There's a telling parenthetical remark in Sam Stein's report on the latest Newsweek poll. In discussing the "already-heated debate raging around the persistent rumors that Obama is a closeted Muslim," Stein - or an editor - felt it necessary to add "(he's not)." In a time when a quarter of the population believes the President is a Muslim, perhaps such asides should appear in headlines instead of parentheses.

It ought not to matter whether a President is a Muslim or a Lutheran or an atheist. The Constitution wisely says the question can't even be asked officially. But the lies about Barack Obama's supposedly secret religious views and alleged allegiance to the Ummah have been fed to the public so relentlessly that even 17 percent of Democrats answered "definitely true" or "probably true" to Newsweek's question: "Some people have alleged that Barack Obama sympathizes with the goals of Islamic fundamentalists who want to impose Islamic law around the world. From what you know about Obama, what is your opinion of these allegations?" Among independents, 27 percent took those positions, while 52 percent of Republicans did.

That's right. More than half the self-identified members of the Grand Old Party think Obama is definitely or probably on the side of fundamentalist Muslims. No doubt in league with Osama bin Laden. Or perhaps he's even Osama's cousin or brother. Who knows what's on the "real" birth certificate? And what about that baptismal certificate?

While Newsweek asked seven questions about Muslims in its 24-question survey, a key inquiry was nowhere to be found: "Do you know what Islamic law is?" Honest answers to that would probably tally in single digits.  
At its core, the belief that Barack Obama is a Muslim or favors Muslims is all part of sometimes subtle, sometimes brazen propaganda spreading the lie that Muslims cannot be trusted, stigmatizing them permanently. Two dark pathologies work in tandem in this effort. Hatred, based on race and religion, and a toxic, willful know-nothingism. Together, they tramp along to the drumbeat of the Rush Limbaughs, Michael Savages, Glenn Becks and their demagogic wannabes throughout the media. These political carnies cannot call the President the word they would like to use, so they hint with a venomous wink and a nod that he is other, not really American, not really one of "us," not acceptable. The "Muslim" label works effectively to that end, reinforcing tribal identity. It's a perfect match for the "socialist" label, something 55 percent of Americans believe about Obama.

The consequences of this campaign of cranking up religious rhetoric aren't difficult to imagine. We see them every day. Obviously, it's not just the President who gets trashed in this demonizing of Muslims. For example, while 72 percent of Americans believe - according to the Newsweek poll - that Muslims have the right to build mosques anywhere, when they choose to exercise that right, their opponents are quick to respond. In other words, Americans have rights, but they shouldn’t use them.

Even if the President were not a target of lies about his beliefs, we should engage in a national conversation about the demonization of Muslims. But the lack of self-awareness by so many Americans combined with their eager scarfing of a never-ending diet of sinister nonsense raise tremendous barriers against making such a conversation productive. The place to start is with our neighbors.

Andrew Sullivan:

The difference is in equating them directly with the Taliban and al Qaeda. That equation is as repulsive to me now as it was when Dinesh D'Souza did the same thing to the left. The neocons and the Christianists are deeply dangerous to Western society and global peace, but they are not, emphatically not, the kind of people who stone people to death, murder innocents as a religious duty, and wage war on us every day. To equate American citizens with the enemy is to engage in McCarthyite excess that is as wrong on the left as it is on the right. It's a step too far - and it is empirically false.

Jon Jarden:

Is this actually true? I would feel safe saying that the majority of the nation (including many religious conservatives) would be repulsed by such an agenda. To say that it's completely outside of the American dialogue, however, is just pure fantasy. I'm sure a poll of Germans in 1925 wouldn't have predicted the political and ethnic persecution of the Holocaust. Pat Robertson has called for the stoning of people who believe in UFOs. Is it really a reach to think he'd support stoning groups he's far more vocal about his hatred of?

Listen to the rhetoric the religious right and their political allies toward Muslims. Does Sullivan honestly think Robertson et al. wouldn't support a war to rid the world of Islam? We've been told by various prominent figures on the right that Islam is "evil and wicked" (and that wasn't overheated post-9/11 venting, Graham reaffirmed the belief in 2006), all Muslims are part of Al Queda, and the United States should be more like Saudi Arabia when it comes to religious freedom.

Remember, the GOP's nominee in the high-profile race against the Democratic Senate Majority Leader in Nevada has called for "Second Amendment remedies" to dealing with Congress. The notion that the American Taliban isn't prone to violence is patently absurd. From their rhetoric, to their fetishization of weapons, to sporadic incidences of violence (several detailed in my book), it's clear the crazy Right isn't far from resorting to wider violence. Sullivan should be quite aware of what would happen to gay folks like him if some of these crazies took power.

America is blessed with a well-established system of norms and laws that hold most of the Right's violent tendencies in check. But that's a matter of government, not a matter of their innate desire to wage violence on people and ideas they deplore.

But if you gave the American Taliban the same amount of power and authority their Islamic cousins enjoy, this debate would be quickly settled.

The Republican primary in New Hampshire's Senate race has been heating up of late, with former Attorney General Kelly Ayotte and self-funding businessman Bill Binnie going negative on each other in a barrage of advertising.

