The Problem With Obama is the discussion of the day. I especially liked Stoller's and Bowers' discussion. Stoller quoted an earlier piece:

Obama is scared. He hasn't had to make choices for a long time . . . We haven't yet seen what a Barack Obama would fight for in a public debate, and it's something I'd like to see. . . .

Fighting. Obama is not a fighter. That is the problem. In July 2006, I wrote:

How did FDR do it and can Democrats defend FDR liberalism today? Maybe not by calling it FDR liberalism but they surely can and do when they have the courage of their convictions. The most prominent of these instances was the fight to save Social Security Faced with Media hostility, Republican demagogy and flat out lies, Democrats rallied to the FDR liberalism banner and crushed the Republican attempts to roll back the clock. FDR would have been proud of Democrats in that fight. No triangulation. Good old fashioned political populism won the day. And that is FDR's lesson for Obama. Politics is not a battle for the middle. It is a battle for defining the terms of the political debate. It is a battle to be able to say what is the middle.

Obama refuses to fight for Democratic and progressive values. He holds them of course. But he does not fight for them. He believes in finding "common ground" and, in the process, simply does not fight. He does not work to persuade the persuadable. As a politician fighting for issues, he fails (while perhaps succeeding in burnishing his own image.) If you are committed to Obama, you can be pleased with his political style. If you are committed to Democratic and progressive values, I think you can not be satisfied. More.

The Supreme Court heard oral argument today in U.S. v. Williams, a case challenging the constitutionality of the pandering provision of the PROTECT Act.

The American Constitution Society has a good explanation of the issues in the case.

At issue is the “pandering” provision in the 2003 Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to End the Exploitation of Children Today Act (“PROTECT Act”). The provision makes it illegal to solicit, distribute, present or offer “actual child pornography” — a sexually explicit visual representation of a real minor — or any visual representation of a minor engaging in obscene behavior.

More....

Today, as it has for many many years, The New York Times today slams the sweet deal given to the American sugar industry:

[S]ugar supports cost American consumers — who pay double the average world price — more than $1.5 billion a year. The system also bars farmers in some of the poorest countries of the world from selling their sugar here.

The North American Free Trade Agreement is about to topple this cozy arrangement. Next year, Mexican sugar will be allowed to enter the United States free of any quotas or duties, threatening a flood of imports. Rather than taking the opportunity to untangle the sugar program in this year’s farm bill, Congress has decided to bolster the old system.

Big Sugar is not the only beneficiary of this corporate welfare. The farm bill is larded with subsidies and other rewards for agricultural producers. The eagerness of members of Congress to please their sugar daddies is not surprising. Campaign donations from the sugar industry have topped $3 million in each of the last four political cycles. American consumers and taxpayers, as well as poor farmers overseas, shouldn’t have to pay the price.

This is of course all true, but the sugar industry is not the only egregious manipulator of our political system. But I want to concentrate on a different point, of personal interest to me. It is the fact that this system does not protect industries and jobs - it protects fat wallets. The small Florida town I grew up in lost hundreds of jobs - the excuse?

I think I've stumbled on to Sully's problem with Hillary:

I think I've stumbled onto something that might explain why [Hillary] doesn't have more support from [some] Democrats, and it is actually somewhat disturbing. I work with a mid 20something [man] who is definitely on the way left of most issues, and he is not [Hillary] supporter . . . . Much of h[is] lack of support for [Hillary] seems to boil down to one major point: [H]e doesn't believe this country is ready to elect a [woman.]

This exercise is merely to demonstrate how easy it is to ignore the criticisms made against Obama OR Hillary and accuse critics of racism or sexism.

Coming from Mr. Bell Curve himself, the irony drips. He is incapable of addressing the arguments made, attacks on those who disagree with him is all he knows. I do not mind the attacks so much, I can dish it myself, but it would be nice if an answer to the actual criticisms made were also offered. But it would be foolish to expect that from Mr. Fifth Column (I got a million of em for Sully.)

I've been waiting to write about Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo's retirement announcement until my post went up at 5280. It's there now, as is Jason Bane's about who may succeed him.

My take (and yes, it's a pretty gracious one for me, considering how off-the-wall I think he is on immigration):

It sounds like he’s tired and needs to regroup and refocus. It’s understandable. He’s been running on a shoe-string budget. He doesn’t fly on chartered jets and he doesn’t stay in luxury hotels like his competitor, Rudy Giuliani.

