John Cole writes:

[M]uch of our politics has devolved into this kind of nonsense. We don’t actually care what policies are enacted, we care how they are enacted. Did Obama stick it to the Republicans? Was he angry enough with BP? Is he showing enough emotion? Can he “connect” with the white voter and “joe-sixpack?” Is he throwing the base “a bone?” Did he say “climate change” and use the right code words? Was he “friendly” enough to Israel?

I wish it would all stop, but the idiocy of the conservative right is matched by the progressive left in this regard.

(Emphasis supplied.) This is an inaccurate attack on the "progressive left." One can argue that they have been unrealistic about the "politics" of what is possible, but if one group has been consistently policy focused, it has been the progressive left. Many (John Cole among them) have spent an inordinate amount of time yelling at the progressive left for being too focused on the "perfect" policy and not sufficiently appreciating the "good" policies the Obama Administration has achieved. Cole's latest critique is not consistent with the past criticisms of the progressive left letting the "perfect be the enemy of the good."

Speaking for me only

DemfromCt celebrates this CNN poll finding:

According to the poll, opposition to increased offshore drilling has grown 10 points since May and is now twice as high as it was in 2008. Fifty-eight percent of those questioned support a six-month moratorium on new drilling in the Gulf and other offshore sites; 68 percent favor increased regulation of the oil industry in this country.

DemfromCt appears to want to attribute this result to President Obama's speech:

Three games again today - Honduras v. Chile, Spain v. Switzerland and South Africa v. Uruguay.

All eyes on Spain, the tournament favorite,

If it becomes possible, I'll write some actual posts on the World Cup today. My jinxing picks - Chile, Spain and Uruguay.

Starting lineups:

USA Lineup: Tim Howard, Steven Cherundolo, Oguchi Onyewu, Jay DeMerit, Carlos Bocanegra, Landon Donovan, Michael Bradley, Ricardo Clark Robbie Findley, Jozy Altidore, Clint Dempsey

England Lineup: Robert Green, Glen Johnson, Ledley King, John Terry, Ashley Cole, Aaron Lennon, Frank Lampard, Steven Gerrard, James Milner, Wayne Rooney, Emile Heskey

First lineup was wrong. Apologies. Not happy with Findley. I preferred Buddle or Gomez. Also I prefer Holden to Clark.

Go USA!

HALFTIME - On the worst error by a keeper that I have ever seen, USA is tied with England 1-1. That said, Bradley has the wrong lineup imo. Holden should be in, not Clark. Clark brings nothing. Holden will defend (Gerrard, who has been the best player on the field, beat Clark for England's goal.) Gomez or Buddle should be in for Findley, who also is useless in this game. The English keeper is obviously very weak and the USA needs more shots on goal. Buddle or Gomez will bring that. Finally, I hope Howard is ok.

FINAL - USA 1, England 1. Lucky result for USA. I do not like Bradley's lineup.

AP:

Gov. Charlie Crist has vetoed a bill that would have required women seeking an abortion during the first trimester to undergo an ultrasound exam and pay for it. Crist said Friday it put an inappropriate burden on women seeking an abortion. Crist was a Republican until he left the party recently to make an independent bid for the Senate.

His veto message.

Discussing why taxes on the rich have not been raised by this Democratic government, Kevin Drum writes:

Soaking the rich isn't the electoral loser I made it out to be. So then the question becomes: why is Congress unable to reform the estate tax, which affects only the very tippy top of the super rich? Why are negotiations over the carried interest loophole, which affects only zillionaire hedge fund managers, retreating from 100% repeal to 75% repeal to 65% repeal? The answer, of course, lies primarily in the ideology of the Republican Party, aided and abetted by the ideology of "centrist" Democrats, which is strong enough to overcome public sentiment. So then, how about this question instead: Americans apparently are sympathetic to higher taxes on the rich, but equally apparently, [. . . t]hey don't care enough, anyway, to sway their elected representatives much. How come?

My answer? Because progressives and moderates are too dependent on the Democratic Party to fight for policies they believe in. In terms of a progressive agenda, the Democratic Party is a failure. Activists and citizens must hold their distance from the Democratic Party and understand they are not your advocates or your friends. Yes, my old refrain.

