His hard line has been derided as provocative, and possibly dangerous, by some so-called realist foreign policy experts, who warn that isolating Russia would do little to encourage it to change. But others, including neoconservatives who deem promoting democracy a paramount goal, see Mr. McCain's position as principled, and prescient. Now, with Russia moving forcefully into Georgia as Mr. McCain seeks the presidency, his views are being scrutinized as never before through the prism of Russia's invasion.

For Mr. McCain, the conflict came after months of warnings about the situation in Georgia. Mr. McCain befriended Georgia's president, Mikheil Saakashvili, over the course of several trips there, and even nominated him for a Nobel Peace Prize in 2005 (in a letter that was co-signed by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York).

Mr. McCain's top foreign policy adviser, Randy Scheunemann, lobbied on behalf of the Georgian government until March, and Mr. McCain has long embraced Georgia's efforts to move toward joining NATO, which has been seen as part of a broader strategy to contain Russia by admitting its old satellites and former Soviet republics into the alliance.

"NATO's decision to withhold a membership action plan for Georgia might have been viewed as a green light by Russia for its attacks on Georgia," Mr. McCain told reporters on Monday in Erie, Pa., "and I urge the NATO allies to revisit the decision."

While Mr. McCain has long called for excluding Russia from the Group of 8, and isolating it on the world stage, his probable Democratic opponent, Senator Barack Obama, has made clear he favors more engagement with Russia (even as he speaks of reviewing relationships with Russia, including its interest in joining the World Trade Organization).

The question of how to handle a Russia that is rich with oil revenues and increasingly independent has divided the foreign policy establishment.

Charles King, a professor of international affairs at Georgetown University and the author of "The Ghost of Freedom: A History of the Caucasus," said that rhetoric like Mr. McCain's might have spurred Georgia to act unwisely. "It hurts because it has encouraged Georgia to try to push maximalist positions - 'We've got to get this territory back at all costs, and if we get it back, the United States will support us,' " Dr. King said.

Mr. McCain acknowledged in a recent interview that his stance on Russia had divided some of his foreign policy advisers.

"If Henry Kissinger thinks that I'm wrong, he'll pick up the phone - and he has, several times," he said of the former secretary of state, "and say 'You're wrong on this; you shouldn't be so hard on the Russians, O.K.?' "

Robert Kagan, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a top McCain foreign policy adviser, said that people who found Mr. McCain's rhetoric on Russia inflammatory were living in denial.

"The reason he's right is that Russia has now entered into an entirely different realm of international behavior which we haven't seen in decades," Dr. Kagan said. "Russia is clearly trying to establish an old hegemony over its near neighbors."

In recent days, the Obama campaign has highlighted Mr. Scheunemann's lobbying ties to Georgia. Mr. Scheunemann's firm, Orion Strategies, has represented Georgia since at least March 2004, lobbying specifically on the issue of NATO membership. Mr. Scheunemann talked with members of Mr. McCain's staff in December 2005 about a Senate resolution Mr. McCain submitted expressing support for the government of Georgia, and he later called them to express thanks after it passed, according to Justice Department records.

McCain campaign officials condemned the Obama campaign for casting "aspersions" on Mr. Scheunemann, and noted that Mr. McCain had long advocated similar positions. (Other advisers to Mr. McCain have ties to leaders in the region backed by the Kremlin: Paul J. Manafort, a business partner of Mr. McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis, advised Viktor Yanukovich, the former Ukrainian prime minister, whose party was opposed by the Bush administration and Mr. McCain because of its ties to Mr. Putin.)

On Monday, though, Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama found themselves on the same page in dealing with the current crisis, perhaps reflecting the delicacy of the situation. Both said Russia had escalated the dispute beyond its catalyst, the conflict over South Ossetia; both said the United Nations Security Council should call for an end to the violence; both called for putting Georgia on a path toward membership in NATO; and both spoke of deploying an international peacekeeping force in the disputed areas that set off the fighting.

By Michael Cooper, The New York Times, August 11, 2008

Obama met the second type of economic voter the next morning in St. Paul, Minn., when he stopped by the Copper Dome Restaurant for some pancakes. There he met Fred Romo, 71, a retired Ford factory worker. Romo's a lifelong Democrat, but he remains undecided, even after meeting Obama. "I'm kind of leaning towards Obama, but he's a rookie, you know, and I'm kind of worried about that," says Romo, who wants a candidate who'll bring down the cost of living for retirees.

It was Hillary Clinton who planted the first doubts about Obama on the economy. The key theme: experience. "Hillary said she's the candidate for people who need a President," says Thomas Riehle, a partner at RT Strategies, a bipartisan polling firm in Washington. "In other words, people who don't need a President can afford to vote for Obama because he's exciting, represents change, etc." Which is why, Riehle says, Obama did so badly in some blue collar areas - places along the Ohio River, for example, where Clinton beat him by two- and three-to-one margins.

Taking a few pages from the Clintons' playbook, Obama is beginning to eschew his signature monster rallies in favor of smaller events: roundtable discussions, town-hall meetings and surprise trips to diners. In his earlier speeches, his stories were mostly inspirational. But Obama has begun to also mention some of the painful stories he hears from voters - just as Clinton did. In making his case for an energy rebate, last week Obama pointed to "the mother that had to cut back on groceries because of rising gas prices, the guy I met who couldn't fill up his gas tank to go on a job search." He is also growing more detailed in his policy proposals. The word legislation, hardly found in his early speeches, is now mentioned regularly.

Clinton's strategy worked against Obama in Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia. The voters in those states are Romo's brethren and the Democratic base that Obama needs to hold. Obama should learn Clinton's lesson, says Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics. "Obama could use a little more empathy and a little less lecture," Sabato says. "Feel your pain, anyone?" The constituency is willing to be persuaded. Says Romo: "I'm hoping Obama would be a better steward of the economy, but I'm undecided." He adds, "I don't like McCain. McCain is Bush, and we've already had this one, you know what I mean?" In the end, says Riehle, Obama retains a big advantage with true-blue Democrats over McCain, who is seen as anti-union, pro–free trade and supportive of Bush's fiscal policies.

In addition, political analysts say Obama needs to focus more on expanding his political map and luring fiscal-conservative voters away from McCain - voters like Hecimovich. McCain's "base are independent-leaning voters concerned by overspending in Washington," Riehle says. "Obama can battle McCain in appealing to those kind of voters very well." But so far Obama has seemed unwilling to do what both Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton did against their respective rivals: paint his opponent as, having spent the past 30 years in Washington, being out of touch with ordinary voters.

Instead, Obama accuses McCain of running for a third Bush term, a message that is resonating with some fiscal conservatives like Hecimovich. "McCain, he'd be a good military leader, but I don't know as far as running the economy," Hecimovich says as he balances his little boy Sam on the lunch table. "It's hard to say at this point who'd handle the economy better." Then his wife Debbie leans over, steadying Sam, and almost under her breath adds, "We need change, so whoever's going to make the biggest change."

While Romo and the Hecimoviches make up their minds, Obama and McCain remain close in polls. When I ask Obama on the flight from Minnesota to Chicago if he's worried about his economic message, he reminds me that it's still early. "My sense is that during the summer months, people are not going to be paying as much attention as they're going to be paying in September and October." Obama says he plans to highlight the differences between his and McCain's tax and health-care plans in the fall. "When the American people start focusing on those contrasts, they will see two fundamentally different visions of where we can take America." In the words of an old Clinton campaign, he plans to remind McCain: It's the economy, stupid.

While most Democrats and pundits try to divine what John Edwards's confession of adultery will mean going forward for the party, some Hillary Clinton partisans are looking back.

They wonder what might have been had the confirmation of the affair had come before the first Democratic presidential contest, likely knocking Edwards out of the race. The former North Carolina senator vehemently denied tabloid reports late last year of an affair with a woman who had been hired by his political action committee to make videos. The mainstream media did not delve into the case, and it wasn't an issue while Edwards was in the race.

I believe we would have won Iowa, and Clinton today would therefore have been the nominee," former Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson told ABCNews.com today, voicing the argument that Clinton's inevitability would have been strengthened by a win in Iowa -- not punctured by Barack Obama's surprise victory.

"Our voters and Edwards' voters were the same people," Wolfson said the Clinton polls showed. "They were older, pro-union. Not all, but maybe two-thirds of them would have been for us and we would have barely beaten Obama."

Instead, Obama won the caucuses with 38 percent of the vote, Edwards finished second with 30 percent, and Clinton ended up third with 29 percent. Obama emerged as the front-runner, Clinton had to pull off a come-from-behind win in the New Hampshire primary to stay in the nomination fight, and the Democratic contest became a bitter, drawn-out battle that lasted until June 3.

Entrance polls done for the TV networks, however, suggest that many Edwards voters would have gone for Obama instead, so Clinton still probably would have lost. And longtime Clinton strategist James Carville chalked up Wolfson's assertions to wishful thinking.

"My instinct tells me she probably would have done better if Senator Edwards wouldn't have been on the ballot," Carville said on ABC's "Good Morning America." "But that wasn't the circumstances at the time. I think Howard is fine in engaging in this kind of speculation, but it doesn't really mean very much."

UPDATE: Meanwhile, Salem State College announced today that, at least for now, the Sept. 23 appearance is still on for Edwards and his wife Elizabeth to discuss presidential politics and healthcare.

YORK, Pa. - John McCain, teased as "that wrinkly, white-haired guy" by Paris Hilton, said on Tuesday he knew he wasn't connecting with young voters but urged them to give him a hearing.

"I need to do a better job ... with young voters in America and I want to reach out to them," he told a former Sen. Hillary Clinton supporter now pondering whether to support him or his Democratic presidential opponent Barack Obama.

The questioner said during the town hall meeting in York, Pennsylvania he wasn't sure what McCain stood for on issues like education that mattered to young voters.

"I would like to say 'tell all your friends, come to the next townhall meeting.' I'd like to meet and discuss with them ... especially those who are undecided in this election," McCain replied.

Bryce Wagoner, a 19-year still trying to make up his mind about who to vote for, said the Republican senator from Arizona had not managed to ease his concern that social security would not be worth anything when he eventually retired.

"Everyone says that we need to fix it but nobody has a plan ... he didn't have any real solutions," Wagoner said.

McCain later swung by Manheim Central High School to watch football practice and continue courting the youth vote.

After suggesting that they run over the press corps clustered in the center of the field, McCain told the squad - 15 times league champions since 1989 - that "you win as a team or you lose as a team," before reminding them to study.

The likelihood of the 24-hour tchochke mill churning out buttons, placards and key chains screaming Obama/Clinton '08 is about zero.

That's a huge loss and a big mistake. Normally, as we know, the choice of the vice-presidential candidate is far from an election-maker. But this is no ordinary year, as we also know.

The reasons for Senator Obama to choose Senator Clinton as his running mate are manifold, inter-connected, and urgent.

1. Practicality. She would make a meaningful, if not profound difference on the ticket. Her appeal to women and blue-collar voters is indisputably stronger than Obama's. Yes, he can get stronger, although it will be difficult in the face of McCain/Schmidt's relentless efforts to frame him as running for president of the United States of Arugala.

But he will never have her drawing power with the Krispy Kreme krowd, never be able to energize her base, which is so critical in Ohio, Indiana and Pennsylvania. And the value of the power and influence of the Clinton network as the race tightens is inestimable.

2. Fairness. Normally by the time a putative nominee has been determined, and the runner-up runs out of gas, the gap between them has become substantial, crippling the argument that any one candidate has a "claim" on the vice-presidential slot.

This year, however, on the strength of 18 million passionate voters, Hillary made it a horse race almost till the end. Say what you will about her mistakes, she threw herself into retail politics with a vengeance, and through that has earned a place on the ticket more than any vice-president in recent memory earned theirs.

To ignore the passion, grittiness and success of her efforts, and anoint a secondary figure like Evan Bayh, is a definitive act that would be hard to interpret as anything but a slap in the face. After all, when both fairness and logic point to Hillary, a rejection of her - from someone whose brand, in large part, stands for a clear-eyed, unemotional, pettiness-free analysis of the facts at hand - is unambiguous.

3. Obama's Personal Narrative. The "Not Ready to Lead" storyline that McCain has introduced essentially says that Obama is talented but immature. Given that the vast majority of reasons for spurning Senator Clinton are personal - the negative nature of the primary, the awkwardness of having Bill big-footing all over the White House, the country and the world - moving beyond her is essentially a validation of McCain's framing of Obama as not possessing the true qualities of leadership.

If she's not selected, the implicit message to voters will be that ego kept her off the ticket, reinforcing the dangerous cultural sub-texting going on right now that defines Obama as arrogantly self-confident.

4. The credibility of her voice. Who would be stronger making the argument that Obama is prepared to lead at 3AM...Hillary Clinton, or Evan Bayh? Who would you want as the archetypal pit-bull VP candidate, taking the low road while Obama remains Obama? Who is remotely as strong as her to stand beside him at the convention, and through the remainder of the campaign, as both a validation of his leadership abilities, a comforting bastion of continuity, and as someone who could lead the country at a moment's notice herself?

5. The stakes. If you believe this is a pivotal election, that it's absolutely critical that we reverse the failed geopolitical, social and economic policies of the last eight years, isn't it a moral and ethical responsibility to construct the strongest national argument for that? Hillary Clinton needs to be part of that argument.

In fairness to Obama, he inherited the problem. Not since 1976, when Democrats last achieved a majority, has a Democrat won more than 38 of every 100 white, male voters. That Obama is nearly at par with Democrats' poor performance is hardly good.

Obama remains narrowly ahead because of black, Hispanic, and youth support. Those strengths may prove brittle. Large black populations are mostly in states Obama will surely win, across the Northeast, and states he will surely lose, the Deep South. Hispanics are a nonfactor in Heartland swing states like Ohio. Young voters are notoriously unreliable.

On Election Day, high youth and black turnout will matter in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Nevada. But as Hillary Clinton demonstrated, Obama's strengths may not matter enough.

Obama's one clear gain with white men, over Gore and John Kerry, is with those under age 30. But those gains are undercut by a poor showing with older white men, according to Pew Research Center summer polling. The same effect, though more mild, is also true for white women.

Pundits will be tempted to blame racism. Yet Colin Powell would have won white men and likely defeated Bill Clinton in 1996. Liberals have long placed white guys atop their ticket. Look where that got them. Democrats have won three of the past 10 presidential elections.

Many Democrats explain their failures in a respect that reaffirms their self image; the good fight for black equality caused a racially motivated "Southern flip." In the Deep South, that was true. But nationally, political white flight occurred in the South and the North. It also reached its crescendo with Ronald Reagan's election - not during the peak of civil rights debates.

This impulse to cite the color of the issue as the issue was recently applied to Obama's Appalachia difficulty. Race did matter, and will matter. But if Obama were white, would we have expected him to win rural voters? Like Gary Hart or Paul Tsongas, Obama was not Appalachia's kind of Democrat.

That weakness is neither inalterable nor politically fatal. His unique personal attributes may, amid the near implosion of the Republican Party, galvanize enough minorities and young voters to squeeze out a win. But a majority coalition, that does not make.

In search of that coalition liberal analysts tend to subscribe to the "Emerging Democratic Majority," a plan to wait out demographic shifts - more Hispanics, more young voters, more educated whites. In short: "Why should I change, let America." That strategy failed George McGovern. Give it a couple more decades. The portion of white, male voters remains about five times the size of all Hispanic voters. And a college education has not led more white men to vote Democratic.

Latinos are increasingly vital to Democratic ambitions in Florida and key western states. Yet electoral math ultimately concerns the sum. Minority groups can more easily tip vital states for Obama if aided by gains with far larger blocs of the electorate, none more than white men.

In the end new majorities do not merely "emerge," even for Richard Nixon. It takes proactive efforts. For Democrats, the potential reward is massive.

White men make up the largest portion of independents. More than one in three voters who will choose the next president remains white and male. And McCain's support is soft with these men, compared to George W. Bush's bids.

Yet for too long, some progressives have viewed seeking these men as antithetical to liberalism. Rebutting that intellectual vice would truly change Democratic politics. It would also expand the electoral map. Therefore, whether he knows it or not, Obama has tied the audacity of his promise to the white men his party has lost.

"Russia should immediately and unconditionally cease its military operations and withdraw all forces from sovereign Georgian territory," he said, interrupted by the sound of jets taking off.

"We've seen this movie before in Prague and Budapest," McCain said on Fox News. "And I'm not saying we are reigniting the Cold War, but, this is an act of aggression in which we didn't think we'd see in the 21st century. " For McCain's team, it has become the latest incarnation of what Sen. Hillary Clinton once called the "3 a.m. moment," an opportunity to showcase for voters his longstanding skepticism about Russian leader Vladimir Putin while emphasizing Sen. Barack Obama's lack of experience dealing with foreign affairs.

"You got a guy who is ready to be president on Day 1 who understands the world for what it is," said McCain ally Sen. Lindsey Graham, echoing another Clinton line. "The thing about Sen. Obama, he's playing catch-up here. His initial statements, quite frankly, didn't appreciate how bold a move this was from Russia."

McCain's public statements have highlighted his differences with the Bush Administration, which Graham said "has miscalculated the Russian threat" to its former republics, and are also designed to show off his predictions about Russian aggression.

"Sen. McCain has talked for years about the dangers of Russian policies in the way they conduct themselves and undermine the sovereignty of their neighbors," said Randy Scheunemann, McCain's top foreign policy adviser, who noted that McCain has known Georgian President Saakashvili since 1997, when Saakashvili was a graduate student.

"There is a depth of knowledge, a breadth of knowledge and an extent of historical experience" that is greater than that of his rival, Scheunemann said.

Obama adviser Susan Rice, appearing on MSNBC's "Hardball" Tuesday night, accused McCain of responding irresponsibly. "Barack Obama, the administration and the NATO allies took a measured, reasoned approach," she said. "We were dealing with the facts as we knew them. John McCain shot from the hip, very aggressive, belligerent statement. He may or may not have complicated the situation."

Obama has confronted the crisis in Georgia in more modulated tones, initially sounding closer to Bush than McCain, but later condemning the Russian aggression in strong terms, saying there was "no possible justification" for it. Unlike McCain, he has also taken note of Georgia's military actions in the breakaway region known as South Ossetia. He supports Georgia's candidacy for NATO and has called for a review of Russia's application to join the World Trade Organization, but has not followed McCain in threatening to expel Russia from the G-8.

"Russian peacekeeping troops should be replaced by a genuine international peacekeeping force, Georgia should refrain from using force in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and a political settlement must be reached that addresses the status of these disputed regions," Obama said during a break from his vacation in Hawaii on Monday.

Obama's advisers argue that he, too, has been prescient about the region's potential for conflict. In April, the Democratic nominee condemned Russian provocations in the contested Georgian provinces, and in July he urged Georgia not to be tempted into military action and called for an international peacekeeping force in the region. Since becoming a candidate, he has warned that the U.S. preoccupation with Iraq has distracted policymakers.

They said Obama's response in the last several days has been suited to the events on the ground. Obama's first statement calling for a ceasefire by both Russia and Georgia came when Georgian troops were still attacking targets in South Ossetia. As Georgia pulled back and Russia invaded Georgia proper, Obama's condemnation grew stronger and focused on Russia, his advisers note.

"He was not calling for equivalence [between Russia and Georgia], he was calling for a ceasefire to stop the violence . . . After Russia invaded, it was a totally different order of magnitude," said Stanford University professor Michael McFaul, the campaign's chief adviser on Russia.

Richard Holbrooke, an ambassador to the U.N. in the Clinton administration and an Obama supporter, objected to the suggestion that Obama had been late in coming to a tough condemnation of Russia. Obama and McCain are now more or less on the same page in decrying the aggression, he said.

"It is based on an exaggerated and deliberately misleading perception of Senator Obama's initial statement, which was issued early, while the crisis was unfolding," he said. "This is an attempt by people supporting Senator McCain to politicize a great international tragedy and it's not worthy of the dimensions of the problem, especially when both candidates have roughly the same position."

Obama's more nuanced tone may reflect the debate going on among his advisers, who say they must bear in mind the messy geopolitical reality that America relies on Russia on a host of issues, from Iran to nuclear proliferation to energy and climate change.

"Part of the reason we don't have leverage is that we don't have a U.S.-Russian relationship. It has been adrift," McFaul said. Referring to McCain, he added, "It's easy to say something belligerent about Russia. I'm no friend of Vladimir Putin, and cheap shots about tough talk are all well and fine. But what are you doing to actually make the situation better?"

Several Russia experts not affiliated with either campaign said they recognized that tough talk had become a political necessity on the campaign trail, but worry that U.S. credibility could suffer because the country does not have the leverage to follow through.

"This type of bluster is fairly counterproductive because it is a bluff, there's nothing we can do about this," said Clifford Gaddy of the Brookings Institution. But he noted that "it has become a race to be see who can be the tougher. I can't see anybody suddenly stepping back and becoming a voice of moderation and calling for calm."

By Michael Shear and Alec MacGillis, The Washington Post, August 13, 2008

Penn was always the biggest hawk in Clinton's campaign, always the one who advocated going negative against Obama. The day after the senator from New York won primaries in Ohio and Texas, Penn called for drawing a sharp contrast with Obama along the following lines:

"He is just words and she is a lifetime of action. . . . She is the one who is ready to fill the big shoes of this job and he is an inspiring speaker who isn't, and whose background you are beginning to wonder about. She has brought real results and even his words today are in doubt, invented for a campaign. Ultimately he cannot win against John McCain."

Clinton's campaign, he argued, "must now in earnest show that their image of Obama Camelot is simply nothing but campaign pitter-patter."

"Does anyone believe it is possible to win the nomination without, over these two months, raising all these issues against him?" Penn wrote. "A 'nice' campaign that wins the states alone that can be won -- will that be enough or do serious issues have to raised about him?"

None of these were new positions for Penn. A year earlier, on March 19, 2007, he portrayed Obama as lacking roots in basic American values and as being a phony -- although he was more tentative on how the campaign ought to approach those topics.

Penn was particularly struck by what he called "a very strong weakness" in Obama -- "His roots to basic American values and culture are at best limited. I cannot imagine America electing a president during a time of war who is not at his center fundamentally American in his thinking and in his values."

But then he worried about how the Clinton campaign could draw a contrast on this without sounding negative. "We are never going to say anything about his background -- we have to show the value of ours when it comes to making decisions, understanding the needs of most Americans -- the invisible Americans."

Penn's solution? "Let's explicitly own 'American' in our programs, the speeches and the values. He doesn't," he wrote. "Make this a new American Century, the American Strategic Energy fund. Let's use our logo to make some flags we can give out. Let's add flag symbols to the backgrounds."

Clinton's campaign never did quite become the flag-waving, patriotic operation that Penn envisioned in March 2007, nor did she ever go as overtly negative as he was preaching in March and April 2008. Would she be the nominee if she had? And can McCain win the presidency if he -- carefully -- pursues a similar path?

Earlier this year, the McCain campaign, presumably unknowingly, adopted some of Penn's provocative 2007 playbook with an ad that talked about the presumptive GOP nominee as "the American president Americans have been waiting for."

That was even less subtle in invoking a cultural-values argument against Obama than Penn's suggestion to Clinton that she always tell audiences she was "born in the middle of America" and to talk about "the deeply American values you grew up with."

Interestingly, the most provocative of Penn's memos posted by the Atlantic -- the one that talks about Obama's lack of roots in American values -- went nowhere. "I don't remember there being a real discussion about this," Howard Wolfson, who was the campaign's communications director and who often differed with Penn on strategy, said yesterday. "It was universally rejected, and in fairness to Mark, I don't think Mark pushed it. . . . It's one of those things people heard and said, 'That's not a good idea.' "

The ads, at a minimum, may be getting under Obama's skin. It's possible they are doing real damage. Penn seems to believe that, based on what he wrote for the Politico. "Fair or not, as advertising it did its job," he said.

Just how far McCain's campaign will pursue this strategy isn't clear. There are risks for him, just as there were for Clinton. Obama has proven over this long campaign to be a difficult target to hit -- at least on anything more than an occasional basis. So the mileage may be limited long term.

More fundamentally, McCain risks damaging his reputation as a politician who has eschewed the politics of negativity. But what was considered out of bounds in a Democratic primary campaign may be less so in a general-election race, in which other voters come into play. McCain will have to make some difficult judgments about this in the final 82 days.

South Carolina Rep. Jim Clybrun said Tuesday that he takes issue with comments by Bill Clinton in which the former president seemed to suggest Clyburn undercut Clinton's reputation with black voters.

The No. 3 Democrat in the House, Clyburn said his heart has been with Barack Obama, but his head had been supportive of Hillary Clinton despite suggestions otherwise.

Clinton told ABC News last week that Clyburn "used to be" an old friend of his, but he "was not Hillary's supporter. Never. Not ever. Not for a day."

When told that Clyburn had said Clinton damaged his own credibility with the black community, Clinton responded, "That may be by the time he got through working on it, that was probably true."

Cilnton "is not correct in his conclusions," Clyburn told FOX News.

As for whether Clinton thinks Clyburn undermined him with black voters, the congressman said, "That's easily to be understood from his comments, and I just beg to differ with that. Because the fact of the matter is all the stuff that I saw reported were reports on things the president said from his own mouth."

Clyburn specifically pointed to Clinton's comparison of Obama's primary win in South Carolina to Jesse Jackson's 20 years earlier. Jackson won the black vote and not much else on the way to losing the Democratic nomination to former Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis.

"Most people thought that the most telling thing back in January was the equation that the president made of Jesse Jackson having won South Carolina caucuses 20 years earlier, and compared that with Obama winning the South Carolina primary. There's a big difference in a caucus and a primary," Clyburn said. "And so a lot of that, irrespective of what the president may have meant by the statement, a lot of people interpreted that as having a racial connotation, and Jim Clyburn didn't speak on that issue at all."

As for whether Clinton did hurt himself among black voters, Clyburn said, "I don't know that I've done any surveys to determine whether or not the president, former president has ever damaged himself or not."

What does his gut tell him? "My gut tells me that some things I ought to keep to myself," he said.

"Fair or not, as advertising it did its job: It used humor, stuck viewers with memorable images and created a debate, just as Lyndon Johnson's 1964 'Daisy' ad, Walter Mondale's 'Red Phone' spot 20 years later and Hillary Rodham Clinton's '3 a.m.' commercial in 2008 did," Penn wrote.

Penn, who was behind Clinton's headline-grabbing "3 a.m." ad that questioned Obama's readiness to lead during a national security crisis, also said the Illinois senator should have responded more effectively to the Hilton/Spears ad.

"The Paris Hilton ad also bore a Republican political trademark -- attacking a candidate's strengths rather than the candidate's weaknesses," Penn wrote. The spot attempted to portray Obama's leadership for change as something fluffy and useless. Obama did not immediately hit back on the air."

Penn, who was ousted from his formal role with the Clinton campaign last spring, faced fresh criticism earlier this week after newly released campaign memos revealed that he advocated painting Obama as foreign.

"All of these articles about his boyhood in Indonesia and his life in Hawaii are geared toward showing his background is diverse, multicultural and putting that in a new light. Save it for 2050," the memo added.

The e-mails shed light on a bigger problem plaguing Democratic Party stalwarts: how best to bring Clinton supporters into the Obama column.

Obama has said, however, that he doesn't anticipate "any problems."

But Obama's assessment runs counter to grumbling from some of Clinton's supporters, some peculiar praise from the former president and Sen. Clinton's seeming embrace of a plan to put her name into nomination.

In the modern era of presidential primaries, no losing candidate has so visibly endorsed an opponent so many months before the convention and still put his or her name up for nomination.

"I happen to believe that we will come out stronger if people feel that their voices were heard and their views were respected," the senator from New York has said of some of her supporters, who are demanding a role in the party's convention.

A video posted on YouTube showed Clinton talking to supporters who wanted to have her name put to a vote at the convention.

"I know from just what I'm hearing, there's incredible pent-up desire, and I think that people want to feel like, 'OK, it's a catharsis, we're here, we did it, and then everybody get behind Sen. Obama,' " she told the crowd.

Obama said last week that the brouhaha over whether Clinton's delegates would be able to vote for her at the Democratic convention was a media creation. "There hasn't been controversy other than what you guys are projecting right now," he told reporters Thursday.

Obama described conversations between the two campaigns over convention planning as "seamless."

"It has not been a problem," he added.

On Friday, Clinton seemed to agree. At an Obama rally in Las Vegas, Nevada, she said, "We had a hard-fought campaign, and it was exciting. It was a bit like the proverbial roller coaster, but we are now unified and ready to go forward together.

"And it is imperative that each and every one of us think about how we're going to help in this election," she said.

"We are one party, we share one vision, and we believe as Democrats, as independents and repentant Republicans, in the progress we can make together!"

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Fierce infighting undermined the US presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton as she rejected calls to paint rival Barack Obama as un-American, according to campaign documents published in a magazine expose Tuesday.

An inside glance at the rough-and-tumble fight for the Democratic nomination showed that Clinton's advisers and the New York senator first did not believe Obama was a serious contender and then failed to forge a strategy to fight him.

But the Atlantic monthly magazine feature by Joshua Green also characterized Clinton as not making the command decisions needed to resolve poisonous bickering between her top strategists.

"Clinton ran on the basis of managerial competence, on her capacity, as she liked to put it, to 'do the job from Day One,'" Green wrote.

"In fact, she never behaved like a chief executive, and her own staff proved to be her Achilles' heel."

Citing a trove of campaign internal documents and emails provided by staff of the now-failed campaign, Green showed that well before Obama gained an edge in the Democratic primaries, campaign chief strategist Mark Penn dismissed Obama's chances to become the US president while focusing on former vice president Al Gore -- who ultimately did not enter the race.

"The right knows Obama is unelectable except perhaps against Attila the Hun," he wrote in a campaign memo.

Still, Penn urged Clinton to portray Obama, who lived as a youth in Indonesia and Hawaii, as having "roots to basic American values and culture (that) are at best limited."

Senator Clinton "wisely chose not to go this route," Green wrote -- though much later the same strategy has since been picked up by Republicans seeking to blunt the African-American senator's White House quest.

But then Clinton's advisers fought for months without resolution on how to staunch Obama's march to victory in the primaries.

Green cited a document which showed that Clinton's team, despite having from the beginning a clear strategy, consumed by "anger and toxic obsessions".

While Clinton was a "shrewd strategist," she never weighed in to decide venomous battles between advisers.

On January 3, just after Obama scored a stunning upset victory in the bellwether Iowa primary, Green wrote, Clinton "seized control of her campaign."

But when her attempts in a conference call with staff to restart the effort were met by stunned silence, she became incensed.

"This has been a very instructive call, talking to myself," she said before hanging up, Green wrote.

The continued infighting, and disagreement over whether to launch negative attacks on Obama, led to rival strategists leaking embarrassing internal documents to the media.

Following a March 6 Washington Post article on the internal rancor over Penn's strategies, Robert Barnett, a respected Washington insider, blasted off a memo to the campaign.

"This circular firing squad that is occurring is unattractive, unprofessional, unconscionable, and unacceptable ...It must stop."

But neither that nor the sacking of campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle could save the campaign, as Obama continued to rack up the delegates that finally led to Clinton's conceding the race in June.

AFP, August 12, 2008

A stash of internal memos and emails from Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign yesterday exposed a toxic mix of indecision and infighting that destroyed her chances of winning the White House.

The 26 documents, posted online and to be published in Atlantic magazine, suggest Clinton failed to face up to tough decisions and act - while campaigning on the slogan of "Ready to lead on day one". They also suggest the Clinton campaign struggled to come up with a coherent strategy against Barack Obama, even when she was undisputed frontrunner.

Mark Penn, Clinton's chief strategist, repeatedly pushed for Clinton to attack Obama. "His roots to basic American values and culture are at best limited," Penn wrote in a March 2007 memo. "Let's explicitly own 'American' in our programmes, the speeches and the values. He doesn't." In the same memo, Penn writes: "The right knows Obama is unelectable, except perhaps against Attila the Hun."

Penn pushed for Clinton to emphasise her toughness. In a December 2006 memo laying out his launch strategy, he advised her to use Margaret Thatcher, the Iron Lady, as a role model. "Regardless of the sex of the candidates, most Americans in essence see the president as the 'father' of the country. They do not want someone who would be the first mama, especially in this kind of world. But there is a yearning for a kind of tough single parent."

But Clinton alternated indecision with flashes of temper. In December 2007, an enraged former first lady demanded her campaign go on the attack, after learning she was trailing Obama in Iowa. Within four minutes, according to the email trail published in the Atlantic, her press operation decided to attack Obama for overweening ambition on the basis of a comment he made as a five-year-old. The attack backfired on Clinton.

But by late February, after Clinton had had 12 consecutive primary defeats, she was again torn over attacking Obama, withholding her approval on the "3am" ads touting her fitness to deal with a national security crisis in the White House. According to Atlantic, it was Bill Clinton who finally issued the order to run the attack ads.

That mindset of paralysis alternated with too-hasty decisions extended to fundraising and delegate strategy. Warnings from Harold Ickes, a senior adviser, to keep $25m in reserve for the February contests went ignored, leaving the campaign without the money it needed to compete against Obama.

Suggestions from a staffer, Philippe Reines, that the campaign raise the issue of the disputed Florida and Michigan primaries, which could provide enough delegates to win the nomination, went ignored for three months.

The sheer quantity of email and memos produced by the campaign suggests a bureaucracy mired in its own infighting. By March, Clinton's friends were appalled. "This circular firing squad that is occurring is unattractive, unprofessional, unconscionable, and unacceptable," the Clintons' lawyer, Robert Barnett, wrote.

But the campaign clung on. The final memo from Penn in June lays out an argument to superdelegates, or senior and elected Democratic officials, for giving support to Clinton over Obama.

Some of Clinton's supporters have adopted the same die-hard approach, launching a signature petition this week to put her name on the ballot at the party's convention in Denver.

Meanwhile, Obama's campaign yesterday highlighted his ability to win over moderate Republicans and independents by producing endorsements from former Rhode Island senator Lincoln Chafee, and Iowa congressman Jim Leach.

Significant parts of the book, whose subtitle is "Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality," have already been challenged as misleading or false in the days since its debut on Aug. 1. Nonetheless, it is to make its first appearance on The New York Times best-seller list for nonfiction hardcovers this Sunday - at No. 1.

The book is being pushed along by a large volume of bulk sales, intense voter interest in Mr. Obama and a broad marketing campaign that has already included 100 author interviews with talk radio hosts across the country, like Sean Hannity and G. Gordon Liddy, Mr. Corsi said on Tuesday.

The publisher is Threshold Editions, a division of Simon & Schuster whose chief editor is Mary Matalin, the former Republican operative turned publisher-pundit. And it is a significant, early success for Ms. Matalin's three-year-old imprint, which is also planning to publish the memoirs of Karl Rove, President Bush's longtime political guru. Threshold says it has undertaken an extensive printing effort for anticipated demand, with 475,000 copies of "The Obama Nation" produced so far.

"The goal is to defeat Obama," Mr. Corsi said in a telephone interview. "I don't want Obama to be in office."

He said he was planning to aid several conservative groups that intend to run advertisements against Mr. Obama this fall, though he would not name them.

Mr. Corsi, who has over the years also written critically about Senator John McCain, Mr. Obama's probable Republican opponent, said he supported the Constitution Party presidential nominee, Chuck Baldwin, and had not been in touch with McCain aides. He called his reporting on Mr. Obama, which he stands by, "investigative," not prosecutorial.

Ms. Matalin said in an interview that the book "was not designed to be, and does not set out to be, a political book," calling it, rather, "a piece of scholarship, and a good one at that." She said she was unaware of efforts to link it to any anti-Obama advertising.

In its timing, authorship and style of reporting, the book is strikingly reminiscent of the one Mr. Corsi wrote with John O'Neill about Mr. Kerry, "Unfit for Command," which included various accusations that were ultimately undermined by news reports pointing out the contradictions. (Some critics of Mr. Kerry quoted in the book had earlier praised his bravery in incidents they were now asserting he had fabricated; one had earned a medal for bravery in a gun battle he accused Mr. Kerry of concocting.)

But books like "Unfit for Command," which remained for some 12 weeks on the Times best-seller list, and, now, "The Obama Nation," have become an effective and favored delivery system for political attacks. There have been anti-Clinton (both Bill and Hillary) and anti-Bush books too numerous to name. The sensational findings in these books, true or dubious, can quickly come to dominate the larger political discussion in the news media, especially on cable television and the less readily detectible confines of talk radio and partisan Web sites.

Fact-checking the books can require extensive labor and time from independent journalists, whose work often trails behind the media echo chamber.

Web sites on the left have begun poring over Mr. Corsi's latest book. Media Matters, which is run by David Brock, a former right-wing journalist who wrote a classic of the attack genre, "The Real Anita Hill," has been particularly aggressive in fact-checking the book, and its press releases on inaccuracies in the book have gotten some attention on cable television.

Several of the book's accusations, in fact, are unsubstantiated, misleading or inaccurate.

For instance, Mr. Corsi writes that Mr. Obama had "yet to answer" whether he "stopped using marijuana and cocaine completely in college, or whether his drug usage extended to his law school days or beyond." "How about in the U.S. Senate?" Mr. Corsi asks.

But Mr. Obama, who admitted to occasional marijuana and cocaine use in his high school and early college years, wrote in his memoir that he had "stopped getting high" when he moved to New York in the early 1980s. And in 2003 The State Journal-Register of Springfield, Ill., quoted him responding to a question of his drug use by saying, "I haven't done anything since I was 20 years old."

In an interview, Mr. Corsi said "self-reporting, by people who have used drugs, as to when they stopped is inherently unreliable."

Mr. Corsi described most of the critiques of his book as "nitpicking," like a contradiction of his claim that Mr. Obama had failed to dedicate his book "Dreams of My Father" to his family; Mr. Obama dedicated the book to several family members, in the introduction.

Mr. Corsi called the Media Matters critique inconsequential because it was advancing a liberal, political agenda.

Media Matters was created in part to answer a conservative "echo chamber" - one that liberal activists say they have still yet to match - that gives books like Mr. Corsi's extra bounce.

"There's just no doubt that in terms of longer-term infrastructure, there's more out there on the right than there is on the left," said Cliff Schecter, author of a liberal attack book on Mr. McCain, "The Real McCain," which, with 35,000 copies in print, did not make the Times bestseller list.

Mr. Obama's campaign has yet to weigh in heavily on Mr. Corsi's accusations. It appears to face the classic decision between the risk of publicizing the book's claims by addressing them and the risk of letting them sink into the public debate with no response.

"This book is nothing but a series of lies that were long ago discredited, written by an individual who was discredited after he wrote a similar book to help George Bush and Dick Cheney get re-elected four years ago," said Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for Mr. Obama. "The reality is that there are many lie-filled books like this in the works cobbled together from the Internet to make money off of a presidential campaign." He added, "We will respond to these smears forcefully."

Several Democrats associated with Mr. Kerry's campaign in 2004 said in interviews Tuesday that they were comfortable so far with Mr. Obama's more muted response to the book, which has not showed up yet in television advertisements.

Even Mr. Corsi said this book did not have what "Unfit for Command" had: a built-in interest group, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, to run advertisements against its target.

While he said he thought it was a certainty that he would be "assisting in the creation of ads in the fall," he did not say what he believed their content would be.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Hillary Rodham Clinton's top campaign strategist advised her to cast presidential rival Barack Obama as having questionable "roots to basic American values and culture" and use the theme to counter the image that his background is diverse and multicultural.

"I cannot imagine America electing a president during a time of war who is not at his center fundamentally American in his thinking and in his values," Mark Penn wrote in a March 2007 memo to Clinton.

Clinton did not take Penn's advice, revealed by a report in the September issue of The Atlantic magazine.

The article says Clinton's campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination went from front-runner status to failure for a number of reasons, from badly managed money to blistering warfare between advisers. Clinton, the candidate who said she was ready to lead on Day One of her administration, did little to quell the infighting.

Clinton grew angry during a conference call with her senior aides about how to recover from her loss in the Iowa caucuses. She found herself doing most of the post-mortem, to near-silence on the other end of the line.

"This has been a very instructive call, talking to myself," Clinton snapped, and hung up, the magazine reported.

Mostly, the disputes were over whether to go negative against Obama, a half-black, Harvard-trained lawyer with a gift for soaring rhetoric and big themes.

Penn advised going negative.

Obama's background - he grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii - was a "lack of American roots," Penn wrote. Also a weakness, he added, was the divisive rhetoric of Obama's controversial pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who cursed America during a sermon.

"Won't a single tape of Wright going off on America with Obama sitting there be a game-ender?" Penn wrote in a March 30 memo.

Penn's memos also contained prescient advice. The memo from March 2007 talked about the importance of a key voting bloc he called "the invisible Americans" - women and lower- and middle-class voters.

Those groups helped Clinton beat Obama in key states before she quit the race in June.

YORK, Pa. - One of the McCain campaign's new themes, that Senator John McCain has always put his country first, has been seen by some analysts as a subtle suggestion that his opponent, Senator Barack Obama, has not.

But as he introduced Mr. McCain at a campaign event here on Tuesday, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut made the attack a lot more explicit, calling the election a choice "between one candidate, John McCain, who has always put the country first, worked across party lines to get things done, and one candidate who has not."

Mr. Lieberman, the Connecticut Independent who was the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 2000, made the remark as he used his introduction of Mr. McCain to deliver a harsh assessment of Mr. Obama without mentioning his name.

"In my opinion, the choice could not be more clear: between one candidate, John McCain, who's had experience, been tested in war and tried in peace, another candidate who has not," Mr. Lieberman said. "Between one candidate, John McCain, who has always put the country first, worked across party lines to get things done, and one candidate who has not. Between one candidate who's a talker, and the other candidate who's the leader America needs as our next president."

Mr. McCain, for his part, told the town-hall-style meeting here that he had spoken by phone Tuesday morning with Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili - he referred to him familiarly as "Misha" - and told him that "today we are all Georgians."

"My friends, today the killing goes on," Mr. McCain said. "And the aggression goes on. Yet I know, from speaking this morning to the president of Georgia, Misha Saakashvili, whom I have known for many years, that he knows that the thoughts and prayers and support of the American people are with that brave little nation a they struggle today for their freedom and independence. And he wanted me to say thank you to you, to give you his heartfelt thanks for the support of the American people for this tiny little Democracy far away from the United States of America. And I told him that I know I speak for every American when I say to him: today we are all Georgians."

Some Georgians have felt abandoned by the West, which has encouraged it to act more independently of Russia, since Russia invaded it. Mr. McCain - who noted that he visited the disputed territory of South Ossetia two years ago - again spoke of his strong support for Georgia. His rundown of the situation there cataloged Russia's aggression but did not mention that Georgia had sent its military into South Ossetia last week.

His campaign bus, the Straight Talk Express, may no longer host the national press corps anymore, as the campaign has cut down access to the candidate. But it can still make quite an entrance: the bus drove right into the hangar-like hall, where a large crowd awaited Mr. McCain. To the theme from Rocky, natch.

"It's great to be here with Rocky McCain," Mr. Lieberman said, before going into his criticisms of Mr. Obama.

HONOLULU - In at least one way Senator Barack Obama's fund-raiser Tuesday night in Hawaii will be just like all the others: supporters had to fork over a big check - tickets cost $2,300 - to rub shoulders with the candidate.

And that's where the similarities end.

In almost every other way - from the dress code to the entertainment - the sold-out event at the luxury Kahala Hotel and Resort - will be a distinctly Hawaiian affair.

Guests will be treated to performances by an award-wining local hula ensemble as well as Kuhi Suganuma, who was crowned Miss Aloha Hula 2008. The musical entertainment includes Willie K, a guitarist who the Honolulu Weekly once described as "a Hawaiian Jimi Hendrix" and Raiatea Helm, a Grammy-nominated Hawaiian female vocalist.

The invitation lists Hawaii's Senators Daniel Inouye, Daniel Akaka as well as Representatives Neil Abercrombie and Mazie Hirono as honorary co-chairs of the event.

On the menu: Hawaiian pupus.

And leave your haute couture at home. The dress code tonight is "Aloha attire," according to the invitation. (In case you're wondering, that means flower-patterned Hawaiian shirts and muumuus are acceptable, even encouraged.)

More than 500 guests are expected at the fund-raiser, and those who contributed at least $10,000 to the Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee were invited to a V.I.P reception to have their picture taken with Mr. Obama.

The campaign is hoping to collect $1.5. million on Tuesday night. That is more than three-times their original goal and, as the Honolulu Advertiser pointed out today, would exceed the total amount Mr. Obama has raised from residents of Hawaii since he began his presidential campaign.

The private fund-raiser will be only the second - and perhaps last - event on Mr. Obama's official itinerary during his week-long vacation here.

The Illinois senator, who was born in Hawaii, has been keeping a low-key schedule on the island. On Monday, he visited his grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, at her Honolulu apartment for the third time on his trip. Later he watched "The Dark Knight," at a nearby movie theater and ate dinner with his wife, Michelle, his sister, Maya Soetoro-Ng, and a group of friends at an upscale Honolulu restaurant.

A new poll of likely women voters shows Democrat Barack Obama still has work to do to attract the ballots of some who backed Hillary Clinton in her primary fight with him.

Obama leads Republican John McCain, 49 percent to 38 percent among all women voters, according to the poll, but 18 percent of the women who voted for Clinton in the nomination fight say they plan to vote for McCain in November.

The survey, conducted for the Lifetime television networks by two respected pollsters, Democrat Celinda Lake and Republican Kellyanne Conway, was released last week.

The findings are important because women are likely to comprise a majority of the American electorate in what is shaping up to be another close presidential election. Some national tracking polls show the race in a statistical tie. McCain has gained in recent days.

"While the majority of women who voted for Hillary in the primary are flocking to Obama - 76 percent - nearly one out of five - 18 percent - say they will vote for McCain for president," according to the poll's findings.

Obama needs to try to stop that erosion if he hopes to win. In any primary contest, the losers' supporters are sometimes slow to join up with the winner, but these numbers suggest Obama still needs to pay special attention to Clinton and her voters.

(That could be difficult. A Pew Research poll last week showed 48 percent of voters say they've been hearing too much about Obama. Pew called this "Obama fatigue." Only 26 percent said they'd heard too much about McCain, and 38 percent said they'd heard too little. Only 10 percent said they'd heard too little from Obama.)

The Lifetime poll offered a mixed bag for Clinton.

"Despite all the talk about sexism in the presidential campaign, the majority of women voters laid the blame for Hillary's loss squarely on her and her strategists' shoulders, they largely reject gender as a cause of her demise," the poll found.

There were 34 percent who "believe she lost because of the kind of campaign she ran, 31 percent who said it was who she is and what she stands for and 21 percent who said it was because she is a woman.

"Despite losing the Democratic nomination, women (69 percent) credit Hillary for paving the way for tomorrow's female presidential candidates." The next female presidential candidate won't have to put up with all the novelty and tabloid scrutiny of being first.

There were 44 percent of the respondents who said they expect to see a woman president in the next eight years.

The poll has some whimsical findings:

- A majority - 51 percent - said if they were trying to carpool to save gas, they'd rather do it with Obama; only 31 percent preferred McCain.

AS BARACK Obama vacations in Hawaii, his staff is on heightened image alert in these two weeks before his official nomination for president. The problem is not Republican John McCain. It is the Democratic dysfunction erupting and festering all around him.

With the revelation last week by John Edwards that he had an affair in 2006, Obama is now deprived of a significant weapon in the values arsenal at the party convention in Denver. The former North Carolina senator, 2004 vice presidential candidate, and a third-place burr in the campaigns of Obama and Hillary Clinton made some interesting noise in the campaign by recasting himself as the voice for the poor, the working class, and against Washington lobbyists.

He was one of the Democrats who denounced President Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky for its "remarkable disrespect for his office, for the moral dimensions of leadership, for his friends, for his wife, for his precious daughter. It is breathtaking to me the level to which that disrespect has risen." With Edwards's outrageous display of disrespect - as his wife was in remission from cancer - the party is one scandal closer to forgetting why it took back the leadership of the House and Senate in 2006. The Democrats won in part because voters were tired of Republican moral immolation.

Reports say the Edwards family will not be at the convention. It will be interesting to see how the Democrats now handle the morals issue in Denver, let alone the notion as to whether the poor will have any voice at all.

Then there is the never-quite-buried hatchet between the Obama and Clinton staffs. The Atlantic Monthly magazine, according to Politico.com, will report this week that Clinton's former top campaign strategist, Mark Penn, wanted to run a more aggressive campaign against Obama than what unfolded during the primaries. Penn wanted to strike at the very heart of imagined voter uncertainties as to how "American" Obama is.

In two excerpts printed yesterday by The New York Times, Penn wrote memos saying:

"All those articles about his boyhood in Indonesia and his life in Hawaii are geared towards showing his background is diverse, multicultural, and putting that in a new light. Save it for 2050."

"I cannot imagine America electing a president during a time of war who is not at his center fundamentally American in his thinking and in his values."

In another excerpt posted by Politico, Penn advised, "Let's explicitly own 'American' in our programs, the speeches, and the values. He doesn't."

As it was, the Clinton campaign periodically embarrassed itself as volunteers and high-level surrogates created firestorms by passing along right-wing rumors that Obama is Muslim, said his youthful cocaine use made him unelectable, or diminished him as an affirmative action baby. It is small wonder that with friends such as these in his own party, Obama, a Christian, continues to battle the notion that he is Muslim. Newsweek polls in April and May and Pew Research Center polls in March and July are all frozen at between 10 and 13 percent of Americans who think Obama is Muslim.

Given the tightness of the last two presidential elections, the Pew poll holds particular dangers for Obama. There is no difference in the percentage of Democrats or Republicans who think Obama is a Muslim. And of the Democrats who think Obama is Muslim, 19 percent said they preferred McCain over Obama. "Democrats who share the misconception are significantly less likely to support Obama," Pew said about the poll.

Obama of course had no control of the private life of John Edwards or the inner workings of the Clinton campaign. But if he is to be president, he has to overcome the corrosion of such episodes as these. Voters in major polls say they want change on domestic issues such as the economy. But they also still trust McCain more for dealing with Iraq and terrorism. The fact that one in 10 Americans still think he is Muslim is a sign that Obama has to go to Denver on a heightened mission to define the Democrats and himself.

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Hillary Clinton would be the Democrats' White House nominee today if former presidential hopeful John Edwards had come clean earlier about an extra-marital affair, a top aide to Clinton believes.

"I believe we would have won Iowa, and Clinton today would therefore have been the nominee," Howard Wolfson, who was the combative communications director for Clinton's doomed campaign, told ABCNews.com.

In an interview released Monday, Wolfson also said that Clinton's campaign knew about the affair but kept quiet.

"Any of the campaigns that would have tried to push that would have been burned by it," he said.

Former senator Edwards, whose wife Elizabeth is stricken with terminal breast cancer, confessed Friday to having had an affair in 2006 with filmmaker Rielle Hunter.

But Edwards, who was the Democrats' vice presidential nominee in 2004 and bowed out of this year's White House race in late January, denied fathering the six-month-old baby of Hunter.

Wolfson insisted that Edwards voters in Iowa, whose presidential caucuses kicked off the 2008 race in early January, would have been behind Clinton rather than Barack Obama.

"Our voters and Edwards' voters were the same people," he said, citing internal polling by the Clinton campaign.

"They were older, pro-union. Not all, but maybe two-thirds of them would have been for us and we would have barely beaten Obama."

Obama, who is set to be crowned the Democratic nominee in just over a fortnight, won the Iowa caucuses with 37.58 percent of the vote. Edwards came second on 29.75 percent, a hair's breadth ahead of Clinton with 29.47 percent.

It was a shock result that derailed what was once seen as an "inevitable" march to the nomination by the former first lady, and put Obama firmly in the driving seat over the marathon primary process that followed.

Just two months before the caucuses, Edwards had angrily denied a National Enquirer report about an affair with Hunter, and the issue was ignored by the mainstream press until he belatedly came clean on Friday.

While the Obama campaign did not comment on Wolfson's claim, it can point to subsequent primary results to undermine the assertion that supporters of Edwards were a natural fit with Clinton's.

Both Edwards and Obama ran outsiders' campaigns that vowed to take on Washington politics, and after Edwards bowed out, the Illinois senator swept 11 nominating contests in a row in February.

But Wolfson's intervention does come at a sensitive time just ahead of the Democratic convention, with Clinton supporters demanding a potentially divisive roll-call vote to formally acclaim her battle for the nomination.

Meanwhile as Democrats denied that the revelations about Edwards would hurt their electoral chances in November, Hunter was reported to have ruled out a DNA test to establish the paternity of her baby.

Edwards offered to take the test in an emotional ABC television interview on Friday, when he also denied extending financial payments to Hunter to buy her silence.

AFP, August 11, 2008

I can't be the only person who sees the snake in the room. The one that slithers away whenever the political pundits start explaining what the latest presidential poll means.

From the moment Barack Obama went from a wannabe presidential contender to a front-runner, the race factor curled up and waited to strike anyone who got too close.

Still, whenever commentators talk about the close contest between Obama and John McCain, they ignore the snake.

Yet anyone who thought Obama would whip past McCain like an Olympic speed skater was being naive about the state of race relations in this country.

I wouldn't label as racist every white Democrat who switched to McCain after Hillary Clinton was dispatched, but acting as though racial prejudice no longer exists in this country is also wrong.

Obama tries to avoid talking about race, as do his surrogates, staffers and supporters.

But when a cable network interviewed Virginia voters during the Democratic primary, a white woman didn't stutter when she said she couldn't vote for a "Negra."

Does this woman represent a large percentage of the white voting population? Probably not. But there are still enough people like her out here, and they are giving the Obama campaign the flux.

He could put his birth certificate and his baptismal papers on his Web site, and some will still argue that he is a Muslim.

He could distance himself from every black leader who has ever said anything that might have offended white people, and he will still be perceived by some as running to represent Black America.

And he can swill beer, hit the lanes and ride in a pickup truck, and a percentage of blue-collar workers won't be able to bring themselves to vote for a black man who has surpassed them by every measure.

Indeed, it says a lot that McCain, who dumped his first wife to marry a wealthy heiress, is perceived to possess more of the values that resonate with voters than Obama does, according to some polls.

Using code words and nasty attack ads, the McCain camp might as well have called Obama an "uppity black." Yet, they are the ones complaining that Obama has dragged race into the campaign.

The truth is, despite avoiding the topic as much as possible, Obama hasn't transcended race.

Although he has tailored his message to appeal to white voters, McCain has a 17-point lead with white men and is leading by 10 points with whites overall, according to the Associated Press-Ipsos poll.

Those who argue that Obama's 55 percent lead among blacks and Hispanics and other minorities is proof that blacks are voting for him because he is black are ignoring the fact that blacks always vote heavily Democratic.

If Colin Powell was trying to become the first African-American president, he'd have to switch parties to pull similar numbers among black voters.

Women, minorities and young voters accounted for Obama's 6-point lead over McCain, according to the national poll.

Still, given the mess George Bush is leaving behind, conventional wisdom would lead you to believe that Obama won't have much trouble beating his opponent.

But in this election, race trumps the economy, an unpopular war and a dull candidate.

A poll taken in Florida found Obama and McCain in a statistical tie, with Obama at 46 percent of the vote and McCain at 44 percent, with a margin of error of 2.8 percentage points.

How Floridians summed up the potential first ladies was especially telling.

Voters there said Cindy McCain -- a former drug addict and thief -- better fits their idea of a first lady than Michelle Obama, someone who has not had a hint of scandal attached to her name.

How does that make any sense?

Like her husband, Michelle Obama has spent a great deal of time trying to convince white independent voters that she is not "unpatriotic" and "angry."

But I would not be surprised if a photo spread in an upcoming Harper's Bazaar of Tyra Banks pretending to be Michelle Obama in the White House doesn't result in a fresh round of complaints.

I disagree with those who say Obama ought to "suck up" the racial fear-mongering because it's a battle he can't win.

Maybe not.

But you wouldn't want to be in a room with a snake and deny that it is what it is.

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Diehard Hillary Clinton backers stepped up a campaign Wednesday to get their heroine onto the nominating ballot alongside White House hopeful Barack Obama at this month's Democratic convention.

But the Clinton and Obama campaigns issued a joint statement late Wednesday insisting they were working together to unify the party.

"We are working together to make sure the fall campaign and the convention are a success," the statement said.

"At the Democratic Convention, we will ensure that the voices of everyone who participated in this historic process are respected and our party will be fully unified heading into the November election," it said.

The group Colorado Women Count/Women Vote said it would hold a pro-Clinton parade in Denver on August 26, the second day of the convention when the New York senator is rumored to be given a prime-time speaking slot.

The date is also the 88th anniversary of female suffrage in the United States, and the group said it would press home its demand for Clinton supporters to have a chance to vote for her on the first ballot with Obama.

Even if she has no chance of winning, given Obama's overall lead in the delegate count, such a vote would mark a symbolic confirmation of the nearly 18 million primary votes won by Clinton during her battle for the nomination.

But other pro-Clinton groups such as PUMA (Party Unity My Ass) claim that she could still win the nomination if enough Obama delegates can be persuaded to switch sides at the Denver convention, and are lobbying to that end.

"That is not going to happen!" Clinton told a group of female supporters a week ago, while appearing to back the efforts to get her name on the first ballot as a cathartic exercise for the sake of Democratic unity.

"What we want to have happen is for Senator Obama to be nominated by a unified convention of Democrats," she said.

"The best way I think to do that is to have a strategy so that my delegates feel like they've had a role and that their legitimacy has been validated."

After a bitterly fought primary campaign with Obama, Clinton suspended her drive for the Democrats' presidential nomination in June and then gave her full backing to his election battle against Republican John McCain.

Following a pair of joint fundraisers in New York last month, she is due to hold a rally on Obama's behalf in Las Vegas on Friday and another in Florida on August 21, four days before the start of the Denver convention.

Obama, now safely secure in the party nomination, called Sunday for the renegade states of Michigan and Florida to be restored with full voting power after months of bitterness over their decision to hold early primaries.

That represented an olive branch to Democratic officials and voters in two states that will be vital players in November's presidential election.

Clinton won both unofficial contests, though neither candidate campaigned in Florida, and Obama was not on the ballot on Michigan.

But PUMA and other pro-Clinton groups such as the Just Say No Deal Coalition, vowing never to support Obama, are still threatening to raise a ruckus in Denver.

AFP, August 6, 2008

On a clear-skied Sunday in New York City's Flushing Meadows-Corona Park, a dozen Asian American teenagers scarf down hot dogs, fly kites and do their bit for the U.S. presidential race. Over the din of a crowd cheering rowers at the annual Hong Kong Dragon Boat Festival, the students, part of city council member John Liu's Youth Action Team, call out to passersby in Mandarin, Cantonese and English, "Have you registered to vote?"

For Asian Americans across the nation, it's an important question. Their numbers might be small compared to other ethnic groups-only five percent of the total population-but they've been growing nine to 10 times faster than the general population, according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census. That could swing the ballot in key states, according to "Awakening the Sleeping Giants?", a recent report by researchers at UCLA.

The broader significance of Asian American voters was evident in 1996, when U.S. Senate candidate Jim Webb garnered 76 percent of Virginia's Asian American and Pacific Islander votes, thus securing a narrow victory (less than 0.5 percent) over Republican incumbent George Allen, tipping control of the Senate to Democrats.

Barack Obama and John McCain are running neck and neck.

Impossible?

It would seem so. Republican President Bush still has less than a 30 percent approval rating. Headlines blare that unemployment and inflation are up -- even if we aren't, technically, in a recession. Gas is around $4 a gallon. Housing prices have nosedived. Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, has been indicted -- another in a line of congressional Republicans caught in financial or sexual scandal.

Meanwhile, the GOP's presumptive candidate, John McCain, is 71 years old. The Republican base thinks he's lackluster and too liberal.

So, everyone is puzzled why the Democratic candidate isn't at least 10 points ahead. It seems the more Americans get used to Barack Obama, the less they want him as president -- and the more Democrats will soon regret not nominating Hillary Clinton.

First, Obama was billed as a post-racial healer. His half-African ancestry, exotic background and soothing rhetoric were supposed to have been novel and to have reassured the public he was no race-monger like Al Sharpton. On the other hand, his 20-year career in the cauldron of Chicago racial politics also guaranteed to his liberal base that he wasn't just a moderate Colin Powell, either.

Yet within weeks of the first primary, the outraged Clintons were accusing Obama of playing "the race card" -- and vice-versa. Blacks soon were voting heavily against Hillary Clinton. In turn, Hillary, the elite Ivy League progressive, turned into a blue-denim working gal -- and won nearly all the final big-state Democratic primaries on the strength of working-class whites.

Americans also learned to their regret how exactly a Hawaiian-born Barack Obama -- raised, in part, by his white grandparents and without African-American heritage -- had managed to win credibility in what would become his legislative district in Chicago. That discovery of racial chauvinism wasn't hard once his former associate, his pastor for over 20 years, the racist Rev. Jeremiah Wright, spewed his venom.

Obama himself didn't help things as he taught the nation that his dutiful grandmother was at times a small-minded bigot -- no different from a "typical white person." And in an impromptu riff, Obama ridiculed small-town working-class Pennsylvanians' supposed racial insularity.

The primary season ended with a narrow Obama victory -- and a wounded, but supposedly wiser, Democratic candidate.

Third, Obama knows that all doctrinaire liberals must tack rightward in the general election. But due to his inexperience, he's doing it in far clumsier fashion than any triangulating candidate in memory. Do we know -- does Obama even know? -- what he really feels about drilling off our coasts, tapping the strategic petroleum reserve, NAFTA, faith-based initiatives, campaign financing, the FISA surveillance laws, town-hall debates with McCain, Iran, the surge, timetables for Iraq pullouts, gun control or capital punishment?

Fourth, Obama is proving as inept an extemporaneous speaker as he is gifted with the Teleprompter. Like most rookie senators, in news conferences and interviews, he stumbles and then makes serial gaffes -- from the insignificant, like getting the number of states wrong, to the downright worrisome, such as calling for a shadow civilian aid bureaucracy to be funded like the Pentagon (which would mean $500 billion per annum).

If the polls are right, a public tired of Republicans is beginning to think an increasingly bothersome Obama would be no better -- and maybe a lot worse. It is one thing to suggest to voters that they should shed their prejudices, eat less and be more cosmopolitan. But it is quite another when the sermonizer himself too easily evokes race, weekly changes his mind and often sounds like he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

In a tough year like this, Democrats could probably have defeated Republican John McCain with a flawed, but seasoned candidate like Hillary Clinton. But long-suffering liberals convinced their party to go with a messiah rather than a dependable nominee -- and thereby they probably will get neither.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is seeking a way for her delegates to be heard at the Democratic National Convention, telling supporters such a step will help unify a party that split between her and Sen. Barack Obama during their hard-fought nominating contest.

"I happen to believe that we will come out stronger if people feel that their voices were heard and their views respected. I think that is a very big part of how we actually come out unified," Clinton, D-N.Y., told supporters last week at a California fundraiser. A video clip of her remarks was posted on YouTube.

"Because I know from just what I'm hearing, that there's incredible pent up desire. And I think that people want to feel like, 'OK, it's a catharsis, we're here, we did it, and then everybody get behind Sen. Obama.' That is what most people believe is the best way to go," she said.

The former first lady did not rule out the possibility of having her name placed into nomination at the convention, being held Aug. 25-28 in Denver. But she also said no decisions had been made.

"We are trying work all this through with the (Democratic National Committee) and with the Obama campaign," said Clinton, who suspended her White House bid on June 7 and endorsed Obama, an Illinois senator.

Clinton campaign officials are negotiating with both parties to determine the full scope of her role at the convention. She is expected to deliver a prime-time address to delegates on Aug. 26, the second night of the gathering.

"We are working together to make sure the fall campaign and the convention are a success," said a joint statement released late Wednesday by the Clinton and Obama campaigns. "At the Democratic Convention, we will ensure that the voices of everyone who participated in this historic process are respected and our party will be fully unified heading into the November election."

Spokeswoman Kathleen Strand said Clinton believes "it's important that her supporters have a voice in some way," adding that no decisions have been made on how this would happen.

But advisers to the New York senator said she will almost certainly not ask to have her name placed in formal nomination at the convention, avoiding a divisive vote on the night Obama is expected to become the Democratic Party's first black presidential nominee.

Under DNC rules, Clinton must submit a signed, written request to have her name placed in nomination, accompanied by a petition signed by at least 300 delegates. Some Clinton delegates have circulated such petitions, but the effort is meaningless without Clinton's signed request.

Delegates are not formally pledged to any candidate so Clinton does not need to "release" them to Obama. The rules also say delegates may vote for the candidate of their choice whether or not the name of such candidate was placed in nomination.

DNC Chairman Howard Dean said in an interview last month that Clinton would have the right to put her name up for a binding vote at the convention.

"That's totally up to her," he said. "She is a duly registered candidate who got a lot of votes, and she is going to do what she wants to do."

Meanwhile, Democratic officials announced Wednesday that more than half of the 75,000 tickets for Obama's acceptance speech on Aug. 28, the convention's fourth and final night, will go to residents of Colorado, a battleground state critical to the party's hopes of winning the White House.

Ticket selection was designed "to showcase the gains the party has made in the West," she said.

Convention committee spokeswoman Natalie Wyeth declined to say how many tickets would be issued.

Last week, Obama campaign officials said they hope to turn the stadium crowd into a giant phone bank, with attendees using their cell phones to ask friends and others to register and vote.

The first three nights of the convention will be held at the 21,000-seat Pepsi Center.

By John McCormick, Chicago Tribune, August 7, 2008

Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama has fuelled speculation about potential running mates when he appeared with Indiana senator Evan Bayh on the campaign trail.

But the 47-year-old Illinois senator gave no indication he was nearing a decision as to who would be his vice president if elected in November's election. At the very latest, Mr Obama's running mate will be unveiled by the end of the Democratic Party's national convention in Denver, Colorado, at the end of the month.

Mr Bayh, who is widely considered to be on Mr Obama's shortlist, hailed the likely Democratic nominee as "a breath of fresh air" when he introduced him at a campaign event in Elkhart, Indiana.

Others thought to be on the list include Mr Obama's former rival Hillary Clinton, Delaware senator Joe Biden, Virginia governor Tim Kaine and Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius.

Mr Obama called Mr Bayh "one of the finest US senators that we have" today. The former governor of Indiana, which neighbours Mr Obama's home state of Illinois, has experience in government and represents a swing state, but his image as a political insider could be at odds with Mr Obama's message of change for America.

Delaware senator Mr Biden's 35 years in the US Senate and experience on its foreign relations committee could help Mr Obama overcome criticism of his own experience by former Vietnam prisoner-of-war John McCain, the Republican candidate.

Virginia governor Tim Kaine leads a state which the Obama campaign wants to target and would help the Democrat attract key constituencies, including the white working class, Hispanics, Catholics and southerners. But he has little experience, especially in foreign policy.

