November 14, 2008

11/14: Senators In The Spotlight

Liberal bloggers are buzzing about IN Sen. Even Bayh's suggestion that ex-John McCain surrogate/CT Sen. Joe Lieberman should be allowed to retain his committee chairmanship if he offers a "sincere apology" for his behavior. Lefty bloggers think Bayh's statement is "an important development" because he's a Lieberman ally. They're urging him to follow through and vote against Lieberman if the latter refuses to apologize (which they think is likely).

Meanwhile, conservative bloggers are keeping up a steady stream of complaints in advance of the looming MN Senate recount. Righty bloggers are accusing Al Franken's campaign of making "a series of deceitful allegations" in an effort to "steal the election". They're also accusing MN Sec/State Mark Ritchie of being a Franken shill. In yet another indication of the growing influence of bloggers, the NRSC is featuring a number of these blog posts on a new website they created in order to keep "a watchful eye on Minnesota's Senate recount."

LIEBERMAN: Bayh Wants An Apology

Liberal bloggers are discussing Bayh's recent appearance on Rachel Maddow's MSNBC show, in which Bayh "called on [Lieberman] to apologize for his attacks on Barack Obama, saying doing so would temporarily let him retain a key chairmanship position next Congress". Lefty bloggers think Bayh's statement is significant because he is a strong Lieberman supporter, but they don't expect Lieberman to apologize:

• Daily Kos' Jed L: "Bayh could be blowing smoke up our you-know-what. He may have no intention of following through on his demand of Lieberman. But at least Evan Bayh, one of Lieberman's strongest supporters, is now on record saying that Lieberman needs to apologize."
• Daily Kos' Kagro X: "Can we expect Bayh to vote against Lieberman retaining the chair if [an apology] isn't forthcoming? I'm doubting it, which means Bayh was probably blowing smoke up your ass with that one."
• Daily Kos' Markos Moulitsas: "I think this is an important development in the Lieberman saga. So Evan Bayh, one of Lieberman's strongest boosters, is saying that Joe should apologize. And this can't be a weak 'behind closed doors' type of apology. It needs to be an apology to all Democrats, public, sincere and heartfelt. Of course, we all know Lieberman never will issue such an apology. He doesn't think he did anything wrong. His megalomania is such that it prevents him from every showing any humility or regret. So will Bayh still whip his fellow Democratic senators in favor of Lieberman if Lieberman refuses to offer that heartfelt public apology? He'd look foolish if he did so. Then again, Lieberman has never given a damn about making his allies look foolish. Bayh may end up being just the latest in a long line of people burned by Lieberman's insufferable sanctimony."
• Firedoglake's Jane Hamsher: "Lieberman to apologize for being such a prick? It's what Lieberman supporter Evan Bayh seems to think we have in store, anyway. [...It will] never happen."

LIEBERMAN II: Fool Me Once, Shame On You; Fool Me Twice, Shame On Me

Liberal bloggers are pushing back against Marc Ambinder's criticism of their campaign against Lieberman:

"This is a fun distraction, but isn't the bloggy left having a major overreaction to the idea of keeping Lieberman in his current position? It's true that he'll have subpoena power over the new administration, but the idea that he'll be a serious political player in the coming term is frankly laughable. If Joe Lieberman wants to wage a one-man crusade against President Obama, he can certainly do so, but it's hard to imagine him winning such a fight, or even making himself look good by losing. Most likely, Obama will bring Lieberman back into the fold graciously, and he'll vote with the Democrats, and occasionally go on Meet The Press to express his disappointment about something or other. He seems to enjoy being a scold, but there's no evidence he has the the belly to be Ken Starr."

• MyDD's Josh Orton: "It's amazing: even after Lieberman's operated in bad faith for years, there are still some who insist on pretending he'll start acting differently. It won't happen -- Lieberman has spent the last two years positioning himself as a contrarian power-broker, and he's not going to stop now. In fact, if the Democratic caucus ignores what Joe did during the election, it might embolden him more. Why wouldn't it? Lieberman smeared Democrats up and down this cycle, and yet anyone in a position to notice insists on jamming their heads in the sand. And by the way -- no one's saying that Lieberman is the next Ken Starr. But it's undeniable that Joe waged a full-frontal assault on his party's credibility, and yet he'll return to his gavel and subpoena power under the seniority he enjoys in that very party. Anyone that assumes Lieberman is as classy as [NE Sen. Chuck] Hagel -- i.e. someone who expresses 'disappointment' without acting maliciously -- is in denial."
• AMERICAblog's John Aravosis: "If Ambinder and [Chris] Cillizza, and apparently Bayh and [IL Sen. Dick] Durbin and even Obama, feel that defecting to the other party, helping their candidates win office, and calling your own party's candidate a terrorist sympathizer is really not that big an offense, then the next time the Republicans call the Democrats unpatriotic America-haters I don't want hear a peep out of the Democrats or the media. After all, what [MN Rep.] Michelle Bachmann did was really just a high school prank. And is it time to rehabilitate [ex-GA Sen.] Zell Miller too?"

Meanwhile, several bloggers are buzzing about a new Daily Kos/Research 2000 poll indicating that Lieberman's popularity has plummeted in CT:

• Moulitsas: "Lieberman can threaten all he wants to caucus with Republicans if he doesn't get everything he wants. Fact is, he's in shaky electoral territory, and it would only get worse if he decided to become a Republican. Call his bluff. Give him another committee chairmanship in an area where his ideology matches up with the Democratic Party. He won't leave the Democratic caucus. It would be career suicide."
• Open Left's Matt Stoller: "Remarkable numbers from Kos. [...] Senate Democrats have leverage right now, and Lieberman knows it. That situation won't last forever, and the moment Lieberman can begin scewing over Obama, he will. It's time to throw him to a lower committee or kick him out of the caucus."

CLINTON: Secretary Clinton?

Several liberal bloggers like the idea of Obama choosing Hillary Clinton as his Secretary of State:

• Aravosis: "Hillary [is] being considered for Sec of State. Good, I like that. I think someone with a 'Clinton' name could do a lot of good restoring the world's faith in America."
• TAPPED's Dana Goldstein: "If given a formal role in the Obama administration, Hillary would rise to the occasion as a team player. She has a detailed understand of global conflicts and has met many of the players involved. She'd be greeted enthusiastically around the world, where the only American political phenom who could have possibly overtaken affection for the Clintons was Obama. [...] The downside to Hillary as secretary of state is losing her strong voice for women's issues and health care reform in the Senate, where she has the potential to grow into a kind of Teddy Kennedy figure on domestic policy. [...] There's also the question of whether she could effectively manage a large bureaucracy, considering her messy campaign. Secretary of state is more a figurehead than day-to-day manager, though, and with the right people working for her, I think Hillary could do an admirable job."

TPM's Josh Marshall doesn't understand why Clinton would want this position: "Secretaries of State don't usually last more than a single presidential term. And sometimes they don't make it that long. So, for the life of me, I do not understand why Hillary Clinton would want to give up what is in all likelihood a senate seat for life to run the State Department for Barack Obama."

Ezra Klein doesn't think it will happen: "I'm not taking the rumors that Hillary Clinton is being considered for Secretary of State particularly seriously. Obama's main argument against Hillary Clinton in the primaries was that she was wed to a Washington establishment of cautious and stale foreign policy thinkers who'd helped her blunder into, among other things, supporting the war in Iraq. Elevating her to the country's top foreign policy job would be an odd resolution to that argument. [...] But respect necessitates that Obama leaks her as a contender for it. Indeed, if she were going to get it, my hunch is there would be no leaks. The fact that she's being publicly considered is probably pretty good evidence that she's been privately ruled out."

