May 01, 2007

5/1: The Frontrunner Isn't Even Running

For the first time since its inception, a GOPer built on a previous month's lead in the GOP Bloggers straw poll. Non-candidate Fred Thompson gained 14 points, currently taking in 52% of first-place votes cast in the 4/07 poll. Rudy Giuliani's numbers didn't budge (16%-15%), while Newt Gingrich's numbers tumbled from 14% to 6% (the Blogometer guesses Newt's 4/10 Global Warming debate performance is the cause of the fall). Disheartened Gingrich fans seemed to flock to Thompson as Mitt Romney moved into third place without gaining any support. If Thompson finally does run, we'll see whether or not GOPers' love for Thompson is genuine, or just another case of not wanting what you've already got.

GOP FIELD: Waiting For Fred

With over 10K respondents Fred Thompson is still dominating the GOP Bloggers straw poll:

Thompson 52%
Giuliani 15%
Romney 10%
Gingrich 6%
Hunter 4%

At The Corner, Kathryn Jean Lopez predicts 5/3's GOP debate will be "mildly aggravating" since Thompson will not be participating: "If no one shines at the debate, there will be this sense that it doesn't matter because Thompson can save the day. If someone shines, their performance will be diminished by this mystical candidate, who didn't have to stand in the lineup."

Looking ahead to 5/15's SC debate, the Daily Chaser comments on the SC GOP's decision to let Fox News help pare down the field. Fox will only include candidates with more than 1% in recent state polls. DC comments: "The problem is, candidates such as, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, Jim Gilmore, and others, who have not had the time to build their indemnification nationwide but can be considered credible, will most likely not be allowed on the stage. The result of the disqualification could spell the end of some campaigns in South Carolina."

GOP FIELD II: Bad, But Not That Bad

RCP Blog's Blake Dvorak links to the following George Will comments from 4/29: "The Depression haunted the Republican Party. This could be a foreign policy equivalent of the Depression, forfeiting the Republican advantage they've had since the '68 convention of the Democratic Party and the nomination of [George] McGovern. The advantage Republicans have had on national security matters may be forfeited."

Dvorak reacts: "I won't dispute the possibility of such a scenario, but we need to consider where exactly the Iraq war will fit in history. For instance, does Will's Depression-analogy hold up? The only answer is that we won't know for several years, if not decades. ... As for their more general point that 2008 will be another rough year for Republicans barring any real change in Iraq, that will almost certainly be the case, as would Will's point that the White House will start to see defections by the fall if not earlier should the surge not produce noticeable results."

GIULIANI: No Grey Here

Christian Broadcasting Network's The Brody File introduces a new Rudy Giuliani campaign video by explaining why some evangelicals are supporting the ex-NYC mayor: "One word: LEADERSHIP. ... When I talk to just ordinary Evangelicals ... [the] answer is basically this: 'Yeah, I heard about those marriages and some of that liberal stuff but I don't know. There just seems to be something about him. I guess I like that straight talk. That black and white view. He may just be the guy right now to take on these radical extremists.'"

MCCAIN: When UN Bashing Is Not Enough

John McCain's call for a new "league of democracies" is receiving mixed reviews. Power Line's John Hinderaker thinks it's "a good idea" since it "could render the U.N. more or less obsolete if it proves able to act effectively." Captain's Quarters is more circumspect: "If McCain wants to truly do something radical, he should jettison the entire notion of global organizations and simply pledge to form coalitions based on mutual goals and approaches based on shared interests on particular issues -- which is how nations conducted diplomacy for millenia prior to 1945."

At Townhall, Dean Barnett is still fuming over McCain's refusal to endorse torture: "Unfortunately, given the nature of the war we're in, certain moral compromises are a necessity. Using coercive interrogation techniques is one of them. ... Yesterday on Fox News Sunday, McCain stated that we can reclaim the moral high ground in this war if we close the Gitmo detention center and cease our use of coercive interrogation techniques. This comment makes the ludicrous assumption that we've lost the moral high ground because of these things."

ROMNEY: Osama Is So 2001

Reacting to news that Mitt Romney does not want to spend "billions of dollars" capturing Osama bin Laden, Townhall's Matt Lewis writes: "I've yet to read or hear Romney's remarks, in full. ... If Romney really believes that getting bin Laden doesn't matter, I strongly disagree with him. First, he must be forced to pay for his crimes. Second, we need to set an example. Third, his capture or death would bring a sense of closure to the families of 9-11."

Liz Mair at GOP Progress comes to Romney's defense: "I totally agree that Islamic terrorism is not going to drop off the face of the planet if we just catch Osama bin Laden, which was Romney's real point here."

