Bloggers vs. the Old Way of Governing

Bloggers vs. the Old Way of Governing

By Tim Graham (Bio | Archive)
January 18, 2007 - 15:44 ET

Robert Bluey, the editor of HumanEvents.com and our old colleague from downstairs at Cybercast News, has an op-ed in the Washington Examiner today about the growing significance of bloggers on Capitol Hill. Just last week, Rob and others successfully pressured Sen. Harry Reid to strengthen earmark reform -- thanks to Internet pressure and the help of a couple seasoned bloggers who are now working in Senate offices:

The debate had captivated the blogosphere. As Roth noted at the Club for Growth, more than 1,700 blogs had been written about earmark reform over a 24-hour period.
Three of the most well-trafficked liberal blogs — Daily Kos, MyDD and TPMmuckraker — also turned on the Democrat leader. “Sen. Harry Reid is fast losing whatever credibility he had on earmark reform,” wrote a blogger at Daily Kos. “Who’s the arm-twister now?” asked Paul Kiel at TPMmuckraker.
By Friday afternoon, Reid had reversed course and DeMint was lauding him for agreeing to language that was “even stronger than what I had originally proposed.”

Read comments Free email alerts Take action

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Tim - isn't reversed course e

January 18, 2007 - 15:51 ET by FastEd

Tim - isn't reversed course equal to flip-flop? Or could this be an unintended consequense of what they tried to say, hoping nobody was listening? The next unintended will be actually staying near the center, further distancing themselves from their "base". - 2007 is turning out to be exciting. And, the closk is ticking, but will there be a signature?

There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad

I only hope international law

January 18, 2007 - 16:12 ET by uc

I only hope international laws and internet rights laws get as much inforcement around the world as we as lucky americans are used to at home. I hope we can figure out a way to go after the terrorist who use the same medium towards undemocratic means. On a similar note - where else could I write maybe with typoes the following summary of Clinton years? Clinton comes to hold with his wife the office of the President after running on a "New Covenant" for America > brings in Warring Christ. (?) and later Madams All-bright > Doesn't strongly respond to terrorism but does have Women in office go around telling men and women alike in many societies that their women deserve equal rights > Also talks with Al Gore about need to buy less of their oil products as an environmental priority higher than helping with acheiving above mentioned rights > Also does do what he/she can to cut into one of Afganistan's primary exports, drugs. All this while letting murderous Saddam Hussein keep flaunting UN sanctions as while cutting intelligence budgets etc. > All this again during an easy economic time to be President with the post cold war elation and .com boom. > Above was written to show possible how those new to english language around the world may have looked at Clinton's choices and the names of people he chose.

Poor Harry Reid, the victim o

January 18, 2007 - 16:30 ET by dscott

Poor Harry Reid, the victim of ideological consistency. What's the problem Harry, the Democrat Party being held to their campaign promises? Even the dolts at the Daily Kos are seeing through you campaign rhetoric (salesmanship). You know the world is coming to an end when the far right and the far left agree on something. Hell just froze over.

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius

I caught Rush saying today, a

January 18, 2007 - 16:36 ET by Chris Norman

I caught Rush saying today, as one element of the Fairness Doctrine's proposed revival, blogs with over a certain number of readers would have to register as lobbyists - disclosing financial records, etc. It sounds like some on the Left are trying to make certain any and all opposition to them is hushed as much as possible. Anyone else hear of this?

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb

Yes I did Chris...he reported

January 18, 2007 - 16:43 ET by bigtimer

Yes I did Chris...he reported any site that has over five hundred members can be fined if any political influence is shown on that site...well now, that can be interpreted into just about anything, now can't it...talk about communism, wonder if McCain would agree with this, Feingold most likely would.

"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan

bt,This is really chilling st

January 18, 2007 - 17:06 ET by Chris Norman

bt,

This is really chilling stuff, isn't it? They say that the Administration is suppressing speech (huh?), but good grief, this is for real. I don't usually listen to Hannity's radio show, but I caught some of it yesterday when he was debating, I believe, Kucinich, over the revival of the so-called Fairness Doctrine. Hannity let Kucinich have it (the best he could do - Hannity is a little clumsy, rhetorically).

