March 13, 2007

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 March 13, 2007 12:32 PM