10/16: Walking A Thin Line

The seeming inevitability of Hillary Clinton's campaign presents a challenge to the netroots: how to effectively challenge her now without doing any damage that could possibly linger into the general election. The solution: only attack her on policy areas where the probable GOP nominee would never go in a general election. Attacks on the pardon's of Bill Clinton's second term: rarely mentioned. But on torture, force against Iran, and trade, HRC's positions are fair game since a GOP nominee (like Giuliani)would never think of getting to the left of her on those issues. Although some in the community believe that Mike Huckabee would be the greatest threat to Clinton in the general. Liberal Oasis' Bill Scher makes that case here.

CLINTON: Like Cheney Only With Hair

TPM's Greg Sargent and Andrew Sullivan both watched Hillary Clinton's 10/15 visit to the View, and both came away unsatisfied with her answer on torture. From HRC: "

We also have to be smarter about how we interrogate. There's a lot of evidence that you don't get accurate, good information from extreme measures. In fact, you get it by developing some kind of system that can really get people to feel that they need to give you that information...For both the moral and values reason and because of the lack of effectiveness that a lot of these so-called techniques have. we need to be very clear that we do not conduct torture.

Sargent comments: "Again, she's not condemning specific techniques such as waterboarding by name or characterizing them as torture. So there may still be some wiggle room here, and this is unlikely to fully satisfy critics who are hoping that she'll rule out the use of all such techniques by name." Sullivan blogs: "For all her positioning, her public statement is quite close to Bush's who also inveighs against torture, while authorizing it as policy. ... Clinton won't call the techniques in question torture; and she won't explicitly rule out specific techniques. I remain skeptical of her bona fides on the matter. ... If you want to end torture as an instrument of American policy, I don't believe Hillary Clinton is your candidate."

The Hill's 10/16 coverage of GOP intent to use an allegation in a recent book "which suggests Clinton listened to a secretly recorded conversation between political opponents" caused Atrios to comment: "Who knew that the spouse of a presidential contender, in 1992, could get the FBI to record phone conversations of political opponents. ... And the Clinton rules roll on..."

Instapundit couples The Hill story with a Guardian headline reading 'Clinton would use violence against Tehran' and quips: "It'll be like President Cheney, only with hair!"

CLINTON II: Like Humphrey Only With Better Hair

Matthew Yglesias reads Hillary Clinton 'foreign policy manifesto in Foreign Affairs' and comments: "I've noted this before, but reading Hillary Clinton's foreign policy manifesto in Foreign Affairs is once again a reminder of how nice it would be for politicians to give us some idea of what they mean by terms like "vital interests." ... Broadly construed, I think Clinton accomplished her goals here: She's laid something out that I think most people will regard as indistinguishable from what her rivals have put on the table but that contains subtle signals to people paying close attention that she'll probably govern more hawkishly than they will."

Huffington Post contributors need no convincing HRC will be a hawkish president. 10/15 HuffPo-Hillary-bashing includes:

• Paul Jay: "On September 26th Hillary Rodham Clinton voted for the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment, which designates the Iranian National Guard as a terrorist organization. As I read through the amendment I found it harder and harder to understand how she could possible defend her vote. ... With Seymour Hersh predicting a U.S. attack Iran, this vote put Senator Clinton squarely in the Hawk's nest."
• Thomas de Zengotita: "Never mind empowering Bush to bomb Iran in a mad effort to double-down on a bad bet just so she can fend of Ruthless Rudy in the general election. The heck with that deadly decision and its long term consequences. She's SO optimistic! ... Grinning from ear to ear -- and when she does that, she gets a trifle jowly and actually looks like Hubert Humphrey."
• Gareth Porter: "Does she support an unprovoked military assault on Iran or not? ... Even more serious, she told the same audience Saturday that the Iranians "are supporting sending weapons into Iraq right now that are used against our troops". That tortured formulation tells us that Clinton cannot be counted to exercise any independent judgment about the facts surrounding the administration's case for war. That is why Clinton's co-sponsorship of the Webb amendment requiring the president to seek congressional approval before any military action against Iran should not be taken seriously."

Not talking Iran but still bashing Clinton, John Edwards aide Mudcat Saunders talks trade at The Huffington Post: "First, it is callous and offensive to the many Americans who have been "sucking wind" due to Clinton trade policies for Hillary to tell them "to take a deep breath." Secondly, Hillary, ... top-tier economists, many who were tricked on these ill-thought, ill-negotiated, ill-enforced, and erroneously presented to Congress trade treaties, are now taking a second look themselves. ... The reason Hillary is distancing herself from the trade treaties, rather than continuing to talk about ridiculous unintended consequences is because she understands politics like nobody else. The question is not whether Hillary understands politics but instead, how many of us understand Hillary."

