CSPAN Caller: Dems really in power last 6 years.

Comment on C-SPAN from a caller: "Democrats have been in power whether you realize it or not."

The caller started off saying she and many Republicans like her had stayed home to send the Republicans the message that they hadn't taken the fight to the Democrats enough. The Dems, the caller said, are responsible to obstructing the Republican's efforts.

The call came on National Journal during an interview with Richard Baker, a senate historian.

- Murphy

Realignment?

John Judis of the New Republic offers an interesting analysis of how the Democrats won back Congress. The critical term is…independents (surprise!).

An illustrative excerpt:

But Democrats also won in a host of districts and states that George W. Bush carried in the last election. In some cases, Democrats won primarily because the seat had been held by a Republican implicated in a personal or political scandal. But, in many others, Democrats benefited from the reemergence of political trends that had been suppressed after September 11--or, even before that, by Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky. The most important of these trends involves independents.…In the 1980s, these voters generally supported Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush; but, in 1992, many of them abandoned Bush for Ross Perot, who received 18.9 percent of the national vote.…In 1996, Clinton and the Democrats won back many of these voters, but, after September 11, they gravitated toward the Republican Party, helping to account for Republican success in 2002 and 2004. In this election, however, independents flocked back to the Democrats. Nationally, the Democrats won independents by 57 percent to 39 percent. In the East, the margin was 63 to 33 percent; in the Midwest, 56 to 41 percent; and, in the West, 58 to 35 percent. Democrats also did well in many of those Western and Midwestern states where Perot had won over 20 percent of the vote in 1992: Arizona, Colorado, Kansas (where the Democrats won two of four House seats and the top state offices), Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

If Judis is correct, Republican strategist Karl Rove's promise of the ever-lasting Republican majority was impossible all along. The growing number of self-identified independents would always contribute enough turbulence to keep a permanent majority out of anyone's reach.

Already a great deal of fun has been had reflecting on the "genius" of Rove who, according to President Bush in his less-than conciliatory press conference the day after the election, was not working as hard on the campaign as the President.

As Judis described, many independents came to the Republicans following 9/11. That rally and the desire for stability and continuity contributed greatly to Republican success in the 2004 election. The Iraq war was still young and it dominated the environment. Criticism was mounting, but the momentum was greater.

This time, the costs have surpassed the benefits for most Americans. Once dissatisfaction with the war reached a tipping point, dissatisfaction in other areas such as the economy added the straw.

An additional point that Judis makes very well, is that this election represents a step in the final realignment that became brightly visible in 1994 with the Republican takeover of the South.

- Murphy

The truth, my friend, may not always set you free...

There is a story of journalistic courage that will hopefully re-spark the debate over the role of journalism and the protection of sources, a debate that is stained following the circus over the CIA leak investigation.

The two San Francisco Chronicle reporters who kicked in the door to slugger Barry Bond's skeleton closet are now facing 18 months in jail for mining exactly the same vein the San Francisco prosecutor later dug into.

- Murphy

Not quite Famous

Macy's is running commercials in St. Louis. They integrate Eero Saarinen's Arch in the commercials, but still have a "we're not based in St. Louis" feel.

- Murphy

How are they doing...

Former Slate columnist Eric Umansky examines the ebb and flow of journalistic coverage of the Bush Administration's tactics in prosecuting its foreign policy.

Reporters and news organizations deserve enormous credit for exposing the abuse and torture of detainees during the U.S. war on terror, more than other institutions or individuals. Without Carlotta Gall, The New Yorker’s Seymour Hersh, The Washington Post’s Dana Priest, and many other reporters, we might well never have learned of the abuse and torture that have occurred in Afghanistan, Abu Ghraib, and elsewhere.
…
What is true and what is significant are two different matters. Everybody agrees that journalists are supposed to ascertain the truth. As for deciding what is significant, reporters and editors make that judgment, too, all the time — what story leads on the front page, or gets played inside, what story gets followed up. And when it comes to very sensitive material, like torture, many journalists would prefer to rely on others to be the first to decide that something is significant. To do otherwise would mean sticking your neck out.

Umansky describes, with great detail, the various investigations and reports that have helped uncover methods and practices that seem to defy U.S. and international law. It also tells some compelling stories of how these issues finally see the light of day.

- Murphy

"I'm Out!"

Iraqi leader Ayatollah al-Sistani has thrown up his hands and is on his way out of Iraqi politics. Up, until recently, Sistani has been widely viewed as a moderating force. The increasing sectarian violence combined with little trust in the "official" enforcement, police and army, has splintered the remaining middle ground.

- Murphy

Inside voices

Great piece in Newsweek by Fareed Zakaria.

One man who is greatly enjoying being the subject of this outsize portraiture is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He has gone from being an obscure and not-so-powerful politician—Iran is a theocracy, remember, so the mullahs are ultimately in control—to a central player in the Middle East simply by goading the United States and watching Washington take the bait. By turning him into enemy No. 1, by reacting to every outlandish statement he makes, the Bush administration has given him far more attention than he deserves.

As Zakaria and others have pointed out, making international statements for the benefit of domestic approval is usually a recipe for disaster. President Bush and many of the leaders of antagonistic states exhibit a rhetorical similarity, a similarity that would be loudly denounced if it were ever brooked in the press.

- Murphy

"You can't be untouchable, but you can be undefeated".

Over at Slate magazine, William Saletan summed up exactly what I have been trying to say for quite a while now.

In a liquid world, you can't seal off evil. All you can do is fight liquid with liquid. You have to absorb the tragedy, flowing around and through it. You need the strength of a river, not a rock. You need resilience. You can't be untouchable, but you can be undefeated.

You can skip the duct-tape, a crack team of investigators and a realistic view of the world will better serve you.

Lean times?

The threat of a recession hastened by the tipping of the housing market has again been raised. I have heard this time and again for several years as the household savings rate dropped into the red and housing prices headed for the sky.

"Refinance this, refinance that; can't afford it? Just refinance!"

With so much of the economy dependent on consumption and so many of the consumers financing their contributions to the economy with credit and mortgages, when creditors come calling it will not be a pleasant visit.

Liberman's Challenge

Connecticut journalist and commentator Colin McEnroe explains what the national media seem unable to get. It's not the liberal wing of the Democratic Party driving opposing Lieberman, it's the Connecticut voters that have supported him lo these many years.

The New York Times and other national media outlets are right that the Iraq war -- this deeply unpopular, catastrophic adventure -- is what finally made the natives brave enough to act, and what may have ended Joe Lieberman's tenure as a senator. But people in Connecticut know the war was only the tipping point. They have long memories of everything that came before.

(Via Atrios)