Now this is more like it: A slew of actual Shrumesque attack ads. They're short. They aren't going for viral Web hits. They are trying to demonstrate the price Senators may have to pay if they choose two-faced Kabuki (e.g., for cloture, against the bill) over forthright opposition. ... "John McCain--Weak on Immigration" wins the best eerily effective soundtrack category. ... Freedom Folks' anti-Lott spot seems almost as damaging as the professionally-done Numbers USA hit. There appears to be no shortage of scary-looking Lott photos. ...
P.S.:Blogometer worries about YouTubish attacks in the 2008 campaign and warns that "candidates must assume some responsibility/control for the more notorious unauthorized efforts."
Otherwise we should expect a flurry of web based Swiftboat style attacks as consequential primaries draw close.
I'd say we should expect that flurry whether the candidates assume responsibility or not. How are the candidates going to stop them? Democracy is messy and it will get messier. ... Plus, candidates couldn't assume "control" of the ads without running into campaign finance complications, right? (The ads would no longer be "independent" expenditures, and would have to be paid for with "hard" money, I think.) 11:40 P.M.
National Review on the state of play on Tuesday's first cloture vote: "Stopping amnesty is entirely within the power of senators who oppose it." Those seven are: Bond, Brownback, Burr, Cochran, Coleman, Ensign, Webb. All they have to do is vote against cloture. ... Blocking something you claim to be against. Would that be too simple for the Senate? Do they have to try to have it both ways? ... Update:Wash Times reports on an overlapping set of swing votes. ... 11:17 P.M.
Hot Air's latest attack ad is more of a call to arms, or to phones. It has a terrible beat and you can't dance to it (you'll see why). But it's effective. ... 10:50 P.M.
The Grand Bargaineers have resorted to adding the Hutchison "touchback" requirement the "Z-visa" requirements in the immigration bill. This is almost certainly a total fraud: 1) The requirement itself is a fraud; and 2) even so, it will be removed by the House of Representatives. It's being added now to provide cover for timid Republicans. But I think it's a sign of weakness that the bill's managers had to resort to this ruse--they'd rather not have to do it. (It annoys Latino groups and its phoniness may embarrass even the Bargaineers. Plus Republicans have an excuse for voting no if the bill comes back from conference without it.) ... P.S.: Kate O'Beirne had speculated that Sen. Burr had been demanding "touchback." Has he now been bought off for cloture? Both clotures? If so, he's a cheap date. ... P.P.S.: Burr's contact info. .. 10:35 P.M.
Another citizen admaker rises to the challenge with a hit on Lindsey Graham ("Come Home Lindsey") ... It's witty. You can dance to it. But it's not mean enough! Lindsey Graham isn't going to "come home" on immigration. And when he doesn't change his position, do you want him to be able to "come home" by stressing his conservatism on other issues--which is what he's counting on? Or do you want to defeat him? ... Remember: The idea is to do the sort of short, vicious poll-draining 30 second spot that a challenger might run--in order to give waffling Senators a taste of what they will be in for during their next campaigns. Don't be Webby! Be TV. ... 5:35 P.M.
Polipundit suggests six Senate candidates for lobbying. ... 3:03 P.M.