March 30, 2007

3/30: Round Two

While NV Dem Chair Tom Collins and Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) said netroots pressure had nothing to do with their decision to nix a Fox News-sponsored WH '08 debate, anyone following the story would have suspected otherwise. Now, despite earlywarnings , the Cong. Black Caucus has gone ahead and partnered with Fox, and the netroots campaign to quash that is already underway. If the netroots manage to notch another victory onto their belts, who could be next? It's not like they don't have anysuspects .

GOP FIELD: Back To Basics

The Corner's Larry Kudlow hopes "the big three Republican presidential candidates - Messrs. Giuliani, McCain, and Romney follow suit with Pres. Bush's 3/29 call for: 1) No to the pork barrel laden Iraq funding bill; 2) No to Congress' attempt to micromanage the war and help the enemy with specific withdrawal timetables; and 3) No to the implied tax increase coming out of the Democratic Congress' budget making process. Kudlow adds: " It's good to see him restoring conservative principles on the war, on taxes, and on overspending."

GIULIANI: Not Running For Mayor Of NYC

Doubts about Rudy Giuliani's fealty to low taxes drove in depth exchanges between AmSpec Blog and The Corner bloggers. Contributions include:

• The Corner's Ramesh Ponnuru: "Giuliani even got involved in a Democratic primary race to oppose an assemblywoman who had voted to end the commuter tax. Nor was this the only time Democrats got to the mayor's right on taxes."
• The Corner's John Podhoretz: "The issue was a little more complicated than that ... In short, the Giuliani opposition to the commuter-tax repeal tells you nothing about his view of taxation generally. As mayor, he did what he could to cut some of the most onerous taxes in the nation that had been imposed specifically by the City Council and previous mayors."
• The Corner's Jonah Goldberg on federalism and taxes: "Still, I think if Giuliani is going to win over social conservatives he's going to have to master this sort of argument more than others. He needs to explain why what's good for New York isn't necessarily good for Montana or Georgia and how he understands and respects that."
• Ramesh responds: "Sure, support for higher local taxes doesn't necessarily mean support for higher federal taxes. But Giuliani was resisting a federal tax reform because he wanted the federal tax code to continue to subsidize high-tax states."
• AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein: "Furthermore, Giuliani did cut taxes as mayor, which was no easy task in New York City, so the fact that he would now be open to the idea of a flat tax, or at least flatter tax, while a reversal, is not as totally out of left field as if he had a record of supporting and imposing higher taxes.

Also at AmSpec Blog, Klein notes that a new YouTube showing Giuliani endorsing Mario Cuomo clips the middle portion of a press conference out to skip Rudy's worry "about rising property taxes in and around New York City."

Some Cornerites and AmSpecers worry all this cat fighting makes them look bad.

GIULIANI II: Thanks But One Giuliani In The WH Is Enough

In case you were wondering, tentative and committed Rudy-blogger-supporters are not thrilled about reports that Mrs. Giuliani "would sit in on Cabinet meetings" if Rudy were elected. Ankle Biting PunditsBull Dog Pundit blogs: "No offense to Mrs. Giuliani, but nobody is electing her. I can certainly understand a man wanting his wife's opinion on certain things, but to have her sit on policy meetings for which she is completely unqualified is out of bounds."

MCCAIN: Loyalty Was Never His Strong Suit

Townhall's Dean Barnett argues The Hill's claims that John McCain felt out Dems about a party switch in '01 have "essentially buried John McCain's campaign for the Republican nomination." More Barnett: "this incident illustrates a perfect storm of McCain's shortcomings in a way that none of his other bi-partisan adventures do. The vanity, the immature pique of anger, the utter indifference and disloyalty to the people who voted for him and the party that supported him - they're all on naked display."

Power Line's John Hinderaker counters that any damage on the GOP loyalty front has already been done: "Will these reports hurt McCain with the Republican party's base? Probably not much. The base already doesn't consider him a very loyal Republican; that's the price you pay if you want the media to praise you as a "maverick." But the marginal impact of this story is no doubt small."

ROMNEY: Button Pusher

The Corner's Ramesh Ponnuru reports "that the dozen or so attendees to whom I spoke after Mitt Romney's speech" to the Club for Growth's "winter" conference "were impressed." More Ponnuru: "Romney hit every one of the club's buttons. He came out against most trade barriers, for reductions in marginal tax rates, against the "death tax," for cuts in corporate tax rates to make our rates comparable to those of other countries, for federal tort reform, and for scaling back Sarbanes-Oxley. He repeated his call for federal spending to shrink by one percent in real terms every year."

In less positive Romney blogging, there arerumblings that pro-Romney forces on the web are not playing well with others.

THOMPSON: As Good A Christian As Reagan

RedState's Erick Erickson rises to defend James Dobson against the "bashing" he took for suggesting Fred Thompson was not a Christian. Erickson blogs: "[Y]ou people who are so outraged by James Dobson need to suck it up and get over it. ... the reason some of you are so frustrated with Dobson today, is because Dobson is a Christian first, a conservative second, and a partisan third."

More Erickson: "[T]he key difference between a nominal Christian and a Christ following Christian ... is that the former shows his colors by the inactive pursuit of his faith and the latter shows his colors by the active pursuit of his faith. Fred Thompson, I think Dobson is suggesting, falls into the former category. ... if that is the case it'd probably put Fred on par with Ronald Reagan."

And K-Lo is still making sure Cornerites are getting their daily dose of Thompson "commentary."

DEM FIELD: Casey At The Bat

TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent and Eric Kleefeld completed "a comprehensive comparison" of all of Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL) and Hillary Clinton (D-NY) Iraq related votes, and it turns out "the two differed on only one." Sargent and Kleefeld stress: "We are not posting this to suggest that their earlier difference at the start of the war -- their most important difference -- should in any way be overshadowed by these similarities."

The only vote Obama and Clinton differed on: " The confirmation of General George Casey to be Chief of Staff for the Army, held just this past February. Hillary voted against confirmation, while Obama voted to confirm."

CLINTON: Carville And Clinton Sittin' In A Tree...

Linking to CNNtranscripts of James Carville talking about "a couple of less- than-impressive performances at a health care forum out in Las Vegas" by Barack ObamaMyDD 's Matt Stoller wants to know why Carville is still "identified as a CNN Political Analyst" given his close ties to Team Clinton. Stoller blogs: "This is crazy. It's just crazy. When CNN commentator Bay Buchanan took over the Tancredo campaign, she resigned from the network. ... Carville isn't getting money from Clinton, but there are other ways of compensation in politics and everyone knows that."

IRAQ: Blue Dogs And Netroots Living Together ... Mass Hysteria!

A proposal by Reps. Dennis Cardoza (D-CA) and Mike Ross (D-AR) to parcel out supplemental Iraq funding in three month chunks so that Pres. Bush has "to keep coming back for more" is receiving a warm netroots welcome despite the members status as Blue Dogs. A strong critic of almost everything Blue Dog, MyDD's Chris Bowers finds himself "slowly being won over to this strategy" and details its "advantages" including:

• This could keep the caucus unified during a long fight, while slowly picking off an increasingly divided Republican caucus, as we gradually build toward a veto-proof majority.
• It allows the timelines to stay in the bill, which in my opinion is non-negotiable.
• It allows the entire bill, which was an excruciating task to pass through both branches of Congress, intact.
• As both popular and congressional opinion continues to swing to our side, it leaves our options open down the road to eventually just say "you get these deadlines, or none"

The man Matt Stoller has "outsourced [his] policy-oriented opinions on Iraq to," Matthew Yglesias, is also on board: "So I'd say congress should pass a "clean" supplemental that Bush'll feel compelled to sign, but one designed to last a lot less than a full year. Three months, as proposed by Reps. Cardoza and Ross, seems like a good choice to me. That way in three months time, with public opinion even more against Bush and against the war, he needs to come back and ask for more money. ... The point is to try to generate as many votes on this as possible. Either at some point we'll start seeing significant GOP defections (which is the best hope for ending the war while Bush is still president) or else at a minimum GOP incumbents will need to keep casting votes for perpetual war and set themselves up for defeat in 2008."

Even heavy critics of the Dems current supplemental sees possibility in the Blue Dog plan. Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat writes: "The source of the idea intrigues more than the idea itself. I prefer a different approach, but it is a good sign when conservative Dems are preparing fighting tactics, as opposed to rollover tactics." BTD later outlines his concerns: "But the intention of not funding past a date certain must accompany such a proposal. And that intention must be followed up on in determined fashion when the regular appropriations process for the Iraq Debacle begins again in June."

IRAQ II: Baghdad Or Bust

Asking readers, "What if you had the choice to send someone to tell you that story firsthand? Would you send someone like, say, Dan Rather?" RedState's Directors are raising money to send two of their own to Iraq. RedState already has Pentagon approval and is looking to raise $7.5K for the trip. At deadline they had just over $7K.

BLOGGERS VS. MSM: 'Dancing With The Devil'

The netroots are gearing up for round two against Fox News after the CBC announced it would partnering with the news organization to host a Dem WH '08 debate. DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas says, "Here we go again," and adds: "The CBC's decision is breath-taking in its stupidity, and the organization will now face the well-deserved scorn of its own constituents as well as outside observers. Candidates will be forced to choose between grassroots activists (of all colors) and an out-of-touch, entrenched inside-the-Beltway organization." Kos urges readers to sign Color of Change's petition against the event.

Under the header "Dancing with the Devil," Color of Change's petition argues: "Fox News has consistently attacked Black people, Black leaders, and Black cultural institutions. Despite this, the Congressional Black Caucus Institute has announced that it will partner with Fox to co-host presidential debates. The Congressional Black Caucus is letting us down at a time when Black Americans need strong and strategic leaders more than ever."

Jack and Jill Politic's Jill Tubman notes: "In 2002, the CBC Foundation was given an undisclosed amount from Fox News and parent company News Corp. Between 2003-2005, they gave the CBC somewhere between $47,500 to $98,998 with numbers for 2006 still unavailable. Don't believe me. Get the facts here and take a look at CBCF's donor list. Are our leaders purchased so cheaply?"

BLOGGERS VS. MSM II: First They Came For Fox ...

While not acknowledging The Politico's 3/29 front page story on the GOP's upcoming '08 "Meltdown," the netroots are elevating their campaign to paint the fledging paper as a cog in the right wing noise machine. A Media Matters report showing The Drudge Report has linked to Politico items "on at least 45 separate occasions" since Politico launched 1/23/07 is just the latest salvo in an ongoing campaign.

Kos quips "Drudge and the Politico, sitting in a tree..." while Atrios labels the paper "Drudgico" and asks, "Why don't they just merge operations."

Also at Media Matters, Eric Boehlert attacks Politico for "hit pieces" on WH '08ers Bill Richardson and Barack Obama. Boehlert explains: "The reporting simply reinforced the notion that Politico plays loose with the facts when dealing with Democratic candidates. I can't find similar examples of The Politico manufacturing phony controversies about Republican candidates. And honestly, I don't want it to. I just want Politico to practice sound journalism."

PROSECUTOR PURGE: The Best Scandals Always Come Back To Hookers

Blogging on ex-AG CoS Kyle Sampson's 3/29 testimony focussed mostly on trying to build a case the WH obstructed justice when it fired San Diego USA Carol Lam. "Big things" coming out of the hearing include:

• TPM's Paul Kiel on two items from Sen. Diane Feinstein's (D-CA) questioning: "The first was a glowing letter about Lam that Feinstein presented from the Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency. ... The second was the revelation that after the FBI bureau chief in San Diego complained to the press about Lam's firing, Samspon called FBI headquarters to complain.
• TPM's Josh Marshall: "Attention all chumps who think that Carol Lam was canned for not following administration immigration enforcement policy. Sampson has just confirmed that for all their deep concern about her border enforcement policy, no one from the DOJ ever raised the issue with Lam. Ever."
• More Marshall: "Sen. Kennedy (D-MA) makes a very good point. The prosecutor firings and replacements just happen to be in all the key 2008 swing states, and not in any states that are safe for either party -- with the exception of California, where the Lam -Cunningham investigation is. Why do you think that would be?"
• Firedoglake's Christy Hardin Smith: "Karl Rove may have been involved in the decision to briefly float Patrick Fitzgerald as a great candidate to fire. Sampson's not much help there, though."
• More Smith: "Chuck Schumer seems to have certain suspicions about what Monica Goodling did. In particular, it seems that he may have well-grounded suspicions that she was administering loyalty oaths to Assistant USAs, a career position.
• The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum: "[H]ere's the single most remarkable thing about Sampson's testimony ... And after all this time to prepare and finally get it right, what did Sampson say? Nothing. Almost literally, nothing. He still didn't have any plausible, documented reasons for firing the USA-8.

In non-hearing but related news, Marshall alerts readers that Lam defender and San Diego FBI chief Dan Dzwilewski has "just announced he's resigning from the Bureau."

The Huffington Post's Joseph Palermo makes the case that Sampson's testimony makes it "clear that top officials of the Justice Department obstructed justice." Palmero argues: "First, Ms. Lam, a Republican, secured a conviction against former California Representative, Randy "Duke" Cunningham ... Then Ms. Lam caught the trail of two well-connected associates of Cunningham's, Brent Wilkes and his old high-school buddy, Kyle "Dusty" Foggo. ... As soon as U.S. Attorney Lam began to secure search warrants against Wilkes and Foggo, Gonzales had her fired. ... Attorney General Gonzales said he had no role in discussing the firings of the eight U.S. attorneys, but today his former chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, told the Senate that Gonzales had signed off on them. ... It has been alleged that Wilkes' company provided high-priced prostitutes to satisfy the carnal pleasures of Cunningham and his well-connected defense and CIA-contractor pals on the taxpayer's dime. The boys at Justice might have fired Lam, not only to protect their colleagues' kickbacks, but to block the exposure of a full-throttle sex scandal."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Top Ten Things This Administration Is Too Incompetent To Pull Off

Townhall's Dean Barnett sketches out one clever way Pres. Bush could deal with Dems on Iraq:

But what about this: What if the president surprises everyone and signs the bill into law but says the usurpation of the president's Commander in Chief duties are unconstitutional and he has no intention of following the orders of 535 congressional General wannabes. ... If Bush takes such a course, then the Congress can do one or two things: It can bring the law to the Supreme Court for a ruling on its constitutionality, a case that it will surely lose. Or it can just skip that step and go right to impeachment.

LEST WE FORGET: And You Thought Reagan Ended The Cold War

The Plank's Isaac Choitner is tracking coverage of Indian's cricket team current losing streak including this Bombay op-ed:

A lot has been said about what has gone wrong with the Indian cricket and what needs to be done to fix it. But the key to solving the problem lies perhaps in the 1982 flick Rocky III. The players, selectors, and all cricket administrators should sit together and watch this film. [If the team cannot win] they should make way for players who are hungry--they are practicing hard somewhere on the maidans of India with the track Eye of the Tiger in the background.

Choitner adds: "Yes, yes, Rocky II was better. Still, all the cynics out there might choose to remember that Rocky IV concluded with The Italian Stalion peacefully ending the cold war."

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:42 PM

March 29, 2007

3/29: Last Man Standing?

In a definite change of pace from typical conservative blogging on John McCain, the AZ senator came off as funny, engaged, and insightful to those on a 3/28 blogger conf. call. McCain followed up the charm offensive with an online petition called Surrender Is Not an Option, reminding bloggers: "Success or failure in Iraq is the transcendent issue for our foreign policy and our national security." This is exactly the way the vast majority of conservative bloggers feel about the issue that is most important to them (one was moved to compare McCain to Lincoln). If GOP bloggers continue their whack-a-mole approach to frontrunners, might they all just fall in line for McCain in the end?

PROSECUTOR PURGE: They Say 'Political' Like Its A Bad Thing

Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall readies readers for ex-AG CoS Kyle Sampson testimony before 3/29's US Attorney firings hearing by clearing "one big chunk of administration bamboozlement out of the way." Marshall links to Sampson's prepared remarks and quotes: "The distinction between 'political' and 'performance-related' reasons for removing a United States attorney is, in my view, largely artificial."

Marshall is having none of it: "This use of the word 'political' is at the heart of Sampson's and others effort to lie their way out of what happened here. ... 'Political' can mean many things in different contexts. ... The charge against Sampson and crew is not that they fired them for 'political' reasons. The charge is that they fired these prosecutors for not using their law enforcement powers to help the Republican party." Marshall concludes: "So, have your eyes out for Sampson's word play and games. This investigation is about whether Sampson and his crew corrupted the justice system by purging US Attorneys who wouldn't use their prosecutorial powers to help the Republican party."

Marshall also flags analysis from Paul Kiel showing that "Sampson attempted to mislead Congress by proxy -- that is to say, he gave false information to DOJ officials who were preparing to provide information to Congress." Kiel links to a DoJ letter claiming Karl Rove had no role in appointing Rove aide Tim Griffin to his USA spot, and then follows up with a link to an email Sampson wrote WH ass. counsel Christopher Oprison claiming Griffin's appointment was "important to Harriet, Karl, etc."

Daily Kos' Hunter updates: "Oprison also was the White House lawyer who vetted the opening statements Deputy Attorney General William Moschella made in front of the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month -- statements later determined to have been grossly misleading."

PROSECUTOR PURGE II: More Politics

Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall has background on the chairman of New Mexicans for Honest Courts, Linda Chavez Krumland, the group that is currently running an anti-David Iglesiasradio ad in NM, including: "Krumland was an at-large delegate to the 2004 Republican National Convention. ... FEC records show, not surprisingly, that Krumland is a major contributor to Republican candidates in New Mexico. And she lists her business as Roswell Toyota. ... A year ago, Krumland's husband Tom -- also a 2004 RNC delegate -- in a heap of trouble after he and state Rep. Dan Foley tricked the New Mexico state National Guard into arranging an F-16 flyover to mark the opening of his new dealership."

Marshall concludes: "As I said, the depth of the moral corruption of the GOP at the moment is profound. And it shows itself in both the contemporary (bribery and self-dealing) and Early Modern (bodily and moral decay) senses of the word."

PROSECUTOR PURGE III: Heckuva Job, Gonzo!

National Review's call for AG Alberto Gonzales' resignation was met with mild to enthusiastic approval. Reactions include:

• NRO's Ed Whelan: "Much as I have struggled to resist the conclusion, I find myself in reluctant agreement with NRO's house editorial today ("Time to Go") stating that Attorney General Gonzales should resign. ... it is Gonzales's astonishing fecklessness in refuting such assertions that convinces me that he has to go.
• The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez: "Laura Ingraham ... on her show this morning threw out "Good job, Brownie." She ain't Bill Maher, ya know? In the spirit of the editorial this morning: It's going to be a long two years if we don't get some fresh air, and fast."
• The Corner's Andy McCarthy: "One of the most striking things about Byron's important article this morning is the apparent lack of direct communication between Main Justice in DC and the office of (the now-fired) U.S. attorney Carol Lam in San Diego. As Ed Whelan and I found yesterday in a Federalist Society panel on the current controversy, it is a lot easier to argue for upholding the administration's legal rights than to defend DOJ's management."
• A Corner reader: "You are not surrendering in the face of difficulties. You are recognizing truth, even though it may benefit your opponents. It speaks to a core difference between the Democrats' and Republicans' core constituencies.
• Power Line's Paul Mirengoff: "Gonzales' management style is not what I want to see from the Attorney General. But Gonzales reports to President Bush, not conservative writers.

Right Wing NewsJohn Hawkins, however, wants to go on the offenseive, sensing scandal in Sen. Diane Feinstein's (D-CA) resignation from the Mil. Const. Apps. Subcmt. Hawkins writes: "Republicans should be doing exactly what the Democrats would be doing right now if the situation were reversed: Screaming about how corrupt the Democrats are and urging Diane Feinstein to resign from the Senate over her lapse in ethics."

GSA: Brown-Bagging It

Video of GSA Administrator Lurita Alexis Doan "humiliating herself" while testifying about a PowerPoint presentation given by White House Deputy Political Director Scott Jennings at a GSA "team building" bag lunch is all over lefty blogs. Carpetbagger Report's Steve Benen writes: "As one might imagine, Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee had a few concerns about this, and called Doan to testify under oath in an open hearing today. It really didn't go well for the administration - Doan probably would have been better off resigning instead of humiliating herself the way she did today."

Firedoglake's Christy Hardin Smith live -blogged the event.

GIULIANI: End Run Around SoCons?

Rudy Giuliani received wide blogger praise for landing Steve Forbes' endorsement:

• Hit and Run's David Weigel: "Today we find out that Steve Forbes is signing on to Giuliani's campaign. So is Rudy carving out a niche as the fiscal conservative candidate who'll govern like Reagan without the speeches to the March for Life?"
• Townhall's Matt Lewis: "In 2000, Forbes was also endorsed by movement conservative giants like Phyllis Schlafly, Morton Blackwell, and Paul Weyrich. These are the same conservative leaders who ... have tended to have a rocky relationship with John McCain ... By securing Forbes' endorsement, could Rudy be simultaneously making a move in New Hampshire -- and making a play for the support of conservative leaders?"
• Captain Quarters: "Rudy Hits A Homer ... Giuliani has tried to sell himself to conservatives as a member of the national-security, low-taxes Right while acknowledging the differences on social issues. ... In order to make that sale, though, he needed more credibility on economics and fiscal policy. Steve Forbes delivers that credibility."

The Corner's Ramesh Ponnuru identifies past Giuliani statements against Forbes' flat-tax idea and blogs: "The tone of his remarks suggests that he has come around on these issues, which is great. But there are plenty of reporters who scourge flip-floppers, and I can't wait to see what they have to say about this."

Also worrying past statements may catch up to Giuliani, The Brody File posts past Rudy quotes on partial birth abortion and parental notification and then advises: "Rudy needs to be careful. Part of his charm is that his supporters like the way he is straight shooter. He doesn't want to be seen as someone who is playing both sides." TBF also warns of "plotting going among grassroots religious conservatives in New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina and many other states" threatening to "work 40 hours a week ... to destroy his candidacy for President" if he receives the nomination.

MCCAIN: Jerks Wanted

A John McCain netted some rare conservative blogger praise from a 3/28 conference call. The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez shares these nuggets:

• On Potential for Compromise on Iraq in Washington - "I don't know where the compromise is between withdrawal and non-withdrawal?" and "The battle is going to be won or lost on public opinion."
• On Democrats - "Are being driven by moveon.org"
• On Why Conservatives Don't Seem to be Rallied by Him - "Because life isn't fair" and "I am happy with where we are ... I'm unhappy with my performance in fundraising ... my fault ... I kinda view this as a spring-training"
• On Fred Thompson's Polling - "Of course his approval ratings are so high. Why wouldn't they be? He's already been president at least three or four times that I know of."

More McCain from David All's live-blogging: "We'll do these calls regularly and I invite you jerks to come on the bus with us and we'll have some fun." Also on the call, RedState's Erick Erickson shares a "great idea" of McCain's: "He suggested that when the President vetoes the legislation, the President should hold a press conference and read all the bribes in the bill -- every earmark the Democrats attached to the supplemental funding."

In other positive McCain blogging, K-Lo notes that Bill Bennett and Laura Ingraham both attacked CNN's Michael Ware on their radio shows for Ware's suggestion the McCain had no "credibility" on the situation in Iraq. Power Line's John Hinderaker was moved to ask if McCain is "the Lincoln of our time?"

MCCAIN II: No Dice

Conservative bloggers are not buying The Hill reports that McCain sought to switch parties in early '01. Captain's Quarters blogs: "If true, this would effectively end McCain's presidential bid. ... The principals tell completely conflicting stories, and the nature of the issue almost ensures that no independent proof one way or the other could exist. I'm betting this is nonsense."

ROMNEY: Google Powered Oppo

Evangelicals 4 Mitt's David French responded to AmSpec Blog accusations that E4M has "been using opposition research provided by the Romney campaign" and accepts "funds from donors steered to the site by the Romney camp." French writes: "Good grief. It really would be difficult for this story to be more wrong. Apparently, the "Prowler" took his or her own speculations about E4M and just spewed them out on the screen--all without taking the time to take care of such minor details as, say, talking to us."

More French: "Since the Governor announced his candidacy, we have completely shut down any monetary expenditures ... other than maintaining this blog site, and I don't think that's cost us anything this year. My favorite allegation in the "Prowler" piece is that we have been using "opposition research" provided by the Romney campaign. Honestly, I was unaware that the Romney campaign owned Google."

THOMPSON: Onward, Christian Soldiers

James Dobson's decision to tell US News that he doesn't think Fred Thompson is "a Christian" allowed conservative bloggers to distance themselves from the Focus on the Family founder. Reactions include:

• Instapundit: "Another reason to like Fred Thompson: James Dobson doesn't like him."
• Outside the Beltway's James Joyner: "The great irony is that Dobson goes on to heap lavish praise on that paragon of moral virtue Newt Gingrich. The whole thing is quite odd. Dobson strikes me as something of a kook, but then again so do all the post-Billy Graham teevee preachers.
• Ankle Biting Pundit's Bull Dog Pundit: "Look, Dobson is flat out wrong. Thompson is indeed a Christian by the religious definition. ... Can someone please tell me what "committed Christian" means?
• AmSpec Blog's Dave Holman: "Dobson's arrogance in this situation is shocking. ... I mean his presumption to judge Thompson's Christianity in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
• Virginia Virtucon: "Who Died and Made James Dobson the Arbiter of "Good Christians"? This sort of nonsense that Dobson is spewing is what too often turns the average voter off from the GOP, just as MoveOn.org and DailyKos turns them off from the Dems.
• Race 4 '08's DaveG: "If Dr. Dobson is going to continue to try and influence Republican and conservative politics, he needs to do so in a responsible, inclusive, and far more politically savvy manner ... either conservatism and the Republican Party will be destroyed, or James Dobson will be directed towards the nearest exit.

DEM FIELD: Leave No Trainer Behind

The Nation's Ari Melber promotes MoveOn's announced "three 'virtual town hall meetings' for 2008 presidential candidates to discuss Iraq, health care and energy policy." Melber reports: "The meetings will be organized from the bottom up: MoveOn members choose the candidates and questions, and then vote for their favorite. The first topic is Iraq, and MoveOn says it will encourage its members to support and donate money for the candidate 'they believe will do the best job of leading us out of the war in Iraq.'"

MyDD's Matt Stoller comments: "This is a big deal, because it's the first time that various political candidates are going to hear from activists on Iraq, and be held accountable for their positions. It's important at this point for people knowledgeable in the issue to explore the various candidate plans and track records, and begin to equip activists with useful questions."

Also focussing on Iraq, MyDD's Chris Bowers links to reports "a viable GOP candidate could criticize the management of the war, but not the need for the war" and goes on to make a similar litmus test for the Dem nominee: "In order to win the 2008 election, every Democratic contender does not need to do much more than pledge to withdraw all troops--including "trainers"--from Iraq within six months of taking office. Who is willing to do that? Who has done that? The only candidates who can truly consider themselves "electable" are candidates who can answer "I have" to both of those questions."

DODD: The All Powerful Tim

Chris Dodd received a round of netroots thanks for his involvement in scuttling Swift-Boat funder Sam Fox' nomination to become Ambassador to Belgium. Atrios calls Dodd "All Powerful" and MyDD's Jerome Armstrong plays the story this way: "The White House quickly buckles to the pressure brought on by Tim Tagaris (on behalf of Chris Dodd) --and many others fighting against the nomination over the past couple of weeks." Bob Geiger and Crooks and Liars also thank Dodd.

EDWARDS: More Than Sympathetic

Linking to a past John Edwards interview about faith with David Kuo, TAPPED 's Paul Waldman marvels at John Edwards character: "In the interview, Edwards says that after their son Wade was killed in a car accident in 1996, 'my faith came roaring back and has stayed with me since that time.' ... So while Edwards is right that no one should vote for him simply out of sympathy for his family's struggle, there's nothing wrong with watching how he deals with that struggle and making some reasonable conclusions about what it says about the kind of person he is. It may be an imperfect means to assess how he would deal with the unique challenges a president faces, but at least it's something."

OBAMA: People-Power Metrics

MyDD's Jerome Armstrong is impressed that Barack Obama's campaign is showcasing "the number of people that have contributed to the campaign" not just the financial totals. Armstrong argues: "What Obama is doing with this metric that's smart is setting it up as a parallel process number to the total amount raised in the quarter. They know that Clinton is likely to raise a lot more money than Obama will, perhaps $40 Million? So even if Obama gets half that, he has the number of contributors to point toward as a people-powered marker in the process."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Yeah!!!! McCain-Feingold!

Blog PI's Not Paul Begala looks at Americans United for Change efforts to unseat "one of the smartest elected GOP political minds and he can easily raise money, Min. leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and claims defeating McConnell is not the point of their ads: "Campaigning has grown into something completely different than winning and losing single elections: It's now almost sport." NPB continues:

Back in 2002 a group of rich Democrats and consultants got together and said to themselves, "we want influence." They created this 527, originally, to protect Social Security from the Republicans' "privatization." Now, they still have this 527 and still continue to have influence with their money and with their consultants. And that's the beauty of this for people like me. No candidate, no pressure to win the race, no worry about the candidate's wife or best friend telling me how to do my job, no grueling travel days and no limiting contact with pesky reporters. Just a bunch of paid professionals sitting around a table making a couple of rich dudes happy.

LEST WE FORGET: Not For The Feint Of Heart

Crooks and Liars SilentPatriot posts video of Karl Rove rapping at the annual Radio/Television Correspondents' Association Dinner 3/28 and comments: "Not as good as Colbert's roast of President Bush last year, but it's pretty damn funny to see Karl try to get down with his bad self."

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:35 PM

March 28, 2007

3/28: Ahead Of The Game

Unlike their conservative counterparts, the netroots are largely satisfied with their WH '08 field (Sen. Hillary Clinton being the glaring exception). So while conservative bloggers are busy running with MSM leads attacking whatever candidate they have a problem with, the netroots are largely united in pushing back against MSM storylines that attack Dems. After AP, Politico, and Richard Cohen all hit Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) (AP and Politico for being "lightweight," Cohen for having "a tendency to manipulate facts") the netroots hit back hard, detailing past descrepencies with the AP reporter Nedra Pickler's coverage, connections between Politico and Matt Drudge, and Cohen for being "elitist." Considering any WH campaign would love to have this kind of free rapid response, how much better will the evntual Dem nominee emerge if conservative blogs don't start playing the same game?

GIULIANI: Unapologetically Teve Torbes

RCP Blog's John McIntyre says Larry Kudlow's recent interview with Rudy Giuliani focussed "primarily on economic and war issues" and comments: "I have been saying for some time now that there is a real opportunity on the Republican side for a candidate to fill the Steve Forbes-kind of role in the GOP field with an unapologetic embrace of low-tax, pro-growth, supply-side policies. ... With Kudlow's prodding, Giuliani seemed to willingly embrace the supply-side mantle."

MCCAIN: Politics Is As Politics Does

Two major stories drove John McCain discussion 3/27, neither of them positive for the Senator. RedState's Erick Erickson provides some back story on the hacking of McCain's MySpace page. A McCain MySpace graphic was changed to read: "Today I announce that I have reversed my position and come out in full support of gay marriage ... particularly marriage between passionate females." Erickson explains: "The template [McCain] used was created by Mike Davidson, a talented guy who knows his internet. He's a co-founder of Newsvine.com. Well, not only did McCain take the template, but he also used Mike's graphics without permission. Mike, who inspired the title of this post, decided to retaliate."

The other event driving McCain-blogging was the five year anniversary of McCain-Feingold's passage into law. Townhall's Mary Katharine Ham snarks: "Ahhh, can't you just feel how much cleaner politics is now than it was in 2002? Is it the lemony-fresh scent of Randy "Duke" Cunningham's fall from grace? Or, the sparkle of fresh negative advertising popping up earlier than ever? ... Um, no. Politics is still politics five years later. And, the bill that was supposed to get the money, corruption, and negativity out of politics has succeeded in dealing a blow only to our access to free political speech and John McCain's popularity among conservatives, both of which have dropped dramatically."

McCain did himself no favors by discussing the subject on Laura Ingram's radio show. The Brody File writes: "I know he believes strongly in it but if he can't strongly mobilize the base and instead has parts of the movement actively working against him, then that is spelled T-R-O-U-B-L-E." Race 4 '08's Gary Miller is harsher: "John Sidney McCain would set the conservative movement back a generation. ... when you listen to this audio from today's Laura Ingraham show, you realize that this is a man who would simultaneously swear to "preserve, protect and defend" the Constitution and yet would gut the first item in the Bill of Rights."

Also on CFR Townhall's Matt Lewis defends My Man Mitt from charges he lied about McCain's beliefs on the subject: "Yes, technically McCain was misquoted -- but not misrepresented. It is clear that McCain agrees with the courts -- that's why he is quoting them. In my view, this is a matter of semantics (and not worth flaming somebody over)."

Eye on '08's Soren Dayton basically concedes the point but offers no apologies: "I do not think that this is "just" semantics. ... In other words, McCain is himself quoting the legal concept underlying what he believes to be the constitutionality of some or all of BCRA in support of his law. That's how I understand that. Now, does McCain also believe that? Probably. But I think it is far to pithy an question." Lewis also posts a bevy of CFR related videos from the Straight Talk Express.

THOMPSON: Like Obama, But With More Experience

The conservative blogger honeymoon with Fred Thompson isn't over yet, but it is experiencing some early turbulence. Although The Corner's Ramesh Ponnuru would "probably support Thompson if he got in the race" he still advises "Thompson would hurt himself if he tried to maintain that he was always pro-life."

Also looking into Thompson's pro-life past, AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein finds '95 testimony on partial birth abortion and summarizes: "Thompson expresses concern that if a partial birth abortion ban is passed and held up in the courts under the commerce clause, then it may lead to further expansion of government in other areas. To be clear, he ultimately voted to ban partial birth abortion, but what his statement reveals is a concern about limiting the power of the federal government."

Race 4 '08's DaveGreviews Klein's work and later recaps: "I've concluded that Sen. Thompson a) is, and has always been, opposed to the notion of a constitutional right to an abortion; b) is, and has always been, in favor of banning partial-birth abortion; c) is, and has always been, in favor of restrictions on most later-term abortions (post-first trimester); and d) is now across-the-board pro-life, but in the 1990s, was in favor of earlier-term abortions (first-trimester) remaining legal."

In other Thompson blogging, Outside the Beltway's James Joyner reminds readers the Thompson voted for McCain-Feingold and adds: "It's not therefore clear in what sense Thompson is more "conservative" than McCain. Mostly, I think, it's that Thompson hasn't gone around grandstanding on issues that would win him media acclaim at the expense of his party." NY Sun's Ryan Sager stands by his claim voters "know precisely zero about Fred Thompson past what they know of him from Law & Order" and adds: "Mr. Thompson's political experience is limited to a short, uneventful stint in the Senate - reminiscent, perhaps, of one Barack Obama."

Also, K-Lo is still linking to a transcript and audio of Thompson's Paul Harvey Show segments. His latest hits Charles Sheen and Rosie O'Donnell for siding with the 9/11 truthers.

CLINTON: We're No Pushovers

Admitting he is "participating in an anti-[Hillary] Clinton electability narrative," MyDD's Chris Bowershighlights recent polling on HRC and blogs: "If 50% of adults of voting age say they won't vote for a candidate, that candidate will have difficulty being elected nationwide." First clarifying that he still believes any Dem nominee will win in '08, Bowers jusitifies his HRC doubting: "In the end, I justify this somewhat mild questioning of Clinton's ability to win the general election because I don't want to see the progressive movement become a bunch of pushovers in important Democratic primaries. If our candidates can get taken down based on "electability," while establishment candidates receive a pass on the concept, then we will have ceded an important strategic position."

HRC did get some rare lefty blogger praise from Silicon Valley maven Michelle Kraus who reports on HRC's recent swing through the Golden State at The Huffington Post: "Hillary Rodham Clinton was very impressive when she came through northern California last weekend and wowed audiences from San Francisco to Silicon Valley. She upped the stakes significantly even with the "ATM machine" Democrats of California. ... She has become a Presidential candidate deeply at ease in her own skin."

OBAMA: Toxic, Cynical, Corrupt, Elites Not Wanted

The netroots have begun a concerted effort to push back against MSM suggestions that Obama is "all style and little substance." TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent takes on Nedra Pickler's AP article suggesting Obama has "delivered no policy speeches and provided few details about how he would lead the country." Sargent blogs: "What about this speech on March 21 [Senate floor speech on Iraq]? What about this one on March 2 [address to AIPAC]? ... If you want to say these speeches are too short on specifics, go ahead, but that doesn't mean they're not policy speeches -- just thin ones." Jeremy Cluchey of Obamarama asks: "AP reporter stumps for Clinton?" and links to pastcritiques of Pickler's Dem coverage.

Also on the warpath, Glenn Greenwald attacks The Politico for being "poisonously joined at the hip" to Matt Drudge after a Mike Allen "petty, trite hit piece" on Obama was quickly linked to by Drudge. Greenwald also attacks WaPo's Richard Cohen for writing, "a tendency to manipulate facts may bear watching in Obama." Greenwald concludes: "It is inevitable that the Beltway elite are going to end up hating Obama for exactly the same reason they hated Howard Dean -- because by all appearances (which, in my view, are still incomplete and uncertain), Obama is not one of them, does not want to be one of them, and is actually going to run his campaign by attacking the toxic, cynical, corrupt attributes which define how they operate." For his efforts, Cohen was awarded "Wanker of the Day" by Atrios.

Also commenting on the Politico-Drudge connection, MyDD's Matt Stoller explains why the 'experience' attack is so important: "The whole point of the 'experience' frame is to whitewash Clintonian complicity in Iraq and in the corporate takeover of our government from the early 1990s onward. Lest we forget, it was Hillary Clinton who screwed up the universal health care debate, despite a massive public mandate for universal health care in the 1992 election and high public support for it. Don't be fooled by the experience frame, because it's coming from the right-wing hawks in both parties"

OBAMA II: Black Like Who?

Jack and Jill Politics' Jill Tubman posts an email that has gone "viral" and "will be seen by potentially hundreds of thousands of middle class African-Americans, especially women." The email is from a wife watching 2/10's The State of Black America hosted by Tavis Smiley and featuring a panel with Charles Ogltree an Cornel West among others. After some on the panel, including Smiley and West, expressed doubts about Obama based on his absence from the event, the emailer writes:

If I had the technological saavy, I would jump off this page with all the passion, hope, rage and volume of Spike Lee's Dap and tell you, brothers and sisters everywhere, please please please WAKE UP!!!!!!!! The best thing Barack can do for us is to win, not show up at yet another black forum simply to prove he's one of us by placating the egos who believe Barack should clear his calendar for their "ultimate black" event!

RICHARDSON: Two Days Late, But Hopefully Not A Dollar Short

The Blogometer apologizes for missing this earlier, but MyDD's Jonathan Singer posted an interview with Bill Richardson 3/26. Excerpts include:

• Singer: "I was wondering if that's an indication that you're not going to be focusing as much on Iowa or that, alternatively, you just see Nevada as a better opportunity in some respects?"
• Bill Richardson: I see Nevada as a better opportunity. I believe I'll do well in Iowa but obviously because of my Western roots I believe that I have a greater potential to do better in Nevada. ... But realistically Nevada has more opportunity for us because of the Western state proximity, and I'm a Western Governor, etc.
• Singer: Can you talk a little bit about some of those issues that don't crop up in, say, New York or in New England or areas like that but are important to the West, and the Mountain West particularly?
• Richardson: Okay. First, issues relating to water. Water conservation, water availability, new water technologies, number one. Number two, immigration issues are very important in the West because of the very strong Hispanic immigration. Three, agriculture, the role of the family farm, ranches, the fact that in the West a large portion of the West is owned by the federal government.

PROSECUTOR PURGE: All About Lam

Talking Points Memo continues to focus on San Diego USA Carol Lam and the relationship between her firing and ongoing investigations into GOP corruption that might lead to the WH. TPM's Paul Kiel details the reasons "we're so suspicious" including:

• Lam was never confronted over her approach to immigration prosecutions, the given reason for her dismissal.
• In November, shortly before Lam was fired, a Justice Department official brainstormed about how to explain firing several U.S. attorneys
• Lam was fired midway into a historic, wide-reaching public corruption investigation that targeted a number of Republican members of Congress and the executive director of the CIA.
• Despite the fact that it was one of the highest profile federal investigations being undertaken at the Department, Lam's investigation into Duke Cunningham and others is never mentioned in the Justice Department emails that have been released. Not once. This must have been discussed at the highest levels, but we've seen no record of those communications.
• The FBI's bureau chief in San Diego has said, "I guarantee politics is involved" in Lam's firing.
• the day after Lam informed the Justice Department that she planned to execute a search warrant on CIA Executive Director Kyle "Dusty" Foggo and the same day that it was reported that her investigation had spread to Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA), Alberto Gonzales' chief of staff Kyle Sampson wrote to a White House official: "The real problem we have right now with Carol Lam that leads me to conclude that we should have someone ready to be nominated on 11/18, the day her 4-year term expires."

