Blogs

• Wow, Luskin really IS the stupidest man alive. And competition is stiff in that department.

• Speaking of competition, there is Fred Wertheimer of the anti-free speech Democracy 21, who lives in a fantasy media world so immune to reality that is breathtaking. Speaking of giving blogs the press excemption, he said, "Last time I looked, press institutions aren't in the business of raising money for candidates." Homeboy must be blind, since Krauthammer, Limbaugh, FNC, NRO, and so are all press institutions that have raised money for candidates. So Wertheimer is either Luskin-level stupid, or blind, or disingenuous.

• Any basketball fans in the house? Sports Illustrated has a photo gallery of the top 10 point guards of all time.

• The Center for American Progress is looking for interns.

• A sign of good things to coming? Two retired Democratic congressmen are considering retaking their old seats in 2006 -- Ken Lucas in KY-04 and Ron Kilnk in PA-04. Those seats are now held by Republicans.

• Wolcott wins a skirmish on the War on Christmas (TM).

• 10 Marines killed by a single IED. More of the cost of Wittmann/Lieberman/Bush-style "resolve". I have a Marine family member over there right now. My heart skips a beat every time a Marine gets killed. Not a problem for Wittmann, Lieberman, or Bush. Their social and family circles doesn't bother themselves with such niceties as "national service".

• The National Guard, desperate for recruits, is paying "finders fees" to exisiting members. Not a bad idea, actually, but indicative of their desperation.

• Greenspan, who helped cause the current deficits by giving Republicans a green light for their irresponsible tax cuts, is now whining about those deficits. He demands the deficit be closed "from the outlay side". Good luck eliminating $300-500 billion via budget cuts, especially if national security spending is sacrosant.

• Andrew Natsios has resigned. Who was he? A neocon at the U.S. Agency for International Development who swore up and down to Ted Koppel that the US share of Iraq reconstruction wouldn't exceed $1.7 billion. He mocked higher estimates as "hoopla" and "outlandish". We've already spent $10 billion and more is in the pipeline. (Note, reconstruction costs aren't the same as the hundreds of billions spent to wage the war.)

• It's not the Avian Flu, but the last thing I want to hear is that the U.S. is being invaded by bed bugs.

• One last meta question -- do you guys like these quick-link open threads? I found in the course of blogging that a lot of good stuff never made the site because of time constraints or an inability to add anything of substance to the debate. These bulleted open threads allow me to pass them on without having the pressure of doing a full post on them. Should I keep doing them? I added a poll.

Funny how Ahnold is suddenly running as fast as he can away from the Republican Party. There's the problem of trying to move left -- by hiring a new Democratic chief of staff -- but pretending to still be a Republican to mollify his GOP base:

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger insisted this week that "there will be no change in direction at all" despite naming longtime Democratic activist Susan Kennedy as his chief of staff.

It was meant, apparently, to reassure his GOP base that he's not suddenly veering to the left, but with his governorship plummeting into the abyss of failure and irrelevance, Schwarzenegger should change direction, or he will join Kennedy's former boss, Gray Davis, as a footnote to history.

Political circles are buzzing with speculation about the meaning of Kennedy's elevation - ranging from hopes among some that it will help jump-start Schwarzenegger's governorship after voters rejected his "year of reform" ballot measures to fears among others than she'll preside over his exit from politics.

Those on the furthest right and the left wings appear to be equally unhappy. While conservatives worry that Schwarzenegger's wide-ranging mélange of advisers will be purged of Republicans and that he will be hearing only from liberals, some liberals are denouncing Kennedy as an ideological traitor.

Then there's the Republican Governors Association conference in California, which Arnold is avoiding (except for a "private" reception).

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has declined to appear with Bush during the president's last two visits to California, did not appear in public with his fellow Republican governors. Instead, he planned to speak to them privately Thursday at a reception.

Schwarzenegger, who named a Democrat on Wednesday as his new chief of staff, has tried to distance himself from Bush as he prepares to seek reelection next year in a state that has largely shunned the GOP.