But that doesn't mean it's a two-way race -- there are two other candidates in the race, and this week, one of them moved out of the "easy to overlook" category. Former gubernatorial nominee Ovide Lamontagne has now gotten the endorsement of the state's biggest newspaper, the Union Leader. Steve Kornacki writes in Salon that:

[T]he Union Leader's decision could provide Lamontagne with a spark. The fiercely conservative paper is unusually influential in right-wing circles and it tends to promote its chosen candidates more aggressively than other newspapers do. Plus, Lamontagne has been in this same position before. Back in 1996, he waged an insurgent bid for governor, running far to the right of Bill Zeliff, a moderate three-term congressman with strong establishment credentials. At this point in that campaign -- three weeks before the primary -- Zeliff led Lamontagne 46 to 19 percent. But as voters focused  on the race after Labor Day, Lamontagne surged, boosted by the Union Leader's loud support (and its equally loud condemnations of Zeliff). In the primary, Lamontagne prevailed, 48 to 43 percent.

Lamontagne had already been named "the only true conservative in a very important race" by Laura Ingraham, and this week he's going on the air with a cable ad touting her endorsement and that of the Union Leader.

In late July, PPP polled (PDF) this primary and found Ayotte with a 33 point lead. But after a month of Binnie advertising against her and with Lamontagne's boost this week, it looks like this could become a real three-way (and then some) race. That being the case, here's the question: Can Lamontagne be the Creigh Deeds of this primary, slipping through as two better-funded candidates nuke each other? Or if the Union Leader endorsement and his ad are too little, too late, will he draw votes away from Ayotte and let Binnie in?

Tonight, President Obama addresses the nation from the Oval Office to mark the official end of combat in Iraq. I'll be live blogging the speech right here and the video feed will be embedded at the top of this post when it is available.

Earlier today, President Obama traveled to Fort Bliss, Texas where he addressed troops, saying that while their combat mission had ended, the military's task in Iraq had "is not yet over" and that "there’s still a lot of work" to be done before American forces are fully withdrawn from Iraq by the end of next year.

Although the large majority of the public believes -- like President Obama -- that we never should have gone to war in Iraq, you can expect the neo-con architects of the Iraq war to continue pushing for a U.S. military presence in the country beyond next year's scheduled withdrawal. The battle over that will, as they say, be a tough slog.

While tonight's address marks a moment of transition in Iraq, it's worth remembering that President Obama remains commander-in-chief of a military embroiled in another war in Afghanistan. In that war, since Friday, twenty-one American soldiers have perished. Overall, nearly 500 members of coalition Forces have been killed this year in Afghanistan.

Against the backdrop of these two unpopular wars, President Obama will also address what we must do at home to strengthen America and rebuild our own country. Speaking to NPR earlier today, press secretary Robert Gibbs said: "What the president will discuss tonight is not just the ending of our combat mission, but what we're doing to strengthen our security, and what we HAVE to do to rebuild OUR nation, here are home.”

According to excerpts of the address released by the White House, the President will say:

“Today, our most urgent task is to restore our economy, and put the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs back to work. To strengthen our middle class, we must give all our children the education they deserve, and all our workers the skills that they need to compete in a global economy.  We must jumpstart industries that create jobs, and end our dependence on foreign oil. We must unleash the innovation that allows new products to roll off our assembly lines, and nurture the ideas that spring from our entrepreneurs.  This will be difficult. But in the days to come, it must be our central mission as a people, and my central responsibility as President.”

If that is what resonates from tonight's speech, the President will have communicated one of the most important messages of his first 20 months in office.

After the speech, the White House is making Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications, available for questions from the public on whitehouse.gov. He'll answer them live on YouTube and you can submit them now.

Update 1: Video embed is now posted.

Update 2: Posted remarks as prepared for delivery below the fold.

Update 3: President Obama begins by recognizing the challenges of our times, voicing his confidence in our ability to rise to those challenges, and saluting the performance of our troops in Iraq.

Update 4: Words we've waited far to long to hear, finally delivered by Barack Obama:

So tonight, I am announcing that the American combat mission in Iraq has ended. Operation Iraqi Freedom is over, and the Iraqi people now have lead responsibility for the security of their country.

Update 5: President Obama reaffirms our commitment to leave Iraq at the end of 2011:

Consistent with our agreement with the Iraqi government, all U.S. troops will leave by the end of next year.

Update 6: Now President Obama is turning the discussion to the home front, beginning with a message of unity:

Through this remarkable chapter in the history of the United States and Iraq, we have met our responsibility. Now, it is time to turn the page.

As we do, I am mindful that the Iraq War has been a contentious issue at home. Here, too, it is time to turn the page. This afternoon, I spoke to former President George W. Bush. It’s well known that he and I disagreed about the war from its outset. Yet no one could doubt President Bush’s support for our troops, or his love of country and commitment to our security. As I have said, there were patriots who supported this war, and patriots who opposed it. And all of us are united in appreciation for our servicemen and women, and our hope for Iraq’s future.

The greatness of our democracy is grounded in our ability to move beyond our differences, and to learn from our experience as we confront the many challenges ahead. And no challenge is more essential to our security than our fight against al Qaeda.

Update 7: President Obama defends the war in Afghanistan, but as with in Iraq, he makes it clear the engagement is a limited one and the United States forces will withdraw beginning next year after the July deadline.