Kiel delves deeper into DoJ explanations that Lam was fired for not prioritizing immigration cases here, writing: "the demand that Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and others were making, that her office have a "zero tolerance" policy of prosecuting alien smuggling, was an impossible one. ... There are approximately 140,000 immigration arrests in Lam's district per year -- and approximately 110 lawyers in her office to handle them. They manage to file around 3,000 cases per year total, one of the largest loads in the country."

Kiel also identifies emails showing certain DoJ officials "just didn't like Lam - and seemed to harbor a wish that she not succeed." Josh Marshallalso notes FBI special agent in charge of the San Diego field office Dan Dzwilewski told reporters "I guarantee politics is involved." Marshall also says Dzwilewski told reporters "Carol Lam's dismissal would jeopardize on-going corruption investigations" but The Blogometer could find no quote in the article to back up that claim.

Finally on Lam, Marshall reports that ex-Rep. Duke Cunnigham (R) briber Mitchell Wade's first contract for the WH was actually for screening WH mail, not furniture for VP's office as originally reported. Marshall adds: "So it all comes back to the same question. Why did a company like Wade's, which had no track record whatsoever and had only been approved to receive federal government contracts two months earlier, get a contract from the White House to screen the mail of the President of the United States? ... So whose palm got greased?"

IRAQ: Pryor The New Netroots Whipping Boy?

Most of the netroots celebrated the defeat of Sen. Thad Cochran's (R-MS) amendment removing a non-date specific timetable withdrawal language from the Iraq supplemental bill:

• AMERICABlog's Joe Sudbay: "It's not perfect. It's still non-binding, but it is a critical vote to change the course of the war. The Senate bill will go to a conference with the House bill that passed last week."
• MyDD's Chris Bowers: "The only Democrat who voted to strike the withdrawal language was Mark Pryor. I don't care what state he is from--that is the sort of issue that could cause you to lose either a primary or a general election. There isn't a state in the country that currently has a majority in favor of the war, or against this bill."
• DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas: "Reid did an incredible job of keeping Democrats together. I mean, he even brought Ben Nelson aboard! Pretty impressive."

Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat dissented: "Hello? He got Nelson and Hagel because the language was NON-binding! Did anyone hear Hagel's floor speech on the issue? HE stressed that point."

IRAQ II: Putting Haliburton To Shame

Conservative bloggers were extremely upset by the Senate vote. Reactions include:

• RedState's Haystack: "I am sick and tired of this laughingly-termed "Conservative Movement". We all suck at it ... When you have that pig loser Chuck Hagel, (yeah-the one that thinks you want him to be your President?) and that (expletive removed in deference to the posting guidelines) Gordon Smith from Oregon BOTH voting against an amendment such as this, what do you have exactly?
• Ace of Spades: "What's the point of forcing a timetable? To reassure American liberal voters that they can trust the promises of the Democratic Party. What's the point of resisting a timetable? To reassure Iraqi civilians, and Al Qaeda terrorists, that they can trust, or fear, as the case may be, the promises of the American government. It's largely a symbolic matter. But whose symbolism is in the American interest, and whose symbolism in only in the interests of a political party and, not coincidentally, Al Qaeda?
• Instapundit: "They're running away with their little curly tails between their legs. ... It's a disgrace, but par for the course for this bunch."
• Don Surber: "Thus the Democratic-controlled Congress puts placing our troops in harm's way on the same level as dairy subsidies, tours of the Capitol and sugar (both beeted and caned). This is worse than war profiteering. At least Haliburton gave the troops something, even if it was tainted water. What does Congress give them?

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: The Church Of Progressivism?

Commenting on Dan Gilgoff's new book on James Dobson, Ezra Klein muses on the megachurch phenomenon:

The megachurches, with their remarkably innovative techniques for constructing social capital and a feeling of connectedness, have been fairly explicit responses to greater geographic dispersal, weakened family ties, and increased insecurity, and so forth. Many of us who don't experience the megachurches as anything but occasionally malign actors on the national stage are quite poor, I fear, at understanding why they are important and why their influence is proving durable. Which is odd, given that the very foundations of the liberal critique of contemporary society -- increased economic risk, civic deterioration, etc -- are exactly what the churches help address.

LEST WE FORGET: Get Over Yourselves

Outside the BeltwayJames Joyner links to news that while only four out of 3.1 mil. ESPN entries chose the Final Four correctly last year, over 160K got the final four right this year. Joyner comments: "Sadly, I was not among them. Having followed college basketball news even less closely this year than in the past, I picked several used-to-be-good teams to upset highly ranked teams whose recent resurgence flew under my radar screen. While I picked seven of the Elite Eight, only Florida remains alive in my Final Four bracket."

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:30 PM

March 27, 2007

3/27: Another One Bites The Dust

In December it was Newt Gingrich. In January it was Mitt Romney. In February it was Rudy Giuliani. Now that it's March, Fred Thompson is currently the new leader in the GOP Bloggers straw poll. The Blogometer is starting to notice a pattern here: a new name is mentioned, bloggers fall in love, compromising facts are revealed, and a new name is mentioned. It could be that this ealry 'whack-a-mole' approach to GOP frontrunners might end up producing a stronger candidate in the end. But it also might just demonstrate that nobody is happy with the GOP's '08 options.

GOP FIELD: The Fredinator

Fred Thompson is quickly making his presence felt online. He's currently crushing the competition in early voting in the GOP Bloggers March '07 online straw poll. At deadline the top five vote getters were:

F. Thompson 38%
Giuliani 16%
Gingrich 14%
Romney 10%
Hunter 7%

Comparing these numbers with last month's results, we see Thompson stealing 13 points from Giuliani (previously at 29%), 8 points from Gingrich (previously at 22%), and 9 points from Romney (previously at 19%). Thompson is also the most "acceptable" option for conservative blog readers with 74% indicating they'd be willing to support him (55% of respondents tagged John McCain as "unacceptable").

GOP FIELD II: Who Knew Romney Was So Popular In Vegas?

Townhall's Matt Lewis is eagerly awaiting Q1 fundraising results and previews three possible headlines coming out of the filings:

• Romney/McCain/Rudy raise most, but spend most (remember, you can only spend NET money).
• 50% of Romney's money comes from Utah/Nevada (you may not like this story, but it would be newsworthy).
• Brownback/Gilmore/Hunter are dwarfed by the big three.

GIULIANI: It's A Famous Contest

Conservative bloggers reading recent nat'l and NH polling all conclude Fred Thompson's entry into the race is hurting Rudy Giuliani the most:

• RedState's Hunter Baker on NH ARG numbers: "In February, before there was any talk of Thompson, Giuliani and McCain were in a virtual heat with 27% and 26% respectively. Move to March and Giuliani drops to 19% and McCain drops much less dramatically to 23%. ... Why does Thompson (in this single poll in this single state) gain from Giuliani? One possibility is that both men are famous beyond the simple confines of the political world."
• AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein on Gallup's results: "With Thompson in the race, first place Giuliani drops to 31% from 44% in the last poll from early March, McCain actually ticks up to 22% from 20%. ... I think Thompson eats into Giuliani's support because clearly a portion of Rudy's backers are people who want someone electable, but hate McCain. Thompson offers a viable alternative to McCain who is also hawkish on national security, but is conservative on social issues.

The Brody File asks his evangelical readers if Giuliani's description of himself as a person who "supports parental notification laws and a ban on partial birth abortion; is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and believes marriage is between a man and a woman," is "just a tad bit disingenuous?" Brody continues: "Does the way he portrays himself on his website bother you or do you just chalk it up to political spin just like every other candidate out there?"

HUCKABEE: Why Is He Doing This?

RCP Blog's Tom Bevan posts a 3/14 interview with Mike Huckabee conducted in NH, including:

• RCP: First question: why are you doing this?
• HUCKABEE: Because I really believe this county needs leadership that will restore America to its spirit of optimism, bring practical solutions to many of the problems we face, and that can bring people together from not only other parts of the country but from political parties.
• RCP: And what's the issue that driving you?
• HUCKABEE: The single most important issue is restoring America's faith in itself. This country is at its best when it's optimistic and resilient and when it sees that its greatest days are ahead of it, not behind it.

MCCAIN: Straight Vlog Express

Eye on '08's Soren Dayton and Townhall's Matt Lewis continue their video dump from their weekend trip on the Straight Talk Express through NH. New video includes:

• at Eye on '08, McCain "has harsh words for the House Democratic Leadership on the Iraq Supplemental Appropriations Bill that they just passed. ... He called the Democratic approach a "new recipe for defeat."
• at Townhall, McCain tell Lewis Ronald Reagan would be "very upset" about the current spending practices of todays conservative movement.
• at Townhall McCain tells Lewis "he absolutely hates the influence of soft money on politics" while discussing campaign finance reform.
• at Townhall, Lewis talks to pastor/ex-state Rep./former Gary Bauer and Alan Keyes supporter Mike Gilman about why he supports McCain.
• at Townhall, undecided state Rep. Stephanie Eaton (R) (who has a 96% NARAL rating) tells Lewis why she is pro-choice but still is considering McCain.
• and finally a Ronald Reagan fan tells Lewis why he supports McCain.

ROMNEY: Mormons Need Not Apply?

Townhall's Hugh Hewitt took issue with a sentence in RedState's Erick Erickson's review of Hewitt's "A Mormon in the White?" The offending line: "If we can expect heavy participation by Mormon missionaries as grassroots activists for an American presidential campaign, why can we not ask questions about Romney's Mormon beliefs and why can Americans not be concerned?"

Hewitt responds: "I find the effort to mainstream religious tests and even religious bigotry to be abhorrent and far outside the political mainstream. ... Erick ignores how Catholic Americans were very enthusiastic over Kennedy's candidacy, and how that was not the occasion for denunciations of Popery or assaults on the miracle of Fatima or Lourdes. ... The attempt to use Romney's candidacy as a step-stool for attacks on the LDS is shocking when it occurs on the left, and worse when it occurs on the right."

Erickson returns fire at RedState: "I understand Hugh's concerns, but I just can't bring myself to find fault in a deeply evangelical Christian who will not vote for Romney because he is not a Christian. Certainly Hugh and I may disagree, but I also understand the Christian who is so deeply committed to his religion that he will not vote for someone outside his religion."

ROMNEY II: Unfiltered Oppo Research Dumps

The American Spectator's Prowler reports Romney booster blog Evangelicals for Mitt "has been using opposition research provided by the Romney campaign, as well as accepting funds from donors steered to the site by the Romney camp."

Race 4 '08's Republius is not pleased that Romney is feeding anti-Mike Huckabee/Fred Thompson stories through E4M: "While I am not yet formally behind any one Republican presidential contender in 2008, I am willing to publicly condemn those GOP candidates who engage in negative campaigning during this process, which is evidently what the Mitt Romney campaign is guilty of."

THOMPSON: Another Pro-Life Conversion?

The Corner continues to link to audio and transcripts of Fred Thompson's Paul Harvey Show radio addresses. His latest on Dem funding for Iraq finishes: "This bill isn't just about funding the war for democracy and freedom in Iraq. It's a political statement. And it's about buying enough votes with pork in order to make that statement. Maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing, if Congress did have its power cut off every once in a while."

Also The Corner's Ramesh Ponnuru and AmSpec Blog's James Antle are fighting over Thompson pro-life credentials. Ponnuru writes: "The evidence that these guys [Thompson and Bill Frist] were once pro-choice is pretty substantial. Why not just admit that they've changed their minds?" Antle responds: "Ramesh Ponnuru is right that there is substantial evidence that Fred Thompson and Bill Frist began their political careers as at least nominal pro-choicers before embracing the pro-life label. That they stressed the pro-life policies they supported when talking to professional pro-life activists doesn't alter this fact. Both Tennessee senators compiled pro-life voting records, something nobody is trying to take away from them."

CLINTON: The Anti-Kucinich

Matt Stollermusings on why Hillary Clinton remains the front runner despite recent remarks "that she will continue a military mission in Iraq" had lefty bloggers comparing the Iraq positions of the Dem big three. Stoller argued: "There is just no way that she can say that she will end the war and that she will continue a military mission in Iraq to contain extremists and ward off Iran. Those are mutually exclusive. ... Whatever you think about the supplemental fight, our party's standard-bearer at this moment does not represent the party or the country. ... I'm just wondering why Clinton is getting a free pass on Iraq."

Ed Kilgore responds: "There's one big problem with Matt's anathema: it would also apply to Barack Obama, John Edwards, and quite a few other Democrats generally considered to be unimpeachably anti-war. ... Obama's Iraq withdrawal plan explicitly calls for a "residual force" to stay in the country to fight terrorists and deter foreign intervention. John Edwards, who has emphasized the need for immediately withdrawing half the current troop deployment, has also talked about a continuing if limited military commitment. ... Dems who basically want to forbid U.S. military force commitments in the Middle East ought to be supporting Denny the K."

Matthew Yglesias basically agrees the big three have no substantive differences on Iraq, but still comes out strongly against HRC: "Now, in a big picture sense, what this emphasizes is the extent to which it would be good to have a president you trusted. ... To me, what separates Clinton from Obama and Edwards on this front is that Clinton appeared to be saying that one mission of her proposed continuing presence in Iraq would be trying to intimidate Iran which sounds more like loophole territory than prudence territory to me." Yglesias also concluded by invoking Kucinich: "If, however, you want the United States to more-or-less entirely abandon the project of projecting military power in the Middle East you really do need to back Kucinich."

MyDD's Chris Bowers was having none of the suggestions that there are no substantive differences between Clinton and Obama on Iraq. Instead he identifies some reasons why HRC is still winning including: 1) Most Democrats do not make Clinton their first choice; 2) Obama actually is making up ground; 3) Clinton still commands the most attention; 4) Clinton camp blurring the lines on Iraq; 5) Obama and establishment media, allowing Clinton to brand herself as anti-war; and 6) It is also important to keep in mind that many voters do not even consider policy questions when selecting a candidate, and instead prefer personal qualities / characteristics.

OBAMA: Playa' Hatin'

Barack Obama doubting is spreading into usually friendly quarters. MyDD's Jerome Armstrong recaps unfavorable reviews from Obama's 3/24 Las Vegas, NV, performance and remembers how Obama "gave a somber non-partisan delivery to a hall full of the most partisan Democrats in the nation" at the DNC winter meeting. Armstrong adds: "It just seems that Obama doesn't have the knack to plays to the crowd, or he just doesn't prepare for doing it."

At The Huffington Post, Tish Durkin says she still "could very well end up voting for" Obama but right now "he fact that everyone loves him" drives her crazy. Durkin continues: "It's that he's new. And just by being new, he can, without promising anything, promise to realize that sweet, recurrent American dream: the dream that after all these years of disillusionment, some untold chevalier is going to ride up to the Capitol on his white horse and, with a brandish of his boldness, kick Congress in its cronyism, and finally, you know, 'bring the country together' and 'get things done' .. Like all rescue fantasies, this one has tremendous power - and tremendous problems when it has the sore luck to hit the light of day."

WEBB: Drinking With Jim

Huffington Post political correspondent Melinda Henneberger dropped by the run on military time offices of Sen. James Webb (D-VA) to talk about his opposition for a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. Henneberger summarizes: "He is convinced that cutting off funding would be too hard to do in a sufficiently targeted way, and that troop caps "mean you've just given the administration the floor" -- and thus would actually decrease the likelihood of a full withdrawal. Instead, the focus should be on the diplomatic front -- because without real progress there, all the caps and cuts and timetables in the world won't mean much."

Daily Kos diarist Pegasus notes Webb "doesn't support most of the out-of-Iraq methods that are bandied around this site" and queries Kossaks on whether they are "Pissed at Senator Webb?" A relatively small sample shows only 35% of readers are. 27% "just want to have a beer with him."

Finally, Taylor March hits back at Fox News "sissies" who "couldn't even figure out the word for ammunition and how to describe a magazine clip" when trying to report on the arrest of a Webb aide for gun position. Daily Kos' Kagro X adds: "Best possible way to get arrested, I say. Beats Viagra smuggling by a mile, eh Rush?"

PROSECUTOR PURGE: It's The Crime, Stupid

The netroots are hitting back against MSM reports that the "firestorm over the fired U.S. attorneys" is due to by Dep. AG Paul McNulty's failure to follow the company line that the WH "would not comment on personnel issues." Talking Points MemoJosh Marshall responds: "I can almost imagine Harriet Miers pitching the ABC reporter on this nonsense. ... this is the classic case of mistaking the symptom for the disease. As McNulty could see, refusing to give any explanation for an unprecedented firing of multiple US Attorneys with active investigations or prosecutions of prominent Republicans simply wasn't tenable. ..."

Marshall continues: "There's this old line the wise folks in Washington have that 'it's not the crime, but the cover-up.' ... But only fools believe that. It's always about the crime. The whole point of the cover-up is that a full revelation of the underlying crime is not survivable. Enough of this shambling foolery. The controversy wasn't 'sparked' by the break down of the cover-up. The 'controversy' is about the underlying bad acts."

Daily Kos's pontificator picks up on a second angle: "Given this selective release of a single internal White House email (which only could have come from a White House source), it's clear that the White House has waived its claim of executive privilege. You can't claim that a category of documents is protected by a privilege, and then release a cherry-picked few from that category in order to help yourself. If you release some, you have to release all."

PROSECUTOR PURGE II: 'Witch Hunt' Is Not A Defense

Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall describes Monica Goddling's letter invoking the 5th Amndt to prevent her testimony before the House Gov't Reform Cmt. as "a sort of witness's nullification." Marshall explains: "the essence of his argument is that the committee has relinquished its legitimacy as an investigative forum and that she has thus unilaterally decided that she will refuse to testify."

Marshall later draws out one possible self-confessed crime Goodling could be protecting herself from, quoting from the letter: "it has come to our attention that a senior Department of Justice official has privately told Senator Schumer that he (the official) was not entirely candid in his report to the Committee, and that the official allegedly claimed that others, including our client, did not inform him of certain pertinent facts." Marshall deduces: "His name isn't stated. But this appears to be a reference to Deputy Attorney General McNulty. ... Here we finally appear to have a bad act that Goodling believes or at least claims may expose her to criminal prosecution -- lying to Congress by proxy by intentionally misinforming an official about to testify before Congress."

PROSECUTOR PURGE III: Think Of All The SPAM They'll Lose Forever

Noting that "about 95% of Karl Rove's email traffic" has been done "using RNC email accounts to get around governmental records archiving regulations" Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall asks, "Can executive privilege even conceivably cover emails from the Republican National Committee? By any definition, those aren't emails written or received by anyone in their capacity as a presidential advisor. They're private and have nothing to do with the president in his executive capacity."

The Left Coaster's Steve Soto is also excited about what the House Gov't Reform Cmt. has ordered the RNC to save the emails: "The White House's use of nongovernmental email accounts and servers to mask their political activities done on government time is about to blow up in their faces. ... Sure, the RNC and Bush/Cheney will now furiously delete all these emails if they haven't done so already, but just the fact that there is a record of such communication means that: 1) it is essential to demand that Rove and others be put under oath to testify to Congress; and 2) claims of executive privilege go out the window if the White House was conducting the allegedly protected communications in a nonsecure, purely political manner through outside cut outs."

PROSECUTOR PURGE IV: The Resignation Watch

Townhall's Dean Barnett and RCP Blog's Tom Bevan joined the growing list of conservative bloggers calling on AG Alberto Gonzales to resign. Barnett writes: "Gonzales and Miers are two of the president's Texas friends, and neither one of them had previously demonstrated the ability to organize a one car funeral. In short, these terminations should have been easy. Thanks to the maladroit efforts of the Dynamic Duo, they weren't. ... The Bush administration should move on from the bumbling and stumbling of the Gonzales era.

The shrinking number of Gonzales supporters aren't even bothering to defend their man. Mark at RedState "Gonzales has done nothing wrong besides giving fumbling answers to reporters' questions. If Republicans are not altogether thrilled with Gonzales, so be it. They must put that aside and realize that there is value in the fight if not in the man. It is time for Congressional Republicans to stand together on this for the sake of the party and its future."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: The 50-State Macaca

At TechPresident Bush '02 eCampaign Dir. Michael Turk is worried the GOP is not matching the Dem efforts he learned about from the following email:

Do you remember the George Allen "macaca" video? ... The Democratic Party needs to support that kind of diligent reporting in the new election cycle -- with video crews permanently on the ground in early primary states, for example. What did John McCain say in New Hampshire? Who did Rudy Giuliani visit in Iowa? What did Mitt Romney do in South Carolina? The DNC needs to know the answers to these questions every time a Republican makes a campaign stop, and we have to be ready to take the proper course of action. Let's set up a state-of-the-art operation to bypass the media and take the story of their lies, flip-flops, and out-of-whack priorities directly to you."

Turk responds: "Despite the fact that this is a fundraising pitch, and may be all blow and no whistle, the thought of a 50-state videography plan should actually make Republicans nervous. The sheer volume of footage the Democrats could grab on Republican gaffes at all levels cannot be underestimated."

LEST WE FORGET: Why Do Fools Fall In Love?

Picking up on research form Robert Cialdini's book Influence: Science and Practice showing that people who were asked to write essays in support of a random point of view they did not hold, still held that same view point months later, Dilbert Blog advises his unlucky in love readers:

Go down to the local mall with a clipboard and pretend to be doing a research experiment. Offer $1 to attractive people who will write a paragraph describing how incredibly sexy you are. (Based on the research, you should offer a low dollar amount so people don't think they did it entirely for the money.) Tell participants that the research has to do with handwriting analysis of people who are writing opinions they do not believe. Stop after you get 100 people to do it. That's less than the cost of one meal at an upscale restaurant.

Give the participants your e-mail address and tell them they can get the results of the research study in a month if they contact you. According to the science, about two-thirds of the people who wrote a paragraph on your sex appeal will strongly believe it a month later, no matter how hideous you are. And a few of those people will remember to e-mail you for the results. You'll still have to close the deal, but I think we can agree that I just did the hard work for you.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:42 PM

March 26, 2007

3/26: Where's The Beef?

That's what lefty bloggers who attended 3/24's SEIU forum in Las Vegas, NV are asking after seeing Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL). Those blogging from the event were "surprised" Obama would come to a health-care forum with only "basic principles" and no "concrete offerings." The Blogometer is not used to reading negative things about Obama, but as we move from already enthralled crowds to yet unconvinced audiences who want more than "platitudes," can Obama keep the magic alive?

CLINTON: "Bubba, Don't Sista Souljah Us"

Bill Clinton's "it's just not fair" complaint to hundreds of supporters on conference call about netroots backing for Barack Obama as an anti-war candidate drew wide negative reaction including:

• Firedoglake's Jane Hamsher: "I don't know if Bill quite understands that much of the netroots hostility the Clintons generate is the result of his trashing of Ned Lamont on Larry King. Nobody really doubts that he saved Lieberman in order to protect Hillary's war voting record and keep the heat off of her. Perhaps he doesn't even care."
• Bob Johnson at Daily Kos: "The story is noteworthy for the hemming and hawing explanation Bill offered which was sadly reminiscent (for me, anyway) of John Kerry's tortured explanations on his various Iraq votes. And it highlights the problems facing Hillary Clinton's campaign moving forward as the war grows increasingly unpopular with voters. ... Get a clue, Bill. I'm not sure you're helping your wife's cause."
• BooMan Tribune: "The Big Dog can cry me a river. His wife gave the keys to the neo-cons and she knew better. Just like Kerry, she thought her future presidential viability depended on getting on the right side of a war. ... I doubt it will work out any better for Hillary than it did for John Kerry.
• MyDD's Aiko: "I love Bill Clinton and I can't believe that I am about to write a diary criticizing him but I am. ... I remember knowing full well that a yes vote meant that Bush would eventually go to war. It wasn't about semantics.It wasn't an issue of what the resolution said. Today Bill Clinton re-writes history to suggest that the resolution didn't mean war it just meant....fade to bulls**t."

Not blogging on Bill's call, but on TNR article instead, Matthew Yglesias has similar thought on HRC's Iraq vote: "...she thought it was the right thing to do; it appears that she won't apologize for it because she doesn't think she was wrong; and, last, it appears that her views on both these things are connected to a larger worldview that's more militaristic than your average liberal's. ... She's so stuck with the "calculating" tag that even in the face of all the evidence, Clinton's views on Iraq get read exclusively through the lens of political calculation (like any pol, of course, she does in fact do some calculating) without any consideration of the possibility that there are real views her."

CLINTON II: As Long As We're Not On The Subject ...

She may not be a netroots favorite, but even bloggers noticed the warm reception HRC received from the SEIU Health Care Forum audience in Las Vegas, NV. Taylor Marsh, who live-blogged the event, says "Hillary Shines" and blogs: "Yes, my fellow Americans, there is an issue beyond Iraq. It might even be one that outlasts the war. ... The clear winner was Hillary Clinton. Period. No one came close to her passion, energy and details, as well as the humor and, yes, humility she brought to the subject at hand: health care."

Also in Vegas, The Nation's Marc Cooper says HRC "made a spirited presentation" and MyDD's Jonathan Singer has audio of her speech and adds: "Clinton's biggest applause line, however, came when she said she believed the IRS should stop harassing tip earners and start looking into the improper use of loopholes by corporate CEOs."

EDWARDS: Someone Get The SEIU Some Absentee Ballots

As well as Hillary Clinton did at the SEIU forum, it appears John Edwards did even better. The Nation's Marc Cooper says Edwards "Stands Out" on health care and quotes a "high-ranking West Coast SEIU official" off the record: "If the election were held today, we'd be supporting Edwards." Cooper adds: "Edwards was also the only candidate who said that, without doubt, taxes would have to be raised to be pay for the $90-120 billion price tag on his plan for universal coverage."

MyDD's MeanBone also appreciated Edwards call for higher taxes: "Edwards has a very realistic shot at making universal health care a reality, because he is being very realistic up front, both about the cost of universal health care and about the implementation. ... The best part is that Edwards is selling the American people on the idea that some things are worth higher taxes (especially on the wealthier people who can afford to pay them). When he gets elected, Edwards will have the political clout to make universal health care happen ... because he had the courage to run on it."

EDWARDS II: Carrying Rush's Water?

Katie Couric was roundly condemned for her 3/25 questioning of John and Elizabeth Edwards. Negative reviews include:

• Crooks and Liars' (with video) John Amato: "Isn't it nice that Couric asks all the questions [Rush] Limbaugh and conservative critics have been attacking them with? I guess it's fine as long as she masks them as if she's being a compassionate journalist. Couric should at least have the guts to tell her audience who is actually criticizing them."
• Daily KosBobcatJH: "Some people will surely come away thinking you legitimized the shameful opinions of the far-right fringe by couching them in relative anonymity. ... In other words, calling you a journalist is like calling President Bush a sophisticate."
• Kausfiles on audio of the interview: "It certainly makes you want to throttle Katie Couric."

OBAMA: My Plan Is In The Mail

Barack Obama received the first negative netroots reviews the Blogometer can remember reading following his 3/24 SEIU health care forum performance. The Nation's Marc Cooper writes: "Barack Obama, who has suffered from accusations that he deals too much in platitudes and not enough in concrete offerings, came to the forum surprisingly unarmed with details. He admitted that he has not yet finalized a plan but promises one will be forthcoming."

Las Vegas Gleaner says some in the audience were running out of patience with Obama: "But at the forum Saturday, even a mild-mannered questioner in the crowd basically ripped into him because there's no there there. ... 'He comes to a health care forum unprepared? Un. F**king. Believable.'"

Taylor Marsh had the harshest words for Obama: "The big loser was Barack Obama, who wasn't at all prepared. ... An African American man sitting next to me in the bleachers wearing an SEIU shirt said he liked Barack Obama but he "wasn't prepared," because he didn't even have a plan ready. The look on his face said it all." More Marsh: "It was obvious he wasn't up to speed for this event. I can't say it more plainly, except to add that no one in the audience was fooled. Barack Obama blew it. Hey, but it's one event."

MyDD's Jonathan Singer has audio of Obama's address and adds: "The Senator's biggest applause line came during a rousing portion in which he detailed the positive effects that organizing has not only upon members of unions but upon Americans all around the country." Matthew Yglesias found the whole event boring and isn't worried about Obama's health care credentials: "Everyone thinks he'll produce one soon enough, and it would be good to hear about it when it happens."

RICHARDSON: Skipping IA?

According MyDD's Jonathan Singer, Bill Richardson's biggest applause line "came when he said it was time to get begin getting of Iraq immediately. Perhaps the most newsworthy moment of any of the three speeches came when he said that he wanted his first victory to be in Nevada, perhaps an indication that he will not focus as much on Iowa." Audio here.

WEBB: The End Of The Affair?

Linking to Newsweekreports that Sen. James Webb (D-VA) "doesn't favor a timeline for withdrawal" Taylor Marsh reminds readers she does not "believe Congress can play commander in chief" and looks forward to "the coming legislation from Webb and [Sen. Chuck] Hagel (R-NE)" on Iraq. Marsh adds: "Both senators plan on stopping the military collapse currently underway through Mr. Bush's continued incompetence, which began under the 109th Republican Congress.

MyDD's Jerome Armstrong reacts: "Taylor, what's really interesting is that Hagel has said he'd run on the Unity ticket if he could find a Democrat to team up with him."

MCCAIN: Straight Talk About Anything ... But CFR

Eye on '08's Soren Dayton and Townhall's Matt Lewis joined "5 or 6 'old media' reporters" on John McCain's Straight Talk Express through Plymouth, and Littleton, NH. Dayton promises to post 2.5 hours of video from the bus throughout the week on YouTube here. Lewis already filed a report including:

McCain displayed the energy and intensity of someone half his age. ... His schedule would have been rigorous for even a twenty-five year old. When I asked McCain about the stress of constantly being "on," he told me: "This is the fun part!" ... Of course, I couldn't resist asking about campaign finance reform. He clearly doesn't like this question, but says that the fact a blogger (such as myself) is on the bus is an example of how free speech is alive and well. Bottom line; he's convinced campaign finance reform is a good thing. This is, perhaps, the only time the normally unexpurgated McCain refuses to elaborate.

Also on able to resist CFR blogging, Don Surber claims reports McCain will miss fundraising goals is "karma." Surber explains: " McCain-Feingold was supposed to limit money in political campaigns. That is why McCain is having trouble raising money. McCain-Feingold made him a political pariah. Republicans love him and respect his wartime heroism, but they would rather see Hillary get elected."

THOMPSON: Didn't Dick Wolf Prep With W?

Declared Mitt Romney supporter Paul Mirengoff of Power Line opens his thoughts on Fred Thompson admitting "right now Thompson appears more electable than Romney." Mirengoff explains: "In a sense, then, Thompson looks like the perfect blend of the Allen/Frist/Romney/Gingrich and McCain/Giuliani "factions." He seems to combine the conservatism of the former cluster with at least some of the popularity and stature of the latter pairing."

More Mirengoff: "Millions of Americans see Thompson exercise sound judgment every week as the district attorney on "Law and Order." I'm reliably informed that the show's creator, Dick Wolf, developed the persona of this fictional D.A. specifically for Thompson, and that the actor/politician protects his image by pushing back when he thinks his lines don't portray him in the proper light."

PROSECUTOR PURGE: The Grand Unifying Karl

Responding to "right-wing nutjobs who've written in asking just what the big deal is" Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall explains: "What we seem to see are repeated cases in which US Attorneys were fired for not pursuing bogus prosecutions of persons of the opposite party. Or vice versa. There's little doubt that that is why McKay and Iglesias were fired and there's mounting evidence that this was the case in other firings as well. ... We all understand that politics and the law aren't two hermetically sealed domains. ... But here it appears to have become the rule rather than the exception, a systematic effort at the highest levels to hijack the Justice Department and use it to advance the interest of one party over the other by use of selective prosecution."

Firedoglake's Pheonix Woman argues the "scandal may well be the Grand Unifying Scandal that connects most if not all of the other Bush scandals" and fingers Karl Rove as the center of it. PW concludes: "If Gonzo had left last week over this, the whole bidness would have likely settled down and Rove would be safe. ... Now, too many reporters are joining with their blogger brethren into focusing on Turdblossom's role in all of this."

Also summarizing the "fishiness" of the scandal, The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum focus on an email from "DOJ flak Tasia Scolinos" to "White House flak Catherine Martin" reading: "The one common link here is that is that three of them are along the border so you could make the connection that the DOJ is unhappy with the immigration prosecution numbers in those districts." Drum reacts: "Indeed, you could make the immigration connection if you were casting about for a semi-plausible post hoc reason for the firings. But you wouldn't have to do that if you had an actual reason at hand, would you? ... We still don't have any emails from before the purge explaining why DOJ wanted to fire these particular USAs. Surely there are some? And if not, then what was the reason?"

Netroots impeachment calls for AG Alberto Gonzales are only growing:

• Arianna Huffington: "If the president continues trying to run out the clock on this scandal, Congress should immediately begin impeachment proceedings against Alberto Gonzales. It's the quickest way to the truth."
• TAPPED's Robert Kuttner: "Why impeachment? In our system of checks and balances, the Senate confirms members of the Cabinet, but impeachment for cause is the only way to remove them. The White House, by refusing to cooperate, has now left Congress no other recourse."
• The Left Coaster's Steve Soto: "The question for Democrats is whether they should accept a serial prevaricator as the senior law enforcement official in the land ... At what point will Democrats ... accept that Bush is comfortable with lying and simply move for the impeachment of Alberto Gonzales?

Finally, CaliticsBrian Leubitz reminds readers that Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) was asking the "right questions" about the purge "way back in January." From Leubitz: "If you go back and look as the release, you will see the same concerns she was talking about back then are the same concerns right now. There are questions in all of the USA firings, but California's firings are some of the most questionable firings.

PROSECUTOR PURGE II: Doesn't His Family Miss Him?

Washington Postrevelations that AG Alberto Gonzales was involved with the decision to fire the prosecutors despite comments under oath to Congress otherwise has conservative bloggers again doubting his value to the administration:

• The Corner's Jonah Goldberg: "Some readers are cross with me for using the word "lied" in reference to Gonzales. Okay, he may simply have been deeply, deeply, confused, out of touch and unprepared to give a press conference which was supposed to put an end to the "scandal" and instead poured gasoline on it. ... Maybe, just maybe, a good "CEO" would have asked his staff, "Hey, before I unequivocally tell the world I was out of the loop, let's double check and make sure I wasn't in the loop. Okay?" ... Doesn't Gonzales need to spend more time with his family?
• Captain's Quarters: "Even if Gonzales didn't intend to deceive -- that is to say that he honestly didn't recall sitting in on that meeting -- wouldn't a competent CEO (as he described himself) do some research before making categorical statements? ... Gonzales and others who have presented misleading versions of the project are either incompetent or deceptive. We should not accept either in the office of the highest-ranking law enforcement officer of the United States, regardless of whether he is a Republican or Democrat.
• Power Line's Paul Mirengoff: ".... politics aside, Gonzales should not continue to serve if he lacks the president's confidence. I have no idea where Bush is on this, but my confidence in Gonzales, already shaky, would diminish if it turns out that Gonzales misrepresented his involvement in the firings to the press. As noted, though, it's not clear that Gonzales did this.

IRAQ: Born Fightin'

Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat questions whether the Iraq supplemental was really the "Big Win" fellow netrooters claim it is noting that the Senate fight will be over "non-binding deadlines." BTD then links to Taylor Marsh thoughts in favor of Sen. James Webb's (D-VA) non-deadline-for-withdrawal position and comments: "Oh by the way, look and see who you'll be fighting with."

Also dissenting from the netroots "first step" talking points, The Left Coaster's soccerdad writes: "The fact that so many progressives are celebrating the passage of this bill is mind boggling. ... Bush is right for once when he called this political theater. They have set the bill up to make maximum political advantage as the 2008 elections approach without sacrificing the war."

Still on message, Daily Kos' Hunter hits back at Washington Postcriticism of the bill: "Both the Post and the New York Times proved to be devastatingly incompetent during a period in which the United States very much needed the voices of a strong free press. ... That Iraq War failure, in itself, is nothing more than an extension of the ever more asinine failures of the national press for the last dozen-plus years. ... We don't trust the editorialists of the press anymore, as an institution, and that has implications for the entire American political debate."

IRAQ II: Washington Does Love Hogs

Conservative bloggers are playing up on Club for Growth efforts to punish Blue Dogs for abandoning their pledge to restore fiscal responsibility to Congress by voting for the "outrageous pork projects" laden Iraq supplemental bill:

• The Right Angle's Ivy Sellers: "The Club, a conservative PAC devoted to restoring fiscal responsibility to Congress, also singled out five freshmen who broke their word by voting for the bill: Representatives Nancy Boyda (KS-2); Heath Schuler (NC-11); Nick Lampson (TX-22); Tim Mahoney (FL-22); and Harry Mitchell (AZ-5) all ran on platforms of fiscal responsibility and promised voters they would cut out earmarks, not vote them in.
• RedState's Adam C: "Hopefully Club for Growth will run issue ads pointing out their promises and how quickly they became comfortable in the DC pork culture."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: At Some Point You Might Just Try Governing For A Change

Commenting on Washington Postreports that Karl Rove spoke with political GSA appointees about ways to help GOP candidates, Matthew Yglesias comments:

The irony in all this, at some level, is that if the Bush administration had spent less time thinking about ways to abuse their power for electoral gain and more time thinking about ways to govern the country in a non-disastrous manner, they probably would have done much better in the midterms. At some level, there's no substitute for knowing how to do your job properly.

The Washington MonthlyKevin Drum reminds readers the John DiIulio had similar thoughts over four years ago

LEST WE FORGET: From Starbucks, With Love

BlogAdsHenry Copeland points us to a Starbucks employee rant that moved from Craigslist to the Starbuck's gossip blog. The barista's complaints include:

• We are not your friends. We are usually not your neighbors. In most cases, we absolutely loathe you.
• Oh, you work from home? We are not your water-cooler break.
• SKIM MILK is the same as NONFAT MILK. Do not order a "skim nonfat latte" - it's redundant.
• If you are yapping away on your cell phone when you get up to the counter, TELL THE PERSON ON THE OTHER END TO HOLD ON. Do not try to communicate what you want by hand gestures. Do not stare at me blankly - YOU approached ME.
• If you order a Frappuccino, I will hate you even more.
• Order by the names on the menu, because I've had people ask for a "medium coffee" and get inexplicably pissed off when I give them a grande. Which is a medium coffee. If you eat at McDonald's, you put a "Mc" in front of just about everything - get the f**k over yourself and get used to it.
• When you order "three shots of espresso, over ice, in a venti cup, extra ice" - WE KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING. You're stealing.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:41 PM

March 23, 2007

3/23: Spin Cycle

Even though nobody is happy with the Iraq war supplemental funding bill, the netroots are determined to portray its passage as a win for progressives since it represents a "first step ... to get the U.S. out of Iraq." The netoots are determined to amplify MSM headlines like US Democrats press deadline for Iraq pullout so they can win "the message war," "hold the White House and Congress," and make this war history.

Although it has been "an extremely trying experience" for progressives to submit to this compromise, one must wonder what further compromises they'll make when it comes to their WH '08ers. Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) recently told CNN: "Well, first of all, I don't know anybody who's been talking about packing up and going home. I think that there is room for providing logistical training, counter-terrorism support for Iraqis if they have met various benchmarks that would allow our -- our assistance to be effective." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) has been criticized for similar comments. As the primaries draw near, what will an netroots-acceptable WH '08er position on Iraq look like? Have Obama and Clinton already passed that bar?

