Today, Louisiana 1976, jlms_qkw, claude, dopper0189, ybruti and vcmvo2, with ItsJessMe editing scoured through 24 hours' worth of diaries to find these gems for you.  Please take the time to read them and comment in them to let the diarists know that you appreciate the time they took to share their thoughts with the community.

Literary Inspirations

• With Wallace Stegner in mind, Mother Mags examines the situation in Arizona and says, We Failed You Wally, And It May Get Worse. (Louisiana 1976)
• Stranded Wind senses "a Steinbeck moment" in his illustrated NN10: The Immigrant's Travails. (ybruti)
• veritas curat posts detailed criticism of Daniel Quinn's Ishmael in Leavers vs. Takers: The Battle of the Strawmen. (ybruti)
• gjohnsit explores how the class struggle aspect of a famous bandit has slowly been edited away in modern retellings: When Robin Hood was real. (dopper0189)

Inspiring Photography

• Photos! Graphs! And More! jamess puts it all together in Disruptive Technology, Micro Solar, and Recovery Act Innovation. (jlms qkw)
• Pakalolo shares some extraordinary photos of extraordinary natural phenomena along with descriptions of what they are and how the occur in Strange Earth Phenomena - Photo Heavy -Updated x2. (claude)

Inspired by Nature

• Here are some insights into same-sex-couple parenting from examples of such in the animal kingdom, compiled by gaycatholic in Same Sex Parents, Furred and Feathered. (claude)
• LaughingPlanet makes a plea to stop the environmental destruction in Action! Utah seeks 1st tar sands project in US history. (vcmvo2)
• fishgirl26 muses beautifully on parenting, suicide, fishing, her father, and mutual support, in Life and Death in a day. (jlms qkw)

Inspired by the Past

• Clytemnestra tells a personal story of school desegregration from the 1970's in What we learned on the playground: a story of racism. (dopper0189)
• Mokurai gives us some perspective in Godless, Gritless Liberals, Then and Now. (jlms qkw)

Finding Inspiration in the Present

• thefourthbranch says Glenn Beck's "crusade" against social justice attacks a basic religious principle. (ybruti)
• In a thoughtful approach to journalism and ethics, 8ackgr0und N015e writes How Obama can change the tone and defend democracy. (vcmvo2)
• rfall wonders if there are Ghosts in the Machine? (jlms qkw)

jotter has High Impact Diaries: July 25, 2010.

emeraldmaiden has Daily Kos Top Comments 7/26/10 - The Evil Weed.

The Wrap is being written, for what it is worth, by a guy wearing a parka at the moment. Because...seriously...when you have languished in 108-degree heat for five days, 75 degrees feels downright frosty.

Here is hoping that everyone has made it home from Netroots Nation 2010 in Vegas safely and happily. And for those who haven't had their political fill in the wake of that wondrous event, there is quite a bit to peruse in the Monday edition of the Wrap....

THE U.S. SENATE

IN-Sen: Indiana Dems tweak Coats for lobbyist past
While the Wrap will not cover every new ad that gets launched this cycle, I am enough of a sucker for parody ads that this one made the cut. The Indiana Democratic Party gives a good-natured smack to Republican nominee Dan Coats (a former Senator and lobbyist) by going through his lobbying greatest hits by riffing off of the famous "priceless" MasterCard commercials. Worth a watch, to be sure.

KS-Sen: Moran's former campaign head kisses Tiahrt, tells on Moran
Paul Moore used to be the campaign manager for Senate candidate Jerry Moran. He has now endorsed Moran's opponent, Congressman Todd Tiahrt. That, in itself, is interesting. But it gets more interesting when you see what Moore is saying about Moran. Moore complains in an AP article that Moran "winced" at being referred to as a conservative, fearful of alienating pro-choice moderates in a state whose rivalry between mods and cons is the stuff of legend. That is probably not the story Moran wants to see with eight days remaining in his primary.

LA-Sen: Vitter internal claims enormous primary edge
The Vitter/NRSC internal poll giving him a big lead over Charlie Melancon was posted on the Wrap this weekend, but SSP's Crisitunity caught another data point of note in that internal. The poll gives Vitter a dominant edge in the Republican primary: Vitter polls at 76%, with former judge Chet Traylor at 5% and former Indie House candidate Nick Accardo at 2%.

NH-Sen: Palin becoming Paul Hodes' best asset, according to PPP
Tom Jensen from PPP is a master poll-tease. Today, he hinted at the results his crew will release tomorrow in the New Hampshire Senate race. From the looks of things, the Sarah Palin endorsement of Attorney General Kelly Ayotte had divergent impacts on the landscape in the Granite State. Jensen teases that the tip of the cap from Mama Grizzly has made Ayotte more popular than ever among GOP primary voters, but less popular than ever among the general electorate. Expect Ayotte's edge over Hodes to be smaller than ever when the poll is released tomorrow.

SC-Sen: Alvin Greene...Superstar
This is a pretty unbelievable statistic: according to Yahoo's Michael Calderone, the candidate who received more media coverage than any other 2010 candidate is...Alvin Greene, the accidental Senate nominee from South Carolina. Greene tops the chart, followed by Nikki Haley, Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina. In fairness to the American press, however, this study by Pew only included media coverage from June 8th (the primary day for South Carolina) through July 18th.

WI-Sen: Ron Johnson hates the President, loves BP
Two separate news items from the weekend paint a pretty ugly picture of likely GOP Senate nominee Ron Johnson. The first one came during the weekend, when Johnson sat mute while a campaign town hall guest ripped President Obama as a "criminal" and an "American-hater." When asked if he agreed with that sentiment, Johnson stammered a bit, saying "I am not going to argue with...arm wrestle you about it." On Monday, Johnson revealed something he can stand for--profitting from BP. After saying two weeks ago he was going to dump his BP stock, Johnson is now saying that he has not made a final decision. Either way, he is a pretty bad guy. Either he sells the stock and pays for his campaign with BP's blood on his hands, or he keeps the stocks and advocates on their behalf, because he personally stands to gain from their success.

THE U.S. HOUSE

MN-06: Clark claims major endorsement for general election
Law enforcement will apparently have the back of Democratic House contender (and NN10 attendee) Tarryl Clark. The MPPOA, the largest police union in the state, has endorsed Clark over incumbent Republican Michele Bachmann. The union has endorsed Republicans in the past (including Norm Coleman in 2008), but has never endorsed Bachmann in her three bids for the House.

NE-02: Terry told to keep partying ways to a minimum
This is delicious, especially for a candidate in the Heartland. Both Roll Call and the New York Post ran stories today highlighting the renewed efforts of Minority Leader John Boehner to keep his caucus out of trouble amid a wave of frat-like behavior, particularly with female lobbyists. The best nugget from the stories, however, is the actions of one Lee Terry, who is locked into a potentially competitive battle with Democrat Tom White. Check out this little excerpt from one of the Post's reporters:

GOP Rep. Lee Terry of Nebraska -- who's in a tough race against Democratic opponent Tom White -- was witnessed by Page Six in close conversation with a comely lobbyist at the Capitol Hill Club in DC recently.

"Why did you get me so drunk?" Terry asked the giggling woman, among other personal remarks.

When Terry realized he was sitting near a reporter, he quickly changed the topic of conversation to his three children and the struggle to pay their college tuition.

Terry was given a 100 percent rating by the Christian Coalition for his pro-family voting record.

NM-01: Dueling polls paint very different pictures of race
Depending on who you believe, either Democrat Martin Heinrich has a double-digit lead in his re-election bid with Jon Barela, or he is trailing him. Those are the split verdicts from a pair of polls that came to light today. KOB's poll, conducted by SurveyUSA, had Barela out in front of Henrich by a 51-45 margin. This shows a bit of consistency for SUSA, who has been bearish on Democratic prospects virtually across the board. Heinrich's campaign immediately countered with a poll from GQR (a Democratic pollster, but one that has been pretty even-handed in the past). They polled about two weeks ago, and had Heinrich leading Barela by a dozen points (53-41).

PA-03: Kelly internal poll claims double digit lead over Dem freshman
This is an internal poll with a fairly small sample size, so use more salt than what would normally be prescribed for an internal. That said, a new Tarrance poll conducted for Republican challenger Mike Kelly has the Republican staked to an eleven-point edge over Democratic incumbent Kathy Dahlkemper (48-37). The poll claims a surprisingly high level of name recognition (67%) for Kelly.

RI-01: Progressive upstart nabs major endorsement
He might not be the leading fundraiser in the Democratic field, but progressive candidate (and NN10 attendee) David Segal claimed a big endorsement in his bid to topple better-funded candidates like Providence Mayor Kevin Cicilline and former state party chair William Lynch. Segal, a state legislator, earned the endorsement of the state teachers union. The union is on an endorsement kick, having given Lincoln Chafee their nod late last week.

THE GUBERNATORIAL RACES

GA-Gov: Deal internal poll claims a toss-up in runoff
It is still a couple of weeks until the gubernatorial runoff for the GOP in the Peach State, and last week's primary runner-up has a new poll out claiming that it is a coin flip (PDF file). The poll, taken for former Congressman Nathan Deal by McLaughlin, claims a one-point lead for Deal over primary frontrunner Karen Handel (39-38). The winner of the Handel-Deal runoff will battle with former Democratic Governor Roy Barnes in November.

KY-Gov (2011): Former Rand Paul manager teasing '11 ticket reveal
By the end of the week, we will know why former Rand Paul campaign manager David Adams parachuted out of the Paul campaign. A tweet from local political site Bluegrass Politics claims that Adams will unveil a candidate for the 2011 gubernatorial race. The GOP will be challenging incumbent Democratic Governor Steve Beshear, and Adams claims that the candidate he will be working with will have Tea Party support.

OK-Gov: General more competitive than primaries, according to new poll
There was some seriously interesting polling data emerging from the Sooner State over the weekend. Apparently, tomorrow's primaries are not going to be terribly competitive. As expected, Congresswoman Mary Fallin is cleaning house on the GOP side, with a 56-18 lead over state legislator Randy Brogdon. However, the Democratic side was expected to be a bit more competitive than it apparently will be: Attorney General Drew Edmondson has a 49-33 lead over Lt. Governor Jari Askins. Even more interesting, however, is that the general election is considerably closer than most folks would have wagered. Fallin leads Askins by just six points (46-40) and Edmondson by just eight points (47-39). Despite the deep-red profile of Oklahoma, this would be a pickup for the GOP, as Fallin would replace term-limited Democrat Brad Henry.

TN-Gov: Haslam has sizeable primary and general elex leads, says M-D
With about a week to go until their primary elections, Mason Dixon has waded into Tennessee, and they see good news for the uber-wealthy mayor of Knoxville, Republican Bill Haslam. The Mason Dixon poll has Haslam leading Congressman Zach Wamp by eleven points (36-25), with Lt. Governor Ron Ramsey trailing with 20% of the vote. Haslam also has a sizeable lead (49-31) over the sole Democrat in the running, Mike McWherter. All three Republicans hold leads over McWherter, although both Wamp (45-38) and Ramsey (43-38) are considerably weaker than Haslam.

THE RAS-A-POLL-OOZA

The House of Ras goes from the desert to the prairies to the sea with their trio of polling results. None of them would qualify as a surprise, though, as the continued rule of incumbents and quasi-incumbents carries the day. This is good news for two Republicans (Senator John McCain and Governor-turned-Senate candidate John Hoeven) and one Democrat (Governor Deval Patrick).

AZ-Sen (R): Sen. John McCain 54%, J.D. Hayworth 34%
MA-Gov: Gov. Deval Patrick (D) 38%, Charlie Baker (R) 34%, Tim Cahill (I) 17%
ND-Sen: John Hoeven (R) 69%, Tracy Potter (D) 22%

Wow.  

I hope you were inspired.

I hope you were engaged.

I suspect you're exhausted.

There are so many sub-conferences which take part in Netroots Nation.  Of course, there's the formal calendar with its keynote sessions, panel discussions, training sessions and caucuses.  There's the Exhibit Hall, an energetic world of its own.  There's the social calendar, too, but then there's what I'd call the interstitial conference -- all those little moments in between everything else where you run into an old online friend (or make a new friend), or meet someone who's running for office, or otherwise just plain happenstance at the conference.  

I can't possibly single out one moment -- big or tweet-level -- and that's not my job.  But I do think that more than any other conference we've run, this was a progressive conference more than it was a Democratic conference.  Yes, party leaders and office seekers were there, but this felt more like a conference about progressive ideas and building our progressive movement (and obtaining progressive policy victories) than it was about the electoral process.

Right now, there's something I'd like you to do, and it's absolutely essential for the enduring success of this conference.  You need to tell us what worked, and what didn't work.  We have received a great deal of positive feedback so far, but we need to keep listening.

As chairman of the board of directors for NN, I need to know what you think.  You are our stakeholders, our constituents, and your satisfaction is essential to our continued success.  There is no aspect of this conference which cannot be rethought, and no detail not worth mentioning.  And, obviously, we don't want to forget anything that worked out better than our wildest expectations, and want to capture as much of that now while it's still fresh in your minds.  Tell us what you loved, and what we need to do more -- because we didn't see everything, even all the good stuff.  So tell us stories about your Netroots Nation experience.

[To give you an idea -- from your feedback last year, we added karaoke this year.  We also made sure to put the exhibit hall front and center geographically, and to make sure the schedule was more endurable overall.]

We've got a few ways you can register this feedback.  First off, um, here.  I think you know how to do that.

Secondly, anything you tweet to #nn10, we're still watching.

And thirdly, if you'd like to keep it private, email me at adam [at] netrootsnation [dot] org or to executive director Raven Brooks at raven [at] netrootsnation [dot] org.  We will make sure every email gets to the appropriate person(s) on our staff, and that each receives a response.

Thanks again.  You each make our conference, and our movement, what it is.

[See, also, Nurse Kelley's diary on accessibility issues.  We are paying attention.]

The Palinization of the Republican Party proceeds apace and party insiders openly tremble as they should. And it's not only the Tea Party extremists. It's Sharron Angle hiding from the press. And Rand Paul doing the same. Or Meg Whitman ducking her own press conference. Or Chris Dudley ducking a debate.

And then there are the liars and cheats. Serial plagiarist Scott McInnis. And serial liar Mark Kirk, who also, understandably, literally runs from the press. And then there's Dudley's dishonesty, too.

Not only are Republican candidates hopelessly extreme and/or inept, they or their backers know that they're hopelessly extreme and/or inept. These people are attempting to follow the Bush model of avoiding mistakes while not letting voters know the truth about who and what they are or where they stand on the issues. It's politics by obfuscation and avoidance, a deliberate strategy of dishonesty, because they know that truth is their worst enemy. Traditional Republican avoidance of scientific facts, such as on evolution or climate change, has created an alternate universe. They depend on myths and lies because it's who they are, desperately hoping that the voters believe false narratives, don't pay attention to issues, and are motivated more by fear and idolatry than rationality.

As Steve Singiser has pointed out, this is an odd election year for polling. Generic ballots and approval ratings and direction of the nation polls don't look so great for Democrats. People are worried and restless. Recovering from the many Bush disasters has not been easy, and on some issues, the Democrats should have been more aggressive in pursuing substantive change. A lot of people aren't happy with the Democrats, and are seeking something different. But once the voters take a look at the different that is offered, the present approach of slow incremental progress doesn't look that bad. It could be better, and it should be better, but the offered alternative certainly isn't better. Not only is it worse, it's frightening, and at times disturbing. What's offered by the Republicans isn't progress, not even slow incremental progress. It's regression, rapid regression. In some cases, it's back to Medievalism regression.

The Democrats need to do a much better job of convincing voters that they stand for the people and for a better future. Being better than a train wreck isn't much of a standard, but for now the best thing the Democrats have going for them is the quality of the opposition. Or, more accurately, the lack of quality of the opposition. That could be enough. As the unhinged extremists increasingly come to dominate their own party, even many traditional hard right Republicans are just plain scared.

I'm going to address this one more time:

Democrats are likely to start the next Congress with a majority, even if they lose the election quite badly. With sufficient unity, they could change the rules before work begins again. But it'll be a pretty raw move: Neutering the opposition after the voters favored them at the polls is a bit hard to defend on principle, and it's even harder when the principle in question is that the Senate should be governed democratically.

[...]

My oft-expressed preference is for Republicans and Democrats to figure something out jointly and set it into motion such that it either phases in over the next few years or begins six years from now, when we don't know who'll be in control. But if that's not going to happen, then members of both parties have to be thinking: Do they really want to be the side the rules get changed on, rather than the side that changes the rules?

I think it's a fair-ish idea, considered in a vacuum, but I'm unwilling to be the only fair party at the table, and see very little advantage in dealing in good faith with the other party, considering that they would have forced us to the table on account of their dealing with us in such remarkably bad faith.

I'd also say that what we're fixing here is the Senate as an institution, and that doesn't belong to one party or the other. The Senate needs to be able to operate, regardless of who's running it. The country stands to benefit from this fix, and the question of which party the voters want to run a working Senate is a separate issue, and one they're perfectly familiar with deciding. If they don't like the way Democrats do it, they'll fix that. Casting the fate of the Senate rules to the wind doesn't promote small d democratic accountability.

From a more partisan perspective, I'd add that the rules need to be changed, and making the change requires some very heavy lifting. I think the benefit of having done that work ought rightly to go to the team that does the work. If the other team would like to have the benefit of that work, they can convince the American people to give it to them in the next election after this one. But for myself, I wouldn't give it away in a lottery.

Disclosure: I'm doing paid work as a Fellow for ProgressiveCongress.org in addressing the necessity of filibuster reform in the Senate. The Fellowship is being supported in part by CREDO Action and Blue America. You can help support this work -- at no cost to you -- by signing CREDO Action's petition and/or by donating at Blue America's ActBlue page.

I'm going to address this one more time:

Democrats are likely to start the next Congress with a majority, even if they lose the election quite badly. With sufficient unity, they could change the rules before work begins again. But it'll be a pretty raw move: Neutering the opposition after the voters favored them at the polls is a bit hard to defend on principle, and it's even harder when the principle in question is that the Senate should be governed democratically.

[...]

My oft-expressed preference is for Republicans and Democrats to figure something out jointly and set it into motion such that it either phases in over the next few years or begins six years from now, when we don't know who'll be in control. But if that's not going to happen, then members of both parties have to be thinking: Do they really want to be the side the rules get changed on, rather than the side that changes the rules?

I think it's a fair-ish idea, considered in a vacuum, but I'm unwilling to be the only fair party at the table, and see very little advantage in dealing in good faith with the other party, considering that they would have forced us to the table on account of their dealing with us in such remarkably bad faith.

I'd also say that what we're fixing here is the Senate as an institution, and that doesn't belong to one party or the other. The Senate needs to be able to operate, regardless of who's running it. The country stands to benefit from this fix, and the question of which party the voters want to run a working Senate is a separate issue, and one they're perfectly familiar with deciding. If they don't like the way Democrats do it, they'll fix that. Casting the fate of the Senate rules to the wind doesn't promote small d democratic accountability.

From a more partisan perspective, I'd add that the rules need to be changed, and making the change requires some very heavy lifting. I think the benefit of having done that work ought rightly to go to the team that does the work. If the other team would like to have the benefit of that work, they can convince the American people to give it to them in the next election after this one. But for myself, I wouldn't give it away in a lottery.

Disclosure: I'm doing paid work as a Fellow for ProgressiveCongress.org in addressing the necessity of filibuster reform in the Senate. The Fellowship is being supported in part by CREDO Action and Blue America. You can help support this work -- at no cost to you -- by signing CREDO Action's petition and/or by donating at Blue America's ActBlue page.

TPM busts open the latest embarrassment for the Republican National Committee: the RNC is now touting Andrew "The Race-Baiter" Breitbart as a special guest at a fundraiser next month with Michael Steele.

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele has a party fundraising event coming up in August that is scheduled to feature a very special guest: Conservative media activist Andrew Breitbart, according to a copy of the invitation exclusively obtained by TPM.

According to the invitation, Steele and Breitbart will appear together at a reception on Thursday, August 12 at 6:00 PM. From the invite:

Thursday, August 12:

6:00 p.m. Welcome Reception featuring Andrew Breitbart and RNC Chairman Michael Steele

The fundraiser has ambitious goals, seeking contributions as much as $60,800 per person. The minimum donation to attend the Breitbart-Steele reception is $5,000.

The RNC's decision to hold an event with Breitbart in the wake of his attempted smear of Shirley Sherrod reminds of of something Michael Steele said earlier this year:

“We have lost sight of the historic, integral link between the party and African-Americans,” Steele said. “This party was co-founded by blacks, among them Frederick Douglass. The Republican Party had a hand in forming the NAACP, and yet we have mistreated that relationship. People don’t walk away from parties. Their parties walk away from them.

“For the last 40-plus years we had a ‘Southern Strategy’ that alienated many minority voters by focusing on the white male vote in the South.”

At the time, Steele was trying to argue that the GOP needed to move past its race-baiting Southern Strategy. Just a few months later, it's clear that Steele's argument fell on deaf ears. Race-baiting is alive and well in the GOP. In fact, it's retaken center stage.

Thursday evening at Netroots Nation, Markos said one of the things he's looking forward to witnessing after this November's election is the civil war that will engulf the GOP as party insiders blame tea partiers for costing them key races throughout the country (for example: Sharron Angle and Rand Paul).

It turns out he might not need to wait. In fact, some teabaggers are already pointing fingers at each other. Case in point:

Buck is the Tea Party candidate running against establishment pick Jane Norton in Colorado's Republican Senate primary. His latest gaffe is being caught on tape by a Democratic operative saying, "Will you tell those dumbasses at the Tea Party to stop asking questions about birth certificates while I'm on the camera?" according to The Denver Post. Without walking it completely back, Buck has already told the Post the language was inappropriate.

The funny thing is that Buck might be dumber than the tea partiers he was attacking -- he hasn't won the primary yet, and if there's one thing we've learned this cycle, it's that if you want to win a GOP primary, don't pick a fight with a tea partier.

Another point worth noting: Buck's problem doesn't seem to be with birtherism. Instead, he just doesn't want to talk about it on camera. Which raises the question: what would he say about it in a private conversation with a tea partier? We may never know for sure, but it's a pretty good guess that behind closed doors he's as birther-curious as any other teabagger.

MoveOn takes on Andrew Breitbart:

MoveOn takes on Andrew Breitbart: