August 02, 2007

8/2: Yearly Kos Presidential Forum 8/4, 1 PM, Don't Miss It!!!

OK, so we were already super excited for 8/4's Yearly Kos Presidential Forum featuring every Dem candidate but Dennis Kucinich and Joe Biden. But after Barack Obama's 8/1 promise to unilaterally act inside Pakistan should a high-value target present itself, we can barely contain ourselves. We simply have no idea how the forum will play out. While John Edwards has been a comfortable favorite in recent Daily Kos straw polls, Obama does have strong currents of support in the community and they were out in force 8/1 spinning the Pakistan comments his way. We also must remember that the convention is on Obama's home turf, Chicago, IL, so this should be considered a road game for all the other candidates. Watch for Edwards to lead the charge against Obama's recent speech, he has the most to gain from a netroots community unified behind one candidate. Remember, Hillary Clinton doesn't need to be the netroots favorite to win, she just needs to keep them at bay.

OBAMA: We Checked, And Our Local Store Does Not Carry This 'Bush-Cheney Lite' Everybody Keeps Talking About

Netroots reaction to Barack Obama's 8/1 Wilson Center speech on foreign policy was mixed. For the most part, the original Howard Dean core of the netroots were more critical of the hawkish nature of the speech, while the more Washington based wonky end of the community was more defensive of it. Obama still has many supporters in all segments of the community, and one diarist at Daily Kos posted a "preemptive strike" anticipating "distortion" on Obama's call for unilateral action against high-value terrorist targets in Pakistan. His defense of Obama was adopted by most Obama supporters: "You won't find anyone in the Democratic field (except Kucinich and maybe Gravel) who would say that if they had a chance to take bin Laden or al-Zawahiri out, they'd hesitate to do so."

From those with Obama:

• TAPPED's Sam Boyd: "It was, indeed, very good and there's a good chance it will be remembered as the moment he finally dispelled worries about his foreign policy experience. ... The most ballyhooed part is the suggestion that Obama might invade tribal areas just across the border from Afghanistan in Pakistan to root out Al Qaeda and even use US troops. Is this a good idea? I don't know."
• AMERICAblog's AJ Rossmiller: "Obama delivered a speech today on terrorism, demonstrating his clear understanding of both the situation in Iraq and the real threats we continue to face abroad. ... The pledge to use actionable intelligence in Pakistan sounds pretty tough, but it's really nothing new. I'm willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt on something like this."
• Matthew Yglesias: "Obama didn't use the phrase "war on terror." Obviously, on this score it's John Edwards who got the ball rolling and deserve credit for breaking the taboo, but it's good to see further forward progress on this front, especially since Obama gave a speech that could hardly be accused of ignoring the reality of terrorism, as opposed to the right's conceptual terrorism-related mirages."
• pro-Iraq invasion Andrew Sullivan: "Obama's JFK Strategy: He will not be Dukakized. And his emphasis in his major foreign policy speech today homes in on a key Bush-Cheney failing: al Qaeda in Pakistan. This is something a Republican should be comfortable saying. ... This is the speech of a potential president.
• Oliver Willis: "The Senator is simply echoing the concerns of the vast majority of Americans in that he will actually follow through on the post-9/11 rhetoric to bring Bin Laden and his ilk to justice. If we have to cross Pakistan's border to kill Bin Laden, so be it. ... Sen. Obama proposed a common sense foreign policy alternative to the Bush doctrine of terrorist appeasement. This should be cheered, not derided."
• The Left Coaster's Steve Soto: "Obama calls for redeploying troops out of Iraq and back into Afghanistan to finally do what Bush wouldn't do at Tora Bora. Obama goes further, trying to get to Bush's right by calling for attacks inside Pakistan if necessary to go after Al Qaeda's safe haven. This rankles the foreign policy pros, who rightly argue that such talk undermines Pervez Musharraf and is only a continuation of Bush's "shoot first, think never" world view. But he's aiming to look tougher here than Bush, and to go farther than Hillary would. In the context of a moving campaign and changing narrative, this makes sense regardless of whether or not a President Obama would ever do this.
• Daily Kos' VirginiaDem: "Obama doesn't say "I will invade Pakistan." Or even, "I'll send our best troops into those mountains to blah blah blah." We just says that we'll act. A surgical bombing strike into a region -- that wouldn't be an invasion. ... Senator Obama could "act" against terrorists in Pakistan without inserting troops.

From those with the terrorists:

• a Kossack: "I like Obama, but I do not like this plan too much. I do not support an incursion into a nuclear-armed nation, especially one as problematic as Pakistan. If this is Obama's way of showing he's not naive on foreign policy (as the article suggests), I'm not sure threatening Pakistan is the way to go."
• another Kossack: "Obama, It's Over. You blew it. ... You had just won your debate with Hillary, and then just a short time later you've said something genuinely naive and irresponsible."
• one last Kossack: "This whole Obama speech debate has led me once again to shake my head in wonder at how stupid people are. ... Does Obama really think that any of this will make a difference when we threaten to go against what a leader of a sovereign country wants? ... There is nothing in his speech but force, money to bribe people to like us and more exceptionalism. This is the same BS that Bush used to talk us into the war."
• Talk Left's Jeralyn Merritt: "It could be just me, but I'm not in favor of sending our troops in Iraq anywhere but home to the U.S."
• The Huffington Post's Robert Naiman: "Just when some folks might have thought that Barack Obama was a real alternative, given his full-throated defense of the common sense notion that the U.S. should, in fact, talk to countries that it doesn't like, he tries to burnish his Empire credentials in response to the attacks by Hillary's people by saying that the U.S. should invade Pakistan, even without the Pakistani government's permission. Never mind that (a) this would be a blatant violation of international law (b) it could go very, very badly (c) lots of innocent people would die and (d) such statements actually undermine the Pakistani government's efforts to suppress violent Islamic militancy."
• Open Left's Chris Bowers: "This is a speech where he contextualizes his policy on fighting terrorism in virtually exactly the same manner that Republicans have for some time. ... No Democrat running for President tells the country that he will deploy more troops to Afghanistan and conduct military strikes in Pakistan without Pakistan's approval in order to appeal to the primary electorate. ... Republican win when the terrorism frame is foregrounded, and Democrats are not able to vaccinate themselves against attacks by appearing hawkish themselves."
• MyDD's Jerome Armstrong: "[T]his is basically a continuation of the Bush-Cheney doctrine of endorsing unilateral pre-emptive military attacks abroad, lighter perhaps, but certainly not the mentality that would pull us out of the mideast quagmire. ... Heck, even Clinton has the opportunity to move to the left of Obama over the issue of a the US launching a unilateral pre-emptive attack inside Pakistan.

The Pakistan portion of Obama's speech even had The Washington Monthly agreeing with the following passage from The Corner's John Podhoretz:

Obama is full of it. This country is never -- never -- going to stage a major military action against Pakistan. Every serious person knows the United States won't invade Pakistan, even with Special Forces - since the reason we cancelled the proposed action against Al Qaeda in 2005 is that it was going to take many hundreds of American troops to do it. This isn't 15 people dropping like ninjas in the darkness. It's an invasion, with helicopters and supply lines and routes of ingress and escape. It would have had unforseen and unforeseeable consequences, but it would have been reasonable to assume the Pakistanis would have turned violently against the United States and hurtled toward Islamic fundamentalist control.

Drum comments: "I understand the political imperative to sound tough, but on a substantive level there's less here than meets the eye."

Daily Kos contributing editor Meteor Blades hopes Obama's speech starts a larger foreign policy discussion among the netroots: "Over the past few years, we've been more or less united around getting out of Iraq and staying out of Iran, but when the talk turns to the details, and when we go further afield, our differences cannot be submerged. ... What is desperately needed among progressives of all stripes as well as their Democratic allies is a full-throated discussion of the entire panoply of foreign-policy issues, starting with an intense focus on what to do about the military-industrial-congressional complex that was first described nearly half a century ago."

A poll attached to Meteor Blades diary show 57% of respondents support "what Senator Obama said about going after bin Laden," 15% disagree, and 20% are undecided.

DEM FIELD: Thanks For Playing By The Rules, HRC

Blue Hampshire's Mike Claufield posted his latest Policy Straw Poll, this time on education. Candidates choosing to distinguish themselves from opponents include:

• From Kucinich: I am the only candidate to introduce a bill calling for Universal Pre-Kindergarten.
• From Dodd: I am the only candidate to offer a comprehensive proposal to reform No Child Left Behind, which every parent recognizes the next President must fix immediately.
• From Edwards: I am the only candidate with a proven plan -- that I call College for Everyone to pay for one year of public-college tuition, fees, and books for every young person in America willing to work hard and stay out of trouble.
• From Obama: I am the only candidate who will work with parents and teachers to break through the political stalemate in Washington and improve our education system for the 21st century.
• From Clinton: As President Hillary Clinton will make education a priority and fight to improve the quality of every child's education, from preschool through college.

CLINTON: The Ultimate He Said, She Said

IA Independent's Dien Judge reports Monroe County Dem chair Joe Judge received a poll call 7/31 "asking him for his opinion on the CNN/YouTube Democratic debate answers of Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama." From Judge: ""The poll caller quoted directly the debate responses from Obama and Clinton and then asked me which candidate I agree with."

IA's Bleeding Heartland's Des Moines Dem links and comments: "There's been a lot of debate in the blogosphere over who was helped by this dispute. If Clinton tries to keep this story alive in her speeches and/or campaign ads, it's a safe bet that her internal Iowa polling showed it was a winner for her. If she doesn't bring it up much in the future, we can assume that the polling showed most Iowans agreed with Obama."

For what it's worth, TPM's TW Farman reports that the YouTube contributor, Stephen Sixta, that asked the original debate question is now "sickened" by the controversy his question caused, but also "wholeheartedly agrees with Obama." From Sixta: "I realized that [Clinton] was going to use the presidency in a more traditional way and that Obama would be more dynamic about it. And that was the key to the question - 'are you open?'. That's the basic difference. It was a yes or no question. He said 'yes.' She said 'no.'"

DODD: He Can Watch The Segment Air With Kossacks In Chicago

After Chris Dodd taped his segment with Bill O'Reilly, but before it got bumped by the MN bridge collapse, official Dodd blogger Matt Browner Hamlin promoted Dodd's defense of Daily Kos. Hamlin quotes Dodd post O'Reilly: "I hope that our discussion today reminds Bill that a free press is at the very heart of this nation's values. The blogosphere is enormous - and to exploit such a tiny fraction of it in such a way is ludicrous, especially considering that Bill himself has said some things in the past that he may not want distorted... Democrats aren't going to be lectured to about the crudeness of language or civility of discourse by Bill O'Reilly."

GIULIANI: RudyCare

The slow roll out of Rudy Giuliani's health care plan continues to draw positive conservative reactions. AmSpec Blog's Jennifer Rubin calls the plan 'Milton Friedman Care' and blogs: "It is an impressive attempt to get away from government mandates and toward a market based system of health care based on individual choice and responsibility. Who loses? According to one of his advisors: plaintiffs lawyers." RedState's Pejman Yousefzadehh writes: "I want to see more specifics of the plan ... But I am pleased to note that granting incentives to people who purchase their own insurance either through tax breaks or through vouchers and opposing government mandates that require people to purchase health insurance."

NRO's Jim Geraghty notes that some Giuliani supporters are 'gleeful' to see Barack Obama adopt Giuliani's "the terrorists war on us" line when addressing foreign policy. Geraghty quotes the relevant Obama passage: "Just because the President misrepresents our enemies does not mean we do not have them. The terrorists are at war with us."

Finally, Charlie Rose promotes his upcoming interview with Giuliani at The Huffington Post: "In a thoughtful interview, GOP frontrunner Rudy Giuliani talks about his executive experience, his policies about abortion and his response to terrorism. He also talks about his love for his third wife, Judith Giuliani."

MCCAIN: How McCain Can Get His Groove Back

NRO's Jim Geraghty hears rumors John McCain "will be focusing on earmarks, spending, and corruption in the coming days" and reacts: "I hope he names names. Any candidate who pledges to punch out Republican Congressman Don Young (R-AK) for indignantly berating opponents for trying to take "my money" will likely pick up my vote.

ROMNEY: Judging Judy

Townhall's Matt Lewis links to Vanity Fair's profile of Judith Giuliani and comments: "I've never met Judith, but I have talked to close associates who have been at meetings in which she accompanied Rudy. In short, they couldn't stand her. As far as I'm concerned, given the choice between Ann Romney and Judith Giuliani, Ann Romney will win every time. So if it comes down to the spouses, I guess I'm a Romney fan..."

F. THOMPSON: Yeah, What's Happening To Southwick Is Exactly Like The Salem Witch Trials

The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez promotes Fred Thompson's blogging in support of Judge Leslie Southwick's nomination to the 5th Circuit. Thompson blogs: "You've probably never heard of Rebecca Nurse, but bear with me for a moment. Nurse arrived in Salem, Massachusetts in 1640. There, despite being known as a woman of virtue and piety, she was accused of being a witch. On July 19, 1692, she was hanged. Now almost 315 years to the day later, one of Nurse's descendants is suffering through a witch hunt of a more modern variety. I'm talking about Judge Leslie Southwick."

At AmSpec Blog, Philip Klein makes the case for Thompson as a VP: "I know this might come across as a slap in the face to Fredheads, but the more I think about it, the case for a Vice President Thompson is pretty compelling. All of the attributes that Thompson supporters tout in their man (his charisma, his persona, his star power, his communication skills) would make him the ideal candidate to return the vice presidency to its historically symbolic role."

AmSpec's Lawrence Henry responds: "I was as enticed as anyone by Fred Thompson's prospects -- up to about a month ago. But I'm afraid that, for Thompson, The Moment -- to do you-know-what or get off the pot -- has passed. Hard to see that moment coming, but when it's gone, you really know it's gone."

IRAQ: Pre-Season Preview

Just like the NFL teams in training camp positioning themselves for the real thing when the league kicks off 9/07, bloggers from the left and right are ardently working to frame the debate before Gen. David Petraeus testifies before congress that same month.

Conservative preparations for 9/07's Congressional showdown over Iraq include: 1) defending the credibility of Gen. Petraeus; 2) highlighting as many arguably pro-surge MSM sources as possible (this includes both defending the Ken Pollack's and Michael O'Hanlon's of the world as well as promoting the less impeachable John Burns); and 3) tracking possibleDem defections on the issue.

Netroots pre-9/07 priorities include: 1) destroying Gen. Petraeus' credibility byportraying him as a partisan hack ; 2) attackingallpro-surgeMSMsources ; and 3) refocusing the deabte away from any perceived gains in military progress in Iraq and onto the agreed uponlack of any political progress .

IMPEACHMENT: Elections Have Consequences

Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN)[DLC chair Harold Ford's old seat] has a diary up at Daily Kos announcing his support of Rep. Jay Inslee's (D-WA) resolution calling for a Jud. Cmte. investigation into the impeachment of AG Alberto Gonzalez. Cohen writes: "I realize many of you have been following the ongoing developments concerning the potential impeachment of AG Gonzales. As my staff and I research the specific grounds on which to impeach him, I welcome your input."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: More Enforcement, Or Bigger Fines Needed In Mumbai

Tyler Cowen points us to a Sydney Morning Herald article describing an unusual market that formed in Mumbai, India:

"My favourite ticketing system was in Mumbai, India," Kim enthuses. "No one actually buys a ticket, but you can buy 'ticket insurance' from private entrepreneurs who work at the entrance of the station. The 'ticket insurance' is about half the price of a regular rail ticket. It gives you a guarantee that, in the extraordinary event that you are booked by a railways inspector for taking a free ride, your fine will be paid. A relative was once booked and the ticket insurer paid the fine exactly as promised.

LEST WE FORGET: Can The Beckhams Go Home Now?

Uber lists the Top Ten Worst Celebrity Reality shows including:

• #9 Coming To America - Cancelled immediately after Victoria Beckham discovered that everyone might soon realize she was ugly and pretty uninteresting.
• #5 Hey Paula - It's simply a brilliant PR move to do a reality show that shows you having a nervous breakdown every episode when people already think your an alcoholic trainwreck
• #1 Britney & Kevin: Chaotic - This show was even bad by UPN standards. And we both know that's saying all you need to say about this show. Besides the usual redneck jokes about Britney and K-Spend.

Posted by Conn Carroll at August 2, 2007 12:42 PM