Atrios Blog

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

It's pretty much a given that Ben Chandler probably wouldn't have won without support from bloggers. It's also the case that Stephanie Herseth got a tremendous boost from bloggers, though I won't say I can claim that blogger support was necessary. Neither of those members of Congress are my favorites, but the fact that they were supported despite being rather right wing undercuts the usual media narrative that lefty bloggers only support candidates that are crrrraazy lefties who are otherwise unelectable. Herseth and Chandler won against Republicans in conservative districts.


But, anyway, supporting Rodriguez was a no brainer and it's a shame we didn't jump on it earlier. The seat is going to remain Dem regardless (unless Cuellar jumps ship) and it was an obvious opportunity.

There are lots of reasons to support underdogs, and for better or for worse most of the candidates directly support by Kos and me in the last election cycle were not especially ideologically liberal. They were generally underdogs running against incumbents (most people running against incumbents are underdogs), and in many cases the small amount of funds provided to them helped force their opponents to spend huge amounts of money in return, diverting money from other places.

If my goal in life was to support people who were "winners" I'd be writing checks to Joe Biden, Hilllary Clinton, and Ted Kennedy. All 3 of those candidates will win their next election. All 3 of those candidates have far more money than they need to win their next election. All 3 of those candidates still have no problem getting people to line up to give them even more money for their campaigns. If there's wasted money in campaigns that's where it is. And, yes, I know, that those candidates tend to pass on some money to other candidates, but I'm not sure how supporting party "kingmakers" is really of much value.

It's odd that people who throw $50 at Ciro Rodriguez get mocked while people who throw down $2000 to the Clinton campaign aren't. This is not a slap against Clinton, it's just that the "big money" in campaigns is accepted as the way things are done while the little money is scorned.

Hilarious.

For the record I never wear pajamas.

Unsurprisingly he says that the military will only embed the "right" journalists.

Sounds like a bestseller to me. Probably win a Pulitzer, Polk, Oscar, and Nobel as well.

Still lying.

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Travel day. Try not to shoot anybody in the face.

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

I guess CNN promised UAE that 5-6 would be the daily "Pro-Ports Deal Hour" to balance out Lou Dobbs from 6-7 after this episode:

Dubai Ports World tonight is making what I consider to be a rather astonishing new attempt to silence me and our coverage of this ports deal and our reporting of what at least I consider to be legitimate national security concerns about this transaction. Dubai Ports World has actually refused to grant CNN anymore interviews from Washington or London, and it's refused to allow CNN to videotape its operations in the United Arab Emirates and Hong Kong if we were to show you the video on this broadcast.

This is not the first time that Dubai Ports World has tried to silence me. Last week, a spokesman for the public relations firm that represents the company, Mark Dennis, declared, "CNN won't shut up Lou Dobbs." And as a result, they weren't going to cooperate.

Well, let me assure you that this latest attempt to silence our reporting and to explore the national security interests just like their last effort won't succeed. CNN's management, to its great credit, says it won't comply with any of Dubai Port World's demands, and I'll guarantee you that we're going to continue to report on the facts of this deal, we're going to continue to analyze it, we're going to continue to absolutely scrutinize our elected officials and administration officials who, in some cases, are not being straightforward about the national security interests and the reasons motivating this deal.

If you're in a position to do anything constructive, please try to do so.

The lunatics that rule us.

Hilarious.

My guess is that Mitch Wade just saw an opportunity to get his fingers into the inevitable wingnut slush fund.

THE war in Iraq is her father's business, but Elizabeth Cheney, the US Vice-President's daughter, has been given responsibility for bringing about a different type of regime change in Iran.

Ms Cheney, a 39-year-old mother of four, is a senior official in the US State Department, which has often been regarded as hostile territory by Dick Cheney's White House team.

However, father and daughter agree it would be better for the mullahs' regime in Iran to collapse from within rather than be ousted by force.

The question is whether democratic reform can be achieved before Iran becomes a nuclear power. That is the younger Cheney's job.

In the State Department, she is referred to as the "freedom agenda co-ordinator" and the "democracy tsar" for the Middle East. "She's fantastic and dynamic," said a colleague.
Her official title is deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, and she is in charge of spending $US85million ($114million) -- up from $US10 million last year -- recently allocated to promote democracy in Iran. Much of the money will be spent on broadcasting the views of exiles, dissidents and reformers inside Iran.