I suspect this whole notion that the Brennan nomination was brought down by "Liberal Bloggers" is a convenient way to launch a smear and to claim that "Liberal Bloggers" are a risk to National Security. -- Ché Pasa

[Hamsher] likely planned to insert Duncan's the power of Glenn Greenwald right at the beginning, as she did. [...] I tend to agree with others that the lefty bloggers could not have done this alone. [...] you'll be hauled out as a useful justification when there is co-incidence in the value sets. -- bystander

I second this idea, and I don't discount the possibility that Glenn in particular is being set up to take the fall for "denying" this "very worthy man" his rightful place in the new administration.

Ché can be a bit of a tinfoil type, but this "liberal bloggers" rationale for denying a position to a shoe-in -- it really comes out of left field.

Irrespective of the true influence of Teh Netroots ™, the political/media establishment's public position on it has been consistent: belittle it with glib, soundbitey phrases, or ignore it.

What is the tenor of the whine coming out of the rightwing noise machine this morning?

Sorry, you missed a shot at being on Maddow's show. Jane is a good colleague, however. I think she likely planned to insert Duncan's the power of Glenn Greenwald right at the beginning, as she did. She did a nice job. The more I hear her - already being familiar with her writing and her views - the better I like her. She's one cool cookie, that Jane.

As I think about it, I tend to agree with others that the lefty bloggers could not have done this alone. I'd like to think that you all could create some measurable pressure, but suspect you'll be hauled out as a useful justification when there is co-incidence in the value sets.

Still, it would be crazy for Obama to blow off those online denizens who are mostly young, provided great energy for his candidacy, and should be integral to his re-election. If he does a bang up job in his first term, perhaps those young 'uns willing to take a risk on a generally unknown candidate won't be so important. But, you'd think he'd want to keep that element as an ace-in-the-hole.

The "Liberal Blogs" did this?

Well, if they had any other discernable influence whatsoever on the course taken by Team Obama, that might be a reasonable inference. But since they do not, I think it's appropriate to be highly skeptical of claims that somehow these "Liberal Blogs" brought down the most highly qualified and most respected candidate to run the CIA in history (as paraphrased from the NPR "Morning Edition" report this morning).

http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=97502074&m=97502110

A Blogger Campaign against him? What campaign? A campaign as strong as that launched against FISA "reform" and Patriot Act renewal? As strong as the campaign to smush Lieberman's Senate committees and perks?

No, I suspect this whole notion that the Brennan nomination was brought down by "Liberal Bloggers" is a convenient way to launch a smear and to claim that "Liberal Bloggers" are a risk to National Security.

Be wary.

It's your right.

I get the feeling you may be implying that Brennan could be a sacrificial lamb. Some raw meat to the 'netroots'

No, absolutely not. Almost exactly the opposite... something more like what Digby says, with the "netroots' as some sort of misdirection.

ITo a large extent, we're all speculating, so I'm being free in throwing my WAGs out there. The bloggers/psychologists theory doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but I could be engaging in gross tinfoilhattery with this.

And it may be that things will be clearer when the eventual designee is out there.

One, John Bolton's appointment as UN ambassador was also blocked to a large extent due to bloggers' efforts, in that case largely due to Steve Clemons. There have also been some other fairly high-profile examples of bad appointments being thwarted to a large extent due to bloggers's efforts, such as Spakovsky, and some judges.

Two, call me cynical, but I can't help but wonder if Obama never really intended to appoint Brennan, and the possibility of his being appointed was floated, and then withdrawn, by design, in order to placate the netroots and make them feel that they have influence over Obama.

In any case, it's good to see that the "He can do no wrong" Obamabots aren't the only Obama supporters out there these days, and that productive and energetic dissent is still alive and well on the left, despite Obama's having won a decisive victory, which is ultimately much more about a movement and its ideas and goals, than about a man and his undeniable and deserved star quality and talents. Let's hope that Obama never loses sight of that.

Sic transit gloria mundi.

You may be right about the role of Navy leadership within the new administration.

The Navy is the Navy, as my Annapolis-grad brother keeps telling me from his retired captain's chair, as he drones on about leadership and what not.

I yawn mostly, not having a vested interest in the military in a career sense (though I do have a punched ticket in my scrapbook) - nor in the minutiae of leadership, whether military or corporate.

However, I did have the pleasure a few months ago of shaking hands with Alberto Mora, the former Navy counsel, who appeared at a recent discussion about the book, "Torture Team", by Philippe Sands. In the book, Sands, a British barrister, lays out in detail what happened within the White House, Pentagon, and Justice Department legal staffs on the torture and rendition questions and procedures.

Mora is credited with challenging all the other administration lawyers on the effort to push the envelope on these tactics, what another government official called going right up to the line and "getting chalk on your spikes."

I hope we hear from Mora again - soon.