Sure, the flip flop attack probably won't cost Obama the election. But why not ask yourself this, why feed the line of attack in the first place? Maybe Obama is not really hurt by the flip flopper line, but please tell me how exactly it helps?

To me, the "it probably won't hurt him" line of defense misses the point. Explain to me instead, how the flip flops HELP Obama? Because, wrap it up in pretty packaging all you want, but Obama DID flip flop on FISA capitulation. Obama did change his position on public financing (I see all the upside to this one BTW, I just think he should have done it earlier), Obama has given strange and contradictory statements on choice. Given these mistakes, it was inevitable it seems to me to see the Media take Obama's use of "refine" on Iraq and make up a story - that Obama changed his position on Iraq withdrawal too. That one was flat out false, but the others were not. Obama created the opening, for no good reason. That is the point. It may not be potent, but it should not even exist.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

The DNCC sent out a press release this morning confirming that the final night of the Democratic Convention, including Sen. Barack Obama's acceptance speech, will take place as Invesco Field instead of the Pepsi Center.

When we said we wanted to 'bring down the walls,' open up this Convention like never before and truly speak to the American people, we meant it," said Leah D. Daughtry, CEO of the DNCC. "On August 28, we will offer grassroots Democrats, who have turned out in record numbers this year, the opportunity to witness history shoulder to shoulder with thousands of Americans standing up for the change our country desperately needs."

The stadium seats 76,000 people. With that size crowd, I think we can expect a pretty big-name rock band to open the event. I did some checking on who's available. Personally, I'd love to see Bon Jovi, but I think more likely possibilities include: Bruce Springsteen, Sheryl Crow, Bonnie Raitt, Melissa Etheridge and Stevie Wonder. [More...]

Did you watch Nadal-Federer? This is an Open thread.

One unrelated note - Joe Gandleman, who runs The Moderate Voice, is a good guy so he should not be tarred when one of his writers uses sexist language ("the last thing Obama needs is this pack of doomsaying [formerly Hillary supporting] crows [Link] nipping at his ears and caw-cawing over every perceived slight") and falsely describes the posts of other bloggers, as was done to me. Somehow writing "absent a change in the dynamics of this election, Barack Obama will defeat John McCain for the Presidency in November" is "tak[ing] a masochistic delight in reporting on every poll showing problems for the Illinois Senator." To some, nothing short of fawning adulation will do.

By Big Tent Democrat

Every election in November will be important.

[T]he political handicapper Charlie Cook envisions Democratic gains of up to 20 House seats and 7 Senate seats, close to the 60-vote threshold in the Senate needed to break filibusters by the minority.

Frankly, it doesn't matter which presidential candidate has the best plan for health care or social security reform. Sausage gets made in the legislature. As long as a Democrat holds the presidency, a strong Democratic majority in the House and Senate will have a chance to repair some of the damage the Bush government has inflicted upon the nation. Perhaps it will even advance some planks of a progressive agenda.

Up and down the ticket, 2008 is the year to vote for Democrats. What do you think of Cook's prediction?

When John Kerry decided to contend that John McCain lacks the judgment to be president, he had to expect this:

If that's the case, then it's probably a good thing McCain rejected overtures from Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004, to form a bipartisan ticket and run with Kerry as his candidate for vice president.

Putting aside the gratuitous smack, it's difficult to argue with Kerry's current assessment of McCain's judgment:

"John McCain ... has proven that he has been wrong about every judgment he's made about the war. Wrong about the Iraqis paying for the reconstruction, wrong about whether or not the oil would pay for it, wrong about Sunni and Shia violence through the years, wrong about the willingness of the Iraqis to stand up for themselves"

Kerry, who knows something about being accused of flip-flopping, argues that the new McCain isn't a recognizable version of the McCain he once knew: [more ...]

Yahoo is not the government. It has no obligation to respect your right to free speech. In fact, you give Yahoo the right to delete anything you upload if it contravenes Yahoo's difficult-to-discern standards. When Yahoo deletes publicly displayed content (or when TalkLeft does, for that matter) it is not playing a "governmental role," as this writer asserts. Substitute "managerial role," and the writer has a point.

Companies in charge of seemingly public spaces online wipe out content that's controversial but otherwise legal. Service providers write their own rules for users worldwide and set foreign policy when they cooperate with regimes like China. They serve as prosecutor, judge and jury in handling disputes behind closed doors.