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb

New slogan for the DNC: 'Si

January 18, 2007 - 20:05 ET by DontFeedTheTrolls

New slogan for the DNC: "Silencing Voices One At A Time".

DSG

Chris,I mentioned on a simila

January 19, 2007 - 04:01 ET by Indiana Joe

Chris,

I mentioned on a similar thread that this seems like almost an inevitable result of McCain-Feingold. Once political speech is suppressed at all, it is then only a matter of definition to suppress it more and more. I was shocked when the SCOTUS upheld that oppressive law. The beginning of the end for the First Amendment's intended protections, IMO.

So was the President, from

January 19, 2007 - 05:09 ET by sarcasmo

So was the President, from what I've heard, which makes it particularly-sad Bush kept the veto-pen a virgin on that one & relied on the Supremes, despite their increasingly-screwed-up First Amendment "jurisprudence"...The first amendment used-to-be -- and should-be -- a rather simple thing, but I think the beginning of its end happened long-ago. sarcasmo's universal answer: Defund both the FCC & NPR, along with all the forced-speech I pay for every April 15th such as (but not limited-to) drugwar propaganda. Government needs to get out of the speech business, as well as the speech-regulating business, and concentrate instead on doing a few things as described in the Constitution.
JMR

Sarc,There was a comment, lik

January 19, 2007 - 05:30 ET by Indiana Joe

Sarc,

There was a comment, likely gone after the cr*sh, from DebraSmith (or something like that... heavily religious, links to her webpage... know who I mean?) to the effect that this could be gotten around by only addressing members or somesuch. But no mention of a limit on membership numbers. Doesn't matter, to my mind, if it just becomes a matter of numbers instead of principle, then those limits can be changed. Funny, I didn't think the First Amendment was originally meant to protect porn, but apparently that's the one thing it DOES protect, according to the "Supremes."

I don't mind it protecting

January 19, 2007 - 05:49 ET by sarcasmo

I don't mind it protecting porn, because I fear so-much how others would define "porn." These days it doesn't, but someday "child porn" might even extend to "ascii art." o-|--< "Look at her -- so young, so willing..." And when DebraSmith said that, I mentioned a way to get around the new law by declaring all US citizens are in the: "likely to see something offensive on the internet written by sarcasmo" club. What we don't need is new laws with new interpretations, we need a return to simple, exacting First Amendment jurisprudence from back before I was born. This is why I like to imagine no-FCC America, along with no-PBS America. For example, and to hit close to home on NB, an FCC commissioner is likely to kiss Brent Bozell's butt when he comes to testify, and FCC bureaucrats are proven to be-stupid-enough to believe thousands of almost-automatically-generated "astroturf" complaints from his PTC sent in by people like Tim Graham's mom. Brent Bozell & Tim Graham's mom have a right to speak and complain about things they don't like -- even TV shows which they themselves have not actually seen -- but a federal judge (who by-definition can't be easily fired) is much more likely than a hyperpolitical FCC bureaucrat, when people with too much time on their hands are complaining about speech, to tell them to go find the off button. I'll save the Balboa-upsetting no-PBS anecdote for when he's awake. :)
JMR

Well, I have no problem with

January 19, 2007 - 06:04 ET by Indiana Joe

Well, I have no problem with protecting porn, either, per se. I just was making the point that it seems to be a head-standing exercise to protect speech like porn while chipping away at our political speech, which I'm pretty sure was the original intent of the First Amendment. That's all....

And yeah, save the "bal baiting" for when he'll see it... although I give balboa credit; he'll at least attempt an honest debate, unlike a lot of our resident leftist bomb-throwers... ;^)

And just btw, we left "McCain-Feingold" to our TOP "federal judges," and look where it got us. Should have died by the veto-pen, as you said before.

but apparently that's the one

January 19, 2007 - 05:59 ET by Jack Bauer

but apparently that's the one thing it DOES protect, according to the "Supremes."

That and throwing yourself off the top of the Empire State Building. Tough shit on the poor citizen who might be killed for simply walking along 42nd Street though.

Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex

Chris,I heard it on Rush and

January 18, 2007 - 17:04 ET by Dave R

Chris,

I heard it on Rush and earlier on Boortz' show (when he finally made it to the studio) and there is most definitely something rotten in the cotton going on here. I think the lefties are up to something truly sinister with all this "fairness" nonsense. It is no secret to most of us here that liberals have pretty much zero tolerance for any form of dissent, and this could be a clandestine attempt at going after more than just talk radio.

Something else, too. Prior to the recent election, I mentioned the "Fairness Doctrine" on this blog in several threads. Some here pretty much poo-pood all over me for it. I have noticed that since the Dims took over, I have seen no more of that.

I wish Mr. Bush had never signed that stupid McCain-Fiengold nonsense, as I feel it has set some rather dangerous precedents that our friends on the left will employ in furthering their effort at stifling dissent.

Dave, I, for one, never pooh-

January 18, 2007 - 17:13 ET by Chris Norman

Dave, I, for one, never pooh-poohed you. It's just that the thought of the Democrats winning was too horrible to imagine at the time. I've always thought that, given the chance, the Democrats would do whatever they could to rein in what I'm sure they see as what hurt them back in the early nineties and since - namely talk radio. Now, they're turning their eyes towards the blogs. This is all being done in the name of "fairness" and "opening up the airways for more discussion". It looks like 1984 might be getting here - it's just twenty-three years late.

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb

Chris,Yeah, it's like Neal sa

January 18, 2007 - 17:32 ET by Dave R

Chris,

Yeah, it's like Neal said this morning: The democrats blame their loss of power in '94 on talk radio and now that they have returned to power they have no intention of losing it again.

Of course, he also mentioned the Republicans naming Rush Limbaugh an honorary member of congress thereby rubbing it in their faces probably wasn't such a hot idea after all. I think part of what is motivating them is revenge.

What concerns me even more is that Bush could very well let the Dims hoodwink him into signing some of this garbage. I've been hearing speculation he may go along with them on a tax increase. I recall his father was deceived into doing that, too. Guess the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. He has also apparently caved in on the terrorist surveillance program. I'm beginning to think that we have been had.

There's the quandry. You rub

January 18, 2007 - 17:40 ET by Chris Norman

There's the quandry. You rub it in their faces and aggravate them. You try to be gracious and compromise and it just encourages them to go for the whole enchilada. If even small parts of these poisonous proposals became policy, it would be a disaster for free speech. For Pete's sake, I can't believe proposals like this are being seriously discussed in our country.

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb

Well sure, what has he got to

January 18, 2007 - 20:39 ET by msh1973

Well sure, what has he got to lose now...nothing. I am very disappointed in the President. He is not taking a stand against anything the Dems are proposing.

I was upset when the Presiden

January 18, 2007 - 17:15 ET by bigtimer

I was upset when the President signed it...it is thought he thought it would be struck down by the SC...well....of course they didn't, as they should have, they didn't have Roberts on there yet or Alito if memory serves me right.

Btw...this will never make it throught the Seante, so I am not too worried about it at the moment, maybe I am wrong and should be...they will never get enough votes for a super majority anyway. It is frightening no matter how you look at it.

"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan

bt,I'm continuously not surpi

January 18, 2007 - 17:58 ET by Chris Norman

bt,

I'm continuously not surpised that things happen that surprise me...

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb

You are right Chris...that is

January 18, 2007 - 18:06 ET by bigtimer

You are right Chris...that is why I added on I could be wrong....

(again.) as in the recent elections

"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan

Haing this stuff rammed down

January 18, 2007 - 18:14 ET by Chris Norman

bt,

Having this stuff rammed down our throats day in and day out makes us more accepting of some some pretty bizarre things. But if you stop and think about it for a moment, it's hard to get your head around the fact that some of this stuff is really happening - and here...

