Watching the Clinton's body language on the campaign trail, I got the impression Chelsea was a lot closer to her mother than to Bill.

She's probably afraid to bring any of her friends around him.

Did anyone ever hear the "Mambo #5" song re-mixed for Bill Clinton, "Bimbo #5". It's old, but I crack up every time I hear it.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=L8saZemleN8

I plan to!

Any other shot wouldn't have been cheap. Because it was "racial", it is.

Cheap = sensitive.

I meant no offence. Sorry.

(Good job the "s" is nowhere near the "b" on a keyboard, isn't it? Imagine if somebody typo'd Barack's surname.)

Why would you vote for John McCan't?

Just to bug you.

Report: Iraqi PM backs Obama's withdrawal plan

(CNN) -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told a German magazine that he backed a proposal by presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months.

"U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months," he said in an interview with Der Spiegel that was released Saturday.

"That, we think, would be the right time frame for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes," he said.

Al-Maliki said his remarks did not indicate that he was endorsing Obama over presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain.

"Who they choose as their president is the Americans' business. But it's the business of Iraqis to say what they want. And that's where the people and the government are in general agreement: The tenure of the coalition troops in Iraq should be limited," he said.

"Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic," al-Maliki said.

The interview's publication came one day after the White House said President Bush and al-Maliki had agreed to include a "general time horizon" in talks about reducing American combat forces and transferring Iraqi security control across the country.

The Bush administration has steadfastly refused to consider a "timetable" for withdrawing troops from Iraq.

But, in a statement issued Friday, the White House said that "improving conditions" in Iraq would dictate the pace of the negotiations and not "an arbitrary date for withdrawal."

"The day is coming when American forces will step back more and more from combat roles. The day is coming when will be doing more in the way of training and less in the way of fighting," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told CNN's Wolf Blitzer Friday.

"Those goals are being achieved now, as we speak. And so, it's not at all unusual to start to think that there is a horizon out there, in the not too distant future, in which the roles and responsibilities of the U.S. forces are going to change dramatically and those of the Iraqi forces are going to become dominant," she said.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said al-Maliki had made it clear that such decisions will be based on continuing positive developments.

"It is our shared view that should the recent security gains continue, we will be able to meet our joint aspirational time horizons," he said.

"It is because of the president's bold surge strategy that we've been able to achieve the gains we're seeing today, be it security, economic or political progress."

The prime minister's remarks emerged as Obama visited Kuwait and Afghanistan before embarking on a tour of the Middle East and Europe to boost his foreign policy credentials. He also plans to visit Iraq.

The Democratic candidate says he supports a phased withdrawal of troops, promising to remove all combat brigades from Iraq within 16 months of taking office if he becomes president.

McCain does not think American troops should return to the United States until Iraqi forces are capable of maintaining a safe, democratic state.

He has been a strong advocate of the 2007 "surge" to escalate U.S. troop levels and says troops should stay in Iraq as long as needed.

McCain says Obama is wrong for opposing the increased troop presence, and Obama says McCain's judgment is flawed.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/19/almaliki.obama/index.html

This makes it more enjoyable, if this story is true claiming that the White House "accidently" sent this to the media.

TIS


White House Accidentally E-Mails to Reporters Story That Maliki Supports Obama Iraq Withdrawal Plan
July 19, 2008 1:29 PM

The White House this afternoon accidentally sent to its extensive distribution list a Reuters story headlined "Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan - magazine."

The story relayed how Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told the German magazine Der Spiegel that "he supported prospective U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months … ‘U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes,'" the prime minister said.

The White House employee had intended to send the article to an internal distribution list, ABC News' Martha Raddatz reports, but hit the wrong button.

The misfire comes at an odd time for Bush foreign policy, at a time when Obama's campaign alleges the president is moving closer toward Obama's recommendations about international relations -- sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, discussing a "general time horizon" for U.S. troop withdrawal and launching talks with Iran.


http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/07/white-house-acc.html

Oh and CNN has a story too.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

Republican strategist: "We're fucked."

