There is much that I can agree with or tolerate in Barack Obama's new article in Foreign Affairs. On the occupation of Iraq, he does not favor completely ending it, and he does not mention the ownership of oil, but he does say:

"[W]e must make clear that we seek no permanent bases in Iraq. We should leave behind only a minimal over-the-horizon military force in the region to protect American personnel and facilities, continue training Iraqi security forces, and root out al Qaeda."

Obama is no George W. Bush. But then, neither was candidate Bush what he and Dick Cheney have been in office. And preferability to Bush is far too low a threshold, I think, to merit support as a candidate for president. It is an indication of how far to the right Washington opinions on war and peace have shifted, that a Democratic candidate for president can write the following:

"I will not hesitate to use force, unilaterally if necessary, to protect the American people or our vital interests whenever we are attacked or imminently threatened. We must also consider using military force in circumstances beyond self-defense…."

Cindy Sheehan’s temporary withdrawal — in exhaustion and frustration — from a leadership role in opposition to the war that claimed her son has at least given the mainstream media something to talk about: the antiwar movement’s lack of a “face,” or celebrity void.

That’s news, I guess, while mere abysmal poll numbers, which indicate that the war is lost on the home front, seem to have little more than curiosity value. And, indeed, the American public’s two-to-one opposition to the war and a presidential disapproval rating of nearly 70 percent have so far barely caused a sputter in the Bush war machine. Its vigor and ability to intimidate Congress haven’t flagged, and plans for a 50-year occupation of Iraq proceed apace, under cover of impenetrable cliche: Our troops have to be allowed to complete their mission.

On Monday, Ted Koppel offered a report / commentary on National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" which can be found online (  http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10947954  ) with this headline: "A Duty to Mislead: Politics and the Iraq War," and this introductory text: "Democrats are telling voters that if they are elected, all U.S. troops will be pulled out of Iraq. But as Sen. Hillary Clinton privately told a senor military adviser, she knows there will be some troops there for decades. It's an example of how in some cases, politics can force dishonesty."

Well, someone is trying to force dishonesty.  I'm not sure it's politics.

Did you know that one in six hate crimes are motivated by the victim's sexual orientation, and yet today's federal laws don't include any protections for these Americans? What's even more outrageous is that some radical groups are running an all-out campaign to stop Congress from expanding hate crimes laws to include sexual orientation and gender identity--something three out of four Americans support. A bill expanding hate crimes laws has already been approved in the House of Representatives and now a similar bill needs to make it through the Senate.

Please contact your Senators and urge them to pass this important legislation! To send your letter, go to: HR Action Center