OBAMARAMA

The New York Times reports that the Congressional Black Caucus Institute has signed on to co-sponsor two presidential debates with FOX News — a move that earned them a sharp rebuke from Rev. Jesse Jackson, who rightly asked, “Why would presidential candidates, or an organization that is supposed to advocate for Black Americans, ever give a stamp of legitimacy to a network that continually marginalizes Black leaders and the Black community?”

It will be interesting to see what kind of pressure to skip the debates materializes and how the Democratic candidates respond. I’ve discussed my personal view on this previously — I think it’s a great opportunity to broadcast the fact that the jig is up on FOX’s “fair and balanced” reporting — but am curious to hear what your thoughts are on this.

An interesting video of what young people in Athens, Ohio know about Sen. Obama. This was apparently taped a few weeks ago, and while most of the commentary is positive, it underscores how important it is that we get information about Sen. Obama out there over the next 10 months.

I have to say, though, “Barack 2008 — Why Not?” wouldn’t be my pick for a campaign slogan.

(Hat tip goes to Blog Obama ‘08.)

The Associated Press reports tonight that Rev. Jesse Jackson has announced that “he’s backing Democrat Barack Obama in his presidential bid, giving his support to a new generation of black politicians. “

From the article:

“He has my vote,” the Rev. Jackson told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.

…In a statement responding to Jackson’s support, Obama said, “This campaign has been about giving hope since Day One and I am proud to have the support of my friend Jesse Jackson. It is because people like Jesse ran that I have this opportunity to run for president today.”

Jackson could help Obama to secure the support of black voters, a critical bloc in the Democratic primaries.

The Hill reports today on the growing number of K Street lobbyists backing Sen. Obama despite the fact the he refuses to accept donations from them on principle in order to keep his campaign beholden to the American people alone.

The article notes that “Lobbyists are cautious creatures,” adding that “Evidence that they are flocking to Obama’s camp shows that his campaign has gained substantial momentum among the politically sophisticated.”

It also includes this interesting quote from a prominent lobbyist and supporter:

“He’s like Bill Clinton with no baggage,” said Jimmy Williams, of the Wine & Spirits Wholesalers. “He’s got that aura and people are talking about him. You realize you’re in the presence of something incredible. He has broad appeal.”

“He won’t take our money but we can go out and campaign for him,” he said. “I’m more than happy to campaign for the guy because the country is in dire need of honest leadership.”

In an interview with Wolf Blitzer yesterday, Sen. Obama had this to say about the situation in Iraq — and Sen. McCain’s insistence that the United States maintain an indefinite presence there:

“John McCain may believe that it’s an option for us to maintain an indefinite occupation of Iraq, regardless what happens in terms of politics within Iraq, so that we’re every year sending $100 billion over to Iraq, so that every year we’re seeing hundreds or thousands of young Americans dying, so that we continue to see a deterioration of America’s standing in the world,” the Democratic presidential candidate told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “I don’t think that serves the best interests of the United States, and I don’t think it will ultimately result if the kind of stabilization in Iraq that’s necessary.”

Sen. Obama also expressed his thoughts about executive privilege, the Iranian-UK hostage situation, and his positive relationship with Rev. Al Sharpton. Read more (and watch the video) here.

Between the image of Sen. Obama “protesting for his friends” at Guantanamo bay and the ingenious photoshopping of Osama bin Laden’s face onto Sen. Obama’s body, picking a favorite part of this unpleasant, specious and utterly absurd anti-Obama video is not an easy task. However, I’m going to have to go with the doctored photograph of pro-Obama graffiti on a partially-demolished wall in Pakistan.

I’ll leave discussion of the video’s many factual inaccuracies to anyone who would like to post a comment.

For an explanation of why negative videos about Sen. Obama are screening on this site, please see this post. You can view all “Expose the Hate” posts here.

Critics of Sen. Obama have been looking for anything to throw at him, and have lately seized on the fact that a story he said he read as a child in Life Magazine wasn’t able to be located there. The story was about a black man who had tried to bleach his skin, and Sen. Obama wrote in his memoir that it was a formative moment in the development of his racial identity.

After the Chicago Tribune reported that they could find no such story in the archives of Life (or Ebony, another possibility), many looking to score cheap political points on an issue of minor importance have highlighted the incident, ostensibly as an example of some sort of intellectual dishonesty.

A recent discovery means it’s time for that stop.

(Read more after the jump…)

Bill Bradley is a hero of mine — pick up a copy of his memoir Time Present, Time Past and you’ll quickly see why — so it was a real treat to read his praise for Sen. Obama in the New York Times Magazine this weekend.

Here’s what he had to say in his interview with the Times:

Which Democratic candidate do you find the most impressive? Right now, I suppose Obama is extremely impressive to me. He is in a cultural skyrocket, a vertical ascent.

But doesn’t that contradict your argument? Couldn’t he be seen as coasting on charisma? It’s not just charisma, because he has touched something very deep that had been waiting to be touched for a long time — returning idealism to a central focus of our politics. I tried to touch it in 2000 and didn’t make it.

Bradley goes on to discuss US energy independence, explaining that he drives an Impala because it has more legroom than an SUV and noting that “If we simply had the same gas-mileage average as Europe does, about 43 miles per gallon, we would import no oil from OPEC. Zero.”

He also has kind words for his old adversary, Al Gore, saying that “I wish Gore had been president. It could have saved us a lot of heartache. Iraq is the worst foreign-policy mistake in my lifetime. It dwarfs Vietnam.”

There shouldn’t be any doubt that America would look a lot better under a Bradley administration, too. And better still under an Obama/Bradley administration…

I’m not generally in the habit of writing FOX News-esque rhetorical-question titles like the one above. But then again, I’m not Associated Press reporter Nedra Pickler.

