NC-Sen: Kay Hagan is out with her second TV ad of the cycle:

Hagan is trying to close a relatively narrow gap between herself and incumbent Sen. Elizabeth Dole. Polling was tight prior to Dole's June ad blitz, and has seemed to trend slightly up for Hagan in recent weeks as she herself has hit the airwaves. Another positive bio ad such as this one should help the state Senator improve her statewide profile as the general election heats up.

CO-Sen: The DSCC can't get enough of "big oil" ads, it seems. Here's their latest, against Colorado Senate candidate Bob Schaffer:

Meanwhile, the infamous Freedom's Watch is taking to the airwaves themselves, attacking Schaffer's Democratic opponent, Rep. Mark Udall.

Freedom’s Watch, a conservative advocacy group, launched ads Tuesday in Colorado hitting the Democratic Senate nominee, Rep. Mark Udall, for missing a key vote last month on energy policy to attend a fundraiser back home.

The 30-second ad, with amusing graphics and whimsical music, shows gasoline prices rising as a narrator refers to the Congressman as "Skip Udall."

Tim Pearson, deputy communications director for Freedom’s Watch, said the ad buy was "substantial," though he declined to provide specifics. It is airing in the Denver, Colorado Springs and Grand Junction media markets.

The IE buys are only going to get bigger and more frequent over the next few months, on both sides.

AK-Sen: Guess what! Ted Stevens thinks he's above the law!

In this case, he's apparently above the laws he himself helped to pass:

In 1989, Congress amended the Ethics In Government Act of 1978 to require members of Congress to file financial disclosure reports including income and honoraria exceeding $200. The bill gave the Attorney General the authority to take action against anyone who falsifies the financial disclosure report. Stevens joined the rest of the Senate in a voice vote in favor of the legislation.

Either he's forgotten about this law he supported...or he just doesn't care, now that it's applied to him. As he is trying to get his case thrown out of court:

Last week, lawyers for Senator Ted Stevens filed several motions asserting that Senators are above the law and deserve special treatment. Specifically, the defense explained that since the Department of Justice is part of the executive branch, they cannot investigate Stevens or interview his staff since they are part of the legislative branch. Stevens’ attorneys went as far to say that only Congress can discipline a Senator who violates the law by lying on the financial disclosure forms. However, Stevens voted for the legislation which established the financial disclosure forms. In essence, Stevens’ defense is that legislation he supported is now unconstitutional, and therefore the case should be dismissed.

This is not altogether surprising really. If Stevens had any respect for the rule of law, he wouldn't be in this nasty situation to begin with.

ME-Sen: Down East has a new article on the state of the Maine Senate race. In general, it's a sober analysis of what looks to be a pretty tough, though viable, race for Democratic Rep. Tom Allen, who faces off against incumbent Sen. Susan Collins.

Allen starts at a disadvantage in name recognition, polling and money (though the DSCC has committed a great deal of money to this race, which should even the financial playing field somewhat). That said, Allen is quoted one major advantage: his ground game.

The grassroots is the only area where Allen has an undisputed edge in this race. The Democratic Party has 29 offices open across the state, with more opening every week, and has a dedicated and energized volunteer base, due in part to the excitement caused by Barack Obama's presidential campaign. The Republican Party has just four offices and many fewer volunteers.

The Democrats are working on registering thousands of new voters and making sure they get to the polls, an effort that could shift the political landscape in the Senate race. However, with less competitive races in Maine for president and for the other congressional seats, which democrats will likely win, Maine's ticket-splitting voters may choose to make Collins the one Republican they support. In the latest poll, 29% of Democratic voters abandoned Allen.

It's likely that there will be at least a decent number of ticket splitters this fall in Maine, but

House Races

FL-24: Republican Rep. Tom Feeney must be awfully nervous about his electoral prospects against former Democratic state Rep. Suzanne Kosmas.

Because Feeney has paid for robocalls across the district in support of Kosmas' primary opponent, fellow Democrat and 2006 loser Clint Curtis.

The third-term lawmaker from Oviedo -– who defeated Curtis in 2006 -– has paid for "tens of thousands" of robo-calls to Democratic voters on behalf of Curtis, who is running again for the House District 24 seat, this time as an underdog in the Democratic primary against former state lawmaker Suzanne Kosmas.

In calls to Central Florida residents, a volunteer for the Feeney campaign lauds Curtis and calls him the "only Democrat taking on Tom Feeney that has consistently opposed the war in Iraq." At the end of the call, the female volunteer said the calls were "paid for by Tom Feeney for Congress."

This isn't the first time that Feeney has tried to help a challenger. In a release sent a few weeks ago, Feeney touted independent candidate Gaurav Bhola as "the only candidate talking sense" at a candidate debate that Feeney never attended.

A clip of the robo call was provided by the Kosmas campaign. Paul Dunn, her campaign manager, called it one of Feeney’s "dirty tricks" and said it was proof that Feeney fears Kosmas, who has more money on hand than the incumbent.

Yes, I think it's safe to say that Feeney's running scared. Given that he's mucking about in Democratic primaries, you know.

Fortunately, given Curtis' bankroll of $7,000, it's highly unlikely Feeney will get his wish.

TX-07: Democrat Michael Skelly's newest ad:

OH-02: Daredevil Jean Schmidt's latest scandal: she and her sisters own a multi-million dollar property in Cincinnati, via their late father's real estate company, on which they pay all of $95 per year in property taxes.

