Month: March 2012

Harper's publisher John MacArthur wieseltiers against the rise of online media and decline of print:

[A]s much as I object to free content, I am even more offended by the online sensibility and its anti-democratic, anti-emotional, even anti-intellectual effect. Devotees of the Internet like to say that the Web is a bottom-up phenomenon that wondrously bypasses the traditional gatekeepers in publishing and politics who allegedly snuff out true debate. But much of what I see is unedited, incoherent babble indicative of a herd mentality, not a true desire for self-government or fairness.

Alexis Madrigal sighs:

I do respect one thing about MacArthur's op-ed: he does truly value writers and their writing. We agree there. But it is precisely because I value my writing that I want it to be online and free.

I don't write merely to rub two pennies together; I write because I want to have an impact in the world. I want to work with my community to break stories and tell jokes, to highlight injustice and find better ways of solving problems. That means reaching readers where they are. People's lives aren't divided into "offline life" and "online life," even if we'd like to pretend that's the case. People on Capitol Hill use the Internet. People on Main Street use the Internet. People on Wall Street use the Internet. The Internet is where the action is: it's where all the elegant, dirty, pretty, lowbrow, brilliant ideas come together to commingle and evolve. 

A reader writes:

OK Andrew…it’s called the Dish…either dish on the state dinner or tell us you are not going to…

I try to keep social occasions off the blog since so much of my life is an open book. But it was a really magical evening. I'm a proud Tory and a proud American (almost a citizen) and to see my political party bond so effortlessly with a president I endorsed and admire was enormously gratifying. It made me feel saner, amid today's Republican madness.

I bumped into many people – we were next to John Legend and his fiancee and the British ambassador and his wife at dinner – and did have a brief and warm chat with the president. I think such things should remain confidential, but you should know that there's a Dish-reader in the Oval Office, and "not just the political stuff." So don't feel too guilty about our regular dips into pop-culture, high and low. POTUS gets the mix.

There were several openly gay couples present, which is change you really can believe in, and we entered with the future HRC head, Chad Griffin and his boyfriend. I also didn't realize the impact that the Newsweek Obama cover-story had on Obama donors and staffers until last night. So many people mentioned it. Oh, and George Clooney came up to say hi. Not since Jon Hamm came out as a Dish reader at the White House Correspondents' Dinner did such a shiver go up my leg.

The tent in the garden was gorgeous, as you can see above. And particularly poignant for Aaron and me: it was designed and produced by Bryan Rafanelli, who planned our own wedding. Good times. And a bit of a hangover.

A reader writes:

I'm not NRA, I'm not right-wing, and I voted Obama, but that selection of clips from Mississippi was shameless. "Let's find a bunch of toothless, white Mississippi rednecks living in poverty who hate blacks and think Obama is a Muslim." Wow – tough assignment, Alexandra. Is it any wonder the right has gone "ape shit" over this? It is the cheapest of cheap journalism. Imagine a right-wing "documentary" about homosexuality in which the only interviews they get are guys from a gay pride parade in San Francisco clad in chaps, speaking with flamboyantly exaggerated lisps.

Come on, Andrew. You're better than this.

That my reader doesn't think it's a tough assignment to find these folks rather undercuts his point, don't you think? These people were not hard to find and were not dressed in a parade in a way they wouldn't be in ordinary life. Objective polling shows that a plurality of these voters believe Obama is a Muslim. The idea that racism is no factor in the deep South's disdain for Obama is a preposterous piece of spin. But if there are videos out there of interviews with white Republican Alabamans or Mississippians expressing a different point of view, or coherently criticizing Obama on specific policies, please let me know and I'll post them.

Snowmass, Colorado, 5.22 pm

Brandishing a new report from Brookings, Max Fisher shows how "health care subsidies on birth control actually save you money — a lot of money":

The savings come from averting health care, child care, and other costs associated with unplanned pregnancies. [It's] a rate of return of 100% to 500%, making it one of the safest and most profitable investments anywhere. … As an added bonus, you'll also reduce the number and rate of abortions, 90% of which are estimated to be for unintended pregnancies. And you'll reduce the number of unwed mothers (if you happen to think this is a number that should be reduced), who carry 70% of unplanned pregnancies.

Scott Conroy bucks conventional thinking: 

Gingrich’s continued presence in the campaign may be the only way that Romney can be denied the 1,144 delegates he needs to lock it up. If Gingrich were to drop out, various polls show that Santorum would garner the majority of the former speaker’s support. Nonetheless, in a two-man race with Romney, the math is more difficult for Santorum, not less. Romney figures to win enough of the delegates Gingrich otherwise would have taken to prevent Santorum from overtaking him. 

Gingrich is making a version of this argument himself. Harry Enten's calculations don't agree:

In states that are proportional (like North Carolina and Texas), Gingrich getting out would makes no real impact on Romney's delegate total (and may actually help him a little). In states like Arkansas, California, Illinois and Wisconsin, where there is some version of winner-take-all on the state or congressional district level, Gingrich is helping Romney. But with Gingrich out of the picture, Romney probably gets 50-100 delegates fewer than he does with Gingrich in the race. I'm not saying this will deny Romney a first-ballot victory, but it would make it more interesting. 

Megyn Kelly called him out on it last night:

Chait dissects the dodge:

All these evasions cleverly managed to imply something without quite stating it. Has the question been raised many times? Yes — Romney has just never been forced to answer it. Did he favor letting states impose national mandates? Yes – but that’s not all he favored. Has Romney said he opposes a national mandate many times? Of course – since 2009, anyway. But has Romney always opposed a national individual mandate? Absolutely not.

"I heard a lot of rhetoric about gay and lesbian Americans that didn’t fit with what I know to be true and what many Republicans believe. As an evangelical Christian Republican, I know many people who hold conservative values like equality and freedom, but those voices were lost this year. However, I believe in my heart that things are changing. If it weren’t for the loud voices of a few in our party, I do believe more Republicans would stand up in support of marriage equality," – Kathy Potts, former GOP committee chair for Rick Perry's presidential campaign in Iowa.

The right has gone ape-shit about this selection of interviews from Alexandra Pelosi. I think they speak for themselves.