More on Penn

Greg Sargent has more on the lack of blogger ethics in the Washington Post.

I don't think this is the most important issue in the world, but as I said I'm really sick of standards being applied to bloggers that don't apply to anyone else in the universe. Three years ago a presidential campaign that nobody knew about paid a tiny bit of money to a blogger that practically nobody read, something which was fully disclosed at the time, and years later it still gets held up as some sort of questionable ethics issue. Meanwhile, millions of dollars get sloshed around Washington, with people seamlessly shifting between pollster, consultant, media figure/source, etc. The whole town operates on people buying each other off, one way or another, and now bloggers are somehow tainted if they so much as talk to a political candidate. There are genuine ethics issues to be explored, so explore them.

Horrifying

Indeed it is.

Oh the Joy

Just watch this Meet the Press Moment. Trust me. Beautifully done, Ms. Priest.

They Hate You

Pierce:

Here's a hint, guys and gals. They hate you. They will always hate you. They will hate you if you help them transmit their slanders and they will hate you if you don't. Look at the last week if you don't believe that. Judy Miller's newspaper haled before the public bar for treason. You owe them nothing. You owe the country more courage than this.

Standing Up

While the ideological makeup of the MTP panel today was absurd, it was good to see that the journalists, and even Andrea Mitchell, seemed to understand that something obscene was going on. Kudos to the producer who sat Dana Priest next to the bloviating gambling gasbag, who had previoulsy called for her to be imprisoned. As Bennett kept yammering on and interrupting people they mostly managed to treat him like a deranged drunk uncle whose presence in the room made them ill.

Civility

As our descent into homocidial lunatic-land continues, Bill Bennett, Assrocket, and Hugh Hewitt got to cheerlead the prosecution of the media on the Sunday shows. Greenwald:

There has been substantial media coverage recently about the crazed, fringe radicals who fuel the "liberal blogosphere" (apparently, some use curse words in their posts and like Russ Feingold!). Just for a change of pace, if for no other reason, the Times might want to consider examining the dynamic in the right-wing blogosphere that causes the home addresses of their photographers to be published on the Internet along with calls that their reporters and editors and their children be "hunted down." None of this is aberrational; quite the contrary.

Journamalism

Murdoch's rag in London:

“Any payola allegations or some quid pro quo deal involving Markos and myself are complete fabrications,” Armstrong responded on the web last week. The two bloggers believe it is revenge for their success as opinion-formers, which in the words of a friend “has freaked out a lot of people”.

Moulitsas himself has said little about the controversy, short of rubbishing The New Republic and other critics. In an e-mail to supporters, he suggested: “It would make my life easier if we confine the story . . . let’s starve it of oxygen.”

The email in question had absolutely nothing about any "controversy" regarding "payola allegations" or "quid pro quo" deals, and was only about Jerome Armstrong's SEC issues.

My favorite bit was this actually:

“It’s the French revolution on the internet,” remarked Walter Shapiro, Washington bureau chief of the online magazine Salon, who believes Moulitsas has a poor record of picking winners. “These people were nothing a few years ago and now they’re being courted. Of course they’re supporting those who suck up to them the most.”

"Of course" says Walter Shapiro, because in his world people "of course" end up "supporting those who suck up to them the most." Washington types continue to imagine a hierarchical top-down world where it's all about the money, access, and political star fucking because that's their world. If that's the world Markos wanted to live in he'd sell his new Berkeley home for a nice Washington condo so he could have his ass kissed 24 hours per day.

One doesn't even know how to begin to really defend against this kind of crap. Markos's never tried to be the best at "picking winners." If that's what he tried to do he'd head down to Vegas and make some bets. If the goal was to pick winners I'd ask you all to contribute to the re-election camapigns of Senators Kennedy and Clinton. Those who keep imagining "Kosola" should take a gander at Kos's ad rates and notice that he's imagined to set up an incredibly lucrative business which doesn't really require skimming a few grand from politicians.

