• Mile High Letdown
  Obama's non-memorable speech.
  Mickey Kaus
  posted Aug. 30, 2008
• Obama's Failed Fight Back
  A mostly political Weblog.
  Mickey Kaus
  posted Aug. 27, 2008
• Dems Rally Against Unions!
  OK, teachers' unions. Still ...
  Mickey Kaus
  posted Aug. 24, 2008
• How Big a Victim is Elizabeth?
  People and the Enquirer agree. Are they wrong?
  Mickey Kaus
  posted Aug. 16, 2008
• Edwards: Hey, I Was "99% Honest"
  It's all the tabloid's fault!
  Mickey Kaus
  posted Aug. 9, 2008
• Search for more kausfiles articles
• Subscribe to the kausfiles RSS feed
• View our complete kausfiles archive

Will GM Blow It?The Detroit giant may actually have an edge in hybrid technology. But ...

NBC's excellent First Read, on Huckabee's strong showing in Ames, Iowa:

He actually received more votes than he bought, a noble feat in the straw poll. ...

10:13 A.M.

___________________________

Bush--You Asked for It, Yahoos! Is the recently announced Bush crackdown on employers of illegal immigrants

1) a desperate, Lindsey Graham-like make-up call to placate conservatives by enforcing existing laws (a possible trust-building precondition to winning some of them over to legalization of currently-illegal residents) or

2) a Leninesque attempt to heighten the contradictions and create pressure for legalization by demonstrating to business and the media that actually enforcing the existing immigration laws is intolerable?

Day In/Day Out wonders too. ... If it's option 2, of course, then Homeland Security might intentionally choose to enforce the law in as clumsy, heartless, and lawsuit-inspiring a fashion as possible, in order to create the maximum number of negative headlines. ... Certainly the case for the paranoid option (2) was enhanced by the LAT 's report on the crackdown, featuring bitter you-asked-for-it-now-you're-going-to-get-it quotes from Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff:

Chertoff acknowledged. "There will be some unhappy consequences for the economy out of doing this," he said in an interview with The Times.

Chertoff said he had little sympathy for businesses that hire illegal workers, saying they should have seen the crackdown coming after the Senate failed to pass immigration reform. "We have been crystal clear about what the consequences would be," he said. ...[snip]

Chertoff suggested that once the provisions had been in force for a while, Congress would see immigration reform in a different light.

"Everybody who criticized comprehensive immigration reform for being too complex, maybe now they're going to realize it's complex because there are a lot of interconnected pieces to this and when you try to deal with only one corner of it, you wind up with a huge impact on something else," he said. [E.A.]

Bush Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez is also quoted saying, in effect, that the effort he just launched will lead to disaster. ("We do not have the workers our economy needs ... Ultimately congress will have to pass comprehensive immigration reform.")

Do you trust these men to implement the plan skillfully when they have an explicit interest in causing pain? For example, wouldn't it be better to focus enforcement on new hires whose Social Security numbers don't match, rather than disruptively forcing the firing of existing workers who may have been here for decades? But of course, if it's strategy #2 Bush is pursuing, then destroying the lives of decades-long residents exactly what Chertoff should be focusing on, because that's what will generate the horror stories that might fuel a new push for amnesty. ... It's a new twist on the old Washington Monthly "Firemen First" Principle, in which agencies defend their budgets by making cuts in the most disruptive manner possible, typically by firing firemen and cops. ...

I'm paranoid. I don't trust Chertoff--he seems personally embittered by his "comprehensive" humiliation. I'd focus on new hires, not existing workers. But so far the anti-comprehensive camp--including, for example, Mark Krikorian, Polipundit and Terry Jeffrey--thinks highly of the Bush crackdown. Will they wake up in a few months and realize they've been snookered, or Lenined? ...

Update: Alert reader PD says Chertoff's off to a good start in pursuing Strategy 2--it was a screw-up in a Customs and Border Protection computer that stranded 20,000 people at LAX over the weekend. ...

More: Krikorian may on board with the new measures, but he isn't a fool. He concedes--subhead: "The White House thinks it's calling America's bluff"--that #2 is the strategy. But he seems confident it will fail:

Lobbyists for farmers and roofing contractors and others will soon be screaming bloody murder. But Congress and the media would do well not to take at face value the squealing of firms losing their cheap-labor subsidy. When the end of the last big guestworker program was being debated in the early 1960s, California farmers claimed that "the use of braceros [Mexican guestworkers] is absolutely essential to the survival of the tomato industry." Instead, termination of the program prompted mechanization which caused a quintupling of production for tomatoes grown for processing, an 89-percent drop in demand for harvest labor, and a fall in real prices.

The same sort of thing happened half a century earlier, when the textile industry predicted disaster if child labor were ended. At a Senate hearing in 1916, one mill owner said that limiting child labor would "stop my machines"; another said "investors would never receive another dividend"; while a third said that ending child labor would "paralyze the country."

We're going to hear a lot more of this sort of thing — the White House is counting on it. Standing up to the coming lobbyist onslaught will be the final stage of the battle against amnesty.

I fear Krikorian underestimates the outrage and opposition a Katrina-like application of the new rules by Chertoff's agencies could produce. But maybe they're so hamhanded they can't even be hamhanded when they want to be.

P.S.: Beyond Paranoia Lies Ecstasy! Roy Beck of Numbers USA sees the upside of outrage--

The illegal alien communities – and the outlaw businesses that hire them – are in a panic this weekend.

And they should be.

The panic has spread to your town or city – all across America.

It is most important that all of us contribute to that panic and ensure that it continues. [E.A.]

The panic, argues Beck, will bring about "a big increase in the exodus from the United States of settled illegal aliens." This may be where I part company with Numbers USA. It seems to me the nation can absorb the current number of illegals, as long as further illegal immigration is effectively deterred. We can do the latter, I should think, without encouraging political support for amnesty by provoking an unnecessary, wrenching exodus. ... 1:56 A.M. link

___________________________

Will Pinch Sulzberger Set a Date Certain for Withdrawal? Another analyst fails to appreciate the genius of Arthur Sulzberger, Jr and his TimesSelect project, noting that the number of paying TimesSelect customers--220,000--"has risen a miserable 8,000 since the start of the year." ... At this point the NYT's main challenge is figuring out how to kill TimesSelect without making it appear to be a humiliation for Pinch, confirming the markets' fears about him. Calling Steve Rattner! ... P.S.: I again suggest that the line-of-least resistance Plan B for saving the NYT is to kick Pinch upstairs and make Rattner the actual full-time CEO. ... 11:29 P.M.

___________________________

Saturday, August 11, 2007

In case you missed it, GM's coming next-generation hybrid technology may have some advantages over the hybrid battery Toyota is planning. Autoblog summarizes the WSJ's account:

Toyota's lithium battery of choice uses cobalt oxide, much like the problematic batteries that were catching fire in Sony laptops. GM's iron phosphate-based battery is said to be more chemically stable. ...

Why do I completely lack confidence that GM will capitalize successfully on any technological lead it has? Because where GM has had a technological edge in the past it has been unable to translate it into cars customers like me would rather buy than Toyotas.

A large part of that inability has to do with GM's dramatically higher labor costs--apparently the total labor cost for a GM hourly worker ( including health, pensions etc.) is about $146,000 per year. They're competing against Toyota and Honda who pay $96,000 per year--on equally American workers in American factories. Much of this disparity is in health care costs, something that would be fixed if the government took over that burden. But, according to CNN (citing Harbour-Felex data) $630 per vehicle is for union-negotiated "issues like work rules, line relief and holiday pay," while "paying UAW members for not working when plants are shut costs another $350 per vehicle."

