Just got this e-mail from Environment Iowa. There’s a big vote coming up Thursday in the Senate Natural Resources and Environment Committee:

Did you know that we here in Iowa spend less state money per capita on the environment than almost any other state in the nation?

We think that’s outrageous, and a bi-partisan committee of legislators, working closely with environmental groups as well as the Farm Bureau, has recommended that Iowa spend an additional $150 million a year to improve water and soil quality, enhance parks and trails, and protect wildlife habitat.

Tomorrow afternoon, Thursday March 6, the Senate Natural Resources and Environment Committee will vote on a bill that is the first step toward dedicating those funds. Join us in urging these committees to vote ‘yes’ on our environment.

To send an e-mail to the Senate Natural Resources and Environment Committee, click here:

http://environmentiowa.org/act…

Action is critical now — this legislation must pass both houses in the next two months, or else the process will be delayed for two years.

This bill would put a question on the ballot asking Iowans create a fund specifically for Iowa’s water and soil quality, parks and wildlife. These funds would be protected for environmental purposes only and future legislatures won’t be able to raid them for other purposes as they have in the past.

The new resources would be invested in:

 * Protecting water quality from both urban and agricultural sources of pollution;

 * Keeping the best soil on earth where it belongs – on the earth,not in our streams and lakes where it smothers fish and other aquatic life;

 * Restoring parks, biking and hiking trails at the state, county and local level;

 * Protecting habitat for a diverse array of species such as trout, bobwhite, pheasant, and bobcat.  

So please take a moment to tell members of the Senate committee how important it is to invest in our water, land and wildlife. Follow this link to take action today:

http://environmentiowa.org/act…

For what it’s worth, I would call the members of this committee rather than e-mailing them. There’s no guarantee that anyone on their staff will open e-mail in time for this vote.

It is quite possible that Barack Obama could win the Democratic nomination based on his lead in pledged delegates, even though more voters in primaries and caucuses supported Hillary Clinton.

Texas is the latest state where Obama may win more delegates despite losing the popular vote (Nevada was another example.)

Also, Obama has gotten lots of extra delegates by running up the score in caucus states with comparatively low turnout compared to populous states such as Ohio, where Clinton won the popular vote by a wide margin.

Gordon Fischer writes at his blog, Iowa True Blue:

Matthews grills McAuliffe:  The Founder of the Democratic Party [Thomas Jefferson] said that a victory by a single vote is as sacred as a unanimous vote.  Do you agree?  McAuliffe couldn’t and wouldn’t answer.   Why?  Because he supports the Clintons and their entire strategy is based, indeed must be based, on ignoring the elected, pledged delegates.

My question to Obama supporters is this: do you see any problem with nominating the candidate who won fewer votes in all of the caucuses and primaries?

Gordon ignores the possibility that the pledged delegate leader could be the candidate who has won fewer votes from real, live citizens.

By the way, if we were only counting Democratic voters, Hillary would be even further ahead of Obama. A strong case can be made that Democrats should select our nominee, rather than Republicans and Democrats-for-a-day.

Former state Representative George Eichhorn, who served three terms in the Iowa House before losing his seat in the 2006 election, announced that he will seek the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate this year.

Up to now, Tom Harkin’s only declared opponent was Cedar Rapids businessman Steve Rathje, who had less than $60 in campaign cash at the end of 2007. Harkin started the year with close to $3.5 million cash on hand.

As I wrote here yesterday, Senator Tom Harkin has introduced The Complete Streets Act of 2008, which would

work to promote the design of streets that are safe for all of those using the street- including motorists, bus riders, bicyclists, and pedestrians, including people with disabilities.  Between 1993 and 2003, nearly 52,000 pedestrians and more than 7,400 bicyclists were killed in road accidents; studies show that the designing streets with pedestrians in mind may reduce pedestrian risk by as much as 28 percent.

More information about this issue can be found at the Complete the Streets website.