There has also been much talk among US pundits of a potential "dream ticket", with Mr Obama picking former first lady Mrs Clinton as his running mate. But a passionate, and often fierce, 16-month-long primary season between the two candidates led to frequent disputes between the two camps and many US pundits now feel an Obama-Clinton ticket is unlikely.

If Mr Obama wants a woman on the ticket, then Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius, who gave the Democratic response to this year's State of the Union address, could be considered. But a Democratic ticket devoid of any white men would be a radical choice and could alienate many voters across the US.

On the Republican side, Mr McCain is thought to be seriously considering former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, a former rival during the Republican primary season.

On the veep watch yesterday, Obama campaigned in Indiana with Senator Evan Bayh, who supported Hillary Clinton during the Democratic primaries but is believed to be under consideration by Obama.

Obama called Bayh "one of the finest US senators that we have." Bayh said Obama would bring "a breath of fresh air" to the nation's capital.

On the Republican side, Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota appeared to veer off message a little in an appearance in Arlington, Va., before GOPAC, a Republican political action committee that helps find party candidates.

"Say what you will about Barack Obama," Pawlenty said, "people gravitate when you have something positive to say. People want to follow hopeful, optimistic, civil, decent leaders. They don't want to follow some negative, scornful person."

He added that McCain has been positive as well, and later criticized Obama's experience and resume in comparison with McCain.

In a telephone interview, Bayh said Obama has not asked him to be his running mate.

"I'm absolutely confident there will be no announcement (today)," he said. "I guess the best way to put it is, if there's an announcement (today), I'd be as surprised as anybody else."

But, again, none of that means it couldn't still happen.

Bayh, a two-term senator from Indiana who also served two terms as governor, has been the focus of a media frenzy in recent days, including cable TV news shows and blogs, as speculation escalates that Obama is close to making his choice.

Bayh has been tapped by many as among a handful of names on the likely short list, along with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., and Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.

The length of Obama's visit here this week -- 21 hours, with Obama arriving Tuesday evening and scheduled to leave about 3:30 p.m. today -- added to the speculation that he was in Indiana for more than his scheduled town hall meeting in Elkhart this morning.

Bayh will introduce Obama at the event but said he knew of no plans for a private meeting with him.

He said he believed the campaign was trying to add another stop in Indiana, accounting for the length of the visit.

One additional sign that the rumors were off-base is that Bayh's wife, Susan; twin sons, Nick and Beau; and father, former Sen. Birch Bayh, will not be joining him on this trip.

In addition, Obama is scheduled for a weeklong vacation in Hawaii next week -- something he'd be unlikely to do immediately after announcing his vice presidential choice.

Bayh has been touted by some as a good fit for Obama. As a strong backer of Clinton during the primary, he could help bridge the two factions of the party; and he has executive experience as governor and foreign policy experience as senator. Even Republicans acknowledge that Bayh would be unlikely to make verbal missteps that could embarrass Obama.

Democrats in Indiana also hope his name on the ballot would mean their party could carry this state for the first time since 1964 and help them win other state races as well.

Barack Obama stands accused of introducing race into this election.

Why, before Obama quipped that the McCain campaign had nothing to offer but fear of "the other" - and then implied that he was the other because he "doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills" - I bet no one had given race a thought. Certainly not Billy Shaheen, the former co-chairman of Hillary Rodham Clinton's New Hampshire campaign, who suggested that Republicans would ask whether Obama had ever sold drugs.

Not Bill Clinton, who condescendingly likened Obama to Jesse Jackson and then described the reaction to that comment as a "mugging." Clinton is still reeling from the episode. During a recent interview with ABC News, Clinton insisted: "I am not a racist. I've never made a racist comment, and I didn't attack (Obama) personally."

Not Hillary Clinton, who - in a tacky remark condemned by one of her supporters, Rep. Charlie Rangel - questioned the strength of Obama's support among "hard-working ... white Americans."

Not the media, where pundits spent months examining the inane question of whether Obama was "black enough" only to turn around during the Rev. Jeremiah Wright fiasco and essentially ask if he wasn't too black. Analysts also insisted that Latinos wouldn't elect an African American president. Now, with Hillary Clinton out of the race, Obama leads McCain 2-1 among Latinos.

Not the New Yorker, which depicted Obama and his wife as flag-burning, fist-bumping, Osama bin Laden-worshiping black militants. While some of that is race-neutral in that the same could be said for a white militant, the fact that Obama is black only fuels the caricature because African Americans have long had to suffer fools who question their patriotism.

Not the voters, some of whom - according to polls - still have mixed feelings about making history and electing America's first black president. In a Washington Post-ABC News poll in June, 30 percent of white voters (and 34 percent of blacks) admitted to harboring some racial prejudice. In the poll, just over half of white voters called Obama a "risky" choice for president, but two-thirds considered McCain a "safe" one. Twenty percent of white voters thought that Obama would over-represent the interests of African Americans.

Really? Tell that to the African American hecklers who pestered Obama during a recent speech in St. Petersburg, Fla., holding up a banner that read: "What about the black community, Obama?" Some on the fringe complain that Obama hasn't addressed the concerns of a community that all but worships him so that he can appeal to the mainstream.

The point is that long before Obama noted that he doesn't resemble dead white males on dollar bills, race was already one of the currencies of this campaign. And, from the moment that Obama entered the contest and began playing to win, it was always going to be. Some are jumping on Obama for even alluding to race, when others have flirted with the topic for months.

Race doesn't have to become the dominant narrative of this election. But it is naive to think that it wasn't going to be woven in there somewhere. If anything, it seems that Obama has tried to avoid the subject out of fear that it'll weaken his support among white voters.

And so it looks childish for McCain campaign manager Rick Davis to rant and rave that Obama - in implying that Republicans would use race to scare up support for McCain - "played the race card, and ... played it from the bottom of the deck." Davis said this was "divisive, negative, shameful and wrong."

Give me a break. Davis went over the top. Obama was just pre-emptively dealing with a touchy subject before his opponents could use it against him. In response, Davis did the same thing. What was it that McCain said in defense of that desperate celebrity ad comparing Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton? "Campaigns are tough."

Yes, they are. But is it too much to ask that they also be useful? Are we done playing games? Can we start the real campaign now - the one where Obama and McCain explain how they would improve the economy, lower gas prices, save Social Security, pull out of Iraq, expand trade, provide illegal immigrants with earned legalization while securing the border, make the public schools accountable, etc?

You know, the campaign where we spend less time wringing our hands over where America has been and more time charting where we need to go.

By Ruben Navarrette Jr, San Diego-Union Tribune, August 6, 2008

The likely shift reflects concern among Democrats that they need to do more to regain the allegiance of Roman Catholic voters, who broke decisively for President Bush in 2004 and could be crucial to the outcome in a number of battleground states this year. Senator Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee, lost the Catholic vote badly to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who, like Mr. Obama, is a supporter of abortion rights, during the primaries in states like New Hampshire, Missouri and Ohio. In Pennsylvania, Catholic voters preferred Mrs. Clinton to Mr. Obama by a 40-point margin.

The Obama campaign is being close-mouthed about its convention plans and would not confirm whether Mr. Casey would be given a prime-time speaking slot. Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said that the call was Mr. Obama's, but that a prominent speaking role for Mr. Casey would assist in the candidate's efforts to woo Roman Catholic voters.

Mr. Casey, who endorsed Mr. Obama early and campaigned extensively for him in Pennsylvania, said there was no formal offer yet from Mr. Obama or the party. But, he said, "I think we'll get something worked out."

Mr. Casey's appearance would be an important signal to Catholics, especially those who follow church teachings and oppose abortion. Mr. Obama could also use his choice of a vice-presidential running mate to reassure Roman Catholics. Among those that his campaign is vetting is Gov. Tim kaine of Virginia, a Roman Catholic whose faith has been part of his political identity. At least three other Catholics have also been mentioned as possible running mates: Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut and Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas.

Although abortion is central to the political crosscurrents around Catholics - Ms. Sebelius has vetoed a number of bills that would restrict abortion rights in Kansas, prompting the archbishop of Kansas City to suggest that she stop receiving communion - part of Mr. Obama's strategy is to emphasize that there are other issues on which they can base their votes. It would be a way to address the perception that Mr. Obama has a "Catholic problem."

Douglas W. Kmiec, a conservative Catholic legal scholar at Pepperdine School of Law, said that although the formal teachings of the American Catholic bishops put primacy on the sanctity of life, including fetuses and embryos, doctrine allows for voting on other grounds, including the Iraq war, which the Vatican has opposed from the start.

Mr. Kmiec, a Republican who served in the Justice Department under President Ronald Reagan, said he was supporting Mr. Obama because his platform met the standard of justice and concern for the poor the church has always defended. This year, Mr. Kmiec was denied communion by a priest at a gathering of Catholic business people because of his support for Mr. Obama. Mr. Kmiec said, "The proper question for Catholics to ask is not 'Can I vote for him?' but 'Why shouldn't I vote for the candidate who feels more passionately and speaks more credibly about economic fairness for the average family, who will be a true steward of the environment, and who will treat the immigrant family with respect?' "

He urged Mr. Obama to invite Mr. Casey to speak as an answer to those who believe they cannot vote for someone who supported abortion rights.

Mr. Kmiec’s and Mr. Casey's views put them in conflict with millions of lay Catholics, for whom abortion is a nonnegotiable issue, and many Catholic clerics, including Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver, the site of the Democratic convention.

Archbishop Chaput, who has stopped short of telling his flock how to vote, has called abortion a "foundational issue." He has said that a vote for a candidate who supports abortion rights or stem-cell research, like Mr. Obama or Senator John Kerry in 2004, was a sin that must be confessed before receiving communion. Mr. Obama's Republican rival, Senator John McCain, an opponent of abortion rights, met last week in Denver with Archbishop Chaput.

The archbishop declined an interview request but his spokeswoman, Jeanette DeMelo, said that his views had not changed. In a column this year, Archbishop Chaput wrote that Catholics could support a politician who supported abortion only if they had a "compelling proportionate reason" to justify it. "What is a 'proportionate' reason when it comes to the abortion issue?" the archbishop wrote. "It's the kind of reason we will be able to explain, with a clean heart, to the victims of abortion when we meet them face to face in the next life - which we most certainly will. If we're confident that these victims will accept our motives as something more than an alibi, then we can proceed."

That is a tough standard for Mr. Obama, or any supporter of abortion rights, to meet. Republicans are gearing up campaigns to depict Mr. Obama as a radical on the question of abortion, because as a state senator in Illinois he opposed a ban on the killing of fetuses born alive.

Mr. Obama has said he had opposed the bill because it was poorly drafted and would have threatened the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade that established abortion as a constitutional right. He said he would have voted for a similar bill that passed the United States Senate because it did not have the same constitutional flaw as the Illinois bill. Mr. Obama has opposed the federal ban on so-called partial-birth abortions for similar legal and constitutional reasons.

That explanation did not wash with many abortion foes and most Republicans.

"When you look at his opposition to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act in Illinois and the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, which many Mass-attending Catholics view as bans on infanticide, Obama's more extreme than any other Democratic presidential candidate," said Leonard Leo, who directed Catholic outreach for Republicans in 2004, and is an informal adviser to the party and the McCain campaign.

Mr. Leo also said that the appearance of Mr. Casey on the dais at the Democratic convention would not be enough to address the concerns of faithful Catholics.

"He might get a slight bump from Casey among Catholics generally, but it doesn't get him all the way there because Casey-the-Younger isn't his father, and Mass-attending Catholics have figured that out," Mr. Leo said.

William A. Galston, a domestic policy adviser to President Bill Clinton and now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said Catholics were the quintessential swing voters. Mr. Galston said they were roughly a quarter of the electorate but lived in disproportionate numbers in the swing states of the Midwest. Polls show them closely divided between the two candidates. Mr. Galston said Mr. Obama could improve his standing with Catholics by, like Mr. Clinton in 1992, conferring with a group of Catholic leaders and then giving a substantive speech at Notre Dame or another Catholic institution.

Mr. Obama should also speak out in favor of legislation now before Congress to provide financing for alternatives to abortion like free prenatal care and adoption assistance, Mr. Galston suggested. Mr. Obama should also invite Mr. Casey to speak at the convention, he said.

"I spend a lot of time with Catholic intellectuals, and no matter how liberal they are and inclined to support Democrats, they speak with vehemence about the exclusion of Casey's father from the 1992 convention," Mr. Galston said. "They don't accept any of the explanations. I think it would be a dramatic act of historical rectification that would resonate with Catholics."

By John M. Broder, The New York Times, August 6, 2008

The latest population changes by race, ethnicity and age, as of July 1, 2007, were generally marginal compared with the year before. But they confirm the breadth of the nation's diversity, and suggest that minorities - now about a third of the population - might constitute a majority of all Americans even sooner than projected by census demographers, in 2050.

In 2000, black, Hispanic and Asian children under age 20 were at or near a majority in only about one-fifth of the counties and, over all, blacks, Hispanics and Asians accounted for 40 percent or more of the population in about one in seven counties.

Even with the growing diversity, all but one of the 82 counties where blacks make up a majority are in the South (except St. Louis), all but two of the 46 where Hispanics are in the majority are in the South or the West (except the Bronx and Seward, Kan., home to giant meatpacking plants), and four of the five counties with the largest proportion of Asians are in Hawaii (San Francisco rounds out the top five with 33 percent).

Except for two counties in New Mexico and South Dakota with large American Indian populations, the 10 counties with the highest proportion of minorities were along or near the Mexican border.

From 2006 to 2007, according to the bureau's revised estimates, the counties that became majority-minority included Rockdale, near Atlanta.

An analysis by Kelvin Pollard and Mark Mather of the Population Reference Bureau found 489 counties where a majority among people younger than 20 are racial and ethnic minorities and another 274 where they account for 40 percent to 50 percent of people in that age group.

The latest figures confirm the sweep of America's growing diversity, outside central cities and beyond black and white. In 109 of the 302 majority-minority counties, no single minority made up more than half the total population.

In the New York metropolitan area, the changes suggested that the city was experiencing a racial equilibrium while the suburbs were becoming more diverse.

The number of Asians rose in every county in the New York area. Only Manhattan lost Hispanics. Non-Hispanic whites declined in every county except those that make up Manhattan, Brooklyn and Staten Island, and in New Jersey, Monmouth.

An analysis by William H. Frey, a demographer with the Brookings Institution, found that since 2000 the top 10 gainers of non-Hispanic whites were all counties in the South or West, except for Manhattan and Will County, near Chicago.

Since 2000, Mr. Frey said, only one in six counties recorded an increase in the number of non-Hispanic white children under 15.

While half the counties recorded losses of non-Hispanic whites, Dr. Frey found, almost five times as many counties are losing white children as gaining them. A growing number of minority families with children are clustering in suburban and Sun Belt counties.

At the other extreme, he said, "are counties in the nation's industrial heartland, inner suburbs and Great Plains that are losing their largely white child and young adult populations."

Meanwhile, nine times as many counties are gaining mature adults as losing them.

People 65 or older made up 25 percent or more of the population in 24 counties, led by La Paz, Ariz., home to the Colorado River Indian Reservation, where they make up 32 percent. Most of the counties with disproportionately high populations 65 and older are in Florida, Texas and Michigan. Children under 5 make up 10 percent of the population in 26 counties, led by Webb County, Tex., on the Mexican border, where they constitute nearly 13 percent.

In contrast to Illinois, Mr. Obama's home state, neighboring Indiana has not supported a Democrat for president since 1964, when it was part of President Lyndon B. Johnson's landslide victory. But in this election, it is considered a battleground state. Many Republicans crossed over to vote Democratic in the May 2 primary, and there is some thought that putting Mr. Bayh on the ticket just might be enough to make this red state and its 11 electoral votes turn blue.

During the primary campaign, Mr. Bayh, 52, not only supported Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, he was also one of her national campaign co-chairmen and described her in an advertisement as having "a spine of steel." But his roots and popularity in Indiana run deep. His father, Birch Bayh, served three terms in the United States Senate (losing in 1980 to Dan Quayle, the last Indiana native to serve as vice president). And Evan Bayh served two terms as governor of Indiana before being elected to the Senate in 1998.

Still, there was not much to parse Wednesday at the event here, which focused, as have all of Mr. Obama's public appearances this week, on energy independence. Mr. Bayh introduced Mr. Obama as "my friend, our neighbor" and they embraced on the stage, Mr. Obama patting Mr. Bayh on the back and smiling warmly.

But a stop later in the day, at Schoop's Diner in Portage, exemplified the sometimes-feverish and ultimately undecipherable speculation that has been swirling around Mr. Bayh. He and Mr. Obama entered together, and, according to a pool report, after Mr. Obama ordered four cheeseburgers, a local reporter yelled out, "What does the V.P. want?"

Mr. Bayh smiled and said, "You're causing trouble." At that, another reporter asked about the speculation and Mr. Bayh said, "Nothing today." In fact, he added, the subject of the ticket did not come up on their bus ride to the diner. Instead, he said, they spoke about sports and family.

And Mr. Obama remained as mum on the subject during a conversation with reporters Monday night during a flight from Boston to Ohio, when he deflected a question about his leanings. Which is exactly why there was so much attention paid to body language and nuance when Mr. Bayh was in his company on Wednesday.

By Larry Rohter, The New York Times, August 6, 2008

Amid a sea of contributions to the McCain campaign, the Abdullahs stand out. The checks come not from the usual exclusive coastal addresses, but from relatively hardscrabble inland towns like Downey and Colton. The donations are also startling because of their size: several donors initially wrote checks of $9,200, exceeding the $2,300 limit for an individual gift.

Making matters murkier, some couples in the family who contributed more than $9,000 to Mr. McCain also gave the maximum in December to either Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton or Rudolph W. Giuliani, or both, totaling in the case of at least one family more than $18,000.

On Wednesday, an article in The Washington Post said the donations were collected by Harry Sargeant III, a Florida businessman who has also raised money for Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Giuliani.

It appears, however, that Mr. Sargeant, the finance chairman of the Florida Republican Party and the part-owner of a major oil trading firm, International Oil Trading Company, did not actually solicit the donations from the Abdullahs and their friends.

That task fell to a longtime business partner, Mustafa Abu Naba'a. Mr. Sargeant said in an interview that he has known Mr. Abu Naba'a for more than a decade and has worked with him on commercial ventures, including a contract with the Pentagon to supply fuel to the military in Iraq.

Through Mr. Abu Naba'a's connections, Mr. Sargeant has raised more than $100,000 in contributions from several dozen Arab Americans in California, including the Abdullahs, for four candidates: Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Giuliani, Mr. McCain and Charlie Crist in his successful campaign for Florida governor in 2006. Mr. Crist is a close friend and college fraternity brother of Mr. Sargeant.

Several of the donors were emphatic in interviews that they had made the contributions on their own and had not been reimbursed. Indeed, while the donors do not fit the typical profile of people who often make large political donations, it appears many have made relatively successful livings, toiling away at small businesses they own: an auto repair shop, a discount stereo warehouse, a realty company.

Brian Rogers, a spokesman for Mr. McCain, said the campaign strictly followed campaign finance laws and as a general rule would look into a matter if flags were raised, but he declined to say whether it would look into the contributions tied to Mr. Sargeant.

Mr. Sargeant is a former Marine fighter pilot who has business interests around the world. He hosted a fund-raiser for Mr. McCain at his lavish home in Delray Beach, Fla., this year. Mr. Sargeant estimated he had raised more than $200,000 for Mr. Giuliani and helped a business associate raise a similar amount for Mrs. Clinton.

But Mr. Sargeant's business dealings have caused controversy. Representative Henry Waxman, Democrat of California, opened an investigation last month into whether his company has been overcharging the military for its contract in Iraq, although Mr. Sargeant said Mr. Waxman's office had an erroneous understanding of what the company was billing.

As for his political fund-raising, Mr. Sargeant said he often turned to his business associates and asked them to solicit their extended families, although Mr. Sargeant said he was unclear exactly how Mr. Abu Naba'a knew the Abdullahs in California.

Mr. Sargeant said Mr. Abu Naba'a, who has a home in Florida, was unavailable for an interview because he was abroad.

Faisal Abdullah, a Palestinian immigrant who works as a director of operations of a window treatment company, identified himself in an interview as the driver behind the McCain donations from his relatives and friends. He sent them to Mr. Abu Naba'a, whom Mr. Abdullah described as an acquaintance.

Mr. Abdullah is an unlikely McCain fund-raiser, admitting he had soured on the Republican Party as a result of President Bush.

Nevertheless, he said that he harbored vague designs on a political career and that a discussion with Mr. Abu Naba'a gave him the idea that fund-raising was a way to get started. He said he initially collected numerous $500 checks for Mr. Crist from relatives and friends, and late last year, set out to raise money for the presidential campaign.

Mr. Abdullah said he cajoled a few relatives into giving the maximum donations to Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Giuliani, the early front-runners last year.

But when Mr. McCain claimed the mantle of presumed Republican nominee in March, Mr. Abdullah decided to support him.

"This is the horse I'm betting on for the future," Mr. Abdullah said.

He told his friends and relatives that the contributions were tax-deductible, something he later seemed surprised to learn from a reporter was not true. Many in his circle appear to have little affection for Mr. McCain but said they gave mostly as a favor to Mr. Abdullah.

Abdullah Makhlouf, the owner of a discount stereo store who is one of Mr. Abdullah's closest friends, and his wife contributed $9,200.

"He's like a worse copy than Bush," Mr. Makhlouf said of Mr. McCain.

When a reporter initially contacted Mr. Makhlouf, he denied giving to the McCain campaign.

After eventually admitting to the donation, Mr. Makhlouf added, "I'm still not going to vote for him."

WASHINGTON - Alice Rocchio is an office manager at the New York headquarters of the Hess Corp., drives a 1993 Chevy Cavalier and lives in an apartment in Queens, N.Y., with her husband, Pasquale, an Amtrak foreman.

Despite what appears to be a middle-class lifestyle, the couple has written $61,600 in checks to John McCain's presidential campaign and the Republican National Committee, most of it within days of McCain's decision to endorse offshore oil drilling.

At a June fundraiser, the Rocchios joined top executives at Hess Corp. - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer John Hess, his wife, Susan, his mother, Norma Hess, and six other officials in giving a total of $313,500 to a joint McCain-RNC fundraising committee, Federal Election Commission records show.

The donations, first traced by Campaign Money Watch last week, were part of $1.2 million in oil industry contributions to McCain's Victory '08 Committee, 73 percent coming after McCain reversed his long-held opposition to offshore oil drilling. The non-partisan watchdog group said oil executives and their spouses from Colorado, Mississippi, Louisiana, California, Indiana, New Jersey and Florida also donated.

Hess, among the nation's five biggest oil companies, conducts deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico as well as off the coasts of Europe, Africa and Asia.

The Rocchios donated $4,600 to McCain's campaign in February and another $57,000 at the June fundraiser.

Alice Rocchio, reached at the office, confirmed that she registered her '93 Chevy in February, but said that she "absolutely'' used her own money to make the donations.

Moments later, she asked a reporter: "Are you done with your questions?''

A former FEC official said that it's possible that the Rocchios had the means to make those hefty contributions - their first reported donations to a federal campaign. But the official, who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter, said that their donations also could trigger a complaint or otherwise catch the eyes of the agency's enforcement staff, tasked to ensure that companies or wealthy individuals don't illegally circumvent contribution limits by using employees or other third parties as "conduits'' for cash.

The staff might wish to determine whether the couple is too "under-employed'' to be making donations that large, the official said.

An agency spokesman declined to comment on the matter.

The McCain campaign had no immediate comment.

Of the $57,000 the Rocchios donated in June, $4,600 went to McCain's general election "compliance committee,'' to pay for campaign lawyers and auditors, and $52,400 went to the RNC, which devotes nearly all of its money to supporting McCain's presidential bid.

By Greg Gordon, McClatchy Newspapers, August 5, 2008

RALEIGH, N.C. - Former Sen. John Edwards has a deadline to save his spot on the national stage.

With two weeks to go before their national convention, a number of Democrats are saying that Edwards needs to publicly address National Enquirer stories that have alleged he had an affair with a campaign worker and fathered her baby.

If Edwards fails to clear up the story in short order, he risks party officials deciding not to have him speak or, if they do, creating a distraction from a week focused on Barack Obama accepting the nomination.

"If there is not an explanation that’s satisfactory, acceptable and meets high moral standards, the answer is 'no,' he would not be a prime candidate to make a major address to the convention," said Don Fowler, a former Democratic National Committee chair.

Democrats gather in Denver on Aug. 25 and Edwards, as the 2004 vice presidential nominee and a presidential candidate who won delegates this year, ordinarily would be locked in as a speaker.

"He absolutely does have to (resolve it). If it's not true, he has to issue a stronger denial," said Gary Pearce, the Democratic strategist who ran Edwards’ 1998 Senate race. "It's a very damaging thing. ...

"The big media has tried to be responsible and handle this with kid gloves, but it's clearly getting ready to bust out. If it's not true, he's got to stand up and say, 'This is not true. That is not my child and I'm going to take legal action against the people who are spreading these lies.' It's not enough to say, 'That’s tabloid trash,' " Pearce said.

Edwards is widely regarded as a rousing speaker, particularly on poverty, and still has as many as 19 delegates pledged to him, making him a logical choice for a high-profile convention role under normal circumstances.

Convention organizers said Wednesday that the schedule of speakers has not yet been announced.

Edwards' political currency declines with each day the story goes unresolved, Fowler and other Democratic strategists said.

An appearance at the convention would only highlight the unresolved story, said Chris Lehane, a Democratic consultant and former aide to then-Vice President Al Gore. A convention speaking appearance could become the moment that drives news media coverage of the alleged affair to explode.

"You want to address these issues long before you get to that point," Lehane said. "Otherwise people who haven’t written about it before, now start writing about it." Edwards' decision not to take questions about the alleged affair has allowed doubts to linger and political bloggers to speculate. The National Enquirer has reported that he fathered a child with a former campaign worker and met with her in a Beverly Hills hotel last month. He made no response to the National Enquirer’s posting on Wednesday of what it said was a photo of Edwards and his illegitimate child. Two weeks ago, after the National Enquirer ran the story about the hotel liaison, he dismissed a reporter’s question in Houston and used the "tabloid trash" line.

He brushed off a McClatchy reporter in Washington last week: "Can't do it now, I'm sorry."

His designated staffer for press contacts has not responded to e-mail requests for an interview.

No one answered a reporter who rang a buzzer at the gate of Edwards' Orange County home on Wednesday.

Friends and former staffers refuse to comment now, though they helped Edwards last fall by dismissing an October story in the Enquirer of a sexual relationship between Edwards and a campaign videographer when it initially broke.

"Sorry cannot help you on this one," wrote Jennifer Palmieri, a former top Edwards aide, in an e-mail Wednesday.

The Enquirer's October story, citing unnamed sources, claimed that Edwards was having an affair with a woman who had filmed a series of videos during his presidential campaign. The tabloid later reported that she was pregnant.

Two weeks ago, the tabloid posted a story online chronicling how Edwards had visited the woman, Rielle Hunter, and their child on July 21 at a Beverly Hills hotel and that the paper’s reporters confronted him afterward.

Hunter posted an online statement at the time denying the October story. In December, a campaign worker for Edwards, Andrew Young, claimed paternity of the woman’s then-unborn child. Last week, though, the Charlotte Observer obtained a copy of the child's birth certificate, which did not list the father. Hunter's lawyer would say only that "a lot of women do that" and that it was a personal matter between Hunter and Young.

Presidential candidates who lose in the primaries traditionally are invited to address their party's convention. Politico reported last month that Edwards told others he was promised a prime time speaking slot when he endorsed Sen. Barack Obama.

WASHINGTON - Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader is quietly making headway in his third bid for president.

He clinched a major victory last Saturday by getting on the California ballot as the nominee of the Peace and Freedom Party. In 2004, Nader wasn't on California's ballot - a state receptive to his antiwar, anti-corporate message - and was on the ballot in only 34 states. He said Wednesday that he's confident of getting on the ballot in 45 states this year.

With the major-party candidates in a close race, Nader could have an impact, perhaps as dramatic as in 2000, when the then-Green Party nominee received more than 97,000 votes in Florida, which Democratic nominee Al Gore lost by 537 votes to George W. Bush. That gave Bush an Electoral College majority and the White House.

Nader is at 3 percent in one recent poll and 6 percent in another.

True to form, however, he's complaining about being excluded from the presidential debates, paid for, he noted, by a "corporate duopoly" of the Democratic and Republican parties.

"Why do we ration debates in this country?" he asked. "You can only reach 2 percent of the public without debates."

The Commission on Presidential Debates stipulates that participants must have 15 percent support in national polls to be eligible.

Nader accuses the news media of being in a "cultural rut" by ignoring him. He said he'd been on national television only 10 seconds this election cycle.

"Put me in all the debates and we'll have a three-way race," Nader said of likely Democratic nominee Barack Obama and Republican nominee John McCain.

An AP-Ipsos poll released Tuesday shows Obama with a 6-point lead over McCain and Nader at 3 percent among registered voters. Recent CNN/Opinion Research polls scored Nader's support at 6 percent.

His critics worry about a repeat of 2000.

Nader, who's called Bush a "raging pit bull," hates the spoiler label that's been hung on him since that election, saying it's "a contemptuous word of political bigotry."

As for Obama, Nader said he "lost all respect for him" when the Illinois senator spoke out against impeaching Bush. Nader supports impeachment because of how Bush handled the lead-up to the war in Iraq.

While Nader doesn't seem to face a concerted Democratic campaign to block him from state ballots, as he did in 2004, so far he's on only 12 state ballots, according to the newsletter Ballot Access News. Nader campaign spokesman Chris Driscoll said signatures had been submitted in 26 states and that the campaign was on track to win access in 45 states.

In 2004 Nader received 463,653 votes, 0.4 percent of the total. In 2000, he received 2,882,955, 2.74 percent of the popular vote.

Political analyst Larry Sabato takes a jaundiced view of Nader's latest run.

"People aren't stupid," said Sabato, the director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia. "They're not going to throw their vote away. It's August, not November. When it matters in November, people will abandon third-party candidates."

Texas billionaire Ross Perot won more than 19 percent of the popular vote in 1992, but Sabato said he was an exception.

American University history professor Allan J. Lichtman thinks Nader still has a "limited appeal" to those who "are sick and tired of politics as usual."

And, Claremont McKenna University professor Jack Pitney said, as unlikely as he thinks a 2000 repeat is, "you can't completely rule out a Nader effect."

The conventional wisdom has it down pat: A bad economy works against the candidate from the party in power as voters take out their rage and fear on the president's party and back the challenger, just like they did in 1992. But this is not a normal economic slowdown (or recession) and Obama is not a normal challenger. I think the conventional wisdom may be dead wrong.

It is not so much that unemployment is so high (5.7%) or that the economy is in the tank (1% growth this quarter) as that everything seems to be falling apart. Banks are under assault, mortgages are in default, and quasi-government agencies like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac need bailouts, financial institutions go hat in had to foreign sovereign wealth funds peddling shares of their equity in return for desperately needed cash, the cost of filling a gas tank has tripled. It is not the present circumstances that have voters freaked, it is the threats that seem to loom on the horizon.

And Obama is no ordinary challenger. Not like Bill Clinton, for example. In 1992, from the first moment the campaign started, Clinton billed himself as the expert who could solve the economy's problems. His promise to "focus like a laser beam" on the recession won him big points throughout the campaign. His ten year record as a governor and his chairmanship of the National Governors' Association all bolstered his credentials. But we first met Barack Obama as an advocate of racial and partisan healing and then as an opponent of the war in Iraq. When he tried to morph into an economic expert in time for the Ohio and Pennsylvania primaries, voters didn't buy it and voted for Hillary.

So the question that hangs over the election is: Are we prepared to trust a new candidate with almost no experience and no claim to economic expertise in the middle of one of the most threatening economic situations we have ever faced?

Add to this backdrop, Obama's pledge to raise taxes and you have a combustible situation which could frighten American voters en masse. When, amid relative prosperity, Obama said he would restore fairness by raising taxes on the rich, it was well received, particularly in the Democratic primary. Raising the top bracket to 40% seemed a no-brainer. Applying the Social Security tax to more earned income, not just to the first $100,000, seemed like elemental fairness and a good way to save the pension system. Restoring the capital gains tax to 28% appeared to comport with the notion that those whose income comes from investment should pay a tax closer to that paid on earned income (despite the argument that it is after tax money that they invested in the first place).

But now, with massive capital outflows crippling the public and private sectors, doubling the tax on capital seems like a very, very bad idea. And a sharp increase in taxes on the entrepreneurial class seems like a risky proposition.

And, besides, when a candidate starts raising taxes, who knows where he will stop once his in office.

McCain can put economist after economist on the air to prophesy depression if Obama's plan for taxes is enacted. And the public will not be reassured by the Democrat's claims that his tax hikes are only on the rich.

It almost doesn't matter that McCain is not an economist and avows ignorance of what Thomas Carlyle called the "dismal science." We know McCain. We know he will surround himself with some pretty capable people and, above all, we know that he won't raise taxes.

Were these calmer times, with less of a threat from abroad and less economic danger, we might indulge our penchant for change and elect an ingénue in the hope that he will offer something different. We might be more easily captivated by his charisma. But, in these times, we may want to stay with the safer candidate.

Barack Obama may be the fresh face in this year's presidential election, but nearly half say they're already tired of hearing about him, a poll says.

With Election Day still three months away, 48 percent said they're hearing too much about the Democratic candidate, according to a poll released Wednesday by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center. Just 26 percent said the same about his Republican rival, John McCain.

Obama, the 47-year-old Illinois senator who would become the first black president, has dominated political news coverage much of the year. According to an ongoing Pew study, Obama has appeared in more news stories this year and more people say they have heard more about him than McCain, the longtime Arizona senator who also ran for president in 2000.

Two-thirds of Republicans and about half of independents said they've heard too much about Obama, as did a third of Democrats, a significant number.

At the same time, nearly four in 10 said they've been hearing too little about McCain _ about four times the number who said so about Obama. About half of Republicans, four in 10 independents and even a quarter of Democrats said they've not heard enough about the GOP candidate.

The poll was conducted from Aug. 1-4 and involved telephone interviews with 1,004 adults. It had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

Town Hall, August 06, 2008.

Come November, more Americans might cast their ballots on paper than in any other election in U.S. history.

That wasn't supposed to happen. If everything had gone according to the government's $3 billion plan to upgrade voting technology after the hanging-chad fiasco in Florida in 2000, that sentence would read "electronic machines" instead of paper.

Instead, thousands of touchscreen devices are collecting dust in warehouses from California to Florida, where officials worried about hackers and fed up with technical glitches have replaced the equipment with scanners that will read paper ballots.

An Associated Press Election Research survey has found that 57 percent of the nation's registered voters live in counties that will be relying on paper ballots this fall.

The number of registered voters in jurisdictions that will rely mainly on electronic voting machines has fallen from a high of 44 percent during the 2006 midterm elections to 36 percent. (Much of the rest of the electorate consists of voters in New York state, who will be using old-fashioned pull-lever machines.)

In fact, because of growth in the electorate over the past decade, expansion of absentee voting rules, and expectations of high turnout for the contest between Barack Obama and John McCain, some experts are predicting a record number of Americans will cast ballots on paper this year.

"More people will be using computer-read paper ballots than at any other time in the nation's history," said Kimball Brace, head of Election Data Services, a consulting firm. "As you get more registered voters and more people in the pool, it exacerbates this bigger issues of paper."

In 2000, about 97 million registered voters lived in counties that relied on some form of paper ballot, Brace said. That figure is expected to top 100 million this fall, according to the AP data.

The return to paper creates extra stress on an already-strapped election system. Cash-poor counties will have to spend tens of millions of dollars printing ballots. Voters, many of them first-timers, may wind up confused by the ballot formats and frustrated by long lines of people waiting to use the scanners. And counting all the paper could hold up the results of the election.

"After 2000, there was a widespread revulsion about paper - everyone had the mental image of the guy cross-eyed looking at the punch-card ballot," said Doug Chapin, director of the watchdog organization Electionline. "But there's no silver bullet. You're trading one set of problems for another."

All states but Idaho have junked the punch-card ballots that caused so much trouble in Florida. But many plan to use paper ballots that require voters to fill in ovals with a pen. The ballots are then read by digital scanners.

Unlike touchscreens, paper can't malfunction or be hacked into. But it has to be printed, shipped and securely stored before and after Election Day. Counties already paying to warehouse electronic machines will have to buy reams of card stock, print extras in multiple languages, pay for delivery and eventually destroy the unused ballots.

In counties that are on their third system in three presidential contests, officials are retraining workers in how to use the equipment and demonstrate it to voters. Broward County, Fla., which was caught in the punch-card maelstrom in 2000, has produced guides showing voters how to feed their paper ballots into the scanners.

"A lot of officials are in damage-control mode because they're going to try to limit the problems of switching to paper," said Mike Alvarez, an expert in voting technology at Caltech in Pasadena. "You will have ballots not showing up, being printed wrong, the litany of mistakes voters make with these ballots, and then there's incredible pressure in a crowded polling place for people who are trying to make their decision."

As Brace put it: "Paper is traditionally the device that the public is really good at screwing up."

In 2000, about 61 percent of registered voters lived in counties that relied on some form of paper ballot, whether punch-cards or fill-in-the-oval forms, according to Election Data Systems. Only 13 percent of voters lived in counties that used touchscreens or other e-voting devices; the rest used pull-lever machines.

With fewer than 100 days until Nov. 4, the first concern for many election officials is making sure they will be able to get all their ballots printed between the time the national, state and local slates have been selected and Election Day.

California, the nation's biggest electoral prize, with more than 16 million people registered to vote, abruptly outlawed most electronic machines last summer, creating a potential crunch in the highly specialized ballot-printing industry. San Diego contracted with a Washington state company after local businesses said they couldn't produce the 3.5 million extra ballots in the two-month window.

Many paper ballots may wind up in the shredder.

THE RACE: The presidential race nationally

THE NUMBERS (CBS News)

Barack Obama, 45 percent

John McCain, 39 percent

___

OF INTEREST:

Obama's lead in the CBS News poll has not changed since June. Combining undecided voters with those who favor one candidate but say they may switch, about four in 10 have not made a final decision. Among the likeliest to be undecided are supporters of Hillary Rodham Clinton, 24 percent, and women, 17 percent. McCain now is viewed as more believable than Obama: 49 percent say he says what he believes, compared to 42 percent for Obama. In May, just over half said each was believable. Fifty-three percent of voters say they are paying a lot of attention to the campaign - a level not surpassed during the 2004 campaign until October of that year. Three-quarters want the next president to pay more attention to domestic rather than foreign policy issues.

___

The CBS News poll was conducted from July 31-Aug. 5 and included interviews with 906 registered voters. It had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

To understand why Barack Obama and John McCain are emphasizing solutions to the country's energy woes and have scrambled to change their positions, look no further than the voters' distress over $4-a-gallon gasoline and its wide ripple effect.

The presidential candidates' sparring over energy peaked this week as each sought to capitalize on a topic that touches every voter and provides a way to discuss the declining economy at home, national security threats abroad and the changing climate worldwide.

"Sen. McCain's energy plan reads like an early Christmas list for oil and gas lobbyists," Obama charged Wednesday, a day after accusing the GOP of misstating his proposals. He is using the issue to paint the four-term Arizona senator as a Washington insider beholden to special interests while trying to strike a balance on the environment vs. exploration debate that divides Democrats.

Conversely, McCain is leading a Republican Party largely unified in support of oil and gas drilling off U.S. coastlines and is trying to use energy to cut the Democrat's edge in the polls on economic issues. He dubbed Obama "Dr. No" because of his opposition to expanded nuclear power and unlimited offshore drilling. Said McCain on Wednesday: "We need an 'all of the above' plan."

This year energy policies resonate with voters of all political stripes, as high gasoline prices inflate the cost of food, transportation and other necessities. The country's dependence on foreign oil raises national security concerns as U.S. troops fights wars in the oil-rich Middle East. And, the public's concern over global climate change has grown in recent years along with calls for alternative energy sources to curb planet-warming greenhouse gases.

"Almost everyone wants this problem solved," said Andrew Kohut, director of the nonpartisan Pew Research Center. "The candidates are responding to the fact that the public is hurting and crying for relief."

Interviews and surveys bear that out.

"We can help our family less and less" because high gas costs are "pretty bad" and crunching the family's budget, said Renee Wren, a 50-year-old Riverview, Fla., homemaker with three grown children who are semi-dependent and two grandchildren.

In St. Louis, Carla Fehribach, a 65-year-old airline customer service agent, is shopping and going out less because gas prices have strained her budget. She said: "I don't do things I would normally do right now."

Like many others, Fehribach and Wren say energy proposals will help them determine their vote. Both are leaning toward Obama now.

An ongoing AP-Yahoo News poll that began in November shows that gas prices have risen steadily to near the top of voters' concerns; the issue now is second only to the economy. A whopping 87 percent surveyed now say gas prices are at least a very important issue to them personally, while roughly the same amount as before the primaries - 62 percent - say the environment is at least a very important issue.

Also, a Pew Research Center poll in June found growing support for more energy exploration. Roughly the same percentage of people said drilling and other exploration should be the top priority as said energy conservation should get the most attention. A few months earlier, far more people favored conservation than exploration.

More than half of those in a USA Today/Gallup Poll in late July said they would be more likely to vote for a candidate who favored easing restrictions on offshore drilling, while one third said they'd be likelier to oppose that candidate. Even more - nearly seven in 10 - said they'd be likelier to support a candidate who favored tax breaks for energy conservation, raising mileage requirements for vehicles, and increasing federal research on alternative energy.

GOP efforts may be swaying some undecided voters.

"I would have to lean more toward McCain with this offshore drilling," said Gene Zupkofska, 71, a retiree in Rockland, Mass. In Amarillo, Texas, Terry Hearn, too, cited McCain's drilling position on that as a primary reason he's seriously considering the Republican over the Democrat. Said Hearn, age 51: "They need to do something" to try to lower gas prices.

McCain reversed his opposition to more offshore drilling in June and endorsed lifting a federal moratorium to allow individual states to decide whether to drill in waters off their coasts. Thereafter, President Bush backed the move and Republicans in Congress beat the drilling drum.

Obama was pulled in two directions as liberal Democrats continued to oppose drilling because of environmental concerns while other Democrats revised their longtime positions to respond to voters' distress.

Over the last week, Obama dropped his longtime opposition to offshore drilling and to using the nation's oil stockpile: He said he'd be willing to support limited offshore drilling if that's what it takes to enact a comprehensive energy policy and proposed releasing 70 million barrels from the nation's 707-million-barrel strategic oil reserve to help lower pump prices.

The diverse culture of the nation's 50th state - and the island nature of Hawaii itself - shaped Barack Obama's view of the world and the politics he would practice.

Those who knew him as a child say that view and those politics click with the themes of his Democratic presidential campaign. For Obama, though, Hawaii is even more personal, the place where he picked up basketball and formed his racial identity.

"If you grow up here, where we have no majority and there's a complete ethnic mix, people have learned how to get along with others who look different and are from different places," said longtime family friend Georgia McCauley.

"In Hawaii, because we have a confined space in terms of being an island state, we perhaps have to learn how to cooperate and compromise more," McCauley said. "We learn how to listen to each other and work on things in a positive manner."

This weekend, Obama planned to return to the island where he spent his childhood as a pudgy kid called Barry who lived in a modest apartment with his grandparents. He planned to visit his maternal grandmother and sister for a few days of vacation before the Democratic National Convention in Denver at month's end.

Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961 to a white mother and a black father who had met in Russian class at the University of Hawaii. He was an island boy most of his first 18 years. His mother's charitable work, his multiethnic friends and the economic gap between his family and his classmates at the island's most prestigious private school - he attended on scholarship - helped forge Obama before he left for college on the mainland.

His father, also named Barack Obama, was a scholarship student from Kenya. His mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was an 18-year-old from Kansas who went on to become an anthropologist and helped set up loans for poor people to start businesses in Indonesia.

Their marriage didn't last long. When Barry was 6, he moved to Indonesia, the homeland of his stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, another university student his mother met in Hawaii. Obama was 9 when his half-sister, Maya Soetoro-Ng, was born. She now teaches history in a private girls high school in Honolulu.

Obama has recounted numerous instances when he felt like an outsider, as when a seventh grader called him a "coon" and the parents of a white girl objected to her going to the prom with him. The islands' roughly 49,000 blacks account for less than 4 percent of the population.

"Hawaii's spirit of tolerance might not have been perfect or complete. But it was - and is - real," Obama wrote in a 1999 essay for the Punahou alumni magazine. "The opportunity that Hawaii offered - to experience a variety of cultures in a climate of mutual respect - became an integral part of my world view, and a basis for the values that I hold most dear."

He left the islands for Occidental College in Los Angeles, then graduated from Columbia University before taking a church-based community organizing job in Chicago and moving on to Harvard Law School. He returned to Illinois as a civil rights lawyer. When he won the U.S. Senate race in 2004, Hawaii Democrats adopted Obama as the state's "third senator." He continued to make regular visits to be with family and friends, the last in December 2006, as Democrats were urging him to seek the presidency.

"He himself is a child of diversity, and Hawaii gave him that opportunity," said Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, who was friends with Obama's family and remembers him as a boy. "He believes diversity defines you, rather than divides you. That's the central message of change he's bringing. It's nothing to be afraid of."

Republican presidential candidate John McCain is taking up the issue of possible job losses due to the closure of a DHL shipping site in Ohio, the result of a corporate merger aided by his campaign manager during his work as a lobbyist.

In 2003, McCain campaign manager Rick Davis lobbied Congress to accept a proposal by German-owned DHL to buy Airborne Express, which kept its domestic hub in Wilmington in southwest Ohio.

In announcing a restructuring plan in May, DHL said it planned to hire United Parcel Service to move some of its air packages, sending them through an airport in Louisville, Ky., and putting the Wilmington Air Park out of business. Some 8,000 jobs could be at stake, Wilmington officials estimate.

Davis took a leave of absence from his lobbying practice to work for McCain, a self-styled reformer who asked his campaign staff to disclose all previous lobbying ties and make certain they were no longer registered as lobbyists or foreign agents.

McCain on Thursday was to discuss DHL's plans with local officials and others affected by the potential job losses. The economy and job losses are important issues in Ohio, a critical swing state that gave President Bush the electoral votes needed for re-election in 2004.

McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers said Wednesday that Davis had not worked with DHL since 2005, long before DHL announced plans to move its work out of Wilmington. The companies merged in 2003.

"At the time of the merger, no one anticipated an impact on jobs in Wilmington," Rogers said.

McCain, as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, had a role in the deal too. He urged then-Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens to abandon proposed legislation that would have prohibited foreign-owned carriers from flying U.S. military equipment or troops, which Airborne Express said was aimed at torpedoing its merger with DHL.

Rogers said McCain opposed the bill because it could have hurt the military's airlift capabilities in a time of war.

The DHL-Airborne deal ultimately went through, despite opposition from competitors UPS and FedEx, which argued that it would violate a ban on foreign control of domestic airlines. DHL is the U.S.-based shipping unit of German postal service Deutsche Post AG.

On Wednesday, Sen. Sherrod Brown, an Ohio Democrat and supporter of presidential hopeful Barack Obama, called on McCain and Davis to use their past ties to DHL to urge the company not to move jobs out of Wilmington.

"John McCain through this whole thing has said zero about his connection to DHL," Brown said. "We need their help. I'm accusing them of indifference."

A task force of local and federal elected officials as well as business and labor leaders has been working to save the jobs.

"This is worthy of every presidential candidate's attention," Wilmington Mayor David Raizk said. "Whether it's a vote-changing issue or not, I think it might be a little too early to tell. It's a matter of making sure our situation here stays on the front burner."

In a statement Wednesday, Ohio Republican Sen. George Voinovich called the situation "one of the worst job catastrophes that any community in this nation is facing" and said the involvement of both McCain and Obama indicated it merited global attention.

"We are going to need some involvement by the German government," Voinovich said.

DHL declined to comment.

Ohio is a general election battleground state, and rural southwest Ohio, where Wilmington is located, is a Republican stronghold. In 2004, Clinton County - which includes Wilmington - voted for Bush over Democrat John Kerry by more than 2-to-1, even though Bush narrowly won the state.

WASHINGTON - Pundits see Hillary Clinton fading as a possible running mate for Democrat Barack Obama. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Tuesday referred to her as "the big name" who "would make a great vice president."

Pelosi was asked whether the Obama campaign had signaled Clinton was out of the running because the New York senator and ex-presidential candidate has been slotted to speak on the Tuesday of the Aug 25-28 Democratic convention. The vice presidential nominee traditionally addresses the convention on Wednesday while Obama will speak on the final evening - Thursday.

"I think convention schedules can be changed," said Pelosi, who will chair the Colorado convention.

Pelosi was quick to add that she does not have "the faintest idea" who Obama will pick. "I think the only person who knows maybe is Barack Obama himself and Michelle Obama."

By TOM BRUNE, Newsday, August 6, 2008

The conventional wisdom is that $4 gasoline raises the odds that Sen. Barack Obama will become the nation's next president.

This may well turn out to be the case, since history suggests an ailing economy, in this case hurt by high energy prices, works to the advantage of the political party that does not hold the White House.

Yet, the American people are undergoing a change of opinion when it comes to all things energy that might actually provide a useful campaign opportunity for Sen. John McCain.

Simply put, this transformation offers the Republican presidential nominee a potential vehicle to turn around his largest problem - voters don't think he can resurrect the nation's slumping economy.

It provides him the chance to redefine the economic debate to emphasize reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil and rescuing the American economy from the straitjacket of rising energy prices. Doing so would take the focus off rising joblessness, the real-estate crisis and health care - issues that work to the Democrat's advantage - and shift it to energy, where the Republican might hold the edge in public opinion.

Energy Policy Beats War Stance

Moreover, a new series of Quinnipiac University polls in the last two weeks has found that voters in six of the seven largest swing states in the Electoral College say a candidate's energy policy has become more important to their choice for president than his views on the Iraq War. In the seventh, Florida, the war has a 1% margin.

The big plus for Sen. McCain comes from the fact that $4 gasoline has forced voters to re-evaluate their view that more drilling for oil and natural gas in previously protected areas offshore or in Alaska is not worth potential environmental risks.

They've shed that notion along with their previous reluctance to support expansion of nuclear power - long unpopular due to safety concerns - to produce electricity.

Clearly Sen. McCain is aware of this transformation. He is trying to make the most of it, seeking to link the energy issue and the need to increase production of existing fossil fuels to the economy, which voters say is their top concern when it comes to picking a president.

And, at the very end of last week, Sen. Obama showed he understood the changing political climate. He indicated he would accept more drilling off a portion of the nation's coastline if there was a bipartisan energy compromise reached in Congress - as likely as a snowfall in this summer's highly charged political climate.

Not only do voters agree with Sen. McCain about the need for drilling but also the issue offers an opportunity to make him the candidate of change while branding Sen. Obama as the captive of the status quo by catering to environmentalists over the national interest.

The Candidate for Drilling - and Change

If Sen. McCain can successfully make that case to the American people it might undercut the central theme of Sen. Obama's campaign: that he is the candidate of the future who will make real change in Americans' lives.

The Quinnipiac University polls in the seven key battleground states, whose electoral votes will decide the November election, finds either majority or large plurality support for opening up previously protected areas offshore and in Alaska for drilling.

The data come from Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin (the last four were surveyed in conjunction with The Wall Street Journal and washingtonpost.com).

To be clear, the surveys found that Americans would still prefer that future energy needs be met by development of alternative energy sources such as solar, wind or biomass. They want the government to mandate better car mileage and also say they favor more conservation over more exploration.

However, what has changed is that high energy prices have apparently driven home the argument that the pro-drilling and nuclear power folks have been making for years: That renewable, alternative energy sources are decades from being able to significantly cut America's need for fossil fuels. And the only way to bring down the high prices and avoid sending billions of dollars daily overseas is to increase domestic production of oil and natural gas.

Interestingly, the public's support for drilling appears to override its distaste for President George W. Bush. While only roughly a quarter of Americans approve of the president's job performance, strong majorities agree with him that Congress needs to follow his decision to allow drilling in previously closed offshore oil fields.

Sen. McCain recently changed his position to favor opening up those offshore areas for drilling because of the energy crisis. He suggests that Sen. Obama's refusal to go along with more drilling by itself shows that the Democratic candidate doesn't understand the seriousness of the problem.

Whether Sen. McCain can use the energy issue to raise questions about Sen. Obama's judgment or not, a shift in the campaign's spotlight from the Iraq War and the real estate/mortgage crisis surely can't hurt the Republican's chances.

In America, we like our steak medium rare, our beer ice-cold and, as a rule, we expect our first ladies to act out the part of the supportive political spouse, the archetypal housewife in the ultimate white house. Look pretty, but don't speak out of turn, a la Laura Bush. Glam it up, but always in a demure, ladylike way, like Jackie O. And if you have to speak your mind, like Hillary Rodham Clinton, then be prepared to pay the price. When Clinton, one of the most polarizing figures in modern American politics, said dismissively in 1992 that "I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was fulfill my profession," she endured a storm of conservative criticism.

In her outspokenness, Clinton is much like Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, ex-supermodel, C-list pop star, occasional centerfold and the new first lady of France. The difference is that in France, the public couldn't care less about the public gaffes of its political wives; they're more interested in preserving the 35-hour workweek. The difference between Bruni-Sarkozy and her possible future American counterparts, Cindy McCain and Michelle Obama, couldn't be starker. As America's November election nears and the candidates and their families go under the magnifying glass, Americans seem to want their political spouses to present a pristine appearance, even if they aren't Snow White.

On her new album, "Comme Si de Rien N'etait" (As if Nothing Had Happened), Bruni is in no danger of being compared to the virginal cartoon character. She sings, presumably in reference to her husband, French President Nicholas Sarkozy, lyrics that would make Tammy Wynette blush if she were alive: "You need to understand, you are my lord, you are my love, you are my orgy." Her music has also referred to heroin and polyandry - one can be reasonably sure that the only kind of cookies she might bake would have psychotropic qualities. The Italian-born Bruni-Sarkozy, with her penchant for unforgettable metaphor, has been embraced by the notoriously nationalistic French, but in America, she never would have had a chance. Never mind her enthusiasm for group sex; she's just too darn beautiful.

The McCain and Obama wives are discreetly stylish, appealingly pretty and, not by accident, conspicuously nonthreatening. Michelle might love a nice set of pearls as much as the next woman, but the wholesome image they represent is probably part of the reason she's been seen sporting them all over the country. Consultants, campaign advisers, focus groups hover in the background - it's not just the husbands who have hand-tailored images. Sartorial strategy factors into the bigger political picture, and you can be sure there is someone considering the broader implications of hemlines, color palettes and cleavage.

Clinton's success in the primaries sparked some celebratory rhetoric about barriers being broken and glass ceilings shattered, and without a doubt, her candidacy has raised the bar of possibility for American women. But missing from this conversation is an acknowledgement of the way that America's complicated relationship to its own sexuality influences the standards by which women in public life are judged. We sneer at the French and their "liberated" ways, but they make allowances for the humanity of their political figures instead of holding them up to a desexualized standard of perfection that often yields disappointment, or, alternately, deception. In her latest publicity bombshell, Bruni-Sarkozy poses with a catlike smile on the cover of this month's Vanity Fair, and inside, she stands defiant in a blood-red gown that billows in the wind, on the roof of the Elysee Palace, in Paris. In the accompanying interview, it is clear she is not going to apologize for being herself. Simon Doonan, the creative director of Barneys New York and author of "Eccentric Glamour," sums up the difference between the two countries' conceptions of political figures: "America still has that Puritan thing going on: self-denial is a prerequisite for public service." Just try telling that to Carla.

In fact, Obama's actual energy plan is much more than a tire gauge. But that's not what's so pernicious about the tire-gauge attacks. Politics ain't beanbag, and Obama has defended himself against worse smears. The real problem with the attacks on his tire-gauge plan is that efforts to improve conservation and efficiency happen to be the best approaches to dealing with the energy crisis - the cheapest, cleanest, quickest and easiest ways to ease our addiction to oil, reduce our pain at the pump and address global warming. It's a pretty simple concept: if our use of fossil fuels is increasing our reliance on Middle Eastern dictators while destroying the planet, maybe we ought to use less.

The RNC is trying to make the tire gauge a symbol of unseriousness, as if only the fatuous believed we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil without doing the bidding of Big Oil. But the tire gauge is really a symbol of a very serious piece of good news: we can use significantly less energy without significantly changing our lifestyle. The energy guru Amory Lovins has shown that investment in "nega-watts" - reduced electricity use through efficiency improvements - is much more cost-effective than investment in new megawatts, and the same is clearly true of nega-barrels. It might not fit the worldviews of right-wingers who deny the existence of global warming and insist that reducing emissions would destroy our economy, or of left-wing Earth-firsters who insist that maintaining our creature comforts would destroy the world, but there's a lot of simple things we can do on the demand side before we start rushing to ratchet up supply.

We can use those twisty carbon fluorescent lightbulbs. We can unplug our televisions, computers and phone chargers when we're not using them. We can seal our windows, install more insulation and adjust our thermostats so that we waste less heat and air-conditioning. We can use more-efficient appliances, build more-efficient homes and drive more-efficient cars, preferably with government assistance. And, yes, we can inflate our tires and tune our engines, as Republican governors Arnold Schwarzenegger of California and Charlie Crist of Florida have urged, apparently without consulting the RNC. While we're at it, we can cut down on idling, which can improve fuel economy another 5%, and cut down on speeding and unnecessary acceleration, which can increase mileage as much as 20%.

And that's just the low-hanging fruit. There are other ways to reduce demand for oil - more public transportation, more carpooling, more telecommuting, more recycling, less exurban sprawl, fewer unnecessary car trips, buying less stuff and eating less meat - that would require at least some lifestyle changes. But things like tire gauges can reduce gas bills and carbon emissions now, with little pain and at little cost and without the ecological problems and oil-addiction problems associated with offshore drilling. These are the proverbial win-win-win solutions, reducing the pain of $100 trips to the gas station by reducing trips to the gas station. And Americans are already starting to adopt them, ditching SUVs, buying hybrids, reducing overall gas consumption. It's hard to see why anyone who isn't affiliated with the oil industry would object to them.

Of course, in recent years, the Republican Party has been affiliated with the oil industry. It was the oilman Dick Cheney who dismissed conservation as a mere sign of "personal virtue," not a basis for energy policy. It was the oilman George W. Bush who resisted efforts to regulate carbon emissions. And most congressional Republicans have been even more reliable water carriers for the industry's interests.

John McCain has been a notable exception. He is not an oilman; he has pushed to regulate carbon emissions; and he opposed Bush's pork-stuffed energy bill, which Obama supported. He also opposed efforts to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and until recently opposed new offshore drilling. But now that gas prices have spiked, McCain is running for President on a drill-first platform, and polls suggest that most Americans agree with him. It's sad to see his campaign adopting the politics of the tire gauge, promoting the fallacy that Americans are powerless to address their own energy problems. Because the truth is: Yes, we can. We already are.

And the root of it is probably this: Obama has been a sojourner. He opened his book "Dreams From My Father" with a quotation from Chronicles: "For we are strangers before thee, and sojourners, as were all our fathers."

There is a sense that because of his unique background and temperament, Obama lives apart. He put one foot in the institutions he rose through on his journey but never fully engaged. As a result, voters have trouble placing him in his context, understanding the roots and values in which he is ineluctably embedded.

Last week Jodi Kantor of The Times described Obama's 12 years at the University of Chicago Law School. "The young law professor stood apart in too many ways to count," Kantor wrote.

He was a popular and charismatic professor, but he rarely took part in faculty conversations or discussions about the future of the institution. He had a supple grasp of legal ideas, but he never committed those ideas to paper by publishing a piece of scholarship.

He was in the law school, but not of it.

This has been a consistent pattern throughout his odyssey. His childhood was a peripatetic journey through Kansas, Indonesia, Hawaii and beyond. He absorbed things from those diverse places but was not fully of them.

His college years were spent on both coasts. He was a community organizer for three years but left before he could be truly effective. He became a state legislator, but he was in the Legislature, not of it. He had some accomplishments, but as Ryan Lizza of The New Yorker wrote, he was famously bored by the institution and used it as a stepping stone to higher things.

He was in Trinity United Church of Christ, but not of it, not sharing the liberation theology that energized Jeremiah Wright Jr. He is in the United States Senate, but not of it. He has not had the time nor the inclination to throw himself into Senate mores, or really get to know more than a handful of his colleagues. His Democratic supporters there speak of him fondly, but vaguely.

And so it goes. He is a liberal, but not fully liberal. He has sometimes opposed the Chicago political establishment, but is also part of it. He spoke at a rally against the Iraq war, while distancing himself from many antiwar activists.

This ability to stand apart accounts for his fantastic powers of observation, and his skills as a writer and thinker. It means that people on almost all sides of any issue can see parts of themselves reflected in Obama's eyes. But it does make him hard to place.

When we're judging candidates (or friends), we don't just judge the individuals but the milieus that produced them. We judge them by the connections that exist beyond choice and the ground where they will go home to be laid to rest. Andrew Jackson was a backwoodsman. John Kennedy had his clan. Ronald Reagan was forever associated with the small-town virtues of Dixon and Jimmy Carter with Plains.

It is hard to plant Obama. Both he and his opponent have written coming-of-age tales about their fathers, but they are different in important ways. McCain's "Faith of My Fathers" is a story of a prodigal son. It is about an immature boy who suffers and discovers his place in the long line of warriors that produced him. Obama's "Dreams From My Father" is a journey forward, about a man who took the disparate parts of his past and constructed an identity of his own.

If you grew up in the 1950s, you were inclined to regard your identity as something you were born with. If you grew up in the 1970s, you were more likely to regard your identity as something you created.

If Obama is fully a member of any club - and perhaps he isn-t - it is the club of smart post-boomer meritocrats. We now have a cohort of rising leaders, Obama's age and younger, who climbed quickly through elite schools and now ascend from job to job. They are conscientious and idealistic while also being coldly clever and self-aware. It's not clear what the rest of America makes of them.

So, cautiously, the country watches. This should be a Democratic wipeout. But voters seem to be slow to trust a sojourner they cannot place.

Such a small core of activists don't post much of a political problem for Obama, who is popular among voters who identify themselves as liberal.

But this group previewed some issues where they would challenge Obama if he wins in November.

"In other areas--such as the use of residual forces and mercenary troops in Iraq, the escalation of the US military presence in Afghanistan, the resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the death penalty--your stated positions have consistently varied from the positions held by many of us, the 'friends on the left' you addressed in recent remarks," they wrote. "If you win in November, we will work to support your stands when we agree with you and to challenge them when we don't. We look forward to an ongoing and constructive dialogue with you when you are elected President."

The letter adapted Obama's own slogan "Change We Can Believe In," with special emphasis on the word "we." It was also signed by author Walter Mosley and Katrina Vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation.

By Perry Bacon, The Washington Post, August 5, 2008

Behind those larger donations is a phalanx of more than 500 Obama "bundlers," fund-raisers who have each collected contributions totaling $50,000 or more. Many of the bundlers come from industries with critical interests in Washington. Nearly three dozen of the bundlers have raised more than $500,000 each, including more than a half-dozen who have passed the $1 million mark and one or two who have exceeded $2 million, according to interviews with fund-raisers.

While his campaign has cited its volume of small donations as a rationale for his decision to opt out of public financing for the general election, Mr. Obama has worked to build a network of big-dollar supporters from the time he began contemplating a run for the United States Senate. He tapped into well-connected people in Chicago prior to the 2004 Senate race, and once elected, set out across the country starting to cultivate some of his party's most influential money collectors.

He courted them with the savvy of a veteran politician, through phone calls, meals and one-on-one meetings; he wrote thank-you cards and remembered birthdays; he sent them autographed copies of his book and doted on their children.

The fruits of his efforts have put Mr. Obama's major donors on a pace that almost rivals the $147 million raised by President Bush's network of Pioneers and Rangers in contributions of $1,000 or larger during the 2004 primary season.

Given his decision not to accept public financing, Mr. Obama is counting on his bundlers to help him raise $300 million for his general-election campaign and another $180 million for the Democratic National Committee.

An analysis of campaign finance records shows that about two-thirds of his bundlers are concentrated in four major industries: law, securities and investments, real estate and entertainment. Lawyers make up the largest group, numbering roughly 130, with many of them working for firms that also have lobbying arms. At least 100 Obama bundlers are top executives or brokers from investment businesses: nearly two dozen work for financial titans like Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs or Citigroup. About 40 others come from the real estate industry.

The biggest fund-raisers include people like Julius Genachowski, a former senior official at the Federal Communications Commission and a technology executive who is new to political fund-raising; Robert Wolf, president and chief operating officer of UBS Investment Bank; James A. Torrey, a New York hedge-fund investor; and Charles H. Rivkin, chief executive of an animation studio in Los Angeles.

"It's fairly clear that this is being packaged as an extraordinary new kind of fund-raising, and the Internet is a new and powerful part of it," said Michael J. Malbin, executive director of the Campaign Finance Institute. "But it's also clear that many of the old donors are still there and important."

The care and feeding that top Obama fund-raisers have received underscores their significance to his campaign. Members of his National Finance Committee who fulfill their commitment to raise at least $250,000 are being rewarded with trips to the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

Finance committee members participate in conference calls with top campaign officials every other week. The fund-raisers meet quarterly, often with Mr. Obama dropping in. He lingered after the most recent meeting in June in Chicago, telling his staff he wanted to thank every person in the room. Some fund-raisers who knocked on doors for Mr. Obama in places like Indiana, Iowa and Pennsylvania got to spend time with Mr. Obama backstage before and after speeches on primary nights.

His fund-raisers invariably say their support for him is not rooted in any kind of promise of access, but rather their belief in him.

"This is about Barack Obama and changing the direction of our country," said Jonathan B. Perdue, a business consultant in Mill Valley, Calif., who has raised more than $250,000 for Mr. Obama's campaign.

Mr. Obama has pledged not to accept donations from lobbyists or political action committees registered with the federal government. But some top donors clearly have policy and political agendas. Hedge-fund executives, for example, have bundled large sums for Mr. Obama at a time when their industry has been looking to increase its clout in Washington.

Kenneth C. Griffin, chief executive officer of Citadel Investment Group in Chicago, has collected more than $50,000 for Mr. Obama. But Mr. Griffin, whose $1.5 billion in income in 2007 made him one of the country's highest-paid hedge-fund executives, has given generously over the years to Republicans as well, and he recently helped to hold a fund-raiser for Mr. McCain. Citadel has spent more than $1.1 million, dating back to 2007, in lobbying against higher tax rates for hedge-fund gains. (Mr. Obama has supported the higher tax rates.)

Similarly, Paul Tudor Jones, a billionaire hedge-fund manager from Connecticut, has raised more than $100,000 for Mr. Obama. But he also gave to Mr. McCain, to Rudolph W. Giuliani and to Mitt Romney. Mr. Jones, who has given more than $900,000 over the last decade to federal candidates and political organizations, helped form a trade association that has fought hedge-fund regulation.