The governmental role that companies play online is taking on greater importance as their services - from online hangouts to virtual repositories of photos and video - become more central to public discourse around the world.

Sometimes those judgments seem arbitrary: [more ...]

. . . in the dynamics of this election, Barack Obama will defeat John McCain for the Presidency in November. Obama leads by 6, roughly the margin for a month now. How can he lose it? By exposing a flank. The flip flopper flank, by listening to his inner Dick Morris. Speaking of Morris, he, not surprisingly, loves Obama's tack to the "middle":

For the past two weeks, Obama has moved quickly toward the center. He has reversed his previous positions for gun control, against using faith based institutions to deliver public services, against immunity for tele-communications companies that turn records over to the government in terror investigations, for raising Social Security taxes, for imposing the fairness doctrine on talk radio, and a host of other issues.

. . .[I]f McCain doesn't answer, or just replies with his own positive ad, he will let Obama move to the center, a key mistake from which he may never recover. If Obama can hold his 5-10 point lead until the conventions, he will have set in place a pattern that will be very hard to change. With his new ad, Obama could even elevate his lead to double digits.

More . . .

Here's further fuel for the conservative argument that no government functions so flawlessly that it deserves to be entrusted with the decision to administer the death penalty.

Since 1978, the federal courts have ordered new trials in 38 of 54 death penalty appeals in California, an unacceptable 70 percent error rate.

By "appeals" the writer is referring to federal habeas corpus review, the right that President Bush and his most ardent followers deem inconsequential.

The linked editorial cheers "the chief finding of the Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice:" [more ....]

Former President Bill Clinton is in Aspen at the Ideas Festival. Today he's playing golf, but he spoke yesterday to a crowd of 700.

Via Troy Hooper, Editor of the Aspen Daily News, in the Denver Post:

It's well-documented that Clinton is no angel either but he remains a rock star of the Democratic Party and was the headliner at the festival, hosted by the Aspen Institute.

He filled the Greenwald Pavilion with more than 700 high-powered attendees who greeted him with an extended standing ovation. Clinton's daughter, Chelsea, was seated next to Gen. Colin Powell front and center.

Much of Clinton's remarks centered on the Africa election in Zimbabwe, calling for Robert Mugabe either to step down or "form a power-sharing arrangement with his chief opponent."

He didn't mention Hillary or the Democratic nomination for President, but he had this to say about John McCain and Barack Obama on environmental policy: [More...]

As Jeralyn noted, a few days ago, Barack Obama said:

I don't think that "mental distress" qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term...

Obama refined his remarks:

Who'da thunk it? In the Washington Post today, Peter Beinart echoes my thoughts:

When Democrats worry about the backlash that awaits Barack Obama if he defends civil liberties, or endorses withdrawal from Iraq, or proposes unconditional negotiations with Iran, they are seeing ghosts. Fundamentally, the politics of foreign policy have changed.

. . . Because Americans are less afraid and because Republicans have abandoned the foreign policy center, Democrats need not worry that Obama will suffer the fate of George McGovern, Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale or John Kerry. He won't lose because he looks weak. The greater danger is that he will change positions in a bid to look strong -- as he recently did on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- and come across as inauthentic and insincere. As Ruy Teixeira and John Halpin have noted, the Democrats' biggest political liability is not that Americans believe they are too liberal but rather that they believe that Democrats don't stand for anything at all. . .

(Emphasis supplied.) It is scary to me that Peter Beinart gets it but some of the Left blogs do not. Which is funny, because the Left blogs were first to recognize this. But now in Obama adoration mode, they forget their original raison d'etre.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

Part of the outrage that many of us feel about the FISA Capitulation is that the Democrats, led by our presumptive nominee, are signalling not only a diminution of our Constitutional right to privacy, but also an acceptance of the Bush Administrations abuses as acceptable behavior for the United States. Today, Nick Kristof proposes a Truth Commission:

These abuses happened partly because, for several years after 9/11, many of our national institutions didn’t do their jobs. The Democratic Party rolled over rather than serving as loyal opposition. We in the press were often lap dogs rather than watchdogs, and we let the public down.

. . . Both Barack Obama and John McCain should commit to impaneling a Truth Commission early in the next administration. This commission would issue a report to help us absorb the lessons of our failings, the better to avoid them during the next crisis.

More . . .