Party Splits Archives
|
 |
Back when I worked at the Tampa Tribune, one of the long-running stories was about a soon-to-be-indicted public official. The feds came close but they never got him.
Well, today, someone dropped a hammer on The Hammer.
So I believe we can dust off the old chestnut that made its way around the Trib newsroom in anticipation of the indictment that never was. It's handy for all indictments.
Those of you who know Howard Troxler might be able to get him to hum a few bars. The tune, of course, is that Pointer Sisters ditty from Flashdance:
I'm so excited
Delay's indicted
He's going to be arraigned
And I think I like it.
Wed 11:11 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Ohhhhh. Darn that Glenn Reynolds. That law professor!
He fights dirty! He's saying that I am siding with Rep. Tom Delay on the pork in the highway bill!
Ha! I am cut to the quick! I may never type again! Tom Delay! Glenn really knows how to hurt a Liberal, doesn't he?
Actually, Reynolds, being a law professor and all, has found the one thing I didn't say in this post calling his and N.Z. Bear's Porkbusters "wrong-headed."
Of course, I'm not siding with Tom Delay. I'm siding with more citizen involvement in government. Those are two different things. And, I would maintain, that if more folks paid attention to they way lawmakers like Delay behave, that crook - oh, yes, he is - would not have gotten elected in the first place.
As I said, Porkbusters is a worthy attempt to get folks to pay attention to the ways in which legislation is enacted and the different little tricks, asides and sleights of hand that go into crafting spending legislation. I covered Congress. I covered the passage of the Telecommunciations Act of 1996 which could also be called "Christmas for Phone Companies." And I’m here to tell you that the Telecom Act passed as it did because no one - no real people - cared. Just like the highway bill.
Continue reading "The Hammer"Tue 10:26 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Silly me. Here I am thinking that the lesson of Katrina is that - finally - people in politics and government are going to have a "Come to Jesus" moment about infrastructure spending and how putting off for tomorrow what you need to do today is a bad, short-sighted idea that's just beginning to affect this country's economic well-being.
Then I get a pointer to Instapundit Glenn Reynold's and N.Z.Bear's "PorkBusters."
Now, I'm well aware of the stupidity of disagreeing with Reynolds, the Pope of the blogosphere. But Porkbusters is, well, it's wrong-headed. It's saying that cutting government spending by scouring the latest highway bill for "pork" is a good substitute for, I dunno, raising taxes and for the first time in a generation allowing government spending to become slightly less shameful about spending money in a pro-active way.
The Porkbusters list is long and the list is bipartisan and it makes some good points about how very messed up the federal government's appropriations and spending process is. That part, I get. Having covered Congress, I doubly get it. But the whole idea behind Porkbusters is, I'm afraid, an extension of the thinking that got us - and the City of New Orleans, the states of Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana - in this mess in the first place.
Porkbusters is, really, an on-line take on the old "It's Your Money" reports that TV stations and newspapers do to increase viewership. And it's going to have the same effect. It's going to play to folks who think - and few don't - that their tax dollars could be better spent. But pork is in the eye of the beholder. One man's sweaty ugly overfed hog is another's porkchop dinner for his hungry and hard-working family.
Continue reading "Pork Barrel Politics"Mon 12:16 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
How do you separate a good politician from a great one? Well, reaction - the ability to manage things beyond your control - is one very good test. Presidents Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan had that skill.
Just to get an idea of how hard it is, take a look at President George W. Bush's September 'to-do' list. You do not want to be this man. Why? Mid-term Congressional Elections are coming up in about a year and while most states have jerry-rigged their Congressional districts to prevent any sort of sudden change-over in representation, it's looking more and more like the Republicans - particularly the outspoken conservatives - are going to have a hard time of things.
But back to George Bush's list of stuff to do:
1. Solve Katrina fall-out by doing something this administration has never done: Anticipate problems. Specifically the problems arising from the real fear that the flooded City of New Orleans is the Love Canal of the 21st Century (Rebuild it? Uh, yeah. A city that was built on tourism, a love of visiting pretty places? What's so pretty about a football stadium where babies died of dehydration?)
2. Nominate a new Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court (bearing in mind that there are a lot of pissed off Black folks and not too many happy white women out there these days...). And see that the white man you nominated already as a sop to your "conservative" base through his now sure-to-be-tough, rough and not-too-easy confirmation hearings to be Chief Justice.
3. Get the boys home from Iraq in time for November, 2006 elections so you and your party don’t lose the House, which if Rep. Tom Delay gets indicted could well happen. At times like this I want Jon Stewart to publish transcripts of his shows. A few week ago, Sy Hersh was on predicting that "external events" would get the U.S out of Iraq. Fast. He was, as he often is, correct.
4. Keep Democrats - specifically that not-so-nice Senator from New York- from deciding that it's not a good time to stretch their national political ambition and see how far they can push you on Judge John Roberts' nomination to the Supreme Court, Plan B and Katrina. Class and race in the right hands - the extended reach of a southerner like former President William Jefferson Clinton - is a powerful tool.
5. Worry about normally conservative Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the sole woman on the Senate Judiciary Committee who was recently reminded of her Roe-v.-Wade duties. The possibility that she and California will do well if a woman is elected president can't have escaped her. And hope she hasn't had this thought: If Republicans are happy to abandon the good, God-fearing black folks of New Orleans 'cause they don't vote the "right" way then what is this White House going to do for us Godless atheist in California when our earthquake hits? Not a Goddamn thing. That's what.
Continue reading "Yes You. Worry."Mon 01:41 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
It's a little premature to feel truly sorry for Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. But since he is fast moving from being a bit of a dope to the punching bag of the U.S. Senate, I guess we can take a few minutes, before he becomes a complete joke, to give his dying political career its due.