Next August, we will begin a transition to Afghan responsibility. The pace of our troop reductions will be determined by conditions on the ground, and our support for Afghanistan will endure. But make no mistake: this transition will begin – because open-ended war serves neither our interests nor the Afghan people’s.

Update 8: Now the speech turns to the possibilities of the road ahead-- and the need to strengthen the foundation of our society.

Throughout our history, America has been willing to bear the burden of promoting liberty and human dignity overseas, understanding its link to our own liberty and security. But we have also understood that our nation’s strength and influence abroad must be firmly anchored in our prosperity at home. And the bedrock of that prosperity must be a growing middle class.

Unfortunately, over the last decade, we have not done what is necessary to shore up the foundation of our own prosperity. We have spent over a trillion dollars at war, often financed by borrowing from overseas. This, in turn, has short-changed investments in our own people, and contributed to record deficits. For too long, we have put off tough decisions on everything from our manufacturing base to our energy policy to education reform. As a result, too many middle class families find themselves working harder for less, while our nation’s long-term competitiveness is put at risk.

And so at this moment, as we wind down the war in Iraq, we must tackle those challenges at home with as much energy, and grit, and sense of common purpose as our men and women in uniform who have served abroad. They have met every test that they faced. Now, it is our turn. Now, it is our responsibility to honor them by coming together, all of us, and working to secure the dream that so many generations have fought for –the dream that a better life awaits anyone who is willing to work for it and reach for it.

Our most urgent task is to restore our economy, and put the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs back to work. To strengthen our middle class, we must give all our children the education they deserve, and all our workers the skills that they need to compete in a global economy. We must jumpstart industries that create jobs, and end our dependence on foreign oil. We must unleash the innovation that allows new products to roll off our assembly lines, and nurture the ideas that spring from our entrepreneurs. This will be difficult. But in the days to come, it must be our central mission as a people, and my central responsibility as President.

Update 9: In my view, the preceding paragraphs don't just represent the most important part of his speech tonight, but they represent the central challenge of this presidency -- indeed, of our nation. This needs to be the central, driving focus of everything our government does.

Update 10: And the speech concludes with a reminder of the tremendous sacrifice that America's soldiers have made for this nation -- and how urgent it is that we honor and reward that sacrifice.

Update 11: My quick take on the speech -- I thought it was effective, particularly when it came to discussing the challenges at home. I know some folks won't be happy with the turn the page language as it relates to Bush and the errors of going to this war, but President Obama has long ago crossed that bridge. Tonight, we get to turn the page and finally begin closing the book on the war itself, and return our focus where it belongs: rebuilding our own nation. In general, I think most of what President Obama said about Iraq and Afghanistan was predictable, though I was glad to hear him reaffirm his commitment to leave both nations on a timetable, making it clear that the end is approaching. But what I was pleasantly surprised to hear was his acknowledgment that America's strength and security depends on rebuilding the middle class. For far too long, we've allowed the backbone of America to bend under the weight of a wealthy elite who recklessly amassed great fortunes without regard to the kind of society they were creating. The central mission of this presidency must be to restore the strength and vitality of the middle class which makes this country possible. Frankly, President Obama has yet to find his voice on this, but in tonight's address, he may have taken his most important step yet towards that end.

This is rich. Koch Industries, led by the "billionaire brothers" who "have funded opposition campaigns against so many Obama Administration policies—from health-care reform to the economic-stimulus program—that, in political circles, their ideological network is known as the Kochtopus."

They spent millions in astro-turf efforts against health insurance reform, in the guise of Americans for Prosperity ginning up the teabagger August revolt. So guess who's on the list of employers lining up for money from the Affordable Care Act? Yep.

Today, the Department of Health and Human Services announced the “first round of applicants accepted into the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program,” a $5 billion program established by the new health care law to help employers and states “maintain coverage for early retirees age 55 and older who are not yet eligible for Medicare.” According to the agency, “nearly 2,000 employers, representing large and small businesses, State and local governments, educational institutions, non-profits, and unions” applied and have been accepted into the program and “will begin to receive reimbursements for employee claims this fall.”

You're totally shocked, right? At least their older employees will be getting coverage. But it's more than ironic that federal dollars in the form of these reimbursements could end up contributing to the far-right libertarian get-government-out-of-our lives campaign the Koch's remain committed to bankrolling.

This should be required viewing for all opponents of same-sex marriage ...

Republican freshman Senator Richard Burr is doing his best imitation of a Democratic incumbent this cycle:

PPP (PDF). 8/27-29. Likely voters. MoE 3.5% (7/31 results)

Pollster Tom Jensen:

PPP's first look at the North Carolina Senate race since switching over to a likely voter model finds Democratic interest in this fall's election on a severe decline compared to 2008, and as a result Richard Burr has expanded his lead to 5 points. He's up on Elaine Marshall 43-38, with Libertarian Michael Beitler pulling 6% and 13% of voters undecided.

Marshall's winning 77% of Obama voters and Burr's winning 76% of McCain voters so if the turnout patterns this year were the same as in 2008 we'd have a tie race. But those planning to vote at this point two months before the election report having voted for John McCain by 9 points in 2008, in contrast to Barack Obama's actual narrow victory in the state. That Republican shift in this year's electorate is consistent with what we're seeing across the country, and it's the biggest thing Marshall's going to have to overcome if she's going to win this fall.

