July 2008 Archives

A day off...

As I mentioned yesterday, I'm going to be off the grid tomorrow (Friday), leaving the blog in the hands of debrazza, who will be guest blogging in my place. (I'll be back Saturday, but I'm also taking off a couple of days next week -- Tuesday and Wednesday -- and debrazza has agreed to keep things going then as well.)

Before I "sign off" there's a few items that I had meant to get to today:

  • Sam Wang (the Princeton University neuroscientist who goes by "mindgeek" at Daily Kos) wrote another extraordinarily interesting essay about the neuroscience of false beliefs. It's an absolute must read for journalists and political communications professionals, particularly those who cover or work for Barack Obama. (His work inspired my post about the AFL-CIO's excellent mailer on who Barack Obama is, a mailer that debunks smears against him without reinforcing them.
  • Did I mention Professor Wang's essay is an absolute must read?
  • There's a new chapter in the never-ending saga of "what the heck is John McCain's position on taxes." Now he's returning to the 'I'm against it, but everything is on the table' position.
  • Speaking of John McCain and taxes, AMERICAblog's John Aravosis had some incredibly kind words to say about me and my video on McCain's confusing position. So let me say thanks to John, not just for what he said, but also for the support that both he and Joe Sudbay have given to this blog from the very beginning. (And just for the record, I write and edit my material in a home office next to my kitchen -- no basements here in Vegas.)
  • This probably isn't relevant any longer, but I wish that I had mentioned it during the Landstuhl debate: John McCain used images of him and David Petraeus in fundraising mailer just a couple of months ago. Even McCain ultimately admitted it was wrong of him to politicize that active duty military.
  • For those of you who recommended I get a Mac after my BSD experience, allow me to recommend to you "The 'Mojave Experiment.'" It'll be sure to generate a thousand platform flame wars, and feel free to let it rip in this thread!

McCain's Landstuhl attack aired only 12 times as paid ad

Somehow this passed me by:

With Commercial, McCain Gets Much More Than His Money’s Worth
By JIM RUTENBERG - Published: July 30, 2008

WASHINGTON — The number of times Senator John McCain’s new advertisement attacking Senator Barack Obama for canceling a visit with wounded troops in Germany last week has been shown fully or partly on local, national and cable newscasts: well into the hundreds.

The number of times that spot actually, truly ran as a paid commercial: roughly a dozen.

Result for Mr. McCain: a public relations coup that allowed him to show his toughest campaign advertisement of the year — one widely panned as misleading — to millions of people, largely free, through television news media hungry for political news with arresting visual imagery.

Does the McCain campaign have to report this as an in-kind contribution?

In case you missed it

I continue to be pleasantly surprised by Andrea Mitchell's coverage of the campaign. Her report on NBC Nightly News tonight was pretty solid.

Video below, along with the first segment of Countdown.

Why does Atrios love Rick Davis?

Lucky me, a trip to the DMV

I'm about to go renew my license plate tabs. Wish me luck.

A quick note before I leave: at this point, it seems pretty clear that the media is steadfast in its refusal to cover Obama's response ad connecting McCain with Bush.

Because they won't play it, I'm going to repost it here:

McCain Campaign Manager Lies to Andrea Mitchell

In an interview on MSNBC, Rick Davis claimed John McCain had not undertaken any presidential campaigning outside of the United States.

But McCain has campaigned outside the U.S.: he gave a political speech in Canada, went on a Congressional junket to Europe to look like a statesman, and while he was in London, England, a British Lord hosted a fundraiser on his behalf. (Thanks to commenter alchemytoday for pointing the Davis comment out.)

Who's the Liar Now?

FactCheck.org looks at the central policy attack in McCain's new ad and declares "that's false." It turns out that despite McCain's claim, Barack Obama does not support raising taxes on electricity.

So which campaign is lying more than the other? Hmm. How about let's take a look at the FactCheck.org home page. I took this screen grab at 11AM Pacific time:

Slowing things down?

This isn't all that surprising. After all, Reagan took naps during cabinet meetings.

Rick Davis Tries to Defend McCain's Low Road

Andrea Mitchell's good week continues -- she just gave McCain campaign co-manager Rick Davis a very hard time during an interview on MSNBC. He really struggled to explain McCain's tactics.

One can only hope that more reporters follow her lead -- and that she sticks with it.

McCain's Low Road Express

The Obama campaign returns fire against McCain with a new website, previewed here.

The race, according to McCain

No subtlety left behind:

"Do the American people want to elect the world’s biggest celebrity or do they want to elect an American hero?" -- Steve Schmidt, McCain Campaign Co-Manager (July 30, 2007)

John McCain's war service was heroic.

It is now clear, however, that the man is no longer any sort of hero. He had the opportunity to run a clean campaign, and he chose not to.

He has dishonored his own name.

Pimp the archives blogging

I just noticed that someone "dugg up" an old post of mine about John McCain's fourteen hour long craps sessions, his lobbyist gambling buddy, the biggest federal land swap in Arizona history, and one of McCain's top contributors. It even has a picture of McCain playing craps at Bellagio here in Vegas. And I'd be remiss if I didn't thank SeattleAJ for making the connection between the land deal and McCain's gambling buddy.

Update: Of course, just as I posted this, the digg.com seems to have completely crashed. Update 2: And it's back online.

From hero to zero in forty-eight hours

Now John McCain is now accusing Barack Obama of playing identity politics?

This coming just one day after McCain's campaign put out a memo calling Barack Obama a "worldwide" celebrity instead of an "American" celebrity?

This coming from a man who says that he alone in this campaign "puts country first"?

This coming just one day after McCain put out an advertisement flashing the words "is he ready to lead" superimposed on the first closeup shot of a person in the Berlin crowd, and that person just happened to be black?

Check this line out

I'm too tired to fire up the video editor, but you'll get the point just by reading James Rosen's (a Faux news reporter) words from Brit Hume's broadcast last night. Barack Obama, Rosen said, is "coated with a Teflon veneer of urban cool."

Housekeeping notes

As I'm sure many of you will be horrified very happy to learn, I'll be taking a few days away from blogging over the next week, though not all in a row.

My plan is to take off Friday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, though there's always a possibility I'll screw up and slip in a post or two. I've asked debrazza, who is a fellow Seattleite and one of the most prolific commenters on this site, to guest blog for me on those days. Thankfully, he agreed to put up a few posts to keep things moving along.

The other housekeeping item of note is that I've spent much of the evening and early morning expanding my ability to record live TV. If I've set things up correctly (cross your fingers), I'm now recording FOX, CNN, and MSNBC 24x7, except for repeats. What this means is that things like Rachel Maddow's smackdown of Pat Buchanan won't fall into a black hole (The problem is that MSNBC doesn't post every clip of David Gregory's show and redlasso was shuttered.)

So if you see anything noteworthy on cable, drop me a line, and I might be able to put it up (no promises though, and nothing until after Wednesday).

Over at Daily Kos, Barath is fighting the ugly smear campaign against John McCain by starting a viral e-mail initiative to defend McCain from the false rumors that he's gambled away millions of dollars in Las Vegas to equally false rumors that he buys shoes $50,000 at a time. You can digg Barath's campaign to set the record straight here, and you can e-mail it to everyone you know.

A challenge for the cable and broadcast media

As several commenters and e-mailers have noted, now that Barack Obama has responded to John Bush McCain's attack ads with his most forceful counterpunch of the campaign, the question is whether the cable networks and broadcast news networks will spend as much time analyzing Obama's attack on McCain as they have today about McCain's attack on Obama.

And I don't mean analysis of whether or not this hurts or helps Obama -- I mean analysis of whether or not Obama's response helps or hurts McCain. For example, if Barack Obama succeeds in tying McCain and Bush together in the perceptions of independent voters, does John McCain have a chance of winning? Whatever the answer to that question, how effective is Obama's new ad in tying Bush to McCain? And what are the implications for McCain?

Whether or not the media does this tomorrow will be an objective indicator of whether or not they are capable of being fair.

This is how we win

McCain = Bush = Status Quo.

That is the entire campaign.

Everything else is a sideshow.

New Obama Ad Smashes McCain's "Low Road" Attacks

Awesome ad. LOVE the image of McSameMcCain and Bush.

