Democrats On Offense

Non-defense? Meaning Pentagon pork is okay?

What's this? Republicans blaming Bush for excessive spending?

"Congressional Republicans from across the ideological spectrum yesterday rejected the White House's open-wallet approach to rebuilding the Gulf Coast, a sign that the lockstep GOP discipline that George W. Bush has enjoyed for most of his presidency is eroding on Capitol Hill," says The Washington Post .

"Trying to allay mounting concerns, White House budget director Joshua B. Bolten met with Republican senators for an hour after their regular Tuesday lunch. Senators emerged to say they were annoyed by the lack of concrete ideas for paying the Hurricane Katrina bill."

Bottom line? It didn't work.

Arianna Huffington has gotten a lot of attention for her blog, which is less celebrity-oriented and far more liberal and anti-Bush (despite the presence of a few token conservatives) than I had expected. In Wired, Adam Penenberg admits error:

"Last May, when I first heard that Arianna Huffington planned to launch a blog and news site, I glibly predicted she would attract as much traffic as she did votes for California governor (she ended up dropping out of the 2003 recall election that Arnold Schwarzenegger went on to win).

"Frankly, I didn't think a liberal version of the Drudge Report that would depend on the ruminations of blognorant celebrities like Laurie David (wife of Curb Your Enthusiasm's Larry David), octogenarian news anchor Walter Cronkite and actor John Cusack could be anything more than a virtual Hollywood cocktail party . . .

"But I was wrong. Not only has Huffington delivered on her promise to create an 'innovative group blog,' she has created a viable business. In its first month, The Huffington Post started out with more than 700,000 visitors, according to Nielsen/NetRatings. By inking deals with AOL, Tribune Media Services and Yahoo, site traffic has grown to almost 1.5 million readers a month -- a leap of more than 60 percent from the prior month -- who click through 10 million pages."

Dan Rather is criticizing the media again, as we see in this Hollywood Reporter dispatch:

"Former CBS News anchor Dan Rather said Monday that there is a climate of fear running through newsrooms stronger than he has ever seen in his more than four-decade career. . . .

"Addressing the Fordham University School of Law in Manhattan, occasionally forcing back tears, he said that in the intervening years, politicians 'of every persuasion' had gotten better at applying pressure on the conglomerates that own the broadcast networks. He called it a 'new journalism order.'

"He said this pressure -- along with the 'dumbed-down, tarted-up' coverage, the advent of 24-hour cable competition and the chase for ratings and demographics -- has taken its toll on the news business. 'All of this creates a bigger atmosphere of fear in newsrooms,' Rather said."

Dan has issued the dumbing-down indictment before, but I wonder if the "fear" diagnosis related to his own National Guard fiasco.

Paul Mirengoff at Power Line responds:

"Dan Rather finds that there is an increasing 'climate of fear running through newsrooms' these days. I certainly hope that this is so -- the former monopolists in the newsrooms should fear that, unless they report with less bias, their audience will continue to decline in the face of competition. And, at a minimum, they should fear that if they present blockbluster reports based on fabricated evidence, as Rather did, they will lose their jobs."

Mirengoff hits the MSM for trumpeting the 10,000-may-be-dead-from-Katrina story. I agree that blaring that without qualification was irresponsible, but you can't not report it when the mayor of New Orleans says so. What you can say is that he has no evidence to indicate he knows what he's talking about.

I just saw the Paul McCartney ad for Fidelity Investments, and as an old Beatles fanatic, it bugged me (the guy doesn't exactly need the money). Here are some ruminations from Seth Stevenson in Slate:

"The British press was all over McCartney (even though the spot has not run in the U.K.). The Brit tabloids roasted 'Macca' for tainting his legacy with vile commerce. Several stories trotted out a 2002 statement in which McCartney claimed, 'We're not in the business of singing jingles. We do not peddle sneakers, pantyhose, or anything else.' The headlines ranged from 'Rubber Sold' to 'I Am the Ad Man, Goo Goo G'joob.' American papers were a tad more restrained, but the Miami Herald titled its piece 'Sir Paul Sells Out.'

"I'm not sure that the concept of selling out has much traction anymore. The battle is over, and the sellouts have won. At this point, about 97 percent of Who songs have been used in automobile ads. The Rolling Stones appear in ads for Ameriquest, a mortgage-services company. Bob Dylan made a cameo in a spot for Victoria's Secret underwear.

"Those are all geezers, you protest--not fierce and uncorrupted young bucks. But when I talk to younger people, the sellout label seems not to exist anymore. They expect TV ads to introduce great new music. They don't care when Oscar-winning actors turn up in spots for Diet Coke. To them, endorsement deals just seem like a natural byproduct of fame, and nothing to get worked up over.

"I'm not quite post-integrity, yet. Part of me continues to wince when artistic heroes get sucked into the marketing machine. It makes me wonder what their work really means to them. It makes me contemplate the force of greed. Bottom line, it's just sort of a bummer/

"I think Paul's driving desire is for relevance. This is a way for Paul to say: Remember that bloke in the home-movie clips? The guy you loved so much? I'm still here. I've got a fresh new album."

Then he should have paid for his own ad campaign and heeded his long-ago advice: 'Cause money can't buy me love.