Senator Barack Obama's attempt to woo the Beltway Elite is a fool's errand. He is their darling now as Hillary Clinton's main opponent. But if he wins, they will turn on him on a dime. Heck, Fred Hiatt did not even wait:

It's also true that, more responsibly than Clinton, he acknowledges a fiscal challenge for Social Security. But where he used to accept that all possible remedies must be on the table to achieve a political compromise, he now opposes benefit cuts and proposes to solve the problem with, yes, a tax hike on the rich.

Of course, Obama's attempt to woo the Beltway Elite by speaking irresponsibly about Social Security will NEVER be enough for the Hiatts and Russerts of the world. But Hiatt's attack on Obama should be a lesson - the Beltway Elite and the GOP believe "bipartisanship" and "compromise" means Democrats doing what they say.

Will Obama ever learn this? For his campaign, it remains the key question - can Obama ignore the Beltway Elite? So far he has not been able to.

Providence, Rhode Island columnist Froma Harrop today exposes some of the statistics from the War on Drugs, calling it a failure:

Since it started in 1970, American law enforcement has arrested 38 million people for nonviolent drug offenses, nearly 2 million last year alone. The number of people jailed for violent crimes has risen 300 percent, but the prison population of nonviolent drug offenders has soared 2,558 percent.

The culprit, as Harrop says, is mandatory minimum sentences. [More...]

The New York Times has a compelling article today about recent immigration raids in Suffolk County, Long Island, initiated after local police submitted names of those they subjectively believed to have gang affiliations.

Not surprisingly, they were wrong. And some of the Greenport, NY employers of those arrested are helping by providing lawyers and other support.

The raid was part of the two year old ICE program, Operation Community Shield, aimed at undocumented violent gang members. The Long Island raid resulted in 186 arrests. Of the 11 men arrested in Greenport (without warrants while inside their homes) one, a 19 year old, may be associated with a gang -- and even that is hotly disputed.

The 10 others, while accused of immigration violations, were not gang associates and had no criminal records. Instead, they were known as good workers and family men. When they suddenly vanished into the far-flung immigration detention system, six of their employers hired lawyers to try to find and free them.

More...

Barack Obama is not a supporter of medical marijuana. He is a supporter of more research to determine if it helps reduce pain.

When a voter asked Obama if he was for the legalization of medical marijuana, Obama said that he wasn't in favor of legalization without scientific evidence and tight controls.

..."My attitude is if the science and the doctors suggest that the best palliative care and the way to relieve pain and suffering is medical marijuana then that's something I'm open to ..... (my emphasis).....He added that he was concerned that the reasons for the use of marijuana would grow and create a "slippery slope."

There is a plethora of research showing that medicinal pot reduces pain and relieves disease symptoms.[More....]

A great Sunday morning here. Homemade blueberry pancakes, maple syrup, bacon, fresh-squeezed orange juice and piping hot coffee. It's so much fun to have a kid around to cook for -- even if he's all grown up.

We saw Darjeeling Limited yesterday which included the ten minute short Hotel Chevalier. I really liked both (Adrian Brody is outstanding in Darjeeling) although Hotel Chevalier is a much stronger film. Here's an interview in today's Observer with Natalie Portman about it. Next up to see: Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, blogger Brian Linse's (Ain't No Bad Dude)new film.

What's going good in your life today?

And yes, this is an open thread, all topics welcome.

Former Attorney General John Ashcroft's consulting firm is set to make $52 million in fees as a result of being picked by New Jersey U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie to monitor a civil settlement regarding alleged wrongdoing with hip and knee replacement firms. They were investigated for allegedly paying surgeons to use their products.

Former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft was one of five private attorneys whom Christie hand-picked to monitor the implant makers. Now Ashcroft's D.C.-based firm is poised to collect more than $52 million in 18 months, among the biggest payouts reported for a federal monitor.

Disclosed in SEC filings, the arrangement calls for Zimmer Holdings of Indiana to pay Ashcroft Group Consulting Services an average monthly fee between $1.5 million and $2.9 million. The figure includes a flat payment of $750,000 to the firm's "senior leadership group," individual legal and consulting services billed at up to $895 an hour, and as much as $250,000 a month for expenses including private airfare, lodging and meals.

Mark Corallo, still doing press relations for Ashcroft defends the fee.

More...

Free trade is good. Does anyone disagree? Even "fair traders" agree today. We do not hear about nakedly protectionist domestic content legislation anymore. The "fair traders" argue instead for the need for a "fair playing field" on issues like environmental and labor standards.

