AP Interview: "Edwards reminds voters that despite cash, Dean lost"

Boston Globe:

MOULTONBOROUGH, N.H. --Presidential hopeful John Edwards said he's raising enough money to compete in the early states and invoked Howard Dean's 2004 fundraising totals as a cautionary tale.

"Money will not decide who the nominee's going to be," Edwards said in an interview with The Associated Press. "Everyone will remember Gov. Dean who outraised everyone else by more than 2-to-1 and wasn't able to win the nomination."

Edwards' campaign reported it raised $9 million from April through June. It's a shortfall compared to Sens. Barack Obama or Hillary Rodham Clinton -- his top rivals who best him both in the polls and fundraising tallies.

"I like very much where I am," Edwards said, taking a break from his three-day vacation with his wife and two youngest children. "Among the three of us, I'm the underdog. I'm fighting. I like that place. It's always worked very well for me. That's the story of my life."

Edwards said he's on pace to run the $40 million campaign through the early states.

"We have at least three presidential candidates on the Democratic side who have plenty money to run a serious campaign in the early states, where the nomination will be decided," Edwards said. "We will have plenty of money. We'll have more money than we had last time, a good bit more."

"We don't want to discourage anybody from giving," Elizabeth Edwards said, interrupting him.

"We'll have more than John Kerry had last time when he won the nomination," her husband added.

Edwards was Kerry's vice presidential pick in that failed campaign. He said his party will pick a nominee smartly.

"Democrats want to win. This is not an intellectual exercise for us. We want to make sure we nominate somebody that can win the general election and win the White House," John Edwards said.

Elizabeth Edwards said part of that process should be listening to the candidates and not just looking at them.

"You look at the Democratic field and there's a lot of extremely attractive people. But if you spend time talking about how attractive they are, it almost diminishes what they're saying," she said.

"You shouldn't be talking about that. I'll complain about it for anybody. I'd much rather have you talk, not about how they look and what they're wearing or how attractive they are, but what it is they have to say. That's what's going to matter, their rationale for being president, what it is they're going to do. That's what is going to matter in the long run."

The Edwardses are vacation in New Hampshire's Lakes Region, borrowing the cottage of a state senator and supporter. Earlier in the day, the Edwards clan went fishing, visited a firefighters' competition and a fed trout in a pond. The stops were not campaign events; Edwards wore jeans and a T-shirt, not his typical button-down campaign trail uniform.

"There's never a complete break, you know. This is about as relaxed as it can be during a presidential campaign," John Edwards said. "That just goes with the territory. We knew this already. We've been through this before."

His two children, Jack and Emma Claire, ran through the crowds, ate their hamburgers and hot-dogs.

"I think they understand it. They understand what's at stake," John Edwards said. "They like traveling. They're very flexible, They're very adjustable. They love being around people. They're not that excited about hearing mom or dad give another speech. That part they can deal without."

Their parents walked with them through the field where firefighters tested their skills with water challenges and other competitions.

"I've got to choose how I'm going to spend my days," said Elizabeth, who has announced her cancer has returned in a tougher variety. "If I'm willing to spend them this way, it's because I believe that John is not only should be the candidate, but will be the nominee."

She said she's doing well.

"I feel strong and healthy. I'm still not fast enough to keep up with these kids," Elizabeth said.

"Nobody is," her husband said.

Newsweek Cover Story: "Black & White" (with audio)

Newsweek, with audio:

Across the Divide--How Barack Obama is shaking up old assumptions about what it means to be black and white in America.

Cornel West was on fire. Bobbing in his chair, his hands sweeping across the stage, the brilliant and bombastic scholar was lambasting Barack Obama's campaign. Before a black audience, at an event outside Atlanta called the State of the Black Union, West was questioning why Obama was 600 miles away, announcing his bid for the White House in Springfield, Ill. Did he really care about black voters? What did that say about his willingness to stand up for what he believes?

"He's got large numbers of white brothers and sisters who have fears and anxieties and concerns, and he's got to speak to them in such a way that he holds us at arm's length," West said, pushing his hand out for emphasis. "So he's walking this tightrope." West challenged the candidate to answer a stark set of questions: "I want to know how deep is your love for the people, what kind of courage have you manifested in the stances that you have and what are you willing to sacrifice for. That's the fundamental question. I don't care what color you are. You see, you can't take black people for granted just 'cause you're black."

A few days later, West was sitting in his Princeton office after class when the phone rang. It was Barack Obama. "I want to clarify some things," the candidate calmly told the professor of religion and African-American studies. Over the next two hours, Obama explained his Illinois state Senate record on criminal justice and affordable health care. West asked Obama how he understood the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. and interrogated him about a single phrase in Obama's 2004 Democratic-convention speech: that America was "a magical place" for his Kenyan father. "That's a Christopher Columbus experience," West said. "It's hard for someone who came out of slavery and Jim Crow to call it a magical place. You have to be true to yourself, but I have to be true to myself as well." A few weeks later, the two men met in a downtown Washington, D.C., hotel to chat about Obama's campaign staff. Just a month after ripping into him onstage, West endorsed Obama and signed up as an unpaid adviser.

West may have come around, but he raised one of the most potent—and controversial—questions facing the candidate: is he black enough? It's one that has long dogged Barack Obama's career, though he says he settled his own struggle with racial identity (as the son of an African father and white, Kansan mother) in his late teens. Questions about black "authenticity" are hardly unique to him; many successful African-Americans face them, too. Obama just happens to be grappling with the issue in full public view as he runs for the highest office in the land.

To the candidate, the debate says more about America's state of mind than it does about him. "I think America is still caught in a little bit of a time warp: the narrative of black politics is still shaped by the '60s and black power," he tells NEWSWEEK. "That is not, I think, how most black voters are thinking. I don't think that's how most white voters are thinking. I think that people are thinking about how to find a job, how to fill up the gas tank, how to send their kids to college. I find that when I talk about those issues, both blacks and whites respond well."

He may be right. One eye-catching measure of Obama's broad support is his extraordinary fund-raising. More than 150,000 donors gave $31 million for his primary campaign in the second quarter, roughly $10 million ahead of Hillary Clinton and far ahead of anyone else in either party. In the key, early-primary state of South Carolina, Obama and Clinton are locked in a close fight for Democratic voters, especially African-Americans who are the backbone of the state party; recent polls have shown the lead changing hands each month. Nationwide, the latest NEWSWEEK Poll suggests that race is no longer the barrier it once was to electing a president. A clear majority—59 percent—says the country is ready to elect an African-American president. That's up from 37 percent at the start of the decade, but it still indicates that a significant percentage of the country is either skeptical or prejudiced.

Obama faces many challenges in what he calls his "improbable candidacy," but few are as complex or emotional as the politics of race. Racial politics are a key source of his campaign's energy, but they could also be his undoing. Obama wants to be the nation's first black president, and he needs to win a clear majority of African-American votes to win his party's nomination. Yet he isn't running purely as a representative of African-Americans, nor can he afford to. He also needs to win the backing of a wide swath of white America. Can he appeal to both black and white, while still being true to himself?

For Obama and his wife, Michelle, navigating the racial riptides can be uncomfortably personal. Michelle likes to tell supporters that her 6-year-old daughter calls the family's new security detail "the secret people." Officially, Obama became the earliest presidential candidate to get Secret Service protection because he's attracting such huge crowds. But NEWSWEEK has learned that a key factor in that decision was a string of racist e-mails sent to his Senate office, something his staff is unwilling to discuss publicly for security reasons.

That kind of overt hatred is not visible on the campaign trail. Many of Obama's supporters are enthralled by the content of his character—by his earnest desire to heal the nation's political divisions and to restore America's reputation in the world. Many also are excited by the color of his skin and the chance to turn the page on more than two centuries of painful racial history. But even that phrase—"turn the page"—is fraught. Black voters are wary of whites who think Obama represents a kind of deliverance—proof that blacks are doing well and that the playing field is leveled.