EDWARDS: Living Breathing Organisms Endorse John Edwards

IA Independent's John Deeth liveblogged John Edwards 10/15 IA SEIU endorsement from Iowa City, IA. Garance Franke-Ruta covers the endorsement's impact: "This is the best news the John Edwards campaign has had in some time. The endorsement will have several positive results: 1) strengthening Edwards on the ground organizationally; 2) providing a conduit for the SEIU locals in Nevada and California that are likely to endorse him to funnel their enthusiasm into Iowa; and 3) creating a momentum signal to the press not to count Edwards out. There's also the scissors-paper-rock element of the endorsement, in that it effectively blocks the powerful Chicago SEIU locals from streaming into the state on Barack Obama's behalf (under union rules, the locals get to call the shots about who operates on whose behalf in which states, so the local endorsements in the early primary states matter most)."

Also endorsing Edwards 10/14, Friends of the Earth. Blue Hampshire reports: "As Brent Blackwelder, FoE-A President, and John Edwards stood on the grass just outside a lovely home in a stunning waterfront setting they both talked about why the issue of global warming is so vital to the future of our country and planet. Mr. Blackwelder enumerated the reasons for the group's endorsement, but his remarks were not just about the endorsement and the mortal peril our planet faces as the living breathing organism that it is."

OBAMA: Bigger Than Jesus

DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas links to Barack Obama telling CBS News' Early Show, "If I believed in polls, then five years ago I would have backed the war in Iraq like she did," and remarks: "I like the aggressive Obama."

AMERICAblog's John Aravosis is impressed with recent Obama rhetoric on faith and the environment: "More die-hard Christians believe that we are "stewards of the earth" (a lot of other people do too). Linking environmentalism to faith is a smart move to help get more people supporting pro-environment policies, and to help get more Evangelical voters looking again at Obama."

Also talking about God and Obama, Andrew Sullivan posts reader speculation on Sullivan's Obama-crush: "Jesus pointed beyond dualism, conflict and fear to something higher, to that kind of patient, inclusive - dare I say loving - nondualism that comes from seeing that both left and right are both right and wrong. And that, as I see it, is why you are really so enamored of Obama: he's the only one out there who seems willing to rise above the politics of division and fear, and reach for something better, something higher, something that can bring us all together - not just here in this country, but globally."

On the right, RCP Blog's Tom Bevan notes that freshly minted Dem ex-Sen. Lincoln Chafee (?-RI) hinted at an Obama endorsement on RI radio 10/14.

GOP FIELD: See, Bloggers Can Get Along

Soren Dayton's recent bemoaning of the GOP's "transformation" from a conservative movement formed around "core of principles to a bunch of interest groups" has earned him the title of DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas "new favorite Republican blog." Dayton writes: "Because conservatism lost its coherence, it has also lost its brand." Kos responds: "Welcome to our hell. It really is amazing how the GOP, so long able to keep message discipline and its supposed core set of principles to a list of three (strong national defense, family values, and lower taxes) has in so short order become just as disjointed and unfocused as Democrats."

MCCAIN: Once Again, Things That Could've Been Brought To My Attention YESTERDAY!

John McCain called into Captain's Quarters Heading Right Radio 10/15. CQ highlights McCain's criticism of ret. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez: "I honor and respect his service to the country. I respect anyone who spends their adult life in the military as he has, but I respectfully have to say, General Sanchez, why didn't when I was in Baghdad, meeting with you and Jerry Bremer five years ago -- well, four years ago -- and I said, "You don't have enough troops here. You're going to fail. Looting is going on, Al-Qaeda is coming in, you're going to have these problems. Why aren't you settling the de-Ba'athification issue, etc etc." And he defended the present policy [at that time], he said it was succeeding, and he testified before the Armed Services Committee, of which I am a member, the same way."

Also talking McCain and foreign policy Campaign Standard's Matthew Continetti reads McCain's Foreign Affairs essay and comments: "Among the top four candidates for the GOP nomination who have contributed these essays to Foreign Affairs (Thompson hasn't yet), only McCain embraces the idea that democracy promotion should be a top concern of U.S. foreign policy."