In related news, I read in the Smart Growth America newsletter that four pilot programs aimed at promoting bicycling and walking for short trips were found to significantly reduce vehicle-miles traveled, and therefore carbon-dioxide emissions, in the communities:

“This report just goes to show that, for many travelers, the automobile is not always the mode of choice, and that safe and convenient options will lead them to use their bicycles or their feet to get around,” says Columbia Mayor Darwin Hindman. Adds Marin County Supervisor Steve Kinsey, “This program, and its legacy, will change the face of transportation in communities across the country. Its contribution, and that of walking and bicycling, to the nation’s fight against global warming will be notable.”

Reducing vehicle-miles traveled is an essential part of any comprehensive strategy to combat global warming. Otherwise gains from more efficient vehicles or better fuel sources could be wiped out as Americans continue to drive more miles per capita.

Meanwhile, George W. Bush’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2009 would cover a projected shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund by taking money away from public transportation projects. Is there any policy this president doesn’t get wrong? We already devote way too little funding to public transit compared to road-building.

We are going to have a real problem getting to 270 electoral votes this November. Obama is still heavily favored to win the nomination, unless some bombshell scandal emerges during the next couple of months.

However, the rout in Ohio yesterday suggests that McCain would be heavily favored in that state against Obama. There are key elements of the Democratic base that are not sold on Obama.

Remind me again how he gets to 270 electoral votes without Florida (where he has virtually no chance against McCain) or Ohio. Kerry states plus Iowa and Missouri would not be enough, would it? I think he would also need Colorado, New Mexico or Virginia.

More worrying, Obama’s weakness in Ohio suggests to me that he may struggle to carry Pennsylvania in the general as well.

Within the last hour I got a robocall from Leonard Boswell informing me about some kind of telephone town-hall meeting tonight.

Was anyone able to listen in on this call? I am curious.

I am pretty sure that the robocall directed me to Boswell’s Congressional website (boswell.house.gov) for more information–not to the campaign website (www.boswellforcongress.com).

Then, about 20 minutes ago I got my first phone call from a field organizer for Boswell. I was frank with him, saying I’ve supported Leonard in the past and like him, but he’s voted against my interests too many times. I’m going for Fallon in the primary and will support the winner of the primary in the general. The field organizer was polite and thanked me for being direct.

Boswell is taking this primary challenge seriously, and that’s good for residents of the third district. Obviously, I hope Fallon wins the primary, but even if he doesn’t, I think the challenge will nudge Boswell toward better serving his constituents.

UPDATE: A franked mailer from Boswell arrived in the mail on Wednesday afternoon. It certainly looks like a campaign piece–I will transcribe it later. The small print makes clear that it was prepared, published and mailed at taxpayer expense.

Desperate for an election-year campaign issue, House Minority Leader Chris Rants tried and failed today to pass a resolution that would have made a gay marriage ban eligible for debate this session. No committee in the Democratic-controlled chamber is willing to pass the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

By a 50-46 party-line vote, the House rejected Rants’ resolution, which would have allowed the chamber to debate the ban even after the bill failed to get through the “funnel.”

Iowa Independent has more on the story here.

I am pleasantly surprised that none of the House Democrats defected on this procedural vote. They must all be feeling confident about their re-election prospects. Maybe that’s because nine House Republicans are retiring this year, while only two Democratic-held House seats will be open.

Regarding Rants’ efforts to keep the gay marriage debate alive, I think Des Moines Register reader Jay Radcliffe said it best in this letter to the editor from late January:

Thank goodness for Christopher Rants. As I drive down the highway smelling the stench from the hog lots, watching the filthy water roll under the bridge, worrying if my kids will fall behind as their schools fall apart, wondering if my elderly mother is receiving quality care and planning how to survive if I lose my job in this recession, Rants is leading the charge against gay marriage. Talk about a profile in courage.

Keep up the great work, Christopher!

Tom Harkin is touring the state this Friday through Monday to officially launch his re-election campaign. He has events scheduled in Davenport, Dubuque, Iowa City, Burlington, Ames, Sioux City, Storm Lake, Des Moines, and Council Bluffs.

