Obama: Pro Israel does not mean Pro Likud
How refreshing to have a presidential candidate tell us the truth, even if it runs counter to their political aspirations. Â Barack Obama, campaigning before jewish leaders in Cleveland said this regarding U.S. Israeli policy:
“I think there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt an unwavering pro-Likud ap-proach to Israel, then you’re anti-Israel, and that can’t be the measure of our friendship with Israel.  If we cannot have an honest dialogue about how do we achieve these goals, then we’re not going to make progress.” Â
Obama disputed the notion that anyone asking tough questions regarding the Palestinian issue or suggesting alternative approaches to merely “crushing the opposition” is anti-Israel.  With Ohio’s pivotal primary coming next Tuesday it would have been very easy for Obama, who has been the target of a vicious email campaign claiming he is Muslim, a Farrakhan proxy, and an anti-Semite, to pander instead of delivering unsavory medicine.  Â
More and more I am coming to the belief that Obama holds certain things higher than his immediate political interests.  Most importantly, he nailed this tricky issue.  Israel can not thrive over the long haul with successive U.S. administrations acting as their enabler.  2/3 of Israeli citizens want peace with the Palestinians, yet our government has thwarted that process in the name of real security for all parties.  It is time to reclaim our middle eastern policy from the neo-conservatives.    George Bush ran as a man who could reach across party lines to get things done.  We know how that worked out.  Is Obama the man George Bush promised he was? Â
Leaked pic of Obama in Somali Headdress shows Clinton Campaign at New Low
I personally found the picture of Barack in Somali headdress published on Drudge Report to be offensive.  Not that the content itself was disturbing, but the manner in which the Clintons attempted to use is smacks of pure desperation.  The subtext of the pic is that Obama is a Muslim and that should bother you.  Just to clarify, Obama is not a Muslim, but a Christian.  This picture, I believe, is going to blow up in Clinton’s face, with Democrats in droves condemning the Rovian tactic. If anything should drive the establishment to pressure Clinton to shut it down, this picture is it.  This does not assist the democratic cause or help them in their November push.  To me the campaign seems downright manic oscillating between the respectful posture in Thursday’s debate and the blazing rhetoric of this past weekend. It should be an interesting debate tomorrow night as Hillary is forced to defend these ugly tactics.
NY Times runs Questionable Piece Alleging McCain’s Improper Relationship with Lobbiest
The New York Times should be embarrassed about the pitiful piece that will run in tomorrows paper accusing John McCain of engaging in an improper relationship with a lobbyist some eight years ago.  Yes, the article raises questions about the senator’s ethics and whether he provided his alleged mistress any preferential treatment or disclosed a free ride on her corporate jet, but come on; this piece is thinner than Mary-Kate Olson.
What troubles me is that even with shocking little evidence The Times are going forward with a piece they supposedly have been sitting on for many weeks. The article cites unnamed former McCain staffers who first contacted the Times at the end of 2007, well before the Iowa caucus. Who knows what axe these former staffers had to grind with McCain or what their motive would be for derailing the senators nomination, matters that didn’t seem to concern The Times.
If I were a conspiracy minded sort I would think that perhaps the anti-McCain faction of the right wing, a group that has been disgruntled with the Maverick since he sponsored the ethics reform bill–McCain Feingold, had a hand in this. At the time The Times was contacted questions about McCain’s ethics and conflicts of interest could have still derailed McCain’s candidacy.
And then there is the issue of the articles timing and why The Times kept it in the bottom drawer for so long. If this story is worth running now and to be believed why not give the voters a chance to utilize this information when placing their votes? If there are questions as to the story’s legitimacy and whether it was worth being a game changer then it shouldn’t be run now, at least not until they can get more sources to go on record.
What sort of legs will the story have? It depends on whether conservatives use this story as an excuse to sabatoge McCain’s candidacy or whether a backlash develops against The Times and the perception that the “liberal media” is once again attacking a Republican candidate, a development that would benefit McCain.  We will get our first look at the McCain war room in action as they deal with their first real crisis of this election season. It will be interesting to see how Huckabee plays this. He was waiting for an act of god to justify his staying in the race and now perhaps he has gotten it.