But is this new emphasis on equal labor and environmental standards really about anything but protectionism? Is there really an expectation of that countries like Peru, Mexico and the Central American countries (not to mention China and India) will meet US labor and environmental standards? the irony is of course that this would be a form of erstwhile globalization - an attempt to impost US standards on the Thrid World - if it were sincere. It is not. It is just a new way of defending an old idea - protectionism.

I think the evidence of this is obvious - in no other context do we see a drive for higher labor and environmental standards in the Third World. Consider the issue of climate change:

The much touted WaPo Iowa poll gives us a clue:

Which of these is more important to you in a candidate for president: (strength and experience) or (a new direction and new ideas)?

Strength New direction

33 55

These words mean next to nothing in real life but they have become the narrative for the coverage of Iowa and I think most Iowa caucus voters will think of it that way.

These buzz words are emblematic of two candidates now - Hillary Clinton means strength and experience. Barack Obama means new direct and new ideas. Forget the fact that the phrases mean nothing. They are standins for a Hillary Clinton referendum.

For reasons unfathomable, John Edwards seems to believe that attacks on Hillary Clinton's trustworthiness and candor will make him the alternative to Hillary. He has left Barack Obama unscathed. In the face of these results, it is hard to imagine what Edwards is thinking:

Who is the most honest and trustworthy 11/18/07 7/31/07
Barack Obama 31 30
John Edwards 20 24
Hillary Clinton 15 14

Edwards is losing ground here? Not really. HE is losing SUPPORT. The attacks he is engaging in give him no benefits whatsoever.

And the end game seems set to me - Two choices - "strength and experience" (Clinton) vs. Change (Obama). Where is the Edwards choice? He ceded it to Obama. In my view, he is finished.

Via LGM, Mark Halperin seems intent on making sure that the 3 people who do not already consider him an idiot do. Consider this:

For instance, being all things to all people worked wonderfully well for Bill Clinton the candidate, but when his presidency ran into trouble, this trait was disastrous, particularly in the bumpy early years of his presidency and in the events leading up to his impeachment. The fun-loving campaigner with big appetites and an undisciplined manner squandered a good deal of the majesty and power of the presidency, and undermined his effectiveness as a leader. What much of the country found endearing in a candidate was troubling in a president. When George W. Bush ran in 2000, many voters liked his straightforward, uncomplicated mean-what-I-say-and-say-what-I-mean certainty. He came across as a man of principle who did not lust for the White House; he was surrounded by disciplined loyalists who created a cheerful cult of personality about their candidate. As with Mr. Clinton, though, the very campaign strengths that got Mr. Bush elected led to his worst moments in office. Assuredness became stubbornness. His lack of lifelong ambition for the presidency translated into a failure to apply himself to the parts of the job that held less interest for him, often to disastrous effects. The once-appealing life outside of government and public affairs became a far-less appealing lack of experience. And Mr. Bush’s close-knit team has served as a barrier to fresh advice.

That the Media is incompetent seems to be Halperin's well hidden point. He makes it by comparing the worst President in history to Bill Clinton? He makes it by comparing the Media and the GOP's obsession with the President's sex life and the Iraq Debacle?

Please, no more Mr. Halperin. You have effectively made your case. You are an idiot. We get it. We know that you do not understand "what it takes" to do legitimate and relevant journalism.

Update [2007-11-25 9:40:1 by Big Tent Democrat]: Paul Krugman adds an important point:

The New York Times has a feature article on the struggles of exonerated to rebuild their lives after years in prison for crimes they did not commit. Here's the story of Jeffrey Deskovic.

There are 400 exonerees and the number keeps growing. When you're making your holiday donations this year, I hope you consider Life After Exoneraton and The Innocence Project.

More...

Out-of-Touch Rudy Giuliani today called for fewer regulations and increased tax cuts for corporations as a means of responding to outsourcing jobs.

Businesses have a right to make a profit, he said. The solution, he said, is lifting some regulations on businesses and lowering the corporate tax rate.

Just what we need, more corporate welfare.

The media is loving talking up Barack Obama's chances in Iowa. But nationally, Hillary is easily maintaining her big lead over him among Democratic supporters -- those most likely to vote in a primary or caucus. In fact, she's up 7 points from September. From the latest Harris poll:

More than half of Democratic Party supporters in the United States think Hillary Rodham Clinton should become their presidential nominee next year, according to a poll by Harris Interactive. 52 per cent of respondents would back the New York senator in a 2008 presidential primary, up seven points since October. Illinois senator Barack Obama is second with 29 per cent, followed by former North Carolina senator John Edwards with 11 per cent.

She has a three point lead over Rudy Giuliani.