Time For Another Goddamn Blogger Ethics Panel

The worst thing that could ever happen in the world, according to many Beltway types, is that a blogger could be paid by a campaign and not disclose it. Of course, paid consultants/strategists appearing in the media without fully disclosing their client lists is something which happens all the time. For the record I'm for disclosing such arrangements, I'm just tired of bloggers being held to a standard which doesn't apply anywhere else in the universe.

Today James Carville and Mark Penn write an op-ed in support of Hillary Clinton. Good for them. I have no problem with that, though I do have to say that Clinton supporters apparently think they can hold a 2008 presidential campaign without mentioning the war. Mark At the end Penn is identified:

Mark J. Penn was a key strategist in Clinton's 1996 bid for re-election and in Hillary Clinton's 2000 Senate campaign.

Penn is a pollster and the May 29 New Yorker describes him as (present tense) Clinton's "chief strategist."

A 2005 Roll Call article says:

But, perception does matter, and winning a fight for a sought-after consultant or firm lends momentum to a candidacy in the inner circles of political Washington.

Even though few firms dealing with cross-pressures from the 2008 presidential contest publicly acknowledge the decision they face, several consultants have already made choices.

Mark Penn, a partner in the Democratic polling firm Penn, Schoen and Berland, parted ways earlier this year with Bayh to devote full attention to New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

And, a December 2005 2005 Washington Post article says:

But Penn said in an interview that he will continue to work for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), as well as do corporate work for other clients. PSB will be a division of Burson, and Penn will remain its president; partner Mike Berland becomes chief executive of PSB.

Here's Arianna describing a recent encounter:

Then came the post-panel Q & A, during which I asked Mark Penn whether Hillary Clinton's cosponsoring a bill criminalizing flag desecration was also the product not of polling but of her deeply held convictions.

Without batting an eye, Penn said: "You guys want to make believe that you know better what her beliefs are than she does. This is her belief. This has been her belief for a long time. She's been listening to veterans in New York, and that's what she believes." After catching his breath he added: "And you know what? She doesn't care what you think!"

"Well, if she doesn't care what we in the blogosphere think," I said, "why did she hire Peter Daou to build bridges to us?"

That one went unanswered.

Morning Thread

Enjoy.

Time Out For Fun

Devo.

Late Night

enjoy

Apropos of Nothing

Reader ja brings a Gwen Ifill atrocity to my attention.

On this weekend's Wait Wait Don't Tell me, Gwen Ifill is on. At 19:51, the quick transcript is:

Sagal: That was kind of contentious of course, that's where the subject of Mary Cheney came up which she's been talking about

Ifill: And ya know the funny thing? I didn't even ask about Mary Cheney they obviously the candidate, the Democratic Candidate, Senator Edwards, just felt the need to bring it up apropos of nothing and then claim later that he was just trying to express his sympathy and solidarity with the vice president's daughter.

Let's rewind the tape.

FILL: The next question goes to you, Mr. Vice President.

I want to read something you said four years ago at this very setting: "Freedom means freedom for everybody." You said it again recently when you were asked about legalizing same-sex unions. And you used your family's experience as a context for your remarks.
Can you describe then your administration's support for a constitutional ban on same-sex unions?

CHENEY: Gwen, you're right, four years ago in this debate, the subject came up. And I said then and I believe today that freedom does mean freedom for everybody. People ought to be free to choose any arrangement they want. It's really no one else's business. That's a separate question from the issue of whether or not government should sanction or approve or give some sort of authorization, if you will, to these relationships.

Traditionally, that's been an issue for the states. States have regulated marriage, if you will. That would be my preference.

In effect, what's happened is that in recent months, especially in Massachusetts, but also in California, but in Massachusetts we had the Massachusetts Supreme Court direct the state of -- the legislature of Massachusetts to modify their constitution to allow gay marriage.

And the fact is that the president felt that it was important to make it clear that that's the wrong way to go, as far as he's concerned.

