CNN\YouTube Debate Challenges Top Candidates

I have to hand it to the folks over at CNN and YouTube who put together tonight's Democratic debate live on CNN--the event was a pleasure to watch.

The debate format, which allowed "everyday Americans" to submit questions to the candidates via YouTube, offered viewers the chance to see the candidates struggle with some of the most difficult questions put to them during this campaign so far.

YouTube viewers posed questions on a broad variety of topics from Darfur to gun control, gay rights to health care, and of course, Iraq. The best part about this innovate format? Most candidates squirmed when faced with this eclectic mix of questions from concerned and curious voters.

When all is said and done, the format underscored how voters want to be spared canned soundbites from the candidates. Unfortunately, most of the candidates, particularly those in the "top tier," struggled to deviate from their stump speeches.

If any candidates came away winners in tonight's debate, it was those in the "second tier." The CNN/YouTube debate allowed Biden, Richardson, Dodd, Kucinich, and even grumpy ol' Mike Gravel a chance to let their personalities and their ideas shine.

Was the debate as "historic" as CNN would like us to believe? Only time will tell. But one thing is for sure: The format nudged candidates away from their stump rhetoric and allowed second tier candidates an opportunity to be heard. That can only be a good thing for a democracy.

Money Talks: Obama's Record Fundraising

$32.5 million in the second quarter. It's an absolutely stunning number, especially when taken in its historical context. For your consideration: Bill Clinton's total during the same period in 2005, the previous Democratic record, was just $9.6 million.

So what do Obama's second quarter numbers tell us about the state of American politics? Well, now more than ever, candidates travelling the road to the White House must pay a steep toll, a toll that prohibitively expensive for "second-tier" candidates and, it seems now, for some "first-tier" candidates. Consider John Edwards, who with just $9 million in the second quarter seems strapped for cash next to Obama and Clinton.

It's enough to breed some serious cynicism, until we take a closer look at the numbers.

In six months, 258,000 people have donated to the Obama campaign. Thousands of those donations have been contributions of less than $50. Thousands more of those contributions have not been monetary donations at all, but instead, donations of time from folks who are testing their political voices, exercising political action, and placing their trust in a candidate for the first time in their lives.

When we speak of Obama's donors, we're not speaking about people who simply showed up to a fundraising dinner, cut a check for $2,300, and snapped a photograph with the candidate that they can hang in their corner office. Thousands of Obama's supporters have never donated to a campaign before in their lives. These are people who have finally encountered not just a candidate, but a man, and a family, who have inspired them to believe in America again, to believe that we can turn this country around. Barack Obama has inspired Americans across economic, social, and ideological lines to believe that we all have more in common than we think we have, and that a little bit of time and a little bit of hope, from a lot of people, will make an enormous difference in this nation and in this world.

Campaign finance is too often a depressing subject. It's not right that "second-tier" candidates have already been buried under the piles of money available to the "top-tier" campaigns. It's not right that candidates have to raise $32.5 million to have the establishment stand up and take notice. It's not right that 2008 is going be our first billion dollar presidential campaign.

But money talks. It's a political reality, and a dismal one at that. But what makes the Obama campaign special, and full of hope, is that the $32.5 million represents the voices of everyday Americans contributing what they can, when they can, be it $50, $5, or five hours of time at a grassroots event. Ultimately, the Obama campaign is winning the financial race because it is interested on more than simply monetary contributions. It is interested in contributions of time, ideas, and hope.

When you run a campaign like that, you discover that thousands of people have been waiting their entire lives to contribute to something bigger than themselves. That's the sort of campaign that breaks records, and makes history.

Latest Polls: Obama Strongest General Election Candidate

A new Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll indicates that Barack Obama would be the strongest candidate in the general election, thanks to an unlikely source of support: Republicans.

While these early polls are highly speculative and largely meaningless, it is interesting to note that Obama is the only Democratic candidate who performs well in head-to-head polls versus the three major Republican candidates.

Among the findings of the poll:

• 15 percent of Republicans say they would choose Obama in a head-to-head match- up against Rudy Giuliani. Just 3 percent of Republican respondents say they would pick Hillary Clinton in a similar contest.
• A majority of Democrats say they favor ``a candidate who can bridge partisan divides'' -- a central theme of his campaign -- over a candidate ``with long experience in government and policy making,'' a cornerstone of Clinton's self-presentation. Independents voting in the Democratic primary say they favor unity over experience by more than 2-to-1.
• 18 percent of Democratic primary voters say they couldn't vote for Clinton, the highest negative rating of any Democrat. Five percent say they couldn't vote for Obama.