Conservative blogger Amanda Carpenter thinks it would be hypocritical of Obama to choose Clinton as his Sec/State: "Barack Obama is making all his potential staffers submit an exhaustive questionaire about their personal lives, finances, etc, right? So how is it he could POSSIBLY pick Hillary Clinton, whose husband Bill [Clinton] has refused to disclose ANY financial information about his multi-million international foundation? [...] If Obama wants to be all about transparency and disclosure, he can't pick Hill."

MN SEN: Florida 2000 Redux

As the MN recount looms, conservative bloggers are keeping up a steady stream of complaints about the conduct of Franken's campaign:

• Power Line's John Hinderaker: "The Al Franken campaign is using a series of lawsuits to try to bully the ex-comedian's way into the United States Senate."
• Hot Air's Ed Morrissey: "[Franken's lawyers] want to browbeat voters and county boards into generating votes that don't exist in order to steal the election. The Minnesota courts need to shut Franken down fast and hard. The recount should only involve the ballots certified as legitimate by the counties on Election Day. Franken can't win with the legitimate ballots alone, though, and apparently he has no problem with stealing an election with illegitimate ballots instead."
• Power Line's Scott Johnson: "Al Franken is waging a campaign to overturn the results of Minnesota's Senate election based on a series of deceitful allegations. On this score the fraudulent sob story involving the 84-year-old stroke victim whose ballot was supposedly rejected because of an issue regarding her signature may serve as representative. Another such myth, retailed by the AP's Brian Bakst, is premised on a supposed Franken 'undervote.' Ed Morrissey takes pains to demonstrate the fraudulence of this line of attack for anyone unfamiliar with Minnesota's voting system."
• Townhall's Matt Lewis: "Interestingly, the Franken Campaign publicly stated they will have 1,250 lawyers on the recount. As someone close to the recount emailed me, 'that's roughly 6 attorneys for every ballot they want to try to get to overturn the outcome of the election.' It seems like a lot of attorneys just to make sure the recount is fair and square..."
• RedState's Erick Erickson: "I spent six years as an elections lawyer. I handled a lot of very wacked election canvasses and recounts. One thing they all had in common: when new votes were found, they generally went both ways -- a few for one candidate and a few for the other candidate. It didn't quite follow the polling, but then close races only happen at the 50-50 margin. Here's something that never happened: the votes did not all go 100% for one candidate except in the two instances where there was only one misplaced ballot discovered. In Minnesota, though, the votes are all going for Al Franken -- pretty much all 600 of them. That defies statistical probability."

On the left side of the blogosphere, Daily Kos' BarbinMD pushes back: "This is really pitiful. Republicans are in such a panic over the possibility that they will lose another senate seat when the legally-mandated recount in Minnesota is completed, they are doing everything they can to taint the results before the process even begins. The desperate moves began the day after the election when [MN Sen.] Norm Coleman declared himself the winner and laughably suggested that Al Franken forego any recount, and now, the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) has set up a website for 'keeping a watchful eye' on the recount. And their idea of keeping a close eye on the race? By posting deep thoughts from various conservative blogs, and deranged, fact-free opinion pieces. [...] Given the all-out blitz of false charges, innuendo, and disinformation the Republicans have been peddling, it's clear that they don't think Norm Coleman's 206 vote lead is going to hold up."