First, President Bush -- who helped Frist get the job of Senate leader -- asks Sen. Movie Star, former Senator Fred Thomas to help run the Judge John Roberts' Supreme Court nomination. That was after Frist couldn't figure out how many votes he had on John Bolton's nomination. The answer: not enough. And that was after Sen. John McCain stepped in to the role Frist should have taken to negotiate a compromise on the filibuster and the judicial nomination process. And let's not forget Sen. Arlen Specter and his insistence -- just by showing up in all his ailing glory -- that stem cell research is something the federal government out to fund. Oh yeah, and Terry Schiavo.
Now comes former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott. And he ain't happy either. Just as Frist is getting ready to return to a Senate that he leads in name only, Lott is stepping up with a new message of moderation and cooperation. It isn't just a challenge to Frist, it's a challenge to the White House and the way Republicans have been conducting business on Capitol Hill for the past three years.
Continue reading "Hitting Below the Belt"Mon 10:39 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
You know what I miss? Media circuses run by the media, for the media.
A bunch of guys -- it's always mostly guys 'cause they tote the cameras -- standing around telling jokes, cracking wise and generally treating the spectacle as what it is: A show.
The rest of us come and go, sizing up the competition, rumor-monger, gossip, look for jobs, trade horror stories about editors or sources, or just catch up on old times. We drink too much coffee, annoy the nice folks who brought it to us and pay -- happily -- inflated hotel bills 'cause it was all going on Tony or Pinch or Kaye's tab. New Hampshire during the week before the primary is a good example; or it used to be before every TV station with 10 minutes on the bird sent a blond and two heavy-set tech guys.
But these days, it seems, is fashionable -- on both sides of the political aisle -- to have participatory media circuses. The idea seems to be who can out-spectacle the other side with media coverage, hangers-on, catering trucks and time on the 'blogs, the airwaves or the papers. At the beginning of the summer, the Right had Terry Schiavo. Now, we here on the Left have Cindy Sheehan.
And I have a sinking feeling -- you know, being a Democrat these days is to live with a constant sinking feeling -- that the Left is screwing up. Sheehan is an impassioned defender of her point of view. She has lost a son and while a lot of others don't think that gives her moral authority of any sort, it does. It's foolish to argue otherwise. Cindy Sheehan is not behaving logically. She is protesting. And she has a right to do so.
But she should remain alone in her protest. Her loneliness makes her plight and her determined decision to camp in Crawford even more eloquent. Alone, Cindy Sheehan appears to be what she truly is: inconsolable. So when I read that Fenton Communication, the folks who help MoveOn, was in on the game, I got nervous. When I heard that a wealthy LA mother of my acquaintance was heading to Crawford -- her kids are in camp, I guess she wants to go, too -- I started to twitch.
Continue reading "Leaving Well Enough Alone"Tue 11:18 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
John Bolton got sent to the United Nations without the U.S. Senate's approval. President Bush is saying that "intelligent design" ought to be taught in schools so people can be aware that there's more than one theory on evolution and, on top of that, he's going to veto any legislation that supports federally funded stem cell research.
It seems like the Bush Administration has declared war on the U.S. Congress, doesn't it? It sure does. Particularly if like most Americans, you think stem cell research is a good idea, you're pretty sure evolution is a viable scientific theory and well, you're beginning to think the invasion of Iraq wasn't such a good idea.
It's not quiet enough to make me feel sorry for the men and women in the Republican party on Capitol Hill who bought into this sort of nonsense because they were thinking that social conservatives were the future of the party. They are not its future. They are its present. To a man - a white man - they are Republicans and they are going to stay Republicans.
Continue reading "The Scent of Victory"Wed 05:23 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Hillary Clinton. I may not make it through to 2008 if Sen. Hillary Clinton appoints herself titular Democratic Party nominee. And she clearly has.
See, I'm going to have to vote for her. I'm a Democrat. And I'm going to have to support her candidacy. 'Cause I happen to share her gender and, yeah, I'd like to see this country elect a woman president and, honestly, she can probably win. As my conservative friends say: No one ever made any money betting against Bill and Hillary Clinton. No one. Except, my conservative friend reminds me, Roger Clinton.
But those are the only reasons to support her and, honestly, they're not good enough.
'cause after the former First Lady gets into the West Wing on an official-like basis, I'm going to have – we are going -- to have to listen to all her Clinton-esque BS – that's redundant, isn't it? - about how she's really a Liberal or a Centrists or a believer in the meaning of politics or whatever baloney she and the husband cook up to satisfy all their funders and supporters. The Clintons are Corporate Democrats. They run their campaigns like they'd run – if they gone into business, not politics – a big huge corporation. In an age of Big Media and Big Corporate Planning, that was a great strategy. But it's out of touch – way out of touch – with where the party should be going in the future.
So after Hillary gets elected, we're going to watch her ignore the development of a sound foreign policy for this country – just like her husband did – and we're going to have to squirm and protest as she tries to figure out how to be a "free market" Democrat while placating the unions and ignoring the impact of globalization on U.S. foreign and domestic policies. And I'll have to listen to her twaddle about making abortion "rare" – you know, conservative Republicans have kind of taken care of that if you're young, poor and happen to live in the 'wrong' state – and birth control more available. Or listen to more crap about how a video game – one of a well-know and well-established series built for young adult men whose tastes dominates the video game business – should be banned, amended or have its sales restricted. Only someone as out of touch as the grandma who bought the thing for her 14-year-old could worry that Grand Theft Auto was for a child. You see what I'm saying?
Continue reading "Grand Theft Autopilot"Thu 11:22 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Everybody else on the Leftie side of the house has chimed in on The New York Times magazine piece on "framing" and George Lakoff and, well, I'm sorry but I can't leave this alone.
