HUGH AND SID

My analogy seems to have hit a nerve. Powerline provides ten reasons Hewitt isn’t as slavishly pro-Bush as Blumenthal was slavishly pro-Clinton. One is that Sid was on the Clinton pay-roll. But Hewitt doesn’t need to be on the Bush pay-roll. He does it for free. He’d pay to do it. Which was roughly Sid’s mojo when he was a journalist as well. I know. I edited him. Sid worships the Democratic party, regardless of what it does; Hewitt’s own site once boasted as its guiding principle that the “Power of the Democrats Must Be Destroyed.” Hard to get more nakedly partisan than that. Then there’s this: “Hugh has a massive nationwide U.S. audience (sort of like Sullivan once did).” Hewitt’s radio show does indeed have a big audience and so does his blog. Good for him. But according to this blog traffic list, Hugh’s site gets around 44,000 visits a day and this blog – despite my attempt to piss off every conservative reader I’ve ever had – still gets 54,000. Add in my Time column – the biggest news magazine in the U.S. – and my Sunday Times column – the biggest Sunday circulation in the UK – and I’m not sure how Powerline believes that I have fewer readers than Hewitt has readers and listeners. But, hey, Powerline believes that the Iraq war has been conducted flawlessly and that the feds did a perfect job with Katrina. I should add one thing: I like both Sid and Hugh. I’ve never met Hewitt, but our interactions have always been civil and he seems like a perfect gentleman, as crazed ideologues go. But I don’t think even he would deny that he is one of the last true believers in the administration. Rove would abandon the ship before Hugh would. As with Sid, it’s admirable in a strange kind of way.