For how come? Because they grow a few thousand dollars' worth of soybeans on the property. The property isn't primarily used as farmland...but naming it as such saves them a boatload, it seems:

The Schmidt campaign vehemently denies any wrongdoing (they do pretty much everything vehemently, in fact), and legally, they're almost certainly covered. Still, as the video notes, it sure doesn't look good.

NY-26: Finally, the first ad from Orange to Blue candidate Jon Powers:

And not a moment too soon for Wyoming voters who have been subjected to one damned ugly Republican battle. There are four names on the Republican primary ballot today, but the battle is between just two of them: Mark Gordon, a rancher and businessman, and Cynthia Lummis, former state representative and state treasurer.

The going got ugly in the race months ago, when an anonymous flier started circulating around the state that detailed Gordon's past contributions to Democratic candidates and his past membership on the board of the Sierra Club. A follow up flier released by the Lummis campaign echoes the charge.

Lummis' flier notes Gordon was a board member of the Sierra Club and describes the group as a "left-wing environmental organization" that opposed a coal-fired power plant in the Gillette area.

"As a member of the Sierra Club board, Mark Gordon helped them! Just what kind of Republican is he?" read the Lummis flier.

Not to be outdone, Gordon has gone on tv with his own nasty ad.

"When you find yourself in a hole, you stop digging," says the voice over the image of the digging girl, whose blond hair resembles Lummis'. "Career politicians like Cynthia Lummis just don't get it. She voted to increase taxes on gasoline, supported raising taxes to balance the state budget and opposed tax relief for veterans.

"Cynthia Lummis will dig a deeper hole, not get us out of the one we're already in."

Meanwhile, on the Democratic side, Orange to Blue candidate Gary Trauner is unopposed, and he's kept up his grassroots, retail campaign. He's just completed a state-wide trip, having gone to all 23 county fairs. He's likely to see some dividend from this very ugly Republican battle.

Oliver Walter, Arts and Sciences dean at the University of Wyoming and a political science professor, said the ultimate beneficiary of the negative Republican campaigning might be neither Gordon nor Lummis, but Gary Trauner.

"The more contention, the greater chance he has," Walter said Tuesday.

Professor Walter isn't the only one who thinks so. The editorial board of the Casper Star-Tribune seems to be really wanting to root for the Republicans in November, but can't help saying

At a time when the economy is in a downturn, the country still doesn't have a national energy policy, and we're mired in a war in Iraq, aren't there more relevant issues to discuss?....

[W]e'd like to remind both candidates that it's their party's nomination they're seeking, and Republicans already have their work cut out for them in the general election. Democrat Gary Trauner, who lost to incumbent Rep. Barbara Cubin by only about 1,000 votes in 2006, doesn't face any opposition in this year's primary. He's effectively been running for the office for four years, and he has built a solid campaign network.

Trauner also has an advantage over his eventual GOP opponent: He'll be a member of the majority party in the House. A freshman in the minority party won't be operating from a position of strength.

Gary has a lot of advantages over his eventual GOP opponent. Whether it's Gordon or Lummis (or maybe one of two the dark horses on the ballot who benefit from the Lummis/Gordon death spiral) Trauner faces in November, he's got a strong grassroots army and the fundraising to show for it.

Gary Trauner, Democratic candidate for U.S. House, has raised more than $1 million so far in the election cycle and will carry more than $660,000 into the general election.... Trauner said the totals show his message is resonating with Wyoming voters.

"The grassroots is excited about my race," he said. "We have orders of magnitude more Wyoming contributors than the entire other side combined, so clearly people believe in what we are trying to do."...

Republican candidate Cynthia Lummis infused her campaign with an additional $50,000 in personal funds Aug. 4, after filing her pre-primary campaign finance report. Lummis detailed the donation in an addendum to that report. Lummis raised about $110,000 in the last month, including her own contributions, and about $480,000 for the election cycle. She carries about $220,000 into the final week of the race for the Republican nomination....

Republican Mark Gordon of Buffalo kicked an additional $60,000 into his campaign Wednesday, according to an addendum filed with the Federal Election Commission, bringing his total contributions to his campaign to almost $1.1 million. Gordon has raised about $1.2 million and is carrying a little less than $200,000 into the final week of the primary....

Actually, that "raised" figure for Gordon should be clarified--he has self-funded to the tune of more than $1 million in this primary, and Lummis about $67K. So if you can judge enthusiasm in Wyoming by where the people are putting their money, Trauner is in good shape for November. That, combined with the baseline poll Research 2000 conducted in May, means that Dick Cheney's old seat could most definitely be in danger of turning Blue.

• Bill Donahue has quite the racket -- he creates an organization with the name "Catholic" on it without any sanction from the Vatican, then he claims to speak for all Catholics. And the media gives him attention! But sometimes, he overextends himself.
• Okay, I admit it. I had to read this twice before I got the joke. And then, I laughed and laughed and laughed.
• AK-Sen: Ted Stevens' new defense: he's above the law. I wonder how a judge will treat that claim.
• Everyone has veep scoops! Too bad none of the names match. We've got Kaine, Biden, Sebelius, Reed, Dodd and Daschle.
• Gore will speak Thursday at the convention, at Invesco Field.
• What? You mean he doesn't play Dungeons and Dragons?
• Whatever happened to the party of personal responsibility? With conservatives, it's always someone else's fault.
• Amazon versus traditional book sellers. Writing a book gives you a peek into this industry, and it's a crazy, crazy one. More here. And how about this for being f'd up?

