July 17, 2007

7/17: Good Enough

Reading through netroots reaction to ex-Amb. Joe Wilson's 7/16 endorsement of Hillary Clinton, we are reminded that HRC doesn't really need to win over bloggers in order to secure the nomination. She just needs to make sure they view her as an acceptable option. The blogger conference call promoted by HRC Internet dir. Peter Daou featuring Wilson endorsing Clinton was just the latest roll out of that strategy. In just over two weeks, HRC will be attending the Yearly Kos convention, which last year featured an entire panel devoted to the Plame affair. With Barack Obama failing to establish a Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) like progressive voting record in the senate, Clinton needs only to show up to keep the community satiated.

DEM FIELD: Not The Same Lesson Most Netrooters Took From CT SEN

Blogging at The Huffington Post, Alan Dershowitz describes himself as "a liberal democrat" who believes that "if the 2008 election were a referendum between the Republicans and the Democrats, I would have no doubt about the outcome" but also warns "elections are not referenda about parties, about policies, or about history. They are contests between personalities."

Dershowitz claims Dems will still "lose if they listen to the Michael Moore-Cindy Sheehan extremists in their party." Dershowitz concludes: "The Democrats should learn from Ned Lamont's loss to Joe Lieberman in Connecticut. It's easy to win a Democratic primary by pandering to the Hard Left. But winning that way virtually assures defeat in the general election. Any Democratic candidate who wants to be seriously considered for president should stop running for the nomination and begin right now running for the general election. The slogans that help in the primaries often hurt in the general election."

DEM FIELD II: Big Money From Little Donors

Daily Kos' Adam B posts Campaign Finance Institute data on small dollar donations and notes: "Here's the good news: Edwards' percentage haul from $1000+ donors dropped from 77% to 64% of his total, while small dollar donors rose from 15% to 24%. Overall, the percentage of contributions of $200 or less rose from 14% of all Democrats' fundraising to 21%, while the $1000+ gang dropped from 78% to 68% of candidates' overall totals."

CLINTON: Endorsing Hillary, Just Like Joe Wilson Did

Led by "Hillary Clinton's Director of Online Everything" Peter Daou, HRC's campaign did their best to capitalize on Joe Wilson's revered status among the netroots when announcing his endorsement of Clinton 7/16. Hours before the blogger only conference call, Daou sent out "a tantalizing email" promoting a "mystery endorsement." The Washington Note's Steve Clemons took the bait and was not let down by the show: "Wilson and Plame are favorites among the leftish "net-roots." They are a favorite among many bloggers for taking them seriously and for working with them to understand the nooks and crannies of what was real and not in their David and Goliath battle with the White House. ... This will have impact and will shock some. Some lefty bloggers will not abandon Obama and not forgive Clinton for being complicate in the decisions that empowered the Bush White House to wage the Iraq War. But others will now rethink their positions.

Other reactions include:

• Taylor Marsh: "Clinton has come a long way in understand the blogosphere even in the face of huge criticism and sometimes out and out bias on the blogs. ... The '08 selection season is not over by a long shot and I am staying neutral in the primary. But the endorsement of Clinton by Joseph Wilson is a big step for her campaign. ... Clinton is illustrating her ability to engage on all fronts, even where she knows she'll take heat. The strength of Clinton's candidacy continues to expand."
• TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent: "It's interesting, then, to note that the primary reason Wilson cited for backing Hillary is her view of what should happen after the war -- her awareness, as he sees it, of the need to end the war "in a way that preserves some shred of our strategic position in the region." This, of course, touches on the whole residual force debate, which ironically is something Hillary has taken heat for from bloggers and others whom the Wilson endorsement is most likely to impress."
• MyDD's Todd Beeton: "Coming as it does via conference call with liberal bloggers 2 weeks prior to the start of YearlyKos, the Clinton campaign apparently believes Wilson's endorsement will give her a sort of she's-one-of-us cred among bloggers, if only to lessen the boos she gets at the YearlyKos presidential forum. And it just may work."
• Talk Left's Jeralyn Merritt: "I agree Hillary has the strength, the smarts and the commitment to be a great President. I believe she will get us out of Iraq. I also think she will appoint excellent judges, improve our health care system and protect social security. ... This is not to say Hillary is the only candidate who fits the bill."
• Bleeding Heartland's Chris Woods: "The campaign seemed like they were genuinely reaching out to the netroots constituency, giving them a big story, and were going to let them break the news. ... However, the blogs didn't get credit with breaking the news. The Clinton campaign didn't direct the traditional or mainstream media to blogposts about the endorsement and then elaborate and what was reported by citizen journalists. ... Maybe I'm just jealous. But it sure seems like if you're going to reach out, make it count and put some force into it. Don't do it half-assed."