A bunch of Democrats are quoted in this capable story by Matt Bai as thanking "framing" – which seems to be a new, fancy way to describe the ability to put issues in language that some how is super resonating with voters – for their recent victories. What victories? Say you, sensible reader.
Well, the defeat of the Republican move to remove the filibuster from the Senate and the stuttering defeat – it's done, no one's said anything yet – of President Bush's plans to reform Social Security.
The Democrats say have these victories because they are "framing" Republicans as office-holders who abuse their power.
Yeah. Right. I think it's more like Republicans really are abusing their power (Terri Schiavo, anyone?) and – for once – Democrats are taking note of that fact, loudly and publicly. I mean, look, the reason the press went along with the White House scenario about Iraq – and the lies that accompanied it – is because there was no real, substantive criticism of that war coming from the Democrats in the U.S. Congress. Howard Dean was the anti-war candidate, not John Kerry.
Continue reading "Frame This"Mon 02:06 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Have you noticed that this site is a Karl-Rove-free zone?
Why? The raging summer controversy over Rove's role in identifying Valerie Plame Wilson as a CIA agent is of great and massive interest to many, many people I know and respect as journalists. It is of no interest whatsoever to anyone living outside the Washington, D.C. beltway or off the island of Manhattan. It is a high-stakes game of inside baseball gone public. And it is boring.
It is boring because it is predictable. Even I have been having trouble getting interested in this mess. It's that much of an inside game. Of course, Rove was the source. And of course he denied it. And of course the White House is embarrassed. But this whole mess is just another good example of why most folks think that the national press and politicians deserve each other. They see the Rove controversy as a family spat that will be settled in time for everyone to make nice at the family Christmas party. A pox on both their houses, is the thinking.
They're right. The Affair Rove is a perfect example of how Big Media and politicians in elected office – regardless of party – feed off each other. No one individual is at fault here. It's a corrupt system nurtured in part by systemic weaknesses in the media business, weaknesses that can be disguised by reciting supposedly absolute rules about sources, or information or how we do our jobs. The only absolute in this business is that there are no absolutes.
Here's an example of what that's true: In spinning Time writer Matt Cooper, Karl Rove was doing this job, he was dissing a critic of the administration going to a rival publication – Time magazine – to throw a little dirt on the New York Times editorial board. Cooper had to have born this in mind when he sent a memo to his editors saying that Rove had spoken to him on "double secret" background. That's ridiculous -- Cooper was putting Rove's name in the memo for anyone to see and read. But Cooper, too, was doing his job: Telling his boss what the White House thought of former Ambassador Joe Wilson's New York Times op ed piece and "warning" them about that editorial. Was Rove being sleazy? Yes. How about Cooper? Well, he was showing off, that's pretty clear. But both men were doing their jobs, playing their roles; that of powerful insiders, armed with information unavailable to the outside world. To some extent, they're still at it.
Continue reading "Fantasy Island"Thu 11:07 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
I am not exactly sure what President Bush hopes to accomplish with his decision to hire actor and former Sen. Fred Thompson as an escort for whomever he decides to nominate to the Supreme Court.
Thompson has had one of the more interesting public careers out there. First he's a Watergate lawyer. Then he's a Tennessee lawyer. Then he's an actor. Then he's a Senator. Now he an actor again. And, it seems, charged with wowing Senators and, one suspects, the press with his "star" power.
If this works, the U.S. Senate is filled with more fools than I thought. And I didn't set the barrier very high, believe me.
There are two things that could be going on here. Recruiting Thompson is an indication that Bush is seriously thinking of nominating Gonzalez who – if his confirmation hearings for the Attorney General's job were any guide – is not ready for primetime grilling. The guy's too much of a lawyer. That's fine when people think your job is to fight terrorism – and where the measure is entirely based on how well you do domestically -- but when you're going to be a Supreme Court justice the stakes are different. He plays dodge ball: Feint to the left, feint to the right, stand up, say nothing, fight, fight fight.
Straight-talking twangy Fred from the TV, now he can be trusted. And, well, he's got more juice that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. It'll come in handy.
The other possibility is even more insulting: Thompson's TV show, Law & Order does really well among women, particularly career women of a certain age: Yours and mine. These women are the folks likely to be the most interested in the next Supreme Court nominee in part because whoever gets the nod will be replacing Justice Sandra Day O'Conner, the first woman nominated for the job. Not to mention all the Roe v. Wade stuff out there.
Fri 12:01 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Judge Janice Rogers Brown may have one of the shortest Appellate Court tenures on record. Barely confirmed to a seat on the D.C. Circuit by the U.S. Senate last month as part of the filibuster deal, Brown's name is showing up with some regularity on the list of potential Supreme Court nominees.
It's a good bet she'll get the nod. Brown is conservative and she's an African American. That doesn't make it hard for Liberals to object to her legal opinions but it makes it hard for Democrats in the U.S. Senate to vote against her. Brown's nomination would also take pressure off the Bush administration – losing its edge with women voters – to keep at least two women on the court.
The public signs are good for Brown, too. Her name was floated last week by Jay Sekulow, head of the conservative American Center For Law and Justice in Atlanta. Even he admitted that Justice Sandra Day O'Conner's resignation from the court has uh, kind of surprised everyone and that, with "reality setting in" woman judges would advance up the list of nominees. Brown's name showed up front and center in the Wall Street Journal's early rundown. When you consider that it's a woman lawyer making the list, it's looking safer and safer for Brown.
Continue reading "Supreme Bank Shots"Mon 11:37 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
A few days ago, a local consultant here in San Francisco sent me a note. He's been thinking: the Internet is a much "hotter" medium than TV. So the kind of people being attracted to politics aren't the cool-headed TV-types but brawlers. The consultant was thinking of Howard Dean, of course, but also about a little round of fisticuffs that had almost broken out between one of DailyKos's apparatchiks and Democratic Party activist Donnie Fowler.
