June 26, 2007

6/26: No Amendment Can Assuage Critics Of This Bill

The WH and 'Grand Bargainers' can toughen the Z-visa background checks and require even more pointless 'touchback' provisions but they are not going to cool their burning phone lines one bit. Conservatives could not be more clear: after 20 years of broken promises on border enforcement no legislation from Washington is going to convince them that Americans are going to get the border security they crave. Only future government results can rebuild trust. Captain's Quarters (an original supporter of the bill) puts it best: "Secure the border. Fix the visa program, and the passport system as well. When those tasks have been completed, then we can talk about how best to normalize those remaining in the US and how best to incentivize them to come forward."

CLINTON: It's Almost As If Arianna Doesn't Like Hillary Or Something

The Huffington Post hosted a full round of attacks on Hillary Clinton's 'authenticity' 6/25. Most notably, Robbie Baitz, a dissenter from HRC's 6/23 fundraiser at the Hollywood, CA, home of Roland Emmerich blogs: "I am the man who suggested that the senator's answer to a single question felt -- well, sorry -- a little bit like a set-up. ... The young lady in charge of the mic hissed at me, and a couple I knew accused me of being cynical and naive at the same time. ... Hillary was a pro, cautious, hard core, and clean-edged. At the point where I felt gypped for a moment by her, at the moment when I felt let down (again!), something snapped. And when I bemoaned it, more out of worry -- if you're fake here, where the hell will you be real? -- she bristled at me."

The Huffington Post's Bill Barol later thanked Baitz for calling out HRC's "zombie-like caution and unshakable allegiance to talking points." Barol adds: "A peevish sense of entitlement doesn't look good on a US president, and the reason I know that is that I've been looking at it for the last seven years. Democrats and Republicans, left, right and center, we all deserve better."

Not to be out done on her own site, Arianna Huffington pairs recent coverage of VP Dick Cheney's penchant for secrecy with Carl Bernstein's Clinton bio A Woman in Charge and blogs: "[I]t's pretty safe to say the central question facing Democratic voters in the presidential primaries is: which candidate will be most effective at rolling back the Bush years? ... But when it comes to the issue of secrecy and an administration operating in the shadows, there's an argument to be made that the candidate least likely to turn on the lights is Hillary Clinton. Her lifelong commitment to secrecy is one of the main themes of Bernstein's book."

Finally, Mike Gravel blogs about "Why Hillary Scares Me" including: "Hillary's speech last week to the Take Back America conference gives me yet another reason to be afraid. In an indignant voice she decried the Bush administration's 'stunning record of secrecy and corruption, of cronyism run amok. . . It is everything our founders were afraid of, everything our Constitution was designed to prevent.' Actually, our Constitution grants Congress the power to prevent these ills but Hillary and her colleagues weren't up to the task."

EDWARDS: Is There Such A Thing As A Haircut Card?

MyDD's Jerome Armstrong picks up on "something that's been going around," namely suggestions emanating from the John Edwards campaign that Edwards is more electable than Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Armstrong blogs: "Though it's not a clear-cut case though that Edwards does better nationally than Clinton or Obama, I do think the polls make enough of a case that it's a good strategic move, if only to put the others on the defensive."

Some at MyDD were not eager to engage in an 'electability' debate with Loving J even suggesting such arguments were borderline racist: "The most concerning aspect to this whole debate is the notion that any democrat can win a large number of states in the South. This remains to be seen since to date, democratic presidential candidates have done poorly in the south ... So I am going to stick my neck out on a limb here and suggest that John Edwards may be gearing his campaign up to play a subtle race/gender card strategy. I hope this is not the case but the fact remains that America has never elected a woman or a black man."

More popular among the netroots, Edwards aide Jonathan Prince email attacking the New York Times for their 6/22 coverage of Edwards non-profit orgs were well received. Daily Kos' McSnatherson blogs: "A lot of Edwards backers and observers in the blogosphere - most definitely including myself - have been hoping that the Edwards campaign would hit back against the slanderous smears our corporate media have been pumping out, and I'm more than happy to say that Mr. Prince delivers with gusto." TPM's Greg Sargent adds: "It's unusual, to be sure, for candidates to attack the almighty Paper of Record so directly. Also unusual, [p]ointing to a negative story about yourself in order to raise money."

Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat also tracks recent negative MSM stories on Edwards and concludes: "This reminds me of no one so much as Bill Clinton circa 1992 and during his Presidency. The Washington Establishment never liked the Clintons because, as far as I could see, they were nouveau powerful and, in the minds of the Beltway, tacky. Sort of like they feel about the blogs. ... I tell you what, I think it is becoming pretty clear that the BEST politician in the race appears to be John Edwards."

EDWARDS II: His Better Half

Linking to Elizabeth Edwardsendorsement of gay marriage , DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas sums up the sentiments of many netrooters: "If Elizabeth Edwards was running for president, she'd be my candidate with no reservations. Unfortunately, she's not."

Also impressed with EE, MyDD's Todd Beeton live blogs part of the Edwards' Tonight Show appearance including: "The first part of the interview focuses on Elizabeth and she is really brilliant -- smart, compassionate, funny. ... Jay asked Sen. Edwards about the fact that Elizabeth came out in support of gay marriage, which he disagrees with. He said 'I'm not where Elizabeth is yet' but said he is a strong supporter of gay and lesbian rights."

Earlier 6/25, CaliticsBrian Leubitz posted video from EE's 6/24 meeting with bloggers in San Francisco, CA, and recounts: "She addressed a litany of issues, including her husband's Senate record, the Iraq war, and economic/poverty issues. She had a very long speaking engagement, and she seems to be holding up remarkably well. I'm quite amazed that anybody, let alone a woman battling cancer, has the stamina to keep the kind of schedule that she's keeping."

Also with video and a live account Left in SF: "She also was faced with a series of questions about some passages from political consultant Bob Shrum's book. She endeared herself to the bloggers in the crowd by referring the questioner to YouTube to see her point-by-point refutation of Shrum."

OBAMA: Everyone's A Critic

Plenty of mixed reviews on recent Barack Obama campaigning including his new ads in IA, a speech in New York, and his evolving position on liquified coal:

• MyDD's Jonathan Singer on liking only one of Obama's new IA ads: "[T]he longer biographical spot that deals with Obama's community organizing. I think this ad hits on the right points and is fairly effective. ... Now on to the second ad. ... My issue with the ad ... is that Iowa isn't necessarily the best place to run an ad about bipartisanship, at least when running for support in the caucuses rather than in the general election.
• The Huffington Post's Glynnis Macincol on not liking Obama's 6/22 speech at New York, NY's Hammerstein Ballroom: "However, as his speech progressed it felt more and more as though we were watching him on television; there was simply no gesture on his part that suggested he knew where he was, or to whom he was speaking. ... Talk that Obama is running a traditional campaign, lacking the innovation and substance he has led people to expect, is on the rise and one can only imagine what a little bit of originality on Friday might have led to in terms of coverage.
• The Huffington Post's David Berreby on liking Obama's 6/22 speech at New York, NY's Hammerstein Ballroom: "He doesn't sound like a politician; he sounds like a preacher, with a pastor's way of rising to high rhetoric and then swooping down to take in a heckler's shout, fold it in to his sermon ... A really simple emotion, actually. I was feeling: This guy, the actual person I'm seeing and hearing, the man having this effect on everyone around me -- this is who I want to be President of the United States.
• Matthew Yglesias on rumblings over Obama and coal: "Barack Obama attempts to rise above the trivial matters (i.e., chemistry and economics) that divide supporters and opponents of liquid coal technology and makes everyone unhappy with a nonsensical compromise position. ... I think Obama had an opportunity here to just tell the truth ... and now he's flip-flopping to the correct position because as president you need to respond to matters of pressing national and global importance."

OBAMA II: We're All Conspiracy Theorists Now

Connecting ongoing coverage of both Pres. Bush's Prosecutor Purge and the federal indictment Antoin Rezko, The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum urges journalists to ask if political harm to Obama could be behind the investigation: "[D]espite all the evidence that the Department of Justice has become little more than a political instrument of the White House, we've heard almost no questions about whether Rezko's indictment is legitimate or simply puffed up. ... [U]ntil recently, faith in the basic integrity of our justice system has run so deep that it's been hard for most journalists to shake it. But shake it they should. Given what we've learned over the past several months, it's no longer conspiratorial to wonder whether political scheming could have contaminated the DOJ. It's an established fact."

OBAMA III: Extremism In Defense Of Price Gouging

Progressive States Network ED Joel Barkin is asking Obama to reject The American Legislative Exchange Council's (ALEC) invitation top speak at their summer conference. Barkin explains: "I look forward to Sen. Obama rejecting the invitation, rather than lending any more legitimacy to ALEC's extremist agenda. After all, Obama has spent his career working against many of the policies ALEC pushes."

David Sirota claims ALEC is using Obama's notoriety "to build an audience for its conference" and urges Obama to use this "PR gift given to him by the Right" by demanding "his photo be removed from ALEC's website and marketing materials." Sirota also details the agenda of this "extremist group" including: "This is a group that takes truck loads of cash from ExxonMobil to rail against proposals to stop oil industry price gouging and start regulating greenhouse gas emissions."

MCCAIN: September Is A Popular Month For Big Decisions

Conservative bloggers may have questioned the fall date of a London Timesprediction that John McCain may drop out by 9/07, but few questioned the inevitability of his campaigns demise. Posts include:

• RCP Blog's Blake Dvorak: "When you're a candidate of McCain's stature, you don't drop-out before the first vote is cast. Money might certainly be a problem for McCain going into the fall, but he'll have enough to last the first round of primaries.
• Townhall's Patrick Ruffini: "Don't count me in the McCain Death Watch camp just yet. ... The true moment of decision for McCain won't come until September, when net cashflow starts turning red. ... If things got really dire, McCain would have the option to self-fund or loan himself some of his wife's eight figure fortune, like Kerry mortgaged Teresa's house to rescue his failing campaign in late 2003.
• The Corner's Rich Lowry: "I'm not sure what McCain has to do to revive his campaign (avoiding driving it into a ditch on immigration would have seemed the obvious thing to do). But I do know that whatever it is will have nothing to do with 2000, but with the here and now in 2008."
• Captain's Quarters: "I don't think McCain will get the nod, but he's not finished yet. McCain has weathered tougher situations than a mid-campaign slump. Anyone expecting him to quit while polling 11% nationwide in June is indulging in earlyitis."
• IA Voice: "He could very well hang in until the convention, just to prove everyone wrong. But facts are facts: with his poll numbers tanking the way they are (driven by his boneheaded amnesty bill that he's pushing), he really can't survive much longer. I'm actually surprised he's managed to stay in the race as long as he has."

The Daily Chaser has two videos up from McCain's recent Columbia, SC press conference including one featuring a person greeting him with a McCain mask "surrounded by a giant cardboard box with words 'S.S. Titanic' scrolled across one of its sides." The other video features McCain telling a reporter people saying he will drop out 9/07 must be "smoking something stronger than is legal here in the state of South Carolina."

MCCAIN II: At Least He's More Popular Than Lindsey Graham

Conservatives were not happy with McCain's response to 6/25's SCOTUS decision striking down elements of the McCain-Feingold campaign speech law. Reactions include:

• Townhall's Jonathan Garthwaite: "I'm sure the [Mitt] Romney folks smiled every time they typed "'McCain'-Feingold" in the following press release. Always helps when the U.S. Supreme Court repudiates a bill with your opponents name on it."
• Ankle Biting Pundit's Bull Dog Pundit: "What the hell are you and your colleagues so afraid of anyway? Corruption? Well, you were one of the Keating 5?, weren't you?
• AmSpecBlog's Philip Klein: "Again, a problem for McCain that his reaction to the decision is the exact opposite from the reaction of most conservatives."

Finally, 1426 Right Wing News readers fingered Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) as their least favorite GOP Senator. McCain came in third.

F. THOMPSON: Kicking 'Em While He's Down

NY Sun's Ryan Sager notes that Fred Thompson is running Google ads "next to stories about John McCain's tanked poll numbers" and Power Line's John Hinderaker hits back against an AParticle on Thompson's lobbying on behalf of "billion-dollar corporations." Hinderaker writes: "[I]t's easy to make a lobbyist look bad by associating him with his clients' causes. That said, the ammunition against Thompson is pretty thin. ... Most of his lobbying activity fell between 1975 and 1993, when, according to the AP, "lobbying clients paid him about half a million dollars." That works out to a gross of less than $30,000 a year--small potatoes, although it may not seem so to the average voter."

IMMIGRATION: The Party Of Lincoln ... Chafee

Going into the 11:50 AM scheduled vote, the vote counter's at The Corner pegged 'no' on cloture votes at "around 35." The Corner's Jim Geraghty reports on how the job is getting done: "Someone following the immigration issue closely says White House representatives have been up on Capitol Hill in force today, trying to arm-twist as many "no" votes as possible. ... For wavering senators, it's the phone lines ringing off the hook vs. the administration men sitting in their office lobbies."

The National Review have targeted seven Senators who have voiced opposition to the bill in the past, but have also shown signs they intend to vote yes on cloture: Sens. Kit Bond (R-MO), Sam Brownback (R-KS), Richard Burr (R-NC), Thad Cochran (R-MS), Norm Coleman (R-MN), John Ensign (R-NV), and Jim Webb (D-VA). Conservatives areurging compromise opponents not to believe WH and leadership assurances that their amendments will be addressed, and claim the only way to stop the bill is to kill it whenever possible.

The Corner's Jim Geraghty warns: "You know what the immigration bill reminds me of? It reminds me of Lincoln Chafee trying to have it both ways by allowing Roberts and Alito to get to the floor, but then voting against them. Chafee was expecting pro choice support in his bid for reelection, but voters saw through his little charade. If Republicans think they can let the bill come up for a vote, but then hide behind a no vote later, they're in for some trouble."

