Democrats

This could be interesting. Democrats know they have a good thing going with the whole Obama cult of personality and figure the bigger venue the better, and why not open it up to the general public:

Barack Obama's campaign is considering moving his nomination acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention from the Pepsi Center to Invesco Field at Mile High to allow tens of thousands to witness the historic moment, sources say.

The move would mark a major departure from tradition, but would be in keeping with the candidate's desire to build a large grass-roots campaign focused on "change."

Should the Illinois Senator give his Aug. 28 speech - which occurs on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech - at Invesco, the move would leave behind the multi-million-dollar broadcast studios and high-tech podium and stage to be constructed at the Pepsi Center.

Possible downside? Well I suppose it's a possibility that he could tank the speech like Kerry in 2004 and come off as awkward in front of even more people, but given that it's Obama, that's not something I would count on happening. McCain could try the same thing I suppose, but could he fill a stadium? Would be embarrassing if he didn't.

I guess that Team Obama decided the Fourth of July weekend would be a great time to float the idea of refining his Iraq position. The idea is that most Americans (and hopefully media reporters) are too busy to pay attention to a very substantial shift in his Iraq stance.


GOPublius lays out the unfortunate choices of Mr. Obama:

John McCain has set a trap for Barack Obama, and its one Obama may find hard to avoid. Obama owes his current candidacy and his position at the top of 2008 Democratic ticket to his uncompromising anti-war stance. Through the fall and spring, Obama's position on the war was unmistakable, "Let me be clear: there is no military solution in Iraq and there never was...the best way to protect our security is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months, or one year - now!" As a regular part of Obama's stump speech, the freshman Illinois senator pledged, "I will end this war in 2009." Such a position worked well with the left-wing base of the Democratic Party, but over the course of the past year a funny thing has happened in Iraq - the U.S. has employed an increasingly successful military strategy, and its primary public proponent has been Senator John McCain.

...

...Will Obama campaign as the man who wishes to singlehandedly snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq, or the man who flip-flopped on the central issue of his campaign and embraced Bush? ...

A year ago conventional wisdom told us that McCain's position on Iraq would surely doom him as a candidate in the general election. It now appears that being one of the few politicians that has stood firm on a single position that turned out to be correct might be his saving grace!

Which is another example of why I hold conventional wisdom with such a low regard. CW and $3 will buy you a very small (but tasty) coffee at Starbucks.

Hillary might have fared better, had she been the nominee, but unfortunately for her and the Democrats, she's not the nominee, and even if she was Obama and the left roots pulled her so far into the anti-war camp that her earlier strong position on the war in Iraq had been quibbled into meaninglessness.

Influential blogger and Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas caused a first-class kerfuffle on an economy-class budget, announcing that he would be withholding his $2300.00 donation from Barack Obama's campaign until he sees some "good behavior." From Daily Kos:

First, he reversed course and capitulated on FISA, not just turning back on the Constitution, but on the whole concept of "leadership". Personally, I like to see presidents who 1) lead, and 2) uphold their promises to protect the Constitution.

Then, he took his not-so-veiled swipe at MoveOn in his "patriotism" speech.

Finally, he reinforced right-wing and media talking points that Wes Clark had somehow impugned McCain's military service when, in reality, Clark had done no such thing.

Markos goes to great pains to explain that he still supports Obama, but that he won't be anyone's "water carrier."

He also tries to downplay the importance of his donation (with a 739-word story on the most popular blog in the universe.)

I applaud Markos for not being a water-carrier now, but it makes me wonder where he's been this whole campaign.

Barack Obama unveiled his vision for re-tooling George W. Bush's "Office of Faith-Based Initiative." From the AP:

Taking a page from President Bush, Democrat Barack Obama said Tuesday he wants to expand White House efforts to steer social service dollars to religious groups, risking protests in his own party with his latest aggressive reach for voters who usually vote Republican.

The AP originally reported, then corrected, the assertion that Obama's program would "support their ability to hire and fire based on faith."

The move has pundits drawing comparisons, mostly favorable, to George W. Bush, but is being characterized by some as a rightward shift by the candidate. The preferred narrative these days is that, now that the primaries are over, Obama is making a sharp, rightward turn for the general election.

While the merits of the program are debatable, this is unquestionably smart politics by Obama. The move is consistent with everything that people know about him, so the pandering charge won't stick, and his program fixes, and builds on, Bush's flawed program.

For my part, I find myself mostly in agreement with Andrew Sullivan on this one.

It often seems there are few things agreed on when it comes to politics. But this year - whether it be the historical support Barack Obama has received on the campaign trail, the distance John McCain is trying to put between himself and President Bush on many issues to convince us a vote for him is not a vote for "more of the same," or the ousting of many congressional incumbent Republicans around the country - I think we can all agree that "CHANGE" is a good a theme as any in this year's elections.

So if any of you Democratic or Republican convention planners need a good theme song this year, I've got one for you: "It's Your Life" by 23-year-old Francesca Battistelli.

Battistelli, a Native New Yorker who now lives in Nashville, is like a breath of fresh air amid a political process becoming more filled with rancor every day. "It's Your Life" was influenced, in part, by the importance of this year's election and the need for everyone to get up and get involved in changing their own lives and the state of our country. She has a debut performance in New York City Tuesday, July 8. Details after the jump.