In recent polls, Clinton still leads by 11 points among core Democrats, and Clinton supporters would probably point to Obama's success appeal among Republicans as evidence that he is more moderate than liberal. Yet with so many tough challenges ahead--Iraq, Afghanistan, climate change, health care, immigration--it is heartening to know that even Republicans are rallying around the one candidate who they believe can bring this country together and tackle the tough issues.

Clearly, Obama's message has been resonating among voters across the political spectrum: Partisan bickering has led us down the wrong path--It's time to come together and turn a new page in America's history.

Who Wants to be a Millionaire?

Financial disclosure forms filed by presidential candidates Wednesday show Barack Obama as the least wealthy of the top-tier presidential candidates, despite the fact that his family reported $991,000 in income last year.

It was an unusually high-flying year for the Obama family, however. $572,000 of the reported income was from Senator Obama's book sales, which surged as he gained national recognition for his leadership on issues like Iraq, alternative energy, health care, and the genocide in Darur.

The Chicago Tribue reported that Senator Obama's financial portfolio is divested of all companies that do business in Sudan.

While Obama obviously won't have to cut coupons to put food on the table, the Obama family fortune is downright meager when compared to the other candidates. Let's take a look, shall we?

• John Edwards. $479,000 last year in salary. More than $7.5 million from investments with Fortress Investment Group, a New York hedge fund. Net worth is estimated between $22 and $62 million dollars. He said he worked only a few days a month at the hedge fund, so maybe he just didn't know that Fortress owned offshore funds that served as tax havens for investors. Maybe he didn't know that the firm's portfolio included subprime lenders, which provide high-risk loans that often target minorities. Maybe he just didn't know.

• Lovely Hillary Clinton. Well, she requested a 45-day extension to file her papers. She just needed to get everything in order. I'm going to guess she's doing all right, though. As for Bubba, Former President Bill Clinton earned about $10 million in speaking fees last year.

• Speaking fees! Former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani (R) raked in $11 million by speaking at events around the globe, reminding everyone how qualified he is on issues of national security. His empire, sadly built on the ashes of the World Trade Center, is worth somewhere between $20 million and $70 million. Hate to be harsh on Rudy, but let's face it--just a few years ago his net worth topped out at about $1.8 million

• Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney became the richest candidate by buying and selling more than 180 companies through private equity funds. His net worth is somewhere between $190 million to $250 million. A healthy chunk of that money goes to the Mormon church, though. It's a rule.

• Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is married to the millionaire daughter of an Arizona beer tycoon. Pretty cool.

So many choices. Hedge fund warrior. Former first lady. Former mayor cashing in on a national tragedy. Uber-wealthy private equity Mormon. Husband of a beer princess. Best selling author.

Hmm...I do love beer. And princesses. But I can't really jive with McCain's stance on Iraq.

I'm going to have to go with the best selling author. I'm sure Senator Obama wouldn't mind if you checked his book out from the library or borrowed it from a friend.

[Full disclosure: The author, a high school teacher, earned $42,448 in 2006. He has filed for an extension to report his net worth, which he will begin to calculate once he pays off his student loans.]

In First Debate, Obama Calls Attention to Rising Black Infant Mortality

On the day that the Senate joined the House in passing a bill that would require troop withdrawals from Iraq starting October 1st, eight Democratic candidates convened at South Carolina State University for the first debate of the 2008 presidential election.

Predictably, most leading candidates stayed on message, attacking the Bush administration and defending their earlier votes to authorize the Iraq invasion.

Meanwhile, Senator Barack Obama called attention to an alarming health care crisis in the nation's south.

"This week, we saw a story that showed that black infant mortality in this country is actually

going up in some states, which is shameful and makes no sense," Obama said.

The New York Times reported on April 22nd: "In Mississippi, infant deaths among blacks rose to 17 per thousand births in 2005 from 14.2 per thousand in 2004,while those among whites rose to 6.6 per thousand from 6.1. (The national average in 2003 was 5.7 for whites and 14.0 for blacks.)"

The trend is troubling for some of the nation's leading health care experts.

