Andrew Breitbart is offering Matt Damon $100k to debate Bill Kristol over the war in Iraq. Now that's a debate I'd pay to see.

A new Sienna College poll finds NY Atty Gen. Andrew Cuomo closing on Gov. David Paterson in a hypothetical 2010 Democratic primary for governor. Paterson's lead over Cuomo has dropped to just 2 points from 23 points last month.

Dem Primary
Paterson 35 (-14 vs. last month)
Cuomo 33 (+7)
Und 33 (+8 )

Cuomo, for the first time since May, has higher favorable ratings than Paterson, who's been caught up in the controversy surrounding his filling of Hillary Clinton's vacant Senate seat. Meanwhile, Paterson's lead in a hypothetical general election matchup against Giuliani has also dropped significantly and is now less than Cuomo's lead.

General Election
Paterson 44 (-7 vs. last month)
Giuliani 42 (+4)
Und 14 (+3)

Cuomo 48 (-2 vs. last poll, month)
Giuliani 39 (+2)
Und 13 (nc)

Kentucky Democratic Lt. Governor Dan Mongiardo just made it official: he's going for a rematch against incumbent Republican Jim Bunning for the Senate in 2010.

In 2004, Bunning beat Mongiardo by just under 23,000 votes out of more than 1.7 million ballots cast at the same time George W. Bush was thumping John Kerry in the Bluegrass state by twenty points. See Mongiardo's full statement below the jump.

(more...)

The latest Quinnipiac survey finds that 46% of New York voters approve of Gov. David Paterson's selection of Kirsten Gillibrand to fill the state's vacant Senate seat (Jan. 23-25, 1047 RV, MoE +/- 3%). Thirty percent do not approve of Gillibrand and 24% are undecided.

Republicans approve of the selection by a larger margin than Democrats. Republicans approve by 56%-27%, while Democrats have a 41%-35% approval-disapproval rating.

Gillibrand, however, is still an unknown quantity to most New Yorkers, with 63% saying they don't know enough to hold any kind of opinion of her. Twenty-five percent hold a favorable opinion of her and 10% have an unfavorable opinion.

My favorite part of Obama's inaugural speech:

To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West — know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

Oh, I'm sure he could have been thinking of a lot of people, but could it be, by any chance ...

... someone like this?

(more...)

Susan Jacoby, author of Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism, praises Barack Obama for delivering an inaugral address "notably lacking in religious rhetoric":

Yes, he mentioned God, but as an atheist, I have no objection to a president who believes in God making such a reference. What he did not do was invoke a Higher Power as a source of and a justification for public policy.

Jacoby also expresses satisfaction that Obama specifically mentioned "nonbelievers" along with various religions as a part of America's diversity.  On that, I completely agree.  But on religious rhetoric and religion as a "justification for public policy," was Obama's inaugural address that different from George W. Bush's in 2001?

(more...)

First of all, greetings to all my new readers at Real Clear Politics.  It's an honor to join the fine line-up of bloggers here.

I will start with a few slightly belated thoughts on the inauguration.

The speech: The best inaugural address since Ronald Reagan, says Thomas Sowell.  That's pretty high praise.  "A fine speech," says Michael Goldfarb on The Weekly Standard blog, particularly impressed by Obama's emphasis on the role military force has played in maintaining American democracy.   Ron Radosh likes the speech too, while The New Republic's John Judis doesn't (particularly the overly Bushian "Our nation is at war against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred") and neither does Paul Krugman, who thinks Obama's assertion that we're all collectively at fault for the economic mess we're in is a cop-out.  (I couldn't disagree more; I'm glad it was said in so public a venue.)  This is not to say that Obama is generally making a better impression on conservatives -- at least, those of a neoconservative bent -- than liberals, but he certainly continues to confound expectations.

Incidentally, Jonathan Last at the Standard blog thinks that Obama's  reference to "worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics" was a potshot at conservatives, but Ron Radosh thinks it was a reference to dogmas of both right and left (notably, Judis disliked it).  I'm inclined to agree with Ron, since at least so far, if the Obama presidency has an ideology, it's trascendence of ideology.   Take this passage: (more...)

A new ad from Fidelis to mark the 36 anniversary of Roe v. Wade:

(Via Ross)

Here's an eight minute interview with Rod Blagojevich in which he tells CBS2's Jay Levine that the "hidden story behind this rush to judgment by the legislature is to get me out of the way so Pat Quinn and the legislature can sock it to the taxpayer." Yeah, I'm sure that's the reason and not the 76-page indictment by Patrick Fitizgerald.

However, I have to add that while I've never been a fan of Blagojevich, his beef about the lack of due process in his impeachment trial has merit.  He has not been convicted of a crime, and he should be able to call witnesses to mount a defense before the body conducting the impeachment proceedings.

Here are the three Executive Orders and one Presidential memorandum signed this morning by President Obama:

Executive Order regarding Guantanamo Bay detainees

Executive Order regarding detainee policy

Executive Order regarding interrogation

Presidential Memorandum on review of the detention of al-Marri