By Big Tent Democrat

WaPo Polls Ohio and Texas:

TEXAS

OHIO

The details on the flip.

By Big Tent Democrat

Via Greg Sargent, NYTimes Executive Editor defends the McCain story:

On the substance, we think the story speaks for itself. In all the uproar, no one has challenged what we actually reported. On the timing, our policy is, we publish stories when they are ready.

'Ready' means the facts have been nailed down to our satisfaction, the subjects have all been given a full and fair chance to respond, and the reporting has been written up with all the proper context and caveats. This story was no exception. It was a long time in the works. It reached my desk late Tuesday afternoon. After a final edit and a routine check by our lawyers, we published it.

I agree with Greg's take. This statement addresses NONE of the concerns raised. Wholly inadequate.

Update: (TL) The New Republic, which reportedly was the impetus for the Times running the McCain story yesterday, has now published its article about the history of the Times' article and investigation.

The Bush Administration has admitted for the first time using a British territory in its transporting of Ghost Air prisoners as part of its secret rendition program.

The Bush administration is bracing for a diplomatic backlash after conceding it used British territory to transport suspected terrorists on secret rendition flights despite repeated earlier assurances the U.S. had not.

U.S. officials have sought to quell the fallout by apologizing to Britain for what they said was an "administrative error." The admission, however, may reopen a bitter debate between the United States and its allies over how the fight against terrorism should be conducted and compromise future cooperation.

The territory at issue: Diego Garcia.[More...]

Via Mother Jones:

Tennessee's next trial court judge might be a prison company executive who has less courtroom experience than most inmates.

His name is Gustavus Adolphus Puryear IV:

Puryear has spent the bulk of his legal career at the Tennessee-based Corrections Corporation of America, the nation's largest private prison company. As its general counsel since 2001, Puryear has made millions of dollars working for a company that profits from the country's incarceration boom, particularly through his recent sale of more than $3 million worth of the company's stock. (His financial disclosure form shows a net worth of more than $13 million.

...According to his written questionnaire for the committee, of the two cases he has tried in the entirety of his legal career, he was lead counsel on one of them. The last time he litigated a case in federal court was more than a decade ago.

Puryear oversees the defense of Correction Corps of America to inmate lawsuits. [More...]

By Big Tent Democrat

A minor matter, but Hilzoy is concerned about Clinton's finances and states:

Question: does anyone think that she will take in as much in February as she did in January? I don't.

As I understand it, Clinton raised 13.5 millon (though Politico says $20MM, including Clinton's loan) in January. In February, just online, Clinton had raised 15 million in 15 days. So the answer to Hilzoy's question is actually, yes, Clinton will raise MUCH MORE in February than January.

Here's a recipe for getting caught if you decide to steal a car:

Authorities say a man drove a stolen car to the Anderson County Sheriff's Office to demand the return of nearly $2,000 officers seized from him during a drug arrest last June.

Not surprisingly, he didn't get his money back.

Barack Obama is seeking to portray himself as the better candidate on issues pertaining to NAFTA, jobs, unions and labor.

For voters in Texas, Ohio and PA (it's too late for Wisconsin), I suggest you examine their voting records in the Senate on these issues. It's a far better yardstick than speeches. A good starting place: Progressive Punch.

Hillary Clinton's voting record during her seven years as U.S. Senator is 100% progressive on "Aid to Workers Negatively Impacted Upon by International Trade Agreements", on General Union Rights and on Outsourcing of American Jobs Overseas.

Here is Hillary's record on Preventing Workers' Rights From Being Eroded by International Trade Agreements. It is solidly progressive with the exception of two votes on one bill in 2002. [More...]

Conservatives attacking Barack Obama and his supporters wanting change believe Obama is a more progressive candidate than Hillary Clinton. Let's take a look at that, because their voting records in the Senate suggest otherwise.