EDWARDS: What Did He Know And When Did He Know It

The Huffington Post's Paul Abrams has met John Edwards "on several occasions, and found him to be a thoughtful fellow" but is also "getting very queasy about him as a candidate for President, as he engages in Bush-like statements and explanations." Abrams points to Edwards denial that he knew anything about Elizabeth Edwards call in to Ann Coulter or about EE's call for gay marriage and blogs: "Two campaign strategy decisions, each involving his wife, and he was "surprised"? We have lived more than six years with an administration whose respect for the American people is so low that they consider dissembling to be a virtue. Do NOT go down that path. ... And, I will add something else -- even if, somehow, Edwards were unaware, he should take responsibility as if you had been. It is called leadership, and the quality in our next President that we need the most."

GOP FIELD: Don't Expect Any GOP Candidate To Be On The Same Stage As Bush Any Time Soon

Mark I at Redstate picks up on Bill Bennett's call for a joint GOP WH '08 press conference where every declared candidate would "stand up and say a) they support the troops and their mission; b) they believe in giving Petraeus and Lynch and their boys a chance; and c) that they will do everything in their political power to lead us through to victory, rather than retreat."

Mark comments: "Some may argue that not all of the Republican candidates will want to tie themselves so closely to Bush on Iraq. Others may say that not all of the candidates will agree on the best way forward in Iraq. I say that they must. The Republican nominee will not have a shot of winning the presidency if he presents himself as a watered-down Democrat on the war. The American people would rather vote for the real thing. ... Furthermore, the candidates don't have to agree on a strategy going forward. They only have to agree that Congress's attempts to undermine the troops and the war are harmful and must be resisted."

MCCAIN: Trolling For Staff

Reacting to newsJohn McCain hired NJ state Sen./'06 Sen. cand. Tom Kean Jr. (R-NJ) press sec Jill HazelbakerAtrios links to past speculations that Hazelbaker was behind pseudonymous postings at BlueJersy attacking Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ).

At the time BlueJersey's Juan Melli even matched up Hazelbaker's IP address with with those of the "troll" poster.

ROMNEY: For Cleaner Oceans

Conservatives largely approve of the strategy behind Mitt Romney's new "Ocean" ad, but some are less than convinced by its execution. Reactions include:

