"anyone with even moderate liberal tendencies should nowadays feel a desire to spend more time criticizing Republican"

Anyone who doesn't want endless war, trillions more in debt, stagnating wages, etc.

If the Democrats had drifted as far left as the GOP has drifted right since 1994, the Dems would change their name to the American Communist Party. There is no balance anymore - wishy-washy, flaccid Democrats vs. red-meat fascism.

Sad.

Who cares what Kaus has to say about anything?

Au contraire! Only Republicans can whip government into shape, giving taxpayer dollars to the RIGHT people (oil companies, drug companies, Halliburton).

This is absolutely right on. And Kaus is FAR from the only pundit (or politician) that this could be said of.

Well done.

Agreement with JeffII above. When I first started reading blogs, I kept reading that this Kaus guy was a Democrat, but everytime I read him, all I heard was Republican talking points.

One of your finest posts, in my humble opinion. Kaus has long deserved a big take-down to the mat, and you just put him there. It will be interesting to see if he has the courage to respond--without his usual pompous, snide, and indecipherable wordplay, I mean. In other words, some intellectual honesty on his part. Nah, too much to hope for in my life time.

I can't believe anyone still reads Kaus.

I consider myself a centrist, and those of you who've seen my posts here I'm no raging liberal in any case. Even I can't read Kaus anymore without going into a rage. The guy spends his whole smug blog making pointlessly catty comments about various liberals, Democrats, and Andrew Sullivan (I love Sullivan, I admit). When he actually puts forth some logical reasoning, it's usually pretty weak. He's had a few great points in the past, but the rest of it will drive you nuts and isn't worth wading through.

What drove me particularly crazy was the 04 presidential campaign. Daily we heard about such important issues as Kerry's conduct on the ski slopes from Kaus. Heck, I didn't really like Kerry either. But it was already apparent at that point that Bush was driving us into a disaster. Finally, at the end of a long campaign of criticising Kerry for the sin of having a terrible personality, and saying nary a word about Bush's screw-ups, Kaus comes out with an endorsement of .. Kerry. Thanks Kaus! I'm sure your readers will flock to the polls for him, now.

End rant.

On Bloggingheads.tv, Kaus defended his Dem-bashing as being like a "military policeman" (i.e., an army may be fighting for a good cause, but it still needs MPs). But it's a pretty weak analogy - military policemen (I hope) don't take apparent glee in arresting fellow soldiers, nor do they use the enemy's talking points or ideology in doing their job. MPs don't collaborate with the enemy's propagandists. And as far as I know most military policemen don't date the enemy's women.

Mickey who?

Honestly, I think this person is a figment of your and Josh's imagination.

Is it possible that Micky just floats with the prevailing winds of his chosen audience? He is writing purely for a pay check. No core convictions. Just a stack of bills to pay and a desire to be part of the `in` crowd.

Shoot, people with conservative tendencies now spend more time criticizing republicans. Just ask Bruce Bartlett, Paul O'Neill, Andrew Sullivan, and on and on.

Demons from the seventies? What, did a time-traveling hippie seduce Mrs. Kaus again?

The problem is, we have this horrible concept of the idea of an "extremist". We think of traditional left-right issues, and leave it at that. So if you're in the middle, you can't be an extremist.

To that, I say hogwash. I say an extremist is someone who demands extreme outcomes, and rejects debate, both principled and practical, on the issue. It's not black or white, of course...

But I think that the "left" barely qualifies in the extremist catagory. There are some, of course, but not a huge number. For a good example on what really is the two most important issues of the day (one is and one isn't. Which isn't our fault)...

Universal Health Care:Most progressives support this not because it'll give more power to the government, but because it'll be more efficent, and we believe it'll result in better outcomes as a whole. Hardly the thing of a bunch of pinko-lovers..huh?

Foreign Affairs, specifically terrorism:Most progressives take the stance that an overaggressive military campaign against terrorism acts as a recruiting tool to gain future converts and supporters for terrorist leaders. As this, we should be aggressive attacking terrorism on a moral and cultural level. And if that means taking some sacrifices, so be it. We believe it's THAT important.

Dare I say, both those issues are very moderate stances at that. There's nothing really leftist about them. They're reasonable solutions to real problems.

Now, we welcome a debate on those issues. But please, no commie/terrorist-lover baiting, ok?

It came as a shock to me when Kaus was described as a liberal on Sullivan's blog. I honestly had no idea after reading Kaus for six months that he was anything but a Republican shill (at least on those rare occasions I could understand his virtually incoherent writing constructions -- all of the asides and elipses and self-references honestly just sound like mush most of the time).

Had I not been told he's a liberal, I'd never have guessed it from reading the man.

So there isn't even a size constraint on posts? Geez.

Guess I'll start using this blog as offsite backup storage....

Did anyone point out to Kaus that Homeland Security, the agency which had the most to do with Katrina, was precluded by a republican congress from puting their employees in the civil service system?

Kaus is to blogging as Joe Lieberman is to the Democratic party.

For gosh sakes, Mickey's targets remain the New York Times, Hillary, the "cocooning" Dems, unions, labor, the LA Times, and Hollywood liberals.

In other words -- Bill O'Reilly's targets.

The boy's a contrarian plant.

I don't even know who Mickey Klaus is so he can criticize the 60's Democrats, try to redo the Protestant Reformation, or even argue that Inkaton should have avoided monothesism in ancient Egypt, for all I care.

However, it should be fairly obvious that the problems of the mid-twentieth century and the problems of the twenty-first century are presumtively different. Which means that different solutions presumtively should apply.

And when - oh when - are we going to connect the dots and figure out that altrnative energy, national security, and the economy are three aspects of the same thing?

Mickey Kaus is completely insulting to those who worked in disaster relief. We worked our butts off to make it work, and then the GOP ripped it apart. And now he wants to whine about Democratic lefties as the problem?

But the joke's finally on him and his stupid "Slate". Who reads their pathetic drivel anymore? Those stupid inane comments. Those glib little witticisms with a non sequitor or two to make it clear the person hasn't thought through anything in years.

Kevin, congratulations on having the courage to read that twit. But please, also take the time to realize that Sully, Kaus and a few other of the first generation bloggers are of the past now.

No-one really gives a s*** what they think.

Please Mickey, please go off and become Joe's campaign advisor in our new third party.

Kaus is such a complete putz that I really don't see how anyone could give a flying fuck what his motivation is.

Has anyone else noticed that they hardly even do politics at Slate anymore?

Oh, and Mickey Kaus sucks ass.

Just two words: Uriah Heep

2x4, meet head.

I went to high school w/ Kaus. He was insufferable then.

Kaus rose the the top of the pundit pile by showing up the inconsistencies in liberal policies and ideas. He is very good at what he does and he feels that he makes an original contribution to the national discourse. But I think his approach suffers from the following flaw. Kaus' problem is that all political policies be they from the right or the left have inconsistencies, no matter how well designed or noble. Kaus has forgotten that wisdom comes from making choices based on known outcomes. So, although internal consistency is important, a democratic party policy's relative worth can only be measured properly in the face of the other outcomes: the status quo or the republican proposal.

Kaus is a master logician and skeptic but by training his eye so harshly on the left side of the aile he has let the right run wild, to the point where it could bring down the whole house.

Right now he is a man out of season. He is doing a job that is no longer helpful to anyone except Republicans. I hope for his sake that he can reinvent himself. His predicament is common to that part of the pundit class that are not outright Republican operatives.

Isn't it time Kaus got a real job, walking the floor at Home Depot or some such? He really needs to start contributing to his society, instead of the parasitism that he's been indulging in for years.

Why does anybody pay attention to Mickey Kaus?

I stopped reading him when he started hyping Kerry-intern allegations.

Mickey Kaus is a GOP Hack. He is an Anne Coulter escort and apologist.

Listening to Mickey Kaus on what is in Dem party interest is like listening to Osama on how to spread peace.

Has anyone else noticed that they hardly even do politics at Slate anymore?

Kaplan and Gross (Lithwick, too, I guess, though her subject matter isn't my first interest) are the only reason I stop by the Slate. And Gross has his own blog now; if Kaplan follows suit, Slate will be completely off my radar. It's really crap.

Exactly. Assholes like Kaus have horrible political judgment and no sense of proportion. Or else they do and they're just huge assholes.

The days of the Vichy Democrats are numbered...

What I don't understand is why rational people like Kevin Drum still buy Mickey Kaus act as "concerned Democrat". What does Kaus have to do convince Drum et al that he is in fact a right wing GOP Hack? Anybody with a mental pulse can see that Kaus has gone off the deep end and is simply striking poses as "concerned Democrat" as a conceit.

The most radical right wing elements of the GOP control all three branches of govt, not to mention much of the media. And yet according to Mickey Kaus the biggest threat to the country is Noam Chomsky types, people with absolutely no power and no media presence. It is the Noam Chomsky types we should be fighting tooth and nail everyday. Not the people IN POWER, in charge of decision making.

As I said I just don't understand Kevin Drum types. Why do they take Kaus seriously and respond to him? Kaus act has become transparent and stale.

In what language does Kaus write?

The few times I have tried, I have never been able to go past the first paragraph, if that, of his posts.

Such a horrid absuser of the English language should not be allowed to write for an audience.

In the strange world of punditry, you can never go away. Charles Krauthammer and Bill Kristol can continue to pontificate about Lebanon, after thoroughly discrediting themselves time and time again. Mickey Kaus, who may be the single most contemptible pundit on the scene, is no different. He's made a name for himself, so people still care what he says. It doesn't matter if his blog is a stream of nonsensical narcissitic rants with no actual insight, analysis, and perspective. A smarmy half-wit, Kaus is simply worthless. Worthless.

Watching him battle the estimable Robert Wright on bloggingheads.tv is akin to a one-on-one basketball game between Helen Thomas and Dwayne Wade. That intellectual midget Kaus has no chance.

Look Kaus is a breed of "liberal" who has had plenty of company from the Clinton years onward.

For example, there are plenty of alleged liberals out there who still can't wait to rush their latest bash of Al Gore into print, even under the pretense of praising his recent movie.

The rest of us liberals have let this go on for almost 10 years without really calling it out into the open. We snipe at our own, and then wonder why the right-wingers find our tactics so useful.

Also, look at how McCain is treated from the left. So-called liberals kiss the man's arse on a regular basis, when in reality he's not more "authentic" than anyone else out there.

I wonder if the "liberals" will continue to do this right up until the inauguration of a President McCain in 2009. Seems plausible to me.

Kaus is a master logician and skeptic...

Errrrrmmmmm.... I don't see that at all. Long before the Slate-esque "contrarian" schtick got tired, I stopped reading the guy because his writing is shit -- juvenile, tabloid-quality stream of consciousness drivel. I find it very hard to believe that Kaussian prose one can emerge from a "master logician and skeptic". Thomas Paine and Bertrand Russell are just two examples of the genuine article, and their writing was expressive, lucid and forceful.

If the only thing you do is snipe at liberal policies, the only reasonable conclusion is that this represents the sum total of what you really care about. And if that's the only thing you care about even in our current era of rampant conservative extremism, Bush-inspired governmental incompetence, and Rove-ian dedication to ever-increasing polarization as a positive political good, it doesn't suggest a very robust commitment to liberal principles.

A very apt comment in the wake of Lieberman's defeat, Kevin.

Kaus said one thing that was dead on: Democrats' problem isn't convincing people that the Repubs are idiots, the problem is convincing people that the Democrats have a better solution. Simply bashing Bush, Hastert, Frist, and McCain isn't going to win any major elections.

Kaus is the leading argument for determining party affiliation via the Sorting Hat.

I appreciate your effort to tease appart this issue in the various posts in the series (or was it just two?--anyway...). These subtleties are mostly uninteresting except to the wonkiest of wonks (witness the relatively low comment total), but among liberals, it's a critically important discussion to have. I think you've struck the right balance.

Kevin,

O,K., if Katrina is proof of Bush-inspired incompetence, how come they're pretty happy with the govt response across the river in Haley Barbour's juristiction? How come Jeb Bush handled four of the worst hurricanes in Florida history with the same FEMA response teams and is one of the most popular governors the state has ever had? You can continue to be a shill for the teachers and the public employee unions, you can continue to dodge the obvious validity of Mickey's criticisms, and your only response is that Bush Derangement Syndrome should overwhelm everything else, or you're just not worth paying attention to. The longer you continue to trash people like Kaus, or dismiss people like Glenn Reynolds or Ann Althouse as wingnuts, the longer Rove is going to be smiling every election night.

Kaus said one thing that was dead on: Democrats' problem isn't convincing people that the Repubs are idiots, the problem is convincing people that the Democrats have a better solution. Simply bashing Bush, Hastert, Frist, and McCain isn't going to win any major elections.

Modern politics, as set up by the geniuses who have taken control of both parties, allows for comments like this. Voters have no idea how policies work because all they get to hear on the public's air waves are empty-of-information rhetorical slogans.

I know why the Republican party does this, likes this type of politics - it's perfect for authoritarian control over the people.

The Democratic party, however, used to give better, used to inform and educate and encourage participation of all citizens in government.

All that changed when Republicans-in-Democrats-clothing (the DLC) infiltrated the Democratic party in the 1970s. Speaking of which....

The Democratic party needs to purge the DLC from its ranks. That's only going to be possible when more citizens get involved, ask questions, learn policy and demand better of the party's leadership. It's going to take citizens joining the actual Democratic party in their community, and getting active on a grassroots level.

Oh, look at this - Lamont wins and Tucker Carlson brings Bill Press (a Democrat whom Tucker thinks is a bleeding heart liberal, but isn't) out of exile.

When, oh WHEN are we going to get real liberals, intelligent and articulate representatives on the left, onto the public air waves?

Of course the public is ignorant about what liberals have to offer - they never get to see or hear any!

minion of rove wrote: How come Jeb Bush handled four of the worst hurricanes in Florida history with the same FEMA response teams

He didn't. FEMA's response to the hurricanes that hit Florida was dramatically different from FEMA's response to Katrina.

You really are a minion of Rove -- whether or not you actually work for him, you are certainly regurgitating his scripted, programmed bullshit talking points with true Republican brownshirt slavishness.

"There's nothing wrong with a liberal criticizing liberal policies he finds indefensible."

Since when is Kaus considered liberal?
I had no idea. (He can consider himself a Democrat if we wants to vote in Democratic primaries. But you'd have to be pretty right-wing to honestly consider Mickey Kaus a liberal.

Kevin,

I agree with you completely, but have one question: Why do you link to him on your site?

very, very well put.

``If the only thing you do is snipe at liberal policies, the only reasonable conclusion is that this represents the sum total of what you really care about.''

applies toJoe Klein and the rest of the conservatives masquerading as liberal voices.

tomboy wrote: "Shoot, people with conservative tendencies now spend more time criticizing republicans. Just ask Bruce Bartlett, Paul O'Neill, Andrew Sullivan, and on and on."

Who is currently in power? And whose policies have caused the problems that these commentators are complaining about? When a Democratic Congress and/or president return to power, I feel fairly confident that those rightwing pundits will turn their ammunition to the left. I also feel fairly confident that Kaus will also leave his cannons firmly pointed in that direction.

In short, there is a difference.

mr minion of rove, as one who was hit by both frances and jeanne in 2004, those hurricanes were not "four of the worst" to ever hit florida. while charley and ivan did some considerable damage, neither compares with the devastation that accompanied andrew in 1992. not all republicans are morons; not all bushes are incompetents. i've had the priviledge of voting against jeb 3 times for policy reasons, not because he is inept. i'm not sure all is swell in haley barbour's mississippi, but providing relief in a fairly rural state is a far cry from the task of providing assistance to a major urban center like new orleans, where the level of destruction is off the charts and federal assistance is crucial. oh and if you want to judge the job jeb has done, just look at his sterling leadership (or the lack there of) on the insurance crisis facing florida.

What, did a time-traveling hippie seduce Mrs. Kaus again?

there's actually a Mrs. Kaus? Someone besides his mother actually loves that ugly piece of shit?

Seriously, I saw him on t.v. one time, and, aside from the fact that he's a complete idiot, I know why I've never seen him on since then.

mudwall and secularhuman,

I did not say they were the worst hurricanes ever, I said they were amoung the worst. I live in Charlie Taylor's district in NC, and we had a lot of damage, even highways washed away, by Floyd and Ivan. FEMA did a pretty effective job helping out here, as they did everywhere except the locales where Blanco and Nagin were feuding and stopping each other's relief trucks. I think only Bush Derangment Syndrome allows you to paint with a broad brush about how this proves Bush's incompetence [I think Rumsfeld is a better example if that's the argument you want to pursue.]
The point I was trying to make is that purging Kaus, Glenn Reynolds, etc will not help you guys feel better in the long run, no matter how good it feels right now.

"When, oh WHEN are we going to get real liberals, intelligent and articulate representatives on the left, onto the public air waves?"

You are not going to get it in the corporate media.

Corporate media allows range of opinion from Anne Coulter to David Broder. Anybody to the left of Broder is portrayed as left wing fringe.

"Kevin,I agree with you completely, but have one question: Why do you link to him on your site?"

I wonder the same thing. Mickey Kaus should be judged by what he writes. Based on that he is just another unhinged GOP hack, no different from Michelle Malkin. Why link to him?

Shorter Kaus: No matter how much power the Republicans acquire and how badly they govern the country, the Democrats' top priority must be to attack their own base and associated interest groups for being less than perfect. Oh, by the way, I'm a Democrat.

Wait a minute!

1. Katrina response was controlled by FEMA.
2. FEMA is part of DHS.
3. DHS was publicly, and rather noisily, deprived of civil service protections as a political weapon during the 2002 election cycle.
4. Kaus argue democrats are responsible for Katrina because of support for the civil service that managed the response.

WTF? Did I miss something or is Kaus that ignorant?

minion of rove, the FEMA of 2005 was not the same organization as the FEMA of 1992-2000. James Lee Witt, the director under Clinton, is widely acknowledged (by Republicans, even) as a competent disaster specialist who built and ran a responsive, useful agency. All that went to shit under Brownie and his predecessor. And even though he's gone, the FEMA of 2006 looks pretty much the same to me. We'll find out soon enough, I suppose.

Draw your own conclusions about what the drastic difference in performance says about the different presidents who appointed them...

Wow. Just saw the video. Kaus reminds me of the guy who runs the concessions at the race track on "King of the Hill."

Sure, Kaus, is a liberal...one of those liberals who hates all other liberals, all their ideas, the way the govern, and everything they do. It's almost like he's a conservative whackjob. It's time to call a spade a spade. That horse's ass is no liberal.