Dean, of course, is embroiled in an argument with the Republican Party over who has more white people: Us or them. As far as I can see, politics, media and most business – most social and economic power in this country – is mostly in the hands of white folks. So I'm not exactly sure what this fight is all about or where it's leading. But it serves as a nice prelude to another heated exchange.
It seems that The Great and Powerful Progressive Blogger Markos Moulitsas – Daily Kos to you, "media" to himself and, a bona fide jerk as far as I can tell – is threatening Carol Darr and George Washington University's Institute for Politics Democracy and the Internet. Why? Because Darr made some typical D.C-generated "middle of the road" comments to the Federal Elections Commission about its proposed rules on campaigns, campaign finance and the Internet.
Moulitsas didn't like what Darr said. So, of course he mocked her on his site. Then, in an email to IPDI's annual conference director, The Great and Powerful Progressive Blogger got ugly.
Matthew,Carol Darr and you guys fucked up with your FEC comments. I am going to do everything in my power to make sure you don’t get a single netroots individual at your conference next year. Just thought I’d let you know.
Have a good day.
Markos Moulitsas
Daily Kos
Oh, I can feel the hot wind of "progressive" inclusiveness, can't you? You're either with Kos or you're a fuck-up. Good thing I never thought of myself as perfect, eh? Naturally, the Great and Powerful Progressive followed up with more unkind remarks about Darr – a long-time Democrat who served in the Clinton Administration - on his site. Darr's no dummy; she forwarded the message on to the commission.
UPDATE:: The Great and Powerful Progressive has written to the commission. It is not an apology.
Continue reading "The Man Behind the Curtain"Wed 08:12 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Maybe I'm missing something but didn't the idea of "Liberal federalism" just take a hit? You know, the idea that the state can set their own (more liberal) laws, different from the feds, the idea that a lot of folks think will mean that same-sex marriages can become legal without a lot of political wailing and gnashing of teeth?
With the U.S. Supreme Court saying Monday that interstate commerce is interstate commerce, regardless if what's being sold is legal or not, it seems to me that they haven't left a lot of room for reconsideration on other issues that might be decided by the states. Like gay marriage. Or maybe even stem cell funding. Or, I dunno, dope smoking for sick folks. These things have become state issues because conservatives thinks state government is a better tactical arena for them (they're right, by the way). Liberals like the states because they've gotten nowhere at the federal level on these issues.
Continue reading "Good For the Tippler, Not for the Toker"Mon 06:52 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Until I found this column by the Washington Post's David Broder, I was going to write a post talking about how Sen. John McCain is the new – de facto – Senate Majority Leader.
He engineered the "compromise" on the judicial filibuster and he's been trying to cut a deal with the White House and Senate Democrats on John Bolton's nomination to be ambassador to the U.N. When titular Sen. Majority Leader Bill Frist stumbled – twice! -- McCain was doing the heavy lifting to get a deal done. That's significant, not just because McCain is clearly aiming for a presidential run against Frist but because he is managaing to attract the support of seasoned and experienced Senators on both sides of the aisle.
There is, however, something else brewing that's almost as interesting as McCain's out-of-the-closet presidential ambitions. In fact, this particular fight might serve as the platform on which McCain builds his presidential campaign. Increasingly, Senate Republicans are willing to take on the conservative wing of their party. McCain is smartly leadling that fight. And it promises to be a doozie because it means that Republicans like McCain will be taking on the lame duck Bush administration.
Continue reading "The Worst That Could Happen"Sun 06:42 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Who taught Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist how to count?
We'll probably never know the answer to that questions. The Senator, it seems, was snoozing during his political arithmetic class.
There are lots of ways to sugar-coat what happened in the Senate yesterday when Frist found he didn't have the votes to cut off debate on John Bolton's nomination to become U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. Frist is trying to blame the Democrats for being obstructionist. And the White House is trying to shame Democrats for being partisan.
This is good. You can see the logic in this, can't you? Calling someone who disagrees with you obstructionist and partisan. Man, that's original. It's been a while since Democrats showed they had spines and now -- my God! – they're being called names. This keeps up, someone could win an election. Scary, huh?
Continue reading "At Last: Demanding Democrats"Fri 09:55 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
A deal is a deal is a deal. Which often means no one's happy. But everyone's glad it's all over.
The LATimes has a good piece on the landscape created by the Senate Filibuster deal pointing out that a new moderate middle could be beginning to swing its weight. We'll see today as the House votes on stem cells.
It's way too early to say that moderation is back in style – conservatives are on the war path – but both houses of Congress operate better when they're not at each others' throats and everyone in and out of politics knows it. Deals, baby, it's all about the deals.
That's the sentiment that was behind California's Recall election: The pure and simply belief that the state government was broken. That is not an atmosphere that wins elections and the next Congressional elections are only 18 month away.
Tue 10:50 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Yesterday, Brooks. Today Brownstein. Two sharp political writers take a look at the Filibuster Compromise That Wasn't and come to – not surprisingly – different conclusions. It's worth reading them in concert. The insight you'll get ain't pretty.
The NYTimes David Brooks makes fun of the moderate Democrats and Republicans who were working to forge a deal in the Senate to put off a show-down over filibuster rules.
"As we descend down this path, the moderates are being serenaded for their valiant efforts to find a compromise. I'm all for valiant efforts, but why do the independent types always have to be so ineffectual? Why do they always have to play their accustomed role: well-intentioned roadkill?The answer, to be blunt, is that some of the moderates are moderates out of conviction. They do have courage. But many moderates are simply people who feel cross-pressured by different political forces, and their instinctive response is to shrink from pressure. They lack spirit to take risks, to actually lead."