Schwarzenegger sealed his political fate when he spent over $50 million in state funds in a special electioon in which every single ballot initiative was defeated. Governing like a Republican has fallen flat in this solidly blue state, and at 35/63 approval/disapproval ratings, he's now desperate to ressurect his political fortunes.

Pretending to be a Democrat, then pretending to be a Republican and promising that his agenda won't change, won't do the trick.

Public opinion is turning against the war, and more and more people are clamoring for withdrawal. Democrats, sensing the public mood, are increasingly calling for a withdrawal timetable, led by military hawk John Murtha.

Yesterday, Pelosi endorsed Murtha's plan, and The Washington Post's Jonathan Weisman framed his endorsement as "fissures" within the Democratic caucus. I'd like to think that anything that brings together Murtha and Pelosi, on opposite ends of the party's ideological spectrum, as simply being "ahead of the curve". Well, that's the nice spin. We can also call that fissure "cowardice" on the part of Democrats still afraid they'll be labelled weak on defense.

Because no matter what the war apologists might want, fact is we'll be pulling out soon enough anyway. Even Bush seems to be losing his political will on the issue.

But not the chickenhawks at the DLC. Nope, not they:

Marshall Wittmann, a former Republican political strategist now with the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, said Pelosi may have resurrected her party's most deadly liability -- voters' lack of trust in the party on national security.

"If Karl Rove was writing the timing of this, he wouldn't have written it any differently, with the president of the United States expressing resolve and the Democratic leader offering surrender," Wittmann said, referring to Bush's top adviser. "For Republicans, this is manna from heaven."

Wittmann, like Jean Schmidt, has now accused Democrats like Murtha of cowardice. But, unlike Murtha, I doubt Wittmann has spent much time in Iraq or at Walter Reed. Unlike Murtha, Wittmann hassn't seen combat or even served his nation in uniform. Unlike Murtha, Wittmann has no clue what this conflict is doing to our military readiness, morale, and fighting effectiveness as our armed forces degrade to "paper tiger" status.

Of course, Murtha is concerned with the safery and welfare of our men and women in uniform, not about what Rove thinks. A different set of priorities, no doubt. But even politically, Democrats are on solid footing.

The more public attention has been focused on Iraq, the lower Bush's numbers have gone, the lower the Republican Party has sunk. Unlike Wittmann's odd obsession with Rove, Iraq is not a political winner. Like Lieberman, his "stay the course" alarmist rhetoric simply exposes him as yet another PNAC-style, reality-addled neocon.

The American people are unhappy with the debacle in Iraq. They are looking for courage from those who would change course, not acquiescence from cowards too afraid to speak out on the moment's biggest issue.

They want more Murthas and less Liebermans.

Update: Republican governors are sweating it:

Political fallout from corruption scandals and the Iraq war cast a pall over a gathering of Republican governors in Carlsbad, Calif., on Thursday as GOP strategists and leaders acknowledged the party faced a tough climate for its 2006 campaigns.

"You'd have to be really disconnected from reality to not see and admit that Republicans nationally have gone through a tough patch here the last six or eight months," Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty said. "We should just acknowledge that."

But don't Marshall that. He thinks standing with the president in Iraq and "showing resolve" is the path toward Demcoratic electoral victories.

Update II: I didn't even notice that Armando beat me to this in the previous post. But I don't mind the 1-2 punch. It's well deserving.

The DLC will remain a corrosive and harmful entity for the Democratic Party as long as it continues to include people like Marshall Wittman:

Marshall Wittmann, a former Republican political strategist now with the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, said Pelosi may have resurrected her party's most deadly liability -- voters' lack of trust in the party on national security.

"If Karl Rove was writing the timing of this, he wouldn't have written it any differently, with the president of the United States expressing resolve and the Democratic leader offering surrender," Wittmann said, referring to Bush's top adviser. "For Republicans, this is manna from heaven."