Obama himself dismisses the idea. At the end of a NEWSWEEK interview in his Senate office, Obama offered an unprompted statement about "post-racial" politics: "That term I reject because it implies that somehow my campaign represents an easy shortcut to racial reconciliation. I just want to be very clear on this so there's no confusion. We're going to have a lot of work to do to overcome the long legacy of Jim Crow and slavery. It can't be purchased on the cheap." Obama was dismayed by the Supreme Court's recent decision against public schools that pursue diversity by taking account of students' race. The latest NEWSWEEK Poll suggests public opinion is divided on the issue but Obama argues that it all depends on how the question is framed. "This is a situation where you had local communities voluntarily trying to promote racially diverse schools," he says. "If that had been described to the public, my sense is that they would have said, 'Why is the Supreme Court getting involved in the way that it is?' "

From his earliest days as a politician, Obama has made a career out of reconciling opposing sides. He's been able to assuage some conservative whites, who have been surprised by his lack of grievance and encouraged by his pragmatism. And he's accomplished that, for the most part, without alienating African-American supporters. The story of how he has walked that tightrope reveals a lot about what kind of politician Obama is, and how he might perform in the White House. It also says something about how far America has come—and how far it has to go.

Obama's first campaign was among the mostly white voters at Harvard Law School. At the time, in the early 1990s, the school was torn over racial issues such as affirmative action. On the left, there was anger at the failure to appoint African-American professors; on the right, there was dismay at the influence of liberal scholars who condemned the criminal-justice system as skewed against minorities and the poor. Amid this turmoil, Obama won election to the presidency of the influential law review by seeking consensus—with the support of a bloc of conservative students.

The conservatives knew he wasn't one of them, says former classmate Bradford Berenson (who later served in George W. Bush's White House). "What really set him apart from the people who had roughly the same views he did is that he did not demonize the people on the other side of the dispute," says Berenson. "He was not the sort to accuse people of being racist for having different views of affirmative action." Obama rewarded the conservatives by appointing several to the masthead of the law review, which angered some of his more-liberal supporters.

One summer during law school, Obama worked in a Chicago firm where he found a soulmate who would help him navigate his difficult course. Michelle Obama's family comes from the South Side of Chicago, where her father was a city worker and her mother still lives in the humble house where Michelle was born. Like her husband, Michelle is an Ivy Leaguer (in her case, Princeton and Harvard), but she proudly calls herself a product of Chicago's public schools. Some people assume that Obama needed her entree into African-American society to break into Illinois politics. But that's not correct: by the time he met Michelle, Obama had already worked as a community organizer with black churches on the South Side for several years.

When the two first met at the law firm, Michelle was his reluctant mentor for the summer. She remembers rave reports that circulated around the office before she joined him for lunch the first time. "Yeah, he's probably a black guy who can talk straight," she recalls saying to herself. "This is a black guy who's biracial who grew up in Hawaii? He's got to be weird." Afterward, she realized she may have misjudged Obama. But it was only later that summer, when he took her to a church basement on the South Side, that she fell for him. He gave an inspiring speech about "the world as it is, and the world as it should be." Three years later, they married.

Michelle had to work through her early misperceptions about him; now, she says, the nation needs to do the same. "Barack poses this interesting dilemma because we are still a country that puts people in boxes," she tells NEWSWEEK. "Barack kind of shakes up those notions because his life has crossed so many different paths. He grew up in Hawaii but he was indeed a community organizer. He became very entrenched and rooted in the black community on the South Side. He is very much a black man, but he's very much the son of his mother, who was very much a white woman, and he grew up with white grandparents."

Obama's years in Chicago didn't help much in his first run for Congress. After four years in the Illinois state Senate, Obama challenged Rep. Bobby Rush, a former Black Panther who had once called on black men to arm themselves for self- defense. Another of his rivals in the 2000 race was Illinois state Sen. Donne Trotter, who hails from one of Chicago's oldest and largest black families. Both Rush and Trotter questioned Obama's racial bona fides, and his ability to represent poor black voters. But for Obama, the Rush race was more of a lesson in overconfidence than in racial identity. "Were there moments during the campaign where the suggestion was that the Harvard-educated, Hyde Park law professor wasn't keeping it real? Yes. Did that have any significant influence on the outcome of that race? No," he says.

Rush supports Obama's run for the White House today, but still rails against a "bourgeois elite" in the country that would "rather have a Harvard-trained, smooth-talking, forever-smiling, nonthreatening African-American" than someone like himself. Yet Rush also recognizes that Obama has a rare ability to work comfortably in different worlds. "You know, Moses could not have been effective had he not been raised as the son of Pharaoh's daughter," he tells NEWSWEEK. "Moses had a relationship inside the palace, he knew the ways and wherefores of the palace ... So therefore he was accepted ... Barack has that capacity to move in and out of privilege and power."

Back in the Illinois Senate, Obama made a name for himself as someone who could work both sides of the aisle. He befriended an eclectic group of lawmakers, including Kirk Dillard, a conservative Republican. Dillard specifically recalls Obama's work to reach a compromise on the death penalty. Gov. George Ryan had commuted every death sentence in the state after a series of flawed cases had come to light; the legislature was deeply split. Conservative law-and-order types were incensed, while black legislators, in particular, thought it was about time that the state stopped executing prisoners who had been wrongly convicted. Obama was handed the herculean task of reaching a compromise. He did so by getting conservativesto embrace the idea of videotaping policeinterrogations and suspects' confessions. Among Obama's toughest opponents: Illinois state Sen. Ed Petka, a former prosecutor who had put so many men on death row that his friends called him Electric Ed. "Ed Petka was the hardest person for Obama to convince that he was the real deal, but even Petka became an Obama convert with respect to these criminal-law issues," says Dillard. (Petka, now a Will County judge, declined to comment.)

Yet obama's drive to find consensus also raised the suspicions of some black colleagues. At the same time as the death-penalty debate, Obama worked to pass legislation on racial profiling; it required police to record information on the race of people pulled over during traffic stops. Obama's seat on the Senate floor was close to the bathroom, a lowly place he'd taken as a freshman. But he learned how to use it to his advantage: he would watch legislators going into the restroom and buttonhole them on their way out. In the heat of the racial-profiling debate, however, the argument spilled into the facilities. Dillard recalls watching as an African-American legislator from Chicago, who wanted even stricter requirements on racial reporting, confronted Obama. "He was questioning Senator Obama's toughness and, frankly, his blackness, as to whether Barack really understood what it was like to be a teenage African-American standing on a street corner in Chicago and being harassed by police officers," recalls Dillard. Obama stood his ground, evoking his childhood in tough neighborhoods of Honolulu and his work as a community organizer in Chicago. But Dillard was struck by Obama's discomfort. "I remember thinking, 'I feel sorry for this guy because he's got to justify himself to blacks and whites alike'."

On the campaign trail, Obama doesn't seek sympathy; he evokes hope. He's especially fond of a story from his 2004 campaign for the U.S. Senate. Obama is riding on a bus in southern Illinois with Sen. Dick Durbin, his mentor in Congress, when they approach the hardscrabble town of Cairo. Durbin tells him that his first visit to Cairo was in the 1970s, when it was still one of the most segregated towns in Illinois, with a history of lynchings, cross burnings and riots. Durbin, then a young state lawyer on a mission to promote racial harmony, was worried when his driver warned him not to use the telephone because the operator was a member of the White Citizens Council; when he checked in to his motel, a visitor knocked on his door demanding to know what the hell he was doing in town. After the story, Obama and Durbin are apprehensive as their bus pulls into Cairo. But as they turn the corner, they see a crowd of 300 supporters wearing blue buttons saying obama for U.S. senate. Some in the crowd are black; most are white. To Obama, the story of Cairo confirms Martin Luther King Jr.'s observation that the arc of the moral universe bends toward justice.

