In case you missed the major non-story of the day, a pall has settled on the Netroots.  A bunch of Democrats in the house wound up supporting a bill that condemned Moveon.org’s ill-advised ad that called David Petraeus a traitor.  The Democratic apostates in the House who supported the bill joined numerous other Democratic apostates who made a similar vote in the Senate. 

Of course, none of this makes Markos Moulitsas happy.  In response to today’s mass apostasy in the House, Markos printed a list of the Democrats in House and Senate who voted against the measures and commented on the congressmen who stood with Moveon.org and against David Petraeus, “Here's a list of those Democrats we can trust to have our backs. Everyone else is a fair-weather friend, at best.”

Friends, welcome to the bass-ackwards world of the Netroots.  Normally, political organizations support politicians that they deem worthy of the tribute.  The Netroots have turned that formulation on its head.  The Netroots expect Democratic politicians to support them, even when they do something mind-numbingly stupid like the “Betray-Us” ad.  According to a Rasmussen poll, 23% of America approves of the Moveon.org ad, while 58% disapprove.  Nevertheless, the Netroots demand the Democratic Party pays a political price for Moveon’s stupidity and “have the Netroots’ back.”

HERE’S THE INSIDER’S CONVENTIONAL WISDOM OF THE Netroots.  By the way, I should know this conventional wisdom since I helped write it a couple of years ago.  The Netroots are all about political tactics.  They lack any discerning governing philosophy.  Markos Moulitsas and Jerome Armstrong conceded in their manifesto, “Crashing the Gate”, that the Netroots lacked ideas.  Their solution?  Develop liberal think-tanks to rival things like the Hoover Institution so Netroot dwellers of the future would know what to think.

There was another side of this agenda, one that I haven’t talked about much because it didn’t have a lot of real world impact.  The Netroots want to accumulate power for their movement.  On the one hand, I never begrudged them this desire.  I wouldn’t mind if I led an online movement that could summon all the Republican presidential candidates at the snap of my virtual fingers.  Besides, since they lacked any discernible or consistent political philosophy aside from ending the Iraq war, who cared if they had power?  It’s not like they’d know what to do with it if they ever got it.  Besides, the politicians who the Netroots have aided are a pretty diverse bunch, ideologically speaking anyway.  Erstwhile Netroot heroes Heath Shuler, Jon Tester and James Webb (all crowned “fair weather friends at best” in Markos’ post today) are unlikely to be crashing any gates with more loyal Netroot allies like Maxine Waters and Sheila Jackson-Lee.

Still, today’s post by Markos represents some kind of watershed.  This might be the clearest expression yet of his sentiment that “the movement” comes first.  Not coincidentally, Markos leads the movement.  Other members of the movement like Moveon.org’s obtuse Eli Pariser share Markos’ sentiment as well as his risible self-importance.

Of course, the Netroots have a problem.  They can bluster all they want about fair-weather friends, but somehow I doubt such veiled threats are leaving any Democratic congressmen quaking in their boots.  The Netroots threw everything they had at the Democrats’ most prominent apostate, Joe Lieberman, in 2006.  Lieberman represented a very blue state, and was the most pro-Bush member of the Democratic caucus.  Last time I checked, he still holds the Senate seat that the Netroots were so sure would now belong to (…wait a minute...it’s coming to me…got it!) Ned Lamont.

In other words, why would someone like Heath Shuler or Jim Webb pay a political price to have Moveon.Org’s back, especially when Moveon.Org has done something that most members of congress genuinely found offensive and politically moronic?  The Netroots like to think they’re running the Democratic party, but they’re not.  It’s not surprising that few Democratic incumbents (who don’t have what’s tantamount to lifetime tenure in their seat) have any interest in having the Netroots’ back. 

Sadly for “the movement”, the Netroots are like any other interest group – politicians will court them only in proportion to their importance.  Right now, the Netroots aren’t looking that important.  In the latest Daily Kos straw poll, presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton pulls only 11% of the vote, trailing John Edwards by 28 percentage points.  In other words, the so-called reality-based community has both feet firmly planted in Fantasy Land.

FOR MARKOS, IT gets even worse.  Early this afternoon, he moved Barack Obama off the fair-weather friend list even though Obama didn’t vote against the bill that condemned Moveon.org.  Obama, and Obama alone, received this preferential treatment because he offered a purportedly compelling excuse for abstaining on the vote.  According to Markos, the rationale for Obama’s abstention “(was sound.)  It was a protest against a piece of ridiculous legislation.”

Markos is known for his oft-times amusing intellectual incoherence, but even by his standards, this is a bit much.  A more likely reason for Markos’ lenience towards Obama is he doesn’t want to offend any Democrat with a chance at being president. 

From crashing to the gates to groveling for a seat at the table.  What a sad trip it’s been for the Netroots since they jumped the shark with that “Betray Us” ad.

Compliments? Complaints? Contact me at Soxblog@aol.com.