Daily News Roundup, 11/30/07: Rick Perry Leads By Example

Time for a pop quiz: why would the Republican Governors Association choose, for their leader, a guy who didn't get even 40% in his last election?

I don't know, but I think the results are going to be hilarious. For his first trick, Perry attempts to shift the blame for beatings that Republican governors facing re-election are no doubt in line for:

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who officially becomes chairman of the Republican Governor's Association today, said Thursday that GOP governors running for re-election next year will be on the defense because of partisan bickering in Washington.

Perry said Republicans can win some close governor's races by concentrating on their accomplishments and avoiding partisan politics.

I have bad news for, sir. It isn't the partisan bickering that's going to cause all the trouble for your merry band, and running on your accomplishments won't help, because people don't like Republicans precisely because of what Republicans have accomplished. Avoiding partisan politics is probably a good tip though. They may want to avoid elections altogether.

I'm not sure I understand all the hollering about how CNN picked their debate questions. If you have a network and you're going to broadcast a debate comprised almost entirely of user-submitted questions, I don't see why you wouldn't pick questions that force candidates to answer questions about subjects they aren't crazy about. Don't mistake this for anything other than it is — as George said the other day, CNN was going for a little sensationalism, which brings ratings, and fine. Good for them. But what Republicans are REALLY upset about is that they would ever have to lower themselves to answering questions about gay rights, or gays in the military, or abortion, and have to do it in response to questions that aren't automatically framed for their usual pat answers.

Senator Patrick Leahy is turning some silly Republican arguments on their heads, but these arguments about the US Attorney firing scandal, not a debate. It goes a little something like this: since President Bush was totally uninvolved in the US Attorney firings (which it appears he was, and Leahy calls the evidence to that effect "uncontroverted"), then his aides (in this case Josh Bolten and Karl Rove and two other, lesser underlings) have no claim to executive privilege and thus must respond to subpoenas. Leahy has to say all of this in an official ruling to get the train rolling on holding Rove and Friends in contempt. I just like the argument because it makes so much sense.

Digby makes an excellent point about some recent Washington Post blunders in reporting recycled rumors about Barack Obama, essentially saying that reporting on things that are barely rumors advances them as actual rumors, which then advances them even further. The headline doesn't help:

Foes Use Obama's Muslim Ties to Fuel Rumors About Him

Not exactly what I would call award-winning writing, guys. The article in question is available here.

This probably deserves a more thorough treatment than I will give it here (and it is likely to get it at the hands of our staff) but Time has a very interesting — if short — article about the growing foreign policy schism between President Bush and Vice President Cheney. I would not classify George Bush as a diplomat, but he is apparently wielding his Decidership to override Cheney in these late days of his presidency in an effort to get a few things done around the old foreign policy barn. I wonder what Cheney's preferred diplomatic tactics would be. Or at least I wonder about it and then immediately stop, for fear he might hear me thinking about him with his dread magical powers.

Lastly today, something funny. The guy who is the most likely replacement for Trent Lott in his Mississippi Senate seat is Congressman Chip Pickering. Congressman Chip Pickering was in Borat. If you haven't seen it and I tell you anymore about I'll just ruin it for you, so go see for yourself.