In the real world, the arc of Cairo has not led so clearly toward racial harmony. Until recently, city politics were deadlocked for several years by a mean-spirited dispute between its white, Republican mayor and the majority black Democrats over patronage and the firing of city workers. Paul Farris (whose term as mayor ended in May) blames his opponents for exploiting racial divisions for their own political ends. The story of Cairo is an example, perhaps, of Obama's portraying the glass as half full—oversimplifying a complicated racial and economic divide to score rhetorical and political points. Still, Farris says he's supporting Obama in the presidential race because he tried to bring biodiesel and liquid-coal plants to the economically depressed town. "Say he gets elected president of the United States, he'll have a lot of support from this region," says Farris. "Hopefully he won't forget his trip into this underprivileged ghetto community."

Obama can be idealistic about race, but he can also be blunt in ways that few white politicians could ever pull off. On Father's Day in 2005, before he began his presidential campaign, the freshman senator stepped into a South Side church to talk about what it means to be a responsible black father. "There are a lot of folks, a lot of brothers, who are walking around and they look like men," Obama said. "They've got whiskers, they might even have sired a child, but it's not clear to me that they are full-grown men." The senator urged them not just to get a job, but to start a business; not just to stay at home, but to turn off the TV. Above all, he urged the community to aim high for its kids. "Sometimes," he said, "I go to an eighth-grade graduation and there's all that pomp and circumstance and gowns and flowers. It's just eighth grade, people. Just give them a handshake. Congratulations. Now get your butt in the library."

There wasn't much pre-planning for that talk, which got a lot of attention. His speechwriter had forgotten about the event, so Obama jotted down some notes on the back of a few sheets of paper, based on family conversations around the kitchen table. In his own mind, Obama was trying to walk the middle ground between the need for personal duty and the imperative of social action. "I talk about these things not out of shock value," he tells NEWSWEEK. "I also am not at all interested in what some conservative commentators are interested in, which is to use the issue of personal responsibility as an excuse for governmental inaction. It is very much a both-and [approach] as opposed to an either-or approach. When you talk about it in those terms, then the African-American community is responsive." (When Bill Cosby made stronger comments about black responsibility a year earlier, he left out mention of society's duty, and got seared by the reaction of fellow African-Americans.)

Sometimes, the middle ground doesn't hold between black and white, and Obama's innate sense of caution and compromise can look like weakness. Just before his big announcement outside the old state capitol in Springfield—where Lincoln delivered his "house divided" speech—Obama abruptly changed plans and asked his pastor not to deliver the invocation prayer. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright is the man who gave Obama not just spiritual direction, but also his signature phrase, which became the title of one of his books, "The Audacity of Hope." But in the days before Obama officially launched his campaign, Wright was also caricatured as a "radical" for his Afrocentrism and his focus on black issues—a strange criticism, perhaps, of a preacher on the South Side. (The Reverend Wright is considered mainstream among African-American church leaders; Ebony magazine once named him one of the top 15 black preachers in America.) "Fifteen minutes before Shabbos I get a call from Barack," a clearly perturbed Reverend Wright told The New York Times. "One of his members had talked him into uninviting me."

Obama says he was just trying to shield his pastor from harsh media attention. But the effect was to look like he wanted to distance himself from his own spiritual leader and community. "It's conceivable that I might have been overprotective, and probably didn't anticipate that he might feel hurt by it," Obama concedes. "So we had a discussion about it and everything is fine at this point." (Wright declined to talk to NEWSWEEK.)

No matter how he positions himself on the campaign trail, when Obama returns home to his wife and two daughters in Chicago, there's no ambiguity about identity. To Michelle, the persistent questions about Obama's roots are not about him. "We as a black community are struggling with our own identity and what it means to be black," she tells NEWSWEEK. "We see what is shown of us on TV but we also know that is not the full picture. So what is the picture? We're figuring it out. It's a conversation that needs to take place." There are times when the conversation turns in ways Obama cannot control, especially under the bright lights of the presidential campaign. In March, he traveled to Selma, Ala., to mark the Bloody Sunday march of 1965—a turning point in the civil-rights struggle. There, Obama delivered a powerful speech about the need for his generation to overcome its apathy and take action in politics. But he also went too far in suggesting a personal connection to Selma, saying his parents "got together" because of the march, when he was actually born four years earlier, in 1961. A few blocks away, Obama's main Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, was making her own pitch for the African-American vote, drafting her husband's public help for the first time in the campaign. Obama tells NEWSWEEK that his error was simply the result of "testing lines" without forethought; he denied with a wry smile it had anything to do with pressure from the Clintons and a heated competition for black voters.

Four months later, Selma has become the rousing end to Obama's stump speech. Now he makes it clear that he was a young boy at the time of Bloody Sunday, but he says the marchers fought for the rights of children just like him. "They did that for me and now we've got to do it for the next generation," he said last week in front of an ivy-covered barn in southeastern Iowa. "When I went back to Washington [from Selma], some people slapped me on the back and said, 'That was a wonderful celebration of African-American history.' I said, 'You don't understand: that was a celebration of American history.' Because at every juncture in American history, that's how change happens—by people coming together and deciding we're going to have a better America."

It was the week of July 4, and all across Iowa, presidential candidates were wrapping themselves in the flag. Yet none could have delivered that line quite like Barack Obama. He might have been too young to march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, but he sees himself as part of that broad struggle—and in ways his forebears could hardly imagine, he's still got his eyes on the prize.

"Senate Floor To Be a Stage For '08 Race"

WaPo:

The four Senate Democrats seeking their party's presidential nomination will take their campaigns to the chamber's floor next week, pushing new limits on U.S. involvement in Iraq in an attempt to burnish their antiwar credentials.

Next week, the Senate turns to the annual Defense Department authorization bill, legislation that is becoming a magnet for Iraq-related amendments as Democrats press ahead in their quest to force President Bush to change course and begin withdrawing U.S. troops. Among those hoping to reshape the bill are a who's who of the 2008 field -- Sens. Barack Obama (Ill.), Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.) and Christopher J. Dodd (Conn.).

For months, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) discouraged his caucus's 2008 candidates from taking prominent roles on Iraq, in hopes of inoculating his party from charges of politicizing the war.

But Reid spokesman Jim Manley said the Democratic leader has given up on that proposition, a decision that was probably inevitable as the party's base pushes aggressively for immediate withdrawal. Reid has assured all antiwar Democrats drafting Iraq amendments that they will get a vote during the defense policy debate -- a pledge that amounts to free airtime for the four presidential candidates.

Clinton, teaming up with Sen. Robert C. Byrd (W.Va.), is lobbying other senators to support a measure that would essentially revoke the authority Congress gave Bush in 2002 to wage the war. Obama is drafting amendments to improve mental health services for veterans and to beef up oversight of military contractors. Dodd's amendment would begin troop withdrawals within a month and terminate funding for combat operations next spring.

Biden will seek additional support for mine-resistant vehicles and will pitch in to help Democratic leaders build consensus on troop-withdrawal language -- an effort likely to become the debate's focal point.

The tit-for-tat between the Democratic presidential candidates flared up during the Iraq funding debate in May, when the four senators sought to outdo one another in their opposition to the war. Clinton and Obama, both of whom had previously resisted firm withdrawal deadlines, wound up embracing a cutoff of funding for the war next year, the toughest, most controversial proposal to reach the floor.

In that last major floor debate on the issue, Democrats were handed a substantial setback in their drive to curtail the president's ability to wage the war on his terms: They failed to override a veto of an emergency war spending bill, eventually sending it back to Bush's desk with few restrictions.

Clinton's deauthorization plan has raised a few eyebrows. The idea was considered by Democratic leaders early in the spring, after Biden and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) floated it, but it was set aside as too contentious. Yet for Clinton, whose support for the 2002 authorization remains a point of criticism for many Democratic primary voters, the proposal is tantamount to a legislative reversal.

"It is time for the President to make the case to the Congress and the American people for the U.S. military's changed mission in Iraq," Clinton and Byrd said in a letter to Democratic senators. "The American public and our troops in the field are entitled to a new debate about this war."