  One smart publisher seems to have devised a way of easing the pain for the millionaire bestseller writer. They have posted an advert on the listing site, Craig's List, inviting a team of part-time workers to fake the signatures and get paid in cash for the privilege.

  The advert says it is looking for 14 people who can do a blitz of false autograph signing on behalf of two unnamed co-authors of a newly released, and equally anonymous, book. "You will need to be able to copy the look and style of both author's signatures," it says.

• So is McCain picking Portman as his veep?

  If it’s true that the venue for this announcement will be Ohio, that in and of itself could be telling. Former Ohio Rep. Rob Portman has often been mentioned in conjunction with McCain’s short list and he would, perhaps, make Ohio a little more competitive for McCain than it’s already going to be. Portman also represented Ohio’s second congressional district — the second most Republican district in Ohio — which is not that far from Dayton. Moreover, the fact that we received the news about McCain’s announcement from the chairman of the Hamilton County Republican Party rather than the Montgomery County Republican Party is very telling; Dayton is in Montgomery County, but Rob Portman is in Hamilton County.

  McCain is hoping to steal some of Obama's convention-related glow with his veep announcement a week from Friday. If he picks a no-name like Portman, that strategy won't be half as effective. I'm certainly rooting for Portman, Bush's choice for McCain's veep:

  Choosing Portman will mean that John McCain has accepted that he is running for President Bush’s third term. Robert Novak reported in February that Portman’s name was floated as running mate material by the Bush political team, effectively making him Bush’s choice of running mate. Portman is irrevocably tied to President Bush’s massive deficit and to the fiasco that has been "free trade" under the Bush administration. A look at Portman’s On the Issues profile demonstrates that he has been in lockstep not merely with the Republican Party in general, but with the Bush administration specifically. (See, for example, his positions on illegal immigration, out of step with most Republicans but perfectly in sync with Bush).

• Cafferty (CNN) on McCain:

  He will leave office with the country $10 trillion in debt, fighting two wars, our international reputation in shambles, our government cloaked in secrecy and suspicion that his entire presidency has been a litany of broken laws and promises, our citizens' faith in our own country ripped to shreds. Yet Bush goes bumbling along, grinning and spewing moronic one-liners, as though nobody understands what a colossal failure he has been.

  I fear to the depth of my being that John McCain is just like him.

  (DemFromCT)

• Jonathan Cohn at TNR writes about the Democratic platform on health care... and its implications for an Obama Presidency.

  Most striking of all, perhaps, is the sheer amount of attention--and apparent priority--health care gets in the platform. Health care is the first policy issue the document takes up in depth. No other platform in recent memory dealt with health care so prominently--or in such detail. Even in 1992, the last
  year in which a Democratic nominee seriously proposed universal coverage, the platform relegated health care to lesser status: It appeared ninth in a long list of measures to improve economic security. Priorities like deficit reduction, public investment, and agriculture all came before it.

  (DemFromCT)

A couple of reviews today.

Jonathan Singer:

In the 288 highly readable and very engaging pages of Taking on the System, which is released tomorrow, Markos lays out his eight rules for achieving progressive change within today's digital world. Far from just being a book for a bloggers, about bloggers, by a blogger, this is a book that is relevant far beyond the Netroots, or even the expressly political realm. It is a book that folks who don't spend hours a day on sites like MyDD or Talking Points Memo or Daily Kos can read, understand and thoroughly enjoy. Markos goes to great lengths to relate developments within society -- for instance the new open source ways in which new albums are reaching consumers, overturning some of the notions of unchecked and uncheckable powers of the gatekeepers in the music industry -- to changes within the political system that likewise have the capacity to make the country more democratic.

And then there's pastordan, who originally decided he hated the book before realizing that, well, maybe it wasn't a total mess of a disaster of a calamity.

I've had all of these concerns kicking around in my head over the past week or two as I tried to figure out how to write a critical but basically polite review. Markos has been a very ally, and Taking On The System isn't a bad book.

It wasn't until Rod Parsley's shop went after me that I really got it, though. Because the moment I tried to figure out how to respond to his bullying, I reached for Taking On The System to help me devise a strategy.

That's when the lightbulb went on. Markos didn't write a book on political science; he wrote a damn cookbook. And you don't look to a cookbook for theory. You look to it for recipes.

Taking On The System provides exactly that: recipes for winning political strategies. To push the metaphor just a little too far, the stories Markos sprinkles throughout the book are like illustrations of the many savory - and some sour - tastes to be created in his virtual kitchen.

Book is officially out tomorrow. Exciting!

Update: A reminder for Bay Area readers:

Netroots Nation San Francisco
Join us to celebrate the release of Markos Moulitsas' new book:
Taking on the System: Rules for Radical Change in a Digital Era

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 20, 7–9 P.M.
HOUSE OF SHIELDS
39 NEW MONTGOMERY STREET
SAN FRANCISCO

Liberal eats+drinks. Stimulating conversation. Progressive camaraderie.

TICKETS
$40 general, $125 host committee*
RSVP at nnsf08.eventbrite.com

I'm not going to link it directly, but via Boing Boing, one Michael Goldfarb is making the case that progressives who read Daily Kos are like tweeners playing Dungeons & Dragons in mom's basement. Now, the knee jerk reaction here would be to state "But I'm not playing D & D in my mother's basement!" But you know what? I'm not going to play that role and I'm not going to be nice.

