Happy Blogosphere Day!

Blogosphere Day started three years ago today after Rep. Jim Greenwood announced that he would not be returning to Congress and the netroots started raising money for the Democratic candidate in PA-08, Ginny Schrader.  You can find Mr. Liberal’s recounting of the original post that started it all here on Daily Kos.

In 2005, the netroots rallied behind OH-02 candidate Paul Hackett as he competed in a special election.

In 2006, the netroots rallied behind Ned Lamont in the Connecticut Senate primary.  Lamont won the primary, but unfortunately lost the general election to Cryin’ Joe Lieberman.

All of the fundraising the netroots did was done online, via the Democratic fundraising clearinghouse known as Act Blue.

So, let’s help Act Blue!

While the previous candidates of choice for Blogosphere Day donations haven’t achieved lots of success, we’ve seen the liberal activist online rally behind causes and candidates in a way that hasn’t really ever been done online.  And Act Blue has been the focal point of that effort on the past three blogosphere days.  Today is our chance to support Act Blue and help them raise money to expand and improve their services, and as a way to say thank you for their years of support and work for Democratic candidates.

To get just an idea of what the netroots are doing on this blogosphere day in support of Act Blue, check out these posts:

• Tim Tagaris at Open Left
• Gen. Wes Clark at Huffington Post
• Sen. Dick Durbin at Daily Kos
• Mike Lux at Open Left

Today is a day about supporting Democratic infrastructure and a way to build it through fundraising and organizing at the local, state, and national level.  In the past three years, ActBlue has sent $25 million to 1700 Democratic candidates, from over 200,000 contributors, and helped channel the rising tide of grassroots energy and commitment to retake Congress in 2006.

ActBlue is on the road to raising $100 million this election cycle. But that won’t happen if we wait to support their work.  It’s a 16-month journey to November 2008, and if we wait until we only have a year, or six months left left, we won’t reach our destination.  Please support ActBlue today.

Iowa’s Democratic infrastructure can be helped via fundraising on Act Blue as well and Common Iowan has already set up a page for Iowa bloggers as well.  Senator Tom Harkin’s campaign will be doing their fundraising online solely through Act Blue.  So, Act Blue is helping us.  Let’s help them.

As of 1:30 PM Central Time 169 contributors have given $8,715.  Let’s get it to 200 contributors and $10,000 by 3 PM.  We can do it with your help!

It's ridiculously early for yard signs–I don't think any of the Democrats are handing them out yet. So I was surprised to see a “Ron Paul–Hope for America” yard sign today in a fairly Democratic neighborhood on the west side of Des Moines.

If you know Des Moines, the house is just off Polk Blvd, close to the Waveland Cafe. I don't know the precinct number, but if memory serves, this was an area where Kucinich was viable in 2004.

Anyone else seen any yard signs up yet?

The final vote was 52 in favor of cloture and 47 opposed (Reid switched to “No” at the end so that he could bring a motion to reconsider at a later date–a procedural move).  Dems picked up one new Republican waverer in the form of Sen. Susan Collins of Maine.

Greg Sargent’s got the best write-up of the GOP blockage here.  As he says:

What this means in a nutshell is this: While a majority of the U.S. Senate favors withdrawal from Iraq, the Senate can’t vote on a measure that would accomplish this — because the GOP Senate leadership won’t allow it.

Repeat that line to everyone you know.  Senate Republicans are blocking a true change of course in Iraq.

And in response, Senate Maj. Leader Harry Reid has pulled the Defense Authorization bill and it appears that he won’t bring it back to the floor until he can be guaranteed an up-or-down vote on the Levin-Reed Amendment and three others that will be offered (Warner-Lugar, Salazar ISG, and Landrieu).  Talk about playing hardball.

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson’s campaign went on the air in Iowa with a new TV ad calling for an end to the war in Iraq and calling on Congress to “stand up” to President Bush.

As I type, the US Senate is currently voting on cloture for the Levin-Reed Amendment.  On this cloture petition, 18 Senators had signed their names.  Now a vote is taking place.  Bill Richardson  is right.

He’s calling for all US troops out of Iraq and he wants it done now.  It is a vigilant position and one that may even be politically dangerous for him to some degree, but it is the right one.  The American people want this war ended and Bill Richardson will do that.  He may not be the only candidate, but he’s the first to say it so bluntly and forcefully in an ad.