This race is likely more winnable than the Missouri Senate race, where the DSCC is pumping in big bucks while ignoring this one. Part of the problem is money -- as of the last reporting period, Burr had over $6 million cash on hand, while Marshall had $163,000. The DSCC doesn't feel like it can close that gap. Yet despite the big cash disparity, Marshall remains competitive, and money isn't everything in a climate that isn't being kind to incumbents.

And will Burr really be the incumbent to break this seat's curse? No incumbent has won it since 1968.

The composite, including Rasmussen:

Fresh off of being forgiven by the White House, Simpson has a new target.

RALEIGH, N.C.—The system that automatically awards disability benefits to some veterans because of concerns about Agent Orange seems contrary to efforts to control federal spending, the Republican co-chairman of President Barack Obama's deficit commission said Tuesday.

Former Wyoming Sen. Alan Simpson's comments came a day after The Associated Press reported that diabetes has become the most frequently compensated ailment among Vietnam veterans, even though decades of research has failed to find more than a possible link between the defoliant Agent Orange and diabetes.

"The irony (is) that the veterans who saved this country are now, in a way, not helping us to save the country in this fiscal mess," said Simpson, an Army veteran who was once chairman of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee....

"It's the kind of thing that's just driving us to this $1 trillion, $400 billion deficit this year," Simpson said. "It's not that I'm an uncaring person, but common sense is the most uncommon thing in Washington."

Just like the irony of millions of Americans paying into Social Security on the promise that they would receive benefits back, while the rich get off the hook for repaying the fund they "borrowed" from for their tax cuts and wars. Disabled vets are just like seniors--those "lesser people" of Simpson's, the ones who fought our wars. Those disabled vets that our own military poisoned while they were serving, can just shove it.

This comes right on the heels of an announcement from Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Eric K. Shinseki that the VA, with the "unwavering support of President Obama," is finally doing the right thing by those veterans exposed to Agent Orange. In announcing this, Shinseki said "the President and I are proud to finally provide this group of Veterans the care and benefits they have long deserved."

Maybe this attack from Simpson will be enough for President Obama to give Simpson the boot.

There's a lot more to this story -- which revolves around an energy firm named Enbridge Energy that bused in undocumented immigrants to work 14 hours per day, 7 days a week cleaning up an oil spill in unsafe conditions -- but this one detail jumped out at me (emphasis added):

In an e-mail responding to the submitted photos, David Polish, spokesperson for the EPA wrote, “Thank you for bringing your concerns about worker safety to our attention. The United States Environmental Protection Agency takes the issue of worker health and safety very seriously. We have instructed Enbridge to investigate the circumstances surrounding these pictures. Once they complete their review, we will direct corrective actions if warranted.”

What an amazing statement from the EPA. (a) They take this very seriously. (b) They take it so seriously, that they have told the company -- against whom allegations are being made -- to launch an investigation and report back. What a perfect situation for Enbridge. All they need to do is push some paper and say they've taken care of the situation and voila, problem solved. And that's just what seems to have happened:

Enbridge spokesperson Terri Larson said, “We definitely identified a few things that we consider safety issues. Some were minor, some were more important.” As a result, Larson said worker safety specialists would be working to address those safety concerns promptly.

Translation: "Yeah we saw some stuff, did some things, but it's all good now. Thank's for asking." What is the point of even pretending that we regulate these people if all we're going to do is send them notes asking them to investigate themselves? It's utterly pointless.

And as for Enbridge Energy? Not surprisingly, their attorney -- you know, the one who should know that is against the law to hire undocumented workers -- donated heavily to the GOP in the last election cycle, including a donation to GOP Rep. Pete Olson. Yep, the very same Pete Olson who says he wants to crack down on immigrants:

If we don’t know who is coming into our country, how will we know they don’t want to harm us? I believe in strengthening our borders with fences, increased surveillance, increased man power, detention facilities, and an increased commitment to FULLY enforce our laws--no excuses, no delays, and no second chances for those who break our laws. Amnesty is not an option.

Isn't it great that Enbridge is putting it's political weight behind passing laws that it clearly has no intention of following?

The forecast track for Hurricane Earl hasn't changed much this afternoon. The storm is still a category 4 hurricane and may be undergoing an eyewall replacement cycle, and if so it could well be at or near maximum intensity during a possible close approach to the US tomorrow evening. It's tough call how close that might be, when a storm is on this kind of course even tiny variations can mean the difference between it moving away from shore and closing in. And if it does begin closing, because of the geometry of the eastern seaboard and the storm's heading, it could potentially close fast. That's why there remains a small but very real chance that it comes close to or even hits somewhere between NC and Maine.

Not trying to scare anyone, but just as public service let's talk about what a hypothetical category 2 hurricane is like for the average homeowner. In a solidly built home you're probably protected from the elements. But, odds are the power goes out in which case there's no info at all; no internet, no cell phone, oh and maybe no water. There's nothing to do but sit there and listen to howling, screaming wind and debris slam into your house. At peak intensity you'll be able to see walls and ceilings flex, paint flecks may come down in a brief indoor snow flurry, you may wonder if that's a precursor to the roof peeling off. It's stressful.

For at least nine out of ten homes the roof stays intact and no trees crash through a window or door, the storm passes, and that's when the real misery starts. Imagine camping out, with no water, no power, no food except what you have in cans, no refrigeration, no AC, no internet access. Power may be out for a few hours or it may be out for a few weeks, it's a roll of the dice. Sure, for the first two or three days you'll grin and bear it like a red-blooded American pioneer, but within four or five days, if that power isn't back on, you're gonna reach a breaking point. And past that, every day life just starts unraveling. It's also dangerous as hell, especially for kids. Broken glass, jagged edges, power lines down, backed up sewers, it's a microbe Mecca.

That's what it's like in a typical cat 2 hurricane. Imagine a cat 3 or worse? Point being, in the unlikely event Earl takes an unexpected, more nefarious course, even if it weakens, this is something you probably don't want to experience. What better excuse to consider taking a five day weekend, visit a friend or family member further inland! If things looks worse tomorrow morning, warning time could be short. It's a good idea to have your car gassed up and your plans made. Odds are you won't have to rely on those plans, odds are it will be sunny and nice all weekend and you'll be able to laugh at silly meteorologists. But in the meantime you'll feel better having them.

Interesting:

Here’s what happened: [Florida] Attorney General Bill McCollum was the favorite in the GOP gubernatorial primary, with a moderate record on immigration and strong support from Latino Republicans.  His opponent Rick Scott, a political newcomer and self-funded multi-millionaire, decided to make a name for himself by riding the wave of anti-immigrant sentiment so popular with a segment of the Republican base.  He emphasized his strong support for an Arizona-like immigration law in Florida and painted McCollum as soft on illegal immigration.  Still, once McCollum started attacking Scott as a shady businessman, he regained the lead and was expected to win.

In what proved to be the fatal move of his campaign, McCollum introduced his own version of an Arizona-type law less than two weeks before the primary.  McCollum called on the Florida state legislature to enact it in September and bragged that the bill was tougher than Arizona’s.

Turns out, McCollum’s strategy of trying to outflank Scott on immigrant bashing backfired.  McCollum rapidly lost support from Latino leaders, and faced a backlash in the press.  On Tuesday, many Latinos in Miami-Dade County stayed home.  Turnout in what was expected to be a McCollum stronghold was less than 17%, while statewide turnout was 21%.  Scott raced over the finish line and pulled off the come-from-behind upset.

Remember, Florida has a large Latino Republican base, particularly the Cuban community in South Florida (reinforced by the smaller Nicaraguan crowd). The entire GOP has been propped up by these "anti-communist" Republican Latinos, both in terms of votes and in cash. The Cuban-American community is loaded, and they spend freely on politics.

But with the GOP turning hard-Right on immigration, these numbers spell serious trouble for Florida Republicans. Their base is demanding Arizona-style anti-immigrant hate, and the blowback in the South Florida Latino community could have serious electoral repercussions.

With Latinos comprising over 15 percent of the state’s voting population in 2008, as well as almost 50 percent of the recent population growth, it is dangerous and even fatal to underestimate the power of this growing voting bloc.  According to a NALEO’s recent poll 55% of Florida Latinos said that the current immigration debate made them more likely to vote in the November 2010 elections and 60% of Florida Latinos said they were certain, very likely, or somewhat likely to vote against a political party or candidate who took a disagreeable position on immigration, even if they agreed with that candidate/party on most other issues.

Good news for Democrats!

Except, the Latino community is furious about the lack of progress on comprehensive immigration reform, or even the Dream Act (for students of undocumented parents), and Spanish-language media has been turning against Obama with a vengeance (and there's no one from the professional left in that world).

Republicans are making headway with Latinos by talking about Obama's broken promises. And while they may conveniently omit their role in blocking any such reform, fact is that Democrats never made a serious push for reform. Reid may whine about 60 votes, but even holding a vote and going down in defeat would've shown Latinos which party was fighting for them, and which one is standing in their way. Instead, Democrats are stuck with the worst of all worlds -- lack of progress, and the blame for the lack of progress.

For Latinos, a demographic that is already prone to staying home on election day, a sense of political helplessness is a recipe for lower turnout. And the lower the Latino turnout, the more seats we'll lose in November.

Most of you have probably seen this by now:

That 10-point GOP lead is the widest in Gallup's polling history, and suggest serious Democratic losses in November. If the elections were today, we'd lose the House, with seats to spare. The Senate is seriously in play. There's no hyperbole here -- the Dems are headed toward crushing defeats this November.

And it's worse than that even:

Now, an enthusiastic vote counts just as much as an enthusiastic one, but it's also harder to get that unenthused voter to the polls. The Democratic turnout machine, which has made great strides in recent years, is going to have its work cut out just getting base voters out, and even then we'd still come up short. Yeah, it's bleak. And the White House can whine all it wants about the "professional left", fact is that this goes far beyond some blog or cable news host. So what to do?

Digby:

I don't know about you, but it seems to me that if you want to get people enthusiastic you might want to pick a big old fight right about now instead of trying desperately to avoid controversy (also known as "kerfuffles".) In case the Democrats don't realize it, Republicans and right leaning Independents aren't going to vote for them no matter what they do. Even if they open up those FEMA camps and start rounding up every Muslim and Mexican looking person they see, it won't work. Neither will rolling over and playing dead.

This goes beyond "doing something", and into the realm of actually doing something to excite the base. The administration has done virtually nothing designed to reward its partisans. Half measures and compromises with Republicans who voted against final legislation certainly doesn't count. Failing to follow through on promises on everything from comprehensive immigration reform to DADT doesn't help. Fighting to open up more shoreline to drilling doesn't help. Lilly Ledbetter was a step forward, then the Stupak Amendment was two steps back.

In fact, from the beginning, this administration and Democratic congress seemed more concerned with "bipartisanship" for the sake of bipartisanship, than they were in passing the best possible legislation possible. Harry Reid came off the gate in 2008 by immediately whining about "60 votes" -- something I don't recall ever hearing from Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. The Obama Administration indulged Max Baucus' "negotiations" with Republicans Mike Enzi and company, even as those Republicans publicly bragged that their entire strategy was to delay and obstruct.

People may whine about cable hosts and bloggers who point out these failings, and try to shoot the messenger. But we don't have a noise machine like Fox's. Rush Limbaugh reaches a third of the conservative base on a weekly base. There is nothing even remotely close to that on the Left. Limbaugh's weekly audience is 20 million. Keith Olbermann's is maybe a tenth of that.

No, this mess is the administration's making, with a healthy assist from Harry Reid's Senate. The shame is that Nancy Pelosi's House, which did its job, will bear the brunt of the voter backlash. But the White House won't be spared.

Paul Krugman:

So what will happen if, as expected, Republicans win control of the House? We already know part of the answer: Politico reports that they’re gearing up for a repeat performance of the 1990s, with a “wave of committee investigations” — several of them over supposed scandals that we already know are completely phony. We can expect the G.O.P. to play chicken over the federal budget, too; I’d put even odds on a 1995-type government shutdown sometime over the next couple of years.

It will be an ugly scene, and it will be dangerous, too. The 1990s were a time of peace and prosperity; this is a time of neither. In particular, we’re still suffering the after-effects of the worst economic crisis since the 1930s, and we can’t afford to have a federal government paralyzed by an opposition with no interest in helping the president govern. But that’s what we’re likely to get.

If I were President Obama, I’d be doing all I could to head off this prospect, offering some major new initiatives on the economic front in particular, if only to shake up the political dynamic. But my guess is that the president will continue to play it safe, all the way into catastrophe.

It's a slow motion car wreck in the works, and the best the White House and its allies can do is complain that we didn't clap loudly enough.

• Great CPR campaign from the American Heart Association.
• PA-Sen: Joe Sestak needs to do something to shake up his campaign.

  Republican candidate Pat Toomey has a 10-point lead over his Democratic rival in the race for a Senate seat in the key swing state of Pennsylvania where worries about the economy dominate, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Tuesday

  In the latest sign that President Barack Obama's Democrats could struggle at the November 2 midterm vote, 47 percent of likely voters said they would back Toomey and 37 percent said they favored Democrat Joe Sestak.

  And yes, I know Sestak came back from behind in the primary. But he had a dragon slayer with the ad of Specter endorsing Sarah Palin. Does he have something that potent for the general election?

• The Koch brothers aren't just spending millions to defeat Democrats and progressive legislation, but the hypocrites are also first in line to receive government handouts.
• KY-Sen: I like Jack Conway's first ad of the general election:

  Help keep the ad on the air by contributing to his campaign.

• Newt gets slapped in the face by Tom Coburn:

  Conservative Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma bluntly stated his concern about the twice-divorced, thrice-married Gingrich during a Friday town hall.

  "He's the last person I'd vote for for president of the United States,” Coburn said, per the Tulsa World. “His life indicates he does not have a commitment to the character traits necessary to be a great president."

  Coburn said that Gingrich’s personal history indicates that he “doesn't know anything about commitment to marriage.”

• This shit pisses me off:

  A new report on who supplies — and who spends — California's public dollars shows an interesting disparity between the givers and the takers:

  Counties that provide most of the state's revenue streams like income and sales taxes reliably elect Democrats, who traditionally want to take more of your money. And counties whose Republican representatives argue most vociferously for social services cuts draw, per capita, the most state aid [...]

  [R]ural residents would be most affected by the drastic cuts being considered to health and human services programs. The report shows the Bay Area's blue counties are, in many ways, a revenue lifeline for the rural Republican red.

  "Is there a disconnect here between political sentiments in rural areas and the demand or desire or need for public expenditures? I think there is," said Al Sokolow, a retired professor at UC Davis. "Leaders in these rural areas, while wanting more from the state, are also less reluctant to give in on the tax front."

  See also Alaska.

• The Onion really knows its Republicans.

  ALINA, KS—Local man Scott Gentries told reporters Wednesday that his deliberately limited grasp of Islamic history and culture was still more than sufficient to shape his views of the entire Muslim world.

  Gentries, 48, said he had absolutely no interest in exposing himself to further knowledge of Islamic civilization or putting his sweeping opinions into a broader context of any kind, and confirmed he was "perfectly happy" to make a handful of emotionally charged words the basis of his mistrust toward all members of the world's second-largest religion.

  "I learned all that really matters about the Muslim faith on 9/11," Gentries said in reference to the terrorist attacks on the United States undertaken by 19 of Islam's approximately 1.6 billion practitioners. "What more do I need to know to stigmatize Muslims everywhere as inherently violent radicals?"

  "And now they want to build a mosque at Ground Zero," continued Gentries, eliminating any distinction between the 9/11 hijackers and Muslims in general. "No, I won't examine the accuracy of that statement, but yes, I will allow myself to be outraged by it and use it as evidence of these people's universal callousness toward Americans who lost loved ones when the Twin Towers fell."

  "Even though I am not one of those people," he added.

  When told that the proposed "Ground Zero mosque" is actually a community center two blocks north of the site that would include, in addition to a public prayer space, a 500-seat auditorium, a restaurant, and athletic facilities, Gentries shook his head and said, "I know all I'm going to let myself know."

• If we had Washington as concerned with our problems TODAY, as opposed to Social Security's projected problems in 27 years, we wouldn't be facing an electoral drubbing this November.
• A preview of coming attractions if GOP takes either chamber of Congress (at least one is now likely):

  Republican pollster Dick Morris told conservative political activists that newly elected Republicans should shut down the government next year. Morris said the party must elect lawmakers who will stand up and say "No" to President Obama's requests for more government spending and predicted a repeat of how Republicans forced a shutdown under President Clinton after they won control of Congress.

  "There's going to be a government shutdown, just like in '95 and '96 but we're going to win it this time and I'll be fightin' on your side," Morris said at the Americans for Prosperity Foundation Conference on Friday in Washington.

You gotta say this for Joe Miller, he knows a fundraising opportunity when he sees one, and he sees one in the absentee ballot counting in the Alaska primary.

Joe Miller's lawyers are asking for state troopers to be stationed at Alaska elections offices, charging that there are serious shenanigans afoot involving improper shredding and that Sen. Lisa Murkowski's observers of the ballot-counting brought an illegal iPhone into the room.

Those are just two allegations in a new letter  from Miller's attorneys to Lt. Gov. Craig Campbell and state elections officials that detail serious concerns and will make the sustained vote counting all the more interesting.

The Tea Party Express group, which spent more than $500,000 in a last-minute effort to put Miller over the top in a primary to unseat Murkowski, is emailing supporters a copy of the letter with the ominous subject line: "Irregularities Arise in Alaska Vote Count - URGENT!"

....

"The NRSC, the Murkowski campaign and the Republican political establishment in Alaska are doing everything they can to steal Joe Miller's apparent victory away from him. We must fight back," they wrote. "We went through this with Al Franken in Minnesota when the Democrat Party pulled this stunt - we can't stand for it in Alaska with the Republican Party establishment."

They certainly know the crowd they're appealing to, and it's not run of the mill Republicans. It's pure paranoia and persecution in the teabagger crowd, and Miller knows just the buttons to push. And it's also pretty hyped up, considering the one NRSC guy who flew out to Alaska from DC was only there for three days and left quickly in order "to ensure that the NRSC’s actions would not be misinterpreted."

This is the most blatant attempt by the Tea Party to declare all-out war with the Republican Party. Unity has been lacking in the Republican party post-primary from Kentucky to Washington State, but until now the NRSC hasn't been the declared enemy. Which makes one wonder how committed the NRSC will remain in this election should Miller prevail in the primary. Who knows how far he'll escalate this if it actually gets to a recount.

Update: Further evidence that this is primarily about money, from Roll Call [sub req]:

Joe Miller is working to raise $100,000 as Alaska begins counting thousands of additional ballots in the Republican Senate primary. Miller’s campaign told supporters in an e-mail Tuesday that it needs the money for the "fight between the establishment and the conservative grassroots."

"Unfortunately, Joe Miller and his homegrown base of conservative Alaskans are facing legal battles with well-funded special interests committed to maintaining the status quo in Washington," the solicitation reads. "With your support, Joe can continue his momentum; stave off the inevitable lawsuits, and cross the finish line with another victory for the conservative movement."

Salon's Justin Elliott:

A bigoted pastor who has assailed gays and Muslims is launching the "9-11 Christian Center at Ground Zero" a mere two blocks from the World Trade Center site this Sunday, but so far the project hasn't drawn a peep of protest from those who are outraged by the "ground zero mosque."

Pastor Bill Keller of Florida said today he will begin preaching Sunday at the Marriott at 85 West Street (see proximity to ground zero here). A weekly service is planned at the hotel until the $8 million 9/11 Christian Center finds a permanent space. (Fundraising is going well, Keller told Salon today.)

To get a sense of where Keller is coming from, consider his project's website, which calls Islam a religion of "hate and death" whose adherents will go to hell. It also says: "Islam is a wonderful religion... for PEDOPHILES!"

Keller's mission in life is to impose his version of Christianity on the rest of America -- the First Amendment or the Constitution be damned. Unlike the Park51 proponents, he is adamantly opposed to religious pluralism. He wants to turn America into a Christian version of Mecca. He is a poster-child of the American Taliban.

His bigotry cuts across the theological spectrum. Here's a perfect example from a story TIME's Michael Scherer wrote for Salon back in 2007:

Keller has focused his biblical fire on a new target, Mitt Romney. Keller opposes Romney because the Republican presidential contender is a Mormon.

"A vote for Romney is a vote for Satan," Keller declared in his daily e-mail devotional last May. His reasoning went like this: Romney's election would serve as a giant advertisement for a competing religion, Mormonism, which Keller and others believe has falsely portrayed itself as another form of Christianity in an effort to find converts. "He would influence people to seek out the Mormon faith," Keller predicted of a Romney presidency. "They would get sucked into those lies and they would eventually die and go to hell."