David Sirota, a Democratic strategist in Montana long critical of the party leadership's timidity, fired back: "It is not surprising that a bunch of insulated elitists in the Washington establishment -- most of whom have never served in uniform -- would stab the Democratic Party in the back and attack the courage of people like Vietnam War hero Jack Murtha and Nancy Pelosi for their stand on Iraq."

I agree with David but I think he is too kind to Wittman calling him an insulated elitist. Wittman is a Rovian pawn who practice the New McCarthyism with Republican aplomb. Criticizing Pelosi and Murtha's position is certainly his right, and we can argue fiercely about the policy, but to accuse them of "offering surrender"? Rove himself could not have done it better.

The DLC, if it actually cares about the Democratic Party, should disassociate itself immediately from Marshall Wittman. The man is an affront.

The problem of the Media in a microcosm, from James Wolcott:

Rich Lowry gave himself whiplash today at The Corner, and it was not a pretty sight.

"FALLOWS--UNBELIEVABLE [Rich Lowry ]

The Wall Street Journal reports in its Iraq editorial today that the public affairs shop at the Multinational Security Transition Office Command in Iraq--they do the training--says Fallows never visited nor did he ever contact them during the course of the reporting for his piece. . .  

Posted at 01:52 PM

Right off you can see the problem . . . First, Lowry assumes what the WSJ says is true; then speculates on how Fallows would snootily defend himself; then treats his own speculation as fact, and expresses incredulity at Fallows' highhandedness. Lowry is so sure of himself you just know he has to be wrong.

And sure enough...

"FALLOWS--UNBELIEVABLE, CONT. [Rich Lowry ]
It looks like it was too good (bad?) to be true. Cullen Murphy has written this letter to the Journal:

To the Editor:
Your editorial about President Bush's speech latest speech on Iraq ('Complete Victory,' Dec. 1) contains a false statement about an article on the effort to train Iraqi forces by our correspondent James Fallows ('Why Iraq Has No Army,' Atlantic Monthly, December 2005). You said that according to the training organization, the Multinational Security Transition Command in Iraq, Fallows 'didn't even contact them while reporting the article or at anytime during at least the past nine months.'

"That is untrue. Mr. Fallows had extensive email correspondence, starting last August, with the Public Affairs Officer for that organization, Lieutenant Colonel Frederick Wellman, who arranged an interview with its commander, Lieutenant General Dave Petraeus, in September. Mr. Fallows spoke with General Petraeus by phone for more than an hour, and checked quotes from that interview via Lt. Col. Wellman before using them in his article.

"He also interviewed one of Petraeus's deputies, Colonel John Martin, and had not-for-attribution discussions, via phone and email, with other members of the organization. As Mr. Fallows pointed out in his article, and as he has records to demonstrate, the Pentagon's press office turned down his requests to interview Major General Paul Eaton and others who had been involved in the training effort.

"At no point before printing this false statement did you contact Mr. Fallows or me to determine whether what you intended to publish was true.

Cullen Murphy
Managing Editor
The Atlantic Monthly

Posted at 04:42 PM"

Of course Lowry expresses no regret for sliming Fallows, a serious and careful reporter/analyst. And of course, the Wall Street Journal Editorial Page is simply not only not trustworthy, but a propaganda machine for Republicans.

Not a sin in and of itself, it is an opinion page - but they have proven time and again they will flat out lie. So, I guess Lowry is better than that - at least he acknowledges the error. You think Paul Gigot wil acknowledge his? Printing a LTE is hardly the same thing.

The next time Tina Brown wants to slime the blogs and defend her cocktail party friends:

Mainstream Media are trapped in the pincer assaults of the fact-free ethical anarchy of the blogosphere...."

she should try and understand that there is a BIG difference between the Left and the Right when it comes to sticking to the facts. Her inability to understand that pretty much demolishes HER credibility.

From the GREAT STATE OF MAINE...

BREAKING!!  Top Ten New President Bush Strategies For Victory in Iraq...

