April 11, 2007

4/11: Out Of Iraq

MoveOn.org is still polling members to determine "Which Candidate is best able to lead the country out of the war in Iraq?" but if early blogger reviews are any indication, Bill Richardson managed to separate himself away from the pack during 4/10's Virtual Town Hall Meeting on Iraq. The Blogometer recently pressed card- carrying netrooter Liberal Oasis about what a candidate would have to say on Iraq to win his vote for BloggingHeads.tv. Bill Scher stressed that the candidate who best convinced him they would leave no permanent troops anywhere in Iraq would get his vote.

Bill Richardson did just that 4/10 telling MoveOners he "would have no residual force whatsoever" in the country. MyDD's Chris Bowers responded: "With perfect clarity, that is exactly the line I have been looking for from Democratic candidates for President." Richardson has steadily improved his numbers in online straw polls, and this position would seem to only bolster that momentum. Will any of the Big Three join in Richardson's pledge?

DODD: Announcement Do-Over, Please?

Taking a break from some well-deserved paternity leave, DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas hits Chris Dodd for being the only '08er to announce their candidacy on the Don Imus show: "I'm quite pleased that Imus is finally being shown for the a**hole that he is, but let's not forget that he's no run-of-the-mill shock jock. This guy is a fixture of the establishment. So much so, in fact, that even wannabe "insurgent" candidates like Chris Dodd feel compelled to worship at his feet. It's not as if Dodd didn't know what Imus was about. All of them know what he's about."

EDWARDS: Hit Me Baby One More Time

John Edwards may not have been the clear winner from 4/10's MoveOn.org forum but he did receive high marks for urging congressional Dems to stand firm on their Iraq appropriation fight with Pres. Bush. Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat says Edwards knows "How to talk about Iraq" and highlights this passage: "Congress must stand firm. They must not write George Bush another blank check without a timeline for withdrawal -- period. If Bush vetoes the funding bill, Congress should send another funding bill to him with a binding plan to bring the troops home. And if he vetoes it again, they should do it again."

OBAMA: No Divisiveness Here

Barack Obama scored some points serving up netroots red meat by attacking Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). MyDD's Matt Stoller liked this line: "The idea that the situation in Iraq is improving because it takes a security detail of 100 soldiers, three Black Hawk helicopters and a couple of Apache gunships to walk through a market in the middle of Baghdad is simply not credible and not reflective of the facts on the ground." Stoller also appreciated that Obama "reframed his discussion of the post-veto strategy."

RICHARDSON: Seriously Winning Them Over

MyDD's Chris Bowers explains why Bill Richardson's "I would have no residual force whatsoever" statement on Iraq is "exactly the line I have been looking for" from an '08er: "It is a profound, substantive difference than what we have heard from, for example, Hillary Clinton, when she states that if she is President there will be a "remaining military as well as political mission" in Iraq. This is, in the final analysis, a difference between ending the war in Iraq, and simply decreasing the size of the war Iraq."

Bowers further praises Richardson's foreign policy credentials: "This is a man who, earlier today, brokered a deal with North Korea to allow weapons inspectors back into the country, and who, three months ago, brokered cease-fire deal in Darfur. To use the favorite term of neoliberal hawks, no one alive today is more 'serious' about foreign policy than Bill Richardson."

GINGRICH: The Future Of The Party?

Conservative blogger consensus seems to be that Newt Gingrich did not have "his best day" sparring with Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) on global warming 4/10. The Right Angle's Amanda Carpenter labeled her recap of the debate "The Greening of Gingrich" and he "disappointed" GOPers and conservatives "when he declared that human activity was causing the Earth to warm."

Carpenter argues the admission was part of Gingrich's larger long-shot run for the nomination: "Gingrich's concession was expected in many news circles as part of his long-shot strategy to run for President in 2008. He has said since last year he would make a decision to run or not sometime in the fall of this year. He is planning to release a new book, "Contract with the Earth" this November that he co-wrote with conservationist Terry Maples."

AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein saw not just global warming at stake, but a preview of GOP policy to come: "Because Gingrich is one of the most thoughtful Republicans around, often ahead of his time, it's worthwhile to reflect on what some of his statements suggest about the direction of the Republican Party. What became clear to me very early on in the discussion between two prominent figures from both sides of the political spectrum was that I was not watching a debate about small government vs. big government, but a squabble over how to effectively wield the power of government to prod private enterprise into behaving the way politicians and other experts deem appropriate."

GIULIANI: Shirking On Schiavo

There seems to be some confusion among bloggers about Rudy Giuliani's position on the Terri Schiavo affair. The Brody File takes Giuliani's statement "I thought it was appropriate to make every effort to give her a chance to stay alive," to mean his current position is the same as "Tom Delay and Bill Frist" at the time "this all went down." Brody likes what he sees: "I think this speaks to Rudy's no nonsense approach. He tells it like it is. Love him or leave him. It's so New York."

NY Sun's Ryan Sager takes a closer look at Giuliani's focus on "the point that we should keep people on life support who have asked to be kept on life support" and wonders if Rudy "doesn't even remember what the case was about." More Sager: "If Schiavo's wishes had been known, there wouldn't have been a controversy in the first place. ... The question [was] whether - once the courts in Florida sided with Michael Schiavo as to determining his wife's wishes and best interests - the Florida legislature, Governor Bush, Congress, and President Bush should have all intervened in one family's private medical dispute, turning it into a national media circus."

Sager says Giuliani's camp refuses to clarify Rudy's position "instead referring back to Mr. Giuliani's plea that, 'I think we should let it rest.'" Sager comments: "Unfortunately for the Giuliani camp, neither side in the dispute is likely to let that happen. While the Schiavo case itself is over, the issues of pro-life and right-to-die are - no pun intended - alive and well."

Not commenting on the Schiavo affair Race 4 '08s DaveG argues that Giuliani does not necessarily "need every social conservative vote" to win the nomination. Dave does acknowledge Rudy has been "bleeding" lately he urges Giuliani submit to "a crash course in how to communicate with the average national Republican voter, which is a distinctly different breed from the average NYC Republican voter."

Townhall's Dean Barnett argues Rudy shouldn't change a thing: "The problem here is that Rudy's principal appeal is that he's a tough SOB. If you like him (as I do), it's not because of any soft side that he might purportedly have."

MCCAIN: At Minimum, He's No Liberal

Conservative bloggers continue to say nice things about John McCain, while also clearly stopping short of embracing him. The Corner's Andy McCarthy apologizes to colleague Ramesh Ponnuru for calling him a McCain apologist and thanks him for his NR article. The article reminded McCarthy why he never supported McCain, but also said "McCain is superior to the Democrats currently in the field."

At Power Line, John Hinderaker recommends Jonah Goldberg's op-ed urging better conservative treatment of McCain and concludes: "McCain's courage doesn't entitle him to be President, of course, but I think it does entitle him to a respectful hearing from conservatives. At a minimum, we should stop calling him a liberal."

ROMNEY: Veepstakes Already?

Reacting to new Gallup numbers showing Mitt Romney in fourth behind Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich, The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez floats her ideal '09 GOP administration: "I continue to casually float an early Thompson-Romney ticket. Solves Fred Thompson's initial money and organization problems. They can get Rudy to be their secretary of Defense. John McCain as ambassador to Iraq (by putting someone of his stature there we emphasize how important we think it is to help Iraq succeed). John Bolton as secretary of State. Pat Toomey for Treasury. [Rick] Santorum as DOJ."

Back in IA, Krusty Konservative thinks Romney has "survived the Mitt-Flop moniker" by staying on message on and raising enough money to stay competitive. Krusty concludes: "Right now Romney has the momentum. That being said it's still 4 months till the straw poll. Lots of things can change."

And in SC, A Daily Chaser reports Romney walked away the winner from a Newberry County straw poll. The Chaser adds: "Everyone says that if you win Newberry County, you win the state."

THOMPSON: That Pipe Smoking Must Be To Blame

Within minutes of Fox News' announcement that Fred Thompson would be speaking with Neil Cavuto about his indolent lymphoma, Thompson had a post up at RedState headed: "What You Need To Know." Thompson blogs: "about 2 1/2 years ago when, shortly after a routine physical, I was diagnosed with what the doctors call an indolent lymphoma. Of the 30-plus kinds of lymphoma this is a "good" kind, if there is such a thing. I have had no illness from it, or even any symptoms. My life expectancy should not be affected. I am in remission, and it is very treatable with drugs if treatment is needed in the future--and with no debilitating side effects."

Even before the cancer story broke, The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez was posting selections from floods of pro-Thompson emails hitting her inbox, including:

• I know that Fred's recognition from TV shouldn't matter in something as big as national elections, but I have to wonder how many people would vote for him simply because they saw him on Law and Order or watched Hunt for Red October? ... That beautiful southern drawl of his coupled with conservative talk just makes it all that much better. I don't know if there are skeleton issues, but the complaints I've heard so far, he's pretty much brushed off with a nice flair.
• How many of us are old enough to remember him on the Watergate Committee? The voice was the same. The earnestness was the same. He pursued truth and wasn't prissy about where it led. The actor usually plays himself.
• I'm old enough to remember Fred Thompson on the Watergate committee. He was the one who first questioned Alexander Butterfield about the existence of a taping system in Nixon's Oval Office. After that, the rest was history. Thompson also smoked a pipe during the hearings. Bet the anti-smoking Nazis will resurrect pictures of THAT.

In other positive Thompson blogging, Race 4 '08s DaveG argues Thompson's "cultural identity" as a "true-blue red-stater" will help him "get a pass on many cultural issues that has been given to none of the GOP Big Three." Kausfiles contributes with his "thinly-sourced kf item of the day" pegging 5/3 as Thompson's official announcement.

Not on the Thompson bandwagon, The Brody File reminds readers that Thompson supports socially liberal bad boy Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee in '06. TBF writes: "The last time I checked Chafee was pretty much off the reservation on most Republican talking points: immigration, taxes, Iraq war, traditional marriage, abortion. Shall I go on? ... That may be hard to stomach for Thompson fans who believe he's the true conservative choice if he runs."

IRAQ: An Offer They Must Refuse

The netroots are urging Dems to reject Pres. Bush's Michael Corleone offer to negotiate on Iraq supplemental funding. AMERICAblog's John Aravosis characterizes Bush's offer this way: "He wants to meet with Democrats to work out an agreement over the war funding, provided that the Democrats understand that this isn't a negotiation, that Bush isn't going to change his mind, and that the Democrats will have to accept Bush's position 100%. Really, that's what he said."

Atrios lays out "The Compromise Shuffle" bloggers do not want to see play out: "Democrats loudly proclaim their willingness to negotiate and compromise, even after they've already compromised with themselves. The Bush administration loudly proclaims its unwillingness to do so. ... Broderesque columnists loudly wail about the fact that both sides are unwilling to sit down over tea and negotiate and compromise. Republicans sneak in with what they call a "compromise" which, magically, will be exactly what Bush wants, and won't involve actually compromising with the people who run Congress. Broderesque columnists will loudly praise the non-compromise compromise put forward by the Republican party and the Bush administration. We've been here many times before."

Instead the netroots want Dems to stand firm with the bill they have now:

• Daily Kos' mcjoan: "There's no need to rush the conference supplemental funding bill. Let [Bush] lie on the floor kicking his feet and holding his breath until he turns blue. It's time the Boy King realizes he doesn't get to call all of the shots on this one.
• Bob Geiger: "It's clear both sides want to fund the troops and nobody, on either side of the Congressional aisle, has suggested leaving troops wanting for the arms, equipment and other supplies they need while stuck in Iraq ... There's no argument over the money. It's all about whether or not the troops will be extracted from an Iraqi civil war or kept there on a Bush-Cheney-McCain timeline that has no end.
• MyDD's Matt Stoller: "Bush wants to have the debate over funding, but the reality is that there is no fight over money because nearly every member of Congress voted to provide money for the military. There is only a fight about whether to end the war or to keep it going. ... If Democrats can keep putting pressure on Bush to end the war, Republicans are going to crack and abandon him."

IRAQ II: War On Civilians, Not Civil War

Rob Bluey rounds up conservative blogger posts about a meeting with official Iraqi spokesman Dr. Ali Aldabbagh at the Heritage Foundation. The Weekly Standard's Brian Faughnan blogs: "His message is that Iraq is making progress on reducing violence and building institutions, and that the premature withdrawal of U.S. forces would help no one but the terrorists."

QandO's McQ adds: "He was asked about whether or not Iraq was engaged in a civil war and his answer was a fairly emphatic "no." As he said, "civil war is not a war against civilians" and, in his opinion, that's primarily where all the violence is pointed by terrorists in an effort to goad Iraqis into civil war."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Bring Back Vilsack!

Hit and Run's David Weigel is shedding no crocodile tears for the slow death of public financing of presidential elections:

Public financing was never truly popular. Its support hovered in the mid-60s when it started; in polls taken since then it has tumbled into the 20s. Support wavered as fringe candidates like Lyndon LaRouche collected government money to run campaigns that had almost no grassroots support. ... In late February former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack dropped out of the Democrats' race and made a glum tour of the pundit circuit, bemoaning how he had to end his quest for a promotion because he couldn't raise money. The implication: An unassuming Midwestern politician who was polling third or fourth in his own state, long before any TV ads started running, deserved as much money as Hillary Clinton. And if taxpayers had to provide that money, so be it.

LEST WE FORGET: Who Hates Cilantro?

Overstated uses Google to identify the ten most hated things on the web (1. Cilantro; 2. Brooklyn; 3. Starbucks; 4. Divorce; 5. Emo kids; 6. Clowns; 7. Cubicles; 8. SBC Yahoo; 9. Haggling; 10. Macs) to create the most unsuccessful personal ad ever:

Part-time clown seeks cilantro-loving emo kid. My house in Brooklyn, my cubicle in Manhattan (selling SBC Yahoo), but my heart is with Austen (die hagglers!). Let's grab a Starbucks or just chat on our powerbooks!

Posted by Conn Carroll at April 11, 2007 12:37 PM