PROP 8: Cool It, Protesters

Conservative bloggers are criticizing the recent activities of critics of CA's Prop 8, which banned gay marriage in the state:

• Morrissey: "From profane billboards to violent protests, the anti-8 demonstrators have focused their ire on Mormons, and now two envelopes of white powder have turned up in the mail at the Mormon Temples in Los Angeles and Salt Lake City. [...] This fortnight-long temper tantrum certainly won't help the anti-8 cause when the inevitable referendum appears to reverse the constitutional amendment Californians added in this election. I'd expect to see that on the ballot every two years from now on, but if its backers keep acting like lunatics, they can expect to lose by greater margins in the future."
• Glenn Reynolds: "Can I suggest that folks unhappy about Proposition 8 would be better-served by pushing for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act than by protesting at Mormon Temples and stomping on crosses? Lashing out in anger feels good to some people, I guess, but that's about it."
• Townhall's Carol Platt Liebau: "The LA Times covers the mass protests against the passage of Proposition 8, which amends the California constitution and clarifies that marriage is restricted to one man and one woman. [...] What's worth noting is that since the proposition passed, some of its opponents have behaved in a way that would be universally condemned if, say, conservatives had behaved in the same manner about Obama's victory."

Several righty bloggers are calling on Obama to intervene:

• Michelle Malkin: "Pssst. Hey, 'Lightworker.' Yeah, you, 'Mr. Soul-fixer.' Bearer of 'Hope and Change.' Across the country, there are broken souls in need of fixing. They are the opponents of Proposition 8, California's traditional marriage initiative, which passed 52-48 (the same margin you won by, Lightworker). Perhaps you would care to weigh in and work your healing magic on the anti-Prop. 8 rabble-rousers who continue to wreak havoc on Mormon churches in several cities and states and blacklisting peaceful voters who supported the ballot measure. It is getting very ugly out there and no one in the Democratic leadership has stepped up to condemn the insane rage, to borrow a phrase. Where art thou, Lightworker?"
• RedState's Moe Lane: "For the love of God, President-elect Obama, do something about this. Before it gets worse."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Don't Overreact To Defeat, Republicans

AmSpec Blog's Robert Stacy McCain blasts Jennifer Rubin's critique of the GOP, in which she argues that "fiscal austerity" and "emphasis on social conservatism" have limited appeal:

"...To urge that the GOP abandon both limited government and social conservatism (jettisoning both Grover Norquist and James Dobson, as it were) doesn't exactly strike me as a winning formula. Minus both social and fiscal issues, what do Republicans have left -- invading foreign countries to promote global democracy? That's really worked well so far, hasn't it?

Republicans should try to learn a lesson from the Democrats. In terms of basic political philosophy and policy, Barack Obama is indistinguishable from Howard Dean. But Obama is charismatic in a way that Dean was not, and voters in 2008 were sick to death of Republicans in a way they were not in 2004. After successive defeats in 2002 and 2004, Democrats kept their powder dry, improved their game, and were ready to score victories in 2006 and 2008.

Finally, as Jim Antle pointed out yesterday, Republican 'Reformists' -- I prefer the term 'Young Turks,' since it is broader and less ideological -- do themselves no favors by offering criticisms that sound suspiciously like RINO mating calls. We've already got one pro-gay-marriage, pro-abortion party, and we've already got two pro-amnesty parties, so those aren't exactly 'new ideas.' Soi-dissant 'Reformists' who couch their criticism in such terms might get published at the New York Times, but they're unlikely to gain much influence among the rank-and-file of the GOP."

LEST WE FORGET: Catchphrase From 'The Love Guru' Overheard

From The Onion:

"ST. CLOUD, MN -- A catchphrase from The Love Guru, comedian Mike Myers' latest film, which follows the exploits of a self-help mentor tasked with reuniting a professional hockey player with his wife, was overheard at a local bar, stunned witnesses reported Monday. 'I didn't see who was saying it, but I think it was that part from the trailer where Justin Timberlake comes into the scene wearing a Speedo and Mike Myers says, "It looks like he's smuggling a schnauzer,"' said a visibly distraught Richard Finestra, 28. 'Who the hell is going around quoting from that movie? Oh God -- and I recognized the line. What does that say about me?' The nation's film experts have urged Americans to remain calm, saying that the statistical likelihood of the movie ever being casually referenced again is roughly 1 in 300,000,000."

Posted by Ian Faerstein at November 14, 2008 12:47 PM