An AP article by Pickler and published this morning in the Washington Post is entitled “Is Obama All Style and Little Substance?” — but it has some serious substance issues of its own, particularly when it comes to Sen. Clinton.

In an attempt to reinforce the image of Sen. Obama as inexperienced, Pickler falsely claims that John Edwards is “the only other candidate to serve less time in elective office than Obama.” Edwards was a US Senator for six years; Sen. Obama has served in the US Senate for over two years, following eight years as a state senator in Illinois.

But what about Sen. Clinton? She was reelected to the US Senate last year, and has served for just over six years — nearly exactly the same amount of time as Edwards. This is her first time holding elective office. So why does Pickler not include her among the ranks of candidates who have served less time in elective office than Sen. Obama?

Perhaps it’s for the same reason that she lets Sen. Clinton off the hook for not having a written health care plan yet, while with the other hand she attacks Sen. Obama for the same infraction. Here is her stunning justification:

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton doesn’t have a written plan yet, but no one questions her expertise, since she was the chief proponent of the issue during her husband’s presidency.

No one questions her health care expertise? Seriously? I’m not in the business of attacking fellow Democrats, but I do expect an AP political reporter to have at least some familiarity with political history.

Pickler doesn’t exactly have a clean slate when it comes to covering Democrats. Sen. Obama’s policy proposals will undoubtedly come in time, and talking about their absence in the meantime is certainly fair game. What’s deplorable is that Pickler has chosen to do so by distorting the facts about other candidates in order to paint Sen. Obama in a negative light.

UPDATE: Media Matters takes Pickler to task for her claim that Sen. Obama has “delivered no policy speeches” and “provided few details about how he would lead the country,” noting the utter inaccuracy of those assertions.

In what has become a ridiculous and inexplicable pattern, The Politico’s Mike Allen has penned yet another gratuitous and insubstantial attack piece on Sen. Obama and cloaked it in the guise of “political journalism.”

Titled “Rookie Mistakes Plague Obama,” the article documents exactly zero instances of what could reasonably be classified as rookie mistakes, opting instead to harp on the sort of unimpressive minutiae that could be found in any campaign.

It opens breathlessly by suggesting that Sen. Obama is disingenuous when he condemns the practice of having lobbyists write legislation, since he once voted for and (gasp!) publicized his support of a Senate energy bill. But nowhere does Allen provide evidence that the bill was written by energy lobbyists, something he would need to do to support his implied charge of hypocrisy.

Nor does Allen note that the bipartisan bill included substantial funding for alternative fuel development, did not open the Arctic to drilling (as the House version did), and addressed “the concerns of Democrats and environmentalists that more needs to be done to conserve energy and develop cleaner energy alternatives,” according to an actual newspaper, The Washington Post.

(Read more after the jump…)

Rasmussen is reporting its latest finding that former senator, Law & Order star and likely Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson is “essentially tied with the Democratic frontrunner, Senator Hillary Clinton. It’s Thompson 44% Clinton 43%.”

Matched up against Sen. Obama, though, Thompson doesn’t fare quite so well:

I wrote here last week about the sort of attacks I expect to see coming from many on the right once Sen. Obama secures the Democratic nomination. Primarily ad hominem in nature, they’ll focus on his name and his race and bring exactly nothing to the table other than the fear and prejudice of those who make them.

It’s no surprise that, in some quarters, those base attacks have already begun. In a new regular segment called “Expose the Hate,” I’m going to share a sampling of them here because I’m confident that many more Americans will be repulsed by this vile, tasteless ignorance than will be seduced by it.

In that spirit, here is the latest example of enlightened political discourse from the anti-Obama right:

The AP is reporting that Sen. Obama has called for an “independent inquiry” into whether Mike Nifong withheld DNA evidence that would have exonerated three white Duke lacrosse players charged last year with raping a black exotic dancer. Nifong is the District Attorney in Durham, NC, and charged the players in what became a very high-profile case that highlighted the strained state of race relations in the area.

ABC News adds that Sen. Obama made the suggestion “in a written response to a constituent,” who then posted it to a website devoted to discussing the case. The remaining charges against the lacrosse players may be dropped this week.

From Jimmy Kimmel:

This may not seem like the sort of video you’d expect to find on a site dedicated to promoting Sen. Obama’s candidacy, and for good reason: it is a negative spot conflating his name with that of known tyrants and terrorists.

The video’s focus on Sen. Obama’s name is purely superficial, and belies more than anything the creator’s discomfort with the idea of a black man with an unfamiliar name running the country. I opted to post it because I think it’s typical of the attacks we’ll see on Sen. Obama from many on the right once he becomes the Democratic nominee.

Some Democrats are undoubtedly uneasy with what they perceive as a vast swath of this country that simply will not vote for Sen. Obama based on his name and his skin color. I think that logic sells Americans short. I wouldn’t put “Hussein” on the campaign literature exactly, but we should welcome discussion about Sen. Obama’s name — and showcase the small-mindedness of those who will try to use it against him.

The fact is, if that’s the line conservatives choose to take, it means they’re unable to engage on the issues, and Sen. Obama’s supporters shouldn’t miss an opportunity to point that out. I was encouraged when reports came out a few months ago that callers to Sen. Obama’s office inquiring about his middle name were told that “It’s Hussein, like the dictator.” That, my friends, takes balls. And if there is one thing Democrats need…

At the end of the day, I’m confident that those who are persuaded by the sophomoric “Obama rhymes with Osama” line wouldn’t have voted for Sen. Obama anyway — and that many more will be turned off by such ignorance than will be drawn to it.

In an effort to get that ball rolling, here is a video entitled “How To Remember Barack Hussein Obama’s Name” from RepublicanMan10, whose depth of argument is matched only by his camerawork: