This is not surprising:

[T]he interpreter for the interview works for Mr. Maliki’s office, not the magazine. And in an audio recording of Mr. Maliki’s interview that Der Spiegel provided to The New York Times, Mr. Maliki seemed to state a clear affinity for Mr. Obama’s position, bringing it up on his own in an answer to a general question on troop presence.

The following is a direct translation from the Arabic of Mr. Maliki’s comments by The Times: “Obama’s remarks that — if he takes office — in 16 months he would withdraw the forces, we think that this period could increase or decrease a little, but that it could be suitable to end the presence of the forces in Iraq.”He continued: “Who wants to exit in a quicker way has a better assessment of the situation in Iraq.”

By Big Tent Democrat

Chuck Todd on Meet the Press:

MR. BROKAW: But is Iraq going to be the fault line in the fall, or is it going to remain the economy, Chuck?

MR. TODD: I think it absolutely remains the economy, and I think it's possible we will see how both candidates use their vice presidential choices to make that emphasis.

If that's the case, then Bill Clinton is a shoo-in to be Obama's VP . . . But seriously, who exactly would be an "economy" emphasis pick? Not anyone not named Clinton frankly. I know some would argue John Edwards or Sherrod Brown but to me that is silly talk. One name means good economic times in the modern Democratic Party -- that name is Clinton.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

Your turn. One point, if you are a supporter of the Iraq Debacle, especially if you agreed with McCain and Bush that starting the Iraq Debacle was the right idea, please say so when discussing McCain's positions on Iraq. In that way, when you write that "McCain has been right on Iraq from the onset," we will know where you are coming from.

This is an Open Thread.

SPIEGEL: How short-term [a period of continued US troop presence]? Are you hoping for a new [security] agreement before the end of the Bush administration?

Maliki: So far the Americans have had trouble agreeing to a concrete timetable for withdrawal, because they feel it would appear tantamount to an admission of defeat. But that isn't the case at all. If we come to an agreement, it is not evidence of a defeat, but of a victory, of a severe blow we have inflicted on al-Qaida and the militias. The American lead negotiators realize this now, and that's why I expect to see an agreement taking shape even before the end of President Bush's term in office. With these negotiations, we will start the whole thing over again, on a clearer, better basis, because the first proposals were unacceptable to us.

(Emphasis supplied.) Quite an indictment of the Bush Administration. Read the whole thing.

John Avlon, a speechwriter for Rudy Giuliani writes in Politico:

Throughout the left-wing blogosphere, the cry has come: Barack Obama is moving away from them, and to the center. . . . But all this outrage ignores the obvious: Throughout his career, Obama has consistently framed himself as a post-partisan centrist. He’s been a bridge-builder all his life, first between black and white, and now between left and right.

Obama positioned himself to the right of the Democratic primary pack on virtually every issue except Iraq. . . . [T]he founder of the centrist (and historically Clinton-boosting) DLC, Al From, now sees a kindred spirit: “This general election, more than most we have seen, is going to be a battle for the center. ... The more we learn about Sen. Obama's policies, the more we will see some of the policies the DLC has championed for years.”

More . .

Over and over and over again. We knew that the Bush Administration would twist Maliki's arm and try to get a walkback from him. Obama should refuse to accept it. Kevin Drum writes:

"Maliki Endorses Obama Withdrawal Plan is a headline everyone can understand." True enough, but only if that's the headline the U.S. media actually decides on. . . . This ought to be a pretty good foreign policy moment for Obama, but we won't know for sure until the media narrative takes shape. Stay tuned.

It is up to Obama to demand the narrative he thinks is correct. Drum's approach is entirely too passive for my tastes. Maliki said what he said. Obama should discuss it truthfully. He should not let the Media decide what "the truth" is.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only.

You all missed a great rock and roll photo exhibit at a Denver gallery tonight. Renowned photographer and artist Lynn Goldsmith was in town for three nights exhibiting her incomparable rock and roll photos from her collections of the 70's to her new Looking Glass series, which is something you just have to experience in person.

I was there with my pal Anita, who's in Denver again this weekend, and who also is good friends with Lynn, who spends much of the year in the Aspen Valley.

Below are some photos:

Didn't this happen on an episode of X-Files?

Inmate loses weight, escapes through jail vent

The vent was less than a foot wide. The Sheriff's explanation:

"We just found out he's been slimming down a lot recently"

Remember Diebold?

A leading cyber-security expert and former adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) says he has fresh evidence regarding election fraud on Diebold electronic voting machines during the 2002 Georgia gubernatorial and senatorial elections.

RawStory reports that a whistleblower became suspicious of this:

The first red flag went up when the computer patch was installed in person by Diebold CEO Bob Urosevich, who flew in from Texas and applied it in just two counties, DeKalb and Fulton, both Democratic strongholds. ... The whistleblower said another flag went up when it became apparent that the patch installed by Urosevich had failed to fix a problem with the computer clock, which employees from Diebold and the Georgia Secretary of State’s office had been told the patch was designed specifically to address.

Are these election results a coincidence? [more ...]

The Onion has its own perspective on the Supreme Court's death penalty jurisprudence. Content warning: don't watch if you're offended by the gratuitous use of four-letter words.

Thomas Jefferson described the right to a jury trial as "the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution." So important was the jury trial to Jefferson that he said: "Were I called upon to decide whether the people had best be omitted in the Legislative or Judiciary department, I would say it is better to leave them out of the Legislative."

We elect presidents and legislators but not federal judges. Juries bring democracy to the third branch of government. In a criminal case, only the jury -- not law enforcement, not a paid representative of the government, but twelve randomly chosen members of the community -- can decide the fact of guilt. As Jefferson pointed out, juries even have the power to decide the law (or at least to decide whether it's fair or reasonable to apply the law as the judge explained it), although judges don't like to tell juries that they have that right.

As the embodiment of democracy in the courtroom, it is unconscionable that reasonable members of the community who have no reason to be unfair to the government are summarily removed from death penalty juries because they are philosophically opposed to capital punishment. How representative of the community is a group of people who represent only one side of a controversy that sharply divides the nation? [more ...]

Al Gore's new project, We Can Solve the Climate Crisis.

“America must commit to producing 100 percent of our electricity from renewable energy and other clean sources within 10 years.”

On a related note, Gore said today at Netroots Nation he will not accept a formal role in the next President's Administration: [More...]