This from the guy who said, pretty much without stopping, that this was a nation too divided by partisanship – and too likely to continue to be divided -- to be governed with any sense of decorum. So his pushing around the moderates so avidly feels a little -- no, it feels a lot - like a cheap shot. And that's before reading the LATimes Ron Brownstein who today bemoans the fact that compromise, once the hallmark of the Senate, is being pushed off-stage. Why? Intra-party fighting by Republicans.
"[Senate Minority Leader Harry] Reid and [Majority Leader Bill] Frist have kept their distance from these negotiations. But participants perceive a distinction in their attitudes. Aides to Democrats involved see Reid exercising a kind of benign neglect. He has subtly encouraged the talks by not discouraging them. He has pressured Democrats on only one point: trying to secure the most ironclad guarantee possible from the Republicans not to support a filibuster ban later this congressional session.Republicans involved, by contrast, believe Frist is actively discouraging a deal. One senior advisor to a key GOP participant says Frist has even suggested to some Republicans that he would rather lose a filibuster ban on the floor than preempt a vote with a negotiated agreement.
In both parties, the conventional wisdom is that Frist is pushing so hard for a vote because he's courting social conservatives, the most ardent supporters of the filibuster ban, for his likely 2008 presidential bid. By this theory, Frist can't accept any compromise that would allow potential 2008 rivals like Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) or Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) to accuse him of surrendering to Democrats.
"Frist has got so many people [looking over his shoulder] … that he doesn't have any flexibility," says veteran GOP pollster Tony Fabrizio."
Okay, so Republicans are publicly saying that their party is pushing around moderates while Brooks, a happy conservative who got big-time ties to the party and its top-level advisors, is saying that Senate moderate have no sense of leadership. Put some Steely Dan on the turntable. Time for a little Pretzel Logic. No one who's not in on this very private game – you know, like those breathing things called voters -- is going to win here. No one.
Also worth noting: News that voters' impatience – or is it disgust? – with Congress is at an all time high. Now how do you think that happened?
UPDATE:And is it possible that bad polling for everyone involved finally made Republicans and Democrats see the light? The filibuster fight might have looked like the Battle of the Marne to political insiders but to normal folks it was just more - sigh - politics as usual. That Democrats chose this issue to take a stand, as my good friend Marc Cooper has pointed out, isn't just sad. It's almost pathetic. That Republicans, jockeying for positioning in the next election cycle would play politcs so blatently isn't surprising - hey, the Dems do this stuff, too - but what does raise an eyebrow here is their determination, once again, to air their dirty laundry in public.
Mon 02:59 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Congressional Democrats should be feeling just a teeny bit optimistic. And Republican moderates a lot more powerful. President Bush bragged about his "political capital" but, it seems, it's not getting him or his adminstration anything it wants.
On the Senate side, moderate Republicans and Democrats have managed to get the review of John Bolton's qualifications to be Ambassador to the United Nations expanded. He's dead in the water and would do well to resign; his not doing so is just more proof of his pigheadedness. As for the White House standing by him? Er, what do you think they're going to do? Fire him in public? Not this crowd. So now Bolton will experience a time-honored Washington, D.C. tradition: death by a thousand cuts. Fine, thin cuts delivered, delicately and subtly by friends and foes.
Continue reading "Welcome To Middle Earth"Wed 06:24 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Vigils are supposed to be quiet, contemplative occasions where the seriousness of what's at hand – dying – is well, taken seriously.
That's anything but the case in Pinellas Park, Fla., where Terri Schiavo is expiring. Tape from last night's Olberman show was pretty scary and I'm not someone who normally shies away from the spectacle created by a media circus; I've helped out once or twice.
But this is a new level. Folks are being bussed in to hold up signs for the TV cameras. The school down the street has closed for the week, temporarily disbursing its students to other schools for a week. The Schiavo case has become a media circus on speed. Politicians fueled this zealotry -- on both sides -- with false hope by flouting the law and creating an environment where the end of a life can be taken and exploited to an unseemly extreme. This is not the footage you're used to seeing from the U.S.
And let's just say – because someone should – that it's a good thing Terri Schiavo didn't die on Easter Sunday. That's a Molotov cocktail of politics and religion that we've only barely and perhaps only temporarily avoided.
Tue 09:56 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
The Terri Schiavo case has been so annoying – even Conservatives are getting impatient -- that it's been easy to lose site of the longer-term politics here.
This isn't about pay-back to the Christian Right on President Bush's part. He has no reason to return any favors; he's leaving office in three years. He can't run again. So Terri Schiavo isn't about him or the last election; it's not more evidence of his religious zealotry.
Continue reading "Brother's Keeper"Thu 09:55 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Is it me, or is there something made-for-TV-ish about the way politicians are, um, acting in this whole Terri Schiavo drama?
The Palm Sunday Compromise? Coming back from what's supposed to be a week-long recess away from Washington? You can see it now: A bunch of b-list actors playing Speaker of the House Denny Hastert, Majority Leader Tom Delay and Rep. Barney Frank will take over the Capitol some slow summer afternoon for the re-enactment. The president, as he does from time to time on some of those cheesy pro-military shows, will play himself, rushing back from Crawford, Texas, suit jacket flapping behind him as he strides purposefully down the West Wing portico. He's saving a woman's life! The stakes are high! The man is brave!
Continue reading "Movie of The Week"Mon 09:08 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
From Sunday's New York Times Magazine interview with the bozo calling himself Jeff Gannon:
"Gannon":…But as Einstein said, "Sometimes a wedding card is just a wedding card.''
The Times' Deborah Solomon:You mean like "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar''? That wasn't Einstein. That was Freud.