Fight the Smears Blogging: $520 Shoes Edition

The Lie:

John McCain drove former President
George H.W. Bush's golf cart while wearing a pair
of $520 Salvatore Ferragamo 'Pregiato' Moccasins

Change vs. more of the same

I know the Republicans think they can use their tendentious reading of this "symbol" controversy as a way of reliving the glory of past campaigns, but I think they are making a big mistake.

The truth is that Barack Obama's candidacy does represent our best hope for real change, for living up to America's promise, both at home and overseas. Barack Obama's candidacy does symbolize a break from the status quo of the Bush-Cheney years.

Meanwhile, John McCain does symbolize the past. McCain does symbolize four more years of the same old stuff.

If the GOP wants to dispute that, then fine -- game on, let's do it.

Are you confused yet?

So this one of the only times you'll ever find me in agreement with the Club for Growth: John McCain is trying to have it both ways on taxes. Today's re-flip-flop-flap just makes it all the more clear nobody really knows what John McCain actually believes. Maybe he's just as confused as we are.

Barack Obama: We Can't Afford The Bush-McCain Economy

This was awesome -- Barack Obama tying John McCain and George Bush together on economic issues and framing the election as a choice between a new direction and the Bush-McCain status quo. The best part of this is that he hit a populist note, but it didn't feel forced. This was authentic Barack Obama, hitting on the issues the Americans care about most.

This is exactly what I've been looking forward to seeing. Here's the video, from a town hall event on the economy in Springfield, Missouri:


YouTube link

Here's my transcript of the key passage:

So we've got a choice in this election. We can either choose a new direction, or we can keep on doing the same things we’ve been doing. Now my opponent, John McCain, thinks that we’re basically on the right track. [Boos from audience.] He does. He’s said our economy has made great progress in the last eight years. [Laughter.] He’s embraced the Bush economic policies and promises to continue them. Same policies as George Bush -- he wants to continue the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, and he wants to put another $300 billion in tax cuts on the table for corporations. [Audience member yells: "why not small businesses?"] Well, why not small busineses? Because he thinks it's okay the way things are going right now. Let me tell you, we can't afford to keep on doing more of the same and that's why I'm running for President of the United States of America. [Standing ovation.]

Update (4:40PM): The Obama campaign has posted the full video here. I am in the process of a posting a larger segment, including Barack Obama's hilarious Wild Bill Hickok story.

Update 2 (6:20PM): I have now posted a new version of the video in this post. (It's a bit longer and includes the Wild Bill Hickok story.) If for some reason you want to watch the original video, you can find it here.

McCain Camp Admits Their Ad Was False

Wow. This is just the strangest campaign in the world. Ben Smith:

McCain campaign backs off 'cameras' charge

McCain's camp, accused in the New York Times and the Washington Post this morning of distorting Obama's canceled trip to a military hospital in German, seems to have backed off the core of the charge: That he canceled the trip because "the Pentagon wouldn't allow him to bring cameras."

"It does now seem that Barack Obama snubbed the troops for reasons other than a lack of photo-op potential," writes McCain blogger Michael Goldfarb this morning, contradicting his campaign's televised ads and his candidate's statements.

But as the media swings around to contradict McCain's story, the campaign is trying to stay on offense, blaming the press for the confusion:

So basically they campaign now seems to be trying: our ad wasn't true, but we don't take responsibility for the falsehood because the press screwed up? But how does that explain the fact that they linked to an outdated version of Lynn Sweet's blog that had only stayed up online due to a server snafu?

Might as well frame this one

::: :::

Well this is a nice surprise: The Washington Post's Michael Shear and Dan Balz completely annihilate John McCain's dishonorable Landstuhl attack in no uncertain terms:

For four days, Sen. John McCain and his allies have accused Sen. Barack Obama of snubbing wounded soldiers by canceling a visit to a military hospital because he could not take reporters with him, despite no evidence that the charge is true.

Also, Lynn Sweet takes a whack at all the Republican lies, demonstrating how they willfully misinterpreted her reporting, even taking advantage of a server glitch to distort what she had said.

Standing with Joe Klein

Josh Marshall salutes Joe Klein for standing by his condemnation of the bellicose war policies favored by Jewish neocons towards Iran.

Like Klein (and, I believe, Marshall), I'm Jewish. And like most Jews, I completely agree with Klein -- it's an absolute farce that anyone would suggest that he is an antisemite for stating his views, and it's not just because he's Jewish.

Is McCain now planting questions at his town halls?

So I've finally watched Countdown and the segment that interested me most was the one on McCain's tax schism (and schizophrenia). Basically, McCain has now returned to the "no new taxes pledge" which is directly opposite what he said on Sunday's This Week broadcast (and also said in 2005). So who in the world really knows what he believes? I sure don't.

But there was something else that confused me. McCain took the question about taxes from a cute little girl, and his answer was somewhat charming. Definitely it was good theater, and I think it's great that he's taking questions from younger folks.

The whole thing seemed a little staged to me, especially coming after Club for Growth's freakout. It seemed like a real about-face from McCain's long-standing proposition that aside from his open remarks, his town halls are completely unscripted.

Some other stuff I should have blogged

  • Al Giordano takes a look at the veepstakes, reminding us of that ol' Kerry-Gephardt ticket.
  • BarbinMD nails McCain about Landstuhl.

The Blue Screen of Death

Well, I just spent more than two hours wrestling with Microsoft customer service over the most inane issue: my computer crashed BSD-style just before Countdown, and when it came back to life, it claimed that my Vista license key needed reactivation. But it wouldn't reactivate, and it wouldn't even let me reenter my product key.

Finally, after a phone call that spanned the life of two cordless phone batteries, a guy in technical support walked me through the steps that I needed to take to regain control of my computer (basically, I had to delete and reinstall the license key authentication software).

What a complete and total hassle. Making things more annoying, I record most of my TV on this particular computer, so I don't have Countdown saved. Fortunately, I can watch it online, which'll be a nice way to unwind.

Anyway, there is a political point to this post: I just checked HuffPo, and they featured this most glorious of articles from Politico. It turns out that the AP's bureau chief, Ron "Keep up the fight" Fournier, considered taking a job with John McCain's presidential campaign. I guess he ultimately decided he could do more good from the AP than inside the campaign.

Reframing the debate over the price of oil

Rasmussen is out with an interesting poll showing that a slight plurality of Americans think its more important to crackdown on speculators than it is to expand offshore drilling.

Obviously, this is something of a false dichotomy, but this is also politics, and I think the poll suggests that Obama can push his anti-speculators argument in contrast to McCain's offshore drilling argument.

Hilarious new viral video on McCain, absolutely brilliant

Update 2 (4:33PM): Wow. On the frontpage of digg in less than 90 minutes. Incredible!

Updated and bumped (3:11PM): The McCain bury brigade buried this on digg despite getting 180 diggs in the first 2 hours. When will they ever learn? Anyway, you know what to do: please redigg and spread the word.

Original post (12:29PM): Via commenter evathia, here's the newest video from Humanitainment, the folks that brought you The Empire Strikes Barack. It's called "The Commander in Chief Test" and it's the funniest McCain video I've seen.


YouTube link

Obama Counters McCain's Gas Attack Ad

Two interesting things about Barack Obama's (not quite) new counterpunch against McCain's gas prices attack (via Ben Smith):

  1. As Ben notes, Obama's "new" ad has been running for two days. So for those who've been wondering when the Obama campaign will respond to McCain's attack ads, well, they already have
  2. Obama's ad counters McCain's gas attack ad, not the Landstuhl one. Despite all the attention we've paid to the troops ad, the gas attack ad McCain is actually emphasizing in his ad rotation. The troops ad is just a free media play.

Here's the ad, airing in the same markets as McCain's:

Actually, I didn't, and no, it wasn't

According to CNN, I felt the earthquake in Los Angeles all the way out here in Las Vegas, albeit only "slightly."

Also, according to Wolf Blitzer, the earthquake is a nightmare scenario. Wolf seemed a bit disappointed when the Mayor of LA told him that he wasn't aware of any major injuries or structural damage.

p.s.: I did feel the Joshua Tree earthquake and the Nisqually quake, both of which were much stronger (7.0 and 6.8 respectively) than today's (5.4).