That's about $1,000 per vehicle not related to health care (or "legacy" pensions, for that matter). I don't begrudge Detroit auto workers six-digit pay packages--unlike some professors, I don't think it odd that they make more than professors. It's harder work! But I also don't see why they should necessarily make more than Toyota's hard-working American autoworkers. And as a car consumer, every time I see a nice Detroit vehicle I might want to buy--the Ford Mustang and Pontiac Solstice come to mind--and then I see the tacky materials used in the interior, I think about how much more appealing the car would be if I didn't have to pay $1,000/vehicle in extra costs to finance the UAW's work rules, etc. (with the grand going to buy higher quality plastics or to lower the price). Toyotas don't have this problem--I'm more confident the money I spend will efficiently go into the car I buy. ...

Update: This better-than-MSM Automotive News article--free at the moment, with registration--argues that the coming UAW-Detroit negotiations will actually start the process of bringing GM, Ford, and Chrysler's labor costs down a notch to Toyota's level. In effect, argues David Sedgwick, we still have "pattern bargaining," it's just that non-union Toyota sets the pattern. ... But isn't it just as likely that, in the toothpulling process by which the UAW is forced to climb down from above-Toyota labor costs, the concessions will be too little, too late--or rather, just enough to keep current workers employed but not enough to actually let GM make significant anti-Toyota inroads? You could argue that the UAW would in fact be serving its older, near-retirement workers well if it merely allowed GM to limp along and shrink with the shrinking UAW membership, making just enough money to cover pensions. ... That's one problem with Wagner Act unionism--even the most democratic unions, like the UAW, represent a fatally underinclusive constituency. One group that's not included is Americans now in elementary school who might benefit from having GM around in 20 years. Another group is communities that would benefit if GM actually capitalized on technologocial breakthroughs and took some market share back. .... 3:12 P.M. link

___________________________

Friday, August 10, 2007

Hmm. Should the campaign of John Edwards be accusing other candidates of exploiting tragedy? 2:36 P.M.

___________________________

"My people have been in this game for 25 years . . . They are losing their jobs": I thought Wall Streeters were paid big money because they took big risks. Capitalism, etc. But when those risks actually materialize, and the Wall Streeters are actually threatened with large losses that might change their lifestyles, Jim Cramer shows up to demand that the government bail out his friends. ... P.S.: bhTV take. ... P.P.S.: The Cramer/Crystal Method mash-up gets better a couple of minutes in. ... [via bhTV commenter Namazu] 1:34 P.M.

___________________________

Now this one should work: Bloggingheads, Special Cleavage Edition. ... Update: Or maybe I meant to link to this. ... 1:28 P.M.

___________________________

Fred Kaplan expresses what seems like the sound position on Iraq: The surge is unlikely to be enough to create a stable, unitary nation given the sectarian animosity. The prudent course is to move to Plan B right now, while we still have to troops and time to carry it out:

Before they withdraw, U.S. troops could try to help minorities relocate into areas where their ethnic brethren are in the majority—providing the means of transportation and, to the extent possible, safe passage.

I'm not sure how to read Kaplan's next sentence, though:

Iraqi troops and police may be very keen to assist, if not lead the way, in this mission—at least if Shiite forces are called on to help Shiites, Sunni forces to help Sunnis.

Does he mean that Shiite forces would be keen to help Shiites relocate? At the moment, Shiite forces seem most keen on helping Sunnis relocate. It's not clear to me why they would want to assist in the de facto cleansing of their own people--in effect, surrendering a piece of turf to their rivals. Likewise, why would Sunnis help Baghdad become a wholly Shiite city? ...

P.S.: One way to characterize Bush's second term in domestic policy is that he's consistently moved to Plan B too late to salvage anything from the demise of his Plan A. That was certainly the case on Social Security reform, and in all probability will be the final story on immigration. Will he replicate that misjudgment on Iraq? ... 1:07 A.M. link

___________________________

Bob Wright doesn't know who "Jess and Nick" are. ... Or "K-Fed." ... 12:48 A.M. link

___________________________

Wednesday, August 8, 2007

Tout le Gauche: Markos Moulitsas' co-author and MyDD blogger Jerome Armstrong--recently quoted assessing the state of the left blogosphere in Salon--has agreed to pay $30,000 to the S.E.C. to settle stock-touting allegations, according to TimesSelect prisoner Chris Suellentrop. That seems like quite a bit to me, though I'm no S.E.C. expert. It apparently includes a $20,000 fine. From the S.E.C.'s news release, with emphasis added:

The Commission's Complaint, filed on April 14, 2003, alleged that beginning on March 6, 2000, Armstrong touted the stock of BluePoint Linux Software Corporation ("BluePoint") by posting unsubstantiated, favorable buy recommendations on the Raging Bull internet site. Armstrong posted over eighty such recommendations during the first three weeks that the stock of BluePoint was publicly traded. According to the Complaint, Armstrong praised BluePoint's investment value and encouraged investors who were experiencing trouble having their orders filled to keep trying. The Complaint further alleged that the promoters of BluePoint were secretly transferring stock in three other companies to Armstrong at prices below the then current market for those three stocks and that Armstrong made at least $20,000 by selling the shares he received from the promoters of BluePoint. The Complaint alleges that Armstrong did not disclose in his internet postings that he was being compensated for making the postings.

That's just the complaint, of course. Still ... what's he touting now? ... P.S.: Red State eagerly awaits the long-promised Armstrong "offensive." ... He could start by issuing either a confirmation or denial of the truth of the SEC's charge. The settlement itself is neither. But if Armstrong doesn't owe the SEC an admit-or-deny answer, doesn't he owe it to everyone else--his allies, his readers, his colleagues? Is it true, Jerome? ... 1:23 P.M.

___________________________

Today's Google Alert Special: Mark Kleiman say he's "on a listserv embracing a bunch of real journalists and a bunch of bloggers, academics, activists, and think-tankers, representing a pretty good spread of Blue opinion." Sounds like the KleinKlub! Kleiman then discusses two threads on the listserv. One "is about the extent to which the Information Age dictates basic changes in social policy." In the other, on No Child Left Behind, critics and supporters debate whether its "tests measure to narrow a spectrum of capacities, measure them too infrequently, measure them badly, measure them in ways that aren't robust to 'teaching the test,' and lead to a soul-deadening rote-learning atmosphere ..." Wouldn't it be better if these debates were conducted in public, where readers could at least listen in? [They sound incredibly tedious--ed Hmm. Good point. Though they're interesting when Kleiman puts them together. But that's on his public blog. ... Never mind.] 2:12 A.M.

___________________________

Is the WSJ ed page's Cult of Bartley doomed by Rupert Murdoch's acquisition of the paper? I'd say yes, despite the firewall erected by cult members. Murdoch will want his own people, and more ideologically flexible people, in charge. If Paul Gigot is still running the place in 18 months I'll give him $100. ... 1:38 A.M.

___________________________

Tuesday, August 7, 2007

Pinch's plan, nailed to perch: They laughed when kf reported that the NYT might be about to abandon TimesSelect, Pinch Sulzberger's visionary project in which he sought to charge readers for the very thing (opinion) most readily available on the Web for free. ... OK, they didn't laugh. But I got lots of emails telling me I just didn't understand the complex futuristic economics of newspaper publishing the Web. TimesSelect was "about more than revenue," wrote the experts. It was a strategy for retaining "high-paying print subscrbers." ... Well, hah! ... Note: Always trust content from kausfiles. Except when I get hoaxed. ... 10:39 A.M. link

___________________________

Monday, August 6, 2007

Educating Ezra: Whippersnapper apparatchik Ezra Klein, after smugly dismissing the motives of neolibs who criticize teachers' unions, is corrected by his own more knowledgeable readers. Sample excerpts from the comments [E.A.]:

if you're going to say this about "endemic, root problems" you should probably explain what you think they are. I agree that blaming teacher's unions is a popular hobby horse of pundits, right and left, but knowing that doesn't make all the isses around the teacher's unions simply go away -solving issues in our education system does mean some sensible reforms of union practices ....