Now, he sets the policy for this administration, and I support the president.

IFILL: Senator Edwards, 90 seconds.

EDWARDS: Yes. Let me say first, on an issue that the vice president said in his last answer before we got to this question, talking about tax policy, the country needs to know that under what they have put in place and want to put in place, a millionaire sitting by their swimming pool, collecting their statements to see how much money they're making, make their money from dividends, pays a lower tax rate than the men and women who are receiving paychecks for serving on the ground in Iraq.

Now, they may think that's right. John Kerry and I do not.

We don't just value wealth, which they do. We value work in this country. And it is a fundamental value difference between them and us.

Now, as to this question, let me say first that I think the vice president and his wife love their daughter. I think they love her very much. And you can't have anything but respect for the fact that they're willing to talk about the fact that they have a gay daughter, the fact that they embrace her. It's a wonderful thing. And there are millions of parents like that who love their children, who want their children to be happy.

Apropos of nothing.

Heh.

Indeed.

Over to you, Adam...

Slapping Everyone In The World With His Cock, One Face At A Time

A lovely poem about Jeff Goldstein.

Wanker of the Day

Mark Levin.

Afternoon Thread

Enjoy.

Time Makes A Funny

As Newton Minnow pointed out in comments, someone at Time Magazine is having a bit of fun with their "liberal" columnist, putting his recent column below the new poll numbers.




...oh, and regarding this line from the Klein column:

If Baghdad isn't stabilized, the war is lost. "I know it's the cliche of the war," an Army counterinsurgency specialist told me last week. "But we'll know in the next six months—and this time, it'll be the last next six months we get."

I've started taking these Friedmanesque predictions and putting their expiration dates in my calendar. If you spot them, please send them in.

WHEEEEEE

Bush still bouncing!

In fairness Bush has edged up a bit in a few polls, but only in the world of The Note could poll numbers in the high 30s be considered good news.

Media Matters

From Paul Waldman:

The events of the past week provide one more demonstration that progressives must begin to fully appreciate the importance of the media in our political life. Look what happened: Conservatives began a coordinated attack on a news organization, and suddenly we weren't talking about Iraq or about anything else, we were actually debating whether The New York Times should be prosecuted for treason.

And journalists could barely summon the energy to defend not just their colleagues, but their profession -- let alone the citizens they are supposed to serve. At the same time that they were being subjected to this assault, they continued to view the political world through a lens created by the very people battering them mercilessly.

In recent editions of our weekly wrap-up, Jamison Foser has been making the case that, as he wrote back on May 26, "The defining issue of our time is the media." Conservatives obviously understand this fact. Perhaps soon progressives will come to the same understanding.

Sammy's Hill

I see our Ana Marie has her claws out again and has written a bubbleheaded review of a Katha Pollitt book. Pollitt - intelligent, funny. Cox - not so much. The real mystery is why the New York Times... oh, never mind. That's no mystery.



Which brings me to the real point of the post. Long ago after her reading her nasty review of Kristin Gore's book I vowed to read Gore's book to see if it had merit, and after Cox wrote her own book I vowed to compoare them.

I finished Gore's book, Sammy's Hill, a few weeks back. It was really kind of amusing to compare them. Gore's book was everything Cox's tried to be but wasn't. Both were basically "chick lit" (and I don't mean that pejoratively) set against the backdrop of Washington. But Gore's book actually provides some insight into what Washington culture is like, has interesting characters that are fully realized, has an unpredictable plot, and most of all is actually frequently funny. Cox's book was a lame attempt to exploit whole "Washingtonienne" thing one more time with a boring plot about a fake blog.

A key difference between the two books is that in Gore's book, the lead character actually gives a shit about something, which makes it possible for us to give a shit, while Cox's book is just a parade of narcissists who don't give a shit about anything.

I imagine it's a key difference between the two authors as well.

So, if you need a fun light summer read from one of the writers of Futurama, go for it.

Morning Thread

Enjoy.