10.  Make an even larger 'Mission Accomplished' sign

9.  Encourage Iraqis to settle their feud like Dave and Oprah

8.  Put that go-getter Michael Brown in charge

7.  Launch slogan, 'It's not Iraq, it's Weraq'

6.  Just do whatever he did when he captured Osama

5.  A little more vacation time at the ranch to clear his head

4.  Pack on a quick 30 pounds and trade places with Jeb

3.  Wait, you mean it ain't going well?

2.  Boost morale by doing his hilarious 'Locked Door' gag

1.  Place Saddam back in power and tell him, 'It's your problem now, dude'

---Late Show with David Letterman

Weekend...straight ahead!!  Cheers and Jeers starts in There's Moreville... [Swoosh!!]  RIGHTNOW!  [Gong!!]

This is disgusting:

Justice Department lawyers concluded that the landmark Texas congressional redistricting plan spearheaded by Rep. Tom DeLay (R) violated the Voting Rights Act, according to a previously undisclosed memo obtained by The Washington Post. But senior officials overruled them and approved the plan.

The memo, unanimously endorsed by six lawyers and two analysts in the department's voting section, said the redistricting plan illegally diluted black and Hispanic voting power in two congressional districts. It also said the plan eliminated several other districts in which minorities had a substantial, though not necessarily decisive, influence in elections.

"The State of Texas has not met its burden in showing that the proposed congressional redistricting plan does not have a discriminatory effect," the memo concluded. The memo also found that Republican lawmakers and state officials who helped craft the proposal were aware it posed a high risk of being ruled discriminatory compared with other options.

But the Texas legislature proceeded with the new map anyway because it would maximize the number of Republican federal lawmakers in the state, the memo said. The redistricting was approved in 2003, and Texas Republicans gained five seats in the U.S. House in the 2004 elections, solidifying GOP control of Congress.

J. Gerald "Gerry" Hebert, one of the lawyers representing Texas Democrats who are challenging the redistricting in court, said of the Justice Department's action: "We always felt that the process . . . wouldn't be corrupt, but it was. . . . The staff didn't see this as a close call or a mixed bag or anything like that. This should have been a very clear-cut case."

. . . The 73-page memo, dated Dec. 12, 2003, has been kept under tight wraps for two years. Lawyers who worked on the case were subjected to an unusual gag rule. The memo was provided to The Post by a person connected to the case who is critical of the adopted redistricting map. Such recommendation memos, while not binding, historically carry great weight within the Justice Department.

Corruption in every part of the Bush Administration. Scandalous.

This is hilarious:

A new National Research Inc. (R) poll finds that the National Republican Senatorial Committee's ad campaign against Cranston, RI, Mayor Steve Laffey (R) may have negative consequences for Sen. Lincoln Chafee's (R-RI) campaign. Sixty-one percent of GOP respondents said they had seen the ads, and of those, 34% of them said they were now more likely to vote for Laffey. Only 25% said they were less likely to vote for Laffey after having seen the ads.

Liddy Dole's NRSC is lagging behind the DSCC in fundraising, yet it has spent a significant amount of its meager war chest running ads against a fellow Republican in a bid to sabotage Laffey's campaign early. Now, the numbers suggest that this money is actually having the opposite effect.

Dole can't do much right these days.

Now the threads I've sang don't add much weight to the story in my head so I'm thinking I should go and write a punch line.

FAIR confirms what must of us long knew - WJ leans more than just a little bit right.

Elected officials who appeared on Washington Journal were slightly more balanced than overall partisan guests. Of the 97 elected officials appearing on the show (senators and House members), 58 were Republican and 39 were Democrat—a 60 to 40 percent imbalance in favor of the GOP.

One might reasonably expect Republicans to moderately outnumber Democrats at a time when the GOP controls the White House and both houses of Congress, but a nearly two to one advantage is hard to justify—particularly in the wake of the national election that concluded in the first week of the study period with the Republican candidate receiving 51 percent of the popular vote. That election gave the Republicans control of 53 percent of the House and 55 percent of the Senate.