MCCAIN II: He Was For Mitt Before He Was Against Him

RCP Blog's Tom Bevan tracks McCain's hightened criticism of Mitt Romney including a campaign statement from ex-Rep. Chuck Douglas (R-NH) who complains: "Mitt Romney actively worked to defeat the Republican candidate trying to reclaim my old congressional seat. Therefore, I'm amazed that Romney would claim to represent the Republican wing of the Republican Party."

RCP Blog's Blake Dvorak follows up the story with Romney campaign supplied YouTube of McCain endorsing Romney for governor in '02. Dvorak comments: "I guess this is supposed to show that McCain used to "heart" Romney back then, but doesn't now out of political ambition. (Flip-flop!) But it's a little weak as far as YouTube Moments go." Townhall's Matt Lewis also comments on the vid: "Maybe this should be filed in the 'no good deed goes unpunished' file. Or maybe this illustrates the fact that candidates are free to change their minds on issues (and people), over time. Romney's point is that, if he's so liberal, why did McCain support him on 2002? McCain's team would probably argue that Romney was fine for Massachusetts, but too liberal for the presidency."

PAUL: 3.8% With A Bullet!

Pollster.com's Mark Blumenthal notes, "we made a small change earlier today to the charts that display results for Republican presidential candidates nationally and in each of the early primary states: We dropped the trend line for Newt Gingrich and added a trend line for Ron Paul."

More Blumenthal: "Newt Gingrich has finally made it clear he will not be a candidate, and so the many pollsters that had included his name on trial heats will now stop. Meanwhile, Ron Paul's support in New Hampshire now increased to 3.8% on our trend estimate, within a whisper of Mike Huckabee (at 4.2%)."

ROMNEY: Mr. Fix It Needs To Fix His Tin Ear

Commenting on the rest of the field's quick response to Mitt Romney's new Republican wing of the Republican Party line of attack, Pat Shortridge blogs: "I have to believe, given the almost immediate and devastating responses from McCain, Giuliani, Thompson, etc, that this was the most eagerly awaited political comparison since Lloyd Bentsen stood onstage praying for Dan Quayle to liken himself of JFK."

Campaign Standard's Richelieu looks at Romney's recent troubles and concludes the campaign has a 'tin ear'. Richlieu continues:

There seems to be no filter to prevent silly remarks in Romney's material. In fact, the campaign too often appears to leap at the opportunity to pander by saying silly things. Beyond the [Howard] Dean line, there was a truly nickel and dime item in a Romney speech a few weeks ago where he pledged to protect America from having "In God We Trust" moved to a secondary position on our coinage. ... Even Romney's attacks are small. The line-item veto? That is the defining difference between Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani in a presidential race? Romney has a long career of doing big and impressive things. He badly needs to get that bigness back to his candidacy.

NRO's Jim Geraghty advises: "Would Romney Be Better Off Running as 'Mr. Fix-It'? ... An adviser to one of Romney's rivals told me: 'I'm not a huge fan of what Romney did in Massachusetts, but it was successful enough to be the foundation of a his message: I'm Mr. Fix-It, I'm the the can-do, get-it-done governor.' ... Romney says much of what's above, but it rarely seems like the centerpiece of his message. Instead, he seems hell-bent on proving he's a social conservative despite a less-than-ideal record."

THOMPSON: The Gloves Aren't Off Yet

Fred Thompson's 10/25 speech before the Conservative Party of New York drew many conservative reactions, including:

• Hot Air's Allahpundit: "Your takeaway line: 'Some think that the best way to beat the Democrats is to be more like 'em. I could not disagree more.' ... That's good advice circa 1980, after a Democratic administration had spent four years alienating the center; circa 2007, when it's a Republican administration that's done the alienating, I'm not so sure."
• RCP Blog's Blake Dvorak: "Interesting that the campaign released this particular part of the speech, since it's so clearly aimed at Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney . ... But it will be the "less regulation" part that might raise eyebrows in the crowd. A major sticking point with conservatives is Thompson's support of McCain-Feingold while he was in the Senate."
• Campaign Standard's Matthew Continetti: "If you are a movement conservative, Thompson's argument is loaded and compelling. Question is: Because so many in the media already have written Thompson out of the race, will voters have the chance to hear his critique?"
• AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein: "Why is Thompson holding back on going after Giuliani on the abortion issue, especially at a time when some social conservatives are making noise about a third party?"
• AmSpec Blog's Jennifer Rubin: "Why not go after Rudy on something that makes sense like abortion? Well here are some possibilities. First, maybe he really wouldn't mind being VP-- a great supporting role for a supporting actor. Second, he may figure it is better to let Romney and McCain or third party groups do the nasty work ... Third, Thompson has not exactly been aggressive on the stump or in debates and maybe this is just him --nice guy ... Fourth, I think the name of the game right now with Thompson and McCain is to inflict permanent damage on Romney and become the conservative alternative to Rudy around which the base can rally."

