On Obama, McCain and Robert Stone's Dog Soldiers, a really good diary by Blueness at Daily Kos. I especially like the parts about FISA and criminal law, about how of course we are going to be disappointed in Obama from time to time, but that's no reason not to support him for President.

A few quotes below, but there is much more, so go read the whole thing.

This is an open thread.

Republicans to Bob Barr: Don't run.

Bob Barr to Republicans:

“ ‘Well, gee, you might take votes from Senator McCain,’ ” Mr. Barr said this week, mimicking one of the complainers, as he sat sipping Coca-Cola in his plush corner office, 12 stories above Atlanta. “They all said, ‘Look, we understand why you’re doing this. We agree with why you’re doing it. But please don’t do it.’ ”

But with the Libertarian nomination in hand, Mr. Barr hopes to follow in the footsteps of Ross Perot and Mr. Nader, whose third-party presidential bids wreaked general-election havoc.

There's nothing quite so much fun as wreaking havoc on the Republican Party. Barr doesn't have much in the way of money or organization, but every vote he can siphon away from Republicans disgruntled with McCain is valuable. Go to it, Bob!

Michelle Obama had these encouraging remarks about her husband's positions on gay rights at a fundraiser this week:

A world where together we work to reverse discriminatory laws like DOMA and Don't Ask, Don't Tell. A world where LGBT Americans get a fair shake at working hard to get ahead without workplace discrimination.

..... And, a world where our federal laws don't discriminate against same-sex relationships, including equal treatment for any relationship recognized under state law.

More...

The LA Times reports that Sen. Barack Obama is "shifting towards the center" and adopting views Republicans would be comfortable with. Examples:

A handgun ban. The death penalty. U.S. wiretaps. Iran and Israel. Trade. On all of those issues, he has recently staked more moderate ground.

Barack Obama, as he introduces himself to the broader voting public, is emphasizing centrist -- even conservative -- positions on hot-button issues.

[More...]

Alan Beaman has always denied killing his "on again, off again girlfriend." A jury nonetheless convicted him in 1995. Last month, the Illinois Supreme Court concluded that the outcome of his trial may have been different if prosecutors hadn't withheld evidence implicating another of the murdered woman's boyfriends.

In an opinion by Justice Thomas Kilbride, the court said evidence against Beaman was “not particularly strong.”

“We cannot have confidence in the verdict finding (Beaman) guilty of this crime given the tenuous nature of the circumstantial evidence against him, along with the nondisclosure of critical evidence that would have countered the state’s argument that all other potential suspects had been eliminated from consideration,” Kilbride wrote.

The prosecution, unwilling to admit that it may have convicted the wrong man, intends to bring Beaman to trial again. A couple of days ago, he was released on bond. After spending 13 years in prison, the things he enjoyed during his first few hours of freedom included: watching the sunrise, chewing gum, and playing with dogs.

It has now become apparent to just about everyone that Barack Obama is a conventional politician who will run a conventional general election campaign. Unlike some, I am not surprised. Pols are pols and do what they do.

What I am more interested in is how we, as Democrats, progressives and pseudo activists, should react to this. I have stated clearly that I will be no mere cheerleader and I think I have been true to my word. By the same token, I will, without question, support and vote for Barack Obama as the best choice I have for President in this election.

Some see this as an inconsistency. I think it is not and I will try to illuminate my view on the flip.

Gail Collins is clever today:

[J]ust as [Hillary Clinton] was engrossed in her multiple concessions, [Obama's] campaign started using the same political shape-shifting that Obama had decried in the Clintons. . . . The Democrats could not care less. They want a winner, and most of them are prepared to forgive quite a lot of inconsistency in order to get one. A liberal opponent of the Senate wiretapping bill virtually wept with joy when Barack deserted the cause and voted with the law-and-order folk.

. . . You’d like to think that after 17 months of angst over its presidential nomination, the Democrats would not wind up with the exact same candidate they started out with, except for a different gender and a higher quotient of panache.

. . . . Take a lesson from the residents of Unity, Hillary fans. Everybody has to do their part. . . . Sometimes it’s trying to figure out how to get through a killer presidential campaign without losing every single quality that made people want to vote for you in the first place. And sometimes, it simply involves a lot of nodding.

Heh.

The Crosby Stills & Nash concert in Denver last night was terrific. More on that later, but first, two C,S & N songs relevant to today's unity announcement:

If you can't be with the one you love

love the one you're with

More...

It figures that accountability would be a hang-up in the Bush administration's attempt to convince European leaders that their citizens' privacy interests are outweighed by the American government's desire to know everything about everyone everywhere.

The United States and the European Union are nearing completion of an agreement allowing law enforcement and security agencies to obtain private information — like credit card transactions, travel histories and Internet browsing habits — about people on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.

A predictable stumbling point:

whether European citizens should be able to sue the United States government over its handling of their personal data, the report said.

Lawsuits? Accountability? Not a chance. [more ...]

Remember Steven Hatfill? He's the scientist who was declared a "person of interest" during the FBI's investigation of a series of anthrax incidents. In Hatfill's case, "person of interest" means "our profiler thinks he did it but we can't prove it so let's publicize the allegation and see if he panics." As TalkLeft reported here, Hatfill sued before the FBI got around to announcing its public regret over the mess it made of Hatfill's life.

That report was in September 2003. The litigation has finally ended.

The Justice Department has agreed to pay former Army scientist Steven Hatfill almost $6 million to settle his claims that the government violated his privacy rights during its investigation of the 2001 anthrax attacks.

It's a structured settlement. [more ...]

Mississippi lawyer Dickie Scruggs, brother-in-law of Trent Lott, was sentenced to five years in federal prison today for conspiring to bribe a judge:

Scruggs, a former Navy pilot, is tall, slender and appeared composed as he entered the courthouse. But he caved when Biggers brought up his family. His wife, Diane, has been gravely ill.

At the mention of her and his daughter, Claire, Scruggs began to shake as he stood before the judge. His attorney, John Keker of San Francisco, put an arm around Scruggs, whose knees buckled before another attorney slid a chair forward so he could sit down.

Scruggs was contrite. [More...]

The unity train took off today with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's joint appearance in New Hampshire.

Some Hillary supporters are on board. Others are not.

Your thoughts? Mine are simply this: I wasn't impressed by the joint appearance, but I'm voting for the Democratic nominee and since that's Barack Obama, I'm voting for him.