Earlier tonight, I stood on the floor of the Senate to show my support for our men and women in uniform by trying to bring them home.

As you know, the Senate held a rare all-night session because Republicans are filibustering our efforts to get an up or down vote on re-deploying our troops out of Iraq.

It’s that simple.

In an extraordinary display of fealty to President Bush and his failed Iraq policy, Republicans are literally refusing to allow a vote on an amendment to bring home our soldiers and reduce the U.S. involvement in Iraq.

The American people deserve to know where every Senator stands on the most important issue facing Congress. We must not allow Republicans to block an up or down vote with procedural semantics.

I wanted to make sure my colleagues knew where Iowans stand on the issue. So earlier tonight, while on the floor, I read some letters that I have received from Iowans, including Iowa soldiers and their families.

I hope that this one sleepless night in the U.S. Senate will awaken Republicans to the reality that their loyalty belongs not to the President, but to the American people.

The Democratic National Committee has put together an action page on their site asking for Democrats to help fight against Republican obstruction on a straight up-or-down vote on the Levin-Reed redeployment amendment.  Check it out here.  According to the DNC’s Internet Outreach guy, Kombiz Lavasany, the responses won’t only go out in email form but as a fax into Senate offices as well.

If you’re from Iowa make sure to go send a letter/fax to Sen. Grassley and ask him to stand with Sen. Harkin and move for a straight up-or-down vote on the Levin-Reed Amendment–and tell him to support it, too!

Mike Lux posted this earlier over at Open Left:

If you are living in Iowa, please send me your thoughts and stories regarding the state of play as things move forward to

openleft at gmail dot com

I’d love to hear your on-the-ground perspective.

The caucus reports from those on the ground is going to be a new feature at Open Left and he’s looking for activists, writers, and anyone else to send him their thoughts.  That means you.  Drop him a line every once in a while, and tell him what you think its like on the ground here in Iowa.

And while you’re at, leave your thoughts in diaries here as well.  Bleeding Heartland only grows when you post your own thoughts, leave comments, and invite your friends to take part in our community.

I haven’t decided if I plan on staying up all night long to watch the Senate debate on the Reed-Levin Amendment but if I do, I’ll be on the lookout for Tom Harkin.  As I reported this morning on Iowa Independent, Harkin is supporting Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid’s move to keep the Senate open all night to make the Republicans publicly display the filibuster they’re putting forward on the Reed-Levin legislation.

But I’m glad to see Senate Democrats standing up and truly playing hardball with obstructionist Republicans.  I value the filibuster–it is a worthwhile political tool in the Senate for the minority–but when threats of filibusters are used time and time again to stymie meaningful legislation (that could just as easily be (or will be) vetoed by President Bush) then it is time for Democrats to make sure that the American public get a chance to really see what Republicans are doing and saying.  Democrats never took the filibuster option this far on Iraq legislation or anything other that judicial nominations when we were the minority in the two most recent congressional sessions.  Maybe that’s because we were being naive or something, but we didn’t.  Clearly, we weren’t prepared for Republicans to do it us and now it is time that we respond in a way that proves our leadership.  We’re on the side of the American people and they should be allowed to see us fighting for them while Republicans protect the President, not the troops in Iraq.

Before we get too far into the debate (which is already happening currently on C-SPAN 2), let’s take a look at what exactly the Reed-Levin Amendment to the Defense Authorization bill does.  From Spencer Ackerman over at TPM Election Central:

“How It Would Work: Again similar to a measure pushed by Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), the chairman of the armed services committee, in the spring. Joined by Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) this time, the Levin amendment would start troop withdrawals from 120 days after passage, to be completed by April 1, 2008. In the interim, troops in Iraq would have their mission shift to training Iraq troops, fighting al-Qaeda, and protecting themselves from attack.

Likelihood of Passage: It’s not a certainty for inclusion as an amendment. Harry Reid successfully shepherded the measure’s predecessor through the supplemental, where it inevitably met President Bush’s veto pen. Both men will probably do the same thing again.

Political Purpose: The big enchilada: getting out of Iraq by a date certain. Many Senate Dems clearly think that the public has coalesced around withdrawal, and even in defeat, they’ll get the opportunity to distinguish themselves from Bush and the GOP going into 2008 while hanging the war around their opponent’s necks as an albatross.”