IRAQ: All About '08

At about the same that "key House liberals" Reps. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Lynne Woolsey (D-CA), and Maxine Waters (D-CA) announced they would "not stand in the way" of the House Dem Leadership's current Iraq war funding supplemental, an overwhelming majority of left blog traffic leaders threw their, at best tepid, support behind the measure. Those urging progressives to support the bill include:

• MyDD's Chris Bowers: "I arrived at my position because, in my final analysis, I believed the politics of the situation demanded it. ... Republicans have to be the ones who hold this bill up, and / or fail to implement it, not Democrats and not progs. If the war will continue either way, then it must be clear that it was their decision to continue it, not ours.
• DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas: "I'm actually quite proud of the progressive caucus -- it's time House progressives start flexing their muscles a little. And the concessions they've won are important ones."
• Atrios: "Democrats being in the majority makes life a bit more difficult for people like me. ... It isn't perfect, but the choice isn't between nothing and a pony, it's between nothing and this. From what I understand Pelosi has called in every chip she has (and thrown some elbows) for the Bill. Whatever its imperfections, it's better than the realistic alternative. Let's hope it passes."
• VoteVets.org co-founder Jon Soltz at The Huffington Post: "To be sure, the legislation is not perfect.But, while not perfect, the legislation being offered is clearly a compromise that opposes President Bush's "stay the course on steroids" policy. It is not the end all, be all, but a significant first step in bringing about what the American people, Generals, the Iraq Study Group, and the troops want - a change of direction in Iraq, focused on disengaging troops from the Iraqi civil war."
• AMERICAblog's AJ in DC: "The bill isn't perfect. It isn't even great. But it's the right first step. ... This is not a conservative bill and it's not a progressive bill, it's the product of what I can only imagine were herculean efforts by Pelosi, Rahm, and others to corral a variety of opinions and constituencies behind a very public statement that President Bush is mismanaging the war and it needs to come to a close."
• Firedoglake's Jane Hamsher: "While it's hard to justify giving Bush another penny for his illegal and immoral war, I'm surprised at the glee I feel knowing that Nancy Pelosi got the votes to finally beat George Bush on an Iraq vote at a time when the abuse of power makes the most paranoid amongst us look rational. Let's hope this is a first step toward restoring some kind of sanity."

Many on the left justified their support for a less than ideal by calling it a 'first step.' For some, the bill is a step to future votes on legislation's more resembling Rep. John Murtha's (D-PA) "recent plan requiring that all troops be properly rested, trained and equipped before being sent to Iraq."

For most, however, the bill is part of a larger effort to keep "the fault of this war and its mismanagement firmly on GOP shoulders" as Dems try and take the WH and strengthen their control over the Senate. MyDD's Bowers says progressive "won this fight" since the bill will eventually get defeated anyway and progressives get "headlines showing Democrats trying to end the war, but being thwarted by Republicans."

Markos was the most forthright about why he supported the bill, linking to "headlines the Supplemental is generating" and commenting: "Few care about the details. The message being sent is that Democrats want out, Republicans want more Americans to die in Iraq." Kos continues: "That is the clear distinction we need heading into 2008. Voters will then decide which they prefer -- pullout or escalation. And when we win that battle and hold the White House and Congress, this war is history. So the particular of the bills matter little. So we use this as part of the message war."

Dissenters could still be found. Netroots backed '06 candidate Gary Trauner (D-WY) blogs at Daily Kos: "This is Congress' chance to show the American people that they have the courage to hold others accountable, and that they have the intestinal fortitude to do the right thing regardless of political calculation." Others, like Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat, took on Kos' "But ultimately, it matters little. Bush will veto it, just like he'd veto a "tougher" bill." arguments more directly:

But what bill will Bush see? The Senate now starts from a weak baseline - and McConnell has the filibuster power. What bill will Bush see? If he sees any bill, it will certainly be even weaker than this bill. Then Bush starts to negotiate. Markos thinks this is the end of the concessions. It is only the beginning of the "compromises." See what Kos is saying, the war does not end until 2009. He thinks that is something to celebrate. Obviously I do not.

BTD then turns to Kos' arguments that the bill is good for Dems in terms of '08: "But just as importantly, Kos assumes that the politics will play favorably for a craven Dem Congress that did next to nothing to end the war. Where will the GOP nomine be then on Iraq? This is a bad business policy wise and politically. I think Kos is too clever by half on this."

IRAQ II: They Say 'Butter' Like It's A Bad Thing

Conservative bloggers are playing up MSM reports on Dem efforts to secure votes for the bill "with billions of dollars for parochial projects." Instapundit comments: "Isn't it interesting that the Democrats -- who ran on an anti-corruption, anti-war platform -- now offer us a porked-up supplemental to fund the Iraq war?"

AmSpec Blog's John Tabin points readers to the Washington Post's "spot-on editorial" titled: "Retreat and Butter: Are Democrats in the House voting for farm subsidies or withdrawal from Iraq?" Gateway Pundit adds: "Holy, Honey Baked Ham! Democrats are out buying votes to lose a war. Honestly, could there be anything more disgusting."

But all is not well in GOP land either, The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez reports some "porkbusting types" are chaffing at House GOP debate time allotment that only allows leadership and Apps. Cmte. members time to speak. More worried about developments in Iraq, Instapundit links to reports conservative blog favorite/Iraq was reporter Michael Yon might be kicked out of Iraq. Instapundit comments: "Jeez. Can somebody at the Pentagon or White House with a clue intervene here?"

CLINTON: They Really, Really, Don't Like Her

TAPPED made their "debate over Hillary Clinton" available to non-subscribers just in time for Mark Schmitt to tell readers his beef is not with HRC, but with her "very influential and multiply employed" pollster Mark Penn. The rest of the TAPPED contributors though, seem to have plenty of beef with Clinton."

• Sam Rosenfeld: ""nobody is entitled to a presidential nomination on account of unfair treatment at the hands of scoundrels, and liberals should avoid the danger of judging Clinton's political maneuvers and struggles from her perspective rather than from the perspective of what's best for liberalism ... Clinton's new dissembling, on an issue where the record is so clear, fits a pattern: Not only is she not much of a liberal, she actually seems determined to insult liberals' intelligence."
• Matthew Yglesias: "Liberal Democrats should want a nominee who is, in fact, a liberal. ... Clinton, however, is a moderate who people think is a liberal. This is a terrible combination of qualities from almost every point of view -- except, perhaps, for the faction of her advisers whose views are probably too right-wing to be associated with the Democratic presidential nominee, unless they can latch onto the one candidate both blessed and cursed with an undeserved reputation for liberalism. Well, bully for them. But liberals should open their eyes."

EDWARDS: Go Get 'Em, Elizabeth!

Reaction to Elizabeth and John Edwards announcement that the family intends to stay on the campaign trail while fighting the return of Elizabeth's cancer drew wide support and admiration from bloggers everywhere. Three time cancer survivor Jane Hamsher of firedoglake explains why she "fully understand[s] why Elizabeth made the decision she did." Hamsher blogs: "Even though Christy, Marcy, Pach, Swopa, Jeralyn and Arianna practically had to prop me up and my brainpower was marginal when I was in DC, I was at the Libby trial. Every. Single. Day. I needed to know, for myself, that even though accommodations had to be made, I was still living my life on my terms."

TAPPED's Scott Lemieux described the choice as "entirely beyond criticism" and offers "good luck to them both." Daily Kos diarist nyceve was a bit more effusive his/her praise in the most commented on diary on the subject: "I honestly and sadly ask myself, do we deserve John Edwards, a man of such compelling decency leading us and our beleaguered nation? Are we worthy of him and Elizabeth? Will the American people sacrifice for them as they are sacrificing for us?"

Townhall's Dean Barnett's post sharing his own struggle with progressive illness was by far the most linked to conservative blog item on the story: "Through the years, I've come to view serious and progressive illness as an ever constricting circle with oneself at the center. The interior of the circle represents the contents of one's life. As the circle gets smaller, things that were inside get forced out. ... he Edwards have begun their own journey of that sort. Whether they still find presidential politics at the center of their lives a few months from now is an open question. Regardless, the journey is theirs, and one would have a heart of stone to wish them anything other than good luck and Godspeed."

OBAMA: First They Came For Fox News ...

A letter from Barack Obama's pastor Jeremiah Wright to the New York TimesJodi Kantor is beginning to circulate around lefty blogs. Skeptical Brotha posts the letter including:

Jodi, out of two hours of conversation I spent approximately five to seven minutes on Barack's taking advice from one of his trusted campaign people and deeming it unwise to make me the media spotlight on the day of his announcing his candidacy for the Presidency and what do you print? You and your editor proceeded to present to the general public a snippet, a printed "sound byte" and a titillating and tantalizing article about his disinviting me to the Invocation on the day of his announcing his candidacy.

I have never been exposed to that kind of duplicitous behavior before, and I want to write you publicly to let you know that I do not approve of it and will not be party to any further smearing of the name, the reputation, the integrity or the character of perhaps this nation's first (and maybe even only) honest candidate offering himself for public service as the person to occupy the Oval Office

MyDD's Matt Stoller comments: "The larger context here is twofold. There's a lot of anger among black leaders in this country over Barack Obama because he isn't showing enough deference to their place in the political system. At the same time, this leadership is struggling to remain relevant in the face of a serious disconnect between younger African-Americans and an older generation."

Stoller concludes: "Normally I'd say that there is something to the rumor that Obama rubbed his pastor the wrong way, but this letter is incredibly passionate about the New York Times. It is not a non-denial denial, it is an aggressive statement that the NYT made up this story. The sensationalism of the New York Times and political journalism has been so pronounced for so long that the newspaper no longer has the credibility to do reporting like this and get away with it."

BROWNBACK: The Yellow-Brick Road Does Not Go Through Manchester

Blog P.I.'s Bill Beutler details his amusement with Sam Brownback's "Brownback on the Blogs" box that features only two quotes since "most of the Brownback commentary I've seen could be most favorably described as disappointed."

Beutler further notes that one of the blog currently cite, Thurrock Tory, is actually from England. Beutler comments: "That Aker's website is relatively obscure is no problem - most bloggers' are. ... But when your biggest online supporter comes from across the pond, well, that's a little different. And actually, there is another problem. Two paragraphs later, Aker writes: 'I still support Newt Gingrich.'"

GIULIANI: Just Win, Baby!

After blegging for evangelical reader thoughts on Rudy Giuliani's early success with the community, The Brody File shares emails for against the ex-NYC Mayor:

• For: "Giuliani does not offend me at all even though I know I differ extremely with him on social issues. Christians may need to consider the BIG PICTURE and realize the consequences of NOT WINNING the next election. ... As long as we get the right judges appointed I don't believe turning things back over to the states is a bad idea and one that would work. After all, which democrat will even try to save us from radical Islam? There is also a big problem brewing against ISRAEL and we cannot let the US forsake them at this time."
• Against: "Rudy used the name Reagan some 21 times in his CPAC speech, and God a number of times in his speeches to Religious Conservatives. He is reading what he is told will go over well with whatever crowd he is speaking to. Have you ever heard him reference Jesus outside of said group?"

Back in IA, Krusty Konservative shares polling data from a Giuliani mailing that went out statewide. KK comments: "Everyone, including Iowa's conservative activist, likes to support a winner. Information like this is always good to send out in the mail. What I find interesting is McCain's strength in the early contest states. McCain polled well in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Michigan. He needs to do well in those states, because it looks like Rudy is primed to do well on Super Duper Tuesday."

Finally, The Bivings Report gives "low marks" for Team Giuliani's official website "at this point."

ROMNEY: An Infomercial That Doesn't End

Hugh Hewitt hosted a bloggers conference/book sales call 3/22 about "A Mormon in the White House?". Those with posts on the proceedings include:

• My Man Mitt: "I asked whether or not a larger debate and dialogue is necessary outside the campaign to relieve the concerns (legitimate or otherwise) that people have about Mormonism. ... Hugh believes it would be a good thing and notes that it has already started. The appendix of his books is a transcript of a dialogue he had between two prominent theologians. Get the book and read it... it's very instructive.
• Townhall's Matt Lewis: "My last question to Hugh had to do with the importance he places on Romney's intelligence. I argued that if intelligence were so important, Jimmy Carter would have been a "great" President. ... Hugh agreed that intelligence isn't the only thing that matters. He went on to add, though, that the the issues we face today have made it more important than ever to have a president who is intellectually curious, and understands complex issues."
• Ankle Biting Pundit's Patrick Hynes: "I work for McCain, so take whatever I say with the usual grain of salt. You all know how I feel about Mitt Romney and I don't think he's going to win. That said, if he's the nominee, you all know I'll back him."
• Captain's Quarters on whether John McCain will get any credit for backing away from amnesty: "Hugh, whose book on Romney was the main topic of conversation, disagreed with me on this point, saying that the flip-flop meme was more of a commentariat artifact than a real concern for voters. The Republicans certainly used it to great effect in 2004 on John Kerry, however, making him appear (rightly) as indecisive and inconsistent."

For some, however, Hewitt's book tour is wearing thin. AmSpec Blog's Hunter baker writes: "I'm turning into a full-time Hewitt critic, but as someone who has often enjoyed reading his blog in the past, I simply can't take the continuing infomercial quality of his endorsement of Mitt Romney and the way every conversation comes back to Romney somehow. ... It's become like a verbal tic. Hewitt mentions Romney when ordering dinner these days."

In more positive Romney blogging, IA's Krusty Konservative congratulates Mitt on the hiring of ex-IA Christian Alliance Dir. of Outreach Joe Earle. KK comments: "Romney's Iowa campaign needed a Christian conservative organizer on their campaign. Earle's job is no easy task, but his rolodex and contacts he has created by working with the ICA is priceless."

Also, Jason from Race4 '08 links to a Romney release on mandatory union dues and blogs: "One of things that distinguishes Romney from other candidates is that he has already begun to lay out concrete positions. Most of the other candidates are resting on the stilt legs of name recognition and image, with no sign of where they stand on important issues. Romney knows the presidential race needs to be raised to the level where policy initiatives are put forth and discussed at length, thus pushing our country in a better direction."

THOMPSON: No 'Road to Des Moines' Convert

AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein hits back against pro-Romney blog claims that Fred Thompson ran as a "pro-choicer" during his two TN SEN victories. Klein tracked down National Right to Life exec. co-dir. Darla St. Martin who shared: "I interviewed him and on all of the questions I asked him, he opposed abortion."

NY Sun's Ryan Sager breaks down Thompson's strengths and weaknesses, first arguing the Thompson's entry hurts Romney the most: "Mr. Thompson is pro-life, pro-gun, anti-gay marriage, and anti-tax - like Mr. Romney. But he has one advantage over the former governor: He didn't just come to these positions over the last year or so, in a "Road to Des Moines" conversion."

On his weaknesses, Sager includes: "First ... He is, after all, a close friend of Mr. McCain's. ... Second, he doesn't have a particularly distinguished legislative record. ... Third, while Mr. Thompson has an actor's flair for talking plain and talking tough, it's not entirely clear what qualifies him to lead a nation at war with worldwide Islamic fundamentalism."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: The Real YouTube Losers?

Bush '04 eCampaign Director Michael Turk of Kung Fu Quip worries that GOP-tech-trepidation will be the lasting fallout from the "Hillary 1984" video:

The real impact will be felt in the Republican party, and for our guys, it's not good.
At this moment, there are a bunch of Communications guys in GOP campaigns and consultancies who are using this as justification to avoid doing anything interesting on the web. They're pointing to the 1984 ad as evidence that doing anything that isn't "strictly on message" is inherently bad. They're going to use this to reinforce their position that the Internet is simply too wild, too hard to control, and has no place in their well oiled machine. ... So ParkRidge47, despite what you may hear on the news for the next few days, is not a rogue operative who as done damage to Hillary or Barack. He ultimately will be seen as a hero to Democrats, because he will have kept the GOP from realizing the potential of the Internet for a little while longer.

LEST WE FORGET: WH Aides As Fashion Accessories

Linking to reports that the WH may be "pointing the finger at former White House counsel Harriet Miers" for the Prosecutor Purge Fanatical Apathy's Adam Felber blogs: "Is Harriet Miers poised to take the fall for Karl Rove? How many human shields does that guy get? Maybe that's why he often looks fat to me - he's actually wearing actual staffers under his suit! Think about it. It's what we've all known all along but haven't dared suggest."

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:48 PM

March 22, 2007

3/22: There's A What Going On In Iraq?

As Ned Lamont's Dem primary victory over Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) showed, Iraq drove the netroots in '06. But as a vote to continue funding the war looms for 3/23, the issue has taken a back seat to the prosecutor purge story. Sure there is somedebate over whether progressives should support the resolution. But on the heavy-hitternetroots sites, posting is 90% about the fired attys. Will the netroots bring their force to bear on wayward Dems in heavily Dem districts that are wavering on the supplemental?

OBAMA: Against Disngenuousness

Phil de Vellis showed he harbored no ill will to The Huffington Post for fingering him as the creator of "Vote Different" ad featuring Hillary Clinton as Big Brother by blogging at HuffPo: "Hi. I'm Phil. I did it. And I'm proud of it."

de Vellis continues: "I made the "Vote Different" ad because I wanted to express my feelings about the Democratic primary, and because I wanted to show that an individual citizen can affect the process. ... I made the ad on a Sunday afternoon in my apartment using my personal equipment (a Mac and some software), uploaded it to YouTube, and sent links around to blogs. ... The specific point of the ad was that Obama represents a new kind of politics, and that Senator Clinton's "conversation" is disingenuous. ... This ad was not the first citizen ad, and it will not be the last. The game has changed."

Fellow HuffPoster Martin Lewis didn't let off the hook so easy: "How many times does this need to be said to well-intentioned but utterly misguided Democrats. You do this kind of thing and you do NOT help the party. Ultimately you HURT the party. ... Vigorous debate about the merits of the candidates - absolutely. ... But using your undoubted skills to make a piece like this just plays into the Faux News hands and into the hands of green-eyed agitators such as Chris Matthews who slaver over any opportunity to kick a Clinton. And by extension Democrats."

At MyDD, Jerome Armstrong is not happy de Vellis' employer Blue State Digital (a vendor for Obama) made a point of firing him: "Phil blogged on Huff Post that he "resigned"; but Thomas Gensemer (who I vaguely know) goes out of his way to claim that Blue State Digital "terminated" De Vellis. I guess the guys at BSD thought they needed to offer up Phil's head to the Obama campaign. ... I know the founders of Blue State Digital, and this was a petty move on their part."

PROSECUTOR PURGE: Endless Rabbit Holes Wanted

The longer the netroots examine facts surrounding the recent firing of eight US attys, the more nefarious explanations they create. The latest developments include:

• Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall: "The president fired US Attorneys to stymie investigations of Republicans and punish US attorneys who didn't harass Democrats with bogus voter fraud prosecutions. In the former instance, the evidence remains circumstantial. But in the latter the evidence is clear, overwhelming and undeniable."
• Think Progress on connections between ex-USA Carol Lam's investigation of ex-Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA) and VP Dick Cheney: "To recap, the White House awarded a one-month, $140,000 contract to an individual who never held a federal contract. Two weeks after he got paid, that same contractor used a cashier's check for exactly that amount to buy a boat for a now-imprisoned congressman at a price that the congressman had pre-negotiated."
• firedoglake's Christy Hardin Smith on swing state nature of where each prosecutor was from: "6 of the attorneys come from states that are not completely red or blue. The other 2 are from the country's largest state and a major source of campaign contributions California. Coincidence? I think not. And the USAs from California? Contemplate, just for a moment, what an electoral prize CA would be in the upcoming 2008 election."
• Daily Kos' BobcatJH on the "hidden scandal" within the larger one: "If you couple the president's obvious distrust of e-mail communications with the fact that both he and other top officials don't use e-mail, a picture begins to emerge. When you add to these facts the notion that other administration officials are conducting official business using unofficial e-mail addresses, the picture becomes clearer. ... when they're conducting our business, their communications should be subject to our oversight. Anything short of that, anything that attempts to either cloud or circumvent the transparency that lies at the heart of our democracy is, quite simply, un-American."
• Blue Hampshire's Dean on phone-jammer James Tobin's conviction being overturned: "Unbelievable scandal convergence today on the phone-jamming saga. ... I'm not a lawyer, but to me, that sounds like the prosecutor messed up. Accidentally on purpose? I wouldn't make light of it if this didn't come right on the heels of the NHDP pressing for a new investigation into why it took sooo long for the Justice Dept. to pursue indicting Tobin."

Matthew Yglesias explains can and should force top WH aides to testify: "Congress has requested the presence of some aides in order to look into (a) some apparent lying to congress, which is illegal and (b) appropriate legislative fixes for the institutional setup that let the purge happen in the first place. Bush has denied that request. The next step is for congress to subpoena those witnesses. ... There's no political reason for congress not to use its legal powers to their full extent; the recent drop in congressional approval ratings is primarily driven by Democrats disgruntled by a lack of boldness."

Also hoping Dems retain their resolve, MyDD's Jonathan Singer links to Jonathan Alter on Countdown telling Keith Olbermann that FDR allowed Congress to grill his aides about the New Deal. Firedoglake's Jane Hamsher tackles suggestions that Bush may want a fight over this scandal to draw away from other investigations: "The Carol Lam firing has the potential to be an endless rabbit hole that could lead to both Cornyn and DeLay, and it's no surprise that both are openly encouraging the petulant Boy King to be obstreperous, obstructionist and bellicose when it comes to dealing with Congressional subpoenas. ... I frankly don't think they fear anything more than this."

Finally, TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent posts text of a DCCC radio ad attacking Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM) on "her role in the Attorney Purge." Sargent reports: "The ad will be running during drive time for the next five days."

PROSECUTOR PURGE II: An Unpopularity Contest

AG Alberto Gonzales is still receiving no support among conservative bloggers, however many do hope the WH does continues publicly battling a "uniquely unpopular" Dem Congress. Instapundit thinks the "showdown" will "fire up" Bush's base and reminds readers "Congress is polling even worse than he is." Townhall's Dean Barnett adds: "The president also understands that the American public is predisposed to dislike Congress. What's more, this Congress, once its true colors show, will be uniquely unpopular. ... So why not pick a fight with Congress? Drag the bloody affair out."

Hugh Hewitt explains to "lefties" who "are e-mailing" him quotes about exec. privilege from the Clinton years why this scandal is different: "What the lefties don't seem to realize is that U.S. v. Nixon concerned claims of executive privilege made against demands for evidence in a criminal proceeding, and that Clinton's many executive privilege claims --including novel ones such as the claim that Secret Service agents could not be questioned were also made and defeated in the context of a criminal investigation."

Also at Townhall, Mary Katharine Ham takes a min. position, arguing "I'm not sure dragging this out makes Democrats look that bad. .... Unfortunately for Bush, there have been too many complicated scandals (some legit, most not) pinned on him successfully, partially due to bad damage control at the White House, to suddenly convince people this is just a partisan witch-hunt, I think. ... This skirmish also moves us away from the spectacle of the Democrats constantly swinging, missing, and making their defeatism explicit on the Iraq issue."

Whatever their opinion on exec. privilege, calls for Gonzales' resignation are growing. Unhappy that Bush failed to explain why he fired the attorneys, The Corner's Larry Kudlow suggests: "Mr. Gonzales ought to be replaced by an eminent law school dean or college president-someone with enormous credibility and respect."

IRAQ: At Least The Bloggers Are Keeping It Civil

TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent reports the "behind-the-scenes brinkmanship" among Dems "really is on full boil right now, with tensions running excruciatingly high." Sargent adds: "The House Dem leadership has simply ceased reaching out to three of the leading liberals opposed to the bill -- Reps. Lynne Woolsey, Barbara Lee, and Maxine Waters 'because they're lost causes.' Meanwhile, Reps. Dennis Kucinich and John Lewis, the Civil Rights icon, are "beyond gone," a third source says, meaning there's no hope of winning them over.

Sargent's source adds: "None of them wants to be the one making a deal with 'the man.' None of them wants to be outflanked on the left. None of them wants to be 'outprincipled' -- being seen as the one who is willing to compromise."

Reminding readers of his "experience as an operative on Capitol Hill for a progressive caucus member, as a strategist on the campaign trail, and as a committed member of the progressive movement, who has been using all of my resources to end the war as precipitously as possible" David Sirota explains why progressives must vote for leadership's Iraq war appropriation: "The Iraq supplemental bill begins redeploying troops by March 2008, and completes a full withdrawal by September 2008. You can label the bill anything you like. For all I care, you can label it the Iraq War Indefinite Continuation Act and Fox News can run slick graphics cheering on the legislation as the greatest escalation of militarism since Genghis Khan. But as long as that language is in there and the bill passes, then at the end of the day, real, binding power has been wielded to end the war."

First, saying he considers Sirota "a good friend and a good progressive," Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat responds: "The bill does NOT "complete[] a full withdrawal by September 2008." This is false. The bill funds through September 2008 and on that date, in THE REAL CONGRESS THAT EXISTS TODAY, ADDITIONAL FUNDING will be voted "FOR THE TROOPS" two months before an election. Only wishful thinking can imagine anything else happening. This bill is a complete and utter failure. It does nothing to stop the war. It is why PRAGMATISTS and PROGRESSIVES who want the war to end MUST vote against it."

Helping to whip the vote, Calitics urges readers in Rep. Jane Harman's (D-CA) district to call and urge her to support the bill. Working GOPers, Daily Kos' Kagro X highlights local netrooters in district of "Republican troop haters" who "voted (unanimously) in the Appropriations committee last week to continue to send troops to Iraq before they're combat ready and fully equipped."

On the right, RedState's Insider wonders if Blue Dogs are looking forward to campaign ads attacking their vote "for the Moveon.org military strategy in exchange for pork." Insider goes on to urge readers to get their congressman to sign a discharge petition that "simply fund[s] the troops and the mission - no strings, no pork and no Moveon.org interference in military strategy." Insider explains: "If the discharge petition gets 218 signatures, the bill automatically comes to the floor for consideration."

Also at RedStateRob Bluey links to a letter sent to cong. leadership 3/20 urging them "to strip patently unconstitutional provisions "designed to tie the President's hands" from pending supplemental appropriations bills." Bluey adds: "The letter is signed by a dozen lawyers and law professors specializing in the Constitution and national security -- most notably former U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese, who served under President Reagan and now works at the Heritage Foundation."

CLINTON: Less Liberal Than Kucinich

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas observation that, "it is amazing, however, to witness a presidential race where being the white male candidate appears to be a disadvantage" set off a flurry of Hillary Clinton related speculation at TAPPED 3/21. Ezra Klein and Garance Franke-Ruta ended their exchange with these thoughts:

• Klein: "I think that Hillary is uniquely incapable of sparking progressive change in this country, and she should be clear-eyed enough to understand that. Her past failures on health care render her singularly unable to achieve comprehensive reform, her reputation as a liberal forces a more ostentatious centrism than anyone else would have to project, and she's overwhelmingly polarizing at a time when the country could use a drawdown in partisan hostilities. And that doesn't even get into my ideological disagreements with her. ... So let me ask Garance this, because I believe it's the nub of our disagreement: Do you think Hillary is more or less liberal than the other frontrunners, and do you think the narratives from her past in any way constrain her ability to, say, reform the country's health care system?
• Franke-Ruta: "So, no, I agree Clinton is not the most liberal candidate running -- Dennis Kucinich is -- or even the most liberal of the top three (that appears to be Obama). I'm with Matt in being cynical about any Democrat's ability to achieve major domestic policy reforms during the 2009-2012 term, so, with all due respect, [I] don't particularly think the question of who can best put together a universal health insurance reform package ought to primary.

GORE: J-Pod Hearts Boxer

Al Gore's testimony before the Senate's Env. and Public Works Cmt. 3/21 set off a largely predictable round of calls for Gore to "Jump In The Race." In less predictable blogging about the hearings, John Podhoretz takes Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) to task for his "boorish" questioning: "My fellow conservatives are going crazy with this clip of California's Democratic Senator, Barbara Boxer, having a tussle with Oklahoma's Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe. The thing is that Inhofe was behaving boorishly toward Gore during his questioning. He'd ask questions, Gore would answer them and then Inhofe would whine that Gore was eating up Inhofe's time. It was very discomfiting, and Boxer was in the right to bust him on it."

GIULIANI: Helping Bring People To Jesus

Speculation continues on whether evangelicals will accept Rudy Giuliani as the GOP nom. A Daily Chaser highlights Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission pres. Richard Land recent "beating up" of Giuliani on his marriage: "How can we believe him? He promised two wives that he would love, honor and cherish and be faithful only unto her until 'death us do part.' And twice he lied to his wife-twice. He broke his marital vows. That gets to the basic issue of trust, the basic issue of character."

The Brody File, meanwhile, unearths a Giuliani quote from an address to The "Billion Soul" Pastors' Conference in '06: "I can't tell you how much I appreciate what you are doing, and if any of these lessons help at all in saving people and helping people and bringing them to Jesus and bringing them to God, you've done me a great favor." Brody comments: "I know, I know. I can see the emails already. Something like, "It's just words, what about action! Hey, my guess is there are some closet Evangelical Rudy Giuliani fans out there."

Race4 '08 interviewed Rudy Giuliani Sr. Com. Adv. Mike McKeon, including:

• R408: What drew you to Mayor Giuliani's campaign?
• MM: I've known Rudy and his team for a long time. We worked very closely together during 9/11 when I worked for Gov. Pataki, so I've seen Rudy in action up close at a time that was of critical importance to our country. So I came to have a great deal of respect for the job he did at the time.

ROMNEY: All '08ers Should Have Friends Like This

Hugh Hewitt continues to promote his pro-Mitt Romney book "A Mormon in the White House," this time with a competition looking for the best YouTube to promote the book. The first entry has arrived.

THOMPSON: Ever Get The Feeling GOPers Want A President Who Can Speak English?

The Fred Thompson/conservative blogger love fest continues unabated. RedState's Hunter Baker asks, "What is that makes Thompson so attractive?" and then answers: "First, there's the negative case for the other main candidates from a conservative point of view. ... Second, there's the positive case for Thompson ... We have seen the War on Terror and President Bush's other policies seriously threatened by his weakness in political communication. If we have someone out there who is a legitimate conservative, has experience at the highest levels of government, and is a top drawer political communicator, then that is the person we need. Fred Thompson, yes, like Reagan, is the kind of candidate who can appeal directly to the people."

SENATE '08: BlogoMetrics

DSCC chair Chuck Schumer (NY) posted a diary at Daily Kos about his belief "the netroots can play an important part in - recruiting for the 2008 Senate races." After reviewing the role bloggers played in electing Sens. Jim Webb (D-VA) and Jon Tester (D-MT), Schumer asks for their help again:

Netroots support is a key metric the DSCC uses to determine the viability of any given candidate. And the importance of netroots support is often larger in the early stages of an election cycle. ... So please make your suggestions and recommendations in the comments below. I've also asked my staff to create a section on our Web site that you can use to recommend Democratic candidates after today. Let's harness the power of the netroots to find the candidates that we need to expand our majority.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Grass Growing Left

Commenting on the role grassroots played in ending Fox News sponsorship of a NV Dem WH '08 debate, MyDD's Chris Bowers writes:

For too long on the progressive side, the small donor, the political news junkie, the local precinct captain, the community organizer, the rank and file advocacy organization member, and the junior staffer were generally ignored by a top-down establishment obsessed with only and always targeting the elusive, mushy "swing."
Creating of a large apparatus both willing and capable of preaching to "the choir" (or, if you prefer, the progressive, activist working class) 24/7 has not been a bad thing for progressives. It is, instead, a key element to any successful, long-term, modern political machinery that progressives had been lacking for some time. Without it, all of the ways in which the netroots have aided progressives over the past few years would have never come to pass. The neoliberals, the Blue Dogs, the DLC-nexus, the disciples of triangulation--none of these groups were capable of harnessing, much less willing to even talk in a friendly manner with, the activist working class. It was necessary for other elements in the progressive ecosystem to undertake that important and oft-ignored job.

LEST WE FORGET: Jim Valvano Was Not President Of The United States

Linking to a site cataloging "silly childhood beliefs" Townhall's Mary Katharine Ham shares: "I used to believe that Jim Valvano was the president of the United States because he was on TV so much more than Reagan in North Carolina circa 1983. ... And, I used to believe that "argyle" meant "uncomfortable" because I had one really uncomfortable pair of socks that happened to be argyle. So, when my parents told me to put on my argyle socks, I figured they were referring to the overwhelming aggravation factor, not the overwhelming pattern."

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:47 PM

March 21, 2007

3/21: They're Going To The Mats On This One

So far the biggest netroots find in the latest prosecutor doucument dump is what's not there: an 18-day gap between emails. First noticed by a Talking Points Memo commenter, netroots heavyhitters are tying the gap into the larger House Dem struggle to get senior WH aides to testify under oath. While some on the right may say Dems are letting investigations get in the way of the main reason voters gave them control of Congress (Iraq), the netroots aren't having any of it. From firedoglake: "Of course, whenever the threat of Democratic "overreach" is brought up, it is natural to compare it to Republican investigative overreach during the Clinton administration, and how that supposedly soured the public on the GOP. ... The Democrats are investigating the Bush administration for real, honest-to-God serious crimes, like outing a covert operative, and using the Justice Department as a partisan sword and shield. That is oversight, not overreach - and it's about bloody time."

PROSECUTOR PURGE: Game On!

Surprise! Both progressive and conservative sides of the blogosphere hope their respective parties don't give an inch in the upcoming "Constitutional confrontation" between Congressional Dems and Pres. Bush over requiring top WH aides to testify under oath. From the left:

• The Left Coaster's Steve Soto: "The issue of our times, indeed the issue for the modern Democratic Party is whether or not this group of Democratic leaders has the stomach to wage that fight even if they lose. It is not a partisan issue: legislative branch prerogatives hang in the balance here because the Congress will be eviscerated if this fight is not waged now. If the Democrats fail to force this issue now, their entire ability to oversee this administration and provide any kind of check and balance will evaporate."
• The Reality Based Community: "There will be calls for negotiation and compromise. They should be rejected. The Congress need not, and should not, compromise its capacity to carry out its core functions. And this White House has certainly earned no particular comity. ... This is a confrontation Mr. Bush and his cronies cannot win."
• Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat: "But if this to be fought in the court, it'll end up in the Supreme Court. ... What is the state of the law on this issue? ... Short version - it won't be decided by law. It will be the politics of this that decides it. To wit - who ever loses the political battle with the American People will give in the most. Right now, the Dems have a great hand to play. Let's hope they don't screw it up."
• DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas: "this story dead by having Gonzales resign, but his petulance ensures this story goes strong into this coming cycle."

While some on the right were not impressed with Bush's performance, many National Review Online readers liked what they saw: "Good press conference by Bush, he finally got mad. He was firm, aggressive, and, frankly, pissed off. ... I liked it. Defiant, assertive, and full of vigor. His message to Leahy... Up Yours. Good Stuff."

Many on the right welcomed a battle over investigations with cong. Dems, many citing new Gallup poll data showing public approval of Congress is down:

• Captain's Quarters: "In a way, this kerfuffle has provided an interesting distraction from the Democrats' other promised investigations. ... Instead of just making the point that the administration allowed political hacks to run wild at Justice and embarrass the White House for a while, the Democrats have turned it into an issue that has overshadowed all others -- and has deprioritized their ever-changing efforts to end the Iraq war."
• RCP Blog's John McIntyre: "Any effort by Chuck Schumer and John Conyers to lead a protracted fight against the White House will pretty quickly deteriorate into a partisan brawl, which will actually have the effect of bolstering Bush. ... The President said he hoped the Democrats "don't choose confrontation," but not unlike the Clinton phenomenon in his last two years, confrontation with this Democratic Congress may be just what this ailing President needs...and wants.
• Power Line's John Hinderaker: "Gallup is not alone. Check out all of the polls, collected at Real Clear Politics. The polls consistently show that Congress never got more than a slight bounce when it changed hands in January, and its ratings now are pretty much where they were when the Republicans were in control before the election. I attribute this to the fact that the Democrats have no positive agenda. They patently have no interest in doing the people's business, and, similarly, show no interest in appealing to any element of the electorate other than the hard-core haters who form their base."

PROSECUTOR PURGE II: Seeing The Forest ...

Unsatisfied with the Washington Post's recent breakdown of the scandal, The Left CoasterSteve Soto ably sums up the progressive bill of particulars against the admin.:

The truth still remains that a political hit list was drawn up inside the White House to rank these attorneys on their loyalty to Bush and not on their performance; that the rationale for these firings has changed several times as each reason fell apart under scrutiny; that the list of targets changed due to pressure from Republicans around the country on corruption cases and petty personal backbiting inside Justice; that there was an organized effort from the White House to provide misleading testimony to Congress; that the White House wants to avoid at all costs going under oath on this; and that the AG and his senior aides not only mismanaged the department but were willing participants in the White House's efforts to politicize the federal prosecutors.

Based on these facts, Atrios and MyDD's Matt Stoller are calling for the impeachment of AG Alberto Gonzales. Daily Kos' Miss Laura also wants ethics charges filed against Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM).

Keeping their noses to the 3K page document dump grindstone, Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall credits a TPM commenter for first noting an 18-day gap in the emails turned over by DoJ. Marshall comments on the 11/15/06 to 12/4/06 stretch: "The firing calls went out on December 7th. But the original plan was to start placing the calls on November 15th. So those eighteen days are pretty key ones."

Also plowing through documents, The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum divides "the quality of the stated reasons" for firing the eight fired prosecutors into "strong" "middling" and "weak." Drum adds: "Notice anything unusual about this list? I didn't at first, but it turns out that the five firings with the weakest official explanations are the same five prosecutors who have been suspected of being either too tough on Republican corruption cases or too weak on Democratic ones. You can't very well put that on your summary sheet, though, which probably explains why the DOJies had trouble coming up with good reasons for firing them. The dots are practically begging to be connected here."

On the right, The Corner's Andy McCarthy says in his 18 years as a prosecutor under 6 different US Attorneys "I can't remember a single time when the transition resulted in a major investigation - especially a corruption investigation - being shut down." McCarthy adds: "What I think is most regrettable about this controversy is that the political nature of U.S. attorney appointments (which are virtually always political) is being conflated with the day-to-day work of U.S. attorneys' offices (which is virtually never political). Democrats should take heed."

Power Line's Paul Mirengoff describes the story as "the mother of all employment cases" but The Corner's Ramesh Ponnuru is already looking forward to the next AG: "I just want it to be somebody the president has never met."

DEM FIELD: Obama's Campaign To Lose

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas unveiled his latest WH '08 'cattle call' ranking "where these candidates sit in the race today." Hillary Clinton still sits atop the rankings even though Markos thinks Barack Obama "will win this all by the time votes are counted." Thoughts on the big three plus Bill Richardson include:

• On HRC: "She wussed out on the Fox News debate thing. ... Her campaign's hissy fit over David Geffen betrayed how afraid they are of Obama. A campaign that believed their spin about "inevitability" wouldn't be so twitchy.
• On Obama: "When you are drawing crowds in the five-figures 10 months before the election, you know you've got a special something. However, a disproportionate percentage of his support is from young people. ... Obama's fate will depend, in large part, on 1) how much of this vote turns out, and 2) how effectively Obama can expand into other demographics.
• On John Edwards: "Edwards was the big winner of the Fox News debate mess, showing clear and early leadership pulling out of the propaganda network's attempt at legitimacy. He is also apparently the big winner as Clark looks less and likely to enter the fray. Clark's supporters appear to be gravitating toward Edwards in large numbers."
• On Richardson: "Richardson ended up on the right side of the Nevada Fox News debate, squeezing in his withdrawal right before the whole event imploded, just a couple of days of being the sole candidate to confirm his attendance (the campaign should pay greater heed to their netroots coordinator). So they snapped a little victory from the jaws of a major embarrassment. And Richardson remains the sole candidate to increase his support in every single one of the last six dKos straw polls."

DEM FIELD II: Don't Make Me Pull This Car Over, You Two!

Following the Mark Penn/David Axelrod Kennedy School of Government exchange, Atrios offers some "free campaign advice" to Clinton and Obama: "Every public disagreement, no matter how serious or valid, will be portrayed as CNN is doing it now as a trivial schoolyard "spat." As it is only March, 2007, this gives them many months to infantilize and trivialize you as much as possible. By next year, all the public will know about you is that you are very silly people who have regular temper tantrums about nothing."

CLINTON: Classy Lady

Hillary Clinton is receiving praise for her official and unofficial responses to the "Vote Different" YouTube (ed. note: now viewed by over 1.5 mil users) invoking Macintosh's '1984' ad. Mary from The Left Coaster calls her response "classy" and The Nation's Ari Melber argues she "deserves credit for looking past the horserace to celebrate the promise of Internet politics: meaningful participation, democratization ("more people") and inclusion ("reaching people who otherwise are not at all interested in politics")."

Melber also suggests Team Clinton may " be warming up to Internet activism because their supporters are now striking back online. A new video called "Barack 1984" projects Obama on the Big Brother screen, flush with confidence yet poised to lose, just like his favorite football team. The ad ends with the warning, 'The Bears Lost So Will Obama.'"

Back commenting about the "Hillary 1984" ad, IA Progress argues that the original ads "one people, one will, one resolve, one cause," big brother voice over actually has more in common with Obama's message: "Themes such as unity, and "one people" are actually coming from the Obama campaign."

OBAMA: Get Off My Lawn!