Progressive Punch is a site that rates the legislative records of all Senators on progressive issues. For 2007-2008, Barack Obama is the 43rd most progressive out of 100 Senators. # 44 is Joe Lieberman. After #50, they are all Republicans, except for Tim Johnson. (Overall, his ranking is 88% or 24 out of 99, possibly suggesting he has become less progressive over time in the Senate.)

Hillary Clinton is rated far more progressive for 2007-2008, at #29. Her score is 90% to Obama's 81%. Overall, she ranks 17 out of 99, with a 91% progressive voting record, to his 24 out of 99 and an 88% progressive voting record.).

Obama's weakest score: On human rights and civil liberties he's at 75%, and #42 out of 99. One reason: in 2005, he voted "no" on a bill to cut funding for a new $36 million maximum security prison at Guantanamo.

Writing in the Wall St. Journal today, Karl Rove offers some advice for Hillary Clinton with respect to challenging Barack Obama:

Mrs. Clinton can do much more to draw attention to Mr. Obama's lack of achievements. She can agree with Mr. Obama's statement Tuesday night that change is difficult to achieve on health care, energy, poverty, schools and immigration -- and then question his failure to provide any leadership on these or other major issues since his arrival in the Senate. His failure to act, advocate or lead on what he now claims are his priorities may be her last chance to make a winning argument.

Other than that advice, the column is a disappointing, and in my view, inaccurate portrayal of Obama as a leftist hiding in centrist clothing. I think Obama is a centrist. See my new post comparing his and Hillary's progressive voting record and rankings.

By Big Tent Democrat

(speaking for me only)

Barack Obama can convincingly win the Democratic nomination on March 4th. He can win more votes than Hillary Clinton in Texas and Ohio and let the voters decide that Clinton should concede.

Instead, according to the UK Guardian (other sources do not confirm this), the Obama campaign has decided to urge Clinton to concede before the voters in Texas and Ohio (and PA, etc.) have spoken:

Barack Obama's campaign team, riding a wave of 10 straight victories in the contest for the Democratic nomination after wins in Wisconsin and Hawaii, yesterday urged Hillary Clinton to bow to the inevitable and accept defeat.

Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, dismissed the Clinton camp's hopes of making a comeback when the power states of Texas and Ohio hold their primaries on March 4. "This is a wide, wide lead right now," Plouffe said in a conference call with reporters. "The Clinton campaign keeps saying the race is essentially tied. That's just lunacy."

If this reporting is accurate, this is a mistake. Moreover, the intimation is that the voters in Texas and Ohio have no voice in the nomination decision. Let the voters decide, Obama campaign. This attitude smacks of hubris. If I was the Clinton campaign, I would certainly use this. Something along the lines of "Obama says your vote does not matter." Read that somewhere.

More . . . NOTE Comments are now closed.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only.

Many Democrats are glorying and gloating over the NYTimes story on McCain. Some after taking a moment, realize this story is troubling. Yglesias writes:

[T]hinking more clearly past my loathing of John McCain, the Times's effort to substitute innuendo for making a straightforward true or false assertion seems like a pretty shameful attempt to set up a Kaus-like presumption of guilt [Referencing Mickey's attempt to legitimize the "Edwards is having an affair" stories]. If they have reporting they're willing to stand behind of a McCain-Iseman affair, they should publish it. And if, as seems to be the case, they don't have the reporting, then they shouldn't write the story.

Good for Matt. But if Democrats take a moment, they will realize this development is not good at all. I mention one word to you - Rezko. I discuss on the flip.

By Big Tent Democrat

At his press conference this morning, John McCain denied having had a relationship with lobbyist Vicki Iseman:

John McCain emphatically denied a romantic relationship with a female telecommunications lobbyist on Thursday and said a report by The New York Times suggesting favoritism for her clients is "not true." "I'm very disappointed in the article. It's not true," the likely Republican presidential nominee said as his wife, Cindy, stood beside him during a news conference called to address the matter. . . . McCain described the woman in question, lobbyist Vicki Iseman, as a friend. . . .

So McCain has emphatically denied the Times account. Now the ball is in the court of the NYTimes. More