My colleague Professor Bainbridge writes, in a post entitled "On Becoming a Problem Child,"
John Dickerson makes a point about the Harriet Miers nomination that rings true for me:
The White House listens to these outraged voices but considers them more a nuisance than genuine problem.
I have the distinct impression that the Democratic Party sees the liberal blogosphere as being inside the tent, while the Republican Party views the conservative blogosphere as being somewhere between an irrelevance and a minor nuisance. Maybe this is true, at least in part, because many prominent "conservative" bloggers (Andrew Sullivan, Glenn Reynolds, Stephen Green, and Eugene Volokh spring to mind) are not exactly stalwart Republican party loyalists but rather libertarians (or whatever) who put routinely put their principles ahead of party interests. Alternatively, maybe the Democrats have just decided to follow Lyndon Johnson's advice about keeping your critics inside the tent peeing out rather than outside the tent peeing in.
In any event, all of this raises the question of how those of us in the conservative blogosphere can elevate ourselves into the category of genuine problem as opposed to mere nuisances. I'm open to suggestions.
I have no opinion on the factual question of how the Republican Party views bloggers, and I don't want to speak in this post about what people should do about the Harriet Miers nomination. But as a matter of principle, I surely sympathize with any man who wants to be a problem.