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas calls Stuart Rothenberg a luddite, whom he pictures as "an old crotchety guy screaming at the kids to get off his lawn" for suggesting the "Hillary 1984" ad "won't change any votes and "is unlikely to create or re-make impressions of Senators Clinton or Barack Obama." Kos responds by noting the size of crowds at recent Obama rallies and adds: "Fact is, Obama is generating huge buzz online. And I'm not just talking blogs, I'm talking Face Book, MySpace, and other social networking hangouts. People are organizing hard for Obama, and the results are the largest early crowds since I've been paying attention (I'll let the historians go further back)."

Not responding to kos or Rothenberg, Matthew Yglesias offers a less tech-focussed explanation for Obama's popularity: "There's a long tradition in Democratic primaries of a "fresh face" underdog candidate who's plausibly an alternative to "the establishment" but at the same time not a radical who gets treated very kindly by the press until he gets within striking distance of winning the nomination. This is the Gary Hart story, the Paul Tsongas story, the Howard Dean story. Similarly, Obama's combination of somewhat platitudinous rhetoric about finding pragmatic solutions to domestic problems is a perennial media favorite."

Finally, CaliticsTodd Beeton post "Part I" of his coverage of Obama's 3/17 rally in Oakland, CA, blogging: "As you can see, he was greeted like a rock star. Talk about energy. It was incredible."

OBAMA II: Get Hillary

Some netroots supporters of John Edwards are taking issue with recent Obama references to Edwards as "cute" and "good looking." MyDD's Curt Matlock compares Obama's backhanded compliments to Ann Coulter's recent CPAC appearance writing: "In fact, it's an obvious case of Senator Obama using right-wing, Republican attacks against other Democrats."

MyDD's PsiFighter37 pleads with Edwards' supporters to tone down their rhetoric: "There's a diary on the recommended list about how Obama is allegedly insinuating that Edwards is effeminate, in a manner more subtle than Ann Coulter. I think it's rather ridiculous, and I'm surprised that so many people feel compelled to agree with such a hyperbolic assessment. ... Although I'm an Obama supporter, I'd like to tell both sides that they need to shut up and focus on the common opponent - namely, Hillary Clinton."

BROWNBACK: So Is He The Anti-War Candidate Or Isn't He?

A New York Sun article on Sen. Sam Brownback's (R-KS) vote against Maj. Leader Harry Reid's (D-NV) bill to mandate a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq has Kausfiles and Instapundit wondering if he is "Brownbacksliding" back into the pro-surge camp. Kaus highlights "unprincipled" explanation for the 'change': "He's running for president and '[t]he people who will show up in New Hampshire and Iowa to pick the Republican nominee are victory voters.'"

MCCAIN: 'Suck Up To Everyone Or To No One At All'

For the most, part conservatives are not impressed with New York Times reports on John McCain's "re-thinking his position on immigration" following the feedback he's received from voters on the trail. The Corner's Rich Lowry advises: "If he's going to shift, he might as well make it count. He should adopt enforcement-first, requiring certain enforcement benchmarks and a system of workplace enforcement to be in place before we have a major guest-worker program or a quasi-amnesty."

Ankle Biting Pundits BT is more generous: "At the very least, it's encouraging to see McCain hint at moving away from Sen. Kennedy (D-runk) in some way on immigration reform and towards a bit more conservative view." For fellow ABPer Bull Dog Pundit, McCain's credibility on the issue has already sailed: "Clearly such a reconsideration by McCain of making illegals first go back to their home country would be a huge "flip-flop" on his part, and to argue that it wasn't made solely for political considerations would be foolish. Quite frankly I don't trust him on this issue."

Noting the back and forth between McCain and the Club for Growth, RCP Blog's Tom Bevan argues McCain is "frittering away a chance to work with the Club For Growth to reposition himself as a dynamic supply side conservative." Bevan adds: "A few weeks ago McCain was caught on tape responding to a question about him sucking up to the religious right by saying, "what's wrong with sucking up to everybody?" McCain should take his own advice and either suck up to everyone or to no one at all. Sucking up to social conservatives but stiffing anti-tax conservatives is neither smart nor productive."

Meanwhile, The Brody File revels in being the "Malcom" in the middle of it all.

THOMPSON: Better Communicator Than the Current President

It was "Our Readers Love Fred Thompson Day" at The Corner 3/20. Posted emails include:

• I think Thompson could hope to be in this race: Stylistically like the McCain of 2000 (straight-talking, outsider-ish, interesting 1970's biography), but with genuine establishment affection in a race in which (quite unlike 2000) the establishment's center of gravity remains indeterminate.
• A large chunk of conservatives who are now swallowing hard and supporting either McCain or Giuliani as our "best hope," would swing to Thompson in a heartbeat.
• As a conservative I was going to settle for Rudy. Now I won't have to settle.
• Iowans for Thompson
• I think Fred wins over the pro-lifers who think Sam [Brownback] has no chance, if he is acceptable on stem cells.

One reader thought the Thompson boomlet said more about the current field than Thompson's actual chances: "Wow - did you need any more proof that the conservative base is less than overjoyed with the current crop of candidates, or what? I think if you mentioned in the Corner that you heard one of Reagan's brown suits was considering entering the race, within five minutes you'd get 2,000 e-mails from desperate conservatives volunteering for the campaign."

Finally, The Right Angle's Mac Johnson links to audio of Thompson subbing for "radio legend" Paul Harvey and writes: "Much of Ronald Reagan's success was based on his polished natural ability to communicate and persuade. Much of G.W. Bush's lack of success can be explained by his lack of ability to communicate, persuade and defend his own policies. ... This is a man who could speak to his nation if necessary."

IRAQ: A House Divided Cannot Win In '08

MyDD's Chris Bowers urges progressives to continue supporting the House's current Iraq supplemental funding bill arguing: "There are serious messaging considerations to take into account. ... If, in the House, this bill goes down to defeat because Democrats are divided, not only will we get an even worse bill, but we will also get a national narrative on how we don't have our own House in order on Iraq. Thus, the war will be prolonged anyway, and Republicans will be one step closer to regaining control of Congress. That will only prolong the war even further."

Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat responds: "It is ironic that while reporting that THIS bill is in grave danger of not passing, Chris assures us that a WEAKER bill WILL pass. What is he saying here? It is this - the DEMOCRATIC Leadership will accommodate REPUBLICANS before it will accommodate Progressives. What an indictment of the Dem leadership in the House. I could not have said anything more damning than Chris has just done."

Also arguing for the bill, MyDD's Matt Stoller notes the recent slide in Congressional approval ratings and argues the slide will "reverse itself" if Dems can continue funding the Iraq war: "Ultimately, though, this Congress can only succeed if it is willing to go beyond the traditional boundaries of discourse and punish Bush for what he has wrought." BTD also responds to Stoller: "I am also confident it will somewhat. In the very short term. But it will even further the damage when it counts - November 2008. Because this bill does NOTHING to end the war. ... In the long run, meaning the 2008 election, the label is only going to inflame the anger further. Because progressives and the Dem base will know they were lied to, by Democrats.

Finally, Stoller also concedes he "was probably not as charitable as I should have been with Joe Sestak. He has a withdrawal plan, he has strongly advocated against the war and he speaks against Bush on prominent platforms

IRAQ II: Mmmmm, Pork Tastes Good

House Dem Leadership efforts to line up the votes necessary to pass their Iraq war supplemental by adding $21 billion in dom. approps. to the bill are helping to unite GOPers against the bill. The Corner's Kate O'Beirne reports: "Republicans think they are are on solid political ground in objecting to both "General Pelosi's" insistence on micro-managing the war and to the Democrats' attempt to buy $21 billion worth of votes to get their caucus to support the withdrawal deadline." Instapundit calls the Dem efforts "buying votes against the war" and shares a readers qupi: "Coalition of the bribed! I heard that somewhere, once."

Progressives are supportive of the "bare-knuckled" efforts. TAPPED's Dana Goldstein writes: "It puts Louisiana Republicans in the awkward position, for example, of either supporting redeployment or voting against tens of billion dollars in funding for Hurricane Katrina relief and flood prevention. ... I like the way Pelosi is playing this one.

LEST WE FORGET: Worst Job Ever

Mo Rocca tells readers who he most feels sorry for in the whole Obama/Clinton YouTube war:

There's a scruffy twenty-something year old sitting in his cubicle at Clinton headquarters. He's on the team that tracks the blogosphere for what's being said about his candidate. (He spends most of his time on YouTube.) He's a window into what younger voters want. (Help me out here, is he wearing a Metallica t-shirt? Whatever he's wearing, it's kind of ironic.)

But at this very moment, Clinton operative Howard Wolfson -- or maybe even Mrs. C herself - is bearing down on this guy: "Listen, Seth. We need a response ad to that Obama hatchet job - that bulls**t 1984 Orwell hit job. You come up with something just as funny, edgy, and untraceable. And it better get 2 million hits by the end of the day." ... Right now, there's no other person I'd rather not want to be.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:37 PM

March 20, 2007

3/20: Hoping To Stay Positive?

We don't know whether the creative license taken by the creator of the "Hillary 1984" infringes on any of Apple's intellectual property rights claims (some bloggers did not even know of the original ad), but there's no doubt the official Obama logo on the hammer lady's shirt infringes on Barack Obama's copyright and trademark properties. Trademark in particular would be a strong claim since many viewing the ad could conclude the logo signals Obama's endorsement of the message. YouTube policy on intel. property rights enables Obama to flag the video, and given the clear violation involved, YouTube would have to remove the video if Obama protested.

Currently the Obama campaign refuses to discuss the spot, only saying: "There is a lot of energy for Sen. Obama on the Web, in communities all over the country ... and frankly, that energy will manifest itself in a lot of ways." But what if those manifestations come on Swift Boat-style anonymous ads? Shouldn't a candidate, especially one campaigning on ending 'negativity' in politics, move to silence such ads when they can? We certainly Hope Obama isn't playing a cynical game of allowing other to attack for him while he stresses how positive and uplifting politics should be.

DEM FIELD: More Dean Comparisons For Obama

IA Progress looks at the staffing efforts by the Dems' big three:

• On Barack Obama: "Some have compared Obama's staff to Howard Dean's from four years ago, because it seems to include an unusual number of ideologically motivated young people, many of whom have never worked a caucus before. Their typical field organizer offer, which is the lowest of the candidates reviewed here, is $2,000 per month. Because Senator Obama is so magnetic, they are having no trouble filling positions, but the low salary may not be enough to entice experienced operatives.
• On John Edwards: "In contrast to Obama's staff, most of Edwards's staff so far have Iowa political experience, and many have also worked with state director Jennifer O'Malley or state field director Jackie Lee before.
• On Hillary Clinton: "Hillary Clinton's campaign has been a bit slower to announce their hiring decisions here, but those whom they have hired have impressive resumes. Staffers who may not have significant Iowa experience but who have significant experience elsewhere are taking positions on the Clinton campaign that are well below where the staffers might be in most campaign hierarchies. Clinton is paying field organizers about $2,750 per month - the most of any candidate."

OBAMA: The Conversation Has Definitely Begun

Borrowing key analysis from TAPPED's Garance Franke-Ruta, MyDD's Adam Conner has the best rundown on the rise of the "Obama 1984 ad" (although, as Connor explains, the YouTube effort actually borrows its footage from Apple's 2004 iPod ad, not the 1984 original).

Noting that most bloggers he talked to about the ad responded "Oh that, I saw that weeks ago," Connor identifies Carla Marinucci's San Francisco Chroniclestory on the ad as the tipping point that sent the video viral (over 900K views at deadline). TAPPED's Franke-Ruta shares an IM exchange she had with one of the first bloggers to link to the YouTube 3/5, Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall:

I asked Josh via instant messenger where he got the link from, and he says a friend of his who knew the ad's creators sent it to him and that "the person assured me the creators were not tied to a campaign or a political org" and that "i took it as a given that they were dems [given who was doing the iming] and that they liked obama and that that was the point of their creating the video."

Conner then tries to answer, "Who is the creator, 'ParkRidge47?'" and links to a Micah Sifrypost sharing an email from ParkRidge47 claiming s/he created the ad in response to "a New York Times article about the Clinton's campaign bullying of donors and political operatives after the Geffen dustup." TAPPED's Franke-Ruta further notes: "Park Ridge is both a town in New Jersey and -- this can't just be a coincidence, right? -- the suburb of Chicago where Hillary Clinton, also aged 59, was raised."

Connor concludes: "The viral-level distribution from sites like YouTube, which gained so much political notoriety with Senator Allen's 'Macaca' moment, proves its potential for candidate-supportive message. And it call came from an independent supporter unaffiliated with the Obama campaign and distributed through the bottom-up grassroots people-powered effort growing around Obama's candidacy. Expect to see more like this in the future."

OBAMA II: Didn't Bush Love To Brag About His Washington Inexperience?

In non-YouTube Obama news, commenting on Obama's Oakland, CA, crowds DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas praises Obama's "I don't enough Washington experience" line and blogs: "Dodd, Biden, and Clinton have all the Washington experience in the world. To me, that's nothing to brag about. That's why I prefer Richardson, Obama, and Edwards. ... It's no surprise two of these three backed out of the Fox debate while Obama would've followed suit had the issue dragged on for a couple more days (they were close to making the announcement).

Speaking of Fox News debates, MyDD's Matt Stoller notes the CBC "may soon announce [a] co-hosting arrangement with Fox News for the Presidential debates" and claims "[o]ne member of the CBC could stop this debate with a phone call, or even one from a staffer. That member is Barack Obama." Stoller concludes: "Obama could gain more credibility with new progressive activists that he's serious about a new type of politics with some quiet behind-the-scenes maneuvering here."

Tired of punditmusings on the "essence" of white support for Obama, Matthew Yglesias offers a more "banal" explanation for Obama's surge: "Obama is popular among the intersecting groups of black people, young people, and people for whom Iraq is a high priority issue. This, of course, is not very hard to explain. Obama is black, relatively young, and has a consistent record of opposition to the Iraq War. And, obviously, he's good at giving speeches to large crowds."

Finally, MyDD's Jerome Armstrong links to news "Michelle Obama has hired Melissa Winter" a former Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) "gatekeeper." Armstrong comments: "I guess that puts to rest the idea that Matt Stoller is going to score an interview with Michelle anytime soon."

GOP FIELD: Still No IA Ground Game For Rudy

IA's Caucus Cooler has updated their IA Caucus odds for the GOP's big three:

• Mitt Romney goes goes from 3-1 to 7-2: "With all the good things going on for Mitt, the problem is that his poll numbers and public perception have taken a bit of a hit. The media's narrative of Mitt as a flip-flopper has saturated and it is mentioned in most news-stories about him."
• John McCain goes from 3-1 to 7-2: "The problem for McCain is that there is still a vocal contingent of conservatives who don't trust him because of his maverick reputation, and the spector of Rudy's gaudy poll numbers put a shadow on his trip."
• Rudy Giuliani move up to 4-1 from 5-1: "When we started writing this line-change our intent was to put Rudy in a 3 way tie with Romney and McCain. But the more we discussed around Cooler HQ we just couldn't pull the trigger. Rudy hasn't been in Iowa since November. He has to our knowledge only 2-3 staffers in the state."

HUNTER: He Should Probably Borrow Webb's Combat Boots

Captain's Quarters turns his keyboard over to Duncan Hunter for WH '08 guestblogging including:

Now, let me take a moment to talk about Iraq. What we're doing in that country is following the same basic pattern that we've used to expand freedom around the world for more than 60 years in places like Japan, Europe, and El Salvador. First, you stand up a free government. Next, you stand up a military capable of protecting that free government, and lastly, the Americans leave. ...

I returned this week from a fact-finding trip to Iraq where I met with top U.S. military commanders in Baghdad, Ramadi, and Fallujah and was briefed by Iraqi Army and police officials. ... Speaking from experience as someone who has had a son who spent two tours serving in Iraq as a Marine, I know that it's not easy for us here at home to know that our troops are risking their lives expanding freedom in a foreign country. But, even though it's difficult and dangerous work, it's also vital.

MCCAIN: Club For Anybody But McCain

Of the 13 John McCain interview segments The Brody File posted, the "John McCain Rips the Club For Growth" entry easily garnered the most blog coverage ... all of it negative. Conservative blogger beef: McCain blames loss of the Senate on Club for Growth's attacks on ex-Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI).Townhall's Matt Lewis calls the interview "a bad move" and blogs: "Right after the Primary Election, I had dinner with one of the folks doing polling for Lincoln Chafee. He told me that Laffey's challenge to Chafee was the best thing that ever happened to Chafee, because it taught him how to campaign. ... Chafee's loss had little to do with the Club for Growth."

SC's Daily Chaser takes the story a step further pairing McCain's CFG comments with The State reports that SC Gov. Mark Sanford (R) has close ties to the group. The Chaser concludes: "So why hasn't Sanford endorsed McCain? Could it be that Mark Sanford is smart enough to know where his bread is buttered?"

Team McCain did manage to get somedetractors to link to video of McCain saying: "We Lost the Election Because of Spending"

Other than his CFG criticism, McCain also took hits on his comments on campaign finance reform (Ankle Biting Pundits: "The man still doesn't get it when it comes to why conservatives are upset with him over CFR. ... The main reason conservatives are upset with you about CFR is because it impinges the right to free speech.") and for movement on immigration policy (Captain's Quarters: "John McCain started his campaign for the presidential nomination in 2008 with two strikes against him -- the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act and immigration reform.. ... Will his sense of pragmatism inspire him to backtrack on that legislation as well? And would anyone trust him even if it did?").

ROMNEY: 'Not Ready For Prime Time'

Mitt Romney's Castro-fumble in Miami, FL, did not escape blogger attention. Ankle Biting Pundit's BT writes: "As someone who grew up in an area of Texas that was majority Hispanic, trust me, you do not want to be the white guy trying to speak Spanish when you have no clue what you're saying. ... Way to go, gringo." Bull Dog Pundit adds: "[W]hat it does tell me is that his campaign is still not ready for prime-time."

The Right Angle's Matt Naugle ties the episode into a larger anti-Romney narrative: "between this, and flip-flopping on abortion and campaign finance reform, and trying to court social conservatives while saying Republicans were wrong to get involved in the Terri Schiavo case and condemning Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace's comment that homosexuality is immoral, keeping track of Romney's blunders is a overwhelming task."

THOMPSON: Not Just In It For The Buzz

Reps. John Duncan (R-TN) and Zach Wamp (R-TN) set off a fresh round of Fred Thompson speculation with the launch of their Draft Fred Thompson Committee. Reactions from The Corner include:

• Jonah Goldberg: "Good guy, fun actor, etc etc. He ain't gonna run. I base this on virtually nothing, except for the fact that he seems to be in it for the buzz."
• Rich Lowry: "I think he's seriously considering it, more seriously than I would have thought even a week or so ago."
• Kathryn Jean Lopez: "At first, he was flattered to be wanted. Then he decided to have a little fun with it, see if it was for real. While in this mode, he quickly came to realize how deep the yearning conservatives have for a real conservative leader is, and how they feel like they don't have one in the current mix. I think he's now heartened by the fact that so many people seem to want that leader to be him / think it could be him. And so I think increasingly he's been seriously considering the possibility of running over these last two weeks.

Under pressure from emailers Goldberg admits "there's clearly something going on" and posts an example: "This guy is gonna run, and he will take the party by storm. He is as close to a true Reagan Conservative as we have seen in many years, and is the answer to our prayers. Just you watch, and I will email you again to gloat from time to time."

Moving left, The Plank's Bradford Plumer tries to remember why Thompson wasn't a factor in '00 and can only identify failed hearings on China and possible romantic links to Margaret Carlson as strikes against him. Kausfiles is more concerned by the lack of a compelling case for Thompson: "Wherein lies the greatness of Sen. Fred Thompson? Just asking! All I remember is he was given custody of an important set of hearings -- into China and campaign finance -- and screwed them up. ... Thompson didn't accomplish much in two years plus a full six-year term, no?"

Keeping his feet planted in the entertainment world, Thompson pens a response to Iran's reaction to 300 for Pajamas Media including:

Who are these guys who are getting all flushed over our cultural insensitivity? People who want to blow Jews off the face of the earth. The regime that stormed our embassy in 1979 and kept Americans captive for 444 days. Iran's Hezbollah puppets have killed more Americans, than any other terrorist group except Al Qaeda. Explosive devices from Iran are being used right now against our soldiers in Iraq. They're clearly more skittish about cultural warfare than the sort that actually kills people - like the one against Israel that Iran financed just a few months ago.

PROSECUTOR PURGE: TPM Needs You!

Talking Points Memo staffers and readers ("Josh and I were just discussing how in the world we are ever going to make our way through 3,000 pages when it hit us: we don't have to. Our readers can help.") are currently plowing through over 3K pages of DoJ documents related to the firings of eight US Attorneys. At deadline, nothing had been frontpaged from the new documents. Earlier Josh Marshall refuted WH press/sec. Tony Snow assertions that San Diego USA Carol Lam was let go due to lax immigration enforcement: "The point is that while Snow wants to point to the March US Attorney 'ratings list' as evidence that the desire to fire Lam long predated both the Cunningham controversy and the May 2006 emails, they simply don't show that."

After a brief skim of the documents dumped so far, The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum argues MI USA Margaret Chiara is "one of the most inexplicable cases" since "she was completely blindsided by the request to resign, was never given a reason for being let go, and can't afford the loss of income from being out of work for even a short while. However, the administration's lies about the mass firings made it even more difficult than usual to find new employment on short notice."

Also on the left, Matthew Yglesias explains why Pres. Clinton's removal of US attys in '93 is different than Pres. Bush's current actions:

A world in which there's 100 percent turnover of US Attorneys when partisan control of the White House switched, but who otherwise can expect to continue in their jobs as long as they maintain basic standards of conduct, has no particular implications for the neutral administration of justice. A world in which US Attorneys are subjected to the day-to-day whims of the West Wing has completely different implications.

PROSECUTOR PURGE II: An Insult To Barney Rubble

A preponderance of conservative bloggers and their readers seem to favor ending the AG Alberto Gonzales era at DoJ. Michelle Malkin notes Laura Ingraham "blasted" Gonzales last week and Malkin reposts a poll of readers showing 61% believe Gonzales ought to be fired. Malkin shares: "For what it's worth, I can't say I'll miss him.

The AmSpec Blog crowd is also ready to move on:

• Quin Hillyer: "Gonzales claims he had no clue about any specifics concerning one of the most important personnel matters within his purview. If true, that's pathetic. If not, then he is a liar. Meanwhile, he went before Congress and impugned the reputations of all the fired attorneys. That was both politically dumb and also classless. ... This administration needs to lance the boil on this story. The quicker, the better."
• John Tabin: "I'm with Quin. Once in a while, the Democrats are going to get a scalp; it might as well be someone who's no big loss."
• James Poulos: "Alberto Gonzales has always been the Barney Rubble of the second-term Cabinet. Hailed from day one as a major-league lightweight, he now proves himself a first-class drag."

Gonzalez still has his defenders though. Mostare eagerto deflect blame to ex-CoS Kyle Sampson while otherssee plots hatched by career staff in the Dep. AG and Exec. Office for US Attorneys. Either way, "smart insiders" are telling Rich Lowry Gonzales will be out "perhaps by the end of the week."

IRAQ: 80% Of MoveOn Members Can't Be Wrong

With 80% of MoveOn's 3.2 million members in support of the current House Iraq war funding legislation, TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent reports that the organization is "now going up on the air with radio ads bashing two GOP incumbents who oppose the bill." The ad targeting Reps. James Walsh (R-NY) and Phil English (R-PA) is called "Spineless" and accuses the Reps of "rolling over in support of George Bush, in support of sending in more troops, sacrificing more lives and more money on this religious civil war."

At The Huffington Post, Rep. John Murtha also urges support for the measure writing: "After four years of incompetence and mismanagement, this Administration must come to the realization that Iraq's civil war can only be solved by the Iraqi people and that stability in Iraq can only be accomplished when U.S. and coalition forces end the occupation and redeploy."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Effective Not That Different From Ethical

Daily Kos' Adam B shares his contributions to a blogger ethics panel he sat on 3/16:

Given the traceability of IP addresses and the tenacity of online readers (and site owners), there is very little to separate the ethical from the effective in online politics. By that, I just mean this: you will get caught. Whether it's concern trolls and shills getting outed or Wikipedia mischief traced back to its house.gov source, it's actually a lot harder to get away with unethical behavior here than it is when a campaign floods a talk radio show or letters-to-the-editor page with the concerns of "ordinary citizens".

LEST WE FORGET: Be Afraid Bill Gates

Predicting that in the future all work will be done by three groups, "Robots will do the routine work, artists will do what the robots can't, and lawyers will sue them. Everyone else will be wearing straw hats and driving around not working," Scott Adams muses on tax policy at The Dilbert Blog:

I saw a statistic that the people in the top 5% of incomes pay the majority of all the taxes in the United States. If that trend continues, we only need one super rich guy to pay all of the taxes. The rest of us can just enjoy our robot slave labor and free social services. If the guy paying all the taxes says that's unfair, we'll just vote for a robot president who will order the army (of robots) to kill the one rich taxpayer and replace him with a robot that doesn't whine so much. I don't see how that could go wrong.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:36 PM

March 19, 2007

Blogger Spotlight: Calitics

Calitics Brian Leubitz kicks off our tour through Golden State blogs. Tomorrow we stay on the left with D-Day's David Dayen.

What is your full name?

Brian Leubitz

What is your age?

28

What's your hometown?

I grew up in Dallas.

Where do you live now?

San Francisco

What is your educational background?

Well, probably too much. I have a B.S. in electrical engineering and a law degree from the University of Texas (Hook 'em Horns!). I'm also wrapping up a public policy degree from Berkeley right now.

What is your occupation?

Student, although Calitics takes up at least as much time as school.

When did you first get involved in politics and why?

I've been interested in politics for as long as I can remember. I was a precinct chair in Dallas, but that didn't really prepare me for the bizarre world that is California politics. I moved to California during the recall debacle and became very, very frustrated with the process in place. So, I began attending grassroots meetings here in San Francisco. And now, I can't get out.

When did you start blogging and why?

At first, like many bloggers, I started out on community blog sites around the Internet, Daily Kos, MyDD, etc, during the 2004 campaign. After the election, I started my own poorly-trafficked Blogger blog. It was mostly political, but drifted into my personal life every now and again. It was basically just random musings in my spare time (read: not much) time when I was practicing law.

I had been growing more and more interested in California state politics for a while, and when I decided that I wasn't happy practicing law, I decided to start focusing more on California politics. In many ways, I was accustomed to losing fights in state politics (in TX), and California was at once a relief and a great source of frustration for me. On one hand, Democrats had at least nominal control of pretty much every aspect of the state government. But because of super-majority requirements and funding constraints, a truly progressive agenda was still out of reach. So, I really wanted to improve progressive action and enthusiasm at the state level.

Fortuitously, the SoapBlox software system was just beginning at that point, and they were marketing the platform to progressive state blogs. The timing was perfect, and Calitics was launched around Labor Day of 2005. We have had excellent growth since that time, and Calitics has become a gathering point for grassroots and netroots activists throughout the state.

How will blogs impact WH '08?

I'll answer that with respect to California. Before the whole moving the primary up thing, I would have said that we would have just been the feather in the victor's cap. I'm not totally comfortable with the February 5 primary date, but at this point it is a done deal. And as such, California blogs will become more important. While the Internet is important, we are trying to do things at Calitics which encourage people to go out and do some of that not-so-sexy grassroots work that wins elections. If you like a candidate, go out and knock on doors, talk to friends, and build up excitement.

What's your favorite most unsung specific example of a blogger affecting a political figure, organization, philosophy, or movement?

A blog in California's Eleventh District, Say No To Pombo, did more to affect the primary and general election than I think anybody could have ever imagined. SNTP was critical in Jerry McNerney's victory over then-Congressman, now-lobbyist Richard Pombo. In fact, at one point former Rep. Pombo had his own website totally redesigned when he learned that Say No To Pombo was getting more traffic than his own website. I think it's a great blueprint on marrying online and offline political activism to facilitate real results in elections.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 03:44 PM

3/19: An Opening?

Before recommending The Nation's editorial against House Dem supplemental funding for the Iraq war Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat writes: "This is a dishonest joke. IF the House Dems wanted to end the Iraq Debacle, they would NOT fund it. But they do not want to end it. They want to RUN ON IT in 2008." Expressing similar thoughts while introducing the current Senate Dem Iraq plan, DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas wrote 3/8: "All the Iraq proposals in the House and Senate have my head spinning. It seems everyone is happy to introduce bills (especially the presidentials), but no one seems to push them."

While Barack Obama's "early and steadfast opposition to the war" continues to draw grassroots enthusiasm, there's clearly an opening for WH'08ers in Congress to establish anti-Iraq war credentials by championing legislation that could actually affect US policy. Will anyone fill the void?

CLINTON: Out Front On The Housing Bust

Hillary Clinton's 3/15 support for "foreclosure timeouts" is winning her blogger praise. Atrios highlights Clinton's call for consumer counseling and "breathing room from foreclosure" and responds: "This sounds about right. Essentially you need to make it possible for people to refinance, both by getting rid of prepayment penalties and strongly "encouraging" lenders who gave out a bunch of mortgages they shouldn't have to renegotiate the terms in order to make repayment more realistic."

OBAMA: Not Playing Around

The sheer number of supporters turning out to see Barack Obama continues to impress netroots veterans. Atrios writes: "10,000 people showing up to see Obama in March of '07 means...something. Not just about Obama (though about him, too), but about the willingness of large numbers of people to show up for a political rally. Something's up."

Blogging from Oakland, CA, CA Progress Report's Frank Russo says, "Obama's early and steadfast opposition to the war was the single biggest issue that drew many in the crowd to attend," but Russo also noticed "an overarching theme" as he talked to those in attendance: "Obama is a different kind of candidate, that his campaign is one of hope and not negativity."

Also blogging the event, Daily Kos' FemLaw came away with the same two talking points: "Take-home point of the speech? We have real, critical life and death issues facing our country, and our leaders are "treating politics like a game." We want, and deserve, better than that, and we have the power to change it. ... Best line yet about his plan on the war: 'We have to be as careful about getting out as we were careless getting in.'"

The Oakland Tribune has video from the event here, and CaliticsBrian Leubitz posts a San Francisco Chronicle photo, adding: "Obamarama Photo from the SF Chronicle: No description necessary."

GIULIANI: Lemonade Expert

RCP Blog's Tom Bevan lets readers know that '93 NYC Conservative Party nom. George Marlin has a new website, RudysReallyLiberal, attacking Rudy Giuliani "across a variety of issues using clips and quotes of Giuliani's own words from the late 80's and early 90's."

In more positive Rudy-blogging Captain's Quarters liked Giuliani's response to revelations his firm does work for Citgo: "This particular issue always looked like a non-starter. ... Giuliani had a good response ready. He noted that Chavez and Venezuela would not present much of a problem had we developed alternative energy resources and eliminated the need to import so much oil. ... All in all, a good response. Giuliani took a weak lemonade and made some strong lemonade."

MCCAIN: Pansy Allies Wanted

A John McCain in Cedar Falls, IA, interview with The London Telegraph is drawing predictable reactions from different conservative blogging quarters. Explaining how he would improve the US's image abroad, McCain told the Telegraph: "I would immediately close Guantanamo Bay, move all the prisoners to Fort Leavenworth (an army base in Kansas) and truly expedite the judicial proceedings in their cases."

Ankle Biting Pundit's Bull Dog Pundit responds: "Now I love John McCain's views on the war and spending, but this kind of stuff really infuriates me - and I know I'm not the only one. ... Perhaps he needs to realize that while the "ugly American" image may be true, the problem is not with what America is doing, but how his buddies across the pond view it. Does he really think that closing Gitmo is going to assuage the pansies and feckless Europeans?"

Andrew Sullivan was a tad more impressed, hoping more MSM outlets would notice that McCain is running against Pres. Bush: "He's getting more candid about it by the day ... McCain wants to put torture behind us, and to reach out again to allies."

Also reporting from IA, the Caucus Cooler says "the straight talk express" drew "large crowds" at townhall stops in Alton, Des Moines, Ames, Mason County, and Cedar Falls. CC adds: "McCain also distinguished himself by spending long periods of time fielding questions from all-comers. ... McCain also got in trouble over the weekend for using the term 'tar baby,' when answering a question about men's rights in divorce proceedings from one of Dr. Mark Klein's friends."

MCCAIN II: Party Like It's '00

McCain aide Patrick Hynes posts video from a McCain stop at ex-NH GOP Chait Jayne Millerick's house and tells his Ankle Biting Pundit's readers, "No other Republican candidate is attracting such large crowds at so many events here in the Granite State."

Granite Grok's Doug Lambert is also hearing good things about "enthusiasm" for McCain: "It seems as if his supporters truly are everywhere. Could it be that he remains almost as popular in NH as he was back in the 2000 race?"

MCCAIN III: The Straight Talk Express ... In HDTV

The Brody File breaks his "Straight Talk Express" discussion with McCain into 13 separate videos including some titled "McCain's Message to Evangelicals" (McCain: "Just give me an honest and fair assessment."); "McCain on His Past "Agents of Intolerance" Remark" (McCain: "Sometimes you say things in anger you don't mean."); "McCain Says Conservatives are Holding a Grudge on Campaign Finance Reform" (McCain: "Some people in Washington did not like CFR. They didn't like it because it deprived them of some money.")

More McCain via The Brody Files "notebook" from the Straight Talk Express:

• On embattled AG Alberto Gonzales: "Am I concerned? Of course. He has a lot of explaining to do."
• He loves musician Roy Orbison and one of his favorite movies recently was Letters from Iwa Jima. He thought Babel was just OK and hasn't seen Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth"
• He says Bush won in 2000 because he had a better financial and political base.

Not in NH, Jane Galt wonders if HDTV may hurt McCain: "For example, though I've never met him, my understanding from those who have is that McCain's image of vitality is very carefully projected, and that when you actually meet him up close, he looks pretty frail. Will that come out on HDTV?"

ROMNEY: No Word On His Unicorn Preference

TechPresident's David All is impressed with the launch of Mitt Romney's MySpace page: "[S]urprisingly, it's actually very authentic, personal, and hand-crafted for the medium. ... As opposed to simply being a re-hash of Mitt's official/boring/vanilla website (like John McCain's), his team is fully embracing all of the things that makes myspace a great place to hang out, interact, and share with your friends."

IRAQ: Running On The War, Not Ending It

The House Leadership's Iraq supplemental appropriations bill continues to divide online anti-war activists as the final floor vote approaches. MoveOn sent an e-mail to its members noting that while many progressive members believe the bill does not go far enough, they also "see it as the first concrete step to ending the war." MoveOn is still undecided on the bill and the email asks their members: "Should we support or oppose the Democrats' plan?"

Daily Kos' mcjoan puts a slightly more slanted question to Daily Kos' readers: "Given the fact that the bill is little more than a non-binding resolution expressing Congress's wishes for the war along with more funding for it, I put it to Kossacks: Do you support or oppose the Democrats' plan?" With more than 6K voting, a slim 51% majority of Daily Kos readers support the appropriations bill.

DemHillStaffer quickly took issue with mcjoan's characterization of the legislation: "the requirement that benchmarks be met or else there's a withdrawal is still there. so is the withdrawal by sept 2008. this isn't a fair summary." Mcjoan fired back: " There's nothing in the bill that enforces that. They say that the war would be illegal beyond Sept. 2008, but include nothing in the bill to make it so."

Not participating at Daily Kos, but still following the debate at Talk Left, Big Tent Democrat highlights certain arguments in the thread including MyDD's Matt Stoller: "My strategic end goal is to end the war. To do that involves a process of showing that the Democratic caucus is unified behind putting restrictions on Bush and his ability to fight the war, and then using that pressure to remove Republicans (and wayward Democrats) from office in 2008." BTD responds: "All the blather about communications strategies and making the war illegal, etc. was just so much talk. But at least Stoller is now forthright about it."

BTD then quotes DemHillStaffer again: "If [Bush] ignores [the House proposal], we sue and the courts enforce it. if he ignores that, we're in massive constitutional crisis." BTD then hammers his point home: "See? The plan is to sue Bush in October 2008, one month before an election and expect the Supreme Court to do what it never has done - involve itself in matters of war. This is a dishonest joke. IF the House Dems wanted to end the Iraq Debacle, they would NOT fund it. But they do not want to end it. They want to RUN ON IT in 2008."

BTD finishes his post by recommending The Nation's editorial urging Dems "to use the full power accorded Congress in time of war: the power of the purse." Daily Kos' BarbinMD also recommends the item: "Should we as Democrats support the supplemental spending bill? The Nation emphatically says no and advocates the Barbara Lee proposal for a fully-funded withdrawal by the end of the year. Others say yes, anticipating perceived political points and the suggestion that we have to start somewhere. And me? I say no for the simple reason that the bill doesn't do a damn thing."

IRAQ II: Mission Accomplished

Michelle Malkin's coverage of the 3/17 "Gathering of Eagles" counter protest is drawing the most links from conservatives blogging about the event. Malkin writes: "Why did the Eagles come? One common refrain: Vietnam veterans, some fighting back tears, told us they came to show the kind of support for the troops that they did not receive when the surrender lobby marched on the Pentagon 40 years ago today. Mission accomplished."

Also filing reports: Townhall's Mary Katharine Ham ("I was down at the Gathering of Eagles rally this morning on the mall. I filmed a bit, though this is pre-moonbat confrontations, so it's pretty tame."); and RedState's The Fastest Squirrel ("Basically, ANSWER has organized a huge party. There were no speeches (until much later at the Pentagon, apparently) and no attempts at dialogue. It was simply a draw for the old and radical, and the young and gullible.")

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: The Stutzman Code

Commenting on New York Timescoverage of WH '08er use of MySpace, TechPresident's Fred Stutzman writes:

In essence, we're searching for the holy grail of social media. That is, the race in presidential social media is to establish a singular "place", one in which vast swaths of voters can be reached easily and effectively. Obviously, the major vendors like Myspace, Youtube and Facebook would love to be this place - it would be a huge traffic and reputation boon, and no founder of a large consumer-oriented property is going to turn down the chance to play a strategic part in the picking of our president.

The holy grail of social media isn't campaigns throwing their hands in the air and hoping that everyone decides that Myspace (or Facebook, or Youtube) is the singular place to experience candidates. No, that would be too easy. The holy grail (or "social grail", as I just Freudian-mistyped) is actually developing a strategy that leverages the best qualities of social media sites and uses them as effective engagement vehicles. Part of this means ceding control to supporters, which may feel like a dangerous proposition but is actually an undeniable reality.

LEST WE FORGET: If You Absolutely Have To Murder Someone ...

...try not to use Google when making your plans. Freakonomics Blog's Stephen Dunbar draws our attention to a Morris County New Jersey woman who planned her husband's murder using Google searches including: "'how to commit murder,' 'undetectable poisons,' and 'fatal digoxin doses,' as well as searches on local gun laws." Dunbar comments: "This kind of story illustrates why computer forensics is a growing field."

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:37 PM

March 16, 2007

Blogger Spotlight: Students for Barack Obama

Alex Locke of Students for Barack Obama closes off our unofficial WH '08 blog tour. On Monday we begin our tour of California tipping things off with Calitics Brian Leubitz.

What is your full name?

Alexandra Locke

What is your age?

18 years old

What's your hometown?

Wayland, MA

Where do you live now?

Brunswick, ME (Bowdoin College)

What is your educational background?

Freshman at Bowdoin, hoping to major in international affairs with a concentration on the Middle East and journalism.

When did you first get involved in politics and why?

I grew up in a very liberal family -- we used to watch the Daily Show together every night. The exception was my older brother, who was extremely Republican until Bush in 2000. I didn't have anyone my own age to talk to at family events, so I learned to talk politics very quickly. The Barack Obama campaign is my first actual involvement in politics, and I decided to volunteer for him because I felt like it was the chance to be a part of a movement that would become part of history.

When did you start blogging and why?

When I was a teenager I always kept a Livejournal, mostly to whine about my day and talk to my friends. I started reading the Defamer website, which is a Hollywood gossip blog that actually is intelligent and has a sense of humor. Wonkette is part of the same company, so I started reading it pretty soon afterwards. Wonkette remains my favorite blog, hands down. I read DailyKos and the Huffington Post, but those take themselves a little too seriously for me. I started blogging when Meredith and Tobin (directors of SFBO) offered me the position of Blogging Director. It has been a great experience so far.

How will blogs impact WH '08?

I don't think that campaign blogs will do much for the race, but independent blogs have a chance to make a real difference. The ability to organize and raise money on the old series of tubes is really nowhere near capacity, and it will just keep growing.

What's your favorite most unsung specific example of a blogger affecting a political figure, organization, philosophy, or movement?

Everyone cites the Dean campaign as the first example of the power of the blogosphere, but the 2006 midterms was really way more substantive -- Dean produced a lot of buzz without a lot of substance. George Allen's defeat was really a product of the blogs -- without them, "macaca" would have been one guy who captured the event on a cell phone camera.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 03:28 PM

Blogger Spotlight: Giuliani Blog

Giuliani Blog's Fullosseous Flap (aka Greg Cole) answers our regular slate of queries today. Stay tuned for our final WH '08 unofficial blog installment when we talk to Alex Locke of Students for Barack Obama.

What is your full name?

Gregory (Greg) Cole

What is your age?

55

What's your hometown?

El Segundo, California

Where do you live now?

Thousand Oaks, California

What is your educational background?

B.S. Biological Sciences - University of Southern California; Doctor of Dental Surgery, University of Southern California.

What is your occupation?

Dentist

When did you first get involved in politics and why?

In High School. To fully participate in American government - to practice democracy.

When did you start blogging and why?

2005, to inform, argue and persuade.

How will blogs impact WH '08?

The blogs will allow a closer and impartial analysis of the candidates without the spin of either the MSM, the national parties or the campaigns. The blogs will also tell the "inside" story of the candidates as individuals.

What's your favorite most unsung specific example of a blogger affecting a political figure, organization, philosophy, or movement?

Bear Flag League founder Justene Adamec and member Jeffrey Lewis filing amicus curiae briefs in the Apple v. Does case, where the California court held that bloggers are journalists.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 02:58 PM

3/16: As Go The Bloggers ...

... so go the voters? Netroots detractors love pointing to the implosion of Howard Dean's candidacy as proof that blogger preferences don't mirror those of primary voters. And it's true that Hillary Clinton will undoubtedly do better in actual primaries than the 3%-5% she collects in netroots strawpolling . Nonetheless, trends that show up in online polling often translate into more traditional polling as well. While trying to explain why Barack Obama does so much my better in MyDD polls than Daily Kos ones, Chris Bowers notes that MyDD readers skew almost eight years younger than Daily Kos readers. Bowers then shows that more traditional polls, like Pew, also demonstrate that Obama does much better than Edwards and Clinton among 18-29 year olds than he does with any other age bracket. Should Obama be concerned that young voters won't show up on primary day?

DEM FIELD: Out-Foxing A Weasel

Possibly due to Barack Obama's "weasly answer" on the morality of homosexuality or John Edwards' "leading the charge" against Fox News, Edwards has surged ahead of Obama among Daily Kos readers. Over 20K Kossacks voted in March's dKos straw poll. The top five finishers were:

John Edwards 38%
Barack Obama 26%
Other 9%
Bill Richardson 8%
No freakin' clue 8%

Edwards also won Feb.'s straw poll but by a much smaller margin (26%/25%)

DEM FIELD II: Generation MyDD

Noting the 15-point gap between John Edwards 38%-26% margin over Barack Obama in Daily Kos' straw poll and Obama's 36%-33% victory over Edwards in his own's straw poll, MyDD's Chris Bowers digs in to MyDD demographic numbers and finds "the readership of MyDD is much younger than that of Dailykos." MyDD has almost twice as many under-30 readers as Daily Kos does and the median MyDD reader is eight years younger than their dKos counterpart.

Bowers further observes that other polls, including Pew, also show "Obama did vastly better among younger Democrats than he did among older Democrats, while for Edwards the situation was reversed." Bowers concludes: "I can't prove it definitively, but I think the age gap between MyDD and Dailykos is one of the main causes, if not the main cause, behind the different preferences for Edwards and Obama in straw polls on the two sites."

CLINTON: Let Hillary Be Hillary

Hillary Clinton's belated admission that she does "not think homosexuality is immoral" is only reinforcing netroots doubts about her. Daily Kos' mcjoan blogs: "The kneejerk reaction to answer carefully and conservatively is becoming a hallmark of Clinton's campaigning. I'm sure that this statement is the much more honest one, is much more reflective of who she is and what she believes. So why don't we see more of that in her appearances."

OBAMA: As Tolerant As Bush

Helping Barack Obama respond to Los Angeles Timesclaims he "bowed to Allah" as a six year-old in Indonesia, TAPPED's Garance Franke-Ruta tells readers, "we need to be very clear when talking about this issue that being respectful to someone else's faith says nothing about what a person actually believes."

After reminding readers of all the interfaith services Pres. Bush has participated in Franke-Ruta continues: "If Obama says he has never been a Muslim, we have to believe him, regardless of what his early teachers say about how he was registered at school or what he studied, because only Obama can speak to what he genuinely believed. ... The instinctive conformity of a 6-year-old nearly four decades ago is of far, far less public significance than the prayers of a sitting president in formal public ceremonies, except to the extent that it dovetails with an adult commitment to tolerance."

GIULIANI: You Wanna Talk About 9/11 ... Bring It On!

RCP Blog's Blake Dvorak breaks down Rudy Giuliani's troubled relationship with the International Association of Fire Fighters into two separate issues. First, Dvorak quickly dismisses suggestions Giuliani could be hurt at all by the unions non-endorsement noting that Rudy fought with the union long before 9/11 and that, as a union, they have never "endorsed a Republican anyway."

The real problem the IAFF poses for Giuliani, stems from the groups displeasure over Rudy's "cutting short their search-and-rescue efforts for victims lost in the World Trade Center rubble, many of them fallen firefighters." Dvorak references a Robert PolnerSalon essay sketching out possible "Swift Vets" style attacks on Giuliani featuring family members of victims who might have been saved. Unlike Polner, Dvorak argues such ads could not be effective:

Look at this way: Has any credible person or group come forward to claim that Giuliani's handling of 9/11 and its aftermath on the whole left New York worse off? Setting aside the charges of one aggrieved group (and the firefighters are a big one, admittedly), who is claiming New York suffered more than it benefited from Giuliani's leadership in the days and weeks after 9/11? Were the Democrats to go after Rudy on 9/11, Rudy could respond with all the equally heart-wrenching footage from that day, with him in the thick of things -- the same footage Democrats howled that the Bush Team was exploiting in 2004. Rudy would win that tussle.

HUCKABEE: Granite State *Hearts* Huckabee

Mike Huckabee "was quite well received" on a recent trip through NH, according to RCP Blog's Tom Bevan. Bevan reports: "Many of the folks I talked to were getting their first look at the Governor in person, and most generally liked what they saw and heard from him. Up close Huckabee is a pretty darn good retail politician; warm, funny, quick on his feet - yet still remarkably disciplined."

ROMNEY: A Blogger In A Book Tour?

Power Line's John Hinderaker was going to hold off on plugging Hugh Hewitt's 'A Mormon in the White House?' until he finished a longer review, but after realizing Hewitt's quoted him in the book, he decided to "go ahead and plug it now."

Hinderaker pitches: "Whether a candidate like Romney can win, of course, depends on how many people take the trouble to investigate him. So I urge you to read Hugh's book, not only because I'm sure it's well-written and fun to read, like all of Hugh's books, but because I think it's important that conservatives take a hard and well-informed look at a candidate who now, clearly, is a serious contender for the Republican nomination."

Speaking of Hewitt, Hugh plugs a John Mark Reynolds post explaining why social conservatives ought to trust Romney over Rudy Giuliani on the issues that matter to them: "In any church, the person who does the most work and is most dedicated to the cause is the convert or the prodigal member who has come back to faith. ... Far from worrying about our prodigal Romney who has come home to social conservative values . . . I worry about him least on these issues. Romney has the zeal of a new covert tempered by the pragmatic wisdom of one who knows the strengths and weaknesses of his old views."

The Brody File's promotion of an '02 video showing Romney pledging to protect a woman's right to choose elicited a response from Romney spokesman Kevin Madden: "The video from 2002 doesn't show anything new and it's from before his stance on the issue changed. Governor Romney has been very clear and very emphatic about his pro-life position and, like Ronald Reagan and Henry Hyde before him, he has changed on this issue."

More from Madden this time on YouTube: "I'd lose sleep about YouTube clips driving the news only if I didn't have a New Media plan of my own designed to deal with it. Our campaign showed that you can quickly and effectively combat anonymous attacks launched by opponents that use distortions by setting the record straight via the very same medium and with a full archive of the facts."

PROSECUTOR PURGE: "Heads Must Roll"

Two new MSM stories are driving netroots blogging on the US Attorney firings. Daily Kos' Hunter links to ABC Newsreports that emails show Karl Rove imitated the idea of firing all 93 attorneys in Jan. '05 and a National Journal's Maury Waasarticle claiming Pres. Bush stymied an investigation into AG Alberto Gonzales's role in the NSA surveillance program. Hunter adds: "This scandal goes to the heart of the ultraconservative method of governance: restructuring the very government itself into a political tool for defending and protecting a "permanent" Republican majority."

Also at Daily Kos, Kagro X says, "the long term effects of this scandal are incalculable" and urges Dems not to stop investigation into the matter even if Gonzales resigns: "Heads must roll, and they must roll in numbers." To aid understanding of story, Talking Points Memo has posted a "US Attorney Purge timeline stretching from 2001 until this very day."

On the right, few seem willing to defend Gonzales, but most argue the story is overblown. The Corner's Jonah Goldberg writes: "But here's the thing. As I see it, there are only two possibilities. Either it is a really big deal, in which case Gonzales should go. Or, it isn't a really big deal, but through his incompetence Gonzales has made it one. Either way, it seems to me that Gonzales should go." Similar thoughts from Rich Lowry: "I don't think there's anything wrong per se with removing the U.S. attorneys ... I'm not calling on Gonzales to resign, but I think it's more likely than not the way things look right now, and I obviously wouldn't be upset about it."

In a more defensive mood, Power Line's Paul Mirengoff admits "there's no doubt that certain statements to Congress by Justice Department officials were incorrect" in their testimony before Congress, but "so far as appears, there is no evidence that any individual who made the incorrect or dubious statements to Congress was aware of the emails that refute their statements. And the person who was in the middle of the email traffic, Kyle Sampson, has lost his job over this matter. At this juncture, then, there's no scandal as to anyone who remains at the Justice Department."

IRAQ: Lemonade Tastes Good

In the face of mounting evidence their cong. allies are unwilling to end the war, the netroots are still congratulating themselves for moving the debate in their direction. MyDD's Matt Stoller writes: "There are a number of reasons the war won't end in the next two years, but one of them and probably the most important one is that the public isn't yet ready to repudiate the militaristic posture that brought us there. The Democratic Party is becoming an antiwar party that has been pulled out of the bipartisan imperialist consensus. But it is not there yet. ... The public is against this war, but it is not for complete withdrawal. Change is still a very scary prospect."

Still holding out hope for 'Lemonade', Daily Kos' mcjoan explains how Dems can still "salvage" a "seriously flawed bill." Mcjoan urges the House leadership to make a statement ("The statement would not have to be added to the legislation.") that they will "back up the provision of bill to make the war illegal past September 1, 2008 by refusing to fund it past that date." McJoan says this promise would give "the administration 17 months to plan" for the end of the war and that Dems would not need to introduce new "defunding legislation" since "defunding doesn't have to be legislated--it just has to happen."

Previewing what a GOP ad on Iraq might look like for '08, Townhall's Patrick Ruffini posts RNC produced video of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Rep. David Obey (D-WI) explaining their Iraq war funding legislation to the press.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: They Don't Need Us, As Much As We Need Them

Buzz Machine's Jeff Jarvis has a thorough summary of a Online Politics panel featuring ex-Howard Dean advisor Joe Trippi, ex-Mark Warner advisor Jerome Armstrong, Rudy Giuliani advisor Patrick Ruffini, and ex-Pres. Bush advisor Chuck DeFeo. Some guy named Chuck Todd moderated the panel and had this prediction:

Todd says, by way of example, that the owner of the Washington Redskins has hired its own journalists. "In the sports world, this has become a very accepted thing." He asks how close we are to campaigns to hiring their own journalists on staff - not press staff but journalists. Trippi says he knows of one campaign that's about to do that, hiring a journalist to disseminate their story. So it's not a press release. It goes up on GoogleNews or on YouTube as a video news story. Todd says he knows of another that plans to do that. Campaigns, he said, are starting to see that they don't need mainstream media as much as MSM needs them.

LEST WE FORGET: Duke Sucks

TNR's Josh Benson explains how certain pols/bloggers approach their March Madness brackets including:

• The Daily Kos method: Whoever TNR picks, that's going to be wrong. Forever. They have North Carolina winning in the first round? You take Eastern Kentucky.
• The Lewis Libby method: Isn't Marquette just a mid-major? Not sure. Was UCLA hot at the end? I don't recall. Was the ACC overrated? Please rephrase the question.
• The Barack Obama method: Pick every team to win every game. When told you can't do that, smile and mention Jesus. Start with radical, out-of-the-box picks--Old Dominion, Southern Illinois, Nevada--but eventually realize your only hope is to accede to the dominant power structure. Place Florida, Ohio State, North Carolina, and Kansas in the Final Four. Now wasn't that easy?
• The Netroots method: Find the little teams that those AP poll-driven, silk-suit-wearing, slick SI consultants don't give a damn about. Creighton just needs a little higher seed money. VCU is the only real basketball team in the tournament. The elites are afraid Long Beach State won't carry the CBS corporate line. You're the kingmaker, baby. And nothing will convince you otherwise.
• The Bush Administration method: Don't ever change your picks. No matter how much your co-workers laugh at you. No matter when the entire starting five of your sleeper pick gets a case of lupus and falls spasming to the ground. You stay with Wisconsin, Kentucky, and Najaf State. You'll be right in the end. You're playing for history.
• Finally, the meta-rule: When in doubt, always, always bet against Duke.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 11:41 AM

March 15, 2007

3/15: Rudy's Turn?

So far WH '08 has not been kind to conservative blogger faves. Just ask George Allen and Mitt Romney. Now that Rudy Giuliani has been on the top for a few months now, are we starting to see chinks in his armour? So far Rudy is not having much trouble in areas most people thought he would (on abortion and gay marriage). Instead, Giuliani's weaknesses are emrging from his own marriage (see Ryan Sager's post) and from hints his comptence/managment skills may soon be called into question (see Bull Dog Pundit's post). Just as Romney has not been sunk by his Mormonism (yet), Rudy might not be done in by the issues we originally thought would derail him.

DEM FIELD: One Down, One To Go

The netroots are keeping up the pressure on probable WH '08 Dem debate hosts not to partner with Fox News. The CBC is the current target, following news that while the CBC has partnered with CNN for one debate, they still have not chosen a network for the second.

Jack and Jill Politics posts a video called "Fox Attacks Black America:" "Note the vicious, distorted attacks on CBC Member Barack Obama." JJP's Jill Tubman urges readers to sign Color of Change's petition "to persuade the CBC Institute to hold their debate somewhere other than race-baiting, black-hating Fox News."

DEM FIELD II: Not The Comparison To Clinton He Was Hoping For

TAPPED's Dana Goldstein points readers to MSNBC's Bill Dedman's reading of Hillary Clinton's senior thesis on University of Chicago sociologist Saul Alinsky. Goldstein quotes HRC from the paper, ""A cycle of dependency has been created which ensnares its victims into resignation and apathy," and comments: "21-year old Hillary was a welfare reformer waiting to happen."

Goldstein then compares Alinsky's Rules for Radicals to Barack Obama's approach to politics following his "organizing days" in Chicago, IL. Goldstein concludes: "These experiences obviously account for Obama's reliance (I would say over-reliance) today on the soaring rhetoric of bipartisanship. ... Radical community organizing aside, Obama just may not be that different from any other politician with some good ideas, and the calculating ambition necessary to see them realized."

CLINTON: Better Then Bush On Iraq

New York Timesreports that Hillary Clinton foresees a "remaining military as well as political mission" in Iraq drew mixed netroots reaction. MyDD's Matt Stoller volunteered the expected response: "It's a genuinely and deeply conservative foreign policy strategy, involving indefinitely keeping US troops in Iraq for unspecified national security interests while calling the war over. This is a very dangerous roadmap for the Democrats."

Matt Yglesias was more generous: "Hillary Clinton is, I think, to be congratulated for stating reasonably clearly that her vision of "bringing the troops home" from Iraq after she becomes president doesn't actually entail our troops not being in Iraq. ... I'd be interested in hearing what Edwards, Obama, and Richardson think about this. My impression is that most of what passes for the Democratic national security establishment agrees with Clinton."

The Left Coaster's Steve Soto also seemed willing to grade Clinton on a curve on the issue: "It's easy to get angry and dismiss her Iraq policy, as outlined in this story, as just another Clintonian attempt at triangulation in order to be moderate and seasoned enough to be electable. Yet her overall strategy is smarter than what we have now from the Bush Administration, and is realistic in acknowledging how difficult and counterproductive a total withdrawal would be to our national interests."

In more predictable netroots responses, HRC was roundly condemned for her "carefully orchestrated, focus-grouped, run it by Bill answer" on whether homosexual acts were immoral. DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas writes: "She can tell those gays and lesbians she knows and is proud of that she is too afraid to say, unambiguously, that she agrees with 80-year-old Republican Senator John Warner that no, they are not "immoral". ... It's not that hard to say the right thing.

DODD: Ahdooba Dahbah Swobo

Noting Chris Dodd's "likable personality" CT Local Politics describe's Dodd's The Daily Showpage as "a step in the right direction" towards allowing "Democrats across the nation to be able to get to know him." CTLP hopes "the coming weeks and months" will "see more content in that vein."

Team Dodd has continued updating the page with video from "The Daily Show," including clips of Dodd singing in the shower and a look at his MySpace page. Team Dodd clarifies below the clip: "That's not really our MySpace page."

Back MyDD, Matt Stoller explains "Why Chris Dodd Has No Traction" highlighting his assurances to John Stewart that he would debate on Fox News. Stoller blogs: "This is a bad answer, because it treats Fox News as a credible news source. ... And I guarantee that Dodd isn't getting traction among primary voters with his clueless nice guy schtick. Democratic activists and primary voters hate Fox News."

Dodd's Blog Outreach Coordinator Tim Tagaris quickly clarified: "Dodd told me today he was a bit nervous and misunderstood the first question--knew about the fox issue, but took the question to be about debates in general."

Also, as far as the Blogometer can tell, Dodd is the first WH '08 candidate up with video pledging to end "Don't Ask Don't Tell."

OBAMA: A Prophet For The Status Quo

The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum promotes Michael Hirsh's new article arguing that US foreign policy doesn't need "wholesale reimagining" just "a change of personnel." Drum summarizes: "He's actually making one of the most difficult kinds of argument of all, an argument that the current system is fine and doesn't really need big changes. Muscular diplomacy produces results. Liberal internationalism as practiced by FDR, Eisenhower, Reagan, and Clinton is still workable, even (or maybe especially) in a post-9/11 world. And Barack Obama might be just the right messenger to spread this gospel."

In less counter-intuitive Obama posting, Kos notes that Obama's response to whether homosexuality is immoral "isn't much better" than Clinton's.

Finally MyDD's Jonathan Singer links to Media Industry Newsletterreports showing '06's best-selling mags featured Obama as cover boy.

BROWNBACK: Still Not Behind Pace On The Surge Though ...

First noting that Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) "stood firmly behind Gen. Peter Pace today, circulating a letter among his Senate colleagues" in support of Pace's "personal moral views," RedState's Robert Bluey says Brownback "is on a roll" citing a "glowing report Brownback received from the Club for Growth" and kind words from Grover Norquist.

The Brody File received the same Brownback campaign email, but wants more info before he buys Brownback as a credible alternative: "Brownback's future will look a whole lot brighter if he comes out at the end of March and shows some decent campaign fundraising numbers. It's all about the money. As Cuba Gooding Junior would say. 'Show me the money!'"

GIULIANI: Good Thing Unions Don't Vote In GOP Primaries

"Tentative Rudy supporter" Bull Dog Pundit explains that the reason "many conservatives (like me) ... are willing to give Rudy a chance despite his social positions on some issues" is due to Rudy's "tough-on-crime, no-nonsense, post 9/11 America's Mayor" image. BDP worries that the "salacious details" coming out of Bernard Kerik's impending trial "is going to give some people even more pause in considering pulling the lever for Rudy."

In other Giuliani potential weaknesses, The Brody File dismisses the International Association of Fire Fighters as a "pretty partisan organization who has it in for Rudy" and posts 3rd generation active firefighter Phil Ruvolo's defense of Giuliani: " "I've seen first hand that Mr. Giuliani is cool under fire. I've seen what he has done for my city.I don't think anybody in New York City can say he's not a leader." Townhall's Matt Lewis also plays defense for Rudy posting YouTube of a former fire commissioner defending Giuliani.

Offering new worries for Giuliani's campaign, New York Sun's Ryan Sager posts a bad review of Judy Nathan's introduction of Rudy at a recent NYC fundraiser. Sager posts video of Nathan speaking and writes: "Here, she starts off by saying, 'I wanted to tell you all a little bit about how Rudy and I came to be our team together.' The problem with this is that we all know their relationship began as an affair, while he was still married ... She then goes on to describe some of their early flirtations. I don't think I was the only one at this point thinking: Ick."

MCCAIN: Vietnam Is Not Enough

Describing new John McCain campaign video entitled 'Service with Honor' as "pretty powerful," Outside the Beltway's James Joyner wonders " if McCain isn't falling into the same trap as John Kerry in 2004: Campaigning as if it's 1973." Joyner explains: "There's not a Republican voter who doesn't honor McCain's sacrifices for his country in Vietnam; not too many Americans, period, probably. On the other hand, he's got a lot of explaining to do about his record as a United States Senator. Ultimately that, not his time in Vietnam, is what voters will judge him on in 2008."

ROMNEY: Straight Out Pro-Choice In '02

Mitt Romney did not have best day in the blogosphere 3/14. Townhall's Matt Lewis tracks possible endorsement retractions in MI (including Jack Waldvogel and Joel Westrom); The Brody File posts YouTube of Romney saying "straight out that he's pro-choice" [ed. note. In '02 video Romney says: "When asked 'Will I preserve and protect a womans right to choose,' I make an unequivical answer 'yes.']; and The Right Angle's Matt Naugle posts video of Independent Women's Forum VP Carrie Lukas saying Romney, ""doesn't seem to have a real compass on several important issues."

IRAQ: You Either Have Teeth, Or You Don't

TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent reports "MoveOn is privately demanding that House Dem leaders make key changes to their legislation on Iraq" including stronger provisions "to compel withdrawal after the deadlines set forth in the legislation." MoveOn's Washington dir. Tom Matzzie tells Sargent: "We've communicated to the Speaker's office that we want tougher enforceability in the bill. ... We want something that's got teeth." When asked if the current bill doesn't have teeth, Matzzie replied: "We want sharper teeth."

Fully in the 'the current bill has no teeth' camp, Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat says "the political options on Iraq are binary. You are for Bush's Iraq Debacle or you are against it." BTD continues: "The Blue Dogs and the fools who enable them - to wit, the Dem leaders in the House - live in a political fantasyland. They have to pick a side now. There is no other way, whether they like it or not. ... The truth is the Dems need leadership in the House and they are not getting it. ... It is quite disheartening, on all levels. We need new leaders - everywhere."

Still tracking which Dems are responsible for the current state of affairs in the House, MyDD's Matt Stoller adds Reps. Lincoln Davis (TN-04), Joe Donnelly (IN-02), and Bob Ethridge (NC-02) to his list of "saboteurs" and explains why he's keeping Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-20) on: "Apparently activists aren't getting a straight answer from her, and her office is referring people to this post and the one on the Albany Project.

Also at MyDDChris Bowers is particularly disheartened by Sestak's role in the legislation and urges readers "to call Joe Sestak's offices to ask him if he will support the upcoming Democratic bill on the Iraq supplemental. Considering the work the MyDD community has done for Sestak, I think we have a right to know."

Finally, firedoglake's Jane Hamsher "sadly" notes that members she supported through Blue America are on Stoller's list and adds: "If any of these are your representatives, feel free to contact them and express your feelings about their support for endless war."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: He Loves Pajamas, After All

The Blog Herald's Tony Hung picks up on Dan Rather softening towards bloggers, quoting from an interview:

Anybody who blogs, who does real reporting, which is to say, make telephone calls, go interview people, go talk to people, in a spirit of independence ... and (tries) to do journalism with integrity, I would consider a journalist. ... Of course there are an increasing number of bloggers now who by any definition are reporters, or journalists. There are some others who in my opinion would fit into a gray area. They may do good reporting, but they mix in their own opinion, their own point of view, without clearly signifying the difference. Now that's not a kind of journalism that I practice. It's not one that I'm going to damn either.

LEST WE FORGET: Baseball Fans Are Gay

Boing Boing highlights Jakob Nielsen research showing that "men fixate on any visible genital areas in photos" by posting an image demonstrating how long men and women fixated on portions of a photo of George Brett at the plate. The Online Journalism Review writes: "Coyne adds that this difference doesn't just occur with images of people. Men tend to fixate more on areas of private anatomy on animals as well, as evidenced when users were directed to browse the American Kennel Club site."

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:27 PM

March 14, 2007

Blogger Spotlight: Draft Newt

Today we talk to Matt Keller of Draft Newt. Tomorrow we stay on the right, talking to an early believer in Rudy Giuliani's commitment to running: Giuliani Blog.

What is your full name?

Matthew Brian Keller

What is your age?

24

What's your hometown?

Mecosta County, home of Russell Kirk

Where do you live now?

My Hometown

What is your educational background?

Bachelor of Arts in Political Science at University of Michigan

What is your occupation?

I’m the Media Outreach Manager for Draft Newt

When did you first get involved in politics and why?

Ever since 9/11 I wanted to be part of something bigger than myself. The U.S. government – though I think it should be as small as possible – is much larger than all of us, and does much good in this world. That’s something I wanted to be involved in.

When did you start blogging and why?

For Draft Newt? January of this year. I think inside all men burn passions of expression toward their heroes. The blogosphere has infinitely changed how we read text. We’re allowed into a bit of the psyche of others. I started blogging because I wanted to share some of that psyche, some of that passion I have for one of my personal political heroes: Newt Gingrich.

How will blogs impact WH '08?

If all the candidates blogged, personally albeit with an editor standing over them I think it would heat things up. It would help lend credibility to the blogosphere which traditional journalists still have reservations toward. Sure you could have surrogate bloggers like me, but we just become more of an op-ed than anything. If the candidates blogged we’d be getting it straight from the horses mouth, figuratively of course.

What's your favorite most unsung specific example of a blogger affecting a political figure, organization, philosophy, or movement?

Michael Yon hands down. I mentioned how the blogosphere has changed the way we are able to communicate via text; I mean you can literally publish a book online without a publisher if you have a website and movable type. Michael Yon has in my opinion changed the way we look at war. In the Civil War/ World Wars you had letters to home, with the blogosphere you have soldiers and embedded reporters writing letters to the world. Everyone can see the words of those in battle, they can feel the emotion. Not only is it intensely spiritual but it makes the war more real, it invests you emotionally. You have an investment after seeing that young soldiers words in wanting him to succeed over there.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 03:18 PM

3/14: How Blog Outreach Is Done

WH '08ers can't seem to agree on how to title their official blog advisers (eCampaign Adviser, Blog Outreach Dir., and Dir. of Online Communications are a few choices), and most campaigns also have trouble defining how exactly their blog experts fit into their campaign. Each candidate's strengths in other areas ought to inform how they handle blogs, but Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) aide (he doesn't even have an official title) Patrick Hynes' push-back efforts 3/13 are a textbook example of how the job should be done. After a flurry of posts hit McCain for skipping the Club for Growth's winter conf., Hynes went to work emailing bloggers to let them know CFG only offered McCain dates to speak that coincided with a previously planned trip to Iraq. The retractions and updates Hynes netted his candidate both tampered down implications that he was dissing conservatives and reinforced McCain's strength on just about the only issue conservative bloggers back McCain on. This one episode is not going to magically swing bloggers to McCain's column, but it is an example of the vigilant defense WH '08ers must be prepared to play online.

DEM FIELD: If Only 'Unnamed Democrat' Could Be Talked Into Running

After reading the latest New York Times/CBS poll TAPPED's Paul Starr is still "not yet convinced that Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama can overcome the obvious obstacles to their election." Starr explains: "Americans would choose an unnamed Democrat over an unnamed Republican by a 20-point margin. Nonetheless, both Clinton and Obama have run behind in polls first to John McCain and now to Rudy Giuliani. Are Democrats so sure the country has put sexism and racism to rest that they want to bet the future of the country on that proposition?"

DODD: Surprisingly Cool

Chris Dodd managed to stretch positive buzz about his Daily Show appearance into a second day of blogging. MyDD's Jonathan Singer points readers to Dodd's backstage blogging of the event, and Comedy Central Insider promoted the effort with these words:

Well, here's a first: Last night, Senator and 2008 Presidential Candidate Chris Dodd appeared as a guest on The Daily Show, and blogged the entire experience (including green room video of the Senator and Jon) on his website. This was a fascinating look behind the scenes of the show even for us, and a surprisingly cool thing for a Presidential candidate to do. Senator Dodd, we salute both your commitment to fiscal responsibility and your web-savvy.

EDWARDS: WH Dems To Plant Entire New Forest

IA Progress labels John Edwards 'carbon neutral campaign' announcement part of an effort "to fill the 'Vilsack Vacuum'" since ex-IA Gov. Tom Vilsack was the first to make the promise. IAP adds: "He is trying to recruit as many former Vilsack supporters as possible at this point, and this was one of the Vilsack campaign's more novel ideas - although the Vilsack folks seemed to want to use it more for fund raising than anything else."

TAPPED's Ezra Klein calls the effort "sort of cool" and guesses: "I'd expect to see the other campaigns follow suit, too. Currently, it's understood that all merchandise from a Democratic campaign must be union made, I wonder if it'll now become the norm that all campaigns must be carbon neutral."

On recent revelations that Bob Shrum's new book claims Shrum was involved in convincing Edwards to vote for the Iraq war, The Plank's Michael Crowley blogs: "A random survey of opinion at one of the more archetypal "Washington cocktail parties" I've ever been to finds several people, including ones who know Shrum, suggesting that Shrum thinks he's doing his former client a favor (by revealing that Edwards had the right instincts about the war, I suppose). Nor does it sound like there's any bad blood between the two that would explain it as malicious."

OBAMA: Not Doing Enough To End War

Blogging on Al Sharpton's recent criticism of Barack ObamaDailyKos ' founder Markos Moulitsas comments: "Obama talks a great 'anti-Iraq War' game. But when he had a chance to help do something about it -- help get rid of its biggest cheerleader in the Senate, he decided to campaign for Lieberman instead. Obama might wish we had poorer memories, but those of us actually trying to end the war can't forget."

GOP FIELD: Victory Or Bust

Under the header "What Conservatives Want" Townhall's Dean Barnett tells readers the GOP will not win WH '08 "if things remain rotten in Iraq." Going on to advise WH '08ers, Barnett claims that even if there is a positive turn around, it will not be adequately covered by the MSM. Barnett says GOP candidates must "put honor and duty above personal ambition" and "support the war effort, commit to victory, explain the correctness of their actions to their constituents, and politically let things fall out as they may."

GINGRICH: You Can Stuff Your Sorries In A Sack, Mister!

Commenting on Newt Gingrich's "not-a-softball" interview with James Dobson on his marital infidelities, The Corner's Rich Lowry says "there is a limit to how much Newt can do to minimize the damage from that time in his career." Lowry concludes: "I have a keen appreciation of Newt's talents and strengths, but if he runs, he's probably going to have to find a way to win despite those high negatives. There's no way to "inoculate" himself from them, certainly not with one radio interview."

GIULIANI: And You Thought Publicly Funded Abortions Were Bad...

Commenting on a Concord Monitorarticle that examines the record's of some Rudy Giuliani judges appointed in NYC (including a Judge Sheldon Rand who "ordered taxpayers to foot the bill - up to $20,000 - for a sex-change operation") The Brody File writes: "Rudy talks tough on judges when he says he's looking for the Scalia, Roberts and Alito type. ... Giuliani must make the judges issue stick for him. If not, you might want a put a fork in him. He'll be done."

The Corner's Peter Suderman says "It's a waiting game, pure and simple" as GOPers wait to see if Giuliani's campaign will falter "as his views on social issues become more widely known." On that 'waiting game', Mystery Pollster's Mark Blumenthal throws water on suggestions the latest NYTpoll showing a 50%-29% Feb. Rudy lead slipping to 43%-34% in March is evidence of a fall: "Given the sample sizes, the seven point drop for Giuliani (from 50% to 43%) is just barely statistically significant at a 95% confidence level ... [Also], remember that four other surveys conducted over the last 10 days - including the just released CNN/ORC survey - show no comparable Giuliani decline."

MCCAIN: 'In Spite Of Everything Else, John McCain Is A Great American'

While he told readers that John McCain was skipping Club for Growth's conference because he'd be "overseas in a 'war theater,'" RCP Blog's John McIntyre plays up "the contrast of McCain's rivals being in Palm Beach while Senator McCain is with the troops in Iraq."

Team McCain efforts to inform conservative bloggers of McCain's schedule netted positive updates to previously negative McCain postings. Not everyone was impressed however. AmSpec's Quin Hillyer calls McCain a 'scoundrel' for resorting to patriotism as a refuge to escape criticism over his CFG skip.

Not citing McCain's Iraq trip, Townhall's Dean Barnett follows through a previous promise to write one positive McCain post: "This link goes to an interview where the Senator movingly discusses his captivity. While on most days we focus here on the other two thirds of Hugh's formulation regarding McCain, this video reminds us of the first part - in spite of everything else, John McCain is a great American."

IRAQ: Your Official Iraq-Netroots Enemies List

Netroots frustration over Dem capitulation on Iraq war funding is being channeled into pressure on Blue Dogs and other Dems identified not in favor of a date certain for withdrawal. With help "from a source close to the House Democratic caucus" MyDD's Matt Stoller posts a list of Blue Dogs (and other Dems) "that don't want to vote for this bill because it has a certain date for withdrawal" including:

Michael Arcuri (NY-24) John Barrow (GA-12) Melissa Bean (IL-08) Dan Boren (OK-02) Jim Cooper (TN-05) Bud Cramer (AL-02) Brad Ellsworth (IN-08) Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-20) Baron Hill (IN-09) Tim Mahoney (FL-16) Jim Marshall (GA-08) Mike McIntyre (NC-07) John Peterson (PA-05) John Salazar (CO-03) Joe Sestak (PA-07) Heath Shuler (NC-11) Gene Taylor (MS-04).

Stoller adds: "It's sad to see some freshmen we supported on the list. Joe Sestak, Kirsten Gillibrand and Michael Arcuri had some online support from the progressive netroots."

Particularly frustrated over Sec. 1901. (d) of the Iraq appropriation Daily Kos' BarbinMD is calling Blue Dog offices and asking: "Does the Congressman support requiring that all troops are properly rested, trained and equipped before being sent to Iraq?"

Progressives are also unhappy at news Dem leadership does not intend to whip the legislation. MyDD's Chris Bowers blogs: "In other words, progressives get whipped into voting for a compromise, and Blue Dogs get to "vote their conscience." Progressives are expected to compromise their beliefs, but then the leadership won't even stand up and fight for a compromise they wrangled out of the progressives."

Bowers promises: "I am not going to fight for Dems that don't fight for themselves, and I am not going to waste my energies on a foregone conclusion (well, sometimes I will, but not in this case). Another thing I definitely won't do is raise money for any Democrats who are too squeamish to even vote for a fixed withdrawal date eighteen months down the road. Democrats like that can use their political cowardice to secure re-election in 2008."

Daily Kos' mcjoan urges progressives to "vote their conscience" and "kill" the bill. Looking forward, she advises: "Give us more time to put pressure on the Blue Dogs to support the original Murtha proposal, the proposal that the majority of Americans think is an absolute no brainer."

PROSECUTOR PURGE: Get Fitz On The Next Flight Back To DC!

Netroots talking points on the recent US atty firings is coalescing around charges the WH has undermined US law enforcement by politicizing DoJ corruption investigations. Former San Diego US Attorney Carol Lam has emerged as the poster child for WH malfeasance. Talking Points MemoJosh Marshall writes:

Lam's firing has always been at the heart of this. I've had a lot of people ask me why we devoted so much virtual ink to this story so early. But the truth is that by rights Lam's dismissal should have sounded alarm bells for everyone on day one. ... Lam's investigation (and allied ones her probe spawned) were uncovering a) serious criminal wrongdoing by major Republican power players on Capitol Hill, b) corruption at the CIA -- which reached back to the Hill, c) and as yet still largely hidden corrupt dealings at the heart of the intelligence operations in the Rumsfeld Pentagon. Nothing matters unless the investigation gets to the heart of what happened there.

All of the major netroots hubs are on message:

• Eli at firedoglake: "'We need to get rid of Lam before she takes down Foggo' is probably not the sort of communication that you want to have on record anywhere. What I personally believe went down is that Dubya told Harriet and Gonzo "Get rid of any Attorneys who aren't playing ball, but keep me out of it."


• Daily Kos' Kagro X: "The Department of Justice, as it is now constituted, cannot be relied upon to protect Americans from the corrosive effects of real public corruption, due to their own outrageous politicization and overreaching. There is, once again, a cancer on the presidency.


• MyDD's Jonathan Singer: "As is now evidenced by emails and other documents, the decisions to fire Iglesias, Lam and Charlton followed almost immediately after reports of their investigations of Republicans or after complaints by Republican officials that they were not going after Democrats."

MyDD's Singer adds: "At this point the evidence, as I noted above, is largely circumstantial, but we are quickly getting to the point at which the preponderance of evidence suggests that there was a causality between the the reports/complaints and the firings. Certainly a preponderance of evidence is not enough to convict in a court of law. But it is probably enough to warrant the appointment of a special prosecutor to begin an official investigation."

Not openly advocating for a special prosecutor yet, Andrew Sullivan still was ready to see heads role: "It seems to me pretty obvious that they've been caught trying to rig the justice system to perpetuate Republican control of the House and Senate. It seems to me that this originates with the president and Karl Rove. And it seems more than obvious to me that Alberto Gonzales should resign."

On the right, The Corner's Jonah Goldberg reminds readers he is "no fan of Gonzales" and argues the firing of CoS Kyle Sampson was just another Gonzalez move "to shift all the blame to Ashcroft and his crowd." Rich Lowry adds: "I wouldn't be surprised if the White House is furious at him. He and his team have managed to mishandle the U.S. attorney controversy into a major scandal."

Captain's Quarters and Kung Fu Quip have also turned on Gonzales with eCampaign Director for Bush '04 and Kung Fu Quip author Michael Turk blogging:

The public relations disaster in which the Administration finds itself is entirely of its own making. The Justice Department screwed this up terribly. ... I am pleased to see Sampson resign, but I do not believe his head should be the last to roll. Anyone in the Department of Justice or the White House who has willingly misused the power of law to pursue political goals should be run out as well. When they're fired, by the American people, they'll truly know what it means to lose your job for poor performance.

Still defending the Administration, Mark at RedState is "tired of Democrats and the media blowing everything that the Bush Administration does into an earth stopping scandal, like no US Attorneys were ever fired for political reasons and no Congressman ever contacted any US Attorney to check on his potential opponent's legal liabilities. What's next? A Congressional hearing into Bush's choice of tie color?

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: That's Not All Drugs And Politics Have In Common

Blog Herald's Darnell Clayton asks, "What Do Drugs, Politics And Web 2.0 Have In Common?" and answers: "They all promise to bring fulfillment to their users in life, but they can often leave a bad after taste in ones mouth." Clayton explains:

Although virtually most of the (smart) politicians have started a weblog and/or have established profiles on all the popular social networks, very few of them have decided to create social networks of their own, which is quite surprising (at least to me). ... Thus far, these seem to be the only political sites embracing web 2.0 to the fullest measure (or at least beyond a blog, a site feed and "please donate here" link). Hopefully we will see politicians on both sides adopt more measures within their "own backyards," as hooking up via Facebook, MySpace and YouTube is the last thing I want to do, as there are more entertaining items within those respective sites.

LEST WE FORGET: Fettuccini Alfredo Is Macaroni And Cheese For Adults

Reminding readers the two-year anniversary of Mitch Hedberg's tragic death is approaching (3/29), Comedy Central Insider links to a list of delis that serve 'Mitch Sanwiches' (two slices of banana bread, pastrami and cottage cheese) and offer up a list of lesser known sandwiches named after comedians:

• The Jerry Seinfeld: A bowl of cereal on marble rye.
• The Patton Oswalt: A failure pile of Black Angus steak, Paas Easter eggs and Stella D'ora Breakfast Treats on a sadness bun.
• The Sarah Silverman: A racist joke baked inside a fluffy crust made of sunshine and kittens.
• The David Cross: Gefilte fish and bacon between two slices of iron

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:32 PM

March 13, 2007

Blogger Spotlight: Obamarama

Tomorrow we talk to Matt Keller of Draft Newt, but today we return to one of the many independent blogs devoted to Barack Obama. Easily the Blogometer's favorite name for a blog, Obamarama was founded by Jeremy Cluchey.