_____

I will give you that teacher unions aren't the "root problem," but they are the roadblock that prevents any meaningful reform to try and cure our education system. ...

_____

I am a former member of a professional trade union. I am also a former member of a school board. The community was an inner-ring suburb with a student-body profile that ran from poor to upper middle class with a racial mix that cut across class lines, but with blacks concentrated on the lower end. In many ways, we were ground-zero on the achievement gap. We also faced severe budget challenges, having to cut programs and services, including many jobs, year after year.

In this context, despite my generally well-to-the-left-of-center-leanings, I came to conclude, most reluctantly, that the teacher's union was part of the problem, not the solution. This is not to absolve the elected board of education or the administration of any responsibility, but the union steadfastly refused to work with either in addressing the educational and budgetary issues. In the mind of the leadership, cooperation was capitulation. Even between negotiations, it pursued an adversarial strategy designed to undermine the authority of management which, in practice, meant it wanted administrators to fail and, by implication, setting back educational progress for the kids. ...

_____

Ezra, what kind of logic is that. Teacher unions don't explain bad schools: I went to a good school with unionized teachers. The problem isn't that teacher unions hurt or destroy schools; the problem is that teacher unions block reform when schools face serious problems ....

_____

Are the unions the root cause? No, and most sensible folks don't say they are, even confirmed teacher's union haters on the right. Unions do relatively little damage in the areas where schools do well, areas which don't really need reform in any critical way ...[snip] ...The problem is that where more extreme measures might help, unions tend to oppose such measures fiercely.

I tend to think unions do more than simply block systemic reforms--or, rather, it is core union practices (especially protections against firings for bad performance) that need systemic reforming. But Klein's commenters seem to believe these practices aren't much of a problem in affluent school districts.. ...

P.S.: When it comes to the non-affluent districts, Klein asserts that criticizing teachers' unions is worse than empty "gesturing" because

By repeatedly ascribing blame to the teacher's unions, these pundits deflect attention from the endemic, root problems, and refocus on more discrete, and demonizable, culprits. This gives conservatives an easy way out of conversations on education reform, even as they lack an actual solution.

I dunno. It seems to me the consensus "root cause," if there is one, is the culture of fatherlessness and fecklessness that characterizes "ghetto poverty." Changing that culture was what welfare reform was all about. You can argue that welfare reform wasn't the right solution (I'd disagree) but you can't say conservatives or neolib teachers' union bashers didn't propose a solution at all. ... And what's Klein's? ...

P.P.S.: Is Eric Alterman just "gesturing" too? Or does he just have a kid in public school? ... [via Edwize] 10:27 P.M. link

___________________________

John McCain has agreed to participate in a Spanish-language (translated into English) Univision GOP presidential debate on Sept. 16. This seems like an especially dangerous occasion for a Republican trying desperately to live down his pro-legalization immigration stand--unless he's going to pull a Senorita Souljah and tell the Univision crowd to sit still for an enforcement-only bill. But it seems to me that McCain's pal Lindsey Graham is probably better at phony, post-comprehensive seat-saving anti-illegal grandstanding. ... [via Drudge] 9:33 P.M.

___________________________

Kausfiles--Solution-Oriented: In the least convincing chapter in my book,** the one where I desperately try to come up with ways to "mix the classes" in the suburbs, I mention the idea of "microzoning"--requiriing a mix of very small units in richer communities. I didn't really know what I was talking about--e.g., whether this obvious idea was old hat or discredited. It turns out that many suburbs, in Southern California at least, are considering such a move. Some are rejecting it, some are embracing it. ... P.S.: The beauty of tiny condos is that they don't have to be subsidized--they're naturally cheap because they're so small. Nor do you need regulations to restrict them to lower-income people. That's who will naturally want to buy or rent them. .... The social-egalitarian payoff: When you're shopping at the supermarket, nobody knows whether you come from a 300 or a 3,000 square foot condo. ...

**--"Danek S. Kaus" had nothing to do with this book. That's Amazon's mistake. ... [via MayorSam] 5:03 A.M.

___________________________

"Married at 24": Is it that unusual to be married at age 24? ("Crazy in Love or just crazy?") I don't think so. ... Update: It's not. The median age of first marriage for women is 25. .... MSN is out of touch with the Real America! ... 3:47 P.M.

___________________________

Sunday, August 5, 2007

HuffPo nails Hillary on Kos dis: Hillary's blogspinners--and top YearlyKos executives!--cover up that she'd rather schmooze with Ron Perelman and Jessica Seinfeld than a roomful of wristbanded Kossacks. ... Update: Eric Alterman complains:

How silly is Mickey Kaus for linking to this? Was Hillary supposed to cancel a longstanding commitment to hundreds of people? Are the candidates supposed to run their campaigns without money and without public financing? In any case, this piece is completely wrong. Hillary had plenty of time, on her private plane to be in Chicago and to be at this fundraiser. Hey guys, she actually did both. So it's wrong on facts, as well as silly and naïve in its analysis, but hey who cares? I hear Edwards got a haircut. ...

1) Yes, Hillary has to have fundraisers. But then she should be honest about it--she shouldn't try to hide the cause of her "scheduling conflict" from the Kos crowd, treating them like children who can be conned. That's the basic complaint; 2) Yes, she was at the Kos convention and at the fundraiser, but she didn't apparently have time for the advertised "breakout" session after the YearlyKos candidates' forum. When Kossacks kicked up a fuss, a session was apparently hastily scheduled for before the forum; 3) These things are scheduled long in advance, as Alterman says. If she'd wanted to prevent a fundraiser/Kos conflict, she could have; 4) Just because candidates' have to raise money doesn't mean the standard critique of fatcat contributions--that the candidate then owes them-- doesn't apply. And there are plenty of fatcats I'd rather have the Clintons indebted to than Ron Perelman. ... P.S.: Did Alterman really fork over $1,000 for cocktails at Perelman's? $4,600? Or did they invite him for free because of his easygoing personality and publicity-generating potential? .... 12:41 P.M. link

___________________________

Crankiest blogginghead of the week award goes to Matt Stoller of OpenLeft, who gets snip-snippy toward the end of this exchange with Conn Carroll. Some blame all the coffee. But Stoller seemed to be in a discernably pissy mood from the beginning, even though he struggles manfully to be cordial, which leads me to suspect a deeper external cause. ... 12:18 A.M.

___________________________

Friday, August 3, 2007

Bedless Blogger in Topless Hara: Luke Ford really doesn't have a bed. ... Note to Luke: Don't get one now! It's your trademark. ... P.S.: Also, now know how Ford broke the L.A. mayoral marital scandal--he got the story from L.A. Daily News reporter Tony Castro, whose editors had wimped out and spiked his report. ("They didn't think the story qualified as much more than glorified gossip. ... ") I thought only L.A. Times editors did that. ... 2:33 P.M.

___________________________

Arianna--Dramatic Before & After Photos: Getting glammer. Was it the move to the West or the move to the left? You make the call. ... 11:11 A.M.

___________________________

Thursday, August 2, 2007

Unless his veto is overridden, embattled New York Gov. Elliot Spitzer has seemingly saved his state's welfare reform from the Good Jobs Fallacy--the idea that it makes sense to tell welfare recipients to hold out for high-paying jobs ("aerospace engineers" and "chemists" are two of the professions mentioned)--before they have to go to work. Keeping recipients on the dole while they "train" for jobs they never get is a time-tested way of ... well, keeping recipients on the dole. ... New York Daily News' Bill Hammond makes the arguments against the bill; the New York Sun points out that under the current take-any-old-job philosophy, child poverty rates have dropped along with welfare caseloads. ... 3:54 P.M.