Speaking for me only

Via Balloon Juice, Josh Green writes:

The assumption until a few minutes ago was that Lincoln would lose and her [derivatives] provision would quietly get stripped in the conference committee that's about to take place. Now that she's won--and won narrowly, and faces a very tough race in the fall--the calculus becomes a lot tougher. [. . .] The bank lobby and the Obama administration (both oppose the Lincoln provision) may simply prove too strong and do the deed anyway. But their task got a whole lot harder. The markup conference will now get a lot more attention. That could be tough for Lincoln. But it will be especially tough for Democrats who wanted to kill her provision without suffering any political damage.

What's fascinating about Green's writeup is the failure to examine why the Obama Administration and Democrats would want to kill Lincoln's derivatives proposal. Green assumes you know -- that pols are pols and do what they do and the banks have stuffed a lot of money in the pockets of the Obama Administration and Dems. This leads to the question I ask in my title - where does Lincoln go from here? Let's discuss that on the flip.

The White House decided to crow about Blanche Lincoln's primary win last night (will they be willing to take the blame when she gets crushed in November?) and take a shot at Labor. The AFL-CIO's response needs to be seared into every activists' brain:

"Labor isn't an arm of the Democratic Party," Vale said. "It exists to support working families. And that's what we said tonight, and that's what we're gong to keep saying."

Fight for the policies, not the pols.

Speaking for me only

Florida Governor Charlie Crist, running for Senate as an Independent after facing sure defeat in a GOP primary, now faces an important decision:

After more than five weeks of waiting, Florida Governor Charlie Crist now has the most controversial bill of the 2010 Florida legislative session; and he promises a quick decision. The health care bill includes amendments that would require women seeking an abortion during the first trimester to undergo an ultrasound exam and pay for it. The bill would also require women to view the live ultrasound image or have it described by a doctor unless they could prove they were victims of rape, incest, or domestic violence.

Crist can solidify support with women, Democrats and moderate indies by vetoing the bill. As for the bill itself, it is a disgraceful intrusion on women's privacy. And it is unnecessary for enforcing the Hyde Amendment type restrictions already current Florida law. As the Palm Beach Post Ed Board explained:

Writing about the America's Future Now! conference going on in DC this week, David Dayen writes:

Surly is about the best word to describe this conference in Washington after the first day. Speaker after speaker excoriated the trajectory from the political sphere as too accommodating, too solicitous, and not enough. [. . .] Attendees expressed that they can no longer – if they ever could have – expect this Administration to do the right thing, and that they must be pushed aggressively from the outside. “Uncomfortable” was a word I heard a lot. “When you treat Chris Dodd and Barney Frank like they’re your buddies, you’re doing it wrong,” said Rob Johnson, economist with the Roosevelt Institute. “You have to get under their skin. They are part of that resilient structure in DC.”

Dayen complains that no real "solutions" have been offered. Perhaps so. But in my view it is important that this message - that pols are pols and do what they do - be absorbed and accepted. If this conference is spreading that message, it is doing a good thing. Yes, 'then what?' is an obvious question. But the first step to solving a problem is recognizing that it exists.

Comments closed. Please continue the discussion in the new open thread.

Speaking for me only

Al and Tipper Gore confirmed today they are separating. They've been married 40 years.

They announced the decision in an e-mail to friends and supporters. Gore's office has confirmed it.

Politics is almost all BS. Unfortunately, to get to the non-BS - governing, you need to have good politicians. It so happens that President Barack Obama is a GREAT politician. But he is not great at the whole "feel their pain" part of it.

Charles Blow writes:

There are many things at which the president is extraordinarily gifted. Emoting isn’t one of them.

True dat. But what would be worse is if the President felt compelled to try and go Bill Clinton. That's not who he is. Some folks complain about this nonsense (and nonsense it is), but most of politics is nonsense. This is a different part of the nonsense (another part is the big inspiring speeches.) Politics is what it is. In terms of the President's policy and performance on Deep Water? I have not the first clue. But I knew that this situation was not going to fit his political skills very well. The best political move for the President is to do whatever he can to resolve the problem. Good governance is the best politics now. Feeling the pain is not the answer - certainly not for this President.

Speaking for me only