The American people and in fact, all citizens of the world, should examine what we have done in the four years since reclaiming our government from the lobbyists and war criminals in the election of 2008. They will have to agree that the results have been unique in all history.

—Future Speech of Barack Obama

Four years are behind us. Look at what has happened during these four years. People are forgetful. They accept good and wonderful things as they happen — and then forget about them. But we do not want to forget how things were, and what has happened. This is the transformation which the whole world calls the American miracle. Let us look back and examine the unprecedented achievement and progressive policy that has occurred since the 2008 election.

What was it like four years ago? Think back on the great and moving events: how America was despised in the world, how millions responded to Barack's speech in Berlin with overflowing hearts and indescribable joy. Only people who have been freed from some burden rejoice like that. That is the message of change that Barack Obama has brought. That is the greatest thing a statesman can do: to bring hope to a country!

For those keeping score at ringside, Obama has handily won Rounds 1 and 2 against the often-successful Republican tactics of accusing their opponents of being un-patriotic, or worse, "un-American". What will happen in Round 3?

Round 1 ended quickly enough, when Obama wisely started wearing a flag-pin, effectively proving his original theory that pinning a hunk of fake brass to your lapel is facile and meaningless.

Round 2 got a bit tougher. In this round, Obama had to fight off the implications that he "wasn't one of us" i.e. his mixed-race lineage and unusual upbringing disqualified him from representing America and its contingent of "regular voters" (as Chris Matthews likes to say - I think he means white males born in America, but I'm never sure...)

Now for the next round, which will be tougher still, but may give him the opportunity to score a knock-out...

I'll be brief.  Talkingpointsmemo has an interesting interview with the New York Times' Paul Krugman about Obama's campaign and policies here.  

It can't hurt to know more about how and why Krugman's views on Obama evolved.  

On healthcare:

Health care is make or break for whether we're going to have a real liberal turn in policy or not. Health care is the gaping hole in the welfare state. We all agree that the system is deeply flawed. And health care has political spillover. If Democrats get major health care reform, then it kind of re-legitimizes the idea of activist government policies. Even conservatives say that.

Yet on health care Obama is behaving as kind of, "Let's make a deal." The idea that he would be talking even in the primary campaign about the big table is suggesting that he is not all that committed to taking on special interests.

On the big problems there's a fundamental, deep-seated difference between the parties. I've always just felt that his tone was one suggesting that his inclination is to believe that we can somehow resolve these thing through a kind of outbreak of good feeling.

I recently did a diary detailing why I believe that John Edwards would be the best Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces among any candidate on either side. Well, not only is Edwards superior in his plans for our military and ending the failed policies of the Bush Administration, but his vision on domestic policy is also second to none to any candidate on either side of the aisle.

Let's talk about the very basics - - available, clean drinking water - - and the War in Iraq.

The Connection? Start here:

The pending US Clean Water Fund needs an annual reauthorization of $3.5 billion to provide low-cost loans for the delivery of clean drinkingwater and sewage treatment and disposal in all 50 states.

The next full year of clean water loans could be provided with two weeks of Iraq spending: the full four years of the program with eight weeks of Iraq war dollars.

Will the money be there?

Think we can't afford a productive and focused domestic agenda? Sure we can - - when we stop spending $250 million a day (other estimates place it even higher, but this is a useful, round and fiscally conservative number) in Iraq.

POTUS, I’m still lo to use this appellation, delivered a better than mediocre speech last night. The Democrats, except for Virginia Senator Webb, were very careful in their remarks. Webb struck the right tone. Finally, there’s a politician who has the guts to say our current corporate structure is reminiscent of the "Robber Barons" of yore. Senator Webb’s charge lends support to my argument that there must be a "New Capitalism" which gives current "employees" "capital ownership" in the businesses where they toil.

POTUS may work better with a Democratic Congress then he did with his own party. As Governor of Texas he worked in a bi-partisan spirit with the Democratic controlled legislature there.

It’s a wait and see approach, if the White House and Congress can forge compromises on heath care, immigration reform and attempts to turn the corner on global warming, Bush II may have the modicum of a legacy other than the debacle in Iraq. Other than national security, combating global warming should be our top priority for in its wake everything else is irrelevant. I was glad to see ten corporate CEOs express their concern recently. The White House should ask for their thoughts.

"increasing the minimum wage, cutting costs of prescription drugs, reducing interest rates on student loans, rolling back subsidies for oil companies, and pay-as-you-go budgeting"

It's a start!

For W, Its about the Domestic Agenda, Stupid!

I was rummaging through some clips I had from around 2003 and found some goodies off CNN.  
I case anybody is not clear on why this war happened, then think of the vice-grip the Democrats were in only after the population was scared.