The Obama fund-raising operation is meticulously organized. Bundlers are assigned tracking numbers, and the finance staff sends them quarterly reminders of how they are doing in meeting their goals.

"There's no price for admission," said Alan D. Solomont, a top Democratic fund-raiser in Boston who made his fortune in the nursing home industry and has given more than $1.5 million to Democratic candidates and causes. "We value every donation and every donor equally. But we are a performance-based organization. We want everybody to feel like they're included, but at the same time we're not here to have tea together."

Mr. Obama began courting many of his fund-raisers soon after he burst upon the national scene with his rousing speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention.

Mr. Solomont, a major fund-raiser both for Mr. Kerry and for Bill Clinton during their presidential runs, received a call on his cellphone in February 2005, a year after Mr. Obama's election to the Senate, from a member of his staff who asked if he would like to get together with Mr. Obama.

They met for Chinese food in Washington the following week, and Mr. Obama scored points with Mr. Solomont when he pointed out that they had both been community organizers earlier in their careers.

"I've been involved in politics a long time," Mr. Solomont said. "Nobody's bothered to know that about me."

Early that same year, Mr. Obama attended a dinner in the Bay Area for about 20 major Kerry supporters. The dinner was organized by Mark Gorenberg, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist who was Mr. Kerry's single biggest fund-raiser, after Mr. Obama's staff members contacted him. Several of those on hand, including Mr. Gorenberg and John Roos, head of a Silicon Valley law firm, became among the earliest and biggest check collectors for Mr. Obama's presidential bid.

In 2006, Mr. Obama became a vice chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, giving him the opportunity to campaign across the country and to cultivate other potential benefactors.

When his book "The Audacity of Hope" came out later that year, his staff members organized book parties at the homes of major Democratic donors.

In December, Mr. Obama visited the New York office of the billionaire investor George Soros to court a roomful of high-powered Democratic fund-raisers, hoping to lure some of them away from Mrs. Clinton. Not everyone was swayed, but Mr. Obama won over Orin Kramer, a hedge-fund executive from New Jersey, and Mr. Wolf, the UBS executive, both of whom are now among Mr. Obama's biggest fund-raisers.

Mr. Obama signed on as his finance director Julianna Smoot, who had led fund-raising for Senate Democrats and, before that, for Senator Tom Daschle when he was majority leader.

With guidance from Ms. Smoot, a key part of the campaign's fast start was its success in scooping up top former Kerry fund-raisers, including Lou Susman, a Chicago investment banker who was Mr. Kerry's national finance chairman, and Kirk Wagar, a lawyer in Miami who became Mr. Obama's finance chairman in Florida.

Even so, the initial meeting of Mr. Obama's national finance committee, held in Chicago the day after he officially announced his candidacy, was a relatively small affair, numbering about 75 people.

Penny Pritzker, the billionaire heiress to the Hyatt hotel fortune whom Mr. Obama asked to become his finance chairwoman, challenged the group to double in size.

The number of bundlers ballooned quickly. The Obama campaign made important inroads among affluent people under age 45, including Silicon Valley engineers and hedge-fund analysts, many of whom had not been on the political radar screen.

Donations in June, the latest month for which Mr. Obama has disclosed his donors to the Federal Election Commission, illustrate the double-barreled nature of the campaign's fund-raising. Mr. Obama brought in nearly $31 million in contributions of less than $200, his best month for small donations. But he also collected more than $12 million in contributions of $1,000 or more, the most since the first half of 2007.

The share from large contributions appears poised to increase, as Mr. Obama has stepped up his fund-raising schedule.

"In 2007, the campaign relied on the tried and true methods like fund-raisers, for both large- and small-dollar donors, with the candidate or his surrogates, and the Internet largely financed it in 2008," said Kirk Dornbush, the president of a biotech firm and a top fund-raiser in Atlanta. "When you combine the traditional fund-raising methods with the continued online contributions, you have a very, very powerful fund-raising engine."

Forty-seven years after he last looked out from behind the bars of a South Carolina jail cell, locked away for leading a march against segregation in Columbia, James Clyburn occupies a coveted suite of offices on the second and third floors of the United States Capitol, alongside the speaker and the House majority leader. Above his couch hangs a black-and-white photograph of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. speaking in Charleston, with the boyish Clyburn and a group of other men standing behind him onstage. When I visited Clyburn recently, he told me that the photo was taken in 1967, nine months before King's assassination, when rumors of violence were swirling, and somewhere on the side of the room a photographer's floodlight had just come crashing down unexpectedly. At the moment the photo was taken, everyone pictured has reflexively jerked their heads in the direction of the sound, with the notable exception of King himself, who remains in profile, staring straight ahead at his audience. Clyburn prizes that photo. It tells the story, he says, of a man who knew his fate but who, quite literally, refused to flinch.

On the day in early July when Clyburn and I talked, Barack Obama, who is the same age as one of Clyburn's three daughters, had recently clinched his party's nomination for president. Clyburn, who as majority whip is the highest-ranking black elected official in Washington, told me that on the night of the final primaries he left the National Democratic Club down the street about 15 minutes before Obama was scheduled to speak and returned home to watch by himself. He feared he might lose hold of his emotions.

"Here we are, all of a sudden, in the 60th year after Strom Thurmond bolting the Democratic Party over a simple thing, something almost unheard of - because he did not want the armed forces to be integrated," Clyburn said slowly. "Here we are 45 years after the 'I have a dream' speech. Forty years after the assassinations of Kennedy and King. And this party that I have been a part of for so long, this party that has been accused of taking black people for granted, is about to deliver the nomination for the nation's highest office to an African-American. How do you describe that? All those days in jail cells, wondering if anything you were doing was even going to have an impact." He shook his head silently.

This time, however, a lot of the old activists stood in the path of an African-American's advancement rather than blazing it. While Democratic black voters embraced Obama by ratios of 8 or 9 to 1 in a lot of districts, the 42 House members in the Congressional Black Caucus, for a time, split more or less down the middle between Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton, and the country's leading black ministers and mayors trended toward the Clinton camp. Clyburn himself declined until the very end to endorse a candidate in this year's primaries, saying that his leadership role required him to remain neutral, but he made no effort to disguise his relief at having been able to invoke that excuse. "Being African-American, sure, my heart was with him," Clyburn told me. "But I've got a head too. And in the beginning my head was with Clinton. The conventional wisdom was that this thing was going to be over in February."

He then recalled a moment, just after the Georgia primary in early February, when he ran into John Lewis, the legendary civil rights leader and Georgia congressman, on the House floor. Lewis was in anguish over the primaries. He had endorsed his friend Hillary Clinton, but his constituents had gone heavily for Obama, and he was beginning to waver. As Clyburn remembered it, Lewis told his old friend sadly that after all these years, they were finally going to see history yield to the forces they had unleashed. "And I'm on the wrong side," Lewis said. (Later, after weeks of public vacillating, he would switch his allegiance.)

It is hard for any outsider to fully understand the thinking that led many older black leaders to spurn the candidacy of a man who is now routinely pictured, along with '60s-era revolutionaries like Angela Davis and Malcolm X, on the T-shirts sold at the street-corner kiosks of black America. ("You'd be real embarrassed if he won and you wasn't down with it," the comedian Chris Rock joked to a Harlem audience while introducing Obama last November. "You'd say: 'Aww, I can't call him now! I had that white lady! What was I thinking?' ") Conversations like those I had with Clyburn and Lewis, however, begin to illuminate just how emotionally complicated such internal deliberations were.

On a surface level, those who backed Clinton did so largely out of a combination of familiarity and fatalism. If you were a longtime black leader or activist at the end of 2007, you probably believed, based on your own life experience, that no black man was going to win the nomination, let alone the presidency. ("If anybody tells you they expected this result, they're not being honest with you," Clyburn cautioned.) You knew the Clintons personally, or at least you knew their allies in the community. Who was this Obama, really, aside from the resonant voice and the neon smile? As Charles Rangel, Harlem's powerful representative and a strong Clinton ally, told me recently, "Of course I would support someone I knew and had liked and had worked with, versus someone I'd never heard of."

The generational transition that is reordering black politics didn't start this year. It has been happening, gradually and quietly, for at least a decade, as younger African-Americans, Barack Obama among them, have challenged their elders in traditionally black districts. What this year's Democratic nomination fight did was to accelerate that transition and thrust it into the open as never before, exposing and intensifying friction that was already there. For a lot of younger African-Americans, the resistance of the civil rights generation to Obama's candidacy signified the failure of their parents to come to terms, at the dusk of their lives, with the success of their own struggle - to embrace the idea that black politics might now be disappearing into American politics in the same way that the Irish and Italian machines long ago joined the political mainstream.

"I'm the new black politics," says Cornell Belcher, a 38-year-old pollster who is working for Obama. "The people I work with are the new black politics. We don't carry around that history. We see the world through post-civil-rights eyes. I don't mean that disrespectfully, but that's just the way it is.

"I don't want in any way to seem critical of the generation of leadership who fought so I could be sitting here," Belcher told me when we met for breakfast at the Four Seasons in Georgetown one morning. He wears his hair in irreverent spikes and often favors tennis shoes with suit jackets. "Barack Obama is the sum of their struggle. He's the sum of their tears, their fights, their marching, their pain. This opportunity is the sum of that.

"But it's like watching something that you've been working on all your life sort of come together right before your eyes, and you can't see it," Belcher said. "It's like you've been building the Great Wall of China, and you finally put that last stone in. And you can't see it. You just can't see the enormity of it."

The latest evidence of tension between Obama and some older black leaders burst onto cable television last month, after an open microphone on Fox News picked up the Rev. Jesse Jackson crudely making the point that he wouldn't mind personally castrating his party's nominee. The reverend was angry because Obama, in a Father's Day speech on Chicago's South Side, chastised black fathers for shirking their responsibilities. To Jackson, this must have sounded a lot like a presidential candidate polishing his bona fides with white Americans at the expense of black ones - something he himself steadfastly refused to do even during his second presidential run in 1988, when he captured more votes than anyone thought possible.

Most of the coverage of this minor flap dwelled on the possible animus between Jackson and Obama, despite the fact that Obama himself, who is not easily distracted, seemed genuinely unperturbed by it. But more interesting, perhaps, was the public reaction of Jesse Jackson Jr., the reverend's 43-year-old son, who is a congressman from Illinois and the national co-chairman of Obama's campaign. The younger Jackson released a blistering statement in which he said he was "deeply outraged and disappointed" by the man he referred to, a little icily, as "Reverend Jackson." Invoking his father's most famous words, Jesse Jr. concluded, "He should keep hope alive and any personal attacks and insults to himself."

Artur Davis, an Alabama representative and one of the most talked-about young talents on Capitol Hill, recently told me a story about his first campaign for Congress, in 2000, when he challenged the longtime black incumbent Earl Hilliard. Davis was only 32 at the time, a federal prosecutor who graduated from Harvard Law School, and he saw Hilliard as the classic example of a passing political model - a guy who saw himself principally as a spokesman for the community rather than as an actual legislator.

After a debate in which Davis pounded the incumbent for being out of touch with the district, Hilliard took him aside. "Young man, you have a good political future," Davis recalled Hilliard telling him. "But you've got to learn one basic lesson. You're trying to start at the top, and you can't start at the top in politics."

"With all due respect, Congressman," Davis replied, "I don't think a group with 435 members can be the top of anything."

Davis lost that race, but he won in a rematch two years later. Now he's weighing a run for governor.

One telling difference between black representatives of Davis's generation and the more senior set in Washington is how they initially viewed the role of race in this year's primaries. Older members of the Congressional Black Caucus assumed, well into the primary season, that a black candidate wouldn't be able to win in predominantly white states. This, after all, had been their lifelong experience in politics. Not only did Davis, who grew up in post-segregation Montgomery and supported Obama, reject this view, but he also wouldn't concede when we talked that Obama's race was, on balance, a detriment.

"Race was a factor in the contest between Obama and Clinton," he told me. "There's no question race will be a factor with Obama and McCain. But I'm not sure it plays out as neatly as people think. There's no question that some young cohort of white voters were drawn to Obama because they like the idea of a break with the past. A young, white politician from Illinois might not have gotten that support. So race probably cost Obama some votes. And it probably won him some votes. That's the complex reality we're living in."

When I met last month with Cory Booker, the mayor of Newark who at 39 is already something of a national sensation, he told me that he had just finished reading, belatedly, Obama's memoir "Dreams From My Father." He said passages about Obama's youth in Hawaii had reminded him of his own experience with subtle racism in the affluent, mostly white suburb of Harrington Park, N.J. "You know, what it's like growing up every single day and having people ask to touch your hair because they've never seen hair like that," Booker said. "To have the entire class laugh and giggle when somebody pronounces 'Niger' as 'nigger.' The constant bombardment of that kind of thing really affects your spirit, and it's every single day. Like when people want to come back from a vacation and compare their tan to yours and joke about being black."

No doubt these were searing experiences for Booker, and I had to wince as he ticked them off, recognizing too much of myself and my white classmates from the 1980s in the imagery. But as Booker himself noted, they are a world away from the reality that was pounded into civil rights activists like his parents, to whom racism meant dogs and hoses and segregated schools and luncheonettes. You can imagine what James Clyburn - still haunted by the vivid memory of the moment he found out that his erudite father had never been allowed to graduate from high school - would make of the lifelong trauma caused by suburban kids asking to feel your hair.

"I don't want to be pigeonholed," he said. "I don't want people to expect me to speak about those issues." By this, presumably, he meant issues that revolve around race: profiling by police, incarceration rates, flagging urban economies. "I want people to ask me about nonproliferation. I want them to run to me to speak about the situation in the Middle East." Since the mayor of Newark is rarely called upon to discuss such topics, I got the feeling that Booker does not see himself staying in his current job for anything close to 20 years. "I don't want to be the person that's turned to when CNN talks about black leaders," he said.

Even so, Booker told me that his goal wasn't really to "transcend race." Rather, he says that for his generation of black politicians it's all right to show the part of themselves that is culturally black - to play basketball with friends and belong to a black church, the way Obama has. There is a universality now to the middle-class black experience, he told me, that should be instantly recognizable to Jews or Italians or any other white ethnic bloc that has struggled to assimilate. And that means, at least theoretically, that a black politician shouldn't have to obscure his racial identity.

"So Obama's the first one out there on the ice," Booker told me. "This campaign is giving other African-Americans like myself the courage to be themselves."

Given this generational perspective, it is easy to understand why Obama's candidacy was greeted coolly by much of Washington's black elite. Obama joined the Congressional Black Caucus when he arrived in 2005, but he attended meetings only sporadically, and it must have been obvious that he never felt he belonged. In part, this was probably because he was the group's only senator and thus had little daily interaction with his colleagues in the House. But to hear those close to Obama tell it, it was also because, like Booker and other younger black politicians, he simply wasn't comfortable categorizing his politics by race. One main function of the black caucus is to raise money through events, because many of the members represent poorer districts. Obama, already a best-selling author by the time he was sworn in, should have been a huge fund-raising draw, but he never showed much interest in headlining caucus events, and he was rarely asked.

Jesse Jackson Jr. warned his colleagues in the black caucus of the risks of shunning Obama's candidacy, reminding them of the political aftermath of Jesse Jackson Sr.'s campaigns in the 1980s. Back then, too, most black Congressional Democrats sided with the white presidential candidates, and Jackson carried many of their districts in 1984 and virtually all of them in 1988, driving up voter registration in the process. A result, over the next few election cycles, was a flurry of primary challenges, the retirement or defeat of several incumbents and the arrival in Washington of a new class of black congressmen, including James Clyburn. Jackson's message was clear: even if Obama lost, there could be a cost for opposing him.

Within hours of Obama's victory in Iowa, however, Clinton's black support began to crumble. Black voters, young and old, simply hadn't believed that a black man could win in white states; when he did, a wave of pride swept through African-American neighborhoods in the South. Nor did those voters apparently have the deep affection for Hillary Clinton that many of their ministers and local pols did. Carol Willis, a Clinton aide from the Arkansas days who was leading the campaign's outreach to black voters, told me, "I always heard people saying: 'I know Bill Clinton. I don't know Hillary Clinton. So I'll give Barack Obama a closer hearing.' " Internal polling in both campaigns after Iowa showed Obama suddenly garnering closer to 75 or 80 percent of the black vote in primary states.

From then on, the Democratic nomination fight sometimes took on the feel of one of those contentious diversity workshops, with every word parsed for its racial undertone and every emotion rising to the surface. What did Bill Clinton mean by "naive" and "fairy tale"? Was it an accident that Hillary Clinton used the word "spadework" to deride her opponent's record? Clyburn and Bill Clinton had long and tense phone conversations because of several comments the former president had made. The one that bothered Clyburn the most, he told me, came when he read in a South Carolina newspaper that Clinton had referred to Obama as a "kid." "I grew up in the South, where men like Barack Obama, who right now is older than Bill Clinton was when he ran for president, were called 'boy,' " Clyburn told me. "And that's what a kid is - a boy." The most damaging moment for Bill Clinton, though, came just after the South Carolina primary, when he waved away the victory by comparing it with Jesse Jackson's wins there in 1984 and 1988. "There was something about the condescension on his face when he said it and the dismissiveness in his voice," Artur Davis recalled. "It was a verbal pat on the head."

In March, shaken by the persistent controversy over comments pulled from the sermons of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, an icon in Chicago's black community and Obama's former pastor, Obama gave his now famous speech on race. It was aimed, for the most part, at reassuring white voters over the Wright controversy, but it also marked the first time that he publicly addressed the generational divide his own campaign had exposed among black Americans. "For the men and women of Reverend Wright's generation," Obama said, "the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away, nor has the anger and bitterness of those years. . . . At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines or to make up for a politician's own failings." Some older black politicians may have recognized themselves in Obama's subtle criticism, but those I spoke to said they took pride in seeing a black candidate articulate their experience to white America.

A lot of black incumbents who supported Clinton now find themselves trying to explain how they ended up so disconnected from their constituents, and many are preparing for their strongest primary challenges in years. (In a primary last month, John Lewis, who had run unopposed since 1992, had to beat not one but two primary opponents, including a 31-year-old minister named Markel Hutchins who designed his campaign to look just like Obama's, right down to renting the same office space and using a red, white and blue logo in the shape of an "O.") So far, incumbents facing insurrection over their endorsements of Clinton have easily dispatched their challengers, leading to a collective exhalation inside the black caucus in Washington. But then, as Jesse Jackson Jr. tried to remind his colleagues, the history of black politics is that such challengers are often heard from again.

On the first Tuesday in July, I traveled to Philadelphia, the site of Obama's landmark speech on race, to see the city's mayor, Michael Nutter. Known as a reformer during a 14-year stint on the City Council, Nutter played a central and intriguing role in this year's presidential contest, emerging as the black face of Hillary Clinton's campaign in Pennsylvania at a time when she desperately needed - and got - a solid victory in the state. Nutter certainly wasn't the only visible black politician to campaign for Clinton deep into the primary season, but he was, in some ways, the least likely. Nutter is only four years older than Obama, Ivy League-educated, bookish and doggedly unemotional. He is, in short, the very prototype of the new generation of black political stars. But unlike Cory Booker or Artur Davis or Deval Patrick, the governor of Massachusetts, Nutter sided with Clinton, and he enthusiastically campaigned for her.

It was late in the day when Nutter and I sat down at a long conference table in his office, accompanied by the sounds of subway trains rumbling underneath and R & B music piped in from mounted speakers. He told me that he had made his decision methodically and had felt no pressure at all from his constituents.

Nutter said he sat down with both Clinton and Obama after his election as mayor and quizzed them about urban issues like housing, education and transportation. Race, he said, hadn't entered into this thinking. He understood, he said, why the prospect of a black president after hundreds of years of discrimination was "powerful stuff" for a lot of his constituents, but he had a greater responsibility, and that was to run the nation's sixth-largest city. "In the context of what I do for a living, I've not figured out a black or white way to fill a pothole," he said, in a way that made me think he had said this many times before. Nutter was a delegate for Bill Clinton way back in 1992, and he said that the former first lady had shown a "depth of understanding" of what cities like Philadelphia were facing. It probably didn't hurt that Obama endorsed one of Nutter's opponents in last year's mayoral primary, either.

Nutter said he wasn't bothered by comments that the Clintons or their surrogates made during the campaign that had so incensed other black officials. "I think there was a lot of sensitivity, some warranted and some unwarranted," he said. "It's based on your life experience, and it's generational. You know, if you have a sore on your arm, you don't necessarily have to touch the sore to feel the pain. You can touch another part of your arm. You've still got a certain sensitivity to it. So if race is the sensitive thing, then anything that even gets close to it - sounds like it, looks like it, feels like it - is it."

I asked Nutter if, during his private conversations with Obama early in the campaign, the subject of race and the historic nature of his candidacy came up. He stared at me for a moment. "Um, I knew he was black," he said finally. "I'd really kind of picked up on that."

Later, when I mentioned that it could be hard for a white journalist to understand all of the nuances of race, he looked over at his press secretary, who is black, and interrupted me. "He's not black?" Nutter deadpanned, motioning back at me. "You guys told me it was a skin condition. I thought I was talking to a brother." Nutter is known to have a dry sense of humor, but I also had the sense that he was tweaking me in these moments, watching with some amusement as I tried to navigate subjects that white and black Americans rarely discuss together. He seemed to think I was oddly preoccupied with race.

In fact, Nutter seemed puzzled by the very notion that he should be expected to support a candidate just because they both had dark skin. "Look, I never asked anybody to be for me because I was black," he said. "I asked people to be for me because I thought I was the best candidate when I ran for City Council and when I ran for mayor. I'm proud of the votes I received. I'm proud I received the votes of the majority of the African-American community and the majority of the vote from the white community. But I never asked anybody to give me anything because I was black. I asked people to give me a chance because I thought I was the best."

For most black Americans, Obama's candidacy represented a kind of racial milestone, the natural next phase of a 50-year movement. But for Michael Nutter, the reverse was also true: not supporting Obama's candidacy marked a kind of progress, too. The movement, after all, was about the freedom to choose your own candidate, white or black. In a sense, you could argue that it was Nutter - and not those black politicians who embraced Obama because they so closely identified with his racial experience - who represented the truest embodiment of Obama-ism. Here, perhaps, was a genuine postracial politician, even if that meant being, as John Lewis put it, on the wrong side of history.

I asked Nutter if he found it insulting to have me come barging into his office, demanding to know why he didn't pick the black guy.

"It's not insulting," he answered. "It's presumptuous. It demonstrates a continuation of this notion that the African-American community, unlike any other, is completely monolithic, that everyone in the African-American community does the same thing in lockstep, in contrast to any other group. I mean, I don't remember seeing John Kerry on TV and anybody saying to him, 'I can't believe you're not for Hillary Clinton.' Why?"

It's inspiring to hear Michael Nutter say that governing a city isn't about race, that there's no black or white way to fill a pothole. And yet, it's also true that in any given American city there are likely to be more potholes in black neighborhoods than in white ones - along with more violence, more unemployment and more illiteracy. Having grown up in West Philadelphia, Nutter knows well that while the decisions he makes as a mayor have no racial antecedents, rarely do they affect the races equally. "The challenge there is never forgetting where you came from," he told me. "So, yes, I am mayor of all Philadelphia, but I am quite well aware of, and raise on a regular basis, the fact that the majority of people who are killed in Philadelphia are African-American, that the overwhelming majority of people who have health-care challenges are African-American, that education has tremendous disparity gaps. Unemployment, incarceration, poverty, homelessness, housing - all affect the African-American community at a disproportionate level as opposed to everyone else."

This confusion over the direction of the movement has all but immobilized the nation's premier civil rights group, the N.A.A.C.P. Synonymous with the long journey toward racial equality since its founding by W. E. B. Du Bois and others in 1909, the organization has, in recent years, lost much of its cachet with younger black Americans. In 2005, the N.A.A.C.P.'s unwieldy 64-member board hired Bruce Gordon, a former Verizon executive, to retool the organization. Gordon's premise was that civil rights was no longer simply about protesting discrimination - that African-Americans were now stymied not only by institutional barriers but also by conditions in their communities. He proposed that a new N.A.A.C.P step into this breach, organizing services that might include SAT prep classes or training for new parents. He also created a new class of online members who didn't have to pay any dues, adding more than 100,000 members to a group whose paying membership had declined, in Gordon's estimate, to under 300,000.

Gordon's agenda was always controversial among the N.A.A.C.P.'s board members ("Most of them are older than me," the 62-year-old Gordon told me), and after a little more than 19 months in the job, Gordon resigned. In May, after a highly contentious process that divided the board once again, the N.A.A.C.P. hired the youngest president in its history, 35-year-old Benjamin Todd Jealous, the chosen candidate of Julian Bond, the civil rights leader and the N.A.A.C.P.'s board chairman.

You might expect Jealous, a native of mostly white Monterey County, Calif., and a Rhodes scholar, to have shared the racial experience of other emerging black leaders. But generational lines are rarely that neatly drawn, and when we met for breakfast on Independence Day, I was surprised to find that Jealous spoke about race not like Booker or Nutter but much like his heroes of an earlier era. The N.A.A.C.P.'s main job, he told me, was to be the place where African-Americans could turn when institutional racism assaulted their communities. He mentioned the racially charged arrests of six black teenagers in Jena, La., in 2006, as well as the suspicious death, just a few days earlier, of an accused cop killer in his suburban Maryland jail cell.

"It's still a human rights struggle," Jealous told me. "This isn't a struggle that began in the 1930s or 1960s. It's a struggle that began in 1620. It's a struggle against slavery and its children."

Jealous's main difficulty in rejuvenating the N.A.A.C.P., though, may have less to do with the racist power structure than with a new class of black competitors online. And in this way, what's happening among the black grass roots mirrors what's been happening in the Democratic Party over the last several years, as loyalty to institutions and leaders has given way to a noisy conversation about how to better hold them accountable. A new generation of black activists is now focused on reforming institutions, namely the Congressional Black Caucus and the N.A.A.C.P., that they say have become too mired in the past and too removed from their constituents. And as in the rest of the political world, this rebellion is happening on the Internet, driven by ordinary Americans with laptops and a surprising amount of free time.

"The African-American voting population is very much online," Cheryl Contee, who in 2006 helped found the blog Jack and Jill Politics, told me. Contee, who is an owner of a digital consulting business, blogs under the pseudonym Jill Tubman, and hers is one of a number of sites that have emerged in just the last year as part of what's often called the "Afrosphere." "One of the things I talk to clients about is that the digital divide has changed," Contee said. "It's no longer along racial lines like it was in 1996 and 2000. Now it's more economic and educational." In other words, after lagging for a time, college-educated African-Americans are now organizing online in the same way as their mostly white counterparts at Daily Kos and MoveOn.org started doing several years ago.

Most of all, the black roots make it clear to elected officials and civil rights advocates that being black doesn't, by itself, make you a leader. Online activists have attacked the Congressional Black Caucus for, among other things, standing by William Jefferson, the black representative accused of stuffing a freezer with cash bribes. They have harshly criticized several caucus members, some for having endorsed Clinton and others, like Artur Davis, for not being sufficiently liberal. Some bloggers went after the Rev. Al Sharpton and the N.A.A.C.P. for reflexively coming to the defense of four black teenagers in West Palm Beach who were charged with taking part in an unusually horrific rape of a mother and her 12-year-old son. (Sharpton and the local N.A.A.C.P. claimed that the boys were being treated differently from accused white rapists in a separate case, who were freed on bail.) Color of Change claims to have raised more than $10,000 and some 50 volunteers for Donna Edwards's successful Web-supported primary campaign against Representative Albert Wynn, a black incumbent who voted for the Iraq war.

"There are some members who need to go or to update and be accountable," Rucker told me. "It's not about getting rid of the N.A.A.C.P. or our members of Congress. It's just wanting to be proud of our leaders."

For some black operatives in the Clinton orbit - people who have functioned, going back to Jesse Jackson's campaigns in the 1980s, as Democratic Washington's liaisons to black America - the fallout from an Obama victory would likely be profound. "Some of them will have to walk the plank," an Obama adviser told me bluntly. In their place, an Obama administration would empower a cadre of younger black advisers who would instantly become people to see in Washington's transactional culture. Chief among them is Valerie Jarrett, a Chicago real estate developer who is one of Barack and Michelle Obama's closest friends. "She's poised to be one of the most influential people in politics, and particularly among African-Americans in politics," Belcher told me. "She may be the next Vernon Jordan." In fact, the last time I saw Clyburn, he told me he had just spent two and a half hours at breakfast with Jarrett.

Then there are operatives like Belcher himself; Michael Strautmanis, Obama's former chief counsel and de facto younger brother, who first met Michelle Obama when he was working as a paralegal at her law firm; Matthew Nugen, a political aide who is Obama's point man for the Democratic convention; and Paul Brathwaite, a 37-year-old lobbyist who used to be the executive director of the black caucus and who might act as a bridge between black congressmen and an Obama White House.

Should they win in November, Obama and these new advisers will confront an unfamiliar conundrum in American politics, which is how to be president of the United States and, by default, the most powerful voice in black America at the same time. Several black operatives and politicians with whom I spoke worried, eloquently, that an Obama presidency might actually leave black Americans less well represented in Washington rather than more so - that, in fact, the end of black politics, if that is what we are witnessing, might also mean the precipitous decline of black influence.

The argument here is that a President Obama, closely watched for signs of parochialism or racial resentment, would have less maneuvering room to champion spending on the urban poor, say, or to challenge racial injustice. What's more, his very presence in the Rose Garden might undermine the already tenuous case for affirmative action in hiring and school admissions. Obama himself has offered only tepid support for a policy that surely helped enable him to reach this moment. In "The Audacity of Hope," he wrote: "Even as we continue to defend affirmative action as a useful, if limited, tool to expand opportunity to underrepresented minorities, we should consider spending a lot more of our political capital convincing America to make investments needed to ensure that all children perform at grade level and graduate from high school - a goal that, if met, would do more than affirmative action to help those black and Latino children who need it the most."

Then there are the issues that Ben Jealous and others might raise: black men incarcerated at more than six times the rate of white men, black joblessness more than twice as high as the rate for white Americans. Just talking about such disparities as systemic problems could be harder for an African-American president - for any African-American, really - than it was before. "If Obama is president, it will no longer be tenable to go to the white community and say you've been victimized," Artur Davis told me. "And I understand the poverty and the condition of black America and the 39 percent unemployment rate in some communities. I understand that. But if you go out to the country and say you've been victimized by the white community, while Barack Obama and Michelle and their kids are living in the White House, you will be shut off from having any influence."

If there is any American who can offer a glimpse of what it would be like for Obama as president, it's probably Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts. While most of the younger black politicians know one another only from the occasional encounter or phone call, Patrick and Obama shared a cup of coffee, at the suggestion of a mutual friend, in the mid-1990s and developed a close friendship. (The senator even borrowed some of Patrick's oratory during the primaries, which led the Clinton camp to charge plagiarism.) Patrick was Coca-Cola's general counsel and the assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Clinton administration before he became, in 2006, only the second black man to be elected governor in American history, following L. Douglas Wilder in Virginia in 1989.

When we talked recently, Patrick explained for me some of the inherent pressures that come with being a black executive in a state with a history of friction among the races. "You're constantly tested by a whole host of factors to see whether you're speaking for the entire Commonwealth or just for one community," Patrick told me. "I don't fit in any box, and I think that's what the electorate has had to learn about me."

Black ministers were slow to embrace Patrick after he supported gay marriage as a candidate and refused to back down. After a black child was shot and killed in Boston last year, Patrick told me, he sent a note to the family and prepared to attend the funeral service, but relatives held a news conference at which they criticized him for not coming by to pay his respects. (Patrick later grew close to the family.) I remarked that it was usually the city's mayor who was expected to comfort victims of urban crime.

"Yes, but it's not good enough for me to have the reaction that you just did, to say I'm the governor, not the mayor," Patrick told me. "They expect more." In other words, he was expected not only to be a governor but also to fill the traditional role of the black politician - that of spokesman, minister and conduit to the white establishment.

Patrick and I spoke just a week after Jesse Jackson was caught wishing Obama bodily harm. "You wouldn't believe how many times in the last few days people have stuck microphones in my face to ask my opinion about Jesse Jackson's comments," he said, sounding a little exasperated. He had declined to offer one. "I don't have to be the black oracle," Patrick told me. "All I have to be is as good a human being and as good a governor as I can be, and the rest will take care of itself." If Obama's day comes, he might want to think about borrowing those words too.

After all, this was to be the week that somebody picked a vice president -- or was that last week? That is what some of the tea leaves or misdirected signals seemed to suggest not that many days ago. But was it John McCain or Barack Obama who was going to make the early pick?

When Obama was overseas, the thinking was that McCain might have to move quickly on the vice presidency to grab the attention back from his rival. Instead the McCain camp decided to go on offense against Obama with a series of negative ads that changed the conversation about the campaign. There was also speculation while Obama was overseas that he might name his running mate when he returned. That, of course, didn't happen.

Lately there has been talk inside the McCain camp that Obama might pick his running mate soon to deflect attention away from all the attacks flying in his direction. Their thinking was that he needed to grab back some of the momentum for his campaign. That overlooked the reality that the presumptive Democratic nominee is getting ready to fly off to Hawaii for a vacation with his family (and trailing reporters). Leaving behind a newly-minted vice presidential running mate makes little sense.

Meanwhile it's not at all clear that anyone's timetable has truly changed, in part because the process of vetting and interviewing prospective candidates and then debating with advisers who the actual choice should be takes a considerable amount of time -- certainly more than the hurry-up world of 24/7 media and blogs assumes.

Obama now seems likely to make his selection when he returns from vacation, which would put it in the week before his convention. That is later by several weeks than John Kerry made his pick of John Edwards four years ago, but roughly the same timing as in 1992 when Bill Clinton picked Al Gore a week before his convention.

If that seems the most logical timing for Obama, then McCain's choices are clear: preempt Obama and move while Obama is away or wait until Obama has made his selection and counter with full knowledge of what his opponent has done.

Moving sooner of course risks getting caught up in the Olympics, which some strategists believe will overshadow everything else that may be happening in the world. That is a dubious assumption. While the summer games will draw enormous attention, it's hard to believe that the selection of a vice presidential running mate by either candidate will not punch through into public consciousness. Will CNN and MSNBC and Fox and the networks not carrying the games (CBS and ABC) -- let alone the worlds of print and internet journalism--not jump on the vice presidential story?

One of the savviest Republicans in the country was speculating about vice presidential matters a few weeks ago. He was asked whom McCain should pick. "I have a recommendation but it's not of a person and I shared this with them back in March," he said. "Wait till the Democrat convention is over and see who they pick...You'll have more information."

Speculation about who is in the running may be generally accurate, in part because it is in the interest of the campaigns to have most of those on their shortlists the topic of conversation. That is part of the vetting process. That still leaves open the possibility for surprise, although a total shock is not necessarily in the best interest of the candidate unless the pick is a big and instantly accepted person -- someone like Al Gore for Obama.

This week two new names popped up into public view: Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and Rep. Chet Edwards (D-Tex.). How serious they may be under consideration is not really known. McCain likes Cantor. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi thinks highly of Edwards. But reaching for a House member is a stretch for either candidate, particularly for Obama.

The focus remains on a handful of prospective picks. For McCain they include former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, former Ohio congressman Rob Portman, South Dakota Sen. John Thune and Florida Gov. Charlie Crist. For Obama they include Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden, Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh, Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and perhaps a few others. Hillary Clinton has always been a long shot, but Obama may be hard pressed to think of someone better qualified.

Some of these prospective candidates are going through a public tryout. Kaine did a series of interviews and appearances after my colleagues Michael Shear and Shailagh Murray reported last week that he had turned over financial and other records to the campaign. Pawlenty will be in Washington on Wednesday to talk about the future of the Republican Party, which he says should be more about Sam's Club and less about the country club.

If Obama is truly worried about his foreign policy credentials, he would pick Biden, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. But those who know Obama best believe he is less likely to try to deal with a perceived weakness through a vice presidential selection. Rather, they say, he is more inclined to attack weaknesses head on. That was the purpose of his foreign trip, after all.

McCain may be more likely to look to someone younger to offset concerns about his age, and his assumed list of possible choices includes several who would meet that test. Picking someone to shore up his perceived weakness on economic issues -- there has been talk of various people from the business world -- would risk having to select someone who has little political experience. That would violate the first rule of this process: first, do no harm.

This summer parlor game will soon come to an end, after two final media frenzies as the selections near. Meanwhile, the speculation is entertaining for sure and sometimes accurate. But the process is anything but transparent and that too is worth keeping in mind.

Not that I blame the Obama camp for feeling they had to issue a statement of condemnation. It should go without saying that calling Clinton a "bitch" is both sexist and stupid. And had Obama's campaign not distanced itself from it quickly, the media furore would no doubt have escalated, as it did when Obama was slow to draw a firm line between his own views and those of the Rev Jeremiah Wright. But the fact that Obama's campaign team instinctively knew it would have to address the issue (or, rather, the distinct non-issue) of what Ludacris happens to think, shows how much Obama has been cornered by right-wing attempts to sabotage his campaign.

Much has been made by both Ludacris and conservative commentators of the fact that Obama previously praised the rapper as a great businessman, and said that Ludacris was on his iPod. In contrast, the statement sent by Bill Burton, Obama's spokesperson, was clear that "while Ludacris is a talented individual, he should be ashamed of his lyrics". So, does this mean that, like many of us, Obama enjoys listening to hip-hop without agreeing with every line in every song? No, apparently, it means he is in league with "radicals". Sean Hannity of Fox News argued last week that Politics As Usual is nothing less than proof of Obama's "radical associations", because he is endorsed by a "controversial rapper" like Ludacris.

How the conservative commentator managed to bake such a perfect pineapple upside-down cake of logical fallacies - Ludacris is a radical, now, as opposed to a bit of a muppet? And Obama is linked to said radical because he has Ludacris on his iPod? - really deserves a separate article on each little morsel of circular thinking and ad hominem attacks. Hannity even advanced the argument that, by previously saying he listens to Ludacris, but now distancing himself from the song, Obama is showing signs that he flip-flops on issues. (Honestly).

But what really needs unpacking is the sudden objection to calling Clinton a "bitch" by the very figures who so recently, and so flagrantly, used and manipulated sexist attitudes to damage her presidential bid. Now, with Clinton out of the game, a rapper who endorses Obama using the same sexist language is met with outrage and disdain by Hannity. It's a selective and manipulative faux-sensitivity to misogyny that trumps even Laura Bush's expedient 2001 realisation that maybe the Taliban weren't very nice chaps when it came to the treatment of women.

Because, as sexist as it is to call Clinton a "bitch", this isn't really about misogyny so much as it's about race. Or rather, how pundits like Hannity feign outrage at misogynistic remarks when it helps them portray another group as dangerous. In generating a link between Obama's views and the use of the word "bitch", conservatives are implicitly drawing upon the racist fear of the threat of black men to white women. 'They call women bitches', 'They show women no respect' is the sentiment behind the conservative analysis of Politics As Usual, completely ignoring the fact that the most sexist diatribes against Clinton didn't come from hip-hop stars but from white Republicans and media figures.

It's very telling that, second in line to the faux-horror at Ludacris' use of the b-word, is conservative outrage at the line in Politics As Usual that predicts Obama will "paint the White House black". As Hannity played that part of the song on his show, you could almost hear the triumphal "I told you so". Bay Buchanan, a former Romney adviser, told Hannity that the Ludacris track was proof that Obama "appreciates and enjoys a culture that is very much opposed to that which middle America appreciates", a moment of comprehensive amnesia that allowed her to forget not only the popularity of hip-hop among white surburbanites, but also the fact the Obama campaign had already condemned the rap.

By inflating the most tenuous of links between Obama's views and Ludacris's opinions (opinions expressed, I have to say again, in a hip-hop single. In a song), conservative commentators are gambling on the fact that white America is still too racist to vote for Obama, so long as they can out Obama as the secret extremist he surely must be - either through his "terrorist fist bumps" or with supposed evidence of his secret desire to "paint the White House black".

The Catch-22 Obama is caught in by these smears has been analysed in much greater depth elsewhere. But, in rough shorthand: knowing that acknowledging his experience as a black man in America will be spun by conservatives to show Obama is somehow playing the race card, Obama is forced to consciously de-emphasise his race, which leads in turn to Jesse Jackson (who gets a frankly confusing namecheck in Politics As Usual) and others criticising Obama for betraying or talking down to black people. For all his faults, it remains impressive that Obama has managed to navigate such an impossible bind without more bumps.

And, post-Wright, the double standard (that the onus is on Obama, but not John McCain, to prove he does not support the views of all those who support him) is so ingrained that the Obama camp now pre-empts it. The statement condemning Politics As Usual was issued before the media storm had time to really kick off. But why should Obama have to officially distance himself from individuals like Ludacris who both endorse him and happen to hold a party-mix bag of prejudices, dumb ideas and skewed world views? Does McCain get called upon by the mainstream media to distance himself from the neo-Nazis and other self-confessed racists lurking in the seedy corners of the internet, who are trying right now to drum up support for his campaign?

If people cannot grasp the difference between Obama-supporters' views, and Obama's own views, then I for one am worried. Did I miss the memo announcing that Ludacris was Obama's new spokesperson? Do people think Obama will, literally, "paint the White House black" if elected, unless he swiftly issues a statement denying these proposed renovation plans to the West Wing?

Ludacris calling Clinton a "bitch" is clearly misogynistic and offensive. I'm not going down the dodgy, patronising route that says sexism is any less offensive when it comes from the hip-hop community. But what Ludacris said isn't any more sexist than the jokes, innuendos and outright statements that regularly came out of the mouths of white commentators in a shameless attempt to smear Clinton's presidential campaign earlier this year.

What's really offensive, to people who care about women's rights, is how right-wing commentators have suddenly turned to the guise of feminist arguments to tarnish Obama's campaign because an individual who likes him also likes the word "bitch". And what's really offensive, to people who care about democracy, is how the Obama camp has been bullied into the position of having to issue a statement about a song.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton plans to campaign for Barack Obama in Nevada and Florida this month, events expected to be her first solo campaign appearances for Obama since she lost the Democratic nomination contest.

The Obama campaign said Tuesday that Clinton will host rallies and voter registration events this Friday in Las Vegas and again in south Florida on Aug. 21.

In June, Clinton and Obama appeared together in Unity, N.H., in a symbolic event to push for party unity after their long and often bitter primary battle. Both also have been helping each other raise money, in Clinton's case to retire her own hefty campaign debt.

The announcement came a day after former President Clinton defended his role in the hard-fought Democratic primary. He said that while he may have some regrets, he was not a racist and had never attacked Obama personally.

"There are things that I wish I'd urged her to do. Things I wish I'd said. Things I wish I hadn't said," the former president told ABC News.

Democrats hope the Clintons and Obama can persuade supporters on both sides to put aside any bad feelings and come together to defeat Republican Sen. John McCain this fall.

Sen. Clinton is scheduled to deliver a speech at the Democratic National Convention in Denver later this month, but her husband's role there is still unclear.

Sen. Clinton conceded to Obama in early June after the primaries ended and he'd locked up sufficient convention delegates to win nomination.

Since then, she has been slowly re-injecting herself into the New York political scene from which she's been largely absent for more than a year. On Monday night, she was the guest of honor at a party thrown by Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

At the party, Clinton thanked constituents for putting their demands on hold for 18 months while she campaigned for president.

"Now the hold is off, and I am open for business, 100 percent of the time and really looking forward to working with you on behalf of this city and state that we love," Clinton said.

By Steve Stein, San Francisco Chronicle, August 6, 2008

Hillary Clinton supporters will march through Denver during the Democratic National Convention to show appreciation for the New York senator's historic primary run and urge the party to place her name in nomination.

The city issued a permit Tuesday to Colorado Women Count/Women Vote for a parade on Aug. 26 - the 88th anniversary of women's suffrage and the date Clinton is rumored to be speaking at the DNC.

The group also will team with 18 Million Voices, a national organization of Clinton supporters, for a rally in a yet-to-be-determined Denver park.

"We just want to celebrate Hillary's accomplishments and what she's done for the country as a whole and women in particular," said Katherine Vincent, 55, of Louisville, who is organizing the parade and rally.

Vincent is among those passionate followers who believe Clinton's delegates have a right to vote for her at the convention.

"That's why they were selected," she said. "We think it would actually bring the party together."

Nationwide, Clinton's staunchest supporters refer to themselves as "PUMAs," short for "Party Unity My A--."

They are raising money to pay for buses to Denver, and setting up a headquarters at The Broker restaurant downtown, where people can "check-in" when they arrive in town.

But the efforts to put Clinton's name to a vote may be meaningless. Clinton, who conceded to Sen. Barack Obama in June, must submit a request in writing to be nominated at the convention. According to published reports, Clinton has decided against doing so and has been urging her delegates to vote for Obama.

Meanwhile, the Obama campaign said Clinton will campaign for the Illinois senator this month in Nevada and Florida.

Jenny Backus, a senior adviser to the Obama campaign, said Clinton is working closely with the Obama camp, and will continue to be "a tremendous asset."

"Senator Clinton is going to play a critical role in the convention," Backus said.

Clinton is scheduled to speak at an Emily's List gala at the Sheraton Denver Hotel at 2 p.m. on Aug. 26. She will join Michelle Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at the event, a celebration of women's suffrage.

Vincent said she is hopeful Clinton's schedule that day also will include a stop by the rally, which she says will not include any messages that are anti-Obama or pro-John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee.

"We're keeping it positive," she said. "It's a way of saying 'Thank you Hillary, we appreciate what you've done.' "

After two terms as governor of Indiana (1989-96), Evan Bayh was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1998, winning the seat once held by his father.

Birch Evans Bayh III was born the day after Christmas 1955 in Shirkieville, Ind., where his father, Birch Bayh II, was a member of the Indiana legislature.

Seven years later, Birch Bayh became a U.S. Senator and moved his family to Washington D.C. where Evan grew up. He was a serious student who seemed destined for a life in politics.

Bayh's mother, Marvella, was diagnosed with breast cancer in 1971 and died April 24, 1979. He later said her death instilled in him a determination to make the most of his life.

Bayh was elected Indiana secretary of state in 1986 following a heated debate over whether he met the state's five-year residency requirement to be on the ballot. After just two years in that office he ran for, and was elected, governor. He was the first Democrat in 20 years to hold that office and -- at 33 -- the youngest governor in the U.S.

He was re-elected governor in 1992 with the highest percentage of the vote in a statewide election in modern Indiana history. By the end of his second term Bayh had an approval rating of nearly 80 percent.

Although consistently popular, Bayh was sometimes criticized for being overly cautious and not using his political capital to reach for higher goals. Bayh supporters say his administration met challenges such as the rising costs of Medicaid, the need for more prisons and getting Indiana through a recession without a tax hike, all while balancing the budget.

Bayh's second term expired at the end of 1996 and he became, briefly, a private citizen again. He bought a house in the Meridian-Kessler neighborhood not far from the governor's mansion and accepted a lecturing position at the Indiana University School of Business in Bloomington.

In 1995, he and his wife, Susan, became the parents of twin boys Nicholas Harrison and Birch Evans IV (Beau).

In 1998, Bayh was elected to the U.S. Senate seat formerly held by his father. Bayh defeated Paul Helmke with 64% of the vote, the largest victory margin ever by Democrat in a U.S. Senate race in Indiana. In 2004, he was re-elected, soundly defeating Republican challenger Marvin Scott.

When Bayh arrived in Washington in January 1999 one of his first tasks as a senator was to pass judgment on fellow Democrat Bill Clinton, who had been impeached by the House.

More conservative than his liberal father, the second Sen. Bayh established himself as a centrist who seeks common ground with Republicans. In the Senate, Bayh organized a group called the New Democrat Coalition, and in 2001 he became chairman of the influential Democratic Leadership Council.

In the presidential election of 2000 and 2004, Bayh was on the list of possible running mate for presidential candidates Al Gore and John Kerry and it was widely speculated that Bayh would one day make a run for president on his own.

A member of the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence committees, Bayh was co-sponsor of the resolution which authorized President George W. Bush to go to war in Iraq in 2003.

On Dec. 3, 2006, Bayh announced on This Week With George Stephanopoulos that he would create a presidential exploratory committee as the next logical step in seeking the Democratic nomination for president in 2008. But less than two weeks later, on Dec. 15, Bayh said he had decided not to seek the nomination after all.

After deciding not to run himself, Bayh was an early supporter of Hillary Clinton and campaigned with her. His help likely made the difference in her slim victory in the state, but even with that win she was unable to keep up with Barack Obama's delegate lead.

Although Bayh had been a Clinton supporter, his name again surfaced as a short-list contender to be Obama's running mate.

Understated in demeanor and rarely demonstrating a passion for showboat political issues, Sen. Bayh may lack flash. But he sits on the powerful Senate armed-services and intelligence committees, enjoys an easy rapport with Midwestern crossover conservatives and displays a fund-raising knack extending beyond his home constituency.

OpenSecrets.org, which tracks federal political donations, says Sen. Bayh has raised $10.9 million between 2003 and 2008, with 77% of his cash coming from out of state.

Sen. Bayh is also a known commodity. He was under consideration for the No. 2 job -- and presumably vetted for the position -- by the previous two Democratic presidential nominees, Al Gore and John Kerry. It was with Mr. Gore, one former Bayh aide said, that Sen. Bayh had his best shot of making the ticket.

"Sitting next to someone on a Senate committee has sparked more than a few deep friendships," said Anita Dunn, a political adviser for Sen. Obama who served as an adviser to Sen. Bayh during his Senate campaigns.

An early Obama adherent, Ms. Dunn said she wasn't surprised when Sen. Bayh allied himself with Sen. Clinton, whom he described as having "a spine of steel." During the Indiana primary, he offered his own staff to help put her over the top in her race against Sen. Obama, who had a huge ground staff and an advantage in Indiana districts around Chicago, where he is well-known. "There's a Democratic political machine in Indiana -- it's called Evan Bayh," Ms. Dunn said.

Birch Bayh was a darling of liberals, having been the chief architect of the Equal Rights Amendment, which failed to muster enough support to get ratified, and the 26th Amendment, which extended voting rights to 18-year-olds. He also championed Title IX, landmark legislation that included forcing equal opportunity in school athletics for females.

Evan Bayh, by contrast, voted in favor of a failed amendment that would have banned flag-burning and legislation that would have kicked Russia out of the Group of Eight leading economic nations. What upset many liberals the most was his vote to authorize the Iraq invasion and his subsequent co-chairmanship, with likely Republican presidential nominee John McCain, of the Iraq Liberation Committee, a neoconservative group that pushed hard for war.

Sen. Bayh now says he regrets his early support of the Iraq war and has no recollection of the committee. "I don't remember any meetings, any conversations, any anything," Sen. Bayh said in a telephone interview Tuesday. "Obviously my name was linked to it, but other than that there's nothing that can be said."

Supporters note that his overall record hews closely to the Democratic line and sometimes goes beyond it, such as when he voted against the confirmation of conservative Supreme Court justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito.

Sen. Bayh made perhaps his biggest political impression as governor. He developed a reputation as a fiscal conservative, ushering through the biggest tax cut in recent state history and passing what he considers the signal legislation of his career: a bill that extends free tuition to grade-school students who pledge to stay out of trouble. The initiative passed over the objections of a Republican-dominated statehouse.

"He was a governor who tried to not ruffle feathers," said Murray Clark, chairman of Indiana's Republican Party. "It's helped him; he's made very few enemies."

"As a debater, I felt like I was in the 'Twilight Zone' show. You want to reach over and slit the arm to see if there's flesh and blood or just wires," said Mr. Helmke, who is now the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "One of my big accomplishments was at one point [in the debate], he started to sweat."

Ms. Dunn, the current Obama adviser, dismisses such criticism. "Is it boring to win five times as a Democrat in a state that's overwhelmingly Republican?" Ms. Dunn asked. "Obviously, the people of Indiana think there's something exciting about him."

A person on Sen. Obama's staff has said no vice-presidential announcement will come Wednesday in Indiana. Sen. Obama has told reporters not to put too much stock in rumors about candidates.

The Democrats have tried to paint John McCain as a continuation of administration policies. White House insiders probably laugh at the suggestion that McCain has been a reliable ally of the administration. But I digress. Despite all the factors in favor of any Democrat candidate, I predict that Barack Obama will lose the presidential election. There are many reasons why I think Obama will lose but here are a few that I believe will tilt the election.

Obama has all the momentum that a fawning press and left leaning acolytes can provide. The public has suffered through the swooning groupies and pundits claiming to have chills running up their leg when Obama spoke. Now we are within the last 100 days and the voters will start to pay attention to the seriousness of the election. There won't be any more swooning or claims of chills running up legs, and without that hype, the Obama campaign will be forced to depend on substance - which he has not shown.

The Democrats had a dozen or more candidates that began the nomination process. Without a doubt, the person with the least qualifications was Barack Obama. Pick any of the potential Democrat candidates and every one of them had more qualifications than Obama. Obama accomplished nothing in his short time in the Illinois Senate and nothing in the U.S. Senate in the 140 days before he started his presidential election bid. Hillary pointed to Obama's lack of experience several times but the message never resonated. Obama's claim to fame was his time as a 'community organizer'. According to The Nation magazine, "Obama worked in the organizing tradition of (noted leftist) Saul Alinsky...". If working as a 'community organizer' was a resume enhancer for president, Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton would have been elected president. But Obama was the better orator and mesmerized the Democrat primary voters. He made vacuous promises of change to the fawning masses, and he sounded good doing it. But without a teleprompter and a prepared speech he is less than impressive.

Obama has promised change. But his supporters never realized that he meant change in policy positions. His flip flops make a fish out of water look like a statue. Like John Kerry, Obama was against something before he was for it. For example: campaign financing, drilling offshore, troop withdrawal from Iraq, NAFTA, wiretaps, banning handguns, social security reform and campaign debates.

As the election draws near I believe that there will be 'Candidate Remorse' within the Democrat electorate. The electorate will recognize that Obama is a little more than a glib empty suit and that even Hillary would have been a better candidate to represent the Democrats. Hillary defeated Obama in the states that will be needed to become president. Obama won lesser states and amassed a delegate lead through the tainted caucus process. Now, Democratic Party insiders recognize the flaws in the caucus process. But the damage is done and Obama will be their candidate. 'Candidate Remorse' could materialize in low turnout for Obama or vote for a third party candidate.

You can't blame someone for the actions of people they know or associate with, but you can question someone's judgment for associating with them. Throughout his life Obama has sought out and associated with dubious characters. Like known terrorists, Weather Underground members (Ayres and Dohrn), crazy racist preachers (Wright and Pfleger), convicted criminals (Rezko), and known Socialists (Davis). Just imagine the field day the media would have if John McCain was buddies with the Unibomber, Timothy McVeigh, and Angela Davis. The media has given Obama a free ride for his associations, but I doubt if the people will.

In the long run the election is Obama's to lose and I think he will lose.

The Secret Service is wary of discussing threats against the people they protect, but with Mr. Obama poised to become the first black presidential nominee, there are special worries. While law enforcement officials say there are no specific, credible threats against Mr. Obama, they expressed concern about low-level chatter on Web sites frequented by white separatists who spew hate about Mr. Obama's race and what they perceive as his liberal agenda.

One recent scheduling change caused a major shift in security plans. When Mr. Obama announced last month that he would accept his party's nomination not at the Pepsi Center in downtown Denver, where the convention is being held, but at Invesco Field, home of the Denver Broncos, the Secret Service scrambled to work out plans with local authorities to secure the open-air stadium, which seats more than 75,000 people. Invesco is also adjacent to Interstate 25, a major corridor through the Northern Rockies that will most likely be closed for at least part of Mr. Obama's acceptance speech.

"The magnitude of the event has expanded," said John W. Hickenlooper, the mayor of Denver and a Democrat. "It's bigger and more profound than we expected."

Officials acknowledge that their projections for the number of protesters are based more on a worst-case chain of events than specific information about who will show up, but they say they cannot take any chances.

As a result, the Secret Service, the Pentagon, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and scores of police departments are moving thousands of agents, analysts, officers and employees to Denver for the Aug. 25-28 convention. They will operate through a complex hierarchy of command centers, steering committees and protocols to respond to disruptions.

National political conventions are a chance for federal agencies to test their latest and most sophisticated technology, and this year is no different. There was a brief flare-up recently between the F.B.I. and the Secret Service, when each wanted to patrol the skies over the convention with their surveillance aircraft, packed with infrared cameras and other electronics. The issue was resolved in favor of the Secret Service, according to people briefed on the matter.

Both Denver and St. Paul, where the Republican National Convention will be held Sept. 1-4, are enlisting thousands of additional officers to help with security. Even so, their numbers will be only about a third of the 10,000 police officers that New York City fielded for the 2004 Republican convention, just three years after the Sept. 11 attacks.

The Denver Police Department will nearly double in size, according to federal officials involved in the planning. The city is bringing in nearly 1,500 police officers from communities throughout Colorado and beyond, even inviting an eight-person mounted unit from Cheyenne, Wyo. State lawmakers changed Colorado law to allow the out-of-state police officers to serve as peace officers in Denver.

The expressions of concern about security at the convention could have more immediate political and legal implications, too. A federal judge, Marcia S. Krieger of United States District Court in Denver, is expected to issue a decision this week in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union seeking to ease security provisions at the convention. The A.C.L.U. has suggested that the Secret Service and the Denver police have exaggerated risks as part of a crackdown on dissent.

The case centers on whether the security zone around the Pepsi Center is so large, and the designated parade route through the city for marches and rallies so far away, as to unnecessarily stifle free speech. New worries about protests and anarchy could bolster the government's case that the plans are justified.

Last month, under pressure from the A.C.L.U. lawsuit, the city released a list of expenses related to the convention showing that the police were preparing for large demonstrations and mass arrests and that the department had spent $2.1 million on protection equipment for its officers, $1.4 million for barricades and $850,000 for supplies related to the arrest and processing of suspects.

In disclosing the cost breakdown, city officials denied rumors that had circulated for weeks that they had contemplated buying exotic nonlethal weapons that fired an immobilizing goo, or that used radiation or sonic waves to incapacitate people or vehicles.

"St. Paul isn't New York," he said. "We just don't have the staffing."

Kenneth L. Wainstein, the White House adviser on homeland security and counterterrorism, recently visited Denver and St. Paul, a trip that reflected the administration's interest in the conventions. "In the post-9/11 world, you have to prepare and plan for all contingencies," Mr. Wainstein said. "That means preparing for everything from a minor disruption and an unruly individual to a broader terrorist event. We need to plan for everything no matter what the threat level is on any particular day."

Intelligence analysts, however, have not reported a heightened threat from Islamic extremists or domestic threats from antigovernment groups or environmental militants like the kind that operate in many Western states, according to federal officials. "We just aren't seeing a credible threat," said James H. Davis, the F.B.I. agent in charge of the Denver office.

Each convention has been designated a National Special Security Event, which makes the Secret Service the lead federal agency responsible for protecting dignitaries and providing overall security. Other agencies will be on standby.

The National Guard in Minnesota and Colorado will each have hundreds of troops on call to their governors to help civilian medical personnel or bomb squads, for instance, if needed. National Guard specialists trained to deal with biological, chemical, nuclear and radiological weapons will also be available.

"There won't be a visible military presence," said Maj. Gen. Guy C. Swan III, director of operations for the military's Northern Command, which is in charge of the military's response to threats on American soil.

Each city has been awarded $50 million in federal funds for convention costs, a substantial part of which is being spent on security-related equipment and training. And each city has been enlisting the help of neighboring communities to provide more officers to help police the conventions.

The security and safety of convention delegates and visitors has become an increasingly significant issue in Denver and Minneapolis-St. Paul, where local officials were hoping to avoid complaints, heard in 2004 after the Democratic convention in Boston and the Republican convention in New York, that restrictive security arrangements had nearly locked down the convention sites.

From the start, the Democrats' decision to hold their convention in Denver and the Republicans' choice of St. Paul stirred concerns about whether local police in each city had enough officers to deal with a wide range of threats, including terrorist attacks or a lone gunman.

The most pressing fears, particularly in Denver, are that as many as 30,000 demonstrators may sweep into the city to disrupt the convention. Much of the city's planning, in conjunction with federal authorities, has been based on the possibility of such protests, according to federal officials.

Still, these officials acknowledge that they have little concrete intelligence indicating that such large or unruly demonstrations are being planned. But, officials said they had based their assessments on groups like Recreate 68, Tent State and other activist coalitions. Organizers insist the groups are nonviolent, but to the authorities their names alone raise the specter of violent confrontations like those at the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago.

In Denver, federal officials have expressed concern that demonstrators could try to shut down regular business at several major offices, including the Federal Reserve Bank, the United States Mint, and the federal courthouse.

"Because of the Internet, the ability of protesters to mobilize and share information has metastasized," said Troy A. Eid, the United States attorney for Colorado. "That would be fine if it were peaceful, as we expect. But we have to plan accordingly."

In recent days, domestic security officials issued a heightened awareness bulletin urging greater attention because of a number of factors, including the election and the conventions. But law enforcement authorities say they are trying to strike a balance between planning for every conceivable threat, including terrorist attacks and large public demonstrations, and not strangling a city's commercial life in the process.

"We're not looking to shut down an entire city," said Malcolm Wiley, a Secret Service agent involved in security planning for the convention in Denver.

In several states, including the traditional battlegrounds of Nevada and Iowa, Democrats have surprised their own party officials with significant gains in registration. In both of those states, there are now more registered Democrats than Republicans, a flip from 2004. No states have switched to the Republicans over the same period, according to data from 26 of the 29 states in which voters register by party. (Three of the states did not have complete data.)

In six states, including Iowa, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania, the Democratic piece of the registration pie grew more than three percentage points, while the Republican share declined. In only three states - Kentucky, Louisiana and Oklahoma - did Republican registration rise while Democratic registration fell, but the Republican increase was less than a percentage point in Kentucky and Oklahoma. Louisiana was the only state to register a gain of more than one percentage point for Republicans as Democratic numbers declined.

Over the same period, the share of the electorate that registers as independent has grown at a faster rate than Republicans or Democrats in 12 states. The rise has been so significant that in states like Arizona, Colorado and North Carolina, nonpartisan voters essentially constitute a third party.

Swings in party registration are not uncommon from one year to the next, or even over two years. Registration, moreover, often has no impact on how people actually vote, and people sometimes switch registration to vote in a primary, then flip again come Election Day.

But for a shift away from one party to sustain itself - the current registration trend is now in its fourth year - is remarkable, researchers who study voting patterns say. And though comparable data are not available for the 21 states where voters do not register by party, there is evidence that an increasing number of voters in those states are also moving away from the Republican Party based on the results of recent state and Congressional elections, the researchers said.

"This is very suggestive that there is a fundamental change going on in the electorate," said Michael P. McDonald, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and an associate professor of political science at George Mason University who has studied voting patterns.

Mr. McDonald added that, more typically, voting and registration patterns tended to even out or revert to the opposing party between elections.

Dick Armey, the former House majority leader and one of the designers of the so-called Republican Revolution of 1994, said: "Obviously, these are not good numbers for the party to be looking at. Democrats have always had extremely broad multifaceted registration programs."

But in terms of the presidential election, Mr. Armey said the tea leaves were harder to read.

"I think the key in this one is, where do all these new independent voters break?" he said. "I think right now, you've got a guy in western Pennsylvania saying, 'I am really disgusted right now and I'm not going to register as a Republican anymore, but I really don't want this guy Obama elected.' "

Those in charge of state Democratic parties cite a national displeasure with the Bush administration as an impetus for the changing numbers, which run counter to a goal of Karl Rove, President Bush's former top adviser, to create a permanent realignment in favor of Republicans.

"I think nationally and here, people are kind of tired of the way this administration has been conducting the policies of this country," said Pat Waak, chairwoman of the Colorado Democratic Party.

Yet while an unpopular war, a faltering economy and a president held in low esteem have combined to hurt the Republican Party, Democrats are also benefiting from demographic changes, including the rise in the number of younger voters and the urbanization of suburbs, which has resulted in a different political flavor there, voting and campaign experts said. The party has also been helped by a willingness to run more pragmatic candidates, who have helped make the party more appealing to a broader swath of the electorate.

The unsettled political ground has manifested itself in state and local elections. Twenty-three state legislatures are controlled by Democrats and 14 by Republicans, with 12 states with divided chambers (Nebraska has a nonpartisan legislature). After the 2000 election, 16 state legislatures were dominated by Democrats, and 17 by Republicans, with 16 divided.

It is a similar story in governors' mansions. After the 2004 election, there were 28 Republican governors and 22 Democrats; those numbers are now reversed. After the 2000 election, there were only 19 Democratic governors.

Elected Democrats have made significant inroads even in places where Republicans have enjoyed a generation of dominance. In Colorado, for example, Democrats control the governorship and both houses of the Legislature for the first time in over four decades. Last year, Virginia Democrats gained a 21-to-19 majority over Republicans in the State Senate, the first time the party has controlled that body in a decade.

In New Hampshire, Democrats are in control of both the legislative and executive branches for the first time since 1874. In Iowa, Democrats have taken over the statehouse and the governor's office simultaneously for the first time in a generation.

The changes in state government could have broad implications for Congressional redistricting and on policies like immigration, health care reform and environmental regulation, which are increasingly decided at the state level.

In many states, Democrats have benefited from a rise in younger potential voters, after declines or small increases in the number of those voters in the 1980s and '90s. The population of 18- to 24-year-olds rose from about 27 million in 2000 to nearly 30 million in 2006, according to Census figures.

Mr. Obama's candidacy has drawn many young people to register to vote, and some of the recent gains by Democrats have no doubt been influenced by excitement over his campaign. But even before Mr. Obama's ascendancy among Democrats, younger voters were moving toward the Democratic Party, demographers said.

Dowell Myers, a professor of policy, planning and development at the University of Southern California, also noted that a younger, native-born generation of Latinos who have a tendency to support Democrats is coming of age.

Further, young Americans have migrated in recent years to high-growth states that have traditionally been dominated by Republicans, like Arizona, Colorado and Nevada, which may have had an impact on the changing registration numbers in those places.

The changing face of many American suburbs has also had in impact both in voter registration and voting patterns. In many major metropolitan areas, suburbs that were once largely white and Republican have become more mixed, as people living in cities have been priced out into surrounding areas, and exurban regions have absorbed those residents who once favored the close-in suburbs of cities.

"What we speculate is that density attracts Democrats," said Robert Lang, director of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech who has researched voting patterns. "It is not that people move to those areas and change positions. It tends now to be a self-selection of singles, childless couples," who tend to vote Democrat more than their married with children counterparts.

In the nation's 50 largest metropolitan areas, Democrats carried nearly 60 percent of the Congressional vote in 2006 in inner suburbs, up from about 53 percent in 2002, according to Mr. Lang’s research.

This trend is particularly evident in places like St. Louis, southern Pennsylvania and Fairfax County, Va., which President Bush won in 2000 but lost in 2004.

Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, who won her seat in 2006, picked up the large majority of voters in the St. Louis and Kansas City metropolitan areas, and Senator Jim Webb, also a Democrat, won his seat in a similar manner in Virginia, which has not voted for a Democrat for president since 1964.

Democrats have also succeeded, at least in part, by running centrist candidates where they are most needed. Bill Ritter, the Democratic governor of Colorado and former district attorney of Denver, opposes abortion rights. Among the men who flipped three of Indiana's eight Congressional seats in the midterm election in 2006, two also oppose both abortion rights and gun control.

What the demographers, political scientists and party officials wonder now is whether the shift of the last few years will be sustained.

"Major political realignment is not just controlling the branches of government," said Mr. McDonald of the Brookings Institution. "It is when you decisively do it. We haven't seen that in modern generations."

As I read the umpteenth piece wondering why Barack Obama's lead in the polls isn't bigger, I remembered how Robert Redford recently said that you "could kiss the Democratic Party goodbye" if Obama loses the election.

This may be overstating the case - the Democratic Party would not cease to exist if presumptive Republican nominee John McCain emerges triumphant on Election Day.

But a presidential loss in an election year when so many indicators are going its way (an incumbent Republican president with approval numbers in the 20s, an electorate focusing on the economy, and on and on) would likely lead to a prolonged wander in the wilderness, akin to what the British Labour Party experienced in the pre-Tony Blair years. The post-election recriminations within the Democratic Party, taken alone, would see to that.

That scenario and eight years of the Bush administration have a lot of Democrats viewing this year's contest as the most important presidential election in years - a veritable "must-win."

To achieve this must-win, Democratic primary voters and superdelegates opted not for one of the "safe" choices among the large and varied field of primary contenders, but for a history-making candidate. (The same would be true if the party had ultimately settled on Hillary Clinton.)

For the Democrats, there is a lot riding on bringing history to fruition. Maybe anxiety provoked by this fact is at the root of some of the columns wondering why Obama's polling lead over McCain is "only" a few points, three months before Election Day.

A few words about these polls. First and foremost, no matter whom one wants to see in the White House, paying close attention to summer polls is pure folly. Some say to this line of reasoning, "Sure, but look at Michael Dukakis, for example: He was up 17 points over George H.W. Bush in 1988."

If you must search for historical antecedents, you could also look at 1980, when unpopular incumbent Jimmy Carter ran a close race against Ronald Reagan until very late in the campaign, when voters evidently decided they were comfortable with the former actor and onetime governor of California. Reagan went on to win by nine points in an electoral landslide.

But as they say in the disclaimers that run at the end of ads for investment services, past performance does not necessarily serve as a predictor of future results. And it's worth remembering that polls haven't exactly been the most reliable indicators so far in this election season.

Perhaps this is advantage McCain, as Obama polled better than he performed in the run-up to the New Hampshire and California primaries - and perhaps this is advantage Obama, as one theory has it that pollsters, who only use land lines to place their polling calls, are missing a lot of Obama's younger, cell-phone-only supporters.

Obama, a relative unknown on the national stage until only recently, is running against a well-known senator and war hero who - whether you agree or not - has an image as a straight-talking maverick. McCain's campaign hasn't been strong out of the gate, but he remains a formidable candidate and well-matched opponent to Obama.

Given the two previous presidential elections, no one should be surprised that this race is close now, no matter what the indicators. And those who know their history also know that, in this historic campaign, any number of things could happen between now and Nov. 4.

Last week's racial politics may have been "disappointing" but "like it or not, Obama's race is an issue, just as John F. Kennedy's religion was an issue in 1960 - and racism runs deeper in our history than anti-Catholicism," writes The Washington Post's E. J. Dionne Jr.. "There is no doubt that two keys to this election are: How many white and Latino votes will Obama lose because of his race that a white Democrat would have won? And how much will African American turnout grow, given the opportunity to elect our nation's first black president?"

This year Republicans have a host of things to choose from when it comes to attacking Obama - and as unpleasant as they are he'll have to face them. "The great opportunity this year for less scrupulous Republican strategists is that Obama is both black and a Columbia-and-Harvard-educated former professor who lived in the intellectually rarified precincts of Hyde Park in Chicago, Manhattan's Upper West Side and Cambridge, Mass. They can go after him subtly on race and overtly on elitism," Dionne writes. "Is this unfair? Yes, it is. But if our nation is to cast off the shackles of race this year, Obama will have to grapple more than he'd like with the burdens that our history and the past travails of liberalism have forced him to bear."

Both Obama and John McCain seem to be dragging their feet on announcing their veep choices - a decision that might not be such a good one, writes Salon.com's Walter Shapiro. "At first glance, it seems appealing for Obama to delay naming his veep until the Democratic delegates start arriving in Denver over the weekend of August 22 to 24. McCain advisers are even reportedly speculating that the GOP nominee could wait until the Tuesday morning of the convention (September 2) to make his announcement as a way of erasing memories of George W. Bush's scheduled Monday night speech. But such efforts at syncopated scheduling run the risk of replicating the dread Dan Quayle experience when a vice-presidential selection spontaneously combusted in the middle of a convention."

So what does Quayle have to do with anything? "What gives the Quayle quake contemporary relevance is that neither Obama nor McCain will be presiding over rubber-stamp conventions. One of the reasons the Obama campaign moved his Thursday night acceptance speech to Invesco Field is that an outdoor football stadium will mask the reality that about 48 percent of the convention delegates favored Hillary Clinton and may not be appropriately enthusiastic on camera. McCain will have to grapple with a party with the fringe on top, ranging from the unreconciled Ron Paul supporters to the onward Christian soldiers of the religious right on the alert for heresy." If Obama were to choose a woman who is not Clinton and McCain were to make a "bold" veep choice, they'd need some time to defend it. "By waiting until the eve of their conventions, both Obama and McCain will face nearly irresistible pressures to pick nominees who are safe, secure and a trifle soporific. There is nothing like the onset of a convention to create a groundswell for a conventional vice president."

By Sara Murray, The Wall Street Journal, August 5, 2008

With the Olympics starting Friday- and Obama expected to go on vacation in Hawaii next week - conventional thinking is that the announcements will either come this week or much later in August.

Late pick ahead?

By John McCormick, Chicago Tribune, August 4, 2008

Participants described the meeting at the Wolf Block law firm with about 50 fund-raisers and political leaders as a sometimes-emotional celebration of Clinton's victory in the state's April 22 primary.

"It was remarkable," said Alan Kessler, a partner at the law firm and a Democratic fund-raiser. "We see candidates coming through all the time raising money, but it's a rare thing to experience them coming back just to say 'thank you.' "

The event was not a fund-raiser. Attendees said that Clinton did not bring up her $25 million campaign debt, though some in the audience asked her about it, and that she urged them to open their checkbooks and hearts to Obama.

Before the gathering, Clinton met with Mayor Nutter and his wife, Lisa, for 90 minutes at the Park Hyatt Philadelphia at the Bellevue.

"It really was a get-together, in a sense, of some friends," Nutter said. "It was mostly a policy discussion about education and children ... and she was very thankful for all my help."

The visit was a "personal honor," he said.

Clinton has embarked on a series of visits to thank her biggest supporters around the country and to try to integrate her fund-raising network with Obama's. She plans to campaign for him in swing states before the Democratic convention later this month.

Clinton also told people during her Philadelphia visit that she is scheduled to speak to the convention on Tuesday night, Aug. 26. She said she had no more insight than that available in the media about where Obama's super-secret vice-presidential selection process might lead.

"She warned that it's going to be a much closer election than people realize, and that she was putting her loss behind her and moving forward," said fund-raiser Mark Aronchick, who attended the luncheon. Aronchick said "she was very positive," and that she said Obama would be a "great president."

Even former President Bill Clinton, whose temper flared at several inopportune times during the primary struggle, is getting into the healing act.

There are some things "I wish I hadn't said," Clinton told ABC News in an interview from Africa broadcast yesterday, but he denied referring to Obama's race. He said that the media applied "a different standard" to his wife in campaign coverage but that dwelling on such things "interferes with the issue, which is who should be elected in November."

By Thomas Fitzgerald, The Philadelphia Inquirer, August 5, 2008

With a crowd that not only included Kerry but also 1988 Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis, Obama warned of overconfidence, recalling how he had been upset by Hillary Rodham Clinton in New Hampshire earlier this year after his win in Iowa.

"I think that there is a tendency, particularly for Democrats, to start feeling kind of giddy again .. the poll numbers look pretty good," he said.

He then moved to a recent controversy that illustrated the complexity of the campaign for him.

"You go off on a trip that your opponent has told you you need to take. So you take the trip," he said, referring to his travels to Afghanistan, the Middle East and Europe. "And suddenly, this trip that you were told you had to take, you're acting presumptuous. You're acting like a president already."

On the flight from Boston to Ohio, Obama seemed relaxed as he spoke to reporters for more than 20 minutes. He said his traveling chief of staff, Marvin Nicholson, told him a gift from his campaign staff had been accidentally left in a cab "somewhere in Chicago," and spoke of his coming vacation to Hawaii, where he will see his grandmother for the first time in more than a year.

Obama then went down the aisle row-by-row to deliver pieces of his birthday cake to more than three dozen journalists, declaring "it's full service" on the plane. When a female reporter at first declined, the candidate managed to change her mind.

"No cake? Maureen Dowd will write a story about you," he joked, referring to the New York Times columnist who has often tweaked the candidate. "Don't want to be elitist now."

By Perry Bacon, The Washington Post, August 5, 2008

The New York Times looks at the problem facing the Republican Party -- and the advantage for the Democrats -- regarding registration. "In several states, including the traditional battlegrounds of Nevada and Iowa, Democrats have surprised their own party officials with significant gains in registration. In both of those states, there are now more registered Democrats than Republicans, a flip from 2004. No states have switched to the Republicans over the same period, according to data from 26 of the 29 states in which voters register by party. (Three of the states did not have complete data.)"

"In six states, including Iowa, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania, the Democratic piece of the registration pie grew more than three percentage points, while the Republican share declined. In only three states - Kentucky, Louisiana and Oklahoma - did Republican registration rise while Democratic registration fell, but the Republican increase was less than a percentage point in Kentucky and Oklahoma. Louisiana was the only state to register a gain of more than one percentage point for Republicans as Democratic numbers declined."

"Swings in party registration are not uncommon from one year to the next, or even over two years. Registration, moreover, often has no impact on how people actually vote, and people sometimes switch registration to vote in a primary, then flip again come Election Day. But for a shift away from one party to sustain itself - the current registration trend is now in its fourth year - is remarkable, researchers who study voting patterns say. And though comparable data are not available for the 21 states where voters do not register by party, there is evidence that an increasing number of voters in those states are also moving away from the Republican Party based on the results of recent state and Congressional elections, the researchers said."

ALASKA: The Washington Post looks at Obama's chances in the last frontier. "And this year, being a Democrat may not be such a bad thing. Every Republican on the November ballot can expect to suffer from the corruption scandal that has tarred Alaskan politics. Last week's indictment of Ted Stevens, the U.S. Senate's longest-serving Republican, follows the federal convictions of three state GOP lawmakers in cases that featured surveillance videos starring the oil executive who prosecutors say remodeled Stevens's modest Girdwood home."

MASSACHUSETTS: Obama has a 47%-38% lead over McCain in Massachusetts, according to a Suffolk University poll. "Democrat Barack Obama's nine point lead over Republican John McCain in Massachusetts is a sharp fall from the 23-point lead he enjoyed in June. McCain was able to make gains among Western Massachusetts voters, men, middle-aged voters and independents."

MICHIGAN: The Detroit Free Press gives big billing to Obama's plan to offer financial support to the auto industry. The headline: "I'd guarantee $4 billion to retool auto industry."

NEVADA: The Rocky Mountain News tees off on the swing state Nevada. The Silver State's strong libertarian streak, unique political tensions, and passionate defense of gun rights make it a challenge for both McCain -- viewed as too liberal by many vocal conservatives in the state -- and Obama, whose Second Amendment stance (though softened) could get him in trouble. Check out this killer quote from a gun dealer in northern Nevada: "When Hillary Clinton announced she was running, I was swamped. Guns were flying off the shelf." Oh, and then there's this: "Even brothels are offering gas cards now when services -- as they are politely called -- are purchased."

MSNBC, August 05, 2008

Largely as a consequence, the public's attitude toward government -- Ronald Reagan's bête noire -- has shifted. A recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that, by a 53-to-42 percent margin, Americans want government to "do more to solve problems"; a dozen years ago, respondents opposed government action by 2 to 1. Meanwhile, Republican constituency groups' long-standing determination to put aside their often significant differences and band together to support GOP candidates is fracturing: The libertarian darling Ron Paul and the evangelical Christian leader James C. Dobson are among the Republican bigwigs who haven't so far endorsed McCain. And the mountains of books and articles by conservative writers attacking liberals and liberalism have begun to be matched by new stacks of tomes exploring what went wrong with conservatism and what is to become of it.

As I listen to leading voices and thinkers on the right pondering the condition of their ideology, it is increasingly clear to me that they face a fundamental dilemma -- one that cannot be resolved anytime soon and that might well leave the conservative movement out to pasture for as long as we progressives have been powerlessly chewing grass. That choice is whether to stick with rhetoric and policies wedded to free markets, limited government and bellicose unilateralism, or to endorse a more robust role for the public sector at home while relying more on diplomacy and international institutions abroad. Either way, conservative Republicans seem destined to have a much harder time winning elections for the foreseeable future. Just ask McCain how much fun he's having.

The single theme that most animated the modern conservative movement was the conviction that government was the problem and market forces the solution. It was a simple, elegant, politically attractive idea, and the right applied it to virtually every major domestic challenge -- retirement security, health care, education, jobs, the environment and so on. Whatever the issue, conservatives proposed substituting market forces for government -- pushing the bureaucrats aside and letting private-sector competition work to everyone's benefit.

So they advocated creating health savings accounts, handing out school vouchers, privatizing Social Security, shifting government functions to private contractors, and curtailing regulations on public health, safety, the environment and more. And, of course, they pushed to cut taxes to further weaken the public sector by "starving the beast." President Bush has followed this playbook more closely than any previous president, including Reagan, notwithstanding today's desperate efforts by the right to distance itself from the deeply unpopular chief executive.

But in practice, those ideas have all failed to deliver on the promises the conservatives made, and in many instances, the dogma has actually created new problems. Particularly after Hurricane Katrina, when Americans saw how hapless the Federal Emergency Management Agency was, the public has begun to realize that the right's hostility toward government has produced only ineffective government.

One can see the results in recent headlines: a Justice Department where non-conservatives need not apply; tainted spinach, jalapeño peppers and pet food; dangerous imported toys; poorly enforced environmental laws and a warming planet; the regulatory failures that led to the subprime mortgage fiasco. Meanwhile, large tax cuts (as under Reagan) have weakened the country's fiscal health without significantly improving the lot of the vast majority of citizens. And the right's enthusiasm for Bush's brand of "benevolent hegemony" in foreign policy, which insists on the U.S. right to wage preventive war and dismisses the United Nations as a band of meddlesome bureaucrats, has weakened our security -- most notably through the unnecessary calamity in Iraq -- by diluting our military capabilities and diverting their focus from genuine threats from al-Qaeda.

So now what? In new books, two conservative stalwarts, former House speaker Newt Gingrich and the anti-tax guru Grover Norquist, don't even bother wrestling with such failures. Instead, they argue for an even stronger dose of the medicine that has, so far, produced mainly toxic reactions. They owe their fame to denigrating the government, so one can hardly blame them for sticking with the program. For conservatives to abandon the arguments that have served them so well politically for so long would be akin to a Fortune 500 company dropping its core business when it recognizes that the market for its product is rapidly disintegrating.

Running away from something that has made you successful, even after the public is clearly no longer buying, is extremely difficult to do. Business-school curriculums are filled with case studies of long-prosperous companies that went bankrupt precisely because they were unwilling or unable to shift to an enterprise better suited to changing times. Future political science classes might some day teach a similar story about conservatism.

Shifting course won't be easy, either. Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam, a pair of conservative authors decades younger than Gingrich and Norquist, argue in their new, much-hyped book "Grand New Party" that the time has come to "move beyond the Reagan legacy and the mindset of the current Republican power structure." They suggest plenty of proposals that many progressives would support, including a fairly ambitious and expensive national health-care plan, subsidies for entry-level jobs and more investment in infrastructure.

Traditionally, conservatives have defined themselves as resistant to change, standing "athwart history, yelling Stop," as the late William F. Buckley Jr. famously put it. But right now, conservatives -- including McCain -- are damned if they do change and damned if they don't.

That gave Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager, the excuse to offer the preposterous charge that Obama had "played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck."

Davis's use of a dreadful cliche brought to mind George Orwell's observation that there exists "a huge dump of worn-out metaphors which have lost all evocative power and are merely used because they save people the trouble of inventing phrases for themselves."

Nonetheless, the Obama camp was caught short, and the candidate backed off a critique of McCain on race. McCain largely left the matter to his surrogates. Both candidates are wary of racial politics. Obama knows that whites and Latinos will constitute the vast majority of November's electorate, and McCain knows that many swing voters will be turned off by explicit racism. But the episode was a good example of how indirect and misleading political talk can be. Like it or not, Obama's race is an issue, just as John F. Kennedy's religion was an issue in 1960 -- and racism runs deeper in our history than anti-Catholicism.

Let's dispose of the canard that there is something wrong with black people voting in overwhelming numbers for a black candidate. Minorities in the United States always turn out in a big way for the candidate who is breaking barriers on their behalf.

The most obvious example is Kennedy, who won roughly 80 percent of the Catholic vote in 1960, about 30 percentage points greater than the Catholic share won four years earlier by Democrat Adlai Stevenson. Proportionately, Kennedy's gain among Catholics was far greater than Obama's likely pickup over John Kerry's 2004 vote among African Americans, judging by the current polls.

More broadly, the race issue is used less overtly now than it used to be. When Democrats were the party of Jim Crow in the post-Civil War period, many in their ranks ran ugly, blatantly racist campaigns. Beginning in 1968 with Richard Nixon's Southern strategy, Republicans have been far more subtle in playing to white reaction on race.

Often, the appeal to white unease over race is overlaid with a populist rhetoric against "liberal elitists" who side with blacks while not understanding the struggles of the white working class.

William Connolly, a left-of-center political theorist, wrote an essay in 1981 that brilliantly captured why so many white working-class voters came to reject liberal programs.

Connolly argued that such voters saw the welfare state as turning on them, undermining the values they espoused and denigrating their efforts at self-reliance. They saw mandatory school busing as robbing them of their chance to secure a better education for their children by moving into better school districts. Especially among working-class white men, affirmative action seemed to treat "everyone else . . . either as meritorious or as unjustly closed out from the ranks of the meritorious."

When liberals dismissed such concerns as purely racist, Connolly noted, "These vulnerable constituencies did not need too much political coaxing to bite the hand that had slapped them in the face."

The great opportunity this year for less scrupulous Republican strategists is that Obama is both black and a Columbia-and-Harvard-educated former professor who lived in the intellectually rarified precincts of Hyde Park in Chicago, Manhattan's Upper West Side and Cambridge, Mass. They can go after him subtly on race and overtly on elitism. They can turn the facts of Obama's life into mutually reinforcing liabilities.

Is this unfair? Yes, it is. But if our nation is to cast off the shackles of race this year, Obama will have to grapple more than he'd like with the burdens that our history and the past travails of liberalism have forced him to bear.

The key words are "victim" and "racist" -- which Obama did not say. Graham puts them in Obama's mouth because of their power to alienate.

With the first loaded word, Graham is trying to tie Obama to a stereotype: the Great African American Victim. He's playing to the annoyance some whites feel at being reminded of racial sins committed long before they were born or even long before their families came to this country.

As Graham well knows, Obama has taken great pains to sanitize his campaign of even the faintest whiff of victimhood. Obama understands that in order to be elected president, he has to come off as the least-aggrieved black man in America.

Most of his supporters understand this, too. They know that he can't react with anger when his love of country is questioned over a flag pin. They see that he can't be seen to take offense when his self-confidence -- a quality shared by every U.S. senator I've ever met -- is portrayed as arrogance, as if he had somehow reached beyond his station by thinking he is worthy of being elected president.

As the kerfuffle of the past week indicates, it's apparently even problematic for Obama to attempt to describe the Republican Party's obvious game plan of defining him as different, exotic and risky.

Obama could note, however, that the tactic doesn't seem to be working. A new poll by The Post, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University shows him leading McCain by 10 points, 47 to 37 percent, among white low-income workers. These people have to be made to fear or distrust Obama, and in a hurry, or McCain loses.

The second of the bombshell words that Obama didn't say -- but that Graham would like you to think that he said -- is an even bigger canard. He called me a racist has become a popular and convenient refuge of scoundrels. It's the place, for example, where Geraldine Ferraro went to hide when she was challenged on her claim that Obama wouldn't be where he was if he weren't black. In fact, as far as I'm aware, nobody called Ferraro a racist; to do so would imply knowledge of her most private thoughts, as well as a reassessment of her long career in public life. Rather, what I and many others said was that her remarks were insulting and wrong -- with the focus on what she had said, not on what was in her soul.

There's an obvious difference, which Lindsey Graham surely understands. But on Sunday, when former senator -- and current Obama supporter -- Tom Daschle accurately reminded Graham that Obama "has never said that he believes that John McCain is a racist," Graham wouldn't acknowledge the point. As long as he doesn't, it's possible to create the false impression that Obama accuses his critics of being racists.

This battle over Obama's image as a black man is arguably the central front of the presidential campaign right now. Once-sharp lines between the candidates on issues such as withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq or allowing new offshore oil drilling are becoming blurred. The Democratic Party's structural advantages going into the election are formidable. It's hard to imagine how McCain could possibly win unless he generates doubt in voters' minds about Obama.

One way to do that would be to fabricate the impression that Obama is demanding special treatment and privilege because he is black -- in other words, turn a self-made man into a stereotypical beneficiary of affirmative action.

We've been talking a lot in the last several months about the dramatic increase in Democratic registration in Oregon, driven in large part by the heated primary contest between Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

But the trend of Democratic increases is more widespread, and longer term. The New York Times reports today that, since 2005, Democrats have gained some 214,000 voters in the 26 states with available registration data while Republican registration has dropped by more than 1.4 million.

(Two quick paranthetical explanations of the data. Since many young people don't register by party, the long-term trend is for a shift away from both Ds and Rs. Secondly, according to the Times, only 29 states allow voters to register by party. In states like Washington, voters are simply registered as voters.)

As the Times notes, this trend may not make a big difference in the presidential race, where voters will make a highly personal choice about the party nominees. But in legislative and congressional races, where voters know less about the candidates, it could be crucial.

For example, in 2000, Democrats controlled state Legislatures in 16 states and 17 were controlled by Republicans. After 2006, Democrats had full control in 23 states while Republicans slipped to 14. One of the turnarounds, of course, was in Oregon where both houses shifted from R to D.

Lastly, take a look at the Times graphic listing voter registration changes in seven of the states. It is pretty instructive.

YOUNGSTOWN, Ohio (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama sought on Tuesday to link the troubled economy with administration energy policies that he asserted Vice President Dick Cheney helped shape and rival Republican John McCain would continue.

"McCain has taken a page out of the Cheney playbook," Obama said as he stumped in this key battleground state.

With polls showing concern over gas prices a prime concern of Americans, Obama has been depicting energy as the nation's most pressing national security and economic issue. In that effort, he criticizes McCain as more concerned about oil company profits and drilling than an overall energy strategy.

Among other things, Obama has proposed a $1,000-per family energy rebate to be paid for by a tax on excessive energy-company profits. He called for ending U.S. reliance on oil from the Middle East and Venezuela over the next 10 years, a project he said would cost the U.S. $150 billion.

Obama has also proposed borrowing oil from the strategic petroleum reserve, a conditional and limited resumption of offshore drilling, and a new emphasis on alternative energy sources and hybrid vehicles.

"Our economy is in turmoil, I don't have to tell the people of Youngstown," Obama told a high-school gymnasium audience in this rust-belt city. "People here have known some hard knocks and hard times."

Ohio is a bellwether state, having voted for the winning candidate in all 11 presidential elections since 1964, including handing President Bush a close re-election victory in 2004.

Cheney, a former oilman, early in the Bush administration helped draft an energy policy that Obama asserted is biased in favor of tax breaks and favorable treatment for big oil. It was an attempt to capitalize on Cheney's unpopularity.

"President Bush, he had an energy policy. He turned to Dick Cheney and he said, 'Cheney, go take care of this,'" Obama said. "Cheney met with renewable-energy folks once and oil and gas (executives) 40 times. McCain has taken a page out of the Cheney playbook."

It was Obama's second day on a tour featuring a stepped-up emphasis on energy and harsher criticism of McCain.

Increasingly, with his appearances this week and with a new ad, Obama has been seeking to tie McCain to the oil and gas industry, even though McCain has no direct ties to the industry, unlike Bush and Cheney, who both worked in the industry before their election.

A new Obama ad says Big Oil filled McCain's campaign with $2 million in contributions and that he "wants to give them another $4 billion in tax breaks."

However, that consists mainly of potential revenue from a McCain proposal to lower corporate taxes on all American businesses.

The McCain campaign has also pointed out that the ad doesn't mention Obama has taken some $400,000 from oil company executives.

"We have to end the age of oil. "Obama said. "If we fail to act, there are severe indications for national security, our economy and our environment."

Obama has had trouble connecting with white working-class voters, who are a major factor in Ohio. Hillary Rodham Clinton won the state in its Democratic primary earlier this year. Gov. Ted Strickland, who had been a Clinton supporter, gave a rousing endorsement of Obama, calling him "bright, young, energized and compassionate."

Obama's focused on economic issues. He said that oil giant Exxon-Mobil "makes in 30 seconds what the typical Ohio worker makes in a year."

"We need more jobs and economic development. Why don't we focus on clean energy and reopening factories and putting people back to work? Nobody is benefiting from jobs that are leaving the community," he said.

Obama has proposed a $15-billion-a-year program to help promote clean-energy jobs.

In a question-and-answer session, Obama was asked if he would support term limits for members of Congress by a questioner who noted that many senators were elderly.

"That's kind of a tricky question. I've got colleagues in the Senate who are doing absolutely outstanding work, and they're well into their 70s," Obama said. He praised ailing Sen. Edward M. Kennedy as one.

"I'm generally not in favor of term limits," he said. "Nobody is term-limiting the lobbyists or the slick operators walking around the halls of Congress. I believe in one form of term limits. They're called elections."

Apparently, Barack Obama sells. According to The New York Post, the July 21 New Yorker magazine issue with the satiric cover cartoon of Barack as an Islamist and wife Michelle as an armed militant sold 75,000 newsstand copies, compared with an average 43,000. Time magazine, the leading newsweekly, says its five covers this year featuring Obama, Hillary Clinton or both sold either "significantly" above average or above average. (Its single John McCain cover sold below average.) Time's 2006 Obama cover posted the second-biggest newsstand sales that year. Us Weekly expects its Obama cover to sell as many as 200,000 more than its usual 800,000 copies.

The emergence of Barack Obama as a marketable celebrity brings a new dimension to the perennial discussion of media political bias.

Usually, the reasons advanced for why the media lean this way or that fall into familiar patterns: Journalists themselves are liberal and swing coverage to reflect personal ideology; news organizations are owned by conservatives who want anti-corporate politicians marginalized; media try to mirror the prejudices of audiences and advertisers, which means supporting entrenched privilege - such as being male or being white; media like to stir things up, so they tilt toward the sensational and the discordant. And so on.

But one dimension of media behavior that doesn"t get enough attention is the self-serving one: Media like what helps them prosper. If Obama draws bigger crowds, let"s have more Obama coverage. The current outsized attention Obama"s getting - notably the three TV networks anchoring their news coverage from his recent international tour - seems a market-savvy response to audience interest.

Now, the Obama political coverage hasn't been particularly favorable. Researchers at George Mason University"s Center for Media and Public Affairs, which has been tracking network news since 1985, analyzed the first six weeks of the general election campaign and concluded, "Media Bash Obama": Negative statements about him constituted 72 percent of judgments delivered, compared with 43 percent for McCain.

But it may not be the political coverage that matters most. As CNN commentator Glenn Beck suggests, when the Associated Press is moving stories about Obama's exercise regimen and workout attire, we're entering a different realm. My interest here is in looking at how the media's applying journalistic habits derived from celebrity coverage may affect the way the electorate views its political choices. And my hunch is that the easy conclusion that heavy and breathless Obama coverage will work to his advantage is probably wrong.

-First, celebrity popularity is fickle. People tire of them, they get over-exposed. Worse, their claim to public attention depends on fresh new drama. To be boring is lethal. As a presidential candidate, however, the last thing Obama wants are reporters looking for any more surprises.

-Second, celebrity appeal usually turns on personality attributes - who's cruel, who's faithless, who's stuck-up. Lately we're hearing that Obama's "elitist" or "presumptuous." That's a half-step from "conceited," which matters when you're picking a homecoming queen, not voting for president. Making supposed personality foibles pivotal to a candidate's appeal introduces a quirky and bizarre element into electoral calculation.

-Third, celebrities must keep it light. Stardom has been defined, accurately I think, as status without influence. When Hollywood stars get principled, they harm their careers. Oprah endorsed Obama, and her ratings fell. I don't believe Obama's campaign has any less substance than McCain's, but I do suspect his luster as an audience-pleaser is dimmed when the media dwell on that substance. His prominence, in that respect, comes at the cost of downplaying his seriousness.

-Finally, when McCain's campaign says Obama has more fans than Paris Hilton, it's opening a powerful line of attack. All presidential candidates move to the political center after the primaries; all avoid specifics if they can get by with rhetoric.

But not every candidate has to live down the impression that they are, as Glenn Beck puts it, all sizzle and no steak - an impression, ironically, deepened if not created by the determination of the media themselves to cover the sizzle.

Wow. Could upstart Obama's newfound stardom cost him the presidency? Now that's a plotline worthy of a world-class celebrity.

Chicago Tribune, August 5, 2008

ANCHORAGE -- In what might be the fullest realization of Barack Obama's pledge to run hard in parts of the country largely untouched by presidential campaigning, the Democrat's Alaska operation is making plans for organizers to hopscotch the state's vast and sparsely populated interior by bush plane, knocking on doors in remote outposts for their candidate.

"Go around, put up signs, shake some hands, see some of the important people in the village," said state representative and professional pilot Woodie Salmon (D), describing his own campaign tactics in a legislative district that includes 94 villages, 70 of which can be reached only by air. "Get things stirred up and leave again."

Conservative and quirky, Alaska last went for a Democratic presidential candidate 44 years ago. No nominee from either party has even visited since Richard Nixon's journey to glad-hand in Anchorage on the last weekend of the 1960 campaign, a stop that some argue cost him the razor-thin election.

Obama, who often boasts of having visited the other 49 states, has yet to commit to a stop here. But his vibrant campaign operation here is stoking expectations and mounting the most prodigious presidential effort Alaska has seen.

"The campaign is treating Alaska as a key battleground state," said Jeff Giertz, the campaign's communications director in Alaska, who arrived in Anchorage from Iowa, the scene of Obama's first victory of the Democratic nominating contest.

With only three electoral votes, Alaska may seem a low-stakes prize. But by pouring time and money into traditionally Republican Western states such as Montana and Colorado, the Obama campaign is trying to make good on its vow to redraw the electoral map and force the McCain campaign to watch its flanks -- all the while reinforcing Obama's overarching claim of nurturing a politics of inclusion.

"It's a tough state to move, but we're making a play," Giertz said. "If there's any year where a Democrat can win Alaska, this is the year."

Public surveys consistently have McCain ahead, but by single-digit margins that reflect the Republican's tepid support here.

"Obama's really holding his own," said Andrew Halcro, a former Republican state lawmaker and independent gubernatorial candidate who termed the Obama effort "amazing."

"I think they could come pretty close," said David Dittman, the state's leading pollster, who works primarily with Republicans. He added: "I don't think Obama would win."

In a state where Ross Perot drew 28 percent in 1992 and Ralph Nader banked every tenth vote eight years later, an array of circumstances offers encouragement to the underdog Democrat, starting with McCain's last-place finish in the Republican caucus in February behind Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul.

The Arizona Republican faces a tough sell here. Though McCain's military credentials resonate with Alaska's veteran and active-duty residents, he is also known here for railing against the "earmark" appropriations that bring Alaskans more federal money per capita than any other state.

But McCain's most dubious distinction is as the first GOP candidate in memory to oppose oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The position, which McCain reiterated even while reversing his opposition to off-shore drilling, puts him at odds with the overwhelming majority of Alaskans.

"There's a sense of betrayal with McCain in the fact that he doesn't support it," Dittman said. "There's the sense that he's not any better than a Democrat."

And this year, being a Democrat may not be such a bad thing. Every Republican on the November ballot can expect to suffer from the corruption scandal that has tarred Alaskan politics. Last week's indictment of Ted Stevens, the U.S. Senate's longest-serving Republican, follows the federal convictions of three state GOP lawmakers in cases that featured surveillance videos starring the oil executive who prosecutors say remodeled Stevens's modest Girdwood home.

Public revulsion at the continuing torrent of revelations fueled the upset election of Republican Sarah Palin as governor in 2006, on a platform of Alaskan pride and cleaning up government.

"I think Obama's message is similar to Sarah's two years ago," said Halcro, who lost his third-party bid to Palin. "People want to believe that these really complex public policy questions are going to be solved by what I call glittering generalities."

Alaskans may also appreciate being noticed.

"We've always voted up here. Just nobody's paid much attention," said Jim Schultz, 71.

Snowy-bearded and cheerful, the federal retiree worked the phones in Obama headquarters on a rare sunny evening during a cold and cloudy summer. Across the table sat a beaming Celine Gammond, 18.

"It gives us legitimacy," she said of the campaign's effort. "It's like we're a real state."

The youthful enthusiasm that powers the famous Obama ground operation first became apparent here on caucus night: The 8,800 who jammed into caucus sites represented more than ten times the turnout four years earlier, with 70 percent for the Illinois senator.

"I hope America doesn't disappoint these young people," Schultz said. But working the phones reminded him that in the great north, more than the weather can be harsh: "I think what surprises me is the animosity or the rudeness. If they're Republican they say, 'I'm not even going to talk to you.' Or they hang up."

Still, political professionals say the sheer force of effort is bound to produce dividends.

"They really appreciate that people would come to your town and talk to you. That's a big thing," said Salmon, who uses his two Cessnas for "campaigning, hunting, and odds and ends."

Fuel will be expensive, though, especially if the pilot refuels in the bush, where prices reflect the expense of delivering it there by barge or even air. "Arctic villages' last reported gas price was about $10 a gallon, and they live right next to ANWR," Salmon said.

McHugh Pierre, spokesman for the Alaska Republican Party, holds out hope that McCain will change his position on drilling in the refuge. He also batted aside japes from his Democratic rivals -- who issued a series of news releases suggesting vacant office space that McCain's campaign might rent -- by suggesting the influx of Obama staffers amounted to carpetbagging.

"Obama is trying to take advantage of our situation," Pierre said. "Obama has a lot of East Coast liberal staffers in Alaska" while McCain, he said, "has a real grass-roots effort, Alaskans talking to Alaskans.

"I don't think the views or opinions of Alaskans have changed, and the views of the Republican Party still represent the views of most people.

"Ronald Reagan didn't even have an office here," Pierre said. "This is the normal deal."

Virginia hasn't voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since 1964, and President Bush carried the state twice, by nine and eight points. But the campaigns of Obama and his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain, agree that it has become one of the nation's new swing states, joining the likes of Ohio, Florida and other battlegrounds in determining who will win the White House. The result in the Old Dominion has been a burst of political activity unlike any in modern times.

In early June, after clinching his party's nomination, Obama held his first big rally in Prince William County, the state's second most populous county and one that is critical to his chances of winning Virginia. He has since opened more than two dozen campaign offices across the state and says he has 10,000 volunteers working to deliver its 13 electoral votes.

McCain's national headquarters is in Arlington, and his campaign is trying to mobilize a conservative core that other Republicans have been able to take for granted. Both candidates are seriously considering Virginians as their running mates, perhaps the clearest sign yet that the state has presidential cachet.

The Obama campaign believes it can win by duplicating the success of Kaine, Sen. James Webb and former governor Mark R. Warner, who have led a Democratic revival in Virginia that would be complete with a win on the presidential level. The campaign hopes to capitalize on Bush's lack of popularity, the changing demographics in Northern Virginia, high turnout -- particularly among younger voters and African Americans -- and a volunteer base that delivered a big win in the Democratic primary in February.

Virginia Republicans acknowledge that the state has become more competitive but predict that it remains inherently conservative, particularly when it comes to national security and other issues at stake in a presidential race.

"We have traditionally been the party who can get their people to the polls when it's a presidential race," said Jerry Kilgore, a former state attorney general from southwest Virginia who lost to Kaine in 2005. "Even in 1996, when [Bill] Clinton was winning every state imaginable, Bob Dole won Virginia because our people showed up."

Both campaigns have been running television ads in the state for weeks, but on the ground the battle is emerging as a contrast in approaches. In keeping with his strategy throughout the primaries, Obama has invested heavily in field operations, opening 28 offices -- including one in tiny Castlewood, in the farthest southwest corner -- and deploying dozens of paid staffers and "fellows," volunteers recruited from around the country.

His campaign is also relying on native Virginian volunteers -- delegating team leaders in each of the state's 2,600 precincts and encouraging them to organize events, all of which are advertised on the interactive "My Barack Obama" portion of the campaign's Web site.

In Northern Virginia the week of July 21, volunteers ran a nightly phone bank out of offices in Arlington and McLean. They also registered voters at Wolf Trap concerts, movie theaters, grocery stores and a farmer's market. They sent out hundreds of canvassers in the evenings and on weekends, held a house party in Fairfax for the Jewish community, and held issue discussions at restaurants in Arlington and Alexandria.

To further close the gap, the campaign is targeting what it calls "sporadic" Democrats -- potential supporters who missed at least one recent statewide race and may need a nudge to turn out for Obama -- plus moderate Republicans and independents who may be tempted to cross over. To reach this second group, the campaign is using "micro-targeting" techniques popularized by the 2004 Bush campaign, divining voters' leanings through consumer preferences or other hints.

"For a race that's going to be as close as this is, it will take a lot of pieces of the puzzle for us to add to be successful," said Virginia campaign director Mitch Stewart, a South Dakota native who helped run Obama's primary campaigns in states including Iowa and Indiana.

For the McCain campaign, the challenge is holding on to as much of Bush's 2004 advantage as possible, particularly by trying to win back voters who favored the president but also voted for Warner, Kaine or Webb. It is being undertaken with a ground operation more limited in scope and more hierarchical than Obama's. The campaign, which as elsewhere is working in close concert with the Republican National Committee, has opened six offices statewide, with three more on the way, on the theory that Obama's greater visibility is mostly for show and not worth the cost to match.

"We run a very disciplined, methodical, structured organization," said Trey Walker, McCain's Mid-Atlantic director. "We are doing exactly what Republican campaigns have done in the past."

What is different, Walker said, is that because Virginia has become a haven for Republicans, the party does not have close to the presidential-campaign structure that it has in standard swing states such as Ohio, where "all they have to do is add water every four years."

"We've got to get to a level of organization that really hasn't been done before here," he said.

J. Kenneth Klinge, a Republican strategist in Fairfax County, said he is encouraged to see his party trying to rebuild its grass roots. What worries him is Obama's effort to register new voters.

"It is no doubt they are going to register anything that can walk, talk and chew gum at the same time, so that will give them an advantage," he said. "Anyone who they have registered, they will then go grab them by the back of the scruff and take them out to vote."

The lines of engagement are clear across the state's highly variegated landscape. To win, Obama must rack up big numbers in populous Northern Virginia, which has become increasingly Democratic as it has boomed over the past decade.

Greg Werkheiser, a Democratic activist who ran against Albo in 2005 and helps head up Obama's efforts in that part of Fairfax, counters that the district is solidly behind the Democrat.

"I would say eight in 10 doors we go to are either strong, self-identified Democrats who are for Obama or frustrated moderate Republicans who don't believe McCain represents change from Bush," he said.

Obama will also seek to win big in Richmond and try to split the vote in its suburbs, which Kaine did in 2005. Though Bush won Chesterfield County with 63 percent of the vote in 2004, the county ran out of ballots during February's Democratic primary because so many voters turned out.

Obama also must carry Hampton Roads, the heavily populated and politically diverse area around Norfolk and Newport News that is dominated by African Americans, military personnel and religious conservatives.

Democratic strategist Dave "Mudcat" Saunders, a Roanoke native, doubts Obama's chances in Hampton Roads, saying he will instead need to pick up votes in the rural Southside, southwest Virginia and the Shenandoah Valley, a strategy that propelled Warner in 2001. But while Obama can count on high black turnout in Southside, he fared poorly in the primary in Appalachian areas.

Added to this complex landscape are two wild cards. Democrats are hoping that Obama will benefit from the Senate race of Warner, who is heavily favored to beat former governor Jim Gilmore.

"This is a unique situation, where there is both an up-ticket effect and a down-ticket effect," Kaine said. "The Obama effort on turnout is going to have a positive effect . . . that will help Mark, and I also think Mark will perform so well and organize so strongly in some traditionally Republican parts of the state that that will help [Obama]."

Then there is the possibility of a candidate picking a Virginian as his running mate. Kaine is believed to be on Obama's short list, and Rep. Eric Cantor (R) has emerged as a possibility for McCain.

"I suspect most Virginians kind of like the notion that a Virginian can be in key leadership nationally," Kaine said. "How that translates into any effect on Election Day, I don't know."

One, Nolan Fox, moved to the area after graduating from the University of Florida in May because he wanted to help Obama and thought Virginia would be even more closely fought than his home state. "We're going to need to get massive turnout in Northern Virginia," he said.

The energy level was a bit lower a couple of days later at McCain's Crystal City office, where 50 volunteers gathered before going to knock on doors.

"You're going out canvassing for who?" said Walker, trying to rally the troops.

"McCain," replied some.

Walker tried for a louder response. "You haven't had your coffee yet," he said.

Among the most eager to get to work was Warren Robinson, 23, of Alexandria. He relishes Virginia's competitiveness, despite its implications for McCain's chances. "Personally, for me, it's exciting, because Virginia Republicans can make a difference," he said. "But for other Republicans, it's a concern."

I recently met with a group of high school and college women who had come to D.C. for a leadership conference. I wondered whether they felt -- as many women in my generation do -- that Hillary Clinton suffered in the Democratic presidential primary from rank bias against women. So I asked them: Did Clinton's sex play a part in her losing the nomination? And did her loss dissuade them or their girlfriends from wanting to pursue political careers?

Their answers were no and no.

On the first question, they though Clinton lost on the issues. This was not women's loss; it was hers. On the second question, they're not disheartened. If anything, by almost winning, Clinton inspired them to work even harder to elect themselves or other young women.

Such reactions are a welcome contrast to the sour grapes of some older Democratic feminists in this post-primary season, with their Nobama slogans and threats to vote Republican in the general election. Don't get me wrong: Older women have been workhorses of the party for a long time; I understand the disappointment of coming so close to sending the first woman to the White House. But I'm also thankful that there are increasing numbers of young women like those I met at the Beacon Hotel who see more opportunities than barriers in their future.

I hope they're right. But how many men are we talking about? And how does one explain a June poll of Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters by the Pew Research Center, in which far more men ages 18 to 29 than women that age favored Barack Obama over Clinton?

That, the Beacon group said, was due to Obama's youthfulness, energy and promises to govern in a new way. Youth trumped sex, particularly for the guys.

High school activist Zen Keenen from Lincoln, Neb., voted for Obama in her state's February caucus. Before her vote, she said, "older women would come up and ask me, 'Why aren't you voting for a woman?' "

"I don't think of [Clinton] being a woman," Keenen said she replied. "I'm not voting for her because I don't agree with her views." Keenen also persuaded her mother to switch from Clinton to Obama.

Keenen also gave a personal example of her views on gender blindness.

She served for two years on her high school theater board, an elective position, and "really wanted to be president my senior year." But she didn't run. Why? Because she knew the race would be a popularity contest, and another candidate, a male, was more popular than she. "It never was because he was a guy," she says.

Come on, an older woman might say. Maybe the guy was well-liked, but it also may be that her classmates could see a guy in that position more easily than they could see a girl. Bias wears many masks.

In the 1960s and '70s, some feminists would have urged Keenen to run anyway, just to make a point. So much of public discourse then revolved around gender politics. Men were the enemy or, at a minimum, uninterested in women's progress. There was plenty of evidence of sex discrimination in hiring, pay and promotion, and women felt they had to speak with one voice, loudly, to achieve anything approaching equity.

More women serve now in legislatures and sit on corporate boards -- not enough, for sure, but more than four decades ago. Perhaps politically active young women believe they no longer need to concentrate on women as a group but on the merits and weaknesses of individual candidates, not unlike the position that Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.), son of the civil rights leader, takes regarding politically active African Americans.

Of course, some of these young women will become disenchanted as they get older. But it's impossible not to be inspired by people like Kristy Pagan, a 25-year-old education policy analyst on the Hill. In high school, Pagan ran for school president four times. She lost each race but did not lose her optimism and describes her current efforts as "creating a new system that promotes women at any stage of their lives, with men right there beside us."

Arguably such optimism may ease the path toward true equality. If women behave as though fairness is a given, it may encourage men to treat them as truly equal. By contrast, emphasizing sex, like emphasizing race, can lead to divisiveness and other reactions that hinder the progress that has been made.

Pagan takes part in the Public Leadership Educational Network, a national organization that trains young women. Rebecca Leet, PLEN's executive director, says the women who pass through the program "think a lot about process. They're real practical. . . . They want to learn how to write résumés, meet deans of graduate schools, intern on the Hill."

They're hopeful, says the 59-year-old Leet, in part because "we brought them up to believe they can do anything."

Leet has two daughters, both in their early 20s. She says they didn't perceive the anti-woman rhetoric that she sensed during Clinton's campaign.

She got angry in particular with media coverage and was not shy about sharing her opinions with them.

Their response? They rolled their eyes, she says, and said something like, "God, Mom, get over it."

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg is playing host to a welcome-home reception at Gracie Mansion this evening for New York's junior senator, Hillary Rodham Clinton, who returned to her job in Washington late in June after losing the battle for the Democratic nomination to Senator Barack Obama.

Mr. Bloomberg said that he will personally cover the costs of the party - an invitation-only affair for about 400 guests that will feature a performance by the Christian Cultural Center choir and the cast of the Broadway musical Hair.

But if Senator Clinton harbored any hope that the mayor would extend his generosity to her campaign debt of more than $20 million, she is in for a disappointment.

At the heart of Mr. Obama's proposals is a focus on fostering alternative energy development by investing $150 billion in emerging technologies and renewable fuels. Seeking to put a million fuel-efficient hybrid plug-in automobiles on the road, he said that he would offer a $7,000 tax credit to buyers, the overall cost of which he did not specify. In addition, Mr. Obama said his goal was to have 10 percent of the country's energy needs met by renewable resources by the end of his first term, more than double the current figure.

While focusing on alternative energy production, Mr. Obama has veered in recent days toward increasing access to fossil fuels, both in seeking to tap the strategic oil reserve and in softening his opposition to offshore oil drilling. He said he might be willing to accept some exploration of limited offshore drilling as part of a more comprehensive energy bill that would include things he favors, like renewable fuels and batteries for electric-powered cars.

The proposals Mr. Obama offered Monday represented an effort to return the campaign's focus to bread-and-butter issues after he found himself repeatedly on the defensive last week against a newly aggressive McCain campaign.

"We should sell 70 million barrels of oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve for less expensive crude, which in the past has lowered gas prices within two weeks," Mr. Obama said. "Over the next five years, we should also lease more of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska for oil and gas production, and we should also tap more of our substantial natural gas reserves and work with the Canadian government to finally build the Alaska natural gas pipeline, delivering clean natural gas."

Mr. McCain and his campaign have been increasingly tweaking Mr. Obama and his energy policy. The McCain campaign distributed tire pressure gauges outside the event here in response to Mr. Obama's statement last week that Americans could reduce gasoline use substantially if they kept car tires at optimum pressure. Mr. McCain has called Mr. Obama "Dr. No" and said that his energy policy could be reduced to the phrase "just say no" to proposals to increase energy production.

"We have to drill here and drill now," Mr. McCain said Monday in Lafayette Hill, Pa. "Not wait and see if there's areas to explore, not wait and see if there's a package to put together. But drill here and drill now."

Mr. McCain has focused much more on the supply side of the energy equation, supporting increased reliance on nuclear power, the use of so-called clean coal technology and expanded offshore drilling. But he has called for halting purchases to replenish the strategic oil reserve, rather than tapping into it.

Aides to Mr. Obama said that he now favored releasing light oil from that emergency stockpile, 707 million barrels stored in salt caverns, and replacing it with heavier oil, which they said would be more appropriate for the country's long-term energy needs. They described that action - meant to help drive down oil prices, which have begun falling in the last month after a long, sharp increase - as a "limited swap" rather than a depletion of the reserve.

Mr. Obama said that through a mixture of investment, discipline and more restrained consumption it would be possible to completely eliminate oil imports from the Middle East and Venezuela within 10 years. Through a combination of similar measures, he said, Americans could at the same time reduce electricity consumption by 15 percent and create 5 million jobs.

"I will not pretend we can achieve them without cost, or without sacrifice, or without the contribution of almost every American citizen," Mr. Obama said of his objectives. "But I will say that these goals are possible, and I will say that achieving them is absolutely necessary if we want to keep America safe and prosperous in the 21st century."

Repeating his call for a windfall profits tax on companies like Exxon-Mobil, which he singled out in his speech on Monday, Mr. Obama said he would use part of the tax to provide consumers with an "emergency energy rebate" of $1,000 per family.

Mr. Obama and his campaign have criticized Mr. McCain for accepting what they call excessive campaign donations from energy interests. Campaign Money Watch, a watchdog organization, said the McCain campaign received a burst of donations in June from oil company employees after he came out in favor of offshore drilling. Together, Hess employees or their relatives contributed more than $300,000 in June to Mr. McCain's joint fund-raising committee with the Republican National Committee, according to campaign finance records.

Brian Rogers, a spokesman for the McCain campaign, said officials had examined the donations and found nothing untoward.

Mr. Obama offered details of his energy plan as Democrats have been under continuing pressure to allow offshore drilling. Though Congress is in its August break, a band of Republicans occupied the darkened House floor Monday to criticize the Democratic leadership for refusing to allow a vote on lifting a ban on drilling off much of the nation’s coastline before heading out of town.

About 25 lawmakers, many from the most conservative wing of the Republican party, railed throughout the day at Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, saying her "San Francisco mentality" was impeding domestic energy production.

Republicans circulated a petition to urge Ms. Pelosi to call the House back into session, and some called for President Bush, who was on his way to China for the Olympics, to demand that Congress return. The White House said Monday that such a step was unlikely.

The event, held at the swank State Room near Faneuil Hall, was expected to bring in close to $5 million for Obama and the Democratic Party, which organizers say would make it the biggest political fund-raiser ever in Boston.

Crooner Harry Connick Jr. and his 9-year-old daughter led the serenade of "Happy Birthday" to Obama at a reception of 850 people. Revelers sipped wine and beer in front of stunning, 33d-floor vistas of Boston Harbor. About 250 people paid $15,000 each - $28,500 for a couple - to dine with him afterward.

For a birthday present, supporters presented Obama with a Red Sox-themed Hawaiian shirt, for use on his vacation next week in Honolulu. "I gotta say that, as a White Sox fan, this hurts a little bit, particularly because we've been losing lately," Obama said. "But it is a very attractive shirt, I must say."

The private fund-raiser, the Illinois senator's first Boston appearance since clinching the Democratic nomination in early June, was designed to be a coming-together of sorts for local supporters of Obama and Senator Hillary Clinton, whose backers were deeply angry at how they believed Clinton was treated by the media and some Obama surrogates during the prolonged primaries.

Massachusetts, where admiration for the Clintons runs deep, gave the New York senator a lopsided victory over Obama in its primary in February. But with Obama now leading the ticket, Bay State Democrats have joined forces to catapult him into the general election with his pockets full.

"We all wanted to make a dramatic statement that we're with him every step of the way," said Steven Grossman, a leading Clinton fund-raiser and former chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

Clinton supporters by themselves raised $700,000 for Obama at last night's event, according to Grossman and Shanti Fry, a longtime Democratic activist who said she campaigned hard for Clinton in five primary states. Fry said that she hoped that the amount chipped in by Clinton supporters would help erase doubts that they were not wholeheartedly behind Obama.

"Given the perception out there, I hope that figure would be a surprise to people," Fry said.

Alan Solomont, who heads Obama's fund-raising in New England, said the event was a "joint effort" among supporters of both candidates. "We've stopped thinking in terms of Hillary people and Obama people," Solomont said. "What was good about this was that we got everybody involved."

By John Nichols, The Nation, August 4, 2008

If the campaign consultants have their way, 90 days from now roughly half of the electorate will think that John McCain is an angry, nasty and bitter old man. The other half will think that Barack Obama is an egotistical, feckless and immature dilettante.

There are still two conventions, three presidential debates, dozens of policy pronouncements and thousands of photo opportunities before Election Day; but those two caricatures that are on the verge of being imprinted in the public consciousness will frame the campaign conversation from this point forward.

It's too convenient and too condescending to dismiss the voters as fascinated by personality and uninterested in policy. The American public understands that there are clear-cut distinctions between Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama on issues like national security, taxes, energy and health care, to name a few. But voters also view the candidates' ability to deal with those issues through a prism of trust, which develops through an emotional connection between political leaders and their followers. By turning their opponents into cartoon characters, both campaigns are trying to make it difficult for their foes to establish that trust.

In a less confrontational universe, Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama could have simply continued to emphasize their respective messages of "experience" and "change." But pointing out your attributes only goes so far: the flip side is talking about where the other guy falls short. The campaigns' approaches to this challenge were on full display recently, when the McCain campaign began running an ad that identified Mr. Obama as "the biggest celebrity in the world," and Mr. Obama put up a response that criticized Mr. McCain for practicing "the politics of the past." Mr. Obama linked the Arizona senator to President Bush, and Mr. McCain compared his opponent to Paris Hilton. Neither association is going to eclipse national security, taxes or energy as the deciding force in the campaign for most voters, but that exchange illustrates what the home stretch of this campaign is going to sound like.

Neither candidate is particularly well-suited to this type of politics. Both have earned reputations as representing something different and better than the conventional politicians who populate the landscape. Both diminish themselves and their brands by engaging in this type of conversation. Voters see a discussion between the candidates of policy differences as a legitimate way of providing useful information. But name-calling is another matter, especially for two politicians who've built their careers on the idea of rising above politics as usual.

Both candidates have learned other lessons from past campaigns as well. Mr. McCain and his advisers watched carefully as Hillary Clinton resurrected her campaign last spring when she took the gloves off and began to confront Mr. Obama more aggressively. The Illinois senator is at his best from the mountaintop, and while Mrs. Clinton's change of course came too late to bring her the nomination, she demonstrated that the best way to deal with Mr. Obama is to force him back to earth. For their part, Mr. Obama and his team know that Mr. McCain can be goaded into lashing out when he feels he's being unjustly criticized.

For better or worse, assume that the competing stick figures of Angry Old Geezer and Callow Young Egotist remain in place through the election and beyond. After all, for most Americans, Al Gore will always be boring, Ross Perot is still crazy, and Dan Quayle will forever be learning how to spell. So neither Mr. McCain nor Mr. Obama is going to shed these images anytime soon: the question is how to best deal with them.

The advantage for Mr. Obama is that his caricature may not be particularly flattering, but at least it’s somewhat aspirational. Young people get older, naive people become more experienced and presumptiveness sometimes leads to achievement and success. Mr. McCain's new mean-guy persona has the potential to be more damaging because it undermines the reputation he's developed over the course of his career. His most effective approach as a critic has always been when he frames his disapproval in the context of sorrow rather than anger: the public display of annoyance or irritation is always less appealing than disappointment or regret.

That said, it's also less complicated for Mr. McCain to move beyond charges of nastiness than it will be for Mr. Obama to get past the appearance of arrogance. While shrillness and negativity may seem like necessary components of a political campaign, they're not requirements. But it's pretty difficult to run for president without telling people why you're good enough for the job. In other words, it would be a lot easier for Mr. McCain to start saying nice things about Mr. Obama than it is for Mr. Obama to stop saying nice things about himself.

I don't know if offshore oil drilling will be a significant part of the solution to our energy problems. I don't trust either the don't-worry-be-happy hype of the oil industry types or the reflexive nay-saying of the no-drilling-anywhere crowd. And I certainly don't want to see the search for more oil take precedence over the long-overdue development of reliable, renewable alternative energy resources.

But I do think Barack Obama's about face on offshore oil drilling is good news, not least because it suggests the man is serious about being a pragmatic, effective leader. (Rather than stifle the buzz, I'll ignore his phony comment that his shift really isn't a shift at all. It's the heat of the campaign. Two-thirds of the stuff he and McCain are saying on any given day is liable to be preposterous political spin.)

"We have to compromise," Obama told the Palm Beach Post. "The Republicans and the oil companies have been really beating the drums on drilling. And so we don't want gridlock. We want to get something done." Yes, exactly right. Desperately-needed energy-policy reform has gone nowhere in Washington because the baby-boom political culture appears to abhor compromise of any kind. If gridlock and failure are the result, so what? Better that an entire nation should suffer than a single self-satisfied boomer activist should have to settle for half a loaf on a "matter of principle."

Obama's move is clearly a concession to political reality; his no-drilling stance was bombing with the voters. And his modest conversion won't please the droolers of the left who insist he be pure on all their hot-button fantasies. The slobbering right that sees deceit and conspiracy in everything Obama does will be similarly outraged. But what better signs can you have that a politician is on the right track?

Is it possible that the most overused political charge of modern times - that of "flip-flopper" - might have jumped the shark? It was overdone as a weapon against John Kerry in 2004, although he did beg for it with his "voted for it before I voted against it" gaffe. George W. Bush ran in 2000 as a non-interventionist in foreign affairs; what followed might well be called a flip-flop of gargantuan proportions. You need a fast computer to keep track of all of John McCain's policy compromises during the last year alone.

Last week Barack Obama did the unthinkable - he played the race card. In an unusually clumsy attempt to pre-empt the onslaught of McCain's increasing negative campaign, Senator Obama made a huge mistake. Reacting to the Paris Hilton and Brittany Spears ad and the "Messiah" ad, which depicts Obama as an "anti-Christ figure," he spoke out against the fear tactics he believes McCain and the GOP will use against him. His mistake was that he made himself sound weak by inferring that attacking his race would be a part of the fear campaign of the Right.

Last Friday, Laura Ingram, guest host for Bill O'Reilly, asked me why the senator would resort to such measures. My answer was that I believe he was planning to use the race card all along. The senator had no doubt braced himself for the return of Jeremiah Wright sound bites and stinging criticism by his opponents in the last 30 to 45 days of the contest.

In the Obama campaign's mind, McCain would use race as one of several factors that would lead voters to conclude that Barack could not be trusted. Unfortunately for him, Obama miscalculated when to play the card. This tactic only works when your opponent is seen as a bully. In fact, the last thing Obama wants to do is to make race the defining aspect of his candidacy. Throughout his campaign he has presented himself as a post racial candidate, but the reality may be that he has used a sophisticated form of political jujitsu. Jujitsu often uses the strength and force of an opponent's attacks against them.

This is just what he did in his contests against Hillary Clinton. He cried, "Victim!" when he was "attacked" by Bill and Hillary Clinton. The "fairy tale" comments by Bill were taken out of context, blown out of proportion, becoming the genesis of criticism that the Clintons had stooped to the lowest point in their political history. As things progressed, it was weeks before Hillary could lay a hand on Obama in terms of substantive discussion of legitimate policy differences between the two candidates. In the case of the Clinton debacle, Obama seemed to rise above the fray, but his race may have actually given him an unfair advantage. His campaign surrogates and the media pointed the finger of accusation at the Clintons, as Senator Obama simply sidestepped their criticism.

Last week, the Senator was no doubt pressured by the mixed reviews he received from his overseas visit and speaking tour. With his lead in the polls slipping, he no doubt felt the weight to immediately respond to McCain’s negative attacks. He dared not look vacillating and weak like John Kerry. In addition, he must have felt that he had to maintain a lead in the polls until the Democratic National Convention.

For the last few weeks, Obama has been using a sophisticated stalling technique as he waited to throw his best punches closer to the end of the contest. The senator's refusal to debate the verbally challenged McCain is a sign that he did not want to risk too much conflict. I am sure he was weary of the medium given all the debates of the primary season, but the American people would love to see McCain and Obama engage in a real contest. Despite his eloquence and his affability, perhaps he was afraid that a town hall discussion with McCain could yield disappointing results. Therefore he stalled, believing that he could win the hearts of the American public without the "head butting" and "body blows" of close political combat. Perhaps Obama's international trip was designed to give him a rest and offer him an opportunity to coast into the convention.

At this point, Obama needs to shift the discussion away from race again. He must remind the American public that he is more than just a black candidate. He must put real issues on the table and speak to heart of the American people. Perhaps Middle America was turned off by his interaction with the fawning fans he addressed in Europe. He may have once again just painted himself as an East Coast liberal who appeals the most to left leaning liberals. The answer to Obama's woes is to think about the economy, energy, and other grass roots concerns.

McCain on the other hand must capitalize on the flurry of blows he has landed on the seemingly untouchable Mr. Obama. He must clarify his vision for America. If he doesn't, his negative ads will seem like the machinations of a mean-spirited, old man. A clear vision could cast him as an American hero that has once again offered to lay down his life for his nation. The contrasts in this election remind me of the Bush versus Clinton contest of 1992. The 1992 election was a "beauty-versus-the-beast" campaign that could have gone to the older Bush, if he had spoken to the heart of the American voter. I remember yelling at the television as the senior president Bush gave a campaign speech. I shouted, "Tell them your vision or you are going to lose!" Similarly, I hope that McCain begins to share his vision of a 21st century America. If he does, he may be on the verge of pulling off the biggest upset in recent political history.

In this political version of "Pride and Prejudice," the prejudice is racial, with only 31 percent of white voters telling The New York Times in a survey that they had a favorable opinion of Obama, compared with 83 percent of blacks.

And the prejudice is visceral: many Americans, especially blue collar, still feel uneasy about the Senate's exotic shooting star, and he is surrounded by a miasma of ill-founded and mistaken premises.

So the novelistic tension of the 2008 race is this: Can Obama overcome his pride and Hyde Park hauteur and win America over?

Can America overcome its prejudice to elect the first black president? And can it move past its biases to figure out if Obama's supposed conceit is really just the protective shield and defense mechanism of someone who grew up half white and half black, a perpetual outsider whose father deserted him and whose mother, while loving, sometimes did so as well?

As evidenced by Gergen's bizarre criticism, we've gotten to the point where almost any criticism aimed at Obama for any reason is now being treated as some sort of racial attack.

So, let's see; Obama was a member of an anti-white church for 20 years, talks about "typical white people," only won the Democratic primaries because he was black, and now he and his supporters are trying to rule all criticism off limits because of his race.

Some "post-racial" candidate Obama turned out to be.

I'm so tired of these talking heads telling me that it must be racism for me not to like Senator Obama. Let me repeat it again slowly. Not every criticism of Obama is racist. Just as sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, sometimes a criticism is just that, not a secret racist attack.

By Betsy Newmark, Real Clear Politics, August 4, 2008

This end to seven years of trade negotiations reveals a clash of old and new giants with different ideas of how to run the world. It also shows how much poorer nations are eager to throw off that word "developing" because it implies they must merely follow the "developed" world, or the West.

The irony in Doha's end is how much these emerging countries have benefited from leadership from the US since World War II to open its own markets and to persuade others to expand free trade. Now that these countries have tasted the fruits of this trade freedom, they want to control its future course to their own ends.

The easy response is to say that a superpower, super-idealist America must now learn to live in a "multipolar" world. But that assumes the Lilliputians have a master plan once they rise up and tie down Gulliver. America's ideals on trade and other issues more often than not have been universal, a result of its founding on ideals. But the US doesn't have the clout anymore to carry the banner on issues such as free trade. In Doha, it was clearly every country for itself.

Not since the 1930s have global trade talks broken down the way they did last week in Geneva. The chances of their revival are slim as protectionist pressures are building in key countries.

Mr. Obama, for instance, wants to slap hard conditions on bilateral trade deals. India's ruling Congress party, which relies on rural farmers for support, faces elections next year. France keeps the European Union from reducing farm supports. And China fears more uprisings if peasants are forced to face global competition.

Global trade deals impose more openness and benefit more people than regional and bilateral ones. But America, frustrated at slow progress in expanding worldwide trade, has resorted to the latter in recent years, hoping to force global deals. Instead, the Brazils and Chinas are now doing the same.

The world is splintering into nationalist camps on many issues, such as nuclear proliferation, global warming, and human rights. Old global agreements still stand, but Doha's demise may be a historic pivot away from a brief moment during the latter half of the 20th century in which America tried to lead the world toward shared goals, values, and responsibilities.

The time may now be ripe for the US to create a new grouping of nations dedicated to both free trade and democracy, excluding countries that reject a commitment to freedom. There are risks in keeping the Russias and Chinas out of such a tent. But if Doha's tent can't be mended soon, America may need to start a new type of leadership, one that is still universal but less global for now.

The Christian Science Monitor, August 4, 2008

Still, one in six of the white workers polled remains uncommitted to either candidate. And a majority of those polled, both white and minority, are ambivalent about the impact of the election, saying that no matter who wins, their personal finances are unlikely to change.

"It's not my main concern in life," said Mary Lee, 50, a factory worker in rural Kentucky. "I know how politics is. I really don't think it's going to matter either way."

More than disaffection drives these workers, according to the new national poll by the Washington Post, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University.

Their politics are shaped partly by their lot in the current economy: These voters are among the most severely hurt by rising prices, and many are insecure about their finances and lack jobs with basic benefits. Nevertheless, many are optimistic about the future even as they express deep suspicion about government.

The new poll included interviews with 1,350 randomly selected workers 18 to 64 years old who put in at least 30 hours a week but earned $27,000 or less last year. As a group, they are somewhat less likely to be Republicans than all adults under age 65 and are also less likely to be registered to vote. As many call themselves conservatives as liberal, and nearly four in 10 said their views on most political matters are "moderate."

The group, which accounts for nearly a quarter of U.S. adults, gives the Democrat the nod both as the more empathetic candidate and as the one who more closely shares their values. And while many express no opinion about who would do more to improve the economy or health care -- or the voters' finances -- Obama has the clear edge among those who picked a favorite on these core issues.

Obama's standing with the white workers runs counter to an impression, dating from the primary season, that he struggles to attract support from that group. McCain advisers have said for months that they think the Republican can win a significant share of those voters because of Obama's performance in the spring.