It's election season, so it must be terror alert time

DHS thinks they can scare you into voting for John McCain by issuing a terror alert sponsored by ABC News.

Remember 2004? Just a few days after W won reelection, the government lowered a key terror alert. Hmm. Coincidence?

Remind you of Charlie Black's not-so-wishful thinking?

The most effective anti-smear message of the campaign

One of the big challenges with defending Barack Obama -- or anyone else, for that matter -- against false, viral smears is that the last thing you want to do is to inadvertently reinforce the smear.

In late June, Professor Sam Wang, a neuroscientist at Princeton (mindgeek at Daily Kos), penned a New York Times op-ed describing how debunking falsehoods by repeating the falsehoods can in fact strengthen the original falsehood. Consequently, the best way to spread the truth is by leading with the truth to debunk the smear. For example, emphasize that  "Barack Obama IS a Christian" instead of saying what he is not.

Today, Ben Smith posted a new mailer from AFL-CIO aimed at debunking several of the most prominent smears against Barack Obama, and it is by far the best effort I've seen during the entire campaign to combat the smears.

Three ideas for the campaign

I know it might seem presumptuous to offer advice to a campaign that is currently ahead by as many as 8 points in the national tracking polls, but armchair campaign management is way too much fun, so here goes: a list three ideas that might prove useful for the Obama campaign.

In brief, they are:

  1. Recognize that you already have all the presidential imagery you need, and start putting it on the air.
  2. Feed the beast from time to time, but continue giving McCain the opportunity to self-destruct.
  3. Start defining McCain by tying him to Bush in a Harry and Louise-style TV ad campaign

Details below.

From almost unwatchable to somewhat entertaining

I don't watch Dan Abrams' show all that often, and I was about to kick myself when I started watching the broadcast earlier this evening because it started off dreadfully. First, Abrams launched into a typical he said-she said overview of McCain's new ad, and then Jonathan Alter slept his way through a tepid rejection of it. Then Brad Blakeman (or whatever his name is) started spouting off the McCain talking points and all the sudden Alter woke the ___ up.

McCain backs off his no-new-tax pledge?

So says the AP.

For perspective on the problems this could cause McCain with his conservative base...take the negative fallout that Barack Obama took from what actually happened on FISA, add to that the negative fallout that would have happened had the media's initial reports about his Iraq timetable been accurate, combine them, and then multiply that total by 5,432,981, and then apply it to John McCain.

Club for Growth, the conservative anti-tax organization, is already ripping McCain a new one in a letter from their organization's president, Pat Toomey:

Your liberal media...both of them

Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann take on the media's coverage of the 2008 campaign, calling the MSM's handling of McCain's dishonorable Landstuhl smear "unconscionable."

Just a thought

All of John McCain's attack ads have had major factual problems. He's falsely claimed that Obama is responsible for high gas prices, he's falsely claimed that Landstuhl had something to do with cameras, and he's falsely claimed that Obama opposes nuclear power. And those are just off the top of my head.

On policy issues, he hedged his bets on the surge back in 2007. He's nearly impossible to pin on key issues ranging from affirmative action to cap-and-trade to gay adoption to whether or not he supports a timetable for ending the war in Iraq. Even on local issues he's all over the map: he flip-flopped on burying nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, but now he's flipped back to supporting it. And that was just in the course of one month.

Steve Benen has compiled a tremendous list (edit: I fixed the broken link) of flip-flops by McCain. Some of these flip-flops might be evolving positions based on new realities, but far too many of them are purely political.

So here's the thing: John McCain really isn't that honest a guy after all, is he?

Running mates, fav/unfav

Rasmussen did a fav/unfav poll for the various VP possibilities for both Barack Obama and John McCain. Romney's fav/unfav numbers really aren't very good -- 42 favorable, 48 unfavorable. Huckabee's are decent -- 47/39, as are Lieberman's -- 46/39. John Edwards does best on the D side, 56/35, and Hillary Clinton comes in at 51/46.

Pretty much all the other names Rasmussen tested weren't very widely recognized. I'd have liked to have seen Wes Clark's numbers to see how many people know who is. Anyway, I suspect that Obama's pick won't be one of the names Rasmussen tested, but that McCain's pick will be.

Also: While I'm on the subject of polls, this USA Today/Gallup likely voter screen sure does seem strange. (Another odd note: Gallup now has one poll showing Obama with a 48-40 lead, and another poll showing McCain with a 49-45 lead. Hmmm. Just imagine if Diebold ran the polls...)

It's Okay If You're John McCain

Remember cap-n-trade, the anti-global warming policy on which McCain flip-flop-flipped? Well, now it seems that his campaign is signaling a reflop.

FORBES: Yes. I think cap and trade is going to go the way of some other things...I don’t think those things are going to get very far as people start to examine the details of them.

BECK: But shouldn’t he have examined those details, Steve? Shouldn’t he have known that’s a bad idea?

FORBES: Yes, well, he’s moving in the right direction. You got to give him credit. He’s now for really having active exploration offshore.

Once again, I'm totally confused about where John McCain really stands. This pattern of trying to be all things to all people is a hallmark of McCain's presidential campaign, and the media allows him to get away with it. He is playing them for a fool. Either that, or they are playing us for a fool.

Andrea Mitchell: McCain attack ad "literally is not true"

Wow.

Andrea Mitchell lacerates McCain's dishonorable Landstuhl attack. In her words: "It seems inexplicable that this whole thing has become an issue."

McCain Aide: "Nothing that looked in any way cancerous"

Political Radar:

McCain Has Mole-Like Skin Removed

ABC News' Bret Hovell Reports: John McCain had a small piece of mole-like skin removed from his right temple this morning at a regularly scheduled dermatological checkup in Phoenix.

Update: Video of McCain talking about his doctor's visit:

Be careful what you wish for

This made me chuckle. From Ben Smith's and Jonathan Martin's article on how the McCain campaign is focusing its dishonorable campaign around character attacks:

Jim Pinkerton, a contributor to Fox News who worked for Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, and for former Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee in this year's GOP primary, isn’t convinced of the efficacy of this line of attack:

"First they goaded him into going to Iraq and that was pretty successful — for Obama. And now the McCain people are trying to goad him into spending more time with the troops and going to hospitals to visit wounded soldiers.

“They better be careful what they wish for, since Obama just might screw them up and do it.”

Republican veepstakes

First of all, I have to concede defeat: my prediction that McCain would pick his VP last week didn't come to pass. But Novak did float -- falsely -- that McCain would make the pick, so I'm going to take a partial victory.

I'm going to stick with my other prediction, that that McCain's pick will be Romney, but I'm beginning to think that Romney might be a better pick for McCain than I had originally thought. Nate Silver does a good job running through the impact a Romney pick would have on the electoral map and demographics. The short version is that Romney would be a smallish boost in a lot of states that matter (western, New England, and Michigan) and a liability in the south.

My take is that in a close election, Romney's liabilities in the south wouldn't make that much of a difference -- I can't imagine McCain would lose any southern states in a very close election, with the possible exception of Virginia. But in a close election, Romney would also provide a significant boost in states like Michigan, New Hampshire, Nevada, and Colorado.

Double digits

The election countdown is now below 100 -- just 99 days left until the election. And speaking of numbers that keep getting smaller, this seems like just as good a time as any to take another look at a certain presidential candidate talking about his academic record.

McCain Loses Argument: He Hedged On The Surge In 2007

Josh Marshall digs up a Salon.com article from February, 2007 arguing that John McCain hedged his bets on the surge:

By simultaneously endorsing the surge and harshly criticizing certain aspects of the Bush plan as potentially disastrous, McCain appears to be hedging his bets should the surge fail. "He is looking for an exit strategy if it does not work," said Stephen Wayne, a political science professor at Georgetown University. "It says: 'You just did not do it right, Mr. President.'"