What is your full name?

Jeremy Cluchey

What is your age?

26

What's your hometown?

I'm originally from Maine, but don't get back nearly enough.

Where do you live now?

Washington, DC

What is your educational background?

I majored in English in college and am planning to start a joint degree in public policy and law this fall.

What is your occupation?

I work on communications for a nonprofit that places tutors in public school classrooms.

When did you first get involved in politics and why?

I've always been sort of a junkie. One day in college I was eating a bowl of cereal and watching Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party live on C-Span. I saw Trent Lott make his now infamous toast and shook my head, figuring his remarks would be overlooked the same way every other ridiculous thing Republicans said after September 11th was overlooked in the name of fighting terrorism.

Over the next few weeks, though, I followed the growing outrage as it evolved on the web. It started off relatively small, then gradually caught the attention of journalists, eventually prompting Sen. Lott's absurd appearance on BET, and finally erupting into the firestorm that forced his resignation. I'd never seen anything like it.

When did you start blogging and why?

Shortly after that, in the summer of 2003, I moved to Washington. I started a blog to see what all the fuss was about. It was a pretty simple Blogger operation -- just a few friends and me musing about the field of Democratic presidential candidates, basically rehashing the conventional wisdom and regurgitating The Note (we didn't know any better). The site faded out by mid-2004.

I launched OBAMARAMA at the end of last year to try and generate a little extra interest in Sen. Obama's potential candidacy. He was the first candidate I've encountered that I felt I could wholeheartedly support, and I wanted to do what I could to help. In particular, I was interested in responding to disingenuous attacks on him from the right, which were going largely unaddressed in the absence of a formal campaign. That's changed now to some extent, but I do my best to make the site an interesting and informative place for supporters to gather and share information and ideas.

How will blogs impact WH '08?

We'll have to see. They'll play a crucial role without a doubt, and I'm hopeful it will be a constructive one, facilitating debate and helping to voice ideas that would otherwise not be heard.

I have to say I'm also a believer that with power comes responsibility. It's amazing that we can influence and even direct the discussion, but sometimes I think we as bloggers get a little carried away with flexing our collective muscle for its own sake. Being organized in support of your values is a good thing, but threatening to tear down any leader who doesn't get in line is irresponsible. If we get too wrapped up in the bullying of politicians, pretty soon we'll start looking an awful lot like the special interest groups that controlled the politics many of us came here to change. That would be a shame.

What's your favorite most unsung specific example of a blogger affecting a political figure, organization, philosophy, or movement?

I realize this may qualify as shameless self-promotion, but I'd have to say my favorite instance is when OBAMARAMA posted a video of a local FOX affiliate in Minneapolis that ran footage from an Obama rally during a segment about a sex offender who had just been sentenced to 24 years in prison for molesting two students. The clip included images of Sen. Obama with the words "Sex Offender Sentenced" underneath. We encouraged people to contact the station and respectfully request a correction and apology. A few hours later, the News Director posted a comment on the site saying it had been a terrible mistake and that the station would run a correction and apology that night during both news broadcasts, which they did. It was a big day for the little blog.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 07:37 PM

3/13: Steady Wins The Race?

The steady drip of YouTube clips that knocked ex-MA Gov. Mitt Romney (R) out of his spot as conservative blogger frontrunner are not having the same effect on ex-NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R). Why the difference in reaction? Conservative bloggers suggest that people just aren't that shocked to learn about Rudy's past. It seems that past video of Giuliani supporting tax-payer funded abortions is just not as jarring as past video of Romney coming out in favor of campaign finance reform. Romney probably wouldn't be where he is today if he had not 'grown' into his pro-life/pro-marriage positions. But one wonders if, all things being equal, Rudy's steady position on the issues will better calm social conservative anxieties.

DEM FIELD: Hillary Who?

MyDD ran their March straw poll 3/12. After removing stuffed votes ("most were for Obama") Chris Bowers posts the following results:

Candidate   1st Choice     
Obama       36%
Edwards     33%
Richardson  10%
Clinton      5%
Kucinich     2%

Bowers adds: "[W]hile Richardson is strong among second choice, Edwards is quite comfortably the clear second choice of Obama supporters, and Obama is quite clearly the second choice of Edwards supporters. Those two really dominate."

CLINTON: If You Can't Beat 'Em, Hire 'Em

Blue HampshirePericles files a smooth reading account of Hillary Clinton's 3/10 speech to NH Dems annual 100 Club dinner. Admitting he "should have worn a suit" so he could blend in better, Pericles was disppointed HRC did not even eat in his room and was not impressed with Team Clinton's Hillary/Hershey bar giveaway: "This idea was cuter when Wes Clark's people did it in 2004. Clark bars actually exist and don't have to be fabricated for the campaign. I am resisting turning that into a metaphor."

Pericles on the content of Clinton's speech: "She knew the room was full of the state party establishment rather than undecided voters, and she clearly sent the "I'm one of you" message. A running joke through the evening was the state party's need to find new staffers because the Clinton campaign has hired them all."

Back at The Nation, Nicholas von Hoffman proclaims the Draft Hillary website light on "solid position papers" and a little heavy with lists of "the many awards which have come to her."

Reacting to reader complaints that his earlier HRC criticism was light on substance, Andrew Sullivan responds: "I come back to character, which I've learned matters a lot. I simply see her opportunism and focus-group politics to be disconcerting. This isn't about gender. My long passion for Margaret Thatcher should lay that to rest. But I see in Clinton the antithesis of Thatcher: an instinct always to say what she thinks we want to hear. At this point in time, America needs better."

DODD: He's The Coolest

Back stage video of Chris Dodd before his Daily Show appearance was a huge hit with the netroots. Fans include:

• Atrios: "This is pretty cool, actually. A virtual "backstage pass" to all the excitement."
• My Left Nutmeg: "Sen. Dodd set up a page on his website to broadcast the backstage, green room period as well as a live webcast of the taping. Pretty cool idea, IMHO."
• Digby: "Anyway, thanks to Dodd (and his online team) for putting this together for all of us pathetic P.D's who enjoy such things."
• California Majority Report: "Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, perhaps the most underrated of the underdogs running for President on the Democratic side, is going to The Daily Show tonight. His campaign also apparently has a sense of humor. Here's a smart use of the Internet to tease viewers about the upcoming appearance, giving those who log on a "Backstage Pass."

OBAMA: We Know You Would Have Voted Against The War, But How Would You Have Voted In CT SEN?

Al Sharpton's 3/12 attack on Barack Obama struck some netroots chords due to Obama's early support for Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) against blogger fav Ned Lamont (D-CT). MyDD's Tarheel reminds readers of an 3/30/06 Lieberman fundraiser where Obama told supporters: "I am absolutely certain Connecticut is going to have the good sense to send Joe Lieberman back to the U.S. Senate so he can continue to serve on our behalf."

MyDD's Matt Stoller adds: "Al Sharpton is expressing very legitimate questions about Barack Obama's candidacy. Why, in 2006, did he support a candidate like Lieberman who, whatever his personal qualities, represents a dramatic right-wing extremist ideology on America's place in the world? I can imagine any number of answers, many of which are legitimate. But it's important to know why Obama chose a 'go along get along' attitude in a key race, and why he displays this tendency in his political instincts (Tammy Duckworth was another questionable anti-progressive choice)."

TAPPED's Garance Franke-Ruta was a bit more circumspect on Sharpton's motives: "[T]he point is that Sharpton has a well-documented history of attacking and undermining liberals, as I reported in this detailed 2003 piece for The Prospect, and that I think his attacks will be much less powerful when directed against Obama than they were when directed at, say, Howard Dean, whom Sharpton accused, in late 2003, of having an "anti-black agenda."

In other Obama news, Blue Hampshire's Mike hopes "9/11 Truth people" don't ruin Obama's 3/16 Keene, NH, townhall on Iraq. Also TechPresident's Jack McEnany makes the case that Obama's streamed "coffee klatch" scheduled for IA living rooms 3/31 "is a much shrewder use of the internet" than Hillary Clinton's fireside chat-inspired "conversations."

BROWNBACK: Anti-War, Pro-Amnesty GOPers Already Have A Candidate ... Sen. Hagel

RCP Blog's Tom Bevan sat down with Sam Brownback 3/7 and before posting a full transcript observes that Brownback is "taking the lead in the Senate on comprehensive immigration reform" and is "the only Republican in the current field who came out against the President's surge in Iraq."

Bevan continues: "Another interesting piece of Brownback's profile that is sometimes overlooked: he grew up on a farm and was elected the youngest Secretary of Agriculture in Kansas history. When it comes to retail politics with Republicans in Iowa, he's basically one of them. How well can Rudy stand on a farm or in a local town hall meeting and talk 'ag' issues?"

GIULIANI: These Blog Conf. Calls Never Go Perfectly

Rudy Giuliani aides Ed Goeas and Brent Seaborn hosted a blogger conference call 3/12 with Ankle Biting Pundit's Bull Dog Pundit, Townhall's Mary Katharine Ham, Captain's Quarters, and AmSpec's Phil Klein all in attendance. BDP has the most thorough rundown of the proceedings including:

• Seaborn said said it's been a good 6 weeks as far as polling, and there has been a big growth when people found out Rudy was running for certain. Rudy is 100% committed to running a strong and lean campaign.
• They are looking at data, and it seems that [social conservatives] are aware already about his positions that most conservatives disagree with.
• MSM stories don't understand that the "negatives' Rudy may have with some conservatives is already known. Says "conservative" voters are not one-dimensional as the MSM makes them out to be.
• Before they could answer the CFR question The female aide then gave a number for answers on specific policy questions and wanted to, in the interest of time, move on to other questions. ... Weak.

AmSpec's Phil Klein has more on Seaborn's assertions that social conservatives are already aware of Giuliani's socially liberal positions: "I asked whether they could give any more specifics, in light of public polling I've seen showing that less than half of conservatives correctly identified Rudy as pro-choice, but they said they wouldn't disclose internal numbers. Also, when asked whether they thought polls showing Giuliani with big leads were meaningless this far out, Seaborn said because of the accelerated election cycle, people have been paying more attention to the presidential race than they have in the past."

GIULIANI II: Not That The Current President Can't Get Things Done

The Corner's Byron York shares Sen. David Vitter's (R-LA) three reasons for endorsing Rudy Giuliani: "The first is Giuliani's "Churchill-like" qualities that make him the best man to conduct the war on terror. The second is Giuliani's record as a conservative reformer in New York City. And the third, Vitter explained, is, "I am convinced that Rudy will appoint the best federal judges of all the major candidates."

When asked if Giuliani would be "tough sell in Louisiana" Vitter told York and co: " "I don't think he's going to be at all ... Especially after Katrina." York ends: "The message: Rudy Giuliani is a guy who can get things done." Coming away with a similar message from the presser, The Brody File highlights a different Vitter quote ("I'm convinced that Rudy Giuliani isn't running for president to push forward in an aggressive way some liberal social agenda. I think you're going to see that isn't what his campaign is about.") and agrees: "So far, that's my sense too." Video of Giuliani on judges here.

GIULIANI III: It's The Marriages, Stupid

Chatter about a YouTube showing Giuliani supporting tax payer funded abortions continued on conservative blogs. The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez argues Rudy must "do more than say "Alito" and "Roberts" to rally pro-life voters" while RedState's Kowalski feins shock: "Please, Rudy!! The 142 people in the Tri-state area who didn't know this because they were living in the subway tunnels and eating out of dumpsters for the past 20 years are going to be completely, utterly shocked!!"

The Brody File, however, suggests that among the social conservatives he talks to, Giuliani's marriages are more of a stumbling block than his pro-choice beliefs. Brody shares reader emails including: "Failed marriages are signs of a character flaw that we don't need to see in someone who is seeking to be our President."

HAGEL: The Blogometer Is Also Not Running For President

Following Chuck Hagel's lead, Right Wing NewsJohn Hawkins told readers: "I'd Like To Announce That I Am Not Running For President." Also unimpressed with Hagel, RedState's Erick Erickson tags him "Indecider in Chief" and The Corner's K-Lo explains why Hagel made 3/12 "the Lamest 2008 News Day So Far This Cycle ... Hagel announces that he's not announcing. And Hardball's top-of-the-show "exclusive" is with Senator Hagel's Democratic brother who doesn't "have any inside information."

Also at The Corner, John Podhoretz sees a Hagel candidacy as the final nail in John McCain's coffin: "Now that John McCain has disappointed his media "base" with his stalwart support for the war and the open advocacy of the socially conservative votes he has always cast, Chuck Hagel would be ideally suited to win the Chris Matthews Primary - playing the supposedly "straight-talking" anti-Republican Republican. Of course, with Barack Obama audaciously hoping all over the place, there may be no room for a media favorite on the Right, as the media are going to be unabashedly slobbering all over somebody on the Left."

MCCAIN: Why Does CFG Hold Its Winter Conference In Spring?

John McCain took some predictable hits for skipping The Club For Growth's Annual Winter Conference.RedState 's Erick Erickson says "McCain Continues Shafting Conservatives" and The Corner's K-L0 suggests maybe McCain will "appear on American Idol instead."

Mitt Romney advisor and Harvard econ prof Greg Mankiw hits McCain for telling NRO: "Tax cuts, starting with Kennedy, as we all know, increase revenues." Manikw responds: "I doubt that, in fact, Senator McCain believes we are on the wrong side of the Laffer curve. But unfortunately, fealty to the most extreme supply-side views is de rigeur in some segments of the Republican party."

ROMNEY: Wandering Off The Pro-Life Reservation?

No one issue dominated 3/12 Mitt Romney blog chatter, but he was definitely on the defensive. The Right Angle's Matt Naugle suggested Romney "should spend some more quality time with his 'pro-life talking points' flash cards" after learning of Romney's disagreement with federal involvement in the Terri Schiavo case. Also at TRA, Elizabeth Kantor tells George Will why social conservative are worried about Romney's recent "moral epiphany" on marriage and abortion: "We care because a politician "locked into" a given position -- on abortion, say -- by a given set of political circumstances can very easily find himself unlocked from that position if political circumstances change. Whereas a politician who's had what Will disparages as a "moral epiphany" has something stronger than current circumstance binding him to his positions."

At The CornerKathryn Jean Lopez pushes back against The Nation, New York Times, Andrew Sullivan claims that Romney bought her allegiance for $10K. After detailing where Romney's National Review went, K-Lo adds: "Back in 2005 - long before that $5,000 - again, I was dismissing Mormon-problem concerns. In March 2005 I wrote about his leadership on religious freedom in Massachusetts. You get the idea. Anyone who's been reading NRO knows it's been the issues, stupid, that have moved me toward Romney - with full knowledge that the good comes with a bad history."

PROSECUTOR PURGE: More And More Like Harriet Miers, Everyday

Washington Post and New York Times stories on WH emails and documents turned over to Congress 3/13 are driving the latest netroots posting on the recent firings of US Attorneys. Noting revelations that the WH was behind the firings, Daily Kos' mcjoan writes: "Tear the story down to it's components and you have: Rove looking for a political edge, Bush nodding at Rove's every whim, and Gonzales eagerly twisting the truth to justify whatever Bush puts in front of him. That's not just the story of the purge, it's the script for this whole administration."

Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall and Daily Kos' Miss Laura both argue the administration's focus on voter fraud is the real story: "The very short version of this story is that Republicans habitually make claims about voter fraud. But the charges are almost invariably bogus. ... Why didn't the prosecutors pursue indictments when GOP operatives started yakking about voter fraud? Almost certainly because there just wasn't any evidence for it."

Talk Left's Jeralyn Merritt urges readers not to feel to sorry for the fired attorneys reminding readers that a "U.S. Attorney's job is a plum, a reward for party loyalty" and blogging "let's not pretend this is something different than past administrations." She concludes: "So have whatever sympathy for these U.S. Attorneys that you deem appropriate. Just remember that when appointed, it wasn't because they were non-partisan champions of justice. It was because they were political friends of Bush or the Republican party."

AG Alberto Gonzalez is also facing heat on the right, but mostly on competence issues. Captain's Quarters details why the attorneys would never have been fired absent the Patriot Act and Power Line's Scott Johnson collects a conservatives bill of particulars against Gonzalez including, Michael Barone on "contrasting the prosecutions of Sandy Berger and Scooter Libby;" Josh Gerstein on "the runaround the Department of Justice has given Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA) on its stalled leak investigations;" and the WSJ on "the FBI's failure to provide adequate supervision of the issuance of national security letters."

IRAQ: Like Speed Limits In MT

Greg Sargent's early look, at TPM Cafe, at compromises made in the House's Iraq legislation has more and more lefty bloggers doubting Dem resolve on ending the war. Sargent highlights two major "disappointment[s] to some House liberals" including removal of language that would have "clipped funding" after a certain deadline and changes to language on Iran that now does not mandate Pres. Bush get Congressional approval before attacking Iran.

Following up on earlierarguments about the efficacy of ending wars by making them "illegal", Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat chides: "Remember the Kosovo case Kucinich brought? A court case to end a war? Just pathetic. Let's see Matt Stoller and Chris Bowers sell this one. This is simply horrible. Just horrible."

Also against the bill:

• Daily Kos' mcjoan: "The war drags on and the leadership not only makes weak policy, they make a weak statement. ... Every bit of teeth, every bit of enforcement has been stripped from what was a principled and politically intelligent proposal by Murtha. Like speed limits in Montana, this bill is nothing more than a suggestion to the administration on Iraq."
• TPM Cafe's MJ Rosenberg: "So this is what we needed a Democratic Congress for. The Democratic House yielded to pressure from AIPAC to strip language from the war spending bill that would have required the President to come to Congress for approval before going to war in Iran. Unbelievable.
• The Huffington Post's Cenk Uygur: "I want names. Which so-called conservative Democrats and Israeli-lobby suck-ups killed the provision to stop war with Iran?"

So far the early favorite to become the lighting rod for netroots' anger on Iraq capitulation seems to be Rep. Allen Boyd (D-FL). MyDD's Matt Stollerr writes: "If you want a focus for your anger on Iraq, there are a few members to look at. The most prominent - the one who forced Pelosi to drop the Iran attack language - is Allen Boyd, who is coincidentally also the only Democrat to offer an alternative to Bush's Social Security plan in 2005."

On the right, conservatives are suddenly in love with MSM editorials. RedState's Dan McLaughlin promotes the Los Angeles Timeseditorial entitled "Do we really need a Gen. Pelosi?" and The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez says WaPo is calling "the new Dem Iraq resolution 'something of a trick' and is merely 'an inflexible timetable conforming to the need to capture votes in Congress or at the 2008 polls.'"

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: All Quiet On The Neocon Front?

After reading John Patrick Diggins new book on Ronald Reagan, The Corner's Jonah Goldberg wonders where neoconservative pushback against the bio has been since Diggins shows "the Gipper" disagreed with his neocon advisors who "were wrong about just about everything." Goldberg muses: "

I wonder what Peter Robinson or Steve Hayward or the entire constellation of folks at Commentary and The Weekly Standard have to say about all of this? And, from what I can tell the answer is: absolutely nothing. George Will, Jim Pinkerton and Rich wrote about Diggins's book and that's about it (Will loved it, oddly) . Pinkerton takes a shot or two - at the neocons - but basically nobody has pushed back on Diggins' frontal assault on them ... And, from what I can tell from trolling in Nexis and elsewhere, virtually no liberals have pounced on Diggins' anti-Neocon assault either, which you'd assume they be grateful to do.

LEST WE FORGET: There Goes The Rest Of Jonah's Day

Riffing off of reports that a Finnish "member of parliament is aiming for re-election by campaigning with a translation of his Web site into Klingon," firedoglake's Eli blogs:

I mean, I'm sure some Klingons are very gentle and nurturing, but for most of them, their love of combat and incomprehension of tolerance makes them a poor fit for the Green Party. I would say that it positions them closer to the Republicans, except for the fact that Klingons believe in actually participating in combat (they also have that whole "honor" concept going for them, so Republicanism is right out). I'm not sure where they would fall on the political spectrum, really. Reform Party, maybe? Jesse Ventura might make a halfway decent Klingon, but Ross Perot is clearly Ferengi. Anyone have any suggestions as to what political party the Klingons would belong to? Or the party affiliation of any other Star Trek species, for that matter.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:32 PM

March 12, 2007

Blogger Spotlight: Evangelicals for Mitt

Nancy French volunteered to represent Evangelicals for Mitt for our continued run through unofficial WH '08 candidate blogs. We've got bloggers for Gingrich, Romney and Obama lined up all week so if you blog in support of another candidate and want to see your guy represented, please let us know. Tomorrow we talk to Jeremy Cluchey of Obamarama.

What is your full name?

Nancy Jane French

What is your age?

32

What's your hometown?

Paris, Tennessee

Where do you live now?

Columbia, Tennessee

What is your educational background?

I studied philosophy at David Lipscomb University and New York University

What is your occupation?

Author of “Red State of Mind: How a Catfish Queen Reject Became a Liberty Belle”

When did you first get involved in politics and why?

I’ve always been interested in Tennessee politics, so I took an unpaid internship with Lamar Alexander’s pre-Presidential campaign organization called the “Republican Exchange Satellite Network” back in 1994. I answered phones, made copies, and entered data. The highlight of my time was going to the Christmas party at the Alexander’s home, where Lamar wore his ill-advised plaid tuxedo and played carols on the piano. It also was the first time I ever heard the words “Mitt Romney.” We were closely following all the races across the country, and I distinctly remember someone in the Alexander office explaining a guy named Mitt was “taking one for the team” up in Massachusetts. We were amazed that he ended up actually giving Ted Kennedy a run for his money. That Senate race stuck with me for many years… little did I know twelve years later, I’d be writing so much about this “guy named Mitt.”

When did you start blogging and why?

We started EvangelicalsforMitt in June of 2006, after we saw first hand the excitement that many Southern Christian voters had about Gov. Romney. He placed second at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference’s straw poll held in Memphis (after only Tennessee’s own son Bill Frist, meaning he beat every current candidate). We thought it’d be interesting to explore his candidacy through the lens of our faith.

How will blogs impact WH '08?

Blogs allows regular voters like us to communicate to other voters, without interference from the MSM. When the AP’s Glen Johnson and Jennifer Dobner recently wrote a heavy handed piece on Gov. Romney’s ancestors, for example, blogs allowed voters to directly communicate with each other... nullifying the desired effect of the article. In other words, the MSM has much less punch, and correct information can reach the monitors of millions of Americans before Matt Lauer can reach their television screens. In fact, before he’s even had his morning cup of coffee.

What's your favorite most unsung specific example of a blogger affecting a political figure, organization, philosophy, or movement?

I hope EvangelicalsforMitt has helped shape the debate around Gov. Romney’s perceived Mormon problem. While everyone associated with our site is an evangelical Christian, we’ve had the chance to have some interesting debates with people of other faiths. Most importantly, however, we’ve had the chance to talk to other Evangelicals about the next possible occupant of the White House. And, for this rural Tennessee mother of two (who lives so far out she can’t get pizza delivered), that’s quite an honor.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 04:15 PM

3/12: Moving Voters Vs. Moving Candidates

As the latest blast from the past YouTube (of ex-NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani supporting tax payer funded abortions) circulates through conservative blogging circles, its worth noting the decidedly different tacks progressive and conservative bloggers have taken in approaching WH '08 candidates. For conservative bloggers, its all about digging into their candidates pasts to best identify which of their policy histories best mirrors conservative principles. As the netroots recent victory over Fox News and NV Dems shows, progressives are more interested in seeing which candidate is most responsive to their issues.

For example, Atrios told readers 3/6, he was "trying to stay out of the intra-party primary food fight as much as possible" but would reward "good behavior" when he found it. Using remarkably similar language, DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas rewarded John Edwards with a fundraising link as a reward for his "good behavior" in being the first to skip the Fox News debate. Looking forward, we wonder which is the better approach for ensuring a nominee that each movement can be happy with?

NV CAUCUS: Too Hot For TV!

Citing a Fox News Pres. Roger Ailes joke about Pres. Bush confusing Osama and Obama, NV Dem Chair Tom Collins and Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) announced via email that NV Dems were officially cancelling their scheduled WH '08 debate with Fox News. The email did not mention any pressure from blogs or other online sources. Identifying the 'Big Winner' of the debate cancellation, DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas painted a broader picture of the forces at work: "the Progressive movement, which came together at all levels -- netroots, grassroots, and even some institutional players."

Kos also declared John Edwards and Bill Richardson as winners for spurning the event, and he branded Barack Obama a 'mild loser' for missing an opportunity to show leadership. More concerned about the reputation of NV Dems, Reno and Its Discontents' Myrna Minx admits "there may be some initial embarrassment and even anger" but also claims "our internal debates will result in a better organized and focused organization-an organization that can run a successful caucus and bring Nevada the kind of attention it deserves."

Comparing Dems to "the pathetic people who go on Jerry Springer-style shows" because "any form of humiliation was worth a little bit of TV exposure," The Huffington Post's Mike Lux suggests "Once again, the progressive movement has saved the Democratic Party from itself." Lux adds: "I don't want to get too cocky here. I know my side of the party makes mistakes too. But I would ask my careful, cautious, conventional wisdom-following friends in the party establishment: pay attention. The times, they are a-changin', and sometimes - a lot of times, actually - the outsiders have it right."

Plenty of conservative bloggers took note of the story, including Townhall's Dean Barnett: "It was a power play. It was one of Markos' well-chosen battles that allowed him to demonstrate his power. Yes, the entire Democratic presidential field looks pathetic for bowing to the irrational wish of a blogger. But it doesn't make the blogger look ridiculous. It makes him look like a king-maker."

CLINTON: Win NH, Or Die?

Only conservative bloggers seemed to care that Hillary Clinton was in NH 3/10. Democracy for NH posts one photo of HRC from the even but offers no further commentary. At deadline,netroots NH stalwart Blue Hampshire has nothing on HRC's visit. On the right Granite Grok links to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) aide Patrick Hynesreport and video from Clinton's "100 Club" dinner speech.

Not in NH, but still tracking developments in the state, MyDD's Jerome Armstrong notes Team Clinton recently added ex-Howard Dean aide Sarah Nolan to the campaign and may land the endorsement of Dem activist Bill Shaheen (also husband to ex-NH Gov. Jeanne Shaheen). Armstrong comments: "That's substantive, as it shows that Clinton is getting the leadership of both the Dean and Kerry '04 operations." Armstrong looks ahead: "Considering that all the rumors say that New Hampshire is likely to jump ahead of Iowa for its primary, Clinton is in a very strong position to begin the nomination on a winning streak."

Bloggers were less impressed with HRC comparisons to JFK. The Huffington Post's John Bohrer quips: "So quit with the comparison, Hillary, unless you want to remind us of Dan Quayle."

EDWARDS: The Decider

Reminding readers he still hasn't made up his mind who he'll support, Kos does link to a John Edwards fundraising appeal "to reward good behavior," specifically Edwards decision to skip the Fox debate. From Edwards Dep. Jonathan Prince's pitch: "Enough is enough. It's time to send a clear message to Fox News and their allies that their right-wing talking points and temper tantrums won't go unchallenged anymore - when it comes to what Democrats should do in the Democratic primary, we'll decide - no matter what they report."

Edwards also received high praise from CaliticsTodd Beeton for not using the Golden State as an ATM on his last visit: "John Edwards came to California last Friday and stayed through Monday when he appeared at UCLA for the latest stop on his college tour. ... The fact that John Edwards is speaking to California voters whose attendance doesn't depend on a 4-figure donation is significant. It says that sure, he's coming here for money but he also cares about the issues regular California voters care about."

OBAMA: No Hope On Foreign Policy?

The Left Coastersoccerdad is no fan of Barack Obama's "nonsense about Iraq" since Obama " has adopted the centrist view that the problem is with the Iraqis." SD adds: "Without a fundamental change in policy towards the Middle East there is no hope for this country. We will be subject to never ending war in the name of Israel and oil. There must be an explicit repudiation of the America's hegemony towards the rest of the world. ... The Democratic leadership wants no change in policy and in fact are just as willing to back this mad extension of the Carter Doctrine for their corporate masters. When it comes to Mid East policy there is little difference in substance between the Repub and the Centerist Democrats."

GIULIANI: YouTube Strikes Again!!!

The latest episode of the YouTube 2008 Wars is making its way across the conservative 'sphere, this time in the form of an '89 clip showing Rudy Giuliani supporting tax payer funded abortions. The Right Angle's Matt Naugle blogs: "I don't see how social conservatives could end up ignoring Rudy's liberal tendencies. And clearly, no candidate is safe from the anonymous youtube monsters."

ROMNEY: Just Because The Times Said It, Doesn't Necessarily Mean Its False

Townhall's Hugh Hewitt reminds readers that the New York Times' David Kilpatrick called Hewitt 2/28 fishing for negative info for Kilpatrick's 3/11 article on Mitt Romney's use of foundation "to influence his image on the right." Hewitt comments: "Today's article does not mention the call or my post about it. How many other groups and individuals did Mr. Kilpatrick call and ask if Romney had "spread cash around" in their direction, to quote Mr. Kilpatrick from our call, only to be told "absolutely not?" Would it matter if Mr. Kilpatrick had been fed a dozen rumors from anti-Romney activists and called each of them only to be told in no uncertain terms that no such payments had occurred? This is why MSM loses credibility every day with the center-right: An MSMer starts with a thesis and meticulously compiles all the evidence that supports it and leaves off with all the stuff that doesn't."

Hewitt's recounting of Kilpatirck's tactics seemed to soften Romney-doubter Bull Dog Pundit's take on the piece: "However, just because the source is tainted doesn't mean the information is bad, or that the implication isn't true. One thing is certain, this information isn't going to help Romney, whose main weakness thus far has been his seeming opportunistic positions on social issues depending on the time and place he's asked the questions."

Speaking of anti-Romney activists, under the header "Bay Staters vs Romney" Andrew Sullivan breathlessly links to MassRepublicansForTruth which describes themselves as "a federal political action committee comprised of local activists around the United States." The site includes links to the virulently anti-gay group MassResistance.

THOMPSON: Cone On In

Fred Thompson's non-WH '08 announcement on Fox News 3/11 received a moderately warm reaction:

• Townhall's Dean Barnett: "Let me offer the following as an unequivocal Mitt Romney supporter: I think it would be great if Fred Thompson got in the presidential race. He would be a wonderful candidate, and would strengthen what I think is already a pretty strong Republican field.
• RedState's Mark Kilmer: "but where does he stand on the issues? The portion of the transcript with his answers to Wallace's "lightning round" questions is below the fold, but it looks pretty good. He gives some specifics and explanations, and others would have to come, but some conservatives might be about to find their man for 2008."
• Captain's Quarters: "Thompson also had no trouble talking policy, even if some of the current crop of candidates have had some reservations about stating their positions in clear terms. On abortion, Thompson declared himself pro-life, and he also opposes gun control, two issues with which Republicans have issues with the current front-runner, Rudy Giuliani. He opposes comprehensive immigration reform as it is currently understood; he wants border enforcement first before any other considerations. ... If anyone has contact information for Senator Thompson, I'd love to get it."

PROSECUTOR PURGE: Where There's Smoke...

While they are sure AG Albert Gonzalez's involvement in the recent firings of eight U.S. Attorneys is "almost the definition of what impeachment is truly intended," the netroots are still asking themselves what actual statutes Gonzalez may have violated. Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall hopes Dems investigate the firing of San Diego AUSA Carol Lam, who successfully convicted ex-Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA) of corruption. Marshall argues a Dem investigation should reveal that Lam was fired because her further investigations were about to focus on Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA) and and Bush Administration dealings with the CIA.

Following Paul Krugman's lead, Daily Kos' Kagro X ties the attorney firings into a larger picture of DOJ wrongdoing including misuse of NSA security letters and redistricting in TX. MyDD's Jonathan Singer asks the House Jud. Cmt. to begin impeachment hearings on Gonzalez now arguing: "such a move would both begin to ensure that there is some accountability for the actions of this administration -- accountability that has been sorely lacking due to President Bush's reticence to fire his incompetent personnel -- and it would put Republicans on the record as defending someone whose actions have undermined the Constitution."

Also pushing for impeachment:

• Down with Tyrnany: "But what I don't understand is why the Democratic majorities in Congress haven't moved to begin impeachment proceedings. Maybe someone can explain that to me. ... I know I heard Arlen Specter (R-PA) hinting at it the other day. But the Democrats are in the majority and it's their duty to move on this."
• The Left Coaster: "I will repeat what I said last week: how long will it take for Patrick Leahy to subpoena Gonzales and drag his lying ass in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee to explain under oath the lies he has already told? ... It's well past time for the Democrats to wipe the sleep from their naive eyes and publicly call this for what it is.
• The Carpetbagger Report: "
• Daily Kos' mcjoan: "By all means, Bush should force Gonzales's resignation. That is not about to happen, so this Congress must be prepared to impeach this Attorney General."

IRAQ: Losing This Battle To End The War?

Iraq is causing just as much division for the netroots as it is for congressional Dems. MyDD's Chris Bowers and Matt Stoller are both unhappy with the the compromise legislation that Dems are currently pushing through the House (they are slightly more satisfied with the Sen. Dem proposal), but both claim the Dem bills are strong enough to force Pres. Bush to take unpalatable actions that will hurt him politically:

• Bowers: "The progressive opposition might have helped improve the bill somewhat, even though it is still clearly not what we looked for, hoped for, and fought for these past years. However, it does contain enough provisions that will force Bush into operating the war illegally if he refuses to begin drawing it down over the next year or so."
• Stoller: "The point here is to get to Bush saying flat-out that he will not obey the law, and will not obey Congressional authority. ... The point of this Iraq debate is not to get the perfect bill, or even a good bill. It's to get any bill that restricts Bush and helps move us closer to ending the war. Because that will bring the public into the fight, and keep in mind, the public hates George Bush, and the public hates this war."

On the the other hand, Daily Kos' mcjoan and Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat label the latest House bill just more "kabuki" and argue that progressives are better off making the principled case for fully funded withdrawal and then taking that message to the public. BTD blogs: "First, no, not defund the government, defund the Iraq Debacle. If the Republicans choose to shut down government in order to force the continuation of the Iraq Debacle, do not give in. Fight the political fight. We'll win." Mcjoan, House Dems: "It seems they are also determined to lose this round on political terms. If they can't make policy, they should at least be making the effort to make a statement."

IRAQ II: Is That A Magic Wand In Your Pocket, Or Are YouTube Just Happy To See Me?

David Sirota correctly notes "the blogosphere is abuzz" about video of Rep. David Obey (D-WI) telling "antiwar activists" outside his Rayburn office, "We don't have the votes...do you see a magic wand in my pocket...how the hell are we going to get the votes for it."

Sirota, however, argues that the video does not help the anti-war effort as much as its posters think it does: "I'm going to say a few things here that some of my readers aren't going to like - some things that I've been pondering as I am writing my new book. But it's important at times to look at ourselves and our movement critically if we are to continue advancing. Here's the deal folks: There are some "idiot liberals" out there, and this episode actually highlights that reality."

More Sirota: "berating one of the antiwar movement's longtime leaders and then trying to mount his head on the virtual YouTube wall over a debate about the best WAY to end the war suggests that the antiwar movement fundamentally does not understand the very power structure it is trying to influence. ... The idea that Jack Murtha - the guy who voted for the war, the guy who was one of the most outspoken pro-war Democrats, the guy who has never seen a defense bill he didn't try to increase - is now an antiwar saint beyond reproach, but Dave Obey is some sort of pro-war villain is so fundamentally absurd it suggests that at least some who liken themselves as progressive movement leaders really are "idiot liberals" because they have positively no idea how the hell basic movement building or power works.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: The First Step Is Admitting You Have A Problem

Noting that Harris poll tracking on liberal vs. conservative self identification has been steady for decades, The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum writes: "Ronald Reagan made conservatism slightly more popular and Clinton made it slightly less, but the changes have been modest and today we're in almost precisely the same spot as we were in 1976. What's more, the fact that this supposedly conservative country continues to favor operational liberalism hasn't changed much either. Apparently we just don't like to admit it."

LEST WE FORGET: Pooling Your Madness

The Bivings Report's Erin Teeling ranks the best websites for hosting online office pools, based on: Ease of registration; Interface; Customization options (i.e. rules and features); Flexibility (having multiple brackets and groups); Extra features (message boards and updates); Prizes. (because some people like to play for more than bragging rights):

• 1. MSN/Fox Sports College Bracket Challenge - Easy to use interface with different tabs for group standings and your own personal bracket.
• 2. Yahoo Tournament Pick'em '07 - Probably the best bracket display of any of the systems.
• 3. CBS Sportsline Bracket Challenge - This was the only website I found that allows you to customize the points system for your bracket.
• 4. Facebook Men's Basketball Tournament 2007 - Great message board system.
• 5. ESPN Tournament Challenge - I can't even judge this year's system because I can't get past the registration page, which seems to be broken.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:41 PM

March 09, 2007

Blogger Spotlight: Mike Huckabee for President

Blogging since 2/14/05, Mike Huckabee for President is the first unofficial WH '08 blog we remember seeing (if you're a blogger that can beat them, please let us know). Before moving on to a tour of California bloggers a week from now, we are going to spend five more days talking to unofficial WH '08 bloggers, starting with Nancy French from Evangelicals for Mitt.

What is your full name?

This isn't my "real" job so, since I blog from work and have clients who I know hail from the left side of the aisle, I prefer to be known as Blue Staterepublican (or "BSR" for short).

What is your age?

42

What's your hometown?

A charming little town in northwestern Arkansas (population 500).

Where do you live now?

Nowdays, I hail from a very blue state. I prefer not to say more than that at the moment.

What is your educational background?

I have a B.A. in communications/journalism and some post-graduate work in political science.

What is your occupation?

I run an in-house marketing department for a technology firm.

When did you first get involved in politics and why?

I started getting involved during the 2000 election because it was the first year I was eligible to vote and was taking my American Government class in high school. I wanted to be involved in picking my representatives in government. I enjoyed the caucus and have since been volunteering for the past 7 years on various campaign from national to local elections.

When did you start blogging and why?

I launched Mike Huckabee President 2008 on February 14, 2005. I did it for two reasons. First, I've known Gov. Huckabee personally for more than 10 years. I know what kind of man he is, what kind of Christian he is, and what kind of leader he is. I've thought for years he'd make a great president. Secondly, as someone who studies the convergence of technology and communications, I couldn't resist the opportunity to dive in and see for myself how blogging might influence the system.

How will blogs impact WH '08?

I think the internet, particularly user-generated content, will have a huge impact on the election. When I say user-generated content I mean blogs, but I would also include sites such as YouTube which is already having an impact, both positively and negatively, on candidates. Bloggers have the ability to communicate things about candidates on such a personal and authentic level, I really believe they will challenge the MSM in this election cycle.

What's your favorite most unsung specific example of a blogger affecting a political figure, organization, philosophy, or movement?

Well, my favorite example isn't really just one blogger. Some individual bloggers do have influence, but it is nothing compared to what can happen when bloggers unite behind a singular cause. I think the first example of how powerful bloggers can be came when President Bush nominated Harriet Meirs to the Supreme Court. The conservative blogosphere reacted immediately and nearly unanimously. We all saw the result.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:40 PM

3/9: A Case In Point?

Does recent netroot 's joy over the outing of CPAC Jeane Kirkpatrick Academic Freedom Award winner Cpl. Matt Sanchez as a former gay porn star/male escort provide insight into social conservatives embrace of Rudy Giuliani? Whether inspired by the viciousness of the netroots attacks or true Christian forgiveness, either way, conservative bloggers have leapt to fully embrace Sanchez since the revelations first surfaced. As media elites try to figure out how Giuliani's liberal social views could possibly jibe with conservative voters, its worth noting some similarities between Giuliani and Sanchez. Both gained notoriety fighting 'liberals' in NYC and both appeal to conservatives on foreign policy grounds (Rudy through 9/11 and Sanchez through his support of military veterans). Is this just more evidence that the GOP base will let national security trump social issues next winter?

GIULIANI: He'd Actually Fire People, Unlike Some Presidents We Know

A Daniel Casse post at Contentions on Rudy Giuliani'a ability to use the current conservative crack-up as an opportunity "to take on the task of realignment-and break the red/blue split that forces the GOP to place all its bets on 100,000 votes in Ohio," inspired a lengthy Rudyathon at The Corner 3/8.