"Gannon":Oh, Freud. O.K. I got my old Jewish men confused.
As opposed to what? Young Jewish men? Jesus. If this guy is a threat to national security, I'm the Queen of Sheba. And never fear, I know my Solomons when I see them.
Sun 05:46 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
So let me get this straight: The President of the United States – a man who doesn't attend the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq – can rush away from his "vacation" to Washington, D.C. specifically to sign legislation designed to extend the life of a 41-year-old woman who has been sustained by a feeding tube for the past 15 years? A woman who at the age of 26 was apparently in the process of starving herself – that's what an "eating disorder" is, folks – and succeeded to the point of triggered a heart attack? President Bush who talks about the rule of law when it comes to foreign affairs is happy to let his party override those very same precepts in this country, flouting the states' and the judiciary's authority, all in hopes of getting a sympathetic judge who will rule the way he and other social conservatives see fit?
At its core this is a case of judge-shopping. The Southern Baptist Florida judge who ruled that Terri Schiavo's feeding tube should be removed isn't following the party line. Like the Republican Catholic judge who issued the gay marriage ruling here in San Francisco last week, you can't call Judge Greer activist or Liberal and really mean it. And while we're here, it's probably worth asking: If Congress has no respect for the authority of the judiciary, how can it expect better from anyone else?
Continue reading "A Good Man Is Hard to Find"Sun 11:49 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
For those of us at the intersection of media and politics, it was a hell of a week. Big Media, the 1st Amendment and the on-line world have met; it ain't pretty. And a glance at today's New York Times hints at more ugliness to come as Big Media's credibility -- particularly television's -- circles the drain.
On Friday, a California judge ruled Friday that on-line writers violated the trade secrets act in publishing information about Apple Computer. Also Friday, a group of bloggers calling themselves the OnLine Coaltiion – banded together to ask the Federal Elections Commission to look at its rules and decide exactly how they're covered – or not – by campaign finance laws.
In the court case, the judge skirted the question about protecting on-line writers with laws that cover salaried journalists. It's an important omission. One the Online Coalition – their slogan, "From Left to Right, Preserve Our Rights,'' sounds familiar, no? – is attempting to address in another arena asking the FEC to grant them the same status as Big Media outfits. That, of course, will have the immediate effect – in the commission's rules anyway – of diluting Big Media's influence just as the judge's ruling lumping on-line writers with salaried hacks would dilute the power and influence of traditional media outlets.
All this played out against a background described – and in some ways influenced -- by Garance Franke-Ruta's piece in The American Prospect, drawing (inaccurately, I think) connections between the Dan Rather and CBS' Memogate, Eason Jordan's resignation from CNN and Jeff Gannon's White House accreditation.
There are a couple of fights going on here. They're overlapping, which makes it hard to trace their outlines. But let's try. But first let's work from an understanding articulated by that great sage, Pogo. The enemy is indeed us. Many on the Left – particularly that section that thinks of itself as "progressive" – don't like to admit that Liberal Democrats are this country's establishment. For all his rebellious mannerism, Steve Jobs is a member of this establishment. So is Dan Rather. Eason Jordan probably counts, too. For a variety of reasons having to do with my schooling and work history, I am, too. So is Garance Franke-Ruta. And there's a cozy relationship between our nation's political and media establishments. Much to my satisfaction, it's in the process of being blow apart but many, many people feel very, very differently. John Kerry's failure to win the presidency is the most glaring sign we've had so far. This back and forth over whose a "journalist" is the next step in this conflict as the nation's political and corporate establishments attempt to defend their turf.
That's why Apple Computer has gone to court to try and define "reporter." The obvious purpose of its lawsuit is to intimidate the hordes of on-line writers who cover the company and its charismatic CEO Steve Jobs into toeing the party line. But it's suit has the extra attraction of trying to define what is and isn't journalism. That's important for large companies long accustomed to dealing with Big Media and its cheerful handmaiden Corporate PR. Apple – and it should surprise no one that a computer company is cutting the path here – is trying to find out if it has to take all those on-line voices seriously and, if it does, it wants to know just how far it can push them. It would be better for big companies, better for Big Media and Corporate PR, if a court says the on-line world doesn't matter; that it has no rights. That way, Big Media can keep its relationship with Corporate PR and Big Companies intact. Nothing changes.
Just as it would if the FEC kept ignoring on-line writing. But instead, one member of the commission has shown a spotlight on blogging in an attempt to start a conversation about overturning existing campaign finance law. He's got company. Some of the Online Coalition's more conservative and libertarian members -- who also don't like the latest campaign finance reform legislation -- are hoping debate on this issue creates enough confusion and discontent (good old, FUD: Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) to get the law over-turned or substantially modified.
Continue reading "The Mirror Crack'd"Sun 10:36 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Postings will be a touch light around here for the next day or so.
I'm under the weather although, thankfully, I don't have the flu which, according to my doctor "makes you wish you were dead."
Those of you in need of a strong feminist rant can head on over to Kirsten Power's newly revived site and read what she has to say about David Brooks' column in today's NYTimes.
I had a similar reaction to Powers when I read Brooks' silliness about separate bank accounts for spouses. It's not good for marriages, says BoBo man. Well, it's long been a credo of the women's movement that women should control their own money and it's a statement of how far we've gotten from that idea that even a conservative like Brooks doesn't even bother to take that kind of thinking into account.
Women – specifically mothers -- left the Democratic party during this last election. And that move has bred a kind of complacency among Republicans. Why Democrats are squandering this with silly quarrels about whether the party should ditch its pro-choice politics is really hard to understand. Democrats ought to be making hay over how Social Security change are going to impact women – who live longer and have historically earned less – particularly if benefit payments are decoupled from inflation. But they're not. So you've got to wonder: Have Democrats really forgotten that Social Security was once billed as a way to protect widows and orphans? Because, in another sign of complacency from the other side of the poltiical spectrum, it looks as if they have.