The article points to a February 8, 2007 Senate floor speech by McCain opposing the nomination of Gen. George Casey to be Army chief of staff. I found video of it, and sure enough, McCain did hedge his bets on the surge -- and he wasn't subtle about it at all. Here's what he said:

I am very nervous about this new strategy. I am very doubtful that we have enough troops. I don't know if the Maliki government will be strong enough. But if General Casey is appointed to this position, my confidence will be lowered because it is not appropriate to put someone who does not support wholeheartedly the new strategy in a position where he will be responsible for a great deal of it.

Here's the video:

And we haven't even reached cruising altitude yet

A seismic collapse of McCain's attack?

Is it just me, or does it seem like the Republican noise machine has all but given up on John McCain's dishonorable attack on Barack Obama?

I've now watched all four morning talk shows, and the only full-throated embrace of McCain's attack came from McCain himself (recorded yesterday) and John Thune (who wants to be McCain's VP).

When Stephanopoulos brought it up on This Week, George Will gave gave Obama a light slap on the wrist, but quickly moved onto a new topic. On FOX News, if the panel mentioned it at all, they barely dwelled on it. Karl Rove muttered a couple of the talking points, but moved right along, clearly more interested in talking about other issues. And on Face The Nation, Chuck Hagel ripped McCain in the most personal terms that I've yet heard from him. (I wouldn't have expected Hagel to defend McCain, but there's a big difference between being supportive of Obama and attacking McCain.)

Chuck Hagel and Jack Reed Slam McCain's Desperate Tactics

Over at The Field, Al Giordano makes two important points. First, McCain's attack ad is a play for free media -- it's only airing in three locations (edit, I left out PA: DC/NoVA, PA, and CO) with very small buys. It's entirely designed to derail the Obama campaign from its message.

Second, Al also points out that the backlash to McCain's ad is so fierce that the Obama campaign may not need to engage in tit-for-tat (so long as this stays as a chattering class issue). I'll let Al take over:

Note that the pushback is so far coming from a multitude of surrogates, bloggers and journalists, none of whom waited for orders from above to get out their blowtorches. To me, that's a more significant development than anything the Obama campaign itself does. That brings to mind another rule of life: do not shake a hornet's nest! Obama's gonna have to take a number behind everybody else that has lined up to throw knives on this one.

And now here's Chuck Hagel and Jack Reed proving Al's point. Each Senator devastates McCain in a different way, but just as importantly, they both speak to the strength and promise of Barack Obama.

Just to be clear: Obama visited wounded troops

I can't stress this point enough: during the portion of his trip that was official Senate business -- the portion in Iraq and Afghanistan and Kuwait -- Barack Obama visited with wounded troops, and he did so without any fanfare.

Nonetheless, John McCain is criticizing Barack Obama for not seeing wounded troops at Landstuhl, even though during McCain's most recent Europe trip, he didn't visit them either, despite being just a short drive away.

The funny part is that McCain's trip to Europe was official Senate business, funded by taxpayers. Barack Obama's trip was political and was funded by the campaign. Now, I would never suggest in a million years that John McCain -- whose several decades of service I deeply honor -- doesn't care about the troops. But it's simply remarkable that he sees fit to make such an attack on Barack Obama.

Barack Obama on Meet the Press

From London, recorded on Saturday afternoon. Worth watching for the first 90 seconds alone.

Okay, now McCain has got me confused on timetables

Gold star goes to the first person who can figure what what the **** his real position is on ending the war in Iraq.

McCain Re-Rejects Timetables, Denies Using Term (Update)

Well, we're back where we started. John McCain made it clear today that he opposes a timetable for ending the war in Iraq. (He also denied ever having used the word.) So the choice once again is between Barack Obama's plan to end the war and John McCain's plan for neverending war.

Update: I've now updated this post with a short video of McCain denying having used the word "timetable." You can find the full segment of the interview in the vodpod at the top of the page. Edit: I had a typo in the dates on the first video. That typo has been corrected.

Polling trend update

Mixed results in the tracking polls today: Obama's lead dropped from 6 points to 5 in the Rasmussen poll, but grew from 7 points to 9 in the Gallup poll. Net/net: Since leaving for his trip overseas, Obama is +5 in Rasmussen and +7 in Gallup.

Politician spins out of control in freak flip flop accident

PHOENIX, AZ -- U.S. Senator John McCain (whom we honor and respect for his decades of service to this country, blah blah blah) today spun completely out of control while chasing the runaway polling numbers of his political opponent, Barack Obama, who all rational people intend to make the next president of the United States of America.

Why didn't McCain want to see the troops in March?

The curious thing about John McCain's dishonorable attack on Barack Obama is that McCain himself visited Europe in March, but didn't visit the wounded troops in Landstuhl, Germany.

It's true that McCain's trip to Europe bypassed Germany -- he only went to London and Paris. But as you can see in the map below, it turns out that London and Berlin are about the same distance from Landstuhl, and Paris is just a four hour drive away.

So if McCain wanted to visit the troops, it would have been trivial to arrange -- no seismic event needed. But it's clear McCain didn't want to visit them, and as a result, it should be fair to ask McCain why he now feels entitled to attack Barack Obama.

The last stop before home

Above: Barack Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown (NYT)

"If somebody comes at me, I will knock them out"

Courtesy of evathia in the comments, here's Barack Obama last November speaking to the Keene Sentinel (NH) editorial board: "I am always best as a counter-puncher...if somebody comes at me, I will knock them out." (The key comments start about 90 seconds into the clip.) Also: Ben Smith sees a counterpunch TV ad coming from Obama within 24 hours.

McCain's responsibility

There is only one candidate in this race who thinks it was a mistake to go to war with Iraq in the first place. There is only one candidate in this race who stood up against the war before it even started. And now, more than five years later, there is only one candidate in this race who is pushing to end it.

The other candidate advocated waging a war that claimed the lives of more than 4,000 American troops and caused injuries to tens of thousands more.

For that candidate to attack the other's commitment to the troops is the ultimate dishonor and disgrace. It reveals the sinister ambition that has invaded his soul.

Smackdown: McCain campaign "increasingly dishonorable"

A strong response from the Obama campaign to John McCain's detestable new TV ad:

Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor: "John McCain is an honorable man who is running an increasingly dishonorable campaign.  Senator McCain knows full well that Senator Obama strongly supports and honors our troops, which is what makes this attack so disingenuous."

Before and (almost) after

Before Barack Obama's overseas trip:

  • Rasmussen (7/16-18): 46% Obama, 46% McCain (tie)
  • Gallup (7/16-7/18): 45% Obama, 43% McCain (+2 for Obama)

Near the end of Barack Obama's overseas trip:

  • Rasmussen (7/23-25): 49% Obama, 43% McCain (+6 for Obama)
  • Gallup (7/23-25): 48% Obama, 41% McCain (+7 for Obama)

McCain Can't Keep His Story Straight on Iraq Timetables

Compare what McCain said yesterday to what he said while attacking Mitt Romney just before Super Tuesday. (h/t: Josh Orton)

Also worth keeping in mind: even though McCain now says he thinks the 16-month timetable is "pretty good," unless he commits himself to a specific plan on how he will achieve it, it's just meaningless campaign rhetoric.

War on his mind

During the Reagan Library Presidential debate on January 30, Janet Hook of the LA Times asked John McCain what made him more qualified than Mitt Romney to manage the eocnomy. McCain's answer: that his Navy and POW experience shows he's ready to lead, that he's ready to fight Islamic extremism, and that Democrats want a timetable for withdrawal which would be surrender in Iraq.

Full text below.

DoD flack pushing Landstuhl smear has anti-Obama history

DoD's Bryan Whitman

AMERICAblog's Joe Sudbay documents that one of the key DoD spokesmen pushing the the attack on Barack Obama for not visiting wounded troops at Landstuhl is Bryan Whitman, who has a history of pursuing attacks against Barack Obama.

My personal favorite part of Whitman's on-the-record quote is "quite frankly, I expected them to have the visit." First, in Washington, DC "quite frankly" means "I'm lying." Second, if, as he claims, he just told "them" that they couldn't make a political visit, why in the world would he expect them to visit?

ABC News Officially Endorses John McCain For President

After tonight’s broadcast of ABC News with Charlie Gibson, ABC might as well openly declare its support for John McCain.

Hours after first watching it, I’m still stunned at just how blatant its bias was. About the only good thing I can say about it is that at this point Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos are so confident that they won’t be held accountable that they are getting arrogant and sloppy. As a result, tonight they made some glaring mistakes that make it easy to prove their bias towards McCain.

Here’s a video from the broadcast, followed by a writeup documenting the many ways in which it was biased.

Without a plan, McCain's "timetable" is a misleading pander

I've been thinking a bit more about John McCain's seeming embrace of Barack Obama's and Nuri al-Maliki's withdrawal timetable. (His "I think it's a pretty good timetable" comment.)

On the one hand, it's nice to say "McCain endorses Obama's position on ending the Iraq war." And it's true, he did effectively make that endorsement. But he didn't say how he would accomplish the goal.

In fact, McCain is sending all sorts of mixed signals about whether or not he would do what he now says he supports. He is still refusing to suggest any specific plan to begin withdrawals. To meet the 16 month timetable, the new president will need to start implementing a withdrawal plan as soon as he takes office, and John McCain has not even come close to suggesting that he would actually do that.

So unless John McCain offers a plan on how he expects to meet the timetable, his words today really have no meaning -- except as a dishonest attempt to convince American voters he intends to end the war.

Why hasn't Barack Obama won yet?

I keep on hearing and reading pundits puzzle over why Barack Obama hasn't put this race away already. I mean, it's already July, dammit! Shouldn't he be getting sworn next month or something?

To be fair, it's not as ridiculous question to ask in 2008 as it would be in any other year. I mean, in 2000 or 2004 if you told me at the end of July that Barack Obama had consistently led John McCain in every single national poll for the past two months, I'd have been thrilled.

But in 2008, an overwhelming majority of Americans oppose Bush's policies and want to take the country in a new direction. Substantively, John McCain shares George Bush's policy vision -- so by all rights, he should be getting walloped by Barack Obama at this point.

But even though McCain is trailing, he's not getting thoroughly crushed. Why not?

Well, most pundits seem to answer the question by focusing on Barack Obama. Certainly, he's part a key part of the equation, but almost universally, they make the mistake of underestimating John McCain's political strengths.

Of timetables and flip-flops

Today:

BLITZER: Why do you think [Maliki] said that 16 months is basically a pretty good timetable?

MCCAIN: He said it's a pretty good timetable based on conditions on the ground. I think it's a pretty good timetable, as we should -- or horizons for withdrawal. But they have to be based on conditions on the ground.

May 16:

MCCAIN: For him [Obama] to talk about dates for withdrawal, which basically is surrender in Iraq after we're succeeding so well is, I think, really inexcusable.

So would it be fair to conclude from this that in McCain's own terms, he would rather a lose a war than lose an election?

Update (3:23PM): In funny bit of understatement, NBC's First Read notes that McCain's embrace of a 16-month timetable is something he "probably never would have said a week ago."

And here's video:

Moving forward

Yesterday, Chuck Hagel urges John McCain to stop squabbling over the surge. "Get out of that. We're done with that. How are we going to project forward?"

Today, in a newly released statement, Bob Kerrey echoes Hagel's message: "Let's not re-fight the past."

He still doesn't know YouTube exists

John McCain is sticking to his "I was against the war before I was for it" line of argument. Now I will concede that he had some tactical differences with the administration on how to fight the war in Iraq -- but only in certain parts of the country.

But that isn't the point. The point is that he was 100% behind the strategy of preemptive war with Iraq. That is what the big disaster was. That is where the huge failure of judgment was. And that is why he is trying to rewrite history.

Perhaps he should watch "John McCain's Neverending War." Maybe then he'd finally understand why he'll never get away with it.

Out of touch? McCain needs cue card to remember milk prices

John Aravosis at AMERICAblog sent over a tip that John McCain had needed a crib sheet to talk about milk prices during his photo opportunity Wednesdayyesterday at a Bethlehem, Pennsylvania supermarket.

Sure enough...

Making lemons out of lemonade

Good morning...or afternoon if you're out east. This was a pretty hilarious segment from The Daily Show last night...especially Stewart's complete dismantling of the tool idiot from FOX News.

Stuff I should have blogged, no horserace edition

Don't hold me responsible if anything they say turns out to be wrong:

  • Alan Abramowitz cautions against getting hung up on daily swings in tracking polls.
  • He also thinks the idea that Obama has a problem with whites is hooey.
  • Abramowitz joins with Thomas Mann and Larry Sabato to challenge the idea that this election is a toss-up. (I think they make good points but ignore the enduring benefits of McCain's maverick image honed in 2000.)
  • Josh Marshall suggests taking a long-term view of Obama's trip, the fundamentals of which he thinks went very well. (He also challenges wingers who think the President's central focus should be on the military.)
  • Nate Silver offers an interesting model for interpreting how things might play out over the long-term. (The most important implication of his model is that the short-term horserace numbers can be very misleading.)

Related to all this, earlier this month I took a look at the road ahead in the campaign -- which is now 102 days away from finally being over. My short-take on the state of things: everything is going pretty well, except I think that that too many independents still think McCain could represent a change of direction for the country.

And in totally unrelated news, I just had to repimp this newspaper front page with McCain's VP Tim Pawlenty (am I allowed to change my Romney prediction?):

Senator Mixed-up-a-lot?

I first posted this video on June 15. Since that time we've had: Iraq-Pakistan border, Czechoslovakia, Somalia-Sudan, Packers-Steelers, Birth control/Viagra, and $4 dollar a barrel oil. Not to mention the more serious surge timeline stuff. (Edit: I forgot the Iraq is the first major war thing...DOH!)

I like his gaffe's / I cannot lie / You Rethuglicans can't deny... (Anthony Ray is going to have to take over from there.)

John McCain throws a bone to conservatives

So John McCain writes an op-ed in the St. Petersburg Times slamming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Without wading into the merits of his position, McCain is channeling Phil Gramm in this op-ed. (Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if he wrote it, or at least reviewed it.)

But the point is that McCain was sending a subtle -- but public -- signal to hard core economic conservatives that he is still with them, and that Gramm still has his ear.

Interesting idea

Found this on reddit:

Idea: Just as violent felons lose the right to own a gun, white-collar criminals should lose the right to own stock or investments.

There's a certain amount of logic to that.

More Obama in Berlin Videos

Brian Williams talks with Barack Obama immediately after the speech and offers a behind-the-scenes view of the speech, and Keith Olbermann delivers his report on the speech in Countdown's first segment.

Barack Obama's Interview With Brian Williams

Here's the full interview. I'm watching it now, though I caught excerpts on Countdown. From what I saw, it was outstanding. My favorite moment was when Williams asked him about why he gave the speech, what he hoped to get out of it. Obama's answer: the response to the speech demonstrated that there is hunger in the world for America's leadership. Edit: I think that part of the interview came in a behind-the-scenes moment (which I'll post soon) before the sit-down part of the interview.

McCain Attacks Obama, But Forgets His Own Record

Could anyone other than Teflon John McCain get away with these hypocritical attacks?

He yells at Obama for speaking in Germany...but forgets that he had a campaign event in Canada and held a fundraiser in London, hosted by a wealthy British businessman (edit: and a British Lord).

The interesting thing about Obama's senior thesis

Apparently, wingnuts are batty for getting their hands on Barack Obama's "missing" senior thesis, which was on Soviet nuclear disarmament. I guess they think that if they can find proof that Barack Obama opposed nuclear weapons, that he is unqualified to be president?

Even their the reasons for their search are plain ol' stupid, I did find one thing interesting in NBC's writeup of the caper (emphasis added):

His former professor, Michael Baron, recalled in an interview with NBC News that Obama easily aced the year-long class. Baron described the paper as a “thesis” or “senior thesis” in several interviews, and said that Obama spent a year working on it. Baron recalls that the topic was nuclear negotiations with the Soviet Union.

“...As I remember it, the paper was about those negotiations, their tactics and chances for success. Barack got an A.”

Baron said that, even if he could find a copy of the paper, it would likely disappoint Obama’s critics. “The course was not a polemical course, it was a course in decision making and how decisions got made,” he said. “None of the papers in the class were controversial.”

A World that Stands as One

Above: one of the many images of Barack Obama in Berlin, Germany from Al Rodgers' photo diary at Daily Kos. Also, I've posted the full video here and full text here.

Damn foreigners!

So John McCain is (predictably, perhaps) attacking Barack Obama for speaking at a political gathering outside the country.

This, of course, is the same John McCain who held a political event in Ottawa at the Economic Club of Canada just one month ago.

This is the same John McCain who held a campaign fundraiser in London in March.

This is the same John McCain who is quoting Fidel Castro in an attack on Barack Obama.

This is the same John McCain who has quoted Hamas on the campaign trail in another attack on Barack Obama.

This is the same John McCain who has repeatedly used the words of Osama bin Laden to attack not just Barack Obama, but also Hillary Clinton and the entire Democratic Party.

This is a sad, desperate, and pathetic John McCain.

Update: Oh, and lest I forget, this is a bitter, lonely John McCain:

John McCain: Iraq Was First War After 9/11

MoveOn.org petition: CBS, don't cover up for McCain

">

MoveOn.org is ">launching a petition drive to let CBS know that we think their decision to "remix" John McCain's interview with Katie Couric -- letting him off the hook for telling a flat-out falsehood -- was wrong, and that CBS should correct the record.

(On a personal note, MoveOn's ">petition page features my video of the CBS original interview, which I've reposted below. It's cool to see it being put to good use.)

McCain = Bush = Status quo

One the questions in yesterday's new NBC/WSJ poll was how closely voters thought McCain would follow Bush's policies. 32% said very closely and 45% said somewhat closely. 16% said not too closely and 5% said not at all.

On the surface, these seems good -- 77% of voters think McCain will follow Bush's policies very closely or somewhat closely. But I think there may be some trouble signs in these numbers.

Nearly three-fifths of those who think McCain will follow Bush's policies only think he will do so "somewhat" closely. Not to be greedy, but I'm not convinced "somewhat" is good enough, especially in light of other polling data (see below). Moreover, it's almost certain that if you just look at independent voters, the "very" closely numbers would drop, probably significantly.

Barack Obama's Remarks in Berlin

Remarks of Senator Barack Obama (as prepared for delivery)
“A World that Stands as One”
July 24th, 2008
Berlin, Germany

Thank you to the citizens of Berlin and to the people of Germany. Let me thank Chancellor Merkel and Foreign Minister Steinmeier for welcoming me earlier today. Thank you Mayor Wowereit, the Berlin Senate, the police, and most of all thank you for this welcome.

I come to Berlin as so many of my countrymen have come before.  Tonight, I speak to you not as a candidate for President, but as a citizen – a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world. 

I know that I don’t look like the Americans who’ve previously spoken in this great city. The journey that led me here is improbable. My mother was born in the heartland of America, but my father grew up herding goats in Kenya. His father – my grandfather – was a cook, a domestic servant to the British. 

At the height of the Cold War, my father decided, like so many others in the forgotten corners of the world, that his yearning – his dream – required the freedom and opportunity promised by the West. And so he wrote letter after letter to universities all across America until somebody, somewhere answered his prayer for a better life.

That is why I’m here. And you are here because you too know that yearning. This city, of all cities, knows the dream of freedom. And you know that the only reason we stand here tonight is because men and women from both of our nations came together to work, and struggle, and sacrifice for that better life.

Ours is a partnership that truly began sixty years ago this summer, on the day when the first American plane touched down at Templehof.

On that day, much of this continent still lay in ruin.  The rubble of this city had yet to be built into a wall. The Soviet shadow had swept across Eastern Europe, while in the West, America, Britain, and France took stock of their losses, and pondered how the world might be remade. 

This is where the two sides met.  And on the twenty-fourth of June, 1948, the Communists chose to blockade the western part of the city.  They cut off food and supplies to more than two million Germans in an effort to extinguish the last flame of freedom in Berlin.

The size of our forces was no match for the much larger Soviet Army. And yet retreat would have allowed Communism to march across Europe. Where the last war had ended, another World War could have easily begun. All that stood in the way was Berlin.

And that’s when the airlift began – when the largest and most unlikely rescue in history brought food and hope to the people of this city. 

The odds were stacked against success.  In the winter, a heavy fog filled the sky above, and many planes were forced to turn back without dropping off the needed supplies. The streets where we stand were filled with hungry families who had no comfort from the cold. 

But in the darkest hours, the people of Berlin kept the flame of hope burning. The people of Berlin refused to give up. And on one fall day, hundreds of thousands of Berliners came here, to the Tiergarten, and heard the city’s mayor implore the world not to give up on freedom. “There is only one possibility,” he said.  “For us to stand together united until this battle is won…The people of Berlin have spoken.  We have done our duty, and we will keep on doing our duty. People of the world: now do your duty…People of the world, look at Berlin!”

People of the world – look at Berlin!

Look at Berlin, where Germans and Americans learned to work together and trust each other less than three years after facing each other on the field of battle.

Look at Berlin, where the determination of a people met the generosity of the Marshall Plan and created a German miracle; where a victory over tyranny gave rise to NATO, the greatest alliance ever formed to defend our common security. 

Look at Berlin, where the bullet holes in the buildings and the somber stones and pillars near the Brandenburg Gate insist that we never forget our common humanity. 

People of the world – look at Berlin, where a wall came down, a continent came together, and history proved that there is no challenge too great for a world that stands as one.   

Sixty years after the airlift, we are called upon again. History has led us to a new crossroad, with new promise and new peril. When you, the German people, tore down that wall – a wall that divided East and West; freedom and tyranny; fear and hope – walls came tumbling down around the world. From Kiev to Cape Town, prison camps were closed, and the doors of democracy were opened. Markets opened too, and the spread of information and technology reduced barriers to opportunity and prosperity. While the 20th century taught us that we share a common destiny, the 21st has revealed a world more intertwined than at any time in human history.

The fall of the Berlin Wall brought new hope. But that very closeness has given rise to new dangers – dangers that cannot be contained within the borders of a country or by the distance of an ocean.   

The terrorists of September 11th plotted in Hamburg and trained in Kandahar and Karachi before killing thousands from all over the globe on American soil. 

As we speak, cars in Boston and factories in Beijing are melting the ice caps in the Arctic, shrinking coastlines in the Atlantic, and bringing drought to farms from Kansas to Kenya.

Poorly secured nuclear material in the former Soviet Union, or secrets from a scientist in Pakistan could help build a bomb that detonates in Paris. The poppies in Afghanistan become the heroin in Berlin. The poverty and violence in Somalia breeds the terror of tomorrow. The genocide in Darfur shames the conscience of us all.

In this new world, such dangerous currents have swept along faster than our efforts to contain them. That is why we cannot afford to be divided. No one nation, no matter how large or powerful, can defeat such challenges alone.  None of us can deny these threats, or escape responsibility in meeting them. Yet, in the absence of Soviet tanks and a terrible wall, it has become easy to forget this truth. And if we’re honest with each other, we know that sometimes, on both sides of the Atlantic, we have drifted apart, and forgotten our shared destiny.

In Europe, the view that America is part of what has gone wrong in our world, rather than a force to help make it right, has become all too common. In America, there are voices that deride and deny the importance of Europe’s role in our security and our future. Both views miss the truth – that Europeans today are bearing new burdens and taking more responsibility in critical parts of the world; and that just as American bases built in the last century still help to defend the security of this continent, so does our country still sacrifice greatly for freedom around the globe.

Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe. No doubt, there will be differences in the future. But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more – not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity. 

That is why the greatest danger of all is to allow new walls to divide us from one another.
The walls between old allies on either side of the Atlantic cannot stand.  The walls between the countries with the most and those with the least cannot stand.  The walls between races and tribes; natives and immigrants; Christian and Muslim and Jew cannot stand.  These now are the walls we must tear down. 

We know they have fallen before. After centuries of strife, the people of Europe have formed a Union of promise and prosperity. Here, at the base of a column built to mark victory in war, we meet in the center of a Europe at peace. Not only have walls come down in Berlin, but they have come down in Belfast, where Protestant and Catholic found a way to live together; in the Balkans, where our Atlantic alliance ended wars and brought savage war criminals to justice; and in South Africa, where the struggle of a courageous people defeated apartheid.

So history reminds us that walls can be torn down. But the task is never easy.  True partnership and true progress requires constant work and sustained sacrifice.  They require sharing the burdens of development and diplomacy; of progress and peace. They require allies who will listen to each other, learn from each other and, most of all, trust each other. 

That is why America cannot turn inward.  That is why Europe cannot turn inward.  America has no better partner than Europe. Now is the time to build new bridges across the globe as strong as the one that bound us across the Atlantic.  Now is the time to join together, through constant cooperation, strong institutions, shared sacrifice, and a global commitment to progress, to meet the challenges of the 21st century. It was this spirit that led airlift planes to appear in the sky above our heads, and people to assemble where we stand today.  And this is the moment when our nations – and all nations – must summon that spirit anew. 

This is the moment when we must defeat terror and dry up the well of extremism that supports it.  This threat is real and we cannot shrink from our responsibility to combat it. If we could create NATO to face down the Soviet Union, we can join in a new and global partnership to dismantle the networks that have struck in Madrid and Amman; in London and Bali; in Washington and New York.  If we could win a battle of ideas against the communists, we can stand with the vast majority of Muslims who reject the extremism that leads to hate instead of hope.

This is the moment when we must renew our resolve to rout the terrorists who threaten our security in Afghanistan, and the traffickers who sell drugs on your streets.  No one welcomes war. I recognize the enormous difficulties in Afghanistan.  But my country and yours have a stake in seeing that NATO’s first mission beyond Europe’s borders is a success. For the people of Afghanistan, and for our shared security, the work must be done.  America cannot do this alone.  The Afghan people need our troops and your troops; our support and your support to defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda, to develop their economy, and to help them rebuild their nation.  We have too much at stake to turn back now. 

This is the moment when we must renew the goal of a world without nuclear weapons.  The two superpowers that faced each other across the wall of this city came too close too often to destroying all we have built and all that we love.  With that wall gone, we need not stand idly by and watch the further spread of the deadly atom. It is time to secure all loose nuclear materials; to stop the spread of nuclear weapons; and to reduce the arsenals from another era. This is the moment to begin the work of seeking the peace of a world without nuclear weapons. 

This is the moment when every nation in Europe must have the chance to choose its own tomorrow free from the shadows of yesterday.  In this century, we need a strong European Union that deepens the security and prosperity of this continent, while extending a hand abroad.  In this century – in this city of all cities – we must reject the Cold War mind-set of the past, and resolve to work with Russia when we can, to stand up for our values when we must, and to seek a partnership that extends across this entire continent.

This is the moment when we must build on the wealth that open markets have created, and share its benefits more equitably.  Trade has been a cornerstone of our growth and global development.  But we will not be able to sustain this growth if it favors the few, and not the many.  Together, we must forge trade that truly rewards the work that creates wealth, with meaningful protections for our people and our planet.  This is the moment for trade that is free and fair for all.

This is the moment we must help answer the call for a new dawn in the Middle East. My country must stand with yours and with Europe in sending a direct message to Iran that it must abandon its nuclear ambitions. We must support the Lebanese who have marched and bled for democracy, and the Israelis and Palestinians who seek a secure and lasting peace. And despite past differences, this is the moment when the world should support the millions of Iraqis who seek to rebuild their lives, even as we pass responsibility to the Iraqi government and finally bring this war to a close.

This is the moment when we must come together to save this planet.  Let us resolve that we will not leave our children a world where the oceans rise and famine spreads and terrible storms devastate our lands.  Let us resolve that all nations – including my own – will act with the same seriousness of purpose as has your nation, and reduce the carbon we send into our atmosphere.  This is the moment to give our children back their future. This is the moment to stand as one.

And this is the moment when we must give hope to those left behind in a globalized world. We must remember that the Cold War born in this city was not a battle for land or treasure. Sixty years ago, the planes that flew over Berlin did not drop bombs; instead they delivered food, and coal, and candy to grateful children. And in that show of solidarity, those pilots won more than a military victory. They won hearts and minds; love and loyalty and trust – not just from the people in this city, but from all those who heard the story of what they did here. 

Now the world will watch and remember what we do here – what we do with this moment.  Will we extend our hand to the people in the forgotten corners of this world who yearn for lives marked by dignity and opportunity; by security and justice? Will we lift the child in Bangladesh from poverty, shelter the refugee in Chad, and banish the scourge of AIDS in our time? 

Will we stand for the human rights of the dissident in Burma, the blogger in Iran, or the voter in Zimbabwe?  Will we give meaning to the words “never again” in Darfur? 

Will we acknowledge that there is no more powerful example than the one each of our nations projects to the world?  Will we reject torture and stand for the rule of law?  Will we welcome immigrants from different lands, and shun discrimination against those who don’t look like us or worship like we do, and keep the promise of equality and opportunity for all of our people?

People of Berlin – people of the world – this is our moment.  This is our time. 

I know my country has not perfected itself.  At times, we’ve struggled to keep the promise of liberty and equality for all of our people.  We’ve made our share of mistakes, and there are times when our actions around the world have not lived up to our best intentions. 

But I also know how much I love America. I know that for more than two centuries, we have strived – at great cost and great sacrifice – to form a more perfect union; to seek, with other nations, a more hopeful world.  Our allegiance has never been to any particular tribe or kingdom – indeed, every language is spoken in our country; every culture has left its imprint on ours; every point of view is expressed in our public squares. What has always united us – what has always driven our people; what drew my father to America’s shores – is a set of ideals that speak to aspirations shared by all people: that we can live free from fear and free from want; that we can speak our minds and assemble with whomever we choose and worship as we please.   

These are the aspirations that joined the fates of all nations in this city. These aspirations are bigger than anything that drives us apart. It is because of these aspirations that the airlift began. It is because of these aspirations that all free people – everywhere – became citizens of Berlin. It is in pursuit of these aspirations that a new generation – our generation – must make our mark on the world.   

People of Berlin – and people of the world – the scale of our challenge is great.  The road ahead will be long. But I come before you to say that we are heirs to a struggle for freedom. We are a people of improbable hope.  With an eye toward the future, with resolve in our hearts, let us remember this history, and answer our destiny, and remake the world once again.

Barack Obama in Berlin, Germany (Updated w/video)

If you have any troubles with this embed (below), visit BarackObama.com which has the same feed.

Update: The video doesn't seem to be working for me as of 10:15am Pacific, but then again, Barack hasn't started speaking yet. CNN reports that hundreds of thousands have showed up for the speech.

Update 2: CNN.com has a live stream as well -- it's working perfectly for me. (It's also on live TV.) I'll leave the embed up just in case it starts working.

Update 3: Full text of the speech. The speech is now over -- I've removed the embed, which started to work about half-way through. Whenever the full video is posted, I'll post it here.

Update 4: Here's the full video:

Just Hours Later, ABC Uses Berlin Speech to Sell Ads

debrazza points out that Jake Tapper is flipping out (with the headline "Just Hours Later, Obama Campaign Uses Berlin Speech to Raise Campaign Cash") because Barack Obama's e-mails all have a red donate button on them, and he didn't remove the donate button for his most recent e-mail on his Berlin speech.

Which raises the question of whether or not Tapper will note the fact that a British Lord hosted a fundraiser for John McCain last March.

Meanwhile, how much money is Mickey Mouse making in ad dollars on his silly post? Compare all those ads to that lonely little donate button at the buttom of the page that I might not have noticed if it weren't for Tapper.

Team McCain-Pawlenty

John McCain finally gets his mug on the front page of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune...and of all the headlines in the world that could have been below the picture of him and Pawlenty. (h/t: Jonathan Martin)

Coming soon to a swing state near you

(Movie buffs: Here's the IMDB page for Desperado, released in 1995.)

Spill Contaminates Water Supply Before McCain Oil Rig Visit

John McCain planned to visit a New Orleans area offshore oil rig...but suddenly canceled, blaming the weather. But it turns out that today it is 85 degrees and sunnypartly cloudly.

Perhaps the fact that a huge oil spill has contaminated the New Orleans water supply and closed the Mississippi River has more to do with McCain's quick turnabout?

Slip Of The Tongue: Chris Matthews Calls McCain 'Bush'!

One can only hope this mistake is the start of a beautiful trend of McBush mixups.

"McCain's Neverending War" now most dugg item in past week

Thanks to all of you who helped overcome the McCainiacs who attempted to bury my video, "John McCain's Neverending War." Because of your efforts, the video is already the most dugg item of the past week, and it's only been "popular" for a little under 14 hours.

Thanks again to everybody. And if you haven't yet watched the video...what are you waiting for? :) Grab some popcorn, and set aside nine minutes and thirty seconds for some of the scariest film you've ever seen.

Update: For those of you who are new to the "digg" thing, digg is the most popular recommendation site on the web. If you get something made "popular" it means that it goes onto the front page of the site, where tens of thousands of people will click on it and follow it. So being the most dugg item over any given period of time isn't really about bragging rights, rather its about letting other people know about something.

ABC News Ad Campaign Driving Wedge?

This ABCNews.com ad showed up today on my gmail account. Given that the story it links to is from March 10, I've got no idea why they are still advertising it. It might be just an innocent mistake, but it sure seems like an attempt to drive a wedge...

An imaginary scandal

So Michael Goldfarb of the McCain campaign is apoplectic because Barack Obama mistakenly said "my committee" when referring to the Senate Banking Committee (on which he does not sit).

Clearly, Barack meant to say "my bill" because he was talking about the fact that last week the banking committee passed the key provisions of his Iranian divestment legislation as part of a larger Iranian sanctions bill. In other words, he misspoke on a trivial detail, and immediately made sure the record was corrected. Compare that to John McCain's stubborn reluctance to admit error on the surge timeline.

Video: McCain '07 Contradicts McCain '08 On Surge Timeline

In order to defend his claim that the surge is responsible for the Anbar Awakening, John McCain now says that the surge actually started in 2006.

But that not only completely contradicts the universally accepted historical record, it also contradicts his own words, delivered on January 5, 2007, when he declared his support for the surge, which Bush announced five days later. Moreover, in McCain explicitly noted that there was already good progress taking place in Anbar province, and that the primary goal of the surge was to improve security in Baghdad.

McCain's new claim that the surge started before the surge is part of his effort to spin his way out of his misstatement on CBS yesterday evening. He'd have been far better of just admitting a mistake. Instead, he's now lying -- and his own words have caught up to him.

What if McCain held a town hall and nobody came?

According to a video report posted by Scranton, Pennsylvania's Times-Leader, John McCain's town hall event in Wilkes-Barre earlier today featured an underwhelming turnout -- more than half the seats were empty. About seven hundred folks showed up -- a decent sized crowd, perhaps, but it left nineeleven hundred seats empty.

Meanwhile, when Barack Obama visited Wilkes-Barre on April 1, more than two thousand people attended -- not including the line of people that were turned away by fire department officials.

Pictures below:

Going Purple

Gallup (whose tracker shows a 4 point lead for the good guys) reports that Barack Obama has gained the most ground in the states that matter the most, at least as far as the electoral college goes:

Questions

Does John McCain think Americans are losers because most of them support Barack Obama's timetable to end the war (by a 60% to 30% margin)?

On what factual basis was the WaPo operating when it falsely claimed that Iraqis oppose a timetable?

Will CBS ever fully explain itself?

Why didn't Mark Halperin note the oil spill in his explanation of McCain's oil rig cancellation?

Will John "canceled my first media availability ever" McCain ever answer these questions?

How did John McCain's policies towards Iraq change after his trip there in March? And since we all know they didn't change at all, does that mean it wasn't a fact-finding mission?

That's some good politics right there

Probably the most impressive difference between Barack Obama's campaign and those of past Democratic nominees is that he refuses to accept the opposition's framing.

So today when the RNC launched a small ad buy campaign claiming he was opposed to troop funding, instead of adopting a defensive posture ("he is too for the troops"), the Obama campaign effectively said "bullshit."

There are honest differences between Senator Obama’s position on Iraq and Senator McCain’s, but there’s no question that both support our troops. Under the RNC’s definition, John McCain would have also chosen politics over our military when he urged George Bush to veto funding for the troops, and we know that’s not the case.

You can't make this stuff up

Update: He's not going, blaming the weather. Yeah, right. Smells like an oil spill to me.

So McCain is going to NOLA tomorrow to do an event to tout off-shore oil drilling, flying out to a rig on a helicopter, trying to be all Jack Bauer the oil man. His agenda: demonstrate how easy, safe, and important more offshore drilling is.

But there's a problem: today, on the eve of this stunt, there was a huge oil spill in NOLA:

Oh my McGod

Anytime some jackass makes a messiah crack, just point them to this freaky poster of John McCain (h/t: Ambinder)

Despicable

Michael Goldfarb -- official blogger for The McCain Report and a key part of the campaign's message operation -- goes after Barack Obama on genocide.

This, of course, on the very same day that Barack is visiting a Holocaust memorial site.

It is utterly detestable.

This, by the way, is not the first time Goldfarb has gone after Barack on a similar issue. Back in June, he invoked the Nazis in a misleading attack.

There's a reason that Barack Obama is far more popular among American Jews than Joe Lieberman. Speaking as one of them, and as the great grandson of a Holocaust victim, I'd urge Michael Goldfarb to spend some time pondering why that might be.

Whoa

Well, I guess the second-time was the charm for digg -- my new video is now on the front-page over there. Thanks to everybody for helping it get there so quickly!

And more importantly, what a crazy morning of campaign news. I'm just getting started for the day, and it looks like there's a ton of stuff to sort my way through. My favorite story so far?

McCain cancels press avail. When was the last time you've heard of that happening for the McMaverick Straight Talk Express McSame?

McCainiacs Bury My New McCain "Neverending War" Video

I figured my new video on John McCain would make the front page of digg fairly quickly after it generated 200 diggs in just a few hours, but when it didn't, I got suspicious. Sure enough, it seems to have been buried.

So it is has now been resubmitted. If you use digg, please digg it, shout it, etc. -- don't let McCain's bury brigade keep this video from getting out. Here's the new digg:

digg_url = 'http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ieHwOm4ljA&eurl=http://www.jedreport.com/'; digg_bgcolor = '#ffffff'; digg_skin = 'compact'; digg_window = 'new';


YouTube link

What a shock

Howard Wolfson is joining FOX News as a political analyst...I guess to balance out Karl Rove or something?

Oh, thank you so much

Gee, Charlie Black is just such a swell guy:

Breaking: McCain Campaign "Concedes" That Obama Is Patriotic
By Greg Sargent- July 7, 2008, 10:20AM

This line from a top McCain adviser, in a Politico article on Obama's efforts to convince the electorate that he's American through and through, is unintentionally funny and revealing:

"We don't want to talk about his patriotism and character," said McCain adviser Charlie Black. "We concede that he's a patriot and person of good character. This is about big issues."

It kind of says it all that to this senior McCain campaign hand, acknowledging that Obama is patriotic is a concession.

Is John McCain violating his own conflict of interest policy?

I think John McCain may have set a little trap for himself when it comes to his campaign's conflict of interest policy. The key issue is the third provision of that policy, which states:

3.) No person with a McCain Campaign title or position may participate in a 527 or other independent entity that makes public communications that support or oppose any presidential candidate.

That's about as clear as you can get -- there's no modifiers or qualifications. It explicitly forbids participation by anyone affiliated with the McCain campaign in a "527 or independent entity" that runs candidate advocacy ads in the presidential campaign.

Here's where McCain's problem comes in: he has personally raised millions if not tens of millions of dollars -- at a pace of up to $70,000 per contributor -- for the RNC's new "independent" expenditure committee now running ads for John McCain.

If the RNC's new committee really is an independent entity as they claim, then John McCain's fundraising activity on its behalf is a blatant violation of his own policy.

On the other hand, the campaign might argue that the committee really isn't an independent entity. That's a fair argument, but it would put McCain in an even worse position, because unless the committee disbanded before the GOP convention, it would completely betray the promise he made to limit his campaign to public funds for the general election.

Going local

Chuck Todd (and I'm sure others) made a good point about the timing of the announcement that Barack Obama would g