I think that the question of judgment is a credible one for Obama to raise. Of course, past performance is not a perfect indicator of future success, but clear thinking about Iraq in the runup to the war seems like a good test.

My ears pricked up at a new wrinkle in Clinton’s explanation as to why she voted for the authorization of force:

Knowing that he was a megalomaniac, knowing he would not want to compete for attention with Osama bin Laden, there were legitimate concerns about what he might do.

So I think I made a reasoned judgment.

I’ve always been bothered by Clinton’s assertion that the intentions of Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld were concealed and unknowable. But okay, screw me once….

And I’ll concede that nearly everybody in government seemed to believe that Saddam probably–if not certainly–had a stockpile of some weapons of mass destruction.

But having WMD is different from using WMD. Hussein had control over the Iraqi state. Using WMD outside of his borders would cause an immediate and swift, unified response from the world to strip him of his power. Clinton justifies her vote by saying that she thought that Hussein would be jealous of all the attention that Osama bin Laden was getting? A ridiculous bit of amateur psychological profiling is a centerpiece of your “reasoned judgment” to authorize the war?

In my book, that’s either being governed by unreasonable fear, or being tragically overconfident in your ability to personally read the intentions of faraway dictators.

Better get a Democrat elected in 2008. Then hope that he/she has a successful first term. Reallocation of house seats, and therefore electoral college votes, is likely to create the net effect of the loss of one mid-sized blue state. Based on the projections of EDS and Polidata, I quickly and unscientifically break down the allocation shifts.

Clearly bad: Texas +4, Arizona +2, N.C. +1, S.C. +1, Georgia +1, Utah +1; New York -2, Mass. -1, California -1, New Jersey -1, Pennsylvania -1, Michigan -1, Illinois -1, Minnesota -1.

Maybe good: Nevada+1, Oregon+1; Ohio -2

Impact unclear: Florida +2; Iowa -1, Missouri -1, Louisiana -1

The impact on the makup of the House is less obvious, because we may be shifting some red districts in blue states for newer, bluer districts in a few red or swing states. But in terms of the electoral college, this clearly argues that the Democrats are going to have to make inroads into the South or Southwest in the next few cycles.

For those who missed the August 5th program, the NBC10 Live @ Issue program is available online. Both Congressman Joe Sestak and State Representative Bryan Lentz are interviewed.

Bryan Lentz also has posted video of the July 23rd hearing on HB1182 held by the PA House Transportation Committee in Ridley Township. HB1182 is the Lentz’s bill proposing to create a regional airport authority.

PSoTD recommends that we start talking publicly about whom Lieberman will endorse in the 2008 election. The logic is that doing so may prevent the MSM from acting with shock if he gives a speech at the Republican convention, a la Zell Miller. So PSoTD asks us: will Lieberman support ANY REPUBLICAN NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT in 2008 over ANY DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT in 2008?

For starters, I hope Lieberman does endorse the Republican nominee, and that they hungrily snatch him up for a prime time podium slot. After all, Lieberman’s endorsement will be entirely based on the Iraq War. The highly unpopular Iraq War. Nothing would hang that particular albatross around the Republican’s necks quite so well. It’s not as though Connecticut is likely in play for the Republicans in November, and Lieberman’s dynamic personality isn’t gong to convert the nation’s seven remaining independents who haven’t already made up their mind about Iraq. I dare him to do it. I double-dog dare him.

Since the probable Democratic nominee is one of two Senate colleagues who didn’t endorse him after his loss in the Democratic primary, one has to assume that loyalty will not keep Lieberman from endorsing a Republican. After all, it was the Republicans who got him re-elected.

The only thing that might keep him from crossing the line–which again, I’d welcome–is that the Senate looks very to likely to swing a few more seats toward the Democrats in 2008. If he keeps pressing his luck, he may lose his seniority privileges and end up a lonely soul. He’d be too much of a RINO to have influence in the GOP except when they need him as a prop. Crossing the red line during what might be shaping up to be a historic electoral realignment might be one too many betrayals to ever come home again.

If I’m being asked to place a bet, I’d bet that he would endorse any of Romney, Giuliani, or McCain. He obviously won’t back Ron Paul. Thompson’s an unknown. If he doesn’t endorse the Republican nominee, then he’ll be backing down strictly out of self-preservation.

Ornery Delco Times pundit Gil Spencer has never missed an opportunity to tweak freshman Congressman Joe Sestak (PA-7). In his most recent column, he performed a useful journalistic service while dishing out his usual critique of all things Sestak.

Gil got the goods on who Sestak’s opponent might be in 2008. Delco GOP candidates don’t run in primaries. They obtain blessings from machine power brokers like Upper Darby’s John McNichol. According to Spencer, two men are currently courting the approval of the war boarders–attorney Steve Elliott and wealthy real estate developer Tim Pulte. McNichol pulled no punches in explaining to the Times columnist how his party sizes up its potential candidates:

It was Pulte, Upper Darby GOP leader John McNichol mentioned first.

“He’s an attractive candidate, but his family is a little reluctant.”

Which is to say, he’s “interested,” but his wife is less so.

While not dismissive of Elliott, who is a state department lawyer with excellent national security credentials, McNichol looks at all the money Pulte could bring into the race with him.

“The family has a ton of money,” McNichol says, and the candidate would have his own “personal fortune” from which to draw.

“He’s never been in the political arena,” McNichol said of Pulte, but …

“He knew a lot about Sestak. He’s done his research and if he became the candidate, he’d get in there with both feet.”

McNichol was less enthusiastic about Elliott, but only because of his lack of dough.