Mr. Goldfarb was one of the original PNAC boys, the lovable neoconservative guys and gals who dreamed up and then whined for an invasion of Iraq starting in the late 1990s, claiming it would be decisive, quick, cheap, and easy. If that sounds familiar, it's because these are the very same opportunistic assholes who used a bogus WMD threat to stampede a spooked nation into their cherished war on Iraq in the traumatic aftermath of 9-11. When the wheels fell off their experiment and it ground to a brutal halt on the streets of reality, true to neocon form, they scattered and ran hitherto, pointing fingers at the CIA, the Democrats, blaming anyone and everyone else for their giant, massive, bloody Baghdad fuck-up, once it became clear what a colossal fuck up it was.

Mr. Goldfarb, please accept this with all the venom and hostility you can conceive of: D & D players don't scare me. They hang out quietly in dorm rooms and apartments playing their RP game hurting no one. You and your friends at PNAC on the other hand stand guilty of practicing gross fatal global negligence to a degree so grotesque I would not have thought it possible in this modern nation. You and your friends started a war you cannot finish, now you blame it on those who warned against it, you did this at a cost to date of over four thousand US soldiers' lives and growing every week, tens of thousands wounded, a hundred thousand or more dead, innocent Iraqi civilians¹; all bought and paid for by almost one-trillion US tax dollars. You started this bloody cluster-fuck against the wrong nation and, in the process, helped allow the masterminds of 9-11 get away scot free.

Mr. Goldfarb, Mission Accomplished, sir.

Better to play D & D well as an adolescent, than play a shitty game of Risk as an adult. Yes, you played Risk, Mr. Goldfarb, only you played with real blood and guts, just not of course, your own. You played Risk, Mr. Goldfarb, you mendacious twit, and you play it poorly, and you have lost. May whatever deity you worship have mercy on what's left of your rotten soul.

First it was Speaker Pelosi:

Reversing course, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is planning energy legislation that may allow oil and gas drilling in new areas off the U. S. coast, according to a House Democratic leadership aide.

Now it's Mark Udall:

If any doubt remained that the debate over energy has shifted in Republicans’ favor, Rep. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) ended it this week.

Udall, one of the House’s preeminent environmentalists and the Democratic nominee in a closely contested Colorado Senate race, came out in favor of a bipartisan, comprehensive energy plan that would permit additional offshore drilling — a striking departure from his past opposition to such measures.

And it's probably not just Udall. To tell you the truth, I didn't even look to see who else might be doing the same thing. Because even if it is just Udall for the moment, it won't be just Udall for long.

Why not? What's behind the opening of the floodgates?

Meteor Blades told you last week:

Republicans have an ace up their sleeve. The ban on additional off-shore leases must be renewed each year by September 30. The extension is attached as a rider to the annual appropriations bill. Senator DeMint says 36 of the 49 Republican senators have signed a letter to Senate leaders opposing a renewal of the ban. Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling is said to have gotten 136 House Republicans to sign a similar letter.

CongressDaily [now linkable] reports:

"Many people aren't aware that these bans on drilling must be renewed every year, and that all we have to do is to allow these prohibitions to expire on Oct. 1," DeMint said in a statement released Tuesday.

"In just 50 days, Americans will have the freedom to pursue their own energy resources here at home," he added. DeMint argued that it was "irrational to say 'no' to American energy" because it was needed to reduce independence on foreign oil and bring down gas prices.

That's the game, right there. The floodgates will open because they have to open. There's no way on God's green earth to find veto-proof majorities to re-up that ban, and no bill George W. Bush won't veto to stop it. Not a defense bill. Not a continuing resolution to keep the government running. Not a National Motherhood and Apple Pie Day bill. Nothing.

So it's either flip now and do what you can to save face, or stick it out to the bitter end and lose.

We know how these things go, by now.

Visiting the other guy's home field, and holding his own, Obama was feisty today at the VFW in Orlando, FL. And like the Olympics obscuring the appearance at Saddleback, Tropical Storm Fay will distract a bit from Obama's remarks. From First Read:

Before McCain’s oil rig visit, Obama addresses the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Orlando, FL -- a day after McCain told the group about Obama’s "ambition to be president" and declared that "both candidates in this election pledge to end this war and bring our troops home. The great difference is that I intend to win it first." Per the campaign, Obama "will discuss his veterans policies and his commitment to continuing support for America’s service men and women after their deployments have ended." (Of course, whether Floridians will notice Obama in the state due to preparations for Fay is another story.) After that, he embarks on a two-and-a-half day economic bus tour through North Carolina and then Virginia.

But more importantly, the vet vote is the same as in 2004, and Gallup notes that the demographic of old white men is singularly skewed GOP.

McCain clearly holds an advantage over Obama among veterans, but that is probably due more to the fact that veterans tend to be Republicans than to the fact that McCain himself served in the military and is regarded by some as a war hero. Veterans showed similarly strong support for Bush in the 2004 presidential election. The data suggest there still is an effect of military service on candidate preference, but it is rather small and is overwhelmed by the effects of party affiliation.

Once again, Obama's task is not to 'win' over a GOP-oriented audience but to show up and be credible. That, he did. And that he keeps going to unfriendly audiences and holding his own is great news for when he actually has to be President of everyone.

In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, I warned that war would fan the flames of extremism in the Middle East, create new centers of terrorism, and tie us down in a costly and open-ended occupation. Senator McCain predicted that we’d be greeted as liberators, and that the Iraqis would bear the cost of rebuilding through their bountiful oil revenues. For the good of our country, I wish he had been right, and I had been wrong. But that’s not what history shows.

