I think this is interesting: New Yorker Editor David Remnick's thoughts on the cover.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politic s/2008/07/14/tsr.remnick.newyorker.cnn?i ref=videosearch

We're a free society, still, sort of. The NY'er is a very pro-Obama magazine, the NY'er is a very liberal magazine, and breaks anti-Bush stories that no one else does, with Seymour Hirsch...  As a subscriber I'd say: Let's get a grip.

Honestly, I was offended when I first saw it, but then I realized that those who will take it seriously wouldn't vote for Obama anyway--probably half the country. But it does battle those for whom there is a subconscious narrative of the Obamas as dangerous and anti-American. I think this cover will do more good than harm, ultimately.

Dear Nancy,

You'll note that Karl Rove didn't show up at the Senate today. And I'll wait and see, but I imagine that the  Senate's reaction will be like yours in the House vis a vis impeachment. The maybe true/maybe false belief: The more the GOP is seen as breaking the law with impunity, the more people will vote for Dems

Here's the problem with that philosophy which, while it doesn't separate us from the apes, surely separates you and your colleagues from any claim to greatness: If George and Karl and the others can break law as they have and our side does nothing--and yes, the GOP has made a mockery of the law time and again--do you know what is going to happen when Obama's president?

If he stubs his toe one day in the White House, we'll hear loud and consistent calls for his impeachment.

This new McCain ad is very powerful and therefore very scary.

Opposition research:

qo

They're trying to make this a culture war election as they successfully have many times before (68, 72, 80, 84, 88, 00, 04). At this point, I'm more for Obama than many of the Kool Aid kidz, as I see all of his FISA, campaign finance reneg, etc., as the old politics Obama's been successfully playing all along. I always felt 'politics is politics,' and I took the "I'll change the culture of Washington" with a grain of salt, so Obama's current moves don't dampen my wish for a Democratic president.

But I'm struck by the irony of how all of the 'change we can believe in' and 'yes we can' worked on [a minority of] Dems but he'll need more than that to beat McCain nationally. Unfortunately.

I think he'll win, but it's going to be close.

I can't get over the irony of this. I was a diehard Hillary supporter, now a Barack supporter. But it seems that using the language of "new politics," Barack old politic'd himself into the nomination. In other words, he "out-old-politic'd" our girl, and he did it fair and square.

Kind of funny to me. I was blogging nonstop during the primaries how there's no such thing as new politics, and I took a lot of heat for it at orange Big Brother. And during that time the progressives were taken in with all the Yes We Can. That's funny.

But the truth is that Barack's tacking to the center makes me respect him more, not less. (I'm a moderate). And Barack wanting to win more than some b.s. idea of being a noble candidate (translate: noble loser, see: Stevenson, Humphrey, Mondale, Dukakis, [Gore], Kerry) makes me respect him more, not less. And knowing that he knows that new politics was a tool, and is obviously tough enough to win makes me respect him more, not less.

I like him and think he's a noble guy of integrity, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying you've got to hand it to him, as master a politician as Bill Clinton ever was: to have cast Hillary as "old politics," when that very casting was a shrewd "old politics" move by Obama.

What a world!

As some of you may know, I was the strongest Clinton supporter. I wore myself out fighting for her at the orange Big Brother. I think anyone who follows names around here knows that I was almost violently anti-Obama.

So here's what I want to say to you, Hillary-loving brothers and sisters. GET A GRIP.

This is not about the strong fabulous white woman or the cool smart black guy. This is about one thing only. THE PLATFORM. Health care. Iraq. Iran, Taxes, etc.

No one's perfect. Maybe Barack is 60% perfect. But wouldn't you like 60% of health care rather than McCain's 0, 60% of out of Iraq and not-in-Iran, rather than McCain's?

I love you all for the cause, but please remember that this is about the quality of life. Not personalities. Hillary will have her day. She's made a strong impression. Trust that, and root for America, please.

There's an old joke (was it WC Fields?) of a contest, in which the first prize was a week in Philadelphia, and second prize was two weeks in Philadelphia. (No offense to Philadelphia. The joke is decades old and doesn't represent the city now)

Move On has a new ad that tries to be anti-McCain and anti-Iraq. It  shows a young mother with her little baby who says to McCain, "You can't have my little Alex for your war." As someone who has connections to the military, I can tell you that an ad like this may appeal to the already-converted in our party, the extreme left, but will alienate the soldiers who are open to the Democratic party for the first time in years. In other words, if your party is offering benefits to vets that the GOP isn't, but at the same time we're insulting military service through a dumb, emotionally-provocative ad (as they see it), which aspects wins? Sometimes one, sometimes the other.

I'm for Obama. I will wake up early on November 4th and vote. I will stay up late waiting to see him declared the winner. Why? Because 'it's about the Democratic agenda, stupid,' and I like him.

One other thing. As much as I'm rooting for Obama, and I love the new ad, I will contribute $0.00 to Obama and $0.00 to the DNC unless she's VP. That's just my personal preference, which I have every right to.

That said, he has my vote no matter whom he chooses.

Go Obama!

There was a great article in the New Yorker last month, in case you missed it. The Fall of Conservatism by George Packer. It spoke about conservatism and its demise. I've heard forecasts of a sustainable Democratic majority before, but wanted to post this here.

This long article had a wonderful quotation I thought many would enjoy.

The fact that the least conservative, least divisive Republican in the 2008 race is the last one standing--despite being despised by significant voices on the right--shows how little life is left in the movement that Goldwater began, Nixon brought into power, Ronald Reagan gave mass appeal, Newt Gingrich radicalized, Tom DeLay criminalized, and Bush allowed to break into pieces.

Credit where credit is due. Link below.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/ 05/26/080526fa_fact_packer