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb

bigtimer,There is Senate Bill

January 18, 2007 - 19:38 ET by msh1973

bigtimer,

There is Senate Bill S.1, called an Ethics Reform bill. It includes a number of provisions, some of which would limit the influence paid lobbyists can have directly on Senators and Congressmen. This Bill redefines "lobbying" to include citizen involvement through grassroots organizations, including non-profit organizations like Focus on the Family. It subjects any organization to the same restrictions, and the same reporting requirements, as paid lobbyists in Washington. Has anyone heard about this? Hannity has been talking about it, but I haven't heard anyone else mention it on the air. Frankly, I find it rather scary. What better way to silence the conservative voice than going after these organizations

msh1973...It is scary. This o

January 18, 2007 - 19:43 ET by Clear thinker

msh1973...

It is scary. This one needs to be tracked very closely.

Thanks guys and gals for you

January 18, 2007 - 20:31 ET by msh1973

Thanks guys and gals for your comments. I am in total agreement.

55-43!! Yahoo! Grassroots lobbying bill struck down!

January 18, 2007 - 20:47 ET by bigtimer

We just won...55-43, Bennett from Utah's provision passed that struck this down in the lobbying amendment...

WHOOOOOPEE! Eight dem's voted with the Republicans!

Not Shrillary!

"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan

bt,Thanks for that much neede

January 18, 2007 - 20:58 ET by msh1973

bt,

Thanks for that much needed information.

You are more than welcome, ma

January 18, 2007 - 21:03 ET by bigtimer

You are more than welcome, many of us out here have been worried too! Glad I caught it when I did!

I am tickled and glad it was the first vote of the Ethics Reform bill that will be done tonight, as they all want to go home...poor babe's

Btw...the ACLU was with us on this one, naturally, when you think about it....LOL!

"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan

msh,See Warner Todd Huston's

January 18, 2007 - 19:44 ET by Blonde

msh,

See Warner Todd Huston's blog today on Paine, Jefferson, et. al.

There was quite a discussion on this topic today prior to the site meltdown when all the comments were lost.

msh...I have been watching th

January 18, 2007 - 19:58 ET by bigtimer

msh...

I have been watching this bill try and get through, it has been stalled since yesterday, they will not let Gregg get his earmark bill through, they are calling it a line item veto bill, but it is a bill that the President can take any earmark the Senate puts in and have them go back and vote on it individually before he or she will sign the bill if it passes, so anyway, I have not had time to listen to all the stuff they cram in with their amendments, it is scary, it will also have to go through Congress and I agree with you, it is impossible to know what all will get passed and ,made law and what won't in the end, also what will be held up to scrutiny and end up going to court.

Reid just said he will be stripping alot out, so who knows until the end...unfortuantely. They are going to vote tonight.... they just said they are taking out Gregg's bill so who knows....and letting him put his bill in when it comes to minimum wage on Monday.

I wished they would just stay out of our lives most of the time.

"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan

msh and others interested in the lobbying bill

January 18, 2007 - 20:38 ET by bigtimer

The Bennet Amendment that strikes the grassroots lobbying bill is going to be defeated! There are eight dem's that voted with the republicans to strike this down so far...so we are safe!

So far!

"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan

This is what BLOGS have done

January 18, 2007 - 18:07 ET by JayTee

This is what BLOGS have done for me.......as far as "information" and "learning" .....

I can't see the Daytime shows, I can't watch ALL the news stations, I do watch a very few, and read a few Newspapers, and I notice a "Bias".

I come to a Blog, and I get MORE informed on MORE Bias, and all of a sudden one realizes......It's a PLAGUE upon us. Mis-represented facts, or omission of facts, and that which used to be a minor Irritation/observation, is recognized in it's entirety. There's a LOT of baloney out there, and I used to think it was minor.

The Blogs show in living color that it's a rampant disease of the Media. It is larger than one can observe on their own, and the blogs inform and put on display the larger view of the KGB mis-information network.

jt,You're going through the &

January 18, 2007 - 18:20 ET by Chris Norman

jt,

You're going through the "anger stage". Later on, you'll calm down and go into the "cynical stage". You sort of get numb - the anger is still there - but you sort of get angered out. I used to get mad, now I find myself smirking more.This has all been studied and documented and yes, I have no idea what I'm talking about...

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb