Changing your mind is … unpatriotic?

You’re going to see a lot of this, unfortunately. McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers couldn’t manage a comment on Obama’s shift on Iraq without attacking his patriotism. Here is Rogers in the New York Times:

There is nothing wrong with changing your mind when the facts on the ground dictate it. Indeed, the facts have changed because of the success of the surge that John McCain advocated for years and Barack Obama opposed in a position that put politics ahead of country.

That last bit is so awkwardly grafted on that it’s obviously deliberate. And it’s going to happen a lot. Here we begin to see the real harm in Wesley Clark’s true but impolitic remarks about McCain’s getting shot down not being a qualification for president: they are so easily mischaracterized as an attack on McCain’s military service that they can be seen as justifying questions about Obama’s patriotism.

I recommend this David Greenberg essay in Slate on how patriotism has played out in presidential politics.

Fear itself

In my latest for The Guardian, I take a look at the unfavorable political landscape that Barack Obama will have to traverse this fall: the very public trial of alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed; heightened tensions, and possibly war, with Iran; and a determination on the part of the Bush White House once again to use terrorism as a cudgel with which to bludgeon the Democrats.

Ganging up on Obama

I caught the podcast of “Meet the Press” early this morning and couldn’t believe my ears. Guest host Brian Williams devoted the first dozen or so minutes to pounding Barack Obama over his flip-flop on accepting public campaign money.

Fair enough. But you’d think someone would have brought up the fact that John McCain appears to be violating the campaign-finance law right now. Not Williams. Not McCain surrogate Lindsey Graham. Not even Obama supporter Joe Biden. At least Biden didn’t call Obama “clean and articulate.”

It’s one and out for Williams, who’ll be replaced by Tom Brokaw next week. Let’s hope that Brokaw is better prepared.

Wrong on the National Press Club

Josh Marshall passes along a Daily Kos item criticizing the National Press Club for providing a platform to an Obama critic from the lunatic fringe. The Kos piece — by Markos himself — urges readers to sign a petition asking the press club to disinvite the wingnut in question, someone named Larry Sinclair.

In fact, the National Press Club is merely renting space to a group called Veritas Federal Media, which is sponsoring the news conference. Click here and scroll down to June 18. You’ll see this: “This event is not affiliated with the National Press Club or the Eric Friedheim Library.” (The library is part of the press club.)

That said, the press club could certainly do a better job on its home page, where you’ll find a plug that looks very much like an official notice saying: “Larry reveals the truth about Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Obama.”

The anti-Obama right’s latest obsession

Did you know that there is a movement afoot on the right to demand that Barack Obama produce his birth certificate on the grounds that it might prove he’s not a “natural born Citizen,” as the Constitution requires of presidents? I hadn’t heard that one until it came tumbling out of Jay Severin’s careless mouth on WTKK Radio (96.9 FM) yesterday.

Anyway, I went to Google Blog Search, entered “Obama ‘birth certificate,'” and got 3,416 returns. Perhaps that’s not indicative of a major groundswell — many of the posts appear to be refutations of the crazier conspiracy theories out there. But the crazier conspiracies are indeed out there, including the notion that he was born in Kenya, and that he’s lying about his date of birth in order to cover that up.

This post on Daily Kos strikes me as smart and comprehensive. And National Review’s Jim Geraghty — a conservative who thinks Obama should produce his birth certificate — nevertheless offers a reasonable and non-hysterical perspective.

It’s over

Hillary Clinton will drop out of the race on Friday and endorse Barack Obama, the New York Times reports. (ABC News had it first, but the Times version strikes me as a bit more definitive.)

Not surprisingly, Charlie Rangel has the best line: “We pledged to support her to the end. Our problem is not being able to determine when the hell the end is.”

Dept. of They All Look Alike

The Massachusetts Republican Party just sent out an e-mail headlined “MassGOP Statement on Barack Obama.” The entire press release that follows is about Deval Patrick. Must be because they both have a Chicago accent, eh?

We’ll post the apology as soon as it arrives.

Update: Got a corrected e-mail shortly before noon. No apology.

Clinton enters “Daily Show” territory

The funniest thing about today’s lead Boston Globe headline is that it’s completely accurate.

I just sent off a piece to the Guardian on where the race goes from here. Despite some technical difficulties, it should be up in a bit.

Update: Well, this is annoying. I’m told that my deathless prose won’t go up until 5 p.m. or so due to computer issues. Since my stuff tends to have the shelf-life of day-old fish, I’m afraid it may be overtaken by events. So be it.

Clinton (sigh) for veep

I can think of all sorts of reasons why Barack Obama shouldn’t make Hillary Clinton his running mate. She stands for what he was running against, she’s the most divisive politician in America, her husband is reckless, etc., etc. But I think he ought to suck it up and do it.

By running consistently ahead of Obama since — what? early March? — she has succeeded in forcing her way onto the ticket. It’s going to be very difficult to unite the party, and it’s got to gall Obama that it’s largely her fault. Tough. Putting her on the ticket creates some problems, but it solves more.

OK, time to hit the cable nets.