Casse argues Rudy has not yet "delivered a personal vision of what the Republican party ought to embrace. His speeches have been full of anecdotes but lack the ideas that ought to guide Republicans and the conservative movement over the next ten years." Not articulating what that 'vision' might be, but still offering a glimpse of what it could be, Cornerites shared the following pro-Giuliani thoughts in response to Casse:

• The Corner's John Podhoretz: "The man is an anti-liberal, as the word "liberal" has been defined since the late 1960s. That doesn't make him a social conservative. But it makes him an opponent of anything-goes liberalism, which is a position he shares with a great many social conservatives.
• NRO's David Frum: "No matter what liberal positions Giuliani endorses, he just feels right-wing."
• A 'clever friend' of The Corner's Kate O'Beirne: "One thinks, if the wife of 15 years and mother of his two children could be so summarily, publicly and ruthlessly fired, it would be likely that the Man as President similarly would not hesitate to fire at a moment's notice deranged and incompetent old blowhard Secretaries of Defense or generals who don't use enough troops. He also would be unlikely to award Medals of Freedom to spectacular failures like Paul Bremer or Tommy Franks. The public now hungers for it.
• The Corner's Rich Lowry: "There is certainly an opening for Rudy to run a powerful campaign based on cleaning up and running Washington. He can make a good case that he has the record, the executive abilities, and the toughness to do it."

When The Corner's Yuval Levin points out "most Republican voters do not yet realize that Giuliani is very liberal on social issues," J-Pod responds: "But then what accounts for Giuliani's extremely respectable showing in the CPAC straw poll? I don't think such things matter except that it suggests voting for him is not in the least unthinkable for very self-conscious conservatives. ... I get the feeling ... that there's a certain degree of desperate hope in this argument by now ... But there's no evidence it's going to. In fact, the evidence is running in the other direction so far."

Lowry fires back with WSJ polling data showing: "Fully three of four Republicans-including a majority of those backing the former New York City mayor say they would have reservations if they learned Mr. Giuliani supports abortion rights and supports civil unions for gay and lesbians couples."

Not referencing The Corner discussion, Townhall's Matt Lewis posts audio of Southern Baptist Convention Dir. Dr. Richard Land hitting Rudy for the way he treated his firs wife.

HUNTER: Only Candidate With Son Who Served In Fallujah

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) sat down for a podcast session with Instapundit. Topics covered include: "Iraq ... gun control, stem cell research and cloning ... Plus, what his son learned serving in Fallujah."

ROMNEY: Best...Staff...Ever

Tons of staffing praise for Mitt Romney 3/8. Robert Bluey describes incoming Dir. of eStrategy Mindy Finn as "the key piece of the puzzle" who will bring "a holistic approach that includes more synergy to the campaign's online message, money-raising and mobilization efforts."

At Townhall, Hugh Hewitt lauds "Romney's Economic Team" blogging: "[N]o one in the field, on either the Republican or Democratic side, can approach Romney's credentials on understanding the economy and how it can be kept growing both in overall productivity and also in crucial areas in which America must lead. The top rate team of advisors Romney has attracted is a testament to this."

DEM FIELD: No George Left to Hate

First reminding readers that despite his unpopularity Pres. Bush "won't actually be running for re-election" in '08 Atrios blogs: "while a lot of the political internet was focused on the presidential race in '04, in '08 the focus will be much more on House and Senate races, at least in relative terms. There most likely won't be a Dean-like figure who emerges this year to provide the focus of that support, and after the primaries there won't be the sense that netroots support is needed by the nominee."

Earlier Atrios tells readers he is "trying to stay out of the intra-party primary food fight as much as possible" but still likes to reward "good behavior" when he finds it.

DEM FIELD II: Fox Making Bloggers Unhappy

The CBC seems intent on dragging themselves in between the netroots and their campaign to delegitimize Fox News. DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas recounts past Fox sins against Barack Obama and directs readers to voice their concerns with the CBC. MyDD's Chris Bowers hopes the CBC deal "will spur more conversations and organizing among progressive African-American leaders."

Jill Tubman of Jack and Jill Politics comments: "I hope no one is taking some kind of under the table kickback from Fox News at the CBC. I really do. I think our CBC brothers and sisters are better than that though. I want to think that the new CBC wants to show America how strong we really are and represent. Let's hope they make a different choice."

Back in NV, Reno and Its DiscontentsMyrna Minx bemoans the public nature of the current fight among NV Dems but also comments: "It means we are having a healthy debate about the way our state party functions. ... I know that Tom Collins and the party leadership are stuck between a rock and a hard place created by the media consultants they hired, and I sympathize with them-really I do. But that doesn't mean the right decision has been made, and it doesn't mean I have to be happy about it."

Also unhappy, Markos reacts to news Bill Richardson has committed to the NV Fox debate: "Sigh. Here I was hoping that Richardson would make the leap to the top tier. ... He was threatening to be my favorite in the race. ... But by being the first to agree to this debate, it shows his utter lack of understanding of the right wing propaganda machine and tone deafness to party activists in the trenches fighting the VRWC. Instead, he apparently thinks appeasing right-wing operations is his path to victory."

DODD: Be Prepared

At MyLeftNutmegChris Dodd promoted the introduction of his bill allocating $38 bil. to the National Guard to address reports showing "88% of Army National Guard units are not adequately equipped for combat and unprepared for domestic emergencies." Bob Geiger and CT Blog both thanked Dodd for his efforts.

EDWARDS: What Is Netroot's Love Worth?

TAPPED's Garance Franke-Ruta claims reports that the CBC is in negotiations to host WH '08 debates with Fox News explain why most Dem campaigns (other than John Edwards) have not yet announced whether they will be skipping NV's 8/14 Fox debate. Franke-Gupta praises Edwards for his courage and comments on the other candidates: "It's not that they are slow or afraid of being leaders. They've been waiting for the CBC Institute to make its final decisions and announcement before giving a public answer to the netroots, in order to avoid alienating allies."

Fellow TAPPEDer wonders if Edwards properly calculated his decision: "In the end, the question for Edwards will be whether the base appreciates this action enough to increase his chances of getting the nomination by the same amount that Fox's fury will decrease his shot. And on that, I'm unconvinced. Edwards undoubtedly did the right thing here, but I just don't know that the netroots have the power or focus to make it worth his while."

OBAMA: The Organic Candidate

Netrooters are impressed with reports Barack Obama has earned more than $6 mil online. Atrios calls it "pretty amazing for a variety of reasons," and MyDD's Chris Bowers adds: "However, if this report is true, and Obama has indeed raised half of his $12M online, he would already equal the peak of the Howard Dean campaign despite the Iowa caucuses still being ten months away. As Matt has repeatedly pointed out, he has not even done this through repeated asking--it seems fairly organic organizing done on his behalf."

IRAQ: Feingold Is All The Approval Kos Needs To Know

Early netroots reviews of the latest Senate Dem plan for Iraq are tentatively supportive. DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas admits, "all the Iraq proposals in the House and Senate have my head spinning" and complains, "it seems everyone is happy to introduce bills (especially the presidentials), but no one seems to push them," but finally vouches for credibility of the effort: "I forgot to mention that Feingold is one of the key architects of this legislation, along with the rest of the Democratic leadership. This one has progressive 'cred'."

Cross posting everywhere, David Sirota says the plan "appears - for the first time - to be binding" and calls it a "a solid (though certainly not perfect) step." Former Levin-Reed Amendment critic, Big Tent Democrat of Talk Left calls the compromise "a start of a long political road" but also reminds readers: "The Spending Power, or NOT Spending Power, as I will now refer to it, will be the key."

The House plan also received some positive posts. The Left Coaster's Steve Soto congratulates Dems for "finally taking a position demanded by their base and that is supported by over 60% of the public. ... Democrats are cleverly now offering their GOP counterparts the opportunity to go on record in support of getting out of Iraq before their next election."

Not everyone is happy however. TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent recounts an "awkward moment" from 3/8's pre-press conference closed door House Dem meeting: "The source says that while Nancy Pelosi was addressing the assembled Dems, a bunch of liberal Dem members stood up and walked out to get to their previously scheduled press conference at which they unveiled their own approach."

Sargent also reports that despite the withdrawal of language forcing an end to funds at the behest of Blue Dogs, enough "folks who were supportive of the [liberal position] seemed to have heard the magic words they needed to hear from the leadership to get on board with their approach ... There was some erosion of support for the Progressive/Out Of Iraq position.""

For a window into what the Progressive/Out Of Iraq caucus is facing, see this video of a Rep. David Obey (D-WI) telling a 'military mom' and her male companion: "I am the sponsor of the bill that's going to be on the floor and that bill ends the war. If that isn't good enough for you you're smoking something illegal. ... We don't have the votes...do you see a magic wand in my pocket...how the hell are we going to get the votes for it. ... if you guys would stop screwing it up we do have the votes for ending the legal authority. That's the same as defunding it."

Already frustrated by a lack of Dem resolve to fully fund troop withdrawal, MyDD's Chris Bowers strategized for the future: "If we can get a list of members in favor of fully funding withdrawal, and those opposed, then at least we have the beginnings of potential accountability on Iraq. If we know who is opposed to it, then we can run activist, electoral and other challenges against the members who are opposed to it. If we don't know who is opposed to ending the war, then we don't know where to focus our pressure. This is why I support the Out of Iraq caucus strategy to force a vote on an amendment to fully fund withdrawal. Floor votes with roll calls on measures like that are the only ways to generate a list of which members are serious about ending the Iraq war, and which members are not."

On the right, RedState Insider hits House Dem leaders for turning down "a chance to meet with General Petraeus" to meet with "Labor Unions and Moveon.org" instead.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Maybe They Should Just Unionize The Mullahs?

"By no means begrudge airport baggage screeners their newfound union rights" Matthew Yglesias contrasts "the speed, alacrity, and daring with which the Democrats pushed forward on this issue" to the "sloth and timidity in taking the progressive side in other fights about national security issues." Yglesias details: "To stop a war with Iraq? To halt torture? Illegal surveillance? Suddenly you see a lot less speed, a lot less determination, and a lot less backbone."

Yglesias does not "begrudge the unions their influence" since they "won it fair and square -- with organizing, with money, with volunteers, with discipline, with clear requests, etc." Instead, Matt concludes: "Sadly, there are virtually no institutions of any consequence organized around providing a progressive take on the substance -- as opposed to labor procedures -- of national security issues. And until that changes, you'll keep having what we have today; a Democratic Party with very clear ideas about whether or not airport screeners should be represented by unions, but very hazy ideas about how to deal with Iran."

LEST WE FORGET: Sports Illustrated To Solve Global Warming?

Noting that SI contributor Alexander Wolff wrote both the current front page cover story on global warming and "the definitive meditation on the 'SI Jinx'" Blog P.I.'s Bill Beutler asks: "What does this mean? Does the SI Jinx apply to global warming, thus signifying happy days ahead? Or to planet Earth, signifying a cloudier future than Ron Artest's?"

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:32 PM

March 08, 2007

Blogger Spotlight: IA for Edwards

Better late than never, today we interview one of the bloggers behind the the unofficial, IA for Edwards blog. Tomorrow we will talk to perhaps the first unofficial blog for WH '08, Mike Huckabee for President.

What is your full name?

Joshua Allen Brown

What is your age?

24

What's your hometown?

Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Where do you live now?

Indianola, Iowa

What is your educational background?

BA in Political Science from Simpson College, currently working towards my MA in Special Education at Morningside College

What is your occupation?

Middle School Teacher

When did you first get involved in politics and why?

I started getting involved during the 2000 election because it was the first year I was eligible to vote and was taking my American Government class in high school. I wanted to be involved in picking my representatives in government. I enjoyed the caucus and have since been volunteering for the past 7 years on various campaign from national to local elections.

When did you start blogging and why?

I started blogging by running my own personal diary type blog and had a few people read it that were my close friends, after my son was born I created a site for him. It was not until 2004 that I started any political blogging and even that was just on and off on John Edwards' official campaign blog. This is my first blog and website that I have created for a purpose beyond just my own thoughts.

How will blogs impact WH '08?

I think that blogs will have a powerful impact on the 2008 Presidential Election. People are tired of just waiting to hear what the MSM is saying and their spin. Young people especially, who have grown up with computers and the internet, are getting most of their news online and the impact of blogs is going to be immeasurable. Blogs allow supporters of a candidate to immediately respond to real life issues and criticisms. It is also apparent how important blogs are going to be in the presidential campaign since so many of our candidates are getting on blogs and taking questions. I believe that John and Elizabeth Edwards are leading the way in this

What's your favorite most unsung specific example of a blogger affecting a political figure, organization, philosophy, or movement?

Well, the most immediate example for me would be the Iowa for Edwards blog and website I started to just share my ideas and get out news articles and events in the area to anyone out on the internet that was listening. As time went on I had several people ask how they could help and we started building a real grassroots organization from the website and blog I started on my own. Now we are working on getting county contacts in each of the 99 counties in Iowa and looking at how we can be an affective tool in helping to organize Edwards supporters across Iowa.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 07:24 PM

3/8: A Dem-Free Zone?

The main focus of the netroots campaign to force the 8/14 Reno, NV, Dem debate off of FOX News is to de-legitimize it "as a neutral news outlet." If the netroots do push Dems off of Fox this primary season (and it looks like they have the NV Dem establishment on the run now), will they step up their campaign for the general election? If Brit Hume and Co. are still around in Aug. '08 will the netroots press their nominee to avoid Fox altogether? How far are they willing to go in their campaign to push Fox out of the news business?

NV CAUCUS: A Day Late, And A Dollar Short

NV Dem efforts to address concerns over FOX News sponsorship of 8/14's Reno, NV, debate are not placating the netroots. Forwarding an email from NV Chair Tom Collins proposing a compromise where "a local progressive voice" would be invited on the panel, Reno and Its DiscontentsMyrna Minx blogs, "It looks like the [John] Edwards campaign's refusal to participate has forced the mysterious decision makers of the NSDP to rethink their position. So the big question now is, will Edwards participate under the new deal?"

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas hopes he does not: "Actually, there was no "good faith effort" to address concerns until John Edwards dropped the debate. Before then, there was nothing but arm-twisting efforts to get people to support their asinine decision. Now that the debate is falling apart, they want to compromise. Too late. The time for compromise is past. At this point, all that's left is killing this Fox News Debate dead."

Later, Kos updates readers on which '08ers have gotten back to him on whether or not they would attend: Edwards: No; Richardson: Yes; Obama: Decision will be made within the week; Clinton: Too early to make a decision; Dodd: They haven't decided yet; Biden: No response." MyDD's Jerome Armstrong urges readers to keep up the pressure, posting campaign phone numbers for each of the '08 candidates. Fellow MyDDer Matt Stoller also urges calls to Maj. Leader Harry Reid's (D-NV) office.

In other FOX News/NV Dem blogging, Taylor Marsh posts a Carson City, NV, Demo Cent. Cmt. resolution opposing Fox affiliation with the debate, The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum marvel at the speed of "the activist community's" big impact, and TPM Cafe's Nathan Newman chides Markos for buying into a "Rightwing Frame" by using the term "local union bosses" to criticize the NV Dem establishment.

CLINTON: So How Much Do You Make?

TAPPED's Dana Goldstein defends Hillary Clinton's "Paycheck Fairness Act" from colleague suggestions that the bill does not address the "social conditions that leave women out-of-the-loop when it comes to salaries and disproportionate domestic responsibilities as major problems." Goldstein responds: "But if we take a close look at the proposed legislation, we see it is designed to address exactly these issues. It prohibits employers from penalizing workers for sharing salary information with one another, and requires firms to keep detailed records on pay classified by gender, race, and national origin."

OBAMA: David Geffen Strikes Again!!!

The New York Times came under heavy netroots criticism for its 3/7 story on past Barack Obama investments. Atrios dubs the piece "Whitewater Journalism" and adds: "The fact that, for example, in the Obama story the money involved was a tiny amount of money both brings it down to a human scale people can understand and makes people believe that if an important newspaper like the New York Times is writing about what seems to be a trivial matter it somehow must be important."

The story did, however, provide Team Obama with another opportunity to prove their rapid response mettle. TAPPED's Garance Franke-Ruta notes: "Proving once again that he's got the fastest media operation in the race, Barack Obama has already gotten The New York Times to publish a second story following up on its front-pager this morning, in which he explains his finances at length -- "At no point did I know" -- and also manages to demonstrate surprisingly good humor, given the topic."

At TechPresident, Micah Sifry tracks down the decidedly not amateur "ParkRidge47" behind the "1984" Macintosh YouTube mash-up with Hillary Clinton as big brother. PR47 tells Sifry: "The idea was simple and so was the execution. Make a bold statement about the Democratic primary race by culture jacking a famous commercial and replacing as few images as possible. For some people it doesn't register, but for people familiar with the ad and the race it has obviously struck a chord. ... A friend suggested the idea after reading a New York Times article about the Clinton's campaign bullying of donors and political operatives after the Geffen dustup."

GIULIANI: The Information Age Candidate?

IA's Krusty Konservative is no fan of Newsdayspeculation that Rudy Giuliani might skip the IA caucuses: "Craig Gordon of Newsday thinks that Giuliani announced his travel plans a full month in advance in a bid to head off a spate of Rudy-skips-Iowa stories. I don't understand his logic, and it makes me wonder if Mr. Gordon is backing a different presidential candidate."

Krusty goes on to handicap Rudy's chances in IA: "While the media and the talking heads think that Giuliani will not fare well in Iowa because of the states konservative Republicans, I actually think Rudy could do very well in Iowa. ... 9-11 changed the political landscape of the entire country, including Iowa. The most important issue for the vast majority of caucus goers is national security, not social issues. While I still think that social issues are still very important, nothing trumps national security, which is Giuliani's strength."

Still posting about his 3/5 coverage of a Giuliani fundraiser in Brentwood, CA, Austin Bay blogs: "Why is "the Mayor" a war winner? I think Rudy Giuliani is the American political leader who can bring the missing media to the great world war for hearts and minds - and in the War on Terror the economic and political dimensions are the determinative dimensions. ... The Brentwood fundraiser I attended wasn't Hollywood ... but Giuliani is positioned to attract America's Information Age media talent. ... Rudy, unlike George W., can also communicate what that crisis means and why it takes blood, sweat, toil, and tears to meet it and defeat it. Giuliani's brief speech made it clear he intends to fight and win the War on Terror -or to use his nom de guerre, The Terrorists War on US. I like that name."

In less positive Giuliani blogging Ankle Biting Pundit's Bull Dog Pundit tracks MSM Rudy doubts on abortion and divorce and argues abortion will be his bigger obstacle: "I think the abortion issue is going to be a much harder obstacle to overcome than his marital behavior. Why? Because the voters don't have to live with him -- but they have to live with his political decisions and judicial appointments."

GINGRICH: Wouldn't Conservatives Want A 'True Red' Conservative?

After listening to Newt Gingrich tell James Dobson he got "on my knees and sought God's forgiveness" over his marital problems, The Brody File riffs on what Gingrich might say for his Sept. '07 WH announcement:

As I've studied the issues and candidates for almost a year now, I have come to the conclusion that I must run. Grassroots conservatives want a true blue Republican that has fought with them on every conservative principle throughout the years. I'm that guy. So today, my fellow Americans, will you not join me in a new Contract with America.

Brody adds: "Cue the music. Cue the balloons. Cue the kids singing America the Beautiful. Cue Lee Greenwood. Cue Charlie Daniels. Cue Sean Hannity."

HAGEL: Hagel/Chafee in '0never

Confusion would be the most generous description of conservative blogger reaction to speculation the Chuck Hagel might soon announce his WH '08 intentions. Ankle Biting Pundit's Bull Dog Pundit asks: "My question is in what party's primary is he running? And how is his 'base' (the "international community", the MSM, and the New York Times editorial board) going to vote for him? ... who is next going to announce and think they can win? ... Is Lincoln Chafee going to come out of retirement?"

The Corner's Michael Ledeen is a bit more welcoming: "I think the appeasers ought to have a candidate in the Republican primaries, and he's their ideal standard-bearer. So far as I know, he never met a dictator he didn't want to appease."

HUCKABEE: In Case You Were Wondering How Bloggers Feel About 'Compassionate Conservatism'

The Right Angle's Ivy Sellers confirms Mike Huckabee has followed through on his CPAC promise to sign Americans for Tax Reform's "Presidential Taxpayer Protection Pledge." Sellers comments: "For someone who calls himself a 'compassionate conservative,' a move like this is somewhat surprising for Huckabee. Here's hoping he stays true to his word and doesn't end up in ATR's Hall of Shame."

MCCAIN: It's Like Rain On Your Wedding Day

Townhall's Matt Lewis posts SC AG Henry McMaster's quote in The Hill: "The people who used to sit around the table and decide how much money would be raised for Bush in 2000 and those that sat around the McCain table, which was a smaller table in 2000, are all sitting around this table."

Lewis comments: "After dooming his 2000 candidacy, it would be ironic if the "Palmetto State" once again serves a decisive role, this time, making John McCain the GOP nominee."

IRAQ: It's Like They've Been Working With Frank Luntz Or Something

Progressive Caucus members Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and Barbara Lee (D-CA) are letting the netroots know Dem language on Iraq must change from "cutting off funding for our troops" to "fully funding the withdrawal of troops from Iraq."

Woolsey at Calitics: "A fully funded withdrawal would ensure that our military commanders have any and all resources available to them to bring our troops home, while providing for their security during the process." Lee at The Huffington Post: "I believe that the best way to do that is for Congress to protect our troops and fully fund their safe withdrawal from Iraq over a clear timeline."

For the first time in a while there is also some optimism that progressive are moving the debate on Iraq. Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat is by no means a fan of the current Dem compromise that would have Pres. Bush 'certify benchmarks' on Iraq, but does describe the position as "certainly better than just a few days ago." BTD urges: "The pressure must continue to build from the Out of Iraq Caucus, the grassroots AND the Netroots."

MyDD's Chris Bowers is also pleased with increased coverage of anti-war voices noting that The Out of Iraq caucus received more Google News results (78) than the Blue Dogs did (55) over the past month. Bowers also looks forward to the upcoming vote on the Iraq supplemental, suggesting the results could dictate netroots plans for '08 House race targeting: "That vote will provide us with essential knowledge on which Democrats are serious about ending the war in Iraq, and which are unwilling to take the decisive action that is necessary from Congress in order to end the war. It will be the start of accountability moment, as we know which Democrats are taking the will of the American people to heart, and which will require substantially increased pressure."

CA 10: Speaking of Blue Dogs ...

Perusing the Blue Dog membership page, CaliticsBrian Leubitz noticed Rep. Ellen Tauscher's (D-CA) was conspicuously missing from the list and asks: "Has Ms. Tauscher unceremoniously dumped the Blue Dogs? As far as I can see, she didn't issue a press release noting the exit from the hawkish group. She tried to do it all quiet like, but as she knows from the "The Caress", the internet has a long memory. It never forgets."

Blogswarm later updates Calitics readers: "Josh Richman ... gets Tauscher Flack Kevin Lawlor to say that she is only taking a "leave" because she "wouldn't be a valuable member."

PROSECUTOR PURGE: It's Got An Official Name And Everything!

Urging readers to follow the latest coverage "in the Prosecutor Purge case," Daily Kos' mcjoan points Kossack to TPMmuckraker reports on which DOJ officials the Senate Jud. Cmt. plans to subpoena for the next stage in their hearings.

SCOOTER: Book Deals For Everyone!!!

Juror #9 and Bob Woodward colleague Dennis Collins posted a seven page diary entitled: "Inside the Jury Room: What the Jury Thought, Day by Day Witness by Witness, at the Scooter Libby Trial" at The Huffington Post a few hours after the final verdict was read.

The Corner's Byron York followed up with Huffington's staff:

• York: Was there any contact between Denis Collins and the Huffington Post before the verdict was announced yesterday?
• HuffPo: No.
• York: Did Collins have his diary already written yesterday, or did he write it in the time since the verdict was announced and the jury was dismissed?
• HuffPo: We have no idea.
• York: Are there any more entries of his trial diary on tap for publication in the Huffington Post?
• HuffPo: No.
• York: What was Collins paid by the Huffington Post for the trial diary?
• HuffPo: Zero.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: What Would Jesus Reference?

RedState's Erick Erickson is doing his best to end "The Latest Dumb Idea From the Separatist Right." Erickson says Conservapedia "is destined to fail miserably to expand outside the clutches of a few conservative cultists" and will "draw away from Wikipedia the conservatives who choose to participate there, while failing to gain popular traction due to its very name -- an upfront banner of separatist conservative anxiety against the liberal biases of an online encyclopedia anyone can edit."

Erickson closes: "I do not deny that wikipedia has a liberal bias. It certainly does, as does modern academia. But conservatives do themselves and the public a disservice by walling themselves off. Christ said to the apostles, "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations," not "wall yourselves off from the world and only talk to each other."

LEST WE FORGET: We Wish We Had Majored In Social Skills

After witnessing 5th grader mastery of astronomy and anatomy on FOX's new "Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?" The Dilbert Blog concludes: "Clearly, our kids are being taught a lot of useless crap." Scott Adams continues: "I try to imagine a situation where I would need to know the name of my largest bone. I suppose I might someday be in a museum when a pack of wild dogs attacked, and someone would see me standing next to the exhibit of early human skeletons and yell "Quick, grab a femur and start swinging!" But realistically, I can count on one hand the number of times anyone has asked me to hit a dog with a femur.

Adams concludes with his ideal core 5th grade curricula: "If it were up to me to add some classes to the grade school curriculum, I think I'd put more emphasis on these skills: public speaking, risk assessment, bullshit detecting, social skills, decision-making, managing your own body, and influencing people."

Clarification

The Blogometer apologizes for using the term 'stalker' 3/5. We did not use it as a technical legal description of anyone's behavior. 'Heckler', 'provocateur', and 'prankster' would all have been more appropriate descriptors. Sorry for the confusion.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:51 PM

March 07, 2007

Blogger Spotlight: Washington for Richardson

Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are lucky enough to have the largest collection of unofficial blogs devoted to their candidacies. Among the many pro-Obama blogs Emmett O'Connell helps run Washington for Richardson.

What is your full name?

Emmett Joseph O'Connell

What is your age?

30

What's your hometown?

Olympia WA

Where do you live now?

Olympia WA

What is your educational background?

BA, Liberal Arts, Evergreen State College (Olympia, WA)

What is your occupation?

South Sound information officer, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission

When did you first get involved in politics and why?

Dean for America meetups in 2004. I was the rare Deaniac in that I started going not because of his opposition to the war (I was agnostic at the time), but rather because the meetups opened his campaign to any supporter. I loved that.

When did you start blogging and why?

In 2001, during a historic baseball season (116 wins), the Mariners started cracking down on ticket scalpers outside of Safeco Field by hiring off duty police officers. While ticket scalping is illegal in Seattle, the Mariners had set up a ticket auction website, where anyone could resell tickets they weren't going to use, but with the proceeds going to the Mariners. Because the servers were located in Bellevue (outside of Seattle), they couldn't be prosecuted.

How will blogs impact WH '08?

We'll probably see the Virginia Senate race on a larger scale, more candidates having to navigate in a less controlled environment. I wish I could say that every campaign will be like the Dean campaign, but I don't think anyone has really learned the lessons of 2004 in terms of turning over control to their supporters.

What's your favorite most unsung specific example of a blogger affecting a political figure, organization, philosophy, or movement?

The 2004/05 effort to get Howard Dean elected as chair of the DNC, especially as it compares to the recent election of Mel Martinez as chair of the RNC.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 02:15 PM

3/7: Investigation Season Has Begun

Patrick Fitzgerald's insistence that his investigation is over, barring any new information, places the possibilty of any further Plame outing action squarely in the laps of cong. Dems. And since, as lefty bloggers admit, the WH can fire and hire US attys as they please, that story will not include any illegality. However, it does appear Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) and Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM) may have violated ethics rules in their contacts with at least one atty. Again, it's going to have to be cong. Dems to move the ball down the field on the story with more hearings. While Dems may still be divided on Iraq, it's becoming clear they'll still have plenty of opportunities to beat up the current WH straight through 'til Election Day.

SCOOTER: Congressmen, Start Your Investigations

Jane Hamsher told her Firedoglake readers her "heart was pounding" in her chest as she waited for the Scooter Libby verdict, since "it all started to become real for me, all we'd done, how far we'd come." After the guilty verdicts came in, Hamsher asked: "It's a good day to be an American, huh?" Firedoglake's Marcy Wheeler was also in a good mood: "I gotta say, it was a pretty cool scene with Fitz and his team walking out of the court room. It made you believe, at least for this day, there was justice. I'm pretty happy about the events of the day. I'm relieved, more than anything else."

Fellow lefty bloggers quickly moved to stress the importance of the verdict. Arianna Huffington blogged: "Before the GOP spin machine kicks into high gear, shouting from the mountain tops that the Libby verdict is just about making false statements to the FBI, and that no one was ever charged with the underlying crime of outing Valerie Plame, let's make it clear that Libby was found guilty not just of perjury but of obstructing justice -- obstructing justice in order to encumber the investigation and keep secret the dark, ugly truth about how the White House sought to cover up its lies about Iraq and its efforts to intimidate and silence critics of the administration." Also at HuffPo, Russell Shaw writes: "Blaming Libby For The Plame Leaks Is Like Blaming Lyndie England For Abu Gharib."

Many on the left fully anticipate a pardon for Libby and hope the GOP will pay a heavy price for the act. AMERICAblog's John Aravosis writes: "It's a done deal, Libby is getting pardoned. Hell, I'd be surprised if he doesn't get a medal. ... but nothing will wipe away the taint the next two years will leave on the Republican party for a long, long while." TAPPED's Jeff Lomonaco has similar thoughts: "I don't think anyone thinks Libby is going to turn on Cheney, so that means indeed that whatever consequences there are for Cheney will be in the political domain -- which I think is good, at the end of the day, in this particular case."

There were also many suggestions that the ending of Fitzgerald's investigation ought to only be the beginning of a cong. one. TPM Cafe's Larry Johnson: "Although Patrick Fitzgerald indicated he has no plans to file further charges in this case, there is still work for Congress to do. At a minimum, charges of impeachment against Dick Cheney should be introduced. ... It is time for Congress, the House and the Senate, to conduct hearings on the falsified case for going to war and to look specifically at the smear campaign launched against the Wilsons." Andrew Sullivan was on the same page: "Something is rotten in the heart of Washington; and it lies in the vice-president's office. The salience of this case is obvious. What it is really about - what it has always been about - is whether this administration deliberately misled the American people about WMD intelligence before the war. ... We now need a Congressional investigation to find out more, to subpoena Cheney and, if he won't cooperate, consider impeaching him."

SCOOTER II: A New Forum To Fight?

Three main talking points seem to be emerging from conservatives blogging on the Libby verdict: 1) Libby should be pardoned; 2) the jurors "Where's Rove?" comments make an appeal likely; 3) Joe Wilson is still a big fat liar.

There is also plenty of blogging on the prudence of Fitzgerald's prosecution without an underlying crime, but there is no consensus. Captain's Quarters sentiments are representative of both sides of the debate: "Regardless of the pettiness of the probe, people cannot be allowed to lie to the police or under oath at hearings and trials. It undermines our system of justice even more than out-of-control special prosecutors. ... Of course, I made this same argument in 1998, when Bill Clinton committed perjury during another court case."

At The CornerBill Bennett and Mark levin also worry about "the criminalization of politics" with Levin noting the voting registration numbers in DC put GOPers at a severe disadvantage in the courtroom: "[A]s long as cases with political overtones are tried in the [DC], Republicans will be at a severe disadvantage. ... I don't believe in every case [jurors] are able to ignore their own biases. And that's especially true when they're being prodded in that direction by the prosecution. Until something is done about this, people like Bill Clinton and Sandy Berger will get what amounts to a pass and Lewis Libby will be facing prison time."

SCOOTER III: No Time For Losers ...

Noting "the knowledge that reporters in the courthouse media room had about the Libby case was remarkably good," firedoglake's Jane Hamsher instructs fellow bloggers to "Take A Victory Lap," citing Glenn Greenwald analysis that blogs kept the MSM from getting lazy on the story. In a similar vein, MyLeftNutmeg's Scarce details Firedoglake national recognition for Libby coverage and The Left Coaster argues "Libby Verdict A Black Eye For Washington Post."

Talk LeftJeralyn Merritt posts video of the final v-log from Hamsher and Marcy Wheeler on the Libby trial and after crunching the numbers from U.S. Sentencing Guidelinesestimates that Libby will get between a 15 and 33 month sentence.

US ATTORNIES: A WH Is Using AUSA Posts To Advance Political Careers? Do Go On!

With the latest phase of the Libby/Wilson about to end, many on the left are eager to extend the story line into the brewing US Attorney investigations. Digby writes: "I would suggest that everyone keep at least one eye on the next brewing legal scandal. It's looking more and more obvious like the Bush administration fired all those US Attorneys because they were investigating Republicans or allegedly dragging their feet in investigating Democrats. ... With the vice president's office being completely discredited today and using the justice department for political purposes, we are now officially in Nixon territory."

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas outlines a pattern he sees developing between Scooter and the US Attornies: "1) a gross abuse of power occurs, 2) the traditional media yawns, while 3) the beltway punditry laughs at those silly bloggers making much ado about nothing. Then 4) it turns out there was reason enough to make "ado", and finally, 5) the traditional media belatedly enters the scene."

Fully established as the blogging leader on the subject, Talking Points MemoJosh Marshall explains what the scandal is all about: "Let's be clear. The DOJ needn't establish a lengthy or any paper trail to justify firing a US Attorney. ... The issue here is different. There is a clear and growing body of evidence that at least three of these fires were canned for not allowing politics to dictate their prosecution of political corruption cases. Or, to put it more bluntly, for not indicting enough Democrats or indicting too many Republicans. Which is to say they were fired for not perverting justice."

The Corner's Ramesh Ponnuru sees more Pres. Bush incompetence at work, not justice perversion: "The administration has the legal right to fire U.S. attorneys for pretty much any reason, and even its critics are conceding as much. ... My best guess is that the administration wanted to season and credential some up-and-coming Republican lawyers as it drew to a close. But instead of just saying, "We just wanted some fresh blood in these positions," or something like that, deputy AG Paul McNulty claimed that most of the firings were the result of subpar performances. ... Nice job."

DODD: Coming Soon To A Blog Near You

MyLeftNutmeg's Matt Browner Hamlin doesn't "have a specific time right now" but does expect Chris Dodd to "be posting at My Left Nutmeg to talk about legislation he's currently working on in the Senate" sometime "around mid-day or the early afternoon."

EDWARDS: Biggest Little Debate-Skip In The World

John Edwards dep camp mgr Jonathan Prince was the first to respond to DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas call for all WH '08 Dems to announce they'll skip 8/14's Fox News sponsored debate in Reno, NV. Prince emailed Kos:

We will not be participating in the Fox debate. We're going to make lots of appearances in Nevada, including debates. By the end of March, we will have attended three presidential forums in Nevada - and there are already at least three proposed Nevada debates. We're definitely going to debate in Nevada, but we don't see why this needs to be one of them.

Kos comments: "Great job by the Edwards campaign on this, showing real leadership on this issue. Hopefully others will soon follow."

OBAMA: We Didn't Know Markos Was Such A Townhall Reader

Barack Obama continues to receive highmarks in netroots circles. Positive posts from 3/6 include

• Kos noting "A conservative Harvard Law Review colleague of Barack Obama talks about how nice, fair, and self-confident Obama was over at the wingnutty Townhall. Not the sort of thing conservatives want to read about one of the Democratic front-runners."
• Matthew Yglesias on Obama's use of the Joshua generation on his Selma, AL, address: "Certainly, I'm not a grizzled veteran of the Civil Rights movement, so I can't say for sure how this will play, but it seems pretty clever to me. ... I think it can also work as a larger metaphor. Progressives these days have a sometimes angsty relationship with the social movements of the 1960s and 70s."
• The Huffington Post's Robert Naiman on Obama's vote to end US use of cluster bombs: "Among the Democrats voting no were Senator Clinton, Senator Biden, and Senator Dodd. Wouldn't you like to know why these folks, who talk a good game about reforming U.S. foreign policy, voted no?"

GOP FIELD: Nobody's Perfect

Noting Mitt Romney's promise to repeal McCain-Feingold, The Corner's Ramesh Ponnuru 'surprises' readers by pointing out Romney has "been on both sides of campaign-finance reform" in the past. Ponnuru also identifies past Rudy Giuliani and Sam Brownback troubles with the issue and blogs about John McCain: "People who believe that campaign-finance reform is an attack on free speech may legitimately regard McCain as the worst of these three candidates because he fought year after year to enact a federal law on it, but they won't be able to look at the other candidates' records with great enthusiasm. "

BROWNBACK: No Reparations Here

Commenting on Politico reports that Sam Brownback has introduced a bill "offering 'an apology to all native peoples' for hundreds of years of government hostility and oppression," RedState's Streiff writes: "How about someone offering a one-time omnibus "Sorry our ancestors kicked your ancestors around" resolution? Let everyone who has been wronged sign up. Criminey, let's get this over with because it is really beginning to resemble a boil on the butt."

Trying to quell a blogstorm before it gets started, Brownback E-Campaign Coordinator Leon Wolf responds at Brownback's official blog: "There's not really a lot to say about this. Senator Brownback is a man who is motivated by his faith, and some years ago he came to the realization that this would be a simple and Christian way to help bring about reconciliation with certain communities which have historically been marginalized. It's possible to be suspicious of this move, I guess, since it's so often linked with reparations, but as you can see from looking at Senator Brownback's record, this is not an avenue he's ever explored, and it's not one he intends to bring up at any point in the future."

GIULIANI: Below Ed Koch!?!?

Conservative blogger push back against Rudy Giuliani is slowly mounting. Power Line's Scott Johnson ultimately defends Giuliani's record reducing crime as NYC mayor, but also posts a rebuttal from Power Line contributor Paul Mirengoff's cousin who is critical of Giuliani's term in office:

Dinkins

appointed Ray Kelly as Police Commissioner and crime declined during the last two years of his administration by a higher percentage than it did during Giuliani's tenure. ... Among the New York Mayors I've experienced during my life Rudy ranks far above Dinkins, Robert Wagner, Vincent Impellitieri and the execrable John Lindsay. In my view he is below Ed Koch, Mike Bloomberg and the underrated Bill O'Dwyer.

Back in IA, the Caucus Cooler posts vintage NYC TV news coverage of Giuliani's "open and notorious adultery" and comments: "Let the comparisons begin ... to you know who! Come on, you know who we at the Caucus Cooler are talking about."

In better Giuliani blogging, Pajamas Media's Austin Bay files a report on a Giuliani fundraiser from Brentwood, CA, including: "The crowd who had gathered to hear and take the measure of the man reacted with an unrestrained applause had the rowdy feel of a Fourth of July celebration at a Brooklyn fire station. ... Security is clearly Giuliani's strong suit, both as a crime fighter and as "America's Mayor," the leader who brought New York through the crisis of 9/11."

HUCKABEE: Every Liberal's Favorite Social Conservative

The American Scene's Ross Douthat tells Newsweek "why can't Mike Huckabee catch fire?" Maybe it's because the people who seem most enthused by him are Matt Yglesias, Ezra Klein, Russell Arben Fox, and Salon's Michael Scherer.

ROMNEY: Doesn't Want To Be That Socially Liberal Mormon Guy

Politico's "Romney Rehab Plan" drew conservative blogger reviews of Team Romney's plans. Bull Dog Pundit of Ankle Biting Pundits argues Romney's past on campaign finance reform prevents him from effectively using the issue, but does agree that Romney could gain ground against John McCain and Rudy Giuliani by stressing their support for 'amnesty'.

The Corner's Peter Suderman suggests whatever the differences on issues are, they need to be stressed now: "If Romney's to have a chance, he'll need to make his views on issues the first thing people think of when they hear the word "Romney"-not "Oh, he's that Mormon guy who used to be kinda socially liberal, isn't he?"

At Townhall, Matt Lewis interview Romney Deputy Campaign Manager Peter Flaherty, and The Brody File posts video of his 700 club segment on Romney.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Music Fans Need More Than Love

Impressed by the more than 90 minutes of remixed Beatles music on the soundtrack of Cirque du Soleil's new Vegas show "Love" The Volokh Conspiracy's Randy Barnett argues for changes to intellectual property law so that he can enjoy more similar efforts:

IP is supposed to create incentives for innovation. Here, as elsewhere, it is suppressing innovation. ... One problem with IP is the "P." ... The Constitution does not use the term "property," but merely "exclusive right" for "limited times." Hardly how one would express a full-blown property right. If you really MUST have a legal subsidy for authors, composers and performers, unlike chefs and dress designers, there is no reason why copyrights, like patents, could not be for a 5 or 7 years nonrenewable term, after which a work is in the public domain. Probably 99% of all value to be gleaned by artists from all copyrights would be captured by these terms leaving the works to be exploited by others with creativity rather than by entertainment companies collecting rents.