Journalists accounted for nearly a third of all guests (215, or 32 percent), the largest single occupational group on Washington Journal’s guestlist. The establishment-oriented Washington Post, with 20 journalists appearing as guests, was the most visible outlet, followed by the Capitol Hill–focused Congressional Quarterly with 12 and the right-leaning Washington Times with 10. USA Today and Time each provided eight guests, while five represented the Christian Science Monitor.

Despite its declaration of balance, the Washington Journal hosted journalists from right-leaning opinion magazines more often than it did those from the left. For instance, the conservative Weekly Standard furnished three guests, as did the like-minded National Review (including National Review Online). Only two guests from the liberal American Prospect were invited on the Journal, and only one guest from the left-leaning Nation.

When opinion journalists from all outlets were included, the right-leaning bias was nearly as strong: 32 right-of-center journalists appeared, vs. 19 left-of-center reporters (even counting editor Peter Beinart, the New Republic’s pro-war editor, as being on the left). Perhaps this tilt to the right could be rationalized if right-wing magazines were distinctly more popular than their counterparts on the left, but the reverse seems to be true; Mother Jones and The Nation both best National Review’s circulation numbers by a wide margin, and The Progressive outsells the Weekly Standard and American Spectator.

The King of Zembla interviews Joe Dante.

Ampersand has good advice.

This roughly applies to discussions of sexism, too. The fact that you don't have a set of robes in your closet or you don't think of yourself as a misogynist doesn't mean that nothing that ever comes out of your mouth has its roots in racism or sexism, whether there's any of that intention behind it. Relax, consider the criticism.

(via pandagon)

Thank God Congress is going to start working on the really important stuff which is just crying out for congressional meddling.

(via americablog)

Leaving all the changes far from far behind. we relieve the tension only to find out the thread's name.

I asked my love to give me shelter And all she offered me were threads.

By Tom Hayden As long predicted, the Pentagon and White House are preparing to “draw down” [not “withdraw”] thousands of troops from Iraq beginning with ten thousand in the near future and 20-30,000 by spring 2006, while turning over bases to Iraqi troops with ceremonial fanfare, and proclaiming the coming of political democracy. A [...]

Michael Kinsley said it best in his op-ed column on Friday:

It used to be said that the moral arc of a Washington career could be divided into four parts: idealism, pragmatism, ambition and corruption. You arrive with a passion for a cause, determined to challenge the system. Then you learn to work for your cause within the system. Then rising in the system becomes your cause. Then, finally, you exploit the system—your connections in it, and your understanding of it—for personal profit. And it remains true, sort of, but faster... There is no better example of this "career path” than former House majority leader Tom DeLay...uh...at least the last two parts: ambition and corruption.

Yet another example from The Washington Post:

Justice Department lawyers concluded that the landmark Texas congressional redistricting plan spearheaded by Rep. Tom DeLay (R) violated the Voting Rights Act, according to a previously undisclosed memo obtained by The Washington Post. But senior officials overruled them and approved the plan.

The memo, unanimously endorsed by six lawyers and two analysts in the department's voting section, said the redistricting plan illegally diluted black and Hispanic voting power in two congressional districts. It also said the plan eliminated several other districts in which minorities had a substantial, though not necessarily decisive, influence in elections.

So let’s get this straight, Tom DeLay and his allies intensively pushed to redraw the congressional boundaries in Texas to strengthen the GOP control of the U.S. House. He’s been indicted on state felony counts for illegally funneling corporate money into state elections; and he’s one of the most powerful politicians in the Republican Party, even after his indictments.

It seems pretty clear that the Republicans have no intention of putting an end to this culture of corruption, which means we must take the matter into our own hands. Hit the bat today and help us take our country back by electing responsible leaders to office in 2006!

John "Stumpy" Pepys killed.

I noticed Showtime was not free for all, but how did the rest of you enjoy it?

Don't be stupid, be a smarty, come and join the Fox News party!