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 March 22, 2007 12:47 PM