Senator McCain now argues that despite these costly strategic errors, his judgment has been vindicated due to the results of the surge...

But understand what the essential argument was about. Before the surge, I argued that the long-term solution in Iraq is political – the Iraqi government must reconcile its differences and take responsibility for its future. That holds true today. We have lost over a thousand American lives and spent hundreds of billions of dollars since the surge began, but Iraq’s leaders still haven’t made hard compromises or substantial investments in rebuilding their country. Our military is badly overstretched – a fact that has surely been noted in capitals around the world. And while we pay a heavy price in Iraq – and Americans pay record prices at the pump – Iraq’s government is sitting on a $79 billion dollar budget surplus from windfall oil profits.

In the end, all these speeches and appearances have less to do with how people vote than party affiliation. As long as there are more Dems than Rs, Obama will do all right for himself, regardless of how these pre-season maneuverings go. But removing the caricature drawn by his opponent by showing up and addressing and engaging the audience is always a plus, and looking to see who gets more applause misses the point entirely.

In the really green part of Oregon, Gordon Smith has a long tradition of presenting himself as the moderate, anti-drilling, good guy. In fact, one of his infamous ads in which he tries to pretend he's been endorsed by Obama, trumpets

"Who says Gordon Smith helped lead the fight for better gas mileage and a cleaner environment? Barack Obama!"

Clean environment? Tell that to the Oregon Department of Environmental Equality, not to mention the folks in Weston, OR.

For the second time in about a year, wastewater from the frozen-foods plant owned and operated in Eastern Oregon by the family of U.S. Sen Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) overflowed into a nearby creek in violation of state environmental regulations....

Smith Frozen Foods has a long history of wastewater violations.... According to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, an employee of Smith Frozen Foods contacted the state agency on July 29 (while the plant was processing corn) to report an overflow from the company's wastewater lagoon that "resulted in a milky discharge to Pine Creek."

...[T]he incident is considered a serious "Class 1" violation, meaning it "can harm aquatic life, contaminate drinking waters, and impair recreational, commercial and agricultural uses of water."...

On July 30, 2007, at the height of last year's corn season, Smith Frozen Foods had a similar violation. That violation resulted in a $3,000 fine — a small sum compared with the $25,000 DEQ fine in 1992 for another infraction. Between those two events, Smith Frozen Foods has been cited or fined by the DEQ more than a handful times.

After one of those fines in the early 1990s, Smith received $766,000 in state and federal grants to bring his plant into compliance with environmental regs. And then he had the gall to run his first, losing campaign against Wyden on "the principles of less government and unfettered free enterprise."

The most recent spill (there have been six or seven in the past 15 years) is hardly the same scope as the massive fish kill of 2002 that Smith helped engineer with Dick Cheney and Karl Rove, an environmental and economic disaster that killed over 60,000 fish, including naturally raised Chinook and endangered Coho salmon.

But it does put the lie to Smith's claim that he's a friend to the environment. And it's one of the reasons Oregon's environmental and conservation communities are lining up behind Jeff Merkley.

Represented by Adam B, myself, Matt Stoller and Duncan Black (aka "Baby Blue Cherub"), the group of us fought (alongside some allies on the Right) to preserve our independence as a medium from federal regulators and campaign finance "reformers" who tried to stifle our free speech.

One of our arguments was that political opponents would file frivolous complaints against websites in order to try and shut them down. While there's nothing that can be done about frivolous complaints, the fact that they're getting shot down so quickly gives less incentive for similar complaints.

The agency said last week it dismissed a complaint by a Hillary Clinton supporter alleging that a pro-Barack Obama blog was actually "a direct arm" of the Obama campaign, and therefore subject to campaign finance restrictions.

In its ruling, the FEC reiterated that whatever costs are incurred by running a political blog need not be disclosed as a campaign contribution. "Political blogging is exactly the type of Internet activity that the Commission exempted from the definition of 'contribution' and 'expenditure,'" the FEC stated.

The complaint was brought last October by Clinton supporter Kirk Tofte, who alleged that the blog Iowa True Blue, operated by former Iowa Democratic Party chairman Gordon Fischer, had coordinated with Obama's campaign. Tofte alleged that Fischer endorsed Obama in September, after which he began posting critical items about Clinton.

"Gordon Fischer's Web site has ceased being just another political blog," Tofte wrote in the complaint. "Since 9/24/07 it has been one hundred percent negative against Hillary Clinton."

The FEC rejected the contention that Fischer had coordinated efforts with Obama. But the agency also held that even had he done so, it would not have triggered campaign finance restrictions.

"Any coordination would have been permissible ... because the activity was specifically exempted from the definition of 'public communication,'" the FEC stated.

The author of this piece at Online Media Daily adds this line:

Still, the new rules have left room for argument.

Actually, the new rules are so crystal clear, there is zero room for argument. They are so clear, in fact, that the FEC shot down a similar complaint filed against Daily Kos last year in a shockingly fast one week from the date they received our filing (see our filing here (PDF), and the decision here (PDF)).

Anyone who knows how adjudication agencies work in the federal government can tell you that a one-week decision can only take place because there was absolutely no gray area in the new rules. They are about as crystal clear as is ever possible in the law. The fact that wankers file bullshit complaints doesn't point to uncertainty in the regulations, it just proves that wankers roam the earth.