Right Wing News posts the latest anti-Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) video and Kausfiles rounds up his favorite "Shrumesqueattackads " designed to show GOP Sens. what awaits them at home.

IMMIGRATION II: Against American Dubai-ifacation

Daily Kos' Trapper John makes the progressive case against the immigration bill including:

[T]he fact that Tancredo and the Minutemen oppose this bill doesn't make it something worth supporting. It's not. And when you look at it closely, it's a bill that progressives ought to vigorously oppose. In fact, this immigration bill is an historically bad bill, one that will undermine wage markets and which will permanently cripple skills training in vital sectors of the economy. ... No, the fatal flaw in this bill isn't "amnesty" -- it's the euphemistically termed "temporary worker program."

And one day, we'll wake up and there won't be but a handful of skilled American tradespeople in the US -- because the wage markets will have been deliberately eroded to the point where those positions are filled almost entirely by 21st Century indentured servants. ... America will have become like Dubai -- a nation crowded with gleaming skyscrapers built and maintained by exploited foreigners living in labor camps. ... This is not a progressive bill. And if we can't get a progressive bill now, it would be better to wait till January 2009 to try again than to pass a bad bill now.

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

Led by Media Matters, the netroots are rallying to pressure PBS into dumping Frank Luntz as a post-6/28 debate analysis. David Brock writes: "With his well-documented Republican ties and history of being criticized and reprimanded by his peers, it's clear that Frank Luntz cannot be trusted to provide objective analysis of Thursday's forum. ... Today, I'm asking you to contact PBS and let the organization know that it should reconsider its decision to use Luntz in light of his partisan Republican ties and history of questionable scientific methodology."

Daily Kos' Kagro X ads: "PBS proposes to bring the FOX modus operandi to public television. How stupid (or evil, if you believe CPB's Republican-heavy Board of Directors is behind it) is it to have the debate performances of both Democrats and Republicans reviewed by Giuliani's pollster, for crying out loud? No, this just has bulls**t written all over it.

BLOGGERS VS. MSM II: The First Step Is Admitting You Have A Problem

Conservatives are no fan Howard Kurtzsuggestions that media companies ban their journalists from giving to political parties in light if a MSNBC story showing 125 of 144 MSM donations went to Dems. Reactions include:

• Instapundit: "But isn't banning those donations just covering up the problem? It's really a failure of diversity."
• Captain's Quarters: "Contrary to media management's belief, political contributions do not create political bias. Donations reveal political bias, as Kurtz himself notes. ... Rather than argue for openness, Kurtz and the industry argues for maintaining a secrecy that seems both hypocritical and a denial in and of itself, the same condition that Kurtz accuses journalists of having."
• The Corner's Jonah Goldberg: "This is a "scandal" because journalists revealed a symptom. But nobody is talking about the underlying malady. Sure, you can ban drinking on the job, but that's not the same thing as banning drinkers or alcoholics from coming into work. ... most drinkers aren't lushes (and many lushes aren't obvious about it) and banning campaign donations from journalists won't change coverage one iota, it'll just take away one small source of corroborating evidence for liberal media bias away. Unfortunately, there's so much more evidence out there."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Evangelists Wanted

Responding to Kathleen Parkersuggestions that WH '08er skip the "coolness" of the web and instead focus on "everyday people," Townhall's Patrick Ruffini responds:

[C]ampaigns have thoroughly bought into Keller & Barry's Influentials thesis. Meaning that more and more of campaign communications are about developing an intense connection with the 1-in-10 who really care rather than a passing connection with those who couldn't care less. I would argue that there is now almost complete overlap between online citizens and the 1-in-10. In a primary, this matters even more because the "don't care" voters probably won't be voting at all. Right now, it's more important for Rudy Giuliani or Barack Obama to tap into an energized base of evangelists than it is to be broadly acceptable to a wide audience who may get yanked away by the media tide tomorrow. The debates were watched by 2 million people apiece, and there's a legitimate argument to be made that they moved the 30-40 million universe being polled.

LEST WE FORGET: More Erin Andrews Please

Wrigleyville23 "very much likes" the Make-A-Wish Foundation and SportsCenter, he just wishes Bristol had the common sense to keep the two separate:

The problem is this: I tune in to SportsCenter for two reasons only: 1. highlights and 2. the off chance that Erin Andrews is on (College World Series!). I do not tune in to SportsCenter to see sick kids. If I wanted to see sick kids, I'd watch that Extreme Home Makeover show (another Disney property) or the National Georgraphic channel. Or the Sick Kids Channel (in the 300s somewhere). So, ESPN, my wish is this: Show more Erin Andrews and fewer sick kids. Please.

Posted by Conn Carroll at June 26, 2007 01:13 PM