___________________________

To get the real anti-Laurie side of the Laurie David/Larry David story--not the sex part, but hypocrisy angle-- you have to go to the web site of the Martha's Vineyard Times and read the posts from "Jackie." ... There is a heartfelt haiku:

Built with size 12 shoes,
Trophy homes mean dirty feet:
Our carbon footprints.

P.S.: A pre-divorce defense of the Davids may be found here (scroll down). ...P.P.S.: Haiku is attributed to "Hal". ... 1:00 A.M.

___________________________

Wednesday, August 1, 2007

Nobody covers baseball like kausfiles: Last night I went to Dodger Stadium and saw Barry Bonds fail to run on a pop-fly that fell in for what should have been a double. Not inspiring. But a friend had some sound PR advice for Bonds. Retire now! Tonight. Before you break Aaron's record. That way you get good press for the rest of your life as the man who would have broken the record but chose not to. The way things are going, if you break the record you're going to get basically bad press for the rest of your life. ... Backfill: Several readers point out this idea has already been masticated by sports fans. See, e.g.., this Sally Jenkins column two weeks ago. ... 4:59 P.M. link

___________________________

It would indeed be an "earthquake"--a GOP-friendly earthquake--if Californians passed an initiative awarding its electoral votes by Congressional district rather than "winner take all." But they won't pass it. At least I don't see how it would have a prayer of passing in such a Democratic state. ... [via Influence Peddler] 4:52 P.M.

___________________________

Mirthala Salinas: Twisting slowly, slowly? ... 4:40 P.M.

___________________________

McCain's Hope--Turn His Back on the Press: A couple of weeks ago, Thomas Edsall wrote a piece on HuffiPo titled "Strategist's Agree: McCain's Only Option is to Turn His Back on Bush." According to Edsall

The only place left for McCain is to be the anti-Bush Republican.

Being the anti-Bush Republican would involve a) attacking Republicans for corruption and overspending, while b) arguing that in Iraq "Bush not only failed to win a winnable war, but that conditions in Iraq are so terrible that withdrawal is now the only reasonable alternative."

Hmm. Sounds as if McCain's only hope, according to the Huffington Post's analyst, is to start sounding a lot like Arianna Huffington. I'm not sure this is a promising way to win a Republican primary, even if the other Republicans split the Republican vote. And there's an alternative to turning against Bush. It's this: Turning against the media.

Republican primary voters don't much like the media, after all. They see reporters as hopelessly biased against the Iraq war and biased against Bush. Reporters were also hopelessly biased in favor of McCain--one reason Republican primary voters didn't much like him either. Or, rather, reporters were biased in his favor until he backed the war and embraced Bush. Now they're piling on the contempt and scorn--which gives McCain a double opportunity: he can bash the hated liberal press while casting himself as the embattled, principled defender of Republican policies even if it costs him his elite Washington friends.

McCain has a "rebellious persona," according to Edsall. I don't write good McCain, but what if he said something rebellious like this ...

"I know the liberal media. Heck, I was the darling of the liberal media. They're my friends, many of them. I like them. But I think I was only their friend as long as they thought I would undermine the President. When I defended the president, when I refused to surrender in Iraq and supported the surge that is only now bearing fruit--they turned on me like a pack of jackals. That's the way it is.

I could do no wrong before--when I blew my stack they said I was passionate, when I disagreed with them they said I was admirably principled. Now when I disagree with them they just say I'm wrong, I'm stubborn, I've lost. It's August and their idea of in-depth reporting is coming up with new ways of asking me when I'm going to give up my campaign. I think they're about to call in Jim Baker and Lee Hamilton to negotiate my withdrawal.

You know what? I don't care what they think. I like good press. I admit. But they can take a hike. I've made mistakes in this campaign--lots--but I'm going to say what I think. I'm not going to accept defeat in Iraq when victory is possible. And if Tim Russert and George Stephanopoulos don't like it, that's life. They're two votes. And they're ... there's a word for it. They're Democrats. I'm a Republican. I don't expect the Democratic media to love me. It was fun while it lasted. But the Democratic media isn't going to pick the Republican nominee."

I'm not saying I agree with these sentiments. After "comprehensive immigration reform" I'm certainly not for McCain. I'm saying the tactic has a good chance of working. McCain isn't running for the editorial board of the Huffington Post (yet). And in a Republican primary, media-bashing seems to hold out more promise than Iraq-bashing and Bush-bashing? ....

Wouldn't strategists agree? ...

P.S.: This is not my idea. I got it from a McCain-friendly friend. ...

P.P.S.: Emailer S.S. notes that "if there's anything the press loves more than a straight-talker, it's someone who bites the media's hand." So bashing the press would also get McCain ... good press! It's not win-win. It's win-win-win! ... 3:57 A.M. link

___________________________

Tuesday, July 31, 2007

What, Me Nanny? From Associated Press' Phillip Elliott:

MEREDITH, N.H. (AP) - Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani on Monday accused Democrats of favoring a controlling "nanny government" as he continued his bashing of the rival party.

Hmm. What mayor was it again who installed those hectoring recordings in New York cabs that kept telling you to buckle your seat belt? I forget his name. I think it's the same guy who cracked down on jaywalkers and street peddlers. ... 2:42 A.M. link

___________________________

Monday, July 30, 2007

Tom Snyder, R.I.P.: When my book came out in the early 1990s, I went on a highly ... er, selective media tour that included a stop at the Cahuenga Pass studio of Tom Snyder's radio show. For whatever reasons--Snyder understood what I was trying to do with the book, or he drew easily on his life experiences, or he was a warm personality or just a good questioner--it was the best interview I did. After a disastrous stillborn conversation with All Things Considered, it was heartening to know I could get on someone 's wavelength. Even if Snyder was faking it--especially if he was faking it--I'm grateful. But he didn't seem to be. ... 2:34 P.M.

___________________________

Doing Pinch's Job**: Emailer X has an idea for replacing the hated TimesSelect paywall while making Pinch Sulzberger's New York Times some extra money. X notes--as have many others-- that with TimesSelect Sulzberger is perversely giving away the paper's unique, expensive-to-create product (timely, authoritative reporting) while attempting to charge for its easily-imitated product (opinion). Instead, X says,

[H]ere is a proposal for The New York Times (and all other publications that have invested heavily in news gathering): charge for early access to your stories. I'm sitting here before bed on the West Coast, as I do most nights, reading tomorrow's paper and looking to get an early jump on the news. And I'm quite taken with the lead story about FBI Director Mueller's contradiction of Attorney General Gonazalez's Senate testimony. In fact, I might even pay for the privilege of doing so. Imagine if, instead of posting the full stories for all web users, before 6 a.m. Eastern (and 3 a.m. Pacific) -- though the best specific times are debatable -- only a stub like the one that now appears for non-TimesSelect members who click a link to an Op-Ed column appeared for non-members who browsed to stories that would appear in the next day's papers. The Times could become more aggressive about posting stories to the web as soon as they were ready the night they're closed -- but only fully viewable to those who paid a fee to be a member of this reverse form of TimesSelect.

... There are all sorts of people--not least, public relations executives, members of the media, bloggers who like to link to big news as soon as they can--who would probably see fit to fork over more than what TimesSelect now charges to get a few hours' jump on the next day's news. [E.A.]

Seems promising to me. If, as has been argued, TimesSelect is not really about creating a new revenue stream but rather about hanging on to high-paying print subscribers by offering them special Web access--well, print subscribers could get the early access for free with their subscriptions, just as they now get TimesSelect. .... The only problem I see is that Times reporters might see the service as offering competitors a chance to read their stories and match them before those stories are available to the general Web public. But the gist of Times reporters scoops will still be available instantly to all in short, "stub" form. NYT reporters will still get credit within the profession, the scoops will (presumably) still get mentioned on Drudge and discussed in blogs-- and everyone will be able to read them soon enough. ... If the paper really wants to surprise the competition it could hold any huge scoops until the actual, printed paper comes out--or just put them outside the "early access" pay wall in selected instances. ...

