|link| Posted 6:46 PM by Brian Linse

Selected Schaivo Thoughts

Just a quick post to direct you to some recent writings on the Schiavo matter. Don't miss:

Voice Of Reason with a clear and thoughtful overview. Found via a trip to Samizdata, even though the guy who wrote the post is sleeping upstairs in my guest room but was too busy to tell me about it over our morning coffee. Check out Perry's post at the above link and marvel at the ignorant and horrifying comments. This one really has brought out the nutjobs.

Paul Krugman [via John Cole]. John seems to think that Krug is a bit OTT, but I think he's spot on.

Robert Freedman has come up with "Bobby's Law". It says it all, really. [via Atrios]

|link| Posted 11:57 PM by Brian Linse

Conservos in Conflict?

Here's a New York Times article by Adam Nagourney that indicates that the internal conflict between "social conservatives" and "process conservatives" has been heightened by the Schiavo case.

The Republican Party has long associated itself with limiting the power of the federal government over the states, though this is not the only time that party leaders have veered from that position. Most famously, in 2000, it persuaded the Supreme Court to overturn a Florida court ruling ordering a recount of the vote in the presidential election between Al Gore and George Bush.

Let's say, for argument's sake, that DeLay and the Republicans knew what they were doing with this stunt, and that they never expected the Federal court system to overturn Florida rulings. Assuming that they wiped their butts with the Constitution just to make points with the pro-life religious base, will they have achieved their goals - including a rallying of the "socials" against the "procedurals" within their own party - to a greater degree if Terri Schiavo is not returned to artificial life support?

I hate to say it, but I think they will get exactly what they want out of this, including the "cherry on top" of yet another means of demonizing the existing Federal Judiciary. Let us not forget that beyond this one tragic woman's case is the far more pressing goal of the religious Right to continue to remake the Federal Judiciary all the way up to the US Supreme Court.

UPDATE: Mark Kleiman wants to know why Congress didn't just mandate a TRO. He informs that the original draft of the bill did so, but that it was watered down and then flushed out in negotiations between Frist and Levin. I think his speculations fit in with what I wrote in the above post. These guys knew what they were doing. If it was really "about Terri" they would have pooped out a bill that required a temporary reinsertion of her tube.

Mo' UPDATE: Garance Franke-Ruta over at TAPPED is thinking along the same lines. [via Joe Gandelman]

|link| Posted 8:17 PM by Brian Linse

CNN Presents: Your Liberal Media

Media Matters has a truly pathetic attempt by someone at CNN.com to exaggerate the poll results on partisan attitude regarding the Schiavo case. I wish I could find some "Liberal" mainstream media these days...

|link| Posted 12:13 AM by Brian Linse

John Cole on the Schiavo Circus

John Cole's Balloon Juice is a place that anyone interested in the horrifying spectacle of the Terri Schiavo case should visit. Start here, and work your way to his most recent post.

John is getting a taste of the blind mania that the religious Right is capable of unleashing and he's not enjoying it. He fears for his beloved Republican Party, and he should. This is part of the price we all will be paying for the assist that the religious Right gave Karl Rove and Bush in the last election.

Remember when so many bloggers, particularly liberal "war voters" who switched to Bush for '04, were writing off the whole Jesusland meme? They ain't saying much about this fiasco now, are they? Of the guys I follow, only Michael Totten has posted his thoughts, but he seems unaware of the fact that this is a perfectly expected collateral cost of re-electing Bush. This is just the beginning, Mike. Wait until we get to the crux of the judicial nominations biscuit. That's where these religious Right fanatics are really expecting payback.

Cole represents the wing of the Republican party that still stands for conservative ideals like Federalism and State's rights, and for the common decency of privacy rights that every American should be able to count on.

How odd that conservatives like Cole are getting more back up from "liberals" than from their own Republican establishment. Though, it must be pointed out as well that a significant number of cowards currently occupying Dem seats have failed to stand up for the Constitution.

In a recent post, John seems to think that the feedback he's been getting from his readers indicates that he has lost many of them. As I said in his comment section, if they can be lost over this, they aren't worth keeping.

