Waterboarding and the New York Times

New York Times: The Liberal Paper has a go at the President for his use of a veto to prevent Congress passing a bill that would prevent waterboarding. The Liberal Paper states the following, " Many such techniques are prohibited by the military and law enforcement agencies. " One gets the impression if the NYT had caught UBL before 9/11 it would have given him a tea and just asked for his name and rank. The point of the Presidency is to protect the country, the point of the NYT is not that clear at present.

Results from Wyoming

Fox News: Reports that Obama is ahead in Wyoming, here are the early results, with 30% of the vote in, Obama 58%, Clinton 40%. If Obama can win by this margin and on Tuesday, the gains made by Clinton in Texas and Ohio will be wiped away. It is still early folks.

Nixon and Kissinger, Partners in Power – Robert Dallek

I can highly recommend this book, one of the best reads in a long time. Alpha Read.

The Right Veto

New York Times: Reports that the White House will Veto a bill that would have put limits on the actions of the CIA when it comes to the interrogation of Terrorist suspects. The aim was to prevent Waterboarding, an essential tool in the War on Terror. The President is right in his veto.

The Outcome?

Newsweek: Reports on the prospects of the Democrats getting a very messy National Convention. The first real active conventions since the 1950s. As the article points out Clinton is in the same position that Reagan was in 1976, the article states the following, “ Governor Reagan stayed in the fight all the way to the convention. He had a hundred delegates fewer than Ford, roughly the same deficit Clinton has today. Reagan helped insure his party's defeat but nailed the nomination four years later. ” But there is a difference, the Clinton's don’t want to damage the Post Presidential reputation of Bill Clinton, also Reagan could run again in 1980, Clinton in today's 24/7 news cycle would be old news. Many thought that after the 1976 speech by Reagan that the Republicans had chosen the wrong nominee. Thus Clinton just might get her chance, the cost would be great for the Democratic Party. In less Obama was the VP one can see African Americans not voting or voting for McCain. The Democratic Party has a heavy choice to make at its convention.

Obama Aide off MESSAGE

RCP Blog: Another Top Obama Aide goes off message. Its the big time now, Obama needs a new Campaign Manager and quick.

Monster ?

The Scotsman: Has an exclusive, it has a Top Obama aid calling Senator Hillary Clinton a " Monster ", that's the problem when Hope has to deal with reality of politics. The Obama camp it seems believed their own press, not a good idea. Senator Clinton what ever her faults is a very good politician, she wants to win, that does not make a her a monster, the Gipper was a gentleman but he was ruthless when he wanted to be, that is why he was a great President. Never thought I would compare Clinton to Reagan. The Obama Camp have to stick to issues, like her claim of experience, being First Lady is one thing, but she is no Nancy Reagan, Nancy was a very smart political operator in the Reagan Administration. The Obama camp have to go hard on the tax issue, what about the business deals of Bill Clinton, all that money that Hillary Clinton gave to her to campaign. The Records held by the Clinton Presidential Library, when are they going to be released. Keep on message Obama Campaign.