While the other candidates persist in trying to explain their poor judgement in the 2002 Iraq authorization vote, Senator Obama, who has opposed the war from the start, rightfully drew attention to an urgent health care story largely neglected by the press.

In a debate full of familiar faces reciting sound bites, voters should be thankful that one leader is willing to draw attention to the issues that his colleagues are willing to ignore.

No Other Candidate Matches Obama's Record of Environmental Activism

Campaigning over the Earth Day weekend, Senator Barack Obama pledged his support to roll out California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard policy nationwide.

The California policy, brought forth by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, would reduce annual gas emissions by 100 million metric tons — equal to taking 32 million cars off the road.

“The problem is not the lack of policy, the problem is the lack of will and the lack of urgency,” Obama said to a crowd of 12,000 at the University of Iowa.

While other Democratic candidates campaigned separately on the issue, only Obama has a proven history of environmental activism and advocacy.

For your consideration:

As an undergraduate at Columbia University, Obama's served three-months with a Ralph Nader offshoot organization organizing recycling programs at City College in Harlem.

Working as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago, Obama fought for lead abatement in the Altgeld Gardens neighborhood.

As an Illinois state senator, representing the 13th district on Chicago's South Side, Obama distinguished himself as a leader on environmental and public-health issues.

In 2003, Obama was one of six state senators to receive a 100 Percent Environmental Voting Record Award from the Illinois Environmental Council.

The League of Conservation Voters named him a 2004 Environmental Champion, one of 18 sitting and prospective members of Congress to receive the award.

At this critical juncture in global environmental policy, wise voters will choose a candidate for whom the environment is more than a simple Earth Day fashion statement.

Obama Sharply Critical of Supreme Court Abortion Ruling

The Supreme Court today voted in a 5-4 decision to uphold a ban on a specific abortion practice referred to as "partial birth" abortions.

Presidential candidates' remarks on the high court's ruling fell predictably along party lines. Democratic candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Edwards all spoke out strongly against the ruling while Republican candidates Rudy Giuliani and Mit Romney praised the decision.

Senator Obama in particular was sharply critical of the ruling, stating that "this ruling signals an alarming willingness on the part of the conservative majority to disregard its prior rulings respecting a woman’s medical concerns and the very personal decisions between a doctor and patient."

The court's decision prompts speculation over whether the court will at some point in the future attempt to overrule the definitive Roe v. Wade decision.

Obama's Fundraising Efforts Set Him Apart

Pundits forecasting our nation's first billion dollar election may have to raise their estimates.

After a first quarter that left his rivals flush with cash, Senator Barack Obama is widely expected to release his first quarter fundraising results Wednesday. Speculation runs rampant that he will equal or top the $26 million reported by Hillary Clinton.

Clinton's record-breaking figure, further beefed up by a $10 million transfer from her Senate campaign fund, is a massive war chest, yet many believe that Barack Obama's community-based fundraising will put him in a position to meet or top Clinton's funding. Regardless of whether he ends up the top fundraiser, he leads his rivals in number of individual contributors with more than 82,000 donors and counting. These numbers suggest a widespread and growing base of support in these early weeks.

As candidates have scrambled for cash, Senator Obama has distinguished himself by offering thousands of young Americans the chance to participate in events with tickets priced as low as $25, a grassroots effort in sharp contrast to other candidates who may charge hundreds of dollars per event.

While other campaigns flaunted their fresh funding, the Obama campaign distinguished itself by holding back a few days, continuing to give the public its message of change and hope, rather than rush to deliver the press a bank statement.

Meanwhile, Senator Clinton, sitting atop $36 million in cash, continues to advocate for publicly financed federal campaigns.

"I believe we have to move, eventually in our country, toward a system of public financing that really works for candidates running for federal office. I will support that as president," she said recently.

How generous of you, Senator Clinton.

The Iraq Authorization Vote

Democratic candidates have spent a lot of time lately explaining or defending their 2002 vote on whether to authorize President Bush to wage war in Iraq.

Both Hillary Clinton and John Edwards initially voted to support Bush in his war efforts. Clinton explains that she would never have given authorization, knowing what she knows now.

In 2002, Senator Obama opposed authorizing the war in Iraq, maintaining that even in 2002, ample information was available to cast doubt on the Iraq policy.

As the U.S. escalates or "surges" in Iraq, how will these initial Iraq authorization votes effect the credibility of both Democratic and Republican candidates?