I may not agree with his politics but it’s hard not to credit the passion and stamina he’s shown to date. All in all, I think he’s made a wise decision for him and for Colorado.

I'm actually kind of sad we won't have him to kick around any more.

As long as we're criticizing Barack Obama today, check out the Daily Howler which takes him to task for his "new" strategy of being more aggressive in his campaign against Hillary.

First off, he's attacking her character, not just her position on issues. Bad move.

Worse, he's pretending she has not taken a stand on social security. That's false. She has taken her stand and her stand is, as it should be, There Is No Crisis.

It’s astounding to see a Major Dem pimping Social Security as a big, troubling issue. It’s astounding to see one Dem attacking another because she won’t go along with that plutocrat claim—especially when he’s been reciting the old chestnut about college kids. This claim has been the tool of plutocrats over the course of the past twenty-five years. Now, we see a Major Dem pimping this line—and criticizing Clinton’s troubling “character” because she won’t go there with him.

By the way, tell us again: Which of these two is the “liberal?”

Update: Obama and Hillary are now in an ad war over social security. Here's Hillary latest salvo, to run in Iowa and New Hampshire, detailing what she has done on behalf of seniors.

More....

Dodd says:

Mr. Mukasey's position that the President does not have to heed the law disqualifies him from being the chief attorney for the United States. We have seen for too long, and at great expense to our national security, an Administration that has systematically attacked the rule of law and turned our Justice Department into a political wing of the White House. I'm afraid that Mr. Mukasey as Attorney General would be more of the same.

Obama gets his just desserts:

Surprise, surprise, surprise. Obama's anti-gay religious right activist used the opportunity Obama gave him last night to preach his hate to thousands of African-Americans. That's just great. And the white preacher who Obama picked to help explain to the audience that gays aren't minions of Satan? CNN reports that he said nothing at all - just a short little prayer, then he left. As for Obama, he did a taped introduction in which he praised McClurkin, the religious right activist, as one of his favorites. That's nice, because the way to help combat homophobia in the black community is to make sure the gay-basher is first endorsed by someone as high-ranking as Obama, who then chooses to say nothing about the gay-bashing.

The San Francisco Chronicle today features the sad story of Kurdish-American auto mechanic Hamid Sayadi. It's an example of what happens when reason gets left behind in our post-9/11 world.

A witty and eloquent Kurdish-American in his 50s, Sayadi waved the flag of his adopted country and cheered its military for three decades — all to end up stripped to his underwear one day, in the boiler room of his workplace, he says, a ragged and sobbing husk of his former self.

The workplace was New United Motor Manufacturing, called NUMMI. It's the largest auto manufacturer in Fremont, Calif, building both GM and Toyota vehicles.

He was a passionate supporter of the US military when it invaded Iraq -- but to his co-workers at the plant, he says, he was just "Ali Baba" and a potential terrorist. The harassment got worse and worse until one day he snapped.

More...

James Carroll in the Boston Globe provides a decimating assessment of Rudy Giuliani. The theme:

Where the world once looked toward all that Giuliani embodied with admiring compassion, today it flinches.

Why? Here are some choice quotes:

COULD THE United States actually elect as president a Yankee fan who has been rooting for the Red Sox? A father whose own children would boycott his inauguration? A husband whose first wife was his cousin and whose current wife can't remember how many times she married? Could the United States, for that matter, elect a cross-dresser? The Rudy Giuliani surge would be comic if its broader implications were not so grave.

More...

The New Eagles album, Long Road Out of Eden, releases tomorrow. Only at Wal-Mart. Why Wal-Mart? Keep reading, I'll explain in a bit.

It's their first album of new songs in 28 years. Some of the themes sound familiar. Instead of "Life in the Fast Lane" there's "Fast Company." Henley and Frey wrote it for their daughters. It's about peer pressure.

More...

In a report released today, the American Bar Association is calling for a moratorium on executions in the U.S.

The ABA studied the death penalties in 8 states. It found:

• Spotty collection and preservation of DNA evidence, which has been used to exonerate more than 200 inmates;
• Misidentification by eyewitnesses;
• False confessions from defendants; and
• Persistent racial disparities that make death sentences more likely when victims are white.

It's conclusion:

"After carefully studying the way states across the spectrum handle executions, it has become crystal clear that the process is deeply flawed," said Stephen F. Hanlon, chairman of the ABA Death Penalty Moratorium Implementation Project. "The death penalty system is rife with irregularity."

I'll update with a link to the report when it's available.