FIRST EVENING POST:  JULY 10,  2008

Posted at 7:30 p.m. ET

SISTERHOOD?

Dan Balz, one of our best political reporters, wonders whether Barack Obama, in his tiff with Jesse Jackson, has had a historical moment, joined in the spirit of sisterhood, with another, some 16 years ago. I love tradition.  Don't you?

Barack Obama leads a charmed life. He finally had his Sister Souljah moment and didn't even have to show up. Jesse Jackson did it for him solo.

Sixteen years ago, Bill Clinton used a Jackson-sponsored forum to rebuke the rap singer for suggesting that black people "have a week and kill white people" rather than each other. Jackson fumed as Clinton made the comments and denounced them later. Politically, Clinton came out such a winner that "Sister Souljah moment" now has its own entry in Wikipedia.

Roll forward to this week and the controversy that is attracting so much attention. Obama did not have to rebuke an important constituency himself to define himself as different from the Jackson-Sharpton wing of the Democratic Party. Being attacked by Jackson was more than enough to get across the point. Whatever people may know or think they know about Obama, they can no longer mistake him as a direct descendant of old-style black politics.

Well, I think he has a touch of the descendant, but has the common sense to drift from the family style.

Whatever his disagreements, Jackson's outburst suggested that he has some fundamental disagreements with Obama's worldview. The more he makes that clear, the better it's likely to be for Obama. Jackson is an old-fashioned liberal with an abiding faith in government, for which he makes no apologies. He has kept that flame burning for many years.

And...

If Obama were looking for a way to endear himself more to those white, working class voters who were resistant to his appeals in the Democratic primaries, nothing is likely to help more than a condemnation from Jesse Jackson.

Finally...

Perhaps Jackson will find enough ways to apologize to make this controversy disappear quickly. By the time the campaign ends, the episode may be remembered only as a footnote or less. But as a moment, it has served Obama nicely -- and he didn't have to do anything other than happily accept Jackson's apology.

Now watch:  Jackson will be "caught" at an open mike, assuring Michelle Obama, "I did it to help Barack.  I truly did."

We are all moved by self-sacrifice.

July 10, 2008.      Permalink          

AFTERNOON POST:  JULY 10,  2008

Posted at 2:50 p.m. ET

TRACKERS

Both our standard trackers are out today, and both Rasmussen and Gallup show Obama leading by three.  The trend for Obama in the trackers over the last week has been a slight drift downward, but it's impossible to know if that's real, or just normal statistical variation. 

However, a newly released USA Today/Gallup poll has Obama six points ahead.  This may seem confusing, since the Gallup tracker and this Gallup poll are three points apart.  But this poll has a margin of error of five to eight points, more than enough to cover the difference.  Also, the tracking polls are, generally, more up-to-date.

Look for trends in the polls, not individual snapshots.  It's a close race, but no poll shows McCain ahead.

UPDATE AT 4:42 P.M.:  A new Pew poll shows Obama up by eight, but the poll is almost meaningless, as it was taken June 18-29.  That's three political lifetimes ago. 

July 10, 2008.      Permalink          

THURSDAY:  JULY 10,  2008

Posted at 7:14 a.m.  ET

OUTRAGE

Britain this week observed the third anniversary of the London bombings, carried out by Jihadist suicide bombers.  Those bombings "only" killed 52 people, far smaller than our 9-11, but they forced Britain to confront the reality of Islamo-fascist terrorism on British soil. 

Reader Ken Braithwaite alerts me to the fact that, in Pakistan, another observance was under way - honoring one of the suicide bombers.  Britain is outraged:

In Britain yesterday, families of the victims wept for their loved ones.

In a village in Pakistan, a banquet was held to honour one of the young men who committed the murderous crimes.

Relatives of Shehzad Tanweer, who is buried there, staged the feast to 'celebrate his life' and 'remember him as a martyr' on the third anniversary of the terror attacks which killed 52 people and injured many more.

Yesterday the families of the victims reacted with outrage to the secret ceremony held at the village where 70 guests gathered to offer prayers and blessings for the suicide bomber whose grave is considered to be a 'shrine of a big saint.'

But wait.  Isn't it important that we respect other cultures and their traditions?  I mean, who are we to question?

Bradford-born Tanweer, whose father emigrated from Pakistan and ran a chip shop in Leeds, detonated his bomb at Aldgate station on July 7, 2005, killing seven innocent people as well as himself.

Together with Mohammed Sidique Khan, 30, Hasib Hussain,18, and 19-year-old Jermaine Lindsay, the four bombers blew up three Underground trains and a bus.

As thousands mourned in Britain yesterday, in Pakistan there were prayers uttered for his soul and verses of the Koran were read out.

At the commemorative dinner held by Tanweer's uncle, 42-year-old property developer Tahir Pervez at his home in Samundari, guests were treated to two courses of sweet rice and salted rice with curry and beef prepared by a renowned local chef.

But we can learn from their dietary habits.  I'll bet they're much more conscious of protein than we are.  I mean, who are we to question?

And to mark the occasion, rice was distributed among villagers. For the last two years, the family gathering has been held in secret at his grave, but this year police urged the family not to hold a memorial at the site.

His headstone - the largest in the cemetery of the village - bears the phrase 'La ilaha il Mohammed dur rasool Allah' which means 'There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his messenger'.

Local police officer Zafar Iqbal said: 'At least 60 to 70 guests, who included villagers and close relatives, were invited. They recited the holy Koran inside Tahir's home and prayed for his soul. We told them not to celebrate the anniversary of his death publicly and call many guests. We also told them to avoid going to the graveyard.

'During the last two years there was a big celebration and people in the area have accepted his grave as a shrine of a big saint. That is why this time we told his uncle to avoid a big celebration.'

Police oppression, no doubt tied to American imperialist pressure on a sovereign people.

But despite police requests, some villagers insisted on laying flowers at Tanweer's grave.

One villager was reported as saying: 'The party is kept secret from people outside the village but everyone knows it happens every year.'

Yuch.

July 10, 2008.      Permalink          

AND MORE OUTRAGE

What a difference a few weeks makes.

Remember those primaries?  Remember how Hillary Clinton portrayed herself as a moderate, someone who could attract the votes of the regular folks, people she understood, whose homes she would defend as "commander-in-chief"?

That was then, this is now.  Time to get back to the real priorities.  The New York Sun reports:

New York's senators, Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton, who started out with votes in favor of the war in Iraq and in favor of funds to fight it, are chickening out now in the choice between defending America and enriching the trial lawyers. That was the message of yesterday's vote on amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Centrist Democrats such as Senators Bayh, Feinstein, Lincoln, McCaskill, Webb, and even the post-primary Barack Obama voted in favor of the amendments, which authorize the Bush administration to do something it already has a constitutional right to do, which is listen to phone calls between suspected Al Qaeda members abroad and the individuals with whom they are speaking in America. Mr. Schumer and Mrs. Clinton joined with the minority of hard leftists — Barbara Boxer, Bernie Sanders, Russell Feingold — who opposed the amendments.

Leave it to a Clinton.  Even Obama, as noted in the editorial, had enough common sense, or political sense, to vote the right way.

The trial lawyers, a powerful force in the Democratic Party, oppose the legislation because it immunizes telecommunications companies who cooperated with the Federal government after 9-11.  The lawyers thought those companies would become another Big Tobacco or Big Asbestos or Big Something.

Back in the voting over the Iraq War, both Mr. Schumer and Mrs. Clinton spoke movingly of their special responsibility as the senators representing ground zero, where the terrorists took so many lives.

Now, less than seven short years later, they have gotten to the point of putting the agenda of the trial lawyers ahead of protecting our country by allowing the administration to listen to the terrorists' telephone calls.

Believe me, their New York crowd doesn't care.  I'm in New York, and the Democratic Party here barely mentions 9-11. 

The editorial says that it's "less than seven short years later."  No, that part is wrong.  It's seven long years, and people have forgotten, or don't want to be reminded.  Even the rebuilding of Ground Zero has become just another real-estate deal, mired in controversy and backbiting.

Pearl Harbor was 1941.  Think of our world in 1948.  People had moved on.  But by 1948 we had defeated our Japanese and German enemies.  Today the centrifuges in Iran keep spinning.

July 10, 2008.      Permalink          

DID MEMBERS APPROVE?

We expect labor unions to support, in general, Democratic candidates. There is a historic connection between the Democratic Party and the unions, and they have helped each other.

But there was a time when support had its limits.  Working people tend to be intensely patriotic, and great supporters of the armed forces.  During the Cold War, labor leaders like George Meany were among the most effective activists for the Free World's cause. 

Apparently, some of the current leaders didn't get the message.

A new union-sponsored ad goes after John McCain, unfairly:

The AFL-CIO plans to begin airing an ad in six presidential battleground states on Thursday that features a Vietnam combat veteran criticizing John McCain's stance on the war in Iraq and on veterans issues.

The ad is part of a new union political effort to reach the 2.1 million military veterans or active-duty personnel who are members of the AFL-CIO.

"Every vet respects John McCain's war record," Navy veteran Jim Wasser says in the ad. "It's his record in the Senate that I have a problem with."

Wasser, an electrician from Illinois, served with John Kerry aboard Navy Swift Boats in Vietnam and helped the Massachusetts senator rebut attacks on his war record during the 2004 presidential campaign.

In the ad, Wasser says McCain "wants us to keep spending $10 billion a month in Iraq. Just like Bush."

And...

"That's money we could use to build schools and roads and create needed jobs here at home," Wasser says.

I cannot imagine George Meany approving that message.  I cannot imagine George Meany depending on someone who defended John Kerry, whose anti-Vietnam-War speeches were played for American POWs in North Vietnam, like John McCain.

I wonder how union members feel about this ad.  I think I know.  They rejected Obama in the primaries, and may do so again.  I hope they send their "leaders" a powerful message.

July 10, 2008.      Permalink