**--I know Emailer X. Emailer X is much smarter than Pinch Sulzberger. Trust me. ... 2:00 A.M. list

___________________________

Sneer O' the Day: Noam Scheiber in the NYT ...

For seven years, Democrats have faced a radical administration that operates in bad faith. Yet there was the Democratic Leadership Council, still arguing that teachers unions endanger the republic.

Hmm. Yes, Bush's Iraq war and his general approach to terrorism are more important than education. But I still think education is kind of important! Even more important maybe than, say, Bush's Social Security semi-privatization (misguided as it was). And I still think you can't reform public education without somehow beating back the teachers' unions. ... How about this--the DLC can stop talking about the teachers' unions when the Democratic candidates stop talking about No Child Left Behind. Deal? If one approach to reforming schools important enough to mention then the other is, no? ... P.S.: Here's a useful primer on what "Adequate Yearly Progress" means under NCLB, co-written by Eduwonk, who asks:

[D]id you know that in only five states do more than 8 in 10 students in any schools have to pass the state test* in order for the school to meet the goal? The median targets nationally are closer to 5 or 6 students in 10 having to pass the state test for the school to meet the state goal. Important context when all the hand wringing starts in August about how unrealistic this all is... [E.A.]

1:05 A.M. link

___________________________

Sunday, July 29, 2007

We don't kill no widows in these parts: Note to NYT's Andrew Adam Newman: That's my quote, buddy--which explains why Steven den Beste, to whom you attribute it, had those two little marks on either end.... P.S. This is the classic sort of error usually introduced by an editor trying to save space. Print editors do have to save space. But web editors don't. That's a major, unremarked virtue of blogs over newspapers when it comes to the newspaper's alleged unique selling proposition: accuracy. In fact, the need to fit copy to a limited space is a powerful error-creating machine in both dailies and magazines. Harried print editors compress, and get it wrong. Or they fool around trying to simplify attribution and get it wrong. Or they guiltlessly edit quotes within quotation marks and (by definition) get them wrong. ... In cyberspace,, if it takes one more line to get it right, you can take one more line. I haven't killed a widow in so long I've forgotten what it feels like. ... [You're just pissed off they gave your quote to den Beste, but to avoid seeming petty you had to dress it up with a Larger Point--ed Worked out well, I thought.]

P.S.--He'll be tasked with launching the new "Upward Failure" section: At least the LAT didn't just promote the unpopular editor who seems to have gratuitously killed a perfectly good Patrick Goldstein column last week, a column that might have upset the paper's beleaguered business side! Oh, wait. Meet Managing Editor Until Zell, John Montorio! ... 9:41 P.M. link

___________________________

Saturday, July 28, 2007

The Iowa Way! Tom Bevan on Bill Richardson:

I'm beginning to think Bill Richardson possesses some sort of Jedi-mind trick capability, which would explain not only why he's been able to convince vicious dictators to do his bidding but also why he continues to rise in the polls despite some sub par debate performances and an incoherent appearance on Meet the Press that might have derailed other candidates.

Richardson's latest knee-slapper was his assertion yesterday that Iowa is one of the Top 10 states in the country at risk of a terrorist attack.

Give him credit: It's not easy to invent a new way to pander to Iowans. ... But it's worth it because of the brilliant candidate-picking judgment the state's caucusers have shown over the years. ... Update: Iowa ex-governor Tom Vilsack criticizes Obama for criticizing Clinton. "It's not the Iowa way." The Iowa Way! What's the Iowa Way again? Oh, right--never be mean to another Democrat in a way that might reveal his or her flaws or ability to respond under fire! That way you can make an uninformed and disastrous gut choice at the last minute. ... 12:56 P.M.

___________________________

Friday, July 27, 2007

Another party I'm not invited to. And you aren't either: Vlogging fogey lashes out at ur-whippersnapper Ezra Klein, upon learning that Klein has created a private Townhouse-like email group where liberal bloggers and editors hash out issues before they let the public in on the discussion. ... P.S.: Yes, I have private email discussions too, and there are probably some advantages in having these talks in front of a group instead of one-on-one. (If, say, Sidney Blumenthal emails five leftish bloggers privately, all five might think they have an exclusive. If they compare notes, they won't.). But the innovative virtue of Web journalism, I've always thought, is that it makes the back and forth process of argument and investigation relatively transparent to everyone. If the Klein Klub succeeds, isn't there a threat that it will a) compromise independence, in part because participants will always worry if they are using something that should be kept private and will feel they owe the other members; b) will encourage groupthink, as everyone works out the tacit party line before presenting it to their sheeple-like readers; c) encourage propgandism (see (b)); and d) become the place where the real conversation happens, a conversation the non-elite public isn't privy to. ... P.P.S.: Who's in the Klein Klub? Have they published a list of names? The sheeple demand to know at least that! ... P.P.P.S.: Chait, I know you're in it. Who else? ... 3:55 P.M. link

___________________________

Did Lindsay Lohan really say, "I can't get in trouble. I'm a celebrity. I can do whatever the f**k I want." It seems too ... pure. 3:19 P.M.

___________________________

Thursday, July 26, 2007

"Anchor Baby Power": From La Voz de Aztlan. "These babies are destined to transform America. ... La Voz de Aztlan believes that the number is approximately 500,000 'Anchor Babies' born every year." ... Update: Readers from all sides suggest La Voz de Aztlan is a wacky fringe site. There is, for example, this odious page. But sometimes wacky fringe sites say things that are worth bringing into the open. ... More: The non-wacky pro-border-control Center for Immigration Studies estimates there were 383,000 births to illegal-alien mothers in 2002,
constituting 9.5 percent of all births in the country. ... 6:21 P.M.

___________________________

Conglomeration + Womanizing = Trouble! Will L.A. Mayor Villaraigosa hold up NBC-Universal's giant $3 billion development plan if it doesn't reinstate his honey at its Telemundo subsidiary? If NBC does take care of Mirthala Salinas, does that mean Villaraigosa owes the company? At last, some irresponsible bloggish speculation from the Los Angeles Times. ... P.S.: Much more irresponsible speculation here and here. ... Update: Womanizing = Traffic Congestion! Bill Bradley notes that while Villaraigosa was distracted by the Mirthala scandal, the state legislature cut $336 million in transit funds "earmarked for Los Angeles and imperiling the long-promised Expo Line to the Westside." Since the Mayor is planning a big increase in housing density in the city, lack of a rail line should make the traffic jams even more brutal than they currently are. [via LAO] ... 5:56 P.M.

___________________________

Missouri's Secretary of State is getting cute, mucking around with the wording of the proposed anti-preference Missouri Civil Rights Initiative to make it seem as unappealing as possible, John Rosenberg charges. ... Update: Press release from the anti-preference camp. ... 5:29 P.M.

___________________________

Margaret Carlson: "In fact, Obama is the only candidate who gets under Clinton's skin. ..." [via HuffPo] 3:43 P.M.

___________________________

Did Giuliani cut crime--or did the removal of lead from gasoline? A discussion, including why the last sentence of this WaPo piece gives the game away. ... 3:27 P.M.

___________________________

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Univision In the Tank? Looks like it. Eric Longabardi has what appear to be emails giving L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa the interview questions he's going to be asked days in advance. Maybe the title of the program, "Villaraigosa a su lado" ("Villaraigosa on your side") was a tipoff. ... Looks like another juicy story the L.A. Times didn't really want to get. They're in the business of killing stories these days, not publishing them, apparently. ... [Via Luke Ford.] .... 1:37 P.M. link

___________________________

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Luke Ford is promising big things. ... 4:46 P.M.