The Senate has traditionally been a stumbling block for presidential ambitions. But with Iraq on the table, it is providing a prime opportunity for Democrats to showcase their leadership skills and foreign-policy views.

"The war has been absolutely huge for them," said Barry C. Burden, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin at Madison and the author of a 2002 study that mapped the miserable track record of U.S. senators as presidential candidates.

Only two sitting senators, Warren G. Harding and John F. Kennedy, have succeeded as presidential candidates. One who came up short, Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), said the landscape now appears radically different from when he launched his 2004 campaign, shortly after the Iraq invasion.

The Democratic nominee's infamous line about war spending -- "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it" -- typified the Senate curse. But Kerry said because voters today are far more skeptical about the war, they now understand the distinctions.

"We're five years into the war, and the strategy has failed. And it's failed deep into the consciousness of the American people," Kerry said. "There's not the kind of confusion there was in 2004."

It might appear that former senator John Edwards (D-N.C.) would benefit from giving up his seat in 2004, given the historical odds -- 13 former senators have won the presidency since 1789. But the last entry on Edwards's official Iraq record was his 2002 vote for authorization. He is now a strong critic of the war and has apologized to primary voters at every turn, but he can play no direct role in changing U.S. policy.

On the Republican side, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) is spending as little time as possible on Capitol Hill as he tries to revive his struggling campaign. A staunch Bush ally, McCain is on the wrong side of public opinion on Iraq, and every Senate vote on the war reinforces that. But as the highest-ranking Republican on the Armed Services Committee, McCain must spend part of July in Washington seated on the Senate floor, managing the defense bill.

"John McCain is a case study this year on the difficulty of running from the Senate," said former Senate majority leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.), who decided against a presidential bid in 2004, having learned from former senator Robert J. Dole (R-Kan.) that it is almost impossible to juggle both jobs.

"I did once before," shrugged McCain, referring to wearing two political hats. "It's fine."

Senate newcomer Obama has participated prominently in the Iraq debate as a member of the Foreign Relations Committee. The withdrawal timetable that the president vetoed tracked closely with a proposal Obama outlined in the Senate in January. He also was an early proponent of establishing benchmarks for the Iraqi government, an idea that Republicans and the White House also embraced.

"Obama's been against the war from the beginning, and being in the Senate offers him an opportunity to fight to end it," said his spokesman Bill Burton.

Dodd and Biden have found the Senate to be a useful -- and free -- forum for drawing attention to their long-shot campaigns. Dodd ran ads in Iowa urging his 2008 rivals to vote with him to cut off war funding and renamed the bill "Feingold-Reid-Dodd" on his news releases, joining original sponsors Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Reid, the Senate leader.

Biden, the Foreign Relations Committee chairman, said his Senate perch "allows me to have instant credibility" on Iraq. "If I had been the best governor ever, it still isn't the same," he said.

"On an awful lot of issues, the case can be made that governors accomplish things, while members of Congress spend their time debating and voting," said Jim Jordan, a Democratic political consultant who is advising Dodd and who served as Kerry's campaign manager in 2003. "The war has changed all that."

The downsides for Senate presidential candidates still exist. The Democratic-led Congress, after all, is almost as unpopular as Bush.

"It's a rare situation, because you don't normally have an Iraq," Daschle said. "For Democrats, to a certain extent, it will be important that we show we can govern. The country's perception of these candidates will be affected, in part, by its perception of the Senate as a whole."

"New poll shows majority of Americans think Cheney should be impeached"

American Research Group via Raw Story:

Question:
Do you favor or oppose the US House of Representatives beginning impeachment proceedings against Vice President Dick Cheney?
7/5/07	Favor	Oppose	Undecided
All Adults	54%	40%	6%
Voters	50%	44%	6%
Democrats (38%)	76%	24%	-
Republicans (29%)	17%	83%	-
Independents (33%)	51%	29%	20%
Based on 1,100 completed telephone interviews among a random sample of adults nationwide July 3-5, 2007. The theoretical margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points, 95% of the time. Of the total sample, 933 interviews were completed among registered voters.

"Gore gets last-minute D.C. venue for Live Earth"

Reuters:

Initially rebuffed by Washington, former Vice President Al Gore's Live Earth concerts found a last-minute home in the U.S. capital on Friday after Native Americans offered their museum for the worldwide event.

A few blocks from the U.S. Capitol where some Republican lawmakers had tried to prevent the Washington concert from taking place, the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian will host one of several Saturday concerts highlighting climate change.

"A couple of global warming naysayers used parliamentary tricks in the Congress to block that," Gore said on CNN. "Well, instead of the cavalry riding to the rescue, the American Indians came to the rescue."

Concert promoters initially sought the expansive National Mall as its U.S. venue, but two groups already had permits for that space, forcing Live Earth to find another location.

Gore turned to friends in Congress in hopes of getting the Capitol lawn but some Republicans blocked legislation to permit it. That bumped the concert to the 80,000-seat Giants Stadium in New Jersey, just across the Hudson River from Manhattan.

In contrast, the space at the American Indian museum's plaza, where the concert will be held, can only hold about 200, but video screens will be set up for larger crowds to gather across the street near the Capitol reflecting pool.

The museum had already scheduled a concert called "Mother Earth" to coincide with the Live Earth events, but expanded that in the last few days to include Gore and more performers.

Gore will kick off the Washington concert with a speech on climate change that will be followed by performances by popular married country singers Garth Brooks and Trisha Yearwood and Native Roots, a reggae band from Albuquerque, New Mexico.

The former vice president has become a global voice on climate change, warning of a "planetary emergency" and calling for U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide, the largest source of the greenhouse gas, to be frozen at current levels.

Other Live Earth concerts will be held in Rio de Janeiro, London, Sydney, Johannesburg, Tokyo, Shanghai, Hamburg, Germany, and New Jersey, and broadcast worldwide.

Unlike most major Live Earth concerts elsewhere, the Washington event will be free.

"IMPEACH DICK CHENEY" (with videos)

Video (03:40) from bravenewfilms:

Watch Dick Cheney's impeachable crimes, then sign the Petition demanding Congress begin impeachment hearings. 14 Representatives currently support H. Res 333, 3 articles of impeachment outlining Vice President Dick Cheney's crimes.

Jim McDermott agrees, with video (04:37).

"General Odom's prescription for supporting the troops: withdraw; cut off funds; and impeach"

AMERICAblog:

General Odom was the Director of the National Security Agency (NSA) under Reagan (think "Minority Report," and you have the NSA). They're the super-duper secret spy agency that's way more top secret than even the CIA. This guy's credentials are beyond stellar. Here is an excerpt of his recent essay:

If the Democrats truly want to succeed in forcing to begin withdrawing from Iraq, the first step is to redefine "supporting the troops" as withdrawing them, citing the mass of accumulating evidence of the psychological as well as the physical damage that the president is forcing them to endure because he did not raise adequate forces. Both Democrats and Republicans in Congress could confirm this evidence and lay the blame for "not supporting the troops" where it really belongs – on the president. And they could rightly claim to the public that they are supporting the troops by cutting off the funds that he uses to keep U.S. forces in Iraq.

The public is ahead of the both branches of government in grasping this reality, but political leaders and opinion makers in the media must give them greater voice....

The president is strongly motivated to string out the war until he leaves office, in order to avoid taking responsibility for the defeat he has caused and persisted in making greater each year for more than three years.

To force him to begin a withdrawal before then, the first step should be to rally the public by providing an honest and candid definition of what "supporting the troops" really means and pointing out who is and who is not supporting our troops at war. The next step should be a flat refusal to appropriate money for to be used in Iraq for anything but withdrawal operations with a clear deadline for completion.

The final step should be to put that president on notice that if ignores this legislative action and tries to extort Congress into providing funds by keeping U.S. forces in peril, impeachment proceeding will proceed in the House of Representatives. Such presidential behavior surely would constitute the "high crime" of squandering the lives of soldiers and Marines for his own personal interest.