They sure have to do a lot of clarifying in the McCain campaign, don't they?

McCain set off a firestorm last week when he suggested that the 86 year old agreement that allocates the scarce resource of the Colorado River among the seven states of the Colorado Basin "obviously needs to be renegotiated" because of "new realities of high growth, of greater demands on a scarcer resource," he didn't mean it should, you know, be renegotiated, really, to make sure that the high growth states of California, Nevada, and Arizona got more of that scarce resource. But that's sure how it sounded to the people of Colorado.

So here comes the McCain campaign with what he "really" meant:

Tom Kise, the McCain campaign's Colorado spokesman, said McCain was not proposing that the 2007 agreement be reopened or any immediate talks on the compact.

"He's talking about ongoing conversations, conversations that happen this year, next year, 10, 20, 30 years down the road," Kise said.

Kise said McCain knows global warming is changing water conditions in the West, and that means the states need to talk. "As long as water is going to be an issue in the West, there should be an open conversation among all parties," Kise said.

Ah, so the states need to talk, that's all he was saying. Only problem is: they have been.

Considering he's a Senator from one of those seven states in the compact, you think he'd have somewhat of a better grasp of the actual policy making on the issue in his state. See, the seven states' governors came together last year to address current changing water conditions. In fact, they came up with an agreement:

The agreement was signed April 23 in Las Vegas by representatives of the Colorado River basin states of Colorado, Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. The agreement proposes reducing deliveries of Colorado River water to Arizona and Nevada when storage in Lake Mead drops below certain set levels, thus reducing the risk of shortages in Colorado. The agreement would reduce the risk of shortages in the lower Colorado River by coordinating Hoover and Glen Canyon dam operations. The agreement also proposes a system for storing in Lake Mead water saved through conservation efforts or the development of new water sources.

In addition to resolving current Colorado River disputes, the agreement reduces the likelihood of future litigation among the seven Colorado River basin states by encouraging cooperation and consultation between the states. "Litigation pitting state against state over the Colorado River would cost taxpayers millions, and the likely result would not please anyone," said Colorado Attorney General John Suthers. "Thanks to the hard work of the parties involved, we can now work with - not against - other states to resolve our water disputes."

Into the middle of all this stumbles McCain, ignoring--or completely ignorant of--the fact that the seven governors (including California's, Nevada's, and Arizona's) decided that those states needed to work on how to find some of their own water, ignoring the fact that this was a complex and difficult set of negotiations.

Between this and his long support of using Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste dump, McCain's shown that he's pretty much completely out of touch with what is going on in the West. He's just not much of a westerner anymore.

Netroots Nation San Francisco
Join us to celebrate the release of Markos Moulitsas' new book: Taking on the System: Rules for Radical Change in a Digital Era

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 20, 7–9 P.M.
HOUSE OF SHIELDS
39 NEW MONTGOMERY STREET
SAN FRANCISCO

Liberal eats+drinks. Stimulating conversation. Progressive camaraderie.

TICKETS
$40 general, $125 host committee*
RSVP at nnsf08.eventbrite.com

The book hits virtual and meatspace bookstands tomorrow, Wednesday. It's been six months since I delivered the book. It'll be nice to finally see it in circulation. It's a good one. I'm quite proud of it. Pick it up when you get the chance and then let us all know here at dKos what you think of it.

Your one stop pundit shop.

David Brooks sadly explains that John McCain doesn't really want to run a campaign based on vicious lies and  accusations of treason, really he doesn't. But what choice does he have when he's battling both the media and the system?

Richard Cohen wonders:

...who among us is willing to fight to bring South Ossetia back into the Georgian fold?

Eugene Robinson says that, in the wake of China's spectacular Olympics and Russia's invasion of Georgia, Barack Obama and John McCain need to acknowledge that:

Our future is being decided not just in Washington but in Beijing and Moscow -- and in Riyadh, Islamabad, New Delhi, Dubai, Caracas, Abuja, Brasilia. . . .

We still have the wherewithal to lead. But we're deluding ourselves if we believe we won't have to adapt to the new reality.

Bob Herbert laughs at the idea of John McCain or any Republican invoking the name of Teddy Roosevelt.

John Boehner says that:

The House Republicans' unprecedented nationwide gas-prices protest is now in its third full week. My Republican colleagues and I have vowed to continue the historic uprising - in Washington and in communities across the country - until the House returns to session for a vote on the American Energy Act...

And America should feel lucky that Boehner was able to take time from his busy golf schedule to write his stinging op-ed.

Frank J. Gaffney Jr. thinks that Barack Obama is making a big mistake in his campaign to prove he's not a Muslim.

Donald Lambro says that Barack Obama's inspiring words only sound good to the unthinking mind and that an Obama presidency would be bad for the economy. That would be versus another four years of George Bush's economic policies.

Derrick Z. Jackson believes that:

Holding one's breath while waiting for presidential candidates to address the gap between rich and poor is a sure way to asphyxiate.

Here it is, three days after a nationally televised honor-system "cone of silence" discussion on faith (during the Olympics), a week before the Democratic convention, and a lifetime after 2004.

The thing that strikes me is how short-sighted and shallow the "McCain won!" sentiment is. While it's true that McCain did very well Saturday, he was speaking to a receptive audience that was leaning toward him from the get-go (more on that in a moment). But McCain also made by far the two biggest gaffes of the night. He, of course, didn't arrive on time, opening him up to suspicion he cheated by listening to Obama's responses on the radio. That was totally under his control, but his chronically error-prone campaign blew that one, and now they are doing damage control.

The John McCain campaign fired off an angry letter to NBC News criticizing Andrea Mitchell's comments regarding the "cone of silence" at Saturday night's presidential candidates' forum at Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California.

And his flippant answer on how rich is rich is going to haunt him. Obama:

[McCain] was in a panel the other day with me, Rick Warren, some of you may have seen it -- and Rick Warren asked him -- how do you define rich? He said, maybe he was joking, he said, "$5 million." Obama added, "Which I guess if you're making $3 million a year, you’re middle class. But that’s reflected in his policies -- where, you know, for people making more than $2.5 million, he’s giving folks a $500,000 tax break. And so this is a fundamental difference in this election. What I've said is we're gonna give 95% of working families a tax break, but it's gonna be ordinary folks."

As far as the night went, History professor Alan Lichtman notes,

"New evangelical stars such as Bill Hybels and Rick Warren, who have built associations of many thousands of churches, are less politically active than Falwell and Robertson. They are also more open to liberal ideas about civil rights, the environment, and social justice, and less inclined to back moral crusades by government, either at home or abroad." Thus through his session with Warren and other forms of outreach, Obama has an historic opportunity to make inroads into a constituency that has been overwhelmingly Republican in recent years.

Kevin Drum pointed me to this post (Cogitamus) that put it more bluntly:

I've said before that Barna Evangelicals are unreachable, so Obama's performance doesn't matter with them.  McCain's performance was acceptable, making it easier for them to support him.  However, he didn't really say anything other than his abortion response that would excite and motivate Barna Evangelicals to get out and vote for him.

As for other Christian groups, I think Obama came out ahead because of his aforementioned ability to speak about faith in an intimate, dynamic way.  Obama talks like a Christian.  McCain talks like a politician being made to talk about Jesus.  Not a disaster, but not much help either.

From CBN's David Brody:

The fact that Barack Obama would show up at an Evangelical Church and take the tough questions is a credit to him. I mean he knew he was the visiting team so to speak yet he handled these questions like he has in the past: with relative ease [...]

Overall the night was a success for Obama. He didn’t get put on the spot too much with the abortion questions. He handled the "Jesus" question about his faith with ease and maybe most important he looked comfortable up there.

It may not matter altogether that much when it comes to the election (Obama will not win a majority vote of white evangelicals, who went 78% for Bush in 2004), but making inroads here will go a good way toward improved governance after he wins, and that, of course, is the Big Picture. Picking up a percentage or two is a smart move, and so is reinforcing his Christian faith (since 8% of voters are ill-informed enough to think he's Muslim). And there's always the "hey, he's really thoughtful. Maybe I don't hate him" factor, which will be needed for the anticipated GOP onslaught of negative advertising.

Meanwhile the tightening race (you won't see it in the unchanging tracking polls, which continue to have Obama up by a tad) takes us through to the conventions, when things can change for the first time since Clinton dropped out.

Regardless of the exact timing, the voter is going to get two vice presidential nominations, and two sequences of four nights of party conventions -- all within the time period from now through Sept. 4.

A few days after that, say about the weekend of Sept. 5-7, we'll know where things stand as a baseline and starting point for the sure-to-be-hyperactive fall campaign. Meanwhile, our Gallup Poll Daily tracking will monitor the ups and downs of the candidates as each day's new events unfold.

Pre-season's coming to an end. Obama needs to be more succinct, start throwing in better sound bites, and needs to reach the gut as well as the heart and the head. He needs to get over the C-in-C threshold, but the key to the election is the economy. And he needs to better define McCain. But, you know, these aren't great mysteries, and the campaign has done pretty well so far. So, rather than give advice to people that don't need it, I think I'll just sit back and enjoy the next two weeks. If you can't do that, you're really not a political junkie.

Don't worry. There'll be plenty more advice to be given come September and beyond. This week (maybe tomorrow) is the VP and I don't vote for VP. But in the end I suspect I'll prefer ours over theirs, whoever it is.

From the GREAT STATE OF MAINE...

Dear U.S. Mint,

I know you've been looking for ways to make the penny relevant again, and I'd like to submit this idea before the liquor wears off.

I think you should join forces with the FDA to release news of product warnings and recalls on the backs of pennies. This would not only provide a valuable public service to Americans, it would instantly turn pennies into valuable limited-edition collectibles. I can just hear the happy haggling on street corners and in soda fountains across the country:

"I'll swap you a Vioxx recall for a mad cow advisory."
"Throw in three tomato scares and I'll consider it."
"How about two tomato scares and a lead-paint-in-childrens-toys warning?"
"Denver mint or Philadelphia mint?"
"Denver."
"You’re kidding. Heck, for that I'll throw in a jalapeno-pepper ingestion alert."
"Deal!"
"By the way, you want to see something cool?"
"Sure."
"Check this out: A genuine "Matterhorn Group Inc. Announces Voluntary Recall of "Astro Pops" and "Missile Pops" 3.5 oz Cherry Pineapple Frozen Novelty Pops in Arizona, Nevada and California due to Safety Hazard" penny.
"The Holy Grail! You lucky bastard."

I offer this suggestion at no charge, out of love for the lowly coin that kept me swimming in gumballs during my youth until I discovered the crowbar.

Sincerely, Bill in Portland Maine

P.S.  Cheers and Jeers starts in There's Moreville... [Swoosh!!] RIGHTNOW! [Gong!!]

Josh Marshall says:

On the other hand, wholly separate from the cosmetics and electioneering calculus, I think he'd be a good choice. On substance, maybe a really good choice. Most senators grasp of foreign policy is fairly thin -- and it tends to be heavily influenced by whatever lobbyists or power players are in their orbit. But Biden has a pretty deep knowledge of pretty much every big foreign policy question. And his ideas and judgment strike me as fundamentally sane.

Judgment? Biden voted for the Iraq war. But beyond that, even if we stipulate that he has foreign policy chops, how does that make him a good veep choice? It strikes me that any pick designed to cover up a "flaw" in Obama (i.e. "lack of foreign policy credentials") only accentuates those flaws. Make him secretary of state.

Sure, compared to Bayh and Kaine, Biden looks almost passable, but that's a low hurdle to pass. I'd rather not have to choose my poison. I'd rather have candy.

I'm already assuming disappointment on Obama's pick, so I won't belabor one bad choice or another. But I'd love to see him pick a fresh face in politics who reinforces Obama's message of change. Biden doesn't. Clinton doesn't. Bayh certainly doesn't. If holding out for Sebelius is too much to ask for, and if Obama is going to pick a guy that has been around for decades, then pick Kerry. Or even Daschle.

But the senator from MBNA? That choice would be exciting to perhaps two audiences -- the Broderites and the credit card industry.

Tonight's Rescue Rangers are Louisiana1976, Yashua, ItsJessMe, HansScholl, BentLiberal, sunspark says, and vcmvo2 as editor.

~ There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility ~Teddy Roosevelt ~ May 2, 1903

The diaries up for rescue are:

• don mikulecky in an informative diary, tells us about the controversial Henry Charles Bukowski's life and work in Notes of a dirty old man's author's birthday yesterday. (Louisiana 1976)
• In PG&E Inks 800MW Photovoltaic Solar Deal with SunPower and OptiSolar - With Analysis, anth details this deal and its impact on renewable energy incentives. (vcmvo2)
• LibertyAndJusticeForSome muses on the incredible power of government policy to provide incentives for energy producers, and the models that this illustrates for the rest of the nation in Renewable Energy and Lessons from Colorado. (ItsJessMe)
• Black Leather Rain checks in with a timely reminder that it is not how many votes you get that win an election but how many of them that are counted in Stealing an Election during a Democratic Tsunami? Never say never. (sunspark says)
• In GOP Veepstakes, DeanDemocrat looks at the other side of the coin in thoughtfully analyzing the potential VP picks. (BentLiberal)
• The FTC has issued a detailed report on how the junk food industry is zealously marketing its stuff to kids, but Michele Simon dissects the tepid response in the politically shaped recommendations in FTC Hands Kids Over to Junk Food Marketers, Defying Global Principles. (HansScholl)
• dancewater continues her series of diaries on Rusul, the girl who was badly damaged in a US missile strike while playing outside her home in Fallujah, and is now in the U.S. receiving medical care, in A day with a war-injured child. (ItsJessMe)
• dday sees the "Cross in the Sand" story as only a tiny symptom of a much larger issue in Update on McCain Cross Story and his Pinocchio Problem - Cafferty mentions it on CNN (sunspark says)
• ytterbius brings us an extremely thorough analysis of coal and solar energy sources in Coal/Solar Cost Comparison - Final Draft. (Yashua)
• In DEADLY FOOD: Who Does the USDA Really Protect When It Comes to Deadly E. coli?; denis diderot offers a disturbing look at a loophole that omits from USDA E. coli testing the majority of the meat introduced into commerce each month. (ItsJessMe)
• aurabass writes excellent reviews and synopses of 3 of this ranger’s favorite documentaries in Depression and Rage = 3 "MUST SEE" Films. (Yashua)

jotter has High Impact diaries: August 17, 2008.

kath25 brings Top Comments: Vacation Photos Edition 8.18.08.

Enjoy and please promote your own favorite diaries in this Open Thread.

::

As veep speculations reach a fever pitch, this nugget of stupidity is flaring up all over the place:

But that experience — he was first elected to the Senate at age 29 and has served for nearly four decades — would undercut Mr. Obama’s image as an agent of change.

So, picking someone with a resume a mile long "undercuts" Obama's image, because apparently, "change" is such a delicate, porcelain concept that it shatters at the slightest hint that, gasp!, a career politician is in the midst.

The Obama camp has long argued--correctly--that "change" and "experience" are not mutually exclusive. Let's play with unicorns for a second and presume that Obama chose Al Gore as his running mate. The former vice-president's "experience" is unparalleled, and yet there would be little serious debate that Gore would shake things up policy-wise.

The idea that a hefty resume is somehow a roadblock to change is ridiculous.  Politicians do not neatly fall into Column A "experience" types and Column B "change" types. But this political taxonomy is catchy, so certain members of the press gleefully run with it.

Obama's image as a "change" candidate will not be "undercut" if he happens to pick a familiar face in politics. On one level, that image is culled from the historic nature of his candidacy. On a deeper level, it exists because the entire Obama candidacy, from the grassroots up, has been build on a foundation of change, on a need for change, and on a belief that the old politics of George Bush and John McCain are hurting the American people. That foundation is so strong (2 million supporters strong, to be exact, and millions more who volunteer or support Obama's candidacy) that it won't be cracked if and when Obama chooses an old white guy with decades of D.C. experience.