August 23, 2007

OBAMA: At What Point Between IL and DC Do Lobbyists Stop Being Paragons Of Virtue And Turn Into All That Is Wrong With Democracy?

Continuing their series allowing supporters to make the case for their candidate on the front page, a MyDD diarist takes on Big Tent Democratcriticism of Barack Obama's call for civility during the John Roberts confirmation. The diarist writes: "Obama felt defensive about what he felt were polemics against fellow Democratic senators who voted for the Roberts nomination, he was hardly criticizing the right of the netroots or the public to be critical. ... Obama wants to return a sense of civility to the process. I believe this is not just a rhetorical but actually a substantive position. Obama emphasizes that decrying the bitterness of politics in Washington has nothing to do with compromising on progressive ideals."

Also blogging for Obama at MyDD, Max Fletcher writes: "Through his bold policy proposals and refusal to bow to conventional wisdom, Obama has been defining the direction of the race in the traditional media. Other candidates have largely been in the position of reacting to statements and proposals put out by the Obama campaign. ... Barack Obama has offered arguably the most significant proposals to change Washington throughout the campaign. Both his urban poverty plan and his ethics reform proposal offered dramatic departures from current political orthodoxy."

Reporting from IA, TAPPED's Garance Franke-Ruta notes that all of Obama's IA offices feature a sign reading "NOT paid for by PAC or federal lobbyist money."

OBAMA II: Almost There

The netroots are encouraged by Barack Obama's recent call for changes in Cuba policy, but they want more. TAPPED's Paul Waldman asks: "Barack Obama is getting some flak from his opponents for coming out in favor of some mild alterations in the Cuba embargo. So my question is, why not go all the way and advocate ending the embargo completely? ... The collective cowardice from both parties on this issue is truly stunning. If there was ever a policy that we can all agree has been a complete failure, it's this one."

The Huffington Post's Robert Naiman makes the case the Obama has the mainstream position on Cuba: "But tallying up, of the candidates mentioned: on the travel restrictions, Obama, Edwards, Richardson, Dodd, and Kucinich would get rid of them; Clinton and Biden would keep them. On remittances, Obama, Richardson and Kucinich would remove the Bush restrictions. Five of the seven support at least some reform; Clinton and Biden support the Bush status quo. Who are the outliers?"

Also at HuffPo, Marilyn Ferdinand attacks Obama's environmental credentials.

Posted by Conn Carroll at August 23, 2007 12:57 PM