"Grass-roots Democrats Push NH Legislature Towards Impeachment"

Dan DeWalt (Huffington Post):

Howard Dean's famous scream may have capped the unraveling of his presidential campaign, but it was also the unwitting herald for a grass roots movement that six years later played a major role in overturning the Republican stranglehold on power, not only nationally, but across the river in New Hampshire as well.

Now those same grass roots groups are calling for impeachment, taking the challenge directly to Dr. Dean's own Democratic Party hierarchy.

If 86 year old Brookline New Hampshire resident Betty Hall has her way, the New Hampshire legislature will be the first in the nation to invoke Jefferson's manual and send a call for impeachment to Washington D.C. "Impeachment is huge for us because Bush is going to kill our elections. The right to vote is the most important right of all and he's stolen the last two elections," she said to The Commons.

It was this perceived threat to the nation that led her and others to bring an impeachment resolution to the floor of last summer's N.H. Democratic Party Convention. Hall said "we passed impeachment in June of '06 over the objection of the top brass of the party. We took the battle to the floor and won."

Hall said that the defeated Party leadership went so far as to not include the impeachment vote on their website's convention coverage.

The Party establishment took another hit in last year's Democratic primary when Carol Shea-Porter was able to muster enough volunteers to out-hustle the Party's favored candidate and take the nomination for U.S. Congress.

Porter benefited from the work of Democracy For N.H., the New Hampshire version of Democracy For America, a grass roots organization that Dean created to give new purpose to the volunteers who had worked for his campaign.

After last November's election, some of these volunteers found themselves in the legislature as well.

Tim Butterworth of Chesterfield N.H. is one. When his granddaughter was born in 2003, he realized how angry he was with what he sees as the sorry state of the world and the profligacy of our government's actions and reacted with anger and determination. He became more of an activist than he had been, then ended up running for and winning a seat in the House. During the first session, he was impressed that every proposal that came forward from the body rather than from the leadership passed. "As a group the Democratic Party would be much stronger if the leadership listens, leading the people in the direction they want to go" he said.

Indeed, N.H. Democratic Party chairman Ray Buckley has tapped two long time state activists to create a grass roots committee for the party. According to committee co-chair Howard Morse, the party is aiding and abetting grass roots groups and is working to bring the various groups together under the Democratic Party umbrella. His co-chair Chas Pru describes it as a sea change. He is encouraged that the Democrats are taking the grass roots interests to heart.

Robert Perry of Strafford, who is one of the leaders of the House legislative impeachment effort, said "the success of the grass roots movement in N.H. has caused the leadership to pause and assess what it all means." He said that state party recognizes what the grass roots are doing and are making space for them in the party structures. He said, "The leadership has us on board."

There is no indication that the leadership has gotten aboard the impeachment train however. In spite of the vote for impeachment at the '06 convention, Howard Morse remembers "no clear call of any kind for impeachment. There might have been a vote, it might have even passed, but in all the reporting that I saw, it did not come up. Its much ado about what I think is nothing."

Betty Hall has a somewhat different take. "I think that establishment Democrats don't understand what's out there. The dumb bunnies don't understand how angry people are."

Tim Butterworth: "I've always assumed that most organizations have pyramidal structures. Generally the ones on top have worked their way up. They tend to become conservative trying to stay on top. D.F.N.H. founder Alex Lee sees it the same way. "Bad habits make the Democrats hold onto their bad political calculus ... there is more interest in holding power than in making positive changes. The election wave came in but they're just worried about the undertow."

Robert Perry says that it is essential to move forward with impeachment. He also has a different assessment of the prospects. He said, "An impeachment resolution presented this fall and voted on in January has a good chance of passing the House and a better than even chance in the Senate."

A legislative House with 400 members makes for an unwieldy body. Party leadership can assert itself, but House votes tend to be more of a reflection of the individual districts and representatives, according to Marjorie Smith, 11 year House veteran and Finance Committee chair.

Hall, Perry and their allies will give these legislators a chance to weigh in on impeachment in the next session. Howard Morse predicts that "it would not be well received and it would not be accepted." Hall accuses the party of being overly cautious. She and Perry see a real urgency. Perry cites U.S. military threats against Iran. Hall is worried about voting and constitutional rights. She has her own first hand account of when she discovered her right to free speech to be missing. "I was arrested and put in jail for carrying a sign that said Bush is bad for America in Nashua where Bush was speaking across the street. The secret service wanted to put us in a cage far from Bush, I refused to go and they arrested me, I had a trial and was acquitted." That judge agreed that her constitutional rights had been violated and the police lost the case. Hall doesn't want to have to worry about what the next judge will say. She wants Constitutional redress now, in the form of impeachment.

"I want to raise the level of noise" she said. Her impeachment efforts are meant to do just that.

"Edwards may add Wal-Mart opponents as senior staff"

Reuters:

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards is expected to name two activists opposed to the giant retailer Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to senior posts on his campaign staff, a campaign official said on Thursday.

Paul Blank, who has worked for Democrat Howard Dean's 2004 presidential campaign, would take charge of day-to-day Edwards campaign operations, the campaign official said. Chris Kofinis, former adviser to 2004 Democratic presidential hopeful Wesley Clark, would become the Edwards campaign's communications director.

The campaign official said a tentative deal was in place and could be finalized within the next few days. The official said Blank and Kofinis would taking newly created jobs with the campaign.

The official asked not to be identified and would speak only on background because the deal has not yet been finalized.

Blank and Kofinis, well-known Democratic Party operatives, both are leaders of the activist group Wake-Up Wal-Mart, which opposes Wal-Mart policies that it says have hurt American jobs, wages, health care and local communities.

Blank is the organization's campaign director and Kofinis its communications director.

The Edwards campaign official said their addition would boost senior staff at a time when Edwards' campaign manager, former Michigan congressman David Bonior, has increased his high-profile media and campaign appearances in early-voting states.

"While he's doing that stuff, you need somebody here in the office overseeing tactical operations on his behalf, budget allocations, things like that," the campaign official said.

Edwards, a former North Carolina senator who was the Democratic nominee for vice president in 2004, has fallen well behind party front-runners, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, in campaign fund-raising this year.

Edwards recently announced that he had raised $9 million in the second quarter of 2007.

That compared to second-quarter primary campaign fund-raising of $31 million for Obama. Clinton was expected to raise about $10 million less than the Illinois senator.

Al Gore on the "Today" Show ( with video)

From the "Today" show with video (10:06) and the NY Times (full article):

On Libby:

“I thought it was improper,” Mr. Gore said of the decision. “He was charged with knowledge that could incriminate his bosses in the White House, which included the vice president and the president. I thought it was very disappointing.”

Mr. Gore said the Libby pardon differed from the Clinton administration’s pardons “because in this case the person involved is charged with activities that involve knowledge of what his superiors in the White House did.”

On 2008:

As for 2008, Mr. Gore said he doubted he would be a candidate again ever. Asked to talk about some of the current candidates in the Democratic field — including Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton — he demurred. That response, too, for any possible endorsement at this point (remember his backing of Howard Dean?).

Here’s the exchange with Meredith Vieira from this morning:

Q: You were vice president while Senator Clinton first lady. Does she represent a fresh face? You said in–when you weren’t going to run in 2004 the party needs fresh faces.

Mr. Gore: Again, it’s 500 — there are 500 days between now and the election, and that’s the simple reason why I’m not ready to sit down and give you an assessment of all the candidates.

Q: But do you think she represents — why not? You can assess them, can’t you?

Mr. Gore: Well, I’m focused on…

Q: You don’t have to endorse, but…

Mr. Gore: I’m focused on trying to get this message out about the climate crisis. And the horse race of American politics is going to continue to play out over the next year and a half and who’s ahead and who’s behind on any given day, who’s going to the starting gate, who’s not. You know, I’ve kind of fallen out of love with politics.

"Al Gore’s son seeks drug help"

Agence France Press:

LOS ANGELES - US former vice president-turned-climate campaigner Al Gore said today his son was getting treatment after being arrested on drug charges when police stopped him speeding in his low-emissions car.

"We’re glad that he’s safe and that he’s getting treatment and we’re going to leave it as a family matter," Gore said in an interview on NBC news.

Orange County Sheriff’s deputies spotted Gore’s blue Toyota Prius going more than 100 miles per hour (160 kph) on a California highway early Wednesday, police said.

When they pulled him over, they smelled marijuana, searched the car and allegedly found more of the drug and several other addictive prescription medicines including Valium.

Sheriff’s department spokesman Jim Amormino told AFP Gore junior did not have prescriptions for any of the drugs.

He was released on 20,000 dollars bail paid by his sister, media reported today.

The arrest comes just days before Al Gore senior is due to take part in a worldwide series of concerts to raise awareness of global warming, "Live Earth."

The younger Gore, who lives in Los Angeles, has a history of drug and driving violations.

In 2003, he was charged with marijuana possession in Maryland after police stopped him for driving without headlights on.

The following year he entered a substance abuse program as part of a plea agreement.

He was also charged with reckless driving in North Carolina in 2000 for allegedly speeding at 94 mph, and in September 2002, police arrested him on suspicion of drunk driving near a military base in Virginia.

The ex-vice president Gore told NBC that family concerns were not behind his insistence that he will not run again for president in 2008.

He stressed that he was focussing on his campaign to ease damaging global warming.

"I don’t have any plans or intentions to be a candidate again and really the main reason is I’m involved in a different kind of campaign," he said, adding that global warming is "the most serious crisis our civilisation has ever faced."

While he denies planning to run, opinion polls have shown that Gore, bested by President George W. Bush in 2000, is not too far behind Democratic hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, with about 15 percent of support.

"From Obama, Clinton, Dueling Ideas of Change"

WaPo:

CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa, July 4 -- Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) took aim at his main Democratic presidential rival during his July 4 campaign swing through Iowa, saying that "change can't just be a slogan" -- days after Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) introduced her new slogan, "Ready for Change, Ready to Lead."

Obama has long cast himself as part of the future of politics, in contrast with a Clinton era that he portrays as part of a divisive past.

But Obama had a ready target on Wednesday: Both Clintons were campaigning nearby in Iowa, their first swing together. Bill Clinton repeatedly introduced his wife with reminders of the 1990s. The former first lady embraced the role of virtual incumbent on their holiday-week tour, promising to restore conditions -- in the economy and in the government -- to the way they were during her husband's administration.

Obama praised the former president, then quickly shifted his tone. "I think he did a lot of fine things, and I think he's a terrific political strategist," Obama told the Associated Press. "What we're more interested in is looking forward, not in looking backward. I think the American people feel the same way. What they are looking for is a way to break out of the harsh partisanship and the old arguments -- and to solve problems."

Clinton, a two-term senator who also spent eight years in the White House as first lady, is trying a "change -- but not too much change" approach. Her advisers believe that her candidacy, to become the first female president, inherently signals change. But they also think voters want something familiar, rather than an unknown quantity of the kind that Obama, a first-term senator and an African American, might represent.

At a rally in Waterloo on Wednesday afternoon, the Clintons were introduced as "the once and future presidents."

Obama, by contrast, is betting that voters will resist another Bush or another Clinton, after nearly 20 years of having a member of the families in office.

In a news conference between campaign stops, a transcript of which the campaign provided upon request, Obama said he is not campaigning against the last Democratic president.

"My campaign is not premised on running against the past -- my campaign is based on what we can accomplish in the future," Obama said. "I do think that we have not had in a long time a sense of common purpose where we've got a working majority to work on the big issues -- on health care, we haven't been able to get a system that works for everybody because it is continually blocked both in Congress and by special interests and lobbying."

Also, he said, "Change has to be something that is demonstrated day to day on an ongoing basis, and I think that my career and my campaign has demonstrated that."

Clinton continued to refuse to answer questions from the reporters traveling with her, holding scripted events and organizing meetings behind closed doors. She did participate in a bipartisan event, marching in the Clear Lake Independence Day parade. It was also attended by former governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, a contender for the Republican nomination for president.

Howie P.S.: Another story about hair and John Edwards: "Splitting Hairs, Edwards's Stylist Tells His Side of Story--Man Behind Pricey 'Dos Details Long Relationship" (WaPo).

Michelle Obama in Seattle July 25

Michelle Obama will be in Seattle on Wednesday, July 25th for a luncheon fundraiser at Bell Harbor Conference Center at 12:30 pm. Cost is $250 for a General Seat at lunch. There will also be a pre-reception at noon for $1000 patrons.

Please email obamaevent@infodrop.info to be on the standby list for ticket purchase.

"Closing in on 10,000"

Al Gore:

Unbelievable! Right now 7,112 Live Earth parties have been scheduled in 129 countries.

Let’s reach 10,000 house parties in the next 72 hours. All it will take is 2,888 AlGore.com members signing up to host a party.

http://joinliveearth.org/gore

These parties add so much to Live Earth. When we first talked about doing concerts, the only downside I saw was that they could only be held in a few locations. But you've changed that -- and now this event is truly taking place nearly everywhere you are.

Live Earth is only 4 days away. Sign up to host a house party today by visiting:

http://joinliveearth.org/gore

Live Earth parties taking place in your area are a great way to gather with other people who believe we need to solve the climate crisis -- and they are a great way to get new people involved in our movement. You can find a party near you at the link below and bring your friends.

http://www.friendsofliveearth.org/page/event/search_simple

Or, if you'd like to hold your own party, you still can. All you have to do is click here:

http://joinliveearth.org/gore

Your passion and commitment are what's driving our movement forward.

Thank you,

Al Gore

P.S. If you haven’t already, sign the Live Earth Pledge right now by visiting:

http://liveearthpledge.org/algore.php

P.P.S. On Saturday you can watch extensive coverage of Live Earth from around the world on MSN by visiting:

http://liveearth.msn.com/

"MoveOn Puts Impeachment Back on the Table"

Ari Melber (The Nation):

In the wake of President Bush's commutation of prison time for convicted felon Lewis Libby and a developing constitutional clash over important subpoenas, influential Democratic activists are pressing Congress to put impeachment back on the table.

Today MoveOn.org, the powerhouse group of 3.2 million political activists, launched an unprecedented petition calling on Congress to impeach Vice President Cheney if he defies congressional subpoenas issued to investigate the Bush administration's purge of prosecutors at the Justice Department. Leading bloggers have also launched a targeted campaign to specifically lobby Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee to put impeachment back on the table, and as The Nation's John Nichols reports, some members of Congress say it is now time to "reconsider impeachment proceedings."

The Judiciary Committee is led by John Conyers, who introduced a bill last Congress to explore impeachment proceedings. It drew support from about one out of seven House Democrats at the time. But Speaker Nancy Pelosi said impeachment was off the table during the mid-term campaign, and Conyers later sent an email to his national supporter list echoing the Speaker's promise.

Leaving aside the detailed debate over when, how and why impeachment proceedings would ever begin, Congress should never have taken the prospect of impeachment off the table. It is a constitutionally protected check against runaway executive power and lawlessness -- problems that Americans are quite familiar with lately. (Politicians are fond of reiterating their willingness to keep the option of nuclear bombs "on the table" in foreign policy, so surely constitutional oversight and accountability can remain on the table too.) When Congress tries to govern without its full power, the President can act with impunity. Here's how the New York Times explained Bush's commutation today:

Mr. Bush comes at the decision a weakened leader, with his public approval ratings at historic lows for any president, his domestic agenda faltering on Capitol Hill and his aides facing subpoenas from the Democrats who control Congress. Those circumstances offer him a certain amount of freedom; as Mr. Black said, "He knows he's going to get hammered no matter what he does."

