HeadlineUpdate

What's Wrong with Tim Russert

I recently heard about the section on the Huffington Post devoted to tirades against Tim Russert. I don't feel like wading through it all to find this out, but wonder if they've commented on my previously mentioned Gripe #1 about "Little Russ."  (I did see this post about the New York Times Sunday Magazine's  snarky Q&A about Tim's apparent professional neglect of his mother)  (Is anyone actually reading the "'Funny" pages anyway?)

So here's my beef:  Russert is addicted to the news clip.  Whether it's a printed quote from long ago or video of a guest taking a contrary view on an earlier interview, Tim seems to feel his job is to play "gotcha" with his guests.  On Russert's Meet the Press, the most important job is researcher. 

Having said that, I wish I had seen the segment of MTP a few weeks ago with Steve Bridges, the comedian who played George W. Bush's doppelganger at the Correspondent's Dinner. (And thanks to the Internet, now I can!)  I only heard it on C-Span radio, and it wasn't the same. Bridges does other political impressions too, including a dead-on Bill Clinton, which he did in his Bush get-up.  Oooooo, scary stuff!

(Speaking of which, I've been asked by one of my 13.9 readers why I failed to comment on Stephen Colbert's performance at the annual Correpsondents embarrassing lovefest.  All a I know is that the same story comes out practically every year about how the host's performance fell flat.  I suppose it depends on where you sit, in the cheap seats, I'm told, Colbert was boffo, up in lobbyist la-la land, the audience was more hostile.)

And speaking of the Clinton family, my rant last week against Markos (Daily Kos) Moulitsas was picked up by the Columbia Journalism Review's CJRDaily, and a reader named CliffsVoice left this comment:

Next, there’s HeadlineUpdate blog which I found harder place. I looked around the site and it seems (I’m guessing now) that the author is a centrist Democrat –– that is to say a New Democrat in the Clinton-Triangulation mode. In any case, HeadlineUpdate blog is Not Left.

Hey comrade, I used to do direct mail for the Christic Institute and this week I worked on an ad from Cindy Sheehan!

The hate mail I got after teasing Elvis fans about the sanctity of Graceland was even better..

Kos Is Wrong About Hillary

Markos Moulitsas, proprietor of the of-course-I'm-jealous Daily Kos, opines in the Washington Post on why Hillary Clinton may be the wrong choice for the Democrats. Of course I'm jealous of his blog (did I mention that?) but let us count the ways he's wrong:

Hillary Clinton has a few problems if she wants to secure the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. She is a leader who fails to lead. She does not appear "electable." But most of all, Hillary has a Bill Clinton problem. (And no, it's not about that. )

Actually, there's nothing wrong with this paragraph except that I don't agree with it.  But that doesn't mean the writing isn't lively and clear, even if the Clinton joke is kind of, well, obvious.

Moving into 2008, Republicans will be fighting to shake off the legacy of the Bush years: the jobless recovery, the foreign misadventures, the nightmarish fiscal mismanagement, the Katrina mess, unimaginable corruption and an imperial presidency with little regard for the Constitution or the rule of law. Every Democratic contender will be offering change, but activists will be demanding the sort of change that can come only from outside the Beltway.

Hillary Clinton leads her Democratic rivals in the polls and in fundraising. Unfortunately, however, the New York senator is part of a failed Democratic Party establishment -- led by her husband -- that enabled the George W. Bush presidency and the Republican majorities, and all the havoc they have wreaked at home and abroad.

You know, the Establishment is a moving target.  When Jimmy Carter ran for president, his campaign manager was quoted saying if Carter got elected and appointed Establishment figures like Cyrus Vance and Zbigniew Brzezinski he'd quit --Carter did and Hamilton Jordan didn't. Ronald Reagan ran as an outsider and so did George W. Bush. The only people who talk today about a "failed Democratic Party establishment" are embittered Howard Dean fans.

Of course, it's still early. At this point in the last presidential cycle, the first hints of Howard Dean's transformational campaign were barely emerging. In 2002, the Democrats had no clear front-runner, but the conventional wisdom was betting on a handful of insider candidates with money and connections: Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman and John F. Kerry, and Rep. Richard A. Gephardt. These three were supposed to contend. The early polls gave them (especially Lieberman) the inside track to the nomination, and the media gave the rest of the field no more than its usual dismissive coverage.

See what I mean?  Bloggers are about the only ones who still have time for Howard Dean, because he gave them credibility.  And it's disingenuious to say that Lieberman was ever a front-runner: all he ever had in the early polls was name recognition.

But the netroots -- the far-flung collection of grassroots political activists organizing online -- proved to be a different world, one unencumbered by Washington's conventional wisdom. Even as the establishment mocked Dean and his supporters ("like a scene out of the 'Star Wars' cantina," laughed a rival campaign aide), his army of hyper-motivated supporters organized across all 50 states. This movement exploded onto the national scene when Dean began reporting dramatically higher fundraising numbers than his opponents. Had Kerry not lent himself millions to reach the Iowa caucuses, and had Dean not been so green a candidate, Dean probably would have been the nominee.

Clever Kos, gets his plug in for the netroots and reiterates the popular myth that Dean could ever have beaten Kerry in Iowa and New Hamshire.  It wasn't money or the "Dean Scream" that finished his campaign--it was Dean himself.  And Joe Trippi, of course.  And the consultants...

The Gift that Keeps on Giving

Link: More Questions Surface in the Wake of a Congressman's Bribery Case - New York Times.

The Congressional influence-peddling scandal grows juicer by the day. Now the FBI is interviewing call girls who might have ridden in limos with formerr Republican Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham. And as Maureen Dowd observed the other day, in a political climate rife with satirical opportunities, the tale of Duke, Dusty Foggo, poker and prostitutes just can't be ignored. I'm still eagerly waiting for the other shoes to drop in the Abramoff/Safavian/DeLay/Ney scandals, aren't you?