___________________________

First the LAT "wikitorial," now the historic CNN/YouTube historic debate ... Victims of the same obscene image? .... Or is the CNN story a hoax? I, for one, ain't checking it out. I hear these images are very disturbing. But CNN might want to take a look. ... Update: Hoax, says this site. ... 4:37 P.M. link

___________________________

Monday, July 23, 2007

Historic Historic CNN YouTube Historic Debate II: Ryan Sager has some afterthoughts. I agree that the Biden response to the gun-toting You-Tuber was revealing--it showed Biden lacks even moderately calibrated snap judgment--and it was revealing in a way that a) wouldn't have happened with a non-YouTube debate, in which the questioner most likely wouldn't have gotten past security, let alone the screeners, and b) reflected Biden's alleged fatal flaw (or one of his several alleged fatal flaws), namely his cringe-making, unhinged spontaneous reactions. (See also: "I think I probably have a much higher IQ than you do"). Sager goes off on the politics of the "gaffe":

Biden's obnoxious response when he insulted the gun owner toward the end as being nuts. It wasn't so much a personal gaffe as a moment that projected an ugly image of the Democratic Party as out of touch with rural voters and gun owners — big problems the party has been trying to overcome. He got a huge cheer from the audience, but that just compounded the problem.

P.S.: I don't agree with Sager that Hillary may have "put that term ["liberal"] entirely in the past." ... 8:40 P.M. link

___________________________

Historic Historic CNN YouTube Debate--Hello, Florida! Am I crazy or did Barack Obama just get suckered into saying that as President within a year he'd personally meet with Fidel Castro? .... Update: He did. And, bizarrely, his camp is not saying he misspoke. More: There's some backtracking here. ... 5:23 P.M.

____________________________

The doors of Tao Las Vegas are open to rich and poor alike: Here's Noah Tepperberg, owner of the nightclub at Tao Las Vegas, the "highest grossing independent restaurant" in the U.S.:

"We sell stratification, but we have an entry point for everyone — from retirees to 21-year-olds who have saved up to blow it out on their first trip to Vegas." [E.A.]

Are giant stratification-selling night clubs like Tao a threat to social equality? My tentative answer: not much. 1) It's only stratification for a night; 2) People don't take it that seriously; 3) Tepperberg does get some social equality points for having everyone under the same roof and for having a roof big enough to include them. ... The velvet rope outside any ordinary New York club seems more obnoxious. ... 1:53 A.M.

___________________________

Sunday, July 22, 2007

I always thought of L.A.'s Earl Ofari Hutchinson as an establishment-friendly, coalition-preserving PC type. I guess I was wrong--here he is on Mirthala Salinas, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's girlfriend, who may or may not lose her job next week:

Salinas is as much a victim of Tony's rapacious political and media egoism as she is a victim of her heart. Politics is a dirty business and the dirt and the business doesn't stop at the bedroom door. If a politician can lie, cheat and manipulate to scurry up the political career ladder, that same politician can lie, cheat and manipulate love. [E.A.]

P.S.: Some of the most rapacious and egoistic pols are the best leaders, of course. The question for voters regarding Villaraigosa is whether there's enough there there to justify tolerating his character flaws. (See this rare good George Skelton column.) Before we can make that judgment, we need a daily paper that actually wants to report what those flaws are. ... [via L.A. Observed] 10:50 P.M.

___________________________

Eat Your Heart Out, Greg Gutfeld: At last, the story on Laurie David's break-up. (The print edition has photos.) ... Looks like gossip columnist Cindy Adams was on target, although the last commenter on this site beat her to it. ... 10:25 P.M.

___________________________

Saturday, July 21, 2007

The LAT finally puts out another Villaraigosa-Salinas story--which focuses like a laser on the least interesting aspect of the scandal, the journalistic conflict of interest! Yes, that's why Angelenos are upset--because a Telemundo reporter might have compromised her objectivity. Someone call CJR! Mayor Sam's Joseph Mailander asks:

[W]hy is the future of the woman always the way a blown affair really pans out? The Times is really letting the man skate here by shifting all the scrutiny to the gal.

But, of course, the tedious conflict-of-interest angle is the only one to obtain the grudging stuff-shirt approval of Consigliere Rutten! ... What about the mayor's callous behavior toward his wife? (In New York City, that was enough to get Rudy Giuliani in trouble.) And did a lobbying firm executive really sell the mayor's honey a condo? Was it on the up and up or does someone now owe someone a favor? Was the mayor lying when he tried to stop the P.R. bleeding by denying he'd been fooling around with anyone other than Salinas? How stupid does he think voters are? Are California's top Latino pols--including but not necessarily limited to ex-Salinas-paramours such as Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez--some kind of secret male bonding-through-womanizing fraternity and what does that mean for the state? ... These are all more significant civic issues than the Agony of Telemundo. But the Times shouldn't need them to justify covering the main event here. Why aren't its readers allowed to simply want to know whom their mayor has been seeing? We know it's not his wife. ...

Update: Ford points out that, as a profile of Salinas, the LAT effort is dully uncritical. "She's an interesting, intelligent and scandalous woman. It takes The Los Angeles Times to produce a boring article on her." ... 1:50 P.M. link

Friday, July 20, 2007

Luke Ford on the sort of Villaraigosa story the L.A. Times might be doing if it was, you know, a newspaper. ... 7:11 P.M.

CNN/YouTube Hype of the Day:

"It's the equivalent of the networks broadcasting the Kennedy and Nixon debate in 1960," said [Kathleen Hall] Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania ... [E.A.]

Historic! In the same WaPo piece, CNN defends its decision to choose the video questions itself:

"As much as I wish we could use the voting method of YouTube, I just don't think it's realistic," [CNN Washington bureau chief David] Bohrman said. If the number of views determined the videos asked at the debate, then candidates could study the most-viewed videos and game the system, Bohrman explained.

This seems like a problem CNN could easily handle if it really wanted to. For example, the network could commit itself to running, say, 20 of the top 50 video questions, chosen at random. If a candidate could study all potential top-50 videos without going insane, maybe he or she should be president. ...

P.S.: It's also possible, as WaPo notes, to devise ways for viewers to rate videos that don't rely on "most-viewed" statistics, which probably skew too far toward funny-but-silly videos . But it wouldn't be the end of the world if they had to answer one asking "if Arnold Schwarzenegger is a cyborg." ...

P.P.S.: I was booked last week for a CNN/YouTube pre-debate hype special today, but yesterday the producer called, said "we need to trim a bit," and un-booked me. It's not at all uncommon to get bounced from shows, so for all I know they needed to trim a bit. ... 2:55 A.M. link

Thursday, July 19, 2007

Hmm. I'm an air-paranoid, and maybe the experts have learned something about asbestos exposure since 1989, but it was troubling to come across this quote from a NYT story about the asbestos-spewing steam pipe explosion in Gramercy Park in that year:

Even one day's exposure to fibers in the air can increase the risk of lung cancer, said Dr. Irving Selikoff of New York's Mount Sinai School of Medicine, and ''one week of exposure is enough to more than double the lung cancer risk.''

Are we sure that, "For any commuters caught in Wednesday's blast, though, the health risk was essentially zero"? ... 3:27 P.M.

Will TimesSelect Go Jane? Is the infamous NYT TimesSelect paywall about to disappear? kf hears rumblings that the paper is about to abandon the whole misconceived project in which it has blocked unpaid Web access to its op-ed columnists. ... P.S.: The Times claims fewer than 225,000 customers pay the $49.95 TimesSelect fee, up less than 100,000 from what the paper was claiming in November, 2005. More get the service through their regular subscriptions. Meanwhile, the Times could use the ad revenue that would come from increasing the readership of the columnists (by making them free). And the columnists would like to have the readers. ... All this was quite evident two years ago when Pinch Sulzberger embarked on this folly, of course. ....

Update: Denials don't get much weaker than NYT spokesperson Catherine Mathis' to the NY Post's Keith Kelly:

"While TimesSelect is very popular and we have certainly met and exceeded our goals since it began in 2005, we continue to evaluate the best approach to our business."

Note: That's not a 'non-denial denial.' There is no denial. It's a non-non-denial-denial non-denial. ... 3:23 P.M. link

E.U.Z. (Editor Until Zell): My impression is that John Montorio's tenure as features editor at the L.A. Times has not been considered a rousing success. The relaunched West Magazine comes in for particular criticism. Is Times #1 E.U.Z. Jim O'Shea really about to promote Montorio to Managing Editor, the paper's #2? That's what I hear. ... At least pompous media critic Tim Rutten isn't Montorio's consigliere! Oh, wait. ... 3:44 A.M.

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

I don't get Rufus Wainwright. What's he whining about? 8:47 P.M.

Someone failed to quit the McCain campaign yesterday. 6:30 P.M.

Karen Hicks must be some kind of "field operative." She's getting paid $66,000 a quarter from Hillary's campaign, according to Politico's Ben Smith. That's a rate of $266,000 a year. ... P.S.: But she's no Laurel Touby. ... 1:42 P.M.

Luke Ford, Eric Longabardi, and Ana Garcia keep the VillarSalinas scandal alive--a skill the L.A. Times has never really learned. 2:22 A.M.

Mort is Deadly: Gawker's Alex Balk on New York Daily News owner Mort Zuckerman, profiled in the current New Yorker:

It's telling that Zuckerman only seems interesting in the pages of the New York Post, which has a vested interest in making its rival look bad.

1:53 A.M. link

Monday, July 16, 2007

Is CNN blowing it? Next Monday, CNN will hold the first of two "CNN/YouTube" debates. It "will feature video questions submitted to YouTube which will be broadcast and answered" by the Democratic candidates for president.

"YouTube enables voters and candidates to communicate in a way that simply was not possible during the last election," said Chad Hurley, CEO and co-founder of YouTube. ...

"These debates take the bold step of embracing the ever-increasing role of the Internet in politics," Jim Walton, CNN Worldwide president.

Yeah, yeah. But the CNN debate, as currently planned, completely misses what's so innovative and subversive about YouTube--namely the ability of average citizens to put political messages before millions of potential voters without the approval of MSM gatekeepers. Who decided that "Obama Girl" would be a huge hit? Nobody. Or, rather, the cumulative decisions of hundreds of thousands of You Tube users. The choice was largely out of the hands of those who traditionally decide what voters get to hear about candidates: editors of daily newspapers, producers of nightly newscasts, professional campaign consultants. The phenomenon rightly alarms the consultants, at least, who now have to worry that a popular amateur video could rise up and bite them at any moment. (See Edwards, John, "Feeling Pretty.") It's all too ... uncontrolled.

So who will decide which 30-second YouTube "video questions" get broadcast on Monday?

CNN will produce the televised events and will select the questions used in the debates. [E.A.]

Kind of misses the point, doesn't it? Instead of being spontaneously and uncontrollably selected by Web democracy, the YouTube questions will be safely filtered through the predictable, respectable sensibilities of CNN editors. They'll be not much different from the queries traditionally sent to the front of the room on index cards--just in video form. Sure, the questions will be asked by "voters from around the country," but debates have been accepting (filtered) email questions for years, no?

You can view the three video questions CNN's editors have already chosen as samples. They're safe and easily answered queries about discrete issues--glorified index cards.** It looks like a long evening.

It's not too late for CNN to save its "unprecedented" format. The debate is a week away. Post all the competing videos on YouTube tomorrow afternoon in a way that easily lets viewers pick the most popular, and commit CNN to broadcast, say, 20 questions from the top 40 submissions at random. No gatekeeping. (There are presumably technical tricks to filter out ballot-box-stuffing by various campaigns, some of which are already trying to gin up submissions. If that can't be done, go with the viewer's selections anyway. Let's see the stuff the ballot-box-stuffers stuff. The ballot-stuffing competition would itself help build excitement.)

A no-gatekeeper format really would be unprecedented, and will terrify the candidates. Politicians know the sorts of questions CNN editors pick. They can handle those questions. But who knows what an army of partisan geeks in their basements will select? Even if the questions aren't penetrating in themselves, we'll get to see the candidates react to unpredictable events, which will be revealing even if the questions themselves are stupid.

Anderson Cooper can always ask follow-up questions and calm things down. He's good at that.

**--One of the sample videos is mildly obnoxious in a way that would make a CNN editor think it has "attitude." Not a virtue. ... 2:45 P.M. link

An Al-Qaida cell in Hollywood? 2:58 A.M.

kf--Still Solution-Oriented! PoliPundit reports on an email from Roy Beck of Numbers USA on a possible incremental, enforcement-only immigration initiative:

I can tell you from the last six days of our meetings with several Democratic Members of the House, with a number of their Republican counterparts, with fellow advocacy groups and with top Senate GOP staffers, there is very strong growing sentiment that it is time to remove the jobs magnet for illegal immigration.

The overwhelming favorite appears to be to make the "Basic Pilot" electronic workplace verification system mandatory for all businesses with contracts with the federal government.

Basic Pilot has problems--it catches illegal workers using fake Social Security numbers, but not necessarily illegal workers who've falsely adopted the identity of real people with real Social Security numbers. Swift meatpacking company participates in Basic Pilot, yet when federal authorities raided Swift plants last year about 10 percent of the work force was arrested on immigration violations.

But all employee-verification schemes seem to have holes in them--even a "biometric" national I.D. wouldn't necessarily stop someone from falsely obtaining a biometric card by claiming they were someone else (and producing fake papers to that effect). You would think a) Basic Pilot at least raises the cost of falsely applying for work, thereby discouraging it and weakening the "jobs magnet" for illegals; and b) if enough illegal job applicants had to resort to identity theft, it would impact so many people that mechanisms would be created to inhibit it. (Why not routinely contact people whose Social Security number might have been stolen, as flagged by a computer the same way a computer flags possible phony credit card purchses--for example, because two people are using the same number, or because it's being used in what looks like the wrong city, etc.?) Requiring the Basic Pilot system for all new hires seems a reasonable--and bipartisan--place to start. ... .

P.S.: I don't know enough about Beck to know whether his email, in an attempt to rev up his troops, exaggerates the prospects for passing a Basic Pilot mandate. I do know his organization was highly effective in this year's immgration debate. Robert Pear says so. ...

P.P.S.: Note the sneering quote about Beck from pro-comprehensive lobbyist Frank Sharry, whose clock Beck cleaned:

"Roy Beck takes people who are upset about illegal immigration for different reasons, including hostility to Latino immigrants, and disciplines them so their message is based on policy rather than race-based arguments or xenophobia."

Translation: 'My opponents are bigots.' That tactic worked so well against welfare reform. And against Ward Connerly's anti-race-preference initiatives. I urge Sharry to stick with it. ... [via Krikorian]. 2:29 A.M.

Limits of Judicial Government, Part XVIII: Since the L.A. Police Department has been operating under a "consent decree" requiring investigation of offical use of force, the number of shootings by the cops has perversely gone up, says Robert C.J. Parry in the L.A. Daily News. Parry's explanation--that veteran, experienced officers have fled the department, leaving nervous rookies--seems plausible, but isn't exactly nailed down. ... [via Mayor Sam] 1:46 A.M.

Note to Arianna: Does McCain's support of the Iraq war really account for his "cratering" ranking among Republican primary voters? May I suggest that another "I" issue played a more significant role. ... 12:43 A.M.