See? Without further consequences on the table, Bush's historically low support, refusal to work with democratically elected officials in the coequal branch and mounting investigations into serious wrongdoing only serve to give him more "freedom." And with that freedom, Bush and Cheney are fighting to preserve the freedom of a convicted felon, defy congressional investigations and continue to undermine the law and the Constitution through spying, torture and detention policies. How can they be stopped? At times like these, Americans might want to consider what the Founders would do.

YESTERDAY'S QUOTE OF THE DAY

Atrios:

I'm going to be mad tomorrow. I'm going to be mad tomorrow that the elite media (except Keith) won't point out that Bush's commutation of Scooter's sentence is essentially obstruction of justice. I'll be mad because that concept was regularly inserted into the narrative during the Clinton days. Mostly I'll be mad because I have yet to see a prominent Democrat put the phrase "obstruction of justice" out there in relation to this. So perhaps my anger at the media is misplaced.

"MARCY WHEELER GIVES THE FACTS ABOUT LIBBY ON HARDBALL" (video)

In case you need to keep it short and sweet, Marcy Wheeler gives you the sound bites (video, 02:18). Listen to it more than once if you need to.

"Democrats Announce 2008 Convention Chairs"

DNC:

Governor Howard Dean, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, announced today his intention to nominate Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi of California to serve as Permanent Chair of the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver. Dean also announced that three outstanding leaders, Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, Chair of the Democratic Governors Association; Texas State Senator Leticia Van de Putte, President of the National Conference of State Legislatures; and Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin, President of the National Conference of Democratic Mayors, will be nominated as Permanent Convention Co- Chairs.

This distinguished group of strong Democratic leaders from all levels of government and all parts of the country exemplifies the vision, values and commitment to America's future that the Democratic National Convention will showcase in Denver.

"Our Party is bringing a new kind of leadership to our country at all levels," said Governor Dean. "We are extremely fortunate to have such a distinguished group of strong Democratic leaders chairing our Convention. I want to thank Speaker Pelosi, Governor Sebelius, state Senator Van de Putte and Mayor Franklin for their commitment to putting our presidential nominee on the path to victory for the November 2008 election."

The recommendations by Governor Dean will be presented to the Convention Rules Committee next summer and then voted on by the delegates to the 2008 Convention at the opening session. The Permanent Chair and Co-Chairs preside over the Convention proceedings, ensuring order, decorum and efficiency as the Party nominates its presidential and vice presidential candidates, adopts the National Platform and conducts other important business.

Biographical information about the Permanent Convention Chair and Co- Chairs (nominees):

Speaker Nancy Pelosi is the first woman to serve as Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. Before assuming this position in January 2007, Pelosi served for the last four years as House Democratic Leader and was the first woman to lead a major political party in Congress. She has represented California's Eighth District since 1987. She served as a member of the Democratic National Committee from 1976 to 1996, serving terms as Northern Chair and State Chair of the California Democratic Party. She was a Vice Chair of the 1996 Democratic National Convention, Co Chair of the 1992 Democratic Platform Committee and served as Chair of the 1984 Democratic National Convention Host Committee in San Francisco.

"It is an honor to serve as Chair of the national convention as Democrats from across the country select our candidate who will become the next President of the United States," Pelosi said. "At the convention, Democrats will share with the American people our priorities and values that will take our nation in a new direction."

Governor Kathleen Sebelius was first sworn in as governor of Kansas in January 2003 and in 2005 was named one of America's Five Best Governors by Time Magazine. She was re-elected to a second term in 2006 and currently serves as Chair of the Democratic Governors Association. Sebelius previously served four terms in the Kansas House of Representatives and two terms as the state's insurance commissioner.

"The national convention is one of our best opportunities to share our Democratic message of progress with the nation," Sebelius said. "And, it's fitting the convention is in our neighboring state, Colorado, home to new Democratic Governor Bill Ritter. I look forward to working with my fellow chairs to hold a convention that highlights our shared values and which brings new voters to the Democratic Party."

State Senator Leticia Van de Putte is the first Hispanic to serve as president of the National Conference of State Legislatures - a position she has held since 2006. Representing a large portion of San Antonio, Van de Putte has been elected to four terms in the Texas Senate, following five terms as a state representative. Since 2003 she has also served as Democratic Leader in the Texas Senate.

"I could not be more proud to serve with these distinguished women as a Co-Chair of the National Convention which will nominate the next President of the United States," Van de Putte said. "Texas women, including Barbara Jordan and Ann Richards, have long served our Party at National Conventions, and I'm humbled to be asked to join their ranks."

Mayor Shirley Franklin has served as Mayor of Atlanta since 2001, when she became the first female mayor of Atlanta and the first African American woman to serve as mayor of a major southern city. She is the first woman to chair the National Conference of Democratic Mayors. Franklin has restored financial stability with five balanced budgets and healthy reserves and implemented the strongest ethics reform program in the state.

"It is a great time to be a Democrat!" Franklin said. "Our diverse leadership for the convention represents the core values of Democrats everywhere. As we prepare for the Democratic National Convention and to send our nominee to the White House, we will also showcase the best in our party and in America."

"Democratic Presidential Hopefuls Woo Latinos" (audio)

NPR, with audio (04:06):

Democratic presidential candidates on Sunday addressed a conference of Latino elected officials in Orlando, Fla. Invitations to Republican candidates to address the group on Friday were declined by all but one.

QUOTE OF THE DAY

WaPo

"One of our opponents is also the quasi incumbent in the race, who in our belief will and should lead just about every national poll from now until the Iowa caucuses. Expect nothing different and attach no significance to it," (Obama) campaign manager David Plouffe wrote.

Goredot Alert: "Moving Beyond Kyoto"

The New York Times, July 1, 2007, OP-ED By AL GORE (restricted):

Nashville---WE — the human species — have arrived at a moment of decision. It is unprecedented and even laughable for us to imagine that we could actually make a conscious choice as a species, but that is nevertheless the challenge that is before us.
Our home — Earth — is in danger. What is at risk of being destroyed is not the planet itself, but the conditions that have made it hospitable for human beings.
Without realizing the consequences of our actions, we have begun to put so much carbon dioxide into the thin shell of air surrounding our world that we have literally changed the heat balance between Earth and the Sun. If we don’t stop doing this pretty quickly, the average temperature will increase to levels humans have never known and put an end to the favorable climate balance on which our civilization depends.