For details, click here:

http://www.tomharkin.com/events

I was pleased to learn yesterday that Harkin has introduced a “complete streets” bill in the Senate. Here is more information from a press release issued by the Thunderhead Alliance:

HARKIN INTRODUCES BILL TO MAKE ROADS SAFE FOR EVERYONE

To reduce accidents, legislation will create ‘Complete Streets’ to keep motorists, transit vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians safe

Washington, D.C. – Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today introduced The Complete Streets Act of 2008, which would work to promote the design of streets that are safe for all of those using the street- including motorists, bus riders, bicyclists, and pedestrians, including people with disabilities.  Between 1993 and 2003, nearly 52,000 pedestrians and more than 7,400 bicyclists were killed in road accidents; studies show that the designing streets with pedestrians in mind may reduce pedestrian risk by as much as 28 percent.  Harkin was joined in this effort by Senator Tom Carper (D-DE).

“Making our streets bike and pedestrian friendly is a win-win for us all,” said Harkin.  “It not only promotes healthier lifestyles, it lowers the amount of traffic congestion that many people deal with every day.”

A recent study by the Texas Transportation Institute found that providing more travel options, including public transportation, bicycling and walking facilities, is an important element in reducing traffic congestion.  The study reported that congestion was responsible for an annual $78.2 billion loss in fuel during traffic jams in 2005, an increase from $57.6 billion in 2000.

Also, as recently as 30 years ago, up to 70 percent of children were walking or riding bikes to school.  Currently, the number has dropped to only 10 percent.  Parents report that traffic safety is the main reason they do not permit their children to walk or bike to school.  This legislation will make our environment more inviting for physical activity, especially for kids.

Harkin’s proposal has been endorsed by: AARP, America Bikes, America Walks, American Council of the Blind, American Planning Association, American Public Transportation Association, American Society of Landscape Architects, Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals, League of America Bicyclists, National Center for Bicycling and Walking, Safe Routes to School National Partnership, Smart Growth America, Surface Transportation Policy Partnership, Thunderhead Alliance, and Rails to Trails Conservancy.

Great leadership by Harkin on an important transportation issue that is rarely covered by the media. If you see him on his announcement tour, please thank him for sponsoring this legislation. “Complete streets” improve the quality of life and are good for the environment and public health.

I heard that the nurse-in organized by the Iowa Commission on the Status of Women was a big success yesterday, with about 20 families represented. A friend who was there e-mailed to say:

Rachel Scott with the Iowa Commission on the Status of Women sort of organized us yesterday and wanted us to know that there’s a meeting of the subcommittee on this particular bill – HF2292 – tomorrow morning [Wednesday] at 9:15.  Here’s what she had to say:

“What I need for tomorrow is to have 3 or 4 women to come, especially those who can speak to breastfeeding/ pumping at work or who worked somewhere where a reasonable accommodation was made that they could describe.   Another great thing would be if anyone knows of a small business owner who would come and speak to how easy this is.”

It really is easy to accommodate a woman who needs to express milk, or nurse a child, occasionally during the work day. If you know anyone who can attend this hearing on Wednesday morning, please spread the word.

Rachel Scott can be reached at rachel.scott AT iowa.gov

Meanwhile, Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement had their rally and meeting with the governor scheduled for today. If anyone was there, please put up a diary to let us know how it went.

Wednesday is Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa’s lobby day. Here are the details:

Lobby Day is from 9:30 to 4 on Wednesday March 5.

Those unable to attend the entire event can meet us at the capitol between 12:15 and 3pm (you can find us on the second floor in pink and black “Prevention First” t-shirts).

The day will begin at 9:30 in the Botanical Center with a training on citizen lobbying and a briefing on PPGI’s legislative agenda.  Participants will be given a “Prevention First” t-shirt to wear to the capitol and we will break into groups based on legislative district.  We’ll have lunch and take a bus to the capitol where we will be lobbying for the following legislation:

   1.  Healthy Families Initiative: Creates Iowa’s first state fund for contraception for low-income women ( Iowa is currently 48th in the nation in contraceptive accessibility.  Over half of our counties have no family planning center)

   2. HPV Insurance Coverage:  Requires all insurance companies cover the HPV vaccine

One of our most persuasive arguments in the legislature is that voters support these initiatives.  We want to create a strong presence at the capitol and need as many supporters there as possible.  Group lobbying provides a great first-time experience in citizen lobbying.  The day will conclude with a brief reception in the Botanical Center from 3 to 4pm.

Please RSVP to Susan Alexander at salexander AT ppgi.org or (515) 235-0441 or register online at http://www.ppaction.org/ppiowa…  

What's going to happen tomorrow?

I think Obama will win Vermont and Texas (popular vote and delegate count), while Clinton will win Ohio and Rhode Island. I don't think Clinton will gain serious ground on Obama.

If she doesn't win the popular vote in Ohio and Texas, I do think Clinton should drop out. If she wins the popular vote in those states, I think it's reasonable for her to continue on to Pennsylvania, even though it would be very hard for her to overtake Obama in the delegate count.

The House Environmental Protection Committee on Monday approved a bill that would extend the 5-cent deposit to bottled water, tea, juice and sports drinks.

It’s a step in the right direction, although it would be better to increase the deposit so that redemption centers could receive more than 1 cent for each can and bottle they handle.

Governor Culver’s original bottle bill proposal would have doubled the deposit to 10 cents, giving an extra penny to the redemption centers. However, Culver’s bill also would have returned only 8 cents of the deposit to consumers. The other 2 cents would have gone to fund some environmental programs.

I’m all for increasing environmental funding, but the key to widespread political support for the can and bottle deposit is that it is not a tax–consumers get all of the money back. Converting the deposit into a tax that is not fully refundable would erode public support for this very important recycling program.

I hope the legislature will extend the deposit to a broader range of bottled drinks this year, but in 2009 I hope someone will step up with a bigger bottle bill reform initiative.

For an overview of other bills that hang in the balance this week, read this Des Moines Register piece. Any bill not approved by a legislative committee by this Thursday will be dead for this year’s legislative session.

I didn’t see this in the news, but just got an e-mail from the Iowa Planned Parenthood Action Network:

Thank You Governor Culver!

Dear [desmoinesdem],

Governor Culver recently announced that he will be “turning back” Federal funds that are restricted for “abstinence only” sexual and reproductive health education.

This action is a rejection of “abstinence only” in favor of comprehensive, medically accurate sexuality education which includes abstinence.

Comprehensive sex education also includes birth control, sexually transmitted infections and other good sexual health practices that “abstinence only” neglects.  

Governor Culver’s rejection of the funds comes from the fact that “abstinence only” programs DO NOT WORK because they leave out information about what to do once you are sexually active.

Help us congratulate Governor Culver on his bold and strong leadership on returning Federal “abstinence only” funds!

Good for him. Taking the money would have been the politically easy route. Instead, he showed leadership on this issue.

If you want to sign up for Planned Parenthood action alerts, go here:

http://www.ppaction.org/ppiowa…

If you supported John Edwards, you probably are familiar with the Edwards Evening News Roundup at Daily Kos. The team who brought you those updates have created a new EENR Progressive blog, a forum for activists to talk about various issues and strategies for building the progressive movement.

Pioneer111 put up this diary about the new blog at MyDD. Key passage:

EENR is a community blog, and we hope you will be part of that community.  We’ve tried to set standards for discussion that reflect our desire for open communication, the search for truth, and that wonderful lesson we all learned in kindergarten, “Play Nice and Share Your Toys.”  There are lots of toys, too.  There’s a wonderful video wall, lots of diaries already there waiting for your comments, links to a mirror of the JRE campaign website, and much more.  We’ll have Open Threads, and special guest bloggers.  And we’re always open to suggestions!

EENR has a really unique feature.  We have 12 subject sections located on the left hand side.  This gives us twelve front pages and if you write a diary with one of the sections in your tags or use the drop down menu in creating it you can be a front pager in any section except the Home Page.   😉 Please join in creating the community discussions in all progressive areas. It also means that candidate diaries do NOT dominate the discussion.  Progressive issues do.  We hope that more contribute to that point of view.

There are diaries on a wide variety of topics at the EENR blog. I encourage progressives to join the conversation–even if you didn’t support Edwards for president.

Barack Obama apparently wants conservative Republicans to serve in his cabinet, possibly in some of the most important jobs:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t…

Obama is hoping to appoint cross-party figures to his cabinet such as Chuck Hagel, the Republican senator for Nebraska and an opponent of the Iraq war, and Richard Lugar, leader of the Republicans on the Senate foreign relations committee.

Senior advisers confirmed that Hagel, a highly decorated Vietnam war veteran and one of McCain’s closest friends in the Senate, was considered an ideal candidate for defence secretary. Some regard the outspoken Republican as a possible vice-presidential nominee although that might be regarded as a “stretch”.

I would hope that even the most fanatical Obama supporter could acknowledge what a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea it would be for Obama to choose a conservative Republican as VP. Hagel and Lugar have voted to confirm every judge George W. Bush has appointed. Having someone like that a heartbeat away from the presidency is just an invitation to some conservative nutjob to take a shot at Obama.

Furthermore, Obama has been a long-term smoker and could easily get lung cancer or some other kind of cancer. No Republican should be his VP.

I also have real problems with the idea of Hagel or Lugar in an important cabinet job like secretary of state or defense. Basically that reinforces the false right-wing stereotype that Democrats cannot be trusted to handle security and foreign policy issues.

We have plenty of highly capable Democrats who would do a great job as secretary of state or defense.

If Obama needs to prove he’s bipartisan, he should pick some moderate Republican for a low-profile cabinet post. No hacks who’ve voted with Bush 90-plus percent of the time in the Senate, and no Republicans for the top-level cabinet positions.

Chris Bowers has more on this:

http://www.openleft.com/showDi…

I particularly agree with this part:

Obama sends out regular signals that he will govern in a very centrist fashion. Running Harry and Louise ads and appointing Bush Dog Jim Cooper as a spokesperson on health care make that obvious enough. His praise of Reagan and bragging that he is more bipartisan than the DLC also make that clear. He has no problem letting you know that he’s “not one of those people who cynically believes Bush went in only for the oil,” that he isn’t a “anti-military, 70s love-in.” He scolds unknown progressives for thinking that “every mention of God is automatically threatening a theocracy,” and reminded everyone that Social Security faces a crisis. Now, he is sending out signals that will be appoint Chuck Hagel and Richard Lugar to incredibly powerful posts such as Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense.

Here is the thing: what counter-indications had Obama given that he will govern as a progressive? I honestly can’t think of any[….]

Outside of telecom policy, his policy platforms are pretty much center-left wonkish boilerplate, and his rhetoric is straight down the middle. In short, I just don’t see Obama as a transformative progressive at all.

If I am missing something, I don’t know where to look for it. Chuck Hagel as Sec Def is just the latest indication that Obama is more about placating High Broderism, Tim Russert and the Washington Post editorial board than he is about transformative progressive change. I’ll work hard to help elect him, but I also don’t intend to delude myself about what to expect when he becomes President.  

Tom Harkin and Leonard Boswell are good people and good Democrats, so it’s disappointing to read in the Sunday Des Moines Register that they are unwilling to take a stand against building new coal-fired power plans in Marshalltown and Waterloo.

It could hardly be more clear that building new coal-fired plants is bad for the environment, bad for the public’s health, and a net loss for Iowa’s economy (since we would be importing all the coal used in the plants).

Ed Fallon categorically opposes building new coal-fired power plants in Iowa. In the article I linked above, Boswell said he hadn’t studied the issue closely, because the proposed plants are located outside Iowa’s third Congressional district. Fallon has the right response:

Fallon said even though the plants would be outside Boswell’s district, some central Iowa towns would be downwind from the Marshalltown facility.

“It clearly affects our district, and because of concerns about greenhouse gas, it concerns our whole planet,” said Fallon, a former state representative who opposes construction of any new coal-fired plants.

Jennifer Oredson of Des Moines, the Greenpeace member who asked about the plants, said she had mixed feelings about the answers from Harkin and Boswell. She said her group opposes the plants, but she appreciated that both men are pushing for more conservation and alternative sources of energy.

She particularly noted Boswell’s support of the Safe Climate Act, which aims to limit greenhouse gases. But she said her group would not endorse a candidate in the primary.

By the way, Representatives Bruce Braley (IA-01) and Dave Loebsack (IA-02) signed onto the Safe Climate Act months earlier than Boswell. Boswell only took that position in December, when rumors of Fallon’s likely primary challenge were circulating.

In related news, Boswell was on Iowa Public Television this weekend saying he is more qualified than Fallon to represent the district. He also brought up Fallon’s support for Ralph Nader in 2000, which seems to be Boswell’s strongest card to play.

But Boswell’s comments on policy during that television program suggest that he is feeling the heat from Fallon’s criticism:

On other issues, Boswell said:

– Congress should consider repealing the North American Free Trade Agreement, which “hasn’t worked well.” Fallon opposes NAFTA and other free-trade agreements. Boswell supported a recent trade agreement with Peru.

– The country should look for ways to burn coal in efficient, environmentally friendly ways perhaps even “cleaning” Iowa’s high-sulfur coal. Fallon wants a moratorium on new coal plants, which are a chief source of greenhouse gases blamed for climate change.

Fallon has said Boswell supports greater use of coal and backed $14 billion in tax breaks and incentives for oil and gas companies.

– He supported tougher fuel efficiency standards for cars after voting against an earlier measure. “We recently raised the fuel-efficiency standard. If you don’t want to put people out of work, and not cause a new problem, you have to look at it carefully.”

– He supports removing troops from Iraq, but opposed a bill that would have led to immediate withdrawal, something that he believed would have cost too many lives. Boswell said he originally supported the war based on the administration’s statement that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, later disputed. Fallon has said he opposed the war all along.

I saw Fallon yesterday at the Natural Living Expo in Des Moines, and it looked like a lot of people were signing up to volunteer.

Also this weekend, the Des Moines Register reported that Fallon has raised about $130,000 for his campaign and has 16 paid staffers.

I’m going to try to flag political events for the week ahead every weekend. Please send me tips or put up a diary if you know of something interesting about to happen soon.

This Thursday is the “funnel” day, the date that will determine which bills have a chance of advancing this year and which are dead for the session. As a result, a bunch of groups are holding lobby days at the capitol this week.

On Monday, please consider helping the Iowa Commission on the Status of Women build support for a bill that would make it easier for working women to keep breastfeeding. Click the link for details about the “nurse in” at the capitol or how to contact your legislators.

On Tuesday, Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement are holding their rally and lobby day. Details can be found in this diary that was posted a few days ago.

Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa is holding its lobby day on Wednesday to push for its “Prevention First” agenda. Click the link to read a post at Blog for Iowa with more details about this event.

On Friday, Windsor Heights Mayor Jerry Sullivan, Democratic candidate for Iowa House district 59, is having a campaign kick-off event at the Ankeny Regional Airport from 5 pm to 8 pm. Weather permitting, short rides on helicopters and small planes will be available at that event. For more information, check out the Sullivan for State Representative website.

I am proud to say that I wrote a check for Sullivan’s campaign a couple of weeks ago.

I encourage everyone to support our candidates for state and local office this year. Your donations go further in those races than they do in a multi-zillion-dollar presidential campaign.

Speaking of which, I recently learned that James Van Bruggen is running against Dwayne Alons in House District 4. Van Bruggen’s campaign website is here.

You may remember Alons for his idiotic comment that global warming is not a problem in light of modern refrigeration and air conditioning, or his baffling observation that global warming may help us by making us stronger and taller, like the ancient Mayans. House District 4 leans strongly Republican, but I am very glad someone has stepped up to challenge Alons.

As one of the few Iowa bloggers who is not enthusiastic about Barack Obama, I’ve noticed some odd behavior among some of his supporters. I have questions for those of you who back Obama after the jump.

I’ve been thinking about these questions for some time, but felt compelled to write them down after reading this piece by Daily Kos superstar diarist kid oakland, as well as the comments below it.  

Hillary Clinton started running this ad, which suggests that Obama is not up to the job of handling international crises:

I don’t think this is a great ad. I understand the experience argument, and I do think Hillary is more experienced, but it hasn’t worked against Obama up to now, and I don’t see why this ad changes the game.

Obama hit back with this ad, which positions Obama as the candidate with superior judgment, because he opposed the Iraq War from the start:

I am not impressed with this ad either. I am tired of hearing Obama coast on a speech he gave five years ago. First of all, he took that speech off his website in 2003, when the war seemed to be going well. Second, his Senate voting record on all things connected to Iraq is EXACTLY THE SAME AS HILLARY CLINTON’S.

As a U.S. Senator, Obama has not shown superior judgment on Iraq compared to Clinton. He has stood on the sidelines while other senators tried to defund the war. I am not buying his claim to superior judgment on matters of foreign policy.

Probably Obama will get the better of this skirmish, because as usual, the media uncritically pass along his claim to superior judgment. I have never seen a single tv analyst point out that since getting elected to the Senate, Obama has done nothing more to end the war than Clinton has.

UPDATE: Jeralyn at Talk Left put up this excerpt from an interview Obama gave the New Yorker in November 2006:

http://www.newyorker.com/archi…

Where do you find yourself having the biggest differences with Hillary Clinton, politically?

You know, I think very highly of Hillary. The more I get to know her, the more I admire her. I think she’s the most disciplined-one of the most disciplined people-I’ve ever met. She’s one of the toughest. She’s got an extraordinary intelligence. And she is, she’s somebody who’s in this stuff for the right reasons. She’s passionate about moving the country forward on issues like health care and children. So it’s not clear to me what differences we’ve had since I’ve been in the Senate. I think what people might point to is our different assessments of the war in Iraq, although I’m always careful to say that I was not in the Senate, so perhaps the reason I thought it was such a bad idea was that I didn’t have the benefit of U.S. intelligence. And, for those who did, it might have led to a different set of choices. So that might be something that sort of is obvious. But, again, we were in different circumstances at that time: I was running for the U.S. Senate, she had to take a vote, and casting votes is always a difficult test.

Obama basically came right out and said that if he’d been in the Senate, he would have done the same thing as Hillary on the AUMF vote.

Thanks again to Betsy of BlueNC for the roundup.-desmoinesdem

This week finds many of us burning the candles at both ends.  We see campaigns gearing up in North Carolina as the time for filing to run for public office comes to a close at noon today.  Campaigns are looking to hire “internet outreach coordinators” for the first time and BlueNC has been announced as a venue for an open forum discussion between our two Democratic gubernatorial candidates.  Imagine seeing that in the newspaper and realizing we didn’t have a date set for the event!  We will also host a debate or forum between at least three of the four candidates for Lt. Gov. in NC.  Just yesterday we received confirmation from a candidate for senate that she will live-blog at BlueNC.  Check out the other state blogs on the list and on the Open Left and MyDD state blogrolls.  

The rest of the roundup is after the jump.

RF asked me yesterday why I don’t plan to donate to Barack Obama’s campaign this year. One of these days I am going to write a fuller explanation of why Obama is not “change I can believe in,” but today Chris Bowers has an outstanding piece at Open Left that articulates some of my concerns.

Bowers prefers Obama to Hillary Clinton, but he hits the nail on the head here:

Rather, what does bother me is the notion is that someone who regularly reinforces conservative stereotypes about liberals when talking to the media is somehow the great champion, defender, and savior of liberalism. Don’t tell me that someone who thinks the DLC’s champion is too partisan is the next Russ Feingold or Paul Wellstone. Obama’s failure to challenge conservative falsehoods, like the notion that Hillary Clinton is some sort of ultra-partisan whose boots are stained with the intestines of her Republican enemies, is a clear indication that he will not fundamentally challenge prevailing conventional, ideological wisdom in other areas. Will he be a hundred times better than Bush? Absolutely. Will be ninety times better than McCain? Oh yeah. Is better than Hillary Clinton? I don’t know, but I’m willing to take that chance at this point. What I just can’t swallow is hearing, on a reasonably frequent basis, Obama reinforce conservative talking points, falsehoods and stereotypes in one ear, and that Obama is a progressive savior in the other ear. The fact is that he is willing to pander to some conservative media if it will win their endorsements, and to reinforce some conservative stereotypes if it will win him independent voters. While that may be playing to win, it is not playing to transform the discursive and ideological landscape of American politics. In my experience, it is actually pretty much the same old politics.  

Click the link and read his whole piece, really.

Big Tent Democrat, another reluctant Obama supporter who blogs at Talk Left, read Bowers’ piece and was struck by this Obama quote:

“I’m not a person who believes any one party has a monopoly on wisdom,” Obama said.

Big Tent Democrat added, “Indeed. Who needs a Democratic Congress? Not Obama apparently.”