F. THOMPSON: Deaverless

Conservative bloggers moved to quash a London Daily Telegraph story suggesting Ronald Reagan media guru Michael Deaver had endorsed Fred Thompson. Marshall Manson debunked the story at The Right Angle: "A couple of months ago, Mike recorded a short video for our European colleagues providing some analysis of the upcoming U.S. Presidential election. Yesterday, using that video as its chief source, the Daily Telegraph of London reported that Mike had endorsed Fred Thompson. ... Unfortunately, it never happened. ... bottom line, Mike told us, is that 'Fred Thompson is a great guy, but I haven't endorsed anyone in the Republican primary, and don't intend to.'"

F. THOMPSON II: Reagan Did Radio Too

An NRO posting of Fred Thompson's regular Paul Harvey commentary (including: "let's be realistic about the world we live in. Mexican leaders apparently have an economic policy based on exporting their own citizens, while complaining about U.S. immigration policies that are far less exclusionary than their own. ... So I wouldn't worry too much about the criticisms we receive.") allowed the Corner to promote the inner workings of Team Thompson. After Peter Robinson posted a glowing review of the piece from a former speechwriter, a current Thompson speechwriter emailed in:

In fact FDT writes many of his commentaries on his own, and has done the initial drafts on his three, major upcoming political speeches [one of which is the address to the Lincoln Club of Orange County that Thompson will deliver this Friday]. These are his ideas, his words. He gets some help, but not much. He thinks this stuff through carefully, his Federalism article two weeks ago being a exhibit A. He worked through that for a weekend before putting pen to pad.

Robinson later shares reader email: "Thank you for pointing out Fred Thompson's latest commentary on National Review Online. Mr. Thompson's commentaries remind me of Ronald Reagan's radio commentaries."

CLINTON: Bad Company

Netrooters chewed over the Washington Post's profile of Hillary Clinton pollster Mark Penn throughout 4/30. TAPPED's Mark Schmitt writes: "In one respect I think the article largely gives Penn a pass -- it presumes he's a good pollster ... But we know that his trademark is not "hard information," but loose, malleable, and unverifiable voter categories that support his unchanging and narrow theory of politics: soccer moms, office-park dads, etc. ... What concerns me is that Penn uses the corporate work to give himself credibility for political work. We assume that he must be a good pollster because businesses pay for his services. ... But here's the news: big business can waste money too. ... And ... in the case of Mark Penn, I think they do."

MyDD's Matt Stoller chimes in arguing Penn is just a symptom of a larger problem: "The Democrats fell apart in the 1980s for a variety of reasons, but one of the manifestations of the collapse was the increase of influence of relatively non-progressive centrists like Penn, who were often on retainer to tobacco, telecom and pharma because it was good business to have influential consultants on their payroll."

Atrios announces that he like HRC, just not "he people she surrounds herself with. ... As the campaign goes on it'll be harder and harder to rationally distinguish between the two." Matthew Yglesias fails to compartmentalize as will as Atrios: "I'm not sure I really grasp the content of the distinction. Mark Penn doesn't become a person's political guru by accident. ... In short, you don't run a certain sort of campaign because you hired Penn, you hire Penn because you've decided to run a certain sort of campaign."

OBAMA: A Neo-Neo-Con?

The perceived military focus of Barack Obama's 4/22 foreign policy speech continues to drive Obama-doubting in netroots circles. Daily Kos' Jerome a Paris has a highly rated diary up titled "Neocons love Obama" that highlights positive reviews of Obama's speech from Robert Kagan, Andrew Sullivan, and the WaPo editorial board. Jerome comments:

And when you read the speech, it's hard not to note the multiple references to the military, how it must be supported, increased in size, and used, preemptively if necessary. ... Basically, his proposal is to accept the goals of the George Bush administration, use the same tools, but run the policy competently and less boneheadedly.

A completely unscientific sampling of comments showed most seconding Jerome's concerns:

• dkmich: "I'm not a part of Obama's cult. I was open to him until he kept on saying nothing. Then his overnight rock star persona turned me off. This neocon garbage cements that we might be better off with (ugh) HRC than Obama although I would prefer Edwards."
• rogerdaddy: "spot on, brilliant take. Obama is starting to scare me. Not as much as BushCo, of course, but still...
• TocqueDeville: "I suspect Obama is just positioning himself as a non-threat to the defense establishment. Just like his running-mate Hillary."
• dotster: "this is hyperventilating for nothing. Obama plans to begin to restore our reputation of honor and integrity and repair our relationships with the countries of the world---and believes that has to come with reestablishing feelings of trust and fairness. See--not scary at all."
• thoreau247365 responding to dotster: "your analysis 'Obama plans to begin to restore our reputation of honor and integrity and repair our relationships with the countries of the world' is an emotional feel-good phrase that does not address how those things are accomplished. It would be very easy to argue that the exact things that Obama just mentioned, unilateral military action for example, would actively prevent the restoration of American credibility and integrity.
• VirginaDem: "Obama's entire speech is replete with examples of non-military progressive foreign policy that the diarist, due to Kagan's misleading ways, misses. Yes, he made the extremely non-controversial statement that he would attack a country that looked like it wanted to attack us. The fact that he talks extensively about the military during a time of war in his first, major foreign policy address doesn't make him a Iraq-invading, Bill Kristol-loving neo-conservative."