Sunday, July 15, 2007

Army of Farinas: I wouldn't claim that the political ads made by unofficial lone amateur YouTube propagandists are better than the ads made by professionals.** But unofficial designs for the rumored Ferrari Dino from lone, amateur auto stylists--one Turkish, one Portuguese--are almost certainly better than any design Ferrari will actually produce, judging from its recent products. ... [via Autoblog]

**--This doesn't mean they don't have an impact. See this Pew survey. ... 1:53 A.M. link

Thursday, July 12, 2007

L.A. Times--Scooped again? ... 10:15 P.M.

Army of Shrums Update: On reflection, homemade YouTube ads seem more potentially subversive than I originally thought. I try to explain here. ... Not only do these amateur ads seem to evade the campaign finance laws, they seem to undermine the whole assumption of those laws, which is that candidates with more money enjoy a proportional advantage. No they won't--at least if they're typically undone by whichever catchy,15-second spot cooked up by a teenager on blogspot gains the most viral exposure (by being re-shown on the TV news in addition to being viewed on the Web). The outcome of a true YouTube election will be more random--but, arguably, more substance-related. ... To Be Sure: I'm not saying we're already past the time when races get determined by what Bob Shrum and Roger Ailes, or their successors, spend donors' millions to tell voters. But that's the direction, no? ... 7:44 P.M.

I realized what's wrong with celebrated L.A. Times auto columnist Dan Neil when I came to the point in a recent road test where he describes the Scion tC--a depressing mash of mainstream design cliches, the Maison de La Casa House of cars--as "beautifully styled." Decide for yourself. Or take it from me: he has schlocky taste. ... 3:31 P.M.

The Strange Case of the Diamond Dildo: It's just like porn-centric lone L..A. blogger Luke Ford, writing about new arrival David Beckham, to recklessly report:

On another occasion, while Victoria was expecting their third child, Beckham spent $1.8 million for a diamond-encrusted sex toy with matching 16-carat diamond necklace. [E.A.]

Too good to check--and bloggers don't have to check, do they? It turns out Mrs. Beckham has now denied the tidbit:

"It isn't true," Victoria said, her voice calm and measured. "We do buy each other nice things," she admitted, but some things get exaggerated. "I don't have a diamond-encrusted vibrator."

Indeed, a quick NEXIS search brings up a lot of stories citing a man who was selling $1.8 million diamond-encrusted vibrators speculating that Beckham was thinking about buying one. Anyone with any professional journalistic experience would view with suspicion subsequent reports that might have Beckham actually purchasing the thing.

Maybe pompous L.A.Times media critic Tim Rutten had a point about those "gossip sheets, whether online or on slick paper, that continue to proliferate like informational vermin." The Pulitzer-winning Times would never . ... Hello? What? Really? The bogus Becks vibrator story didn't appear in Luke Ford's blog at all? It appeared ...well, here. ... P.S.: And it hasn't been corrected. ... [via Steve Smith] 1:15 A.M.

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

According to L.A. Observed, Mayor Villaraigosa appears to have drawn a line around Mirthala Salinas and put his credibility, if not his career, on it:

At today's photo op du jour, he flatly denied that there have been any other women in his recent past — "a definitive, absolute no."

The mayor's language is echoed in this local ABC TV report. The LAT, with its traditional flair for the telling detail, truncates it to "no." ... 6:13 P.M.

He Helped Build Pottersville: The only actor in our family--my grandmother's cousin, Charles Lane--passed away Monday at the age of 102. He was a great character who had a fantastic career as a character actor, although the two characters did not always coincide. (Unlike some of his screen and stage personalities, he was a kind and non-unconsciously funny man.) I guess he couldn't live forever.--but he made it close! Here's a nice LAT obituary. ... As Kevin Roderick notes, Charlie lived through the San Francisco earthquake of 1906. ... 12:30 A.M.

Monday, July 9, 2007

Only the most respectable, noble-minded political analysts get to call people who disagree with them 'cowards.' ... 7:26 P.M.

You Connect the Dots! I tried this before, and it all came crashing down. But now there are two more dots!

Dot 1: Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta report in their recent book that Hillary Clinton personally

listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of Clinton critics plotting their next attack. The tape contained discussions of another woman who might surface with allegations about an affair with Bill. Bill's supporters monitored frequencies used by cell phones, and the tape was made during one of those monitoring sessions.

Dot 2: Tina Brown's new Diana Chronicles contains this passage, supporting reports that Princess Di was thinking of marrying U.S. tycoon Ted Forstmann as part of a possible presidential ticket:

Diana built an escape fantasy around Forstmann for a time. "It's a true story," he told me, "that Diana had the idea that we should get married, that I should run for president and she would be First Lady."

Dot 3: Forstmann was in fact seriously mentioned as a Republican opponent for Hillary in the 2000 N.Y. Senate race.

Dot 4: Both Diana (according to Tina Brown) and Forstmann (according to the New York Daily News**) thought they were being bugged.

Dot 5: A British paper reported that Diana and Forstmann and Diana were bugged by some American outfit during the Clinton administration, although the official Lord Stevens inquiry failed to include this allegation despite press predictions that it would. (See also this account, which doesn't mention Forstmann but does claim Diana was bugged by Americans.)

Emphasis added.

**--Dec 12, 2006 Daily News story not online, but it's on NEXIS. 7:03 P.M. link

Is that vaunted "virtual fence" on the border vulnerable to "denial of service" attacks? Yes, it is at the moment. Influence Peddler comments. ... 2:19 P.M.

The lid is off: L.A.'s mayor faces some N.Y. tabloid-style questioning at a news conference. The L.A. Times reporter who didn't get the story doesn't know quite what to make of this new state of affairs--I detect a mild sneering tone! Luke Ford sees a "beautiful synchronicity." ... I think Angelenos may be actually getting interested in local politics for once, which will give us better government in the long run. Special interests (e.g., unions, developers) have less power when people are actually paying attention. [What will happen if all the pols in power are no longer womanizers, etc.?--ed Not a serious possibility.] ... 1:43 P.M.

Bob Wright diavlogs with my brother Steve on bloggingheads.tv (about Scooter Libby and Barry Bonds, among others) and at the end tries to extract dirt from him on me. Ha! After one lucky question, Wright gets a schooling in the concept of omerta. ... 1:37 A.M.

Sunday, July 8, 2007

Wasn't Jacqueline Bouvier kind of a "trophy wife"? Just asking! ... [via Powerline] 11:28 P.M.

Web 1, Downie 0? I was hoping to be able to violate at least one of Slate-owner WaPo's "Ten Principles for Washington Post Journalism on the Web"--but it turns out that's not easy to do. Take Principle #7:

We recognize and support the central role of opinion, personality and reader-generated content on the Web. But reporters and editors should not express personal opinions unless they would be allowed in the newspaper, such as in criticism or columns.

What opinions would not "be allowed in ... criticism or columns"?** This is a decisively permissive standard, no? A reporter could blog "Bush lied, people died" or "Hillary scares the daylights out of me." Len Downie could even tell Web readers for whom he might vote if he slipped up and actually thought about voting. ... P.S.: In fact, #7 doesn't sit very comfortably alongside Downie's earlier monastic ban on activities that might "seem" to compromise a reporter's ability to report fairly. If you denounce Obama, op-ed style, mightn't that "seem" to be compromising to many readers? ... [via Romenesko] 11:18 P.M.

The New York Times is for withdrawal of U.S. troops from most of Iraq, except maybe the Kurdish north. Even the promising Anbar-type initiatives--which seem to require an aggressive U.S. military presence--are apparently to be abandoned. The Times admits the result of the withdrawal will "most likely" be chaos, including "further ethnic cleansing, even genocide." But it still prefers withdrawal.