• Townhall's Hugh Hewitt: "its visual approach is unique for the cycle. ... The ad appears two days before Romney speaks at the Lincoln Day Dinner in El Paso County, Colorado. El Paso County is home to, among other groups, James Dobson's Focus on the Family and Young Life, two of the region's many evangelical organizations. The message of "Ocean" is one that every evangelical can agree with and applaud."
• RCP Blog's John McIntyre: "I think the ad is clearly a recognition of the changing dynamics in the Republican race as well as a clear attempt to try and preempt evangelical/social conservative support from moving en masse toward Fred Thompson."
• Power Line's John Hinderaker: "I'm sympathetic to the message of the ad, but can't help noting the complete absence of any suggestion as to what steps can realistically be taken to clean up the culture. With the Supreme Court still committed, seemingly, to the view that pornography and pole-dancing are the core activities protected by the First Amendment, and with the ability of a public high school to prevent students from unveiling a "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner a 5-4 squeaker, it isn't obvious how any President can deliver much on this issue."
• The Brody File: "Romney has come under a lot of criticism from pro-family groups because they say he didn't do enough to curtail the Marriott Hotel chain from profiting off porn videos while he was a board member. ... Let's be real here. Mitt Romney has the family and the scandal-free resume to pull it off. You won't find Romney's name next to David Vitter's on the Madame's list. Campaign ads like this can distinguish him from the field with social conservatives. This seems to be a step in the right direction."
• NRO's Jim Geraghty: "If you watch it with the sound down, you might think it's about environmental policy. ... It reminds me of the Nissan Infiniti ads that didn't show the car, but instead featured pastoral scenes of landscapes."
• AmSpec Blog's Jennifer Rubin: "With so much talk about abortion and which of these candidate's pro-life credentials are stronger and more consistent, Romney is upping the ante. By invoking the "culture wars" Romney can shift the conversation to more favorable ground -- his message about our "polluted" culture, his own devoted family and his battle against gay marriage in Massachusetts. In essence he will be saying, talk is cheap but look who I am and what I have done."

F. THOMPSON: Nothing To See Here

Power Line's Paul Mirengoff attempts to Politico's Jonathan Martin why conservatives were not impressed with the LA Times revelations that Fred Thompson "once lobbied for a pro-abortion group." Mirengoff blogs: "Martin may be the victim of the stereotype liberals have of conservatives -- the same one that caused many non-conservatives to believe two years ago that Rudy Giuliani had no shot at the Republican nomination. ... In reality, of course, conservatives have the wit to make distinctions, even on the abortion issue. Since Thompson's advocacy (if it occurred at all) happened 16 years ago; since it arose in the course of a minor legal representation rather than sua sponte; and since Thompson's subsequent Senate voting record was solidly pro-life, all of the relevant distinctions cut in his favor. "

Not directly responding to Martin, Captain's Quarters expresses similar thoughts: "The LA Times story about his alleged work with an abortion-rights group, which he initially denied and then appeared to retreat on the denial, probably didn't help his credibility. However, the evangelicals will look more at his actual voting record in the Senate than his lobbying activities beforehand, and there he has a solid if not spectacular record. NARAL listed him as a dangerous opponent, while National Right To Life gave him consistently high marks."

IRAQ: But Does He Have Enough Troops To Sustain The Strategy?

Pleased that theircampaign to pressure Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) into forcing the GOP to filibuster on the Levin-Reed DoD funding amendment played some role in Reid's decision to do just that, the netroots are stepping up their campaign to make sure Dems follow through with their threat. Phoenix Woman at Firedoglake blogs: "Call your Democratic Senators. Tell them it is time for Republicans to be exposed ... Yes, Harry Reid's already announced today that he intends to do just that. But let's hold him to that!"

Other positive reactions include:

• Bob Geiger: "With the whole specter of cots being dragged into Senate cloakrooms and the pure theatrics involved, I'm hopeful this will shine a white-hot spotlight on the Senate's Republican leadership and show Americans how the GOP doesn't truly support helping troops and their families at home or extricating them from pointless involvement in the Iraqi civil war."
• Crooks and LiarsJohn Amato: "Sen. Dick Durbin made a passioned plea in Congress on the Iraq war. He called out the Republicans obstructionism on the war and Mitch McConnell's 60 vote straw-man argument. Also, CNN called it a "theatrical" event by the Democratic Party. We're talking about war and hell and these idiots are bringing in Broadway.
• Daily Kos' mcjoan: "This is theatrics, yes, but it's theatrics to bring to light the ongoing efforts by the Republicans to block any and all efforts to force a change of policy in Iraq."
• The Huffington Post's Lane Hudson: "This is a welcome development. First, it shows that Reid is ready to play some hardball in order to advance the will of the American people. Second, it will quickly expose the Republicans for what they are: blind supporters of a failed foreign policy that has sacrificed several thousand American lives because we were lied to by an unpopular President."
• Matthew Yglesias: "I don't think this is particularly good political theater, as such, but something needs to be done to highlight the fact that things aren't passing the Senate not because "congress" can't take action or because "the Senate" is rejecting various proposals but, specifically, because the filibuster lets the GOP block the majority's initiatives."
• Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall: "It's about time on the Iraq filibuster. But it's a very good move. There has been little if any press attention to the fact that senate Republicans are filibustering practically every piece of legislation to come before the senate. But Iraq is the sui generis issue. And the Democrats need to make it clear that the Republicans won't allow anything on Iraq to even come to the floor."
• Atrios: "Should make them do it until the Iraqi parliament comes back from vacation."

