This is from Krugman's blog, not the paper, so I hope an extended quote is okay:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12 07/oy-obama

Here's what I said about the Obama plan when it first came out:

So there's a lot to commend the Obama plan. In fact, it would have been considered daring if it had been announced last year.

Now for the bad news. Although Mr. Obama says he has a plan for universal health care, he actually doesn't -- a point Mr. Edwards made in last night's debate. The Obama plan doesn't mandate insurance for adults. So some people would take their chances -- and then end up receiving treatment at other people's expense when they ended up in emergency rooms. In that regard it's actually weaker than the Schwarzenegger plan.

I asked David Cutler, a Harvard economist who helped put together the Obama plan, about this omission. His answer was that Mr. Obama is reluctant to impose a mandate that might not be enforceable, and that he hopes -- based, to be fair, on some estimates by Mr. Cutler and others -- that a combination of subsidies and outreach can get all but a tiny fraction of the population insured without a mandate. Call it the timidity of hope.

On the whole, the Obama plan is better than I feared but not as comprehensive as I would have liked. It doesn't quell my worries that Mr. Obama's dislike of "bitter and partisan" politics makes him too cautious. But at least he's come out with a plan.

And I was prepared to leave it at that -- Obama's plan was weaker than his rivals' because it wasn't universal, but I hoped that he would fix that in practice.

But then Obama started attacking his rivals from the right, denouncing their proposals using exactly the same false claims that conservatives will use to try to derail reform in the future.

And now, having been caught out on the facts, the Obama people respond with a personal attack, lifting quotes out of context to pretend that I never had problems with the plan. Something is very wrong here.

also posted at Daily Kos:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/8/1 612/01549

Al Gore speaking in Singapore today:

"I may re-enter politics at some point in the future because I'm only 59 years old," Gore told reporters on the sidelines of a forum in Singapore.

Gore said he has "no plan" to run in the 2008 presidential election but aims to make the environment a focus of public discussion during the campaign.

"There is no single candidate that is putting forward a comprehensive argument about the environment or making climate change a priority,"

Full article here: http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?set_i d=1&click_id=3&art_id=nw20070808 093403512C645821

Also posted at Daily Kos

If you want to see Gore enter the Presidential race and will be attending Yearly Kos AND/OR will be in the Chicago area next weekend, then this meeting is for YOU.

This is a unique opportunity for grassroots Gore supporters from around the country to meet face to face and brainstorm ideas for encouraging Gore's entry, raising public awareness of the need for Gore to have the power of the Presidency to tackle the problems of our rapidly heating planet, disfunctional political system, etc. etc.

This is an especially propitious time for such a meeting as petitioning to get candidates and delegates on state ballots is about to begin in many states (including Illinois).

The event is planned for 6PM on Friday, August 3rd, in the Hyatt Regency McCormick Place Hotel adjacent to the convention center. For further details and to RSVP, please click here:

http://www.dfalink.com/event.php?id=2160 6

Also posted at Daily Kos

This will be the chance for people around the country who support an Al Gore candidacy to meet in person and put our heads together to come up with ideas how we can work to encourage Gore to enter the fray. (Remember "We have the power!")

I have posted the event on DFA-Link with a tentative time and date of Friday, August 3, at 6:00 PM. Please RSVP here:

http://www.dfalink.com/event.php?id=2160 6

This seems like a good time since YearlyKos activities on Friday appear to end at 5:15. I put McCormick Place as the stand-in location, but we will probably want to have the meeting off site since the convention will be done for the day and we will likely have local participants who aren't attending YearlyKos. If you are staying in a hotel near the convention, please note that in your RSVP since a nearby hotel would be an obvious choice for our location (e.g., in the hotel bar).

[Also posted at DailyKos]

Al Gore was in Chicago to sign copies of "The Assault on Reason" today. After thanking him for all he is doing and mentioning a member of my family he knows, I gave him a letter which I hope he will read. In any case, I thought I should make it public in the hopes that others who would like to see him run might find my arguments helpful in formulating their own (I encourage EVERYONE who supports Gore for President to write to him).

Dear Vice President Gore,

Thank you for everything you are doing to try to restore our democracy and save the planet.

I know you feel the current state of political discourse in this country is one in which you might not be the ideal candidate. However, I think the best way to change that discourse would be for you to run exactly the kind of campaign you have been running - to fix our broken political system and solve the climate crisis - with yourself as the candidate for President who could accomplish these goals.

Just got this in my email and felt it was worth passing along. As much as I want Gore to be the nominee, it's at least as important to make sure Hillary is NOT. Read to the end to see how Bill and Hillary are taking their tactics right out of the Rethuglican playbook.

Link: http://vermontdailybriefing.com/?p=619

Trickle-Down Fear-Mongering 101

by Philip Baruth

Vice President Dick Cheney, September 8, 2004, on the real dangers of electing a Democratic President:

"It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States."

I did not see this posted anywhere on MyDD and thought it too important a point to leave unsaid:

In his NY Times column today, Paul Krugman writes the following:

Barack Obama recently lamented the fact that "politics has become so bitter and partisan" - which it certainly has.

But he then went on to say that partisanship is why "we can't tackle the big problems that demand solutions. And that's what we have to change first." Um, no. If history is any guide, what we need are political leaders willing to tackle the big problems despite bitter partisan opposition. If all goes well, we'll eventually have a new era of bipartisanship - but that will be the end of the story, not the beginning.

Or to put it another way: what we need now is another F.D.R., not another Dwight Eisenhower....

It was only after F.D.R. had created a more equal society, and the old class warriors of the G.O.P. were replaced by "modern Republicans" who accepted the New Deal, that bipartisanship began to prevail.

also posted at DailyKos

Well, the FEC reports are in and they tell a very interesting story:

Itemized Contributions from District:
1.5%  Duckworth
64% Cegelis

Percentage of Individual Contributions under $200:
18% Duckworth
49% Cegelis

more after the flip