I urge everyone reading this post, and especially my fellow liberals, to make John's Balloon Juice a regular part of your blog surfing.

Other Schiavo Links: FindLaw's Writ, Orin Kerr of the Volokh Conspiracy, Jesse Taylor - twice, Majikthese's Schiavo Blogswarm, Roy Edroso, Tbogg, James Wolcott, Digby here - here- and here, and Talk Left - twice (and one to keep watching).

And: Dahlia Lithwick's column in Slate is a must-read, as is Will Saletan's, while Samizdata has the pure Libertarian take but the normally sharp Jim Henley is way off the reservation.

|link| Posted 2:52 PM by Brian Linse

Questions Answered

My pal Mickey Kaus wants to know what the difference is between Armstrong Williams's media whoring and a situation over at American Prospect that the always objective folks at the New York Post and Tech Central Station are covering.

Seems that the American Prospect published some foundation-sponsored specials and failed to disclose that the first one, covering campaign fiance reform, was paid for by a foundation grant.

Mickey seems to see this in the same light as the series of scandals involving the Bush Administration paying journalists like Armstrong Williams to shill, undisclosed, for administration-favored programs.

The difference, Mickey? It's the government.

I haven't looked into this much beyond the posts linked here, but it seems that non-profit foundations spend a lot of money promoting their agendas... Isn't that what they are set up to do? Mickey seems to feel that if a profit-seeking corporation like GM were to pay the profit-seeking (yet, ideally objective) NYT to publish a piece that it would be the same as the non-profit Carnegie Corporation issuing a grant to a magazine with an open political agenda like The American Prospect.

I am not arguing that there is not a real issue here with regard to sponsored media, but Mickey's blending of this question with the entirely separate issue of government manipulation of the media is wrong. He is in effect saying that, yeah, this Armstrong Williams stuff was bad, but look at what these liberals are doing! It's the same!

It's not the same.

Perhaps there is a problem with foundation sponsorship of media, but would the activities of folks like the Heritage Foundation hold up any better? I doubt it. Perhaps Mickey could take some time off from his patented lefty-bashing to check it out.

UPDATE: Glenn Reynolds agrees with Mickey. You sure about that, Glenn...?
Mo' UPDATE: Yeah, he's sure. Glenn says payola is payola to the reader. I'd agree in terms of the need to disclose in all such circumstances, but the difference between non-profit foundations pushing an agenda through media grants and the US government pushing an agenda through direct payments to journalists/pundits still strikes me as quite profound.

|link| Posted 5:53 PM by Brian Linse

British Invasion

Agents of Samizdata.net and The Big Blog Company have invaded Los Angeles in an effort to establish a North American beach head. In the midst of their whirlwind month of meetings and subversive activities, Perry De H. and Jackie D. took over Casa BadDude Friday night to throw a blog-type bash for LA friends and associates. It was, not surprisingly, an eclectic and fascinating crowd. We present here some of the photographic evidence:


Professor Eugene Volokh of The Volokh Conspiracy with Jackie of Samizdata, tBBC, and The Hole.


Bijan Tehrani, Editor in Chief of Digital Journal Online, with Perry.


Richard Rushfield of Vanity Fair and LA Innuendo with Emmanuelle Richard.


Matt Welch, Eugene Volokh, and Karate-man Mickey Kaus.


Brian with one of his favorite Lefties, Arianna Huffington...


... and with one of his favorite Righties, Cathy Seipp.


Rob Barrett of LATimes.com, journalist and novelist Ruth Shalit, and Professor Volokh.


Somehow, Perry kept turning up with the many beautiful women in attendance. Here, caught with Amy Alkon of Advice Goddess.


Matt Welch, Amy Alkon, and prodigal blogger Howard Owens.


Jeffrey Wells of Hollywood Elsewhere with Perry.


Brian with an old friend, political activist Donna Bojarsky.


Amy Alkon, Brian, and Pat Saperstein of Daily Variety and Eating LA.


Perry with filmmaker Peter Stuart and Drudge Report's Andrew Breitbart.

For other posts on the party see: Samizdata, The Hole, Cathy's World, and Howard Owens.