Wednesday punditry. And National League wins All-Star Game.
Dana Milbank:
It would not be accurate to say that Democrats are worried about losing control of the House in November. It would be accurate to say that Democrats are in a screaming panic about losing control of the House in November.
The panic threshold was crossed Sunday morning on "Meet the Press," when White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said, "There's no doubt there are enough seats in play that could cause Republicans to gain control."
Excellent example of how political reporting has deteriorated into simply making things fit a pre-conceived storyline. See? Gibbs is in a "screaming panic". Milbank's example proves it. Better coverage, same paper:
Chris Cillizza:
Now, Democrats are being forced into a process conversation about whether or not their majority is in jeopardy -- a conversation that the House leadership did their damnedest to avoid by adopting a concerted strategy not to mention publicly the idea that control was at stake in the fall.
The counter-argument -- and, yes, this is politics so there is always a counter argument -- is that in acknowledging that the House could switch control effectively set the stakes for voters this fall.
Politico:
As he walked through the Capitol recently, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was asked repeatedly about Democratic attacks on his Republican opponent Sharron Angle, but he would not say a word about her.
In fact, Reid has been remarkably quiet about Angle, letting surrogates do the dirty work while he keeps his lips sealed.
Why say a word? Let her positions speak.
David S. Abraham/NY Times:
Congress has proven adept at placing blame for the gulf oil spill — depending on whom you listen to on Capitol Hill, BP bears the bulk of the responsibility, or the Interior Department and its increasingly inadequate regulations, or both.
There’s no question that each of these deserves blame. But there’s also no question that the responsibility for developing safe offshore operations extends much further, to Congress itself.
For more than a decade, legislators have allowed themselves to be lulled by industry assurances that drilling in deep water posed little danger. One could say that Congress, just like the companies it has attacked, was obsessed with oil.
Oil is just like any other corrupt special interest with unlimited amounts of money. I apologize for this NY Times op-ed." -Joe Barton (R-TX).
Kathleen Parker:
Sarah's long-term plans are anybody's guess. Anyone who thinks she won't run for president because she's making too much money on the celebrity circuit is missing a big point. You make money as a presidential candidate, too. If you win, you're president. If you lose, you're rich.
And don't tell her she can't. If you do, she's just gonna get feistier and cuter. Next thing you know she'll be a dadgum lioness givin' heck to those media hyenas, just the way they can't stand it.
Look outcha!
If you can make money at it, Sarah's there.
Katrina vanden Heuvel:
Will this argument work? It may well energize some of Obama's discouraged supporters, along with drifting independents, by training their focus on the primary source of their frustrations. These groups include people who have been hit especially hard by the economic downturn and may be incensed at the ability of entrenched interests to delay, dilute and defer vital reforms.
These two groups are also especially in need of energizing. According to political analyst Charlie Cook, election enthusiasm, compared to November 2008, is up among those who voted for Republican John McCain; the biggest decline in enthusiasm is among "liberals, African-Americans, self-described Democrats, moderates, those living in either the Northeast or West, and younger voters 18 to 34 years of age." At the same time, recent polls have shown independents moving away from Obama and Democrats and toward the right. The president's backward-or-forward framework has a chance to reverse that shift.
There are a couple of problems, however. A number of conservative Blue Dogs have joined with Republicans in opposing reforms. And by highlighting obstructionism, the Obama administration may be making members of its own party vulnerable.
All politics is still local.