Conservatives are unimpressed with the tactic, and The Corner's David Freddoso doesn't even think Dems have the votes to pull it off: "Right now, there are only 50 working Democratic Senators (Tim Johnson D, S.D. hasn't cast a vote yet this year), and there are only 49 if you don't include Joe Lieberman (who I hear isn't really up for this sleepover, whether you want to count him as a Dem or not). ... You need 51 senators for a quorum, in the event that someone makes a quorum call - which any senator can make at any time. So all it takes is one Republican to stay in the chamber, object to anything the Democrats try to do, and then note the absence of a quorum. When the quorum is called, and only 50 senators are present, the Senate adjourns (or at least it can't come out of the quorum call without unanimous consent), and the whole stupid stunt is over before Senator Byrd can even begin his outraged four-hour speech."

The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum notes Freddoso's point, blogging "it sounds disturbingly plausible." Drum later updates: "[T]his all depends on Republicans unanimously boycotting Reid's all-nighter in the first place (except for one senator to call for a quorum). True enough. But as Freddoso points out, even Republican senators who oppose the war don't have much incentive to help Reid out by showing up for this. It might not be hard to derail it."

Also on the right, Townhall's Hugh Hewitt promotes VetsforFreedom.org efforts to bring "some fresh perceptive from folks who have been there and done the fighting" to Congress and the MSM.

BLOGGERS VS. MSM: Does This Mean dKos Is That Big, Or That O'Reilly Is That Small?

Fox News personality Bill O'Reilly has picked a fight with Jet Blue over their official sponsorship of 8/2-5's Yearly Kos convention. O'Reilly ambushed Jet Blue CEO David Barger outside his apartment with "hate"ful quotes dKos commenters and then aired the segment 7/16. Michelle Malkin lends her hand to help O'Reilly linking to the shows transcript, hosting a photoshop contest with Jet Blue's logo, and providing contact info for Jet Blue.

The Kossacks couldn't be happier to be in the fight. On vacation in Greece, DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas posts O'Reilly inspired messages from his inbox including: "U/R a dirty rectum licking slime maggot! Born from Karl Marx Feces." Kos comments: "Irony in spades, layer after layer of it. But what can you say when O'Reilly runs the most hate-filled television show in cableland, on the Republican Party's premier propaganda outlet?"

Daily Kos' mcjoan adds: "This is a curious gambit by Fox. Do they really want to get into a corporate sponsor fight? Seems dangerous territory to tread for them. Because if they want to have that fight, we can have that fight." Crooks and LiarsJohn Amato posts video of O'Reilly's show and comments: "FOX and the right has been shaken at its core because of the growth of the netroots and the American people that have finally caught on to the policies they promote. They were so angry at the role the netroots played in discouraging the Dems from participating in their debate that they'll stop at nothing-not even making up ridiculously out of context stories-to discredit those who tell the truth."

IMPEACHMENT: How Much Progressive Legislation Is Bush Signing These Days?