In the last 150 years, in an accelerating frenzy, we have been removing increasing quantities of carbon from the ground — mainly in the form of coal and oil — and burning it in ways that dump 70 million tons of CO2 every 24 hours into the Earth’s atmosphere.
The concentrations of CO2 — having never risen above 300 parts per million for at least a million years — have been driven from 280 parts per million at the beginning of the coal boom to 383 parts per million this year.
As a direct result, many scientists are now warning that we are moving closer to several “tipping points” that could — within 10 years — make it impossible for us to avoid irretrievable damage to the planet’s habitability for human civilization.
Just in the last few months, new studies have shown that the north polar ice cap — which helps the planet cool itself — is melting nearly three times faster than the most pessimistic computer models predicted. Unless we take action, summer ice could be completely gone in as little as 35 years. Similarly, at the other end of the planet, near the South Pole, scientists have found new evidence of snow melting in West Antarctica across an area as large as California.
This is not a political issue. This is a moral issue, one that affects the survival of human civilization. It is not a question of left versus right; it is a question of right versus wrong. Put simply, it is wrong to destroy the habitability of our planet and ruin the prospects of every generation that follows ours.
On Sept. 21, 1987, President Ronald Reagan said, “In our obsession with antagonisms of the moment, we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world.”
We — all of us — now face a universal threat. Though it is not from outside this world, it is nevertheless cosmic in scale.
Consider this tale of two planets. Earth and Venus are almost exactly the same size, and have almost exactly the same amount of carbon. The difference is that most of the carbon on Earth is in the ground — having been deposited there by various forms of life over the last 600 million years — and most of the carbon on Venus is in the atmosphere.
As a result, while the average temperature on Earth is a pleasant 59 degrees, the average temperature on Venus is 867 degrees. True, Venus is closer to the Sun than we are, but the fault is not in our star; Venus is three times hotter on average than Mercury, which is right next to the Sun. It’s the carbon dioxide.
This threat also requires us, in Reagan’s phrase, to unite in recognition of our common bond.
Next Saturday, on all seven continents, the Live Earth concert will ask for the attention of humankind to begin a three-year campaign to make everyone on our planet aware of how we can solve the climate crisis in time to avoid catastrophe. Individuals must be a part of the solution. In the words of Buckminster Fuller, “If the success or failure of this planet, and of human beings, depended on how I am and what I do, how would I be? What would I do?”
Live Earth will offer an answer to this question by asking everyone who attends or listens to the concerts to sign a personal pledge to take specific steps to combat climate change. (More details about the pledge are available at algore.com.)
But individual action will also have to shape and drive government action. Here Americans have a special responsibility. Throughout most of our short history, the United States and the American people have provided moral leadership for the world. Establishing the Bill of Rights, framing democracy in the Constitution, defeating fascism in World War II, toppling Communism and landing on the moon — all were the result of American leadership.
Once again, Americans must come together and direct our government to take on a global challenge. American leadership is a precondition for success.
To this end, we should demand that the United States join an international treaty within the next two years that cuts global warming pollution by 90 percent in developed countries and by more than half worldwide in time for the next generation to inherit a healthy Earth.
This treaty would mark a new effort. I am proud of my role during the Clinton administration in negotiating the Kyoto protocol. But I believe that the protocol has been so demonized in the United States that it probably cannot be ratified here — much in the way the Carter administration was prevented from winning ratification of an expanded strategic arms limitation treaty in 1979. Moreover, the negotiations will soon begin on a tougher climate treaty.
Therefore, just as President Reagan renamed and modified the SALT agreement (calling it Start), after belatedly recognizing the need for it, our next president must immediately focus on quickly concluding a new and even tougher climate change pact. We should aim to complete this global treaty by the end of 2009 — and not wait until 2012 as currently planned.
If by the beginning of 2009, the United States already has in place a domestic regime to reduce global warming pollution, I have no doubt that when we give industry a goal and the tools and flexibility to sharply reduce carbon emissions, we can complete and ratify a new treaty quickly. It is, after all, a planetary emergency.
A new treaty will still have differentiated commitments, of course; countries will be asked to meet different requirements based upon their historical share or contribution to the problem and their relative ability to carry the burden of change. This precedent is well established in international law, and there is no other way to do it.
There are some who will try to pervert this precedent and use xenophobia or nativist arguments to say that every country should be held to the same standard. But should countries with one-fifth our gross domestic product — countries that contributed almost nothing in the past to the creation of this crisis — really carry the same load as the United States? Are we so scared of this challenge that we cannot lead?
Our children have a right to hold us to a higher standard when their future — indeed, the future of all human civilization — is hanging in the balance. They deserve better than a government that censors the best scientific evidence and harasses honest scientists who try to warn us about looming catastrophe. They deserve better than politicians who sit on their hands and do nothing to confront the greatest challenge that humankind has ever faced — even as the danger bears down on us.
We should focus instead on the opportunities that are part of this challenge. Certainly, there will be new jobs and new profits as corporations move aggressively to capture the enormous economic opportunities offered by a clean energy future.

But there’s something even more precious to be gained if we do the right thing. The climate crisis offers us the chance to experience what few generations in history have had the privilege of experiencing: a generational mission; a compelling moral purpose; a shared cause; and the thrill of being forced by circumstances to put aside the pettiness and conflict of politics and to embrace a genuine moral and spiritual challenge.

"Candidates venture into texting"

WaPo (via Spokesman Review):

Democrats trying to tap into growing cell phone universe

If Sen. Barack Obama is your guy, dial 62262 – which spells "Obama" – on your cellphone and text "Go." For supporters of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, punch in 77007 and text "Join." Text "Today" to 30644 if you're a fan of former Sen. John Edwards.

A small but growing list of presidential candidates, all Democrats, are jumping on the text-messaging bandwagon. With more than three-quarters of Americans estimated to own cell phones – and more than 15 billion text messages sent within the country each month – campaigns believe it's a technology they can't afford not to exploit.

Aides for Obama, D-Ill., the latest to launch a mobile campaign, say they'll use text messaging to organize events and urge supporters to donate money. Hours before Thursday's Democratic forum at Howard University, his campaign sent this message: "Debate tonight! Watch Barack Obama."

"Your cell phone is probably the one piece of technology that is with you all the time," said Joe Rospars, Obama's new-media director. He oversees the mobile campaign, which kicked off a few days ago. "The reality is, I don't think there's a campaign or a political organization right now that has figured out how to smartly use this technology. There's going to be a lot of experimentation."

With their foray into text messaging – also known as SMS, for Short Message Service – the campaigns are taking a cue from corporations and nonprofits, large and small, that have used text messaging to get their message to an increasingly mobile population.

There are already a handful of examples of American politicians using the technology: California Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., used text messaging in their re-election campaigns. But the better examples are found overseas, in presidential elections in the Philippines, South Korea and Spain.

So far the Democratic front-runners are using texting in varied ways.

Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, the first of the candidates to launch a mobile campaign, has sent texts urging his supporters to join his Young America program (text "Summer" to 30644) and sign a petition to end the war in Iraq (text "Iraq" to 30644). Late last month, his campaign launched a fundraising drive that started off with a text message and was followed by a prerecorded phone call from Edwards himself: "Hi, this is John Edwards. Thank you for taking the time to respond to our text and listen to my message. ..."

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., who announced her mobile campaign in mid-May, has sent a couple of texts, one about her debate appearance and another urging supporters to vote for their favorite campaign song. Her campaign faced a little technical glitch at first. When Justin Oberman, a consultant in the field of marrying cell phones and politics, texted his ZIP code to 70077, the reply he got was the address of a community clinic. The glitch has been fixed, said Peter Daou, Clinton's Internet director.

Obama e-mailed his supporters about his mobile campaign and asked them to text "Strk" and their mailing address to get free Obama bumper stickers – another way to update and build his mailing list. In addition, Obama is offering seven ring tones (his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention mixed with a hip-hop or rock beat, for example) and four cell phone wallpapers (two Obama photos and two Obama logos). Everything's free (text "ringtone1" and "image1" to get them), though standard texting rates apply.

Supporters can send their ring tone and wallpaper ideas, and they can text questions about health care, for example, and get a response from a small group of volunteers and staffers. Within about an hour, if not a few minutes, a text such as "Iraq?" gets this response: "... Barack has been strongly against the war since 2002. Please visit www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq ... 2 learn more."

Oberman has closely followed the mobile campaigns.

"Of the three, Obama has had the smoothest release of a mobile campaign so far. You can tell that his camp has really thought it through. Edwards, I think, has been the most innovative – the 'Stop the war in Iraq' petition, the prerecorded fundraising pitch.

I'm a little disappointed with Clinton's," Oberman said. "A text-messaging campaign shouldn't be about telling me to go online and vote for a campaign song. It's about Clinton telling me to meet somewhere for a local Meetup event. It's about Clinton telling me to sign a petition. It's about something that takes into account my surroundings. Remember, my cell phone is with me everywhere, so what comes to my phone better be personal to me. Otherwise it's unnecessary."

"Obama Tops $30 Million"

Political Wire:

A source close to Sen. Barack Obama tells ABC News his presidential campaign "raised more than $30 million during the second quarter. That figure tops Obama's haul during the first quarter of the year, when he reported raising $25.8 million."

"Official figures have not yet been released by Obama's rivals for the Democratic nomination, although the campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., had said it expected to raise about $27 million during the quarter, and the campaign of former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., had publicly set a goal of $9 million."

Meanwhile, CNN notes Gov. Bill Richardson (D) has raised approximately $7 million.