Also in Obama-doubting, Reno and Its Discontents' Myrna Minx voices her frustration that the "mooonbeam" that is Obama refuses to meet with northern NV Dems: "[H]ow long can Obama ignore the region that Jill Derby, the new state party chair, has called the must win territory in the Nevada caucus?"

OBAMA II: Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy Strikes Again

TAPPED's Garance Franke-Ruta walks readers the implications of a Human Events ad popping up on a her recent Obama blog post: "This means that Human Events has bought the adword "Obama" or "Barack Obama," and is paying more for it than others currently purchasing the same adword ... If you click the link provided, it takes you to a splash page demanding your e-mail address before Human Events will send the "expose" on Obama. That's a classic e-mail harvesting gambit, and e-mails harvested this way can be added to others and sold to, for example, political outfits looking to eventually go after Obama, as well as other conservative groups. Targeted e-mail lists are quite lucrative properties."

Garance then delivers the punchline: "But the prevalence of the ad all over the internet this early in the cycle suggests that Obama may go on to experience Hillary Clinton-like levels of negative attention from the VRWC -- if people on the right find that they can fundraise or get new readers by going after him."

RICHARDSON: Is That Your Final Answer?

4/26's Dem debate is quickly turning into Bill Richardson's netroots Waterloo. At issue: Richardson's endorsement of Whizzer White as his model SCOTUS chief justice. Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat writes, "I blogged about this Richardson gaffe earlier, but it seems the Governor of New Mexico has not put away his shovel and keeps digging," and links to a Mark Kleiman report on how Richardson justified his choice in San Diego, CA, 4/28: "Richardson says, "White was in the 60s. Wasn't Roe v. Wade in the 80s?"

TAPPED's Garance Franke-Ruta spells out the severity of the blunder: "Not knowing when one of the most controversial court cases in the past half century was decided and who wrote the opinions in it is the domestic policy equivalent of a presidential candidate not being able to name the president of Pakistan or Iran." Daily Kos' Trapper John piles on calling Richardson "just not ready for prime time."

PROSECUTOR PURGE: What Exactly Does Gonzales Get Paid To Do Again?

Murray Waasrevelation that AG Alberto Gonzalez delegated much of his personnel authority to CoS Kyle Sampson and WH liaison Monica Goodling is driving 5/1's US Attorney related blogging. Reactions include:

• The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum: "Well, Gonzales did tell us that administrative and managerial tasks weren't his strong suit. ... Now, that's pretty lame, but it's not illegal or anything. Except for the fact that he didn't see fit to say anything about this during his testimony before Congress a week ago. Even though hiring and firing of DOJ employees was the whole point of the hearing.
• Daily Kos' MLDB: "This secret order would seem to be evidence of an effort to hardwire control over law enforcement by White House political operatives."
• Daily Kos' mcjoan: "The Waas article lays out a pretty damning indictment of the gross politicization efforts by the White House. But what's really got Gonzales and the department in trouble is that this document was found by Waas, and was not made available to Congressional investigators."
• The Left Coaster's Steve Soto: "That's right; the senior law enforcement official in the United States willingly transferred day-to-day power of his department over to two young political hacks with no real world justice or prosecutorial experience."

On the right, AmSpec Blog's Quin Hillyer raps the WH on rumors they nixed SEC Chair Chris Cox as a possible Gonzalez replacement due to his bipartisan work at the SEC: "that just shows again how politically obtuse the White House is. ... He has steadied a leaky boat at the SEC, moved it to the right, and done so in a way that most from all sides of the spectrum have applauded (even though the NYTimes still criticizes him, which obviously means he's doing something right!). ... I swear, I keep wanting to rally around this president for reasons I outlined in a column a couple of months ago, but he continues to act in an insular, arrogant, self-absorbed, short-term-thinking manner."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Win, Lose, Or Draw

Reacting to former Marine infantry officer Nathaniel Fick claims in the Washington Post that the war in Iraq is lost, AmSpec Blog's John Tabin writes: "Our main "original objective" -- taking out Saddam Hussein's regime -- has already been achieved. Perhaps Fick is saying we can't leave behind a self-sustaining democracy. But I think the Kurds, at least, already have just that. If we keep a relatively small number of troops in Iraq indefinitely to enforce a partition and prevent a bloodbath, is that a loss? That is, more or less, how the Korean War ended (I know, it never "ended" in the technical sense, but you get my point). Did we lose Korea?"

LEST WE FORGET: No Word On Randall Tobias' Position On The Issue

Progress Ohio's Dave Harding reports that "entertainers" from across OH will gather in Columbus for a "Dancers for Democracy" press conference combating "a measure that would limit the hours of adult businesses and ban patrons from coming within six feet of any nude or semi-nude entertainers." A commenter quips: "Can't wait for the Flikr update!"

Posted by Conn Carroll at May 1, 2007 12:30 PM