Netroots calls for the impeachment of VP Cheney have reached a level that Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) felt the need to post a diary at Daily Kos explaining why he did not support such efforts. Feingold blogs: "I fully respect the anger and frustration many Americans feel with this administration. I share much of it. But on balance, I think Congress's time is much better spent ending the war in Iraq, conducting the oversight that was absent for the last six years, and advancing progressive legislation." Color Kossacks unconvinced:

• Senator end the war through impeachment. Bush and Cheney are outlaws! The only way to stop em is to throw em out!
• Low Point For Russ - Never Thought I'd See It. The Russ I know stood up to impossible odds, and when everyone told him he was wrong, he spoke louder. And now he's telling us that impeachment is just too hard. Well gawd damn.
• What else can we do? We can't get anything passed while Bush continues to veto progressive bills sent to him! What's better: two years of a few bills passed but most important ones vetoed, or at least an attempt at correcting this grave misuse of executive power?
• No more bulls**t! No more excuses! We're sick of it. It's time you get on board for justice in America - or be prepared to suffer the consequences.

Not responding to Feingold, Firedoglake's Scarecrow picks up on Charlie Savage's Boston Globearticle reminding "us of a fundamental truth about the history of Congressional efforts to end wars: while there have been many examples of Congress voting to end authorizations and/or to cut off funding for ill-conceived military adventures, such efforts, even when nominally endorsed by the President, almost invariably failed when the Presidency is held by pro-war Republicans willing to ignore the law."

Scarecrow concludes: "What our history tells us is that if Congress truly wants to alter America's policies in Iraq, a winning strategy probably requires removing the war's zealous champions from the White House and encouraging the American people to relegate the Party of Aggressive War to 40 years in the political wilderness."

Finally, The Blogometer erred 7/16 in citing David Sirota as the author of a pro-impeachment post at the group blog Working for Change. Leah Adler made the argument, not Sirota. We apologize for any confusion.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Less Than Historic

Noting that CNN editors will be selecting which YouTube-user videos will be used in 7/23's Dem debate, Kausfiles argues CNN and YouTube are completely missing "what's so innovative and subversive about YouTube--namely the ability of average citizens to put political messages before millions of potential voters without the approval of MSM gatekeepers."

Kaus advises them to rectify the situation: "It's not too late for CNN to save its "unprecedented" format. The debate is a week away. Post all the competing videos on YouTube tomorrow afternoon in a way that easily lets viewers pick the most popular, and commit CNN to broadcast, say, 20 questions from the top 40 submissions at random. No gatekeeping. ... A no-gatekeeper format really would be unprecedented, and will terrify the candidates. Politicians know the sorts of questions CNN editors pick. They can handle those questions. But who knows what an army of partisan geeks in their basements will select? Even if the questions aren't penetrating in themselves, we'll get to see the candidates react to unpredictable events, which will be revealing even if the questions themselves are stupid."

LEST WE FORGET: Moo

After catching an outdoor staging of Hamlet in Hollywood Forever Cemetery, The Huffington Post's Jennifer Ouellette was reminded that the play was her least favorite of Shakespeare's efforts and puts together ten things she hates about Hamlet, including:

• That Damned Indecisiveness. "To be or not to be," blah, blah, blah. No one would ever accuse Hamlet of acting impetuously (apart from accidentally stabbing Polonius through the arras); he's the quintessential procrastinator.
• Shhh! Quiet Please! You know those people who can't sit through a movie without offering some opinion or insight about it? Hamlet is one of Those People. He goes to all this trouble to stage a play to confront his uncle about the king's murder, and then can't shut up during the performance.
• Sacred Cow Syndrome. Hamlet is considered one of the greatest plays in the English language, and every actor knows it. So there's an unspoken reverence upon approaching the role that, more often than not, has a deleterious effect on any given performance. The actor invariably becomes self-conscious, and the audience, in turn, is aware that they are watching a performance -- rather than being transported into an imaginary world.

Posted by Conn Carroll at July 17, 2007 12:33 PM