Love you Mom.

One of the criticisms of Obama is that he is not patriotic. Something stupid about a flag pin. But think about it for just one moment. If Obama weren’t patriotic, would he run for president? Does he embody hope or despair? These are the questions we ask ourself as we move forward. My point is this: Of all the racial calls to arm that we’ve undergone in the last few years, don’t you think that the Obama call to peace is the most significant? Negotiate with everybody? Negotiate with our enemies?

We’ve all known it for a while, but I think that after last night it is probably unofficially official: Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee for President of the United States.

I think its going to be an absolutely incredible next few months. From my perspective, it is hard not to view these two candidates as the most inspiring since Reagan. Not that everyone found Reagan inspiring, but he’s probably the last candidate who really did provide any inspiration to anybody. It’ll be great to see how it all plays out.

I get the impression that we are also likely in for an attempt at a fairly civil campaign. Maybe the national and state parties will pursue the usual tactics, but I’ve got a feeling that the two candidates themselves will try and stay above the fray.

That being said, I wanted to take a moment to examine the only instance during their overlapping time in the Senate in which John McCain and Barack Obama have worked together: ethics reform. This was prior to the 2006 mid-term elections.

This is a website that has a large archive of September 11 television coverage, including CNN’s coverage during the first hour after the first plane hit the World Trade Center.

I’m not a conspiracy theorist. Far from it. But I can’t help but marvel at the coincidental nature of CNN’s last words before they cut to coverage of the Trade Center. Note this, as the anchor says these words, she has no idea about what is going on in New York. “But stock that could come under pressure is Boeing. Prudential has cut its twelve month price target on the Dow component to $42 from $60. Boeing closed Monday at about $43 and an half.” They cut to commercial, and when they come back, there is a plane inside the Trade Center.

A reader writes:

I was thinking about this the other day and the glacial pace and stagnancy of changes to the political process in this country. In the past few days I’ve seen a few articles that may turn the whole thing upside down and asked me ask the question: Could this election, regardless of who wins the democratic and presidential election, lead to the end of the two-party system?

Regardless of who runs, I think that McCain will win the presidency. Here’s what I see happening and why.

1. If Barack Obama wins the Democratic party nomination (and I believe he will), you would normally see everyone rally around him. However, I think the Clinton campaign has allowed so much animosity to develop against him, that Clinton supporters will not support Obama in the general election. Furthermore, I cannot envison the Clinton’s out on the campaign trail rallying support for Obama. They do not take losing easily. Not that they would undermine his campaign, but their lack of full-support would show through. Her voters would split between staying home, vote for Obama, or vote for McCain. Outcome: McCain wins.

Watching Charlie Rose right now. He’s interviewing Patrick Stewart regarding his “critically acclaimed” portrayal of MacBeth. Fifteen years after Mrs. Carter made me memorize this:

To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

I still don’t know what it means. Never did. But I sure as heck memorized it. I can’t help but think of Conor Oberst with his much more significant:

“Well, my teachers, they built this retaining wall of memory,
all those multiple choices I answered so quickly.
And got my grades back and forgot just as easily,
but as least I got an A.
And so I don’t have them to blame.”

Lots of Iraq stuff today:

Michael Yon explains why violence is up in Iraq. Hint: Its not because we’re losing.

Iraqi PM says private army mentality in Iraq is over

Maliki told Miliband, on a surprise visit to Baghdad, that “national reconciliation has been a success and all political parties will return to government. “The ideology of having rival militias is over. The weapon is now in state hands,” the statement said that Maliki told Miliband during their talks.

Sunnis Agree to End Boycott, Rejoin Iraq Government

Iraq’s largest Sunni bloc has agreed to return to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki’s cabinet after a boycott that lasted nearly a year, several Sunni leaders said on Thursday

Read the full article...

From The Long War Journal, Baghdad police show progress, but challenges remain. An interview with a General in the Iraqi Police, located in Bagdhad. From the interview:

LWJ: What do you think of the American advisers and America’s role in this? And when do you think the Iraqi security forces will be able to stand on their own?

Hamed: To be honest with you, if the Americans leave, a bloody civil war will start the next day, for one reason: the Iraqi security forces cannot stand on their own yet. That is my personal opinion, to be honest with you.

LWJ: And how long do you think it will be before the army and police can stand on their own?

Hamed: In my opinion, three years.

I’ve mentioned the International Crisis Group before. They call themselves “the world’s leading independent, non-partisan, source of analysis and advice to governments, and intergovernmental bodies like the United Nations, European Union and World Bank, on the prevention and resolution of deadly conflict.”

The Crisis Group has published two Iraq pieces recently, with the first one being, Iraq after the Surge I: The New Sunni Landscape. If you want to understand the changing dynamics in Iraq and what is really going on, then you need to read pieces like this. Since they’re 30-40 pages long, single spaced with footnotes however, I doubt you’re going to have time to do that. So, I’ve picked out some of the more relevant points.

On the role the Surge played in calming violence:

“It would be just as simplistic to attribute these facts to the surge alone as it would be to deny any causation between the two. Without a doubt, supplementary troops helped increase security, alter the balance of power and embolden those opposed to al-Qaeda in Iraq to switch sides. But the addition of some 35,000 troops to the 130,000 already there could have only a marginal direct impact; indeed, some of these changes occurred in areas that saw no increase in U.S. military presence. The developments that took place could have come about neither as swiftly nor as massively without concurrent, profound internal transformations. The U.S. did not generate them; rather, and importantly, it showed the subtlety and flexibility necessary to turn them to its advantage. The surge is one element in a set of mutually reinforcing dynamics, the complexities and ambiguities of which must be understood if the current window of opportunity is to be transformed into more sustainable progress…”

I’ve rummaged through the Polling Report archives to put together a few charts on Iraq. Specifically, I wanted to see, in one place how people have thought the war was going, from the beginning through now.
The question asked by the pollsters is thus: “How would you say things are going for the U.S. in its […]