Required Reading

A Happy 4th to everyone. Believe me - I would have liked to have prepared a Required Reading that was appropriately and perhaps tritely thematic, but there was too much other good stuff out there.

1) From the New York Times, "New and Not Improved" by the editors.

Hell hath no fury like a Grey Lady scorned. Disappointed over Barack Obama's latest evolutions, the Times has lashed out with a furious editorial, lamenting, "We are not shocked when a candidate moves to the center for the general election. But Mr. Obama's shifts are striking because he was the candidate who proposed to change the face of politics, the man of passionate convictions who did not play old political games." And then to really twist the knife, the editors conclude with the observation, "This country needs change it can believe in." Meow.

Now, if you'll pardon my French, what in tarnation is the Times talking about when it says Obama "was a man of passionate convictions?" Where and on what issues exactly did he manifest those convictions? Favoring Hope/Change, however strongly, really doesn't qualify as a conviction.

2) From BarackObama.com, "Why I Screwed the Left on FISA*" by Barack Obama.

(*Actually, the essay was untitled, so I tried to give it a title that fit)

Obama goes to Greenwaldian lengths to explain one of this week's many betrayals of the left. Since I know no one will follow the link, I'm going to provide a lengthy excerpt so that you may best wallow in the equivocations and intellectual confusion:

This was not an easy call for me. I know that the FISA bill that passed the House is far from perfect. I wouldn't have drafted the legislation like this, and it does not resolve all of the concerns that we have about President Bush's abuse of executive power. It grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that may have violated the law by cooperating with the Bush Administration's program of warrantless wiretapping. This potentially weakens the deterrent effect of the law and removes an important tool for the American people to demand accountability for past abuses. That's why I support striking Title II from the bill, and will work with Chris Dodd, Jeff Bingaman and others in an effort to remove this provision in the Senate.

But I also believe that the compromise bill is far better than the Protect America Act that I voted against last year. The exclusivity provision makes it clear to any President or telecommunications company that no law supersedes the authority of the FISA court. In a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people. But in a free society, that authority cannot be unlimited. As I've said many times, an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people. This compromise law assures that the FISA court has that responsibility.

Know shamelessness!

3) From the Iowahawk, "A Clarification" by Barack Obama.

Channeling Obama, the Iowahawk delivers Senator Hope/Change's hidden strategy behind his Iraq evolution:

Let me be crystal clear: if elected president, my first act will be to call for the immediate withdrawal of all American troops from Iraq. I have always been consistent and forthright in this position, and I want to reassure my supporters that my recent statement backtracking from it was just some bulls**t my staff came up with to tack to the center for the general election. To win this election, it will be critical to appeal to the dwindling but stubborn group of idiots who cling to fantasies of American "victory" in this tragic disaster. It's an unfortunate part of the complicated game of presidential politics, but let's face it: I can't stop this war if I'm not in the White House. However, you should know by now that whatever I may say from now until November, once elected I will immediately pull the rug from these gullible pro-war rubes.