VA SEN: Mission Improbable

The Directors at RedState out throwing their weight behind an on line effort to draft Gen. Peter Pace to take on ex-Gov. Mark Warner (D) for Senate. they write: "With wealthy former Gov. Mark Warner holding significant leads over Rep. Tom Davis and former Gov. Jim Gilmore - two unimpressive candidates with little grassroots support - the likelihood of two Democrat Senators is high. ... Today, we urge General Pace to accept One Last Mission on behalf of his country. We urge him to heed the calls of his fellow countrymen and, rather than slipping away into a quiet (and much deserved) retirement, to serve once more a proud and grateful nation that desperately needs the unique leadership only he can offer."

National Review also supports the effort. The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez links to OneLastMission.org, a supporting Facebook page, and NRO's editorial in favor of Pace's candidacy. The open letter at OneLastMission reads:

General, the American people need your leadership in the U.S. Senate. The outcome of even one Senate race could mean the difference between pushing on towards victory and being driven from the field and rendering meaningless the blood that has been spilt in the sands of Iraq and Afghanistan. We cannot afford to be represented by a September 10th politician. We cannot spare you now. Sir, we respectfully ask you to take on one last mission for your country.

BLOGGERS VS BELTWAY: Now Batting .400

The netroots have claimed the second convert in their campaign to pressure five wayward House Dems to commit to vote to overturn Pres. Bush's SCHIP veto. Fire Dog Lake's Jane Hamsher blogs: "On the heels of our recorded calls to the districts of five reactionary Democrats who refused to support the override of George Bush's veto of SCHIP, two of them have now flipped their votes - last week Baron Hill, and today Mike McIntyre of North Carolina."

Open Left's Matt Stoller identifies the remaining targets: Boren (OK-02), Ethridge (NC-02), Marshall (GA-08), and Taylor (MS-04). ... Jim Marshall is facing a primary challenge, Bob Etheridge is undecided, and Gene Taylor is still obstinate (though he's getting criticized by radio ads from pro-life group Catholics United)."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: So What Our Health Care System Really Needs Is More Rich People

Tyler Cowen lists nine "micro-facts" on health care policy including, "Health care outcomes improve with income even under single-payer systems. Our best estimates suggest that this gradient is no steeper in the United States than it is in Canada." Cowen then instructs:

Now here is how to debate health care policy. Ask a defender of single payer systems (or other possible reforms) how many of these points he or she accepts. Settle on that list, noting that residual disagreements may well remain. Then debate what the list means for what America should do about health care policy today.
Here's how not to debate health care policy. When you hear one point on that list, bring up in response that other countries spend less and produce better health care outcomes and that therefore we should copy the systems of those countries.

But libertarians, I am not letting you off the hook either: Isn't there some form of further government intervention into health care that could help somebody? And if your basic model is that governments steal as much money as they can, and then waste it all, shouldn't we then jump at the chance to institute health care subsidies of this at least partially helpful nature? The alternative is simply that the money gets wasted some other and worse way.

LEST WE FORGET: We Like Hung And We Hug Everybody

We know Top Chef ended weeks ago, but we just stumbled across this analysis from The Onion's The Hater about what your choice in favorite Top Chef finalists says about you:

• If your favorite is Casey: You were either in a sorority at some point, or very close to rushing. You use the word "soul" a lot, and probably own more than a few throw pillows with cutesy sayings ("Life is measured in shoes!"), or hilarious affirmations ("The Queen Of Mean"). You idolize Jennifer Aniston. If none of the above is true, you are from Texas.
• If your favorite is Dale: You think Will & Grace was hysterical, especially Megan Mulally. You consider yourself edgy, and may even use the word "edgy" in conversation, even though the "edgiest" thing you've ever done was get a nose ring, or wear a grafitti-print t-shirt. You enjoy savory tarts, and think they can be incorporated into every meal. You have a separate shelf in your bathroom for all of your hair-care products.
• If your favorite is Brian: You don't exist. Sorry, no one's favorite is Brian.
• If your favorite is Hung: You're smart, kind of selfish, and don't hug people who aren't your friends. You realize that Top Chef is a competition, and you wouldn't help people if you finished early, either. In fact, you would probably walk around the kitchen, reminding all the other chefs who are still working that their time is running out. Why? Because that's funny (and fun to watch at home). Also, you really enjoy fried skin of all varieties.