Month: August 2004

So Kerry is shuffling the deck chairs a bit, adding former Clinton spokesperson Joe Lockhart, among others, to his campaign Dream Team.
Joe Lockhart?
Let’s be serious: can anyone actually imagine Kerry, or his senior advisors, suddenly interrupting a staff meeting to declare: “We’re screwed! Get Joe Lockhart on the horn — he’s the only one who can save our asses!”
I don’t think so. Joe’s a nice guy and all, but a Rove-like Svengali he ain’t. Flacking for Oracle might be heavy on the dukats, but it isn’t exactly the political big leagues.
But forget Joe for a moment (who?). The even worse news for Kerry is that despite the exceptional job his campaign has been doing at executing political hari-kari, the Bush team hasn’t even started to attack him yet. All the damage thus far has been self-inflicted, or at the hands of the Swift Vets (also arguably self-inflicted, allowing that karma sometimes takes a while to come around — but it does come around). And don’t give me any nonsense about how Bush is behind the Swifties; these guys have hated Kerry’s guts for thirty years, and they show every intention of hating him for thirty more.
No, Kerry’s recent Swift-Vet-driven collapse is the political equivalent of a boxer being clocked by a random spectator on his way to the ring. (OK, a not-quite random spectator, more like one who’s been nursing a 30-year grudge). Somewhere, Karl Rove is sitting in quiet misery, gloomily considering the prospect that by the time he’s allowed to open up on Kerry with the big guns, the poor sod may have already self-destructed. Takes all the fun out of it.
So Kerry, fading in the polls, disliked by the electorate, faces the unappealing prospect of not only the traditional post-convention bounce for Bush, but that the true campaign hasn’t even started yet. Who knows what surprises Rove & Co. have in store for the hapless Senator? All we can know for sure is that they’ve got some, and they’re unlikely to be of the pleasant sort.
I think it’s going to be a rough September, Senator…

I’m pleased to announce the public launch of a new project: Campaign Truth 2004!
The intent of Campaign Truth is to provide a portal where bloggers and other interested folk can gather links to information which sheds light on where the candidates stand on issues in the 2004 Presidential Campaign. By harnessing the collaborative power of bloggers that has been proven by sites such as The Command Post and by the influence of the blogosphere itself, Campaign Truth will provide a place where voters can come to get past the story-of-the-moment in the media, and dig deep into candidates’ true positions on the issues that matter to them most.
The site is now live and open to the public, but is extremely light on actual content. That’s where you come in! I’m putting out a call for assistance to any and all interested bloggers and blog-readers who would like to contribute. It’s easy: just post comments on the relevant topic entry for the candidate you’ve found info on, and the information will be periodically rolled up into the body of the page by the editors (well, editor: at the moment, it’s just me.)
For more information, see the FAQ, or just drop me a line.
The site is an evolving work in progress, so suggestions, comments, and feedback are very much welcome.
I hope you’ll all join me in this effort to bring a focus on substance to the 2004 campaign. Because as the banner says: it’s about the issues, stupid!

Overheard at Kerry campaign headquarters:
“OK, so what the hell do we do now?”
“How about Plan B?”
“That was Plan A, moron.”

Jeff Jarvis has been one of the few voices criticizing the blogosphere for our participation thus far in the 2004 campaign. Jeff is a stand-up blogger (and person, I assume, although I haven’t had the pleasure of meeting him in ‘real’ life), but I think he’s missing the boat slightly when he says he’s “been a bit disheartened in recent days by the incessant gotchaism of some blogs and more commenters in our new medium.”
Jeff doesn’t point to specific examples, so I have no idea whether he includes TTLB in his disappointment, although he’s made clear he takes a dim view of the Swift Vets controversy in general.
I’d argue that we in the blogosphere have two roles: first, to try to bring stories that aren’t getting attention into the public eye, and second, to ensure that the stories that are being widely reported are covered accurately and completely. We try to change the focus of the debate, and we try to improve the quality of the debate.
Focusing on the Swift Vets story (although Jeff specifically did not limit his comments to it), it seems undeniable that the blogosphere played some role in moving the story into the public focus. But to be frank, blogger triumphalism aside, I think that was going to happen anyway. The Swift Vets had a compelling story, and it was only a matter of time before Big Media walls crumbled and they received a great deal of attention. Whether focusing on their story was a good thing or a bad thing is, I think, a matter for every voter to decide for themselves. I think it is relevant, I believe it is safe to say Jeff thinks it is not.
But now, with the Swift Vets story in full public view, we’re in our secondary role: improving the quality of debate. And I have to say, I think our performance has been absolutely stellar. Blogs like Captain’s Quarters, BeldarBlog, and others have been devoting serious effort to the story, and arguably doing more hard-core research than professional journalists seem willing to devote. And of course I would hope my own contributions in researching 527’s, campaign financing, and other topics will be viewed as useful, substantive contributions to the debate.
So, to Jeff, I’d say: cheer up, friend. The new media which you’ve done so much to foster is young, and we’re passionate, and perhaps sometimes a little too eager to go for the quick kill. But overall, I think we’re doing a damned fine job of adding to the public debate — and we’ll get better from here…