This is where Sen. Tom Harkin’s call for bloggers to put the Republican defectors feet to the fire on the issue of Iraq and to put the pressure on those who are abandoning the troops in Iraq to give President Bush political cover:

“Now more than ever we need the progressive blogosphere to do what they do best—to rally around those that support a change of course in  Iraq and to call out those who would rather follow the orders of Karl Rove and Dick Cheney than the voice of the American people.”

Democrats are prepared to debate all night with the Republicans who say they’re ready to filibuster.  Those of us activists and bloggers out there who support the Democrats, let’s make sure we show it.  As my colleague and friend Lynda Waddington reported, there will be a counter-filibuster sponsored by MoveOn and Iraq Summer here in Des Moines tonight; if you can make it, please do.

Oh, and I finally heard a Democrat use “up or down vote” language today on the floor of the Senate.  Thank you Majority Whip Dick Durbin.

Earlier today Sen. Hillary Clinton’s campaign actively solicited bloggers to join in on a conference call hosted by their blogger, Peter Daou, in announcing a “special endorsement.”  The campaign didn’t release any more information about the endorsement and it was a pretty cryptic move, yet I still decided to join in on the call along with several other major bloggers from across the progressive blogosphere.

So, at 12:30 PM Central time I got on the call to find out that the special endorsement was coming from former Ambassador Joe Wilson, the husband of outed CIA operative Valerie Plame.  And by 12:53 PM I broke the news on Iowa Independent that Amb. Wilson had chosen to endorse Clinton.

Multiple blogs picked up the news and reported the news, as they should have because it was a substantial endorsement.  But the traditional or mainstream media didn’t pick up the story at all.

Greg Sargent of TPM’s Election Central posted these thoughts about the call:

“A few quick points about this. The Hillary campaign, which rolled out the Wilson news on a conference call with liberal bloggers, clearly hopes the Wilson endorsement serves at least the partial goal of winning over liberal activists and netroots types who might still be unhappy with Hillary for all the reasons you’ve heard repeatedly by now. Wilson carries great cache among such folks, who were energized by his speaking out against the administration and everything else that happened as a result of his protracted fight with the White House.”

Taylor Marsh wrote:

“The ’08 selection season is not over by a long shot and I am staying neutral in the primary. But the endorsement of Clinton by Joseph Wilson is a big step for her campaign. That Clinton offered the scoop to a group of bloggers shows just how far she’s come and how far she’s willing to engage a community, which on the whole is very critical of her on all fronts. She’s also accepted the invitation to YearlyKos, which I’m looking forward to very much. Clinton is illustrating her ability to engage on all fronts, even where she knows she’ll take heat. The strength of Clinton’s candidacy continues to expand.”

The campaign seemed like they were genuinely reaching out to the netroots constituency, giving them a big story, and were going to let them break the news.

However, the blogs didn’t get credit with breaking the news.  The Clinton campaign didn’t direct the traditional or mainstream media to blogposts about the endorsement and then elaborate and what was reported by citizen journalists.  Instead, they waited until later in the afternoon and put out a release from the campaign.  Their campaign didn’t even post the announcement on their blog until two hours after the conference call occurred and didn’t link to any other bloggers’ reactions (of which their was plenty).

The Des Moines Register first reported their story on the endorsement at 6:15 PM this evening, a full 5 hours after the news was broken at Iowa Independent, on their own blog.

Now, I admit, I’m probably a little pissy and being a bit selfish.  Both because I broke the story on Iowa Independent and because I’m a blogger who has been harsh on Clinton in the past.  Multiple other blogs around the country, even ones more than important than Bleeding Heartland, have been critical of Clinton (even unfairly so) so when I got today’s invitation to the call I was hopeful that it would be genuine interaction with a constituency or interest group that hadn’t been on her side for a long time.  Particularly on the issue of Iraq, she’s had to fight for respect on the blogs.

Other campaigns have been great about highlighting how the netroots help in breaking and spreading news about the campaigns, and even engage them like the traditional media (see Chris Dodd’s, John Edwards’ and Bill Richardson’s campaigns as an example).  Heck, Bill Richardson’s campaign sends out a weekly “Richardson Round-Up” in Iowa that highlights what the media–both traditional and new–have been saying about the candidate in the past week.

Instead, the Clinton campaign let the blogs break the news and then let it fester amongst themselves.  Then gave the traditional media a heads-up a few hours later and even let Wilson do some one-on-one interviews over the phone.

Maybe I’m just jealous.  But it sure seems like if you’re going to reach out, make it count and put some force into it.  Don’t do it half-assed.