This could be one of those unexpected events that forever changes the way the world perceives an issue. Iraq's Prime Minister agrees with Obama, and there's no wiggle room or fudge factor. This puts John McCain in an extremely precarious spot: what's left to argue? to argue against Maliki would be to predicate that Iraqi sovereignty at this point means nothing. Obviously, our national interests aren't equivalent to Iraq's, but... Malik isn't listening to the generals on the ground...but the "hasn't been to Iraq" line doesn't work here.

So how will the McCain campaign respond?

(Via e-mail, a prominent Republican strategist who occasionally provides advice to the McCain campaign said, simply, "We're fucked." No response yet from the McCain campaign, although here's what McCain said the last time Maliki mentioned withdrawal: "Since we are succeeding, then I am convinced, as I have said before, we can withdraw and withdraw with honor, not according to a set timetable. And I’m confident that is what Prime Minister Maliki is talking about, since he has told me that for many meetings we’'ve had."

Will Maliki retract his words?

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/07/almalikis_announcement_a_big_d.php

Today's useless random Polling...

..."One more thing, though: it's worth noting that among cell-phone-only users (i.e., people who don't have landlines at all and use cell phones exclusively), Obama beat McCain by a whopping 29 points, 61-32."

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_07/014120.php

I saw parts of Senator Obama's speech from Germany today. He was always an impressive speaker, but he's grown even more so. He's gained a certain layer of confidence and assuredness. He truly LOOKS presidential now.

I'm a little concerned that he's only 6 points ahead in the latest polls. Let's face it, he should be swamping McCain at this point. His trip to Afghanistan hasn't increased his lead whatsoever.

And in all honesty, I'm a bit concerned about the "Bradley Effect." A 6 point lead may actually be a deficit.

Meh. It's still too far from November for polls to be TOO accurate. I'm sure his numbers will go up once he starts campaigning at home, once he starts going to the people, names his VP, appears in a debate or two. It's summer. People have their minds elsewhere.

I agree that the numbers make no sense, though. How can the current administration have such a low approval rating, but the the guy who promises to continue its policies be so high in the polls?

Ditto.



Because the race isn't Obama/McCain, but "Obama or Not?" Consider that recent poll where over 60% of McCain's supporters say they support him because he's "lesser of the evils."

Which worked for Kerry in 2004, btw.

And the visual of 200,000 Germans waving American flags(!)....I guess we'll be debating in the next few days whatever this helps him or if he's running for "President of the World, not America"(as McCain campaign is already shouting)...

But you know, that whole visual scene today made me feel good, and isn't it nice to say that about a current President or possible President these days?

I find that golden, at least Obama's making the "effort" to "run" instead of just going ahead and muscling in on everyone without giving a fuck.

Plus, remember when the President was known as the leader of the Free World?

Just the fact that he's being received like Elvis everywhere shows me what I think everyone should've suspected along...no one appreciates a vicious cowboy, but diplomacy? Hey!

His slide in the polls this week are a reflection of about ten days ago when he "clarified" some of the positions he took during the primary, thus re-positioning himself toward the center. He is having trouble with the left wing of the Democratic party and the Clintons aren't being especially helpful. I remain optimistic the lefties will come to their senses by November. He should get a bump in next week's polls which will reflect his gains from this trip alog with John McCain's geezer ride with Bush Sr., and his speech in front of the cheese counter. According to the elecotral map polls he is well ahead.

I have to tell you, the visual of McCain last night was fairly amusing. In response to Obama's speech in Germany, he was interviewed outside of a German restaurant, where I believe he had just made a speech. It looked like he was campaigning at the beer garden in Epcot!

I don't believe that McCain is stupid and easily manipulated, which I do think of President Bush. I think he might even be a decent man. However, I can't even consider voting for anyone who bases their campaign on the promise that we will have more of what we've had to endure for the past 8 years.

He should have gotten the GOP nod in 2000, and he probably would have been a better President than Bush....a pity that the Rove clique's "black lovechild" nonsense killed McCain's campaign in South Carolina...

Good candidate, wrong year.

Looks like McCain now endorses Obama's plan for a 16-month Iraq withdrawal time table....

"...But now the administration’s agreement to consider a “time horizon” for troop withdrawals from Iraq has moved it, at least in the public perception, in the direction of the policies of Senator Barack Obama . That has thrown Mr. McCain on the political defensive in his opposition to a timed withdrawal, Republicans in the party’s foreign party establishment say.

On Friday Mr. McCain went so far as to say that the idea of a 16-month withdrawal, which Mr. Obama supports, was “a pretty good timetable,” although he included the caveat that it had to be based on conditions on the ground.

Republicans also say the administration’s decision to authorize high-level talks with Iran and North Korea has undercut Mr. McCain’s skepticism about engagement with those countries, leaving the perception that he is more conservative than Mr. Bush on the issue.

Essentially, as the administration has taken a more pragmatic approach to foreign policy, the decision of Mr. McCain to adhere to his more hawkish positions illustrates the continuing influence of neoconservatives on his thinking even as they are losing clout within the administration.
"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25856677

Wow, I guess there is a bounce from the trip. 9 point lead for Obama in the latest Gallup poll.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/

Frankly these polls are giving me a headache. Gallup in one poll has McCain up 2 poits and in another has Obama up nine.
Maybe they just wat to keep us in suspense. In reality this thing won't come into focus until after the conventions when people other than political junkies start paying attention.

Also I do not understand why they give us these polls the way they do. It doesn't really matter if it is 50% each. What matters is the electoral map, and who is ahead in which states, and by how much. For some reason the media keeps this from us until election night.

Sometimes you can tell what the internal polls are showing. For instance allegedly Florida is more in play than the Dems had first thought and Obama is puttig some heavy money here, opening offices overywhere. If this continues then Flrida is in play. If suddenly in mid October he starts closing those office and opens others in Ohio and New Mexico we know what his polls are telling him. If these people on cable would stop yelling at each other and using McCain and Obama surrogates to make up total lies about the candidates, perhaps we could get a more intelligent analysis of what is really going on.

The poll number can differ depending on a survey of registered voters or likely voters.

But at this time Obama is ahead with over 200 electoral votes.

Which poll?

Any election poll.

Hillary Clinton agrees to Denver keynote: Sign she's not running mate

BY DAVID SALTONSTALL
DAILY NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT

Wednesday, July 30th 2008, 9:52 AM

Hillary Clinton has agreed to speak on Day 2 of the Democratic convention to commemorate the 88th anniversary of women's right to vote - a move seen by delegates as another sign she won't be on Barack Obama's ticket, the Daily News learned.

A top Obama aide told party leaders in a conference call last night that Clinton has accepted the offer to be the featured prime-time Tuesday night speaker, a high-profile slot that some of Clinton's own people have floated in recent days.

Aug. 26 is the anniversary of the ratification of the 19th Amendment, which granted women the right to vote in 1920.

That historical tidbit was shared by Obama aide Jennifer Koch, one of Obama's deputy political directors for the Northeast, in a conference call last night night with a group of Massachusetts delegates, among them DNC Rules Committee co-chair James Roosevelt.

Koch added that Obama's vice presidential nominee - whomever that turns out to be - will likely speak Monday and Wednesday evening as part of the traditional build-up to Obama accepting the nomination on Thursday night.

Some of those on the conference call concluded Clinton was not under serious consideration for vice president, and would instead be filling a more limited - albeit historically charged - role at the Denver convention.

"She said Hillary Clinton has accepted the role of speaking on the passage of the 19th Amendment," said Gus Bickford, a DNC member and superdelegate from Massachusetts who was on the call. "It really does send the signal that Hillary will not be the vice president."

Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, had no immediate comment on when or in what context Clinton might be addressing the convention, in keeping with a general policy on the planned Denver pow-wow. "We are not talking about any convention decisions," he told The News.

The jockeying comes as Obama and his team are said to be seriously vetting several potential vice-presidential picks, among them Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia and Sens. Joe Biden of Delaware and Evan Bayh of Indiana. All three men have been placed under the political microscope by Obama aides in a way that Clinton has not, insiders say.

Giving Clinton a prominent, prime-time speaking role - on a topic freighted with significance for Clinton, the first woman to almost win a presidential nomination - is a fitting consolation prize that should help to heal remaining tensions within the party, some said.

"For me, Barack Obama is the nominee and we all have to get together, because this is not going to be an easy election," said Bickford, a longtime Clinton supporter. "Having her be the keynote on one night is enough for me."

I think it's going to be Governor Kaine of Virginia. Along with Senator Robb, that choice will help deliver Virginia for Obama.