Make no mistake, Barack Obama gives a good speech. Of course, we already knew that. And as announcement speeches go, I give it high marks for tone, message and wordsmithing. Delivery was excellent, staging was wise (aside from the weather, but hey, they are hearty in the Midwest!), and Obama is comfortable in his words and in his ideas.

But, in my view, there is one problem. If the latest poll is correct and Hillary Clinton is thought to be the “most qualified” candidate for President by 61%, Edwards at 21% and Obama at 13%, he needs to prove that point in the coming 12 months.

There was too much talk in his speech about “process” – and blaming our problems on the “system.” Obama’s advisors are pushing the same old mantra of attacking special interests, campaign finance, insiders. This should not be the centerpiece of this campaign. Obama needs to prove that he is qualified by virtue of his ideas that solve problems. In campaign after campaign, I have found that pocket-book issues trump process issues every time.

Obama has the likeability factor; the politics of hope is inspiring, but can only carry him so far. This campaign will be won only if Obama convinces voters that his ideas are better and he is qualified and able to make them happen. For voters, it is about improving their lives, not improving the “system.”

Well, it’s finally over. The first 100 hours of the new 110th Congress have passed and not much has changed. The new Democrat majority is still spending money faster than a Vegas wedding, and talking big about the war in Iraq.

Yet a closer look at those first few items Democrats moved through the Congress reveals an interesting paradigm — the lack of demand for their passage by average Americans. Think about it — how many Americans do you know clamored for the passage of “non-interference” for Medicare Part D? Even the minimum wage polled less than 2 percent of issues Americans wanted Congress to address in 2007. Only the topic of ethics reform polled greater than 15 percent in a post-Election Day ranking among registered voters — and the new Congress made quick business of that topic. Read more...

I don’t get it. Are Republicans really this silly? Or are they just pretending? Either way, they look like a bunch of clowns.

First, they shut down debate in the Senate over Iraq.

And now, in the House — with the Iraq war out of control, 45 million Americans with no health insurance, and global warming destroying the planet — what are they debating? The size of Nancy Pelosi’s plane. Read more...

As Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) tries dodging questions about the identity of her private donors, and Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) staff works furiously to draft his coming response to the question of public matching funds, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has thrown an Obamian wrench into the debate — Clinton and McCain need to start getting used to these — asking the Federal Election Commission if he can collect private funds now but return them if he became the nominee and his GOP counterpart accepts his challenge to revert back to using public funding.
Read more...

I’ve been listening with interest to those Democratic Members and handful of Republicans who claim that a non-binding resolution regarding the increase in Iraq will have no impact on our troops or our enemies. I’m sure most liberals have conveniently overlooked the following testimony yesterday by General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

"There's also no doubt in my mind that just like we look out to our potential enemies to see division in their ranks and take comfort from division in their ranks, that others, who don't have a clue how democracy works, who are our enemies, would seek to take comfort from their misunderstanding of the dialogue in this country." (Committee On Armed Services, U.S. House Of Representatives, Hearing, 2/7/07) Read more...

Rudy is running. And what poll numbers he has — a dream come true, low negatives, high positives — that’s America’s Mayor. Trouble is, Rudy will have to lose his issue positions a lot faster than he lost his comb-over.

Voters don’t know how liberal he really is, and conservatives who make up the Republican delegate base for 2008 are about to find out real fast. In the meantime, Rudy is telling folks that he is against late-term abortions, loves the institution of marriage (he sure does) and thinks gun control is OK for New York but maybe not for South Carolina. And, of course, he just can’t wait to appoint conservative judges. If you believe all that, I have a special deal on the Brooklyn Bridge for you. Read more...

Did anyone notice that newest '08 Contender Club member Rudy Giuliani scored the commencement address at The Citadel on May 5? Yes, that lucky pro-choice, pro-gun, pro-gay rights presidential candidate gets a chance to charm South Carolinians in Cadet Country right in the heart of silly season. Read more...

I’ve seen a lot of stupid political tricks in my life, but this one takes the cake. How could Senate Republicans be stupid enough to block Senate debate on the war in Iraq? Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and Trent Lott (Miss.) should be sued for political malpractice.

What were they thinking? The president’s surge in Iraq is being debated on every talk show and in every coffee shop in America. Is it really too hot a debate topic for what used to be called the “world’s most deliberative body?” Read more...

I remember so well being on TV shows in 2005 and 2006 agreeing with Senate Republicans who insisted that President Bush's judicial nominees should be entitled to up-or-down votes on the Senate floor based on majority — not 60 votes — in the Senate. They did so based on two principles — in fairness as well as consistency with the small-"d" democratic principles.

They complained that requiring 60 votes to break a filibuster before an up-or-down vote was unfair and undemocratic. Read more...