGERS: Politics As Usual

Blog P.I. tracks a blogosphere rumor about possible incoming Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) opposition research on a list of VA bloggers (both right and left) and doesn't see anything out of the ordinary. Commenting on Webb research into official "Netroots Coordinator" Lowell Feld, Blog P.I. writes: "Why on Earth would he want to risk alienating his chief ally in the blogosphere? Easy: To protect himself. Everybody who follows politics at least casually knows about oppo research, but the flip-side of that seamy-but-crucial campaign activity is what's called self-research. ... Some Virginia bloggers assume this research might have been used for character assassination, but what's more likely is the Dem-side research was done to decide whether to hire Feld in the first place, and whether to associate with other bloggers. Do we really expect that a Senate campaign wouldn't do this kind of due diligence?"

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: The Right Questions

The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum is shocked to find himself asking the same questions Instapundit is. Instapundit writes:

We like to treat this [i.e., the broad war on terror] as a military problem because (1) we're good at those; and (2) that seems to produce simple questions, like "more troops, or not?" Trouble is, those probably aren't the right questions. ... Our Army size was entirely adequate for crushing Saddam's forces in short order. It's probably adequate to doing the same to Iran's forces. It's not up to fully policing a big country once we've done that. Do we want a military that is?

Drum then links to a summary of a New Yorker piece describing the GWOT as a "global counterinsurgency" and writes: "Food for thought. I confess that I'm not entirely sure (a) exactly what a "global counterinsurgency" would entail, although a few of its features are fairly clear, and (b) whether we ought to create a branch of the military dedicated to occupation and peacekeeping (since it seems unlikely to me that our existing Army can do both that and fight conventional wars). I lean toward believing that we should, because even though I'd like to see us fight many fewer wars than we do, it's inevitable that we're going to fight at least few. As long as that's the case, we better learn how to fight them successfully."

LEST WE FORGET: It's Your World, The Rest Of Us Just Live In It

Blogger derision of Time's decision to name everybody person of the year was widespread. MyDD new comer Nancy Scola had the wittiest reaction: "I'm with Markos in tagging this a cop-out, though perhaps not surprising following years where the picks were "The American Soldier" and "Whistleblowers." Next year the magazine's cover will just be blank and will arrive in the mail with a crayon taped to it with which you can express your singular vision by just drawing someone's face in. Or a picture of your cat. Whatever. It's your world, the rest of us just live in it."

While Scola had a great line, Blog P.I. deserves credit for predicting this move two months ago when they wrote at the time: "[I]t's only been about 10 months since Time Magazine declined to choose an individual for its much-devalued Person of the Year award, so it only stands to reason they're back in the hunt. It's also been nearly a decade since Time named someone (or thing) from the tech industry - Jeff Bezos in 1999 - and more than 20 years since they named the PC its "Machine of the Year." Also, it's not an election year, so it won't be the winner of the presidential election. It's time for another gimmick!"

Posted by Conn Carroll at December 18, 2006 12:28 PM