LEST WE FORGET: We Can't All Be The San Diego Chicken

Reacting to reports the Phillie Phanatic was recently attacked by a dog, Deadspin admits: "We are terrified by the Phillie Phanatic. Everything about him creeps us out: That weird tongue thing he shoots out, the googly eyes that we see in our nightmares, the purple (purple!) eyelashes. He's not a monster, he's not cuddly, he's not a being with any recognizable cousins in the animal kingdom. We suspect he will someday reproduce an army of Phanatic spawns who will commence World War Phi, enslaving our women and children and exterminating us through a series of anal probes. But that's just us. ... Oh, and a particularly skittish dog."

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:27 PM

March 06, 2007

Blogger Spotlight: MyManMitt

Perhaps the best executed unofficial WH '08 candidate site, MyManMitt has only been around 1/3/07 but already has made quite a name for itself in conservative blogging circles. Today we talk to one of minds behind MMM, Justin Hart. Tomorrow we move left and west to talk to Emmett O'Connell of Washington for Richardson.

What is your full name?

Justin Thomas Olson Hart. Thomas - father's name; Olson - Mom's maiden name (my mom was the oldest of six girls... hence, I carry on the name :) )

What is your age?

35

What's your hometown?

I was born in Boston, lived in Maryland until I was 11 but I was raised primarily in the SF Bay Area

Where do you live now?

Ashburn, VA

What is your educational background?

Studied Comptive Literature, Russian and Polish at Brigham Young University

What is your occupation?

Engagement Director for large IT Consulting Firm. I do political strategic consulting on the side.

When did you first get involved in politics and why?

My father was the Appointment Secretary for President Nixon during his second term but he went into the private workforce shortly after that

.

I became really excited about the Conservative movement after watching the C-Span courses that Newt Gingrich taught in Georgia (the lectures he got "in trouble" for but was later recused). I was really into it. I even had the Washington Times mailed to my apartment in Utah (even though the issues arrived 3-4 days after publication).

In 1996 I worked as the Phone Bank Chairman for a Republican primary challenger in Utah's 3rd district. I've always been a bit of wiz with computers. During that time I got to know the folks at Aristotle Publishing (the premiere provider of voter lists to political campaigns). After the campaign they moved my family out to the D.C. area. I worked in tech support to political campaigns all over the country and then as a Capitol Hill trainer for Aristotle's Constituent Software package.

I'm not sure there was a single event or person that got me into the Conservative movement... rather it was a set of core ideas around limited government and core family-driven values that got me excited.

When did you start blogging and why?

I started blogging at RightSideRedux in February 2004. Here's a quick sampling of the niche I employed there:

• 1) Multimedia satire and comment: Conservative Ice Age
• 2) Live blogging from DC events: Blogging from the Capitol
• 3) Taking complex news items and organizing them: Pro-con Harriet Miers

How will blogs impact WH '08?

In my mind blogs will play a few roles in this Presidential campaign:

• 1) They will be the fermenting driver behind numerous grassroots efforts. The main audience for most blogs are like-minded people. 90% of DailyKos readers are hard lefties. 90% of FreeRepublic readers are on the hard right. If the candidates can succeed in moving those sites to their cause it will be to their advantage in the grassroots. Convince the readers of RedState that you are their man and tomorrow you can have 20 people in every major city pounding the pavement for you.
• 2) Blogs will be a laboratory for new messaging. Campaigns will be trying to use the blogs as a testing ground for new initiatives, new soundbites and new attacks (primarily the later).
• 3) Blogs will remain the end-run against the MSM. If a message needs to get out to beat a news cycle... the blogs are the ones to do it. Witness the Romney YouTube debate with the Instapundit response within hours.

What's your favorite most unsung specific example of a blogger affecting a political figure, organization, philosophy, or movement?

Hmmm... let me get back to you in a week's time. I'm curious where this thing will go...

Hart also volunteers on the Edwards/Marcotte affair: "The role of a blogger to the candidate is not to blog. Rather their goal and role should be to steer the candidate through the blogosphere and steer the blogosphere to the candidate."

Posted by Conn Carroll at 02:55 PM

3/6: A Difference Of Style, Not Substance

Following Joe Klein's continued insinuations that Atrios is an "ideological extremist" TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent links to a list of Atrios' positions on a broad array of issues and asks: "Which ones does Klein agree with, and which ones does he disagree with?" Atrios' lists include such 'extreme' positions as: "Undo the bankruptcy bill enacted by this administration;" "Increase the minimum wage and index it to the CPI;" and "Simplify and increase the progressivity of the tax code."

Noting Klein's previous objections to Atrios' use of the term "wanker," Sargent asks: "How is the term 'ideological extremist' as used here anything more than a meaningless slur, just like 'wanker' or 'jerk' ... or anything else?" The Blogometer also doubts that Klein disagrees with many of Atrios' policy positions, let alone would describe them as 'ideologically extreme.' We speculate that the real issue here is that Atrios' "Wanker of the Day" grates on Klein's ears just as bad as Klein's attacks on bloggers grates on Atrios.

CLARK: Too Little, Too Late

Linking to a Clark Community Network post reporting ret. Gen. Wes Clark has no plans on announcing a WH '08 bid for the next three months, MyDD's Chris Bowers writes: "I can't seriously believe that he thinks he will delay as long as last time and still be an effective candidate against a far, far more star laden field." Bowers further notes that "the draft movement for him this time around is about one-tenth of what it was four years ago" and goes on to promise he will cross "Clark off all straw polls until he actually declares his candidacy."

CLINTON: Big Sister

Blogger reports from Selma, AL, continue to roll in, and while they are not all bad for Hillary Clinton, they still point to Barack Obama as the clear winner of the day. Alabama-Democrat writes: "As far as Hillary's speech went I thought it was very good, but my expectations are usually to high for her, because she is no Bill Clinton. Mrs. Clinton did do a good job of saying that "we" endured the civil rights struggle together and relating to the civil rights pioneers that the celebration was being held for. I still think, if one had to judge, Obama won the day if not for his speech itself for a much better supporting cast."

Back in the Golden State, Calitics Todd Beeton has a lengthy post about his efforts to track HRC down at a 3/3 fundraiser in Laguna Beach, CA. Unable to find the event's address (hosted at a private home) on Google, Beeton drove around Lahuna beach till he stopped to ask "two women adorned with STOP THE WAR paraphernalia" if they knew where Hillary was. One of them did and wrote him directions. Beeton later finds the house "at the top of a huge hill, not surprisingly, in quite a wealthy neighborhood" manned by activists from Military Families Speak Out. Beeton posts video of Clinton ignoring the protestors as she exits the residence and drives of in her motorcade.

More defensive of HRC, Media Matters Eric Boehlert chides MSMers for portraying her '02 Iraq AUMF vote as possible "doom" for her campaign. Boehlert points to ABC News polling showing 52% of Dems "don't even think Clinton's vote to authorize the war was a mistake" and comments: "Reporters and pundits though, remain committed to the story. I suspect journalists are married to the Clinton Iraq-vote story because the tale fits in nicely with their preferred narrative about the candidate, that she's cold, overcalculating, and insincere."

MyDD's Matt Stoller doesn't call Clinton cold, overcalculating, or insincere but he does post a mash up of Macintosh's 1984 Big Brother ad with HRC taking the place of Big Brother on the omnipresent video screens. In place of the hammer throwing Mac liberator that ends the original ad, a woman wearing an Obama t-shirt does the the honor in this send up.

Finally, Mark Foley exposer Lane Hudson blogs at Huffington Post about his discovery of a "'Hillary '08' bear" in the Fox News stores of Dulles Airport. Hudson writes: "Did Hillary license merchandise that ended up being sold in stores branded by Fox News? Something along those lines is more likely. I was going to buy one for evidence, but I'm broke, so I didn't. I'll be asking Hillary's folks if they know anything about it. If I get any new information, I'll be sure to update to let you know."

EDWARDS: Bothered By "Christian" Word

Former Pres. Bush Spec. Ass. David Kuo sat down with John Edwards to talk faith and politics. Portions from the full interview, that can be found at beliefnet, include:

• Kuo: What parts of American life do you think would most outrage Jesus?
• Edwards: Our selfishness. Our resort to war when it's not necessary. I think that Jesus would be disappointed in our ignoring the plight of those around us who are suffering and our focus on our own selfish short-term needs. I think he would be appalled, actually.
• Kuo: In what ways do you feel God is happiest with you right now?
• Edwards: I think he would be happy with the fact that I have focused on people who live in poverty here and people without healthcare. And the suffering of others in other parts of the world, like some of the work that I've done on humanitarian issues in Africa, for example, and going to the slums outside of Delhi and India.
• Kuo: Do you think that America is a Christian nation?
• Edwards: That's a good question. I never thought of it quite that way. There's a lot of America that's Christian. I would not describe us, though, on the whole, as a Christian nation. I guess the word "Christian" is what bothers me, even though I'm a Christian. I think that America is a nation of faith. I do believe that. Certainly by way of heritage--there's a powerful Christian thread through all of American history.

OBAMA: What's Jim's Crime Exactly?

Among the uniformly positive praise for Barack Obama's Selma, AL, performance youth activist Illai Kenney says Obama was "Crazy Good in Selma" adding: "I also liked the fact that Obama talked about his grandfather in Kenya. He could have just been an American who happened to have a Kenyan father but he embraced his heritage and his white mother from Kansas. He told the truth about his father not being in his life and how Black men can do better. This is another powerful message that I identify with on a personal level."

The Alabama-Democrat found Obama's Moses/Joshua generation analogy "phenomenal" but took issue with those comparing Obama to JFK: "Kennedy was a serious 'cold warrior' not just bells and whistles. I think people should with hold this much praise of Obama until we see more from him."

In non-Selma Obama blogging, MyDD's Matt Stoller takes the possibility of Obama's hiring Jim Margolis as another reason to worry about the Obama campaign: "From what I understand, Margolis is pretty bad when it comes to the poor commission structure of Democratic media consultants. ... the choice of Margolis is another example of the good old boys club at work. As such, Obama is building an old school campaign where the internet is an afterthought, a high end ATM and walled garden of social networking. It's too bad. Obama could really let his movement change politics if he only embraced it."

DEM FIELD: Leadership Wanted On Card Check

At The Huffington Post labor activist Jonathan Tasini articulates key questions unions will be asking when choosing which Dem to support in '08 including: "Can the Candidate actually talk about unions? ... Can the Candidate break from the false worship of the twins gods of the so-called "free market" and so-called "free trade"? ... Which Candidate actually has walked a picket line or spent quality time on a union organizing campaign? ... Which Candidate can show a real record of fighting for good laws, or at least a real plan for the future?"

Tasini also identifies some specific make or break issues candidates must support, including:

• Fast Track: I do not know how any union can endorse a candidate who doesn't vote against "fast track."
• Employee Free Choice Act: this is a no-brainer. The real question, though, is will those candidates take a leadership role in fighting for the bill?
• Health Care: ... at the very least, a labor-backed candidate has to be pushing a plan that takes away the power from the insurance industry and drug companies to exploit tens of millions of Americans.

WEBB: Still A Netroots Favorite...

Virginia Beach Dems says Sen. James Webb's (D-VA) legislation "prohibiting the use of funds for military operations in Iran without the consent of Congress" is exactly "the kind of legislation we're looking for." VB Dems continues: "You have to start somewhere, and the Congress during the Vietnam era started by preventing a widening of the war ... It took time. A great deal of time, and they had far more anti-war votes than we do now."

VB Dems noted Maj. Leader Harry Reid's (D-NV) support of the positively, but Taylor Marsh wanted more: "Harry Reid offered some drivel that went like this... "very, very confident ... in real generality ... that I can support" Webb's resolution. "In real generality"? What the hell does that mean? It's doubtful Reid even knows. In case I haven't made it clear before, I'm starting to wonder about our majority leader. He's been positively spineless on Iraq. If he can't support Webb's bill all bets are off with me."

GIULIANI: Competence Please

Responding to Instapundit queries on Rudy Giuliani's popularity among conservatives, Shots Across the Bow responds: "To me, it's a pretty simple answer really. Conservatism has never been dominated by the religious right the way liberals have always pictures them to be. Fiscally conservative socially liberal conservatives are a dime a dozen. It just doesn't make for good campaign fodder for either side to recognize their existence. Hey, my ideal candidate is one who is strong on defense, a champion of the balanced budget, and believes that the best government is the smallest government. Show me a candidate like that, and he's got my vote no matter what letter comes after his name."

The Brody File posts reader email voicing different sentiments but reaching the same conclusion: "I am a Christian, Republican, and a southern social conservative and I am supporting Rudy Giuliani. I don't think he's a liberal as his opponents try to make him out to be. Moreover, I think he has the best chance of winning the White House. ... I think Giuliani is competent and that's what I'm looking for. Conservative values are a matter of one's heart and that is the responsibility of the church. We've had pro-life presidents for 19 years out of the last 27 and we still have abortion on demand in all 50 states. I'm pro-life, but I believe the best deterrent to abortion is education and maternal support."

MCCAIN: The Straight $100 Express

Acknowledging John McCain catches "a lot of flack here at RedState" Erick Erickson still admits McCain "had a decent month." Erickson recounts McCain endorsements from Rep. Chip Pickering, (R-MS) Frank Keating, Sens. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and John Thune (R-SD), as well as recent big So. Cal. money men. Erickson allows: "He may be trailing Rudy, but he's still ahead of the rest of the pack and the general public really likes the guy. I don't think it will be enough to get him the nomination, but with all the crap we pile on the man, we ought to at least be willing to point out he really has done well this past month, even with skipping CPAC."

Not willing to cut McCain any slack, The Right Angle's Matt Naugle hits McCain for making himself available for online questioning ... but only after charging $100 for the honor. Naugle writes: "I understand the webcast is taking place at a fundraiser and McCain's campaign is seriously falling behind in fundraising dollars. But isn't the entire point of a webcast to try to reach as many members of the same Republican base that McCain claimed CPAC attendees aren't part of?"

ROMNEY: There's Politics Going On At This Conference!!!

IA's Krusty Konservative posts video of Mitt Romney staffers Jordan Sekulow and Gary Marx working the main exhibit hall at CPAC but later has to qualify the posting to readers: "I wanted to clarify that I don't think the Romney campaign did anything unethical. Jordan Sekulow and Gary Marx are stand up guys, and I'm told that both of them know how to push it right to the line, but neither get any chalk on their cleats. That's how politics work, I think the Romney campaign was smart to work the CPAC Straw Poll, he needed a win and he got it. I would have done the same thing if I were in their position."

Also with video, The Right Angle's Matt Naugle responds to an earlier Romney press release promising to end McCain-Feingold with video of Romney endorsing taxes on political contributions and limits on campaign spending. Naugle writes: "There are perfectly legitimate points to argue on both sides of the campaign finance debate. And now, Republicans on both sides of this hot issue have a candidate who, at least at some point in time, firmly agreed with them."

Finally, video of Romney and the dragon lady in CPAC's very blue Green Room can be found on left and right blogs.

DEMS: Maybe's Reid's Staff Just Likes Talking To Bloggers?

Netroots frustration with Maj. Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is mounting rapidly. Coupling Reid's "tacit support for the Fox News-sponsored debate in Nevada" with Reid's choice of Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) to deliver the Dems weekly radio address, DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas asked if this was Reid's "f--k Democarats week."

Also on happy with Reid, Matt Stoller asks MyDD, Daily Kos, and Huffington Post readers readers to "call Reid's offices and ask him to not legitimize Fox News as a neutral news outlet." Stoller pitches: "It's time to let Senator Reid know that we want him to act like a good Democrat and ensure that the candidate forum in August treats the Democratic Party and our Democratic leaders vying for the Presidency with the respect that they deserve. Treating Fox News as a neutral news outlet by letting them solely host this debate does not do that."

Back in NV, Reno and Its DiscontentsMyrna Minx muses: "I'd hate to be working in Reid's office over the next few days now that the Kossacks are loose. As I have discussed previously, it appears that someone made a unilateral decision (Tom Collins/Harry Reid/Western Majority Project?) without consulting the rest of the state party leadership. Doesn't that seem anti-democratic to you? And who has those pesky updated by-laws anyway?"

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Schumer/Gingrich for 2012?

Freakonomics contributor Stephen Dubner points us to "the most bipartisan thing I've read since ... well ... ever." That 'thing' ... Newt Gingrich's Amazon book review of Sen. Chuck Schumer's (D-NY) Positively American. Gingrich's review includes:

"I am surprised to be recommending Senator Chuck Schumer's Positively American and yet it is a very powerful and effective book. ... For any Republican who would like to understand what happened in 2006, the Schumer explanation is compelling and sobering. He and Rahm Emmanuel have understood that a hard left Democratic Party will never be a majority. They were prepared to recruit candidates who were electable and to accept that those candidates would infuriate their more liberal wing. They saw a center-left majority as preferable to a happy leftwing minority. It is a formidable warning about how they will run 2008 and beyond."

"Finally Schumer lists 11 major areas of solutions. Republicans could easily coopt half of those solutions and challenge Senator Schumer to help pass them into law. ... This is a smart book by an intelligent, liberal Democrat who is determined to turn his party into a governing majority again. It is worth study by every Republican who would like their party and their center-right philosophy to prevail."

LEST WE FORGET: Everyone's Favorite Smug, Arrogant Brat

For his Slate review of the DVD release of Family Ties, David Haglund recounts the show's very first scene where Steven and Elyse Keaton are showing their kids slides of their march on Washington prompting Michael J. Fox's Alex P. Keaton to respond: ""What were you protesting ... good grooming?" Haglund then goes on to explain why Keaton became such a hero to many young conservatives:

How did this happen? Partly, no doubt, it was the sheer absence, before Family Ties, of explicitly conservative young people on network television. And much of the credit must go to Fox himself, whose specialty as an actor was playing the smug, arrogant brat that you like in spite of yourself (see also Back to the Future, The Secret of My Success, The Hard Way, etc.). It seems unlikely that, say, Andrew McCarthy could have exuded such likable sincerity while explaining that "God wants me" to "make a lot of money ... because if he didn't, he wouldn't have made me so smart," as Alex tells that off-screen psychologist after his friend has died. (Even Matthew Broderick, the producers' original choice for the role, might not have pulled this off.)

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:30 PM

March 05, 2007

Blogger Spotlight: LaurinLine

Unlike some bloggers hired by WH '08 campaigns, LaurinLine's Laurin Manning shuttered her blog before going to work for Barack Obama. Bad for us blog readers, but good for Obama. Tomorrow we'll look at the blogging force behind MyManMitt.

What is your full name?

Laurin Parham Manning

What is your age?

25

What’s your hometown?

Hartsville, SC, a small town in the rural, northeastern corner of South Carolina. Cotton and tobacco country.

Where do you live now?

Columbia, SC

What is your educational background?

I have a BA in English from Wofford College, a liberal arts school in Spartanburg, SC. I'm currently completing my law degree at the University of South Carolina School of Law.

What is your occupation?

I'm a 3rd year law student.

When did you first get involved in politics and why?

I grew up three doors down from the late Ed Saleeby, longtime state senator from my hometown. Every November Sen. Saleeby sent all of the leftover "Saleeby My Senator" lollipops that he had passed out to trick-or-treaters down to me, the youngest kid in the neighborhood. I'm pretty sure those free lollipops sparked my interest in politics.

When did you start blogging and why?

I started blogging during the summer of 2002, when I was living in Birmingham, AL and working as a summer intern at Southern Living Magazine. I didn't know many folks down there and began playing with Blogger.com out of boredom. I've been writing as long as I can remember, and I'd recently taken up web design, so blogging as a hobby seemed a natural fit. My site didn't take a decidedly political turn until a few years later. In its early stages, I wrote mostly about day-to-day minutiae. One of my first entries discussed a recipe submitted to Southern Living's annual recipe contest. The submission was for a "Wham-Bam-SPAM Cake" and called for a can of pureed SPAM.

How are blogs changing politics in your state?

State-based blogs are popular among politicos here. Several state legislators have begun maintaining blogs, indicating they recognize what an effective means of communication blogs are.

What's your favorite most unsung specific example of a blogger affecting a political figure, organization, philosophy, or movement?

My friend Ross Shealy, who retired his blog several months ago, spent much time and energy combing the campaign disclosures of statewide candidates in South Carolina. He uncovered countless financial ties between many South Carolina candidates and individuals/business entities associated with Howard Rich, a New York Libertarian who has spent millions of dollars fueling a movement for school choice in South Carolina. The state's mainstream media likely wouldn't have reported these ties had it not been for Ross's investigative reporting and blogging. A coordinated effort by Ross and several other bloggers helped defeat the candidate who'd benefitted most from Rich's support. The candidate was the only Republican to lose a statewide election in South Carolina in 2006, and she lost by fewer than 500 votes.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 04:44 PM

3/5: So Stop Inviting Her!!

The Blogometer has previously posted about our hesitancy to write about Ann Coulter, but conservative blogger outrage following her hijacking of media coverage of CPAC deserves further examination. A common theme running through conservative blogger thoughts on the incident is that her words were just typical of her act and no one should really be surprised. But if that's true, then why invite her to speak in the first place? Let alone after one of the GOP's big WH '08 three. Post-fracas condemnation of Coulter is good and all, but until Coulter starts getting shut out of events like CPAC, GOPers deserve to have Ann hung around their necks.

CPAC: It's Almost As If She's Using Them To Sell Books Or Something

Conservative bloggers were uniformly unhappy that Ann Coulter was the "the real winner at the end of the day" after her off color questioning of John Edwards masculinity stole headlines from WH '08 GOPers attending CPAC. Reactions include:

• Robert Bluey: "When you have eight presidential candidates in your presence but the top story is [nn Coulter], there's something very wrong with the rightosphere."
• Michelle Malkin: "With a single word, [Coulter] sullied the hard work of hundreds of CPAC participants and exhibitors and tarred the collective reputation of thousands of CPAC attendees. ... Not all of us treat the communication of conservative ideals and ideas as 24/7 performance art. ... You can joke without becoming the joke."
• Hugh Hewitt: "I cannot imagine [Coulter] being invited to any panel or television appearance on which I would want to appear. Colleges and universities must also stop inviting her to appear as a representative of the conservative movement in America. She is not."
• Townhall's Dean Barnett: "I guess you could say that Ann loves to shock us, but at this point, who's shocked? She obviously can't behave well enough to attend a respectable political gathering. It's not a lack of intelligence. It's an indifference to self-control and a preening sort of narcissism that compels her to need the spotlight, even if it's unflattering."
• Bryan at Hot Air: "And, what's the big headline coming out of CPAC? ... The headline coming out of CPAC is that [Ann Coultter] said an awful thing. Which is what she wants, since it'll keep her profile up and help her sell books. ... It's all about [Ann]. And that's the problem."
• Ace of Spades: "They could be talking about their biographies, their values, their vision for the future. Instead they're talking about a cable-news clown. I'm just tired of it.
• RedState's Leon Wolf: "I'm not going to willingly feed the ego of a person who cares nothing for the movement she claims to associate herself with, all so that they will (apparently) reinforce that very same ego. Au revoir, [Ann]. This time, at least, I hope you start to reap the rewards you've been sowing for the last couple years."
• The Directors of RedState: "[Ann Coulter] doesn't speak for us. And we hope and expect that this is the last time a candidate for public office willingly accepts her endorsement or appears on the same stage with her.

CPAC II: In Non Coulter CPAC News ...

Posting the results of the CPAC straw poll (21 percent for Romney/ 17 for Rudy/ 13 for Brownback / 14 Gingrich/ 12 McCain) The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez shares: "When they broke the poll down and pointed out [which] folks said expanding individual freedom was a priority, Giuliani and Romney were tied, someone screamed "but they're both liberal" and more than a few applau[ded]."

Underlying K-Lo's screamer, blogger handicapping on who performed well at CPAC was decidedly mixed. RedState's Erick Erickson declared "Rudy vs. Romney" as "the End Result of CPAC." (also at RedState, Moe Lane adds Brownback ("but to a smaller extent") to his list of winners. Captain's Quarters, however, was less impressed with Romney's victory: "However, the straw poll probably reflects Romney's organizing abilities far more than his popular support among conservatives. The Romney campaign turned CPAC from a get-acquainted event to a mini-convention by recruiting scores of young activists to attend CPAC and haranguing attendees to vote for Mitt. The Brownback campaign did the same with a smaller coterie of foot soldiers. None of the other candidates bothered to do anything of the kind."

From IA, Krusty Konservative argues the most "valuable information from the CPAC Straw Poll is how these Candidates did with certain type of voters." Krusty notes Brownback finished first (29%) among self-identifed "Traditional Values Voters" while Giuliani won among "Secure and Guarantee Safety Voters" (25%).

C-SPAN has videos of all the WH '08er speeches here.

CPAC III: Everybody Play Nice Now

More atmospheric CPAC blogging includes:

• The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez: "People not in town keep asking me: "Are they as depressed as it sounds?" Nope. Not from what I saw and heard. These politically active people for the most part aren't totally whipped up by anyone. But they hear things they like and are considering - and appreciate the candidates who stopped by. Yeah, sure, they would like a reincarnated Reagan, but they also don't live in a fantasyworld. They want a leader and they wonder which of those before them might just be the one."
• Outside the Beltway's James Joyner: "Until arriving at CPAC, though, I had no ill feelings about either [Brownback or Romney]. After two days of barely being able to walk around the convention center without some idiot teenager in a t-shirt shouting at me or hitting me with a poster, invariably imploring me to vote for either Brownback or Romney, though, I would sooner vote for Ralph Nader than either of those men.
• The Right Angle's John Gizzi: "Although there will no doubt be a winner in their straw poll of Republican presidential favorites for '08, many participants at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington March 1-3 voiced to me dissatisfaction with the current field."

There were also some minor altercations between conservative bloggers and party-crashing progressives. Captain's Quarters was not amused when George Allen-stalker Mike Stark stopped by bloggers row: "Stark showed up yesterday to get an autograph from Michelle Malkin and then started haranguing her about CPAC attendees not enlisting in the military. ... He brought his weak-assed crap to me and started going into his schtick. I stopped him and told him to go back to Huffington Post. He looked taken aback to be greeted with nothing more than tired disgust, and said, "I thought we were peers." Uh, no, Mike, we're not peers. You're a provocateur and a self-involved assault artist. Jeralyn Merritt, John Aravosis, James Boyce, and other real thinkers on the Left are my peers."

Stark later posted at The Huffington Post, bemoaning the lack of military recruiters at the conference: "CPAC didn't want to be embarrassed when pictures were released that showed recruiters standing around looking lonely. Similarly, recruiters know it's a better investment of their time to troll 'the other malls' rather than to recruit these nice white college boys."

Also doing his best Borat imitation, Sidney Blumenthal's son Max has a video up at The Nation's Campaign Matters that is a hit across lefty blogs.

BROWNBACK: Yellow-Brick Road To Revisit McCain-Kennedy

Rob Bluey was impressed with Sam Brownback's CPAC showing, claiming he "continued to distance himself from the second-tier candidates with a strong third-place finish. Just a day after finishing fourth in the South Carolina straw poll, Brownback now has back-to-back finishes that no one expected. As I reported earlier, Brownback supporters outnumbered the other candidates." Bluey later reported that Brownback might be "reversing course on immigration" and was "Ready to Fight McCain-Kennedy Bill."

The Right Angle's Ivy Sellers was also impressed with Brownback's showing and RedState's Haystack appreciated his focus on Africa.

The only really negative Brownback comments were actually aimed at his supporters. Captain's Quarters explains: "the Brownback crowd shows a lot of enthusiasm for their candidate, and that's great. However, his followers tried drowning him out with Brownback cheers when he was talking to some of the bloggers. These campaigns need to dial down the confrontation and allow people to speak. We'll get enough mindless noise during the primaries." CQ also interviewed Brownback and liveblogged his speech.

GILMORE: Not Ronald Reagan

While Jim Gilmoremay have "red meat" that "went over well," RedState's Erick Erickson still described him as a "non-starter," blogging: "He failed to attract a lot of enthusiasm from the student activists and his largest applause lines were about Ronald Reagan -- not himself.

GINGRICH: Still Not Running!

The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez found Newt Gingrich's main exhibit hall reception "slightly ridiculous" reporting: "He opted for a dramatic walk in from back of the ballroom to the stage, as America the Beautiful played majestically, and the entire ballroom (from best I could see) was standing, some on chairs."

GIULIANI: Getting The Job Done

Rudy Giuliani's speech and overall CPAC performance received mostly positive blogger feedback. Those impressed with Rudy include:

• The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez: "Rudy Giuliani may have been the real winner of this thing though - that he did as well as he did with a self-identified conservative crowd. His speech had both an overarching theme and great moments - that frankly surpassed anyone else at one moment in particular. No one but Giuliani can give the defense of the Patriot Act and NSA surveillance that he did - comparing it to prosecuting the mafia."
• RedState's Erick Erickson: "Today I have seen the future and that future is President Rudy. It's not that I'm voting for Rudy, but the vacuum to be filled has been filled. ... More and more, the conservatives at CPAC are realigning. You have the Brownback folks, the Mitt folks, and the people who are headed quickly to Rudy. And you know what? They are more or less cheerful in doing it."
• RedState's Moe Lane: "Where Giuliani's speech was strong, it was strong. He hammered home the point of the need to make decisions - over and over again - and there was a certain rustle through the audience clustered around the television when he talked about the threat of Islamic terrorism."
• Outside the Beltway's James Joyner: "The speech, which I was able to watch via closed circuit television, was quite impressive. ... Interwoven throughout the speech, though, was what he said was Reagan's foremost lesson, that of optimistic leadership. Giuliani is not quite a Reagan as a communicator, but he got the job done, I think."
• Captain's Quarters: "Rudy Giuliani is speaking now at the CPAC conference, and he is drawing huge crowds -- not only in the Regency Ballroom where he is appearing, but also around every monitor in the exhibition hall. He's keeping the CPAC attendees riveted, and the place is otherwise as quiet as I've seen it since my early morning arrival."

Giuliani doubters included Rob Bluey who points out that Rudy's second place finish is not all that impressive since he finished first in the same straw poll in '05. The Right Angle's Amanda Carpenter says Giuliani flopped big time since he did not address social issues, and self confessed "Romney guy" Dean Barnett at Townhall hits Rudy for naming Chris Matthews as one of his favorite pundits.

MCCAIN: When A Win Is Not A Win

While at CPAC, RedState's Erick Erickson explained why John McCain's South Carolina straw poll victory actually spells doom for the Senator: "McCain has the entire South Carolina Republican structure: the Governor, one of two U.S. Senators, the vast majority of the state GOP legislative caucus. Rudy Giuliani has nothing. There's no significant structure for Rudy in South Carolina. He has no significant presence and no significant hires in the state. How did the straw poll break down:

164 McCain, 162 Giuliani

ROMNEY: If You Don't Want Ann Stepping On Your Story, Don't Appear At The Same Events She Does

The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez does not think criticism of Mitt Romney for associating with Ann Coulter is "fair" since "This wasn't Ann Coulter being at a Mitt Romney campaign event or fundraiser to bring more people to see him." Lopez adds: "I don't think he needs to issue a statement - though I suspect he will wind up addressing it before long in an interview or a Q&A on the trail, etc. I think he needs to make clear what kind of leader he would be on marriage and family issues and what kind of civil campaign he intends to lead by just doing it."

Aside from Coulter, Romney received mostly positive reaction, including:

• RedState's Erick Erickson: "Mitt Romney was pitch perfect and willing to talk social issues -- something totally missing from Giuliani's speech. And people noticed. ... He poked fun at John McCain subtly. He spoke negatively about McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy. He pulled at the heart strings of social conservatives, something Giuliani did not even attempt."
• Captain's Quarters: "Mitt comes across very well in person -- warm, funny, informed, and engaging. ... I wanted to ask him if he would insist on a repeal of McCain-Feingold -- he came out in opposition to it in his speech -- but he had to move on before I could get the question out.
• Power Line's Paul Mirengoff: "Mitt didn't disappoint today at CPAC. Instead, building on the theme of a unified conservative movement articulated by Ronald Reagan at the same forum 30 years ago, Romney presented a fiery defense of all three major strands of conservatism -- economic, social, and security."

Defending against suggestions Romney's straw poll victory should be discounted due to the supporters he brought to the event Townhall's Matt Lewis writes: "Romney's ability to organize, inspire, and transport college students to the conference is precisely why he did deserve to win! A campaign that has the organizational ability to bus in college students has the organizational ability to do a lot of other things, too." Rob Bluey also defended Mitt's win: "The anti-Romney faction is already dismissing the victory because Romney bussed supporters to CPAC from Michigan and Massachusetts. But his critics shouldn't attack him for such tactics. Rather, it proves that Romney has a tremendous organization, which says something about his chances in the Iowa caucuses next year."

CLINTON: Not Going To Be The First Black Female President

Early blog reaction to Hillary Clinton's Selma address were not positive. Daily Kos' ResponsibleAccountable blogs: "Out of the gate her attempt at a religious rabble-rousing start just fell completely flat and sounded totally phony... and I am quite an HRC fan! I guess she really cannot do it. Really cannot speak to the religious side of things... no fault in my opinion, but probably an electoral liability."

An Andrew Sullivan emailer had a similar reaction: " Unbelievable. She lapsed occasionally into this phony southern accent. I'm from the midwest (with southern relatives) and the jarring transition from Chicago accent to southern mush mouth was unbelievably phony. She doesn't know who she is. In fact, she isn't anybody, just a robot. Empty phrases. Fake emotion. Fiction. She claimed to have gone to a MLK speech in Chicago in 1963 and been transformed (hey - what about being a Goldwater volunteer?)."

OBAMA: Killing Them Softly

Barack Obama only solidified his growing netroots support with his 3/4 Selma address. Daily Kos' diarist ResponsibleAccountable says Obama was not originally his choice but, " his announcement speech was a tearing-at-the-eyes moment for me... this speech today, for someone like me who abhors the religiosity in politics in the US, was another great speech... he really is starting to make me believe."

Another dKos diarist links to YouTube of Obama's speech and adds: "Barack Obama is as gifted an orator as FDR, Kennedy, Reagan or Clinton. ... Judging the reaction of the crowd, I cannot imagine in the end Hillary getting more than 20% of the black vote, if that. If that is the case, is the blogosphere plus the black vote enough to elect a nominee? ... Any doubts that Obama is not the most progressive of the big 5 Dems running (Hillary, Edwards, Clark and Richardson) will be erased by viewing this speech. ... He is masterful, however, at not appearing radical or progressive. ... If Obama is the nominee, its likely the black community will work and turn out like we have never seen before-- which has strong implications on election day downticket."

The Reality Based Community thought Obama's speech was the perfect illustration of how to marry religous rhetoric to progressive causes. Kleiman blogs: "watch Barack Obama invoke the idea that all human beings are created in the divine image as the fundamental justification for equality, and then use the imagery of Exodus to sanctify the civil rights movement and the story of Joshua to frame the task of moving forward from here. ... We don't need to carry the white evangelical vote. If we can shrink the Republican advantage among that group, that would be enough. And the Christian tradition, and especially the Gospels, has within it enormous resources for liberalism."

Obama also seems to have received passing grades for the netroots on his 3/2 AIPAC address. TPM Cafe's MJ Rosenberg writes: "This is a good speech. Not perfect. But this is not the kind of full-court pander I (and certainly AIPAC) have come to expect. No Palestinian-bashing. And remember this is what he says to AIPAC, not the Council of Foreign Relations. A good start."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: No Surprise Here

Townhall's Patrick Ruffini (who is also Rudy Giuliani's eCampaign Adviser looks at similar results from the CPAC straw poll (Romney, Giuliani, Gingrich), the Pajamas Media poll (Giuliani, Gingrich, Romney), and 2/07's GOP Bloggers poll (Giuliani, Gingrich, Romney) and writes:

I don't know if this will predict where the broader GOP primary electorate goes, but it's a good commentary on how thoroughly integrated the blogosphere has become in the conservative movement. Conservative blog readers aren't their own standalone constituency; they're a proxy for the movement. The lineup in the blogosphere probably isn't too far off from the organic votes cast at CPAC.

LEST WE FORGET: George Lucas' Next Project

The Corner's Jonah Goldberg points us to a Websurdity post on "Uncomfortable Questions about the Death Star Attack" including:

• 1) Why were a handful of rebel fighters able to penetrate the defenses of a battle station that had the capability of destroying an entire planet and the defenses to ward off several fleets of battleships?
• 2) Why did Grand Moff Tarkin refuse to deploy the station's large fleet of TIE Fighters until it was too late? Was he acting on orders from somebody to not shoot down the rebel attack force? If so, who, and why?
• 3) Why was the rebel pilot who supposedly destroyed the Death Star reported to be on the Death Star days, maybe hours, prior to its destruction? Why was he allowed to escape, and why were several individuals dressed in Stormtrooper uniforms seen helping him?

Posted by Conn Carroll at 12:47 PM

March 03, 2007

Blogger Spotlight: The Blogland of Earl Capps

The Blogland of Earl Capps closes out our SC coverage. Next week we will look at the bloggers behind some WH '08 focused blogs before moving out west to California.

What is your full name?

Earl Capps

How old are you?

Just turned 36 this month.

What’s your hometown?

Born in Charleston, SC

Where do you live now?

Summerville, SC

What is your educational background?

Currently working on my Masters in Communication, with several research awards and publications as both an undergrad and graduate student.

What is your occupation?

Corporate Communication and HR for U.S. Group, Inc., one of the state's leading heavy and highway construction general contractors.

When did you first get involved in politics and why?

I was a teenager back in the 80s, and wanted to do more to support President Reagan's agenda, as well as act against the corruption and good-old-boy politics that was then far more common in South Carolina. Back then, being a Republican in South Carolina was about as "anti-establishment" as one could get, and I was pretty anti-establishment back then - and to a point, I still am. But I've come to view the political process as less black and white and much more shades of grey.

When did you start blogging and why?

As a creative outlet and to increase the amount of writing I did as practice for graduate school. My original intent was to use it to explore new subjects outside of politics, to broaden my interests and prove to myself and others that I was not a political hack. As hard as I tried, after a while, I found it impossible not to use it to express my opinions on that front as well. But I still touch on a lot of stuff that is outside of politics, such as music, my work, my academic research, my kids, and my religious faith.

How are blogs changing politics in your state?

Bloggers provide alternative insights into what is going on in government and politics in South Carolina, by getting around the channeling that takes place with traditional media outlets (i.e. newpapers and TV news), often challenging the traditional view that positions on issues are generally arranged along the traditionally-perceived bi-polar right-versus-left, Republican-Democrat divide of politics. We're not out to "fight the power", but we certainly challenge it, often by broadening the range of perspectives on issues by including people who normally would be shut out of the political process in meaningful ways that often contribute to the political process. Bloggers in this state are spread all over the map, from liberals to social conservatives to libertarians - there is no dominant point of political view on most issues, but lots of discussion that gets attention.

Bloggers are part of a new approach to how "new" media looks at news and issues are covered that uncovers information and presents perspectives that in the past would have been overlooked. More than once, what's shown up on blogs has become the stuff of news stories in traditional media, and the incidence of this "crossover" is increasing, not decreasing. I've also found out that legislators and state agencies regularly pass around blog postings, and in discussions with legislators, we talk about some of what comes up on various blogsites, including mine.

I see a growing co-existence between "new" media, such as blogs and websites, are feeding "old" media and vice-versa. Frankly, I think many bloggers appreciate the recognition they've given us by taking what we talk about and making it news, and I know they're grateful for our inputs. The Spartanburg Herald-Journal and Anderson Independent-Mail are probably the two best traditional media outlets in South Carolina, in terms of working with bloggers, as well as giving us credit for our work, but other traditional news outlets are starting to tune in as well.

Posted by Conn Carroll at 09:23 AM

March 02, 2007

3/2: Kossacks To The Right Of Rudy?

Rudy Giuliani will be speaking at CPAC as we go to press, but his past positions on social issues and gun control are sure to dominate discussion of him throughout the conf. The Brody File brings our attention to a YouTube video chronicling Giuliani statements for gun control, for partial birth abortion, against welfare reform, for civil unions, and for McCain-Feingold. Contrast Giuliani's statements in the video with this wildly popular pro-2nd Amendment diary at Daily Kos.

CPAC: Pajama Party!!!

A virtual '