The first half of today's show was about patriotism, and it was juicy. The second was about Barack Obama's shift to the center and John McCain's Campaign Shake up.

A substantive discussion amongst the panelists about what patriotism means. Bob Scheer expounds on George Washington's farewell speech; Tony Blankley talks about how the theme plays out politically; Matt Miller shares thoughts by Peter Beinart of Time Magazine that the right says "America's great," the left says, "Here's what would make America great;" and Arianna Huffington mentions the USA Today poll that says 2/3 of Americans think that protesting is patriotic. Are Obama's moves toward swing voters going to win him votes or just the animosity of his base? And will John McCain's campaign recover its footing with new guy, Steve Schmidt, at the helm.

Barack Obama's national standing has been significantly damaged by the controversy over his former pastor, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, raising questions for some voters about the Illinois senator's values, credibility and electability.

The erosion of support among Democrats and independents raises the stakes in Tuesday's Indiana and North Carolina primaries, which represent a chance for Obama to reassert his claim to a Democratic nomination that seems nearly in his grasp. A defeat in Indiana and a close finish in North Carolina, where he's favored, could fuel unease about his ability to win in November. Such results also could help propel Hillary Rodham Clinton's uphill campaign all the way to the Democratic convention in August.

In the USA TODAY survey, taken Thursday through Saturday, Clinton leads Obama among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents by 7 percentage points, the first time in three months she has been ahead. Two weeks ago, before the controversy over comments by Jeremiah Wright reignited, Obama led by 10 points.

In February, Democrats and Democratic leaners by 33 points said Obama had a better shot at beating Republican John McCain in November. Clinton is now seen as the stronger candidate by 5 points.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/el ection2008/2008-05-04-obama_N.htm

By the way a NY Times / CBS poll paints an entirely different picture .

A majority of American voters say that the furor over the relationship between Senator Barack Obama and his former pastor has not affected their opinion of Mr. Obama, but a substantial number say that it could influence voters this fall should he be the Democratic presidential nominee, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/05/us/pol itics/05poll.html?_r=1&hp&oref=s login

Who is right ?

Most of us are familiar with the campaign tactic Obama adopted for his presidenitial run.  He has made it a central theme as to counter his lack of experience.  His declaration that he doesn't accept money from "registered" Lobbyists or PACS.   Trying to infer being in Washington for only a couple years means he hasn't been tainted by what he views as a natural occurence if you're in DC for a longer period of time.  And apparently his other view, if you take money from Lobbyists, you will automatically have to curry your vote to their favor.  Thankfully all of our elected officials don't operate that way.

WASHINGTON — Barack Obama often boasts he is "the only candidate who isn't taking a dime from Washington lobbyists," yet his fundraising team includes 38 members of law firms that were paid $138 million last year to lobby the federal government, records show.

And of course, Obama did not practice this principle in of his other campaigns, the ones he ran for the state of Illinois, or the current seat he holds as a US Senator.  But there does seem to be some continuity here folks.  He IS accepting money from Lobbyists individually AND, he has 38 Lobbyists raising a pledged $3.5 million EACH for his current Presidential Campaign.

You can allways count on Gov. Ed Rendell to be painfully honest.

Demoting Penn ??? No way, under the bus with this guy !!!!

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/200 8/04/gov-rendell-cli.html

The generic ballot doesn't tell us a lot, but this jump post-Foley is stunning, according to USA Today/Gallup.

On the question of which party's candidate would receive their vote if the election were held today, Democrats held a 23-point lead over Republicans among every type of person questioned -- likely voters, registered voters and adults. That's the largest lead Democrats have held among registered voters since 1978 and a jump from last month's 48%-48% split among likely voters.

Government corruption, Iraq and terrorism were the three most important issues to poll respondents. They said Democrats would do a better job on all three. The party had a 21-point advantage on handling corruption and a 17-point advantage on Iraq. A longstanding GOP advantage on terrorism vanished; Democrats had a 5-point edge. In other indicators:

* 57% of registered voters say their own representative should be re-elected, the lowest since just before the 1994 Republican House sweep.

* 56% said it was a mistake to send troops to Iraq while 40% said it was not -- the biggest split in a year.

* Voters gave Democrats a 54%-28% advantage over Republicans concerning which party would handle gasoline prices better despite the recent drop in prices.

I've been meaning to write something on how 'issue' silos are really stupid, that a drop in handling of, say, moral values, also drops your favorability in handling Iraq or terrorism since these are all proxies for 'character'.  But I think I'll let these statistics speak for themselves.

20 years ago, I'd have bet I'd never say this, but I think we should take a moment and thank our stars for USA Today.  They haven't exactly been crusading journalists, but from the beginning they have been consistently the most likely of the majors to publish, on the front page, important stories that reflect badly on Busholini, Count Dickula, or one of their GOP minions. And, USA Today's national circulation sends this information to percolate through the heartland, where the local newspapers are even worse than the WaPos and NYTs.

Compared to the WaPos, NYTs, and CNNs hiding under their desks, USA Today's simple willingness to do its job counts as a kind of heroism.  Bravo.