Sphere: Related ContentWith Castro Gone What’s Next For US Cuban Policy?
Ailing dictator Fidel Castro, who for nearly half a century ruled Cuba with iron fist, jailing dissidents and squashing freedoms, announced today that he would be resigning due to health problems.
“I neither will aspire to, nor will I accept, the position of president of the council of state and commander in chief,â€Â he told the newspaper, Granma.Â
In the letter, published on Granma’s website during the middle of the night in Cuba, Mr Castro said he would not accept another five-year term as president when the National Assembly meets on Sunday, because of the health problems.
“It would betray my conscience to take up a responsibility that requires mobility and total devotion, that I am not in a physical condition to offer,†he wrote. Â
Â
Here we have the perfect opportunity to review a Cuban policy that since 1962 has achieved little besides impoverishing the Cuban people, preventing Cuban Americans from visiting their family in Cuba, preventing US citizens from traveling freely, and denying opportunity to US businesses and farmers, all while doing nothing to advance human rights and democracy in Cuba.  As expected the Bush administration announced that there would be no imminent change in US policy towards Cuba.  Yes, there will be boatloads of talk about liberty, but until the real issue gets resolved–the nationalization of US assets in Cuba–the Helms Burton Act, which codifies our Cuban policy into law, will remain in force. Â
Note the paralel between our Cuban embaro and Iraqi policy - the former was intended to weaken and topple Castro, but it had the opposite effect, solidifying his grip on power and entrenching him for some fifty years; we intervened in Iraq to “make ourselves safe from the scourge of freedom haters” and we instead created new armies of “freedom haters”.  Perhaps it’s time for a new approach.  Interventionism isn’t working. Â
What about Obama and Clinton, Â which will be the first to step up to the plate and propose a new direction in US policy? Â With Florida’s 27 electoral votes and the concentration of cuban americans living in Miami this is a potential minefield, but one that must be navigated. Â Here is an opportunity to show some real guts and moral bearing. Â Somehow I suspected I’ll still be getting my Cohibas from Canada for the foreseeable future.Â
How Much Will you Get from Stimulus Bill?
President Bush signed the $168 million economic stimulus package into law this week. Â Along with tax breaks to businesses that invest in capital equipment and a personal income tax cut for 2008 in the form of a rebate to be mailed to taxpayers this summer, the plan will make it easier to obtain large size mortgages through the FHA. Â
Â
How much this modest stimulus will impact a $3 trillion dollar economy is open to debate. Â A much better use for the money would have been to extend unemployment benefits for its longer term impact on the economy, but I suppose if we all go out and buy ipods, blue jeans, and other consumables the stimulus would have done its job.
Â
 Want to know how much you are getting this summer?  Fill your information into this calculator and find out:
Â
Â
Sphere: Related ContentClinton Campaign at a Tipping Point
The dominoes have begun to fall on the Clinton campaigns much ballyhooed superdelegate strategy as another key supporter has switched to the Obama camp. The New York Times is reporting that long time civil rights activist Rep. John Lewis of Georgia will be throwing his support behind Barack Obama instead of Clinton.
Since Obama’s sweep in last weeks Potomac primary, it has been assumed that he would head into the convention with a small, but important lead in pledged delegates.  With a 100 point lead in superdelegates (party leaders who don’t have to adhere to primary results when choosing a candidate) it was thought that Clinton could still eek out a win buy calling in the chits of these party loyalists.  The fear in the Obama camp and among supporters is that no matter  what happens between now and August, the backroom dealing would somehow put Clinton over the top, despite the will of the popular vote.   Â
Two key points  that should worry Clinton. Â
By citing his districts overwhelming support for Obama and that it would be wrong for him his vote to run counter their wishes, Lewis sends an important message.  One of the Democrats biggest problems in a prolonged battle is the notion that this contest could be decided by superdelegates, who could ignore the results of the primaries and install whichever candidate they wish as the nominee.  How can the party that has fought disenfranchisement for the past eight years put forth a nominee that doesn’t represent the will of the voters?  Do the Democrats really want to risk a street fight with the Republicans with illegitimacy being used as a dagger against them?  Obviously, if the superdelegates adhere to the voters wishes and vote consistent with primary results then Obama wins. Â
Lewis also cited the sense of movement and spirit in Obama’s campaign. Â All season long Clinton has trumpeted her “electability” as an important reason to choose her over Obama, but how can she make the case that she offers a better chance against John McCain if she can’t even defeat Barack Obama? Â Electability is a key issue and by citing the movement and spirit of Obama’s campaign Lewis is stating that he wants to cast his vote with a winner. Â Right now Obama enjoys the appearance of a winner more than Clinton. Â Â Â Â
There have been numerous defections in the past week, but none are as potentially ominous to Clinton as Lewis.  As a respected and influential member of the African American community his loss is particularly painful to the Clinton campaign and it sends a message to other superdelegates beginning to waver that it is okay to switch to Obama.  The more superdelegates switch to Obama’s side the greater will be the perception of his inevitability and the more other superdelegates will want to climb on board, lest they risk remaining aligned with the wrong candidate and one with little to offer politically come the Denver convention.
Â
Momentum is all about momentum, which itself is about the perception of momentum.Â
McCain Fears Obama
It seems that John McCain will do what he has to to pump up a Hillary Clinton nomination, sparing himself from having to face Barack Obama in the fall. Â With his nomination on the Republican side a near certainty, McCain has trained his focus on Obama as he hopes to tilt that race in Clinton’s favor. Â Yesterday the attacks began in earnest as the Arizona senator derided Obama’s soaring rhetoric for lacking specificity. Â Â
 Â
 ”There’s going to come a time when we’re going to have to get into specifics.  I have not observed every speech he has given obviously, but they are singularly lacking in specifics…To encourage a country with only rhetoric rather than sound and proven ideas that trust in the strength and courage of free people is not a promise of hope, it is a platitude.”Â
Â
The attacks continued when McCain’s economic adviser, Kevin Hasset, alleged that Obama “plagiarized” Hillary Clinton’s economic stimulus package.  The wording was harsh.  The full text of the attack along with the Obama camp’s response can be found here.   McCain’s attacks hold little water as he has been painfully vague himself in his policy proposals.Â
Why is the Senator bothering to inject himself into this as yet undecided fight?   The polls consistently show that McCain runs stronger against Clinton than Obama by anywhere from 6-11 points.  Obama runs very strong among independents and some moderate Republicans, the same constituency that McCain is courting.  But McCain’s biggest fear is that the conservative wing of his party, jaded by what they see as liberal tendencies of their nominee, simply stays home in November.  With Hillary Clinton on the ballet this is far less likely as she is a most reviled figure in conservative circles and would surely drive Republican turnout in a way that Obama would not.  Â
 Â
Obviously if the McCain camp sees Obama as a more formidable opponent than the Democratic establishment in the form of super delegates are seeing the same thing.  There is nothing this core group of Democratic loyalists want more than to take the White House this fall and if they believe Obama offers them the better shot you can be sure they’ll be abandoning Clinton in droves in the coming weeks. Â
McCain Supports Waterboarding. A Maverick No More.
Talk about hypocrisy. Republican nominee in waiting, John McCain had a golden opportunity today to illustrate how he values principal over ideology, and his willingness to thumb his nose at the Republican establishment to do what he knew was right. He failed.
McCain voted against an intelligence bill that would have banned waterboarding.  Wow. What happened to McCain’s own time in a Vietnamese prison camp? Does that experience get sold out in order to buy the conservative vote this November?
The Maverick, folks, is nothing but fiction.
Sphere: Related ContentJason Kidd traded to Dallas Mavericks in Blockbuster Deal
New Jersey Net cornerstone Jason Kidd was finally traded to the Dallas Mavericks who sent guards Devean George, Devin Harris, and Jerry Stackhouse, center Desagna Diop and Maurice Ager along with draft picks and cash to New Jersey for Kidd and another Nets player. Â
Kidd had asked the Nets to trade him last month making a deal all but inevitable.  Key for the Nets was getting point guard Devin Harris.  While Kidd is one of the top point guards of all time, it can be argued that at this point in his career Devin Harris is a more productive player.  More importantly for for the rebuilding Nets, he is also 10 years younger than Kidd.  The Mavericks are in “win now” mode, so for them the issue of age is not as important as the savvy veteran leadership Kidd will provide night in and night out. Â
Update: 2/15/08 4:02PM -    One of the players the Nets were to get back - forward Devean George - invoked a rare and complicated clause in his contract that gives him the right to refuse a trade.  His refusal to come to New Jersey is not expected to kill the deal.  As of last night, the Nets, who had been preparing to set up a conference call to announce the deal, said the trade was “on hold.”   If George had accepted a trade, he would have had to give up his “Bird rights,” named after Larry Bird. George has this veto power over a trade because he is in his second year and on his second contract with the Mavericks. Losing the “Bird rights” could limit the length of his next contract or the amount of money the Nets could spend to re-sign him.
Â
Sphere: Related ContentClemens’ Hearing an Utter Circus
There was no knockout blow today against Roger Clemens, but there were three stunning punches that came close. Had the steroid hearing not deteriorated into a matter of partisan debate, that trifecta might have actually brought closure to this debate. 
    The first moment involved Andy Pettite, a religious man who is well respected around the game of baseball as an upstanding citizen. Earlier, Pettite had corroborated McNamee’s claims that he had used steroids in 2003. He went a step further in his deposition admitting to self-injecting human growth hormone in 2004, an even nobody else knew about. Petitte didn’t need to make this claim, but did so he said because he ultimately has to face god and doesn’t want to lie. At that moment he running an 11 on the credibility scale and it is then that he claimed that Roger Clemens had admitted using steroids and HGH. Up to that point it was Clemens’ word against the tainted word of his former trainer, but Pettite’s claim changed the dynamic.    Then there was an issue of a party at Jose Canseco’s home in 1998. The trainer claimed that Clemens was at this party, a gathering where steroids was discussed. Clemens claimed repeatedly that he was not there and couldn’t have been there because he was golfing.  The trainer had seen a woman at the party with Clemens’ children whom he later found out was Clemens’ nanny. The congressional committee asked the Clemens camp for information on this nanny so she could be interviewed. They balked, not producing her information until two days before the hearing. It came out that Roger met with her before producing her to congress and coached her on what to say, or that was the implication. It didn’t seem to matter, as she told congress that Clemens was at the party in question. Like most of this debate, the party itself wasn’t that big of an issue, but when Clemens lied about it he made it an issue. Her testimony further damaged his credibility.    Then there was this question of an abscess on Clemens’ right butt cheek. McNamee claimed this was the result of an injection of Winstrol, a horse steroid. Clemens claimed that it was from a B12 injection. Testimony was then provided from a leading specialist in the field who claimed that it was highly unlikely that B12 could have caused the abscess and that it was likely the result of a steroid injection, just as McNamee claimed.   Those three issues should have been three nails in Clemens’ coffin, except each time evidence damning to Clemens was provided one of the Republican committee members would do whatever they could to discredit it, whether it meant attacking the trainers credibility, that of a doctor providing independent analysis, or the Mitchell Report itself. When did the issue of Roger Clemens become a matter of partisan debate? How is Clemens’ use of steroids a Republican or Democratic issue? Yes, Roger is a Republican and contributed to the Bush campaign, but this was downright puzzling. Embarrassing, really. Reps Burton, Shays, and Issa should have been ashamed of themselves as they dismissed credible evidence and sound arguments, putting politics in front of our children and that is what this is really about. How do I explain it to my son when Roger walks and it does appear that this will forever reside in the murky confines of ambiguity?      Roger Clemens should be the new Pete Rose, but it seems now that he is Bill Clinton. Â