Tue 04:00 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
When you're beat, you're beat and when it comes to Ryan Sagar's coverage of CPAC, I'm a drum.
Start with this post and work your way up. It's funny, smart, engaging writing that manages to combine a sly sense of humor poking fun at pretty much everyone from the kids at the conference to the way Big Media looks at conservatives. And I'm not saying that because Sagar's got a NYPost affiliation or because he said something nice about me earlier in the week.
Now, I didn't see Sagar's co-blogger at the conference, which is really too bad. I've been hearing about him for years. Then again, I was slammed busy doing my own thing. I did, however, catch a glimpse of Ruth Shalit. She was looking over Erick Erickson's shoulder.
Sat 09:05 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
As is her wont, Ann Coulter threw chum in the water for Liberals and called – repeatedly -- for a "new McCarthyism" at the Conservative Political Action Committee meeting this week. And, being a Bleeding Heart West Coast Liberal educated at an East Coast university where memories of the academic and other purges created by McCarthyism were still fresh among the faculty who taught me, I should be ranting and raving.
But then Skinny Annie blew it.
Continue reading "Goodbye Norma Jean"Sat 06:58 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Listening on an off, parsing through the rhetoric at the Conservative Political Action Committee's combination tent revival and trade show, it's hard to tell who won this election.
Congress is spending too much to support the U.N. John McCain's campaign finance reform proposals are a gag on free speech. Teresa Heinz and George Soros – millionaires both – are engaged in that will undermine the country's economic health.
You'd think John "François" Kerry – the French affectation is kinda cute, no? – had won the presidency not George Bush.
Continue reading "A View From Abroad"Fri 05:29 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Okay. Here we are. Belly of the beast. Surrounded. As I type, Sen. Rick Santorum -- made really famous to you non-conservative by sex advice columnist Dan Savage -- is talking about the sancity of the family. I've been here in Washington, D.C., at the Conservative Political Action Committee convention and um, they don't like Liberals here. I'm not sure they even like moderates.
But they're very nice and well-mannered. They're also very young. If you're thinking conservatives are a bunch of old coots longing for the days of black-and-white TV, women staying home and minorities in their places, think again.
This is a young crowd. Young as in youthful. "I just took whatever they gave me for graduation," says the nice young man sitting across from me. He's talking about his laptop. It's a contrast to the post-election Democracy Rising party I attended in Berkeley a few months ago. That room was filled with grey hair in part, of course, because hair colorists are an unknown species in that little town. This room – this convention by contrast – is filled with fresh young earnest faces. And lots of blondes.
This isn't just a digression on cosmetics. Young faces look ahead. Not back.
Thu 08:14 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
The news that the Federal Elections Commission is going to take a look at bloggers who raise money for political candidates shouldn't be unexpected. And it should underscore the importance of having political consultants tell their readers – and supporters – what they're up to.
This is why it's important that Markos Moulitas describes what he does, accurately and honestly. And this isn't just an idle criticism. Moulitas's lapses, his weird determination to have his cake, eat it, then smear icing on his fasting guests' faces is going to shape the way on-line fundraising, writing and organizing is conducted by party activists and others. And Democrats refusal to think defensive on this – to assume all criticism springs from political motivation – is just as troublesome as Moulitsas' behavior. There's a good reason we have laws governing the role that money plays in politics. It's called Watergate.
Continue reading "Free Edgar. Make Him Run For Office"Tue 06:49 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
There are a few things that have come in over the past week that serve as handy reminders of why this site continues to be worth your time. No, it's not the regular posting schedule, I'll give you that (last week I was plagued by some pesky technical glitches on Wednesday and Thursday). No, it's the timeliness of the coverage and commentary.
First up, Joe Klein's column in last week's Time, "The Incredible Shrinking Democrats." Here's the graph that caught my attention:
Continue reading "Why You Read: Catching Up Edition"Mon 07:50 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Notice a difference in style and tone between the endorsements that Simon Rosenberg and Donnie Fowler made of Democratic National Committee Chairman-to-be Howard Dean?
One's an insider's message. That'd be Fowler. His formal statement withdrawing from the race and endorsing Dean has all kinds of nice words from Dean. That's a good sign Fowler's gonna get a nice job with the DNC. Rosenberg's statement of withdrawal ain't as warm and cozy.
Mon 10:11 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
After last night's State of the Union Speech, it's pretty clear to me that Democrats are in a lot deeper trouble than the party realizes.
Because for much of his speech, George Bush was talking to me, a single woman living in San Francisco. It was his usual campaign laundry list, not that different from what was trotted out at the Republican Convention, tagging the bases for his anti-abortion supporters, the folks who want conservative judges and, finally, waving the flag. But I was paying attention.
Continue reading "You're Talking to Me"Thu 10:35 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Well, well, well. Who shows up on the front page of today's New York Times as the only viable alternative to Howard Dean taking the chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee than slow-talking Donnie Fowler?
Now, I'm not going to say "I told you so." That would be gloating. And I only do that in person. But here and here are some earlier posts on how the race was breaking.
Now, Donnie may not get to be co-chairman with Dean. But I'm not ruling it out. Clearly, the union guys and their buddies the Corporate Democrats are tearing their hair out worrying about the "softs" and the hot-heads like Dean and how they're going to ruin the party. Fowler can talk to those folks and, unlike other candidates still in the race, he is trusted. With Dean in the top spot, the betwixt and between the unions worried about when the idea of a split chair was first proposed – and shot down by AFCME – is going to exist within the membership, not the chairman's office. I mean, we could be talking open warfare. No wonder the Republicans are happy.
I'm not entirely sure that would be such a bad thing. Besides, we've got a full 10 days until the vote. And this is the Democratic Party we're talking about. Anything can happen. The AFL-CIO is neutral but no one's heard from the SIEU. And that Clinton family hasn't weighed in either. Pounds of flesh can still be extracted.
Wed 09:35 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Okay, so Hillary Rodham Clinton has pulled a Sister Souljah and gone to a Roe V. Wade commemorative meeting to talk about how Democrats should be less dogmatic about abortion and more interested in embracing a culture of life.
You saw this one coming, didn't you? If you didn't, the January/February Atlantic has a very good, smart essay "Clintonism RIP" on the Democrats and the Clintons by Chuck Todd.
Continue reading "Sistah Hillary"Fri 11:48 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
The DNC Chairmanship race has heated up a bit. Western Democrats gathered in Sacramento on Saturday. Today MoveOn.org announced that it's throwing its fundraising and organizing weight behind Howard Dean's bid for the job. That raises new questions about what will happen if Dean doesn't get the party leadership job. Of course, the thought of Dean as DNC chair raises a whole series of questions about how Corporate Democrats will try and stop -- or modify -- his role.
It's been an interesting contest for someone sitting between tech and politics and looking at the splits that need to be healed within the party -- and fast, dammit -- I started thinking about the possibility of a split chairmanship. So I wrote about for my friends at PersonalDemocracyForum.
If that's not enough for you, I did a techier version for the nice folks at eWeek. This networking thing us Silicon Valley types like so much is catching on and that's going to mean changes -- eventually -- in Washington.
Wed 09:49 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
There isn't going to be much discussion on this site about the fight over Social Security. It's an important issue, yes. And it's a big fight where the Democrats get to – or should get to – rack up some credibility with voters. But so far, it's been a pretty dry conversation best left to the experts, wonks and economists.
But we're starting to get a look at the politics of this thing. And it's kind of interesting. Remember, changing Social Security used to be known as the "third rail" of national politics? Changing it was deemed impossible. That's no longer the case. And remembering that context give you an idea of what's to come.
Continue reading "Walking the PowerLine"Tue 11:13 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Well, Donnie Fowler came back to town and Big Media, in the shape of the AP's capable Beth Fouhy, took notice.
"Two Tech-Savvy Young Men Join Fray to Lead DNC," reads the wire service headline on the story she wrote over the weekend about the tussle – now a real live honest-to-God campaign – to run the Democratic National Committee. Nothing you didn't already know if you come by here regularly, of course.
Tue 10:15 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Political bloggers the nation over have gotten themselves in a lather about a recent Washington Post story detailing how Democrats lost the election.
Slate's Mickey Kaus was particularly frothy (and he calls Andrew Sullivan "excitable"?) writing about how the Post story indicated that 527 – that's slang for the independent organizations that collect and spend money on behalf of candidates – might really work as intended. The guys over at RedState were particularly gleeful since they like anything that boosts their raison d'etre: Democrats are misguided dummies.
Continue reading "A Loss, Not a Theft"Fri 11:50 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
A few weeks ago, eyeballing the leading contenders for chairman of the Democratic National Committee – two white men, two black men -- I worried about all the testosterone at the head of the party. Was I right or what?
The pre-Christmas LATimes brings firm word that former Rep. Tim Roemer – yet another white guy who wants the DNC Chairmanship – is saying the Democratic Party should walk away from its stance on abortion. Being pro-choice – protecting women's legal right to end their pregnancies – should not be a key part of the Democrat's strategy, Roermer says. What's worse is that he's got the support of House Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Harry Reid, the party's Congressional leadership.
Continue reading "Not a Choice. Not a Chance."Wed 01:21 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
If Jim Ross keeps this up, I'm going to make him a regular writer. Here's his response – and this is it 'cause they're dissing Lakoff over at AndrewSullivan's pad, too – to Bennett Charles' earlier note.
I don't question Lakoff's intentions I just don't agree with him and this new emphasis on tricking people to vote for Democrats. Like wars we are always fighting the last campaign. In 2000 the Democrats lost because of turn-out, or at least that was the spin coming out of the election, so this year we ran the largest GOTV operation in history. Now the spin coming out of the 2004 election is we lost because Republicans communicated better than we did. So now the move is to change the way we talk about issues. I don't disagree with Lackoff when he talks about the hundreds of millions of dollars Republicans and their supporters have put into right-wing think tanks. These think tanks have developed policies, ideas and ways to talk about them that Americans will support. What I hear from Lackoff and the MoveOn folks is that we have the policies and ideas, we just need to work on the communication, not developing new ideas and policies. Because we are not developing new ideas, have been put into the position of defending the status quo not fighting for progress. This must change or we will continue to lose.
Continue reading "Nice Frames. Better Argument."Wed 01:18 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Dump on Lefty linguist George Lakoff and your mailbox fills right up. Here's a note from San Franciscan Bennett Charles responding to Jim Ross' comments from last week. This is a kind of eavesdropping because Charles sent part of this note to Ross directly.
There's been some unfair Lakoff dumping. Just because the Volvo V70 Cross Country Liberals dig Lakoff doesn't mean that his work is useless.
Continue reading "Lovin' Lakoff"Mon 11:07 AM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Well, Donnie Fowler's not fooling around.
He's playing that Silicon Valley card for all its worth signing up Mr. Moneybags 2004, Mark Gorenberg to help with his race for Democratic National Committee Chairman.
"Go Donnie" is all I gotta say.
Continue reading "A Walk Between Two Shores"Thu 04:32 PM | permalink | printer-friendly version | email this article
|
|
Yesterday's post on George Lakoff