I remain rather puzzled by the fact that the Kerry campaign has not posted an official announcement of the FEC complaint they allegedly filed last Friday. The fact that it cannot be found on the Kerry-Edwards site has led me to suspect that perhaps it wasn’t actually filed after all.
So, to attempt to clarify matters, I sent the following inquiry to the Kerry-Edwards campaign this morning:
To John Kerry and the Kerry-Edwards Campaign:
I publish the weblog ‘The Truth Laid Bear‘ , and have recently been covering the controversy surrounding the Swift Boat Veteran ads, 527 organizations, and your campaign’s response to these issues.
It has been reported in the media that the Kerry-Edwards campaign filed a complaint with the FEC on Friday, August 20th, alleging coordination between the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth 527 and the Bush-Cheney campaign.
It puzzles me, however, that I can find no official mention of this filing on the Kerry-Edwards campaign website (see here).
In the interest of clarifying the record, I would appreciate the following:
1) A confirmation from the campaign that the FEC complaint was officially submitted to the FEC on Friday, August 20th (or, if it was not, when it is expected to be submitted).
2) A copy of the actual FEC complaint. As I am sure you know, the Bush-Cheney campaign submitted a similar complaint alleging collusion between the Kerry campaign and 527’s; they have put the actual complaint and other documentation online here. I urge you to do the same, and allow voters to review the complaint for themselves, and make up their own minds as to the validity of your claims.
Although I am a simple ‘blogger’, I would appreciate your treating this request with the respect you would accord to those in the professional media. Any response received to this message may be published on my weblog.
Thank you…
-N.Z. Bear
The Truth Laid Bear

I sent the inquiry to press@johnkerry.com, and submitted it as a general comment on the campaign website. If you are similarly curious, I urge you to take a moment and do the same. As always, I would ask that you be courteous and polite (and feel free to cut-and-paste my message); no need to get obnoxious with the folks answering the Inbox. Perhaps if the campaign receives enough inquiries, we’ll actually get to see the mysterious complaint…

From The Paper of Record:
The Republicans, in an e-mail message to reporters, listed several Democrats who they said showed connections between Democratic 527 groups, Mr. Kerry’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Among them were Zack Exley, the former organizing director for MoveOn.org’s political action committee who now works for Mr. Kerry’s campaign; Jim Jordan, the former campaign manager for Mr. Kerry who now works as a consultant for the liberal groups America Coming Together and the Media Fund; and Joe Sandler, who is a lawyer for both the Democratic National Committee and MoveOn.org.
Emphasis mine: Gotta love that passive reporting! Heaven forbid that the Times might actually do some research and establish whether connections exist or not on their own. Nah, why bother — there’s a staff meeting in twenty minutes and this cruller is tay-stee.
Hello! It’s over here. At least steal some solid information, for crissakes. Look, I’ll turn my back for a minute, go ahead, I’ll pretend not to notice…

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
Exterminate:
Function: transitive verb: to get rid of completely usually by killing off <exterminate crabgrass from a lawn>
From The Stakeholder, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Weblog:
Exterminate DeLay
Getting a little carried away, aren’t they?

TRUTH LAID BEAR EXCLUSIVE!!! MUST CREDIT TTLB!!!
Glenn Reynolds targeted by VRWC, plans to flee country!
DEVELOPING!!!

Although some folks might not believe it, as a blogger, I do exercise judgement in what I publish. And as it turns out, over the weekend, I decided to hold off on publishing a story after having some doubts as to whether it was genuinely newsworthy or not.
Fast forward to this afternoon, and the following story:
WASHINGTON Aug. 24, 2004