Keep in mind this was back in 2007. You also won't be surprised to learn that Keller also hates Glenn Beck (who is also Mormon) accusing him of being the most deceptive figure in media other than Oprah Winfrey -- because he is a Mormon.

Now, all that being said, despite my own views about Keller's theology and ideology, I still strongly believe that Keller and his flock should be protected by the First Amendment -- even though they would not afford the same protections to their neighbor. Freedom of religion is at the heart of our Constitution, and if we abandon that, we abandon the American dream.

But to those who would deny American Muslims those same protections because they falsely believe that those Muslims seek to impose Sharia Law on the United States, what on Earth is stopping you from protesting Keller with equal vigor? The only answer, it would seem, is that he's not Muslim. He may be just as a fundamentalist and loony as the real Taliban, but because he's part of the American Taliban, he gets the wingnut seal of approval. It's crazy.

When we last left Wisconsin Republican Senate candidate Ron Johnson, his campaign was trying to put out the fire from yet another revelation that his vocal "anti-big government" teabaggerism ran contrary to his "hand out to the big government" business record.

How does a good teabagger try to reconcile such an uncomfortable part of his history? Easy...by rewriting his own history, of course:

It's one thing to flip-flop on the issues.

But who's ever heard of a candidate rewriting his own company history?

That's exactly what U.S. Senate candidate Ron Johnson did last week.

For nearly nine years, his plastics company has carried this online description of its beginning:

"Founded in 1977, Pacur occupies a facility constructed specifically for sheet extrusion, which provides polyester and polypropylene sheet and rollstock to converters, distributors, and end users," said the website for the Oshkosh-based factory.

But that changed on Wednesday.

Johnson's firm tinkered with its website to move up Pacur's first day of operation by a couple of years.

"Founded in 1979*, Pacur occupies a facility constructed specifically for sheet extrusion, which provides polyester and polypropylene sheet and rollstock to converters, distributors, and end users," the site says now.

Why the shift? Because the government-financed rail line that was the crux of last week's story was approved in the Spring of 1979. At the time, Pacur was known as Wisconsin Industrial Shipping Supplies. It changed its name in 1979, but the existence of the company (and the involvement of Johnson's brother-in-law, Pat Curler) predated the name change.

Johnson is clearly trying to make the case that WISS and Pacur are two totally separate entities, which would put his involvement in the company AFTER the rail line was built.

Of course, that still doesn't explain his firm's acceptance of $4 million in government-backed cash during the 1980s for expansion of his company. It is estimated that getting the cash from local government development bonds saved Pacur over a million dollars in financing costs.

It is those bonds, incidentally, which now have the Wisconsin Democratic Party now calling for Johnson to release his corporate tax returns.

With that in mind, expect this update to the Pacur site: "Pacur was founded in 1979, but Ron Johnson really, honestly, had nothing to do with it until...until...hey, when was the last time we had our hand out to the government?"

Update 12 noon CDT via WeatherUnderground:

The latest set of computer models runs from 2am EDT (6Z) this morning push Earl's projected track a little closer to the U.S. East Coast, and we now have two of our six reliable models predicting a U.S. landfall. The latest NOGAPS run  shows Earl hitting the Outer Banks of North Carolina late Thursday night, then striking Southeast Massachusetts late Friday night, and Eastern Maine on Saturday morning. The HWRF model predicts a strike on Eastern Maine Saturday morning, but keeps Earl offshore from North Carolina and Massachusetts. None of the other computer models show Earl hitting the U.S., but several models bring Earl within 100 - 200 miles of North Carolina's Outer Banks and Southeast Massachusetts.

Hurricane Earl (update 11 AM) has taken a few small jogs over the last 24 hours and now potentially poses some danger to the eastern seaboard, from the Carolinas to Maine. The most likely forecast still has Earl missing the US east coast and recurving into the North Atlantic. But the storm's westerly track brushes the east coast, meaning residents could feel the brunt of a major hurricane.

On a just completed conference call, NHC director Bill Read said that as of 11 AM EDT Earl is a powerful category 4 storm about 1000 miles from Cape Hatteras, North Carolina. Earl is expected to make a turn toward the northwest or north later today or tonight. The exact location and degree of that turn will determine what areas, if any, on the US east coast are most at risk (FEMA officials are watching that closely). Ideally, Earl moves parallel to or away form the east coast, staying 200 miles away, causing no or minimal damage. There is a small chance Earl causes real problems for the DC region and a slightly larger chance that areas from Cape Cod to Maine see landfall or other storm effects from a weakened Earl. Sea surface temperatures and general conditions are warm enough to sustain a hurricane well north of the DC metro coast. I'll be updating data and other info here throughout the day.

In plain English, for now odds are this system misses the US. But residents from North Carolina to Cap Cod and as far north as Maine should keep an eye on the storm over the next 24 hours and be prepared for high winds, drenching rain, and widespread loss of power, phone service, or water. Those in low laying, coastal, or flood prone regions should be prepared to move to higher ground and know where local storm shelters are located. More info can be found at FEMA and GetReady.gov.

Update: 11:24AM CDT, I'm told latest model puts Earl just a hair west, edging slightly closer to NC and DC.