“He’s well spoken and knows the issues,” said McNichol. “He’s a credible looking candidate.” But, he said, “We’re a ways from making any decisions.” That won’t happen until after Labor Day.

Sestak already has over $1M cash-on-hand saved up for 2008. He can also count on the DCCC defending him like Fort Knox if his race gets even remotely close. The GOP has no choice but to consider fundraising prowess in choosing a candidate to back.

Congressman Joe Sestak (PA-07) made a recess visit to speak with the Swarthmore College Democrats Monday afternoon. He gave a brief report on how he has been fulfilling his campaign pledges since taking office in January. Then he took questions for most of an hour from the audience of 40-50 students and other members of the College community.

Sestak fielded questions from the audience on topics as diverse as extraordinary rendition, foreign aid, and libraries. A number of the questions focused on energy policy, global warming and the environment. (On those matters, Sestak notes that he’s co-sponsoring bills to raise the CAFE standard, and two different bills on global warming that are supported by the Sierra Club. He’d also spent time today talking with local experts on issues relating to improved management of our troubled Delaware County watersheds.) Sestak also discussed Iraq, and his view of Congress’ constitutional role in oversight and management of the war. He referenced the need to fix and extend No Child Left Behind before it is reauthorized this year. And, of course, he was asked about his recent controversial appearance at a CAIR banquet. (On that front, Joe encourages those with concerns about his appearance to at least judge him on his full remarks.)

My personal observations about Joe are that he is more at ease and less programmed than he was as a candidate. He gave answers that were more off the cuff, and he told a few light anecdotes and jokes. He’s still prone to long, meandering explanations on some topics where a simple statement of conviction is all that’s required. (His answer on the role of Congress in oversight of the war included a story of George Washington, Tom Delay’s questioning of his patriotism on Meet the Press, and a listing of the specific war power in the Constitution.) Were I able to bend his ear, I would keep encouraging him that his answers will be more powerful and direct if he can keep them short and from the heart.

Nevertheless, we have to recognize that this is no ordinary freshman legislator. He has thrown himself into the fray with a great deal of vigor and dedication. He’s sticking to his guns on tough issues and staking out his claim to influence processes in the House and the Democratic Caucus. He’s bringing high-ranking officials to the district to hear from our citizens. He’s following through with votes that match campaign pledges. I’m most impressed that he’s assumed the Vice Chairmanship of the Small Business Committee as a freshman, which is a tremendous platform for working on economic development–something that Delaware County seriously needs to stave off the slow drain of jobs and workers.

After decades of one-party representation, it’s also simply refreshing to have a Democrat in Congress to come talk to the loyal progressives at ol’ Swarthmore. (We were liberal when liberal wasn’t cool.)

We residents of Delaware County are coming to the realization that it’s going to be an uphill slog to resist the FAA’s plans to redirect flight paths from Philadelphia International Airport right over our heads.

Today, the FAA officially identified its preference for the so-called “Integrated Airspace Alternative.” Yes, Delco sports fans, that’s the one where planes taking off from PHL can turn turn directly over our heads, instead of having to stay over the Delaware River until they’ve achieved sufficient altitude.

If you peruse the documents pertaining to the airspace plans on the FAA site, you quickly realize why we’re hosed. Although County Councilman Andrew Reilly (R) and other politicians have cast this as a highly local issue about the Philadelphia Airport, the FAA has tied the traffic issues of the Philadelphia Airport with those of Newark, JFK, and LaGuardia. When you calculate the untold billions of dollars of commercial interest invested in these gigantic airports, you realize that a half million residents of a suburban county are an afterthought.

The FAA will hold one open meeting in Pennsylvania to allow for public comment. (Aren’t we so lucky?) Of course, they’re holding it in a hotel down at the airport. I’d love to see them come out to one of the affected areas, like Media or Ridley Park, because they ought to see the area and the residents that they’re really impacting.And you know they’d get an earful.

County Council is threatening to sue, although from what I’ve heard from others who know more, it’s difficult to find legal grounds to stop the FAA. They apparently have pretty broad latitude to do whatever they want. Andy Reilly (R) and Co. haven’t advanced a legal theory by which they might be able to withstand the FAA, but I suspect that his tough talk is as much about the posture as it as about results. He’s still plotting the next step in his political career, after all.

Our best hope now is to get some relief from Congress; some recognition from the Aviation committee that the FAA might need more oversight and restrictions to its ability to claim eminent domain to the air above your head.

This strikes me as an undeveloped market. Like in other matters of pollution, maybe a cap-and-trade system is needed. If Delaware County could sell direct flight-path routes to the airlines, we could at least be compensated for the real costs to us of the extra noise and pollution. Then perhaps, the airlines and air travellers who most wanted shorter delays and more direct routes could buy and trade their “tokens” to go over Delco instead of the Delaware River. The cost-conscious consumer could take the flight that takes a little longer, while the premium airline passenger could spend the extra money for a flight that takes less time and has a lower likelihood of delay. In the meantime, we’d retain our privileges to balance the compensation against the various inconveniences. If we can be paid fairly for our troubles, the market should reach equilibrium over time.

Unfortunately, this is a case where we seemingly have no standing in the marketplace. At least we know that it’ll be years before actual changes to flight paths will be permitted to take place. There is a little time for some mitigation to this initial plan. Here’s hoping that Joe Sestak can find some leverage over the FAA in the form of support from his colleagues in the House.

For more of the political reaction to the FAA’s decision, see today’s Delco Times and Inquirer takes on the news.

More »