The survey suggests it will be difficult, but not impossible, for McCain to increase his appeal. Whereas Obama underperforms congressional Democrats by six points among low-wage whites -- 53 percent would prefer that the party control Congress -- McCain has a seven-point edge over congressional Republicans.

Sixteen percent of the white workers polled chose neither Obama nor McCain, saying either that they have no opinion or that they support someone else or that they do not plan to vote.

Ruth Haskins, 64, the city clerk of Billings, Mo., said she is "scared about the younger generation running the country" and is solidly "on the fence" about the election.

In an interview last week, Black said the campaign still plans to target working-class white voters, particularly by appealing to them on economic and energy issues. Jobs and gasoline prices are "very big to people in that income range," Black said.

Nearly two-thirds of the white workers surveyed want the government to make lower gas prices a "top priority," something McCain pitched earlier this year in advocating for a suspension of the federal gas tax. One respondent was particularly clear on this point: "I'll vote for whoever can bring the price of gas down," said Brian Levesque, 25, a social worker from Lansdale, Pa.

But slightly more, seven in 10, say government should focus on helping people like them find more affordable health insurance, a core component of Obama's campaign. Just over four in 10 favor placing a top priority on tax cuts or on creating jobs through an expansion of public works projects.

Overall, the survey suggests that Obama's economic appeals have the most resonance with white workers who are under the greatest financial stress. He leads by 19 percentage points among those white workers who feel "very insecure" financially; that is more than double his advantage among those in the group who feel better off.

McCain leads among those who say they have advanced over the past seven years, but it is a much smaller group -- only 17 percent of low-wage white workers. Obama has the edge among those who say they have stayed about even over that time period.

An issue of acute importance to low-wage workers -- the impact of illegal immigration -- is one that divides workers in the poll about evenly: Forty-nine percent said illegal immigrants take jobs from legal residents, and 47 percent said they do not.

Nearly six in 10 white and black workers said they think undocumented workers take jobs away from those here legally; seven in 10 Hispanics disagreed. (Nearly half of the Hispanic workers interviewed in this poll are not U.S. citizens.)

International trade -- and its impact on increasingly scarce jobs -- is another issue that may prove a flash point for workers in the fall campaign.

Half of those polled said growth in trade has made things worse for the country; far fewer, only about two in 10, said it has had a net benefit, and a similar percentage said they are unsure. But a majority also said trade has not changed their lives one way or the other.

As is the case with immigration, majorities of white and black workers said trade has done more harm than good, while most Hispanics disagreed.

"One thing I keep seeing is a lack of wherewithal to tackle the tough issues like health care, illegal immigration," said Stephanie Dayton, 51, a bookkeeper in Tucson. "It's sort of like overhauling the tax code. If there was an easy way to tackle it without conflict, they would have done it already. At some point it takes some backbone to get it done. Get some backbone and decide what you stand for."

McCain's biggest challenge is among minority workers.

Among the African Americans polled, 92 percent chose Obama as the candidate more concerned with their problems; not a single black respondent said so about McCain, although 1 percent said "both do." Hispanics also sided with Obama on that question, favoring him by more than 40 percentage points as the more empathetic candidate.

The poll was conducted by conventional and cellular telephone June 18 to July 7, among a random national sample of low-wage workers. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish. The results have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus four percentage points.

Clinton addressed some of the frenzy over his comments about his wife Hillary Clinton's Democratic rival, presumptive party nominee Barack Obama, following the Illinois senator's win in January’s South Carolina primary.

The former president, who appeared to grow agitated at times during one of his first interviews since his wife ended her active campaign for the presidential nomination in June, was asked by in the ABC interview if he was at least partly to blame for the New York senator's loss, and if he personally had any regrets.

"Yes, but not the ones you think. And it would be counterproductive for me to talk about," said Clinton, adding that "there are things that I wish I'd urged her to do. Things I wish I'd said. Things I wish I hadn't said.

"But I am not a racist," he continued. "I've never made a racist comment and I never attacked him [Obama] personally."

Clinton's comparison of Obama's South Carolina victory to those of former Democratic presidential candidate Jesse Jackson drew resentment from some in the African-American community and an apology from Hillary Clinton.

In an April interview, the former president himself said his words had been deliberately distorted by the Obama campaign. "We were talking about South Carolina political history and this was used out of context and twisted for political purposes by the Obama campaign to try to breed resentment elsewhere. And you know, do I regret saying it? No. Do I regret that it was used that way? I certainly do. But you really got to go some to try to portray me as a racist."

He added that the way Obama's campaign had reacted was "disrespectful to Jesse Jackson" that the former presidential candidate had told him he was not offended, and that "we all know what's going on."

By Rebecca Sinderbrand, CNN, August 4, 2008

That's true, of course.

But Team Obama whined that their rookie United States Senator and audacious presidential hopeful was being dissed by the playing of the race card by Team Clinton.

It was nonsense, yet it worked very well for Obama (thanks to a big push from the Obama-fawning media folks).

When Team Obama tried to play the race card on war hero, veteran United States Senator and presumptive 2008 Republican presidential candidate John Sydney McCain, it failed miserably.

Team McCain had just run a commercial focused on Obama's celebrity and comparing it to the celebrity of two very well known young blonde (white) females, Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.

Obama could have deflected the attack with a laugh and a joke that he had not seen either at Harvard Law School, the Illinois State Senate or the United States Senate.

Instead, Obama himself played the race card, charging that Team McCain was out to make voters think he's risky because he doesn't look like the "other presidents" on the dollar and five-dollar bills.

Translation: Obama isn't as white as George Washington or Abraham Lincoln.

First, the presumptuous Obama is not a president (unless he counts being a former president of the Harvard Law Review).

Second, Britney and Paris are white like George Washington or Abraham Lincoln, but they don't resemble those Presidents.

Third, there was nothing racial, much less racist, about Team McCain comparing Obama to two blonde, white female celebrities.

Polls are showing that the black vote will be all but unanimous for Obama in the upcoming presidential election.

That's fine with Obama, of course.

But Obama quickly played the race card anyway, to win white votes.

To win the presidency, Obama will need a substantial share of the white vote, so Obama is claiming to be a victim of racism (instead of a beneficiary) and trying to convince white voters to vote for him to show that they are not racist.

It's an evil, but interesting, strategy.

It lets Obama have it both ways.

If he loses, he can blame white racism.

If he wins, he can claim that he won despite white racism and would have won bigger but for white racism.

Team McCain is NOT running a racial, much less, racist campaign.

The McCain family adopted a dark-skinned child (at the suggestion of the late Mother Theresa); the Obama family has not adopted anyone.

McCain chose military service.

Obama didn't choose either military service or Peace Corps service.

McCain has been pro-life.

Obama favored death for babies born alive as a result of botched abortions.

Obama isn't an airhead (or blonde, or female, or , yes, 100% white). But he's not presidential material for lack of character and experience and his reaction to that McCain television commercial on celebrity exposed Obama as a shameless race card player.

By J. Grant Swank, Jr., The Post Chronicle, Aug 4, 2008

LAS CRUCES, N.M. - Pink morning light climbs over the jagged Organ Mountains, casting a glow on the Rio Grande, the lifeblood of this otherwise unforgiving desert.

Emma Jean Cervantes, the "Chile Queen" of the Mesilla Valley in southern New Mexico, is beginning her morning ritual. Every day, this grandmother of six and savvy businesswoman checks her land south of Las Cruces. She talks to her chile plants. In early summer, they are still baby shoots poking through the sandy dirt.

"They will tell me how they're doing, if they need water," Cervantes says.

A hands-on CEO, Cervantes makes sure her workers are weeding the right fields, that the irrigation ditches haven't flooded her cayenne chiles, and that the pecan trees, with their canopies of rich green leaves and precious shade, are growing well.

Before heading to her office and chile processing plant, Cervantes stops in the home where she grew up, then raised her own children. Cooking relaxes her. She takes time to make her own tortillas and salsa from sun-dried New Mexican red chiles, grown in her home garden. Every day, Cervantes prepares lunch so she can enjoy a homemade meal of enchiladas or chile con carne with her grown children, who now help her run their expanding farm empire.

"La Familia" is everything in this community: Family, tradition, loyalty, politics. Cervantes' sister and one of her sons are both powerful lawmakers in the New Mexico legislature, and the history of political involvement stretches back generations among the families who settled the Mesilla Valley when it was part of Mexico, and before that, a colony of Spain.

This country is as fertile for Democrats as it is for chiles. One old-timer explained that party affiliation comes at birth: "We are Hispanic. We are Catholic. We are Democrats."

Even though Barack Obama has been polling well nationally among Hispanic voters, he faces a huge challenge in must-win New Mexico. An overwhelming number of voters here adored Hillary Clinton and distrust Obama. If Bill Clinton was the "first black president," then, to many around Las Cruces, Hillary could have been the first Hispanic president. They identified with her that closely.

"I loved her comment about glass ceilings," said Cervantes, who is deeply concerned about women's issues. "In agriculture, there are a lot of barriers to women. I have broken a lot of glass ceilings."

Mary Jane Garcia, a New Mexico state senator and pledged Clinton delegate, cried as Clinton conceded. She first met Hillary Clinton in 1992 and speaks of her like a sister who has been wronged.

"It hurt me deeply," she said of Clinton's loss. "I'm really struggling. I'm going to Denver to cast my vote only for Hillary and no one else. She's good. She's kind. She's compassionate."

Garcia, 71, lives in Doña Ana, just north of Las Cruces. She thinks Obama has come off as condescending and arrogant.

"I don't know one single Hispanic over 50 who will cast a vote for Obama," she said, conceding that "there have always been conflicts between blacks and browns."

Obama's only hope, said Garcia, is to name Clinton as his vice president.

"That might push us all to go to the polls and vote," she said.

Obamas regarded coolly

Several voters said they wanted Obama to clarify his positions and felt they "didn't know Obama."

That's a surprise considering both Obamas have visited this vital swing area in this vital swing state.

Michelle Obama came to Las Cruces in February, followed by her husband on Memorial Day. To some, Michelle Obama seemed aloof, an impression only bolstered by her infamous "fist bump," seen in urban America as cool and here as cold. Las Cruces is full of retired veterans and parents of current service members. Many of them homed in on Michelle Obama's comment about being "really proud of her country for the first time" and think she's unpatriotic.

When Barack Obama came to Las Cruces on Memorial Day, he should have locked in support. Instead, his campaign inadvertently angered some reliable Democrats. Loyalists here expect face-to-face time with candidates and are willing to wait hours in 100-degree heat for a good old-fashioned political bash. Obama's campaign initially promised a public rally; so Democrats canceled their Memorial Day plans and revved up for a celebration. Then the campaign shifted gears and held a small, private, made-for-TV gathering with a handful of veterans instead.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson appeared with Obama at the Las Cruces Farm and Ranch Museum. The rugged mountains provided a perfect old West backdrop for CNN. But the event left some excluded locals grumbling.

Obama made another trip to New Mexico in June - this time to Albuquerque. He got the message that he needed to reach out to women. He held a forum with working women, but once again failed to hold a large rally. If Obama wants to win in the Las Cruces area he'll have to come back and let people here get to know him much better, analysts say.

"New Mexico is a Democratic state, but it's conservative," said political analyst Heath Haussamen of Las Cruces. "I think voters will look at John McCain very seriously if Obama doesn't come back and give them a compelling reason to vote for him."

Winning southern New Mexico is key to the Democrats' plan to win New Mexico. And if the Democrats triumph in New Mexico, Colorado and Nevada - three states that went for Bush in 2004 - Obama will have 19 additional Electoral College votes, which would have made Democrat John Kerry successful in 2004.

To succeed in their bet on the West, the Obama campaign must win over conservative Democrats, like the ones in the Mesilla Valley, who care deeply about their families, spiking gas prices and precious land.

"Everyone needs a personal touch. Everybody knows everybody here. We're personable here," said Kristina Cervantes Vanderlugt, 39, Emma Jean Cervantes' daughter and her "right-hand woman" in their chile business.

"When push comes to shove, it's not the world economy. It's not the war," said Vanderlugt. "It's how these candidates touch each individual."

Las Cruces at crossroads

Las Cruces may have gotten its name from the crosses that marked grave sites of would-be settlers who lost their lives to Apache Indians in the 18th century. Or, it may stem from the Spanish word for a river crossing or crossroads. What's clear today is that Las Cruces has become a key crossroads for the Democratic Party.

It's a place where old-line Hispanic Democrats with roots in the valley dating to 1850 are intersecting with newly arriving baby boomers. Snowbirds are flocking to the area for its warm weather, golf courses, wineries, Mexican food and the stimulation of New Mexico State University.

Money Magazine picked Las Cruces as one of the best college towns to retire. AARP picked the area as a "Dream Town." Hispanic Magazine and Forbes have both highlighted Las Cruces as a hot place to live and work.

With stunning asymmetry, the granite spires of the Organ Mountains jut into the sky like nature's pipe organ. At the base of the peaks, thousands of acres of new gated communities have sprouted up with turquoise pools, emerald golf courses and scarlet desert flowers.

Just finishing a round of golf with his son at the Sonoma Ranch Golf Course, David Vistine, 55, explains the issues that drive his vote in the presidential contest. A minister at a First Assembly of God Church, Vistine moved to this area 15 years ago from Texas. A registered Democrat, he plans to cast his ballot for McCain, "the lesser of two evils" in his mind. Vistine cares about moral values, the economy and health care, and he doesn't trust government-run health care.

As newcomers carve a life in this desert valley, they underscore the crossroads here between the past and the future. Tiny 150-year-old adobe churches dot the original settlements around Las Cruces. Mexican plazas give a timeless, international feel to the area. At the same time, the atomic age dawned in New Mexico at what is now the White Sands Missile Range. The Trinity explosion in 1945 marked the first detonation of an atomic bomb at the far northern end of the range, about 100 miles from Las Cruces.

Closer to town, about 40 miles north in Truth or Consequences, residents are banking on the new space frontier. Spaceport America is on track to offer private and commercial space travel along with NASCAR-like rocket races in coming decades.

On the other end of the spectrum, south of Las Cruces, the border with Mexico is less than an hour away in El Paso, Texas, making this valley a crossroads.

Poverty grips colonias

Immigration issues affect nearly every employer in this region and conversations regularly dart from English to Spanish in the same sentence. Just over the border, in Juarez, Mexico, a spiking homicide rate - fueled by drug cartel hit lists - provides haunting evidence that the border lands are increasingly lawless. A new fence is under construction between the U.S. and Mexico here, but immigrants still stream across the border every day to find work in Mesilla Valley and beyond.

While Las Cruces itself is an oasis, some of the worst poverty in the U.S. lies in settlements, known as colonias, that dot the desert around town.

Colonias are illegal subdivisions that developers carved from seemingly worthless land in the 1980s to serve farm workers and new immigrants. Developers offered plots for what seemed like cheap prices. But, many of the colonias offered few or no services including water, sewage treatment, natural gas lines or paved roads.

Heavy rains regularly unleash torrents of water that can leave cars stranded in mudholes. One colonia lies just downstream from a dairy farm. When the rains come, dirty runoff from the farm gushes through the settlement. Because so few roads are paved, during the dry months, dust storms swirl constantly, caking windows in layers of white sand.

Some of the street names have a poetic ring to them, like Angel's Wing Drive. North of Las Cruces, one of the worst colonias has the most deceiving name of all: El Milagro.

Chile farmer Emma Jean Cisneros shakes her head at the sorrows endured by people there.

"For them, it's a new beginning. That's why they call it 'The Miracle.' But it's the wrong beginning," Cervantes said. "These are communities of total chaos. They buy a piece of land without any infrastructure, any transportation. It's false hope."

Chaparral is one of the biggest colonias, about 20 miles southeast of Las Cruces in the middle of nowhere. Official census reports list about 6,000 residents. But nuns who live and work in the area estimate that as many as 20,000 people call Chaparral home. Most live in tattered trailers. Getting anywhere takes miles of driving and an increasingly expensive tank of gas.

Illegal immigrants, who cannot vote, account for some of the residents. Immigration officials conduct regular raids.

Maria de Jesus Garcia, 75, bought one acre for about $6,500 in the 1980s. She paid in installments — $50 a month. Born in Mexico, she came to the U.S. in 1950 and earned her citizenship. Her biggest struggle now is that she does not drive and has no access to natural gas at her home. Every time she fills her propane tank, she pays at least $150. In the summer the heat in her trailer is oppressive, so she must turn on her swamp cooler.

"We are the stepchildren," she says. "Most people don't even know we exist."

Garcia always votes, but, she, too, was a Clinton supporter. A confirmed Democrat, she is nonetheless considering voting for Republican John McCain.

Obama is too mysterious for her.

"To me, Obama is not an American name. It's a name like in the Middle East. I don't know the man very well," Garcia said. "I like McCain. Maybe I'll vote for McCain."

She hopes the next president will boost the economy.

"I always fight for the little people because I am one of those little people," Garcia said.

History of discrimination

J. Paul Taylor is revered as the conscience of the Democratic Party in the Las Cruces area, dubbed "St. Paul" by some activists. Now 87, he holds court from a spectacularly restored adobe home full of art, pottery, baskets and textiles that he and his wife collected around the world during 61 years of marriage. The home is over 150 years old and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

When the couple moved in a half-century ago, with the first three of their seven children, the house was in ruins. There was no running water, no bathroom, no heat. Now, it's a masterpiece from another era, a cool refuge from the desert heat with thick adobe walls, winding passageways called zaguans and multiple patios. Colorful rugs fill the floors and hang over chairs. Overhead, a traditional New Mexican wooden ceiling features large log beams called vigas that support sapling cross beams called latillas. Niches in every room feature santeros — sculptures of Catholic saints.

The home on Calle Principal is a required stop for politicians at all levels - including Democratic presidential hopefuls like John Edwards - who visit seeking support and advice. The home and all its furnishings and art will become a museum upon Taylor's death. His wife, Mary Daniels Taylor, passed away last year at age 84.

Outside the door is the historic Mesilla plaza, the best preserved Mexican-style village in southern New Mexico. The bells of San Albino church ring each morning and evening, a fitting reminder that San Albino was the patron saint of the "little people," the sick, the indigent, widows and orphans.

Paul Taylor spent his life fighting for just these kind of underdogs as a state lawmaker and educator. He cannot understand the lack of enthusiasm among some of his neighbors for Barack Obama. To Taylor, Obama represents a true miracle.

"It says something to the world - a black man being nominated for the presidency of the U.S. I'm interested in peace and caring for one another," Taylor said. "It bothers me that Hispanics ... are not for Obama. Hispanics have gone through a lot of the same discrimination as black people have."

Taylor witnessed the discrimination himself. Born south of Las Cruces in a tiny village called Chamberino, his parents survived the Depression growing cotton, alfalfa, corn and vegetables. He remembers the era when cotton growers from the south migrated to the Las Cruces area, bringing black workers with them. He remembers blacks having to sit in the balcony of the Rio Grande Theater to watch movies. He remembers Las Cruces' separate and very unequal black school, Booker T. Washington. And he remembers black students being barred from New Mexico State University, except for summer session.

Hispanics suffered discrimination too. When his own children attended the university, Taylor worried that his daughters would be rejected from sororities because of the Hispanic blood that flowed to them from their paternal grandmother, Margarita Romero. She traced her roots to early founders of New Mexico and Spanish settlers who came north from Zacatecas, Mexico, in the late 1500s.

"I saw so much segregation and so much abuse of the black population. If anything will make a change, the president of this country will make a difference," Taylor said. "Obama has the power to change feelings toward ethnic groups as much as anyone has ever had that power."

Taylor believes that increased tolerance will help children of all ethnicities, including longtime Hispanic residents and children of Mexican immigrants.

"It is personal to me. In our schools, I started the bilingual programs."

Taylor agrees with political analysts that Obama must come back and let people here look him in the eye and warm up to him. Taylor attended Obama's Memorial Day rally. He will be a delegate for Obama in Denver. But, Obama has not yet come to Taylor's home for a political tête-à-tête. If he did, Taylor would give the candidate some valuable advice along with a tour of the home.

"He has to project his interest in every ethnic group," Taylor said. "There has to be a lot of groundwork. They have sent some wonderful young people here. But they're all young Anglo men. They need to bring some Hispanic men and women and some blacks along with the Anglos."

As Taylor talks, his daughter's miniature schnauzer, Hillary, curls up at his feet. Mary Helen Ratje, 54, is also an Obama supporter and named her dog long before Senator Clinton made her presidential run. She jokes that she should change the dog's name to Obama. Or maybe the name is just right. As so often happens in the Mesilla Valley, the conversation circles back to the importance of Hillary Clinton.

"In November, in the long run, Obama will win if Hillary gets out and works with him," Taylor said.

Ratje added that Obama will need great turnout from another key constituency.

"If we can get the young people geared up, that's going to help."

Clinton could help ticket

Doña Ana, just north of Las Cruces, and home to the oldest church in southern New Mexico, could well be a bellwether for Barack Obama. Artist Jennie Delao Carbajal, 58, helped restore the village church, which was nearly torn down in the 1970s. She also helped paint a vibrant mural at Doña Ana's exit ramp from Interstate 25. She and others hope to entice tourists to the historic town and revive its economy.

Carbajal speaks of Obama with the same enthusiasm and faith she exudes when she's sitting in the peaceful hush of the beloved church.

"I was for Obama since I first heard his keynote speech. I told my husband, 'This is our next president.'"

Down the road, at Larry's Food Store and Texaco gas station, owner Larry Montes, 66, doesn't like Obama and has a visceral reaction to his wife.

"I think she's prejudiced other than her own," Montes said.

Still, he and his fishing buddies are torn. They all have children who are in the military or who have recently served. Montes now opposes the war and sees McCain as an extension of George Bush.

He can't imagine skipping the election, but is considering voting for local candidates and boycotting the presidential contest - unless Obama picks Clinton.

"I wouldn't have to think about it if Hillary ran for V.P. I'd go for them then. At least we'd feel we'd get a little bit of her."

Traditional values sway voters

Back at Emma Jean Cervantes' chile ranch, the matriarch wants to hear specifics from Obama. What will he do to bring down gas prices? How will he handle immigration reform? What will he do to improve health care?

Cervantes' father started the farm by clearing 650 acres of mesquite scrub. He was a truck farmer who grew simple crops and drove them into town to sell. A strict Hispanic patriarch, he reluctantly passed his land down to his two daughters after insisting that they first get an education in traditional women's fields. Cervantes followed her father's wishes, becoming a nurse, then found she had a great flair for business. She gambled heavily on the cayenne chile market, leasing additional fields in Mexico and even selling in Saudi Arabia until 9/11 attacks made that segment of the market too risky. She has more than doubled the farm her father handed down.

Cervantes recently bought out her sister and now supplies much of the state of Louisiana with the famous red hot sauce used in Buffalo wings and Cajun cooking.

Soaring costs are Cervantes' chief foe.

Diesel fuel cost her father 50 cents a gallon. She's now paying $5 a gallon. The costs of chemicals and seed have doubled. And labor costs keep climbing along with the reluctance of new workers to do the back-breaking work.

"Peru and China pay $1 a day to get chile harvested," Cervantes said.

In contrast, she must pay well over minimum wage to keep good workers and spends considerable time making sure they are all legal.

"The economy is the No. 1 issue to me. I'm looking to Obama for some answers."

Environmental and health issues are also vital to Cervantes. Long-term droughts have gripped New Mexico. And, as a nurse and former chair of a hospital board, Cervantes is concerned about lack of access to quality health care. After all the obstetrical practices in Las Cruces closed because of overwhelming malpractice costs, Cervantes helped start a nonprofit called the First Step Center to ensure women would have a midwife or visiting obstetrician attending their babies' births. After her mother became ill with cancer, Cervantes also started both a Cancer Center and a Hospice for Las Cruces.

"I'm a Democrat through and through. They represent the ordinary, average population of America," she said. "But, I'm going to have to really study Obama. I personally think he lacks a lot of experience."

Voting for McCain is not a choice Cervantes wants to make. But, she and many in southern New Mexico are looking for someone who feels familiar to them.

"I'm a traditionalist. I'm for preserving land for agriculture," she said. "It's not an easy life here, but I love the family values."

By Katie Kerwin McCrimmon, Rocky Mountain News, August 4, 2008

TITUSVILLE, Fla. - This state might be as close as the Democratic Party comes to having haunted ground. And here was another presidential candidate standing after a maybe-not-so-great week talking about trying to push through the attack ads and "get to" the public.

Senator Barack Obama's flame burns coolly - he betrays no hint of punching pillows in private - but his words Saturday came with a frosting of frustration.

"If you think about this week, what they've been good at is distraction," he said during an expansive and quite humid early morning press conference. "You've got statistics saying we lost another 50,000 jobs. That Florida is in recession for the first time in a decade and a half. And what was being talked about was Paris and Britney."

Now, in truth, many candidates experience weeks like this. The issues seem to run in a candidate's favor - Mr. Obama awoke in St. Petersburg, Fla., ready to talk about an ailing economy and saw this newspaper headline: "IT'S A RECESSION." The mojo should feel good.

Except it does not.

Two slightly hallucinogenic attack commercials by Senator John McCain had caught the popular eye. One television commercial linked Mr. Obama to Paris Hilton-Britney Spears bubblehead celebrity, and a Web advertisement portrayed him as Moses. (Biblical prophet though Moses was, the comparison was distinctly not complimentary.) Both raised the question of whether Mr. Obama was ready to be president.

He also stumbled on the question of race. By week's end national poll numbers showed a tightening of the race and CNN ran a story asking about the "Obama Cult."

Mr. Obama's face scrunched just a bit.

"Their team is good at creating distractions and engaging in negative attacks and planting doubts about people," he said. "We have to make sure that we keep focused on people's day-to-day concerns. And we've got to drive that very hard. And I will keep on driving that hard."

A speck of doubt seemed to linger in his voice, though. High fiber talk about the economy appears to resonate in Florida. Nor does he hesitate to attack, often hotly, Senator John McCain on issues from the economy to education to off shore drilling; Mr. McCain, who has carved out tough policy positions on many issues, responds in kind.

But the candidate and his advisers are aware that he remains an elusive figure for some Americans, a preternaturally cool man who just might cut too effortlessly through the water.

The temptation might be to laugh off the commercials, as McCain surrogate Senator Joseph Lieberman advised "young" Mr. Obama on a Sunday television show. But the candidate is not inclined to heed such advice.

"We don't take the skill of the Republicans in engaging in negative attacks lightly," Mr. Obama said. "I would argue that issues like my relative youth or the fact that I have been on the national stage, a relatively or, you know, not as long as somebody like John McCain has been, those are issues that they are going to try to play up."

Democratic consultant Chris Lehane served as spokesman for Gore 2000, a campaign that included an unpleasant extended stay in Florida. Mr. Obama, he said, is diagnosing correctly his vulnerability.

"He's in a challenging spot," Mr. Lehane says. "He's famous, but not necessarily well known. So attacks on his character and identity can hurt."

The subtext to the celebrity commercials seems clear. Republicans would define Mr. Obama much as they did Senator John Kerry in 2004: an elitist, out of touch with ordinary Americans. Mr. McCain's campaign manager even raised the "arugula" issue again last week, mocking the candidate's taste in lettuce and his occasional hankering for a cup of organic herbal tea.

A column in The Washington Post last week also skewered the candidate's many alleged sins, not least for being somehow "presumptuous" by talking about the economy with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and for the Secret Service's decision to close off selected streets for security reasons. The Secret Service makes such judgments independent of candidates.

Are you presumptuous, a reporter asked the candidate toward the end of the news conference? Mr. Obama gave a look that suggested he recognized a cul de sac with no good way out.

"I don't know that there is that perception," he said. "I think what would be useful is to ask the question, 'what's this based on'?"

A presumptuous candidate, Mr. Obama said, would not have traveled across four states in three days. "I'm beat," he said. "Obviously, we think we are in a tight race. And we think that this is going to be a close race all the way through."

At which point he offers a coda, more wish as analysis. I think, he said, that the American people are watching these television commercials and the discussion on television and "saying to themselves, 'what does this have to do with me?' "

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama today sought to reclaim the energy debate from Republican John McCain with an advert calling for a rebate to aid consumers struggling with high fuel costs and a call to tap America's strategic oil reserves to lessen fuel supply pressure.

In recent weeks, McCain has made repeated calls for an end to the US moratorium on oil drilling in coastal waters, and has portrayed Obama as unwilling to take the steps necessary to reduce the cost of gasoline.

Polls have shown a slim majority of Americans favour drilling in areas currently off limits, a response to gasoline prices that have topped $4 per gallon across the country. Since his tour of Europe and the Middle East last month, Obama has seen McCain erode his slim lead in head-to-head polling.

In a new advertisement unveiled this morning, Obama calls for a $1,000 per family rebate funded by a windfall profits tax on oil companies. The clip also highlights campaign contributions from oil company workers to McCain.

"After one president in the pocket of big oil, we can't afford another," the narrator intones as an image of president George Bush besides McCain floats across the screen.

The McCain campaign struck back, accusing Obama of distorting and exaggerating McCain's ties to oil companies. The advert claims "big oil's filling John McCain's campaign with $2m in contributions," though the McCain campaign points out that corporations are forbidden to contribute directly to presidential campaigns.

The Obama advert cited a report from the Centre for Responsive Politics, an organisation that tracks money in political campaigns, which says that oil and gas employees have donated $1.3m to McCain's campaign and $394,465 to Obama.

"Barack Obama's latest negative attack ad shows his celebrity is matched only by his hypocrisy," McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said. "After all it was Senator Obama, not John McCain, who voted for the Bush-Cheney energy bill that was a sweetheart deal for oil companies."

In addition to new drilling in US coastal waters, McCain backs increased use of nuclear energy and coal-fired power plants.

"The Obama assertion that he can take off the table" new oil and gas sources and nuclear energy "and somehow relieve the US of its dependence on foreign oil [shows] he either doesn't understand what he's saying or he's not being straight with the American people", McCain economic policy adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin said in a conference call.

Obama also joined the Democratic congressional leadership this morning in calling for the US to tap its strategic petroleum reserves to increase flow of fuel to the market.

Campaign spokeswoman Heather Zichal told the Associated Press that the arrangement would involve swaps by oil companies with the government of light crude oil or heavy crude oil in oil stockpiles in Texas and Louisiana.

Obama has not previously advocated tapping the oil reserve, but Zichal said he has reconsidered because he recognises that high gas prices have caused many Americans to suffer. The Illinois senator is to make a speech on energy later today in Lansing, Michigan.

Meanwhile, Obama yesterday extended an olive branch toward the legions of Hillary Clinton supporters that have remained cool to his candidacy.

The Obama campaign called on the Democratic national committee to give a full convention vote to the delegations from Michigan and Florida. Those states voted for Clinton this winter, although Obama was not on the ballot in Michigan and neither candidate campaigned in Florida.

The states were sanctioned by the Democratic party for holding their primary elections before February 5, and in June the Democratic party halved their delegate strength as punishment.

The move will not hinder Obama's path to the nomination - the vote on the convention floor in Denver later this month is merely a formality - but is a remaining mechanism within Obama's control with which to reach out to Clinton supporters.

As the presumptive nominee, Obama is effectively the head of the national party, and the Democratic national committee's credentials committee is virtually assured to accede to the move.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Former President Clinton acknowledges there are some things "I wish I hadn't said" during the Democratic presidential nomination fight, but denies he made racist statements about Barack Obama.

Clinton, who had traveled to Rwanda for his private foundation's work to fight AIDS, charged that news organizations applied "a different standard" to his wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. But when asked about it an interview broadcast Monday on ABC's "Good Morning America," the former president said that spending time on such recriminations "interferes with the issue, which is who should be elected in November."

"I bragged on Sen. Obama hundreds of times," he said. "Now, I will be glad, as soon as this election is over in January, to have this conversation with you and everybody else. I have very strong feelings about it."

Clinton cut a controversial profile throughout the Democratic delegate-selection process, championing his wife's cause and vehemently defending her on the campaign trail. But he also at times seemed an angry surrogate and he was harshly criticized for apparently disparaging Obama's early-season victory over his wife in the South Carolina primary. Clinton noted at the time that Jesse Jackson had won there 20 years earlier.

Asked in the interview whether he blames himself for his wife's loss, Clinton replied, "I've heard it from the press and I will not comment on it. ... There are things I wished I said. Things I wished I hadn't said, but I am not a racist. I never made a racist comment and I didn't attack him personally."

Nevertheless, Clinton did say he thought news organizations covered his wife more harshly than Obama. "A different standard was applied to the finest candidate I ever supported," he said. Clinton declined to comment on whether he thought Obama should put his wife on the ticket and he said he admires how she handled the loss. "She went right back to work," he said.

For example, he charged that news organizations were more likely to accuse Hillary than Obama of going negative.

"He hit her hard a couple times. And they hit us a few weeks before she ever responded in kind," he said. "The only thing I ever got mad about, people in your line of work pretending that she had started negative stuff. It's contact sport."

Sen. Clinton conceded to Obama in early June after the primary season concluded and he'd locked up sufficient Democratic National Convention delegates to become the party's standard-bearer against presumed Republican nominee Sen. John McCain this fall.

"I never was mad at Sen. Obama," the former president said. "I think everybody's got a right to run for president who qualifies under the Constitution. And I'd be the last person to begrudge anybody their ambition."

The Associated Press, August 4, 2008

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Ex-president Bill Clinton said in an interview Monday that he was not a racist, but refused to revisit his primary campaign spats with Barack Obama's campaign until after November's election.

Clinton, who became embroiled in a string of controversies while backing his wife Hillary Clinton in her unsuccessful Democratic primary bid, denied ever attacking the presumptive Democratic nominee personally.

"It would be counterproductive for me to talk about it," Clinton said in an interview with ABC television.

"There are things that I wished I urged her to do. Things I wished I had said, things I wished I hadn't said.

"But I am not a racist. I never made a racist comment and I did not attack him personally.

Clinton accused the Obama campaign of "playing the race card" against him during the primary campaign, which appeared to strain his previously close ties with the African American community.

Some Obama backers bristled when Clinton in January likened Obama's candidacy to the campaign of African-American civil rights icon Jesse Jackson in 1988.

Others also accused Clinton of trying to diminish Obama, the first African American candidate with a realistic chance of winning the presidency.

In the ABC interview, Clinton denied he was still fuming over his wife's defeat, eight weeks after she bowed out of the race and offered a warm endorsement of Obama.

"I never was mad at Senator Obama -- I think everybody's got a right to run for president who qualifies under the constitution," he said.

"I'd be the last person to ever begrudge anybody their ambition. He's a superbly gifted candidate in this and had a great operation," Clinton, said, during a tour of Africa focusing on HIV/AIDS for his global foundation.

The former president said he would not divulge his full thoughts on the campaign until after the election, and also stopped short of saying that Obama was currently ready to be president.

"You can argue that nobody is ready to be president. I certainly learned a lot about the job in the first year," Clinton said.

"He clearly can inspire and motivate people and energize them which is a very important part of being president. And he's smart as a whip so there's nothing he can't learn."

AFP, August 4, 2008

Since Senator Obama announced his candidacy for president, he has had to walk--as commentators and pundits have noted--a racial tightrope. Race has long been a dynamic on the American political landscape. Conservatives' use of racial code words to galvanize White voters and White voters' resistance to voting for Black candidates are both part of this history. But this is a new day, or is it? Senator Obama likely has a good idea as to how to answer this question, hence his success thus far. For months now, he has indicated that those who oppose his election will use his race to scare voters. Nonetheless, he has raised this issue sparingly and been careful not to direct that charge at any one individual or candidate in particular.

Despite recent accusations that Senator Obama has played the race card, it is doubtful that he has. He seems quite mindful of the racial minefield he must traverse to the Oval Office. For instance, on one hand, research suggests that voting is not based on solely rational processes; intuition and emotion play significant roles in voters' candidate choice. And a candidate's race can be quite emotionally evocative. On the other hand, research suggests that Whites are less receptive to Black Democrats raising race issues than they are to other types of political candidates. Furthermore, the more racially prejudiced the White person, the more irritated and antagonistic they become over being confronted about their perceived anti-Black racial bias. In essence, Senator Obama must point out potentially deep-seeded racial biases among the electorate for those voters who wish to guard against casting their votes tainted by racial bias. At the same time, he has to avoid being perceived as branding them as racists, which would create voter backlash.

The broader challenge for Senator Obama, however, is to make voters aware of the fact that even many well-intentioned individuals harbor unconscious, anti-Black biases. And these biases influence behavior. Maybe this is what he meant when he referred to his grandmother as the "typical White person."

There is a growing body of social and cognitive psychological research, which sheds considerable light on how racial attitudes actually function in this day and age. Most Americans are not expressly racist. And one may even argue that within the 2008 presidential campaign, numerous racialized instances were not even intentional despite the fact that they were consequential to Senator Obama. Nonetheless, what researchers on "implicit bias" have found is that race biases are part of unconscious, emotional processes, wholly apart from the conscious, rational ones. Many people who embrace the egalitarian norm that skin color should not affect their judgment of a political candidate, for instance, also unwittingly harbor negative associations with minorities. The 2008 campaign is replete with examples of how unconscious race bias has likely been at work. Let me give a few examples.

Senator Obama is quite accurate when he says that his opponents have engaged in and will engage in a "politics of fear." Whether his opponents intend to or not (and many probably intend to), many of their character attacks on Senator Obama result in raising unconscious racial biases among voters. Implicit racial bias is not a mere abstraction. It is linked to the deepest recesses of the mind--particularly the amygdale, which is involved in emotional learning, perceiving novel or threatening stimuli, and fear conditioning. Neurological research shows that Whites react to Black faces with amygdala activation, even when shown Black faces only for a millisecond. This activation does not occur in Whites processing White faces. Furthermore, the degree of amygdala activation after exposure to Black faces correlates with measures of unconscious bias. In short, Whites who show strong unconscious anti-Black bias react to Black faces, whether they know it or not, with fear and anxiety.

Moreover, part of what may have exacerbated unconscious voter racial sentiments against Senator Obama during the primaries was the endless loop of sound bites of Reverend Wright's controversial statements on YouTube and the cable news networks. As MSNBC's Chuck Todd recently noted, with regards to the uproar about Senator Obama allegedly playing the race card against John McCain, every day the media talks about race within the campaign is a bad day for Senator Obama. Research suggests that repeated negative images of Blacks on the news serve to exacerbate people's unconscious anti-Black biases.

Senator Obama has also been labeled as unpatriotic. He has been criticized for allegedly not pledging allegiance to the American flag and not wearing an American flag lapel pin. Researchers have found that Whites and Asian Americans more easily associate, at the unconscious level, American symbols with White faces rather than with Black faces. This is so even when the Black faces are those of recognized U.S. Olympic athletes. When Whites and Asians are shown images of the American flag for only milliseconds, their attitudes toward Blacks become more negative. When similarly shown images of the American flag, their attitudes toward Democrats are not altered. Their attitude toward Blacks generally, and Senator Obama specifically, become more negative, however. Additionally, people more easily associate, at the unconscious level, Senator Clinton with the category "American" than Senator Obama; even Tony Blair is unconsciously associated with "American" more so than Senator Obama.

In addition to conflating Senator Obama's race with a lack of authentic Americanness, critics have also labeled him as foreign; Pat Buchanan's constant refrain is that Senator Obama is "exotic." Detractors have attempted to allude to his middle name, "Hussein," as another indicator that he is inauthentically American. And research shows, for example, people tend to find it easier to associate American names with pleasant words and foreign names with unpleasant words.

Senator Obama has also received a considerable amount of criticism after he referenced some working-class voters' frustration with the economy as being, among other things, "bitter." Senator Clinton, in turn, charged Senator Obama with being elitist, which got lots of traction in the press and among some White voters. What was striking about such a critique is that Senator Obama's life-story, vis-à-vis that of both Senators Clinton and McCain, is just the opposite. More recently, Senator McCain and his surrogates have attempted to paint Senator Obama as presumptuous and arrogant for doing the same, if not less egregious, things as the McCain campaign. But the subtext to all of this, as David Gergen aptly described it on ABC's This Week, is that Senator Obama is being portrayed as "uppity" (a Black person who believes he is better than a Black person should so think). "Uppity" amounts to a racial slur, and research suggests that unconscious, anti-Black bias is correlated with the use of verbal slurs towards Blacks.

Poll data and express comments by voters also highlight how the race in the 2008 campaign may best be interpreted through the lens of unconscious bias. For example, approximately 70-90% of Whites harbor an unconscious, anti-Black/pro-White bias. As such, it is no surprise that Senator Obama had difficulty with White voters in primary, as opposed to caucus, states in his bid for the Democratic nomination. Group deliberation, like caucuses, provides a context where individuals are more likely to engage in self-checking with regards to racial bias due to the desire not to be perceived as racially biased by others. Primaries, where voters cast their ballot in private, do not provide the same context. Moreover, even Asian and Latino Americans harbor unconscious anti-Black biases. As such, Senator Obama's difficulty in wooing more Latino(a) and Asian American voters than Senator Clinton is also understandable in light of unconscious bias research.

Additionally, one might suspect that even after an acrimonious primary season such as the one experienced by the Democrats, in the end Democrats would unify behind their party's candidate. But during their campaign, some supporters of Senator Clinton indicated that they would not vote for Senator Obama if he were the Democratic nominee. Research shows that Democrats who hold the most favorable unconscious views towards a racial minority are several times more likely to prefer a minority candidate compared with Democrats who hold the least positive unconscious views of that racial minority group. Unconscious bias is less of a determining factor when the minority is a Democrat. In essence, even when Democrats harbor unconscious anti-minority biases, they tend to overcome these biases when choosing between a racial minority Democrat and a White non-Democrat. However, the minority used in this study was Latino, and arguably unconscious biases against Blacks are more virulent than those against Latinos.

Polling data suggests that there was a profile, in addition to race and sex, of those who supported Senator Clinton over Senator Obama. Senator Clinton's supporters, tended to be older and less educated than Senator Obama's supporters. And research suggests that age and education are correlated with political orientation, with those who are older and less educated being more politically conservative. People who are more politically conservative also tend to harbor stronger unconscious anti-Black biases than those who are liberal. In fact, in a Newsweek poll published several months ago, participants were asked to answer questions on a variety of race-related topics (e.g., racial preferences, interracial marriage, attitudes toward social welfare and general attitudes toward African-Americans). Participants were categorized according to their responses on a "Racial Resentment Index." Among White Democrats who scored low on the Index, Senator Obama beat Senator McCain in a hypothetical match-up 78% to 17%. That was almost identical to Senator Clinton's margin in the category, 79% to 13%. Among White Democrats with high scores on the Index, Senator Obama led Senator McCain by only 18 points (51 to 33) while Senator Clinton maintained a much larger 59-point lead (78 to 18). Those who scored high on the Index, 61%, had less than a four-year college education, and many are older (44% were over the age of 60 compared to just 18% under the age of 40).

Some commentators and critics have argued that the support of some Whites for Senator Obama and the overwhelming number of Blacks who voted for him rise to the level of reverse discrimination. Black support of Senator Obama ranged anywhere from 66% to 93%. And robust White support was seen during the primaries in states such as Connecticut, Delaware, Oregon, and Vermont. Many of these voters were not hesitant to indicate that the fact that Senator Obama is Black was at least part of the reason why they voted for him. Such voting patterns are a good thing, in light of how unconscious biases operate. Between 50-65% of Blacks exhibit unconscious bias in favor of Whites. Many Blacks' and Whites who voted for Senator Obama tended to vote against their unconscious anti-Black bias. Therefore, their voting was strikingly different from White voters who supported Senator Clinton or support Senator McCain because they are White candidates. Many of these Whites are voting with the grain of either their conscious or unconscious anti-Black biases. Pro-Blackness, therefore, is not analogous to pro-Whiteness.

In the end, critics of such an approach to analyzing race within the 2008 campaign will likely raise two points. The first is, "How do you account for Obama's success among White voters?" The second is, "So anybody who doesn't vote for or criticizes Obama is a racist?" With regards to the former, the distinction between primaries and caucuses, the respective checks and lack of checks they place on unconscious bias, explains a lot. But even more, there is a growing body of psychological research suggesting that positive images of Blacks, among other factors, can reduce unconscious, anti-Black biases. And arguably, Senator Obama's whole persona is one that militates against such unconscious biases--even in the face of mudslinging from his opponents. With regards to the latter, racism (which is largely express and overt) should not necessarily be conflated with unconscious biases (which are implicit and outside of conscious awareness). Furthermore, individuals may vote for a candidate based on any number of factors, some of which may legitimately focus on distinctions among candidates on policies and experience. However, voters should not underestimate the influence of their unconscious on their voting behavior. Most voters will remain unaware that unconscious biases may be helping to dictate which candidate they support. Others, like an individual who is HIV positive and protests that they are free of the virus because they "feel healthy," will argue that they are free from racial bias because they don't perceive that they harbor such biases. But like HIV, unconscious racial biases lie outside of full awareness. The only way to actually know if one is (in)affected is to get tested.

Senior Democrats voiced growing concern yesterday that the barrage of personal attacks against Barack Obama by his Republican rival are working and that he should hit back harder before it is too late.

Strategists on both sides of the political divide agreed that John McCain's stream of negative advertisements, including one that compared Mr Obama to Britney Spears, have damaged the Democrat.

Since his world tour last month Mr Obama has been portrayed by the McCain camp as arrogant, presumptuous, addicted to celebrity and too elitist to connect with American voters. His lead in the polls has disappeared, and two surveys yesterday showed the candidates tied.

The attacks were orchestrated by the same Republican strategists who destroyed the White House ambitions of John Kerry in 2004. Their latest video, entitled The One, juxtaposes Mr Obama with images of Moses parting the Red Sea.

Many Democratic strategists are haunted by the fate of their previous candidates when confronted with Republican attacks, such as Mr Kerry, who failed to react quickly enough to the negative Vietnam Swift Boats campaign.

"Some Obama backers are right to worry that the relentless daily attacks on the candidate will take their toll on the campaign," said Donna Brazile, the campaign manager for Al Gore in 2000. "It's time for the Obama campaign to build a political firewall by using outside surrogates unaffiliated with the candidate to debunk these misleading attacks."

David Gergen, who has advised Republican and Democrat presidents, said: "What we have learnt this week is that when the Republican attack machine cranks up, as Hillary Clinton predicted, [Obama] is actually pretty vulnerable."

The tactics are risky for Mr McCain because they could alienate swing voters and leave the Republicans looking uninspiring. Strategists say that the explosion of race into the campaign poses dangers for Mr Obama at a time when he is trying to win over white blue-collar voters who refused to vote for him during his primary battle with Mrs Clinton.

After Mr Obama said that Mr McCain and Republicans were trying to scare voters by saying "he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bill," the McCain campaign accused him of playing the race card.

A few weeks ago, Bonnie Chang decided to throw a house party at her home in Bucks County to unite supporters of Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton after the state's bruising, closely fought seven-week primary.

It was not a rip-roaring success.

"The Clinton supporters told me they're going to vote for Obama but they're not going to work for him," said Ms. Chang, a 53-year-old Clinton delegate in the 8th Congressional District who is now busy trying to convince people to volunteer in Mr. Obama's campaign. "They'd say, 'OK, OK, I know he's the nominee, just don't expect me to have a house party for him.'"

As Democrats prepare for their national convention in Denver three weeks hence, Pennsylvania is presenting a mostly positive picture for the presumptive nominee. But while Mr. Obama currently leads Sen. John McCain in Pennsylvania by anywhere from 6 to 9 points, according to most polls, many women delegates who supported Mrs. Clinton in Pennsylvania are still grappling with feelings of disappointment and alienation -- and they say voters are too.

"I just don't think the enthusiasm is there," said Ruth Rudy, a former state legislator and a superdelegate who backed Mrs. Clinton and now supports Mr. Obama. Her home district of Centre County, home to Penn State, went for Mr. Obama, but in the rural areas nearby, disaffection among women -- and men, too -- is deep, bordering on suspicion and even apathy about a candidate they don't know well.

"Some of these people may just not vote," she said. "The women in rural areas, the farm wives, are not necessarily going to be that accepting of a candidate like Sen. Obama. It's not so much about his color, or at least that's not what they're saying. They just don't feel they know him. He does have some more work to do to win them over."

Most state Democratic party officials -- from Gov. Ed Rendell on down -- believe that Mr. Obama will carry Pennsylvania in the November election, and Thursday's Quinnipiac Poll had him leading Sen. John McCain among likely women voters by a 50 to 39 percent margin. Among white women, he is virtually tied in the state with Mr. McCain, whereas in April's Democratic primary, women went for Mrs. Clinton over Mr. Obama by a 14-point margin.

The Obama campaign is making a special effort to reach out to women, said Sean Smith, the campaign's communications director in Pennsylvania. It has hired former Clinton aides and, in town hall meetings and in reports on his Web site, the candidate repeatedly stresses how his economic plans help women.

In Chicago last week, Michelle Obama departed from her prepared speech to speak warmly of Mrs. Clinton, saying "my husband is a better candidate because of her." And on Tuesday, Mr. Obama met privately with a group of women leaders including representatives from the political action committee EMILY's List, which passionately advocated for Mrs. Clinton but now supports Mr. Obama.

"This was the longest primary campaign in the history of the Democratic party," said Ellen Moran, executive director of EMILY's List. "Given the closeness of the outcome, the length of the race and the loyalty supporters felt to their candidates -- when you have that level of investment, yes, you're going to have disappointment when you're on the losing side."

But, she added, "the Obama campaign has taken some very important steps" to heal that divide. "Women, as a voting bloc, hold this election in their hands. We know that a healthy gender gap produces a Democratic president."

It's doubtful anyone in Pennsylvania's 187-member delegation will follow the lead of Debra Bartoshevich, a Wisconsin delegate for Mrs. Clinton, who vowed to vote for John McCain at the Democratic convention. She was promptly kicked out of the delegation.

But among the nearly two dozen women delegates in Pennsylvania interviewed for this story, rebellious feelings hover not far from the surface.

They'll vote for Mrs. Clinton on the first ballot -- unless she tells them not to. They'll continue to push Mr. Obama to select her as his running mate -- a prospect that seems less and less likely these days. And some want to insert language in the party's platform stating that the primary elections "exposed pervasive gender bias in the media."

And please, do not suggest that Mrs. Clinton has ended her campaign.

"She has suspendedher campaign, and that is a distinction with a difference," says Michele Bortner, a delegate from York who proudly notes that she was Mrs. Clinton's highest vote-getter in the 19th Congressional District.

While Ms. Bortner will be working energetically for Mr. Obama, she nonetheless notes that Mrs. Clinton's campaign "is not over. She didn't end it. I have not heard from her or the campaign that it is over, and you could interpret that in a lot of different ways. You never know."

Carol Fiorucci, the 68-year-old Register of Wills in Beaver County, says she'd not only vote for Mrs. Clinton on the first ballot "if we are able to do that," she'd strongly support any party platform that condemns gender bias against Mrs. Clinton, whose story, she noted, "was my story.

"I've been in politics a long time, and it's a good old boys club, no doubt about that, but she was an inspiration,'' Ms. Fiorucci said. "This has been the most personal of any of the campaigns I've ever been in, and it was a big disappointment when she lost."

"I saw the handwriting on the wall as soon as the media started to beat the hell out of her," added Jean Milko, vice chair of the Pennsylvania Democratic party. "I'll do what I have to do," she sighed, "but for a lot of people I'm talking to, it's up in the air."

Mrs. Clinton's strongest demographic included older, less-educated, blue-collar women. But Mrs. Rudy, the Centre County superdelegate, recalled attending a candidate's function recently "when the talk drifted to the campaign and the women I sat with, professional, college-educated women, were saying the one chance in their lifetime to see a woman president had passed."

Not every delegate has picked up on that sentiment. Eileen Connor, who is running the political outreach program for the Pennsylvania chapter of the State Employees International Union, an early backer of Mr. Obama, says she hasn't encountered much resentment among women.

"Our internal polls show he has the most difficulty with women over 65 and white men," she said, "and frankly, it confuses me that some people are still debating whether a woman should be the nominee. It's over, I say, and Obama is their best choice."

Indeed, "my hunch is that in the fall it won't be women per se but blue-collar workers who will be more of a problem for Obama for a variety of reasons," said Terry Madonna, director of the Center for Politics and Public Affairs at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, who is currently conducting polling on the issue.

Opposition to Mr. Obama, he believes, comes less from the notion that "it's 'her time, a woman's time,' than it was about some of the themes raised by Clinton during the primary" -- including the controversy over Mr. Obama's fiery former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, and Mr. Obama's comments that small town voters in Pennsylvania are "bitter" and cling to guns and religion.

"For the voters who fell into the category of the Bitter-gate comment, overall, that's a bigger problem than winning back college-educated women," Mr. Madonna said.

In the meantime, Obama supporters are doing what they can to heal hurt feelings -- without pushing too hard.

Cheryl Bohn, a State College resident and a Clinton delegate from the 5th Congressional District who's helping the Obama campaign, says she's been on the phone to so-called "super Democrats" -- those who have voted in the past four elections -- and "there are some hard cases," she said.

"I usually say something pretty trite, like, 'Oh, disagreement is the Democratic way,' but you can't cut through that kind of anger very easily and have a rational conversation with someone in that mode, so I just say, 'Call us down at Obama headquarters if you have any questions.'

"But seriously, are these people going to really jump ship and vote for John McCain? I really doubt it."

Others are more impatient -- like Gov. Rendell, Mrs. Clinton's most high-profile backer. At this year's annual meeting of the Pennsylvania Federation of Democratic Women, which came shortly after Mrs. Clinton bowed out of the race, "he told the us we had 10 days to get over it. Well, women aren't over it," said Ms. Bortner, the delegate from York.

"I will tell you that women are far angrier than I expected. It actually surprises me that women have resisted moving on for as long as they have, but I think they just feel that in their lifetime they will never see this kind of momentum for this kind of candidate again."

Then she paused.

By Dan Janison, Newsday, August 4, 2008

Now that he's just over three weeks away from formal acceptance of the Democratic presidential nomination, Barack Obama has come around to a position long advocated by his erstwhile rival, Hillary Clinton: Michigan and Florida should have full voting representation at the party's national convention in Denver.

Obama recently wrote the convention's credentials committee about the two delegations, and today the committee issued this reply:

"Today we received a letter from Senator Obama requesting that the Convention's Credentials Committee grant each delegate from Florida and Michigan a full vote. We deeply appreciate and value Senator Obama's perspective on this important issue. This matter will be the top priority for the Credentials Committee when we meet on August 24th. As always our goal is to ensure a fair process and a unified Democratic Party so that we can win in November."

Hmm. Wonder what they'll decide.

By Leslie Hoffecker, Los Angeles Times, August 3, 2008

Still, he got a little testy in an interview Sunday with ABC's Kate Snow, telling her he is "not a racist" even as he avoided delving into specifics about what happened in the Democratic presidential primary. The interview, taped in a quick stop in Liberia, will air Monday on "Good Morning America."

Snow asked Clinton, "Do you personally have any regrets about what you did campaigning for your wife?"

With his arms folded and looking a bit tense, Clinton replied, "Yes, but not the ones you think. And it would be counterproductive for me to talk about it."

Barely pausing for a breath, he added, "There are things I wish I'd urged her to do, things I wish I had said, things I wish I hadn't said. But I am not a racist, I never made a racist comment, and I didn't attack him personally," a clear allusion to Sen. Barack Obama.

By Anne E. Kornblut, The Washington Post, August 3, 2008

Alaska is young. Georgia, North Carolina and Virginia have growing populations and many black voters. Montana has seen recent Democratic inroads, and North Dakota has sent only Democrats to Congress since 1986. Indiana borders Barack Obama's home state.

The Democratic presidential candidate is putting money and manpower in all seven of these states _ at levels unmatched by Republican rival John McCain.

For decades, these states have almost exclusively voted for Republican presidential candidates and have rarely seen any campaign action. Now, thanks in part to demographic and political shifts, they are emerging as new battlegrounds.

"We have the organizational ability and the financial ability to compete there," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said recently. "There is not a head fake among them."

Undeterred, senior McCain strategist Steve Schmidt said: "We feel very confident about holding these states." He also expressed optimism that McCain can win several Democratic-leaning perennial swing targets.

In the seven historically GOP bastions, Obama has run five weeks' worth of TV ads and dispatched dozens of workers to sign up legions of unregistered voters that his campaign believes can be persuaded to support the Illinois senator in droves if courted aggressively. Among their targets are blacks and young people, two constituencies that favor Obama but historically have been unreliable voters.

McCain is largely absent from most of these states, trusting for now that right-leaning roots will prevail.

Unlike McCain, Obama had a presence in all seven during the protracted Democratic primaries and that could benefit him.

But Republicans - and even some skeptical Democrats - claim Obama simply is trying to lure McCain into spending money defending GOP turf so he has less to compete with elsewhere.

Indeed, cash flow is a major factor; Obama expects to be able to afford to compete most anywhere while McCain must be more careful with his money because he is accepting public financing and the spending limits that come with it.

Democrats see other dynamics in the states as opportunities, which Republicans say are just delusions.

Of the cluster, Virginia is most likely to go Democratic, so it's the one where McCain is competing in earnest.

Obama is advertising statewide and has opened several offices. Putting Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine on the ticket could help.

McCain's headquarters is in northern Virginia, and he has a full paid Virginia campaign staff. So far, he's only on the air in the Washington, D.C., media market that serves the burgeoning Virginia suburbs.

That's the moderate region that has helped Democrats retain the governor's office and pick up one Senate seat.

Democrats say the growing numbers of young left-leaning professionals in the north and the state's large percentage of blacks - one in five - as well as untapped pools of potential voters make Virginia a ripe target for them. More than 4 million people are eligible to vote, but roughly a third are not registered, including a half-million blacks and several hundred thousand people age 18-24.

The situation is similar in two other fast-growing Southern states.

North Carolina has seen an influx of Northern retirees settling along the coast and in the mountains, while upper-class and academic transplants from all over flock to the booming economies of the high-tech Research Triangle and the Charlotte banking hub.

"You're definitely getting a new mix," said Bill Peaslee, a former state GOP chief of staff. "Some of the old givens are no longer true. It's not how it was 20 years ago or even 10 years ago."

Voter registrations are up, blacks are signing up in record numbers and a Democrat leads the state.

Recognizing a potential problem, McCain is sending a full paid staff to North Carolina though running no ads for now.

Georgia saw GOP gains in recent decades as conservatives moved in during a population spurt. It now has a Republican governor and legislature, and a strong state party organization.

Even so, Democrats see an opening among blacks who now make up 30 percent of Georgia's population. Even Republicans predict the first black major party presidential nominee will produce the largest black turnout ever.

"It can't be understated that he is from our neighboring state," said Dan Parker, the state Democratic Party chairman.

Since 1936, Democrats have won Indiana once in presidential elections, 1964. Still, they have had some success on the state level and ousted three GOP incumbent congressmen in 2006. Working-class Indiana whites pose hurdles for Obama as they did in his narrow primary loss to Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Along the U.S.-Canada border, Democratic statewide victories have emboldened Obama to make plays for Montana and North Dakota. Republicans argue Democrats who win in those states are moderate and Obama is not. Obama's campaign also is counting on residual goodwill from his primary wins in both.

In Montana, Bill Clinton showed it's worth it for a Democrat to compete hard; he narrowly won it in 1992 but narrowly lost it four years later. President Bush, however, won by enormous margins in back-to-back elections.

Nevertheless, Democrats took the governor's office back with Gov. Brian Schweitzer's election in 2004 over a Republican, and booted a GOP senator facing corruption allegations two years later to take control of both Senate seats.

Democrats claim the electorate has become more moderate as new people settled in mountainous western Montana. Republicans argue the GOP foundation is strong and note that Montana has sent a Republican to the House since 1994.

North Dakota has a GOP governor but has had an all-Democratic congressional delegation for more than two decades. Still, no Democratic presidential candidate has won the state in more than 30 years.

Obama has opened offices in North Dakota's four largest cities and has visited twice since wrapping up the nomination.

"Barack Obama coming up here and competing here is going to force John McCain to make a choice," said Jamie Selzler, the state party director. "For everything that McCain does up here, that's a little bit less that he can do in these big battleground states we always hear about."

Even farther north in far-flung Alaska, it's been three decades since a Democratic nominee won the state.

Republicans dominate the levers of power, but corruption has rocked the party, including the latest black eye: the indictment of Sen. Ted Stevens this week.

All that turmoil emboldens Obama. So does the fact that Alaska is home to the nation's third-youngest population. Voter registrations among Democrats are outpacing Republicans.

Said state Sen. Hollis French, an Anchorage Democrat: "There is a real sense of energy coming off that campaign that is completely lacking from the other side."

With Democrats gunning to expand their control of the Senate, Mr. Sununu, whose seat has been in Republican hands for 30 years, faces a grueling rematch against former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen. It is a contest in which eagerness to replace President Bush looms large and voters say the battered economy is their chief concern.

"I think everything needs change, a fresh start, fresh ideas," said Meg Halley, 49, a software support technician, who stopped to greet Mrs. Shaheen on Main Street here one recent afternoon. "The economy, the environment, the price of gas, education, health care," Ms. Halley said, listing her concerns. "It's hard to say things are working."

Such sentiments, reflected in opinion polls nationally, are fueling the Democrats' belief that they can oust Mr. Sununu and run competitively in up to 10 other states in a quest to push their slim 51 to 49 Senate majority as close as possible to a filibuster-proof 60 seats - a goal they rank second only to Senator Barack Obama's winning the White House.

Since the first Sununu-Shaheen contest in 2002, New Hampshire Republicans have lost an 11-point edge among registered voters. Each party now has 31 percent of the electorate, with 38 percent undeclared. In the state's presidential primaries this year, 62 percent of independents who voted chose a Democrat.

Still, beating Mr. Sununu will not be easy. At 43, he is the youngest senator and, many of his colleagues say, one of the smartest. An M.I.T.-educated engineer with an M.B.A. from Harvard, he may be a symbol of Republican vulnerability, but he also represents incumbency's inherent advantages, not the least being his $5.1 million war chest.

Mrs. Shaheen, 61, who in 1996 was the first woman elected as New Hampshire's governor, is an archetype of the high-profile candidates that Democrats have put forward this year in hopes of seizing on a built-in numerical advantage: Republicans must defend 23 Senate seats, including 5 left open by retirements, while Democrats have just 12 seats up with not a single vacancy.

Besides Mrs. Shaheen, other battle-tested Democrats include two former governors, Mark R. Warner of Virginia and Ronnie Musgrove of Mississippi, and Representatives Mark Udall of Colorado and Tom Udall of New Mexico, who are cousins.

And in Alaska, Mark Begich, the Democratic mayor of Anchorage, is now favored to knock out the Republican, Senator Ted Stevens, who was indicted by a federal grand jury last week on charges of failing to disclose more than $250,000 he received from an oil services company.

Senator John Ensign of Nevada, the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, conceding the grim political map, has said it would be a good election night if his party lost only four seats.

Democrats are betting on a bigger bounty. "New Hampshire is one of the five seats we expect to win," Senator Charles E. Schumerof New York, the head of the party's campaign efforts, boasted at the Capitol last week.

The New Hampshire race is shaping up as a bare-knuckle bout featuring two veteran, polished candidates who know the terrain - and each other - well. It is already heavy on policy, with clashes over the economy, health care, the Iraq war, national security, and their records in Congress and the State House.

Mr. Sununu dismisses Mrs. Shaheen as a hopeless liberal who blindly follows the playbook of Democratic strategists in Washington. "Jeanne Shaheen read the press release from Chuck Schumer, she didn't read the legislation and she came out for the wrong bill," he said recently, criticizing her position on a Medicare bill.

Mrs. Shaheen, in turn, pounds on Mr. Sununu's close ties to Mr. Bush and his voting record, which she says has supported the White House 90 percent of the time. "The policies of George Bush and John Sununu," she said, "have been out of step from where the voters of New Hampshire are."

In recent days they have pummeled each other on energy policy, particularly over the Republican proposal to lift a moratorium on offshore oil drilling.

The candidates are appealing to voters in a state where consumer confidence has fallen and economic anxiety is high, despite blossoming high-tech and health care industries that have kept unemployment relatively low.

So far, Mrs. Shaheen seems to have an edge. She has been ahead in the polls for more than a year, often by double digits, though one recent survey had her up by just four percentage points, a statistical dead heat.

Her campaign has also been spending more than Mr. Sununu's and has just $2.1 million left on hand, according to the most recent campaign finance reports. National Democrats are expected to spend heavily on her behalf.

Mr. Sununu, projecting supreme confidence, has only recently begun to campaign in earnest and is said to be readying an advertising blitz for after Labor Day, when voters will begin paying more attention.

He may also benefit from sharing the ballot with Senator John McCain, who won the Republican presidential primaries here in 2000 and 2008. Mrs. Shaheen is now coordinating with Mr. Obama's campaign.

"It's probably the best test out there of a political climate being a Republican incumbent's worst enemy," said Jennifer Duffy of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report. "He does constituent service. He shows up to work. He votes. He brings home the bacon. There are not a lot of inherent things wrong with John Sununu except that he is a Republican."

Felicia Concepcion, 32, a jewelry store owner from Hudson, N.H., said she had no complaints about Mr. Sununu but would not vote for him. "I don't think he's too bad," Ms. Concepcion said. "But with the economy going the way it has been going the last few years, nobody in any office looks too good right now."

"That kind of effective leadership will be contrasted - by the media, by me, by others - to the things she failed to do as governor," Mr. Sununu said.

He said she failed to deal with the state's education financing problems, a continuing issue, and he also attacked her handling of tax policy. "She raised spending to record levels, which I think people have come to expect from liberal Democrats," he said.

Mrs. Shaheen casts herself as representing the change that voters crave these days. "When I am out on the campaign trail, talking to people in New Hampshire, I don't hear people say we need to elect a Democrat," she said. "What I hear them say is we need to change the direction of this country."

Mr. Sununu has also been a frequent target of Senate Democratic leaders, who at times force votes to put Republicans in a political bind. He shrugs off the tactic, saying, "What's important is that you cast a vote that is based in principle."

Neither Mrs. Shaheen nor Mr. Sununu is an electrifying campaigner. He looks like an engineer with a preppy wardrobe and seems to sprint everywhere he goes. She favors colorful suits and has a kindly but serious demeanor.

When they first ran against each other six years ago, Mrs. Shaheen was a three-term governor, and Mr. Sununu was a three-term congressman and a rising Republican star. American troops had not yet invaded Iraq, and Mr. Bush, then popular, campaigned for him.

Mr. Sununu won 51 percent to 47 percent, by a margin of 19,751 votes. A Republican also won the governorship that year.

Since then, however, the party's strength in New Hampshire has dwindled. In 2004, Senator John Kerry won the presidential vote, and John Lynch, a Democrat, was elected governor. In 2006, Democrats rode a wave of discontent to a major sweep of state and federal offices.

Some analysts believe that the 2006 cycle was an aberration and that Democrats were helped by the ability to vote a straight ticket for one party, a longtime practice in New Hampshire balloting that was ended this year.

But even without the straight ticket, Mike Caulfield, a co-founder of bluehampshire.com, a political Web site, said he expected Mrs. Shaheen to win.

"People kind of treasure their indecision," he said of New Hampshire residents. "They kind of hold on to it much longer than people in other places might. But if 2006 is any guide, the independents will break very hard for the Democrats."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is behind on a dark horse in the Democratic veepstakes: Rep. Chet Edwards of Texas.

"I hope he will be the nominee," Pelosi said Sunday on ABC's "This Week."

Edwards, first elected in 1990 and now in his ninth term, represents Texas' 17th District, which includes Waco, College Station, Fort Hood and the small town of Crawford, where President Bush has a ranch. He serves as a senior member on the House appropriations and budget committees and has guided funding measures for military veterans.

Pelosi said that amid all the talk about possible running mates from the Senate, she didn't want the House to be left out. Presumed nominee Barack Obama has not announced when he will make his pick.

"There's such a great array of people from whom Sen. Obama can choose," she said. "So, any one of them, I'm fine with. I just wanted people to be aware of the extraordinary credentials of Chet Edwards."

Pelosi's push for Edwards was reported by Newsweek in its issue set for release Monday.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., mentioned as a potential running mate, said Sunday she had not been asked for any documents as part of a vetting process.

Former Rep. Rob Portman, an Ohio Republican and a former budget director under President Bush, said the campaign of Republican John McCain had not asked him for any personal records. He and McCaskill appeared on CNN's "Late Edition."

Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, on the other hand, has been asked by the McCain campaign for personal documents as part of its search for a running mate, The Associated Press reported Saturday. Cantor had no comment on the report.

ALASKA:

Last voted for a Democratic presidential candidate: 1964

Electoral votes: 3

2004 margin: George Bush, 61 percent; John Kerry, 36 percent

2000 margin: George Bush, 59 percent; Al Gore, 28 percent

Governor: Republican Sarah Palin

Congressional breakdown: Two Republican senators; one Republican congressman

GEORGIA

Last voted for a Democratic presidential candidate: 1992

Electoral votes: 15

2004 margin: George Bush, 58 percent; John Kerry, 41 percent

2000 margin: George Bush, 55 percent; Al Gore, 43 percent

Governor: Republican Sonny Perdue

Congressional breakdown: Two Republican senators; seven Republican congressmen, six Democratic congressmen

INDIANA

Last voted for a Democratic presidential candidate: 1964

Electoral votes: 11

2004 margin: George Bush, 60 percent; John Kerry, 39 percent

2000 margin: George Bush, 57 percent; Al Gore, 41 percent

Governor: Republican Mitch Daniels

Congressional breakdown: One Republican senator, one Democratic senator; four Republican congressmen, five Democratic congressmen

MONTANA:

Last voted for a Democratic presidential candidate: 1992

Electoral votes: 3

2004 margin: George Bush, 59 percent; John Kerry, 39 percent

2000 margin: George Bush, 58 percent; Al Gore, 33 percent

Governor: Democrat Brian Schweitzer

Congressional breakdown: Two Democratic senators; one Republican congressman

NORTH CAROLINA:

Last voted for a Democratic presidential candidate: 1976

Electoral votes: 15

2000 margin: George Bush, 56 percent; Al Gore, 43 percent

Governor: Democrat Mike Easley

Congressional breakdown: Two Republican senators; six Republican congressmen, seven Democratic congressmen

NORTH DAKOTA:

Last voted for a Democratic presidential candidate: 1964

Electoral votes: 3

2004 margin: George Bush, 63 percent; John Kerry, 35 percent

2000 margin: George Bush, 61 percent; Al Gore, 33 percent

Governor: Republican John Hoeven

Congressional breakdown: Two Democratic senators; one Democratic congressman

VIRGINIA:

Last voted for a Democratic presidential candidate: 1964

Electoral votes: 13

2004 margin: George Bush, 54 percent; John Kerry, 45 percent

2000 margin: George Bush, 52 percent; Al Gore, 44 percent

Governor: Democrat Tim Kaine

Congressional breakdown: One Republican senator, One Democratic senator; eight Republican congressmen, three Democratic congressmen.

Intensified attacks by Republican John McCain on the character of his Democratic opponent have coincided with Barack Obama losing a nine percentage point advantage in a national poll, which showed the candidates running dead even over the weekend.

McCain, who had vowed to avoid the kind of negative tactics that were used against him in the 2000 Republican primary contest with George W. Bush, began attacking Obama during the Illinois senator's trip to Iraq and Afghanistan late last month.

In the course of the McCain offensive, Obama's lead in a Gallup Poll tracking survey slid from nine percentage points on July 26, when he returned from overseas, to nothing by Saturday, when the poll showed the candidates tied at 44 percent.

The four-term Arizona senator, who backed the war and claims experience with security and foreign policy issues, charged that Obama's promise to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq within 16 months of taking office amounted to his having chosen to lose a war to promote his run for the presidency.

McCain has not relented even though he took criticism for the remark. It appeared at the time to be a defensive response to the massive attention paid to the Obama visit to the two U.S. war fronts as well as to the Middle East and Europe.

He subsequently ran a television ad that accused Obama of deciding not to visit wounded U.S. troops because he could not take television cameras - a claim that appeared to be false. Next he issued a commercial that interpose images of Obama with pop culture figures Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, trying to paint Obama as a celebrity without the experience to lead the country.

That was followed by accusations that Obama, who would be the first black U.S. president, had resorted to racial politics by asserting McCain and other Republicans would try to frighten Americans because Obama did not look like past U.S. presidents whose images are on the country's paper money.

And most recently, in an Internet advertisement, the voiceover calls Obama "The One" and features Obama appearing to describe himself and his presidential quest in grandiose terms. It ends with Charlton Heston as Moses parting the Red Sea in the movie, "The Ten Commandments."

Obama may have given McCain more fodder in recent days by announcing a readiness to compromise with Republicans on offshore oil drilling - which he had opposed - and apparently rejecting McCain's challenge to join him in a series of town hall meetings.

On Saturday, Obama said McCain's campaign was cynical and trying to distract voters from real issues but that he did not believe his opponent and his campaign had engaged in racism.

"In no way do I think John McCain's campaign was racist. I think they are cynical," Obama said. "Their team is good at creating distractions and engaging in negative attacks."

Paris Hilton's mother doesn't share John McCain's sense of humor.

McCain, the Republican presidential candidate, said last week that his campaign ad mocking Democrat Barack Obama with images of Hilton and singer Britney Spears was part of an attempt to inject humor into the presidential race.

On Sunday, Hilton's mother, Kathy Hilton, a McCain donor, registered her disapproval.

"It is a complete waste of the country's time and attention at the very moment when millions of people are losing their homes and their jobs," Kathy Hilton said in a short article posted on the liberal Huffington Post Web site. "And it is a completely frivolous way to choose the next president of the United States."

The ad plays on Obama's popularity by dismissing him as a mere celebrity, like Hilton and Spears. The Obama campaign has said the ad is proof that McCain would rather launch negative attacks than debate important issues.

McCain on Friday denied that his campaign had taken a negative turn, saying, "We think it's got a lot of humor in it, we're having fun and enjoying it."

Kathy Hilton, however, was unpersuaded, calling the ad "a complete waste of the money John McCain's contributors have donated to his campaign."

Kathy Hilton and her husband donated a total of $4,600 to McCain's campaign earlier this year.

The different paths John McCain and Barack Obama have taken to support expanded offshore drilling for oil demonstrate how each would govern as president, their supporters said Sunday.

McCain surrogates contended on the Sunday news programs that the Arizona Republican's turn toward drilling, which he had once opposed, showed how McCain would respond decisively to a crisis. Obama's supporters argued that his willingness to consider a bipartisan proposal including more drilling showed how the Illinois Democrat would pursue compromise to achieve results.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut independent and ex-Democrat backing McCain, was skeptical of Obama's support of 10 senators, half of them Republicans and half Democrats, promoting compromise legislation including drilling and other energy-related initiatives.

"John McCain sees the crisis," said Lieberman, who also once opposed more offshore drilling.

"Barack Obama says this weekend, 'maybe,' 'eh,' 'and,' 'if,' 'but.' He did not endorse, he did not come out with a strong decision," Lieberman said on "Meet the Press" on NBC. "I predict to you he'll find reasons not to be for it if this comes to a vote in the Senate."

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., appearing with Lieberman, said Obama remains opposed to drilling but is prepared to "break America's gridlock by honoring a bipartisan effort, if that is the only way to move us towards alternative and renewable fuels and an energy policy that's comprehensive."

Both Obama and McCain opposed expanding oil exploration on American coastlines when they were seeking their parties' nominations for president. As oil prices shot upward and gasoline edged toward $4 a gallon, McCain - with the Republican nomination sewn up - announced that he would support drilling because of spiraling energy costs.

Obama said last week that he remained opposed to additional offshore drilling but would consider it as part of a plan promoting fuel-efficient cars and developing alternate energy sources.

Obama's supporters repeated their argument that new offshore oil exploration would take nearly a decade to produce any oil, thus not affecting gasoline prices today. They also said oil companies should first start drilling in the millions of acres for which they already hold leases.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said she would not support a vote on a stand-alone bill for allowing increased offshore drilling, calling it an effort to "to mislead the American people as to thinking it's going to reduce the price at the pump."

"What Sen. Obama said is what we want a president to say," Pelosi said on "This Week" on ABC. "Let's look at all of the options. Let's compare them. And let's see what really does increase our supply, protect our environment, save our economy, protect the consumer, instead of a single-shot thing that does none of the above."

Pelosi suggested that she might be open to a vote on a broader energy bill that includes some offshore drilling in areas now off limits. As far as a vote being scheduled, she said: "Well, maybe it will, as it's part of a larger energy package."

WASHINGTON - Despite all the hyperventilating about whom they're likely to be, vice presidential candidates rarely make much of a difference in the fall elections.

"They can only make a small difference at the margins," said James Riddlesperger, an associate professor of political science at Texas Christian University, in Fort Worth.

They don't get much news coverage after an initial burst when they're selected, and they often lose their own states.

Yet every four years - especially this one, when two people are about to be rocketed into the spotlight - a frenzy of speculation builds about whom it's going to be.

There are reasons for that:

* The choice is the presumptive nominee's first big president-like decision, so it reveals something about the nominee.

* There are potential intangible electoral advantages.

* And it's summer, when speculating about presidential ticket mates becomes a national pastime.

Only twice in recent history, however, did a number-two pick arguably make an obvious difference, in 1960 and 1976.

Democrat Lyndon Johnson, then a Texas senator, "probably delivered the state for (John) Kennedy," Riddlesperger said. Kennedy won the state's 24 electoral votes in 1960 with 50.5 percent of the popular vote.

In 1976, Democrat Walter Mondale, then a veteran U.S. senator, was invaluable to little-known presidential nominee Jimmy Carter, said Joel Goldstein, a vice-presidential expert at St. Louis University.

Mondale's opposite number was Republican Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas, who had a reputation as a slashing critic of his opponents. He burnished that image during his debate with Mondale by railing against "Democrat wars."

The calmer Mondale looked like a statesman, Goldstein recalled, and was dispatched in the campaign's final days to swing states such as Ohio, which the Democrats won by 0.2 percentage point.

"It was as though he was running for an Ohio Senate seat," Goldstein chuckled.

Those elections were the exceptions.

A few controversial modern picks, notably Richard Nixon in 1952, Spiro Agnew in 1968 and Dan Quayle in 1988, wound up on winning Republican tickets.

Nixon saved his place on the 1952 ticket with his emotional "Checkers" speech - invoking his dog to gain sympathy amid an alleged scandal - six weeks before the election. Dwight Eisenhower carried 39 of the 48 states with Nixon aboard.

In 1968, Agnew, then in his second year as the governor of Maryland, was best known for his blunt talk, but presidential nominee Nixon won 32 states and the election with Agnew in tow.

Those examples proved the rule, analysts said, that people vote for presidents, not their running mates.

"We can't find any evidence in our recent polling that the vice president made a significant difference," said Frank Newport, the editor in chief of the Gallup Poll.

If one could have, it would've been Texas Sen. Lloyd Bentsen in 1988. A man of almost regal bearing who'd easily won three Senate terms, he had one of the campaign's best-known moments when he icily told Quayle during their debate, "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy."

But Bentsen and Democratic presidential nominee Michael Dukakis lost Texas by 13 percentage points to George H.W. Bush and Quayle. If there were any doubt that those voters were looking mostly at Dukakis, Bentsen was on that ballot twice and he won re-election to his Senate seat by 19 percentage points.

Bentsen reflected a recent trend. Since 1984, the losing ticket's vice-presidential nominee has carried his home state only twice.

In 1992, Quayle's ticket won Indiana, traditionally a Republican stronghold, while eight years later, Democrat Joseph Lieberman's ticket won Connecticut. But Democrats had counted heavily on Lieberman to help presidential candidate Al Gore carry Florida by virtue of his appeal to Jewish voters, and Florida fell narrowly to the Republican ticket.

A vice-presidential candidate's problems are compounded by invisibility. The two of them usually have only one debate, while presidential candidates typically have two or three. And it's the ticket-toppers who are the subject of commercials and who speak in the biggest venues.

"People ultimately see the promises, and the voice, coming from one person," said Timothy Walch, an Iowa-based author and vice presidential expert.

Still, the veep pick can mean something. Political strategists weigh whether a given candidate could help swing a much-needed state in a close election.

That's why there's talk about whether former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney could help Republicans win Michigan - Romney's father was the governor there in the 1960s - or whether former Democratic Sen. Sam Nunn could help Democrat Barack Obama carry Nunn's home state of Georgia.

More important, the pick offers clues about how prospective presidents make personnel decisions.

"The choice can shape how a presidential nominee is perceived," Goldstein said.

In 1992, Bill Clinton was still introducing himself to a skeptical American public, and his choice of Al Gore "brought value to the ticket," recalled Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., because it reinforced the idea that Democrats had a young, forward-looking team.

Eight years later, George W. Bush's choice of Dick Cheney "signaled what kind of a chief executive officer he was going to be," said Allan Louden, an associate professor of communication at Wake Forest University, in Winston-Salem, N.C., by picking someone with an impressive Washington and business resume.

Chances are, though, that the vice-presidential picks will have no discernible effect on the outcome, so long as the presidential nominees follow a key rule of ticket-making: First, do no harm.

"The choices may not make a difference," Goldstein said, "if they both pick somebody good."

By David Lightman, McClatchy Newspapers, August 1, 2008

KANSAS CITY - A poll completed for two Missouri television stations show John McCain leading in that critical swing state by 49 to 44 percent.

The survey, conducted for KCTV-TV Kansas City and KSDK-TV St. Louis by SurveyUSA, shows McCain leading among men by 12 and Obama leading among women by 3.

Among voters older than McCain, McCain leads by 19 points. Among voters younger than Obama, the contest is tied.

McCain holds 87 percent of Republican voters; Obama holds 83% of Democrats. Independents break 5:3 for McCain.

McCain leads by 28 points in southeastern Missouri, by 23 in southwestern Missouri, and by 21 in the northern portion of the state. Obama leads by 13 in the St. Louis area. The two tie in the Kansas City area.

Missouri is considered a swing state, where Obama is mounting the largest Democratic election effort in years.

Residents of Kansas and Missouri go to the polls Friday to pick party candidates in local elections.

In Missouri, the poll show U.S. Rep. Kenny Hulshof is likely to win the Republican gubernatorial primary and face Democrat Jay Nixon in the fall. The poll showed Nixon is leading in that matchup, 48 to 42 percent, with 9 percent undecided.

In a local district attorney race that has drawn national interest from anti-abortion groups, Phill Kline, who is pressing to prosecute a Planned Parenthood clinic in suburban Kansas City, is trailing badly in the Johnson County, Kansas, district attorney race. The poll there showed Kline's rival, Steve Howe, leadinjg by 52 to 44 percent, with 4 percent undecided.

Kline made prosecuting abortion providers a hallmark of his tenure as Kansas attorney general. He was named to the Johnson County post after he was defeated for re-election in 2006. He's since pressed forward with abortion clinic prosecutions, pushing a case against Planned Parenthoods clinic in OVerland Park, Kansas, a Kansas City suburb.

ORLANDO -- Addressing a mostly black audience one day after his campaign accused Barack Obama of playing the ''race card,'' John McCain took a gentler approach to criticizing his opponent's plans for jump-starting the economy and improving public schools.

The hundreds of activists, politicians and executives at the National Urban League convention gave McCain a standing ovation before his speech and then listened quietly -- a stark contrast with the spirited call-and-response that occurred with earlier speakers.

McCain drew mild applause for touting increased domestic oil production, tax credits to families and bonuses for teachers in troubled schools. A few people in the crowd grumbled when he talked about opposing affirmative action, though McCain added that he would "fight for equal opportunity.''

The latest employment report provided a gloomy backdrop for the organization focused on urban problems such as jobs, housing and education. The unemployment rate rose from 5.4 percent in June to 5.7 percent in July, the highest level in four years.

McCain repeated his call for offshore oil drilling, arguing that lifting the federal ban could ''seriously lower'' gas prices. Obama opposes more drilling, but a new Quinnipiac University poll shows that most Florida voters think it's a good idea.

''We need to drill more, drill now, and pay less at the pump,'' McCain said, eliciting some applause.

McCain also criticized the Illinois senator for opposing the use of taxpayer money for private school vouchers.

''All of that went over well with the teachers union, but where does it leave families and their children who are stuck in failing schools?'' McCain demanded.

McCain faces an uphill battle in the black community as he faces the first African-American presidential nominee. Though a few people at the convention said they were undecided, most said they had already made up their minds to support Obama.

''I am a candidate for president who seeks your vote and hopes to earn it,'' McCain said. "But whether or not I win your support, I need your good will and counsel. And should I succeed, I'll need it all the more.''

McCain skipped candidate forums organized by the Urban League and the NAACP last year.

''I think more of him, just for being here,'' said Thomasina Skipper, who works at State Farm Insurance in Omaha. "Just because he's not my preference doesn't mean I don't respect what he's done.''

When McCain spoke to the NAACP last month, he praised Obama as a ''impressive fellow . . . who has inspired a great many Americans.'' But on Friday he took a shot at his rival early in his speech, saying, "You'll hear from my opponent, Sen. Obama, tomorrow, and if there's one thing he always delivers it's a great speech. But I hope you'll listen carefully, because his ideas are not always as impressive as his rhetoric. ''

The backbiting between the candidates has escalated this week, as McCain began airing another negative ad that derides Obama as a ''celebrity'' like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.

Amid heated debate over the ad, McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis, said Thursday, ''Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck.'' McCain later said the accusation was ''legitimate,'' drawing strong denials from the Obama campaign.

Wilson's comment came in response to remarks Obama made while campaigning in Missouri. He said: 'So nobody really thinks that Bush or McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face, so what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me. `He's not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name. You know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills, you know.' ''

That's stating the obvious, not playing the race card, said several black voters at the Orlando convention.

''Is race a factor in this election? Of course it is,'' said Maurice Wilson, who serves as vice president of the Urban League chapter in San Diego. "I thought McCain's reaction was overreaching and opportunistic.''

Alluding to widely condemned attack ads in the 2004 and 1988 elections, Skipper said: "That's just one step up from Swiftboating. I keep waiting for the Willie Horton shoe to drop.''

But Norvel Bethel, who works at JM Family Enterprises in Deerfield Beach, said both campaigns need to watch their step.

''The candidates should just leave it alone,'' he said. ``It's a divisive tactic on both sides.''

Marc Morial, president of the National Urban League, alluded to the controversy when he said, "I ask you to join with me in understanding that those types of things are diversions and distractions. . . . The issues are serious.''

Friday marked the first day both candidates were in Florida at the same time, and the polls show a dead heat.

Before McCain's speech, Obama hosted a town hall meeting on the economy in St. Petersburg. He's slated to hold another forum Saturday morning in Republican-friendly Brevard County before speaking at the Urban League.

McCain is slated to attend a concert in Panama City with country music star John Rich on Friday evening.

In Florida, Gov. Charlie Crist may be an asset for McCain in the black community. Crist got 18 percent of the black vote in 2006, the best showing by a Republican candidate in decades.

Crist briefly addressed the convention, calling it a ''get-out-the-vote rally regardless of party.'' He added: "Those of us in Florida understand how precious that right is, just like you do. There's an island just 90 miles south of Florida called Cuba where they don't have that right.''

By Beth Reinhard, Miami Herald, August 1, 2008

ORLANDO -- In a sign that the road to the White House runs through Florida, the presidential candidates overlapped in the state Friday for the first time, offering contrasting fixes for the economy while confronting racial issues.

In Orlando, McCain defended his opposition to affirmative action and support for private-school vouchers in front of a mostly black audience at the National Urban League convention.

About 100 miles west, in St. Petersburg, protesters at a racially diverse town-hall meeting held up a banner demanding of Obama, "What about the black community?''

The mild but tense confrontations came one day after McCain's campaign accused Obama, who will be the first black presidential nominee of a major party, of playing the ''race card'' in a comment earlier this week. Neither candidate directly addressed the charge in his public appearance.

McCain, though, told reporters at a Panama City event later Friday that Obama's "comments were clearly with the race card.''

He added: "His campaign retracted those remarks. So let's move on.''

Obama's camp issued no retraction. And though both sides said they wanted to focus on the issues, it might be inevitable that race will permeate a campaign that could put the first black man in the White House.

''This is America. Race is always an issue that people will be preoccupied with,'' said T. Willard Fair, executive director of the Greater Miami Urban League, after listening to McCain's speech in Orlando. "We all still make decisions along racial lines.''

The candidates' presence in Florida comes as the polls show a dead heat in the largest battleground state. In recent weeks, Obama's campaign has been on a hiring spree and unleashed an advertising blitz to make up for his boycott of the state's unsanctioned early primary.

At the Urban League convention, hundreds of activists, politicians and executives gave McCain a standing ovation and then listened quietly -- a stark contrast with the spirited call-and-response that occurred with earlier speakers.

GLOOMY BACKDROP

The latest national unemployment report, which showed another 51,000 jobs were cut last month, provided a gloomy backdrop for a gathering focused on tackling urban problems. Florida is currently leading the nation in job loss. McCain drew a smattering of applause for touting tax credits to families and bonuses for teachers in troubled schools. He met with a much more energetic crowd in Panama City, where country singer John Rich introduced the Arizona senator with a fiddle-heavy tribute song called Raisin' McCain.

In St. Petersburg, Obama also met with an enthusiastic crowd of about 1,500 people crammed into a high-school gym. His economic plan includes tax cuts for middle-class workers and seniors, $1,000 ''energy rebates'' and stimulus packages in states facing budget shortfalls.

McCain faces an uphill battle in the black community, with polls showing Obama as the overwhelming favorite. When McCain spoke to the NAACP last month, he praised Obama as an "impressive fellow . . . who has inspired a great many Americans.''

But on Friday he took a shot at his rival early in his speech, saying, "You'll hear from my opponent, Sen. Obama, tomorrow, and if there's one thing he always delivers it's a great speech. But I hope you'll listen carefully, because his ideas are not always as impressive as his rhetoric. ''

The remark echoed the theme of McCain's latest ads, which mock Obama as a wannabe messianic figure or as an empty-headed ''celebrity'' like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.

''They know their ideas are used up,'' Obama said in St. Petersburg. "That's why they spend all their time talking about me.''

Later, in response to a question from one of the black protesters, Obama talked about his efforts in Illinois and as a senator to stop predatory mortgage lending in the black community.

''On each of these issues I have spoken out,'' he said. "I just may not have spoken out the way you wanted me to speak out.''

The backbiting between the campaigns hit new heights this week when McCain said he agreed with his campaign manager's accusation that Obama was playing the ''race card.'' Obama had said while campaigning in Missouri: 'What they're going to try to do is make you scared of me . . . You know, 'He doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills.' ''

'OVERREACHING'

That's simply stating the obvious, said several black voters at the Orlando convention.

''Is race a factor in this election? Of course it is,'' said Maurice Wilson, who serves as vice president of the Urban League chapter in San Diego.

"I thought McCain's reaction was overreaching and opportunistic.''

But to some white voters in Panama City, Obama's comments smacked of race-baiting.

One McCain supporter, Daniel Hirsh, sported a shirt with a homemade print that implored "Don't Let the USA become an Obama-Nation.''

He said he opposed the Democrat for one major reason: "He's a racist. Just recently, in his last speech, he played the race card.''

Seeking closure of the bitter dispute that rocked Florida's Democratic primary, presumptive nominee Barack Obama asked the national party Sunday to let the state's delegates cast full votes at the convention in Denver.

Practically speaking, whether Florida delegates have full or half votes won't matter because Obama won enough delegates in the primaries to claim the nomination. Still, Democratic leaders welcomed the gesture.

'Today is a proud day for all of us who fought so hard to ensure Floridians' votes are fully counted,'' said Florida Democratic Party Chairwoman Karen Thurman in a statement.

Last year, the DNC ruled that Florida and Michigan could not attend the convention because their early primaries broke party rules. Upon the urging of four states entititled to hold the earliest contests, Obama and other candidates boycotted the two states, shutting Democrats in Florida and Michigan out of a historic primary season.

Shortly before Obama cinched the nomination, the DNC said Florida and Michigan could send delegates to the convention but cast only a half vote.

In a letter to the DNC released Sunday, Obama wrote, "I believe party unity calls for the delegates from Florida and Michigan to be able to participate fully alongside the delegates from the other states and territories.''

The DNC responded that it would consider Obama's request at its Aug. 24 meeting, one day before the convention begins.

Florida Republicans are also seeking full representation when John McCain is nominated. The Republican National Committee said last year that only half of the delegation could attend.

WASHINGTON - Many undecided voters have a common concern when they size up Barack Obama: his inexperience.

"I have nothing against Obama. I just think John McCain has more experience," said Steve Viernacki, an Ashley, Pa., restaurant owner.

Experts say that such worries are overblown.

"Experience matters, but its importance is terribly overstated," said historian Robert Dallek, the author of recent books about Presidents Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon.

Presidents with sterling resumes often have turned out to be busts, usually because they lacked the key quality a good president needs: sound judgment.

"John Quincy Adams understood the world, but he didn't have a political gene in his makeup," Richard Norton Smith, a presidential scholar at George Mason University, in Fairfax, Va., said of the nation's sixth president, who isn't remembered as successful.

Yet presidents with far lesser credentials have triumphed. John F. Kennedy was 43 years old when he took office in 1961, four years younger than Obama. Kennedy's early years were rocky, Dallek said, but "he was a quick learner" and his third and final year as president was masterful.

Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee, has been a U.S. senator for three and a half years, but since the 110th Congress began in January 2007, he's missed about 45 percent of all votes while running for president. He's never chaired a major committee.

McCain, 71, the presumptive Republican nominee, was a member of the House of Representatives from 1983 to 1987, and has been a senator ever since. He's chaired Senate committees and authored several major bills, notably the 2002 campaign-finance overhaul.

Experts agreed that none of these experiences - or a lack of them - is an accurate predictor of either man's likely White House performance.

"The presidency has too many moving pieces. Trying to gauge whether experience matters really eludes measurement," said Carl Pinkele, a presidential expert at Ohio Wesleyan University, in Delaware, Ohio.

Scholars suggest two yardsticks - executive background and foreign policy expertise - but they also find both flawed.

Herbert Hoover was the widely admired U.S. food administrator in World War I, presidential adviser at the Versailles Conference and secretary of commerce in the 1920s.

"Yet his management of the economy was a disaster," Dallek said of Hoover's one-term presidency, which began months before the Great Depression.

Jimmy Carter also brought a management background, taking office in 1977 after one term as the governor of Georgia and more than 20 years running his family business. But "he was then universally criticized for being a micromanager in the White House," said John Baick, an associate professor of history at Western New England College, in Springfield, Mass.

President Bush has a master of business administration degree from Harvard University, served nearly two terms as the governor of Texas and surrounded himself in the White House with experienced advisers. But after seven and a half years in power he holds a dismal public-approval rating rooted largely in the Iraq war and the staggering economy.

Foreign policy also has proved to be an unreliable barometer.

Two presidents regarded as among the nation's weakest - John Quincy Adams and James Buchanan - had extensive diplomatic resumes. Adams held several diplomatic posts, was the secretary of state under President James Monroe and negotiated an end to the War of 1812. But he met difficulty when he tried to improve the economy with a road- and canal-building program and high tariffs, and he was trounced when he sought re-election in 1828.

Buchanan, who served as James Polk's secretary of state in the 1840s, spent the three years before his 1856 election as minister to Great Britain.

Yet "he's quite possibly the worst president in American history, because of his inability to effectively manage Southern secession and the slavery issue," said Chris Dolan, a professor of political science at Lebanon Valley College, in Annville, Pa.

Similarly, Bush's father had been the U.S. envoy to China, United Nations ambassador, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency and vice president for eight years.

But he was seen as an ineffective manager of the nation's economy, and the nation spurned his 1992 re-election bid, giving him the lowest popular-vote total of any incumbent president in 80 years.

What matters more than experience, scholars said, is an ability to hone and trust one's instincts.

"Give me good judgment every time," Dallek said.

Thomas De Luca, a professor of political science at Fordham University, in New York, cited Ronald Reagan as an example.

"Ronald Reagan had no foreign policy experience, but according to Republicans he was one of the most successful foreign-policy presidents ever," De Luca said.

Abraham Lincoln, whom most scholarly surveys rate as the nation's greatest president, had no training to be the commander in chief and almost no Washington experience. He served eight years in the Illinois legislature and two in the U.S. House of Representatives, and had been out of office for nearly 12 years before he won the presidency in 1860 with 39.9 percent of the vote.

South Carolina seceded from the union the month after he was elected. Yet Lincoln is highly regarded not only for keeping the union together through the Civil War, but for "a number of things in his administration that had nothing to do with the war," presidential historian Alvin Felzenberg said. Among them: authorization for building the transcontinental railroad and spurring the growth of public colleges.

Dallek and Smith pointed to Kennedy as a key modern example of a president who came to trust his judgment.

The young president made a series of highly public missteps in his early years in power, notably the April 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion and the May 1961 summit with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, who found Kennedy weak. The Berlin Wall went up three months later, followed by the Soviet effort to build missile bases in Cuba.

Kennedy would rebound, starting with his deft handling of the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962, which defused the most dangerous moment of the Cold War.

Smith also pointed to a two-day period in June 1963 as a key turning point. On June 10, Kennedy announced new talks on a nuclear test-ban treaty and called for an end to the Cold War. He'd sign the ratified pact in October.

On June 11, Kennedy faced a different test, when Alabama Gov. George Wallace stood at the door of the University of Alabama's administration building, barring two black students from registering.

Kennedy federalized the state's National Guard, the students registered and he went on national television to announce that he'd back strong civil rights legislation. That measure became the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, enacted after his assassination.

Kennedy's actions those June days were "the moments he mastered the presidency," Smith said. "He understood then how you take risks and use your political judgment."

Voters, though, don't go to history books to seek guidance on such matters. They go with their guts, and right now, many of them lament Obama's lack of experience.

Joe Lipinski, 82, a carpenter in Mocanaqua, Pa., vividly remembers Kennedy, and for him Obama doesn't compare. "I'm still a Democrat, but I just can't like Obama at this point," he said.

Call it lack of experience, said Theresa Mulaski, a Pittston, Pa., retiree, or call it a question about judgment, but it all comes down to this, she said: "I can't seem to get a grasp on Obama."

CLEVELAND (AP) - Platform writers for Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton worked side-by-side Saturday as the Democratic Party developed a policy statement to promote nominee-in-waiting Obama and keep Clinton backers involved.

The 20-member drafting committee heard Friday and Saturday morning from scores of party regulars, policy experts and hard-luck Americans before beginning a draft of the platform, which goes before the full platform committee Aug. 9 in Pittsburgh.

The committee, meeting through Sunday, reviewed a 44-page document principally written by Karen Kornbluh, who has worked on Obama's Senate staff. She said the draft included Obama and Clinton materials and was meant to highlight renewing core American goals.

Kornbluh said the Clinton materials in the draft include a commitment that "people who do the work in America will never be invisible to the Democratic Party," echoing a common Clinton campaign theme.

The platform also commits the party to addressing the needs of another group often mentioned by Clinton, the "sandwich generation" of working parents who are also caring for aging parents.

"They are working longer hours than ever even as they are asked to meet a new and growing set of caregiving responsibilities," the draft said.

The draft, subject to a number of changes to be offered by members, is to set the tone for the convention and Obama's campaign.

"As we meet, our country is in the sixth year of a two-front war. Our economy is struggling. Our planet is in peril. These challenges, and many others, demand new leadership," the preamble said.

The Clinton and Obama camps seemed eager to deflect any suggestion of rivalry in the platform writing in the lead-up to the convention.

"Senator Clinton has worked to ensure that the Democratic platform will represent the concerns of working families in America today. The collaborative effort between Clinton staff and the Obama campaign has been positive and productive, and we look forward to continuing to review the platform as it develops," the Clinton campaign said in a statement.

Obama campaign spokesman Nick Shapiro said the platform drafting reflected a goal of "uniting in common effort to bring change to America."

Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, who backed Clinton and is a draft committee member, skipped the meeting but sent word that she wanted stronger language on issues of concern to her home state, including job retraining and developing more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Ron His Horse is Thunder, a draft committee member and chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of North and South Dakota, supported former Sen. John Edwards, then Clinton and eventually Obama over the course of the primary campaign.

He said any Obama-Clinton policy differences were small in the context of the general election, and he used the "Invisible Americans" mantra that the Clinton campaign utilized to underscore overlooked working-class people.

"If you want to say 'Invisible Americans,' I think Obama was supportive of issues for the 'invisible Americans,' if you will, from the beginning," he said.

The session was interrupted for a minute by five people chanting "U.S. leadership represents imperialism. Don't attack Iran," reflecting opposition to possible military action to halt Iran's nuclear program. Protesters walked out as they chanted and identified themselves as Revolutionary Communist Party members who don't see a difference between Democratic and Republican policies toward Iran.

Both of the two major political parties produce a platform as a statement of principles each presidential election year.

The Republican platform committee meets in late August to develop a draft to present to the GOP convention beginning Sept. 1 in St. Paul, Minn. The GOP solicited online platform suggestions and video submissions for platform writers.

By THOMAS J. SHEERAN, The Associated Press, August 2, 2008

A s election time approaches in America, Barack Obama's historic candidacy holds much of the world in thrall. Yet there's one significant sector of the US voting public that has so far proved resistant to the Democratic candidate's charms. The great American redneck - that rifle-toting, Bible-thumping, truck-loving caricature devoted to beer and motor sports - has already tripped up Obama once, and he may do it again before November's presidential poll.

So I have driven to Winchester, Virginia, to find out more about a class of voters who ought to be natural supporters of Obama - the would-be champion of the working man - yet who, in recent years, have turned their backs on the Democratic party and voted for George W Bush.

My guide to the mysteries of redneck culture is a shambling, garrulous, bourbon-loving writer named Joe Bageant. Raised in the backwoods of Appalachia, he returned to his roots after a 30-year absence and wrote one of those books that change the way you think of the US and the tarnished American dream. Joe, 61, is the author of Deer Hunting with Jesus, just published in Britain. It's partly a scathing portrait of a small Virginia town divided by money, class and race; mostly it's a lovesick and frequently hilarious rant about the poor, hopeless working-class Americans who "stay dumb and drink beer and vote Republican because no real liberal voice, the kind that speaks the rock-bottom, undeniable truth, ever enters their lives".

Joe has a great deal to say about rednecks, God and guns, and the way that Democratic idols like Obama have failed to connect with what he calls "the white ghetto of the working poor".

First, though, we drive out to that mountain-top honky-tonk known as the Troubadour Park, which is the home of a popular country-music guitarist, Joltin' Jim McCoy. The occasion is Jim Jam 2008, a fundraising benefit to pay for McCoy's bandstand, which was rebuilt this summer after the old one was hit by lightning and burnt to the ground. It's a big outdoor space with lovely views across the West Virginia hills, but the redneck hordes are conspicuously absent when Joe and I arrive. On stage, a trio of cowpoke crooners is singing a song about "your cheatin' heart" to an audience of five. Beside the arena, a couple of sweating barbecue cooks turn the burgers and hot dogs next to an oven shaped like a giant Colt revolver.

A few more people arrive, and most of them seem to have stepped from the pages of Bageant's book. One man is wearing a stars-and-stripes bandanna and has tattooed biceps wider than my thighs. His neck really is bright red from the sun. Someone else sports camouflage deer-hunting overalls. There are several Harley-Davidson T-shirts straining over barrel-shaped bellies. Yet the crowd is embarrassingly sparse, and McCoy, who is in his eighties, hobbles around looking glum. Joe and I talk to his daughter, Judy, and she confirms what we suspect: McCoy is charging an extra $5-a-head entrance fee towards his bandstand fund, which, with the soaring price of petrol, is keeping the redneck hordes away.

"People just don't have the cash to go out right now," Judy says forlornly. Her husband, Tom Shifflett, a retired factory worker, talks about the mortgage crisis and the easy money that flowed as banks abandoned lending caution and grateful West Virginians plunged up to their ears in debt.

"A lot of it is their own fault," Tom says. "They couldn't wait for their new car, their new house, and if you asked them how they would pay for it, they'd say, 'We'll get lots of overtime.' But now there's no more overtime and they can't afford the repayments and they've lost their credit, their cars and a lot of them are losing their homes."

Whoever is to blame for America's mortgage meltdown, it occurred under Republican rule and seems tailor-made to benefit the Democrats this year. Shouldn't all these faltering rednecks, the front line of victims of Wall Street excess, be beating a path to Obama's door? Or is there really so much racism in working-class America that they won't vote for a Democratic would-be saviour just because he is black?

It was during the Democratic primary in Pennsylvania in April that the murky spectres of class and race first rose up to confound Obama as he campaigned against Senator Hillary Clinton. Both candidates were wooing the blue-collar vote that tends to decide the Pennsylvania polls.

Obama went tenpin-bowling in Altoona and later appeared on a farm to feed milk to a calf from a bottle. These were standard ploys for a Harvard-educated, big-city politician anxious to appear a good ol' country boy, yet the opinion polls swerved resolutely in favour of Clinton. At one point Obama ruminated publicly about the difficulties of attracting the working-class whites who had abandoned the Democrats for Bush. He said: "It's not surprising that they get bitter. They cling to guns or religion ... or anti-immigrant sentiment ... as a way to explain their frustrations." He sounded like a Harvard sociologist, and Clinton leapt on the blunder. Obama was an elitist snob, she suggested, out of touch with working-class Americans who "don't cling to religion ... they value their faith. You don't cling to guns, you enjoy hunting or collecting or sport".

Obama duly tumbled to a heavy defeat in Pennsylvania, although the setback proved only temporary. Yet the issue is certain to return as he faces John McCain in the autumn, and it's clear that Obama aides are still searching for the right tone of voice for a black intellectual candidate to use when addressing a dim-witted redneck. They even called Bageant for help.

Driving back from the McCoys, Joe tells me to turn right into the West Virginia woods. At the end of a dirt track sits a small log cabin. It's where Bageant grew up. "I remember getting up, milking the cows, walking four miles to get the school bus, walking four miles back in the evening, and milking the cows again before bed," he said. "My neck is as red as anybody's ever was."

Yet he may be the only redneck ever who talks about Gramsci's organic intellect and quotes Jean-Paul Sartre and William Burroughs. "I discovered the French existentialists aged 12," he says. He blames a "drunken railroad engineer" who lived down the road for reading to him from a book about spaceships, sparking an imagination that would soar beyond the boundaries of West Virginia, one of America's poorest and most neglected states. He felt the first shock of his hillbilly roots when his father moved across the state border to Virginia in search of work, and at his new school in Winchester he was put in a class for the handicapped and other slow learners. "It was just because we were from West Virginia," he explains. "They called it the dumbbell class."

His father was a Christian fundamentalist; his mother came from a family of Pentecostal preachers who cast out demons and spoke in tongues. His brother became a Baptist pastor; his sister is a fervent evangelical. Bageant resisted God's orders, and years later he burst into tears when he saw the Piazza San Marco in Venice. "With all that fundamentalism around me as a child, I'd had to live in my head a lot. I thought places like Venice only existed in my head."

The moment he was old enough to join the US navy, he fled. He trained in Philadelphia, where the navy taught him hydraulics, and he discovered coffee shops and folk singers who were nothing like the country-and-western crooners back home - mainly because they were black. There was a war in Vietnam, and in his time off he mingled with members of the peace movement. "All of a sudden there were people I could talk to about Rimbaud," he says.

Returning to Virginia after his navy service, he read about hippies and the beat generation and knew he wanted to join them. He packed up a battered Volkswagen minibus and headed for Colorado, where Burroughs, Ken Kesey, Jack Kerouac, Hunter S Thompson and other literary icons were holed up in a Rocky Mountain hotel. "I was a redneck kid just out of the navy, but I'd been a reader all my life." By the time he went home three decades later, he had consumed a boatload of LSD and "sold more cocaine to Hunter Thompson than I ever want to think about", married twice, produced a couple of kids, and found a respectable job with a farming-magazine group in Oregon.

In his fifties he decided to return to Winchester "to settle some scores with the bigoted, murderous, redneck town I grew up in. I love 'em but they need a good ass-kicking".

He quickly discovered to his horror that his old friends were now all voting for Bush. Joe raged against the invasion of Iraq, but his friends, who were "dumber than owl shit", thought Saddam deserved to be nuked. After a few years of impotent fuming at monstrous Republican governance, he started work on his book.

The most striking achievement of Deer Hunting with Jesus - and the quality that earned him the most credit from American reviewers - is that he somehow channels his raucous fury into a poignant and profoundly sympathetic account of the cradle-to-grave miseries that befall the poor white townsfolk of Winchester.

Bageant's chapters on hunting, and on his tortured dealings with his fundamentalist family, ought to be required reading for Obama, who still appears badly confused about the role of God and guns in the lives of American workers.

"For millions of families in my class," writes Joe, "the first question asked after the death of a father is, 'Who gets Daddy's guns?' "

Although Bageant gave up hunting years ago, he hasn't lost his love of weaponry or his memories of a decent kill. "The crack of a distant rifle or the wild-meat smell of a deer hanging under a porch lightbulb on a snowy night still bewitches me with the same mountain-folk animism it did when I was a boy," he writes.

Bageant pinpoints the left-wing campaign against gun ownership as the tremor that helped spark the political landslide that turned the South against the Democrats. He says: "When the left began to demonise gun owners in the 1960s, they not only were arrogant and insulting because they associated all gun owners with criminals, but they also were politically stupid." By lumping hunting rifles in with handguns as a perceived threat to society, the anti-gun lobby alienated millions of law-abiding folk.

In Winchester, the handguns that feature in big-city crime are referred to as "pussy pistols", and no self-respecting redneck would use one to aim at anything bigger than a goose. Bolt-action rifles are their weapons of choice, preferably with adjustable triggers and detachable box magazines. Many rednecks now view all Democrats - whatever their race or religion - as a potential threat to their guns, and when Obama attributed their animosity to "bitterness", it was another slap in the face for a culture he had manifestly failed to understand.

At first glance, Winchester is a charming enough southern town, with some handsome 19th-century architecture, plenty of trees and a main street full of cute boutiques popular with weekend visitors from Washington, 60 miles to the east. Yet the Winchester described by Bageant is very different: it's a working-class town that is "solidly fundamentalist and neoconservative ... where nearly everyone over 50 has serious health problems and poor credit."

The three preferred avenues of local escape are "alcohol, Jesus and overeating", says Joe. In his book he writes: "These days the neighborhood looks as if it was painted by Edward Hopper, then bleakly populated with gangstas, old men with 40oz malt-liquor bottles, hard-working single moms, and kids on cheap, busted tricycles."

It's also a place of very strange churches. At one point we pass a shop front that declares itself to be the "Faith in Christ church bookstore". It is closed, but a hidden loudspeaker is blaring the scriptures to any passers-by. Joe explains that it's a creationist operation that denies evolution. Further along is the Church of Another Chance. It's not a church in any traditional sense: it's just a room above an empty shop, home to one of many tiny, nondenominational congregations that have mushroomed across the US as believers abandon orthodox worship in favour of a more direct path to God. America is becoming a "collection of weird cults and sects", says Joe.

Bageant knows a lot about sects. His brother preaches at the Shenandoah Bible Baptist Church. "He tells me things like, 'I helped cast out a demon the other day, Joey.' I wish you could have been there." Brother Mike makes the average Washington hawk sound like a sparrow. Mike wants a nuclear war in Israel. This will duly trigger the Armageddon foretold by the Bible, and will lead in turn to the Rapture - the moment when evangelical Christians believe that true followers of Jesus will be called to heaven while the rest of us burn.

There was a seven-year period in Joe's life when he was completely estranged from his family. He remembers returning at one point to see his father, who rose out of his chair and yelled at his Marxist son: "You're going straight to hell!" Later they made a kind of peace, but Bageant senior believed in the Rapture until the day he died. "The last time I saw him alive we talked about it," says Joe. "He asked me, 'Will you be saved? Will you join me on Canaan's shore?' I feigned belief to give a dying man solace."

In this unconscionable world of biblical diktat, there's no place for earthly politics. Obama doesn't stand a chance with the conservative fundamentalists, but neither does John McCain, a mostly secular Republican. The evangelicals turned out for Bush in 2000 and 2004 because he knew how to talk a good gospel; the best Obama can hope for this year is that the right-wing Christians don't bother to vote.

Back at Joe's house, his friend Mike March drops by. March is a bright southerner who used to install security systems in US embassies and then became a loan officer at a co-operative bank. He had a front-row seat for the American debt crisis. Early in his book, Joe tackles the cheap-mortgage racket and the redneck housing crisis. It's a stunningly prescient chapter, written long before the wheels came off the US property boom. It's not just that Bageant saw the crash coming; it's that low-level bank clerks like March realised years ago that by handing out loans to working-class stiffs who were never going to be able to repay them, the American banking system was irredeemably doomed to choking on its get-rich-quick creed.

"Our average customer wanted to be the middle-class person they see on television," says March. "Every day we saw folk who were simply trying to get what Madison Avenue [the centre of the US advertising industry] says they should have: the new car, and the new house with the wide-screen TV. And they were willing to pay all of their income to get it."

March recalls driving past a competitor's billboard that read: "We finance anyone. That means you." What that really meant, he says, was that anyone could get a mortgage, no matter how fragile their income or mountainous their other debts. If March didn't make loans to families who couldn't afford them, he knew they would just find the money elsewhere. "In those days I could have got a ham sandwich a mortgage," he says.

Millions of working-class Americans went on a spree based on inflated property values that quickly took a dive. Construction dried up, throwing many out of work. The US mortgage crisis has had an impact all over the world. Isn't this an issue Obama should be able to exploit?

One afternoon, Joe walks me down to the Royal Lunch diner, a shabby hangout close to the railway tracks that neatly separate polite, middle-class, downtown Winchester from the untidy black neighbourhood up the road. It was from the customers of Royal Lunch that Bageant gathered much of the homespun wisdom that fills his book. The diner is a cramped but cheerful place where several of the customers are wider than their tables and a sign above the counter announces: "Will trade coffee for gossip."

The gossip that day concerns Jim Sylvester, owner of the Stonewall bar across the road, who has apparently been booked for assault. Joe suggests we check out the other local, so we cross the road and enter a gloomy bar where a couple of drunks are staring grimly into the middle distance. Joe notices that the shuffleboard table has gone. "They moved it so there would be more room to fight," says one of the drunks. These are bad times for the rednecks, yet all they do is drink and fight. "In years past there might have been an armed rebellion against oppression," the ageing leftie says. "Now they just seem to take it on the chin."

We end up in John Hayes's cigar store, a comfortable smokers' emporium. There are half a dozen men and one young woman chatting casually about local politics. It seems a good place to talk about Obama. Joe is happy because one of the men turns out to be a visiting trade unionist from Pennsylvania. "In Winchester it's like meeting an endangered dodo bird," he says. The two fall into animated conversation about anti-union companies, the threat of factory closure and the transfer of production to Malaysia.

I chat to Aritha Crandall, 26, the daughter of a local psychologist, who has completed her political-science degree but now can't find a job and isn't convinced that Obama - or McCain - will be able to help her. Then in comes Gary Randall, a retired engineer. He also happens to be black, the only African-American in the room. He settles into an armchair and lights his cigar. Randall turns out to be a character. Born on a farm in southern Virginia, he somehow developed a skill for mathematics. He became only the second black to attend Brooklyn Tech, an elite school in New York. He trained as an engineer and became a successful troubleshooter for AT&T, the telephone conglomerate. He retired with enough money to play any golf course he likes. Is he going to vote for Obama?

"I liked Hillary," he replies. "I thought her husband did a really good job politically." He won't make up his mind about Obama or McCain until after he has watched the televised presidential debates. "I don't vote party or colour or any of that stuff," he says. "I vote for the person who will do best for us. It could be Obama, but right now I don't know." This was a refrain I heard time and again from both blacks and whites in Winchester. Notably absent from my conversations was the remotest hint of racism. Not a single person told me they wouldn't vote for Obama just because he was black.

Perhaps they just didn't want to admit it to a journalist (although some of them made no secret of their rabid anti-immigrant views). But race is a funny subject out here in the American boondocks. "The best-kept redneck secret is we all have black members of the family," says Joe.

At the mountain honky-tonk, I met Norman Mann, a comparatively prosperous local realtor who, like Randall, doesn't vote along party lines. "Whoever wants lower taxes is who I vote for," he says. He supported Ronald Reagan and Bush, but what he really likes is "a conservative Democrat - but that's hard to find today".

Mike March believes some people will vote for Obama because they like the idea of making history with an African-American president; and others will reject him because, secretly, they don't want a black. "Those kind of votes will cancel each other out. What decides it is the 10-15% in the middle who are actually paying attention."

At the Colonial Garage at the edge of town, we talk to Marty Gavis, a veteran redneck who made a fortune from his tow-truck business. "I don't think it matters who becomes president," he says. "One man can't stop what's happened." He is contemptuous of McCain, who "can't keep the same chain of thought from the beginning of a speech to the end", especially when it comes to the economy, which is all Gavis cares about. Yet he hasn't heard anything from Obama that makes him want to vote Democrat either. Everyone has seen the enthusiasm Obama arouses as he campaigns across the rest of the US. But there's not much sign of it in Winchester.

That evening, Joe brings out the bourbon and we talk late into the night about Obama and his problems with rednecks. "It's not so much that we cling to guns and religion, but guns and religion cling to us as a matter of culture," he says. "They are just embedded in our lives."

Are rednecks really bitter, as Obama suggests? Joe pauses. "You're goddamned right we're bitter," he says fiercely. But then he softens. "It's a kind of inchoate anger that nobody knows what to do with. Nobody knows its name or face." He thinks Obama is full of "liberal bullshit", which will hurt him in redneck country far more than his race. Part of the reason rednecks voted for Bush was "he looks as dumb as we feel ... When you see a president who looks aw-shucksy about everything, you kinda like that around here."

Obama is not exactly an aw-shucks kind of guy, and while his huge popularity in the cities might sweep him to ultimate victory, his remoteness from the poor white experience may yet turn out to be costly. "What the Democrats have done is lose contact with the people," says Joe morosely. "The Republicans didn't do that."

The next morning his spirits have recovered. He tosses some bacon into a frying pan. "I have proof there's a merciful God in heaven," he says. "I didn't get the hangover I so richly deserved."

The Sunday Times, August 3, 2008

Toni Alves, a Clinton advocate, said she attended a Clinton fundraiser Thursday in Palo Alto, Calif., where the senator indicated she thought her nomination would be good for party unity. Alves told CQ Politics that Clinton said she wanted her supporters to have their voices heard and her delegates to have the chance to vote for her at the convention.

Some Democratic activists are moving ahead with plans to finish gathering delegate signatures for a nominating petition for Clinton. Will Bower, co-founder of the pro-Clinton group PUMA ("Party Unity My Ass"), said the organization has 200 of the 300 delegate signatures necessary to qualify Clinton for the ballot. Party rules stipulate that Clinton would have to sign off on her own nomination.

Bower said the Daily News report was an attempt by the media to quash the petition drive. "It's not true. She wants her name to be placed in nomination but she can't actively ask for delegates to do it because she has suspended her campaign and that would be campaigning. But we can make sure the petition is in place for her to sign if and when she needs to or wants to at the convention," he said.

Bower also said PUMA is holding a closed conference Aug. 8-10 in Washington during which activists will meet to coordinate their strategy for the Democratic National Convention and also to try to secure the final 100 signatures necessary to get Clinton nominated.

Heidi Li Feldman, a Georgetown University law professor, co-founded The Denver Group to push a roll call vote on Clinton's nomination. She says Clinton is in a tenuous political situation, caught between her desire not to undermine Obama's candidacy or Democratic efforts to win the White House, and giving voice to her supporters and delegates.

The Democratic National Committee and Democratic leadership "has chilled her speech," Feldman claims. She charges that the Democratic Party leadership spent the entire primary season telling Clinton to get out of the race, "so she has every reason to believe that they'll start beating that drum again" if she makes any sort of public statement.

Feldman added that she would continue raising money to help Clinton's nomination "unless and until she says 'I am releasing my delegates.'"

"It's divisive, negative, shameful and wrong," huffed Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager.

What had Obama done? Had he called McCain a racist? Had he demanded reparations for slavery? Had he pointed out the Republican Party's failure to attract large numbers of black and Latino voters?

Nope. Obama had just stated the painfully obvious. Chiding McCain for his below-the-belt attacks, Obama told a Missouri audience that his opponent would try to make him seem too risky a choice, too big a change.

"So nobody really thinks that Bush and McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face. So what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me," he said.

Continuing with a parody of McCain's attacks, Obama said, "You know, he's (Obama) not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name. You know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills. He's risky. That's essentially the argument they're making."

What's wrong with that? Forgive me for pointing this out to the historically challenged, but that is verifiably true. Obama, born to a father from Kenya and a mother from Kansas, doesn't look like George Washington or Ben Franklin or Abraham Lincoln. Indeed, race (Obama's, that is) is a central fact of this campaign, and it's absurd to pretend otherwise.

If Obama were to be elected, he'd become the first black president in this nation's history, a mere half-century after black Americans were beaten and bombed and fire-hosed for attempting to secure the franchise or sit in the front of the bus. While the country has made enormous, perhaps miraculous, racial progress over those intervening years -- enough that a black man can be considered a true contender for the presidency -- it would be foolish to pretend that racial considerations have disappeared from American public life. (Nor have considerations of religion or gender disappeared, for that matter.)

I know, I know. Some of you are furious that I've brought this up. I'll be inundated with e-mails and letters from some of you denouncing me for "playing the race card." You'll insist race and its implications are all I ever discuss. Not true, not even close. (I know because I've counted.) Some of you will claim that racism remains alive and well because I and my fellow race-card-playing pundits won't let it go.

Somehow, I doubt it's as simple a matter as that. Many psychologists believe that recognition of "the other" -- those with obvious differences in skin color or hair texture or language -- is deeply embedded in human beings, a primal instinct. Most of us take race and gender and other superficial distinctions into account subconsciously, without being aware of it. That doesn't make us racist. It merely makes us human.

Is McCain playing the race card? He doesn't have to. Instead, he's trying to take advantage of Obama's "otherness" by portraying him as somehow un-American -- tropes that ride on the shoulders of assumptions derived from Obama's status as a racial minority.

(As for charges that Obama lacks the common touch, a newspaper executive I know recently noted that "we've made progress when the worst thing you can say about a black man is that he's elitist." He had a point.)

Obama's race does not doom his candidacy, of course. Some analysts have argued, persuasively, that his biography helps him significantly in some quarters. Certainly, his message of "change" is aided by his relative youth, his freshness on the American scene and the historical significance of his candidacy. On the other hand, those very factors will undoubtedly turn off certain segments of voters.

But whether Obama's race helps him, hurts him or ends up a wash in a close election, it's a factor in this presidential season. He doesn't look like those other guys on the currency. (Neither would Hillary Clinton have looked like them.) Let's acknowledge that and move on to the mortgage crisis and oil prices.

By Cynthia Tucher, Yahoo News, August 2, 2008

Barack Obama's presidential campaign has rested on two very different sources of financial support. The first has been well documented: the million or so small donors who gave less than £100 each, largely through Obama's peerless website and social networking efforts.

The second is less well known, but far more significant in terms of his future administration. These are the financiers, entrepreneurs and venture capitalists who perceive in him not only a likely winner, from an investment perspective, but also a man whose rise and ideology-lite politics closely mirror their own. They include men like Ken Griffin, the baby-faced, 40-year-old billionaire who runs Citadel Investment Group, one of the largest hedge funds in the US.

Griffin is one of those profiting from America's financial ailments by buying up distressed debt - of which there is a great deal at the moment. But he is also a fierce critic of traditional Wall Street, accusing it of "dropping the ball" and causing a mess that is rebounding on all of America. He should be an ideal candidate for an Obama-era Treasury secretary.

In California, Obama has the support of Tim Draper, one of the most colourful venture capitalists in Silicon Valley, who made his fortune from products such as Hotmail and Skype. Until this election, Draper was a Republican. Not any more. And Obama also has the backing of the Valley's most successful venture capitalist, John Doerr of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, who made his billions from Amazon, Sun Microsystems and Google.

Doerr's business partner is Al Gore and the two invest heavily in green tech - not for crunchy, ideological reasons but, as Doerr puts it, because "we are raging capitalists".

The younger generation of entrepreneurs are climbing aboard, too. One of the key members of Obama's team is Chris Hughes, a 24-year-old who co-founded Facebook and stands to make tens of millions when the company goes public. He has put Obama's campaign on the cutting edge of online social networks, organisation and fundraising. One of the common threads between these men - Griffin, Draper, Doerr and Hughes - is that, like Obama, they all attended Harvard. Not so long ago, wealthy liberals stuck to their enclaves in Beverly Hills and Manhattan.

But now it seems that Obama has tapped into something quite new: a younger generation of the insanely rich and highly networked, whose wealth is not turning them into conservatives. The old maxim that if a man is not a socialist by 20, he has no heart, and if he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain, seems not to apply to those who have achieved lottery-winner wealth by their mid-thirties.

From observing them at close range during my time at Harvard Business School between 2004 and 2006, I can say that their political views are not framed by years of financial struggle but by the extraordinary privilege and opportunity granted them by sudden riches.

They have not built wealth, dollar by hard-earned dollar, but - as a result of the internet and financial boom - they have seen it rain down on them. The truth is that this new, young financial elite didn't talk about politics much and when they did, it was largely in an opportunistic way.

Political discussions were almost taboo on campus. It was through business, and perhaps by bringing business practices to foundations and political organisations, that students discovered politics. I remember running into a friend who had worked for a US senator early in her career and asking if she would be watching the results of the 2004 presidential election. No, she said. They were immaterial to her life.

Despite this general apathy, there was a surprising number of members of the business school's Democratic Club who piled out in force to hear Warren Buffett, the great investor, give a talk.

Buffett argued that the case for being a Democrat came down to what he called the "ovarian lottery". He asked the audience to imagine that they were just about to be born and to think about how they would arrange the world if it could be however they liked.

His only caveat was that they weren't to know where, or in what condition, they would be born. What if you were to be born disabled in Darfur - how would you want the world organised? Republicans, he said, arranged the world for themselves. His argument was that being a Democrat was about social justice and fairness. The key to Obama's popularity among the financial and technological elite may be their age.

Perhaps at no time in US history has there existed such a rich, young, self-made elite. They don't see themselves reflected in John McCain and his old-school, war-hero values but they recognise a lot of themselves in the globetrotting, BlackBerry-addicted, basketball-playing Obama.

They see a man who has risen almost noiselessly through the political ranks, smooth and unaffiliated, with a powerful educational background (Harvard Law School) and stellar network of friends.

In that sense, his is the perfect contemporary career, which is based not on joining a big firm and scrambling your way up but rather on developing a network of contacts, building a personal brand and exploiting them to your own advantage - regardless of any assumed rules of conduct. In this new elite, you do not wait for permission to start your hedge fund or technology firm, you do it - just as Obama didn't defer to Hillary Clinton's assumption that the Democratic nomination was hers by seniority.

The ideal nursery for a great American career these days seems to be the Harvard dormitory room.

It was here that Griffin began trading bonds as an undergraduate. And here that Facebook was founded just a few years ago. And, of course, it was at Harvard Law School that Obama first put himself on the map as a star student.

What They Teach You at Harvard Business School: My Two Years Inside the Cauldron of Capitalism , by Philip Delves Broughton, is published by Viking on Thursday

By Ellis Henican, Newsday, August 3, 2008

"I think it's fair to say that if you look at recent history, I have moved more quickly and done more on behalf of my opponent than comparable candidates have," Clinton said at a fundraiser videotaped in Los Altos, California.

"A lot of people held out until the convention, kept their delegates, and often waged platform or rules or credential fights," the New York Democrat said at the event, held to help her retire debt from her primary campaign. "I have made it very clear that I'm supporting Sen. Obama, and that we're working cooperatively on a lot of different matters."

Clinton said her camp is talking with Obama's campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) on plans for the convention. She said no decisions have been made on whether her name will be listed on the official nominating ballot.

"We're trying to work that out with the Obama campaign and the DNC," Clinton stated.

The former first lady repeatedly said it was important for the Democratic Party to unify behind Obama at the convention. At the same time, she stressed to her supporters, who are petitioning for her name to be on the ballot, that their voice should be heard.

"What we want to have happen is for Sen. Obama to be nominated by a unified convention of Democrats," she said. "But the best way to do that is to have a strategy, so that my delegates feel like they've had a role, and that their legitimacy has been validated."

She said giving a moment of "catharsis" to her supporters at the convention could only help the party.

"I happen to believe that we will come out stronger if people feel that their voices were heard," she added.

It is uncharted territory for the most successful Democratic politician of his generation, and part of the reason he was in Kigali on Saturday, the latest stop in a grueling journey across Africa to visit some of the places where his charitable foundation has been active -- and in the process re-establish his role as a global elder statesman. At the same time, Clinton began, slowly, to discuss the bruising Democratic primary season that ended two months earlier.

In his first extended interview since his wife exited the campaign in defeat, Clinton said he was glad to be back doing international foundation work. "This is my life now, and I was eager to get back to it, and I couldn't be happier," Clinton said in a hotel suite, with three aides looking on.

Clinton volunteered very little praise of Obama, beyond describing him as "smart" and "a good politician" when asked about him toward the end of the interview. He did, however, muse at length about the role that race could play in the general election -- the issue that some of his former black allies angrily accused him of introducing in the Democratic primaries -- as a factor, if not a decisive one.

Clinton appeared at ease, in a yellow button-down shirt and green khakis, an unlighted cigar in his hand, after a long day in which he had visited a remote town in eastern Rwanda to meet with local farmers growing cassava, a sturdy root plant, with assistance from his foundation.

He worked his way up into a village on foot, meeting a 14-year-old boy with AIDS who is receiving care from a local health provider allied with the Clinton health initiative. Then, after having lunch with Rwandan President Paul Kagame, he took a helicopter to just south of the Ugandan border to break ground on a new, advanced hospital -- digging a shovel into the ground and declaring the space as one that "symbolizes health and hope and peace and unity."

He was, along the way, classic Clinton: nodding attentively as villagers described the impact his nonprofits are having, interrogating participants about what they needed, showing off his range of expertise on topics including gorilla preservation and pediatric AIDS care.

Former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack, who with his wife, Christie, accompanied Clinton on the trip, pointed to the stops as part of the way the former president is still helping set an example without making policy outright.

"The lesson here is that this is what foreign policy ought to be about," Vilsack said.

Yet the sight of the Vilsacks trekking down a dusty road in rural Rwanda with Clinton -- with Terry McAuliffe, the ubiquitous Clinton cheerleader and former Democratic National Committee chairman, bounding along close behind -- offered a snapshot of how remote the former president's orbit has become. Vilsack was one of Hillary Clinton's most dogged backers after his own presidential bid faltered, and he remains a Clinton ally now, when it is less fashionable.

Perhaps mindful of the way former vice president Al Gore reversed his downward trajectory after losing in 2000, Clinton has brought along a documentary film crew, sponsored by his Hollywood friend Steve Bing, to chronicle his trip. And two months after his last campaign appearance for his wife, on the eve of the South Dakota primary, Clinton started to talk again to reporters, a species he came to especially resent during the course of the campaign after what he and aides felt was a raft of unfair coverage.

Clinton said that even if Obama wins, people who voted for him will still have immense work to do.

"What we Democrats can't afford to do, even as we support Senator Obama, is try to build one America on the cheap," Clinton said, explaining that people could not tell themselves, " 'I voted across the racial divide; I have no obligations to do something in my community or around the world.' In other words, if he wins . . . we've still got a lot of problems. We've got to heave-to here. We've got to show up."

Obama might be helped, Clinton said, "in some debate when he can say, 'You know, a captain I met in Iraq said this to me,' or, 'I observed this in Afghanistan' -- and I don't mean in a phony, showy way. I mean you want your president to have a feel for this. . . . It's like everything else. You just learn it. You absorb it, so every time you do it, your comfort level goes up."

Clinton said it is an open question whether Obama's big events overseas ultimately helped or hurt politically. But, he said: "He should not be either discouraged or encouraged by the reaction of that trip. He should internalize it. It should be a thing that had merit for him in and of itself. And the fact that it had very little political impact in the short run should be of no concern to anybody. Most voters don't have the space for it right now."

Still, there is a new world order for Clinton, even half a planet away. His trip has drawn large crowds in the places he has gone but has been little more than a blip on the global radar screen, low-key compared with what a Clinton international visit once was and almost invisible compared with the journey Obama made just a week earlier.

Even in Africa, the continent to which Clinton has devoted so much energy, the enthrallment with Obama, the son of an African father, is evident: Before dawn Saturday at the Kigali airport, where Clinton was to arrive to take a helicopter ride out into the country, workers gathered around a television to watch a story about Obama, who was thousands of miles away. At a hotel later, local workers asked reporters if they knew Obama. An African guest wore an "Obama '08" T-shirt.

Clinton is on a characteristically whirlwind journey: After starting out in Ethiopia, he flew to Rwanda on Friday. He travels to Liberia and Senegal on Sunday, making announcements on work his foundation has done on malaria drug price reductions and HIV, and then, without even an overnight stop, he will travel back across time zones to Mexico City to deliver the keynote address at an international AIDS conference on Monday.

His daughter, Chelsea, who took a leave of absence from her job to campaign for her mother, joined her father at every stop, asking questions of local officials and posing for photographs.

And McAuliffe, the over-the-top advocate who introduced Hillary Clinton as "the next president of the United States" on June 3, the night she effectively lost the nomination, brought his exuberance to the small villages along the route as if it were a campaign trail.

As Clinton strolled through a rural town Saturday morning, McAuliffe, running ahead, spotted a group of young children and local villagers waiting to meet the former president. He ran up with his arms outstretched. "How we all doing? Good?" McAuliffe shouted at the bewildered crowd. He waved the Vilsacks over and ordered up a photograph of the moment, and soon the entourage was on to the next stop.

It is a truth universally acknowledged that Barack Obama must continue to grovel to Hillary Clinton's dead-enders, some of whom mutter darkly that they will not only not vote for him, they will never vote for a man again.

Obama met for an hour Tuesday with three dozen top Hillaryites at a hotel here, seeking their endorsement and beguiling their begrudging. He opened the session by saying that he knew there had been frustration about what they saw as sexism during the primary.

The Los Angeles Times reported that Hillary die-hards want to enshrine a whine in the Democratic platform about how the primaries "exposed pervasive gender bias in the media" and call on party leaders to take "immediate and public steps" to denounce any perceived bias in the future. That is one nutty idea.

Perhaps it is because feminists are still so busy cataloging past slights to Hillary that they have failed to mount a vivid defense of Michelle Obama, who has taken over from Hillary as the one conservatives like to paint as a harridan.

Before the Obama campaign even had a chance to denounce Ludacris, one of the rappers on the senator's iPod, Hillary Inc. started to mobilize. Susie Tompkins Buell, a former Clinton bundler, told The New York Observer that Obama had to distance himself, given Ludacris's new song rooting for Obama to "paint the White House black" and calling Hillary the b-word.

Despite Obama's wooing, some women aren't warming. As Carol Marin wrote in The Chicago Sun-Times, The Lanky One is like an Alice Waters organic chicken - "sleek, elegant, beautifully prepared. Too cool" - when what many working-class women are craving is mac and cheese.

In The Wall Street Journal, Amy Chozick wrote that Hillary supporters - who loved their heroine's admission that she was on Weight Watchers - were put off by Obama's svelte, zero-body-fat figure.

"He needs to put some meat on his bones," said Diana Koenig, a 42-year-old Texas housewife. Another Clinton voter sniffed on a Yahoo message board: "I won't vote for any beanpole guy."

The odd thing is that Obama bears a distinct resemblance to the most cherished hero in chick-lit history. The senator is a modern incarnation of the clever, haughty, reserved and fastidious Mr. Darcy.

Like the leading man of Jane Austen and Bridget Jones, Obama can, as Austen wrote, draw "the attention of the room by his fine, tall person, handsome features, noble mien. ...he was looked at with great admiration for about half the evening, till his manners gave a disgust which turned the tide of his popularity; for he was discovered to be proud, to be above his company, and above being pleased."

The master of Pemberley "had yet to learn to be laught at," and this sometimes caused "a deeper shade of hauteur" to "overspread his features."

The New Hampshire debate incident in which Obama condescendingly said, "You're likable enough, Hillary," was reminiscent of that early scene in "Pride and Prejudice" when Darcy coldly refuses to dance with Elizabeth Bennet, noting, "She is tolerable; but not handsome enough to tempt me."

Indeed, when Obama left a prayer to the Lord at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, a note that was snatched out and published, part of his plea was to "help me guard against pride."

If Obama is Mr. Darcy, with "his pride, his abominable pride," then America is Elizabeth Bennet, spirited, playful, democratic, financially strained, and caught up in certain prejudices. (McCain must be cast as Wickham, the rival for Elizabeth's affections, the engaging military scamp who casts false aspersions on Darcy's character.)

In this political version of "Pride and Prejudice," the prejudice is racial, with only 31 percent of white voters telling The New York Times in a survey that they had a favorable opinion of Obama, compared with 83 percent of blacks.

And the prejudice is visceral: many Americans, especially blue collar, still feel uneasy about the Senate's exotic shooting star, and he is surrounded by a miasma of ill-founded and mistaken premises.

So the novelistic tension of the 2008 race is this: Can Obama overcome his pride and Hyde Park hauteur and win America over?

Can America overcome its prejudice to elect the first black president? And can it move past its biases to figure out if Obama's supposed conceit is really just the protective shield and defense mechanism of someone who grew up half white and half black, a perpetual outsider whose father deserted him and whose mother, while loving, sometimes did so as well?

Can Miss Bennet teach Mr. Darcy to let down his guard, be more sportive, and laugh at himself?

By Maureen Dowd, The New York Times, August 3, 2008

RICHMOND, Va. - John McCain's campaign has asked Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor for personal documents as the Republican presidential candidate steps up his search for a running mate, according to The Associated Press.

Cantor, 45, chief deputy minority whip in the House, has been mentioned among several Republicans as a possible running mate for McCain. A Republican who declined to be identified said Cantor has been asked to submit documents but did not know what records were sought.

Cantor through a spokesman declined to comment. A McCain spokesman also had no comment.

Cantor has strong support among the party's conservatives, perhaps comforting a segment of the GOP base that has been reluctant to embrace McCain, who has often been at odds with members of his party on several issues, including a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and federal funds for embryonic stem-cell research.

Cantor also is Jewish and is among Israel's most avid congressional supporters. His addition to the ticket could help the GOP win over Jewish votes.

Obama campaign agrees to debates

ORLANDO, Fla. - Barack Obama's campaign Saturday accepted an invitation for three presidential debates and one vice-presidential debate as proposed by the Commission on Presidential Debates, leaving in doubt a series of town-hall style events proposed by Republican John McCain.

Although not ruling out a Lincoln-Douglas-style debate, Obama aides said this year's lengthy primary season and the McCain campaign's rejection of the Obama proposal led them to move toward the more limited proposal suggested by the national debate commission. McCain has not formally agreed to the commission-sponsored debates, but the McCain campaign said he plans to.

The first presidential debate is set for Sept. 26 in Oxford, Miss. The others are scheduled for Oct. 7 and Oct. 15, with the vice-presidential debate Oct. 2.

McCain suggests caution as Bush visits Beijing

WASHINGTON - Sen. John McCain urged President Bush on Saturday to avoid saying anything "confrontational" to his Chinese hosts when he visits Beijing this week for the opening of the Olympics, lest he damage prospects for cooperation between the United States and China.

In an interview with The Washington Post, McCain advocated a cautious course for Bush, despite U.S. unhappiness with the Chinese crackdown on Tibet, complaints of repression of domestic dissidents and strained relations stemming from last week's breakdown of global trade talks in Geneva.

McCain campaign cynical, not racist, Obama says

ORLANDO, Fla. - Republican candidate John McCain's presidential campaign is cynical, not racist, in its efforts to distract voters from real issues, Democratic rival Barack Obama said Saturday.

"In no way do I think that John McCain's campaign was being racist," Obama said in his first meeting with reporters since predicting McCain and other Republicans would try to scare voters because Obama looks unlike "all those other presidents on the dollar bills."

Obama spent a second day in Florida to speak to the National Urban League, the predominantly black group McCain addressed a day earlier. Obama defended his push to bolster the nation's schools and dismissed what he called McCain's "slim record on education."

Obama also used Florida - a state both sides see as central to victory in November - as the setting for a shift in policy on offshore oil drilling. While still opposed to expanding oil exploration and development on U.S. coastlines, he said he could reach compromise if drilling initiatives were part of a broad program aimed at energy independence.

Also

Platform writers for Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton worked Saturday in Cleveland as the Democratic Party developed a policy statement to promote nominee-in-waiting Obama and keep Clinton backers involved. The drafting committee heard Friday and Saturday from party regulars, policy experts and hard-luck Americans before beginning a draft of the platform, which goes before the full platform committee Aug. 9 in Pittsburgh.

The Seattle Times Company, August 3, 2008

WASHINGTON (AFP) - John McCain is finally making noise in the White House race, after weeks of anemic photo ops, scattershot attacks and looking on as Democrat Barack Obama soaked up adulation and opinion poll leads.

The Republican stiffened his campaign with a negative new strategy, claimed Obama is playing the 'race card' against him, and mocked his Democratic foe as an empty celebrity and prone to a Messiah complex.

In the fiercest combat of the general election so far, McCain tasted successive victories last week in the battle for daily news coverage, the political trench warfare which adds up to define a campaign.

But McCain's change of tack, which followed Republican whispering about his performance and Obama's return from a triumphant foreign tour, carries risks along with its promise of political gain.

He hopes voters will soon start to share his view of Obama as a talented, yet presumptuous pretender unprepared for the presidency.

But such tactics are the political equivalent of playing with fire -- and could cement Obama's narrative that McCain is ignoring real issues at a time of economic peril, has an unpleasant temper and is a typical, cynical politician.

"Any time you engage in negative campaigning, you always run the risk of it backfiring on your own campaign," said Costas Panagopoulos, of Fordham University's Elections and Campaigns Management program.

"That said, people remember negative ads -- candidates use them because they are effective.

"If they can capitalize on pre-existing fears the electorate has about Obama, or hesitations they have about him it can be an effective strategy."

McCain is betting that he can dim Obama's so far remarkably resilient star power -- and seems to be making preemptive bid to limit any 'bounce' his rival enjoys from his party convention in three weeks.

But one political giant -- Hillary Clinton -- has already tried such a strategy and failed, during the Democratic primary season when she branded Obama "a lot of talk, no action."

McCain's barrage opened with an ad using footage of Obama's barnstorming European tour to compare him to troubled popular culture icons Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, the message: the Democrat is all show and no substance.

McCain's campaign then set off a firestorm, accusing African American Obama of playing the 'race card' after he commented that Republicans will point out that he does not look like presidents memorialized on US currency.

Then McCain made headlines again with an ad mocking Obama as a Moses-like figure, which sarcastically asked "can you see the light?" suggesting his opponent had anointed himself to save the world.

McCain left no doubt about his tactics on Saturday.

"Senator Obama is an impressive orator, and it's a lucky thing for me that people aren't just choosing a motivational speaker," he said in a radio address.

"Washington is full of talented talkers and Senator Obama is one of the best to come along in quite a while -- unfortunately on issues big and small, what he says and what he does are often two different things."

Since Obama returned from Europe, the race appears to have tightened. The candidates were tied at 44 percent each in the latest Gallup tracking poll. A week ago, Obama was up by nine points.

Rasmussen had Obama up 43-44 percent in its tracking poll and survey in the next few weeks will be watched to see whether McCain's hard line is damaging Obama -- or himself.

The Obama camp has learned the lessons of past campaigns -- it was in August 2004 that the Republican attack machine honed in on Democrat John Kerry's Vietnam war record, and sowed seeds that would help destroy his campaign.

Each McCain attack was met with a quick, forcible response, with the ads branded "juvenile" and "sad."

Obama joined the fray himself Saturday saying that though he did not think McCain's campaign was racist, it was "cynical."

His campaign chief David Plouffe argued that the McCain broadsides had motivated the Illinois senator's huge grassroots fundraising movement.

"What John McCain has done in the last week has really shown the American people he doesn't want to talk about the economy or foreign policy or healthcare," Plouffe said in a video emailed to Obama supporters.

"He is increasingly going to take his campaign into the gutter -- I think John McCain has harmed himself in the last week, really eroding any capital he had built up in terms of the kind of politician he is."

AFP, August 3, 2008

They've both loaded up their crash carts with plenty of life-saving tools, as they ponder strategies to deal with the staggering number of Americans without health insurance, ever-rising medical costs, and patient-safety concerns.

Once they burst through the swinging doors, though, they're likely to discover that neither has developed a miracle cure. McCain's health plan, for instance, calls for dabbling a bit in experimental medicine, while Obama's hopes could exceed his healing powers.

Like ER viewers enjoying the waning episodes of the TV series, American voters should be riveted to the presidential contenders' ideas.

Health-care reform has ranked only behind Iraq as a public concern among Republicans, Democrats and independents alike. The faltering economy will likely boost Americans' unease over health care since most families' medical coverage is tied to their jobs.

Workplace coverage is eroding across the country at an incremental but steadily growing rate. Meanwhile, the cost of the nation's $2 trillion health-care system consumes nearly 20 cents of every dollar Americans earn. Industries, especially automakers, are struggling under the weight of annual health premiums, which average more than $12,000 for a family of four.

Then there are the 47 million uninsured. Their numbers have grown by 10 million since the early 1990s, when the Clinton administration made the last concerted push to repair the nation's health safety net.

Today's presidential contenders both offer detailed strategies to deal with this array of complex challenges. In some respects, their ideas run along parallel tracks, including: modernizing the health-care system with greater use of technology, driving down drug prices through competition, targeting better prevention and management of chronic diseases, promoting quality care, and coordinating patient care more closely.

That bodes well for incremental reform, at least, no matter who wins. But who's got the big fix for the problem of the uninsured? And can the next president and Congress even afford to spend what it would take, in light of a predicted federal deficit in 2009 approaching $500 billion?

In terms of getting coverage to the uninsured, Obama appears to have the better plan. He proposes a straightforward expansion of the private insurance system that would subsidize premiums for the working poor - mostly paid for by repealing the Bush tax cuts. But the costs also would be shared by businesses that don't provide medical benefits, as well as consumers.

Obama would seek to drive down insurance premiums by enacting a take-all-comers rule for insurers - thus enlarging the pool of potential insurance buyers - and by monitoring fairness and quality through a national clearinghouse.

If the Obama plan weren't missing one critical element, it just might work.

But his plan could flop because it lacks a mandate that the uninsured actually purchase those newly affordable health plans. Hillary Clinton had the idea here, knowing that too many people would wait until they were really sick to buy coverage if they were assured by law they couldn't be refused a policy. That would doom the whole effort to help the uninsured.

But the remedy for Obama is easy: embrace a universal mandate for all Americans to buy health insurance, then find the means to help them purchase that coverage.

The trouble for McCain in capitalizing on any shortcoming of Obama's health plan is that his proposal to expand access to insurance seems bound to unnecessarily tick off the millions of people who have workplace insurance.

McCain would let those people keep their office health plans, but he'd nudge the country in the direction of having more people buy their own insurance policies.

In the short-term, McCain's proposal for tax credits of $2,500 per person and $5,000 for families would enable more of the working poor to afford to get health insurance. But he'd also risk further rattling traditional workplace-based health insurance due to changes in tax treatment for the money employers would spend on health plans.

To pay for his tax credits, McCain would end the tax break given workers whose health care is paid for them at work. That's bound to be unpopular, since it places the cost squarely on individual taxpayers and appears to go too easy on businesses. It makes no provision, for instance, for levying fees on free riders - those businesses that don't provide health plans.

McCain also doesn't have a solid answer for covering those Americans whose existing illnesses prevent them from finding insurance at almost any price.

He does not mandate that insurers accept all clients. Instead, McCain proposes the federal government work with states to set up insurance pools that protect high-risk patients from catastrophic health costs. Trouble is, health-care finance experts say the idea just doesn't seem to be affordable on any grounds, even less so for a balanced-budget candidate who says he won't raise taxes.

McCain isn't wrong to explore moving away from workplace-based health insurance. Giving Americans health coverage they could take from job to job would be a boon. In fact, it's the cornerstone of the most promising reform proposal from Congress, the bipartisan Healthy Americans Act from Sens. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) and Robert Bennett (R., Utah). But for his plan to work, McCain would have to embrace the more comprehensive approach in Wyden-Bennett proposal.

Both presidential candidates have to decide whether they're really willing to follow through on the treatments they're prescribing.

Campaign staffers and paid consultants can be patronizing to the candidates they "handle." In the cynical view of the wise guys who run campaigns, the candidates are softhearted amateurs who can't be trusted not to wander from the disciplined message of the day, or who become all mushy and weak-kneed when it's time to attack the opponent. This seems to have been the attitude toward John McCain in some quarters of his campaign in recent days. A front-page article last week in The Washington Post was headlined AS AIDES MAP AGGRESSIVE RACE, MCCAIN OFTEN STEERS OFF-COURSE. The article was likely fed by Republican Party operatives who were frustrated by McCain's tendency to undercut or talk over his attack lines by being a candid or forgiving human being. When McCain offhandedly described Obama's plan to withdraw troops from Iraq in 16 months as a "pretty good timetable," GOP advisers moaned that he was ruining his attack on Obama as naive on foreign policy. The problem, in the view of campaign strategists, isn't the message - bashing Obama as arrogant and out of touch. Rather, "it's the candidate," says a "GOP strategist with close ties to the campaign," anonymously quoted by the Post.

It's clear McCain's handlers are determined now to keep him "on message" and not allow much spontaneity to creep into his performances. They can't persuade him to give up town halls, but last week he was noticeably kept away from the national press corps, whom he once called his "base." Although McCain requested that a couch be put on his campaign plane so he could sit around with reporters as he did on his Straight Talk Express bus during the primaries, the couch has lately been occupied only by overflow staff. McCain looked cranky most of last week, as if he could sense the potential harm he was doing to his reputation as a high-road politician.

Modern political campaigns, aided and abetted by the press, exert a powerful downward force. The Democratic handlers are no more high-minded. If anything, they have been rattled by Republican attacks in years past and are now determined to show their toughness. In 2004, as John Kerry was getting "Swift-Boated," depressed Democrats would recite a meme attributed to Bill Clinton's war room: "If you're not hitting, you're getting hit." In the 2006 cycle, the hard-edged (and successful) Democratic political team headed by Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Rahm Emanuel urged candidates to "leave no charge unanswered." Howard Wolfson, Hillary Clinton's communications director and one of the toughest players in the Democratic Party, first came to prominence in Schumer's successful bid for the Senate in 1998. Wolfson's motto in that campaign was a line from "The Untouchables": "If he uses a fist, you use a bat. If he uses a knife, you use a gun." Though a veteran of political knife fighting in Chicago, Obama has been more restrained, or at least a little more subtle about negative campaigning, but he does not always rise above it. McCain's staffers were infuriated in April, when Obama slyly talked up McCain's age by saying that Democrats wouldn't play "the age card" and in May, when Obama pointedly remarked that McCain had "lost his bearings" and was "confused."

To be sure, by his own account McCain can be nasty and is not known for shying away from a fight. McCain aides beamed when he coined the derogatory term "Dr. No" (from the old James Bond movie) to describe Obama for opposing offshore drilling. But lately, it appears that McCain is mostly doing the bidding of his handlers, not the other way around. The biggest noise last week was made not by McCain himself, but by his campaign manager, Rick Davis, a veteran Washington operator who accused Obama of "playing the race card." McCain was left to dutifully endorse this incendiary remark: "I agree with it," he said when asked by reporters. (The next day he said, "I'm ready to move on.") The airwaves quickly filled with breathless commentary about race, a taboo subject reporters scrupulously avoid as "sensitive" but thrill to when they can get someone talking about it on the record.

There was a time, all the way back in May, when McCain sounded like he was going to strike a higher note. At a speech to business leaders in Columbus, Ohio, McCain decried the "hyperpartisanship" of presidential campaigns, the endless charges and countercharges. "Americans are sick of it, and they have every right to be," said McCain. But that was then. Off to a lackluster start, McCain seemed to be unable to fire up his base. Evangelicals were either giving him lukewarm endorsements - or privately vowing to stay home in November. Harry Awdey, 21, a Republican National Convention delegate from Michigan, tells NEWSWEEK he doesn't think McCain should invest too much in social networking because "Obama is so far in the lead that it would almost be futile to try and catch up with him in the youth-voting base." McCain's best hope, his handlers have apparently concluded, is to try to make suburban moms and working-class voters nervous that Obama is inexperienced or too elitist and cocky. (They have disdained the Web slime merchants who go on about Obama's ethnicity and religion.) Last week the campaign repeatedly described Obama as "fussy" - a tactic one McCain aide, who wouldn't be quoted discussing internal strategy, insisted was just the campaign "having a little fun at his expense the way Democrats have had with us."

In late spring, the McCain campaign convened a focus group with undecided voters in a swing state, trying to determine if lashing out against Obama would cause blowback against McCain. An adviser, who declined to be named discussing internal strategy, tells NEWSWEEK they quizzed how voters reacted to Obama's remark that working-class men and women were "bitter" and "cling" to "guns or religion," as well as McCain's attacks on Obama for failing to take political risks and do the right thing for the country. The results were "positive" for McCain, the adviser says. Not long after, the man who ran Bush's "war room" in 2004, Steve Schmidt, took over day-to-day operation of the campaign. Schmidt, known as The Bullet for his shaved head, specializes in staying on message.

As much as McCain, Obama has called for a new kind of politics that rises above partisan backbiting. But he, or more commonly his surrogates, routinely take potshots at McCain. Indeed, the McCain advisers insist they are just fighting fire with fire by aggressively going after Obama. They note, for instance, that when a radio host warming up a McCain rally pointedly used Obama's middle name (Hussein), McCain repudiated the remarks and called for an apology. But when another radio host at an Obama rally called McCain a "warmonger," Obama did not personally disavow the comment. (Instead his campaign dismissed the remark in a press release.) "It has not escaped our attention that since the Indiana primary, Senator Obama has not given a speech in which he hasn't attacked John McCain," says McCain strategist Mark Salter. "We're no longer going to put up with that."

Presidential campaigns resemble the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or the Sharks and the Jets ("You started it. No, you started it"). When it comes to self-defense, Obama is in a tricky spot. It has become Democratic orthodoxy that the Obama campaign cannot allow the Republicans to "define" Obama the way they did John Kerry in 2004 - as an elitist flip-flopper. Obama has tried to play it cool, to not let traditional Rovean tactics get under his skin, the way Republican attacks usually do with Democrats. It's particularly perilous for Obama, who has sometimes looked arrogant while trying to act unfazed. Showing real anger at GOP fire could be risky for Obama. "There are limits to what Obama can do in response," says a Democratic operative who did not wish to be identified discussing the touchy issue of race. "An angry white guy can get away with angry responses, an angry black guy can't."

On the other hand, Obama can't afford to play it too cool. Asked if he minded a particularly tough Democratic debate last April, Obama mimed rapper Jay-Z doing a "dirt off the shoulder" brush with a flick of his hand. The move played well with Obama's young base, but rubbed some older Democrats the wrong way. Lately, The Washington Post reported last week, Obama has been keeping his distance from rappers. Last week Ludacris released a single called "Politics," praising Obama but calling Hillary Clinton a b---h and suggesting that McCain should be in a wheelchair. Obama's campaign condemned the song.

Last week, in Union, Mo., Obama tried to distance himself from racial or ethnic stereotyping while taking a dig at his attackers, telling audiences that "John McCain and the Republicans" are going "to try to scare you about me ... 'He's got a funny name, and he doesn't look like all the presidents on the dollar bills'." This apparently provoked the charge from Davis that Obama is "playing the race card, from the bottom of the deck." (McCain aides were angry because Obama specifically accused McCain, by name, of scare tactics, when the purveyors are usually anonymous bloggers and radio talk-show hosts like Rush Limbaugh, who is unconnected to the campaign.) By the weekend, both campaigns were bickering furiously over who played the race card first.

The press was clearly enjoying the squabble, and there is no doubt the reporters egg on the campaigns to flame each other. But the attack-counterattack culture has become slightly overwhelming, even to the press. Reporters are now summoned to two or three conference calls each day to hear campaign operatives bash the other side. Reporters' BlackBerrys fill with attack e-mails at all hours of the day and night from party hacks and bloggers "feeding the beast," in campaign parlance. The avalanche has produced some gallows humor on the campaign planes. Recently, a Democratic National Committee press aide named Rebecca Buckwalter-Poza began flooding electronic mailboxes with unfavorable clips about McCain. A couple of weeks ago, a reporter on McCain's plane opened his e-mail and found his IN box clogged with messages from her. ("Rebecca Buckwalter-Poza?" the reporter asked sarcastically, wondering who this new name was.) The volume, velocity and (probably) viciousness of messages like these will just grow. And it's only early August.

Suggestions that Obama's slim physique is a liability in a nation of mostly overweight voters marked a dangerous new turn for the Democratic contender's suddenly vulnerable presidential campaign.

The rapturous reception bestowed on Obama by awestruck Europeans on his recent world tour has given way to a barrage of Republican mockery and sly innuendo that has wiped out his lead in the opinion polls and turned his stately march towards the Democratic convention at the end of this month into a mud-slinging scramble.

Two new opinion polls on Friday showed that John McCain, the ageing Republican senator who had seemed to be lurching from pitfall to pothole in the wake of the Obama global parade, has not only caught up with his glamorous competitor - Gallup put them level at 44% each - but has also hit upon a damaging new strategy of vicious but effective personal attack.

"This campaign was always going to be closer than many people thought it would be," said one jubilant Republican strategist last week. "Poor Obama seems to have thought it wouldn't be close at all."

Perhaps most menacingly for the man trying to become America's first black president, the fawning US media coverage of his visits to London, Baghdad, Berlin and elsewhere is rapidly giving way to a more barbed approach.

Last week The Wall Street Journal suggested that Obama might be too thin and too fit to appeal to voters who tend to like candidates with flaws that they can identify with. Several analysts noted that widely circulated pictures of a red-faced Bill Clinton staggering into McDonald's after a short jog did the former president no harm at all; millions of Americans knew just how he felt.

Obama's enthusiasm for exercise first raised eyebrows last month, when he stopped three times in one day for workouts at Chicago gyms, prompting an Associated Press reporter to wonder: "Sometimes it's hard to tell if Barack Obama is running for president or Mr Universe."

It has also been widely noted that Obama sometimes seems appalled when presented at election meetings with the pride of local cuisine, often a fat-smothered hunk of meat or a sugary bun dripping in aerosol cream.

While most candidates tend to tuck in fearlessly, thereby assuring themselves positive coverage in the local paper, Obama once visited a chocolate factory in Pennsylvania but turned down a piece of cake on the grounds that it was "too decadent for me". He lost the Pennsylvania primary and appears to have learnt his lesson: last week he was overheard asking for "pie" at a diner in Missouri.

On Friday the Journal wondered if Obama might suffer from his skinniness in potential swing states such as Georgia and Tennessee, which have more overweight people than the northern states more favourable to the Democrats.

Government statistics indicate that two-thirds of the overall voting population is overweight and almost a third is obese. Yet the 6ft 1in senator is reckoned to weigh 10lb-20lb less than the 190lb recommended weight for his height.

The notion that Obama is too thin to win was derided by many of his supporters, but the issue underlined a disturbing reality for the Democratic candidate. Polls have consistently shown that McCain is beating him among significant groups of voters, notably working-class white males and older suburban women, who complain he appears elitist or out of touch with average Americans.

Obama now appears vulnerable to the kind of character assassination that helped to do in Senator John Kerry, the Democratic contender in 2004. Kerry was successfully depicted by Republicans as an effete, windsurfing, brie-eating, French-speaking fop.

While Obama's world tour was undeniably a diplomatic and personal triumph, its main effect domestically was to spur McCain into a negative political onslaught.

The 71-year-old Republican's decision to launch a series of television attack advertisements mocking Obama's celebrity, comparing him with Hollywood brats such as Britney Spears and Lindsay Lohan and disparaging his "divine" demeanour was a calculated risk: McCain had previously prided himself on his political character and had pledged a clean campaign.

Some Republicans warned that McCain was squandering his image of decency and risked alienating a key group of voters whom he still hopes to woo away from Obama: disillusioned former supporters of Hillary Clinton. John Weaver, a former top McCain aide, denounced the television ads as "childish" and "tomfoolery".

Other analysts took one look at the daily tracking polls showing McCain snapping at Obama's heels and predicted a summer of nonstop Republican abuse.

There were signs last week that the tension is getting to Obama, who in a rare misstep unwisely lashed out at Republicans he claimed were trying to scare off voters because he is "not like all those other presidents on the dollar bills".

The overt racial reference to the white faces on US currency played straight into the hands of McCain, who promptly accused Obama of "playing the race card" - a cardinal sin that traditionally repels American voters frightened of racial confrontation.

The sour turn to the race raised the stakes for the next big announcements of the campaign: the vice-presidential choices. What should have been a straightforward selection for Obama, who was widely expected to name a safe but boring white man as his running mate, has been complicated by what is rapidly becoming his woman problem.

According to a recent Fox News survey, McCain is making significant inroads among women voters over 40, some of whom supported Hillary Clinton, whose admirers have all but given up hope that Obama might choose their idol as his running mate.

Two former Clinton aides last week closed down a Hillary-for-VP website called Voteboth.com. They were then stunned to learn that Obama was seriously considering two other women candidates: Governor Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas and Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri.

Lanny Davis, a close friend of Hillary and former aide to President Bill Clinton, expressed outrage that Obama should consider any woman but Hillary.

"If anyone thinks that picking a woman will simply placate Hillary Clinton's supporters, I think that's very patronising," he said.

McCain's shortlist also includes two well known women: Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska and Carly Fiorina, former chief executive of Hewlett-Packard, the computer firm.

Grover Norquist, an influential conservative Republican, declared Palin "a good choice" and other analysts noted that if McCain selected a female running mate, there would be nothing thin about Obama's woman problem.

"The success of the program speaks for itself," he said of the law review's affirmative action policy in a letter published in the school's student newspaper.

Mr. Obama, a Democrat, has continued to support race-based affirmative action, calling it "absolutely necessary" when he was a state senator in Illinois and criticizing the Supreme Court for curtailing it in his time in the United States Senate. But in his presidential campaign, he has unsettled some black supporters by focusing increasingly on class and suggesting that poor whites should at times be given preference over more privileged blacks.

His ruminations about shifting the balance between race and class in some affirmative action programs raise the possibility that, if elected in November, he might foster a deeper national conversation about an issue that has been fiercely debated for decades. He declined to comment for this article.

"We have to think about affirmative action and craft it in such a way where some of our children who are advantaged aren't getting more favorable treatment than a poor white kid who has struggled more," Mr. Obama said last week in a question-and-answer session at a convention of minority journalists in Chicago.

During a presidential debate in April, Mr. Obama said his two daughters, Malia, 10, and Sasha, 7, "who have had a pretty good deal" in life, should not benefit from affirmative action when they apply to college, particularly if they were competing for admission with poor white students.

While Mr. Obama's biracial background in many ways makes him an ideal bridge between racial sensibilities, the issue remains politically treacherous, especially with race taking an increasingly prominent role in the campaign. Indeed, Mr. Obama's comments have already begun resonating in the long-running dispute over affirmative action, emerging as three states consider ballot initiatives that would ban racial preferences altogether.

"We have to have these conversations about race and class," said John Payton, the president of the N.A.A.C.P. Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Mr. Payton disagreed with Mr. Obama's stance on his daughters, but said he believed that his comments would lead to a thoughtful national discussion.

Still, Mr. Payton said, "everybody is nervous that in a political campaign we get reduced to slogans, and the narrowest of slogans, so that you don't get good discussions."

In some respects, Mr. Obama's remarks simply reflect a growing consensus that class should play a significant role in affirmative action programs. It already does in states like California and Michigan, where voters have decided that race can no longer be a factor in government hiring or public university admissions. A Supreme Court decision last year, which barred public school districts from assigning students to schools based on their race, has also forced administrators to focus on socioeconomic status in their efforts to integrate segregated public schools.

But the Supreme Court has also said that universities could consider race as they worked to diversify their campuses. Proponents of such programs point out that blacks continue to face discrimination regardless of class or income. Some fear that Mr. Obama's focus on the socioeconomic status of his daughters - as opposed to the diversity of experience and perspective they might bring to predominantly white campuses - may help conservatives in their battle to eliminate race from university admissions and government hiring.

Ward Connerly, a crusader against affirmative action, said he believed that Mr. Obama's remarks would buoy support for his ballot initiatives in Arizona, Colorado and Nebraska in November that would ban preferential treatment on the basis of race, ethnicity and sex in government hiring and public education.

Last week, Mr. Obama's Republican rival, Senator John McCain, announced his support for those measures. He also accused Mr. Obama of injecting race into the campaign, citing his remarks that Republicans would try to scare voters by pointing out that "he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills." Mr. Obama's campaign officials said the remark had been misconstrued.

And finally we're off . . .

There's a myth out there, typically advanced by moralizing media types and other unsavory characters, that Americans hate negative campaigning.

You know, it's corrosive to democracy, beneath our dignity and an unworthy sideshow in political discourse.

In reality, nearly every campaign benefits from attack ads. Quite often, voters also win, learning more about the mettle of those vying for office. Luckily, the first nasty exchange between our presumptive nominees, John McCain and Barack Obama, is one such occasion.

McCain, whose camp once claimed that he would "run a respectful campaign focused on the issues and values that are important to the American people," has canned the preening and joined the real world.

And when the Republican nominee ran a clumsy negative television ad this week poking fun at Obama's worldwide celebrity, contrasting him to vacuous personalities like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, there was much to be critical about. How could McCain have sunk so low?

I mean, Paris Hilton?

McCain, of course, is trying to feed the perception that Obama is an untested lightweight, a mere celebrity unworthy of higher office. Or, more precisely, as McCain aide Steve Schmidt asks: "Do the American people want to elect the world's biggest celebrity, or do they want to elect an American hero?"

Well, it depends.

Most voters want to elect someone who furthers their ideological and partisan agendas -- or, quite often, someone they find personally appealing. The presidential race is by definition a popularity contest. So, one has to wonder why McCain would run an advertisement pointing out the enormous popularity of his opponent.

Anyway, the entire brouhaha would have reflected poorly on McCain had Obama and others not responded with the tired and transparently ridiculous charge of racism.

The New York Times editorial board, quick to take offense for all enlightened people, claimed that McCain's ad was filled with "sinister overtones, a ham-handed attempt to belittle Mr. Obama as a person that brings back unpleasant memories" of other "racist" campaigns.

OK. We can agree that young white women who are flushed with cash but lacking basic cerebral skills should feel slighted. But the only truly unpleasant memory this kerfuffle evokes, thanks to Obama, is the disreputable use of the race card.

"Nobody thinks that Bush and McCain have a real answer to the challenges we face. So what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me," Obama explained. "You know, he's not patriotic enough, he's got a funny name, you know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills."

We know this is just a prefabricated attack, because last month in Florida, Obama brandished a similar, less opaque, comment, saying, "They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?"

It's true; Obama is black. And the person who keeps mentioning that Barack Obama is black most often is Barack Obama.

In fact, Obama has preemptively accused the entire McCain campaign of racism and the entire electorate of being susceptible to racism.

So now, those of you who find Obama's inexperience or his policy prescriptions -- or even his personality -- lacking, have fallen prey to bigoted politics. You are too frightened to see the light. The hope.

Yet, in reality, the typical American, according to a recent Gallup poll, is far more prone to spurn an elderly candidate (or gay, atheist, Hispanic, Jew, etc.) than they are to reject an African-American candidate.

One of the appealing aspects of Obama's early run this year was that he transcended these stale tactics -- even as his own party, mind you, was injecting race into the campaign.

Then again, with this much power at stake, it was bound to get ugly.

Change? Not exactly.

By David Harsanyi, Real Clear Politics, August 01, 2008

WASHINGTON - Barack Obama committed the worst blunder of his campaign by wrongly accusing President Bush, John McCain and other Republicans of trying to make voters fear him because he's not "like all those other presidents on the dollar bills."

This racial calumny is completely unfair, diminishes his own campaign, and certainly is the worst possible way to win over those blue-collar white Democrats in Ohio and Pennsylvania who picked Hillary Rodham Clinton over him in the primary.

And it's certainly not how he's gotten this far.

Whether Obama wins the White House in November or not, he will have enthralled the world, revolutionized modern American politics, and secured his place in history.

Defying every smug prediction, Obama raised more money, inspired more volunteers and executed a near-flawless campaign to become his party's nominee.

His base is broad, fervent and generous.

Throughout the campaign, race has never been the central, driving issue. If it were, Obama would still be just an inexperienced freshman senator from Illinois with a strange name and a wildly liberal voting record.

Obama emerged victorious from the snowy-white fields of Iowa not simply because he is Black, or even in spite of being black. He emerged victorious because he refused to allow his race to be the issue that defined him.

The only race card he has played up to now is the one that totally neutralizes the issue - the one that makes his race nearly invisible.

In his speech on race in Philadelphia earlier this year, he talked of the goodness he sees in people - even in whites who are routinely browbeaten by knee-jerk liberals and race hustlers in search of a quick political buck.

Barack Obama should return to these soaring ideals and quit this whining and fantasizing about Republicans making fun of him because he doesn't look like George Washington.

For Obama, the argument was an unwelcome distraction that could complicate his efforts to win over voters who may be skeptical of a relative newcomer with an atypical background. It also pulled the focus away from his efforts to stress bread-and-butter economic issues. For McCain, any hint of racist tactics would hurt his efforts with the moderates and independents he needs to win in November.

Yesterday showed how hard it will be for both to avoid the issue now that it has burst into the public sphere. Obama was heckled in St. Petersburg by black nationalists who accused him of not doing enough for the African American community. In Florida's Panhandle, McCain faced a barrage of questions from reporters and asserted that he is not running a negative campaign "in the slightest," even as his aides launched their latest online attack ad mocking Obama as a candidate with a messiah complex.

In response to questions about his recent attacks against Obama, McCain said he has been waging "a very respectful campaign." McCain has compared Obama to celebrities such as Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, said he is willing to lose a war to win a campaign, said he would rather play basketball than visit wounded troops, and, on Thursday, accused him of playing "the race card" and playing it "from the bottom of the deck."

McCain, who defended himself against tough policy questions from African Americans yesterday at the National Urban League's annual meeting in Orlando, suggested the media should "move on" from the issue of race because Obama had "retracted" his allegations that he and other Republicans were using his appearance to intimidate voters.

But while Obama has toned down some of the language that the McCain campaign criticized, he did not retract his allegations or back away from his contention that Republicans were trying to scare voters about him. Obama and his aides yesterday faulted McCain for not working hard enough to quash state Republican attacks based on race, saying the candidate was merely stating the obvious when he told Missouri voters Wednesday that some of his opponents were insinuating that he does not fit the mold of a traditional presidential candidate.

"I was in Union, Missouri, which is 98 percent white -- a rural, conservative [community], and what I said was what I think everybody knows, which is that I don't look like I came out of central casting when it comes to presidential candidates," Obama told the St. Petersburg Times. "I think that what people are really concerned about, what they're looking for, is fundamental change on the economy, things that are going to help their families live out the American dream. There was nobody there who thought at all that I was trying to inject race in this. What this has become, I think, is a typical pattern from the McCain campaign, whether it's Paris Hilton or Britney or this phony allegation that I wouldn't visit troops. They seem to be focused on a negative campaign; what I think our campaign wants to do is focus on the issues that matter to American families."

The Obama campaign could produce no evidence that McCain's campaign was responsible for any attack that directly cited his race or his name. Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.), an Obama adviser, said the candidate probably regretted evoking McCain's name when he talked about Republican scare tactics.

But adviser Anita Dunn said Obama was more than justified in lodging accusations Wednesday that prompted McCain campaign manager Rick Davis to say Obama had "played the race card." The North Carolina Republican Party has already used inflammatory images of Obama's former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., and the Tennessee Republican Party mocked Obama's middle name, Hussein. Although McCain decried those efforts, Dunn said it was hardly the full-throated, angry denunciation McCain has shown himself capable of, she said.

"The McCain campaign has clearly made the decision that there really is not a road too low for them to travel," she said.

For their part, Republicans said the back-and-forth had laid bare an effort by Obama to inoculate himself from the scrutiny any candidate should expect. Obama's stature as the presumptive first black nominee of a major party has made McCain and his campaign "rightfully overly sensitive," said House Republican Conference Chairman Adam Putnam (Fla.), in whose district Obama campaigned yesterday.

"Obama has been playing both sides of the race card long before he was the nominee," Putnam said. "He played it in the primary. He uses the historic nature of his candidacy to his advantage, which he should, but he also works the refs by accusing his opponents of using the race card, which makes them second-guess common campaign themes."

Although the group's president, Marc Morial, praised McCain for taking questions, the session was awkward at times, especially when the senator defended his opposition to affirmative action.

Obama wrestled with the issue of racial equality yesterday when hecklers confronted him at a town hall meeting in St. Petersburg.

"Why is it that that you have not spoken to the issues or spoken on behalf of the African community?" demanded Diop Olugbala, 31, citing the plight of poor blacks targeted by predatory lenders, police brutality and racist attacks.

Obama defended his record, saying he had spoken out on every issue the hecklers raised, from the shooting of Sean Bell in New York to the prosecution of the "Jena Six" in Louisiana to predatory lending targeted at blacks and Hispanics.

"That doesn't mean I'm always going to satisfy the way you guys want me to talk, which gives you the option of voting for someone else, which gives you the option of running for office yourself," Obama replied, amid deafening cheers.

As the candidates campaigned, their staffs sparred via e-mail and on the Internet. McCain's campaign issued a Web ad called "The One" that insinuated Obama views himself as akin to Jesus and Moses and includes a clip of actor Charlton Heston, as Moses, parting the Red Sea.

Obama campaign spokesman Hari Sevugan said the ad was one of McCain's "juvenile antics."

McCain told reporters the attack was made in jest. "We were having some fun with our supporters that we sent it out to," he said.

"Due to the late date of the two parties' nominating conventions, and the relatively short period between the end of the conventions and the first proposed debate, it is likely that the four Commission debates will be the sole series of debates in the fall campaign," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe wrote in a letter to Frank J. Fahrenkopf Jr. and Paul G. Kirk Jr., co-chairs of the Commission on Presidential Debates.

Early this summer, both McCain and Obama held out the possibility of a unique presidential campaign, when McCain suggested the candidates appear together at a series of town hall-style gatherings. Obama said he would entertain the idea, but after a cursory round of talks, the Obama campaign opted out.

In a statement, the McCain campaign said, "John McCain looks forward to debating Barack Obama as often as possible, but it's disappointing that Senator Obama has refused his offer to do joint town hall meetings."

Given the historic presence of the nation's first major-party African-American presidential nominee, it was likely inevitable.

But now the combustible issue of Barack Obama's racial identity has been thrust squarely into the heated political battle of the 2008 race. Obama Wednesday warned voters that John McCain or his allies would try to "scare" them with his race, and McCain campaign manager Rick Davis responded furiously on Thursday, accusing Obama of playing the race card.

Davis's statement came just a day before McCain's planned address to one of the nation's premier African-American groups, the Urban League, Friday morning in Orlando, a forum likely to keep the debate heated into the weekend.

Behind the accusations from both sides in the last 24 hours lies a furious battle to frame the racially charged conflict many in both campaigns have been girding for and to find effective ways to blame the other campaign for any unpalatable racial subtext to a race that - in theory - could actually show the better angels of America’s nature.

Both sides face risks and opportunities: Obama's pioneering status is inspiring to some voters and discomfiting to others, and the way in which race is discussed may push voters toward or away from him. McCain could benefit from discomfort with race or he could - like Hillary Rodham Clinton, his predecessor in battling Obama - be distracted and ultimately diminished by constant charges of racism, accurate or not.

McCain aides say their goal is to pre-empt what they believe is Obama's effort to paint any conventional campaign attacks as race-based.

Obama's aim, in the view of the McCain camp: "to delegitimize any line of attack against him," said McCain aide Steve Schmidt. He said he saw that potential trap being sprung when Obama predicted in Missouri Wednesday that the GOP nominee would attack the Democrat because he "doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills."

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said McCain's campaign was "misinterpreting" both the "tenor and the meaning" of Obama's words.

"I think they should probably be a little less paranoid about parsing every word we say and a little more focused on actually addressing the challenges that Americans expect the president of the United States to take on," he said.

To campaign watchers, in fact, Obama's warning Wednesday seemed less a direct attack on McCain than as part of a running effort to cast all attacks on Obama in the worst possible light: as products of ignorance at best and bigotry at worst.

But Schmidt said McCain had learned the lesson of Clinton's campaign, which began by taking her and her husband's affinity with African-American voters for granted but wound up seeing days and weeks consumed by racially charged gaffes and allegations, ranging from a New Hampshire supporter's suggestion that Obama had dealt drugs to Bill Clinton's own comparison of Obama's campaign to the Rev. Jesse Jackson's.

Remarkably, in fact, Schmidt sees a sort of political soul mate in Bill Clinton. "Say whatever you want about Bill Clinton," Schmidt said, "but it's deeply unfair to suggest his criticism of Obama was race-based. President Clinton was a force for unity in this country on this subject. Every American should be proud of his record as both a governor and president. But we knew it was coming in our direction because they did it against a President of the United State of their own party."

A former chief strategist to Hillary Clinton, Howard Wolfson, echoed Schmidt's comparison.

"I think the McCain camp watched our primary on the Democratic side very carefully and they know that any accusation of racial divisiveness can be very, very harmful for a candidate's prospects," Wolfson said on Fox News Thursday, adding that the allegations against Clinton were unfair. "They heard something that Senator Obama said and they felt they had to respond quickly to make sure that nobody got the impression that they were engaged in those kind of racial politics."

Schmidt said McCain's aides felt forced to talk about race, and that they don't plan to do it again.

But the aftermath of this campaign flashpoint - which began with a McCain ad using Paris Hilton and Britney Spears to paint Obama as a preening rock star - indicated points were scored for the Republican side.

Obama's campaign quickly put out a statement Thursday retracting the candidate's suggestion that McCain had improperly used race, and, while on a conference call with reporters, campaign manager David Plouffe declined repeatedly to revisit any aspect of the question of race.

Should McCain win, he would be 72 when he takes the oath of office, the oldest first-term president in U.S. history. He has survived three bouts of melanoma, the most serious form of skin cancer, and acknowledges his choice of a vice presidential running mate will be of "enhanced importance."

The vice president takes over running the country if the president is incapacitated or dies.

Obama would be only two-thirds through his first term in the U.S. Senate and had virtually no national exposure before delivering an attention-grabbing and soaring keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic convention. His vice presidential choice could help him overcome voter questions about his lack of experience while showing he would appoint strong figures to his government.

"More than in any election I can remember, the vice presidential choices made by these candidates stand to make a significant difference, especially among undecided voters," says Kenneth Dautrich, professor of public policy at the University of Connecticut.

George H. W. Bush, who was elected president in 1988 after serving two terms as Ronald Reagan's vice president, attended so many state funerals that he was quoted as having said: "I'm George Bush. You die, I fly." Since then, however, Al Gore and Dick Cheney, vice presidents respectively for Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, were much more powerful figures.

Political scientist Robert Loevy says McCain must "reassure people about his age," making his vice-presidential selection critical "because of the greater likelihood that person could become president."

The Colorado College political science professor says that Obama's running mate selection is equally important, especially since he would be the first African American U.S. president.

There is voter unease with the 46-year-old Obama, Loevy says, "given that there is so much that is unconventional about his background and personna."

Obama, himself, put the problem succinctly while campaigning in Missouri on Wednesday.

"It's a leap, electing a 46-year-old black guy named Barack Obama," he said, adding that the Republican message to voters is that Obama "doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bill."

Joel Goldstein, a presidential scholar and professor at St. Louis University school of law, says the stakes may be higher for Obama "because he's newer and perceptions of him might be more subject to change" because of his vice presidential pick. "Voters may see his choice as more of a test."

Given the additional importance of the vice presidential choice this year, campaign watchers are engaged in fierce speculation about who will be named and when.

Obama's window of opportunity appears foreshortened because the Democratic National convention opens Aug. 25 with the Beijing Olympic Games sandwiched in before then, beginning Aug. 8. McCain has a bit more time. The Republican convention is not until Sept. 1.

Those handicapping the choice have Obama looking at Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine, Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden and Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius.

Backers of Hillary Rodham Clinton, who nearly upended Obama's candidacy in a prolonged and sometimes bitter primary battle, saw her as an obvious choice. Obama has locked down comment from his campaign on the vice presidential issue, but suggested in an interview with NBC television that she was out of the running.

"I'm going to want somebody with integrity; I'm going to want somebody with independence, who is willing to tell me where he thinks or she thinks I'm wrong; and I'm going to want somebody who shares a vision of the country - where we need to go. That we've got to fundamentally change not only our policies but how our politics works; how business is done in Washington."

Clinton, clearly a political insider, has spent more than a decade in Washington as first lady and a New York senator.

McCain is believed to be mulling former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney - who sought the nomination this year, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, former Ohio Rep. Rob Portman with former Pennsylvania Gov. and Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge a long-shot, given his support for abortion rights - a delicate topic for conservatives who form a key Republican constituency.

While the elder Bush's choice of Indiana Sen. Dan Quayle, who became known for embarrassing malapropisms and obvious inexperience, damaged his 1988 candidacy, the choice was not politically fatal. The campaign of his opponent, four-term Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis, unraveled on its own.

The enormous importance of the vice presidency was shown most recently when Lyndon Johnson became president after John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963 and with the ascendancy of Gerald R. Ford, who was not even elected to the post but named to replace Agnew. He became president after Nixon resigned during the Watergate scandal in 1974.

Goldstein suggested both campaigns might be looking more for a running mate who would do no harm to the ticket than one who would be a political star.

"If an Agnew were out there today it would be a disaster," Goldstein said, referring to Spiro Agnew who resigned the vice presidency in disgrace during the administration of Richard Nixon.

If the vice presidential choice is "someone who is not ready for prime time, it could matter far more this year than in the past," Goldstein said.

By Steven R. Hurst, The Associated Press, August 1, 2008

ORLANDO -- Capping off a week on the campaign trail overshadowed by racially tinged accusations, Barack Obama sought a tone of unity in a speech Saturday to a predominantly black audience and pledged to help everyone achieve the American dream.

The hundreds of people gathered for the National Urban League convention frequently interrupted the Democratic candidate's speech with raucous cheers, in contrast with the more subdued response to Republican John McCain's appearance the day before.

''Our march is a march for America,'' Obama said, crediting an Urban League leader from the 1960s with the sentiment. "Not black America or white America. Not rich America or poor America, rural America or urban America. But all America.''

Obama's speech to the Urban League wrapped up a a two-day Florida tour that included town hall meetings on both coasts, a gathering with supporters at an Orlando high school and a stop at a Plant City farmers market. Polls show Obama and McCain tied in the nation's largest swing state.

At a press conference in Titusville before the Urban League speech, Obama addressed McCain's accusation that he played the ''race card'' when he said his opponents would try to scare voters because "he doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills.''

Obama explained Saturday that he meant he doesn't come out of ''central casting'' for presidential candidates.

''In no way do I think that John McCain's campaign was being racist,'' Obama said, according to The Associated Press. "I think they're cynical. And I think they want to distract people from talking about the real issues.''

However, McCain fielded tough questions from the audience after his speech to the Urban League convention, while Obama fielded questions only from Urban League President Marc Morial.

Morial said later that Obama said he wouldn't have time for questions from the audience.

At the beginning of his talk, Obama established an immediate rapport by describing his work as a community organizer in Chicago on the same issues targeted by the Urban League: jobs, housing and schools. He quoted Martin Luther King and Alice Walker, spoke of the Urban League's storied history, and described the progression of the civil rights movement, from its original focus on discrimination to the current emphasis on economic inequalities.

''You know that you can't take that seat at the front of the bus if you can't afford the bus fare,'' he said. "You can't live in an integrated neighborhood if you can't afford the house. And it doesn't mean a whole lot to sit down at the lunch counter if you can't afford the lunch.''

He criticized McCain's ''tired rhetoric'' about giving taxpayer-funded private school vouchers to kids in struggling public schools. He also assailed McCain for supporting the continuation of President Bush's tax cuts for wealthy Americans and opposing periodic increases in the minimum wage.

''So we've got a decision to make,'' he said. "We can continue President Bush's economic policies -- the policies that got us here in the first place. That's the course that my opponent would have us follow in this race.''

He added, referring to McCain's ad that mocks him as a celebrity, "But I'm not going to spend time assaulting my opponent's character. I'm not going to talk about Paris or Britney. I will, however, compare our two visions for our economic future.''

Friday marked the first time both presumptive nominees overlapped in Florida, foreshadowing a fierce contest in the critical swing state. With Florida leading the nation in job losses, both candidates touted plans to cut taxes and increase employment.

In Titusville, a Republican-leaning city in Brevard County that voted for President Bush in the last two elections, Obama bashed the administration's economic stewardship. The city, whose livelihood heavily depends on the John F. Kennedy Space Center, is bracing for a major economic downturn when NASA retires its shuttle fleet in two years.

Obama said he would work with Senator Bill Nelson to add a Space Shuttle flight after 2010. He also said he would re-establish the National Aeronautics and Space Council to develop a long-range plan for space exploration.

As new polls show that high gas prices have moved most Florida voters to back offshore oil drilling, Obama has softened his stance against increased exploration. McCain scrapped his support for the federal ban on coastal drilling in June and is running ads accusing Obama of standing in the way of lower gas prices.

On Saturday, Obama offered tentative praise for the second day in a row for a bi-partisan proposal to allow drilling in the Gulf of Mexico within 50 miles of the Florida coast.

''If we can come up with a genuine bipartisan compromise, in which I have to accept some things that I don't like, or the Democrats have to accept some things that they don't like in exchange for actually moving us in the direction of actual energy independence, then that's something I'm open to,'' Obama told reporters before he addressed the convention, according to the Associated Press.

The Republican National Committee circulated a statement Saturday titled ''Obama vs. Obama on Offshore Drilling,'' comparing his recent description of offshore drilling as a ''scheme'' with his comments Friday. Both of Florida's senators, Republican Mel Martinez and Nelson, a Democrat, have criticized the plan.

Obama has repeatedly derided McCain's ad that portrays him as a pop star, but some of the people at the Urban League expressed the kind of adulation typically reserved for A-list celebrities.

''People are really drawn to him, based on his aura, his ideas, and the changes he's going to make,'' said Tammye Young, 36, of Orlando. "It's hypnotizing.''

Young and other voters said they didn't buy into the media's ''hype,'' and described their excitement about Obama making history as the first black presidential nominee.

''I'm honored that we finally have someone we can call our own,'' said 54-year-old Wista Brown of Orlando, while waiting in a line of hundreds of people to get into the speech. "It's time.''

By Beth Reinhard, Miami Herald, August 2, 2008

Just two days earlier, Brown's Labor Party had lost a special election in one of its safest seats, a working-class bastion in Glasgow. It was no comfort that the race was close (decided by 365 votes) or that the loss was to the Scottish Nationalists, a regional party, and not to the main Conservative Party opposition. To sense the size of the catastrophe for Brown, think of the Republicans losing an ultra-safe seat in a wealthy Dallas suburb.

Immediately the British papers were filled with reports about plots among Labor politicians to oust Brown, lest the party's 11-year hold on power slip to the Conservatives. Brown does not have to call an election until 2010, but Labor is petrified.

Obama remained studiously neutral during his British visit, chatting warmly not only with Brown but also with the Conservative Party's 41-year-old leader, David Cameron -- youth is definitely in this year -- who might as well be running on a change-we-can-believe-in platform. Cameron has a huge lead over Brown in the polls.

But Obama did try to buck up Brown, with whom he shares a broadly center-left worldview. "You're always more popular before you're actually in charge of things," Obama told reporters after the meeting. "Once you're responsible, then you're going to make some people unhappy. That's just the nature of politics, and these things go in cycles."

The key word here is "cycles," and Obama, like Cameron, is on the right side of the political cycle at a moment of distress all across the wealthy democracies.

But there is a message to John McCain in Cameron's rise: The British Conservatives didn't get this close to power by sticking with their old ideas or confining themselves to assaults on the Labor Party.

Cameron has entirely renovated British Conservatism by acknowledging the party's nasty public image, its seeming indifference to the economically deprived and its aura of stuffy privilege. The new Conservatives are warm, up-to-date, environmentally conscious and socially concerned.

McCain, on the other hand, is running a campaign straight out of the playbook that lost the Conservative Party the last three British elections. The old Conservatives thought that if they just kept attacking Labor, the citizens would see the error of their ways.

It didn't work, and it's hard to imagine the American electorate buying McCain's new advertising effort to undermine Obama by accusing him of being a "celebrity" and comparing him -- OMG! -- to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. McCain has made matters worse by falsely accusing Obama of wanting to raise taxes on electricity and by offering a phony account of why Obama decided not to visit wounded American soldiers in Europe.

By running an attack campaign that is almost a parody of George W. Bush's 2000 and 2004 exertions, McCain is chucking away his greatest opportunity, which is to show that he could reform Republicanism and offer voters an alternative way of breaking with a past they have come to loathe.

Interestingly, Miliband put himself at the center of Britain's torrid political speculation with an op-ed article in the Guardian on Wednesday suggesting that even an incumbent party can turn itself into a party of change if it understands the fix it's in. "To get our message across, we must be more humble about our shortcomings but more compelling about our achievements," he wrote, noting that Labor "won three elections by offering real change, not just in policy but in the way we do politics. We must do so again."

It's true that Labor's record in Britain is more compelling than Bush's in the United States. That's why it's sad to see Brown, an intelligent and decent man, in such trouble. But Miliband and Cameron both have the right idea: Voters are in a mood to give the status quo a swift kick. Instead of offering puerile ads trashing Obama, McCain should show how he'd be the change we've been waiting for.

By E. J. Dionne Jr., The Washington Post, August 1, 2008

CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa, July 31 -- Sen. John McCain's campaign accused Sen. Barack Obama of playing the "race card" on Thursday, a day after the Democrat said his opponent and other Republicans would try to scare voters by pointing to Obama's "funny name" and the fact that "he doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills."

The charge was the first time the campaigns had directly confronted the subject of race. Although both sides have sought to avoid raising the thorny issue, the back-and-forth showed that it was perhaps inevitable the topic would emerge in a campaign in which an African American is headed for a major-party nomination for the first time.

The exchange was reminiscent of several flare-ups over race during the Democratic primaries, when the Obama campaign complained about comments made by Bill Clinton in support of the candidacy of his wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. The former president responded by accusing the Obama campaign of "feeding" the news media to keep the issue of race alive. Obama also tackled the issue in a major speech in Philadelphia to quell controversy over the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., his former pastor, who accused the U.S. government of conspiring against African Americans.

The McCain campaign's charge comes in a week in which it has launched a series of increasingly harsh attacks against Obama, accusing the Democrat of turning his back on wounded troops and being an arrogant, out-of-touch celebrity who does not appreciate the problems of average Americans.

"Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck," McCain campaign manager Rick Davis said in a statement. "It's divisive, negative, shameful and wrong."

Obama began his day Wednesday in Springfield, Mo., charging: "Nobody really thinks that Bush or McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face, so what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me. You know, he's not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name. You know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He's risky."

In Rolla and then in Union, Obama issued similar lines. "They're going to try to say, 'Well, you know, he's got a funny name, and he doesn't look like all the presidents on the dollar bills and the five-dollar bills,' and they're going to send out nasty e-mails," he told an audience in Union.

E-mails making false charges against Obama have circulated for months, but there is no evidence that McCain's campaign has been behind them.

Obama aides said the candidate's remarks were no different from applause lines he has used for months. At a mid-June fundraiser in Jacksonville, Fla., for instance, Obama said: "They're going to try to make you afraid of me. He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?' "

But Obama did appear to expand upon the theme by linking the attacks to McCain by name. Asked what specifically Obama was referring to, campaign manager David Plouffe avoided the question, saying, "What we're seeing out of the McCain campaign, the Republican Party and some of their allies have been some very aggressive charges."

Obama strategist Robert Gibbs said separately: "Barack Obama in no way believes that the McCain campaign is using race as an issue, but he does believe they're using the same old low-road politics to distract voters from the real issues in this campaign, and those are the issues he'll continue to talk about."

McCain aides acknowledged that Obama has leveled similar accusations for some time, but they said the insinuations that McCain was personally a party to racism required a response. In an e-mail, senior McCain aide Mark Salter wrote that Davis issued the statement to defend McCain "from Obama's repeated suggestion that he's running a racist campaign." Salter continued: "When he did it the first time yesterday, we let it pass. When he did it again later, specifically linking us to it, we decided to respond."

Salter added that "there isn't a shred of evidence" that McCain "would tolerate such a thing," noting that the senator from Arizona had denounced an Ohio radio talk show host who mocked Obama's name and that he criticized an ad by the North Carolina Republican Party highlighting Obama's ties to Wright.

Responding to a question on CNN about whether it was fair to say that Obama was playing the race card, McCain responded: "It is. I'm sorry to say that it is. It's legitimate. And we don't -- there's no place in this campaign for that. There's no place for it, and we shouldn't be doing it."

McCain also defended the more aggressive strategy at a town hall meeting in Wisconsin, where a young woman asked him why he had launched an ad juxtaposing Obama with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. "What we are talking about here is substance, and not style," he said. "Campaigns are tough, but I am proud of the campaign we have run, I'm proud of the issues we have raised."

In recent days, McCain has aired advertisements and issued statements labeling his opponent a vapid celebrity akin to Hilton and Spears, accusing him of canceling a visit to wounded veterans because he could not bring along a media entourage, and suggesting he would raise taxes on electricity -- all questionable assertions.

Battling what aides called McCain's "gutter distractions," Obama's team continued to push back Thursday on the stump and launched a Web site called the Low Road Express.

At a town hall meeting in Cedar Rapids, though, Obama did seem to pull back slightly from his remarks Wednesday, dropping references to his name and looks. "All they're doing is churning out the same stuff they do every four years. All you have to do is change the name," Obama told a boisterous crowd. "So when you hear my opponent say he's too risky, what they're really saying is 'We know we don't have any good ideas, but you should be worried about him.' "

Roger Wilkins, an African American scholar at George Mason University, called Obama's Missouri statements "fair campaigning," considering McCain's recent attacks.

"It seems to me at this point it would be naive of the Obama campaign not to anticipate efforts to tear at Obama's character the way Bush tore away at John Kerry's character four years ago. So if a fellow can rationally expect a Swift boat full of funny racial angles racing at him, he would only be sane to try to deflect that," Wilkins said.

How would candidate Obama answer Professor Obama's exams? During his years teaching constitutional law at the University of Chicago, Barack Obama favored take-home tests touching on some of the scorchingly hot-button legal issues of the day: gay rights, reproductive freedom, affirmative action and racial profiling.

These exams, unearthed by the New York Times's resourceful Jodi Kantor, are edgy versions of the classic law school "issue spotter." Can a state university's law review expand its affirmative action program to include special treatment for gay students as well as racial minorities? Does a man have any right to stop his ex-wife from using their frozen embryos to try to get pregnant? Can parents whose daughter is in a vegetative state be prohibited from trying to clone her?

To read Obama's exams is to get a glimpse of the supple intelligence he would bring to the presidency and to be impressed by his lawyerly capacity -- perhaps even compulsion -- to see the other side's argument and mine the weaknesses of his own case.

But it is also a reminder of Obama's essential elusiveness, and how little we understand about how the candidate himself would resolve these thorny problems.

It's easy to imagine President Obama wrestling with a real-world version of Professor Obama's hypothetical. Obama has said that he does not support same-sex marriage. But his exam question involves the same issues that the California Supreme Court addressed in overturning the state's ban on same-sex marriage. If the Constitution protects Richard and Michael's effort to have a child, would it similarly protect their right to marry?

In the model answers he provided for students after another exam, Obama refers to "some persuasive arguments" that homosexuality should be covered by the equal protection clause. How does that square with his opposition to same-sex marriage? Are civil unions a separate-but-equal substitute?

To take a 1997 question, should "Splitsville," a city plagued by residential segregation and failing schools, be permitted to create an all-black, all-male career academy, or is the "Ujamaa School" unlawful discrimination?

Even if constitutional, Obama asked, "is it good public policy? Put somewhat differently, in light of . . . the history of race and gender discrimination in America, is the Ujamaa School a worthy attempt to promote long-term equality, or . . . a dangerous betrayal of the American ideal?"

In model answers, Obama didn't tip his hand. Instead, he noted merely that "I did find it interesting that, based on a justifiable skepticism in the prospect of truly integrated schools and an equally justified concern over the desperate condition of many inner-city schools, a slim majority of you favored the idea of a Ujamaa-type program."

Another question asked students to advise "Utopia" governor "Arnold Whatzanager" on a ballot initiative -- a follow-up to one barring racial preferences -- prohibiting the state "from classifying any individual by race, ethnicity, color or national origin."

Obama sought from the students a "broader perspective on whether the use of racial classifications by the state should in fact be rethought."

You can hear campaign trail echoes of Obama's efforts to grapple with this question. "I have a sister who is half Indonesian, who is married to a Chinese Canadian," he said the other day. "I don't know what that makes my niece."

Obama's part of the Con Law curriculum involved individual rights, so some of the constitutional issues most salient to a president -- the separation of powers, the scope of executive authority -- are not covered.

In one 2001 question, though, Obama asked students to imagine themselves as lawyers in the White House counsel's office, advising the president after an anthrax-like attack. Faced with a shortage of antibiotics, and given evidence that African Americans and women were more susceptible to the toxin, how could the president allocate the medication?

The Obama exams provide no smoking guns for opposition researchers. Rather, they are fleeting snapshots reminiscent of Obama's approach in "The Audacity of Hope," evenhanded in a way that is simultaneously impressive and maddening.

Reading them buttressed my confidence in Obama's capacity to grasp the nuances of any question, no matter how complex. They also underscored my sense that, in the hardest cases, I'm not always sure where Professor Obama, or President Obama for that matter, comes down.

It is an extraordinary bit of political trivia that two popular red-state Democratic governors -- both in presidential battleground states -- spent time as Catholic lay missionaries in the developing world.

Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia taught at a Jesuit school in Honduras in the early 1980s, an experience he credits with turning his life toward public service. "It was life-changing to live among the poorest of the poor," he has said.

Gov. Bill Ritter of Colorado moved his young family to Zambia for three years in the late 1980s to run a nutrition center -- spreading agricultural technology, caring for the sick, and digging graves for AIDS victims. The experience, he has explained, caused him to make time for the needy and unwanted: "This may be what Jesus meant when he said we must lay down our lives for others."

But maybe this shared background is neither extraordinary nor trivial. Both governors have succeeded in difficult ideological environments precisely because they represent a Catholic-influenced alternative to secular liberalism. Their vision of social justice, especially on poverty and civil rights, is informed by faith. And on right-to-life issues, they at least struggle to balance individual autonomy with the rights of the weak.

But Kaine's performance on life issues is like watching a contortionist on a tightrope. He talks of "a presumption toward life and toward the protection of life," but says, as a government official, he must enforce existing law. So far, so good. But he has also said that, should the Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade and return the issue to the states, he would veto new legislation outlawing abortion. Which means his moral views on the value of unborn life are so private he would overturn the will of the legislature to ensure they do not prevail. This is not "pro-life" in any meaningful sense.

Kaine is likable, religiously outspoken and relatively popular in a battleground state. By all of these measures, his fellow former missionary Bill Ritter should also be in the vice presidential mix.

Ritter has one of the most compelling stories in American politics. One of 12 children abandoned by an alcoholic father, he began working in construction at the age of 14 to support his family. He helped care for a disabled brother who died at age 6 -- an experience that, he says, taught him "the intrinsic value of life." He worked for years to reconcile with his estranged father, sometimes playing cards with him and his friends at the Salvation Army. As a prosecutor, he worked to steer nonviolent drug offenders toward treatment instead of prison. As governor, he has been a strong but responsible environmentalist. Recently, he has found himself in the middle of a messy fight between labor unions and businesses but has tried to broker a peace.

There is one political problem with Ritter: He is more authentically pro-life than Kaine. "It's something that comes to me as a matter of conscience about the beginning of human life," he has said. "I just can't come around to the right to choose." Running for governor, he assured voters he had no plans to push for legal changes on abortion. But he once affirmed that if Roe v. Wade were overturned, he would sign anti-abortion legislation that included exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother. In the Democratic Party, there is no reason to take such a risky position except conscience.

