OK for real, it has been pretty addictive political theater, and today's WaPo story seems to verify that that there are some serious questions to be asked. It's got the buzz of History in the Making, which I'm sure is threatening to completely intoxicate the (pleasantly careful and measured in their work, rising to the occasion) bloggers that have been so dogged in following this story (you know who they are) - so, you know, at first I'm kind of skeptical, cos I don't know anything about this shit (although it does look totally Wordy), maybe this is some kind of mass illusion perpretrated by those internet rumor mongers I've heard about, &c. It's mildly funny, in this context, that I keep checking the mainstream media for news about this, to see if it's, like, really true or just something I read on a weblog.
The media angle has been endlessly fascinating/entertaining, especially to see everybody in the old and new media lined up perfectly as expected: the NYT and the more aparatchiky/self-righteous of the Democrat blogs (Atrios, Kos, &c) manfully try to ignore the story and/or focus on the bigger issue and/or focus on more important issues and/or anything else, this is awful news for us if it is true, especially if it takes another few precious weeks out of the campaign to resolve; the Washington Post, Kevin Drum, Josh Marshall, and other sensible weenie liberals fooled by their familiarity with the DC scene to understand the larger truths of politics are being "unhelpful," as with their spineless behavior during the run-up to the Iraq war ("unhelpful" is the word used by one memorably bolshevist Kossack, and from their perspective it is exactly the right word in exactly the right context).
On the quasi/crypto-conservative side, Kaus is secretly, or not-so-secretly, loving it. And of course the Belmont Club, sporting a striking new color scheme!, and, memorably - endearingly, if you are a fan, terrifyingly/ludicriously if you aren't - is clearly enjoying the opportunity to actually act out his unofficial role as the Clausewitz of the conservative blogosphere:
There are two dangers, both to the attacker and the defender, arising from this situation. The first is that CBS' Internet critics will run into a kill zone of their own. CBS is likely to present its bastions hoping for their opponents to expend themselves on its strongest points. It's important to realize as a tactical matter, that some aspects of the CBS story might be true. It's unlikely to be entirely false. No fraud, however egregious, is ever without some modicum of credibility, although the importance of the subject matter is questionable. But the danger to the defender is even more grievous. I suspect that the bastions that CBS will shelter behind will have chinks whose existence they never even suspected. They are, after all, being forced into a relatively hasty displacement. Something will be forgotten. The pursuit is close on their heels and they may not shut the door behind them. The closest devil behind them is the charge that CBS obtained the documents from the DNC. Any CBS-nik caught outside the defensive perimeter will be raked over the coals on this, therefore they are likely to restrict authorized comment on this matter to make sure the action is kept in-perimeter.By leaving the kill zone of fonts, kerning and proportional spacing and rallying on their new position CBS achieves two things. The near effective fire raining down on them will be transformed into far ineffective fire, simply because its Internet critics will need a whole 12 hours to start raising new questions about the additional CBS allegations. By covering their repositioning with intensified attacks on GWB they will with any luck, restart a stalled story and reclaim the offensive.
Amazing, I bet this guy is a sick at Warhammer40K or whatever those historical wargames that older, more educated dudes play are. It's satisfying, on some level, to realize that even if you can't understand what's going on in the world, you can understand how people understand the world. [a chiasm leitmotif, or whatever passes for a leitmotif around here!]
OK, one more thing, regarding the insta-infamous "bloggers = dudes in pajamas with no checks and balances, " 'meme' that was deployed so unnervingly quickly by CBS and (somewhat more subtly) Atrios and Kos (which must have felt like a kind of weird position for them to be in, I'm sure). The 'dude' is right that there is no outside check/balance on an individual blogger, but The Blogosphere is full of checks and balances. With all due respect to the bloggers who have been impressively thorough in their 'amateur' investigative reporting, I probably first really believed that this story could have serious legs when I saw that first Post article. I second, and much more deeply, believed this could be big when I saw no substantial, point-by-point rebuttal, or even a link to someone else's substantial rebuttal from Atrios, Kos, JMM, &c. To my knowledge at least (and please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm interested), neither the left blogs nor CBS have been able to come up with a definitive defense, although the pajama-wearers on the left have had access to all the same information as the pajama-clad right. What, there are no heroic Democrat typology dorks?? And CBS, of course, should be able to clear this all up, but, again, is looking awfully weak so far.
(BTW, aren't't Atrios's recent posts of charming/heroic/cheesy photos of Kerry, unaccompanied by any text, kind of, like, creepy, and/or desperate? Nothing rallies the faithful during turbulent times like an inspiring photograph of Big John, the Great Leader! Which reminds me of how I was thinking about how the Bush presidency has sexualized the political discourse of the Democrats/left in some really amazing ways, from the Wonkette/Atrios "Big John" stuff (and really, his nomination over Dean in the first place, the anxiety that we had to have a Big Strong Candidate, and isn't this guy basically what one of those looks like?) to the endless plays on the words "Bush" and "Dick" at the RNC protest megamall, &c...)
OK, anyway, I think the only actual 'thing' I had to 'contribute' to any of this is some background on James R. Bath, who is mentioned in one of the two extra mystery memos that USA Today has that CBS didn't show for some reason. Conspiracy theorists and anti-fascist researchers' ears perk up at the mention of James R. Bath, who Bush met in TANG (unlike the obnoxious 'Swifties', I think it's kind of cool to be reading about 'TANG' all the time) and helped to arrange some investments in Bush's first business. Among other things. For lots, lots, lots more info, go to this page and do a search for "James R. Bath." Why was the document mentioning Bath not shown!?!
A - THERE IS A CONSPIRACY!!! This is all a Karl Rove ploy (actually I seriously think this seems like it might be so problematic for the Kerry campaign that it will seem like a work of evil genius to those prone to think that way) as part of his work for the Underground Reich, which, by keeping the malleable and inextricably intertwined Bush in office and by jacking up even further the level of partisan animosity in this country, work towards the destruction of the United States as a continuation of World War II!! Seriously!!.
B - CBS knew its source was a bit of a nut, and the document that (gratuitously) also names Bath makes it seem even more obviously the work of an unhinged conspiracy theorist that wanted to conduct his own 'espionage' operation against the Bush administration.
C - Most likely, of course documents not seen as relevant/Rather doesn't care about Underground Reich, considering them the Far Enemy and Bush the Near.
But hey, who knows, maybe something is way out of left field (or other inexplicable mixups) on this - perhaps CBS produces the original source that had somewhat illegible but more legit-looking documents that were retyped for clarity during the broadcast? We'll see, and watch closely, and it will be fun to learn a bit about typography and about people and the media along the way! And remember the name James R. Bath!