Here's what Battistelli tells Political Machine:

"Voting is so important, and it distinguishes our country from others in the world where so many people don't have a voice. It's a way to be heard and contribute to creating a better future on a local and national level.

Update: The Obama campaign Released the Following statement this afternoon, via email:

"Senator Obama had a terrific conversation with President Clinton and is honored to have his support in this campaign. He has always believed that Bill Clinton is one of this nation's great leaders and most brilliant minds, and looks forward to seeing him on the campaign trail and receiving his counsel in the months to come," said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

6/24/2008 - When Senator Hillary Clinton suspended her campaign, and offered her "full throated support" to Barack Obama, his future got so bright, he had to wear shades. Now, on the heels of news that she will be campaigning with him in Unity, N.H., this Friday, comes the endorsement that could bounce Obama right into the White House. Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the former President of the United States, Mr. William Jefferson Clintoooon! (through a spokesmaaaaan.) From Reuters:

"President Clinton is obviously committed to doing whatever he can and is asked to do to ensure Senator Obama is the next president of the United States," Clinton's spokesman Matt McKenna told Reuters in a one-sentence e-mail.

Update: According to a source at the Obama campaign, General Wesley Clark was not acting as Obama's surrogate when he made the remarks on Face the Nation. "He was with Senator Clinton's campaign, but has not taken a position with our campaign," the source said.

When asked if General Clark had been sent on Face the Nation by the campaign, or went under his own steam, the source said, "Face the Nation booked him."

In response to the furor over General Wesley Clark's remarks on Sunday's Face the Nation, and the McCain campaign's denunciation of same, the Obama campaign has just released the following statement: (via email)

"As he's said many times before, Senator Obama honors and respects Senator McCain's service, and of course he rejects yesterday's statement by General Clark," said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

Senator Obama also referenced the incident, without specifying Clark, during today's speech on patriotism in Independence, MO:

Remarks of Senator Barack Obama

The America We Love – as prepared for delivery

Monday, June 30th, 2008

Independence, Missouri

On a spring morning in April of 1775, a simple band of colonists – farmers and merchants, blacksmiths and printers, men and boys – left their homes and families in Lexington and Concord to take up arms against the tyranny of an Empire. The odds against them were long and the risks enormous – for even if they survived the battle, any ultimate failure would bring charges of treason, and death by hanging.

And yet they took that chance. They did so not on behalf of a particular tribe or lineage, but on behalf of a larger idea. The idea of liberty. The idea of God-given, inalienable rights. And with the first shot of that fateful day – a shot heard round the world – the American Revolution, and America's experiment with democracy, began.

The New York Times chronicles a web-based phenomenon surrounding Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama. A growing number of his supporters are taking his middle name as their own in their online identities. It is cropping up on networking sites and discussion boards as a rash of new "Husseins" take their man's Arabic middle name. Sen. Obama has been trying to run down the rumor that he is a Muslim. He is not, but due to his father's Muslim heritage, Obama's youth spent in Indonesia, and that middle name of his, the rumor persists. Now, a rash of new Husseins are appearing online, taking on the controversial name as a way of showing just how inconsequential a middle name is.

Some of the new name takers say that they are doing so out of anger at perceived Republican attacks on Obama using his middle name as a slur. "I am tired of Republicans pronouncing Barack Obama's name as if it's some sort of cuss word," said Jeff Strabone of Brooklyn, NY. In fact, the issue of Sen. Obama's middle name was placed before the public not by Republicans, but by the Hillary Clinton campaign. Prominent former Senator and Clinton supporter Bob Kerrey first used Sen. Obama's full name during an interview with the Washington Post.

"It's probably not something that appeals to him, but I like the fact that his name is Barack Hussein Obama, and that his father was a Muslim and that his paternal grandmother is a Muslim. There's a billion people on the planet that are Muslims and I think that experience is a big deal."

The Senate adjourned for the Fourth of July Recess without taking action on several important pending bills, including a mortgage bailout, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act reauthorization, and the war funding supplemental. Democratic leaders complain that minority Republicans have deliberately stalled legislation in an attempt to create a "do-nothing Congress" against which to run in the fall. But Democrats have short memories, forgetting that when they were in the minority, they adopted much the same tactics to prevent bills that they opposed from advancing. Then, filibusters were a precious right of the minority, vital to the functioning of a democracy and a sacred method of preventing a tyrrany of the majority.

Ironically, Republicans did not hold up the FISA bill or the war supplemental. Those bills are delayed by infighting among factions in the Democratic caucus. Liberals like Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI), oppose the measures both on principle and as a result of pressure from their political base and wish to offer amendments to soften their impact. The mortgage bailout is opposed by more conservative members in the Republican caucus, but will likely pass by a large majority when it does come up for a vote. Republicans argue that by stalling work in the Senate, they are protecting their minority status from an uncooperative majority which often denies them the chance to amend legislation or offer alternatives.

The back and forth battle is nothing new in Washington politics. Both parties engage in it just as vigorously as they decry its results. But in the short run, it appears that Republicans have been particularly successful at frustrating the Democratic leadership, as well as preventing legislation that their base would find difficult to accept. In an election year that is shaping up to very bad for Republicans, they may have to take their solace anywhere they can find it.