Many national Democrats consider Ritter a cipher, with little reputation outside Colorado. But Ritter's story of personal struggle, service in Zambia and environmental leadership would appeal broadly. And picking a genuinely pro-life running mate would be a revolutionary decision by Obama -- helping remove the largest obstacle to broad, Democratic realignment.

If Obama wants to choose an advocate of Catholic social justice as his vice president, perhaps he should consider a consistent one.

By TOM BRUNE, Newsday, August 1, 2008

The blast-off didn't materialize, and the Dalibama found his numbers falling in Ohio, Pennsylvania an Florida. Even worse, the late night comics were having a field day with his "inflate your tires, end the energy crisis" pronouncement.

Michelle Obama returned to the political lists, and is her habit, she potrayed a grim America the outlines of which just don't register with most voters, even among many of the single moms and working mothers she was appealing to. Mrs. Obama told a crowd she didn't want Obama to run, but then changed her mind:

But then I had to take a step back and take off my "Me" mommy hat, and put on my "Us" mommy hat. And I started thinking about the kind of world that I would want to hand over to my daughters. I had to think long and hard about wanting them to be able to dream of anything for themselves, you know, wanting them to be able to imagine any kind of future for themselves, and know that they would have the kind of support from this country that would allow them and all of our children to achieve those dreams. And then I realized that if that's the kind of world that I wanted for my girls, then I had to do everything in my power, make every sacrifice, to make it possible. So that's why I'm a woman for Obama. That is why.

No imagining "any kind of a future" without Obama? Barack's not the only one with some ego on display this week.

With the pressure on Obama did what he has done before --he played the race card, asserting that John McCain would try and scare voters because of Obama's name, his insufficient patriotism, and because Obama doesn't look the presidents on the dollar bills. Put aside the gaffe about presidents being on dollar bills --just another in a long string from Mr. 57 States-- and note that this is the second time in recent weeks when Obama reflexively played a race card. At a Florida fund-raiser in June, Obama said this:

"The choice is clear. Most of all we can choose between hope and fear. It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy. We know what kind of campaign they're going to run. They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?"

John McCain pushed back, hard, as he should and hopefully will again and again. There have been lots of occasions over the years to disagree with Senator McCain, but no one has ever before accused him or running a dishonorable, racist campaign, and his anger is genuine. The accusation of racism is a slander, and McCain won't put up with it, nor will most voters. Obama's sensitivity to being compared with light weights Brittany Spears and Paris Hilton --"fame without portfolio" is how McCain surrogate Lindsey Graham put it in noting the tie that binds the trio-- led him to throw down the race card, an unforced error on his part, worse even than the demonstration of empty-suitedness with his "inflate your tires to energy freedom" baffler.

McCain won the week, or rather Obama lost it. Even the MSM began to notice the "all hat, no cattle" aspect of Obama's campaign, asking "What has he ever done? What does he propose to do, specifically?"

And as a backdrop to it all, an emerging an undeniable victory in Iraq that, had Obama had his way, would not only have been prevented but which would have seen genocide in its place.

Obama doesn't understand the war, and increasingly seems not to understand the American voter. The former is the most important issue and Obama cannot bring himself to admit and celebrate the unfolding victory, and the latter doesn't live in Germany, and deeply resents unfair accusations of racism.

An old political adage says, "He who sets the debate wins the election."

If the presidential election was held tomorrow, it would be hello President Barack Obama because, so far, John McCain is handing him a victory.

McCain is better than the campaign he has run so far. Most people admit that McCain is an inspirational figure - even Obama has admitted that - so why isn't McCain telling voters where he wants to lead them?

Instead, his campaign is all about his opponent.

"He himself is reinforcing that this campaign is all about Obama," says Democratic strategist Mark Siegel. "His ads and his message are all negatives. The problem with that is, it is driving his own negatives up as well."

GOP strategist David Carney disagrees; he says the McCain campaign has no choice but to do what it can to bring down Obama by constantly introducing him to voters through his flaws. "There is no positive that will help McCain," he insists.

Obama's critics say there is no substance behind his rhetoric - but McCain's critics and supporters alike are wondering where is the rhetoric and the substance?

They know McCain is bigger than the campaign he is running, and wonder why he is acting so small.

Siegel points to Bob Dole's campaign against Bill Clinton in 1996, when "the message that Dole was running on against Clinton was, 'Where is the outrage?'

"Dole had nothing positive to say," he adds. "He came across as a snarling, angry old man and, frankly, McCain is looking snarlier, angrier and older than Dole."

McCain is very smart; his political instincts generally are very good when he is confident and on firm ground. But they are terrible when he feels things are out of control and when he loses faith in himself or the people around him.

Today's close opinion polls have everything to do with Obama. He has not pulled ahead of McCain because he still is an unknown, he's black - and pollsters have not expanded their universes to include the baseline of the new black and youth voters.

Another reason the polling should offer little comfort to Republicans is that the numbers mirror 1980's closeness between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan.

That race was not about Carter in the same way this race is not about McCain. Reagan's biggest hurdle was passing the commander-in-chief test; while remaining tied with Carter, Reagan went the entire summer and into the fall passing threshold after threshold. By the end of October, it all broke Reagan's way.

This race has that same feel to it for Obama.

Traditionally, campaigns that are ahead in the polls can't help but be smug. Once McCain actually has a message that is about him, it will force Obama to react to it and to McCain's core values.

What the McCainiacs should stop doing is using their man as a prop in a supermarket, as if he is somebody's grandfather in a suit and tie shopping for groceries. That is not who John McCain is to Americans.

And McCain just looks plain uncomfortable attacking Obama day in and day out. Isn't that what a surrogate should be doing?

For his own good, he should stop talking about Obama. It's like the first rule of Fight Club: Never talk about Fight Club.

As Democrat Siegel says, all that accomplishes is to trivialize the campaign.

McCain must get back to talking about reforming Washington and how that applies to average Americans and how he will lead the way.

McCain Reform can trump Obama Change. In fact, reform means change with stability attached to it, and stability is the one thing that can undercut change.

The choice right now is change with a guy who is running through the forest followed by blue birds and unicorns - and with a grumpy old man shouting at him.

Sort of like a Grimm’s fairy tale on steroids.

Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama has put his fundraising team to work helping raise unlimited donations from big donors for the cash-hungry Democratic National Convention.

Federal campaigns are not permitted to raise unrestricted amounts of money from wealthy donors, unions or corporations except when fundraising for the host committees that finance national presidential conventions.

Last month, the convention's Denver host committee reported an $11.6 million shortfall in its mid-June fundraising goal of $40.6 million.

Since then, Obama announced that he would give his nomination acceptance speech at Invesco Field at Mile High stadium, significantly increasing convention costs. Convention organizers put the Invesco cost at $5 million-$5.5 million, but say that not using Pepsi Center on the fourth night will save enough to bring the overall increase closer to $4 million.

Organizers had, in part, blamed the lengthy Democratic primary for their fundraising difficulties.

"Now that we have a candidate it has definitely helped in our efforts," said Steve Farber, a Denver lawyer and lobbyist who is the host committee's chief fundraiser. "Before you had a lot of people on the sidelines saying, 'Let me see who the nominee is and then we'll talk.'"

Fundraising for the Republican National Convention has been on target and presidential candidate John McCain's campaign said McCain has not participated in fundraising for the event.

The Obama campaign declined to say whether Obama himself has solicited money as part of this effort, but members of his vaunted fundraising team have been involved and the campaign gave the host committee a list of his donors to hit up.

In helping raise money for the convention, the Obama campaign can seek sums significantly larger than the $2,300 maximum donations allowed by individuals for his campaign.

Campaign finance watchdog groups say the exception in the law that allows host committees to raise unlimited amounts of money is a loophole that should be closed.

"There is a greater concern when members of Congress are raising the money, and, of course, Sen. Obama is a sitting senator," said Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics. "This being the case, it's definitely valid to question what the motives are behind these donations and whether such candidates would feel beholden to these companies."

The Obama camp says that in assisting the host committee Obama intends to abide by his decision not to solicit money from lobbyists. Obama has also applied the ban on lobbyists' money to the Democratic National Committee.

"We are working together and confident that we will raise the funds necessary to have a successful convention in Denver," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said. "We are going to continue not raising money from lobbyists, even if raising for the host committee."

Obama's finance director, Julianna Smoot, was in Denver this week meeting with convention organizers.

Farber said the Obama camp supplied names of donors and fundraisers "that we can contact and get support."

"Most of the outreach has come from us," he said, adding: "That's not to say that we have not received help from a lot of the people in the Obama campaign."

The Denver host committee originally had a target of $55 million in private donations - now closer to $60 million with Invesco Field. The Democratic and Republican conventions also will get $16.5 million each in public money - from the presidential fund financed by taxpayers who choose to designate $3 on their tax returns each year.

"We're still a little bit short, but I'm not worried about it," said the Rev. Leah Daughtry, CEO of the Democratic National Convention Committee. "The (Obama) campaign is on the ground, and they're helping out. And, you know, we'll have all the money that we need to pay everybody on time according to their contracts."

By JIM KUHNHENN, The Associated Press, August 01, 2008

It is a tradition at many kitchen tables to yell at the newspaper. At John McCain's kitchen table, it is becoming a tradition to yell at one paper in particular: The New York Times.

The latest dustup between the Republican presidential candidate and the "All the News that's fit to Print" big-name newspaper centered on the editorial board's back-to-back criticisms of McCain, one dispatch accusing him of taking the low road and another contending that he was playing politics with race.

The second editorial, which appeared on the Times Web site, said McCain's ads conjured up loaded racial images and raised the specter of O.J. Simpson.

"The presumptive Republican nominee has embarked on a bare-knuckled barrage of negative advertising aimed at belittling Mr. Obama," the editorial board wrote.

The response from the McCain campaign was equally cutting.

"If the shareholders of The New York Times ever wonder why the paper's ad revenue is plummeting and its share price tanking, they need look no further than the hysterical reaction of the paper's editors to any slight, real or imagined, against their preferred candidate," said McCain campaign spokesman Michael Goldfarb.

Goldfarb compared the editors to a blogger "sitting at home in his mother's basement and ranting into the ether between games of Dungeons & Dragons."

Times spokeswoman Catherine Mathis declined to comment on Friday.

The relationship between McCain - a frequent reader of the newspaper - and the Times has been rocky. Yet such a grudge could pay political dividends for the presidential candidate, as criticizing the liberal media often improves a candidate's standing with Republican Party conservatives. That's critical for McCain, who has never been their favorite.

Back in January, the Times endorsed McCain's candidacy for the Republican nomination, saying, "Sen. John McCain of Arizona is the only Republican who promises to end the George Bush style of governing from and on behalf of a small, angry fringe."

Since then, it's been McCain v. The New York Times.

In February, the newspaper printed a story about McCain and a female lobbyist, reporting that unnamed McCain associates years ago had become concerned the relationship may have become romantic. Both McCain and the lobbyist have unequivocally denied that it was, and the newspaper's editor said he was surprised at the reaction to the story.

A month later, McCain flashed his temper at a Times reporter, repeatedly cutting her off when asked whether he had spoken to Democratic Sen. John Kerry about being his vice president in 2004.

Then last month, Republicans complained that the paper rejected an Op-Ed piece by McCain about the Iraq war after one by Obama was printed and received widespread attention. The paper said it had only tried to get McCain to rewrite the piece to be more specific about his plan.

"McCain is still, I think, upset about the Op-Ed not being printed," said Mike Paul, a former aide to New York Republicans who is now a consultant.

Paul said several recent moves by McCain show the presidential candidate is consciously moving away from his role as an unconventional politician.

Beyond any personal pique there may be, there is a strategy to attacking the Times because it is a bogeyman of conservatives who still may not be entirely sold on the Arizona senator.

Senior advisers are fully aware that assailing the Times could help endear McCain to his talk radio skeptics and their followers.

So, they go after the newspaper often - and send the message: McCain stands with you.

Advisers also recognize the power of the newspaper to influence how other media organizations cover the campaign, so they are aggressive in pointing out where they feel McCain was wronged.

McCain, though, is hardly the first Republican to want to tear up the paper.

Back in 1992, aides to President George H.W. Bush complained that the Times and other media outlets had mischaracterized his examination of a grocery check-out scanner by suggesting he was unfamiliar with the long-used technology and implying he was out of touch with everyday Americans' economic issues.

In the 2004 election, a conservative anti-tax group called Club for Growth ran an ad decrying Democrat Howard Dean as a "latte-drinking, sushi-eating, Volvo-driving, New York Times-reading" tax-raiser.

"It's not complicated," said Club for Growth spokeswoman Nachama Soloveichik. The paper, she said, "has really become a symbol for a lot of conservative grievances."

"For starters, their editorials are decidedly liberal. That's a no-brainer. And there are often complaints that even their general reporting is biased in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. The New York Times has come to be associated with the Northeast liberal establishment."

Paul, the consultant, said he thinks the McCain campaign's criticisms of the paper may look good to some but won't work in the long run.

"You might get that base, but you won't win the election," he said. "It goes back to the old saying, 'Don't throw rocks at people who own ink barrels' ... and people have gotten sick and tired of the excuse that all media is liberal."

By DEVLIN BARRETT, Town Hall, August 02, 2008

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama opposes offering reparations to the descendants of slaves, putting him at odds with some black groups and leaders.

The man with a serious chance to become the nation's first black president argues that government should instead combat the legacy of slavery by improving schools, health care and the economy for all.

"I have said in the past - and I'll repeat again - that the best reparations we can provide are good schools in the inner city and jobs for people who are unemployed," the Illinois Democrat said recently.

Some two dozen members of Congress are co-sponsors of legislation to create a commission that would study reparations - that is, payments and programs to make up for the damage done by slavery.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People supports the legislation, too. Cities around the country, including Obama's home of Chicago, have endorsed the idea, and so has a major union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

Obama has worked to be seen as someone who will bring people together, not divide them into various interest groups with checklists of demands. Supporting reparations could undermine that image and make him appear to be pandering to black voters.

"Let's not be naive. Sen. Obama is running for president of the United States, and so he is in a constant battle to save his political life," said Kibibi Tyehimba, co-chair of the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America. "In light of the demographics of this country, I don't think it's realistic to expect him to do anything other than what he's done."

But this is not a position Obama adopted just for the presidential campaign. He voiced the same concerns about reparations during his successful run for the Senate in 2004.

There's enough flexibility in the term "reparations" that Obama can oppose them and still have plenty of common ground with supporters.

The NAACP says reparations could take the form of government programs to help struggling people of all races. Efforts to improve schools in the inner city could also aid students in the mountains of West Virginia, said Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP's Washington bureau.

"The solution could be broad and sweeping," Shelton said.

The National Urban League - a group Obama addressed Saturday without mentioning the issue in his speech - avoids the word "reparations" as too vague and highly charged. But the group advocates government action to close the gaps between white America and black America.

Urban League President Marc Morial said he expects his members to press Obama on how he intends to close those gaps and what action he would take in the first 100 days of his presidency.

Obama says an apology would be appropriate but not particularly helpful in improving the lives of black Americans. Reparations could also be a distraction, he said.

In a 2004 questionnaire, he told the NAACP, "I fear that reparations would be an excuse for some to say, 'We've paid our debt,' and to avoid the much harder work."

Taking questions Sunday at a conference of minority journalists, Obama said he would be willing to talk to American Indian leaders about an apology for the nation's treatment of their people.

Pressed for his position on apologizing to blacks or offering reparations, Obama said he was more interested in taking action to help people struggling to get by. Because many of them are minorities, he said, that would help the same people who would stand to benefit from reparations.

"If we have a program, for example, of universal health care, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because they're disproportionately uninsured," Obama said. "If we've got an agenda that says every child in America should get - should be able to go to college, regardless of income, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because it's oftentimes our children who can't afford to go to college."

One reparations advocate, Vernellia Randall, a law professor at the University of Dayton, bluntly responded: "I think he's dead wrong."

She said aid to the poor in general won't close the gaps - poor blacks would still trail poor whites, and middle-class blacks would still lag behind middle-class whites. Instead, assistance must be aimed directly at the people facing the after-effects of slavery and Jim Crow laws, she said.

"People say he can't run and get elected if he says those kinds of things," Randall said. "I'm like, well does that mean we're really not ready for a black president?"

Democratic candidate Barack Obama on Saturday backed away from rival John McCain's challenge for a series of joint appearances, agreeing only to the standard three debates in the fall.

In May, when a McCain adviser proposed a series of pre-convention appearances at town hall meetings, Obama said, "I think that's a great idea." In summer stumping on the campaign trail, McCain has often noted that Obama had not followed through and joined him in any events.

Obama's reversal on town hall debates is part of a play-it-safe strategy he's adopted since claiming the nomination and grabbing a lead in national polls. Advisers to the Illinois senator, speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss strategy, say Obama is reluctant to take chances or give McCain a high-profile stage now that Obama's the front-runner.

On Saturday, in a letter to the Commission on Presidential Debates, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said the short period between the last political convention and the first proposed debate made it likely that the commission-sponsored debates would be the only ones.

"We've committed to the three debates on the table," campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Saturday in an interview. "It's likely they will be the three appearances by the candidates this fall."

Asked by The Associated Press if that meant Obama would not agree to any other debates, Psaki said, "We're not saying that." She said the McCain campaign had rejected Obama's proposal for two joint town hall meetings.

McCain's campaign disparaged Obama for backing off. McCain has not yet formally agreed to the commission-sponsored debates, but the McCain campaign says he plans to.

"We understand it might be beneath a worldwide celebrity of Barack Obama's magnitude to appear at town hall meetings alongside John McCain and directly answer questions from the American people, but we hope he'll reconsider," spokesman Brian Rogers said.

The first debate planned by the commission is set for Sept. 26 in Oxford, Miss., three weeks after the Republican National Convention concludes Sept. 4. The Democratic convention is scheduled for Aug. 25-28.

The other presidential debates are set for Oct. 7 and Oct. 15 and the vice presidential debate for Oct. 2.

A day after Obama clinched the Democratic nomination in early June, McCain challenged Obama to a series of 10 town hall meetings. The candidates' campaigns began negotiations, telling reporters that they agreed in spirit to joint appearances.

Plouffe said Saturday that Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois will be Obama's representative in further discussions with the commission.

The Commission on Presidential Debates, established in 1987, sponsors and produces debates featuring the presidential and vice presidential candidates of the major parties. The nonprofit and nonpartisan organization has sponsored all the presidential debates since 1988.

Hillary Clinton's hopes of becoming America's next vice-president were fading yesterday after it emerged that she will address Barack Obama's nominating convention this month - but on the night before his running-mate is scheduled to speak.

Aides to Mrs Clinton, who has made it clear that she would take the job if asked, say that she will make a speech at the Democratic convention in Denver on August 26, and not on the Wednesday night when the vice-presidential nominee is due to appear. Although Mr Obama still insists that Mrs Clinton would be "on anybody's shortlist", the timing of her speech indicates that he is looking elsewhere.

Mrs Clinton, who campaigned for the first time on Mr Obama's behalf on Thursday, is said to have accepted privately that she will not be on the presidential ticket. A support group pushing for her to be Mr Obama's running-mate also disbanded on Thursday night.

Her address will come on the 88th anniversary of the ratification of the 19th Amendment, which granted US women the right to vote. It is understood that she will be joined on stage by all her female Senate Democratic colleagues.

Mr Clinton believes that the Obama camp exploited the issue to damage him and his wife. After John McCain's campaign on Thursday accused Mr Obama of playing the race card, the top Republican strategists conceded that they had learnt lessons from Mrs Clinton's campaign and would fight back hard against any perceived effort to accuse them of racism.

The McCain camp accused the Democratic candidate of exploiting the race issue on Thursday after he said that the Republicans were trying to scare voters by telling them that he "doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills".

Rick Davis, Mr McCain's campaign manager, said: "We're not going to allow anyone to define John McCain on these terms." Mr McCain, speaking to reporters in Florida, said Mr Obama's comments were clearly racial in tone, adding: "I did not bring up the issue." One third of Mr McCain's advertisements are attacks on Mr Obama, a new study shows. The Republican said: "I don't think the campaign is negative in the slightest."

Mr Obama, at a separate event in the Florida, denied injecting race into the election. Yet his campaign manager, David Axelrod, conceded that when the Democrat made his dollar-bill remark, part of it was racial. "He's not from central casting when it comes to presidents of the United States. He's young, he's new to Washington, yes, he's African-American," he said.

The row erupted after Mr McCain released an advertisement comparing Mr Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, an attempt to portray him as somebody more interested in celebrity than the concerns of voters. Last night the McCain campaign continued the same theme with another advertisement mocking Mr Obama as a narcissistic messiah figure.

Mr Obama said that the McCain camp "seem to be focused on a negative campaign". An aide described the new advertisement as "downright sad". Mr McCain said that he was trying to have fun with the videos.

Presidential race

- Barack Obama on the Rev Jeremiah Wright in March: "I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother ... a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street."

- In a radio interview in April Bill Clinton accused Obama's campaign of "playing the race card". Later, assuming the microphone was off, he said: "I don't think I should take any s**t from anybody on that, do you?"

- Rick Davis, the McCain campaign manager, in a statement yesterday: "Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck. It's divisive, negative, shameful, and wrong."

CLEVELAND (AP) - Democratic platform writers heard hard-luck stories on jobs, health care and pensions on Saturday as the party began drafting a detailed policy statement to promote nominee-in-waiting Barack Obama.

Twelve people from across the Rust Belt sat at linen-covered folding tables with the 20-member drafting committee and described problems getting adequate health care and protecting jobs and pensions. Party leaders also navigated the fragile alliance between primary-rivals-turned-allies Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton.

"I'm worried about the future of this country," said Rita Bugvacich, 57, of Youngstown, who will be laid off from her manufacturing job Oct. 31.

Bugvacich, who has worked as a shipping clerk for 39 years, said manufacturing cutbacks have left people in cities such as Youngstown needing two jobs to support their families.

Bruce Bostik, 59, who relocated to Columbus after working almost 30 years in a steel mill in Lorain, west of Cleveland, said his pension has been cut from $3,000 monthly to $125 monthly amid a company bankruptcy and government oversight of his retirement pay.

He endorsed a proposal to make employee pensions a higher priority when a company's bankruptcy court finances are handled.

The drafting committee heard from policy experts Friday after soliciting ideas at 1,600 gatherings throughout the country during the past month. Obama backers sought ways to incorporate ideas from Clinton's campaign - particularly on health care and working families, two central tenets of her campaign.

Both political parties produce a platform as a statement of principles each presidential election year. The Democrats' platform draft will be written Saturday and Sunday and goes before the full platform committee next Saturday in Pittsburgh.

"The most encouraging thing is she has been listened to," said Chris Jennings, a member of the platform drafting committee and a Clinton backer.

"I think there's a recognition she has a lot of supporters out there and they need to reach out as she's reaching out to him (Obama)," said Jennings, a former top health care adviser to President Clinton.

Jennings said he couldn't rule out Clinton supporters making a stand on specific platform language on key issues of concern to the Clinton camp.

Michael Yaki, an Obama backer who is national platform director, said both sides had worked together well, mindful that any primary campaign differences shrink in comparison to those with Republicans and their candidate, John McCain.

"We've worked together and there are a number of Clinton supporters on the platform committee itself," Yaki said as the drafting committee opened the hearings.

The Republican platform committee meets in late August to develop a draft to present to the GOP convention beginning Sept. 1 in St. Paul, Minn. The GOP solicited online platform suggestions and video submissions for platform writers.

By THOMAS J. SHEERAN, The Associated Press, August 2, 2008

Among our weak points as Americans is a tendency to believe major issues are "done and dusted" long before we have even scratched the surface of their resolution. The French, for example, recognize more than we "plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" (the more things change, the more they remain the same). This election season has revealed that despite such signs of progress as the early twentieth century successful push for the female vote and many years later the Women's Rights Movement, despite the American Civil War during which 600,000 soldiers died, the Civil Rights Movement and The Civil Rights Act of 1964, problems of gender and race bias have not been sufficiently addressed or resolved.

Sure, progress has been made. But why don't we have even 30% women and minorities in the House and Senate? Why wouldn't we insist upon it? Why would we continue to be satisfied with a small number of women wearing bright suits in order to be evident at the helm of our government? And why would we accept the dearth of minority representation in those esteemed halls? Are we so easily satisfied? So confident we've done what's needed and all subsequent lack of progress is the fault of women and minorities?

It might help to look at whether we've ever as a country been truly serious about equal rights and equal appreciation. I happen to be reading Betty Friedman's memoir, Life So Far. Betty and I taught together, became friends and worked together for several years. But I did not recall until recently reading her reflections on the past how Title VII got into the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Believe it or not, it started as a joke.

Congressman Howard Smith, and avid segregationist from Virginia, had tried a last-minute tactic to kill the (Civil Rights) bill by proposing the additions of sex discrimination - as a joke. The House almost had to be recessed in the hysterical laughter that followed. But (Martha) Griffiths and a few other women in Congress swore to make those men stop laughing: they demanded a roll call vote in the House. In the Senate, Margaret Chase Smith of Maine, the only woman senator, demanded the same of Everett Dirksen, the minority leader. Though nobody took the women's vote seriously yet, some sound instinct told those male congressional leaders that they better not be counted in a roll call vote against the ladies, so the "joke" stayed in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The primary reason why hateful attacks on Hillary Clinton from her pantsuits to her cleavage even resonated is because as a nation we are far more immature than we realize, incapable it seems of realizing what a cultural change requires. The only reason why Michelle Obama's opinions must be stifled and Barack Obama must be berated for expressing the obvious - he is different than the presidents past who appear on one and five dollar bills - is that we are far from done with the women's or civil rights movement in this country. Attacks on John McCain's age are no less abhorrent as they reveal our love affair with youth and immature disdain for the benefits of acquired wisdom.

Bias festers beneath a surface sporadic civility in America that we have all seen break down under pressure of the current election cycle.

What do we do? We could start by being more honest with ourselves. No one exists without bias - not even intellectuals who often think they're exempt. Being bright or highly educated doesn't render anyone free of bias though some forms of education certainly open minds and quell dogmatism. Fortunately, many people struggle to overcome their own destructive biases. But even for such people, assumptions about others guide daily life. Most are not harmful even if they are distorted. But to act as if we have somehow conquered those that are, the ones that threaten our unity and value as a culture, is to deceive ourselves.

If Betty were next to me right now, she might well be pacing the room, frowning, loudly demanding that I cease to imply that the paradigm shift of gender equality was never completed - that the revolution for gender and race equality are stalled and the side in favor is still threatened. Perhaps, as was her way, she might settle down and begin to explore whether indeed all she worked for was being undermined mostly because we became complacent too soon.

People cannot function without assumptions. And prejudice will never be eradicated. In place of petty discussions about gender and race cards, we need constructive public debate and discussion about why prejudices still infiltrate our culture all the way up to the government.

We need a goalpost for our culture in terms of appreciation of differences. We need a higher standard of excellence and both the will and a way forward to reach it.

We can't rely for help on segments of the mass media that revel in their "all star" and "crack" analysts who supposedly alter history with the slick turn of a phrase. This is a larger task requiring far less hubris, serious introspection, soul-searching, and far more commitment to balance and truth (to the extent we can know it).

We need long overdue debates between two courageous presidential candidates and on the floors of the House and Senate. In any case, we need to dig deep to unearth self-deception that denies the prevalence of prejudice and to grapple with its ugliness in public until the facetious beast is truly spent.

But Clinton loyalists say it would be even more divisive if the Obama forces denied her a chance to show her historic level of support as a woman candidate. "Then there would be open warfare," says the Democratic adviser.

One solution might be for Clinton to voluntarily remove her name and urge all the delegates to vote for Obama, but it's not clear whether she will choose that course.

For his part, Obama has been conciliatory, reportedly giving Senator Clinton the coveted slot of keynote speaker on the second night of the convention.

Barack Obama was accused yesterday of exploiting the issue of race as his White House battle against John McCain turned into an exchange of televised attacks in which he was portrayed as a vapid celebrity.

Mr Obama, seeking to become America's first black president, was fighting back against a new attack advertisement by his Republican rival suggesting that the Democrat was a vapid celebrity comparable to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.

The advertisement, aired in 11 battleground states, reflects the belief inside the McCain campaign that they have finally found an effective line of attack against Mr Obama - that he is an arrogant, out-of-touch elitist who is more interested in public adulation than the concerns of voters.

The advertisement opens with images of Mr Obama speaking to a crowd of 200,000 in Berlin last week, interspersed with footage of Spears and Hilton, widely considered two of America's most vacuous and selfobsessed public figures. An announcer intones: "He's the biggest celebrity in the world. But is he ready to lead?"

Mr Obama immediately hit back. Speaking yesterday at a rally in Iowa, Mr Obama said: "I do have to ask my opponent - is that the best you can come up with? Is that what is worthy of the American people?" Mr McCain insisted last night that he was proud of the commercial.

Earlier Mr Obama told a crowd in Missouri that Mr McCain and the Republicans were trying to scare voters by saying: "You know, he's not patriotic enough, he's got a funny name, you know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills." Referring to the dollar bills remark, Mr Davis, in a statement from Mr McCain's Virginia headquarters, said: "Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck. It's divisive, negative, shameful and wrong."

The Obama team used sensitivities over race to great effect during his primary battle against Hillary Clinton. Robert Gibbs, his chief spokesman, flatly denied the charge.

Mr McCain's celebrity advertisement uses a tactic pulled straight from the political handbook of Karl Rove, the architect of President Bush's two White House victories. He was a master of defining an opponent negatively, early, and of turning their strengths against them.

It is no coincidence that Mr McCain's new chief strategist is Steve Schmidt, a Rove protege, who headed the Bush re-election war room in 2004 and masterminded the attacks against John Kerry which painted him as an effete flip-flopper. He is now seeking to portray Mr Obama as presumptuous and hubristic. It comes as new polls show Mr Obama and Mr McCain in a statistical tie in Ohio and Florida, two critical battleground states.

Republican strategists were divided over the tactic, amid a new survey showing that a third of Mr McCain's advertisements are negative. Within hours the Obama campaign had released its own response, entitled Low Road, accusing Mr McCain, 71, of playing the "politics of the past" and "old politics" - a none too subtle reference to his age.

Many Republicans fear that Mr McCain will alienate swing voters and independents, who will probably decide the election, by coming across as cranky and mean-spirited. John Weaver, a former McCain aide, said that the advertisement was childish. He added: "He can inspire the country to greatness. This tomfoolery needs to stop." Yet going negative on an opponent has often worked, as Mr Kerry will attest. Michael Dukakis saw a 17-point lead evaporate in 1988 by being defined as a chinless, softon-crime liberal by Lee Atwater, one of the first President Bush's strategists.

There are also signs that the attacks are gaining traction. Frank Luntz, a Republican pollster, said: "Obama has to be careful. Americans punish hubris - ask President Hillary Clinton."

The new disclosures could have political consequences for the Clintons. By calling more attention to the couple's personal wealth, as well as the former president's enormous earning power, the figures could make it more difficult to persuade Democratic Party donors to help pay off Hillary Clinton's $22.5 million in campaign debts - nearly half of which is owed to the Clintons personally. After Clinton dropped out of the presidential race, Barack Obama agreed to ask his top donors to help his defeated rival pay off her campaign debts. But the plea thus far has not yielded nearly the amounts the Clintons and their supporters had hoped for.

A Clinton spokesperson today said that the senator is not seeking relief for the $13 million she poured into her campaign. The spokesperson pointed to a June conference call, in which the New York Democrat said she considered the loan an "investment" and is not expecting anybody to help pay it back.

According to the new financial disclosure, former president Clinton gave 54 speeches worldwide last year. Many of them were given to corporate giants such as Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, General Electric and Lehman Brothers. He averaged more than $186,000 an appearance. Clinton's most lucrative payday was in the United Kingdom on Aug. 14, 2007; a group called AEG London (which operates sports stadiums and franchises) paid him $425,000 for his services.

The disclosure shows that, even while actively campaigning on behalf of his wife's 2008 presidential bid, the former president kept a hectic international schedule. Among his speaking stops: Norway, Sweden, Denmark, London, South Korea and Canada. The international talks have been the most lucrative for the former president, commanding upward of $250,000 an appearance. Over a three-day period in Norway, Denmark and Sweden in May, Clinton earned $1,485,000. The Power Within, a Canada-based motivational speaking agency, shelled out $955,000 in 2007 to have Clinton appear in Minneapolis, Toronto, Montreal and Niagara on the Lake, Canada.

After leaving the White House, Clinton turned to speaking to help settle about $12 million in legal bills accrued during his time as president. In 2006, he gave 352 speeches (nearly one a day) and earned $10.2 million (much of which the former president has donated to charity.) The number of speeches in 2007 was much lower, but appears to have been on average much more lucrative for the former president.

Who played the race card, who is more patriotic, who would have visited American troops in Germany - all subjects that Senator John McCain, the Illinois Republican and presumptive presidential candidate, has used to criticize Mr. Obama, his Democratic oppponent - seemed to matter a bit less on a morning when the Labor Department reported that unemployment had risen to a four-year high of 5.7 percent and General Motors said it had lost $15.5 billion in the second quarter.

Addressing a crowd gathered at a high school gymnasium, Mr. Obama unveiled what he called his emergency economic plan to address the nation's economic woes, including a $500 energy rebate for individual workers and $1,000 for families - his response to Mr. McCain's endorsement of more offshore drilling - and a surtax on oil profits to pay for $50 billion in new spending, half of which would go to state governments that are also hurting and the rest to the depleted highway trust fund.

"This rebate will be enough to offset the increased cost of gas for a working family over the next four months," Mr. Obama told the crowd. "Or, if you live in a state where it gets very cold in the winter, it will be enough to cover the entire increase in your heating bills. Or you could use the rebate for any of your other bills, or even to pay down debt."

"But we have to do more than just provide short-term relief," he told the audience at the high school. "We have to secure our long-term prosperity and strengthen America's competitiveness in the 21st century."

Confronted with the same troubling economic news Friday morning, Mr. McCain said in a statement that "across this country, Americans are hurting, and today's job numbers are just the latest reminder of the economic challenges we face."

"Unlike Senator Obama," he said, "I do not believe that raising taxes is the answer to our economic problems. There is no surer way to force jobs overseas than to raise taxes on businesses."

Like Mr. Obama, Mr. McCain traveled to Florida - a key state where Democrats have lost the last two presidential elections - to address a meeting of the Urban League. Unlike his speech several weeks ago to another mainly black group, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, in which he referred to Mr. Obama as "an impressive fellow," this time Mr. McCain kept up the blistering campaign of criticism that he began last week.

"You'll hear from my opponent, Senator Obama, tomorrow, and if there's one thing he always delivers, it's a great speech," he told the crowd, which grew cooler as he spoke. "But I hope you'll listen carefully, because his ideas are not always as impressive as his rhetoric."

Indeed, Mr. Obama got a chance to show off his oratorical skills at the town-hall meeting on Friday - not just in addressing the crowd but in taming it as well.

While Mr. Obama was delivering his economic message, a loud ruckus erupted behind him. Then came a question.

"In the face of the numerous attacks that are made against the African community or the black community by the same U.S. government that you aspire to lead," said Diop Olugbala, a 31-year-old New Yorker, going on at some length, "why is it that you have not had the ability to not one time speak to the interests and even speak on the behalf of the oppressed and exploited?"

Okay, okay, Mr. Obama said, holding up his hand. Let me finish, he said as the rest of the crowd jeered, and I'll get back to you.

"He asked a legitimate question," Mr. Obama said to the crowd after finishing his prepared remarks, and then said to Mr. Olugbala: "Every question you raised I have spoken about." Predatory lending and its impact on the black and Latino community, the death penalty, the war: all of these he has spoken to, he said.

"Now I may not have spoken out the way you would want me to speak out," he added. "But I am suggesting that I have spoken out, and spoken out forcefully."

Voting for someone else, he suggested, is your option.

Mr. Obama has been sharply critical of the No Child Left Behind law, President Bush's signature education policy, which Mr. McCain generally supports. The law increased educational accountability standards for states, and teachers unions have strongly opposed efforts to renew it.

Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, used much of his speech to highlight his support for charter schools and voucher programs that would allow more parents to send their children to private and parochial schools. Teachers unions have generally opposed these initiatives.

He faced skeptical questions from the largely black audience about his support for a ballot initiative banning affirmative action, for his stance on gun ownership and for his opposition to a federal holiday honoring the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1983 ("Because I was wrong," he replied). Although Mr. McCain was greeted with a standing ovation, and left to one, his remarks about Mr. Obama, his likely Democratic opponent, were often met with silence.

Asked about affirmative action, he said that "affirmative action is in the eye of the beholder" and praised the United States military as the nation's greatest equal opportunity employer.

Mr. Obama campaigned in St. Petersburg, where at a high school gymnasium he unveiled what he called his emergency plan to address the nation's economic woes. His proposals include a $500 energy rebate for individual workers and $1,000 for families - his response to Mr. McCain's endorsement of more offshore drilling for oil - and a surtax on oil profits to pay for $50 billion in new spending, half of which would go to state governments that are also hurting and the rest to the depleted Highway Trust Fund.

"This rebate will be enough to offset the increased cost of gas for a working family over the next four months," Mr. Obama told the crowd. "Or, if you live in a state where it gets very cold in the winter, it will be enough to cover the entire increase in your heating bills. Or you could use the rebate for any of your other bills, or even to pay down debt."

Senator Barack Obama is a man of few rhetorical stumbles, but this week a few of his words opened a racial door his campaign would prefer not to step through. When Senator John McCain's camp replied by accusing him of playing the race card from the bottom of the deck, the Obama campaign seemed at least momentarily off balance.

The instinctive urge to punch back was tempered by the fact that race is a fire that could singe both candidates. So on Friday the Obama campaign, a carefully controlled lot on the best of days, reacted most cautiously as it sought to tamp down any sense that it was at war with Mr. McCain over who was the first to inject race into the contest. Mr. Obama made no mention of the issue, except for a brief reference in an interview with a local newspaper in Florida.

"I was in Union, Mo., which is 98 percent white, a rural conservative, and what I said was what I think everyone knows, which is that I don't look like I came out of central casting when it comes to presidential candidates," he told The St. Petersburg Times. "There was nobody there who thought at all that I was trying to inject race in this."

The furor started on Thursday when Rick Davis, Mr. McCain's campaign manager, said, "Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck." Mr. Davis was alluding to Mr. Obama's remarks on Wednesday that Republicans would try to scare voters by pointing out that he "doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills."

As Mr. Obama carefully addressed the issue on Friday, his campaign's formidable network of grass-roots activists, and the Web sites crafted to give them "talking points" to carry into battle against Republicans, remained uncharacteristically quiet on the matter, even though the issue dominated political blogs for a second straight day.

David Plouffe, the campaign manager, talked briefly, and not too eagerly, about it. And the campaign's chief strategist, David Axelrod, blamed the Republicans for misconstruing Mr. Obama's words as an attack, and quickly moved on.

The muted response should not be taken, even campaign insiders acknowledged, to reflect high-mindedness; the Obama campaign can wield a rhetorical gutting knife. There simply was no percentage for the first black major-party presidential candidate in the nation's history to draw too much attention to his race, much less get into a shooting war with the Republicans over the combustible issue.

"For our part, there is no stake in abetting that strategy," Mr. Axelrod said. "The best we could do is call this and move on."

By the day's end, Mr. McCain proclaimed that he did not want to dwell on the issue either, although he repeated his campaign's central charge that his probable opponent had injected race into their battle.

"He brought up the issue of race; I responded to it," Mr. McCain told reporters in Panama City, Fla. "I don't want that issue to be part of this campaign. I'm ready to move on. And I think we should move on."

For Mr. Obama, the risks of fighting back are that anything that calls attention to the racial dynamics of the contest would potentially polarize voters and stir unease about his candidacy, particularly among white voters in swing states. He is, after all, a candidate who has sought to transcend his own racial heritage in appealing to the broad electorate.

"Ideally, you want to punch back right to the solar plexus," said Chris Lehane, a Democratic strategist. "But when race gets injected, given the 200-year history of this country, it is really fraught with peril."

More broadly, the battles this week over Mr. Obama's comments and Mr. McCain's efforts to link Mr. Obama's celebrity to that of Paris Hilton and Britney Spears raised the question for some political types of both parties about whether Mr. Obama is aggressive enough to lunge for the Republican jugular.

Although his campaign has been known to fire volleys back at Mr. McCain, and Mr. Obama has often been critical of Mr. McCain's policies in his speeches, opportunities to draw blood have come and gone. And he finds challenges on many fronts these days, including at one of his rallies on Friday, where seven self-styled African revolutionaries began shouting and pointing at him, accusing him of undermining revolutionary struggle.

This was perhaps one of Mr. Obama's easier moments of the week, as the crowd was allied as one with him. He motioned the crowd to let the revolutionaries have their say, and then he responded.

"I may not have spoken out the way you want me to speak out," he said. "But I am suggesting that I have spoken out, and spoken out forcefully."

But this is to some extent Mr. Obama's sleight of hand. He relies heavily on surrogates, and tends to back into his attacks. So he cues up Mr. McCain as "an honorable man" and a "war hero," before skewering him as lacking in ideas.

He has, too, a Teflon quality that reminds Democratic strategists of Ronald Reagan. He can get himself in trouble with words, he can flip-flop on a position or three, and little sticks.

"Obama and Reagan are quite similar in this regard," said Jim Jordan, a Democratic strategist who managed John Kerry's unsuccessful presidential campaign in 2004. "They deflect humor with a quip."

So Mr. Obama spoke to a crowd of supporters in Orlando, Fla., on Friday, and poked fun at Mr. McCain. "We were expecting a more elevated debate," he said. "They are running commercials about Hilton and Britney - I mean, that's frivolous."

Still, the candidate has the peculiar habit of rehearsing his faults for listeners, apparently in an effort to inoculate himself against attacks. And that could be how Mr. Obama got himself tangled up in race.

The candidate and Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, traveled this week around the Republican precincts of rural Missouri. Ms. McCaskill tried to set minds at ease by recalling an "old Ozark habit" of saying "they say," as in, they say he's too young, they say he's not the right color.

So far, so politically artful; she never specified Republicans, much less Mr. McCain.

But when Mr. Obama traveled this rhetorical ground, he tripped. "So nobody really thinks that Bush or McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face, so what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me," Mr. Obama said. "You know, he's not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name. You know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills."

Even some Republicans are not convinced that Mr. Obama intended to accuse Mr. McCain of racism, as there's no percentage for him. Mr. McCain talks of himself as experienced but never, ever, old; Mr. Obama talks of change but charily of his status as a historic first.

"He's the candidate who happens to be African-American," Mr. Lehane said. "He's much more effective when he can just throw McCain's words back at him."

Gee, I wonder why, if you have a black man running for high public office - say, Barack Obama or Harold Ford - the opposition feels compelled to run low-life political ads featuring tacky, sexually provocative white women who have no connection whatsoever to the black male candidates.

Spare me any more drivel about the high-mindedness of John McCain. You knew something was up back in March when, in his first ad of the general campaign, Mr. McCain had himself touted as"“the American president Americans have been waiting for."

There was nothing subtle about that attempt to position Senator Obama as the Other, a candidate who might technically be American but who remained in some sense foreign, not sufficiently patriotic and certainly not one of us - the "us" being the genuine red-white-and-blue Americans who the ad was aimed at.

Since then, Senator McCain has only upped the ante, smearing Mr. Obama every which way from sundown. On Wednesday, The Washington Post ran an extraordinary front-page article that began:

"For four days, Senator John McCain and his allies have accused Senator Barack Obama of snubbing wounded soldiers by canceling a visit to a military hospital because he could not take reporters with him, despite no evidence that the charge is true."

Evidence? John McCain needs no evidence. His campaign is about trashing the opposition, Karl Rove-style. Not satisfied with calling his opponent’s patriotism into question, Mr. McCain added what amounted to a charge of treason, insisting that Senator Obama would actually prefer that the United States lose a war if that would mean that he - Senator Obama - would not have to lose an election.

Now, from the hapless but increasingly venomous McCain campaign, comes the slimy Britney Spears and Paris Hilton ad. The two highly sexualized women (both notorious for displaying themselves to the paparazzi while not wearing underwear) are shown briefly and incongruously at the beginning of a commercial critical of Mr. Obama.

The Republican National Committee targeted Harold Ford with a similarly disgusting ad in 2006 when Mr. Ford, then a congressman, was running a strong race for a U.S. Senate seat in Tennessee. The ad, which the committee described as a parody, showed a scantily clad woman whispering, "Harold, call me."

Both ads were foul, poisonous and emanated from the upper reaches of the Republican Party. (What a surprise.) Both were designed to exploit the hostility, anxiety and resentment of the many white Americans who are still freakishly hung up on the idea of black men rising above their station and becoming sexually involved with white women.

The racial fantasy factor in this presidential campaign is out of control. It was at work in that New Yorker cover that caused such a stir. (Mr. Obama in Muslim garb with the American flag burning in the fireplace.) It's driving the idea that Barack Obama is somehow presumptuous, too arrogant, too big for his britches - a man who obviously does not know his place.

Mr. Obama has to endure these grotesque insults with a smile and heroic levels of equanimity. The reason he has to do this - the sole reason - is that he is black.

So there he was this week speaking evenly, and with a touch of humor, to a nearly all-white audience in Missouri. His goal was to reassure his listeners, to let them know he's not some kind of unpatriotic ogre.

Mr. Obama told them: "What they're going to try to do is make you scared of me. You know, he's not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name. You know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He's risky."

The audience seemed to appreciate his comments. Mr. Obama was well-received.

But John McCain didn't appreciate them. RACE CARD! RACE CARD! The McCain camp started bellowing, and it hasn't stopped since. With great glee bursting through their feigned outrage, the campaign's operatives and the candidate himself accused Senator Obama of introducing race into the campaign - playing the race card, as they put it, from the very bottom of the deck.

Whatever you think about Barack Obama, he does not want the race issue to be front and center in this campaign. Every day that the campaign is about race is a good day for John McCain. So I guess we understand Mr. McCain's motivation.

Nevertheless, it's frustrating to watch John McCain calling out Barack Obama on race. Senator Obama has spoken more honestly and thoughtfully about race than any other politician in many years. Senator McCain is the head of a party that has viciously exploited race for political gain for decades.

He's obviously more than willing to continue that nauseating tradition.

ORLANDO, Fla. -- A day after he accused Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) of unfairly exploiting the issue of race in this election, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) made the same pitch to the National Urban League that he delivered two weeks ago to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People: "I am a candidate for president who seeks your vote and hopes to earn it."

Employing many of the identical phrases he used on July 16 in Cincinnati, the presumptive GOP nominee questioned Obama's policy prescriptions for issues ranging from education to taxes. Obama's opposition to federal funding for private-school vouchers has pleased the teachers' unions, the Arizona senator argued, but "where does it leave families and their children who are stuck in failing schools?"

McCain took a harsher tone this time, however. While he started his NAACP speech by saying of Obama, "Don't tell him I said this, but he is an impressive fellow in many ways," today he said he expected Obama to give "a great speech" before the Urban League Saturday, "But I hope you'll listen carefully, because his ideas are not always as impressive as his rhetoric, and this is especially true in the case of the Urban League's agenda of opportunity."

Several hundred people showed up to hear McCain speak here this morning, and they gave him a standing ovation when he started to speak and when he concluded. But they left dozens of seats unfilled, and several voters in the mainly African American audience questioned why McCain and his aides charged the Democrat Thursday with playing "the race card" by saying some Republicans are trying to deter voters from supporting him by suggesting he's different from traditional presidential candidates.

In Missouri on Wednesday, while speaking to majority-white audiences, the Illinois senator had told crowds going to "try to do is make you scared of me. You know, he's not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name. You know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He's risky."

Bruce Williams, a marketing executive from Virginia Beach, Va., said McCain's attacks on Obama amount to "side issues" that fail to address the country's pressing needs.

"We've got five hundred thousand people without jobs. We've got two million foreclosures," said Williams, a Democrat who supports Obama. "Game time's over. It's time to get real."

Virginia Clarke, an executive recruiter from Chicago who knows Obama personally and has donated to his campaign, said she was "saddened" by McCain saying his opponent was capitalizing on his race.

"To make an observation about oneself, about one's race, it's not necessarily creating an unfair advantage," Clarke said, adding that McCain's accusation "seems like a cheap shot, seems like pandering."

McCain, who called education "the civil rights issue of the twenty-first century," got occasional applause for a few of his proposals, including putting educational decisions in the hands of local principals, opposing new taxes and increasing domestic energy production through offshore oil drilling.

Suggesting that teachers who perform well in struggling schools deserve bonuses, McCain added, "Moreover, the funds for these bonuses will not be controlled by faraway officials -- in Washington, in a state capital, or even in a district office. Under my reforms, we will put the money and the responsibilities where they belong, in the office of the school principal." The audience applauded in appreciation.

The audience welcomed several of his traditional stump lines, including "higher taxes are the last thing we need" and in a time of rising gas prices, "We need to drill more, drill now, and pay less at the pump. Drill now and pay less at the pump."

After the speech, McCain held a question-and-answer session with the audience that was awkward at times, especially when he defended his opposition to affirmative action. Asked why he has decided to back a ballot initiative in Arizona that would repeal affirmative action programs, McCain replied, "Affirmative action is in the eye of the beholder.... Americans reject a quota system. That is a system that does not help anyone and has not helped anyone."

When McCain added, "The best equal opportunity employer in America is the United States military," the audience started to laugh, visibly uncomfortable with the idea that blacks would have to enlist in order to receive equal treatment.

At another point, McCain parried with a questioner who questioned the value of charter schools and quoted the singer James Brown as he demanded how the senator would provide greater opportunity for African-Americans. "We want to know, what doors are you opening up to allow all of us to function like adults?" the questioner asked. "As the godfather James Brown says, 'Open up the door so we can get it ourselves!'"

"With all due respect, I do have an idea of what it's like to be deprived of your rights," McCain retorted, adding that charter schools in New Orleans were working. "Those charter schools are succeeding. That's just a fact."

"The answer is not charter schools," the man replied. "We're saying open up America because we are Americans." The crowd clapped in approval.

McCain also explained in blunt terms when he disagreed with audience members: when one woman asked whether he saw health care coverage as "a basic human right for all Americans," he replied that he would make health care "affordable and available" without guaranteeing it.

"I don't believe in government-run health care systems," he added. "I will oppose it with everything I have in me."

The senator made it clear that he disagreed with President Bush on a few issues: when Urban League president Marc Morial asked McCain if he would commit to overseeing a Justice Department that would "aggressively prosecute violations of people's civil rights," he replied he would not only do that but would "commit U.S. attorneys will be appointed strictly on the basis of qualifications and not political connections."

Morial took the opportunity to ask McCain whether he would return to the Urban League's annual meeting next year if elected president. McCain said he would come "even if I'm not elected," and also pledged to celebrate the League's centennial anniversary in the East Room of the White House in 2010. Morial -- and the crowd -- also gave the senator credit for agreeing to allow questions after his speech, saying, "It is unprecedented that a presidential candidate will take questions," as the audience cheered

But while McCain made occasional inroads with the crowd with comments like his quick explanation for why he opposed the creation of a federal holiday to honor Martin Luther King Jr. -- "Because I was wrong," he said -- he had no answer for why a few years later he opposed federal funding for the holiday. "Was that a second mistake?" the questioner asked.

"I'd have to find out what the bill was," McCain said, pausing. "Nineteen eighty-nine, that was nineteen years ago. I'm proud of my work to ensure equal opportunity for all Americans... That's my job, that's my vocation, that's my mission as president of the United States."

"I have said in the past - and I'll repeat again - that the best reparations we can provide are good schools in the inner city and jobs for people who are unemployed," the Illinois Democrat said recently.

Some two dozen members of Congress are co-sponsors of legislation to create a commission that would study reparations - that is, payments and programs to make up for the damage done by slavery.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People supports the legislation, too. Cities around the country, including Obama's home of Chicago, have endorsed the idea, and so has a major union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

Obama has worked to be seen as someone who will bring people together, not divide them into various interest groups with checklists of demands. Supporting reparations could undermine that image and make him appear to be pandering to black voters.

"Let's not be naive. Sen. Obama is running for president of the United States, and so he is in a constant battle to save his political life," said Kibibi Tyehimba, co-chair of the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America. "In light of the demographics of this country, I don't think it's realistic to expect him to do anything other than what he's done."

But this is not a position Obama adopted just for the presidential campaign. He voiced the same concerns about reparations during his successful run for the Senate in 2004.

There's enough flexibility in the term "reparations" that Obama can oppose them and still have plenty of common ground with supporters.

The NAACP says reparations could take the form of government programs to help struggling people of all races. Efforts to improve schools in the inner city could also aid students in the mountains of West Virginia, said Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP's Washington bureau.

"The solution could be broad and sweeping," Shelton said.

The National Urban League - a group Obama is to address Saturday - avoids the word "reparations" as too vague and highly charged. But the group advocates government action to close the gaps between white America and black America.

Urban League President Marc Morial said he expects his members to press Obama on how he intends to close those gaps and what action he would take in the first 100 days of his presidency.

"What steps should we take as a nation to alleviate the effects of racial exclusion and racial discrimination?" Morial asked.

The House voted this week to apologize for slavery. The resolution, which was approved on a voice vote, does not mention reparations, but past opponents have argued that an apology would increase pressure for concrete action.

Obama says an apology would be appropriate but not particularly helpful in improving the lives of black Americans. Reparations could also be a distraction, he said.

In a 2004 questionnaire, he told the NAACP, "I fear that reparations would be an excuse for some to say, 'We've paid our debt,' and to avoid the much harder work."

Taking questions Sunday at a conference of minority journalists, Obama said he would be willing to talk to American Indian leaders about an apology for the nation's treatment of their people.

Pressed for his position on apologizing to blacks or offering reparations, Obama said he was more interested in taking action to help people struggling to get by. Because many of them are minorities, he said, that would help the same people who would stand to benefit from reparations.

"If we have a program, for example, of universal health care, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because they're disproportionately uninsured," Obama said. "If we've got an agenda that says every child in America should get - should be able to go to college, regardless of income, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because it's oftentimes our children who can't afford to go to college."

One reparations advocate, Vernellia Randall, a law professor at the University of Dayton, bluntly responded: "I think he's dead wrong."

She said aid to the poor in general won't close the gaps - poor blacks would still trail poor whites, and middle-class blacks would still lag behind middle-class whites. Instead, assistance must be aimed directly at the people facing the after-effects of slavery and Jim Crow laws, she said.

"People say he can't run and get elected if he says those kinds of things," Randall said. "I'm like, well does that mean we're really not ready for a black president?"

He risked at least temporarily overshadowing a tough ad his campaign had unleashed depicting Obama as a celebrity in the Paris Hilton mold.

And by challenging Obama directly, he chose a course that Hillary Rodham Clinton shied away from in her losing campaign for the Democratic nomination, presenting the most serious black presidential candidate in history with a charge he could not let go unanswered.

"I think his comments were clearly the race card," McCain said Friday.

Obama called that ridiculous. "What I said in front of a 98 percent conservative, rural, white audience in Missouri is nothing that I haven't said before," he insisted.

Whether the exchange turns out to benefit McCain, or Obama, or turns out to be nothing more than a fleeting midsummer controversy, the episode is a fresh reminder that race is often a wild card in political campaigns.

No less a politician than Bill Clinton learned that lesson last winter when he sparked anger among some black leaders who said he had disparaged Obama's victory in the South Carolina primary. The former president's offending remark was that Jesse Jackson carried the state 20 years earlier.

So, too, Greg Davis of Mississippi, the losing Republican candidate in a House race in May. Running against Democrat Travis Childers, he ran an ad that showed Obama's controversial pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. It was an unsubtle - and unsuccessful - attempt to make Childers guilty by association with a black candidate and his fiery minister.

"That didn't work so well," Obama said with a smile in a recent interview with The Associated Press

Point taken by Republicans, no doubt.

Now it's Obama's turn to try and fend off the charge, leveled after he sought to push back against a stinging new ad that derided him as a mere celebrity at a time when the nation needs a leader.

"What they're going to try to do is make you scared of me," Obama said in Missouri on Wednesday in a mocking tone. "You know, he's not patriotic enough, he's got a funny name, you know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills."

He didn't explain what he meant about "those other presidents," George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and the rest, who have in common only that they were white and are dead.

After brief internal debate, McCain's campaign manager jumped.

"Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck. It's divisive, negative, shameful and wrong," said Rick Davis. "I'm disappointed that Senator Obama would say the things he's saying," the candidate added in Racine, Wis.

"Barack Obama never called John McCain a racist," the Democrat's top strategist, David Axelrod, countered on Friday on "The Early Show" on CBS. "What Barack Obama was saying is he's not exactly from Central Casting for presidential candidates."

If there were a central casting, it's a fair bet than neither McCain nor Obama would have gotten this far in the race for the White House.

One is 71, white and a veteran of Washington who has spent years developing an independent political persona in a party that usually rewards down-the-line orthodoxy.

The other is black, running for the presidency of a country founded by slave owners and bedeviled by race throughout its history.

In the modern era, neither party has been racially pure.

Democrats locked in generations of support in the South because they favored an end to Reconstruction. Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal depended as much on the votes of Southern, white supremacist lawmakers as it did on northern liberals.

Gradually, political calculations changed, and President Lyndon B. Johnson, a Democrat, said famously he was delivering the South to the Republicans when he signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Four years later, Richard Nixon, a Republican, won the White House with a so-called Southern strategy that played on white anger with racial integration. In 1990, Republican Sen. Jesse Helms won re-election in North Carolina with an ad showing a close-up of two white hands crumpling a letter. "You needed that job, but they had to give it to a minority," said the narrator.

It's not an appeal that would ever come from McCain - who spoke movingly of Martin Luther King Jr. in May at the site of the civil rights leader's assassination in Memphis.

Racial politics has changed among Democrats, as well, in the generation since Jackson was running for president with an appeal aimed almost exclusively at blacks.

"The hands that once picked cotton can now pick a president," was one of his memorable mantras.

That's not a phrase that's ever going to pass Obama's lips as he urges Americans to overcome their doubts about him.

Instead, he hopes to quietly register millions of new black voters, and put a few of those Southern states in play that have voted Republican for a generation.

By David Espo, The Associated Press, August 2, 2008

WASHINGTON - President Bush chastised Democrats on Saturday for refusing to allow a vote on whether to lift the federal ban on offshore oil drilling before lawmakers departed for their summer recess.

"To reduce pressure on prices, we need to increase the supply of oil, especially oil produced here at home," Bush said in his weekly radio address. It was the fourth time this week that he has called for Congress to end the drilling restrictions off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts and in the eastern Gulf of Mexico.

Some of the drilling moratoriums have been in place since 1981 for environmental reasons and concerns that energy development might harm coastal tourist industries.

Bush acknowledged it would be years before any of the oil beneath the offshore waters could be pumped, but he said "lifting the ban would create new opportunities for American workers and businessmen."

"But the leaders of the Democratic Congress have refused to allow a vote" on whether the drilling moratoriums should be lifted, Bush complained.

Most energy experts and the government's own research agency at the Energy Department have said drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf, which is now off-limits, would have no impact on current gasoline prices and probably would have none for years.

Congressional Democrats have argued that oil companies already have large areas of federal land and waters where they can drill for oil, especially in Alaska and off its coast.

"The president knows ... that the impact of any new drilling will be insignificant, promising savings of only pennies per gallon many years down the road," says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has called the demand to lift the drilling bans a hoax.

Pelosi, D-Calif., has refused to bring up for House consideration various Republican proposals to lift the offshore drilling moratoriums that Congress has renewed annually for years.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada offered to consider a GOP offshore drilling proposals, but when Republicans demanded votes on a number of other energy proposals, he withdrew his offer.

Congress began its annual August recess on Friday without having enacted any substantive responses to public outcries over high gasoline and other energy costs. Reid blamed Republicans, who have filibustered a number of energy measures, for the congressional gridlock.

A proposal presented Friday by a bipartisan group of 10 senators - five from each party - would allow oil and gas drilling beyond 50 miles of the coast in the South Atlantic and eastern Gulf of Mexico, but leave the ban in place elsewhere.

Bush in his radio remarks also urged Congress to end restrictions on developing shale oil on federal lands in the West and to allow drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Bush called these actions "vital steps to help reduce pressure on gas prices," although none of the actions would produce any new oil for years.

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Saturday described John McCain's campaign against him as one driven by cynicism but not racism and rejected McCain's criticism that Obama himself had brought race into their debate.

In response, Obama's campaign contended that the Illinois senator was referring only to being new in Washington politics and, in turn, accused McCain of being the one to bring up race.

"In no way do I think John McCain's campaign was racist. I think they are cynical," Obama said Saturday. "Their team is good at creating distractions and engaging in negative attacks."

Reporters questioned Obama about the issue of race as he campaigned for a second day in Florida, where offshore oil drilling was emerging as a top issue. The Illinois senator said he was willing to compromise his stand against further drilling along the U.S. coastline if other proposals were part of a plan for energy independence.

"What I don't want to do is for the best to be the enemy of the good," he said. "And if we can come up with a genuine bipartisan compromise, in which I have to accept some things that I don't like or the Democrats have to accept some things that they don't like in exchange for actually moving us in the direction of actual energy independence, then that's something I'm open to."

CLEVELAND (AP) - Supporters of Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton drafting the Democratic platform displayed a get-along, unified front Friday as the party looks to put the bruising presidential primary campaign behind it.

The drafting committee heard from policy experts Friday after soliciting ideas at 1,600 gatherings throughout the country over the past month.

As the Ohio hearings neared, Clinton supporters said backers of presumptive presidential nominee Obama were reaching out on a daily basis to give her voice to part of the platform, particularly on health care and working families, two mainstays of her campaign.

The platform draft will be written Saturday and Sunday and goes before the full platform committee next week in Pittsburgh.

"The most encouraging thing is she has been listened to," said Chris Jennings, a member of the platform drafting committee and a Clinton backer.

"I think there's a recognition she has a lot of supporters out there and they need to reach out as she's reaching out to him (Obama)," said Jennings, a former top health care adviser to President Bill Clinton.

Michael Yaki, an Obama backer who is national platform director, said both sides had worked together well, mindful that any primary campaign differences shrink in comparison to those with Republicans and presumptive GOP nominee John McCain.

"We've worked together and there are a number of Clinton supporters on the platform committee itself," Yaki said as the drafting committee opened the hearings.

Both political parties produce a platform as a statement of principles each presidential election year.

The Republican platform committee meets in late August to develop a draft to present to the GOP convention beginning Sept. 1 in St. Paul, Minn. The GOP solicited online platform suggestions and video submissions for platform writers.

Leo Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers of America, was the second witness to testify before the Democratic Party draft committee headed by Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano. He dismissed the suggestion of continued Obama-Clinton rivalry as "narrow and shallow."

Gerard, whose union backed former Sen. John Edwards in the primaries, said he felt the pain of a failed candidacy and offered advice for die-hard Clinton supporters.

If you're in it just to support a specific candidate, Gerard said, "you're doing it for the wrong reason. Anybody who's in it ought to be in it for what's best for the country. You ought to believe in the democratic process. The democratic process chose Sen. Obama and I think it was a good choice."

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton delivered a rousing call to thousands of union workers in San Francisco on Thursday to put Sen. Barack Obama in the White House come fall - but it was a bittersweet moment for some of her most loyal supporters, particularly women, who said they are still deeply pained she's not the Democratic candidate.

"I'm having a hard time," said an emotional Cheryl Reynolds, a retired union librarian from Pennsylvania, after watching Clinton's address, which was met with cheers and a prolonged standing ovation from a crowd of 3,000 at the international convention of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees at Moscone Center.

For both Reynolds and her husband, Dean, who spent more than six weeks on the road in states like Iowa and Indiana working for Clinton during the primaries, the New York senator's appearance to boost Obama was hard to take.

"I'll vote for Obama, because we need a Democrat in the White House," said Dean Reynolds, who stood and applauded at length for Clinton's address. "But, God, I wish it was her."

The powerhouse labor union of public employees, which has promised to mobilize 40,000 workers in the campaign, endorsed Obama after Clinton had left the race, and its members gave him an ecstatic reception when he delivered a speech to them by satellite while on the campaign trail.

But with less than 100 days to go before the general election, Clinton's appearance in San Francisco underscored her continued appeal to many grassroots Democrats who were her supporters, many of whom say they are clinging to the hope that she may get the nod as Obama's running mate.

Clinton - who earlier in the day visited a San Francisco fundraiser to help retire her campaign debt and was to attend another on the Peninsula on Thursday evening - exhorted the union members to put their muscle and their money behind Obama.

"The best way that we can stand up for you ... is to make sure we have a Democratic president taking the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009," she said.

She insisted she was "proud to get more votes than anyone has gotten" in a U.S. presidential primary campaign - a contention some Obama backers dispute - and said it is now "time for us to unite and stand together."

She delivered high praise for Obama, saying that throughout her often-contentious race against him, she had "seen his passion, his determination, his grace and his grit."

"There are a lot of folks still on the sidelines, trying to make up their minds," Clinton said. But she said labor activists like the army of municipal workers must get behind him "if we're going to have a president that respects unions."

Joan Hernandez, a traffic signal technician from San Diego and a strong supporter of Clinton, said that despite the calls for unity, "There's quite a few of us on the fence. ... I'm not the only one. A lot of her supporters are there."

She said she was extremely disappointed when Clinton's presidential bid died - and Obama still doesn't completely excite her. He's too green, she said, and "he still doesn't answer questions directly."

Hernandez is hoping for the VP slot for her candidate, but "right now, Obama is saying she's low on the list. ... we'll decide what to do if he doesn't choose her," she said.

Tamara Hummel, a retired worker with the Pennsylvania state police, said she was "100 percent" behind Clinton. "I was thinking she would win, and she slid back, and I was really disappointed," she said.

She just shakes her head when asked who will get her vote as president. "I'm not quite sure yet," she said.

But other Clintonista Democrats said they've come around - and they urge others to do likewise.

"I definitely want to see a Democrat in the White House," said John Faust, another union member from Pennsylvania.

As the father of a daughter who has become a doctor, he said Clinton and the historic message of her candidacy - "that women can do anything" - impressed him.

Now, he said, he has turned to Obama. "He wasn't my first choice, but that's the choice now," he said.

Jackie Rowe-Adams of New York called herself one of the "staunchest Hillary supporters" in the hall.

"She stood strong and tall - and I'm glad she's supporting Barack Obama," Rowe-Adams said. "She has integrity, and she's a lady of her word."

She said Obama should pick her as the vice presidential candidate only if that best serves his White House bid.

And Rowe-Adams, who heads AFSCME Local 299 in her home state, said it's time to look forward, and offered some words to those who still are looking back.

"They have to focus on electing a Democrat. McCain is not union-friendly," she said. "If you're electing him, you're putting Bush back in the White House."

So, "my advice to them," she said, "is - get over it."

By Carla Marinucci, San Francisco Chronicle, August 1, 2008